Cranbury Forum | Bulletin | Info Sharing Â
[Click here to bookmark this page: http://cranbury.info]
â–ª
Cranbury School
â–ª
Cranbury Township
â–ª
Cranbury Library
â–ª
Cranbury.org
â–ª
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="Guest"]I don't really think it is necessary to have a study over this issue. Many of these studies are slanted towards the political climate at the time. We are a unique affluent town and we enjoy having our own identity. If we are considering getting rid of services like police, we should just consider merging our town with another larger town.Do we want to do that or even consider it? I know I don't. If I wanted to live in a section of Plainsboro,West Windsor, or Monroe I would have moved there. You also have to realize that once you enter into one of these agreements you are locked in. The larger municipality may wine and dine you at first to get the revenue but after the honeymoon period you know what will happen? Cranbury is low priority. What do you do when the contract expires and you aren't happy with the service? Negotiate with another town so we have a different police department every few years? Its not as if we could just restart our own PD when the contract expires. Our elected officials no longer have any real input where police services are utilized in our community. The officers themselves will be employees of another town which as other posters have indicated, means that is where their loyalty and focus will be. For hole in the donut communities this idea may be unavoidable. For those towns they will have to live with the burdens of these situations. Even considering this for Cranbury is a really bad (and unnecessary) idea.[/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
Guest
Posted: Fri, Apr 30 2010, 4:21 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
There is no crime in Cranbury, there is no "Bad people" either. There is this huge protective bubble that encloses the town keeping all the bad people and bad things out.
The streets are lined with gold and gumdrops.
What a wonderful little town it is.
Guest
Posted: Fri, Apr 30 2010, 8:32 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Yes something funny is going it's called crime. The security guards are not cops. I have heard that there have been robberies at some of those warehouses totaling hundreds of thousands. I have also heard they have gang members working there.
Guest
Posted: Fri, Apr 30 2010, 8:10 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Uh, sparky...The police patrols are not free they pay taxes. Second, the sheer number of people in and out leads to theft. And, uh...I guess people don't have alarms for their homes either...
Guest
Posted: Fri, Apr 30 2010, 8:04 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
try telling the warehouses who pay way more money to this town then your little 50x50 on main street that there isn't a detective to investigate thefts costing more then some houses.
If they're losing that much stuff......................they can't be very good business people!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously? That's like saying you must not be a good homeowner if your house is robbed.
er um.........not quite Sparky!
warehouses employ security guards, cameras, alarms, FREE police patrols......................if they have stuff stolen that is worth more than a house in Cranbury........then something strange is going on.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 7:21 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Guest wrote:
Guest wrote:
try telling the warehouses who pay way more money to this town then your little 50x50 on main street that there isn't a detective to investigate thefts costing more then some houses.
If they're losing that much stuff......................they can't be very good business people!!!!!!!!!!!
Seriously? That's like saying you must not be a good homeowner if your house is robbed.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 6:50 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Guest wrote:
try telling the warehouses who pay way more money to this town then your little 50x50 on main street that there isn't a detective to investigate thefts costing more then some houses.
If they're losing that much stuff......................they can't be very good business people!!!!!!!!!!!
What the
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 5:15 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
You would never here anybody say, let's not have public sewer because they get personal use of it. Another example is why don't residents shut off there electric or water service in there own house? They don't because they get personal use of those services.
What the
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 5:04 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
If This is all about saving money then why would you be willing to sacrifice public safety instead why wouldn't you look into other ways like not paying to have the fireworks,not having the brush picked up every month, not paying for leaf pickup things like that. Those things aren't a life and death neccesity. How about not building new ballfields,ye there free at first but now we have to maintain them forever. Nobody say's no to those things because they get personal use of those,but people don't get personal satisfaction from the police until they have an emergency and need them.I would probably guess that the negative comments are probably from people who have been lucky and never had to call or use the police dept. I have been lucky to know and talk with many of the officers in the past 20yrs that I've lived here and they all take pride and care about Cranbury and it's residents.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 4:52 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Does anyone know the details behind why we agree to pay Plainsboro to manage all our tickets court cases on top of them getting all the ticket revenue? Did they determine that the overhead of the court traffic exceeds the value of the tickets enough to require the additional expense?
TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE MEETIN
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 4:30 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Report from Police Chief Edward Kahler Chief Kahler gave his monthly report for the month of March, 2010. Chief Kahler reported
there were 143 summonses issued; 15 for speeding, cell phone violations -12, expenditures (highest to lowest) were shift coverage, training/department meeting and prisoner transports. He
TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE MEETING April 12, 2010
Reports from Township Professionals and Staff (Continued) Report from Police Chief Edward Kahler (cont’d)
reported the Department has not received any communications regarding its reimbursement request related to the snowstorms. The Department has submitted a preliminary damage assessment form for the March flood. The Traffic Bureau reported there were 14 crashes in March and the
Detective Bureau reported 14 new investigations and closed eight (
th investigations
. Chief Kahler reported there is a CERT meeting scheduled for April 20 . He added the State is not sponsoring any new training so starting a new class for volunteers will have to be delayed. He also reported the Department submitted a preliminary damage assessment form for the most recent wind/flood event. Public Works filled and used sandbags purchased from the OEM account to contain flooding on Main Street. Chief Kahler reported the vehicle mileage for the month of March was 13,685. There were 12 arrests for the month; D.W.I. -4, Assault -0, Burglary-2, Theft/Shoplifting-3, Warrants-1 and CDS (Drugs)-2.
Chief Kahler also reported two officers who were standing on Route 130 after completing a motor vehicle stop were nearly struck by an alleged intoxicated driver. The driver was alleged to have been under the influence of a Controlled and Dangerous Substance (C.D.S.). He stated this latest incident demonstrates that intoxicated drivers are moving away from alcohol and using prescription street drugs. Fortunately, Cranbury’s Police Department has a Drug Recognition Expert and has been successfully able to prosecute cases of driving while under the influence of controlled and dangerous substances.
Chief Kahler reported Mr. Craig Sharon sent a letter commending Officer DeChiara for his assistance with his disabled vehicle on Route 130. Also, Chris and Sam Parker sent a letter commending the Cranbury Township Public Works Department and the Police Department for their work during the March 13th wind/flood event. In addition, Megan and Dan Pease sent a thank you note to Sergeant Frank Dillane and Officer DeChiara for their efforts installing the couples carseats[/b]
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 3:31 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Why would Plainsboro even want to patrol our town? They already get every dollar from every ticket and arrest that OUR TOWN works hard to complete. We do the work for them.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 3:27 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
try telling the warehouses who pay way more money to this town then your little 50x50 on main street that there isn't a detective to investigate thefts costing more then some houses.
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 12:13 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Don't disagree about keeping the revenue from summons. I think if u read the meeting minutes and the chiefs report you will see that the detectives work and close many more cases than the "the one bank robbery"
mrfunone
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 11:30 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
The police should be able to write summonses and have the town keep the revenue. No point in writing them if we don't make anything out of it.
Why do we need detectives?
For the one bank robbery that we get every year?
Guest
Posted: Thu, Apr 29 2010, 6:58 am EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Once the question is asked the town has something in writing that can come back to haunt us. This is not home or business we're you can simply kick the tires. Besides, any company who merges even in a merger of equals always ends up finding one party in control.
The danger is that if the study says yes you can save money and then the town says okay, but we don't want it we could have a problem with the state. The state could come in one day to Cranbury and say that study you did showed savings. Clearly, you had a minimal desire to consolidate or you would not have done the study. Therefore, we're going to consolidate you. If you think that will never happen, just look at all the unfunded state mandates that the state forces on us as evidence of the state influencing our actions.
Have we not seen enough impact from where studies or ideas have gotten us in trouble significantly in terms of dollars- Libery Way, Ballfield, Dam, Wright South, Old Trenton Rd. Studies and chasing the dollar can lead to major impacts and major costs.
The same goes for those who wanted to rush a ballot question do you want to merge with Princeton? If we said yes and Princeton said no then there would have been something the state could have pointed to saying Cranbury you want to merge your district so we'll help you and you're now in with Jamesburg, Monroe or South Brunswick.
The fact is either you support the study and therefore are okay with the police gone or you want to keep Cranbury in control. We'll still have overhead, a police station building, salaries, insurance, etc...
original
Posted: Wed, Apr 28 2010, 9:45 pm EDT
Post subject: Re: Merging Cranbury PD?
Guest wrote:
As a neutral observer, this discussion just keeps going in circles.
The original poster / person who keeps replying has never once stated that they know consolidating with another police force is definitely a good idea or would save money and they certainly have never implied that our existing police force is anything but great. Yet some people seem quick to take offense that any questioning of the force is automatically an attack on them. This makes about as much sense as the claim that anyone who questions whether we should commit forces to a particular conflict are "against the troops," which makes no logical sense of course. It's completely legitimate to ask questions and want data behind answers. I;m thankful at least some of the electorate is that dedicated to try and educate themselves and not take every status quo for granted.
And many of those who reply supporting the force also make good points. I personally am inclined to believe we are better off with our own force, just as we are with our own school. But I am not afraid to have the questions asked and see the data. Clearly some people seem to be interested in cutting off debate without seeing the facts. What are they afraid of? If the results showed what they said they would – that it would not save money and would result in a lesser commitment of service – then clearly no one would want that.
BTW, specter of horror stories aside, there are plenty of municipalities that share police forces and get by just fine. Many others have no force and rely on County Sheriff offices by agreement. Of course there will be examples where it doesn’t run well but to suggest it is systemically a given that it wouldn’t work is silly and just alarmist. The same is true for the schools of course. It’s certainly possible Cranbury could merge with another district and still be a good school. Just as its possible it would diminish the school. I prefer to stick it out ourselves.
As the original poster, I agree with everything in the above post.