Observer Letter: SAD 46 new school on 'fast track'
The following letter appeared in the December 27 issue of the Piscataquis Observer.
To the Editor,
The MSAD #46 Board of Directors is trying to "fast track" the referendum vote for a new pre-K-8 proposed school facility in Dexter. The local school board chairman and others claim that an early March vote is necessary in order to satisfy the State requirements for a timeline. There are at least two facts that make it obvious that the Board has decided the referendum date for its own purposes.
In documents titled "Legal Aspects of School Construction Referenda", by Richard A. Spencer, Esq. of Drummond, Woodsum, and McMahon, and dated November 16, 2006, the "Timing Requirements" include "Concept approval must be obtained in designated calendar year," and "Referendum must be conducted within six months of concept approval." It is important to note that the District leaders are misleading you to believe that a June referendum is beyond the timeline set by the State.
The towns of Garland, Exeter, and Ripley all have annual town meetings in March, requiring extensive budget and warrant preparations, year-end audits, Town Report printings, etc. A new school referendum in early March would foreclose the opportunity to have community discussions with school officials at the annual meetings. It also severely limits the time in which voters can consider the impact of the decision. Even the words of the MSAD #46 Chairman, John Parola, in concluding the recent (December 20, 2006) Concept Plan Hearing in Exeter, "We have a lot of work to do," prove the need to take the time allowed by planning a June, rather than a early March vote.
Furthermore, there is a financial impact, and while the Superintendent has stated that the District will pay for the additional referendum costs, it shouldn't be necessary to point out that the District's funds come from taxpayers. Since the District already holds its budget referendum in early June, this date should be used for the new school project vote as well.
Please go to www.votersofmsad46.blogspot.com. for links to the various sources of related information. Those of you who don't want to be railroaded need to pressure the local school board, and the Superintendent at 924-5262. You can also enlist your selectpersons and town councilors to request that the voting be done on the already established June date. The Board wants the early March vote; tell them that you'd rather vote in the June referendum, after they complete "a lot of work" and you have all the information you need.
Arthur Jette
Cambridge
To the Editor,
The MSAD #46 Board of Directors is trying to "fast track" the referendum vote for a new pre-K-8 proposed school facility in Dexter. The local school board chairman and others claim that an early March vote is necessary in order to satisfy the State requirements for a timeline. There are at least two facts that make it obvious that the Board has decided the referendum date for its own purposes.
In documents titled "Legal Aspects of School Construction Referenda", by Richard A. Spencer, Esq. of Drummond, Woodsum, and McMahon, and dated November 16, 2006, the "Timing Requirements" include "Concept approval must be obtained in designated calendar year," and "Referendum must be conducted within six months of concept approval." It is important to note that the District leaders are misleading you to believe that a June referendum is beyond the timeline set by the State.
The towns of Garland, Exeter, and Ripley all have annual town meetings in March, requiring extensive budget and warrant preparations, year-end audits, Town Report printings, etc. A new school referendum in early March would foreclose the opportunity to have community discussions with school officials at the annual meetings. It also severely limits the time in which voters can consider the impact of the decision. Even the words of the MSAD #46 Chairman, John Parola, in concluding the recent (December 20, 2006) Concept Plan Hearing in Exeter, "We have a lot of work to do," prove the need to take the time allowed by planning a June, rather than a early March vote.
Furthermore, there is a financial impact, and while the Superintendent has stated that the District will pay for the additional referendum costs, it shouldn't be necessary to point out that the District's funds come from taxpayers. Since the District already holds its budget referendum in early June, this date should be used for the new school project vote as well.
Please go to www.votersofmsad46.blogspot.com. for links to the various sources of related information. Those of you who don't want to be railroaded need to pressure the local school board, and the Superintendent at 924-5262. You can also enlist your selectpersons and town councilors to request that the voting be done on the already established June date. The Board wants the early March vote; tell them that you'd rather vote in the June referendum, after they complete "a lot of work" and you have all the information you need.
Arthur Jette
Cambridge
posted by PP | 1/02/2007 07:52:00 AM
3 Comments:
Oh come on Art. How can you say they are "fast tracking"?
This district has been working on this project since the failed referendum in 1990!
There have been several meetings and opportunities to advance this project over the years. The only stalling we got was with your committee for site location which took over 2 years to move forward.
SAD 46 was offered the opportunity for this project in February of 2001, round 1 of the major capital funding list. Since that time, more than 22 other school districts have MOVED IN to new or renovated facilities, another 25 or so have either moved in or are under construction, and another 17 are moving the process forward.
Only SAD 46 has ever taken this long to vote on a new project. Never in the history of Maine schools has it taken so long for a district to vote on a construction project. And only 3 other districts have ever had the chance to do it twice for the same project.
Not a statistic that I like my school district to be in.
Why dont you stop trying to create road blocks and offer "useful" suggestions to move this project forward. After all, as a Board member, you voted in favor of it several times along the way.
Why are you trying so hard to create an issue when the majority of the people want this to happen? Do they all want it? No. Do some which some aspects were a little different? Yes. Bue we cant have it all. I doubt that ever in our democracy has there been unanimous approval of all things. This one will be no different.
As Carol Sherburne was said did you stop being a friend of education?
Why are people like Mike McCormick and Carol Sherburne so threatened by simple requests for written ballot straw votes and a June referendum for the new school project?
Why is it that anyone who questions the methods, or planning and motivations of the District is smeared as anti-education?
People like Mike and Carol just can't accept that there are rational people out here who see things differently than the "lemmings"
Not all of us are so blind as to need to follow.
I'm not only entitled to my opinion; I'm empowered to express it. I believe that it is the duty of the citizen in a free society to question the motives of his government... at all levels.
The proposed new school is supposed to be for the benefit of the entire community ... not only the "school community"
Mike, your exaggerations will someday get you in trouble. A review of your website at www.memccormick.com states, among other things, that your are a "twelve year veteran of the school board of MSAD 46". The record clearly shows that you served from 1999, and resigned in 2005, which is only six years, and not even remotely close to twelve.
Stick to the truth, or you'll need a good memory.
Your right Art, I was only an elected member from about those times you seem to remember.
However, I served the Board way back in 1991 when I was asked to Chair the Citizens Building Committee, hence teh 12 plus years of serving the Board.
It is that long service time and all of the notes and reports and meetings that I still have to remind folks, like you, what has factually transpired since the failed referendum.
My question still stands, when are you going to offer to help this process rahter than do nothing other than criticize it?
This district needs a new school. Period. Just because you didnt get your way doesnt mean that it should not move forward. The majority of folks I speak with are in favor of a new school. Not all issues can satisfactorily be satisfied for all folks. We make compromises every day. This is very likely the only remaining chance SAD 46 will have to replace the middle school. Say nothing about an opportunity to better education in the district with the opportunities that the proposed project will bring.
Sorry for not being articulate enough to express my "Board service" on the MEMcCormick website.
Thanks for visiting it though!
Post a Comment
<< Home