 Search
 Register (optional)
 Log in to check your private messages
 Log in
| Topic review |
There are a lot of safety issues to be sure. A noted lack of sidewalks on both side of many streets and some of those streets do not have marked crosswalks to allow safe crossing to the side that does have a side walk.  There is the concept of courtesy bussing but that cost is minimal i'm sure. I think that the bus contracts are bare bones as it is so that probably is not a place for real savings |
|
 |
| Guest |
 Posted: Tue, Mar 31 2009, 8:56 am EDT Post subject: Re: 2009 Cranbury School Budget |
|
| joe the plumber wrote: | I know that this is a stupid question.................but..................why do we need so many school buses? If you live out in the hinterlands of Cranbury, don't you own one or two cars? Can't Mom or Dad drop the kids off on the way to work? Can't we carpool? Maybe, just use the bus for the kids who really need it and can't really walk too far to get to school. Maybe, we can get it down to just one bus VS the 5 or 6 that we already use.
It's just an idea. |
In accordance with State law, N.J.S.A. 18A:39-1, all public elementary school students (grades K-8) who live more than 2 miles from their school and all public secondary school students (grades 9-12) who live more than 2 ½ miles from their school are entitled to transportation. These students are said to live "remote from school". Whenever any school district is required to provide transportation to students attending regular public school programs, students attending nonpublic schools who meet those distance requirements may also be entitled to transportation services. In addition, any student classified with special needs who either meets these distance requirements or for whom transportation is required in the student’s Individual Education Plan must be transported.
At the farthest point for example, Shadow Oaks is 2 miles so they bus in. There is also a safety issue on the roads in Cranbury because many parents can't drive kids to school. |
|
|
| joe the plumber |
| Posted: Mon, Mar 30 2009, 10:20 pm EDT Post subject: Re: 2009 Cranbury School Budget |
|
Oh, yeah, the smartboards.
Why do we need so many? Can't we just get a few in the more specialized classrooms, or in the Large Group Room? I don't think that we need one in EVERY SINGLE classroom.......... do we? |
|
|
| joe the plumber |
| Posted: Mon, Mar 30 2009, 10:17 pm EDT Post subject: Re: 2009 Cranbury School Budget |
|
I know that this is a stupid question.................but..................why do we need so many school buses? If you live out in the hinterlands of Cranbury, don't you own one or two cars? Can't Mom or Dad drop the kids off on the way to work? Can't we carpool? Maybe, just use the bus for the kids who really need it and can't really walk too far to get to school. Maybe, we can get it down to just one bus VS the 5 or 6 that we already use.
It's just an idea. |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 5:28 pm EDT Post subject: Re: CRANBURY: Tuition drives school plan |
|
| Guest wrote: | | Why did you cut off the second half of the post you were quoting that said that the article had pointed out that the smart boards HAD BEEN CUT FROM THE BUDGET and that the poster agreed with that decision to cut them. Instead we've had two non-posts now that make a point about how smart boards are not an essential expense as an example of the budget problems when in fact the they were cut from the budget and thus demonstrate the opposite of the point. |
For clarification, the Smartboards are not totally cut just pushed back.
According to the newspaper article,
"”Slowing down upgrades of projects like SmartBoards (a type of electronic chalkboard for classrooms) is a hard decision, but one that was made easier when we consider the sacrifices we know our constituents and neighbors are making this year,” said Lynne Schwarz, chairwoman of the board’s Finance Committee, in the release. "
Smartboards are just one example of a want and not a need. I'm sure there are other items in the budget that can be cut further that will not negatively affect our children from learning. Adding $1 million dollars per year to our school budget for the last 3 years is absolutely disturbing especially since this is a public school funded by ALL Cranbury taxpayers wether they have children utilizing the public school system or not. |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 3:59 pm EDT Post subject: Re: 2009 Cranbury School Budget |
|
I'll be paying almost $20,000 a year in property taxes next year. Most of the reason we live here is the school system -- both Cranbury School and the sharing arrangement with Princeton High School. I would agrue that this is true for a vast majority of the people who have bought homes in this Township (excluding the 55-and-older community) in this decade, at least. Any discussion to simply consider an arrangement with a lesser ranked school like Monroe or Hightstown not only undermines the reason I am paying that $20,000 a year, but I guarantee you it would negatively affect property values, disproportionate to the regional housing economy, for every homeowver, whether they still have school-aged kids or not. Its a seriously dumb idea.
That said, I do resent the idea that I am supposed to pay more and more taxes every year to accept their short term contract that may only benefit parents with kids in the program now or soon, when even the oldest of my kids is still 5 years away from enjoying the benefit. I agree with the previous poster who said we should at least get the benefit of locking in a longer term contract if we're going to be expected to pay substantial more per year. |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 3:53 pm EDT Post subject: Re: CRANBURY: Tuition drives school plan |
|
| Guest wrote: | | Guest wrote: |
First of all, the article references "smart boards" not lighted chalk boards or lighted chalk. SmartBoard makes a white board and projector system that integrates with a laptop in the classroom and allows for Interactive learning programs. They are pretty useful and are already in some Cranbury classrooms.. |
A smartboard is not a necessity and maybe a cool addition to learning. However, this is just a tool and there is no proof that using one will increase testing scores of our children. To me that is a want and not a need.
With the school asking an addition $1 million, residents out of work and many others taking a pay cut; I don't think the smartboards or any other non-necessity item should be even considered by the school board.
We are a small town and need to look not only at this year's budget, but we need to plan ahead and view expectation for the next 5 years. What will happen if COAH hits us, will our schools need to consolidate, will cranbury have to build a new HS? With the Cranbury school to constantly ask for $1 million extra per year over the last 3 years; when will the increased spending halt? |
Why did you cut off the second half of the post you were quoting that said that the article had pointed out that the smart boards HAD BEEN CUT FROM THE BUDGET and that the poster agreed with that decision to cut them. Instead we've had two non-posts now that make a point about how smart boards are not an essential expense as an example of the budget problems when in fact the they were cut from the budget and thus demonstrate the opposite of the point. |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 2:00 pm EDT Post subject: Re: CRANBURY: Tuition drives school plan |
|
| Guest wrote: | | Is this accurate? I had heard that Princeton does not need Cranbury kids and that because of their increased enrollment might be closing the deal to allow Cranbury kids to attend their school in the future. I have no facts to this just have heard this rumor. |
That was the sentiment a couple of years ago. However, Princeton does need Cranbury funds and our Cranburian student test scores have elevated the Princeton HS overall HS test scores.
So, in fact our children are needed and benefit the Princeton. It all has to do with financing. |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 1:34 pm EDT Post subject: Re: CRANBURY: Tuition drives school plan |
|
[quote="Guest"] | Guest wrote: |
First of all, the article references "smart boards" not lighted chalk boards or lighted chalk. SmartBoard makes a white board and projector system that integrates with a laptop in the classroom and allows for Interactive learning programs. They are pretty useful and are already in some Cranbury classrooms.. |
A smartboard is not a necessity and maybe a cool addition to learning. However, this is just a tool and there is no proof that using one will increase testing scores of our children. To me that is a want and not a need.
With the school asking an addition $1 million, residents out of work and many others taking a pay cut; I don't think the smartboards or any other non-necessity item should be even considered by the school board.
We are a small town and need to look not only at this year's budget, but we need to plan ahead and view expectation for the next 5 years. What will happen if COAH hits us, will our schools need to consolidate, will cranbury have to build a new HS? With the Cranbury school to constantly ask for $1 million extra per year over the last 3 years; when will the increased spending halt? |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2009, 1:20 pm EDT Post subject: Re: 2009 Cranbury School Budget |
|
| Correct me if I'm wrong; Hasn't the Princeton HS increased our tuition every year over the last 3 years? |
|
|
| Guest |
| Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2009, 10:30 pm EDT Post subject: Re: 2009 Cranbury School Budget |
|
| My child is no where near HS age, however, I remember the days of Lawrence. I know people who went to Hightstown under the old agreement. There is no way I want a repeat of this situation. I'd negotiate the PHS deal, but I would not look at this as something to take off the table. From real estate prices to our kids, Princeton is a very valuable asset. |
|
|
