Tonight I attended the meeting of the Secondary Schools Committee. This committee has been meeting for like 4 years. They are reeling from last year's proposal defeat and attempting to re-group and develop a new proposal that taxpayers will approve. They seem like a fine group of citizens, staff and contractors that are working hard to provide a quality place of education for our kids.

So, here is my take...

Clearly the City of South Portland needs a long range plan that includes school grounds and facilities replacement. The question is how to accomplish this in a way that citizens will support.

Some of the current High School facilities are beyond 50 years of age. Anybody without much exposure to details can consider age alone and assume that an evaluation of short and long-term usefulness would be wise. Do we need a new High School? I am not sure.

I can tell you that it seems like the committee who has been working hard on the issue for years is at least in part convinced that some new construction is necessary and prudent. From what I have read (on the SPSD.org website) and what I experienced tonight, it seems that it is highly likely that updating and remodeling may not solve all the current environmental and safety issues. A big concern with what we have to work with is that as soon as you make changes that touch areas governed by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), you can unintentionally push yourself into a realm of governmental requirements. This makes it difficult to make a few upgrades and changes and may very well be a significant factor in deciding what is a responsible solution.

The problem, as I see it, is figuring out how to address the facility needs of the school district and get citizens behind it. I believe that this is exactly what the committee is attempting to do.

So, here is what I would do.

First I would initiate a plan that outlines all the capital needs of the district that will likely need attention in the next 10-20 years. This will give citizens a big picture understanding of the state of all facilities and grounds that the school district is responsible for. Creating this document and making it a living, breathing source of information that is regularly updated will go a long way toward keeping citizens informed of potential big dollar needs.

Assuming that the High School project is determined to be the most urgent priority on the list, the committee is already ahead of the game. What we need to do now is get all the interested citizens authentically involved as soon as possible. We need to hear their thoughts and ideas.

My process idea would start with a “draft proposal” from the committee. They have done a great deal of work on this already and I believe they could come to consensus in a few meetings. We might even just start with one of the plans they were looking at tonight. They need to spend a little time updating their documentation that supports their position so that a regular citizen, non-committee member can understand why they have landed on this “draft proposal”. Organizing the information by needs in order of most critical to least would help a great deal. Each section should be complete with what needs to be done, why it needs to be done, how much it will cost, and what the benefits of doing it are. Also noting potential and known consequences of failure to address each issue would be helpful.

Next we need to hold some public hearings on their “draft proposal”. This is an attempt to include citizens early in the process. The current plan is to have a proposal for fall 2009 voting. That is more than a year away.

The hearings should begin with a short presentation by the engineers of the draft proposal. I heard some of this tonight and it really helps to understand the issues. Once the presentation is complete, the citizens get their chance to poke holes in the draft. They can speak directly to the committee and voice their ideas and concerns. Each comment is recorded and will be responded to in written form shortly after the conclusion of the hearing process. Also, providing other pathways for the people to voice their thoughts would also be helpful. Providing an email address where people could send their thoughts and have replies responded to in the written document would provide an opportunity to hear all the ideas and help the committee make an informed recommendation.

Once all the participating citizens have been heard and considered, the committee should be able to debate the input that was received and offer a defendable recommendation complete with explanations of each aspect. If they really listened and integrated what they heard, I would expect this to offer greater likelihood of citizen support. I believe that the citizens will come through and offer some great ideas that will even offer some “out of the box” perspective.

Tonight I attended the meeting of the Secondary Schools Committee. This committee has been meeting for like 4 years. They are reeling from last year's proposal defeat and attempting to re-group and develop a new proposal that taxpayers will approve. They seem like a fine group of citizens, staff and contractors that are working hard to provide a quality place of education for our kids. So, here is my take... Clearly the City of South Portland needs a long range plan that includes school grounds and facilities replacement. The question is how to accomplish this in a way that citizens will support. Some of the current High School facilities are beyond 50 years of age. Anybody without much exposure to details can consider age alone and assume that an evaluation of short and long-term usefulness would be wise. Do we need a new High School? I am not sure. I can tell you that it seems like the committee who has been working hard on the issue for years is at least in part convinced that some new construction is necessary and prudent. From what I have read (on the SPSD.org website) and what I experienced tonight, it seems that it is highly likely that updating and remodeling may not solve all the current environmental and safety issues. A big concern with what we have to work with is that as soon as you make changes that touch areas governed by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), you can unintentionally push yourself into a realm of governmental requirements. This makes it difficult to make a few upgrades and changes and may very well be a significant factor in deciding what is a responsible solution. The problem, as I see it, is figuring out how to address the facility needs of the school district and get citizens behind it. I believe that this is exactly what the committee is attempting to do. So, here is what I would do. First I would initiate a plan that outlines all the capital needs of the district that will likely need attention in the next 10-20 years. This will give citizens a big picture understanding of the state of all facilities and grounds that the school district is responsible for. Creating this document and making it a living, breathing source of information that is regularly updated will go a long way toward keeping citizens informed of potential big dollar needs. Assuming that the High School project is determined to be the most urgent priority on the list, the committee is already ahead of the game. What we need to do now is get all the interested citizens authentically involved as soon as possible. We need to hear their thoughts and ideas. My process idea would start with a �draft proposal� from the committee. They have done a great deal of work on this already and I believe they could come to consensus in a few meetings. We might even just start with one of the plans they were looking at tonight. They need to spend a little time updating their documentation that supports their position so that a regular citizen, non-committee member can understand why they have landed on this �draft proposal�. Organizing the information by needs in order of most critical to least would help a great deal. Each section should be complete with what needs to be done, why it needs to be done, how much it will cost, and what the benefits of doing it are. Also noting potential and known consequences of failure to address each issue would be helpful. Next we need to hold some public hearings on their �draft proposal�. This is an attempt to include citizens early in the process. The current plan is to have a proposal for fall 2009 voting. That is more than a year away. The hearings should begin with a short presentation by the engineers of the draft proposal. I heard some of this tonight and it really helps to understand the issues. Once the presentation is complete, the citizens get their chance to poke holes in the draft. They can speak directly to the committee and voice their ideas and concerns. Each comment is recorded and will be responded to in written form shortly after the conclusion of the hearing process. Also, providing other pathways for the people to voice their thoughts would also be helpful. Providing an email address where people could send their thoughts and have replies responded to in the written document would provide an opportunity to hear all the ideas and help the committee make an informed recommendation. Once all the participating citizens have been heard and considered, the committee should be able to debate the input that was received and offer a defendable recommendation complete with explanations of each aspect. If they really listened and integrated what they heard, I would expect this to offer greater likelihood of citizen support. I believe that the citizens will come through and offer some great ideas that will even offer some �out of the box� perspective.

The meetings you are suggesting are exactly what has been going on for the last few months, and include the one you attended last night. The community needs to attend these meeting in order for their voices to be heard.

The meetings you are suggesting are exactly what has been going on for the last few months, and include the one you attended last night. The community needs to attend these meeting in order for their voices to be heard.

That would be great if that was the intent. However, I did not get that feeling last night and I did not realize the committee has landed on a proposal they are willing to stand behind in light of last year's defeat. When I heard about the meeting, I don't even recall being told that it was a hearing to talk about a plan. And the only reason I even knew about it was because of my candidacy.

If the committee has a "draft proposal" that will be heralded as such, people will get word and may be more likely to get off the couch. I can see a headline in the paper as follows... "South Portland proposes a new 50 million dollar school" with a sub-header of "Public Hearings to get citizen input will begin in November". (November may also be a good time to begin hearings since many will still be fired up over the elections)

The story would then go on to explain the process and how citizens can participate and how they will be included and responded to.

If that is what has been happening, I didn't even realize it last night and the committee certainly needs a new public relations strategy. Maybe they need to hire a public relations firm to develop a roll-out strategy.

That would be great if that was the intent. However, I did not get that feeling last night and I did not realize the committee has landed on a proposal they are willing to stand behind in light of last year's defeat. When I heard about the meeting, I don't even recall being told that it was a hearing to talk about a plan. And the only reason I even knew about it was because of my candidacy. If the committee has a "draft proposal" that will be heralded as such, people will get word and may be more likely to get off the couch. I can see a headline in the paper as follows... "South Portland proposes a new 50 million dollar school" with a sub-header of "Public Hearings to get citizen input will begin in November". (November may also be a good time to begin hearings since many will still be fired up over the elections) The story would then go on to explain the process and how citizens can participate and how they will be included and responded to. If that is what has been happening, I didn't even realize it last night and the committee certainly needs a new public relations strategy. Maybe they need to hire a public relations firm to develop a roll-out strategy.

South Portland School Project

another thought... I have a friend who is a local engineer and I wanted to pick his brain before I offered this thought. I have done this and will offer it now.

It seems to me that this committee and project has been going on for some time. I liked the presentation given by Harriman and am sure the detail behind it is good work. However, I was thinking about both the length of time that has passed and the length of time the changes will be expected to last. Considering the importance of this project to this City now and in the future, I think that we should consider paying for a "Peer Review". Simply put, we hire another engineering firm to do a broad review of the plans and see what they think and ask for additional ideas or thoughts in light of requirements and costs.

From the information I gathered, it seems like Deluca Hoffman does a great deal of the school projects in our area and may be a good source to approach about a peer review. It's also possible this has been done and I am just getting my two cents in late in the game.

What do others think?

South Portland School Project another thought... I have a friend who is a local engineer and I wanted to pick his brain before I offered this thought. I have done this and will offer it now. It seems to me that this committee and project has been going on for some time. I liked the presentation given by Harriman and am sure the detail behind it is good work. However, I was thinking about both the length of time that has passed and the length of time the changes will be expected to last. Considering the importance of this project to this City now and in the future, I think that we should consider paying for a "Peer Review". Simply put, we hire another engineering firm to do a broad review of the plans and see what they think and ask for additional ideas or thoughts in light of requirements and costs. From the information I gathered, it seems like Deluca Hoffman does a great deal of the school projects in our area and may be a good source to approach about a peer review. It's also possible this has been done and I am just getting my two cents in late in the game. What do others think?

Mr. Fasset

My question for anybody running for School Board is will you represent all the taxpayers in South Portland or just those with children in the public schools? Here are some facts one should think about if you represent all taxpayers.

SOUTH PORTLAND'S 2007/2008 TAX RATE IS ALREADY 25% HIGHER THAN SCARBOROUGH.

SOUTH PORTLAND'S FY 2009 SCHOOL BUDGET IS ALREADY 26.7% HIGHER THAN SCARBOROUGH.

TAXPAYERS WITH NO STUDENTS IN SP PUBLIC SCHOOLS PAY MORE THAN 85% OF THE PROPERTY TAXES IN SOUTH PORTLAND.

THE PROPOSED $56 MILLION RENOVATION DEFEATED LAST YEAR WOULD HAVE INCREASED TAXES BY 12.9%.

THE PROPOSED RENOVATION TO THE SOUTH PORTLAND MIDDLE SCHOOLS COULD INCREASE TAXES BY AN ADDITIONAL 10-15%.

BASED ON STATE STANDARDS, A NEW SPHS FOR 1200 STUDENTS SHOULD NOT
BE MORE THAN 220,000 SQUARE FEET NOT THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED 333,000 SQUARE FEET AND NOT THE NEW REVISED 284,000 SQ. FT.

THE ASSUMED 1200 STUDENT REQUIREMENT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE AS
CURRENT ENROLLMENTS DO NOT JUSTIFY BUILDING A FACILITY FOR MORE THAN 1000 STUDENTS. BASED ON THIS LEVEL THE SCHOOL SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN 200,000 SQ. FT.

I have detail information that backs up all these facts and will provide them to you, if you really want the truth. The SP school officials do not want to hear the truth.

Mr. Fasset My question for anybody running for School Board is will you represent all the taxpayers in South Portland or just those with children in the public schools? Here are some facts one should think about if you represent all taxpayers. SOUTH PORTLAND'S 2007/2008 TAX RATE IS ALREADY 25% HIGHER THAN SCARBOROUGH. SOUTH PORTLAND'S FY 2009 SCHOOL BUDGET IS ALREADY 26.7% HIGHER THAN SCARBOROUGH. TAXPAYERS WITH NO STUDENTS IN SP PUBLIC SCHOOLS PAY MORE THAN 85% OF THE PROPERTY TAXES IN SOUTH PORTLAND. THE PROPOSED $56 MILLION RENOVATION DEFEATED LAST YEAR WOULD HAVE INCREASED TAXES BY 12.9%. THE PROPOSED RENOVATION TO THE SOUTH PORTLAND MIDDLE SCHOOLS COULD INCREASE TAXES BY AN ADDITIONAL 10-15%. BASED ON STATE STANDARDS, A NEW SPHS FOR 1200 STUDENTS SHOULD NOT BE MORE THAN 220,000 SQUARE FEET NOT THE PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED 333,000 SQUARE FEET AND NOT THE NEW REVISED 284,000 SQ. FT. THE ASSUMED 1200 STUDENT REQUIREMENT IS VERY QUESTIONABLE AS CURRENT ENROLLMENTS DO NOT JUSTIFY BUILDING A FACILITY FOR MORE THAN 1000 STUDENTS. BASED ON THIS LEVEL THE SCHOOL SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN 200,000 SQ. FT. I have detail information that backs up all these facts and will provide them to you, if you really want the truth. The SP school officials do not want to hear the truth.

Mr. Dimillo,
I would love all the information you can provide me. The more informed I can be and the better I understand each unique perspective will help me do 2 things... 1) Have a better grasp of all the issues that are in the minds of the taxpayers so I can make a responsible decision 2) Ask some of your questions to people with a seemingly differing perspective.

I do have a few questions for you regarding your numbers...
1)How many people are residents of each community (SoPo & Scarborough)
2)How many students are there in each school system k-12
3)The 85% number you quote... I am assuming you are including the tax that businesses pay in property taxes and you are NOT including the property tax that is paid that is obviously a part of rent (the reality is that someone who is renting a home is REALLY paying the property tax, not the landlord). A more helpful number for me would be to include ONLY the family dwellings.
4)What would you suggest for a system to pay for educating our children? The system today is no different than 20 & 30 years ago. So many who do not have kids in the schools today did 20 years ago and benefitted from others who had no kids in the system subsidizing as well.

As for the school facility needs... considering the magnitude of the projects and that the city has not addressed or planned for replacement, there is no easy answer.

What I can tell you is that I will do two things... 1)Verify that all facets of a proposal are necessary and be vocal if resposibility says a component is not necessary 2)Verify that the timing of the necessary components is such that responsibility says to address it now

Also, I will be a heavy supporter of developing a plan to pay for future facility needs by budgeting now so that we don't need to increase taxes dramatically by bonding. I see this as paying with cash instead of using credit. I understand that the concept of bonding is so that the people who WILL be using the service will pay for it over the first several years of its life. However, as you have pointed out, there are many taxpayers who will get the big increase that actually are not using the service. Please understand though, there is an intangible benefit to providing a quality education and experience to all the students in out city... We all benefit in different ways from quality education.

Thanks for all your thoughts, I look forward to getting further informed from your answers to my questions.

Mr. Dimillo, I would love all the information you can provide me. The more informed I can be and the better I understand each unique perspective will help me do 2 things... 1) Have a better grasp of all the issues that are in the minds of the taxpayers so I can make a responsible decision 2) Ask some of your questions to people with a seemingly differing perspective. I do have a few questions for you regarding your numbers... 1)How many people are residents of each community (SoPo & Scarborough) 2)How many students are there in each school system k-12 3)The 85% number you quote... I am assuming you are including the tax that businesses pay in property taxes and you are NOT including the property tax that is paid that is obviously a part of rent (the reality is that someone who is renting a home is REALLY paying the property tax, not the landlord). A more helpful number for me would be to include ONLY the family dwellings. 4)What would you suggest for a system to pay for educating our children? The system today is no different than 20 & 30 years ago. So many who do not have kids in the schools today did 20 years ago and benefitted from others who had no kids in the system subsidizing as well. As for the school facility needs... considering the magnitude of the projects and that the city has not addressed or planned for replacement, there is no easy answer. What I can tell you is that I will do two things... 1)Verify that all facets of a proposal are necessary and be vocal if resposibility says a component is not necessary 2)Verify that the timing of the necessary components is such that responsibility says to address it now Also, I will be a heavy supporter of developing a plan to pay for future facility needs by budgeting now so that we don't need to increase taxes dramatically by bonding. I see this as paying with cash instead of using credit. I understand that the concept of bonding is so that the people who WILL be using the service will pay for it over the first several years of its life. However, as you have pointed out, there are many taxpayers who will get the big increase that actually are not using the service. Please understand though, there is an intangible benefit to providing a quality education and experience to all the students in out city... We all benefit in different ways from quality education. Thanks for all your thoughts, I look forward to getting further informed from your answers to my questions.

Mr. Fassett,

South Portland has about 23,800 residents and Scarborough has about 19,200. However, Scarborough has more K-12 students in public schools with 3,400 vs. 3029 in South Portland. The 2008/09 budgeted school costs for South Portland is $39.9 million or $13,054 per student. Scarborough's budget is $35.0 million or $10,307 per student, accordingly South Portland's cost per student is 26.7% greater than Scarborough. If South Portland spend the same per student as Scarborough, the budget would be $8.4 million less. Of this $8.4 million, $2.9 million of excess costs are school administration costs.

With regard to my 85% of taxes paid by taxpayers without students in the school system, that number does include the property taxes paid by rental properties. My point is not to suggest that all taxpayers do not benefit from providing a "good education" to students in the city, but rather that because so few tax dollars come directly from residents with children in the schools, that those taxpayers should not force onto the majority the most expensive school system in the area. As a comparison, Scarborough taxpayers with students in the public school pay about 35% of the property taxes, yet their leaders have not imposed excessive costs on the taxpayers with an overly expensive school system with out of control administration costs.

Finally, with regard to the proposed renovation of the High School. In the last several years new High Schools include Cony (Agusta), Noble, Falmouth and Camden. The average square foot per student of these schools was 184 square feet per student. Windham's renovation and additions created a 191 square foot per student High School. The cuurent "downsized" plan for South Portland is a 284,000 square foot facilty or 236 square feet per student, if the assumed 1200 student level is correct. However, using the current student enrollments the more realistic projections result in an average over the next 20 years of 900 students at the High School with a peak for a few years at about 1000 students. Accordingly, a faclity built for 1000 student, not 1200 is what the taxpayers should pay for. At 1,000 students the maximum size of the High School should be about 200,000 not 284,000. The School officials have said they do not want to be limited to state standards when it comes to school size. Taxpayers in South Portland should not be expected to pay for a new facity that is much larger than state standards, especially when those state standards are good enough for all the other High School projects in recent years.

If you give me an E-mail address, I will sent you some Excel files that support all my research on the numbers above. My E-mail is aadimillo@yahoo.com.

Mr. Fassett, South Portland has about 23,800 residents and Scarborough has about 19,200. However, Scarborough has more K-12 students in public schools with 3,400 vs. 3029 in South Portland. The 2008/09 budgeted school costs for South Portland is $39.9 million or $13,054 per student. Scarborough's budget is $35.0 million or $10,307 per student, accordingly South Portland's cost per student is 26.7% greater than Scarborough. If South Portland spend the same per student as Scarborough, the budget would be $8.4 million less. Of this $8.4 million, $2.9 million of excess costs are school administration costs. With regard to my 85% of taxes paid by taxpayers without students in the school system, that number does include the property taxes paid by rental properties. My point is not to suggest that all taxpayers do not benefit from providing a "good education" to students in the city, but rather that because so few tax dollars come directly from residents with children in the schools, that those taxpayers should not force onto the majority the most expensive school system in the area. As a comparison, Scarborough taxpayers with students in the public school pay about 35% of the property taxes, yet their leaders have not imposed excessive costs on the taxpayers with an overly expensive school system with out of control administration costs. Finally, with regard to the proposed renovation of the High School. In the last several years new High Schools include Cony (Agusta), Noble, Falmouth and Camden. The average square foot per student of these schools was 184 square feet per student. Windham's renovation and additions created a 191 square foot per student High School. The cuurent "downsized" plan for South Portland is a 284,000 square foot facilty or 236 square feet per student, if the assumed 1200 student level is correct. However, using the current student enrollments the more realistic projections result in an average over the next 20 years of 900 students at the High School with a peak for a few years at about 1000 students. Accordingly, a faclity built for 1000 student, not 1200 is what the taxpayers should pay for. At 1,000 students the maximum size of the High School should be about 200,000 not 284,000. The School officials have said they do not want to be limited to state standards when it comes to school size. Taxpayers in South Portland should not be expected to pay for a new facity that is much larger than state standards, especially when those state standards are good enough for all the other High School projects in recent years. If you give me an E-mail address, I will sent you some Excel files that support all my research on the numbers above. My E-mail is aadimillo@yahoo.com.

This is great stuff Mr. Dimillo!
I am going to seek a reply from the committee and the Superintendent on your post. I will also send you my email address so I can get a look at those files.
Also, I have a few follow-up questions...
1)Have any of these other schools included "green opportunities" in their plans?
2)Can you outline for me all the "excessive costs" as you see them? This would give us all a great idea of some of the detail we may not have yet discovered.
3)Have you considered making a request to sit on the committee? If not, can you explain why?
Thanks again!!

This is great stuff Mr. Dimillo! I am going to seek a reply from the committee and the Superintendent on your post. I will also send you my email address so I can get a look at those files. Also, I have a few follow-up questions... 1)Have any of these other schools included "green opportunities" in their plans? 2)Can you outline for me all the "excessive costs" as you see them? This would give us all a great idea of some of the detail we may not have yet discovered. 3)Have you considered making a request to sit on the committee? If not, can you explain why? Thanks again!!

The following responses are information that I received from the School Board Chair, Mr. Carter regarding some of the points that Mr. Dimillo was kind enough to offer:

When comparing the different school districts for cost per student, it is not as easy as looking at the bottom line. A district like South Portland includes everything in their annual Budget where as some other schools like Scarborough may actually use bonds for purchases like computers, books, copiers, etc. So, when we are attempting to compare “apples to apples”, it is important that we are all looking at the same details.

There is a requirement from the State that will make it so that in the coming years, all districts will have to use the same reporting format so that the kind of analysis that Mr. Dimillo is doing will be easier to verify accuracy. SoPo is currently working out the bugs and hopes to be compliant by next year.

In addition, when comparing SoPo to other area schools, the number of children that need special education and ELL services must be considered. Currently SoPo has a higher population of students that require these services that Cape or Scarborough. At the same time, Portland’s number is higher than SoPo.

Mr. Carter said, admittedly, Westbrook is a reasonable comparison to SoPo and further research would be needed to identify why that is.

My thoughts are that there is more work to be done here. The administration should certainly try and get an “apples to apples” comparison so that the citizens have factual information that cannot be easily disputed. This would certainly offer validity to what the budget needs are and the differences could be easily identified and explored for savings opportunities.

As for the square footage per student issue, Mr. Carter said that this is certainly an issue that he expects the committee will have to wrestle with and land on a number. He also mentioned that currently the numbers are within the margin of error of the study that the numbers are based upon, but expects we are due for another study.

My thoughts on this are that it might be a good idea to get the new study done before the committee does much more work. If we do not have a solid idea as to what the numbers will be, we certainly shouldn’t be approving a plan that is based on the old numbers or spending tens of millions of dollars. However, what the “required” or “safety” needs are of the school must be addressed immediately. Maybe the committee could work on that in the short term?

The following responses are information that I received from the School Board Chair, Mr. Carter regarding some of the points that Mr. Dimillo was kind enough to offer: When comparing the different school districts for cost per student, it is not as easy as looking at the bottom line. A district like South Portland includes everything in their annual Budget where as some other schools like Scarborough may actually use bonds for purchases like computers, books, copiers, etc. So, when we are attempting to compare �apples to apples�, it is important that we are all looking at the same details. There is a requirement from the State that will make it so that in the coming years, all districts will have to use the same reporting format so that the kind of analysis that Mr. Dimillo is doing will be easier to verify accuracy. SoPo is currently working out the bugs and hopes to be compliant by next year. In addition, when comparing SoPo to other area schools, the number of children that need special education and ELL services must be considered. Currently SoPo has a higher population of students that require these services that Cape or Scarborough. At the same time, Portland�s number is higher than SoPo. Mr. Carter said, admittedly, Westbrook is a reasonable comparison to SoPo and further research would be needed to identify why that is. My thoughts are that there is more work to be done here. The administration should certainly try and get an �apples to apples� comparison so that the citizens have factual information that cannot be easily disputed. This would certainly offer validity to what the budget needs are and the differences could be easily identified and explored for savings opportunities. As for the square footage per student issue, Mr. Carter said that this is certainly an issue that he expects the committee will have to wrestle with and land on a number. He also mentioned that currently the numbers are within the margin of error of the study that the numbers are based upon, but expects we are due for another study. My thoughts on this are that it might be a good idea to get the new study done before the committee does much more work. If we do not have a solid idea as to what the numbers will be, we certainly shouldn�t be approving a plan that is based on the old numbers or spending tens of millions of dollars. However, what the �required� or �safety� needs are of the school must be addressed immediately. Maybe the committee could work on that in the short term?

Mr. Carter is wrong to suggest that the current 284,000 square foot proposed renovation is within state standards. The maximum should be no more than 200 square feet per student and based on a school designed for 1000 students (currently there are 915 students at the high school) that means the renovated school should have 200,000 square feet not 284,000. The cost of this extra 84,000 square feet would cost about $15 million.

Mr. Carter is wrong to suggest that the current 284,000 square foot proposed renovation is within state standards. The maximum should be no more than 200 square feet per student and based on a school designed for 1000 students (currently there are 915 students at the high school) that means the renovated school should have 200,000 square feet not 284,000. The cost of this extra 84,000 square feet would cost about $15 million.

The state of Maine recognizes SoPo as a "service providing community" which means this city provides a large portion of jobs and income in the state, and subsequently sends a large portion of taxes to Augusta. Basically this means that the state deems we are a tax rich city and allocates a very small portion of GPA (general purpose aid) to our schools. Thus, even though we provide a huge amount of tax to the state via our businesses, we dont receive any of the money back via aid for our schools. Our incomes in this city remain fairly low so in order to make up for the difference to fund our schools we have to raise the taxes ourselves. It is a very unfair formula.
For instance prior to the implementation of this funding formula, circa 1996 we received 20% of the school budget from the state. For 2007 it was 11%.
In cities such as Falmouth or Cape Elizabeth however, because they are not business rich cities they receive a much greater portion of their GPA from the state. Their median household income might be $50,000 yet they receive a whopping 65% from the state, compared to SoPo, whose median income is $40,000 we receive 11%. Its a very lopsided formula and one which needs to change drastically to get us some relief in taxes and in how we fund our children's educations.

The state of Maine recognizes SoPo as a "service providing community" which means this city provides a large portion of jobs and income in the state, and subsequently sends a large portion of taxes to Augusta. Basically this means that the state deems we are a tax rich city and allocates a very small portion of GPA (general purpose aid) to our schools. Thus, even though we provide a huge amount of tax to the state via our businesses, we dont receive any of the money back via aid for our schools. Our incomes in this city remain fairly low so in order to make up for the difference to fund our schools we have to raise the taxes ourselves. It is a very unfair formula. For instance prior to the implementation of this funding formula, circa 1996 we received 20% of the school budget from the state. For 2007 it was 11%. In cities such as Falmouth or Cape Elizabeth however, because they are not business rich cities they receive a much greater portion of their GPA from the state. Their median household income might be $50,000 yet they receive a whopping 65% from the state, compared to SoPo, whose median income is $40,000 we receive 11%. Its a very lopsided formula and one which needs to change drastically to get us some relief in taxes and in how we fund our children's educations.

So, are the taxes that we send to Augusta in the form of the Corporate Income Taxes or are you saying we actually send some other tax to Augusta that we collect from our businesses?

I agree, it seems like an odd formula to apply to state education aid. I realize it would make it more complicated, but it seems like household income and maybe even single family homes without school age children should be factored in.

What are your ideas to fix this?

So, are the taxes that we send to Augusta in the form of the Corporate Income Taxes or are you saying we actually send some other tax to Augusta that we collect from our businesses? I agree, it seems like an odd formula to apply to state education aid. I realize it would make it more complicated, but it seems like household income and maybe even single family homes without school age children should be factored in. What are your ideas to fix this?

While the GPA formula is not perfect the amount of aid South Portland gets from the state is low because business pays about 60% of the property taxes in South Portland. For the year 2008-09 South Portland recived $4.2 million or about 15% of the state EPS standard for the cost to educate students in South Portland. This compares to 21%, 25% and 34% for the towns of Cape Elizabeth, Scarborough and Falmouth respectively. If South Portland's business paid only 10% of the proprty taxes then their GPA would increase by $12 million to $16.1 million or 57% of the EPS cost to educate students in South Portland. (Note if South Portland's proprty tax base did decrease from 60% to 10% it would lose $25 million in taxes, so the $12 million increase in GPA is a net loser).

The problem in South Portland is not the lack of GPA it is that South Portland is spending $7.1 million more than the state EPS standard, while towns like Scarborough are spending $600,000 less than than their EPS.

While the GPA formula is not perfect the amount of aid South Portland gets from the state is low because business pays about 60% of the property taxes in South Portland. For the year 2008-09 South Portland recived $4.2 million or about 15% of the state EPS standard for the cost to educate students in South Portland. This compares to 21%, 25% and 34% for the towns of Cape Elizabeth, Scarborough and Falmouth respectively. If South Portland's business paid only 10% of the proprty taxes then their GPA would increase by $12 million to $16.1 million or 57% of the EPS cost to educate students in South Portland. (Note if South Portland's proprty tax base did decrease from 60% to 10% it would lose $25 million in taxes, so the $12 million increase in GPA is a net loser). The problem in South Portland is not the lack of GPA it is that South Portland is spending $7.1 million more than the state EPS standard, while towns like Scarborough are spending $600,000 less than than their EPS.