Fields of Dreams: Opening Pandora's Box?

The contentious debate over whether to install turf fields at the local high schools and how to pay for it was back on center stage at the Township Council meeting at the municipal building Tuesday night. 

The gathering marked the reintroduction of a , dissolve the current Open Space Trust Fund and replace it with a new fund: the .

Tempers rose when any member of Parsippany Unite tried to speak at the public microphone. The to represent them in fighting the turf proposal. For that reason, said Township Attorney John Inglesino, PU members cannot speak on FOD at public meetings—only the group attorney can speak.

The matter came up when residents Michael Espejo, Peter Bradley, Rick Nogueira and Kristen Ritter approached the microphone, and their not being allowed to speak left some PU members visibly upset.

Other citizens, however, took on various aspects of FOD and the proposed open space fund ordinance that helps clear the road for town funds to be expended on the high school fields if the plan ultimately wins approval.

Town resident Rick McNulty stated that he found some of the wording in the proposed new law "repetitive and counterproductive." 

Specifically, McNulty referred to the amendments to section 51-7C of the Township Code, which spells out how open space dollars can be allocated.

Directing his questions to Township Attorney John Inglesino, who drafted the ordinance, McNulty questioned whether 51-7C contradicted previous portions of the proposed law.

"It seems you spell out how [the governing body]can use the money [in previous sections], but then in C, you say [it] can use the money however [it wants]," he said. "I don't think that was the taxpayers' intention. Are you looking to make such a change that wasn't intended by the residents?"

Inglesino said no.

"I want to clarify and make clear that the governing body will be able to use the Open Space Trust Fund in a manner prescribed by state statute," he asserted. "There are no contradictions."

McNulty also asked whether the open space tax levy would continue to stand at the current 2 cents per $100 of home value, and pointed to language in the ordinance proposal where the tax amount is defined as "less than two cents per $100 of assessed valuation."

"With respect to the amount of levy," the lawyer explained, "one purpose [of the amendment] was to kind of clean up imperfections in the manner in which the fund has been utilized in the past and make it clean in a legal kind of way."

Inglesino went on to note that when the Open Space Trust Fund was first instituted in 1988, it was funded through the collection of taxes at a less than 2 cents rate. When the issue was refined during a 2006 referendum, the figure of 2 cents was used, "as if it had already been approved."

"This ordinance is reallty designed to bring the town into strict compliance with what was originally approved by the voters," Inglesino said. "It very deliberately says 'less than 2 cents.'"

Mayor James Barberio said that the town will from now on change the levy amount to less than 2 cents so that it will comply with the law.

Township resident Bob Venezia spoke out against the tax.

"Using revaluation to finance a million-dollar tax increase was wrong and probably illegal," he said, advocating a reduction in the open space tax. "Tax cut or tax and spend, what's it going to be?"

Councilman John Cesaro responded to Venezia's concern.

"I would love to have a sit-down and explore ways of cutting the open space tax," he said. "I assume the council does not mind ways of exploring cutting taxes."

Resident Jonathan Nelson mentioned that from 1997 onward, the township bonded and paid debt service for properties obtained through the use of open space funds.

"I understand why," he said. "There was nothing nefarious or improper about that. But that doesn't change the fact that bonding for the purpose of buying property wasn't legal until the 2006 referendum and this subsequent revised ordinance."

Nelson asked Inglesino if any bonds were issued, and for what amount of money. He also wondered whether residents could amass signatures to force a referendum on the matter.

The lawyer insisted that the only proper legal mechanism for dealing with the open space fund at this point was to pass an ordinance, which he said was outlined in his .

"An argument can be made that the council really wasn't entitled to use bonding or debt service... before 2006," said Inglesino.

"That's why we're recommending the ordinance to clarify, clean up and codify past practices of the municipality."

He stated that both were used for land purchases "two administrations ago," during the tenure of former mayor Marceil "Mimi" Letts.

Letts told Patch that Inglesino is incorrect, and that her administration did not use open space monies for bonding.

Resident Julia Peterson noted that people are still concerned that with all the newly proposed uses for open space funding, dollars available for the acquisition of actual open space and historic preservation may be in short supply.

Homeowner Bob Farbanish said he has lived in his Morris Plains home since 1965.

"When I voted in the 2006 referendum, I voted to buy open space, not to take over a football field," he asserted. "I want to buy as much as possible for parks. That's the intent. But, [the turf field project] is probably a foregone conclusion.

Farbanish said proceeding with the plan to give the town 51 percent control over the Board of Education-owned football fields at Parsippany and Parsippany High School leaves much potential for troubles in the future.

"If you're going to take over 51 percent of the property, who's got liability?" Farbanish asked. "Now I've got two people to sue. And what happens if the state says we'll regionalize our schools? We're creating a really messy situation and a conflict of interest.

"You're opening Pandora's box, and I don't like it," he said. "I want to buy that swamp area and to build parks we don't [already] own and to help people in Lake Hiawatha."

Mayor Barberio said shared services between and consolidation of townships with boards of education is being recommended for many municipalities in an effort to save money and boost efficiency during a tough economic climate.

As far as the so-called Fields of Dreams, the mayor insisted that "we have done our due diligence" regarding the conservation easement that would allow the school board to give the town control it needed. And he maintained that unless the municipality has a property interest in the high school fields, the project likely cannot move forward.

"We have to wait for the opinion of the [state] attorney general," he said. "Either we can do it or we can't."

Barberio raised another point regarding the high school fields.

"It's not the town's or the schools' property, it's your property," he said to the audience. "You're going to pay the taxes, one way or the other."

By sharing services and consolidating holdings, he said the town can have new fields for students and residents without raising taxes.

"That is the sole purpose of this," he said.

Resident Hank Heller disagreed.

'We all have to recognize that the most important thing we have is property," he said. "If the Board of Education is irresponsible and gives up the fields, hat will happen in the future with the next Board of Ed, the next council or the next mayor?"

Barberio countered that sharing services with school boards is considered a best practice now. He added that by working hand in hand with the Parsippany BOE, the town helps the school board keep its academic programs.

"It's hard for us to go to another municipality [to share certain services] because we're so large. We have to do it from within," the mayor explained. "This is the only way we can do this, through the [conservation] easement. We're all on pins and needles waiting for the opinion from the attorney general, which we should have had already."

Recreation Advisory Member and ardent FOD supporter Michael Pietrowicz added that the new ordinance would have another benefit for the town.

"This ordinance would allow for the purchase of homes damaged by floods," he said. "And we can't turn a blind eye to what the town has been doing with open space funds over the years. There have been pooled uses of funds for the purchase of historic properties—the Baldwin House. There has been pooled funds used for the construction of athletic fields."

Pietrowicz went on to say that these actions, legal or not, were done by "good people in office who wanted to do good for the town."

He also noted that the football fields aren't getting much use beyond 12 to 15 times per year.

"They're a disgrace," he exclaimed. "They're not safe for constant use. This is a community asset. ... It's not even grass. Vegetation there doesn't develop root systems."

Pietrowicz defended the Fields of Dreams proposal, saying it would save money and bring the high school fields up to the "standards that exist in this county."

"Let's get past the Pandora's box and hypotheticals," he said, and thanked the council for its public statements of support for the project.

Resident Jane Kimball wasn't sold.

"My family's been here for many generations," Kimball said. "This was a farming community with much open space, a beautiful town. It still has beauty and open spaces. I did vote for the 2006 referendum. I'd like to save all the open space. 

"I don't say the high school fields shouldn't be turfed over. Raise my taxes. But I was never [in favor of] using the money for school fields. It was for open space for the quality of life of the people who live here."

Dena Nogueira, who is married to Rick Nogueira of Parsippany Unite, quickly established her right to speak at the microphone.

"I am not represented. Are we all clear on that? I have no legal representation," she said. "I love this town. I'm from Nutley and searched for many years for a great town with peace and serenity."

She said she eventually secured a pricey Parsippany home right next to a high school football field.

"And now you want to put these big lights behind my house?" she asked rhetorically. "Put yourself in my position. ... I'm aggravated. You're gong to ruin what I searche many years for. I knew there was a football field, but I didn't know you'd have stadium lights there.

"Why are you going to ruin a beautiful area? Take it to Route 80!"

Dena Nogueira said if the matter continues, she will get her own attorney.

Resident Thomas Bluj made another call for the Fields of Dreams project in the name of those "most impacted, the nearly 7,400 students who attend our school district."

The open space ordinance proposal will appear before council again for a public hearing and vote during its May 15 meeting at 7:30 p.m. at Town Hall.