By: centraljersey.com
When Cranbury residents voiced their concerns over the current affordable housing policies of COAH, Linda Greenstein was nowhere to be found.
Cranbury should have been looked upon as a poster child for all of its past work in building and integrating affordable housing within its community. Instead, we were demonized by the press and outside activists for voicing our concerns over a failed and unrealistic policy. Linda’s Greenstein’s silence in this matter was deafening and quite noticeable.
For Cranbury, the state unfunded mandate from COAH continues to be the largest open financial issue facing its residents. With each new round came new changes, each of which was different and more onerous than the last.
At this point, COAH has changed horses in the middle of the stream so many times that they don’t know what horse they’re on nor what stream their in. Because of the constant changes and escalating costs for projects, the current program should be halted until the state figures out where the funding will come from to support it.
That’s what Tom Goodwin is proposing to do and not Linda Greenstein.
Tom’s plan is simple: Put the control of affordable housing back in the hands of the local communities where it belongs with the state being an equal partner in the process. Linda’s plan is simple, too; status quo with Trenton telling our community what to do.
For the citizens of Cranbury, the status quo equates to a huge increase in the size of our town along with tens of millions of new tax dollars.
In conclusion, the way COAH is currently set up is broken and needs to be fixed. Tom Goodwin has publicly said that he is willing to do that. Linda Greenstein has not.
Remember this as you enter the voting booth on Election Day.
Wayne Wittman Cranbury
Garbage contract positive for Cranbury
To the editor:
Nov. 2, here will be a local proposition on the general election ballot.
The proposition will ask whether the residents of Cranbury are in favor of the Township Committee exploring whether it should negotiate a garbage hauling contract with one company on behalf of the entire town.
Tonight, I attended a presentation by Township Committeeman David Cook of the preliminary findings of the garbage subcommittee, and based on what I heard, I urge everyone to vote yes.
There are several advantages to having the township negotiate a contract on behalf of the entire town. Because Cranbury is served by three garbage haulers, each of which has a different collection schedule, we have garbage trucks on our streets five days per week. A contract with one hauler could reduce this traffic dramatically.
We can stipulate in the contract that collection is to be done by propane-fueled trucks, which run cleaner and are quieter than traditional garbage trucks. We can include in the contract curbside pickup four times per year for large items and save the $25,000 the township now spends on the two "Dump Days" it holds each year.
Based on the experiences of other towns that have contracted with one hauler, it is estimated that the cost per household would be around $270 per year.
Remember that a "yes" vote simply authorizes the township to solicit bids from the haulers. There will be a second referendum in the fall of 2011 in which a specific contract will be placed before the voters for their approval.
Glenn Johnson candidate Cranbury Township Committee
New Jersey needs new plan
To the editor:
I recently read the editorial "America’s economic ‘backbone’ is crumbling," posted Oct. 6.
As the chair of the 2007 New Jersey Infrastructure Report Card Committee, I want to thank you for raising awareness to imminent crisis of infrastructure decay.
Recent news events tell the story. Modern ships cannot enter NY/NJ ports because the Bayonne bridge is too low to allow ships to cross safely.
Crowded NJ Transit trains struggle to keep up with demand. Traffic jams on highways and interstates are increasing.
Posted bridges force truckers to detour their routes through local roads. Posted bridges can also affect school bus and emergency vehicle routes.
The list goes on and on.
New Jersey is in a precarious position with many of the funding sources simply drying up. The Transportation Trust Fund is broke, the Environmental Infrastructure Trust Fund lacks the staffing and funds to secure financing for all eligible water/sewer projects, and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act has been sufficient to fund only a small fraction of the overall infrastructure need.
New Jersey needs a new plan.
Andres M. Roda director NJ Section American Society of Civil Engineers
Vote for tour favorite candidate
To the editor:
We are fortunate that in Cranbury, we have three qualified candidates running for the Township Committee.
It is truly unfortunate that there are only two openings.
I’ve had the opportunity of talking one on one with all three candidates. I also attended candidates night on Oct. 12 to hear their responses to questions and listen to their personal thoughts on the future of Cranbury.
On Nov. 2, I will be voting for my favorite candidate, Glenn Johnson. Glenn is a mature, educated and conservative person who will keep Cranbury, Cranbury.
Reminder: On Election Day (Tuesday, Nov. 2), each of you should be voting for your favorite candidate(s).
Leo Fenity Cranbury
Vote for ‘good’ Rush Holt
To the editor:
After reading some of the letters to the editor in support of the candidacy of Mr. Sipprelle for the 12th Congressional District, I have begun to wonder if there are not two Rush Holts.
One is "the good twin" – the thoughtful, intelligent, hardworking, attentive, collegial and progressive scientist of my experience.
The other is his "evil twin" – the "dismal failure" who is "part of the problem not part of the solution," and who, along with the entire Democratic Party, may be responsible for all of mankind’s ills, with the possible exceptions of the 13th-century bubonic plague and the Prohibition amendment with its enabling legislation.
So, first, a wee bit of history may be in order. For his first four terms in office, Rep Holt was a member of the minority party and in his next term was in the majority but constrained without veto-proof numbers.
As we are well aware from all the whining and complaining of the past two years, being in the minority is not all "beer and skittles." Yet, I do not recall Rep. Holt continually kvetching. He appeared to me to be working with others, in particular on veteran affairs and scientific matters, to accomplish as much as he could.
Rep Holt is, thank heavens, not me. Nor do I wish him to be me. He is much better than I am, and for that I am grateful.
I do not vote for my representative to be my robot, puppet or alter ego. I want a representative who will hear me, but who will study the issues carefully and fully, make his own appraisal, vote his conscience and explain his thinking.
In short, I want him to be what Rep Holt was for 33 years before entering Congress: a scientist firmly attached to the scientific method and a person of reason and principles.
The other day, Rep Holt appears to have been accused of having been complicit in the financial crisis of 2008 because he voted for the Gramm, Leach, Bliley Act of 1999 that effectively repealed the second Glass-Steagal Act of 1937.
This occurred in spite of the fact that all the sponsors of the act were Republican legislators, and the act passed the Republican-controlled House by a bipartisan vote of 362 in favor, including every single member, both Democrat and Republican, of the New Jersey delegation.
I suppose very few people could have foreseen Mr. Sipprelle’s former Wall Street colleagues would be so creative in finding loopholes enabling them to thwart the best intentions of the legislation for their personal gains.
Rep Holt voted for President Bush’s TARP because so many eminent economists and financial experts feared a complete collapse of the banking system and another Great Depression. In this vote, he was joined by Republican Rep. Freylinghuysen and another now-retired Republican of neighboring districts.
He voted for the stimulus because he knew that, in such dire circumstances, really only government has enough clout. I suspect he agrees with the 30-plus economists, including Professor Blinder, of Princeton University, and the Federal Reserve that a second stimulus is needed.
Businesses aren’t hiring, a recent article tells me, because consumers aren’t buying, and consumers aren’t buying because they have no money. The federal government is the last resort.
He voted for the final health reform legislation because he does not wish to see 40 million uninsured Americans, and even though he strongly supported the public option. The GOP wants either total repeal (don’t hold your breath) or repeal of the "bad" parts, like the mandate.
Too bad health insurance company executives told Congress that if there was no mandate, there would be nothing else they could support, good or bad.
He was one of the first members of Congress to urge Mr. Obama to name Elizabeth Warren to head the new financial consumer protection group.
Rep. Holt voted against the 2002 war powers legislation when most Republicans and Democrats were too frightened to question the rush to war in Iraq – a war still bubbling away in spite of the loss of national blood and treasure.
Yet, when it comes to supporting the veterans of these conflicts, Rep. Holt is one of their fiercest supporters, so much so that the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America has awarded him an A- rating.
He has supported all manner of aid for returning veterans, not the least his championing of programs for brain injuries and suicide prevention.
DADT repeal, environmental legislation, comprehensive immigration reform, election machine paper trails, repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, campaign financing, Social Security: you name it, the list goes on.
The economy may be the most important issue for a vast number of Americans, but all these other issues are important to the Americans affected by them.
Go to the nonpartisan Project Vote Smart (www.votesmart.org). He answered items in all 13 areas and gained a 100 percent rating for his forthcoming attitude.
You can check Mr. Sipprelle’s responses (or lack of them) as well.
So others may vote against the evil Rush Holt twin. But with a great deal of enthusiasm, I will cast my ballot for the good Rush Holt twin, the student of science and professional scientist of 33 years who has represented Americans of this district and nation so well for the past 12 years.
Guy Butterworth Cranbury
Goodwin against health care
To the editor:
I recently saw a Goodwin commercial, and his wife was next to him who said, "I don’t like Linda Greenstein."
Well, here’s why I like Linda!
Goodwin voted against women’s health care, As a breast cancer survivor, I would not be here to tell all women that he is not for us!
He is against early breast cancer detection and other tests that put women at risk. How can any woman vote for anyone who thinks this way?
Roberta Mahler Monroe Township
Holt has worked hard for nation
To the editor:
For a dozen years, Rep. Rush Holt has provided exemplary service to residents of New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District.
He has sponsored legislation to improve national transit security and to provide better health care for veterans returning from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Holt voted to pass much-needed reforms of our nation’s financial and health care systems. He helped bring $52 million to Rutgers University for research and development that will create jobs and improve infrastructure in Central Jersey.
What Central Jersey voters should consider – and what Republican Congressional candidate Scott Sipprelle hopes they ignore – are the consistently high grades Holt receives from TheMiddleClass.org, a website that examines Congress’ effectiveness in representing the middle class.
Rep. Holt has worked hard to support both his constituents and our nation as a whole. I hope residents of the 12th will overlook Sipprelle’s negative ads and re-elect Rep. Holt on Election Day.
Eddie Konczal Monroe Township
Throw out people who control D.C.
To the editor:
It is time to help put an end to the irresponsible behavior of Congress by electing Scott Sipprelle as our congressman.
Rep. Holt has been in Congress for 12 years, and we can see the results of his votes.
We have a government that spends $7 million a minute. We have a national debt of $13 trillion programmed to grow at a rate of a trillion dollars a year for the next 10 years.
We have a government of elites earning 50 percent more than the people who pay them. We have spent nearly a trillion dollars on stimulus programs that stimulated nothing except the growth of government.
We have a health-care bill designed to control your life rather than your health. We have a Congress absolutely controlled by Democrats that won’t pass a budget or appropriations bills or address the massive tax increases scheduled to occur in three short months until after the election.
We have businesses that won’t hire or expand because of the uncertainty caused by this reckless Congress. And we have a Congressman that supports all of this.
Voting to send Rush Holt back to Congress is to approve his votes and to encourage more of the same. A vote for Scott Sipprelle is a vote for less spending and a smaller, less-intrusive government.
Join with millions of people across the country and throw out the people that now control Washington. The futures of our children and grandchildren depend on it.
Jack A. Frohbieter Cranbury
Holt is clear choice
To the editor:
Every eligible voter in New Jersey’s 12th Congressional District needs to vote Nov. 2 for the person who will best represent us in Washington.
Our choice is between two men: Congressman Rush Holt and Republican challenger Scott Sipprelle.
It is a privilege and our duty to be responsible citizens and vote. Not voting at all is not an acceptable choice.
We all need to consider the qualifications and experience of the candidates and vote for the person who we believe will best represent us on the major issues. There are sharp differences between the candidates.
Rush Holt has done an outstanding job and is respected by members of both parties for his accomplishments and thoughtful approach to the issues facing our nation. He is a brilliant scientist who has worked as a college teacher, as an arms control expert and as assistant director of the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, researching alternative energy.
He serves on several House committees: Education and Labor, Natural Resources and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and was appointed chairman of the newly created Select Intelligence Oversight Panel.
He has been a national leader on election reform, gaining bipartisan support for his bill to assure honest elections. He is an outspoken proponent of legislation ensuring protection of individual rights, job creation and fair labor laws, military personnel support, veterans health care, student aid for post secondary education, universal health care and more.
Mr. Sipprelle is a wealthy Republican hedge fund manager whose entire career has been spent in the world of finance. Hedge funds are investment companies used by wealthy companies, institutions and individuals. They use high-risk investment techniques in an effort to make extraordinary capital gains and require high minimum investments, charge a management fee and collect a percent of the profits.
By law, a hedge fund cannot have more than 100 clients. Mr. Sipprelle has founded two funds. He is spending his own millions and those of undisclosed outside Republican millionaires, possibly billionaires, whose main interest is in preserving Republican tax cuts for the wealthy and lack of adequate regulation of their businesses.
They are trying to buy our votes by funding ads that lie not only about Congressman Holt’s record of service to his constituency, but also about his work ethic and honesty. This is unacceptable behavior.
We cannot afford to put our future in the hands of this unqualified, unprincipled man and his supporters.
The choice is clear. We need to vote for Rush Holt so that he can continue to represent us.
Jane Snyder Kendall Park
Tax appeals curb revenues
To the editor:
One of my concerns for Cranbury in the near future is reduced tax revenues due to commercial tax appeals.
A mixed use project near the intersection of Cranbury – South River Road and Prospect Plains Road – was approved by the zoning board recently and will produce good ratables when completed. A hotel project is being heard by the zoning board now.
There are two contiguous properties bound by South Main Street, Old Trenton Road and Old Cranbury Road that offer another possibility. The properties are owned by the Hagerty and Cheney families and together total approximately 6 1/2 acres. These properties are zoned for small office buildings, and, at present, every office park in town has vacancies.
If these properties were given a permitted use for which there is a demand, they could be repurposed and produce very good ratables for our town.
The Planning Board is reexamining our Master Plan this year. I urge them to carefully consider these properties.
I am opposed to rezoning them for residential purposes, but I believe the Planning Board, in consultation with the property owners and the residents of Cranbury, can find a use that will benefit the owners and our town.
Glenn Johnson Cranbury
Sipprelle plans to boost economy
To the editor:
Scott Sipprelle is running for U.S. Congress in the 12th District, and I believe that he is a candidate that Republicans, Democrats and Independents can all support.
With so many challenges currently facing our country, we are fortunate to have a candidate with integrity, intelligence and a willingness to work with people of differing opinions.
Scott has well-thought-out and sensible positions on many issues, but the primary theme of his campaign is job creation and reinvigorating our economy. His ideas on these issues are based on extensive experience.
Scott has helped new startup companies and established small businesses in the Princeton area to create many new job opportunities. Through charitable efforts, he has helped to fund initiatives to train individuals to take advantage of these opportunities in order to develop their own financial independence.
While I don’t agree with him on every issue, his opinions are well-informed and based on a genuine desire to do what is best for our country rather than any particular interest group.
Unfortunately, politicians of both parties far too often practice the politics of obstruction. They are content to block the initiatives of the other party rather than trying to find realistic compromises that will benefit our country.
Scott has shown the independence and objectivity to support good ideas and people regardless of their party affiliation.
I am sure that political experience has some value in Congress. However, with elections every two years, concerns about getting re-elected prevent some representatives from realistically addressing our most difficult problems. Basing decisions on political job security is not a recipe for good government.
Scott favors term limits and has pledged to run for only three terms in Congress.
I’ve known Scott for five years. In that time, I’ve seen first hand his intelligence, integrity, leadership skills and work ethic. I have no doubt that he will make an excellent Congressman.
I hope that you will consider learning more about his campaign and join me in supporting him on Nov. 2.
Bruce Keyser Cranbury
Wetlands provide habitat, filtering
To the editor:
Although the Cranbury Planning Board denied them key waivers for importing contaminated fill to support their 2.8 million-square-foot warehouse proposal, Cranbury Brick Yard LLC is asking the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection for permission to clear-cut extensive acres of valuable forest habitat.
In addition, they are asking the DEP to allow them to reduce the amount of wetlands restoration they are required to construct under the state’s wetlands laws.
The DEP has determined the wetlands on the proposed warehouse site are valuable as habitat for imperiled species. The developer’s own reports indicate they have observed threatened species on the very same area they are proposing to cut down.
In addition to providing habitat, the wetlands on the proposed development site filter pollutants and keep them from reaching the Millstone River, which is a drinking water source for hundreds of thousands of people in central New Jersey. Wetlands also act as sponges and help protect against flooding.
In an attempt to reduce their obligations under state law, the developer is asking the DEP to reduce by half their obligation to mitigate for the destruction of wetlands. Furthermore, Cranbury Brick Yard LLC is asking the DEP to allow them to compensate for their wetlands destruction by clear-cutting mature forest and constructing wetlands in the forests’ place.
State law prohibits the clearing of an "already ecologically valuable natural community" such as "a forested habitat" to prepare an area for the mitigation of another ecologically valuable natural community that is being destroyed.
We know the site is complicated and that part of the area was used for manufacturing munitions until 1954. In 1957, the buildings were demolished, and since then, expansive wetlands and mature forests have grown.
The developer was aware of the value of the wetlands before they bought the property. The developer should be required to comply with state law. They should not be permitted to destroy valuable wetlands, should be required to fully restore any of the wetlands they have cleared and should be prohibited from clear-cutting mature forest to restore wetlands.
Jennifer Coffey policy director Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association Hopewell Township
Two candidates up for job
To the editor:
Cranbury neighbors, please join me in supporting Dan Mulligan and Art Hasselbach for Township Committee on Tuesday, Nov. 2.
Dan offers a fresh perspective and has been an active and vocal participant in various township committee meetings and board meetings. He has demonstrated his commitment to act as a true liaison to the townspeople.
Art offers experience gained in many capacities as a public servant for several years. His efforts have contributed to numerous accomplishments for Cranbury.
Mulligan and Hasselbach will bring a shared commitment to fiscal responsibility and discipline.
The Township Committee must preserve our historic town, manage its growth and plan for Cranbury’s future all the while maintaining a balanced budget without creating additional tax burdens.
It’s a tall order. Dan Mulligan and Art Hasselbach are up for the job.
Susan Mavoides Cranbury
How candidates view Medicare
To the editor:
As a registered New Jersey voter, I am happy to see that AARP has published a voter guide on several issues so I can find out where my candidates stand.
As an older person on Medicare, I am particularly concerned about being able to see my own doctor because many doctors have stopped accepting Medicare patients. Due to an imperfect payment structure, doctors who treat Medicare patients are facing pay cuts, and this is something that must be addressed.
I am looking to Congress to work on this and work on this quickly. We need a real solution to this problem so that our quality of care doesn’t suffer and so that Medicare health consumers won’t be cut off from the doctors they know and who know them.
This is an important part of being an active patient – being familiar and comfortable with one’s provider.
Older patients who worked all their lives to earn the right to benefit from Medicare should not lose the peace of mind that comes from staying with one’s own doctor.
If you want to see where your candidate stands on this issue, go to www.aarp.org/yourvote.
Marcia DuHart AARP outreach volunteer Monroe Township
Support no one currently in office
To the editor:
I will be supporting no one in office at the present time on Election Day because no one in office has, to this day, addressed the financial disaster the Jamesburg School District suffered last year when statewide cuts were made, arbitrarily, without the slightest inclination of the devastation we would incur.
While I appreciate the governor’s attempt to "fix" New Jersey, and the complete lack of fiscal responsibility in government, there was no attempt to realize the ramifications this would have on a small town such as Jamesburg. To unilaterally cut across the board blindly was more irresponsible than years past in overspending.
Jamesburg has always tried to provide an excellent education on a very small budget. As a Board of Education member in Jamesburg for 15 years and the rep to Monroe Board for 14 years, I can tell you that is no easy task when we are never given our fair share of state aid as a town with very little ratables to offset the tax base.
We work very closely with Monroe Township Board of Education, superintendent, assistant superintendent, staff and business administrator to align the curriculum as much as we can.
Monroe has a $110 million budget. Jamesburg has a $11 million budget.
It is a very involved process, and we have been extremely diligent trying to keep our children on track so they are on the same page when they get to Monroe.
I can assure you we have been successful as I have three children who have gone through the Jamesburg school system and onto Monroe High School, and one, to this point, on to college, and the majority of children have flourished at Monroe in every area.
Our kids do without, year after year. I don’t see Mark Zuckerberg going on Oprah with our governor, giving us a dime. While I appreciate his donation to Newark, 100 million dollars, that district, and several similar to it, get an enormous amount of funding from the state/federal government as an Abbott District and receive several grants from the large businesses in the area.
The inequity in the disbursement of state aid to school districts seems to be a continuing area of contention that, again, no politician is willing to take on, and Jamesburg and small districts like it pay the consequences.
I have written to every person in office, and I have heard from no one. Not one person came to one board meeting when Jamesburg had to make the devastating decision to cut sports, art, music, computers and library just to keep the taxes from increasing 23 cents, which is astronomical in any town.
It was still voted down by the taxpayers, and the town council still cut more at their discretion.
I did not support this decision. I will sacrifice somewhere else, not on education.
So, as November draws near, and our New Jersey representatives are running, I urge you also to support no one in office at the present as no one is clearly supporting our children’s educational needs.
Patrice Faraone Jamesburg
