School board hopefuls offer different views at forum

Advocates for Special Kids holds candidates’ night.

By: Lea Kahn
   Candidates for the township Board of Education battled over their support for Schools Superintendent Max Riley and the district’s proposed 2005-06 budget at the Advocates for Special Kids candidates’ night last week.
   The seven candidates — incumbents Philip Benson and Carole Drury, and challengers Ginny Bigley, Deborah Endo, Gerri Hutner, Kari McGann and William Nathan — outlined their positions before about 30 audience members at the March 31 candidates’ night. They are vying for three seats on the board in the annual election on April 19.
   The forum, held at the Lawrence Branch of the Mercer County Library System, was moderated by ASK co-Chairwoman Diane Goff. ASK is a districtwide parent-teacher organization for parents of children enrolled in the district’s special education program.
   The candidates were almost evenly split on the issue of their support for the district’s proposed $57.6 million budget. The two incumbents — Mr. Benson and Ms. Drury — favored the spending plan, along with Ms. McGann. The other candidates opposed it.
   Ms. Drury said she supported the budget because she found it to be "fiscally responsible."
   Mr. Benson agreed that the budget is a "tight" one. He cautioned that if it is voted down and sent to Township Council, "they will want to cut millions of dollars out of it. There will be one heck of a fight to maintain resources."
   Ms. McGann said she favored several items in the budget, including the K-12 writing program and a plan to review the curriculum to ensure that it meets state standards.
   "I want my child to have the best and I want your child to have the best," Ms. McGann said.
   Ms. Bigley, Ms. Endo, Ms. Hutner and Mr. Nathan said they did not support the budget.
   Ms. Hutner said she would like to support the budget, but it’s a matter of how the money is being spent. She said she was concerned about some of the new positions proposed in the budget, such as the third assistant principal at Lawrence High School and the test assessment coordinator — a position that she said does not exist in other school districts.
   "If you can’t explain why (the positions are needed), then you can’t have my vote. I have to draw that line," Ms. Hutner said.
   Addressing a question to the candidates who oppose the 2005-06 budget, one audience member asked how a defeated budget and possible reductions in it would benefit the students.
   Ms. Bigley said there would always be teachers in the classroom and that learning would still occur.
   Township Council did not make large budget cuts when the defeated 2004-05 budget was sent there, Ms. Endo said. Township Council is not out to slash the district budget, she said, adding that she "has faith" in the council.
   Ms. Hutner said that after last year’s failed budget, it is important to find out why it failed. She said she did not know much about the budget, adding that it is the responsibility of the school board and the administration to inform voters about it.
   Mr. Nathan declined to answer, noting that while he didn’t want to cut anything that would benefit the students, he wasn’t able to offer an answer at this time.
   A $6,000 salary increase awarded to Dr. Riley last year also drew mixed reactions from the candidates, including Ms. Bigley, who challenged the move because Dr. Riley had not been given a formal evaluation by the school board to determine whether he had met goals set out for him.
   Mr. Nathan said he likely would have voted against a salary increase for Dr. Riley last year, because many teachers and staff members were laid off or, in the case of part-time employees, found their hours were cut back. People were laid off so the superintendent could get a raise, he said.
   "I think he earned the raise — it’s as simple as that," Mr. Benson said, defending the board’s decision. Dr. Riley was awarded the raise because of his achievements, such as shepherding through a $37 million bond referendum for school expansion and renovation projects, he said.
   "I don’t think Dr. Riley should be the subject of this election," Ms. Drury added.
   A lack of communication between the school board and the public has been raised lately, but a majority of the candidates told a questioner that they did not think televising the school board meetings was a good idea because of the expense.
   Mr. Nathan said people should attend school board meetings in person and voice their concerns to the school board.
   Ms. Drury suggested making use of the district’s Web site, or possibly developing a weekly column that would be published in the newspaper.
   "When you are looking for items in the budget to cut, how could you add another item that has nothing to do with educating the children," Ms. Drury said.
   Ms. McGann agreed that televising the board meetings could be expensive.
   "My first reaction is, ‘That’s a great idea,’" Ms. McGann said. "My next reaction is the cost. For too long, we have lived beyond our means. We should put the money somewhere else at this time."