Opponents fighting Earle housing plan
Leasing of homes to civilians at Colts Neck naval base is at heart of disagreement
BY LORI ANNE OLIWA Correspondent
Several dozen residents braved the poor weather conditions on Dec. 16 to attend an open house and public hearing on proposed civilian housing at Naval Weapons Station Earle, Colts Neck.

The hearing was held at Monmouth Regional High School, Tinton Falls. Conducted by representatives from the U.S. Navy, the combined format was organized to help clarify the recently released Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), which analyzes and evaluates four proposed access routes from Route 34 to the Laurelwood housing complex on the naval base. The DEIS does not specify a preferred access choice.

Large posters illustrating key components of the proposal were hung in the hallway outside the auditorium so people could become familiar with the proposed access routes, referred to as Alternatives 1-4. The report also contains a No Action Alternative.

Navy representatives clarified information and interpreted images on the posters.

Most members of the public who attended the event were not impressed or convinced. Elaine Mann, the legislative liaison to Neighbors Opposed to Privatization at Earle (NOPE), was highly critical of the project and the methods employed by the Navy.

"The problem is allowing 300 families unimpeded access with only a fence and no background checks. This poses a danger," Mann said. "Earle weapons station consists of 11,000 acres and 300 bunkers filled with ammunition. Is this in the best interest of the community and the Navy itself?"

The DEIS states that the Laurelwood housing for civilians will be separated from the rest of the military installation by a fence and states that the general public will not have access to the installation.

Additionally, it states that the Navy would incorporate "measures necessary to maintain the required security for the installation."

Mann was not encouraged. Buoyed by many of her fellow NOPE members, who also hosted an information session in a separate building, Mann continued her harsh critique.

"This forum does not get at the issues nor does it answer or address any of the community's major concerns. We feel totally frustrated," she said.

NOPE has published and distributed several documents that analyze and critique the DEIS and express strong opposition to the civilian housing on the base. Mann confirmed that the coalition has collected more than 1,000 signatures in support of its position.

In a brochure titled "Top Ten Reasons to Oppose Civilian Housing at Naval Weapons Station Earle," NOPE cites security and environmental concerns, tax implications, traffic impact and reduced home values.

The brochure alleges that the project would violate the National Defense Act of 2008, which was enacted in 2007 by President George W. Bush as a result of a security breach at Fort Dix in Burlington County. The law requires thorough background checks on all civilians visiting or working on military bases.

"Laurelwood housing should not be exempt from Department of Defense regulations," the brochure states.

In addition, NOPE believes that unimpeded access to Laurelwood would set a precedent for future projects that pose risks to the community.

"The U.S. Department of Defense has never allowed unimpeded access to civilian housing on its ammunition and weapons bases. We cannot allow Earle to be the Navy's 'test case' and risk unforeseen consequences," the brochure states.

Mann said NOPE is urging the Navy to buy out the contract with developer Laurelwood Homes LLC. According to NOPE literature, the Navy is paying $3.5 million in annual rental payments to the developer.

"I can't help but wonder if this is the only reason for the project," Mann added.

Monmouth County Freeholder Director and Colts Neck resident Lillian Burry issued a written statement that also urged a buyout of the contract with the developer.

"I am confident that if the Navy were to approach the owner of these units with a reasonable offer to buy, they would find a willing seller. The idea that a buyout would be too expensive must be weighed against the cost and consequences of a successful attack on this facility," Burry wrote.

She was also critical of the DEIS and stated, "The DEIS fails to provide adequate assurances that the security of Earle will be sufficient to protect it from the potential threat unimpeded access to 300 unregulated civilian housing units represents. We are offered only the most generalized statements that security will be adequate."

Colts Neck Mayor Thomas E. Hennessy Jr. also submitted a written statement.

"This hearing should have been postponed to give adequate time for all concerned to review a 400-plus page document (the DEIS). Despite requests from federal, state and local officials, the Navy refused to postpone the hearing," Hennessy wrote.

The mayor's statement cited concerns about security, tax implications, permits, wetlands disturbance, construction costs, traffic and the effects on public services and the school districts in the surrounding communities of Colts Neck and Tinton Falls.

Tinton Falls Board of Education President Peter Karavites alleged inaccuracies in the DEIS relating to the estimated number of children that his school district would need to absorb and the amount of financial aid the district receives.

State Sen. Jennifer Beck and state Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande (both R-Monmouth and Mercer) were in attendance to support their constituents.

"We know from speaking with state cabinet-level commissioners that the Navy is not nearly as far along in this process as they hold themselves out to be in the DEIS," Casagrande said.

Mann said Beck and Casagrande "have been very supportive."

In 1988 the Navy entered into a 52- year contract with Laurelwood Housing LLC to build 300 units at Earle to house military personnel. The contract specifies that the housing can be opened to the general public in 2010.

"We must provide unimpeded access to the (Laurelwood) housing and are contractually obligated to do so," said Navy representative and DEIS team member Bob Waldo, who added that the purpose of the forum was to engage the public and, specifically, the communities surrounding the base.

"The No Action Alternative is really not feasible and the project allows us to meet our contractual obligations," Waldo said.A

ccording to a brochure distributed during the information session, the No Action Alternative would not grant unimpeded access to the developer of Laurelwood at the termination of the in-lease period and an access road would not be constructed. The Navy would subsequently be in breach of the lease agreement.

"This really isn't an option," Waldo reiterated.

Navy representative and DEIS team member Carleen McCaffrey explained that Alternatives 1-4 — for access to the Laurelwood housing — present "a minimal amount of impact to the wetlands and the least interruption."

The public comment period has been extended to Jan. 23. Comments received by that date will be included in the final document. According to representatives at the forum, the Navy could render a decision as early as June 2009. Comments can be submitted online at www.laurelwoodeis. com or in writing and mailed to: Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic; Attn: Code EV21 Laurelwood Housing PM; 6506 Hampton Blvd., LRA Bldg A; Norfolk, VA 23508.