On Aug. 29, voters will decide disagreements between Edgecomb selectmen and the school committee on some articles on the referendum town meeting warrant. About a dozen residents and elected officials participated in the Aug. 19 zoom conference public hearing. Selectmen urge a “no” vote on five school funding articles. The town warrant has 66 articles with 19 pertaining to school funding. 

The school committee is recommending a $3,312,286 budget which reflects a 1.4% increase, but it doesn’t request more local taxpayer school funding. The recommended school budget does seek to exceed the State’s Essential Programs and Services model by $875,114. According to school officials, the additional funding would maintain student-teacher ratios, special education programming, extra-curricular and co-curricular programs, transportation costs and school building repairs and maintenance.

But the selectmen urge a “no” vote on five of the school funding articles. Selectmen urge a “no” vote on Article 48  “Shall the Town authorize the School Committee to expend $1,810,437 for Regular Instruction Programs for the 2020-21 fiscal year” and Articles 60 and 61 which seek authorization to exceed the EPS formula and the entire $3,312,286 Fiscal Year 21 budget.

During the 35-minute public hearing, town officials discussed all five articles selectmen oppose. Resident and former budget committee chairman Nort Fowler was the only one to send in questions. He requested information on several articles and the first regarded Article 64 “Shall the town authorize the school committee to transfer amounts exceeding 5% of the total appropriation for any cost center to another or among others for the 2020-2021 fiscal year?”

After a brief discussion, both school officials and selectmen agreed the article wasn’t worded correctly.  “No. (Article) 64 jumped out at me,” Fowler said. “My experience is when you reprogram funds, it’s usually capped at 5%. This one has a floor, but no ceiling,” he said. 

Alternative Organizational Structure 98 Superintendent Dr. Keith Laser acknowledged there was a problem with the wording and agreed this article should not be approved. Fowler also questioned why selectmen opposed four other school-related articles. Mike Smith spoke on the selectmen’s behalf. He reported the board had concerns over the level of funding in the COVID-19 era. “We are living in an uncertain time, and we shouldn’t ask taxpayers to fund the educational format presented. There was a large surplus of unspent funds this year, and a strong possibility of not expending a large portion next year. We’d prefer keeping spending at the current year’s level until things stabilize,” he said. 

Selectmen also oppose the creation of two non-lapsing accounts. Article 65 seeks authorization to appropriate up to $250,000 from the unassigned fund balance for a capital reserve account. School officials want to repair the 20-year-old school’s roof and other potential capital improvement expenditures. School officials plan on using the fund for future renovations for school grounds and structures. Selectman Ted Hugger supported using surplus funds to repair the school roof, but he opposed creating a non-lapsing account. “I think repairing the roof is a great use of the surplus, but I’ve never seen a non-lapsing government entity ever go away. That’s our concern,” he said. 

Laser defended the committee’s recommendation by stating other school districts around the state used a capital improvement account to protect taxpayers from large, unexpected expenditures. “This is really a smart, prudent move which protects the taxpayers. The roof is 20 years old and this allows us to fix the roof and any other related repairs without raising tax dollars,” he said.

Resident Tom Boudin asked what options the school committee had if the articles were not approved. Selectmen indicated the committee could fund services at the current fiscal year level or seek a special town meeting with a revised budget recommendation on the defeated articles.

Fowler also had one non-school funding related question. He had concerns about Article 47 which created a municipal fire and rescue recovery ordinance. Fowler supports the concept, but he voiced concerns about residents being charged for structure fires. Fire Chief Roy Potter explained the ordinance was for automobile accidents and targeted at non-residents. “There is nothing in the ordinance about structure fires. It was strictly set up to deal with car accidents. We would contract with a company which already works with other towns in this manner,” Potter said. 

Edgecomb will hold its first referendum town meeting from 10 a.m to 4 p.m. Saturday, Aug. 29. Residents can either vote in person or by absentee ballot.