by Thaddeus Flint
At about halfway into last Wednesday’s Berlin School District Board meeting, Board member Frank Zwack took his glasses off and buried his head into his arms at the table where his fellow Board members were once again arguing over the Bond authorization for the Capital Project. The meeting went on. Nobody seemed to find his actions all that unusual. For the sixth time the Board had failed to obtain the required super-majority fifth vote to get the $6.8 million Capital Project underway at the elementary school. [private]Zwack’s response seemed to sum up not only the feelings of the Board – both those for and those against the Bond authorization – but also the residents of the District as well.
Resident Pam Gerstel, who taught physical education in the District for many years, tried to get the meeting off to a productive start. “Board members need to put their feelings aside and get this job done,” said Gerstel. “We need to think about the kids.”
When the vote was taken, the outcome was the same as it ever was. Board President Gina Goodermote and Board members Zwack, Rachel Finney and Jim Willis voted for the project. Board members John Nash, Daniel Webster Jr. and Bev Stewart continued to hold to their position that the project is not a consensus of the either the Board or the Towns that the Board represents. They all voted no.
“The people who are holding it up are the [other] four Board members,” stated Stewart, who has been pushing for a special meeting on the project for months now.
“Baloney!” interjected a gentleman from the somewhere in the audience.
“We are at a point in time where we should have a special meeting,” said the District’s Superintendent Dr. Stephen Young. The meeting would only discuss the Bond and the Capital District Area School Development Association’s (CASDA) efficiency and effectiveness audit of the District which was just released. “We need to try to come to terms on reasons why it’s not being passed, reasons why you think it’s not worth being passed,” added Young. “Certainly we need these buildings fixed.”
Goodermote felt the meeting would only be useful if the Board is really trying to go forward. “There is no sense going back. No ‘he said, she said’,” said Goodermote. “We need to get the fifth vote. Hopefully we can come out with a clear decision at the end of the night. It’s time to move on and grow up,” Goodermote added.
Nash and Stewart took special exception to being urged to “grow up” from one of the two primary authors of the plan (the other being Willis) who largely put the project together with little consultation of the rest of the Board.
Stewart asked that someone independent run the meeting. That seemed to be largely ignored as were Stewart’s previous suggestions to have a meeting in the first place.
“The voters approved this project. What is really sad is that you are holding the kids hostage,” said Willis. Voters did indeed approve the plan in a referendum held in December with 307 “yes” and 173 “no” votes.
“You keep saying we are holding the kids hostage,” responded Nash. “We are not.” Nash has constantly rejected the idea put forth that the project is largely one of little to no cost to the District. “It’s not true the project is costing us nothing. A portion of the funding will come from the capital reserve [$1.8 million]. It’s the taxpayers money,” said Nash. “You know this project is not a one shot deal. The project is flawed. It has flaws in it.”
Willis is adamant that this is the best project the District can afford at this time. “It is not ignoring the taxpayers,” he said. “A lot of people are out of work! The taxpayers have spoken! This is a democracy!”
“No its not,” Nash calmly responded. “It was not done by the entire Board,” added Nash. “If we did this as a seven member Board we would have worked through this by now.” Young waved this argument aside. “When they were designing the Brooklyn Bridge, should everyone have been there?” asked Young.
In the end it was agreed that a special meeting on the Bond and the CASDA report should take place. No mention was made of who was to run it. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for June 13, although that date could still change. “We had some kids here earlier who made a professional presentation,” said Zwack, alluding to 15 year old Courtney Kellar, who spoke of her work in the FCCLA (Family, Careers, and Community Leaders of America) where she is now an officer representing New York State, and a group of Middle School students, who described their trip to Philadelphia. “If they can do it, we can do it,” he said.
Well, Zwack has high hopes. Not everyone is impressed with the CASDA report. The District paid some $30,000 for it with some belief it would be available by budget season. At least Stewart believed that it was supposed to be in Board member’s hands in time for them to learn how CASDA had recommended ways the District could save money and become more efficient.
“No Bev! You’re wrong!” Young adamantly corrected his boss. The Superintendent takes the position that the report is for long term planning and had not really been intended for the last budget discussions. But at the January 18 meeting of the Board, Young had pointed out that “CASDA is a very well known organization” and their report would be ready for the upcoming budget talks.
Nash seems to remember being told the same. “We asked if this report could be done early enough to use it for the Budget time,” he said. “It was not there. They need to explain why.”
“I would like the public to know how their $30,000 was spent,” said Stewart, who wanted the initial report posted on the District’s website. “If we accept anything other than this report we are hiding things from the public. The public deserves the opportunity to read it.”
A vote was taken and the public can now see what their $30,000 paid for at www.berlincentral.org.
The plan to rid the District of the Stephentown and Grafton elementary school properties is moving slowly along, although nobody is certain what the outcome will eventually be. Both the Towns of Stephentown and Grafton are still mulling the offers over. Town of Grafton Councilwoman Barbara Messenger informed the Board that “there is potential for the Town of Grafton to accept the building.” But they need to study both the financial impact to the taxpayers and the problem of what they would then do with their newly vacant library, town hall and fire department should they combine all these locations into the Grafton school property. “It would be prudent for the residents of Grafton to decide if they want to take ownership of the building,” said Messenger. A vote may be take but “we don’t know when that will be.”
Goodermote said she is “hoping, a dream on a dream,” that the Towns take possession of the properties by July 1. “You never know,” she added.[/private]