An Aug. 29 letter dispelled questions about whether the City of Bayonne violated the spirit of an agreement with the United States Army when authorizing residential development for the former Military Ocean Terminal.
In response to questions raised by those who would like to see the area used as a container port instead of housing, Keith E Eastin, assistant secretary for Army Installations and Environment, said the city apparently lived up to its part of a 2001 agreement with the Army for taking possession of MOTBY.
Members of the International Longshoremen Association Local 1588 had requested an Army review, claiming that the city had violated its agreement with the Army when taking over MOTBY, by proposing to construct residential units rather than a container port. In June, ILA members, collectively known as the “Working Waterfront Committee,” filed a complaint with the Army against the city.
The 430-acre MOTBY site was closed by an act of the United States Congress in 1999 and turned over to the City of Bayonne for redevelopment in 2001 on the condition that the city would help create jobs in the region.
Doesn’t have to be a port
Eastin disagreed with the ILA, saying that terms for turning over MOTBY to the city does not require the Bayonne Local Redevelopment Authority or any other body to construct any particular type of facility or development such as a container port.
“Although the natural features and some infrastructure at the site may be conducive to the development of a container port, various other maritime economic development options may also support long-term job creation,” Eastin wrote.
Members of the ILA and other local politicians have argued that a container port was the best way of creating jobs at MOTBY. Under the agreement with the Army, the city of Bayonne agreed to set up some form of maritime industry that would generate jobs. Mayor Joseph Doria said the city had originally looked at a container port as an option, and then rejected it. Instead, the city hoped to create maritime jobs by using a portion of the base for cruise ship operations and possibly roll-off freight.
Eastin said the issue of the container port and the lack of transportation to supply it had been discussed during the transition, and that the BLRA had included flexibility in its proposal to change to meet current situations
Still need jobs
But the Army still does want the BLRA to pursue long-term job growth as one of its objectives, Eastin said, noting, too, that funds generated from MOBTY must be reinvested in a way to create jobs or to upgrade the facility.
“However, the specific direction of economic development activities at the site is the decision of the BLRA and the Bayonne community,” he said. “The EDC [Economic Development Conveyance] does not restrict the property to specific economic uses and does not reserve a reversionary interest in the property on the behalf of the Army. Consequently, the Army does not have the ability to suspend or limit development activity at the former MOTBY.”