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