Princeton Officials Discuss How To Address Consolidation Concerns

If voters are to be convinced to vote for municipal consolidation, officials must address residents’ real and perceived concerns about merging, a member of the Princeton Consolidation and Shared Services Study Commission said on Wednesday.

The issue arose as commission members reviewed its 19-page draft report to clarify language and ensure accuracy.

“One would have to look long and hard at this report to find that consolidation has any disadvantages,” commission member and borough councilor David Goldfarb said.

Residents have rejected past consolidation proposals and the reasons go beyond financial considerations, Goldfarb said. That’s why the commission should be upfront about potential disadvantages and then address why the commission recommends consolidation.

Borough Mayor Mildred Trotman agreed.

“We need to present this in a more balanced way or we will have failed,” she said.

Other commission members disagreed, including Carol Golden, Township Mayor Chad Goerner and commission Chairman Anton Lahnston.

“Now it’s time to advocate for what we’ve learned,” Golden said.

Golden said the biggest issue concern the commission heard, over and over again, was a fear that consolidation would mean that former borough residents would constantly be outvoted by a 2-1 margin.

Goldfarb said he would help outline the other top reasons residents oppose consolidation.

On May 25, the commission voted 9-1 on to recommend that Princeton Borough and Princeton Township consolidate into a single entity.

The new entity, called Princeton, would operate under a borough form of government with an elected mayor and six at-large council members to hold staggered terms.

Goldfarb voted no.

The commission estimates consolidation could save $3.1 million in staff costs and redundancies.

Should both borough council and the township committee approve putting the consolidation question on the ballot, voters would weigh in on Nov. 8.