Consider the source in bond referendum

Just when you have to be thankful for small favors with Edison’s Township Council knocking off a few cents from Mayor Choi’s outrageous $109.6 million budget for 2007, up pops that 900-pound gorilla, called the Edison Board of Education.

You remember them. That’s the only body of government in town where it’s perfectly OK to vote even if you have a conflict of interest. And look at whom they chose as their leadership. Board President William Van Pelt, a retired school district career employee whose immediate family is currently on the board’s payroll. And then there’s board Vice President Joseph Shannon, a lieutenant on the Edison Police Department who was endorsed by the teachers’ union. Apparently, it’s a common practice in town to have a police presence on the board and it’s equally common practice that presence is the quickest way to make lieutenant.

Now, this in no way is meant to imply that either of these gentlemen has anything but the best interests of the kids in both mind and heart. I’m sure they do. It’s simply meant to point out that any reasonable person has to be leery of this board’s independence and judgment.

So, why is this important? Well, after safely giving all our money away to the unions for the next couple of years, it’s now time for the board to come back and squeeze the residents some more. It’s called bond referendum time — and you guessed it, Van Pelt is leading the way. The school district wants to place another bond referendum on the ballot in early 2007 with two questions. The first is for $79.9 million for facility additions and improvements to alleviate the overcrowding, and the second is for $7 million for artificial turf for the athletic fields.

Now, that’s $87 million they want through a bond referendum on top of a separate school district budget that’s sure to approach $200 million, and which will be up for vote at the same time. That’s roughly $287 million they’ll be asking for in one fell swoop.

Maybe now might be a good time to pay attention to what’s going on over there on Pierson Avenue — and don’t be fooled by the rhetoric. Contrary to this board’s feeble attempt to lay all the blame elsewhere for the school overcrowding, recognize that when it comes to budgeting, their first priority is and has always been — salaries and benefits. It’s no surprise then that the board tries to avoid the mea culpa card when it comes to its overcrowding rhetoric. Perhaps annually spending 75 percent of their budgets for salaries and benefits is one clue why there’s never any proper facility planning. But enough about that for now, so let’s move on.

Hopefully, this new plan the board unveils has more substance in it than their $51 million bond referendum back in September. 2005. The residents correctly said no to that impractical, cost-deficient and sorry excuse of a plan to solve the overcrowding problem.

Seriously, the only thing stopping the school overcrowding from being fixed isn’t the people of Edison but rather this board’s inability to come up with a rational, meaningful and cost-effective plan. And it would be helpful this time if they explain to the residents why this is the best alternative, what the bond questions really mean, what the construction plans will be, how much it will cost the residents, how any state aid will work and how much that aid will be. You know, all those unimportant details that the board seems to skirt over or leave out because there’s never enough time to inform the residents in a timely manner.

Or, then again, they can continue to go with the latest Van Pelt rhetoric and forget about explaining how they came up with $80 million and how they plan to spend all those tax dollars — and go with the “It’s only $7 per month” approach. But hey, he’s retired and on a fixed income, and that bit of misdirection works for him — so why not for you?

Ralph Bucci

Edison