Williamstown Elects Planning Board

By Tammy DanielsiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
WILLIAMSTOWN — Voters sent a mixed message in Tuesday's election, ousting two sitting members of the Planning Board and turning out in low numbers.

Challengers Andrew Hogeland and Anne McCallum won their seats with respectable numbers over their opponents. Chris Winters held onto his seat despite a vigorous campaign by Nicholas H. Wright.

But the turnout was lackluster for an election that may well set the agenda for the Planning Board for some years to come. The other two seats had no challengers, and neither did any of the other offices up for election.

Town Clerk Mary Kennedy said only 968 of the town's 4,573 registered voters cast votes, or 21 percent.

"It's not as big of a turnout as I had hoped for; I believe that if the elections were to choose selectmen, the turn out would have been much higher," she said earlier in the day, after only 600 had voted. Even with another five hours to go, the number didn't crack a thousand.

<L2>The turnout may have been indicator that townspeople weren't exactly clamoring for the appointed board to be put on the ballot. The matter had been placed on the town warrant by petition last year after the board had been wracked by several controversial decisions.

It passed by only three votes at a town meeting attended by a couple hundred voters. Hardly a mandate. In fact, within the three races, some 482 votes were blank — nearly half those who voted.

In the race for the four-year seat, Winters polled 642 votes to Nicholas Wright's 279. The two men had kept up a spirited debate in the letters to the editor sections of the local papers in the last days of campaigning. Both also had parked pickups with large signs touting their candidacies in the parking lot at Williamstown Elementary School.

Winters, who had been at the polls since before they opened at 7 a.m., seemed happy it was over. "It's been a long day," he said as he wheeled his two young daughters out of the gym in a red wagon covered with handmade signs.<R3>

Anne McCallum, who bested incumbent John Holden 470-422 for the two-year seat was also brief. "It's so pleasant to be elected; is that enough?"

Incumbent George Sarrouf found himself on the outs when his challenger, Hogeland, garnered 521 votes to his 331 for the three-year seat.

"I think it was better the way it was," said Sarrouf, a longtime civic activist and retiree. "Because a few people were pushing an agenda ... this is how they did it, unfortunately."

Earlier in the day, he said he'd "be able to put more heart and dedication into my work if elected" because he had the time. He also had mentioned he might not run again, didn't rule it out after the results were posted. "I would consider it. I would."

"I'm very pleased with the voter turnout and that the weather was great," said Holden earlier in the afternoon. "I didn't actually plan on running, I'm not a politician and if I am to lose this year who knows if I'll run again. We'll just have to wait and see what the next time brings us."

<L4>Patrick Dunlavey, who polled 719 votes in his unopposed run for the one-year seat, thought the election worked out all right.

"I think that going forward we'll have a much more proactive bunch of people working together," he said.

The fifth member of the board, Richard DeMayo, won 783 votes for the unopposed five-year seat. Beginning next year, one five-year seat on the board will be up for election.

No other seats were contested; vote totals can be found at the Williamstown Web site by clicking here.

For look at the election earlier Tuesday afternoon, click here.

iBerkshires intern Jenn Atwell contributed to this report.
If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Mount Greylock School Committee Moving Superintendent Evaluation to Fall

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass.—The Mount Greylock Regional School Committee this month discussed moving its evaluation of the superintendent from the spring to the fall starting in 2027.
 
Chair Julia Bowen brought the idea to the table as part of her proposed calendar for the committee's work during the 2026-27 academic year, saying that a move to the autumn will allow the committee to factor data from the preceding year into its evaluation.
 
"To the extent that [Superintendent Joseph Bergeron's] goals are tied to school performance and, specifically, MCAS [scores], we don't get that or other end of school year summative information until the fall," Bowen said. "Many schools I've worked with and know of actually moved their school leader evaluation to the fall so they can take advantage of all the data that's actually available, rather than doing it in the June time frame.
 
"The other point on that is, as it is, we otherwise vote for Joe's goals in September/October and evaluate him in May, and that's not a year. If we can do it fall to fall, we actually get a full year of work from when we agree on the goals."
 
The committee's most experienced member, Carolyn Greene, raised a concern about breaking with the practice of completing the evaluation process in May and June.
 
"It feels natural to evaluate a superintendent at the close of a school year, not the beginning of a school year," Greene said. "We're still in it in May and June. We're still in it in terms of our mindsets. Sometimes we don't meet in July. We come back in August and do a ‘retreat.' We're now meant to hit the ground running with an evaluation in September based on the work of the previous school year. And the reason is we don't get all the data from the previous school year until September.
 
"The rhythm is off for me. But it could just be that I'm so used to the previous rhythm. I don't want to oppose it. I just do have some reservations about it."
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories