September 1, 2006
The Honorable Jon Corzine
Office of the Governor
State of New Jersey
P.O. Box 001
Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Dear Governor Corzine:

I am writing regarding an issue that has been a topic of immense discussion—the September 11 Memorial, that is slated to be erected in Liberty State Park.

While we are all sensitive to the nature of the monument, it appears as though there is a great deal of dissent with regard to the placement of the memorial within the park.  That dissent is based on the projected location of the memorial, which will obstruct the view of the former site of the World Trade Center from Liberty State Park.

Of course, that view of the former site of the World Trade Center serves as a memorial in and of itself, as we are able to gaze across the mighty Hudson River and recapture the spirit that America lost on that fateful day.

When the public first saw the hill blocking the view in a spot that formerly provided one of the most important and popular scenic vistas in the State of New Jersey, it was surprising that such a design could have ever been selected or approved for that site.  The public is also outraged that they were not afforded the opportunity to meaningfully comment upon the selected design. 

This sense of outrage will only grow if the 200 foot long and 30 foot high walls are erected.  Right now, along the bank of the Hudson River, there are panoramic vistas of the Central Railroad Terminal, Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty. If the walls are in place, scenic and historic landscapes from points all along the Hudson will be blocked. 

Further, the fact that the public was not consulted about the impact of the proposed project raises troubling questions about the review process for the Memorial.  In this case, the applicant decided upon the appropriate approval process and then ultimately approved its own application. 

Based upon the public outcry against the process, the widespread feeling that the selected design is poor and inappropriate to the site, and that a decision to sacrifice important views was made quickly and without public debate or scrutiny, it appears that shortcuts may have been taken in the approval process. 

I would ask that your office re-examine the way in which this large-scale project was approved, and at this point, re-visit the need for any hearings that would allow the public to comment upon the impact of the design.  From the public perspective, we have a system in place designed to protect our coastlines from inappropriate development, especially for large-scale projects like this one.  In this instance, the system broke down.

In order to gain to gain a fuller understanding of the public’s role in terms of this situation, I have contacted the Office of Legislative Services, and OLS has conveyed some interesting findings.

1.) Specifically, the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior must approve projects that might be deemed to violate federal requirements that were placed on grants used to purchase or construct certain State parks.  Liberty State Park is one such park, as the major portion of the land comprising it was purchased through federal funds.    

 2.) Another point to consider is that the removal of the Terminal Public Plaza violates the Park’s 1978 Master Plan, which had thirty-eight statewide public hearings. 

3.) Moreover, it appears as though there was disregard with reference to the guidelines posited by the selection committee, as original documents that were issued by the committee call for designs that consider, “integration of the Memorial elements with New York City, New York Harbor, Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, Liberty State Park, the memorial tree grove, Morris Canal and the State of New Jersey” as well as, “relevance to the history and location of the site”.  Clearly, both of these tenets were ignored in adopting the current blueprint. 

In summation, I would like to convey that it is my contention that Executive Orders must never be used to supersede regulations that lend transparency to the workings of government.  In this instance, it appears such has happened, and we must work to ensure that everyone’s voice is heard.  Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Louis M. Manzo

Assemblyman