Reorganization Planning Committee Meeting

24 October 2007

DRAFT Minutes

Attendance:  Facilitator, Bill Ferm; Chair, Gail Marshall;  Vice-Chair, Brian Hubbell

Present:  Bar Harbor: Paul Murphy, Bob Garland;  Mt. Desert:  Laurel Robbins, Jeff Smith;  Southwest Harbor:  Skip Strong, Amy Young, Anne Napier;  Tremont:  Amy Murphy, Phil Worden;  Lamoine: Kathleen Rybarz

Others in attendance:  Rob Liebow, Nancy Thurlow, Selena Dunbar, George Peckham,

Kristin Hutchins, Patrick Barter, Lynne Williams, Patrick Smallidge, Mia Brown, Barb Neilly

Commencement of Meeting

Gail Marshall called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.

Review of Draft Minutes from 17 October 2007

The minutes were not reviewed.

Continuation of Discussion Regarding Composition of RSU Board and Powers and Duties of Local School Boards

Rob Liebow reviewed the sheet regarding powers and duties of the RSU Board and Local School Boards and pointed out sections that were changed after the last meeting. 

Election of members –  Each town will elect between 3 and 7 members to serve on the RSU board.  Local school committees will be made up of RSU board of directors “and only RSU elected board of directors”.

Overall school responsibilities – took out transportation.  Too controversial.  Could change over time. 

Budgeting left the same. 

Referendums same. 

Record keeping and reporting all thru RSU. 

Budget and carry over local but then given to RSU.  Kristin Hutchins asked about carryover.

Mr. Liebow explained that there is no change to the way we run this now. 

Special Education Reserves – Kelley Sanborn is needed for this portion.  RSU board would establish a combined special education reserve to cover unanticipated out of district placements for the unbudgeted year for all RSU schools K-12.  A plan must be developed for how this mutual fund will be accessed and refueled over time.  What is the formula for putting that amount back in?  Emergency special education reserves for current budgets were reviewed.  Total is over $1,000,000 for district.  If we had a way to fuel these reserves, then the town could pick it up when they could budget for it.  Brian Hubbel – what would be a guess of what proportion of the special education reserves we now carry should be devoted to out of district placements?  Paul Murphy - Why not move MDIHS reserve which is $320,000 – why not make it a pooled resource and leave the others alone?  That way each town won’t dig into their own reserve.  Mr. Liebow – outlying islands, Trenton, and Lamoine wouldn’t be able to do this because they carry little or no reserve.  The smaller schools can’t make that up in their budgets.  Jeff Smith agreed with Paul.  If we take special education funds and put in one fund, it could be a slippery slope.  The Mt. Desert Board of Selectmen agree. 

Nancy Thurlow – one thought is that when you have a pooled reserve and an individual reserve, where do you go first?  They are all supposed to be for unanticipated costs. 

Mr. Liebow – keep out of district costs in the pool.  Keep it for very rare times.

Anne Napier – disagreed with Jeff Smith and Paul Murphy.  She thinks the pool can grow. 

Mr. Liebow pointed out that everyone would contribute to their own reserve and the combined one. 

Transportation stays local.

Building and equipment Ownership and Maintenance – “Lease for a dollar” was mentioned at a meeting today.  We may not have to do these as full transfers.

Construction and major renovation stay with each group.

Debt Responsibility - MDIHS debt stays with high school.  Individual school K-8 debt will remain the responsibility of each K-8 school as will any future approved K-8 school debt. 

Paul Murphy said that right now there is a component in debt relief included in tuition costs.  Does this anticipate that?

Mr. Liebow said that it is everybody involved, not tuitioned. 

Paul Murphy – towns that now tuition, if they don’t join, then we need to revisit this item. 

Mr. Liebow said they would remain tuition and pay 10% as they have agreed to do.

Scholarship and special funds - same.

Federal and State Grants – same.

Employment Practices – RSU board would hire.  Local boards make recommendation.  This really relates to hiring of teachers.  No boards are responsible for hiring/firing ed techs/support staff.

Gail Marshall – need language that obligates RSU board to accept candidate the local board recommends.  Need to structure it so local board is driving force behind these decisions.

Brian Hubbell said it would be important that the local boards recommendation is a compelling one, or is it both, local and RSU?

Gail Marshall said we would have to make it clear that RSU board needs to take the recommendation of the local board.

Mr. Liebow said that the Superintendent brings candidates to boards now.  Support staff, custodians, ed techs, are all done at the local level.  Recommend, nominate, elect, hire. 

Jeff Smith thinks this is a good idea.  Perhaps all staff would not be RSU.  Understand Superintendent appoints, but seems recommending softens it a little too much. 

Gail Marshall said we should push to have local board hire.

Patrick Smallidge – Does that mean RSU policy would trump local policies? 

Mr. Liebow – State law has hiring written in it.  Some things we may be saying now may be negotiable, but the policy can come out. 

Mia Brown – Before a school hires a teacher, the board gives it the power to do that.  Can we reverse the process?

Brian Hubbell – Reserve the right to make local policy and then have local board make union-wide policy if it chooses, at the local level.

Mr. Liebow – teachers and administrators are what we are talking about in this section.  Support staff will be left to the local board.

Supervision and Evaluation – the way it is now.

Mr. Liebow pointed out that the RSU board is also the high school board.

Negotiated contracts – K-8 no responsibility in this area.  Contract itself makes all employees RSU employees.

Laurel Robbins – is there any information on how negotiating teams are made up?

Mr. Liebow said that would be totally up to us.  RSU board will select negotiating team and teachers association will do it any way they want.

Gail Marshall thinks this is a  good question.  Could create plan that delineates an attempt to compose the negotiating board of representatives across the communities.  We don’t want to lock this into stone for successors down the road, but thinks it would be good to have negotiator from every town.  Salary scales, Rob believes there can be only one.  Labor law question we need to explore fully with counsel. 

Mr. Liebow went to a conference today.  Commissioner was there.  Big barrier – cost shifts and contract issues.  Question from all superintendents was that they wanted to know why the state isn’t looking at a teacher state-wide contract?  The answer was that there could be a bill in front of legislature in January regarding this.

Paul Murphy – issue of salary scale is two-fold, could we do it, and would we want to do it?  Open to grace period to equalize, but totally opposed to permanent multiple salary scale.

Brian Hubbell – regarding Gail’s suggestion, not a good idea to delineate negotiations.  Leave as much latitude as possible.  Need to require local board to have word on that but don’t need to require that participation.  May want to hire professional negotiators.

Paul Murphy – recruiting folks is going to be the issue, not excluding them.

Bill Ferm – now move on to the first of the categories we didn’t get to at the last meeting.

Reduction in force – determined through negotiations.  Mr. Liebow doesn’t think we can weave this into the plan.  This would have to be negotiated.  Currently, RIF stays within building by seniority.  It is a negotiable item.  Currently by impact area and you can change impact areas. 

Paul Murphy – if RIF in MDES and a need in Bar Harbor, and employee taken to Bar Harbor, doesn’t make sense that teacher loses seniority. 

Mr. Liebow – we allow transfer of sick days, so we could do the same with seniority.  Can write it into the contract.

Paul Murphy – some provision for how obligated the RSU is to move person who is RIFed into area where there is a need.

Mr. Liebow thinks it says “up to Superintendent” right now.  Especially when equal seniority.

Paul Murphy – rightfully at this point.  If all employees of one entity, seems like this would make sense.

Mr. Liebow – if there is a volatile enrollment, you would want this.

Gail Marshall – don’t assume that the teachers will want that.  Sat in forum on Monday with MDES teachers.  Protective of their own environment and school community.

Mr. Liebow – this one is talking about going out the door.  Now we’re talking about going in and out.  There could be a mechanism for doing this.

Gail Marshall – this could be negotiatied.

Personnel records stay in RSU.  Same as now.

Assignment of Staff to Schools – RSU determines MDIHS.  Local board assigns K-8 local school.

Laurel Robbins – does that mean assignment in their building, what grade they are going to be teaching?

Mr. Liebow – yes.

Gail Marshall – this could say “to” and “within”.

Mr. Lieobw – if done appropriately, not a sellable thing when it goes to voters.  If it was marketed right, it could be.

Gail Marshall – a lot of work to do with staff before selling this to the public.

Brian Hubbell – nothing even in this model to prohibit local board from conveying this to the Superintendent.

Mr. Liebow – principal ultimately makes this decision.

Brian Hubbell – local board could convey to RSU.

Mr. Liebow – No, you can only assign your teachers in your local building.

Bill Ferm – remember change and flexibility when discussing these items.

George Peckham – if a teacher is laid off in a school because of reduction in the number of students, can that teacher go to another school and bump somebody?

Mr. Lieobw – if allowed through the negotiation process, then yes. 

Gail Marshall – no, but it could be negotiated and altered at some point.

Assignment of students to schools – RSU no responsibility.  Local kids go to local schools.  If changed to neighborhood schools, could change.

Establishing school grade structures – up to K-8 local board.  No RSU responsibility.

Model 5 type concept.  Might make one neighborhood school with one grade level and another with different grade levels.

Gail Marshall – this comes up once in a while, like Southwest Harbor and Tremont.  Not preventing them from doing that now so that flexibility is there now.

Staffing patterns and class size – High School would decide at own school.  So would local schools.  Model 5 type also.

Programming decisions – whether you offer a program or not, like French K-8 or 7-8, RSU only does MDIHS and each local K-8 determines their own.  Also Model 5 type.

For example, French in grade schools under model 5 would be RSU decides that everyone does it or no one does it.  That way when kids get to high school, they would all be at the same level.

Patrick Smallidge – If Mount Desert wants to fund K-8 for French but Southwest Harbor and Tremont don’t, what happens?

Paul Murphy – Model 5 is like an SAD where all towns fund all schools.  In that scenario it doesn’t matter what Southwest or Tremont wants to do, it matters what the RSU wants to do.  Under Model 5 schools will close.

Curriculum decisions and selection of education materials – pretty much the same as now.  RSU approves curriculum and education materials, as Union 98 board does now.  K-8 no responsibility.  They decide together.  Local schools can decide on different methods, but use same curriculum and timelines.

Gail Marshall – we will need to say those kinds of things clearly.  Teachers at Mount Desert specifically wanted to maintain professional responsibility for delivering the curriculum.  Don’t want to end up being given curriculum from outside source.  We need to make sure everybody understands this.

Mr. Liebow – pacing, testing, everyone on level playing field.  Slide over educational material choice and that would probably do it.  “Approve the RSU curriculum.”

Policy making – all policies developed, approved and modified at RSU level.  Same as now. 

School closure – RSU no responsibility.  Local K-8 maintain and control.

Paul Murphy – almost unimaginable ocurrance, but in the case that the high school would close, that would fall to the RSU board.

Extra-curricular – same as is now.  However, if you were a high school coach, you would want to be able to tell K-8 schools what program they were going to use. 

Expulsion powers – leave with local board where kid has the issue.

Transportation issues – high school responsible for all high school field trips, late bus and extra-curricular trips.  K-8 responsible for all K-8 and high school students.  Same as current situation.

Mai Brown – one of the areas she would like to see everyone come together on to save some money is fuel.  If we can do that after the fact, fine.  But get on agenda right off.

Bob Garland – if this is where one of the savings can occur, how would Bar Harbor’s situation with contracted bussing fit in.

Mr. Liebow – would have to read contract more carefully.  There is a “get out” clause that talks about changes in local conditions.  90-days now.  Provision currently to buy back busses.  Then you could decide without having a contract. 

Gail Marshall – There are realities that we have to face regarding transportation.  It sounds like a good idea, but not practical.  Should definitely look at it.

Paul Murphy – should be noted that there is a difference between savings, what state says and efficiencies from pooling resources.  Transportation is not anywhere we are going to save money any time soon.  State says we’re going to spend less, but we won’t.

Jeff Smith – Mount Desert is a wide-spread community.  Drivers are important and care and ownership of buses.  Daughter spends 45 minutes on bus.  Very wary of not keeping buses and drivers up to standard.  Sensitive issue - not just transportation.  Social interactions time.  Works now.

Patrick Smallidge – if bus purchases were being routed through RSU would that be through accepted high school formula?  Very reluctant to lose that control at the local level.

Bus Purchases – The only recognized organization from the state is the RSU.  Everything will have to be run through the RSU.  Local school can raise the money but must go through the RSU to purchase. 

For the islands, at least Swan’s would be quite interested, if they are in the RSU, in transportation.  If shared transportation is off the table, they may not have many incentives to become part of RSU.

Bob Garland – RSU will be able to speak for K-8 in Bar Harbor with their private contract as well as speaking for other towns with transportation issues.

Mr. Liebow – If Bar Harbor wanted to continue their transportation with bus contract they could.

Bob Garland – But if there is any necessity for interchange with the state vis a vis that particular item which would have to be done through the RSU, so the RSU would have to consider Bar Harbor’s specific situation with regard to transportation, as well as the other individual towns the way they do?

Mr. Lieobw – It’s just the actual purchase and approval of buses.  You receive an approval from state if you have need and then go through process if you had your own bus.

Nancy Thurlow said she has to do a form for each one of the schools now.  All buses will have to be RSU approved.

Patrick Smallidge – Individual town can’t buy bus without RSU and state approval?

Nancy Thurlow – right now by town, later will be under RSU name.  Will state approve purchase?  This is just regarding funding.  Subsidy approval is the only thing state is approving. 

Bill Ferm - State will talk to us through RSU only.

Lunch program – RSU handles, but local K-8 decides actual program - staff, what you serve, etc.

Mia Brown asked if that would include children who need help with lunch.  She would like that type of program in every school to continue.

Mr. Liebow – It is all done by state guidelines with free and reduced lunch.

Gail Marshall mentioned that the high school lunch program will need to be run by the RSU.

Gifts – stays with school gift was given.

Calendar – RSU makes calendar.  Local board can change if necessary, but try to keep as close together as possible. 

Insurance – RSU board, not local.  Same as now.

Outside Contracts – RSU would manage high school and central office outside contracts.  K-8 own, but try to combine – like snow plowing.  Heating we would try to do the same thing, if possible.  Dick Spencer may say all contracts have to have RSU name on them and then we’ll have to come back and discuss that.

Lease agreements – RSU board does the high school, others are done locally. 

State subsidy – Distribution of state subsidy.  We are going to get one state subsidy check as an RSU.  The bigger the district gets, the lower the subsidy is.  Aggregate subsidy will be less than what the parts are now.  How you distribute it will not be assigned from school, will have to work on that, not a simple task.  Distribution to individual schools of state subsidy provided to the new RSU will be determined by an agreed upon method by the regional planning committee, yet to be determined.

All related to EPS.  Won’t receive individual ones, will only receive RSU EPS figure - here’s your allowance.

George Peckham – Isn’t that Baldacci’s basis for saving 36 million?

Mr. Liebow said not quite.  This was an added benefit.

Central office costs for exempt island schools – Swan’s, Cranberry, Frenchboro – if they don’t become part of RSU, still may want to contract services with us.  Develop baseline amount for common useage.  If you have this, this, and this, then you pay this much for Superintendent, this rate for Curriculum, etc. 

Gail Marshall– Islands get disproportionate amount of service from the central office.  It is expensive to have them using the central office now.  We’ve done it and it’s okay.

Mr. Liebow – This is a matter of perspective.  Frenchboro looking at $14,000 costs for central office looks expensive.  Think they are paying more than their fair share.

Paul Murphy – as long as they are members of the union, that’s okay.  But if they are a “customer” that’s different.

Mr. Liebow – That is why they would like to know if they are a customer or a player.  I don’t know who has the time or the expertise to determine how we figure out what their costs will be.

CIP in Bar Harbor – Just for Bar Harbor, this runs through their town budget.  What happens with that?

Redistribution of powers between RSU board and the locally created school committees – to be determined at the RSU board level and submitted to the voters of the RSU for approval according to an approved and agreed upon method which must be determined for the RPC plan.

Gail Marshall – taking the vantage point of looking at our school system over time, quality and positive change does not happen overnight.  Can’t be imposed from community to community.  Not going to get peaceful and appropriate change unless it is a change that is authorized by each individual municipality.   Change will not happen tomorrow.  Not the way constructive and harmonious change gets made.  Take the long view as to how plans altered.  Want to find middle ground, but we can’t force communities to accept.

Paul Murphy would agree at least in part.  If you’re going to change the way Mount Desert runs it school, you need Mount Desert to buy in.  Some sort of super majority might work, not just 51% that would get there.  Whether it is 2/3 or whatever.  If we change the way we fund and manage our school, you better do it with our say so.

Phil Worden – takes this very seriously.  Believe in flexibility and evolution and growth.  Don’t disagree with Gail at all.  Not talking about equalizing all at one.  Keep things the way they are but allow flexibility over time.  What is the community?  He doesn’t see it divided by town lines.  He can see an island-wide community.  Ought to be open to become one educational community.  Struck last week by what Gail said about the common contract, that this was a point of progress.  Those kinds of changes are steps in the right direction.  Need flexibility to get there.  The board could be creative over time about what parts to implement and when.  Each step would be taken by choice by the people.  The administration has stuck it’s head out on this.  Strong feeling that there should be flexibility to  lead into Model 5.

Jeff Smith – agree educational boundaries might shift, but tax boundaries don’t.  Don’t like the idea of morphing.  To not allow each town to veto, or accept ideas.  Town has right for self determination.  Final say has to be with town, not RSU at least now.

Paul Murphy – goal of model 5 is admirable.  We may get to that at some point, but in terms of the notion that schools will close being a myth or your school being at the mercy of the weighted voted of Bar Harbor, that is no myth, that is reality.  Our tax dollars are not going to Tremont without our vote on what happens at your school.  Not trying to throwing Bar Harbor’s weight around, but you don’t want to be at Bar Harbor’s mercy.  Taking our tax dollars will put you at our mercy.  What will happen if Bar Harbor and Mount Desert form a coalition, is that your schools will close.  If Bar Harbor and Trenton form coalition, and 51% is what is required, Mount Desert school will close.  Admirable goal, but reality is that no one is going to agree to a structure where Bar Harbor pays for other schools and you decide what is going to happen with the money. 

Amy Young – conceivable that in the future we might find ourselves deciding to break apart into smaller schools.  She can conceive of adding schools in towns.  What if we have twice as many kids as we have now?  Or what happens if we run out of reasonably priced transportation fuel?  Flexibility works both ways, it allows us the chance to come together and to split apart.

Gail Marshall – This school community has vastly improved over the last 15 years due to the fact that we have had Superintendents who have an educational vision and philosophy.  Fully expect that Mr. Liebow’s job is to do what he is doing now.  The answer to Phil’s desire – practically speaking, Paul is right, you cannot just divide the money equally, schools and enrollments are not equal.  Over time change is going to come.  The boards which will follow us will provide leadership to advocate for changes that seem most appropriate at that time.  The way we do it is because we have leaders that convince our communities that that is the right thing to do.

Phil Worden – might be helpful if we were more concrete on what we are talking about.  I don’t’ see the alternative as being the RSU board voting by majority to impose model 5.  More like a district as a confederation.  A vote from the RSU board would reflect all towns.  Not so extreme as a confederation where any given board of selectmen could veto the whole thing.

George Peckham said we could solve this whole problem by creating one town on this whole island.  But there isn’t a sole in this room that will be alive when that happens.

Patrick Smallidge – Comment on Phil – when Paul and Gail are promoting local control factor, giving their opinions – they are referring to the legislative body of the town, the individual voters of the town, not the selectmen. 

Bill Ferm – We’ve been talking about change and some of these categories anticipate change.  How do we build into this structure a mechanism for change?  We need to make a differentiation between different kinds of change.  Some change could be accomplished one way and other changes another way.

Phil Worden – constitution would be important.  Equity of educational funding level is what he is talking about.  Don’t like idea that town can veto whole idea. 

Gail Marshall – Think RSU could do that.  Let’s have a committee to think about different ways to do this or that.  There is nothing to prevent an RSU to work on that.  In what ways do you ratify those changes?  When you start touching money it affects everything and you have to go to the voters on that.

It seems like we need to talk to Dick Spencer at this point.  Rob, and a couple of people could go to Mr. Spencer and convey what we have heard from these meetings.  Continue to work on these things ourselves regarding change.  Funding formula for MDIHS is another issue.  

Also with respect to plan itself, lots of administrative stuff that goes into the plan that we don’t need to agonize over as a whole group, we could delegate that out.  Are you ready to have some of us go meet with Dick Spencer?  When should we meet next and what will we do at that time? 

Phil Worden- Yes, it’s a good idea for some members to talk to Dick Spencer.  For future meetings, should we have a public hearing?  Might be best for public to be involved in decision making. 

Gail Marshall – Mid November for public hearing?  Two weeks we will meet here.

Public hearing November 14 here in auditorium.  Next meeting for RPC November 7.

Gail Marshall, Brian Hubbell, Rob Liebow, and maybe Nancy Thurlow will meet with Dick Spencer.  Paul Murphy would like to go and so would Phil Worden.

MOVED by Paul Murphy, seconded by Phil Worden, and unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting at 8:52 p.m.