Clearwater, Save Sandy Hook to pursue lawsuit
Groups will appeal federal court decision that allows development
BY LIZ SHEEHAN
Correspondent

Sandy Hook

Save Sandy Hook (SSH) and Monmouth County Friends of Clearwater, two grassroots organizations that sued the National Park Service to block commercial development on Sandy Hook, "are planning to go ahead" on an appeal of a decision by a federal court judge that dismissed their suit.

Ed Dlugosz, president of Clearwater and a board member of SSH, said Monday that both organizations had held "straw votes" and decided to go ahead with the appeal. He added that the groups, both of which are plaintiffs in the lawsuit, would first confer with their attorney Paul Josephson, of Hill Wallack, Princeton.

Save Sandy Hook was established to block the commercialization of Fort Hancock, part of the Sandy Hook Unit of the Gateway National Recreation Area. Clearwater is an environmental group that was formerly based on Officers Row at Fort Hancock.

Dlugosz said that James Coleman, an officer of SSH, who is also a plaintiff in the suit, would be talking with Josephson about continuing the legal action which seeks to overturn a 60-year leased the park service awarded to Sandy Hook Partners, headed by James Wassel of Rumson.

Coleman, a former judge, assemblyman and county prosecutor, is out of town and could not be reached for comment.

His wife, Judith Stanley Coleman, is the founder of SSH.

On July 27, U.S. District Court Judge Mary L. Cooper filed a 34-page decision in which she dismissed the suit by the two groups, ruling that they had not sufficiently proved they had standing to bring the suit.

The judge also ruled that Clearwater, which had sought to lease its long time headquarters at Fort Hancock but, instead, the building was included in the developer's lease, should bring its complaint to the Federal Court of Claims.

In June, Assistant U.S. Attorney Irene Dowdy argued in court before Cooper that Clearwater was a "disappointed bidder" and therefore its claim came under the jurisdiction of the Court of Claims.

Cooper gave the two organizations 60 days to appeal her decision. In her opinion, Cooper said that SSH and Clearwater in several of their claims "fail to articulate the injury-in-fact the plaintiffs have suffered as a result of the alleged violations."

She gave as an example the claim that the proposed development of Sandy Hook and the Wassel lease would result in the "crass commercialization and privatization of the Sandy Hook Unit in violation of the purposes and values for which the Gateway [National Recreation Area] was established."

The judge said that the "assertion of a generalized and alleged violation, however does not communicate how the plaintiffs have been individually injured by the defendants' actions."

Wassel plans to renovate at least 36 buildings at the fort and convert them into offices, restaurants, overnight accommodations and educational and environmental facilities.

He was selected to redevelop the historic Fort Hancock buildings by the National Park Service in early 2000, and has been given several extensions of the time allotment to demonstrate that he has financial commitments to carry out the proposal. The most recent extension was granted on June 30.

Opponents of the Wassel plan say it will harm the unique Sandy Hook site, bring more traffic to an area already overburdened and that the proposal does not fit in with the goals used for the establishment of national parks.

Those who favor the Wassel project say that there are no government funds available to preserve the buildings at the fort and therefore private development must be used.