While those in support of council districts in the Town of North Hempstead had hoped for the chance to vote for the proposal this November through a referendum, a decision released last week by Supervisor May Newburger has extended the deadline to November 2003. The projected date of the referendum was extended based on a need to modify town law to comply with current state requirements.

"In 1987, the then all-Republican town board, in response to an effort by some town residents to seek a referendum on councilmanic districts, passed legislation to amend the town code which made it more difficult to make such a change in North Hempstead," said Newburger in a prepared statement.

"The current town board is now faced with the challenge of dealing with the amended town code and the various aspects of the commission's report and recommendations," stated Newburger.

However, Peter Cavallaro, chairman of the Town of North Hempstead Republican Party, believes that part of the reason the referendum is being further delayed is because of partisan political purposes. "That is just not right," he said. "This failure on the part of the board and supervisor is evidence enough as to why there needs to be two party governance returned to North Hempstead as soon as possible. Council districts will facilitate that end and create a more level playing field for all the town's residents."

In an effort to gain a better understanding of how to proceed from a legal perspective, the town board retained election law expert Stanley Schlein who agreed a referendum this year would not be feasible due to discrepancies between state law and the town's code. "It would be unfair and perhaps costly to the public to rush a potentially flawed referendum to this November's ballot," stated Newburger.

Consequently, the deadline to put a referendum regarding council districts on the ballot expired Sept. 30; the town board decision was announced at its Oct. 1 meeting.

In the meantime, the town board will continue to work with Schlein and take the steps necessary to place the issue before voters next year. "This will allow the board the additional time to make any corrective legislative changes and to develop a legally sound referendum process," stated Newburger. "Since 2003 is a town election year, this issue can be debated properly and be given the proper attention by civic groups, the media and the public. Additionally, by holding the referendum in 2003, the public will have ample time to become educated about the pros and cons of such a system before they are asked to vote on its adoption."

Earlier this year, however, the commission held a series of public hearings throughout the town to receive input from town residents on whether town government should be reconstructed. Implementation of a council district system could increase the number of council members by two, divide the town into six districts and require the candidates running for a specific seat to reside within the district they wish to represent. The change could also result in the creation of a minority district.

According to Cavallaro, New York State town law makes it clear that a referendum can be called within a very short period of time (three or four months) after the process has been initiated. "The town has been at this for three years," he said. "There is no other explanation for the delay except that the town is not serious about election reform in North Hempstead. The original town board resolutions passed almost three years ago called for there to be a referendum in November 2002, but the board and the chairman of the commission formed by the board has delayed this process at every step."

According to Newburger, "The North Hempstead Town Board remains committed to allowing the public to decide this issue through a referendum. Holding the referendum in November 2003 is a prudent step to assure that the process will be legally sound, inclusive and in keeping with democratic principles."