Candidates split on details but most back Proposition 3 to reopen Lewisboro for UPK and community use

A majority of candidates in a KATONAH-LEWISBORO UNION FREE SCHOOL DISTRICT forum said they will support Proposition 3, a bond measure to renovate the district-owned Lewisboro building for universal prekindergarten (UPK) classrooms and a 10,000-square-foot community space, while urging voters to review the details before May 19.

Proposition specifics and why it matters: Moderators described Proposition 3 as a roughly $25.4 million bond to create UPK capacity and shared community facilities. Supporters at the forum said the state is moving toward universal UPK and that each enrolled UPK student brings an estimated $10,000 in state aid to the district. Bill Schwarzer, who described facility constraints in existing schools, said the plan would create 11 classrooms sized to meet UPK requirements and add bathrooms and a renovated gym to support both programs and community use. Lorraine Gallagher said the bond is roughly $24.5 million and that the district expects about 25% state aid on that debt, which she said reduces the net cost per household.

Why candidates support or want more work: Lorraine Gallagher said she will vote yes and framed the Lewisboro property as a valuable public asset that is expensive to replace if sold. Stacy Isacson said she supports passing a plan that keeps UPK funding and placements in the district rather than exporting that funding to neighboring municipalities. Melissa Dilmagani said she would be pleased to implement the plan if voters approve it but wants more math and community outreach, including meetings with local preschool operators, if the proposal is revisited.

Questions and caveats raised at the forum: Several candidates and audience members said there is public confusion about cost, scope and alternatives. Panelists diverged on process details: one candidate said the district had put out an RFP and that only one local provider (named at the forum as CCC) responded at the amount then offered; another candidate said two RFP responses were received but one quoted an unaffordable rate. Candidates also offered differing figures for the bond and state-aid offsets on stage; the forum record reflects both the $25.4 million figure used by the moderator and a $24.5 million figure cited by a candidate.

Fiscal context and next steps: Candidates acknowledged rising district costs (health insurance and utilities) and the political reality that voters must approve bond funding. Supporters argued that keeping UPK placements and related aid in-district preserves jobs and local economic benefits; opponents at the forum did not present an organized alternative to the Lewisboro plan, but multiple speakers urged further community engagement with preschool providers so if the bond fails the district can still explore provider partnerships. The record shows the district expects state UPK aid per enrolled child if the state program is funded as described; precise aid amounts, final state participation rules and vendor responses to new RFPs are not fully resolved in the forum itself.

What voters should watch for: Updated RFP results, a final official cost estimate and the district’s formal financing summary (including the exact bond amount, state-aid assumptions and projected homeowner impact) should be posted by the district before the vote. The candidates’ comments close the gap on policy direction: most support reopening Lewisboro for UPK and community use if the financial and operational details are clarified.

The forum closed with a reminder that the district’s budget vote and board election are on Tuesday, May 19.