Wetlands in Peril, Sidewalks for Show, Flooding Unchecked Part 1: Unmasking the CMS Lease Scandal

The first part of this three-part series will begin with the property originally proposed for a synthetic turf field at the Township’s newly acquired lease of Lower Columbia.

The Township has had a rough few weeks.

Emails aren’t being responded to. And I’m not talking about in a “timely manner,” I’m talking about no response at all. I had originally sent 5 emails from the NJ21st account asking questions surrounding Township matters. After Ms. Poage and Ms. Viana made it clear they refused to respond to NJ21st emails, I re-sent the emails from my personal account. Unfortunately, but not surprisingly, those didn’t get a response either.

A governing body that once embraced being held accountable and valued full, honest, and truthful transparency has been struggling to meet the basic needs of governing lately—namely, communication. A vastly different government than what this town once prided itself on as “strong leadership” has taken over in an odd display of secrecy and avoidance.

The downward spiral began around the time of the oh-so-salacious “lease” for the CMS property. The agreement, which the Township Attorney has called a “stylized” lease, was supposed to be about a field and for the betterment of the property for the use of our children. This “stylized” lease, which acts like a shared service agreement—according to the Township Attorney—raises questions about the legality of the Township doing anything with the property if they don’t actually have ownership of it.

To my knowledge (and I asked, but the Township Administrator is refusing to put anything in writing to me or answer questions), no grants have been submitted or procured, no turf field is being installed, and no improvements have been made since March 2025.

Just as I started asking lots of difficult questions, a post to social media made nearly a week after the pot was stirred (on 9/13/25) shows a very small part of the walkway at Columbia Park has been paved. This is what has been accomplished in the six months since the lease was authorized. Thank you?

Readily available documents show what took those responsible for the fields at least six months, but possibly upwards of eight years, to find. They show that the property highlighted for the installation of a synthetic turf field is certainly a buffer zone to wetlands and may even be classified, in part, as wetlands. These documents date back to 2000.

Due diligence is important—not only in remaining a transparent governing entity but also in ensuring a job well done: well thought out, well planned, and well executed. It is the best indicator of an effective and strong government.

HOWEVER, and this is a big however, an article from June 29, 2024, covering the Town Council meeting quoted the Recreation Director stating:

“Seven, eight years, we’ve done all of our due diligence.”

If this is accurate, how would a simple search of Township documents have been overlooked? Those very documents highlighting the environmental concerns cited as the reason the turf field cannot be installed were not consulted, completed, or even entertained.

And why, just now, is the Township realizing that the proposed location for the turf field “may not work”?

My questions surrounding this entire process remain: WHY does the Township want this property so badly? And WHY did the Township abandon all attempts at an ethical, collaborative, and constructive process to procure it?

At this point, logic would support curiosity about the catch, because there has to be one.

In an email I sent to the Recreation Commissioner and Township officials, I asked why no one had the forethought to check the property before the rushed lease with the Board of Education.

Following the silence from the Township in response to residents and myself asking for updates, they dumped an extremely unmanageable number of resolutions in the meeting packet last week (9/16/25). Most concerning was a resolution to give authority to an appointed, non-township employee—a Recreation volunteer—to engage in a contract with a consulting firm to assess and provide feedback on Columbia Field.

Also included in the agenda packet were two resolutions to authorize funds in connection with the property at Lower Columbia ($32,000) and for the installation of a turf field ($250,000).

The press release, which is likely tied to these funds, mentions an original grant in the amount of $71,000 for improvements to Lower Columbia. With only $32,000 remaining or allocated—where did the rest go, or what is it being saved for?

Reference:

The Storm Sewage Map (cited in a 2023 power point presentation created by the Rec Department) doesn’t provide much useful information in determining ’safe’ areas to consider a synthetic field.  Was this the only document used in making a determination in using Lower Columbia field for turf? 

See Our Wiki Section on the CMS Lease Agreement