Leaf pick up, the Brandywine retirement home expansion and copper gutter thievery were on the minds of about 40 borough residents who attended the Haddonfield Civic Association’s annual “town hall” meeting Thursday night at borough hall.
The association is aptly named. Civility ruled the night, even though some of the most contentious issues facing the borough, namely, the proposed Bancroft purchase and installation of artificial turf fields, were specifically designated to be discussed for fully half of the meeting.
The meeting format allowed people to submit questions and have them answered by the appropriate borough official in a calm and careful way.
“This format allows people to have a voice and to have a thoughtful, non-emotional answer to their questions,” said David Siedell, association president. He added it’s one of the only venues where borough commissioners and board of education members, both “taxing” authorities, are present and speaking at the same meeting.
At the two-plus hour meeting, one of the longest in the association’s 31-year history, residents heard school board President Steve Weinstein and Superintendent Richard Perry, as well as borough commissioners, discuss the tax increases that working families and senior residents will face if a scheduled referendum on the purchase passes.
The board of education and the borough have proposed jointly to purchase and redevelop the property, located next to the high school on Kings Highway East, and to install artificial turf on the high school’s main field and a new field to be constructed on the site. Both projects are included in a $16.9 million public bond referendum set for January.
“It is costly. But what’s the cost if we don’t do it?” Weinstein asked of the opportunity the Bancroft purchase provides. “The turf fields are part of a vision we created from the beginning, to create a campus around our high school.” He and Perry mentioned the current safety issues students face, including packing into cars to drive across town to their practice fields and games, as well as inferior grass fields that are impossible to maintain because of overuse. They pointed to a private initiative among residents to raise $500,000 toward the turf’s cost as well as state and county open space funds to help defray development costs.
But , a borough resident for more than 40 years, has led a small but outspoken group of residents over the past few months that is opposed to many decisions being made by borough officials, not the least of which is the Bancroft deal. They are angry that the town would embark on these projects they say will further burden already-besieged taxpayers who pay nearly twice the state average in property taxes.
Indeed, Kelly has used the comments section on Haddonfield Patch articles as a platform for his message, often with biting criticism of borough government, stirring debate from diverging town interests. Along with fellow citizen Cliff Brinker, he created the Facebook page Haddonfield United in June to bring other residents into the conversation.
“They (borough officials) don’t know what the costs are going to be and the future costs are very sketchy,” he said Thursday night. “There are people who just can’t live here anymore because of the taxes. And they can’t come up with a real number.”
Other officials called on to answer residents’ questions included Fire Chief Joe Riggs and Chief of Police John Banning. Former Mayor Jack Tarditi moderated the question and answer session.
One last point, while the impression was left with the writer above that the answers were not sufficient for them, I will say that I was under the distinct impression that ALL questions submitted were read except that a logical time cutoff point prevented a last one or maybe two submitted from making it into the discussion.
The residents of the town are not even close to being aware of how much turf and the problems associated with it will cost. Turf was tied to the Bancroft bill and if it gets installed without the town having a say it will show our elected officials are not interested in serving the town as a whole and cater to a small pocket of influence. The Bancroft referendum is shrouded in enough mystery as it is. When projects of such magnitude are presented the way they are, costs exceed expectations. I don't think our officials fully grasp the agitation residents are feeling about this thing being pushed on them. If the referendum is to pass, people have a right to know exactly what their sacrifice will entail. Haddonfield United and the people we strive to give a voice to are not a small group, we are the majority of the town. The simple issues of community services that Taxpayer mentioned are the everyday concerns of residents. We deserve to vote on field turf, it's as simple as that. If that's denied so is our voice.
I know the resident who submitted the question sure did! For all the questions asked that covered the same old ground, there was one that seemed to slip by everyone but I thought was an honest and telling reply. When asked about how the cost of the Bancroft/turf would affect senior citizens and many of the families of our town, Commissioner Borden answered that it was a serious issue and one that the residents of the town really needed to think about before making their decision. It was the the first time I had really heard that from our elected officials, that the impact on the lives of many of our residents could far outweigh the need for expansion and turf. It was an honest and thoughtful answer and one I appreciated. I often think about what life would be for our town if the Bancroft referendum never existed, that Bancroft never thought about leaving in the first place. We already have terrific schools and if there were never options for new fields we would just find ways to take care of the ones we have. These are not tough problems to tackle if we're on the same page. We have to decide, as a town, what our priorities really are.
Thank you, Bob Phillips