Letter: Look for Facts in Bias Incidents

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

The May 13, 2024, article entitled "'The Roof is Caving In': Mount Greylock School Committee Hears Details of Bias Incidents." If reported accurately, and if I interpreted the article correctly, Mr. Dravis brought to light some extremely troublesome issues. If prejudice is occurring routinely in our schools and elsewhere in town, especially in those institutions under the auspice of town governance, a clearly reasoned plan must be created and implemented.

Also troubling in the article was "… the meeting also features some of the most frank commentary to date from district administrators about the shortcomings of the preK-12 district's efforts to address the problem." There are other quotes from the district leadership that indicated that as Superintendent McCandless said, "We are really just trying to find mechanisms that actually work. We have invested a great deal of money into this work, and as evidenced tonight by the things people didn't want to be saying because they're living in pain at home-the things we're doing aren't working."

Was any conclusion reached that indicated the next step? It seemed that some believed adding additional DEI efforts were in order. It seemed that others believed we should rethink the whole DEI movement.

Might the next step in addressing the prejudice "crisis" be to look for facts? Narratives are extremely important, and should be taken very seriously, but a closer investigation that values the facts of the alleged incidents might reveal different and/or additional perspectives.



Is there anyone who can argue that DEI is not a controversial approach to combatting intolerance? Is there anyone who can argue it has not furthered divisions in our community? It is difficult to judge because so many people are silent. How do we know what the community thinks? What they value?

Might we use our current confusion and frustration to revisit how DEI was introduced to the town? Was there an attempt to calmly encourage discussion with townspeople who questioned (not even challenged) the principles and strategies inherent in DEI before those principles were put into place ? Were there clearly stated MEASURABLE goals shared with townsfolk that could serve as a basis now as to how we should go forward? Taxpayers are, after all, are expected to pay the bills.

No question that mistakes have been made and by many people on all sides of the tolerance issue. Let us try to correct those mistakes and move on to create a tolerant and flourishing community.

Donna Wied
Williamstown, Mass.

 

 

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Williamstown Con Comm Clears Summer Street Subdivision

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Conservation Commission last week gave its approval for a four-home subdivision on a town-owned parcel on Summer Street.
 
Northern Berkshire Habitat for Humanity was before the board with a notice of intent to build a 260-foot road with four associated building lots on a parcel currently owned by the town's Affordable Housing Trust.
 
The road and some of the home lots are planned in the buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland on the lot currently known as 0 Summer St.
 
Habitat plans to build four single-family, one-story homes priced for residents making up to 60 percent of the area median income on the parcel. The non-profit hopes the town will accept the road and associated infrastructure as a town road once it is built.
 
In addition to determining that the construction would minimize impact on the buffer zone, the commissioners Thursday reviewed the stormwater management plan for the site — an aspect that has been a sticking point for nearby residents who say drainage problems are a long-standing concern in the area.
 
Charlie LaBatt of Guntlow and Associates civil engineering took the lead on walking the commission through the plan to handle stormwater runoff from the increased impervious surfaces in the planned subdivision.
 
"Proposed drainage improvements include a rain garden, which acts for filtering of TSS [total suspended solids] and detention and very little recharge — due to the site's soil constraints — and a culvert that helps allow in one portion of this [parcel] the watershed to make it to that rain garden," LaBatt said. The rain garden and the stormwater management infrastructure has been sized anticipating the development of the four lots.
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories