The appeal also must be dismissed on the merits. Contrary to petitioner's allegations, there is no statutory requirement that the annual budget proposition contain a specific monetary figure. According to the record, copies were also available at the annual meeting. Although respondent's actions comply with the technical requirements of Education Law ' 1716, the electoral process is better served when a board of education strives to meet not only the minimal legal requirements, but to provide the voters with as much information as possible to ensure an informed vote. I note in this case that, in addition to meeting the requirements of Education Law ' 1716, respondent also claims that it mailed a copy of the proposed budget to every household in the school district.
Petitioner offers no evidence to the contrary.
Therefore, I find that, in this instance, respondent not only met but exceeded the statutory requirements in presenting its proposed budget to the voters of the district. Petitioner's allegations that respondent engaged in unlawful electioneering are not supported by the record. The record indicates that the flyers were not prepared or disseminated by respondent board of education. Because I find no evidence that respondent was ever aware or otherwise sanctioned the actions of the PTA and teachers' association, I will dismiss petitioner's claim against it. I have reviewed petitioner's remaining claims and find them without merit.