Ferrara stands by her vote
To the editor:
At Thursday night’s Township Committee meeting, I cast a "no" vote on the question of appointing a new township attorney. Several citizens have asked me for an explanation of my vote. I am happy to provide one.
In 1998, when I first ran for office, I said that I would never base my vote to hire or fire professionals based on party affiliation, but rather on their experience, professionalism and expertise. I have held to that promise in every appointment I have been called upon to make.
State Sen. John O. Bennett and his partner Frederick C. Raffetto have ably served as township counsel for the past four years. For the past three years the Township Committee has performed a review of the work of all professionals each summer to assess the satisfaction of the governing body with each professional. No one ever raised any concerns about the legal work done by Bennett and Raffetto. It may be worth noting here that I am a member of the Democratic majority of the Township Committee, and Sen. Bennett is, along with being co-president of the Senate, well . . . a Republican. What I thought was more noteworthy, though, was his extensive experience as a municipal attorney (together, he and Raffetto have 30+ years in the field).
The municipal chairman of the Democratic Party has consistently called for Sen. Bennett’s ouster since there has been a majority of Democrats on the Township Committee, calling it "an embarrassment" to have such a visible Republican representing a Democratic committee. I disagree. I have been proud to have both lawyers work for us, because they are good at what they do. Mr. Raffetto’s meticulous attention to detail, and Sen. Bennett’s wealth of experience and ability to suggest solutions to apparent standoffs on the committee have served the township well.
Three main arguments have been advanced to account for the move to change lawyers: 1) "Change is good"; 2) "Maybe Sen. Bennett will have a conflict of interest because of his public office, and will act contrary to the interests of the township"; and 3) "It happens all the time it’s politics as usual." I have given a good deal of thought to each of these lines of reasoning, and find myself unpersuaded.
1) "Change is good" Yes, where warranted, change is very good, but change for the sake of change, especially in government, is disruptive and inefficient. It is hard to estimate the number of billable hours it will take for the new township attorney to get up to speed on all the issues facing the municipality at the moment. Continuity is cheaper and gives a better result. One of my colleagues is of the opinion that people "shouldn’t have a chance to get comfortable in their jobs." Gee, I think they shouldn’t have a chance to get complacent in their jobs, but a certain level of comfort produces good results.
2) "Sen. Bennett may have a conflict of interest," This is a common problem in legal practice and it is easily remedied by the attorney recusing himself in regard to whatever issue causes the conflict. What I have found disturbing here is the prediction that Sen. Bennett, contrary to all ethical standards, would abandon the best interests of his client and act in a manner contrary to those interests. I find even the suggestion that someone of his stature and reputation would behave so unethically to be outrageous.
3) "It happens all the time." Yes, it does. I’m still trying to understand how that line of reasoning helps to serve the public interest.
I stand by my vote.
Marylou Ferrara, deputy mayor, Hopewell Township
No changes, please, at Baldpate Mountain
To the editor:
On recent Sundays I have been walking at Baldpate Mountain immensely benefiting from the peace and beauty at the summit. From that point there is a view of south of the Delaware River and surrounding area that astonishes, here in Hopewell Township!
A plan has been passed that unfortunately places a parking lot smack in the middle of this open and scenic space. Also planned is a widened access road that will threaten old growth trees and pollute sensitive streams. This disruptive construction defies the fundamental initiative of open space purchases . . . to protect the land from development. In a booklet defining goals and objectives of open space purchases it clearly states to, "Preserve lands that have county-wide significance to be retained in a largely natural or undeveloped state for the purposes of park land, protecting ecologically sensitive areas and preserving flora and fauna." With the state in such dire financial times, where is the money coming from that will build this costly road and parking lot? In nearby Washington Crossing Park we already have many roads and public use facilities that serve many needs including a nature center.
We now have a unique opportunity to keep Baldpate Mountain for hiking and preservation of the open land. There is a simple solution. A public access parking lot at the bottom of the mountain, which is already planned, would allow the public access on foot to enjoy the pristine beauty. Those who need wheelchair access should be allowed to drive closer to the summit and park in a few reserved spaces that already exist. This land was gratefully purchased by a joint effort including Mercer County, Hopewell Township, State Green Acres, and Hopewell Valley Friends of Open Space.
We as citizens must speak up now to our local government to stop this plan to invade open space with bulldozers, rock blasting, tree cutters and asphalt. I would encourage everyone who appreciates nature to take a walk up to the summit of the "Jewel in the Crown" of our local park system. It’s not too late to say no to development!
Ruth Jourjine, Titusville
Walker, Omland get support
To the editor:
Once again it is time to cast your ballot for Hopewell Township fire commissioners. There are two men running for two spots on the board for whom the men and women of the Hopewell Fire Department wish to express support.
William Walker and Laurence Omland both have served this department and the Hopewell Valley as volunteers for well over 20 years and wish to further serve you as fire commissioners.
Mr. Walker is running for re-election to his board position a position he has filled faithfully, with the knowledge and understanding that can only come from years of experience spent in the Emergency Services. This is the first time Mr. Omland has thrown himself into the political field. However, he also will bring with him all the knowledge that he gained while he served not only as a firefighter but also as a past chief of the Hopewell Fire Department.
Both Mr. Walker and Mr. Omland share a desire to serve the residents of Hopewell Valley to the fullest extent of their abilities. The men and women who serve with the Hopewell Fire Department ask you to show them your support on Feb. 15 by electing them to the Hopewell Township Board of Fire Commissioners.
Hopewell Fire Department Inc.
Diaper drive is a success
To the editor:
As members of the Boy Scout Troop 41 and Cub Scout Pack 1776, we are writing to thank the Hopewell Valley community for supporting our diaper drive from Jan 19-26. Because of your generosity we were able to collect over $300 and a full truckload of diapers to benefit the homeless children of HomeFront.
We want to thank the Pennington Presbyterian Church for allowing us to place collection boxes there. We extend special thanks to the Pennington Market for allowing us to stand outside the store on Jan 25 to ask shoppers to buy diapers on their way in, to contribute on their way out. We are grateful that this date fell on "Super Bowl" Saturday when the store was especially crowded.
We plan to make this diaper drive an annual event. So when your child is potty- trained, don’t throw away those opened packages!
Boy Scout Troop, 41 Pennington; Cub Scout Pack 1776, Titusville;
Steve Warner, Matthew Skic,
Tyler Swaim, Jacob Reisser,
Peter Mucciloi, Ryan Butler,
Alex Kiss and Tim Roberto
Repeal downzoning law
The following letter was written to Mayor Fran Bartlett and the Township Committee and submitted to the HVN for publication:
I have resided at 8 Rosedale Way in Hopewell Township for three years. I do not support Ordinance No. 02-1268 (i.e., rezones the bulk of the township’s undeveloped land residential with minimum lot sizes of 6 or 14 acres) which I understand was adopted on Dec. 19, 2002, and urge each of you to reject anti-sprawl/smart growth policies (a more objective term would be restricted growth) which will not achieve the stated public goals of open space preservation, watershed protection and traffic management.
It had been my understanding that the vote on the ordinance was being deferred until January 2003 to allow for meaningful public comment. I now understand the committee has committed to accept and consider additional comments and, if necessary, modify the downzoning ordinance.
In November 2002 the National Center for Public Policy Research published a report entitled "Smart Growth and Its Effect on Housing Markets: The New Segregation," written by Randall J. Pozdena of QuanEcon, Inc. The study was commissioned to quantify the effects of "smart growth/restricted growth" policies on minorities and the disadvantaged. The following is the conclusion set forth in the Executive Summary:
"The policy of restricting growth through limiting site availability in favor of open land achieved none of its goals: reduced sprawl, more livable communities and decreased auto travel. It has, however, harmed individuals and families, disproportionately harming minorities and the poor."
As the study’s author, Randall Pozdena put it in his own conclusion to the study:
"It is difficult to make a case for the site-supply restrictions promoted by advocates of smart growth. It is apparent both from theory and the available data that restricting the supply of development sites is bound to raise home prices, everything else being equal. Insidiously, the burden of site-supply restrictions will fall disproportionately on poor and minority families. Families who already owned homes at the time that smart growth policies were embraced, of course, enjoy some immunity from the effects of smart growth on housing costs. However, for new or young families, and families that rent their homes, the impact of higher home values and rents is a significant burden. The analysis in this report suggests that more than a million families will be adversely affected by site supply restrictions of the Portland type advanced in the name of smart growth. Smart growth advocates argue, of course, that the amenities and efficiencies of smart growth outweigh these adverse effects on the cost of housing. From this author’s viewpoint, however, these amenities and efficiencies have yet to be demonstrated. Until they are, one can only conclude that smart growth isn’t particularly smart."
In a Statement entitled "The Big Five vs. the Sweet Sixteen," released in November 2002, Angelo C. Morresi, a licensed engineer and attorney, who also serves as the chairman of the Essex County Environmental Commission, questioned whether restricting growth to the most densely populated New Jersey counties is good public policy as well as the motives of the anti-sprawl activist.
Like Mr. Morresi, I question the logic of "a governmental policy to limit development in the less dense counties because they are too crowded, and ‘smartly’ cram more people, businesses, and industries into the Big Five (Essex, Passaic, Bergen, Hudson and Union Counties)" and I share his concerns about the use of the environmental banner to achieve unlawful social goals.
Whether you call restrictive growth policies the "new segregation" or an "isolationist mission," Mr. Morresi observes that such policies "are misdirected at best, and at worst, reflect an ugly, bigoted agenda hidden beneath the virtuous guise of environmental planning." The final paragraphs of Mr. Morresi’s statement explain why the type of smart growth being promoted in New Jersey should not be legitimized in Hopewell Township:
"Anti-sprawl activists, empowered by government, pursue zero-population growth in their counties with the consequence of transforming the Big Five into Manhattan West. I question their motives, as their efforts will directly exacerbate one of those dirty-linen issues we don’t talk about in New Jersey its schools are the fourth most segregated in the country. Any so-called sprawl policy must first address the needs of our population centers and then the issue of county isolationism. The present policies and plans are biased and reflect a government-sanctioned movement toward separatism that, in time, I predict, will not stand up to constitutional challenge."
A few weeks after Mr. Morresi’s statement was released, the Hispanic Civil Rights Project at Harvard confirmed this ranking and found that half the black students and nearly 41 percent of the Hispanic students attended minority-dominated schools in the 2000-01 school year. The survey also found that segregation is increasing and is often accompanied by "enormous poverty, limited resources and social and health problems of many types."
The downzoning "sold" in Hopewell Township as smart growth is confiscatory and is not the least restrictive means of achieving the public goals of open space preservation, watershed protection and traffic management. Our state’s land use laws authorize the use of clustering, density transfers, performance standards and the voluntary transfer of development rights to: (a) allow growth to occur where it can be sustained, (b) require environmentally sensitive areas to be preserved and (c) attempt to equitably distribute the burden of achieving the articulated public goals of the downzoning. These land use techniques (there are others as well) also can be used to allow for a range of housing types (i.e., from low income housing to cornfield castles) to be constructed in appropriate locations throughout the township. I urge you to utilize the land-use tools available to the township to "manage" the township’s growth rather than rely upon "junk science" to justify a "no-growth" agenda.
In my opinion, there are other less restrictive ways to achieve the goals of the downzoning. Accordingly, I request that you repeal Ordinance No. 02-1268 and adopt an ordinance that achieves the goals of the downzoning by adopting a rational set of growth management standards.
Frank J. Petrino , Hopewell Township
TNDs? No thank you!
To the editor:
It appears the Hopewell Township Committee and Planning Board were out of touch with their process to prepare the Master Plan with a Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND). Citizen input was provided, but were officials really listening to those seemingly from the targeted area and/or who spoke out at the sessions? That’s doubtful! The rush to sewers to facilitate the great buildout, supposedly to first fix septic system problems near the TND, is clearly wrong.
A published report early this month focused on Mercer County’s Washington Township, where prices in a TND, their "Town Center," are out of sight. For more of a profit, houses are probably built bigger than need be. Add sewer and water fees, and the costs are more than a lot can afford. It also spoke of "opportunities for less expensive condominiums in future housing. Also, apartments proposed along Route 33 will draw residents with different incomes, including some apartments for people with moderate incomes." The article, however, made no mention of Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) homes.
Our TND, possibly reflecting the above stated Washington Township scenario, with or without COAH homes and generally south of the Pennington Circle west of Route 31, just seems a bit much, and particularly without provisions for open space or farmland preservation there. That’s shown per TND map overlay from Route 31 to the railroad tracks west of Reed Road. To their surprise, Brandon Farms residents and others in the southern tier will face more traffic woes. They’ll feel jammed into a relatively small area of the 58-square-mile township, as we take pride in protecting our valley’s rural character. But how about protecting the said area’s rural character?
COAH obligations, "a fine mess," Laurel or Hardy might have said. They’re possibly good for those in need of a subsidy, special price or mortgage, but not my focus in asking, who can afford to live in TNDs? At least one of our officials once wrote that moderate- or lower-income working folks, like firefighters and maybe others still getting their hands dirty or working up a sweat on the job, would become TND homeowners here. There may be no way to hold down prices. And, for the older as well as the young, prices like those in Washington Township are simply out of reach for these groups. Let’s stand our ground on the development push, COAH issues, and other matters. Sorry, but TNDs only translate to more sprawl.
And then, COAH homes requirements never seem certain. COAH officials as well as legislators in Trenton seem to have backed down or might now be reconsidering obligation figures, as stated in rather recent, published information.
Open government was sorely needed in 1998. No axe to grind, no political ambitions from here just honest, good government is what we voted for is what we expect. The recently-elected two Township Committee members appear receptive to scrap plans for the TND. Others, possibly misguided, need to hear from the public once more, perhaps at a future, combined session of the Township Committee and Planning Board.
Erich Lehmann, Titusville

