Morris County committee urges voters be allowed to approve stewardship grants for preserved land

Deputy Director Commissioner Stephen Shaw presented the Preservation Trust Fund Review Committee’s unanimous recommendation that Morris County voters be asked to allow trust fund dollars to pay for stewardship and enhancement of preserved land.

The committee, established under Resolution 2024-42, found stewardship of existing preserved lands to be an appropriate use of Preservation Trust Fund dollars and recommended a broadly worded ballot question so program details and eligibility rules can be drafted if voters approve it. "The committee finds that stewardship of existing preserved lands is an appropriate use of preservation trust fund dollars and unanimously recommends that the ballot question be put to the voters of Morris County," Shaw said.

The recommendation grows from six committee meetings in which members reviewed the program’s charge, prior open-space surveys, state enabling legislation and presentations from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and the Association of New Jersey Environmental Commissions. The committee’s report says stewardship grants would fund activities such as natural resource management planning, green infrastructure, invasive species removal, habitat restoration and pollinator habitat — similar in spirit to the county’s trails grant program — and would exclude deferred annual maintenance, municipal staff salaries and active recreation facilities such as ball fields and turf fields.

Shaw said the committee intentionally recommended a broad ballot question that would permit administrators latitude to draft specific program rules later if voters approve the change. Bill Johnson, special counsel, told commissioners he drafted a proposed ballot question language using terms from the committee report and the interpretive statement so voters would have context on the intent of the measure.

Commissioners asked several clarifying questions about eligibility and funding. Shaw and committee members said the program’s initial focus would be on stewardship of preserved land and that the ballot language is drafted broadly to allow future inclusion of nonprofit land-preservation organizations, if the rules later permit it. The committee did not recommend that the county directly compete with municipalities for grants; Shaw noted county participation is not expressly barred by the proposed question but said the rules would determine applicant eligibility and whether county agencies could apply.

On funding, commissioners were told the county’s preservation account holds roughly $40 million in total balances but that much of that sum is already committed or subject to legal locks. Shaw said the committee did not recommend increasing the open-space tax; instead, the plan would operate within existing funds and annual budget decisions by the board. The report notes some funds are committed and that unlocking additional dollars would require separate board action.

The committee recommended an outreach and education program to explain the ballot question and suggested a timeline if the board chooses to proceed: present the ballot language to the board in June, adopt a resolution establishing the question in July and meet the August 15 filing deadline to put the measure on the November general election ballot. Shaw and committee members said drafting the program’s rules would be a longer process, likely taking about a year once voters approve the change.

Commissioner discussion emphasized that program rules and eligibility criteria will matter for how the funds are used. Several commissioners voiced support for native-plant and habitat restoration work as potential uses; others cautioned that stewardship of historic buildings is already covered through the county’s historic preservation programs and therefore would not be included under this open-space stewardship proposal.

After discussion, Shaw asked whether there was consensus to move the recommendation to administration for next steps; commissioners responded in the affirmative. Shaw thanked committee members and staff for the work captured in the report and asked administration and counsel to prepare draft ballot language and program rules for future board review.

Looking ahead, the committee report and the presentation materials will serve as guidance for staff drafting the rules and the ballot question should the board formally direct the administration to proceed. If the board adopts a resolution to place the question on the ballot, the county must meet the board’s internal timeline to file the public question by August 15 to appear on the November general election ballot.