CAPE MAY POINT — Borough Commission is considering the Planning Board’s recommendations on light trespass, a form of light pollution in which unwanted artificial light spills onto neighboring properties.
“It’s two groups that did a lot of work; it started with the Environmental Commission that did a lot of research and they made some proposals,” Deputy Mayor Elise Geiger said during the April 28 meeting. “Then it went to the Planning Board, and they did quite a bit of work on this as well.”
Geiger added that one recommendation was to add a lighting plan that is DarkSky-compliant to the landscape plan.
“Compliance can be easily summarized [as] everything’s got to be shielded, and then you can use low Kelvin lights, like 3,000 or less,” Geiger said. “There was a discussion whether it’s a recommendation or a requirement that new construction requires this kind of lighting.”
The second recommendation is to have an educational process.
“Putting out a light trespass ordinance is going to be very difficult to enforce, because then you have people running around at night and looking and catching people with lights on and off,” Geiger said. “And we know that several people use lights to fight with their neighbors.”
Mayor Anita VanHeeswyk said the Planning Board had investigated the issue decades ago and that she supported the educational component of the recommendation.
“I think that there could be rules or ordinances built into the zoning ordinances at the time something’s being built,” VanHeeswyk said. “Oftentimes people have spotlights up in the eaves and they shine down all over the place, something that says they can’t have that or better defining what’s up there.”
She said she agreed with the board’s recommendations and would like to move forward.
“I agree that we should be more specific in our zoning in the type of lighting we require,” Geiger said. “The other thing brought up at the Planning Board is that in our master plan, there is actually a statement that is pretty explicit that we should not have up-lighting, pathway illumination only.”
Geiger added that up-lighting is found on the façades of new homes and on little trees.
“That was never envisioned in the master plan, so maybe we should add that, no longer all of this landscaping and structural up-lighting and just reduce it to pathway illumination,” Geiger said.
VanHeeswyk said it was important to note that if people already have light fixtures, the board can choose to grandfather them in.
“That’s where I think the education comes in,” Geiger said. “Their recommendation was that the Environmental Commission takes that role.”
Commissioner Suzanne Yunghans thanked the Planning Board for looking into the situation and ideas that came from it.
“I hope that through the education, it also encourages folks to not just think about their own property in the lighting, but also think about how that impacts their neighbors,” Yunghans said.
Online donation platform
In other business, Borough Commission discussed using an online platform for donations for the annual Lifeguard Challenge.
“The Lifeguard Challenge requires a significant level of fundraising, and the borough does not financially support it,” Geiger said. “It’s a big event, a real positive to the community and a well-respected race.”
Donations for the challenge are currently accepted in cash and check, which Geiger said requires a lot of manual management.
“As we know, donors today usually seek to donate via credit card,” Geiger said, adding that there is a growing segment of the population that does not use cash or checks.
The program is run by Kristen Moorby, who Geiger said requested that the borough evaluate an alternative donation process that allows credit card processing.
“She’s recommending we look into a platform called Zeffy,” Geiger said. “The value here is for non-profits; there is a zero fee structure.”
Chief Financial Officer Jim Craft said his concerns were safeguarding the cash and turning it over in a timely fashion. He also said the state is very strict about how money is collected for municipalities.
VanHeeswyk agreed with Craft, noting that guidelines must be followed to conduct an audit properly.
“I would rather be on the safer side and say at this point in time that we shouldn’t do it; people have checks somehow and they can get cash,” VanHeeswyk said. “There are other ways of doing this and I don’t think it’s necessary to do it at this time.”
Geiger asked whether the issue could be further evaluated, and she could inquire with Cape May about how they process credit card payments for beach tags. VanHeeswyk added that they should continue to look into which platforms other towns are using.
“I have to be accountable for it in my department, so that’s how I feel about it this year,” VanHeeswyk said.
Craft said credit cards are accepted in many municipalities and that the route could be pursued.
“Maybe we could have a project where we look at some of the options,” Geiger said. “People come empty-handed without cash and we don’t have an ATM at the beach entrances either.”
Geiger added that over time, collecting by check and cash can become constrained.
“I understand what you’re saying, Anita, because it’s government,” Geiger said. “We won’t get it done for this year but maybe by next year.”
Yunghans said Geiger’s point was well taken, and she asked whether people use credit cards to pay and whether a receipt or letter was provided for tax deduction purposes. Geiger said that Zeffy does provide that.
By RACHEL SHUBIN/Special to the Star and Wave
