|

Results of Questionnaire
Distributed at Advisory Committee Meeting #1
I. At the first Advisory Committee meeting on
November 26, 2001, a questionnaire was distributed to the meeting
participants asking them to prioritize the following draft Strategic
Plan Objectives based on a one (1) to five (5) scale with one (1 ) being
the most important objective:
-
To
address existing needs for jobs, infrastructure, and economic
development
-
To
provide balance between economic development and environmental
protection
-
To
achieve intermunicipal agreement on development goals and
strategies
-
To
develop a planning and implementation agenda
-
To
obtain plan endorsement
Based
on the 23 questionnaires that were collected at the meeting plus those
faxed to Anthony Stanzione of the Cumberland Development Corporation,
meeting participants prioritized the objectives as follows.
Questionnaire
Results

Roughly
half of the participants identified Objective A (to address existing
needs for jobs, infrastructure, and economic development) as the most
important objective of the plan. Objective A received the highest
overall ranking. About one-quarter of respondents identified Objective C
(to achieve intermunicipal agreement on development goals and
strategies) as the most important objective. With 77 percent giving it a
ranking of 3 or better, Objective C was selected as the second highest
priority. Approximately one-fifth of the respondents selected Objective
D (to develop a planning and implementation agenda) as the most
important objective and overall it ranked third. Objective B received a
rating of three (3) from approximately 32 percent of respondents and
finished fourth in the overall rankings.
Obtaining
Plan Endorsement (Objective E) does not seem to be a high priority of
the meeting’s participants. Slightly over 80 percent of respondents
ranked this objective either four (4) or five (5) and it finished last
in the overall rankings.
II.
To help direct future components of the study, participants were also
asked three questions pertaining to the study. The questions and
selected responses are listed below.
Question
#1. From your perspective, how
important are environmental protection and/or land conservation as goals
for the region?
Responses:
•
Environmental protection and land conservation are essential to
Cumberland County’s quality of life.
•
Land conservation and land protection is very important but the
townships with the larger amounts of open space must work in conjunction
with the more developed municipalities for economic survival.
•
Environmental protection is important but should be flexible enough to
accommodate new industry.
•
Environmental and land conservation goals are important and a number of
programs are already in place in our County to reach these goals.
•
We need to emphasize the regional benefits of preserved lands including
economic studies of cost savings for services, environmental benefits,
and payment in lieu of taxes programs.
•
Environmental protection and land conservation are important but the
present goals of the plan should focus on economic development.
Increased environmental protection measures and land conservation should
take place after there is an increase in jobs and industry.
•
Many respondents did not elaborate on the question but indicated that
environmental protection and land conservation are very important for
the region.
Question
#2. Is there a possible or inevitable
conflict between economic development and environmental protection? How
do you deal with potential conflicts?
Responses:
•
I believe that there is a possible conflict but we must keep
environmental protection a top priority when considering economic
development initiatives.
•
We should provide education to residents and businesses on how to take
advantage of the county’s natural resources to cater to the tourism
trade.
•
There needs to be public education and discussions of relationships
between environmental protection and economic development.
•
Conflicts between environmental protection and economic development will
always exist because different organizations have their own agendas.
There are substantial controls already in place to minimize the
conflicts, such as NJDEP, wetlands bureau, CAFRA, Pinelands Commission,
Wild & Scenic Designations, etc.
•
Development should be concentrated in areas where infrastructure already
exists. Ecotourism is a good tool for this conflict in this region.
•
Prudent zoning is essential to planning in the region and will help
avoid future conflicts.
Question
#3. Regional collaboration in
preparing a Strategic Plan is a primary objective of this project. What
impediments do you see to obtaining a planning consensus on goals and
strategies?
Responses:
•
A lack of communication and varied political interests are a major
impediment.
•
Some municipal officials may be interested in specific goals for their
municipalities and may want to keep development in their area.
•
The inability to share costs and benefits between
municipalities/Spreading the economic benefits equally between
participants.
•
All parties involved must agree that this plan’s success depends on
total membership cooperation. We must be willing to put aside individual
desires for the benefit of the county as a whole.
•
Setting meeting dates that will be convenient for the people involved.
•
Making sure all municipalities are treated equally in the process.
•
Long-term planning can be hindered by short-term economic ideas that
need to be considered in terms of broader environmental impact.
•
Personalities and personal agendas will get in the way of progress.
III.
A regional strategic plan has many components. Subcommittees have been
formed for the Western/Southern Cumberland Region Strategic Plan. These
subcommittees will focus on key planning topics that will be addressed
in the strategic plan. Participants were asked to identify the
subcommittees that they were interested in:
Agriculture
(AG)
Economic
Development (ED)
Historic
Preservation/Cultural Resources (HP)
Housing
(H)
Infrastructure:
Transportation/ Public Sewer/Water/Electric/Gas (INF)
Inter-Municipal
Collaboration (IMC)
Natural
Resources (NR)
Planning
Implementation (PI)
The
following individuals indicated their subcommittee preference:
|
|
|
Subcommittee |
|
Name |
Organization |
Preferences |
|
Andersen, Scott |
First Pioneer Farm Credit |
IMC |
|
Basile, Bruno |
Upper Deerfield Twp. Planning Board |
IMC, PI |
|
Betchner, Neil |
Cumberland County Planning Board |
ED |
|
Bierbaum, Martin |
NJDCA |
PI |
|
Brewer, Robert |
Cumberland County Planning Dept. |
All |
|
Campbell, Sr., Ronald |
Shiloh Borough Municipal Clerk |
AG, INF, IMC |
|
Carrara, Jody |
Assoc. of NJ Environmental Commissions |
NR, INF |
|
Dare, Harry |
Harry R. Dare, Planning Consultant |
INF, PI |
|
Dawson, Ruth |
Lawrence Twp. Municipal Clerk |
AG, ED |
|
Ely, Gordon |
Bridgeton Planning Board |
NR, INF |
|
Fralinger, J., Michael |
Fralinger Engineering |
ED, INF, IMC, PI |
|
Goodwin, Wally |
Greenwich Twp. Committee |
IMC |
|
Hollinger, Debi |
Commercial Twp. Land Use Board |
ED |
|
Jacobson, James |
Downe Township Planning/Zoning Board |
NR |
|
Joyce, Louis |
Upper Deerfield Twp. Administrator |
H, IMC, PI |
|
Kirchhoffer, Don |
NJ Conservation Foundation |
ED, NR |
|
Maloney, Blake |
Cumberland County Utilities Authority |
NR, INF, IMC |
|
Pappas, Clement |
Clement Pappas & Co. Inc. |
ED, INF |
|
Reed, Robert |
Hopewell Twp. Planning Board |
AG, ED, INF |
|
Reeves, Michael |
SJTPO |
INF |
|
Requa, James |
NJDCA |
IMC, PI |
|
Ritter, Ted |
Hopewell Twp. Administrator |
ED, NR, INF, PI |
|
Roork, Dean |
Greenwich Twp. Planning Board |
AG |
|
Tomson, Carol |
NJDEP |
AG, NR, INF |
IV.
There will be four Advisory Committee meetings during the course of the
project. The meeting participants were asked to check off the best
possible date and time fore future meetings. The responses varied, but
the fourth Monday evening of the month was the most common response.
|