Public Comment? not really 4/8
- Bloomfield Sustainability
- Apr 10
- 8 min read
Updated: Apr 15
Public comment on the 2025 Master Plan for the Township of Bloomfield. Prepared by Phillips Preiss Grygiel Leheny Hughes LLC, April 8, 2025.
It was made clear early on that “There will be no public comment" during the Planning Board meeting on Tuesday, March 11th, when the Township Planning Board approved the Master Plan without a single question from the board or Mayor.
The plan was then moved forward for "public comment" on April 8th. Once again the town took great pains to repeatedly inform the residents of Bloomfield that they would "not be allowed to submit written comments, they must appear in person, be sworn in, and would have only three minutes to comment" on a 300+ page document, which was uploaded to the Town webpage a couple of days later.
On Friday March 28th, almost 50 people showed up to a strictly apolitical community meeting where Bloomfield neighbors were invited to share their priorities and concerns at breakout tables over pizza.
Many of the speakers who showed up on April 8th came to give voice to the community.
We came out in large part to object to the manner by which the approval process bulldozed over community engagement and public discourse.
Most residents were not in opposition to much of what is in the document. They were concerned with what was missing, such as no information from the Bloomfield Flood Mitigation Advisory Committee, the Bloomfield Center Alliance, or the urgent need for affordable housing for low income people. Everyone who spoke said there should not be a vote that night; instead, the Planning Board should consider all the comments, revise the Master Plan and resubmit it to the public before voting.
Many residents showed up in good faith to give their comments, but were forced to speak at pharmaceutical-disclaimer speeds. Most were cut for time.
For a 300 page document which will impact how Bloomfield will be built for the next TEN years, this was unacceptable.
To discredit the whole process further, the Planning Board Chairman repeatedly informed the residents that “this isn’t really for Ten years, it can be changed any time”. Which really begged the question; then why do it at all?
Will it be “changed” to meet a developer’s greed?
Can it be “changed” because of petty political differences?
And we’d like to ask, Who, Mr. Chair, will PAY for those future revisions?
The developers who rent or sell housing underbuilt for flooding? The family whose loved one gets sucked down a drain and dies in the next flood? The family who loses another car and can’t get insurance? The Planning Board members’ own time? Or the Public who spend their precious (but free to you all!) time fighting for their community?
The answer is All of the above.
Of course the residents of Bloomfield will pay, either because the town will hire another “consultant” to make the change, and the working public will also pay for the time they will need to spend reviewing yet another 'something' they probably shouldn't trust because transparent public engagement has died and political theater replaced it.
It became clear as we watched the Mayor ignore the speakers again, in her now famous “scowling text face,” and the town Engineer who looked bored as hell too, that this exercise at Public Comment was pure performance, granted to us from on high only because it was probably legally required.
The plan itself was professional. It presents as almost a travel brochure vibe of a happy eco-friendly suburban town (a bit of a stretch - can you say solar?)
The Bloomfield Sustainability Network supports most of the Recommendations in the Master Plan such as:
· P8. Adopt a Renewable Energy Ordinance ... Specifically, the ordinance should address solar panels including ground-mounted, roof-mounted, building integrated, and parking lot canopies. The Township’s ordinances should also be updated to reflect Municipal Land Use Rules regulations regarding renewable energy systems.
· P9. Hold informational sessions and create brochures or other materials regarding sustainable best management practices. This information could be available on the Township’s website.
· P12. Improve the efficiency and transparency of the Land Use Code and application process by providing both in online and hard copy formats informational materials, clear checklists, templates, and timelines to be used by both Township staff, Board Professionals, and applicants.
We believe Flooding, sustainability, and affordable housing are the most important issues Bloomfield is facing. While there are many good recommendations in the plan, there are some significant oversights.
The most egregious oversight was that the Master Plan process failed to seek input from most of the town’s committees. These committees are comprised of passionate, dedicated citizens who are willing to use their expertise and time to make our town a better place to live and work. They deserve our gratitude, respect and acknowledgement.
Speakers noted that many other towns had created a diverse Steering Committee to engage the public in the process before final release. When asked specifically who was on Bloomfield's steering committee in Bloomfield, it was revealed that it was just the Mayor and the planning board itself.
This highlights a disturbing trend that Bloomfield seems to only aim to meet “minimal requirements” - the town CFO is not held to providing transparent budget background material, Remington Vernick is not held to completing an expensive yet still unfinished Flood Engineering report. Instead, they're nepotistically rewarded with more contracts...and who pays for this? we the taxpayers.
Greg Babula, formerly a Planning Board member, on a Facebook post April 4th,
confirmed that the town’s own Planning Board was not consulted, and that the sub-committee had failed to engage the community over the past 2 years.
A summary of the issues Mr. Babula highlights:
· The Planning Board is wrapping up a re-examination of the township’s Master Plan. State law requires this reexamination every ten years.
· The Bloomfield Township Master Plan Reexamination has taken 3 years, which is 2 to 3 times longer than it should have taken. There has been no explanation for the delay.
· The Master Plan Reexamination and work on the new Master Plan was outsourced to a group of professionals hired by the planning board with no opportunity for planning board members to participate in the process or to review their work along the way.
· Planning Board members were kept in the dark about progress on the Master Plan Reexamination and new Master Plan until both documents were publicly shared at the Planning Board meeting on March 11, 2025.
· There was very little opportunity for the community to participate in the Master Plan Reexamination process. The only two public workshops were held almost 2 years ago, and nothing since then.
· The Planning Board is now rushing to adopt the new Master Plan at their upcoming meeting on April 8, again with virtually no meaningful opportunity for community involvement.
· The Planning Board should postpone adoption of the new Master Plan to give the community a meaningful opportunity to share their concerns and suggestions.
· I was kicked off the Planning Board and the Bloomfield Historic Preservation Commission because I did not support our current mayor in last year’s Democratic primary election.
Flooding In Bloomfield, and why the Master Plan matters:
Bloomfield must be prepared for the next 10 years to build for the maximum future impacts, not the “minimum required.”
To any people who have never heard of the flooding in Bloomfield, here's an article you might want to read to catch up. Another article worth reading: Murky Waters: Inside Bloomfield’s Stormy Pay-to-Play Saga, Published on the Bloomfield Chronicles Mar 20, 2025
At least two speakers pointed out that the rainfall data in the Master Plan is over THREE YEARS out of date.– (See outdated Appendix C Environmental Resources Page 4 NOAA database 1991-2020)
Phillips Preiss acknowledged this and offered to update it. However, the Planning Chair pushed the plan approval through without accepting their offer. The Chair and Mayor should have insisted this critical data be updated!
The Flood Mitigation Advisory Committee came prepared with a list of Five pages of recommendations. Because of the strict 3 minute timing rules, and the refusal to admit written testimony to the board, most of the Flood Mitigation Committee recommendations were not able to be read. The following is a list of their recommendations which the Chair posted on Facebook, having been left with no other avenue to communicate potentially lifesaving information:
It was particularly jarring when the Flood Committee chair introduced herself, and the Planning Chair interrupted her saying he wasn’t "aware that a Flood Committee existed".
The Planners also seemed caught off guard, and apologized that they had not engaged with the Flood Mitigation Advisory Committee, but said it was because they had not been directed to do so. In fact, the Planners confirmed they were not directed to meet with any committees.
This was a slap in the face.
Note: The Flood Mitigation Advisory Committee was created in October 2024, with the full support of the Public and the previous Mayor, five months before the release of this Master Plan.
The members of the Bloomfield Flood Mitigation Advisory Committee are all volunteering their professional expertise for our town. Please see their Bios:
Speakers also mentioned:
A Lack of Affordable Housing was mentioned by several speakers.
(this will continue to be updated and added to)
Missing Timeline was also mentioned by several speakers;
The Master Plan is missing a key element of other plans; a timeline for executing the recommendations.
In contrast, the Master Plan for Teaneck NJ, also prepared by Phillips Preiss in January has such a timeline. Bloomfield's plan does not.
Another speaker was in Opposition to:
(P72, sec. 5.6.5) "creating a Township staff position focused on Bloomfield’s Economic Development. [to act as] the primary liaison between the Township, business owners, property owners, developers, and other stakeholders."
This Job description would duplicate positions already filled by the entertainment director and PR firm. New Payroll Hires would be better spent on a full time New Jersey Professional Planner, in line with Montclair and Glen Ridge.
Also, Creating an ‘Economic Development’ (reference to the Newark NCEDC scandal) position between the town and developers is an open invitation to corruption, and is not a good idea, especially in Bloomfield.
Speaker's recommended the town should instead encourage local businesses to engage in our multiple Chambers of Commerce.
In the end, the Master Plan was of course approved, again without a single question from the Mayor or anyone on the Planning Board.
This insulting performance on Tuesday night cost all of us.
Town Leadership, many of whom are securely employed with benefits paid for by We the People, need to show more respect.
We entered the meeting believing a dream that the town might someday implement the recommendations in the plan that would make Bloomfield a safer and more enjoyable place to live and work.
By the end, the majority of people who took the night off felt they had been lured by a lie that the town leaders actually care about our concerns.
We left seeing that dream will not come to life under the current leadership.
We will have to buy more insurance, live with flooding and empty promises, and put up with those cloying political photo ops.
Or, maybe there are better people who will actually serve Bloomfield. We’ll see.
Opmerkingen