Chairman Mark Russo opened the Plympton Selectmen’s meeting Monday night, March 22, with a little lesson in comity.  Comity:  courtesy, considerate behavior for others, a clear understanding of the rules, customs.  “Tonight the password is ‘comity’”.

The board welcomed Lillie Krueger, as part of a continued segment of their regular meetings where a representative of a group or board or committee is welcomed to tell about their organization.  Krueger represented PAYS, Plympton Athletic Youth Sports, of which she is treasurer.  President Amy Hempel was not able to join the meeting.

Krueger told selectmen that PAYS had just wrapped up their basketball season and were able to form four teams of combined 4^th, 5^th and 6^th graders, giving the kids something to do in the pandemic.  Working with Dennett Principal Peter Veneto, PAYS was able to play and practice in the school’s gymnasium.  They even did a little fundraising for the school to get storage units to give the school a place to put the desks and chairs that had been  stored temporarily in part of the gym, Lillie told the board.  “Now we’re looking forward to baseball and t-ball in the spring, “ she said,  “Kids just need to exercise!”

Selectman John Traynor said that he had especially enjoyed watching the games on Face Book, something new PAYS was doing where only one family member per athlete was allowed to attend the games.  “This way,” Krueger said, “they call all watch the games – even the payers.”

Selectman Christine Joy asked if they had enough girls to form a team and Krueger said that they were able to do it.

Krueger said that they are hoping their schedules will be close to normal with the fall sports schedule.  Russo congratulated the group for their dedication.

Under appointments, the board voted unanimously to appoint Christine Kelly as Treasurer/Collector.  Kelly has been the assistant treasurer/collector for several years and is well acquainted with the details of the job.

Another appointment was David Batchelder to the Board of Assessors.   Batchelder had been an assessor years ago and is a welcome addition as an interim assessor until the election is held in May.

Russo brought up the question of making the position of Town Clerk and appointed position.  Christine Joy spoke up and said she had asked for this, that she had spoken with the current Town Clerk Patricia Detterman last week.  She said that this was another step in assuring qualified professionals in key town government positions.  Selectman John Traynor said that he would like to hear from the present town clerk on the subject.  Detterman was present at the ZOOM meeting and said that she thought making the position appointed gives too much say to the Board of Selectmen when it has always been the vote of the people of the town.  Detterman said that the position of Town Clerk is the very basis of town government and it is important for the people to have the final say (at election).

Russo moved to include the article in the town meeting warrant, saying this is only a first step in the process.  The hope is, he said, to have the present town clerk fill out her term and appointment would follow, should town meeting vote in favor of the change.

Another item for the warrant is a $5,000 to $7,000 item to hire a hydrologist to go over the records and recordings with the Dept. of Environmental Protection from Rocky Harvest water company withdrawals on Brook Street.

Town Administrator Elizabeth Dennehy suggested repurposing the article originally used for the Town Administrator search, to change the language so it can be used for other professional positions in the town.

Dennehy said that the Town Properties Committee submitted an article for $300,000 to replace middle and rear portion of the Town House and an article for $7,500 for an assessment of the roofs on the Fire Station and Library.

Dennehy also said there is an article asking for $5500 to refurbish two flagpoles, one at the Town Green and the other at Route 106 and Main Street intersection and $15,000 for general consultant and preliminary design services for any projects related to town-owned buildings and grounds.

The warrant closes the last Monday of the month, March 29.

Traynor said that he would vote to go forward with these articles but wanted to wait to see what the finance committee says before he will say he recommends them.   Russo made the motion to proceed with the articles discussed.  Joy was the second.  The motion passed unanimously.

A matter of concern to selectmen is the Board of Selectmen Member Protocols as well as information sharing among selectmen.  Chairman Russo presented a list of ten items outlining how selectmen should behave during a meeting.

Joy said that the ten items were right out of Roberts’ Rules of Order and the selectmen’s handbook.   “I’m glad you’ve put it in writing, “ she told Russo.   

John Traynor disagreed with several items, saying that there was really no need for such a structure and that it would likely get in the way of free and open discourse. “I believe everything should be out in the open for the public to see… I think that when you say the chair is the arbiter for when the discussion ends, that hampers discussion.”  Traynor said he would like more discussion on the subject before the board votes on it.

Russo defended his position, saying that most of these come right out of the selectmen’s handbook.  A couple of weeks ago the Massachusetts Selectmen’s Association had a webinar on Civility in Town Government.  “The main theme, the almost exclusive thing that was put forth as the way to promote and foster civility was to have rules of conduct exactly like this.”

Traynor continued saying that he would like to see an item on the agenda for selectmen’s items of interest,  “trying to make it easy. …  Put a line that says Selectmen’s Updates and then underneath list all the things like I’ve done.”  They agreed to have more discussion and will take the matter up again.

The next agenda item is the proposal for a cannabis facility on Spring Street in the industrial park.  Russo asked for a vote and suggested a motion to ask the people who are putting this together to ask Town Counsel to make an agreement.  “This commits us to nothing; there are many steps along the way.   They have not purchased the property, or gone through all the permitting, and we have not seen the details,” Russo said. “This is just an opportunity for us to give them a signal that we continue to be interested … enough to explore a municipal agreement with town counsel.”

Joy said she is interested in exploring, recognizing there are still a number of unanswered questions but thinks “we should pursue this.”  Traynor agreed with Joy in that he has a lot of questions and wants to see a plot plan as to just where the property is they are considering and if it’s going to be an issue with Spring Street neighbors, he “really doesn’t want to go down that route.  But if it’s back in the industrial zone, that’s the place it should be.”   

Russo moved that we let the principals involved in this know that the town is interested in hearing more of their proposal and negotiations with Town Counsel.  Joy seconded the motion.  The motion passed unanimously.

Area 58 ZOOM issues

Traynor began the discussion by saying that he has been somewhat negative on the Area 58 operation right back to when he was moderator, “when we changed over from Comcast to Area 58 and they couldn’t provide the same service.”  Traynor said, ‘I want them to be successful,” citing it as the next step in the communications process.  Traynor said he was disappointed in the operation of Area 58 and disagreed with Russo’s assessment of Area 58 as a business model to emulate.  Traynor shared with the board that he felt the operation was “mediocre at best.”   There have been operational glitches and stumbles, and although the director of Area 58 told selectmen at a recent meeting that Area 58 could deliver more meetings and better technology using ZOOM, Traynor gave as an example a Hazard Mitigation meeting that was to be set up on zoom and to tie the Zoom into TV so it could be broadcast at the same time.  “I see that as a significant advance when they can do that.“   The meeting didn’t go off.   The Zoom portion was fine but they couldn’t broadcast over the educational channel simultaneously as they indicated they could.  Area 58 representative said that Comcast was the cause.

Traynor went on to say that when Jon Wilhelmsen had a meeting on the return to school – an important meeting – it failed again.  Traynor said that he wants to see more accountability from Area 58.  “What are you measured on?  How are you measured?  I think we need to talk to Richard (Goulart) again. “ He said he doesn’t think this is an issue where Plympton or Halifax gets more or less time, it’s about how they run the overall operation.”

Russo answered that he appreciates separating the success of shared services, and some operational difficulties along the way.    “Like everyone else, Area 58 is working under COVID situations which makes it all the more challenging.  I have been in touch with Rich about the two meetings and he fully understands the problem and is working on it. “   Russo also mentioned that the Director of Area 58 reports to the Board of Directors of Area 58, not the boards of selectmen.  Russo noted that he is a member of the board of directors of Area 58 and “they are fully aware of some of the things that happen along the way that aren’t quite as good as they should be but they continue to push hard for things to improve.”

Traynor said that Area 58 has the same responsibility as other businesses.  All I’m asking is Let’s make sure that Area 58 gets the message that we want them measured and that we’d like to have them come back and provide feedback.”  Traynor furthered that residents of Plympton who have Comcast paid them $68,000 last year for the operation of this business.

Russo said we will continue to hold them to a high standard.  Joy asked if it is our intent to go live with town meeting?  Russo said he’d like to think about that; there are some pros and cons to consider.  Joy said perhaps they could do a selectmen’s meeting.  Traynor answered,  “Let’s do that.   That would be great.”

Town Administrator’s report

Had a conversation with Carver’s town administrator, looking into possibility of shared services, particularly with the Animal Control Officer.  That position is currently vacant in town and it would be great if we could work out an arrangement, perhaps with a municipal agreement.

Working on putting together an inventory of all of our town-owned vehicles, to put it into a spreadsheet so everyone knows which vehicles we are talking about, rather than looking at separate lists.

The Hazard Mitigation Planning grant is still moving forward and we expect that the project will be completed soon, looking at an August 1 deadline.  When completed it will be a stand-alone plan as well as give the things needed to provide to the Old Colony Planning Council so it can become part of the regional plan.

The Green Communities Grant is moving forward and it looks like we will be able to move forward with the weatherization project at the Dennett School.

We also have still pending replacing the thermostats at the old town house.

Everything is a go as far as the Dennett School is concerned and ready for Town Meeting on May 12.  Dennehy said that she and Town Moderator Barry DeCristofano had worked with Principal Peter Veneto to make the arrangements.

Dennehy told the board that  FEMA and the state are requiring towns to update their floodplain by-laws to incorporate some of their required changes.  Vote to forward this to the Planning Board for a public hearing and also to co-sponsor the article with the Conservation Commission.  Russo moved that the zoning by-law revisionbe forwarded to the Planning Board.  Joy seconded the motion and it was unanimously passed.

Liz Dennehy also announced that she had completed her certification as a Massachusetts Certified Public Purchasing person.   “ A lot of time went into that and some pretty in-depth courses as it relates to procurement.  I’m glad to have that under my belt.”  The board gave its congratulations to Dennehy on her achievement.

Ken Thompson, Plympton’s Zoning Enforcement Officer, asked to speak regarding possible warrant articles from the by-law review committee, especially regarding apartments, in-law apartments and kennels.  He said that from the night’s conversation regarding warrant articles there won’t be any such articles on the warrant for town meeting.  He expressed his disappointment, as these items are frequent, if not daily, questions he has to try to answer in his position as Zoning Enforcement Officer.  Russo said that these items need more discussion and will be heard at a future meeting.  Joy suggested an off-night work meeting.  The board concurred.

Raves:

Joy spoke of the beautiful weather – yard work, sunshine, are all good for the soul.

Traynor agreed, and encouraged people to drive by the great stone wall on  Route 106.  “it’s amazing.  There are daffodils coming up and it will be spectacular!”  Another accolade went to State Rep. Kathy LaNatra.  “She really worked well for us.” Traynor told the board that when one of the places in Kingston got some extra doses of vaccine, she wanted to see them go to the most vulnerable people in town and this past weekend five of our senior citizens were vaccinated.

In another rave, Traynor acknowledged his “Hero” David Batchelder, who at the age of 91 has returned to town government to help out the Board of Assessors with an interim appointment until town election on May 15.  “Thank you, David.”

Lastly he said it was a joy to see the kids getting off the bus.  “It was good to see a little bit of normality.”

Russo said they will be back ifor a meeting in two weeks, if not sooner.

The Plympton School Committee held an interim meeting on Friday, March 12 for the purpose of reviewing the revised plan for more in-person learning time at the Dennett Elementary School. The revised plan was created using feedback from the meeting on February 22 as well as the parent survey which was distributed. Chair of the School Committee Jon Wilhelmsen thanked Dennett Principal Peter Veneto for his work creating the revised plan and the work still to be done to implement that plan. Veneto presented the plan prior to opening the meeting for discussion for both School Committee members as well as members of the public. Speakers were asked to hold their comments to three minutes.

“I completely understand that this is an emotional subject for all involved, for parents, teachers, administrators, and School Committee members and while I anticipate this will not be an issue, my expectation is that all comments, questions, and discussions this evening will be presented in a respectful and professional manner whether or not we agree with everything that is said by others,” Wilhelmsen told those remotely assembled.

Committee member Jason Fraser provided a brief legislative update pertinent to the night’s discussion prior to moving on to Veneto’s presentation. Fraser said he was happy to report that teachers were now eligible to receive their COVID vaccinations in Massachusetts. He said the development was in large part due to the work of Massachusetts’ Senate President Karen Spilka. President Biden also mandated that federally contracted pharmacies must open their vaccination programs to teachers as well. Fraser said they were still working on getting the Governor to allow local Boards of Health and Fire Departments to administer the vaccines directly to teachers themselves. Fraser said that they were also working with Representative Kathy LaNatra and Senator Michael Brady on suspending the MCAS for this year in order to prioritize a return to more in-person learning including social and emotional support. There is legislation in place at the State level to receive a waiver at the federal level for bypassing the MCAS.

Veneto then made his proposal for a full-time, in-person return to school with six feet of social distancing. The proposed start date is March 22. Veneto said that the most recent guidance from the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) on March 9 stated that they expected a return to a full, in-person learning model by April 5 which includes 5 hours of structured learning time per day. Students can choose, however, to remain remote through the end of this school year though it is unlikely that option will be provided next year. As full-time learning is the default model mandated by the Commissioner, a School Committee vote was not necessary to change models. The School Committee did, however, take a vote to approve the plan as presented that night since the start date was earlier than the one proposed by the State. It was unanimously approved.

Veneto went over the parent survey results which indicated that 84.1 percent of respondents were requesting a full, in-person return at six feet of distance with 78 students requesting bus services. Nine students were requesting to remain in a remote model. Veneto said that the school will be following state guidance for remote students by live “streaming” into the classroom.

Veneto said that the schedule for the revised model will be nearly identical to the pre-pandemic one with school hours being from 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. daily. Masks and six feet of social distancing will be maintained. Some of the changes that allowed the school to maintain six feet of distance include moving one fifth grade class to the library, another fifth grade class to the art room, and changing a reading teacher to a first grade teacher for the remainder of the school year. In order for music class to be held, it must be held at 10 feet of distance; something the administration was able to arrange. Wind instruments will not be allowed. Music teacher Carla Pecinovsky thanked parents that donated to allow the school to purchase ukuleles to be used instead.

Veneto said that one of his concerns with the changes is the number of students being dropped off and picked up and the length of the lines. Veneto said he is working with bus drivers to ensure safe protocols are followed. Regarding lunch, Veneto said, “In order to accommodate the kids in the cafeteria, we can’t do it with our current model of having three lunches, so we’re going to increase up to five lunches.” The first lunch will be served at 10:45 am and the last at 12:30 pm. Only 50 students can be accommodated in the cafeteria at once at six feet.

Veneto said that next steps will be securing a letter of commitment from families stating their preference for live or remote and whether they will need bus services for Term three. “One or two kids will make the difference if we can do this at six feet,” Veneto said. Based on survey results, he expects that it will work out. Wilhelmsen asked parents to turn that commitment around as quickly as possible.

School Committee members expressed their gratitude toward Veneto for coming up with a feasible plan that still allows students to remain six feet apart. “I don’t take sole credit for this; this was a lot of people working hard and collaborating and trying to think about what’s best for our kids,” Veneto said. Wilhelmsen said that he wanted those on the call to know that the plan that was proposed was largely the one that was pushed for by parents during the February 22 call. “I think this is right for us at this point,” he said. He also thanked the parents for participating and being part of the discussion.

A parent of a Cohort C student asked if there had been given any thought to allowing the previously fully remote students to gradually work their way into a full, in-person model beginning as hybrid. She called it “daunting” to go from full-remote to full, in-person. “I think the tricky part is that the hybrid model is basically not going to be in existence in about two and half weeks or so,” Veneto explained. He offered to have a conversation offline to see if something could be worked out. It was also confirmed that students on IEPs would still be getting all services necessary despite the model change. Several parents thanked Veneto and his staff for the new plan referring to it as “a relief.”

The Feb. 18 Halifax Planning Board meeting began with Attorney Amy Kwesell present to discuss drafting a defendable decision with regard to site plans and special permits and answer any pertinent questions in order to better inform new Board members and refresh older ones. She also presented on the Housing Choice Act of 2020. Some of the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) members were also on the call. Kwesell has been practicing law for 21 years with a special interest in land use and is a teacher for the Continuing Legal Education and Zoning Conference.

Kwesell explained the Housing Choice Act of 2020 as part of the legislation that included the budget. “What this does to municipalities is they have some mandatory definitions… but one of the most important things is that they require multi-family housing in MBTA communities and Halifax is a MBTA community,” Kwesell explained. “A MBTA community has to have a district of reasonable size for multi-family housing permitted as of right; there can be no age restrictions and it has to be suitable for families with children… it has to be within a half mile of a commuter rail station,” she further explained.

If a community fails to adopt multi-family housing then they will no longer be eligible for grants through the Commonwealth including but not limited to Mass Works, Local Capital Project Fund, and Housing Choice Initiatives.” The MassDOT Complete Streets Funding Program is one such grant. The program provides technical assistance and construction funding to eligible municipalities.

Later in the meeting, Chair Alan Dias said that the Complete Streets Program had been submitted by the Board to the Highway Surveyor. He said that once past that part of the process, he would expect to hear from a representative of the program regarding which projects would make the cut. Board member Amy Troup asked, “Won’t we have to enact the new bill to be eligible for it?” Dias responded saying, “If we do not have some zoning districts that we will not be eligible; we’re eligible for the Complete Streets as of now under this program. If we don’t do something whenever the legislature agrees to give us whatever time frame, then we won’t be eligible after that but right now I believe that those funds have been sort of set aside depending on what we pick.”

The Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) and MBTA will be developing parameters for multi-family housing. Kwessell said she was advising that towns not make changes to zoning until the parameters are released. Kwessell called the Act “not well thought out.”

She said the Act also allows for certain bylaws to be enacted without the two-thirds vote at town meeting. Additionally, some special permits can be granted with a simple majority rather than the normally required four-fifths.

Kwessell began her presentation on site plans saying that when an application comes before the Board, it is important to understand which bylaw is at issue. She said that the Planning Board has special permits for which they are the Site Plan Granting Authority (SPGA) while other special permits are granted by the ZBA. An SPGA may be the Planning Board, the ZBA, or the Board of Selectmen. Regarding site plan approval, Kwessell said, “the purpose is not to regulate the use, it’s to regulate how that use is implemented… there’s been no land court decision that upholds the denial of a site plan for an as of right use… you can’t deny it, you can condition it.” She continued, “With the special permit process there is discretion so there is a difference between special permit and site plan approval.”

When a site plan review application comes in, the Board is required to circulate it to all of the various Boards that need to see it. Next steps would be conducting the public hearing where the Board has quorum, close the public hearing, deliberate, and then vote. During the public hearing, public participation is allowed though it may be limited by time constraints. “Best practices for just conducting these hearings, you want to be respectful to the applicants and the public; you want to keep an open mind, avoid conflict of interests. If there are any conflicts, any question of conflicts, you can always call the attorney of the day,” she said. She also said that an extension from the applicant must be in writing and must provide enough time for all necessary steps to be made. “You want to perfect the decision which is sending it to the Town Clerk’s office,” Kwessell explained. Kwessell said if a motion is made to approve the decision and it fails, the project is denied and it is not necessary to take a vote to deny the project. All decisions must be recorded and filed with the registry.

Once an application is filed with the Town Clerk, it is dispersed to the Planning Board, the Board of Health, the Building Inspector, the Highway Surveyor, the Water Commissioners, the Zoning Administration, the Board of Appeals, the Conservation Commission and the Board of Selectmen. The various Boards then have 30 days to submit feedback to the Planning Board. The Planning Board must explain any divergence from the other Boards’ recommendations in their decision. “The courts have held that for a use allowed as a right, a Board may deny site plan approval only in situations where a plan is seriously deficient in important elements or is ‘so intrusive on the interests of the public in one regulated aspect or another that rejection of the Board would be tenable,’” Kwessell read to the Board.

Kwessell described a special permit as serving to “regulate that special middle tier of uses.” She continued, “There’s uses that are so offensive they’re prohibited and then those that are you know very innocuous and they’re allowed, so then you have this middle section that’s what I consider special permits.” A special permit cannot be refused for reasons that are not in the bylaw and the statute is not more detrimental. Kwessell also added that you cannot base your decision on the applicant but rather on the project. If there are already special permits issued that impact the neighborhood, the Board is not allowed to deny what Kwessell referred to as “the last guy” if the impact is of the same caliber as previous ones.

For a special permit, a public hearing is required within 65 days of filing and a decision within 90 days. For a five-member Board as in Halifax, special permits require that four out of the five vote in favor. The public hearing must be published at least fourteen days out from the hearing.

Following Kwessell’s presentation, Board member Gordon Andrews asked what the role of the Planning Board was in site plan enforcement. “Under your bylaw the enforcement is by the Building Inspector or a designee designated by the Board of Selectmen,” Kwessell said. “So the Planning Board doesn’t go out and police it?,” Andrews reiterated. “No,” Kwessell said.

Michael Joyce with Joyce Consulting Group, who was representing Brookside Construction, met with the Board regarding 300 Plymouth St. Joyce showed the proposed site plan which included the intersection of Plymouth St. and Monponsett St. He said there were six commercial units in the building including Verizon and a bike shop. He said they were proposing a solution to correct a drainage issue that would entail collecting all the stormwater the same way, put new pvc but then bring it out below grade at the curb line to two infiltration areas. Stormwater had been going into the building during some larger storm events. Board member Rick Perry said, “It makes perfect sense to me what they are trying to do there.” Dias recommended that they go before the Conservation Commission as well. Andrews disagreed as wetlands weren’t involved saying it did fall under the purview of the Planning Board to take it under advisement. Dias wished to clarify who did have purview over stormwater management.

The Board also discussed 0 Monponsett St. “If you go down 58 toward Plympton on the left-hand side there’s some concrete blocks there and it’s listed as 0 Monponsett St. and it looks like there’s a stump dump going on in the back,” Andrews explained. He further said that there was a gravel operation and a loom operation with trucks going in and out. Andrews said he had received numerous calls questioning what was going on, what the hours are, and where the site plans are. “There’s a business operation there and it doesn’t look like there’s a site plan,” he explained. Dias asked Andrews for more information and Andrews said he would get a lot number and a map. Dias seemed to think it might better fall under the purview of the Zoning Enforcement Officer.

At the end of the meeting, there was significant disagreement over the meeting minutes from October 15 and whether or not Troup had approved the version that were sent to the town clerk. Planning Board secretary Jo-Anne Snow said that she didn’t make any edits to the minutes that were approved though Troup seemed to feel that a line had been deleted about using Chapter 90 money being spent on engineering to apply for grants. Troup asked that the removal be added back in and everyone on the Board re-sign the minutes. Dias recommended tabling the conversation as all the members that had previously approved the minutes were not present. Troup said, “We do not need a re-vote, what we need is for that to be put into the minutes and that is all that needs to happen.” “We’ll just move that off to our next meeting,” Dias finally concluded after quite a bit of back and forth.

Halifax has seen discussion and dissent regarding PEACE flags being displayed in several Halifax Elementary School classrooms.  After concerns were brought to the attention of the administration and the school committee, the flags were taken down.

At Monday night’s meeting of the Halifax School Committee, Steve Ruisi, representing the Halifax Teachers Assn.,  spoke to the group of almost 200 logged into the remote meeting, defending those teachers who displayed the flags saying their intent was to  create a learning environment to  welcome diversity, tolerance, and inclusion.

Ruisi introduced Lisa Whitney, a sixth grade teacher at Halifax Elementary School who told the committee and those in virtual attendance that “these flags were intended to display unity, kindness, and inclusion.  This banner was hung as a visual representation that all students regardless of race, orientation or abilities are welcome and celebrated in our classroom.  This message is also supported by the HES mission statement.

Alexander Meade, speaking as a parent, not as a school committee member at this time, said he wants a safe, welcoming learning environment for every student who walks through the doors at HES.  “The personal attacks, the slander, name calling and the general disrespect I’ve seen online in recent public gatherings as a result of this dispute seems to be in complete opposition to this project’s intended purpose. “   Meade went on to say that one of the most common lessons that our student body has been taught has to do with the act of bullying.   The definition of bullying reads “seeking to intimidate, harm or coerce someone perceived as vulnerable.”  I am most appalled at the recent classroom discussion that devolved from the ongoing issues at hand.  Despite the ParentSquare letter posted by ‘the great 16’ that reads “we had extremely productive, respectful and positive conversations with our classes this week regarding the PEACE banner that was previously hung on our classroom walls, reports have been made that not only repeatedly but as recently as last week, there was singling out of students based on their beliefs regarding the PEACE flag that didn’t align with the staff views that doesn’t seem productive, respectful or positive.  As a matter of fact, the teachers seem to have taken their platform and views to turn their discussion into an opportunity to pick on certain pupils and become the bullies themselves.“ … “Unfortunately, the only thing that has been accomplished in this dialogue is showing our youth that as long as you agree, you will be lauded and praised, however if you express dissent, the golden rule is waived and your opinion is dismissed as invalid.” …“We’re all attending this meeting tonight because we care about our children.  And they deserve better.”

Mr. Smith, spoke as a concerned town resident and not as an attorney and as a father of a 21 year-old gay son who was at times the target of anti gay behavior at HES while he was growing up.  “While we consider the issue it is important to know that the flags had been hanging for several weeks already without causing any disruption before they were removed.  In an email, Dr. Proulx has said that the teachers violated proper protocol for displaying PEACE banners and that an IMB policy which addresses the teaching of controversial topics was not followed.”  Smith furthered that Dr. Proulx had said in an email that some parents felt politically marginalized by other flags not being allowed and that the removal of PEACE flags was a matter of allowing equal access for different points of view.”   Smith said that he had reviewed the IMB policy and said it was clear to him that because the PEACE flag message was 100% consistent with the emotional learning aspects of the curriculum, hanging the flag was not a violation of the school’s policy.  “The PEACE flag represents all humanity, not just any group and they were hung by individual teachers, not by an organization.  With the stated purpose of the PEACE flag being love and respect for all, I think it is sad that anyone ever suggested that a differing point of view to this message was needed in class.  And it is ironic that a flag that symbolizes support for police has been suggested to represent a message that is the opposite of peace.  No one who supports the PEACE banner being in class has suggested that support for our police is a bad thing.   To the contrary we’re grateful for the heroic service the police officers render in trying to maintain and preserve peace which is why it is a ridiculous misapplication of law to state equal access is the mission here.” …

Saying the issue appears to be a Halifax matter, not a Silver Lake District issue as Peace flags have been displayed for months without incident, Smith asked that each member of the the school committee state their position.

Miss Carroll was recognized by the chairman who told the assembly, “I feel that the American flag stands for all diversity, all inclusion, all genders, all races, all religion backgrounds, no matter who you are.  That’s what the American flag stands for.   I feel we that we have now wasted almost two months of this.  What we’re not talking about is a lack of education that our children aren’t getting by  not being in school five full days.  We need to come to a peaceful resolution regarding this issue and it needs to be done immediately because we are coming up on one full year of our kids not being in school …”

Superintendent Proulx responded, “The flag issue has many dimensions and there is a central point that we want to emphasize in all of this.   Halifax Elementary School encourages and expects the teachers to teach about equality and nondiscrimination.  Our classrooms are special spaces where students learn about being a community member and a citizen.  The school committee and our administrative team recognize that this must be done in a way that creates a safe environment for all students to share and expand their views.  That is also why it is important to assure the classroom environment remains a place where students can feel safe to express their views. Spaces for reasonable rational dialogue are becoming fewer and we owe it to our students to keep classrooms for every member to feel that they belong and are valued.  Our administrators are currently working with our teachers to foster this environment in all classrooms.  This is not work that can be done in a single lesson, and we have confidence in the skills of our teachers to promote values of belonging and community.  We want to assure our community that our administrators will continue to work with our teaching staff to create and teach lessons that prevent bullying  and promote a respect and kindness for all, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and political affiliation.  Halifax Elementary staff know their students and their needs.“  …

“We appreciate the work that has been done and will continue to be done to achieve our collective goals.  A true community classroom for all our values is not created by putting up a single flag, decorating a bulletin board, or even  following a curriculum. This is an issue that must be resolved through the ongoing and daily efforts of a caring, supportive community of adults that model kindness, respect. and a willingness to work together to resolve complicated issues.”

A response from the school committee was read.  “The school committee has been reviewing policies, correspondence, and conversations from both sides of the PEACE flag argument.  Most recently on Friday the school committee was given a detailed timeline of events that preceded tonight’s meeting.  After having a chance to investigate the different complexities of the issue, the school committee would like to issue the following statement: ‘Over the past few months there have been false accusations made and name  calling directed at school committee members and administration including their families.  As an elected board, we are a group of people who do not always see eye to eye, nor do we have the same beliefs and opinions.  One thing we do all agree on is making the best decisions for all our children at Halifax Elementary School, no matter how difficult that may be at times.  Procedures have been put in place by both the town and the school which need to be adhered to in the interest of providing the best learning environment for all our students.  After meeting with the district’s counsel it has become clear that the policies were not followed by the teachers and staff regarding the hanging of the PEACE flag.  As a result, an unintentional divide has been created not only in our town but amongst our student body.  The divide has taken away from the safety of the classroom and in turn, the ability of our children to feel comfortable and welcome.  In addition, it has taken precious time away from their limited in-person learning environment. It is our job to hear the facts and make the best decision for all children in our school.  It is the teachers’ job to foster a safe place for each and every student and to educate them on the curriculum as set forth by the District and the Commonwealth.  We as a committee will continue to support the students, the administration, and the teachers in creating a safe learning environment that accepts and celebrates the differences of our students regardless of race, color, sex, gender identity, religion, national origin, or political stance.  We hope the town will come together to support all of our children and truly be the village it takes to raise  the young people we know grow from our school system.”

Discussion ensued from parents, school committee members, and school administrators, all meeting with the same goal in mind – the education of the students at Halifax Elementary School and providing a safe, loving environment for all concerned.