The problem of the polarization and apartheid education in Englewood is at the highest point right now. Some people may be very happy that the students in the Eagle Program have a new home in St. Cecilia's School. I am not. Even though the building has a cafeteria and a gym, it is still a substandard facility. Does the state of New Jersey know that EPSD has leased another substandard facility for our children? The building is not Handicap accessible. The lease states very clearly that any modifications that must be made to bring the building up to code must be paid for by the Board.
The terms in the
lease are not favorable to the taxpayers of Englewood. It is also not favorable to the teachers and the children in the building.
Why are we paying over $300,000.00 a year to
rent yet another substandard building? I thought we had a money problem. Is this further evidence of the spending problem? Why is it so important to keep the children separate? What happens if no more children transgress to a degree that they must be placed there? There are rumors that some students are there because they
uttered curse words and others because their pants hung down below their boxers.
 |
Behind a chain link fence are children capable of learning as
well as any others. Why? |
In my humble opinion, Dr. Carlisle seems desperate to avoid another
Sharpstown. That is his motivation, but what motivates the Board? Are there clandestine plans underway that will insure that St. Cecilia will always have students? Is this the true purpose behind the "Credit Recovery Program" and the "5 Year Plan"? This way there will always be empty seats for "school choice" students. The Department of Education has already asked the million dollar question of why so many
African American and Latin American males are in special education. I would also like to know the answer to that question. How many of the students in St. Cecilia were exiled there because no attorney looked over the
paperwork that put them there?
Inside all of the subterfuge we find another problem. The Law says that taxpayer money shall not be used to improve or renovate property that does not belong to the Board of Education. What about property that is owned by an Archdiocese? That is the epitome of mixing Church and State. There are repairs and renovations going on right now that are contrary to the law that ruled in the case below.
In Wildwood Crest, Cape May County the Board of Ed was simply improving a sidewalk owned by the City.
Petitioning Board contested the Department’s determination (resulting from an audit) that petitioner exceeded its authority in purchasing materials for the construction of a sidewalk on property not owned by the school district and in waiving the Borough’s obligation to pay contaminated soil removal costs in return for labor which was supplied for such sidewalk construction.
The ALJ found that the legislative scheme permits a school district to improve its own
property but not that of the municipality. Therefore, the ALJ found that a school district may not expend public funds to construct a sidewalk improvement on property which is not owned by the board but is municipally-owned in order to jointly develop and construct a recreational field. Thus, the ALJ concluded that there is no statutory authority that would permit the Board to make the sidewalk improvement in question at its expense."
Read more: http://www.state.nj.us/education/legal/commissioner/2000/73-00.pdf
My Father would call this jumping out of the frying pan into the fire. I think I would like to see the paperwork that alters the Long Range Facilities Plan and adds this new substandard facility. Speaking of the contents of that Long Range Facilities Plan. How many schools do we have again?
 |
| Why? |
Why is it so difficult for this Board of Education to follow the law? Two lawyers sit behind that long table during Board meetings.
How are the children?
