Letters for the week of April 6

Customized education is more cost effective
To the editor:
   
Deep in your reporting on state aid for Lawrence public schools ("Lawrence state aid holds steady for 2006," March 30) is the principle reason for an educational system that is expensive and ineffective. The problem is framed by the unsupported statement from a fresh-faced superintendent fronting stale ideas.
   Said Superintendent of Schools Philip Meara, "…you really have to customize the educational program, and it costs more money. It’s not one size fits all." Says who? In fact, I would argue that the need for a wide-ranging educational curriculum is mythology promoted by over-paid consultants and administrators in love with their own theories, but blind to their impracticality.
   Even the New York Times recently ran a front page article that chronicled many schools narrowing curriculums to focus on the subjects that matter most. In those schools, "customized" education was rejected in favor of effective education. The difference between customized and effective is a nuance the new superintendent should ponder.
   I suggest to readers and to Mr. Meara that it’s not the students who find basic teaching in basic subjects to be unsatisfying, it’s teachers and administrators themselves. Here’s why.
   A narrow curriculum is easy to manage; hence, the need for fewer administrators. With administration salaries running twice the average teacher salary you can see there is an incentive to move from teaching to administration. Also, a narrow curriculum is easier to teach. Accordingly, there is less of a need for expensive teacher training. Yet, it is from additional training and advanced degrees that teachers achieve higher salaries. Take away complexity and the system becomes more successful and less costly. Great for society, students and taxpayers.
   Stated another way, a complex customized curriculum has its roots in economic incentives for designers, managers, and practitioners of the program — but returns little of substance for many students. How do I know this? The facts are all in my corner. Curriculum breadth and complexity have been increasing for decades and educational costs have been sky rocketing. But student achievement has been deteriorating. The burden of that failure rests on the pillars of the public education monopoly — unionized teachers and high-brow educational consultants embraced by administrators pushing people and dollars around the system. And most school boards rubber stamp the exercise with nary a whimper of dissent.
   Public education can be nay, must be, effective and affordable. Increasingly, the system fails in both areas — and it is failing nationally and locally. An educated understanding of the federal No Child Left Behind Act reveals the value of a standardized curriculum and exposes customization as an airy buzzword — "great taste, less filling." It will short-change students and bankrupt taxpayers.
John A. Heffern
Toftrees Court
Reject flawed plan and revamp zoning
To the editor:
   
Regarding the proposed development at the corner of Lawrenceville-Pennington Road and Carver Road, it’s true: the neighbors are not happy.
   The problem is first and foremost one of safety. I believe the issue at this time is not between the residents and the developer, but between the residents and the township. In 1998, the parcel of land in question was owner-occupied but converted from residential zoning to mixed use. This puzzling decision created an issue of inappropriate zoning. Unfortunately, the current Planning Board has inherited this problem and it falls to them to address it. Anyone familiar with this section of the township knows that Lawrenceville-Pennington Road has gone from being a moderately used road to a busy thoroughfare where speed limits are not enforced and reckless driving is common.
   This situation was already emerging in 1998, so I’ d like to know why the zoning board made the decision to convert a relatively small, occupied residential lot into a mixed-use property on such a road. One does not have to be an engineer or traffic expert to determine that the area is clearly residential with existing traffic problems. Moreover, a strip mall already exists nearby that frequently has available space to lease. The established businesses and restaurants that remain adequately serve the area residents. Adding another strip mall is redundant and will create traffic congestion and accidents.
   My concern is that the Planning Board and the township’s engineering consultants are so overwhelmed with development conflicts throughout our township that they will opt to take the path of least resistance in these matters. I was troubled by the casual familiarity between the township’s engineering consultants and the developers’ team at the screening meeting. Their job is not to facilitate the project but to critique without bias.
   I was also alarmed by what I experienced as the Planning Board attorney’s attempts to dismiss the real issue: flawed zoning. Yes, the rezoning that was done in 1998 carries the weight of ordinance. But ordinances can change.
   I am hoping that with ongoing community involvement, this process can be slowed down and the 1998 zoning change can be thoroughly reviewed and amended accordingly.
   I am asking that the Planning Board avoid a rush to judgment, and take the time necessary to review this problem. This is a situation in which a short term solution could lead to long-term problems. It is incumbent upon elected and appointed Officials as well as township employees to take a long term view that takes into account issues of safety for residents over the impulse to commercially develop this inappropriately zoned property.
Russell Healy
Lawrenceville-Pennington Road
Lawrence must rethink Wal-Mart plan
To the editor:
   
Wal-Mart proposes to build a third store in Mercer County on a 23-acre site at the intersection of Spruce Street and Arctic Parkway.
   The League of Women Voters of Lawrence Township is concerned about the environmental impact of this development. The site borders on both Ewing and Trenton while running along the Shabakunk Creek stream corridor setback. We fear that the Wal-Mart store would increase flooding and produce water run-off contaminating local waterways and lands. In addition, the resulting increase of traffic would generate congestion, noise, accidents, and fumes.
   In March, The League of Women Voters of Lawrence Township unanimously approved a resolution urging Lawrence Township Council and the Planning Board to address these points before the Planning Board approves the Wal-Mart construction:
   • A new flood line should be drawn. The 100-year-flood line has not been revised in 30 years.
   • The Delaware and Raritan Canal Commission regulations must be fully adhered to.
   • The new storm water regulations adapted in 2004 by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection give towns a year to develop a plan and another year to submit an ordinance to implement it. Wal-Mart should not be allowed to build on Spruce Street until the Lawrence plan has been approved and Wal-Mart is prepared to fulfill all its requirements.
   • Any and all other environmental standards must be met, including watershed management, water quality, and water run-off issues.
   • A traffic impact study for the area should be done by an independent agency.
   We strongly urge the Township Council to consider an alternative vision for redevelopment of the entire area such as that suggested in the expansive study by the consultants from the Urban Land Institute of Washington, D.C. This would involve long range planning with community input and placing the present, more limited proposal in the context of redevelopment for the whole area.
   Certainly, proceeding in this manner seems far more prudent and appropriate if the township is serious about moving towards becoming a sustainable Lawrence.
Edith Pike
Burning Tree Lane
Karen Siracusa
Burning Tree Lane
Investing in schools will lead to more jobs
To the editor:
   
In the category of "hits and misses" (and ways to help quell the migration of businesses and jobs from New Jersey), the recently announced efforts to create a four-year college degree program for operating engineers is clearly a positive hit for our region.
   In cooperation with the Thomas Edison State College, PSE&G continues its leadership role in the energy industry as it pioneers an approach that all industry representatives should consider. Public and private partnerships in the academic and business worlds will not only attract some of the our nation’s brightest and best to New Jersey, but will prove invaluable if we are to retain New Jersey’s own skilled workforce and future business leaders.
   Now what other industries could we encourage to explore similar efforts in areas of financial services, pharmaceutical, environmental remediation? Perhaps incentives of a short-term nature that will generate long-term benefits need to be addressed. New Jersey has more than its fair share of institutes of higher learning, and in the primary public school systems; nonprofit education foundations like the Lawrence Township Education Foundation are already a wonderful means for local businesses to reinvest in our communities.
Victor Murray
Melvina Drive
Abortion is not safe nor rare
To the editor:
   
It was good to read last week’s letters regarding the abortion ban in South Dakota. I agree with one writer’s observation that speaking candidly about abortion requires some measure of courage. Therefore, I appreciate those who took the time to write with intelligence and respect.
   These letters prompted me to reconsider the pro-choice slogan "safe, legal and rare."
   Rare: Approximately 1.31 million abortions are performed in this country every year. It is estimated that 25 percent of U.S. pregnancies end in abortion, the highest rate in the West. Less than 18 percent of abortions are performed on teenagers, while a whopping 60 percent of abortions are performed on women who have already given birth to one or more children. Sadder still, 45 percent of women seeking an abortion have made this choice before.
   Safe: Abortion hurts women, and I find it reprehensible that so-called pro-women abortion advocates continue to hide this fact from women. Any expectant mother who has read up on pregnancy knows that a previous abortion puts her and the baby she now carries at risk for a host of complications. A growing body of data is finding post-abortive women at increased risk of depression, anxiety, substance abuse, and difficulties parenting their other children. After decades of planned parenthood, what happened to the promise "every child a wanted child?" Are we any closer to realizing this goal? Will more abortions get us there?
   Safe: Safe for whom? Every abortion results in the death of a genetically complete, self-organizing member of homo sapiens at the early stages of life: one of us. A 2004 Zogby poll found 61 percent of Americans believe abortion should not be available after the baby’s heart begins to beat. Yet this occurs after only 22 days, and 77 percent of abortions are done well beyond this point. Nearly 80,000 abortions annually are performed after the 16th week; that is, once a mother can feel her baby moving.
   Legal: Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, together with a series of more recently decided cases, have created a legal right to abortion throughout nine months of pregnancy. This is completely out of touch with the abortion policies of other democratic societies, and it’s out of touch with the will of the vast majority of Americans. Given what we’ve learned since 1973 about fetal development and the effects of abortion on women, how can we not reconsider abortion rights? How can we not consider the possibility that legal limitations on abortion just might reduce the number of abortions?
   Why is there such fierce resistance from the pro-abortion lobby to a return of the issue to the states?
Marjule Anne Hartmann
Nassau Drive
American Red Cross serves with integrity
To the editor:
   
The American Red Cross is investigating allegations of fraud, waste and misappropriation of aid by some Red Cross volunteers who participated in the Hurricane Katrina relief effort. We wanted to make our community aware that the Red Cross has taken appropriate steps to aggressively investigate these allegations and is working closely with the FBI in New Orleans on this matter.
   We are outraged that any individual would take advantage of those so devastatingly affected by Hurricane Katrina. That these allegations involve Red Cross volunteers elevates the matter to an even more reprehensible level, especially to the more than 230,000 decent and caring Red Cross volunteers who selflessly participated in this massive relief effort.
   We can appreciate that some departure from standard procedure after a huge catastrophe like Hurricane Katrina is inevitable — and even acceptable if it provides faster aid to people who need it. However, any departure that violates the Red Cross Code of Conduct or the law will not be tolerated.
   The American Red Cross is made up of people who share a commitment to helping neighbors when they need it most, and Central New Jersey contains many of these outstanding people.
   Our chapter proudly deployed 141 Disaster Relief volunteers to the Gulf Coast who worked long hours under extremely difficult conditions. Another 90 local volunteers tended to the immediate needs for the 210 evacuee families who relocated here from the Gulf Coast, and an additional 100 local volunteers helped the Chapter respond to the tremendous outpouring from you, our community, who contacted us to help. We are honored to work side-by-side with these selfless volunteers.
   Our chapter continues to meet its charge. Since Hurricane Katrina, with the help of 146 volunteers we’ve responded to 86 local disasters, assisting 386 community members. In March alone, we’ve responded to major fires in Lambertville, Piscataway, Trenton and East Windsor, which combined, left 33 families homeless.
   The American Red Cross of Central New Jersey will continue to serve the needs of our community while upholding the integrity of the trust placed in us by you.
Kevin Sullivan
Chief executive officer
Robert E. Humes
Chairman
Board of Directors
American Red Cross
of Central New Jersey
Alexander Road
West Windsor
Help kids be proud of the Garden State
To the editor:
   
Two men have organized a "think tank" in Trenton called the Hall Institute which is designed to describe New Jersey and its people in terms of the problems faced here. They say they want ideas discussed and debated fairly with the hope of finding solutions.
   It’s so easy to take for granted what works, yet behavior theory indicates that people are more creative in solving problems when they feel positive. That’s why a coalition of 20 statewide groups support a movement called Celebrate New Jersey! — a grassroots campaign that builds awareness and pride in all that New Jersey has to offer.
   Our Celebrate NJ! School Program for fourth-graders already has 8,000 students from every county creating articles for the first "NJ Kids Newspaper." The best of the best will soon be published in special supplements to leading New Jersey newspapers later this spring. As they research their columns, our children are learning about New Jersey’s proud history, people, places and events.
   The Celebrate NJ! School Program fosters pride in our kids and gives them a sense of place. Every state has problems, but NJ needs to build on her strengths.
Marguerite Chandler
Founder
Celebrate NJ!
East Lake Drive
Cape May Point