Public Out in Spades for Community Garden Project

With its chambers packed full of residents in support of locating a community garden on a prime piece of borough-owned real estate along side of the Navesink River, Red Bank Council passed a resolution Wednesday night in full support of a community garden, just not there.

The resolution seemed almost passive aggressive, an official declaration of obstinacy with no real explanation, even as members of the public approached the microphone during the public portion of the meeting, as to why the community’s favored site will never be the site of the community garden.

For the council, the official line is that the proposed site, one of more than 20 that have been identified throughout the borough, is inappropriate. What that means, exactly, isn’t quite clear. Though the public was treated to a relatively small list of concerns from council members, including handicap access and unsightly rain barrels, most of them are easily rectified, garden organizers said.

Ernest Anemone, a more recent addition to the ranks of community garden supporters, acted as the group’s de facto representative Wednesday night, taking the council to task over not only its failure to approve the riverside site, but also its vague and inconsistent logic over why that site isn’t a good fit.

“The community garden is going to happen because of the residents of Red Bank,” he said, noting that the site adjacent to Front Street would provide a great location for the borough’s communities to integrate. “You have a room full of residents willing to make it happen.”

The idea of the community garden is simple. It’s a place for the community to gather to not only grow fruits and vegetables but a place for students, members of the community, and volunteers to learn about farming and sustainability, and where their food comes from.

The Front Street location is ideal, gardeners say, because of its centralized location and visibility. But, like the council, garden clubbers seem to be unflinching when it comes to the location of the garden.

At environmental commission meetings earlier this year, more than 20 potential sites were detailed and ranked based on pros and cons. Many of the sites just aren’t feasible for a number of reasons, including being too small. But, while the riverside site is tops on the list, the council’s message that the garden club should consider sites number two or three instead was met with resistance.

“We’re not saying that this site is bad,” Councilman Mike DuPont said of the riverside site. “But we haven’t been presented with the information as to the benefits of these other sites.”

Like the council’s ambiguous objections, the Red Bank gardeners seemed unable, or unwilling, to explain why one site and one site only would do.

Councilwoman Kathleen Horgan noted that some objections to the community garden have come from the Red Bank Library, which would be the garden’s closest neighbor. Though gardeners have in the past been quick to relate how great the relationship between the garden and the library would be should the Front Street location be chosen, the library’s board sees otherwise. Some of the concerns include having its parking spaces taken, rain barrels detracting from the aesthetics of the library, and concern over possible water damage.

The benefits to the library, Gardner Chairwoman Sarah Klepner said, should be obvious to anyone. Not only would educational opportunities directly tie in with what the library does regularly, but also the goals of the library line up perfectly with those of the community garden, to serve Red Bank’s underprivileged.

“The library is underutilized,” she said. “Let’s put it to better use.”

Just as the answer to which site is the best location for the community garden remains unanswered, so to does when will Red Bank finally see a community garden? With both sides entrenched, the answer may not be so clear.