August 8, 2018

A School District in Decline Affects Not Only Children But Property Values, Community Morale

To the Editor:

I’m a parent of three children, two of whom are in the Princeton public schools and one who will be, and I’m writing in support of both the upcoming school bond referendum and the superintendent and School Board members who put our district’s ambitious plans together. Other letter writers have written persuasively about the conditions that create the need for this referendum: overcrowded buildings, a growing school-aged population, critical security improvements. What I’d like to focus on is not the need for these changes, but the process by which the Board developed its plan; the opportunity that we, as a community, have had to give input; and the choice that we, the voters, will face in the referendum.

Some recent letters have criticized the process by which the facilities plan was developed, arguing that residents had too few opportunities to weigh in before the final plan was announced, and that the proposal costs too much for too little in return. Others have argued that no improvements are needed: that the Princeton schools are doing just fine, or even if they’re not, our elected officials should be doing more with less.

I agree that involving voters in the development of such a plan is crucially important, and that our board members must continually strive for frugal solutions to district challenges. From what I’ve seen, the Board and Superintendent Cochrane have done just that. During the proposal’s development, they held countless information sessions seeking community input, and since the plan’s completion, they’ve conducted ample outreach to inform voters about its components. The recent decision to split the referendum in two is evidence of the Board’s commitment to keeping costs down while still achieving necessary improvements.

When I voted for our town’s Board members, I voted for individuals whom I believed would preserve and build on our schools’ excellence in a fiscally responsible manner. To me, this means more than husbanding our schools’ resources. It also means anticipating future needs, so that our schools will be positioned to improve upon their already distinguished record. Undoubtedly, each of us, on our own, would have prepared a slightly different proposal. But that’s not how collective decision making works. We, as a town, have pooled our resources to develop a plan; now we get to vote on it. If, on balance, we think the plan sets our schools on the right path, we vote yes. A no vote would scuttle the plan and send the district back to the drawing board, with all the time and expense that would entail: a profoundly dismaying outcome.

No one likes paying taxes. But no one likes living in a town with unsatisfactory schools, either. A school district in decline doesn’t only affect the children who fill its classrooms; it drags down property values and community morale along with it. A thriving school district, in contrast, boosts not only our community’s young people, but the vibrancy of Princeton as a whole. This fall, I will enthusiastically vote yes on the facilities referendum.

Jane Manners

Wheatsheaf Lane