Anybody patroling the streets

[anon-0p83]

The question still hasn't been answered as to why all of the dept. Needs to be at Teddys for 2 hours and at the same time? How long is their break time? Do you really need that much time for a break from driving around? Why 3-4 officers all at the same time?

[jealous-8q9r]

[anon-0p83]

Ye, that's it !!!

[Issue of nothing-p899]

Here is the thing. The "break" doesn't really exist. The officers have portable radios. When they are needed the dispatcher calls them and they leave Teddy's(which is centrally located) or wherever they are and answer the call. I am in Teddy's all the time I see the officers get calls and leave. Same thing with the first aid people. This occurs every day.stop making an issue out of nothing.

[anon-921r]

To me this is a non-issue. A number of residents spoke up supporting police at Teddy's and visiting other businesses and the TC said it was supportive as well.

So I don't see any issue or need to try and create one.

[anon-97on]

[anon-p82s]

Agreed two hours is an long time for a lunch break, and I believe that was the reason for this post.

[anon-921r]

[anon-25p1]

There are some valid points in these posts but they are few and far between. There are several delusional people who hide their identities. They seem to have an agenda to attack the police regardless. "We need more speed traps" " we don't need speed traps" " the cops are never in town" "the cops take 2 hour breaks in the center of town(Teddy's). I guess they think the cops should either be volunteers or another town like Plainsboro, Monroe, or South Brunswick will magically take over policing Cranbury and not charge Cranbury. Either way I kind of feel like our cops can't really win this argument because it comes from a very illogical angry mindset. I am in favor of keeping costs down and maintaining a level service. I think the Commitee did a good job listening to the people and made a difficult decision.

[anon-opp6]

Differing in your opinion does not make one, nor appropriate for you to call us "angry mindset"

Any more than does your opinion makes you labeled as one incapable of accepting change.

You are not being personally attacked, not are the police in my opinion. I enjoy the service here, I do not agree with the decision, there are other options. The increase is not justified. Keep telling yourself it is, if it makes you feel better, and keep comparing to other neighboring towns also becoming too expensive to live.

Maybe we can all agree on something, the cost to live here will certainly never go down. And maybe that is something people need to think about if they wish to stay here, maybe retire, maybe figure out how to get by on a fixed income in Cranbury.

[anon-0p83]

Why not just make Teddys a police sub station. Free food and security for Teddys. Seems like a good deal !!!

[anon-921r]

I disagree about the costs going down. The town budget is less now than a few years ago. The problem is the property values went down at the same time thus to maintain revenue the tax rate had to be adjusted. It seems that most of the decrease in value comes from the commercial properties so they are paying less with residents paying a bit more.

What I see is the TC trying to balance what makes Cranbury a destination town while reducing costs. I have honestly never met someone who sought a home in East Windsor or Hightstown if they could afford Cranbury. I have met numerous people who tell me how they love Cranbury and are looking or tried to get in, but home prices were too high.

Our homes are our largest investment. If paying taxes that go up (but are still lower than comparable homes in surrounding towns) means my home value is high than I am fine. When we start cutting services and see our average home drop from 600k to 400k I'll have an issue. If we raise taxes beyond neighboring towns and our home values drop as a result I 'll have an issue.

Right now, I think our TC is doing well and we see Cranbury remaining attractive to future home buyers.

In terms of retirement, that decision is individual. I doubt I'll retire in NJ as I can sell my home here, cash out my equity and live well in the south.

[anon-opp6]

Watching this discussion makes me laugh.

You are dillusional and have been sipping a little too much of the coolaid from the liberal agenda to say its less expensive living here now and the budget is fiscally responsible.
Probably a govt worker or otherwise someone with an interest in big government.

Great house values! Woo hoo! But would be nice to be able to afford to live here.

Higher taxes adversly affect the resale of your home.
If you disagree then enjoy your break from reality.

[anon-opp6]

Watching this discussion makes me laugh.

You are dillusional and have been sipping a little too much of the coolaid from the liberal agenda to say its less expensive living here now and the budget is fiscally responsible.
Probably a govt worker or otherwise someone with an interest in big government.

Great house values! Woo hoo! But would be nice to be able to afford to live here.

Higher taxes adversly affect the resale of your home.
If you disagree then enjoy your break from reality.

[anon-921r]

[anon-opp6]

"Look at the budget, the expenses are less than a few years ago. That is a fact.

Look at our average home value- 600k. Look at realtor.com for Cranbury then search other neighboring towns. Our home values are higher than Hightstown, East Windsor, South Brunswick who all have higher tax rates and for similar priced homes pay more and worse schools and sense of community. You can't find a 3 bedroom home in Cranbury for less than 300k. Based on your comment,"Higher home values! Whoo hoo!" Lacks the understanding that higher home values translates into wealth. Destroying everything about Cranbury to lower taxes by a few dollars and as a result lowering home values lowers your wealth.

Higher taxes above surrounding towns may affect your homes value depending on schools and services (see WW for high taxes not impacting high end sales.) However, our taxes are not higher than all the surrounding towns for equal value. So when one considers our quality of life Cranbury is attractive. That is the balance.

You say the TC is not fiscally responsible, then tell me where? I can tell you in my view the only area lacking responsibility is where the state imposes mandates believing all towns are equal.

Cranbury is not big government. As I said I won't retire in NJ. However, I'll gladly sell my home for more than I could get in other towns. Then take that cash to buy a home in a lower cost area and live comfortably. I will be angry when our TC listens to people who want to cut everything and cause my home value to drop. If we go from 600k to 300k and pay less taxes, I'll never make up that difference. A couple hundred dollars in taxes is not worth a 300 k property drop."


So.. We are spending less, you are sying bottom line.

Soooo. And we have to increase taxes why????

Something is not adding up.

And then to add insult to injury. Let's say the only way to balence the budget is to fire police officers to support your tax increase that youy need.... To support the town that is spending less money.

Don't get me wrong. Great services great town... But for once it would be refreshing for the small town, with big governement ideals to say, hey we want to spend more, and we are raising your taxes.

Atleast be honest,

The current situation of by design is criminal and unethical,
If it was in error, then well that's incompetence.

So tell me, why pick "3 years", what is the average trend.

And for us "simple" not politicsal folks that don't understand liberal big governement math,,,

HOW CAN YOU BE SPENDING LESS, BUT NEED TO INCREASE TAXES??