Er, remember what you said before, Scott?
Hmm, things seem have changed, eh?
School Board members and the selectmen discussed the possibility of relocating the SAU offices that currently are in the Gilford Town Hall basement. The School Board has budgeted $74,000 for the upcoming year to move the offices.
Last year, the SAU had to temporarily move to a section of the elementary school while repairs were being done to the ceiling of the SAU offices.
"The best-case scenario would be to have a place before Town Meeting in March," Town Administrator Scott Dunn said. "We're keeping in mind the best interest of the school district. We are not throwing anyone out."
Selectmen have decided to hold off on recommending the renewal of the SAU lease agreement with the town until after March's Town Meeting. The board felt that there is too much going on right now and they felt that a few items on the ballot need to be voted on before proceeding with the lease.
1/22/09, School Board meeting at GES concerning the budget and its impact on staffing and locations (which I attended)
paraphrased: "we got a letter today saying that the lease for the SAU is not going to be renewed..."
Well, THAT progression didn't take long, did it? I think that Joe Wernig et al are going to have their knickers all in a knot over this one.
The problem is that space on the municipal side IS a big problem - I support the moving of the heavy files / Planning Dept down to the lowest level so that we don't have the same problem of the roof starting to crack (which forced a temp move of the SAU) return anytime soon. Which does leave the SAU in a bit of a bind.
Last year, Joe was one of the most vocal protesters against the warrant that would have enabled the SAU offices to move to the Elementary school - it seemed that a lot of the teachers there did not want their management in the building either. Lots of reasons were actually given, but my personal belief still remains - it seems that the staff wanted to tell the management what was going to happen, and when that happened, people got riled up
Sidebar: hmm, sounds familiar! Am I starting to sound like Terry? Good - I hope I am. Frankly, I am in complete agreement with Terry with his current series on the School side of the budget process. We pay REALLY GOOD bucks for Management to manage - their staff, while being allowed input (and from Thursday nite's meeting, certainly seems that they have been given that opportunity - and more!)
Look, the SAU needs to move. I also believe that the SAU should move to the "educational" campus and use the now available space within GES - either up or down, although I'm betting that the first floor will be better for ADA compliance (no elevator will be needed). NO, the SAU should not move to the old library building (I still think it should go back to the heirs and [ha!] I still want my chainsaw out of that race car!).
And NO, the SAU should not be moved to other quarters outside what is already owned by the Town. While it sounds good in theory, I don't want to extra expense. Sure, there is a line item to pay "rent" to the Town, so some might say "hey, it's already budgeted!".
OK, call me cheap - right now, looking upward as a taxpayer supporting both the SAU and the Town, the money collected from me via the school tax is merely an accounting action - it goes right to the town and (every so slightly) lowers the tax I pay on that side of the ledger. Basically, it stays within the system. Moving the SAU to Village West (as was mentioned during the meeting) means an outflow of real money.
And for those of you who are complaining that "hey, we rejected the Warrant last year, and this year the budgeted cost is higher!". Well, decisions have consequences, and those that did not want that Article to pass are now having all of us pay the piper even more. Decisions have consequences, and hindsight now says you made the wrong one in stirring up a no vote.
I echo Doug's position and actually demand more - what IS the official teachers' union stance on this? Are they willing to make it public?
OFFER: I'm offering an invite for the teachers' union leadership to come on Meet The New Press and layout, publicly, their stance on the SAU move. And the SAU Budget! And the wind down of the staffing levels!
For the record - right NOW, I support the SAU move. And the SAU Budget. And the staffing decline. And the CBA for the teachers.
For right now.
I do not speak for the Budget Committee or the other members. I will say that I know what my vote for Recommending / Not Recommending will be after the SAU Deliberative Session if changes are made to the SAU Budget relative to the SAU move or the staffing cuts other than what the Budget Committee has done.
But more later...
Comments
Hi Skip, I'm not sure if the "Scott" menioned in your headline refers to me or exactly what the implications are intended to be...however, I would like to make 3 points.
1. Just because the newspaper prints a quote from a Town Official doesn't mean it is entirely true. Often times these quotes are taken out of context or neglect to include the rest of the story. And sometimes reporters make mistakes.
2. As Town Administrator, I work for and represent the viewpoint of the Board of Selectmen. Sometimes circumstances change and new decisions have to be made that contradict a previous position. Sometimes Board members or other Town Officials (myself included) change their minds based on new information that comes to light. For the record, I have no issues with using the eraser on my pencil.
3. Here is the exact text taken from the letter sent by the Board of Selectmen to the School Board:
As for the SAU Office lease agreement, it should be noted that the current lease is set to expire on June 30, 2009. It is also noteworthy that the Town has heretofore been charging the School District $2.62 per square foot for office space, including utilities, at a time when the average rate is $8-9, not including utilities. In any event, you have asked us to provide you with a definitive position on the future availability of this office space. With that in mind, we are writing to inform you of our desire not to renew the lease and to have the SAU office vacate the Town Hall by July 1, 2009.
Our reasons for this decision stem primarily from the Town’s need to utilize this space in the near future during the anticipated construction of a Police Station addition and in the long-term as the new home of the Planning & Land Use Department so that their heavy files can be situated on a concrete floor.
We do recognize, however, that this objective may require some flexibility on the part of all concerned, and therefore we do not want this letter to be construed as a pending mandatory eviction. Hopefully there will be a better understanding of the office space needs and funding availability for both parties immediately after the elections in March, and we also hope to know more about the status of the Town’s ability to re-use the Old Library within the next few months as well.
Accordingly, we are prepared to reiterate our willingness to enter into a lease agreement for the use of the Old Library by the SAU office upon the consent of the Probate Court in response to the Town’s cy pres petition. Although we have not yet drafted any specific lease terms, we envision a framework similar to the current lease agreement, with an understanding that a new rent amount will have to be calculated at a future date and the SAU office will have to pay for utilities and maintenance. Of course any final terms would be subject to approval by the Boards that will be in place after the March 2009 elections and will also be subject to the limitation of one year intervals unless otherwise approved for a longer term by a Town Meeting vote.
Thanks for letting my share these thoughts with you and your readers.
Posted by: Scott Dunn | January 26, 2009 09:09 AM