By Victoria Hurley-Schubert, Staff Writer
Opinions on consolidation by residents were split between those in favor and those against at a joint meeting of the governing bodies of Princeton Borough and Princeton Township on Tuesday night.
However, except for Councilman David Goldfarb, the rest of the members of the two bodies expressed support for the move.
One of the main topics discussed was the way voters in the borough and township vote.
”It seems to be common sense if you go from two police departments to one, from two public works to one, two government bureaucracies to one and all these consolidated agencies reporting to one government instead of two it’s a no-brainer if we as a community can’t save money under these circumstances, we should all pack it in,” said Dan Preston of Princeton Township.
To address concerns that borough voters would be outvoted 2 to 1 by township voters, Mr. Preston, president of the Princeton Community Democratic Organization, said there is no difference in the way borough and township voters vote and the percentages were the same in 2009 and 2010 in both municipalities.
”In campaigns, I’ve knocked on doors in both the borough and township” and the people and attitudes are the same, he said.
”I don’t care which side of the line I’m on. People in this community are very like one another,” he said.
Borough resident Rob Whiteside had the opposite opinion. He said borough voters tend to vote down the school budgets whereas the township tends to pass them, so in a combined municipality the township votes would override the borough’s.
Anne Waldron Neumann, a borough resident against consolidation, said the votes of the Township Committee differ from those of Borough Council on issues that affect both municipalities.
Garbage and brush collections were subjects of discussion.
Ken Fields, a borough resident, was unhappy with the idea of differing levels of service drawn on the current municipal boundaries. He alleged this could be a form of discrimination in a combined municipality.
The downtown area will maintain its current level of service, “but (there will be) differing levels of service within the municipality, depending upon where you live,” said Councilman David Goldfarb.
Borough resident Kate Warren, who is spokesperson for the Preserve Our Historic Borough anti-consolidation group, said the JSSCC dismissed the status quo as an option, so therefore the study was flawed. She also questioned the savings and transition costs and the impact of new ratables.
Others say the onus of whatever happens will be on the shoulders of the voters.
”The responsibility to make sure this works well, assuming it is approved, rests with us,” said Van Williams, borough resident, calling the rationale fundamentally sound. “We will be the ones to elect the officials. We will be the ones who take this blueprint and hold those elected officials accountable.”
Mr. Williams also posed the question if the town had not formed two municipalities in the 1890s, would anyone ever consider dividing it?
”We are one community,” he said.
Sandra Persichetti, township resident and executive director of Princeton Community Housing, pointed out that municipal taxes are not a significant portion of a resident’s tax bill — about 25 percent — so “it’s not going to be a significant number. I think we need to put aside the money part of this and think about just the efficiencies.”
Speaking out in favor of consolidation for the first time, Councilwoman Jo Butler pointed to how much time and money the two municipalities spend on the “dirty little secret” of legal fees for all the shared services, going so far as taking legal action against each other.
”We all talk a good game about shared services and they are the right thing to do for our community and largely, they work,” she said. “But what you don’t see behind the scenes is the incredible amount of energy and manpower required to make it work and there always is a little bit of tension between the agencies that report to the borough versus the ones that report to the township. You saw it with the swimming pool. It’s no accident the votes against it came from the borough because the Rec Department falls under the township.”
Borough resident Jim Firestone likes the check and balance system that exists between the two municipalities. He also likes that the Borough Council holds Princeton University accountable for its development, whereas he isn’t so sure about the township.
Alain Hegedus of the borough said consolidation is irreversible and voters need to be careful not to destroy something that is “pretty good.”
Ms. Butler and Township Deputy Mayor Sue Nemeth both said a proposed $3.2 million annual savings is nothing to sneeze at and put it into perspective with a pool analogy: Two years of $3.2 million savings would pay for the new Community Park Pool.
Ms. Nemeth also posed the question if the university offered a $10 million voluntary payment, or the amount of savings in about three years, would the voters turn it down?
The entire meeting is available on www.princetontv.org.
