I’m surprised at how many respected public voices seemed to have gently caved in at the prospect of taking away a voter’s right to register a simple up or down vote on annual school budgets in New Jersey.
In exchange for moving school board elections from April to November, the New Jersey legislature may pass, and the Corzine administration may sign into law a provision which would, as part of that change in timing, take away the right of New Jersey voters to say yea or nay to individual budget proposals across The Garden State.
New Jersey needs to get with the program and to move its school elections to November. But, -- and this is a critical “but” – what is even more crucial than when school elections are held is what New Jersey citizens get to vote on.
Voting on the school budget itself is far more important than voting for individual board members. The reason is simple: Put pressure directly on the budget and you automatically bring pressure to bear on both the board of education and the administration to hold down costs. Anyone who doesn’t believe that should look back to last April’s organizational strength behind the successful and highly-targeted lobbying effort to promote voting in favor of the Bridgewater-Raritan school budget.
Every group which lobbied in favor of the Bridgewater-Raritan budget knew from experience that Bridgewater Township would have had to make reductions to bring a failed budget below the cap level. That’s why, under the present system, budgets are nearly always presented to voters at cap, a number which has been consistently above the rate of inflation: Boards and administrations always fear that voters may reject budgets; therefore budgets are presented to voters at cap. This makes it easier to pare back the numbers should voters disagree.
Getting the school budget question off the ballot in exchange for moving elections to November is only the first step at disenfranchising voters. The next lobbying effort will be to increase, make exceptions to, or eliminate the cap on spending. Remember where you first read this.
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Sunday, May 25, 2008
John Basilone Stands Over Raritan
Sometimes there can be a popular misunderstanding of the primary loyalty that all U.S. soldiers adhere to while in battle. We often think of it as an intellectual concept – the struggle for freedom. For Americans the defense of freedom is, in fact, the main justification for going to war. It is never to be minimized. But, when U.S. warriors are in battle, there is nothing intellectual – certainly not romantic – about it. Just think of the roadside bombs maiming and killing U.S. troops in Iraq as you read this.
Soldiers in combat think first and foremost about the protection and survival of their immediate fighting teams: their buddies to their left and to their right, in the front and in the back. No soldier wants to lose his best buddy on the field of fire. That’s why there is so much pain and agony for a soldier when a buddy loses his or her life in battle. Every soldier wants to be with his fighting team and is willing to lose his life to protect anybody on that team.
This came vividly in focus during a May, 2008 ceremony in which young Army Specialists Christopher Corriveau and Eric Moser were awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. They had been part of four American paratroopers who were outnumbered 10-to-l by “a massive al Qaida kidnap-and-execution operation in the Iraqi city of Samarra.” Two of the paratroopers were killed in that operation.
When interviewed after the ceremony, Corriveau said that he didn’t consider himself a hero, and that, “Any one of those guys would have taken a bullet for me and likewise for them. I would have taken a bullet for any of them.”
Similarly, that was the same kind of allegiance that Marine Sergeant John Basilone of Raritan Borough, NJ, demonstrated for his own buddies in the midst of warfare. In 1942, after having been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for heroic action during battle on the island of Guadalcanal in the Pacific, Basilone returned to the U.S. But he grew weary of stateside duty, turned down a promotion to 2nd Lieutenant, and voluntarily returned to combat in the Pacific, where he rejoined his fighting Marines. In 1945, it cost him his life during the battle for Iwo Jima.
Such is the fidelity felt for comrades which, for men like Basilone and Corriveau, defines a “Band of Brothers.”
Soldiers in combat think first and foremost about the protection and survival of their immediate fighting teams: their buddies to their left and to their right, in the front and in the back. No soldier wants to lose his best buddy on the field of fire. That’s why there is so much pain and agony for a soldier when a buddy loses his or her life in battle. Every soldier wants to be with his fighting team and is willing to lose his life to protect anybody on that team.
This came vividly in focus during a May, 2008 ceremony in which young Army Specialists Christopher Corriveau and Eric Moser were awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. They had been part of four American paratroopers who were outnumbered 10-to-l by “a massive al Qaida kidnap-and-execution operation in the Iraqi city of Samarra.” Two of the paratroopers were killed in that operation.
When interviewed after the ceremony, Corriveau said that he didn’t consider himself a hero, and that, “Any one of those guys would have taken a bullet for me and likewise for them. I would have taken a bullet for any of them.”
Similarly, that was the same kind of allegiance that Marine Sergeant John Basilone of Raritan Borough, NJ, demonstrated for his own buddies in the midst of warfare. In 1942, after having been awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for heroic action during battle on the island of Guadalcanal in the Pacific, Basilone returned to the U.S. But he grew weary of stateside duty, turned down a promotion to 2nd Lieutenant, and voluntarily returned to combat in the Pacific, where he rejoined his fighting Marines. In 1945, it cost him his life during the battle for Iwo Jima.
Such is the fidelity felt for comrades which, for men like Basilone and Corriveau, defines a “Band of Brothers.”
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Council Cuts Bridgewater Township’s Budget Increase
At a special working session that started at 7:30 p.m. and lasted two hours, the Bridgewater Township Council agreed to reduce the increase in the proposed 2008 budget by approximately $192,000. These reductions will have to be approved at a June 5th meeting, and presented to the community on June 16th at a public hearing.
My impression after sitting through this meeting, which included Bridgewater’s mayor, Patricia Flannery, and Township Administrator, James Naples, is the stark contrast between this year’s state funding for the Township, compared to that given to the Bridgewater-Raritan School District.
The Corzine administration cut state funding to Bridgewater Township by about $550,000, while simultaneously giving the Bridgewater-Raritan School District a last minute windfall of $2,400,000, for a total of $12.1 million in state aid, resulting in a 24.9% increase over the prior year. Fortunately for Bridgewater and Raritan residents, the school board decided to return $1.5 million to the taxpayers to dampen the increase in the school tax.
Nonetheless, the school board still presented a voter-approved budget that went up by $4.9 million, a 4% increase, well over the rate of inflation, and at the maximum increase allowed by the state. Meanwhile, the township increased its budget by a smaller 2.5%.
I won’t complain about state aid to our school district, because we’ve been short-changed for years and need far more $ from Trenton. And I’m not saying that the township still can’t find opportunities for further budget reductions. But there is something absolutely bizarre when the Municipality of Bridgewater has to swallow a $550,000 reduction in state aid, while the Bridgewater-Raritan School District gets $12 million and enjoys a percentage increase to its budget that is 60% higher than that of the Township.
Think about the implications of those lop-sided numbers on the fiscal health of Bridgewater. There may be two separate legal entities in this township, but there is only one group of taxpayers footing the bill for both.
Note: The Bridgewater Township Council consists of five elected officials. They are Robert Albano, Michael Hsing, Matthew Moench, Howard Norgalis, and Patrick Scaglione. Mr. Norgalis currently serves as Council President. Linda Doyle is the Township Municipal Clerk and sits in on all Council meetings.
My impression after sitting through this meeting, which included Bridgewater’s mayor, Patricia Flannery, and Township Administrator, James Naples, is the stark contrast between this year’s state funding for the Township, compared to that given to the Bridgewater-Raritan School District.
The Corzine administration cut state funding to Bridgewater Township by about $550,000, while simultaneously giving the Bridgewater-Raritan School District a last minute windfall of $2,400,000, for a total of $12.1 million in state aid, resulting in a 24.9% increase over the prior year. Fortunately for Bridgewater and Raritan residents, the school board decided to return $1.5 million to the taxpayers to dampen the increase in the school tax.
Nonetheless, the school board still presented a voter-approved budget that went up by $4.9 million, a 4% increase, well over the rate of inflation, and at the maximum increase allowed by the state. Meanwhile, the township increased its budget by a smaller 2.5%.
I won’t complain about state aid to our school district, because we’ve been short-changed for years and need far more $ from Trenton. And I’m not saying that the township still can’t find opportunities for further budget reductions. But there is something absolutely bizarre when the Municipality of Bridgewater has to swallow a $550,000 reduction in state aid, while the Bridgewater-Raritan School District gets $12 million and enjoys a percentage increase to its budget that is 60% higher than that of the Township.
Think about the implications of those lop-sided numbers on the fiscal health of Bridgewater. There may be two separate legal entities in this township, but there is only one group of taxpayers footing the bill for both.
Note: The Bridgewater Township Council consists of five elected officials. They are Robert Albano, Michael Hsing, Matthew Moench, Howard Norgalis, and Patrick Scaglione. Mr. Norgalis currently serves as Council President. Linda Doyle is the Township Municipal Clerk and sits in on all Council meetings.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Baseball, Cancer & Courage
Every so often, in the midst of all the not-so-happy news emanating from newspapers, radio, TV, and the Internet, there is a hopeful, beaming ray of light that breaks through and shines on the tenacity of the human spirit’s ability to prevail over a potentially fatal disease.
Cancer is probably the ugliest six-letter word in the English language. No one who has not contracted it can understand the dread that it can cause. And no one who has not contracted it can understand the day-to-day courage of cancer patients who squarely face this disease with hope, prayer and good medical assistance.
The Red Sox have an example of that reach-down-deep strength in John Lester, the 24-year old left-handed pitcher who, on Monday, threw 130 pitches over nine innings to clinch a no-hitter against the Kansas City Royals.
During his treatment, Lester had been away from major league ball, and it was unclear whether he would return to the roster. But he did. And how! Last year, Colorado Rockies fans remember him well as the man who sealed their defeat in the fourth and final game of the 2007 World Series – a mere 14 months after being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Somerset County, N.J. is Yankees & Mets baseball country. Yet, any good baseball fan can easily offer a tip of the hat to Lester’s kind of grit: A sports enthusiast doesn’t have to love the Red Sox to love Jon Lester. He is hope for every patient struggling with the life-altering challenges brought on by this disease, and a beacon to the rest of us who can only stand in awe of such purpose and strength of mind.
Kind of puts life in perspective, doesn’t it?
Note: Since this post was drafted, Massachusetts senator Ted Kennedy was diagnosed with malignant glioblastoma; and, yesterday, Hamilton Jordan, former chief of staff to former President Carter, passed away from other forms of cancer.
Cancer is probably the ugliest six-letter word in the English language. No one who has not contracted it can understand the dread that it can cause. And no one who has not contracted it can understand the day-to-day courage of cancer patients who squarely face this disease with hope, prayer and good medical assistance.
The Red Sox have an example of that reach-down-deep strength in John Lester, the 24-year old left-handed pitcher who, on Monday, threw 130 pitches over nine innings to clinch a no-hitter against the Kansas City Royals.
During his treatment, Lester had been away from major league ball, and it was unclear whether he would return to the roster. But he did. And how! Last year, Colorado Rockies fans remember him well as the man who sealed their defeat in the fourth and final game of the 2007 World Series – a mere 14 months after being diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
Somerset County, N.J. is Yankees & Mets baseball country. Yet, any good baseball fan can easily offer a tip of the hat to Lester’s kind of grit: A sports enthusiast doesn’t have to love the Red Sox to love Jon Lester. He is hope for every patient struggling with the life-altering challenges brought on by this disease, and a beacon to the rest of us who can only stand in awe of such purpose and strength of mind.
Kind of puts life in perspective, doesn’t it?
Note: Since this post was drafted, Massachusetts senator Ted Kennedy was diagnosed with malignant glioblastoma; and, yesterday, Hamilton Jordan, former chief of staff to former President Carter, passed away from other forms of cancer.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Live New Jersey Senate Debate
Right now, if you have the time, tune in to the remainder of the debate between Richard Zimmer and Murray Sabrin. It’s live on MyCentralJersey video until 1:00 pm today at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080520/PROMO/80520012/-1/promo. (After 1:00 pm today, this hot link, which originates from the Asbury Park Press, will be playing other news items on video.)
Together with Joseph Pennacchio, who is not at the debate which started this morning, the three candidates are vying for nomination to the Republican U. S. Senate Seat from New Jersey. Whoever wins will be running against incumbent Democrat Senator, Frank Lautenberg, Congressman Robert E. Andrews, or whoever else wins the Democrat nomination.
Update, Tuesday, May 21, 2008: If you missed the live debate, you can now view the video in its entirety at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080521/NEWS/80521004&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
Together with Joseph Pennacchio, who is not at the debate which started this morning, the three candidates are vying for nomination to the Republican U. S. Senate Seat from New Jersey. Whoever wins will be running against incumbent Democrat Senator, Frank Lautenberg, Congressman Robert E. Andrews, or whoever else wins the Democrat nomination.
Update, Tuesday, May 21, 2008: If you missed the live debate, you can now view the video in its entirety at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080521/NEWS/80521004&referrer=FRONTPAGECAROUSEL
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Scarlett Doyle, Author & Bridgewater Town Planner
Saturday afternoon, after a luncheon with friends, I stopped by my home, reached for my reliable Kodak digital camera, and pointed the Taurus to Barnes & Noble in the shopping center near the Somerville Circle in Bridgewater.
After reading Michael Deak’s news article about budding author and Readington resident, Scarlett Doyle, I wanted to be at her book signing to hear what she had to say, and to purchase a personally autographed copy of her first book, “There’s No Such Thing as Closure.” It looks like it could be a good summer read – hey, why not take a chance on it?
When I arrived, there was a surprising turnout for the middle of a sunny, spring Saturday afternoon. Doyle was reading from her new creation. I found her delivery to be very good. She won’t put you to sleep with droning. Her reading voice is steady, inviting and soft – pleasant to hear. Since I arrived late, I only grasped a few moments of it, but first impressions are often reliable. As a bonus, the author was handing out her own personally made, artful bookmarks, and had light refreshments ready for her audience.
Doyle has worked through an interesting career as a mother and a professional. She provides municipal planning for five communities and does all of her writing work in the evenings.
Note: If you’d like to read more, refer to Michael Deak’s news report of May 15, at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080515/NEWS/80515006/1012/NEWS0201
After reading Michael Deak’s news article about budding author and Readington resident, Scarlett Doyle, I wanted to be at her book signing to hear what she had to say, and to purchase a personally autographed copy of her first book, “There’s No Such Thing as Closure.” It looks like it could be a good summer read – hey, why not take a chance on it?
When I arrived, there was a surprising turnout for the middle of a sunny, spring Saturday afternoon. Doyle was reading from her new creation. I found her delivery to be very good. She won’t put you to sleep with droning. Her reading voice is steady, inviting and soft – pleasant to hear. Since I arrived late, I only grasped a few moments of it, but first impressions are often reliable. As a bonus, the author was handing out her own personally made, artful bookmarks, and had light refreshments ready for her audience.
Doyle has worked through an interesting career as a mother and a professional. She provides municipal planning for five communities and does all of her writing work in the evenings.
Note: If you’d like to read more, refer to Michael Deak’s news report of May 15, at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080515/NEWS/80515006/1012/NEWS0201
Friday, May 16, 2008
Keeping Bridgewater Neat
One of the services that senior citizens can avail themselves of in Bridgewater, during the spring and fall, is the collection of brush by the Bridgewater Public Works Department.
Most of we seniors like to get out in the early spring and start to clean up our back yards of the accumulated debris from fallen branches and leftover leaves. Then, there are the heavier branches that end up on the ground, after you’ve finished with pruning chores. What do you do with all of that stuff?
If you are unable to pack all of this cleanup debris in the back of a truck to haul it away and, if you are a senior, the folks from Bridgewater Public Works are happy to get out on the streets of the Township twice a year, on the designated months, and clean it up for you – provided that you place it all in a neat pile on your property, near the side of the road. Just call them up well in advance, let them know, and they will do the job for you.
One of my neighbors and I worked for at least a month doing a major cleanup job on our respective properties. I was amazed as I saw the brush pile grow wider and higher.
The Township is very methodical about this process. The first pass is by a crew that picks up only bagged leaves (a dumpster with hydraulic gear is used for this). The second and final pass comes later in the form of a crew equipped with a wood chipper and truck. These guys work fast. When I came home from an errand, they had already cleared up what I had deposited by the road, and were finishing in another area.
Most of we seniors like to get out in the early spring and start to clean up our back yards of the accumulated debris from fallen branches and leftover leaves. Then, there are the heavier branches that end up on the ground, after you’ve finished with pruning chores. What do you do with all of that stuff?
If you are unable to pack all of this cleanup debris in the back of a truck to haul it away and, if you are a senior, the folks from Bridgewater Public Works are happy to get out on the streets of the Township twice a year, on the designated months, and clean it up for you – provided that you place it all in a neat pile on your property, near the side of the road. Just call them up well in advance, let them know, and they will do the job for you.
One of my neighbors and I worked for at least a month doing a major cleanup job on our respective properties. I was amazed as I saw the brush pile grow wider and higher.
The Township is very methodical about this process. The first pass is by a crew that picks up only bagged leaves (a dumpster with hydraulic gear is used for this). The second and final pass comes later in the form of a crew equipped with a wood chipper and truck. These guys work fast. When I came home from an errand, they had already cleared up what I had deposited by the road, and were finishing in another area.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
Scorned Van Holten Mothers
If it’s true that “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned,” then the Bridgewater-Raritan Board of Education needs to pay attention, because a lot of moms may be planning to show up at tonight’s 8:00 pm board meeting at the Wade Building in Martinsville, and they may have that aphorism in mind.
Their beef is with the reassignment of Van Holten Principal, Roberts Phillips, to the position of vice-principal within the school district. I don’t yet know the particulars of this situation, but the moms seem to have a case for continuity, for insisting on a more open process, and upon having a voice within that process.
For 31 years, Van Holten had a steady hand at the helm, in the person of Principal Ernest Shuba. I knew Ernie well when I was involved in school matters and when I was subsequently elected to the Board. He was respected in that job and brought a steady hand to his responsibilities. He knew how to maintain discipline, scholastic rigor and how to relate to parents.
It shouldn’t be surprising if Van Holten parents are upset at the current situation. This may be a good time for parents to challenge the conventional policy that the Board and Administration have of recusing themselves under the legal umbrella of personnel matters.
None of them is so tightly obliged to remain under that shadowy umbrella. It’s not raining, and there is sunshine out in the open. The Bridgewater-Raritan Board of Education needs to step out into that light.
Their beef is with the reassignment of Van Holten Principal, Roberts Phillips, to the position of vice-principal within the school district. I don’t yet know the particulars of this situation, but the moms seem to have a case for continuity, for insisting on a more open process, and upon having a voice within that process.
For 31 years, Van Holten had a steady hand at the helm, in the person of Principal Ernest Shuba. I knew Ernie well when I was involved in school matters and when I was subsequently elected to the Board. He was respected in that job and brought a steady hand to his responsibilities. He knew how to maintain discipline, scholastic rigor and how to relate to parents.
It shouldn’t be surprising if Van Holten parents are upset at the current situation. This may be a good time for parents to challenge the conventional policy that the Board and Administration have of recusing themselves under the legal umbrella of personnel matters.
None of them is so tightly obliged to remain under that shadowy umbrella. It’s not raining, and there is sunshine out in the open. The Bridgewater-Raritan Board of Education needs to step out into that light.
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Memorable Mothers
Moms are persons that can easily be taken for granted. Decades ago, my own mother embroidered and framed the following words for all the family and visitors to see: “A man works from sun to sun; a woman’s work is never done.” That aphorism delivers a message of deep meaning. Somewhat weathered by the sun, those words now hang on a prominent wall in the laundry room of my daughter’s home in Potomac, Maryland.
Good spot to hang such an adage. It’s a reminder that laundry, although one of the most humble jobs in the lives of most mothers, never really goes away. Even more important, it underscores that mothering goes well beyond the bounds of the laundry room. Moms are an incredible mixture of intelligence, competence, sunshine and, the key ingredient, love.
It’s also a reminder of how many other functions my daughter performs within her community: She comes and goes past that frame, the washer and the dryer, as she completes dozens of family and community commitments, exiting and entering from the back door leading to the garage and the ever-present Honda van.
Oh! How about my own wife and mom, who has done thousands of pounds of laundry during her lifetime for an often Cretan husband who should know better. Thanks, Pris, for all of the washing, drying and ironing. Happy Mother’s Day.
Good spot to hang such an adage. It’s a reminder that laundry, although one of the most humble jobs in the lives of most mothers, never really goes away. Even more important, it underscores that mothering goes well beyond the bounds of the laundry room. Moms are an incredible mixture of intelligence, competence, sunshine and, the key ingredient, love.
It’s also a reminder of how many other functions my daughter performs within her community: She comes and goes past that frame, the washer and the dryer, as she completes dozens of family and community commitments, exiting and entering from the back door leading to the garage and the ever-present Honda van.
Oh! How about my own wife and mom, who has done thousands of pounds of laundry during her lifetime for an often Cretan husband who should know better. Thanks, Pris, for all of the washing, drying and ironing. Happy Mother’s Day.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Hate Pays a Visit
What is the structure of hate? What are its elements? What makes it so pervasive and difficult to stamp out? And what is it that makes the specter of anti-Semitism rise again in Somerset County?
In the early 2000’s, Bridgewater experienced an ugly series of anti-Semitic actions. According to newspaper accounts at the time, a man was indicted for scrawling anti-Semitic graffiti on bleachers surrounding the ball fields at Chimney Rock Park. The same person was also charged with “making telephone calls threatening to harm the former governor, Christie Whitman, and the mayor of Bridgewater, James Dowden.”
The road to tolerance is a long one with many detours along the way. Now, another incident has apparently occurred: In the local section of the Courier News, Michael Deak reports that, “Two 13-year old boys have each been charged with three counts of bias intimidation and harassment.”
In regard to the same topic, Jennifer Golson writes in another local newspaper that two teenagers from the William Annin Middle School in Bernards Township “were charged with bias offenses for allegedly making a series of derogatory phone calls to Jewish families.”
She quotes school Principal Nick Markarian as saying that some eighth-grade students placed “phone calls of a harassing nature” and that he has “counseled” them so that there is no “school-based misconduct.” If the allegations are true, it seems to me that Mr. Markarian may need to review his rather soft statements.
Deak reports that “The principal was ‘extremely disappointed’ about the incidents,” and that, ‘The school emphasizes character development and conducts special programs and daylong events such as Holocaust Day to promote mutual respect.’” Character development begins in the home and is nurtured and developed there. Schools cannot solely impart that characteristic. Educators can only provide information and, most importantly, project a good example through their own personal conduct and integrity.
Mr. Markarian intends to meet with his eighth-graders about this, Deak writes. Sounds OK, but school action involving a broad sweep of the guilt brush over all students doesn’t get to the core of this particular problem. These are highly specific incidents which, if they happened as alleged, require a specific response aimed at those involved.
Mr. Markarian, voluntarily working with the teachers of these two students and, with the full approval and support of their parents, should consider assigning an appropriate community project, followed by a report, to each of the students. Or would that violate the conventions of political correctness?
It is too easy to ignore the import of these alleged incidences. We all know where bias-laden phone calls can lead, how disruptive they can be to the lives of people and, in particular, to Jewish families, whose tradition has endured enough through the ages.
Sources: For the full background stories, see Michael Deak at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080507/NEWS/805080375/1011/NEWS0206, and Jennifer Golson at http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/somerset/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1210221367159820.xml&coll=1. For the Bridgewater archived story, see the New York Times at http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/a/antisemitism/index.html?query=BRIDGEWATER%20(NJ)&field=geo&match=exact
In the early 2000’s, Bridgewater experienced an ugly series of anti-Semitic actions. According to newspaper accounts at the time, a man was indicted for scrawling anti-Semitic graffiti on bleachers surrounding the ball fields at Chimney Rock Park. The same person was also charged with “making telephone calls threatening to harm the former governor, Christie Whitman, and the mayor of Bridgewater, James Dowden.”
The road to tolerance is a long one with many detours along the way. Now, another incident has apparently occurred: In the local section of the Courier News, Michael Deak reports that, “Two 13-year old boys have each been charged with three counts of bias intimidation and harassment.”
In regard to the same topic, Jennifer Golson writes in another local newspaper that two teenagers from the William Annin Middle School in Bernards Township “were charged with bias offenses for allegedly making a series of derogatory phone calls to Jewish families.”
She quotes school Principal Nick Markarian as saying that some eighth-grade students placed “phone calls of a harassing nature” and that he has “counseled” them so that there is no “school-based misconduct.” If the allegations are true, it seems to me that Mr. Markarian may need to review his rather soft statements.
Deak reports that “The principal was ‘extremely disappointed’ about the incidents,” and that, ‘The school emphasizes character development and conducts special programs and daylong events such as Holocaust Day to promote mutual respect.’” Character development begins in the home and is nurtured and developed there. Schools cannot solely impart that characteristic. Educators can only provide information and, most importantly, project a good example through their own personal conduct and integrity.
Mr. Markarian intends to meet with his eighth-graders about this, Deak writes. Sounds OK, but school action involving a broad sweep of the guilt brush over all students doesn’t get to the core of this particular problem. These are highly specific incidents which, if they happened as alleged, require a specific response aimed at those involved.
Mr. Markarian, voluntarily working with the teachers of these two students and, with the full approval and support of their parents, should consider assigning an appropriate community project, followed by a report, to each of the students. Or would that violate the conventions of political correctness?
It is too easy to ignore the import of these alleged incidences. We all know where bias-laden phone calls can lead, how disruptive they can be to the lives of people and, in particular, to Jewish families, whose tradition has endured enough through the ages.
Sources: For the full background stories, see Michael Deak at http://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080507/NEWS/805080375/1011/NEWS0206, and Jennifer Golson at http://www.nj.com/news/ledger/somerset/index.ssf?/base/news-3/1210221367159820.xml&coll=1. For the Bridgewater archived story, see the New York Times at http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/a/antisemitism/index.html?query=BRIDGEWATER%20(NJ)&field=geo&match=exact
Monday, May 5, 2008
Bridgewater’s New Municipal Complex
There has been more progress on the construction of Bridgewater’s new Municipal Complex at the corner of Garretson Road and Commons Way. It seems that for so many years now, the only new public buildings going up in Bridgewater were schools. Meanwhile, township employees continued to be housed in facilities which they have long since outgrown.
Ironically enough, the current Municipal Building was once itself a school. Bridgewater Township took it over from the school district at a time when it was no longer needed and converted it into an all-offices facility. Police, court, and animal shelter personnel continued to be housed in other structures a few hundred yards to the back of the Municipal Administrative Building.
There is always the question of whether public monies should be spent to construct a new, expanded complex to consolidate and house Bridgewater municipal, police and court employees, at a time when the State of New Jersey can’t figure out where its next buck is coming from, and when the Bridgewater-Raritan school budget keeps rising with no end in sight.
Those concerns, however, don’t minimize the long-overdue need for Bridgewater Township officials to finally have resolved this long outstanding need. I’m looking forward to seeing the results. I hope it’s on time and on budget.
Note: See the architect’s web site at http://www.usaarchitects.com/bridgewater/ for a pictorial depiction of the planned facility.
Ironically enough, the current Municipal Building was once itself a school. Bridgewater Township took it over from the school district at a time when it was no longer needed and converted it into an all-offices facility. Police, court, and animal shelter personnel continued to be housed in other structures a few hundred yards to the back of the Municipal Administrative Building.
There is always the question of whether public monies should be spent to construct a new, expanded complex to consolidate and house Bridgewater municipal, police and court employees, at a time when the State of New Jersey can’t figure out where its next buck is coming from, and when the Bridgewater-Raritan school budget keeps rising with no end in sight.
Those concerns, however, don’t minimize the long-overdue need for Bridgewater Township officials to finally have resolved this long outstanding need. I’m looking forward to seeing the results. I hope it’s on time and on budget.
Note: See the architect’s web site at http://www.usaarchitects.com/bridgewater/ for a pictorial depiction of the planned facility.
Friday, May 2, 2008
Hold the Phone!
It looks like Verizon and Embarq want you to pay a lot more for your local telephone service. These firms want to get there by completely deregulating local telephone service in New Jersey.
Baloney! There is no solid business case for deregulating basic local service in this state. Verizon is getting a sound return on investment for that service. Take a look at your local telephone bill. The charge for flat rate unlimited service is $8.95 monthly – that’s the fee which Verizon wants to raise on you. Sounds cheap, doesn’t it?
Let’s take a closer look. The next line item on that very same bill is $6.29 for something called “Federal Subscriber Line Charge.” That levy represents a now-obsolete charge which should have been eliminated years ago. It is a monthly gift to Verizon which no longer has any economic validity for being imposed upon customers.
In 1984, when the Bell System was broken up, the local telephone companies convinced a federal court which administered the breakup that it would be losing money. This would happen, the Baby Bells lobbied, because the subsidy formerly being provided to the local Bell companies by the Bell System’s Long Distance Division would go away. Before the breakup, the Bell System guaranteed universal telephone service and low rates for retail consumers. The cost for this guarantee was borne on the backs of long distance customers and businesses in the form of higher telephone rates on those services.
The federal court which, under the strong hand of Judge Greene, administered the consent decree, decided to impose a “Subscriber Line Charge” on your telephone bill. A similar and equal charge was also imposed on AT&T, which built it into its rates and transferred the money to each of the local Baby Bells. Those two charges were to compensate the Baby Bells for any losses they would incur as a result of the breakup.
Only one problem with this: the “Federal Subscriber Line Charge” no longer has any reason for its existence because now, Verizon owns the whole kit and caboodle. It has a seamless network from beginning to end, and therefore, there is no logical business reason for this now-undeserved subsidy to continue. Verizon owns not only the local network, but also the long distance network, having purchased and integrated MCI into its operations.
The local telephone network is paid for. It is now a legacy cost which demands only maintenance, not huge investment. New Jersey is what is known in the business as a “dense” telephone state: This means that the cost of delivering local telephone service is one of the cheapest if not, indeed, the very cheapest in all of the U.S., because households are not widely spread out as, for example, they are in large, sparsely populated states such as Montana and Wyoming.
Verizon’s strategy of raising local rates is clear to anyone who understands the telecommunications business. By raising basic local rates through deregulation, Verizon hopes to push residential customers onto its new fiber-optic network and its widely advertized three-tier, one-bill package of local/long distance phone, internet, and TV service. Increasing basic rates is also intended to subsidize the rollout of these new services.
A state and consumer coalition claims that deregulation would raise local rates from $9 to $30 monthly. There is no reason to doubt that statement. I hope that those who sit on New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilities understand this stuff and have the best welfare of New Jersey consumers in mind. What the BPU should be concentrating on is putting pressure on the Feds to eliminate the no longer justified “Federal Subscriber Line Charge,” not deregulating local phone service.
Note: For an excellent Gannett State Bureau news report on this matter, see www.mycentraljersey.com under “state” athttp://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/B3/20080502/NEWS0301/805020498/1067/STATE, or on page 3 of Friday’s May 2, 2008, print edition.
Baloney! There is no solid business case for deregulating basic local service in this state. Verizon is getting a sound return on investment for that service. Take a look at your local telephone bill. The charge for flat rate unlimited service is $8.95 monthly – that’s the fee which Verizon wants to raise on you. Sounds cheap, doesn’t it?
Let’s take a closer look. The next line item on that very same bill is $6.29 for something called “Federal Subscriber Line Charge.” That levy represents a now-obsolete charge which should have been eliminated years ago. It is a monthly gift to Verizon which no longer has any economic validity for being imposed upon customers.
In 1984, when the Bell System was broken up, the local telephone companies convinced a federal court which administered the breakup that it would be losing money. This would happen, the Baby Bells lobbied, because the subsidy formerly being provided to the local Bell companies by the Bell System’s Long Distance Division would go away. Before the breakup, the Bell System guaranteed universal telephone service and low rates for retail consumers. The cost for this guarantee was borne on the backs of long distance customers and businesses in the form of higher telephone rates on those services.
The federal court which, under the strong hand of Judge Greene, administered the consent decree, decided to impose a “Subscriber Line Charge” on your telephone bill. A similar and equal charge was also imposed on AT&T, which built it into its rates and transferred the money to each of the local Baby Bells. Those two charges were to compensate the Baby Bells for any losses they would incur as a result of the breakup.
Only one problem with this: the “Federal Subscriber Line Charge” no longer has any reason for its existence because now, Verizon owns the whole kit and caboodle. It has a seamless network from beginning to end, and therefore, there is no logical business reason for this now-undeserved subsidy to continue. Verizon owns not only the local network, but also the long distance network, having purchased and integrated MCI into its operations.
The local telephone network is paid for. It is now a legacy cost which demands only maintenance, not huge investment. New Jersey is what is known in the business as a “dense” telephone state: This means that the cost of delivering local telephone service is one of the cheapest if not, indeed, the very cheapest in all of the U.S., because households are not widely spread out as, for example, they are in large, sparsely populated states such as Montana and Wyoming.
Verizon’s strategy of raising local rates is clear to anyone who understands the telecommunications business. By raising basic local rates through deregulation, Verizon hopes to push residential customers onto its new fiber-optic network and its widely advertized three-tier, one-bill package of local/long distance phone, internet, and TV service. Increasing basic rates is also intended to subsidize the rollout of these new services.
A state and consumer coalition claims that deregulation would raise local rates from $9 to $30 monthly. There is no reason to doubt that statement. I hope that those who sit on New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilities understand this stuff and have the best welfare of New Jersey consumers in mind. What the BPU should be concentrating on is putting pressure on the Feds to eliminate the no longer justified “Federal Subscriber Line Charge,” not deregulating local phone service.
Note: For an excellent Gannett State Bureau news report on this matter, see www.mycentraljersey.com under “state” athttp://www.mycentraljersey.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/B3/20080502/NEWS0301/805020498/1067/STATE, or on page 3 of Friday’s May 2, 2008, print edition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)