By:Carrie James
East Meadow School District's $50-million bond issue recently came under attack by a handful of civic organizations and community members regarding plans for the Salisbury Center.
As part of the 2000 bond issue, the school district proposed moving its administrative offices from East Meadow High School to a space at Salisbury Center, which is now home to the Nassau County Board of Cooperative Educational Services.
As part of the move, BOCES has been asked to vacate the space by the end of June 2002. BOCES is now looking for a new location, said Barbara Behrens, information officer for the board.
Community and civic leaders said they recently discovered the move through communications with BOCES and are outraged that the East Meadow School Board didn't tell them about it before the bond issue was approved.
"Our recollection is that there was discussion that they had a small space they would move into, but they never said that they were kicking BOCES out, as I recall," said Dick Cardozo, president of the Carman Civic Association and a member of the East Meadow Civic Association. "Besides, they don't need that much administrative space anyway."
Many civic associations have gotten involved, including the Birchwood on the Green Civic Association and the Clearmeadow Civic Association. They have asked the East Meadow School Board to revisit the issue.
The Salisbury Center school was shut down more than two decades ago, when enrollment numbers dropped, East Meadow district officials said. In 1974, the district leased the building to BOCES, with the knowledge that the district might reclaim it in the future if student numbers rose. With the district's enrollment increasing, East Meadow officials decided to move the administrative offices to the Salisbury Center to provide more space for classrooms at the high school, which they said has limited space for construction.
East Meadow officials contend they visited and discussed the issue at length two years ago when they first started entertaining a bond issue. They looked at many options, including construction of a new building at various district locations.
"We looked at many options. We looked into leasing office space, building on one of our other properties," said Leon Campo, assistant superintendent for administration and finance. "We looked at a variety of options. But one thing was clear, with the growth, we had to move. We could have built, but it would be costly. This was the most cost effective option."
Furthermore, board President Clem Grieco recalls that, during the discussions, the district approached BOCES about reclaiming the school for administrative offices.
"We approached BOCES and asked them to terminate their lease, but said to them, 'If you are willing to commit for 10 years, then we'll look at other options,'" Grieco said. "BOCES refused to agree to a 10-year contract."
Residents and community leaders are bothered by the removal of BOCES and the loss of about $500,000 in annual revenue from the lease agreement, Cardozo said. But there probably wouldn't have been a problem with the proposal had he and others believed the district was up front with plans, he said.
"It was never disclosed as part and parcel to the plans," he said. "If one person misses [this information], that's normal, that's expected. But when 10 people don't know about it, then there's something wrong. "
District literature and 30 bond-issue presentations let people know about the district's move to the Salisbury Center, Campo said. It stated in "Analysis of Proposed Bond Referendum" that $200,000 would be used to renovate the school and also that the offices would move to that location.
East Meadow Civic Association President Bob Zafonte recalled that he and others believed BOCES would stay at the center, and the district's administration would only use a small part of the building.
Another concern of residents is that moving the administrative offices to the Salisbury School, which is in the northern part of the district, would decentralize the administration and leave them isolated from other district schools, Cardozo said.
"It will just be space for administration. They will have no constant interface with the faculty and students," he said. "And it is physically on the outskirts of the district."
District officials contend that any school, regardless of its location, is part of the district and should be seen in that light. No one school is on the "outskirts," Campo said.
Cardozo and others have asked the school board to reconsider the move and look at other options, calling the current decision irresponsible to taxpayers. Their suggestion is to bring in a mobile unit to house the administration or build an addition at one of the other district schools.
Former board member Helen Murphy, who served when BOCES first leased the Salisbury Center, agreed that the move would hurt taxpayers.
"I just think the young taxpayers in the area are unaware of this," she said. "This is a big income like this to give away [the $500,000 in revenue from BOCES]. I would not have voted to give it up. BOCES has paid for the upkeep of the building and has been a good tenant."
Building an addition, however, would cost the district between $10-$14 million, Campo said. He stood behind the present solution as the most cost-effective way to handle the district's lack of space. Building an addition would inevitably raise taxes.
"It is less costly to forgo that revenue than to construct new space," he said. "Our need is not for the entire building; our administration doesn't need all that space. Our goal is to share that space so as not to lose all of the revenue."
The district is looking for a tenant for one part of the building to make up some of the lost revenue, Campo said. BOCES could still rent the space, he said.
Also, Grieco said, the wheels are already in motion regarding the move of administrative offices from East Meadow High School to the Salisbury Center. Any objections, he said, should have been brought up during bond-issue discussions, not after voters overwhelmingly approved the bond issue.
"This was discussed up front, and it was part of the bond-issue presentations," he said. "If they didn't ask a specific question, they might not know all the details. Why this is surfacing now, I'm not sure. The wheels are in motion. We have to have a place to put these children, so we had to find another place for administration. I'm not sure there is a better alternative."
There may or may not be, Cardozo said, but he, Zafonte and others said the issue should at least be revisited.
"The board should explore other alternatives that would not have such a serious, negative financial impact on the district," Zafonte said.
