[Updated 2 p.m.] The MSAD #58 Board of Directors have arranged a special meeting for Tuesday, June 2, 2015 at 7 p.m. at Mt. Abram High School.
SALEM – More than 100 residents of MSAD 58 effectively defunded their school district Thursday evening, as the long-simmering dispute between the Mt. Abram Teachers Association and the district finally boiled over.
Attendees wasted no time turning the meeting from the $9.4 million budget proposed by the school board to the issues raised by the association in a Declaration of No Confidence issued yesterday. Teachers and Ed Techs in the district overwhelmingly supported the document, which called for a “critical re-evaluation of [MSAD 58’s] leadership direction” due to the district being in “crisis.”
After an introduction to the budget by Luci Milewski and the swearing in of moderator Paul Mills and the ballot clerks, the Regular Instruction article was immediately amended from $3.33 million down to $1. Given that the board had decided to ignore the input of professional educators and implement their own agendas, Christina Mitman said after making the motion, regular instruction in the district could be paid for with $1.
The vote to fund the Regular Instruction article was 67 in favor and 49 in opposition. While those attending the meeting would proceed through all 18 articles, discussion moved from the budget, which included $192,000 for a new pre-Kindergarten program, to the rift between educators and the school board.
Issues raised by teachers, or those advocating for the teachers, included subjects that have been discussed before: the longstanding contractual disputes between the association and district, the use of a Portland-based lawyer to assist the school board with negotiations, and questions about other financial items, such as pay-to-play athletics. The most consistently-leveled accusation by teachers, however, was that the school board no longer supported or respected educators within the district.
“Last year, I got up here and said we’re coming to a cliff,” teacher Steve Mitman said. “Folks, we’re over the cliff.”
Comments by educators echoed the Declaration of No Confidence issued by the association yesterday. That document, which had the support 93 of 94 educators as of Wednesday evening, blamed an “unprecedented exodus of staff members at all levels; administrators, teachers and ed techs,” the declaration reads. “Not only is the cost for filling these positions putting a significant burden on the budget, it’s not clear that quality replacements will be available while the conditions that are driving staff away remain in place.”
Four administrators had previously announced they were leaving the district in the past few weeks: Superintendent Erica Brouillet, Technology Manager Angel Allen, Business Manager Luci Milewski and assistant principal/athletic director James Black. Thursday evening, Brouillet indicated that a fifth administrator, Mt. Abram High School Marco Aliberti, was also resigning.
Additionally, Brouillet said that a candidate to fill the technology manager position had decided against coming to the district. The school board had approved a $10,000 increase in that position to $75,000 in a bid to draw the qualified candidate.
A number of speakers at the meeting urged those involved in the district’s disputes to work together. Marc Edwards of Strong, who said the school in Strong was what drew his family to the area, questioned the impact of the protest vote and dispute on the education of the district’s students.
“We really need to look at what we’re doing to this district,” Edwards said.
Sophomore Brandon Haines, who said he was sunburned after three days of protesting in front of Mt. Abram High School, and that he knew there were “wonderful” people on both the school board and association.
“We see these two groups of wonderful people at each others throats,” Haines said, asking both groups to sit down and “try and meet in the middle.”
Neal McCurdy of Kingfield got a laugh when he asked both sides to take some of the money spent on lawyers, “buy some shovels for some of the teachers and the school board and go bury some egos.”
In addition to the unresolved teacher contracts and rapidly diminishing pool of administrators, another issue facing the district is a renewed push by Kingfield to discuss withdrawing from MSAD 58. Selectman Mervin Wilson pointed out that his town had set aside $20,000 to consider the idea. Kingfield currently pays more than a third of the local tax assessments for the district.
“Do you think this creates any more confidence in the district?” Wilson said, addressing the $1 protest votes. He asked that the meeting simply be adjourned after Article 2, which deals with the Special Education cost center, was also set at $1.
However, moderator Mills said that the meeting articles did need to be disposed of before a motion to adjourn could be entertained. Residents moved quickly through the warrant, approving $1 for all articles except Article 10: Debt Service, which was set at the recommended $255,955, and Article 15: Pre-K, which was set at $0. Those in attendance advised against cutting debt service even temporarily, as those funds are used to pay off debt for school projects. As recommended, Article 15 would have raised $192,033 in one-time, start-up costs for a pre-K program. Milewski said that the program was expected to more than pay for itself by the second year.
The overall budget was set in Article 14 at $255,964. That represented the debt service payments plus $14 in protest votes.
Several voters questioned whether the confirmation referendum scheduled for June 9 would need to be held. It is believed that the school board can prevent an effectively meaningless budget meeting result from proceeding to referendum. A new meeting will be required to set a budget capable of supporting the MSAD 58 through the next fiscal year, which begins on July 1.
Enough already! People don’t move into a district with ongoing disputes like this, they move away. This will slowly bleed our already fragile rural economy. Strong schools make strong communities. Put my tax dollars where they will do the most good, into our greatest resource, our children.
Take notice SAD 9 residents! This is what’s needed in our district. For once stand up to
the board and the administrators!
Contract negotiations are always difficult. Just because you don’t give the teachers union everything they want does not mean you do not value education. It is OK for the teachers union to bring in their paid experts to help with their negotiations, but they cry foul when the school board brings in their legal help, because let’s face it these are legal documents that cost the districts tons of money down the road. It’s time to accept a 1% pay increase and pay at least 25% of your insurance costs like the rest of us.
So you’ve effectively voted to disban RSU 58. If this goes to the voters on June 9th you have closed Mt.Abram along with putting all the teachers on unemployment. The high school kids will have to be pulled back to their respective, already crowded, elementary schools, or tuitioned to another district. With the high schoolers back in local schools there will be no room for UT students. What will happen with them?
So sorry to see this. This is a special time of year for our Seniors. It is to bad that they have to leave Mt. Abram with all this going on. Good luck Senior Class.
Local control has turned into yokel control. Sorry to see this turmoil affecting so many futures.
Back to the drawing board. Good luck coming to an agreement, folks.
Still proud of our school board for standing up for what we taxpayers can afford….Still disappointed in the teachers/school personnel/union for pushing for way more than we can afford and pointing fingers instead of working to resolve the problem in the best way for all involved…right now I’m more appreciative of the time and trouble the school board has invested in this process than the teachers and administrators…too bad… And teachers + admin personnel wonder why they are not shown more respect..they need to remember that respect is earned…
So glad to see it was a dedicated teacher who came up with this brilliant idea of $1 budget. I’m sure your union bosses came up with this idea. I hope it backfires and simply shuts down Mt Abram High School. In the end we’ll all be better for it and the taxpayers will save in the end
This is very simply a case of big labor holding the kids, the non teaching staff, tax payers, and the school board hostage untill they get what they want. Last night when asked to explain what it would take to settle the contract they either didn’t know or were ashamed to get that out in public. They are such professionals. I’m going to call my local member and ask them to pay the teachers more so they can better afford to act this way.
Many districts every year have trouble passing a budget for a variety of reasons….it does not shut down the school district or cause it to disband. Schools operate on the prior year budget until such time as a new budget is passed. So let the conversation begin let each side be kind to the other and find solutions. It is time that we worry about the education of the students of MSAD 58. They deserve it and it is our job as taxpayers to provide them with the best one we can.
Fred, perhaps all administrators should pay 25% of their insurance as well! Teachers in Maine deserve all they can get in rural areas where teaching students is tougher than let’s say Falmouth or Cape Elizabeth where parents support education. Hang in there teachers!
I believe the people have spoken.
The fact is that the people (not all, but enough to vote and make their point) don’t support the existence of a school district in this area.
The teachers don’t feel respected and appreciated because, well, they aren’t. I’m not saying that in an inflammatory way, it’s just the facts. Clearly demonstrated last night.
It’s a crucial part of this ‘fight’ because the teachers have been fighting for something that does not exist. The school board is simply (apparently) representing the people in communities.
Time for plan B, what does this mean for the area, how do we pick up the pieces from here? Will the towns now pick up the funding for the elementary schools? Does the school board dissolve? Do we turn Mount Abram HS into a sand pit and make some cash out of this wreckage?
I hope the very difficult message sent last night about the budget is heard and we can all move on to supporting the future of our communities: our children. For me it’s not about money: it’s about priorities, decision making and empowering the people hired to do their job to the best of their abilities. We all live in a democracy, and while it’s not perfect it’s the best system so far. There IS enough money in the budget to provide a great education for our children, and it’s got to be balanced on the ability of our communities to pay. Nobody asks for the support a school like Falmouth provides, we can’t afford it, but to be ranked last out of the surrounding 9 school districts (in total compensation) in surrounding areas makes it hard to recruit and retain quality teachers, administrators and ed techs, especially when by all measures our students outperform surrounding districts on every metric we have. Yes we can certainly do better, and we want to, but not if we continue on the present course. It’s gratifying to see what our alumni have achieved since they left here, and reflects well on the support of our communities in the past. Money spent on the $300/hour lawyer never sees the light of day in our communities, and the $200,000 hasn’t saved any money for the local taxpayer. It’s all gone to a Portland law firm. This can change in a heartbeat and we can spend our money locally, where it supports our communities and our students.
Our communities have always shown their support of our schools in the past, and are willing to do so in the future IF they feel their hard-earned money is spent on the right things. We CAN all figure this out together and take care of our children in a way that provides them the education the deserve, at a price we can afford, IF the money is spent on the right things. Losing quality teachers, administrators and ed techs to surrounding schools is not something we can afford to do. When they leave all the money spent on gaining their experience is lost. Would you want to go to a first year doctor or one who has practiced medicine for a number of years?
We are in a crisis with our schools right now, but crisis also means “opportunity” and the chance to make critical decisions and achieve a positive result. Let’s all pull together and MOVE ON!
I would like the school board to understand that this meeting last night in no way represents my (support staff employee) opinion. Though I don’t agree with all the decisions that have been made by the school board I was embarassed and frustrated to say the least. I don’t feel that the teachers union gave any thought to how their “protest” would effect the rest of the MSAD # 58 Support Staff, and that is very sad. I hope that this district can move forward, but at this point I am very doubtful.
I’ve had a change of heart… Go teachers!
This is a response to Fred’s comments: 1. The difference between expenditures for the Board’s paid expert and the teachers’ paid experts has to do with the source of funding. You and I, and all other taxpayers of MSAD 58, are paying for the Board’s squandering excessive funds on a lawyer. Teachers, however, fund the Union through their own contributions withdrawn directly from their paychecks. 2. Also, it seems that you are asking teachers to take a 24% pay cut and wondering why they won’t accept those terms. Would you?
Here is my solution to the contract fiasco we as tax payers should just stop paying taxes to fund these schools. School ends in a couple of weeks. Either the teachers agree to the contract as written, or the Freshman class would not be the only new faces at Abram in the fall.
This happens in other districts has a very rational and true comment.
Emotions and hysteria aside.
The underlying problem with the school system is bumping and tenure. Tenure, if at all, needs to be between 7-10 years not 3. Bumping guarantees the system will degrade over time, and no amount of money can fix it once it has gone on for a while.
This piece of an article shows what some students did to protest deficient education.
Ruling in a case brought by nine California students, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Rolf Treu said the current system discriminates against minority and low-income students in K-12 classrooms, saying there was “no dispute that there are a significant number of grossly ineffective teachers currently active in California classrooms.”
He agreed with the students’ claims that California tenure laws result in ineffective teachers “obtaining and retaining permanent employment” in schools that predominantly serve low-income and minority students.
The lawsuit asked the courts to strike down several laws providing teachers with tenure, seniority-based job protection and other benefits. During the trial, Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent John Deasy testified that it can take more than two years on average to fire an incompetent tenured teacher and sometimes as long as 10. The cost of doing so, he said, can run anywhere from $250,000 to $450,000.
The lawsuit, Vergara v. California, was brought by Beatriz Vergara and eight other students who said they were saddled with teachers who let classrooms get out of control, came to school unprepared and in some cases told them they’d never make anything of themselves.
USA Today article 6/10/14
Just something to think about when arguing and trying to create a crisis over 1% pay increases when the real fight should be for the structural damage to the system that tenure, the way it is cast into contracts now, deprives students from the best education parents and other tax payers pay for.
Our district is in crisis and the exodus of administrators and teachers is a testament to the fact that somthing needs to change. The ed tech and teacher contracts are just a symptom of the larger problem. But, as one respondent pointed out, the word “crisis” also means “opportunity” in some parts of the world, and this is our opportunity to refocus on what should be the priority for all of us, which is the education of our kids. We all know that there are school board members and teachers alike who share that priority. Now is the time for those with maturity and integrity to look forward, work together, and try to get this district moving in the right direction again. A colleague has accused me of wearing rose colored glasses because I always hope for the best; I’m keeping them firmly in place and am hopeful we can work together to make the district better for everyone.
Karen, I’m sorry! I was wrong. You are right.
This entire situation is frustrating for all of our communities. As a parent of multiple children within the district my first concern is the quality of my children’s education and the impact this standoff is having on my children. The fact that it takes money to provide our children with an adequate is not a new concept. Money has to be budgeted and things have to be prioritized and used wisely as it would be for any “large family”. That’s what this district is; or used to be.
There are a few areas that I feel a little confused about. For example; it’s my understanding that the Strong School is operating as a day treatment facility now, which means that they can bill Maine Care for certain services which they had previously been providing out of the schools budget. All money being paid to the district by Maine Care is going into the general fund. If this is the case what are those funds being allocated for? This could potentially be a significant amount of money for the district; which could help to offset the budget needs of both the teachers and the school board.
Our community, school board members and teachers need to look at the big picture and make some very difficult decisions. We cannot expect to obtain or maintain quality educators and administration by providing less pay, no pay increases, and by asking them to pay a much higher percentage of their health care than they’ve had to pay before. That being said teachers cannot expect to be paid here in Rural Maine what teachers may be getting paid large cities.
I do not necessarily agree with the approach taken with this budget meeting but I do understand the concept behind it all. It’s time to stop all of this and come to an agreement so that the children of our communities can be the focus of our attention!
Perhaps this the right time to close MTA. Low enrollment, lack of hands on, vocational learning and a crumbling building…. Just saying..
“A lean Compromise is better than a fat lawsuit.”
It is unfortunate that the school board has refused compromise and has set its mind on expensive lawsuits. You would think that they would want to set a better example for the children of our community, especially because it is the children that will eventually be taking care of them.
As a Mt. Abram alumna who has stayed in the area for work and previously planned on starting and raising a family here, I find this very concerning and would much rather move elsewhere.
This is just sad.
Lets be rationale everyone…..stop blaming one side or the other as that is what got us to this point. We need to accept the things we can’t change and change the things we can. I believe that this is a great district even with its problems. Also let’s stop speculating about teachers leaving because as of right now teachers may be looking for work but only one or two have actually resigned. Yes the administrators are leaving and we need to worry about quality replacements. But again we can solve these problems if and when we put the needs of the students 1st and foremost. Thank you to the school board for creating and working on a budget, thank you to the teachers that teach our children now work together.
Our community is in crisis, and i hope that this IS an opportunity for us to come together and to have something positive come out of all of the negativity. Mt. Abram is a wonderful school. I wish that when I was growing up I had the opportunity to attend such a small high school with caring, effective educators who treat all of their students with equality and respect. My child has a couple of years left, and I hope that they are able to graduate from Mt. Abram. The kids are all so freaked out at this point that it’s extremely sad. They have been supporting the teachers and administrators whole-heartedly, but the teachers obviously did not have their students in mind during last night’s meeting.
The fact that administrators are abandoning ship is truly disheartening. I can’t blame them, but it is complicating an already difficult situation and making it much worse. Marco Aliberti’s resignation is going to be a huge loss to the community, and especially to the kids at Mt. Abram.
Everyone who cares about MSAD 58 needs to attend the special school board meeting on Tuesday, June 2nd and to come with an open mind, good ideas, and good intentions. We don’t need any more negative, angry attitudes if we’re going to figure this thing out as a community.
Let’s all remember that we need to do what’s best for our children. It’s not just about money.
To the comment that @Let’sMoveOn made —- Your argument against an “effective”, “knowledgable”, “better” healthcare provider was completely off target. Sometimes that doctor who has been practicing medicine for many years can be just as “wet behind the ears” as that first-year doctor. The problem being that anyone working in any profession can easily fall into a very safe operating procedure often failing to look for the “new” or “equally effective” means of execution. I, personally, would MUCH prefer a doctor who has an open mind, who is “up on” the latest information, who is both knowledgable and professional. You incite that young new doctors aren’t as good which is an incredible disservice to them.
To the comment to @Mike – You couldn’t be more correct about tenure. It’s such an interesting aspect of the discussion…keep your noses clean and enough off the radar for those 3 years and these teachers are pretty much golden. Not many other professions can say that, can they?
Time to be realistic with our tax dollars…we elderly only have so much money we can pay in taxes…someday those wanting everything will be old, too…
Mike and others,
Nice article about the land of California, but it in no way reflects the situation here in our district. Sadly we have very little diversity. While we are classified as economically disadvantaged, our school was recognized as the 13th best in the state a couple of years ago by US News and World Report. It was one of the top 10% in the country, precisely because it does a great job with our “economically disadvantaged” student population. They recognized that the school does a great job meeting the needs of our students, who have not had all the “advantages” other areas have. I hate those terms but there is a general link between economics and achievement. We are unique in that we break the expectations based on our student population. Of course we can do BETTER, and we want to, but losing our teachers, administrators and ed techs will likely NOT help our students do better. It takes time for a teacher to become proficient, like any activity.
In addition, our report card by the governor gave us one of the very best “grades”, much better than any surrounding schools, and significantly better than economically “advantaged” districts across the state. There doesn’t seem to be any connection between tenure and achievement of our students. In fact the opposite could be claimed: we have an experienced staff and compared to other schools we outperform them. Our schools do better than just about any even though we don’t have all the financial “advantages” of southern Maine schools. Personal feedback from alumni attending the most rigorous colleges and universities tells us our students are well prepared. I know we can do even better, but not if all the experienced teachers, ed techs and administrators leave for other schools.
The district spent a great deal of money a few years ago when they commissioned a study to examine the options, and to the surprise of many the results proved that educating our students in our own district was the cheapest alternative. That bears repeating: it’s cheaper to educate our students in our own schools than it is to tuition them out. The EUT students provide a lot of income and help the towns share the fixed costs. Take them out of the mix and costs go UP, not down. Not developing a budget simply is not an option: in fact it’s required under state law and it’s illegal not to provide for the education of our students. The question is do you want to pay more to send them away, or less to have them here in our area where we have a say in their education?
It seems that many people have chosen to forget the conclusions of the study: higher taxes and absolutely NO SAY in the education of our students. All you do is pay, you have no say! Sounds just like the original tea party in Boston. In fact if they were tuitioned out they would attend schools ranked below our own schools, at a greater expense. Get a copy of the report from the central office and have a look. Closing the schools will result in HIGHER taxes, and the exodus of many families from our towns. If you think education isn’t important in attracting new people to an area, go talk to a real estate broker and get the facts. Schools are at the top of the list of things that motivate people to come to an area, as Mr. Edwards pointed out last night.
As far as a “crumbling” building, come have a look at the money that has been invested in the last 10 years. Our school looks better, and functions better, than many newer schools. The bathrooms in the new school in Brunswick were a disaster after the first year, while our bathrooms look great considering the building opened in 1969. A testimony to the great students we have, and the custodial staff who take care of our building with pride. Closing the school will mean the millions invested will be wasted: it’s virtually worthless to anyone except someone hoping to open a private school.
We CAN solve the present situation and provide a great education for our students at a cost we can all afford. It’s a fact that it’s cheaper than closing the schools. Read the report. There’s enough money in the budget, we just need to be transparent about what it’s being spent on, and we all need to examine our priorities. Fancy locks or support for our staff? There are a lot of things that can be rearranged that will directly impact learning. Examine the costs and the benefits of everything: bang for the buck! Our students deserve it and the survival of our towns is linked to the success of our schools. We can all work together to generate a budget we can afford and that we can all support!
Has anyone thought of the fact that LePage’s policies that push more of the economic burden onto the community versus the state which distributes cost over a much larger set of people probably is the cause of the people of the Mount Abram district getting ready to eat each other? How many of the same anti-education people voted for LePage? This is what he wanted all along: defunded districts, consolidation, kids turned into commuters, charter schools and virtual schools benefiting. . .. LePage’s policies hit rural districts the hardest. Sorry to say but it is with great irony that his best supporters are people who supposedly love rural Maine. LePage is a scourge on this state; it’s sadly too late to recognize that.
Three years of contract negotiations, over $150,000 in legal fees as of February of 2015, and still no contract.
In most cases, as ‘Herbert’ posting above me states, “a lean compromise is better than a fat lawsuit.” Actually, a lean compromise is better than a fat lawsuit — except for the lawyers if the lawyers are being paid by the hour. Lawyers make money when cases do NOT settle. Every hour spent fighting instead of settling is an hour of fee in a lawyer’s pocket. It is not the peacemakers who make the fat fees; it is the war-makers who know how to drag a case on forever milking it for all it is worth.
There comes a time in the course of most settlement negotiations when the cost of paying the lawyers to keep fighting an issue is greater than the cost of settling the issue and moving on. It is important, I believe, for a lawyer to tell his client when this point has been reached, to bluntly state to the client something like this:
“I know you feel strongly about this, but how much sense does it make for you to pay me another $15,000 to fight for a $5,000 truck, because that is what refusing to compromise on this issue is going to cost you. Oh, and by the way, even if you pay me the $15,000, we still may not win the truck, and then you’ll be out the $15,000 and the truck.”
Unless the goal of these negotiations in union-busting pure and simple, it is not a win for the board or the district when a stalemate costs the district over $150,000 and counting in legal fees — when 1/4 of the pie that could have gone to the kids and the teachers goes to the lawyers, and then another 1/4, and another 1/4 until there’s nothing left of the pie but the plate because the lawyers got the last crumb of it.
It is not a win when the best teachers and administrators in the district are leaving in droves, when the community is divided and up in arms, when our kids are the ones who have to stand up and fight for a decent education because the rest of us are too selfishly concerned about our taxes going up to put the best interests of our children ahead of our own.
I get it that our property taxes are too high. I am an older person having a hard time finding the money to be able to afford to continue living in my own home. But hey, how about we stop squeezing and blaming the teachers and the kids for the fiscal mess we are in and start directing our anger and frustration where it belongs, starting with a Governor who has no problem starving our schools and local communities to provide fat tax cuts for the rich.
For the sake of the district, the teachers, the community, and most of all, the kids, stop throwing good money after bad and settle this.
So, what is the answer? How do we continue to maintain our district as is? I don’t see how we can. Change needs to happen but what is the change? I know the high taxes have discoursed people from moving into Kingfield. The first $1500 in taxes, per home owner, is for education. For some that’s not a problem. Now consider that 40-50% of our students quality for free & reduced lunches and 10% of our residents rely on the food panty in Salem. We are shrinking in numbers. We don’t have the income base we had 15 years ago. That being said,
I want to believe that everyone supports having good, strong teachers that can continue to provide a great education to our kids. Working in the district for many years, I understand that salaries & benefits need to be competitive in order to retain good staff, all staff, not just teachers. What happened with the verbal contract agreement that the teachers & the Board had a few weeks ago? Is it true that teachers are holding out for additional language that is new to unions? Fill us in please. What is the answer? Give teachers what they want? Give Board what they want? I have no suggestions but I do remember going through this in the early 90s. Three years no contract. The losers were the students.
I must respectfully disagree with Jason Simpson. Thanks to Gov. LePage’s policies I no longer have to pay state income tax. I am very willing to give some of that few hundred dollars to local property taxes where I have much more say over how it is spent.
I really do hope the school board will consider that people envy the amazing school district we have here, and just like we protect our other treasures, please do what it takes to keep our biggest treasure, our top ranked school, fully supported.
Did the teachers that thought of this ridiculous plan last night even think of whoever else this might effect in their school system….like the support, custodial and transportation staff? How selfish……there Are other ways to protest and were many other meetings that this little show could have been presented…..and for the one teacher who was asked specifically what the board needed to do to the budget to re-present it and he conveniently said that he had spoken enough and he should let someone else speak?…….how shameful! I am disappointed in our communities for not showing up to vote one way or another last night. I saw one selectman from Phillips out of the three and no Town Managers or representatives from the other towns (although they might have been there) andwould say over 3/4 of the audience was comprised of school employees…..where is the general public that complain so much about wanting resolution to these issues? My wife and I went and voted, but where are the rest of the community members? Maybe one of the teacher was right when she mentioned the board was perhaps representing what the towns wanted. Not many thought it was important enough to stand and vote, but MANY take lots of time to complain about something they have failed to be informed about!
And Mike, if you knew these schools at all, you would know Strong ‘ s principal, Felicia Pease and MTA’s principal, Marco Aliberti, would not put up with bad teachers. I don’t know if they weed out bad one’s at hiring, or if it’s through team building or how they do it, but they have lead great schools where kids protest and get suspended because they LIKE their teachers!
Ah Jason Jason Jason…
The man you hate is the man who said”the schools need to be about the students not the teachers”.
If you can’t agree to that…Then you are simply part of the problem.
Times have changed.
Denial doesn’t change it back.
I am a parent in Phillips and I have a two year old son with my husband Michael and he will be 3 in August we planned on him going to head start and now he won’t be able to! Many young lives are impacted by this budget plan and it’s ridiculous does anyone care about the lives of our children anymore! I just don’t know what to think!
I hate to say it, but the idea behind this $1 budget voted in for most of the categories will come back to hurt everyone who currently works for the school system. The bus drivers, ed techs, secretaries, custodians will all suffer when there is a very good change that Mt. Abram high school will be closed. Then good luck to all of the teachers finding another job. Some of you will, others will not. It never pays to take advice from your union bosses.
These “senior-experienced” members of the professional staff in MSAD (RSU) 58 are not going to quit their jobs and go to work for another district. Nobody will hire them because they cost too much. When an educator “transfers’ to another school district, the years of experience transfer also. No district is going to pay $60K for 25 years experience when they can pay $35K for someone proven in the classroom with 5 to 7 years experience. This is why, once these professional educators hit the 12 to 15 year milestone in their career, they stay where they are until retirement. The exceptions to this are very few and far between.
No other district in the state has had a contract issue this drawn out. The board has laid all of their negotiation cards on the table for the public to view. In the meeting last evening, the chief negotiator for the board and the board chair (two different board members) asked what the professional staff wanted. The professional staff refused to answer publically. What are they hiding from the public? The board has asked for fully public negotiations. Why do they continue to refuse to negotiate anywhere except behind closed doors? Why can’t the people who pay their wages (the taxpayers of the district) observe the negotiations?
Having negotiated three different contracts with many of these same people when I was a board member, I am quite certain the professional staff of MSAD (RSU) 58 are not divulging all of the facts and once again are trying to play on the public’s emotions in hope of support. I wish them the best of luck.
Concerned:
To be fair the one question you specified wasn’t the only question not answered. What about Mr. Martin’s questions he placed to the board? No answers, nothing. I pay $50 for my son to play baseball. Not a problem, I’d pay more if needed. BUT, that being said, I also had to buy his uniform pants from a local sports shop. WHY?? There was $20,000 (roughly) in the pay to play program..where is it and what is it being used for? There are many unanswered questions, from BOTH SIDES, that need answering.
If you remember correctly there was a petition put out to have the chair of the board step down. Not resign, step down and appoint a new chair. There was no response to that (except for cowardly blurbs on the Bulldog, where no one had nerve enough to use their names), how much clearer can the community say what they think? 95% of these teachers are also taxpayers to the towns. I’m sure they don’t want their taxes to go up any more then the rest of us do. These are our kids..I would rather my tax money go to their education then anything else.
I propose that MTA be moved to Carrabassett Valley. When I lived in the valley we never groveled over the budget, and I’m sure the taxpayers would love to put money into the childrens futures!
Mr. Dyar, you must be confused; the truth is exactly opposite from what you wrote. The teachers have asked repeatedly for the board to sit down with us and negotiate publicly, without their lawyer talking for them. This has been done multiple times in writing and verbally at board meetings. They even agreed once, last February when a town selectmen requested that they deliberate in public, and that was the most productive session we have had. This is all public record; it would be good for you to know the facts before pointing fingers.You also never negotiated with “these same people” because we (the teachers who are negotiating) have never negotiated with you.
You are probably right that the most veteran (and therefore expensive) teachers are less likely to get a job elsewhere, so the district will be losing many of those good, proven, 5-15 year teachers to other districts. And with the compensation package offered, it is also likely that we will have a hard time attracting quality applicants, like we are already experiencing with the open math position at Mt. Abram.
I agree with Hrtlss Bstrd. Simple solution. If the current teachers don’t agree with the contract….let them find jobs else where. It is there choice. There is only so much money you can take from the tax payers. There are lots of new graduates that would love jobs! Enough is enough! Let them go out in the real world where they don’t have that awful teachers union behind them! After they work out in the real world for a while they will regret there selfless actions. What is important is our kids!
Jason is the one who should admonish you condescendingly; you say that LePage is all about the students because he SAYS he is, but I say talk is cheap, look at his actions. He has cut school funding year after year and has tried (and partially succeeded) to do irreparable harm to public schools by underfunding them to promote his pet projects, charter and virtual schools (which all studies show are NOT delivering quality education).
What ever the residence do here, please educate yourselves before you make decisions.
Settling with the teachers would have SAVED the district over $150,000. That is a simple fact. The teachers have agreed with the salary amount offered by the board since part-way through the first year of negotiations, and the most they would have saved on insurance by forcing the proposed cut is $50,000 (now they can only save about $10,000 since this has gone on so long). They also have given up the one thing that they said they wanted the most, which is a change in the percentage of insurance that teachers are responsible for. We proposed to take on an additional 2% resposibility for our insurance, and if the board had agreed to that it would have become part of our contract. Since they instead chose to impose a 5% decrease (which will only take effect from now until the end of the year, hence the limited savings), that decrease WILL NOT become part of the contract, so we will be starting over again right where we were at the beginning of this process. There is also a high likelihood that this will cost the district significantly more in legal expenses, with no possible hope for any financial gain. It seems like a different decision would have been far better for taxpayers, teachers, and especially STUDENTS!
re: re:about
I can’t believe it took this long for someone to blame it on LePage.
Sally B.
The open math position is probably one of the easiest for the board to address. They do not need a third full time math teacher. Simply partner with the University of Maine Community College System to provide the Advanced Placement level courses. The folks that proctor the students at the college level are professional educators, familiar with the subject matter. On a daily basis they successfully deal with class size of greater than thirty students. The U-Maine system could provide either an onsite or online, any AP course the district wants to offer. Upon successful completion not only would the AP student the bonus points to artificially inflate their GPA, they would get the real world value of transferable college credits. Credits transferable, not just within the U-Maine system, but that are accepted at many public and private universities nationwide. And these credits would come at no cost to the students, decreasing the cost of their post-secondary education. This type of progressive partnership has proven successful across the United States.
For the record, the majority of the current professional staff at the High School and K-8 facilities were employed by MSAD (RSU) 58 when I was a member of the board. So unless the professional staff negotiating team is only looking out for themselves, not the entire membership, I did negotiate with you.
Our group was present and was extreamly saddened by the school boards lack of concern for the students
The school board needs legal help in order to make sure they are entering into agreements that make sense financially for this district for many years to come. The teaching staff has professional resources on their side, so it is necessary for the school board to do the same. Oncee the school system does that, the teachers wants are usually reduce d by the school board in the bargaining process. The teachers then drag the process out, start blaming it on the school board, and then start trying to gain public support from certain parents. You see this play out in school system after school system. Even though it is costing the school board a significant amount of legal monies, this ends up saving them many more times than that in future costs. What happens time and again when you read the paper, is that school systems will state that the school budget is going up so much because of negotiated contracts and they can’t do any thing about these costs. Well you can! It is called bargaining and not giving the house away. Keep up the good work Mt Abram school board.
Randi, that may be true elsewhere (I wouldn’t know), but here its almost exactly the opposite from what you described. Our negotiators are school teachers; not what one would normally consider a frightening opponent. They went to the first meeting as themselves, prepared to negotiate with people they knew from the community. Instead, the found a lawyer from away whom they had never met, and who did all of the talking in the entire meeting. This continued for several meetings before teachers threw up their hands and said “we can’t do this process with a lawyer because we aren’t lawyers ourselves.” It was only then that they asked MEA to send a representative.
Former MTA math teacher Neil McCurdy pointed out an important fact the other night: a lawyer who bills by the hour has a strong incentive to see that a settlement is avoided. In three years, the Board’s lawyer has earned more than $200,000 in MSAD 58. Teachers have pointed out often that our representative from MEA costs the taxpayers nothing, but its also important to note that they (we’ve had to go through several) are salaried workers. They don’t make a dime from extending the process. Its the opposite in fact; the longer this goes, the more extra work they have, without any extra pay. That right there is a very strong incentive to settle, and the reason we keep having to change our representatives: they get burned out.
And finally, the figures just don’t add up, because the teachers never asked for anything unreasonable. You can see exactly what has been saved just by looking at the offers. The difference is a fraction of that $200,000, and it was never that high even at the very beginning. This has simply cost the taxpayers more, and the only person who’s truly benefited lives in a no doubt very nice home in southern Maine.
The school committee cannot lead the school district. In my opinion the school board needs to employ a strong superintendent who has the full support and confidence of the board. The board needs to empower him/her to guide them out of these difficulties. Hire an experienced superintendent who will do the negotiation on the board’s behalf rather than use an expensive negotiation consultant. Hire a superintendent who can bring the factions together and work out compromises. Bring in a superintendent who can earn the respect and trust of the staff and the community, someone who wants to become a part of the Mt. Abram community and make a commitment for the long haul. There’s no substitute for skillful, energetic leadership. The board needs to be willing to work with and follow the lead of the superintendent. The troubles now affecting MSAD 58 have been slowly piling up over time due to lack of effective, consistent leadership.
I absolutely agree Randi, “The school board needs legal help in order to make sure they are entering into agreements that make sense financially for this district for many years to come.” Before voting to approve any item in a contract it would be foolish for either side to not have their legal counsel check out the fine print.
However, the piece that the public is not aware of is the previous superintendent used the lawyer to do 90% of the talking DURING the actual negotiations! We (taxpayers) paid for a Portland lawyer to get in his car drive to Kingfield, talk and drive back to the tune of $200k !!!!!! That is MISUSE of public funds, it is also an example of a superintendent who is not doing a very critical piece of their (high paid) job.
As for the teachers, they entered the process 3 years ago asking for NOTHING! Yes, that’s the truth. The only goal was to not lose ground on health insurance and on the salary scale we currently have. We have since given on BOTH of these fronts in negotiations both in public and in private and it is not enough for the board to settle!
I propose a simple solution to our crisis.
The problem is that both sides have escalated the issue to point now where only destruction of the other side will be a ‘win’.
The contract is now signable (let’s be honest), but teachers won’t sign it because this has become an issue of respect for their professionalism and expertise.
The school board is now in a spot where only new teachers will fix the problem, since our teachers have been characterized as (essentially) lazy, overpaid, underperforming union thugs; they ‘suck’ according to one board member in public venue.
Here’s my proposal. Address both of these issues.
The board needs to make a statement of confidence in our teachers. Admit that the rhetoric has escalated to the point of ridiculous hyperbole. Our teachers don’t ‘suck’. There needs to be some admission that the board has overstepped in this area of micromanagement and disregarding of teacher expertise and micromanagement. Create some meaningful mechanism for teacher input that has some teeth, and recognizes their years of experience and training when it comes to academic matters.
Teachers, on the other hand, need to recognize that there *are* some less than stellar teachers in our district. The community IS willing to pay for quality but they feel helpless when the teachers circle the union wagons at the first sign of discontent. You need to do a better job of policing your own, because your cries of ‘expertise’ and ‘professionalism’ are seriously undercut when the community helplessly looks on at the few rotten apples spoiling the entire barrel. Admit this and deal with it in a meaningful way or you will never gain the trust and respect that you are seeking in this district.
Just a little back ground on removing teachers due to poor performance. I am sure I will get some guidance from someone with more knowledge than myself, but I believe there is, and always has been, a means for weeding out what some have called ” less than stellar ” teachers. I believe probationary, as well as tenured teachers, can be let go. Probationary teachers can be “weeded out” without being given any reason. The process for tenured teachers requires just cause. The school administrator is responsible for doing observations and evaluations on their entire staff. If a deficiency is found in a teacher’s performance, the teacher is informed and given an opportunity to make appropriate improvements. The administrator is required to make and keep documentation of all observations and evaluation meetings. If, after a number of evaluations, there are still deficiencies in the teachers performance, the administrator has met the just cause portion of the contract and can start the process to have that teacher removed. It is the school administrator who is responsible for weeding out the ” less than stellar ” teachers, not the other teachers, nor the teachers union. Again, that used to be the process unless it has changed.
You have made some points throughout this discussion that demonstrate thoughtful consideration of the issues, and I appreciate that and give them consideration because you have a different perspective from my own, and that is often helpful in a debate like this. I would like to respond to a couple of points, though. I believe teachers would sign in a heartbeat with a slight change in the current insurance proposal. This is not just a matter of respect, it is financial necessity for our younger teachers with families who, under the current board proposal, will be paying OVER $1000 MORE for their insurance than they currently pay. The amount of their experience step does not cover that, so they will lose money every year they continue to work here. And, the board’s decision to impose that proposal means they lose what they wanted most in this contract; a change in the amount of teacher responsibility. If they had come to an agreement with the teachers (who proposed a 2% increase in the amount teachers pay), that change would be written into the contract. Everyone knows that you rarely get back something you have given up, so that would have been a permanent improvement (from their point of view) in the contract. Now, they will have to start over again completely. The choices they are making are a LOSE/LOSE for the district, and will probably cost a lot more in legal expenses.
As far as the quality of teachers, there is a system in place which should prevent “bad” teachers from ever getting a continuing contract, and the new evaluation law will create a system that would take care of those that may have become lazy or complacent (although I can’t say I am seeing any of those), although both of those need experienced administrators to oversee and we just lost half of ours. It is up to the administration to do that job, there is no mecahnism for teachers to “police their own”. But, I can’t remember the union ever “circling the wagon” to keep a teacher who is a “bad apple”. In those cases, if there are any, the union role is to make sure they get fair treatment (a fair “trial”, so to speak) which everyone deserves.
You are right, the respect issue is huge, but not only to the teachers; that is why we have lost so many administrators already. While school personal have to respect that the board is doing a difficult job with little thanks or pay, the board needs to understand that they are making decisions for which they may have little knowledge, training or experience, and have the wisdom to respect the professionals they have hired and accept their input. A case in point is the recent decsion by the board NOT to accept the plan for next school year that was developed by the whole HS staff, teachers and administrators together. It was clearly demonstrated that this new proposal would greatly benefit ALL students (not just a few) by providing over 3000 minutes of extra contact time with teachers, again for ALL STUDENTS. It also provides a structure necessary for the transition to Proficiency Based Education, which is a state mandate for next year and which requires extra contact time with teachers for remediation when students don’t meet proficiencies. Since the board chose not to accept this proposal, there is no possible way to provide for that remediation, and over 80% of the students will have 3000 minutes less contact time with teachers. But, there were a couple of incorrect statements made implying that students would get less instructional time (which was only true for the few who had double AP classes, and even they would only lose about 100 minutes), and no one who knew better was allowed to speak, so they made a decision instead that took away BOTH the extra 3000 minutes for all students AND the 100 extra for the AP students. How can this make sense?
There is also an issue of respect for community members. The recent practice of going into executive session early during board meetings does not respect those in the community who want to participate. I would also suggest that the board needs to be more responsive to the communities by allowing more frequent commentary when issues of concern are being discussed, and answering direct questions that have been asked. And certainly, when the voters have made their views clear at budget meetings, the board should listen and respond to those views. These people are the board’s constituents and deserve to be heard.
It’s time to get some of the costs into the open. I know what I pay for family health insurance and it is not cheap. I pay almost 500 per month and have a 2000 deductible before the insurance kicks in. Let’s here what the teachers currently pay for a family plan under the expired contract. What do they pay per week and how good is the insurance. What is the copay for a doctors visit and what is the deductible that must be paid before insurance takes over. And what is the school boards proposal for both a single employee and a family plan.
John, all approved contacts are public record. The price of insurance, salaries and expectations, such as annual evaluations of professional staff, are in that document. If you get a copy of a contract from another district, comparable in size and socia-economics as MSAD (RSU) 58 , again public record, you will get a very good idea of where the salaries and health care costs to the district and professional staff should be. I would recommend you request a copy of the expired MSAD (RSU) 58 document for comparison to current costs to other disticts. While the results of professional stall evaluations are strictly confidential, you may want to ask when they were last completed for all staff and what the publically available results were.
The school board has no choice in the health insurance policy that is provided to the professional staff. The Mt. Abram Teachers Associtation dictates to the school board, through the contract, the entity that will provide the professional staff with health care insurance. The health insurance historically is provided by the Maine Employees Benefits Trust and historically, is has been managed by Anthem BC/BS of Maine. MEBT is completely staffed and owned by the the Maine Educational Association. The MEA is the parent organization of all teachers unions in the state. Typically, retirees are also insured through MEBT, though their rates and deductables are on a different scale than active members. There are quite a number of teachers and retirees in the state, creating a huge “rate pool” for rates to be established. For some reason, the rates for active members, even with such a large pool of healthy, low risk members, historically, are some of the highest in the country (12K-15K/ year for a family plan), with extremely low deductables.
The district historically, has paid close to 100% of an individual professional staff members health insurance. When a husband and wife are both employed by the district, the district typically pays a stipend (in all contracts for many years) of to one of them, to get them both on a family plan. It costs the district less to pay the stipend (normally $2500.00/year), than to provide an individual health care plan for the professional staff member.
Scott,
As a mt abram taxpayer, I am not concerned what other districts are paying for wages and health insurance. I am only concerned what mt abram does. If teachers want to go elsewhere to make more money and get better health insurance go for it. I have the same option in the private workforce as well. So can someone please post the health insurance benefits that are available at Mt abram and what they cost the employee and the district. thanks,
Tom McLaughlin
Perhaps a good start to us all coming together on these issues would be to use our real names when offering our opinions. Just saying,
The following link is available to anyone with a connection to the internet. It is the benefit description booklet for the health care plan provided by the MEA Benefits Trust. Read it thoroughly and then ask for the numbers specific to your questions. The best answers would come from your school board members who are fully informed or from the business office. Ask specific to 2014/2015, or 2015/2016, depending on the year you are interested in. Of course the 2015/2016 is for the proposed school year, while the 2014/2015 is the current year.
http://mydigimag.rrd.com/publication/?i=205520#{%22issue_id%22:205520,%22page%22:0}
Please remember google works: mea health insurance costs took 5 seconds to type in and only came up with about 575,000 hits in .28 seconds.
Nothing is hidden.
In relation to bumping within tenure. The tenure comments have focused on how the admin has tools to remove a tenured teacher. It isn’t as easy as you make it sound, however to get to that extreme to need to go through that process years of students have been deprived of their education. The most damaging part of tenure issue isn’t removal but the bumping that goes on often during the year and as is needed to fill a position. The teacher with the longest time in gets the position whether they are as qualified as other available teachers or not. Over time this contractually mandated behavior degrades the system, lowers the quality of education to the students, while costing the district/school system/tax payers more money for lower quality education. After say 40-60 years of this behavior what condition do you think the school system has degraded it’s self into. How much more money can you throw at it to try to fix it without fixing the underlying source of decay?
Response to response.
I appreciate the calm and thoughtful tone of your response here.
My overall point is that we have reached this point of ‘nuclear option’ on both sides, and some of the specifics you mention bolster this point.
*Both* sides, in my opinion, need to back up, thoughtfully examine where they have stepped off the cliff, and begin to make it right.
Your words don’t seem to include any recognition of the teacher’s missteps in this process. Do you feel the teachers are completely right and the board is completely wrong?
As long as either or both sides continue with this “I’m right so the other side needs to acquiesce, not US!” we will remain stuck in this quagmire, bleeding our good people until our kids are left with less and less competent staff and administrators. Or no district at all.
There is a legitimate basis for some of the communities resentment. It’s manifesting itself in some of the board’s behavior and actions. I’m not condoning it, I’m saying now is a time for both sides to cry ‘mea culpa’; that, in my opinion, is how we move forward out of this mess.
To try to solve any disagreement, both sides need to be willing to examine and discuss their positions and try to compromise, and the teachers are very willing to do that. In fact, we have been asking for that opportunity in multiple ways (letters, emails, personal contacts, statements, press releases) for the last 2 years. We aren’t saying that we are completely right, only that we feel we are honestly trying to work it out (as I know some board members have as well). Even though we made great effort to present a reasonable initial offer (we were the ones who proposed a cut to our salary scale, something that has NEVER been done before in this district), we have still compromised our offers many times. The current offer from the board, in terms of real dollars, is essentially the same one given more than 2 years ago. When we try to find a way to discuss this with the board, we get the same printed rationale from the lawyer that doesn’t really address our questions, and no real discussion with the people who understand our district and its issues. One of the major issues in this district is the lack of appropriate communication, and that is part of why so many people (not just teachers) are leaving. We need to create real structures to allow effective communication between all parties; that’s part of the solution to saving the district.
And to Mike, there has been very little “bumping” in this district for as long as I can remember. The only time “bumping” can occur, according to our contract, is if a position is cut. There was one teacher “bumped” as a result of the Stratton closure; that is the only one I can remember. Perhaps that is an issue in some places, but has not been here. So many of these statements that point the finger at the “unions” don’t apply here at all; it would be helpful if people constrained their comments to the facts of this situation rather than bringing in unrelated philosophical beliefs.
response to response to response
I know the teachers have compromised. The board has compromised. Both sides have compromised. This issue has become so vitriolic that we are far beyond the point of the ‘normal’ give and take in a negotiation.
Take a look at what you wrote. It’s essentially this: “Our side has compromised, it’s THEIR fault now.”
‘We are willing, we are trying, we have made great effort, we were the ones who, we are the ones trying’
The school board is saying exactly the same thing. It’s time for a complete 180 in terms of approach.
If you are coming at this from the teacher’s point of view, how about expressing some remorse to the community for your side’s part in all of this, some things that were done wrong, some actions taken that, in hindsight, can be seen now as divisive and unproductive. I support the teachers to a large degree in this but if you are not willing to come to the table and say, ‘yeah, we were wrong when we did x, y, and z’ you’ll never have the support of the community that you need.
The school board needs to do exactly the same thing, I’m not dumping on teachers.
I think the people in the room at this meeting made it loud and clear that we want a resolution in respect with the teachers contract. The people also made it loud and clear they love Mt Abram HS and want the majority of the school board negativity to change. For three months during public comment different people have stood up and have asked the school board majority to change their ways, it has fallen on deaf ears. The district has a responsibility to educate the students in this district. You can not just back out of that obligation. The towns have an responsibility to do the same, you just can not pay your taxes. And just just can not just shut down a school and not have some serious economic backlash. there are over 300 human beings at Mt Abram HS that their lives would be adversely effected if it was not there. Housing prices would plummet as people would be trying to leave. There is a reason we choose to live here and the schools are at the top of that list. the towns need kids, teachers and schools for obvious reasons. Taxes are not cheaper in Farmington, contrary to popular belief. We have some of the cheapest property taxes in the area. The reduction in revenue sharing by the state has also had a negative impact in our area. This is another variable that I am hopeful our next governor will change. It is time certain members of our school board put their egos aside, get the teacher contract settled. I was troubled when the custodian contract was recently settled within 2 WEEKS. It is a coincidence that the board chair use to be the head of that department when he “worked” for the district? Teachers have been working for over 3 years without one, but the custodians get one within 2 weeks? Also if there is not a budget, ALL schools will be effected, not just MTA. We now have a student activist group who is calling for the school board majority to change their ways, yet certain members refuse to acknowledge them. I have the UTMOST respect for certain members of this board because I know they are there for the kids. I can not say the same for the chair and vice chair. They are there for their own agendas. If I were a business owner in this area I would be deeply concerned with all of this. We need people to move here, not move out. Yet that basic economic principle seems to elude the school board chair and vice chair. It takes a village to raise a child. In our system the way it is designed the towns are responsible for the education of the kids that live there. You can NOT brush off this responsibility. The cheapest and most effective way to do this is to be involved within a district. If a town goes it on their own, it will cost that town more money then you are paying now. Ask Stratton. However I applaud Stratton because they did it for the right reasons, they did it to SAVE their school. The same school board leaders that we are dealing with now wanted to shut Stratton down, so Stratton pulled out to educate their kids K-8 and tuition their HS kids to MTA. MTA is a good school, do not knock it. No MTA, then the population here will drastically decrease and the area needs people economically. We need to think holistically and our school board leadership majority is not, they are thinking of themselves. Time to stop the nonsense and stop fighting this 45 year old battle to shut down MTA. It will destroy the area. Maybe that is what our chair and vice chair want.
I’ll be very interested to learn the terms of the new settlement with the support staff. Did they agree to a salary freeze (after calculating in the inflation rate) and a reduction in health benefits paid by the district? Hopefully someone at the Bulldog will get on to this and publicize the terms of the new support staff labor agreement.