In debate, GOP slams Greenstein for abstention on affordable housing vote

[Guest]

In debate, GOP slams Greenstein for abstention on affordable housing vote

By Matt Friedman, PolitickerNJ.com Reporter

WEST WINDSOR - The four major party assembly candidates in the 14th Legislative District met this morning for their first and only debate of the campaign season.

The forum, attended by about thirty senior citizens, was organized by two retiree groups and focused on property taxes, Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) regulations, senior issues and same sex marriage. Incumbents Linda Greenstein (D-Plainsboro) and Wayne DeAngelo (D-Hamilton) asserted their independence from Gov. Jon Corzine and the Democratic establishment, while Republicans Rob Calabro and Bill Harvey branded themselves as small business owners facing the same tax pinch as the rest of the district's residents.

All four candidates came out against at least some of the provisions of bill A-500, which barred municipalities from paying other towns to take on their affordable housing obligations. Greenstein abstained on the bill - a vote she characterized as a "soft no," while DeAngelo voted in favor of it. That led to one of the only contentious exchanges in an otherwise civil debate.

"Only three Democrats did not vote yes on that bill, and I was one of them," said Greenstein. "The meaning of that vote is no. You might say it's a soft ‘no,' but it's a ‘no.'"

Calabro, a restaurant and Italian food market owner from Hamilton, hammered Greenstein for not voting the way she really felt, and then criticized DeAngelo for voting yes.

"Abstain is undecided to me," he said. "We're here to make a decision, not to be a soft ‘no' or a soft ‘yes.'"

After the debate, Greenstein said that she did not vote no because she wanted to continue to have input on the issue, which might not have maintained if she voted no on a bill that was important to Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden).

All of the candidates acknowledged that this suburban, middle-class district has been hit particularly hard by COAH regulations. Under A500, Republicans noted, Cranbury Township - which has just about 1,000 housing units - is required to have 500 units of affordable housing.

DeAngelo, an assistant business manager with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, said that he still hoped to amend portions of the COAH bill regarding how new jobs in a town would affect its obligations. But he said he supported the bill because "New Jersey has some economic difficulties right now with affordable housing" and because "you want to be able to afford to live in the town where you work.

Harvey, an attorney with a private practice in Lawrenceville, said that amending COAH in a lame duck session was "too little, too late."

When asked plans on how they would lower taxes, Greenstein and DeAngelo noted that the legislature and governor had kept the rate of property tax growth to a lower level than in previous years, cut the state budget by $4 billion and revamped the school funding formula. Greenstein also brought up regionalization and shared services.

Calabro and Harvey offered many of the same platforms as their party's gubernatorial nominee, Chris Christie: electing an independent auditor, as opposed to the currently existing appointed comptroller; instituting initiative and referendum; and required a two-thirds supermajority in the legislature to pass new taxes.

All four said they were in favor of an across-the-board property tax freeze for seniors, though Greenstein, who noted that she was a prime sponsor of a bill that froze them for seniors under a certain income, added the caveat that it might be tough to do.

When asked whether they would support a bill that would recognize same sex marriage, the two Republicans said they would vote no while DeAngelo and Greenstein - who chairs the Judiciary Committee -- said they had not made up their minds.

Perhaps the most notable aspect of the debate was how low-key it was. About 30 seniors showed to the West Windsor council chambers to watch it. Although their campaign rhetoric has gotten heated at times - most notably when the Republicans compare the Democrats to Governor Corzine - they were mostly polite to each other. DeAngelo even congratulated Harvey, who was just married on Saturday, and Calabro on the birth of a new child two months ago.

This was supposed to be one of the top three competitive races in the state. It is one of only three split districts in the state (represented by state Sen. Bill Baroni (R-Hamilton, who is not up for reelection until 2011), and two years ago DeAngelo squeaked by Republican Tom Goodwin by less than 1,000 votes.

But Republicans' chances in the district seemed to diminish after their top recruits - Hamilton Councilwoman Kelly Yaede and former State Police Captain Jim McSorley - declined to run. They settled on Calabro and picked Harvey after Middlesex County Republicans - who typically pick one of the district's two candidates - chose 21-year-old Brian Hackett, a candidate Mercer County Republicans found unacceptable.

Fundraising numbers seem to indicate that the state Republican Party does not plan to compete seriously in this district. According to campaign finance records, Calabro and Harvey have just $27,050 to Greenstein and DeAngelo's $602,638.

But the two Republicans say they're campaigning in earnest, having knocked on over 5,000 doors and have not thrown away their candidacies.

"This election is not about money. People are desperate. People are losing their homes, they're losing their jobs, and they're tired of the status quo," said Harvey.

Update: PolitickerNJ.com neglected to mention the third party candidate in the race: Gene Baldassari. Baldassari, who belongs to the Modern Whig Party, was not invited to the debate.

Matt Friedman is a PolitickerNJ.com Reporter and can be reached via email at matt@politicsnj.com

http://www.politickernj.com/matt-friedman/34241/debate-gop-slams-greenstein-abstention-affordable-housing-vote

[Guest]

She always makes the same bogus argument -- that she didn't vote no so she could still have a voice on improving it.

But she never follows-up with the logical extension of that argument. It has been a year -- what tangible benefit did her strategy yeild? Exactly how did she improve the situation?

Nada.

She has used the same argument over and over when she votes against Cranbury's interests -- that staying in line with the party line will help us. But not once have I seen a tangible example of where it did.

It's just an excuse.

I am a Democrat but there's no way I'm voting for either of them.

[Guest]

Here is the other point that concerns me. She mentions- REGIONALIZATION. This is the next battle like COAH and she clearly comes out in support. Just as she and Wayne did on COAH. Notice, the semantics. She was to modify COAH, not get rid of it.

She makes a comment about a soft no. But, she has not done anything since.

Cranbury Residents have a choice we can vote for Linda and Wayne based upon party or we can stand up and take our town back by voting for their opponents.

[Guest]

It seems like for anyone in Cranbury to vote for them is to let the NJ corrupt party machine win. Wayne doesn't even pretend to represent us. He is a full-time employee of a Union (he manages their big blow up Rat, no joke) whose campaign was financed by the Union and he has made it clear his constituency is his union. Linda is in it for Linda, which is why she never votes against her party machine, ever. That's nice for her but why would we support that?

The future of Cranbury as a viable township will continue to be under attack in the coming years. We are being targeted from multiple sides -- COAH, regionalization, school consolidation, etc. To vote for two people who's record clearly show they will support or not resist any of those town-killing initiatives is to unequivocally vote against our self-interests. Why would ANYONE do that unless they are either self-destructive or plan to move-out soon anyway and don't care about their neighbors.

the only way for us to win is for Linda to get a shocking wake up call on the election. Even if she manages to win, she should see her margin of victory eroded to a dangerous thin margin and she should see her base of support in Cranbury as responsible for that. Then her self-interest may start to align with us. Then maybe she’ll rethink her loyalty to party machine over constituents. Wayne is a lost cause – he doesn’t even pretend to care – he has yet to EVER set foot in Cranbury and even for our big events like Cranbury Day he sends junior interns to man a station. By comparison at least Linda shows us and Baroni even ran in our charity race.

[Show me the Money]

[Guest]

Just to add a further point I think this is also why we need Jay and Dan on the TC as well. I can see at least Wayne losing his seat because people in Hamilton and in West Windsor are also upset, plus people are upset at the state level.

Dan and Jay have a very good relationship with Senator Baroni which is key since he opposes COAH and you'll note that Mr. Harvey and Mr. Calabro mentioned Cranbury specifically in terms of the insane rules.

My logic is that Jay and Dan have built a good bridge for the future if the cards hold. If we manage to at least get rid of Wayne then we're sitting in a better position to fight COAH and consolidation with Dan and Jay in office.

At worst, Wayne and Linda are voted back and we then have three people locally who will hold them accountable to us and not thank them for voting yes or abstaining - Win, Dan and Jay.

[Guest]

[Guest]

Don't have much to add to this thread...my only hope is that folks will not vote D or R as a matter of course, but really evaluate whether incumbents deserve your vote, or challengers have something more to offer.

[Afraid]

When asked plans on how they would lower taxes, Greenstein and DeAngelo noted that the legislature and governor had kept the rate of property tax growth to a lower level than in previous years, cut the state budget by $4 billion and revamped the school funding formula. Greenstein also brought up regionalization and shared services.

WOW - This is really scary. Greenstein and D'Angelo defending Corzine's record on taxes. What is especially terrifying is just what towns is Linda Greenstein referring to with regionalization. The towns in her districut are:

Large towns - not likely - Hamilton, Monroe, Plainsboro, South Brunswick, West Windsor

Smaller towns - Jamesburg and Cranbury

We need to be very concerned with the regionalization agenda pushed by Corzine and supported by Linda Greenstein.

[Guest]

[Guest]

Hightstown is a smaller town but not in Greenstein's district.

[Guest]

[Guest]

Robbinsville which is right next door to Hamilton is also not in district 14. They go around Robbinsville.

[JD]

[Guest]

[Guest]

Now that Rush Holt is endorsing Dave and Glenn they can't do anything anti-Wayne or Linda or anti-party.

Rush's endorsement concerns me more than anything because it means to me -being a cynic-that bigger party politics are involved in Cranbury if things don't change on the TC. We need to get away from party in my opinion.

I don't mind Baroni endorsing and in fact I think that is valid because he does cross the aisle and I have seen him work and support Democrats. He is also he is a local official who opposed COAH.