Consolidation 101: Tumultuous history for Borough, Township

Fifty-five percent of Borough voters rejected consolidation in 1996, even though Township voters said yes by a nearly three-to-one margin. Attempts to consolidate in 1953 and 1979 were similarly rejected by Borough voters despite Township support. Last November’s referendum, however, saw Borough voters break with tradition and vote in support of merging the municipalities, with 63 percent voting yes.

The Borough, which currently spans two square miles that include much of Nassau Street and Prospect Avenue, has existed as its own municipality since 1894. All the land known as Princeton Borough is geographically contained within the 16-square-mile Princeton Township in what is known as a “doughnut town.” Including Princeton, New Jersey currently has 22 of these so-called “doughnut towns,” in which one body — in this case, Princeton Township — completely surrounds another.

Many of the arguments in favor of consolidation frame the issue in bureaucratic terms. Due to the community’s split government structure, policy changes within the community are often put to a joint planning board, which must be formed and appointed before meeting to decide on a new policy or change. A 1978 Daily Princetonian editorial called the dual government structure “a continual waste of legislators’ time and taxpayers’ money,” as members of the joint boards were constantly forced to “run back to their municipalities for funding” after deciding on a proposal or project.

Historically, the progression of the merger issue also reflects the changing politics of Borough-Township relations, as the once-rural Township developed over the course of the last century against the wealthier, more stable Borough.

Consolidation first appeared on voter ballots in the local election of 1953. The Princeton League of Women Voters had been agitating for consolidation since 1950. An opposition group, led by former University politics professor William S. Carpenter, emerged in 1952.

Local residents, however, did not take kindly to the idea of consolidation. Firefighters from the Volunteer Fire Companies of both municipalities staged a “vociferous, two-hour parade” urging voters to defeat the measure, according to a Nov. 3, 1953, article in the ‘Prince.’ Residents of the Borough, which was then more highly developed, balked at the prospect of higher taxes “to pay for the services needed in the more rural Township,” according to a 1953 ‘Prince’ article. Both the Borough and the Township rejected consolidation in the 1953 vote, by a vote of 1450-1965 in the Borough and 863-1498 in the Township.

1960s: Township develops, schools regionalize

Political leanings began to change, however, in the 1960s, as the issue of school consolidation came to a head. The community’s school systems had been split between what was then the Princeton Public Schools — which served residents of the Borough — and the Princeton Township School System. By that point, the two communities shared services and tax burdens in several key areas, including common playgrounds and one community hospital. The Princeton Public Library became a joint operation in 1962.

The Township rented fire protection services from the Borough, although the two municipalities remained separate in government and financial structure.

Borough attitudes toward the Township had changed in the decade between the school consolidation debate of the mid-’60s and the 1953 municipal consolidation vote. The Township had experienced an influx of research and engineering firms that had doubled its population and led to school and sewer developments in the area.

The long-wealthier Borough, meanwhile, had remained relatively stable. A 1965 ‘Prince’ opinion piece by Ned Scharff ’68 noted that the Borough was “a small entity. Its inhabits are selectively wealthy, and its problems few.”

The Borough and Township Boards of Education merged into one body in 1966. The community was prepared for the merger of the school districts since, by 1965, Township and Borough residents were already sharing Princeton High School.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

School taxes were collected from the municipalities on a per capita basis — the Township paid more, as it had a larger enrollment at the school. A 1962 straw poll conducted by the Princeton Packet saw Borough residents narrowly voting against school consolidation, while Township residents voted overwhelmingly for the idea.

1979 and 1996: Borough continues to stymie Township efforts

Following the success of school consolidation, municipal consolidation again became an issue in the 1970s and led to another referendum in the 1979 election. Town residents debated consolidation everywhere from the local firehouses to advertisements in the ‘Prince’ seeking student votes to a public debate at Whig Hall on Oct. 22.

A ‘Prince’ editorial published on Nov. 5, 1979 — the day before the election — urged eligible students to vote in favor of consolidation despite the fact that “most students probably do not care,” arguing that the move would have “little effect on students, but however little, it is likely to be positive.”

The measure was narrowly defeated by a 33-vote margin in the Borough vote. The Township approved consolidation 3,432-1,444.

“We finally beat those bastards!” said anti-consolidation leader Alan Wallack in a Nov. 7, 1979, ‘Prince’ article. A recount finalized on Nov. 20 sealed the measure’s fate. It would not, however, be the last word on consolidation: Pro-consolidation leaders told the ‘Prince’ that the issue was “bound to come up again” once the state’s three-year prohibition on retrying failed referenda passed.

They were correct. Consolidation again appeared on the 1996 ballot and was again heavily debated in the town and on campus. With the increase in student activism and presence, opponents and proponents of consolidation began appealing to the student bloc, writing letters to the editor addressed to students, publishing ads directed at students and otherwise pushing for student attention.

At the core of the 1996 debate was the Borough’s self-image as “a unique, separate cultural entity — old Jersey in the middle of a suburban commuter sprawl,” according to a Nov. 5, 1996, ‘Prince’ editorial urging students to vote for consolidation.

By then, the Township that had once been seen as the “little brother” of the wealthier, more commercial Borough had evolved into a suburban community marked by “many large lots and houses occupied mainly by commuters, local executives and retirees,” said a Nov. 4 letter to the editor addressed to University students and signed by a number of regional alumni.

Due to the “inner-city deterioration” evident at Yale’s and Brown’s campuses, the alumni expressed concern that the Borough, too, would run the risk of “losing its identity” should it become essentially a downtown district under consolidation.

The Borough again defeated consolidation, this time with 55 percent voting against, despite 73 percent of the Township voting in support.

Present day

With the historical backdrop of Borough-Township tensions and increasing student attention to local politics, the 2011 election was again marked by a Borough concerned over its own identity and future. This time around, voter concerns coalesced over the prospective move of the Dinky as a symbol of lifestyle differences between Borough and Township residents.

“In the Township, there are many drive-in, drive-out properties. In the Borough, we have walkable streets,” Borough resident Alexi Assmus, a member of anti-consolidation group Preserve Our Historic Borough, said in a Sept. 19 ‘Prince’ article. “And I think those are significant lifestyle differences, and I think those interests should be represented.” Assmus was speaking at a panel on consolidation hosted by the Princeton Community Democratic Organization.

Pro-consolidation panelist Claire Jacobus, however, called the perceived differences “an absolutely illogical trope” and said she was unable to distinguish between Borough and Township residents. “We always were one community,” Jacobus said. “And we should be.”

Despite the concerns of Assmus and others with vested interests in the Borough as an independent municipality, the majority of Borough residents shared Jacobus’ sentiment and supported consolidation. Sixty-three percent said yes for a vote of 1,385-802. With that and the Township’s reiterated approval, consolidation finally passed.