Long-range plan for Region 12 Editorial Opinion

6/20/13 


Published 12:39 am, Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Efforts to create a workable long-range facilities plan for the Region 12 school district have hit a significant snag.

The resignation last week of 17 Bridgewater residents from the Long-Range Planning Group over myriad concerns dramatically affects the process and raises questions about the future of the district.

We are hopeful Superintendent of Schools Pat Cosentino, the Board of Education and the remaining members of the LRPG will respond sufficiently to those concerns so the "Bridgewater 17" will return to the table and a game plan can be agreed upon.

All three towns in Region 12 -- Washington, Bridgewater and Roxbury -- are experiencing significant declines in student enrollment, and a solution is needed that balances fiscal realities, quality of education and quality of life in the towns.

Acrimony and strong disagreement are not new in Region 12 when it comes to school facilities. Almost since the formation of the region over four decades ago, there has been ongoing debate over the issue of a consolidated elementary school vs. local elementary schools.

Officials and residents in Washington -- which as the largest town hosts Shepaug Middle High School and also has its own K-5 school, Washington Primary -- have long favored a consolidated elementary school within its borders.

Neighboring Roxbury has generally supported retaining its own elementary school, Booth Free School, while Bridgewater -- located further away from Washington -- has adamantly opposed closing its Burnham School.

To be sure, Bridgewater and Roxbury residents make some compelling arguments.
Most parents prefer to have their young children schooled close to home, not several miles and up to an hour's bus ride away. Burnham and Booth Free also serve as community hubs, as folks of all ages use them for various purposes.

There are also concerns about the potential drop in real estate values if Bridgewater and Roxbury were to become the only two towns in Connecticut without their own elementary schools.

And in similar fashion, there are worries that if the local schools were closed, those two towns would become retirement communities without young families and the younger adults who add vitality to a town and serve as volunteer firemen and emergency services personnel.

In an effort to keep their schools open, Bridgewater and Roxbury have proposed combining forces, with K-2 students from both towns going to Booth Free and 3-5 to Burnham.

The thrust of the district's long-range planning to date, however, has focused on multiple plans that would consolidate grades K-12 at the South Street campus in Washington.

That focus -- and putting retention of Burnham and Booth Free on the back burner -- ultimately led to the resignation of the Bridgewater 17, along with their contention there are "consistent misstatements (and) inaccuracies" being presented in a "clearly biased process."

We regret the breakdown in the process, but we believe the residents of the two smaller towns deserve a fair chance to preserve their local schools and, as they view it, their way of life.

We are pleased Cosentino has expressed a desire for the Bridgewater 17 to remain involved, and that at least some of them plan to continue to attend meetings.

It is worth keeping in mind, because of a 2009 state Supreme Court ruling in favor of Bridgewater over Region 12, each of the three towns in the district must approve any change in the regionalization plan.

In effect, that gives Bridgewater (or Roxbury) veto authority over any new plan, which makes it essential that the interests of the two smaller towns are given full and fair consideration and that all towns are integrally involved in the process.

Region 12 faces its big decision

Susan Tuz

Updated 3:18 pm, Thursday, June 20, 2013

Sharp divisions separated the Region 12 Board of Education Monday as it decided which referendum question to pass along to voters in the region's three towns.

In a vote of five in favor, two opposed and four abstentions, the board agreed to pass along a report to the Commissioner of Education on a proposal to amend the regionalization plan.

The proposed amendment followed Long Range Planning Committee Option 2b: the proposed closing of the three elementary schools -- Burnham in Bridgwater, Booth Free in Roxbury, and Washington Primary School -- and building a new pre-K-to-grade 5 building on the Shepaug Middle/High School campus along the Washington/Roxbury town line.

Renovations to the existing facility would be included.

Once approval is received from the state, a referendum date would be set, tentatively in the fall.

Bridgewater residents in the audience Tuesday were devastated, with many breaking into tears. "There is an actual reason why we want to have elementary schools in all of our towns," said board member Alan Brown, of Bridgewater.

"They may not be financially delicious but they go beyond the subjective, the economical," Brown continued. "We crazies in Bridgewater believe the emotional, sociological development of our children is important and that is fostered by having small community schools."

The decision by the board was precipitated in part by a statement from the towns' three first selectmen and three boards of finance chairmen.

They had met on June 13 and reviewed options and data presented. Their decision was to recommend Option 2b: a new PreK-5 building on the Shepaug campus with a schedule of the projected costs for the middle high school repairs.

"We felt the high cost of a new K to grade 12 school would be difficult for the towns to bear," said Mark Lyon, Washington first selectman, "and would be difficult for the resident to accept."

"When the boards of finance looked at borrowing capacity of the three towns," he added, "they decided that a large bonding package for a new K through 12 school would affect bonding for other things needed in the towns."

Town officials concluded the full $20 million in repairs to the middle/high school proposed by architect Kaestle Boos did not need to occur all at once, saying they could be parceled out in five-year increments for work done.6/20/13 

This path would bring the projected cost of Option 2b down from $49 million, making it more manageable, explained Superintendent of Schools Pat Cosentino.

Move to Consolidate by BOE

Region 12 consolidation 
Fall vote OK'd on new elementary school 
BY RICK HARRISON REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN 

Members of the Region 12 Board of Education debate what configuration option to present to voters in a referendum at Shepaug Valley High School in Washington, Conn. Rick Harrison Republican-American

WASHINGTON, Conn. — The Region 12 Board of Education will hold a referendum in the fall proposing the construction of a new consolidated elementary school.

With four board members abstaining, the board voted 5-2 Monday to ask voters to approve a plan to build a new pre-K-5 school on the current campus of Shepaug Valley High School in Washington, Conn., while closing Washington Primary School, Burnham Elementary School in Bridgewater and Booth Free School in Roxbury. In addition, the $49 million plan calls for repairing the current middle and high school.

The board's decision followed a recommendation of the first selectmen and chairmen of the boards of finance in all three towns, who didn't necessarily all support the plan but felt it was the best one to bring to voters first. 

Region 12 Studies the Dollars and Sense

Susan Tuz

Wednesday, June 12, 2013

Anthony Amato received a round of applause from the audience Monday at the Region 12 Board of Education meeting.

Amato, a member of the region's Long-Range Planning Committee, presented an economic evaluation of six options for the district's schools being considered by the committee. His background is strategic planning, business development and operations management, and he holds an MBA in finance and operations from Columbia University. "Seeing how the numbers were coming at people, I thought it best to aggregate the financial information so it was understandable for everyone," he said.

The options ranged from staying with the present four facilities, with repairs done, to building a new pre-K to grade 12 school on the Shepaug Valley Middle/High School campus straddling the Washington/Roxbury line.

Using the present 2012-13 schools budget as his base, he projected two factors from the budget to 10 years -- salaries and benefits, and preparations and maintenance.

The analysis was kept constant between options by using capital planning and financial planning factors over a period of 20 to 25 years, which would cover the life of anticipated bonding.

Amato's evaluation was reviewed by Board of Finance chairmen from the region's three towns and agreed upon.

Under capital planning -- which considers construction costs for each option compared to cost savings over the length of a bond -- Amato found "most economically practical" the options including renovation of the core of the Shepaug facility, with two new wings holding grades pre-K to 12; and building a new pre-K to grade 12 building, without central office, included on the Shepaug campus. Cost savings for the latter plan is projected at $6.2 million for a 23-year bond.

Under financial planning considerations, those two options were also found to be "affordable" when bonded out for 21 to 30 years.

Amato is scheduled to appear Monday, June 17, at the next Board of Education meeting to answer questions from board members.

The date when an option would be chosen by the board to go before voters in a fall referendum is still being determined.

Ponders Region 12's future - NewMilfordSpectrum

Ponders Region 12's future

Published 11:32 am, Wednesday, June 12, 2013

To the Editor:

In the last year, much time and effort has been spent constructing the case for a consolidated elementary school in Washington.

The region has spent close to $50,000 on architects and consultants to build their case.

Consider we currently have the top two elementary schools in our district resource group (DRG). According to the school performance index of the state Department of Education, Burnham in Bridgewater has an index of 93.6 and Booth in Roxbury has an index of 93.4. This means Burnham is first out of the 39 elementary schools in our DRG. In fact Burnham and Booth are in the top 5 percent of 600 Connecticut public elementary schools.

When Shepaug Valley High School is compared to other high schools in our DRG, it is last with an index of 80.6. When compared to all the high schools in the state, it ranks 76th in the list of 188 public high schools.

We have a lower school performance index than all the neighboring public high schools in the area -- Brookfield (90.9), Litchfield (88.9), Region 15 (88.6), New Fairfield (87.1), Region 14 (84.8), New Milford (83.2), and Wamogo (82.1). The current student forecast for school year 2022-23 also shows the current school year (2012-13)
student population.

The 10-year comparison forecasts the student population to decrease by 31 percent in the elementary and middle schools. However, this Region 12 forecast also shows a decrease of 47 percent for the high school. The region needs to focus its attention on improving the high school so we can keep our students in the system.

Region 12 has important decisions to make regarding the future.
Should the region continue its fixation on consolidating elementary schools or should it fix the Shepaug high school to be competitive with other schools in the area?

If no compromise can be reached in the region, the most economical approach is to leave the middle and high school business entirely.

This would mean paying tuition for our older students to attend the surrounding school districts.

Ed Wainwright
Bridgewater

Letter from New Families

To the Editor,

Region 12 has hired a firm (Kerin & Fazio) to conduct a real estate impact study.  The purpose of this study is to find out if communities who close their only school will experience an adverse impact on real estate values. The firm has hit a snag as their initial findings show that every town in the state of Connecticut has a school.  The firm is now looking to find “comparable” towns in other states. 

We represent seven new families who have recently moved into the town of Bridgewater. We all have children either enrolled at the Burnham School, or children who we intend to enroll at the Burnham School.  There are many reasons why we chose Bridgewater, Connecticut to raise our families.  By far the most important consideration was the local schools.  Bridgewater represents all that we were looking for: a high quality education, a small school close to home and a tight knit community. We also recognize that with a school in town, there are many other family friendly services, programs and events that naturally follow.  Bridgewater has a wonderful recreation center, playgrounds, summer camp programs, a children’s librarian, annual fishing derbies, Easter egg hunts etc.  It would be unlikely that these services and children focused activities would continue without a local school to draw new families into the town.

We would not have considered Bridgewater without a hometown school.  If Region 12 consolidates in Washington, it would be highly unlikely that we would have chosen Bridgewater which is the furthest away from the proposed elementary school. 

We hope that this “real” data will help to solve the question regarding real estate values.  Is there an impact if you close the only school in town?  Absolutely!  You will lose a whole segment of prospective buyers.

Sincerely,

Dawn & Fred Basli, Bridgewater

Suzanne & John Creech, Bridgewater

Erin & David Elovecky, Bridgewater

Diana & Jeff Kelly Bridgewater,

Shannon & Zach Klaus, Bridgewater

Megan & Alex Romanoff, Bridgewater

Amanda Telford & Morgan Hill, Bridgewater

Options for Reconfiguration

In Regon 12:
Board Hears Options
for Reconfiguration

by Mike Preato

Published:

Saturday, June 8, 2013 7:07 AM EDT

BRIDGEWATER-ROXBURY-WASHINGTON — The Region 12 Board of Education, meeting Monday, June 3, saw presentations on the eight school reconfiguration options.

To prepare for the meeting, Long Range Planning Committee members spent months researching one or two of the reconfiguration options and created PowerPoint presentations on their groups; findings.

Each group reviewed 12 categories, citing the positives and negatives effects each option would have on the educational curriculum, classroom arrangement, opportunity equality, flexibility, security, fiscal issues, logistics, student rearrangement, transportation, the community, voter support and the challenges the region faces.

Each group assigned scores to the categories on a scale of one to four.

A score of one meant that effect of the option on the category would be detrimental to Region 12; a score of four meant that the effect would be beneficial.

After presentation, Board of Education members were given approximately 15 minutes to ask questions to the presenting groups.

Board Chairman Jim Hirschfield limited the discussion time so the presentations could be completed in a timely manner.

Much to Mr. Hirschfield’s ire, a few board members decided do more than ask questions.

Washington resident Darcy Campbell discussed the effects of maintaining the status quo.

Ms. Campbell said the group determined that calling the option the “status quo” was misrepresenting the situation the region is facing and renamed the option the “current configuration.”

“We wanted to make sure we were only talking about the four buildings themselves,” she said, adding that projected population changes would impact the region heavily.

“Nothing is staying the same in the next 10 or 20 years, looking down the line, so we wanted to make sure we’re only looking at keeping the four buildings, rather than keeping the population as it is today, because we couldn’t work with that,” Ms. Campbell said.

Throughout Ms. Campbell’s presentation negatives were plentiful, while positives were scarce. Of the 12 categories reviewed, 10 received a score of two or less. No category received a score of four.

The conclusion slides at the end said that the configuration does not address the population and enrollment issues or educational equality.

Board member Susan Stumpf asked Ms. Campbell why the group determined that the declining enrollment would lead to less staff.

Ms. Campbell responded that common sense would say that when you have fewer teachers teaching the same number of students, costs would be reduced.

Ms. Stumpf responded, ”I’m asking a loaded question because I have research that indicates that it doesn’t bring down the per pupil expenditure.”

Mr. Hirschfield interrupted Ms. Stumpf, asking her if she has a question to ask.

According to Ms. Stumpf there were a lot of assumptions made about the positives and negatives.

Superintendent of Schools Dr. Patricia Cosentino stepped into the discussion and apologized for any confusion about the role of the groups.

“They were not to go out and research and find this information, they were to do it based on the knowledge of our schools, based on [their] knowledge of their experiences, et cetera, to give the Board of Education input from the communities’ point of view on each option,” Dr. Cosentino said.

“I ask that you try to limit your questions to the things that the committees were asked to do.”

Board member Kelly Lott said that she couldn’t believe that Ms. Campbell’s group couldn’t find any positives on the classroom arrangement and balance category.

Ms. Campbell said the group determined that having small classroom groups was not giving the children in all three schools an equitable education.

Ms. Lott said that there were many positives to having a small classroom.

Mr. Hirschfield cut off Ms. Lott. “This is not the time for the board to give their opinions, if you have a question for the presenter, ask a question. If you’re not satisfied with the answer, we’ll discuss it amongst ourselves, but I don’t want you to get into a debate, or any of us into a debate, with these people.

“They are here as volunteers to present the information. If you have a question, ask them a question, but please don’t get into a debate with them,” he said.

Ms. Lott said that she still couldn’t believe the group found no positives to small class size.

Ms. Campbell responded that although teachers might like to have a small class size at times, the discussion focused on the equability of classrooms.

Washington resident Peter Tagley reviewed the idea of creating a new pre-K to 5 school on the Shepaug Campus.

The positives outweighed the negatives greatly on most of the slides, resulting in nine of the categories receiving a score of three or greater; no score was below a two.

Mr. Tagley said having all of the elementary school students together would help to equalize the gender imbalance issues some of the schools have.

He said he spoke to one parent who withdrew his or her son from a class since the child was the only male in a class of 11 students.

The study of this option concluded that the single elementary school would “optimize class size and facilitate a uniform distribution of students.”

The option also provided flexibility in that the new building could be added onto to facilitate a population re-growth or further consolidation.

Michelle Gorra, who also serves as a board member, discussed the options of renovating Shepaug for grades pre-K to 12 or creating a new facility for the same grades.

The options had a balance of positives and negatives, with scores ranging from 1.9 to 3.75.

The group came to some of the same conclusions as Mr. Tagley’s group, saying that there were clear educational benefits for having all of the children in grades pre-K to 5 together.

They also noted that elementary school teachers would be able to collaborate and coordinate curriculum more effectively than before.

However, the group concluded that there would be some issues with the logistics of creating a new building and the school’s planning and construction phases would take significant time.

Jennifer Pote of Washington chaired the subcommittee to keep the Burnham School and consolidate everyone else to a new facility on the Shepaug Campus.

The scores for this option ranged from two to four, and there was a balance of positive and negative comments amongst the categories.

The group concluded that there were some severe drawbacks to this option, such as resentment over which towns got to keep their schools, unequal instruction programs and the costs associated with having one elementary school open for a student population of less than 40.

Allyson O’Hara, director of the Pupil Personnel Services, discussed the option of tuitioning out the middle and high school students while maintaining the elementary schools.

Ten of the scores were of one or less, and the option was plagued with negatives.

The group concluded that the option would result in the towns having no athletic teams, theater or other programs; no control over the educational planning; a lack of control over the cost; and the loss of the district’s culture.

Dr. Cosentino reviewed the option of making Booth Free School K to 2, Burnham School 3 to 5, and keeping all of the other facilities as is.

The option, which was reviewed by a group of ten administrators, received nine scores of 1 or less, and had a lot of negatives listed.

The conclusions were that the option addresses some socialization issues, but ultimately does not address the decreasing enrollment issue.

Additionally, the option does not address the infrastructure issues the aging facilities have, according to the conclusion.

The region’s principals researched a themed elementary schools option and it did not appear to be a well-received idea based on their scoring.

The option received eight scores of one or less, the highest score was a three.

The group concluded that although the themed schools are innovative and can make the region stand out in some ways, the option left the region with several problems such as new training for the teachers, meeting state common core standards, providing an equitable education and giving students an option to not go to a themed school.

Following the presentations, the board discussed issues such as new school policies and an increase in next year’s lunch cost from $2.50 to $2.60.

The board approved of policy 5118.2, a policy which allows the children of staff members to attend the Region 12 school system for 5 percent of the region’s cost per student.

Dr. Cosentino said she had four staff members who were interested in sending their children to Region 12 and four other staff members liked the idea, but lacked children.

Board member Greg Cava said that it shouldn’t be a a problem financially as the students would be spread out amongst the classrooms, meaning the schools shouldn’t require any extra faculty or see an increase in facility costs.

Mr. Tagley said that approving of the policy was a bad idea as the towns were picking up the bill for outside of region students.

He called it a “bad public relations move” for the board, saying that although it helps to fill holes in the classroom, it would add costs to the region.

Temperature rises in Region 12

Susan Tuz

Updated 12:29 pm, Friday, June 7, 2013

The temperature is rising in Region 12 as planning for the future takes center stage.

Bridgewater parents have restarted Save Our Schools, hearkening back to the court battle some six years ago that blocked consolidation of elementary grades.

In a heated meeting of the region's Board of Education Education Committee May 20, the board decided the real estate firm Karin & Fazzio would conduct a study to determine the effect on property values for each facility option being considered.

Board members Kelly Lott of Roxbury and Susan Stumpf of Bridgewater argued the study was being rushed at the last minute solely to placate residents of their towns.

Stumpf has filled the seat vacated by Mardi Ford, who retired from the board in April.

"People in Roxbury are saying they should sell their homes now before consolidation goes through and property values plummet," Lott said.

In a quest to keep Burnham School open, SOS leaders Julie Stuart and Carolan Dwyer are hoping to attract new families into Bridgewater and reverse its declining student population.

Some ask how realistic that goal is.

New housing construction has declined. Just eight building permits were issued in 2011 in all three of the region's towns, according to researcher Peter Prowda's 2012 enrollment study.

Does Bridgewater's four-acre zoning make it attractive for young families to build there?

On Roxbury mom suggested closing Shepaug Valley High School and paying tuition to other districts for high school students to attend elsewhere.

She believes Shepaug has ridden for too long on a Blue Ribbon rating received from the state in the 1990s and is no longer living up to that rating.

Shepaug Valley Middle/High School on the Washington/Roxbury border needs extensive repairs and renovations.

Being debated is whether to invest $20 million and repair or to invest some $70 million and build a state-of-the art consolidated school.

At issue if that were to be the decision is what the individual towns would do with their empty schoolhousdes.

"We're in the battle to save Shepaug," said education board member Michelle Gorra from Washington.

"Washington and Roxbury, with the most student populations, have been subsidizing keeping Burnham School in Bridgewater open," Gorra said. "And that building can't support technology upgrades."

"The board is trying to put forward a vote for residents of the three towns," Gorra added, "that addresses educational quality and fiscal reality while respecting residents' affiliations to each community."

The Board of Education is scheduled to hear an economic analysis of the facility options, possibly combined with results of the property value study, on June 10 at 7 p.m. at the Shepaug library/media center.

Criticizes Region 12 Board of Ed's process

Criticizes Region 12 Board of Ed's process

Published 4:43 pm, Wednesday, June 5, 2013

To the Editor:

Has the integrity of the process which the Region 12Board of Education employs been compromised?

The following are my opinions and thoughts.

On May 20, during a regular Board of Education meeting, the board considered agenda item No. 6, which deals with the funding of a study about real estate values.

The $17,000 study is to evaluate the impact of the loss of a primary school in Region 12.

This would be an impossible task, as there are no towns in the state without elementary schools. Many similar studies have been done elsewhere in the country.

I believe the integrity of the process has been compromised by two board members, Greg Cavafrom Roxbury and chairman Jim Hirschfield from Washington.

As an overview, the subject of this study had not been presented to the board, to my knowledge, before a company was selected. Was Mr. Cava authorized by the board to solicit proposals, and when did this authorization take place?

According to the tapes of the meeting, when the item came up for discussion, Mr. Cava proceeded to explain to the board that a proposal was at hand from a company in Fairfield called Kerin & Fazio. Board members did not have a copy of this proposal.

In addition, no members of this company were present to answer questions about the scope or their capabilities. Several board members suggested they wanted to read the proposal and meet with the firm prior to spending $17,000 of taxpayer money.

Here is the policy as it pertains to hiring vendors from the Regional School District 12 policy manual, 3323.1 Bids and Request for Proposal (RFP) Requirements:

"The solicitation of three or more proposals is required for the purchase of all non-instructional materials, equipment or supplies when the anticipated expenditure is in excess of $6,000 but less than $25,000. Proposals should be solicited from prospective contractors/vendors. Contractual services, where appropriate, shall be covered by this policy."

During the one-hour discussion, Mr. Cava revealed he had a business relationship with this company. Proper protocol states he should have recused himself from this entire discussion, not voted and physically removed himself from the assembly to the audience.

During this time, he interjected his comments approximately six times. When the vote on the subject was taken, Mr. Cava did not vote, and it was a 5-5 tie.

According to Robert's Rules of Order, this means the motion failed to pass.

Mr. Cava requested a revote because he had not voted and he claimed he did not understand the motion. Mr. Hirschfield immediately called for a revote.

According to Robert's Rules, chairmen should not make a motion but request one from the assembly. Once properly moved, the assembly must vote unanimously to have a revote.

Instead, based on Mr. Hirschfield's call, a revote was taken, but Mr. Cava voted to spend the money. I find these events questionable and disturbing.

Jay Kronfeld

Roxbury

Region 12 Article - Voices June 5th 2013

For Reconfiguration:
Region 12 Long Range Panel Mulls Options

by Mike Preato

Published:

Wednesday, June 5, 2013 7:07 AM EDT

WASHINGTON — The Region 12 Long Range Planning Committee, meeting Tuesday, May 28, went through trial runs of PowerPoint presentations on each of the reconfiguration options.

Superintendant Dr. Patricia Cosentino reviewed the option of making the Burnham School for grades 3-5 and Booth Free School for grades K-2, while keeping Shepaug and Washington Primary as they are.

She said the change would help equalize the student population in Burnham and Booth Free schools, however, Washington Primary School would still face the issue of very small class sizes.

Dr. Cosentino said this option did not allow for the elementary schools to be renovated and lowered the number of renovations that would happen at Shepaug High School.

She said the combined classes would save money by reducing the number of teaching positions, but noted the schools may also need additional specialized staff.

One of the positives, she said, was that the option could be implemented immediately since it would require minimal planning time and rearrangement. It would still require a referendum vote.

There would be additional costs to the transportation portion of the budget sincer longer bus routes would traverse the towns.

Following the presentation, committee members discussed the community impact portion of the study and the attitudes of residents towards the reconfiguration options.

Committee member Darcy Campbell said that most people who grew up in Region 12 want a small school in their town, but noted that the educational needs of the students are also an issue of concern to residents.

“Those are two distinctly different topics. What we want and what we need; and as adults, educated adults, I think we need to get the emotion out of it and look at what our students need, not what the adults want,” Ms. Campbell said.

Region 12 Board of Education member Kelly Lott brought up the topic of re-regionalizing with other towns or regions.

Dr. Cosentino responded by saying that Region 12 was not in any position to re-regionalize with any other towns, “Because no one in their right mind would join us at this point.”

She continued, saying that no town or region would agree to join with Region 12 if the stipulation was that each town keeps its elementary school.

Following this discussion, additional presentations on several other reconfiguration options were reviewed.

The option to create themed elementary schools seemed to receive a negative response from committee members, who expressed concerns about the effectiveness of the system.

The themed schools options would create specialty schools for children on subjects such as science, math, art or humanities, instead of providing a standard elementary school education.

Problems with this option include the retraining of staff members, choosing themes, possibilities of students interested in one theme school being forced to attend a different one due to class size issues and the two years it would take to create the education programs.

It was also noted that unlike towns with magnet schools, there would be no regular school that children not interested in the themes could attend.

Because the schools are not magnet schools, any parents from outside of Region 12 who want to send their children to one of the schools would need to pay the tuition themselves.

Education Connection’s Jonathan Costa said themed schools may cause some families to want to move into the towns, but that it would take several years for this to happen as the schools would need time to establish themselves and become well-known for their themes.

He said the demand for themed schools was not high, but that amongst a small segment of the population there is a strong demand.

On the option of tuitioning out high school students while maintaining the elementary schools, committee members discussed what impact the loss of Shepaug High School might have on the towns.

Commenting on the loss of facilities, Roxbury First Selectman Barbara Henry said that under this option, “You can also kiss athletics goodbye.”

Mr. Costa said that one of the problems with tuitioning out students is that the receiving towns set the tuition rates, meaning they could charge either less or more than it costs the town to educate the high school students currently.

Committee member Peter Tagley presented the option of creating a new pre-kindergarten to fifth-grade school on the Shepaug campus and closing all of the other elementary schools.

Mr. Tagley said the subcommittee researching this option consisted of members of all three towns and none of them could come up with any real negatives to the plan.

He said that he believes this is the only option that would have a chance of passing in all three towns.

In order to help provide the region with the most information possible, committee member Anthony Weymouth has been reviewing data about the costs of each project and is working to develop a net present value for each of the reconfiguration options.

Mr. Weymouth said that he has been doing this kind of work for many years on other projects and he decided to offer up his services to the region to help with compiling and organizing numerical data.

He said that when it comes to evaluating the data, he will only evaluate the costs to the region itself.

He said that options which return the elementary school facilities to the towns will not factor in the towns’ costs for re-purposing the facilities as it is up to each town to decide what they will do with their buildings.

Compromise Opinion -The Voices June 5th 2013

OPINION > LETTERS

Reviews Regional Plan

Published:

Wednesday, June 5, 2013 7:07 AM EDT

To the Editor:

The first thing you should do in Long Range Planning is review the current Region 12 Plan which states that (1) Each town will have K-5 and (2) There will be a school in each town. What changes to the plan will the voters in each town approve?

The current Long Range Planning Committee seems to be headed towards a consolidated K-12 school with all students on one campus. Would the three towns accept the younger children (K-5) on the same campus as the M/HS with a building cost of $50 to 70 million when the enrollment has dropped from a high of 1,169 in 2003 to the 528 projected for 2022?

This may not be acceptable to the taxpayers mainly because of the cost.

If the Region Plan was changed to say: “Each town will have a school of at least three grades.” Would that compromise work and could it pass a 1047-C Regional vote?

Example: Primary, Booth, Roxbury (K-2); Intermediate, Burnham, Bridgewater (3-5); Middle, Shepaug, Washington (6-8) and High, Shepaug, Washington (9-12).

The benefits of having the early grade students together but separate from the older students are numerous for the district. Each school would have about 100 students. Closing WPS would accommodate having classes for all grades together.

Without an acceptable wording for the change to the Regional Plan, the work on the Long Range Committee will be a wasted effort.

Gerald J. Ronan

Bridgewater