Contact: S. Thomas Gagliano
732-747-8277
June 19, 2008

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

I am here on behalf of the Jersey Shore Partnership as the Founding Chair of this non-profit organization.

The Jersey Shore Partnership is very concerned about the negative effects on our state’s beaches and tourism economy that would be created if the A2806/S2043 becomes law.

Immediately after the disastrous northeast storms of 1991-92 that hit New Jersey, the Asbury Park Press in an editorial urged New Jersey to create a stable funding source for shore protection that would be used to match federal funds from the United States Army Corps of Engineers. Without those funds, our sand-starved beaches cannot be replenished.

In response to that call and the obvious need to rebuild our beaches, we created the Jersey Shore Partnership with the mission of advocating for the creation of a stable source of funding for shore protection.

Initially, the fund was created by the Legislature in the amount of $15M and then thanks to the Governor and Legislature, the amount was increased to $25M.

Basically, the funding goes like this:

The Federal government, through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, does the planning and contracting for sand replenishment and is responsible for approximately 65% of the overall costs. The remaining 35% is called the “local share” and is paid for by the stable funding source with contributions in several cases from individual counties and municipalities.

The New Jersey experience in shore protection has been one of the most successful in the entire country and is responsible for millions of cubic yards of sand to be borrowed from offshore locations and pumped onto our beaches. A summary of New Jersey shore protection projects by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is attached to this statement and is a clear indication of how important the beach fill program has been to our coastal communities, the state, and tourism in our state.

When this program started, it was projected to have a 50-year project life. At the same time, the Army Corps and the NJ DEP investigated the sand-borrow sites from offshore and established that there was sufficient sand to meet the program. As part of the 50-year project life, it was recognized that some sand would be lost over time and therefore, re-replenishment projects were anticipated and are now planned for some municipalities along the shore.

For example, Monmouth Beach and Long Branch need sand now. With regard to Long Branch, it is clear to all that without beach replenishment, the thriving economic development which is taking place there would not have happened. Prior to the beach replenishment program, Atlantic City essentially had no beach. Well, now it does and the casinos have established tiki bars and entertainment facilities on the beaches which have turned out to be a very successful endeavor.

There are several beaches in New Jersey that need replenishment where the beach is almost nonexistent, and having the Fund intact is the only way that we will protect our beaches.

The Partnership understands that under the pending legislation, the plan is to expend any balances in the Shore Protection Fund to benefit the parks of New Jersey. The problem with this proposal is that it reduces substantially the availability of funds to match federal funding. As I recall the program which was headed up by Mr. Bernie Moore of the Toms River office of NJ DEP, there were some years where more than $25M was needed and so any excess from the year before could be used toward the ensuing year and the system balanced itself.


If this legislation is adopted, that will not be an option available to the DEP and without state funding we lose Federal funding. Furthermore, the $25M program was established in the early 1990’s and the amount of sand that can be relocated to the beaches is less and less due to inflation, increased fuel costs, and frankly, the value of the dollar.

Therefore, on behalf of the Jersey Shore Partnership, I urge you to reject A2806/S2043. This is not a statement adverse to the parks in New Jersey, but it is a statement in total support of our outstanding beach replenishment program which could be crippled by this legislation.

This Legislation is a really bad idea.

Thank you and if you have any questions, I would be glad to try to answer them.