Guest Column
Chris Berzinski
All residents must have a right to speak in U.F.
I recently read Deputy Mayor Bill Miscoski’s response to the letter written by Upper Freehold Environmental Commissioner Sue Kozel in the Jan. 31 issue of the Examiner. Ms. Kozel happens to be my wife. It is a fact, which I disclose immediately, so that I can state that this letter is written in support of the issues we both believe in — not to defend a woman more than capable of standing on her own. Sue’s point was that property taxes would increase significantly with the continuing of a two-acre zoning.
Mr. Miscoski, a voting member of the Planning Board, refused to address that issue and instead called her ignorant for raising the question and challenging him to address it. His comments referred to all the "men" in our community, who created Upper Freehold as it is today.
The debate about the future of Upper Freehold should be about what’s best for the town. It should not be defined, in its simplest form, to be that the people who lived in Upper Freehold the longest should make all the decisions. And, it shouldn’t be a debate just confined to "men" who have lived here for decades. Women, including Ms. Kozel, have a right to speak at town meetings and ask the "men" to explain how they can justify the anticipated higher taxes, which will result from increased development.
I applaud the deputy mayor for serving in Vietnam. But, what does that have to do with the fact that more development means higher property taxes?
A resource paper by the Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions reported that:
• "Studies show that residential development costs the municipality more in educational and public services than it generates in tax revenue."
Simply translated that means higher property taxes."
• "As land is developed, municipalities and developers often can save costs of infrastructure and municipal services by using a compact rather than a sprawling development pattern and preserving surrounding open space."
I am concerned about my property taxes increasing. Is there something wrong with that concern? The debate over property taxes has dominated gubernatorial, legislative and county elections. Is this an inappropriate debate for Upper Freehold? I think not.
Mr. Miscoski has suggested that senior citizen housing will not increase property taxes. Who is he trying to kid? Aren’t there costs in new municipal services? How about emergency services? This is shared now, but can’t anyone envision a time where we will need our own Police Department to address changes in population?
I support the country code and the rural nature of the town. That’s why I moved here with my wife. If we wanted to live in Piscataway Township, Franklin Township (Somerset County) or New Brunswick, we would have remained in Middlesex County. We just didn’t expect to find that some of the farmers and other landholders, who advocated for a country code, are now turning around to urge large developments which will undermine the country code.
My home is on a road that has two major development projects under way — Hidden Acres being developed by a member of the Upper Freehold Environmental Commis-sion, and Fox Hunt. Perretti Acres is another big development. How about Perl Acres I on Sharon Station Road, another large development owned by a member of the Upper Freehold Environmental Commission. Then there’s also The Woods project on Sharon Station Road.
That’s five development projects, not the two that the deputy mayor cited in his Feb. 7, 2002 letter to the editor.
Maybe the Upper Freehold Planning Board should publish a list of all the development projects with their years of approvals so town residents can see if Mr. Miscoski has his facts right. If we look at the ANJEC resource paper, it reported that 13 towns added $4.2 billion in commercial and industrial ratables over 20 years, and they did not see a reduction in the costs of running local government. The property tax rates went up. I don’t want to see that happen in Upper Freehold.
If large landholders get to run roughshod over the rest of us, I don’t think we have a zoning plan that works, especially since we are not preserving open space. While I applaud the town for forcing a recreation area to be established and being the New Jersey leader of farmland preservation, we have not done much to spend our municipal preservation taxes to protect open spaces.
We need to be open to hear other opinions regarding the future of Upper Freehold. This is not an "Old Boys’ Club." I hope we can all work together to bring a sensible compromise into existence, including four-acre zoning and a special clustering designation to protect the Upper Freehold way of life.
Chris Berzinski is a resident of Upper Freehold