Most of the comments from residents concern the issue of school choice for students in the future.
ARUNDEL – Comments from residents at a
public hearing Wednesday on a proposed school withdrawal agreement
centered mainly on school choice, an issue that officials and residents
agreed is important to the town.
The hearing was the first chance for residents to weigh in
on an agreement that outlines how Arundel would withdraw from Regional
School Unit 21, which also includes Kennebunk and Kennebunkport. About
100 residents attended the hearing at the Mildred L. Day School.
Arundel is the first town in southern Maine to get conditional
approval for a withdrawal agreement from the Department of Education.
Four communities have scheduled votes to approve withdrawal plans and 13
other towns have formed withdrawal committees, according to the
Department of Education.
The entire process was sold as a 'study', despite the language on the ballot stating otherwise. Uninformed voters were led to believe that the town would allow for the expenditure of up to $35,000 (but at a Selectmen's meeting, the statement was made that it could cost more, and a vote to approve additional expenditures wasn't out of the question) to 'study' whether a withdrawal was economically feasible.
ReplyDeleteHere, at the tail end of these meetings, the financial impact hasn't been shared, and the plans for withdrawal have only been bandied about for a year after withdrawal.
I understood Maine statute to allow all high school students choice; the language in the withdrawal agreement is now removing that choice, and contracting students to a school two towns away, when there is a viable and successful high school literally down the road.
The reason for this is because of upcoming renovations and improvements to the school that a small group of citizens doesn't want to share cost-wise. The problem with their argument is that a year or so ago, they voted down a cost-sharing formula in the school district which would have reduced their portion of the burden. Instead, residents now have higher tax bills.
What is most unfortunate is that the town is made up of close to 4,000 people, according to a 2010 census. Between 20 and 30% of that population even bother to vote, and a majority of that group doesn't bother voting with any common sense.
This will be a financial disaster, and there are theories that within the next few years, because of sustainability issues, Arundel's only elementary school will close. Not a very attractive feature for future homeowners and residents, most especially when your school 'choice' is to pay $8300 a year to send your child down the road, or be contractually obligated to go to school a couple towns away.
Once again Erin you are wrong. The agreement does not remove choice, it is clear of what the expectations are.
Delete4000 in the census also makes up children who can not vote.
I don't know who's theory that you are going by that says that ML Day is going to close because of sustainability issues, it would be greatly appreciated if you shared your source of information.
What is really not attractive about Arundel is that there are people who live here who say we all voted with out common sense. Regardless of what your follow up comment is. You seem to think that you have all of the sense and those who do not agree with your belief, have none at all.
The library didn't get funded by the voters of Arundel because even if we were to fund it, Kennebunk "Un"-Free Library was going to charge the fee any way. You can also confirm this at town hall by listening to the recording of the meeting. The news did not correctly tell what happened at the meeting. Additionally, it would be nice if we were just not stuck to one library, if we are going to pay for a library then let people go where they want to go. There are other library's that charge no fees.
The TAMS contract more than likely will not get renewed, but that will be left up to our new school board to decide as to whether or not they would put it to the voters.
I see so many things wrong with your comments, that I choose to only touch upon a few. If you are going to blast out statements like this, and continue to rehash hold stuff and not move on, the problem isn't the town, it is you.
The new board that will be hand picked and paid for buy Thornton academy supporters like all the mistruths the the tams group said about the buy out "vote no save taxes" no thanks
DeleteI was defending Erin's comment. Pointing out what should have been obvious to you; since you choose to cherrypick, it's plain to see that you haven't any substantive argument in opposition to what she said.
DeleteSubstantive arguement is statute that says Arundel will have high school choice. Can't take away statute..need I go on?
DeleteIt is the middle school contract I am revering to.
Delete2 more years of the contract, and then Arundel will have choice.
DeleteIf I'm reading the contract correctly, there's a deadline of 2026 for "continuity". After 2026 any Arundel student who chooses to go to Kennebunk High school will have to pay. So not only have we lost middle school choice, we will also lose high school choice? Is there a plan out there that's not being shared with the town? I thought we would always have high school choice.
ReplyDeleteComments like Tom Danlyk's about him losing school choice if students were allowed to choose to go to MSK and the "mass exodus" comment, proves that there's fear that the majority of Arundel students would choose Kennebunk over Thornton. Probably because of location and a much better rated education.
If the people wanted to withdraw solely because of money then why can't there be school choice? It's because it's not about money and saving our neighbors taxes. It's because the withdrawal group knows that if there was school choice, not enough students would choose TAMS in order to sustain it and since TA is in the business of making money, they will close TAMS. I wish this town could be honest and come out and say that. There's no guarantee that TAM's will stay open for our Arundel students. Our $7,400 in tuition is nothing compared to the $28,000+ in international tuition.
I want to what this group and the town manager was promised from Thornton academy they are tearing this town apart the one sidedness is sickening hope they are proud
ReplyDeletecomputer problem word was omitted ''know ''
ReplyDeleteLet's not forget that RSU 21, and the Arundel Withdrawal Committee agreed to the wording of the agreement.
ReplyDeletePrior to the withdrawal petition the Board of Selectmen would not look into the costs of education. The majority of *voters* have voted, and will do so again. Those who continue to stomp on the town will do so, every time that there is reason for a debate.
I am just wondering, what does international tuition have anything to do with RSU 21, or Arundel withdrawing?
This "voter" will not do it again. I voted to investigate the withdrawal. I did not vote to withdraw and I will not come November. After seeing and hearing what the withdrawal committee has come up with, this town would be making the biggest mistake ever withdrawing from the RSU.
DeleteI'm glad to hear that and I hope you can rally more people to come out and vote the same way. I'm curious as to who told you the April vote was to just investigate withdrawing. I hope you go back to them and ask why they mislead you
DeleteThe international tuition means they're making money, hand over fist. The measly $7400 in tuition per Arundel student wouldn't be a huge loss if those who chose to attend MSK or KHS left the TA stranglehold.
DeleteIt isn't about TA, or KHS, it is about choice. I think we all agree that for middle school and high school, Arundel should have choice after the expiration of the contract that Arundel voters voted on prior to consolidation.
DeleteOur town manager appointed the Arundel divorce committee with complete disregard for level judgment! Appointing Tom Danylik as our Selectman representative was in my opinion a complete conflict of interest, (which Todd was made aware of before decisions were made) and was reaffirmed last night! Mr. Danylik stated that he was against putting wording in the agreement that would provide middle school choice because it could potentially take away his choice! What…..how can he make such a statement…..? State law reads that any town that does not provide a school in their town they will have choice in the grades not provided….Oh that’s right; his child is a Thornton Academy employee. Shame on you Tom for representing your personal and family’s interest and not the town as a whole. I urge you to disclose this information publicly and make known this conflict in any further votes pertaining to Arundel and TA.
ReplyDeleteJon Reneel was appointed as a petition signer representing a citizen in favor of withdrawal… remember Jon?… his reasoning is that if we allow school choice then there could be a mass exodus from TAMS……enough said. Todd appointed Jack Turcott as the one community member. Wait a minute; Jack Turcott signed the petition also?! Mr. Turcott stated last night that the committee wanted to put things back to the way they were before consolidation. Is Mr. Turcott aware of the way things were?! A K-5 school out of compliance with several state mandates, failing to perform proficient in state testing, an unsafe water system, sewer backing up into building, lack of leadership and accountability…just to touch the surface. Maybe Mr. Turcott thought he might slide into the newly opened superintendent position in Arundel if he could help speed through a divorce. Sadly, Mr. Turcott will probably get the job because Arundel’s expectations have never been to awfully high!
I can’t believe that this committee stands fast to “they are only following the statue of the law”….Arundel deserves more foresight into a decision that is going to effect every facet of this town for years to come!
Last night a question was asked why cost sharing will not be voted on before Arundel’s vote, which is such a huge part of future costs. Arundel RSU representative, Dan Pleva, tackled the question head on! Wait a minute; was Dan at the meeting to cast his vote? NO! Just how many meeting has he attended on this RSU board? What exactly did he say….We voted to get divorced…Is he confused on where we are on this process? That my friend…is who Arundel elected to represent our interest in the RSU. I am sad that Sue Sinnot Curran did not stand up and explain why she cast her vote to “not” allow cost sharing to be voted on prior to Arundel’s decision. Had Sue voted in favor of this…it would have passed and Arundel would have had a very important future cost set….now it is a variable that will be used to scare Arundel voters! Sue stated she didn’t want to CONFUSE Arundel voters is why she voted it down. There are two perfect examples of “OUR VOICE” in this district that some claim we have no voice in. After witnessing this….I agree!
All this happens by the hands and in front of the eyes of our town manager and elected bodies! If you don’t think that people are watching this, and if you don’t think that future businesses are taking a hard look at Arundel’s future…
Tom Danylik has, and always will make decisions for the town that are in the best interest of the town.
ReplyDeleteI believe that people are so short sided to their own personal beliefs, that they can not see what this process is, and to understand what is happening and how it needs to happen.
All of the elected officials on the RSU 21 school board cast their votes accordingly, to pin down who's fault is was, is as aggorant, and rude as what I read in the PPH comments on the above article. "What is most unfortunate is that the town is made up of close to 4,000 people, according to a 2010 census. Between 20 and 30% of that population even bother to vote, and a majority of that group doesn't bother voting with any common sense." Go see for yourself, and a response from Tim Goodwin, ""a majority of that group doesn't bother voting with any common sense. How are you to judge whether someone votes with common sense? Is it if their opinion differs from yours?" Thank you Tim Goodwin!
Shame on the person who wrote publicly that the people of Arundel do not vote with common sense. What is even more sad, is the group of people who side with this individual do it all of the time.
Why should they be ashamed for posting the truth?
DeleteYou failed to post the follow up comment, which explained their reasoning:
Voting down a cost sharing formula that would reduce your financial burden lacks common sense. Voting down a contract buyout that would cost $1.6M (to buy out the remaining five years), versus paying $1M a year for the next five years lacks common sense. Defunding a local library lacks common sense. I'd say those three are pretty good examples.
You're probably painfully aware that there are a large number of Arundel residents who feel the same. It would be nonsensical for you to dismiss the obvious lack of common sense. The 'Angry 200' don't understand finances, don't care about education, and will sell this town down the river at any opportunity. Look at the points above, in this comment, and share with us all if any of those choices made sense.
Cost sharing is a done deal after the vote. Why bother?
DeleteThe above article has error in it. Arundel, think about school choice, if RSU 21 can not take away school choice, how do you think Arundel is going to take it away.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the article, and some of these comments, I am awed. I agree with the above comment. Think!
ReplyDeletePeople posting on this site are continuing to push the divide. some of the other sites used to communicate information were shut down as far as I can tell. this site should consider shutting down the posting ability as the next 45 days will only bring more harsh words from many. it makes those of us willing to stand up in meetings and speak our minds look bad as we are linked to the posters. to many people stiring the pot and nit enough creating change the right way.
ReplyDeleteThe committee should have had all partys involved just saying!
ReplyDeleteThe committee that was formed, statute was followed. Not so sure what the issue is.
DeleteThe issue is that in order to determine whether withdrawal was economically feasible, they did not need to form a withdrawal committee, or vote that the town wanted to withdraw. What should have happened was a vote on conducting a feasibility study, and after all of the financials were shared *first*, THEN a decision could be made as to whether to vote to withdraw or not.
DeleteThe fact that this point has been made continuously and continues to elude people is rather ridiculous. Willful ignorance is what has made this town a joke in the eyes of many.
God forbid if the truth was told before the vote
ReplyDeleteLooks like the town of Durham's a bit smarter than Arundel. Look at how they have approached this process. It's exactly what should have been done in Arundel, but we're learning that Arundel tends to do the exact opposite of what makes sense to the outside world:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.pressherald.com/news/Durham-schedules-forum-on-leaving-RSU-5.html
We are the laughing stock if the state
ReplyDelete