School Followup Question - The "All Opinions are Welcome, but Sorry no Instigators" Board

Date: Sun Feb 29 8:41 AM, 2004

School Followup Question

Date: Sun Feb 29 3:57 PM, 2004

Make no mistake, we do not need to build an entire school.

Our current classes are NOT overcrowded.. The last time we built. Average class size was uner 24 for K-5's and just about 30 for Copeland. Then we built about 20 acedemic classrooms plus labs, gyms teacher lunchrooms etc

The concrete hasn't been dry 5 yrs but in the last five yrs we increased by 119 students. Simple math indicates we have plenty of room

Birchwood's 2nd grade is promoted as one of our overcrowded classes. However, upon closer inspection you find that the class of about 26 homeroom students drops by three or four due to all day 'pullouts'. A few more kids are pulled out for part of the day and when they're still togather there's an inclusion teacher to share the load.

Future growth is somewhat distant and plans are, by law, limited to 5 years...with good reason. The town homes planned for Rte 15 have been halted due to water restrictions and the total number may be reduced. I'l point out that at the time of the last referendum a full boat of kids were expected by now...to date the has been Zero.The apts near birchwood have yet to break ground.

Also, to date there is no support for the 472 students these two devlopments are projected to generate. But think about it, didn't most of us wait until we owned single family homes before we had children? Apartments and condos DON'T generate many kids

Date: Sun Feb 29 5:11 PM, 2004

Ted... Since the district is looking for a site, I guess you are either working with different facts or have somehow reached a different conclusion based on the same facts.

I formerly worked for an electric utility and it was the same kind of thing. You needed to plan to bring generating facilities on line sometime in the future and you had to just go with your best estimates of what electricity demand was going to be. We always felt that it was better to have a little extra capacity than to be caught short.

In the case of the education of our children, I would personally rather be conservative and run the risk of maybe spending a little too much on their education than to shortchange them. My guess is that schools, like generating stations, take a number of years to bring on line and if you underestimate the need, there's no good solution in the short run.

Class size is a factor in education.

Date: Sun Feb 29 5:26 PM, 2004

Most of the stats I use were given to me by the facilities committee.

The Birchwood info was given to me by a Rockaway TWP K-5 principal

And Iwas on he BOE when the last referendum was passed.

Very big of you the be "conservative" and over build but it's all of our money. Spend away when you're paying it yourself.

Date: Mon Mar 1 12:34 PM, 2004

I guess then you're interpretation of the facts differs from everyone else. I guess your just smarter.

I'm not even sure that it will cost more. Perhaps it would cost less. Have you calculated the effects of losing another ratable if a different property is selected or do you just want to cram the kids into existing classrooms? Interesting that your view is so different from the others. Must be a conspiracy.

Date: Mon Mar 1 1:42 PM, 2004

We're talking about our school district, there's never any analysis.

And it's not a case of being smarter. It's the committee's membership. In this case the group is primarily made up of "the choir" ie District employees, who don't even live in town (or NJ for that matter) and moms (some dads)that have no problem speading financia burden on all residents.

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:00 PM, 2004

So people in apartments and condos don't usually have kids?

Most of the people I know in apartments and condos live in them BECAUSE they've got kids and can't afford a single-family home.

But then, I'm clueless so maybe my friends are too.

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:12 PM, 2004

Yes Karen, you are clueless.

Of course some people in apts have kids. But, like I said, not enough to cause residents to build a school. For example, more than 10yrs ago the BOE cleared space at DBO for "all the kids that" the condo complex at the foot of Fleetwood Dr would generate (I think it's called Stoney Point). After the condos were filled, the BOE had to undo its redistrict effortt becuase the Condos didn't generate enough students.

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:20 PM, 2004

If this does happen, isn't it about time that Rockaway Township had a high school for all of Rockaway Township?

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:20 PM, 2004

TED IS

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:24 PM, 2004

A Question for Ted

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:39 PM, 2004

RE: School Followup Question

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:42 PM, 2004

TED,

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:47 PM, 2004

RE: School Followup Question

Date: Mon Mar 1 2:58 PM, 2004

The question was "isn't it time" ... for ouyr own HS. The answer is that it isn't going to happen-for the reasons I described.

To Karen, School taxes are about 60% of our property taxes. Keeping informed about them is a prety good hobby. And yes, you're the clueless one.

Date: Mon Mar 1 3:00 PM, 2004

Decide for yourself. Both evasive in answering the difficult questions and using hindsight as their crystal balls (are they Ted? - lol)

Maybe it is time to take another look. Maybe you are OK with the "that's the way it has always been approach, but it seems from past posts (see your Bill Rosen references) that you were not happy with the past either... Stop whining and take this opportunity to make a positive impact (there's that word again.)

Maybe the district fathers did not think it was a good idea then. Kinda like the Master Plan not defining a mega-church.

And you talk about Karen....

Date: Mon Mar 1 3:08 PM, 2004

Actually, Ted

Date: Mon Mar 1 10:52 PM, 2004

RE: School Followup Question

Date: Mon Mar 1 11:31 PM, 2004

It's very obvious that tED (have you fixed your caplocks) dOTY and todddavid are two different people.

Ted (oooh - much nicer with normal caps - can you please do the same Ted?) is intelligent, articulate, and adversarial.

Todd, if he went back to school for a year or two could possibly bring his grammer up to a 3rd grade level. He's an idiot.

The only thing these people have in common is that they both disagree with 95% (or more) of the township residents. They won't even agree on that fact. Ted (please, please Ted - use the right caps for VORT and don't make yourself look the part of a fool) will probably agree that 95% of the town disagrees with him. Todd will claim that almost everyone agrees with him, except for a few racists who are very angry.

Date: Tue Mar 2 9:37 AM, 2004

I’m not so sure about the 95% opposition to CC. Since the vORT fundraiser at Copeland, an increasing number of CC supporters have contacted me (sorry, they’re both small people and small voices).

However if the citizensin support won’t stand and be counted, they don’t really exist; so you got me there. It’s sorta like “If there isn’t a sound in the forest, a tree didn’t fall”

Date: Tue Mar 2 9:44 AM, 2004

Oh tED (ouch that hurts). Now I'll have to spend the rest of my days on this board typing your name as tED dOTY and making us BOTH look foolish.

Here I am - trying to defend you as one of the articulate, educated people around here...and you go and play the childish game of messing with your caplocks.

The word is VORT - have some respect for them and you'll earn respect from others...At least from those who recognize someone making an informed opinion (even if it disagrees with theirs).

When you play the tED dOTY game of vORT, you lose my respect - and I'm sure the respect of others. The arguments you put forth get ignored and you cause people to concentrate on stupid things such as your inability to use caps properly.

Maybe that's what you want - to have even the people who find your arguments intelligent to think you are foolish - I don't know...I've seen you at many town meetings and never really figured you out. You should know though, that people who might otherwise have read your comments are just being inflamed by your childish attitude instead and completely ignoring what you have to say. Somehow, I can't believe that is your intended goal. Is it?

Date: Tue Mar 2 9:48 AM, 2004

???

Date: Tue Mar 2 9:53 AM, 2004

Big difference

Date: Tue Mar 2 10:29 AM, 2004

RE: School Followup Question

Date: Tue Mar 2 10:39 AM, 2004

the big picture...

Date: Tue Mar 2 11:25 AM, 2004

RE: School Followup Question

Date: Tue Mar 2 11:51 AM, 2004

Why ask a church about growth caps?

Because a company is held to stricter standards and would not be permitted to grow past the size they project without some sort of approval. The church, having carte blanche through RLUIPA, can grow all it wants--once it's in.

The real reason:

Because we want to know--and the leader of a church would be presumed honest and hopefully we could count on his word.

And since his word is "no, I will not commit to a 25,000 person cap", I imagine we can indeed count on it.

Date: Tue Mar 2 11:52 AM, 2004

i'm sure felt it necessary to be condescending (as i've explained many times before...) but it isn't...

1 - the church is the only entitiy that would not pay taxes to help support the stress on the road and offset any increase...they are the only entity that will not give back to the community...

2 - with growth potential that has not been (or at least not reported) measured...you really can't say how much traffic the church will generate...especially after a years worth of growth...and since they plan on having a school...it will also generate weekday traffic in the morning and afternoon...plus after school activities...banquet functions...

3 - property value is already showing a decline...b/c of the legal actions being threatened...

4 - a mega church is the only type of church that would need to promise a cap...as their main goal (MEGA) is to grow and grow and make more and more money...

Date: Tue Mar 2 1:04 PM, 2004

Karen, you’re still clueless. The church doesn’t have carte blanche; they are subject to the same zoning laws as anyone else

The question about 25,000 was not really a question. It was a statement designed to incite. The Reverend’s response did not refer to the 25,000 his “no” referred to any growth cap; be it 1 or 1000…get a clue.

vORT an other clueless folk refuse to accept any answer that is provided by CC unless it falls into their twisted views. I expect that will continue.

Maria,

A school would also not pay taxes and would exert far greater stress on the roads. Also Agilent has been inactive for several years. So any ongoing concern would exert far more stress on the roads. You do have a point about property tax contributing to repair but when the loss of it is compared to the ratables brought online in the past 12 months, it hardly seems worth it.

Traffic has been addressed in at least 2 reports. Those are the facts you need to deal with. Stop stretching just because you don’t like the answers.

I’m not sure where you obtained the definition of a Mega Church but it’s wrong..

Date: Tue Mar 2 1:31 PM, 2004

in response...