Your Turn

Monmouth Junction rail line the best choice

As a result of tremendous growth over the last two decades, increased public transportation has become a necessity for Monmouth and Ocean counties. The best way to satisfy this need would be to reactivate NJ Transit’s proposed Lakehurst to Monmouth Junction line and connect Monmouth and Ocean with their neighbor, Middlesex County. As the least intrusive of the three proposed lines, this alternative would offer an appropriate balance between the needs of the commuters and the needs of the neighborhoods that would be affected by a rail line reactivation.

Although NJ Transit’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement suggests that the Lakehurst to Matawan line would attract the most riders, this is not the only priority that should be weighed during this discussion. Equal consideration must be given to both the commuters and those who would have to accommodate the reactivated line in their neighborhoods.

For that very reason, we are opposed to the reactivation of the proposed Lakehurst to Matawan line, which would run through Freehold Borough, Freehold Township and Marlboro, and the Lakehurst to Red Bank line, which would be located in Red Bank, Shrewsbury, Colts Neck and Tinton Falls. Eastern Monmouth County already has train service, and the Monmouth Junction line would serve western Monmouth communities in a much less disruptive manner.

Because we understand the need for mass transportation from an environmental and traffic perspective, we agree that Monmouth County must do its part, if feasible, to allow rail service for the MOM (Monmouth-Ocean-Middlesex) line to pass through. However, we believe strongly that the Monmouth Junction line would be the most advantageous route. The Matawan line, which NJ Transit seems to be favoring at present, would be detrimental to thousands of people and would destroy a $2.5 million trail project just about to be completed by the Monmouth County Park System.

This southern extension of the Henry Hudson Trail is expected to be used by 145,000 people per year when it opens. Many area homeowners paid premiums to live nearby, and hundreds of homes are currently being constructed along its borders. To reactivate a rail line in this area would be a betrayal of the public’s trust.

As part of our process of reviewing NJ Transit’s findings that point to the Matawan line as the most advantageous, we have made a request under the Open Public Records Act for copies of all communications between NJT and lawmakers or state officials, as well as internal documents produced by NJT from the date one year before their February 1996 Major Investment Study through the current date, with respect to the Matawan line currently being considered.

In that 1996 report, NJT determined that the Matawan line was not worthy of study. We are trying to determine why what was an unattractive option has suddenly become the most favored. The only information we can glean is that a Middlesex County legislator demanded that this line, which does not even affect his county, be put back on the table. If this is the motivation behind NJ Transit’s about-face from their own 1996 study, we believe that the Matawan line is tainted on its face and should be excluded from further consideration, along with the Red Bank line, which their current study shows is the least desirable based on ridership data.

We further believe that an objective assessment of these rail lines will reveal significant flaws in NJT’s ridership estimates for the Matawan line, since areas served by that route will not realize population growth as high as those served by the Monmouth Junction line.

We encourage anyone with comments or questions about this process to please e-mail us at AsmPanter@njleg.org and AsmMorgan@njleg.org.

Michael J. Panter and Dr. Robert L. Morgan are members of the N.J. General Assembly, representing the 12th Legislative District in Monmouth and Mercer counties

Michael Panter & Robert Morgan

Guest Column