PITTSFIELD – Thirty people split into groups Wednesday night and made lists of the values they wanted to keep when and if SAD 53 consolidates with other districts, as per the state’s plan. They also made lists of their concerns.

Not surprisingly, local control came up on both.

Losing local control, the participants said, would devastate the solid educational structure of SAD 53, since local control is also what they determined to be one of the district’s strongest assets.

The group that gathered Wednesday represented town officials from all three district towns – Burnham, Detroit and Pittsfield – along with community and business leaders, school board members and administrators from both SAD 53 and Maine Central Institute.

“In our district, we focus on the individual child and family,” board member Rosalie Williams said. “In other words, we want to preserve the culture we have here.”

Williams said her group also felt it was vital that SAD 53 pair with a district that is willing to financially support education.

This was a real concern since SAD 53 has been recommended by the state to pair with SADs 48 and 38. SAD 48, which consists of six rural towns surrounding Newport, has a long history of financial upheaval, with voters repeatedly defeating school budgets and showing a great distrust in their administrators.

The group was also concerned that by getting lumped in with the 11 towns of SADs 38 and 48, SAD 53 would get lost in the shuffle.

Other attributes the participants mentioned as critical to retain included academic rigor, skilled educators, staff accessibility, positive school atmosphere, the high standards of the buildings and grounds, and the sense of family within each school.

“There is a very strong element of caring in our education,” board member Ron Bessey said.

Debt, asset allocation, loss of access to the superintendent and a loss of academic rigor were concerns.

“There was a heavy concern in our group that the state plan is flawed and can do irreparable financial harm to us,” board member Rosalie Williams said.

Nothing that was said surprised Superintendent Michael Gallagher.

“These same concerns we are talking about, other districts are talking about,” he said. “This was exactly what I expected to hear.”

Gallagher said the state has been urging districts to have “conversations” with each other.

“These are going to be hard issues. They talk about conversations but these are going to be tough negotiations,” he said.

At the start of the meeting, Gallagher explained the process that is unfolding toward consolidation. A letter of intent must be sent to the State Department of Education by Aug. 31. Before that, on Aug. 15, another meeting of officials will be held to come up with recommendations for the SAD 53 board. “Tonight’s comments will provide a foundation for [those recommendations],” Gallagher said.

The board will then select a reorganization planning committee and define the role of that team.

A plan must be in place by Dec. 1 and a referendum to approve the consolidation plan would be held by Jan. 15. A new, regional school board would be elected and a superintendent hired.

Nov. 4, 2008, is the last date to get a referendum passed before financial penalties set in, Gallagher said.

“We only have two months to do this. It’s going to a be a very difficult process,” Gallagher said. Noting that SAD 48 and 38 already have a relationship both in meshing curriculums and programs, Gallagher said, “For them to meet the July 2008 start of consolidation is feasible. But where would that leave us? That’s the real piece we are going to have to wrestle with.”