Home Rule Town or State Subsidiary? Public Hearing Testimony on "Repealed and Replaced" School Charter.
Home Rule Town or State Subsidiary? Public Hearing Testimony on "Repealed and Replaced" School Charter.
Testimony submitted for hearing on Boothbay Maine School Charter on May 9
I have received information about a public hearing scheduled for the Boothbay School Charter No. 1786 H.P. 1149 this coming Tuesday May 9 2003
LD 1786 is scheduled for public hearing before the Joint Standing Committee on Education on Tuesday, May 9, 2023 at 1:00 pm. If you plan to testify at the hearing onsite in the State House Complex, please bring 20 copies of your testimony to the hearing for distribution to the committee by the committee clerk. If you wish to testify remotely over ZOOM, you may upload your testimony using this link: https://www.mainelegislature.org/testimony/
Submit a Testimony! This is the testimony that I submitted:
My name is Susan Mackenzie Andersen. I am a member of the Boothbay Community School District where I attended school through grade 12, graduating in 1966. My parents moved to the region in 1952 to establish a small free enterprise business, Andersen Design, that designed and made ceramics and taught those skills on the job to the women who used to work in the fish packing industry. The original school charter, which is now being repealed and replaced, was created in 1953.
I am also an independent researcher, and have studied the Maine economic development policy put into place in 1976 which I submit is the driving force behind the repealing and replacing of the Community School Districts local charter with state law. Laws cannot be understood on a stand-alone basis but must be considered in their larger context. I have been narrating the story of Maine’s incremental transition from a Home Rule State in 1969 to a centrally managed corporate state in 2023. I publish the Substack Newsletter, The Individual vs the Empire.
My testimony is complex and so I feel it is best submitted in written form but would like to speak briefly about it so that people will know it is here.
I attended the publicized first meeting about the school charter after I saw a public announcement in the Boothbay Register. Present were the Town selectmen of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor, a representative board, and my sister and myself. No one acknowledged our presence. The discussion centered around minor changes that become necessary with the passage of time such as adjusting appropriated funds for inflation. After that meeting I did not see further announcements about the school charter discussion.
The district school committee members used “repeal and replace” to describe what they are doing with the Boothbay school charter. The new school charter as written for the towns of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor repeals our local school charter and replaces it with state statutes, particularly Title 20-A, chapter 105.
The abandonment of our local school charter is an undervaluation of the importance of home rule and a disservice to the community school district as Title 20, chapter 105, subchapter 4, §1752. Districts formed by private and special Acts of the Legislature, states the following:
§1752. Districts formed by private and special Acts of the Legislature If the provisions of this chapter conflict with the provisions of any private and special Act of the Legislature which created a community school district, then the provisions of the private and special Act shall control. [PL 1981, c. 693, §§ 5, 8 (NEW).]
That means, consistent with home rule, that local communities have the right to decide whether they will be governed by the rules in the state educational statute or establish our own rules.
Title 20-A, chapter 105 was codified in 1981, Apparently no one questioned if it is consistent with Municipal Home Rule which uses the words “The inhabitants of any municipality shall have the power to alter and amend their charters on all matters, not prohibited by Constitution or general law, which are local and municipal in character.” I question that Title 20-A, Chapter 105 is consistent with the spirit and intention of Home Rule as it seems that the inhabitants of the community have a limited voice in what happens in their public school system in Title 20, Chapter 105 but they are the primary in the Home Rule Amendment.
The remedy to the disenfranchisement of local inhabitants in the statutes is to write a local school charter that protects the community from political dangers written into the state educational statutes but instead the Boothbay community school district has simply repealed our existing charter and replaced it with the state statutes. Since the Legislature must approve all charter changes, the question to ask is, once we repeal our local school charter, established in 1953, can we ever get it back?
So now let’s get down to the real nitty gritty
LD 1786 begins by stating Sec. 1. P&SL 1953, c. 156, as amended by P&SL 2019, c. 11, §§1 to 3, is repealed 3 and the following enacted in its place: 4 Sec. 1 to 3
I could not find the former sections so I put in a request at the Maine Law Library.
Next:
LD 1786 Sec. 1. Organization and continued existence. The Boothbay-Boothbay Harbor Community School District, referred to in this Act as "the community school district," is a community school district organized pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 20-A, 7 chapter 105 and this Act to provide public education in grades prekindergarten or kindergarten to grade 12 for the Town of Boothbay and the Town of Boothbay Harbor. The community school district is governed by Title 20-A, chapter 105 except as provided by this Act.
In the public forum provided by the Boothbay Register, I have asked the Boothbay district school committee members if they are planning on a demonstration and research school, as established in H.P. 1845 as schools for which the standard rules of public education are waived and they can invent their own rules. No answer has been given as members insist it is inappropriate to discuss the matter in a public forum (Boothbay Register comments). However, the Maine School Law Advisory says that “a result of not being solely representatives is that school boards are not required to let members of the public speak at its meetings…..Stated simply, the rights of voters in a school unit are (1) to watch the school board meet when it is in public session (2) to vote for school board members, and (3) to vote on the school budget and referenda.
Pursuant to my question we have to see where the exceptions lie in this Act. The words “The community school district is governed by Title 20-A, chapter 105 except as provided by this Act.” confirms that the new Boothbay School Charter is intended to accommodate demonstration- research schools, since Title 20-A represents the general rules that apply to the public educational system, and the new charter codifies exceptions to the general rules.
LD 1786 Sec. 2. Governance transition. The district school committee members and the trustees of the community school district serving as of the effective date of this Act shall continue in their offices for their respective remaining terms.
Except for the heading “Governance transition.” That seems like what is said doesn’t need to be said. It’s the normal state of affairs to serve a complete term. The heading implies there is some other sort of transition taking place but the text does not tell us anything about that transition. Par for the course, the district school committee will tell the public only what it chooses and so it is fair for members of the school district to read between the lines and connect dots to construct a probable picture of what is underway.
Sec. 3. Board of trustees; district school committee. Except as provided by this Act, the board of trustees and district school committee have the duties and authority pursuant to the Maine Revised Statutes, Title 20-A, chapter 105. The board of trustees may act as a building and facilities governing committee, including authority in consultation with the district school committee over the budget for maintaining, repairing, replacing and improving the community school district's buildings and other facilities and over the district's capital reserve funds. The community school district may vote in accordance with Title 20-A, section 1651, subsection 4 to have the district school committee perform the duties of the board of trustees.
In Title 20-A Chapter 105 §1601. Definitions. A community school district means “a school administrative unit consisting of the inhabitants of and the territory within 2 or more municipalities.” Although the inhabitants of the community are described as “administrative”, the community school district’s administrative authority is limited to voting for school board members, and on the school budget and referenda.
The district school committee is the school board, which is an administrative board, not a representative board. The Board of Trustees consists of one municipal member elected by the voters out of three municipal members appointed by the town selectmen. The inhabitants of the community can vote on whether the school board can function as the board of trustees. The Community School District or the inhabitants of the community, can vote for the board of trustees but only from three candidates chosen by the selectmen.
What are the exceptions to the general rules of the public school system that the new Boothbay School Charter allows? The powers of the Board of Trustees and the District School Committee are expanded in LD 1786
Title 20-A, chapter 105 §1654. Powers, duties and authority E.
May acquire, construct and operate related recreational and athletic facilities, which may also meet other community needs.
LD 1786 Sec. 3. Board of trustees; district school committe The board of trustees may act as a building and facilities governing committee, including authority in consultation with the district school committee over the budget for maintaining, repairing, replacing and improving the community school district's buildings and other facilities and over the district's capital reserve funds.
Chapter 105: COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Subchapter 3: FINANCING §1706. Reserve fund
Community school districts may establish a reserve fund as follows: [PL 1989, c. 132, §3 (NEW).]
1. Establishment. A community school district may establish a reserve fund for school construction projects, financing the acquisition or reconstruction of a specific or type of capital improvement, financing the acquisition of a specific item or type of capital equipment or any of the expenditures listed under section 1485, subsection 1, paragraph A by including a request in the district budget, which must include a description of the purpose of the reserve fund, and receiving voter approval.
LD 1876 Section Three co-ordinates with HP 1845- An Act to Amend the Educational Statutes enacted in April of 2022. Both Acts propose that general rules do not apply to some parts of the public-educational system and yet the exceptions will be publicly funded obligation. HP 1845 proposes that “demonstration-research schools” can “innovate” their own rules.
In Boothbay there exists a development cabal (secretive organization) that funded the architects to design a new school system. The school administrative board said that the funders wanted to remain anonymous and so to learn their identities I submitted an FOAA request. I first heard of the idea when Paul Coulombe, a dominant and high-profile local developer and owner of the country club and many other properties on the peninsula, suggested that a new school system would attract well-heeled families to the peninsula, which has a declining school attendance according to Selectman, Charles Cunningham’s write up for his re-election campaign.
Mr. Cunningham told of the declining school attendees in the context of promoting extending the TIF zone and appropriating TIF funding for a highly concentrated housing zone, which is only possible because of the enactment of H.P. 1489 An Act To Implement the Recommendations of the Commission To Increase Housing Opportunities in Maine by Studying Zoning and Land Use Restrictions, enacted as an emergency also in April of 2022, alongside H.P. 1845, An Act to Amend the Educational Statutes. However, the well-heeled families that Mr. Coulombe wants to attract to the peninsula would not live in such quarters. For one thing those families would own their homes including the land occupied by the home and the home would have a private yard. The housing plan will create an upstairs downstairs community such as the peninsula has never known before, but Selectman Cunningham tells us that the corporate-owned housing zone with a density of 3.5 the surrounding area will allow families to live on the peninsula which will increase school attendance, clearly identifying that the two developments are of one coordinated plan. Coulombe says we need the school to attract well-heeled families and Cunningham says we need the concentrated housing zone to populate the school. However, Erin Cooperrider, the VP and spokesperson for the Boothbay Regional Development Corporation has described what parses as a unit for four people as a 1200 square foot unit, which is half the size of what is considered a comfortable amount of space for four persons from numerous other sources. This means there is no space for creativity within the concentrated affordable housing zone and to find such space the inhabitants might look toward a public facility such as a school.
There is much public uproar about H.P 1489 for its infringements on the home rule authority provided by the Maine Constitution, but H.P. 1489 is not only arguably unconstitutional based on its own merits, but the concentrated housing zone, the subject of the new TIF zone and TIF financing is arguably unconstitutional pursuant to HP 1489 being enacted as an emergency. (See what Maine Constitution says about emergency acts)
It is not my purpose to argue the constitutionality of HP 1489 but only to demonstrate that the proposed 100-million-dollar school and the corporate owned concentrated housing zone are linked together in a unified development plan advanced by a cabal so secret that when the Boothbay select board awarded the Boothbay Regional Development Corporation $50,000.00 dollars in American Rescue Plan funding it did not ask for the names of the board members, or other significantly missing information.
The linking of the proposed 100-million-dollar school and the concentrated housing zone is disturbing in light of the fact that, in response to my FOAA request, it was confirmed that the administrative board elected from the start to fund the school with conditional gifts rather than tax deductible contribution, an option provided in Title 20-A, chapter 105.
There is the open possibility that the conditional donor will demand units reserved for corporate employees in the concentrated housing zone. This is consistent with the narrative that Erin Cooperrider, the spokesperson and VP of the Boothbay Regional Development Corporation has been developing for years. In a 2018 Boothbay Register article titled Housing, water projects highlight Planning Commission annual meeting, Ms. Cooperrider said “other communities have been targeting more specific industries or types of jobs, rather than income brackets.” Apply that to the “affordable workforce housing zone” and see what sort of political system you get. The targeted industries are state targeted industries acting in the capacity of a stand-alone corporation, even though industries outside of the state’s targeted sector have the capability of providing equal pay even at the disadvantage of being part of the public that subsidizes state targeted industries, Ms. Cooperrider is saying that anyone working in the free enterprise sector, which exists outside of the state’s targeted industry sector, can be given the very least consideration when applying for housing.
Since there are no conditions placed on the “donor” of the conditional gift, the donor can make nondisclosure a condition. The only statutory condition in conditional gifts is that the inhabitants of the district must honor the conditions made by the donor in perpetuity. As written, the community school district is given no consideration while the donor can make anything a condition, but it is the property owned by the inhabitants of the district which serves as equity should the district default on its debt, pursuant to §5701. Debt liability (referenced in Title 20, chapter 105)
The personal property of the residents and the real estate within the boundaries of a municipality, village corporation or other quasi-municipal corporation may be taken to pay any debt due from the body corporate. The owner of property taken under this section may recover from the municipality or quasi-municipal corporation under Title 14, section 4953.
It is my opinion that the conditional gifts option should be repealed in Title 20-A but since it is not, a local school charter that prohibits the use of conditional gifts as a funding method of Boothbay’s public educational system will do. This idea was likely not even considered as those in charge of writing our new school charter are a special interest group pursuant to the 100-million-dollar proposed school system. Conditional gifts are just another name for a legalized pay to play system, which will have an inordinate effect on the character of our public educational system. I believe that the state educational statutes are designed to transform the public educational system into an instrument of the state’s economic development agenda, specifically in consideration of Title 20-A: EDUCATION Chapter 313: CAREER AND AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION.
What we lose when the State conflates our public educational system with state economic development agendas, is a holistic education that values the individual and gives the young mind background knowledge for choosing the career path that is right for the individual rather than indoctrinating the student into a career path serving the interests of the corporate state at the earliest age possible. A technical education should be an option but it should not be a publicly funded option as that creates an unfair advantage for the state’s targeted sector over the free enterprise sector, which is subsidizing the state’s targeted sector.
Erin Cooperrider is one of three unelected commissioners who wrote the frame work for H. P. 1489 which has caused so many to cry foul against state pursuant to the Maine Home Rule Amendment, and attempted carveouts from its totalitarian rule over Maine municipal ordinances, which is a matter of local and municipal concern, for which the authority is granted to the local unit of government by the Home Rule Amendment.
State corporatism and Home Rule are diametrically opposite political philosophies.
Home Rule grants authority to the inhabitants of the Municipality. Title 20 Chapter 105 largely repeals the authority of the community school district and grants that authority instead to administrative boards.
Last years, H.P. !845 links up succinctly with Title 5: ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES AND SERVICES
Part 19: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 407: RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
Subchapter 3: TECHNOLOGY CENTERS
5. Relationship with academic institution. A technology center shall establish a relationship with at least one academic institution in this State. The Department of Economic and Community Development shall establish guidelines for such a relationship and determine whether a technology center has met the requirements of this subsection.[PL 2011, c. 691, Pt. C, §4 (NEW).]
6. Rule-making authority. The Department of Economic and Community Development may adopt rules to carry out the purposes of this section. Rules adopted pursuant to this subsection are routine technical rules as defined in chapter 375, subchapter 2‑A.
The mockup for the new school looks more like a corporate headquarters designed for adult use, with its very high balconies in a glamorous setting of high ceilings and floor to ceiling glass walls. Is this a setting for sometimes raucous teenagers, or a setting for another public-private state technology center, all of which are required to have a link to the public university system at the core of which is the University of Maine, which is not only an educational system but state manufacturing, which includes the Advance Manufacturing Center of the University of Maine and last year’s new Maine Space Corporation:
§13201. Maine Space Corporation established
3. Workforce. Facilitating the creation of a highly skilled workforce and attracting and retaining young workers in a new space economy. The corporation shall work closely with the University of Maine System, the Maine Community College System, career and technical education centers and regions and satellite programs, elementary and secondary schools and other organizations in the State to ensure education, training and recruitment programs are in place for the primary purpose of ensuring the availability of a highly skilled workforce to support the State's new space economy; (emphasis added)
An FOAA request revealed that the board had elected to use conditional funding rather than tax-exempt funding available through the AOS 98 educational foundation. Conditional funding is indistinguishable from corporate welfare deals that the State has been negotiating for years, but the corporate welfare deals require tax exempt zones like the Pine Tree Zone or Opportunity Zones to transform a refundable tax credit into a subsidy. Today large corporations expect to be generously subsidized if they are to locate in any neighborhood. Transforming our public educational system into hidden corporate welfare systems allows the state to implement its corporate welfare deals in any neighborhood. Superintendent Kahler has spoken of negotiating with corporate donors as well as having identified that the negotiations are done as conditional gifts.
Title 20-A, chapter 105. COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT includes a provision for accepting conditional gifts. So does Chapter 223: MUNICIPAL FINANCES §5654. Conditional gifts.
§5654. Conditional gifts 2. Perpetually comply with conditions. When the donor or the donor's representative has completed the donor's part of the agreement concerning the execution of a conditional gift, the municipality shall perpetually comply with, and may raise money to carry into effect, the conditions upon which the agreement was made. [PL 1987, c. 737, Pt. A, §2 (NE
Chapter 105: COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT §1702. Borrowing 5. Status. A community school district shall be a quasi-municipal corporation within the meaning of Title 30-A, section 5701. The provisions of Title 30-A, section 5701, shall be applicable to it.
§5701. Debt liability
The personal property of the residents and the real estate within the boundaries of a municipality, village corporation or other quasi-municipal corporation may be taken to pay any debt due from the body corporate. The owner of property taken under this section may recover from the municipality or quasi-municipal corporation under Title 14, section 4953.
A matter of great significance is found in the University Of Maine Claims Ownership of Intellectual Property Rights
In 2004, The University of Maine System, Statement of Policy Governing Patents and Copyrights, claims the right of ownership by the University of intellectual property created by university staff and students and uncompensated individuals, based on the university's ownership of publicly-funded facilities.
In 2011 The US Supreme Court held that a researcher inventing a patent in a federally funded lab owns the patent.
The Intellectual Property Clause grants ownership of a patent to the inventor of the patent. In Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems Inc, 563 U.S. 776 (2011), the Supreme Court held that even when a researcher at a federally funded lab invents a patent, that researcher owns the patent.
The University of Maine is a State University that has been federally funded since birth, but as of today, it is still claiming rights to its ownership of intellectual property based on usage by the true author of the University’s publicly funded facilities.
In 1999, §1921. Maine Patent Program was enacted as an educational program on patenting. The University of Maine claims that it can charge “a reasonable percentage of the royalties for any successful innovation patented through the program for services provided in registering a patent.
2.Applicant’s costs and duties. An applicant accepted by the program shall pay the costs of the patent search and opinion and for patent prosecution if the final product is manufactured or licensed out of state. An applicant shall pay to the program a reasonable percentage of the royalties for any successful innovation patented through the program. [1999, c. 731, Pt. WWW, §1(NEW)
4. Fund. The Maine Patent Fund, referred to in this chapter as the “fund,” is established as a revolving, nonlapsing fund to supplement the Maine Patent Program. All money from royalties received from applicants pursuant to this chapter must be credited to the fund. Money in the fund not currently needed to meet expenses of the program must be deposited with the Treasurer of State to the credit of the fund and may be invested as provided by law. Interest on these investments must be credited to the fund. Money in the fund may only be expended in accordance with allocations approved by the Legislature.
I have never heard of such a practice in the private sector,where royalties belong to authors and are not appropriately claimed as a fee for a service. The University is acting like an intellectual property vulture and its policies are extended into the public educational system of Maine, and most highly likely to be extended to tech centers and “makers” facilities, as is talked about for the 100-million-dollar school.
Pursuant to Home Rule, a local school charter can protect the students from such practices found at the state level but the Boothbay District School Committe has ditched out local charter and replaced it with State-controlled public education that sounds like it will be workforce industrial training and a corporate -controlled innovation center where the owners of the facilities can freely roam looking for intellectual property whose ownership they can claim rights to over the true authors based on ownership of the facilities- a very Communist idea.
Since the state has been centrally managing our economy through public-private relationships, the wealth divide has continually expanded, which should not be surprising in a system whereby the whole economy subsidizes the top of the economy. Now, with a lot of help from unregulated short-term rentals the wealth divide has become the ownership class-working class divide. The Boothbay Regional development cabal’s solution is to build corporate-owned undersized overcrowded single-family homes for the working classes and a spacious oversized tech center school where the working classes who no longer own homes may be challenged over ownership of their own intellectual property. This is a recipe for dystopia. If the100-milliond-dollar facility becomes a reality, our school district committee has failed the school district by tossing away our local school charter and failing to protect the interests of the public.
This charter is handing our local power over to the state, which seems to be the purpose in redoing our school charter at this time. Instead, our local charter should retain local power, reclaim authority for the inhabitants of the community and mandate teaching the Maine Constitution in public schools beginning in secondary school.