Jersey Dad
Joined: Tue, May 20 2008, 11:02 pm EDT
Posts: 179
Location: Cranbury Estates
|
 Posted: Wed, Aug 13 2008, 10:40 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The 7/28/08 Township Committee minutes have been posted. |
 |
|
| James wrote: | Mr. Ritter as a candidate running for office is different. His thanks shows a stance and a view that he would take while in office. To me, his expressing thanks to Linda, if he did express thanks, is a sign of where his priorities lie as a candidate. It also concerns me as an inability to see beyond party lines. However, I was not at the meeting and I did not see a personal thank you in the notes. Therefore, I can't conclude anything.
In terms of Mr. Stannard, I find his actions at a minimal level to be unprofessional pandering and at the largest level bordering on the improper given his position and situation. He used his position sitting as an active TC member during an active TC meeting to express thanks for a fellow party member who failed to uphold the interests of the voters. He did so when that individual, Linda Greenstein, acted against Cranbury's interests and in her own self interest. Mr. Stannard set a precedent of condoning such actions and setting it as though it was the TC and town also agreeing to such actions. If he wanted to personally thank Linda outside of the meeting he is more than welcome. Mr. Stannard has set a dangerous tone or perhaps highlighted the current tone of our TC where party politics play a key role. In so doing he has essentially absolved Linda from accountability.
I also find it interesting that the TC has yet to offer thanks to Bill Baroni who actually did support us. But, I would never assume party politics has anything to do with this.
In terms of whether we should ignore it as another poster stated, I would disagree. Ignoring such actions only serves to support them at a time when we need Trenton to understand Cranbury is serious and that our residents are truly looking for help.
If the notes were edited toward the positive, then it is unethical behavior and we voters should remember this at the next two elections. |
James,
A couple of points of clarification... I did have a chance to attend the meeting and from what I can tell, everyone's comments were paraphrased. For example, my recollection is Stout made a point to applaud Baroni's efforts and also took a shot at De Angelo. I didn't see that in the notes.
I also thought the Conservative did a nice job of taking Greenstein to task for her vote, while also leaving the door open for redemption and reconciliation (my opinion). It is unfortunate that his comments were not captured in the minutes because his approach was quite tactful and I thought he set a good example, especially for our township officials.
Stannard was out of sorts all night, as was shown at the beginning of the meeting when he mixed up the meeting minutes twice. For what it is worth, I understand he may not have been 100 percent. That said, his response to the Conservative's comments were awkward, at best.
For the record, I thanked Greenstein, the TC and CHA for their efforts, too (also not in the notes). I doubt I can be accused of being overly gracious to the TC and CHA. Perhaps I have been overly gracious to Greenstein, but I don't see the benefit to burning her in effigy at this point. I also would have thanked Baroni, too, if he had been there, because I do appreciate his strong voice of support.
I believe all of our pols (except DeAngelo) want a reasonable obligation for Cranbury. However, to me the question is, who can make it happen? To this point, it does not appear that anyone has actually helped reduce our obligation. This fall, we will see who is effective and who is not. Then, we can vote for the people who help us the most and try to vote out those who let us down.
In the mean time, there is a lot of work to be done. If anyone wants to meet offline at an event other than a TC meeting to discuss what we can do to make a difference, I am happy to host or participate. Also, as a reminder, this round of COAH Comments are due by 8/15. |
|
Concerned
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu, Aug 14 2008, 3:29 pm EDT Post subject: Re: The 7/28/08 Township Committee minutes have been posted. |
|
|
Before we give Linda Greenstein too much credit, we must remember what she has done (and not done) in the past. It will be great if she can now help Cranbury.
1) By all accounts, Wayne D’Angelo has ignored Cranbury, but, Linda Greenstein helped bring him to office. She was his running mate in 2007. D’Angelo did much better in Greenstein’s home territory of Plainsboro/Monroe than in his home territory of Hamilton. She helped D’Angelo win his seat. Check out her website:
www.lindagreenstein.com
2) An abstention is not a “no”, nor is it a “yes”. It is a non-vote, not taking a position. Linda Greenstein should have voted against A-500. She should be supporting her constituents, not trying to please the party bosses. Linda Stender, another prominent Democratic assemblywoman, chose to vote no. Linda Greenstein could have worked with Linda Stender to rally some more Democrats (including her running mate Wayne D’Angelo) to vote no or amend the bill. Linda chose to abstain. This is not supporting the people who voted for her.
If Linda Greenstein is now truly willing to help Cranbury in the future, great. Perhaps all the residents who were angry at her motivated her to do the right thing. Let’s hope we will see some results. |
|
