Chatham Parent: Why I Support the Referendum and Board of Education

The following letter was submitted to Chatham Patch by a Borough resident. The letter follows three other submissions discussing a proposal to spend $14 million to build a new 975-seat theater at Chatham Middle School. Read the first letter here, the second letter here, third letter here. Another resident also submitted a letter discussing splitting the $22 million bond referendum at large. Click here to read that letter.

Dear Editor,

I have read several recent published opinions on the upcoming referendum for the Chatham School District and am now offering my opinion to respond to a couple of the points that were made.

The first point is regarding the idea of splitting up the questions. In my opinion, this would serve only to fracture our community into conflicting factions and could ultimately result in losing votes for many or all of the questions. This seems self-defeating to me or worse.

If the questions are split up into six questions, as one opinion suggested be done, I would have to assume that we are left with the six choices that are spelled out in the latest presentation at the 01/28/15 Board of Education meeting. These choices are as follows.

1.) Renovations to the HS auditorium.

2.) Convert the MS auditorium to classroom and professional spaces.

3.) Construction of new MS auditorium.

4.) Construct six additional elementary classrooms.

5.) Upgrades to Cougar Field.

6.) Upgrades to HS athletic fields.

These cannot simply be broken into 6 questions because you cannot vote for #2 without voting for #3 and if both are rejected, there should be a substitute item for renovation of the MS auditorium. This structural problem aside, there is still an inherent risk that some or all of these items are rejected outright. This seems like an unacceptable risk to me.

If these items are presented in a piecemeal fashion, then what is to stop the athletic supporter from voting only for their interest in the athletic facility upgrades (#5 & #6), while voting “no” to those areas outside of their interest? What about the full day kindergarten supporters who may not be concerned with the auditoriums or the athletic facilities? My kids are done with elementary school, so what concern do I have for full day kindergarten or the new elementary classrooms? My kids are not in band or theatre programs, so what concern do I have for new auditoriums? Perhaps you can see my point.

Carving this up will create factions and can result in an insufficient number of positive votes for any or all of the items. What if there are not enough positive votes to even provide renovations to the HS and/or MS auditoriums (let alone the construction of a new auditorium)?

Do we just decide have our district live with the same aging, sub-standard, embarrassing and potentially hazardous auditoriums for another decade or two? To sum up, it is my opinion that it would be a poor choice to break up the questions with the very real potential for some very negative unintended consequences.

The next point is related, but distinct. There is a thread running through those opinions which oppose the referendum. This thread is either explicitly stating, or through inference and intimation, that our Board of Education is conducting itself in an untoward manner or without fairness in the process. It has also been suggested that the referendum proposes to “waste” taxpayer money.

I submit that these claims or suggestions seem baseless and are serious claims to make with no more than assumption to support them. The spending of money is not inherently wasteful. It is only wasteful if no benefit is derived. In the case of the new auditorium, I believe there will be great benefits derived.

If you do not support the performing arts, then you will no doubt disagree, just as you will disagree with improvements to athletic facilities if you do not believe athletics are an important aspect to a community and to the educational process.

“To argue, as some have, that only a certain percentage of kids utilize the facilities is primarily untrue and, secondarily, missing the point. Not all kids participate in athletics, but we still should have those facilities and they should be commensurate with the caliber of the school district we support and benefit from. The performing arts should be no different.”

By my analysis, our Board of Education has provided a stewardship of our school system which has brought our district to the highest levels of statewide performance and maintained that level of performance for years. This has been achieved with efficiency, fairness and demonstrable success thus far, in the face of considerable challenges resulting from the explosion of the school-age population in our community.

It is we, the parents, homeowners, and residents of Chatham, who benefit most from this persistent and effective leadership. Based on their track record, the performance of our schools, and the understanding that our school district is one of the central components of our community, I will grant the Board considerable leeway and trust in plotting the course forward.

This is not to say that I have blind trust or faith, but that they have earned my trust based on past performance. I would certainly not engage in the type of sniping that impugns the Board’s motives and actions without very good evidence. So far, I have not seen or heard such evidence.

I support the referendum because I see the value that the performing arts provide for my children and countless other kids in the district. Music and theatre exposure are invaluable experiences and we should have modern facilities that inspire a sense of pride (which I believe IS actually important!) not serve as an embarrassing display of what a low priority looks like.

To argue, as some have, that only a certain percentage of kids utilize the facilities is primarily untrue and, secondarily, missing the point. Not all kids participate in athletics, but we still should have those facilities and they should be commensurate with the caliber of the school district we support and benefit from. The performing arts should be no different.

It is true that only a certain number of kids participate in a theatre performance or that only a certain percentage play in the band or orchestra, but that does not mean that students and residents who are audience members do not also benefit from these productions and performances as well. I can attest to the fact that the friends of my children, along with their families, regularly attend their performances and enjoy the experience.

I am as sensitive as anyone to the tax burdens of this community. I am also sensitive to the reality that it is our school district that is a primary magnet and one of the fundamental components which keeps our community sought after and is constantly driving our property values higher.

All decisions are a judgment… a weighing of the benefits versus the costs. In the decision on whether to vote in favor of this referendum or not, we should all be making this judgment – and it should be rendered with consideration for the community as a whole, not simply one’s individual interests and perspective. In my view, the benefits to the community as a whole contained in this referendum far outweigh the costs manifested in the increased tax burden.

Sincerely,

Andrew Clarke

Chatham Borough

For breaking news alerts and more from Patch, sign up for the daily newsletter by clicking on the links below.

Westfield* Clark-Garwood* Cranford* New Providence-Berkeley Heights * Scotch Plains-Fanwood* Springfield* Summit* Chatham* West Orange

More on Patch:

• Resident: Is a $14 Million Chatham Middle School Theater Reasonable?
• Chatham Parent: Let the Voters Decide How the $22 Million Referendum Should Be Spent
• Chatham Resident: $14 Million Middle School Theater Is Unjustifiable Waste of Taxpayer Money
• Prosecutor: Man Murdered Wife, Dumped Body In Suitcase Outside Chatham Home
• Breakdown: Where Did Your Chatham Taxes Go In 2014?