I support the purchase of the Bancroft property. My optimistic hope is that it will be used to benefit all the residents of the Borough. I do not support the artificial turf component of the proposal. I hope that can be considered separately from the property acquisition, as that would be the most appropriate way to handle it. Piggy-backing the turf issue on the property issue would be an unworthy, shady maneuver because it is not generally supported..

Last night's meeting was a dog and pony show for the local politicians and administrators who have a vested interest in spending resident tax dollars for things the Borough cannot afford. Hence, it's no wonder that there was more support for the proposal than opposition. Fortunately, the opposition will have its day at the ballot box come November. Last night's meeting did prove, however, than many of those in attendance are no wiser than the average New Jerseyian, who for the last two-plus decades has supported politicians who have spent this state into insurmountable debt. Many attendees also seem to miss the point that, even if the Borough purchases the property, a substantial portion of the property will be developed. The only difference (versus a private acquisition) will be that the development will be less dense and taxpayers have to foot the bill. While my family could afford higher taxes from this purchase, there comes a point for those of us who are sick and tired of this overspending mentality at the state level (and now in Haddonfield) won't want to afford to live in Haddonfield. This is already happening in areas throughout California, where those who can afford it are leaving many posh areas due to a crushing tax burden.

If you think it doesn't make sense to borrow for 20 years for turf that depreciates in 8 years, take that logic one big step further--how much sense does it make to bond for an "asset" that is worthless from Day 1 (namely Bancroft's nonhistoric school buildings?) These buildings, costly demolition prospects in any scenario, will likely be included in the BOE's appraisal to reach the $12.2 million, 2006 borough-assessment for land ($9 million) and improvements. So if the referendum passes, we'll pay principal plus interest for 20 years for useless structures that we'll also have to pay about $1.7 million to demolish.

And the COAH development is another $2 million project waiting to happen on the east side of the Bancroft property near the Mews. That cost is not in the BOE bond because the borough will be responsible for COAH in a public acquisition.

Readers, In addition to leave comments here, if you have more to say on the topic (or any other topic), you can also write a letter to the editor. Just email it to bill.duhart@patch.com. Thanks for reading and commenting.

I found interesting at last night's meeting that someone who was vehemently opposed and offended by Steve W's comment about selling Radnor Field for low income housing because it was the less affluent part of town, thought it was a dandy idea to put it on the Bancroft property. It seems that we have a bad case of "well, I can't see it from my house" syndrome in H-field...and it shouldn't be tolerated. The panel certainly was in damage control mode...they must be reading the on-line posts and recent articles/letters to the editor. And I agree, just another dog and pony show, but my question is....why is the Borough Bancroft's realtor?

Both borough and BOE appear to have put Bancroft's interests ahead of Haddonfield's. Heard prospective buyers decided $8 million was too much.

That presentation showed the elected officials of Haddonfield live in another era. As for their projections to build up the school system to handle more children, I watched the number of students at the high school graduation. When I graduated from Haddon high there were 250 students in my class. There were at least 30% fewer students in this graduating class.
Most importantly, EDUCATION IS ON THE VERGE OF A REVOLUTION NOT ONLY IN AMERICA, BUT THE WHOLE WORLD.
Just as corporations link offices via internet to show a presentation from one spot and save thousands of dollars, that same format will apply to schools all over the country. Interactive CD programs are already here that teach children at higher levels than crowded classrooms. The astounding technology that exists will evolve in ways we can hardy imagine. It's already applied to home school programs that drop the cost of a student from 6 thousand dollars to 6 hundred dollars in towns and cities all over the country. This Technology is already being used in classrooms and will alter the crippling cost of educational taxes forever. In 10 years the whole of concept of the way we educate will change. We have borough and board members from a past era with old ideas and no vision. They will burden Haddonfield with an outmoded expensive model of education that won't exist in the very near future.
We need elected officials with ideas and vision for the future, not the past they only know.

This idea of building new schools and sports fields from these elected officials is absurd. In terms of of managing and repairing the infrastructure of Haddonfield, these people are the most incompetent in our history. I had to laugh when Steve Weinstein addressed the complaints to the school's upkeep by saying "The school will be repaired by next year". Don't hold your breath. These people know how to build and spend money, they have let the town fall apart since the day they entered office. By the way, stop saying the school was built in 1929. Half the school was, the other half was built in 1972.
The roads and sidewalks are always the first things a town should maintain. Haddonfield has an antiquated, crumbling water system and an outdated storm drainage system that need repair NOW. They will cost huge sums to repair from the lack of upkeep.
Our elected officials can't take care of what is already in place and they want us to think they'll take care of the maintenance of millions of dollars of unwanted facilities?
Go on Haddonfield United's facebook page to sample a tiny aspect of crumbling Haddonfield. Every week will have new updates on the sad state of our town's foundations. We have the highest tax rates in south jersey and our town is falling apart. We need officials who actually care about the preservation of Haddonfield for its residents, not officials who neglect the residents and tax us into oblivion to take care of their special interests.

Why would anyone expect anything less than an overpriced, unneeded redevelopment plan for Bancroft, when the lead Borough/Board negotiators of this proposal are Borden and Weinstein. Both are employed by law firms that seem to have a finger in every "redevelopment" pie in South Jersey: Erp Cohn and Florio Perrucci Steinhardt & Fader. Those firms have long employed a laundry list of big spenders like ex-Gov Jim Florio, Lou Cappelli (head of Camden County Board of Freeholders), the late Jon Adler, etc. In fact, Borden and Weinstein are themselves big donors to liberal Congressional candidate Shelley Adler, who's running against Runyan this time around. Not sayin' there's anything illegal going on -- merely that the Bancroft proposal makes one wonder whether we're seeing another instance of the political machine in South Jersey scratching each others' backs legally.

What great comments and insight...Your perspective on the future of education, Brian, in compelling and must be taken seriously when projecting future needs and expenditures. And Tony.....do ya think!? I don't know what angers me more....that they are in bed with each other, or that they think we're all too dumb to realize it. Thanks to all who have the courage to speak out on these important issues.

Be aware, school regionalization is not inevitable. It has to be approved in a referendum which will Haddonfield will not do. Beside, between the cost for new buildings and raising the payscale of the lower-paid district to the higher paid district's payscale, which has to happen in regionalization, and the busing (if you bus on kid you have to bus all of them), it will not save districts money to regionalize. What might work is to share administrators between districts.

Oh, and those enrollment projections are pure fiction to justify need for a new building, another bond...How many of those counted were out-of-district placements and tuition students? Those should not be included.

Herb Hess tried to ask about about Bancroft's debt, but he was prevented. Public filings will tell you some of the story. And who gave them those loans in the first place? Are the same people, though with different institutions, still involved? You can guess the answer.

As the turf fields are linked to the bancroft deal, here's another thought to ponder. One of Haddonfield's greatest civic gatherings is the 4th of July fireworks. Having hundreds of people sitting on the turf while kids run around and play and shooting the fireworks off on turf where a stray ash will melt the field isn't something that will happen. A tradition enjoyed by generations of families will be gone, courtesy of our spend but don't fix elected officials.

The combination of the ill-advised turf project and this proposed acquisition was a very bad move. A myriad of issues regarding the turf were ignored - the fireworks, the environmental impact, the excessive heat when they are unusable, the need to raise $10,000 every year just to cover the cost of replacement, infection potential, and maintenance. Schools have had to move graduation ceremonies because they could not safely be held on turf. The insistence of the board to pursue this plus Bancroft will likely result in the failure to approve the measure because even people like me who have always voted for the school budget will not vote for this.