Brick's township council on Tuesday night voted unanimously to accept the donation of a bayfront lot from its owner, Mae M. Maxwell.
The lot, located in the township's Seawood Harbor section, is considered wetlands and cannot be developed.
Business Administrator Scott Pezarras said the township only generates about $300 per year in tax revenue from the lot, and accepting it as a gift would be an easier prospect than foreclosing on it if its owner decided to stop paying property taxes.
"The cheaper option is to accept the gift," Pezarras said at a workshop meeting where the acceptance of the gift was discussed.
The township receives around $300 per year out of a total $1,200 tax bill.
The acceptance of the lot does come with benefits, officials said.
There are no restrictions on the deed aside from the wetlands issue, so it could be used in conjunction with a future Green Acres proposal, explained Councilwoman Susan Lydecker.
JHill
7:25 am on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Just leave the land as it is. Please, no more 15 million dollar parks for Brick!!
We can't afford it folks as we have been in a recession the last 5 years.
Kathie Bottazzi
8:46 am on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Of course they did..no reason not too..it can't be developed yet Bruck controls access not the Feds or State government
Jerry Belle
9:10 am on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Is "Bruck" a new word that is a combo of Brick and Kentucky or just a typo?
Kathie Bottazzi
9:14 am on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Typo..lol ..Brick Township
Kathie Bottazzi
9:17 am on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Perhaps we can "coin" it ..BRuck sounds like a winner to me..just saying
darrell
10:30 am on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Thanks to the people that donated the property to Brick. We need tp preserve whatever we can.
BBW
5:41 pm on Thursday, May 24, 2012
BRuck it is ok by me
HELP..
1:07 pm on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Bricktown Real Estate ...property for sale..maybe than we would lower taxes...Politics come second the hell with helping our taxpayers..GET OF THE BUYING DEAD LAND ..
Daniel Nee
7:37 pm on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Well, nobody actually bought it. It was given to the town for free.
Kathie Bottazzi
1:09 pm on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
Absolutely Darrell
Mare
1:16 pm on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
My how things have changed! I lived with/cared for an elderly woman in 1985/86 who owned "wetlands" that were never to be built upon. A woman whose husband was a doctor decided to do "one last deed for the lord" as she called it, and take care of this lady. She and her husband got control of many acres of wetlands that, of course, were never to be built upon. Well, my brother in law was working with a friend doing bulkheading. One day I brought lunch out to them and what do you know, there was the lady in a brand new multi-million dollar, water front home built on at least one parcel of those wetlands!!! I'll never forget the overwhelming saddness that came over me that day when I realized what they had done to my lady Naomi. They took her land and threw her in a nursing home. Not that any of you care, but I sure hope when they say "NO BUILDING" they mean it now!!!
Kathie Bottazzi
1:38 pm on Wednesday, May 23, 2012
@Mare
That is terrible..she obviously was given incorrect advise..wetlands at that time meant that perhaps the full property could not be built upon without permitting from the State and governments along with local permitting. It wasn't until themmid 90s that stringent Cafra laws were passed and beyond to protect the watershed in Nj .. When buying any property that has any potential of being wetlands or backing up to for that matter, an attorney familiar with riparian and land use laws should be consulted. My empathy and sympathy to you and your friend that has passed on.. I'm sure she's in a better place.
BBW
5:43 pm on Thursday, May 24, 2012
Politics is a luxury in town.