Westfield Washington Township
For The Reporter
Westfield Washington Township board member David Gill has said he plans to call for a vote to rescind the board’s approval to move forward with the bond series to acquire land for open space within the township.
Tolan
“I am shocked and saddened to be informed of this odd and unexpected intention to rescind the bonds when we are in the middle of a public information process to provide clear and consistent education to the residents of Westfield Washington Township,” said Westfield Washington Township Trustee Danielle Carey Tolan. “To call for the bonds to be rescinded during a remonstrance process is unheard of, and the implications of this decision could hurt future bond ratings and the ability of the township to issue bonds for any future fire, parks or community service projects.”
Gill’s change of heart comes on the heels of the board’s 2-0 decision Dec. 12 to move forward to petition in favor of the $15 million park bond series after a remonstrance against the bond was filed. The bonds will provide funding for land acquisition to preserve open spaces and natural areas, specifically near MacGregor Park, as land becomes available for sale.
This also coincides with the new term of a recently elected board member who strongly called for public input and did not want the decision made solely by the board. The 30-day period in which petitions in favor of or against the proposed park bond may be signed by registered voters or taxpayers in Westfield Washington Township is set to begin Jan. 16.
If the board rescinds the bonds, the public cannot actively participate in the process and funding for this project will be eliminated.
“Mr. Gill’s contrarian decision to call for a vote to rescind the bonds could have lasting negative impacts on our community and future quality of life,” said Tolan. “As the previous township trustee, Mr. Gill’s 16-year administration set into motion the future vision for parks and open spaces in the township, and I hope to continue that vision.”
In 2010, as Westfield Washington Township trustee, Gill authored the Parks Master Plan. In 2012, he worked to establish a Cumulative Building Park Fund for the purchase of land and development of park land which later failed in legislation. In addition, Gill contributed to and approved the 2016 Westfield Washington Township Strategic Plan & Parks Open Space Master Plan, which included exploring land acquisition and expanding park amenities – the same open space initiative he is now opposing.
The Trustee’s Office encourages township residents to attend the next information fair on Monday evening to learn more about the open space initiative.
Perhaps a statement from Mr. Gill that provides us with his thought process is in order. This is certainly a very one-sided article that does not provide enough information to allow one to form an opinion without bias.
Using inflammatory rhetoric and political misinformation in a township press release is bad form. If David has decided to call to rescind the vote, that is new information, but it is not at all surprising. As the Trustee knows, David did not vote for the $15,000,000 bond in October at the conclusion of the second public hearing (it passed 2 to 1). Clearly stating his logic that the project had not been thoroughly vetted and should not proceed to a vote until much more public discussion and input could occur, David voted no. That is consistent even if it is not what the Trustee wants. However, using the public podium and PR resources of the township office to cast doubt on someone’s thought processes is bullying, it reads a lot like ageism, and is unworthy of the office.
David Gill’s commitment to responsibly grow parks and recreation in Washington Township is unquestionable and unwavering. Starting with 42 acres from the Sheila Beals Estate he steadily grew MacGregor to a beautiful 94 acre park while obtaining over $1,400,000 in grants, trees and donations. Perhaps there is wisdom in proceeding toward parks acquisition in a more measured way rather than taking on a $15,000,000 debt for citizens that already have an existing debt burden over $233,000,000. Perhaps there is wisdom in not taking on a $15,000,000 debt that is marketed to the community, yet divides our community, by who will pay for it and who will not. He has my support.
This is confusing. So. the guy who did all this good work for the future of the parks in Westfield suddenly wants to rescind the bonds just because a new board member wanted public input? Perhaps I’m reading this wrong? It doesn’t make a lot of sense. New board members can actually bring good things to processes, and getting public input always seems like a good, democratic way to handle things. If it’s not a good thing in this case, how about explaining why it isn’t?