Joint Meeting - Minutes

Cooperative School District Planning Board and

Gorham, Randolph, &Shelburne School Boards

Randolph Town Hall

 

 

Members present:

Cooperative School District Planning  Board: Charles Brown, David Carlisle, Carol Gagnon, Donna Goodrich, Leona Guay, Robert Leclerc, Mike Waddell, Wendy Niskanen, and Tuesday Willow

Gorham School Board: Jennifer Lapointe, Leona Guay, Jay Holmes, Jean Tremblay, Anne Hill + Student Rep

Shelburne School Board: Robert Corrigan, Jo Anne Carpenter, Wendy Niskanen

Randolph School Board: Angela Brown, Carol Gagnon, Kathleen Kelley, and Eoghan Kelley

 

Others present: Patrick Low – SAU Superintendent, Pauline Plourde- SAU Business Administrator, Julie Renaud Evans – recording secretary, Jody Tremblay, and Members of the Press - Chad Dryden

           

I. Call to Order

Donna Goodrich called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

 

II. Welcome and Introductions

Donna Goodrich welcomed all and confirmed the purpose of the meeting was to inform and report progress of the Cooperative School District Planning Board to the governing school boards.

Self- introductions were done around the table.

 

III. Purpose and Process of a Cooperative School District

Donna Goodrich reviewed for the Boards

  • the purpose of the committee,
  • its work timeline,
  • its work approach of respect and consensus, and
  • its commitment to positive, beneficial, and fair recommendations.

 

IV. Timeline

Donna Goodrich updated the Boards on the necessary timeline for a March 2005 District Meeting vote to approve the Articles of Agreement.  This will include meetings with Selectmen, public informational meetings and public hearings; review of Articles of Agreement by the Department of Education, and the needed legislative process at the State level.

 

V. Funding Issues

Donna Goodrich handed out two summary sheets (draft) which tried to present the financial picture of a new proposed cooperative school district.  The information included Operating expenses, Capital expenses, hypothetical bond situations, per pupil costs (present and with cooperative on a per town basis), average daily memberships, local and state assessment values, and operating efficiencies of a cooperative.   She indicated that the committee had tried hard to anticipate every question the voters will ask.   She also noted that the representatives from each of the towns did an excellent job of protecting the financial interests of their fellow townspeople through all the possible financial scenarios that were considered.  Highlights of the ensuing discussion include:

State vs. local evaluation basis – using state figures gives the cooperative an equal standard to apply to each of the towns, it is impartial and neutral.  Using average figures protects the individual towns from large increases or decreases in assessed values.

 

Apportionment for Operating Expenses The final recommended formula of 95% on a 3 yr ADM, and 5% of the 3 yr average State equalized state valuation was calculated in order to keep all three town’s taxes and contribution fair.

 

Efficiencies of a Cooperative

It was noted that it is important to think in new ways, there are examples of costs that no longer need to be considered, for instance Shelburne no longer has to maintain a tuition trust fund in case a family moves in, this is an efficiency of a cooperative approach to education management.

 

Presentation of information –

The Boards discussed the difficulty in financial presentations for lay people; various members made valuable suggestions to the Cooperative Board, most stressing “keeping it simple.”

 

Hypothetical bonding situation-

The Boards thought the presentation of a hypothetical bonding situation and resultant tax impacts was good, but advised the Cooperative Board to choose the hypothetical amount and the presentation wording carefully for universal understanding.  It was noted that this should be a stand alone presentation.  Some members felt this presentation makes it clear why a cooperative is valuable to the taxpayers of Gorham, more than the general funding mechanism presentations.

 

Length of funding agreement - As far as funding goes, this agreement arrangement is for first five years; after that the Cooperative School District may take it up again.  In the mean time, any one town can put in a warrant to reconsider the formula after the initial five years.

 

VII. Articles of Agreement

Donna Goodrich indicated that the Board had utilized the resources of the Department of Education, Department of Revenue Administration, and the attorney to ensure that their work would have solid legal and statute foundations, and smart administrative processes.  She reminded the Boards that some of the Articles may seem vague, because it will be up to a cooperative district board to refine the details; this committee’s job was to write them, present to governing school boards, present to state, and present to people.  She then reviewed the proposed Articles of Agreement:

 

1. Composition and Name

2. Grade Levels - District will handle grades K-12

3. Date of operating responsibility

4. District School Board membership 

            - concern expressed about transition and voting, Board will get legal counsel and check with

            other coops that have done it

            - confirmed everyone (3 towns) votes for at-large member

5. Transfer of Real Property and Creation of School Facilities Capital Reserve Fund

            - need special legislation

            - Co-op will assume ownership of properties

            - DRA property appraisal had to be done

6. Transfer of Furnishings and Equipment

7. Operating expenses

            - will be based upon a formula of  95% three yr average ADM, and 5% 3 yr average state

             equalized evaluation.

8. Capital expenses

            -  will be based upon 100% on 3 yr average state equalization.

9. State aid

            - will be credited to previous district – protected

10. Transfer schedule

11. Policies and By-laws

            – to use Gorham’s for 24 months.

12. Existing contracts

            - are protected.

13. Transportation

            – policies will be as required by law.

14. Community use of facilities

15. Sites of Meetings

            – GMHS gym until other towns has a big enough place; monthly meetings will rotate between

             the three towns.

16. Indebtedness

            - Coop will not incur indebtedness.

17. Trust Funds

            – will be applied as the terms of the trust indicate

18. Capital reserve funds

             – need special legislation.

19. Grandfather Clause

             - Randolph’s current students in SAU 36 will be able to continue there

20. Building committee

            - the existing committee will be dissolved and then recreated as a cooperative building

             committee

21. Physical property

            - all items purchased will be property of cooperative district.

22. Amendment of Articles of Agreement.

23. A Community’s Right to Appeal the Articles of Agreement

 

Closing remarks:

  • More discussion of refining presentation, especially on hypothetical bonding example.
  • Board members said  “thank you” to the Cooperative Board for an exceptional job
  • J. Lapointe expressed concern about Gorham not being paid for recent capital improvements.
  • J. Holmes suggested the Cooperative must go if we are to keep our community; others noted the three towns have been working together for many years, a cooperative will simply commit it to paper.

Adjournment

 

            Motion by L. Guay, second by J. Lapointe

            Motion: To adjourn meeting.

            Vote:  All in favor. Meeting adjourned at 9:38 p.m.

 

Respectfully submitted

Julie Renaud Evans

Recording Secretary