As Chair of the Hope School Committee for the past six years, I’ve come to deeply appreciate the seriousness with which our town approaches questions of education and fiscal responsibility. We may not always agree on where to draw the lines, but we are fortunate to live in a place where people care about their community and its future.

Writing on behalf of, and collaboration with, the entire Committee, cosigned below, we felt compelled to respond to the recent opinion piece “Hope Votes, 2025.” While everyone is entitled to their views, it’s important to be clear about how our school budget is developed and reviewed, especially when it’s suggested that this work happens without transparency or due diligence. Every meeting of the School Committee is public and held after work hours. So are our joint budget workshops with the Hope Budget Committee. These sessions are noticed well in advance, and everyone is welcome.

That said, the reality is that public attendance at these meetings is usually low. The meetings are open — but they are rarely attended by anyone other than the Committee itself. That’s not a complaint; it’s an observation. Whether the meetings are attended or not, your School Committee is doing its work in good faith, in the open, and on behalf of those who aren’t in the room. We are elected by you, and we take that seriously.

So it’s surprising to read a piece that suggests otherwise, particularly when the author attended the key meeting on April 10 and participated fully. Questions were asked and answered. The process wasn’t rushed or hidden.

In addition, a second public meeting was held on April 17 to give the Budget Committee further opportunity to ask questions of the school administration regarding the proposed budget. We have worked closely with many members of the Budget Committee for several years and have developed a mutual respect for each other’s role and thoroughness, even when we disagree. We’ve come to value these interactions as a sign of local democracy functioning as it should.

The claim that the School Committee and Budget Committee “glossed over” important details doesn’t reflect the time and care that were actually taken — and it overlooks the fact that these meetings, and our small-town hand votes, are the very mechanisms through which taxpayers make their voices heard.

We understand that not every resident sees the same value in school funding, especially those without children in the system, and we respect that perspective. The School Committee is made up of taxpayers, too. We live here, and we feel the same economic pressures. Unlike the author, we are also all parents of current or former Hope Elementary School students, which gives us a personal stake in the school’s continued success. We believe deeply in the opportunities provided by our small school and want to ensure it continues to benefit others.

Despite the academic challenges faced across Maine and the country in recent years, Hope Elementary has not only maintained but improved student performance. The School Committee and school administration are proud of these achievements. It’s truly a school our community can take pride in. The budgets we propose are always the result of careful consideration. They reflect an effort to balance financial realities with the conviction that our students and teachers should not bear the burden of cost-cutting. That’s our position, reflected clearly in the current proposal, and we welcome others to engage with it through the open, democratic process of town government.

One area in need of clarity is Social Emotional Learning (SEL). While the term may be unfamiliar to some, the practices are not. Schools have always helped children learn to manage emotions, build relationships, and make responsible decisions. Today, we simply have a clearer vocabulary for that work.

SEL is not a proxy for counseling children on issues of gender or sexuality, as the article implies. It is a core part of helping students become thoughtful, capable people. It’s not new. It is necessary — and always has been — as it forms the foundation of how we strive to treat one another as a community.

There’s also confusion in the piece about Title IX and federal funding related to DEI programs, particularly an assertion that the Hope Elementary School provides “counseling” on LGBTQ+ issues. That is not accurate. Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in federally funded education programs. It does not require schools to offer any form of gender counseling.

Further, despite “rumors” referenced in the piece, this question was asked, and answered, directly, more than once in the referenced meeting. The Hope Elementary School does not offer any of the gender counseling programs suggested in the article, and the reason they are not outlined in the budget is because they don’t exist.

What Title IX does require is that all students are treated with dignity and fairness. That’s not about politics; it’s about following the law and creating a safe environment for every child. 

As such, while the banner at the school’s entrance reflects a message of inclusion, it is just that — a hello. To be clear, the School Committee does not review or approve signage or day-to-day school programming and curriculum; the sign was created voluntarily by middle school students three years ago, as a reflection of how they hoped to be welcomed into their school. It has hung there ever since. The students were so proud of their work that they attended a School Committee meeting to present it to us. It is not a summary of academic programming; it’s a sign of a healthy, engaged school culture. And again, in the interest of transparency, the school is always happy to share more about what teachers and students are doing each day in the classroom.

We understand that this is a time of economic challenge and differing priorities. But it’s also a time when local institutions, like our school, need to be supported, not undermined. The School Committee’s work is in public, thoughtful, and ongoing. We invite everyone to take part in it. Our doors are open. They always have been.

Co-signed,

Hope School Committee

Timothy Lock, Emily Burgess, Judith Masseur, Nick O’Hara, Ben Odgren