Author	Message
wcody	Posted: Sat, Jun 9 2012, 11:57 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn While I have not been very active in township politics recently, I want to correct something that has been said regarding my support of the public works barn. A capital appropriation was approved in April, 2008 for $300,000 prior to my joining the committee. An estimated price was brought to the committee last year that was well above the price. I thought it was too expensive and I had asked that a less expensive option be investigated. Nothing came back until after I left office, then there was a resolution to increase the expense by $150,000 to $450,000. I never saw a cost benefit on the barn to see if the $450,000 would save sufficient future maintenance expenses. If that was done, we should expect budget reductions in future years on maintenance expenses. This was one of the many capital expense items where the township had borrowed and continued to pay interest on the money, but had not spent the funds. There was over $2 Million in unused capital budget items last year. That money can be paid back and bring down debt. I had wanted those allocations reviewed, though I was alone in that desire.
Facts again	Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 2:06 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn The Twp has always and will always apply unused funds to the budget. Mr. Cody did not invent this. Mr. Cody also supported the barn if you read the notes. The fact is the money was already on the books, it can only be used for capital projects it can't be used for general expenses, and the barn will help the shelf life of vehicles so if you can get 5 more years from a vehicle not left in the elements, you save. If a vehicle lasts 10 years now and you can get 15 by covering it and keeping it away from the weather then you are getting 50% more use. Plus a vehicle today will cost less than one tomorrow. Why do you think our farmers in town all have put up pole barns for their equipment? The only way this doesn't make sense is if Tom and Cynthia get in and follow Mr. Mulligan's statement of getting rid of public works. Then this expense is not worth it.
FACTS	Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 12:09 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Thanks wrote: Thanks for showing this spending was already appropriated and tge TC showed good financial management. lets not try to reinvent the facts " Ms. Marabello stated part of the debt is bonds and part is notes. She stated the notes can be retired; however, she reminded the Township Committee over $50,000 has already been spent on this project." Only $50,000 of this massive spend had been used and according to Ms. Marabello she said above in the minutes the notes can be retired. We learned last year from Mayor Cody that bond money which has not been spent can be allocated for other projects. This is an example of poor financial financial management by the towns council
Thanks	Posted: Mon, Jun 4 2012, 6:51 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Thanks for showing this spending was already appropriated and tge TC showed good financial management.
Thank you	Posted: Sun, Jun 3 2012, 6:46 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Minutes wrote: I found this in the meeting minutes from when this was approved Mayor Cook summarized the Consent Agenda Resolutions and asked the Township Committee if there were any questions or comments. Mr. Mulligan asked if Resolution # R 04-12-058 could be addressed separately. He stated during the budget process he had concerns on the Storage Barn to house trucks and other Public Works equipment. Mr. Mulligan stated wear and tear and road salt on vehicles would impact vehicles and questioned if the Storage Barn was necessary. He stated regular maintenance costs for such items as tires and engine parts would continue and stated spending $350,000 for the Storage Barn would not prevent future maintenance costs. Mr. Mulligan stated he did not see a return on investment for the Barn and did not agree with increasing the Township’s debt for this project. Mr. Mulligan asked the Township Committee to reconsider not building the Storage Barn at this time and to wait until economic times get better. Mr. Taylor stated the Storage Barn was not built earlier because the previous Engineer wanted to build the structure on top of the dump. Mr. Taylor stated an alternative plan to fit the budget has been found and the bonds have already been taken out. Mr. Taylor explained equipment does not get less expensive over time, and it is financially beneficial for the Township to try to extend the life of its current equipment. Mr. Tanner explained last year the Township installed an oil and water separator. Public Works will have the ability to wash the road salt off the equipment and extend the life of the chassis. He explained the reason the concrete floor and the channel is being installed is the runoff will go through the separator and down into the sewer system. Mr. Tanner stated currently the equipment is being washed off outside and the runoff is going directly into the ground. Mr. Taylor stated the Township is not taking on any new debt for this project. The money is already on the books and is being utilized for projects. Mr. Taylor reported the Subcommittee consisted of the Construction Department, the Township Engineer and a resident who has built storage barns, and all were unanimous about the need for the storage barn. Mr. Mulligan asked about the debt, and Ms. Marabello stated part of the debt is bonds and part is notes. She stated the notes can be retired; however, she reminded the Township Committee over $50,000 has already been spent on this project. Mr. Mulligan stated this project is not something the Township desperately needs. He stated he appreciates all the hard work done on the project; however, he stated by building a storage barn, the Township is limiting its flexibility should future Committees decide to outsource the Public Works Department or some of its functions. Ms. Goetz stated she also felt the project was a lot of money; however, from an environmental perspective, there is a potential liability to the Township on possible contamination caused by washing the trucks outside. She stated the building provides more control with runoff. Mr. Tanner stated equipment needs to be washed off after repairs, and that created a situation with oils in the discharge. Mr. Mulligan stated the equipment should continue to be washed in that space. Mr. Tanner stated the current space is small and the new larger space would allow for multiple trucks to be washed at one time. Mr. Tanner stated in addition to trucks, there is other equipment that should be under storage. Supplies could be bought in larger quantities at cheaper costs and stored in a dry storage area. Mr. Tanner stated currently there is not much room for Public Works to store supplies. He stated he cannot say how much additional time equipment and vehicles will get from being protected; however, he did state extending the life of equipment is the reason these storage barns are built. TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE MEETING Mayor Cook stated, and Mr. Tanner agreed, the project would only get more expensive in the future as the costs would increase going forward. Mr. Mulligan thanked Mr. Taylor for his hard work on this project. He stated he personally would like to see the Township not move forward on this project; however, he respected the perspective of the rest of the Township Committee. Mayor Cook stated the Township has spent money on this project already. He agreed the project will be more expensive in the future, and stated he feels moving forward with the project is the right thing to do. Ms. Cunningham stated Resolution # R 04-12-058 needed to be voted on separately. Resolution On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Taylor the following Resolution was adopted by vote: Ayes: (Goetz (Johnson (Taylor (Cook Nays: (Mulligan CRANBURY TOWNSHIP RESOLUTION # R 04-12-058 RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS STORAGE BUILDING WHEREAS, the Township of Cranbury requires the construction of a Public Works Storage Building; and WHEREAS, after legal proper notice and publication, four ( bids were received on March 15, 2012; and WHEREAS, the lowest responsible bid was submitted by Security Structures, 125 Martinsville Road, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 in the total lump sum amount of $328,650.00; and WHEREAS, the Township Attorney has reviewed the qualifications of Security Structures, and has recommended that the contract be awarded to Security Structures and;WHEREAS, the Chief Financial Officer has certified that sufficient funds are available for this purpose. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Committee of the Township of Cranbury as follows:1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with Security Structures for a Public Works Storage Building, for an amount not to exceed $328,650.00. Thank you for the update on this spending
Minutes	Posted: Thu, May 31 2012, 5:22 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn I found this in the meeting minutes from when this was approved Mayor Cook summarized the Consent Agenda Resolutions and asked the Township Committee if there were any questions or comments. Mr. Mulligan asked if Resolution # R 04-12-058 could be addressed separately. He stated during the budget process he had concerns on the Storage Barn to house trucks and other Public Works equipment. Mr. Mulligan stated wear and tear and road salt on vehicles would impact vehicles and questioned if the Storage Barn was necessary. He stated regular maintenance costs for such items as tires and engine parts would continue and stated spending $350,000 for the Storage Barn would not prevent future maintenance costs. Mr. Mulligan stated he did not see a return on investment for the Barn and did not agree with increasing the Township’s debt for this project. Mr. Mulligan asked the Township Committee to reconsider not building the Storage Barn at this time and to wait until economic times get better. Mr. Taylor stated the Storage Barn was not built earlier because the previous Engineer wanted to build the structure on top of the dump. Mr. Taylor stated an alternative plan to fit the budget has been found and the bonds have already been taken out. Mr. Taylor explained equipment does not get less expensive over time, and it is financially beneficial for the Township to try to extend the life of its current equipment. Mr. Tanner explained last year the Township installed an oil and water separator. Public Works will have the ability to wash the road salt off the equipment and extend the life of the chassis. He explained the reason the concrete floor and the channel is being installed is the runoff will go through the separator and down into the sewer system. Mr. Tanner stated currently the equipment is being washed off outside and the runoff is going directly into the ground. Mr. Taylor stated the Township is not taking on any new debt for this project. The money is already on the books and is being utilized for projects. Mr. Taylor reported the Subcommittee consisted of the Construction Department, the Township Engineer and a resident who has built storage barns, and all were unanimous about the need for the storage barn. Mr. Mulligan asked about the debt, and Ms. Marabello stated part of the debt is bonds and part is notes. She stated the notes can be retired; however, she reminded the Township Committee over $50,000 has already been spent on this project. Mr. Mulligan stated this project is not something the Township desperately needs. He stated he appreciates all the hard work done on the project; however, he stated by building a storage barn, the Township is limiting its flexibility should future Committees decide to outsource the Public Works Department or some of its functions. Ms. Goetz stated she also felt the project was a lot of money; however, from an environmental perspective, there is a potential liability to the Township on possible contamination caused by washing the trucks outside. She stated the building provides more control with runoff. Mr. Tanner stated equipment needs to be washed off after repairs, and that created a situation with oils in the discharge. Mr. Mulligan stated the equipment should continue to be washed in that space. Mr. Tanner stated the current space is small and the new larger space would allow for multiple trucks to be washed at one time. Mr. Tanner stated in addition to trucks, there is other equipment that should be under storage. Supplies could be bought in larger quantities at cheaper costs and stored in a dry storage area. Mr. Tanner stated currently there is not much room for Public Works to store supplies. He stated he cannot say how much additional time equipment and vehicles will get from being protected; however, he did state extending the life of equipment is the reason these storage barns are built. TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE MEETING Mayor Cook stated, and Mr. Tanner agreed, the project would only get more expensive in the future as the costs would increase going forward. Mr. Mulligan thanked Mr. Taylor for his hard work on this project. He stated he personally would like to see the Township not move forward on this project; however, he respected the perspective of the rest of the Township Committee. Mayor Cook stated the Township has spent money on this project already. He agreed the project will be more expensive in the future, and stated he feels moving forward with the project is the right thing to do. Ms. Cunningham stated Resolution # R 04-12-058 needed to be voted on separately. Resolution On a motion by Mr. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Taylor the following Resolution was adopted by vote: Ayes: (Goetz (Johnson (Taylor (Cook Nays: (Mulligan CRANBURY TOWNSHIP RESOLUTION # R 04-12-058 RESOLUTION AWARDING CONTRACT FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS STORAGE BUILDING WHEREAS, the Township of Cranbury requires the construction of a Public Works Storage Building; and WHEREAS, after legal proper notice and publication, four ( bids were received on March 15, 2012; and WHEREAS, the lowest responsible bid was submitted by Security Structures, 125 Martinsville Road, Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 in the total lump sum amount of $328,650.00; and WHEREAS, the Township Attorney has reviewed the qualifications of Security Structures, and has recommended that the contract be awarded to Security Structures and;WHEREAS, the Chief Financial Officer has certified that sufficient funds are available for this purpose. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Committee of the Township of Cranbury as follows:1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute an agreement with Security Structures for a Public Works Storage Building, for an amount not to exceed $328,650.00.
Waste	Posted: Wed, May 9 2012, 7:39 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Thank you for wasting money on this. Not a Whiner wrote: Wow!!! Its pretty clear you know absolutely nothing about maintaining trucks. You are probably not smart enough to figure out that water freezes ROFL Perhaps you should educate yourself with that study instead of bashing someone for something you clearly are not educated on. Thank you wrote: Thank you for clarifying the trucks could already be washed outside and Mr Taylor is spending $350,000 this year according to the number you posted so our trucks can instead be washed inside. It probably was too hard for our public works department to be washing the trucks outside so spending this money was the only option. Maybe we should also hire some extra employees to wash the trucks since it still may be to grueling for our current staff. Thank you mr Taylor for spending a total of $400,000 over the last 2 years to wash our towns trucks. Facts wrote: I actually spoke with Mr. Taylor. The truck wash installed last year is simply a drain pipe with an oil and sand separator. It was legally required to wash the trucks off outside. If that was not put in then the vehicles could not be washed at all regardless of the time of year. This new barn has a pipe connecting a drain to the system built last year so now the vehicles can be washed off as they come inside after plowing or salting the roads. There was no way to wash vehicles off indoors last year and you can't take dump trucks to a car wash. Also he stated that the cost is about 100k under the 450 stated here for the barn and build. This is covered by bonds and notes already taken out by TC's prior to any of the existing members.
Not a Whiner	Posted: Wed, May 9 2012, 3:27 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Wow!!! Its pretty clear you know absolutely nothing about maintaining trucks. You are probably not smart enough to figure out that water freezes ROFL Perhaps you should educate yourself with that study instead of bashing someone for something you clearly are not educated on. Thank you wrote: Thank you for clarifying the trucks could already be washed outside and Mr Taylor is spending $350,000 this year according to the number you posted so our trucks can instead be washed inside. It probably was too hard for our public works department to be washing the trucks outside so spending this money was the only option. Maybe we should also hire some extra employees to wash the trucks since it still may be to grueling for our current staff. Thank you mr Taylor for spending a total of $400,000 over the last 2 years to wash our towns trucks. Facts wrote: I actually spoke with Mr. Taylor. The truck wash installed last year is simply a drain pipe with an oil and sand separator. It was legally required to wash the trucks off outside. If that was not put in then the vehicles could not be washed at all regardless of the time of year. This new barn has a pipe connecting a drain to the system built last year so now the vehicles can be washed off as they come inside after plowing or salting the roads. There was no way to wash vehicles off indoors last year and you can't take dump trucks to a car wash. Also he stated that the cost is about 100k under the 450 stated here for the barn and build. This is covered by bonds and notes already taken out by TC's prior to any of the existing members.
publius	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 7:11 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Taxes wrote: Another example of raising my taxes great job township committee And you kids...................get off my lawn!
Ugh	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 3:43 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Taxes wrote: Explained wrote: It was explained that the money taken out already by prior TC's would have been insufficient if it was built as originally planned on top of the old dump. My belief is rather then borrow more, the project sat. The subcommittee and TC took the existing funds and basically came up with a way to build it without additional borrowing. A fresh set of eyes so to speak. The money that was taken out already and used for the new building could have been used to pay for other projects. For example the Dam on Main street. Mayor Cody did a wonderful job last year of relocating money for projects and it would have been nice if this years township committee had followed his lead. Bad job by the township committee this year. You do know it was not reappropriated last year because Mr. Cody supported it. Read the minutes. It's fine to say you disagree, but your anger at the TC is just funny now. If you think it's helping your candidates since you clearly dislike Mr. Cook and Mr. Taylor then it's even funnier for you and embarrassing for them.
Taxes	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 3:25 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Explained wrote: It was explained that the money taken out already by prior TC's would have been insufficient if it was built as originally planned on top of the old dump. My belief is rather then borrow more, the project sat. The subcommittee and TC took the existing funds and basically came up with a way to build it without additional borrowing. A fresh set of eyes so to speak. The money that was taken out already and used for the new building could have been used to pay for other projects. For example the Dam on Main street. Mayor Cody did a wonderful job last year of relocating money for projects and it would have been nice if this years township committee had followed his lead. Bad job by the township committee this year.
Explained	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 1:19 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn It was explained that the money taken out already by prior TC's would have been insufficient if it was built as originally planned on top of the old dump. My belief is rather then borrow more, the project sat. The subcommittee and TC took the existing funds and basically came up with a way to build it without additional borrowing. A fresh set of eyes so to speak.
???????	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 1:06 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Quote: 2) The money for the barn was committed, and has been on the books, years before any current TCC member was elected. Why was the barn not built if the money was committed so many years ago? Do we have funds on hand allocated to this now, or will we have to borrow the money?
definition	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 10:46 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Taxes wrote: Another example of raising my taxes great job township committee Again, Mr. Taxes, it is not about you.
Taxes	Posted: Wed, Apr 25 2012, 10:31 am EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn Another example of raising my taxes great job township committee
A Republican for TAylor	Posted: Tue, Apr 24 2012, 7:03 pm EDT    Post subject: Re: Public works storage barn "The only republican on the committee is Dan? Why not just name him instead of saying republican committee member." I'm not referring to Dan. I'm referring to the Republican Committee. Dan is doing a fine job, and I support him 99% of the time. However, I do not agree with him if he goes along with outsourcing.