The regional newspaper for Warren County NJ, Lehigh Valley Live, has been covering the controversy over the proposed warehouse project that the Highlands Council voted to kill last week.
Local activists have told me that the reporter on the story has made errors and does not respond to their efforts to correct them. I myself reached out to contact the reporter, Glenn Epps, to correct his misleading reporting, but he did not reply to me either.
So, today, a week after the Highlands Council vote, Mr. Epps finally got around to writing a story, see:
It’s a doozy!
How’s this for a lede:
The expectation-shattering decision now puts the well-laid plans of Polo Development back in front municipal level officials to decide what happens next.
There are actually 3 biased and misleading statements in that one sentence (“well laid plans”? And just whose expectations were shattered? Are you kidding me?)
It’s hard to know where to begin, so I’ll just post my email to Mr. Epps seeking to correct and clarify his error and misleading reporting:
From: Bill WOLFE <b>
To: “gepps@lehighvalleylive.com” <gepps@lehighvalleylive.com>
Cc: “ben.spinelli@highlands.nj.gov” <ben.spinelli@highlands.nj.gov>
Date: 10/24/2024 9:21 AM EDT
Subject: Highlands Council vote
Dear Mr. Epps – I’d like to clarify and correct statements in your story today.
The boldface below is a quote from your story, followed by my correction or clarification.
1. “The project meets its requirements and makes no impact on the highlands resources, Humphries said.”
You quoted Humphries correctly, but his statement is factually false. 100% of the site has “Highlands resources” that are impacted and must be protected.
Mr. Humphries directly contradicts facts presented in the Highlands Staff Report, which Humphries wrote and is familiar with. Specifically, on page 3 “Resource Assessment”, there is a table that documents that “100%” of the 57.2 acre site is “environmentally constrained” and in an “agriculture priority preservation area”, including a portion that is “critical habitat for bald eagle“, a drinking water “well head protection area“, “forest area” “prime groundwater recharge”, “important soils” and “open waters – wetlands, riparian areas” . I suggest you look at that table and correct Humphries’ knowingly false statement.
Link:
https://www.nj.gov/njhighlands/projectreview/lopatpohat/lopat_pohat_redev_rpt.pdf
2. “According to the review presented by Director of Planning and Science & GIS James Humphries on Thursday, the developer’s plan does conform with the council’s master plan for the region.”
The Staff Report specifically documents several conflicts with the Regional Master Plan (RMP).
First, the RMP does not allow sewers to be extended to service the site. The Council attempted to resolve that conflict via the “redevelopment area” designation. As a result, the Council, not local government, is the legal lead entity. Read the Report which says:
“The RMP does not support extension of water/sewer service in the Conservation Zone or any of the environmentally constrained sub-zones (rear property). The service extension would only be permissible for the proposed warehouse with the approval of the Highlands Redevelopment Area.”
That attempted designation by the Council is a gross abuse of the Highlands Act and the RMP.
Also keep in mind that the “redevelopment area” designation was recommended by the Council because the prior development proposal could not meet the RMP standards for “Highlands Center” designation. So again, the Highlands Council is playing games.
Second, the site does not meet the standards of the Highlands Act and RMP regarding “impervious cover”. The law and the RMP require a MINIMUM of 70% impervious cover in order to qualify for the “redevelopment area” designation.
Again, the Highlands Council attempted to evade this legal standard by using the parking lots (off site) at the Phillipsburg Mall to make the UNDEVELOPED site’s farmland and forests meet the 70% impervious cover standard.
This is another gross abuse of the law and RMP.
3. “This does revert back to the municipalities and home rule and that’s where the decisions have to be made,” Humphries said.”
That statement is false. The Highlands Council is the final decision maker, not the municipalities.
The Highlands Act puts the Highlands Council in charge of the “redevelopment area” designation” (DEP designated “brownfields” also qualify, but again, local government does not make that designation).
The Highlands Act mandates that a “redevelopment area” designation be “appropriate” and meet the goals and objectives of the Highlands Act, as determined by the Highlands Council – not local government.
4. “The measure needed 8 votes in order to pass in front of the Highlands Council; it failed by a split vote 6-5.”
The vote was 6-4.
FYI, I am a retired DEP professional planner (13 years). I was a policy advisor to DEP Commissioner Brad Campbell, I staffed Gov. McGreevy’s Highlands Task Force while at DEP, and I was an architect of and drafter of the Highlands Act with Senator Smith and lawyers at the Office of Legislative Services. So, I’d qualify as an expert witness.
I am copying Executive Director Spinelli in hopes that he can correct his staffer Mr. Humphries’ false statements and set the public record straight.
Bill Wolfe