Garwood Candidates on Issues: Taxes, Redevelopment, Athletic Field Complex and More

In Tuesday's election, three candidates will face off for two seats on Garwood Borough Council. 

Councilman and incumbent Jim Mathieu (Conservative Republican) and Mike Martin (Regular Garwood GOP) will appear on the ballot, while Planning Board member Bruce Paterson – who is running as an Independent, though is a registered Democrat – tossed his name in the hat as a write-in candidate. (The Garwood Democrats did not field a candidate in the primary.)

Read more on the candidates:

- Incumbent Jim Mathieu (Conservative Republican)

- 2012 Candidate Mike Martin (Regular Garwood GOP)

- Write-in candidate Bruce Paterson (registered Democrat, running as an Independent)

Voters were able to see where the candidates stand on the biggest issues facing Garwood when all three participated in a debate at the Pointe two weeks ago. 

First and foremost, moderator Bill Connolly asked how the candidates proposed to keep the borough's taxes under control. 

Mathieu answered first, saying that he did a deep analysis of the budget when he served as finance chair and has always kept his pledge not to vote for a tax increase. He proposed that the borough needs to do a better job of looking into shared services before he will ever vote for a tax increase, and suggested investigating privatizing trash (which he noted is already being studied) and perhaps sharing dispatching with the county or another town and the municipal court with another town.

Paterson said taxes and budgeting involves compromise and working with your fellow council members in a way he feels Mathieu has not done. "Just sitting there voting no doesn’t get us anywhere," said Paterson.

Martin backed Paterson, calling Mathieu's consistent no votes a gimmick. "If there is a need to vote for more taxes, we should have the foresight, courage and vision to vote for a tax increase as long as they are controlled and there is a way to offset taxes going forward through things like redevelopment," said Martin.

Connolly next asked about the Athletic Field Complex. Noting that the project is more than a year behind schedule, Connolly asked if the candidates thought it should be scaled back or if we should "grit our teeth and forge ahead."

Paterson and Martin agreed that the project was too far along to consider scaling back without incurring fees or legal issues. Paterson added that he had once proposed that residents volunteer to construct the building on the site as a heritage structure, similar to others in town. 

"Get over it," said Martin. "The field is going forward and we can’t do anything about it now. So let's have the field and it will be something we can show that enhances Garwood."  

Martin also proposed that the field could be a revenue-generator, as he has already heard that outside groups are interested in using it for a fee. 

Mathieu said he felt the project should have been scaled back and voted no to approving it, but that "the train has already left the station." He took aim at what he called some of the high-end upgrades to the project, like "high-grade siding and a brand new kitchen." He also said he was worried about where the costs would end. 

"This is a level 3, trending level 4 disaster," said Mathieu. "Your checkbook is open until this thing is done, and I don’t know where it ends, guys."  

Next, Connolly pointed out the services Garwood does share – the borough is part of the Westfield Regional Board of Health and Cranford serves as building official – and asked the candidates to identify any other areas for shared service they saw.

Martin again pointed to the Athletic Field Complex as something shareable and added that the borough should withhold the money we pay to the county until they explain where that money goes. He also mentioned that Scotch Plains and Fanwood are discussing merging police departments, and that Garwood could look at other towns to see what sharing worked for them. 

Mathieu pointed to a handout with Garwood police salaries, saying that police was the one thing he did not want to share. He also said it was wrong for Garwood to cut a police officer (there are currently 15 officers, when there were once 16) and spend money on things like the Athletic Field Complex. He added that the borough should investigate any other opportunity for sharing including trash pickup, the DPW, courts and dispatching. He also suggested hiring a public safety director in lieu of a chief, which he says would cost the borough less.

Paterson took aim at Mathieu, claiming Mathieu was once appointed to look into shared services but didn't follow through on his duties. He also rebutted Mathieu's argument about the severity of cutting a police officer, saying that the cut hasn't caused a shortage or even any overtime in the department. Paterson, who has long railed against the county, said he would put his feelings aside to at least look into share services with them as a councilman. 

Connolly also asked if the candidates thought the borough should undertake a property tax reevaluation. 

Mathieu said yes, noting that the borough's last reevaluation was in 1984 and calling it an unpopular choice, but the right one. 

"You folks here at the Pointe are subsidizing me," said Mathieu. "I like it, but it’s wrong."

Paterson said he once thought a reevaluation made common sense, but that after hearing from the borough tax assessor at a recent council meeting, he realized it was unnecessary.

Martin also answered no, saying only 20 percent of residents would have a significant change in assessment, and that that isn't worth the estimated $200,000 cost of reevaluating. 

Connolly then asked, if elected, what the candidates would do to encourage redevelopment of North and South avenues. 

Paterson noted that things are in motion with zoning changes in the master plan to encourage redevelopment and progress is being made on the Paperboard building. 

Martin said the borough needed to make itself more vital and attractive to developers, and suggested holding more borough events, perhaps a "Garwood Day."

Mathieu focused on what he wouldn't do in the name of redevelopment – use eminent domain – saying he believes private property owners' rights come first. He suggested a selective use of tax credits instead.