Where does Hudson Farms fit into equation? It was just deemed "open space" in 2010.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/sussex_county_preserves_hudson.html

continued....

"The greenway virtually connects C.O. Johnson Park with Allamuchy State Park, said Epstein, who noted the Highlands Trail is likely to be re-routed through this new public holding. Partners in the deal with the Land Conservancy included the state Green Acres program, New Jersey Conservation Foundation, Byram and the Sussex County Open Space Committee. The project embodies most goals of Byram’s open space program, including conservation of water resources and forests, connectivity of natural corridors, public access to water bodies, off-road non-motorized access between parks, plus sites for future recreational facilities. "The Hudson Farm Greenway project is a perfect example of how local, county and state agencies can all work hand in hand toward a common goal,’’ said Byram Mayor Jim Oscovitch.

A dozen years ago, billionaire investor/philanthropist Peter Kellogg bought the former Hudson Guild Farm in Hopatcong, which had been a charity fresh-air farm for the prior 50 years, and converted it into a semi-private target/instruction course and private commercial hunting preserve gun club catering to wealthy clientele. In 2007, Kellogg added the 900-acre Westby farm along Roseville Road in Byram and Andover to its growing holdings in Sussex, which now comprise some 4,000 acres in Hopatcong, Byram and Andover.

How does the public find out which parts of Hudson Farm we have access to? Maybe we can all go swimming in Bear Pond? Does he also get a write off because part of the land on Roseville seems to be a community garden?

RBOT - A prominent DPW name came up on this Open Space Fund approx 4 times. There were big players and small players that have exploited this program. I think the people of Hopatcong should be aware that some groups and individuals have selfishly taken advantage of this trust. Can we trust those who are managing this trust? Where was the due diligence that these proprieties are really conforming to the requirements of what it is was intended to be OPEN SPACE for all and NOT a tax exemption for the wealthy and the politically favored people of Hopatcong. Can we trust the motives and judgements made by these elected officials and committee members? Were easement properties really an easement or was it to get someones driveway ploughed or paved by Hopatcong as public property? There are also little fish questions along with the Hudson Farms big fish questions we should DEMAND to have addressed and answered. When others are not paying their taxes on property they are using, they are placing the burden to pay these taxes on the common folks of Hopatcong. So it's something YOU should know. Isn't it time that the people of Hopatcong started getting mad and do something about it before they giveaway everything to their friends and family in the OPEN SPACE circle and start charging us a non participation fee.

Open Space / Recreation Committee
MaryLouise Baker Council Appointee
Cathy Bowen Mayor’s Appointee
John Young Councilperson
Clifford R. Lundin Planning Board
Sylvia Petillo Mayor
Michael Rahill Zoning Board
Joan Reilly Recreation Commission

3 Year TermTerm
Alan Gilbert
Class IV Representative to Land Use Board
Pat Hoferkamp
MaryLouise Baker
Sharon Gruber
Bradley Hoferkamp
Jerry Scanlan - Chairperson
Jule Girman
Alternate Members:
Arlene Lelling
Council Liaisons: - John Young

LAND USE BOARD
RoseMarie Winfield - Secretary
Chairman - Alan Gilbert
Vice Chairman - Robert Rehe
Mayor - Sylvia Petillo
Class II Member - Ronald Jobeless
Class III Member - Michael Francis
Class IV Member - Robert L. Duncan
Class IV Member - Richard Hoer
Class IV Member - Kenneth Trumpore
Class IV Member - Roy Winfield
Alternate 1 - Sam Hoagland
Alternate 2 - John Kieser
Alternate 3 - Richard Schindelar
Alternate 4 - Michael Rahill
William Haggerty, ESQ. - of Dolan & Dolan, Board Attorney
John Ruschke - of Hatch Mott Macdonald, Board Engineer

RECREATION COMMISSION
David Barnish - Chairman
Sal Gugliemello
Willa Scantlebury
Joan Reilly - Treasurer
Danette Swanson
Cathy Bowen
Dave Barella - Vice Chairman

whoha - The Mayor knows all the free swimming holes in town she is on the Open Space Committee too. Maybe she has the list next to the free Farmer's Market Bags. They are both great summer programs - right? Let's ask her if we can wade in the Hudson Farm waterfall. Would that be a problem since it is on the list of Open Space property and we paid into the Trust Fund ?

Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but I believe that you have misinterpreted this report. I read the 133 pages of the report. I do not see anywhere in the report that says that 23 Cove Rd and the 4 properties of the "prominent DPW employee" were ever sold or donated to the Borough. They are listed as vacant land properties. This does not mean that the properties are Borough owned. The report includes a sections of why these vacant properties can be important to the Greenway project, as well as other properties that are over 2 acres in size and remain largely undeveloped. Did you read that, or were you too intent on trying to dig up dirt, and print sensational hogwash? Please show me where it says that the Borough obtained those vacant lots. As a matter of fact, after reviewing the entire list of the vacant properties, I am familiar with some of them, and I know for a fact that the Borough does not own them. I know the people that do own them. They maintain their own properties. Please take more care in reviewing documents before throwing out false accusations on a blog, and encouraging residents to trespass on private property.

Maybe I'll keep bumping this to the top of the feed until someone can respond to my post.

My Home Town - Yes you have misinterpreted this report. These properties listed are not Borough owned but are part of the Open Space Land Trust Program and it was our Hopatcong Open Space Council that processed them into the Open Space Trust Fund. They now either do not pay any taxes on this vacant property to Hopatcong or are paying a reduced tax rate if they have been evaluated by the Commission as an easement property. The same Commission Members who made the determination of Open Space Properties are the same people who have their properties on the Open Space Trust Fund list. I see that as "just because it's legal doesn't make it right" kind of thing. I also found this list disturbing because it listed a few private beach clubs. I belong to a deeded beach association and we have given access to our beach for the Fire Department to do broken ice search and rescue practice drills. Our association pays taxes on this property without any special rate. No one from the Borough approached us about placing this property into the Open Space Trust to reduce our tax burden to the Borough. Shouldn't our association have been considered an easement property for allowing the Fire Department to use it? It appears only some property lot owners and associations were notified of this open space trust fund that the Hopatcong taxpayer paid into with a special tax Levy. The granted few got their property taxes reduced by our Town officials while the uninformed pay up or else.

Please tell me which page of the report states that these homes are part of the Open Space Land Trust. As far as I can comprehend, these 928 vacant lots are only included on the Open Land inventory; which is just a simple list of privately owned vacant lots which have the potential to be acquiesced to the borough's Open Space Land Trust or have the potential to be used as one of the 4 types of easements. It's only a list of potentials as far as I can see. These are not yet part of the trust, nor are they easements at this time (which I do know that properties with established easements do get tax breaks.) I also did not read anything about these 928 properties receiving tax breaks or tax waivers. Please show me where in the report this info is stated.

I too belong to a deeded beach association. Our association is not on the list either, but we have a dock "aka" structure on the property. Perhaps the other beach associations do not. Or maybe the those beach associations cover several lots, and one or 2 of their lots are vacant and not used or usable for the purposes of their beach association. I do agree, by what you have described concerning your deeded beach association, that some of the property may technically be an easement.

My Home Town - You seem very astute on the wording of this plan. I can only deduct that you had some knowledge about this plan beforehand. So maybe you can answer your own questions to the public here. You state "These are not YET part of the trust, " So can you tell us on what date these properties will be part of the trust since they are on the list? And how did these properties get on the list for consideration? Why would they publish names and properties that did not meet Open Space requirements on a copyrighted final document. If they were not going to be part of this trust fund, they should have been omitted from the list before the final copyrighted publication. I would not want my property listed here as Open Space if it wasn't. Exactly what purpose would it serve to list these properties on a Open Space list if they were not going to be processed as such? I know that MMK REINSURANCE, LTD is listed and it has been well publicized that these properties have already been processed into Open Space land trust. Done Deal on these line items . So are you telling us some line items have been processed and some of these line items have not been processed YET. And when they are processed where do you suppose the compensation amounts will be posted? I don't see MMK's posted here.

My Home Town....can you explain to me the four types of easements? Also, how does one get evaluated by the Commission as an easement property to get as you say "a tax break"?

According to the to the Open Space and Recreation Plan Update report, there are actaully 5 types of easements. Agriculture, trail, conservation, historic, and scenic. The descriptions of these easements is on page 49 of the report that Michele posted a link to above. According to the report, if the easement is on private proprty, "Hopatcong Borough will still collect property taxes from the owner. The amount and type of easement right that is sold will typically lessen the owner's tax liability." That's what I as referring to when i used the term "tax break." Well, that's as much as I can tell you. I do not know how to go about getting property evaluated for easement use.

My Home Town - Thanks for expressing your thoughts on how my blog posts have riled you up. I respect your difference in opinion. I like to play Devils Advocate and try not to take things at face value especially from our local politicians. I will also question the motives behind things. The Mayor and Council are gaining more control over our various planning boards and committees. There is less citizen's control and input of them. My past professional career was to investigate due diligence, program and ethical integrity. Having the same members on this council adding their property on this Trust Fund list would be an integrity issue in the private sector. Now the Mayor and Council have control over both the Environmental and Planning Board. Who is there to object to this inventory list that is an unbiased party? I am glad that your annoyance of me got you to read this 133 page document that was hidden on the town's website. I hope that you ask some objective questions. Mine is - why add on these properties to this open space list which becomes a tax exempt or a reduced rate property. Is Hopatcong in a position to reduce its tax rate ables? This Open Space program started in 1997. The economic climate was so different than it is today. However, who has the power in this town to contradict the Mayor and Council to say that completing this program may be absurd today. My point is they don't always do good deeds some our selfish ones and I flag them. It's my mission.

I appreciated this conversation Michele. I understand where you're coming from. I don't always agree with you, and as I said above, some of what you say just bristles me, but you have a right to demand answers if you believe there's just cause to question things. I'm not cut out for cut throat blogging and commenting. It puts a pit in my stomach because I'm generally a non-confrontational, easy going person. Even though I've kept my identity anonymous, I still feel out of my comfort zone. Anyway, I've said what I wanted to say, and feel good about it, but will now stick to commenting on more genteel subject matter like rainbows and unicorns.

In regard to Open Space Preservation...I find it appalling that the boro would pay Bud Patel, a man who has caused NUMEROUS problems in the town, the amount of $315,000.00 for 31 acres of property....I have spent the past 6 years dealing with the corruption in this town, and this was just one more example...

Michelle...If you go to the Sussex County web site, you should be able to locate land records..that is how I found out about Mr. Patels property...

That is a frightening realization ! Fiefdom is becoming an accurate description of the complete and total takeover of the town, and the residents get to pay and pay.

These Land Trust Deals are hurting the Hopatcong Community with wealthy FIEFDOMS! Land Trust proposals have a winning Tax Favoritism advantage that discourages private parties from even bidding on land. Landholders that participate in these Land Trust programs can even realize a 50% capital gains tax cut . This creates a noncompetitive environment for the land-gobbling Land Trusts and government agencies where their low bid offer is accepted - This causes Real Estate devaluation for the entire community. Adding properties to these Land Trusts only weighs down a community in tough economic times by reducing the property tax base of a community when more and more land becomes tax-exempt properties. This increases the tax burden on remaining private landholders and businesses, and hurts schools, police and other government services. All the while, the Land Trust landholder has access to these tax paid benefits but pays almost nothing in real estate taxes themselves. This is the economic development plan that provides Hudson Farms a recreation tax heaven for their elite Sports Club. The Wealthy have the option of supporting our municipal services with a charitable tax contribution. Not the middle-class -we're taxed for this. We also allowed a legal entity with an OFFSHORE address to use this Tax Trust benefit that we paid with our taxes- Yep Hopatcong is now positioned to make sure these FIEFDOMS keep on growing with the Open Space & Rec plans.

What benefit (if any) would a municipality get for allowing this?

So your saying it helps the powers that be to borrow, borrow, borrow.......