James M. Coleman Jr.
Guest Column
Public ought to have say in Sandy Hook plan
(Open letter to Russel J. Wilson, superintendent, Sandy Hook Unit, Gateway National Recreation Area)
The National Park Service (NPS) regional director, Marie Rust, signed a finding July 8 that the proposed project by Sandy Hook Partners (SHP) at Fort Hancock would have no significant environmental impact. According to the Letter of Intent between NPS and SHP, the latter would have six months to obtain "a commercially reasonable commitment for financing necessary for fulfillment of its obligations under the terms of the lease."
You, Mr. Wilson, were quoted in the July 18 issue of a local weekly newspaper saying SHP would be completing the project "in a three-phase five-year period." You went on to say SHP must show it "has firm closed financing for the first phase of the proposal, before a lease will be signed." After that, you said "experts retained by the park service had recommended that process and had said that it was not necessary to have financing in place for the whole project."
I don’t care what your experts say. The NPS signed the contract (letter of intent) and it says no such thing as phases, partial financing, and the like. You’re a lawyer, Mr. Wilson. Surely you can understand what your contract says. If you can’t understand that, please read your proposed lease, Section 14.1. It says, "Prior to undertaking lease improvements or alterations, and by a date sufficient to permit completion of the lessee improvements or alterations in a timely manner … the lessee shall submit to the lessor commercially reasonable evidence, satisfactory to the lessor that the lessee has obtained a commercially reasonable commitment for financing necessary for the construction of the lessee improvements or alterations for which lessee is seeking approval (financial commitment)."
Where does it say first phase or partial commitment? It doesn’t, and you have no right to now say the developer need only show financing for some part of the whole amount.
What right do you have to mislead everyone that SHP has to come up with all the money and now say only a portion of it plus having to submit a reasonable plan for the rest of the project? Reasonable to whom? To you, Marie Rust, or the hired experts? How about the public? Do they have any input?
I’d like an answer as to how you can violate your own contract.
James M. Coleman Jr. is a resident of Red Bank.