Although he spoke respectfully of abutters’ concerns over stormwater flooding on two undeveloped adjoining lots on Starboard Way near Molly’s Cove, Mattapoisett Conservation Commission Chairman Mike King was also very clear: “You should engage an engineer to help you with drainage issues on your property,” he told the abutters, invoking that comment five times during the public hearing.

            Throughout the July 12 Notice of Intent hearings presented by Bill Madden of G.A.F. Engineering for the construction of single-family homes, King punctuated Madden’s comments with the point that the stormwater drainage issues currently experienced in the neighborhood are addressed in the engineering, with roof runoff diverted to underground recharge systems and topographical aspects moving water to the center of the properties. Concerns expressed by several abutters, most notably Nicole Balthazar, were around current conditions where stormwater ponds on the lots. But Madden pointed out that the soil testing confirmed the adequacy of sandy soils for drainage into the ground.

            King also noted that roadways in the beach neighborhood have become, in effect, dams holding stormwater on residential lots rather than granting flow away from homes. He said that if the proposed construction included septic systems, other considerations would cause the projects much more difficulty. However, the two new homes will be serviced by public sewer and water, he said.

            “This project, as proposed, will not add water to the neighborhood,” King assured the abutters. He said, “I’m sympathetic to the neighbor; the reality is that this won’t add water on the ground.”

            Madden called it a “cut and dried” flood zone project with the two homes being built in compliance to FEMA standards and of the occasional stormwater ponding. “It does dissipate,” he said.

            King also pointed to mounting evidence of sea-level rise in the seaside community, including at the Reservation Golf Club, but again said, “This design meets all performance standards, including all drainage issues.”

            Also present for the hearings was Attorney Jamy Madeja, who stated she was representing several other residents of the neighborhood and that her clients wished to join others in requesting the town’s assistance in correcting roadway drainage issues, including their damming impact.

            King advised the abutters that they could appeal the decisions made by the local commission to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, but that in cases such as this, the agency would most likely uphold the local commission’s acceptance of the project as designed. In the end, the commission unanimously approved the two projects with conditions.

            Other matters handled on this night: Requests for Determination of Applicability filed by Peter Annunziato, 11 Rock Road, for the construction of a shed; Mike and Elaine Botelho, 9 Crestfield Street, for an addition to an existing patio; Tom Grondski and Catherine Jackie for septic system upgrades; and Bartholomew O’Brien, lots 25 and 26 Prince Snow Drive, for removal of trees in a buffer zone. All received negative determinations of applicability.

            A Notice of Intent filed by the Howley Trust for 1 Waterman Street for the razing of an existing home and construction of a new residence was conditioned as designed.

            Also receiving orders of conditions were NOIs filed by Fred Danforth, 2 Brandt Island Shores,

and Good Speed, LLC, 1 Brandt Island Shores, both for beach nourishment and boulder placement to repair erosion of beach areas.

            Before adjourning, the commission again discussed the vacancy created by the retirement of Conservation Agent Liz Leildhold. King said that one application had been received for a freelance licensed agent.

            King said that the lack of a conservation agent as a town employee will shift a large burden to the applicants primarily in the form of increased fees. He said an RDA would now cost $450 to file.

            Commissioner David Lawrence confirmed his willingness to help the town with site visits for filed RDAs but said the time commitment was upwards of five hours per day. Commissioner Chapman Dickerson said, “That’s a lot of free labor to the town.”

            Commissioner John Jacobsen said, “This is a result of the town dragging its feet.”

            King said, “We’ll do what we can,” and thanked Leidhold for her service, saying, “You will be missed.”

            The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission is scheduled for Monday, July 26, at 6:30 pm.

The Mattapoisett River Valley Water District Commission voted at its July 13 meeting to move forward with the preliminary design agreement for the Koch Separation filter upgrade to its water treatment plant.

            After Jon Gregory of Tata & Howard told the commission that the preliminary design engineering agreements were set last month for filter replacement, MRV plant manager Henri Renald told the commission that he is “absolutely” good with the plan and reviewed it with Gregory. “I’m very comfortable moving forward with it,” Renauld said.

            MRV Chairman Vinnie Furtado said he, too, is comfortable going forward with the plan. Furtado told the commission that $736,000 was set aside so some of those funds are being used to get the project moving forward as a capital expense.

            Rochester Town Counsel Blair Bailey, who assists the commission, reminded Furtado that the funding was the subject of a vote that took place earlier so the commission should clarify where that money comes from. Furtado said the MRV typically puts an annual $200,000 into a capital fund and that would be the source of the funding.

            The commission voted to approve the $27,696 insurance agreement on the building that houses the MRV’s water treatment plant. The structure, constructed in 2008 for $15,000,000, is now valued at $9,000,000.

            Furtado noted that the City of New Bedford was victimized by ransomware when he said that the insurance company recommends that the Water District consider implementing a stand-alone cyber security system.

            Bailey said that Mattapoisett does not carry its own insurance on the water treatment plant; the policy is completely held by the district according to Renauld. Asked by member Rick Charon that nature of data storage, Renauld said the black box system cannot copy files and send them back to the operator, calling it a “one-way channel.”

            Renauld said the MRV cannot go online with either computer at the treatment plant. There is “no export capability on either one of them. It’s designed that way for protection.”

            In his Tata & Howard report, Gregory said the risk and resilience assessment has been submitted. His Tata & Howard colleague Paul Howard said there is “very little chance of anybody being able to get in there and change anything” because the computers are not on the internet.

            Gregory reported that the PILOT test was completed on June 15 and equipment removed from the treatment plant. Koch, he said, is slowly updating the lab data from the plant, has begun the report and, when complete, will provide it to the MRV. Tata & Howard engineers will review and submit the data to the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection for review and approval. Gregory said that all the chemical bids for FY22 have come in except for liquid oxygen.

            In his Operations Update, Renauld reported that June produced 75,000,000 gallons of water, a per-day average of 2,500,000 gallons.

            Attending the meeting, Mattapoisett Town Administrator Mike Lorenco asked if he should anticipate the MRV requesting ARPA funds. Lorenco said ARPA money lasts until 2024. “We’re looking for valuable reasons to spend this funding,” he said.

            Total commission invoices for the month totaled $50,823.96, covering most of the PILOT study, and including Tata & Howard at $4,426.

            In the MRV Water Protection Supply Committee that immediately preceded the commission meeting, the advisory committee voted to enter into an agreement with Tata & Howard for FY22 that would finance up to $35,000 for the fiscal year, facilitating the engineering firm’s work on behalf of the MRV.

            In his Treasurers Report to the MRV Water Protection Supply Committee, Jeff Furtado reported a July 1 ending balance of $227,394.98, total credits for FY21 at $90,738.60 and total debt for FY21 at $49,357.42. Jeff Furtado announced two credits, an interest rate Rockland Trust of $2.87 for June, and a $5,000 reimbursement for a monitoring program. Debts included $3,436.29 for Tata & Howard.

            The next meeting of the MRV committee and commission is set for Tuesday, August 10, at 3:30 pm and 4:00 pm respectively.

MRV Water District Commission/Water Protection Supply Committee

By Mick Colageo

            Mentorship played a key role in keeping first-year Old Rochester Regional School Superintendent Mike Nelson and his Central Office staff on an even keel through the tumultuous 2020-21 academic year that saw ORR District students begin the year mainly in a hybrid learning format and eventually return to school on a full-time, in-person basis.

            In reporting to the ORR Joint School Committee / Superintendency Union #55 on July 6, Nelson gave a detailed presentation to address the Superintendent’s Mid-Cycle Review at the one-year point of the two-year cycle.

            While alluding to his ongoing work with retired Superintendent Dr. Ruth Gilbert-Whitner who acted as his coach, Nelson thanked Gilbert-Whitner for her availability at all hours, including weekends, and the hours she spent with him prior to the July 6 meeting looking at the 2021-22 academic year.

            Nelson also told the JSC that his Central Office team, including Assistant Superintendent of Teaching and Learning Jannell Pearson-Campbell, Assistant Superintendent of Finance and Operations Howie Barber, and Director of Student Services Craig Davidson were also mentored during the 2020-21 school year.

            The Superintendent’s Goals Subcommittee, made up of Carole Clifford (Mattapoisett SC), Sharon Hartley (Rochester SC), Nichole Daniel (Marion SC), Anne Fernandes (Rochester SC), Cary Humphrey (ORR SC), and Michelle Smith (Marion and ORR SC), assisted through development and feedback meetings with the end game of making a recommendation to the JSC, which approved the superintendent’s goals in a November 19, 2020, public meeting.

            While some of the appointees have since moved on from the school committee and have been replaced on the subcommittee, Nelson felt as though the above listed names best represent with whom he worked throughout the 2020-21 school year.

            In summarizing his 2020-22 goals, Nelson presented those goals in the context of Year 3 (just completed) of ORR’s Vision 2023 Strategic Plan. From there, the Superintendent Entry Plan for 2020-21 progresses to the Superintendent Finding Report for 2020-21. The Entry Plan, he noted, was reviewed and approved by the JSC in November 2020. The Finding Report, Nelson explained, has been submitted to the committee but remains subject to updates.

            The five-year Vision 2023 implementation of ORR’s mission “to inspire all students to think, to learn, and to care” is founded in three parts: 21st Century (project-based) Learning “that creates meaningful opportunities for students and staff to engage in real-life work that helps to solve real-life problems); Social and Emotional Learning (students learn best when they feel safe); and Global Citizenship (respecting all cultures and tied to civic responsibility and empathy).

            Nelson, who became superintendent on July 1, 2020, presented four goals that had been reviewed and approved by the JSC: 1. Effective Entry & Direction Setting; 2. Maintaining Momentum During the Transition; 3. New Superintendent Induction Program Engagement (professional development offered by DESE); and 4. Meeting Leadership.

            On July 6, Nelson charted his course in three categories: Key Actions, Benchmarks, and Resources. He told the JSC that all updates have been accompanied by supporting evidence. Key actions began with November 2020 for plan layouts addressing the progress of the school year that began in a hybrid attendance format.

            Nelson told the committee that his meeting leadership goal was driven by a need to allow teams to better focus on instructional improvement; 75 percent of meetings were to be focused for at least 45 minutes on academics.

            Identifying a “hot topic” of race and ethnicity at ORR, Nelson highlighted the progress “in making sure our schools are safe and welcoming to all.”

            He considers ORR fortunate from a budgetary standpoint to have maintained level services into the 2021-22 academic year. His report addressed building management as well and his work with Facilities Director Gene Jones.

            Nelson’s report was lauded by committee members Anne Fernandes and Michelle Smith, and others quickly followed suit.

            “I was impressed all along how Mike was able to meet or exceed or at least work towards many if not all of the goals,” said JSC member Nichole Daniel. “With this year being such a crazy year with this pandemic, it was hard for anybody in education to meet a lot of those goals that you set for yourself at the beginning, so it was definitely impressive to watch it kind of unfold.

            “It was nice to be a part of it,” Daniel continued. “One thing that Mr. Nelson didn’t mention (on July 6) that he did mention in our meetings was that he not only had his mentor, but he also hooked up all of our new Central Office staff with their own mentors as well as mentoring them himself, which to me was really nice to see.”

            JSC member Sharon Hartley echoed the sentiments of her colleagues. “This in particular, this report that Mike put together, is a wonderful example of someone who set specific and comprehensive goals, wrote a comprehensive entry plan, which is not a requirement but something that is valuable to all professionals as we enter a new path. Every step along the way, he created for us a beautiful portrait of his leadership and his path for us at Old Rochester.”

            “As we met with him, he didn’t just tell us the stuff he was doing … he really listened to the team…. A great leader listens and then acts based on what he or she has heard, and that we also see happening here. This process, this year, despite all the distractions and many ups and downs in the year, as I look at the process from today back to Mike’s time beginning with us as our superintendent, he has been professional, thoughtful, energetic, and we have seen progress in a crazy year.”

            Hartley made sure to redirect the conversation back to the evaluation process yet to be completed.

            “It’s our job right now to make sure we have said and have the conversations with Superintendent Nelson around what our expectations are, what our wishes are, what our advice is…. If you have a thought, this is the time,” she said.

            JSC member Carly Lavin asked if Nelson plans to bring the same structure to the building aspects of his plan for 2021-22. Nelson said it is the same cycle but that schools need to take into account their own plans. “It all should work off one another, and that’s my plan,” he said.

            JSC member Jim Muse recalled giving Nelson advice upon his March 2020 hire not to rest on his laurels and noted that all of Nelson’s activities in the past year prove he has not. JSC member Michelle Smith read a note from former Chair Cary Humphrey, who also served on the Superintendent Review Committee, enthusiastically supporting Nelson.

            Union Chair Shannon Finning said the committee would be going into executive session for further discussion with Nelson.

            A review of the superintendent’s timeline and potential modifications to Nelson’s plan based on feedback will be presented in a September public meeting, followed by two meetings in April 2022, the first at the beginning of April to present committee members evaluation materials and explanation on the process, and the second meeting at the end of April for the superintendent to provide committee members with evidence-supporting materials.

            By May 19, 2022, committee members will have submitted evaluations to the subcommittee, and by May 26, 2022, the superintendent, committee chairs (region and union sides), and subcommittee members will review materials and prepare a final evaluation.

            On June 2, 2022, the committee chairs will finalize the work done with the superintendent, and at the June JSC public meeting present the superintendent’s evaluation.

            Unrelated to his Mid-Cycle Review, Nelson reported on a successful result of the one-time raise voted to attract a better pool of substitute teachers. The rate increase has expired, but Nelson said the situation will be monitored and, if necessary, brought back before the committee. ORR’s FY22 substitute teacher rates will match the rates prior to that one-time increase.

            In policy review, Nelson said changes are the result of questions asked by the Policy Subcommittee and the effort to adhere to the ideology that the current federal administration has put in place. Both the Region and Union sides voted unanimously to approve the policy changes for the 2021-22 academic year.

ORR Joint School Committee / Superintendency Union #55

By Mick Colageo