By Andrew Coen
On June 15, voters rejected the revised budget proposal of $88.4 million, a 3.5 percent increase, by 531 votes, 3,074 to 2,543. Had the budget passed, it would have totaled about $1,000 less than a contingency budget, under which the district is only able to spend money on essential items. The original budget proposal of $89.3 million, a 4.54 percent increase, was rejected by 397 votes on May 17.
The school board must decide before July 1 where the money will be allocated for the 2005-06 school year.
The trustees have vowed to appeal the results to the New York State Department of Education and the New York State School Boards Association, and to explain the hardship the district is facing with the hope of receiving more financial help from Albany.
Moments after the results of the revote were announced, District 15 trustees expressed anger that the voices of public-school parents were not being heard during this year's votes because, they said, misinformation was spread by the non-public-school community in an effort to reject the budget. "It's really hard to swallow that there is this radical group that wants to vote down and destroy our school system," Trustee Anthony Licatesi said after the results were announced. "If that segment thinks that we're going to sit here and be kicked, they are mistaken."
"I have been in this school district for close to 20 years, and I have never been so disheartened by the results of a vote as I am now," school board President Kathy Raquet said after announcing the results.
In a phone interview two days after announcing the board's intention to appeal to the state, Raquet said that while nothing about the June 15 result was illegal, the goal of the appeal is to make state education officials aware of the tough conditions the district is facing as a result of what she described as incorrect anti-budget propaganda that was distributed by e-mail throughout a large segment of the non-public-school community. "Taking facts and using them against us is very upsetting to the public-school parents," said Raquet. "We want the attention of the New York State School Boards Association, and we want the attention of the commissioner."
Raquet said that the school board would send letters to Commissioner Richard Mills as well as the School Boards Association. "We need help from the state," she said.
The board also plans to ask the state Department of Education to conduct a thorough study of how and why $18 million in reserve funds was spent by the district in the late 1990s and early 2000, which resulted in minuscule budget increases over that period. The recently released audit report on Lawrence by state Comptroller Alan Hevesi's office did not identify any wrongdoing regarding the reserve money, but many in the community were not satisfied with the study and want a more careful review.
Despite operating for a second year on contingency in 2004-05, Lawrence was still considered a wealthy district when it came to state aid, and thus experienced a slight drop in aid from the previous year.
Jonathan Burman, a spokesman for Mills, said he could not comment on Lawrence's action until the state receives an official letter from the district.
The revised budget failed by the largest margin at the Lawrence Middle School, with only 279 residents casting their votes for the proposal and 1,522 voting against it. The Number Six School in Woodmere was the only other precinct with a majority of no votes, 941 to 572.
Atlantic Beach and Inwood once again showed overwhelming support for the plan, with the Number Two School recording 690 yes votes to 88 no votes, while at Atlantic Beach Village Hall, 450 levers were pulled for the budget and 72 against it. Lawrence High School, in Cedarhurst, registered 552 yes votes and 451 no votes. After voting at the middle school, many residents said that they did not support the budget because they felt the district would be better served on austerity, with controls on spending after the probable sale of the former Number One School property.
"I don't want [the school board] to have total control of the money," said Yassi Schwartz. "It would be better that the state controls what they spend."
"I voted no because I think the district is being mismanaged as the student population is decreasing and the budgets continue to increase," said Michael Pinter. "I think voting yes would give the district the ability to spend all the profits from the Number One School."
After voting for the budget at the Number Six School, George Pittel said he wished the entire community would realize the impact of not supporting the district. "I wish the people in this community knew they had an obligation to support the schools," said Pittel.
"I support the schools, always have," said Jack Mlawski after voting yes at the Number Six School.
After a school board meeting on June 21, the next scheduled meeting will be July 5 at 8 p.m. at Lawrence Middle School.
Comments about this story? ACoen@liherald.com or (516) 569-4000 ext. 210.
