The public had a final chance to discuss cost-sharing changes proposed for Sheepscot Valley Regional School Unit 12 during a special hearing in Somerville Wednesday night, September 5.

Finance Committee chairman Jerry Nault and fellow members held a total of three public hearings to get feedback on a revised cost-sharing plan they say is more fair to the school district's eight member towns. 

Nault summarized the history of the school district's cost sharing arrangement, beginning with the first year of the RSU's formation and how that has affected what towns have been paying. Some towns pay less, some towns pay more, and the majority of people engaged in the conversation since day one have expressed their frustrations about the inequities.

The proposed cost-sharing change

“Cost per subsidizable student” and state funding each shape the changes proposed to the way RSU towns share the education budget. 

According to information provided by the finance committee, towns have been paying into the school district budget using 2009 figures, which were based on the education costs of each town prior to the formation of the RSU. The end result, referred to as “historic cost,” was a percentage allocated to each town. 

The proposed plan calculates cost-sharing among towns using: the number of students in the RSU the state determines funding for, under the state funding formula “ED 279”; the funding amount the state provides; and the minimum amount the RSU needs to raise for its operational budget.

The revised version also includes provisions to soften the impact of sharing budget costs through the “cost distribution safety net,” which uses carryover funds to help some towns pay. In place since the start of the consolidated school district, the safety net sets limits on towns’ contributions to the RSU from year to year. Towns either pay more or less to the RSU up to a certain percentage and what is paid is based on the prior year’s contributions. 

Using the safety net, towns expecting to pay less toward the RSU contribute additional funds and additional funds will go to assist towns that expect to pay more.
According to finance committee presentation materials, “proposed amendment to plan section 13-B,” the difference between what towns would pay under the historic cost-sharing method and the revised plan would be multiplied by a certain percentage over a 3-year period: 75 percent in the first year, 50 percent in the second, and 25 percent in the third year.
If there is any money left over after 3 years, it will be used toward funding the operational budget, and further reduce the financial impact to taxpayers.
At the end of the fourth year, every town would be paying the same amount per student across the RSU, according to Hilary Holm who serves as chairman on the RSU Board of Directors.

A positive response to the plan

Of the eight residents at the meeting, some asked what has been done to reduce cost, both in terms of organizational costs and staffing. The 2013 budget was funded using the historical cost sharing method, but the district was able to reduce overall costs by consolidating office space, cutting some positions and rearranging staff. The district has also cut back on transportation and energy usage.
Somerville resident David Greer said the biggest cost in government is the people who staff it, and this also applies to the school district.
“What are you doing to reduce that cost?” he said.
The district is investing in professional development for teachers and staff, said Holm. This is designed to increase efficiency and improve students' overall learning experience.
One goal pushed very hard by the government is improving student achievement, said Westport Island Board Member Richard DeVries. Federal, state and local governments all seek this goal. However, some students need more assistance, and the demand for additional support impacts the overall budget. But Nault pointed out that the RSU accepts all students, and all students under the plan are equally paid for among member towns.
People walked away from the September 5 meeting with the understanding that a big reason why towns pay so much for education has to do with a decline in state funding and student population, even as local costs continue to climb.
“What this clearly points out is state contributions continue to go down,” Greer said. “There is an inequity that needs to be resolved; it's a state-wide problem.”
In response, Nault said the inequities made through property taxes are another reason for adopting a system that works toward equal, RSU-wide cost per subsidizable student.
However, Nault said the school district is going to have to come up with a similar solution for funding adult education, which is a separate budget.
Greer said the presentation was excellent. He later complimented Nault and finance committee members for their work on developing the new plan, that their striving toward fairness is important.
More information about the cost-sharing proposal is available at www.svrsu.org.
The Sheepscot Valley RSU Board of Directors will hear from the finance committee about this plan and members will determine if they need to make any additional adjustments for a final vote by the board. Once the board has approved a plan, another round of presentations will be made available to the public in October, followed by a final vote by residents in November.