Pittsfield Sees Legal Threats Over PHS Report

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — City officials say they have received informal threats of legal action if the redacted Pittsfield High School investigation report is released. 

The report was placed on the March 25 School Committee meeting under executive session, and member Ciara Batory argued that the body already voted to release the report by Feb. 18, not review it privately and vote on it again. 

During the meeting, Mayor Peter Marchetti, committee chair, reported that there were threats of legal action if the redacted report were released.  

On Monday, iBerkshires reached out to the mayor's office to clarify the threats. One of the report's subjects and two school unions have said they would consider legal action. 

"We have received written communication from a lawyer representing an individual who is a subject in this report that they will 'pursue all available legal remedies.' In addition, we have received notice from two of the school unions that have indicated they will consider all appropriate legal actions," Catherine VanBramer, director of administrative services/public information officer, responded via email. 

 "Any decisions to release the report would require a majority vote of the School Committee." 

Five past and present PHS staff members were investigated for alleged misconduct, and allegations were found to be "unsupported," according to executive summaries released by the last term's committee. 

Scheduled for the last School Committee meeting was an executive session to discuss an "item of litigation, release of investigation reports." Before the private session, Batory asked if there was active litigation or a specific legal claim. 

Marchetti, chair of the committee, reported: "There are threats." He said some of the School Committee members went to the Mercer Administration Building to read the report, and Batory said they had already voted to release a redacted version of the report. 

He said the motion was for the report to be reviewed by the School Committee before it was released to the public. Batory disagreed and said her motion in January, at his recommendation, was to release a redacted version and have the School Committee review it to ensure they aren't handed a blank piece of paper. 



At the Jan. 28 meeting, the committee voted to release the PHS investigative report with required redactions to comply with all applicable state and federal privacy and confidentiality laws, and to protect the safety and dignity of all individuals involved. The deadline was set for Feb. 18. 

Members agreed to review it beforehand, and Marchetti said: "It won't be released until the School Committee has approved that version." 

Batory voted against the executive session on March 25 because she said the report's release had already been voted on. The committee later took up her request to release the report with required redactions. 

She said she did not put the item on the agenda, and that the public expects school officials to handle this with fairness, consistency, and accountability. 

"… My motion is that we already voted, and that nobody wants to follow Robert's Rules, and that we follow a procedure, and people expect us to follow a procedure, because that's what's fair, and that's all I have to say about it," she said. 

Robert's Rules of Order is the standard guide for parliamentary procedure. 

Marchetti said they had the conversation in executive session that "one person voted for one thing, six of us voted for another," and said they can move on or vote on another motion to release the redacted report. 

Batory maintained that she objected to voting on a matter that was already decided, and added: "We can't change votes just because the outcome is uncomfortable, that's not how the process works."  

"I want to express concerns about what appears to be an inconsistent application of procedure," she said. 

"When rules are applied differently depending on the situation, it undermines the integrity of this body and the public trust in our decisions." 

She reported that there were "serious" other concerns raised, such as individuals who came forward during the investigation not feeling heard or taken as seriously as they should have been.


Tags: investigation,   PHS,   

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

BRTA Focuses on a New Run Schedule

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — The Berkshire Regional Transit Authority is still working on maintaining its run schedules after dropping the route realignment proposal.

Last Thursday's meeting was Administrator Kathleen Lambert's first official meeting taking over the reins; retiring director Robert Malnati stayed during a transition period that ended last month.

Lambert is trying to create a schedule that will lessen cancellations. There was a two-hour meeting the week before with the drivers union to negotiate run bids and Lambert is working with the new operating company Keolis, which is taking over from Transdev.

The board spoke about anonymous emails from drivers, which Lambert said she has not seen. iBerkshires was not able to see those letters, but has received some. 

"They were lengthy emails from someone describing themselves as concerning BRTA employee, and there was a signed letter from a whole group of employees basically stating their concerns. So, you know, to me, it was a set of whistleblowers, and that, what my understanding is that this really triggers a need for some type of process to review the merits of these whistleblowers, not going to call them accusations, but basically expressions of concern," said member Stephen Bannon.

A letter iBerkshires received spoke of unhappy drivers who were considering quitting because of decisions being made without "input from frontline staff," frustration and falling morale, and the removal of the former general manager shortly after Lambert came in.

Lambert said it's difficult to navigate a new change. She also noted many drivers don't want to do Saturday runs and it has been hard negotiating with drivers on the new runs.

"I would like you all to keep in mind that the process of change is super difficult. Transdev has been here for 20 years, and some of these drivers have never known any other operating company, the way some of the operations have been handled has been archaic," she said. "So getting folks up to speed on how a modern transit system works is going to be painful for them. So I don't want to say that I'm unsympathetic, because I am sympathetic, but I am trying to coax people along with a system that's going to seem very strange to them."

The board spoke about better communication between them and Lambert, citing cooperation will be best moving forward.

"There's just a lot of stuff in the air right now, and there are a lot of fires to put out to make this a coordinated effort. And if we don't keep our communications open and be straightforward, then you get blindsided about how you know the input that you could get from us about your position, and how you know what's going on in your direction, and we get blindsided. And I think that we have to make sure that this is a collaboration," said member Sherry Youngkin.

"Both sides have responsibilities, because in the long run, this advisory board is going to have to make decisions as to how we brought forward and if we've gone forward in a fair and helpful way. And I think that's hopefully what everybody is looking for also." 

Transdev and Keolis held a three-day recruiting event interviewing almost 40 candidates and offering jobs to eight, but only three stayed on to start training. Lambert said it was disappointing but she will keep trying to retain more people.

In her first report to the board, she noted that ridership dipped a little over 10 percent, but still remains higher than last year, adding that was because of cancellations of services because of the lack of drivers.

Like the last meeting, some of the advisory board members were torn over the start of the Link413 service, worried that the start of the service took drivers away and the numbers of riders are low.

Lambert, however, said the ridership has doubled from last month.

"As I've spoken before, we have, generally, a six-month adoption for brand-new service before you can really go in and evaluate, are you being successful based on the grant that my predecessor wrote along with the team for PBTA and RTA, we are ahead of schedule, which is pretty good, so I'm hoping that will continue to improve," she said.

Member Renee Wood said the board never approved the service, adding the only thing she could find in the minutes was a vote to accept the equipment. She said it was supposed to be put on the agenda to discuss.

"The Link413 service has been three years in the making. It's been a grant that was accepted and has been working with our partners, PVTA and FRTA, to put into place. So I don't have the entire history of how that process worked, but it's been three years in the making, and did we not understand that once we accept that grant that we were going to put in new service?" Lambert said.

The board discussed if Title VI, the Civil Rights Act, was followed with an accurate review and accurate amount of time for public comment period on the service changes and if its attorney should review if the  grant conditions were properly followed.

Lambert said changes had the 60-day comment period included in the proposed route realignment packet, giving the opportunity for the community to respond to that as well but will look into the legality of the situation with their attorney.

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories