Officials, township residents offer views
Mayors say yes
To the editor:
We 10 former mayors of Hopewell Township four Democrats and six Republicans endorse the recommendations contained in the Hopewell Township Charter Study Commission’s Final Report.
We urge the citizens of Hopewell Township to vote yes on Nov. 8 to adopt the mayor-council-administrator form of government.
Francesca A. Bartlett, Kathleen Bird,
William H. Cane, Jon R. Edwards,
Marylou M. Ferrara, John R. Hart Jr.,
Doris S. Hoyer, William A. Kampfer,
Peter J. Lunetta, Richard G. Van Noy
An underlying truth
To the editor:
Voters in Hopewell Township are being asked in a referendum to be held Nov. 8 to decide whether they want to change their municipal government from its current township committee form to an elected mayor-council-administrator form. I urge my fellow citizens to reject the change and vote no.
While I applaud the Charter Study Commission’s dedication and hard work which is reflected in their report of Aug. 1, 2005, I do not agree with their conclusion that change is necessary. It appears that their major consideration for the change is the option to directly elect a mayor. As a resident of the township for 36 years, I do not find the absence of such an option as having contributed in any way to mismanagement or poor government. Just the opposite. I think that overall the township has been well governed, regardless of party, who the mayor was or their length of service.
Growth has been planned and controlled. Open space has been reasonably preserved. Taxes at the municipal government level have not increased disproportionately.
There are though, some troubling aspects to the suggested changes. Said change would require complete replacement of the current government: i.e., all committee members, possibly a severe discontinuity. In addition, all township departments would have to be reorganized. An administrator would have to be hired. A new budget and administrative code would have to be written and adopted, all this within 90 days of taking office. Certainly a challenge, if not an impossibility. Second, only two other municipalities out of the 500 or so in the state have the recommended form. There is no positive track record that it would improve our township.
Adages are what they are because they have an underlying truth to them. As another correspondent to this section said last week, "If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it."
Bill Hymans
Hopewell Township
Three big reasons
To the editor:
The Hopewell Township Charter Study Commission (CSC) completed its study of the township’s current form of government and has recommended a change to the mayor-council-administrator (MCA) form. A review of the CSC’s Final Report outlines the compelling reasons that residents should vote for the change. I urge township voters to review the Final Report and/or attend the CSC’s public meeting today (Thursday, Oct 27) at 7 p.m. at the Municipal Building.
Of the several reasons for making the change to the MCA form, I am particularly moved by: A) separation of the executive and legislative powers; B) mayor will be elected by voters, not fellow committee members; and C) mayor’s term will be for four years (providing for longer term planning).
The population growth in Hopewell Township, increase in government involvement and complexities in daily life, and the speed with which things change all call for a structure provided by mayor-council-administrator.
I attended several of the early CSC meetings and was impressed by the homework and questioning of the interviewees by the CSC members that went into each session. The Final Report demonstrates the organization and thoroughness that provided them with the background to make this determination for change.
David Bower
Hopewell Township
Voters not prepared
To the editor:
As we Hopewell Township voters prepare to make a decision next week on a dramatic change in the way our municipality is governed, I am disturbed by how ill prepared we are to make that decision intelligently.
In advocating such a massive set of changes, one would expect the members of the Charter Study Commission, in its report and recommendation to voters, to provide a detailed analysis demonstrating that their proposal will reduce, rather than raise, the costs of Hopewell Township government and will, over the long run, increase government efficiency. Instead, the commission has offered vague assurances that their plan will, somehow, be better than what we have now and that it won’t cost all that much.
I am reminded of the mess that California voters often find themselves in after approving some bold initiative the ramifications of which have not been made clear to them and then getting hit between the eyes with major cuts in services and no corresponding reduction in taxes. The moral: be careful what you ask for, or vote for.
Do we face a similar result? Who knows? But we are being asked to accept a lot on faith. And for what? According to the charter commission report, for the privilege of being able to elect our mayor directly. The commissioners seem to have concluded that this is what township voters want and have fashioned a recommendation to fit. But they have made a very poor case for a structural upheaval of this magnitude simply to accommodate this issue. The "privilege," if that’s what it is, comes with significant unknown baggage attached.
Like most of the people I’ve talked to, I’m going to be careful what I vote for. This time around, I’m going to stick with the status quo which I find quite satisfactory and appropriate for a community of our size.
Jim Moore
Hopewell Township
Township alive and well
To the editor:
Attention Hopewell Township residents. We have always elected our mayor!!! Five committee persons are elected to govern our municipality and one of them will serve as our mayor.
Hopewell Township is alive and well. We presently are blessed with an outstanding administrator, Bruce Hillings. He is very energetic, qualified, thorough and completely people- friendly. The administrator office is open and helpful to all. He has filled a need we in Hopewell Township have had for several years.
Truly it is remarkable that this sitting Township Committee has accomplished so much during the past year. They have worked together to settled litigation over lawsuits that they inherited from previous committees. Those lawsuits have drained our spirits and severely challenged our finances. They have worked very diligently to hold taxes from rising any more than necessary. So many issues that were stalemated and pushed to a back burner are being dealt with in a positive way.
Our mayor has presented a very favorable face for Hopewell Township. She and all the committee members have enhanced Hopewell Township’s image in the Valley, county and state. We are again regarded as forward-thinking and positive.
On Election Day, please look beyond politics and hidden agendas and vote for persons who truly want to serve. It’s a very difficult commitment and requires a huge block of time, energy and love for this municipally.
This township committee has been remarkable and has served us well. Return the incumbents, Arlene Kemp and Vanessa Sandom to office. Allow Arlene, David, Judy, Mark and Vanessa to continue healing our community by making us again financially secure, Valley friendly and forward-moving. Vote no to a new form of government. A new form of government would bring chaos and a huge financial burden reflected in raised taxes.
The only change needed is citizen involvement where we live and support for those elected to serve.
Sophia Benson Pedersen
Hopewell Township
Change not
needed now
To the editor:
Last year when I was on the ballot for the Charter Study Commission (I lost) I thought it would be good for Hopewell Township to have a mayor who had more continuity in office. At the time we had had six mayors in seven years. Being an observer of our local government, it was plain to see that long-term projects were being passed from mayor to mayor and little was being accomplished. Two key examples were our wastewater planning and affordable housing obligations.
At the same time there was a considerable amount of mayhem going on between committee members (including the mayor). Also, a couple of years ago, the interested and participatory public were often treated derisively. This public included many of the township’s hard-working volunteers.
Apparently the township’s voters had enough of these shenanigans so things changed resulting in a more cooperative and capable government, albeit a mixture of two parties. Much has been accomplished during this past year. We have a wastewater plan and a comprehensive housing plan is close to completion.
Now the Charter Study Commission (CSC) has completed its task and is asking us to vote for a new type of government that has a strong mayor and six council members. Frankly I believe the type of government the CSC recommends gives the mayor too much power during a four-year term. The mayor could easily control the boards and committees that make the township government function (these are the hard working volunteers). For me this is just too much power that has the potential to produce negative results.
Another item that has not been resolved satisfactorily is the cost to the township for the change of government. This is not just the salaries and benefits that are involved but it includes the cost to upgrade our municipal ordinances. Many township taxpayers will no doubt find it difficult to afford this additional burden.
In his Guest Opinion articles in recent issues of the Hopewell Valley News, township Committeeman David Sandahl has provided a thoughtful and revealing review of the ramifications the new style of government will likely have on the township. Hopefully township residents will read the charter study report and reflect on Mr. Sandahl’s comments and decide to vote against this radical change in our local government.
Robert Beyer
Hopewell Township