A reader wrote this morning:
Sorry to go off topic here, but what is the Board's position on the Valley expansion? At the planning board meeting the other night it was revealed that 20 trucks and 40 buses an hour are expected to travel through the local streets during the 6 year construction time frame. That, and the noise, dust, and distraction are going to inevitably hurt the learning environments at BF and Travell, not to mention potential safety issues for the students. Has the BOE been involved in any of these discussions?
My response later in the afternoon was:
I cannot speak for the Board, but I can report that we have not publicly taken a position on the issue before the planning board. The Board has not been involved in the planning board discussions, but the administration has had discussions with Valley, and some individual Board members have attended information sessions and planning board meetings and hearings.
With that being said, I can report that Dr. Fishbein has stated publicly that should a project be approved, the District will work with the Village and the hospital to ensure that our students are safe, and their learning is not compromised, at all times.
As for my personal opinion, I can say that I will be looking for the establishment of any and all necessary practices, policies, plans and procedures to keep our students safe. If the project goes forward, I will want/expect full and thorough input from the district and especially the closest schools, to create a very clear and detailed developer's agreement (I think that's what it's called) in advance of any work. I've seen past agreements with Valley and they were quite specific as to testing, monitoring, acceptable levels, corrections required, timeframes, etc.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Valley continues to tell people that a developer agreement will solve everything. What Valley is not telling people is that the Village looses much of its negotiating power once the Master Plan is changed. The developer’s agreement is only negotiated at the END of the process, at the time of the site plan hearing - after the Master Plan is passed and associated Ordinances are passed. After the Master Plan is approved, Valley attorney’s have lots of NJ Case Law to stand behind to defend them against Village requests. It is like buying a home trusting the word of the seller that they will fix a problem but not included it in the sale contract. After the seller has your money, the seller can always legally say they are not bound to fix the problem. Now is the time for the commitments to be made by Valley for safety, Village protection and to make them legally binding – before the Village approves anything.
The BOE should be part of this process NOW by providing the Planning Board with what that possible affects on the education of the children might be if they approve the plan. People should know all the facts BEFORE a decision is made.
Laurie,
A few questions I'd like to see the district consider before this is decided: Does the administration have input into the developer agreement? Does it have standing to make sure it is enforced? Are the noise and air standards based on what's acceptable for children in a closed classroom, or children outside using the fields? Will the district use its own consultants to learn about safety standards, or will it rely on Valley's? Are the additional crossing guards that will be needed included in the new budget? Has the district considered establishing new bus routes for kids who have to walk past the construction site?
Laurie,
I'm the original reader who asked about the BOE position. I think you gave a very reasonable response, and I trust you're going to take your responsibilities to the district through this process seriously. I just read the comments, and your response, about you on the Ridgewood blog. I agree they were unsettling, and I apologize if my asking the question opened the window to those comments. Please don't let that stop you from posting your thoughts or inviting questions; I find this blog very informative and helpful. And thanks for all the work you do for the community.
To answer 8:50's questions (as best I can):
Does the administration have input into the developer agreement?
Yes, just as it did for the previous Valley construction project(s).
Does it have standing to make sure it is enforced?
I do not know about "enforcement" powers, but the district could work with village if any issues came up.
Are the noise and air standards based on what's acceptable for children in a closed classroom, or children outside using the fields?
Any standards would be part of the developer's agreement, which has not been created yet.
Will the district use its own consultants to learn about safety standards, or will it rely on Valley's?
I don't know yet.
Are the additional crossing guards that will be needed included in the new budget?
There are no crossing guards in the budget. The district doesn't pay for the current crossing guards. I have heard Valley representatives say that additional crossing guards could be their responsibility. Again, this could be specified in the developer's agreement.
Has the district considered establishing new bus routes for kids who have to walk past the construction site?
No, but that's something the district could consider.
Post a Comment