BERKELEY – The New Jersey Supreme Court decided South Seaside Park can leave Berkeley Township and petition to join Seaside Park.
The Supreme Court only ruled that SSP can leave Berkeley. Whether it joins Seaside Park is up to that town. If Seaside Park declines, then nothing changes.
For many years, residents in SSP have claimed that they are not treated as equals by the rest of Berkeley. Shore residents usually pay more in taxes than the mainland because it’s a desirable place to live. Some SSP residents have said they receive less services. They feel that they have more in common with Seaside Park and might be better off there.
A court summary noted that SSP residents showed that they rely more on Seaside Park emergency services than Berkeley, and they use their businesses.
SSP resident Don Whiteman has been leading the move to leave Berkeley, which is officially called a de-annexation.
“When we started this (in 2014), we didn’t get much services. When we went to court, Berkeley started investing money (in SSP),” Whiteman said. “As we kept winning, they were investing more money.”
He said there has been some appeasement as Berkeley officials provided more services and resources to that area. A former real estate office is now a satellite office for people to do township business. Garbage collection is more frequent. Two police cars were dedicated for patrol there.
“(These services) should have been done prior to 2014,” he said.
Whiteman said de-annexation will happen while John Bacchione is mayor, but this has been an issue for decades. In fact, Whiteman’s father started the first de-annexation push from 1973-1983. He created a playbook that his son would later follow. The 1983 court decision was turned in by the 2022 attorney as evidence. In 1983, the courts also decided that SSP could leave Berkeley, but Seaside Park didn’t want them.
The original attempt to leave took 10 years; this one took at least 11.
Mayor John Bacchione said there’s no room for appeal at this point, but he’s disappointed with the decision.
The courts failed to understand the hardship the rest of the Berkeley property owners will face if they leave, he said. SSP makes up about 10.43% of the tax revenue for the township. There are 46,000 people in Berkeley, and the court served just the few hundred that live on SSP (one estimate is 490 year-round).
“They neglected, in my opinion, the tax impact. It’s going to hurt (Berkeley) more than it’s going to help South Seaside Park,” he said.
Township financial officials gave testimony that if SSP left, the rest of Berkeley’s residents would see an average increase in taxes of $147.63 a year – based on 2017 numbers.
When the Planning Board argued that SSP should stay, they said “while [SSP] may experience inconvenience and frustration in being part of Berkeley Township, they do not suffer the kind of long term, structural and inherently irremediable detriment that the Legislature had in mind” when it adopted the de-annexation statute. The report stated that “[c]onversely, de-annexation will work a long term, structural and inherently irremediable detriment to the remaining residents of Berkeley Township.”
An expert hired by SSP said mainland taxes would only increase $35 a year, again in 2017 numbers. They said back then that SSP residents would see their taxes decrease by 40% if they joined Seaside Park.
The court said that some degree of cost savings would be found in Berkeley by eliminating certain summer auxiliary police positions and other services that would no longer be sent to the beach community.
Long Trials
By a strange quirk of history, this area – which is between the borough of Seaside Park and Island Beach State Park – is part of Berkeley Township. The borough of Seaside Park had been part of Berkeley, too, until they became their own town in 1898.
The Berkeley Township Planning Board held 38 meetings from January of 2015 through February of 2019. During this time, they heard from a number of experts from both sides debating whether SSP should leave.
In 2020, the Planning Board issued a resolution suggesting that the Township Council deny de-annexation. The Council agreed. Then SSP challenged the council’s vote in court.
In 2022, Judge Marlene Lynch-Ford agreed with SSP that they should be allowed to de-annex.
The court found “a pattern of continuous acts and statements by members of the Township Council and the Planning Board reflecting opposition to the de-annexation.”
It went on to say, “the undisputed facts demonstrated by the (SSP) petitioners leads this court to the conclusion that the outcome of this process was in fact predetermined…Rather than conducting a fact finding hearing, the members of the Planning Board became part of the adversarial process.”
Among evidence, the court noted that the Planning Board’s planner privately advised board members how to respond to concerns raised. He was not a witness, so SSP could not cross-examine him.
Additionally, the Planning Board and Township Council held joint meetings to discuss strategy. A few Planning Board members expressed during meetings and on their own time that they opposed de-annexation.
The court also decided that even being geographically distant from most of Berkeley is in itself a reason to leave.
“It defies logic and common sense that the (SSP) plaintiffs be obligated to traverse six or seven municipalities in order to integrate into the community, social and civic affairs of Berkeley Township,” she wrote.
The township appealed this decision. It was argued before the Supreme Court on April 29, and decided on July 10. The Supreme Court upheld the original decision. It opined that SSP has met their burden, proving that the trial court properly ordered de-annexation. The Supreme Court also said the Berkeley Planning Board failed to evaluate the merits of de-annexation objectively.
What’s Next?
Just because the court decided that SSP can leave, it doesn’t mean that it’s automatic.
“We’ll keep serving South Seaside Park” until Seaside Park makes a decision, Bacchione said. “Nothing much will change in that regard.”
This process could take many months or perhaps years and there are a lot of factors to consider, he said.
There’s debt service that Seaside Park would have to take on, Bacchione noted. There are questions about property and a building that the township owns. There are more services Seaside Park would have to provide.
“They’ll make a good decision and do what they think is right for their town,” he said.
He said he trusts the governing body of Seaside Park to make an intelligent decision. If it’s put out to the voters in a referendum, like it was decades ago, then the people will decide.
Seaside Park Borough Administrator Karen Kroon said the South Seaside Park homeowners association would first have to petition the borough. Then, the borough will need to hire professionals to determine if it is a benefit to Seaside Park to take in this property.
She didn’t want to hazard a guess as to what information will help make that decision; this is all new territory.
“The governing body will do their due diligence,” she said. “It’s a decision to be made on data and facts, not emotion.”
