October 23, 2015


As a follow up to our recent newsletter "Who is Scott Scammell?" from last week, we have seen some additional information come out from Mr. Scammell and would like to address that.

1) Mr. Scammell is running as an “Independent.”  He is NOT an Independent.  Quite to the contrary, he is a lifelong Republican and, according to the County Clerk office, a current member of theReadington Township Republican  Committee for District #16:  See page 21 of the Readington Township Republican Committee.  He was a large donor to those defeated in the June Republican Primary and has now entered himself on the November ballot disguised as an Independent.   His second largest reported campaign donation is from the defeated Republican Primary campaign.  If it is your intention to seek an alternative to the Republican nominees, Mr. Scammell is not that.  He would serve as a Republican who has circumvented the Primary election process. 

2) Mr. Scammell’s campaign literature talks of dignity, fairness and honesty.  But he doesn’t practice what he preaches.  One example is his neglect to identify his party affiliation on his advertisements.   He is in violation of NJ Election Commission regulations by not having a “Paid by” identification on his lawn signs.  He has also campaigned on public property with public employees during work hours, and he has installed banners and posters in the Whitehouse Station historical district without permission.  When he was informed that he was in violation of these rules he did not correct the situation.  His political agenda lists items that are not allowable under the rules by which municipal governments operate.  For one thing, his political agenda lists removing appointed Board and Committee members at the whim of the Township Committee.  He also advocates to setting term limits.  These moves are NOT allowable under the rules by which municipal governments can operate.  Someone seeking a seat on the Township Committee should be aware of these laws. Again, though he has been informed of the scope of authority the Township Committee has – and doesn’t have – he continues to harp on this.  Individually these may seem insignificant; collectively, they point to someone who is looking for a bully pulpit and thinks the rules don’t apply to him.    

3)  Mr. Scammell has shown he is completely obsessed with former Township Committee member Julia Allen.  He appears to be campaigning against someone who is no longer an elected official.  However, Mr. Scammell is dedicating nearly all of his limited campaign information up to this point to a vendetta against her.  His petition to remove her from various Boards and Committees on which she still serves, and his scrutinizing of the details of meeting minutes regarding the petition are his only topics at every Township Committee meeting he attends.

4)  Mr. Scammell is a long-time, vocal Solberg Airport supporter and friend.  He is a third generation aviator and pilot.  He is an aviation insurance broker and principal in Wings, LLC.  Prior to that, he was affiliated with AirSure Limited, LLC, an aviation industry services company.  Needless to say, his aviation ties and interests are extremely strong.  This is a complete financial conflict-of-interest given the uncertain future of Solberg airport.  He is quite obviously in support of removing the barriers and constraints currently existing on Solberg airport.  He is now stating that the Solberg issue was resolved in the 60s.  It was not as far as Readington residents are concerned, and that’s who township officials are elected to represent.  All of the residents, not only one entity. 

5)  He has aligned himself with pro-development supporters on the Township Committee.  Committee MemberSam Tropello suggests increasing commercial and residential development.  This is appealing mainly to those who are already salivating over the development opportunities they see in Readington.  He is in favor of rolling back planning and development zoning and in favor of opening up residential and commercial development to align Readington with those developers.  With the Merck property in transition, this is not the time for on the job training and pro-developer leanings.  He has no experience in municipal government and no record of volunteering in 57 years of residency. 

 

On October 2nd, Citizens for Readington sent the campaigns a questionnaire on topics that we are concerned with for the future of our town and published the questionnaire results on our website.  The topics included planning and development, affordable housing and the airport.  Unfortunately, Scott Scammell did not respond to the issues that affect all of us. 

We live in Readington because we cherish the rural environment, great schools, safe community and the overall wonderful quality of life.  The forces at play will jeopardize that experience in short order if given the chance.  Beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing. 

 

Why Scott Scammell's Campaign Concerns Us