The following are letters to the editor from residents on the upcoming bond referendum from Haddonfield Public Schools, in publication date and alphabetical order:
Feb. 10- Feb. 16
Dear Editor,
I would guess that for many, if not most, Haddonfield residents the school district’s building referendum has been unfolding in a rather disconcerting way — the suddenness of it, its magnitude and the numerous changes in prioritization, timing and impact on households.
Having said this, let’s keep some perspective on the issue.
It’s been noted that we approved about $45 million in school capital projects between 1986 and 2004. What that money was spent on or if it was spent well, I don’t know, but the point is there had been no capital referendum in the past 12 years. It’s widely recognized that our nation’s infrastructure is crumbling around us, so would it be surprising that our Haddonfield schools, built largely pre-WWII and tacked onto as the Baby Boom rippled through, are the victims of the same “deferred maintenance” mentality? If your budgets are voted down, if they exceed an arbitrary 2 percent cap, “bricks and mortar” will inevitably be the poor stepchild to “program.”
And a little further perspective: based on the current $35.5 million total referendum and the correct calculation, the average annual cost per household of the referendum comes to $300. That’s less than $1 per day, and less than what many pay for cable/cell phone bills each month.
Finally, I hope that the school district follows the recommendation of several to form an expert citizen advisory group. We may be past the point where such a group can provide timely input before the referendum goes to vote, but I see the group providing a permanent building monitoring function in support of the district and BOE. Like our commissioners, our BOE is comprised of volunteer citizens who devote an incredible amount of time, energy and devotion to their duties and responsibilities — but who are typically not experts in fields such as building maintenance and infrastructure. And the cap-constrained operating budget cannot support enough personnel or consultants to stay on top of issues such as moisture intrusion before they become the next “surprise” referendum.
We have one of the finest “scholar-athlete” school systems in the state and even the country. I’m fortunate to have been a product of this system, from Lizzy Haddon kindergarten through Haddonfield Memorial High School 12. If it takes an average of less than a dollar per day per household to keep it safe and functional, then I say let’s do it — give the district and BOE the benefit of the doubt that they have learned some valuable lessons in this arduous process.
Don Clement, Jr.
*
Dear Editor,
Having happily supported the Haddonfield schools for many, many decades, I am troubled by the coming referendum for two reasons: the incredible dollar amount proposed and the extent of work that suddenly needs to be done. Why have the buildings been so neglected? Not for lack of funding, I know from having happily paid my part for many past bonds.
I know we live in an affluent community, but is the Board of Education thinking about the not-so-wealthy residents’ ability to pay for this whopper? And, not all seniors are eligible for the small help provided by the “senior freeze.” I’ve already seen friends forced to move out of our blessed town solely and sadly because of high taxes. And now we have the Bancroft purchase and other increases to worry about, too.
At the projected 83 cents per day I have read about, I figure the tax bill for my average home will increase $25 a month! That’s a lot of money for me to pay out of my fixed, sometimes declining, income. And some of that would be for pleasantries that I most definitely did without as a student, and to no ill effect. Those pleasantries are totally unnecessary for students today, and isn’t it asking too much to expect me to ante up?
I believe I will be joining the majority of my friends who are counting their pennies and planning to vote this unreasonable bond down.
Josephine Pecorelli
******
Feb. 17- Feb. 23
Dear Editor,
We attended last week’s Board of Education bond referendum informational meeting with the hope we would learn something that would make it possible for us to vote in favor of providing the funds to perform necessary maintenance and repairs. We were disappointed to hear that although the board had made an early effort to cut out some items which it had previously designated as “necessities” that the $35 million requested remained.
It is a mystery to us that the board seems to avoid directly involving the voters. To its credit, it reacted positively early on when citizens pointed out accounting errors and cost calculation issues, but at this final stage we are fed information from BOE leadership as well as their hired architect who has a financial stake in a higher number rather than lower.
Forgetting the fact that the neglect of the infrastructure has been allowed to happen in the first place, this board has not exactly inspired confidence. In addition to the overall lack of community involvement and transparency, there seems to be a failure to actively seek out financial alternatives such as corporate sponsorship and community fundraising particularly for the (non-academic) gym and stadium costs.
We agree that funds are required to address necessary repairs and would support a smaller bond so long as there was serious oversight on the use of those funds as well as a much more robust plan for future maintenance needs.
Sue and Bob Heindel
*
Dear Editor,
A few weeks ago, we attended a well-researched and thoughtful presentation by an experienced professional engineer and Haddonfield resident who outlined the problems with the proposed school bond. In short, as expensive as the bond is, it fails to address the underlying maintenance, mechanical and structural issues of our school buildings.
We would support a smaller bond issue to correct the immediate structural issues of our school buildings. We all agree that the school buildings need to be safe for our students. Once this less expensive bond passes, we can address the larger issues of timely school building maintenance and management and oversight for new projects. We will support school bond issues that spend our tax dollars wisely and thoughtfully.
Haddonfield residents who are professional engineers with years of experience have volunteered to help the community and school board understand what is happening to our school buildings and how best to improve them. Why not take advantage of this wonderful resource to bring a new and improved bond issue to a vote?
Let’s get this right so we don’t have to repeat this in another 10 years.
Mary and John Nosek
*
Dear Editor,
Citizens for Responsible Investment in Our Schools is a group of concerned parents (some of whom are experienced engineers), teachers and community members who have come together for the safety of our children and the good of our community. We have been critical consumers of the information presented by the Board of Education on the bond referendum; we believe this bond responsibly addresses the critical needs of our schools.
Our mission is simple: to educate voters by disseminating factual information, to provide opportunities for voters to ask questions and share information, and to encourage voters to vote “yes” on March 8.
We believe our community shares a desire to fix our schools and to fix them properly. Unfortunately, some of the information that is being publicized seeks to discredit the current bond. We look forward to the opportunity to address misinformation and misperceptions about the bond in the weeks ahead.
To learn more about the bond referendum and our group, please check out our Facebook page at www.facebook.com/CitizensforRIOS or contact us at [email protected]. We will also be hosting an open house at Inkwood bookstore on Thursday, Feb. 18 from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m.
Aimee Subramanian
*
Dear Editor,
A letter in this paper last week hit the nail on the head when it suggested that the Haddonfield Public Schools’ deferral of maintenance on its school buildings has left those buildings a “poor stepchild.”
However, I don’t believe it’s a valid excuse to say that this situation occurs elsewhere. Haddonfield residents have spent tens of millions of dollars over the past decades to repair and improve our school facilities, so there is no good excuse.
Does anyone forget that we were told that our school buildings were in fine shape when the Board of Education proposed to spend more than $12 million from residents to purchase Bancroft, including $1 million for a grass/turf field? Or when the BOE actually spent $600,000 on a turf field at the high school? That was 2012 and 2013 — hardly a lifetime ago. Where were the district’s priorities then? Was it turning a blind eye on the buildings?
Maybe some people actually believe that $7,500 for the average Haddonfield household is not a lot to spend for a single bond alone over its lifetime; half of the households will pay even more, by the way. And, this is not the only tax that will go up this coming year or the next.
If the money is spent on the right projects and spent competently, I’m willing to do my part. But our school buildings did not get to where we are today through competent spending, nor is it because of natural aging.
I agree with the writer of the letter referenced above, that the Board of Education would be smart to appoint a citizens advisory board of individuals with experience in these matters. Several others have been requesting that for months. The board’s proposed alternative of hiring more personnel to oversee facilities, when they will be subject to district oversight, paychecks and history, sounds to me like more of the same thing that got us into the situation we’re in.
More importantly, I agree with other letter writers who have recommended that the board break this massive $35 million bond into an initial smaller bond focused on the priorities. Other smaller bonds can follow, if and when we see a return to wise and responsible spending.
Anne Tarbell
