image description

Pittsfield School Committee Eliminates Full In-School Opening Plan

By Jack GuerinoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

The school Committee on Monday morning voted to eliminate planning for a full school reopening in the fall. The district educates more than 5,200 children in a dozen school buildings. 
PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The School Committee agreed to eliminate a full in-school education model and asked the administration to continue developing a hybrid and remote model.
 
The committee voted Monday morning during a special meeting to take the full in-person education model off the table and continue working on hybrid and remote options while continuing negotiations with bargaining units.
 
"We don't need you at this point to approve a specific model but to give the administration and the bargaining units more of a direction on which way to spend the majority of our time," Superintendent Jason McCandless said. "As we reach a month away of what is currently the first day of school ... we need to focus meeting time when it comes to negotiating and getting an agreement down on paper."
 
The committee's series of votes directed the administration to submit to the state a preliminary plan that would include a hybrid learning plan as well as a remote learning plan. The district will report that the state's preferred full in-person learning is not a possibility.
 
While the state has been setting up the potential for reopening schools by providing health guidelines, no decision has yet been made by the administration. Gov. Charlie Baker has resisted calls from the federal government to reopen schools — and the possible withholding of federal aid if they don't. Vice President Michael Pence raised that issue at a brief press event with Baker on Nantucket over the weekend, saying he would ensure the Bay State had the resources to reopen schools. 
 
"To open up America we need to open up America's schools," the vice president said, according to a report in the Worcester Telegram. "I support your effort to open the economy, but it's important to reopen schools."
 
The United Educators of Pittsfield posted a statement through social media stating that they wish to resume education in the fall remotely. The teachers' union felt a remote learning period would allow time to fully develop a hybrid learning plan that would work for both students and staff. 
 
Deputy Superintendent Joseph Curtis said they plan to enter into negotiations in earnest this week and the vote allows the administration to continue negotiating a hybrid and remote model. A vote to endorse the UEP's statement would direct the administration to fully focus on remote learning in the fall nixing both hybrid and full in-person models in the statement to the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. 
 
McCandless said although their opinion does differ from the UEP, he said they aren't too far apart in many areas and both agree more time is needed.
 
"There are areas where we overlap and are in agreement with our bargaining units," he said. "We would agree that we are not ready to have kids back to school at the end of August ... We totally agree that we need more time to figure this out."
 
Curtis added that because of timelines the school year will most likely start later into September. He said this is a rough guess and the School Committee would ultimately have to vote on the matter. 
 
McCandless did go through a presentation outlining some of these possible scenarios and first touched on the state's preferred goal of a full in-person school week. Students would have to be masked and stay 3 feet apart. 
 
The administration would prefer 6 feet apart, which just is not possible inside the school buildings.
 
"I think that all of us basically reject the notion that 3 feet of distance is adequate," he said. "We cannot facilitate a full school in any of our schools with 6 feet of distance It almost drives us completely away from the all-day, all-student model."
 
He read through some survey data and noted 56.2 percent of responders would not be willing to send their kids to school for a full in-person school week.
 
But 58.4 percent of those who responded no said they would be willing to send their kids to school if a hybrid model is used that would reduce student capacity.
 
McCandless said there is a sense that some students just benefit from in-person interaction with teachers even if it is minimal and they would like to preserve this in some way.
 
"We do know that it is going to be much better for the educational health and social-emotional health of some of our students to have some version of in-person as soon as possible," he said.
 
The superintendent said although a full remote scenario  is being planned, the district is also developing two separate hybrid systems that would accommodate social distancing by shrinking the student body in the schools at one time. 
 
An morning/afternoon model would split the student body in half for 2 1/2-hour shifts  At each school, a morning cohort would go in leaving sometime in the late morning. The second cohort would then go to school and leave around 3 p.m.
 
Students would be provided core instruction in the building and participate in remote experiences for the rest of the day.
 
McCandless said they believe teachers would need a 45-minute preparation period and would be given a one-hour unpaid duty-free lunch. A 30-minute collaborative planning period would also be scheduled in the middle of the day.
 
Custodial work would take place at this time.
 
This all would have to be negotiated with the bargaining units and would likely extend the workday.
 
McCandless went over a second model, the  "AARRR/ RRRAA" model, in which students would go to school two full days each week and learn remotely for the rest of the week.
 
McCandless said this model provides less consistency and lunch would have to be scheduled as well as frequent mask breaks. 
 
With the half-day model, students would be provided lunch but would eat at home.
 
"Lunch is a concern of ours and this would take eating right out of the picture," he said.
 
Curtis noted that all of this is "rough thinking" and true negotiations would truly guide scheduling
 
McCandless added that according to a survey, 14.3 percent of the student body are in a high-risk category per the U.S. Centers of Disease Control. 
 
With this, he noted there is still a portion of the student body that will simply not feel safe returning to school.
 
Because of this, the plan is to provide a robust fully remote system or virtual academy that will function as its own school for families and staff who are not willing to return to school in any physical form.
 
Curtis said they expect between 1,000 to 1,200 to enroll and roughly 60 staff members.
 
McCandless reiterated that the vote does not commit the district to anything and the committee could still decide to start the school year remotely or fully in one of the hybrid systems. As more information becomes available through the negotiation process, he will brief the School Committee.
 
The School Committee will have to vote on a plan before Aug.10  
 
The meeting went more than three hours and, before diving into presentations, the committee took public comment. Mostly educators spoke in opposition to opening school in person.
 
Some felt the model would not be workable and potentially unsafe. There was also a concern that teachers would spend more time making sure kids were wearing their masks and social distancing than teaching. Also, some felt there would be staffing issues with employees urged to stay home even with minor cold symptoms.
 
There were also questions over ventilation and the use of fans.
 
McCandless said this input along with a staff survey to be released will help inform future planning.
 
"We are not going to come up with a system that is going to thrill everybody so we all have to do our best," he said. "We have to do our homework and we have to do what the data tells us."

Tags: Pittsfield Public Schools,   school reopening,   


More Coronavirus Updates

Keep up to date on the latest COVID-19 news:


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

Lanesborough Looks to the Future of Zoning Bylaws

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Planning Board is reviewing the town's zoning bylaws with an eye to amending zones to align with planning documents and projects. 

Members started at last week's meeting to at priority zoning projects that align with the Open Space and Recreation Plan and the Master Plan that was adopted last year. Earlier in the meeting, the board accepted the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission's draft of the OSRP, which the Select Board accepted late last month.

Town planner Andrew Groff informed the board of upcoming projects that will need to be looked at for zoning purposes to try and stay ahead of the bylaws that aligned in both the OSRP and Master Plan.

"Principally, would be going back and thinking about this idea of a mixed-use zoning district for the northern part of town that's responsive to the growth of outdoor recreation as it is really an industry. So you've got Shaker Ridge, you've got the folks at Donnybrook that proposes a glamping resort, Ramble Wild, and Brodie Mountain just over the town line in New Ashford with some new ownership and expanded interest in some development there, so that's one item that's called for in both."

Groff also explained they need to look into agriculture zones to help local farmers 

"Seeing if we can't do something to better support our farms because we have a couple great little farm clusters in Lanesborough. You know, zoning for agriculture is pretty expansive in Massachusetts. The exemption for agriculture is pretty wise, but we want to take a closer look and talk to some of our farmers and figure out there's some tweaks we can do that would make their lives easier."

He also brought up how they can help fix the zoning bylaws around the lake that are nonconforming and want to look into grant funding to help.

"Work that's going to be done to further protect Pontoosuc Lake, and we have a lot in our master plan regarding the zoning issues on Pontoosuc from the issue that you had mentioned to me, bringing back the citizens who were concerned about building heights down there, but you know, more fundamentally identified in the master plan is the problems with how everything is basically nonconforming. The zoning doesn't conform to what the actual built environment is. That's something we probably want to look into talking with folks in the community planning office," he said.

Groff mentioned there is a ballot question that, if it passes, would mean changing zoning regarding public water and sewer, and affect properties near the lake. 

"There is going to be on the ballot in November a question that will essentially require any community in Massachusetts that has built an environment that's on public water/sewer, you're going to have to reduce your lot sizes to 5,000 square feet. So I feel like if that passes, that has massive implications for that part of town. So, just another one to put out there, but maybe we want to wait to really tackle that with some grant funding once we know what the Legislature's done."

Chair Leanne Yinger said she lives in that area and it already seems very congested, meaning that the passage of the ballot question could have big implications.

She also mentioned another implication for the health of the lake she would like to see happen.

"I would like to see us ban pesticides and people treating their lawns," she said. "Part of the problem of the health of the lake is that when I say that out loud, and I'm saying it out loud to anybody who will listen to me, it is not a popular thing to say. But it is killing the lake."

Yinger said she would like to clarify who governs the sewer system around Pontoosuc Lake, noting the new owner of a friend's house needed to purchase access to the sewer from a private party. Groff said he couldn't remember if it is water district or town, but that there is something "funky" about the governance over there.

"I need to understand what that looks like, because the way it came down was interesting. The line comes in from Pittsfield, but there are people claiming that they have rights to it because they bought into it originally. I just want to understand what that's like and who's saying you're in charge with it, because it seems to me that that's a town-managed situation," Yinger said.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories