Ward question revisited; council takes first step
Narrowly defeated ballot question for ward gov't may be on Nov. ballot
BY TOM CAIAZZA
Staff Writer

EDISON - After four years of required hiatus, the debate over whether Edison Township should adopt a ward system of government has resurfaced.

Spurred on largely by the Township Council's introduction of an ordinance on June 27 to put the question on the November ballot, the debate has raised questions over whether the current form of government adequately represents the changing demographics of Edison.

"It's long overdue," said Bill Stephens, former councilman and original petitioner of the ward system ballot question four years ago. "We've gotten way too big. Big issues are not being addressed because there is not equal representation within the different neighborhoods."

The ward system was defeated in 2003 by 29 votes out of over 13,000 cast. Under the law, the township had to wait four years before it could be reintroduced as a referendum question.

The nine-member ward system would divide the township into five districts, each with a representative on the Township Council. There would be four council members chosen at large to provide balance, but the system would do little to fundamentally change the mayor-council relationship.

Under the current system, seven council members are chosen at large by the entire population of Edison, which, Stephens said, has allowed for some areas of town to be neglected by the council.

"If you had a ward council person," Stephens said, "they would be up their screaming, 'How come we aren't seeing more police? How come we haven't had our roads paved in 20 years?' and make sure there is a schedule that everyone gets the services they are entitled to."

Councilwoman Antonia Ricigliano was a strong proponent of the ward system in 2003 and introduced the legislation at this week's council meeting. She also believes that the township, the fifth most populated in the state, needs a ward system in order to adequately represent everyone.

Ricigliano called the 2003 defeat "a healthy turnout" and said that the change in demographics, and the council's support, could make it more likely to pass this time around.

She was quick to point out, however, that the council's support was not necessarily for the ward system, but for the public's right to have an option for what form of government will represent them.

Ricigliano said that four years ago there was a concern that a ward system would push the largely suburban township into the trends of larger urban areas.

"The argument against it was that we were going to become Newark or Jersey City," Ricigliano said. "But nobody is looking at Woodbridge, Old Bridge, Clark, Westfield."

All four of those have ward governments, and Woodbridge could easily be compared to Edison in terms of population and demographics.

In 2003, then-resident and now-Mayor Jun Choi came out against the ward system and formed a committee to fight the proposal.

At the time, Choi had said that it was more important to find quality representatives rather than change the government. He believed then that the ward system would raise taxes because there would be competition between the wards for tax dollars.

He is still convinced that pork will prevail within the wards and taxes will go up if the system is instituted.

"I continue to oppose the ward system," Choi said. "It divides our community and it also raises taxes."

Choi said that with each ward candidate looking out for their own constituents, it is more likely for pork handouts such as community centers for every ward, raising taxes.

He said the reason New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the country is because there is too much government, fragmented, throughout the state. He sees the ward system as an extension of that fragmentation.

Choi said that the four-year mandatory waiting period may not have concluded yet, citing an interpretation of state law that requires four years from the defeat of the ward question before the initiation of the ward question can begin again. He said there were other legal considerations, such as how to draw the lines and how to stagger the terms, that have not been ironed out yet.

"The specifics really haven't been formulated on this," Choi said.

As for whether he would veto the ordinance should it pass the council, he has opted to wait and see.

Republican council candidate Tom Hughes likes the idea for obvious reasons - it gives Republicans a better chance of breaking the Democratic stronghold on the council.

"It will give neighborhoods that - let's face it, the Democrats control the council - that might have a slightly different view, at least a voice on the council," Hughes said.

Hughes said that the ward system mirrors the way federal representation is divided, and though it won't change the direction of the Democratic council, it could give Republicans a seat at the table.

"It would help us from the point of view of the town council," Hughes said. "Would it enable us to take over the council? Absolutely not. It will be better than what we've got, and the neighborhoods will be better represented."

The Republican candidates have all signed off on the idea and in a press release said that the ward system would help the "burgeoning Asian Indian population" to gain some representation on the council as well.

Depending on how the wards are drawn, a process that includes the county Board of Elections, the heads of the two parties, and Township Clerk Reina Murphy, the new system could conceivably help an Asian Indian get elected from a specific ward.

Satish Poondi, co-founder of the Indo-American Caucus, an offshoot of the Edison Democratic Party, is a proponent of the ward system as long as it is done right, and has been since he ran for council back in 2003.

Speaking for himself, but not necessarily the caucus, Poondi would like to see the ward system put in place.

"Generally it is good," Poondi said, "but the devil comes down to the details."

Poondi said that as long as the ward lines are drawn in an equitable way, the ward system could work well for Edison.

He also does not believe that it would be a leading factor in raising taxes. He said it was a "blanket statement, a sound bite," and that the alternative was not doing much better; taxes are rising regardless of the type of government.

"I dare anyone to say the wards are the main cause of tax increase in Woodbridge," Poondi said.

Poondi said the ward system represents the way in which Edison has changed in the last 30 years and could provide better representation for the Asian Indian community but stressed that the needs of that community do not differ greatly from the needs of other Edison communities.

In 2003 the council at the time did not support the ballot question for a ward system. Those in favor of it were required to obtain enough signatures to override the council.

This time around, Ricigliano feels there are enough people on the council willing to give the people a chance to decide, a move that even she admits could be legacy-building, because four of the seven members were defeated in a hotly contested primary election earlier this month.

"It's very possible," Ricigliano said. "It would be a lasting legacy. Just the fact that they are willing to put their names out there, are saying 'let the people decide,' to me, is very positive."

Council President Charles Tomaro said that he wanted only to see what the public wanted and that he would not stand in the way of letting the public be heard.

"I don't think much has changed as far as my support," Tomaro said, "and I don't think the way I feel really matters. It will matter what the voters feel. Charlie Tomaro's not making that decision, the 20,000 voters ... who come out to support it or not support it will make that decision."