Windsor
That scenario became more than likely, and was suggested by the committee’s consultant at a meeting last week when the discussion revealed differences among committee members from Hartland, West Windsor, Weathersfield and Windsor on what they believe voters could support in their towns.
Toward the end of the two-hour discussion last Wednesday, Peter Clarke, a consultant from Quechee who has been facilitating the committee’s work, said that without a consensus, it may be wise to disband the committee and allow Windsor and West Windsor to seek unification, which appears to have support in both towns.
Clarke said a decision on pursuing a “side by side” option, which would unify West Windsor and Windsor in one district and Hartland and Weathersfield in another, while keeping them all in the same supervisory union, needs to be made by May 8 for state approval and to allow enough time for a public vote by June 30.
However, the results of a survey of residents of all four towns show little support in Weathersfield for merging with Hartland, and Hartland committee members were on the fence. Any proposal involving all four towns would need the support of all four towns to be adopted. Thus disbanding would free up Windsor and West Windsor to pursue their own option.
Presently, Windsor is the supervisory union’s lone pre-k to 12 district; Hartland and Weathersfield each have preK-8 schools and choice thereafter and West Windsor’s Albert Bridge School is preK-6 with choice for middle and high school. The towns have been talking about how to satisfy the state consolidation law since it passed in 2015.
Clarke said disbanding the committee would allow Windsor and West Windsor to work out articles of agreement to bring to voters. Based on the discussion last Wednesday, Clarke suggested it would be a good idea to “test the waters” with a Windsor/West Windsor merger.
If such an arrangement were to win voters’ approval, Hartland and Weathersfield would need the state to allow them to remain as stand alone districts but still be part of the supervisory union, Superintendent David Baker said last week.
Baker said in a phone call that he doubts the state would go along with that. Still, Baker said, today is “decision time” and from what he heard at the meeting, “side by side” looks right for Windsor and West Windsor, but there was obvious reluctance on the part of Hartland and Weathersfield to merge.
“I think there was an increasing opinion (at the meeting) that maybe we could convince the state that Hartland and Weathersfield could try to stay structured as they are,” Baker said. “But given the climate at the state board and Legislature I’m not sure that is feasible. I think they (state officials) are weighing alternatives strictly and setting standards high, so I am not sure they would let Hartland and Weathersfield stand alone. But it can’t hurt to ask.”
The differences on the best plans for their towns were mirrored in the results of the survey, which asked voters which of the four options the committee is proposing they preferred.
In West Windsor and Windsor there was overwhelming support for a unified district that brings all four towns together and eliminates choice for Hartland, Weathersfield and West Windsor. All students from those towns would go to Windsor after finishing the highest grade levels in their towns. The second preferred option among West Windsor and Windsor respondents was the “side by side,” which unites those two schools, eliminating choice for West Windsor, and also unites Hartland and Weathersfield, both of which would retain choice.
Also under consideration is a 3 by 1, which is essentially what currently is in place, although it’s unlikely that such a structure would qualify for state incentives to consolidating districts.
A unified district for all four towns was last on the list among Weathersfield respondents, with only 7 of 80 from that town favoring unification. Weathersfield also showed little support for the side by side; while the most respondents, 28, wanted to keep choice for three of the four districts, another 27 wanted to do nothing but wait for the state to decide.
Among Hartland respondents, the preferred option was a merger with Weathersfield that would maintain school choice. But Hartland representatives weren’t convinced a merger with Weathersfield was worth pursuing because of Weathersfield’s opposition.
After the survey results were presented, West Windsor representative Dave Hill said it was time for everyone to say what they want and “step up and put our cards on the table.”
Hill said some in his town would be “upset” because unifying with Windsor would take choice off the table.
“But that is not a majority. Right now, I’d be an advocate for” a merger with Windsor.
According to a committee report, West Windsor residents would realize a significant tax savings under a side by side and it would ensure the long-term stability of the Albert Bridge School. Weathersfield would see a slight tax increase under the same option, the report said.
“I don’t think there is support in our town for a 2 by 2 for it to be useful to put to a vote,” said Sean Whalen, a member of both the Weathersfield School Board and the Act 46 committee, who said he personally favors a unified district.
Hartland representatives were also reluctant to support a side by side for their town, but did not want to want to block a vote on it in all towns.
Taken together, the survey results showed that a unified district had the most support (168 out of 509 respondents) followed by a side by side (99) then a 3 by 1 (91).
Tonight’s meeting begins at 6 p.m. at Hartland Elementary School library.
Patrick O’Grady can be reached at pogclmt@gmail.com.
