NOTES OF FEBRUARY 8, 2017 RYE SCHOOL DELIBERATIVE SESSION
Final Revision B – Provided by the Rye Civic League
Present on the stage (left to right as viewed from the audience): School District Clerk Donna Decotis, SAU 50 Superintendent Sal Petralia, School Board Chairman Scott Marion, School Board Members Kevin Brandon, Kate Hillman, Jeanne Moynahan, and Margaret Honda. Present at the podium: Bob Eaton, School District Moderator.
Also present and sitting in the audience: SAU 50 Assistant Superintendent Kelli Killen, SAU 50 Business Administrator Jim Katkin, Rye Junior High Principal Marie Soucy, and Rye Elementary School Principal Suzanne Lull.
Editor’s
note: The elapsed times are relative to
start of each video segment. Segments
consist of one or more warrant articles.
To access the video for a particular warrant article, click on the
heading for the warrant article. The
video will be positioned to the beginning of the segment. You may then use the slider to position the
video to the appropriate elapsed time.
The video is available at https://vimeo.com/203319303/
Summary
4. Further amendments incorporated key points made by the School Board and the public.
Introduction (0:00
elapsed)
Moderator Eaton called the meeting to order and introduced himself. He first introduced Kate Hillman and explained that she would be stepping down after three years of dedicated service. There was a round of applause.
Moderator Eaton then introduced the School Board members sitting on the stage, as well as the SAU 50 Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent and Business Manager as well as the two principals. He then asked the candidates for the two open School Board positions to stand: Gary Bowser, Jeanne Moynahan and Paula Tsetsilas. Gary Bowser appeared not to be present, but the other two persons stood.
Moderator Eaton invited everyone to attend Candidates Night, Thursday March 9 at 7:00 p.m. at the Rye Public Library and reminded everyone that the Town and School elections, for all offices and warrant articles, would be Tuesday, March 14 at Rye Elementary School from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.
(3:40 elapsed)
Moderator Eaton then went over the rules. Articles may not be amended to eliminate the subject matter, he said. He pointed out that the New Hampshire Supreme Court had ruled, less than a month earlier, that warrant articles could be amended to change their intent or purpose. Editor’s note: See the New Hampshire Supreme Court decision in Cady v. Town of Deerfield, No. 2016-0152, January 18, 2017.
Article
1: Operating Budget ($14,087,950) (8:48
elapsed)
Moderator Eaton read the warrant article which provides for a default budget of $13,967,307 should the warrant article not pass. The article states that it is the same as the last year, with certain adjustments required by previous actions of the Rye School District or by law.
Editor’s note: The default budget is only
approximately $120,000 less than the proposed operating budget. The 2016-2017 budget is $13,436,384, thus
the prior year’s budget was adjusted upward by over $500,000 to arrive at the
default budget. Rather than adjust the
prior year’s budget as provided for by N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. 40:13, IX(b), the
default budget was constructed by selecting, for each detailed budget line
item, the appropriation from either the 2016-2017 budget or that from the
2017-2018 budget. In essence, certain
categories of expenditures, such as Special Education, High School Tuition and
Pupil Transportation were considered to be expenditures “mandated by law” and
thus use of the higher 2017-2018 proposed appropriation was justified for use
in the default budget.
Kevin Brandon summarized the warrant article. He described a process that begins in July. It is a responsible budget, but one that also allows the delivery of a quality education. The difference between the proposed budget and the default budget is largely a reflection of the fact that the vast majority of things that the School District pays for are either under contract, are billed to the School District (as with Portsmouth High School tuition) or are things that are mandated under law, such as Special Education, he said.
There being no discussion of this warrant article, Moderator Eaton ordered it to appear on the ballot as written. Jeanne Moynahan moved to restrict reconsideration. Paula Tsetsilas seconded. The motion carried.
Article
2: Buildings and Grounds Expendable
Trust ($75,000) (12:30 elapsed)
Kevin Brandon addressed. He said that the two school buildings have 110,000 sq. ft. of space and infrastructure that needs to be kept up. One of the two boilers in this school is down and we are going through a protracted replacement process. That was unanticipated. We are trying to replenish the expendable trust so there are sufficient funds for both scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, he said.
There being no discussion of this warrant article, Moderator Eaton ordered it to appear on the ballot as written. Jeanne Moynahan moved to restrict reconsideration. There was a second by an unknown person. The motion carried.
Article
3: Building Feasibility Committee (14:48
elapsed)
Moderator Eaton read the warrant article:
“To see if the School District will vote to establish a Building Feasibility Committee (“Committee”) to explore the feasibility of combining the Rye Elementary School and the Rye Junior High School in one location. The Committee shall consist of two School Board members, and invite one Selectman, one Planning Board member and one Budget Committee member, each appointed by their respective boards, along with two parent representatives who are not members of the previously referenced boards, as well as additional members identified as needed by, and appointed by, the Committee. The Committee should self-elect a chairperson. The Committee should provide a report to the town prior to December 1, 2017, identifying the pros and cons of a single K-8 facility with recommendations for next steps including additional research or implementation steps, if applicable. The Committee shall disband following the 2018 Town Election.”
Moderator Eaton stated that the warrant article had been submitted by resident petition, and that the Rye School Board did not recommend the warrant article by a 5-0 vote.
Mike Schwartz spoke to the article. He apologized for not making the School Board members aware of the warrant article beforehand, although he did e-mail them ahead of time, he said. He mentioned having been ready to address the warrant article at the beginning of the last School Board meeting. He said that he thought that nine years of service on the School Board would have brought him some understanding. The video from the last meeting, which I watched twice, was a bit brutal, he said. You asked twice about the process of defending against a petitioned article. I am going to spend some time discussing the process in the hope that you might change your minds and support this article, he said.
There are many ways to try to achieve democratic change in our community with respect to schools. You all might know that there has been a dialog regarding the ninth grade honors program at the High School. This is another great example of how individuals not on the Portsmouth Board came together to make change. I believe that the result was better for students. The School District decided to reinstitute the ninth grade honors program due to parent input. You probably wouldn’t have been happy with the process that we used. We wrote and administered our own student survey. We did our own research and created our own presentation. We wrote letters to the editor. There were newspaper articles published in the newspaper about it. It is perfectly appropriate for citizens who are not on a board to push for change in lots of ways. This type of civic involvement should be embraced for positive change. Parents went to the Portsmouth Board meeting last week and talked about how great it was to have a Board that was open to comment, he said.
Petitioned warrant articles are designed for this type of democratic and civic involvement. I completely recognize that this is not a process that you, as Board members, might want, but the focus should be on the outcome for students. Perhaps the outcome of this article will be better collaboration so we end up with better outcomes for our students, he said.
I understand that process is important, so I want to talk about the process concerns that you raised at your last meeting, Mr. Schwarz said. Kevin, you summed it up best at the last meeting by stating that, if you put something like this on the ballot, all of a sudden it is elevated overnight to a new level. You hit the nail on the head. That is why this is a warrant article: to raise the level of awareness and importance. There were many comments about the issue already being on your radar. But the comments that you made indicated that it has been a sidebar issue in the past. You mentioned that Craig Musselman asked for this information about six months ago. You said that you had had comments about this, but they are missing from your minutes. All these comments demonstrate that it needs to be elevated to a different level if it is really going to have some teeth. There is a lot going on with the Board and issues like this won’t get addressed unless they are brought to a higher level, Mr. Schwartz said.
This is not a critique about your abilities. When I was on the board twelve years ago, for the first two years I tried to bring out the same issue and I wasn’t able to get any traction. I have to address your repeated comments about people coming to board meetings and asking you to create a committee like this, rather than creating a warrant article. It’s hard to encourage participation when comments like these ones from your prior meeting are made: “It’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever seen. It’s ridiculous. Mike Schwartz was on the Board for nine years. He should be ashamed of himself.” My wife has no desire to return to a Board meeting as in the past she has been publicly chastised by a Board member, he said.
It was suggested that, when I was on the Board, I would never have put up with this. I was a proponent of warrant articles when I was on the Board. I didn’t mind when Joe Cummins came to meetings and discussed his opinions. I am a strong believer in citizen involvement and I would not have reacted so negatively to the warrant article, he said.
Now I’ll address the outcome which is really where the discussion should be: what is the best thing for students and learning in Rye. When I was on the Board, in my first year, I spent an inordinate amount of time reviewing the Greenland School budget. I concluded that the only way you’ll ever cut costs in the Rye School District is to combine the two schools. As a School Board member I took a trip to North Hampton’s K-8 school. Having a K-8 school reduces the redundancies of library, cafeteria, gyms, nurses, librarians, and other teachers. It reduces heating, electricity and maintenance and the list goes on. A single school would allow funds to be spent on additional things like curriculum instruction and perhaps social studies teachers. When I brought this up twelve years ago, the number one concern was the belief that the community would not want to give up Rye Junior High. It has been around a very long time and there is a lot of passion tied to it, he said.
If the schools are merged, the general consensus has been that the Elementary School would be the right location for a single school. It has more space and ability to expand and grow. The purpose of this warrant article is in part to get a sense of whether the community would be willing to have just one school. In a way, it’s the ultimate survey, which I believe one of you mentioned at the last meeting. I can’t speak for all of the other signers, but from my perspective having this on the ballot creates a more unified discussion of other properties in Town and the need for expansion, whether it’s the Town Hall or another facilities. The discussion of Town Hall should be done knowing that there will be discussion about the schools as well, he said.
The article deliberately includes people from different committees. That will avoid silos. A date for the report is specified so that it would be useful for the next election cycle. The School has control of the building, he said.
To summarize, I’m sorry that many of you felt slighted by the warrant article, which was signed by more than 40 people, not 25. I hope that you can focus on the desired outcome and the positive possible impact on students. You have the power to elevate this in a collaborative fashion, he said.
It seems ironic that one of the Board members pushed forward at the past Town Deliberative Session an article to create a committee to study bringing younger families to Rye. The Selectmen could have been asked to form this committee, but it was done the exact same way through a warrant article. I don’t understand the difference between pushing for that at the Town level but saying that it is not appropriate at the School level. I hope you all will reconsider your vote and I welcome any amendment discussion, Mr. Schwartz said. There was applause.
Unsuccessful amendment attempt by
School Board Chairman (24:35 elapsed)
Scott Marion proposed an amendment that he said “we” have. He read:
“To encourage the Rye School Board to study the long-term enrollment projections and consider how best to use the current Rye District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options may include: permitting the use of part of the buildings for other town functions and conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-K to eighth grade student population. The School Board is urged to consider a wide range of options, and perhaps present multiple proposals for consideration at the December 17, 2017 School Board meeting or such future date that enables the School Board to thoroughly evaluate options that meet the stated priorities.”
Kevin Brandon seconded.
Mr. Marion said that he was not going to get into a debate with Mike Schwartz about his various points. He has a slightly different memory of his time on the Board, he said. There are a few factual inaccuracies. But, the main point as to why the School Board voted unanimously to oppose the warrant article is because we’re worried about the process. We’re trying desperately to find people to run for the School Board. It’s hard to get people to commit to the time. If you’re going to be elected to a Town board you are elected to serve a certain responsibility. You mentioned Joe Cummins. Joe Cummins always gets time at our meetings, Mr. Marion said.
Moderator Eaton interrupted and warned Mr. Marion about bringing individuals into the discussion.
Mr. Marion pointed out that Mr. Cummins had brought up the issue of eighth grade science. We didn’t have a petitioned warrant article to look into that. He raised some very good points and we agreed to look into it. We have the principal, the curriculum director, science teachers and others looking into the issue and they will report back. He asked whether the School Board is going to be dragged around by potential petitioned warrant articles. The School Board has been looking into this. The enrollment projections have become more stark the past few years. The School Board has been exploring options and will continue to do so. This proposed committee directs a specific set of meetings, reports and other things. I don’t know why anybody would volunteer to run for School Board if they’re going to be pulled around by people who are not willing to run for the board. All that is needed is 25 signatures to do a petitioned warrant article. We’re proposing an amendment to the warrant article that will serve the same purpose.
(29:02 elapsed)
We don’t want to be like the drunk looking for his keys in the street light, Mr. Marion said. He described how the drunk had lost his keys between the bar down the street and the street light, but was looking only where the light was. We don’t want to be limited to one potential solution of consolidating the schools. While Mr. Schwartz pointed out some of the positives, there are other potential negative consequences. We want to leave this open to multiple options that you might not see now, he said.
(30:16 elapsed)
Selectman Craig Musselman said that this had been a topic of discussion between the Board of Selectmen and the School Board this year. He said that he wanted to review the bidding. There was a meeting last Spring between one School Board member and Selectman Joe Mills to discuss the partial use of the 55,000 sq. ft. Some miscommunication ensued and the word that the Selectmen got back was that this was not ever going to happen. At a School Budget Committee meeting I raised the point that it seemed odd that we had shut off that discussion, he said. I challenged the School Board to go back and think about that. During the Town Hall discussions this year, there was one current and one former School Board member on the Budget Committee and that Committee voted not to recommend the main warrant articles on Town Hall expansion, explaining that use of this building should perhaps be considered before we go spend $3.2 million or $3.3 million, which is all understandable.
When I saw this article that would start the discussion, I thought it was a fine idea. I think your amendment is fine. One of the positive aspects of the petitioned warrant article is that it includes input from the Board of Selectmen, the Planning Board and some others. He suggested that, somewhere in the amendment the words “with the input of the Board of Selectmen” be added. There are broader issues that need to be addressed, he said.
(33:55 elapsed)
Mr. Marion suggested rewording to read “to encourage the Rye School Board, with the input of the Town of Rye Selectmen…” Kevin Brandon was in agreement. Moderator Eaton read the amendment slightly differently, to read “To encourage the Rye School Board to study, with the input of the Board of Selectmen, the long-term enrollment projections…”
Betty Anderson said that she was not totally opposed to the amendment, but it is important to keep a reference in the article to having the schools all in one place. She said that she had served on the School Board with Mr. Schwartz when he studied this. He is absolutely right that it didn’t get traction. Shame on us. It’s really a great idea for many, many reasons. He and I didn’t always agree, but we did agree on this one. It’s really hard for the School Board to get behind this because so many people within the schools are not so happy about this idea. However, it would be good to study further. To get the input from the Town would be great information. If they said no, then you can decide not to waste any more time on this. But, if they say yes, it would raise it to a higher level. I appreciate the petitioners bringing this forward. I didn’t have the opportunity to sign it, but I would have. I would vote against this amendment because it doesn’t include anything about combining the schools, she said.
(36:18 elapsed)
Moderator Eaton said that he had discussed with Mr. Marion the prior day the concern that this eliminated the subject matter of combining the schools and that he had a second amendment proposal.
Mr. Marion said that they had been trying to consolidate amendments, but in the word processing, I left out “such as combining students into one building.” He reworded to read “such options may include permitting the use of part of the building for other Town functions, combining students into one building, …” Mr. Brandon was in agreement.
Moderator Eaton reread the entire amendment:
“To encourage the Rye School Board to study, with the input of the Board of Selectmen, the long-term enrollment projections and consider how best to use the current School District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options may include: permitting the use of part of the buildings for other town functions, combining students into one building, and conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade student population. The School Board is urged to consider a wide range of options, and perhaps present multiple proposals for consideration at the December 2017 School Board meeting or at such future date that enables the School Board to thoroughly evaluate options that meet the stated priorities.”
(38:45 elapsed)
Peter Crawford said that he is still against the amendment. The language “to encourage the Rye School Board to study…” would allow them to consider the encouragement and then go ahead and do nothing. Democracy in towns is all about the citizens and Town Meetings. They are the legislative body. They are the ones that draft the laws and ordinances and appropriate the money. It’s our Town. The governing bodies, the School Board and the Board of Selectmen are there to execute what the citizens decide that they want. This really needs to be citizen driven. The parents are definitely going to have a view on this. The Planning Board will have input in terms of zoning and the effect of different types of housing on the number of students coming into the schools. The Budget Committee is going to be concerned because of the impact on town budgets, he said.
Mr. Crawford referred to a handout that he had distributed to people as they came in. The problem here is that we’ve been cutting, cutting, cutting in small steps to keep within the budget because the Special Ed. costs are climbing like a rocket and Portsmouth High is going up as well. We have to get on a different track where, to satisfy everyone in Town, including the taxpayers, we have some big increments of cost taken out. One excellent way to do that is combining the schools. There would be some deep cuts at first, but then you move on and recover from there. It’s horrible for morale to have these small cuts every year. We need to get to get out of that mode and into one where there is a plan that solves the issues for the taxpayers as well as the parents, he said.
(41:15 elapsed)
Peggy Balboni said that she felt that she had to speak as she was the one who blew up the Budget Committee the other night. She said that she had served on the School Board for nine years with Ms. Anderson and Mr. Schwartz. This is a problem that we have known about, but not to the extent that it has emerged recently. I feel that we have to address the declining enrollment, but do it in a way that looks at all of the other space needs in Town. My intent was to make sure that there were other people in Town looking at the issue because of the space needs. Everybody knows we’re looking at the Town Hall. Now Rye Rec. has a warrant article as well, looking for space down at the Rye Rec. Center. They also use School space. I think that it is important to have input from other Town committees and also keep in mind the needs of the SAU. Greenland’s population is increasing, and despite their addition they are bursting at the seams. The Community Pre-School used to be housed in Rye years ago. That or some of the early childhood programs could be put into the Elementary School. Fifth grade could be moved up here. There are a lot of options out there. Input from a variety of sectors is needed, she said.
(43:38 elapsed)
Kerry Labovitz said that she feels that the proposed amendment describes what the School Board should already be doing. The amendment undermines the democratic process. People are trying to get other people involved. I am not in favor of the amendment as proposed unless it includes other committees as suggested by the original article. However, I agree with the expansion to include other possible solutions, she said.
Sam Winebaum said that some of the elements of the amendment are good, in terms of looking at more than one location, but he echoes what some of the others have said. Involvement by other citizens and board members should be welcomed. He referred to his service on the Parsons Creek Watershed Committee. There was a large group of citizens, along with professional people, and we started to get a lot done. You can leverage talents and have a report that you can start with. He encouraged the proponents of the amendment to restore the elements relating to the establishment of the Building Feasibility Committee and the memberships and some of the other good ideas that have come out.
(46:57 elapsed)
Steven Borne said that he supports the broadening of what we would be looking at, but cannot support the wording at the beginning that does not make it definitive. We need to have a date at the end by which it will be completed. This is a tremendous opportunity to get the talent involved and get the information. With the information for Town Hall and from Rye Rec., we can get close to having a strategic plan in Town. This is a key piece. I very much encourage the expansion of the committee, he said.
Jeff Conway asked whether the issue was whether having other representatives on the committee was one of precedent, and the School Board then being pulled in a number of different directions.
Scott Marion said that their proposed amendment does not close off other involvement. We have plenty of committees. We had a class size committee. Somebody has to own this. What I object to is directing the School Board. People go to a lot more than one three hour meeting per month. We’re going to be going to more meetings because somebody had an idea for a study. This way, we have some say in how things get structured, but we would welcome the input. We struggle to get people to serve on any committee, he said.
Mr. Conway said that he gets the comment about Science test scores and Joe Cummins. But, this is about one of the biggest decisions that anyone on the School Board will make in the next 5-10 years. In this case, you really want to tie things up and you need regular people involved. This is a really big deal and it should be held to a higher standard, he said.
(51:34 elapsed)
Jaci Grote said that those of us who are older and do not have children value the education provided by the schools. It is one of the gems that we have in the Town. The citizens are looking for direction: on Town Hall and on the schools. Everyone knows about this. It is something that we need to talk about as a Town. This needs to be elevated. We need more action verbs. It sounds a little mushy and it sounds like not a whole lot is going to get done. You also need to include more than just the Selectmen so that the Town feels that they have some input, she said.
(53:38 elapsed)
Betty Anderson asked whether the School Board members would change their vote to not recommend the warrant article if Mr. Marion’s proposed amendment passes. Mr. Marion said that he would change his vote. Mr. Brandon would not say, because the final language had not yet been arrived at. Kate Hillman, Jeanne Moynahan and Margaret Honda agreed with Mr. Brandon.
Mr. Marion, responding to Jaci Grote’s point, suggested the addition of “with the input of other potential ad hoc committee members.”
Mr. Musselman suggested “with the input of the Board of Selectmen, the Planning Board, the Budget Committee and interested citizens.”
Mr. Brandon expressed concern about a slippery slope and it being necessary for the committee to meet in the gymnasium. He spoke about an off-site meeting of parents that had gotten together, talked about important issues and held a vote. Editor’s note: He is apparently referring to a meeting that occurred on November 29, 2016 at the Library. The video is available at: http://www.townhallstreams.com/locations/rye-public-library/events/36496. This is similar to the warrant article where there were 40 signatories, but only three showed up at the relevant School Board meeting. There is no telling that a random sample of those willing to spend their time is actually going to reflect the interests of the Town. Show me a board with seventeen people on it, and I don’t want to be on it, he said.
Selectman Musselman said that the School Board would lead the process. Interested citizens could be invited only to certain meetings, he said.
Moderator Eaton asked Mr. Brandon whether he was accepting this as a friendly amendment. Mr. Brandon responded affirmatively, but added that it is not to be exclusive, but to have a board that can function.
Randy Crapo moved to call the question. Moderator Eaton reread the article with the proposed amendment:
“To encourage the Rye School Board to study, with the input of the Board of Selectmen, the Planning Board, the Budget Committee, and interested citizens, the long-term enrollment projections and consider how best to use the current School District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options may include: permitting the use of part of the buildings for other town functions, combining students into one building, and conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade student population. The School Board is urged to consider a wide range of options, and perhaps present multiple proposals for consideration at the December 2017 School Board meeting or at such future date that enables the School Board to thoroughly evaluate options that meet the stated priorities.”
The motion to end discussion failed.
(61:35 elapsed)
Paula Tsetsilas thanked Mike Schwartz for getting this started. She said that she did support the warrant article. She is thinking of this as a parent and also a possible future board member. I realize that there is a lot of work on their plate right now, but this is one of the biggest issues we will undertake over the next few years. She proposed a friendly amendment to provide for quarterly input from the Selectmen, Planning Board, Budget Committee and citizens. She said that she would also like to change “to encourage” to “to have the Rye School Board.” She would also like a definite end date and suggested March 2018.
Mr. Marion pointed out that the Budget Committee goes into “quiet times” and may not meet quarterly. Many of the other things might be OK, but I’m nervous about the quarterly report, he said.
Moderator Eaton said that, if it is not a friendly amendment we are going to deal with the amendment that we have.
Mr. Marion responded that he did not consider the quarterly requirement to be a friendly amendment.
Mr. Brandon said that it was becoming more invasive when you start talking about the frequency of the meetings. The School Board is elected and there is a certain amount of designated authority and designated judgment implicit in that vote. Trying to specify exactly what is going to happen gets back to the slippery slope. If people want to have more input, there are School Board and Budget Committee seats that they can run for. The episodic appearances at School Board meetings are an indicator of the commitment that people have relative to elected representatives and it waxes and wanes and we try to get people with continuity of interest, and not have rules imposed from the outside when the individuals trying to impose them are not part of the process.
Moderator Eaton said that he took the comments from the School Board to indicate that it is not considered to be a friendly amendment.
(67:02 elapsed)
Mike Schwartz said that he appreciates the efforts to try and find something that works for everyone. The way the amendment is written, he recommends voting it down. It is too vague. There are too many words like “encourage.” There is uncertainty as to whether there would even be a report by a particular date. It is definitely a lot weaker than the intent was. If this is voted down, I would propose an amendment to extend this beyond just merging the schools into one building, he said. This needs to be a bigger issue. A dialog beyond the School Board is needed, he said.
Peter Crawford said that he agrees with Mr. Schwartz and said that he thinks that there are some positive elements that the School Board wanted. This should be voted down and then those should be added to the article as it stood before we started. It seems like people are just trying to accommodate the School Board. There are only five of them here and there are fifty of us. We’re the ones that will make the decision, he said.
Margaret Honda said that, as the newest Board member, she is somewhat disappointed to hear so many former Board members talk about this. It was in play for so long and we find ourselves here, in crisis mode. In terms of the original warrant article, I have trouble with its specificity. There are so many things that we could be doing for the community as it relates to the buildings, she said. In terms of catering to us, we’ve made the point that it is about involvement of other people. It is the five of us as we can’t get them involved, she said.
(70:18 elapsed)
Frances Erlebacher called the question. The outcome was uncertain so Moderator Eaton asked Ms. Anderson and Ms. Soucy to help him take a count. The vote was 20-17 in favor of ending discussion, which did not achieve a two-thirds majority, so Moderator Eaton allowed debate to continue.
Steven Borne suggested that the word “quarterly” be changed to “periodic.” He said that he was confused regarding the concern. This year we had the Recreation Space Needs Committee, the Parsonage Committee, and the Parson’s Creek Committee that all brought in lots of people that went and got information and reported back so that the work wasn’t all on the three person Select Board. He said that he does not understand why there is a problem with people meeting and doing the heavy lifting and reporting periodically.
Jaci Grote said that she agrees that “quarterly” is a sticky thing. Meetings should occur when needed and the School Board needs to head this up. I am concerned about Mr. Brandon’s invasion. “Democracy” is messy. It is very, very messy, she said. Mr. Brandon corrected the word to “invasive,” not “invasion.” Ms. Grote referred to knowing what it is like to serve on a Board. The people on the Planning Board right now are not having a lot of fun. That comes with serving. It is not uncommon to have something pushed off again and again to the point where the Town wants to become involved because they want to help the Board. It’s actually a good thing, because the Town recognizes that something needs to be done. We feel that it is our duty to bring this to your attention. I agree with the quarterly comment. She asked whether, if that is taken away, the proposal of Ms. Tsetsilas is acceptable.
Mr. Brandon said that there is not a resistance to democracy. If you go back and look at the tapes, we say, please fill these seats. We like to hear your ideas. I’m a parent with two children in the schools. We are all taxpayers. We all have a vested interest. What I am saying is that there is a certain amount of designated authority. We have to have structure and process. We are regular people. There is no high ground, but someone needs to show up and be accountable. We could have a report by December, but the impact on the students needs to be considered. I get the elimination of overhead, but that’s not the hardest part. The citizens are going to have to vote on whatever comes out of this Committee, he said.
Moderator Eaton said that he had heard suggestions for friendly amendments. The first is to change “encourage” to “have.” Mr. Marion agreed. Paula Tsetsilas agreed that the requirement of quarterly reporting was no longer being pressed. Moderator Eaton asked if there was anything else.
Mr. Marion referred to a change to “March 2018” in the last sentence. Mr. Brandon accepted the change.
Randy Crapo said that, if there is a delay until March, the ability to put a warrant article on the ballot would be lost. If it’s kept in December there could be an article to provide funds to proceed. If there is a delay until March there would be a year’s delay, he said.
Scott Marion pointed out that this is a long-term study, not a one year one. This is a slow-moving train, he said. With all deference to Jaci, it is going to be us writing the report, he said.
(81:42 elapsed)
Carla Cole, 77 Liberty Common, said that the difference between the original and the proposed amended article is that, in the first, the Committee is driving the bus, whereas, in the second, the School Board is driving the bus. I completely respect your time. She suggested organizing a focus group to provide the data. I don’t think quarterly meetings would ever be enough to get this done. Clearly, the community is interested in developing a plan, whether they agree with it or not.
Kate Hillman said that going to multiple meetings is part of their jobs. She critiqued the proposed amendment by Mr. Marion and Mr. Brandon, saying that a committee of four committees would not be effective. She suggested that it be changed to representatives of each committee. This is going to be very challenging, she said. I’m concerned about what we’re putting on the Committee, she said.
Mike Schwartz said that there are three concepts in the original warrant article. The first is the idea about merging the two schools. The second is the composition of the Committee. It talks about two School Board members, and one Selectmen, one Planning Board member and one Budget Committee member being invited as well as parent representatives and anyone else that you think should be on the Committee. The third thing is a date by which the report is due. He asked which of those three things need to be changed. He said that he heard that other possibilities need to be included. He offered to make a friendly amendment to the original warrant article to provide for that.
Mr. Marion interrupted Mr. Schwartz and raised a point of order, saying that there is a proposed amendment on the floor, but Mr. Schwartz was trying to amend the original article.
Moderator Eaton said that Mr. Schwartz was asking Mr. Marion if he would accept a friendly amendment, but that from Mr. Marion’s reaction the answer appears to be “no.”
Mr. Schwartz asked what the concerns were of the Board with regard to the original wording. He said that having input from committees is not the same thing as having a committee with members from the various committees on it.
Mr. Marion said that he thought that all of these had been addressed.
Kerry Labovitz said that she thought that we had all tried to work with the amendment to make it what we all want and it’s not working. There are too many problems with what is proposed based on what people want, which is a lot of what is in the original proposal. We should call the question on the amendment, vote that down and then make the necessary changes to the original warrant article to address the School Board’s concerns. These are twofold. First, making it so that they have ownership of the committee and that the scope is expanded. Ms. Labovitz called the question.
Moderator Eaton called for a show of cards. Moderator Eaton indicated that the motion passed and declared debate to be over.
Moderator Eaton read the amendment one last time.
Further amendments (91:52
elapsed)
Mr. Schwartz moved to amend the first sentence to read “[t]o see if the Rye School District will vote to establish a Building Feasibility Committee to explore the feasibility of combining the Rye Elementary School and the Rye Junior High School in one location, combining the two schools and to consider other options to increase the use of the buildings.” Ms. Anderson seconded.
Jaci Grote said that she thinks that the School Board is resisting the formation of the Committee unless a change is made regarding who the Committee reports to.
Moderator Eaton asked whether Ms. Grote was talking about the amendment.
Ms. Grote said that she was, and said that she was proposing a friendly amendment. The voters present like the language about who is going to be on the Committee and when the work will be done. It is appealing to me too, she said. She said that she would like the first sentence to focus on options for the students rather than options for the buildings, however.
Mr. Crawford said that we should just vote on the amendment. Ms. Grote has some ideas to make it more specific, but these could be added once this has been voted on. He stated that this was a common sense amendment with which the School Board members should agree. He said that he was not going to call the question because someone else might want to speak.
Paula Tsetsilas started to speak and it appeared that she might be about to offer a friendly amendment.
Moderator Eaton said that he would never allow a friendly amendment again. There was laughter.
Ms. Tsetsilas said that broader options to look within the SAU was missing. She suggested “to consider other options to increase the use of buildings or explore options within the SAU.” Mr. Schwartz was in agreement with the friendly amendment. Ms. Anderson agreed.
Debra Holloway stated that her issue with the warrant article is that it is not clear why we are looking at a building feasibility study. Ms. Holloway said that there is no mention of enrollment projections or study of them. I cannot support the article the way it is, she said.
Kerry Labovitz said that she had a friendly amendment to offer and had provided it to Mr. Schwartz. She made a number of suggestions, stating that they are all in a friendly way.
Moderator Eaton said that it is starting to get convoluted, and suggested that Mr. Schwartz’s amendment be taken first and then her amendment considered.
Several people called the question. The motion carried.
Moderator Eaton read the amendment:
“[t]o see if the School District will vote to establish a Building Feasibility Committee to explore the feasibility of combining the Rye Elementary School and the Rye Junior High School in one location, and to consider other options to increase the usage of the buildings, or explore options within SAU 50.”
The motion to amend failed.
Kerry Labovitz suggested an amendment to incorporate a portion of the School Board’s amendment. She read a number of changes to the language.
Steven Borne seconded. Moderator Eaton requested the amendment in writing, saying he had become thoroughly lost.
(105:50 elapsed)
Margaret Honda said that she was opposed to the change as it changes “may” to “will.” She referred to other communities that had combined schools only to see enrollments increase and have to add back.
Peter Crawford said that it seemed like we would be going back to some of the language that was voted down just a minute ago. He suggested that the changes be taken one at a time, rather than trying to craft an amendment that is going to satisfy everyone. I think we’ll get out of here a lot faster, he said.
Laura Brown said that she could see how, at a particular time, it might not have been appropriate to look at combining the schools because the enrollment was up, because of all of the things going on in town we need to be looking at this. Some of the things being added to the amendment are things that the School Board would be doing anyway. You’re already looking at statistics and how many kids should be in a classroom. If there’s going to be a committee they need to have a task. It cannot be convoluted with all of these other things. I would vote this particular amendment down and make sure that there is a due date. She said that she would have an amendment if this one is voted down.
Jeanne Moynahan warned that the schools could not be combined without doing some major renovations. When the prior renovations were done they were tailored to the age of the children in the schools, she said.
Kate Hillman said that she is OK with a good amount of the article as written. It needs to say something about why this is being done. She said that she also doesn’t see anything about the impact on student experience and learning.
Moderator Eaton read the amended article, as proposed by the Labovitz amendment:
“To see if the School District will vote to establish a Committee to study the long-term enrollment projections and consider how to best use the current School District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options will include: merging two buildings, permitting the use of part of the buildings for other Town functions, conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade population. The Committee shall consist of two School Board members and invite one Selectmen, one Planning Board member and one Budget Committee member, each appointed by their respective boards, along with two parent representatives who are not members of the previous referenced boards, as well as additional members identified by the Committee. The Committee shall provide a report to the Town prior to December 1, 2017, with their recommendations for next steps. The Committee shall disband following the 2018 Town Election.”
A friendly amendment was proposed to change “will” in the fifth line to “may.” While Ms. Labovitz agreed, Mike Schwartz, who erroneously believed that he had seconded the amendment, disagreed. He complained that the addition put back in the School Board’s language that said that they may want to do these three things. He asked why they had come up with those three things if they don’t think that they need to be done. Scott Marion responded that these are not the only things. Mr. Schwartz countered that “will” does not prevent the consideration of additional options, but only mandates that these three options be considered.
Ms. Labovitz encouraged Mr. Schwartz to reconsider as they are close to agreeing to language that is acceptable to everyone. Whether it says “will” or “may,” the option will be considered, she said. Mr. Schwartz agreed to the substitution of “may.”
The question was called. The motion passed.
The Labovitz amendment passed.
Ms. Labovitz asked whether the School Board would reconsider its recommendation. The response was that they had scheduled a meeting afterwards.
Scott Marion expressed a concern that, while it tells two School Board members that they have to participate, it invites a Selectman, who could decline. The language is restrictive on parents and vague with respect to others. He suggested that the School Board, in consultation with the Selectmen, should appoint the Committee representing citizens of Rye and relevant Town committees. There is nothing about expertise in here, she said. Mr. Brandon seconded.
There was extended conferral between Mr. Marion and Moderator Eaton.
(124:16 elapsed)
Moderator Eaton read the article with the proposed amendment. Mr. Marion said that Moderator Eaton had not incorporated Ms. Labovitz’s amendment. Moderator Eaton said that he had just asked Mr. Marion to put it all in one place. Moderator Eaton read it again:
“To see if the School District will vote to establish a Committee to study the long-term enrollment projections and consider how to best use the current School District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options may include: merging two buildings, permitting the use of part of the buildings for other Town functions, and conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade student population. The Committee shall be appointed by the School Board, in consultation with the Selectmen, include members from relevant Town committees, citizens with specific expertise and other citizens of the Town of Rye. The Committee should self-elect a chairperson. The Committee should
provide a report to the Town prior to December 1, 2017, identifying the pros and cons of a single K-8 facility, with recommendations for next steps, including additional research and implementation steps if applicable. The Committee shall disband following the 2018 Town Election.”
(69:15 elapsed)
Peter Crawford said that he is opposed to the amendment. This is what got us into trouble with the Town Hall project. We had a Selectmen’s Committee appointed and it tended to be people who all agreed with a particular course of action. We ended up spending $356,000 and came up with a $4.1 million building design that didn’t even get 40 percent of the vote. The operative language in the original article was to invite one Selectman, one Planning Board member and one Budget Committee member, each appointed by their respective boards. That allows those respective boards to weigh in and appoint who they think is the best person, getting the broadest possible representation on this committee without being biased by the School Board, even though the Selectmen would be consulted. It’s fine the way it is. I don’t see the reason for the amendment. It seems like it is going to stack the Committee as the School Board wants, he said.
Laura Brown said that she would vote for it because it supports the School Board. It provides an avenue to get this accomplished, she said.
Mike Schwartz said that the original article was simpler, but it’s extremely valuable to have the School Board’s support and he hopes that they will be able to provide that. With that in mind, he said, I would support this, he said.
It was pointed out that Moderator Eaton had not incorporated some changes that had passed with Ms. Labovitz’s amendment. Moderator Eaton asked that it be rewritten as he cannot keep doing these things. Give me a piece of paper with one amendment, he said.
(133:35 elapsed)
There was a long pause while Ms. Labovitz came up to speak with Mr. Marion and they went over the language. Then Mr. Marion was observed typing into his laptop. Moderator Eaton stated that he saw that, but would need a hard copy.
(139:20 elapsed)
Moderator Eaton read the article with Mr. Marion’s proposed amendment:
“To see if the School District will vote to establish a Committee to study the long-term enrollment projections and consider how to best use the current School District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options may include: merging two buildings, permitting the use of part of the buildings for other Town functions, and conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade student population, to explore the feasibility of combining the Rye Elementary School and Rye Junior High School in one location. The Committee shall be appointed by the School Board, in consultation with the Selectmen, to include members from relevant Town committees, citizens with specific expertise and other citizens of the Town of Rye. The Committee should self-elect a chairperson. The Committee should provide a report to the Town prior to December 1, 2017, with recommendations for next steps. The Committee shall disband following the 2018 Town Election.”
Mr. Marion noted some issues. Moderator Eaton said that he is non-violent. There was laughter. The proposed warrant article as amended was again read by Moderator Eaton:
“To see if the School District will vote to establish a Committee to study the long-term enrollment projections and consider how to best use the current School District properties to best meet the educational needs of Rye students while striving for fiscally-responsible proposals. Such options may include: merging two buildings, permitting the use of part of the buildings for other Town functions, and conferring with SAU 50 administrators and other SAU 50 school boards to determine whether there may be other mutually beneficial program structures for the SAU 50 pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade student population. The Committee shall be appointed by the School Board, in consultation with the Selectmen, to include members from relevant Town committees, citizens with specific expertise and other citizens of the Town of Rye. The Committee should self-elect a chairperson. The Committee should provide a report to the Town prior to December 1, 2017, with recommendations for next steps. The Committee will disband following the 2018 Town Election.”
Mr. Brandon agreed to second.
The question was called. The motion carried.
The motion to amend passed.
There being no further discussion of Article 3, Moderator Eaton ordered it to appear on the ballot as amended.
Mr. Musselman moved to restrict reconsideration. Ms. Anderson seconded. The motion passed.
(144:30 elapsed)
Moderator Eaton declared the meeting adjourned until the Town election. There was applause.