Your Turn
Guest Column
Judith Stanley
Coleman
Secrecy still shrouds Sandy Hook redevelopment scheme

How can a newly released traffic study, that I read about in the paper on March 27, predict the effect of any plan for Fort Hancock upon our community unless we know what is being proposed for each of the 36 buildings and perhaps up to 78 buildings possible for lease?

What is the exact number of people, the type of tenants and cars involved?

We still ask the same old questions we asked last year.

The National Park Service’s (NPS) new traffic impact study should claim to assess the potential impact of the redevelopment of Fort Hancock upon a widespread area from Keyport to Asbury Park to Eatontown and the Garden State Parkway.

According to the National Park Service, this study was necessary because of the concerns raised during the public comment period.

I know that I, for one, called the previous traffic study a farce. Now, the public will have until April 30 to comment on the new traffic study, and the NPS will hold a meeting April 12 from 2-5 p.m. at Fort Hancock.

We obtained a copy of the traffic study on March 31, less than two weeks before the date of the next public hearing.

This latest development in the Fort Hancock project is unacceptable and once again reflects the shroud of secrecy that surrounds the way the NPS does business.

This meeting on April 12 should be extended for at least 30 days to ensure full citizen participation.

Why did the park service fail to inform the public that yet another traffic study was under way?

Did the paid consulting group who completed the study meet with the administrators and planning boards of the towns along Route 36 or consult with the Monmouth County Planning Board?

Are the figures in the traffic study reflective of what the towns are really planning?

I know they did not contact the Middletown Planning Board office.

The previous public hearings were merely presentations by a panel of experts paid for and selected by the NPS to tell and defend their point of view.

This panel did not sit as a judicial body such as a Planning Board would.

A Planning Board serves to protect the community, not as a panel whose mind is already made up.

In addition, throughout the NPS public hearing process, the public has always been at a disadvantage with information released at the 11th hour and no opportunity for any real exchange of ideas.

I have been concerned about the way this project has been handled from the beginning.

I have written to Fran Mainella, director of the National Park Service, and Marie Rust, Northeast Regional director, several times with no response.

We have understood some of the NPS officials to say we have valid objections, but all we get is the runaround.

I have also expressed concern with the secrecy of the process and the withholding of crucial information from the public to whom the land and buildings belong.

Now we are back to the same old problems.

The secrecy of the traffic study and the timing of its release only underscores why we cannot accept this process.

The release of the previous public comments was promised back in November 2002.

Now, NPS releases another traffic study.

Why? What is next?

We deserve better from our government. This is our region’s future.

Where is the response?

Secrecy does not breed the inclusion of truthful facts that should be addressed.

The public must be allowed to play a real role if the process is to have any credibility.

We must make sure this last remaining fragile area in the gateway region is saved from commercialization, sprawl and traffic.

A citizens task force must be appointed, and independent traffic and environmental studies must be ordered.

We at Save Sandy Hook shall next comment on the traffic study after it has been thoroughly reviewed, which cannot be done by April 12.

An extension of time for at least 30 days should be granted.

Judith Stanley Coleman is the president of Save Sandy Hook