To the Editor:
Who Gave to Whom
I typically do not respond to letters to the editor based on partisan politics and personal bias.##M:[more]##
But a writer whose letter appeared in your November 16 edition made several outrageous claims that are simply false. As a West Windsor resident whose company owns property near the train station, I’m compelled to set the record straight.
The fact is my company, InterCap Holdings, has a strict policy not to donate money to local politicians or campaigns. Furthermore, neither InterCap, any of the former companies I owned, nor I personally have given any donations to West Windsor politicians, state or county parties, or political action committees that support West Windsor politicians. That is an indisputable fact.
When InterCap Holdings proposes a redevelopment plan for underused property, we want township officials and the community at-large to weigh the merits, provide input, and work with our professionals to develop a plan that truly benefits the community. Political donations are not an appropriate part of such an open process.
To ensure a transparent process, InterCap Holdings meets directly with local residents and holds public meetings to maximize community participation in the planning of our communities. It is important to work with local residents and get their ideas and comments before we seek formal local approvals. We pursue redevelopment projects based on our experience and a positive vision for a community, not politics.
I recognize that developers have traditionally been known to make political contributions to local officials. It is my hope that such a practice is coming to a close, as people are tired of “pay to play” and want their elected officials only beholden to the constituents they’ve sworn to serve.
I am enormously proud that InterCap Holdings is one of a small number of development companies in New Jersey who flatly refuse to contribute to political coffers. The policy ensures our projects focus on what is best for the community, not backroom politics. Steven E. Goldin
West Windsor
Hsueh: No Pay to Play
It is regrettable to read the letter by Farrell Delman (The News, November 16), where he alleges that one of my major sources of funds is a prominent local developer. Let me make this clear — this is absolutely false. I do not accept contributions from any developer.
I am proud to be one mayor who successfully pushed to adopt one of the most restrictive, zero-tolerance “pay-to-play” ordinances in the State of New Jersey. In fact, I was the first mayor in the state to propose that no developer be allowed to contribute to any local officials.
Unfortunately, there are still loopholes under the current ordinance (e.g., donations from labor unions are legal) which should be amended. Nevertheless, as an advocate against all forms of “pay-to-play,” it is important to keep my own campaign records clear and clean.
It is unfortunate that there are those who mislead the public for their own political agenda.
Shing-Fu Hsueh
Mayor, West Windsor
Personal Vendetta?
Your article in the November 16 edition under “Views and Opinions” has certain severe deficiencies and misinformation.
There were accusations made without backup or any factual source. The article stated that the mayor and Marvin Gardner have political financial backers. If one donates money to a political party of an insignificant amount to call that person a “political financial backer” creates an incorrect connotation in the mind of the reader. This is an irresponsible accusation. Farrell Delman, the writer of the letter, is looking to get even with the mayor and Marvin Gardner, because they were against property that Delman owns to be re-zoned for a seven-story office building. This is using a personal vendetta without regard to the public good.
Stanley Goldner
Honeyflower Lane
Delman’s Rebuttal
The responses by Shing Fu-Hsueh and Steve Goldin to my November 16 letter, as well as the one by Marvin Gardner’s fellow Village Grande pal Stanley Goldner, may have been in reference to Shing’s second campaign for mayor. I was not involved in that one.
The financial backing referred to in my letter is to Shing’s first campaign, the difficult one I ran, when Goldin’s first company, Columbia Group — not the new one, InterCap — was putting together the Walgreen deal on Route 571 in West Windsor.
I am pleased to see that his new company InterCap Holdings, is being held to a higher standard. Goldin terminated Columbia Group after cashing in when he resold the building approvals Hamilton Mayor Gilmore graciously helped him to get for hundreds of apartments where American Standard used to be located. This was also before Goldin’s plans for Hamilton’s transit village redevelopment ran into an outraged and newly elected Hamilton Town Council and now a new Hamilton mayor.
Columbia Group was alive and well when Shing’s first mayoralty needed funding and when soft money through the State Democratic party was more common than it is now and pay-to-play was the norm. But enough said on this diversionary issue.
Let’s focus instead on the thrust of my letter: the financial model that would encourage the West Windsor taxpayer to support a grandiose redevelopment by providing taxpayer relief — be tax positive from the start. The mayor likes to tell the residents how this process has included lots and lots of meetings over countless years.
If so, isn’t it odd that after so many meetings we still have no commitment from the mayor that his grand design will not cost us one red cent from day one but instead, after luring us with claims of government funding, we are asked once again to fund additional planning for a mega project when our already approved 571 improvements are not underway, our crosswalks not cared for and our dangerous S curves not addressed?
I don’t know about you but I never invest in projects that have no financial models attached to them. And interestingly neither do developers.
And the mayor is absolutely correct: I do have a political agenda and it is called “don’t spend taxpayer money without telling the taxpayer what he or she is getting for it.” A corollary might be: “only do projects that are tax positive for the taxpayer.”
I wish to thank Stanley Goldner for his letter claiming that I am opposed to the Goldin-Hsueh-Gardner position because of opposition by Gardner-Hsueh on a senior development that I proposed a few years ago, a proposal that would have resulted in two four-story (not seven-story) apartment buildings with about 100 units total set back hundreds of feet from the road and directly across from the 1165 homes that comprise the Estates at Princeton Junction.
This proposal would have brought in $1 million in tax relief annually (a 3 percent tax reduction) for all West Windsor taxpayers without creating any traffic problems since seniors don’t drive at rush hour. Mr. Goldner is absolutely CORRECT: all developments or redevelopments in West Windsor should be significantly tax positive for the taxpayer, not require 4-lane highways through town and not worsen our intersections. And this is what I have been urging Goldin-Hsueh-Gardner to commit to. But they won’t or they can’t.
They tell us about government funding and then want the West Windsor taxpayer to pay for everything: planning.then building.then suffering the woes of increased traffic and air pollution from more and more cars while Hsueh basks in his legacy all the while mouthing his commitment to sustainable community.
Most disturbing of all in these letters, however, is the fact that these efforts to discredit me and the very reality of how Hsueh’s mayoral career was launched has taken away both Shing’s and Steve’s valuable time to actually tell us what financial model they have in mind that should make the West Windsor taxpayer want to support this redevelopment.
In fact as I clearly stated in my letter, the financial model is the key issue here. The only reason I can think that they would prefer to personalize this attack is that when asked for a financial model that makes sense to West Windsor taxpayers the answer is: there isn’t one.
Farrell Delman
102 Bear Brook Road
Rebuttal: Hsueh
In response to Farrell Delman’s letter of November 26, 2007, I’d like to repeat what I said: I do not accept contributions from any developer, state or county party organization, political action committee or special interest. This principle applies to all my political campaigns including my first mayoral election and Council races.
As for a “financial model,” I have no intention of using tax payers’ money for public amenities under the redevelopment plan, as has been supported by Council.
Shing-Fu Hsueh
Editor’s note: The News checked prior articles and the records of the state Election Law Enforcement Commission (ELEC) and could find no records of any contributions made by Steve Goldin to Mayor Shing-Fu Hsueh. Nor did ELEC records show any record of contributions to Hsueh’s campaign from the state Democratic Party.
The records showed that Goldin in 2001 made a $1,”000 contribution to the state Democratic Party, and a $500 contribution to the Bergen County Democratic Organization. In 2003 he and his company, Columbia Group LLC, made a $2,”000 contribution to the Camden County Democratic Party. He also made a $2,”200 contribution to state senator Bob Smith in 2004 and gave $500 to former Governor James E. McGreevey in 1997.
Since a reference was made in the letter by Hsueh to a loophole in the local ordinance allowing candidates to receive contributions from labor unions, the News checked the ELEC records for all candidates during the 2007 elections. Reported below are the large contributors.
In October, 2006, Council President Will Anklowitz received a $500 contribution from Insulator’s Local 89; $300 from the Ironworkers Local 68 Political Action Committee; and $1,”000 from the Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 9, of Englishtown. From June through July, 2006, he also received $1,”000 from Mardy Goldman of the Princeton Overhead Door Co. and $500 from the Communication Workers of America. In September 2006, he received $1,”500 from the Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 9. In April, 2007, he received $1,”000 from IBEW in Washington, D.C., and in May 2007, he received $500 from CWA Local 1034.
In 2007 Councilman Charles Borek received $750 from CWA Local 1033, where Rae Roeder is president; $2,”000 from the Plumbers and Pipefitters Local Union 9; and $2,”000 from the IBEW Educational Committee in Washington, D.C. That year, he also received $1,”500 from the International Association of Firefighters.
In 2007 Councilman Charles Morgan received $1,”500 from the Ironworkers Local 68 Political Action Committee Fund; $625 from the West Windsor Republican Club; and $2,”000 from the Plumbers & Pipefitters Local Union 9.
Candidate Chuck Chang received contributions from various residents and nonresidents that ranged from $30 to $420. Franc Gambatese received a contribution from Frank D. Crawford of the Princeton Microfilm Corporation for $1,”000.
Candidate Barbara Pfeifer received a $2,”000 contribution from Patrick Boyle, who lives on Windsor Road, West Windsor, and works for Alaris Trading Partners LLC in Jersey City. The same individual donated $6,”000, and then $120 to the committee for Diane Ciccone and running mates Gambatese and Chang.
Gardner’s Position
It was not surprising to read Farrell Delman’s letter to the editor and quickly determine that it is riddled with inaccuracies.
I am not and never have been a candidate for public office and therefore have no political financial backers. I am an unpaid volunteer serving with many other residents on the Township’s volunteer boards and commissions.
If Delman had read the newspapers, he would have learned that although Township public officials met with Steve Goldin (a real estate developer) prior to the redevelopment charrette process, I refused to meet with him, stating that I don’t cater to the interests of real estate developers and was more interested in listening to the views of the West Windsor residents. In fact to this day, I have never discussed with Goldin his possible role in the redevelopment area.
If Delman had read the newspapers, he would have learned that many months ago I called upon the state agencies such as the New Jersey Department of Transportation and New Jersey Transit to come forward and indicate what financial contributions they would consider making to support the infrastructure to accommodate the needs of the redevelopment area.
If Delman would listen to the tapes of an early Township Steering Committee meeting where the introduction of 1,”000 housing units was first raised by Hillier, he would hear that I went on record as being the very first person to object to that number as being excessive.
Delman should be aware of how sensitive I am with respect to tall or “giant” buildings in West Windsor. He entered into an agreement to sell his land to a real estate developer who came before the Planning Board with a concept plan to build two residential structures, each 330 feet wide separated by a mere 47 feet of open space and five stories high. These buildings, if approved, would have been the tallest residential buildings in West Windsor and would have been situated across from Toll Brothers’ 1,”165 residential unit Estates at Princeton Junction.
The height of the buildings would be double what is presently permitted under our ordinance for that zone. The Township chose not to draft a new ordinance to accommodate Delman and apparently his deal fell through. This also avoided the precedent to permit five-story residential buildings in other parts of our town.
While we do have fiscal experts making assessments based on economic assumptions, we need a redevelopment plan that is based on what the West Windsor residents would like to see built in the redevelopment area and not a plan that is developer driven.
There is no grandiose plan being advocated by any member of the Planning Board. In fact, no draft of a redevelopment plan has been presented to us to consider. If and when this occurs the public will once again be given an opportunity to give their views on any aspect of the plan. Where appropriate, modifications will be made to accommodate the public’s recommendations and concerns as to intensity of development, infrastructure improvements, amenities, quality of life issues, and tax implications.
Marvin Gardner
WW Planning Board Chair
Stick to the Facts
After reading Farrell Delman’s letter to the editor in the November 16 WW-P News, we feel compelled to respond.
To characterize the West Windsor Township redevelopment project as the “Taj Mahal” is shameful and a gross exaggeration. How would he characterize the current state of the Princeton Junction Train Station area? The current identity of this downtown area is a series of disconnected buildings in various states of wear and tear. No sense of community for residents, other than a once a week seasonal farmer’s market — a great start.
The purpose of this redevelopment project is to control growth in a key area of this township; to put forth a plan that will result in a comprehensive, orderly and integrated plan for commercial, retail, public and, yes, appropriate residential space, for commuters, pedestrians, bicyclists, and just plain citizens in and around the area that we as a township can be proud of.
This township does not have sufficient commercial ratables to offset the current and future spiraling increases in taxes. Commercial ratables and open space acquisition help stabilize municipal budgets, by balancing the greater fiscal demands of residential ratables against the less demanding costs associated with commercial ratable and open space properties.
To assert that all the township wants and needs is a “Main Street” scenario on the east side of the train station along Route 571 along with some improvement for parking on the west side of the train station doesn’t comprehend the realities of financing public infrastructure improvements that are a necessary part of such a redevelopment; not to mention the need for amenities and public safety items that the west side residents have been demanding as part of redevelopment.
We agree that a financial analysis is warranted, and in fact, mandated, at the appropriate time. That time is not now. The entire picture is not clear yet. The comprehensive plan has yet to be formulated. After the Planning Board completes its task of formulating such a comprehensive plan, at that point the Township Council should supervise and direct the financial analysis of the plan in all its phases. After the financial analysis, if need be, the plan may be scaled back, or put on a longer time plan, say 40 to 50 years, instead of the 20 to 30 years currently discussed. Good Planning is about long term growth management, not individualized lot by lot site plan review. “Comprehensive” is not a “buzz word” for “big.” It is merely a statement for orderly management of inevitable growth!
Finally, Mr. Delman apparently does not understand how certain funding sources emanate from Trenton. The State of New Jersey may have a fiscal crisis to deal with, but there are existing statutory and constitutionally mandated funding sources for infrastructure improvements, brownfield reclamation, transportation trust fund, and open space acquisitions, among others that are not “bankrupt.” They come from existing taxes, future taxes and statewide bond referendums already in place. Shouldn’t we as a township get on the favorable lists that redevelopment offers, in order to get back some of our own taxpayer dollars?
Mayor Hsueh is a veteran of State government and knows his way around the State House better than anyone else in elected office in this Township. He has obtained numerous sources of funding at little or no cost to this Township
Mr. Delman should stick to the facts and not try to influence the public by half truths and inaccurate and misleading statements.
Richard Eland
Courtney Drive, West Windsor
Allen & Ina Marx
Claridge Court, West Windsor
Janet Lerner
Rainflower Lane, West Windsor
James & Carolyn Livingston
Astor Court, West Windsor
Second Thoughts
On Poll Politics
We do not want to belabor this issue. However, we would like all the information in the article entitled “Politics at the Polls?” (The News, November 16) to be factual. Therefore, please be advised of the following:
1. Rae Roeder’s mother was never meant to be contacted. A message was left on an answering machine for Rae Roeder, our Democratic Party Chairperson. When there was no response, a second call was made and a very pleasant exchange was made with her mother, who resides there, requesting a call back from Rae Roeder. As far as we can see, this is a non-issue, just an excuse by Roeder to avoid discussing the truth about our dismissal.
2. The only concern Republican Charlie Morgan seemed to have at the polling place, as a challenger, was to make an issue of another non-issue. Steven Shueh, the mayor’s son, came in, said he had moved, and openly asked where he was to vote. We telephoned the Board of Elections, who advised us he should check with the Montgomery district. When Shueh returned, after he was told he couldn’t vote there, we again called the Board of Elections. They told us, after we confirmed the West Windsor address on his driver’s license and his name in the poll books, HE COULD VOTE IN THE WEST WINDSOR DISTRICT.
We checked, and all six poll workers unanimously agreed to go along with the decision of the Board. We all followed instructions and violated no law, as Morgan accused. If an oath was violated, why were we singled out.why weren’t the other Democrat and Republican poll workers present that day removed from future poll workers’ lists?
3.) According to rules set forth for challengers, Morgan should not have spoken to Shueh directly about not voting.and is it a challenger’s responsibility to call in a reporter? It is interesting to note that as soon as Morgan got his interview with the reporter, he left the building, abandoning his job as official challenger. It makes one wonder about his motives and priorities.
In conclusion, our main concern is that we feel we got caught up in something we’ve been told has been going on in the West Windsor long before we moved here: lack of support from our West Windsor Township Democratic party leadership. We feel we were attacked by the Roeder/Morgan team.
Anybody out there interested in going back to a genuine two-party system in West Windsor?
Paul & Andrea Pitluk
Rainflower Lane, West Windsor
Credit Kniewel For WW-P SmartBoards
I write with reference to your recent piece “Black to White to Smart” (The News, November 16). An important detail in the piece needs to be corrected. The eleventh paragraph states that I “brought the idea to Superintendent Victoria Kniewel two years ago, when she served as the assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction.”
This is not true. I, among others, was asked to submit a proposal to Dr. Kniewel that outlined our thoughts about a technologically infused, learner-active classroom. Dr. Kniewel and those who manage technology in the district had previously decided that interactive white boards would be part of the district’s plans to increase the use of technology in the classroom.
Accolades for that decision rest with Dr. Kniewel and her team, not me.
Seamus A. Dowling
Teacher, Thomas Grover
Middle School
Dear Molly Kwon Brossman:
At the end of your article “The New Racial Equation: The Suburban Teen View” (The News, November 16), you asked if High School South is as discriminatory as North regarding teenagers who are half of one race and half of another race.
I honestly think that South is much more accepting than North in general. My conjecture is not only from experience but it also stems from the horrible stories based on how intolerant teenagers at North are not only on race, but with culture, religion, status, appearance, and sexual orientation. I am a Caucasian female who hangs out in a group which is South Asian and East Asian. I have never been discriminated against for being a Caucasian female in a predominately Asian group.
I have learned to embrace the culture and race of my friends. I have a friend who is half Japanese and half Caucasian. I have never seen her be discriminated against amongst my friends for her race.
High School South is not a typical high school. We have distinct groups but everyone from every group gets along fine. Of course there is the typical high school drama every now and then, but it is not enough to make it a sure problem at our school. I know that even though I am predominately in an “Asian group,” I tend to also talk a lot with other groups with similar interests as mine. Thus, making it hard to really distinguish one group from another group based on race at South.
Usually groups at South are broken down into interests; sports, clubs, drama based interests, art based interests, academics, and other basic interests. If you want to fit in somewhere at South, it is solely based on your personality and what you have in common with that group beyond just “race.” Perhaps an open walled school produces open minded teenagers.
Megan Gerity, South ’ 08
P.S Have you considered starting a group for teenagers who are looking for a more open high school?
Passing the Buck
A buck with a rack of 24 points limped directly in front of my car. He stood before heavy woods. I stopped. He turned. We held each other’s gaze. He had been shot in the leg. His wide eyes implored mercy. This animal is elegant, even wounded and hobbled. I wonder what he saw in me. I try to make sense of this surreal moment.##M:[more]##
The herds are being thinned, brutally. I’ve heard about protecting deer from starvation, know dangerous crossings and ruined gardens. Yet what gives anyone the license to inflict misery? Recall the initial scene from The Last of the Mohicans movie. The spirit of the fallen deer is revered as a brother by the Indians who apologize to it for requiring its life. Where is our respect for nature? I may have been able to put this wounded buck out of misery. But he has as much right to heal, eat, procreate, and enjoy the woods and seasons as you and I.
I think of recent tsunami, Hurricane Katrina, and California wildfire victims. Nature is exacting revenge on us for having dominated her as the Bible exhorts. I wonder if the “Green Revolution” can spread fast enough to restore natures balance. I think of my granddaughter, babies to be and the world we’ll pass to them. I’m worried. We can’t even find peace in ourselves and among ourselves.
Certain actions come to mind: voting out Neanderthal politicians for “Green” candidates; practicing compassion; meditation; nourishing oxygen producing plants; recycling; composting; making peace with wildlife (I draw the line at certain rodents); energy efficient bulbs; home insulation; driving efficiently and less often; etc. Tiny efforts can combine with those of others to let the next generation put renewable energy and sustainable development in place.
In some small way I hope to make a difference and assuage my concerns. How about you? Will you pass the buck?
Doug Opalski
Plainsboro Road, Plainsboro
