Sag Harbor School District Hosts Final Marsden Forum Before Vote

Sag Harbor residents came out one final time on Monday to ask questions and share their thoughts on the Sag Harbor School District’s desire to purchase 4.13 acres of vacant land on nearby Marsden Street, a divisive issue that has gripped the community and its residents for months.

District voters will determine the fate of that plan on Tuesday, May 16, when they head to the polls at the Pierson High School gym to cast a yes or no vote on Proposition 2, which would ask them to approve floating a $6 million bond to cover the majority of the $9.425 million asking price, and to authorize an additional $3.425 million to be pulled from existing capital reserves. The polls will open at 7 a.m. on Tuesday, May 16, at the Pierson High School gym, and will close at 9 p.m.

The district has hosted several community forums on the issue, which have featured impassioned debate on both sides, from parents eager to see the district — which is limited in its facility capabilities by its small footprint — acquire more space to create more opportunities for students now and in the future, and from neighbors who live on or near Marsden Street expressing various concerns about the purchase and negative impacts they believe the purchase would have on them and the larger community.

As they have done at various community forums and meetings that have taken place over the last few months, Board of Education members and Superintendent of Schools Jeff Nichols reiterated key points: that the May 16 vote pertains to only to the acquisition of the property and not any future development plans, which would be subject to another community vote, and that the vote is for a $6 million bond and disbursement of $3.425 million from existing capital reserves, and that any other numbers that have been used in the last few months amount to “disinformation.”

Nichols and board members also stressed that any future development plans for the project would be driven by community input, and that the board is open to several ideas that would be in line with what the district’s facilities committee has identified as top priority needs.

Likewise, many of the handful of vocal opponents were on hand at the forum to stress the points they’ve been making. Critics say that they don’t feel comfortable supporting a multimillion-dollar purchase of land when they don’t know what the future development plan will be, and how much more money any future development plan could cost taxpayers down the road; that they do not believe the district conducted proper environmental review on the land; and that while the district is saying publicly that it is open to various options for developing the land, it is privately still intent on ultimately turning it into an athletic field, possibly with synthetic turf.

In a statement that was illustrative of how intense the debate has become over the last few months in the community, Nichols began the forum with a disclaimer that he and the board had been advised by counsel not to engage with any audience members who are involved in pending litigation against the district related to the Marsden Street properties. He advised those audience members that it would be best not to ask questions, because in declining to answer them, it would reveal publicly that they were party to a lawsuit against the district.

One of the first questions of the forum related to how the district planned to “heal the divide” that has been created in the community once the vote is over.

“I think this is an issue that has raised emotions on both sides,” Nichols said. “I’ve always thought our responsibility is to be honest and transparent with the community and then let democracy decide how to proceed in terms of a vote.”

Nichols and several board members reiterated the points they’ve made about why the vote on the land and future development is split into two stages, saying it is simply an issue of time, because the seller is not willing to wait indefinitely as the district does the time-consuming work of coming up with a development plan. “There was no scenario where [a development plan] could be done in a short period of time,” he said. “The choice was to try to acquire the land or walk away.”

Board member Grainne Coen spoke to that sense of urgency later in the meeting. “In 20 years, we could be saying either ‘Thank God we have the land,’ or ‘What a shame, these five houses that are here could’ve been part of the school.’”

Resident Susan Sprott spoke at the forum, articulating the concern she said several residents have about the acquisition, and adding that her desire would be to see the land developed into a passive park: “We don’t know what the final cost will be, so we who may feel we’re not altogether there in support of that are left with this leap of faith, that you’re not presenting the whole story to us.”

Board Vice President Brian DeSesa responded, saying that he understands the hesitation, and admitting that the district does not and cannot know the ultimate budget for the future, while reiterating the point that the acquisition of the land, despite future unknowns in terms of cost and development, is the right move for the district. “It opens up a variety of doors for a landlocked school,” he said.

In recent weeks, the issue of what the district does for students in regard to providing lunch has become a focal point for some residents who oppose the Marsden Street land acquisition, as they’ve raised concerns about the district possibly prioritizing the purchase of the land and future development plans there over other needs, like implementing a hot lunch program for elementary school students. Nichols and board members have insisted that it’s not an either/or equation, and Nichols provided an update on where the district is at concerning hot lunch.

“Right now, there’s a kitchen that, with minimal investment, could be up and running in the Sag Harbor Learning Center,” he explained. “The problem right now is logistical, as it relates to transporting the hot food to the elementary school, which you could address through trucks. But we also have no lunch room at the elementary school.”

Nichols cited an elementary school lunch room as an example of a facility need, saying that trucking hot lunches from the learning center to the elementary school and then delivering them to 50 different classrooms during three different lunch periods is not manageable.

“We’re aware it’s a priority and we will continue to focus on it,” he said.

Board member Jordana Sobey followed up on that thread, connecting the dots to the Marsden purchase.

“At the elementary school, the only space to expand on is the field,” she said, pointing out that if the district ever expanded onto the field space to create a lunch room, it would then need to have additional space for students to play sports. “Whatever Marsden might become, just adding to our footprint only helps give opportunities to kids, whatever those opportunities might be,” she said.

While most of the exchanges between the board and audience members were cordial, if at times tense, there was one moment of particularly emotional back-and-forth between a Marsden opponent and the board.

Board member Alex Kriegsman drew heat from the audience again after complaining of what he said were incorrect and inflated numbers related to the Marsden vote from members of the opposition. He called out opponent Grover Pagano, in particular — which led to a quick and emotional rebuke from his wife, Debbie Pagano, who said the targeting was uncalled for. She said she and her husband have been treated poorly because of their opposition to the acquisition.

“We moved here two and a half years ago — this is our home, we love it, and we love the community and the school,” she said. “Ever since this has started, we have been called so many things. It’s been very disheartening to live across from this school and disappointing that we’ve been told by a board member that if we don’t like kids we should just move,” she added, seemingly referencing a comment Kriegsman made at a previous forum, where he said, “I understand if you live across the street and you don’t want this across the street, but the school has been here since 1908, and if you didn’t like our kids, this wouldn’t be the right neighborhood for you.”

Debbie Pagano continued to speak out of turn after her allotted two minutes, leading Board President Sandi Kruel to bang the gavel and issue several warnings about her conduct before telling her she’d have to ask her to leave if she spoke out of turn again.

Another audience member later said he had also found Kriegsman’s statements at previous forums to be inflammatory, and asked the rest of the board and Nichols if they stood in support of Kriegsman. Each board member and Nichols said they did.

“I think the tenor and heat of the debate has been raised for months now, and I’ve been on both sides of it,” Nichols said. “I was at a Town Board meeting where the behavior of a lot of people present was not appropriate and was less than acceptable from my perspective. I’ve known Alex for six years, and I think he’s a good person, and I think that many of the points he’s made in writing and speaking are valid. Sometimes the tenor and tone can be a little harsh, but he’s an individual, he’s an adult, and I think at the end of the day, I’ve seen it go both ways.”

Coen pointed out that the district and board have been the target of a lot of that emotional heat. “I don’t love any of the name calling,” she said. “We stood up to get elected and made ourselves, I guess, targets by doing that. But that doesn’t mean we enjoy it. We’ve been called liars, underhanded, manipulative and feckless, recently.”

She added, “I totally support Alex as an amazing board member. We have a different delivery protocol, but he does a great job.”

Board member Ron Reed said he agreed with Coen, and added that he’s been “dismayed by the amount of misinformation circulating online,” calling it “unproductive.”

DeSesa, the board vice president, is in his final weeks on the board. His term is up next month and he is not running for reelection. His seat will be filled by resident Dan Marsili, who has publicly expressed support for the Marsden acquisition in the past. Kriegsman and Kruel are also running unopposed to retain their seats on the board.

DeSesa shared words of support for Kriegsman as well, and addressed his critics by adding, “if you want to play Monday morning quarterback, you should run for something.”