A village resident expressed concerns this week about Cooperstown Central School's involvement in the distribution of signs advocating approval of the proposed 2006-2007 budget which goes to the voters next Tuesday.

Paul Clark said Tuesday that he saw signs in some village yards urging residents to vote 'yes' on the budget and asked a homeowner where she had gotten her sign. He was told it came from the school and the next day, Clark called the school and asked about getting one of the signs. He was told to come down to the school and they would see he got one.

The more he thought about it after picking up his sign at the school Monday, the more Clark questioned the appropriateness of the school being involved in handing them out.

He took his question to the state education department and a spokesperson confirmed his suspicions.

"The state education department told me they were breaking the law," he said, adding that "the school shouldn't be taking that kind of stand when it comes to the budget."

Superintendent Mary Jo McPhail said the school board and administration had nothing to do with the distribution of the signs. She said they were coming from the school's faculty association.

"First of all, they're not coming from the school," she said Monday. "If people have asked us how to get the signs, we've directed them to Marjorie Schleining."

Schleining is Cooperstown's faculty association president and a foreign language teacher.

Asked about and whether it was appropriate or potentially illegal for the school facility to be used as a distribution point for signs advocating the budget's approval, McPhail said "I think very clearly we're following the letter of the law."

A state education department spokesman contacted by the Crier declined to comment on the specific situation, citing the fact that it could eventually come before the commissioner. However, he emailed a section from the School Law Handbook, 30th edition, which is published by the State School Board Association and contains a "good overview of the law that applies to schools," said Tom Dunn from the state education department.

Section 4:54 of the publication states that school officials are not allowed to "permit employee unions, staff, or students to use district facilities or channels of communication to encourage a particular vote."

Section 4:52 of the handbook states that districts should also avoid creating an "appearance of impropriety" when engaging in activities that technically do not constitute partisan advocacy.

Schleining said about 20 signs were distributed from her classroom in the school, only two of which went to community members on Monday who sought the signs as individuals within the community. The rest, she said, went to faculty members and the president of the PTO, who agreed to help distribute the signs.

Schleining said the school board and administration had nothing to do with the distribution of the signs and that they came from her as union president. She said the signs were purchased and distributed as part of a regional effort through the Herkimer/Oneida office of the New York State United Teachers union.

"They really stayed away from it," she said about the administration.

She said she was unaware of any legal issues that might exist with distributing signs from the district facility and that their intent was only to show support for the school board and budget.

"Our intent was good-hearted, to encourage people to come out and vote (in support of the budget)," Schleining said. "There is no way I was aware of that (law)."

Clark, who recently took the school board and administration to task over a $1.28 million fund balance which was more than twice the limit allowed by law, said he is concerned about "what seems to be a consistent pattern of 'we can live above the law' down there."

"It's too bad that they put themselves in this position that people feel like they have to be watchdogs," he said.