Sandy Hook is not a community in need of revitalization

In his recent letter to The Hub, Edward McKenna Jr., the mayor of Red Bank, makes a point of the fact that he is "keenly aware of the efforts that it takes to rehabilitate and revitalize a community" (emphasis added). However, it appears the mayor is incapable of differentiating between a "community" and national parkland.

As the mayor states in his article, the mission of the National Park Service (NPS) is to "preserve unimpaired the natural and cultural resources and values of the national park system for the enjoyment, education and inspiration of this and future generations" of park patrons.

Please note the NPS mission statement is quite different from what a reasonable person would expect as the mission statement/goal for a business and residential community such as Red Bank. But this does not appear to deter the mayor from acting as an authority on national park matters.

As for the unimpaired enjoyment of Fort Hancock’s natural and cultural resources by this and future generations, the mayor fails to mention that, once under the control of the private, for-profit developer, only those individuals capable and willing to pay for use of the fort’s rehabilitated amenities would be able to enjoy them. Those who could not afford to pay the developer’s use fees for these premises would be excluded for 60 years, or about two generations’ worth. This is too high a price to pay.

Also, McKenna’s statement that anticipated revenues to be paid by Sandy Hook Partners (SHP) would enable the NPS "to increase its educational efforts in natural resources, restore and improve habitats, and replace native vegetation," appears to be exaggerated and very premature. Given that the amount of anticipated revenues to be paid by SHP has not even been announced by the NPS, and given that Sandy Hook Partners has not yet secured its funding arrangements for its offer — even though it was required of all offerors [those submitting proposals] by the NPS Request for Proposal more than four years ago — and given that the yet-undetermined cost of borrowing money for the project is surely one of Sandy Hook Partners’ most significant cost factors, I do not believe even Mr. Wassel, SHP principal officer, knows for certain what dollar amount the NPS may receive as a result of this project, if any.

Be advised, SHP’s search for funding goes on and on, and on. The question we all should be asking is: Why is the NPS, our government, permitting this to happen? Is our government no longer required to treat all offerors equally?

If you were to ask the environmental organization, Friends of Clearwater, how did their offer for just one building at the fort which they had occupied as their headquarters fare — they would tell you their offer was rejected because the NPS determined their proposal did not adequately demonstrate having secured the necessary financial capacity (funding) to complete the project. Yet, more than four years later, SHP is still seeking funding for the rehabilitation of 36 buildings — how can this be?

New Jersey doesn’t need another convention center/business park, especially one on beautiful, uncommercialized Sandy Hook. If we need anything, it’s more — not less — open space for recreational enjoyment, especially here in the most densely populated state in the nation.

Leave what precious little national parkland we have in New Jersey — especially at Sandy Hook — undeveloped and free of commercialism.

Peter P. O’Such Jr.

Fair Haven