Preserved Farmland in Danger

A Standard of Ethics
Preserved Farmland in Danger
By Rose Ann Scotti

Acting Governor Codey's golden legacy has been highly tarnished! According to an Asbury Park Press editorial dated 1/14, we have a new threat to our attempts to preserve New Jersey's agricultural heritage and open space. Codey signed into law a bill (S-206/A-559) that would expand the kinds of commercial uses permitted on preserved farmland. The synopsis reads, "Allows commercial nonagricultural activities to occur, and personal wireless service facilities to be erected, on preserved farmland under certain circumstances".

Currently farmers are allowed to use portions of preserved land for bed-and-breakfasts, fairs, festivals, concerts, bakeries, wineries, and produce stands. However, while the new legislation is very specific when naming cellular towers, as a new permitted non-agricultural commercial use, it also opens the door for other non-agricultural commercial uses such as banks, convenience stores and gas stations. And, not only can existing structures such as greenhouses be expanded up to 500 square feet to accommodate a non-agricultural commercial use, but new construction of up to 500 feet is allowed as well.

My extensive planning and zoning board experience makes me wary of land use precedents on preserved land with existing large structures. This legislation creates humongous legal loopholes for individuals eager to circumvent development restrictions and could have our future land preservation dollars going to large legal fees. It violates the wishes of taxpayers footing the bill for costly land preservation programs, and I find it insulting that the people I elected to public office let it slip by without full public discourse. Apparently the Sierra Club and the New Jersey State League of Municipalities, as well as Farmland Preservation Committees all over the state have opposed it since its inception, and a public outcry did result in a pre-election postponement. However, it seems to have proceeded very quickly to the Governor's office for signature in the post-election lull without the public being made aware of the consequences.

Feel double-crossed? What can we do? We can request our local governing bodies and Farmland Preservation Committees pass resolutions urging our elected representatives and new Governor to repeal this law soon as possible. In addition, we should personally contact every elected individual we supported in November and let them know that we will be monitoring their active involvement, or lack thereof, in this endeavor.

Immigration Article II

A Standard of Ethics
Immigration Article II
By Rose Ann Scotti

Public officials from Washington down to the local level owe it to us to muddle through the emotion and commotion, the misrepresentation of facts, and the chorus of objections and see the forest for the trees with regard to our post 911 immigration policies. In an Asbury Park Press Commentary on December 29, Partha Banerjee, Executive Director of the New Jersey Immigration Policy Network vehemently objected to (HR-4437) the Border Protection Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control act of 2005, saying that enforcement-only is the wrong way to reform immigration policy. I agree. Any change in our immigration policies and methods of dealing with illegal immigrants must be much more comprehensive, and must include an immigrant worker program as well as relentless enforcement of immigration law.

President Bush's Temporary Worker Program appears to address these goals. It would meet the economy's demands while rejecting outright amnesty for those who break our law. The proposed program attempts to match foreign workers with American employers for jobs that no American is willing to take, and temporary workers will be able to register for legal status for a fixed time period and then be required to return home. The Administration also proposes a more secure border, prevention of illegal crossings, strengthened enforcement of immigration laws, and tamper-proof I.D. cards for every legal temporary worker

Basics of the three-part plan

*The U.S. will return every illegal entrant caught crossing the southwest border with no exceptions.

Since he took office, the President has increased funding for border security by 60 percent and border agents have apprehended and sent home more than 4.5 million people coming into our country illegally including about 350,000 with criminal records!

More than 85% of apprehended illegal immigrants are from Mexico, and most are immediately escorted back across the border within 24 hours. The government is using interior repatriation whereby Mexican illegal entrants are returned to their hometowns, making it more difficult for them to attempt another crossing. Nearly 35,000 illegal immigrants were returned to Mexico through interior repatriation in a West Arizona desert pilot program, and only about 8 percent turned up trying to cross again.

The administration is ending the practice of "Catch and Release" where most non-Mexican illegal immigrants apprehended are released and directed to return for a court appearance. Historically 75% percent fail to show up and in past years only 30,000 of the 160,000 non-Mexicans caught coming across our Southwest border were sent home. We now are using an expedited removal process wherein illegals are returned three times faster than usual (on an average of 32 days). The administration is taking further steps to accelerate the removal process by pressing foreign governments to take back their citizens more promptly, streamlining bureaucracy and increasing the number of flights carrying illegal immigrants home. In one year, more than 20,000 non-Mexicans caught crossing the border between Laredo and Tucson alone were deported using expedited removal, and this process will be expanded across the entire southwest border.

*Administration will work with congress to reform immigration laws.

All those interested in true comprehensive and fair reform should be focusing on bills such as (S.1033) Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, sponsored by Senators McCain and Kennedy providing, among other things, for a temporary work visa program along the lines of the President's proposal and a new H-5B nonimmigrant status for undocumented aliens currently in the U.S. These temporary workers, after paying a fine, will be able to register for legal status for a fixed time period and then be required to return home.

*The Federal Government will act to stop people from illegally crossing the border in the first place through increases in manpower and deployment of new technology and construction of physical barriers to entry.

Why is it that neither of our Senators from New Jersey has joined in the expected chorus of cooperation to support the President's proposals for immigration reform? These proposals deserve strong, bi-partisan support, especially from states like New York and New Jersey where counter-terrorism policies should be at the forefront of the political agenda. I would hope that the new Corzine administration as well as our two Democrat Senators and entire congressional delegation will work with Rep. Garrett (see previous article on immigration), Senators McCain and Kennedy and President Bush to coordinate the Clear Act and the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act with the President's work program to draw out and document all illegal immigrants. In my view, such proposals provide true comprehensive reform to our immigration policies and deserve support from groups such as the New Jersey Immigration Policy Network. Those who are truly interested in working to better their lives will have an opportunity to do so with two-year temporary worker status, and those who are currently working under illegal status would be given an opportunity to join the program and continue feeding and supporting their families until they return to their homelands.

Americans feel insecure in the post 911 era with pre-911 immigration policies in place. And, while we are a generous and compassionate nation, I believe a growing majority of Americans has begun to resent the drain on our social services and schools by unchecked immigration from south of our border. Our government needs to move swiftly and decisively or anti-immigrant sentiment surely will continue to grow.

On Immigration

A Standard of Ethics
BY ROSE ANN SCOTTI
JerseyPolitics.com Columnist

Are we getting our ducks in a row, or are we sitting ducks? Here, in New Jersey, several nuclear power plants, oil refineries and chemical plants could place thousands of people at ground zero in the event of a terrorist attack, yet little has been said about how we plan to use our homeland security funds to prevent further terrorist infiltration of our towns and cities. I recall viewing a 60 Minutes' presentation several years ago about immigrants with temporary visas arriving at local airports and disappearing into the night with little, if any, follow-up as to their whereabouts and activities. Can we really afford to continue lax enforcement of immigration laws in this post 9/11 era?

I was most disturbed when I discovered that local and state police in New Jersey have been reluctant to assist Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in arresting/apprehending illegal aliens, stating that they do not want to get involved with immigration issues because it is the responsibility of the Federal Government. Technically, they are correct, EXCEPT that immigration control is our first line of defense against terrorists, and federal authorities often have information on illegal aliens with known criminal records and possible terrorist plans. Plus, since September 11th, millions of federal dollars have poured into local and state security services to prevent and respond to terrorist attacks.

In Princeton Borough, for example, the Council sought an opinion on banning local officers from going on immigration raids. According to the legal opinion issued by the New Jersey Attorney General on September 20, 2005, local police officers cannot refuse to assist federal immigration agents when they conduct raids in the state. This will surely affect the way the state's municipalities deal with illegal immigrants. In the ruling, it is made crystal clear that municipal government does not have "the authority to direct its police force to suspend the enforcement of a criminal law or to disregard an allegation of criminal activity." It went on to say, "all county and municipal police officers are expected to either enforce or assist other agencies in the enforcement of immigration laws." The opinion repeatedly referred only to "criminal activity", and is still being debated in several New Jersey towns - as well as across the United States - by individuals who have argued that municipal police should not get involved in enforcing federal immigration violations that are considered civil, and not criminal. However, a spokesman from the Attorney General's Office said police don't have the option of choosing which laws to enforce. The decision is believed to be the first time the state has taken a position on local police involvement in immigration enforcement.

Given all the negative press on the misuse of homeland security funds by certain local entities, I find it strange that gubernatorial and state assembly and senate candidates have been eerily silent on the issue. Sweeping federal legislation has been introduced to require state and local police to enforce immigration law. Entitled the Clear Law Enforcement for Criminal Alien Removal Act of 2005 (CLEAR Act, HR 3137), the bill was introduced in the House of Representatives on June 30, 2005. Sponsored by Rep. Charles Norwood (GA), it has 104 cosponsors, with Rep. Scott Garrett being the single sponsor from New Jersey. The companion Senate bill (S 1362) sponsored by Sen. Jeff Sessions (AL), introduced in the Senate June 30, 2005, has three cosponsors, none thus far from New Jersey. The legislation has-far reaching implications and, if passed, would criminalize immigration status violations and drastically expand the role of state and local police in the enforcement of immigration law. Additionally, the bill provides for financial assistance to state and local police agencies involved in such enforcement.

Our elected representatives, and those who are beseeching us for the job, should not shy away from the illegal immigration issue. In fact, they should be proposing ways to protect us against the criminal element in our alien population without causing harm to the millions of innocent individuals working to achieve better lives for themselves and their families. Why don't we hear more discussion about an amnesty program for such individuals to be developed and enforced along with the Clear Act, should it become law? Senator Corzine has referred to the New Jersey coastline between Port Elizabeth and Newark Airport as the most "dangerous two miles in the country." Where are you, Senator, on the Clear Act? I would like to hear more from our two gubernatorial candidates on this issue. I'm certain you would too.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
Rose Ann Scotti and JerseyPolitics.com

If reprinting, credit Rose Ann Scotti and JerseyPolitics.com

Questions for those Seeking Public Office

A Standard of Ethics
BY ROSE ANN SCOTTI
JerseyPolitics.com Columnist

With oil prices at an all-time high, it is no wonder that certain retailer stocks prices are reflecting a drop in consumer spending. Individuals all over our nation are anxious about the war in Iraq, terrorist threats and financial security in one of the most tumultuous eras in our nation's history. Here in New Jersey, residents should be looking to this year's gubernatorial election as a turning point in restoring sanity to a state besot by political scandals, fiscal instability, and killer property taxes. Yet, the average person in New Jersey is probably scratching his head and wondering what all the campaign rhetoric floating around over the summer months had to do with his ability to pay his property taxes and afford a family vacation. Our two gubernatorial candidates each have much to offer. It does not concern me that they are both multi-millionaires. Rather, I view the successes they have achieved as a measure of the attributes each would bring to successfully lead New Jersey. We need less campaign rhetoric about alleged ethical lapses of one or the other, political party differences, or who is responsible for what and when, and more details about proposals to control property taxes. We need more specifics on how they propose to rein in the big time spenders at the local level who have contributed our property tax woes. We need more specifics on how they would cut the state budget in order to redistribute revenue to vital areas such as transportation. In short, we need both men to start "talking turkey" to the citizens of our state, and not to wait for the winds of public opinion to guide them in taking forceful positions on hot button issues.

Here are some of my thoughts on the questions we should be asking gubernatorial candidates, as well as those running for state assembly. I provide a follow up with suggested remedies (exclusively my own) designed to open the door for discussion on some previously taboo items!

Question 1
What is your position on the issue of eminent domain?
All candidates should clearly articulate positions on eminent domain, and outline, clear and concise plans for immediately aiding the people of Long Branch and other areas currently facing the loss of their homes.
*I would suggest that all candidates press those currently in office to immediately enact legislation to halt the taking of property to facilitate local municipal projects.

Question 2
How do you plan to reign in big-spending local politicians who are still raising taxes despite rapidly expanding ratable bases?

Any candidate should be knowledgeable about tax rates and ratable bases and explain to the average person that a low tax rate does not necessarily mean lower taxes. There are all sorts of budgetary gimmicks that I am aware of that can mask unnecessary and outrageous spending by municipal officials. The State Department of Community Affairs must conduct an analysis/audit of all 566 municipalities with an eye toward allowing citizens more say in how their money is spent.

*The state should require mandatory referenda on any large bonding or spending proposals to be put before the municipal voters with specific information on all financial impacts including current and future inherent costs such as maintenance, insurance, etc.

*Most towns have built in taxes for farmland and open space preservation. The public should be made aware of the criteria to be used by the municipality for sponsorship into the state program (what would be the consequences to the town should that particular piece be developed). Outright purchase of the piece by the municipality should be prohibited, even if reimbursement is expected if and when the parcel makes it into the state program. Legislation should be passed requiring municipalities to get the public's permission through referendum before leveraging the farmland preservation tax into big-ticket bond issues.

*There should be a prohibition on utilizing collected school taxes as revenue to spend against in the municipal budget. These are monies collected for the express purpose of funding the school budget and must be turned over to the school board in a timely fashion. However, allow municipalities to anticipate the interest gained by keeping these funds in short-term investments such as C.D.s.

*The state should institute a property tax relief program whereby there would be mandatory application of state property tax relief money to the tax rate AFTER it is struck, providing true tax relief.
*It should be mandatory for municipalities to fund all vital services such as roadwork out of the current operating budget and not through bonding.

*A plan must be developed to merge certain municipalities with an up or down vote by the entire Legislature.

Question 3
What steps would you take to make running our schools more cost efficient?
New Jersey cannot go on as it is and provide a thorough and efficient education for all children. Hard and unpopular decisions must be made regarding the managerial aspects of our school districts. The State Department of Education must push for reforms that will bring school spending under control and redirect more dollars to education.

*The State Department of Education should be mandated to come up with a plan to regionalize certain administrative functions of school districts. Entire districts should be merged as well.

*Teachers who are members of NJEA should be prohibited from serving on local and regional school boards.
*There must be a grandfathering of certain aspects of pension benefits for teachers as well as all state employees. Full health coverage at retirement must go as the Medicare program becomes more comprehensible and future retirees are eligible for enrollment in Medicare HMO's at no cost except the application of their Part B premium.

*Current regulations providing for separate personnel for close, but stand-alone school buildings, need to be evaluated to allow for staffing efficiencies.

Question 4
How would you begin to bring the state budget under control and eliminate waste and inefficiencies?
There needs to be a thorough analysis of the state budget and all state departments and a reduction and redistribution of resources. Waste must be eliminated and spending must be redirected to vital areas such as transportation.

*New Jersey should not assume a leadership position in stem cell research. We simply cannot afford to do so. Cut out all budget items connected with this.

*All pork barrel projects should be eliminated before any further monetary burden is incurred. No further spending proposals until fiscal sanity is restored.

*No arena in Newark. In fact, there should be an investigation into how funds for homeland security as well as income from Newark airport are prioritized and utilized before special municipal aid is given. Special legislatively dedicated municipal aid for any urban areas should be withheld until questions are answered about homeland security funding!

*Each state department should be required to have specific job descriptions and duties for all personnel. Redundant positions should be eliminated.

Question 5
How do you propose to fix the Transportation Trust Fund?There is so much waste and mismanagement in state government that this fund has been depleted over the years by transfers to the general treasury. It is unfair to ask the taxpayer for more money through an increase in the gasoline tax.

*Redirect money from pork barrel projects, stem cell research and savings through municipal merges to the fund.

*No increase in the gasoline tax.

Candidates in this election season had better be prepared to answer tough questions and be very specific about how they propose to aid the people of New Jersey who are struggling like insects in a spider's web because of a fiscal dilemma brought on by politicians who make promises they have no intentions of keeping. The people of New Jersey are smarter this time around. Let's ask candidates the tough questions, and demand strong and immediate action. Let's come out in droves to support them at the polls if they exhibit the will to do the bidding of the electorate, and afterwards as they struggle to withstand the inevitable battering by unions and special interest groups as they lead us to fiscal sanity.