School's Bus Depot, Not the Budget, Revs Up Crowd

It was standing room only on Tuesday at the East Hampton School District’s budget hearing. The public is scheduled to vote on the budget on May 16 from 1 to 8 p.m. This year, voting will take place in the district office, adjacent to the high school building. Voters will not be allowed to enter the main part of the school building but instead must use the entryway to the district office.

Richard Burns, the district superintendent, presented a summary of the proposed $68.3 million budget for the 2017-18 year, which represents a 2.38-percent increase over this year, although it does not exceed the New York State tax levy cap.

Mr. Burns highlighted the fact that the budget did not represent any cuts in academic, athletic, or extracurricular programs. In addition, he said, the school is able to hire new teachers, offer more high school electives, continue with the A.P. Capstone program, upgrade student technology, improve the middle school kitchen, implement solar power options, upgrade security, and even replace all lightbulbs with LED fixtures, which “might seem trivial,” Mr. Burns said, “but because of this, the school got a rebate from PSEG for over $30,000.”

For East Hampton taxpayers, the 2.38-percent increase means that for a house assessed at $6,000, the owner would incur $45.49 more in school taxes next year, or $3.79 a month. For properties with an $8,000 assessment, it would mean an increase of $62.16, or $5.18 a month.

Should the budget be defeated and also fail in a second vote, Mr. Burns said the board would be required to adopt a contingency budget that was $800,752 lower.

“If that happens, I don’t know how we would make up the money, but I know it would mean huge cuts in programs and staff, and result in larger class sizes.”

Voters will also be asked to cast their ballots on the establishment of a capital reserve fund, which Mr. Burns called, “a savings account for the district that allows the school to make necessary improvements without affecting the budget.”

The issue raised eyebrows in the community, as some thought the board’s having called an abrupt meeting at 10 a.m. on April 7 in order to approve adding the capital reserve fund proposition to the May 16 ballot was not in accordance with board rules.

Paul D’Andrea, an East Hampton resdent, charged in an email to The Star, “The board is trying to do an end-run around due process in pushing for funding for the bus depot‚ on Cedar Street. By pushing a last-minute proposition for the upcoming school board budget vote in two weeks, they know perfectly well that the public isn’t paying attention. Why do they need a $10 million slush fund?” Mr. D’Andrea was referring to the $10 million maximum allowed in a school’s capital reserve fund, accrued over 10 years.

James P. Foster, the board president, told Mr. D’Andrea and other community members that East Hampton will never have anything close to $10 million, with approximately $100,000 currently in the fund. The board also addressed community concern over an item in New York Education Law, regarding reserve funds, which states that a board of education does not require voter approval to spend those funds.

“We cannot do anything without voter approval,” Mr. Foster said. “If we need to spend money to fix the tennis courts or replace the turf fields, those items will appear on the ballot for the public to either approve or vote down.”

Also on Tuesday, the board discussed the environmental impact study on the bus depot prepared by its engineering company, V.H.B., and asked questions of David M. Wortman, a senior environmental manager at the firm. Mr. Wortman had presented the report to the board and community on April 4, after which the board requested additional time to review the 300-plus-page document. Mr. Foster asked Mr. Wortman to once again summarize the survey’s assessment that traffic on Cedar Street would not be severely affected.

“After studying the area in question, we did not identify any significant changes in traffic,” Mr. Wortman said. “At most, during peak hours only, drivers could face a 1.23-second delay traveling south on Cedar Street,” he said. Reiterating the survey’s findings, he stated that in all areas examined — traffic, water, noise pollution, emissions — V.H.B. determined that no significant impact would occur.

Jeffrey Bragman, the attorney for the ad-hoc Cedar Street committee comprised of residents opposed to a bus depot on the school campus, took to the podium and was allowed to address the board for longer than the usual three minutes. The district is looking into the possibility of purchasing a different site for the bus depot, along the industrial stretch of Springs-Fireplace Road, but it has not ruled out its original plans.

Mr. Bragman handed board members and administrators a letter he had prepared in response to the environmental impact report. The letter catalogued what he called significant omissions. “There is no plan submitted for lighting needed at the depot. No detail on septic. No septic tank included. There’s no handicap detail and no mention of a fueling station; no dry well in the plan. There’s mention of a berm for aesthetic and sound reasons, but no mention where that berm would be placed, or from what material it would be constructed.”

Mr. Bragman also addressed Mr. Foster’s earlier question about traffic and said he believed the V.H.B. report was a poorly researched document, having only studied traffic patterns on one day, for one hour in the morning and another hour in the afternoon, both peak school bus periods. “And this, on a day, when amazingly, the middle school was dismissed early,” he said, demanding that the traffic report be redone.

Mr. Bragman continued with perhaps his most pointed argument — the potential for polluting drinking water. “There is a public water capture well 1,350 feet away from your proposed facility, on Oakview Highway, serving thousands of residents in East Hampton and you’re thinking about introducing dangerous petrochemicals here. This land is part of a special groundwater protection area, a most sensitive area. If the unthinkable happens, your facility could pose a major public health threat,” he warned. “We all know that we live in a fragile community with a fragile water system and we need to protect it.”

He ended his presentation by requesting another public hearing, at which taxpayers would be given a better chance to debate the issues.