[Local-Maine-Schools] A position in support of our schools: School Union 98

[Brian Hubbell]

http://mdischools.net/20070321_U98_Position.pdf

[Text]

A position in support of our schools
adopted by the Board of School Union 98
Mount Desert Island
March 21, 2007

Maine schools by most measures are very good.  Maine schools perform above
the averages in national tests.  College admission officers recognize
graduates of Maine schools as desirable.

The costs of running our schools are not out of line with other New England
states.  Maine's school administrators work hard and typically have more
varied responsibilities than many of their counterparts in other states.
This has resulted in less administrative support staff and generally allowed
Maine teachers to spend more time teaching.

In Maine, school administrators are more than just business managers.
Personally involved with their individual schools, they provide the
educational leadership and vision that has earned Maine's schools their
reputations.

Studies such as the Brookings Report show that Maine's local governments are
relatively frugal.

The Brookings report also shows that Maine towns, with their distinctive
local governments, provide a recognizable and valuable "brand" that brings
people to live and work in Maine.

Many people move to certain towns because of the quality of schools.

Businesses in communities known for supporting good schools find it easier
to attract and maintain employees.

While schools in more densely populated areas may sometimes enjoy lower
costs per pupil, studies have shown that school consolidations in rural
areas do not necessarily result in similar reductions in costs.

The largest districts in Maine in fact have higher than average per pupil
costs.

The savings projected from proposed consolidation in Maine assume that all
schools can be operated as efficiently as the most compact existing schools,
without regard to location, demographics and geography.

In cases where rural schools find it impossible to operate at the same
minimum per pupil costs as their compact counterparts, the state funding
formula and regional governance both will pressure them to reduce programs
until they reach the same minimum costs.

Under regional and state control, individual towns would no longer be
permitted to provide their own schools directly with any additional
funding.  The governor's approach pits the state against its towns,
asserting that local citizens are either incapable of managing their budgets
or irresponsibly profligate and ignorant of the consequences.

Schools in more rural areas often survive on extraordinary beneficial
support from their taxpayers and significant voluntary contributions from
their citizens.  Because of this community engagement and commitment, often
such schools perform among the best in the state.

Consolidation of such smaller schools will result in both disenfranchisement
of traditional local commitment and shallower involvement from a more
distant and less accountable regional government. For these schools, less
support from both sides will mean a lower quality of education.

Consolidation of schools such as these in areas that already receive
relatively little state subsidy will face not only diminished quality in
their own schools but may also find their own tax resources diverted and
subject to broader regional control.

Overall savings from consolidation are likely overstated.  To achieve the
projected savings more than non-instructional services will have to be cut.
>From this combination, the damage to children's education, and the danger to
a community will be real while the savings may not.

There is no fundamental reason that all the real savings achievable through
consolidation  -- specifically, system administration, payroll,
transportation, operations of facilities, and special education -- could not
be accomplished under the existing systems of school government working in
regional cooperation with other municipalities.

In this regard, cooperation and collaboration between school districts
should not be arbitrarily limited to any regional boundary as it's possible
that local schools could participate in a single statewide payroll
operation, or negotiate their fuel purchases as a single entity with every
other municipality in their county.

Any state endeavor toward reducing the cost of employee health insurance
potentially will deliver more significant savings to Maine taxpayers than
anything likely to result from school consolidation.

The danger is that consolidation as proposed will not necessarily reduce
costs to the taxpayers, but the reduction in educational quality, and the
damage to communities that results from alienating them from their schools,
will be very real.

 *We call upon our governor and legislators *

to work with us and not against us in governing and operating our schools,

to allow us to continue to determine how our schools are structured and how
they may change reasonably over time with our communities' needs,

  and to allow us to determine without limitation what advantageous
relationships may arise through cooperation with other school units and
municipalities, whether our partner schools and municipalities are adjoining
or state-wide.

Amy Young, Southwest Harbor, Board Chair
Brian Hubbell, Bar Harbor
Margaret Jeffery, Bar Harbor
Ned Johnston, Bar Harbor
Paul Murphy, Bar Harbor
Tom Burton, Bar Harbor
Kate Chaplin, Cranberry Isles
Rebecca Lenfestey, Frenchboro
Gail Marshall, Mount Desert
Mia Brown, Mount Desert
Heather Jones, Mount Desert
Laurel Robins, Mount Desert
Gail Royal, Southwest Harbor
Eric Henry, Southwest Harbor
Joe Saunders, Southwest Harbor
Skip Strong, Southwest Harbor
Liz Erickson, Tremont
Tina Jewett, Tremont
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.svaha.com/pipermail/local-maine-schools/attachments/20070321/4934e075/attachment.html