[Local-Maine-Schools] Fwd: Legislative Update and the MEA

[Gail Marshall]

>
>> To our teachers,
>>
>> There is much to be concerned about in the current regionalization  
>> debate, but I want to re-focus some attention on the role of the  
>> MEA. (For more information about this, read the March 6 link to  
>> "MEA's Guidelines for Regionalization" on our web site) As you may  
>> recall, a week or so ago I wrote a letter to the list, which I  
>> copied  to Chris Galgay, head of MEA. (No reply yet.) In that  
>> letter I made a request to our MEA members to think about the  
>> position of their leadership, and contact it with any concerns  
>> they might have about it. I want to re-issue that call now. MEA  
>> leadership is acting in your name.  Some of you have told me you  
>> appreciate the advocacy of board members around this issue.  
>> Believe me, it is a tough slog, and we have a long way to go  
>> before we are through. We are working hard as advocates so you can  
>> continue to be there for the kids. But, in this respect I would  
>> suggest, it is time to add your voices to the discussion.
>> Looking carefully at Brian's synopsis of the current proposals,  
>> below, you will see that MEA's position is that under any proposed  
>> law, if cuts are ordered to the budgets for our children's  
>> education, they all must be shown to have come from an extremely  
>> narrow band of the budget.
>> No one I know is proposing lay-offs in instructional staff. At  
>> MDES we have "down-sized" our school a lot in the face of  
>> declining enrollments in the past few years, and it has all been  
>> done when vacancies occur. By far and away the biggest piece of  
>> the budget is instructional salaries and benefits. While  
>> enrollments continue to drop in some areas of our system, to  
>> suggest that we could not claim any potential contraction in  
>> staffing as "savings" within the context of these proposed laws is  
>> to create an unnecessary additional threat to the quality of our  
>> children's education.
>> Yes, we need well-paid teachers in generous numbers, but you  
>> haven't gotten what you have in our schools without an  
>> administration that works collaboratively with you and goes to bat  
>> for you before the voters. And our kids don't get the services  
>> they need without the help of people like our business manager and  
>> special education and curriculum directors. The idea that we can  
>> deliver high quality education with an administrative hand tied  
>> behind our backs in this day and age is wrong.
>> I know this is a "tough love" message, but the MEA needs to work  
>> with us, not cling to a very narrow brand of self-interest, which  
>> is, in fact, ultimately self defeating. MEA needs to erase its  
>> line in the sand that no cuts from instructional lines can be  
>> considered as "savings" under this bill. If the kids aren't there  
>> to be taught, and/or the schools are squeezed by the state, the  
>> cuts will come anyway. Why compound the problem?
>> I know that many of you are aware of and share these sorts of  
>> concerns. I know that we are "on the same page". I ask you to let  
>> MEA leadership know that too. Again, I am not looking for self- 
>> sacrifice, just the same collaborative effort in Augusta that we  
>> have here to do what we can in the best interest of our students.
>> I appreciate all the work you do for our kids, especially in  
>> trying times like these.
>> I look forward to hearing from you.
>> Thank you
>> Gail Marshall
>>
>>
>>> After the Education Committee's late evening work session  
>>> followed by
>>> this afternoon's presentation to the Appropriations Committee, it's
>>> still not clear what the full legislature is likely to get  
>>> ultimately
>>> to vote on for a regionalization bill.
>>>
>>> On the other hand, some divisions are plainly emerging from the
>>> stress.  Senator Mills, who walked out of the Education Committee's
>>> meeting on Tuesday, has gone forward with his own proposal which he
>>> presented as a minority report late this afternoon to the
>>> Appropriations Committee, following the majority's presentation.
>>>
>>> Senator Bowman presented the Education Committee's majority report
>>> which, while not nearly full yet in detail, was generally a  
>>> compromise
>>> concept initially worked out as a draft by Dick Spencer, MSMA's  
>>> lawyer
>>> using parts from the other proposals that the Committee has  
>>> deemed to
>>> be either desirable or at least politically possible.
>>>
>>> Essentially, the majority plan creates 26 regional planning  
>>> alliances
>>> centered about the regional technical centers and composed of
>>> representatives of existing school boards and municipalities.  These
>>> alliances are charged in the first year with coming up with both
>>> collaborative savings and also proposals to consolidate school units
>>> of fewer than 1200 students.  The alliances' consolidation plans  
>>> would
>>> first have to be approved by the Commissioner but also would have to
>>> be ratified by the individual towns.  What penalties apply school
>>> units whose towns vote down the consolidation plans has not yet been
>>> determined.
>>>
>>> The second part of the Committee's plan is to close the 'hole' in  
>>> the
>>> budget by taking $36.5 million off the top in General Purpose Aid to
>>> Education and, as I understand it, to adjust EPS funding accordingly
>>> to reflect the expected savings achieved administratively through
>>> collaboration and consolidation.
>>>
>>> As one of there final decisions last night they established that the
>>> reduced funding could only apply towards "non-instructional"  
>>> parts of
>>> school budgets.  This caused some significant discomfort on the
>>> management side as many don't still believe that actual savings on
>>> that order are there to be realized in smaller districts if  
>>> restricted
>>> essentially to transportation, food service, maintenance, and
>>> administrative salaries.  And, when Dick Spencer, made a plea to  
>>> this
>>> effect to the committee, a late night crack in the alliance  
>>> seemed to
>>> appear when Steve Crouse from the MEA strongly objected to any
>>> suggestion that instructional services might need to be cut to
>>> continue rural school operations.
>>>
>>> This afternoon, it was hard to read the Appropriations Committee's
>>> take.  Many did seem initially disappointed at the softness of the
>>> Education Committee's approach and the 'fuzziness' of some of the
>>> details, especially regarding incentives and penalties.  A few of  
>>> them
>>> seemed to distinctly liven up after Senator Mills made his minority
>>> proposal to have the State Board directly create larger consolidated
>>> districts with a minimum of 2500 students and to fast track
>>> consolidation with some immediate incentives.
>>>
>>> I think it's safe to say that between both majority and minority
>>> positions of the Education Committee and the real budget pressure  
>>> that
>>> the Appropriations Committee is under, the final outcome and its
>>> consequences to our schools are still very undecided.
>>>
>>> Someone better positioned and more articulate than I will report  
>>> more
>>> clearly on this tomorrow, I hope.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, you can read Victoria Wallack's article just posted
>>> at the Times Record's web page:
>>> 'Compromise emerges'
>>> http://www.timesrecord.com/website/main.nsf/news.nsf/ 
>>> 0/704B74F95873D8AA052572980057D208?Opendocument
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Local-Maine-Schools mailing list
>>> To send a message to the list, write to:
>>>  Local-Maine-Schools at lists.svaha.com
>>> To unsubscribe or change subscription settings:
>>>  http://lists.svaha.com/mailman/listinfo/local-maine-schools
>>>
>>>
>>
>