Community members in RSU 1 have formed a committee to discuss other ways to share the education budget fairly among the five member towns of Arrowsic, Bath, Phippsburg, West Bath and Woolwich.

Members of the Cost Sharing Committee had their third meeting on July 10 at the superintendent’s office in Bath. According to school district staff, a set schedule of meetings has yet to be established; members set the subsequent meeting date and time at the end of each session.

Committee meeting minutes are being posted on the school district website. To find out when their next meeting is, call the superintendent’s office at 443-6601.

The pitfalls and possibilities of sharing costs among member towns was one topic of discussion during their June 26 meeting, according to the minutes. Some towns provide funds to the school district through property wealth, while others bring in more subsidy. This is a factor in the cost sharing equation that is not unknown to community members, but one committee members brought up to help facilitate an ongoing discussion.

The committee also reviewed funding for public education and Maine’s Essential Programs and Services, often referred to as the EPS formula. These state funding standards are intended to ensure that schools are able to provide a balance of educational opportunities among all communities.

The committee has invited RSU 21 business administrator Mark Eastman to contribute to the conversation. Committee members discussed his point that discovering options and collaboration among towns is better than the “threat of withdrawal,” a term some committee members said was too strong.

Members reviewed the state law established to manage cost sharing among member towns in this district.

“I personally don’t think they’re going to find a funding system that is going to make every town happy every year,” Woolwich Selectman David King said during their July 2 meeting. He and fellow Selectman Allison Hepler have been attending the committee meetings and reporting back to residents. “I think we should stay with the system we have for the next two to three years.”

During the July 10 meeting, the committee reviewed the state’s subsidy formula, other possible formulas and factors they said should be considered.