Voters in the Auburn Enlarged School District sent several strong messages Tuesday with their defeat of the same budget that was put before them last month.  

The first was that voters were smarter than Thornton Avenue thought they were. In what could be considered the first of several wrong moves immediately after the May 20 defeat, district officials downplayed the defeat, suggesting that voters were not smart enough to figure out that the controversial issue of turf was not part of the annual spending plan.

With nearly 16 percent of those eligible voting then, no matter what unofficial “exit polls” and hearsay comments may have been heard, to think that half the voters mistook the budget vote as having a turf component was insulting. Voters showed on Tuesday that they knew that wasn't the case - and said so loud and clear - again.

Tuesday's vote is the third and most likely final nail in the turf coffin for now. It would be unimaginable for the district, unless they are completely politically tone deaf, to put before voters anytime soon a building referendum that would include improvements to Holland Stadium, no matter how important they may seem to some.

It is likely that voters would, by the way, reject any new spending referendum put before them at this point. The earliest voters may see any new referendum that includes building up grades may be in May of 2009, but don't count on it. Those up for re-election next year may not want to be on the same ballot when there is the first test of whether voters want to increase spending.

What makes such a vote even tougher is the fact that it seems clear that voters may not have been given the full story on the issue of re-imbursement rate changes for local districts. Some may suggest that people may have been mislead, while the great sin may not be commission, but omission, when it came to what the state was doing.

The last, and maybe the biggest, wrong move may have been on the issue of whether the district should have, at least symbolically, cut something from the $66.49 million spending plan. As written hear on Friday, the district may have been damned if they did or damned if they didn't cut something, getting “I told you so's” from critics saying that something could have been cut originally. But in the end, it looks as if those districts that at least tried to make cuts engendered enough good will from voters to support their plans.

A common phrase over the last several days was that the district was “arrogant” in not making cuts. Whether that is the case or not, what is clear is the district has a lot of work ahead of it to re-gain the trust of one of its biggest constituencies - the public.

Cosentino is a former mayor of Auburn and can be contacted at cozguytho@aol.com