Sunday, March 26, 2017

A Historical View of Brunswick Taxes 


Who likes to pay taxes? Who likes to benefit from the services taxes enable us to have? Just rhetorical questions. We probably would get many different answers.

As we move into budget development season, I thought it might be interesting to investigate the historical tax rates in Brunswick. It turns out this information is readily available on the town of Brunswick's website. For those as interested as I am, the link above will take you to this data.

Budget development begins in Brunswick with a poll of town councilors about their comfort level with any tax increase.  Comments range from, "I'm not comfortable with anything over 2%" to "We might be able to do 2.5%" ..... or 3%". In other words, comfort levels are all over the place. Let's take a look at the historical tax data.

A look at the tax rate at 10-year intervals (using available data on the website):
1967    $24.60
1977    $17.50
1987    $15.12
1997    $18.00
2007    $13.32
2016    $20.54

What might we learn? That when rates are kept low for long periods of time, it is inevitable that cumulative unmet needs don't go away and rates begin to increase. High rates right themselves over time and low rates right themselves over time.

A look at the lowest and highest rates:
1989    $12.96
1970    $28.83

What might we learn? That our current tax rate is not the highest, nor lowest tax rate in the history of Brunswick. .

A look at the highest rates during a continuous 8-year period of time:
1974    $22.16
1973    $23.77
1972    $27.00
1971    $28.25
1970    $28.83
1969    $26.56
1968    $23.76
1967    $24.60
The rates for this 10 year period coincides with decreasing property valuation from 95% to 55%.

What might we learn? That Brunswick's 2016 tax rate of $20.54 is increasingly approaching the rates of an 8-year continuous period from 1967-1974, during which the tax rates were the highest (using available data). 

A look at the average rates during 10-year time periods:
1967-77    $25.97  (decreasing % valuation from 95% to 57%)
1978-88    $18.59  (variable % valuation ranging from 61% to 100%;  100% occurring in 1988)
1989-99    $17.89  (variable % valuation ranging from 84% to 95%)
2000-10    $17.49  (100% valuation in 2000 then variable valuation to 60%)
2011-16    $18.53  (variable % valuation ranging from 66%-70%)

What patterns are there? As property valuation decreases, tax rates increase. Perhaps the completion of the current property revaluation will reduce tax rates as has occurred in the past? What might we project for the next 4 years? Perhaps 2017 is the beginning of a multi-year period of  tax rates that will decrease somewhat AND also be stabilized. Brunswick may need to consider the number of projects that have been delayed for a number of years.  Let's hope these next years will be the beginning of a period during which the people of Brunswick will take care of its citizens, employees, schools and other buildings, roads, landfills, and all the other needs that have been slowly accumulating to the point that action is required sooner rather than later. Perhaps a higher, but stable year over year tax rate is better so needs can be met as they arise rather than keeping tax rates variably low, only to spike when the unmet needs have reached an unmanageable level.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

ALL Students, Not Just Some    

     In a recent March 15 post, I discussed a comment made during a Brunswick's School Board meeting public comment period. The commenter vaguely claimed that a program that was responsible for producing the success of Brunswick Junior High math team had been eliminated. I found that claim unsettling. I know that there have been budget years where financial/program choices must be made, but I did not recall that math teams nor other programs offering enrichment  had been eliminated. Upon further fact finding, it appears that there have been no talent program, nor extracurricular math activity elimination. Rather, the gifted/talented program in Brunswick's schools has been expanded.  A more inclusive talent program in broader areas of talent is now available to all K-12 students. Student eligibility is assessed each year in attempt to identify ALL students whose needs change over time. Giftedness/talent can appear in more areas than academic areas. Brunswick schools are home to some highly talented students in the Arts and Music areas as well as the academic areas. Thus, an expanded Learning and Enrichment in the Arts and Academics program has been developed and is now available to eligible students. I can envision a Brunswick School Department Visual Arts and Performing Academy, can you?  We can dream. But back to the topic of this post.

    Currently, student's verbal, mathematical, and non-verbal talents are assessed using multiple measures, including teacher observation and recommendation. All eligible students are offered Talent Development programming during the school day. At the Brunswick Junior High School, there continues to be a 6th grade Math Team, a 7th grade Math Team, an 8th grade Math Team, and an 8th grade Math Counts Team. These teams meet before/after school. All of the math teams "learn and practice new math concepts in preparation for local and state competitions".  In the Math Counts team, "all students interested in challenging written and oral competitions can participate.  The top four scorers at the State Final Meet win a trip to the National Competition".

I am glad Brunswick offers this expanded gifted/talented enrichment program. It creates the opportunity for ALL students to expand their horizons. That is what public school is all about. ALL students, not just some.

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

 
The Truth
 
 
     At the recent March 8, 2017 School Board meeting, a member of the public praised the well deserved achievements of Brunswick Junior High's math team. The math team had competed state wide and WON! Recognition and celebration time for the students, teachers, and parent volunteers!
 

 
     In addition to the praise within this announcement, was a claim that the program that inspired and produced these 'mathathletes' has been eliminated which will now negatively affect these, and future, students.  Let's have more details rather than just warning about dire circumstances that might happen IF a program has been eliminated. What program was allegedly eliminated? Was it really eliminated or do a few parents not have total control of something they once had?  Will this parent group try to reassert themselves now that a new school board has been seated? 
 
     I have questions. Do you?

Sunday, March 5, 2017

 
Waterfront Public Park or Sell?
 
 
 
 
 
     At the beginning of this post I will acknowledge citizen right to petition their government/elected officials. We can also ask ourselves why anyone would waste their time serving in an elected capacity if the petition process is overused. There are likely many different views to the question, "When does the use of petition become 'governing by petition' and when is that not in the best interest of taxpayers? 
 
     A controversy has developed in Brunswick over the fate of a tax acquired waterfront property. The Town Council has voted to sell the property for the highest price, reasoning the best use of the property is for it to be back on the tax rolls generating revenue for the town of Brunswick. A group of citizens has petitioned the Town Council to reverse their vote and let the citizens of the town decide whether to sell or retain the property. The petitioners reasoned that the waterfront property should be kept by the town and the creation of a public waterfront park should follow. The Town Council has proceeded to prepare the property for sale and return it to the tax rolls. During the public participation period of  the February 21, 2017 Town Council meeting, one of the supporters for the town retaining the property announced that a group of citizens has hired a lawyer and will be filing suit against the town for denying citizens their right to petition.
 
     Does anyone see this ending positively without spending dwindling tax dollars? I am curious how a larger, broader number of Brunswick citizens view this issue. The link at the top of the page is a very quick survey (using the Monkey Survey platform) that aims to gather the views of a larger number of Brunswick citizens about this issue. The petition presented the views of a 'pro' public waterfront park. During the course of this issue, there have been many verbal conversations, public participation at Town Council meetings, letters to the editors, for both a 'support for retaining the property' and 'support for selling the property and return it to the tax rolls'. 
 
 
     What say you? Please share your views. I will write the results of the survey sometime after
April 15.  Yes, that date was intentional :).

Thursday, March 2, 2017

 
Governor Paul LePage's Budget Proposal
 
 
     Among other questionable proposals in his budget, Governor LePage has proposed eliminating state reimbursement for what is referred to in budget documents as System Administration costs. This budget area includes salaries and benefits for superintendents, assistant superintendents, school system support/secretarial staff, school boards stipends, business managers and payroll and accounts payable staff, legal and insurance liability services, and office and professional supplies. Instead the state will provide funds for what is being called 'regional education service agencies' (ESA's) that schools can contract with for these services. Currently, there are no ESAs in Maine. How will school districts be able to contract with an entity that does not exist? Will he bring in out of state entities (private businesses that will gladly accept Maine taxpayer money?) Do the people of Maine even want to give up local control of their schools? The Maine Department of Education should not serve the function of an ESA - there is no leadership there. For most of LePage's tenure there has been no permanent leader of this department of state government. He only recently has been able to convince someone to fill this position 'permanently'. Remember when he declared that he would appoint himself to this position and be the Governor AND the Commissioner of the Department of Education?
 
     Governor LePage has also proposed a statewide teacher's contract.  The only way a statewide contract might work was if there was a centralized body which could negotiate it and support it. Is there such a centralized entity?  Absent this entity, the Department of Education should not be the one to negotiate a statewide contract as long as Governor LePage is in office. This is just a ruse to weaken the teacher's union. It is his way of trying to exert authoritarian control. His actions to date related to all unions within the state have been attempts to 'bust the unions'. Unions offer checks and balances against CEOs who have reckless regard for workers' rights. Governor LePage's actions and shameful behavior have shown that he falls into this category.
 
     I have previously written in a November 2 "Blue Ribbon Commission' blog about New York state's Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) which provide shared educational services to school districts across the state of NY.  Included in that blog are links to this and other related information. Also recall Governor LePage's historical rants during the beginning of his first term in office in which he threatened to get rid of, in any way he could, superintendents, local school boards, and the teachers union who he perceived as getting in his way of accomplishing his goals. Having an entity similar to BOCES does exactly that. Superintendents in NY are hired by the BOCES, but only after the approval of the State Commissioner of Education. They work 1/2 time for local issues and half time carrying out state initiatives under the direction of the State Commissioner of Education. When a Superintendent leaves (or is fired for not achieving state initiatives?), the State Commissioner of Education 'studies' the local unit(s) the Superintendent was in charge of and determines whether or not the local unit(s) still require the services of a Superintendent or whether the unit can be combined with another BOCES unit. This process has usually led to further consolidation with other BOCES units, resulting in decreasing local control and increasing state control.  Has a BOCES system achieve significant cost savings and increase student achievement in New York? At one of the Blue Ribbon Commission meetings, a BOCES representative stated that had not been studied. A look at the www.data.nysed.gov website shows similar patterns of student achievement as here in Maine, ie. students from low income/disadvantaged backgrounds show lower levels of achievement; students of non-white cultural backgrounds show lower levels of achievement (except Asian/native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islanders students); and graduation rates that follow the same pattern as Maine's graduation rate.

     Let us remember that Maine's student achievement level is higher than our nation's average. Our dilemma is the achievement gap in students who come from low income, disadvantaged backgrounds, and/or have special education needs. Our primary Maine problem is children/families living in poverty. The number of families living in poverty is increasing in Maine. This means that the number of children who are arriving in schools with social and achievement gaps is increasing. Schools alone can't solve this poverty problem, Mr. Governor. (And Mr. Trump. And Ms. DeVos. And Mr.  Sessions.) Social stratification is directly affected by government policy. We have seen our state government policy leaning toward favoring business and those extremely wealthy. This further exacerbates social stratification and the issues it brings. Governor LePage boasts that his actions have created a rainy day fund in the millions and another fund in the billions. And how has he accomplished this? By removing the very people who are living in and near the poverty level from the support services they need, which pushes them further into poverty.  Many schools departments will tell you they have had to create additional support services for children and families to address the needs of all children.
 
     I don't trust Governor LePage. None of his actions related to education (nor the general welfare of people) to date have provided the support and leadership that Maine's educational system deserve. You only have to look to his current budget proposal that undoes Maine voter's support of Question #2 that would result in increased educational funding for Maine's schools. He flouts his disdain for the democratic process and acts like a dictator. He may have been able to act like that when he worked at Marden's, but now as Governor his bullying tactics will not work. A strong teacher's union will stand up to him, to protect students' and teachers' rights. A strong School Board's Association will stand up to him to protect local control of education and to choose/supervise our own superintendents. Concerned citizens will stand up to him. We are watching closely.
 
     In order for his proposed ESA's to work, they have to be fully functioning now. This is fundamental. Local school budgets are being developed now. Fiscal year 2018 begins July 1, 2017.  That is only 4 months away. To have regional ESAs fully functioning by then is ludicrous. The use of Maine's ESAs have been described as "voluntary regionalization" as compared to the forced regionalization that occurred across Maine under the Baldacci administration. That regionalization did not result in the cost savings we all were told it would achieve. It is naïve to think this type of voluntary regionalization/collaboration can be functional within months. It is disingenuous because cost sharing is already happening between schools. Regional special education programs already exist.
 
     In 2014, Governor LePage gave his cabinet level political appointees and other top level managers a raise, saying they were being underpaid and that the pay raise would help attract talented professionals.  Each one of these managers now earn $127,878 a year. The only exception was the interim Department of Education commissioner. Why does he criticize the fact that many superintendents are overpaid when he, as a 'CEO' has recognized that salaries and benefits have to reasonably compensate people?  And why did he single out the Department of Education to not receive the raise? Regardless of where and what the job is, professionals, superintendents included, deserve a professional salary and to be treated with professional courtesy rather than derision.

     His budget proposal is just another way, with different words, for him to continue his rant against superintendents and local school boards. Tell him, "No, thank you."
 
    
 
     

Wednesday, March 1, 2017

 
Wearing White
 
 
     Did you see all the women wearing white last night at President Trump's speech? Making a statement for women's rights is as easy as choosing your favorite white apparel. Whatever your style - it's all good, white makes a statement.