About Soupe du Jour
To the editor:
There’s another dimension to the Soupe du Jour eviction not covered in your April 5 article, which is essentially an interview with Patty Phillips, the owner of the restaurant. In addition to the eviction having serious consequence for Ms. Phillips, the closing of the restaurant would be a tremendous loss to Hopewell residents and to the large numbers of people from surrounding communities who come to Hopewell for the antique shops and galleries and lunch at Soupe du Jour.
As a resident of Hopewell I often take visiting family and friends there and they are always delighted with the food, especially Ms. Phillip’s extraordinary soups, and the relaxed and off-beat atmosphere of the place. Ms. Phillips has been gathering a large number of signatures of visitors to the restaurant on a letter testifying that they share my view of the restaurant and dismay at its possible closing.
I hope Alec Gallup will have the community spirit to take these concerns into consideration and work out a way of letting Ms. Phillips continue in business.
Richard Greene
Hopewell
Pennington business going?
To the editor:
Many in our Pennington community have expressed concern over what looks to be the end of our business. We sincerely appreciate the support and wish that we had been able to find some common ground with the borough administration. However, there still has been no positive indication that our plan to extend hours and menu will ever be permissible. In light of rapid commercial development in the nearby township, our window of survival is limited and presently appears to be too short to withstand the administrative process. Our objective was to compete here in place while other local businesses are electing to leave. But we simply can’t afford the price of admission to the official decision-making process.
In February, we submitted what we thought was a routine notice to the Health Department that we were planning to enhance our service. The Department of Public Works subsequently rejected the plan for lack of additional grease interception capacity to accommodate possible additional water flow. We agreed immediately to comply with (in fact, to substantially exceed) the installation requirement and were again rejected for lack of extensive engineering certificationthe purpose of which would presumably be to confirm that the detailed specifications in the borough ordinance are valid.
Beyond that, it was suggested that we could pay for an informal review by the borough engineer to confirm that our certified engineering is accurate. This would buy us the possibility that our first guess at the requirement might be approvedor that we might have to do it all over again at the borough’s discretion. Finally, at some point, the borough engineer’s approval would be certified by the engineer’s firmall on our tab. We were further assured that we "cannot expect any of this to happen overnight." Projected expense with additional fees and delays quickly grew to more than twice the cost of installation and well beyond a remotely sensible business investment.
The borough engineer "could not" attend an exploratory meeting arranged by the borough administrator without being paid up front. The administrator then bowed out of the meeting, designating the Public Works superintendent as spokesman for the borough. The superintendent did appear and stated that he had no authority to speak for the borough. No elected official expressed any interest until we called the mayor, who was able to extract a letter from the engineer confirming his "inability to comment" on our proposal. That’s that. We’ll never know the borough’s requirements to upgrade our service.
When a seemingly simple problem becomes insurmountable, reasonable questions go unanswered, and proposed solutions are not even considered by the powers that be, we’re left to think that there’s some missing piece of this puzzle. The most mystifying question is why the Borough is so willing to see a community service business die due to pure bureaucratic paralysis. We can’t pass judgment on our town’s collective desire to have a downtown or not. But if we have such a desireand we are ourselves residents who believe we shouldwe’ll have to start acting on it. The alternative will be to bulldoze the business district because no one will want to live next door to an abandoned town center.
Our parting question would well be asked by the larger Pennington community: "What’s going on here?"
Stuart and Cindy Carothers,
owners
Pennington’s Bread & Breakfast
Give to soldiers
To the editor:
The Huntington Learning Center of Pennington is proud to support the community. We are currently participating in a local effort to collect goods for troops serving in the U.S. Military. Items such as beef jerky, lollipops, soup, and other packaged goods are being dropped off at the Learning Center where they will be boxed and shipped to soldiers abroad.
Of all the wonderful things our soldiers do for us, it’s exciting to be able to do something small in return. Even the youngest students at Huntington are eager to participate; many are writing letters of gratitude along with drawings and sketches.
This is the fourth community drive that Learning Center has sponsored in the last year. Previous collections have been made for such organizations as Womanspace, New Jersey Foster and Adoptive Family Services, and there is no better way than to give to the soldiers who give so much to us.
If you are interested in donating items, please drop them off at the Huntington Learning Center of Pennington, 800 Denow Road, or call 737-5105 for any further information. The center is open Monday-Thursday, 10 a.m. through 8 p.m., Friday 3-8 p.m., and Saturday, 9 a.m. through 2 p.m.
Philip Charles, owner
David Awrachow, director
Apples, pomegranates
To the editor:
The school district administration and the school board seem to be comparing apples to pomegranates when it comes to a viable auto shop program at the high school. They would have us believe that they are replacing the excellent program with something very similar.
The Valley’s program of basic auto and small engine design enrolls students starting in ninth grade at the point in their young lives when they are exploring options for further academic and training endeavors. Currently some 60 students and their parents can attest to that goal. Thousands have benefited from this program, which is for many the equivalent of performing arts or TV/video studies and equally valuable.
What students and parents are most proud of when it comes to the current program is the reality that many college-bound students also elect the program. A combination of advanced academic courses and auto shop is not unusual.
The fill-in program, hurriedly proposed in response to the public outcry against dumping auto shop, is to have auto shop become a branch of the Mercer County Vocational School within Hopewell Valley Central. But as recommended by the school superintendent, all variables change.
If the county school were to sponsor the program, the program would be available only to juniors and seniors. Ninth and tenth graders would not be eligible. The eleventh and twelfth grade program will be distinctly vocational, making it difficult for college-bound students to participate.
At present, the facility is available only to Hopewell Valley students. As a county-run program, it would have to be available to all high school students in Mercer County. Also, as part of the four decade-old program at Central High, the facility and shop are available for after-school use. This is an unknown (and unlikely) quantity under county auspices.
Available to only Hopewell Valley students, the current program is so popular that all potential students cannot be accommodated. In the county’s hands, the facility would be shared with students from other nearby districts, and there would be far fewer places available to our own students.
Why has there been no sincere effort to find a new auto shop teacher to replicate, as much as possible, our present auto shop? It certainly seems because there was no interest or will on the part of the superintendent and school board to do so.
Of course, this is only one of the critical issues badly dealt with by the superintendent and the school board (standing as one monolithic unit). Add it to busing, religious and other holidays policy, depletion of strings program, elimination of grassroots evaluation by teachers, parents, and community (Middle States evaluation procedures), plus strange past administrator hires and terminations (i.e., high school principal, superintendent), and a budget gone wild, and you have a picture of a malfunctioning school administration.
Billie Moore
Hopewell Township
A mistake
To the editor:
I was disappointed, but not surprised, to learn that the Primary Strings program was eliminated from the Hopewell Valley Regional school budget for the 2007-08 school year. Primary Strings has been a unique feature of the Hopewell Valley curriculum for many years. It is one of the programs that distinguishes this school district from its neighbors, and it has certainly played a role in helping to develop a high quality orchestra program at the upper elementary, middle school, and high school levels. The string program does much more than simply teaching students about music. It also teaches students about the importance of practice and hard work in order to reach one’s goals. It provides a welcome break from the increasingly academic elementary day.
I am one of the lucky parents. My two older sons participated in Primary Strings and continued as members of the orchestra throughout middle school and high school. Both went on to take part in music and performing arts activities in college. My youngest son is currently a violinist in the high school orchestra. Music has been a source of joy for all three of my sons, and I feel sorry for the elementary students who will not have the opportunity to participate in this wonderful program. As a former school board member, I realize that hard decisions must be made at budget time. However, this decision was a mistake. I have lived in Hopewell Township since 1985, and I have never voted against a school budget. I am considering voting no this year.
Pam Crabtree
Hopewell Township
Vote for budget
To the editor:
I would like to take this opportunity to express my support for the school budget that will be voted on this April 17. I have been to several of the budget presentations and have talked with board members and Superintendent Judith Ferguson, and appreciate the fact that the budgeting process is a difficult, delicate balancing act of needs versus means. I fully believe that our district administration and school board are presenting the voters with a fair and reasonable compromise taking into consideration state and federal restrictions that they bump up against at every turn, parent and staff concerns and wishes, and the realities of greater needs and fewer dollars.
Like all Pennington (and many Hopewell Township) parents of high school and Timberlane students, I would love to see our current busing continue unchanged. However, I believe that a reasonable compromise has been reached, with the district covering third-thirds the cost. I’d also love to have after-school activities continue for free, as both my children take advantage of many programs throughout the year. But again, I’d much rather pay a fair fee than have the programs eliminated. As with any budget, dealing with a fixed income, when expenses go up, something must be eliminated or funded in another way. I think the administration has come up with creative compromises for continuing to provide these and other programs that we might otherwise lose.
The budget process is complicated and confusing. I encourage you to take the time to familiarize yourself with the proposed budget by reading the detailed information found on the district’s Web site, and to contact school board members and district administrators with questions that come up as you consider your vote. Finally, I strongly encourage you to vote yes on April 17, showing your support for this wonderful community that values education and our youth.
Randee Tengi
Pennington
Valley Regional College?
To the editor:
I’ll admit I’ve been complacent for many years regarding the school budget. After all, I went through our school system and it served me well. I went on to attend college, pass the CPA exam, and obtain my master’s degree. Hopewell Valley provided me with the educational foundation necessary to accomplish those things. And that is what a school system should do provide a foundation. My complacency ended last month when I learned of the intended elimination of the Primary Strings program, a program that has been scientifically proven to contribute to children’s mental development – truly, a foundational course.
Despite Kim Newport’s claim that we have been given an unprecedented opportunity to "participate in the development of the 2007-2008 budget", the public was not notified of this intended cut; a reporter unearthed the story just two weeks before the board’s final budget vote. When, on March 26, we presented the board with two petitions containing 250 signatures and over 60 comments from residents desperately trying to save the program, we were met with blank stares.
A few days ago, I heard that the high school is offering a class in Pacific Rim cooking. Intrigued, I decided to check out the whole roster of courses, listed on the district’s Web site. Looking at that list certainly brought back memories, only they were not high school memories, they were memories from college! Our high school now offers not only foundational courses designed to help students no matter what career they choose to pursue, but career specific courses that are interesting, but certainly not essential. Just to give you a taste, these courses include Clothing Design (not an introductory class), Textiles and Needlecraft, Advanced Scene Study and Direction, Sports Marketing and Management, Interior Design, Home Survival (basic home repair for all those teenage homeowners), and of course Pacific Rim Cuisine. We also offer Foreign Cuisine, Fitness Foods and American Cuisine (this one includes a "dessert smorgasbord" yum!). Well. The last time I checked, our high school was not a satellite location for the Culinary Institute of America, The Philadelphia School of Design, or Home Depot Weekend Workshops! Yet the current school board apparently feels that these career specific courses are more important than foundational courses, such as Primary Strings, which help our youngest minds develop.
When the public became involved in the Primary Strings issue, we were told that we were not looking at the big picture. I agree that someone isn’t looking at the big picture, but it’s not us. The board states that in these times of "austerity," they are working with a bare bones budget, and they simply do not have the money to fund the Strings program. My question to them is this: If we do not have the money to pay for a fundamental program such as Primary Strings, how in the world do we have the money to teach kids how to prepare Shrimp Tempura and create a faux finish on their living room walls?
Kim Robinson
Hopewell Township
Send ‘a simple message’
The following letter, in response to Robert Gehm’s April 5 letter to the editor, was inadvertently left out of Campaign Corner in the April 12 edition. Instead Adam M. Finkel’s Campaign Corner letter, also printed April 5, was printed again by mistake in the April 12 edition. This letter replaces that letter:
To the editor:
I’ve never met Robert Gehm, but it appears he endorses the imperious tactics of the current boardcontrol the information, dole out tidbits of time for public comment, avoid the tough questions, make bizarre decisions, and then denounce dissenters as "offering no plan" and having a "narrow vision." This conveniently ignores the fact that proponents of Primary Strings have indeed offered a specific alternative: keep the program alive for one more year (simply by allocating a 7 percent cut in the music staff so the other 10 grades bear some of the burden), while starting a true dialogue with the community about what our second- and third-graders need (if anything) added to their curriculum and what should be cut to make way for any new offering. But why should we have to counter a vague, unsupported decision with a detailed alternative? I’m sure we all could point to one or another decision at the national level that was made on false pretenses, by officials who say you shouldn’t criticize them unless you have "a detailed plan for change." Sometimes the alternative to a bizarre decision is simply "fix the mistake."
So how about this for a "broad vision" and a two-part plan for doing things differently? First, stop treating public meetings like roll-outs of the latest Soviet Five-Year Plan, all the while complaining about how time-consuming it is to come before the voters. As Mark Majkowski’s excellent letter (April 5) indicated, 90 minutes of lectures from board members, followed by three-minute sets of questions from citizens, then summarized by testimony from a district employee that no one was allowed to discuss, is hardly a dialogue. Secondly, when your lips begin to move, either tell the truth or have the guts to say "I don’t know" or "I choose not to answer." A recent letter from Kim Newport states that "we believe this (elimination of Strings in grades two and three) will not harm" the music programwhich directly contradicts what the board’s own "fact witness" said at the meeting Mr. Majkowski referred to. "Only time will tell how much of a negative impact (the cut) will have," were the music department head’s exact words.
A month ago, I had no plans to vote in April, and no idea how wide a gulf exists between the superb teachers in our district and the officials who decide what they will be empowered to do and unable to do. I urge everyone in the area to consider voting on April 17, and to consider sending a simple message to the incumbents: if you have no patience with us, we have no interest in you.
Adam M. Finkel
Hopewell Township

