To the Editor:

I am a 20+ year resident of Princeton. I am very sympathetic with recent Town Topics letters advocating for the retention and enhancement of the historic character of our lovely town. The economics of this Stockton Street development “deal” suggest long-term problems for all town residents which should be equally considered. As I understand it, the Princeton Municipal government has agreed to provide a substantial “gift” to the developer in the form of a PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes), which is usually offered to develop challenged or blighted areas offering long-term tax reductions and forgiveness.

There are many ways to calculate the long-term impact on the town, but importantly, according to the town’s numbers, the PILOT offers a huge tax break of $30 million (see the town’s memorandum posted online and dated December 6, 2024). Over the last five years, average rent inflation has significantly exceeded 4 percent. If we use a more modest number averaging the last 10 years of 3.8 percent rent inflation (tradingeconomics.com/united-states/rent-inflation), the value of the tax break is even higher at roughly $40 million.

This massive gift and the PILOT program will lead to two key problems: 1) School Funding: Not one penny of tax revenue appears to be committed to schools in this proposal despite the 238 rental units bringing many new learners into our great but crowded school system; and 2) Over time this “‘gift” to the developers and the shortfall in tax revenue to the school system will lead to all taxpayers making up the difference in this and other areas of municipal spend.

For comparison, Avalon Princeton, the 280-unit development on Witherspoon Street, would appear to demonstrate clearly that no subsidies are needed for a rental development like this. To make things even clearer, the proposed rental rates of the new Stockton project will be 20-30 percent over the current published rates at Avalon! Hardly a ‘blighted’ area — clearly not requiring financial incentives from Princeton. Allocations for school services that will be incurred are essential. Funds should not be used as a “plug” to fix recurring poor financial decisions by the Princeton Municipal Government.

Finally, do note that the PILOT is based on a designation of this area as an “Area in Need of Redevelopment” that is “blighted.” Last time I looked, none of the areas included in this site could be considered blighted. It is Marquand Park without landscaping. The density of this development is proposed to be over 15 times that of the surrounding neighborhood and will surely create additional traffic havoc.

This project needs a substantial rethink.

Steve Snyder
Farrand Road