My column today — well, yesterday — on Princeton Patch.
Princeton University wants to move the Dinky station about 460 feet to south — farther from Nassau Street, a move that appears to be opposed by the Princeton Borough Council.
The proposal is part of a larger reconfiguration of the University Place/Alexander Road area that calls for it to become an “arts and transit neighborhood” surrounding the McCarter Theatre. The notion is a good one, taking advantage of the theater and the rail link to create a destination on campus but close to downtown Princeton.
The issue, as many pointed out when a revised plan was unveiled last week, is moving the station. The 460-foot shift is not a lot — less than a 10th of a mile or about two city blocks — but there were concerns raised.
Borough resident Roberto Wineman said he walked to the Dinky and “those 500 feet coming and going may be very pleasant in June but are worth 5,000 feet in January,” for commuters like himself.
Sheldon Sturges, managing director of Princeton Future, said “the single sustainable truth of this development is the Dinky ought to move closer to the town.” If the university wanted to do something for the community as part of the arts and transit neighborhood, it would move the Dinky closer not farther from downtown Princeton, Mr. Sturges said.
That said, the response was mostly positive for a plan that could create another spur off the downtown and offer another reason to come to Princeton.
Consolidation of the two Princetons is back on the table.
Members of the governing bodies of both towns — along with numerous residents — appear ready to move ahead with a study, despite a history of failed consolidation attempts. At a Monday meeting on the issue, even people who in the past opposed a merger said they were ready to investigate — even if they were not ready to take a position on consolidation.
Borough Councilman David Goldfarb, a past opponent of full municipal consolidation, said, “We should move ahead very carefully, make sure we are all on the same page before we move on to the next step, and don’t make any assumptions.”
Mr. Goldfarb said, “I think we can go forward with the next two or three steps without throwing the c-word in front of everybody and getting an uproar and having everybody taking sides.”
Such a discussion — occurring at a time when the governor is pushing for more shared services and potential municipal and school consolidations — could help frame the debate statewide. The issues — cost savings and services, debt, identity and representation — are the same ones that pop up in every discussion.
And while the Princetons already share more services than most communities — there are probably 20 or so agencies and commissions that operate jointly, including the Planning Board, tax assessment and collection, the Board of Health, the library and the school district — there remains plenty of other areas that could result in savings. Most notable, of course, is the existence of two separate police departments, one of the largest costs incurred by any municipality.
There is no doubt that New Jersey has too many layers of government (can we reform the counties?) and too many municipalities (566!) and school districts (611!) and that we need to streamline. It will require municipal mergers, school regionalization and other changes.
Critics of consolidation dispute this assertion, which is why the Princeton discussion is likely to have implications well beyond the township’s borders (the township is the doughnut that completely surrounds the borough) and even beyond Mercer County and central New Jersey.
While the two municipalities share some services, they continue to oversee significant duplication, including two separate police departments. Mayor Miller said that the increased economic pressures faced by local governments in 2009 demanded he and his borough counterparts pursue “the opportunities for longer term savings” through full consolidation even it that means “working myself out of a job.”
Hank Kalet 