| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Nimby Pines Press
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 8:28 am EDT Post subject: Tantrum |
 |
|
Last night at Town Hall several children from Shallow Oaks (AKA "Nimby Pines"), whined, wimpered and yelled at Township and Parks Committee members. Ironically, the two-hour tantrum was in response to the Township Committee's informal decision to take no action to mark walkway easements with a green dot in order to clarify points of deeded public access to 46 acres of township owned parkland.
Shallow Oaks neighbors danced the Whiskey Tango Foxtrot as they argued simultaneously that...
No one will ever go back there anway to...
throngs of partiers, creeps and thieves will flock to the woods
We don't want public land for a "private park"...
we just want to be able to say who goes back there
I don't want strangers walking on a public walkway easement next to my property to...
instead I want them to knock on my door and ask me.
Its a dangerous mess back there. People will get hurt and the EMTs will never be able to save them to...
Marking the easements will ruin this wonderful place where all the neighborhood children play.
In a totally unrelated note, no one has stepped forward to run for Township Committee.
Also, a word of warning for all residents...
Acid rain has apparently taken on a more dangerous and deadly form called "Acid Snow". Scientists are puzzled by this new substance which has demonstrated the ability to make entire pine trees completely disappear. Local residents are now concerned that Acid Snow is seeping into the water supply in Shallow Oaks, potentially causing unusually aggressive behavior, uncontrollable public outbursts and other signs of potential brain damage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 11:12 am EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Why would anyone from Shadow Oaks have needed to say anything more about the topic at the TC since they got their best case scenario of not having the public park land that they have been treating like their private waterfront property marked for public use? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 12:39 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Let's just say it wasn't a Mensa meeting. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 12:43 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Since it is for their private use then divide up the taxes on the "Public Land" amongst the properties that it touches. Win Win situation, they get more land and are now responsible for it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 2:53 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Since it is for their private use then divide up the taxes on the "Public Land" amongst the properties that it touches. Win Win situation, they get more land and are now responsible for it. |
Except they have been living under the expectation, for a long time, that it is effectively already there's at no tax or cost to them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 3:21 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Since it is for their private use then divide up the taxes on the "Public Land" amongst the properties that it touches. Win Win situation, they get more land and are now responsible for it. |
Except they have been living under the expectation, for a long time, that it is effectively already there's at no tax or cost to them. |
use the pronoun - yes?
Except they have been living under the expectation, for a long time, that it is effectively already theirs at no tax or cost to them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 5:17 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
Watch out, the grammar Police are here and they will point out every little typing mistake we make.
Gall dern it, we aint the type of educated folk that you is. You reel smirt and we juss dumm. I hope yous feel more better bout yourselve. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 7:08 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Since it is for their private use then divide up the taxes on the "Public Land" amongst the properties that it touches. Win Win situation, they get more land and are now responsible for it. |
Except they have been living under the expectation, for a long time, that it is effectively already there's at no tax or cost to them. |
use the pronoun - yes?
Except they have been living under the expectation, for a long time, that it is effectively already theirs at no tax or cost to them. |
no apostrophe on possessive pronouns - either |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 9:19 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | Since it is for their private use then divide up the taxes on the "Public Land" amongst the properties that it touches. Win Win situation, they get more land and are now responsible for it. |
Except they have been living under the expectation, for a long time, that it is effectively already there's at no tax or cost to them. |
Let's put the land up for sale and see if anyone buys it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue, Apr 26 2011, 11:18 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| The committee members failed the decision making test again! After all the meetings and panels formed to evaluate the situation there was no decision. Why have people do all this work and spend their valuable time to provide input? Maybe with no decision nor any action being taken it is sort of a type of job security. The same issue will come up again and again. Its just another example of an indecisive committee. Maybe they should hire some "Professional" at some outrageous fee to give some more input. It really amazes me that the committee members totally disregarded the petition with a huge number of signatures in favor of marking the easement. There are some members of the Committee that certainly chastised some previous Committee members for their disrespect of the public. Its a shame that they have turned into carbon copies of their disrespectful predecessors. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2011, 8:57 am EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | The committee members failed the decision making test again! After all the meetings and panels formed to evaluate the situation there was no decision. Why have people do all this work and spend their valuable time to provide input? Maybe with no decision nor any action being taken it is sort of a type of job security. The same issue will come up again and again. Its just another example of an indecisive committee. Maybe they should hire some "Professional" at some outrageous fee to give some more input. It really amazes me that the committee members totally disregarded the petition with a huge number of signatures in favor of marking the easement. There are some members of the Committee that certainly chastised some previous Committee members for their disrespect of the public. Its a shame that they have turned into carbon copies of their disrespectful predecessors. |
I wasn't at the meeting so maybe I missed a key fact, but why do you say no action equals no decision? By definition not taking action is a decision. If lack of action always meant indecisiveness then the only way to ever demonstrate decisiveness would be to constantly vote for change, which would be just another form of inaction because there would be no real decision involved. Action and decisiveness means considering each situation and making decisions when to act and when the best action is to preserve the status quo.
What I heard, perhaps incorrectly, is they made a conscious decision to preserve the status quo, to not further mark the public easement. Is that not what happened? Did their indecision just defer some future action down the road? It’s easy to see why the people who were in favor of helping the public access its wetlands would be upset by this, but why would the Shadow Oaks people be unhappy? Were they expecting something further like a permanent declaration that the public land was inaccessible to the public? I’m unclear what kind of decision you feel they didn’t make.
I also don’t understand your comment about comparing them to their predecessors. In what way were they disrespectful? Again, I wasn’t at the meeting so I didn’t see what happened. But the reputation of some of the former Committee members was that they would allow people favorable to their positions to speak multiple times but limit those they allowed to speak against their position, and that they stacked all the decision making boards only with members of their party. The latter certainly hasn’t happened as a point of fact. Did the former? If not, what made them disrespectful? I assume them simply not voting the way you wanted isn’t your definition. Someone will always be unhappy and what would be disrespectful to their constituency as a whole would be to cater to the crowd in the room at any given time. So what exactly was disrespectful? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2011, 10:44 am EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
What is to stop...
-Homeless people from setting up a tent city?
-Campers from lighting a bonfire?
-Teenagers from partying all night?
-Young Adults from bringing booze?
-Hunters from shooting guns or setting traps?
What if someone gets hurt?
Couldn't they sue the Township?
Or couldn't they sue private property owners?
There are no signs indicating what is and isn't legal. There are no markings to indicate what is public property and what is private.
You would think all the lawyers who live along the park would consider the liabilities of NOT marking the easements and posting signs. Then again, you would have thought they would read their property surveys, too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2011, 10:47 am EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | The committee members failed the decision making test again! After all the meetings and panels formed to evaluate the situation there was no decision. Why have people do all this work and spend their valuable time to provide input? Maybe with no decision nor any action being taken it is sort of a type of job security. The same issue will come up again and again. Its just another example of an indecisive committee. Maybe they should hire some "Professional" at some outrageous fee to give some more input. It really amazes me that the committee members totally disregarded the petition with a huge number of signatures in favor of marking the easement. There are some members of the Committee that certainly chastised some previous Committee members for their disrespect of the public. Its a shame that they have turned into carbon copies of their disrespectful predecessors. |
They decided by not doing anything to not mark the easements. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2011, 5:51 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | The committee members failed the decision making test again! After all the meetings and panels formed to evaluate the situation there was no decision. Why have people do all this work and spend their valuable time to provide input? Maybe with no decision nor any action being taken it is sort of a type of job security. The same issue will come up again and again. Its just another example of an indecisive committee. Maybe they should hire some "Professional" at some outrageous fee to give some more input. It really amazes me that the committee members totally disregarded the petition with a huge number of signatures in favor of marking the easement. There are some members of the Committee that certainly chastised some previous Committee members for their disrespect of the public. Its a shame that they have turned into carbon copies of their disrespectful predecessors. |
First off the Mayor who is the one who sets the agenda did not put it on so a formal vote would not have been proper. Second, as an attendee at the the meeting the TC did take action they said they were not going to vote on the physical marking, but would mark them via the website and have a map at town hall. So that is a decision, just not a decision to physically mark them.
There were two petitions as well with equal numbers of signatures. So it is not proper to say they ignored the voices of residents. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2011, 8:16 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: | | The committee members failed the decision making test again! After all the meetings and panels formed to evaluate the situation there was no decision. Why have people do all this work and spend their valuable time to provide input? Maybe with no decision nor any action being taken it is sort of a type of job security. The same issue will come up again and again. Its just another example of an indecisive committee. Maybe they should hire some "Professional" at some outrageous fee to give some more input. It really amazes me that the committee members totally disregarded the petition with a huge number of signatures in favor of marking the easement. There are some members of the Committee that certainly chastised some previous Committee members for their disrespect of the public. Its a shame that they have turned into carbon copies of their disrespectful predecessors. |
The item did not appear on either April agenda and no vote was taken in April. I believe it appeared on the December agenda and was effectively tabled. The Cranbury Press reported a non-binding "straw poll" as a vote at the April 11th meeting.
First off the Mayor who is the one who sets the agenda did not put it on so a formal vote would not have been proper. Second, as an attendee at the the meeting the TC did take action they said they were not going to vote on the physical marking, but would mark them via the website and have a map at town hall. So that is a decision, just not a decision to physically mark them.
There were two petitions as well with equal numbers of signatures. So it is not proper to say they ignored the voices of residents. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed, Apr 27 2011, 10:12 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Tantrum |
|
|
Some residents received an email stating that the vote would be on the 25th there was also a rumor it would have been voted on at the 11th meeting. The clerk at the meeting explained that this was all false. However, the TC did a straw vote on the 11th as they said they saw a number of people in the audience and wanted to give thought on where the TC stood.
I received the false email as well and interestingly the person who sent it did not show on the 25th. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
