Conference 7.286::maynard

Acton has approached Maynard to regionalize at the high school level.  One of
the reasons is because Maynard has something they want - to tie some section of
Acton into Maynard's sewer treatment plant.  Acton's enrollment at the high
school level has dropped about 500-600 (don't hold me to that) which is 
another reason.  It, also, has something to do with federal funds they could
receive for regionalizing with another school.

There has been a committee established in Maynard to study the pros and cons 
of regionalization and whether or not Acton is the right town for Maynard
to regionalize with.  The committee is made up of some school committee members
and volunteers.  I understand there have been a good number of volunteers.  It
is expected to take about a year and half to two years to complete the study.  

Right now I hear the school committee is split, the selectman are for it and
the superintendent is against it.  Once the study is completed it will be 
voted on at a special town meeting by the voters.

I have mixed feelings but for academic purposes I hope to see it happen
and that's the biggest part about what education is about.  

    There is a discussion of this going on.  A committee has been formed
    to study such a possibility.  The sole reason for this isn't that
    Maynard would like to join the A-B school system, or that A-B would
    like Maynard to join their system.  There are underlying factors that 
    have led to this discussion, those being - S.Acton tying into the
    Maynard sewer system - and the Maynard Fire Dept. covering the S.Acton 
    area.  
    
    I've heard that the school committees of both Acton and Maynard are 
    against such a proposal.  Keep in mind that this is 2nd/3rd/4th hand 
    material that's being passed on, so read it with a grain of salt.

    					Steve

    
    I can see why the school committee would be opposed to regionalization
    -- it's a threat to job security of the teachers and other staff of the
    schools. 
    
    But it could be very good for the town. A-B is purportedly one of the
    best schools around. Its students score high on standard tests, and a
    high percentage of A-B graduates go on to college.  I realize that
    these are not the ultimate measures of school quality, but they can say
    a lot about a school curiculum.  
    
    Although Maynard schools are improving, it's unlikely that they would
    ever compare favorably to what's found now at A-B. There's just too
    much inertia working against major change in the system.
    Regionalization gives Maynard an opportunity to take a big step
    forward. 
    
    And the town might save money in the process. I've head that Maynard
    spends approximately $5,000 per pupil annually, while A-B spends 4,000
    -- and gets more value for the dollar.    
    
    And being tied to a school system of A-B's caliber could improve
    property values in the town. 
    
    
    
    

    I think it's a good idea, too. it seems silly to me for all of these
    small towns to duplicate each other's services. there's got to be a
    tremendous amount of overhead that could be saved if towns combined
    various boards. the obvious benefit of being involved with the A-B
    schools is good for us, too.

    who's working on this? can we get involved, or is it too early for
    that?

    					-- hs 

If anyone is interested in participating in the regionalization study you
may contact Lorraine LoChiatto at 897-2222 between 8:00 and 4:00 or Jim
Duggan (high school principal) at 897-8891.

There are a number of conflicting factors relating to regionalization.  

 -- The financial benefits, and the high quality of Acton-Boxboro HS have
    been mentioned in previous notes.
    
 -- A lot of Maynard's pride and self respect comes from the local schools.
    When you walk around in Maynard, you see all the kids in those orange
    and black Maynard jackets.  You don't see that so much in Acton and
    Concord. Consider how well the HS athletic teams have done in recent
    years. Town residents identify very strongly with the schools,
    especially at the high school level, and regionalization throws that
    away.

 -- Consider the outstanding reputation of WAVM and the music programs. 
    Would regionalization preserve those programs?

 -- Autonomy is a big issue.  Once you have a regional system, your town
    has representatives to the board.  If the board as a whole does something
    irresponsible or contrary to your interest, well, that's too bad.  You
    just have your one or two reps to complain about it.  That includes
    policy and money.  For example, a lot of people are getting steamed up
    about the regional votech school.  The school has an excellent
    reputation, but the total number of kids enrolled keeps dropping. 
    Maynard sends roughly the same number of kids as in the past, but that
    becomes a larger percentage of the total enrollment each year, so our
    financial obligation keeps growing. The votech school dictated at 14%
    increase in Maynard's share of their budget.  This is in a year when
    everything else in the Maynard town budget is supposed to be level
    funded.  We have contractual obligations to the votech, and we have no
    choice.

 -- On the other hand, consider that Acton and Boxboro have obviously been
    doing something right with their high school.  If Maynard joins, will
    the Maynard board reps keep everything on the same track?  Is it fair
    to upset an excellent program?  There are potential problems in both
    directions here. 

 -- Talk to people who grew up in Sudbury, Acton, and Concord. I've
    talked to people who said that they looked down on Maynard kids when
    they were growing up.  Since the economic difference between towns have
    not exactly diminished, that may still be true.  This implies that
    Maynard kids may not integrate well at a regional HS.  They may be
    considered 2nd class citizens. 

My point here is not how terrible regionalization is, but that you
have to decide by considering relative cost and benefits.

One really interesting proposal is to do a partial regionalization.
Regionalize the school administration, but not the students.  Why? Well,
consider that since 1988, the Maynard schools have lost 25% of the
students and two schools, while the number of administrators has stayed
constant at 11.  Administrators are at the high end of the salary
structure, so losing one saves substantially more money than losing a
teacher.  Sharing administrators regionally would let the schools adjust
an administrator's responsibilities and cost to each school system as
enrollment fell.  For example, you might effectively have 10 1/2
administrators instead of 11 that way.


Note that Maynard is losing more students this year than the number of
Maynard kids who attend St. Bridget's, so you can discount any talk of
increased enrollment because of the St. Bridget's closing.  It is quite
likely some of those parents would sent their kids to other area
Catholic schools, anyway. 


There are lots of other implications of regionalization.
Regionalizing schools is not strictly a school matter.  As we all know,
there was an attempted prop 2 1/2 override to try to move the police
station to Roosevelt School.  Since the need for more room and
facilities for the Police still exists, the Roosevelt scheme and some
others are still being bandied about.  Also, speculation has it that Fowler
Jr. High is not going to last forever.  If you remove a school (the high
school) from the equation, the possibilities are different. Since the
selectmen control and fund several of the town buildings (including
Coolidge, used for school admin.), they are necessary players in any
scheme.  The police and fire have an obvious interest.  A space study a
couple of years ago recommended moving the Town Library to Coolidge.
The financial implications should involve the Finance Committee.
Regionalization of the school affects all this. 

Now, let's get on to how this is being handled. In Note 155.1
AKOV11::BARE notes that there is a subcommittee to the Maynard
school committee:

>The committee is made up of some school committee members
>and volunteers.  I understand there have been a good number of volunteers.  It
>is expected to take about a year and half to two years to complete the study.  

The risk is that the subcommittee only represents the school point of
view, and not other town boards.  If regionalization is a good idea,
they may not be able to make a good case for it.

So who really should be on a regionalization committee?  Those involved
with the implications:  Selectmen, Police, Fire, Library, Finance, and
School.  Plus the DPW, if there is a sewer trade-off.

The question is whether the current committee will raise all the issues,
and be able to answer all the concerns.

-Steve

Re: .6  Good reply!

A few "stream of consciousness" items:

I'm interested in regionalization more at the administrative level than the
school level.  Do the towns around Maynard really each need a superintendent
(and and assistant super... and so on)?  Perhaps dollars can be saved by
purchases and contracts being made at the regional level, while still
preserving the integrity of the local schools (town pride, etc.).  You trade
a little control here, I admit.  [One can argue: Why look at regionalizing
the schools - I bet a number of administrative levels of town governments could
be regionalized with benefits to all of them.]

A very personal comment: If we are going to regionalize, I'm not in favor of
it being with the Acton school system.  It looks real nice on paper, but I've
heard my share of stories about it that I'd rather pay more tax dollars and
keep the local school going.   I am *extremely* concerned with Maynard kids
being treated as outsiders.  High School is not a time to be playing mind games
on people.

An earlier comment mentioned that Maynard pays more per student than Acton.
Are the numbers you are quoting based on the school budgets for the respective
towns.  If so, they may be skewed.  From what I understand the Maynard school
budget includes the costs of the buildings.  The Acton school budget does not -
the town owns the buildings and the money to maintain them comes from another
budget [I do not assert this 100% - just what I've heard].

The style of local service providers we have in the New England area is
apparently rather unique.  Many other parts of the country, especially in the
South use a regional style of government.  Maryland is a good example.  Many of
the towns on the outskirts of Washington D.C. are not towns at all - they are
just spots on a map that belong to a county government.  Many of these counties
have some of the best school systems in the country.  Other services (water,
police, fire, etc.) are also run at the county level quite successfully.  Some
of these counties are practically as large as Rhode Island.   I don't point
this out because "they have a better way", nor am I sure that any of this would
work in our part of the country (for any number of reasons).  I just wanted to
highlight that in other parts of the country regional/county services have been
the norm for quite a long time - and they have been successful with it.

- dave

    good points, steve. I won't answer them all now (because I've got to
    get home and make supper so we can go to town meeting), but...

    * the music and athletic and media programs in maynard may not be
    around at all, if budget problems continue. some kind of
    regionalization might save enough money to continue them at the current
    (or some!) level.

    * good point about autonomy, but I think that the most important thing
    to consider is your next point, that the A-B schools are doing
    something well. 

    * it would be a shame if maynard kids had problems at a regional school
    just because they're from maynard. I'd like to think that that's a
    silly worry, but I know better. it would be a good way to force them to
    mix and see that they're all the same, but that's probably a little
    idealistic.

    					-- hs 

I have no children in the Maynard school system, and won't have any for at least
six years.  I've also only lived in town for two years, so I don't have a whole
lot of experience with issues surrounding the Maynard schools.  But... 

My neighbor, who is a teacher in the Acton school system, has two boys, one who
just graduated from MHS, one who is a junior there.  She is VERY GLAD her 
children attend Maynard schools and not Acton schools.  She feels that her kids
have had opportunities at Maynard that they would not have had at Acton.  
Also, the pressure to succeed in Acton schools is considerable, and while it
can be argued that pressure can be more a function of an individual's family's
expectations than school environment, I'm sure the school's atmosphere plays 
a significant part.

>    * good point about autonomy, but I think that the most important thing
>    to consider is your next point, that the A-B schools are doing
>    something well. 

I think a teacher would have a good grasp of the many intangible aspects
that contribute to making a school a "good" or a "bad" place to be, so I trust
my neighbor's opinion more than I trust something like the raw acheivment
scores that real estate brokers and legislators use to rank school systems.

Before folks get too hyped up about fully regionalizing with the Acton school
system and saving a few tax dollars, I think we should better understand the 
environment that the Maynard kids would be thrust into by such a move.

Pete 

(who has attended small friendly schools and large competitive schools, and
 knows where he would rather be learning and growing)