Citizens United for Safe Passage (CUSP)

The District-Community Wound that Just Won't Heal

FROM THE HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS

 

Bring back busing

Thursday, October 16, 2008 11:54 AM EDT

 

Kate Randazzo, Hopewell Township

    I am writing to express my concern with the decision the Hopewell Valley Regional School District has made in regard to transporting our children to school. I have, from the start, questioned how an elementary school child can walk over 1 mile to school and still function well in his or her studies. I have, from the start, questioned its safety when predators not only loom around the corner, but come off the screen of the home computer and materialize in “real life.” These are different times than in the past, when we were children. Yes, those threats may have existed in some part, but not as prevalent as today.

   On the afternoon of Oct. 9, a man was walking alongside my house, apparently impaired in some way. My neighbor’s babysitter phoned the police and immediately there were several squad cars from both Hopewell and Lawrence townships. I am sure you have seen the story. Several blocks away, that same man had been driving under the influence, veered off the road and struck an elderly man walking his 9-month-old granddaughter in a stroller and then drove his own car into a tree. I now ask myself, how safe are the streets in Brandon Farms, or anywhere in Hopewell Township? As it turns out, the man is expected to recover from his injuries and the child was miraculously unharmed except for a few bumps and bruises.

   Last year, a Stony Brook teacher and Brandon Farms resident was struck by a car in this neighborhood, as well, and she too recovered. What, however will it take for someone from the school district to stand up and take notice of this? Will it take one of our precious commodities — a child to be injured or worse? Please, when considering the budget, do something that will truly impact our children —keep them safe and protect them from harm’s way. It is the duty of not only the parent, but the school community to protect them. Please bring back busing.

The New York Times, August 18, 2002, "Lining Up on Opposite Sides of the Football" - the Sally Turner Saga

By IVER PETERSON

In September, Hopewell Valley Central High School hopes to field its first football team in 30 years. But a lot of people here are bent on changing September to ''never.''

So while a squad of boys sweat out football camp on a dusty gridiron, a group of taxpayers are putting their energy into having the state block the return of a game that is a fixture of high school life across the country.

''Class snobs,'' a local paper called the antifootball forces. Defenders of democracy and majority rule, they call themselves.

And caught up in the squabbling are all the familiar elements that make for tension in so many corners of American society these days. Hopewell's Puritan name speaks of its long history as a quiet, rural and decidedly upscale suburb of Princeton and Trenton, and the fight over football seems to be a part of generalized concerns about newcomers clogging the roads, and about vanishing open space, an exploding school population and rising taxes.

''There seems to be a cultural objection to football,'' said Sally Turner, the president of the local school board. ''I've never had someone come up to me and say, 'We don't want those kind of people playing here,' but could there be that kind of thinking? There could be.''

Many of the newcomers, typically young parents looking for bigger yards and better schools, had been pushing for several years to bring football to Hopewell Valley Central High. For them, the idea that their high school did not have a team came as a shock. Real estate agents joke about home buyers demanding their deposit checks back when they find out that theirs is the biggest high school in New Jersey without a team.

''I moved here five years ago and started looking in the paper to find out where the high school played,'' Mike Foster said. He asked everyone. ''And they're like, 'There is no high school football,' and I'm like, 'What? You're kidding me!' ''

Mr. Foster, who operates an electronic security business, helped form HIKE -- Hopewell Involved in Kids' Enrichment -- to lobby the Hopewell Valley school board for football, and the board agreed to start a program. But its cost would have put the school system over a state-imposed budget cap, so the board had to put the issue on the ballot.

In April last year, the voters approved the district's $39 million budget by a wide margin, and they approved $125,000 for computers and better security. But by more than two to one they rejected $53,500 for a first year of football and lesser amounts for lacrosse equipment and expansion of girls' softball.

''I like to watch football and I don't mind kids playing football,'' said Walter G. Bittner, a retired engineer and an opponent of the football program. ''My objection is on them not honoring our vote.''

Mr. Bittner added that a dominant sport like football could hurt education. ''For years, we have had a very fine educational institution here, and we don't want to see it diluted by extracurricular activities.''

Dr. Fred Babinowich, a dentist, also voted no. ''The school board seems to have the attitude that they have to be Santa Claus,'' he said.

Undaunted, HIKE members raised $70,000 on their own to pay for the first year of football, and promised to pay the same for a second year, then lesser shares for three more if the board would allow football. After all, they argued, it is not unusual for schools to accept outside financing to start programs -- hockey programs often get their start that way -- and school science labs are full of donated equipment.

The school board, reasoning that the referendum barred only the use of taxpayer money for the 2001 season, said yes. Opponents went on the offensive, forming H.O.V. -- Honor Our Vote -- and filing a petition with the state education commissioner to block football before the first whistle. They argued that the board ignored the referendum, and that football would upset the balance between boys' and girls' sports mandated by Title IX.

''Once they let the camel's nose into the tent, they'll say there's no more money and the kids are all suited up and upset and the taxpayers will have to pick up the bill,'' said Michael Tusay, a C.P.A. ''It's an end run, pardon the football pun.''

Kris Kley is the mother of two young boys and HIKE's treasurer. ''Is it the camel's nose? I hope so,'' she said. ''The school board says this is the right thing to do.''

Discouraged, Ms. Turner, the school board president, has decided to leave the board in April, after 12 years. ''There is a large number of students who cannot play soccer or basketball or whatever, and perhaps they are not turned on by the education process,'' Ms. Turner said. ''I want to give them an opportunity to be excited about going to school, and football may be a strong component in that excitement.''

A state administrative law judge could issue a ruling before the new team's first scheduled scrimmage, against the Peddie School on Sept. 4.

In the meantime, 45 boys have signed up for the freshman team -- a varsity team will be added next year if the program survives -- and are running their drills under the hopeful eyes of their parents along the sidelines. Terry Williams, whose son Brett is trying out for the team, said that staid Hopewell needs more excitement than soccer, the school's main fall sport for boys, can offer.

''It's so lame, I couldn't believe it,'' Mrs. Williams said. ''I went to the soccer homecoming game and it was so quiet, it was like watching a golf match.''

Out on the dusky field, Alex Mayer explained why he had given up the last week of vacation to suffer under the heat and David Caldwell, the team's coach. ''I've wanted to play football ever since I knew what football was,'' he said.

TRENTON TIMES, 02/28/08, "HoVal School Chief Resigns"

Superintendent leaving with 1 year on contract

By Michael Ratcliffe

Judith Ferguson, who has led the Hopewell Valley regional school district for three years, tendered her resignation yesterday as superintendent.

Her last day will be Aug. 31. She announced her decision to leave the district in a letter sent to school board members. Her contract is not set to expire until July 1, 2009.

While she is contractually required to provide the board with six months notice prior to leaving, Ferguson told The Times last night that the timing of her resignation was planned, in part, to give the school board ample time to find a new superintendent prior to the start of the next school year.

"It's really the perfect time," she said, noting that leaving when she does will allow her replacement time to create his or her own referendum package for next year's school district voting rather that inheriting a package already in the works.

Ferguson's resignation was sudden, but not entirely unexpected.

When she was hired, Ferguson told the board that she did not plan to stay in the district beyond her four-year contract and, she said, she had confided with both the past and current board presidents that she might leave early.

"I didn't quite expect it. I was a little caught off guard," school board member Mel Myers said. "I knew it was something we'd have to deal with in the future -- it's just sooner than I thought."

"I regret that we are being asked to accept Dr. Ferguson's resignation as she has been a highly effective superintendent whose shoes will be very hard to fill," school board President Linda Mitchell said. "Her extensive experience, including her background in school district business administration, has served our district very well in challenging financial times. I personally appreciate her exceptional commitment to the staff and students of this district and her flawless professionalism."

Ferguson joined the Hopewell Valley district as interim superintendent on March 1, 2005, following the departure that January of former superintendent Nick Lorenzetti. In June of that year, saying she was a "good fit for the district," the school board awarded her a four-year contract as superintendent starting at $166,700 and topping out at $184,823.

A veteran administrator who headed the Princeton schools' business department for eight years in the 1980s, Ferguson started a consulting business after retiring as superintendent of the West Morris school district. She has also served as interim superintendent in South Brunswick and Lawrence townships.

Ferguson plans to return to her consulting business but will likely take a little time off after leaving the district.

When asked why she was leaving before the end of her contract, Ferguson told The Times, "I really do feel that I've done what I was called upon to do. We are in a much better place today than we were four years ago. We've put strategies in place for cost containment and brought in revenues we didn't have before."

In her resignation letter sent to the school board yesterday, Ferguson wrote, "I have enjoyed my stay in Hopewell and feel a great sense of pride in the work that we have completed together despite the growing demands and shrinking resources we have experienced. We have met the rigors of 'No Child Left Behind,' fulfilled nearly all of our commitments in our strategic plan, streamlined our budget to conform to new spending and tax caps, reached agreements with most bargaining units and instituted significant cost controls as well as alternative revenue sources to protect our essential programs and services."

Mitchell, the school board president, hailed Ferguson for further developing partnerships with foundations and booster groups, bringing in new revenue-generating grants, downsizing the district administration while increasing teaching staff, and entering into shared services agreements with neighboring school districts and local municipal bodies.

She credited Ferguson with instituting "significant" new security measures at the district's schools, starting the PEECH pre-school program, introducing online courses through the district's "virtual high school" program, and improving the overall quality of the district's technology, including introducing a cable TV channel for the district.

"The board will have a very large and serious task in its effort to find a suitable replacement for the school district, both in terms of quality of the candidate and the proper fit for Hopewell Valley," Mitchell said, noting that board members will begin discussing the search for a new superintendent at their next meeting.

"Under her leadership, the improvements that have been made in the school district will last for years to come with recurring financial and institutional benefits," Mitchell said.

Ferguson, in turn, credited her staff of administrators and faculty members with helping her make "educationally sound" decisions and recommendations to the board.

While she will not miss the long hours and evening meetings, Ferguson said she will miss the people with whom she has worked closely for the last three years. "Hopewell is an amazing school district with a really high quality staff -- some of the best I've ever seen," she said.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, "Ferguson to Retire August 31st"

By John Tredrea, Staff Writer

Judith A. Ferguson, superintendent of the Hopewell Valley Regional School District, has announced her intention to retire, effective Aug. 31.

In a Wednesday letter to board President Linda Mitchell and the school board, she said: “I have decided to retire (again) at that time and pursue other interests. Some of these interests are professional, but others are personal and include spending time with family, volunteering, and caring for my aging canine pal.”

She said Wednesday her plans include “full-time consulting, superintendent searches and regionalization feasibility studies primarily.”

Dr. Ferguson’s contract is not up for renewal until June (2009 ed.). “I told the board many times that I would not be seeking a renewal,” she said. “ I have been considering this retirement for over a month and gave notice to the board and my administrative team well before receiving a reporter’s call on the Nemeth matter Tuesday afternoon,” she added, laying to rest any thoughts citizens might have about the timing of her announcement.

Dr. Ferguson, who is making $178,573 this school year, said Wednesday: “I have a four-year contract and am three and a half years into it. I was brought here to help the district out of a budget crunch. I think we did that.”

About that, she said: “Over four budget years, we whittled expenses and raised revenues in lieu of taxes impacting the budget by over $1M.” These included administrative reductions and a reduction in nonmandated busing. On the revenue side are the fees for nonmandated busing and (student) activities.

In the proposed budget, she noted, “the tax increase will be less than the 4 percent cap. We have no cuts in programs or services and are adding three teaching positions.”

In her letter to the board, she also said: “While we have accomplished a lot during our short time together, there is much to be done, and this district deserves to have its next leader at the helm immediately upon my leaving if at all possible. If you begin a search in the near future, my six months notice should give you adequate time to find the right future match for Hopewell Valley Regional Schools.

”I have enjoyed my stay in Hopewell and feel a great sense of pride in the work that we have completed together despite the growing demands and shrinking resources we have experienced. We have met the rigors of ‘No Child Left Behind,’ fulfilled nearly all of our commitments in our strategic plan, streamlined our budget to conform to new spending and tax caps, reached agreements with most bargaining units, and instituted significant cost controls as well as alternative revenue sources to protect our essential programs and services.

”Through our partnerships, we have completed much of AFT (Athletic Fields at Timberlane) including the road and parking lot. The five new fields will serve the needs of our athletes and help relieve our existing fields from overuse and wear. Our partnerships with our foundations and booster groups continue to grow and improve, and we have recently settled into improved working relationships with our municipal partners that promise to serve us all better.”

Dr. Ferguson served as acting superintendent from March 1, 2005 until June of that year when she was tapped as the permanent superintendent. She replaced former Superintendent Nick Lorenzetti, who resigned in January 2005.

In spring 2005, the school board had intended to launch a national search for a permanent superintendent. However, the cost of a search in time, money and lost progress was considered unnecessary, given the board’s “overwhelmingly positive experience with Dr. Ferguson,” said then board President Kim Newport. The search firms interviewed by the Personnel Committee submitted quotes ranging from $18,000 to $46,000.

”I don’t believe it is necessary or responsible for us to launch a full search when the ideal candidate is right in front of us,” Ms. Newport said then.

A school administrator for 25 years, Dr. Ferguson previously worked as superintendent of the West Morris Reginal High School District in Chester and the Newton Public Schools in Sussex County.

She also has served as business administrator for Princeton Regional schools, as assistant superintendent and acting superintendent in South Brunswick for the 2003-2004 school year and, for three months in 2000, as interim superintendent in Lawrence Township.

Dr. Ferguson began her educational career as an English teacher at Northern Burlington Regional High School and was a teacher and department chairwoman at Upper Freehold Regional High School for six years.

She holds a bachelor’s degree in English education from Trenton State College. She earned a master’s degree in foundations of education and a doctorate in educational administration from Rutgers.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, "Nemeth Must Return Nearly $40K"

By John Tredrea, Staff Writer

The state Treasury Department has ordered John Nemeth, retired business administrator for the Hopewell Valley Regional School District, to pay back nearly $40,000 in pension benefits he collected during a six-month period last year while he was working as a consultant for the district.

Treasury Department spokesman Mark Perkiss said Wednesday morning that Mr. Nemeth collected $6,500 pension benefits each month from July through December of last year. During that six-month period, Mr. Nemeth also was being paid $12,000 per month as a consultant. The six-month consultant job began after Mr. Nemeth retired last June 31, after a 15-year stint as the school district’s business administrator.

Mr. Perkiss said the Treasury Department’s Division of Pensions and Benefits ruled that Mr. Nemeth was acting as an employee rather than a consultant for the district and therefore was not eligible to collect pension benefits and be paid at the same time.

The decision can be appealed to the Division of Pensions and Benefits. The second level of appeal is to the state court system, according to Mr. Perkiss.

”We follow IRS (Internal Revenue Service) guidelines in determining whether a relationship that has been termed a consulting relationship really is one,” Mr. Perkiss said. “The Division of Pensions and Benefits decided he (Mr. Nemeth) should have remained an employee.”

Mr. Perkiss added that Mr. Nemeth also has been ordered to pay to the pension system the amount he would have contributed to it, from July to December, had he remained an employee.

Mr. Nemeth, who lives in Bucks County, Pa., could not be reached for comment.

Superintendent Judith Ferguson said she could not comment because the school district “has received no official notice” of the Treasury Department action.

Before the school board voted in favor of the contract to hire Mr. Nemeth as a consultant, school board attorney Robert Martinez said the contract was legal. Several months ago in The Times of Trenton, board member Jim Wulf was quoted as saying the Nemeth contract “did not sit well with the community.”

Mr. Wulf was reprimanded by board members about that story. The members said Mr. Wulf should have discussed the matter with other board members before going to the press.

“Assuming the Department of Treasury’s analysis is indeed correct, all I can say is that every dollar our district misspends is a dollar not applied to delivering a quality education for our children. It’s a tragedy,” Mr. Wulf said Wednesday.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, "Seven File for Three School Board Seats"

By Ruth Luse, Managing Editor

By Monday’s 4 p.m. deadline, seven Hopewell Township residents had filed nominating petitions as candidates for three open seats on the Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education.

Three candidates hoping to capture one of the three-year terms are:

• Armelle Daniels, of Michael Way;
• Roy G. Dollard, of Elm Ridge Road;
• Desiree Fogler, of Pennington-Titusville Road, Titusville;
• Incumbent Edward R. Gainsborg Jr., of Washington Crossing-Pennington Road;
• Stephen Keen, of Hopewell-Pennington Road;
• Judith Lindenberger, of Hopkinson Court;
• and, Brian McHugh, of Masters Way, Brandon Farms.

Board members whose terms expire this year are Mr. Gainsborg, Judy Karp — who is not seeking re-election — and Bill Hills, who was appointed in December to serve the final months of Carl Swanson’s term. Dr. Swanson resigned in November for health reasons. Mr. Hills, a previous president and member of the board, is not seeking a seat on April 15, election day.

Mr. Hills was among seven township residents interviewed for Dr. Swanson’s vacant seat in December. The others were Ms. Fogler, Ken Hansen, Mr. Keen, Ms. Lindenberger, Mr. McHugh and Paul Ronollo. Four of these are April 15 candidates.

On April 15, Hopewell Township registered voters will pick the three board members who will begin service at the school board’s annual reorganization meeting that follows the election.

Of the nine seats on the regional board, seven are Hopewell Township’s. The remaining two seats belong to Hopewell Borough and Pennington. These are not involved in this year’s election.

Also on April 15, registered voters in all three Valley towns will cast ballots on the school budget proposal.

The school board has planned 2008-2009 budget sessions as follows:

• March 3, 7 p.m., tentative budget adoption, 425 S. Main St., Pennington;
• March 6, 8 p.m., budget presentation, CHS Media Center;
• March 12, 7:30 p.m., town meeting on budget plan, CHS Performing Arts Center;
• March 17, 7 p.m., board work session, 425 S. Main St., Pennington;
• March 19, 7:30 p.m., public hearing and adoption of proposed budget, 425 S. Main St., Pennington. If OK’d that night, the spending plan would be ready for April 15 ballots.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, "Tentative School Budget Adoption Set for Monday"

After OK plan will go to county office

By John Tredrea, Staff Writer

The Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education plans to adopt a tentative 2008-2009 spending plan Monday at a meeting set for 7 p.m.

The session will be held at the Administration Building, 425 S. Main St., Pennington.

No figures for the budget are being released until Monday, when board members will see the detailed proposal for the first time, according to a district business office spokeswoman.

If OK’d Monday, the tentative plan will go to the Mercer County superintendent of schools, who supervises and administers the county office of education as a representative of the state commissioner of education. The county office must review and OK the Valley board’s budget plan before it is finalized at the local level.

Other budget meetings include:

• A presentation on March 6 at 8 p.m. at the Central High School (CHS) media center. The high school is located on Pennington-Titusville Road, just west of state Route 31.
• A town meeting at the CHS Performing Arts Center on March 12 at 7:30 p.m. Members of the governing bodies of the school district’s three constituent municipalities will be invited. Those municipalities are Hopewell Township and Pennington and Hopewell boroughs.
• Final budget adoption session on March 19 at 7:30 p.m. at 425 S. Main St., Pennington. Public comment will be taken before the adoption vote is cast. The budget that comes out of this session will be the one that appears on April 15 ballots.

All the events listed above are open to the public.

The school board/budget election will be held on April 15.

Only Hopewell Township voters will pick school board members — three for three-year terms. Board seats for the two boroughs are not up for election this year. All Valley voters get to vote on the 2008-2009 school budget plan.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, Letter to the Editor, "An Eagle's Commitment"

To the editor:

Once again controversies have developed about actions of the Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education. Comments and criticisms have unfortunately been very personal in some cases. One that particularly disturbed me was the allegation that board member James Wulf was not true to his pledge as an Eagle Scout. James Wulf is a man of great integrity who has taken that pledge as seriously as anyone known to me.

Years ago, as a scoutmaster in Penns Neck, I welcomed James Wulf to the ranks of Eagle Scouts, the first scout in the troop to gain that achievement. It was a proud moment for him, and he remains fully aware of the responsibilities of being an Eagle. One of the ways in which one can honor that pledge is to seek elective office, something that I always encouraged.

I know very well the hazards of public service. In 12 years on the Ewing Township Planning Board, most of them as its chairman, I heard myself called names I never expected to hear in a public forum, and intemperate language was all too common. Many people were much too quick to label my decisions as dishonest, simply because they disagreed with me. Courses of action, which I felt were in the best interest of the general public, were all too often misinterpreted.

I will not presume to take sides in a matter outside my own constituency, but I do want to say that Hopewell Valley residents may be assured that James Wulf reflects the honor and noble ideals of Scouting. The simple fact that he sought to serve them in elective office stands as evidence of his commitment as an Eagle.

David Christian Parris
West Windsor Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, Letter to the Editor, "The Real News"

To the editor:

I believe the real point was missed during the last board meeting and subsequent newspaper articles. The real headline should have been “Hopewell Valley school district grossly overspends budget in legal fees.”

At the current burn rate, Hopewell Valley Regional School District will be outspending comparable school districts (Montgomery, Princeton, Lawrence) attorney fees by more than 500 percent.

As I recently watched the televised school board meeting from Feb. 11 on Channel 19, I saw one school board member continue to ask the hard questions regarding overspending by the district on attorney fees. Thanks to (Jim Wulf's) persistent questioning, he saved us hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Who cares about a silly little e-mail that is a public record anyhow? We need to keep our eye on the real issues here. Bloated overspending that threatens our children’s quality of education is what counts.

John Hieronymus
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, Letter to the Editor, "Ferguson Email a Public Document"

Not OPRA exemption

To the Editor:

Does anyone in this community understand the difference between what is or isn’t nice and what is or isn’t right? I completely understand why Linda Mitchell and several writers to the HVN last week regard what Jim and Rhona Wulf did with an e-mail as “unprofessional,” “disrespectful,” or even an “antic”— in my opinion, it probably was all of these things. But I’m flabbergasted that none of the newspaper reports or letters devoted even one word to examining whether forwarding a group e-mail to the public was a violation of any law, policy, or agreement. I’ve checked the state laws and board policies thoroughly, and it’s clear that it wasn’t! Suppressing a public document—now that would be “dishonest” and “untrustworthy.”

According to the state Open Public Records Act (and numerous fact sheets prepared by the School Boards Association, NJ State League of Municipalities, etc.), as soon as Judy Ferguson decided to cc. the e-mail she sent to Jim Wulf to the entire school board, it became a public document. So had someone not forwarded it, it could have become one more piece of public business hidden in the hopes that no one would know to exercise our legal right to it. I worked in the Clinton and Bush administrations for 12 years, and I understood from my first day on the job that acting like a petulant child would not change the law or the fact that executive power comes with a price. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan: “Dr. Ferguson, we paid for your computer and for your e-mail account,” and I appreciate anyone who puts the public’s business in front of the public. I know of the exemptions in federal and state law that let officials deliberate about certain matters in private, but this announcement from the superintendent to the whole board falls under none of the 24 OPRA exemptions. If I am wrong about this, I trust an attorney will correct the record.

So shame on anyone who used words like “untrustworthy,” “dishonest,” or “misuse.” Hiding a public communication is not something an Eagle Scout would do, and it boggles the mind to imagine how repeating verbatim the words of someone else could constitute “misuse” of anything. Accusing someone of being dishonest is a serious charge, and to do so falsely is simply despicable.

And Linda Mitchell needs refresher training if she thinks she should refer to Dr. Ferguson as the “CEO of this fine school district.” HVRSD is not Halliburton, as much as it might be run like it is—it is a wholly-owned enterprise of the people of this area. If you want to send private e-mails to each other about our children’s education, I suggest you do so on your own time and expense.

I too wish the board could get along better and stop wasting so much time. I’ve concluded that another election and a couple of long-awaited resignations can get us there, to a board that acts both with civility and with integrity.

Adam M. Finkel
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/28/08, Letter to the Editor, "Tired of Negative Press"

To the editor:

It was just shy of a year ago that Jim Wulf and Aaron Tellier were elected to the school board with their campaign slogan of “It’s Time for a Change!”

What have these two men contributed of substance so far? The difference they have been making is not the difference this community needs, or our children will benefit from. Mr. Tellier’s allegiance to his former campaign partner is demonstrated regularly when he never speaks up during the difficult board discussions.

Mr. Wulf is quick to make accusations about the board and administration, and yet he does not hold himself to a reasonable standard of behavior. It wasn’t Mr. Wulf’s misuse of the superintendent’s e-mail by forwarding it to his wife Rhona for her use that most caught my attention. Rather, it was Mrs. Wulf’s addition: “Go, Jim! He caught a mistake in their statement regarding waivers” that demonstrated to me just how calculating and destructive Mr. Wulf (and his wife’s) attitude is regarding the school board.

The “change” I am noticing is it appears Mr. Wulf’s sole purpose is to discredit the work of the board and the superintendent. I have tremendous respect for the countless hours they devote to solving tough issues regarding the education and employment of so many.

Personally, I am tired of all the negative press directed at Hopewell Valley’s school system!

Debbie Noyes
Hopewell Township

TRENTON TIMES, 02/27/08, "Adviser Ordered to Repay Pension"

By Darryl R. Isherwood

Former Hopewell schools administrator John Nemeth has been ordered to repay nearly $40,000 in pension benefits he collected last year while working as a consultant for the district.

Nemeth collected the benefits from July through December when he was also being paid $12,000 per month as a consultant to the regional district, a spokesman for the Department of Treasury confirmed yesterday.

Treasury officials ruled that Nemeth was acting as an employee of the district rather than a consultant at the same time he was receiving some $6,500 per month in pension payments.

The order also requires Nemeth to make an undetermined contribution to the state teacher's pension fund for the same six months.

"We rely on IRS guidelines in making the determination as to whether a relationship like this is truly a consulting relationship as opposed to an employer-to-employee (relationship)," said Treasury spokesman Mark Perkiss. "A determination was made that (it was) an employer-employee relationship."

Nemeth, who lives in Pennsylvania, could not be reached for comment on the deal, which was first reported by The Times of Trenton in October.

Members of the school board who originally approved the deal with the former business administrator said they could not comment on the decision by the state because they had not been notified.

"As far as I know the school district has not been given any notice," said Hopewell Valley Regional School District Board President Linda Mitchell. "I would consider it inappropriate to comment on something I have not (seen)."

In October, board member Kevin Doran defended the contract saying it would help with a smooth transition and calling it a "good management practice."

Doran did not return a call for comment.

District Superintendent Judy Ferguson also said she could not comment on the deal. Ferguson said Nemeth's consulting deal ended in December and she has not heard anything from the state regarding the contract.

The agreement was approved last summer by board attorney Robert Martinez, who said he had consulted state guidelines before blessing the deal. Martinez said at the time that the district's auditor had also OK'd the arrangement. Martinez was unavailable for comment yesterday.

Jim Wulf, a school board member sworn in after Nemeth's contract was approved, was critical of the deal in October. He said he hopes a lesson was learned.

"Obviously the state frowns on this type of stuff," Wulf said.

Nemeth's consulting contract was awarded just hours before voters narrowly approved a school budget that cut programs and upped fees for district students.

Nemeth had recently retired after more than 15 years with the district but was kept on to help the district close out construction projects and to continue labor negotiations, facilities planning and administrative consultation.

At the time, Wulf said he had heard from several residents and said the contract did not "sit well with the community."

After the deal was brought to light by The Times, the school board voted unanimously to hire a special legal counsel to review the $72,000 consulting contract.

At the same meeting, board members chastised Wulf for speaking to The Times about the contract before consulting with his colleagues on the board.

TRENTON TIMES, 02/25/08, Letter to the Editor, "School Board e-Mail Pushes the Envelope"

To the editor:

The Hopewell Valley school board is, once again, on the wrong side of the public's right to know ("A school board's e-mail hub bub," Feb. 18). Linda Mitchell, board president, last week reacted self-righteously because a board e-mail was forwarded to the wife of a member. For two reasons, she should rethink her reaction.

First, the board was considering having all correspondence among board members delivered electronically, via e-mail, as a regular policy. This is a clear violation of the Open Public Meetings Act. It should not even have been introduced as an idea. The board president, of all people, should want to follow the law to the letter. As leader of the school board, which is responsible for 58 percent of the entire tax bill in Hopewell Valley, Ms. Mitchell should recognize her responsibility to the public and want to expand communication, not propose policies that shut out the public.

Second, the e-mail that was forwarded was in no way confidential; therefore, board member Jim Wulf had every right to forward it to whomever he pleased.

Despite Mitchell's political attack, Wulf continued during the meeting to ask tough questions about how the administration is wasting taxpayer monies on excessive legal fees. While Mitchell's ambush of a fellow board member may make for sensational copy, Wulf's critical oversight is what makes a board member valuable to the public.

BILLIE MOORE, Pennington

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/21/08, Letter to the Editor, "Straight Talk and Answers"

To the editor:

One hopes school board member Judy Karp reads school board documents under deliberation more carefully than she reads this letters column.

This writer has consistently supported our schools and teachers. His clarion call: “The school board’s work-in-progress (the annual budget) should continue to focus directly on the student within that intimate learning experience with the teacher.”

Reacting to current economic conditions, the admonition continued: “It is administrative overhead that has to be minutely examined.”

As for the school superintendent, the question was raised: “Are we getting enough bang for our buck?” Cited were the creation of a high-priced administrative position in central headquarters, public relations functions provided by previous superintendents, time for her outside consulting employment, and a meaningful role in informal legal/statutory advice to avoid excessive attorney costs.

Since the majority of current school board members may be inhibited to speak up on these issues (how they are “romanced” into aphonia was addressed by this writer last week), one hopes forthcoming candidates for school board will.

Upon arrival 20 years ago, a community leader advised me the constituents in the Valley want straight talk and answers. I believe they still do.

Norm Goldman
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/21/08, Letter to the Editor, "Stakes Are Too High"

To the editor:

After reading about and watching the latest disturbing events at the Feb. 11 school board meeting, I am sadly reminded of a pattern of negative behavior by various members of the board during the last 17 years. Is the pendulum swinging back to that place when our Board of Education finds it necessary to have an attorney present to enable the board to direct its full attention to the task of overseeing our school district?

Serious and thorough consideration of issues before a Board of Education is welcome, but the shenanigans that we have been witnessing from Jim Wulf and Aaron Tellier exhibit behavior we as a community should pay close attention to. This climate of obsession with “special interest” issues compromises the board’s ability to achieve a financially responsible and educationally sound program for all our children.

Our community needs to be alert and informed. Let’s not allow history to repeat itself. The stakes are too high!

Sally Turner
Hopewell Township
FORMER SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/21/08, Letter to the Editor, "Think Again!"

To the editor:

Let me get this straight! At the Feb. 11 meeting, when Jim Wulf was confronted with his misuse of an e-mail he received from the superintendent, his response included: “I’m very sorry... flog me, stand me out at the corner of one of the intersections and throw tomatoes at me ... whatever.”

However the next morning his tone and message had drastically changed. Mr. Wulf’s quotes to local newspapers show how he attempted to spin the inappropriate use of the e-mail. Mr. Wulf states, “All my wife was trying to do was to correct a misleading budget presentation.”

Please! He sounds like a child who knew he was guilty but has since thought of a way to detract from his own accountability. There are other ways for Mrs. Wulf to suggest correcting something on the district Web site. Sending it out to “Busing Advocates” as a “gotcha” on the superintendent is certainly not one of them.

Do the Wulfs really think this community believes they were acting in a respectful and responsible manner? Think again!

Sharon Squicciarino

Titusville

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/21/08, Letter to the Editor, "Enough is Enough"

To the editor:

The antics of the Wulf-Tellier team are getting old. In the middle of critical budget deliberations, work has again been upstaged and slowed by Mr. Wulf’s irresponsible behavior, in this case, his sharing a board member-superintendent communication with his wife and ultimately with a political group lobbying for a special interest.

In his recent e-mail to the HVN, Mr. Wulf respun his apology given at the meeting and expressed mortification at the response of the school board to his wife’s “innocent communication.”

What should have mortified him was this: while he was being exposed at the board meeting as untrustworthy (No. 1 Boy Scout requirement —something Eagle Scout Jim must have forgotten), his wife hid in the hallway laughing. I guess she thinks the disruption is funny. It is not. The relentless campaign against our school district is destructive and shameless. Our school district should not be held hostage to these antics and the whims of an unelected spouse.

At an October meeting, Mr. Wulf needed to quiet an outburst from his wife. It is time for the community to wake up and repeat Mr. Wulf’s words that night, “Go home, Rhona!”

Alex Semple
Hopewell

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/21/08, Letter to the Editor, "Get Political Dishonesty Out of Hopewell Valley"

To the editor:

It is a very sad state of affairs in the Hopewell Valley Regional School District.

Once again, Superintendent Judith Ferguson discovers that she cannot trust all of the board members she must work so closely with. The “paperless” board proposal was an excellent idea for those taxpayers like myself who enjoy seeing the Board of Education working toward ways to save our money.

It infuriates me to think that Jim Wulf would destroy this initiative with his unprofessionalism. I find it hard to believe that he forwarded Dr. Ferguson’s e-mail about busing to his wife, one of the leaders of the group opposed to the past year’s transportation cuts, and he had no idea that she would be passing it along to her fellow “busing advocates.”

How can Dr. Ferguson possibly do her job most effectively when she is dealing with this complete lack of professionalism and trust?

On election day in April, I will certainly be casting my vote for board candidates who will work well together as a team to make decisions in the best interests of our children. What are we teaching the children of this district by electing board members who try to push their own former campaign platforms at any cost?

I am disgusted by the dishonesty in politics we see every day in Washington. We do not need such behavior here in Hopewell Valley.

Kathy Coppins
Hopewell Township

TRENTON TIMES, 02/17/08, "A School Board's e-Mail Hubbub"

By Jeff Trently

Hopewell Valley school board President Linda Mitchell reprimanded board member Jim Wulf last week for allowing his wife to forward an e-mail from superintendent Judith Ferguson to a busing advocacy group.

Wulf apologized at last Monday's school board meeting but later said his wife did nothing wrong.

"I am disappointed my wife's concern for the safety of the children in our community should become so politicized," Wulf said.

But Mitchell said it was the Wulfs who were using the e-mail -- which dealt with the interchangeable use of certain busing terminology -- for political reasons.

"There has been a breach of trust within the board of education," she said.

The flap over the e-mail fueled the board last Monday to vote unanimously to shelve a proposal that the board communicate electronically rather than with printed materials.

The e-mail -- which corrected the misuse of "courtesy" and "hazardous" busing terms in a recent presentation to the board and discussed a transportation waiver -- was sent to Wulf and other board members by Ferguson.

Wulf's wife Rhona, who was active in a grass-roots campaign against the elimination of some school busing routes last year, forwarded the e-mail to her busing advocacy group.

"Go Jim!" she wrote at the top of the e-mail. "He caught an error in their statement regarding waivers. This statement by the superintendent will help our hazardous busing effort."

That communication evoked the anger of Mitchell.

"I cannot tell you how deeply disappointed and frustrated I am that at least one member of this board allows his correspondence with the CEO of this fine school district to be misused for political gains or special interests," Mitchell said.

Wulf, who has been at odds with Mitchell and other board members over policy and procedural issues since his election to the board last year, said he was "blindsided" by Mitchell's comments on the e-mail.

"It doesn't surprise me that an organization that has very little leadership or direction, that lives in a vacuum, would also have a kangaroo court as well. This is a distraction from the issues at hand," he said.

"All my wife was trying to do was to correct a misleading budget presentation and make sure the parents had the correct information."

Board member Judy Karp was dismayed by the lack of trust between board members.

"To have this stuff going on at the board level is crippling the district," she said.

Kim Robinson, of Hopewell Township, attended the meeting last Monday and was critical of Mitchell.

"I felt like we were reliving the Spanish Inquisition, with Linda Mitchell serving as the Grand Inquisitor," Robinson said.

"I think the board needs to stop criticizing its own members and focus on the business at hand -- our children's education."

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/14/08, Letter to the Editor, "Interpretations"

To the editor:

I think I have finally figured out what arrives in our mailboxes every Thursday under the guise of a “news”paper. It is a collection of “interpretations.” For example, last week’s HVN contained, among many others, these “facts”: the Princeton Elks are having a St. Patrick’s buffet on March 8 at 7 p.m., and the “U-11 Hot Shots” lost to Robbinsville by a score of 18 to 9. But how do we know that the buffet won’t be on March 7 at 8 p.m., or that the Hot Shots didn’t win by 19 to 8? Surely, we can rely on these and other facts because the local paper understands the difference between a fact and an “interpretation.”

I assume that when the HVN continues to say, week after week, that the decision to direct four primary strings teachers to teach band this year was a hard fiscal necessity, rather than a clear signal that the board and superintendent value the latter and disdain the former, it is because HVN chooses to “interpret” the facts that way. We had the teachers in one place, and they were moved to another, but HVN says we couldn’t afford to leave things as they were, and anyone who questions the decision doesn’t understand the “fiscal realities.” So this coming year, if the district decides to change the job descriptions of the elementary math teachers and make them teach high-school weight-lifting (this is a rumor I just made up, just so readers can see what an honest journalistic disclosure would look like), HVN can print that it’s fiscally selfish for anyone to question this, and all debate can end before it begins. More pointedly, will HVN say we can’t afford not to have new playing fields, when parents question whether our limited funds should be spent on education instead?

In a democracy, people who feel strongly about policies often get outvoted; I count my blessings to live in such a society. But civil back-and-forth can never occur if one side’s policy choices get “reinterpreted” as saving resources, rather than moving resources around -- or in the case of athletics, as “educational adequacy” (the superintendent’s description, not mine).

I look with admiration and awe at the volunteers who devote so much of their time to serving on the board, and I admit that for selfish personal reasons, I cannot make that kind of commitment. But I also can’t imagine how frustrating it must be for board members to be interviewed (or not interviewed, as seems more often to be the case) by a publication that believes all facts that don’t align with its views can be “interpreted” at its pleasure.

I stopped advocating for strings months ago. I have been advocating for good journalism and sensible debate, and I urge readers of the HVN, when election time draws near, to seek out unbiased information about the candidates, from sources who understand the difference between a fact, a belief, and an untruth. Oh, and call first before you show up at any events reported in the weekly “interpretation paper.”

Adam M. Finkel
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/14/08, Letter to the Editor, "The Romance Factor"

To the editor:

Obviously from reading this column last week, school decision-making in “Happy Valley” is not doing too well. The well-documented problems: lack of authentic community involvement, hazardous bus routes unresolved, and program cuts in spite of a surplus.

So why is it so difficult to get a broad-based debate, consideration, and resolution of these citizen concerns? Openly dealing with such issues is inhibited by the training board members receive from the NJ School Boards Association, which traditionally advises that board members should not disagree in public, but march forth as a united team. Otherwise, the organization claims, the school board will be vulnerable. This lack of publicly examining and revisiting all alternatives as well as reducing the costly often fat-laden area of administrative costs by school boards is further complicated by what I call “the romance factor.”

That phrase defines the basic relationship between board members and top school administrators with whom they come in contact most often as they pursue their elected responsibilities.

Examples: the late meetings at night they “suffer” together, the intense free-wheeling committee sessions with rolled up shirt sleeves, the trips to the caffeine dispenser to keep themselves alert during times of crises, the staff-developed report drafts that enable them to accomplish their objectives, the camaraderie before and during their meetings in addition to attendance at workshops, conferences, and retreats.

Such togetherness may not portend well for a very deep look into cutting costs at the top. “We did that last year” might be the first response. Skeptics might view that scenario as a form of “musical chairs.” Revisiting an issue might be “misinterpreted” as an admission by the administration or the board that it erred in the first place.

The question before the school board is how to maintain and enhance the instructional process at the same time reducing the unnecessary brass, bells, and flourishes. Board members might also use this weekly column as an early warning system.

Norm Goldman
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/14/08, Letter to the Editor, "In Ferguson's Defense"

To the editor:

Norm Goldman’s letter of Jan. 31 unfairly attacking the school district and its superintendent is rife with misinformation and I submit this letter as a private citizen to correct the record.

First, he dismisses the dramatic changes that have taken place over the past few years in downsizing central administration as a “game of musical chairs.” This could not be further from the truth. The fact is that Judith A. Ferguson has led the district in a smart plan to restructure and downsize administration in an effort to trim the budget and preserve programs. This reorganization resulted in a net loss of two high-level central office administrative positions and two school-level vice principal positions. These administrative changes alone saved the district well over $300,000 not just this year, but in every succeeding year.

In addition, Dr. Ferguson developed creative solutions to save money by securing new grant money, expanding cost savings with shared services and developing partnerships with organizations such as the Mercer County Vocational Technical School District, Hopewell Township and Hopewell Valley YMCA, to name just a few.

Attacking a superintendent’s salary is an easy, simplistic target to vent taxpayers’ frustrations with a broken state system. Looking to our comparable neighboring districts in the state of New Jersey and in Mercer County, in particular, Dr. Ferguson earns a salary on par with superintendents of her experience. The fact is that there is a dwindling pool of well-qualified superintendent candidates willing to endure the position’s hours and pressures. Surely, Hopewell Valley deserves a highly qualified chief officer to head up the $65 million organization that is our community’s biggest investment, our school system.

It is no accident that when other districts in this area are scrambling to balance their budgets, Hopewell Valley is balancing its budget while maintaining excellence. This is the result of three years of deliberate and intense planning by the Board of Education and the superintendent. Dr. Ferguson’s accomplishments in terms of fiscal prudence and enhancing our programs and facilities are too numerous to mention in one letter, but the positive impact of these changes will benefit this district for years to come.

Judy Karp
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/07/08, "About Busing Cuts"

To the editor:

At a recent school board meeting, members Jim Wulf and Aaron Tellier suggested reinstatement of last year’s hazardous bus routes cut. Unfortunately, their suggestion was shot down by board President Linda Mitchell and Superintendent Judy Ferguson, who both stated they had heard few or no complaints about the cut.

Seriously? Maybe they just don’t read mail (or letters to the HVN , or petitions) that oppose their view.

The majority members of the school board excel not only at ignoring opposing points of view but at spinning stories for the press. The HVN article about the above exchange referred to the axed routes as “non-mandated.” While it is true the routes cut are not “mandated” by state law, they are in a different category called “hazardous.”

Hazardous bus routes are those where the absence of sidewalks or other road conditions make foot or bike travel by children dangerous. Drive to the high school one day on Pennington-Titusville Road and think about a 14-year-old walking down and then up the hill, around the blind curve, in the dark, to get to school by 7:45 a.m.

Do we really want to wait until a child walking a hazardous route gets hit by a car for the majority members of the school board to pay attention to what many of us in the community have been saying all along?

To everyone who voted in the last school board election for the priorities that will make our students safe and well-educated, please, in April, let’s do it again. For more information about this issue, visit www.hvcusp.org.

Amie Rukenstein
Titusville

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/07/08, "Reinstate Cuts"

To the editor:

The current school board continues to cover up problems, avoid the real issues and ignores possible solutions.

Three years ago we saw it with the selection of the superintendent. Parents and teachers were told that they would be part of the selection process. That did not happen. We now have a mediocre superintendent who spends more time with her two consulting companies than addressing real problems in her own district. Two years ago, the board’s busing cuts put the safety of many children at risk. Last year the flag-ship 25 year strings program was demolished with little reasoning and many lame excuses.

What is next? We are currently entering the budget discussion time of the year with a $1.8 million surplus from the previous year. That’s right, a surplus! And yet for two years we have been told that we needed to make painful cuts. Parents have had to foot the bill for givens such as activities and safe busing. In fact, we have had surpluses for the last three years! This is now becoming the districts’ slush fund for special projects.

Isn’t it time to reinstate everything that has been cut? Give the taxpayers some relief? And provide needed capital improvements to the schools?

Jeff Van Order
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 02/07/08, "HVRSD Ignores Community"

To the editor:

Readers of the Hopewell Valley News (HVN) are aware that HVRSD is in the midst of the 2008-2009 budget-planning process. It is my belief that the school board should function as an intermediary between the school administration and taxpayers to ensure that a high-quality and cost-efficient education is delivered.

Unfortunately, anyone who has witnessed a recent school board meeting would be hard-pressed to describe board conduct as anything but dysfunctional. I was pleased to learn that Bill Hills was selected to fill Carl Swanson’s school board position. He claimed to have some technical experience and, unlike the other board members and the school administration, he might have enough competence and knowledge to consider my suggestions that would save millions and definitely enhance the quality of education! After all, wasn’t he selected to rejoin the board because he had budget-planning experience? Didn’t he claim to have the ability to satisfy the numerous district critics? I eagerly await his exhibition of common decency when he responds to one of the multiple e-mails I’ve sent him.

Readers of the HVN also continually hear of the exemplary HVRSD accounting practices. I saw in the 2005-2006 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report that HVRSD spent $7,796,711 from the state of New Jersey, but saw on a state of New Jersey Web site that only $4,136,407 was provided to HVRSD. Without speculation or accusation, I filed an OPRA request to understand this almost $4 million discrepancy. HVRSD Business Administrator Robert Colavita claimed “there are no public records responsive to explaining the difference in state aid.” Should this brief reply be considered a satisfactory fulfillment of my OPRA request?

Lastly, readers of the Hopewell Valley News also are continually reminded of how cost-conscience HVRSD is, e.g., they changed voice providers and saved $56,000! Prior to this change, any parent will recall the multiple pleas from teachers to refrain from leaving voice-mail messages because the phone system operated so poorly. Having realized how much money was being spent on the phone system, I offered some technical assistance to Douglas Brower. Rather than accepting much-needed help or identifying any person responsible for overseeing this problematic telephone system, he replied that, “I don’t work directly with the phone system so I won’t speak to this directly.” Was this smug reply crafted to satisfy a taxpayer? Even if they claim no technical expertise and they represent a school district, isn’t it reasonable to expect any responsible consumer to be able to identify the basic specifications of their telephone service?

Is HVRSD a school district that desires to give the impression that they act responsibly and want community involvement?

I have a doctorate from Yale University in chemical engineering and am a member of Tau Beta Pi, the National Engineering Honor Society.

Brian J. McHugh
Hopewell Township

PENNINGTON STEW, 01/31/08, Editorial, "Busing -- A Non Issue?"

At the Hopewell Valley Regional school board meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 22 school board members Aaron Tellier and James Wulf pushed to have hazardous busing service reinstated.

But members opposed to hazardous busing said that they had not heard enough negative feedback from residents about the cancellation.

I seem to remember that parents were in an uproar over the cancellation of hazardous busing. The Pennington Police even agreed to place an officer at Route 31 and Delaware Avenue during school start and end times to protect the children who are now forced to cross the potentially dangerous intersection.

What do you think about this?

Are Mr. Tellier and Mr. Wulf on to something here, or are Hopewell Valley residents OK with the way busing was handled this year?

Posted by Janine Logue, Pennington Post Editor at 11:53 AM on Jan 25, 2008

COMMENTS:

Citizens United for Safe Passage (CUSP) said...

It is absolutely outrageous that Ms. Mitchell, Judy Karp and others would indicate that they've not heard from parents upset about this issue. One only has to go to www.hvcusp.org and read the countless articles and letters from upset parents therein to see that this is absolutely false. Indeed, Ms. Mitchell herself stated during the recorded School Board session that she has been approached by parents regarding this topic on numerous occasions -- those who recognize that it's a thorny issue, and who (gee, what a surprise), allegedly sympathize with her.

I urge all those who still feel passionately about this topic – so critical to the safety of our children – to send Ms. Mitchell and the other School Board members an email by clicking here.  Let them know that people still care, and that hazardous busing should be reinstated immediately.

If you supported Jim Wulf and Aaron Tellier during the last election precisely because Ms. Mitchell, Ms. Karp and others on the School Board seem unconcerned about the safety of the very people they are sworn to protect -- our children -- then you know what you have to do this election: Vote Karp and the rest of the old guard out.

It’s time for a change...again. Wulf and Tellier can’t do it on their own. They are still a minority and every time they try and raise this issue, they’re shouted down.

Three new School Board members will be voted in this spring. Let’s make sure that they’re the kind of candidates who put our children’s safety first...before new playing fields, bloated legal bills and sweetheart deals for former bureaucrats.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 01/31/08, "Bang For Our Buck?"

To the editor:

Last week’s school board meeting spent only about one hour reviewing three major areas of proposed spending including administration. And the old song about reorganization effecting savings was sung. It’s been mostly a game of musical chairs.

During times of fiscal restraint and overburdening property taxes, and while fixed costs — energy bills, negotiated salary increments, or health care provisions — will be higher, the school board’s work-in-progress should continue to focus directly on the student within that intimate learning experience with the teacher. Obviously, it is administrative overhead that has to be minutely examined.

The imperial superintendency still lives! The negotiated salary for the school superintendent this year is $178,573. Next year she will receive $184,823. A matching tax-deferred annuity provision awards an additional contribution by the district of $9,600 per annum. There are the usual expense items for convention-going as well as $5,000 per year for professional development.

Are we getting enough “bang for our buck?”

In past restructuring, a new expensive administrative position, director of instruction, was created. Such duties were previously conducted by the assistant superintendent of schools. Currently the responsibilities held by the assistant superintendent, an excellent hands-on educator, however, include human resources, which was originally processed by a talented support staffer.

Public relations was handled in the past by the school superintendent who picked up the telephone and was always available to the daily and weekly press. The school budget publication was accomplished with minimal temporary efforts. The current full-time employee, who functions quite creditably in this area, is also responsible for obtaining grants competing with our local parent organizations, parent support groups for high school athletics and music, and the education and recreation foundations.

It would seem logical that the current school superintendent — who also works for the national search firm Hazard, Young, Attea and Associates — might be able to pick up some of the slack in the above-cited administrative areas.

Blockbuster savings are in the utilization of attorneys. Some 12 law firms are currently being paid out of two budget accounts with a total allocation of $420,000. Consolidation might be effective. Also when viewing telecasts of board meetings with the board attorney always present, one asks why can’t critical legal advice be sought by correspondence or if an informal nature be provided by the superintendent, who is a former president of the statewide superintendents organization and still involved in their activities. One hopes the board members continue to dig into the “work-in-progress.”

For dig, they must.

Norm Goldman
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 01/31/08, Editorial -- "School Board Needs Strong Candidates"

EDITORIAL

By Ruth Luse, Managing Editor

On April 15, Hopewell Township registered voters will pick three Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education members who will serve three-year terms.

Hopewell Township residents interested in running for one of the three open seats have until 4 p.m. Feb. 25 to file nominating petitions, which may be picked up from Bob Colavita, board secretary, at the school district administration building, 425 S. Main Street, Pennington.

Board members whose terms expire this year are Edward R. Gainsborg Jr., Judy Karp and Bill Hills. Mr. Hills, appointed in December, is serving the final months of Carl Swanson’s term. Dr. Swanson resigned in November for health reasons.

Of the nine seats on the regional board, seven are Hopewell Township’s. The remaining two seats belong to Hopewell Borough and Pennington. These are not involved in this year’s election.

A would-be candidate must: be at least 18 year old; be a citizen of the United States; be a registered voter in Hopewell Township; be able to read and write; have been a resident of Hopewell Township for at least one year preceding the date of the election; and not be directly/indirectly interested in any contract with or claim against the board.

By law, those who want to file nominating petitions must obtain the signatures of at least 10 qualified voters living in Hopewell Township. One of the names can be the would-be candidate’s own.

School board members are volunteers. They also are state officials. They derive whatever power they have from the state, which is responsible for public education. Those who get it in their heads to run for the board because they want to represent a specific community group or interest should “forget it,” according to “Basic Boardsmanship,” a publication of the New Jersey School Boards Association.

The bottom line of the local school board member’s responsibility is to “ensure that local students meet the educational goals of the state and the community.” In other words, according to “Basic Boardsmanship,” board members “represent the community in its desire to see its children achieve.”

Today, a school board member’s job is difficult and time-consuming. It involves dealing with the innumerable pressures arising from the need to conserve costs in a state whose leaders continue to face a debt that exceeds $33 billion. In facing such fiscal challenges, which trickle down to the local level, school board members often must make hard choices that can adversely affect what some in the community might see as essential offerings. We have seen this happen in the Valley with busing service changes and courses like primary strings, to name just two of the more-discussed issues of recent times.

The job of school board member is for sincere volunteers, whose only remuneration will be the satisfaction of doing a job that must be done well.

We urge those who understand the role board members play and those who sincerely want to serve to come forth as candidates this year. We need you!

PENNINGTON POST, 01/30/08, "School Board Split on Hazardous Busing Issue"

The HVRSD Board of Education has postponed a decision on whether or not they will reinstate hazardous busing for students.

By R. Kurt Osenlund; Correspondent

Following a warm send-off for recently retired Board member Carl Swanson, the Hopewell Valley Board of Education commenced the second of four 2008-09 Budget presentations, as part of their Jan. 22 meeting. The main focus of the meeting was on hazardous busing.

Throughout the district, there have long been three types of busing services provided. However, recent changes made to the transportation policies have forced some of those services to be cut or reduced.

Courtesy busing, a non-mandated program that once served all students living within two miles from any of the district's six schools, was proposed to be eliminated district-wide in the spring of 2006. The action took effect the following September.

More recently, hazardous busing, which served students living less than two and a half miles from school but encountering potentially dangerous conditions in their commute, was also axed for those students in grades 6-12.

That action was put in place at the start of the 2007-08 school year, after a decision was made last March.

These students are now expected to walk to school, provide their own means of transportation or pay a fee of $150 per seat to receive busing.

Mandated busing, a service that caters to all students living beyond the two-mile mark (and is the only service ever to be funded by the state), remains intact.

Although the removal of the unsubsidized programs has significantly reduced bus routes and saved the district hundreds of thousands of dollars, the issue of busing sparked a bit of controversy when it was brought up at the meeting.

Certain Board members, including Aaron Tellier and James Wulf, expressed an interest in having the hazardous busing service reinstated.

"It's my strong feeling," Tellier said, "…to try to find a way to fund Hazardous busing this year."

Wulf, who was very vocal on the topic, raised the question of whether or not it would be practical to begin providing additional in-house service as opposed to outsourcing (the district currently has 81 contracted bus routes and 34 in-house routes).

While Colavita confirmed that a study regarding such had not been conducted (citing that the district currently "lacks the facilities to store the buses"), Hopewell Valley Superintendant Judith Ferguson was quick to give Wulf a response.

"Most districts that have studied [in-house busing services] have determined that it's better to outsource," Ferguson said. "It's not so much a question of quality, as it is cost."

While the matter of forcing certain parents to pay for busing out of pocket was considerable, both Teiller's and Wulf's major concern was student safety.

"I feel very strongly on the safety issue," Wulf said during a brief recess. "I'm worried about people having to cross [Route] 31, and children having to walk across 50 mph roads."

Not all Board members shared Wulf's and Tellier's viewpoint, and many felt that there hadn't been enough negative community feedback to restore the busing program.

Board president Linda Mitchell stated that most parents expressed to her a reasonable understanding. "I've had people that say, 'we don't love it, but we get it, '" she said.

After much additional discussion and deliberation, no definitive decision was made to bring back the service, and the Board concluded that the issue would be discussed in greater length at a later date.

Other key focal points of discussion were the school district's central office and maintenance, as presented by Business Administrator and Board Secretary Robert Colavita.

The next Board meeting is scheduled for Feb. 11, when budget topics of curriculum, athletics and staffing will be discussed.

Additional information can be found by logging on to: http://www.hvrsd.k12.nj.us/district/.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 01/24/08, "School Board Begins Budget Negotiations"

When finalized, spending plan will go to voters April 15

By John Tredrea, Staff Writer

With school district elections less than three months away, the Hopewell Valley school board spent over an hour Tuesday night discussing three areas of its work-in-progress 2007-2008 spending plan.

Those areas are administration, facilities and transportation. Other areas of the 2008-2009 budget will be discussed in depth at board meetings in upcoming weeks.

April 15 is the date school district elections will be held statewide. On that day, voters will choose school board members and approve or reject budgets. A public hearing must be held on the school budget proposal before it can be submitted to voters on election day.

On Tuesday, district Business Administrator/Board Secretary Robert Colavita said that, in the area of administration, the current draft of the proposed 2008-2990 spending plan calls for expenditure of $2,155,405. That’s $588,381, or 21.4 percent, less than the 2007-2008 adjusted budged and $42,454, or 1.9 percent, less than the 2007-2008 adopted budget.

Administrative reorganization during the past year accounts for much of the savings in this area, Mr. Colavita and Superintendent Judith A. Ferguson said. The adjusted budget figures, required by state law, take into account goods and services paid for by the district but not yet received.

The proposed facilities budget is $5,887,849, Mr. Colavita said. This is $706,371, or 10.7 percent, less than the 2007-2008 adjusted budget and $276,081, or 4.9 percent, more than the 2007-2008 adopted budget. Included in this year’s proposed facilities spending plan is $500,000 for replacement of a portion of the roof at Bear Tavern Elementary School.

The proposed transportation budget is $4,024,798. This is $30,324, or 0.7 percent, less than the 2007-2008 adjusted budget and $8,033, or 0.2 percent less, than the 2007-2008 adopted budget.

The district saved $209,692 this year by making policy changes in grades six-12 busing not required by state law. Under those changes, families who want that busing must pay part of the cost.

On Tuesday, board members Jim Wulf and Aaron Tellier said the board and administration should investigate the possibility of having the district pay for all this busing again. Mr. Tellier said he has heard comments to that effect “from more than a handful” of district parents.

"We’ve had very few complaints," responded Dr. Ferguson on the nonmandated busing issue.

Board President Linda Mitchell said she has heard no complaints at all. She asked the board if any other members had heard any complaints about the busing changes. No other board members said they had.

PERSONNEL MOVES approved unanimously by the Hopewell Valley school board Monday night included:

• Granting a family leave of absence to Stony Brook Elementary teacher Lesley Moore, effective April 23.
• Granting a family leave of absence to Timberlane teacher Kristine Burns, effective Jan. 22.
• Approval of the following substitute teachers for 2007-2008: Eric Bradshaw, Kathleen Dougherty, Winne Fitzgerald, Kathleen George, Carey Higgins and Jo-Ann Marie Sciarrotta.
• Approval of Angela Drake as a substitute nurse for 2007-2008.
• Approval of the following student teachers for the 2007-2008 spring semester:
  • Joseph Luccio of Rider University, at Timberlane Middle School.
  • Vina Barnes of Rider University at Timberlane Middle School.
  • Heidi Haldeman of Rutgers College of Nursing at Hopewell Elementary.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 11/08/07, Letter to the Editor, "Where Is The Holiday Celebrations Report?"

To the editor:

Catalogs focusing on holiday gifts appropriate for my grandchildren have arrived. Our local drug store has had a display adjacent to its cash registers for quite a while offering pre-Christmas season buys (and shelves are still stacked with leftover Halloween goodies).

So a key community-based question comes to mind: Where is the report and subsequent policy deliberations on holiday celebrations and related issues in our public schools responding to last December’s administrative “ineptness?” This is not rocket science. Case law points the way. Americans United for Separation of Church and States has historically monitored such litigation.

As a supporter of Americans United, here is a quick rundown of what can and cannot take place. Of course, our schools may acknowledge cultural aspects of religious holidays. We teach about them objectively. As for those concerts, religious music along with secular selections may be included.

But, we do not celebrate holidays in a way that promotes religion.

When it comes to student assemblies, we may not sponsor programs that feature prayer or other religious activity. And as we have known for decades, schools may not sponsor prayer, Bible reading or others forms of worship. (Students have the right to pray in a nondisruptive way on their own time. As the venerated bromide goes: as long as we have testing in schools, we will have praying.)

Yes, the Bible can be taught objectively as part of a course on world religions and the role of religion in history also can be taught as long as it is presented in a fair manner absent dogmatic pronouncements.

As for religious clubs, the emphasis is on secondary school students forming religious clubs that meet during “noninstructional” time. They are run by students, not school personnel. However, allowing religious clubs means that other noncurriculum groups, such as gay-straight alliances and nonreligious clubs, must also be permitted.

Our schools need not be “religion free” as long as we avoid sponsoring or promoting religious activity.

Norm Goldman
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 11/01/07, Letter to the Editor, "Weeks, Swanson Get Response"

To the editor:

Last week’s letters by Melissa Weeks and Carl Swanson have an important feature in common, beyond their mutual attempts to “blame the victims” of the growing rift between the school board and the community . . . the utter absence of any facts to support their insults. According to Ms. Weeks, the news reports about John Nemeth’s consulting contract contain “baseless accusations using distorted facts,” and according to Dr. Swanson, the reporters and concerned citizens have not “sought to learn the economic benefit of the arrangement.”

Two simple questions: “baseless” how? and “economic benefit” in what way? I still have no idea if there is a sensible defense to the concerns that the contract was imprudent, suspicious, or illegal, simply because no one from the board or its chorus of cheerleaders has offered a single fact in support of the expenditure. Surely Dr. Swanson doesn’t mean by “economic benefit” the nonsensical “fuzzy math” offered up two weeks ago, to the effect that “anything we spend having saved money elsewhere is a good deal.”

The attempts to engender pity (Dr. Swanson) and the venom directed against people seeking information (Ms. Weeks) look exactly like the tactics of people with something to hide, and are making it harder and harder to believe the next “explanation” offered up. If there are good reasons—not silly “spin”—why we should believe the consulting money was well spent, now is the time to stop making baseless accusations of your own and explain them. If Ms. Weeks really wants to live somewhere where people who request public records (at their own expense) get punished for doing so, I’m sure there are some nice properties for sale in North Korea.

Adam M. Finkel
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 11/01/07, Letter to the Editor, "The Nemeth Contract"

To the editor:

According to John Nemeth’s contract found on www.hvcusp.org, Mr. Nemeth should be providing, on a monthly basis to the full board a report of his hours to the nearest one-tenth of an hour. His monthly payments must be approved by the full board.

Have these requirements been fulfilled? I see nothing in the minutes or agendas upholding these conditions. Mr. Nemeth has already been working for four months! Who is providing oversight of the $12,000 per month that we are paying Mr. Nemeth?

Hopewell Valley deserves to know why when programs are cut, the administration and board is handing out thousands to a “retired” employee without any oversight. It seems no one on the board really read this important contract.

Furthermore, Jim Wulf did contact the board attorney regarding his concerns about Mr. Nemeth’s contract and his concerns were ignored. At some point, the board must take responsibility for its lack of oversight and dismissive attitude when contracts are handed out at our children’s and the taxpayers’ expense.

Claudia Olswfski
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/25/07, Letter to the Editor, "Harmful Story"

To the editor:

The recent character assassination and school board-bashing by another area newspaper, of a retiring school administrator at the Hopewell Valley school district, for accepting a request by his previous employer to close out some complex referendum projects after his retirement, is an unfortunate example of pandering to an easy stereotype, that of citizen outrage over public officials engaging in “double dipping,” benefiting from multiple government employment and conflict of interest activities.

This one-sided coverage of the situation has tarnished the reputation of a career public servant without seeking to learn the economic benefit of the arrangement to the public schools concerned, as well as to the taxpayers of the district. By relying primarily on the complaints of an outspoken critic of the school board and that person’s generalizations about public concerns over the situation, in its coverage, its editorial and an editorial cartoon, that newspaper has practiced careless and harmful journalism, not befitting a newspaper’s responsibility as a watchdog of good government. I believe that kind of coverage of a public issue contributes to the polarized, anger-driven kind of debate that has come to dominate much of political discourse today.

Carl Swanson
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/25/07, Letter to the Editor, "Wulf's Misbehavior"

To the editor:

For those who live in Hopewell Township, and haven’t been watching the school district’s Channel 19, you really should. At the school board’s Oct. 8 meeting, numerous board members voiced their frustration with Jim Wulf for discussing with the press what he had not first brought before the board. Many at the table were blindsided by sensational headlines that we found in recent papers. Several members of the board asked Mr. Wulf to follow a Code of Ethics they had all agreed to. Mr. Wulf’s response was that the board had “brought it on themselves.” He also stated that he hasn’t agreed to all that the other board members think he has agreed to.

Mr. Wulf said he came on the board “hoping to build consensus,” and yet his actions do not support these words. While he is certainly entitled to his opinions and should vote his conscience, Mr. Wulf also has a responsibility to respect the board and the processes that allow for appropriate discussion and decision-making.

Our children deserve a school board focused on the serious issues at hand, and not to be distracted by an individual board member’s misbehavior.

Debbie Noyes
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/25/07, Letter to the Editor, "Wasting District's Time"

To the editor:

Public records show that there are ongoing multiple OPRA (Open Public Records Act) requests being made to our school district for meeting minutes, bus routes, contracts, curriculum documents and various other information by one person, Rhona Wulf, wife of Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education member, Jim Wulf.

The administrative offices are spending untold time and effort gathering and copying this information for Mrs. Wulf. Interestingly, baseless accusations using distorted facts from these records continue to show up in the newspapers.

It appears the Wulfs either have a personal agenda or are running a political smear campaign. Either motive is counterproductive to tackling the important issues concerning our children’s’ education. Mr. Wulf needs to roll up his sleeves, learn what his responsibilities are as a board member, and leave the swift-boat tactics for April, if he must.

Melissa Weeks
Hopewell Township

TRENTON TIMES, 10/21/07, Letter to the Editor, "Wishing For Greater Fiscal Responsibility"

To the editor:

I read with interest The Times' article, "For some, retirement is revolving door" (Oct. 7), regarding "consulting" fees paid to retired school administrators. Mentioned was the award of a contract to former Hopewell Valley school business administrator John Nemeth, in the sum of $72,000, to close out "existing business." Wouldn't it make sense to use the money for other options that would directly benefit the classroom, such as re taining an excellent music teacher and maintaining the strings program or putting the money toward reducing activity fees?

I can only imagine that there are a host of other deserving programs that could have benefited, but won't, because of the misuse of tax dollars. It is a normative fallacy to suggest that this practice is OK "because other districts do it." I am sure that I am not alone in wishing for responsible governance of our hard-earned tax dollars. I hope that the school board will show more restraint in the future and set a new tone that is more critical of these superfluous contracts.

Lars P. Wendt
Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/18/07, Letter to the Editor, "School Board Strikes Out"

To the editor:

Monday night (Oct. 8) was an eventful, adrenaline-filled night for the Hopewell Valley school board. “Sports game?” you ask. No. They held an agenda meeting. “Boring,” you say? Not this time. This time the agenda meeting had a very special agenda — the public degradation, derision, and overall thrashing of board member Jim Wulf.

The board attorney and other members were very organized in their attack; in fact it was a real team effort. Robert Martinez was first at bat, followed by Kevin Doran and Judy Karp, with Jeff Bartolino batting cleanup. Their hits were all over the place, and each one was decidedly foul.

Mr. Martinez blamed Mr. Wulf for the “negative effect of attracting regulatory attention.” Interesting. I usually find that people who view necessary government oversight as “negative” are those who either disrespect our government or those who have something to hide. Mr. Bartolino spouted terms like “crusade” and “much ado about nothing,” while Mr. Doran asked: “What are you going to cry wolf on next Jim?” Mr. Doran, your choice of question implies that Mr. Wulf’s current and future concerns have no merit. I’d say that’s pretty presumptuous on your part, and I believe the public would prefer that experts make those judgment calls.

When Aaron Tellier, the relief pitcher, motioned that the game be over and the board get back to work, the motion was voted down, and Mrs. Karp again stepped up to the plate to say that Mr. Wulf’s methods were not good for the taxpayers. What a sad, sad commentary on the current mental state of the majority of our school board.

But “Why was Mr. Wulf being battered?” Very simple. He told the truth. He told the truth to the school board, to the public, and yes, even to the press. The truth that former Business Administrator John Nemeth was granted a very lucrative and possibly illegal consulting contract. The truth that, even if legal, this contract makes no fiscal sense for the school district, especially in light of recent cuts to programs and services. And the truth that the Hopewell Valley public is not very happy about it.

Now get your ice-cold beer ready for this one. Mr. Martinez also stated that Mr. Nemeth had told him of his “desire to enter the consulting business, with multiple clients.” Does this mean that we will be seeing more no-bid contracts for Mr. Nemeth in the future? That this six-month stint is not the one-time contract we were pitched as necessary to “transition” Mr. Nemeth’s knowledge to his deputy of the past five years? How very nice for Mr. Nemeth. For the taxpayers? Not so much.

Mr. Wulf, the public applauds you. Although greatly outnumbered, you continue to stand strong in the truth, and as far as I’m concerned, you are pitching a no-hitter.

Kim Robinson, Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/18/07, Letter to the Editor, "Good News Overlooked"

To the editor:

Recent press coverage on the topic of state pensions has spilled over to Hopewell Valley, and muddied the rationale for the decision by the school board to hire John Nemeth as a six-month consultant.

Unfortunately, the good news for local taxpayers and those interested in efficient school district governance has been generally overlooked. The important financial details that need to be restated are:

1. Bob Colavita replaced John Nemeth as the school district’s business administrator at a savings of $27,089.
2. The position of assistant business administrator was downgraded to that of a comptroller, creating a savings of $30,300. These two actions created a reduction of $57,389 in reoccurring costs.
3. Additionally, during the current budget year, the administrative position of director of instruction was eliminated. These responsibilities were absorbed by existing administrative staff, representing another reoccurring cost savings of $122,893.

The school board could have contracted another professional as the needed short-term consultant. But, it seemed illogical to spend money and time bringing an outside professional to the district to provide the consulting services that Mr. Nemeth was most equipped to do. Mr. Nemeth also was the ideal individual to mentor our new business administrator, who had been asked to perform his new duties without the support of an assistant, as had been the former structure.

Last April, the board wisely chose to initiate these cost savings while supporting the reduction in staff with a short-term and knowledgeable consultant. We relied on the research and advice of our board counsel, who assured the board of the appropriateness of such an agreement with a former employee. We are eager to have this issue settled by the state pension board review, and as always, we will continue to be fiscally responsible stewards of the school district upon which our children depend.

Linda Mitchell, president, chairwoman, Policy Committee; Kevin Doran, vice president, chairman, Finance Committee, Valley school board

And the Comments posted at the Hopewell Valley News site that follow...

John Maloney wrote on Oct 22, 2007 4:53 PM:
"Check out Nemeth's contract at www.hvcusp.org. Reading it really makes you wonder!"

Roxane Douvos wrote on Oct 22, 2007 3:17 PM:
"Mr. Bruno, though you no longer serve on the school board, can you explain what "manage the financial transition of the school" means? And can you tell us why Nemeth alone is required to do that? While I agree that infrastructure (I'm presuming that's the word you meant to use) is important, the school district is not a corporation that has the funds available to afford a lengthy and luxurious transition. As a former public servant, it is nice that you are trying to engage in dialogue about this, as our current school board is not. As for whether or not they're doing the best job they can: I'd like to think so, but based on the lack of responsiveness to the public I witnessed throughout the budget season (a whole lot of rudeness and arrogance in addition to a blunt refusal to answer questions or engage in meaningful dialogue), I disagree. Kim Newport was ousted for it. I'm not a betting person, but if I were, my chips would not be down for any other than the new guys (Tellier and Wulf) who understand well what public service means. Every question I've asked has been responded to by them, and I'm not even their constituent as I live in Pennington Boro. My rep, Kevin Doran, has never returned an e-mail. I come from a political family, some of whom are high-ranking, and I've never seen such arrogace and disinterest in public participation -- especially considering this is a small-town type community, that's really inexcusable and unforgivable!"

Adam Finkel wrote on Oct 22, 2007 10:28 AM:
"Mr Bruno: thanks for putting this discussion back on a sensible plane after you turned it ugly the other day. I appreciate that you now realize that the original letter we are all commenting on was ridiculous, and that the Nemeth contract in no way "saved" any money. It *might* be worth $72K to have the "smooth transition", but no one on the Board (or among their chorus line) has addressed this yet, preferring to make arguments any eight-year old could see right through. I look forward to the beginning of a grown-up discussion about what we all just bought with our taxes. There is no conflict between knowing a lot about academic subjects and knowing a lot about "instructure" (infrastructure?)-- some of us are quite good at both. Perhaps you are right that the volunteers are "trying to do the best job they can." If so, I find that profoundly depressing given the results of their efforts. If they worked for you at Rodale, would you re-hire them?"

Michael bruno wrote on Oct 22, 2007 8:38 AM:
"My point is very simple. The school board kept John Nemeth on to manage the financial transition of the school and complete some projects that were in the hopper. Companies hire retirees all the time for project work. My understanding is fireman and police retire constantly; then they find new positions while collecting pensions. I value teaching quite a bit; but you also need an instructure to manage an organization. As to my qualifications, I am a SVP with a global media company. Master's degree from Columbia and worked previously at GE and PepsiCo. I served on the school board for four years. While you may disagree with some of their decisions, these are volunteers trying to do the best job they can."

Brian J. Mc Hugh wrote on Oct 19, 2007 9:44 PM:
"Or is this the Michael Bruno that wrote the letter-to-the-editor at school board election time where he claimed some uncanny gift to judge a candidate's qualifications? Didn't your wife claim that every community member she knew was upset that Jim Wulf gave his honest feelings to the Trenton Times about John Nemeth's secret consulting agreement? Where are they? Why were they upset?"

Brian J. Mc Hugh wrote on Oct 19, 2007 9:05 PM:
"Is this the same Michael Bruno that was on the HVRSD School Board? It's all starting to make sense... some people have never heard that people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones?"

Roxane Douvos wrote on Oct 19, 2007 8:23 PM:
"Since Nemeth provided ample notice of his departure, any transition needs could have been handled during his remaining days as an employee. I've worked at high levels of education (at a little school called Yale, Mr. Bruno -- and my graduate degree is from Columbia) and have NEVER seen someone be paid $72G to aid in a transition from his former job. It is wrong, and the school board knows it. Further, it is very telling that our school board chose to spend cost savings on making their own lives easier and not on teaching. Of course, the fact that they don't value teaching is evident in their inability to negotiate contracts with our teachers -- the best of whom, I expect, will soon be looking for jobs in districts that value them. The problem with the school board (and apparently with Michael Bruno, whoever you are -- noting that you did not provide YOUR qualifications) is that they think we're stupid. I predict their self-destruction as a result (evidence: Kim Newport)."

Adam Finkel wrote on Oct 19, 2007 5:52 PM:
"What a pathetic ad hominem response by Michael Bruno. I would not mind the sarcasm if he had first demonstrated that he had anything worthwile to say about the issue, but apparently not. All I was trying to say, in words even an MBA could understand, is that if you "save" money with one decision, and then spend money on a second decision, the only sensible way to judge the second choice is what you spent for what you got. To make it even simpler, if I buy a suit that has been marked down from $500 to $200, have I "saved" $300? I hope Mr Bruno understands that the correct answer is "no-- I have spent $200 and MAY have gotten a good deal, depending on what the suit is worth." Read the letter I am responding to, and ask yourself what the lower salary of Nemeth's replacement has to do with whether giving Nemeth a no-bid contract to do [something, unspecified and undefended] was a good idea or not. BTW, I have a Ph.D. and ran two very large federal agencies. I would gladly put my credentials up against Mr Bruno's, but I'm more interested in whether he has the cojones to address the actual question without name-calling. I bet not."

Brian J. Mc Hugh wrote on Oct 19, 2007 3:23 PM:
"I consider myself very competent and would be willing to discuss my insights, but I submitted my comments to expose the incompetence of the school district. Is anyone willing to defend their decisions or explain their mathematical logic concerning cost-efficiency?"

Brian J. Mc Hugh wrote on Oct 19, 2007 3:09 PM:
"Why would anyone assume an MBA would be needed to develop efficient and cost effective processes? While working for Bell Laboratories and Lucent Technologies, I developed plans to introduce equipment into the AT&T Switched Network. After the plans (which involved operations system requirements and organizational task assignment) received complete approval by surviving several rounds of scrutinous review, I was recruited to join AT&T and implement the plans. The plans saved AT&T more than $300 million per year… and all I have is a Ph.D"

Michael Bruno wrote on Oct 19, 2007 2:23 PM:
"Interesting comments by Mr. Finkel and Mr. McHugh. Can you elaborate on your experience running organizations and process management/cost efficiency. Have you reorganized organizations and re-engineered product groups. Just wondering about your depth and experience knowledge. I am assuming you have MBA's and have worked in Fortune 500 companies in order to have gained your insights."

Adam Finkel wrote on Oct 18, 2007 4:44 PM:
"Good comment-- except of course it's even worse than that. The "company" here saved $57,000 in light-bulb-screwing-in costs, but then promptly spent $72K more outsourcing the light-bulb-screwing function! (the admirable $122K savings in the curriculum department is about as relevant to the Nemeth contract as is the savings on the proverbial tea in China). Why do these people (rhetorical question) make everything so convoluted? The "savings" by replacing a senior retiree with a more junior person have nothing to do with this issue. Is $72K to Nemeth a good use of $72K? Simple question; simple answer awaited. [I suspect the answer may well be "yes"-- you'd just never know because the Board was too busy bloviating about being "blindsided" to think about what it was buying and why.]"

Brian J. Mc Hugh wrote on Oct 18, 2007 3:47 PM:
"If a publicly-owned firm which had employed ten people to screw in a light bulb devises a new plan which reduces the number of people required to screw in a light bulb by two, should the public rejoice that the firm is committed to cost-effectively screwing in light bulbs? I guess (because no one would want their child stranded in the dark), the firm could say the redundancy is vital."

THE NEW YORK TIMES, NJ Section, 10/14/07, "An Ethics Syllabus"

Something has been overlooked in all the furor about official corruption in New Jersey. There is one plan, partially in effect, that could lead to reform.

When he was governor, Richard Codey initiated requirements imposing ethics standards on officials and employees of the executive branch of state government.

An executive order required them to take ethics courses, online and in person. They were given clearly written ethics guides. A toll-free number, 888-223-1355, was made available so that citizens could point out ethics violations. And a State Ethics Commission, composed of more private citizens than public officials, was established to hear complaints. It has recently been given tough enforcement powers.

The problem is that these requirements cover only the executive branch, even though they were originally designed to cover all governmental bodies in the state. As a result, the Legislature, county and municipal governments, and local school boards are covered by a hodgepodge of regulations of their own devising.

Local officials, for example, get no ethics training unless it is required by the individual town or county, which is rare.

Legislators and their employees get an ethics guide and are offered training online, but they do not have to take it. (Under a bill awaiting Gov. Jon Corzine’s signature, legislators would have to receive ethics training starting next year.) School board members and some administrators are provided training by their professional organization.

Interestingly, most of the recent federal indictments of government officials involved legislators and local officials rather than members of the executive department or school boards.

The Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers and others have proposed that the executive branch’s standards be extended to all governmental bodies in the state and that enforcement powers be given to the State Ethics Commission. The newly elected Legislature that convenes in January should adopt such a proposal. Ethics training should be mandatory for all local officials, school board members, and legislators, and the same standards should cover all public officials in the state.

Ingrid Reed, a director at Eagleton, has pointed out that common ethical standards and training would not deter those intent on breaking the law. But they would help those officials who are unaware of the nuances of ethical standards, or are easily conned by unscrupulous colleagues and outsiders wanting favors.

On their own, a common set of ethical standards, guidebooks and training would not assure cleaner government. But they would impress on officials and employees of all governmental bodies that their job is to serve the public, not themselves or their relatives.

TRENTON TIMES, 10/09/07, Editorial, "Essential Arts"

When parents send their children to school each morning they can expect that their child will be instructed in math, English, science and other basic components of a traditional education. At the same time, far too many parents in the state cannot be certain that their child will have classes in all four areas of the arts -- dance, music, theatre and visual art -- as mandated by the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards. While the New Jersey curriculum standards are among the most comprehensive in the nation when it comes to the arts, it is lacking terms of full implementation. The New Jersey Arts Education Census Project's report released in September found that more than 75,000 students in the state have no access to any arts education in their schools. That's a situation that needs correcting now.

According to the New Jersey Core Curriculum Standards Web site, an arts education is essential for "the achievement of human, social and economic growth." Still, 19 percent of schools do not yet meet the arts core curriculum standards. Only 3 percent of elementary schools in the state offer an education in all four areas of the arts. Despite those poor statistics, Mercer and Burlington County schools were generally ranked high for arts education, with the Bordentown Regional School District, Hopewell Valley Regional School District, Princeton Regional School District and Lawrence School District ranked among the top 10 percent of arts education providers in the state. No schools in Mercer County received a ranking of low, however many only achieved an average ranking.

Studies have shown that arts education helps increase tolerance among young students and a willingness on their part to accept others. Arts are also an excellent outlet for students who might other wise have little or no way of expressing themselves as individuals. Still, there are skeptics. They believe the arts, while beneficial, don't rank in importance anywhere near traditional subjects. Studies, however, have shown that an education in the arts helps increase a student's performance in other subjects -- for example there is a direct link between taking music and doing better in math.

The census report offers several recommendations that would further help arts education in New Jersey. First is to review the schools that have no access to arts education and come up with a strategic plan to help those schools implement such an education into their curriculum. Arts related agencies and organizations might help these schools along through offering grants and guiding policies. New Jersey is leading the nation when it comes to arts education yet there is still plenty of room for growth and improvement, especially when comparing schools in different economic areas. An education in the arts is an important part of a complete education and is necessary to produce well rounded, tolerant and creative students.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/11/07, Letter to the Editor, "Tone Deaf?"

To the editor:

Last week’s tone-deaf remark that “Historically, American parents . . . have managed to secure musical instrument lessons for their children” makes me wonder what kind of community my family and I have recently settled in. As many of us said publicly last spring, we would gladly pay for music lessons if their elimination made any fiscal or educational sense, but we were concerned more about the message this sends our youngest children: Learning to play an instrument is something you do after, not as part of, a long school day. But to those in our community struggling to make ends meet, Sally Turner’s comment adds class warfare to the list of possible explanations for the district’s behavior, and merits an apology.

More of us would find it “time to move on” if more of the district’s sycophants would stop repeating the tired falsehoods. We really do understand that there will be no violin instruction for grades 2 and 3, no promised fee-based program at the YMCA, and that the promised new science curriculum involves “filling the time.” We also have understood from the beginning that moving the music staff around to eliminate Strings and expand band instruction saves not a single penny, so our “imperiled” district had all the resources it needed to continue to provide an award-winning music program—as well as golden parachutes for its own (Trenton Times, Oct. 7).

Perhaps it is too harsh to conclude that the defenders are trapped by their lies, rather than garden-variety confusion and incompetence. If the other side has anything new to say, I invite comments on the Website www.hopeforhopewell.wordpress.com. Otherwise, we will “move on” to address one point of agreement: the curriculum is indeed “imperiled,” but personnel changes, not instructions to “let them eat cake,” are the remedy.

Adam Finkel
Hopewell Township

TRENTON TIMES, 10/09/07, "Consulting Deal Raises Questions"

By Robert Stern

Questions about the Hopewell Valley Regional school board's decision in April to allow former Business Administrator John Nemeth to retire, collect pension benefits and award him a six-month consulting contract have prompted the board to look into hiring special legal counsel.

The board voted unanimously to consider school district attorney Robert Martinez's recommendation that an attorney who specializes in the state's pension and tax rules be brought in to review if Nemeth's $72,000 consulting contract complies with the state's pension regulations.

Martinez and several school board members emphasized that the possibility of tapping an independent attorney doesn't mean that either Martinez or the board as a whole now thinks Nemeth's consulting contract violates state pension regulations. Rather, it would be meant to reassure the board, Martinez and the public that there was nothing improper or illegal about the board's decision to let Nemeth retire only to tap him as a special consultant for six months through December, Martinez and board Vice President Kevin Doran said.

Martinez said he stands by his own legal advice and review of state pension regulations, which the board relied on when it approved Nemeth's consulting contract during its public meeting on April 16. That vote was unanimous.

But last week, the contract came under scrutiny when The Times was preparing a report on it that was published Sunday. Jim Wulf, a board member who was elected the day after the board's April 16 decision on Nemeth, said in Sunday's article that the decision to pay Nemeth retirement benefits and a consulting contract "doesn't sit well in the community."

In large part due to the fact that Wulf's criticism indicates that at least one board member seems to question the reliability of Martinez's assessment that the contract with Nemeth would be appropriate and legal, Martinez said he is recusing himself from giving the board further advice on this issue.

Doran and several other board members also publicly chastised Wulf for not discussing his concerns about the matter with his colleagues or other board members before commenting to the press on it.

Since July 1, Nemeth, who was not at last night's meeting, has been paid more than $18,500 per month in consulting fees and pension. He has been working for the district in part to help the transition with the new business administrator and in part to advise on facilities planning and possible referendum next year.

TRENTON TIMES, 10/07/07, "When Retirements Seems Like a Revolving Door"

Ex-Public Workers Return With Lucrative Consulting Deals

by Darryl R. Isherwood

Just hours before voters narrowly approved a budget that cut programs and upped fees, board members in the regional school district quietly okayed a consulting contract for a retiring official who also would collect pension benefits.

Since July 1, former Business Administrator John Nemeth has been paid $12,000 per month, a total of more than $18,500 per month in salary and pension benefits, from a deal approved in an April 16 closed session board meeting.

Nemeth, a 15-year employee of the district, is among an unknown number of public employees who have retired from their positions and then returned to lucrative consulting deals, while drawing pensions from the state system.

Officials come across about a dozen cases per year, said treasury spokesman Mark Perkiss, and the legality of each is decided on a case- by-case-basis.

Nemeth's deal, which runs for six months, could potentially put the former administrator at odds with state pension authorities if it is determined he is doing the same job he retired from in July.

Two high profile cases have been raised lately in Rahway and at the state level. In both instances, the state Division of Pensions ruled that the consultant should have been considered an employee and has ordered the repayment of pension benefits.

In Hopewell, where Nemeth's contract was unanimously approved by the school board, quiet opposition has begun to fester.

One new board member elected in April is raising questions about the contract in light of the district's financial troubles that have forced officials to charge fees for sports and busing and eliminate some programs. "This doesn't sit well in the community," said school board member Jim Wulf, who was elected the day after Nemeth's contract was approved. "We are cutting programs and charging for busing and given all of these reasons we can't afford things and then this is going on behind the scenes."

A SMOOTH TRANSITION
This school year, the district began charging $100 per child at Hopewell Central High School and $50 per child at Timberlane Middle School to participate in certain extracurricular activities, including most sports, student council and jazz band.

The district is also charging students for busing not mandated by the state.

Nemeth did not return calls for comment, but a school board member defended the hiring, saying it was necessary to ensure an easy transition once Nemeth retired.

"As a board it got full support for all of the right reasons, which is to create a smooth transition of a long service employee," said board member Kevin Doran. "The consulting agreement was simply to deal with helping to close out things he is intimately involved in as an administrator. This is a good management practice. I didn't find any concern or issue as a board member and neither did the rest of the board."

An attorney for the school board also defended the hiring, saying he sees no issue with the contract from a pension standpoint. "When the contract was negotiated in early spring I went back to the Division of Pensions regulations and checked the tests they use for independence and at the time I felt he was independent and I still believe so," said attorney Robert Martinez. "I also understood that the district's auditor reviewed the agreement as part of his year-end audit and also approved it. I'm not aware of any issue surrounding the contract."

The contract signed by Nemeth outlines six job responsibilities including close-out of construction projects, labor negotiations, implementation of inter-local agreements regarding student transportation, facilities planning and administrative consultation. It is unclear how many of those duties Nemeth performed while business administrator, but Wulf said as a consultant the former employee is doing roughly 30 to 50 percent of his former job responsibilities.

In July, the district promoted former Assistant Business Administrator Robert Colavita to fill Nemeth's shoes at a salary of about $30,000 less than Nemeth made at his retirement. In addition, a spokeswoman for the district said overall, administration costs went down after a restructuring when Nemeth and another long-term employee left.

DEAL NOT UNIQUE
Nemeth's consulting deal, which is set to expire on Dec. 31, is not unique to Hopewell Valley.

A small handful are discovered each year through tips and media accounts and all are looked at on their own merits, Perkiss said. It's an issue, Perkiss said, when the consulting job is made up of the same work as the contractor's former position.

"When we become aware of these situations, we will make a case by case determination of whether the relationship is correctly classified as a contractor -vendor, or should more appropriately be deemed an employee-employer relationship," Perkiss said. "If someone comes back and is doing the same work they did before, that raises the question."

Similar issues have been raised locally in the Trenton fire and police departments when paid chiefs have retired to take positions as civilian directors. In the case of former Fire Department Chief Dennis Keenan, the courts ruled that his duty as a civilian director was different than his duties as chief and allowed him to keep his pension.

Police and fire officials draw their pensions from a different state system than education officials. Municipal workers also have their own pension fund, but all are administered by the state Division of Pensions.

A 2006 report by the NJ state Commission of Investigation (SCI) detailed the practice as one of many abuses practiced regularly by school administrators.

In a section of the SCI's 165-page report titled "Taxpayers Beware: What You Don't Know Can Cost You," investigators cite consulting deals as a form of severance package often used to pad an employee's compensation. The report, which was sent to every school district in the state when it was issued in March 2006, paints a grim picture of the state's educational administration. "The findings detailed here raise serious questions about the reasonableness and rationality of employment contracting standards utilized by boards of education and whether these local governing bodies -- as frontline stewards of the public purse -- are properly and adequately overseen in that regard by higher authorities," the report stated.

To repair the broken system, the SCI recommended a host of changes including more transparent contracts, benefit limits to limit the cash-in of unused sick and vacation days, forced adherence to pension calculations and the requirement that school boards be made financially responsible for any unfunded pension costs that arise from a violation of the system.

To implement the recommended changes, Assemblymen Bill Baroni, R-Hamilton and Kevin O'Toole, R-Cedar Grove, have introduced a pair of bills mandating many of the changes. Identical bills have also been introduced in the state Senate. Included in the legislation is a requirement that all contracts for school superintendents be forwarded to the state Department of Education for approval. One bill would also require a school board to provide the state education department with a statement detailing any benefits offered to an employee after retirement.

Reached Friday, Baroni said it's time to reel in pension abuse. "The pension systems were not built to accommodate these types of special arrangements, they were built for the rank and file public employees, police officers, fire fighters and teachers," he said.

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/04/07, Letter to the Editor, "Facing Realities"

To the editor:

It is wonderful that students of Hopewell Valley have a huge range of educational interests.

A public school district cannot be expected to provide either the time or the money for all of these interests. Our district’s elementary curriculum has been packed for years, causing scheduling to be a continuing issue. State funding has dried up to the level that many valued programs are at risk.

Unfortunately, two of the three years of primary strings have been eliminated. The realities are:

1. The future of our entire varied K-12 curriculum is imperiled due to funding constraints.
2. Historically American parents who wish for their children to benefit from learning to play a musical instrument have managed to secure lessons for their children.

It is time to move on.

Sally Turner, Hopewell Township
(Former School Board President)

--------

And the Comments posted at the Hopewell Valley News site that follow...

THE REAL ISSUE wrote on Oct 4, 2007 9:36 PM:
" This isn't about Strings anymore. Reasonable people can differ on the value of strings vs. science vs. whatever. It's about the way in which the School Board treated parents, even when they voiced their concerns. It's the way they tried to muzzle opposition by throwing out the sop of science, without any curriculum alteration to support it. It's the way they volunteered the YMCA without first bothering to check they could do it. It's the arrogance we can't abide. Spring is coming. "

Long resident wrote on Oct 4, 2007 2:11 PM:
" I have been a resident here in Hopewell Valley for over 20 years. I would like to say that Sally Turner presided over the worst school board that I can remember in all the years I lived here. I keep hoping she will go away. "

History Lesson wrote on Oct 4, 2007 1:38 PM: " I think every remembers the mess while Sally Turner was on the school board."

Go away wrote on Oct 4, 2007 12:40 PM: " I thought I heard the last from her. She never listens and is always right. "

Listen to the Community wrote on Oct 4, 2007 12:38 PM: " She had the motto "Don't do what the community wants, do what we want" obviously she still believes this. I voted for a change in the last election and I got it, I will continue to vote for change. "

Law abiding citizen wrote on Oct 4, 2007 12:10 PM: " What Turner is missing completely is that the Board ignored its own policies and even a state law when it chopped Strings. Perhaps Turner needs to revisit what it means to obey the rules. Hate to know what she did during her tenure. "

Fed Up Parent wrote on Oct 4, 2007 11:57 AM: " As a former School Board President, it's no wonder Ms. Turner so readily agrees with the majority of our School Board members -- but not all. Jim Wulf and Aaron Tellier are the only ones still fighting the good fight. "

Concerned Parent wrote on Oct 4, 2007 11:38 AM: " I wish she would move on and quit defending bad decisions. "

Jon Cooke wrote on Oct 4, 2007 11:29 AM: " Doesn't she ever give up? We should listen to the community and not to yourselves. "

Anonymous wrote on Oct 4, 2007 11:26 AM: " I remember her now. She was the one that made all the bad decisions and ignored the community. "

Paul Papier wrote on Oct 4, 2007 11:23 AM: " First Sally Turner should identify herself as a former School Board President. One of the reasons why this district is having problems is all the bad decisions she made while being President. She sides with current incompetence of this board and administration. "

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 10/04/07, Letter to the Editor, "Musical Opportunities"

To the editor:

Some letters to the Hopewell Valley News in recent weeks might lead readers to believe that great harm has been done to the quality of the music program in Hopewell Valley schools by changes in the elementary schools strings program.

Not so! Previously, all children in grades one, two and three have received instruction in string instruments. Some children undoubtedly benefit greatly from this opportunity. But to require three years of this by every child defies common sense, particularly when the instructional day must include a whole host of learning experiences to prepare our girls and boys to deal with the unfolding challenges of the 21st century. Under the present arrangement, all first-graders are still given lessons in strings and an opportunity to discover a continuing interest and the potential for further development in this aspect of music.

The YMCA is attempting to identify strings teachers for second and third grade children who wish to go on with a strings program beyond the first-grade experience. Hopewell Valley schools continue to be far ahead of most in what is offered in music education. Our music students now are able to perform in the new state of the art Performing Arts Center, and they bring home awards and recognition regionally and throughout the country. New opportunities to be involved in musical performing groups are constantly opening up for the young people who attend our schools.

Carl Swanson, Hopewell Township
(Current School Board member)

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 09/27/07, Letter to the Editor, "Outright Duplicitous"

To the editor:

In response to Jeff Bartolino’s attempt to obfuscate the unquestionably inappropriate way in which the Board of Education went about eliminating the strings program, I offer some simple, irrefutable facts. The reduction in strings was never “clearly listed as a budget highlight.” The reduction of the music staff by one person was listed. I never studied Chicago Math, but, no matter how I look at that equation, the reduction in staff by one member does not add up to the elimination of an entire program for two whole grades across the district. In response to public outcry, the elected officials — whose responsibility it is to answer to the public — could have taken steps to cover the strings class with the current staff. Since our fine teachers are in their second year without a contract, it is to no one’s surprise that the board did not even vet that option.

Those of us who sat through most of the board’s budget meetings into the wee hours of the morning attempting to force discussion of the strings issue were never granted the courtesy of a simple discussion. In fact, during the first post-budget meeting, the newly elected officials, James Wulf and Aaron Tellier, along with Ed Gainsborg attempted to initiate a discussion of options and possibilities for recouping the strings program. Nearing 1 a.m., the board voted 3-6 against having that discussion. Needless to say, failing to host that discussion reflects negatively on the majority of the board.

Notably, the only option many children had to continue in strings — the before- or after-school program promised by the board and superintendent — does not exist this year. Children in the second and third grades who wish to keep up with playing the violin have no option in the schools.

As for the expansion of science teaching time, our teachers, who did teach the full science curriculum last year, have been given no expanded curriculum or guidance on filling the extra period of science per week. So, it is likely that our children actually will not be learning more science this year.

To Mr. Bartolino and the board, you should note as these letters continue that the parents opposing your methods will remind the public as elections happen that your efforts have been outright duplicitous. You may find a way to bend your own board policies to suit your rhetoric, but the public will not be fooled. As a parent, I teach my children that rules cannot be bent to suit their needs. If you really want to do the right thing, offer the public a true hearing on the strings program. At the very least, offer the children the in-school options you promised. We’re waiting.

Roxane Douvos, Pennington

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 09/27/07, Letter to the Editor, "Two Accidental Truths"

To the editor:

During 10 years as a public servant in Washington, I learned that if you (have to) listen to doubletalk for long enough, once in a while the perpetrators will blurt out something true. Now that grades two and three are settling into “life without primary strings,” most of the madness behind the method has been revealed.

I am not referring to the debate, further confused by Jeffrey Bartolino’s letter in last week’s paper, over whether cutting strings was legal or properly communicated before it happened. His defense is characteristically lame, but more telling is that he nowhere addresses the more fundamental issue: legal or not, was it the right thing to do for our children?

Redeploying the existing music staff of the district so as to increase band instruction and eliminate two-thirds of the strings program obviously had nothing to do with cost savings, as concerned parents figured out months ago. The only explanation left that passed the laugh test was “to free up more time for science.” So imagine our surprise when many of us heard from our children’s respective second-grade teachers at “back to school night” that they have received no advice about how to work in the additional science modules that have allegedly been burning a hole in the curriculum. Indeed, some of the unused material is apparently at the fourth-grade level and can’t be used in grade two.

We also were told that “your children will be learning mostly the same science as we taught last year’s group — only we’ll have more leisure to present it (with the time freed up from strings).” So it seems that when Linda Mitchell told an audience at Toll Gate last spring that “it will be easy to fill the time,” she wasn’t kidding. Thanks for that candor, inadvertent though it may have been. The other accidental truth that now shines through the fog is Superintendent Judy Ferguson’s remark at a spring board meeting that “strings has been on the chopping block for several years now.” Why we may never know, but chop they did, while furiously trying in vain to explain this as anything other than a payback, vendetta, or random impulse. The promised half-loaf of a pay-to-play program at the YMCA has now apparently evaporated, which is exactly the shameful outcome one would have predicted if this whole affair was an exercise in power rather than reason.

This is not about personal preferences for violins over science (my own rank order is “both, science only, strings only”) or for favoring primary grades over middle and upper, or about being a “single-issue voter” (stay tuned). It’s about people unable to say “maybe there’s more to this than we realized,” and unable to tell the truth unless provoked to recklessness. The two accidental truths we now see for what they were will come in handy at election and contract-renewal time.

Adam M. Finkel

Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 09/27/07, Letter to the Editor, "Speaking of Factual Errors"

To the editor:

Sssshhhhhhh. Do you hear it? There it is again. Its sounds like spinning?

I would like to address Jeffrey A. Bartolino’s assertions in his letter last week regarding Primary Strings.

First, Mr. Bartolino indicates that the complete elimination of strings from two grades is not considered a major curriculum change (and therefore board policies don’t apply) because they have not changed the way that strings is taught to first-graders. Using this twisted logic, the school board could eliminate all 11 years of math after first grade and it would not be considered a major change, as long as they continued to use Everyday Math in first. Jethro Clampett here we come! Mr. Bartolino’s argument does not make sense.

Second, Mr. Bartolino indicates that the parents and public were well-informed of the intended elimination. Not true. As a parent, I can tell you that the school district uses two major forms of communication when they want parents to know about something — they send home a flyer in everyone’s backpack and/or they send out an e-mail to a master e-mail list. If the school board truly wanted to inform the parents of their plan, and elicit their input, wouldn’t they use the already established method of communication? Where was the flyer? Where was the e-mail? No, the parents were not informed. And we would have remained in the dark, except for a lone music teacher who told her students about the cut. Those students told their parents, who told other parents, and so on, and so on. The story finally made its way to the Hopewell Valley News, where it was seen in print for the first time, as Mr. Bartolino admits himself, only five days before the budget vote. Not much time to act, now is it?

Third, Mr. Bartolino states that they did have the roll call vote for changes to curriculum that is required by law. Wait. Is Mr. Bartolino admitting now that this was a curriculum change? (Doesn’t that mean that the board policies would, in fact, apply?) Regardless, the law requires the vote to be on the change itself, not on an entire budget or an entire curriculum list. Without this roll call vote on the change itself, the public has no idea which board members were in favor of the elimination and which were not. (Individual accountability is itself the entire purpose of this law.)

I would like the board to know that my intention is not to be argumentative. I simply want our children to have the best education possible with the resources available. But when the body that is elected by the people to represent the people does not communicate with the people, I am certainly going to speak up. There should be no need for spinning stories; there should simply be open, truthful communication from the board, and the opportunity for the public to have its opinions and ideas heard and valued. We are eager to participate. Please let us.

Kim Robinson

Hopewell Township

HOPEWELL VALLEY NEWS, 09/20/07, Letter to the Editor, "Strings Letter Had Several Factual Errors"

To the editor:

A recent letter to the editor on the subject of violin instruction in the elementary grades carried a number of factual errors. In the interest of an accurately informed public discussion and as chairman of the Board of Education’s Curriculum Committee, I offer the following facts:

1. The board did not, as alleged, violate its policy on curriculum when it chose to reduce elementary violin (strings) instruction from grades one through three to grade one. Board Policy 6210 governs major change in the curriculum, i.e., the adoption of a new program (such as Everyday Math) that dramatically changes content and/or teaching strategy. The strings instruction that is taking place today is the same instruction that took place last year. The difference is the duration. At the request of a newly elected board member, the Policy Committee held a special meeting on June 13, 2007 at which board attorney, Bob Martinez, advised that neither policy 6210 nor companion policies 6200, 6205 and 6211 were violated by the board’s action to reduce strings instruction.
2. The reduction in strings was not, as alleged, hidden from the public. It was clearly listed as a budget highlight both in written materials distributed to the public and available at local libraries. It was clearly listed on the district Web site pages dedicated to the 2007-08 budget development. It was clearly listed in a prominent newspaper ad that ran in the April 12 issue of the Hopewell Valley News, five days before the budget election. Between informal coffee klatches, formal full-board meetings, televised meetings of the finance committee and school-based meetings attended by board leaders, there were a total of 28 public discussions during the development of the current year’s budget.
3. The board did not, as alleged, violate state statute requiring roll-call votes for a change in curriculum. In fact, there were roll-call votes of the board on both the 2007-08 budget (March 26, 2007) and the adoption of the 2007-08 curriculum (Aug. 20, 2007), both of which impact elementary music instruction. In fact, the entire K-12 curriculum was adopted by unanimous vote of the board.

An honest debate about the board’s decision to reduce strings must acknowledge that there were two key factors to this issue: the opportunity presented by a retirement to reduce spending and mounting concern by our district administration over the past few years about our elementary school schedule and the limited time for instruction in the core content standards for science and social studies.

Jeffrey A. Bartolino

Hopewell Valley Regional Board of Education