Parent ‘offended’ by REA president’s recent comments
To the Editor:
I take personal exception to Mr. Michael Yannone’s letter to the editor of The Ridgewood News dated Sept. 25. In its own letter, the Board of Education’s president, vice president and two trustees clearly outlined where Mr. Yannone went wrong in his belief that the Board of Education is disrespecting our teachers.
As a parent in this district and as just one of the countless parent volunteers who has worked tirelessly to improve our schools and help our excellent teachers in and out of the classroom, I am very offended by Mr. Yannone’s words and tone. Perhaps he should take the time to go on a field trip or enjoy a parent provided meal with his teachers. Maybe he should visit an elementary school and see behind the scenes as parents and teachers work hand in hand to create amazing moments. Maybe he should attend an HSA and Board of Education meeting to hear the support of parents for their teachers. I can provide countless suggestions.
Ridgewood is a charming New Jersey town whose residents often return to their roots to raise their own children. This village attracts families from the city, such as myself, not just because of its charm or the ease of transportation, but because of the schools.
Our schools are ranked as some of the best in the state and country, yes, because of our excellent teachers but also because of how well run they are by our school board both fiscally and academically. Parents in this community constantly are concerned not only with keeping the bar high academically but in also helping teachers in any way they can to insure our children are provided the best education. Parents work hard to guarantee teachers are given the resources to achieve that goal.
Is Mr. Yannone suggesting updated books, modern technology, refurbished classrooms are not necessary for our teachers? What about our children? I understand Mr. Yannone is the advocate for our teachers, but what is education ultimately about if it is not about the education of our students?
It seems to me that our Board of Education (all volunteers by the way) does an amazing job by balancing the different interests that create our top notch school system. I know their priority is and has always been about educating our children and thereby insuring more people will be returning to Ridgewood or discovering the district’s commitment to educational excellence.
I also know that parents will be there every step of the way with our teachers and administrators to lend a hand.
The time of the Ridgewood Board of Education’s Regular Public Meeting on Monday, October 5, 2015, at 7:30 p.m.
The public is invited to attend the meeting at the Ed Center, 49 Cottage Place, Floor 3. The meeting will be aired live on FiOS channel 33 and Optimum channel 77. Or it may be viewed live via the district website at www.ridgewood.k12.nj.us using the “Link in Live” tab.
Click here to view the agenda for the October 5, 2015 Regular Public Meeting.
Ridgewood NJ , A huge turn out filled the the courtroom last night with some estimates saying there was another 300 people in the rooms downstairs watching it on the TV’s.It seems the people were finally heard. The council voted 4-1 (Al Pucciarelli the only no vote) to continue the hearings and conduct impact studies on the fiscal impacts, traffic (a comprehensive study that would include all off the proposed buildings as well as the 2 parking garages and the 98 unit assisted living facility), and schools.
The resistance to the over development and urbanization was spearheaded by the Citizens for a Better Ridgewood . The group is non-profit with a mission to make sure development is achieved within the character of Ridgewood.
They are in favor of development that compliments our existing CBD. “Our town has been reacting for far too long. It is time for a shared vision, a comprehensive plan that allows for extensive community input and can move us forward.”
The council has postponed the vote on the ordinances to increase the density from 12 to 35 until those studies have been done. The next meeting will be held Monday, November 9th. Many people left because it just ran too late so If you want your chance to speak Nov 9th, you will be able to.
Reader said , “Partial victory tonight… tabled the vote! However the real solution here is to roll back the “Valley Hospital inspired” master plan changes which allowed these ordinances even be proposed in the first place.”
Subject: letter to Hauck in response to her own misinformation
Dear Councilwoman Hauck,
As you and I have yet to formally meet, I’d like to start by introducing myself. My name is Dave Slomin and I have lived at 36 Heights Road for since 2001. My wife grew up in this town, as did her mother (who still lives here). My two sons attend RW Public Schools (RHS and GW). While I have not been a formal appointee or elected official, I have been very involved in working with the Village – whether my input is welcome or not 😉 – on several recent matters, including as a key advocate for Citizens for a Better Ridgewood. My main volunteer work is with the BSA, where I was Pack Leader of Ridge School’s Pack 44 (the largest Pack in North Jersey) for many years and am now Pack 44’s Executive Committee Chair and an Assistant Scoutmaster with Troop 7. I mention these things, not to toot any horns, but so my opinions are not taken as those of an armchair complainer. As with so many other Residents, I am out there caring about my community, putting in my time for Ridgewood and – having attended almost every planning board meeting for the past 2-3 years – I am well educated in the Multi-Family debate, process and ordinances.
I am also President of Andover Properties, a real estate company that specializes in multi-family properties. We own and manage apartment complexes in 4 states, including New Jersey. I know the benefits and difficulties of the multifamily business and I know how investors and developers work, think and act. At many Planning Board (PB) meetings, I tried to pass along some of my experience and knowledge, given the gaps in data provided by developers. Unfortunately, it fell on too many ears that, if not deaf, were wrongly “prematurely decided.” Given the far too little amount of time the Council has relegated to multifamily discussion, I am hopeful that you will consider some key points, insights and corrections from an industry insider: and one who is a big fan of apartments… when properly planned and appropriately built. I am for multifamily development, but at lower densities and scale that in the ordinances.
I write to you, as I am aware of some responses you have provided to emails from members of the Ridgewood (RW) Community. As they were sent from your official RW email address, I am comfortable that you intended for your thoughts to be shared. They were. And unfortunately, your responses illustrate – to this real estate professional – that you and the council really do need more correct and unbiased information on the matter you are voting on. Beyond that, some of your answers leaned more towards the influences of the developers PR firms, than to multifamily realities. And unfortunately, some of your data and response were wrong. I am writing to help… because this is so important.
I am also writing because of a statement you wrote to a fellow resident saying: “If only people understood the other facts and not the points which have become cocktail party innuendo.” I hope to show, with knowledge of “the facts,” how such a statement is wrong and can appear to come from the developers’ PR Playbook. Please know that I do know the facts. As do so many residents. And I’d like to clarify some and provide others you may not know.
So, some responses:
THE MALTBIE/FRANKLIN APARTMENTS ARE 19.5 UNITS PER ACRE, NOT 33.6
In one email, you incorrectly proffered that the apartment complex across from Ridge School (on Franklin and Maltbie) is a great example “for a comparison” as it represents “33.6 units per acre.” I do agree with you that: (1) it is “attractive” and “quaint,” and (2) they “do not look like Fort Lee,” but a key reason for that is the fact that their density is only 19.5 UNIT PER ACRE. The complex has 13 units and sits on .664 acres. Some outdated records show the property to be .459 acres. That was the case until the owner added an adjacent lot to provide parking when some additional units were built. Nevertheless, the property is most definitely not 33.6 units/acre. It is almost half that. But it is an excellent example of a scale and density that would fit beautifully in RW’s CBD. It is also only 2 stories, plus the roof peak. Dramatically less than the 5 stories we may see downtown if you vote in favor of the current ordinances. Maybe that’s why you like how it looks and fits.
YOU SAY THE OAK STREET APARTMENTS HAVE MORE CHILDREN BECAUSE THEY ARE LESS DENSE. THAT IS AN INCORRECT ASSUMPTION.
In another email you note that the Oak Street Apartments, at 18 units/acres have “more school children in them than higher density apartments BECAUSE they are less dense.” While I can understand how one might make this faulty assumption, it’s not accurate or that simple. There are many other low to mid density complexes in town that have fewer children. And there are many higher density properties in other towns that have lots of children. That’s because there are so many factors that play into apartment demographics. Some key factors are the management company policies and the historic “community” of the complexes themselves. Firstly, management companies, while being required to adhere to law regarding renting vacant units often do have discretion as to how they wish to run their communities. Some managers/owners are happy to have more occupants (including children) in units, if they know they can fill vacancies with paying renters. Others would like to have fewer occupants, as fewer occupants results in less water consumption and often less wear and tear. Furthermore, over time certain properties, like certain towns, gain a reputation, or a community culture. For example, a senior will want to move to a complex known for having more seniors, while a family might skip that complex for one that has more kids… even if both are garden-style properties. So, in sum, your assumption is wrong. Lower densities do not automatically equal more kids. If a manager wants kids or higher numbers of occupants to fill units, and prices units appropriately, there will be more school children. The current ordinance cannot dictate this, so be careful. You just don’t know the answer to this question. And, right now, no one does.
YOU ALLEGE THAT FOLKS WHO WISH TO PUT HIGHER NUMBERS OF CHILDREN INTO UNITS ARE “SCAMMERS” AND/OR WOULD RENT HOUSES FIRST.
In another email you hold that “people who want to scam the schools would rent single or double family houses” before paying a premium for apartments. There are several issues here. Firstly, having high numbers of children in a unit is not a “scam.” It is actual a “right” maintained by law. Many NJ municipalities use occupancy guidelines stating that 150 square feet is required for the first occupant and only 75 additional s/f is needed for each additional occupant (not including kitchens and baths). In a 1,000 S/F apartment, you could potentially, and legally have 6-9 occupants. So again, folks who may wish to put more kids into a unit to benefit from our great schools (provided that the proper guardian is there) are not necessarily running a “scam.” They are really just doing the right thing within the law for their children. As these decisions on occupancy limits often come down to property management, RW needs to tread more carefully. The ordinance cannot define this. So limit the risk. If a property is not leasing fast enough to singles or couples, I guarantee that we will see more families with greater school impacts and costs. That’s just the way it works.
Regarding renters opting for house as a first choice, this again is something that you don’t and cannot know. But you NEED to be right on these things. Be advised that even though the developers are projecting rents in the $3,000-4,000 range, there is no way of guaranteeing that. Nor can you guarantee the “luxury” status in design, and especially management, that the Mayor especially has said he desires. If a property is underperforming – and with so many units coming onboard at once, that may happen – investors will need paying tenants, even if the rents have to come down. Some money is better than no money, when the mortgage bank comes calling.
THESE APARTMENTS WILL NOT EFFECT OUR SCHOOLS.
On this, no true and full study has been done. RW has not done a market study to more accurately determine who may move in. While discussed ad nauseam, data to date has too predominantly been provided by the developers. I am further concerned about the fact that (I believe) only one Council-member currently has children in the Schools. The other members either have no children currently in the system or chose to send their children to private schools. As such, we need all of you to know how current school-age parents are feeling. How have our schools changed since you may have experienced them? What are the current limitations and needs? YOU NEED TO SPEND MORE TIME SPEAKING WITH US. And, on this topic, a 3rd party study really still needs to be done. The very fact that the developers used, and some PB members embraced, the now outdated “Rutgers Study” to determine numbers of school-children was a big data fault. The Rutgers Study looked at no towns with schools anywhere near the quality of Ridgewood. One PB resident speaker pointed out the she chose Ridgewood specifically due to the quality of educational services for her Special Needs child. She said, she’d spoken to many “special needs parents” who are just as aggressive as her and feared that if options availed themselves via multi-family we might see more special needs children. This would, she said, possibly diminish the current programs helping her child. And at up to $100,000 per special needs child, could hit our schools and taxes hard.
So in sum, we have no real data on OUR OWN schools. Lots of speculation from both sides. And that’s dangerous. You should ask for better. Slow down and let’s get it right. That’s why we voted for you!
THE BUILDINGS WITH 80+ UNITS/ACRE YOU NOTE AS “LOVELY” & “ICONIC” DON’T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING… OR ANY PARKING.
Too support a position for higher density, you noted several buildings as “iconic” and “lovely” with higher densities than 35. While you are correct in quoting their densities, you failed to note that none of them have enough parking, and the largest, 263 Franklin, has no parking! They couldn’t and shouldn’t be built today like that. And I guarantee, if the land required for parking was added, their densities would plummet. Please take that into account. As our Representatives, the data you proffer needs to be unbiased and as accurate as possible. Personally, I would argue that 263 Franklin isn’t so lovely or iconic. It’s an example of something that doesn’t fit within its surroundings. Its design and scale is seen more frequently in Hudson or Essex Counties than in northern Bergen… it’s just too “dense.”
RIDGEWOOD WILL BENEFIT FROM TAX INCOME DERIVED FROM MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENTS.
Working in the multifamily business for two decades, and having filed dozens of tax appeals, I can tell you that municipalities all agree on one thing: residential development, including apartments, are almost always a tax drain. Residential costs so much more in services… AND SCHOOLS than office or commercial. So PLEASE GO IN WITH YOUR EYES OPEN ON TAXES, there will be a deficit. I believe even Blais alluded to this in some PB testimony, but also noted that tax revenue and financials should not be used in the PB’s considerations. They need to be considered by you and the Council.
APARTMENT COMPLEX OWNERS FILE TAX APPEALS, AND OFTEN WIN OR SETTLE.
I say this, because, anyone who owns properties of these sizes will assuredly be professionals. And RE Professionals file tax appeals as part of the game. Real Estate is not designed to be altruistic. It’s designed to make the biggest profits. Our firm files appeals on most of our properties every year. If our financials are off, we expect to have our assessments lowered. They often are and then we pay less taxes. If the developers don’t get their $3-4K rents, you’ll see appeals very quickly. You’ll see them even if they do!
OTHER OPTIONS FOR THE PROPERTIES ARE LESS OPTIMAL FOR RIDGEWOOD.
You state in one email, “the private owners… might build something worse than what is currently being proposed if we do not approve the amendments.” Given that we started talking about 50 units per acre (500-700 total potential units, per Blais) and buildings sized like the new developments in Fairlawn on Route 208, in our constrained downtown, I’m not sure what could’ve been worse! 35 is certainly better, but is still not appropriately sized. Those 208 properties are still not far off from the scale of what we will see. Please note that. To me, a Walgreens on either of the car dealer sites, would provide a great amount of ad hoc free parking, especially after hours. They wouldn’t be so quick to tow, as they’d lose customers if they did. Furthermore, by raising densities, we are also raising property values and making it more expensive to potentially provide much needed additional parking. I’ve told Paul that it would be much more affordable for RW to buy pieces of land, pave and create new parking lots, than to build and maintain a $15,000,000 garage. But if you raise multifamily densities so high, you will make potential land purchases for parking prohibitive.
“WHAT IF THE OWNERS TRY TO PUT UGLY, BUSY COMMERCIAL ENTITIES HERE?”
This is a comment you made to a resident. Please know that nowhere in the ordinances are aesthetics fully defined. RW can and will have some say, but there is no way to require that the apartments that get built will look anything like the pictures you’ve seen. As you know, the new buildings will be near, but not in, a “Historic District.” Apartments can be beautiful or ugly. Commercial buildings can be beautiful or ugly. It’s up to the property owner. Both apartments and commercial are good options, when appropriately sized. Take this down a notch. Make it really and truly fit. You said you like the Maltbie apartments. Let’s zone for something like that!
“WE NEED OUR BUSINESSES TO SURVIVE…” (E.G. APARTMENTS ARE THE ONLY OPTION).
This has come up again and again: the need to save our business. On this, you and the Council need much more real data. Adding a few hundred apartments will not “save Ridgewood.” There’s no guarantee they will shop in town. What is guaranteed is that the current applicants do not fully provide enough parking for their tenants, guests, contractors, etc. As such, business may very well be hurt if the 26,000 current residents find that traffic and parking worsen. I know many West-siders who use the CBD less during peak hours (e.g. for dinner during rush hour, or coffee and breakfast in the a.m.) due to the longer waits at the underpass. And my family is one of them!
Yogi Berra said of a restaurant, “Nobody goes there anymore, the line’s too long.” Ridgewood has a similar issue. It’s beautiful and special… and successful. But we need more parking and better, safer traffic and pedestrian flow to handle the lines. And, to boot, landlords (many who have a vested interested in keeping rents too high) may need to adjust rents overtime to keep businesses in business. What we don’t need is these somewhat artificially created longer lines right now. Especially until ALL the right work has been done to fully understand the impacts. And from statements I’ve heard members of the Council make, yourself included, I don’t think you have all the information you need.
FINANCIAL IMPACTS
We haven’t even gotten to the subject of “financial impacts” which, while not a factor for the Planning Board, the Village Council MUST fully assess. That just hasn’t been done properly yet either. You need to. You don’t really know the answer. Too much “innuendo.”
I hope you will do the right thing and try to help convince some of the other Councilmembers to lower the density and scale, or Vote No as-is. At the very least, put off the vote and plan for the much needed independent studies. Real estate is a game. And RE professionals are generally much better at it than municipalities. It’s just the nature of the business. So please be careful with our Village.
Respectfully,
Dave Slomin
CC: Mayor P. Aronsohn, Councilmembers Pucciarelli, Knudson & Sedon, CBR, Residents of Ridgewood
As you may or may not know, on September 30th the village council will be continuing the 2 night hearing and voting on the 5 ordinances regarding the high density housing. These ordinances would increase the density allowed from 12 units per acre (current) to 35 units per acre (UPA) in our downtown. Here’s a comparison as to what some other towns in our area allow: Fort Lee 50 UPA, Teaneck 28 UPA, Englewood 12 UPA, Hackensack 22 UPA. If passed, Fort Lee would be the only town in our area, similar in population, with a greater density per acre. I do believe the majority of the town is accepting of development, but on a smaller scale. Maybe 25 units per acre? Do we really want to be built up more than Teaneck? I certainly don’t want to be anywhere near Fort Lee’s density.
The planning board spent approximately 3 years in discussions and 1 1/2 years in a public hearing before voting. The village council had a small portion of their Sept 16 meeting devoted to this and now the council will be coming to the sept 30th meeting with their written statements prepared on how they are voting and why. The Ridgewood News had an editorial last week about “what’s the hurry?”. I have to agree with them. While I don’t want this to drag out, I do want the council to do their due diligence and get all of the facts before they vote. During the Valley hearings at the council level, the council brought in the traffic expert, planner, geotechnical engineer, etc and each council member asked questions of these experts and based their vote on what was discussed at council.
It appears that the majority of the council does not want to bring in any experts. They are ready to vote without asking any questions of any experts as to how this will effect Ridgewood. At the planning board level, a concern about the increase this would bring to our taxes was brought up several times by residents. The discussion was always shot down, because “it is not in the purview of the planning board to consider finances.” In fact, the village planner stated, “residential housing almost always increases taxes, we should not be doing this if we think taxes will go down, but there are other benefits to residential housing.” The council has a much broader scope of items they can discuss, finances being one of them. You may remember that Tom Riche voted yes to the Valley amendment at the PB level, but no to it at the council level. That is because the council is able to look at a broader range of issues. Finances should definitely be discussed.
I would like to see the council bring in several experts in addition to a financial expert. Water must be discussed. I know this year is an exception with the lack of rain, but we have mandatory water restrictions every year. Can you imagine an additional few hundred apartments to supply? I can’t.
Schools must be discussed. The planning board did not have a member of the BOE at their public hearings. The council needs to ask Dr Fishbein to appear at the council hearing to answer questions.
The traffic expert, the engineer, the planner, etc should all be questioned. I do hear the planner will be there, but that’s it.
I don’t know how anyone could possible vote on something so monumental without questioning all of these experts to see what the impacts will be for Ridgewood.
I urge you to e-mail our council and ask them to have these experts at the hearing, get the facts first hand, and then vote.
These people are our elected officials, and we have a right to make sure they have done their due diligence before they vote.
Whether you are for or against the increase to 35 units per acre, I think we can all agree that each council member needs to be able to ask questions of the experts to help them in their decision making process.
Below are the e-mails of all the council members. Please send them an e-mail today and forward this to friends. Thanks
On Saturday the high school chorus group was holding a car wash to raise a few dollars for their program. The kids were about an hour into it, 2 hoses with nozzles when the police came by and had them shut down due to a complaint. The officers were apologetic but had to act due to a compliant. I don’t have anyone in the schools, but what an awful example for the village. We ask the kids to work a task to help their program and then send the police to shut it down.
We should all be very concerned that their are people so miserable and angry in town that they complain about a organized event at the school to raise money.
Why is there no pressure on the water company to build a system that can meets the needs? Why is there no consideration of water use in the proposed increased in area housing? Why are we using village police resources to enforce water rules, seems if they had the time to do this perhaps we should review staffing levels when the water “crisis” is over ?
The “Stage 4 In Effect” notice posted on the Village’s website says NOTHING about a ban on washing vehicles. It addresses IRRIGATION ONLY.
When were we told in writing that washing cars is prohibited?
Ridgewood NJ, the 2015 winner of the coveted Ashby Award is Ann Brown, George Washington Middle School Library Media Specialist. Ann, who has been the Library Media Specialist since 2001,holds a Masters Degree in Library and Information Science from the Palmer School of Library and Information Science at Long Island University.
The Ashby Award was established in 1966 to honor former Superintendent Lloyd Ashby and his wife, Lois, for their distinguished service to the community. The recipient is selected from nominees submitted by staff members and is someone who, in the opinion of his or her peers, has upheld the Ashby tradition of service and contribution. This is the highest award that can be bestowed upon a Ridgewood staff member.
The 2015 Tradition of Excellence Award for Support Staff was presented to Pat Kowalczyk, Administrative Assistant in the Office of Special Programs.
The Ridgewood Board of Education established the Tradition of Excellence Award in 2014 to honor a member of the support staff, who in the opinion of their peers has made an outstanding contribution to the excellence of the Ridgewood Public Schools
JULY 31, 2015 LAST UPDATED: FRIDAY, JULY 31, 2015, 12:31 AM
THE RIDGEWOOD NEWS
Wealth shouldn’t determine future of community
To the Editor:
The litigation with Valley Hospital over its $780 million expansion plan is in the news again. I’m having a lot of trouble trying to reconcile Valley’s position with my understanding of what democracy is all about. I thought the people in the village, through elected officials, determine the nature of the village. We have established a master plan that presumably gives guidelines of a general nature about the village, such as defining ourselves as a residential community as opposed to, say, a home for heavy industry like the oil refineries that we see from the NJ Turnpike. We also have zoning specifying the maximum height of buildings, etc. All these plans and regulations were established by officials elected by the citizens of Ridgewood.
Now along comes Valley who seems to be saying: “Your master plan and zoning regulations are restricting our expansionary vision. Change your regulations!” Valley has been here for a long time, and it certainly knew our regulations when it decided to build and operate in Ridgewood, but now it has decided it wants to change the regulations established by the citizens of Ridgewood. Hmm. I know a number of people who have settled in Ridgewood because they like the community as it is, its ambiance, its schools, its zoning and other regulations. If we now give in to Valley, have we not abandoned an implicit trust?
The Valley litigation says to me democracy is not about the majority of citizens deciding on our regulations. No, instead it says to me it’s about wealth deciding the fate of the community. Valley, with its $780 million allocated for expansion (where did a non-profit, suburban hospital get $780 million anyway?), can out-litigate the Village of Ridgewood simply because the village doesn’t have Valley’s budget of discretionary funds. This is democracy?
David Mamet: Why I Am No Longer a ‘Brain-Dead Liberal’
An election-season essay
By David Mamet Tuesday, Mar 11 2008
See also that most magnificent of schools, the jury system, where, again, each brings nothing into the room save his or her own prejudices, and, through the course of deliberation, comes not to a perfect solution, but a solution acceptable to the community—a solution the community can live with.
Prior to the midterm elections, my rabbi was taking a lot of flack. The congregation is exclusively liberal, he is a self-described independent (read “conservative”), and he was driving the flock wild. Why? Because a) he never discussed politics; and b) he taught that the quality of political discourse must be addressed first—that Jewish law teaches that it is incumbent upon each person to hear the other fellow out.
And so I, like many of the liberal congregation, began, teeth grinding, to attempt to do so. And in doing so, I recognized that I held those two views of America (politics, government, corporations, the military). One was of a state where everything was magically wrong and must be immediately corrected at any cost; and the other—the world in which I actually functioned day to day—was made up of people, most of whom were reasonably trying to maximize their comfort by getting along with each other (in the workplace, the marketplace, the jury room, on the freeway, even at the school-board meeting).
And I realized that the time had come for me to avow my participation in that America in which I chose to live, and that that country was not a schoolroom teaching values, but a marketplace.
Due to the winter storm forecast, the Ridgewood Public Schools will have an EARLY DISMISSAL / EMERGENCY MINIMUM DAY on Friday, March 20. Cafeterias will not operate and lunches will not be provided. Students will attend school as follows:RED Program: 9-11 a.m.
Tweets, FaceBook, Instagram and other social media being tracked! Not only by the NSA, but by Pearson Education and the NJ Department of Education!!
MicheleNJTPC
CRITICAL UPDATE – COMMON CORE
We recently wrote about this story that appeared last week concerning the PARCC tests. This is a follow up with more troubling news.
Bob Braun, former Star Ledger education reporter, reported about the surveillance of students’ social media following their taking of the PARCC test at Watchung Regional HS, and the superintendent’s reaction. Pearson asked, through the NJ Department of Education, that the students be disciplined, on account of their tweets concerning the test. The NJDOE contacted the school district and forwarded Pearson’s request to the district. One student was suspended as a result, but the superintendent’s e-mail to her colleagues has also been posted, expressing concern about the compromise of student privacy.
This story has now exploded across NJ and the nation, as other reports of Pearson snooping into student social media accounts have surfaced. Now, in addition to the Watchung Regional School District. Two high schools in the HANOVER PARK REGIONAL HS District (three blocks from my house), and COLUMBIA HIGH SCHOOL in Maplewood HAVE REPORTED SIMILAR CASES OF PEARSON’S SNOOPING.
Worse – Pearson has confirmed their interests in maintaining test security through monitoring of student social media, and a call this morning to the NJ Department of Education defended the practice as not violating student privacy, because it was obtained not through the school district, but through information posted “publicly” on social media, by the students themselves. PLEASE, PLEASE – read Bob Braun’s entire blog, for which the link appears above. He indicates that his story has NOT been covered by the Star Ledger, for which he used to work!!!
As a result of this news, NJ Commissioner of Education, David Hespe, and Pearson have been called before the NJ Assembly Education Committeethis Thursday at 10:00 a.m. in Trenton to answer questions.
PLEASE CONTACT ME IMMEDIATELY IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING. UNLESS PARENTS AND THE PUBLIC ACT DECISIVELY, THERE IS NO DOUBT THIS UNIMAGINABLE AND OUTRAGEOUS BEHAVIOR, MONITORING OF STUDENT DATA AND ABRIDGEMENT OF EVERYONE’S FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH WILL CONTINUE!!!.
PEOPLE GET THE GOVERNMENT THEY DESERVE!!! FAILURE TO ACT WILL ASSURE THAT THIS MONITORING WILL CONTINUE !!!
Here is an excerpt from Braun’s FaceBook blog:
Bob Braun’s Ledger
March 15, 2015
The Brave New World of testing expands
Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someoneShare on LinkedInShare on Google+Share on StumbleUpon
BLOG: HANOVER – Two other New Jersey school districts-Hanover Park Regional in East Hanover and South Orange-Maplewood-were notified by state officials that “monitoring”-spying?- Twitter traffic revealed students had used social media accounts to post a forbidden messages regarding the PARCC tests. No surprise, really-it’s happening everywhere, including Maryland where a state official said he gets daily reports from Pearson, the publisher of the standardized tests. on what students are saying about testing on their internet accounts.
“PARCC has a very sophisticated system that closely monitors social media for pretty much everything (comments like the one you shared, test item questions that students use cell phones cameras and take),” said Henry Johnson, the state assistant education commissioner in Maryland. The state, like New Jersey, has a contract with Pearson.
“We get those reports daily.”
Let’s run that one by you again:
“PARCC has a very sophisticated system that closely monitors social media for pretty much everything….”
The phrase “pretty much everything” aptly describes the broad reach of how this brave new world of testing and cooperation with government works. Pearson will say-as it told the Washington Post-that it is doing it for “security” reasons.
But security is itself a broad term. Here is what the State of New Jersey and Pearson agreed encompassed the idea of security and its possible breach-it’s codified in the testing manual developed by the state and sent out to all the districts:
“Revealing or discussing passages or test items with anyone, including students and school staff, through verbal exchange, email, social media, or any other form of communication.”
Another opportunity for repetition for emphasis here-discussing? Any other form of communication?
So, if children come home from school and their parents ask-“How was your day, sweetheart?” and the children talk about a really dumb question on the PARCC, they will be violating the rules and be subject to whatever punishment is meted out for cheating-as a blogger did who learned from a child who hadn’t taken the test that there was a passage on it about The Wizard of Oz.
In addition, research into Pearson has shown that by students logging on to take the test, their district-held “personal” information is forwarded on to Pearson, then to Amazon Cloud servers – where the only remaining protection is a “promise” that whatever companies it is then shared with will have and honor a privacy policy. Pretty risky, given the hundreds of millions of dollars being spent to promote Common Core.
Here’s what you can do:
1. Read the entire Braun blog, and FORWARD THIS ON TO EVERYONE ON YOUR LIST!!!! To do this, please use the “forward” buttons at the top and bottom of this e-mail, rather than using your own server to forward, as you may unwittingly “unsubscribe” yourself from our e-mails if someone you sent it to “unsubscribes”.
2. Let’s show up in Trenton on Thursday. Three other bills are on the agenda, in addition to Hespe and Pearson being called to testify. I am told that testimony must be on the bills, not on the privacy issue alone. Therefore, I would suggest that you address your remarks to A4268, that establishes a PARCC task force (deja vu all over again!). Click here for a link to the text of the bill. You will see it looks a whole lot like the bill proposed last spring and ultimately voted on and passed, almost unanimously by the Assembly. This is like tying your child to the train track as the train approaches, but telling him to relax, you’re going to study how fast it is coming, how far it will go, how many people are on board, whether you CAN stop it, etc.!!!
3. Call and/or e-mail all of the contacts for Senate and Assembly Ed committees, and the Governor’s office.
4. Call and/or e-mail your own 2 assembly representatives and your state senator.
Sale to Benefit Scholarships The 60th Annual Book Fair will take place starting March 31st at Somerville School: Tuesday, March 31: 4-8pm Preview and Sale, $20 per person admission Wednesday, April 1: 10am-8pm (no admission fee) Thursday, April 2: 10am-5pm (no admission fee) Friday CLOSED (Good Friday) Saturday, April 4: 10am-2pm Half Price Sale (no admission fee)
Somerville School cafeteria,
45 South Pleasant Ave,
Ridgewood, NJ 07450
Come peruse the wide variety of books including: beautiful “coffee table” books, children’s books including “grandparent books” and Easter books, cooking, art, gardening and design books, large print books, curio books, special first editions and signed books, books on tape, CDs, movies and, of course, hundreds of mysteries, novels, and current 2009-2014 best sellers in hard cover and paperback.
Please do not call Somerville school for information. All inquiries should be directed to the event Co-Chairs, Toni Cohen at [email protected] or (201-670-9689) and Dacey Latham at [email protected] or (201-445-5498).
Support Covenant House for Homeless Teens Teens and Broadway Stars Sing for Homeless Kids– March 24 Local Voice Teacher Prepares Covenant House Youth to Perform in Ridgewood, NJ On March 24, a very exciting musical event – A Night of FUTURE Broadway Stars – will be bursting out of the windows of Ben Franklin Middle School in Ridgewood beginning at 7:00 pm.
Shining stars from high schools around Bergen County will be performing show stopping tunes alongside Broadway Stars John Treacy Egan (The Producers, Nice Work), Sally Ann Skoric (Jekyll and Hyde, Victor Victoria), Richard Todd Adams, (Phantom, Les Miserables) and David Elder (Curtains, 42nd Street) to benefit Covenant House New Jersey. “One of my favorite days of the year is the day I go down to Covenant House in Newark and meet the young person who will be singing at our show with my students,” says Susan McBrayer. “Wait until everyone hears David. He is so talented, and such a joy!” Students from Stage Right, Art of Motion, McBrayer Vocal Studio, and Ridgewood High School will also be there sharing their talents and their passions to help homeless youth. “This will be my 5th year to perform at A Night of FUTURE Broadway Stars and I wouldn’t miss it for the world,” exclaimed Sally Ann Skoric, a Broadway performer and Ridgewood mother. “My students at Art of Motion are busy rehearsing their big number! And I heard today that Hollywood Anderson, a beautiful Covenant House youth who made it all the way to Hollywood this year on American Idol will be with us too! How fun is that going to be?” Several young men and women from Covenant House will share their inspirational stories and be singing in the finale. “Each of our homeless kids comes to us with their own story, and we don’t turn any away. We are so grateful to all of these performers – close to 100 Bergen County students – and volunteers who are making it possible for us to keep our doors open for the young people who need us”, says Marcia Mann,
Development Director for Covenant House New Jersey. Covenant House New Jersey serves homeless young men and women between the ages of 18 and 21 at crisis centers and transitional housing in Newark, Montclair, Elizabeth, and Atlantic City. A Night of FUTURE Broadway Stars, March 24, 7:00 pm at Ben Franklin Middle School in Ridgewood, NJ. Tickets are $25, $20 for Students and Seniors, and can purchased on-line at chnj.booktix.com, and at the door. For more information, contact Marcia Mann at [email protected].
Mark Cuban: Forgiving student loans is ‘bailout’ for universities
March 13, 2015
Victor Skinner
DALLAS – Dallas Mavericks owner and billionaire investor Mark Cuban is waving red flags at higher education, and he’s arguing against the idea to forgive student debt amid the current “student-loan bubble.”
“Forgiving the debt is the worst thing you can do, because all it does is bail out the universities,” Cuban recently told Business Insider.
Cuban’s comments come a week after Sweet Briar College announced it will close following the spring 2015 semester “as a result of insurmountable financial challenges,” according to the news site.
The closure is the latest in what Cuban calls a “student loan bubble” brought on by a cycle of ever-increasing tuition and student loans. Cuban, who bought collegedebt.com to keep tabs on student loan debt, believes it’s simply a matter of time before the benefits of higher education are outweighed by the costs.
“What you thought you were going to get in quality of life by going to that college,” he told Business Insider, “you’ve just undermined with the amount of debt you’re taking on.”
Collegedebt.com shows student loan debt in the United States currently totals about $1.3 trillion.
Cuban told Business Insider that an initiative laid out by President Obama this week to help students with federal student loans may have some merit, but cautioned against a college debt bailout.
“Anything that causes lenders and service companies to act fairly is a good thing,” he said. “The challenge is that you can’t subsidize or forgive existing debt without very strict rules. Otherwise it allows schools to tell future students not to worry. They too will get some portion forgiven. Which in turn gives the school more leeway to raise tuition.”
Cuban said he thinks a bailout would only exasperate the current situation.
After news of the Sweet Briar College closure last week, Cuban tweeted “this is just the beginning of the college implosion.”
“At some point,” he said, the student loan bubble is “going to pop.”
Cuban told Inc.’s GrowCo conference last year that if he was “running the economy, I’d go and say, ‘Sallie Mae, the maximum amount that you’re allowed to guarantee for any student in a year is $10,000, period, end of story,’” according to Business Insider.
“There’s all kinds of things that have been proposed to reduce existing student debt,” he said. “At some point, there’s got to be legislation where we put a limit on how much you can take out on a loan.”
Commissioner Hespe Talks PARCC Testing to Senate Education Committee
Given the debate swirling around the new PARCC assessments — not to mention the muted roar over the testing itself — state Education Commissioner David Hespe should have plenty to say when he goes before the State Senate education committee this morning to answer questions from legislators.
The discussion is sure to get another jolt from the two pending bills that could significantly affect the testing going forward: one to put a moratorium on using the new tests for evaluating students, teachers, and schools and another setting a statewide policy for families who want their kids to sit out the tests. (Mooney/NJSpotlight)
Readers say Tragic Window Jumper give cause for Concern ,but does over protection of kids do more harm than good ?
Is added safety just a distraction from real threats to our childern?Here’s an idea. Let’s have all kids just stay at home in their protective cocoons. The Village will provide private tutors for all of them. That way, they are completely safe. No more snow days. No threat of abduction by pedophiles. Yes, let’s continue to bubble-wrap our kids. I didn’t make the “gender” comment, but I think the writer was of the opinion that it’s another example of the femininization of society, where women have this instinct to protect us.
…..An upstairs window that can easily be flung open is a hazard. Children do not understand all the risks, they see super heroes flying on TV, they are melodramatic. It is the job of adults to protect them in reasonable ways. Making windows difficult to open wide makes complete sense, and it should be done at the schools. This horrible tragedy could have been prevented. This poor child’s impulsive fatal act would never have happened. Let us learn from this . I can guarantee that if this had been a Ridgewood incident, windows would be secured immediately.
When we over-react to incidents we create unexpected harms and we create tax burdens. In fact, were it an event we should react to, it would likely not even be a news story. Suicide, obesity, drug addiction, car accidents. These events really kill kids. Falls from windows?–Not so much. Spend those precious resources where they do the most good, not where the latest news story points.
