NJ Audabon Responds to NJ Future
Fri. Feb. 11, 2000
Dear Conservationists:
The Star Ledger has had our response to Barbara Lawrence's op-ed piece of Jan. 24 ("State Development Plan can't work if it's ignored") for about 10 days now, so who knows if it will ever appear. The longer the time lag between an opinion and a response, the greater the reader disconnect. So we offer you our response, with a central quote from Barbara. We were happy to see the now famous Star Ledger-Eagleton poll from Dec. referred to, and a call for the implementation of the plan, but disagree with NJ Future about who's chiefly responsible for failure to implement, and we also don't accept the State Plan as a fully effective model. Here's what we think is the central quote from her article:
"The failure lies in lack of implementation. Despite court rulings that have upheld its merits, the plan is ignored, largely unfamiliar to state officials who are supposed to use it for funding and infrastructure decisions."
Here is the NJAS (NJ Audabon Society) response:
STATE PLAN: NJ CITIZENS DESERVE BETTER
NJ Future's "Speaking Up" piece on the State Plan (Jan. 24th) leaves us bemused. They are right that the Plan hasn't been implemented. Partly, that's because its architects were content with a voluntary "ideal," with municipalities free to ignore it - which most surely have. It's a miscalculation, however, to pretend that the same politics that block implementation didn't also work to dilute the current plan.
In an age obsessed with standards, especially educational ones, this plan sets none to protect rural areas. Even the most sensitive areas, farms and forests in Planning Areas 4 and 5, are zoned for suburbia at one unit per 3-5 acres. We're seeing upscale "villages" on the scenic ridges in Hunterdon County - but these are not the centers or the locations the State Plan called for. After saying we should protect PA's 4-5, the Plan also says we can have growth everywhere, as long as it's in centers. But nobody wants more centers. Confused? So is this Plan.
NJ Audubon has pleaded with the Governor, the State Planning Commission and groups like New Jersey Future to return to national and state models that set growth boundaries and strong rural zoning/density standards, like in Oregon and in our own Pinelands. But our pleas have fallen on deaf ears. How is it that citizens know the Plan isn't working, but there wasn't a dissenting report from any Commissioner when the Plan was revised in 1997-1999?
NJ Future cites the powers of the purse set up by Maryland, which rewards areas that do things right. That's good, but how come New Jersey doesn't have any substantial $ reward system to overcome old sprawl habits? And carrots are the easy political lift.
However, in Maryland the counties, not the local governments, have the zoning power, and many rural counties have one unit per 15-20 acres zoning to draw a clearer line between suburban and rural areas. In New Jersey, our citizens know that it's hopeless to expect local governments to enact such zoning fast enough to make a difference. No, if we want it done right in New Jersey, we have to look to our own best tradition, Pinelands and the Wetlands Act, which set fair standards that local governments must respect.
Polls show citizens know the Plan isn't working. They are looking for leadership. We need a crusade to overcome the powerful special interest politics blocking a tougher Plan. The Governor will have to do better than her recent failed coastal reform effort, which was called a "sham" by the Star Ledger. NJ Future writes that the plan is "largely unfamiliar to state officials." How can that be, since Department Heads are directly accountable to the Governor, and she long ago asked them to tell her what they are doing to implement the Plan? Could it be that they are looking to her, or the next Governor, for a clear game plan about how to do it?
William R. Neil
Director of Conservation
New Jersey Audubon Society
PO Box 693
Bernardsville, NJ 09724
908-766-6446