This website
is dedicated to the Michelin Plant on Ford Avenue, the Evans Family, Dr Forney and his sons, who
they have given so much
to the town of Milltown and for playing an important role in forming the town we
love and respect. Also dedication goes to the remaining historical sites that
are remaining that we hold dear to our heart, also to the ones that we have lost
to the senseless disregard of our town history and to what makes this town so
special, the residents that live and work here. We need to stop the senseless destruction of our historical
landmarks and Milltown's history now before its to late and is lost forever.
Talking about
our Town History is one Thing- Saving it is Another
Economy aside,
bank still set on Forney site Ad offered house for $1 if buyer would relocate
Though Valley National Bank is feeling the squeeze of the economic crisis, it
will continue its efforts to raze the historic Forney Clinic building in
Milltown and replace it with a bank branch, according to bank attorney Pete
McArthur.
"I can tell you that they are pursuing it
just as zealously as they have in the past," said McArthur, of Pompton
Plains-based Azrak & Associates. "Their treatment of this matter has
not ceased."
According to the bank's Web site, its
third-quarter earnings were down 90 percent, to 3 cents per share, as compared
to 29 cents per share in last year's third quarter. The losses came from
preferred stock holdings of government-seized mortgage giants Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac, and totaled $44.1 million after taxes.
A report from McClatchy-Tribune Information
Services quoted Gerald Lipkin, the bank's CEO, saying the loss is sizable, but
it will not break the bank.
"... It will not have a significant impact
on operations or strategic decisions," Lipkin was quoted as saying.
He went on to say the bank might sell some of
its 100 branch buildings. By the end of the year, the bank may release an
announcement on deals pertaining to some of its properties.
Milltown resident Michael Shakarjian, a trustee
of the John C. Evans Project, which is committed to saving the Forney house,
said his group is unsure of how much of an impact the bank's financial losses
would have on its drive to pursue the North Main Street building. He noted that
the bank applied for government bailout funds and was approved.
Like Valley's officials, the citizens group is
expressing no thoughts of giving up.
"We intend to continue to do whatever we
can," Shakarjian said.
The Forney house was built in the 1860s by the
Evans family, whose son served as Milltown's first mayor. It was converted into
a medical facility by John C. Evans and operated as such from 1907 until the
1970s. During many of those years, it was run by Dr. Norman C. Forney Sr., the
town's first surgeon.
In March 2007, the borough Zoning Board of
Adjustment granted approval for the bank to build a branch, complete with
drive-through facilities, on the site. Proponents of saving the nearly
150-year-old Forney house and clinic organized to form the John C. Evans Project
soon after. The group has engaged in a continuing fight to keep the house
standing. Its efforts to have the zoning board decision overturned in state
Superior Court proved unsuccessful, but the group subsequently filed an appeal
of the court ruling with the New Jersey Appellate Division.
Valley National did not sit idly by during the
process. The bank filed a counterclaim in August 2007, alleging that the
citizens' group interfered with its economic advantage, as well as with its
rights under the sale contract between the bank and Dr. Bhudev Sharma, who owns
the property. The counterclaim is still pending, with no trial date set.
Stuart Lieberman, attorney for the John C.
Evans Project, said the bank's counterclaim was an attempt to intimidate the
group into silence. He called the claim a SLAPP, or strategic lawsuit against
public participation. Such suits involve corporations or developers bringing
litigation against citizens' groups that take an oppositional stance to their
plans.
The bank will have to prove malicious intent to
interfere on the part of the citizens.
Sharma, who operates a medical practice within
the building, has also filed a lawsuit against members of the John C. Evans
Project.
After the citizens' group filed its appeal,
McArthur moved successfully to have it dismissed, due to the fact that the
counterclaim filed by Valley National was ongoing in county courts.
According to Shakarjian, a letter from the
courts after the initial ruling to uphold the zoning board decision gave the
plaintiffs only a certain number of days to appeal, which made it seem as if
they could do so within that timeframe. Though the group's recent efforts to
appeal have been thwarted, Shakarjian said they are only on hold.
Amid all the litigation, other types of
developments have arisen. Throughout the process, the federal Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has been involved, as its approval is needed
for Valley to follow through with its plans for the new branch.
As part of that decision, the federal agency
conducts a Section 106 review process. Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act requires federal agencies to consider the possible impacts of
their projects on historic places.
John C. Evans group members and Ron Emrich of
Preservation New Jersey blasted the OCC for its handling of the process, saying
it did not follow regulations, and moved hastily and without much consideration
toward a memorandum of agreement (MOA).
After a July meeting held by the OCC that
proved unsatisfactory for those trying to save the Forney House, a State
Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) representative contacted the Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), an independent federal organization, to
get involved. The National Trust for Historic Preservation was also involved in
the process.
Shakarjian said he did not think it prudent for
the OCC to have held the meeting before lawsuits were resolved.
"We thought that was a really bad policy,
because we didn't think the public, or anyone advocating for the house, would be
able to speak freely," Shakarjian said.
He said the OCC case manager restricted
commentary from Lieberman, but allowed bank attorneys to speak. The result of
that meeting was that another conference would be held, when a new draft of the
MOA would be discussed. No documentation was sent out for review by involved
parties until 9 p.m. the night before, according to Shakarjian.
Despite issues preservationists may have had
with the handling of the meeting, they were happy with one new provision of the
MOA — one that required Valley to advertise the house itself for sale for $1
so it can be moved to another location.
The purchaser would be required to keep the
house up to standard federal regulations set for historic places, as the house
has been deemed eligible for both the state and national registers of historic
places. The ad, which ran in the Star-Ledger, said any purchaser must move the
house no later than Nov. 22.
"If the Forney House is not removed by
Nov. 22, 2008, the house will be immediately demolished," the ad read.
According to McArthur, the bank received
"a couple of brief inquiries," but no bids in response to the ad,
which ran twice a week for four weeks. Later in the ad, it said that if no
offers were received by Oct. 24, the house would be "immediately
demolished."
As of press time, the house still stood, but
when Shakarjian recently questioned bank officials and others about the timeline
of its demise, no one provided an answer. His inquiries arose from having
received an offer from "This Old House" magazine for a monthly feature
entitled "Save This Old House."
Keith Pandolfi, associate editor of the
magazine, made some calls of his own, to find out whether the Forney House would
still be standing in order to be featured in "Save This Old House" in
the magazine's January issue. His deadline has passed.
In an Oct. 14 e-mail addressed to Shakarjian,
Mayor Gloria Bradford, Council President Randy Farkas and others, McArthur made
clear his feelings about the inquiry from Pandolfi.
"Please make no mistake that Valley is not
interested, nor will consent to the timeframes of Mr. Pandolfi's magazine,"
McArthur wrote. "This is yet another lame attempt to delay this matter more
than it already has been."
McArthur said the bank has a demolition permit
for the house, but noted there are other conditions that must be met before the
building is razed.
