Palisadian. [volume] (Cliffside Park, N.J.) 1906-current, 1915-01-23
DIR. GOEMANNS LETTER
ON THE HIGH SCHOOL,
Board of Education Gives Sound Business Reasons for
Support of School.
To the Editor, The Palisadian:

To the Editor, The Palisadian:
Dear Sir:
1t is matter of public record that
| opposed the erection of additions to
the Grantwood and Cliffside schools
Ny opposition was based on the fact
that we should not provide for the
needs of section but for the entire
Borough. | have already explained
in detail why the Clifrside School
which is in easy walking distance of
all parts of the lower end of the Dor
ough, should be reserved for the low
er grades; the same is true of the
Grantwood School. The High School
and seventh and eighth grades should
be accommodated in a new building
on site central to all parts of the
borough. This site should be as near
the center of the borough as possible;
it should be selected irrespective Of
sectional lines. The only standard
should be, "Can it serve all parts Of
the borough"
Wants Central Location.
The site on Riverview and Palisade
it cannot be denied that it is the mid
die of the borough; it lies between
CHffside and Grantwood, while it is
outside of the limits of both. 1t is
within a short distance of all the
borough's leading streets; Palisade
avenue, Gorge road, Edgewater road,
also Palisade car line-it is an ideal
school site. Would it not be to the
interest of the borough if we should
acquire this land at present low
if we erect thereon a building so con-
structed that additions can be erected
at any time? If we centralize the
school system, thereby lessening its
cost of maintenance and adding to it's
efficiency?
Sectional Construction Best.
Anyone who will approach this sub
ject unbiased must come to the con-
clusion that Sectional Construction
on Central Site is it's only solution.
The opponents of this brought many
arguments to bear against it, they
have been forced to abandon them one
by one They have gone through an
interesting evolution. They have rea-
soned in a circle. Their first argu-
ment was that we did not need any
additional schoolroom, yet today they
are advocating the erection of addi-
lions to the Cliffside School. At last
they are out in the open. We know for
what they stand. They say, eff a
school is built it must be and will be
in Cliffside." What can they bring
forward to support this claim?
We Can Test 1t in Four Ways.
First; Centrality:
1t is only necessary to look at the
map of our borough to see that the
Cliffside School Site is not central and
and cannot be called central by any
stretch of the imagination. We cannot
have central school unless it is
built on central site.
Second; Location in Relation to Popu-
lation.
Location.
The advocates of High School in
Cliffside claim, that although the geo.
graphical situation may be inferior,
it is accessible to larger popu-
lation; our only statistics in the
matter are the official registry
lists. They show that the first or
Cliffside District contains 344 voters
whereas the Second or Grantwood
Districa, situated north of Edgewater
Road, contains 1888 voters, which is
about II per cent. more than the
Cliffside District.
Third; Taxes.
Can the advocates of the Cliffside
School claim that they are entitled to
it because they contribute most of
is supprt? Our schools are main
tanned by the entire borough, there
fore they must be so located as to
serve all parts f it. They must be
within walking distance of the whole
borough
For this reason | have opposed the
erection of additions to the Grant
wood School in spite of the fact that
the Grantwod District has a larger
population and pays the bulk of the
borough taxes.
Here are the figures:
Land tax-Cliffside 35 per cent;