Buckfield RSU committee outlines outreach plan, seeks budget clarity before withdrawal decision

The RSU committee meeting in Buckfield focused on preparing public outreach materials and getting clearer budget and staffing numbers ahead of a possible withdrawal vote. The group agreed to finish a trifold FAQ and calendar and to convene again on April 30 to review central-office staffing estimates and transition costs.

Educational consultant Connie told the committee that "Superintendent Alden has expressly prohibited me from meeting with any RSU10 staff without attorney Spencer who is representing the school department present," and said she is submitting written questions to the superintendent so staff responses can be routed through the district. Connie offered to meet with committee member Neil Austin to review February budget documents and said she will provide "best-guess" staffing and central-office recommendations for the next meeting.

Members reiterated that many answers remain uncertain until the committee and consultants can compile a budget for a new district. The group confirmed that the district budget vote is scheduled for May 27 and that a draft budget will be necessary to present to voters. Committee members stressed that collective bargaining agreements "remain in place until they expire," a point Connie said should be included in public materials to reassure staff about immediate contract protections.

On outreach, the committee said it has a Facebook page, has held in-person sessions at area schools, and plans a printed trifold and town-office copies for residents who do not use social media. Aaron was identified as a Facebook administrator; the committee agreed the trifold should include a timeline, key dates (including the primary and November election), contact information for the committee email address, and a list of frequently asked questions with clear, factual answers. One member volunteered to rework the draft FAQs and post them for review.

The committee also discussed logistics if withdrawal proceeds: whether Buckfield Town Office could host central-office functions, potential shared back-office services (payroll, accounts payable) with the towns, and software compatibility (the town uses Trio). Members asked the town manager, Cameron, to help assess space and shared-service possibilities.

Committee members requested more concrete transition-cost examples. Barbara Chow provided a transition budget document that itemized one-time costs (software licenses, laptops and start-up payroll services); the committee asked Cameron to circulate the file and to help clarify which items were recurring versus one-time. The group agreed to invite representatives from districts that have withdrawn (Dixfield and others) and to prepare questions in advance.

During public comment, resident Aelia said the committee should communicate "possible avenues and considerations" more kindly and transparently, and urged the group to address staff concerns about potential job loss and student–teacher ratios. Resident Judy asked the committee to include whether withdrawal would improve educational quality in public materials.

The meeting produced several next steps: Connie will send preliminary central-office staffing figures and meet with Neil; committee members will refine the FAQ and trifold and arrange expert guests; Cameron will circulate the transition budget file and report on town office capacity. The committee scheduled its next meeting for April 30 in Buckfield and adjourned after a motion and second.

No formal votes on withdrawal, staffing or budgets were taken at the meeting; the committee limited actions to scheduling, document-sharing and outreach planning.