State-level politicians enter Dinky controversy

On Dec. 8, Simpson told The Times of Trenton that he supported the relocation, praising the planned improvements to traffic flow and saying they would be worth the extra distance from the town to the new train station. Simpson did not respond to a request for comment.

In an ensuing press release, Gusciora criticized Simpson’s support for the University’s plan.

“I am confident that the students and professors at Princeton University can figure out some plan to incorporate the existing Dinky station into the arts center without an unnecessary move,” Gusciora said, adding that he questioned why the center could not be built around the Dinky station.

In the press release, Gusciora also said that he felt it was inappropriate for a member of the governor’s cabinet to comment on University matters.

“By virtue of his office, the governor is a member of the Board of Trustees for the University and, therefore, should most likely refrain from taking public positions on this pending proposal,” Gusciora said.

The governor of New Jersey is an ex officio member of the University’s Board of Trustees.

University Vice President and Secretary Bob Durkee ’69 said he didn’t think Simpson’s position should prevent him from commenting.

“This is the first time I can remember anyone suggesting that Cabinet officials should not carry out their responsibilities on a matter in which the University is involved because the governor holds an ex officio position on the Princeton Board of Trustees,” he said in an e-mail.

Durkee added that he feels moving the Dinky is the best option.

“The reason we have not been able to [create a plan that does not move the Dinky] is not because we don’t have smart enough people working on the plan, both at the University and among our highly regarded outside consultants,” Durkee said. “The relocation of the terminus by 460 feet needs to be considered in a context in which important community goals would be achieved and important community benefits would be provided.”

Gusciora told The Daily Princetonian that he meant Simpson should have reached out to community members before speaking publicly on the matter.

“I think Simpson may have had a meeting with the University and then unilaterally decided to make that statement. He certainly didn’t talk to the local officials or any local commuters. I think that he would have come to a different conclusion,” he said. “I don’t mind him coming to a conclusion or making a statement after he’s spoken with all sides.”

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

Gusciora said he was confident public opinion opposes moving the station and added that he hoped to be included in further discussions about the Dinky.

“I’ve reached out to Commissioner Simpson. I’d like to be included in the meetings that he now has announced that he will have with local officials, which I think is a good move,” Gusciora said.

Several of those local officials also expressed their dissatisfaction with Simpson’s comments.

“As Princeton Borough governing body members, we were surprised and disappointed that you publicly announced support of the University’s plans, including moving the Dinky, without first consulting with the various municipal governing entities that have also been active in the discussion,” newly-elected Princeton Borough Council President Kevin Wilkes ’83 and former council president Andrew Koontz said in a Dec. 29 letter to Simpson excerpted by the Times.

Anita Garoniak, a Borough resident and a member of the local group “Save the Dinky,” said she felt community members were opposed to the relocation of the train station. “We’re adamant that it should not be moved,” she said. “We don’t really see a need.”

While Durkee indicated that the University was open to considering other designs for the arts center, he noted that alternative plans would only be considered “as long as they are workable and affordable and meet the goals of the project.”

In his press release, Gusciora expressed his belief that the primary goal of the project “should be ... the preservation of our Dinky.”

“Consideration for the residents and the public should be the first concern, not those on the [University] Board of Trustees,” he added.