To the editor:
I write to correct a misimpression a recent story in The Edge may have given about the work of our 8-town planning board. (The Berkshire Edge 11/19/2022; Drama and discord at eight town planning board meeting)
Our board of 24 volunteers (representing the eight towns of Sheffield, Monterey, New Marlborough, Alford, Egremont, Great Barrington, West Stockbridge and Stockbridge) has spent the last 2 ½ years studying the educational and financial advisability of merging our two school districts. Over that period, we have held over 150 open meetings. The vast majority of those have been substantive, productive and cordial. We have worked well together despite the complexity of the work and the differing perspectives our board members bring to the table.
We are studying a question that can be simply put but is difficult to answer: can our two districts do better together than apart? By pooling resources, can we offer our students more, while also achieving economies of scale? Would a combined district be better positioned to face the challenges of staggering enrollment declines, increasing operational costs, flat state aid, and, most important, the increasing needs of our students in many areas, including Career Vocational and Technical Education (CVTE), English Language Learners, and social-emotional support?
Our last planning board meeting (November 16) was held to address a different question. One of our now former board members (who is also a former member of the SBRSD school committee and who supports the board’s work) was concerned that certain unhelpful dynamics were hindering our progress. To address that concern, our board voted unanimously to engage an outside facilitator to help with a difficult conversation. While the meeting turned out to be less productive than some had hoped, it did demonstrate that we remain largely united in our commitment to stay the course. With only a few exceptions, planning board members (including our board and subcommittee chairs and vice chair whose comments were not quoted) expressed strong support of our process and our commitment to finish the work begun nearly three years ago.
All voices were heard at our November meeting, as they have been at all of our meetings. No board member (or community member) has ever been denied the floor to express their viewpoint. All views expressed have not only been heard, but considered, debated, and probed, as is our charge. It is only through that process we can hope to achieve our goal: finding the model of operation that holds the most promise for our kids and for all residents of South County.
In addition, all questions and concerns raised have either been addressed by our research team (there are over 60 FAQs on our website, 8towns.org) or remain under study. No question or concern has been ignored.
Two months ago, the SBRSD school committee sent to the press and, simultaneously, to our board, a letter demanding a “pause” of our process and threatening that the four school committee members who serve on our board would withdraw if that demand was not met. The demand for a pause was puzzling. How would a pause serve the stated desire that the board address unanswered questions? What would be the purpose of a pause (of unstated length) other than to slow or block our work? While the letter suggested that a pause was necessary because SBRSD leaders were too busy with other matters, district leaders (in both districts) are always very busy and there’s no reason to think they’ll be less busy in the future.
This work is important to our community. And our board’s resources and time are not unlimited. If, following further study, our board votes to recommend a merger, we need to make that recommendation within a time frame that would allow any new high school in Great Barrington, and the expanded CVTE programming and facilities that are planned, to be right-sized for a combined district. An extended “pause” would effectively kill the merger before voters are given the opportunity to decide that question for themselves.
The Edge article includes parting comments from the outgoing SBRSD school committee chair (who opposes the merger model recommended by our research team) that she “doesn’t hold much hope for [our] group.” I have a different view. Our board members continue to invest enormous time, thought, and care into this work, looking for solutions and common ground. We are being guided by an experienced research team, expert in public school education and finance. Much creativity has been brought to the table, as we have no easy blueprint. Many in our community have expressed their support for this work and are invested in its success. While I don’t know what the final decision will be, I have confidence in our process. I salute my fellow board members who are sticking with it, and I encourage all to become fully informed. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
Lucy Prashker
Alford, Mass.
The author is chair of the Regional School District Planning Board
