Reorganization Planning Committee Meeting

7 November 2007

DRAFT Minutes

 

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

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, Kelley Sanborn,  George Peckham, Patrick Barter, Kristin Htuchins, Mia Brown

 

Commencement of Meeting

Gail Marshall called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m.

 

Review of Draft Minutes from 17 and 24 October 2007

MOVED by Brian Hubbell, seconded by Bob Garland and unanimously voted to approve the 17 October 2007 and 24 October 2007 minutes as presented.

 

Review of Agenda

Gail Marshall pointed out that the deadline to submit a plan is November 30.  The committee also needs to plan for the public forum on November 14.  The agenda was reviewed and the meeting proceeded.

 

Brian Hubbell spoke about the meeting that he, Gail Marshall, and Rob Liebow had with attorney Dick Spencer.  They learned that Mr. Spencer is concerned about technicalities of authority to assign local boards powers we want them to have.  He suggested that a direct way would be through a private and special law, but there are drawbacks to that; the legislative process being the largest obstacle.  This subcommittee thinks it would be best to go ahead and accomplish the plan as outlined and assume we won’t run into difficulties. 

Gail Marshall added that the committee should put as much of a plan together including all the kinds of proposals we want and meet with Hannah Pingree to see what she thinks. 

Brian Hubbell - we realize the probability of running into a situation where we don’t comply, but if it doesn’t work, we could go back and form a private and special act.

Kristin Hutchins – Are you ignoring Dick Spencer’s concerns?

Brian Hubbell – not ignoring, or disregarding Dick Spencer’s concerns, just not changing our approach based on his cautions.

Kristin Hutchins – If we go back and create a Private and Special Act we could really be starting again in terms of relationships with each other.  We have a Private and Special Act now that we made to please ourselves.

Gail Marshall – It would be almost impossible to get a Private and Special Act that says what we actually want and goes around law.  The disadvantage of a Private and Special Act is that it is hard to change.  If we stick to the plan, it will easier to get by.

Skip Strong  –  Are we trying to have a complete plan to submit by November 30th ?  Or are we moving on the slow track?

Gail Marshall – We may not know until we put pen to paper.

Brian Hubbell – The critical part of the plan is the powers and duties of local boards.  We want to sure that part is clearly established.

Gail Marshall – Dick Spencer said that if we decide to create a Private and Special Act it would cost a lot of money.  

Phil Worden – Will our plan go straight to the commissioner’s desk for a yes or no?

Gail Marshall – We are not sure at this point.

Brian Hubbell – Dick Spencer said he is more concerned with the commissioner’s authority than we are. 

Phil Worden – Private and Special Act doesn’t seem politically feasible.  We need to try to get our plan through.

Gail Marshall asked Jeff Smith to report on the  Mount Desert funding formula that went to referendum yesterday.

Jeff Smith – The town of Mt. Desert had a non-binding referendum to see the percentage of people who want to change the funding formula.  The majority of voters which was 58% said they want to examine the funding formula.  That’s all we should make of it at this point, is that people want to look at it.

Gail Marshall  - We have a lot of work to do between now and December 1.  We can use the statute as a checklist to be sure we’re including everything.  We have developed a proposed work schedule for this month to make this happen.  November 14 is the public forum, then and RPC meeting November 15 so we can digest what happened at the public forum and continue to work.  Rob Liebow, Brian Hubbell and Gail Marshall will work November19 and 20 to create the document.  They will then send to all RPC members by email and meet on November 28th to discuss that plan and act on that plan.  If it is in good enough shape, we will send it to the commissioner.  We will have to submit what we have by November 30th  knowing that we may not have a complete plan. 

Skip Strong - Do we know if the commissioner is going to rule on sections of the plan? Or will she say that some are incomplete plans and she won’t continue.

Gail Marshall – She will have to respond in some way.

Rob Liebow – She will deal with plans that need referendums in January first.  Mr. Liebow would like us to have a concept and get concept approval from her.

Phil Worden – Which school units are going to be involved?  Does that mean by the 15th  we need to know who is in and who is out? 

Gail Marshall – we can say whatever we want to about that.

Kathleen Rybarz – Union 92 has been meeting separately from RSU.  Their intention is to remain as Union 92 and every board there wants to do that.  The commissioner already turned it down, but they think they have enough to get by.  They could share services in a different way with Ellsworth.  School choice is a big problem.  Some want it and some don’t.  Trenton will stay with Union 92 as of today. 

Rob Liebow – In regard to the second part of Phil Worden’s question, we need to include a plan for the islands.  They have to file an alternate plan, or a plan with us.  If they don’t like our plan, they could at least file with us and then file an alternate plan.

We don’t want them to file an alternate plan knowing that they want to be part of us, but we want them to have the choice. 

Bob Garland – When the plan is submitted, do we anticipate getting thoughts back, or just approved or denied?

Gail Marshall – We don’t know, but her guess is that it would be a cursory response.

Rob Liebow – The commissioner was pretty particular about the Letters of Intent that were denied.  She told them what they needed to do.  The more constructive she can be to make plans work, the more that will help her position. 

George Peckham – If Lamoine goes with Union 92, do they still have the opportunity to send kids here?

Gail Marshall – Yes, Trenton and Lamoine would still have choice.

Mia Brown – If we send the plan in with just the 4 MDI towns and the outer islands, if things change with Union 92 and they decide to join us, can we have line item changes or do we need to resubmit a whole new plan?

Gail Marshall – We’re not excluding other towns, but we haven’t built the plan using them at this time.  We will word the plan so it is not impossible to include other towns that are not originally mentioned.

Phil Worden – It’s not just a matter of who is in and who is out, but more funding issues then.

Gail Marshall – funding issues would not affect that part of the plan.  We won’t get through funding issues for the high school anyway.

Brian Hubbell – For example, the plan we submit by December 1 might not say more than our high school will be funded by a funding formula.  The plan will either contain the four towns on MDI, the four towns on MDI plus the outer islands, or the four towns on MDI plus the outer islands, Trenton and Lamoine.  We need to determine how the plan would be different under any of those circumstances. 

Gail Marshall – The actual plans are going to need to be from each SAU.  Tremont, Southwest Harbor, the high school, etc.  The plans for each of those units will  hopefully be photocopies of each other.  Somehow those will have to be approved by each SAU before November 30th.  We are asking each school board to try to send as many members as they can to the RPC meeting on the 28th.  We’ll make sure that any school board member has a chance to ask any questions that night. 

MOVED by Phil Worden, seconded by Laurel Robbins, and unanimously voted to  adopt the proposed schedule for submitting the plan to the Department of Education by December 1. 

 

Gail Marshall asked that the committee move out of order and talk about special education funding since Kelley Sanborn is here.

 

Kelley Sanborn – All schools currently have a fairly hefty special education reserve.  One reason for that is that MaineCare provided reimbursement for special education students who are receiving special education services.  Many boards at that time determined they couldn’t count on that money forever and decided to put those funds into a reserve account.  The reserves that aren’t that hefty are the result of money that had to be spent from them.  Unforeseen costs do arise, so this reserve has not been specifically for out of district placements, although those are the most expensive.  

We don’t dip into the reserve fund without unforeseen costs.  We could budget for those needs if we knew a student would be remaining at that school for a number of years.

How many out of district placements do we have per year?  Since 2000, between 7 and 10 students.  All of those have been day placements, not residential.  The state of Maine is touting the number of kids they are getting out of residential placement.   This means that kids will be returning to our schools. 

Kristin Hutchins – That’s to save money?

Kelley Sanborn –  Yes, it’s about money.  The Department of Human Services says that community based services and having kids with their families is better for them.  That is great if the services are available in the community.

Right now we have two elementary age and three high school age students who are placed outside of our schools.  One is fully funded by the state.  All the rest is for educational costs that are funded by schools.  Transportation and some other services are not included.  It costs $300 per day, 5 days per week, and residential placement is closer to $700 - 800 per day.  We need to work with schools to see what we need to provide for students and how can we get them back into the regular school setting. 

There are compelling reasons to put these reserve accounts together in terms of equity for students.  Leveling the playing field for student services and programs in our schools is something we should keep in mind.

Gail Marshall – Are we still receiving MaineCare reimbursement at the same rate?

Kelley Sanborn – MaineCare has reevaluated how they reimburse us and now we receive money for all special education students.

Gail Marshall – The suggestion was that we would use the MDIHS reserve because we’re all together.   Why can’t we just use that as a basis for the pool?

Kelley Sanborn – The majority for the placements have been MDIHS students.

George Peckham – Are you referring to our community special education kids or tuition students?

Kelley Sanborn – Our community only.  Tuition kids are determined by the special education director in the sending district.

Phil Worden – Sense from the last discussion was that pooling was a good idea, but for what expenses?  Maybe just out of district placement.  What are our options and what are the advantages and disadvantages?

Kelley Sanborn – Purchasing unanticipated items or placing kids out of district. 

Phil Worden – Does it make sense to pool some of these things? Or all of these things?

Kelley Sanborn – It makes sense to her to pool it all.  If you have a couple of kids who move in and need intense services at the same time, one school’s budget wouldn’t be able to absorb that as well as a centralized pool would.

Brian Hubbell – The idea was not to raid the high school fund to fund out of district placements, but that this was one place we might be able to pool together.

Kelley Sanborn – Are you talking about putting around $100,000 into a reserve pool.

Brian Hubbell – Agrees in principal that each town should start to contribute to a common insurance pool.  The place where that could happen now would be the high school.

Kelley Sanborn – The money could be local, but most of it comes from MaineCare.

Brain Hubbell – It is possible that we’re talking about a 3rd account for out of district placement costs.

Gail Marshall – The other place it could get touchy is that local money that gets put in the fund after being raised locally could now be used by whoever needed it. 

Nancy Thurlow – When those reserves were established through town meeting those were established for unanticipated costs, not things you count on.  It is not always for out of district placements.  One school doesn’t have any reserve left and it happened because of unanticipated costs, not out of district placement.

Kelley Sanborn – To give an idea of how much things cost, to have kids go to Kids Peace for a day program which works really well, the cost is $80 per day to transport to Kids Peace and back.  This will continue to escalate.  It is a very significant cost.

Phil Worden asked if this is something we can put off for RSU to decide. 

Gail Marshall – It is her understanding that we don’t have to decide that. 

Brian Hubbell – He does think we need to establish in the plan if we are going to have two different levels of reserve.  We can figure out how to fund them and their purpose at the RSU level, but we have to establish that.

Gail Marshall – Does that mean that at no point in the future a reserve account could be established?

Brian Hubbell – It has to be specified in plan.

Rob Liebow – To maintain local reserves we need to have it in the plan.  The RSU could decide later to create a reserve.

Brian Hubbell – We could have local boards create special reserves.  If we’re going to have special education reserve at the RSU level we would need to decide that.

Laurel Robbins – Are our options that we could pool all special education money or leave what’s in elementary schools there and have the high school fund only kids at the high school?

Gail Marshall – Yes, we could do nothing, pool all the money, set up a new account, or say everybody is going to take a percentage of the account.  It’s beginning to feel like a task that we may have run down as much as we want to at this point and maybe we set it aside for now. 

Jeff Smith – Agreed that we should set it aside.  Understands and partially agrees, but feels we need to examine this very carefully and maybe get citizen input. 

Anne Napier – What happens to reserves now? 

Nancy Thurlow – Some of the funds are invested.  Now all of these reserves are held by the individual towns or the high school.  Now investments are earning interest.  We just break them down and divvy up the interest when they come in.

Anne Napier – The larger the bulk we could invest, the more growth the accounts would have.

Nancy Thurlow – Medicaid money is paying for establishing or reenergizing those reserves.  Some schools also have to add to the reserves.

Kelley Sanborn – As and FYI, there is a substantial amount of money from MaineCare per year. 

Amy Young – Agrees that the RSU handle this whole thing.  When we all get together as the RSU, the state is only going to recognize us as that.  All money will come in as a lump and go out as a lump.  The larger the group gets, the smaller the money gets. 

Nancy Thurlow – All we’re going to get is one check.

Amy Young – To divide it up, maybe it has a cap on it and maybe if flows into other funds. 

Rob Liebow – The problem with doing that is that money comes to the K-8 budget.

Kelley Sanborn – Medicaid money does come out of state subsidy.  The subsidy drops by what you are going to get from Maine Care.

Bob Garland – As he understands it, this is the penalty money if we are assessed.

Gail Marshall – No, this is subsidy.  That is not the punishment.

Kelley Sanborn – We’re still getting our money.

By consensus it was agreed to table any decision regarding the special education reserves.

 

Gail Marshall – The public forum in next Wednesday, November 14.  What are we going to do to promote attendance?  And how are we going to structure that meeting?  Discussion ensued regarding how to get the public to attend and who would handle getting the notices posted.  There is still a need to create a sense of urgency regarding this situation.  We also need to let people know that our legislators, or at least one of them, will be in attendance. 

Brian Hubbell – The purpose of the public forum is to let people know what we are doing, but what we hope to accomplish is some sort of support for the route we are taking.

Paul Murphy – There is more than one purpose.  It is informational but also to let the public know that the fact we are proceeding does not mean we have come to love this law.  Repeal is real and desirable.  This is an opportunity to let our legislators know the community is still up in arms about this matter.

Jeff Smith recommended that Bill Ferm moderate the public forum.  Rob Liebow could present first then Gail Marshall could discuss what we have done.

Amy Murphy – People really want to know how this will affect them and their taxes. Gail Marshall – We want people to see that the system we have now functions well, and to gain public support, we want to strive for revenue neutrality at least for now.   Regarding the repeal petition, it makes sense to lay back in our public approach to the repeal petition until we have had a chance to deal with the commissioner on the plan we want her to approve.

Paul Murphy thought it would be well worth taking a position regarding the repeal before the public forum and announcing it at the public forum so the legislators hear it.

MOVED by Paul Murphy and seconded by Skip Strong to support the repeal.

Brian Hubbell strongly disagreed.  This is not the job that we are here to do right now.  We are charged to make the best of this plan under the current law.  What happens with that is ultimately up to our voters.  If we take an official position and present it at the public forum we risk losing our potential leverage with legislators as allies and also risk taking our public voters and sidetracking them in such a way that they won’t be able to approve the plan if that ends up being what we are selling.

Phil Worden –  As individuals he thinks it is okay to support the repeal.  The fact that we are trying to make the best of it is totally consistent with what we have been doing. 

Jeff Smith  - We need to retain our credibility with the public.  Anything we can do to advance this legislation is good.  What if our plan is denied?  We are making the best of a bad situation, here is what we support, but we need to say we don’t agree and want the law repealed.

Paul Murphy agrees that there is tension between the work we are doing as a committee and taking a position on repeal.  Agreed with Jeff Smith that it is important for town folk and legislators to hear.

Bob Garland – Big cities may not be as intense about this issue as we are, but what sort of progress are they making in reaching 50% savings in the targeted areas?

Gail Marshall – Nobody has to do that.  They’re going to cut that out of EPS. 

Rob Liebow – They’re going to have to replace loss in state aid in categories that are cut by the state in order to operate as they are now.  They either have to cut services or raise additional savings.

Paul Murphy said that the savings are at state level, not the local level.

Bob Garland – The larger cities aren’t having a problem with this?

Gail Marshall – The larger communities are not the ones that are threatened by this, it is the small communities that are. Individually we can act as we please to support this repeal legislation or not, but from a purely political point of view, to support it does not help our position. 

Brian Hubbell – We have one opportunity to get a plan through which reflects what we want it to be that will revolve around December 1 and state responses.  Up until then, our best position is that we are fully cooperating with the law and because it allows us to do what we want and is best for our schools .  There will be plenty of time between December 1 and the time the legislature goes back into session to state our position.

Gail Marshall asked for a vote on the motion to take the position of supporting the repeal of the consolidation bill. 4 in favor 5 opposed.  To be revisited.

Amy Young suggested that at the Union 98 meeting the Union could make a resolution to support the repeal. Need to make distinction between Union 98 supporting this and not RPC.

Future Agenda Items – funding formula and upcoming legislative session

MOVED by Paul Murphy, seconded by Skip Strong and unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting at 9:07 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Selena Dunbar, Recording Secretary