ABSECON – City Councilman Chris Seher interrupted the early stages of the Tuesday, Jan. 10 Planning Board meeting to challenge the members on a procedural count.

The first meeting of the year began with the board attempting to pick up unfinished business from December regarding the master plan revisions.

Seher objected to the board conducting any such business at its first meeting before it had completed the business of reorganization.

“I’m concerned,” Seher said at the meeting. “I’ve served probably 40 years on one board or another. I’ve tried to follow Robert’s Rules of Order. I’ve never heard of conducting business before the reorganization.”

Board attorney Michael Fitzgerald said it was OK for the board’s first meeting of 2012 to pick up with unfinished business from 2011 and end with the reorganization, which did not change the membership on the board.

Seher pointed out that two members’ terms expired Dec. 31.

“It’s irrelevant; no problem,” the attorney responded.

At Seher’s prodding, Fitzgerald swore in the two members to their new terms before the board resumed its business with the master plan.

No vote had been taken on the document at a December meeting after residents and Planning Board members voiced opposition and raised questions. It was determined then that the Master Plan Committee headed by Vice Chairman Glenn Hayden would meet and give Planning Board Planner Rob Reid direction to accommodate some of the concerns. People were encouraged to submit any additional concerns to the board.

However, the plan re-examination was resubmitted at the Jan. 10 meeting without modification.

Fitzgerald addressed the board and public, speaking of the city’s need to placate the owner of the stalled age-restricted Visions at the Shore project off Pitney Road.

If the owner, Amboy Bank, can’t sell his units, the city is at risk of facing a builder remedy lawsuit, the attorney said.

Seher challenged Fitzgerald’s comments.

“Mr. Fitzgerald, I’d hate to be fighting a war with you as a general,” the councilman said. “You’ve exposed Absecon as vulnerable.”

The lawyer had said the vulnerability arose from the city’s ignoring state affordable housing regulations.

According to Seher, such issues – if true – should be discussed in executive session and not placed before the public, including those who might be tempted to bring suit.

During the public portion of the meeting, he challenged numbers introduced by Reid and alluded to by Fitzgerald on the city’s affordable housing preparations.

“As for affordable housing, there are 360 units in the master plan,” Seher said. “That’s far more than the required 270 you say we haven’t met.”

Seher asked what the Master Plan Committee had discussed at its meeting if no changes were introduced to the re-examination.

Hayden replied that the committee had not met.

Seher said he was under the impression that the three members – Hayden, Gorohoff and Robert Bey – had met with Reid prior to the City Council reorganization meeting Thursday, Jan. 5.

Both Hayden and Gorohoff said no meeting was held.

“OK, then, I guess I was misinformed,” Seher continued. “If you did not meet, why didn’t you? You told the public that you would be meeting to give Mr. Reid guidance to modify the re-examination.”

Hayden said that no suggestions for changes had been received from the public.

“You had numerous public suggestions at the last meeting,” Seher countered. “And three – maybe four – of your members had problems with parts of the proposal. Don’t blame the public for not following up with still more objections. You tabled the issue over objections.”

About a half dozen people from the 75 or so in attendance at the reorganization meeting addressed the board Jan. 10, all on the Visions at the Shore age-restriction issue.

The re-examination would mix age restriction and open market at Visions, and in all multiunit zones.

One woman pointed out that when the property across from Crestview Avenue was for sale, bids were taken on it as a 55-and-older project.

“Wouldn’t other builders now have a legal claim?” she asked. “We’d have bid if not for the age restriction. You’re changing it for them.”

After the public portion of the meeting, the board conducted its reorganization.

The Planning Board is scheduled to meet 7 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 24 in the Municipal Complex.