School closure heads for vote in Robbinston

The students at the Robbinston Grade School may be attending classes at a different institution this fall with the possible closure of the school on the horizon. On Wednesday, June 1, the Robbinston School Committee will meet at 7 p.m. at the school to discuss and vote on tuition proposals from Perry, Eastport and Calais for Robbinston students in Pre‑K to Grade 8, beginning in September 2011. The board will vote on closure of the school, and if the closure is approved, action then will be taken to eliminate teacher and staff positions and to terminate individual contracts and employment. The school committee's vote to close the school would then require that the town hold a referendum vote on the closure.
"We would need to work very hard and very fast to get everything done by September," says AOS 77 Superintendent Jim Underwood. "If the school committee votes on June 1 and immediately asked the town to get the warrant articles posted, the referendum vote could then occur. But we need to have a tuition contract in place to move real fast." The superintendent would need to write to the state describing the needs for the school closure. "I've been advised that the process is not cumbersome."
Currently, the school has four teachers, including the teaching principal, one special education teacher, three ed techs, one secretary, a cook and a custodian. According to Principal John Owen, there are 53 students enrolled, with 55 expected for the fall. "In 1991 we had 59 students and one and one‑half more staff than now. We had art, music, gifted and talented," Owen says. He is concerned about how quickly the town would need to act if the school is closed. "The thing that bothers me is that neither the school board nor I knew the amount that needed to be raised until mid‑April. An intelligent choice needs more than four months. It's not the school board's fault, but the community needs more time." Owen notes that other communities that closed their schools "took months to make certain their vote was made with a fair amount of knowledge."
School committee Chair Tom Critchley says, "We had this discussion last year. We thought we'd gotten over the hump." According to Underwood, the loss of state and federal stabilization funds will amount to $56,920 for this coming year. The state is reducing its percentage of funding for the school from 54.2% to 45.6% for the upcoming year, while the local percentage is increasing from 49.12% to 54.4%. The state is requiring that the minimum local share increase by $75,000, but in addition another $79,000 is needed to meet the total school budget, for a total local increase of $154,000. Underwood notes that amount will need to be raised whether the school stays open or closes.
Critchley says, "We cut everything last year, and that caused a three mill increase. Last year we had such a struggle to get a budget passed." The fiscal year 2010‑2011 budget was rejected three times by Robbinston voters before being accepted.
"It's been a long road for the past five years. The state cuts and cuts," says Critchley. Underwood agrees. "What's happened at Robbinston is the state share has been going down. The biggest reason is the state's calculation of property value. It has gone up so much each year for the last several years. That's what's hurting." The superintendent says that, with the exception of Lubec, Robbinston property values have increased more than any of the other communities in AOS 77.
The superintendent has run various budget scenarios for the school committee's consideration. At the last meeting Underwood created a school budget that "wiped out any staff costs, no instruction," but kept in the building utilities and insurance, although with no custodian or upkeep. Because the school committee wanted to keep the children close to Robbinston, Underwood formulated a budget based on the students being placed evenly between Charlotte, Eastport and Perry. "To tuition out all the kids actually costs more than the salary and benefits of all teachers and ed techs." He adds that he did factor in the cost of bus and driver. However, if he were to eliminate total costs of the building, meaning that the building would need to be closed and torn down within a few years, "that would probably send the budget the other way, a little lower.... Depending on offers, if the busing is included -- there's a little competition -- I have to say, maybe we could come close."
However, for Critchley it comes down to providing a decent education for the town's children. "The kids really start losing out.... There's no music, art, gifted and talented. There's a part‑time phys ed/health. There's nothing left, there's no end in sight." He adds that the building itself needs a new roof and drainage work, all costly additions to the budget.
"We don't want to split the kids up," he says and explains that a part of the committee's consideration of proposals will be to hear from each school as to whether it could accommodate an additional 55 students. But he believes that sending the students to another institution now makes sense. "For the same amount of money we could offer a lot more to students."