District folds; Does the DOE hold all the cards?

Perhaps you read the front-page article in last week's (December 6) Piscataquis Observer, "SAD46 airs new school design." In a report on the November 28 Informational Meeting (see our reports here, here, and here), there was particular attention paid to those aspects of the design separating the different grade levels:
Blatt said the neighborhoods were designed to create small groups within the school, much like the old district elementary schools which had small class sizes.
Separating the various grades will also prevent "the big and little kids from mixing," said Blatt. He added that the school will have two front entrances, with one for grades sixth through eight and the other for younger students so contact between the different ages groups is reduced further. The two doors will also help to prevent crowding in the lobby which is "contrary to the schools these students are coming from." One door will be locked during the school day as an added measure of security.
Then Friday (December 8) the Bangor Daily News brought us "SAD 46 to revise entrances to proposed school":
Having separate entrances in the proposed new SAD 46 elementary-middle school for younger and older pupils seemed like a good idea to local people, but to state education officials it spelled trouble.
It was the only significant change in the concept plan requested by the Department of Education in a recent meeting, according to SAD 46 Superintendent Kevin Jordan.
In view of incidents that have occurred at others schools in the nation, state officials felt it would be harder to monitor the comings and goings if there were two entrances, Jordan said Thursday.
Otherwise, state officials are "very happy" with the concept plan, Jordan said. "It fits the vision of the state of Maine's education consolidation," he said.
Undoubtedly this was discussed at Wednesday's School Board meeting, which was attended by yours truly, but it must have been discussed after the Executive Session. I'll not be so easily sent away next time.
What are the lessons of this story about the turnaround on separate entrances?
First, and probably most importantly, the situation is still fluid; many of the details of the school plan can still be changed. Despite official intransigence, locals can still influence the outcome. That is, of course, unless the state holds all the cards, and the locals hold none?
Second, now that the two-entrance design has been overruled by the state, does the rationale for separating different ages vanish?
Third, isn't it remarkable how the architect justifies aspects of the new school concept by appropriating the virtues of the older, soon-to-be-closed schools? We verge here into "newspeak" territory!