The July 28, 2008 Township Committee meeting update?

[Guest]

Any news?

[Cranbury Conservative]

Cranbury’s Affordable Housing Meeting: Let’s Give Assembly Women Greenstein a chance….

Overall last night’s Township Affordable Housing Meeting was a good productive meeting from the standpoint that the town communicated what is happening regarding the COAH rules and Affordable Housing Legislation as well as clarifying how we are involved in litigation in a partnership with the League of Municipalities and Clinton Township.

I felt the attorney Ed from the League of Municipalities who spoke was a bit overly optimistic about the threat to Cranbury from Affordable Housing. To paraphrase he said something to the effect of “The Affordable Housing Sky is not falling on Cranbury”. While I disagree with that statement, I did realize he was there to help us so I decided not to engage in a debate about that topic.

Further I was impressed that Assemblywomen Greenstein was at the meeting. She explained to us why she voted the way she did on A-500, which was Not Voting (NV Not Voting, Excused, Absent, or Present). Someone else mentioned that it was stated a Nay (No) vote would make that person an enemy of Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts. With that said she felt her vote still gave her the ability to work on our behalf to help Cranbury going forward with a possible amendment to the A-500 legislation or through some other legislation.

Many of us did speak during the public comment portion of the meeting. Several residents did thank Assemblywomen Greenstein for her vote of Not Voting (NV Not Voting, Excused, Absent, or Present).

Win Cody felt the one of the keys to the Affordable Housing argument was the numbers.

Brian from Cranbury Estates gave an excellent overview of his perspective on the Affordable Housing issues that face Cranbury. Brian once again offered to help the town in its efforts against COAH and A-500. Hopefully someone is listening on the TC and will add him to the COAH sub committee???

Dave M from Cranbury Estates did an excellent job of bringing up the point of mass transportation and how Cranbury is not located near any rail stations or transit hubs. Further he pointed out that affordable housing money would be better served being used in areas that did have available mass transportation which would give people in affordable housing access to better jobs. The Attorney Ed mentioned he had heard the same idea earlier in the day at another meeting and thought is was a good idea.

Two of our residents (Ed K and another gentleman) who spoke made excellent points about the perception of our town and how we need to do our best to change it in the eyes of the media and legislators in Trenton.

Nancy K brought up housing limits for communities which seemed to make sense to many in attendance.

John Ritter also brought up several valid points as well pertaining to affordable housing rules and legislation.

When I spoke I took the opportunity to let Assemblywomen Greenstein know my displeasure with her vote on A-500 and that I felt a vote of Nay (NO) would have sent a stronger message. Further I asked her to keep us informed as to what she did going forward to help us, since to be fair it is hard to determine who exactly is responsible in Trenton for an amendment to legislation that may or may not help our town. I directly asked her to see what she could do to help Cranbury regarding A-500 going forward and to keep us informed if possible.

Additionally I called on the township Committee to invite COAH Chairman Joseph Doria and Lucy Voorheis (now Lucy Vandenberg) the executive director of COAH to Cranbury to face the residents for our town. I also asked that we invite Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts as well. Of course I know the odds of any of them actually showing up are slim to none. I do however feel it is important for the request to be made so that everyone in Trenton is aware of how serious we really are in our community concerning how unjust the Affordable Housing rules and regulations are as they stand. Further I asked we publicize in the media that we invited them to our town weather they accept or not. Another resident who spoke earlier about the perception of Cranbury added we should get TV cameras here for such an event.

I found it interesting after I spoke how quickly Township Committee Member Stannard felt the need to state that for the record, that by Not Voting Assemblywomen Greenstein was voting No. It is his right to comment after I spoke however I did not see the need for that comment from him at that time. While there are many in town who agree with Mr. Stannard, I also feel there are just as many that agree with my stance that a No vote would have sent a stronger message to the other legislators in Trenton since Assemblywomen Greenstein does have a history of voting the party line.

After the meeting I was able to speak with Assemblywomen Greenstein for some time. I thanked her for coming to the meeting last night to face the music since I was critical of her vote for A-500. I immediately found her to be very gracious and engaging when we spoke.

We discussed the issues which were brought up in the meeting, in particular the topic brought up by Dave M from Cranbury Estates about the importance of allowing suburban towns to partner with other towns with regards to Affordable Housing near mass transportation hubs and rail stations. It was a sentiment that I also echoed when I spoken during the meeting and she felt this was a good idea for the use of Affordable Housing dollars.

I additionally took the opportunity to point out something that Assembly speaker Roberts has been saying, and that is we need affordable housing for the Teachers, Firemen and Police in our communities. Yet his legislation does nothing to address that very issue since affordable hosing goes out to a state wide lottery. I asked Assembly Women Greenstein to consider legislation which would allow for people from the community the first right to affordable housing since I would like to see our local police and teachers live in town if they choose to and cannot currently afford it.

We both agreed that the COAH rules would need to be settled in the courts; however she did have an opportunity going forward to influence the legislation regarding Affordable Housing.

I left my conversation with the Assemblywomen Greenstein with hope and I said to her that I was going to give her another chance to help all of us here in Cranbury with regard to the Affordable Housing Legislation and Rules which will destroy Cranbury as we know it.

Now we just need Assemblywomen Greenstein to go make it happen!

[Guest]

Great summary, C.C.

I'd add that I hope that future meetings can attract more of our neighbors. This is a tough time of year for meetings because of vacation schedules, etc. However, there are important dates in October (the 13th and 16th, according to the town attorney's comments) where the TC and planning board will hold public sessions on the revisions to the master plan/housing element. This will be the basis of the documents forwarded to COAH in December to demonstrate our town's strategy for compliance.

There is never going to be 100% consensus on the "right" approach to any major issue in our town. But in my view, the course of action being taken by the TC is appropriate. We, all residents, need to be engaged in the process as well.

[Cranbury Conservative]

Good point I left out the disappointing turnout. My guess is maybe we had maybe 30 people in the audience?

[thanks]

Thanks Cranbury Conservative.

It seems to me the Democratic-led TC is in an awkward COAH situation. I am wondering why Cranbury residents won't elect more Republicans to the TC?

[Guest]

Thanks for your summary and dedication as usual CC. But I gotta’ say I am surprised you let Greenstein convince you she is really on our side. She is an expert politician, of course she can talk a good game. That's why she is where she is. But she has been doing that for years and so far I haven't seen any point where her "I'm really on your side but I have to stay friendly with the corrupt political bosses to help you behind the scenes" has actually EVER helped us behind the scenes. Can someone cite any specific examples?

I think she is just a slick talker who can charm anyone she meets. Her not voting is not a strategy to help us -- it was her trying to server her own interests, giving herself a way to convince people that she is on our side while telling her boss that she's really on his. Don't fall for it! Unless her "behind the scenes" help can show real results, I still oppose her on principle. Results aren't letters to COAH. Results are actual changes in legislation or regulations or waivers for us, etc.

Shame on one of the Stout-Three for falling all over himself to kiss up to Greenstein with obviously nonsensical statements. of course no vote is not the same as no. No is no. What an spineless idiot.

[Guest]

"Shame on one of the Stout-Three for falling all over himself to kiss up to Greenstein with obviously nonsensical statements. of course no vote is not the same as no. No is no. What an spineless idiot."

What does this mean? Did you edit yourself and forget to retype something?

[Cranbury Conservative]

I will answer with this. She has an opportunity now to show us that she does care, and we have nothing to lose by letting her at least try. Then we go from there.

[aResident]

I agree. We need allies in fighting with the new COAH rules. She seems to be on our side. Whether this is a tactic to win votes or a sincere effort to help, we will track it from here.

[Jersey Dad]

Conservative,
As usual, thanks for your fair and thorough coverage. My opinion regarding our District Reps...

We have 3 horses in this race; and they're off! One horse stumbled right out of the gate. One horse is leading the pack at the first turn. One is running with the pack, however, she may make a move down the stretch. I want to see the finish before laying down my bets on the next race.

Regarding Mr. Stannard, the timing of his comment was indeed odd. He seemed a little off in general and may not have been feeling 100 percent.

In any case, I wanted to remind everyone about the August 15th deadline for COAH comments.

Also, it seems as though there will be a short window of time for public comment on Cranbury's new 3rd Round Plan. It sounds like we won't see it until mid-october and it needs to be approved by mid-December. Concerned citizens may want to keep an ear to the ground.

As a final point, several people spoke to the importance of telling the story of Cranbury in the media. This issue is being positioned as rich vs. poor instead of big government vs. main st. The truth is, some of our seniors and families will be driven out of town by a 50-100 percent tax increase. It might be helpful for these folks to share their stories.

[Guest]