PRINCETON: Mayoral matters

Dinky, consolidation on the table

By Victoria Hurley-Schubert, Staff Writer
   Arts and transit, consolidation and revaluation were topics of discussion for the two borough mayoral candidates when they met for an editorial board meeting at The Princeton Packet last week.
   The first issue Borough Councilman David Goldfarb and challenger Yina Moore tackled was Princeton University’s proposed arts and transit plans.
   Mr. Goldfarb did discuss the issue, despite being employed by Drinker, Biddle & Reath, who is representing the university. He has recused himself from any discussion on the council.
   Ms. Moore, a member of the Planning Board, said she was “hesitant about overstating an opinion “because the applications will come before the board should the university choose to move forward.”
   Ms. Moore said the community has expressed concern regarding the plan and if the location is the best spot for the project. She also said there has been support for the arts in general.
   ”I’m still considering whether that’s the best location from a planning perspective,” she said. “How that area is a gateway to the community and how it so should be interpreted or read, whether it’s an entrance to the university or the community and what those uses may be, whether they are strictly university served or whether they are open to the community.”
   An alumna of the university, she said she would not let that influence her.
   ”I expect to hold it to the highest standard, possibly even higher standards since they are so highly regarded,” said Ms. Moore.
   From his recusal, Mr. Goldfarb said he is learning about the issue from the public’s point of view, which is interesting to him as a sitting municipal official.
   ”When development takes place on the edge of the campus … we have the right to define the boundaries of the campus and to send the right kind of message of where the university stops and the town begins and to get appropriate uses in the border area.”
   he also said moving the Dinky is “inconsistent with the community’s needs and goals and it is really not acceptable,” although it is a separate issue from the proposal.
   ”I’m not at all enthusiastic about the current proposal because it involves moving the Dinky and because there are big, looming institutional buildings in an area that should be read as an entrance to the Princeton community, to the downtown.”
   When asked if his role with his employer would impact his role as mayor, Mr. Goldfarb said when his employer is involved with business with the borough, he “simply cannot be involved,” but doesn’t see it being too big of an issue because his conflicts would be fewer than previous mayors, some of whom were married to university employees.
   If Mr. Goldfarb were to become conflicted on a particular issue, the council president would take over.
   He said his candidacy is also being reviewed at his employer.
   ”The outcome of that discussion is not clear,” he said. “Their ethical constraints are being discussed and we’ll see how that plays out.”
   When asked how they would have handled the whole arts and transit situation, both agreed they would have had a more public process.
   Ms. Moore said she would have had the university come to formal action in front of one of the municipal bodies sooner rather than later.
   Mr. Goldfarb would have had residents express their concerns in public forums and get involved earlier, rather than force an application, which requires a large financial commitment from the applicant. He would also have had the public involved at every stage and had each part discussed in public.
   To improve university relations, the candidates have slightly different ideas.
   Ms. Moore suggested the governing body meet regularly with university officials to discuss issues of concern to town and gown. She and other alumnae are concerned about the university’s relationship with the community.
   ”I spoke with many alumnae who are very disappointed in the kind of attitude the university displayed to the community. They were appalled,” she said. “I think through closer ties to more people than just a couple of administrators who happen to cross the street on an intermittent basis to get something.”
   Mr. Goldfarb said the relationship with the university has changed over the years, where the can no longer speak frankly about concerns and be sure the university is hearing the right message.
   ”I’m not sure meeting with the president is going to work, it might be an improvement,” he said, offering the idea of a public forum with the president of the university, who could answer questions from the council and residents. “We need to have a place where we can engage the university on issues of mutual concern … if we don’t find a way to do that, we’re going to engage our respective armies and battling it out and that’s not the most product way to do it.”
   The second big issue the candidates tackled was consolidation or shared services.
   Mr. Goldfarb serves on the Joint Shared Services Consolidation Commission, which is studying the issue to make recommendations to the governing bodies. He hasn’t made up his mind about consolidation, but is in favor of shared services, especially police.
   He said one thing the communities could do would be to combine and share police services, which at $2.1 million, is the biggest chunk of potential savings.
   ”The people who say ‘we must consolidate in order to achieve these savings,’ should realize that the biggest chunk is available without consolidation,” he said. “That said, there are savings that can only be achieved through consolidation, but there are also significant costs of combining.”
   Ms. Moore said part of her concern is the quality and perspective of the information being used and how the study is not looking forward and taking differing revenue bases into account. She is also concerned about the population differences.
   ”It is not an equal population coming together, so there is an imbalance.”
   Redevelopment of the hospital had the candidates Mr. Goldfarb expects to see the hospital executives before the governing body again because of the affordable housing requirement that was put in place when the parcel was rezoned.
   ”We are in for a very, very interesting discussion with the hospital because I assume they will come to us and ask us for some flexibility in terms of the affordable housing,” he said. “I want to hear what the hospital has to say.”
   Ms. Moore said she is looking to the hospital to revaluate the appraisal process they are using to value the land, which is what they are using to measure the proposals against.
   ”That perhaps was not realistic,” she said. “Developers coming in are not liking it.”
   The final issue for the mayoral candidates addressed was revaluation and if they agreed with the Joint Revaluation Commission and their finding that the revaluation was sound.
   Mr. Goldfarb said he agrees with the findings of the commission and he has personally intervened to prevent a lawsuit.
   Ms. Moore said she thinks the process began on an incorrect premise and the process itself should be changed.
   The primary will be held June 7.