COUNCIL DIGS IN AGAINST PROPOSED GARDEN
Advocates are pushing the council to allow a community garden on borough-owned property to the right of the library, above. (Photo by Dustin Racioppi; click to enlarge)
By DUSTIN RACIOPPI
The green thumbs had their rakes and hoes out in force Wednesday night.
An already lengthy Red Bank council meeting carried on about 45 minutes more as elected officials and proponents of a community garden clashed on the proposed location for the first of what the group hopes will to be up to four community-tended gardens throughout town.
Advocates want the start-up site at borough-owned property adjoining the public library site. But officials say it’s the last available piece of public land on the Navesink River, and don’t want to exclude people by turning it into an area of specific interest.
And so a back-and-forth that started in March continued Wednesday, with still no place to plant a seed decided upon.
A group of about eight residents of Red Bank and nearby towns pushed the council to allow a community garden at a plot at 90 West Front Street, an oyster-shell’s toss from Maple Cove, which is also borough-owned but considered unsuitable for a garden.
Despite the council’s objections about open public space and potential issues with water connections, proponents say the site is a prime starter spot.
Sarah Klepner, of Shrewsbury Avenue, said the group believes it has addressed all concerns the council had and still, after a couple of trips to the microphone during the meeting, couldn’t figure out why the governing body wouldn’t budge on the idea.
“We haven’t been told any substantial reason why we can’t be there,” she said.
One woman suggested there were political motives behind brickwalling the plan.
Taking the stance they’ve maintained since the garden idea’s inception, council members said that piece of land should be for the use of the general public, not a select group.
“That has already been decided,” Mayor Pasquale Menna said.
Councilwoman Sharon Lee said that she, too, is a gardener, but had serious concerns that the group’s focus was too narrow, and said it should take the suggestion of the council to find another location to start the garden.
The group has chosen about 20 sites for gardens, but maintains the best place for the first one is at the West Front location.
“We are willing to support any other location. We all want this to happen,” Lee said. “You’re showing no interest as a community group, and that really concerns me, that you don’t have the ability to do what you’re asked to do.”
At Klepner’s request, Menna said he’d put the proposal into a resolution to be voted on at the council’s next meeting.
Highlands resident Tony Sloan, a farm engineer who’s been assisting the group in getting the plan in action, read an extensive letter to the council pointing out the importance of the first garden and said Red Bank could be the “flagship of urban agriculture” in Monmouth County maybe even the state if it would take the steps the group has outlined.
“In light of what it takes to start a first garden, the only suitable response of any political body to the group of people wiling to take on such a task,” he read, “should be nothing less than worshipful appreciation.”
May 26, 2011 @ 07:41:14
The public use of this land, as I have noticed, has been mainly for young teens on mountain /trick bikes, snow tubers and hang-out/rest spot for all people. And of course the fire work watchers. How would this small plot exclude the above group? I think the town council is not being specific enough as to why they are against this project.
May 26, 2011 @ 08:12:45
I agree with Susan. The council’s objections are unreasonable and their response last night was particularly rude. This piece of land is not currently being used by “the public” as it was intended. The only people I have ever seen down there are a few loitering teenagers. Putting a small community garden, with no permanent structures, on a portion of this spot will actually bring all sorts of people together and allow “the public” to come and enjoy our land as it was intended. What better place than next to the library where all aspects of the community already congregate? It is clear that there is something else going on here, some other political motive that we need to be made aware of.
May 26, 2011 @ 09:36:52
I would like to know the location of the other 19 areas mentioned. Is it possible to place this somewhere else? Perhaps somewhere that actually has water service and perhaps be a more level surface? Let ‘s face it, it’s almost June. The timig to get a plot of land marked out and plowed seems to make this a possibility for next summer.
May 26, 2011 @ 17:05:59
Developers never seem to get stone walled. Only gardeners and the YMCA.
May 26, 2011 @ 21:35:44
John,
I see a political motive on both sides which is not at all hidden.
Cindy, who is suing RB, has publicly called for the defeat of the Mayor & incumbent Council members in the last election.
And her recent actions seem directed at achieving that political goal.
She recently stirred up a controvery out of nothing by complaining loudly when RB refused to provide mulch for Maple Cove even though she admitted that was not what they agreed to.
And now there’s this controversy.
The Mayor and Councily are probably sensibly trying to avoid working further with their clear political and legal advesary.
I’m guessing they’re understandably reluctant to give her even a small piece of public property for fear she’ll use it as a new beachhead for fresh assaults on them.
May 27, 2011 @ 06:27:37
Kevin, Please…. your insinuation that the council will not let this garden happen because of me, sounds good, but hears the truth. Sickels told me back in Dec that the garden couldn’t be there because “It would take seating away from the fireworks.” That was way before the lawsuit. Now that RB is only charging at RiverSide Gardens, they have to come up with another lame excuse. Sure, they are pissed at me, but I am not the chair of the garden Committee, only a member.
Sickels was right when he stated that “This is the last piece of public land on the Navesink River”. It IS the ONLY PIECE of property left on the river that Red Bank has to sell and it abuts all of Hovanian’s properties. If Red Bank allows this garden on the property and it is successful, the people will not want to give up this land. I see the Library property along with 94 Front St. a nice little overdue gift to Hovanian. I’m sure RB wil also try to get Maple Cove into that mix.
As for the mulch, if the council people are going to say how wonderful Maple Cove is and how it is the most covented kayak launch around, I think treating it like any other park is the proper and correct thing to do. Please remember that Councilwoman Jaunita Lewis is the Parks & Rec leision to the council and Zipprich is the DPW leision. They are both running for re-election this Nov. Thanks again to Ryser’s for donating the two yards of mulch for Maple Cove. I wonder what RB pays the private landscaper that mulches the parks, on Sat and mowes the grass at 94 Front?
May 27, 2011 @ 15:51:58
Once again, someone who isn’t even a citizen of Red Bank is telling us where our tax money should go, what we should do with our land, and who we should elect.
Maybe it’s just me, but I’m finding it rather cheeky.
May 27, 2011 @ 19:32:51
Cindy,
Thanks for your response, and for sharing your earlier conversationwith Stanley.
Keep in mind I was responding to Johns comment that there is some other political motive we need to be made aware of.
But it appears you disagree with John there is political motive.
Since you were th one who had discussed the garden with Stanley, I’ll defer to you on that.
It seems youve taken a swipe at RB & Hovnanian in your comment, interestingly not for what theyve done.
But for the gift of the park they MIGHT receive from RB.
Kind of ironic with the multi million dollar gift you and I DID receive from Hovnanian, the Alton Hovnanian Emergency Care Center at Riverview.
May 28, 2011 @ 11:24:14
oh my gosh! i can not take it any longer! i am so tired of ms. burnham and her anger issues.
i have lived in red bank all of my life and am insulted by the accusations she makes over and over regarding the borough of red bank’s council and town administrator. why not keep in in your own town of fair haven or have they had enough of you as well.
in one of your postings you stated this garden was “for the people by the people”. your next comment was how could “these people” ( the council and Mr Sickles) can have so much anger toward one person, you. so cindy, i ask you,is this about “all the people” or just about you?
ps: take me off your email
May 28, 2011 @ 16:05:38
Laurie, I would love to address your questions, but I can’t really figure out what it is your asking.
If your asking me did I fight, 4 years, for public access to the Navesink river and to save this land from development, for me? No.
Am I working with the Community Garden Comm.towards the creation of a Community Garden in an unused boro owned lot for me? No.
Am I sueing RB over the illegal sale of 51 Monmouth St.for me? No.
Laurie, You say that you have lived in RB all your life. I have to wonder if you were around in the 80’s, when I fought the encroachment of the business district into the residential zone or I started the Neighborhood Watch Program in RB or was on the renovation Committee for East Side Park or ran Meet the Candidate Nights out of the Middle School, or was on the BOE. No laurie, I do things for RB and for the people of RB and nothing that I have ever done, has cost the town or tax payers anything. I would be more than happy to remove you from my email list, if you would just let me know what list you are on & what is your email address.
May 29, 2011 @ 10:59:36
Cindy:
If you don’t mind saying, why Red Bank?
Have to been involved in any FH initiatives?
May 29, 2011 @ 11:01:32
Cindy:
“you” not “to” in the 2nd question.
I speak better than I type.
May 29, 2011 @ 13:29:04
Plant the garden or the terrorists have won.
May 29, 2011 @ 13:33:27
No laurie, I do things for RB and for the people of RB and nothing that I have ever done, has cost the town or tax payers anything.
This makes me laugh out loud. Cindy, when you contacted DEP way back when regarding Maple Cove & the Borough had to respond (most likely the Borough Engineer) do you think that they do that for free? When you turned around & sued the Borough for the municipal/YMCA building, do you think that we as tax payers don’t have to pay someone to represent the Borough against your lawsuit? Who do you think is paying for that, the tooth fairy?
Every time you send someone out to Maple Cove (Stanley Sickles, etc) to check out how many petunias need planting there, that’s taking time away from other things that need to be done in the Borough, like code enforcement, fire prevention, etc (or whatever else Stanley does.
Finally, you love to tell everyone that you’ve been around since 1980 fighting for the Borough. Who cares? I was 8 in 1980, does that make me a less concerned or uninterested resident because you are older than some of the rest of us? Honestly, you really need to stick to Fair Haven topics.
May 30, 2011 @ 09:49:32
Jennifer, Years ago I did write to the DEP to ask a question regarding RB. I have a right to do that as a taxpayer, & so do you. Mr. Sickels took it upon himself to jump in and write to the DEP, in order to prevent me from getting a response from the DEP.& an answer to my question. That’s why he did it.
Regarding the 51 Monm. Law suit,if the building had reverted back to RB when Kids Bridge ended, as the law states, this suit would have never had to happen. When all the facts come out, everyone will be amazed how illegal this transaction was & how RB & the RB taxpayers got screwed. Oh, & I have been a RB taxpayer for the last 28 years.
I have never sent Mr. Sickels to Maple Cove, nor have I asked Mr. Sickels to look at Petunias. The only time I have every asked Sickels to come down to Maple Cove,is to approve the placement for the Maple Cove sign & benches. Perhapes Mr. Sickels just enjoys eating his lunch down at Maple Cove on one of the donated benches.
Jennifer, It was never my intension to pull rank on you & if that is how you feel, I am very sorry. I have never said that you were a less concerned or unterested resident. Infact, I do remember saying to you that I admired your interest and concern regarding RB issues. I am just trying to give you some background info on me,so that you can be accurate & more informed when posting comments about me.I am very proud of what I have done in RB over the last 30 years and I will continue to work towards improving the quailty of life for all Red Bankers.
May 30, 2011 @ 11:13:00
There are questions here that have not been answered.
Why is this one spot so important, when it was mentioned that there are 19 other possibilities? Do any of these have access to water? And, how are fireworks watchers going to be kept out of the garden area if and when it is placed there? Who is supposed to pay for the fencing?
And the one that numerous people have asked, that went unanswered………Cindy, why Red Bank? Do you feel that Fair Haven has no problems that need to be addressed? I realize that you own property in town, but was wondering why Fair Haven does not receive more of your attention, since you live there? I do not want to start another argument. Just a simple answer.
May 30, 2011 @ 14:42:03
Alicia, The Community Garden Committee looked at 21 Boro owned lots. Most have become parking lots or were just slivers of land. Lewis & Bagwell looked for other sites. The sites they found were,1)on S. Peral, right around the RB recycling center & not Boro owned, on Monmouth St, also not boro owned & just sold by Metrovation & at the foot of Drs. James Blvd. That is boro owned, but full of trees,trash,& water access will be an issue anywhere the garden goes. It’s just so obveious that 94 Front is so perfect. It’s just that simple. Everything that has to do with the garden is through donation including the split rail fence. As for sitting at the fireworks, the people gave the town Maple Cove, which is much larger than the garden.RB had planned to use that for revenue, it’s an even trade off. If you want, I can drop you off a proposal or you can attend the next council meeting.
As for your question as to why RB. RB is my hometown, my first apartment, my first home, my second home as well as my rental that I will be moving into in two years. I have always been involved in RB. It’s really that simple! I get involved in FH when I feel a need to. I hope that these simple answers help you to understand me & my actions.
May 30, 2011 @ 17:11:45
Thank you for explaining.
May I make a few suggestions?
How about using the smaller areas and have more of them?
Have you tried asking the owners of the empty spaces that are not borough owned to donate the use of them, until they are to be used for the owners purposes? Or maybe there would be room on property at one of the schools? I realize that it is hard to find open space in a almost completely built town. It just seems that the committee has already decided that the garden should be built next to the library, and has no intentions of changing it’s collective mind. Most times it is better to work around problems rather than trying to demand the solution.
I just think it would be more effective to chose your words carefully.
Maple Cove was already borough owned property. You were instrumental in getting it in the state it is now, but what you gave the town was the labor to clean it up, the sign, and the benches. There is nothing to trade here.
May 30, 2011 @ 19:26:16
Alicia, A school garden is not a community garden. A garden can’t be put at the Primary School & there is only land for play at the Middle School. There is a way that community gardens work & spread You need to familiarize yourself with that.Come to the next council meeting and pick up a proposal. That may help you understand how community gardens work.
May 31, 2011 @ 13:52:48
cindy,
blah, blah, blah, you have no gray when it comes to looking at feedback, everything is black and white. you have not, even once considered that maybe someone else other than you has a point. you remind be of a dog with a bone. let go!
you have cost red bank large amount’s of money and that’s a fact inspite of what you would leed people to believe.
took care of receiving you emails. blocked you.
May 31, 2011 @ 15:42:14
The purpose of a town is to benefit people so let Red Bank give the people their mulch and their garden. Maybe one garden will not be enough.
I am not a resident of Tinton Falls or an owner of property/taxpayer, but the community gardeners at the Crawford House garden were kind enough to put me on their list for a garden space. After my experiences in living in Red Bank for more than 30 years, I have no reason to believe Red Bank would extend such a courtesy to anyone.
May 31, 2011 @ 15:46:36
To clarify my comment, although I think the people trying to start a community garden would extend such a courtesy, my faith doesn’t extend to rules or regulations the town of Red Bank might want to impose.
May 31, 2011 @ 16:39:17
Laurie, You are one angrey woman and a very uninformed one too! I don’t have the slightest idea what your talking about. You must be a big drinker of the cool-aid, because I haven’t cost RB anything.If you want to say I have, please elaborate. We would all like to know.
Hey Laurie, I’ll drop the bone if you pick it up and run with it!
May 31, 2011 @ 17:22:08
not uninformed, not angry do not like cool-aid.done with you.
Jun 03, 2011 @ 10:36:31
cindy,
keep the bone.