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 Planning Board, Consultants Discuss Subdivision Bylaw

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Planning Board met recently with consultants who are helping the body develop amendments to the town's subdivision bylaw.
 
In a conversation set to continue at a special Planning Board meeting on Tuesday, April 28, representatives of Northampton architecture and civil engineering firms Dodson and Flinker and Berkshire Design Group outlined some of the decision points for the board as it develops a major revision of the bylaw.
 
Unlike the zoning bylaw, for which the Planning Board makes recommendations to town meeting, the subdivision bylaw is under the direct authority of the five-member elected board.
 
The Subdivision Control Law, Article 170 in the town code, was first adopted by the Planning Board in 1959. The current board is looking to do the first major revision to the rules that "guide the development of land into lots served with adequate roads and utilities," since 1993.
 
The town hired the Northampton consultants with the proceeds of a grant administered by the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission.
 
Dillon Sussman, a senior associate at Dodson and Flinker, laid out the scope of the project and the objectives of the board as conveyed to the consultants.
 
"What we understand of your goals for the project is to make small subdivision projects more economically feasible," Sussman said. "We've heard that you think that small subdivision projects are more likely … that there's not much land remaining [in Williamstown] for large projects. And you've had some experience with a small subdivision project that was difficult to fit in your current subdivision regulations."
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories