While it might make financial sense, it just seems like merging the two towns would only make getting things done in the local government THAT much more difficult.

Unbelievable when someone can move from Fanwood to Scotch Plains, get a bigger house, more property but lower taxes! I think it's time to merge the towns.

I realize that this discussion moves in fits and starts, but my understanding was that the latest discussion was to encompass the creation of a framework for merging the police departments, with most of the savings resulting from attrition.

That said, any discussion should encompass more than just money. I value Fanwood's government - notwithstanding the incremental cost (for now, anyway) - because it is accountable, approachable, reasonably transparent, and reasonably honest. It delivers basic services well with little waste. As I have said before, although we lack a miniature golf course, our branches and leaves are picked up, a streets are paved and plowed, and our houses fit on their lots.

It may well be that rising fixed costs may overwhelm Fanwood's ability to generate corresponding revenues - the recent presentation by PARSA to the Borough Council was but a shot across the bow as to things to come.

I am not at all sure WHAT Fanwood actually gains from a merger beyond what may be a temporary dollar savings, but I know very well what I will lose in terms of governance.

I'm Holden MaGroin and I'm going to paste a letter I sent to Mr. Nuehauser as he was leaving to go ski.

To the Editor,

There has been much discussion concerning the merger of Fanwood and Scotch Plains. We’re now at the point where there appears to be at least movement towards merging certain departments. I support this merger and will hope that the details are soon officially presented to the public.

My letter is written as an introduction to what I would hope will be a spirited yet respectful dialogue on the merits of a full merger, with one governing body. One of the main concerns seems to be that Fanwood would be swallowed up by Scotch Plains. There have also been comments related to Scotch Plains wanting to use Fanwood to help with some perceived financial problems. Further comments included safety concerns and what some have called a disagreeable or dysfunctional Scotch Plains governing body.

I disagree that these opinions should be causal enough to prevent this merger.
From what I can see, both communities have to have a balanced budget. Neither is allowed to deficit spend and rack up unpaid bills. Over time, the merging of these functions will bring more efficiency and lowered costs.

From a safety consideration, I would have to believe that with one police force, officers can be deployed on patrols that will allow maximum coverage, while also having a larger pool of officers to cover call offs, thereby reducing overtime expenses.

The issues of dysfunction within the councils and loss of identity by Fanwood will be lumped together. I would have to believe that our politicians, if they are truly proud of their record, should not be concerned about re-election based on what neighborhood they live in. We are a representative government and our officials will have their constituencies regardless of their zip code. I would have to believe that if a candidate from what is now Fanwood was running and discussed advocacy for senior citizen issues, they would have support from others that felt strongly about those issue regardless if they lived on Rahway Road, William Street or Shady Lane.

Now to the makeup of a future council. Fanwood has six members with the mayor as the tie-breaker and Scotch Plains has four members and a mayor. I can’t see the politicians settling for anything less than six council members plus a mayor. So I will offer a future view using six council members and a mayor.

In my opinion, if each current mayor ran against each other it would be a landslide in favor of mayor Mahr. She was very visible during the two recent storms and just seems to be very prepared for things that come her way. As for a council makeup and assuming all current members were to run against each other, I think our communities would be served quite nicely and professionally by (in no particular order),
Marcus from S.P. (D)
Vastine from S.P. (R)
Suzch from Fanwood (R)
Huegel from Fanwood (D)
Mitchel from Fanwood (D)
……and I would beg Mr. Jeff Strauss from S.P. to run again.

In watching these individuals, they appear to come with minimal agendas, seem to deliberate thoughtfully on issues, and do not bring the theater that turns people off to politics. There is a mix of philosophies without the “my way or no way” attitude that can cause gridlock.

While these are my picks, you could slot in others to replace my choices, but either way all candidates would have to be attractive to the larger community that would come through a merger. If someone was too slanted to a particular neighborhood, that’s why we have elections.

I look forward to this discussion. It’s coming, we may as well begin it now.

Holden

Glover mentioned that Mayor Malool should discuss her intentions with Mayor Mahr before moving forward with her actions - 'ya think? Sounds like the reasonable thing to do! I wonder if the fact that Fanwood has a train station (a real selling point in a buyer's market) and Scotch Plains doesn't has anything to do with this issue, too? Doesn't matter much though, a Fanwoodian might be able to walk to the station, but a Scotch Plainer couldn't.......

I am very active in the community (not politics) and have yet to hear from anyone who is in favor of a FULLmerger of the two towns. The two big ticket items are the schools and police. We already have the SPF School District, so that's out of the way. The police merger may be something to explore further, but beyond that it doesn't seem to be something that many are interested in. I am curious how many people are actually on board with Courage to Reconnect's overall mission of consolidating everything.

FanGuy462 - I would be curious to know how many people are on board with CTR's mission as well. It raises a lot of questions- would Fanwood still be called Fanwood, or would Scotch Plains change it's name to Fanwood, or would we be Scotch Plains-Fanwood (like Millburn-Short Hills)? If we do merge, and one of the towns changes it's mind, can we un-merge? I just feel that there might be a lot of Fanwoodians who came to Fanwood for the small-town feel and might not want to have the town give up its identity...

So at this point, 71 out of 94 people who took the poll above have enough information to make an educated, informed decision as to the future of their town, and their neighboring town? Really? Wow.

I know that neither council has sufficient facts, and if they do, they certainly haven't presented them convincingly to the public. That being said, how can any of the poll takers feel that THEY have enough information?

I just hope that Fanwood and Scotch Plains do their due diligence and not rush to conclusions, only to be sorry later. Most importantly, I sincerely hope that non-scientific surveys, that only poll the limited non-representational population of the Patch, aren't considered too heavily when our representatives work through the issues.

I, for one, am supportive of anything that we can do to reduce the tax burden and increase efficiencies for Fanwood homeowners and citizens - no matter what we might call them in the future.

^ LOL at John Leustek :-)

Bravo for Councilman Kevin Glover, the only one with a lick common of sense. He also questioned the Mayors land grab from Shackamaxon, as they wanted to put city Hall and the two works there on the South Side. Now we have a suit we did not need.

I have been following Courage to Connect for awhile now. They are part of "Smart Growth and Sustainable NJ, bigger picture a UN Global Society. I believe in saving our (and mine) tax dollars, but not there way.

So if you care about your property rights, and land ownership, I would avoid this like the plague. I have been working on Smart Growth for 3 years now

Interesting article in today's Sunday Star Ledger about the CTC group and the efforts to merge the two towns. I might not have understood it correctly, but it basically sounds as if a group of about 35 private citizens feel they can and will push a merger through. Don't the people in both towns get to vote? Or, at the very least, shouldn't the two town councils vote? How can a private group come in and make the final decision? Can anyone explain this to me?

FanwoodMom - all the CTC group can do and did is present petition's to request that the respective town council's look into a merger. Than a committee has to be appointed, further lengthy studies done at a cost (still not clear who pays for that, but my guess is the taxpayers), then a recommendation is made and each council has to decide whether to move it to a voter referendum, whew. So....at the end of the day, yes the voters must decide, but there are MANY steps and decisions that need to be made along the way and if folks thought the shared services study at $48,000 (which, BTW was paid for by a grant) was costly, you can at least double if not triple that figure for a full blown consolidation study. So....if you want to save money faster and more efficiently (and still leave the opportunity to change you mind if things don't work out) I for one think shared services is the way to go, for the immediate future. Then, if we can both play nice a consolidation just might happen with a whole lot less fanfare.

Thanks JTF, it makes a bit more sense now...