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.

Local Authorities Responding to State's Action on Kratom

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Board of Health on Monday began a discussion about regulating the sale of kratom products in town.
 
The board's monthly meeting came four days after the governor's office in Boston announced that the commonwealth temporarily will designate kratom, also known by its chemical name and marketed with the term "7-OH" as a Schedule I drug, greatly restricting its sale in Massachusetts as of Aug. 28.
 
The board already was meeting virtually with the director of South County's Tri-Town Health Department on a different matter. Jim Wilusz stayed on the conference call to discuss the implications of Gov. Maura Healey's Thursday announcement on 7-OH, which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has called potentially "The Next Wave of the Opioid Epidemic."
 
Wilusz said he already was working on draft regulations for Tri-Town based, in part, on an ordinance enacted by Northampton before Gov. Maura Healey's announcement. But in the wake of the announcement and the classification of kratom as a Schedule I drug, he might have to change the language of the proposed ordinance.
 
Healey's emergency order of Aug. 14 is intended to "give local boards of health and other municipal officials additional authority to take enforcement action against retailers selling kratom products," according to a news release announcing the move.
 
"I was actually hoping they were going to pass a statewide ban on this thing," Wilusz said. "This goes into effect Aug. 28, so effective the 28th, they can't have kratom in the entire state on their shelves with a one-year [period] to give not only boards of health but, possibly, the Legislature, time to enact regulation.
 
"I don't know if the intent is to work on a statewide Department of Public Health regulation, which would be ideal, where you would have uniformity across the entire state. It does authorize the boards of health to enact local regulations."
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories