Questions for the Millburn Board of Education from WeLoveMillburn.com

1. Prior DOE Proposals:

• Dr. Brodow has stated that his original recommendation as to the proposed construction that is to be paid for with the proceeds of the proposed $40.27 million bond referendum (the "Proposed Construction") was more modest than the Proposed Construction. Please provide all documents setting forth such original recommendation and all communications regarding such original recommendation. Also please set forth the estimated cost of the original recommendation and a detailed description as to the differences between the original recommendation and the Proposed Construction.
• What facts and circumstances led the Millburn Board of Education ("BOE") to increase the amount of the bond referendum under consideration to $57 million from the original $40 million estimate?
• What criteria were applied by the BOE in its decision to reduce the original proposal for $57 million bond referendum to approximately $40 million? Please describe the items that were eliminated from the original $57 million proposed bond referendum. How was the BOE able to reduce the original bond as quickly as it did?

2. Reasoned analysis of January 18, 2005 alternatives:

• Please provide a detailed analysis as to advantages and disadvantages of the alternatives to the Proposed Construction as set forth in the "Long Range Facilities Plan: Superintendent's Recommendation" dated January 18,2005 (the "January 18 Recommendation"). Please include the estimated costs of each alternative and all factual support confirming the cited advantages and disadvantages. In addition, please provide a copy of or citation to all research studies or academic literature regarding appropriate space requirements and any other factors for optimal education which the BOE or Administration consulted in considering how to react to capacity issues or government mandated program requirements.
• At the September 13, 2005 meeting between WeLoveMillburn.com representatives, the Superintendent, two Board members and the Chairs of the Long Range Planning Committees, the Superintendent stated that retaining the Sixth Grade in the Elementary Schools was "the cheapest" of the viable alternatives available to the BOE to resolve the needs of the Middle School, but that the BOE decided that this option was not optimal for the education of Sixth Graders. In addition to the information provided as to this possible alternative to be provided in response to Question 2.a. above, please explain in detail whether or not the obstacles of concern to the BOE regarding the effect on the education of Sixth Graders can be overcome based on creative, new ideas. Also, please state the names of other School Districts in New Jersey that educate Sixth Graders in their elementary schools, and explain in detail how such schools are able to do so consistent with statutory and regulatory requirements.
• Identify and describe all information indicating (as stated in the Summer 2005 Newsletter) that "[a]t the High School," "[a]t the Middle School," and "in the Elementary Schools" if alternative solutions are implemented, the following might be "necessary or appropriate:": "[c]lass sizes of 30 and above. . . no new course offerings [and] . . . fewer AP course offerings".

3. Impact of Proposed Construction on local taxes: The BOE's projections in its recent newsletter of the tax impact of the bond referendum did not include all of the expected costs that will result from the Proposed Construction. Please provide an estimate as to expected increases in local taxes and the effect on the school system operating budget that will result from the Proposed Construction that takes into account all costs of operation of the expanded school buildings, including staff and overhead costs.

4. Identification of optional upgrades contained within Proposed Construction:

• Which specific portions of the Proposed Construction will provide optional upgrades to the school facilities? By "optional upgrades" we mean portions of the Proposed Construction as to whose elimination will not violate statutory or regulatory mandates, nor prevent the schools from accommodating reasonably anticipated enrollment during the next five years.
• Identify and describe all statutory and regulatory mandates relating to the construction to be authorized by the bond referendum, and identify and describe whether and how each element of the construction is necessitated by each such mandate.

5. Enrollment projections:

• Identify and describe all "annual" demographic studies in the statement in the Superintendent's Summer 2005 Newsletter that "[i]n 2003, annual demographic studies made it clear that enrollment in the Millburn Township Schools was continuing to grow and that as early as 2007 the population increases would severely impact the education and programming for students at the Middle School and High School."
• Identify and describe an reasons why projections as to student enrollment at the Millburn High School and the Millburn Middle School require or support some or all of the Proposed Construction?
• Describe how, when, and why Western Suffolk BOCES was found and hired to do demographic studies, identify those individuals involved in hiring Western Suffolk BOCES, and describe the communications which took place relating to the hiring.
• Please explain in detail why, as the Superintendent stated at the August 23,2005 BOE meeting, that the Weissman and NJDOE enrollment projections are "wrong".
• Were members of the BOE aware of the NJDOE methodology for projecting student enrollment when they asked the LRPC's to make a proposal based upon BOCES projections, and if so, please explain in detail how they were made aware of the NJDOE methodology and when.

WeLoveMillburn.com
October 2, 2005

© 2005-2006 WeLoveMillburn.com Questions/comments, please email info@WeLoveMillburn.com View full copyright statement | View privacy statement Site design Becker and Spector