Are New Jersey’s LSRPs working for Environment Protection or for the Landlords?

When Oversight Fails: How a New Jersey Town’s Park Dispute Raised Questions About Environmental Independence, Political Influence, and the Integrity of LSRP Decision-Making

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, In 2008, the Village of Ridgewood, New Jersey, purchased a seven-acre property along Route 17 North with a straightforward civic goal: convert it into a public park for a neighborhood with almost no access to green space. Early plans included walking paths, a small playground, and a modest athletic field—features aimed at serving children, seniors, and local families who had long requested a safe, accessible recreational area.

For nearly a decade, competing visions stalled consensus. Local sports groups advocated for a large, tournament-scale athletic field, while nearby residents pushed for a mixed-use park that preserved mature trees and prioritized general public access. In 2017, both sides finally reached a compromise: a multipurpose playing field, a playground, walkways, and protection of roughly 1.7 acres of trees on the property.
Two candidates—Paul Vagianos (now Mayor) and Siobhan Winograd (now Councilwoman)—ran their first campaigns pledging to uphold this compromise.

To prepare the land for future use, the Village constructed a 20–25-foot-wide berm along Route 17. Built as a protective barrier, it shielded future park users from highway noise, debris, and pollution, and the Village planted trees on top to reinforce the buffer. It appeared that the project was finally moving forward.

There was just one problem – while protecting the residents from highway traffic & pollution, THE BERM was created for a mid sized field and RBSA still wanted their full size field!

The Reversal

By 2025, the political landscape had shifted. Mayor Vagianos and Councilwoman Winograd, despite their campaign commitments, began promoting a dramatically larger athletic field—one that required removing the berm and altering the 2017 plan. Members of the sports community publicly acknowledged at council meetings that they had supported the officials’ campaigns (through donations) based on expectations of a larger field.

Shortly thereafter, the Village hired a new Village Manager: Keith Kazmark, who had previously served as Mayor Vagianos’s campaign manager for a state legislative race. His compensation exceeded $225,000. At multiple public meetings, Mr. Kazmark stated that he takes direction from the mayor and council, further tightening the political chain of command.

Around this time, Mount Sinai Hospital sent a letter urging the Village to consider health-protective modifications to its plan. According to public records and meeting footage, the Village did not consult its own Health Department and did not act on Mount Sinai’s recommendations.

Consultants With a Mission

In an effort to obtain state approval for the revised project, the Village hired consultant Peter Primavera, despite residents publicly raising concerns about his prior work on other municipal projects. The Village stood by its decision and paid him for his services. Later he was arrested on unrelated charges, proving that resident concerns were correct.

The Village then retained Suburban Consulting Engineers, Inc., whose report concluded that almost every other field or open space in Ridgewood had been “developed to the maximum extent” and offered no viable alternative location for a full-size field. The simplicity and certainty of these conclusions stood in stark contrast to two independent assessments:

• a CMX engineering report, and
• a report by Gianforcaro Architects, commissioned by the Ridgewood Board of Education,

both of which identified multiple Board-of-Education-owned fields that could be expanded. The CMX report contradicts Suburban Engineering report for village owned properties too! The discrepancy raised questions about whether Suburban’s brief, categorical dismissals were tailored to satisfy a key requirement of the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO): demonstrating that no alternative sites existed before altering a historic property.

State-Level Scrutiny and a Sudden Approval

SHPO issued a temporary denial, requesting additional information. While SHPO continued its review, an unrelated political event occurred: NJDEP Commissioner Shawn LaTourette and Village Manager Kazmark co-hosted a fundraiser for governor candidate Mikie Sherrill. The appearance of a close working relationship raised eyebrows but did not violate any published ethics rules.

The NJDEP, which oversees SHPO, then approved the project—despite SHPO’s pending concerns. Commissioner LaTourette recused himself, but the approval was signed by his deputy, who had been on vacation during the SHPO hearing and issued the approval the day after returning. The timing drew attention among residents tracking the process closely.

The LSRP Question: Independence or Influence?

At the center of the current debate lies a crucial system within New Jersey’s environmental framework: Licensed Site Remediation Professionals (LSRPs). LSRPs are intended to serve as independent, scientifically objective stewards of environmental remediation—professionals who act on behalf of public health rather than the entity that pays their invoices.

The Village hired Matrix New World Engineering, which employs multiple LSRPs. In a publicly available YouTube video
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIsq1EQCHkI), the Matrix LSRP makes several key statements:

1. Different standards apply to residential vs. recreational contamination.
   Recreational standards are significantly more relaxed because exposure times are shorter. The berm—never intended for direct public contact—may not have required soil removal under recreational standards. If that 20-25 foot area is going to get contimated again through highway fumes, was adding a fence between the berm and the field an option?
2. Soil removal is not the only remediation method.
   The LSRP openly acknowledged that options such as biodegradation were available.
3. Capping the berm was feasible.
   Capping is a widely used remediation technique that seals contaminants in place.
   The LSRP stated this could be done; however, the Village was pursuing full removal.
4. The Village directed the LSRP to remove the berm.
   In the same video, Village Manager Kazmark confirms that although capping was an option, he chose removal.
5. The remediation by soil removal is estimated at $1.8 million for LSRP plus a few million that will be charged by the trucking company.

Given the berm’s function as a protective barrier from highway pollution, many residents question why a costlier approach—one that also eliminates a safety feature—was selected.

A System Under Pressure

The convergence of political reversals, consultant selections, contradictory engineering reports, SHPO’s concerns, and a rapid NJDEP approval created an atmosphere of mistrust. Now, attention has turned to whether the LSRP system—designed to ensure independence—can withstand political and financial pressure.

The central question emerging from Ridgewood’s Route 17 project is no longer limited to local park design. It is broader and more consequential:

Are LSRPs in New Jersey able to operate independently when a municipal client expects a specific outcome, or do structural incentives make it difficult for them to deviate from the desires of the party that hires them?

The answer matters not only for Ridgewood’s residents, but for communities across New Jersey that rely on LSRPs to safeguard public health, protect historic properties, and uphold environmental integrity without fear or favor.

 

Tell your story #TheRidgewoodblog , #Indpendentnews, #information, #advertise, #guestpost, #affiliatemarketing,#NorthJersey, #NJ , #News, #localnews, #bergencounty, #sponsoredpost, #SponsoredContent, #contentplacement , #linkplacement, Email: [email protected]