Background to Questions
Question 1
In the updated version of Question 1, the projects have been generalized and are ambiguous leaving voters to ponder what, specifically, will be completed if there is support for Question 1. Although “parking lot” refurbishments was removed, the language is still indicative that paving could be part of the projects.
Question 1 still fails to address the most pressing issues to our schools; necessary roofing and HVAC repairs and replacements.
Question 1 does not reflect any information obtained from the stakeholder referendum survey. In fact, the 3 ‘lowest priority’ projects are addressed in Question 1.
Total cost of project is $21,227,001
| ORIGINAL | AMENDED |
|---|---|
|
Site Parking and Drainage Upgrades (all schools) —Parking lot/drive re-pavement/stripping —walkway and site stair repairs/replacement Roofing System Replacement (Woodruff) —partial roofing system replacemet, including drains, coping and flashing Security Technology Upgrades —security camera systems upgrades/expansion (all schools) —clock & speaker PA system upgrades/expansion (GLHS, CMS, TPH) Media Center Renovations & Upgrades (all schools) TV Studio Renovations (GLHS) |
Undertake various security, technology, site and building interior improvements,
alterations, renovations and upgrades (MKM, MP, TPH, CMS, GLHS)
Undertake various security, technology, site, roofing and building interior improvements, alterations, renovations and upgrades (WW) |
Question 2
The approval of projects contained within Question 2 are still contingent on Question 1 passing. Question 2 still contains infrastructure projects that will ensure continuity in our students attending and learning in our schools.
Question 2 has also been amended to reflect general ‘scenarios’ without any specifics on scope of work.
Total cost is $28,915, 969
| ORIGINAL | AMENDED |
|---|---|
|
Roofing System Replacement (GLHS, CMS, MP) —roofing system replacement including drains, coping & flashing Electrical System Upgrades (GLHS) —provide additional 200kWh backup generator —provide surge protection on existing service Mechanical Systems & Piping Upgrades (CMS, MP, WW, MKM) —replace HVAC/unit ventilator units —install direct digital controls – building management system —circulation piping replacement Science Labs (GLHS, CMS) Technology Robotics STEM (GLHS, CMS) |
Undertake improvements, alterations, renovations and upgrades (MKM, WW) —replacement of select HVAC equipment and systems Undertake improvements, alterations, renovations and upgrades, including replacement of select equipment and a portion of roofing (MP) —replacement of select HVAC equipment and systems Undertake improvements, alterations, renovations and upgrades, including electrical upgrades, replacement of a portion of roofing and renovations to various classrooms (CMS) —replacement of select HVAC equipment and systems Undertake improvements, alterations, renovations and upgrades, including electrical upgrades, replacement of a portion of roofing and renovations to various classrooms (GLHS) |
In an email to the BOE and Administration, I posed several questions with the focus on why the most significant projects (roofing, HVAC) aren’t being addressed in question 1 and, IF the referendum fails, what it the contingency plan.
Ms. Akiri raised several concerns about the referendum connected to the necessity of the total amount borrowed and tax impact in the face of declining enrollment as well as the District’s transparency on the availability of existing funds to cover some of the costs that may reduce the amount borrowed. She makes clear that a majority of BOE Members (five) had concerns about the language connected to the bond questions and points to a mismatch between the referendum’s priorities and the District’s own survey results. Lastly, she makes reference to a “copy and paste” email campaign currently underway.
Hope all is well. There will be a tax impact with any referendum bonds. The fact that older debt is expiring does not make new borrowing free. It is similar to paying off your mortgage and feeling relief, only to immediately take out a new loan. You still have monthly payments. You have simply replaced one obligation with another.
The real question is whether we actually need to borrow fifty million dollars at this moment, especially when enrollment is declining and the district’s own survey showed that the community’s top priority is the quality of teaching staff, not large capital projects.
Additionally, the District has not been forthcoming about the money it already has set aside that could be used for some of these projects without taking on new debt. The public deserves a full and honest accounting of what funds are currently available.
Lastly, if I recall correctly, five BOE members raised concerns about how the bond questions were worded during the meeting. I also appreciate politically motivated copy and paste email campaigns because they give me an opportunity to correct the record and provide accurate information.
As always these are my thoughts and opinions as an individual and do not represent the opinion of the Berkeley Heights Board of Education.
Best regards,
Sai Bhargavi
We appreciate Sai Akiri’s response to our questions.
Support & Stay Informed
NJ21st is powered by facts, not special interests. If our reporting helped you stay informed, consider making a contribution and subscribing to get new coverage delivered directly to your inbox.
Contribute TodayRelated Articles
Student Testimony While Supportive Underscores Challenges Within BHPSNJ Referendum Structure
Community Voices: Berkeley Heights Deserves Clear Answers Before the Referendum Vote
Dr. Feltre Responds to Questions on Referendum
