Williamstown's Zoning Proposals Spark Questions on Future Planning

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — A member of the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee last week questioned why its parent committee is moving ahead with an ambitious proposal to redo zoning in the town while the comprehensive plan process is just getting started.
 
Sarah Gardner raised the issue early in Tuesday's meeting, attempting to get the town's planning consultant to weigh in on whether the Planning Board should hit the pause button on its effort to bring zoning bylaw change proposals to May's annual town meeting.
 
"In general, when starting this year and a half long master plan process … do you think it's a good time for the town to hold off on making major zoning proposals?" Gardner asked the consultant from New Hampshire's RKG Associates. "Because there is a big townwide zoning proposal being put forth right now.
 
"I'm concerned about the timing in that we're just getting started on this committee, and we have a robust and thorough plan to get engagement in that process. Based on your past experience, what's your take on that?"
 
Steering Committee Chair Stephanie Boyd, a member of the Planning Board, jumped in before the consultant could address the concern.
 
"To some degree, Sarah, that may be beyond the scope of what our work is here on the comprehensive plan," Boyd said. "We're looking at future issues, and that is more of a current issue on the Planning Board.
 
"You can call the [consultant] team after this and ask them, but it's not on the agenda for this meeting."
 
Boyd and Planning Board member Peter Beck, who also serves on the Comprehensive Plan Steering Committee, suggested that Gardner bring her concerns to the Planning Board at its meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 8, where it will continue its discussion about potential bylaw amendments.
 
The comprehensive plan – formerly known as the master plan – is a state-mandated document intended to guide future development in a community. It is designed to serve as a vision for the next two decades. The last iteration of the Williamstown Master Plan was drafted in 2002.
 
The elected Planning Board appointed nine community members to serve with Beck and Boyd on the steering committee to guide the master plan process; at its late January meeting, the Planning Board approved the recommendation of the steering group to rename its product to a comprehensive plan. 
 
The comprehensive plan process is scheduled to be completed by May 2023, meaning that any zoning changes that might be informed by the final document would not come to town meeting until May 2024 at the earliest.
 
Later in Tuesday's CPSC meeting, during a discussion about the "land use" section of the comprehensive plan, member Justin Adkins, while twice saying that he did not want to "step on a hornet's nest," invited Gardner to elaborate on her concerns.
 
"It seems like this is quite the hot topic in town right now, land use," Adkins said.
 
"If we're going to go ahead as a group here and have this conversation, it feels, to me at least, like this conversation is moving ahead in another arena, under the Planning Board."
 
Gardner agreed.
 
"The essence of this comprehensive planning process is land use, and there is this proposal to rezone the entire town," she said. "I just wanted us to think about the logical sequence. If that's going to go through, I'm not sure what we're doing on this Comprehensive Plan Committee – if the town is going to be rezoned before we get through this process, to put it in the bluntest terms."
 
Beck replied that whatever proposals may come out of the Planning Board's deliberations or may pass at town meeting, the land use section of the comprehensive plan will continue to be relevant in future zoning questions that come up in town.
 
"I think if we passed all of [the proposals] to consider at town meeting or none of them or anything in between, these would still be essential questions after May," Beck said. "I think the Planning Board is doing important work considering these questions because they're so central to what the Planning Board does. I don't think there's any version of what the Planning Board could pass that doesn't mean these questions aren't still alive for us.
 
"It will be an important issue for next year's Planning Board and the Planning Board after that and the Planning Board after that. These are important, enduring questions."

Tags: master planning,   zoning,   

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

Letter: Incomplete Picture from Greylock School Committee

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

At the October Mount Greylock School Committee meeting, there was much celebration over the student growth percentiles (SGP) from last year's MCAS test data (Spring 2026). Growth is worth celebrating. But I worry the meeting, and the coverage of it, left families and our community with an incomplete picture of how our students are doing in math.

"Growth" sounds like it means scores went up, but that isn’t quite what SGP measures. SGP compares each student to students in the state who scored about the same the year before, then ranks how they did this year against that group. If a whole group of similar students decreases, the student who decreases the least can still earn a high growth percentile. A strong SGP tells us our students did better than their peers who scored similarly the year before. It doesn't tell us whether they are at grade level.

For example, the current 6th grade class at Williamstown Elementary School (WES) has decreased in their grade-level math proficiency every year since their 3rd grade MCAS. In 2024, 64 percent of the class was meeting expectations; in 2025 48 percent were at grade level, and in 2026 only 33 percent of their class met grade-level expectations. Our current WES 5th grade class follows a similar trend, with 48 percent meeting grade-level math expectations last year vs 56 percent meeting expectations in 2025 when they were in 3rd grade.

Not every class follows this pattern; our current 7th graders gained to 62 percent last year. But seeing entire classes decrease is something that deserves our attention.

Growth comparisons across the state provide useful information, but they do not tell the complete story. We also need to look at where our students are in terms of grade-level proficiency and how those numbers are changing from year to year within the Mt. Greylock school district. This will be our first year with the math interventionist role filled at WES and our second year with the new i-Ready curriculum.

As we watch whether these changes are working, I hope the School Committee will discuss proficiency alongside growth in its public meetings, so our community can see the full picture. Growth matters, but it isn’t enough if fewer of our kids are reaching grade level each year.

Sincerely,

Jenna Hasenkampf
Williamstown, Mass.

Hasenkampf is a parent of WES students in Grades 2 and 4.

 

 

 

View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories