Resident reacts to ballot proposal
To the editor:
I am writing in response to the recent Hillsborough Township ordinance to create a referendum to allow for the diversion of a portion of Hillsborough Township open space funds for purposes other than acquiring additional open space.
I question the diversion of funds from open space acquisition. Isn’t there still enough open space land that could be acquired that would fully use the open space funds for their intended purpose?
I don’t believe Hillsborough suffers from a shortage of park/recreation areas. In addition, we are told there is going to be a developed GSA Depot, which is to be a huge open space recreation area.
There are many reasons to preserve open space even when it is not made accessible for people:
• Preventing increased flooding caused by additional impervious land cover;
• Helping lessen pollution by absorbing contaminants from our air and water,
• Ensuring the health and diversity of animal and plant communities,
• Avoiding some costs associated with development. Studies have shown that residential development costs the municipality more in educational and public services than it generates in tax revenue. Over time, even commercial ratables may not provide anticipated tax relief.
As a reader commented online: “Land physically unused by people is not useless.”
There is still land in Hillsborough that can be protected from development. Just one example is the large parcel of land, bordered by Hamilton and Sunnymead roads, which is for sale for development.
For the sake of our town and schools and infrastructure, I feel the open space funds should remain being used only for acquiring such land.
Billy Bender
Hillsborough