Searles says ‘No’ to RSU

Editor:

Very soon we will be going to the polls to cast our ballots on some very important matters, not the least is the plan we are being asked to approve regarding the formation of the new RSU. I will not be voting in favor of this plan. This plan is glaringly unfair to the taxpayers of Kennebunk and I cannot support it. A plan that has been rejected by the Dept. of Ed. three times now, the latest but a few days ago. I have been informed that the last refusal has to do with the action that identifies cost savings. There are no cost savings, not a penny’s worth. There will be cost increases.

All along we have been told that the committee was ‘working hard’ to formulate a plan that is fair to all 3 communities involved. If this is so then ask yourself why does Kennebunk receive a tax increase for the over EPS funding while Arundel and Kennebunkport receive a tax decrease? The 60/40 percent split could have and should have been set to create a 0 percent increase or decrease across the board. Remember that in the name of fairness a 50/50 split was proposed. As I recall from following the meetings the 50/50 split was thought best because it ‘looked’ fair and ‘sounded’ fair. The current 60/40 split was adopted only after your Selectmen refused to sign off on 50/50.

We are being told how important it is to approve this plan to avoid a huge penalty from the State. That to me translates into a simple refusal to pare the budget to avoid a tax increase for our taxpayers. It is not too far of a stretch to compare this line to a scare tactic. There is time for another vote, short perhaps but the time is there. The current combined Arundel/SAD71 over EPS cost is $6,835,113. This looks like a good place to start to me. I would suggest that is where it all comes from. When economic times are as tough as we are entering now the portion of the budget that we are NOT required by law to provide is the logical beginning point.

Why has Wells not been brought back into this picture? If we are being forced by the heavy hands in Augusta to accomplish a consolidation then Wells is the logical choice. The original law has been altered to alleviate the harsh penalty’s that became apparent when this was first approached. When I asked about this the answer given amounted to that would be too hard, we don’t want to. That is not what was said but it is what was meant, that was plain enough to me.

The law as written demands current contracts be honored. OK. So that means my fellow taxpayers that we are going to help Arundel pay the cost of sending students to another district because that is where they want them to go. Even while we have enough empty space in our current facilities to house the third armored division. Talk about wasting funds. In this situation it is only fair that any tax burden being caused by this situation be fully covered by the town creating it. This cost should be paid to the RSU by the town causing it and those funds should be used to offset a tax increase it might cause another town.

It also means that we are going to help pay the salary increases required to bring the other districts salary levels up to ours. And there’s another large budget increase, even if the increase is phased in over a few years – if that’s even legally allowed. I feel the school closing restrictions are unfair to Kennebunk. The law as written already deals with this. Why do we need to have a special plan? All I can see this section of the plan doing is forcing us to pay for facilities that we do not need in consideration of the all the empty space we pay for now.

I ask you to consider these few thoughts when you read how urgent it is that this plan passes. Or a friend tells you, or you hear it on our local channel five broadcasts. I for one am just not buying it. There is time to hold another vote on an improved plan. Any penalty can be covered through budget cuts. Making it up over time through teacher attrition is not acceptable; it must be completed in one year’s budget cycle. This entire consolidation policy, from the day it was conceived in Augusta has not and is not “about the children”. It is about the taxpayer. It is about controlling cost now, not next week. I can’t afford any more $30 million budgets and neither can anyone I know personally.

Can you?

I am voting no on the RSU plan. I want a plan that is fair to Kennebunk.

Al Searles

Kennebunk Selectman

Selectmen lay out RSU facts

Editor:

[An open letter from the Kennebunk Board Of Selectmen to the voters: Forming the new Regional School Unit Kennebunk, Kennebunkport and Arundel]

The Kennebunk Board of Selectmen has been closely following the RPC (Regional Planning Committee) in developing the RSU (Regional School Unit) reorganization plan. As you may be aware, our community has already absorbed an annual $2.3 million shift in school cost to Kennebunk taxpayers (approximately $1.25 on our tax rate), so our attention to this matter has been very keen.

The upcoming vote on November 4th will be your first opportunity to approve the plan. The plan is available at the MSAD 71 web site (http://www.msad71.net). If this plan is not approved by the MSAD 71 voters as a whole (Kennebunk and Kennebunkport combined), then the planning committee will reconvene to re-work the plan and another vote will be required before January 30, 2009.

As you decide on the plan submitted, we recommend you consider the following points:

Why you are voting on this RSU plan. In 2007 and 2008, the Maine Legislature and Governor John Baldacci created new laws requiring most school districts and towns to consolidate into new regional school units containing at least 2,500 students. Currently, MSAD 71 has approximately 2,244 students, and Arundel has 623 students, for a combined total of 2,867 students. (Maine State law 20-A M.R.S.A. Section 1461)

If the RSU plan passes: Kennebunk’s estimated minimum additional annual costs increase. Based on the current plan and information discussed publicly by the RPC for the new RSU, the Selectmen believe Kennebunk’s minimum additional annual cost increase to form the RSU is between $147,000 and $267,000.

The average taxpayer owning property valued at $285,000 may see an increase to his or her taxes of $23 to $41 per year.

This assumes the following:

1. There will be a $147,000 cost shift increase to Kennebunk based on the new cost sharing formula. Part of the new formula was endorsed by this Board.

2. There will be additional costs to bring Arundel’s school staff into parity with the MSAD 71 staff. The net cost to Kennebunk could be at least $120,000. This is a conservative estimate expected to be phased in during a period of time to be determined. (See Sections 12 and 13-B of the Reorganization Plan)

If the RSU plan fails Kennebunk’s estimated additional annual cost increase. If voters do not approve a plan by January 30, 2009, then the school partnership between Kennebunk and Kennebunkport will continue. Based on current State law and information discussed publicly by the RPC, Kennebunk’s additional annual cost increase to not-approve the RSU formation is at least $1,221,000.

The average taxpayer owning property valued at $285,000 may see an increase to his or her taxes of at least $187 per year.

This assumes the following:

1. There will be a $739,000 cost shift increase to Kennebunk due to a harsher State-imposed cost-sharing formula with Kennebunkport.

2. There will be penalties levied by the State for not forming the RSU (in the form of reduced State aid for education). The annual penalty to Kennebunk is estimated to be $482,000. These penalties may increase each year). Please note that many questions remain if the RSU plan has not been voter-approved by the State’s deadline of January 30, 2009. (See Section 12 of the Reorganization Plan and Maine State law 20-A M.R.S.A. Section 15696, and the Dept of Education, www.maine.gov/education/reorg/planning.html) The new RSU board of directors. In the RSU plan, the Board will be made up of 12 members with weighted votes.

Kennebunk: Population (2006 Census estimate) 11,505, six board members, 98 votes per member, 588 total votes (58.8 percent), Estimated cost sharing (FY08-09 Budgets and Sec 13-B of the Plan) is 64.2 percent.

Kennebunkport: Population 4,021, three board members, 68 votes per member, 204 total votes (20.4 percent), Estimated cost sharing is 23.4 percent.

Arundel: Population 4,068, RSU three board members, 69 votes per member, 207 total votes ( 20.7 percent), Estimated cost sharing is 12.4 percent.

By law, the allocation of votes is based on each town’s census. See Sections 3 and 13-B of the Reorg. Plan.

School Closure: The RSU plan (which agrees with State law) requires a 2/3 supermajority vote of the RSU Board to close a school. If the RSU Board votes to close Arundel’s Mildred L. Day School or Kennebunkport’s Consolidated School, the cost-sharing formula changes such that Kennebunk’s annual costs would increase an additional $744,000, while Kennebunkport would have an annual cost decrease of $585,000, and Arundel would have an annual cost decrease of $159,000. (See Sections 13-B of the Reorganization Plan and Maine State law 20-A M.R.S.A. Section 15688(3-A))

No cost savings to Kennebunk. As stated in the RSU plan (Section 12) dated October 3, 2008: There are no projected cost savings anticipated for either the RSU or for the local taxpayer.

MSAD 71 is contributing all of its land to the new RSU. MSAD 71 owns over 170 acres in five parcels around Kennebunk, on which four schools sit. Much of this land is used as athletics fields for the students, as well as for the residents of MSAD 71. Any future sales of any excess land would benefit the three towns in the RSU.

Potential benefits of creating the new RSU:

Avoid on-going penalties from the State if the RSU is not created (through reduced State

aid for education).

Possible long-term cost-reduction through consolidation of similar duties and positions We strongly recommend you read the complete RSU Reorganization Plan most recently submitted to the Department of Education. The plan is available at the MSAD 71 web site (http://www.msad71.net).

Email us your opinion at rsu@kennebunkmaine.us.

Chairman Wayne Berry, Daniel Boothby, Robert Higgins, Albert Searles, Thomas Wellman

Kennebunk Board of Selectmen

RSU: No good for taxpayers

Editor:

The upcoming vote on whether or not the towns of Kennebunk, Kennebunkport and Arundel should form the proposed RSU is mostly a win-win situation for the state and a lose-lose situation for many local property taxpayers. The School Reorganization Plan, initiated by the Governor and passed by the legislature, really involves the state getting out of its responsibilities and passing them on to the local property taxpayers.

The state never properly funded education costs with its many mandates and now it is passing on what will become constant increases in future education costs to many local districts. Looking at the flyer, just released by the Kennebunk Board of Selectmen, it is obvious that for the residents of Kennebunk to approve the new RSU will add extra taxes to Kennebunk residents and not to join will add even more taxes to Kennebunk residents through penalties imposed by the state for not joining. What a hoax our Governor and legislators have perpetrated on the taxpayers.

Look for future attempts at shifting costs away from the state to local taxpayers too as the legislature’s inability to stop spending continues. To the Democrat Party, which controls the state government, I say enough is enough. If you are going to insist on new programs then enact the taxes to pay for them so the people can see what is really going on.

James K. McMahon

Kennebunk

Reject an RSU for Arundel and MSAD 71

Editor:

The State legislation on RSU’s was intended to reduced the number of School districts in Maine, reducing local administrations costs and as a result, reduce property taxes.

In November, we will be asked to vote on forming an RSU for these two districts. Per the RSU planning groups proposal to the State, I quote, “There are no identified cost savings. This will be a hard sale to our constituents.” Further quote “There will be no identified cost savings due to contract obligations this consolidation will cost us money.” Specifically “$700,000 to raise salaries in Arundel to the level of MSAD 71” as per state law.

In the RSU discussions, what became clear was that Arundel, probably runs the most cost effective system in the State, with only a K thru 5 school of their own. Their Middle and High School students are tuitioned out to other districts at a much lower cost per student then experienced at MSAD 71.

The Arundel district has minimal administrative costs, largely limited to a part time superintendent, Arundel has nothing to gain through consolidation, and would only relinquish their local control in maintaining a quality, affordable, education for their children.

MSAD 71 voters would be well to reject this consolidation, and explore an Alternate Organizational Structure with Wells/Ogunquit, that would allow separate, school boards, budgets, and combine administrative functions that would meet the State objective of reducing costs and property taxes.

Edward Geoghan

Kennebunk