Looking for Mr. Mayer...

Dear Mr. Mayer:

The following incident occurred at the conclusion of the 23 July 2013 - GT Planning Board Meeting where the Gloucester Premium Outlets plan was discussed and involved one of your 2012 appointments to the stated board.

A few residents that live in close proximity to the proposed Gloucester Premium Outlets stood to express concern over the level of noise that would be generated during any future construction period and about traffic in general in the area. It seems some are already being affected by adverse traffic patterns due to the installation of the new roads that were part of the construction of the new Route 42 exit at the Cooper site under question.

While I do not live in any area directly adjacent to the new roads, my son lives very close and I have traveled on some of those roads. It struck me from the beginning that the rotaries installed were extremely small and would not do well in handling anything more the most minimal of traffic.

After hearing the concerns of the nearby residents I felt compelled to share my experience of driving on the new roads, as well. I do not believe anything I or anyone else said could be construed as disrespectful or derogatory in any manner. After my comments the public portion was closed and the vote was held for the application under review. I do understand that the meeting in question, and the subsequent vote, was not in respect to the Premium Outlets in general, or the traffic, but had only to do with signage at the site, however, none of us there were aware of any other meetings that had been held and so appeared there on that night to express our concerns.

The vote of the Planning Board was unanimous in favor of the application and was conducted with propriety with one exception. The board members all voted “yes” or “yea” and some may have included a “thank you” to the applicants but when it came time for Mr. Scott Owens to vote, he looked in our direction, seemed to kind of lean forward a little, and spoke loudly into the microphone saying, “With pleasure…YES!”

His vote was definitely cast with the intention to annoy those who had expressed concern over the project and was delivered in an “up yours and in your face” style. The only things missing were the use of an expletive and his flashing us the middle finger. That was how the others took it as well and I was able to ascertain that by asking for impressions afterwards.

May I ask, is this the way you expect your appointees to act in the presence of concerned citizens who had acted with no malice or impropriety? We were there to exercise our rights and did only what the meeting itself allows by including a public portion. In addition, every one of us acted courteously only to be responded to in arrogance by Mr. Owens. My understanding, correct me if I’m wrong, Mr. Mayer, is that the various Gloucester Township board members are there on behalf of the residents of GT as our representatives and should be acting in our best interests not as antagonists of GT residents.

Prior to the hearing of the Premium Outlet developers another applicant, the first one heard, was there to apologize for some remarks he had made at a prior meeting. At the least, I would think that Mr. Owens should do the same and would really expect him to be relieved of his seat on the Planning Board and replaced by someone with a little more respect for the residents of Gloucester Township.

As one of your constituents, I would appreciate your reply in this matter.

P.S. I am publishing this letter on the Gloucester Township Patch and would like to encourage you to answer there in lieu of a personal reply. We would like to hear from you, Mr. Mayer.

Sincerely,

Paul J. DiBartolo