Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
▪
Cranbury School
▪
Cranbury Township
▪
Cranbury Library
▪
Cranbury.org
▪
Cranburyhistory.org
(Press Ctrl and = keys to increase font size)
Search
Register (optional)
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
[http://cranbury.info]
->
News | Events
Post a reply
Username
Subject
Message body
Emoticons
Font colour:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
White
Black
Font size:
Tiny
Small
Normal
Large
Huge
Close Tags
[quote="anon-sp0n"][quote="anon-s6p5"]It's not a theory of someone can point to a resolution approved by the TC at a TC mtg. People have asked you - show a TC document on this. - show why if it is such an issue why only one person showed up the night of the resolution being voted on when the TC even praised the opponent. No matter how much you state there is no TC vote or minute shown by you. Just show your proof and all this goes away.[/quote] 1) If the TC has not publicly released the contract and edited the minutes not to include the full details of the contract, how exactly do you suggest showing a document? There were 60 people the PB meeting who heard Glenn on the record. Because the PB meeting usually takes months to release its minutes, it will be a while whether we see how much detail they contain. But if you are really going to take the insincere position that if it's not int he minutes it didn't happen, do you then agree in advance that if it is later proven it did happen you agree it was wrong that it was previously withheld from a public document and you resent your previous statements? You keep going to this defense that it doesn't exist, so I just want to be clear when you are proven wrong that you don't try and backpedal. 2) Show me where there was a public announcement by the TC in advance of the meeting that said they would be discussing and voting on public funding of library-related construction and maintenance? If you can't, there's the answer to your question about why the attendance was so low. You can't have it both ways -- if the Township is going to intentionally under sell what they are talking about, you can't use low turn out as an excuse for justifying whatever they do. When they were talking about affordable housing they held a special meeting, sent out special emails, etc. In this case they didn't even make the full subject of discussion clear in their agenda. The library has appeared many times for informal updates too, and usually say there will be time for formal decisions later. Just look at the PB meeting. There was an "informal discussion" on the Library on a previous agenda where in the end they formally recommended the location which at the subsequent meeting they said it was too late to change -- hardly "informal." (http://www.cranburytownship.org/pb_agendas/2016/PB_agenda040716.pdf) Almost no one came. They didn't notice any of the neighbors. Then they formally noticed the closest neighbors for the most recent meeting and 60 people showed up. And that was from just the small subset that were noticed. Think of what the turnout would have been if they have notified everyone in town. And over-and-over these neighbors commented on not being notified before only to have the Library and TC member suggest it was too late for them to be making any comments. Fortunately the PB adjourned without taking action, but only over the protests of one of the Library supporters and a TC member. Again, it's all about transparency, or lack there of. You can't have informal discussions and an agenda item about municipal parking that actually results in an agreement to fund parts of the library project then say everyone had the chance to speak up. Either make the real, honorable effort to notify people and give them to chance to speak up or accept that it is being railroaded intentionally with as little opportunity for public comment as they can get away with. It's a choice. But doing one then claiming the other is unethical and slimy.[/quote]
Options
HTML is
ON
BBCode
is
ON
Smilies are
ON
Disable HTML in this post
Disable BBCode in this post
Disable Smilies in this post
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Jump to:
Select a forum
Topics
----------------
News | Events
School | Parenting
Blogs by Cranbury Residents
Shopping | Good Deals | Price Talk
Home Sweet Home
House For Sale
Home Sales Pricing Records
Financial | Stocks | Mutual Funds
Cool Bytes & Bits
Garage Sale | ForSale Ads | Things to Trade
Tech Related (PC, Internet, HDTV, etc.)
Interesing and Fun Stuff to Share
What's Your Favorite?
Interests | Hobbies
Cranbury History
Radom Thoughts | Sports | Kitchen Sink
Amazon Deals
Local Business Info
----------------
Local Business Ads (FREE)
Support
----------------
Daily Sponsored Message & Amazon Ads
About Us | Your Privacy | Suggestion | Sponsored
Test Area (Practice your posting skills here)
Topic review
Author
Message
CHRIS C.-0582
Posted: Tue, Apr 4 2017, 5:19 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
anon-475o wrote:
For the same money you could buy every kid in Cranbury school a Tablet reader and an Amazon prime membership.
Past: What could 650K have purchased for its patrons and citizens of Cranbury? I daresay a tablet for every RESIDENT with a paid subscription to Amazon books, Netflix, Spotify and HULU? All the while keeping the current library in place to give people the traditional library setting.
Present: Fake news of BIG and INTERESTING library events, inflated library circulation and usage numbers. Misrepresentation of 'private funds' donations
Future: Squander of annual State Library Tax AND municipal tax on a new brick and mortar library building with LESS shelf space, LESS operating hours than the current, and the delightful sounds of ping pong from the COMMUNITY CENTER meeting rooms.
Save Our Library DON'T BUILD A NEW ONE
anon-15o6
Posted: Fri, Feb 17 2017, 9:25 am EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
While the Indivisible member was trying to hack the site (and prevent free speech), they re-posted an important reminder from the past, the police station. This article points out the increase in bid price over budget, and in fact, I remember the end cost even increased after that. Does anyone recall the numbers?
We don't want to be put into a similar situation if the Indivisible Library gets started. There needs to be either a guarantee of building price by a third party who will assume all cost overruns or a contingency fund built in. We should not have the taxpayers assume even more of a financial burden.
anon-15o6
Posted: Fri, Feb 17 2017, 7:57 am EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
anon-992n wrote:
On another thread it is mentioned the library has collected and held over the last few years an excess of $650,000 that could have been used each year to better our current program.
Is that a true number $650,000 the library "stole" from not using that money each year to better our communities library program? How is that even allowed that we have a mandatory tax each year but they are able to not use that money? I have been on the fence about donating to them but if this is true no way they certainly do not need my money when they have that much left over each year. Why would ANYONE give money to them!!!!
anon-15o6
Posted: Fri, Feb 17 2017, 7:56 am EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
12anony-p0o2 wrote:
Again, if the library is not transparent about information regarding book and programming statistics, how does anybody besides the TC and BOE know about them?
anon-15o6
Posted: Fri, Feb 17 2017, 7:56 am EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
anon-q2q6 wrote:
Reformist-0582 wrote:
anon-pr2p wrote:
Not sure why people may think the new library building and operation are not linked.
The library director is primarily focused on a new building. If you need proof, look at the Director's latest December note on their web site
www.cranburypubliclibrary.org
, it is all about contributing to a new library, nothing about services.
Current shoddy operations will directly impact a new library.
Cranbury Library usage statistics continue to drop. Circulation numbers steadily decline - which is apparent to TC & BOE as they see the monthly reports that Ms. Mullen & Ms. Venanzi REFUSE to post on the library's website. [That is why TC taking hardline with library to have all funds in hand prior to groundbreaking].
THE LIBRARY IS A TAXPAYER FUNDED ENTITY AND MUST BE TRANSPARENT WITH ALL DATA IN REAL TIME.
The smoke & mirror mentality of Venanzi Library Board is that the lack of space hinders the library. In actuality it is the Library Director that is the problem.
Any new library building will be gutless with the inept Director Ms. Mullen at the helm and the slacking Ms. Murphy and Ms. Dera on board.
Library Board of Directors stop being bystanders, focus on the considerable deficiencies in library and tow the hardline.
Until that occurs we will be saddled with a big expensive building being run by bottom barrel performers.
Sadly, the numbers are juiced anyway. They never give a straight answer about how many non-school age people use the library. The fact is, we don't need more space and the design for the proposed library is proof. The actual library space in new design is about the same size as the current library. They could re-design the current library space and accomplish pretty much the same thing.
For my money, I'd rather see them add on a community room to Teddy's. Or people could just periodically rent the room at the Cranbury Inn, or Methodist Church, or Presbyterian Church, or Cranbury Station, or one of the hotels, or Town Hall, etc.
anon-07o2
Posted: Thu, Feb 16 2017, 7:18 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
anon-992n wrote:
On another thread it is mentioned the library has collected and held over the last few years an excess of $650,000 that could have been used each year to better our current program.
Is that a true number $650,000 the library "stole" from not using that money each year to better our communities library program? How is that even allowed that we have a mandatory tax each year but they are able to not use that money? I have been on the fence about donating to them but if this is true no way they certainly do not need my money when they have that much left over each year. Why would ANYONE give money to them!!!!
you're a fucking idiot rofl
anon-992n
Posted: Thu, Feb 16 2017, 2:41 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
On another thread it is mentioned the library has collected and held over the last few years an excess of $650,000 that could have been used each year to better our current program.
Is that a true number $650,000 the library "stole" from not using that money each year to better our communities library program? How is that even allowed that we have a mandatory tax each year but they are able to not use that money? I have been on the fence about donating to them but if this is true no way they certainly do not need my money when they have that much left over each year. Why would ANYONE give money to them!!!!
12anony-p0o2
Posted: Thu, Feb 16 2017, 2:40 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
Again, if the library is not transparent about information regarding book and programming statistics, how does anybody besides the TC and BOE know about them?
anon-q2q6
Posted: Wed, Feb 15 2017, 9:44 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
Reformist-0582 wrote:
anon-pr2p wrote:
Not sure why people may think the new library building and operation are not linked.
The library director is primarily focused on a new building. If you need proof, look at the Director's latest December note on their web site
www.cranburypubliclibrary.org
, it is all about contributing to a new library, nothing about services.
Current shoddy operations will directly impact a new library.
Cranbury Library usage statistics continue to drop. Circulation numbers steadily decline - which is apparent to TC & BOE as they see the monthly reports that Ms. Mullen & Ms. Venanzi REFUSE to post on the library's website. [That is why TC taking hardline with library to have all funds in hand prior to groundbreaking].
THE LIBRARY IS A TAXPAYER FUNDED ENTITY AND MUST BE TRANSPARENT WITH ALL DATA IN REAL TIME.
The smoke & mirror mentality of Venanzi Library Board is that the lack of space hinders the library. In actuality it is the Library Director that is the problem.
Any new library building will be gutless with the inept Director Ms. Mullen at the helm and the slacking Ms. Murphy and Ms. Dera on board.
Library Board of Directors stop being bystanders, focus on the considerable deficiencies in library and tow the hardline.
Until that occurs we will be saddled with a big expensive building being run by bottom barrel performers.
Sadly, the numbers are juiced anyway. They never give a straight answer about how many non-school age people use the library. The fact is, we don't need more space and the design for the proposed library is proof. The actual library space in new design is about the same size as the current library. They could re-design the current library space and accomplish pretty much the same thing.
For my money, I'd rather see them add on a community room to Teddy's. Or people could just periodically rent the room at the Cranbury Inn, or Methodist Church, or Presbyterian Church, or Cranbury Station, or one of the hotels, or Town Hall, etc.
anony12-p0o2
Posted: Wed, Feb 15 2017, 7:51 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
How do you have access to these reports? Are you on the town council or BOE?
Reformist-0582
Posted: Wed, Feb 15 2017, 3:47 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
anon-pr2p wrote:
Not sure why people may think the new library building and operation are not linked.
The library director is primarily focused on a new building. If you need proof, look at the Director's latest December note on their web site
www.cranburypubliclibrary.org
, it is all about contributing to a new library, nothing about services.
Current shoddy operations will directly impact a new library.
Cranbury Library usage statistics continue to drop. Circulation numbers steadily decline - which is apparent to TC & BOE as they see the monthly reports that Ms. Mullen & Ms. Venanzi REFUSE to post on the library's website. [That is why TC taking hardline with library to have all funds in hand prior to groundbreaking].
THE LIBRARY IS A TAXPAYER FUNDED ENTITY AND MUST BE TRANSPARENT WITH ALL DATA IN REAL TIME.
The smoke & mirror mentality of Venanzi Library Board is that the lack of space hinders the library. In actuality it is the Library Director that is the problem.
Any new library building will be gutless with the inept Director Ms. Mullen at the helm and the slacking Ms. Murphy and Ms. Dera on board.
Library Board of Directors stop being bystanders, focus on the considerable deficiencies in library and tow the hardline.
Until that occurs we will be saddled with a big expensive building being run by bottom barrel performers.
psq-07o2
Posted: Sat, Dec 24 2016, 12:29 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
Neener-neener.
anon-q2q6
Posted: Sat, Dec 24 2016, 10:33 am EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
anon-5474 wrote:
grandma-0582 wrote:
anon-475o wrote:
In this town, there can't be more than a handful of kids that are not in school during the day and the school has its own librarian. There are hardly any programs for kids, and the few that there are require very little on the part of the children's librarian.
No success with teen Librarian Joann Dera or children Librarian Jan Murphy. Applied broad definition of "teen" to include 12 yr olds only gathers the gamers one hour a week. No creativity or outreach to actual teens. PHS resident teens abandoned Wednesday night reading sessions. Children's programs flatlined for years.
Greed and selfishness to the tune of $180,000 to have three certified librarians with daytime shifts. Schedule each individually, and alternate, all OPERATING hours and add a short Sunday.
Give real service.
It's a shame. "Supporting the library" is typically a noble cause that involves helping improve access to information and expand literacy and the love of learning. Unfortunately, this project is about indulging a small group of cranky old people and librarians who don't want to have to deal with all those annoying kids making noise in their library.
Psq-0o99 wrote:
Said the mother of the kid who was running around making noise.
Said the cranky old person/librarian.
Psq-0o99
Posted: Fri, Dec 23 2016, 2:04 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
Said the mother of the kid who was running around making noise.
anon-5474
Posted: Fri, Dec 23 2016, 9:20 am EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
grandma-0582 wrote:
anon-475o wrote:
In this town, there can't be more than a handful of kids that are not in school during the day and the school has its own librarian. There are hardly any programs for kids, and the few that there are require very little on the part of the children's librarian.
No success with teen Librarian Joann Dera or children Librarian Jan Murphy. Applied broad definition of "teen" to include 12 yr olds only gathers the gamers one hour a week. No creativity or outreach to actual teens. PHS resident teens abandoned Wednesday night reading sessions. Children's programs flatlined for years.
Greed and selfishness to the tune of $180,000 to have three certified librarians with daytime shifts. Schedule each individually, and alternate, all OPERATING hours and add a short Sunday.
Give real service.
It's a shame. "Supporting the library" is typically a noble cause that involves helping improve access to information and expand literacy and the love of learning. Unfortunately, this project is about indulging a small group of cranky old people and librarians who don't want to have to deal with all those annoying kids making noise in their library.
publius-q30r
Posted: Thu, Dec 22 2016, 1:19 pm EST
Post subject: Re: Queen of Scottsdale
"Why should i pay taxes when i dont have any kids, dagnabbit?"
ummmmm...........i'm sure some ole codger said the same thing when you were knee high to a bullfrog Ebeneezer.
Taxes are the price we all pay for civilization.
I dont like my money going to blow up other countries, but, there you go.