| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 5:19 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
 |
|
THE SPEED LIMIT ON OLD TRENTON ROAD NEEDS TO BE 50 MPH
RAISE IT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!OR LOSE MANY VOTES!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 5:22 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| How come there is no discussion on raising the speed limit back to 50 on Old Trenton road? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 6:15 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| This is again a County Road. The County made the decision. It is highly unlikely that they will now agree to 50 MPH. The TC did not make the change to 35. People wanted the speed limit lowered and the county did it. Take it up with your freeholders. Only Rob Diamond went to the Freeholder meeting where it was discussed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 9:10 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| So how many people in town actually requested the speed limit to be changed? I didn't hear about it nor was I asked about it. I guess Rob Diamond is the spokesman for our town now. Isn't he also against taking his trees down to widen the road? I'll be interested to see how the township acquiesces to that too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shadow Oaks Resident
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 9:28 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| I am glad that the speed limit on Old Trenton Rd. is 35 MPH now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 9:29 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | THE SPEED LIMIT ON OLD TRENTON ROAD NEEDS TO BE 50 MPH
RAISE IT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!OR LOSE MANY VOTES!!!!!!!!! |
Not very birght, are you? First of all, it's a county decision. If you had ever read even one of the many articles in the Cranbury Press or here or attended any meetings, you would know that. Kind of late to the party as it is -- this was discussed for months. And who's going to lose votes? No incumbent is running this year. Duh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 9:31 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | So how many people in town actually requested the speed limit to be changed? I didn't hear about it nor was I asked about it. I guess Rob Diamond is the spokesman for our town now. Isn't he also against taking his trees down to widen the road? I'll be interested to see how the township acquiesces to that too. |
Rob Diamond went to the Freeholder meeting and updated all of us on this board. I don't recall him taking any position ever on the actual speed.
There have been plenty of TC meetings where the county issue and speed limit was discussed. The agendas are public and printed here and on the town's website. If you cared you could have gone and heard the problems. Many residents were there at these meetings over the years. In fact in 2009 there was a meeting specifically to discuss a town traffic report.
The road widening is a County issue. What do you not get? Old Trenton Road is NOT a town road. The County owns it and the Town has nothing to do with it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 9:49 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The CHPS Barn |
|
|
| Why are insider deals still going on in town? I thought all of that was in the past and the talk of transparency and fairness and bipartisanship was what the town and township committee now prides itself on. So why is it that I read that the Kaiser Building Company has been awarded the contract to build the Parsonage Barn for the Historical Society? Kaiser has been on the CHA committee with Mark Berkowsky for years, and Berkowsky is in charge of awarding the contract for the CHPS barn. That most certainly is a direct conflict of interest in my book. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 9:57 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The CHPS Barn |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | Why are insider deals still going on in town? I thought all of that was in the past and the talk of transparency and fairness and bipartisanship was what the town and township committee now prides itself on. So why is it that I read that the Kaiser Building Company has been awarded the contract to build the Parsonage Barn for the Historical Society? Kaiser has been on the CHA committee with Mark Berkowsky for years, and Berkowsky is in charge of awarding the contract for the CHPS barn. That most certainly is a direct conflict of interest in my book. |
Wow, someone clearly has it out for the TC. The barn is being paid for by the Historical Society. The town by contract with the Society turned over the barn. This was all discussed in 2009 and was discussed here at length when people were concerned about the cost of the barn being rebuilt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 10:03 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| BTW, where did you read that Kaiser is building the barn? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun, Jun 13 2010, 11:17 pm EDT Post subject: Re: CHPS Barn |
|
|
| The June CHPS newsletter |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 14 2010, 7:51 am EDT Post subject: Re: CHPS Barn |
|
|
| Guest wrote: | | The June CHPS newsletter |
So if you read it there you would know the TC was not involved in the bid process or in payment of the funds. Seems you have some sort of axe to grind and are trying to get people upset on purpose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guest17
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 14 2010, 9:33 am EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| follow the money. where did the Historical Society get the money to rebuild the barn? From the Township Committee. Sure, they got from some other developer and its a whole convuluted thing, but the bottom line is the Township money, via the Historical Society, is paying to rebuild the Barn. The Barn is also on Township Property. And, who paid for the Barn to begin with, both for its aquisition and storage for the past number of years. Again, follow the money. Pretty sure all that was paid by the Township too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 14 2010, 9:48 am EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| guest17 wrote: | | follow the money. where did the Historical Society get the money to rebuild the barn? From the Township Committee. Sure, they got from some other developer and its a whole convuluted thing, but the bottom line is the Township money, via the Historical Society, is paying to rebuild the Barn. The Barn is also on Township Property. And, who paid for the Barn to begin with, both for its aquisition and storage for the past number of years. Again, follow the money. Pretty sure all that was paid by the Township too. |
Wrong!! You are trying to make issues for the sake of making issues with no knowledge or facts. Before making yourself look bad and hiding why not go to meetings or read the notes? This was all discussed last year at the TC meetings and here.
Some money came from the sale of the Holland house which was accidentally deeded to the town instead of the Historical Society by the developer. The Society wanted to protect the home and asked the developer to donate the home which they did. The town can not pass over property as such so they auctioned the property and by agreement with the CHPS would pass those proceeds on to the Society for a wash. The money paying the storage et all came from Holland House money.
The cost of rebuilding the barn is being paid for from Society and Landmark funds. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guest17
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon, Jun 14 2010, 10:32 am EDT Post subject: Re: The June 14, 2010 Township Committee meeting agenda |
|
|
| not sure I have it so wrong. you try to make it sound better, but there is nothing in what I have posted that is not correct, and you have confirmed much of it. what you have not addressed is that the barn is on Township land. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
