Arundel Town Manager Todd Shea said it best
Wednesday, summing up what had been months of heated debate culminating
in Tuesday's 517 to 291 vote in favor of exploring withdrawal from RSU
21.
"The town of Arundel has spoken," Shea
said. "Now we'll do all the due diligence to try to figure out what's in
the best interest of the town."
My true concern is that with all these websites up (on both sides) when ever someone hears what they don't want to hear they discredit the person who verified it.
ReplyDeleteThe RSU has been discredited, then Todd Shae was discredited...both had verified numbers, but because they didn't support one side, it was said that they were not telling the truth, or flat out lied that they couldn't verify he numbers. Case in point when an editorial was written last minute claiming that Todd didn't verify numbers that he did...and he PUBLICLY said it more than once, most recent at the last selecmen's meeting. Or the fact that a certain person continues to publish that we gave 500K to the RSU and only got 227 back...that 500K was given back to the people in the form of Tax relief and has been documented. But because that doesn't support their argument they continue to try and discredit everyone...and mislead people.
So here is the question...if the firm comes up with the same type of numbers that show that its been a savings and will continue to be one in the RSU, are they going to be attacked and discredited too? Is this just going to continue until the Yes group hears what they want to hear or are they going to finally TRUST what the professionals are saying.
This was my big reason for voting NO, it seems like this group is on a quest, and they don't seem to care who says what...if it isn't what they want to hear they will try to discredit it.
At some point people are going to have to be willing to hear information...even if it doesn't say what we want it to...and that goes to BOTH sides. Is this group...or this town willing to do that? I don't believe that they are, and frankly, this will ONLY be a bigger divide until everyone grows up and starts working together to find a solution and being truthful about what the real motivations are...I don't believe that it is taxes...I really don't, and if no one can be honest and upfront about that...well, I don't think any study in the world is going to change this...
So whats it going to be Yes?
So whats it going to be No?
are we all going to finally be honest?
are we all going to finally let the experts be experts?
are we all going to shut down our websites and political agendas?
if not, we are wasting this 35K and our time.
You hit the nail on the head with your comment. Dana Peck stated that if he didn't feel he got 'the right answers' (I'm repeating myself here, but whatever that means), he would vote to spend *beyond* the $35K, but couldn't put a cap on the number.
DeleteI predict that this is going to turn into a huge debacle, and the ones who will most suffer are our children.
There always has been and will continue to be an agenda and personal vendetta from one group of folks toward the Kennebunks. It's ancient history at this point, and holding a grudge because they could not accommodate the number of children entering middle school at the time when it became crucial is really not their fault; that's Arundel's fault for not thinking ahead.
And it's Arundel's fault that we look like a laughingstock to the rest of our RSU. And it will be a very select group of individuals in Arundel's fault if this goes through and then people are left wondering 'how did this happen'?
Don't let a small group of angry people decide what happens in this town - at all withdrawal meetings and Selectmen's meetings, and at the vote going forward, make your voice heard.
Just so people are clear, this is the statute. When the paperwork has been submitted to the school district, as well as the Commissioner of Education, the withdrawal committee will be charged with the task of drawing up a withdrawal agreement. Read that again: WITHDRAWAL AGREEMENT. This is not a 'study'.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.arundelmaine.org/vertical/Sites/%7B59869D99-BF8C-4BB4-B531-4D501803061C%7D/uploads/title20-Asec1466.pdf
#4 specifically explains the next phase of this process, none of which discusses spending money to 'see if we want to withdraw'.
4. Agreement for withdrawal; notice; changes in agreement; final agreement. The agreement for
withdrawal must comply with this subsection.
A. The commissioner shall direct the municipal officers of the petitioning municipality to select
representatives to a withdrawal committee as follows: one member from the municipal officers, one
member from the general public and one member from the group filing the petition. The commissioner
shall also direct the directors of the regional school unit board representing the petitioning municipality
to select one member of the regional school unit board who represents that municipality to serve on the
withdrawal committee. The municipal officer and the member of the regional school unit board serve
on the withdrawal committee only so long as they hold their respective offices. Vacancies must be filled
by the municipal officers and the regional school unit board. The chair of the regional school unit board
shall call a meeting of the withdrawal committee within 30 days of the notice of the vote in subsection
3. The chair of the regional school unit board shall open the meeting by presiding over the election of
a chair of the withdrawal committee. The responsibility for the preparation of the agreement rests with
the withdrawal committee, subject to the approval of the commissioner. The withdrawal committee
may draw upon the resources of the department for information not readily available at the local level
and employ competent advisors within the fiscal limit authorized by the voters. The agreement must be
submitted to the commissioner within 90 days after the withdrawal committee is formed. Extensions of
time may be granted by the commissioner upon the request of the withdrawal committee.
Read each article below this paragraph - these are the conditions which must be met, and this agreement needs to be drawn up within 90 days after the committee is formed.
I repeat: This is NOT a study. Those of you who didn't go out and vote - wake up. Those of you who voted 'yes' and advertised this as a 'study', shame on you for lying.
Consider our town sold down the river.
The Board of Selectment wanted the study to be done. People might want to start asking themselves why the study is even being done, or how it even got to the point of a study being done. Statute doesn't request it, and the only way for it to be included in the Special Town Meeting Vote, is for the Board of Selectmen to want it. Don't take for granted what they tell you, because you might hear otherwise while sitting in the meetings.
ReplyDeleteThose who supported withdrawal, didn't request it, and only told the truth about the Board of Selectmen putting forth the study.
People need to stop and think, because both sides are not so far from the truth, we just don't agree on how education is delivered.
Give VOICE back to Arundel, and let Arundel decide what to do. Closing the Arundel Fire Department to be ill-informed, and left with out a form of public safety is moving backward, and not forward. THINK!!!!