.jpg)
The following is Oceanport Councilman Joseph Irace's statement at the Oceanport council meeting on September 4, 2008.
Councilman Johnson, Councilman Briscione, and I attended many FMERPA meetings over the last several months. Our residents should be proud of the fact that Oceanport was represented so well at these meetings. Mayor Mahon did a great job of navigating through some important issues and Oceanport came out better for it. I'm sure it took a lot of time and effort and for that I thank him. Our Borough attorney, Senator Bennett also should be commended for the conference call after conference call making sure the COAH issues that Oceanport has raised were brought to the forefront. Kim Jungfer, our Borough Clerk assisted at many meetings and represented our Borough very well during these negotiations. Borough Council represented this town in a fashion that drew compliments from the other Fort towns. I know all of us collectively; Mayor, Council, Attorney, Clerk, and resident volunteers spent countless hours delving over 500 pages of information to get to the bottom of what will be Oceanport's future.
I'm here to tell you that the vote last night for the Fort plan does not represent an end but a beginning of a new chapter for all of Oceanport. We will all remain relentless in our pursuit of a plan that Oceanport can be proud of.. We will all remain diligent in protecting the sovereignty of our town. Whether you were born and raised here or chose to move your family here like I did 11 years ago; we all know what a special place our town is. We will hold the Governor's office and Commissioner Doria to their promises regarding the COAH issues Oceanport raised.
Yes, we should all be proud of everyone who participated in the plan on behalf of Oceanport. This is not the end of our journey. It's not over yet.
Thank you!
Posts
6 comments:
Great job by Oceanport and Tinton Falls in rejecting the plan. It's a shame Eatontown and the Freeholder didn't join in but I guess that is politics as usual. The next step is to ensure local control of the reuse authority. The less State representation the better!
Art,why not call the Director and participating county dept's, who wrote the requests,attended countless meetings,heard all the arguments, and pushed decent plans for over 2 years now,and find out how much land the county stands to get, for preserved parklands, and facilities, to be used by the whole county, before someone condemns this vote, based on one small, (though relevant), portion of this whole puzzle?.. it is never perfect, when locals try and fight a messed-up, liberal state like NJ,(which would love to see the rest of it "blue" for good), and be heard by the huge Fed. gov't, too.. let's try and see how much positive we can glean from this years-long battle and effort!...
So basically the County sold out 2 of its towns for some pieces of parklands. Sounds a little like Judas if you ask me.......
Not really. The FMRERPA submitted a plan, there was only one plan on the table. To reject the plan would have left control of Fort Monmouth's redevelopment to the Department of Defense...they could have sold it to the highest bidder and put anything there.
I don't see eye to eye with Lillian Burry about Fort Monmouth, but she was right to vote to keep control local.
Like Joe said, this in only the beginning.
Art, The fallacy is that there is local control the whole process was a dog and pony show to make us think we have control.
It is all about $$$$ and the developers got what they wanted.
Art, The fallacy is that there is local control the whole process was a dog and pony show to make us think we have control.
It is all about $$$$ and the developers got what they wanted.
Unfortunately, that is very believeable.
Post a Comment