[Local-Maine-Schools] Education Committee: January 16: (ballot language and what happens to non-reorganized CSDs)

[Gail Marshall]

I hate to say it.
We certainly have enough to deal with these days, but I hope no one  
is taking their eye off the ball Brian reported in the last paragraph  
of this report:
> "She also reminded Committee members that the Department shortly will
> be putting forward "substantive rule changes" regarding chapter 125
> and 127 regarding comprehensive requirements for high school
> curriculum."
Even if you agree with the rule changes she may be proposing, (and  
indications to date suggest that might be a big "if") you should  
carefully consider whether there may be substantial increases in  
costs inherent in these proposals that are likely to be borne by  
local communities about the same time consolidation costs are kicking  
in.
Thanks
Gail Marshall


On Jan 16, 2008, at 12:46 PM, Brian Hubbell wrote:

> Education Committee work session
> Wednesday morning, January 16, 2008
>
> This morning the Committee picked up with its list of the five 'easy'
> pieces which it hopes to reconcile with a "non-controversial"
> Committee Legislative Request.
>
> The first item was reconciling the ballot language that is presently
> in two different sections of LD.499
>
> The allocated language in § 1461 (5) says:
>
> "Article: Do you favor approving the school reorganization plan
> prepared by the (insert name) Reorganization Planning Committee to
> reorganize (insert names of affected school administrative units) into
> a regional school unit, with an effective date of (insert date)?
> Yes No"
>
> A "YES" vote means that you approve of the (municipality or school
> administrative unit) joining the proposed regional school unit. The
> financial penalties under the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 20-A,
> section 15696 to the existing school administrative units will no
> longer apply to the proposed regional school unit."
>
> While the unallocated language in Sec. XXXX-36 (8) says:
>
> A "YES" vote means that you approve of the (municipality or school
> administrative unit) joining the proposed regional school unit, which
> will be provided with the following incentives:
> More favorable consideration in approval and funding of school
> construction projects; and
> Eligibility for additional financial support for reorganization costs.
> A "NO" vote means that you do not approve of the (municipality or
> school administrative unit) joining a regional school unit, which will
> result in the existing (municipality or school administrative unit)
> receiving the following penalties:
> Less favorable consideration in approval and funding of school
> construction projects; and
> A reduction in state funding of education costs in an amount estimated
> to be $_______ for school year 200_ and $______ for school year 200_,
> with the possibility of ongoing penalties for continued failure to
> join an approved regional school unit. Reductions in state education
> funding will likely result in an increased mill rate expectation to
> meet the local share of education costs."
>
> As Geoff Herman had previously reminded the Committee, the explanation
> in the unallocated language is arguably substantially biased in that
> it describes the consequences of a 'Yes' vote merely as being the
> self-evident fact, while it goes to great lengths to describe the
> negative consequences of a "No" vote.  Moreover, it is not at all
> clear how the specific penalties are calculated (although Jim Rier
> testified that the Department is expecting to take on those
> calculations.)
>
> Senator Mills suggested that the unallocated language was the result
> of specific previous consideration and ought to be maintained.
> Representative Farrington argued in favor of keeping the language
> clean and neutral, as there were very likely countervailing drawbacks
> to voting "yes" that could not be easily itemized either.
>
> In the end, the Committee voted for the more "neutral" approach of the
> allocated language.  But, at Rep Makas's suggestion they couldn't
> resist altering the ballot wording from:
>
>  Do you favor approving the school reorganization plan...?
>
> to what Rep Makas characterized this "less threatening" language:
>
>  Do you favor approving the school *administration* reorganization  
> plan...?
>
> Notwithstanding the fact that what's really being voted on is in fact
> a school *governance* reorganization plan.
>
> **************
>
> The second item from the five-issue list was what happens to CSDs and
> K-8 SADs that do not approve reorganization plans.
>
> This is not as simple a matter as one might think, as LD499 repeals
> that laws that support SADs, Unions, and CSDs.  So, while it's
> possible (and perhaps generally expected) that municipal school
> administrative units, after July 2009, may continue operating as they
> currently are but with their state subsidies reduced by penalty, it
> seems very unclear what would happen to joint municipal school
> ventures presently operating as CSDs, even if they non-reorganized
> SAUs were somehow declared to be de facto RSUs or are somehow by
> sleight-of-hand be allowed to "continue as they are" as the Committee
> seems inclined to hope.
>
> The Commissioner happened by the Committee Room during this part of
> the discussion and said that in her view the larger concern is that
> the reorganization law requires comprehensive K-12 education and that
> this is not achievable in the case of isolated K-8 SADs or CSDs which
> vote down plans and so are left without a "guaranteed" relation to a
> high school.
>
> She also reminded Committee members that the Department shortly will
> be putting forward "substantive rule changes" regarding chapter 125
> and 127 regarding comprehensive requirements for high school
> curriculum.
>
> When the Committee reconvenes at 1:00, they hope to resume  
> discussion of LD 1932
>
> _______________________________________________
> Local-Maine-Schools mailing list
> To send a message to the list, write to:
>  Local-Maine-Schools at mainetalk.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription settings:
>  http://mainetalk.org/mailman/listinfo/local-maine- 
> schools_mainetalk.org
>
>