Board Does Not Respect Voters Rights!
I was amazed as I sat through my first Region 12 Board Of Education meeting on Tuesday evening. It is perplexing that the majority of the board members have no appreciation or understanding of the rights of the voters in the districts towns.
The Educational Plan for Region 12 that was written in 1967 clearly spells out that each town within the district have a school and that the primary schools remain in their respective home towns.
Edith Kinney then chairperson of Bridgewater’s School Board and a member of the Regional Planning Committee told me exactly what happened. “When we first put the plan out to voters at a town meeting it didn’t fly because there was no stipulation that the elementary grades would stay in their home town. It didn’t occur to us to spell that out in the plan even though we had no intention of ever sending our little ones out of town. So we rewrote the plan to be sure that it specifically said the elementary schools would remain in the towns. Once we put that in writing, the plan passed easily, first in Bridgewater then in the other two towns.
We never wanted the board to change that or have the authority to change that.” The records in town hall verify Mrs. Kinney’s statement. This 1967 plan, is the plan that the Board has been operating under for 40 years, but the majority of the board does not think they are bound by the plan. They don’t believe that taking away a town’s elementary school is considered a fundamental change to the plan.
The state of CT in its statute 10-47(c) has clearly stated that a fundamental change in the regional educational plan would have to be approved by the majority of the voters in each town. Doesn’t it make common sense that a small town within a region shouldn’t be forced to close its local school because another town within the region has more voters? Bridgewater voters should and do have the right to decide whether or not we keep our school!
Keeping the elementary schools in the local towns is repeated three times in the regions educational plan, but it does not site specific reasons why each town felt so strongly about keeping its elementary school.
As a mother of two in the Burnham School and an alumni of that school, I can site just a few. We have binders full of research from nationally accredited educational associations that prove the educational advantages of small, hometown schools.
Our CMT scores are higher than the state averages and in many areas significantly higher. At Burnham School every teacher knows every child and every child knows every teacher – not just their own – but all of them. Its not about economy of scale for kids in school, it’s about individual attention, personalized plans and small class sizes.
The bus rides would be too long for our youngest residents.
The school is the hub of our town, and the kids feel a strong bond and connection to our community. We (Bridgewater) would be the only town in the State of Connecticut without a school.
Our PTO raises tens of thousands of dollars each year to provide outstanding enrichment programs for our kids at no cost to taxpayers. I think the great people of our towns can figure out a way to keep our kids in their local schools without spending a fortune.
The towns of Roxbury and Bridgewater have build to suit plans on the table that will do that. As for the Board of Ed’s plan for consolidation - I can think of over 1,800,000 better ways to spend our tax dollars than on a piece of swamp land on a dangerous curve in which the Board of Ed. has already agreed in writing to allow hunting just outside of the perimeter!
Our kids deserve better.
Julie Stuart
Bridgewater, CT
Saturday, May 5, 2007
Region 12 Needs Approval to Close Local Schools
05/05/2007
Bridgewater Board Will Seek Okay to Ask School Board to Amend Education Plan
By: John Addyman
BRIDGEWATER - At Tuesday night's town hearing, the Board of Selectmen will seek approval to make a formal request to the Region 12 school board to amend the educational plan of the district to allow for a consolidated school, rather than the three-town-school set that now exists.
That request would force referenda in all three towns and if one or more towns decide against a consolidated school, the issue may be dead.
Region 12 already has a referendum planned for June 19 to bond a consolidated-school project; Bridgewater's selectmen argue that neither the project nor the referendum can move forward without the region's educational plan first being amended to allow for a consolidated school.
"What we're doing, according to the statutes of the state of Connecticut, is requesting that the educational plan be amended," said First Selectman Bill Stuart.
"A legislative body has to request that the Board of Education to amend its plan and that's what we plan to do.
"The region wants to put a consolidated vote up. We believe, before they can put that vote up, they must amend the plan - with referenda in each town. They're going to tell you they don't have to do that. That doesn't make any difference to us; the statute says when a town's legislative body requests an amendment to the plan, 'the school district shall file a report with the state board of education and have a referendum.'
"The school board has to have an approval in each town to proceed. If they don't have each town's concurrence, they can't change the plan."
Mr. Stuart said the Atwood et al case from 1975 ruled that minutes of meetings that led to the formation of the region also constitute the educational plan.
"What was filed with the state is the regional plan and the school district is bound by it. Also, we have in our possession a document filed with the state board of education in 1967 that states right out that the three schools stay in their towns."
Bridgewater Board Will Seek Okay to Ask School Board to Amend Education Plan
By: John Addyman
BRIDGEWATER - At Tuesday night's town hearing, the Board of Selectmen will seek approval to make a formal request to the Region 12 school board to amend the educational plan of the district to allow for a consolidated school, rather than the three-town-school set that now exists.
That request would force referenda in all three towns and if one or more towns decide against a consolidated school, the issue may be dead.
Region 12 already has a referendum planned for June 19 to bond a consolidated-school project; Bridgewater's selectmen argue that neither the project nor the referendum can move forward without the region's educational plan first being amended to allow for a consolidated school.
"What we're doing, according to the statutes of the state of Connecticut, is requesting that the educational plan be amended," said First Selectman Bill Stuart.
"A legislative body has to request that the Board of Education to amend its plan and that's what we plan to do.
"The region wants to put a consolidated vote up. We believe, before they can put that vote up, they must amend the plan - with referenda in each town. They're going to tell you they don't have to do that. That doesn't make any difference to us; the statute says when a town's legislative body requests an amendment to the plan, 'the school district shall file a report with the state board of education and have a referendum.'
"The school board has to have an approval in each town to proceed. If they don't have each town's concurrence, they can't change the plan."
Mr. Stuart said the Atwood et al case from 1975 ruled that minutes of meetings that led to the formation of the region also constitute the educational plan.
"What was filed with the state is the regional plan and the school district is bound by it. Also, we have in our possession a document filed with the state board of education in 1967 that states right out that the three schools stay in their towns."
McKenney Wants Democracy in District 12
Mothers For Democracy
Apr 27 2007 2:00 PM
Reminds Region 12 Board of Ed: 'In a democracy, majority rules'
To the Editor:
I am writing in response to a letter last week from Jane Boyer of Washington.
However, even though I reference her letter, my rebuttal isn't specifically to Ms. Boyer, but to all who shockingly still think there should be a consolidated elementary school in Region 12.
My thoughts here have nothing to do with the pros and cons of consolidation versus retaining our three schools.
The time for that debate is over. The time for singing the praises of a consolidated school are over.
I think you're wrong. You think I'm wrong. So let's just agree to disagree and focus on the real issue at hand.
Ms. Boyer speaks of how we've been going "round and round" on the consolidation/three schools issue and that the issue should be "put to bed."
I couldn't agree more. Except that the only ones leading us round and round have been the leadership of the Region 12 Board of Education and the only issue that should be put to bed is that of consolidation.
The public has been given the information, the numbers and a hard sell from all sides ad nauseum. We have been given the opportunity to vote (twice? three times? I've lost count) and the results were clear and commanding.
Region 12 does not want a consolidated school. I regret that some don't agree with that, but in a democratic society, majority rules.
Somehow, though, these clear and commanding results were not quite as clear and commanding to the leadership of our Board of Education. Apparently, they did not like the results of these referenda and so they crumpled them up and tossed them in the trash.
And promptly continued to pursue a consolidated project 'behind closed doors'.
In one fell swoop, they managed to disenfranchise and enrage a large majority of voters in Region 12, as well as make a mockery of the democratic process.
Nice work.
Building committees in Bridgewater and Roxbury have been working for months on comprehensive, realistic, fiscally-sound plans that would enlarge/improve our schools.
These 'Build To Suit' plans have been given outrageously short shrift by the Board of Ed.
If the Board of Ed had put half as much energy and money into a plan to retain our three schools as they have put into the folly of consolidation (especially this swampy hunting ground otherwise known as the Mundy property), we might be well on our way to a project we could all be proud of.
But, alas"� we are nowhere. And we have the leadership of the Board of Education to thank for that.
Some think that those of us who are willing to pay more to keep our small schools are fiscally irresponsible.
How about a Board of Ed that continues to blow through taxpayers' money, in a brazen and malfeasant way, on an idea that voters have voted down more than once?
Now that's what I call fiscally irresponsible.
Ms. Boyer invokes the name of Abraham Lincoln and paraphrases him as saying "you can't satisfy all of the people all of the time." Of course you can't.
But here's an idea: How about satisfying a majority of the voters in Region 12?
It's ironic to me that Ms. Boyer brings up Abraham Lincoln, one of the most intelligent, wise and honorable men in our nation's history. He is a real "rock star" in the pantheon of democracy (and so, I am loath to say the words "Abraham Lincoln" and "the Region 12 Board of Education" in the same sentence).
However, as I write, I am looking at his biography on my bookshelf and I am reminded of something else he once said: "Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed."
Foolish is the person (or Board of Ed member) who deigns to fly in the face of this simple truth.
"Public sentiment" wishes to retain their three schools. The current leadership of the Board of Education somehow fails to acknowledge this, act on this, or even care about this.
Perhaps it's time to get some 'new blood' on the board, people who are willing to serve, rather than patronize, the public.
The latest chapter in this merry-go-round we are on is that the board would like to have yet another referendum in June.
And you'll never guess what the question is. That's right. "Do you want a consolidated school in Region 12?"
Wow. Talk about going round and round.
If this referendum happens (and that's a big if), I predict the notion of consolidation will fail just as miserably as it has before.
But before we vote it down again, I would like the board to assure the public that this referendum would actually mean something.
That the board would actually respect the voters and accept the results, that, if consolidation is voted down, the idea would be dropped once and for all.
And I don't just mean dropped publicly, but behind the board's 'closed doors' as well.
Continuing to pursue the idea of consolidation when a vast majority of your constituents don't want it would be indescribably irresponsible, not to mention baffling.
Bridget McKenney is a resident of Bridgewater.
Apr 27 2007 2:00 PM
Reminds Region 12 Board of Ed: 'In a democracy, majority rules'
To the Editor:
I am writing in response to a letter last week from Jane Boyer of Washington.
However, even though I reference her letter, my rebuttal isn't specifically to Ms. Boyer, but to all who shockingly still think there should be a consolidated elementary school in Region 12.
My thoughts here have nothing to do with the pros and cons of consolidation versus retaining our three schools.
The time for that debate is over. The time for singing the praises of a consolidated school are over.
I think you're wrong. You think I'm wrong. So let's just agree to disagree and focus on the real issue at hand.
Ms. Boyer speaks of how we've been going "round and round" on the consolidation/three schools issue and that the issue should be "put to bed."
I couldn't agree more. Except that the only ones leading us round and round have been the leadership of the Region 12 Board of Education and the only issue that should be put to bed is that of consolidation.
The public has been given the information, the numbers and a hard sell from all sides ad nauseum. We have been given the opportunity to vote (twice? three times? I've lost count) and the results were clear and commanding.
Region 12 does not want a consolidated school. I regret that some don't agree with that, but in a democratic society, majority rules.
Somehow, though, these clear and commanding results were not quite as clear and commanding to the leadership of our Board of Education. Apparently, they did not like the results of these referenda and so they crumpled them up and tossed them in the trash.
And promptly continued to pursue a consolidated project 'behind closed doors'.
In one fell swoop, they managed to disenfranchise and enrage a large majority of voters in Region 12, as well as make a mockery of the democratic process.
Nice work.
Building committees in Bridgewater and Roxbury have been working for months on comprehensive, realistic, fiscally-sound plans that would enlarge/improve our schools.
These 'Build To Suit' plans have been given outrageously short shrift by the Board of Ed.
If the Board of Ed had put half as much energy and money into a plan to retain our three schools as they have put into the folly of consolidation (especially this swampy hunting ground otherwise known as the Mundy property), we might be well on our way to a project we could all be proud of.
But, alas"� we are nowhere. And we have the leadership of the Board of Education to thank for that.
Some think that those of us who are willing to pay more to keep our small schools are fiscally irresponsible.
How about a Board of Ed that continues to blow through taxpayers' money, in a brazen and malfeasant way, on an idea that voters have voted down more than once?
Now that's what I call fiscally irresponsible.
Ms. Boyer invokes the name of Abraham Lincoln and paraphrases him as saying "you can't satisfy all of the people all of the time." Of course you can't.
But here's an idea: How about satisfying a majority of the voters in Region 12?
It's ironic to me that Ms. Boyer brings up Abraham Lincoln, one of the most intelligent, wise and honorable men in our nation's history. He is a real "rock star" in the pantheon of democracy (and so, I am loath to say the words "Abraham Lincoln" and "the Region 12 Board of Education" in the same sentence).
However, as I write, I am looking at his biography on my bookshelf and I am reminded of something else he once said: "Public sentiment is everything. With public sentiment, nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed."
Foolish is the person (or Board of Ed member) who deigns to fly in the face of this simple truth.
"Public sentiment" wishes to retain their three schools. The current leadership of the Board of Education somehow fails to acknowledge this, act on this, or even care about this.
Perhaps it's time to get some 'new blood' on the board, people who are willing to serve, rather than patronize, the public.
The latest chapter in this merry-go-round we are on is that the board would like to have yet another referendum in June.
And you'll never guess what the question is. That's right. "Do you want a consolidated school in Region 12?"
Wow. Talk about going round and round.
If this referendum happens (and that's a big if), I predict the notion of consolidation will fail just as miserably as it has before.
But before we vote it down again, I would like the board to assure the public that this referendum would actually mean something.
That the board would actually respect the voters and accept the results, that, if consolidation is voted down, the idea would be dropped once and for all.
And I don't just mean dropped publicly, but behind the board's 'closed doors' as well.
Continuing to pursue the idea of consolidation when a vast majority of your constituents don't want it would be indescribably irresponsible, not to mention baffling.
Bridget McKenney is a resident of Bridgewater.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)