Resident questions legality, timing of RSU 22 referendum to fund new central office
6495477 · October 16, 2025
Summary
Dr. Eric Jaffe told the RSU 22 school board he doubts whether the district may use $1.6 million in excess fund balance to build and equip a new central office without voter approval and criticized the timeline for the special referendum set for Nov. 4.
Dr. Eric Jaffe, a resident who addressed the board during the public-comment period, told the RSU 22 School Board on Wednesday that he believes the district’s proposed special referendum to fund a new central office is legally and procedurally questionable.
"I find this special referendum request suspicious at this time," Jaffe said, saying the measure would ask voters on Nov. 4 to authorize construction and equipping of a new modular central-office building using a $1,600,000 transfer of a voter-approved surplus fund allocation into an administrative office replacement reserve fund.
Jaffe cited state rules governing use of excess fund balances and said he found no explicit authorization for new construction or equipping in the permitted uses. "State statute provides that when an unallocated fund balance grows beyond the state's 9% threshold in a particular year, the district can disperse these excess funds over 3 years on educational programming, paying for school maintenance project, or decreasing property taxes for residents," he said.
Jaffe also criticized the timeline for the referendum language. He told the board the district did not approve the referendum language until the "09:15 board meeting," leaving roughly 50 days before the Nov. 4 vote and a required public hearing scheduled Oct. 21. "Today is the first school board meeting since the language is approved that provides the public an opportunity to express any concerns; the vote is in 20 days," he said.
Jaffe said the expedited schedule, combined with recent and widespread property-tax increases affecting RSU 22 towns, could make it difficult to secure voter approval. He urged the board to consider alternatives if the timing or legal basis proves problematic.
Board members did not take action on the referendum during the public-comment period; the board announced a public forum on the referendum for Oct. 21 at 7 p.m. in the district library. No board member offered a direct reply to Jaffe’s legal concerns during his remarks.
The transcript of Jaffe’s remarks and the board’s scheduling statements indicate the referendum will appear on the Nov. 4 ballot; the district’s formal public hearing is set for Oct. 21. The board packet or subsequent staff materials would be the source for detailed legal citations and the referendum ballot wording.
