BITS 'N PIECES - ELECTIONS - AND SILVER MORNINGS

Looking out my kitchen window yesterday morning, I knew Jack Frost must have been busy. In the hazy sunlight, the skeletal young trees that mark the boundary between my lot and the one next door glittered as though Jack had brushed each branch with silver paint and then dusted it with diamond dust. Two lots away big white puffs of smoke billowed from the chimney in the cold air. Behind my house the dark trunks of the trees in my woods stood out against the mounds of snow from last week-ends storm.

By 7:30am the work crew was hard at it on the year-round house being built next door. It sure is going up fast. Foundation's in, walls and the roof is up. The back half of the roof is already shingled. The double-storied deck is framed along with the peaked roof for the second story. Windows are in - which has got to make the crew happy. Watching them shovel out that snow this past Monday - straight out the front, through the window frames there was no problem knowing there'd been a goodly amount that had made it through the various opening. Kudos are due all the same to the men working on that house. Through all this cold, even huddled around the small fire at the back during breaks, they work hard and diligently right up to dark. "Spect the new family will be on on schedule by late March-early April. Just hope the weather holds.

*****

Sign in front of the Clifton Town Office says Nomination Papers need to be obtained - 1 Selectman position AND 1 School Board position. As I recall, Chris Fickett, the current school board rep from Clifton, was appointed last year by the Clifton Board of Selectmen. The appointment was for one year. Considering the current situation of a "do-nothing" SAD 63 school board, it would be a good idea for any candidate running for the school board to really know the duties and responsibilities of the position. Especially anyone running this year.

The situation since the last posting has become even more tenuous - not just regarding the overall RSU questions but WHY the SAD 63 school board members (and former board chairman, Don Varnum) have ever had the mindset SAD 63 had to wait on Orrington and Dedham before taking any action to get an RPC started. None of the people of Dedham or Orrington elected the members of the SAD 63 school board. None of the people of Dedham or Orrington will be paying the penalty assessed to the towns of Eddington, Clifton or Holden.

Considering the amount of work needed to be done before the voters can even decide on any RSU issue, the individual and collective members of the SAD 63 board have totally failed the very people to whom they have direct responsibility - the people of Eddington, Clifton and Holden - the people who elected those members of the SAD 63 school board. How hard is that for the eight people on that school board to comprehend? Extremely hard it would appear.

THE FACTS:

• SAD 63, CSD 8, and Otis have all filed Letters of Intent with the State Commissioner of Education indicating their intent and interest of forming a "partnership" RSU.

• Following the November 17, 2009 meeting at the Holbrook Middle School, the Orrington and Dedham school boards and superintendents indicated their intentions to file Letters of Intent to join SAD 63, CSD 8 (but not Otis) in the same "partnership" RSU.

• According to credible rumors and sources in both this area and from the Orrington area, Orrington and Dedham have not filed Letters of Intent and do not intend to do so.

There is absolutely no reason why any member of the SAD 63 school board could not take the reins and call for a meeting of all towns from all five (5) school boards [SAD 63, CSD 8, Otis, Dedham and Orrington] at a place and time and date to be determined by the SAD 63 board. Additionally, the SAD 63 board could declare that all boards should notify all RPCs from their jurisdictions should send three-member teams and that such teams should be comprised of 1 school board member, 1 municipality/selectman, and 1 community representative. The notification should stipulate that any school board, or jurisdiction within any given school board, that does not attend the initial meeting may be allowed to attend subsequent meetings; however, the decisions that will have been made up to that point shall be the governing rules which the late-comers shall have to accept or be excluded from the group. There is simply no more time for prima donnas.

IF a quorum of the SAD 63 school board is not prepared and willing to take this action at it January 25th meeting at the Eddington Elementary School, they should all resign.

The initial RPC meeting should take place no later than Monday, February 15, Presidents' Day, since it is a holiday and more people should be able to attend.

All people should be provided a copy of the "OLD" RSU document.

Kevin Mills has tried to raise the idea of looking at the option of an OAS. Otis wants an OAS and can probably provide some good and valid information for such a plan. Generally speaking, this writer's understanding is that an OAS allows the existing systems to continue with one change - consolidation of Central Services, which was the State's original intent for consolidation in the first place.

The letter the Superintendent from Orrington generated from Commissioner Gendron (refer to the previous positing) is not what Must be - in fact Mr. Higgins at the November 17th meeting was in support of a community representative on the RPC teams. It is highly unlikely any RSU vote will be supported by any community without community representation on the RPC. At this point in time, there is little respect or confidence in Eddington, Clifton or Holden in their school board representatives - the very people the townspeople elected to be responsible for taking care of business and who have failed to do just that. Over recent months the Selectmen have been made aware of the failing of the school board representatives. It IS time for the towns and citizens and school families to let their positions be known.

There will be a SAD 63 Budget and Finance Committee (BFC) meeting January 20 at 6pm at the Holbrook Middle School.

Perhaps this will be an opportunity to obtain some of the answers to the questions that were submitted the first part of October re: the 2007-2008 SAD 63 Audit.

Perhaps the members of the BFC will be prepared to discuss to Maine School Management Association Bulletin dated January 4, 2010 titled "$73 million in proposed GPA cut shifts burden to locals" (Locals means us - the town taxpayers)

Gov. John Baldacci's proposed biennial budget, which cuts $73 million out of General Purpose Aid to schools, also calls for other changes, including reductions in the tuition private schools can charge public districts this year and the amount of aid going to communities whose high property values make them minimum receivers.
While the Dept. of Education says the reductions in aid to minimum receivers and the tuition proposals are designed to spread the pain of the GPA cuts, other provisions would allow closer monitoring of how the districts spend the money they get.
There is a proposal, for example, to make annual school district audits more stringent regarding cost-center transfers and another to require that minor capital projects be included in the regular school budget.

Cost shift to locals:
Above all, the proposed state budget language makes it clear just how much of the burden of paying for K-12 education is going to shift onto local property taxpayers as state GPA declines. Under state law, each community must cover its local share of the cost of education, as defined by the Essential Programs and Service funding formula, and raise up to the required equalized local mill rate to cover those costs. With the proposed cuts in GPA, that required local mill rate for education is going from 6.37 to 6.69 in this fiscal year and up to an estimated 7.14 next year.
Put another way, the local share for K-12 education this year will be $918 million versus a state share of $921 million, plus $43 million in stimulus money.
Next year, the local share will be $997 versus a state share of $852, plus $59 million in federal money. That means the state share of education will drop to 44 percent in school year 2010-2011, with locals picking up 52 percent and federal stimulus money covering the rest-federal money that runs out on June 30, 2011. The required local-share numbers don't include what districts spend for programs not covered by the EPS formula.
The sticker shock on the required local share will be made worse in those communities where property valuations have increased more than the state average, since the state gives less to those with higher values.

Budget details:
A public hearing on the education-related sections of the proposed supplements is scheduled for Thursday, Jan. 14, starting at 1 p.m., before the Appropriations and Education Committees. That hearing can be heard by clicking on the following link:
http://www.maine.gov/legis/ofpr/appropriations_committee/audio/

Ultimately, the budget will have to be approved by the full Legislature.
The budget as proposed would:

• Cut GPA for the current school year by $38 million and next year by $35 million on top of substantial reductions in GPA for 2010-2011 already included in the regular biennial budget. That means total state aid and federal stimulus money going to schools this year would be $964 million and $911 million in 2010-2011.
• Waive, for this school year only, the requirement that locals make up for what the state is cutting in terms of required spending under EPS. That means communities won't have to raise their mill rates, but districts will have to make difficult cuts in the middle of the school year to keep their budgets balanced.
• Reduce state aid to the more than 80 minimum receivers who receive a portion of their special education expenditures in lieu of a percentage of their overall EPS allocation. They will go to 40 percent of the unit's special education costs in the current school year and to 30 percent in 2010-2011 and succeeding years (emphasis added by this writer).
• For those few minimum receivers who currently get 5 percent of their EPS allocation, versus special education reimbursement, that will be reduced to 4 percent in the current year and 3 percent in 2010-2011 and succeeding years.
• Cut private school tuition rates for the current year by 2 percent to give a break to those districts that tuition out their high school students and therefore have to absorb this year's budget cuts in their K-8 system.
• Cap future tuition rate hikes for both public and private schools at the rate of inflation versus the previous limit of up to 6 percent increase.
• Require the annual school district audit to look at whether districts transferred more than 5 percent among cost centers - 5 percent being the limit in statute. If districts have exceeded the 5 percent limit, they have to file a corrective action plan with the commissioner of education.
• Change statute to say school administrative units can no longer include minor capital projects on the warrant along with non-state-funded major capital school construction projects. They instead will be included as part of the general school budget.
• Repeal sections of the law dealing with budget articles and require SADs and CSDs to have the same cost centers as RSUs.

SO - this is the latest we will ALL have to deal with - as in increased taxes.

Add to this there is a need for at least a 1 year Teachers Contract (because Varnum wanted to wait for the RPC/RSU and of course he never called for any RPC meetings....) and some kind of a 1 year (or something) for the Interim Superintendent because Ray Hart's contract expires 6/30/10 (thank goodness! He, too, has been part of the "do nothing Varnum administration") AND - less we PLEASE do not forget - the Business Manager's contract ALSO expires 6/30/10 - with its $5,000.00 bonus and our annual inflated local taxes paid to cover for the annual state failure to pay its bill.

Seems a great time to begin consolidating SAD 63's central office services. The Otis School Board recently hired an Interim Superintendent. Maybe SAD 63 should think about talking to that gentleman and see if he could also take on SAD 63 and CSD 8. Maybe we could find a Business Manager who could provide those services for all three school districts.

AND - if the commissioner will not accept the honest efforts of our three school districts (without Dedham and Orrington) maybe our Plan "B" (there should always be a Plan "B") should be to talk to the Old Town School District/RSU.

BTW- Whatever communications and documents go forth from SAD 63 SHOULD NOT be signed by Don Varnum. Seems the man can't remember the date upon which he was no longer the SAD 63 Chairman. If a person signs "after the fact" with a title he has already surrendered, is such a document legal? Especially when the Vice Chairman is the legally "Acting Chair" until a new Chair is elected (which should take place at the January 25th meeting).