[ back ]
Voters to decide on open space trust fund
(by Owen Proctor - October 02, 2008)
Cedar Grove voters can once again decide if they want to contribute to the township’s Open Space Trust Fund.
A ballot question on Nov. 4 will ask residents if they want to approve a tax levy of 2 cents for each $100 assessed on a home, to potentially buy property for open space.
Voters originally approved the fund in the late 1990s, and voted for its extension in 2004 and 2006. Deputy Mayor Joseph Chiusolo has been vocal about the biennial extension, so citizens can change their support, for example, if there is a downturn in the economy.
As of Aug. 1, the fund held $383,453, according to Township Manager Thomas Tucci. Accumulating $15,000 to $16,000 per quarter, it could surpass $400,000 by year’s end.
Since its inception, the trust has only been used once, to help purchase Essex County property off West Bradford Avenue. Demolition has begun on the former sewage plant there, which the township hopes to develop for recreational use. It sits across the street from Blasi Field, a county ball field leased by the township.
The committee also lobbied to rehabilitate the Devil’s Hole Bridge over the Peckman River. However, it was able to find other funding. The Department of Transportation provided a $125,000 grant for the bike and pedestrian span, with an additional $13,000 from the county.
According to Cedar Grove Councilman Peter Tanella, the governing body’s liaison to the Open Space Trust Fund Committee, the group has searched for properties ideal for the fund. With limited, large acres available, the committee has considered some smaller lots as potential pocket parks, he said.
Last year, a homeowner on Woodside Drive was apparently willing to sell his property to the township for open space, but council members questioned what to do with the house. Mayor Paul Lee has suggested structures on properties would have to be demolished; otherwise, vandals could target them.
The Open Space Trust Fund does not cover demolition costs.
While the Woodside deal never materialized, that led to other questions this year. Would the township extend the fund to cover potential demolition, development or maintenance on purchased property? The point was most properties that fit the fund’s criteria would require demolition, development or maintenance, even if the preparation and upkeep were minimal.
The council decided to continue to reserve the fund for purchases only. As usual, the governing body supported the question on the ballot.
Tanella said he not only supports the question being put on the ballot, but he will personally vote for it. If the occasion arises, a pocket park could be a nice, serene place for residents, maybe only requiring some wood chips, grass maintenance and a bench, he said.
There really hasn’t been an opportunity to explore all the possibilities for a particular property. But Tanella said he is confident if it happens, any deal or additional expenses would be highly scrutinized by the council. “It’s the people’s money, not mine,” he said.
As with each year of the renewal, Councilman Robert O’Toole has stated he supports the people’s ability to decide on the tax but is personally opposed to it.
“I’ve been against it since the start of it,” he said. “I have no problem keeping open space, but the people are being taxed for something before they know what we’re buying.”
O’Toole also questioned the purchase of land for a pocket park, which he said would benefit a few of its neighbors instead of the town as a whole.
Both Tanella and O’Toole said if the people stop wanting to pay for the fund or the money stops being considered for purchases, it could be transferred into other areas where it wouldn’t be wasteful.
It is anticipated this year’s question will be the correct one.
In 2006, the council approved a draft of the 2004 Open Space Trust Fund question, not the final 2004 question it intended to ask. In addition to the purchase of open space for active and passive recreation, the 2004 draft stated the fund could also be used for maintenance, conservation of farmland and historic properties, words later removed for the ballot.
However, whatever the wording, the public question is non-binding and any use of the fund requires council authorization, Township Attorney Thomas Scrivo said at the time.
[ back ]
