This post was contributed by a community member. The views expressed here are the author's own.

Politics & Government

Bus Traffic, Nativity Display Concern Some Haddonfield Residents

Public comments about traffic flow and seasonal displays dominated discussion at Haddonfield Commissioners meeting.

A handful of public comments at the borough commissioners’ final work session of 2011 topped an agenda filled with a variety of odds and ends, including bus routes and the borough holiday displays.

Euclid Street residents Joyce Howell and Mary Ann Walker spoke about how the diverted the 451 NJ Transit bus to their street.

“As the construction on Tanner Street wound down, the bus traffic didn’t change,” Howell said, adding that Euclid felt to her like “an urban street at certain hours of the day.

Find out what's happening in Haddonfield-Haddon Townshipwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

“Tanner Street is a business street; Euclid from Westmont Avenue up is residential,” she said.

Walker said she saw buses driving up Euclid as recently as three times an hour during a recent weekday. The regular bus route uses Tanner Street to return to Kings Highway after a stop at the PATCO rail station.

Find out what's happening in Haddonfield-Haddon Townshipwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

“I don’t want to live on a bus route,” Walker said.

Commissioner Edward Borden explained that although the borough does not have decision-making authority over bus routes, “the folks at NJT have said they’re willing to put heavy weight on what we as commissioners say, and we’ve been happy to do that.”

The commissioners agreed that they don’t want the buses to go up Euclid, and will reach out to NJ Transit for input as to which route makes the most sense from the perspective of bus drivers. Mayor Tish Colombi, one of three borough commissioners, had previously raised concerns about the 451 returning to Tanner Street after a lengthy project which replaced the road surface.

Haddonfield resident Deborah Marchand also offered comment that a privately funded Nativity scene outside of the was erected near without any signage to indicate that it is not sponsored by the borough.

The scene, , seemed to Marchand to be so close to the borough Christmas tree as to make it seem as though Haddonfield were sponsoring it directly. Furthermore, she added, without any identifying placard, it seemed to her as though the borough were making a religious statement.

“If you’re going to create an area, signage-free, that doesn’t equally represent everybody, then you’re setting yourself up for a problem,” Marchand said. “To me when I look at that, that is the Christianity package, slam-dunk. That’s just my initial reaction when I see it.”

Commissioner Jeffrey Kasko agreed that the proximity of the Nativity scene to the tree “could give the impression that it’s attached to the holiday tree,” but borough administrator Sharon McCullough thought its placement was more a function of access to onsite electricity outlets.

Haddonfield solicitor Mario Iavicoli cited case law says that “the government is allowed to have religious holiday displays on borough property as long as the government does not support or fund it.” Five years ago, he said, the borough decided to allow religious displays on a temporary basis during the holiday season after the issue was raised by former borough administrator Richard Schwab.

“The issue is not whether or not the government can erect a religious display, the issue is whether the government can allow public property to be used by religious entities on a temporary basis,” he said.

Iavicoli explained that the borough was “almost compelled to allow [Nativity scenes to be erected] because the policy was originally established to allow a menorah."

Although the commissioners agreed that distinguishing signage would be a good idea, Iavicoli couldn’t recall any case law that states a requirement “that compels the person who installs whatever religious icon that they have to have a sign up.”

Mayor Colombi agreed: “I don’t think we can make [signage] a condition of putting a sign up this year after we’ve already granted permission.”

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here

The views expressed in this post are the author's own. Want to post on Patch?