Hartland
The committee, which has met for more than 18 months, first defeated a motion made by Windsor for a unified district that would have brought all four towns together, eliminating school choice for Hartland, Weathersfield and West Windsor after students completed the highest grade level in their respective town.
All eight representatives from Windsor and West Windsor supported the option, but Hartland and Weathersfield, with three representatives each, unanimously rejected it.
Windsor’s John Tansey next made a motion to disband the committee, but soon after, Dave Hill, of West Windsor, said a merger between Windsor and West Windsor was something he would support. The so-called 2 by 2, or Side by Side, would merge West Windsor and Windsor, eliminating school choice for West Windsor, and merge Weathersfield and Hartland, both of which would keep high school choice.
But after the discussion, only two representatives from West Windsor — Hill and Pat Eastman — voted in support of merging with Windsor. Even though Weathersfield, Hartland and Windsor voted unanimously in favor, the committee’s rules require a majority of representatives from each town to support any proposed merger. Tim Mello and Elizabeth Burrows from West Windsor voted no, so West Windsor’s vote was 2-2, and the option was defeated.
The proposal was considered an “alternative plan” because while West Windsor and Windsor would have put the merger before voters, Weathersfield and Hartland would not have done so. The ensuing structure, assuming West Windsor and Windsor voters approved, would then need state approval to allow Weathersfield and Hartland to stay independent and remain in the supervisory union.
Burrows and Mello both said they were not steadfastly opposed to merging with Windsor, but wanted to be sure they exhausted all other opportunities first.
Mello said he had a few reasons for supporting a unified district but not a merger with Windsor. He said the resident survey results were not a clear mandate for either a unified district or merger with Windsor and while the taxes were projected to drop considerably for West Windsor if it merged, Mello said he felt other things needed to be considered, including the size of the high school in a merger with Windsor.
“Eliminating school choice is a huge decision,” Mello said. “In my opinion, we need to step back and look at other options. If nothing is as good, we can reconsider.”
Hill said a merger with Windsor presented an opportunity to reduce education taxes and ensure the long-term stability of the Albert Bridge School.
“A lot of people say we need to address taxes and the only way to do that is to look at the budget,” said Hill, who mentioned a petition with 180 signatures earlier this year, pleading with the School Board to focus on lowering taxes. “This option has the ability to reduce West Windsor taxes by up to 40 percent. That is huge. By not hearing what the community is saying and not putting this to a vote, would be a travesty.”
West Windsor was given six weeks to meet with consultant Peter Clarke, who was at Tuesday’s meeting and has been facilitating the process, to look at other merger possibilities.
“We need to see what might be feasible and who it might be feasible to reach out to,” said Clarke, who will sit down with the West Windsor School Board on Thursday.
Earlier, Tansey made a plea for a unified district.
“We have an opportunity to do something very special,” Tansey said. “We can put together a pre-K-12 school to rival any in the region and we could elevate the experience for our children.”
Sean Whalen, of Weathersfield, said he has begun to understand the benefits of a unified district and personally supports it. However, in talking to residents, he said he found few who agreed with him and said he would vote no.
“The rest of the town is not where I am,” Whalen said.
Sarah Stewart Taylor, of Hartland, said she regretted voting no, but said that a unified district is not what her town wants.
The committee is scheduled to meet next in early June to continue the discussion and possibly vote again on recommended consolidation plans to meet the goals of Act 46.
Patrick O’Grady can be reached at pogclmt@gmail.com.
