Debate continued on re-drafting the Cable TV ordinance, and whether to allow the airing of public comment at council meetings during the 30 days before an election — or to tape it and hold off until the election is over.
A public comment made by council candidate Andrew Hersh in which he announced the “571 Day” he had organized during a taped council meeting in the middle of election season sparked a behind-the-scenes controversy, and thus an ordinance review.
The council has a self-imposed prohibition against the discussion of partisan politics on the township’s cable channel. Township Attorney Michael Herbert had issued an opinion that Hersh was violating the township’s policy, which states that partisan politics cannot be aired on the cable channel within 30 days of an election. The opinion prompted an E-mail from Hersh to the council and began E-mail conversations between Morgan and others on council over the definition of “partisan.”
When the council first began taping its meetings, it did not allow the taping of the public comment period for this reason.
During discussions last month, the council seemed to come to a consensus of prohibiting the broadcasting of public comment sessions during meetings for 30 days before an upcoming election. That would have simply required a change in the council’s own procedural guidelines and not the township ordinance.
Council members want to ensure that they protect the nature of the television channel, which is a governmental education channel, and not a public access outlet. Either way, if someone begins campaigning, whether it is on the live broadcast or taped and showed on air 30 days before an election, it will still be considered to be using public resources for campaigning, they argue.
However, during the discussions on February 1, Councilman Charles Morgan said the council members who originally contributed to the drafting of the Cable TV ordinance about a decade ago prohibited the taping of any public comment at any time and simply began taping and broadcasting the meeting after the public comment. Incumbent candidates may also be cheated by restraining from using the dais to campaign, but residents or candidates make campaign statements during election season.
“The fact that we weren’t televising the public comment wasn’t controversial,” he said. It became controversial once the public comment portions began being taped and broadcasted on a regular basis.
Then, council had to continue offering it. “You can’t not allow it now that we’ve allowed it,” Morgan said. However, Morgan said, it would be easiest to go back to only begin taping at the end of public comment.
Councilwomen Linda Geevers and Diane Ciccone said they wanted public comment taped. Although Geevers was amenable to holding the broadcast of that taping until after the election, Ciccone said she did not want to see the broadcast held at all.
“If we’re talking about transparency, we can’t tape it and say, ‘You’ll see it 30 days later,’” Ciccone said.
Ciccone said residents usually know who is running for office and would be able to make their own determination over whether someone is campaigning or not. “People are going to assess me and how I’m doing my job,” when they go to the polls, Ciccone said.
Morgan echoed the sentiment: “We are all on stage; we are being judged,” he said.
Ciccone suggested simply having the township clerk read a statement before each of the public comments sessions during an election season to remind residents that they cannot campaign during public comment.
November Elections. In other business during the February 1 meeting, council continued discussion on the procedure to move the nonpartisan municipal elections to November.
A new law signed by Acting Governor Steve Sweeney last month allows municipalities that currently hold nonpartisan municipal elections in May to move to the same date as the general election, the Tuesday after the first Monday in November — an idea West Windsor officials have embraced.
In order to do so, those municipalities would have to pass an ordinance to consolidate partisan and nonpartisan elections to the November date, and will only be allowed to return to a May election date after 10 years under the new system and through additional local ordinance.
West Windsor officials want to adopt an ordinance as soon as possible so the clerk can begin the extensive paperwork and necessary formalities in preparation for the move. An ordinance introduction is expected on Tuesday, February 16.
Currently, in West Windsor, residents head to the polls three times each year: in November for the general elections, in April for the school elections, and in May, when they elect their municipal council representatives. Moving the municipal elections to November would save the township about $50,000 each year, according to Township Clerk Sharon Young.
The change does not go into effect until January 1, 2011. The law stipulates that current office-holders’ terms would be extended to the start of newly elected office-holders in the November election. The new law also requires the ballot design to be designed in a way in which it will draw clear distinctions between the partisan and nonpartisan elections.
During the February 1 meeting, Township Attorney Michael Herbert told the council to first adopt an ordinance dealing with moving the elections to November. Once that is done, it can pass separate ordinance dealing with boards and committees, where members’ terms will also be affected by the move, at a later date.
Councilman Charles Morgan, however, said he wanted the council to take the extra time in drafting the ordinance to address all of those issues at once, rather than creating one ordinance that is inconsistent with the outstanding issues.
Herbert said, however, that the council should give the clerk’s office direction so that it does not go through the trouble of beginning the process of moving elections to November and later find out that the council is remaining with the May elections.
Rite Aid Update. In other business during the meeting, Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh reported that he met with the Dreher Group, the owners of the future Rite Aid property on Route 571. He said that Dreher has agreed to a phasing approach to developing the site — an alternative accepted by the township — in light of the economy and the developer’s tough financial situation.
The developer has also agreed to stay with its original plan for developing the site of the future plaza, located on the corner of Cranbury and Princeton-Hightstown roads. Those plans call for a 14,673 square foot Rite Aid and an additional 6,000 feet of retail space that could include a coffee shop and a restaurant.
Hsueh said Rite Aid officials have to approach the company’s CEO to get final approval to move forward based on talks with the township.
