LETTERS TO THE EDITOR, June 1
Ballet anniversary cause for celebration
To the editor:
A special thank you to all who participated in making the 50th Anniversary Celebration of Princeton Ballet School and the 25th of American Repertory Ballet such a success on May 1. McCarter Theatre was filled with alumni of the school, former professional dancers, directors, staff, teachers, families and friends, many traveling a distance to be with us. Artistic Director Graham Lustig created the evening performance mixing the past with the present, while featuring the school, professional company, educational outreach programs, along with the induction of eight illustrious alums into our Wall of Fame.
Thanks to the many volunteers who helped make it a special night, to the community businesses that donated food for the reception, picture frames for the retrospective exhibitions, and the many merchants in town who hung posters in their windows and distributed information as well. And thanks to all who participated in the evening’s program and those in the audience.
We are proud to have chaired such a milestone event, and are grateful to everyone who has been involved in any way with Princeton Ballet School and American Repertory Ballet throughout the past and into the future. We are also proud that this community embraces our cultural heritage and supports its continued future journey.
As chairs of Princeton Ballet School and American Repertory Ballet’s Anniversary Celebration, we offer a very special "thank you" to all.
Nancy MacMillan
James Court
Princeton
Lisa deRavel
Pickering Circle
Princeton
Koontz will seek best solutions
To the editor:
We will vote for Andrew Koontz as one of the two Democratic Party candidates for Princeton Borough Council to be selected in the primary on June 8, and we write to urge our fellow borough Democrats to do the same.
We believe that Andrew brings to the council a thoughtfulness and a persistence that will seek out the best solutions to our local problems and see those solutions through to accomplishment. In his short time on council, he has already demonstrated a willingness to propose politically difficult budget cuts in a year when borough taxpayers face substantial increases. At the same time, he is urging the council to take a longer view of budgeting looking ahead three to five years, instead of the current two years. We admire his ability to work at the micro-level (and making sure that Maple Street has a new street sign) while publicly protesting national policies that seem to him (and to us) wrong and destructive.
We have seen Andrew’s efficiency and leadership as president of the Princeton Democratic Community Organization, and if anyone thinks this is a group of people who agree about everything, they have only to attend a meeting to understand both the tough-mindedness and the courtesy required to lead it. He has and will bring those traits to Borough Council meetings, where the discussions sometimes become heated. We are pleased to support Andrew Koontz.
Gail and Dick Ullman
Maple Street
Princeton
Martindell is tireless advocate for residents
To the editor:
I support Roger Martindell for re-election to Borough Council because he is a tireless advocate for borough residents.
I know Roger as a running-mate, fellow council member and friend. He is a fiscally responsible and socially conscious public servant. On the fiscal side, Roger not only protects borough taxpayers by fighting wasteful spending and exploring alternative revenue sources; he also saves the borough countless dollars by reading the fine print of municipal contracts and service agreements. Roger’s attention to detail and legal training often illuminate issues that help the borough dodge major financial headaches.
On the social side, Roger relentlessly advocates for Princeton’s most vulnerable residents. From lifelong Princetonians who fear that skyrocketing property taxes may force them from their homes to Princeton’s newest immigrants who confront abusive landlords and employers, Roger offers an empowering voice and seeks meaningful solutions.
On June 8, borough voters have an opportunity to choose a candidate who will keep Princeton a quality town for borough residents Roger Martindell.
Ryan Stark Lilienthal
Maple Street
Princeton
Freda has shown commitment to town
To the editor:
How refreshing and encouraging it is to see a real Democratic primary race for Princeton Borough Council, with four candidates running at once. Thanks to each of them for wanting to serve.
But when we look at what we hope will happen on the council, we see one candidate who has shown us how committed to the community and how very much in touch with community sentiment he is. He is Mark Freda.
As we know from past experience, he isn’t afraid to engage the public fully in council discussions and decision processes. We strongly urge our fellow borough residents to vote for Mark Freda.
Ginnie and Bruce Finnie
Western Way
Princeton
Koontz backed for Borough Council
To the editor:
We would like to encourage all voters to support Andrew Koontz in the Princeton Borough Democratic primary on June 8.
Andrew was appointed to Borough Council this past January and we have been impressed by his thoughtful positions on controlling costs and exploring alternative funding for government services. His proposal of changing the yearly budgeting process to a multi-year process is an example of his creative thinking. Projecting out three to five years would prepare the borough for future problems not readily seen in the annual process. Also, Andrew’s review of budget items that could possibly be transferred to Mercer County has uncovered possible significant savings for borough taxpayers. He brings a fresh perspective to Borough Council and voters should back his continued service on the council.
We have worked closely with Andrew for four years on many local political issues. He always went out of his way to listen carefully to the different positions before taking a stand. His fair treatment of opposing groups earned him a reputation as a real leader.
Please vote for Andrew on June 8.
David and Dora DeGeorge
Moore Street
Princeton
Route 92 process needs to be inclusive
To the editor:
The communities that Route 92 would hurt the worst have been systematically locked out of participation in the process that created it. All we are asking for is the same chance that Princeton and West Windsor had with the Penns Neck Bypass: a roundtable process with community involvement, mediated by a neutral third party and opened up to solving the very real transportation problems of the region in a way that we can all live with.
I challenge Mayors Cantu, Marchand, Hsueh, O’Neill and Patten to give this chance to their less wealthy neighbors to the north and west or to explain to all of us why they won’t.
Steve Masticola
Church Street
Kingston
Mayors’ letter on Route 92 faulted
To the editor:
There are several fallacies in the letter from the mayors of Plainsboro, Princeton Township, Princeton Borough, Hightstown and West Windsor (The Packet, May 25) that need clarification.
First of all, there is no current or future plan to widen Route 522 to six lanes. There is a plan to extend Route 522 to Route 535, which will give traffic a free east-west roadway from Route 27 to Route 535 and the New Jersey Turnpike. The final segment (Route 130 to Route 535) is due to be completed within a year, will make Route 92 a redundant roadway and was not considered in any of the so-called credible traffic studies cited in the mayors’ letter. Route 522 will not only help those needing to access the Turnpike but will be useful to local residents as well.
Secondly, the aforementioned traffic studies are biased as they were paid for or contracted by the Turnpike Authority or the State of New Jersey. The Army Corps of Engineers, amazingly, used these old studies in their draft Environmental Impact Statement. Additionally, the subcontractors that the Army Corps used should have been disqualified as they have done work for the Turnpike in the recent past and have a conflict of interest.
Thirdly, the traffic studies, flawed as they are and skewed as they are in favor of the Turnpike, show that traffic on local roads will not improve (the same number of intersections fail after Route 92 is constructed as before). Traffic on Route 1 south of the proposed intersection (near the current intersection of Ridge Road and Route 1) will see an increase in traffic, according to these studies.
Fourth, this project will not make our region more "livable," as these mayors have written. It will bring additional traffic and additional sprawl and development as Forrestal Center lures more industry to the region.
Finally, fifth, I fail to see how the development that has gone on in Plainsboro, Princeton Township, Princeton Borough, Hightstown and West Windsor is "smart growth." These towns have counted on a phantom roadway for decades to plan their residential and commercial development. That is not smart.
I would suggest a roundtable discussion with a professional leader be set up with input from local residents, local and regional planners as well as the mayors of towns affected. This was done with the Penns Neck project and would work well with this one.
Cathy Dowgin
Friendship Road
South Brunswick
Plenty of alternatives exist to Route 92
To the editor:
Considerations of a limited-access road linking the New Jersey Turnpike near Exit 8A at Jamesburg and Route 1 at Ridge Road near Princeton have been under discussion for decades and appear to be again reaching a possible approval. I am writing to express my opposition to the proposal.
While it is true that there is no major connecting road between these two points, other connecting roads do exist. For traffic beginning or ending in the Princeton area, there is the Princeton-Hightstown Road (Route 571), which connects to the Turnpike at Exit 8. Traffic coming up the Turnpike can also reach Princeton using Interstate Route 95 and then go north on Route 1, and traffic coming down the Turnpike can exit in East Brunswick and take Route 1 south. These roads can get crowded, but they can be widened, double-decked or closely paralleled.
For traffic from the Turnpike that is headed to northern New Jersey or New York (via Interstate 287) there are also alternatives, and very much better ones. From the intersection of Ridge Road and Route 1 there is no connection to Route 206, which might be used to connect to Interstate 287; there are only local streets. And if a connector is built it will dump more traffic onto 206, requiring widening, double-decking or closely paralleling of that road. But Route 287 already has a direct connection with the Turnpike at Edison. (From Exit 8A of the Turnpike to Edison and then on Route 287 to Somerville is a distance of about 30 miles. From Exit 8A of the Turnpike to Route 206 near Route 518 and then on Route 206 to Somerville is a distance of about 25 miles. The saving is only about 5 miles.)
That’s why I do not see a strong need for the proposed Turnpike extension.
And there are good environmental reasons to oppose the road. We’re talking about building a road through poorly drained wetlands, an area highly suitable for birds, reptiles and amphibians, and for the enjoyment of these co-inhabitants of our planet, but surely not one that should be crossed by a major road. Haven’t we had enough loss of habitat caused by residential, commercial and industrial development?
I urge our legislators to oppose this extension plan. A much broader area needs to be brought into consideration. The Turnpike Authority, like any authority or corporation, always feels the need to grow. Growth is not always good.
Michael Kaplan
Copper Mine Road
Franklin Township