Who was the woman who made comments near the end of the meeting? She was the one who asked for an explanation of the educational value of going to 8 periods. She also brought up that it was not so many years ago when the board argued that it was vital to retain the 9-period day for educational reasons. I thought her points were particularly well made, and I was so disappointed that no one on the board responded to them.

The upside of 9 periods is so high that some of the money from the state should have been diverted to save it. What a sad time for our school district! Does no one on the board have any regrets about this decision? Does the administration really have a good educational reason to make this move? That's all we hear from the board -- that the administration has a good educational reason -- but have they themselves ever probed this? Is the reason backed by any data? Many people would love to hear the detailed educational reasoning that supports this move. Saying simply that the administration wants it is not sufficient.

Going forward, I hope that board members will closely monitor the impacts from this decision. What metrics will be used to evaluate it?

I couldn't agree more, LisaB. For the benefit of those who were not at the meeting, I will summarize Amy's points. In 2006, when we were asked to fund the expansion at Ridge (and other schools) it was argrued that if we did not expand, we would run out of space at Ridge and be forced to go to an 8 period day. At that time, the Board argued that the 8 period day would have NEGATIVE impact on our students' achievment/college admission. She read a slide from the 2006 presentation. It said that the 8 period day would: "Afford less opportunity for AP courses", "Less opportunity for electives", "Negative impact on art and music programs", "Not as strong transcripts", "Negative impact on world language program", "Imact on graduation rate", and "Loss of tutorial period for teachers". These are their words, not mine! Two of our current Board members served on the Board in 2006, Ms.Carlsson and Ms. McGowan. Additionally Dr. Goeger and Mr. Howlett were in their current positions. What has changed since 2006? Their adgenda, I think, and that is all. Nothing else seems to fit. It is not the money, as we have demonstrated clearly that we have enough to fund the 9 period day, it is not academics as the 2006 presentation lines up exactly with what the majority of parents have been arguing at the meetings....Can anybody make sense of this for me??

Only sense I can make of it is that they are going to use that money to give raises to the teachers. So glad they rushed to give Goger a contract before the cap set in so the district wouldn't lose her! So glad we spent a fortune on a building for an educational program that she said was absolutely necessary five years ago but apparently isn't even all that desirable today! Stunning!

Last night the board indicated that eliminating midterms would add an additional 2 1/2 weeks of instructional time. So there's the perfect solution; eliminate midterms and reinstate the 9 period day, getting more core curriculum instruction and keeping electives.

For all the parents who debate the issues on this site and others the most important thing we all can do is vote in April.

There are 2 incumbents running for the board... 3 spaces available and 7 others running for the positions. Your voice matters, get to know the candidates and vote.

Your vote is the ultimate power.

Voting the budget down only means they will fire more teachers. In an environment where we are desperately trying to keep those teachers, voting the budget down isn't going to help. I would love to see the Board start acting rationally. Realistically, we need to vote better people into office. That's the solution.

n, voting down the budget will simply make the hard times harder. Do you have kids in the school system? Perhaps they already graduated and got to take advantage of the excellent education this district has provided for so many years. Those who value education ... for THEIR OWN FAMILIES AND EVERYONE ELSE'S ... appreciate the value of a good public education and the benefit of sharing the cost of it.

TJ, I'm not sure who spoke who was a candidate, other than one. Priti Shah made some very helpful comments, IMHO, about the issues regarding solar installations, given her experience on the Hills HOA board.

If anyone else who is running spoke up, please comment here.

n- the community voted down the budget last year and the Township Committee took $800,000 out of our budget. That is most certainly not in the best interest of our schools. Our district has lost a great deal of money in the last 2-3 years already, that's why there is this move to the 8 period day, and why Kindergarten was cut to half day.

I have not heard anyone on the Board saying that the 8 period day is BETTER than the 9 period day. What I hear them saying is this: looking at an array of necessary cuts, it's a cut that is least damaging to the district because at least it has some benefits.

You reference a presentation in 2006. Well, here are some differences between 2006 and now: the district had a 4% cap on increases in 2006, and in 2011, thanks to our current state government, the district has a 2% cap. In 2006, we received $623 per pupil in state aid - last year we recieved $148 per pupil in state aid...this year it will go up to something around $284 per pupil - a far cry from $623 per pupil, which was considered quite low back then. In 2006 the district did not just lose over $6 million from it's budget over the previous two years - in fact, in 2006 the district could still get cap waivers for those costs that rose higher than the cap (such as health care and energy), and it had money in surplus. Those days are gone, too.

So the district's ability to pay for it's schools is much, much more curtailed now than it was in 2006. That's the hard reality.

Can someone explain why there is no teacher's contract? Seems like this would be important for budgeting for next year? Why do we HAVE to increase our expenses 2%, just because that is
the Governor's cap? Are you getting a 2% salary increase this year? We may want to hold our
expenses flat in light of this economic environment and maybe try to reduce taxes? Just a thought ...

Lisa, no one denies we are in much greater economic duress than a few years ago.

I believe Amy's point was that the board made an argument just a few years ago that was strongly in favor of 9 periods. Now it acts like moving from 9 to 8 is critical, an enormous cost savings that, according to one board member at this week's meeting, has academic benefits. Bullhockey. We were told in the fall that they wanted this move to save some moderate amount of money and were rebuffed at suggestions we raise that money, for instance the same way full day K was saved. We heard that they didn't want to take our money to resurrect it since that money might not be there in a year.

I argued last week and again this week that it makes no sense to kill something today just because you might have to kill it in a year if you don't. By that logic, we might as well sell our houses and leave Bernards because, after all, we might lose our jobs in a year.

The state is indicating they will give us much more money than we expected, and there is ample room there to reinstate the 9 period day and still have money left for repairs. And if they think they need more for repairs, perhaps they should add a separate question to specifically provide additional funding for that. Who'll vote for leaky roofs?

Anyone with a child pursuing an interest in Chorus/choir, Art, Instrument, or extra AP and other academic electives is hurt by the cut to 8 periods a day in high school. Unfortunately that includes hundreds of children. The top 5% or more who are competing for top colleges, the kids wanting to sing or play instruments or pursue art, those who can do the arts and AP~ these options are now highly limited, not to mention those who need the study hall. The kids in the middle school are overworked with 9 periods a day. Do they really need electives that are graded? Do middle school children need 30 minutes per night of homework in each subject coming out to 3 hours a night as stated in our school policy? Was a cut made in the upper management area? No the cuts come where they hurt the most. And the board is not fully disclosing or being open and honest about the pain that will impact so many. We never go outside the comparable 8 in the NJ area to compare when making budget choices. We compare to those we are better than already. Yet when our children go off to college they are compared across the nation. Let's look around the nation not just our own back yards. Lets cut the extra curriculum supervisors or at least the supervisor of the curriculum supervisor. Our school has been great so far we don't need to reinvent the wheel all the time. Cut at the middle school and middle management where it hurts our kids the least! Be honest about the hurt!

Well, Fred, you know I'm in favor of a second question!

For those of you who so passionately support the 9 period day, it seems obvious that it is the best and most important thing about our school district. I personally have mixed feelings about the 9 period day, so it's not so obvious to me that everything should be cut in order to keep it in place. I am very concerned about Art and Music students with an 8 period day, yet also support giving all of our students so much more instructional time with our teachers. I also think that the top students at Ridge are under tremendous pressure to take 6 or 7 AP's a year in Junior/Senior year in order to compete with EACH OTHER to get into the best schools...while students at other high schools in NJ are getting in the same top schools yet not taking so many AP's at a time, since their high school doesn't offer so many. At every college I visited last year with my son, the Admissions officer said that they evaluate students according to the degree to which they take advantage of the most rigorous courses that their school OFFERS. Even with 8 periods, our top students will be able to take 12 AP's at Ridge - that's a lot of AP's.

In both this thread and others there seems to be a lot of biased characterization of AP courses, much of it implying that they are so difficult, that there is undue pressure, competitiveness, etc and that taking multiple AP courses is something negative, only undertaken by grade grubbing nerds who are consumed by getting into Harvard. Fact is, there are many kids for whom anything other than the highest level class (and accompanying peer group of classmates) is simply way too easy. I know kids who chose to take elective APs rather than regular level electives because they had tried regular classes and found them frustratingly easy, among other complaints - it wasn't just because of college admissions. With respect to pressure and stress, this can occur at any level course, and also depends on the particular teacher- some are harsher and more demanding than others. The key is to pick the appropriate level for each subject for each student- best, worst and intermediate- and have the options there for all of them. I just don't like the implication that there is something wrong with smart kids taking all AP classes if that's what they want to do or that they are all suffering under such horrible pressure. I agree with Amy that this should be up to the student and their parents, with obviously some academic standards.

LisaB - While I prefer the 8 period day, I agree that the loss of the tutorial is an issue. That is one of many reasons that I don't think the implementation of the 8 period day is being done appropriately or has been well thought out. My issue continues to be that the Administration caters to the AP students/classes so they can reflect a high AP rate for the school, but it does not balance out the needs of all the students. It's a numbers game, and your daughter benefits but mine falls the cracks.

"n", it's hard to have a debate with someone who signs his or her posts with a single letter. I sign my posts. Will you?

In any case, your lack of children does explain your totally antagonistic view of the school system. It's a shame.

Note to commenters: We have had some great insights here on the Basking Ridge Patch from residents, and we are hoping not to get into too-much personal conversations.
Note to SZ and LisaB: A speaker at the meeting the other night pointed to electives as an opportunity for students who aren't necessarily academic stars to shine in specialty areas. (perhaps music or woodworking, for example.) What do you think?

Electives also give students the ability to pursue BOTH higher level academics and the arts as my son has done very successfully. The arts allow for creative expression and group work in a way that no other class can.....and they are also great stress reducers. Music and art as well as other electives are important for many of our students who are exploring and trying to figure out who they are and where their interests lie during a critical time in their development.
While i

Sorry...while I like the idea of extra time for teachers to teach, I must disagree with the Board member who said this 8 period day is like adding a 5th year to our students' high school experience. That would make sense to me if we were to go to school 6 days per week or have shorter summer breaks, but I don't think it will make that much difference in 10 minute increments.

Let's be honest~ Mr Howlett has made it clear he is interested in this 8 periods a day and so is the board. However It is certainly not in the best interest of so many children,
Child type 1) the art , chorus and instrumental student who now cannot continue the dream of learning and practicing daily an dtaking these arts for honors or AP credit as required classes will interfere with their time alloted to freely take courses in the arts

Child type 2) the average student who needs study hall for MAP, make up tests, 1:1 tutor with teacher, respite from a busy school day, time to finish up hw or study for tests, or to eat!

child 3) the AP student who wants (and I had a child who is in college now, who only wanted to take every and as many AP classes for core curriculum and electives.

Child 4) the child who likes to take all the AP classes and is in the arts! or the child who needs MAP or study hall and has the talent in the arts!

The switch to an 8 period day without block scheduling is cut directly affecting and effecting the emotional and academic well being of these hundreds of students!

I understand and agree that block scheduling is very difficult to start now, but then stick to a 9 period day to benefit the students and stick with cuts in the middle school and administrative areas.
And lets be honest we are sending our students to colleges and out in the real world to be with a variety of people from all over the country. We should seek data about our school changes from far more than the 7 schools near us in nj. We should be thinking about and holding conversations with schools in areas similar to ours in different states. VA, MD, PA, CA etc!

Goger and the Board unabashedly pose the 8 period schedule change as it serves whichever argument they are selling, consider 2006 and the negative impact it would pose and now a few short years later, benefits? As to the benefits, they are limited at best and especially when considering the overall cost in terms of loss of science labs, elective scheduling, music, arts, study halls etc. 8 additional minutes of instruction may be well utilized by some teachers but wasted by others. The nine period day should remain until all other possibilities are exhausted including more administrative cuts. Lose mid-terms, the additional instructional time there would be most meaningful. It is simply not necessary to further prepare high school students for more tests, not if we what we seek is authentic education. The single most important thing we can do collectively is vote out incumbents on the Board and send a clear message to incoming members that we need people who are able and willing to challenge the status quo and not be “yes” men. Teachers increases were already factored into the prior year’s budget and will be again. You simply cannot create a budget without considering this, so the unknown is not quite so bleak. As far as I know just last year, administrators received a fairly generous increase locked in for the next three years, and then there was that rushed contract for Goger.

SZ please seek MAP for your child. There is a psychologist who acts as the teacher adn helps the students check their work and be more responsible. She also teaches self advocacy skills and helps them work with teachers. If your child is falling through the cracks and the teachers are not responding to your cries for help then get those supervisors involved.
Please remember though, and this comes from a mom with a kid in MAP and a kid in All AP classes ~ the 9 periods in the day helps both types of kids. Please think about my earlier post listing just how 9 periods helps your kid falling through the cracks~ getting hw finished, getting a break, meeting a teacher or being in MAP. Good luck!

I want to say something about teacher and administrator salaries - and I know this won't be a popular thing to say right now.

To the person who says the additional aid money should be used for the 9 period day and not for increases to teachers - I cannot disagree more. In my opinion, the single most important factor in a school is the quality of its teachers. I think that means way more than whether a student can take an extra elective or AP.

I think some people are separating the structure of our education from the people who actually deliver the education - the teachers, and the administrators and supervisors who support those teachers. I believe that in a school, the people are EVERYTHING. Most educational research supports this as well - it's not the class size, it's not small schools versus big schools, it's the quality of the teaching! It's hiring good teachers, and then retaining the good ones by providing a supportive environment, and being sure not to tenure the less than excellent ones.

I DO think that any increase should reflect the cost of living, however. Since the CPI is much lower now than it was 3 years, any increase will need to be significantly lower too. The increase should also, of course, reflect the difficult financial situation that our district is in.

Many people seem to be disparaging teachers right now and saying that they are over-compensated. I couldn't disagree more with that - they are a school's most important resource. The countries that do the best job in education, such as Singapore and Finland, compensate their teachers better than we do in the US, and also give them a lot of respect. We're moving in the opposite direction here.

Some people here are criticizing the Board for giving teachers and administrators increases in the past. I want to point something out: under this and past BOE's, and in particular with this Superintendent, our district has among the lowest costs of all school districts in NJ, and among the highest quality. How do you get a better measure of value than that?

Lisa, I agree with you completely about compensation. People look at the raise they got this year and last year and say "I didn't get a raise so why should my teacher". But they need to consider the salaries in the context of the teaching profession and not simply the year over year change. As I recall, Bernards is on the low end of salaries for comparable school districts (correct me if I'm wrong), which contributes to our very low cost per pupil. What's amazing is how good the overall education has been, considering we aren't necessarily doing a good job with the financial incentives to attract the best teachers. (Let alone comparisons with other countries that pay their teachers a better wage...

Inflation has been low, and the budget's tight, and the raises need to reflect that, as you said.

Lisa, Not even the Board has proposed that we use the extra state aid for teacher salary increases rather than the nine period day. In fact, in contradiction to your argument the Board wants to LAY OFF 8-10 teachers by switching to the eight period day, something which, in my opinion is extremely short sighted given the "bubble" coming up into the High School for the next three years. Also, one would hope and expect that the Board factored in at least some increases for teachers when they prepared the 82+ million budget that they are putting out to the public for approval. To not do so would be irresponsible. What I still have not heard is a valid reason for making the switch to eight periods given all the factors that have previously been discussed. We are not asking for a change- we are asking for status quo as long as we have the funds to support it which we apparently do. Lastly, part of the reason our costs per pupil are so low is because the median salary of our teachers, who indeed are among the highest quality, is below the state average for districts of our size.

Regarding teacher salaries and if they are overpaid -- I think people have a hard time of it because the perception is that ALL teachers (even the worst) are getting the same raises as the best, that the union acts oblivious to the current economy and insists on raises that the bank accounts can no longer support, etc. Along with the fact that unions protect their worst teachers (in general in the country). There's also the issue of how the money is raised. Since the money comes from local taxpayers and the majority of those are either seniors or households without parents -- they may be on a fixed income that has gone DOWN, not up. And therefore, they cannot support higher taxes -- i.e. raises that are being demanded. I agree that the pendulum has swung towards the absurd in this country when they talk about teachers being overpaid -- that is ridiculous. But the current fact of the matter is that if we have a 2 percent tax cap, then it's hard to see how we're going to pull a rabbit out of a hat and give the teachers 4 percent raises. (P.S. Did anyone see the Daily Show last week with the segment about teacher salaries? Histerical!)

Lisa your point about the teachers, the first in command, the ones who actually impact our students the most, is valid. Indeed then why did the board cut the teachers in the high school first and not yet some of the curriculum supervisors and supervisor of the curriculum supervisors etc. Again too many levels of management which not only makes costs higher in managerial positions, salaries lower for teachers, but creates an interesting problem with who is the boss of the teacher? The principal or supervisor. Cause the supervisors don't have time to oversee how each teacher is involved with the classroom. There is a principal per grade level and a supervisor and supervisor of the supervisor for each subject area. TOO MANY managers! Put the money where it belongs then! And what does an 8 period a day cutting teachers from the hs do for the moral of the teachers? And why has the cut been made at the hs and not the middle school? with the bubble of kids moving up and the middle school over cooked with classes and homework anyway?!

I see that an update has been added to the article, in which Valerie Goger was asked how difficult it would be to revert to 9 periods, given that scheduling at Ridge is almost complete. This quote from her is included: "We do not have the ability to schedule a nine and eight period schedule in tandem, although some have commented that they thought our system was capable of doing that. Only one schedule can be built at a time."

While it is most likely true that the computer software can handle inputs for only one scheduling scenario at a time (either for 8 or 9 periods), there is no reason why counselors could not have asked students at their scheduling meetings what their choices would be under each scenario. They could have retained this information in some separate form in the students' records.

In fact, I have it from a reliable source that last year, since there was uncertainty then about 8 vs. 9 periods, the counselors noted during their scheduling meetings what the students' selections would be under either scenario. Apparently, this was quite easy to do.

This year the counselors were instructed to plan only for 8 periods. I think someone is not being entirely candid. Someone in the administration decided that counselors should not allow students to plan for the contingency that the 9-period day would be retained. Maybe someone thought that there was no chance that the funding would be there for it, or maybe someone wanted to guarantee the move to 8 periods.

Great Point Lisa and either way, this is no reason to keep the 8 period day. The school holds high standards for all of its students. We should expect no less from the school. It could include a simple email or a newly scheduled meeting. There is no reason the whole thing can't be started again!

Great points, as usual! I thought the same thing, and asked our counselor why they weren't getting information for either contingency. She said that she was told not to, and that we were going to have an 8 period day. Period. She also stated that it would be difficult to change the schedules as they had already had a week of meetings with the upperclassmen. Perhaps I was not in a very "good" mood about it, but pointed out that that was being a bit short sighted. They couldn't throw away opportunities for the students for a weeks worth of meetings....Also: the students had to choose second and third choice electives. They could be used for scheduling purposes as well.

Pe

Lisa Winter~
I just wish to point out that studies show there is no difference in the quality of teaching if your child has 37 kids in AP Us History or 30 kids. Additionally, your son is in an AP course and should be comfortable with this collegiate atmosphere. If he needs help he may seek it before or after school. 8 periods hurt so many other students who may not have sports but music and art as their specialty. Make the changes at the middle school where the effects are smaller on the population as a whole! Would you not agree with that? I hope that with this line of back and forth conversation we could see eye to eye to some degree! :)

Lisa Winter said: "The savings from the 8 period day are $360,000 the first year, but then will be $500,000 a year from then on (because of unemployment that must be paid the first year). If the Board postpones the 8 period day one year, then the additional $140,000 of savings is postponed and will have to be found the following year - more cuts. "

I have mixed feelings about this analysis. It's true that the estimated cost savings increases after the first year once unemployment is paid. But if you take the argument to its logical conclusion, you lay off the entire teaching force and in a year have no salaries to pay. :) Obviously there is a tradeoff between the savings that would accrue and the benefit of having the teachers in the first place.

What I was hearing at recent board meetings was that there was a fear of big cuts in a year, which would force the cuts to take place then. So let's cut this year, so we don't have to worry we might have to cut next year. Huh? Your comment is, I believe, more reasoned. You're basically saying that it's not a question of saving $360,000, we should view it as an annual savings of $500,000 and decide if it's important to have those savings. That sets the bar higher, but it's still not clear that the impact to the curriculum, especially electives like music, justify those cuts unless they are basically the last option. These cuts were proposed before the state indicated we'd be getting a lot of money back. (to be cont.)

(cont'd ... due to character limit, ugh.)

So, if we got more than what was needed to restore 9 periods, the question is whether all that extra money in the budget should go toward repairs and such, as proposed by the board. If they truly needed $3M in repairs, then they should have been budgeting more for this in the original budget and past years. But I don't believe they really need it, because they explicitly said on 3/7 that they could put the money there because it's non-recurring and this way they wouldn't fund a program that might go away. So ... they'll make the program go away now. By their own admission, the state might continue its "generosity" past this year. Why don't we use it for educational purposes, and look next year to see if the axe finally has to fall?

Hi Suzy! Please email the board asking them to save 9 periods in the day. They have the money. We need to show them we care. Email all of your friends and kids' and ask them to do the same. This is something we need to do immediately. Post it on facebook. find a friend who is in the group baskingridge moms on FB and start the conversation there as well. Send your message to boardmembers@bernardsboe.com Tell them we want the 9 periods in a day. Thanks!

Remember that a defeated budget means that it goes to the Township Committee and will most likely be cut further. Last year the Township Committee cut $800K from the budget.

Suzy--We feel that we ARE making headway with the Board and have had many people tell us that they are voicing their opinions. Perhaps they might not be as silent as you may think. We are, however, open to suggestions as to how to "get in their faces". A "no" vote will NOT restore the 9 period day as it will cause the Township Comittee to cut more from the budget. If the 9 period day is not restored, you can voice your disapproval by becoming informed about all candidates who are running for BOE and voting out incumbants if you so desire. In the meantime, please e-mail the BOE and tell your friends to do the same if this is an issure that concerns you.

The fact is that we have money to do capital improvements and save the 9th period. Another fact: parents approached administrators to see if we could contribute money to our cause and we were rebuffed. Money is not the issue. If the cut is paid then many parents will have to fund their child's Option II online classes which cost $300 or more per class. These classes will not count to GPA and are "only for the most independent student". They will have to be taken in the students' "free" time. Option II is a lose/lose for students and parents alike. I hope that you have taken a look at the architect's estimate for repairs. There are many things that need to be addressed, like the roofs and leaks, but do we really need to purchase 295 interior doors for 5 schoos at a cost of $2,000 each for a grand total of $590,000?

The freedom to chose a class elective and stick with it for 4 years is MY choice as a parent paying high taxes in our schools. We have different children who would benefit from different types of teaching perhaps! Perhaps some students benefit from the AP offerings and others music while still others need more 1:1 help. Colleges are interested in different types of students who have different passions and yes community service after school is certainly important, as is the students' job or whatever it is each student pursues. However while in school, 8 periods limits each child's opportunity to learn more in the way he/or she does best. Without 9 periods in a day some students will not get the help they need and complete required classes, and pursue the passion of music.

Here is a solution ... Hold the budget FLAT. Do NOT take the 2% increase,WE cannot afford to PAY MORE TAXES!!!!!
Finalize the Union Contract so there are no surprises. Cut one, maybe two Assistant Principals (non academic/staff) from EACH school. If you want a 9th period elective, you can pay for music lessons outside of school, it is your choice. The 60%
residents who do not have children in the school system should not, in this challenging economic environment be
asked to pay for this. The money you get back from paying lower taxes could be used to pay for your child's music
lessons. Everyone wins - especially the children!

It's been in the news since yesterday that the state education funding is found to be below adequacy in general, and our township has been spending less than it should be for a district of its size. The costs have been held extremely low yet provided a very good education. And you want to strangle our schools by rejecting the budget? I hope you figure that your home's value will hold up if the reputation of the district goes from excellent to sucky, because I think you might just lose more in home value than it costs you in increased taxes if the schools go down the drain.

I have two comments. First, relating to the cutting of the HS teachers and fall out from that. There is a large influx of students coming in from William Annin next year - but this 'bubble' of students doesn't stop until the current 3rd graders hit the middle school and HS, and that is assuming no more movement occurs to our district - a stretch. This is well known by the district, as the over crowding concerns at Annin have been discussed for years. Cutting teachers now is going to further penalize the students in grades 3 through 8 disproportionately (and of course current and future HS students in general). Increased class size is ALREADY a challenge. Second, on the teachers contract. I find it interesting that there is no 'date set' for negotiations or mediation with the state and feel that this is a delay that will end up hurting the residents. If we don't know the content of the teacher's contract, namely what is being proposed in regard to salary increases and benefits, then how are we to have a full view of the budget process and make an informed decision? There ought to be a statement on the part of the Board and Superintendent as to what they are proposing for the teachers contract. Please don't say the content of negotiations is private. There are ways to inform which will not breach the 'bargaining in good faith' clause - especially given the great concern on the part of the public regarding salaries and teacher cuts.

Since my son graduated from Ridge in 2007, the state has added 3 more semesters of required courses; Financial Literacy is new this year. It is possible that the state may add new requirements in the future.

At the heart of this discussion, and other budget related ones for that matter, is a rather simple question, namely: "what School District does Bernards Township want to be, and to what can it realistically aspire given the realities of financial boundaries?"
Many studies have been conducted, and research has proven that there has to be a core offering. Not only because it is mandated by rules and regulations, but also because those core subjects lay a basic minimum knowledge foundation to build on for further curricular and extra-curricular activities.
We need to review the above fundamental question on a grander scale, outside the immediate boundaries of our School District, beyond our state, and possibly even beyond the nation for two reasons. Firstly, many have made Basking Ridge their home because of the strong reputation of the School District. This is true for families that have moved from nearby, as well as those that have come from afar, including overseas countries. Reputation is a relative measure, and determined by benchmarking Bernards versus other School Districts and systems.
Secondly, our children will have to be equipped for a much more diverse world. This will be important for them no matter where they end up living, or how they will end up living their lives. That readiness will be shaped and formed by providing programs beyond the core offering so our children have options when they enter their next stage in live.

We can debate long and hard what those options ought to be, and what it exactly should include. Arguably, every High School makes a core offering of language arts, mathematics, science, social studies. world languages, PE, and fine arts programs available to its students. The question is how does the program cater to the needs of students of different abilities (regular, honors, AP), and how far does it reach beyond the minimum treshold requirements to equip students with knowledge, skills and values well beyond the minimum. What are those formative programs that have a lasting positive effect on mind, character and physical ability? A well balanced program with appropriate choices, engaged and motivated faculty and administration, parents and a broader community that truly care are obvious ingredients for success. We have much of that today, and the BR community should treasure it.
However, we need to be open to change. School programs have evolved, and will need to continue to evolve, to stay relevant to a changing world. Macroeconomics and geopolitics continue to change, and we cannot predict what it will look like 5-10 years from now. The thing we do know is that the pace of change will continue to accelerate, and the demands on our children to be multi-faceted in their skill- and mindset is paramount.

The debate around the 8th versus 9th period at RHS is clearly loaded with emotion and understandably so. We should take ourselves back to the fundamental question posed above. We know that Bernards wants to be a School District that performs well above average, moreover it wants to be in the top quartile of performance, by whatever standard or metric we wish to use. However, this debate goes well beyond rankings and ratings. The four years of High School are hugely important for our young adults. These are formative years during which they make critical decisions about first steps into the rest of their lives. These decisions will be influenced by the learning environment we create, and by the choices that are available to them. Diversity in offering (within the obvious constraints of financial and operational practicalities) is critical. The School District needs to decide as it answers the strategic question (to what do we aspire?) what it logically needs to include in its curriculum, and how those programs are being offered to students.

The crux of the issue with the proposed move to 8 periods is that the ramifications on the total program is not thought through. This is evidenced by guidance counselors and faculty not having answers to scheduling questions. We run the serious risk of implementing an ill-conceived concept. The notion of a 8 period day may have a logic, but it is quite obvious that communication of its rational leaves a lot to be desired.

We have an option! Good governance is about reviewing positions taken and weighing in constructive arguments. Good governance is also about putting personal pride aside, and lending a listening ear to legitimate concerns voiced by all of those that passionately care about the quality of our School District.
Again, the world around us is evolving and we cannot close our eyes to that fact. There is the potential of loss of face of an ill-conceived change that jeopardizes the existing curriculum beyond intention. Scheduling is a huge issue borne by factors in addition to the period change that are well documented by other writers on this forum. Although the 8th period has been years in the making, it seems apparent that the implementation plan is not in a state of readiness for this upcoming school year.
We have an option given the available funding. It seems to make utter sense for such a weighty decision to be only made when it is absolutely clear how the programs will work. Split periods and part-time participation are not a solution, but a band-aid. I would very strongly encourage the Board and the Administration to review their "go-live" plan and carefully assess whether we set ourselves up for failure or success. My recommendation would be to use the available funding to stay with the current 9 period format, and "buy" a year to properly engage, plan, communicate, and then successfully execute. I wish the Board and Administration much wisdom.

HK, your several postings last night are very well stated. Bravo!

Regionalize the police force or do away with it. Contract NJ State Police to patrol it. Seven supervisors making way over 100,000 and officers close to it. For what? Look at the crime rate. Look at the money bordering towns are spending as well (bernardsville). Who is paying attention and watching the pay-to-play violations and "entitlements" of local government... There is no police force patrolling ethics and fraud...

What does the police force have to do with the school budget?