School Board Candidates Assert New School Positions as Election Nears

The $31 million middle school warrant article is causing the biggest rift between School Board candidates – incumbent Chairman Bruce Anderson and his challenger, former Selectman Dennis Senibaldi.

On Tuesday, March 5, the two candidates squared off for one last debate at the annual PTA Candidates Night held at Center School.

The first topic discussed was the need for more school capacity and the proposed new middle school to be constructed on London Bridge Road for grades seven and eight.

Anderson, who is in favor of the new school, believes that the capacity numbers presented in the 2011 Facilities Master Planning Committee Report are on target showing that, even including the portables at Golden Brook School, the district is in excess of 500 students over capacity. 

Anderson cited that the committee’s capacity numbers are based on published literature and educational best practices.

Senibaldi, who served on the committee and is named on the committee’s report, disagreed and argued that while the district is over capacity, it is not at a high enough level to warrant a new school.

“Yes, my name was on the original report,” Senibaldi said Friday. “But they’ve made so many changes, my name shouldn’t even be on it anymore.”

When asked about the budget, and any waste in the budget, both candidates stated that the school board works on a very lean budget and there is little to no waste within the budget.

Senibaldi said the population would eventually stop growing since there are only 400-500 lots remaining in Windham according to the town assessor.  Anderson pointed out that at two kids per household, that is 800-1000 more students.

But, Senibaldi said that an average new build only has an average of 0.8 kids per household and a member of the audience pointed out that this equates to 500 new students which is equal to a new school. 

While the School Board fully supports the new middle school, which includes a new turf field at the high school, Senibaldi said the two items should not be on the same bond.

“It’s the manipulation that bothers me,” he said by phone. “They attached the new field to the middle school article. I would absolutely support a new field. I was chairman of the recreation department for six out of 10 years serving on it.” 

Senibaldi pointed out that voters shot down by 70 percent last year architectural and engineering fees to study a new middle school.

“What makes them think now the town will vote for a new school?” he asked.

He did add that he fully supports the school administration having all the tools they need for education.

“They said building an addition to the high school rather than a new school would be disruptive,” Senibaldi said. “This has not happened in the past with additions.”

Questions also centered on curriculum initiatives in the district.  In response to a question asking what was being done to keep the district’s curriculum updated, Anderson discussed the work over the last two years to align it with the national Common Core Standards. 

Senibaldi stated that he thought the curriculum was outstanding, except for teachers needing more space.  He said that Golden Brook Principal Kristi Michaud, said that all she needed was to have the third grade classes at her school return to Center School, and she would be able to deliver the curriculum she desired.

Anderson quickly noted the irony of this statement and pointed out that the addition to Windham Middle School that Senibaldi favored would not allow the third grade to be reunited at Center School.

Another question asked the candidates their feelings about the district making a recent change in the mathematics curriculum.

Senibaldi, who got the question first, said he said he couldn't speak to why the school board did or did not make a decision. Anderson said that this was one of the most public changes in the district’s curriculum in recent years.

The candidates were also asked if they agreed with Article 3 about the proposed teachers contract. 

Anderson said he was in favor of the contract since it restored one step to teachers on the pay scale that was lost in two years of impasse, contained major cost savings in healthcare, and for the first time rewarded teachers, at least partially, based on individual performance. 

Senibaldi stated that he basically agreed with Anderson’s assessment; however, he hoped future contracts would push more health costs back on the teachers.

Anderson wasn't immediately available for comment on Friday, but supporter Kevin Lefebvre spoke to his effort last week.

“Overall, it was obvious that Dr. Anderson had a better understanding on what is happening in the school, the standards and what it takes to support the education of Windham children,” said Lefebvre, who is one of three co-chairs of the Windham Initiative for a New School.

Detailed information about warrant questions is available at windhamsd.org.