"Splitting scare resources to do it = Bad idea.
Taking money out of the existing schools to do it = Bad idea."

Funding is apportioned on a per-student basis, regardless of which school is being attended.
The money follows the students. Why is this basic and inarguable fact continuously glossed over and dismissed by all those who so vocally oppose charter schools?

If the parents and students choose to attend the chartered school, how is that "taking money" that has been allocated for that student?

Education funding (through property taxes, etc.) is allocated on a per-student basis; charter schools then only receive 90% of that amount to be transferred with the student (already a 10% reduction in per-student costs).

It is propaganda and a myth supported by the incumbent monopolistic educational juggernaut that chartered schools are a drain on a community's educational funding. Just look to more progressive states in this space such as Minnesota for successes and publicly-available records.

Because the per-student 'allocation" is NOT the incremental cost of educating each student. The fixed costs remain with the existing school district. This is basic economics.

The money follows the student, but the expense remains behind.

(Credit to another poster who summed it up that way -- great way to encapsulate the issue.)

It's not about the language. It's about the funding formula.

Language Study = Great!
Mandarin Immersion = Great!
Splitting scare resources to do it = Bad idea.
Taking money out of the existing schools to do it = Bad idea.

@AHS: you need to do more research on the charter school funding formulas and look into what has happened in districts with charter schools. The allocation of funds is not truly per child; there are economies of scale in running a school system. Fixed costs such as maintaining a building and extra expenditures such as special needs services all play a role. The cost of running the school system is amortized across a broad array of homeowners, including some with kids in the school district and some without. Taking the entire budget and dividing it by the number of students to determine a "cost per child" is an inaccurate way to measure costs.

I wasn't there; what did she say?

An incorrect statement, on many levels - and please don't put words in other's mouths, especially mine.
The point I made earlier was regarding learning the language of a "major economic power", which Japan is clearly regarded as, despite having been recently overtaken by -- you guessed it -- China! For confirmation, perhaps consider skimming the Financial Times, Wall Street Journal or The Economist this summer, while sipping that "thin beer".

great point about China; back in 2009, President Obama urged Americans to align their educational system with global market trends, and he specifically mentioned bilingualism, and the need to look towards China; I am not sure why all the districts have been slumbering in the meantime; also back in 1995, NJ enacted the "Strategic Plan for Systemic Improvement of Education" to ensure the development and assessment of rigorous academic standards throughout the state. The inclusion of not only ONE but TWO world language standards was recognized as an essential component of the core curriculum for all students spanning the entire spectrum K-12 education. Sadly, most NJ school districts have not taken this advice!!!! We are living in a very interconnected global world, and as citizens we must do everything to remain connected. The proposed Mandarin-English immersion school will prepare kids as global citizens! what a great way to go;

An entirely self-aggrandizing political statement, with not one mention of what would be in the best interest of students -- which should inarguably remain the focal crux of this discussion. Continue to enjoy that "ale", while we continue to progress with agendas of opportunities for an enlightened education.

While I understand the concern about the wording it needs to be pointed out that the NJSBA's resolution used "approval" not "input" as Sam Levy challenged last night. Not sure if this was just the motion that was made by our board incorrectly, but I find it interesting that if a global resolution,as this was referred to last night needed to be voted on, then a copy of the resolution should have been in front of all the members for reference. There was a lot of time wasted as a result. Check out the NJSBA's website and read the PDF titled "emergency resolution".

Yes, agreed (at least, in part) -- please note further how the enlightened community of East Brunswick recently welcomed, approved and accepted the Hatikvah International Academy Charter School, focused on teaching the Hebrew language, as detailed in this NJ.com article below, by Star-Ledger contributor Karen Keller:

New Jersey approves first publicly funded Hebrew-language school
Published: Wednesday, September 23, 2009, 2:40 PM

"The state has approved New Jersey’s first publicly funded school with a mission of teaching Hebrew, according to a New Jersey Department of Education press release.
Hatikvah International Academy Charter School of East Brunswick won the green light Wednesday along with seven other charter school proposals. Nineteen applications this year were rejected.

Hatikvah, Hebrew for “hope,” will offer “in-depth study of Hebrew and Hebrew culture,” and open in fall 2010 with 108 students from kindergarten through second grade, according to the founders’ application."

The other seven approved are: Hoboken Dual Language Charter School; Trillium Charter School (Hunterdon County); Academy for Urban Leadership Charter School (Perth Amboy); Charter High School for Environmental and Civics Studies (Teaneck); Barack Obama Green Charter School (Plainfield); Visions Academy Charter High School (Newark); Newark Legacy Charter School.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/09/mt-preview88d6e00d3419f4d6a3189c7f8124c578deaefd95.html

Did you know that in East Brunswick, the public schools had to cut full day kindergarten so they could afford their charter school bill? The charter school has full day kindergarten, not the public schools. That's appalling. I am Jewish and I am completely against this charter school. I pay for my kids to learn Hebrew privately; that's my responsibility and no one else's.

No, actually, the point here is that High School (or even Middle School) is FAR TOO LATE for a child to gain significant proficiency in a level-three foreign language like Mandarin, given their level of neuroplasticity at these young ages (Bialystok, et al), which decreases dramatically by age seven (which is why kids learn languages so instinctively). A fair and interesting comparison in relative levels of foreign language proficiency would perhaps then be for two students, both of which are not from native-speaking foreign language households, whereby one has taken the foreign language only in High School (or possibly add Middle School), versus a child who has been immersed in and also learned math, science, and history in that same foreign language.

to Susan1 - FYI - East Brunswick public schools did not cut full day kindergarten to fund the charter school. They never had full day kindergarten to begin with.

I respectfully disagree; following your analogy, we could also all use calculators, computers and digital algebraic systems to perform higher math after merely having learned basic arithmetic. Reinforcement and familiarity, coupled with curiosity and opportunity, foster true learning. Albert Einstein (who was raised multi-lingually) is quoted as having said, "Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death". To add another relevant adage, "practice makes perfect": even more so when based upon that much more of a solidly-built foundation.

Because charter schools are incorrectly being purported to be a monetary drain on current educational funding, and are thereby garnering misrepresented blame for the increases in property taxes which have been ensuing steadily without the introduction of any chartered schools to date. This is a no-brainer to instill negative public opinion for any cause. Any such educational cost increases should rightfully be attributed to the shamefully high, publicly-avaialable administrator's salaries and recent increases, especially in light of the current levels of unemployment and economic downturn in this country. "Lunacy" are the statements made in Livingston last night that charter schools would "drive Seniors out" of the community; that has been happening for years based on out-of-control budgets with little-to-no accountability.

Any misrepresented grass-roots organizations will have to fight such an uphill battle, just like my ancestor John Krause did in the American Revolution against the oppressive British monarchy. Give the charter school supporters the same access to all of money, email distribution lists and Trenton insiders that the incumbent educational juggernaut possesses (which we all paid for), and those numbers are likely to become closer to each other.

KLF & susan1 :

Actually, as per this very article above, yes: charters in existence today in New Jersey (as per the shining example Hatikvah International Academy Charter School cited above) are indeed funded on a PER-STUDENT basis (ABC, or "Activity Based Costing", and is considered to be far more accurate than GAAP: http://www.accountingformanagement.com/activity_based_costing_external_reports.htm. I am however not nor do I purport to be an accounting professional, but I am currently learning more in this field):

"School Board members voiced opposition not only to the way the charters are funded – with the district paying 90 percent of the PER PUPIL COST for students who choose charters...".

What fails to be mentioned here is that this is NO ADDITIONAL COST - and that the district RETAINS 10% for doing absolutely nothing, which they could use for infrastructure, salary increases, etc. Would charter school opposers support a higher percentage of retained apportioned student costs in return for doing absolutely nothing for those students?

Perhaps it is instead those in opposition charter schools who are in "need to do more research on the charter school funding formulas".

Matt - Sorry, but - we were here before you - your group is purely reactionary to these charter efforts, you obviously need to be reminded. And, we certainly welcome you and value all valid points for a mutually-benficial discussion. However, regarding the expectations for the school system to meet requested needs - I guess we can eat any cake in your living room as long as it's the flavor you deem best.

Are you saying that you pay higher property taxes than others, and therefore have a bigger say or vote? The Activity Based Costing that you all say does not apply "per-student" now suddenly applies "per-taxpayer"? Interesting flip-flop-flam of facts!

Charter school opposers FAILED to block the Hatikvah International Academy Charter School of East Brunswick from opening, and even if these misguided and misinformed initiatives do proceed with blocking charters in these districts, true American innovation will never be stifled - you just can't keep a good woman or man down!

JSB - Yet, dollars-to-donuts based on your statement above alone, you most likely promote the current administration and therefore their "health plan", which is mandating cost-sharing and wealth-distrubution to cover a similarly out-of-control medical community cost structure. Wouldn't health care improvement programs be more beneficial, by proactively advocating healthier lifestyle habits through education?

What's next: "I don't want 1% of my healthcare dollars keeping an overweight grandmother with emphysema alive for even one day longer!" ? Wow, that hearkens to the philosophies of the political parties that both of my grandfathers enlisted to risk their lives fighting against (and defeating) both Axis powers around 65 years ago...

And, no - I personally do not subscribe to any one political party's views - for this cause, I can truly say that my drive and interest lies solely with what is best for all of our children.

Shari,

Great points, and well-articulated. In agreement with your points above, how would then a property tax rebate received for families who choose to send their children to private schools differ from allocating those same funds towards a publicly-available charter school? Or are you implying support for an aristocratic structure, whereby only those who could afford to pay astronomical property taxes for education services rendered unused in addition to private school tuition? Doesn't that come across as quite elitist, and non-democratic and non-egalitatarian?

I was hoping that America hadn't become that place where we all receive just as much justice as we can each afford...

That's called "spreading cost", as per insurance. Charters are as open or arguably more open to the special-ed children that you mentioned, and are therefore subjected to that same potential overhead. Charters are PUBLIC schools, open to everyone.

AHS I beg to differ on your last comment, " Charters are PUBLIC schools." They may seem like PUBLIC schools on the outside but on the inside are funded by private equity, such as the one you mentioned earlier, in New Brunswick. Sounds more like a business to me.

The current bill has loop holes so wide, you could drive a truck through. The initial Charter school idea was based corrected to help children in poorly performing school districts. That was the theory behind them.

As for your argument about learning a second language, I am completely bilingual and actually learned most of it when living abroad. ( and not a junior yr abroad either).

Lastly, all children are welcomed....when Charter schools have lottery systems, and also base it on prior siblings attending...sounds like the private nursery school process to me all over again.

And if you want to discuss the true America, let the voters decide.

Susan1 - Great points, but I have yet to see proponents of charter schools attacking career educators or their methods. My use of 'juggernaut' (an oppressive and overwhelming organization) was directed towards those well-remunerated administrators and bureaucrats who are propagating misinformation regarding charter school funding.

Regarding the New Math (and the Metric) Initiatives of the '70s:
Yes, I remember it well; I also recall that shortly thereafter, due possibly in part to our collective failures to rise to that higher bar, came the beginning of the end of our dominance as a world leader in math and science., which continues to measurably decline today. We need to challenge ourselves more - "no pain, no gain". An education is about learning - fun alone should for recess and free playtime. Sure - by all means make learning fun - but, not at the expense of not learning core concepts.

Susan -- You are EXACTLY correct when you say "This is about making thoughtful decisions and considering all the facts before making a huge commitment." No one I know is against learning Chinese, or other language(s).
For the record, when BOE last discussed if Chinese should be added to the elementary level, the objections from both the BOE and the public were that the last program proposed was not a "well thought out initiative". After learning there was not time in the school day to have both Chinese and Spanish at elementary level, the then World Lang Supervisor proposed Chinese a couple of times a week for 20 - 30 minutes in K and 1 with a change to Spanish in grades 2 -5, student choice of Spanish or French, 6 - 8 and then student choice of language in HS including possibility of returning to Chinese. BOE recognized, given it is a tonal language and very different from English, that early exposure to Chinese could be beneficial. However, a smattering of Chinese in K/1 and then nothing until high school did not strike anyone (BOE or public comment) as a "well thought out" or an "effective plan". Also it was unclear if there would be enough Chinese teachers available to add to elementary curriculum. Questions were raised, never answered by the Supervisor and the proposal then seemed to get dropped. It was never voted on by BOE. And given available time in elementary day, no one was discussing " immersion".

Now that the District is rethinking its elementary World Language program, it would be perfectly reasonable to revisit what language should be taught in elementary school. And whichever language is chosen, make the curriculum be a result of thoughtful planning.

Susan1 - As I stated and re-stated above, "I can truly say that my drive and interest lies solely with what is best for all of our children". If your kid(s) chose not learn Mandarin (or Hebrew, or Swahili / Urdu / etc.), do you feel that they would not benefit from those students who choose to, take on the extra effort, and do?

And, yes, I am a fellow Essex-county taxpayer (seeing as how Millburn's attempt to secede to Union county where I grew up failed years ago. One must wonder about the impetus behind that whole effort: was it perhaps based on adversity towards cost-sharing with the Newark urban community in Essex county?).

Yenta - AHS was "hard at work" at my office while y'all were meeting last night - no apologies from me on that! However - I had a number of well-informed and like-minded comrades who attended and received updates on anything pertinent that went down. It's unfortunate that those foreign language learning experiences you detailed were no worthy of reminiscing on; mine were wonderful, so much so that as an adult I have sought out third and fourth foreign languages to learn, in Summit and Princeton, in my own little, precious time, and on my own thin dime, thank you!

this is for Yenta responding to her posting questioning who would be interested in a Mandarin immersion school; well Yenta, please check out www.PIACS.org, the first Mandarin Immersion Charter school approved in NJ. The school is not even yet opened but has a very long waiting list, for both, in and out off district kids! Please also call NJ's other language immersion schools, e.g Hola in Hoboken, or the Hebrew school in East Brunswick to get updates on their long waiting lists especially Hola's;
another Hebrew school in Teaneck was approved back in Feb 2011, and they also have a waiting list, even so the school is not yet opened. To your point, there is community support for language immersion schools. Remember, the children are signed up by choice. Clearly, if the seats of a charter school can't get filled, than the school can simply not open the doors
And, I am not sure how charter school founders could make money? I hope you are aware that all founders of charter schools are volunteers, and there is lots of work needed to be done even prior to getting to the application state; . I am happy to answer any of your questions you have, or I am happy to meet with you and have a chat over some tea or coffee. How does the little muffin place on Ridgewood, next to the store Milkmoney in Maplewood sound to you for a friendly chat?

I hadn't realized that residents voting on tax expenditures was per-county. (kidding - obviously it would be the exact same issue there, which means it really does boil down to not wanting to "pay" for Newark schools, as AHS mentioned above)

Actually, I am a homeowner and property tax payer in neighboring Maplewood, since 2000, which is sort of local; Maplewood may ring a bell as the proposed location for the Hua Mei Charter School. The oversight made by the charter proponents, which has now become glaringly obvious, was the incorrect assumption that Millburn residents would have been more interested in a progressive foreign language immersion school. If this gaggle represents the vox populi of your fair town by the river, then that was clearly an incorrect assumption.

I grew up and went to public schools in New Providence, Chatham, Madison, and Warren, so I would like to say that I am rather well-versed regarding first-hand experiences as a product of the educational systems of those towns. I am happy and proud to say that they were almost without exception outstanding experiences; my only wish in retrospect would have been to have started with foreign languages earlier than the 7th grade introduction that Madison offered, earlier than most in the early '80s. And no, my parents did not have the means to send me to extracurricular opportunities, so I grasped what my public school offered me with enthusiasm and vigor that persists so much that I now speak that same foreign language that I first started learning in 7th grade at Madison Middle School (where my paternal grandmother graduated high school) as my primary and sole language in my home today. Pretty cool, right? Thanks - I happen to agree! :-)

Susan1 - Actually, as you probably know, the University of Pennsylvania is a private institution, so taxation does not really pertain to this discussion, per se. Sure, Philly is a long haul from Maplewood, but everything I'm learning there and at Wharton is certainly worth the haul! By the way, my parents and my brother and his family happen to live in Pennsylvania, and my nephew will start Kindergarten this September by attending a CHARTER LANGUAGE IMMERSION SCHOOL in Bethlehem! We are happy and excited for him. It seems like at least the hometown of Lehigh University is not objected to the value propositions charters bring to open communities, with open minds!

You missed my point- I was responding to jsbeckerman's comment above.

Yenta, thanks - I deleted mine as well. I am sorry to hear that you wouldn't want to continue on with this discussion - we all certainly appreciate your and everyone's feedback. The beauty of this free nation that we all need to remember is that we, as neighbors (and even family members!), can have diametrically-opposing viewpoints, speak our minds openly, and hopefully learn from other's viewpoints. Most importantly, however: unlike in Syria or Iran, or formerly prior to our military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan, we don't have to worry about being tortured and / or killed for opposing the government or the benevolent majority. Freedom is indeed not free.

Jessica F. - Great points, which would beg one however to ask: where then is (or why isn't there) a lobby for earlier language learning within the current public programs? That looks as if it would certainly be a win-win situation for us all, and the "boogey-man" that charter schools are being portrayed as may slither away into the alleyways of redundancy.

Lottery is the great equalizer, unless there is a more egalitarian and less elusive way that anyone could propose. The opportunity is available to everyone, and what more fair way than a random drawing, as anonymous as the votes we all cast on Election Day? Lottery is also the method employed by U.S. Government agencies for fair allotments; for example the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) awards U.S. citizenship each year to a group of immigrant applicants selected through the lottery system.

And again, please remember that charter schools are indeed public, so the correct possessive pronoun should most likely be 'ours', not 'yours'.

Lastly - I certainly would hope that the property market value of Millburn wouldn't be undermined by the introduction of even a handful of chartered schools within or in nearby districts. Even Littleton, Colorado (location of Columbine High School) did not suffer dramatic losses in their housing markets following the devastating massacre which occurred there in April 1999:

http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Littleton-Colorado/market-trends/

@ AHS You ask "why isn't there a lobby for earlier language learning within the current public programs?" If you lived here, you would know that in the last round of budget cuts (state aid losses in excess of $3 million) our language programs were CUT. Not because anyone wants it that way, but we had no choice. Now outsiders like yourself are running around telling us that we should be INCREASING our language programs and threatening our school budget even further with charter schools. I'm sure many people would LOVE to see a strong language program in our elementary schools; it's not possible right now. This is why people are so upset about the charter schools, which will drain even more money from our budgets. We've had enough cuts and made enough tough choices. Our school system is not perfect but we, as a community, are doing the best that we can with what we have to work with. The charter school people find it so easy to come into our community and tell us what we should be doing; it's arrogant and selfish and I'm disgusted by it.

So, in your words Susan1, Hua Mei has signatures from Millburn, Maplewood, and South Orange. I think you meant to say "affected towns" since that is where the school's proposed location would be (Maplewood).

No, I suppose I wasn't very clear. What I meant was that, while most of the Hua Mei signatures were from the affected towns, a fair number were from non- affected towns such as those I listed. In the case of the Hanyu petition, there were many from people who will not be affected and I found that upsetting. Why should someone who lives in Bergen County get to advocate for a school that won't cost them a dime but will cost us?

I wonder if anyone as checked to see how many of those who signed the petitions have since signed the new petition recinding their earlier approval.

Do you mean signed the opposing petition due to political pressure? Or for fear of "retaliation?" Several people that I have spoken to that were "for" the charter, are staying silent because of the political pressure, not because they are "changing their mind"

If you are missed out in the 514 signatures, you still have a chance.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/nocharterschool/

Compare with 440 from Livingston, only 74 from Millburn, and more than 50 are Chinese.
Come one Millburn people, where are you?

Students are not "chosen" to go to the charter school, unless they are sent to lottery (due to having a full applicant list). It is a public school, period, and cannot, by law, show "favoritism."

Craig and Jutta, how is this school different than a private school other than having the public pay for it? There are several Mandarin programs for pay around this area. Parents who find it imperative for their child to be bilingual with Mandarin their language of choice should pay for it.

The debate about the worthiness of bilingual education should not muddle the question at the center of this dispute, namely whether the public should have a say in funding niche charter schools in areas where the public schools are more than adequately educating our students.

sms, we feel that the education opportunities with Mandarin Immersion should be relegated to the "rich" - it benefits ALL children, and should be treated as such.

I hardly equate the availability of language immersion as an issue of the haves versus the have nots. We are not talking about decaying schools in urban blighted areas with crime, lacking the barest minimum of quality regarding education. That is a case of have nots - not being able to learn to read or write or do mathematics. There are children in inner city high schools that cannot read - not English not Mandarin. Those are the children entitled to educational opportunities that a charter school can provide. There are real problems faced by thousands of children in this State. Our limited resources should be dedicated to where there is true need, not want.
How is this niche immersion school any different than a private school that is publicly funded? When it comes time for college, I have to send my kids to a college I can afford, whether it be a pubic or a private institution. Because a "rich" student can afford a private university does not mean that I am entitled to send my kids to one too at taxpayers expense.
The frustration is not with language immersion, but with funding. In Millburn we just went through a very difficult budget process - we cut programming, an entire team of teachers at MMS and courtesy busing. There are no extra dollars to follow kids out the door. Our taxes pay for ~99% of our school budget. To lose even 150k more would mean that we would probably have to fire 2 additional teachers and increase class sizes even more.

A school that has an "applicant list" is not a public school.

Charter schools are publicly funded, but they are not public schools.

KLF don't try to redirect it - it has to do with available properly zoned location - as the school would grow it would be able to expand to a larger location and increase teachers and classes.

Susan1, it is not about "drinking the Koolaid," as we are defending our position, just as you are defending yours. If you look at what the myriad of founders are saying, it is not only about MANDARIN education, it is about offering a choice, and giving students another "tool in the toolbox" to compete in a global market - in language, math, and science as well.

Yes, it is about choice. That's why I am in favor of allowing voters to choose whether they want charters in their communities or not.

Good point, KLF. You should address these issues to Commissioner Cerf. He is the person making the decision.

Chris Cerf
Acting Commissioner
New Jersey Department of Education
100 River View Plaza
P.O. Box 500
Trenton, NJ 08625
Telephone (609) 292-4450
Fax (609) 777-4099

LDSF -- MIllburn schools already devote a good part of the budget to English as a second language instruction in a myriad of languages which would surprise many-- for the many students who enroll in the District but do not speak English well. The instruction is individualized to the student's needs -- point being -- this inclusive programing already exists and is require by state of NJ.

You may be right that AHS is the husband of one the hua Mei founders. but I can approve that Craig who posts here is the husband of one of the Hua Mei founders, he has identified by himself in Livingston Patch. see copy from him

Craig
4:02pm on Wednesday, May 25, 2011

The founders have received threatening letters from Livingston townspeople, is all I can say.

Yes, I was at the Livingston meeting. I did not stand, as my wife is a founder and was with the group that stood.

FYI.

The supporting letters from MSHCA, Livingston Chinese Association, Livingston Chinese school have been withdrawn from Hanyu's application package. You can verify that with Commissioner Cerf. Please take them out of your consideration.

nocharterschool -- can you please clarify this? Are you saying that the MSHCA, the LCA, and the Livingston Chinese school have WITHDRAWN their SUPPORT? If so, that is HUGE.

interesting - the MSHCA has already gone on record, about two weeks ago ( i think) that they were not for OR against, and did not officially endorse the charters. It was here on the patch. Please provide links as I haven't seen anything about the other schools/associations. Not that it matters, because it is political distancing, nothing more.

KLF,

There weren't any support from these three organization to start with. The officials were just misled into signing the supporting letters without knowing the contents of them. Now they realized the mistakes and went forward to withdraw the supporting letters.

Not only they do not demonstrate legitimate support from the three organization, they also "do not demonstrate legitimate community demand". The following are quote from Livingston patch.

http://livingston.patch.com/articles/charter-schools-livingston-acts-to-persuade-nj-education-leaders

"The board will also question parts of the applications, including that they do not demonstrate legitimate community demand. Six identical pages of community support signatures (for a Mandarin Chinese immersion school in Northern New Jersey) were photo copied and included in both charter applications, according to the draft letter."

Xenophobia alive and well in Millburn.

I don't think it's xenophobic to question a foreign government's involvement in US public schools. Especially one with an appalling record of denying human rights.

And there it is, Godwin's Law in action. If you can't argue facts, bring up Hitler.

AHS...why not publish your name? emerge from the shadows?

You are arguing for a voucher system of public education...but ignore that your individual tax dollars do not even come close to covering the cost fo "your child's" education...without the benefits of the social contract (pooling of tax dollars)...most families would barely be able to send one kid to public school on their local tax $, let alone have their garbage picked-up...

you can't have it both ways...if you want 100% contro over your child's education...go top private school...

if you want the beenfits of the social contract to ease your financial burden...then stand with democracy...

instead...you want Have Cake; Eat Too education...i.e. You get to choose, while everyone else gets to pay...

how convenient...

M. Moore - I can't believe you quoted Godwin's Law! I'm ROTFLOL.

For those of you unfamiliar with Godwins Law: It states "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1 (100%)."

j s - Almost; those seem more like initials than a name, per se, such as 'Johann Sebastian'. For the incessantly persistent, I could offer to appease the curious my mnemonic d'plume is: "An Honorable Sinophile" [AHS], in the fashion of GWL [Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz], co-founder of the calculus, etc.

But - given the unlawful and documented multiple harassments undertaken by Livingston charter opponents, your like-minded charter school opposers have force anonymity on us, the minority (sorry, no Godwin-fodder there).

working on it...

Matt - Two friendly words of advice for that letter to Commissioner Cerf: spell check.

Exactly! Similarly: attempt to post anonymously because name, race, ethnicity, or income have absolutely no relevancy or bearing on the topic matter at hand, and stand to be accused through smearing of association with the very party that was portrayed in disdain.

M. Moore and Susan1 - I have many first-hand experience stories about this from proud veterans in my own family, who enlisted to risk their lives against oppressive juggernauts. Great for you if you are so lucky as to similarly have such personal heroes in your families as well!

Oh, and - apparently I can argue facts, since I had been the sole charter proponent posting and thereby lengthening this thread until Craig joined me, against these collected voices of feeble opinions, as just so many May gnats....

Feeble opinions, May gnats? I think your argument isn't very strong if you must resort to insults to others that disagree with you.

While "name, race, ethnicity, or income have absolutely no relevancy or bearing on the topic matter at hand" one's relationship to the "founders" is absolutely relevant.

I refuse to take the bait from AHS anymore. We need to stay focused on the facts and how we can stop this unfair re-appropriation of our taxes.

No, actually the town that was chosen for Hua Mei is "our" town, Maplewood; our mutual administrators in Trenton mandate neighboring community involvement, thereby putting us through the Mill (-burn).

Susan1: Great analogy; as that old saying goes, "It's time to fish, or to cut bait!", yú know! (sic; yú = 'fish').

Damian - you're absolutely right, I would like to please apologize to the group for my earlier "May gnat" transgression. I certainly am learning from and appreciate everyone's feedback on this thread.

M.Moore - yes, there are many good points being made here, by both parties, but - there are a good deal of opinions being presented based on conjecture and hearsay, focused on the opposition to charters, which I humbly do find to be weakly supported, or feeble. Perhaps if the original Millburn BoE meeting had been a truly democratic meeting, allowing for ALL parties to voice relevant facts, we all would have learned more that evening. Instead, a certain loud and red-faced administrator (whose anonymity I choose to respect) made derisive and direct wishes of ill-will to the charter founders, who were not afforded even one second of verbal airtime at that same meeting. ... Which is REALLY FEEBLE!

stopcharter - If only the process were that simple; fortunately for us all, the controls are regulated much more tightly than your example; this same example however unfortunately exposes a complete unfamiliarity with the charter application process (which is also all publicly available / downloadable). I'm pretty certain any founder would be glad to provide those details to anyone interested in those irrefutable facts as set forth by Trenton.

LDSF,
As I said before, there weren't any supports from the three to start with. They have withdrawn mistakenly signed supporting letters.

you are right about the process. State will make decision by end of sept. dead line for school district to submit comment is end of may. No deadline for individual to submit comments, but earlier the better.

AHS lives in Maplewood; in fact, most of the charter school founders live elsewhere. It's troubling that people who live in other towns are attending our BOE meetings, commenting on our decisions, and have the power to take a portion of our taxes to spend as they want on a project located outside of our town.

The Charter school has no "right" to simply "take" our tax dollars. This decision must be made by a Millburn township resident (i.e., taxpayer).

Yeah, they need ONE founder to reside in the town. ONE person can affect the fate of many kids. That's a lot of power for anyone who wasn't elected to public office, wouldn't you say?

Allison -- I was on the BOE at that point in time so do have some recollection of what was under discussion. There were many unanswered questions about the proposed Chinese program -- its implementation and finances, and whether enough teachers would be available. As I pointed out, there wasn't time in the elementary day during grades 2 - 5 to add a second language. So what was proposed was Chinese in K & 1 and then a big gap. So speaking for myself only, I was not supportive of that proposal as I didn't think it made sense. It would have been expensive and it was uncertain as to what, if any, lasting benefit would accrue to our students. If you look at the videos of public meetings you will see/ hear public had same questions during Public Comment as BOE did. But after public discussion produced same questions, the proposal vanished and the questions were never answered. I agree perhaps now it is a good idea to re-explore which language to teach in elementary school.

KLF In the Spring of 2010, when Gov Christie/state of NJ announced it would pull $3.5 million of state aid from MB Schools (with 1 week's notice before the budget was to be approved to go to the voters), all of the individual Subject Supervisors were cut from the budget and the District went back to the old paradigm of one high school teacher per subject as part time Dept chairs and each of the elementary instructional Supervisors became subject specialist for K - 5 curr. So to answer your question, Dr Tator's job was eliminated due to sudden, unexpected lack of funds. Ironic right?

Thank you, Noreen, for clarifying about Ms. Tator. You are right -- it is ironic. Her position was cut from Millburn High School because of a huge budget cut from Trenton. Then she goes on to be a founder of a proposed charter school that would remove even more money from the district. Interesting.

Can you be more specific about what you say are the "fake" things?

@stopcharter: "language immersion charter school is wrong thing (promoting isolation and segregation)".

So, you're saying that taking on the extra effort to immerse oneself to learn a foreign language to one's utmost levels of proficiency is responsible for "promoting isolation and segregation"? Wow - do you just think everybody else should just speak American? (sic: English).

AHS, please don't mix up the concept. "taking on the extra effort to immerse oneself to learn a foreign language to one's utmost levels of proficiency" doesn't mean it has to go through charter school. There are many more other channels, with much better, more effective way to achieve it. "taking on the extra effort to immerse oneself to learn a foreign language to one's utmost levels of proficiency" doesn't "promoting isolation and segregation". Charter school does.

Hi!