View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Guest
|
Posted: Thu, Apr 17 2008, 11:57 am EDT Post subject: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
FYI:
The Township Committee will have a Special Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. in the Township Administrator’s Office, Second Floor of Town Hall, 23-A North Main Street, Cranbury, New Jersey to interview a candidate for the position of Township Police Chief and discussion of potential acquisition of PNC Bank Property, North Main Street.
Agenda:
1. Pledge of Allegiance
2. Open Public Meetings Act Notice
3. Roll Call
4. Appointment of Christine Smeltzer, Temporary Deputy Clerk
5. Resolution
Closed Session Resolution # R 04-08-072 –
---- Personnel: Interview with candidate for position of Township Police Chief;
----Land Acquisition: Discussion of potential acquisition of PNC Bank property, North Main Street.
6. Public Comment
7. Mayor’s Notes
8. Adjourn
http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_Specialmeetingnotice042108.htm
http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC_agenda_042108.html |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Thu, Apr 17 2008, 3:19 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Does anyone know the logic behind the proposal to have the tax payers pay for the acquisition of the PNC Bank site? Since the bank is on Main Street in the historical preservation district, I presume the Township has ample authority to restrict whatever is privately developed there in the future within reason. Beyond that, why would the Township be seriously entertaining a proposal that would cost the tax payers more money for a discretionary issue while the Township has been in the midst of major tax increases, school budget increases and perhaps a crippling increase in COAH requirements?
Unless there is a good explanation which I haven't heard yet (and leave open the possibility for), I think it is bad faith and insulting to the citizen's of Cranbury for the council to even allow discretionary spending measures on their agenda right now. It sends a better message if they have a total moratorium on such items. Instead, they are going into a closed door session on it so we don't even get to hear the reasons. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
?? Guest
|
Posted: Thu, Apr 17 2008, 3:40 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Are they going to turn the PNC bank into a stand alone library?
Why not, just ask everyone in town to chip in.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
James Guest
|
Posted: Thu, Apr 17 2008, 4:24 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
I believe this is to make the PNC building a stand alone library. I am very opposed to such an acquisition given the current tax situation in town. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wcody
Joined: Tue, Mar 18 2008, 9:49 am EDT Posts: 126 Location: Cranbury, NJ
|
Posted: Thu, Apr 17 2008, 4:55 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
A meeting to discuss a topic of such magnitude should be open to the public to hear the discussion and allow public feedback. Is a stand-alone library at this time the right thing to do? A survey was done by the library last year but that survey did not indicate to the recipients the cost of a new library.
It is important for the residents to understand the costs and decide if that is a worthwhile investment. The costs will include acquisition of the land & building as well as a whole new set of operating costs. We would need to still keep the library at the school for the students. While I have not done a study, I could see this easily cost an average household an additional $500 or more per year in taxes. Perhaps a group of volunteers who are passionate about a new library can get some numbers and give a good estimate of costs.
After the costs are understood, if most residents want to bear that cost, then we should proceed. Although, I suspect, when the costs are fully understood, most people will be happy with the current library situation.
I have sent a message to the township committee requesting the portion of the meeting pertaining to the acquisition of the PNC building be open to public.
It would be helpful if residents could post their opinions on a stand-alone library here (I will be sure to forward this to the committee if they don't read this yet) and attend township meetings so the township committee knows your opinion.
Win Cody |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jason Guest
|
Posted: Thu, Apr 17 2008, 7:15 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
While I will keep an open mind and am happy to consider any facts the Township Council or proponents would like to publicly share about the idea, until convinced otherwise I am opposed to the plan for a stand alone library.
First, is it necessary? We are a town with less than 4,000 residents, small by design. And by design we have historically limited our spending to key areas such as our great school, local police force and efforts to keep the town small through farmland preservation of fulfillment of our COAH requirements without rely on deals with private builders. My family is a frequent user of the existing library and it suits us fine. In fact, we use it more than in previous communities because of the convenience of it being located at the school. Also, residents are free to use other area libraries, including West Windsor and Plainsboro. Why impose more on our local taxpayers for something redundant? I have heard that some parents are uncomfortable with the free access adults have to the library during school hours when kids are there. If this is the reason there are many alternative solutions far cheaper and less invasive than a whole new library.
Second, the timing is poor. This is not the time in the local or national economy for like-to-have projects. Why do it now, only a year after a radical tax increase, right after a significant school budget increase and in the middle of what could be a town-killing expansion of our COAH obligations? If anything, the Township should be creating a cash reserve to fight the revised COAH rules if necessary or pursue creative alternatives like buying more land to re-zone against development. It sends the wrong message to be considering any further discretionary spending right now.
Third, it is bad public policy to pursue major projects without a clear understanding of the full costs or impact. This could quickly become another Babe Ruth Ball Field, where the costs greatly exceed the original understanding. In fact, when it comes to development it is the rule rather than the exception that the costs will go up substantially. I can thing of nothing more reckless than the Township committing to the purchase of a property, out of some fear that they may lose a rare opportunity, when the project itself is not fully understood or approved. It will create substantial pressure to proceed with the project because of the already sunk costs. And with real estate soft right now there is every chance they would have to resell the property at a loss if they didn’t proceed.
The Township should suggest the proponents of the stand alone library to first pursue early development of the idea privately, through volunteer efforts and donations. There are many local architects and builders in residence. When they can deliver a plan with a budget, then the Township or even the citizens via vote, should decide. A volunteer effort would lend credibility to the idea that this has broad appeal. I sit on the Board of an organization in Manhattan called Friends of the High Line (www.thehighline.org) and this is exactly what they did. They created a private organization of local volunteers and contributors and raised enough money to pay for a design that could be budgeted, as well as raise public awareness and support. Then armed with that they sought government funding and approval. The result is now the most ambitious new parks project in New York City, funded through a combination of private contributions and community, city, state and Federal monies.
Approving the Babe Ruth field without broad community support was a mistake. In general, the Township Committee seems to do little to build public support for things before committing to them. Public comment at a few sessions at meetings where they are about to vote and therefore likely decided is not even close to enough, especially when they ask for comments AFTER a vote as they have sometimes done. They should learn from their own mistakes and from what works in other communities.
Jason Stewart |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 18 2008, 9:17 am EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
I think the Stand-Alone Library is just one idea for this property.
The town certainly needs the additional parking spaces that PNC allowed visitors to use - maybe one of the reasons for this is to preserve these parking places. Maybe it is to build a "village green", which would be a wonderful addition to our town. Maybe the town sees this as an investment opportunity - buy the building and lease it out. There are so many things that could be done... why not talk about it? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 18 2008, 9:49 am EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Guest wrote: | I think the Stand-Alone Library is just one idea for this property.
The town certainly needs the additional parking spaces that PNC allowed visitors to use - maybe one of the reasons for this is to preserve these parking places. Maybe it is to build a "village green", which would be a wonderful addition to our town. Maybe the town sees this as an investment opportunity - buy the building and lease it out. There are so many things that could be done... why not talk about it? |
Why do it in closed session then? I would think there should be very few things the Township Committee should do in closed session, like discuss performance of city officials, etc., and everything else should be open to the public.
Talking is fine, but this Township has a habit of quickly jumping into action despite being in crushing debt as it is. The Township acts like a dumb consumer who loads his credit card up buying things he didn't need then is surprised when there are consequences. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 18 2008, 9:54 am EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
We don't need more parking or a "village green" right now if it costs the taxpayers a dime. Parking isn't even usually a problem by the standards of just about anywhere else. And while a green sounds like a nice idea it is not essential. I like the other posters idea. If someone wants these things,let them handle it privately through donations. If they can't get enough people to contribute then why did we think it was a good idea to impose on the same tax payers who didn't want to pay for it voluntarily? That just seems like a way to force everyone to pay for something only a minority of people wanted, like the ball field.
Seriously, some people seem in denial that we're in a recession, that the Township is in significant debt and that tax payers are under strain. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wcody
Joined: Tue, Mar 18 2008, 9:49 am EDT Posts: 126 Location: Cranbury, NJ
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 18 2008, 9:55 am EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
I found the listing for the PNC Bank property. I do not understand the deed restriction comment in the listing. Does this mean PNC is giving a break on price in order not to have a competing bank take over the property? Does anyone have insight on that provision?
The poster who said there are many potential uses for this property in the town and there should be a discussion is right. But, the discussion should be in an open meeting. The township residents have a right to understand and comment on an important decision.
Former PNC - Cranbury
32 North Main Street
Cranbury, New Jersey 08512
County: Middlesex
For Sale Active
Property Use Type: Vacant/Owner-User
Type: Retail
Street Retail
Building Size: 8,700 SF
Lot Size: 51,408 SF
Price: $1,395,000
Price/SF: $160.34
Date Last Verified: 4/15/2008
Property ID: 15651231
Property Description:
Two story former PNC Bank branch with 8,700 sq. ft. GBA situated on a 51,408 sq. ft. parcel of land. PNC Bank, N.A. will convey the property with a deed restriction prohibiting future occupancy and use of the property as a financial institution.
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Fri, Apr 18 2008, 11:23 am EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Can the property owner place such a deed restriction without the approval from the township?
I agree that any decisions that have a potential of using large sum of tax money should not be discussed in secrecy. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Sat, Apr 19 2008, 5:07 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
I'm not so sure it is as much a deed restriction as it is a clause in the sellers contract that the property can't be used. 20-30 years from now I am sure it won't matter and the people could protest the restriction. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 20 2008, 8:45 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Let's say the township can cut a deal between $1M and $1.2M. It would be around $500 per household assuming 50% of the cost comes from residential property tax. I don't think it would be a big issue if the township can restrict the property be used only for general public. For example, it can be used as a community center and renting half out to cover the maintanence. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 20 2008, 9:00 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Guest wrote: | Let's say the township can cut a deal between $1M and $1.2M. It would be around $500 per household assuming 50% of the cost comes from residential property tax. I don't think it would be a big issue if the township can restrict the property be used only for general public. For example, it can be used as a community center and renting half out to cover the maintanence. |
I disagree on all counts. First, you are only quoting the land cost not the cost to do anything with the space which will likely cost a multiple of the cost of aquisition. Again, this is the typical way that the Committee has jumped the gun without a full plan. It's exactly why we need to see the full picture before making a decision.
Second, You make the presumption that only 50% of the cost would come from property taxes but you don't know that. All this talk of possible grants etc. is not a sure thing. If they buy now they have to assume that all the cost will come from property which means at least 55% residential.
Finally, many people would consider even $500 each big idea. There seems to be a disconnect where some people think its okay to spend at all. We are in a recession and finances are tight for many. It is very presumptuous to assume a majority of residents want to spend anything at all on this, let alone all of them. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
james Guest
|
Posted: Sun, Apr 20 2008, 10:14 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
Guest wrote: | Let's say the township can cut a deal between $1M and $1.2M. It would be around $500 per household assuming 50% of the cost comes from residential property tax. I don't think it would be a big issue if the township can restrict the property be used only for general public. For example, it can be used as a community center and renting half out to cover the maintanence. |
The issue is not simply the initial cost, but maintenance, operational costs, staffing costs, this all adds up regardless of usage. The price could very well mean a continued extra $500 per home every year.
You cannot make decisions based on the hope of a grant. You must assume the expense would have to be through tax payer money. In addition, when the town is already nearing our debt limits, is spending 1 mill on a ball field, facing new very costly COAH regulations and that the purchase would mean increased interest payments due on a purchase this size, there is no justifocation for the town to make this acquisition. The TC does need to discuss this for PR purposes, but the town council has to decide not to pursue if they are truly managing the finances in a proper manner.
The comment about $500 I find to be a little out of line as well. There are many seniors and lower income people who could not afford a $500 plus increase in taxes and it is likely more than that on an on-going level.
In terms of renting out the building, there is not enough interest or money in terms of local groups to cover the cost of the purchase. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
guest3 Guest
|
Posted: Mon, Apr 21 2008, 5:55 am EDT Post subject: Re: Special Township Committee Meeting on Monday, April 21, 2008 |
|
|
The Township Committee should definitely look into this possible purchase. This could be as important as acquiring open space.
A library would be a great use for the building. Through NJ State law, our tax money is already supporting the public library so there would not have to be additional cost for maintaining a library. Yes, there is the initial cost, but there is a lot of support for a public library that would better serve all residents of our town. Fund raising could be done as well as doing any renovations in stages so that the cost would not hit all at once.
This possible purchase works on many levels...parking for our downtown, providing a great location for a community center, and preserving our downtown. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|