Author	Message
Cranbury Press	Posted: Thu, Sep 25 2008, 5:58 pm EDT    Post subject: Cranbury candidates discuss plans for the library Cranbury candidates discuss plans for the library Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:47 PM EDT By Maria Prato-Gaines, Staff Writer CRANBURY — Both candidates for Township Committee say residents should get their say regarding whether Cranbury should build a free-standing library. Democrat John Ritter and Republican Win Cody are vying for one, three- year seat on the Township Committee. The Cranbury Public Library shares space with the Cranbury School Library, and as a result, is under the school district’s jurisdiction. This week, the district decided the library would be closed to the public Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. and from 1 p.m. to 3 p.m. as early as mid- October for the duration and an evaluation period of one year. School officials made the request after discussing some recent security issues and in an effort to help their standings with state evaluators, who look at how the library is used to help with core content standards. Li brary representatives say they will not be able to fully serve the public operating under these limited hours and will have to cut a number of its programs. M r. Ritter said the development has been a wake-up call for Cranbury. ”T he Cranbury School and the Cranbury Public Library both make strong cases,” he said. “We have reached the point where they cannot both meet their missions at the same time in the small space that they share. It is time for the library board, the school board and the Township Committee to carefully plan a transition of the Cranbury Public Library to its own space in a way that creates the minimum loss of vital services for both the students and the public.” Mr. Ritter said he encourages the public library and Township Committee to formalize an agreement for using the space on the Wright South property, which has been designated by the township Master Plan as the site for a future library. ”The library will then be in a position to develop a design for a library with expanded programs and capabilities and meeting spaces that can be shared by other community groups that it can present to the community for approval,” Mr. Ritter said. “The library will also have to aggressively pursue public and private grants and contributions to reduce the cost of a public library to taxpayers as much as possible. Cost is a major consideration for all of us. ”We are going to have to decide as a community where we are headed in the future and the place of a public library in our community is a critical decision about our future,” he said. “It’s a lot of lead time to plan this so the sooner we start the better.” Mr. Cody said that although the public library’s dilemma is an important, the Township Committee’s major concern should be recent third- round housing obligations that have been set by the Council on Affordable Housing. Until that is addressed, Mr. Cody said, he thinks that after 40 years of partnership, the public library and school should be able to come together to find a temporary solution. ”The timing is bad because of COAH,” Mr. Cody said. “Until we resolve COAH (obligations) the committee itself should not be distracted by this, but individuals could be.” Mr. Cody said he would like to call on the township’s residents to investigate the possible cost and the implications that building a new stand-alone library or purchasing a building to renovate would have on Cranbury taxpayers. ”I don’t want to spend a lot of Cranbury’s money to do this, there’s enough talented individuals in this town to do it,” he said. “Whatever we do we need a plan and to have a full understanding of the acquisition costs, or renovation costs, or ongoing costs to run and support (a library).” Although Mr. Cody said he would prefer to see a standalone and energy efficient library built on the Wright South property, ultimately he said that decision should be left to the voters. ”I think a plan can be developed,” he said. “But I’d let the people decide this because there is a lot of debate.” Mr. Cody said he would also like to see a library building fund established, that way the township could begin fundraising to build a possible new facility. Both candidates agreed that if the township does intend to build a new library the plans should incorporate a space for a community and senior center. In June, the Township Committee said it would not consider the PNC Bank building on Main Street for use as a library after receiving despite 52 signatures presented by residents for it to do so. The approximately 8,700-square-foot building at 32 N. Main St. sits on a little more than an acre and has been on the market as of April. During an informal poll of the Township Committee on May 19, Tom Panconi and Wayne Wittman said they would not support further exploration of the purchase. Since four of the six council members would need to support a bond ordinance that would allow the committee to borrow money for a purchase, the committee decided to end discussions on the topic that night. A group of residents began circulating a petition in late June and presented it to the committee, hoping it would change township official’s opinions. Mr. Ritter, who publicly spoke in favor of further exploration of the PNC bank purchase, said that he supported the idea if it triggered discussion on the future of the library. ”I think the outcome of the study would have probably concluded that it wasn’t the best solution for a library,” he said. “But it would have allowed us to understand how fast we were going to need a facility.” Mr. Cody, on the other hand, has been adamantly opposed to further exploration of the purchase, because he said the township officials did present the community with enough information to really know what they were approaching. ;”The way the PNC bank acquisition was presented was let’s buy it now and figure out its use later,” he said. “The PNC bank did not seem as ideal as the Master Plan.” http://www.packetonline.com/articles/2008/09/25/cranbury_press/news/doc48dbf6e62c88f527625435.txt
voter	Posted: Mon, Sep 15 2008, 8:09 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view I am reviving this thread for three reasons. 1) I've seen Mr. Ritter walking around talking to people so I am sure this site has come up in conversation, which to me means he should be looking at it now. 2) Win has posted his response, so I think we need to keep this active for Mr. Ritter to respond as well and to know the thread exists. Most people won't look through the archives. 3) All the Pro-Obama support recently shows this site has Democrat readers. So no reason Mr. Ritter should not feel comfortable (as some, not Mr. Ritter) have said.
Guest	Posted: Thu, Sep 11 2008, 11:02 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view Guest wrote: I favor a town hall type meeting that allows the candidates to express their views. I'd opt for a moderated format that allows questions to be posed to the candidates as well. Anonymous board postings are not always the most civil form of debate. Such a forum would be great as long as there can be some back-and-forth on the questions instead of a single question-and-answer. The problem with that is candidates can often not truly answer the questions.
Guest	Posted: Thu, Sep 11 2008, 9:15 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view The Women's club for years has sponsored an open forum debate that few people ever attend. The event is held in October and will be posted here and in the Press. I encourage everyone to attend. However, the candidates should choose every option available to voice a platform including here.
Guest	Posted: Thu, Sep 11 2008, 9:05 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view I favor a town hall type meeting that allows the candidates to express their views. I'd opt for a moderated format that allows questions to be posed to the candidates as well. Anonymous board postings are not always the most civil form of debate.
Traveler	Posted: Thu, Sep 11 2008, 8:45 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view How about staging a town hall meeting where the two candidates can come before our residents to field questions from a select panel.
James	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 10:13 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view Jersey Dad wrote: voter wrote: Sorry, it was late and yes I most likely did read too much into it, but please know I was not talking about you specifically. I was going to post an immediate follow up about the tone of my post, but went to bed instead. I hope this clarifies things. Again, no harm meant. Voter, No problem. Thanks for the clarification. I hope both candidates use this site and every other available forum to make their opinions and intentions clear. We are facing some very serious issues (consolidation of schools and services, affordable housing plans, declining commercial tax revenue, etc.). We are going to need hard working leaders with good ideas, business and political acumen and tremendous dedication. Whomever gets elected should be fully vetted during the campaign, because once they are on the committee, there's a lot they can't say. I could not agree more.
Jersey Dad	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 10:08 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view Guest wrote: I won’t personally feel satisfied with anything short of an in-person opportunity to ask questions. I have been able to speak with Mr, Cody numerous times and would like to with Mr. Ritter. As far as I know, Mr Ritter makes himself available after every TC meeting. You may want try to catch up with him after a meeting. Just a suggestion.
Jersey Dad	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 9:43 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view voter wrote: Sorry, it was late and yes I most likely did read too much into it, but please know I was not talking about you specifically. I was going to post an immediate follow up about the tone of my post, but went to bed instead. I hope this clarifies things. Again, no harm meant. Voter, No problem. Thanks for the clarification. I hope both candidates use this site and every other available forum to make their opinions and intentions clear. We are facing some very serious issues (consolidation of schools and services, affordable housing plans, declining commercial tax revenue, etc.). We are going to need hard working leaders with good ideas, business and political acumen and tremendous dedication. Whomever gets elected should be fully vetted during the campaign, because once they are on the committee, there's a lot they can't say.
Guest	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 9:18 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view On the one hand, I do believe that Mr. Cody has a "home field" advantage on this forum since he has been a long-time poster here and the majority of overall posts have clearly expressed parity with many of his positions and strong opposition to some held by Mr. Ritter, including the PNC site and library and support for the current TC leadership and policies. Also, the fact that this is a mostly anonymous board (an amazing feat in such a small town) has led many to post more aggressively than they might in-person. Mr. Ritter has every reason to be concerned that he would meet with some hostile responses whether that is the intent or not. And perhaps a written forum like doesn’t play to his strengths. All that said, I a concerned that the Cranbury Press is not going to be an adequate forum to fully appreciate the positions and integrity of the candidates. While the editor seems to have embraced the suggestions that started on this board to do much more detailed coverage of the candidates this year, the format still doesn’t lend itself to the more iterative back-and-forth discussion that will really allow us to understand these candidates. I feel burned by having relied on that for the last TC election where I voted along my party lines and this contributed to helping elect the majority that I now feel is undermining Cranbury’s economy, future and non-political tradition. And when you go back to what they said in the Press, it is clear that they haven’t minded directly contradicting their campaign pledges, in spirit or letter. I won’t personally feel satisfied with anything short of an in-person opportunity to ask questions, hear answers and further have a chance to re-press or clarify them if I didn’t feel I got clarity. Mr. Ritter indicated in the Press that he is making the rounds house-to-house. If so, I welcome the chance to speak to him but he has yet to come to my neighborhood or house. Ideally I would love to see an open forum where both candidates appear and stay as long as it takes to answer everyone’s questions – we’re a small enough town that this could work. In lieu of any of the above, this forum is the next best thing. I will say this. I have made a pledge, since realizing the huge mistake I made in blindly voting for Mr. Stout, that I will never again vote for a candidate in the local election that I did not get to meet or directly question about their positions. If I haven’t met either, I will withhold my vote for that position before voting along party lines or reputation. But as a responsible citizen, that is a last resort and I will strive to meet the candidates. I have been able to speak with Mr, Cody numerous times and would like to with Mr. Ritter.
voter	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 8:38 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view Sorry, it was late and yes I most likely did read too much into it, but please know I was not talking about you specifically. I was going to post an immediate follow up about the tone of my post, but went to bed instead. Some background. I ran into people at the grocery store who were complaining about my post not knowing it was me who posted. Saying it was not right for someone on this forum to ask for a candidate to respond. Then I saw the first post about the Cranbury Press and that Mr. Ritter doesn't post here, then I saw yours and well I hope you can understand.. So I did not mean to cite you specifically. Since you say I took it out of context or misread it I apologize to you. I read your post one way that was you had not intended. I took it as saying ask the candidates direct, not here. Just as the others. My intent is simply that I can't believe people (just generic not anyone poster or person specifically) don't want to hear an answer from the candidates in an open forum or not even question why candidates may ignore a forum like this. I say this because you'll never see Pari challenge David, so it is important to know if Mr. Cody and Mr. Ritter will be like Mr. Wittman or if they will be like Pari. A lot of people can't go to meetings, but do read this forum. I hope this clarifies things. Again, no harm meant.
Jersey Dad	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 8:23 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view voter wrote: I find it amazing how many people are jumping to defend a lack of response from the candidates. I wonder if this is Democrat support for not having to put Mr. Ritter on the spot for voicing an opinion that may differ from the other Dems on TC. Or justifying Mr. Ritter from having to committ to a plan on hearing resident concerns. I really don't understand the opinions posted opposing the question being answered. Voter, If this is supposed to be a response to my post, you are reading way too much into it and I don't appreciate your overeaching accusations. While I share your frustrations with the lack of openly available information, it is important to understand that it would be irresponsible to post certain types of information. If you have any questions about my comments, please feel free to call me, or talk to me at the next meeting. Despite the "Jersey Dad" tag, I'm pretty sure anyone paying attention to my posts knows who I am. See you àt the next meeting. Dave
voter	Posted: Wed, Sep 10 2008, 6:42 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view Mr. Cody, Thank you for the information you put forward. I appreciate your taking the time to respond. Hopefully, we can hear from Mr. Ritter and see his views and plan.
wcody	Posted: Tue, Sep 9 2008, 11:57 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view Voter wrote: Mr. Cody and Mr. Ritter, please let us know how you'll involve residents in the decision making process. How will you differ from the current people on the TC? I feel it is critical for the Township Committee to take in the opinions of the residents on making decisions. The township committee is elected to represent the people of Cranbury. Decisions should be made that serve the best interest of Cranbury. The larger the magnitude of the decision, the more input is necessary before making a decision. By magnitude I mean large expense (i.e. library, ballpark, etc.) or long term potential irreversible action (land preservation). There are several ways to get more input from residents: Being around, attending events and talking to people in town. I have started my walking around town and have already visited several hundred houses. This is a great way to get the pulse of what people care about. Listening to residents at the township committee Reading email and letters from residents Having a booth at Cranbury Day where the TC can interact with residents, I was disappointed there was no TC booth this year Reading this board. All the activity is great way to get a sense of what is going on. Because most posts are anonymous, it is sometimes unclear to determine how widespread a view is held in town by posts on this board but it is a great indicator and a way to learn information. I feel there needs to be more openness from the Township Committee to improve communication. I feel there are too many closed sessions and sub-committees. Sub-committees are de-facto closed sessions. Of course closed session for certain matters such as personnel are still needed but they should be kept to a minimum. For major decisions (i.e, ball field, new stand alone library), I would propose we have public referendums to truly get the sense of the town. Before we embark on large non-emergency expenditures, a plan and business case should be put together outline expenses and impact, then presented that to town and placed on a ballot. The plan and business case need not be done exclusively by the TC or consultants, concerned residents can help put these plans together where appropriate. There are at least two elections (primary and general election) each year, there should be sufficient time to plan and put these on the ballot without increasing expenses. I am very happy to any question to the best of my ability. I will post answers to questions of general interest. I am getting questions from meeting people and will start posting some answers. I will post them on this site and my blog on Cranbury (I have not been active posting there since this site is so active). There are many ways to reach me: There are email links on this site, my blog – http://cranburynj.blogspot.com – and the Cranbury Republican site which has many of my positions – www.cranburyrepublicans.com My email is wcody@alum.mit.edu Win Cody
voter	Posted: Tue, Sep 9 2008, 11:10 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view I would also encourage everyone to meet the candidates. I agree they both seem like very nice people. Pari and David are also nice people. However, I stand by my post. I am not asking for a comment on their plan for COAH, I am not asking views on litigation, I am asking a very valid, very open question and the posters here should know the answer. Especially in light of our current TC. How will residents be heard? My comments are not heard at public comment with today's TC. See the ballfield, west property, revaluation, staff increases, etc... I find it amazing how many people are jumping to defend a lack of response from the candidates. I wonder if this is Democrat support for not having to put Mr. Ritter on the spot for voicing an opinion that may differ from the other Dems on TC. Or justifying Mr. Ritter from having to committ to a plan on hearing resident concerns. If not, it certainly doesn't help his cause. I really hope he responds because these statements are doing him a great disservice when in all fairness he may not be and likely is not aware. My initial question is fair and stance is fair. I really don't understand the opinions posted opposing the question being answered on this forum.
voter	Posted: Tue, Sep 9 2008, 11:07 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Mr. Ritter and Mr. Cody- Tell us your view I would also encourage everyone to meet the candidates. I agree they both seem like very nice people. Pari and David are also nice people. However, I stand by my post. I am not asking for a comment on their plan for COAH, I am not asking views on litigation, I am asking a very valid, very open question and the posters here should know the answer. Especially in light of our current TC. How will residents be heard? My comments are not heard at public comment with today's TC. See the ballfield, west property, revaluation, staff increases, etc... I find it amazing how many people are jumping to defend a lack of response from the candidates. I wonder if this is Democrat support for not having to put Mr. Ritter on the spot for voicing an opinion that may differ from the other Dems on TC. Or justifying Mr. Ritter from having to committ to a plan on hearing resident concerns. If not, it certainly doesn't help his cause. I really hope he responds because these statements are doing him a great disservice when in all fairness he may not be and likely is not aware. My initial question is fair and stance is fair. I really don't understand the opinions posted opposing the question being answered on this forum.