 Posted: Mon, Nov 4 2013, 6:02 pm EST Post subject: Re: Candidates Night |
|
| I don't think better is the right or fair word. I would say Joe offers an alternative and provides an asset not on the TC today.
I don't see a difference between Mr. Mulligan and Mr. Johnson. The endorsement letters cite the same accomplishments. What I see Joe contributing is dialogue and small business experience. It is extremely pressure filled to own and succeed with a business. You have to say no, but not alienate customers. You have to watch every dollar. He also has a way of speaking that makes me think he can get people to work together to better the town. I think coupling Joe with either of the others provides a solid team. Individually all are great, but what makes the best overall team? I think the more dialogue and different views the better provided they are respectful. |
|
| Posted: Mon, Nov 4 2013, 3:58 pm EST Post subject: Re: Candidates Night |
|
| Thanks. It sounds like I need to get to know Joe a little better. He seems like a nice guy, but I don't know what makes him better than the candidates running for re-election.
Any idea why Tom skipped this year? Seems odd for a serious candidate to miss candidates night. |
|
| Posted: Mon, Nov 4 2013, 8:54 am EST Post subject: Re: Candidates Night |
|
| I didn't see a decision coming out of the debate.
I thought candidates night went well for all three. Certainly, Mr. Mulligan and Johnson did well as they were current members. A number of questions posed we're why the TC did things or directional questions about why the TC has done such and such. My thought was it shows how few people attend TC meetings. I thought on questions where it was more future generated what would you do, how would you handle XYZ then all three were pretty equal. Where it was why the TC has done what they've done then Mr . Mulligan and Johnson did well. What I noted that stood out. I did not see any disagreement of opinion between Mr. Muligan and Mr. Johnson. There was no real explanation of our budget or why it is the way it is good or bad. There were no questions on why the TC adopted a maintenance code or other ordinances. No questions about our debt, sewer increases or tax increases. I think they could have helped themselves by explaining these items. When asked what they would do differently there was a non-answer. Mr. Bounavolonta mentioned that if we're to redevelop certain areas then we need to make it look attractive to buyers and developers. That means speaking with the owners of the properties. He also suggested attending some of the business meetings in the area to advertise what Cranbury has to offer to businesses. Mr. Mulligan and Johnson stated our COAH plans are in limbo pending the courts. That they are watching carefully. Mr. Bounavolonta stated he could not comment as he was not part of the TC and it would not be proper to comment without the facts. In general, if we remove the questions based on the current TC decision making process then I would say it was fairly equal. If I had to put a strength to each. Mr. Johnson seemed the most analytical. He paused a few times making me think he was thinking of the answer. Mr. Mulligan seemed concerned about keeping the community intact. His family to me was key as he mentioned a few times. Mr. Bounavolonta seemed the most approachable and based on calling out a couple of issues is a get things done type. In all all three should be congratulated. I am not sure how Tuesday will go. I wish there were three seats open. |
|
| Posted: Mon, Nov 4 2013, 7:50 am EST Post subject: Candidates Night |
|
| Does anyone know how candidates night went? All I heard was that Tom skipped it, but I'm sure there has to be more to it than that. | |