Teaneck voters should vote yes on electoral change, renewable energy

Teaneck voters – some of whom, we’re sure, have already gone to the polls with their early ballots – have decisions to make on two local issues this election:

  • Should Teaneck hold non-partisan council elections in November instead of May?
  • Should Teaneck implement a government energy aggregation program to solicit proposals for cleaner, less expensive power generation and energy aggregation for homes and businesses?

On both measures, we encourage our neighbors to vote yes.

Council elections set to move to November

We wish we could live in a reality in which civic engagement could last year-round, but 21st century suburban life is busy, complex and disrupted by a pandemic.

We have seen, as defenders of Teaneck have done, that holding elections for all levels of government in November results in increased participation, engagement and interest in federal, state and local office races.

Reshma Khan, one of Teaneck’s petitioners who pursued the ballot issue which, if approved, would move the city council elections from May to November, told us such a move is “pretty much a given.”

We agree.

Earlier this year, Khan, who represents One Town One Vote, the grassroots organization that issued 791 signatures on a petition that ultimately led to the ballot question, highlighted the heightened engagement Teaneck experienced when the education council were moved from April to November.

“The Education Council really set the precedent when it moved from April to November and saw a dramatic increase in attendance,” Khan told editor Katie Sobko. “Once we saw that, we talked about the municipal elections, because we were one of only three cities to hold them in May. ”

Moving the Teaneck City Council elections to November should, in our opinion, earn the approval of township voters.

Vote yes to question 1.

Teaneck should move towards renewable energies

Climate change is a fact. We have long championed an environmental policy that would make New Jersey cleaner and, in turn, safer and healthier.

Teaneck voters need look no further than the devastation left behind by Hurricane Ida, which left 30 people dead in New Jersey.

Question 2 proposes that Teaneck put in place a government energy consolidation program that would provide residents with a high proportion of renewable energy sources. Taxpayers could also opt for 100% renewable energy for a monthly fee of $ 6.

PSE & G, the utility that serves Teaneck, would remain in place, as Sobko reported earlier this month. The utility would continue to supply energy and manage billing and service calls.

Paula Rogovin, one of the petitioners, shares our perspective on climate change and the need to move away from energy supplies fueled by fossil fuels when possible and feasible.

“We have to do something,” she said in a recent conversation with The Record’s editorial board.

If Teaneck voters approve Question 2 – and they should – they would join their neighbors Glen Rock, Glen Ridge, Livingston, Montclair, Maplewood, South Orange and Verona, who all have AEGs in place.

Vote yes to question 2.

On petitions and electoral matters

Questions 1 and 2 faced challenges related to how and when they were submitted.

Judge Robert Wilson wisely ruled that the questions should land on the ballot.

Community issues like this should not be hidden from New Jersey voters.

Early voting continues until Sunday. Election day is Tuesday, November 2.


Source link

Comments are closed.