Hello Members of UniServ District 8,
I want to bid all of you a sad farewell. I will not be your UniServ Director any longer. I am going to be on loan to the Department of Education from the MEA for the next year. In that capacity I will be serving the entire state in the Teacher Quality Unit. I will still be an employee of the MEA and as such, am still a resource for each of you in matters having to do with professional development. A new UniServ Director should be in place within the next two to three weeks and I am looking forward to introducing that person to the fine men and women of District 8.
One final note, I want you to know that although my work with you has been brief, I have learned a great deal about being a UniServ Director from the multiple and diverse situations I have assisted with. As many of you know, this was my first assignment as a UniServ Director, and although I did not meet all of you, I was honored to be serving such a knowledgeable and hardworking group of members.
Sincerest Regards and Best of Luck
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Clarifications on Reorganization Implementation
Hello Everyone,
Below is the latest information from the DOE pretaining to regionalization. I hope that your summer is going well.
INFORMATIONAL LETTER NO: 5
FROM: Susan A. Gendron, Commissioner
DATE: July 31, 2007
RE: Clarifications on Reorganization Implementation
I would like to take this opportunity to provide clarifying information on a number of crucial questions and issues that have been raised repeatedly at the Regional Informational Meetings that were conducted around the state and by superintendents, school board members and others. * Budget validation referendum. All school administrative units (SAUs) are subject to the new budget preparation and approval process, including the requirement for a budget validation referendum, for the 2008-09 school year (all budgets prepared after January 1, 2008). This corrects earlier information suggesting a phased-in requirement for different types of SAUs. The requirement in the new law is found in four different places and makes this process a requirement for all forms of SAUs. (Public Law 2007, Chapter 240, Part XXXX-11 (now at 20-A MRSA §1305-C), XXXX-13 (now at 20-A MRSA §§1482-1486), XXXX-16 (now at 20-A MRSA §1701-C), and XXXX-21 (now at 20-A MRSA §2307)* Requirements for each RSU to have a high school. Each RSU's plan must provide comprehensive programming for all K-12 students, and must include a public or publicly-supported private high school(s). There is not a requirement that the high school be physically located in the RSU or municipal school unit so long as there is a contractual relationship (or contractual relationships) ensuring that all students - including those in special education and alternative education - are provided comprehensive programming. Please note that RSUs that choose to provide K-12 programming for all students in their RSU without having a public high school within the RSU are likely to face challenges in meeting this requirement. Solid contractual relationships must be shown to meet this requirement and it may not be easy to find high schools - public or private - willing to commit to taking all students.* Who must go through the process? ALL school administrative units, whatever the current structure and whatever size - SADs, CSDs and municipal school units (city/town/plantation), small and large must work with other units to reorganize into larger, more efficient units; or where expansion of the unit would be impractical or inconsistent with state policy, reorganize their own administrative structures to reduce costs. A school union is not an SAU - each of the municipal units that make up a school union is an SAU and each must work to reorganize, each must file a Notice of Intent, and each must file a Reorganization or Alternative Plan.* Additional guidelines for submitting financial data requests. The requests for financial data are intended to assist potential RSU partners that are having discussions about possible partnership. Superintendents should submit the requests on behalf of SAUs and/or Reorganization Planning Committees. The requests should be for potential configurations that include SAUs that are having at least preliminary discussions, as these will be given priority here in the Department. * Financial penalties for units not conforming by July 1, 2009o For minimum subsidy receivers - the law states that minimum subsidy receivers would receive 50 percent of what they would have "otherwise received" for FY10 and beyond. The Department is unable to calculate the exact amount of "otherwise received" until we prepare FY09 funding in December 2008. For these units, what they would have "otherwise received" would generally refer to the 5% minimum subsidy OR 84% of special education allocation, whichever is greater. The minimum subsidy is, of course, subject to legislative adjustment, though none is currently anticipated.o For regular subsidy receivers -* 50% reduction in system administration allocation. The EPS amount for system administration for the 2008-09 school year will be $204 per pupil, and for 2009-10 is projected to be approximately $210. The penalties would begin in 2009-10 and would be half that amount, or approximately $105.* Beginning in 2009-10, the state will be required to calculate the EPS subsidy based on 53.86% of full EPS for non-conforming units, rather than the 55% for conforming units. (In addition, the balance resulting from reduced subsidy to non-conforming units will be redistributed to conforming units.) For illustration purposes, remaining at 53.86% in FY08 would increase the local obligation by approximately 0.25 mills on top of the statewide local expectation of 7.44 mills for those units that do reorganize. That is, penalized units would be subject to a required local share of roughly 7.70 mills instead. We cannot calculate the 2009-10 impact until Maine Revenue Services calculates the state valuation and the Department calculates a funding level for that year and it is approved by the Legislature.o All units that vote against reorganization - both regular and minimum subsidy receivers - will receive less favorable consideration for approval and funding for school construction.o All units that vote against reorganization - both regular and minimum subsidy receivers - lose eligibility for "transition adjustments."* What exhibits due diligence? Due diligence: the expectations of any responsible person; good faith effort; applying the right attitude; taking the necessary steps to fairly and considerately explore all optionso Due diligence may be evidenced by documenting exploration of reasonable options, financial and other analyses, public involvement, and other activities aimed at reorganizing according to the law. The SAU and/or Reorganization Planning Committee should maintain documentation of: public meetings and planning committee meetings; minutes and meetings within the SAU; correspondence with other SAUs and meetings with other SAUs. It is expected that each SAU will utilize data in the process and access facilitation services as determined appropriate by the SAU. This list is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather illustrative.* Resources on the website! Please do not forget the DOE website - there are considerable resources available to superintendents, board members, municipal officials, community members, and others including:o The Reorganization Law and a summary of it;o PowerPoint presentation explaining the process if you missed it at the regional informational meetings, or want to see it again, and the more detailed PowerPoint presentation from the Superintendents' Conference in Bar Harbor;o A Planning and Resources page for superintendents, school board members, municipal officials, and community members with guidelines for forming planning committees, information about facilitators and what they can do for communities, and explanation of what goes into a Notice of Intent, and a Reorganization or Alternative Plan;o A Q&A section that we are updating weekly to answer key questions we are hearing; ando A place to sign up for updates we are sending out as we add items to the website or clarify key questions that people have.Go to www.maine.gov/education/ and click on the School Administrative Reorganization logo. Ray Poulin and Norm Higgins will continue to be available to superintendents during the process to help answer your questions and assist in your planning. They can be reached directly at 624-9843 (Ray) and 624-6783 (Norm).
Below is the latest information from the DOE pretaining to regionalization. I hope that your summer is going well.
INFORMATIONAL LETTER NO: 5
FROM: Susan A. Gendron, Commissioner
DATE: July 31, 2007
RE: Clarifications on Reorganization Implementation
I would like to take this opportunity to provide clarifying information on a number of crucial questions and issues that have been raised repeatedly at the Regional Informational Meetings that were conducted around the state and by superintendents, school board members and others. * Budget validation referendum. All school administrative units (SAUs) are subject to the new budget preparation and approval process, including the requirement for a budget validation referendum, for the 2008-09 school year (all budgets prepared after January 1, 2008). This corrects earlier information suggesting a phased-in requirement for different types of SAUs. The requirement in the new law is found in four different places and makes this process a requirement for all forms of SAUs. (Public Law 2007, Chapter 240, Part XXXX-11 (now at 20-A MRSA §1305-C), XXXX-13 (now at 20-A MRSA §§1482-1486), XXXX-16 (now at 20-A MRSA §1701-C), and XXXX-21 (now at 20-A MRSA §2307)* Requirements for each RSU to have a high school. Each RSU's plan must provide comprehensive programming for all K-12 students, and must include a public or publicly-supported private high school(s). There is not a requirement that the high school be physically located in the RSU or municipal school unit so long as there is a contractual relationship (or contractual relationships) ensuring that all students - including those in special education and alternative education - are provided comprehensive programming. Please note that RSUs that choose to provide K-12 programming for all students in their RSU without having a public high school within the RSU are likely to face challenges in meeting this requirement. Solid contractual relationships must be shown to meet this requirement and it may not be easy to find high schools - public or private - willing to commit to taking all students.* Who must go through the process? ALL school administrative units, whatever the current structure and whatever size - SADs, CSDs and municipal school units (city/town/plantation), small and large must work with other units to reorganize into larger, more efficient units; or where expansion of the unit would be impractical or inconsistent with state policy, reorganize their own administrative structures to reduce costs. A school union is not an SAU - each of the municipal units that make up a school union is an SAU and each must work to reorganize, each must file a Notice of Intent, and each must file a Reorganization or Alternative Plan.* Additional guidelines for submitting financial data requests. The requests for financial data are intended to assist potential RSU partners that are having discussions about possible partnership. Superintendents should submit the requests on behalf of SAUs and/or Reorganization Planning Committees. The requests should be for potential configurations that include SAUs that are having at least preliminary discussions, as these will be given priority here in the Department. * Financial penalties for units not conforming by July 1, 2009o For minimum subsidy receivers - the law states that minimum subsidy receivers would receive 50 percent of what they would have "otherwise received" for FY10 and beyond. The Department is unable to calculate the exact amount of "otherwise received" until we prepare FY09 funding in December 2008. For these units, what they would have "otherwise received" would generally refer to the 5% minimum subsidy OR 84% of special education allocation, whichever is greater. The minimum subsidy is, of course, subject to legislative adjustment, though none is currently anticipated.o For regular subsidy receivers -* 50% reduction in system administration allocation. The EPS amount for system administration for the 2008-09 school year will be $204 per pupil, and for 2009-10 is projected to be approximately $210. The penalties would begin in 2009-10 and would be half that amount, or approximately $105.* Beginning in 2009-10, the state will be required to calculate the EPS subsidy based on 53.86% of full EPS for non-conforming units, rather than the 55% for conforming units. (In addition, the balance resulting from reduced subsidy to non-conforming units will be redistributed to conforming units.) For illustration purposes, remaining at 53.86% in FY08 would increase the local obligation by approximately 0.25 mills on top of the statewide local expectation of 7.44 mills for those units that do reorganize. That is, penalized units would be subject to a required local share of roughly 7.70 mills instead. We cannot calculate the 2009-10 impact until Maine Revenue Services calculates the state valuation and the Department calculates a funding level for that year and it is approved by the Legislature.o All units that vote against reorganization - both regular and minimum subsidy receivers - will receive less favorable consideration for approval and funding for school construction.o All units that vote against reorganization - both regular and minimum subsidy receivers - lose eligibility for "transition adjustments."* What exhibits due diligence? Due diligence: the expectations of any responsible person; good faith effort; applying the right attitude; taking the necessary steps to fairly and considerately explore all optionso Due diligence may be evidenced by documenting exploration of reasonable options, financial and other analyses, public involvement, and other activities aimed at reorganizing according to the law. The SAU and/or Reorganization Planning Committee should maintain documentation of: public meetings and planning committee meetings; minutes and meetings within the SAU; correspondence with other SAUs and meetings with other SAUs. It is expected that each SAU will utilize data in the process and access facilitation services as determined appropriate by the SAU. This list is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather illustrative.* Resources on the website! Please do not forget the DOE website - there are considerable resources available to superintendents, board members, municipal officials, community members, and others including:o The Reorganization Law and a summary of it;o PowerPoint presentation explaining the process if you missed it at the regional informational meetings, or want to see it again, and the more detailed PowerPoint presentation from the Superintendents' Conference in Bar Harbor;o A Planning and Resources page for superintendents, school board members, municipal officials, and community members with guidelines for forming planning committees, information about facilitators and what they can do for communities, and explanation of what goes into a Notice of Intent, and a Reorganization or Alternative Plan;o A Q&A section that we are updating weekly to answer key questions we are hearing; ando A place to sign up for updates we are sending out as we add items to the website or clarify key questions that people have.Go to www.maine.gov/education/ and click on the School Administrative Reorganization logo. Ray Poulin and Norm Higgins will continue to be available to superintendents during the process to help answer your questions and assist in your planning. They can be reached directly at 624-9843 (Ray) and 624-6783 (Norm).
Friday, June 22, 2007
Disturbing News in SAD#36
Hello members,
I saw this article in the paper and thought you all would want to see it. If you hear of similar things going on in your districts please let me know. You can also respond to this post by clicking on the word "comment."
Wage Freeze Suggested for Jay Schools
By Donna M. Perry , Staff WriterFriday, June 22, 2007
JAY - A three-year wage freeze and a part-time superintendent were among ideas presented Thursday night to lower costs to get a school budget passed on Aug. 21.
At least 740 voters, the number who voted on the nearly $10 million budget package June 12, need to cast ballots on a revised budget Aug. 21 or it fails, regardless of whether the articles pass, Superintendent Robert Wall said. If the budget is not approved, officials may not be able to open schools, he said.
An article being added to the next warrant asks residents to authorize selectmen to transfer up to $1.6 million from the undesignated fund so schools can operate until a budget is approved.
Voters authorized selectmen to transfer up to $500,000 for school operations until a budget passes, but Wall said that money won't go far. Summer pay for custodians will be more than $100,000, he said, and as soon as school resumes, they'll have another major staff payroll.
A school system is "a personnel-driven organization, and the services we provide depend on quality personnel," Wall said.
A revised budget will be presented at 6 p.m. Wednesday, June 27, at the middle school for votes by the School Committee and the Budget Committee.
More than 30 people attended Thursday night's School Committee workshop to discuss the budget and suggest possible cuts, including having a part-time superintendent, a three-year salary freeze, the curriculum director position, maintenance projects, curriculum, transportation, food service, testing and prekindergarten. The latter cost is $72,000 to educate 34 pupils, but Jay will be reimbursed $26,000 of it, Wall said.
It was agreed that moving fourth-graders to the middle school to save $97,000 would not be considered.
Wall issued a freeze on purchasing supplies and materials and halted summer maintenance projects after voters refused to raise an additional $2 million locally for education and authorize the School Committee to spend $9.96 million for education.
The budget was $504,000 less than this fiscal year's budget and eliminated or reduced several teaching and administrative positions, Wall said.
Two additional articles that failed June 12 - one to buy a school bus and the other to fund adult education - will not be brought back for a vote, Wall said.
Suggested reasons for the budget rejection were:
• negative wording on the warrant article pertaining to why the system exceeded the state's essential programs and services model by $1.8 million;
• not enough positive news printed in the newspaper, just the press stirring the pot;
• no newsletter sent home to residents explaining the budget and reminding them to vote;
• revaluation of properties in town that increased values on residential property;
• state education subsidy figures not presented on time;
• misconception of budget information;
• not enough reductions in administration;
• giving nonunion personnel, including the superintendent, 3 percent raises at the same meeting when they eliminated staff members; and
• the Budget Committee not giving a recommendation on several school articles. The latter is required by the committee's bylaws to give no recommendation if a majority doesn't reach a consensus.
I saw this article in the paper and thought you all would want to see it. If you hear of similar things going on in your districts please let me know. You can also respond to this post by clicking on the word "comment."
Wage Freeze Suggested for Jay Schools
By Donna M. Perry , Staff WriterFriday, June 22, 2007
JAY - A three-year wage freeze and a part-time superintendent were among ideas presented Thursday night to lower costs to get a school budget passed on Aug. 21.
At least 740 voters, the number who voted on the nearly $10 million budget package June 12, need to cast ballots on a revised budget Aug. 21 or it fails, regardless of whether the articles pass, Superintendent Robert Wall said. If the budget is not approved, officials may not be able to open schools, he said.
An article being added to the next warrant asks residents to authorize selectmen to transfer up to $1.6 million from the undesignated fund so schools can operate until a budget is approved.
Voters authorized selectmen to transfer up to $500,000 for school operations until a budget passes, but Wall said that money won't go far. Summer pay for custodians will be more than $100,000, he said, and as soon as school resumes, they'll have another major staff payroll.
A school system is "a personnel-driven organization, and the services we provide depend on quality personnel," Wall said.
A revised budget will be presented at 6 p.m. Wednesday, June 27, at the middle school for votes by the School Committee and the Budget Committee.
More than 30 people attended Thursday night's School Committee workshop to discuss the budget and suggest possible cuts, including having a part-time superintendent, a three-year salary freeze, the curriculum director position, maintenance projects, curriculum, transportation, food service, testing and prekindergarten. The latter cost is $72,000 to educate 34 pupils, but Jay will be reimbursed $26,000 of it, Wall said.
It was agreed that moving fourth-graders to the middle school to save $97,000 would not be considered.
Wall issued a freeze on purchasing supplies and materials and halted summer maintenance projects after voters refused to raise an additional $2 million locally for education and authorize the School Committee to spend $9.96 million for education.
The budget was $504,000 less than this fiscal year's budget and eliminated or reduced several teaching and administrative positions, Wall said.
Two additional articles that failed June 12 - one to buy a school bus and the other to fund adult education - will not be brought back for a vote, Wall said.
Suggested reasons for the budget rejection were:
• negative wording on the warrant article pertaining to why the system exceeded the state's essential programs and services model by $1.8 million;
• not enough positive news printed in the newspaper, just the press stirring the pot;
• no newsletter sent home to residents explaining the budget and reminding them to vote;
• revaluation of properties in town that increased values on residential property;
• state education subsidy figures not presented on time;
• misconception of budget information;
• not enough reductions in administration;
• giving nonunion personnel, including the superintendent, 3 percent raises at the same meeting when they eliminated staff members; and
• the Budget Committee not giving a recommendation on several school articles. The latter is required by the committee's bylaws to give no recommendation if a majority doesn't reach a consensus.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Regional Meetings with the DOE and Resources
The Department of Education is in the process of scheduling regional meetings, as required in the law, at which presenters will provide information about the reorganization law and guidance about moving forward with regional planning, as well as answer questions. These meetings are open to members of the public, including superintendents, school board members, teachers, parents, business people, and all others. All meetings – one in each Career and Technical Education region, will be held by July 15.
For meeting details and more information please visit:
http://www.maine.gov/education/supportingschools/meetings.html
For meeting details and more information please visit:
http://www.maine.gov/education/supportingschools/meetings.html
MEA Summer Hours
As the school year draws to an end, I want to remind you that MEA offices will close at 4:00 pm every day over the summer season beginning on Monday, June 25th and ending on Friday, August 24th.
Thursday, June 7, 2007
ANNOUNCING Maine Education Association Summer Conference 2007
Sunday River Resort and Conference Center, Bethel, ME
Monday, July 30 - Wednesday, August 1
The conference brochure and on-line registration are available on the MEA website at: http://www.maine.nea.org/dir1/SCBrochure.pdf.
Monday, July 30 - Wednesday, August 1
The conference brochure and on-line registration are available on the MEA website at: http://www.maine.nea.org/dir1/SCBrochure.pdf.
To go directly to the on-line registration form, go to: https://webmail.onlinemea.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.regonline.com/MEASC2007 by Friday, July 13.
Important: You need to make your own hotel reservations.
Reservations MUST be made by calling the Reservations Department at 1-800-207-2365 between the hours of 9 AM-5 PM. Identify the group as the “Maine Education Association, group number 84H5OX.” Rooms are guaranteed until June 29; after that date, rooms will be based on availability so, please make your reservations today.
For driving directions consult https://webmail.onlinemea.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.sundayriver.com/directions.html.
If you are looking for things to do in your “free time”, check out https://webmail.onlinemea.org/exchweb/bin/redir.asp?URL=http://www.sundayriver.com for links to area points of interest and activities.
School Regionalization News From Executive Director, Mark Gray
Hello:
After much work and many late nights, the 2008-09 biennial budget was passed last night by both houses of the Legislature. The regionalization/consolidation plan was included in the budget and after a great deal of political maneuvering and compromise, the vote was overwhelmingly in favor in both the Senate and the House. The final language is not complete at this point, but I want to share the highlights:
Employment and Collective Bargaining Protections:
The language that the MEA worked to develop was maintained and included in the final bill! School employees and their employment agreements will be transferred to their new regional school district. Collective bargaining agreements will stay in place and be transferred to the new school district. And, existing bargaining agents will continue to be recognized, in most cases, by the new regional school districts. The conditional “in most cases” was added because in cases where different bargaining agents represent the same classification of employees in school districts that consolidate into a new, single regional school district, representational elections will most likely need to be conducted.
Existing collective bargaining agreements will remain in effect, and interim agreements will have to be negotiated that expire no later than the current agreement with the latest expiration date. These dates and timelines can only be calculated after regional school districts are formed and approved by voters.
MEA will have a great deal of work to do in order to reorganize existing local structures and to renegotiate existing collective bargaining agreements, but the majority of this work cannot begin until regional school units have been settled. Once that is complete, we will have a three year window period (approximately) to get our organizational structures to conform to school unit structures.
School District Size:
This was an area of much debate and compromise! In the end, the language will read something like…it is the "intent" of the Legislature is that "sustainable, long-term administrative efficiencies be achieved by consolidating the current number of school units...into 80 regional units or into a number of units that meets the administrative efficiencies established by this (law). Regional units of at least 2,500 resident students must be created except where circumstances justify an exception to that size requirement (off-shore island, tribal schools, etc.). Where circumstances require an exemption....the (consolidated) unit must serve as close to 2,500 students as possible and in no case....may it serve fewer than 1,200 students.
The Commissioner must approve proposed plans and when approving or disapproving a proposed plan, she would be prohibited from basing disapproval solely on the basis that such a plan would cause the number of regional school units to exceed 80.
Exemptions:
Off-shore island schools, tribal schools, schools already serving more than 2,500 students, and schools that believed they were eligible for an exemption because of a list of unquantified circumstances related to geography, demographics, economics, transportation, or population density were all exempt from the statute’s consolidation requirements. During legislative negotiations, schools designated as "efficient, high-performing districts" were added to that list of schools eligible for exemption. To meet that definition, the school must contain at least three school facilities identified as "higher performing" in a 2007 report of the Maine Educational Policy Institute, and the school must also have reported that its 2005-2006 per-pupil expenditures for system administration represent less than 4% of its per-pupil expenditures.
Additionally, a new term was coined…"donut-hole" schools. They would be exempt from consolidating, if they serve at least 1,200 students and if they have performed "due diligence" to develop a regional plan to meet the 2,500 student requirement but were unable to achieve the enrollment goal due to the decisions of the geographically proximate school systems.
Penalties:
Penalties for communities/school districts that vote to “opt-out” were softened as follows: non-compliant "minimum receivers" will receive 50% of their minimum subsidy; they will receive 50% of the financial support they would otherwise receive from the state for "system administration"; they will be ineligible for "transition" funding; they will not receive the full amount of state aid they would otherwise receive because the state is providing (on a statewide basis) 55% of the cost of education as measured by the EPS school funding model. (Specifically, the non-compliant schools will receive a subsidy calculated as though the required state share, in the aggregate, was 53.86% rather than 55%...in short, as if their state funding was frozen.); and all non-compliant schools will receive less favorable consideration for future school construction funding.
On the other hand, voters in municipalities that felt the regional school unit's budget was not properly funding their local elementary school would be authorized to raise money and direct the spending of the funds to that elementary school. This provision was provided in response to the concern that under the proposed legislation the school union system would generally not be allowed unless the regional board of directors is willing to effectively create such a system.
Timeframe:
Only those municipalities that have fully developed school consolidation plans by December 15, 2007 would have to schedule a referendum vote on or before January 15, 2008 in order to create a new consolidated school system that would begin operations on July 1, 2008.
All other municipalities would be given until June 10, 2008 to hold the mandatory referendum votes on their school consolidation plans to create new school system that would begin operation on July 1, 2009. If communities opt out, the penalties above apply.
Other Issues:
Regional school administrative units will replace SAD’s, school unions, community school districts, and municipal schools.
Regional school boards will have representational apportionment in same way that SAD boards are established.
School choice will continue for those communities that currently have school choice.
A 2/3’s vote of the regional school board is required to close a local school and a community can keep such a school open by majority vote if they are willing to assume most of the costs.
As I stated earlier, this is one of the most significant CHANGES in the organization and delivery of K-12 education in Maine in decades. How these changes are implemented will take many forms and plans that are made today will undoubtedly change many times as we move forward….but contrary to the threatened implementation of TABOR, or the Palesky referendum before it, the MEA as able to help shape the direction and the degree of this change in the structure of our K-12 school districts. In doing so, I believe that we may have averted yet another attack on our public schools by those who have much less interest in their success or in our success.
Over the next several days, we will get the actual legislative language and we will keep you abreast of the specific details of this far-reaching legislation. I will be putting together a staff work group to begin to identify issues and concerns that the MEA will need to address. I will keep you posted as such planning take place. In the meantime, if you have questions or concerns, please give me a call.
Best,
Mark
After much work and many late nights, the 2008-09 biennial budget was passed last night by both houses of the Legislature. The regionalization/consolidation plan was included in the budget and after a great deal of political maneuvering and compromise, the vote was overwhelmingly in favor in both the Senate and the House. The final language is not complete at this point, but I want to share the highlights:
Employment and Collective Bargaining Protections:
The language that the MEA worked to develop was maintained and included in the final bill! School employees and their employment agreements will be transferred to their new regional school district. Collective bargaining agreements will stay in place and be transferred to the new school district. And, existing bargaining agents will continue to be recognized, in most cases, by the new regional school districts. The conditional “in most cases” was added because in cases where different bargaining agents represent the same classification of employees in school districts that consolidate into a new, single regional school district, representational elections will most likely need to be conducted.
Existing collective bargaining agreements will remain in effect, and interim agreements will have to be negotiated that expire no later than the current agreement with the latest expiration date. These dates and timelines can only be calculated after regional school districts are formed and approved by voters.
MEA will have a great deal of work to do in order to reorganize existing local structures and to renegotiate existing collective bargaining agreements, but the majority of this work cannot begin until regional school units have been settled. Once that is complete, we will have a three year window period (approximately) to get our organizational structures to conform to school unit structures.
School District Size:
This was an area of much debate and compromise! In the end, the language will read something like…it is the "intent" of the Legislature is that "sustainable, long-term administrative efficiencies be achieved by consolidating the current number of school units...into 80 regional units or into a number of units that meets the administrative efficiencies established by this (law). Regional units of at least 2,500 resident students must be created except where circumstances justify an exception to that size requirement (off-shore island, tribal schools, etc.). Where circumstances require an exemption....the (consolidated) unit must serve as close to 2,500 students as possible and in no case....may it serve fewer than 1,200 students.
The Commissioner must approve proposed plans and when approving or disapproving a proposed plan, she would be prohibited from basing disapproval solely on the basis that such a plan would cause the number of regional school units to exceed 80.
Exemptions:
Off-shore island schools, tribal schools, schools already serving more than 2,500 students, and schools that believed they were eligible for an exemption because of a list of unquantified circumstances related to geography, demographics, economics, transportation, or population density were all exempt from the statute’s consolidation requirements. During legislative negotiations, schools designated as "efficient, high-performing districts" were added to that list of schools eligible for exemption. To meet that definition, the school must contain at least three school facilities identified as "higher performing" in a 2007 report of the Maine Educational Policy Institute, and the school must also have reported that its 2005-2006 per-pupil expenditures for system administration represent less than 4% of its per-pupil expenditures.
Additionally, a new term was coined…"donut-hole" schools. They would be exempt from consolidating, if they serve at least 1,200 students and if they have performed "due diligence" to develop a regional plan to meet the 2,500 student requirement but were unable to achieve the enrollment goal due to the decisions of the geographically proximate school systems.
Penalties:
Penalties for communities/school districts that vote to “opt-out” were softened as follows: non-compliant "minimum receivers" will receive 50% of their minimum subsidy; they will receive 50% of the financial support they would otherwise receive from the state for "system administration"; they will be ineligible for "transition" funding; they will not receive the full amount of state aid they would otherwise receive because the state is providing (on a statewide basis) 55% of the cost of education as measured by the EPS school funding model. (Specifically, the non-compliant schools will receive a subsidy calculated as though the required state share, in the aggregate, was 53.86% rather than 55%...in short, as if their state funding was frozen.); and all non-compliant schools will receive less favorable consideration for future school construction funding.
On the other hand, voters in municipalities that felt the regional school unit's budget was not properly funding their local elementary school would be authorized to raise money and direct the spending of the funds to that elementary school. This provision was provided in response to the concern that under the proposed legislation the school union system would generally not be allowed unless the regional board of directors is willing to effectively create such a system.
Timeframe:
Only those municipalities that have fully developed school consolidation plans by December 15, 2007 would have to schedule a referendum vote on or before January 15, 2008 in order to create a new consolidated school system that would begin operations on July 1, 2008.
All other municipalities would be given until June 10, 2008 to hold the mandatory referendum votes on their school consolidation plans to create new school system that would begin operation on July 1, 2009. If communities opt out, the penalties above apply.
Other Issues:
Regional school administrative units will replace SAD’s, school unions, community school districts, and municipal schools.
Regional school boards will have representational apportionment in same way that SAD boards are established.
School choice will continue for those communities that currently have school choice.
A 2/3’s vote of the regional school board is required to close a local school and a community can keep such a school open by majority vote if they are willing to assume most of the costs.
As I stated earlier, this is one of the most significant CHANGES in the organization and delivery of K-12 education in Maine in decades. How these changes are implemented will take many forms and plans that are made today will undoubtedly change many times as we move forward….but contrary to the threatened implementation of TABOR, or the Palesky referendum before it, the MEA as able to help shape the direction and the degree of this change in the structure of our K-12 school districts. In doing so, I believe that we may have averted yet another attack on our public schools by those who have much less interest in their success or in our success.
Over the next several days, we will get the actual legislative language and we will keep you abreast of the specific details of this far-reaching legislation. I will be putting together a staff work group to begin to identify issues and concerns that the MEA will need to address. I will keep you posted as such planning take place. In the meantime, if you have questions or concerns, please give me a call.
Best,
Mark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
