Requesting Residents' Help in Fair Haven

I am writing to ask for your help in determining the best course of action in relation to a critical issue affecting Fair Haven. With your guidance, I hope to help the borough to achieve an end result which is acceptable to a majority of residents.

For several years, the Borough Council has been trying to decide on the best placement for a cellular tower. Most recently, the governing body agreed on a location on Fisk Street. Several residents have contacted me to protest this placement. At the same time, I understand that when Fair Haven Fields, the Department of Public Works, the police station and other locations were discussed, there was also some opposition. In addition, the Church of the Nativity has discussed privately installing a cell tower on the church property.

Many of us, myself included, have been unclear whether Fair Haven must accept a cell tower at all within its boundaries, or whether we can decide that “no tower” is the best option given our concerns. My office has thoroughly researched this issue.

We found that the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 allows a municipality to control the placement of a cell tower, but prohibits an outright ban. If a municipality does not approve a site on public land for the construction of a tower, then a cell carrier can identify a private location. While the approval of land use boards is required to proceed on private property, if this approval is denied or delayed for an unreasonable time the cell carrier could bring legal action. This would be costly and probably a losing battle for Fair Haven.

Although I am not happy with this conclusion, it appears to be a reality we need to face as we consider the road ahead. Verizon has notified Fair Haven that they intend to wait until October for a public site to be approved, before proceeding on private property.

If a cell tower must go forward, ideally Fair Haven should benefit from the revenue that would be generated. If a cellular company were to construct a tower on private property, Fair Haven would have far less control over its location than if public property were used, and would not be able to benefit financially.

However, the potential health and safety issues pertaining to cell towers, effects on neighborhood aesthetics, property values and other factors are far more important than any potential financial gain. In this sense, the location of a tower (as far from homes as possible) should take precedence over any effort to capture revenues.

In examining possible public sites for the cell tower, it is clear that using a parcel of Fair Haven Fields would be the best alternative since it is not in close proximity to homes and would require only about .2 acres from this 77 acre space. But as you may know, Fair Haven’s application to pursue this alternative was denied by the NJ Department of Environmental Protection since this land is preserved as open space under the state’s Green Acres program. This decision was made despite Fair Haven’s offer to contribute approximately .57 acres of land at the end of Hendrickson Place (historically used for leaves) into the Green Acres program in exchange for the .2 acres that would be needed, in addition to making other concessions.

The primary reason is the policy that preserved open space should never be used for any type of development, unless it is an essential project and there are truly no other alternatives.

The DEP has maintained that there are other public and private sites within Fair Haven which would be viable locations. Implicit in their position is the notion that community opposition, in and of itself, does not make a location a non-viable alternative. They have also stated that the property offered in the “swap” is not suitable for open space and recreational uses. On this point, I have written to the DEP proposing that initial revenues from a cell tower could be used to improve the property.

In the end, I think it will be difficult to prove to the DEP that there are no other viable locations. Even as we continue our advocacy, the mere fact that Verizon is speaking with Church of the Nativity implies that the church location is viable – even if residents of the Gentry and elsewhere have valid concerns about it.

The DEP has also reminded us that we would need to seek approval from the National Park Service as well, since some federal funds were used at Fair Haven Fields.

I have had numerous conversations with Governor Corzine’s office, the administrator of the Green Acres program, and with DEP Commissioner Lisa Jackson, requesting that they reconsider this decision. At this point, a change seems unlikely. I would very much like to advocate for Fair Haven on this issue, but there doesn’t seem to be an easy solution at this point. I would greatly appreciate any guidance or suggestions you may have, and I will continue speaking with the Borough, the DEP and Verizon to try to work toward a solution.

I will make sure to keep everyone for whom we have an e-mail address up to speed on any developments. Please feel free to contact me at anytime via e-mail at AsmPanter@njleg.org or at the address and phone number listed above. Thanks for your help.