01:00 AM EDT on Tuesday, August 26, 2008

By Maria Armental

Journal Staff Writer

CHARLESTOWN –– Two months after they were first to meet, members of the Town Council and an ad hoc committee charged with studying the town’s educational options last night discussed the panel’s report, which recommends withdrawing from the Chariho regional school district.

The committee recommends establishing a K-8 district and paying tuition to another district, possibly Westerly, to educate the town’s high school students.

Council members had objected to the committee’s findings, saying the report seemed to contradict the town’s stated support of the $25-million construction referendum that will be on the ballot on Nov. 4.

The council also criticized the committee’s releasing the report to the media before it was discussed by the council.

But committee members restated their position, calling withdrawal from the Chariho Regional School District, which includes Hopkinton and Richmond, “the best educational solution” for Charlestown.

Giancarlo Cicchetti, chairman of the withdrawal update committee and a member of the Chariho School Committee, extended an olive branch to the council.

The disagreements, he said, centered on the council’s focusing on the district’s short-term needs and the committee seeking long-term solutions.

Some of the “perceived inconsistencies,” Cicchetti said in responding to a comment from fellow School Committee member Andrew McQuaide, “are really different views along a different timeline.”

While in the short term the study committee “does not oppose” the bond referendum, Cicchetti said, in the long run the district’s long-standing dispute over tax equalization — a costly proposition to a town whose tax base is more than twice the other towns’ tax base –– is bound to resurface.

“Building a preK-12 district is substantially cheaper for the town than is tax equalization,” the committee of seven concluded in its report.

Council members asked the committee to rewrite the report’s conclusion to “qualify that you are not talking about withdrawal right now.”

“I think this committee has done a great work and I think it has put some bricks in place so that Charlestown has some options if it needs it,” said council President James Mageau.

But as to where the council stood in terms of a possible withdrawal, council members remained uncommitted, saying that if the referendum were to fail and, Mageau added, “efforts to remove Hopkinton from the district fail,” the town would “move on” or “move forward,” never verbalizing what that next step would be.

Only Councilwoman Harriet A. Allen said she would favor a partial withdrawal should the impasse continue.

Residents in all three towns appear to support the return of the lower grades to the local elementary schools. However, there is no consensus as to which grades should be reconfigured and the issue of tax equalization is likely to resurface as all towns would have to build new space, committee members said.

(Committee members had considered, and rejected, four grade reconfigurations as part of a possible partial withdrawal.)

But leading to November, council members said, the discussion should focus on supporting the referendum and “educating” Hopkinton voters as to the district’s financial bottom line. That is, while Richmond’s share of the district’s cost this year is 36.03 percent, Hopkinton’s 35.82 percent, and Charlestown’s 28.15 percent, based on student enrollment, once state aid to education is factored in, Charlestown taxpayers foot 33.96 percent of the bill compared with Richmond’s 33.05 percent and Hopkinton’s 32.99 percent.

marmenta@projo.com