Installing field lights on the playing fields at High School North and South will build a sense of community — especially during Friday night football games — currently lacking in West Windsor and Plainsboro.
That was the argument made by proponents of the lights during the West Windsor-Plainsboro School Board meeting on January 12. They also say it will give parents the opportunity to catch their children in action without having to skip work or rush home on weekdays.
Opponents include the schools’ neighbors, who say that the light and noise from the evening games will be a nuisance.
Siding with proponents of the plan to install lights on the football, soccer, and lacrosse fields at both high schools was the board’s finance committee, which recommended moving forward with the project. The board is expected to vote on the issue on Tuesday, January 26.
Installation of the lights is proposed to be funded by money raised by a nonprofit athletic foundation under the auspices of the West Windsor-Plainsboro Education Foundation. School officials say that there will be no costs to taxpayers for the project.
But members of the school board will have their work cut out for them to draft policies that would grant permission to private donors to pay for the field lights, set advertisement procedures; govern use of the fields, including times; and place restrictions to protect neighbors living adjacent to school grounds.
Those neighbors, however, expressed a lack of confidence that any procedures will protect them from safety and quality of life issues that come along with late-evening games.
Fearing that the games will draw crowds, cause light and noise pollution, encourage delinquent behavior, and even impact the students’ academic success, the neighbors urged the board to turn the proposal down.
The discussion came a month after the district released a report conducted by the Independent Field Lights Committee, which was commissioned to analyze whether to support a private proposal to raise funds to install the lights. It did not make a recommendation about whether or not to do the actual installation of the field lights.
Most of the concern during the meeting seemed to come from neighbors in West Windsor who live near High School South.
Canoe Brook Drive resident Neale Campanella said the board didn’t do enough homework. Installing the lights, he said, “would have an adverse effect on academics,” in that it would take away more time for students to complete their homework if games are played later into the evening. He said the board should “allow the main focus to continue to be on education.” He also said there were already sufficient fields in the surrounding area that already had field lights.
Sara Campanella, who also lives at the address, echoed the concerns, saying that there would be no way to guarantee that funding for the ongoing maintenance associated with the lights would be available later in the future.
“If this district already has financial issues and is willing to sacrifice support personnel, I absolutely cannot fathom this district even considering a nonessential, nonacademic expense,” Campanella said, referring to the board’s move toward outsourcing the custodial and maintenance staff to save money (see following story).
Former school board president Richard Harbourt said the concerns of “the citizens surrounding South should be given a lot of weight.”
Nassau Place resident Deane Bornheimer also had financial concerns, pointing out the possibility that state aid will decline and that the district already has to cut between $2.5 and $4.7 million in next year’s budget. “Why, in light of difficult times, would you even consider voting in support?”
Sherri Bailey, a secretary at South, said that given the rough economic climate, people may be more frugal in where they choose to donate their money. If someone donates to the athletic fund to support the installation of the field lights, “it’s $200 they may not be giving to Post-Prom.”
One Plainsboro resident, whose property abuts North’s tennis courts, said he already spends 15 to 20 minutes every weekend picking up trash that flies onto his lawn, and that he has seen spectators to games at North using the bushes in the surrounding neighborhood to “relieve themselves.”
Other residents pointed to venues like Mercer County Park and Community Park, both of which have lights available.
Proponents, however, disputed the claims. Among them was Pat Boyle, one of the two residents who originally approached the board with the idea over the summer, and who is one of the organizers of the nonprofit organization charged with raising the money.
“As far as the costs go, there will be zero costs,” he said. The WW-P Athletic Foundation will “pay all expenses associated with the lights.”
Boyle said he had experience in fundraising for lights at other fields in both communities, including at Community Park in West Windsor. He said the fund would continually hold fundraisers and collect money from the community to offset any ongoing costs. “It’s for the good of all the different sports that use the fields, and it’s for the good of the community.”
Resident Jeff Rohrbach said athletic programs are beneficial to a student’s academic success. “It is a proven fact that our student-athletes make good academic role models. If you adopt this measure, it will increase our sense of community among our students.”
Michael Meduski, another resident, said his daughter played sports as she went through the WW-P school system. Every year, she made the principal’s honor roll, even though she had to balance her schoolwork with her sports schedule. He said he was able to “see personally there were no adverse effects academically.” He also said that in grades kindergarten through eight, field lighting is available for later games, but when students get to high school, officials have to set up portable lights for evening games.
He said he saw many benefits in pursuing the project, “especially given the fact that these lights are being presented to the district at no cost to the district.”
Tom O’Connor, a resident living in the nearby neighborhood, took an opposite view from the rest of his neighbors. Having moved to the area from another state, O’Connor said he found that “I love hearing the football games, I love hearing the fireworks that go off during Christmas time, and I love being part of the community.”
Contrary to the argument that rough economic times should deter approval, O’Connor said that “in rough times, it’s important to have those things available” to the community.
Proponents also argued that games are already played late at night. Resident Andrew Washuta said his sons play ice hockey, which requires them to attend practices that sometimes begin at 9 p.m. and last until 10:30 p.m. There were no adverse effects to his sons’ grades, he said.
Steven Campanella, however, another resident of Canoe Brook Drive, was still not convinced. He said he had heard a “great deal from a number of parents who want to watch their children.” He said he understands the district’s mission is to “meet the needs of the children. I have heard nothing about serving the needs of the parents” in the mission. “Is this serving the students, or is it for the convenience of the parents?”
While school board members endorsed the plan, they pledged to address the concerns of the group of neighbors, particularly surrounding High School South, who previously have indicated taking legal action to prevent the lights from being installed.
“I’m convinced it would be a good benefit to the community and the schools,” said board member Anthony Fleres. “We do have our work cut out for us in coming up with the policies to mitigate the concerns of the neighbors.”
Board president Hemant Marathe said the board will work over the next several months to draft sound policies.
Echoed board member Ellen Walsh: “We clearly get the message we have to have the right set of rules.” She emphasized that the project would be “about the kids.”
Board member John Farrell, whose son was a star quarterback at High School South before he graduated last year, said he was “very in favor of the lights.”
“I believe it facilitates our mission by providing another venue for our extracurricular activities,” Farrell said. He pointed to teams like soccer, field hockey, lacrosse, baseball, football, band, color guard, and more, which generate more than 500 students at each high school who will reap the benefits of the lights.
“We’re all about academics, and we see opportunity for co-curriculars to help our students,” he said.
Alapakkam Manikandan was the sole board member to oppose the proposal, saying that “in this particular case, it’s the fear of the unknown.” He said he was worried about the ability for funds to continually be generated to support the ongoing costs of maintaining the lights on the fields. “When the market goes down and things get tough, what’s going to happen?”
He said that because the project is a much more significant investment than something as minute as a “small basketball hoop.” This will make it harder for the board to abandon the project if costs begin falling to the taxpayers. “Even if it is hard to raise the money, you’re committed to it.”
He also pointed out that Principal Charles Rudnick does not support the idea, and that moving forward with the project could come with legal ramifications. “Are we opening a can of worms?” He also worried that the board would be setting a precedent of accepting gifts from outside parties simply because they come at no cost to the district.
Board member Randall Tucker, however, said the board would ensure that if it could not sustain the maintenance costs that it does not install the lights.
“We need to take advantage of it, or it might be gone,” he said. He said he saw the establishment of the foundation as a permanent solution. He said he has heard many complaints that the community lacked “any revenue that allows the sense of community to be created,” and said this could provide that opportunity.
He also said he felt more people would benefit from the project than the residents who “just don’t want it in your backyard.”
Board vice president Robert Johnson, who resides close to the school, echoed the sentiment. “I don’t like the divisiveness” seen in West Windsor, and “if we can find a way to bring the community together, I think that’s a good thing.”
Johnson also said he did not buy into the idea that students will stay up later and that their grades will suffer, saying it was the parents’ responsibility to ensure the students do not stay out late. In addition, there are basketball and ice hockey games as well as plays and other extra-curriculars that keep students out later into the evening already.
The study into the installation of the field lights began shortly after the committee was formed in the summer. According to the report, members of the independent committee, including Skip Evans, Janet Greenman, Elliott Korsen, and Jeffrey Miller, interviewed various stakeholders and conducted their own research.
In the report, they wrote that Pat Boyle and Manny Efstathios, the two residents who approached the board in the summer with the idea, told them that the installation of the lights would cost between $240,000 and $260,000 using energy-efficient lighting with a 25-year guarantee and that auxiliary lighting would probably also be required.
The group of concerned neighbors — Deane Bornheimer, Paul Van Der Werf, Neale Campanella, Alexandra Lawrence, Donna Tillson, and Genevieve Stiefel — living adjacent to South “have indicated that they would not support the installation of lights under any conditions,” the report stated. “This group is a very vocal opposition who has indicated that legal action is a potential option.”
One alternative pointed out by the committee was to only install lights on the fields at High School North for use by both schools.
The report did mention, however, that even though the funds would be raised privately, the community would be required to bear additional costs, including auxiliary lighting, ongoing operations, and maintenance expenses such as electricity, the committee reported. However, the report also pointed out that these costs would be offset by eliminating the costs of using other lighted county facilities.
The committee also urged the board to address safety and security concerns, specifically as they relate to the impact on the adjacent neighborhoods when an evening event on a lighted field brings large groups of people to the school facility.
During the interviews, neighbors told the committee that they were most concerned about noise generated by the public address announcers and marching bands. The residents also told the committee that currently, even during daytime events, “there is a fair amount of smoking, drinking, and general mischief that goes on in the area behind the visitor’s side of the football field and behind the concessions stand at South,” and neighbors feel the problems will worsen if more nighttime games are added.
The neighbors also said they were concerned about the financial impact of having the police department providing additional security for night games. Academic impact was also a concern for the neighbors, who said the students are currently stretched to the limit with a demanding academic workload and extracurricular activities.
The independent committee also spoke to realtors, who told them they did not believe that the installation of lights would have a significant effect on property values.
The committee also contacted five other Mercer County police chiefs, in municipalities whose high schools have lighted fields. Those chiefs as well as those in West Windsor and Plainsboro said they did not feel holding the events at night would impose an additional security concern.
South principal Charles Rudnick told the committee he felt the negatives of installing the lights outweighed the positives and that the lights would create more wear on the turf fields, possibly increase misbehavior at the events, and impact academics.
North principal Michael Zapicchi, however, said the lights would create greater opportunities for parents and students, who will be able to participate in other afternoon and evening activities. He also suggested graduation could be held on the fields if there were adequate lighting.
WW-P Moving Toward Privatization?
The writing seems to be on the wall for the West Windsor-Plainsboro School District’s custodians and maintenance workers — start looking for new jobs.
The WW-P School Board took the first step toward privatizing custodial and maintenance services by approving a contract with its consultant for preparation of bid specifications and creation of an invitation for bids (IFB).
While it approved a $9,192 contract with Edvocate School Support Solutions on January 12, the board has emphasized that this does not mean privatization is certain. Board members say that once the bid specs and IFB come back, they have to decide whether or not to solicit bids from outside facilities management firms. And when those bids come back, the board can examine the costs and savings and make a decision then.
The issue has been controversial since news broke in October that the board had been studying the possibility of outsourcing the WW-P school district’s custodial and maintenance staff to help save money in the budget. Opponents of the possible outsourcing have disputed information in a report prepared by Edvocate, which estimates the board could save $1.5 million if it privatizes the jobs.
Members of the unions representing the more than 125 maintenance and custodial employees in the district as well as their public supporters vowed that the battle was not over, threatening to respond at the polls when it comes time to vote on this year’s budget.
Board members, however, said they felt moving toward privatization was the only solution to their need to cut between $2.5 and $4.7 million from the budget. In addition, they pointed to the current economic climate and recent uncertainty with regard to state aid to school districts.
Board member Randall Tucker said that over the past few months of public comment at board meetings and elsewhere, some suggestions for saving money were helpful. However, “the reality is that we heard no idea that has had significant impact to the budget problem we face.”
Board vice president Bob Johnson said there were some residents in both communities who “suffered outright loss of their career,” and the board needed to look out for their interests as well.
Some residents and district employees, however, accused the board of taking “the easy way out.” Wes Mostello of West Windsor criticized the board for targeting the district’s lowest paid employees and expecting people hired by a private firm to be able to survive on wages as low as $26,400 — compared with the average salary of $40,000 to $41,000 currently offered to in-house employees. He said the board was content with paying the current custodians over 50 percent more for all of these years.
“The board seems to think nothing is their fault,” he said. Cuts should have been done across the board — “not singling out the lowest tier in the most need of it.”
West Windsor resident Gerda Duffy echoed a similar concern. “At the very time you started to consider outsourcing the district’s lowest paid employees, you were also approving increases” to the administrators, she said. “If all else fails, we the people who are ashamed of what’s happening can show how we feel when we vote.”
Former board president Richard Harbourt said that “in order to solve our budget problem, outsourcing our custodial staff should be the last thing we consider.”
Warren Mernone, a member of the union who said he was in charge of the negotiations, pointed to another item on the agenda during the meeting — the installation of field lights at the district’s two high schools (see previous story).
While a decision was not on the agenda, the board discussed the matter and said they were leaning toward recommending the move. “It’s absolutely a non-necessity when you are scraping at the barrel to pay me,” he said of installing the lights. “I believe the school district has done fine without the lights and will continue to do fine without the lights.”
He said that while a nonprofit group is proposing raising funds for the installation, he believes that eventually the maintenance costs will trickle down to taxpayers.
Mernone also said that during contract negotiations, “the board put offers on the table and never once said your jobs are on the line.” He also criticized the Edvocate report, which characterized the number of holidays and days off custodians were given as excessive. He said he gets 19 holidays a year — just like the administrators. “We’re all getting 19 holidays.”
Referring to comments made over the past few months by members of the union, who said the board refused to meet with them to negotiate, board president Hemant Marathe emphasized that the board never said it did not want to talk with the unions. “That’s completely false and fabricated. Unless we can get the budget under the state-mandated cap, we are going to take any means” to reduce spending.
After the board voted 8-0 to award the contract to Edvocate, Mostello said he felt the board had failed to solve its own financial problems. “Whose responsibility is it to take a good, hard look at the budget to see what the opportunity for savings are?”
He said he believed there were people on staff who could have taken a closer look at the budget to come up with the savings without resorting to outsourcing.
Sherri Bailey, a school secretary at High School South, said she was happy that the superintendent had agreed to meet with a group of concerned employees to come up with ideas for savings, but said that if the board would be considering corporate sponsorship as revenue to pay for ongoing maintenance costs of the field lights, it should consider broadening that approach. “We could earn millions if we’re going to allow this, and we wouldn’t have to outsource anyone,” she said.
Duffy called the vote “depressing” and said she already consulted with West Windsor township officials about protest procedures. Residents “can make ourselves heard anywhere where we’re not compromising safety.”
