Voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly defeated a $26.76 million school district building project.
The vote was 1,509 against and 811 in favor of the plan to renovate classroom space at the middle and high school and install an artifi cial turf athletic field.

Board of Education President Margaret Smith said she was disappointed.

“The community has spoken. We have to respect, I guess, what they’ve said,” she said. “Obviously, I’m very concerned about how we’re going to meet these needs that we have in our district. We’ll have to take some time as board to regroup and see what our options are.”

Superintendent Susan Swartz said she was not surprised by the vote. The board will have to look at whether it wants to put together a smaller proposition in time for the May budget vote so it can at least use its $935,000 Expanding our Children’s Education and Learning (EXCEL) grant from the state.

“We can expend those without any impact to our community. I think that we’ll at least at try that.”
Smith said she believed the timing of the vote did not help, given the sour economy and Gov. David Paterson’s announcement of projected school aid cuts the same day. Voters on Tuesday afternoon said the economy weighed heavily on their minds.

“I think it’s hard for people right now,” said Marjorie Kremzier of Scotia.

Ron Peterson of Glenville also said he worried about the entire cost of the project, which would have raised taxes an average of 1.9 percent starting in 2010. This was equivalent to about $59 for a home with an assessment of $160,000.

“The taxes are high enough. Even though they get money from the state, it still comes out of our pocket,” he said.

One controversial aspect of the project was installing artificial turf at the current football field. School officials had said they would be able to practice and play more games on the surface without it degrading. It would also free up the other athletic fields and allow them to rest.

Some voters like Dan Serrell of Glenville said they believed artificial turf was a luxury.

Others like Elsa Lehman of Glenville, who has a daughter who plays field hockey, said she believed it was needed. “I think it’s more durable and requires less repair.”

Even residents who voted in favor had an issue with the idea. Elizabeth Schwarting of Glenville said she was opposed to artificial turf, but voted yes because she supported the other aspects of the proposition. This included $5 million worth of general maintenance projects, including: roof upgrades at three elementary schools; renovating art and technology classrooms and expanding the library at the high school; enclosing the library and upgrading science laboratories at the middle school; and a demonstration solar project at Sacandaga Elementary School.

The district had distributed an exit survey at the polls. Spokesman Robert Hanlon said an initial review of the feedback confirmed that the economy and the artifi - cial turf were two main reasons why voters said no.

Smith said if the district did another proposition, it would try to address as many of the items on the building conditions survey with that amount of money. She worried that the aid could be cut in the future.
She did not know what the district would do about the athletic fields. A stand-alone project to fix them would not qualify for state aid.

This is the second area school building project to be defeated within a week. Last Thursday, Ballston Spa Central School District voters defeated by a nearly a 2-1 margin a $56.1 million proposal to expand the middle school.