001Um if uh we're gonna start with uh the pledge of allegiance, please. >> Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. So, how this is going to work is we have um it's our final public forum and what we're going to do, well, first I guess first I'd like to just say I know it's uh staff appreciation week and I just want to thank our staff uh especially with all that's going on. You know, it's so spring is always a busy time. Budget season, of course, a busy time. And for everything that our staff deals with and has to go through, uh, you know, in the springtime, uh, to finish out
002the year, really appreciate it and appreciate all the work that they do. Uh, we have a great staff at RSU1 and that's partially why when we're doing this budget, um, it's so difficult because no one wants to wants to eliminate anything and and you know, but the the reality is we have to work on some things. So, with that, what we're going to do is we've got uh one more public session. Um, and what I'll do is ask people to come up. Please uh keep it under three minutes. Uh, just let us know, you know, your name, where you're from. And after that, I'm going to direct things to the board and we're going to discuss the couple of uh scenarios we have on the table and try to get some consensus as to whether
003one of those will work um for the board at this time or whether, you know, people want more cuts, want to add stuff back in, whatever they want to do. So, that's how we're going to do things. But, um, I'm going to start with, [snorts] uh, the public session and I'm going to open it up. So, if, um, unless you had some comment. Okay. I'm just going to, uh, open it up and if anyone would like to come up to the mic, um, feel free. Okay. And if not, that's fine, too. Um, all right then. I'm going to Oh, yeah. Come on up. No, that's fine. Come on up. >> Good evening. My name is Carolyn Braftoft. I live in Bath. I have um a son at Fischer Mitchell. Um and I just have a
004question of clarification. First, I want to thank you all for doing this do doing the work you do and um I appreciate that you record have recorded them. I haven't been able to attend in person, but I've listened to a few of the recordings and um I realize this is really difficult um what you all are navigating. Um so, thank you. Um the question of clarification I have is just what happens if the budget doesn't pass. I'd just like to better understand if it's voted down at the end of this month or doesn't pass in June, what what are we facing as a school district? And that's something maybe that's something I missed, but I would just love to better understand talked about a little bit, but no, we can we can clarify that. Do
005you want Patrick? Do you want us to say? >> Yeah. I mean, the district budget meeting on the 26, people can vote up or down articles. Um, and that's the budget when we leave there that night on the 26th. Um, that's what goes to the voters on whatever it is in June. Um, if a budget doesn't pass, then we know we have so much time to go back. we would have another district budget meeting and we meaning the district and the board would have to um estimate um um why it didn't pass and what what amount we would come back with and then go through the district budget meeting and another referendum vote uh over the summertime. >> Great. Thank you. Anyone else want to come up to speak? >> Turn it towards me. [laughter]
006>> I guess most I don't really want to read part of what I wrote. I just want to know if people read it. >> Did everybody get it? >> Then I don't need to read it. >> No, we [laughter] >> read it. >> Thank you, Melissa. >> Okay. Anyone else? Okay, then um we're going to move on. Um so now we get to uh coming up with an adoption of a school budget as well as so what we have to do tonight just the board understands is you've got papers in front of you. There's two scenarios you see based on those scenarios what how it could affect uh taxes on a home. Um we also see positions that based on this budget would be eliminated. Uh and that is technically something we have to do.
007We have to eliminate those positions tonight. And then there are the um the logistical piece where we have to have a someone to motion for whichever if either of these scenarios are something people want to do, you'd have to uh motion for it. we discuss it and then if it passes, you know, our second motion, then if it passes, um, we have the formal motion to, uh, approve the warrants. And then if that all goes through tonight, what happens then is, uh, what is it? 26th of May, uh, day after Memorial Day is when we come together for the district vote where, as Patrick said, we present it to the public. The public has a right to um, comment on and, you know, call for cutting more, call for putting something back in at each
008of the call centers. And then whatever is at the end of this that has been voted in or maintained or cut, whatever it is, that's what will go out on I think it's June 9th, I want to say. Um, and as Patrick said, if that were to fail by any means, then we got a busy summer ahead of us because we have to figure out what that looks like, what that means, and what kind of restructuring cuts, moves we'd have to make in order for the community to um to pass the budget. So, that's where we are. What I would like to hear from the board is based and you can jump to use as a jumping off point. you don't have to tell me, yeah, this is what I want or not want. But
009if if uh like to hear from the board members how you're feeling about the two scenarios, if there's one that at this point you feel you could get behind, or if you have any questions about what you're seeing in front of you, positions eliminated, what the money is, or what you're calling for? Anybody? No comments. >> What? >> [laughter] >> Um, well, I I'm leaning towards the one with the part-time secretaries added back in, but I I was also wondering, sorry, to do more work, but um the interventionist position, I just didn't know um what the cost would be to add like even if you did just add tech 3 or add that back in. I'm just curious. Um, do you know what >> what's the difference between a two and a three, Deb? Roughly,
010>> well, it all boils down to what's available for the um title >> for two or three probably 30,000, but it's all grant funded the whole position. So, it there's any ch and the grants funding came through and basically it's almost similar a little bit less than this current year. So it depends on what's what we have available grand. >> Yeah. Katie, do you want to just explain that that position that has changed since your last meeting since the last meeting you had where that money comes from? Just want to explain that to that board. >> Sure. So our um our interventionists at Fiser and at um Dyke Newell are all paid through title one funding. Um and so by reducing um to a two and but we can't always because of the that number
011having gone down by the feds a portion of someone's salary has always come locally and so essentially the reduction is a little confusing because it's people who are partially in title one and partially local but by changing it to a two it would all be in the title two budget so we get the full savings if we wanted to change it from a two to a three, we could see if um depending on how the other salaries pan out, it all could get covered by title one, but we wouldn't know for a little while. Um but if it was if it couldn't be covered in one, then it like Deb just said, it's a $30,000 increase to do a two to a three. And then obviously a teacher would be more than that. Is that
012an accurate explanation, Deb? >> Yeah, and it all depends on who the candidate is that's chosen because, you know, you could get a an edtech 3 who's a step zero versus an edtech 2 who's step 14. So, but bottom line is that's the part of money that we have to work title one funding. >> That may not be real. >> Does that answer your question, Megan? Does that I mean does that still do you so do you does it change your mind or not or >> Well, it's just I've been struggling with this position. Um >> and I think it was something that Melissa even pointed out like um I don't know. Yeah, I know you're saying you're going to have somebody there, but sometimes having somebody there like I think she's it can create
013more work for the people who are already doing the more work. Um, >> and it would be Beth Kaser, our RTI coordinator, who would be overseeing the edtech. >> Um, >> okay. >> so she would be planning, >> it would be work for Beth. >> Okay. um not our interventionist per se, although they would obviously be on the ground and checking in, but Beth officially would be the one providing the person with the programs to use, helping oversee the case load, um creating the schedule, >> um >> and paperwork and >> Yeah, exactly. Um and she oversees the whole program, so that makes me feel better. Would it be better obviously if it was a three? Absolutely. because the person would potentially have more um you know background training. Would it be better if it
014was teacher? Absolutely. Um I mean depending on how the funding pans out, I can also know if it's it's going to be title one funded. Um, it's helpful to know that the board would support a three in the federal funding if, for instance, it's a person who's lower on the three scale and therefore not more than we would have planned for a two. >> Do you know what I mean? since it's already fedally funded in like I can try >> when we're looking we can we could post potentially >> for a two or three but then just be really mindful about not any three if we can't afford how many years of experience for instance a person has >> okay >> I don't know if that makes you feel better teeny tiny bit [laughter] >>
015um Anything else regarding the scenarios that we Kurt, did you want to say something? You were going to say something before. >> Oh, yeah. I thought we were all going to be on the record here. >> I will be. I'll talk next. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Uh Deb, does that is that I know you're not going to be here, but does that seem how do you feel about that? The that idea >> one. >> Yeah. A two advertising a two and a or a three and then like what do you think that's feasible? If you if you hired a teacher at step zero, that probably costs the same as net deck three. So, it all depends on who the candidates are, who the team is interviewing, and what's available for money after the positions
016are starting to, you know, be filled. >> Well, um, okay. So looking at these two options and looking at and hearing about people who are talking about their taxes going up significantly um and looking at all the positions being eliminated, I don't have any new thoughts or questions or requests of the administration. I don't think we I don't think they should be spending more time than they already have trying to figure anything else out because I'm not happy with the tax increase. I'm not happy with happy with the positions eliminated. Um that being said, I do I would support including the part-time secretaries at the 50,000 whatever. Getting back to what Jamie said at a previous meeting about how we have tried to add a little bit back into most of the areas that were
017cut, not all of them, but some of them like the nurse um and the interventionist, etc. But so I do support adding in the two part-time secretaries. [snorts] >> Okay. Thank you. Did you want to speak, Jen? >> Sure. Um to clarify just for anyone listening um or anyone looking at the documentation um the mill rate um examples that we were given out those are not anyone's taxes. That's just the educational piece to your taxes. So based on the budget without the secretaries, I was I understood that the that the actual increase in will which is going to be more around the $4 to $500 amount in terms of all the other things that go into the budget. Now those things are in flux and those things change, but um that was the most recent
018thing that the art select board said to us. So it's it's this 108 whatever amount it is that you're looking at here in either part that's one part of your taxes. That's a big section of it but only one part. Um I was really grateful to see that we have um a one-time subsidy increase um in this budget. I don't think just because we've got that subsidy increase that we should turn around and add back more into the budget. I think that it's an opportunity to try to use that funding to help to help preserve what we have and help um the impact on our local taxpayers. Um I've been really worried about these cuts and they do concern me. Um I looked back and I have to say that voting on this budget is
019going to be the 25th budget that I have voted on for this district. Um, so I have a long history of uh a lot of concern and uh wanting to help provide our our districts and our schools whatever we can. I um have started doing some research and I've said to Patrick and Katie about this just starting, but I've have started to research on how maybe main care reimbursements can help our budget in the future. There are some new things going on at the state right now and I'm just beginning to understand them. no silver bullet by any means, but um one of the things that I was informed by a person who is our state liaison between mainare and education is that if they get through something called a rate study, if they get
020through rulemaking, that there's a possibility that school nurses will be able to, as I understand, school nurses will be able to uh get reimbursed for services provided to all students that have main, not IEP students only like how mainare reimbursements usually work, but to a much better set. So, I am very hopeful it can impact this budget now. But I'm really hopeful that we may, if it works out of Katie and Patrick and everyone says it doesn't hurt our funding, if it works out that those can be some ways that we can use that main care reimbursement to help fund more of these services to our kids. And I think anything that we can do for that is an important thing to research. So, I have a little bit of hope. Um, it takes attending
021some meetings this summer and I plan to do that just to help inform myself. Given that um I don't support the increase of the secretary positions and I would like to see a further reduction in the budget numbers that we're looking at here by $100,000. And that's just my wish. >> Okay. Thank you. Anyone else want to comment on where we are? Jamie, no. You don't have to. I'm just >> Yep. I will >> people an opportunity. >> Yep. I will support the budget that includes the part-time secretaries. >> Patty, anything? Same. Okay. I motion that we >> um last year you gave me you were you were very kind in allowing me to make a motion that was different than these two options. You don't have to, but um it gave me the opportunity
022to be on record by making a motion that would be the budget that I I believed in. Um you don't have to do that. It's likely to fail, but it was really nice to be able to have my voice heard. So I can't >> Sure. Yeah. So, may I make a motion then, please? Um, I'd like to make a motion to reduce the How do we refer to the budget in front of us? The the budget in front of us that doesn't have the additional secretaries. I would like to make a motion to pass that budget with $100,000 less in the total Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, I motion to approve the RSC1 FY27 budget proposal for the total amount of 47,657,517. >> Okay, thank you. And so then we would need um a second
023motion to read that because this has to do with the elimination of positions, too. I'll have a second for that. Okay. Oh, second motion. I see what you're saying. I'm getting confused. All right. So, who will second? Megan. So, Kurt and Megan. All right. Any further discussion regarding that that budget scenario? Okay. All those in favor? Opposed? Okay. So that's six and one and the motion passes. Now we need a second motion and this has to do with approving the elimination of the positions that were presented under this. >> Yeah, I can just read down through those quickly. Um, so EdTech 2 at Ba Middle School, library position at Bath Middle School, which will be replaced with an edtech 3, uh, one custodial position, uh, science position at Morse, edtech, two at Witch, uh, half
024of a position, middle level world language, point4 nurse position at Fippsburg, and an interventionist position at Dyke Noel, which would be replaced with an edtech 2 or But >> so those are the uh positions that we're voting on tonight as a group. >> Okay, everyone clear on that? So if you're clear on that, I now need a motion for that. Okay. Uh I make a motion to approve the elimination of positions presented due to local conditions as part of the fiscical year 27 budget process. >> Okay. May I have a second? Second. >> Second by Jamie. Any further discussion, questions? All right. All in favor? Okay. Looks like that's unanimous. Thank you. And then, so that was Megan and Jamie. Okay. And then the third motion, this is um what for the actual warrants. [snorts]
025And I think Jamie, you're going to read that. Okay. Go ahead. >> I move that the vote entitled call vote to call and approve the warrants for the budget meeting and the budget validation referendum and to authorize the notice of amounts adopted be approved in form presented to this meeting and that a copy of said vote be included with the minutes of this meeting. Vote to call and approve the warrants for the budget meeting and the budget validation referendum and to authorize the notice of amounts adopted. voted that the warrant for the regional school unit number one, the regional school unit budget meeting presented to the meeting be approved and that a regional school unit budget meeting be called for May 26, 2026 for the purpose of fiscal year that the warrant and notice of
026election for the regional school unit budget valid referendum presented to the meeting be approved and that a regional school unit budget validation referendum be called for June 9th, 2026 for the purpose of approving the budget adopted at the regional school unit budget meeting for the 2026 2027 fiscal year. and that the form of notice of amounts adopted at budget meeting presented to this meeting be approved and that the superintendent of schools of the regional school unit be authorized and directed to complete said notice in accordance with the regional school unit budget meeting on May 26, 2026 and to cause copies of said notice as completed to be delivered to the municipal clerks of each municipality of the regional school unit for posting at the polling places for the June 9th, 2026 regional school unit budget
027validation referendum. >> Okay, thank you very much. You can breathe now. Um well well done and you second. Okay, I'll um you have a question? Sure. >> Um so I started thinking about what we present to voters when they go to vote on our school budget and it's been two questions. It's been a question of do you support what the state funds and then do you support us spending more. And I started thinking like if any other place that we vote on something on articles in our when we vote on the district vote or articles in our town meeting, it's never do you want to spend more. It's actually you present to voters this is what money you're you're voting on. And so I'm kind of confused to why that vote when you go to
028the polls, why it doesn't say here's how much the state is exact with dollar amounts. Here's how much the state is providing for us and here's how much more we're going to vote over and above that. Um if that would include either the whole district or by town, if the people are going to the polls in any of our towns to be able to have in front of them, this is how much above and beyond our budget that we're spending. And so it just kind of struck me that it seems like it would be helpful to people to be very transparent to say here's really what you're voting on. Um my understanding is that that timing that actual referendum has to be printed in time maybe before our district our district meeting happens. Um, so
029I'm not sure it can be printed in time to be printed physically on the ballot, but I think that I I if it could be, it'd be great, but it would also be nice to have an addendum to that that if we had something to show voters, this is really what you're voting on. This is how much of our budget is state funded and this is how much of our budget we're, you know, spending on these really important things we think is important to spend on and here's it by town. So any voter could go to the polls when they vote and try to help them be as open as possible about what we're trying to do. I think >> all of that is posted, right? I mean, you know, that's why that's what we're
030doing on the right. That's what we're doing on the 26th. Um >> at the polls. >> Yeah. At the polls itself. How you're saying how the you're saying how the referendum is worded. >> Yeah. is what you're questioning >> between that and the other one, right? >> That might be why it's done that way. I just want to be able to let people know. >> Well, it is it is available and we do let people know. Go ahead. >> Can I make a comment? >> Yep. >> So, what you're signing tonight is one warrant that I prepare that I'll post in all the towns. That warrant has one article in it that specifically says we will raise a certain amount of money which is $8 million more than the EPS formula. That's very clear in
031this document. These other documents that you'll be signing tonight are all warrants to go to each town for the town to approve the vote and the budget validation vote. So those are signed by each town and posted throughout the town. So, as everybody's sitting at the the big June 26 meeting, it's real clear because every cost center has an article that's explained and discussed and the front sheet of the paper of the budget document specifically says what each town is raising. So I think that it's clear if people came and asked questions and read through the documents that they'll have in front of them. >> Um >> so what you're what you have in your hands will that does that amount show individual municipal municipalities? Yeah, because it goes to each state just show it
032shows it in one revenue article which is required by the state to specifically say >> town of arousek they have to raise they it's recom well let's look at wool witch because this is what we're talking about >> $6.7 million that the EPS that the town has to raise in order to receive $3.6 $6 million in state subsidy. So it's broken down by town. So Woolwitch has to raise 6.7 million in order to receive 3.6 million in subsidy >> and it's broken down for each town. Bath has to has to raise >> 15.9 almost 16 million to receive 8 million in. >> So it's all it's all there and it's all available. It's all broken down. >> No, it is. It's all available. It's not >> I'm thinking the face. I'm thinking I'm saying the
033warrant that's not the wording that's in the referendum. >> Regardless of that, we can still talk about it, but we have a motion on the floor. So, I think Yeah, I'm sorry. Second one. So, you more of a quick question. >> So, I want to get back to that and we have if there's no other [snorts] discussion, um all those in favor? Any opposed? No. Okay. So that passes. So um and I think that's the kind of question of how that kind of stuff is worded that you can ask you know the legal you know how legality why it's done that way or but all the information is out there and it's a lot of information and it's posted and it's no different than you go in you see somebody's name if you haven't done
034the research you don't know what they stand for it's not in there and I understand you're saying well if it's a bond it has this amount that yeah because they know how much exactly what that's going to be and there probably isn't time because we also vote I don't know if we vote every time. I can't remember now, but we're also always voting about whether to have this next meeting that we're going to have in May. Um because that's something that I always thought was convoluted and not understood very well as to what it is. But that's something that we have to vote on periodically anyway. It's like every couple years, I think, >> three years. There we go. Um whether to continue to have it. But just so the public knows, so here's where
035we are. So we passed these warrants. We're going to sign them. It's going to go to all the towns. The next step is that May 26th meeting. It's going to be in the gym. >> Not the gym. Auditorium. Thank you. At the auditorium at 6:00 uh like it was last year. Uh and that would be the opportunity to address each cost center. So if you, you know, live in the district, uh, you have an opportunity to vote and we go through each cost center and then we end up with what we end up with at the end of that for folks to vote on. And then just again, keep in mind, you know, this is this is government at its either best or worst. No one's happy. You've come with a compromise. There's certain things
036people are happy about, certain things people are unhappy about. everyone's doing the best they can and and trying to give the best picture that we can. And so we do this together as a community. We vote on it and if it fails, then we have some really even more hard work to do to determine just how much more of a cut or what needs to be re-entered or whatever it is in order to uh make this work for our community. But, uh, you know, we're working with the the limitations of state and federal money and then what we have to raise because of it. So, it's not all this community's fault. It's it's you know, there are bigger things happening. But, um, we're the ones that have to deal with it. So, I appreciate everyone's
037input. I appreciate everyone being here. Um, all the discussion. I'm glad we can agree and disagree and have civil discourse about it and move forward with this. And again, appreciate everyone for taking the time, for coming out, for caring for the community, and I will ask um for an adjournment. >> Second. Go Megan. All right. All in favor? >> Okay. Thank you everyone. Have a good evening.