(TONIGHT) TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE MEETING at 7:00 P.M. TOWN HALL MEETING ROOM

[Guest 2]

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]

The above poster was not correct. The planning and design of the project was done by Brown and Keener(sp?). Alan was still on the committee so Stout and Stannard were not yet elected. It may have been Staves first year.

The process for deciding on this project was as open as it could be. Tontines(sp?) were held. The project and its design had widespread community support. Were there those against the project? Yes, a very small very vocal group.

The main cost of this project was the remediation, which would have to have been done whether it was a Ball field or not. The problem with the project was the construction oversight which was a debacle.

The township committee which put this project in motion was 100% behind the project. Again, Stannard and Stout were not there. It was Danser, Mayes, Overstreet, Gambino and I think Stave but it may have been the end of Hasselback's term.

I do not recall Gambino being vocal about this project. Remember Tom wanted to buy the land behind Wright and put the remaining 200 some housing units still zoned for Cranbury there. This plan was snarkily called Gambinoland. Tom hated that characterization.

I bring all this up to make one point. The community was strongly in favor of the project. The TC gave them what they wanted for good or ill. The lame attempts by those on this board to try to use this project to attack current or former TC members is laughable.

This thing has been built.

[Guest]

If you are going to re-write history, then try and be accurate. Here is the history and meeting notes.

June 2004- Beauregard, Michael Mayes, Thomas Panconi, Jr. and Pari Stave, Wittman
he Township has gone out for bid on the demolition of the buildings on the Wright South Property in order to clear the land, abate the soil contamination and build a baseball field. A water line is currently being used by Mr. Zurfluh runs across the property and needs to be relocated prior to demolition of the buildings.
http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_minutes_07-12-04.html

- Comment- For those who were there, there was no commitment to build a field at that time. It was an idea of a use when the buildings were demolished.


December 2004 Beauregard, Panconi and Stannard, Stave, Stout

Township Engineer, Cathy Marcelli, will update the Township Committee on the Wright South clean up. Ms. Marcelli discussed the demolition of the buildings, abatement of the soil contamination, relocated driveway, baseball field and asbestos's remediation on the Wright South Property. D.E.P. will send a representative tomorrow for an on-site meeting and the lab analysis should be back in January, at which time they will be forwarded on to the State and hopefully get a response back in March so that the Township may proceed with advertising a contractor to remediate the soil.

http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_minutes_12-20-04.html

June 2007- Stout, Stannard, Stave, Wittman, Panconi

Mr. Coughlin reported prior to the meeting he had met with Township Committeewoman Stave reference to the proposed baseball field as Ms. Stave is very anxious to get the
project moving. Edaw, the consulting firm hired by the Township, was going to submit a proposal. They had contacted Cathleen Marcelli, Township Engineer, to give them a proposal to do the work for them. However, Ms. Marcelli did not feel comfortable with the arrangement and instead has offered to submit a proposal to the Township and have it ready for the next Township Committee meeting on July 9, 2007. Mr. Coughlin stated Ms. Marcelli had indicated to him the project could not be started for quite some time as her office would need to do some soil boarings at the site. Ms. Marcelli had indicated to Mr. Coughlin the bid specs would have to be prepared and the earliest the Township could receive the bids would be some time in October. The work could then be started some time in December. Mayor Stout stated it was his understanding Edaw does not have the capability to do the architectural work on the project.

http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_minutes062507.html

September 2007- Same TC as above
http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_minutes091007.

December 2007 Same TC as above

Ms. Stave inquired about the status of the Babe Ruth Baseball Field Project. Ms. Smeltzer reported Ms. Marcelli, Engineer, was in the process of reviewing all documents submitted by the successful bidder. Ms. Stave stated she had walked the area over the weekend and the area where the proposed Village Green would be is in great need of some work. Ms. Smeltzer indicated she would pass the information along to Ms. Marcelli, however, that work had not been in the bid specs.

http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_minutes121707.html

[Guest]

[Guest]

You are accurate to the point where your history begins, when the ballfield went out to bid. I wonder pray tell why you did not go back to the tontines(Sp?) two years prior? At the time of the Tontines Panconi was not on the TC Danser was.

This is what my post was refering to. As soon as the Tontines were complete Browne and Keener began work on the design plan for the entire Wright property. That is when the decisions were all made. The public was involved the entire time and kept wanting more and bigger. The TC merely accomodated the crowd.

Your rather snotty comment about accuracy followed by your decision not to go back to the beginning of the process leads me to believe the facts don't back up the narrative you have dreamed up in your head. Sorry. Go to the library look at old copies of the Cranbury Press and read about all the fun we had at the Tontines.

One final comment, the time to bitch about this was 2004 BEFORE it went out to bid. It is now 6 years too late time for everyone to get over it and move on.

[Guest]

"No committment to build a ballfield at that time"

Are you kidding? They were definitely building the ballfield. There was no commitment to building the rest of the "village green" concept because they did not have the money. Have you forgotten the village green and all the other stuff that was involved. I am sorry you thought there was no commitment to build the ballfield, but there was. Why exactly do you think they were removing the buildings? That by the way is where this project went to hell. The ballfield did not cost 500k. Removing the buildings and then having to remediate what was basically a toxic site was where we flushed all the money away.

You are saying you wanted to remove the buildings and not build a ballfield? The better idea would be to not have bought Wright in the first place.

[Guest]

You're mixing the recreation master plan discussions with the actual decision to proceed, design and build the field.

The actual field design, fencing, dugout, etc.. was not done until as the meeting notes showed. The management was under two people on the TC today, but they were only 2 of 5.

Simply because something was in discussion does not mean it was agreed upon.

If you believe that the poster who showed the notes and everyone else including me is wrong about how it occurred including the history Pari gave last year, then show us. Provide the meeting notes as the other poster did. Otherwise, what you're saying may be true, but lacks proof.

Yes, a lot went to remediation, but a lot went to mismanagment too. I am just glad it's done.