Silence sirens in Cranbury forever

By: centraljersey.com
You kindly published a letter from me in The Cranbury Press some weeks ago concerning the noise pollution created by the Fire Department and First Aid Squads’ sirens, and now the township have given me two further reasons why it is necessary to continue with the sirens.
Sirens, which present a health hazard, cause loss of productivity and negatively affect house values for those houses within earshot of those annoying "whoops."
Although both squads use pagers with vibrators at times when the sirens are now silenced, I’ve been told that the sirens are necessary at certain times during the day since it is hard to recruit volunteers unless sirens are used.
I find this to be a totally implausible argument since I’m sure many potential volunteers would prefer not to be responsible for the ghastly noise and would much prefer to be working for organizations, which go about their splendid business with as little disruption to the tranquility of Cranbury as possible.
I am also told that another reason for the need for sirens is to warn the residents of Cranbury of the impending passage of firetrucks and ambulances. Since I believe that the firetrucks sound their horns and flash lights – the latter also actioned by the ambulances – why is it necessary to give advance warning to an event that is announced by the vehicles themselves?
After all, not all emergency vehicles head down Main Street when called out, and the argument that school kids walking to school have to be given advance notice of the possible arrival of the vehicles is very specious. Crossing guards and a policeman are on duty on Main Street at the start and end of the school day, and school children do not walk in the street except at the relevant crossing on Main Street, which is very well controlled and extremely safe.
At the same time, the emergency vehicles are allowed through by the police with the minimum of delay should these vehicles be heading past the junction for the school at the relevant school times.
I think it’s also fair to say that the vast majority of drivers will always pull over when they see the firetruck and/or ambulance in their rear view mirrors – as they do in other communities, which no longer pollute the environment with this dreadful noise which, at 105 decibels, is way higher that the recommended state daily maximum of 65.
And the good citizens of Cranbury are not known for walking in the street when there are excellent sidewalks, and, therefore, they do not impede the progress of the emergency vehicles.
I still find it quite bizarre that the volunteer nature of the squads is being used as a reason for the retention of the sirens when pagers with vibrators are used at times of siren silence and are used 24/7 by all the other volunteer squads in local communities who dispensed with sirens some years ago.
It would appear to me that it’s still a case of "We’ve always done it this way, and we’re not going to change," especially when this complaint is coming from a resident who has only been in Cranbury for five months and is considered by both squads to not know what he’s talking about.
A number of residents have expressed support for my argument, and the valid reasons for retaining the sirens seem to be dwindling by the day. It’s starting to look as if it all boils down to some sort of perverse machoism where the excellent long-term volunteers want the villagers to know when they are being called out.
Presumably, those volunteers called out at night need to sleep by day, which must be difficult when there is another siren attack while they sleep in daytime, and, as I said at the last township meeting, it would be very sad and ironical if the First Aid siren caused a heart attack to someone walking past the siren when it started up with its loathsome noise.
After all, the First Aid Squad is there to go to the aid of the infirm and not to cause infirmity. And, only recently, the siren was sounded at 12:15 a.m. in the middle of the night.
If the squads are looking for more volunteers and more contributions, an announcement that the sirens are to be silenced forever would probably be very beneficial in both areas. A widespread publicity campaign announcing the termination of the sirens – at the same time requesting greater contributions and more volunteers – would silence the complaints of many of the residents, and, at the same time, hopefully, bringing in more funds and volunteers.
Volunteers who can go about their excellent work knowing that they are not responsible for the ghastly noise pollution that we’re now having to endure and volunteers who can be called out efficiently and quietly with the use of their pagers and vibrators at all times.
Surely a volunteer mowing the lawn with his music pods in his ears is far less likely to hear a siren than to feel his vibrator operate on his belt.
I implore the township to continue to consider this issue and, hopefully, decide to silence the sirens once and for all, at the same time instituting a massive drive for more volunteers in a new more peaceful environment.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the only "noise" we had to listen to in Cranbury was the delightful chiming of the Presbyterian church bells such as the soothing hymn and carol music that graced the evening air on New Year’s Eve?
Richard Moody Cranbury
Wants more Cranbury coverage
To the editor:
I am dismayed at how little news or coverage of events that take place in Cranbury is being reported in the newspaper called The Cranbury Press.
Surrounding communities, especially Monroe Township, seem to have much more coverage of local news.
Perhaps not enough reporters are being assigned to cover events in our town. I doubt Cranbury has less happening locally than in years past.
I hope readers who see this letter might be prompted to report local activities so those of us who live here will be able to discover what actually is going on.
Joan Freeman Cranbury
New councilman claims mea culpa
To the editor:
On Monday night, I was sworn in as a member of the Cranbury Township Committee.
It is hard for me to believe that I have already done something that I must clarify.
When it came time to offer nominations for mayor, Win Cody’s name was placed in nomination and seconded. I nominated David Cook. Dave and I anticipated that his nomination would die for lack of a second, and he and I would join our Republican colleagues in voting for Win.
But Dave’s nomination was seconded unexpectedly. At this point, a roll-call vote was taken on Win’s nomination.
I voted no on the assumption that I would have an opportunity later to cast a vote for Dave. But when the first name voted on attracts a majority of the votes, he is declared the winner, and the second name placed in nomination is not called up for a vote.
In short, my lack of knowledge of Robert’s Rules of Order left me unable to extricate myself from an unfamiliar situation, and I flubbed my only chance to make Win’s election as mayor unanimous.
I want to explain what happened and why because the Township Committee’s reorganization meeting was well attended, and I don’t want anyone to think that my vote was intended as an affront to Win.
He graciously consulted with Dave Cook and me on the mayor’s appointments to the boards and commissions. He didn’t have to do that, because those appointments are his prerogative.
I wish Win well during his term as mayor, and I look forward to working with him and the other members of the Township Committee.
Glenn Johnson Cranbury