By: centraljersey.com
Stanley J. Vitello of Hopewell Borough wrote last week to state that he considers my opinions about duplicative municipal costs in Hopewell Valley "whining." If by "whine," Mr. Vitello meant complain, fuss, gripe, grouch, grumble or protest, he is absolutely right.
While the outside world grapples with the prospect of a shutdown of the federal government and protests escalate in state capitals from Trenton to Madison, our local elected officials act as if nothing has changed. They seem to have made no adjustment to the realities of a weakened economy, reduced property values, and an anxious voting public.
These days, it is hard to fathom an expansion of government overhead, such as a new municipal center in Hopewell Borough. It is equally hard to fathom our elected officials not following through on a commitment they all voted to keep – to evaluate whether municipal consolidation in Hopewell Valley could save taxpayers money.
If Mr. Vitello considers it whining (or complaining, fussing, griping, grouching, grumbling, or protesting) to expect elected officials to carry through with what they voted to do, I’m happy to own that.
David Sandahl Hopewell Township
‘Unabashed lobbying’
To the editor:
The Abey Building at Howe Commons was once named by a real estate trade association as the New Jersey Historic Office Building of the Year. And during our 14 years of owning the property we have commemorated two of historical Pennington’s most distinguished citizens, William P. Howe and Dr. William J. H. Abey. So we obviously feel that historic preservation is virtuous. However, Pennington’s proposed ordinance presents meaningful risks, which the task force has neither adequately nor fairly assessed because the borough’s process has been flawed from the start. Rather than creating a task force that was a representative sample of its citizens, council instead selected only history enthusiasts who quickly made it their sole objective to establish the strongest ordinance possible. Their ideas were resoundingly criticized at their information sessions last summer, but they forged ahead nevertheless and badly overreached on their first draft of the ordinance. Now after more intense criticism, they’ve published a revised draft for which they are mounting a frantic advertising blitz. The objective should have been to decide whether this was a good idea for Pennington. But because the task force has no diversity of opinion, that proper objective has been superseded by unabashed lobbying.
While they have diluted the ordinance a bit in this current draft (no doubt reluctantly), we must remember that bureaucracies are organic. Once created, the new commission will take every opportunity to annex more properties and to expand their regulatory powers. This draft ordinance is merely the opening verse. Isn’t that exactly what the affordable housing lobby did with COAH?
First their six-page campaign brochure and now their leading-question survey have both brought the task force’s extreme partiality into plain view, rendering the survey not credible. If the National Rifle Association published an opinion survey on gun control, would you trust the results?
During this debate I’ve pointed out many ways that this ordinance would be harmful. And I’ve been inundated with communications from people that agree. Why didn’t council put a few of those many skeptics onto the task force? Wouldn’t this have been a far less acrimonious discussion if the task force had some constructive friction rather than being 100 percent populated with cheerleaders for the historical society? I am skeptical when big oil lobbyists suggest that there is no global warming. And my 25 years of buying real estate for a living compel me to be very skeptical when these lobbyists say that this ordinance will increase property values.
Council should start again and form a new task force to take a balanced look at all of the ramifications of this proposal. I suspect that a truly representative task force might reach the very good conclusion to leave well enough alone. Passing an ordinance based strictly on the recommendations of the historical society’s lobbyists would be absolutely farcical.
George Ackerman Hopewell Township
Project support needed
To the editor:
I am writing to thank the Pennington Day Committee for their recent decision to grant me $500 for support of my Eagle Scout Project, and to use this opportunity to inform the Hopewell Valley community of my quest to improve the Stony Brook-Millstone Watershed Association’s property. I am a junior at Princeton Day School, and have been involved in Troop 44 for the past seven years.
For my Eagle Scout Project I am working with Watershed Association Educational Director Jeff Hoagland to construct over 400 linear feet of boardwalks around the Watershed trails. For many years, the Watershed has offered beautiful nature trails to the public for community usage. Maintenance is challenging and a consistent problem is the constant weathering of man-made trail implements, and sunken trails/marsh areas that surface during the spring months and heavy rainfall.
I plan to build 20-40 pressure-treated boardwalks that will withstand the elements, and then place the boardwalks in the impacted areas where they will be needed should the water level rise. Along with this convenient way to stay muck-free, it will also provide a way to preserve the natural environment by helping us keep from treading further and further off the trail to avoid water obstacles. These boardwalks will not only help cover areas submerged during marshy conditions, but will both expand the use of the trails provided to the public as well as create a better learning environment for the Watershed’s summer camp programs.
I am seeking additional donations toward the estimated $2,500 construction of the boardwalks. Labor will be provided by Scouts from Troop 44, friends, and family. I would be grateful for your contribution to be mailed to me, care of Troop 44, Conor Hassett’s Eagle Scout Project, 4 W. Franklin Ave., Pennington, 08534. Thanks for supporting me, the Watershed, and Scouting everywhere.
Conor Hassett Troop 44 Pennington
‘You’ve Got Mail’
To the editor:
Attention bullies and predators! Hopewell Valley Regional School District is open for business. "No way", you say. "Yes way", I say. And the best part? All you need is an e-mail account; the school district provides the rest. (Oh, and if you’re a student, staff member, or retired district employee, the district provides the e-mail account as well!)
E-mail. A useful tool in today’s technology-based society. Should the school district teach students about e-mail? Sure. Should they provide students with individual e-mail accounts? Perhaps. Should they provide every student in grades three-12 with externally functioning e-mail accounts? Quite debatable. But since that decision has already been made (and trust me, they are not budging on it; I’ve tried), should the district design and implement controls within the system to ensure the safety of our children? Absolutely. Have they? Absolutely not.
First, let’s take a look at externally generated e-mails. The district places reliance on two main factors – the children, and the system filter. Regarding the children, I am sure the district knows that despite classroom teaching, statistics show that the large majority of youth do not report either sexual solicitations or cyber-bullying to an adult. And the filter? The district seems to believe that their filter is useful in protecting the students from bullies and predators. In reality, their filter is useful only in protecting the students from "inappropriate" language. Since when do the "bad" guys need to use "bad" words? Messages like "You’re dead meat." or "I’m going to pound you" go through just fine; I know; I’ve sent them. (Sorry Sweetie; it was just a test.) Or how about "Hi Jane. My name is Susie Johnson. I play soccer for the Pennington School. I was at your game the other day and you’re great! Maybe we can practice together one day"? (Of course we all know that’s really you, right Rusty? 55 years old and lonely?)
"But wait," says Rusty. "How can I possibly get the e-mail address for 12-year-old Janie?" Don’t worry Rusty; it’s simple! Of course you will need to have a name, say from a photo in the paper. Then just go to the district website. They provide you with the format of the student e-mail addresses for all students in grades six-12. (I am not going to print that format here in the paper, but trust me Rusty, the district literally spells it out for you.)
Now, the elementary children do at least have a small safeguard added to their addresses; a safeguard I requested and the district added, kicking and screaming, two years ago (after I wrote my last letter to the editor on this subject). But, as luck would have it for Rusty and any bully friends of his, this safeguard is removed once the children hit middle school. Ironically, it is the middle school and high school years where bullying and solicitations occur most frequently. So why do we remove the safeguard as the children enter the very years they need it most? I asked Superintendent Thomas Smith, who asked his Supervisor of Educational Technology Douglas Brower. Dr. Smith told me he was unable to get a clear answer, but he believes that Mr. Brower feels the addresses look "more businesslike" without the safeguard. Let’s just weigh those options in our heads for a minute. "Safe" or "Businesslike"? "Safe" or "Businesslike"? "I’m sorry Mrs. Smith. Your daughter is dead. But on a positive note, I must say she really had quite the businesslike e-mail address."
OK. Pornography break for external predators; I want to talk about internal system users now. The school district’s internal e-mail system (which can be accessed remotely at any time from any computer) is basically an unmonitored free-for-all. Every user can look up and e-mail every other user. Even if a safeguard exists for external e-mails, it has no effect within the system. So 18-year-old Johnny can e-mail 8-year-old Joanie, 45-year-old Mr. Jones can e-mail 16-year-old Tammy, and bullies can e-mail their victims. Oh, and guess what? There are no internal filters! So bullies, if you want to kick it up a notch and add some choice expletives to your messages, feel free; they go through just fine. (Again, sorry Sweetie; I have to test these things.) Pornographic or provocative pictures? No problem; according to Dr. Smith, photos are not blocked. (No, I did not test this one!) Now have I mentioned retired employees? Yep. Retired employees are allowed to keep their internal district e-mail accounts. So Joe teacher, who hasn’t worked for the district in seven years, still has free e-mail access to all of our children. When I pointed out in 2008 that allowing retired teachers to retain their accounts is in no way necessary (I know our retired teachers are intelligent enough to be able to open a free Hotmail account), Mr. Brower stated, " In no way, shape or form do our retired teachers and administrators pose a safety threat to our students online or otherwise! " While I recognize his loyalty, loyalty can sometimes be misplaced. Hopewell Valley does not exist in a bubble apart from the rest of the world. I think some may have learned that recently when three district employees were charged in relation to drug offenses. Why take the risk, Mr. Brower? It is our children you are betting.
Now let’s discuss a different sort of protection, or lack thereof. My current third-grader was just given her e-mail account a week or so ago. On that first day, waiting for her in her inbox, was a message from a high school teacher. The message discussed the behavioral problems this teacher was having with a specified student. My 9-year old found it just fascinating, and was quite proud to have been consulted on the matter! After I alerted Mr. Brower, he learned through investigation that the e-mail was also mistakenly sent to a retired employee! Confidential student information being sent to a third-grader and a retired employee? Who knows how many easily preventable mistakes like this have happened in the past, and how many times they will happen in the future? Just one more reason why access within the system needs to be controlled!
By this point, I’m sure you’re dying to know what the school board has to say about all of this. After all, the safety of the students and student information ultimately falls on their shoulders. Incredibly, they have very little to say, other than indicating that they think the district e-mail system is just hunky-dory. They agree with the administration that the bulk of the responsibility should be lifted off of their shoulders and placed on the shoulders of the students – students as young as 8 years old.
New technologies are great, but they cannot simply be implemented without forethought and planning. Potential areas of risk, e.g., external access and internal access vis-a-vis bullying, confidential information, and predation, must be identified and addressed as part of the planning process. This has clearly not been done in the case of the e-mail system. We have all read the news stories. I certainly hope we are not waiting for one of our own to come to harm, or worse, before we implement some control.
At the Feb. 7 board meeting, Dr. Smith said that he felt that Facebook posed much more of a threat than e-mail. That may be true, and I am certainly heartened that he is considering the dangers of social networking, but I would encourage him to fix his own house as well. The district provides the e-mail system. The district shows the children how to use it. The district is accountable.
Kim Robinson Hopewell Township
Kidspalooza thank-yous
To the editor:
On Feb. 20 at Stony Brook Elementary School, Family 411 Resource Network hosted Kidspalooza. Family 411 Resource Network is a pre-k through fifth grade Hopewell Valley district-wide PTO committee that supports families of Hopewell Valley Regional School District special needs children. This was an event for special needs children and their siblings where they could have a lot of fun in a very supportive environment. Teen volunteers were available to serve as buddies for any child who needed one. Over 20 amazing Valley teenagers freely volunteered their time for the event as buddies and in many other capacities. Thank you to all of these and our adult volunteers!
We have many people to thank for making this event a huge success. First we’d like to thank those that led the four activity stations. Schafer School of Gymnastics staff facilitated an obstacle course station. Nicole Gianfredi, HVRSD supervisor of special education for pre-school through fifth grade, led the children in yoga. Sandy Bonasera, Hopewell Elementary School parent and art teacher in the West Windsor-Plainsboro school district, facilitated an art activity and Music Together facilitated the music station. The children had an amazing time at each.
While the children were busy, parents were able to visit the many information tables provided by the following vendors, for which we are grateful; The Arc of New Jersey, Autism NJ, Children’s Specialized Hospital, Crayations, Food Allergy Committee for Education and Safety (FACES), Hopewell Valley Municipal Alliance, Mercer County Project Lifesaver, Miracle League, Music Together, National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), Pediatric Therapy Solutions, LLC, Statewide Parent Advocacy Network (SPAN) and Stockton Family Practice.
Last, we would like to thank all of the district’s elementary school PTOs for their support, sponsorship by Stop & Shop, Pennington Quality Market, Starbuck’s of Pennington, Laura Pedrick Photography, Stony Brook Elementary School office and custodial support, and Amber Spa for providing complementary massages at the event!
Angela Jacobs, Heather O’Connell, Lydia Holland, Theran MacNeil, Mona Patel, Family 411 Resource Network