Controversy has been surrounding an open space bill that would let voters amend the state constitution to allow $200 million to be set aside each year to preserve open space. A strong supporter of the bill is Assemblyman John McKeon. He said the measure makes sense for the state and wishes politics wasn’t getting in the way. He also addressed his refusal to sign an easement by his property.
McKeon said he was proud that the Senate was moving in a bipartisan way for the bill, but said politics reared its ugly head with Republicans withdrawing support today. “It’s obvious to me that the governor doesn’t support it because he’s been actively lobbying against it,” McKeon said.
Some environmentalists have spoken out against the bill, which McKeon explained is because they’re concerned that earmarking $200 million per year might take away from other programs. “They think that we should have a new tax or a new source of funding. That’s just not what the politics dictate. This is a great way to approach it as it comes from existing revenues and it earmarks it so can’t be raided, like for example the Clean Energy Fund. One million dollars was taken by this administration over the last several years,” he said.
Others have criticized the bill for setting aside too much money. McKeon disagrees with that. “It’s actually probably not enough related to what land prices will be projecting forward and inflation,” he said.
McKeon said there is only one million acres of open space left. “It’s money we can’t afford not to spend. Forget about quality of life, forget about being the most densely populated state and all of those issues. Environment aside, it has to do with our economic well-being,” he said.
Losing just one acre of the one million left is too much, according to McKeon. “Agriculture is our third largest industry in New Jersey. The secretary of agriculture will say unless we come up with another 350,000 acres of farmland preservation, that’s going to plummet. We only have 200 in the bank right now,” he said.
McKeon is one of the people who hasn’t signed easements for dune projects on his property in Brick. “I’m totally, 100 percent behind having an upgraded dune system. But there are questions and information that’s not coming for me as a homeowner,” he said.
Officials have said if easements aren’t signed by Aug. 1, they will start to go after homeowners through the legal system. McKeon said he’s not afraid of that process because he believes 90 percent of what homeowners are asking for will be divulged in the legal process.
McKeon said he hopes the integrated dune system goes from Island Beach State Park to Point Pleasant and beyond. “I understand some of the towns because of other issues aren’t going to go. I think it’s dangerous,” he said. “Eighty percent of it, by the way, is beach replenishment so the dune system itself is important, but the beach replenishment is really what we need to focus on.”
When asked if he’s going to sign the easement for his property, McKeon said he hired a private engineer to go forward. “My family and I are still working on, frankly, hundreds of thousands of dollars we had in our own damage. So, it’s kind of not fair as it relates to the focus on us directly. We’re one of hundreds of families asking questions,” he said.