Township of Washington zoning board endorses settlement with 660 Pascack Realty LLC
June 05, 2026 | Township of Washington, Warren County, New Jersey
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Township of Washington Zoning Board returned to open session on June 4, 2026, and approved Resolution ZB26-10 endorsing a settlement agreement with 660 Pascack Realty, LLC over property listed as Block 2110, Lot 1 and Lot 6-11. The board had gone into closed session earlier to discuss the settlement and then reconvened for the vote.
The board’s clerk announced the motion to approve the resolution; the motion was seconded and no discussion was offered before the roll call. The clerk recorded 'Yes' votes from several members and recorded recusals from two members. Chairman Goetz and other board members answered in the affirmative when polled. The transcript records that Mister Zitko and Mister Bellion recused themselves from the vote; additional members who had been absent for the first roll call joined during the closed session and then voted 'Yes' when the board returned to open session.
The meeting record identifies attorneys Gary G. Antonio, Lula Matina and township attorney Siobhan Bailey as attending, and notes that board secretary Grace Kamish was present. The board opened a general public comment period earlier in the meeting for non-agenda items, received no comments, and then closed that portion before entering closed session to discuss the settlement.
The board recorded the motion on the docket as Resolution ZB26-10 and, based on the roll-call responses recorded in the meeting transcript, endorsed the settlement. The transcript does not record the names of a mover or seconder for the motion beyond the generic 'Motion' and '2nd' calls, and the vote tally in the transcript shows multiple 'Yes' responses and two recusals; the transcript does not record any 'No' or 'Abstain' votes.
The board announced that the YouTube broadcast would resume for the second open session after the closed session, noted there was no old business, set the next meeting for two weeks, and adjourned.
Quote attributed to the meeting record: "Let the record also reflect that Mister D'Agostino and Mister Tadros joined us at the beginning of the closed session, so they are now here," the clerk said during the post-closed-session roll call.
The board did not disclose details of the settlement during the open session; discussion of the settlement took place during the closed session authorized by the board. The transcript refers to the Open Public Meetings Act and to a state law change noted by the board that transitions public notices from print to online platforms effective March 1, 2026. The resolution number, parcel identifiers and the names of attending counsel appear in the meeting record but the transcript does not include additional terms of the settlement.
The board’s clerk announced the motion to approve the resolution; the motion was seconded and no discussion was offered before the roll call. The clerk recorded 'Yes' votes from several members and recorded recusals from two members. Chairman Goetz and other board members answered in the affirmative when polled. The transcript records that Mister Zitko and Mister Bellion recused themselves from the vote; additional members who had been absent for the first roll call joined during the closed session and then voted 'Yes' when the board returned to open session.
The meeting record identifies attorneys Gary G. Antonio, Lula Matina and township attorney Siobhan Bailey as attending, and notes that board secretary Grace Kamish was present. The board opened a general public comment period earlier in the meeting for non-agenda items, received no comments, and then closed that portion before entering closed session to discuss the settlement.
The board recorded the motion on the docket as Resolution ZB26-10 and, based on the roll-call responses recorded in the meeting transcript, endorsed the settlement. The transcript does not record the names of a mover or seconder for the motion beyond the generic 'Motion' and '2nd' calls, and the vote tally in the transcript shows multiple 'Yes' responses and two recusals; the transcript does not record any 'No' or 'Abstain' votes.
The board announced that the YouTube broadcast would resume for the second open session after the closed session, noted there was no old business, set the next meeting for two weeks, and adjourned.
Quote attributed to the meeting record: "Let the record also reflect that Mister D'Agostino and Mister Tadros joined us at the beginning of the closed session, so they are now here," the clerk said during the post-closed-session roll call.
The board did not disclose details of the settlement during the open session; discussion of the settlement took place during the closed session authorized by the board. The transcript refers to the Open Public Meetings Act and to a state law change noted by the board that transitions public notices from print to online platforms effective March 1, 2026. The resolution number, parcel identifiers and the names of attending counsel appear in the meeting record but the transcript does not include additional terms of the settlement.
Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!
Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.
✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
30-day money-back guarantee
