The Difference Between “Town Hall-Style School Format,” and "Town-Hall Meeting" Is in the Public Voice!
Like the school charter, the historical culture of the Boothbay Penisula of Maine is being "repealed and replaced". Will the people have a fair say?
The battle against the anonymous developers of notoriously secretive ways continues on the Peninsula with the introduction of a new voting matter, or two, as whatever is going on with the new school charter it is impossible to fathom, whether there will be a public vote or not.
Boothbay Register reporters generally do a professional job of walking the line and even subtly speaking between the lines but the reporting about the replacement school charter reads as if someone other than the reporter is directing what is said.
The latest article starts with the line “Boothbay, Boothbay Harbor and Community School District officials have reached agreement on all major charter changes except one.” That is the totality of the reporting about all the major charter changes, except one- the one being the budget validation process. Every article written about the charter redirects our attention away from the other charter issues, which gives all the more reason for the public to know what the other changes are, especially since The Industrial Partnerships Act of 2013 repurposed public education as industrial training and an anonymous group known only as “community members” is trying to replace the current educational system with a one hundred million dollar school system- with cost estimates rising in leaps and bounds by the month as secretively as the school charter is being repealed and replaced.
The latest article starts off well with “All three entities support changing the school budget validation process from a town-hall style public vote to a written ballot referendum.”
That makes sense, a written ballot referendum is, in my opinion, the fairest way to vote.
But that is followed by this”
But for future charters changes, especially ones involving changing the school budget validation process, school officials prefer a public vote to revert back to the town hall-style school format. Under the current proposal, any charter change would require legislative approval. (emphais by author)
This paragraph appears to be written as a puzzle. Does “future charter changes” refer to the replacement school charter or changes after the current charter has been “repealed and replaced”? Instantly the focus is switched to the budget validation process. The sentence ”school officials prefer a public vote to revert back to the town hall-style school format,” sounds as if the school officials want to eliminate the ”public vote” with a “town hall-style school format,”
I am wondering who really wrote that paragraph. I expect a professional writer to explain what is meant by “town hall-style school format” with the intent to provide the information that people need to know.
School boards are governing entities, not representatives so they do not answer to the people, though there are matters that the people vote on and that would be a “town-hall style public vote or a written ballot referendum.”
A town hall-style school format is altogether different because the school board is not a representative body, it is a governing body, as this article explains:
#510 Maine school boards are unique: Understanding that uniqueness is important
Public participation
Another important result of not being solely representatives is that school boards are not required to let members of the public speak at its meetings. The Freedom of Access Act merely requires that school boards conduct the public session of their meetings in public. (In only a few instances do the education laws require that a school board seek any public input at all.) 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. (In charter towns or cities, the town or city council votes on the budget.)
That residents have no right to speak at school board meetings is often difficult for school board members and members of the public to accept. The town meeting tradition in Maine is so well established that many assume that members of the public have a right to express their views and ask questions at school board meetings. …It is important to focus, however, on the difference between a town meeting and a school board meeting. At a town meeting, the residents of the town, the audience, actually are the legislative body of the town. Like legislators everywhere, they need to ask questions of their executives, the selectmen, and to argue and debate warrant articles placed before the meeting, so that the audience can make a decision on each warrant article by voting it up or down.
Contrast that with a school board meeting where the members of the audience have no responsibilities and only the right to be there and watch.
So a public vote cannot be reverted back to the town hall-style school format. It’s not either-or. They are functionally distinct and separate, not interchangeable.
I attended the first meeting about changing the school charter. There were no school board members present, only the two select boards of Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor.
So…by “revert back” does that mean a redo- so that the charter is being repealed and replaced by the school board instead of by the select board, in hopes of eliminating a public vote? This is an agenda that keeps repeating itself, as also said in the previous article :
One change both select boards support includes eliminating a town hall-style vote following the public hearing. Both select boards support a school budget referendum. “Once the new charter is approved by the legislature, it’s the law. So only the legislature would be able to change it,” Kahler said.
A town hall-style vote following the public hearing can be eliminated by making it a “town hall-style school format”.
I located the charter documents on the AOS website going back to 1953. The statute governing public charter schools was enacted in 2011 but Boothbay and Boothbay Harbor were incorporated as a school district in 1953, with a charter.
The sentence, “Under the current proposal, any charter change would require legislative approval. “ is odd. The past charter and amendments are special acts of state legislation, which require legislative approval, so the purpose of making such a statement seems cryptic. Unlike past charter changes, this change is not being called an amendment, it is being called “repeal and replace”, concurrent with many large transformational developments, including the 100 million dollar school, all of which are conducted under cover of secrecy. The entire culture of the peninsula is being repealed and replaced in a non-transparent method by anonymous actors and poorly identified corporations.
Maine Constitution
Article VIII.
Part Second.
Municipal Home Rule.
Section 1. Power of municipalities to amend their charters. 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. The Legislature shall prescribe the procedure by which the municipality may so act.
My assumption, pursuant to home rule, is that the municipality presents its charter and or amendments to the Legislature for enactment, which is different than the Legislature changing the charter themselves. A school charter is local and municipal in character. The authority over matters local and municipal in character is granted to the local authority in the Home Rule Amendment. Kahler said, “Once the new charter is approved by the legislature, it’s the law. So only the legislature would be able to change it”. I question that. Home Rule does not grant the Legislature authority over matters local and municipal in character, it instructs the Legislature to prescribe the procedure by which the municipality may so act.
In a town hall-style school format, the public is not allowed to ask questions just watch, so we cannot ask Mr. Kahler to explain his statement in such a format.
In a Town Hall Style meeting, the public can ask questions, and the public gets to vote.
Another issue happening concurrently will be put to a public vote. The Boothbay Region Development Corporation is asking for the TIF district to be expanded so that it can apply for “$1.25 million in TIF funds for BRDC’s infrastructure project” a large housing development.
When the Boothbay Register originally announced the large-scale plans it identified the corporation seeking 40% public funding of their plans as the Boothbay Region Development Corporation, but has since taken to referring to the corporation as BRDC, which could refer either to the Boothbay Region Development Corporation, which was reported in the Register as being a 501 C3 and is not found listed in the Secretary of State’s database, or BRDC could refer to the Boothbay Regional Development Corporation which is listed on the Secretary of State website not as a 501 C3 but as a NONPROFIT CORPORATION (T13-B) which stands for Title Thirteen B of the Maine statutes, a legislative response to the Maine Constitution, Article IV Part Third Section 14, that declares that if the Legislature charters a corporation by special act of legislation, as prohibited by section 14, it is not a corporation, it is a corporate outgrowth of the State. Since the State declares such corporations to be not corporations they are usually not listed in the Secretary of State database. In fact, this is the first time that I have ever come across a corporation listed as a NONPROFIT CORPORATION (T13-B).
How will the warrant identify the corporation? As BRDC?, as the Boothbay Region Development Corporation?, or the Boothbay Regional Development Corporation? At the May Town Hall meeting for the warrant articles, questions pertaining to whatever identification is chosen can be raised.
Since the meeting must be posted in advance, the identifier will be in the notice and known in advance of the Town Hall meeting.
Attested copy posted. The person to whom it is directed shall post an attested copy in some conspicuous, public place in the town at least 7 days before the meeting, unless the town has adopted a different method of notification.
Look for it in May!