[CTartist]

Originally Posted by BPt111

What you think of small school districts joining larger towns to save the state some money. Oxford schools which less than 2,000 kids would join Newtown or Middlebury etc


“School districts with fewer than 2,000 students would be required to join other districts to regionalize populations and save money on administrative costs, under legislation submitted by state Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff.”

https://ctpost.com/politics/article/...o-13561693.php

Wow!

In a few days we have seen 1) tacking on one mill rate to all houses to go to the cities via subsidized car taxes. IMO it is really an increase of the CT income tax for the middle class and wealthy...... and 2) the above.



I wonder what next week will bring.

[Lalalally]

Originally Posted by CTartist

Wow!

In a few days we have seen 1) tacking on one mill rate to all houses to go to the cities via subsidized car taxes. IMO it is really an increase of the CT income tax for the middle class and wealthy...... and 2) the above.



I wonder what next week will bring.

One never really knows when liberal progressivism is at play. Exact reason why I wil never, ever, ever once again in my entire life vote for any dem in this state for ANY office, including my own town’s pittily municipal posts. EVER
They are all screaming lunatic extremist nut jobs in this part of the country these days...
Give me a New England Republican any day. Fiscally conservative, and socially libertarian. Win win for the rest of us
This **** we have for the next 4 years, is going to suck just as much as the last 8 years have. We have to start grass roots, from the bottom up, and change this crap. Weed and RIP out every single small Lib local politician that we can, and then build up from there. We need real representation for our 160 towns vs these corrupt and in some cases, criminal career politicians who are pulling the strings for the entire state From behind the curtain of 9 FAILING “cities”

[ads94]

A very solid bill. Regionalism is the path forward for cutting costs and I'm glad the state is looking to do force it on towns for the very reason in this thread, the backlash it gets. I had a 35 minute bus ride to high school in a regional district. Didn't cause my education to suddenly collapse and become some awful student

My region shared the middle and high school. The property taxes at the time were low and reasonable, from the cost sharing of schools and no two seperate administration budgets. Don't whine about taxes when the government takes postive steps to reduce taxes (car mill rate + new property tax) and to cut costs (regionalisation).

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by NUHuskies01

So Oxford always used to have its own elementary and I think middle but went to high school over in Seymour.

But, I think it was around 10-15 years ago they built the new high school, which is quite lovely, and are planning on breaking ground on a new middle school this spring/summer to open the 21-22 school year. The K-2 is also a new building.

Interesting idea, but small towns like Oxford, and not going to want to give up what was already invested in.

Oxford sent students to both Masuk in Monroe and Seymour HS, until around 2004 when they began sending all of their students to Monroe due to some parents being dissatisfied with Seymour (for whatever reason). Oxford reached out to Newtown and Southbury to regionalize in the past, however residents in all communities showed no interest. Oxford parents wanted their own. I always thought they should look into pairing with Beacon Falls, but apparently Oxford never thought so. By the numbers, I guess the socioeconomics of the two towns are too vastly different (Oxford average household income is 137k, Beacon falls is 84k).

Unfortunately people don’t want regional school districts. I can hardly figure out why, because some of the best public schools in the state are regional (Easton/Redding, Amity, Pomperaug). It would save a heck of a lot of money, especially in 2019, when income to cost of living ratio is not what it used to be. Why does there need to be three six figure administrators at each building? Get rid of the waste.

I also believe they should do this with emergency services. California’s Orange County and Florida’s Palm Beach County have both combined emergency services where many police and fire were switched from being local to county. It streamlines communication and allows jurisdictional boundaries to be wider. That, and it gets rid of the waste at the top (hefty administration pay).

Connecticut needs to become more fiscally sound. I think this regionalization is a great way to do it, on a local level.

Originally Posted by JayCT

I do not agree with this. This should be up to the community and not be state mandated. What is to prevent the state from trying to force other consolidations? I doubt this will go anywhere. Jay

That all being said, I agree with Jay, it should not be state mandated.

[Lincolnian]

Regionalization could be encouraged with incentives. Since the state contributes funding to the towns there could be conditions on receiving state funding as the state pays the pension costs of the teachers in the districts receiving funding. If a town with a costlier per pupil cost wants to stay independent then the amount of funding provided by the state could be reduced or eliminated requiring those communities to adjust their own funding. Districts willing to develop regional plans could receive increased funding.

As has been pointed out in the teacher pension problem, the state has to payout significantly higher pensions for teachers in Fairfield County than the rest of the state. Regionalization will not necessarily address that particular component, and in fact could end up raising teachers' salaries in some cases, yet it will remove costs from municipalities and towns' school budgets easing the burden on the state allowing more money to be allocated to solving the pension funding problem.

There are some small districts with class sizes of under 15 students where nearby communities have class sizes of 30 or more. An individual school district can only do so much to react to demographic bubbles/shifts in the short-term. Building/remodeling new schools or closing schools is a costly endeavor. With a fluid society schools need to be more flexible to offer skills, programs and experiences that meet the needs of all students. This is not efficiently done in 169 or so individual school districts.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by ads94

A very solid bill. Regionalism is the path forward for cutting costs and I'm glad the state is looking to do force it on towns for the very reason in this thread, the backlash it gets. I had a 35 minute bus ride to high school in a regional district. Didn't cause my education to suddenly collapse and become some awful student

My region shared the middle and high school. The property taxes at the time were low and reasonable, from the cost sharing of schools and no two seperate administration budgets. Don't whine about taxes when the government takes postive steps to reduce taxes (car mill rate + new property tax) and to cut costs (regionalisation).

I attended a regional school for a time and I hated it. 45 min bus rides each way. After school activities dependent on being able to get a ride back home at night. Ended up in private school as a result. Which is what I imagine will happen quite a bit if this comes to pass.

Also, from a political standpoint, this puts suburban Dems in a tough spot. They can't support it else they will be voted out in 2020, and yet even if they don't support it, their GOP opponents will use it as ammo against them - this is what happens when you elect Democrats. Especially the newly elected ones in FFC. Gotta imagine they are not too happy with their leadership right now.

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by kidyankee764

Unfortunately people don’t want regional school districts. I can hardly figure out why, because some of the best public schools in the state are regional (Easton/Redding, Amity, Pomperaug). It would save a heck of a lot of money, especially in 2019, when income to cost of living ratio is not what it used to be. Why does there need to be three six figure administrators at each building? Get rid of the waste.

Those are middle school/high school regional districts if I remember correctly. The towns still run their own elementary schools. They actually have more administration types, as there are two boards of ed, two superintendents etc. Unless they end up closing/consolidating schools, I don't see what savings are achieved by forced regionalization. Headcount will remain pretty much the same.

[kidyankee764]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

Those are middle school/high school regional districts if I remember correctly. The towns still run their own elementary schools. They actually have more administration types, as there are two boards of ed, two superintendents etc. Unless they end up closing/consolidating schools, I don't see what savings are achieved by forced regionalization. Headcount will remain pretty much the same.

Building maintenance, for one, would be a tremendous savings. That, alone, really hits small towns hard.

[Masterj]

They’ve discussed merging East Granby and Suffield (and occasionally Windaor Locks) for as long as I can remember put it never pans out.

[blakesq]

Central planning is always better, comrades!

Originally Posted by BPt111

What you think of small school districts joining larger towns to save the state some money. Oxford schools which less than 2,000 kids would join Newtown or Middlebury etc


“School districts with fewer than 2,000 students would be required to join other districts to regionalize populations and save money on administrative costs, under legislation submitted by state Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff.”

https://ctpost.com/politics/article/...o-13561693.php