Grace Sinden, Princeton
I am more than disappointed by the direction of the discussion at the Princeton Council meeting of Jan. 25 which I viewed electronically. First, I want to applaud Council President Lance Liverman and Council members Jenny Crumiller and Heather Howard for their far-sighted support of a rare financial opportunity to gain open space in Princeton. Although Mayor Lempert also supports this measure she is prevented from breaking a tie vote on this type of ordinance which requires a two-thirds vote of council to pass.
My disappointment is focussed on the three council members who I and many others feel are being short-sighted in their reasons for either denying or delaying, and potentially not proceeding with the ordinance to approve the purchase of 20.4 acres of heavily wooded land from a developer who would otherwise build a large development on the environmentally sensitive Princeton Ridge. The 20.4 acres would add to the Princeton Ridge Preserve.
The funds for this $4.4 million purchase would come almost exclusively from other sources, including the state, county and Friends of Princeton Open Space. To close the gap, the town is expecting a Green Acres state grant from funds approved by voter referendum last November which constitutionally dedicated a portion of the Corporate Business Tax to Green Acres funding. Of this, $66 million has yet to be allocated from the state’s current fiscal year ending July 1, with another $80 million expected to be available in the next fiscal budget.
Gov. Christie, on one of his visits to New Jersey, has pocket vetoed the Legislature’s bill which would move forward with open space funding. Meanwhile, the deadline for the option to purchase the land is Feb. 14 and the offer could be withdrawn by the developer if not approved by the council before then. The council will take this up again on Feb. 8.
My concern is primarily regarding the three council members in their lack of focus on the land preservation thesis that “they aren’t making any more” in this, the most densely populated state in the U.S., expected to be the first state at full “buildout.” Two of the council members concerns are related to the possibility that the $397,000 (9 percent of the $4.4 million total cost) would be delayed by the governor’s actions, though Mayor Lempert has received word that the state funding will be available.
Also puzzling are some of the reasons of one council member that the property does not have good access and trails for public use and that we have sufficient open space. Those amenities can be developed later but the land won’t be available to preserve later if action is not taken now. This heavily wooded acreage has ecological value even if it is not immediately available to people for use. Such preservation is made also for future generations, not only for those of us here now.
In addition, the avoidance of more large development, including the removal of many trees, would stem water runoff and flooding as well as increased traffic and other burdens on myriad municipal services. Those factors are also worth quite a lot financially and otherwise.
I urge that the council on Feb. 8 to take the long view on this land preservation, also a unique financial opportunity, and that people who care about open space preservation make themselves heard at that 7 p.m. meeting. Agendas are online at www.princetonnj.gov.
Grace Sinden
Princeton
