A Danger to Avoid

 

     I would like to add my voice to the current debate regarding finding common ground on the State of Maine budget. There are many ways of finding common ground on this budget. The sticking point currently seems to be funding public education. I have written long before in previous posts about my position on a statewide teacher contract. It appears that this issue is a major negotiating item for Legislative approval of the budget. Governor LePage has come out and signaled his support of  the GOP proposal of piloting a statewide teacher contract as a way to find common ground on the budget. Ask yourself why he would support this. Because it would put negotiating teacher contracts under his political control (or whoever the governor may be). A statewide contract would not save money. In fact, it would likely add to the cost of education if all teachers in Maine were offered the same PROFESSIONAL salary and benefits. Or, in the alternative it would create yearly havoc in school departments across Maine because someone in Augusta would be willing to not negotiate in good faith. Create havoc - sounds familiar. It is exactly what Governor LePage, and now, President Trump, engages in. When systems are in turmoil, they are susceptible to devastation. Exactly what both LePage and Trump advocate. Reduce government by devastating the very institutions central to our way of life.

 

     I would hope that giving up local control of education and agreeing to even a pilot statewide teacher contract in Maine meets strong and continuous refusal. A statewide teacher contract would put education perilously close to the governor's control. This current governor is no friend of public education! His views on public education, as are the current federal views, are devastating public education. I hope the integrity of public education is supported in a way other than opening the door to a statewide teacher contract. Even if that means a statewide government shutdown. Public education is fundamental to our democratic way of life and is worth continued struggle to maintain it for the future. 



 

Children Need Healthcare

 

 

     As our federal representatives begin to debate the proposed GOP healthcare bill, let's remember that in order for children to do well in school they need to be healthy. The proposed bill cuts Medicaid funding which many families with children depend on for their healthcare, specifically 39% of all children and 76% of all poor children.

 

     And where will the money 'saved' go?  To tax cuts for insurance companies and the wealthy.

Obama said it well in his recent tweet: this bill will pave the way for a "massive transfer of wealth from middle class and poor families to the richest people in America".

 

     When we consider the transfers of money from the federal education budget and Medicaid, children will be hit hard in this next proposed federal budget.

 

     Unbelievable.





Looking Forward - And Backwards

 

 

     The citizens of Brunswick have voted to approve the School Department's 2018 budget (even with the uncertainty of the amount of state contribution) and to locally fund the building of a new elementary school to replace the old Coffin School. What do we have to look forward to now?

 

     While I believe a new elementary school is needed (and the junior high school also needs replacement and a new name to match the middle school philosophy), I hope the building plan is tweaked to maximize taxpayer investment. Recent citizen commentary has included a reflection of the building of the Harriet Beecher Stowe School in 2007. We can recall that conflicting ideas included whether that school was needed, but was approved following citizen and Maine DOE approval. However, the school department had to support its building proposal in response to a citizen initiated lawsuit which claimed the new school was not needed. While the lawsuit was dismissed, the size of that new school was reduced to save money. Fast forward to the present and that school is now overcrowded and cannot accommodate the current student population, let alone any future growth. The plans approved for the current new school that will replace Coffin does exactly the same thing. The building is built to one use only - as 2 smaller schools built out as wings separated by shared administrative space on the ground floor. The architect originally showed plans which included 2 stories with classrooms (music and art included), gym with stage area, cafeteria, community spaces and hallways on both levels with the shared administrative space on the ground floor. Looking to the long term future (of hopefully more than 40 years), this one use plan decreases flexibility in use and growth. The key phrase that was echoed time and again is 'small school'.  The plan literally divides the building in half with separate wings for separate small schools. The second floor was reduced to cut costs. Does this sound familiar?  Did we not learn from reducing the size of Harriet Beecher Stowe School?  Repeat: let's maximize taxpayer investment so we don't risk another overcrowded school in the future.

    

     While we are addressing overcrowded schools. In the future, the School Department also needs to have flexibility in using the buildings we currently have to address year to year fluctuations in school populations. Building schools with maximum flexibility factored in and then using them with flexible plans can save taxpayers from having to build new schools.  IF the sum total of school buildings in the school department is unable to accommodate a growing school population, then an addition to a school makes sense....if it has been designed that way from the beginning. Instead of adhering to a fixed mindset of how to build new schools and how the schools we have are used, there may come a time when a school and/or schools' population require us to move students around in the different schools. One of the choices offered to deal with the current overcrowding of both Coffin and Harriet Beecher Stowe schools was to move some of the second graders to Harriet Beecher and the fifth graders to the Junior High which the architect determined was underutilized.  It was loudly dismissed. There was also a muted undertone of converting the two elementary schools back to a kindergarten through fifth grade configuration. The ONLY way the School Board could come to agreement on a new school plan was to not talk about reconfiguring these schools ---- which will cost money to retrofit Harriet Beecher Stowe.. Stay tuned for the chorus of reconfiguring our elementary schools to begin. Reconfiguring for the sake of reconfiguring is unproductive and expensive. If reconfiguration talks begins anew, discussion of the fifth grade moving to the junior high should be included, perhaps easing some of the use issues at the elementary level.

 

     

 

Correction of Inaccurate Reporting

 

 

     Previously, on June 2 and June 4 I wrote about my concerns regarding the Brunswick School Department budget and my belief that a Pre-Kindergarten program that serves Brunswick preschool aged children should be operated by the Brunswick School Department and included in the budget rather than contracted out. It was reported in the local paper, The Times Record, that Cub Camp, would be offered but it would not be operated by the Brunswick School Department. I had encouraged those interested to contact the School Department Superintendent, Mr. Persanoski, and inquire why the Brunswick School Department would not operate this valuable, albeit abbreviated, program that research shows time and again produces positive results for those children who attend.

I visited Superintendent Persanoski today and asked him if the money to operate the summer program version of Cub Camp was included in the budget AND if the Brunswick School Department would operate it rather than contracting out this program.

I AM HAPPY TO SAY THAT SUPERINTENDENT PERSANOSKI ASSURED ME THAT THE MONEY TO OPERATE CUB CAMP IS IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET AS PRESENTED TO THE TOWN COUNCIL AND THE ONE THE PUBLIC WILL VOTE ON JUNE 13TH.


SUPERINTENDENT PERSANOSKI ALSO ASSURED ME THAT THIS PROGRAM WILL BE OFFERED AND OPERATED BY THE BRUNSWICK SCHOOL DEPARTMENT AND WILL NOT BE CONTRACTED OUT.

     This is good news and changes my vote. Even though I believe the final dollar amount for the School Department budget is less than adequate, I will support the budget. Even though I believe the Town Council overstepped its authority, I will support the budget and continue to educate the public about the very good reasons there is an independent separation between the School Board and the Town Council. Even though I believe the School Board should concentrate their efforts on working with the Superintendent to develop a yearly budget and develop policies that guide the direction of the school department and not try to get cozy with the Town Council and politicize decisions, I will support this budget. Even though I would like the School Department to move more quickly on developing policies and practices that offer equity and quality programs and services to ALL students enrolled, I will support this budget.

I also hope that the Town Council looks back into the historical records to see that after a period of keeping tax rates 'low', inevitably a back log of needs is created and tax rates increase to meet the needs of the citizens in town. You can find the historical tax records on the Town of Brunswick website in the Assessing Department under 'Notices, Documents, and Forms'. You might be surprised to see that in 2016 Brunswick's effective tax rate was $20.54 and has been climbing from a $13.32 rate since 2006.  Compare this to Brunswick's effective tax rate of $28.83 in 1970 with 6 years of higher tax rates in the $24, $26, $27 range.

Sooner or later, tax rates 'right' themselves when a town's political body operates on a 'keep the tax rate to no more than 2% mentality'. We still have a ways to go before we match the 1970 rate of $28.83. And many many pent up needs in this town that have been accumulating during those years of lower tax rates.

You Get What You Pay For



 

     The Brunswick School Department budget is on its way to the voters. Residents of Brunswick will decide, yes or no, if they support the budget the town council approved after the town council demanded a $1.3 million reduction in the school budget while increasing the town budget $1,060,145 (4.7% increase).

 

 

     There are various reasons to reject this budget. Some town citizens believe the school budget is too high and should be rejected. Another reason is because the budget is too low and it cuts too deeply into programming and services; and unfair due to a difference of opinion of how any additional state school subsidy will be spent. Another reason is because there is a perception that the Town Council's actions are punitive toward the School Board. There were continuing comments from councilors that 'although they cannot tell the School Board how to spend its money, they can say how much is allocated to the school department'. (Wrong - the voters of Brunswick actually decide this.) Additional comments this year extended to how the school department salaries are too high compared to town employee salaries and 'we have stacks of school documents to prove that'. (Does this sound like line item meddling? This year's public airing was about salaries and contracts; last year it was paving of the high school parking lot.) A third reason to vote against this budget, my reason, is because there is a reduction in student support programs/services and one of those services is being contracted out to a community agency. The beginning of a slippery slope.

 

 

     The Brunswick community has taken great pride in its educational program for many years. Boasting occurs each year around graduation time about the colleges graduates will attend, many out of state and private. Many accolades are given to the students who challenge themselves and take Advanced Placement courses and are enrolled in gifted and talents classes. Admittedly, great accomplishments. But beneath these positive statements lies the fact that these opportunities (in small classes) were available to some while other students have not always received the educational support needed for them to be successful in maximizing their potential. Over the past six or seven years, a coherent and consistent student support system has been researched and begun to be put into practice. Each year, even through tough budget years, these services and the staff to provide them have been incrementally initiated and included in the budget. (Usually not by adding new staff but by redirecting money from retired teachers to the new initiatives.) The goal is to have these support services available at all schools in Brunswick to quickly and effectively address all students' academic and social needs to promote ongoing achievement, rather than failure, moving closer and closer to graduation day. Each of Brunswick's schools are making progress in their ability to offer these student support services. 

 

     A Pre-kindergarten program has been researched and identified as a goal for about 8 years. The research is clear that a high quality Pre-kindergarten experience produces positive results in addressing social and achievement gaps. Space and budget limitations have prevented this from happening. In order to move this goal forward, inch by inch while waiting for a new school to be built, a summer program at Coffin School called Cub Camp began two years ago for incoming kindergarteners who already have identified social and/or academic gaps. Cub Camp was offered at Coffin School where they will attend, familiarizing them (and their parents) with the school campus, school routines, school staff and new children who will become classmates. Each child enrolled participated in activities that will not only make a new school environment familiar and less intimidating, but also begin to address the social and academic skills they are behind in.

 

     But this year, there was not enough money to operate Cub Camp during this summer. It is reported that the program will be contracted out and provided by a community agency. The little money that was allocated for it will be paid to this community agency. Contracting out support services that are integral to the educational mission of our schools, in my opinion, continues the inequity that has existed in the Brunswick schools for a very long time. It also is dangerous because it creates a segregated path for students right at the beginning of their school experience, the path that has been separate from those students in gifted/talented classes and Advanced Placement courses.

 

     Segregated and unequal school experiences that are supported by an inadequate budget is the most important reason to reject this budget. Many years ago Plessy vs Ferguson found separate, but equal was illegal. Please say no to this budget so the Town Council will begin to realize that a comprehensive education, not just a basic template plan that gets us through this year and ensuing years so we can also have a new school, is in the best interests of ALL students.  Please say no to this budget so the School Board will realize that their responsibility is to identify, with the help of the school department, a budget that supports a comprehensive education that meets all students' needs.

 

     The efforts at collaboration with the Town Council over the past several years were naïve and counterproductive. A Town Council that is over-controlling and bitter about the legitimate separation between them and the School Board only has continued to erode the public confidence in the schools. There is good reason that there is an independent School Board separate from a Town Council. There is good reason that a School Board works with school department staff to identify a comprehensive education program rather than the basic education that the EPI school funding formula allocates dollars to.  

 

Why Outsource Brunswick's PreK Program?

 

 

A June 2, 2017 Times Record article reported that enough money has been raised locally in Brunswick to run a summer Cub Camp.  This is a Pre-K program for preschool aged students who are identified as 'needing extra attention' in social and/or academic areas to get them ready for entering kindergarten. In previous years, Brunswick used federal money to operate this program run by the Brunswick School Department and staffed by Brunswick School department staff. This year reductions in federal money jeopardized the continuance of the program, which required $21,000 to operate during the summer. (A summer program was the precursor to a full fledged Pre-K program which has been waiting for implementation because there is no space in our schools during the school year to operate it until a new school is built.) A community group offered to fundraise to supplement the $10,000 the School Board allocated for the program in the Brunswick School Department budget. Space and budget limitations have now been addressed: the $21,000 has been identified and space in the school buildings is available during the summer.

 

BUT WAIT!  The Times article also indicates that the program will no longer be a Brunswick School program, but rather operated by another entity. We need to know more details. Why won't this Pre-K program be continued to be offered by trained staff through the Brunswick School Department? Previously, there was some interest by a School Board member to have a community program deliver the program. This School Board member is also a board member of said community program in question. Sounds like a conflict of interest to me. Why transfer public dollars to a community program?

 

Before we vote on the budget, let's be sure that our tax dollars are used appropriately. Ask the Superintendent why Cub Camp is no longer a Brunswick School Department program. I will be asking that very same question of him. I will not vote for a budget that outsources critical student support services to community agencies unqualified and unable to provide a complete, coherent set of student support services and highly trained personnel to children who require them to prepare them for kindergarten entry. I will not vote for a budget that uses public tax dollars in a way that doesn't allow for program oversight and evaluation. And I especially will not vote for a budget that is built on a conflict of interest of individual Board members.