JACKSON – The township’s affordable housing plan, overlay zoning and municipal spending were among many accusations made during a recent Township Council meeting.
Councilman Christopher Pollak pulled no punches when bringing up the topic of the township’s affordable housing plan and the overlay zones.
“I’ve asked repeatedly, who these developers are, who is involved in these planning meetings. I still haven’t received any clear answers,” Pollak said.
“The township spent over $300,000 on a master plan. Our affordable housing plan was a part of that process. After all that money and time, we still end up putting 58% of our prospective affordable housing obligations in the Pinelands,” he added.
“Now why would we do that?” Pollak asked. “Pinelands land is usually very restricted and very difficult to develop on and when something is difficult to develop on, guess what? The price is going to be very low. When the government votes and creates overlay zones that increases the price of this land for particular developers.”
Zoning details what can be built on a piece of land. An overlay zone is a specialized zoning district applied on top of existing base zoning to address specific site-specific issues, such as historic preservation, environmental protection, or development incentives. These zones add a supplemental layer of regulations – including stricter standards or design guidelines – that properties must follow in addition to the underlying zoning, without replacing it.
Pollak went on to say that “when you are able to increase land value with a vote, it begs you to ask, who owns this land, who is part of this planning and who is in these planning meetings? Who benefits from these decisions? The public deserves to know.”
“When land values begin to change because of government action, the public needs to know everything.” Pollak went on to say, he also kept a letter from the Pinelands Commission citing serious concerns “and urging us to table the ordinances from myself and other council members voting on it. How transparent is this government I have to ask?”
The councilman didn’t mention who “he” was but the Pinelands Commission told The Jackson Times that the letter Pollak referred to had been sent to Mayor Jennifer Kuhn, Council President Mordechai Burnstein and several township professional staff members prior to the vote on the overlay ordinances.
Pollak also referenced development in the township. “Due to being such a concern. we have an open space fund. People voted on this. They voted to be taxed. We fought a war over being taxed. They voted for a tax because they wanted to protect the land. Now the use of these funds is supposed to be for the acquisition of lands and interest in lands for open space, recreation and conservation and farmland preservation purposes.”
He went on to say that this was not necessarily happening in Jackson. “They’ve been using this fund as a secondary parks and recreation fund to support pet projects. Things like pickleball courts, playground equipment, lawn care and engineering fees for projects unrelated to land purchase and acquisition.”
Pollak said he reviewed municipal bills from January 2025 to the present and “we have spent a half a million dollars on things unrelated to purchasing land which is what people are most concerned about.”
The councilman said he would send an ordinance to the council president “to help hopefully fix this problem. We’ll see if they can pass it, if it will even come up for a vote. I am very concerned about the financial future of our town and how we are spending our tax money.”
Pollak said he had some regrets in voting on some of the resolutions involving spending and for voting for the current business administrator, Charles Terefenko. “I regret voting for what I thought were vehicles for our police. A Chevy Tahoe purchase with public funds for the police appears to have been assigned to our business administrator. Now I know he’s been made our public safety director but I wasn’t made aware of this. I don’t think the public was made aware of this and this is after losing a $2 million lawsuit that had to do with that very role.”
He said that a lot of blame was put on “the people before you but the people here have been in office for years. They ran with prior administrations; they controlled the council. They were involved with these votes. I think the public should be upset.” Upon those words members of the audience began to cheer and applaud.
The official went on to suggest that the public speak out at meetings “and I think we should bring back an old tradition of bringing tomatoes to the meetings and whenever you hear that word transparency, maybe you should throw it up front. We need real transparency.”
