The meeting was called to order at 6:30pm at the Holden Elementary School. (The parking lot at the side of the school was full and cars had started parking in front which indicated a better than usual attendance.)
Board members in attendance - and seated from left to right - were: Sylvia Ellis, rep from Holden; Ray Hart, Interim Superintendent; Don Varnum, Rep from Holden and Chair; Therese Anderson, rep from Eddington and Vice Chair; Karen Clark, rep from Eddington; Chris Fickett; and Mario Tiesl, rep from Holden.
Kevin Mills, rep from Holden, was absent, as was Pam Dorr, rep from Eddington who was out due to illness.
Chairman Varnum read letters of Recognition for Keith Kennedy, Elizabeth DeMerchant, and Theresa Richardson.
Although the Agenda had an Executive Session scheduled to be held next, Chairman Varnum entertained a motion to take up the land transfer issue (identified as the Holden Town Deed on the agenda) out of order since it was quite a ways down on the agenda and because a number of people from the public in attendance were there for that specific item on the agenda.
Three of the five members of Clifton Board of Selectmen were in attendance (one became ill at the last minute and was unable to attend) along with a resident of Clifton who was also at the September 23 meeting in Eddington. A fourth member from the Board, expecting the Executive Session to be conducted first, arrived just as the issue was concluded but he did come to the meeting and his efforts are applauded by this writer.
Eddington was represented by its Town Manager. One Selectman had planned to attend but he advised the Town Manager at the last minute that something had come up and he wouldn't be able to attend. (Perhaps readers saw him in the television news clip of the LURC public hearings on Monday.)
Holden was represented by the Town Manager, the Chairman of its Board of Selectmen and Selectman Harvey.
Chairman Varnum turned the microphone over to Vice Chair Therese Anderson who provided a brief synopsis of the "situation." She explained the history of the RSU discussions as they impacted the "excess land" in question. She also explained that the voters in all three towns had voted down the RSU several months ago (that proposed consolidation with Brewer). However, while Eddington and Clifton voters had believed that vote had cancelled the question of transferring the "excess land" to Holden, the people of Holden had not seen the issue in the same light. That "difference of perspective" had created a problem in that actions had subsequently taken place without the involvement of Eddington and Clifton. This culminated in special discussions at the Clifton Board of Selectmen on September 16 and the Clifton School Board rep, and the Special Meeting at the Eddington Town Office on September 23 with the Eddington Board of Selectmen and members of the Clifton Board of Selectmen with Eddington's School Board representatives.
Therese then went on to describe the discussions that ensued September 23 and the resulting resolutions: (1) that the portion of land where the Veterans Memorial and Gazebo are located [roughly from the area just past the far edge of the backfield of the ball field to 1A] should be transferred to the Town of Holden so that a committee could be formed to raise funds for the perpetual care of the Veteran Memorial; (2) that additional surveying work is needed to determine where the Nature Trails actually are, as well as identifying an access/easement for the Town through School land to the Nature Trails for trail maintenance and care; and (3) that the ball field should stay within SAD63 land (and not be transferred).
Therese further stated that the Town of Holden should pay for the surveying and legal work done to date, but that SAD63 should pay for the additional surveying and legal work needed for item #2 above. It was recommended that the same firms be retained for #2 that did the original work since those firms will be familiar with the project and land sites. It was also stated that it be clear in the final documents that the land in question will (1) continue to be public land, and (2) be returned to the school district without cost should it ever be needed by the school district.
The Chair from the Holden Board expressed appreciation for the work that was done by Eddington and Clifton and by the SAD63 Board and that the proposed resolution of this issue appeared to meet the good will and mutual objectives of all concerned.
The motion was put forth, seconded, and passed unanimously.
One thing that was not done was to identify who (from each of the three towns plus the School Board) was going to meet and when to direct the attorney as to the drafting of the subsequent legal Release Deed and Recitals. It should be noted that the original Release Deed and Recitals presented to the Board cannot be signed because they do not conform to the actions of the Board last night.
At that point the SAD63 Board went into Executive Session and all of the towns representatives, with the exception of Eddington's Town Manager, left. This writer stayed. I believe the Eddington Town Manager left when the Board returned from its Executive Session.
When the members of the Board resumed from its Executive Session, things went fairly quickly. There were a few "high lights" that I will report on.
Rep. Clark pointed out that Board members did not receive the 2007-2008 Audit in their packets. Mr. Teisl stated this was an error. Since the document could not be emailed to Board members, copies of the report will be sent to them. It was also noted by Rep. Clark that Board members only received a July Financial Statement in their packets for the meeting - no August Statement. Budget and Finance Committee (BFC) Chair, Mario Tiesl, stated the Business Manager (BM) was requesting a two month lag for producing Financial Statements. The explanation was that not all receipts and statements were available to the BM in time for her to get the statements done in time for the BFC meetings.
Waiting until the end of the agenda when there was an opportunity for the public to ask questions, this writer asked if the same receipts or statements are late every month and/or if they don't come in until the same "late" date. At that point the BM stated that she doesn't receive the Bank Statements until the end of the first week of the next month (after month end) and she needs a week to balance the accounts. Also the BFC committee meets the first week of the month. This writer then asked Mr. Teisl if the BFC couldn't meet later in the month - since the SAD63 Board meets at the end of the month.
There was also the purported "problem" that a draft Financial Statement is given to the members of the BFC for their review and questions before it goes into the Board members packet (in preparation of the Board meeting at the end of the month). This process requires time. This writer suggested the "draft" report could be emailed to the BFC members to expedite review. Ms. Ellis, a BFC member (other members are Ms. Anderson and Chair Teisl), stated she can only download 5mg of email because she uses her cell phone for emails.
Mr. Teisl seemed willing to consider changing BFC meetings to later in the month in order to have Financial Statements that are no later than the month preceding the month in which the Board is meeting. He concurred the Board does not want to get into the same situation as it found itself last year.
This writers suggests that Ms. Ellis can access her emails via any public library, at any one of the three schools, or even at the District's central office. This writer also wonders why the BM hasn't set up online account review. Such online access would allow her to balance the District's accounts daily or weekly - certainly long before she receives the bank's (banks) paper statement(s). Since the District now has an additional part-time person to assist the BM with the workload, there should be no reason why the books aren't balanced well before the paper statement is received. At that point, the paper statement is just a simple process requiring little time.
Karen Clark was elected to be the Delegate to the Maine School Board Association Annual Assembly on October 22nd & 23 representing SAD63. Kevin Mills was elected Alternate.
There was a request that the School Nurse for Holden Elementary, Shirley LaVoie, be hired for three days a week instead of two. This will increase the budget by $7,895. Discussion followed and Interim Superintendent Hart pointed out that there are two School Nurses who split time between Eddington and Holbrook resulting in (I believe he said) 1.5 days at each school per nurse. Mr. Hart proposed the Board consider hiring one nurse for five days next year which would allow full coverage at all three schools as well as having a nurse "on call" at all times for all three schools. The Board voted 6-0 for Ms. LaVoie's days to be extended to three days a week.
Mr. Hart reported that the State Commissioner of Schools is currently requesting the State Legislature's permission to allow Districts to file for consolidation with as few as 1,000 and below (in contrast to the original 2,500 student requirement) to constitute an "approved consolidated district." Mr. Hart further stated the State is projecting a state-level shortfall of $40 million in the current year and next for schools and a cut in state funding for the district can be expected in the area of $95-100 thousand.**
** This writer's thoughts: One wonders if the Commissioner is not all that certain that the voters will endorse consolidation come the November vote. After all, how many voters will remember the "promise" that consolidation was supposed to save money, prevent a rise in property taxes. How many times in the last two years have we been sold that bill of goods? - consolidating state corrections with county jails was supposed to "guarantee" no rise in property taxes. Read what the sheriff in Washington County is saying or what the sheriff of Penobscot County said LAST year.
We were already told LAST year the state was going to cut $60 million from public education in 2011. Seems to me $40 million is a better estimate. Bottom line: No one can believe ANYTHING coming out of Maine State Government. Everything is just one threat after another to make the PEOPLE act like herd animals and go along with whatever government wants them to do - with as little thought and analysis as the current administration and legislature has been exhibiting in its "tax and spend approach to government. It's fast approaching when local school districts better plan on running and paying for public education with nothing from the state. We'd probably produce a better product - IF we had better leadership at the local level than we do currently.
And speaking about that November vote re: consolidation.... It appears that School Board Chair Varnum doesn't plan to even appoint an RSU committee to START talking until after that vote. I guess he thinks there's no sense in even beginning to develop a plan if the voters repeal consolidation (which doesn't say much for Mr. Hart's confidence all these months that we will go forward with consolidation). On the other hand, if the voters DO endorse consolidation, SAD63 voters have only until January 2010 (two months!) to develop a plan, calculate the costs of such a plan, present the plan to the voters, and have the voters vote and approve the plan, and then submit the plan to the Commissioner for approval... It takes longer than that to get most teenagers to clean their rooms!
This $163,000 penalty assessment (which the Governor is so anxious to grab hold of - remember that shortfall... He needs the money, people!) will go into effect next July IF consolidation is required and IF we don't have a plan.
So, say Orrington, Dedham and Otis are interested (Otis voted against going in with Ellsworth so they'll still be interested in SAD63 if they have to consolidate). SAD63 still has to sit down with them, figure out how we'll consolidate our central office services and then how much each community will need to pay for those services. And we'll need to figure out how the School Board will be configured. And then there is that little matter of school teachers' contracts - because SAD63 hasn't started those negotiations either.
Am I the only one wondering who is leading this group at SAD63? Or if there is any leadership at all? With what I'm seeing, I expect 2010-2011 to be a very expensive year. Our role? Just keep on paying the bill, I guess. (as a side note, I learned at the Eddington Selectmen's meeting last night - Eddington was assessed $140,000 MORE this year for the School Budget than last year! And I can't figure out why? More in a posting later this week.
Just one more reason to vote for TABOR II as far as I'm concerned.
Tomorrow - information on the lawsuit.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment