It was about one year ago that a committee of Regional
School Unit 21 board members decided to put in months of work to develop a new
proposal for a cost-sharing agreement between Kennebunk, Kennebunkport and
Arundel.
In the end, they moved forward with a plan to base cost sharing 100 percent on property values, but voters in June chose instead to keep the old system of 60 percent on property value and 40 percent on pupil count.
Now, the board is talking about revisiting the cost-sharing agreement once again, in response to complaints about the 60/40 agreement from residents who believe it is unfair. It’s interesting that people are speaking up now, considering that the cost-sharing discussion voted upon this spring was not initiated by the voters’ desire for a new agreement between the three towns. It began as a way to address a dispute between Kennebunk and Kennebunkport concerning $324,000 of old debt from the two towns’ former school district, Maine School Administrative District 71.
Arundel is not party to that debt and never was, but somehow the scope of the committee’s review was widened to look at how future costs will be shared among all three towns.
The committee ended up considering three main options, each of which would impact the three towns differently. All three of the plans would have increased costs for Kennebunkport and decreased costs for Arundel, with minimal changes either way for Kennebunk.
Today, the committee is calling for a new way, with Arundel’s Diane Robbins, a school board member, saying that the same proposals won’t do this time around.
In the meantime, some Arundel residents are working toward withdrawal from the RSU, and it’s interesting how their efforts are being interpreted. Some, like Kennebunkport Town Manager Larry Mead, are against a new cost-sharing proposal because they believe it seems pointless if Arundel is not even going to be part of the equation next year. Others, like Arundel Town Manager Todd Shea, think a new cost-sharing proposal could change Arundel voters’ minds about pulling out.
In the end, they moved forward with a plan to base cost sharing 100 percent on property values, but voters in June chose instead to keep the old system of 60 percent on property value and 40 percent on pupil count.
Now, the board is talking about revisiting the cost-sharing agreement once again, in response to complaints about the 60/40 agreement from residents who believe it is unfair. It’s interesting that people are speaking up now, considering that the cost-sharing discussion voted upon this spring was not initiated by the voters’ desire for a new agreement between the three towns. It began as a way to address a dispute between Kennebunk and Kennebunkport concerning $324,000 of old debt from the two towns’ former school district, Maine School Administrative District 71.
Arundel is not party to that debt and never was, but somehow the scope of the committee’s review was widened to look at how future costs will be shared among all three towns.
The committee ended up considering three main options, each of which would impact the three towns differently. All three of the plans would have increased costs for Kennebunkport and decreased costs for Arundel, with minimal changes either way for Kennebunk.
Today, the committee is calling for a new way, with Arundel’s Diane Robbins, a school board member, saying that the same proposals won’t do this time around.
In the meantime, some Arundel residents are working toward withdrawal from the RSU, and it’s interesting how their efforts are being interpreted. Some, like Kennebunkport Town Manager Larry Mead, are against a new cost-sharing proposal because they believe it seems pointless if Arundel is not even going to be part of the equation next year. Others, like Arundel Town Manager Todd Shea, think a new cost-sharing proposal could change Arundel voters’ minds about pulling out.
No comments:
Post a Comment