FARMINGTON – The Department of Education has officially approved MSAD 9’s reorganization plan, the district’s superintendent told the school board at a meeting Tuesday evening.
“Good news all around,” Superintendent Michael Cormier told the board.
The plan approved was submitted on Jan. 7 by MSAD 9 to the state, as an alternative after a proposed consolidated district consisting of MSAD 9 and MSAD 58 was rejected by the voters in practically every town in Franklin County. The school board had previously given Cormier approval to get the ball rolling on the alternate plan, as the voter’s rejection of the Western Mountains consolidation plan had been widely expected.
The alternative plan outlined five reasons for the state to find in favor of MSAD 9. It pointed to the recent consolidation effort as an example of due diligence, noting that the voters had rejected the plan on Nov. 4. All other districts, Cormier wrote, were already in their own reorganization plans or, like MSAD 58, wanted no part of MSAD 9’s.
Cormier also cited the large size of the current district, at 450 square miles, and the student population of 2,375, which is only 125 students short of the minimum recommended size for a Regional School Unit.
Furthermore, Cormier went into some detail about the cost saving initiatives the district was already utilizing, both within the district and through partnerships outside of it. These included the recent budget cuts, the use of a new heating regulation system in MSAD 9 schools and the closing of the Weld School and New Sharon central office building.
The DOE Commissioner Susan Gendron wrote in a letter to Cormier that MSAD 9’s alternate plan was in compliance with the law.
“I appreciate the great effort that went into preparing your alternative plan,” Gendron wrote, “and I wish you continued success as you implement the elements set forth in this plan.”
Cormier, for his part, told the board he was happy that the consolidation process was mostly over for MSAD 9.
“It’s done, it’s over,” he said. “We can move forward as a school system.”
He also noted that MSAD 9 would continue to work together with neighboring school districts to save money and preserve programs for students. Representatives of both MSAD 9 and MSAD 58 have told Gendron and others that the consolidation process the two districts attempted to go through was destructive to their relationship.
Director Neil Stinneford of Weld, offered congratulations.
“I would like to publicly than the employees and the staff and the central office,” he said. “Certainly these people went above and beyond.”
A round of applause followed his statement.
Next up is the issue of the name “SAD 9.” According to the reorganization law, School Administrative Districts no longer exist after June 30. One option is to have the official name of the district be “RSU 9,” or Regional School Unit No. 9, while a business name of “SAD 9.” This would let the district avoid the time-consuming and expensive process of changing the name on every deed, school bus and sign.
However, Cormier said, the insurance companies disliked “d.b.a” or “doing business as” names. Another option may be to choose a new name, which would not consist of numbers and letters. He plans to ask the DOE for clarification on what the best way to proceed is.
“We’ll work on it,” Cormier said.
|
|
In other business, the board unanimously accepted adopting the Extra-Curricular Activity Participation Regulation JJJ-R, without any real changes. A substantial revision had been previously proposed, but ran into trouble at the first reading. Those modifications would have granted the administration additional powers to determine when a student broke the law.
That revision would have added language that would help set parameters for the undefined amount of time students are not allowed to participate in sports and other activities following a crime.
However, more controversially to the school board, the revision also added a requirement that students suspected of being involved with a crime must agree to authorize law enforcement to release “any discoverable information about the student’s alleged conduct.”
If the student, along with his or her parents, refused to sign the release form then the student would have been banned from extracurricular activities for a year.
Several board members had found the concept of students “signing their rights away” troubling, and the majority voted that the regulation be looked at again, without the additional language.
