Contact info for legislators:
   http://www.maine.gov/portal/government/edemocracy/lookup_officials.php

Background: Maine Municipal Assn's Legislative Bulletin for April 13, 2007:
   http://www.memun.org/public/MMA/svc/SFR/Publications/LB/2007/4-13-07.pdf (*.pdf) [*.htm version]

WHAT WE NEED FROM OUR LEGISLATORS

1. TIME:  More time to develop a cooperative process that is most likely to produce costs savings in education without the destructive disruption and uncertain probability of savings in the current proposals, while retaining the Maine tradition of local control over schools and school-related taxes.
2. HEARING:  A public hearing on whatever bill comes out of the Appropriations committee, before it is voted on by the Legislature.
3. KILL THE BILL:  Strong leadership (and a vote) against any bill (i.e., any budget) that includes the level of consolidation and removal of local control present in the Appropriations proposals/bill.
4. TAME DOE:  Any future role for the Department of Education in such efforts must require partnership and cooperation with local entities to be effective.

REASONS YOU MIGHT MENTION IN SUPPORT OF THESE DEMANDS

1. RADICAL:  The legislative proposals so far have been radical revisions, not carefully developed plans.
2. INAPPROPRIATE FORMAT:  Educational reform should not be presented as part of a budget, since it confuses financial and educational issues and prevents a public vote on any proposal.
3. NO CRISIS:  While there may be a crisis in state finances, there is no demonstrated crisis in education or its cost that justifies radical action -- that is,
1. COSTS:  There is serious question as to whether the allegedly excessive costs are higher higher than those in comparable states.
2. EDUCATION:  Overall educational quality in Maine is nationally acknowledged to be high in the ranks of states.
3. TIME:  There is no functional need for the 14-month compressed time frame being proposed, and much past experience to indicate that such rushed programs yield bad results.
4. NO DATA:  No statistically-sound reality-based data has been provided that significant savings would be realized by the type of consolidation being proposed.
5. ONE SIZE FITS NONE:  The natures of school districts in Maine diverge wildly, and no one-size-fits-all plan can work effectively in such a situation -- problems need to be identified where they exist, and fixed by appropriate means.
6. NO LOCAL INVOLVEMENT:  The consolidation proposals have been conceived by people with no first-hand knowledge of what is or isn't working well, and no input from those "on the ground" who do have such knowledge.
7. ANTI-DEMOCRATIC:  The proposals cause an unacceptable shift in school and tax control from towns to larger, more distant entities and to the state, with no local vote of ratification permitted.
8. THEFT:  The proposals rob towns of their physical investment in schools, while leaving them saddled with the debt incurred in making an investment they no longer own.
9. BLEEDING DRY:  The combination of loss of local control and an EPS-maximum funding formula will cause a truly drastic reduction in service in, and likely closing of, many schools.
10. DOE PROBLEM:  The Department of Education has a history of making arbitrary mandatory decisions that turn out to be useless or destructive, decisions that would have been made differently if they'd consulted the knowledgeable people on the ground.
11. LOCAL ECONOMIC IMPACT:  If teaching and administrative staffs are suddenly reduced, there is bound to be an economic impact. More drastically, if the new regional school board decides that a particular school can't be run "efficiently," it can elect to close that school.