Why do Edison officials keep rejecting efforts to create a public advocate post?
EDISON – For the third time since last fall, an ordinance to create the position of municipal public advocate has failed, and one resident sees a ballot question as the only recourse.
During Wednesday's Township Council meeting, the introduction of an ordinance to create the public advocate position, to represent residents' interests in matters before the Planning Board or Zoning Board of Adjustment, failed by a vote of 4-3. Councilmen Joseph Coyle, John Poyner, Asaf Shmuel and Council President Nishith Patel voted against the introduction. Council members gave no reasons in voting for or against the ordinance.
Resident Akhtar Nasser said he was disappointed by the vote.
"The public advocate has gone through thousands of revisions. People have been personally spoke to about it and it sounded like whatever you needed to be in there, was going to be in there, but sadly it was not something that was voted upon," said Nasser, who questioned if there was some sort of secret agenda.
"I think we need to have a better conversation of what the public advocate (ordinance) said this time and tell you what you want in there. Otherwise I feel this is going to go to a referendum," he said.
The ordinance had called for the public advocate to represent the interests of residents in hearings in development applications that, if approved, may have a detrimental impact on the health, safety, quality of life or property values of residents.
More: Edison man stabbed to death; South Amboy woman charged with murder
Those factors included light, sound or air pollution, flooding, blockage of sun or view of the horizon, casting of shadows on adjacent properties, loss of privacy, increase of truck traffic on residential streets, or change in the architectural or visual character of the neighborhood, the ordinance stated.
Under the ordinance the public advocate would be empowered to hire experts to assist in evaluating development applications and to provide expert testimony at land use hearings, as well as appeal a land use board's decision if it's determined to be legally flawed or detrimental to the health, safety or property values of residents.
Last year the Township Council twice introduced ordinances to create the public advocate position, but second readings and public hearings were never held.
Earlier this year the Council discussed the idea of getting voter approval with a ballot question to create the position of public advocate, as well as using the technical review committee, which reviews development applications, to determine if expert professionals should also weigh in on projects and their impact on residents.
Some residents along with some Council members see the creation of a public advocate position as a tool to help residents fight undesirable development in the community, such as when townhouses were planned for the site of the former Charlie Brown's restaurant on Plainfield Road, a huge warehouse in the Silver Lake Avenue neighborhood, and four-story buildings in the Clara Barton section.
Mayor Sam Joshi has previously indicated he would veto any effort to establish a public advocate in part because of the cost and the possibility of creating conflicts of interest which could result in hefty legal fees for the town.
Email: srussell@gannettnj.com
Suzanne Russell is a breaking news reporter for MyCentralJersey.com covering crime, courts and other mayhem. To get unlimited access, please subscribe or activate your digital account today.
This article originally appeared on MyCentralJersey.com: Edison NJ officials keep rejecting efforts for a public advocate
