The following are letters to the editor from residents on the upcoming bond referendum from Haddonfield Public Schools, in publication date and alphabetical order:
Dear Editor,
In case others missed it, the Haddonfield Board of Education announced last week a significant correction to a math error in its proposed school bond. As a result of that correction, the total cost of the bond jumped from $5,740 for the average Haddonfield household, to $7,500. Haddonfield households with costlier-than-average assessments would pay even more.
The BOE also extended the bond’s term from 20 years to 25 years. While a 25-year bond may appeal to voters who are lured in by the prospect of a lower annual payment, as any homeowner with a mortgage knows, the longer the term, the greater the number of annual payments, and the higher the total interest. In fact, a 25-year bond means that Haddonfield property taxpayers cumulatively will pay several million dollars more in interest, when compared to a 20-year bond.
In the wake of its math error, the BOE was also forced to remove more than $5 million dollars in projects from its bond. Apparently, the deleted projects, which were once portrayed as essential, were not so essential after all.
Speaking of essentials, residents have no problem with paying more property tax for the replacement of leaky roofs and other critical infrastructure. However, in a bond that is otherwise so massive, millions of dollars for nice-to-haves such as stadium upgrades, constructing a culinary arts classroom, converting grass rights-of-way to concrete, etc., are projects of lesser importance for another time. Focus on providing safe learning environments for our students.
Residents should also keep in mind that emergency repairs to our school buildings were already addressed in the summer of 2015 — due in substantial part to a handful of outspoken residents who pressed the board to investigate more thoroughly the poor state of our school buildings. It is also important to realize that the construction phase of the bond that the board is currently pitching would generally not even begin until June 2017.
That leaves plenty of time for the BOE to run a smaller bond, which by focusing on the essentials might just earn an “A” from residents.
Brian Kelly
*
Dear Editor,
As a concerned and passionate Haddonfield resident and parent, I have purchased yellow bows to give out to anyone who is voting in favor of passing the bond referendum. Our schools are in desperate need of repairs just so they can function properly.
The reasons for the yellow bow initiative are simple: show your support and get out there and vote “yes” on March 8. There are plenty of articles and websites that explain why you should vote yes, so there is no need for me to do so in my letter.
Please feel free to pick up your yellow bow from my doorstep anytime that is convenient for you, the address is 300 West Euclid Avenue, or email at lizbarrett11@yahoo.com.
The bows are free to a good home. Happy Voting!
Liz Barrett
*
Dear Editor,
In a few short weeks, we’ll be voting on the Haddonfield Public Schools’ $35 million school facilities bond.
I was hoping that the bond would strike a reasonable balance between needed school repairs and the capacity of the community to pay. Yet, this bond falls far short of that goal.
For starters, there’s the $35 million charge. That’s more than the prior three school facilities bonds combined.
I support projects that are absolutely essential for our schools. However, there are items included in this bond that aren’t critical, such as the expansion of sidewalks and curb cut-outs for student drop off at all the schools as well as $1 million in repairs and upgrades including soft costs at the high school athletic stadium that I will not support.
So where do we go from here? A letter in this paper the other week pointed out that the main projects in the bond would not even begin until summer 2017. That leaves the school board time to ask the voters to pass a smaller bond concentrating on the best interests of everyone including our students.
I’m the survivor of many school bonds. I’ve been struck each time that school districts spend so much money on PR firms that recycle the same pitches: “Vote for the bond, and it won’t cost you much; vote against the bond, and it will cost you dearly.” Truth be told, these big bonds aren’t cheap, and the rejection of a bond has never resulted in state funding drying up or the world coming to an end.
What I’m saying is that the school bond must strike a balance. Citizens will gladly pay more to repair our schools if the school board first repairs its bond.
Patricia Van Cleve
*
Dear Editor,
The Haddonfield Board of Education encourages residents to become informed voters and to participate in the March 8 referendum, in which the board will seek approval of three questions relating to repairs and maintenance at all five schools.
To help you make an informed decision, the board has developed a website — accessible at HaddonfieldBondReferendum.com — containing detailed information about the referendum. Also, we are hosting a series of Community Information Meetings, all at 7 p.m. in the elementary school libraries. The next meetings at Tatem will be on Feb. 3 and at Elizabeth Haddon on Feb. 10. All residents are encouraged to attend.
We are all aware that our school buildings are old. Parts of Lizzy Haddon date to 1913, when President Taft was in office — more than 100 years ago. Tatem was built in 1923 (Coolidge), and Central in 1947 (Truman). Our school buildings need constant repair and maintenance and, from time to time, major repairs. The board has worked for more than a year to conduct a comprehensive expert review of all district buildings, going well beyond previous visual inspections to include detailed examinations inside walls, roofs and crawl spaces. Those in-depth inspections revealed some structural risks, water leakage, inefficient utilities and other issues that are addressed in the upcoming referendum.
As noted above, there are three questions on the ballot. In Question 1, the Board is requesting approximately $30 million to address primarily infrastructure needs, including but not limited to replacing corroded steel, repairing deteriorating brick and mortar components, replacing leaky roofs, failing heating and air-conditioning systems, and our outdated and broken communications system. If voters approve Question 1 on March 8, we expect that the state will absorb approximately one-third, about $10 million, of the cost.
Approximately two-thirds of our classrooms are air-conditioned. Question 2A presents the opportunity to complete the air-conditioning of all school buildings. The board is requesting approximately $3.7 million for this project. If voters approve Question 2, we expect that the state will absorb approximately one-third of that cost as well. Question 2B covers repairs to the high school stadium and track, with an estimated cost of approximately $1.4 million; we expect that the State will absorb about ten percent of those costs.
I encourage you to become informed about the details of the three ballot questions. Please visit the website haddonfieldbondreferendum.com (where you also will find answers to frequently asked questions), and attend one of the community information meetings.
Thank you.
Glenn Moramarco, President, Haddonfield Board of Education
*
Dear Editor,
As the Haddonfield Board of Education’s $35 million referendum on March 8draws near, attention turns to the particulars of this unprecedentedly massive funding request.
The BOE has already moved certain items out of its Question 1 “critical work” list, to not-so-critical Questions 2a and 2b. This was done in response to residents’ concerns; and it’s appreciated.
Unfortunately (according to the BOE’s website at this writing), Question 1 still contains items that cannot be regarded as critical or essential, notably window replacements not justified by the claimed energy savings, climate control systems that will not fix the problem of classrooms being too hot or cold, the paving over of grass medians, certain water drainage work, and more.
And the other questions contain many nonessentials, like $1 million to spruce up the high school stadium. Is that an essential?
At this point the prudent and responsible thing for voters to do is reject this referendum.
Relatedly, past “bad fixes” abound undeniably in all of the school buildings. Residents have long asked if we are getting our money’s worth in return for funding maintenance and repair — an obvious question in light of the poor state of repair at some facilities.
Board and district representatives claimed recently that the New Jersey Comptroller’s Office found that funds from several previous facilities bonds were spent “properly” and that “everything checked out.” Unfortunately, the New Jersey Comptroller’s Office did not address the all-important question: Were those funds spent wisely, competently, and for work of good quality?
Rejection of this referendum will surely inspire the dedicated stewards of our highly esteemed school system to regroup a little and offer up a more essentials-only and quality-work referendum. One that we can happily vote in favor of, hopefully as soon as this coming September. We all want what is best for our schools.
Walter Weidenbacher
