Hopewell parking issues

By: centraljersey.com
I am responding to the recent letter to the editor: "Seminary parking."
The author of the letter, while properly suggesting the formulation of a long- term parking plan/strategy for the borough, appears to be unaware of our continuing efforts surrounding the issue of public parking in the borough. It is my hope that this response will provide a better understanding of steps-to-date, as well as short- and long-term goals to address the increasing parking concerns, on Seminary Avenue and elsewhere in the borough.
I am a member of the Hopewell Borough Council and chairman of the Parking Subcommittee charged with recommending an updated parking policy/plan for the municipality in light of our current and future parking challenges.
As many know, Hopewell Borough is, by design, a "walk to" community and as such there will always be structural challenges to providing a "drive to" solution that work for everyone all the time.
Many studies have already documented the traffic and parking patterns for Hopewell Borough and officials have repeatedly discussed these issues in various public forums.
As the Hopewell Borough business community expands and prospers, we need to responsibly accommodate that growth. The Parking Subcommittee recognizes this and has assembled to both identify existing/anticipated issues and identify proper solutions. We have made good progress. One of our next steps is to conduct a public meeting to listen to the concerns and suggestions of the community. That meeting will be scheduled and announced in the coming weeks.
Once that solicitation is concluded, we plan to present our findings to both the Hopewell Borough Council and the Planning Board for additional comment and/or action.
With particular reference to Seminary Avenue, in response to expressed concerns by residents through public testimony, council lifted the then two-hour parking restriction from Broad Street to Columbia Avenue last summer, and stated its intent to monitor the effectiveness of that decision in the ensuing months.
According to the testimony, the two-hour restriction was problematic for residents, while merchants tended to favor the parking limits. During council meetings in December and January, once the repeal was tested for a few months, additional public testimony was taken and council has listened. It has not postponed a solution to the Seminary parking issue, as has been alleged.
On Jan. 3, we introduced an ordinance to restore two-hour parking to the east side of Seminary Avenue and a public hearing on that ordinance is scheduled for Feb. 7. If the ordinance is adopted, it would take effect immediately and hopefully relieve some of the Seminary parking pressure.
In the meantime, and until the ordinance is adopted, if it is, Mayor Paul Anzano has asked the merchants to tolerate the current unrestricted parking policy.
Ordinances do take time to enact, and the process is necessary to be fair to all parties involved. To the author of the letter and for others who are not able to attend our council meetings, I hope this explanation sets the record straight regarding our efforts to work with the people of Hopewell in an honest and straightforward manner. I would also suggest that if you have a concern, please feel free to contact any council member or attend a council meeting. All are welcome.
Robert Lewis Hopewell Borough Council
‘Offensive and unconstitutional’
To the editor:
In a recent edition of the Hopewell Valley News there was a front-page story with the headline, "School district could pick up $179,872 in prep tuition fees." I don’t see this ever happening.
The article mentions two bills, one in the state Senate (S-426) and one in the state Assembly (A-3463) that would, if passed, compel tax-free educational organizations that meet certain criteria to make payments equal to what I call a "Contrived Tuition Obligation" or CTO for each faculty child that resides on tax-free land (like on-campus faculty housing) and is enrolled in the local public school system.
The CTO is calculated by dividing the local school district budget by the number of students enrolled on Oct. 15 of a school year, resulting in a number that, in the minds of some, equates to the actual cost of educating an individual child in that district. (I call this a contrived number because if you add or subtract any number of students from the district rolls, the resulting cost increase or savings will in no way equal the corresponding CTO dollar amount.)
These bills have been languishing in the Senate/Assembly since January 2010 and I see no reason to ever expect them to be passed. They violate the New Jersey State Constitution, specifically Section VIII, Article IV, paragraph 1, which reads: "The Legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a thorough and efficient system of free public schools for the instruction of all the children in the state of New Jersey between the ages of five and eighteen years."
By demanding a CTO payment from tax-exempt organizations for each student they send to the state-mandated free public school system, Sen. Shirley Turner is creating a "quid pro quo" relationship between property tax payments and public education. If you don’t pay property taxes, you have to pay a CTO payment for each student you send to the public schools. You may be thinking "stick it to the fat cats" or "they can afford it," but take this to its logical conclusion. What about households that send a number of children to the public schools, but their property taxes only cover a fraction of the CTO cost of educating all their children. Should those families be expected to pay additional fees to cover the actual cost of the education provided to them? What about households that send no children to the public schools? Should they get a discount on their property taxes since their CTO is less than they would otherwise pay in property taxes?
Either Sen. Turner doesn’t understand the state Constitution’s requirement that the state is to provide a free education for all OR she was simply pandering to supporters that don’t understand the state Constitution. Either way, the idea of charging a per-student fee to some residents, while offering the same education to others for free is offensive and unconstitutional.
Ken Hansen Hopewell Township
Swanson, Moore deserve applause
To the editor:
The Hopewell Township Planning Board will be starting the new year without two of its most valuable members, Russ Swanson and Billie Moore.
I had the privilege of serving on the Planning Board for the last two years, giving me an appreciation for not just their efforts, but what it takes to contribute to the process in a meaningful way. It is good to be diligent, intelligent, and well-motivated, but to guide the process in a way that fulfills the mandate of the Planning Board – that is, to ensure that all development is consistent with the guidelines of the Land Use Law and the Master Plan – requires much more. It requires both the professional expertise to understand testimony presented to the board, the understanding of what is in the purview of the board, and the historical context in which the application is being made. Institutional memory on the part of the board members is a huge advantage for the township, but now the majority of the members on the board will have only one to two years’ experience.
Mr. Swanson is an accomplished and successful architect who has shepherded large development projects from inception to completion. This depth of experience gives great weight to his contribution to the board. Russ served on the Planning Board for nine years, three of which were as vice chairman, one as chairman of the board. Meetings that Russ chaired all had the same qualities – attention to detail in preparation, incisive questioning, and fairness in letting opinions be heard from all quarters. Consensus-building requires recognition of disparate points of views, but ultimately finds the common ground. The fact that virtually all votes of the Planning Board have been unanimous under the leadership of Mr. Swanson speak to his commitment to make decisions that not only stand the test of time, but meet a legal standard which protects the township from legal challenges from all sides.
Ms. Moore, a resident of Hopewell Valley since 1966, has been a successful realtor for more than 25 years. She served on the Master Plan Advisory Committee from its inception in 1999 for five years, and served as chairman for one year. She was on the Planning Board for a total of 13 years, first serving in 1975. The length of her commitment is matched by the depth of her commitment to keep Hopewell Town ship’s character intact. Hopewell Township has avoided the fate of West Windsor and neighboring towns by enacting downzoning, which has preserved our rural character and withstood all legal challenges.
Russ and Billie were always prepared, rarely missed a meeting, and brought a level of knowledge to the process that balanced the paid expertise and power of the development team. Their reappointment to the board would have been a continued asset. We in the township have benefited from their work, and for that they are owed a round of applause for a job so well done.
Janet Krommes Titusville
Not responsible leadership
To the editor:
Following David Sandahl’s Guest Opinion in the Jan. 6 edition and the school articles quoting Superintendent Thomas Smith, I hear two competent people with workable ideas. I attended the consolidation meeting referred to by Mr. Sandahl. He is correct, all three mayors agreed to proceed with studying consolidation of services. Nothing happened. This is not responsible leadership.
As a homeowner/taxpayer for 40 years in Hopewell Township, I’ve heard promises over and over and then nothing, or very little happens. Are the three mayors so clueless that they think out-of-control property taxes will just be accepted by residents. I don’t think so! We need leadership that is effective and not just "business as usual." It won’t work any longer.
Reading Superintendent Smith’s comments about what must be done to reduce costs of the school system, I give him praise for setting it out early in the year. Because teacher salaries and health insurance benefits are the highest line items in the school budget, they must be addressed sooner rather than later. I go along with Gov. Chris Christie’s comment to the teacher who was complaining about having to pay a few dollars more for health benefits: If you don’t like it here, go elsewhere. While it sounds cruel to some; it is realistic. Why keep talking about reducing property taxes and then not handling the items that cause the high rates?
Perhaps residents who have moved into this township for it’s well-reputed school system, have paid high prices for their homes (except those who took advantage of recent falling values) and hence don’t mind paying high property taxes. In good times when the economy is flourishing, employment is high, salaries growing each year and there’s lots of discretionary household revenue, we can have lots of "extras" in our schools and other areas of spending. That’s not the situation for at least three years and things are not getting better any time soon. Hence we need to trim the "extras" in our school system and elsewhere.
Tough love is needed by our leaders who are responsible for the budgets. Since I live in the township, it is our new Mayor Jim Burd whom I address here to be the leader in getting the job done once and for all!
Superintendent Smith’s comments in recent articles written by John Tredrea are encouraging and realistic. Yes, it is early in the school budget process, but it is gratifying the HVN printed his thoughts.. I implore the HVN to have Mr. Tredrea regularly interview other township officials on the progress they are making toward reducing property taxes. We need stand-up leaders who are not afraid of doing what is right and just and to fulfill promises to the residents. It takes gutsy leadership to trim budgets to bring down property taxes and I sure wish the HVN would print each week on the front page an interview with a township official as to what he/she is doing to reduce property taxes.
While I realize that not every resident taxpayer feels property taxes are too high in this township, to them I say, you can always send an extra check to the township or you can pay individually for special desired services, sports, etc. That is your choice and all resident taxpayers should not be burdened with ever-increasing property taxes for redundant services, and other than the basic necessities in running a township.
I want the best for our students, seniors, etc., but I am realistic. These are trying times and our leaders must do their jobs and not shy away from difficult decisions.
I welcome responses: [email protected].
Maryann Perkins Hopewell Township
Sewer alternatives need evaluation
To the editor:
Bringing public water and sewers to various locations in Hopewell Township will alleviate the problems that many homeowners and businesses have been experiencing for years. They no longer will need to tolerate contaminated well water or failed septic systems.
But many of us know that fixing one problem can result in the creation of a new problem. Sometimes the new problem that is caused can be significantly greater than the problem that was fixed. I’m not sure that our Ttwnship officials are aware of these unintended consequences.
Public water and sewers are "magnets" for dense development. Dense development, in turn, leads to more traffic, more municipal services, more children to overburden our school system, and more loss of farms and forests.
There are indeed alternatives to public water and sewers. These include community wells and community septic systems to serve only those existing homeowners and businesses in need of relief. While these alternatives are typically more costly than the regional water and sewer systems, they wouldn’t have the financial and societal impacts to the remaining homeowners and businesses that can continue to rely on private wells and septic systems.
Those served by the new community systems would also not have to worry about a Walmart being built up the street from them or concern themselves about a housing subdivision on a nearby farm.
Robert Kecskes Hopewell Township
Lions say thanks
To the editor:
The Lions Club of Hopewell Valley thanks all who supported its annual fundraiser during our pre-Christmas fund drive. Our members were greeted very warmly as we visited many of the homes in the Hopewell Valley, and reached out to friends and neighbors, with items for sale. As a result, we will once again be able to carry on our commitment to serving the people of the Hopewell Valley, which we have since 1951.
Helen Keller challenged the Lions to be "Knights of the Blind" many years ago. As a result, sight preservation has been the centerpiece of many of our programs. However, support for youth, for post hospital rehab needs, libraries, for seniors, and for community volunteers have been added to work we support. Although our members are dedicated to the Lions core motto, "We Serve," we enjoyed the enthusiastic and friendly reception we received as we called on our friends and neighbors to help us during this time.
George Sciarrotta, president David Gore, Fund Drive chairman Carl Swanson, director