Search This Blog

Monday, August 30, 2010

Council OKs Delilah’s Den Settlement After 15-Year Battle

(Reprinted from Amboy Beacon, Aug. 25, 2010) SOUTH AMBOY — The City Council voted unanimously last week to authorize a settlement by and among S.A. Holding Co. LLC, Delilah’s Den of S.A. Inc., 86 Broad Street Corp. and the City of South Amboy, thereby closing-for-good Delilah’s Den on Route 35 north, the final adult nightclub in the city. Delilah’s has relocated to Route 35 north in Sayreville. The Resolution was moved by Councilman William Schwarick, seconded by Councilman Mark Noble and adopted 5-0. The settlement, which ends litigation that began in 1995, is still subject to approval by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey. The nightclub’s owners “agreed that they’re not going to be reopening,” Council President Fred Henry said in response to questioning by resident Nancy McLaughlin.
“Someone-else is in the process of purchasing the property,” Business Administrator Camille Tooker added. “Under the settlement, they have to abide by the zoning that’s currently in-place.” Under terms of the six-page Settlement Agreement, a copy of which has been obtained by the Amboy Beacon, all parties agree to stipulate to the dismissal of all lawsuits, 86 Broad Street will be allowed to seek reinstatement of its liquor-license by the state Alcoholic Beverage Commission (ABC), and the property can now be developed with a use that is permitted within the Redevelopment Area. However, a clause in the Agreement specifically allows the property’s owners or their successors “to seek any variance of the applicable zoning that affects the property,” so-long as they “comply with all municipal requirements.” “I fought it all-the-way since Day One, ever-since our local electrician was there,” resident Eileen Ryan declared. Her reference was to Mayor John O’Leary’s father, former City Electrician Jack O’Leary, who worked on the building before Delilah’s Den opened. In a prepared statement released early last week, the Mayor — who did not attend last week’s Council meeting — hailed the settlement. “Through the commitment of elected leaders over the years, we’ve finally accomplished what we set-out to achieve,” he declared. O’Leary noted that when he was first sworn-in as Mayor in 1986, South Amboy “was known for its sea of unruly bars and venues for adult entertainment that attracted people from all-over.” He pointed out that in his initial political campaign and in subsequent ones,he vowed to rid South Amboy of every single adult business that did not fit with his stated “vision of the city as a quiet, safe, family-friendly waterfront hamlet. “Over the past quarter-century, we’ve worked within state law, using every device at our disposal to have unwelcome businesses operate legally or weed them out,” O’Leary added. As for Delilah’s Den, “This business started-out in South Amboy as a club use with a liquor-license and ended-up being an all-nude business, after giving up its license,” the Mayor said. “The city has fought this entity at every turn, from First Amendment challenges to bankruptcy court. We’re happy to finally be rid of this all-nude operation.” In 2001, Delilah’s Den’s owners reached an agreement with the city to shut-down the club, but when the time came to do so, owner Joseph Shamy “refused to close, claiming the city was in breach of its agreement because the city’s zoning restricted what he could build on the property. “The property is zoned for high commercial use, such as medical offices or retail,” O’Leary said. “The owners of Delilah’s Den proposed a large number of housing units which would have required a change in zoning for the site. In addition, the proposed use would have increased traffic in an area already congested with traffic.” The city sued Shamy, seeking to enforce the 2001 agreement to close, and a Superior Court Judge was preparing to rule on the case when Delilah’s Den filed for federal bankruptcy protection in 2005. That legal maneuver bought the club time because the Bankruptcy Court took jurisdiction of the case.

No comments:

Post a Comment