Update: Residents Decry Addiction Clinic at Emotional Planning Board Meeting

Emotions ran high at Chatham Borough's Planning Board meeting Wednesday night as about 20 borough residents, mostly from Tallmadge Avenue, spoke out against a plan to convert the historic—and soon-to-be defunct—Parrot Mill Inn into a rehabilitation center for gambling addicts.

On Feb. 3, the borough Planning Board uninamously approved the application of Michael Osborne, the owner of Tricare Treatment Services, to provide counseling, mental health sessions and overnight accommodations to gaming addicted individuals. No physical changes will be made to the dwelling at 47 Main St., which was built in the late 18th century.

The approval will allow Osborne to lease the site for three years with an option to eventually purchase it. The present owner is Betsey Kennedy, who opened the bed and breakfast in 1986 with her then-husband, Frank, who died in 1990. Kennedy has run the business since then.

One by one, nearly 15 people walked to the microphone to voice their concerns, and Planning Board Attorney Anne Marie Rizzuto primarily responded to their comments.

Residents decried the gambling rehab center on the grounds that it would set a precedent for the development of future rehab centers; that their children would be in danger; that property values would go down and that the integrity of Chatham as a family-friendly place would be compromised. They implored the board to find a loophole to stop the center from opening.

The board assured residents that Osborne said his clients will include only white-collar individuals—Wall Street bankers, doctors, attorneys and professionals—who are eager to keep their anonymity.

This did little to assuage the fears of residents.

"You wouldn't want them on your block," Michael Callahan, who lives at 53 Tallmadge Ave., told the board members. "We need to find a loophole so this won't happen."

Residents wanted to know how a gambling addiction treatment center fits in with the permitted use of the inn.

Board members explained that the inn property is zoned for B-3 uses, which permits many different kinds of use.  Osborne wanted to combine the uses of the inn to include professional offices and treatment, in addition to the overnight accommodations the inn would provide. He was required to go to the board to request a site plan waiver to change that permitted use. 

If Tricare LLC had leased the building across the street to use as the professional offices and leased the inn to use as residences, he wouldn't have had to come before the planning board at all, according to Borough Engineer Vincent DeNave.

He was only required to go before the planning board because he wanted to change bedrooms into offices.

Barry Osmun, an attorney representing Osborne, told the board at its Feb. 3 meeting that the inn's use of overnight accommodations had been "grandfathered in" from a time without restrictions.

"What this application contemplates is very similar to what the Parrot Mill Inn did," Osmun said.

The Board approved Osborne's plan, as Rizzuto repeatedly pointed out, because he fulfilled the necessary requirements for a site plan waiver. Because of that, the board had no choice but to allow the clinic to lease the Parrot Mill space.

Board members had a hard time convincing the residents that their hands were tied because of laws of what the planning board can and cannot do.

"The applicant met submission rules," Planning Board Chairman H.H. Montague said. "The board did what it could do under the ordinance and state rules."

But Tallmadge residents remained unhappy. At one point during the meeting, Borough Mayor Nelson Vaughan implied that residents should be relieved that the inn won't be knocked down. Residents responded, shouting out: "Knock it down!" "Build a garden!" "Build a McDonalds!" 

"People here would much [rather] see it torn down," said Tallmadge resident Robert Ehrvar.

His comments elicited claps from the audience. Others spoke out in a similar fashion.

"As a resident, I am so disappointed that there's nothing written to prevent this from happening," said Christine Walls, who lives at 16 Tallmadge Ave. Walls sent a letter to borough officials before the meeting.

Board members spent much of the evening on a quest to clarify their decision, to explain what the board actually does and to appease the fears of the emotional—and sometimes hysterical—crowd. Three people who stepped up to voice their concerns began crying towards the end of their speeches.

Many residents were worried that the board's decision to accept Osborne's application would set a precedent for future rehab centers.

"Setting a precedent is obviously a concern for the board," Rizzuto assured the audience. "Each application has to be governed by its own set of facts and circumstances.

"Just because you approve something or one place doesn't necessarily set a precedent for another," she said.

Marion Eckert, who lives on Roosevelt Ave, wondered if the board would stop Osborne from opening up his treatment center to include other addictions.

"The testimony's intent was they would not accept drugs or alcohol. If they came in and asked for drug or alcohol use, we would look into it as a separate issue," Rizzuto said.

Even so, Rizzuto had to remind the residents several times that it is not within the board's authority to monitor how Osborne, or any business owner, uses the facilities.  

"We don't question professionals, what they can and can not do," Rizzuto said.

The most heated testimonies came from residents who were concerned with the safety of their children and the overall desirability of Chatham.

"Gamblers are a big concern for me," Rachel Granger said. "I don't feel comfortable with someone going through a desperate stage around the corner."

She added, "It's unfair. We pay our taxes, we paid a premium to be in a safe, family-oriented community. I do want people to get treatment, but I don't want them to get treatment in this town. They are liars. They are desperate."

Rizutto told dissatisfied residents that they have 45 days from the date of the adoption of the written resolution (which will take place in the first week of March) to appeal to the superior court of New Jersey.

"Legally, the next step is to wait for the adoption and then decide if you want to appeal as a group or indivdual," Rizutto told the residents.