Closed sessions questioned at Princeton Borough Council meeting

By Lauren Otis, Staff Writer
   Following a closed session where negotiations with Princeton Township and developer Nassau HKT Partners were discussed, several members of Princeton Borough Council offered differing opinions on whether keeping the discussions private was justified at their meeting Tuesday evening.
   Following a summary in public session of the topics covered at the closed session by Borough Administrator Robert Bruschi, borough resident Dudley Sipprelle asked why discussions related to the township and Nassau HKT were kept private.
   ”I don’t understand what these circumstances are…for not presenting this in public forum,” said Mr. Sipprelle, who is a candidate for the council seat currently held by Kevin Wilkes.
   Mr. Bruschi responded that, regarding Nassau HKT, the council discussions relate to developing a position for when the borough enters into mediation over disputed aspects of Phase I of the downtown redevelopment project, which included an apartment and retail building, Albert E. Hinds Community Plaza and the Spring Street garage.
   The discussions were conducted in private in order for Nassau HKT not to learn the borough’s negotiating position before it was presented to the developer, Mr. Bruschi said.
   Regarding negotiations with the township — which have encompassed joint custodianship of the River Road property and joint Sewer Operation Committee operations there, and an agreement between the municipalities for public library parking — Mr. Bruschi said it was “a matter of public policy whether they want to discuss that in open session or closed session.”
   Councilman David Goldfarb said he was comfortable keeping the Nassau HKT discussions in closed session at present. Mr. Goldfarb said that “for better or worse” the borough had designated the Phase I development site “an area in need of redevelopment,” which under statute gave it the ability to negotiate in private with developers on the project rather than engage in a public bidding process.
   As long as there are still issues to be negotiated, it is appropriate to deal with them in private, Mr. Goldfarb said. “At the end of the process all will be disclosed,” he added.
   But Mr. Goldfarb said “it is grossly inappropriate to exclude the public” from discussions pertaining to the township as a matter of policy.
   Councilman Roger Martindell said he disagreed with Mr. Goldfarb “for strategic reasons rather than anything else” on the subject of township-related discussions.
   Noting that “the borough and township do not negotiate in a rational, consistent and productive way. It has been an abominable relationship, dysfunctional to the max,” Mr. Martindell said it was important for council to be able to privately discuss “where do we want to go in the relationship, what our bargaining position is.”
   He added, “Sometimes we need to sit in the privacy of our own offices or conference room and hash out what we want.”