For those of you not following this issue, the Township Committee voted by a margin of 1 (3-2) to push this ordinance. In addition, they got help from Kevin Sullivan in the Planning Board to get this approved too.

Besides the legal arguments put forward in this lawsuit, the Citizens of Chatham raised a number of logistical and ethical reasons against this Ordinance. First, we objected to Mayor Hagner hiding her employer's Superfund site (Novartis) in the Ordinance. Second, we objected to her including her own property in the Ordinance. Third, we objected to Committeeman Abbott used the landscaping services of the petitioner of this Ordinance. Fourth, we objected to to Committeman Brower including his Noe Pond in the Ordinance. Fifth, we objected to them allowing for the owners of these properties to house their workers at the homes. Why we want to become a haven for illegal aliens is beyond us? Sixth, we objected to them not including an exclusion prohibiting landscaping, excavating, and other contractor companies from operating out of the properties. Seventh, we objected to them not including a provision limiting the owner's from seeking the Right to Farm protections. Finally, we asked them to protect our children by enforcing Meghan's Law in this situation. Despite all these concerns, Brower, Abbott, and Hagner pushed this ordinance through. Worse yet, they did nothing to address any of our concerns, so the lawsuit was our last option.

I would like to say I broke this story, but the credit should go to Jen. Here is her comment and the link.
Jen Galante
7:47 am on Saturday, June 2, 2012
Instead of running around town trying to get your and Brower's boy elected shouldn't you be explaining to tax payers how they are going to be subject to hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal expenses now that the town has to respond to a major legal suit? Chatham Twp. is getting sued over the incompetency in crafting the market ordinance. I'm a proponent of farming in Green Village but I'm not a proponent of yours and Browers properties being included in the "right to farm" passage (entitling you to pay lower taxes). Does this not scream - Conflict of Interest?? There was also a failure to enforce "Megan's Law" on these properties which would enable future workers to potentially be brought in to the green village area that could be dangerous to our kids. And don't you work for one of the major owners of the Superfund site - another property identified as a right to farm one per the market ordinance? Again, conflict of interest? How hard is it to keep our taxes low when you collect the exhorbant amount that you do from hard working tax payers. All you do is beat your chest on what a great job you've done, and campaign hard for your hand picked rubber stamper, yet you fail to let the tax payers know what is going on. People have a right to be in the know.
http://chatham.patch.com/articles/twp-mayor-endorses-sullivan

Wait a second...your running for Township Committee AND suing the Township at the same time?? Interesting way to win the hearts of the towns people.....waste their time and tax money because you didnt get your way.....

I'll run for township committee. It's time to merge police departments. Not every 2 towns with the same name need a separate police chief, different schools etc. A lot of Chatham's land is the great swam.. It's technically the safest town in New Jersey. Or, if anything make cuts. Harding's police is apparently being taken over. Merging must start happening. Keep Chatham rural. We don't need more houses and more potential crime. Our town is beautiful, so leave it that way I like living near farms. Do what's RIGHT for the citizens and the environment we have so much to be proud of, don't take that away. Seriously.. I'll run for committee.

Well said Dave2. A frivolous suit at that

John,
Here you are at this link praising Sullivan. Now you are here supporting his demented stand with his commercial farming, reward his cronies scheme.
http://chatham.patch.com/articles/video-sullivan-committed-to-township#video-10169059
You are some sick puppies! Why don't you back to circle jerk with Brower, Dave, and Dirty Dan?
john corigan
9:22 am on Monday, June 4, 2012
Well done Mr. Sullivan. A sound, rational, reasonable presentation. Chatham would be well served by having you on the committee. Vote Sullivan.

Reply

Mr Templin - Just a few questions for the record....Have you always been a registered Democrat? We're you ever a registered Republican? Who is representing your group in this lawsuit? When was this suite filed? You want the people to know about you and your cause then you will answer these questions.

Why can't you provide the answers to the questions? Why direct people to a hack web site? I havent heard you provide any true facts yet. Just answer the questions.

WAIT..... I got two more questions for you....how much time a month would you say you spend in your Green Village house? Do you own or rent any other houses or apartments????

Come over any time, I am always there. 480 Green Village. I am waiving at you now.

What do you mean OUR Township attorney?? I thought you were the one suing. Do you mean THE Township attorney? Which side of the fence are you arguing from...the guy suing or the guy running?? Didn't you have a lot to say about Mayor Hagnor switching parties?? Seems you did the same thing. You still haven't answered the residence question.

Templin, you lost my vote. I can't believe you are suing the town you own a house in and don't live in and are running for township committee in. What is not adding up here? What is your real motive???????

You are not my neighbor (thankfully!) and you still have not answered the residence question.

I thought Republicans were opposed to government keeping people from doing what they wanted with their own property.

Why don't you like people that "don't look like you"?

I have my own apartment and pay taxes in chatham township mang!

Another question....what is the argument for Megan's Law? What does this have to do with Market Gardens? Please explain.....

Hi everyone,

Please remember these comments are not a forum for name-calling or inappropriate comments. For reference, here is a link to our terms of service:

http://chatham.patch.com/terms

Please review the terms and adhere to them, or comments on this story will be closed.

Sincerely,
Laura Silvius

Don't shut us down because an espanple is posting!

Who is Megan and what does she have to do with this Mr. Richard Erich Templin?

Racism is bad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am familiar with Megan's Law but do not understand the relevance to your groups argument. still haven't answered the question...do you own or rent any other properties other then your current Green Village Rd property???

Where in the ordinance does it say that employees of the market garden can live on the property? Other than hating your neighbors and the growing of vegetables, which, by the way, chatham township has condoned, what is your political platform?

Jen Galante does not live in chatham, so how is she associated with richard erich templin and why is she suing chatham township and why is she leaking a lawsuit for you and what is her modivation other than her being a TOOL and feeding your nasty, mean crusade to destroy chatham township. Don't understand, Richard. What are you trying to do here?

Templin....I am not DAN MILLER.....answer the question. The fact of the matter is you are a weekend worrier if anything. You do not reside in Green Village, you just own the propery...go ahead...challenge me for proof.

See you can answer the question.....it's sad, you don't even live here and you start all of this trouble. You don't even show up for the town meetings. You litter OUR town with your signs, but what do you care, you don't even live here.......

Maybe you can answer this....have you ever been arrested or convicted of a crime?

Ofcourse not, as you described me, I am an Eagle Scout, Christian minister...I literally emulate a perfect existence....
http://www.savegreenvillage.com/2012/04/a-letter-from-an-organic-farmer/

This is crazy. I think what I said made sense. . However, if you asked me what MY plan is, it's already planned out. I'm only in my 20's but you don't see me pulling this circus stuff. Time to start merging. Leave the land alone in Green Village it's meant to be beautiful. Let the people do what they want with THEIR land.. The rules have been the same in Chatham Township for the longest time let them be. If anything, work on merging police. Most of our town is the great swam.

Several members of both the Planning Board and the Town Committee correctly noted the MG ordinance was not consistent with the MP. Pre ordinance zoning allowed only for residential - not commercial - activities on the properties in question. The fact that an ordinance was necessary demonstrates that there was NO existing commercial farming permitted on the affected properties. The language the PB relied on in finding that commercial farming was “not inconsistent” with the MP spoke to the "the CONTINUATION of remaining agricultural activity" and the preservation of "agriculture as a way of life in Chatham Township WHERE IT EXISTS.” I assume we all have a working understanding of the meaning of CONTINUATION and EXISTS? If commercial farming was being continued, or it existed, there would have been NO REASON to pass a Commercial Farming Ordinance. It’s really a simple concept. If the Town wants to modify the MP to permit commercial activity in a residential neighborhood to accommodate 2 families, it should do that, and it should satisfy the conditions necessary to revise the MP. You don’t change the rulebook once the game has started. That is simply not how our system works. All I ever asked is that the Town play by the rules. If they want to allow commercial farming, withdraw the ordinance until the Town has properly prepared and adopted a Master Plan that allows for what have historically been zoned residential properties to convert to commercial zoning.

Who changed the rules once the game started? How was he/she/they allowed to do it? How have they gotten away with it?

I guess we will see. Soon enough, the court will be determine whether the rules were followed.

John, Perhaps I misunderstood your intent in asking these questions. It's quite simple. Many of us bought houses, with the understanding that we were purchasing a home in a residential neighborhood. The Market Garden Ordinance now allows commercial activity - specifically, commercial farming - on properties just a short distance from where we purchased our homes. Prior to the recent passage of the MG Ordinance, they could not conduct commercial farming operations on these properties (although, there is documentation of efforts to conduct other commercial activities there).
Generally, if you want to do something on your property that is not permitted by the current zoning ordinances, you can seek to amend/modify the ordinance, or you can file for a zoning variance. Typically, under the circumstances here, you would expect someone that owns residential property but wants to conduct commercial operations to file for a variance (here, a "D" Variance). Our friends at Green Path and Dan Miller decided not to go that route - and did not have to - because they are quite close to some of the current members of the Town Committee, and were able to convince 3 of the 5 members to change the zoning rules, to allow for their own little project. The benefits of a variance - as far as neighbors are concerned - is that the applicant is required to identify positive criteria and negative criteria to justify the request for the variance. (con'td).

That way, you have an objective basis, with relevant facts, to assess the impact of the variance on property values, quality of life, the environment and other factors necessary to make an informed decision. One would hope that our elected officials make decisions on an informed basis, though, my experience here leads me to conclude that some of them do not.
The alternative is to pass a zoning ordiance. That is the route we went here. Under the Municipal Land Use Laws, in order to even pass a zoning ordinance, a municipality is required to have a Master Plan. The MP is drafted by the Planning Board, and must be revisited every six years. There are strict requirements for adopting a master plan. See, for example, NJSA 40:55 D-28. The MP must protect public health, safety and promote the general welfare. It needs to take into effect topography, soil conditions, water supply, drainage, flood plain areas, marshes and woodlands. Impact on utilities, traffic, property values, the environment etc. all need to be considered. These are all procedural safeguards, to make sure that zoning and development do not have any unintended negative consequences, and that the benefits are greater than the harm of a change in zoning. A municipality only has the power to zone where the ordinance is substantially consistent with the land use plan element of the master plan. (cont'd)

The ordinance in question was not consistent with the master plan. The MP does not provide for the creation of “new” farming properties. Thomas Browne (planning board) was correct when he said the ordinance was substantially inconsistent with the Master Plan. He also correctly noted this ordinance essentially introduces farming into a residential area and that it could transform a residential area into a farming community. Jonathan Cohn also found that PB letter to the committee stating the ordinance was “not inconsistent” with the Master Plan was incorrect. Committeeman Tubbs opined that market gardens should not be allowed as a conditional use. He reasoned that in the absence of overwhelming support for farming by those most affected, the status quo should be maintained. Deputy Mayor Gallop also noted there is not a demand for allowing commercial farming throughout Chatham Township, and the Board of Adjustment process is sufficient for those who do want to farm. All of these concerns were, in my view, well thought out. They were also rejected by the majority. With this being the first issue I have followed this closely, things just don't smell right. The whole process smacked of favoritism, and it seemed to me, that many of our officials approached this matter in a very arbitrary and capricious manner, without any real analysis of the impacts that are likely to occur as a result of new commercial operations in what has been strictly residential for decades.

That's at least my understanding. YMMV.