Stories helped
make change
To the editor:
As a senior citizen living in a homeowner association in Monroe Township, I would like to thank you for writing two stories that I believe benefited owners in Rossmoor. The stories helped to make owners aware that a problem did exist.
In 2003 we unwittingly voted for a new Master Deed that made condo owners responsible for utilities within and under our floors and within walls. The great majority of the owners were not aware that they now had the responsibility for these costly repairs. A small group of owners tried to spread the word to our 3000 neighbors and your articles helped.
In December 2005, Leon Tovey wrote an article for your paper, "Rule change riles residents." This article pointed out that Rossmoor’s 2003 updated Master Deed turned responsibility for the repair of numerous utilities over to the majority of owners.
Then in July 2006, Stephanie Brown, a writer for your paper, wrote an article, "Condo maintenance dispute continues." I had given Ms. Brown a copy of the text from a previous Master Deed, which showed that owners in 12 of the 15 condo sections within Rossmoor were never responsible for the utilities within their floors, walls, etc. Ms. Brown quoted from the text of that deed.
After spending a large amount of money for an attorney and spreading the word about our sad situation, two amendments that return responsibility for most, but not all, of these utilities to management were put in a vote by the directors of the majority of the condo sections in 2006 and 2007. The owners, of course, voted for the amendments and most owners are, consequently, no longer responsible for the costly repair of these utilities.
Unfortunately, I believe that there is now one condo section where owners are responsible for the repair of these utilities. Of the 15 condo sections, this is one of the three sections with an original Master Deed that made owners responsible for these items. One would hope that the director of that section would be willing to give those residents the same benefit that the amendments gave to the majority of the condo owners in Rossmoor.
Thank you for writing the stories that helped spread the word.
Janet Huet-Cleary
Monroe
Court wrong
on campaign cash
To the editor:
Why does free speech cost so much? In this horse race for nomination by both major parties, the barrage of phone calls for money to promote a candidate borders on the insane.
The phone calls come in at different hours and at unexpected days: Saturday, Sunday, Wednesday and Sunday again. The political traffic is out of sight and clutters up the recycling bin by expensive high gloss multicolored flyers extolling the virtues of each of the candidates. It is a tremendous waste of time, energy, and money so early in the game.
What is really disheartening is the scale of money needed in the name of free speech to get the candidates’ message out. TV, radio and newspaper promotions plus the constant running around to make speeches in front of the party faithful. Money, money and more money is the means to an election so significant in 2008 and yet money is not free speech. The Supreme Court might think it is, but it is not; only those with the connections and deep pockets to promote a particular point of view are heard and seen.
Free speech would be the defining means of decision with the candidates debating each other at public forums without the influence and parameter of who gets to spend the most. It is the ideas and answers to questions that the public needs to make up its mind. Money given to a candidate in an election is a demand of payment for financial support. That is not free speech by the candidates but promises made in a campaign to satisfy its financing. That sort of debt is hardly ever noticed by the voter, but only those who provide the money grease for the campaign.
We will have free speech and a decisive method of determining who best represents out best interests when the money supply is no longer needed. Campaigns paid for by the public in an abbreviated schedule for elections is the answer to elections without the taint of money.
Martin Berkowitz
Monroe
Get involved
in clean elections
To the editor:
The community is invited to a reception for the Democratic Party candidates for the 14th Legislative District on Saturday, July 7, from 3 to 5 p.m. at 79 N. Main St. in Cranbury.
This year Linda Greenstein, Seema Singh and Wayne DeAngelo declared that they would forgo special interest money and participate in a pilot program called Clean Elections. Clean elections aims to rid the political process of special interest money and allow more diverse citizens the opportunity to run for elected office. The 14th Legislative district was selected by a bipartisan commission to participate in this first-of-a-kind program.
In order to qualify as a clean elections candidate, participating individuals must raise 800 $10 contributions from voters in the district. Our candidates need your help to qualify for the clean elections program. Any questions, please phone (609) 409-8405.
Glenn Johnson
Cranbury
Mr. Johnson is chairman of the Cranbury Township Democratic Party.

