As had occurred in the October 19 public meeting of the Old Rochester Regional School Committee, the October 27 public meeting of the Rochester School Committee addressed a state Open Meeting Law complaint filed by Rochester resident Rhonda Baptiste.

            The case stems from Facebook comments made by ORR School Committee member Joe Pires regarding pornographic content in books kept at the ORR Senior and Junior High School libraries. On October 19, the ORR School Committee voted to delegate response to the complaint to attorney Peter Sumners.

            In this case, the Open Meeting Law complaint alleged that Pires and Rochester School Committee member Anne Fernandes were in violation with comments made in the Facebook group known as Tri-Town Buzz. Fernandes’ comments were posted in response to comments made by Pires, who also serves as one of the group’s page administrators/moderators.

            Baptiste read from a prepared statement to the October 27 public meeting of the Rochester School Committee, explaining her allegation.

            “Within 18 hours of Mr. Pires’ post, there were 214 comments made, including comments made by Mrs. Fernandes engaging with members of the public… creating a discussion environment which included four of the five Rochester School Committee members and 15 of the 18 Joint School Committee members within their public membership,” stated Baptiste. “Mrs. Fernandes knowingly and intentionally violated (state) Open Meeting laws by commenting on this public post made by fellow (ORR) School Committee member Joe Pires, and by engaging in this discussion environment, engaging with Mr. Pires’ comments, including engaging with members of the public, all in response to her emergency censorship agenda.

            “Mrs. Fernandes also violated School Committee policy by unilaterally demanding the school remove the materials (without a vote of the committee or committees to do so.) This overstep of her authority as a single member among many is an attempt to usurp the will of the committee for her own agenda, and is a violation of general school-committee policy as well as the specific policy IJ-R Reconsideration of Instructional Resources. By behaving in such a manner in a public forum, she is abusing her role as a School Committee member and utilizing her status as such to push her very vocal, political agenda toward censorship. In addition, Mrs. Fernandes is participating in an advertised public forum… as speaker of the event, to promote the censorship of the library materials under consideration by the entire (ORR District) school committee(s).”

            During the Open Comment session of the October 27 Rochester School Committee meeting, Baptiste also shared a letter signed by 631 community members that had already been read to the October 19 ORR School Committee meeting. The letter speaks out against banning books and requests that the ORR District support students from vulnerable populations, including those in the queer community and people of color, noting that they are already underrepresented in mainstream media.

            Sarah Bernier, a Rochester resident, spoke out in favor of banning books with what she called “pornographic content.”

            Marion resident Heidi Doobie focused away from the content in books and onto cell phones.

            “If my biggest concern as a parent right now (or) over the last few years is the ‘pornographic books’ and the school library,” she began, adding finger quotes for effect, “I feel like I’m missing the big picture… Sorry. Not many children read books, but they do look at their phones. All of the things that are in question right now are readily accessible to them. So I think our bigger concern as parents should be that we are not all represented.”

            “I have three white, so-far-straight children. I am not concerned for their safety. I am concerned about the people in their community who are underrepresented and underserved. So my focus – and I’m speaking only for myself – is to see that those groups of people who have historically been oppressed are brought to light and supported, and I don’t care … about the books that they may, truthfully, are not reading.”

            After a yes vote with one abstention, the Rochester School Committee assigned responsibility for responding to the complaint to Town Counsel Blair Bailey.

            The complaint, as well as supplemental materials for the committee meeting, are accessible on the ORR School District website.

            Shari Fedorowicz, ORR’s new assistant superintendent of Teaching and Learning, gave an extensive PowerPoint presentation on the intricacies of the OpenSciEd program, obtained through a grant. Fedorowicz explained that it includes supplemental resources and materials for students in grades 6-8. The program was developed alongside educators using researched-based objectives centered on how students learn.

            “Objective: To improve science education through the development and implementation of high-quality, freely available science instructional materials that are research-based,” Fedorowicz read off one of the opening slides.

            After a three-year PILOT program will come full integration, with two units implemented each year. Grade 6 units are “Light & Matter” and “Sound Waves;” Grade 7 units are “Contact Forces” and “Thermal Energy;” and Grade 8 units are “Chemical Reactions & Matter” and “Chemical Reactions & Energy.” Supplemental units raise and answer questions like, “How can a sound make something move?” or “How can containers keep things warm/cold?”

            Several members of the committee expressed support and excitement over the implementation of OpenSciEd, noting that supplies for all the units have been obtained and will be provided to students as needed. There is also a variety of available assessments to track the student’s understanding of the material, including entrance and exit “tickets” and a daily science journal. Students will be able to write in questions and have the teacher answer as needed. Teachers can adjust and integrate the styles and methods within the program as needed to suit their own schedule and teaching or learning styles.

            An early look at the 2023-24 school calendar was next on the agenda, as it was previously requested that it be presented earlier in order to allow for questions and ask for information.

            An increase in student meal prices was discussed, as there’s been supply-chain issues leading to higher costs for the meal components. While the first servings of breakfast and lunch are free to all students, it’s expected that the prices for additional meals will go up. Currently the pricing is $2.25 for breakfast, expected to rise to $2.75, effective January 3, 2023, in both the elementary and secondary schools. The elementary lunch cost is $3 and will rise to $3.50, while the secondary-school price will rise from $3.25 to $3.75.

            ORR Superintendent of Schools Mike Nelson noted that price increases are not ideal for anyone involved, but it’s the fiscally responsible option for the committee and Tri-Town school system in order to cover operating costs. The motion was passed.

            Solar panels were discussed as a part of the Facilities Report. They are still in the planning phase between the town, solar company and planning committee. The Chairperson’s, Central Office Administrator’s and Principal’s reports were all brief but optimistic, as well as discussing certain updated consistency across the schools, this year’s ALICE training and a new literacy grant.

            The next meeting of the Rochester School Committee is scheduled for Thursday, December 1, at 6:30 pm at Rochester Memorial School and accessible via Zoom.

Rochester School Committee

By Jack MC Staier

The Marion Bylaw Codification Committee is a subcommittee of the Planning Board, but not all Codification Committee members are Planning Board members.

            As the Codification Committee has been grinding through an arduous updating and cleaning up of existing bylaws, some Planning Board members have in their own public meetings articulated frustration with their lack of involvement in the drafting process, at least on the ground floor.

            So when the Codification Committee held a public meeting on October 27, two Planning Board members not on the Codification Committee attended, creating a Planning Board quorum of four, including the two members serving on the Codification Committee, Norm Hills and Eileen Marum.

            Planning Board member Tucker Burr also took a seat alongside committee members, while Planning Board member Chris Collings sat in a spectator row and did not participate in the meeting.

            The October 27 Codification Committee meeting agenda called for discussion with respect to the Village-Style Smart Growth District concept and the Planning Board.

            The committee went over changes, including signage regulations, as Hills was preparing a draft to bring before the Planning Board that he chairs.

            In Section G, commercial signage was discussed relative to political signage, and a clause stating that no private/political signs are allowed on public property was eliminated. It was noted that treating the two separately could be viewed as a violation of free speech.

            This kind of deep dive into a world of detail was only the tip of the iceberg of what the Codification Committee has been doing for several months.

            Building Commissioner Bob Grillo offered perspective regarding residential accessory dwelling units, noting that putting certain language into a bylaw does not guarantee it can be effectively enforced.

            Hills proposed forwarding the discussed items onto the Planning Board, adding that other items of concern can be addressed as they are identified.

            Member Will Saltonstall asked if the document should be addressed in “one big public hearing.” Hills said that matter is up to Planning Board, which can address the bylaws in multiple sessions “as necessary.”

            A detailed discussion ensued on the trigger points necessitating site-plan review, projects that can be done by right, and those requiring a public hearing.

            Grillo said that site-plan review is viewed “vastly different in the courts” and that the Planning Board’s purview is limited to things affected by the zoning bylaws.

            One thing that member Mike Sudofsky said can streamline the vetting/permitting process is to address zoning before the Planning Board holds a public hearing.

            “Watch Mattapoisett’s process. They have the same problems, but they approach it a little bit differently,” said Sudofsky. “Start with everyone understands the zoning (via a recommendation for the case from the zoning officer) … it’s just quicker. It’s worth it.”

            “The board requires good information before it can entertain an application,” said Saltonstall, interpreting Sudofsky’s message.

            Grillo suggested a preplanned (presubmission) meeting.

            “If we can get a clear understanding and say this requires site-plan review … from my office … it allows the Planning Board to use common sense and waive any of the engineering requirements,” he said. “If it’s a multiuse complex that’s coming in, we want everything. … so we don’t make somebody spend $20,000 or $30,000 on engineering.

            “We do it in Sandwich. We loosely do it here. It’s super helpful. (If) we have to talk to this board and that board and that board, then it’s more questions for me. One downside, if the property goes up for sale, we would have 20 meetings on the same property.”

            The Codification Committee did not announce a date for its next meeting upon adjournment.

Marion Bylaw Codification Committee

By Mick Colageo