patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!
Local Voices

Why The LS Regional Agreement, the AC Unit at Fairbanks and the Minuteman Stabilization Fund Are Related

Anyone at Town Meeting Monday night should have been alarmed at Scott Carpenter’s presentation about L-S. With one child attending L-S and two on the way, I was alarmed. The picture of the car with the wheel falling off was especially poignant. L-S is a great school, the courses are wonderful, the faculty exceptional. So how do we fix the funding for the school? How do we fix SPS funding for that matter?

If we think that we can do this by more overrides, I would argue the Sudbury taxpayers are fatigued and unlikely to support many more. Waiting for state aid is another tactic that doesn’t provide much hope. A solution is to reopen the L-S Regional Agreement and get Lincoln to pay a more equitable share of the school’s costs. Other regional systems, like Manchester-Essex, have adopted better funding models for their schools that we should examine.

To explain this, we have to look no further than two other votes from Monday night’s town meeting.

Monday, we voted to replace the AC unit at the Fairbanks Pool. Why? The pool is a town asset. As citizens of the town, we have access to this asset hence we all pay to maintain it. There are also user fees charged to those who swim that support the operating costs. Since you and I all benefit from access to this facility, however, we all pay to maintain the physical facility. We get a return on this investment in our property values. When your house goes up for sale, the realtor will drive by Fairbanks showing perspective buyers "this is the town pool you can use." Those who use the pool, however, also pay usage fees.

Now on to Minuteman Tech, and the second vote of the night. The selectman recommended against funding a stabilization fund. Why? Because the member towns of Minuteman pay the facility costs plus the per student operating costs for Minuteman. The problem is that “out of district” students, those not coming from the member towns, only pay per student operating costs and make no contribution to the facility costs for Minuteman. So the selectmen, rightfully so, rejected Minuteman’s request for a stabilization fund until a more equitable funding model is established that shares both facility costs and student costs between the towns that use the asset.

Now back to L-S. The L-S Regional Agreement funding model is based purely on student attendance. Hence, we pay about 85% of the annual bill including non-instructional, capital and instructional costs, while Lincoln pays 15%. From an attendance standpoint, this makes sense. But this is not how you apportion a town or regional asset as we saw with the Fairbanks Roof and Minuteman Stabilization Fund. The assets of L-S – the buildings - belong to both towns. Both towns need to pay for the assets and their maintenance (non-instructional operating costs) in proportion to their household asset valuation, just like you and I did Monday night when we voted to fix the Fairbanks roof. Fairbanks costs were apportioned by household valuation, not distance, location, or some arbitrary measure like a town boundary or precinct. All of us have access so all of us pay based on household assessment. All of us gain in our property values.

Remember the realtor selling your house and showing off Fairbanks? That same realtor will also drive by L-S with a prospective buyer and say “and your kid can attend L-S.” But if this same realtor is selling a home in Lincoln, they show off L-S and say “you will pay 1/3 the cost of a Sudbury resident to send your kid to L-S if you buy in Lincoln.”

Now what about the instructional costs at L-S? These are the only costs you divide up by school attendance. This is similar to the model that Manchester-Essex uses.

Changing our regional agreement to share the cost more equitably is in line with other regional agreements. For the citizens of Lincoln, it is the right thing to do to support L-S. Fixing the regional agreement will also allow us to move a portion of the savings to SPS where it is badly needed. It is time to reopen the regional agreement.

Andrew MacEntee

7:46 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012

Unfortunately, if past is prolog, certain members of the LS School Committee from Sudbury that depend on the Lincoln "block vote" for election will not advocate for equitable contributions...see Collins for historical reference

Reply

Sudburytoo

7:48 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012

Thanks for the contribution Bryan. I believe the problem is more complex than you explained. Unfortunately, we (Sudbury) have brainwashed ourselves into thinking that money and overrides solve all problems. We know that is not the case. This is more complicated by the fact that Lincoln with only 15% of the student population controls the school committee. Adding insult to injury is the fact that Lincoln publicly states in open meetings that Sudbury does not want to properly fund LS. The SJC has opined the exact opposite.

Until we have elected officials that want to consolidate administrative functions and eliminate redundancy, we will continue to erode the foundation at LS and SPS. Students at LS do not benefit by having redundant payroll departments, HR departments, IT departments etc...

This problem can be solved but it won't be solved with the group think mentality we currently have on our boards and committees.

Sudbury is not a well run town as evidenced by the most numbers and dollars of overrides in MA over the past twelve years. Until we change the leaders, expect more of the same.

Reply

Ralph Tyler

10:53 am on Thursday, May 10, 2012

Instruction in tjhe Sudbury Public Schools is funded by the property tax which is paid by all property owners whether or not they have children in the system. Equitable funding for LS between Lincoln and Sudbury requires a similar model. That is a district wide assessement based on property values. The fact that Lincoln has fewer student attending LS should be of no consequence.
Just as parents in Sudbury who send their childen to private school still are required to pay for instruction in the public schools so too should all of Lincoln be required to fund instruction irrespective of of the number of Lincoln Students.
If Lincoln will not agree to change the formula, the Sudbury Selectmen should consider litigation to resolve the present unfair distribution of the burden because Article IV of the Massachusetts Constitution requires "to impose and levy proportional and reasonable assessments, rates, and taxes, upon all the inhabitants of, and persons resident, and estates lying, within the said commonwealth". The present LS Agreement does not provide for a proportional levy on the estates of Lincoln and Sudbury.

Reply

GrumpyBastd

10:01 am on Sunday, May 13, 2012

As a matter of interest, how do the "Member" Towns of Minuteman apportion the costs that they alone pay between them?

As long as LSRHS is allocating the full costs to the two towns, then I'm struggling to think of a better way of making the allocation than on a per-student basis. Since each town pays for its allocation through local taxes, all residents of each town are contributing, regardless of whether or not they have kids at the school.

Reply
Comment_arrow

siobhan hullinger

7:55 am on Monday, May 14, 2012

@Grumpy - Lincoln pays only on a per student basis - they do not pay half of the fixed capital costs. The building and all costs associated with it have to be paid regardless of student population. They should pay half of the fixed costs. The allocation should be as number of households in each town not number of students going.

GrumpyBastd

7:18 am on Thursday, May 17, 2012

Thanks, Siobhan. Do we know how many households each town has?

Reply

Leave a comment