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 Planners Finalizing Draft of New Subdivision Bylaw

By Stephen DravisiBerkshires Staff
WILLIAMSTOWN, Mass. — The Planning Board last week gave its final direction to the consultants hired to help the panel rewrite the town's subdivision control bylaw.
 
The town's contract with Northampton's Dodson and Flinker Landscape Architecture and Planning, which is funded by a state grant, expires on June 30, and the consultant is set to deliver a draft document in early July.
 
Last Tuesday, the board reviewed the latest progress from the consultant and considered some of the points discussed at its final, lengthy, video conference with Dodson and Flinker and its team on May 26.
 
Ultimately, plans to take the final draft and make any last decisions before presenting it to the town for a public hearing and adoption by the Planning Board later this year. Its goal has been to make the subdivision bylaw easier to navigate and more contemporary in order to encourage economic development.
 
At Tuesday's regular monthly meeting, Planning Board Chair Kenneth Kuttner told his colleagues he felt a lot of the issues were resolved at the May 26 session, including the development of a regulatory regime that ties infrastructure requirements to the size of a proposed development.
 
He also said he thought Dodson and Flinker's proposed language properly distinguishes between proposed developments in the town's core and those proposed in its rural residential districts.
 
"The thing they suggested, which I thought was interesting, was the 'payment in lieu of' for things like sidewalks in the rural area," Kuttner said in a meeting telecast on the town's community access television station, WilliNet. "So we could keep the sidewalk in the subdivision areas but require in the rural areas, payment in lieu of, which, as he said, would put the urban and rural development on an equal footing in terms of development cost.
 
View Full Story

More Williamstown Stories