| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
 Posted: Sat, Mar 15 2008, 9:25 am EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
 |
|
| CP wrote: | I could not find the article wrote by Hank Kalet that supports the proposed COAH rules. If this is the view of Cranbury Press, then I will cancel my subscription.
Does anyone know what does it take to block the proposed COAH rules? |
Conveniently, their online site isn't very good and you can't comprehensively search by his name or the name of his column ("Dispatches") so someone would have to search old copies at the Lirbary and make a copy. It was over a year ago. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aThought
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat, Mar 15 2008, 9:31 am EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| Do the proposed COAH rules dictate what kind of affordable housing units a town should build? If not, let's build all the units as one-bedroom ones. That will help reduce the school load. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Mar 16 2008, 3:25 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
I urge all Cranbury residents to individually contact our state representative to voice your opposition to the New and future COAH obligations. Our representatives in District 14 is as follows:
District 14 - Cranbury Township, Hamilton Township, Jamesburg Borough, Monroe Township, Plainsboro Township, South Brunswick Township, West Windsor Township
Senator BILL BARONI - Republican
District Office: 3691A Nottingham Way, Hamilton Square, NJ 08690 (609)-631-9988
Assemblyman WAYNE P. DEANGELO - Democrat
District Office: 2239 Whitehorse-Mercerville Rd., Suite E, Hamilton, NJ 08619 (609)-631-7501
Assemblywoman LINDA R. GREENSTEIN - Democrat
District Office: 7 Centre Dr., Suite 2, Monroe, NJ 08831-1565 (609)-395-9911 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 10:46 am EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| Baroni and Greenstein are always showing up at Cranbury events. But I have never seen DeAngelo. If he is really one of Cranbury's representatives, why does he never attend meetings or our public functions? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Traveler
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 11:48 am EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| Does opening the meeting to the public guarantee our collective voices will be heard or has a decision regarding COAH already been reached? Sometimes I wonder if the public's opinion really matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJJ
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 12:02 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| Are there politicians in Trenton who oppose the proposed new COAH rules? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 12:47 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| JJJ wrote: | | Are there politicians in Trenton who oppose the proposed new COAH rules? |
No, the reason being that at this point in time with the housing market builders need to keep busy anyway possible. They contribute to the politicians campaigns so the politicians in turn grant favors. They are now making housing requirements that are simply forcing towns to pay builders to build homes to meet the COAH obligations. It is a classic NJ politican move. Corzine and his cronies are destroying the state. I have friends whose town is going to be destroyed by consolidation and I can see the same thing happening here with COAH rules being just the first step.
The funny thing is that everywhere I have lived with consolidation the taxes are still an issue, but now you have bigger districts and programs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JJJ
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 12:56 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
Are the state politicians working for the builders or for the tax payers?
I think a good way to approach this issue is to unit all the townships that oppose the COAH rules and organize a mass protest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 1:19 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
My understanding of COAH is if we accept the 3rd round proposal, by 2018 the ratio of Low income housing to regular single family housing will be 50/50.
COAH is on a voluntary basis. Princeton is probably going to opt out of the third round that COAH has stipulated. I think we have to have an answer by 3/22. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 1:39 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| I say we join Princeton and just say NO! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ya
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 1:53 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| If this is on a voluntary basis, then just tell the state that Cranbury is going to opt out. Are there penalties for opting out? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Traveler
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 2:33 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| The only penalty I see is the one the township committee will have to pay when they don't get re-elected to another term. They better pay strict attention to the people's voices that elected them in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 3:02 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| The saddest part of this is that great towns are being destroyed because the builders' lobby is pushing this through. They are protecting their own interests by securing mandated building. Our best bet is to band together with other communities and form an organized "lobby" of our own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 3:14 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| JJJ wrote: | | Are there politicians in Trenton who oppose the proposed new COAH rules? |
As I understand it, our reps, at least Baroni and Greenstein, do oppose it. They will be attending the meeting at our request.
Let's make sure our expectation is clear for the meeting today. It is a Canbury gathering to discuss the issue, so it is all singing to the choir. There are no officials of COAH or the politicians supporting the measure in attendance. The Cranbury Township Council has already gone on record as uniformly opposing the measure and planning to send an official statement on Cranbury's opposition as well as consider legal actions.
This meeting is a chance to hear more details, VENT, maybe get a little publicity and maybe, just maybe, discuss other concrete actions the citizens of the Township can do to fight this.
This meeting is NOT a chance to be face-to-face with anyone who is voting for these measures or who supports them. It is NOT a forum where you will here anyone defending them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Mar 17 2008, 3:19 pm EDT Post subject: Re: Save Cranbury! |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | The saddest part of this is that great towns are being destroyed because the builders' lobby is pushing this through. They are protecting their own interests by securing mandated building. Our best bet is to band together with other communities and form an organized "lobby" of our own. |
I agree that Trenton is all about special interests including the builders lobby. But the real reason for this particular bill are the politicians like the Governor and Assembly Speaker who want to force smaller towns to merge into larger ones, plain and simple. When you say this measure will destroy Cranbury you have to realize that this is precisely the intent of the proponents of the bill -- to end small townships. Builders make out fine with or without the bill since in the current rules we pay other townships to take our quota and the builders make out anyway. The unique thing here is the way they are forcing the small towns to keep the quota in their borders, with the sole purpose of making their economics impossible unless they merge. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
