Parents, some of you are taking too long getting your kids on the school bus, so said Rochester School Committee Chairman Sharon Hartley on September 4 during their first meeting of the new school year. The discussion was continued from last year when the topic of consolidating bus stops first came up.

New School Business Administrator Patrick Spencer told the committee that the district managed to reduce the number of school bus stops in Rochester from 320 to 257 without compromising safety. Spencer said consolidating six stops on Route 105 and 60-odd stops throughout the town has saved some time bussing students to and from school.

Hartley questioned the bus stop etiquette of some parents who she said she has personally witnessed in the past do not have their children ready and prepared when the bus pulls up, stops, and opens the door.

“It happens over and over,” said Hartley, describing how she has seen parents wait in their car with their child, who then does not exit the vehicle until the bus stops and opens the door, leaving the bus driver, the students on board, and traffic waiting too long. She added that the time some parents take to hug their child, say goodbye, and chitchat with the bus driver is also adding to the time that students have to be on the bus each day.

“I always thought of making a little video,” Hartley said of when she witnesses these occurrences.

There was a slight misunderstanding between Hartley and School Committee member Jennifer Kulak, who wondered if having the children rush across the street to hurry up onto the bus would jeopardize their safety. Hartley reassured Kulak that she was only referring to some stops on the same side of the road as the bus where some parents do not have their child ready by the road when the bus approaches.

Hartley wondered how the committee could get the word out to ask parents to cooperate by having their kids ready to board the bus in a timely manner, without taking up too much of everybody’s time.

“[Because] that’s abusive to everybody,” said Hartley.

Also during the meeting, committee members approved new Director of Student Services Michael Nelson’s funds request to cover the cost of an unforeseen out-of-district placement for one student with special needs. The “not to exceed $69,500” Special Education Stabilization Fund request will be placed as an article on the Special Fall Town Meeting Warrant for Town Meeting approval.

Spencer specified that the cost could be brought lower with changing circumstances, but the total could not exceed the requested $69,500.

In other matters, Rochester Memorial School Principal Derek Medeiros said he welcomed at total of 477 students on the first day of school, including 16 new students who either registered before the end of the school year or entered the district during the summer.

“Derek, it looks like grade two is creeping up in size,” said School Committee member Tina Rood. Medeiros replied that this has been the trend, but for the most part, the new students are evenly spread across the grades.

Medeiros said the new math curriculum, “Go Math,” has been delivered and unpacked with the assistance of some ORR Junior High School students, and teachers have already had their first professional development day pertaining to the new curriculum.

During the meeting, Superintendent Doug White introduced the committee to the new technology restructuring that will eliminate the need to keep the technology director position. Technology needs will now be spread out throughout all six schools in the district instead of each having their own consultant. Staff members throughout the ORR district will take on increased hours and technology roles that will be monitored and tracked more effectively by the central administrative office.

Spencer gave a brief update on the status of the closing of the fiscal year 2014 budget, prompting Hartley to comment, “That might be the briefest financial report in a long time.”

The next meeting of the Rochester School Committee is scheduled for October 2 at 6:30 pm at the Rochester Town Hall.

By Jean Perry

Two Brandt Island Road projects brought out neighbors and abutters whose concerns were heard by the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission at their September 8 meeting.

The first project heard was Brandt Point Village, which has been the subject of storm water management hearings and proposed unit reconfiguration to this cluster housing project that has brought out issues which have been worrisome to the neighbors.

The hearing before the board this night was for an amended order of conditions that would allow the developers to move the remediation location slightly and to increase it by 245 square feet. Al Loomis of McKenzie Engineering represented the applicant J. M. Furtado, Inc. Loomis detailed the modifications that the conservation commission was instrumental in orchestrating. The commission during an earlier hearing had suggested that the applicant construct the mandatory environmental reclamation area at the newer location, resulting in fewer trees being removed and easier access.

Abutters were invited to air their questions and concerns after Loomis’ presentation. All were concerned that the reclamation area would cause more water issues than presently being experienced and that placement of the wetland mitigation near a drainage culvert would overwhelm the system. However, both Chairman Peter Newton and member Bob Rogers explained the prudence of moving the wetland mitigation area as outlined and how it will ultimately benefit storm water management systems at the site.

Abutters were not convinced and countered that they were experiencing water problems now. Newton explained, “This is a natural storm water management system.” He continued, “I’m a hydro-geologist … this should help mitigate water. I’m not here to advocate on behalf of the applicant … but this should help.”

Rogers said, “This will provide slightly more storm water management and it’s a common sense idea … we think it’s a good idea.”

In spite of these explanations, the abutters pressed for more assurances that storm water run-off wouldn’t become worse. Newton said, “This project before us tonight was suggested by us. This application was not for a review of the total storm water management system.”

The application was approved with all the previous conditions in place along with notification to the commission agent when work commences.

The next Brandt Island Road project was a notice of intent by Ron Oliveira for the construction of a single-family dwelling that would require the filling in of low-lying depressions in the topography of the site to create a dry backyard space. Alan Ewing of Ewing Engineering represented the applicant. After review of a 2008 plan that had been approved by the conservation commission at that time and the airing of concerns by neighbors regarding the importation of soils to the site, the commission suggested that Ewing discuss with Oliveira the possibility of putting in a wetland reclamation area. The application was continued for two weeks.

A certificate of compliance was issued to Beverly Moore of 9 North Road.

The commission then had an informal discussion regarding the ongoing studies at the Appaloosa Lane development. Highway Superintendent Barry Denham said that he has been talking to Field Engineering, had not heard from G.A.F. Engineering, and that no conclusions have been reached regarding storm water management issues. He said he needs answers to the correct types of soils at the site and current water table levels, as well as an estimate of the amount of water the developers expect will be handled at the site and will be discharged into the town’s sewer system in order to size drainage pipes correctly on River Road. Newton thanked Denham and asked him to please keep the commission informed.

Conservation Agent Elizabeth Leidhold gave her report that included a recent meeting with Blue Wave LLC, solar farm developers, regarding requests by the DEP that the storm water drainage system be modified at the Crystal Spring site. She also reported that Blue Wave has not sought clearance from Natural Heritage to date. Leidhold said that she anticipates the applicant will come forward with a request to amend their plans in the next couple of weeks. She added that NSTAR will most likely also be applying for permits to install three new telephone poles in the area of the project.

Leidhold said that the commission’s office has received a number of complaints regarding NSTAR because of the severe clear cutting of trees. She had photographs from Tinkham Road and Crystal Spring Road that were startling. NSTAR has rights to clear 200-foot roads for access to equipment and power lines. She noted that there is little the towns can do.

The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission is September 22 at 6:30 pm in the town hall conference room.

By Marilou Newell