Guestblogger: Karen Marlow-McDaid

Well, it’s official... the Tent Meeting and subsequent budget cuts have left two children behind.

At last night’s meeting, the Portsmouth School Committee voted 6-1 (Wilkie dissenting) to close the Prudence Island School for the 2007-2008 school year. On paper, and in the brief background presentation provided by Superintendent Susan Lusi, this looks like a no-brainer. The town will save roughly $75,000 by closing the school and sending the two kids involved to Melville. The reality for those two children makes the decision less clear-cut.

At best, closing the school results in a 10-1/2 hour school day for these children. While a ten-hour school day exists in other rural communities across the country, it is far from ideal. Older children have the maturity to deal with changes in the weather, an uncertain ferry schedule, and an early school day, but younger students do not. I certainly cannot imagine sending my 7-year-old son off on a bus to a ferry to a bus each morning, with no guarantee he would be able to get home should the weather change, and no way to retrieve him should he become sick at school. Even Dr. Lusi said that, on a personal level, if she were in this situation, she would probably opt to home school. Essentially, we told two families that the town can no longer afford to educate their children.

The citizens of Prudence Island have done everything right to try to keep their school open. The Prudence Island School Working Committee, under the leadership of Dick Carpender and Dennis Canario, have pursued a broad range of ideas to give short- and long-term relief. Island volunteers have taught co-curriculars and performed maintenance on the school building. They have been striving to make the Prudence Island School an asset to the town as a whole, rather than a tax burden. They get it — that having a thriving school in their community benefits everyone, not just the families who have students there.

And yet, given the current financial climate, closing the school seemed inevitable. Several committee members expressed their deep sadness over the need to make this decision. This issue has come up, as Marge Levesque said, “every year since I’ve been on this committee.” Dick Carpender offered a heartfelt apology to the Prudence Islanders present, saying that it was the hardest decision he had ever had to make as a committee member. “Had the tent meeting not taken place,” he continued, “We would not be sitting here.”

Come to think of it, PCC members, who have been calling for the school to close at least since last summer, were conspicuously silent in tonight’s discussion. Was there celebration that the School Committee was taking action they had proposed, diligently saving taxpayers a few cents? Why, no. Jamie “Needs to look up the word 'syntax' in the dictionary” Heaney asked some questions about bus schedules and Doug Wilkie, who eventually voted against the motion, expressed the need for a ferry monitor and the desire to maintain the building for future operations (in other words, to undercut the cost-savings outlined). It’s almost as though they enjoyed it more when they weren’t getting what they asked for. But more about this later.

Before I leave this subject, I was deeply moved by the dilemma facing Prudence Island parents, and the tremendous amount of work they’ve done to keep from getting here. Not only is Prudence Island part of Portsmouth, it is a community that makes Portsmouth unique. The current financial situation made it impossible to keep the Prudence Island School open. But let’s consider as a town, since we will all benefit from lower taxes, what can we do as a community to support these children.

The second major action on the business agenda was moving the fifth grade from the middle school to the elementary schools. According to Dr. Lusi’s presentation, this move uses space available in the elementary schools and will save taxpayers an additional $75,000. In a real WTF move, Republican committee members Buddemeyer, Wilkie, and Heaney opposed this cost savings, but the motion passed 4-3.

Let’s look at the dissenting arguments. Mr. Buddemeyer essentially said I don’t want to save this $75,000 because I grew a lot when I went to middle school. Thank you for sharing. Mr. Heaney suggested that the “easiest way to save money is to cut overhead by eliminating a building.” He said, “With a heavy heart I support this decision,” and then voted against it a short time later.

But the most entertaining argument had to come from Mr. Wilkie, who read some prepared remarks so far off base that both Dr. Lusi and Dick Carpender “took strong exception” to them. In a nutshell... (oh, and the outline format was as presented):

1. The middle school is established as 5-8 and the elementary schools are established as K-4. In other words, change is bad.
2. Parents have voiced objections, including a loss of continuity as a class (ignoring the fact that this class has no experience as a unit to continue). He said that the fifth grade is seen as a transition year and moving that transition to 6th grade will somehow result in less time for teaching new materials.
3. He inaccurately characterized moving the administrative offices (not the $75,000 cost savings) as the catalyst for these changes.
   
   1. He said, citing other issues that had been floated as brainstorming possibilities, that renovating the current space on Middle Road had not been adequately analyzed.
   2. He suggested, ridiculously, that increased enrollment at the middle school would result in a bond issue.
   3. He asked about bussing costs and schedules.
   4. He said “student services would be lessened by the application of unevaluated new ideas.” Yeah, I don’t know what that means either. He also challenged that the elementary schools had adequate space. And what about the custodians??? How could they possibly clean 3 additional classrooms per building?

Dr. Lusi corrected some of his inaccuracies, and assured him that she had done her homework with regard to adequate elementary school space and bussing costs. She said that inconsistencies among elementary schools were an issue “being addressed by the district” regardless of whether this move takes place. She challenged the idea that moving administrative offices was the primary motivator, saying, “I hate to move. I really do.” She said that should middle-school enrollment exceed projections, we wouldn’t need a bond issue, “we look for office space.” She said that the district still could save $75,000 even if administrative offices didn’t move. “I’ll stay where we are, but why not take the short-term savings (from closing the Middle Road location)?”

Mr. Carpender said, “While I support Mr. Wilkie’s right to make those remarks, there are aspects that aren’t correct.” He assured Mr. Wilkie that appropriate analysis had taken place, and expressed his appreciation for Dr. Lusi’s “thinking outside the box.”

An array of parents spoke in favor of and opposed to the change. Most vocal among the opposition was Mr. Blank Nasspeff [NASPPF: Not a special-purpose public figure], who questioned the co-curriculars, computer training, and library books that would be available to 5th grade students at the elementary schools. The most keenly-felt loss seemed to be band instruction for 5th grade students. Many people on both sides of the issue expressed the desire to find a way to make band available to 5th graders.

Interestingly, this issue seemed to split along gender lines. Many of the women speaking expressed concern about kids moving on to the middle school before they were ready; many men expressed concern about holding kids back (My ten-year-old don’t need no stinkin’ recess). The only man who spoke in favor of the move was Alan Macmillan, a middle-school teacher who said he sees 6th graders as more developmentally ready for the transition than 5th graders.

Principals from two of the elementary schools were there and spoke of finding creative ways to make this transition positive, not just for the 5th graders, but for all the elementary school children. They expressed commitment to providing full academic experiences for these children.

Tensions rose toward the end of the long, stressful meeting when Blank Nasspeff and another newbie whose name I didn’t catch said, essentially, so sorry that they had not been paying attention to budget issues earlier, ("I can't read 400 pages of budget," Nasspeff complained) but had the committee had looked for other places to cut the $75,000? The answer, to be brief, was yes. And let me just add that not only had the committee looked, but a RI Superior Court judge and two Certified Public Accountants.

Nancy Zitka welcomed the many new faces in the room, and lamented the fact that the school funding could have been preserved if there were just about 100 more supporters at the Tent meeting.

Perhaps there is a market for bumper stickers that read “Where the f**k were you in August?” Maybe just a flashing sign to use at committee meetings.

Speaking of which, where does the PCC get off opposing these cost savings? They want to have it both ways. "Cheshire" Kathy Melvin, one of the most vocal PCC budget cutters, got up to lament the change to 5th grade. "The Middle School," she said, had been designed by the community, with "citizens directly involved." So the PCC wants to take credit for slashing the budget, and then hang the results of their handiwork on the School Committee, who are clearly ignoring the will of the people.

I don't know what amazes me more, that they have the balls to force these cuts, or that they lacked the balls to support the changes required to live within them. I don't know whether they have huge balls, or no balls, but there is a metaphor in there, and it certainly involves testicles.

In less exciting, but important news, Dr. Lusi said in her opening remarks that the school department budget has been formally submitted (in a new streamlined format!). She read a letter from Sylvia Wedge and herself identifying potential problems with the budget. The budget is within the 5.25% cap stipulated by Paiva-Weed and, while achievable, “going below the budgeted amount would compromise the quality and legality of the budget.” Several issues remain outstanding: Little Compton tuitions are still under negotiation, state aid for education has not been finalized by the legislature, and the governor’s budget did not include the tuition owed Portsmouth for students at the Girls and Boys Club. An unfavorable outcome in any of these areas would put Portsmouth schools at risk, since cash reserves have been depleted to get through this school year. She somewhat half-heartedly suggested applying for permission to exceed the cap to overcome shortfalls in non-tax revenue, as a precaution.

Last but not least, kudos to the middle school girls basketball team who were congratulated for their winning season last night. Go Patriots!

---

Editor's note: Karen had to guest-blog this while I covered the wastewater workshop. Anything good here is hers, anything bad is a result of my editing. She sent me this in her cover note, and I wanted to share: "Let me begin by saying, I don’t know how you all do it. My hat's off, way off, to those who attend these meetings on a regular basis because honestly, my head would explode."