School construction realities has one resident up in arms, By JoAnn Baker WEST MILFORD Jim Foody is really frustrated with the school district. Back in January of 2003, residents voted to allow the district to spend over $6 million to make improvements in almost all the West Milford school buildings. The district had hired architects and engineers, and together they developed a plan to make numerous improvements without raising taxes. They were able to promise a zero increase for two reasons - the district was coming to the end of an earlier debt, so the new debt would simply replace the old, and the Educational Facilities Construction and Financing Act of 2000 guaranteed 40 percent state aid. But the district still needed voter approval, so they began courting yes votes by holding public meetings to explain the improvements they wanted to make. They presented plans that included, among other things, all new windows at Marshall Hill School, all new windows at Apshawa, the replacement of three temporary classrooms at Maple Road and security fencing around a bus drop-off area at Westbrook. The reason Foody is so frustrated is because only some of the windows at Marshall Hill and Apshawa were replaced. And because the addition at Maple Road ended up as one classroom, an office and a conference room. And because there is no security fencing around the bus drop-off area at Westbrook. But all the projects have been deemed complete and all the money has been disbursed. Foody started looking into these things during an unsuccessful run for a seat on the board of education this year and later accused the district of potentially misappropriating a minimum of $2 million. One of his sticking points was that once the windows in the front of Marshall Hill were done, the district ran into cost overruns and used the remaining money on the Maple Road project. The law clearly states that the district cannot divert funds from one project to another. “It was absolutely irresponsible of them,” charged Foody. But because all the various improvements were lumped into one referendum question, they are not considered separate projects. “It’s very common for school districts to handle referendums that way,” said Bond Attorney Steve Rogut, “because districts often need to prioritize within a project when costs change.” District Business Administrator Stephen Cea explained that there were cost overruns at Marshall Hill because there was a two year lag between the original estimates and the start of the project and prices had gone up. “We’re very confident that what we did was proper and necessary and we have nothing to hide.” In addition, he said, the School Construction Corporation [the entity which oversees spending of state aid for construction] inspected all the paperwork and the project itself at every step of the way. Board Member Wayne Gottlieb dismissed Foody’s claims, “He’s doing this to position himself to run for the board next year.” But Foody said he was leaning against running again. “Someone has to watch out for the taxpayer and the regulations from the state board would essentially act as a gag. I just think what they have done is wrong. I think I’d rather be able to talk about it” So in the end, voters thought they were spending over $6 million to get a specific project completed. And it appears more dollars will have to come from somewhere in order to finish them all. Is it fair to the taxpayers? That’s the question that has Foody so frustrated.