I will not be responding to questions from anonymous bloggers on this site. If you have a question, please email me at TimBraden@optonline.net
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 8, 2007 10:32 PM
Tim -
Two years ago, you and four others were elected to the charter study commission to evaluate our government. A little more than a year ago, your charter committee very quietly presented its recommendation to leave the status quo intact. Your report concluded that since there was no form of government that stood out as better than the current one in town, then we might as well stick with the one we have. If voters thought that the current government was satisfactory, would they have elected a charter study commission? Your current running mate ran on the platform of changing the government so that we elect a mayor. Wasn't that a sign that the electorate wanted a change? Shouldn't you have said that since our current form of gov't is as good as many others, and since the electorate wants a change, that we should opt for a change? Under what circumstances would you ignore the voters again?
The state of NJ recommends several forms of gov't, one of which is very similar to ours. The primary difference between our gov't and the state-recommended one is the ease of initiative and referendum. The form of government that you endorsed makes voter initiative and referendum much harder than the state recommends, thus eroding our rights. Why would you do this?
Tim -- why are you afraid of anomymous questions? We all want to know your platform -- in fact, if you have one, you should WANT everyone to know exactly what you stand for. All I know from your opening statement is your resume. That tells us nothing about how you would govern if elected. This is not a popularity contest. The question from "you stole my vote" seems like a valid question about your positions. The fact that it is from an anonymous source doesn't make it less valid.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 10, 2007 12:17 AM
Why won't you respond to questions from anonymous people? Isn't one of the pillars of our system that a voter has the right to keep his/her preferences private? Shouldn't we be able to ask you a question without having to make our names public? You, of course, have the right not to answer any question, but to disqualify it based on the lack of identification of the composer will potentially leave many good questions unanswered.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 10, 2007 1:07 AM
I would like to know too.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 10, 2007 10:27 AM
Tim,
The post refusing to answer questions from anonymous posters authored by ANONYMOUS! Was this an attempt at humor?
Seriously, it's sad to think you'd "dodge" any legitimate question regardless of the author. This is a platform to make your positions known. It indicates to me a desire to field as few questions as possible.
You will not get my vote like this.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 10, 2007 10:39 AM
In my humble opinion if you want your post taken seriously, be a stand up person and put your name to it. If not, how can one give merrit to an individual that hides behind the keyboard and monitor regardless of the validity of the question.
Posted by
Chris Schlomann
on
October 10, 2007 1:33 PM
Chris,
With all due respect, your post is nonsense.
How does posting one's name grant merit to a question? Again, complete nonsense.
Tell me, will knowing who asks the questions influence your answers? Come on, anonymous posters make good and bad posts, just like those posting their name.
You posted your name and frankly, I dont give your post much merit..go figure.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 10, 2007 2:32 PM
Questions either have merit or not – the questioner is irrelevant. That said, here goes:
This question is being asked of all four candidates. At a recent Township Committee meeting, it was revealed to the committee that the Montville Messenger was way over budget, with only 3 out of the 4 scheduled issues for 2008 published. If you were on the committee today, what action would you take immediately, and, if elected, what actions would you take?
Robert, Good question. As a regular attendee of Township Committee meetings you may recall that I questioned the Committee on this very issue. I suggested that the Township distribute the Messenger electronically and save the largest cost associated with it, postage. I was told that there are obstacles to this form of distribution. As a Township Committee member, I would look to overcome these obsstacles and get the necessary information out to the public at the lowest cost.
Tim Braden
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 11, 2007 1:34 PM
Thanks for the quick response to my question. I see from the responses to my question that I should be clearer about the first part of the question: if you were on the township committee today, what would you do immediately pertaining to the 4th issue that has not yet been printed?
For the record, as of the 3rd issue, we were on track to reach close to $30,000 for an item budgeted at $12,000 per year.
How does posting one's name grant merit to a question? Again, complete nonsense.
Tell me, will knowing who asks the questions influence your answers? Come on, anonymous posters make good and bad posts, just like those posting their name.
You posted your name and frankly, I dont give your post much merit..go figure.
Posted by Anonymous on October 10, 2007 2:32 PM
Hey Anonymous, Go Figure? Keep hiding behind your keyboard and monitor, your helping the community and thread by doing so.
Thanks!
Posted by
Chris Schlomann
on
October 15, 2007 8:33 AM
I would like to know each candidates' platform regarding the Kelly Bill and services to condo communities.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 15, 2007 3:44 PM
Soem people work for the town or have relatives that work here. We can't use our names but that our comments are vallid.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 15, 2007 5:15 PM
Braden is showing a side that is pathetic.
I guess he thinks he can ride Art's coattails to a win. I will vote for Art but definitely not for Braden.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 15, 2007 5:24 PM
Chris -
What makes an anonymous question illegitimate? If Tim puts things like his leadership of the Charter Study commission on his political resume, shouldn't he have to answer questions about that? Can you point out anything in the 'you stole my vote' questions that is biased or invalid? If not, then the questions should be answered. They won't be, but they should. I remember when the last charter study was done. We all received a written copy of the report in the mail. This time, nobody recieved the report.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 16, 2007 12:04 AM
Is Tim still participating in this blog? He said that he would not answer anonymous questions (which is suspect in and of itself -- what is he hiding from) but he did not even answer the question that was signed by a poster on Oct 11th. Is he out of town wth our Mayor?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 16, 2007 2:06 PM
You Have to admit, Dan is not afraid to answer questions. HMMMMMM who should we vote for?
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 17, 2007 8:17 AM
This question is being asked to all candidates: The Montville animal shelter is one of the town's few areas where we practice shared services. By sharing our shelter's service with 4 other towns, we keep the cost to Montville taxpayers down to approximately $15,000/year. In the near future, the animal shelter will be destroyed in favor of a new shelter that must be built. The preliminary cost for the new shelter is $750,000. I know that Montville Pet Parents are trying to raise money for this through fund raising and grants, and I know that the town wants to ask the county to chip in. ASSUMING that we must bond for a substantial portion of the new shelter, our annual costs would easily exceed $50,000 / year (after taking into account the payments from other towns). If it would cost us more to provide the shared service ourselves than to share another town's animal shelter, would you advocate providing the service ourselves or outsourcing?
It has been almost a week since Mr. Braden has responded on this forum. This question is directed at the blog host -- have you heard from Mr. Braden and is he still participating?
It seems that Tim has decided that giving his opinions and stating his platform will not win him any votes.
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 18, 2007 1:24 PM
Robert, Animal Control is an important municipal function. One of the reasons we are operating at a cost of $15,000 per year is because we have let our facility become overcrowded and run down. If you haven't visited the facility you should. The ladies do a fine job with very little. I don't know whether $15,000 or $50,000 is the correct number for its operation but I would venture to say that it is somewhere in between. I would be in favor of raising the fees we charge other towns to the point where they would consider building there own facility. This, in my opinion, is the correct number. I believe we could fund a new facility with these additional funds.
Tim Braden
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 18, 2007 5:24 PM
Tim -
I'm glad to see that you're back responding to questions. You may not have noticed my follow-up question regarding the Montville Messenger. I'm curious to see your response.
With respect to the animal shelter, we are charging the market rate. If we raise our fees, then the other towns will simply contract with another town to provide this service.
The fees that we charge offset the cost of running the shelter. If we turn away our partner towns, then that fee will rise substantially. On top of that, we now must fund the construction of the new building ($750,000). Our partners wouldn't fund that because they can always share services with another town that does not ask them to fund the capital expenditure.
I ask, therefore, if you would be in favor of outsourcing the animal shelter to another town if the cost of doing so would be less than the cost of doing it ourselves.
Robert, On what basis do you claim that we are charging the "market rate" to other towns?
Tim Braden
Posted by
Anonymous
on
October 19, 2007 7:18 AM
Tim, are you saying that we are not charging "market rate"? If so, why not?
Posted by
Concerned Taxpayer
on
October 19, 2007 10:46 AM
Tim -
It was mentioned at the 9/25 TC meeting that we were charging market rate. There are issues with the way that we charge other towns that were not reported to the TC at that meeting, but I could not alert them to this, as the public portion of the meeting had been closed.
