The town of Woolwich has been named as a defendant in a cost-sharing lawsuit by West Bath against Regional School Unit 1 and may be required to pay $117,000 for its share in restitution costs. 

The town received a summons from Sagadahoc County Superior Court on January 24.

Woolwich selectmen met with Belfast attorney Kristin Collins Monday afternoon. Collins has agreed to represent the town in the suit, according to staff, and will help selectmen pursue options as the suit progresses. 

West Bath filed the lawsuit against the RSU to recover $1,919,380 the town says it overpaid in local education costs to the school district over the past four fiscal school years, from 2008 to 2012, under a former cost sharing arrangement. 

In April 2012, the RSU-member towns of Arrowsic, Bath, Phippsburg, West Bath and Woolwich changed the way local education costs would be shared. From 2008 to 2012, towns had been paying local additional costs for RSU education using a state calculation called ED279. 

The April 2012 vote changed the cost sharing plan, effective for the 2012-2013 school year, such that towns would pay all of their local additional amounts by thirds (one third state valuation of a town, one third student population, and one third town population). 

This change in the cost sharing plan reflected the way the majority believed towns should share education costs, under the law (titled LD910) that created the school district.

West Bath and Phippsburg would have paid less under the new cost sharing plan in the past four years than they had to pay under the former plan (West Bath – $1,919,379 and Phippsburg – $15,920), while the remaining three towns would have paid more overall (Arrowsic – $183,526; Bath – $1,633,917; and Woolwich – $117,856). 

Towns would not have fared the same each year under the LD910 cost sharing plan. Phippsburg, for example, would have been asked to pay more in the 2011-2012 school year, a difference of $228,696. Woolwich would have paid more for the first two years, but less in fiscal years 2011 and 2012 ($37,628 and $82,616 respectively).

The following table shows the difference in what towns would have paid over the four-year period under the LD910 cost sharing plan versus what towns actually paid. These are approximate numbers taken from a chart provided by Woolwich officials. Areas where towns would have paid less under LD910 are shown in red, while all other numbers show increases in what towns would have paid.

Woolwich officials speculated the town's position could be reversed if those assessing the case determine they can only use the 2011-2012 school year. 

“If they only go back one year,” King said. “We get up from the defendant's table and we walk over and sit down at the plaintiff's table.”

The town has 20 days to respond to the summons, according to King. They plan to work with Collins to come up with an appropriate response to the suit. 

“We started this ball rolling down the hill,” King said, adding that while their discovery resulted in a cost sharing plan change that saved Woolwich from paying $374,000, he would not want to ask that the suit be thrown out.

“I don't think it should be thrown out,” Board member Alison Hepler said. “I'm not sure offering to pay $117,000 ought to be our first strategy. I'd like to see how this plays out.”

King said Woolwich should pay its share only if Bath pays. Woolwich selectmen will meet with Collins again in executive session on February 4, just before their regularly scheduled meeting.

Meanwhile, members on the RSU 1 Board of Directors representing all of the towns in the school district agree on a cost-per-student plan. This would replace both the former cost sharing plan towns used through 2008 – 2012 and the LD910 plan, but not for the current year. Some RSU 1 board members would like to implement such a cost sharing agreement for fiscal year 2014.