Letters

Matawan MOM spur would mean loss of trail

Will a train replace the hikers and bikers who enjoy the newly-opened southern extension of the Henry Hudson Trail? If Sen. Peter Inverso could wield his political power once again, the answer would certainly be yes.

In 2001, Inverso (R-Middlesex/Mercer) was a member of the Senate Budget Committee that controls NJ Transit’s budget, and during budget hearings he requested the Lakehurst-Matawan line be reconsidered — even though NJT’s own multimillion dollar 1996 Major Investment Study concluded it was not a viable option. Why did Senator Inverso do this? The answer is simple: he did not want train service running through Middlesex County, even if the Lakehurst-Monmouth Junction route is the most efficient and logical choice.

Furthermore it is distressing to know that, because of the pressure exerted from politicians in Middlesex County, NJT was reconsidering the Lakehurst-Matawan train line after a 20-year lease was granted to the Monmouth County Parks System to develop the southern extension of the Henry Hudson Trail.

For residents of Monmouth County, a Lakehurst-Matawan line would mean the loss of the newly opened recreational facility and the loss of $2.1 million of our tax dollars the Monmouth County Park System recently spent to pave the trail. Homeowners in Monmouth County, like myself, who moved into the vicinity of the Henry Hudson Trail because we believed it would be an exciting addition to our community, will lose a great recreational asset.

The Matawan proposal makes little sense based on the large number of homes along the trail and the closeness of this route to the existing North Jersey Coast Line. Let Sen. Inverso and NJT’s Executive Director George Warrington know that if a line is to be developed, the only one that makes sense is the Lakehurst-Monmouth Junction line as the 1996 Major Investment Study has already concluded.

Brian and Barbara Buckley

Freehold

Educate yourselves on issues and exercise right to vote

Labor Day is over and now the “silly season” is upon us — did you ever ask yourself what motivates a politician? It’s not always explained by Maslow’s Hierarchy of Need or the desire to serve. Lately, we learn greed, power and corruption can be the strongest of motivators, overriding any virtue or conscience an individual may have. Then there are times some politicians have more nerve than brains.

The voters, all of us, need to educate ourselves and exercise our franchise. We must make our voices heard. We can no longer wait until the roof falls in before we fix it. It just costs too much to fix every time it fails.

Term limits are necessary to correct some of the evils of politics. Don’t kid yourself — some aspects of politics are corrupting. Just read the newspapers. Too much concentration of power in one party or one politician is unhealthy for the masses. This is why we have more than a single-party system. Our forefathers were not naive.

There are different schools of thought and different approaches to correcting problems. That doesn’t make any one proposal wrong because it is presented by a particular political party. Negotiation and consensus minus the corruption, greed, power struggles and egotism might really make headway in solving some of New Jersey’s critical issues. Unfortunately I don’t have any delusions about New Jersey — or our communities’ — politics. I just hope for a better world — someday.

Currently this state can hold itself up as the epitome of all that’s wrong with politics in this country. It’s time for the residents of New Jersey to make their voices heard. Educate yourself and vote — at the local level, at the state level and at the national level. Maybe the GRIP (get rid of incumbent politicians) movement would be a good start. Make politicians prove their integrity and worthiness of the public trust. Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric — much of it is hyperbole.

Regardless of the color of your politics — red, blue, green or purple for that matter — we can no longer afford the follies of the fools. Character flaws are character flaws. We do not need politicians whose sole purpose is to serve themselves. We the residents of this state, this county and our communities are the losers.

Election Day is the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November. This year, that’s Nov. 8. Make sure it is a day marked on your list of “to do” things. Remember always the old adages — “to the victor go the spoils,” “if you don’t vote, don’t complain” — and if you’re a politician reading this, “there’s no honor among thieves,” and “if the shoe fits, wear it.”

Barbara R. Thorpe

Lincroft section of Middletown

Resident defends condition of Hazlet 9/11 Memorial

This is in response to a letter printed last week titled “Hazlet 9/11 memorial is also poorly maintained.”

It was with sadness and anger that I read Mr. George Paterson’s overall view of the condition of the 9/11 Memorial in Hazlet Township. My first thought was how “ungrateful.” Here our town — through the tireless efforts of many volunteers and individuals who comprised our own 9/11 commission — worked to raise funds and donations in order to pay tribute to those lives that were lost, in particular those individuals from our town who were taken away from their loved ones on the horrific day. But after further thought, I realized there was no possible way I can know how he feels.

However, to label the Hazlet memorial park as in “poor” condition is an overstatement. I am proud to be a resident of Hazlet and one who is very active in town.

First let me say I frequent the memorial park quite often. It is in excellent condition. It is my understanding that personnel from the township’s public works and recreation commission were present on that day and pulled overgrown weeds and grass from and near the site. I was there for both the commemoration of the memorial as well as for this year’s ceremony.

The memorial is the one site in town that I can honestly say I am proud of in town. No tax dollars were spent on this as far as I am aware of. My definition of something that is in poor condition is “something that has begun to deteriorate and needs immediate attention.” I am proud to say this does not currently exist. There are no loose pavers, falling brush or the like.

Falling pollen, dust and soot is an everyday thing. My car is covered with it now.

Walter Szczuplak

Hazlet

Residents tried their best to stop town hall project

It’s a sad day for Hazlet. The trees are down, and they have begun to dig. Although many residents tried to stop the destruction, we failed. Our first mistake was to trust those individuals who were elected to look out for the interest of our town. The current administration may state they were working on this project for years; however, it was not until February of this year that the details of the project were made public. No information was presented in the media to make the residents aware of the planning process.

During the last few months — as my husband and I socialized with other residents — we realized we were not the only ones who felt this was a bad decision, and our voices needed to be heard. Hence, the beginning of the petition. A petition of more than 1,000 residents’ signatures was presented to the committee at the June meeting. The committee completely dismissed the petition.

At subsequent meetings, many concerned residents spoke to the committee reinforcing the opposition to the location, to no avail. Mayor Michael Sachs was going to “pull the trigger” on this project and no one could stop him. Some have accused the Democrats of using this opposition as a political platform. I applaud the Democrats for at least listening to the cry of the people.

I watch, helpless, as Hazlet deteriorates, as trees fall, developments grown, and now Veteran’s Park becomes a “commercial center.” A sad day, indeed.

Diana Marques

Hazlet

Zoning will ‘guide future of beautiful town’

On Sept. 12, the Holmdel Township Committee voted 3-2 to approve a new conservation zoning ordinance which will preserve a large amount of open land in southern Holmdel at no cost to taxpayers. Mayor Larry Fink, Janet Berk, and Tony Orsini — who voted in favor of the ordinance — are to be commended for taking this step, as are the planners who worked so hard to create a plan that will benefit us all.

The two members of the Township Committee who voted against this ordinance did so, I believe, in part because they failed to analyze the effects of the plan. One expressed a concern that without a formal traffic study we will not know how the plan affects the growing congestion of Holmdel roads. But in fact, the new zoning permits the same number of homes to be constructed on each of the affected tracts as would have been allowed by previous zoning, except where it allows two small commercial buildings — only about the same size as permitted homes — to replace the same number of homes; consequently, the change in zoning will have no greater impact on future traffic than building under the old zoning.

Another member voiced a concern about the fiscal impact of the new zoning, i.e., whether it will increase our taxes. After all, if lots are smaller, won’t the prices of the homes — and their property taxes — be lower? And won’t that mean that the rest of us will have to pay more? The township planner answered this very ably by giving examples of existing new homes and showing that lot size was not the determining factor in their selling prices. In fact, homes close to preserved land are likely to be worth more than similar homes without this amenity.

I’ve seen this for myself — when I had to sell my mother’s home recently, I discovered its price was much higher than that of nearly identical homes a few blocks away, simply because it was adjacent to a large tract of preserved forest. People want privacy and beauty, and they are willing to pay for it. Furthermore, since the number of residences that can be built on this land will amount to less than 2 percent of the existing residences in town, any differences in future tax revenue — whether positive or negative — will represent a small fraction of the total in the town, and hence can have no noticeable effect on current residents’ taxes.

This new zoning ordinance is a win for us all — for the people who will live in homes that benefit from being built next to open space, for the developers who will be able to build homes that will prove especially appealing, and for all the people of Holmdel who will gain large amounts of contiguous public land at no cost.

I thank those members of the Township Committee and the planners who have found a creative way to guide the future of our beautiful town.

Janet Jackel

Holmdel

Berk, Orsini will help save open space in Holmdel

While living in Holmdel for more than 30 years, I have seen woods and farms disappear to be replaced by housing developments. This 20-year trend was en route to eradicate all of Holmdel’s open land when our present mayor, Larry Fink, led a citizens movement to change course and start preserving what was left.

Larry Fink and his conservationist supporters on the Township Committee, Janet Berk and Tony Orsini, have used their majority on the committee to preserve Holmdel’s most highly prized attribute — our open space. The conservation zoning they advocate is an innovative way to keep the rural character of the town and save open space at no cost to the taxpayer.

Land conservation protects our drinking water and enhances our property values because open land becomes more desirable the less there is of it. In fact, preserving open space is good for everyone in the community — everyone, that is, except the developers, who never rest until every speck of land is built out.

This brings us to November’s election. Janet Berk and Tony Orsini supported Larry Fink against the two developer-friendly members of the Township Committee. By re-electing Berk and Orsini in November, we keep Larry Fink as our mayor and we ensure the success of this team’s anti-sprawl conservation program.

Anita Linke

Holmdel

‘Wildlife key to keeping balance in a natural area’

For all those urban folk that moved from an overdeveloped area to escape congestion and the effects thereof on their quality of life, the expectation that all other previous inhabitants should move out to make room for them is self-serving, shortsighted and unrealistic.

Bears inhabited New Jersey long before the relocation of those fleeing urban sprawl. What will be the next species that encroaches on residential dwellings and deemed by Fish and Wildlife to be a nuisance? Perhaps the blue jay will be considered too noisy for the peace and solace of suburbia. Fish and Wildlife would reap overwhelming revenues for issuing voluminous permits to hunt blue jays.

One cannot expect an agency subsidized by fees for hunting permits and fishing licenses to be objective when establishing best management policies/practices for those that are hunted and fished.

For human habitation in New Jersey to remain desirable, a balance must be struck to preserve, conserve and protect our vanishing natural resources. Wildlife is a byproduct of and are vital inhabitants for our natural resources.

The conservation/preservation of and bonding for open space are popular and promoted by elected officials and those that seek public office. Not all open space must and/or should be destined for soccer fields, golf courses, associated recreational pursuits and commercial use. Areas kept in their natural state are the best bang for the taxpayers’ buck to keep our air and water safe and sound and our taxes down. Wildlife is key to keeping nature’s balance in a natural area.

Ursula Goetz

executive director

Monmouth County SPCA

Eatontown