More than 200 people showed up at the meeting to voice their opinions on the failed budget and the district's financial situation and to criticize or support the board's decisions.
The $55.9 million contingency budget is just $230,000 less than the failed budget, cutting funds from transportation, equipment, maintenance expenses and student supplies.
Board member Leo Greeley said the original budget the board presented to the community was frugal -- one the board felt was already at contingency level.
In past meetings, he said the board had stated it would likely go to contingency if the budget failed by a large majority.
"This shouldn't be a surprise. We publicly announced this was more than likely what we would do given the results of the budget [vote]," Mr. Greely said, adding that the board realized the likelihood of the budget's going down was high.
The district's proposed $56.1 million budget was defeated by a margin of more than 750 votes on May 19, when voters also voted down the district's health and safety proposition to fix code violations at the middle school by a slim 34-vote margin.
But residents are still headed toward a 25.6 percent tax levy increase coming after a two-year tax freeze, a situation many taxpayers are unhappy about.
In April, the board voted 6-1 to take the increase all at once instead of borrowing more money to mitigate the increase and take it in increments over a few years' time. Board members cited an uncertain economic future and its potential impact on the state budget process as the reason for their decision.
"The tax spike can't be avoided," said board member Jack Costas. "It can be delayed, it can be split, it can be subsidized, but it can't be avoided."
As it stands, the board will be renewing $3.8 million in debt this year it had originally expected to pay off. The board borrowed $11.4 million against $35.8 million it is owed in prior years' state aid, but only received $7.5 million of the $11.5 million prior years' state aid payment it had expected.
Superintendent Harriet Copel briefly spoke at the meeting about the possibility of borrowing against the remainder of the prior years' state aid money via the state-owned Municipal Bond Bank Agency, an idea championed by State Sen. Ken LaValle (R-Port Jefferson). The idea, first brought forward during the 2006-07 school year, was abandoned in 2008 because the board felt the terms of borrowing were too risky. Instead, they chose to borrow against anticipated payments via short-term revenue anticipation notes.
Dr. Copel said the district is in talks to see if the terms of the Municipal Bond Banking Agency borrowing could be modified, but they remain as they were when the district originally chose not to accept them. The district has until July 1 to decide whether to move forward with Municipal Bond Banking Agency borrowing this year.
At the meeting, the residents' comment period lasted for more than an hour as some residents gave board members quite a lashing, while others stood to defend the board.
"You're in the position where you are now because you lacked the fiscal discipline and courage to spend inside your income," said Ridge resident John Grady. "You do not represent the people."
Wading River resident and budget advisory committee member Ed Safford said the board should continue its discussions about the MBBA borrowing with Mr. LaValle and that the board needs to confront the rate of escalating costs in the district. Teachers and other employees should give concessions, he said, bringing applause from some of the meeting attendees. The repairs having to do with the health and safety proposal need to be expedited, he said, and it will be irresponsible to delay them. The best way for people dissatisfied with board members' decisions, he added, is to run candidates against them. Both board president Michael Fucito and Mr. Greeley were re-elected in May after they ran unopposed.
Finally, he defended the board.
"To those attacking the Board of Education, I remind you that these are your neighbors serving voluntarily," he said, to more applause.
Shoreham resident Chris Zukowski said the community's frustrations should not be directed at the board, but at the district's lack of state aid, which is a continuing problem. Other districts with similar income levels and enrollments receive a much higher amount of annual aid, she noted.
"You can't project your anger on a group that didn't make the rules," she said. "You should be mad as you are mad, but you should be focusing your [anger] in the right direction."
Shoreham resident Anthony De Louise said he wasn't sure the board had taken out a calculator and figured out what a family has to do to net out an additional $200 a month to pay taxes, especially if they live on a fixed income or have had their pay reduced.
"The years are going to fall off the calendar," he said. "And soon those people's names on the PTA and PTO are going to be a distant memory, and they're going to be sitting on the other side of this auditorium in a spot that a lot of people, especially seniors, are in right now."
When people began to clap, he stopped them.
"This is not them against us," Mr. De Louise said. "I was really kind of upset to see that every single time someone said something, one faction or another clapped. That's the board's fault for allowing that kind of schism to develop in the community."
asnyder@northshoresun.com