VOTE411 Voter Guide

The Herring Property is actually one of the easier Fourth Round projects to implement – we have a fully vetted Redevelopment Plan and Redeveloper’s Agreement in place, which were carefully prepared and are standing up consistently to legal challenge. The project has broad support in the community. For this one, we just have to be patient and stay the course until the legal challenges have exhausted themselves. In contrast, probably the biggest challenge we face is to vacate the two Public Works sites on John Street and North Harrison in order to make way for the 100% Affordable projects slated for these locations. In order to vacate them , we must move forward expeditiously with creating a whole new set of Public Works facilities at the municipality’s River Road site, a monumental planning effort in its own right, which is well underway but is facing headwinds in the form of budgetary constraints.

I think this is an area where we could improve. Since I have been on Council, over the last nine years, the pendulum has swung away from maximum engagement for projects such as the original Seminary Redevelopment planning effort, the Franklin Affordable Housing Design Guidelines Task Force, or the Permit Parking Task Force attempt to overhaul our inequitable resident parking permit system. Our current practice has allowed more limited public engagement. I will note that I was deeply involved in each of those early public engagement initiatives and would be very willing to continue to play a role in more robust public processes. There are lessons to be learned from some of the failures of those earlier efforts – in two cases small numbers of motivated individuals were able to derail the process. The question is how to strike the balance between engagement and stasis. The bottom line, for me, is that members of the public should have a vote but not a veto. For example, we still desperately need permit parking reform – the residents who did not want to give up their favored status were able to stop the whole process, whereas they should have been listened to, given the opportunity to improve the plan, and then we should have adopted new rules which, though not perfect, would have been a big improvement over the existing regimen.

I take issue with the notion that Council does not have a sense of urgency around putting the Westminster property to use. The Planning and Redevelopment Committee which is charged with moving this forward meets twice a week (in contrast to most Council committees which meet monthly) to focus on the myriad complexities of the challenge – addressing the needs of community partners like the Public Schools, McCarter Theater, and the Westminster Conservatory (each with their own decision-making bodies who must engage in their own thorough processes); addressing the technical challenges of maintaining and adaptively reusing historic structures; accommodating the regulatory and funding hurdles of notoriously slow-moving state agencies around wetlands permitting and grant funding; also garden variety space planning and financial planning issues. Like the proverbial duck who appears to be floating serenely on the surface of the pond, under the water, we are paddling as fast as we can. I can promise that this Fall we will be sharing status updates with the community so everyone can be more aware of what has been accomplished, and give input on next steps.

I have spent much of the last year serving on the Center for Modern Aging’s (CMAP’s) Age Friendly Princeton 2.0 Working Group. The needs assessment survey provided the basis for many of CMAP’s Action Plan’s recommendations.

Better communication between all service providers - Princeton’s Public Library, the YWCA, municipal Human Services, the Police Department, Council, Princeton Community Housing, and more, will help ensure that collaboration is ongoing and all service providers know what the others are offering, reducing the likelihood that residents in need will fall through the cracks.

Council is currently considering adopting an ICE Out of Princeton ordinance which could help alleviate some residents’ fears about accessing services. Close collaboration can also allow trusted community partners to fill some of the needs that the municipality, as a government entity, cannot provide to undocumented residents.

Lastly, moving our municipal transit to a micro-transit on-demand service can dramatically improve access to services by shortening wait times and reducing cost-per-ride, providing more robust door-to-door services to the entire community. This has the added benefits of lessening traffic congestion, easing parking woes, improving road safety (by giving elderly drivers an alternative to driving themselves around town), and achieving emissions reductions, all important Council goals.

Many of my priorities for the coming years are already mentioned in my answers above – Working to successfully implement our fourth-round housing plan, move forward the planning process for the Westminster campus, develop the new Public Works campus at River Road, and transition to a transit-on-demand model for our municipal shuttle service. Other key priorities include continuing to promote Princeton’s Vision Zero goals, shepherding our Zoning overhaul to a successful conclusion, implementing a Stormwater Utility to better protect Princeton from the risks of climate change, and working to address the need for “missing middle” housing, which would be affordable to those who make too much to qualify for subsidized affordable housing, but not enough to afford even the least expensive single family housing which predominates in the Princeton market. I plan to implement these goals, all of which are currently well underway, by working collaboratively with Council colleagues, staff, and interested members of the community to come up with thoughtful, data-driven, practical solutions.

If you mean the proposed development on 108 Stockton Street, please see the website and read: "Marina Rubina Architect". I am sorry: I think it is time to stop this game. It seems like a scheme where: 1)-a narrative is generated so the citizens will feel there is the need. 2)-The council will hire consultants, often without any bid, that may side or not with the architects already in the council. 3)-A so-called "housing plan" will be implemented WITHOUT HOUSING: developers are not building houses for families but LUXURY APARTMENTS IN CONDOMINIUMS where people will stay for a short time, until they find something better or cheaper. 4)-These apartments are FOR RENT ONLY, NO BUY. The less appealing apartments will be labelled "affordable housing". 5)-Citizens will contribute to their associated costs (school, transportation, sewage etc) after a referendum with "no quorum" will approve the plan. EVEN IF ONLY 20 PEOPLE WILL VOTE, 30,000 CITIZENS WILL PAY. 6)-The builders-developers will contribute an irrelevant fraction because they will benefit from the PILOT (Pay In Lieu Of Taxes) instead of paying all the taxes that they owe, like WE, THE PEOPLE, do. 7)-Ordinary citizens are not the only ones who will pay: their children will pay too, because the Municipality will issue BONDS. STOP, PLEASE! - I WILL ASK FOR A MORATORIUM ON BUILDING LUXURY APARTMENTS AND ISSUING BONDS. "Pause, and check if we are doing right" before asking more money to the distressed citizens of Princeton!

No, the decision making, as it appears from the hearings of the Municipal Council Meeting, is very unbalanced on paid-consultants reports. This way to proceed may generate decisions that are actually taken closed-doors when these reports are received. These decisions are just formally ratified by the Council (where, in any case, there is no opposition). One example that comes to my mind, because of my involvement in the Westminster Choir College saga, is the award to the small firm "TOPOLOGY NJ" LLC (Newark) for a redevelopment plan for the Westminster Campus. Topology received a contract in February 2025 for $115,000 for 15 months and, more recently, a contract for $33,000 for 12 months. A total of $148,000. To the best of my knowledge, it is not clear if OTHER FIRMS have been required to compete for these contracts. Even less clear to me is why TOPOLOGY was identified as "qualified for the task" or more "qualified than others". On their public website they give no clues on their experience in redeveloping these kinds of areas (musical education). Local press reported that some of the area could be developed for the housing market so the Princeton citizens could be spared a too high increase in taxes. Does it mean that the chinese developers that were blocked by the citizens on the door of the acquisition, will likely get back from the window? (citizens blocked, with a legal action, the acquisition of the area by chinese developers that posed as an educational institution).

The saga of the Westminster Choir College was the reason why I got involved into municipal politics. I came to Princeton to retire and I was so lucky to join the Westminster Community Orchestra. I spoke during a council meeting to advocate the preservation of the musical activity in the unique environment of the Princeton campus. I started to familiarize myself with the methods of the council. Everything seemed decided in closed-door meetings. HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS WERE SPENT ON EXTERNAL CONSULTANTS (often selected without any bid). Conflicts of interest were declared. I wanted to contact the councilmen from the opposition... but there was no opposition. The local Republican committee did not submit candidates in 10 years, AN UNFORGIVABLE FAULT. So, I became a candidate. I WILL PROPOSE, AND SEEK, AN INTERNATIONAL BIDDER FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF AN INTERNATIONAL MUSIC SCHOOL AT THE PRINCETON WESTMINSTER CAMPUS. I can devote a lot of time to that. I owe this to the Westminster Community Orchestra (that now, unfortunately, moved to Lawrenceville). I know that NO BIG MONEY will come to the Municipality from this but, at least, WE WILL NOT GIVE UP A PIECE OF MUSIC HISTORY FOR SOME EXTRA FAKE-LUXURY APARTMENTS THAT WILL ONLY ENRICH A FEW DEVELOPERS. I understand that we will pay for the insane bonds of the acquisition. However, we will not pay for consultants in the meantime. My timeline is 3 years: give me 3 years and I will make the Westminster campus "great again".

Marginalized groups do exist in Princeton. I would have rather spent the money that the Municipality used to ASSESS THEIR NEEDS, to CONTRIBUTE TO THEIR NEEDS INSTEAD. If they are not accessing the necessary services may be a matter of hot debate. Let's say that is true, we can still see that Princeton is a rich community and that tax collection still provides a lot of money. LET'S STOP WASTING MONEY AND GIVE THE RESOURCES TO THE PEOPLE IN-NEED. Let's publish, and AUDIT, a transparent municipal budget and let's write the next budget in an open way. Every citizen should be able to understand what the council is doing. One of the key points of my program is to use a "lay language" so the budget could be checked by anyone. Currently, a budget is published that is impossible to read (and I was an auditor and then treasurer for the European Society for Biomaterials) but has the mocking heading "user friendly budget" (so, in case you don't understand it, you should feel stupid). I have also to say that while knocking the doors of several households, I met several wealthy citizens that could and would contribute to those who are "less wealthy" (I would not say "less fortunate" because I believe in "blessed are the poors", so, maybe the wealthy are those who are less fortunate). Give the caring and wealthy people of Princeton the chance to operate directly to support the marginalized groups, without the intermediate step of a municipal administration in which they have lost trust.

The 5 key points of my campaign are: 1)-writing and and running a BUDGET that does not require new taxes every year; 2)-ENDING the practice of issuing BONDS; 3)-promoting the use of lay LANGUAGE so all citizens can understand what the council is doing; 4)-bring RESPECT AND TOLERANCE back into Princeton political life; stop to the many examples of "acquittance" with antisemitism. 5)-provide MORE FUNDING TO THE POLICE to enforce existing local, state and federal laws. No need to fund new fancy initiatives whenever the Police can already do the job. Let me add that I also want to honor CLAUDE SHANNON in Princeton. He is an unsung founding father of computer science. Even if I could not define this as a priority, I think that Shannon deserves recognition from Princeton. I will implement my priorities trying to convince my fellow Democrat councilmen to do things right (that means, to follow my 5 key points). However, I am aware that they may not listen to me (and I will end 1 against 5); in this case, my plan is TO BE THE EYES AND THE EARS OF THE PRINCETON CITIZENS inside the seclusive council environment. I will let the people know everything about how the budget is structured, the consultants are chosen, the priorities are selected. The citizens will have a source to make their independent judgement in every election year. Maybe, more and more councilmen will be elected that are minded like me until, one day, we will have a truly transparent and accountable municipal council.

Judge Lougy approved Princeton’s Fourth Round Housing Plan in February and dismissed lawsuits focused on the Stockton St project. The developer will now submit his design for municipal staff, Planning Board, and public review. What we have learned from the past two rounds is that creating affordable housing is not easy, even in a welcoming town like ours. I see two key problems. 1st, compliance happens every decade in batches of large projects that can appear to have been negotiated behind closed doors. 2nd, these projects combine below-market-rate units (1k+ waiting list) with very high-end units that help subsidize them. This leaves a huge gap in the middle: few homes for people who work in our small businesses and almost no smaller homes to purchase. Although we call it “affordable housing,” what we see are large apartment buildings advertising themselves as high-end luxury. This disconnect contributes to opposition, lawsuits, and frustration. Rather than looking in the rearview mirror, I want us to prepare for the next round of state requirements. Can we make it easier to build smaller projects, allowing housing to grow gradually and organically, with more local sensibility? I would like to work with the state to test approaches focused on missing-middle housing. That way, people of different incomes and needs can find homes before the next mandate arrives. My goal is to create truly affordable homes today that will be considered landmarks in the future.

In short, no. I am not accusing Princeton Council of hiding anything, but I suspect we differ on our definition of transparency. Information is publicly available, but our government functions through a Kafkaesque maze of paperwork, reports, and delays, making it nearly impossible to follow.

For me, transparency means that the logic behind a decision is clear. Even if residents disagree, they should understand how and why we are doing something.

The North Harrison bike lane is a good example. A resident who was not paying close attention could easily see the new bike lanes and assume they were the purpose of the project. In reality, we were testing whether reducing the road from four lanes to two would reduce dangerous and aggressive driving without causing traffic backups. The bike lanes were a reuse of the outer vehicle lanes, but that message got lost.

At the 08/10 Council meeting, even Council members appeared to have different understandings of the project’s purpose, what was temporary, and how success would be defined.

An abundance of documentation is not enough for meaningful transparency. I would like to see us shift to citizen-centric clarity. In my recent TapInto Princeton article, “Let’s Decide How to Decide So We Can Decide Already,” I proposed setting clear parameters, evaluating options against them, and then analyzing the results. That is the transparency I strive for.

Yes. There is a real sense of urgency. The roof is leaking, carrying costs are accumulating, and the Community Music School and other potential partners are in limbo. But urgency should not mean rushing into a predetermined plan.

I would establish a clear timeline and a public process that puts the financial realities on the table before alternatives are developed. We need to understand what it costs to maintain and restore the property, what the town can afford, and what potential partners can contribute. Then I would involve residents and stakeholders in developing and evaluating several complete, fiscally balanced options.

My goal would be to have a preferred direction within 12 months and move into implementation immediately afterward. This is one of Princeton’s most significant opportunities in a generation, but we cannot afford to spend another five years discussing it.

I have proposed a more detailed public engagement process in my recent article, “The Roof Is Leaking and the Clock Is Ticking,” including a way for residents to help build and evaluate possible scenarios.

Read the full article here: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/princeton/sections/elections/articles/op-ed-at-westminster-the-roof-is-leaking-and-the-clock-is-ticking

No one is more marginalized than our unhoused population. It breaks my heart to see people sleeping on benches and in nooks downtown. I have no words to explain to my kids why we cannot find a way to help the fewer than a dozen people who call our streets home. As I walk around town, I recognize most of them. They have been our unhoused neighbors for some time.

This will be my absolute priority on Council. I am sure this will be non-trivial, but I am committing to getting our unhoused population housed by the end of my term.

I have three goals that I am committed to getting done during my three-year term:

1. Revise our zoning code to reflect our values.

Zoning manages our land, our most valuable and limited resource. Our current laws close doors to new ideas and make life a nightmare for small businesses and property owners. Let’s instead make zoning a guide to our values: sustainability, walkability, community, shopping, working and playing locally, encouraging well-designed streets and shared public spaces.

2. House our homeless population (see above)

3. Bring municipal services online.

In Princeton in 2026, a scientist has to go to the municipal offices three times to apply for, pay for, and pick up a permit for a home condensing unit instead of inventing quantum computing or curing cancer. Small business owners working long hours to support their families face unnecessary hurdles too. It is no longer acceptable to kill trees printing paperwork just to keep it in files or to not accept credit card payments.

One more goal is aspirational: Create a car-free walk parallel to Nassau Street, winding through underused driveways, passages, and forgotten spaces from Moore Street to Chambers Street. Think of the Shopping Center courtyard, with businesses, concerts, trees, and games. A linear version of that could be an incredible new public space downtown. We may not complete it in three years, but we can lay the groundwork, complete the legal work, and get it under construction