The January 4, 2010 Township Committee Reorganization Meeting

[Guest]

The January 4, 2010 Township Committee Reorganization Meeting Agenda has been posted.

http://www.cranburytownship.org/TC-Documents/2010/Agenda010410.pdf

[Guest]

Who will be the new mayor?

[Guest]

It will be decided at the meeting.

[Guest]

David Stout was voted in as the Mayor. He and Win were both nominated, but only David was seconded so the vote was 5-0 in support.

[I need to know?]

And the two planning board seats. Who were they filled by? Did Win Cody get one in a bi-partisan effort?

[Guest]

David will fill one and Richard Stannard will fill the other one. The Mayor has the option to sit on the PB or do as Pari Stave did and delegate it to another individual.

[Guest]

Win was also nominated to fill the PB seat, but was not seconded. The vote was 3-2.

[Guest]

So, in short, there was a strong showing of bipartisanship?

[Guest]

[Guest]

There were three spots that the TC committee needed to appoint themselves to, the Mayor and 2 members of the planning board. Even though there is a 3-2 majority for the Democrats, it was sad to see that the Democrats used their majority to fill all three positions on party line votes. It would have been better representation to see one of those roles go to Win.

[Guest]

What drugs are you folks on. In my time here there has been a crossover vote so the minority party would hold the mayoral post exactly once ( by the way it was a democrat voting for a republican). This isn't about the death of bipartisanship or those mean democrats, it is how this body functions whether democrat or republican. You may dislike that, however there was no indication it was going to change and I don't recall any call for it too change on this board or anywhere else.

[Guest]

Here is my view as an independent who voted for one TC Dem and Rep this past year.

The issue is not the Mayor, it is the whole organization of our town- Mayor and 2 PB seats. It's quite clear that the 3 positions could have been filled in a bi-partisan manner by 3 people, David choosing to not allow Win the PB seat by filling it himself was a clear partisan move. They could have easily appointed Win and Richard to the PB and David as Mayor- a win for all people and a great showing to our town.

There has been many calls for bipartisanship. Dave Cook and Jay Taylor both stated in the campaign they supported working in Bi-partisan manners appointing Dems and Reps equally to positions.

So either we all agree that our town is now party politics or we stand by the statement that many of us want to believe that party politics should be excluded and hold our TC responsible for that goal. Win and Jay easily could have said no to David as Mayor along a party line vote and did not. They supported a David which in a bipartisan vote. When given the chance to do the same on the PB the Dems chose not to return the courtesy and vote in party lock step. (side note- this concerns me for any major vote this year that may arise as it shows there is a group of 3.)

Again, we should not be Republican or Democrat, we should be looking to put as many TC members in positions of advice as possible because all are voted in equally. If there are 3 seats available then 3 different people irrespective of party should be in those seats not 2 people with one serving a dual role.

[Guest]

I honestly think it won't make any difference who sits on the Planning Board.

[Guest]

[Guest]

[Guest]