Rochester’s Planning Board Tuesday delayed signing the draft decision to allow Blue Wave Solar and BWC Snows Pond LLC to build a solar-energy array at 0 Cushman Road after the applicant’s representatives raised concerns about one of the decision’s conditions.

            BWC Snows Pond LLC Managing Director of Solar Operations Aaron Simms, appearing on Zoom, asked for an alternative to complying with the condition that contractors on site use equipment only with bio-hydraulic fluids.

            Simms said vendors have all told the company the same thing, that meeting this requirement is hard to do. The contractor hired for such a relatively small operation would have to drain all their hydraulic equipment, he said, a burdensome, expensive process that lead vendors to not even bid for the job. The size of the operation would not make it worth the effort.

            “A larger firm could handle it,” Simms said. “I am not confident they would be interested in a project of this size.”

            Simms asked if instead the company could fund a bond to front the risk of a fluid spill into the groundwater “for any issue that might come up,” he said.

            Planning Board members were firmly against any compromise.

            “You being in a groundwater protection district requires this condition,” Planning Board Chairman Arnold Johnson said. “No one has been given a pass on this before. Ninety-eight percent of our homes are on wells. Our job is to protect the townspeople’s wells.”

            Johnson noted, however, language could be added to make an exception for smaller equipment, specifically skid-steel loaders and pile drivers. “Nothing bigger than that,” he said.

            Simms asked if a designated equipment size could be the exception. Johnson said no. “We haven’t made any exceptions with solar projects before,” he said.

            Simms and the project’s engineering consultant Andrew Hamel, who was attending in person, then quietly agreed to have this lone exception added to the draft decision. “So now we will wait to see the revised language,” Hamel said.

            Concerned abutters of the 31-acre parcel where the 12.55-acre solar array will be built in a Residential/Agricultural District and a Mattapoisett River Valley Watershed and Groundwater Protection District were again in attendance, but Johnson said he could not let them speak because the public hearing had closed.

            Johnson noted that once a decision has been filed, complainants or the applicant will have 20 days to appeal that decision. The Rochester Zoning Board of Appeals will then judge whether it was an appropriate determination but would be unable to change the decision language.

            In other action, the Planning Board endorsed an Approval Not Required application for a plan to sell off land at 52 Wolf Island Road. From the house lot there, 2.5 acres are being sold off, and a 6-acre bog is being sold to the Buzzards Bay Coalition.

            The board also endorsed an ANR application to modify an internal lot of around 40,000 square feet at County Road and Cranberry Highway for a proposed self-storage building project there.

            Upon the applicant’s request, the board continued its hearing into the Site Plan Review application for JPF Development’s plan to construct a 15-acre self-storage facility at Kings Highway and Route 28 until March 26.

            The board agreed to contract Ken Motta of Field Engineering to review the Planning Board’s rules and regulations at a cost of “up to $3,500.”

            The board discussed one of the Zoning Bylaw articles it will submit for the May 13 Annual Town Meeting warrant, a bylaw change to regulate the battery systems installed at solar-array projects. Johnson said specific language for this article is not necessary before the warrant deadline of March 22, only “place-holder” language. The board intends to have the specific article ready for its next meeting.

            The Rochester Planning Board will meet next on Tuesday, March 26, at 7:00 pm at Town Hall, 1 Constitution Way.

Rochester Planning Board

By Michael J. DeCicco

            An unsuccessful appeal of a book by Rochester resident Sandra Bock was heard by the Rochester School Committee at its February 28 public meeting.

            Referencing Policy IJR regarding Reconsideration of Instructional Resources, Old Rochester Regional Superintendent of Schools Mike Nelson explained that the book “It Feels Good to be Yourself” by Teresa Thorn had been appealed by Bock to the library standards committee and the school library.

            The standards committee, he said, voted unanimously to uphold the decision to continue to carry the book in the Rochester Memorial School Library. Nelson then met with Bock to hear her concerns and upheld the decision of the standards committee. Bock then appealed the Rochester School Committee.

            Once the decision is made, instructed Nelson, the policy dictates that reconsideration of the book in question should not occur for the next three years. The committee would vote to uphold the decision to include the book in the RMS library but not unanimously.

            “I just want to say compromise, that’s what I’m stressing for … this world needs to compromise more,” said Bock, who considered the outcome of her appeal to be a complete refusal to reach a compromise. “Maybe I didn’t present my case forceful enough, but I am adamant about the damage that this book will instill in youth in the days, the weeks, the months to come. … If indoctrination is a matter of teaching ideology, it’s wrong when it misleads students.”

            Bock, who classifies herself as a career educator, asserted that the book in question misleads children by instructing that there are more than two biological genders.

            “That’s a fact!” said Bock. “The book says your parents guessed at what you were when you were born. … Kids who have a weak sense of identity tend to be more likely and therefore more successfully brainwashed. The indoctrinated thinking is stated throughout the book until there is acceptance of it without question.”

            Bock cited professional criticism of the book from Dr. Jason Rafferty, MD (helpingchildren.org), whom she says puts the onus for developing children’s identity is the job of the family, not educators.

            Bock considers the indoctrination of children into the ideology espoused by the book appealed a form of discrimination. She appealed to the School Committee to compromise by keeping the book off the library shelves and “behind the scenes” or in the adjustment counselor’s office. She asked the committee to consider the topic of gender confusion sensitive and not appropriate for an elementary school “where educators are not licensed to answer questions of young children.”

            Bock insisted that children with access to the book will seek answers as to its meaning from their teachers. “Teachers are influencers, they know everything (in the minds of young learners),” she said.

            As an educator, Bock said she has vetted many books that affirmed imagination but not fiction.

At the conclusion of Bock’s remarks, Committee Chairperson Sharon Hartley reminded meeting attendees a process exists whereby parents and guardians who wish that their children not have access to a particular book can talk to the librarian.

            “We respect our parents, and a parent can request that a student not read or see a certain book, not follow a certain book or a certain collection of books or an author,” said Hartley. “Those are possible through the work of our really talented and terrific librarians.”

            Interrupted with a question from the audience as to how that works, Hartley acknowledged the merit of the question but said the committee was in the middle of a public hearing and public comment would be offered attendees at the end of the meeting agenda.

            With that, Hartley invited comment from committee members, and Anne Fernandes asked how parents know what books are in their children’s school libraries. Nelson confirmed that the library catalogue is posted on the ORR District website.

            Member Robin Rounseville said the book has been through the vetting process. “I feel strongly that this book should remain accessible in the library,” said Rounseville. “In terms of a compromise, I believe that a compromise is there. If you do not want your child to see this book, then you have the ability to inform the librarian.”

            Rounseville said she read the book and read all the submitted public comments and estimated them to be “about 50-50.”

            Hartley supported Rounseville’s comments and said the criteria and the established process was adhered to.

            Citing ORR’s Responsive Classroom protocols for age-appropriate education, Fernandes said the book is geared toward ages four to eight but considers it inappropriate for RMS students.

            “I’ll put that right out there,” said Fernandes. “If it were up to me, I wouldn’t have it in the library at all – period. But I think having a compromise about where the book might be placed …” Fernandes considered the librarian’s desk and the social worker’s office as appropriate options.

            Nelson clarified that opting out by a parent is a “practice” but not “policy” per se. Hartley said when librarians have spoken at public gatherings about other books in recent years, they have emphasized the parents’ ability to opt out for their children.

            Member Kate Duggan asked if a student reads a book and has questions, how would that be handled in school. Nelson said it would be handled on a case-by-case basis. RMS Principal Heide Letendre said the first move would be to consult with the parents.

            Attending the meeting remotely, member Jason Chisholm pointed to the consistency of the committee in leaning on its experts.

            “I appreciate the concerns, I appreciate the perspectives. At the same time, I think what we probably don’t talk enough about is that, as parents, we are responsible for our children, and we should definitely recognize the influence that we have in our own households and in the messaging … morals … and the expectations that we set for our children,” said Chisholm. “While I appreciate that there are outside influences, I think everybody in this community should take some time and think about what are the conversations that you are having with your children, what are the expectations that you are setting within your household, and how confident are you that your voice is one of the loudest voices that your children are hearing?”

            Chisholm concluded his remarks by qualifying his apparent lack of an opinion on the appealed book by stating his belief that parents who feel threatened by the potential for outside influences diminishing their own voice in their children’s minds have a far greater problem to address than what’s on the library shelves.

            He did side with the viewpoint that the compromise exists in the parents’ right to opt out for their children but also recommended that it be better communicated to the community.

            “I’m prepared to support the professionals that we have in this school to make these decisions,” he said.

            With that, the committee voted 4-1 to keep the book in the library.

            Fernandes, the lone no vote, restated her position that the committee’s decision is inherently conflictual with the theory and practice of ORR’s Responsive Classroom.

            During the Public Comment section of the meeting, Michelle Cusolito read a letter cosigned by 500 people into the record supporting the reading and not the banning of books.

            Michael Kovacevich, an adjustment counselor, addressed the meeting, saying that those going through gender-identity issues, had nothing at their disposal 10 or 20 years ago. He said the book is not being forced on anyone but is a resource for those who experience confusion.

            Jeff Costa, who has a daughter at RMS, said it is a shame that a parent needs to second-guess their school system. He said gender identity should be brought up in the home.

            Jim Ramsey said he had braces and was relentlessly bullied and has zero tolerance for bullying. “I also believe it’s a parent’s job to deal with their children’s problems as they see fit,” he said, qualifying his remark to confine school to traditional learning but not about physical differences.

            Amanda Costa, self-identified as Jeff Costa’s wife, urged everyone to read the book through the lens of a four or five-year old.

            As an expert on molecular biology, Isabelle Gomes-McMahon reinforced the need for compromise.

            Kathy Rusinoski asked if a list of questioned books is published by the school in its student handbook and said most parents are unaware of what their children are able to access at school.

            After hearing details from Assistant Superintendent of Finance and Operations Howie Barber, the committee voted unanimously to award the bus contract to Amaral Bus Company.

            The next meeting of the Rochester School Committee is scheduled for Thursday, April 4, at Rochester Memorial School, and the next meeting of the Joint School Committee is scheduled for Thursday, March 28, at ORR Jr. High School. The meetings begin at 6:30 pm, are streamed live via Zoom and recorded by ORCTV.

Rochester School Committee

By Mick Colageo