CORRECTED
OCTOBER 24, 2007
PLEASE
NOTE THAT THE MINUTES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FINAL
UNTIL
THE RPC HAS APPROVED THEM AT ITS NEXT MEETING.
LISBON/M.S.A.D. NO. 75
REORGANIZATION
PLANNING COMMITTEE (RPC)
October
10, 2007
The Lisbon/M.S.A.D. No. 75 Reorganization Planning
Committee met at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 10, 2007, at
Committee members present were: (from Bowdoin) Leroy Letourneau, Tim Lavan
and Kim Totten; (from Bowdoinham) Kim Benjamin, Daniel Billings and Joanne
Reinhart; (from Harpswell) James Henderson, Elinor “Ellie” Multer and Joanne
Rogers; (from Topsham) Stephen Harris, Robert W. Hill and James Trusiani; and
(from Libson) Prudence “Prudy” Grant, Gina Mason, Martha Poliquin and Charles
Smith.
Also present were Superintendents J. Michael
Wilhelm (M.S.A.D. No. 75) and
Business Manager Ron Lavender (M.S.A.D. No. 75) and
Catherine Messmer (
Student representatives Sam Prindall (
The meeting was moderated and facilitated by Jay
Bartner.
A. Call
to order
The meeting was called to order by Co-chair Robert
Hill at 6:35 p.m.
The two student representatives to the Committee
were present and introduced themselves.
Sam Prindall is serving his second year as a student representative to
the M.S.A.D. No.75 Board of Directors and indicated he enjoys seeing things happen
on the “front line.” Cam Bubar is a
Lisbon High School junior, who is trying to keep connected with the process,
and hopes to maintain the focus on students.
B. Approval
of minutes of the September 26, 2007, meeting of the RPC
Ms. Mason noted that in the fifth line of Page 2,
she had been incorrectly referred to as Gail
Mason.
It was moved by Ms. Poliquin, seconded by Ms.
Benjamin, and VOTED (unanimously, except
for Mr. Smith’s abstention (Smith and Mason sharing one position/one vote) to accept
as corrected the minutes of the September 26, 2007, meeting of the RPC.
C. Framework
for conducting meetings/decision making/voting
Co-chair Hill had requested that examples of such
be brought to this meeting. Mr. Bartner
had provided copies of Simplified
Roberts Rules of Order and Rules of
Order for Association Boards. Everyone
was familiar with Roberts, and Mr. Bartner indicated that the Rules of Order
were written for a major Board, with Mrs. Multer noting that if the Rules of
Order are adopted, a change needs to be made to A-3.
Ms. Grant, noting no citation, asked the source of
the Rules of Order; and Mr. Bartner
indicated he had accessed the Internet for it, agreeing that it had obviously
been designed with a corporate use intended.
Mr. Hill and Ms. Poliquin (co-chairs) noted that
each School Board operates similarly.
Mr. Henderson referenced the need for a protocol to employ when a motion
needs to be amended.
Mr. Hill related that the M.S.A.D. No. 75 Board
opens the discussion of an agenda item until the point is reached when members
believe they know what the motion should be.
Mrs. Rogers asked why the group has to adopt a set
of “rules,” to which Mr. Bartner responded that he had brought them in as examples, as had been
requested.
Ms. Multer stated that the RPC has to have in place
a process of rules and how the group will work, before reaching the last phases
of the process. She stated that specific
rules need to be in place.
Mr. Harris suggested that the group could use “Parliamentary
Procedure Motions Chart” contained in the Simplified Roberts Rules. Ms. Grant agreed but admitted to being more
familiar with Roberts Rules, citing the book which Superintendent Welsh takes
to Board meetings.
It was moved by Mrs. Rogers, seconded by Mr. Smith,
and VOTED (unanimously) that the RCP
follow the informal system which seems to be in use by both systems, until such
time as there may be a problem (with the informal system) then the use of
Roberts Rules would be utilized.
D. Public
input at RPC meetings/dissemination of information/keeping the communities
informed
Mr. Hill noted that these are open and transparent
meetings and that the question of how to inform the taxpayers needs to be
answered.
Information will be posted on the two systems’
websites. The suggestion was made that
an opportunity could be afforded for people to submit questions online.
The agenda could offer an opportunity for pubic
comment (opinion or concern).
Superintendent Wilhelm indicated that newsletters
could be sent out more often.
Superintendent Welsh indicated that
Ms. Benjamin suggested using the schools to
publicize information, citing the example of
Superintendent Welsh indicated there had been some
discussion of having a link between both systems.
Mr. Henderson suggested utilizing community television. Mr. Lavan stated that not all have access to
it. Mr. Hill said that Harpswell TV is
viewed in all communities of M.S.A.D. No.75, but it’s not broadcast in Lisbon,
to which Mr. Henderson stated that the station could supply a DVD to
Ms. Multer encouraged the use of whatever means is
available, not ruling out anything.
Ms. Poliquin is interested in everyone knowing her
contact information.
Mr. Harris pointed out that it’s not good to have
three or four people at the meetings, then 400-500 at the “final” meeting. Mr. Hill asked for an indication of anyone
who does not welcome their contact
information being put out.
Sam Prindall feels this may not be “student
friendly” and indicated that the large “milestones” need to be communicated to
students.
Ms. Grant assured the two students that the process
guarantees that students will be “ok,” meaning they will not be hurt by the
process. Sam Prindall clarified that he
feels the parliamentary procedure will be difficult for students to comprehend.
Mr. Lavan asked about the possibility of issuing
press releases. Superintendent Wilhelm
noted that no media was present at this evening’s meeting. Ms. Mason noted that the
Superintendent Wilhelm asked how active the Talon
is this year, to which Sam Prindall stated not many students are on this year’s
staff.
E. Sub-committee
scope & authority, sub-committee/RPC decision making
Ms. Poliquin had suggested this agenda item, not
wanting the sub-committees to take on a “life of their own.” She noted that the RPC is the purveyor of
information, with sub-committees bringing recommendations to the full RPC for
decisions.
Mr. Trusiani reiterated that any recommendation a
sub-committee makes has to go to the full membership of the RPC, and that if
the RPC hasn’t voted on a recommendation, it will not materialize.
Mr. Harris agreed that sub-committees make recommendations, and the RPC makes the decisions.
Mrs. Rogers emphasized that sub-committee have to
make the “decision to make recommendations,” but not the ultimate decisions
which will need to come from the full RPC.
F. Sub-committee
breakout
At 7:10 p.m. the three sub-committees broke out,
with each committee preparing to take notes (to take the form of minutes) and
report out later this evening.
G. Sub-committee
reports:
● Governance:
Mrs. Rogers reported that the Sub-committee had
agreed to make changes in the apportionment plan for weighted votes on the
RSU’s Board of Directors, noting that the Law requires the use of the most
recent census.
She noted that the Sub-committee has agreed that
submission of a plan by December 2007 with a referendum vote in January 2008 is
not possible, but that a successful June 2008 referendum and subsequent
creation of an RSU in July 2009 seems more likely.
At the November 2008 general election new Board
elections will be held and will yield the following:
Bowdoin: one
3-year Director
one
2-year Director
Bowdoinham: one
3-year Director
one
2-year Director
Harpswell: one
3-year Director
one
2-year Director
one
1-year Director
Topsham: two
3-year Directors
one
2-year Director
two 1-year Directors
(Bolded section
following was added as a correction noted at the October 24, 2007, RPC
meeting>0
one 2-year Director
two 1-year Directors
In the second year of the RSU’s operation, it will
be left to the Towns when to hold its elections.
The Sub-committee is also recommending that two
students from both
Ms. Multer asked the
rationale for a 17-member board, and it was explained that it was perceived to
be easier to “sell” to the communities.
Following the November 2008 election of the RSU’s
Board, that body will develop a budget and hire staff, while the current Boards
for
● Financial:
Ms. Multer reported that the Financial
Sub-committee produced one recommendation --- that all real and personal
property be transferred from the existing units to the new RSU, with the
exception of the elementary school being used as a central office in
Lisbon. This action would require a
conversation with the Town Council, and if a similar recommendation regarding
that facility, the Sub-committee agrees it would be appropriate to do so.
The Sub-committee will recommend that the RSU’s
central office be located in the present administrative offices of M.S.A.D. No.
75, as there is sufficient room for all personnel. Superintendent Wilhelm and Mr. Trusiani noted
that when the federal government “excessed” property and buildings to M.S.A.D.
No. 75, the building housing the District Office had a proviso attached to it
that if it ceased being used for educational purposes, it would revert back not
to the Town of
Superintendent Welsh sought clarification that the
M.S.A.D. No. 75 District Office would have adequate space for everything, and
Superintendent Wilhelm reiterated there is space enough.
It was moved by Ms. Multer, seconded by Mr. Harris,
and VOTED (unanimously, except for Mr.
Smith’s abstention (Smith and Mason sharing one position/one vote) (to make
the recommendation) that all real and personal property be transferred from the
existing units to the new RSU, with the exception of the elementary school
being used as a central office in Lisbon, and to open a discussion with the
Town of Lisbon regarding that facility.
● Employee & Bargaining:
Mr. Harris reported that the Sub-committee
summarized the lists of employees that will be needed, as well as bargaining
agreements to compare contractual obligations.
The Sub-committee will look at cost savings the RSU must achieve.
The next meeting will be held inside the October 24th
RPC meeting. Mr. Henderson agreed that
the group needs this much time to collect data needed.
Mrs. Rogers would like to have the Governance Committee’s
recommendation on the agenda of the next RPC meeting for its full
consideration.
H. Naming
the RPC
It was moved by Mrs. Rogers, seconded by Mr. Smith,
and VOTED (unanimously, except for Ms.
Mason’s abstention (Smith and Mason sharing one position/one vote) to
recommend naming the RPC the “Lisbon/M.S.A.D. No. 75 RPC.”
I. Wrap-up
and schedule of meetings
The next meeting of the full RPC will be held at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 24th
at
The Financial Committee will meet at 6:30 p.m. on Wednesday, October 17th
in the M.S.A.D. No. 75 District Offices.
Mrs. Rogers noted that the Governance Committee is
concerned that the Reorganization Committee will not be able to complete its
work by December 1st.
Ms. Grant noted that Superintendent Welsh is
meeting weekly with Union 30’s School Boards, alternating between
It was decided to meet on October 24th
and November 7th, and then make a decision on future scheduling of
meetings.
At 8:55 p.m. the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
Rebecca A. Brillant
Recorder
/bb/minutesRPC101007corrected