JACKSON – The Jackson Township Council has adopted an amended version of an existing ordinance that restricts obstructions from being placed in the right of way throughout the municipality.
The original ordinance stated that “no person shall encumber or obstruct any street or public place with any article or thing whatsoever” and referred residents to the Township Committee to seek waivers from the law.
The amended ordinance states that “no person shall encumber or obstruct any street or public place with any article or thing whatsoever” and drops the reference to the Township Committee, which has since been replaced by the Township Council. In addition, waivers from the law can no longer be sought.
The second reading of the ordinance took place at the Sept. 12 council meeting. Council President Kenneth Bressi, Vice President Ann Updegrave, Councilman Scott Martin, Councilman Robert Nixon and Councilman Barry Calogero voted to adopt the ordinance.
“The issue before us tonight is correcting something in the code that refers to a form of government that does not exist anymore and unfortunately suggesting there is an appeals process to a form of government that does not exist,” Nixon said.
“Not only is it false hope, it is improper lawmaking, so before there can be a conversation on accommodations for anything we need to get the law into its proper format, give the mayor’s office their powers to do enforcement,” he added.
Mayor Michael Reina previously said the obstruction ordinance is primarily concerned with items such as portable basketball hoops, soccer nets and skateboard ramps being left in the street by residents.
Reina said the recent enforcement of the obstruction ordinance is a result of residents complaining about those items being left in the street by their neighbors.
The vote to adopt the amended ordinance was preceded by a public hearing during which members of Jackson’s Orthodox Jewish community expressed concern that the law could prevent the establishment of an eruv in the township.
An eruv is an area enclosed by a wire boundary that symbolically extends a Jewish household into a public area and permits certain activities that are prohibited on the Sabbath to occur in the public space as if it were a home. The establishment of an eruv can involve the placement of a wire on utility poles in the right of way.
Resident Chava Lowi asked the council members “to recognize the religious needs of your constituents. Jackson residents represent a broad range of religious beliefs and I ask you to consider the over 2,000 Orthodox residents in your jurisdiction who would be affected by this ordinance.
“I propose that whoever oversees enforcement of the ordinance can take over issuing the waiver. The new code does not allow for dialogue or consideration of our religious needs. It takes away our right to request accommodation. Council members who care about family, community and religious tradition, won’t you take these essential factors into account when designing a new ordinance? Please do not take out the clause that protects us,” Lowi said.
Resident David Prupas said, “As I look around the room tonight, I am sad it has come to this, that a community has to come together in order to be heard because they feel they are not being considered … The council is now doing their job and rewriting a faulty code that is based on a nonexistent form of government.
“I urge (council members) to do their job fully and rewrite the law in a fashion that allows for appropriate accommodations for those that need it. Rewrite the code taking into account the thousands of Jewish residents who would like to be able to enjoy their Sabbath to the fullest.
“Rewrite the code to ensure that every Jackson child can play basketball, hockey or any other wonderful sport they have done until now. Please listen to the thousands of residents of this town who want the treatment and respect they deserve,” Prupas said.
Resident Joseph Sullivan said, “To me, whatever religion anybody wants to practice is up to them. I do not think one is better than the other. I do not consider myself a very religious person.
“What anybody’s religion is, that is not the point. The point is the separation of church and state. I do not want any one religion … to take the right of way and decide the right of way is going to be used for their religious purposes,” he said.
Sullivan said he would not object to anything an individual might want to do on his own property and added, “I think the proper interpretation of the ordinance would be that nothing (can be) put in the right of way except utilities.”
