A heated discussion brewed concerning the upcoming bond referendum at the Dec. 13 Board of Education meeting, as well as a recent third party poll.
Board members unanimously approved the wording for the Jan. 22 Bancroft $12.5 million bond referendum.
The full proposal can be found on the district’s website.
Resident Dr. Susan Hoch said that she feels there is something corrupt in the referendum, citing a recent McLaughlin & Associates phone poll in the borough.
“Who has paid for this push polling in Haddonfield?” Hoch asked. “My head’s spinning.”
Board President Steve Weinstein said that no one on the school board was involved in any way with the poll.
Hoch asked if Weinstein participated in the poll, to which he said he did.
Board member Dr. Cheryl Laney said she also received the “destructive” poll call and instantly contacted Superintendent Dr. Richard Perry.
“We would not pay people to give a poll like that,” she said. “It’s ridiculous.”
Throughout the roughly two-hour long meeting, talks spanned from the matter of turf to open space to the future of Haddonfield.
Resident Beth Zigmund asked why turf was removed from the referendum.
Weinstein said that there would be a period of time after the referendum, assuming it passes, to have further discussions on the merits and demerits of turf versus grass.
The language now doesn’t mandate a turf field, he said, and the change was made to accommodate the interested of those opposed to turf.
Brian Kelly of Haddonfield United said he believes that “part of the referendum has already passed” in regards to turf.
Kim Custer, who has been part of the process for several years, said that the $3.5 million in grants for open space did not come in over night, but through years of commitment.
If the borough does not use the grant money, she said, it will go back to the state and Camden County.
It’s important to have open space, Custer said.
“We are looking to the future,” she added.
Lifelong resident Bill Tourtellotte expressed similar sentiments.
“This board is exhibiting vision,” he said. “This is about the long term of Haddonfield”
The referendum brings something for everybody in town, he said, as more open space increases property values.
As for the poll, he said, “Who cares who made this phone call?”
Tourtellotte said he doesn’t think that unrelated maintenance costs in the district are an excuse to ignore vision, as prior generations have made sacrifices for places in town, such as Hopkins Pond, the Fortnightly building and Crows Woods Gardens, to exist.
To resident Dave Siedell, there is a lot of value in the town.
“I trust this board completely. If you don’t trust the board then run for the board,” Siedell said.
Radnor Field
Resident John Stokes was present at the meeting to discuss his hope for a permanent easement to protect Radnor Field. He stood on behalf of 500 residents who signed a petition for a resolution, which was allegedly collected “in a matter of a few days.”
Weinstein said that the board does not have the power to adopt the resolution, according to legal counsel.
The board distributed a letter to the public from attorney Joseph Betley with Capehart Scatchard on the issue.
However, Weinstein said, “There is no intention to sell Radnor or do anything else with Radnor other than to continue current uses.”
Audit presentation
Auditor Robert Inverso presented the 2011–12 audit at the meeting.
According to Inverso, the district is in “as good of condition as we can be” as of June 30, 2012.
He recommended four points to the board.
According to Inverso, the district should see that that all revenues and expenditures be carefully recorded in financial records, that expenditures be directly charged to federal programs, that federal funds be requested only for the amount of cash expenditures and that no contracts be awarded until the SDA grant is signed and executed.
Next meeting
The next meeting of the Board of Education is scheduled for Jan. 3 at the high school library at 7:30 p.m. and will be the board’s reorganization meeting.
