Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
Candidate has not yet responded.
My first priority is improving the safety and walkability of our sidewalks, particularly where they have become hazardous for residents walking, running or pushing a stroller. Many have been affected by tree roots and maintenance challenges. Addressing this will require cooperation among the Shade Tree Commission, Township Committee, Township Administrator and affected residents. We should evaluate municipal investment, property-owner responsibility and ordinance changes, while considering the financial implications. Our downtown is historic, beautiful and charming, and it should be safe and accessible for residents of all ages and abilities.
My second priority is improving the value residents receive for their tax dollars. Before considering increases, I want the Township to identify efficiencies, pursue available revenue opportunities and ensure contracts deliver full value. I would also like practical performance measures to evaluate whether services meet residents' needs, projects are completed effectively and taxpayers receive the outcomes they expect.
My third priority is strengthening our volunteer committees and commissions. Our volunteers are the Town's lifeblood, and we need to respect their time and support goals established with the Committee each year. Delays and communication breakdowns can frustrate volunteers and make it harder to attract and retain new ones. We should improve communication, coordination and accountability so our volunteers can succeed.
I believe the best way to solicit feedback is to be approachable, accessible and willing to listen. Since entering the race, I’ve been canvassing and speaking directly with voters about issues facing our Town. Those conversations have reinforced how important it is for residents to feel heard and have access to their elected officials. I’d like to institute a twice-yearly “Town Hall” where members of the Township Committee are available to answer residents’ questions. This would supplement existing channels: responding promptly to emails, bringing concerns to Committee meetings and serving as an active liaison to our commissions and committees.
Regarding disagreements, I’ve found the most productive approach is to start where people agree – whether on principle or the underlying concern – before working through where they differ. My role would be to ensure each side is genuinely heard before the Committee acts and to explain the reasoning behind decisions afterward, so residents who didn’t prevail understand how we got there. A fair process matters even when the outcome isn’t what someone wanted.
Fundamentally, disagreements should be handled respectfully and constructively, rather than becoming personal. I’d encourage a sit-down discussion, formal or informal, with any community member with whom I disagree. Maintaining relationships and open communication is important, because today’s disagreement does not have to prevent us from working together on tomorrow's issue.
I want to start by thanking our current Township Committee for working through the Fourth Round of Affordable Housing. They were placed in a difficult situation and were able to meet the 265-unit obligation while structuring the plan so the projects could compete successfully for Low-Income Housing Tax Credit financing.
The adopted plan is moving forward, with the properties being transferred to the developer, so the immediate implementation risk is limited. The challenges I’d focus on are keeping residents informed as the project proceeds and preparing now for the next round.
I recognize there may have been legal or strategic reasons for limiting certain communications during the process. Going forward, the Township should work with counsel to identify ways to keep residents informed to the greatest extent legally possible – what decisions are being made, what the major milestones are, and how they affect the community.
We’ve seen what happens when the options narrow under a deadline. Even though the next obligation won’t be known until the State establishes it, we can begin scenario planning now – asking the Planning Board to inventory potential locations and infrastructure constraints and weighing financial implications and the impact on the broader community, while engaging residents and relevant commissions early.
I’d be cautious about labeling groups in our community as marginalized without hearing that from the residents themselves. What I can point to are specific barriers that keep some residents from participating fully, and those are what I’d work on. Cranbury has made real investments here – the Senior Center and the inclusive playground at Village Park – and I’d want to continue that work, including continued attention to how our sidewalks and pedestrian routes serve residents with mobility limitations.
Looking ahead, a significant portion of the Fourth Round of Affordable Housing is located across Route 130. The Township Committee should ensure residents in these new communities have equal access to Township communications, community events, and transportation to facilities like the Senior Center. Geography shouldn’t determine how connected a resident feels to the Town.
I’d also want to know whether residents are having trouble accessing Township information, whether anyone has asked for translated notices, and whether we have a policy if they do.
Cranbury Township has little, if any, authority over federal immigration policy. That does not mean the Township is without a role when federal actions have local impacts.
The first concerns our residents. Immigration enforcement is a federal function, not a local one, and our police department's job is to enforce New Jersey’s criminal law. That distinction matters for people who might hesitate to call police – a crime victim or witness who stays silent makes everyone less safe. I’d want Cranbury residents to understand that distinction, and it's something the Township should highlight through its own communications.
The second is land use. Roxbury Township’s experience is instructive. When federal authorities moved to convert a warehouse into an immigration detention facility, Roxbury joined New Jersey in litigation arguing that federal officials had bypassed environmental reviews and consultation with local government. That case is ongoing. Whatever the outcome, it shows municipalities are not without recourse when federal proposals affect their communities.
Cranbury has substantial warehouse inventory, so I would rather be prepared than caught off guard. I would support reviewing our land-use and zoning framework and, where legally appropriate, considering resolutions or ordinances that protect Cranbury’s interests. The Township should assess impacts on infrastructure, public safety, traffic, the environment and municipal resources, and use every lawful tool available.
