FARMINGTON – A fourth validation referendum will be held in all 10 RSU 9 towns Tuesday, determining whether or not the $33.6 million budget approved at the Oct. 11 meeting will be enacted for the remainder of the fiscal year.
Referendum votes and meetings have seen a sharp uptick in participation as the district entered its third and fourth iterations of the budget process. More than 300 residents attended the Sept. 5 meeting, resulting in approximately $980,000 in reductions to the school board’s recommended budget, with 4,500 voters rejecting that budget at the Sept. 12 referendum. More than 500 voters attended the Oct. 11 budget meeting, approving the $33.6 million budget recommended by the board.
At the Oct. 11 meeting meeting, voters approved the board’s proposed $33,637,093 budget for the 2017-18 fiscal year. If validated Tuesday, the budget would represent a 2.71 percent increase over the previous fiscal year. It would result in more than a 2 percent decrease in local property tax assessments as compared to the previous fiscal year, or $267,444 less.
According to the town assessment projections relating to the budget, three towns would see tax assessment increases and seven towns would see decreases relating to the school budget. Specifically, Chesterville would be assessed $939,060, $2,973 more than the 2016-17 assessment or an increase of .32 percent. Farmington would be assessed $4,519,221, $108,489 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 2.34 percent. Industry would be assessed $819,946, $11,345 more than the 2016-17 assessment or an increase of 1.4 percent. New Sharon would be assessed $998,329, $26,670 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 2.6 percent. New Vineyard would be assessed $700,739, $4,726 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of .67 percent. Starks would be assessed $380,275, $21,582 more than the 2016-17 assessment or an increase of 6.02 percent. Temple would be assessed $418,702, $21,672 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 4.9 percent. Vienna would be assessed $685,517, $14,242 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 2.04 percent. Weld would be assessed $462,791, $7,696 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 1.64 percent. Wilton would be assessed $2,769,914, $119,939 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 4.15 percent.
The $33.6 million budget is identical in its bottom line to the budget presented at the Sept. 5 meeting. Directors did shift $126,000 out of contingency and fuel lines to cover two, out-of-district placements and to add a part-time nurse position to the budget to meet the needs of three students.
The validation vote will take place in all 10 towns. Would-be voters should check all poll times, as some may have changed since the last vote.
Chesterville Town Office, from 12 p.m. to 8 p.m.
Farmington Community Center, from 12 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Industry Town Hall, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m.
New Sharon Town Office, from 12 p.m. to 7 p.m.
New Vineyard Smith Hall, from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Starks Community Center, from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.
Temple Town Hall, from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Vienna Fire Station, from 1 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Weld Town Office, from 4 to 8 p.m.
Wilton Town Office, from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m.
It should tell the school committee something when we are voting for the 4th time hoping to pass the rsu budget. If we taxpayers were presented a reasonable budget in the first time (like most surrounding school districts), we wouldn’t have to go thru hoops to get one passed.
Like other people have said: You can be for education and still present a budget that comes in at 1.5% above the previous year. All of us are doing it with our own household budgets. I know no one in the private sector who is getting more than a 1.5% raise, if that.
What a pity. The Administration and School Board just don’t get it. The 2010-2011 budget was 22.1 million dollars. Now, eight years later, the proposed spending is 33.6 million dollars 11.5 million increase in 8 years !!!! The proposed budgets have been turned down three times. Now, the new proposal is, remarkably, the same that was proposed for the second vote that was voted down in the second referendum. What do you bet that, if this budget passes in referendum, that the 2018-2019 budget will jump another million or million and a half?
No doubt the usual apologists for the Board and administration will offer the “think of the children” “argument,” but there will be no mention of the those who have to pay the bills.
Realize that the break for the property tax was not the result of the Board’s action, but the State came up with money for it for school systems in the state.
Please vote NO on this latest referendum.
People and groups have tried and tried to impress upon them that the increases are too much. For several years comparisons to other districts have been made. To no avail. THE BOARD and ADMINISTRATION won’t listen. Over and over the excuses flow about mandates,employees being underpaid, state money not in line,bare -bones budget, being frugal, the poor kids etc. Never mind those struggling to pay taxes. Never mind those areas that have been suggested as excessive. It appears that nothing will change. Each year will begin with a $1 million increase to the school budget. That’s the history, why should it change? Other RSU’S, SAD’S whatever operate on smaller increases, BUT not NO’ 9, not the campus, it is special, it is better. NO one tells or asks it to do more economically. STUDY THE HISTORY OF THE DISTRICT. RESEARCH and STUDY you’ll learn a lot!
Woodsman: so glad you are willing to discuss facts concerning other district, and their budgets.
Factually speaking: Comparisons have been made to nearby districts, and RSU 9 is lower cost than most, spending under the state average in nearly every expense category.
Factually speaking, some nearby districts did not go for increases in the near past, but still spend significantly more than RSU 9 per student.
Factually speaking: RSU 9 has reduced the amount of property taxes required from the ten towns each of the last two years.
Factually speaking of the increases over the last 8 years, about half is for building projects, which were approved by the voters of our district several times. Fortunately the funding for these building projects is almost completely covered by the state.
And finally, factually speaking, the state did certainly come up with more money for schools this year, after the second citizens initiative passed to increase funding for schools. Our state revenues have grown enough to not require additional taxes to help out our schools, since the overall state economy is growing, and has been.
I will be voting yes on the budget as proposed and unanimously approved by our School Board, and encourage all taxpayers, and registered voters to do so.
Matt is right – the comparison to the budget of 2010 is bogus since so much is building projects paid by the state. And it’s not like this cost extra tax money. If we hadn’t accepted money for building, the state would have built the new schools elsewhere. If that had happened, property taxes would be HIGHER, as the old buildings would need massive repairs just to be maintained. Other expenses increased – and those are similar in every district.
That’s why the public massively defeated an effort to set the budget at $32.7 million last month – by over 600 votes. Clearly that was too low for the vast majority of the community, it was a 2 to 1 margin, I believe. Moreover, saying that other districts are cutting when we’re not is wrong. If you compare, we spend less per student, and we’ve got a growing student population, unlike many other districts. That said, we compare very favorably to others. Please, look at the facts rather than glib ill defined accusations.
The board did not choose to have a legal obligation to fund over $500,000 more for special ed this year. The “no” voters never acknowledge that legal obligation for more funding, it disrupts their effort to make it seem like the board is engaged in massive discretionary spending. But the administration and our legislators worked hard to make sure that the property tax payers didn’t have to shoulder that burden.
If the community chooses to vote yes, the board will continue to place a priority on avoiding if possible any property tax increase.
Thank you to the Board and administration for all your hard work!
It’s simple!! Vote no
I am on a fixed income. MY taxes will be going up. I’m voting YES because I support our students and the schools.
I vote NO!
I wonder if “unfair to taxpayers” has read Scott Erb’s explanation of how taxes will not be going up. Or maybe he is afraid of being lied to? i think the writer is “unfair to students.” I’m voting YES on the school budget.
This budget is fine. Voting yes to stop feeding the local crisis mentality and madness. We will all survive and our kids will be well educated. Done, over, voting YES. Mrs. Porter and friends, I will gladly work and pay my state, fed, and local taxes so that you can benefit with medical and social security. I pay a lot for my health insurance and co pays so I don’t eat out and I don’t have cable. Be glad you don’t have those bills hanging over you.
Regardless of whichever side you are on regarding this vote all “statements of fact” should include the source so all can validate the content as fact or opinion.
M. Brown-
“Realize that the break for the property tax was not the result of the Board’s action, but the State came up with money for it for school systems in the state. ”
As has been stated over and over, the State increased their funding for multiple reasons, none of which were because the State just decided on a whim to hand over more money to our schools.
Regulations have increased to all schools, causing an increase in costs for districts across the State. This money was given to subsidize those costs. In an effort to increase bureaucratic oversight by the State, schools must administer services, and then bill for reimbursement. This allows the State to monitor services and ensure they are only paying for State approved programs and usage. Due to the phenomenally accurate billing practices and procedurally sound staff of MBRSD #9, the school has seen an increase of State reimbursement that matches closer and closer the State regulated mandates that have been outside of old budgets, like those seen in 2010. That is why local towns are seeing their local portion of taxes cut. The exceptions to this are towns that have had increased State assessed tax valuations.
Also, please keep in mind the great amount of tax revenue this State has seen from Question #2 (which Gov. LePage was against). This was a citizen initiative in which personal income (not small business, or any business at all) greater than $200,000 would see a 3% tax increase. This tax on the wealthiest population of Maine has been estimated to bring in to the State around $157 million each year. This referendum question was brought forward by hard working Mainers that wanted State assistance to greater match the requirements to run a school. Unfortunately, Governor LePage vetoed the citizen vote and held it up at the State house. That was why, as I’m sure you remember, the State house budget was not passed at the beginning of the fiscal year, July 1st. When it was eventually passed, it was only after compromising with the Governors demands to not use all of the funds specifically ear marked for education. Which has again keept that burden on property owners. Instead, only half of those funds that were generated with the intention to go to education is being supplied to the schools. Imagine the reduction you would see in your property taxes each year if the funds had been allotted as they were originally intended.
I will be voting YES today. I believe in the power of education. I believe in my community.
I seems to me the folks voting yes are far more informed and understanding of how the budget will not increase taxes and how the increases in certain line items are caused by State mandate.
It’s important to be informed with the facts rather than rumors and scare tactics. The facts are provided to the public any time they want them. There is no conspiracy to enrich undeserving teachers and administrators. There is no attempt by the administration and the school board to hide the facts or mislead voters. Yet when I go to budget meetings there seems to be a trend among several of the no voters to either not have the facts or to ask the same questions over and over. Everyone has a voice and a right to express themselves and we can all learn from INFORMED voters.
A Well-Informed Electorate Is a Prerequisite for Democracy. So one last word to the no voters. YOUR TAXES WILL NOT GO UP DUE TO THE SCHOOL BUDGET!
One thing that seems to always go unmentioned is that by the time the general community sees a proposed budget the Board has already cut a large portion of an increased budget proposed to them by the administration.
Every department representing a line item in the budget goes before the Board with requests, usually based on what they perceive to be a need. Those requests are considered, questions are asked, and sometimes those requests are granted. Sometimes the administration is asked to find things in their budget they can cut in order to help cover the increase they are requesting. A great deal of COMPROMISE has already taken place by the time a final number is presented to the community.
Presenting the Board as an entity that is unwilling to compromise is FALSE.
facts, facts, facts! everywhere i turn i’m confronted by facts that challenge my firmly unfounded convictions and baseless preconceived notions! is there nowhere one can escape this tyranny of facts?
According to the town assessment projections relating to the budget, three towns would see tax assessment increases and seven towns would see decreases relating to the school budget. Specifically, Chesterville would be assessed $939,060, $2,973 more than the 2016-17 assessment or an increase of .32 percent. Farmington would be assessed $4,519,221, $108,489 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 2.34 percent. Industry would be assessed $819,946, $11,345 more than the 2016-17 assessment or an increase of 1.4 percent. New Sharon would be assessed $998,329, $26,670 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 2.6 percent. New Vineyard would be assessed $700,739, $4,726 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of .67 percent. Starks would be assessed $380,275, $21,582 more than the 2016-17 assessment or an increase of 6.02 percent. Temple would be assessed $418,702, $21,672 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 4.9 percent. Vienna would be assessed $685,517, $14,242 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 2.04 percent. Weld would be assessed $462,791, $7,696 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 1.64 percent. Wilton would be assessed $2,769,914, $119,939 less than the 2016-17 assessment or a decrease of 4.15 percent.
This is the fourth paragraph from this article. It clearly states three towns will see an increase in assessments due to the school budget. The town of Industry held a special town meeting because of this in order to hold the tax bills until a school budget is passed. So again please explain how some people shouldn’t be concerned about there taxes. I’ve said it almost as much as Scott Erb has said the number $545,0000 I’m not concerned with my taxes going up a few dollars just the lack of transparency and some wasted money. So if it’s not the budgets fault please have Ben Hanstein rewrite this article using accurate information and tell my selectpeople of Industry they wasted there time holding tax bills back because it’s not the budgets fault.
SEE YOU AT THE POLLS.
Jesse – how could seven towns have decreases and three have increases if the fault was the budget? The budget asks for less money total from property taxes. That is all the school board can control. If the towns nonetheless ask for increases, that’s not the board’s fault. Something else is going on. Declining population? Collection last year below projections? I don’t know. The number $545,000 is documented (it’s actually $546,000), and was in the mailing sent to everyone in the district. That’s all we can control, we can only impact the total requested, we have no say over how the towns divide it.
My taxes did not increase this year because of the school budget,my taxes actually went down a little. Additional homestead exemption was the reason,certainly not the frugal school budget and that’s a fact.It is listed on my tax bill that 48.9% of my tax is for the school.I assume that is the same % on everyone’s bill.If spending one out of every two dollars of your bill on the school isn’t reason enough to get out and vote then when the tally comes in don’t complain.Which ever way it goes I feel that the awareness of the process has been heightened all around and hopefully there will be more transparency in the future.
Scott, It is not ALL about the property tax.
The concern is simply the annual school budget increases we have seen year after year.
Yes or no, would I be a fool to think that the school budget will not continue to increase at the historical rate? Based on your insight to the process, I would expect you to be able to answer this question.
How long can the tax payers expect to carry this load?
Vote Yes, it is that simple.
The assessment for Wilton for schools went down about 4% this year, adding to the tax decrease for schools fro Wilton from last year.
Our household will also be voting yes to the unanimously approved by the School Board budget. (See article above for source: down by 4.15%)
Same. Old. Arguments. We have read them all from the same people over and over. Time to move forward and live our mutually meaningful lives. As a community we are a resilient group, we will all eventually focus our attention on more pressing matters, I hope. We should remain mindful of the concern on both sides of this issue. There will no doubt be another budget looming on the horizon next year. I am firm in my conviction that this budget is practical and reasonable. Time to get back to life as we know it. Those with agendas that are aligned with minimizing the budget will undoubtedly get another chance to do so in a years time. For now, I hope this budget passes. Democracy will have spoken.
Dulles – again, a lot of in increase is from building projects paid by the state. If we didn’t have those projects the state would have built new schools elsewhere, so no tax money would be saved. Our total budget would be lower, but the property tax portion would be higher as we’d have massive bills from breaking down old buildings! Other increases have been mandated in special ed.
Look at our spending compared to other districts, we are doing very well! It’s true that all over special ed costs rose the last decade, but that’s one reason the state is reimbursing more. We don’t have a say over that.
In terms of discretionary spending on programs, there have been more cuts than additions, that has been to avoid property tax increases. If you look at the bottom line total budget you get a misleading figure, as it includes things like the state paid building costs. It’s only about $13 million paid by property tax payers (I need to look that up to be sure, but that’s close). That’s the line you need to compare with past budgets.
I agree there needs to be real transparency in all of this. It’s taken me awhile to learn how this budget works. For instance, one person was claiming that the administration were saying contradictory things on Maine Care reimbursements, saying we got $500,000 then we got less. The reality: We have to pay back a portion of the amount collected (seed money is in many of these programs) so there was no deception. But it confused people. So yeah, we need to work on transparency and explaining so people don’t get misled by one number of off base accusations. I believe people are paying attention now, so I’m hopeful!
Same old same old …. So my selectpeople are wrong I guess. Another question I’ve asked numerous times that hasn’t been answered as all questions are according to previous commentors is. How much does the windmill at the high school actually help the offset to CMP ?? Seems maybe only certain questions are answered….
Dulles-
” would I be a fool to think that the school budget will not continue to increase at the historical rate? ”
The school board does not create or regulate Federal and State mandates. I would recommend you contact Betsy Devos the current United States Secretary of Education. Their telephone number is: 1-800-USA-LEARN (1-800-872-5327). The department of education mailing address is:
U.S. Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue, SW
Washington, D.C. 20202
They will be your best resource to learn about current and future regulations and how they may impact school budgets.
“How long can the tax payers expect to carry this load?”
A right to education is globally accepted as a basic human right. International law, Article 26 of the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights of 1966 states,
“Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.”
Education regulation in America began in 1642 with three legislative acts by the Massachusetts Bay colonists. However, the 1776 Declaration of Independence did not provide this basic human right. It was up to the States to provide compulsory education. By 1852, Massachusetts was the first to enact a public education law. The last state to follow suit was Mississippi. The Federal Department of Education was founded in 1867.
As public education has been recognized as a global human right, and the United States of Americas Federal and State legislative bodies have accepted this and adopted policies in which taxes are appropriated to this right, I would say this will remain until these truths are no longer self evident.
Did somebody say “sam-o”? Sam o silly questions that don’t even have points in this conversation. Why do people keep asking pointless questions and expect an answer on demand. Put some effort into it.
@Jesse Sillanpaa
“How much does the windmill at the high school actually help the offset to CMP ?? Seems maybe only certain questions are answered…”
Nobody is bothering to answer that question because it’s so odd. Why are you obsessed with the windmill? Do you want to challenge the electrical bill CMP delivers? I haven’t heard any questions about solar power, geothermal, biomass, or motion detection switches that automatically turn lights off – all which reduce the CMP bill.
If you’re that interested in the windmill – go to the high school and ask for a tour. Then go to the superintendent’s office and ask to see the CMP bill. You keep returning to these boards to ask the same questions over and over again. Why? This isn’t where the (weirdly specific) information you want can be obtained.
Jesse- re: MBC windmill
The windmill was added during the renovations to provide tech students the opportunity to learn the accompanying technologies. (Initial studies to include wind power as a viable option for powering the school concluded there was not enough consist wind to make it an option.) Someone from the tech faculty who served on the building committee might have better memory of those specific details .
Jesse – I’ll second Guppy on the windmill, that seems a very specific idiosyncratic question. I did make a note to try to ask at some point, but it’s not something I’ve seen discussed by the board, or a question that others have had. I’m sure all the specific information is out there, but like so many things in this widespread school district, it’s not something I recall the board discussing. I’m also not sure what the point of the question might be.
Guppy,
You and other anonymous people (both sides) keep returning to these boards. Your opinions hold no weight (both sides) OWN YOUR POSITION.
@Matthew Billian
It’s never a good idea to use your real name online. It’s basic online security – especially with people getting so angry. Attaching a name/face to an idea shouldn’t give it more or less weight. I’ll let my positions stand on their own merit.
And this is where I think the problem is Reality. Many people don’t have a problem with ” the basics “, what you outlined in your comment. It is when people who are struggling see windmills, fancy sports fields, ipads, buses, cafeterias, classes that don’t really have relevance to what you are saying but make the students ” feel good “, counseling, field trips, and all the things that are not basic, read, write and math.
But what I see is that when the basic schooling is failing, or doing poorly, maybe we should focus on ” the basics “.
I voted no because I think that the basics, that you outlined, can be done for much less than the proposed budget.
Matthew Billian,
That’s your opinion. I value an anonymous opinion just as much as I do one with a name beside it.
DON’T SPEAK FOR THE REST OF US!
@Jesse sillanpaa I think you have a good question . How much did the wind mill coast when will we see a return on that investment . Will it be out dated by then? how much does it cost to maintain? witch would prolong a return on the investment . As far as how can seven towns see a tax degrees or stay the same and three have a increase. Pretty simple put more burden on the few to lighten the load on many to get the votes you need to get what you want .It’s kinda like transferring one credit card balance to another than another eventually your going to pay .
Thank you !!! If I remember correctly. My point was a previous commenter said all questions asked are answered. Scott thanks for writing it down and plan to ask at some point. One other question I asked was why everytime that the budget is reduced there is a different number asked for for special ed. I’m in NO WAY PICKING ON SPECIAL ED. it just seems odd that the number has changed so many times this year since the original proposed budget. As for the windmill even if the wind is speratic if it was able to be used it should be as should anyother “green enery” implement that was or is installed across the district. That might hell the fact that we pay CMP $500,000 per year. Maybe the lights that so many have mentioned should be shut off. I can remember coming out of wrestling practice to the lobby and those two rooms were the only lights on in the building. Maybe we should go back to that practice.
sooner or later these million dollar increases will catch up to all of us. They already have caught up with me.
It seems to me that it makes sense to limit the budget increases as a way of being prudent.
note NO
@John
“Pretty simple put more burden on the few to lighten the load on many to get the votes you need to get what you want .”
There’s no evil conspiracy. The school has asked for less total money from local taxes. The school has no control over how the towns divide up that total. If you don’t like how it’s done – take it up with the politicians who make those laws and decisions. Let’s not accuse school administrators with false conspiracy theories.
Way back in this thread reality mistakenly labeled question 2 a tax on only individuals. That in fact is wrong. It would have taxed hundreds of small businesses and generally harmed our state economy. The governor and legislature compromised and found a way to fairly increase funding for education
Skeptic-
It is on Income Tax:
http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/elec/citizens/k12.pdf
Sec. 2. 36 MRSA §5111, sub-§6 is enacted to read:
6. Income tax surcharge to advance public kindergarten to grade 12 education.
An income tax surcharge to advance public kindergarten to grade 12 education, referred
to in this subsection as “the surcharge,” is established and administered as follows.
A. For tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2017, in addition to any other tax
imposed by this chapter, a tax at the rate of 3% is imposed on that portion of the
taxpayer’s Maine taxable income in excess of $200,000.
B. One hundred percent of the revenue from the surcharge must be deposited each
year into the Fund to Advance Public Kindergarten to Grade 12 Education
established in Title 20-A, section 15697 in accordance with this paragraph.
(1) Prior to January 1st of each year, the bureau shall estimate the annual
revenue to be collected from the surcharge for the immediately following
calendar year.
(2) On the first of each month, beginning on January 1, 2018, the Treasurer of
State shall deposit 8.333% of the estimated annual total revenue from the
surcharge into the Fund to Advance Public Kindergarten to Grade 12 Education.
(3) The bureau may adjust the monthly transfer amount once annually to account
for any difference between the estimated collection and actual collection.
C. The surcharge must be imposed and collected regardless of whether the income
tax brackets in this section are changed, replaced or eliminated by an act of the
Legislature or by a measure approved by voters pursuant to the Constitution of
Maine, Article IV, Part Third, Section 18.
Jesse – special education changed because by the time we set this budget, we knew of new students entering the district with needs that were beyond what was previously projected. That meant that the estimate in the original budget (actually all the other ones) was too low. Only because this budget was made after the school year started we know the actual number. (To be sure, changes during the year could impact the final cost)
Guppy- reprinting the text doesn’t explain to people that over 11000 small and medium businesses file as individuals. Therefore they would have been subjected to this”income” tax. Intent of the law and reality are not always the same thing. Still, i am happy things have worked out for everyone this time. Class warfare aside, we should ALL support our schools.
@Skeptic
I’m not the one who reprinted the tax laws, but I’m glad you support our schools.