To the Editor:
Monday, June 04, 2007

K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATION IN MAINE, CONSOLIDATION, AND THE THREE CHOICES:
By Heather J. Perry, Union 60 Superintendent of Schools

It doesn't take a genius to figure out that public education is “at a crossroads” in the State of Maine. Never in our state's history have so many things collided at the same time that can each have monumental impacts on our schools individually, let alone when taken all together. Since January, when the Governor first announced his regionalization proposal, it has been difficult to keep up with the various conversations in Augusta involving consolidation plans and their potential impacts upon Maine's Schools.

In fact, it has been next to impossible to figure out with any certainty at all what these various impacts may be. Some tout consolidation proposals as cost savings measures that will enable state government to save millions of dollars in this biennium budget alone, and possibly even more, further down the line. Others tout consolidation proposals as creating efficiently run school systems that may save some money, but more importantly, offer more educational opportunities for our students for less money (when is the last time any of us got more for less in anything?). Still others tout consolidation proposals as the apocalypse that will cause our entire educational system and hence our entire state's economy to fail (Scenes of Chicken Little come to mind for anyone else?). Personally, I tend not to believe in any of these notions fully (as I still haven't seen any accurate data to prove any of them), and at the same time, in all of them partially.

Regardless of what individuals think of the impacts that consolidation may or may not have on the education of children across the state there are basically only three choices to be made at this juncture:

1. Maintain the status quo – If you were walking along a wooded path on a sunshiney afternoon, and you ran across a sign that said: “DANGER, Quicksand Ahead” you would not simply stop in your tracks and stand there staring at the ground until the quicksand disappeared. If you did, you'd be standing there a VERY long time indeed. Schools have NOT remained the same over the past 50 years, nor should they continue to remain the same as they are today. Fifty years ago, schools didn't have laptop computers, Smart Boards, LCD projectors, and video conferencing. Technology has changed the face of education and will continue to do so. In order to give our children the best and most competitive educations possible, schools must keep up with the ever-changing world of technology. Schools that utilize distance-learning, and other innovative approaches to education must continue to find ways to positively change at a sustainable rate over time, and to do so as efficiently as possible. Does that mean we MUST consolidate schools? No that doesn't mean we MUST consolidate schools, but it also doesn't mean we stay the same either in hopes that the quicksand disappears.

2. Jump into the “quicksand” – Quicksand is kinda' hard to see until your already “too deeply in” to get out. This is a problem. The most effective and long lasting changes occur from using the “bottom-up” approach and from making sure that reasonable time has been taken to make decisions based upon solid “real life” data. Speculation just doesn't cut it. If I were walking along and I saw a sign that said “Danger Quicksand”, I probably shouldn't speculate whether or not it is just a mud puddle before I go wading in. I should verify that it is “quicksand” through solid research. I should “measure” it to see how deep or how wide the pit may be. I should fully understand the implications of my choice to either jump in or to go in a different direction and instead go around. And if I do choose to jump in, I should take the time to ensure I put some sort of a safety harness in place in case my worst fears are realized, otherwise, God help us if it really IS quicksand!

3. Build a bridge to walk across – Now here is a concept I can “get my teeth into!” Follow this little metaphor and I think we have something that can be used to create positive, long lasting change. If we were to think about that same pit of quicksand described above, and instead of deciding to either go around or to jump in, we decided to build a sturdy bridge over top of the pit, wouldn't we all still arrive in the same place we intended to arrive at? If we speculate that the pit is simply not dangerous and decide to jump in to find out that it is. . . we're sunk and we don't arrive where we want to be. If we decide to go in a different direction. . . who knows if we will ever find out way back again to our intended destination? But if we take the time to study, to pilot actual real scenarios, to test the waters, to measure our successes, etc and use that information to build a bridge TOGETHER. . . wouldn't we arrive at that same intended destination? Maybe a little later than we had wanted, but yes, we would most assuredly arrive. The key would be to make sure we know where it is that we want to arrive at FIRST. If the bridge worked, the best part would be, others could more easily follow!

To the Editor:
Thursday, May 24, 2007

It is extremely important for the people of this State to realize that NO consolidation plan has been passed by the Maine Legislature at this time.  There are several plans being proposed, but only the Governor's plan has been printed for the public.  The appropriation's subcommittee came out with a draft document, being it has not be finalized.

Once a plan has been agreed upon, it has to go the Office of Policy and Legal Analysis to be drafted.  From there it goes to the Legislature to vote to decide if the bill passes or fails and then, if it passes to the Governor for his signature. 

The process is far from over and until the process is completed, a bill can be amended by the committee or on the floor of the House of Representatives or the floor of the Senate.

The point is that there is still time to let your Legislators know what position you want them to take with their vote.  So, call to let them know your point of view.

Richard A. Gould
Maine Small Schools Coalition

To the Editor:
School District Consolidation – In Case Your Interested
By Pete Johnson

As I reflect on the information being passed around by the State administration and legislature I often ask myself, what motivates the purveyors of this information. I have concluded that is described by one of three C’s corruption, competence (lack of) or cowardice.

I wonder if the Governor and the Commissioner understand that consolidation often results in increased cost because:

• Merging school districts results in pay scales that often equal the higher of the pre-existing districts
• Faster rising personnel costs because of the increased bargaining power of unions
• Need for more specialized staff
• Higher costs to transport kids greater distances
• Higher rates of vandalism
• Lower support for bond levels
• Need for newer and larger facilities

Now there are a few misleading statements (some might say lies, but lets give him the benefit of the doubt because he is a nice guy) that the Governor consistently makes. See the Portland Telegram of Sunday May 6.

• The Governor’s statement is that we must achieve sustainable savings of $ 36.5M in the fiscal years 2008-2009. What he really means is that the state can not afford to live up to the commitment they made to fund 55% of the EPS funding formula results. The other half of that misstatement that is implied in that statement is that EPS (Essential Programs and Services) does not really cover all the programs that are essential. This is demonstrated when approximately 80% of school districts exceed the EPS funding level. Does he really think they do that because they like higher taxes?

• The Governor’s statement is that we must support local schools. Local people must have a voice in their schools. Administrative changes must not mandate school closings. Frankly, I have a hard time giving the Governor a pass on this one but, you can if you are feeling compassionate. After all I didn’t vote for him. The changes proposed by the Governor would result in school closings. Specifically, our High School in Greenville and the Shirley Elementary School. The reason is the proposal would transfer all assets to the new mega school district, the governing board would be elected with representatives based on population of the member communities and the amount of financial contribution of each community would be determined by the community’s valuation. So the result would be, unless we wanted to fund two school systems, we would not have the voting power in either Greenville or Shirley to continue to operate our school systems. The Governor and his agents say that local people must have a voice but the proposal decreases that voice to the point that it is useless for towns like ours.
• The Governor states we must guarantee property tax relief and I fully agree with that statement. He states that in the last 4 years the state has increased its support to education by $800M. Well, I got a news flash for him. IT DIDN'T COME TO GREENVILLE! Our state subsidy for education has decreased in each of those four years because of the method the state has used to allocate funds. The Governor is using national averages of dissimilar costs to impose an arbitrary cut in administrative funding that will vanish over time. If he wants to apply this mindless organizational change methodology then he should mandate that all departments of the state meet those national averages. That way we could reduce the bloated state bureaucracy and provide better property tax relief.
• The Governor states that parents, businesses and tax payers want to invest in quality classroom education not administration. I agree with half of that. People do want quality education for their children. However, there is nothing in the Governor’s proposal that addresses that. One of the most important ways to achieve a high performing school system is to provide good leadership (Principals and Superintendents) and a competent teaching staff relieved of unnecessary administrative mandates. By the way, in case you didn’t know, the mandates come from the state. The most egregious being the Local Area Assessment (LAS) that was directed by the state and wasted thousands of productive hours of quality education time before it was scrapped.