To the Editor:

On June 3, Princeton Democratic voters will choose among three candidates for Princeton Council: The two incumbents Jo Butler and Bernie Miller and challenger Sue Nemeth. Voters may cast up to two votes for any combination of candidates. My first vote will definitely go for Jo since she is already performing the job admirably, and provides an independent perspective as one of a group of progressive Democrats currently serving.

This year’s campaign for Council had an unusual start. Bernie and Sue announced in January that they would run as a “slate” with the clear intent of unseating Jo. The stated reasons for this aggressive move were somewhat vague, but centered on the notion that Jo was not always a team player and asked too many questions, slowing the decision-making process. In fact, in the past year Council has voted unanimously about 97 percent of the time. With the mayor, they can be proud of many accomplishments, especially regarding the many complex challenges stemming from consolidation, and reaching a long-term agreement with Princeton University. So there’s no gridlock or lack of progress in meeting the community’s needs.

As it turns out, many citizens actually value having a sometimes dissenting voice on Council, compared to a Council where all decisions are reached behind closed doors and then presented to the public on a “consent agenda” with a happy face. So that case for dumping Jo and replacing her with Sue has faltered.

Then there is the question of consolidation, and whether there’s some difference there. In fact, all three candidates (and the rest of the local elected officials) were all strong supporters of consolidation. In the Borough, where success was uncertain, Jo campaigned vigorously for passage. Following approval, Jo and Bernie both served on the consolidation transition task force in 2012.

Meanwhile, Sue mounted a notably negative Democratic Primary campaign for a state Assembly seat against public school teacher Marie Corfield, who won the primary but then narrowly lost the general election in November 2012. It’s now interesting that Sue cites her support of the public schools as one of her qualifications for office. It’s also irrelevant. While all three candidates are firm in their support of public education, they all acknowledge that the Council has absolutely no jurisdiction over the schools or their budget: The independent Board of Education has sole responsibility for that.

In sum, I see clear benefits in keeping Jo on the Council. There are few differences in substance: All three candidates are progressive Democrats who are strong advocates for community priorities including making consolidation a success and supporting great public schools. Jo stands out because of her willingness to go the extra mile, and delve more deeply into issues than some of her colleagues. So Jo gets my first vote. Both Bernie and Sue are highly capable, and either one will be a great choice as my second vote.

Dan Preston

Moore Street