It isn't the planned use of the sun for energy that spurred four environmental groups into filing suit against Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson. It's what happens back here on the ground.

Main entrance to Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson
Main entrance to Six Flags Great Adventure in Jackson (Dan Alexander, Townsquare Media NJ)
loading...

Clean Water Action, the NJ Conservation Foundation, Save Barnegat Bay and the Crosswicks Creek Doctors Creek Watershed Assocation (CCDCWA) claim that the solar farm project omits comprehensive planning required under the New Jersey Municipal Land Use Law.

In addition to the theme park and KDC Solar, Jackson Township is also named in the action. Litigants claim that municipal agencies ignored longstanding environmental components of the township's master plan and land use ordinances.

They also contend that clearing the estimated 19,000 trees the solar farm would increase the amount of rainwater pollution carried through tributaries into Barnegat Bay.

In a previous discussion with WOBM, Great Adventure President John Fitzgerald claimed that the solar project would reduce the equivalent of 226,000 tons of carbon dioxide in the next 15 years, while the trees would have removed about 9,600 tons in the same time frame.

He also said that the company intends to plant 26,000 trees, about 7,000 more than would be cut, in the same 1,300 acre tract, under the guidance of the park's full-time arborist.

At the same time, the theme park would become nearly independent of fossil fuels for energy, Fitzgerald said.

Six Flags Great Adventure spokesperson Kristin Siebeneicher added, in a prepared statement:

"Six Flags has been a good custodian of the environment and believes the solar project is a net benefit to the environment, despite whatever concerns may have been raised. At this time we are declining interviews in light of the recent lawsuit."

More From 92.7 WOBM