Reorganizational Planning Committee
September 18, 2008 - 6:30 p.m. - Hope Town Library

Agenda:

1. Comments from the public

2. Approval of the minutes of the meeting of September 11

3. Review of changes in Draft #3 of the AOS Plan (attached)

4. Review of financial projections

Reorganizational Planning Committee
September 11, 2008 --  6:30 p.m.  --  Hope Town Library

Agenda:

1.  Options of the make-up of the various Boards in an AOS

2.  Financial  considerations allocation of subsidies, etc.

3.  Possible regionalization of special education and transportation under the AOS

4.  Steps going forward . . .

Five Town Reorganization Planning Committee
Thursday, August 28, 2008
6:30 p.m. -- Hope Town Library

Agenda:

1. Public comment

2. Approval of the minutes of the meeting of August 14, 2008

3. Review option of an "Alternative Organizational Structure"
Presenter: Robert Liebow, Supt. In Mt. Desert

4. Decision points to be voted upon:

a. Local Committees -- Proposal that local committees be established as sub-committees of the RSU Board. For example, the two RSU Board members from Appleton would be the sub-committee for Appleton. These local committees would be advisory in nature just as would be other sub-committees of the Board.

b. Cost Sharing proposals

i. Additional local costs shall be shared at 50%
EPS, 25% valuation, and 25% pupil count. Pupil count
would be determined by the most recent three-year
average.

ii. Low Circuit Breaker: if the total cost is higher than
previous year, no individual town's cost shall be lower; if
the total cost is lower than previous year, no individual
town's cost shall be higher

iii. High Circuit Breaker: no individual town's percentage
cost increase shall be more than twice the overall
percentage increase.

5. Discussion of "super majority" decisions (to be voted upon at the next meeting). Talking points:

a. What should constitute a "super majority?" Options discussed thus far include: i.) 75% of weighted vote; ii.) 67% of weighted vote;
iii.) the greater of 67% total weighted votes or one more than the two largest towns.

b. What items would require a "super majority" vote? On the table so far are the following:
all votes calling for the elimination of a curricular, co-curricular, or extra-curricular program at one or more grade levels
all votes calling for the elimination of a grade level on the combining of two or more grade levels within or across schools
all votes related to class size policies
all votes related to the formation of local Boards
all votes related to any dissolution of the RSU

c. Is it desirable to allow a municipality to agree to locally fund a program or staff position that has been eliminated by a "super majority" vote?

6. Discussion regarding potential language that might assist the RSU Board in its first year(s) of operation. Ideas that have been offered have included not permitting (or limiting) student transfers and delaying program equalization.

At the last RPC meeting on June 26, the Committee decided that it did not want to meet on July 3 due to the July 4th holiday.  The next two meeting dates were changed to:

 

Thursday, July 10, at the Hope Town Library at 6:30 pm

Thursday, July 24, at the Bus Barn in Camden at 6:30 pm

To:  RPC Members
From:  Mike Weatherwax
Date:  May 20, 2008

RE:  DOE Update

 

Last night I attended one of the four sessions that Commissioner Gendron is presenting to share information about changes to the law resulting from the enactment of LD 2323 and to answer questions about the implementation.  Attached in PDF format are the two handouts from that meeting as well as another copy of the letter stating where/when the other three sessions will occur in case any of you wish to attend (closest is in Ellsworth on May 22).

 

I won't try to repeat all of the information that is in the handouts, but I do encourage you to read these.  A couple of important pieces of information:

 

1.  When the language says that bargaining contracts must be "consistent," that essentially means they need to the the same for salaries and benefits -- I understand that there is a three year window for achieving this consistency as contracts expire.

 

2.  The penalties are now pretty clearly laid out for schools that receive minimum subsidies (MSAD #28) and for other receivers (the rest of our schools). -- see pp. 4-5 of the "Summary" document.

 

3.. The things that we have been discussing -- local boards, etc. -- are supported in the law, so we are ok with this so far.

 

4.  There is language about the opportunity to create an "Aletrnative Organizational Structure" (AOS).  Under this system there appears to be more latitude in organizational structure -- for example, a local board could be the employer of personnel although contracts would still need to be "consistent."  It also calls for interlocal agreements that must be approved by municipal bodies (I am not yet sure how these agreements would work).

 

5.  "Core curriculum" is defined as those things in the eight parts of the Maine Learning Results.

 

6.  As of July 1, 2009, school unions will no longer exist as governance structures, but CSD and SAD structures could still exist in places where RSU's are not approved.  A town currently in a Union that votes down becoming part of an RSU would then be governed under the municipal system.

 

7.  Under the general law and as we have discussed them, local boards would not need to have RSU administrators (e.g. Superintendent) at their local board meetings.  Not sure if this is also true for AOS boards.

 

8.  Schools that do not become RSU's and instead take the penalties do have future opportunities to form an RSU -- e.g. if the penalties become too much, then schools could reconsider.

 

9.  In the case of a district that notified the DOE it was refusing to submit a plan, they are exploring with the Attorney General withholding that District's subsidy from January, 2009-July, 2009. (Penalities would then kick in in july, 2009).

 

10.  Next year will be a very challenging one for schools to get subsidy information from the DOE -- Superintendents will get estimates in January but will not get final numbers until mid-April at the earliest.

 

For Handouts, click here:  Summary of Reorganization Law   Letter from Susan Gendron 5/08/08Gendron Presentation May 16

 

To:  Reorganization Planning Committee
From:  Mike Weatherwax
Date:  March 10, 2008

RE:  Reorganization Planning Legislation

Pat, Deb, and I went to a workshop this morning presented by Drummond and Woodsum regarding the reorganization planning.  While a large part of the workshop dealt with budget referendum issues, they also provided a very clear description of the muddled status of current legislation.  I am going to try to present that information as follows:

1.  LD 1932 is the amendment to the Reorganization Legislation that was developed last fall by the Legislative Education Committee to provide a "fix" to problems in the original legislation.  It was anticipated that this legislation would be passed the first week in January, but that is not how things
went . . .

Included in the original LD 1932 were the following (only listed major items below):
a.)  provisions for alternative cost sharing methods
b.)  provisions for amending  cost sharing formulas
c.)  repealing the requirement of a two mill minimum
d.)  continuation of minimum subsidy allocations
e.)  delay of the budget validation referendum process to 2009
f.)  changing the 2% limitation on voting authority to 5%

2.  LD 1932 was then amended by both the Senate and the House of Representatives.  The most controversial amendments were as follows:
a.)  the Damon amendment permits the creation of "super unions" with local towns maintaining significant powers including local collective bargaining, hiring of teachers, etc. just as school unions do now.
b.)  the Ray amendment provides for dissolving or getting out of an RSU
c.) the Martin amendment provides for requiring the budget validation process for all municipalities in an RSU "union"

LD 1932 passed in the Senate by a vote of 21 to 13

3.  Next the House took up LD 1932.  They added two additional amendments and the legislation passed by 86 to 61 (or a vote close to that).

4.  The House version went back to the Senate today so that the two versions could be combined and they are working on that right now so that one version can go to the Governor.  The Governor has said that he will veto this legislation, I think primarily because of the Damon amendment.  He has ten days to veto it after he receives it.  If it is vetoed, it can go back to the Legislature and if it gets a 2/3 vote the veto is overridden and it becomes law.

5.  Simultaneously, the Governor has introduced his budget Legislation and attached to that is most of the original LD 1932 with the exception that the Governor took out those parts that he did not like.  He took out the following:
a.)  the delay in the budget validation referendum
b.)  the change in the last date for an RSU referendum
c.)  the entire Damon amendment re "super unions"
d.)  the change from a 2% to a %5 limitation on voting authority
e.)  the entire Ray amendment re dissolving an RSU

So, there were lots of questions (but no clear answers) about if the original LD 1932 is passed, how does that impact the changes in the Governor's legislation  i.e. who wins?

At any rate, it looks like we will still need to wait a few more weeks to see how things shake out before we should meet again with hopefully a definitive set of rules.

The one brighter note is that today the Commissioner today sent a letter saying that if we did not change anything from our December plan submission, then we did not need to submit a plan by March 28; rather, we can send a letter stating that there have been no changes.

The February 1 date has been pushed back. A letter from the DOE is below:

 

Dear Superintendent/RPC Chair/Facilitator,

Yesterday, the Education and Cultural Affairs Committee agreed to give Commissioner Susan A. Gendron the flexibility to establish new timelines for the submission of revisions of reorganization and alternative plans. You are no longer required to submit a revision by February 1, 2008. New timelines have been established.

All proposed RSUs anticipating a June 2008 referendum must submit their plans to the Department of Education for final review and Commissioner's approval no later than March 28, 2008. All units not ready to submit a final plan by March 28, 2008 must submit a status/progress report by March 28, 2008. Any plan submitted prior to March 28, 2008 will be reviewed and responded to within 15 days.

Thank you for your efforts to date.

Press Release from the Reorganization Planning Committee

As many in our community know, there is a 20-person committee working on a consolidation plan for the local school districts in Appleton, Camden, Hope, Lincolnville and Rockport.

This work is required by state law. It is challenging and time consuming. Among the many details, the committee is reviewing the liabilities and assets of the schools within the five towns as well as preparing initial recommendations about how the new district will be organized and operated – how its budget will be formed and how its board will govern.

The Reorganization Planning Committee will share its work thus far in a status report at a Public Hearing being held on Wednesday, November 14, at 7:15 p.m. at Camden Hills Regional High School. The public is encouraged to attend to hear more about this important work.

By Dec. 1, in accordance with the state mandate, the committee will have completed a draft plan to send to the Commissioner of Education for her review. As with most plans across the state, ours will not be a final plan as it is impossible to address all required components of the planning in such a short time. The committee hopes to have a final plan developed and sent to the Commissioner by March, 2008.

What follows are some Frequently Asked Questions about the school consolidation and how the committee's work has been proceeding. Additional questions are encouraged and may be addressed to Committee Chair Michael Weatherwax at: Michael_weatherwax@fivetowns.net

HOW WILL CONSOLIDATION AFFECT MY TAX BILL?
It is not completely clear, but there is potential for taxpayers in some towns to pay more for education after consolidation than they do now. These calculations, which are based largely on state property valuations and local school enrollments, are still being reviewed and should be considered as "preliminary" only. Additional legislation is anticipated this winter to permit changing the cost sharing formula to better balance costs across our communities.

HOW WILL THIS AFFECT EDUCATION?
Nothing is certain, but everyone involved in this process in the five towns is working to ensure that the process does not negatively impact the programs and services that each school offers to its students.

WHAT NEXT?
The Commissioner will review the local plan submitted on December 1, and the follow-up plan(s) submitted in early 2008 and offer feedback. Once the plan is approved by the Commissioner, it will be presented to local voters for possible approval, probably in June, 2008. In addition to the Commissioner's feedback, a number of changes in the law have been proposed by legislators and will be taken up during the next legislative session as part of suggested revisions from the Department of Education. Areas of change could include cost sharing formulas, state subsidy rules, penalties for not consolidating and rules about weighted votes on school committees.

DO VOTERS APPROVE THIS?
The recommended plan goes before the voters in either June or November, 2008, to go into effect July 1, 2009, if approved.

WHAT IF VOTERS REFUSE TO APPROVE THE PLAN?
If voters reject the plan, the legislation calls for financial penalties to be applied to dissenting towns through the state's Essential Programs and Services (EPS) funding formula. A logical next question is whether it might be worth accepting the penalties and not consolidating. This would depend on how significant the penalties will be, and thus far we don't have enough information to make an informed decision about this.

WHERE CAN I FIND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION?
The minutes of the committee's meetings have been posted at the Five-Town CSD website: http://www.fivetowns.net/subsites/reorgplancom/
In addition, further information about the statewide consolidation process may be found on the Department of Education's website at: http://www.maine.gov/education/supportingschools/index.html