A March 27 column in the Times of Trenton by West Windsor resident Irwin Stoolmacher has prompted a series of comments on the state of politics in his hometown. Herewith excerpts from the Times’ pages:
#b#WW Attorney Issue#/b#
by Irwin Stoolmacher
West Windsor Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh was recently re-elected to his fourth term as mayor of West Windsor. Based on these results, it’s fair to say that the town’s residents, like me, are pleased with the performance of our municipal government. We received high-quality services in a fiscally prudent manner without a hint of impropriety. However, if you attended the reorganization meeting of our town government on January 1, 2014, you would come away with a quite different view.
There is a major rift between a newly emerged majority on West Windsor’s Council and our mayor. The new majority are determined on derailing Mayor Hsueh’s fourth term. They are dissatisfied with the direction the mayor has taken our town over the last 12 years, while the majority of our community, as demonstrated by the margin of our Mayor’s November re-election victory are pleased with the direction he has taken us.
The majority of West Windsor’s voters, like the fact that we are a full-service community, with regular garbage and rubbish pick-ups, have a vibrant art and senior center, and many beautiful, well-maintained parks including an Asian-themed park. We are okay with maintaining a decent operating surplus that helps us achieve an AAA bond rating and a stable property tax rate which, for what we get, is the best deal in Mercer County.
West Windsor’s Mayor Hsueh is a class-act who conducts himself with decorum at all times. In addition, he is extremely hard-working, accessible, and very knowledgeable about state and local government.
This past November, through a ballot anomaly that placed two candidates from another ticket beneath the mayor on the ballot, two opposition candidates were elected (one of the opposition candidates based on her vote would probably have won regardless of her ballot position, the other owes his office to the ballot’s construct). The opposition candidates have forged an alliance with anti-administration holdover Bryan Maher (who was appointed council president by 3-2 vote). Mr. Maher is stylistically and ideologically the exact opposite of Mayor Hsueh. Where the Mayor is low-keyed, civil, conciliatory, and data-driven; Maher is loud, pugnacious, dogmatic, and squeaky-wheel driven. Maher and his two allies now control the five member town council. I have, no doubt, that Maher and his allies will do everything within their power to make the mayor look bad. The first issue they have chosen to draw swords over is the annual selection of the township attorney.
West Windsor has a nonpartisan Mayor-Council form of government governed by the Faulkner Act. Under this form of government the Mayor is the executive authority and is responsible for the appointment and removal of all department heads. The township attorney, who serves as legal advisor to the mayor and council, is appointed by the mayor with the advice and consent of township council.
The current township attorney, Mike Herbert, has served for a number of years. He is talented and has extensive municipal government experience. Maher’s cronies have pressed the mayor to competitively bid the contract through an RFP under the guise that it is best practice. Legal services fall under the professional service provisions of the Public Bidding Laws, and as a result do not have to be competitively bid. The thinking being the selection of professional services should not, necessarily be made, solely on the basis of price. While price is key determinant in any buying decision, in the case of certain types of expenditures, other factors are more salient. For example, in my own case I have opted on various occasion to go out of health care plan’s network to see a particular specialist and pay more than I would pay for doctor in the network.
The mayor in an attempt to placate Maher and his allies has agreed to competitively bid the township’s attorney contract. In my opinion he is making a mistake, because the underlying issue is neither Mr. Herbert’s fee nor his expertise. It’s about trying to make it clear to the mayor that the council will set the future direction for the township. It is fight, not about an attorney, but for the future of West Windsor.
I have not always agreed with Mike Herbert’s style, but the Mayor Hsueh should not give up the fight to retain him. I believe, on certain occasions, he has talked a little too much — playing too much of a role at council meetings. This can be easily corrected.
Mayor Hsueh has the right to appoint the attorney and he should not concede that right to those who oppose the appointment for political, not good, government reasons. The mayor went down a slippery slope. Appeasement never works especially when those you are dealing with have a hidden agenda. I would not be surprised to see a low-ball bid for West Windsor’s attorney. If that is the case, I hope the mayor does not give-up the authority that was given to him by the voters to those who seek to change the direction of our community.
Irwin Stoolmacher is president of Stoolmacher Consulting Group and a 36-year West Windsor resident.
#b#Turnover Is Good#/b#
I am also a long-time resident of West Windsor, but I see things differently than does Irwin Stoolmacher (op-ed, March 27). For example, by no means does Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh have a mandate; he received less than a majority of the vote in the November election. Mr. Hsueh’s chance placement on the ballot with Councilwoman Linda Geevers arguably gave him an advantage, while opponent Hemant Marathe’s name on the ballot was stuck above two unpopular council candidates.
The mayor’s two running mates lost by significant margins. People can debate the effects of the ballot placement, but this was as broad as it was long.
An independently elected council serves as a check on what otherwise could become little more than a dictatorship running an entrenched political machine. History has repeatedly shown us the regrettable consequences that can flow from such an arrangement. Elections do have consequences, as President Barack Obama himself has remarked.
Regarding the RFP (request for proposal) for the township attorney’s position, it is well past time that we did this, as neighboring Princeton has just done. Whether for this or other positions, we need to acquire the best performance at the best price. It’s always good practice to have some turnover.
Marshall Lerner
West Windsor
#b#A Must-Read#/b#
I wish to compliment The Times and Irwin S. Stoolmacher on his well-written guest op-ed article “It’s about more than West Windsor’s attorney” (March 27).
It is a must-read article to get the true, factual picture of West Windsor politics and how the mayors’ enemies are trying to upstage his way of running the township administration.
Yes, the mayor was re-elected for his fourth term. Most West Windsor residents appear to approve what is being accomplished under Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh’s leadership.
Paul Eland
West Windsor
#b#Beneficial Changes#/b#
I wish to respond to Irwin Stoolmacher’s highly partisan and inaccurate guest editorial. I believe the mayor was elected by a minority of West Windsor residents — a third-party candidate siphoned off votes that I believe would otherwise have gone to Hemant Marathe.
The council is within its right to advice and consent on the hiring of an attorney. It is not obligated to approve a contract for an attorney it does not want. The real problem that Mr. Stoolmacher and the mayor have is they no longer enjoy a rubber-stamp council that will do the mayor’s bidding.
Jim Solloway
West Windsor
