Minutes
Cooperative School District Planning Board
Thursday, October 2, 2003 – Gorham Middle/High
School Library
Attendees
Donna Goodrich –
chairperson
Leona Guay – Gorham
Keith Parent – Gorham
Michael Waddell – Gorham
Tim Collia – Shelburne
Wendy Niskanen –
Shelburne
Lark Wood – Randolph
Charles Brown – Randolph
ITEM I – CALL TO ORDER
D. Goodrich, chairperson
of the Cooperative School District Planning Board, called the meeting to order
at 6:35 pm. Tim Collia, a new member to
the Board from Shelburne, was introduced to all members at attendance. When asked why he decided to get involved,
he commented that he believed he could bring an outside view to the board. He also was somewhat dismayed to find out
when he moved here that Shelburne did not have a vote in school elections.
ITEM II – APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM AUGUST 28, 2003
-L. Guay requested that
in both the minutes from the August 28, 2003 meeting and review of the work
session from September 18, 2003, that all references to the Cooperative Planning
Board be corrected as such (ie. strike committees). W. Niskanen clarified that the legal
name of the board is Cooperative School
District Planning Board.
-Ms. Guay also requested
striking references to subcommittees,
and that these be corrected to committees.
Motion by Leona Guay, seconded by Michael Waddell
Motion: to approve the minutes from August 28, 2003 and work session
review of September 18, 2003 as amended.
Vote on motion:
all in favor; motion carried.
ITEM III – REVIEW OF WORK SESSION – SEPTEMBER 18,
2003
-Wendy Niskanen did
request the inclusion of the following:
-Thursday, September 18, 2003 minutes:
pg. 2 –
The viability of the Gorham school
depends on the other towns.
-Article #3 – Should have
some language regarding one man, one vote discussion.
-Article #1 – should read
‘comprise’ instead of compromise.
-Legal advice will be
consulted on Article #3 regarding Governance, as to whether board structure
should remain ‘as is’, of if it would change with the formation of a cooperative
district.
-Members in attendance
agreed that on this evening, it would be proper to possibly develop the rest of
the articles of agreement, develop a list of legal questions, and have legal
counsel present within a month’s time.
One question to be raised will the ‘one man, one vote’, and how it
pertains to proportionality.
ITEM IV – STATEMENT OF PURPOSE
Donna Goodrich had
presented a variety of notes to members regarding the statement of
purpose. Leona Guay and Robert Leclerc
had come up with different versions, as well as Wendy Niskanen. Members agreed that it is important for the
Board to decide whether a K-12 cooperative school district is worth doing, and
to bring something to the voters that will work and what will be effective,
along with what the costs will be.
S. Welford arrived at 7:05 pm.
After some further
discussion, members in attendance agreed to discuss the statement of purpose
further at the next meeting.
ITEM V – CONTINUATION ON ARTICLES
OF AGREEMENT
Articles
of agreement were reviewed:
Article
#1 – Mr. Parent had asked a Gorham HS English class to come up with some names
for a Cooperative School District. The
following were suggested: Androscoggin
Valley CSD; Mt. Washington CSD; Great North Woods CSD; The Great Northern CSD; Dolly
Co-op CSD; Icy Gulch CSD; Darby Field CSD; and Three Amigos CSD.
Article
#2 – discusses grade levels.
Article
#3 – discusses governance – It was suggested that as much as governance should
be kept as close to as it is now. It
was recommended to make sure that legally, everyone has the proper share of
voting.
R. Corrigan arrived at 7:14 pm.
Article #4 – discusses
buildings and properties to be acquired by CSD (also in conjunction with #5 –
general location of prepared new buildings) – It was agreed to that this
article should not be ‘just about the building’, but should have a facilities
solution. Two things should not be
combined in to one vote, and this should also mention a general location. It was recommended to have someone come from
the state to appraise the buildings. If
the towns were to form a cooperative, they would have to choose which
facilities they would be bought in to.
Article #6 – discusses
method of appropriating expenses – Mr. Welford that there would be no
reimbursement from the state until July of 2005, so construction may only be
approved in March 2005, with ‘a shovel in the ground’.
Time check – 7:28 pm.
It was shared that many
events could affect the amount to which is funded for a new school, if one
should be proposed. Mr. Welford did
share that the law does limit the size and conditions of building a new school,
such as making the school self-contained in regards to athletic fields,
playgrounds, etc. He also stated that
there is a difference between renovation and construction. Members in attendance agreed that more
discussion on Article #6 would be a meeting in itself.
Article #7 – indebtedness
which the CSD will assume – The question was asked of the SAU administration as
to what debt is currently being carried by the school districts involved in the
Cooperative School District Planning Board, to which Mr. Welford replied that
Gorham, Randolph, nor Shelburne are carrying any debt. The question was raised of how a capital reserve
fund is handled for cooperative school districts.
Article #8 – method of
apportioning capital expenses – It was agreed to by members in attendance that
proper information needs to be collected on this article to avoid ‘twin mountaining’ of small communities. Capital expenses must be divided
evenly. It was suggested to work with
formulas based on ADM (average daily membership), formulas based on property
evaluations, and combinations of both.
Mr. Brown agreed to work with a spreadsheet and come up with a variety
of scenarios to email to the Board or present at the next meeting. It was agreed to by the members in
attendance to have a Department of Education representative who is familiar
with cooperative school districts and an attorney present at the meeting
scheduled for October 30th.
It was requested of Mr.
Welford to find out what the costs would be to have the buildings in question
appraised from both the Department of Education and the Department of Revenue
Administration. It was also requested
to inquire whether the buildings had been recently evaluated.
Article #9 – manner in
which state aid is allocated – Ms. Niskanen shared that this is fairly
standard.
Article #10 – methods by
which articles of agreement will be amended – this is also fairly standard. It was recommended that there should be some
statement regarding review of articles of agreement for the cooperative school
district every ten years. It was also
shared that there should be some language with regards to disencouragement in
leaving the cooperative school district, as a bond may be passed which will be
bonded for twenty years. There may be
two articles of agreement which need to be formed in regards to the cooperative
no eliminating towns, and town withdrawing from the cooperative school district.
Article #11 – date of
operating responsibility – It was agreed to by members that the date of
operating responsibility would be July 1, 2004, the first day of the new fiscal
year.
Some discussion was had
possible duplication of budgets, and how much money would be saved overall with
the adoption of a cooperative school district.
Mr. Welford shared that there would be a major difference in the amount
of preparation for meetings. The
cooperative school district would function as one school board. Annual meetings can be held anywhere within
the cooperative, and monthly meetings would rotate from town to town.
Current questions for
legal counsel are as follows:
-one man, one vote – elected at large members and the
method
-if the cooperative school district could lease buildings
-what amount of land would be needed for a new school if
one was built
-if the existing building can be used and method of
appropriating
-percentage vote that would be needed to change the
articles of agreement
Mr. Welford commented
that the state may be able to answer some of these questions, especially in
regards to the acreage that would be needed for a new middle/high school.
It was recommended that a
Department of Education representative be requested for the cooperative meeting
in two weeks, and legal counsel in possibly four weeks. It was also requested to review of variety
of cooperatives and see how their governing board is made up, and how the
various towns are represented.
ITEM VI – NEW BUSINESS
-Ms. Niskanen presented a synopsis which she had
recently drafted. She stated that she
had quoted the minutes whenever possible.
Ms. Goodrich commented that she would brief the CARE committee in Ms.
Niskanen’s place on October 9th, as Ms. Niskanen has a prior commitment. It was also shared that this same
information should be shared on the middle/high school level with the Booster
Club.
ITEM VII – NEXT MEETING/AGENDA
The agenda for the October 16, 2003 meeting is as
follows:
I.
Call to Order
II.
Approval of minutes
from October 2, 2003
III.
Method of
appropriations – projections
IV.
Vote on Statement of
Purpose
V.
New Business
VI.
Next Meeting/Agenda
VII.
Public Comments
VIII.
Adjournment – 8:30
pm
ITEM VIII – PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public comments were shared.
ITEM IX – ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Lark Wood, second by
Charles Brown.
Motion: to adjourn the October 2, 2003 Cooperative School District
Planning Board meeting.
Vote on motion: all were in favor; motion carried. Meeting adjourned
at 8:38 pm.
Respectfully
submitted
Jacqueline
J. Tetreault
Curriculum
Coor. Adm. Assist./Recording Secretary
SAU
#20