As all municipalities struggle with our budgets, Maine is no different than any other state in America with regards to educating our children. We have a love-hate relationship with education and our local schools. On one hand we love our local schools and on the other we hate the cost of getting a good education for our children. The issue always ends up at the same point of contention, which is “local control.”

The Maine Constitution was clear in Article VIII, Section 1 concerning the funding and curriculum for our schools, but like most issues with government “We the People” have been willing accomplices in giving up our liberties to the politicians!

Since 2004 Maine has made the most sweeping education reforms in our state since the 1950s when the different types of districts were formed. The most prominent issues are the way education is funded; in 2004 the passing of LD 1, which included a new formula to fund education, EPS (Essential Programs and Services), and in 2009 the consolidation of school districts which reduced the number of districts.

You are probably wondering why I am not including the referendum requiring the state to fund local education by 55 percent. I warned people during the referendum this may sound good now, but be wary of “sleight of hand.”  Think about this folks, if anyone controls 50.1 percent of anything, who controls the way things are done? Those who voted for the referendum gave up local control.

The second question I posed was “55 percent of what dollar amount”? The amount has yet to be determined and will not be clearly defined until the department of education reaches the point that they determine is affordable at the state level. In my opinion, EPS funding formula and consolidation of districts was most beneficial for the taxpayer for several reasons.

Essential Programs and Services (EPS) defined what “should be spent by” and is essential for the school districts to provide for education. Only a small portion, 10 percent, covers extra curricular activities that are not considered essential to a good education such as sports, clubs, technology, etc. The formula covers class size, every teaching position, librarians, school nurse…you get the idea. Each town is responsible for what “extras” they wish to provide and deem essential for their kids. That is where your local control comes into play.

The second reform, 2009 consolidation initiative, was the most sweeping and important initiative in my opinion. This was especially true for the towns participating in the “town meeting” form of government. In case you are not familiar with town meeting, it is the purist form of democracy. It is literally, one person, one vote and rule by mob. The education community would pack the meetings with their people to vote on the education budget. Which was fine, but the folks would show up for that debate only and leave when it was over. Many people were intimidated at the yearly town meeting by the pro-education faction and labeled “anti-education” for voting against the school-funding warrant articles. Small town politics, gotta love it! But I digress…

The new consolidation law changed the way the towns funded education as well as the accounting procedures involved. Today we vote for the school budget by secret ballot. Take your ballot, go into the booth and turn it in for counting. The results have been amazing.

In the town of Sabattus our first referendum  took three votes before it passed. The citizens demanded a 0 percent increase in funding and the school board offered an increase the first two times and finally got the message and put a 0 percent increase on the third referendum. The process has forced more transparency in budget workshops and sent a message to town governments as well. Also in the consolidation effort, many districts have had to address the reality of a declining student population, which has dropped dramatically over the past 30 years. Many districts have had to grasp the reality of increasing class sizes, and in some cases close some community schools to bring budgets in line with funding.

I would be remiss if I didn’t applaud and praise our local RSU 4 school board and superintendent Jim Hodgkins for their hard work and difficult decisions they have made these past several years. The towns of Litchfield, Sabattus and Wales are now Oak Hill School District instead of three separate districts and the budgets are more in line with the taxpayers’ ability to pay for education. Kudos to RSU 4.

The next issue for education and the taxpayers is the funding of technology in our local school budgets. Recently, RSU 4 sponsored a “Technology Strategic Planning Event” in which I participated. The actual results of a study of staff and students in RSU 4, opened my eyes and was very revealing as to where the district stands. We took an honest look at where the district actually stands in regard to technology and tried to determine where it should be. The results are indicative of what I hear from students and staff from other school districts: The staff is not maximizing the utilization of technology, due to lack of training and the students are light years ahead of in areas they are allowed to access. In fact, many staff members admit they have to ask the students how to access and solve problems that involve technology. I know that I ask my kids questions all the time about accessing and using some programs, games and other computer functions.

The laptop program in Maine could and should be maximizing the potential of students, but like many political decisions, they have not addressed or considered the unintended consequences of their decisions. The cost that has been thrust onto the individual districts has been high with minimum results! The reality is that the taxpayers will be asked to shoulder more of the cost of the laptop program and asked to evaluate its effectiveness and return on investment (bang for the buck). There is no doubt technology will continue to outpace our ability to pay and keep up with the education side, but is also evident that we need to some how offer the education.

Ok, ok…here is the question: IPAD 2 for kindergartners? Really? Thought I was going to miss the Auburn decision to give kindergartners IPAD 2s?  Not a chance!

It has been a few years, 10 to be exact, since my youngest was in kindergarten. I still remember what a 5-year-old does with crayons, food, toys or whatever and have just one question for the Auburn school district. What the heck are you thinking? These are people who have difficulty controlling their bodily functions. Know what I mean? Actually, my first thought was to get a kindergartner somewhere and move to Auburn so I, too, can get an IPAD 2.

What is going to be the cost to the taxpayers after the grant has been exhausted? Who is going to pay for the staff to be educated? The continued upgrades and damages to the units? Could it be the “unintended consequences” have not been thought through thoroughly? Naw —  not politicians and bureaucrats.

My guess is this will not start the positive experience needed for taxpayers to fund technology in the schools. Sorry Auburn, but not a well-thought-out plan!

That’s my opinion and I welcome yours! You can contact me [email protected] !

Scott Lansley is a selectman in Sabattus, Maine Taxpayer’s United Political director and a former legislator for District 75, towns of Greene and Sabattus.