30 Issues Day 13: NJ Farmlands Preservation

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

New Jersey voters will decide in November whether or not to approve Public Question #1: the "Green Acres, Water Supply and Floodplain Protection, and Farmland and Historic Preservation Bond Act of 2009." Peter Furey, executive director of the New Jersey Farm Bureau, supports the measure. David Russo, New Jersey Assemblyman (R-40th, Ridgewood), argues that the state can’t afford it.


Peter Furey and David Russo

Comments [9]

hjs from 11211

support "To provide for or maintain, by supplying with money or necessities."

Oct. 07 2009 11:54 AM
Steve Polinsky from East Brunswick NJ

Brian, your question about using eminent domain to acquire the property in lieu of a bond issue misses the point (and shows a certain misunderstanding of eminent domain). At least in NJ, when the State does "take" under eminent domain, it must pay fair market value for the taken land. While I don't believe eminent domain is available for green acres, even if it was, the underlying funding is still necessary. Hence, the bond issue. The problem with bond issues is their deceptiveness, the bonded indebtedness must still be paid through tax revenue.

Oct. 07 2009 11:50 AM
em from nj

hjs: depends on your definition of "support". for instance, should "old people" get the nj property tax rebate regardless of income. my answer is NO.

Oct. 07 2009 11:48 AM
hjs from 11211

why should we support old people when we can't "afford to do so"

Oct. 07 2009 11:45 AM
PETE from brooklyn

it's called the Garden State not the Garbage State.

Oct. 07 2009 11:42 AM
em from nj

I would like to buy a nice parcel of land out in the woods but I cannot afford to do so. Why should the state (aka the citizens of NJ) take on more debt when we cannot afford it. Borrowing has gotten us where we are today - and places an unfair burden on future citizens. I have always supported these open space ballot questions in the past, but not this time.

Oct. 07 2009 11:40 AM
John Celardo from Fanwood, NJ

An interesting bond issue, and discussion. I live in Fanwood, a one square mile town with no open spaces. However, we tried out Transfer of Development Rights to attempt to preserve our historic district. TDR is used primarily in farm areas to avoid development of open spaces. Developers are given zoning considerations if they agree to develop land that is not designated as open spaces. It’s bee tabled in Fanwood in favor of our Historic Preservation ordinance. It seems that a ready made procedure could avoid the need for this ballot issue.

Oct. 07 2009 11:40 AM
Derek from 42nd st. & Lex

The State just siezed 800,000 acers in Northern NJ in 2008. The State is irresponsible with it's land management and the State is broke and cannot handle the debt. In a few decades the State of NJ will own a majority of the land in NJ. Every year the State trys to grab more land and this is the problem of high home prices.

Oct. 07 2009 11:31 AM

I think it's relevant to recall former governor Brendan Byrne's legacy on the topic of land preservation. He was instrumental in keeping developers out of the NJ Pine Barrens, a position for which he took a lot of flak at the time, but which is now regarded as farsighted.

Oct. 07 2009 08:45 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.