Seniors decry Sierra Club stands against senior housing

What may be new are charges by seniors and some Sierra Club members that the club has fallen under the sway of ‘extremists.’

By: David Campbell
   The Sierra Club’s latest turf battle over sensitive lands on the Princeton Ridge has drawn fire from seniors desiring housing — and not for the first time.
   The environmental organization was already in the dog house with seniors for the fight it picked on the Elm Court II senior-housing expansion.
   The Sierra Club blocked a court-mediated settlement reducing the Elm Road project’s expansion from 74 to 68 units, arguing that Princeton was illegally diverting public open space bought with Green Acres money.
   That settlement recently was reaffirmed by a Superior Court judge, but again the Sierra Club’s attorney in the case is considering posing a challenge. As tempers continue to flare over Elm Court II, some seniors say the Sierra Club has targeted the low-income elderly in a campaign for conservation at all costs.
   Last week seniors repeated the charge when the Princeton Township Committee approved two overlay ordinances that could bring high-density senior housing to the Princeton Ridge.
   Eleanor Angoff of the Coalition for Senior Housing in Princeton said the Sierra Club’s opposition to the ordinances had again "tarnished" its image in Princeton.
   What may be new, however, are charges by seniors and some Sierra Club members that the club has fallen under the sway of "extremists" who not only have lost sight of the organization’s grand vision of preserving national resources, but who are picking their local fights "undemocratically" with little regard for members’ interests.
   Francesca Benson, a Sierra Club member who said as much at the Township Committee’s first of two public hearings on the Princeton Ridge overlays Dec. 10, said outreach to the membership for setting the club’s agenda is not being undertaken.
   "Never as a member have I been contacted about this, or in any way alerted," Ms. Benson said. "I wonder how many people are being spoken for here, or is this just a few people who have decided they were going to take on this issue? That to me is not really a democratic process," Ms. Benson said.
   She added, echoing Ms. Angoff, "It gives the Sierra Club a bad name," and said that the club "is not speaking for me" in opposing the Princeton Ridge overlays.
   Harriet Bryan said she withdrew her membership from the organization when it came out against Elm Court II, and said that the Sierra Club increasingly is "not being thoughtful" in picking its fights.
   Mary Penney, chairperson of the Central New Jersey Sierra Club, defended the organization’s actions at the Township Committee meeting last week. Calling the Princeton Ridge "an oasis in the middle of suburbia," Ms. Penney said, "We don’t want to pit ourselves against seniors."
   Rather, the Sierra Club was urging the committee to "honor your obligation" and "pledge" to the State Development and Redevelopment Plan, which promotes centralized development, by removing two of the three targeted sites from the overlay ordinances because they are sensitive lands outside Princeton’s regional center boundary.
   The township and Princeton Borough agreed to the boundary in 1995, making the two municipalities eligible for state funding.
   Sierra Club’s Laura Lynch said at that meeting that members who believe they should be better informed of the club’s agenda should attend a meeting or two — she said she never saw Ms. Benson at meetings where plans to oppose the overlay were thoroughly discussed.
   Bill Wolfe, policy director of the Sierra Club’s New Jersey chapter, said the club’s stands on both Elm Court II and the Princeton Ridge are in keeping with its "broad vision" of "preservation of the wild," and said it is "grossly unfair and inappropriate" to say local actions are petty or short-sighted.
   Mr. Wolfe said the Elm Court II case is part of a statewide effort to hold municipalities to their land-preservation agreements under the Green Acres program.
   He said the Sierra Club has opposed illegal diversions of public open space not only in Princeton, but also in Sussex County and Cape May, to name just two.
   "Every time a municipality is diverting public open space, Sierra Club will be there to aggressively fight it," he said.
   In the case of the Princeton Ridge, Mr. Wolfe continued, the Sierra Club is advocating a similarly broad statewide concern — the State Plan — and not against seniors or centralized growth.
   Municipalities such as Princeton Township enjoy the benefit of funding incentives a center designation under the State Plan brings, but ignore the terms of that agreement when they prove inconvenient, he said.
   "Princeton cannot flout the State Plan so arrogantly," Mr. Wolfe said. "This is not a debate about senior housing. This is an issue about compliance with a document that they agreed to, that they sought."