Region 12 voters: 'No' to consolidation

Susan Tuz

Published 10:51 pm, Tuesday, April 29, 2014

• 
  First Selectman Curtis Read tabulates the referendum results in BridgewaterTuesday evening at the town's senior center, moments after the polls had closed. Waiting anxiously for the vote count are, from left to right, Tom Seger, Carolan Dwyer, Julie Stuart and Jenn Iannucci of the Save Our Schools advocacy group.April 29, 2014 Photo: Norm Cummings

Voters in Bridgewater turned out in force for Tuesday's referendum and defeated a proposed change to the regional plan by a vote of 786 to 81.

In Roxbury, the question was also resoundingly defeated, 585-306.

Washington voters, with just a 33 percent turnout, passed the question, 550-251.

The proposed change would have eliminated the requirement a K-5 elementary school must exist in each of the region's three towns and, instead, a consolidated pre-K to grade 5 elementary school would be built on the Shepaug Valley Middle/High School campus.

Voters in the three towns cumulatively voted down consolidation by a 1,622 to 937 count, or 63.4 to 36.6 percent.

"I'm disappointed," said Washington First Selectman Mark Lyon, "because our elementary school students will suffer."

"Washington contributes 46 percent of the cost to run the region," he added, "and has the most people involved in the process but we don't get to say what happens."

Lyon noted almost two years ago the three first selectmen had gotten together and said things couldn't go on as they have.

"There were supposedly some wonderful ideas out there and I can't wait to hear them," Lyon added.

The second referendum question -- to authorize bonding $40.88 million to finance the building of a consolidated elementary school and make repairs to Shepaug Middle High School -- similarly was defeated.

In Bridgewater, Question 2 was defeated, 814-58, while in Roxbury the count was 669 no to 245 yes.

Again, Washington approved the question, 532-288.

The cumulative three-town vote against bonding to build a new school and repair the middle/high school was 1,771 to 835.

"We've always realized there are issues that need to be solved," said Alan Brown, Board of Education vice chairman and Bridgewater selectman. "I've always felt the answer to declining enrollment needed to be a solution that was satisfactory to all three towns."

Brown noted he and a small handful of others have been a dissenting voice on the education board, a voice that couldn't be heard.

"Consolidation always seemed to be the answer gravitated to," Brown said. "Now the board has heard from the people of the towns. Consolidation isn't the answer they want."

Brown said he is ready to work to find the right solution for all three towns, as is Bridgewater resident Carolan Dwyer, co-founder of Save Our Schools.

"We're so pleased that tomorrow our children can go back to Burnham knowing they'll remain in a top-rated school," Dwyer said. "We're thrilled Roxbury has joined us in the fight."

"Now comes the time to move forward and reach decisions that will work for everyone," Dwyer said.

For Superintendent of Schools Pat Cosentino, consolidation had been the best choice from an educational and social perspective for the children.

"However, what the parents and community wants takes precedent," Cosentino said. "We needed this information to move forward."

"I will work diligently with the Board of Education to offer options that put students first," she added, "and address the board's goal of answering declining enrollment rising costs and dealing with our aging facilities."

Board of Education chairman Jim Hirschfield could not be reached for comment.

Board member Valerie Andersen of Washington was disappointed with the referendum results.

"It is a pyrrhic victory and, sadly, it's short-sighted," she said. "There's nothing we can do at this stage."

"I feel sorry for the children of Burnham School because they will be in combined classes," she opined, "and sorry that we will not have a state-of-the-art, secure building for the youngest children of Region 12."

Bridgewater's first selectman, Curtis Read, felt far differently Tuesday after the results were known.

--We're thrilled about Roxbury's outcome," said Read. "It's a resounding message for the school board. Now we have to deal with regional realities. I'm looking forward to new conversations to find solutions."

"Everybody has to work together with no hard feelings between towns," he said. "They've gone for consolidation twice now and both times, heard `no.' "

Roxbury's first selectman, Barbara Henry, was pleased with her town's 54 percent voter turnout.

"In the informational meetings, the comments were mixed and this solidifies what people were thinking," Henry said. "Now we have to go back and get to work. Everything is on the table. We can't go on as we have. Hopefully we can come to an agreement soon."

stuz@newstimes.com; 860-355-7322

Region 12 says no to consolidation

Susan Tuz

Updated 11:04 pm, Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Voters in Bridgewater turned out in force for Tuesday's Region 12 referendum and defeated a proposed change to the regional plan by a vote of 786-81.

In Roxbury, the question was also resoundingly defeated, 585-306.

Washington voters, in a low turnout, passed the question, 550-251.

The proposed change would have eliminated the requirement of having a kindergarten-through-fifth-grade elementary school in each of the region's three towns.

Instead, a consolidated pre-K to grade 5 elementary school would be built on the Shepaug Valley Middle/High School campus.

"I'm disappointed," said Washington First Selectman Mark Lyon, "because our elementary school students will suffer.

"Washington contributes 46 percent of the cost to run the region and has the most people involved in the process, but we don't get to say what happens,"he said.

He said nearly two years ago, the three first selectmen got together and said things could not go on as they have.

"There were supposedly some wonderful ideas out there, and I can't wait to hear them," Lyon added.

The second referendum question -- to authorize bonding $40.9 million to finance the building of a consolidated elementary school and make repairs toShepaug Middle High School -- similarly was defeated.

In Bridgewater, Question 2 was turned down 814-58, while in Roxbury the count was 669 no to 245 yes.

Again, Washington approved the question, 532-288.

"We've always realized there are issues that need to be solved," said Alan Brown, Board of Education vice chairman and Bridgewater selectman.

"I've always felt the answer to declining enrollment needed to be a solution that was satisfactory to all three towns."

Brown noted he and a small handful of others have been a dissenting voice on the Education Board, a voice that wasn't heard.

"Consolidation always seemed to be the answer gravitated to," Brown said. "Now the board has heard from the people of the towns. Consolidation isn't the answer they want."

Region 12 plan shot down

LOCAL

Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:39 PM EDT

Referendum called for consolidation, new school building 
BY JACK CORAGGIO REPUBLICAN-AMERICAN 

Consolidation opponents Carolan Dwyer (left) and Jen Ianucci embrace after hearing the Region 12 referendum failed in two towns. Jack Corraggio / Republican-American

WASHINGTON, Conn. — Two of the three Region 12 school district towns not only voted down both parts of the consolidated grade school referendum on Tuesday, they did so by an overwhelming margin.

Aggregately the Washington/Roxbury/Bridgewater district voted 937-1,622 on the referendum's
first question, which asked to amend the founding regionalization plan that currently demands a grade school in
each town. 

Savings not evident with consolidation plan

Published 7:35 pm, Thursday, April 24, 2014

I wanted to chuckle when I read Diane Lash Decker's comments on the consolidation of Region 12 primary schools ("Save our accomplished region with community connectedness," The News-Times, April 9). Sadly, it is not funny.

Taxpayers are being asked if they want to keep the regional plan that has been in place for 40 years and also if they want to build a consolidated primary school in Washington for an outrageous amount of money.

Ms. Decker was offering personal ideas of community centers for the existing schools if a new primary is built. Can't see them being used much after another fortune would have to be used to re-purpose the buildings.

Right now we have two top primary schools that are in our town centers and are used by the children and parents. There are options that would leave the primary schools in each town that the superintendent that did not even want considered.

Funny how a year ago the high school was "falling apart" and the superintendent wanted a whole new K-12 built. Now, a few repairs and that is good to go.

Listen and read about SOS (Save Our School ), which has been fighting to keep our primaries for some years now. On April 29, let's vote NO on both questions and then move forward with common sense options to address the declining enrollment.

Get informed about the costs of the new school because as much as people tout that they'll be incredible savings, the truth is that taxes in all towns will go up substantially. Nothing is free!!!

I recall asking the superintendent how much my taxes will go down because she said we'll save so much. Interestingly, she did say, "well, taxes won't go down." Savings? I don't see any.

Sharon Gawe

Bridgewater

Consolidation is not best solution to Region 12's problems

Saturday, April 26, 2014 1:06 AM EDT

The value of a local school to a small town is a major factor to consider, but one that most of the Region 12 Long Range Planning Committee (LRPC) and the majority of the Board of Education relentlessly chose to dismiss. I was a member of the LRPC and currently sit on the Board of Education, so I'm not passing judgment second-hand.


The superintendent once tossed the LRPC a list of links to studies and peer-reviewed articles, telling members half the sources said closing a town's only school was a problem, while the other half indicated doing so would be fine. 

In fact the LRPC didn't do any research, even though it had a research budget. It only focused interminably on projected expenses and savings. Members were satisfied with just arguing among themselves with pure conjecture.

The board did eventually hire a real-estate assessor to determine whether property values suffered when a town's school closed. When he could not find a comparable town anywhere that had closed its school, the majority didn't wonder why no one else had done so. It just wrote the research off as inconclusive and nothing that should worry our pretty little heads.

I, however, read everything on the superintendent's list, and it wasn't an even split. All the writers agreed local schools are vital assets to their towns, which in turn play vital roles in the emotional, social and educational development of their youngest students.

The writers agreed town schools sometimes must close, but they should be abandoned only after everything else has been tried. But nothing else has been tried in Region 12.

One of the sources on the list, the National Rural Education Association, noted "Local school officials should be wary of merging several small schools, at least if the goal is improved performance"; and "After a school closure, out migration, population decline, and neighborhood deterioration are set in motion, and support for public education diminishes." The majority on the LRPC and Board of Education members ignored all this advise to focus on money.

When the LRPC discovered the most money could be saved by closing Shepaug Valley Middle/High School, suddenly, other things mattered.

I am not for closing Shepaug; I am convinced its best days are ahead of us. But when Shepaug was threatened, money was no longer everything. Why? Because Shepaug is a vital asset to our community. Wait - doesn't that sound familiar?

Since most of us see the non-monetary value of Shepaug, how can anyone ignore the non-monetary value of some of the best elementary schools in Connecticut? Instead of working together to save what are vital community assets, we've spent the past three years letting people who want to close the elementary schools attempt to convince everyone consolidation is the only solution. How can we know it's the only solution when we literally refuse to try anything else?

Vote no on April 29, to put the distraction of consolidation away, so we can start work on solutions that deal with declining enrollment and don't just gamely accept it; take into account the fact that costs aren't actually rising much when this year's budget is flat; and appreciate that three schools - Booth Free School. the Burnham School and Washington Primary School - are technologically up-to-date and aren't inefficient if they're giving the students the best education in the region, the District Reference Group and Connecticut.

Alan Brown
Bridgewater

Futile exercise in Region 12

Published 8:44 pm, Friday, April 25, 2014

I was present at a Board of Education meeting at which a member of the board explained his support for the organization hired to consolidate Region 12 schools.

This Washington representative said -- PUBLICALLY -- that he supported this firm because, even if their plan failed to pass the first time, they were usually successful on the second or third.

It was a jaw-dropping moment. Here we were facing yet another consolidation vote -- number four -- and he's planning for number five and six? And, who pays? Who pays for this firm's plan?

Who pays for the cost of an election? Who pays? YOU DO.

It's time to ask when this futile exercise becomes an abuse of power.

Eileen M. Buchheit

Bridgewater

No/No vote best on ill-advised Region 12 plan

Published 5:46 pm, Wednesday, April 23, 2014

The Region 12 school district is facing the dual challenge of sharply declining student enrollment and increasing per-pupil expenditures.

An enlightened solution is needed that guarantees continued educational excellence, affordable costs and the best interests of the three member communities -- Washington, Bridgewater and Roxbury.

Unfortunately, the proposed solution that will be voted on in the Tuesday, April 29, district-wide referendum is not the answer.

The plan being put before voters on Tuesday would close down all three beloved, vibrant and excellent elementary schools in the district in favor of building a new consolidated elementary school at the Shepaug Valley Middle/High School in Washington.

We think that is an ill-advised proposal, one that has created deep divisions in the district and would prove detrimental to the students, to the three communities and to the taxpayers.

At best, it is open to debate whether a new consolidated school could deliver as good an educational experience as that now enjoyed by elementary school students in all three towns, let alone improved educational quality.

Bridgewater's Burnham School and Roxbury's Booth Free School are the top-ranked schools around, with Washington Primary School not far behind. Parents are actively involved in their local schools, and the students benefit from the comfort and security of being educated close to home. Why change that?

Under different circumstances, proponents of consolidation might be able to make a better case. But at a time when the district's four schools are way underutilized and projections call for dramatically fewer students in the future, it simply makes no sense to be building another school.

Similarly, when residents are openly wondering if Region 12 can even be sustained as a district if enrollment projections are borne out, it is not good fiscal policy for the district's taxpayers to be taking on tens of millions of dollars in long-term bonding. A consolidated school would reduce operating costs, but so would other game plans that would do so without incurring excessive debt.

We also have serious concerns about the impact on the idyllic communities of Bridgewater and Roxbury if their schools were to be closed, making them the only towns in Connecticut without elementary schools.

There would almost certainly be a deleterious effect on housing prices, a change in demographics, damage to the business community and a shredding of the close-knit social fabric in both towns.

Bottom line: The proposal on the referendum ballot is simply a bad idea and should be voted down.

When voters go to the polls on Tuesday, they will be asked two questions:

1) Do they authorize waiving the guarantee provided in the 1967 regional plan that all three towns would always have elementary schools within their borders and instead approve the concept of a consolidated K-5 elementary school in Washington?

We urge a "No" vote on this question.

As the result of a 2009 state Supreme Court ruling sought by the town of Bridgewater, a majority in all three towns -- not a majority of the voters in the district -- must approve this change, which means any one town can block the proposed consolidation.

2) Do they authorize appropriation of nearly $41 million -- $32.6 million for a new school and $8.3 million for improvements and renovations at the middle/high school?

Refurbishment of the middle/high school is needed, and that part of the proposal may be resubmitted if this referendum fails. But a new school is not in the best interests of the district, and we urge a "No" vote on this question, too.

We are hopeful Region 12 residents will turn out in large numbers for this critical, historic referendum and will cast a resounding "No/No" vote.

Then school and community leaders can sit back down at the table and, we hope, work in harmony toward a more enlightened, more acceptable game plan for the future of education in the district.

Rues 'historically fruitless' bid for consolidation

To the Editor:

It's Groundhog Day all over again in Region 12.

As we approach, once again, a vote on closing the elementary schools in Washington, Roxbury and Bridgewater, it is time to torch the straw men and examine the underlying facts.

Some members of the Board of Education have decided to advance a plan without popular support in all three towns, guaranteeing the defeat of the referendum and further dividing the three distinct towns that make up Region 12.

In addition, the BOE is holding much-needed middle/high school repairs hostage by tying them to their doomed agenda. Thankfully, that can be dealt with separately after this vote.

I want to highlight the worst of many flaws in the latest incarnation of the push for consolidation.

Building a consolidated school would increase taxes by 8-12 percent each year for the next 30 years, all while enrollment is declining not only in this region, but across northwestern Connecticut.

Our towns have never bonded even close to this amount of money. Extensive academic research indicates home values decline by roughly 10 percent when a school is shuttered, especially in a well-to-do community.

Therefore there should be real concern the tax base might not even be able to support this poorly thought-out plan.

Regarding the perennial issue of class size and "cost per student," the plan from the BOE's own long-range planning committee that got the most support -- the plan for merging the two schools with the lowest current enrollment numbers -- would address this very problem, yet it was sidelined so a few BOE members could push the historically fruitless consolidation agenda again with a $40 million-plus price tag.

The school merge plan could and should happen by fall 2014.

The consolidation arguments ignore the fact the elementary schools are currently thriving from an educational perspective and recently received $2.3 million worth of infrastructure repairs.

They are equipped with 21st century technology such as Smartboards, Apple computer labs, and Chrome Book computers for the fifth-graders.

Currently more than $330 thousand sits in a designated elementary school repair fund waiting to be used, and $162 thousand more is set to be expended this year.

Yet we're supposed to call these historic schools "decrepit" or "obsolete?"

The subjects of security and air quality are simply baseless scare tactics.

Don O'Leary, director of Region 12 facilities, has had all of the intake, exhaust ductwork and equipment cleaned at each elementary school twice in the last four years. There are no air quality issues.

On Jan. 7, at the Burnham School PTO meeting, Mark Raimo, the regional school resource officer, spoke about security. When referencing the elementary schools, he said "as far as the buildings go, they are great."

We need thriving communities. We shouldn't drive away young families and seniors who try hard to stay here by saddling them with years of higher taxes on a shiny new building that some want but no one needs.

We should utilize assets we already own, not create new ones and increase the number of buildings for which our taxpayers are financially responsible.

After this vote fails, I hope the leaders of all three towns will restore the practice of critical thinking abandoned by most of the BOE and address the issue of declining enrollment with solutions that will work for all three towns.

I look forward to putting this issue of consolidation to rest once and for all. Vote no/no on April 29.

Carolan Dwyer

Co-chairwoman

Save Our Schools

Bridgewater

Art Cummings: Public input, Bridgewater lawn signs and Tiger Woods - Save Our Schools

Published 8:16 pm, Friday, April 18, 2014

OFFICIALS SHOULD VALUE PUBLIC INPUT: 

The recent controversy in Brookfield over the timing and content of public participation at Board of Selectmen meetings has shone a bright spotlight on a very important area-wide issue.

Some boards and commissions in Greater Danbury do a great job of encouraging public comment, many of them by allowing a substantial amount of time at the outset of the meeting so they can hear what their constituents have to say.

All too many boards do not do such a great job at that.

In fact, some panels outright discourage public input by holding the public comment session at the end of the meeting, forcing residents to wait one, two, three hours to offer their views.

Some boards and commissions make residents feel that their opinions are sincerely valued, as they should be by every official body.

All too many boards do not make residents feel like their opinions are valued.

In fact, some panels institute severe time restrictions on speakers, thereby preventing residents from fully presenting their positions on the issues.

And that is a shame, since town and school officials everywhere should consider public participation an opportunity, not a necessary evil.

"SOS: VOTE NO" SIGNS ALL OVER BRIDGEWATER: Want a quick preview of the likely outcome of the April 29 Region 12 referendum vote in Bridgewater, one of the three towns in the district?

Just take a ride around town, and you will get a pretty good sense of how townspeople apparently feel about the proposal to close their grade K-5 Burnham School (and the elementary schools in sister towns Roxbury and Washington) and build a consolidated elementary school on the Shepaug Valley Middle High School campus in Washington.

There are lawn signs everywhere -- some 400 of them, at last count, all along Route 133 from the Brookfield town line to Route 67, and dotting front lawns on most other streets and roads in Bridgewater.

The signs, distributed by the local grassroots group Save Our Schools, are white with red lettering, and the message is simple: "SOS: Vote No."

You never know for sure how referendums will turn out, but based on sign polling in the tiny town, it probably wouldn't be wise to bet too much money on Bridgewater voting in favor of consolidation.

GOLF MEDIA STUCK IN THE PAST WITH TIGER: The storyline put forth by much of the golfing media heading into last weekend's Masters golf tournament at Augusta National was simple: With Tiger Woods sidelined with a bad back, it was a wide-open tournament.

I was surprised the first time I heard that prediction, because it implied that Tiger would have been a near shoo-in had he played, and only with him on the shelf did other players have a good chance to win.

Every time that pronouncement was repeated in the days leading up to the tournament, I lost more and more respect for the golf writers, sportscasters and so-called experts who spewed that absurd party line.

Do you know the last time Woods won the Masters?

It was in 2005 -- nine years ago.

Do you know the last time he won any of the four majors?

That was in 2008 -- six years ago.

If you didn't know that, don't feel bad. Because a bunch of the big names in the golf media obviously didn't know it either, or they chose to ignore it, so they could continue to perpetuate an image of an insuperable Tiger Woods that hasn't been true for a bunch of years.

Don't get me wrong. Woods is a great golfer -- one of the greatest of all time. But after winning four Masters between 1997 and 2005, he has been shut out at Augusta ever since. He no longer owns the tournament.

But you wouldn't know that from reading or listening to many of those in the golf media, who seemingly are stuck a decade in the past with Tiger.

Art Cummings is editor emeritus of The News-Times. He can be contacted at 203-731-3351 or at acummings@newstimes.com

Offers reminder of a town's right to have a school

Jen Iannucci: Urges a no/no vote on April 29

Jen Iannucci | April 21, 2014

Art Cummings' column, "Region 12 would be better off with a no/no vote on 

April 29th" (The News-Times, April 13) has inspired me to write this response.

"Given all the issues involved, and weighing all the factors, I sincerely believe the 

Region 12 school district would be better off by voting No/No on April 29 and then 

going back to the drawing board for a more enlightened, more harmonious, 

less expensive, more common-sense solution," Cummings wrote.

I couldn't agree with him more.

As the former chair of Save Our Schools, I have stayed quiet these many months

 trying to listen and understand both sides of the debate.

I could certainly spend a lot of time sharing my opinion why I think keeping 

Burnham and Booth is the more viable option, I could also spend time weighing

the benefits of a consolidated school, but I think everyone has heard enough 

reasons, and at this point in the game I don't believe too many minds will be 

changed.

What I do want is to remind everyone that we (the town of Bridgewater) and the 

PAC Save Our Schools fought hard in the 1980s, in 2005-2007 and continues to 

fight in 2013-2014 to maintain our right. Yes, it's our right to maintain our school 

in our town.

We brought this issue not that long ago to the State Supreme Court. The fact that 

we have State Statute 10-47c. (...If the majority vote in each town of the district is 

in favor of the proposed amendment to the plan, such amendment shall take effect 

immediately... ) 

In other words, if any one town votes it down, the proposed amendment to the 

plan will fail.

This is why we are being faced with two questions on April 29. Because Cited. 

169 C. 613. 

Proposal to consolidate three separate elementary schools into a single school, 

thereby eliminating elementary schools in two towns, is not an incidental change

 to the regional school plan and constitutes an amendment to the plan under 

section; conclusion in Atwood v. Regional School District... is protecting us from 

being forced to close our hometown school.

We are three wonderful towns that should be working together to come up with 

a plan that fits the needs of each community and the strong autonomy we each

hold. We should not be voting on a referendum that we all have known from the 

start would divide the region's community, create tension among friends, and 

stall the growth of these towns.

Yet here we are and I really don't understand why the Region 12 Board of 

Education thought the outcome would be any different.

I believe the declining enrollment is not due to the economic times but due to the 

ongoing unresolved debate of the Region 12 schools. While communities around 

us are building more schools because of increasing population, we are scaring 

potential buyers away with futile debates.

While we fight about where the schools should be, families who do live in town 

are sending their kids elsewhere.

I hope that once Bridgewater votes NO NO on April 29 the Board of Education 

will respect the outcome and finally move toward the more harmonious solution.

Perhaps now we might consider re-configuration of Booth Free and Burnham 

School and bring Washington students to this side of the region for the "change" 

that everyone is looking for.

Jen Iannucci is a resident of Bridgewater.