Date : Wed, 11 Feb 2015 12:54:57 -0500
For Immediate Release
February 11, 2015
Contact Jeff Tittel, 609-558-9100
Open Space Bill Hurts Urban Areas, Parks, and Logs our Forests
A senate bill has been introduced, which designates funding for open space programs. We oppose this bill because it does not meet the needs of the people of New Jersey and it takes away money from urban areas and from parks and sends it to rural areas and for so called "stewardship." This is more about certain groups hidden agendas then buying open space for the people of New Jersey. This bill does not address the priorities that we should be facing in our open space programs.
"Green Acres is the most successful state program in history and this bill dismantles 50 years of progress we've made on open space and parks. It cuts money for park capital repair and improvements. It takes money away from urban areas and gives less money than ever before for acquisition in decades. Instead, this bill will open up environmentally sensitive lands to logging, it will cut DEP staffing while giving salaries to nonprofits. This bill is wrong for New Jersey in so many ways," said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club.
Assuming open space dedication is $71 million, the monies would be divided up generally:
64% for Green Acres: $45,440,000
4% for Blue Acres: $2,840,000
29% for Farmland Acquisition and Development: $20,590,000
3% for Historic Preservation: $2,130,000
Major cuts:
Parks capital receives a 50 percent cut. They would only receive $8 million. Under how the bill is written, Parks capital is combined with stewardship. Even though it looks like it is receiving $15 million, when you take out stewardship they are actually receiving less. This was supposed to double and increase to $32 million. They currently receive $16 million.
This bill does not allow a specific set side aside for urban areas. A lot of the money going into open space funding came from programs such as brownfield clean ups, site remediation, and parks, all which benefited urban areas tremendously. We believe we need to shift more money to benefit those communities. There is a bigger need now for parks and playgrounds because these are the fastest growing areas in New Jersey today. As we rebuild and develop our cities we have to ensure there is an adequate amount of recreation and open space for the people moving in.
It cuts the percentage of money going to Green Acres direct acquisition and the Green Acres local match program and significantly reduces the amount of funding for these programs.
The Green Acres program, which should receive 72%, is being cut to 64% percent, though this percentage is not accurate because it is not being used for pure acquisition. Having more money available in a match program will encourage counties and towns to preserve more open space. Half the local money should go to acquisitions and programs in urban areas with an emphasis on distressed communities.
Under the proposed funding for Green Acres, 22% would be allocated for state acquisition ($9,996,800) and 33% for state development ($14,995,200) including 7.26% for Fish & Wildlife Stewardship ($3,298,944), 7.26% Parks & Forestry Stewardship and 18.48% for other state development ($8,397,312). The local government would receive 38% ($17,267,200) and nonprofits would receive 7% ($3,180,800), $546,700 of that specifically designated for "nonprofit stewardship." This is the smallest amount of money for acquisition that we've seen in decades, giving money to stewardship takes away from acquisition. More important, it's not really stewardship but going towards logging and other things that shouldn't be done.
"It's critical that we restore the Green Acres program and get our priorities put back in the right place. The bills' priorities are wrong and this bill will not do enough to advance quality of life, environmental protections, and recreational opportunities. This bill sides with hidden public agendas over the public good. We are not investing enough in parks and recreation for people, nor preserve environmentally sensitive lands and watersheds," said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club.
Under this bill, money from state acquisition programs are going to be reduced and its not going to be enough from the $500 million in backlogs for local acquisition programs. It also doesn't set aside funding for urban acquisitions.
This bill includes money for stewardship for nonprofits. Stewardship is not defined properly under this bill and it has been defined in the past as logging on public lands. They are taking money from DEP staff, site remediation and brownfields to pay for non profit staff. We should not take money from urban parks and playgrounds to log state forests. We will vigorously oppose any money for stewardship. We cannot take money from urban parks and playgrounds to log our state forests.
"It is unconscionable that we are taking away from DEP staff and giving it to staff nonprofits. This is an outrageous abuse of the open space program. When we have the least amount of funding for open space, putting money into stewardship makes no sense. When we are laying off people at the DEP, we should use funds for parks. It is terrible public policy and abuse of open space funds," said Jeff Tittel.
There are also monies for the state Fish and Wildlife and Parks agencies themselves to do stewardship, but it is also not defined. There is funding for stewardship for which we are concerned would be used for clear cutting forests in the Pinelands to create deer and grouse habitat.
In this bill, even though the money is coming from DEP, the amount that agriculture would get would stay the same. We are actually cutting programs from urban areas for toxic sites clean-up and we are giving the same percentage to the farmlands program. Farmland should drop to 20% from its current 29%. When we take Department of Agriculture staff money to clean up toxic sites then they should get more farmland preservation money. Many of these preserved farms are being theme parks with everything from bounce rooms and cow trains to weddings and brew pubs. Farmland preservation funding should come from having farmers repay some of the tax break they previously received when they sell their land to developers.
"How can we justify taking away money from children in cities and funding logging in our forests? We should not allow open space program to go forward on the backs of our urban areas and state parks. It is critical that the most important governmental program in history continues but we have to get our priorities fixed. New Jersey is the most densely developed state in the nation and needs to protect environmentally sensitive areas, and balance that with the need for parks and recreation. We believe that investing in open space is an investment in the future. This bill does not do that," said Jeff Tittel, Director of the New Jersey Sierra Club. "The struggle over the implementation of this legislation will show the clear distinctive lines that have formed when it comes to environmental policy, and open space protections. We strongly oppose this legislation and if this bill were to go forward in its current form then the public should have opposed this ballot question. It's priorities are wrong and it takes us backwards not forwards."
--