| Author |
Message |
| Cranbury Press Article |
|
 |
| Guest |
 Posted: Wed, Sep 29 2010, 3:30 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury planning board sued over cleanup waivers |
|
| Dan Mulligan wrote: | | Guest wrote: | From that article- "Still another waiver would allow the company to import dirt, or dredge material in this case, onto the property - a plan that was approved by DEP but denied by the board."
I fail to see how the DEP has the authority to require Cranbury to accept contaminated soil. If that were the case then the precedent set would have huge implications. It would circumvent local authority.
I sincerely hope our township does whatever it can to fight this action and does not negotiate. Further, this seems to me to be a good question for our candidates on where they stand on this issue.
Two of them openly advocate being pro-business Glenn and Art. I hope they would not support bringing in contaminated soil in a chase for revenue. |
Thanks for the question. As I am pro business as well however I attended all of the planning board meetings for this issue, several of which lasted many many hours and went late into the night. I was an outspoken opponent at the meetings and I am still opposed to the import of contaminated dirt into Cranbury for this project. One of the key points here is Cranbury has an ordnance which forbids without waiver the importation of soil into our community. Our ability to have laws in place which protect our community is extremely important to the long term future of our town.Thus I agree with the stance of the planning board on this issue. |
|
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed, Sep 29 2010, 12:31 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury planning board sued over cleanup waivers |
|
| Just let us know how much this is going to cost us. |
|
|
| Dan Mulligan |
| Posted: Wed, Sep 29 2010, 10:27 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury planning board sued over cleanup waivers |
|
| Guest wrote: | From that article- "Still another waiver would allow the company to import dirt, or dredge material in this case, onto the property - a plan that was approved by DEP but denied by the board."
I fail to see how the DEP has the authority to require Cranbury to accept contaminated soil. If that were the case then the precedent set would have huge implications. It would circumvent local authority.
I sincerely hope our township does whatever it can to fight this action and does not negotiate. Further, this seems to me to be a good question for our candidates on where they stand on this issue.
Two of them openly advocate being pro-business Glenn and Art. I hope they would not support bringing in contaminated soil in a chase for revenue. |
Thanks for the question. As I am pro business however I attended the all of the planning board meetings for this issue, several of which lasted many many hours and went late into the night. I was an outspoken opponent at the meetings and I am still opposed to the import of contaminated dirt into Cranbury for this project. One of the key points here is Cranbury has an ordnance which forbids without waiver the importation of soil into our community. Our ability to have laws in place which protect our community is extremely important to the long term future of our town.Thus I agree with the stance of the planning board on this issue. |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Wed, Sep 29 2010, 10:20 am EDT Post subject: Re: Cranbury planning board sued over cleanup waivers |
|
From that article- "Still another waiver would allow the company to import dirt, or dredge material in this case, onto the property - a plan that was approved by DEP but denied by the board."
I fail to see how the DEP has the authority to require Cranbury to accept contaminated soil. If that were the case then the precedent set would have huge implications. It would circumvent local authority.
I sincerely hope our township does whatever it can to fight this action and does not negotiate. Further, this seems to me to be a good question for our candidates on where they stand on this issue.
Two of them openly advocate being pro-business Glenn and Art. I hope they would not support bringing in contaminated soil in a chase for revenue. |
|
|
| Dan Mulligan |
|
|