Budget passes; Mezhir, Laub win

Mixed results for board majority

by Larry Austin
Lewiston Porter Sentinel, May 21, 2005

Voters in the Lewiston Porter Central School District overwhelmingly passed a school budget that calls for a 5 percent decrease in the tax rate, while electing James Mezhir and Robert Laub to three-year seats on the Board of Education.

The May 17 vote drew 3,447 people, with 3,335 casting ballots at the Community Resource Center. Another 112 filed absentee ballots or affidavits. Proposition No. 1 on the budget to authorize the board to expend $35,038,250 passed with 2,308 yes votes and 959 no votes. The total budget of $35,038,250 achieved a goal set by four members of the seven-member board to have a zero percent increase over the 2004-05 budget.

In a five-way race for two seats, voters chose Mezhir and Laub over three other candidates, two of whom were supported by the four-man board majority of Ed Lilly, David Schaubert, Lou Palmeri, and Len Palumbo. Mezhir led all candidates with 1,735 votes, followed by Laub (1,714), Lynn Garcia (1561), and Neil Richardson (1461). Charlene Lopacki, who entered the race late after James Leighton dropped out, received 184 votes.

Happy with Results

“We’re real happy,” said a jubilant Lewiston Porter United Teachers President Jean Henesey immediately after the results were announced. The union and board majority have sparred repeatedly over mentoring for new teachers and the denial of teachers for coaching positions, among other conflicts. The 2005-06 budget includes more than a dozen cuts to teaching staff positions.

“I think the community has had it,” Henesey said in interpreting the elections of Mezhir and Laub. “And I think they’re sick and tired of the bashing, the attitude.”

“I think they are fiscally responsible, but I also think they are very objective educationally,” Henesey said of the winners, who replace Jack Burmeister and Dr. Nils Olsen. Neither Burmeister nor Olsen opted to run for re-election. With Carol Rogers, they make up the board minority, who often clash with the majority quartet.

Community Thanked

“It’s a humbling experience, and I just thank the community for their support,” Laub said after learning of his win. “And I’ll give it 100 percent the best I can.”

Laub, a former teacher in Niagara Falls, was asked if the board election was a referendum on the board majority’s decisions.

“Well, if so, the vote was very close, so I believe we still have a division within the community,” Laub said, “and it’s my hope that I can do something to bring the board, as well as the community, together and all get on the same page and do things for the good of the kids. I spent 34 years working with kids, and I’m glad to have three more years to do it.”

James Mezhir said: “I can honestly say that I’m pleasantly surprised. I felt confident, but at the same time I was pleasantly surprised.”

Fiscal Compromise

Mezhir reiterated his campaign theme and said he will look for fiscal compromise through the process of collaboration, consensus and professional courtesy on a board that has earned a reputation for disagreement.

“What I’d like to see as part of the board is to bring back the kind of integrity that it needs to be a very, very important part of the community,” Mezhir said. “I think it’s quite important at this stage of the game that the board and the superintendent, the faculty, the staff, and the community work together, not work against one another. And the purpose obviously is for the welfare of our future, and that’s our children.”

Lilly’s Reaction

L-P BOE president Ed Lilly looked on the election of Mezhir and Laub less favorably.

“The fact that we have two teachers on the board negotiating the teachers’ contract is going to cost the community a lot of money,” Lilly said.

Lilly said he thinks the public still supports the direction of the board majority, despite the loss of Garcia and Richardson.

“The cost control passed, the budget passed, and obviously the teachers union spends a lot of money and is able to get their people elected by creating confusion in telling kids to tell their parents that programs are being cut which aren’t being cut,” Lilly said.

Olsen noted that nine of the past 10 Lew-Port school budgets have passed.

“The teachers didn’t speak to the budget so much,” Henesey said. “We advised people to vote with their conscience. Obviously, none of us are happy about a zero percent budget, but either way it was going to be zero percent whether it was passed or not passed.”

Cost Control Passes

The vote was not a grand slam for opponents of the board majority. Proposition No. 2, an advisory proposition offered up by board candidate Neil Richardson, asked voters if the board shall “call a special district meeting and hold an advisory referendum vote whenever a contract between the district and an employee union or the Superintendent results in an increase in taxable cost to District Taxpayers.” The question passed with 1,776 yes votes to 1,325 no votes.

“The taxpayers recognized the need for cost control,” Lilly said, when they approved Proposition No. 2 for the advisory referendum.

Is it Legal?

Olsen, the dean of the University of Buffalo Law School, said Proposition No. 2 would not pass muster with the State Education Department.

“I believe that that is as illegal a proposition as can be imagined,” said Olsen, “and I would hope somebody would find the time to take it to the commissioner.”

Each board is an independent entity, and one board cannot bind a future board’s decision-making processes, Olsen explained.

“They’re requiring every subsequent board to change their decision-making process a certain way, and you can’t do that,” Olsen said.

In addition, Olsen said such a process would not work because Lew-Port has four collective bargaining contracts and a superintendent contract.

“You could end up having five elections in a month as a result of this,” he said, “because these things are all staggered right now so they all come due right around the same time.”

Board Reduction Fails

Proposition No. 3, the brainchild of Lilly, calls for reduction of board membership from the current seven members to five, commencing in the 2007-2008 school year. It failed by a 1,862-1,369 vote.

Though Proposition No. 3 failed for the third time it has gone to the public for a vote, Lilly said he would not give up on the idea.

“No, because we really need to reduce the bureaucracy by making the board smaller,” Lilly said. “People will realize that having more board members doesn’t mean more representation because when it comes down to it, there are two opinions: give the teachers more money or do what’s right for the taxpayers and students.”

Capital Fund Passes

Proposition No. 4 establishing a 2005-06 capital improvement fund by transferring $125,000 from the existing Capital Reserve Fund and $175,000 from the tax levy, passed 2,113-963. The proposition increases the levy 19 cents per $1,000 of assessed value. The resulting estimated tax rate, which does not become final until the summer, would climb to $21.41 per $1,000 and leave an estimated total decrease of $1.09 per $1,000, or a decrease of 4.9 percent.

At a past board meeting, Laub urged support of Proposition No. 4.

“It makes sense to keep your home and property in good condition, and these proposed expenditures are 72 percent reimbursable by the state,” Laub said at the time. “I strongly believe we should invest in our buildings and grounds on a yearly basis.”