Follow study group recommendations to assess and preserve key parts of Pitney Farm and retain the property for historic value as well as to site a future municipal facility, as originally intended. Do not sell part or all of the municipal land at Pitney.

The Issue

Note: Anyone can sign this petition, and thank-you if you do.  Natually, we expect the most support from those who live in or near Mendham Township or have some tie to Mendham.

Please enjoy the beautiful video about Pitney Farm:

LInk to the 14-minute video: https://vimeo.com/99553318  Password = Pitney

 

All Mendham Township residents own Pitney Farm, and whether one favors keeping taxes low, sound long-range financial management, historic value, or the lowest cost and best location for siting future town facilities, they all converge to NOT selling part or all of the municipal land portion of Pitney Farm.  The town currently appears to be citing incomplete, misleading, and incorrect information to justify selling part or all of the land to help a general budget issue, diametrically opposed to what is best for the town and to all the recommendations of two town-commissioned, expert study groups.  Consider:

1. HISTORY:  Pitney Farm began in 1720's, long before the Revolutionary War, and has active history and relics through the civil war and industrial revolution.  It is unique, irreplaceable, and valuable to current and future residents, regionally as well our town.  As recommended repeatedly by two town-commissioned study groups, a preservation plan or similar expert input should be obtained to identify what should be preserved and what need not be.  Grants are available to fund such inputs.

2. PREVIOUS INVESTMENT:  Money has already been put into the property to buy it, pay debt service for over 5-years, and maintain it, which could be lost if part or all of the property were sold.

3. FUTURE FACILITIES, LOCATION AND COST:  The stated purpose for originally buying the land, to site a future municipal facility, is even more valid and compelling now.  It is clear that either now or soon we will need a new library, police HQ, community center, or similar facility.  Our quaint old facilities are cozy but look at surrounding towns who have much better for their residents and have managed to make new facilities happen.  Selling part or all of this well located site would likely leave few or no alternative properties for future needs, which are certain, leaving only less desirable options and at higher costs in the future.  Do not create higher future taxes and restrict future options for a current, short-term solution to general budgeting issues.  The original reasons for purchasing the land were valid, honor them.  Are there any data or facilities planning studies that have recently changed the past conclusions and studies that said we needed better facilities?

4. PITNEY COSTS:  Pitney costs have been well known and the relevant ones budgeted for over 5-years.  They are not onerous nor new, and outside funding is available.  Any town budget issues should be solved in a more sound, longer-term manner than to simply sell Pitney Farm.  Do NOT cite financial woes after almost 6-years of NOT pursuing readily available funding, as all town-commissioned study groups and several independent experts have repeatedly recommended, and do NOT cite high costs for the town that can and should be funded by grants and not town money.  Some unavoidable costs, as for asbestos remediation, would be subtracted from any developer's bid so "lost", or could be funded by grants if we keep the property for preservation, so cost little or no town funds, financially better for the town if we save the property.

5. PURSUE RECOMMENDED NON-MUNICIPAL FUNDING SOURCES:  As two town-commissioned study groups and various experts have repeatedly noted, donations and grants are readily available to, over time, cover most or all of the costs to assess and preserve key parts of the site.  The recommended non-profit should be solidified to manage such funding and oversee site work.  Follow the town-requested, expert, and wise recommendations that have been repeatedly made and verified.  The cider mill project in our own town is a valid, good example for funding and management, even though site details are different.

6. EXAMINE ALL ALTERNATIVES:  In addition to expensive, "perfect" historic restoration of original structures, as studied by the town, there are many other options, including building replica buildings (e.g., the home farmhouse, as was done for the Wick farm house in Jockey Hollow), moving historic buildings (e.g., the unique corn crib), having other groups (County, NPS, etc.) help or even take over, etc., all with lower costs but meeting the primary objectives for the site setting, that can and should be considered.  And again, most or all of such assessment studies, stabilization, or preservation costs could be covered via grants and donations, requiring little or no town money, so should not be presented as high costs to the town.

7. SITE SETTING:  The municipal land portion of Pitney Farm is the portion of the site that is at risk for sale, and it is surrounded by, accessed through, and complements, if not defines, the farm setting of the surrounding open space portion.  The 1720s farmhouse, barn, and other historic farm features are on the municipal land porition (that is at risk).  To just sell part or all of it or ignore the complementary role would be a serious detriment.

8. SITE NEIGHBORS:  Adjacent and nearby neighbors should oppose selling part or all of the site to private development.  They can influence the public process and town government for the current town land, but will have little or no influence on private development.

9. LARGER PICTURE AND CLEAR EXAMPLES TO FOLLOW:  The Township Committee should be thinking of what's best for our residents, now and in the future, not just blindly following the nice but doomed mantra of never increasing taxes.  Other towns acquire and maintain great facilities for their residents (look at libraries, recreational sites, etc., in Randolph, Chester, etc.), they get value for the residents and do not blindly follow unsustainable practices that inexorably build up pressure towards greater problems in the future.  We are not a poor town and our people value the historic setting, it is wrong to casually destroy forever something of such historic and financial value for short-term convenience.

 

if you would like to donate directly to our cause, you can do so by sending a check, payable to "Friends of Pitney Farm", to Friends of Pitney Farm, PO Box 532, Mendham, NJ 07945

 

 And please watch the video if you have not already (see link at the beginning of this petition)!

Thank you!!

This petition had 651 supporters

The Issue

Note: Anyone can sign this petition, and thank-you if you do.  Natually, we expect the most support from those who live in or near Mendham Township or have some tie to Mendham.

Please enjoy the beautiful video about Pitney Farm:

LInk to the 14-minute video: https://vimeo.com/99553318  Password = Pitney

 

All Mendham Township residents own Pitney Farm, and whether one favors keeping taxes low, sound long-range financial management, historic value, or the lowest cost and best location for siting future town facilities, they all converge to NOT selling part or all of the municipal land portion of Pitney Farm.  The town currently appears to be citing incomplete, misleading, and incorrect information to justify selling part or all of the land to help a general budget issue, diametrically opposed to what is best for the town and to all the recommendations of two town-commissioned, expert study groups.  Consider:

1. HISTORY:  Pitney Farm began in 1720's, long before the Revolutionary War, and has active history and relics through the civil war and industrial revolution.  It is unique, irreplaceable, and valuable to current and future residents, regionally as well our town.  As recommended repeatedly by two town-commissioned study groups, a preservation plan or similar expert input should be obtained to identify what should be preserved and what need not be.  Grants are available to fund such inputs.

2. PREVIOUS INVESTMENT:  Money has already been put into the property to buy it, pay debt service for over 5-years, and maintain it, which could be lost if part or all of the property were sold.

3. FUTURE FACILITIES, LOCATION AND COST:  The stated purpose for originally buying the land, to site a future municipal facility, is even more valid and compelling now.  It is clear that either now or soon we will need a new library, police HQ, community center, or similar facility.  Our quaint old facilities are cozy but look at surrounding towns who have much better for their residents and have managed to make new facilities happen.  Selling part or all of this well located site would likely leave few or no alternative properties for future needs, which are certain, leaving only less desirable options and at higher costs in the future.  Do not create higher future taxes and restrict future options for a current, short-term solution to general budgeting issues.  The original reasons for purchasing the land were valid, honor them.  Are there any data or facilities planning studies that have recently changed the past conclusions and studies that said we needed better facilities?

4. PITNEY COSTS:  Pitney costs have been well known and the relevant ones budgeted for over 5-years.  They are not onerous nor new, and outside funding is available.  Any town budget issues should be solved in a more sound, longer-term manner than to simply sell Pitney Farm.  Do NOT cite financial woes after almost 6-years of NOT pursuing readily available funding, as all town-commissioned study groups and several independent experts have repeatedly recommended, and do NOT cite high costs for the town that can and should be funded by grants and not town money.  Some unavoidable costs, as for asbestos remediation, would be subtracted from any developer's bid so "lost", or could be funded by grants if we keep the property for preservation, so cost little or no town funds, financially better for the town if we save the property.

5. PURSUE RECOMMENDED NON-MUNICIPAL FUNDING SOURCES:  As two town-commissioned study groups and various experts have repeatedly noted, donations and grants are readily available to, over time, cover most or all of the costs to assess and preserve key parts of the site.  The recommended non-profit should be solidified to manage such funding and oversee site work.  Follow the town-requested, expert, and wise recommendations that have been repeatedly made and verified.  The cider mill project in our own town is a valid, good example for funding and management, even though site details are different.

6. EXAMINE ALL ALTERNATIVES:  In addition to expensive, "perfect" historic restoration of original structures, as studied by the town, there are many other options, including building replica buildings (e.g., the home farmhouse, as was done for the Wick farm house in Jockey Hollow), moving historic buildings (e.g., the unique corn crib), having other groups (County, NPS, etc.) help or even take over, etc., all with lower costs but meeting the primary objectives for the site setting, that can and should be considered.  And again, most or all of such assessment studies, stabilization, or preservation costs could be covered via grants and donations, requiring little or no town money, so should not be presented as high costs to the town.

7. SITE SETTING:  The municipal land portion of Pitney Farm is the portion of the site that is at risk for sale, and it is surrounded by, accessed through, and complements, if not defines, the farm setting of the surrounding open space portion.  The 1720s farmhouse, barn, and other historic farm features are on the municipal land porition (that is at risk).  To just sell part or all of it or ignore the complementary role would be a serious detriment.

8. SITE NEIGHBORS:  Adjacent and nearby neighbors should oppose selling part or all of the site to private development.  They can influence the public process and town government for the current town land, but will have little or no influence on private development.

9. LARGER PICTURE AND CLEAR EXAMPLES TO FOLLOW:  The Township Committee should be thinking of what's best for our residents, now and in the future, not just blindly following the nice but doomed mantra of never increasing taxes.  Other towns acquire and maintain great facilities for their residents (look at libraries, recreational sites, etc., in Randolph, Chester, etc.), they get value for the residents and do not blindly follow unsustainable practices that inexorably build up pressure towards greater problems in the future.  We are not a poor town and our people value the historic setting, it is wrong to casually destroy forever something of such historic and financial value for short-term convenience.

 

if you would like to donate directly to our cause, you can do so by sending a check, payable to "Friends of Pitney Farm", to Friends of Pitney Farm, PO Box 532, Mendham, NJ 07945

 

 And please watch the video if you have not already (see link at the beginning of this petition)!

Thank you!!

The Decision Makers

Township Committee, Mendham Township NJ
Township Committee, Mendham Township NJ
Petition updates