Deal ACTION needed! -beach access restrictions and Permit parking

[finchaser]

http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=19647&stc=1

[surferman]

Just got this from a group I belong to, Surfrider.
I don't know a lot about the towns up there. If we don't do something it will be another beach where the towns folk win. They got federal dollars for the beach replenishment. Please help by sending e-mails and don't let them do this!


From SURFRIDER:
We find it interesting that Deal just got millions of dollars of free sand in the form of beach replenishment. this is in a town where there is no swimming except at the Pavilion where there are lifeguards. We warned officials that this would happen; that once there are wide sandy beaches, that the taxpayers who paid for those beaches would want to get to those beaches. Getting to those beaches requires people to park.

So please please please come to the meeting of the Mayor and Commissioners on October 9th at 9AM to express your opposition to this. (Yes they meet at 9AM on Fridays - no wonder things like this happen.)

If you can?t get to the meeting, please email the Deal Mayor, Morris Ades, - Mayor@dealborough.com.
Email the Borough Administrator as well Administrator@dealborough.com.
Be respectful, but express your opposition to this.

Email your State Assembly Member
Caroline Casagrande - aswcasagrande@njleg.org
Mary Pat Angelini - aswangelini@njleg.org and
State Senator Jennifer Beck Senbeck@njleg.org

But wait there's more - believe it or not there is a petition at Change.org to limit beach access and parking in Deal, NJ. If it wasn't so ridiculous and illegal it would be sad. Read here but please do not sign.

Please help us rally against this ridiculous plan, please send emails, a lot of emails, to these folks.

[hookset]

This sucks, I saw it coming. Some of the comments by the residents at the Change.org petition-

Parking Restrictions: During the hours of the night (or from dusk to dawn) we should prohibit parking without a permit. What business does one have on the beach during those hours? If residents should like to park their cars on the street, then they should be given permit hangtags; and if they should be hosting a large function, then they should be required to hire a patrolman to waive the summons of all cars that might be parked without permits.

Fewer Access Points: We now have seven beach access points in our town (from north to south, Roosevelt Ave., Ocean Lane, Phillips Ave., Darlington Ave., Deal Esplanade, Hathaway Ave., and Neptune Avenue. By limiting that number to, say, two or three, we can effectively limit the amount of visitors we receive each year, and thereby reduce our town’s liabilities and expenses, while protecting our emergency and sanitary resources. This can be done through either structural impasses (as is exemplified on Marine Place) or stricter parking restrictions (as is exemplified on Clem Conover Road, which has a “no parking beyond this limit” sign nearly immediately after one turns onto the block).

Ocean Avenue Traffic: The more people visit our beaches, the more traffic there will be in the streets. This poses a danger to the children and pedestrians walking or riding bicycles nearby. Moreover, it reduces the quality of life for the residents living within these high-traffic areas. (Speaking from personal experience, we can tell you that it is not pleasant to open your house door to be stared at by a street full of unknown surfers and fishermen—many of whom are oftentimes blasting music from their cars, or changing into their water garments without discretion.)

House Thefts: It is not only our beaches that are accessible to those living in the surrounding areas, but our homes. Those that frequent our beaches are spending more time than we think in our own backyards (literally). This freedom allows them to study the habits of our homeowners—which, once mastered, may leave them with an easy opportunity of theft.

[hookset]

The meeting is next Fri Oct 9. Borough Hall 190 Norwood Ave Deal. Tried to make the notice bigger so all can see the streets they want locked down.

[hookset]

This really sucks. I sent out some e-mails. If you care please do the same.

[porgy75]

Looks like they want to restrict bathing access too? How can they do that if they got federal dollars for the beaches there? I will send an e-mail to the mayor. thanks for posting the addresses.

[seamonkey]

Wow thats just terrible. I'm wondering how they pull that as well. I think they will be the first town in the history of NJ to do that! thanks and I will try to help too. At least send an e-mail sorry I can't go to the meeting. That in itself is sneaky. How many folks can go to a meeting at 9am on a friday.
Does anyone want to post an e-mail they have sent to make it easier for the rest of us to c&p?

[jigfreak]

Parking Restrictions: During the hours of the night (or from dusk to dawn) we should prohibit parking without a permit. What business does one have on the beach during those hours? If residents should like to park their cars on the street, then they should be given permit hangtags; and if they should be hosting a large function, then they should be required to hire a patrolman to waive the summons of all cars that might be parked without permits.


Ocean Avenue Traffic: The more people visit our beaches, the more traffic there will be in the streets. This poses a danger to the children and pedestrians walking or riding bicycles nearby. Moreover, it reduces the quality of life for the residents living within these high-traffic areas. (Speaking from personal experience, we can tell you that it is not pleasant to open your house door to be stared at by a street full of unknown surfers and fishermen—many of whom are oftentimes blasting music from their cars, or changing into their water garments without discretion.)



You know these 2 are directly aimed at fishermen. All those blitz fishermen who sat on those streets every year waiting for the blitzes to start and then littering with the coffee cups and peeing in there bushes. Like you said it was only matter of time before they mobilized for a checkmate. It still violates our rights even though some of the guys I know were scumbags.

[jigfreak]

Here's a few shots, anyone know these people? got from the threads below
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/showthread.php?4042-And-so-it-begins-Insanity-on-the-beaches/page4
http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/showthread.php?9051-The-Waiters!&highlight=waiters

Guys we have to fight this. Send your e-mails today. I just sent 4.

[plugcrazy]

That is a bunch of elitist garbage for them to even try to keep people off the beach! thanks for the heads up. e-mail sent

[fishinmission78]

Will send an e-mail today. That's why I stopped fishing up there, hate the crowds that used to form every spring. I wonder about the legality as well. I thought beach access was protected by the federal govt or something in the constitution.

[buckethead]

Saw the writing on the wall on this too. They already started it last year by putting up seasonal no parking signs on some of those streets. We should try to fight this folks. I'll be sending e-mails as well. Please pitch in.

[cowherder]

I separated out the e-mails and found phone numbers to make it easier. Lets keep this going guys.

Elected official/ State Assembly Member list
call or e-mail
Deal Mayor, Morris Ades, - Mayor@dealborough.com.
Borough Administrator Administrator@dealborough.com.

Email your State Assembly Member
Caroline Casagrande - (732) 866-1695 - aswcasagrande@njleg.org
Mary Pat Angelini - (732) 531-1045 - aswangelini@njleg.org and
State Senator Jennifer Beck - (732) 933-1591 - Senbeck@njleg.org

[lostatsea]

Thanks for that. Makes it easier. emails sent. What a bunch of stuck up people!

[DarkSkies]

I got a few calls from some of ya's this morning, and see there are some very strong opinions.
I'm glad to see the outrage and hope it will motivate people......
Finchaser and I were talking about this for awhile today to try to think of possible solutions and approaches.
Some of you may remember how he and the old timers got Spring Lake to back off on the parking restrictions back in the early 80's.

Based on that I reached out to the NJBBA, DEP, Fishing clubs, and some other contacts.....will keep this updated as needed.











I'll try to break it down to make it easier to understand.

Basic Outline
A. Town Issues and Concerns - very valid and reasonable

B. Legality - Towns have authority over parking restrictions - this has been a back door way for many East Coast towns to sneakily restrict fishermen access.

C. Supporting Cases - Brookhaven LI, Acess restrictions on the North Shore of LI and North shore of LI Sound (CT, RI,)...... recent restrictions near certain bridges/power plants to prevent "terrorist activity...
all serve as possible cited precedents for Deal's action.

D. Access Restrictions vs Parking Restrictions - there is a clear distinction here, and that needs to be understood by anyone who feels angry.

E. Access Requirements for towns accepting Federal Funds for replenishment....

[DarkSkies]

Thanks to all who are posting the e-mail and phone contacts.
The most important thing would be to go to the meeting, and express your Strong opposition, without shouting, without getting arrested.

I don't mean to be negative, but every time there is an issue like this, the "Saltwater fishing community" comes up big on internet comments, but falls far short when it comes to actually doing something.
We, as a voting bloc, have come to be disregarded by Politicians because we are so infeffective and weak at putting rallys together....

Some of the most recent examples;

1. Fishermens' March on Washington-
claimed rally attendance of 5000. I was there and counted. At most there were 3000 folks, more than half commercial fishermen. (In a community.... nation wide, numbering millions of fishermen.... only about 1500 were able to make it down to that rally to make their voices heard)

2. Fight to preserve Drag Island, Parkway reconstruction-
I can speak on this as I was part of that committee. We begged people for signatures on a petition. Thousands of folks who fish NJ, and we barely could get 500 signatures.

3. Opposition to Beach Replenishment, Jetty Country.....
"Thousands" of irate anglers on internet web sites...When it came time to stand up and be counted...less than 200 actually showed up at the protest.....despite the anger represented on the internet...and recent protests of outrage...only a small % actually tried to make a difference.....:learn:


Those are just a few...the list is long...ask the NJBBA how they have had to plead to get folks involved with some of their access battles...or ask the SSFFF how they have to plead to get fishermen to continually support and send $$ in to keep the fires going....the apathy in the fishing community is just astounding, and saddening to me...at times.....

[DarkSkies]

I will be very candid in this statement....

1. What Deal is proposing is very reasonable given the circumstances they have had to endure for the last 10 years. Some of you have pointed this out with pictures and thread links. I thank you for that.

2. Fishermen have rights, but the behavior of some of us has given us a terrible reputation in certain areas. As sad as it is for me to say this, I see how homeowners could hate us. Only a small % of fishermen have shown concern for homeowners in many of these areas where they try to restrict our access.
The fault..... lies squarely on the shoulders of the fishing community.

3. I'm not an attorney...but in my experience....one of few possible legal bases to challenge this...
a. is the federal money given for beach replenishment,
b. and the committment of towns to draft "Reasonable" Municipal Access Plans. (MAPS)

4. I have sat in on a few of these MAP discussions when the DEP and towns invited members of the fishing community for their feedback. It's not an easy process. IMO the DEP should never have given this much power to each town.

5. Now that the DEP gave authority to draft MAPs to the towns, it is an uphill battle to fight something like this.











I wonder about the legality as well. I thought beach access was protected by the federal govt or something in the constitution.

The Public Trust Doctrine will not protect us here.
a. They are not restricting beach access.
b. They are restricting parking.

Anyone who has ever tried to fish the towns along the Northern part of the LI Sound would see that the access in CT is much worse there..... than it is in NJ. There are dozens of towns/boroughs that have "Permit-only" parking.

Just like some of you here, Finchaser, I, and others....... tried to warn folks of this at least 5 years ago.....not many were interested in listening.
When we have meetings, it is the same 15-20 people attending, every time.

Finchaser and his friends, and folks from the NJBBA, who have been fighting for access for decades, will tell you the same thing.
Much shouting goes on about this on the internet,
**but when it's time to take a stand, hardly anyone new shows up.
It's the same old story over and over, and politicians know that.

Our apathy as a voting or political group has diminished the respect we command as a group out there.
Looking back to Spring Lake in the 80's...fishermen were powerful back then.

Now, in 2015 NJ..... and most of America, it has become apparent that even when fishermen rant on the internet, they are mostly all talk, and little action.


My Assessment-
If folks want to win this, we can't do it with 100 people. We will fail miserably.
A. We need hundreds and hundreds...a thousand would be ideal.
B. Coalitions need to be built, with several user groups, surfers, fishermen, bathers, all coming together.
C. Back Room Politics - there will be meetings, if it gets to that stage. Deals will have to be made. All groups will have to live with the details even if they are not optimal. That's the only way deals can be made - which by their very nature are compromises.

[DarkSkies]

Below is a template in case anyone is interested in C&P
some hints-
a. It would be far more effective to write your own e-mail.
b. Mass mailings tend to be ignored.
c. Even if you just put 3-4 sentences together, the fact that yours is original, means it has a better chance of getting read.
d. You can also take 5 minutes and call a protest in, IMO much more effective than an e-mail.











** I may not have time to post the template till later when I can research the terms better, so please bear with me.
In the meantime, I'm advising folks out there that your own words would be more effective.
So please do whatever is easier for you.

** If you really do care, and see how the beginning of this, could be the beginning of Access Restriction for many other beach or fishing access areas..... please get busy and start making the phone calls and sending the e-mails. Take action.

If you want to C&P this one, feel free.

[TEMPLATE for e-mailings]




Thanks for reading. :HappyWave:
And :thumbsup::thumbsup: for those of you who have already taken the initiative and sent some e-mails out. It's really not that hard to speak up for your rights, people. Don't let others tread on your Rights.
The next place you lose access may be your own backyard. :learn:

[williehookem]

It's really not that hard to speak up for your rights, people. Don't let others tread on your Rights.
The next place you lose access may be your own backyard. :learn:




OK you got me motivated. btw thanks guys for all the help at Brookhaven. I came up with this letter-

Dear_____________________________
I am a fisherman and enjoy your beaches. It has recently come to my attention that you are changing the parking regulations so that people who come to enjoy your beaches cannot park on some of your town streets without a permit.
I read that you got hundreds of millions of dollars for beach replenishment. That money is from federal funds and should be for the good of all. I don't know what the law is exactly. If you make those parking regulations you are pushing people away from using your beaches. Do you think that is fair and just? I register a strong protest to that and request that you reconsider before a lawsuit needs to be filed.

Thank you

___________________

[basshunter]

Thank you. Despite what dark said a template makes it easier for me. Just added town name. Emails sent to the 3 assembly officials listed. didn't bother with the mayor. He is probably not going to listen to us cuz we don't live there and can't vote for him.

[jigfreak]

B. Coalitions need to be built, with several user groups, surfers, fishermen, bathers, all coming together.

https://www.change.org/p/deal-mayor-morris-ades-citizens-in-opposition-to-deal-ordinance-1124?source_location=petitions_share_skip
Well there you have it there is a guy building a coalition online. Only this guy is a lawyer. You start reading his petition and it becomes apparent. DS after reading his petition your multi colored paragraphs aren't so bad. He loses me when he starts citing case law after law. I signed it anyway it can't hurt.

[cowherder]

Might be a good thing. A lawyer willing to fight the town for free. Go for it man! Let's see how bold they are when he files the briefs in court!:clapping:

[7deadlyplugs]

loled at some of the comments. Good luck guys kick some ***.

[nitestrikes]

Email sent and signed petition. Good luck fellas

[albiealert]

petition signed. It's now up to 997 which seems pretty good.

[dogfish]

At 1431 now just signed it. Best of luck.

[BassBuddah]

The Public Trust Doctrine will not protect us here.
a. They are not restricting beach access.
b. They are restricting parking.

Anyone who has ever tried to fish the towns along the Northern part of the LI Sound would see that the access is much worse there..... than it is in NJ. There are dozens of towns/boroughs that have "Permit-only" parking.


Much shouting goes on about this on the internet,
**but when it's time to take a stand, hardly anyone new shows up.

Our apathy as a voting or political group has diminished the respect we command as a group out there.


Spot on. The north shore of LI has been turned into little enclaves of no access. If you want to fish you have to go to each borough and purchase a night fishing permit. They can legislate with the parking restrictions and restrict access without ever breaking any laws. Look up the Brookhaven LI case if you folks don't believe. Don't let them set a precedent in your state.

[fishinmission78]

Petition up to 2057. Let's keep the numbers up. Forward that to whoever you can.

[hookset]

Looks like the issue is getting some traction. From the APP yesterday.
http://www.app.com/story/sports/outdoors/fishing/hook-line-and-sinker/2015/10/04/beach-access-deal-replenishemtn/73338550/
(http://www.app.com/story/sports/outdoors/fishing/hook-line-and-sinker/2015/10/04/beach-access-deal-replenishemtn/73338550/)

[surferman]

Now at 2609. Keep up the good work guys.

[fishinmission78]

All the main news feeds are starting to pick it up.
http://townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2015/10/06/shore-town-eyes-parking-near-beaches-for-residents-only-n2061960

Another one someone wrote a pretty good letter.
http://www.app.com/story/opinion/readers/2015/10/06/letter-deal-ordinance-block-beach-access/73449984/
LETTER: Deal ordinance would block beach access

12 p.m. EDT October 6, 2015
http://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/11e73ff2fb9d07f50e757bd4a94f910dcbd482f6/c=43-0-687-483&r=x404&c=534x401/local/-/media/2015/10/06/AsburyPark/B9319152114Z.1_20151006120037_000_GF2C5CVSQ.1-0.jpg

It was just a matter of time before some residents of Deal got the bright idea on how to have their own private beach and keep others away right after the federal government spent millions of our taxpayers dollars on beach replenishment for the Jersey Shore.
An article in the Press on May 9 reported that “A controversial beach replenishment project that will cost close to $40 million and pump 1.4 million cubic yards of sand onto the beaches between Deal and Lock Arbour got underway this week.”

On Friday, Oct. 9, at 9 a.m., the borough of Deal will try to pass a parking ordinance (#1124) restricting the parking on certain streets for residents only by permit from May 1 to Oct. 31 between 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. And you guessed it: most of the “certain streets” are the ones that lead to public access of the beaches.

These beaches in Deal have been used for years by fishermen, surfers, sunbathers and others who just want to enjoy our New Jersey beaches. However, some misguided residents of Deal don’t see it that way and want us gone so only they can enjoy their new beach at taxpayers’ expense.

This ordinance will give a whole new meaning to the phrase, “Welcome to the Jersey Shore,” but not in Deal. If those residents who want Deal to restrict its public access to the beaches, maybe they should repay taxpayers Deal’s share of the $40 million spent to replenish its beaches.

What’s next for Deal? A toll to travel on Ocean Avenue for nonresidents?

Bruce Horn
Ocean Township

[fishinmission78]

https://www.change.org/p/deal-mayor-morris-ades-citizens-in-opposition-to-deal-ordinance-1124?source_location=petitions_share_skip
Well there you have it there is a guy building a coalition online. Only this guy is a lawyer. I signed it anyway it can't hurt.

Put up an e-mail chain to a few fishing buddies. It's now at 2912. Hopefully some fishing people can go to the meeting this Friday.

[plugginpete]

Signed as well. up to 2930. Good luck fellas.

[clamchucker]

Just read this on NJ.com. If this is the mindset up there you folks should fight it for all you are worth. The sheer attitude of the property owners is shameful.

http://www.nj.com/ledgerlive/index.ssf/2015/10/watch_jersey_shore_towns_beachfront_parking_plan_a mazingly_obnoxious.html
WATCH: Jersey Shore town's beachfront parking plan amazingly obnoxious

Jersey Shore town seeks to shut out 'riff raff' taxpayers (http://videos.nj.com/nj/2015/10/jersey_shore_town_seeks_to_shu.html) NJ Advance Media commentator Brian Donohue calls a proposed non-resident parking ban on beachfront streets in the Monmouth County town of Deal "the most amazingly obnoxious" chapter in the state's decades-long battle over public access and beach replenishment. (Brian Donohue | NJ Advance Media for nj.com)

http://imgick.nj.com/home/njo-media/width40/img/avatars/3104.png (http://connect.nj.com/user/Brian%20Donohue/index.html)
By Brian Donohue | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com (http://connect.nj.com/user/Brian%20Donohue/posts.html)
Email the author | Follow on Twitter (http://twitter.com/briandonohue)
on October 06, 2015 at 12:10 PM, updated October 06, 2015 at 3:00 PM















Over the past week, the threat of Hurricane Joaquin and a brutal northeast gale that caused widespread erosion shone a light once again on the crazy state of New Jersey's shoreline protection efforts.
There were triumphs, like Midway Beach in South Seaside Park, where a volunteer, zero taxpayer dollars approach (http://www.nj.com/inside-jersey/index.ssf/2014/05/in_south_seaside_park_communitys_simple_ritual_gro ws_mighty_and_protective_dunes.html) saw the largest dunes in the state growing another four feet (https://twitter.com/DominickSolazzo/status/650296308226478080) with only wind power.
On the flip side, there was the tragically comical sight of dump trucks lined up in the storm to deliver sand to the ravaged beach (http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/2015/10/ortley_beach_high_tide_noreaster.html#incart_river ) in Ortley, where a repeat of the breach that occurred during Hurricane Sandy nearly became a reality.
And as the storm raged, another tempest arose farther north, in the ultra-swanky Monmouth County Boro of Deal.

There, surfers and fishermen got wind of an ordinance introduced by the Board of Commissioners that would limit parking on streets (http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/2015/10/ordinance_looks_to_restrict_parking_near_jersey_sh .html)near newly widened beaches to residents only between the months of May and October.

RELATED: Jersey Shore town looks to restrict public parking near beaches (http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/2015/10/ordinance_looks_to_restrict_parking_near_jersey_sh .html) See, taxpayers had just spent $40 million on a beach replenishment project in Deal and Long Branch (http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/2015/05/some_shore_towns_getting_first_taste_of_beach_repl .html). The project is not even done and town officials are moving to make it harder for taxpayers who paid for the sand to sit on it. Amazing.

In the long, despicable New Jersey tradition of beachfront property owners trying to keep folks from using the beaches near their homes, it is perhaps, (as I say in the video above) the most amazingly obnoxious chapter yet.


Ledger Live brushes the sand off the beach access debate and asks if it is really a class issue (http://videos.nj.com/star-ledger/2011/05/ledger_live_brushes_the_sand_o.html)
Ledger Live for Friday May 27th, 2011 - Ledger Live with Brian Donohue.

On today's show: We discuss the heated debate over waterfront access in New Jersey - whether it is an environmental issue, an economic issue, a class issue, or all of the above.
It was also a reminder of how the issues of storm protection and public access are totally and completely intertwined.

See, in Ortley, a long-awaited beach replenishment by the US Army Corp of Engineers has been delayed because scores of property owners on the barrier island refuse to sign easements (http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2015/08/despite_holdouts_dune_build-up_will_start_di_ionno.html)needed for the feds to do the work.

There is a great myth in this debate (fueled by one high profile case in Harvey Cedars on Long Beach Island (http://www.nj.com/ocean/index.ssf/2013/09/harvey_cedars_sand_dune_dispute_settled.html)) that the holdouts are refusing because they don't want their ocean views blocked.

It's nonsense. I've spoken to many holdouts (http://www.nj.com/ledgerlive/index.ssf/2013/04/ledger_live_video_jersey_shore.html) (or their attorneys) and in almost every instance the issue comes down to one of property rights. Unspoken in their statement is that one right they think they have is to keep the beaches to themselves.
State regulations, while watered down by the Christie administration (http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/03/nj_beach_access_advocacy_group.html), still require any beaches receiving public storm repair dollars to provide public access to those beaches.

Because a few property owners won't share the sandbox, in other words, nobody gets any sand.

And the clamor over access in Deal exemplifies exactly what the dune holdouts in Ocean County fear most.
For decades, the town turned down offers of welfare sand from the federal government. That's partly because a natural 20-foot tall coastal bluff protects homes and streets from damage even in horrific storms like Hurricane Sandy.

But Sandy was enough of a threat to change their mind. And so the sand pumping began last summer (http://www.nj.com/monmouth/index.ssf/2015/05/some_shore_towns_getting_first_taste_of_beach_repl .html), turning narrow strips of sand into wide, inviting beaches. So inviting that large numbers of outsiders might actually want to visit them. Thus, the ordinance to make it impossible for them to park was born.

The ordinance will come up for a final vote by the Deal Board of Commissioners Friday. But whether it passes or fails, it is bound to only fuel the debate across the other 126 miles of coastline and for years to come.
Brian Donohue may be reached at bdonohue@njadvancemedia.com Follow him on Twitter @briandonohue (http://www.nj.com/ledgerlive/index.ssf/2015/10/twitter.com/briandonohue). Find NJ.com on Facebook. (https://www.facebook.com/NJ.com)

[jigfreak]

Love this guy!
"40 million for beach replenishment. If you want to enjoy these beaches you are out of luck!"
He looks like he drinks a lot of coffee. I will buy you a cup any time Brian. Excellent points.:thumbsup:

[seamonkey]

Awesome videos thanks for posting that link.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ED28z76FRmg

[seamonkey]

Here is an earlier video he did. You guys really have some arrogant homeowners up there.
http://videos.nj.com/star-ledger/2011/05/ledger_live_brushes_the_sand_o.html
This is private property. The public doesn't have the right to walk through here.
***?????????????

[buckethead]

We have to keep up the pressure here.
An older video by surfrider talking about public access.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdTlqPuWyvg

[jigfreak]

I guess all the news sites got the same feed- this is from ristori's fishing blog posted a few hours ago.

There's an ordinance being proposed in Deal which would shut off parking for non-residents on six streets. There's been a reaction from surfers and surfcasters who are circulating petitions online to defeat the proposal at an Oct. 9 meeting at 9 a.m. in Borough Hall at 190 Norwood Street. A petition is being circulated online at change.org, and there's also an nj.com article on that issue.

[hookset]

We have to keep up the pressure here.
An older video by surfrider talking about public access.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OdTlqPuWyvg


Thanks for posting that. Kudos to surfrider for all the work they do.

[DarkSkies]

Just a head's up that this issue is moot for Friday's meeting. I was contacted last night and told that Deal is shelving this issue for now because of possible conflicts with the Federal Funds received for replenishment and the ancillary obligation to provide beach access, by anyone receiving those dollars.

1. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Andrew L. Chambarry.
In the times we live in, with the DEP having given too much control over to individual towns by allowing them to create their own MAPs....... often the thread of expensive legal action is the only thing that causes towns to shift their position.

If anyone is looking for a good attorney, his contact info is here:
http://gillandchamas.com/chambarry.php
(Even if you don't want to retain his services, just contacting him with a simple "Thanks!" would probably mean a lot to him)



2. A big Thanks to the Surfrider Foundation. This is their legal page, and cases they have been involved in. As you scroll down you can see the big access case they were involved in with Deal in 1984. They won.
If anyone wants to throw a few dollars to them, it could help future legal battles.
http://www.surfrider.org/pages/surfrider-legal

3. Also another unsung hero in these access battles is the NJBBA.
Just one example:
They spent thousands of dollars in fees to fight for access at Holgate, and they finally won. Many fishermen and outdoors people use the beaches of Holgate today, without realizing the legal maneuvering necessary to preserve that access. This is their link if anyone wants to learn more.
http://www.njbba.org/about-objectives.html


Any of you folks who are worried about access in the future, but just don't have the time to attend meetings, giving some money to either group #2 or 3 mentioned here...or sending some legal business to Andrew Chambarry......... would be big help toward helping these folks fight the battles that no one wants to spend effort fighting any more. Your dollars would be a big help, and go toward preserving our future access.

[DarkSkies]

Finally, a big thanks to folks like Finchaser, and the other Old Salts....:clapping::clapping:
the unsung heroes who have been fighting access battles like this for years...without the benefit of having their names in the paper, or being hailed as heroes on the internet.....
They are old pros at organizing and getting the word out.......http://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/images/smilies/thumbsup.gifhttp://stripersandanglers.com/Forum/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif

Some may have detected a little frustration in my earlier posts....the simple truth being that a lot of folks seem to be very energized on the internet...but when it comes time to attend meetings....a very small % of those who claim to be "outraged" actually show up.....

I feel bad saying that...but it is proven time and time again by the poor attendance at fisheries management meetings, regulation change meetings, and fishing/beach access meetings.....

So if anyone today...feels newly energized by the access that was almost lost in Deal....

** A. Also remember the key point I made earlier....As finchaser so wisely pointed out.....
They were not technically trying to limit beach access..it was "parking access"...(Although it had the same effect)......
this is a sneaky tactic towns can use to get these things done.....almost all towns on the North Shore of Long Island are locked up this way.....

B. please be aware this is not the end of this or other beach access stories....and realize you must be willing to spend time, show up, and have your voice be heard, if you truly want to be a part of protest, and change.








A sincere thanks to ALL the folks out there who work hard to preserve access...:clapping::clapping:...and may not be getting their name in the papers....but work just as hard....if not harder....to be part of a group effort....

ALL are important....
And without that support.....the towns, etc.....are likely to win....
Thanks for reading....:HappyWave:

[hookedonbass]

haha we won! Kicked those richie rich a-holes in the balls and gave them something to think about. Congrats guys!

[buckethead]

Nice going gents. Great group effort as DS said. Thank you finchaser as well for all you do. We need to stay diligent or they will slide this back on the agenda.

[buckethead]

Don't know if this is true or not. You know how these rumors start and can't be verified. I read that they are still going through with the voting on Friday. That's kind of strange because the radio and print media have all reported the matter will not be voted on due to the strength against it.

[jigfreak]

Might be a misinformation campaign. Someone should e-mail Brian Donohue
bdonohue@njadvancemedia.com

or Dan Radel from the APP to see if it's on or not. Anyone else want to try I think this his e-mail addy.
Dan Radel: 732-643-4072; dradel@GannettNJ.com

[plugcrazy]

Thanks. Just sent an email to Brian D. BTW love that guy and his energy.

[finchaser]

To the best of my knowledge its been pulled from the agenda.
not saying like they did in Mantoloking, Brick, Normandy Beach and Bay Head - all beaches are closed to the public until May for dangerous conditions caused by the Northeaster and hurricane

[fishinmission78]

The latest from the asbury sun.
Deal permit parking only vote in flux
(http://asburyparksun.com/deal-permit-parking-only-vote-in-flux/) officials awaiting word from borough attorney
By Michelle Gladden
Deal officials say scrapping a vote to allow permit only parking along its waterfront streets will be determined late Thursday morning.

"We will find out from our attorney tomorrow morning how to go about doing this," said Borough Clerk/Administrator Stephen Carasia of the legal action needed to possibly reverse the ordinance, introduced September 21.

The ordinance limits public parking on six streets east of Ocean Avenue along the beachfront between May 1 and October 31. Residents would be issued six parking permits per household, valid for one year.
But the Associated Press reported Tuesday that Department of Environmental Protection spokesman Bob Considine said the borough would table the ordinance.

"We have concerns (that) it may impact public access, and it could conflict with the agreement signed with the U.S. Army Corps project," DEP spokesman Bob Considine told the AP. "We also simply want to ensure that we work toward providing more public access and not limiting access."


Deal is among the last Monmouth County communities to undergo beach replenishment post Hurricane Sandy. The Army Corps of Engineer supervised the $40 million project that pumped 1.4 million cubic yards of sand between Deal and Loch Arbour.

"The vote is still on the agenda but the final agenda will not be set until late Thursday morning," Carasia said. "We are waiting for word from our attorney on what formal action is needed to table the ordinance."
The Asbury Park Sun has tried via email and phone messages left at borough hall to reach out to Mayor Morris Ades for comment.

The vote is slated to take place 9 a.m. Friday during the borough's Board of Commissioner's meeting.

A legal brief challenging the legality of the move and petitions formed by area anglers, surfers, and those in support of unfettered beach access were formed.

Members of the local Surfrider Foundation, American Littoral Society, and area fishing clubs, like the Neptune and Asbury charters, were expected to attend the meeting.

http://asburyparksun.com/deal-permit-parking-only-vote-in-flux/

[fishinmission78]

Just want to say finchaser thanks for keeping us posted and bringing this up in the first place. Once they do this in deal they can do it in every other shore town.

[buckethead]

Thank you for the update asbury sun update. Thanks as well finchaser. If anyone hears of further updates as to meeting status please let us know.

[hookset]

Just read this


NOTICE REGARDING ORDINANCE #1124
BOROUGH OF DEAL, NJ
(732) 531-1454

08-Oct-2015 PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN REGARDING ORDINANCE #1124 AT THIS FRIDAY'S, OCTOBER 9, 2015 COMMISSIONER MEETING AT BOROUGH HALL, 190 NORWOOD AVENUE, DEAL NJ.

http://www.dealborough.com/announcements/notice-regarding-ordinance-1124 (http://www.dealborough.com/announcements/notice-regarding-ordinance-1124)

[finchaser]

Recreational Fishing Alliance Contact: Jim Donofrio / 888-564-6732

For Immediate Release October 8, 2015















Deal Introduces Ordinance to Restrict Parking for Non-Residents

Anglers Urged to Attend Friday Meeting to Oppose Ordinance

New Gretna, NJ - The state of New Jersey has always had a few rotten apples when it comes to providing public access to our beaches and the Borough of Deal remains at the top of the pile.

The Board of Commissioners of Deal has put forward ordinance #1124 which would restrict parking on six oceanfront streets from May 1 through October 31 from 8am to 8pm, 7 days a week to residents and their guesses only. The streets include Monmouth Terrace, Monmouth Drive, Hathaway Avenue, Sydney Avenue, Neptune Avenue, and Roosevelt Avenue. If passed, such an ordinance would significantly limit the ability of fishermen and others to access the ocean and enjoy the beaches in Deal for 6 months out of the year. It is the opinion of the Recreational Fishing Alliance (RFA) and many other groups that ordinance #1124 violates both state and federal regulations put in place to protect the public's rights. The Board of Commissioners will be holding a public hearing on the ordinance on October 9, 2015 at Borough Hall, 190 Norwood Avenue, Deal at 9am and the RFA is encouraging its members to attend and oppose the ordinance.

As of Thursday, the Borough of Deal has posted a notice indicated that no action was going to be taken on ordinance 1124 at Friday's meeting. However, until the ordinance is official withdrawn by its sponsor or voted down, it continues to be a significant threat. Tabling an ordinance simply means that action is being postponed, not that the ordinance is being withdrawn. As such, as tabled ordinance can resurface at anytime. For this reason, RFA is still encouraging fishermen to attend Friday's meeting.

Deal, along with the other towns included in the Loch Arbour to Deal Coastal Storm Risk Management and Beach Erosion Control Project, is in receipt of millions of dollars in federal assistance through the ongoing beach replenishment project. The Army Corps of Engineers, the lead federal agency for federally permitted beach replenishment projects, has enacted regulations to ensure the public retains access to beaches rebuilt or maintained with federal money. Towns that benefit from federal beach replenishment projects are required to enter into a legal agreement to comply with regulations regarding public access. Ordinance 1124 put forward by the Deal Board of Commissioners blatantly violates this agreement. ACOE Regulations 1130-2-540 states, "Lack of parking may constitute a restriction on public access and use." Had ordinance #1124 been on the books prior to the commitment of the beach replenishment project, Deal would have likely not been eligible for federal assistance.

"Many in the surf fishing community anticipated this type of action would arise and we've been doing our homework and meeting with NJDEP on a regular basis," explained Greg O'Connell, National Access Director for the RFA. "The days of rich property owners bullying the tax-paying public out of beach access are numbered. Deal attempting to pass this ordinance now, prior to even the completion of the multi-million dollar tax payer funded beach project, demonstrates they couldn't care less about public access and surf anglers. We need NJDEP and ACOE to force problem towns like Deal into fulfilling their public access requirements.

At the state level, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) is charged with protecting the rights of the general public (including nonresident users) afforded under the Public Trust Doctrine. The Public Trust Doctrine is the long established principle that the use of tidal waters and shorelines shall be preserved for public use. The Public Trust Doctrine mandates that the government is required to maintain those areas for the public's reasonable use.

"We thank DEP officials for agreeing with our position and telling Deal officials that this ordinance would restrict public access and possibly violate agreements that were enacted prior to the pumping of sand," continued Greg.

While the legalities of the proposed ordinance are being determined fishermen need to let Deal know that what the town is proposing is just plain wrong. With federal tax dollars funding the beach replenishment project that is benefiting Deal, the public must be guaranteed access to the beaches that their tax dollars help build. RFA is urging all fishermen and concerned citizens to attend the October 9th meeting at Borough Hall at 190 Norwood Ave, Deal beginning at 9am.

"The Deal Board of Commissioners heard the immediate and loud response from the fishing community in opposition to ordinance 1124," states Jim Donofrio. "It is important to enforce this message by having as many fishermen as possible attend Friday's meeting and oppose this ill conceived proposal.



######











About Recreational Fishing Alliance
The Recreational Fishing Alliance is a national, grassroots political action organization representing recreational fishermen and the recreational fishing industry on marine fisheries issues. The RFA Mission is to safeguard the rights of saltwater anglers, protect marine, boat and tackle industry jobs, and ensure the long-term sustainability of our Nation's saltwater fisheries. For more information, call 888-JOIN-RFA or visit www.joinrfa.org (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0012G83eAGYdSRw0LopUnH6-ifM5ViRK3e9TLpvnaTuIvNq1fkFjsufRk1nIiRVsAQOM0cTn84 RYbBJGstu5G2T4rIhsr4HR8IAQeXw9FSeapE1v2P7-Td0qyScFgU6xj6guR5UzG_NryRPzuVD0gWKWh5wMgkY1fZg12i KcScxm1g=&c=MN98XSIDiohqggjeJKm29Qj1RQuEwNj1z7Bss45E0F9ZpWvD LM__WQ==&ch=g7mFhBbfa8fy0oiYuqShLHJyyZu6ZLQMzZL7xuf2M8i_dZ8 9UqbxnQ==).

https://imgssl.constantcontact.com/ui/images1/btn_fbk_160_a.png (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0012G83eAGYdSRw0LopUnH6-ifM5ViRK3e9TLpvnaTuIvNq1fkFjsufRn0ul34Ut3B2C8yFsHk wuHr9fiUNpouOrg4tlMsJGTut98rofewxCE2AttJDkAx6lHOQQ X7uZgVdBJaG581Ovasw7lIoev9uMVCbeHfPK4hr9oku4gitNQ6 Ko0XNBN6V_TNYw1Wnh9nDjEAjGCAyZU19fT3baRq-1A==&c=MN98XSIDiohqggjeJKm29Qj1RQuEwNj1z7Bss45E0F9ZpWvD LM__WQ==&ch=g7mFhBbfa8fy0oiYuqShLHJyyZu6ZLQMzZL7xuf2M8i_dZ8 9UqbxnQ==) https://imgssl.constantcontact.com/ui/images1/btn_twit_160.png (http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=0012G83eAGYdSRw0LopUnH6-ifM5ViRK3e9TLpvnaTuIvNq1fkFjsufRoIikdReF1VGJ3uP0IG lYwb7L6fH4J95Jds2rb9QeAdsOTaJ3Wge0qXrJF-w4p1N6P3JMFWUmBGqUparOnxEGX-EEub5FFBShsz0dOXYjPm2ZPhH5g0R5KKfQZry7h4FfQ==&c=MN98XSIDiohqggjeJKm29Qj1RQuEwNj1z7Bss45E0F9ZpWvD LM__WQ==&ch=g7mFhBbfa8fy0oiYuqShLHJyyZu6ZLQMzZL7xuf2M8i_dZ8 9UqbxnQ==)

[surferman]

So glad the RFA has gotten involved. These guys will not take the BS of that elitist cinderella town government. I guess they are saying to go to the meeting then. If I lived closer I would. It is about 100miles from me. Hope some of you gents can go and give them hell!

[porgy75]

:kicknuts:Yup give em hell! and good luck too. Thank you finchaser and the rfa.

[cowherder]

X2 and good luck to anyone who can make it tomorrow.

[fishinmission78]

Does anyone have the results of what happened at that meeting today at 9am. How many fishermen attended? I read they weren't doing it. Would still be nice to hear that some got out and gave them grief for what they were trying to do. Any press show up?

[finchaser]

they didn't do it but people could speak for or against it. There attorney is looking into things

[cowherder]

Thanks for the update. We can't let them take us for granted anymore.

[storminsteve]

x2 thanks finchaser and everyone else. Down with the bou-gie mentality. We all deserve to be able to get to those beaches. It shouldn't matter if you are rich or not.

[baitstealer]

x2 thanks finchaser and everyone else. Down with the bou-gie mentality.

rofl Down with the Bou-gies! Who was that arrogant queen who said let them eat cake? These people remind me of that.

[njdiver]

The RFA misquoted the ACOE regulation. The correct regulation is ER 1150-2-100.

[njdiver]

Interesting reading here:

(Snip)

SEC. 854. SANDY HOOK TO BARNEGAT INLET, NEW JERSEY.

(Snip)

"Before initiation of construction of any increment of the project for beach erosion control, Sandy Hook to Barnegat Inlet, New Jersey, non-Federal interests shall agree to provide public access to the beach for which such increment of the project is authorized in accordance with all requirements of State law and regulations."

Section 4 of the 1988 WRDA (P.L. 100-676):

(Snip)

7.3 Public Access

Suitable public access is required for any areas where Federal expenditure of funds will be utilized for beach restoration. Public access points must be provided within one half mile of each other to meet these requirements. Additionally, the shorefront must be open to all visitors regardless of origin or home area, and cannot be limited for use by only a segment of the public. NJDEP has committed to providing the necessary public access, and ensuring that public access points are provided every half mile. A Draft Public access Plan is included as Appendix K of this report. The Draft Public Access Plan indicates that there are 2 locations within the unconstructed project reach where these access requirements are not met, based upon the information provided to date. NJDEP is in the process of updating this information to either confirm that public access requirements are met, or identify the access points that will be established as an item of local cooperation, prior to construction.

(Snip)

http://www.deallake.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Main_Rpt_21_Feb_2014-1.pdf


(Snip)

Summary of Federal and State Policy

[Department of the Army, ER 1165-2-130, dated 15 June 1989, Federal Participation in Shore Protection, paragraph 6h.] It is Corps policy to participate in the additional costs for placing beach-quality sand or other suitable material onto adjacent beaches or near shore providing that the beaches involved must be open to the public. Project beaches will not be limited for use by only a segment of the public; they must be open to all visitors regardless of origin or home area. Reasonable public access must be provided in accordance with the recreational use objectives of the particular area. However, public use is construed to be effectively limited to within one-quarter mile from available points of public access to any particular shore.

Additionally, nearby parking facilities, on free or reasonable terms, should be within a reasonable walking distance to the beach. Lack of sufficient public parking with reasonable public access to the beach will preclude federal participation. Items of local cooperation require the sponsor to provide necessary access roads, parking areas, and other public use facilities open and available to all on equal terms. However, even though the lack of such facilities may constrain beach use, it is not the intent to require that facilities be provided to meet all demand situations, but only that public use and access not be precluded by the lack of existing facilities due to local practices and/or unique situations.

Finally, in the event public access points are not within one-half mile of each other, either an item of local cooperation specifying such a requirement and public use throughout the project life must be included in project recommendations or the cost sharing must be based on private use.

(Snip)

http://www.nan.usace.army.mil/Portals/37/docs/civilworks/projects/nj/coast/SHtoBI/EtoLA/Feb_SH_to_Barnegat_Public_Access_Plan.pdf


Of course the NJDEP has deleted the 1/4 mile from our CMZ rules, the half mile AcoE rule is still in effect.

[buckethead]

Additionally, nearby parking facilities, on free or reasonable terms, should be within a reasonable walking distance to the beach. Lack of sufficient public parking with reasonable public access to the beach will preclude federal participation. Items of local cooperation require the sponsor to provide necessary access roads, parking areas, and other public use facilities open and available to all on equal terms. However, even though the lack of such facilities may constrain beach use, it is not the intent to require that facilities be provided to meet all demand situations, but only that public use and access not be precluded by the lack of existing facilities due to local practices and/or unique situations.

(Snip)

http://www.nan.usace.army.mil/Portals/37/docs/civilworks/projects/nj/coast/SHtoBI/EtoLA/Feb_SH_to_Barnegat_Public_Access_Plan.pdf


Of course the NJDEP has deleted the 1/4 mile from our CMZ rules, the half mile AcoE rule is still in effect.

I think that covers it right there. They should have had their attorney look at it before they proposed that ordinance. It would seem to be in violation. Thanks for sharing that. I agree with all who say the DEP seems to have no teeth anymore.

[lostatsea]

Looks like the law is on the side of the average Joe. I hope they don't loose sight of that and try to do something sneaky. Thanks