After nearly 12 years in the position, Marion’s Town Administrator Paul Dawson announced that he will retire next year during the November 6 Marion Board of Selectmen meeting.

“After a lot of soul searching and a lot of looking at my family situation, I’ve decided that … I will be retiring from my position effective March 15, 2019,” Dawson stated, leaving the board four months to search for his replacement.

Dawson recalled his cancer diagnosis back in February 2016, saying that since then he has been living with some side effects of the surgery, and told the board that his wife as of late has also been experiencing some health concerns.

“This has been a very difficult decision for me,” Dawson said. “And to quote the famous philosopher Kenny Rogers,” Dawson quipped, “You’ve got to know when to hold ‘em and know when to fold ‘em, and for me the time has come to fold ‘em.”

Dawson thanked the Town and all its employees and volunteers over the years and vowed, “I’m not going anywhere.

“I will never leave the town high and dry,” said Dawson. “I am happy to participate in any way the board wants me to moving forward. … I’ll only be a phone call away.”

“We appreciate your service and we understand some of the personal challenges … and we respect your decision,” said Selectman Jon Waterman.

Dawson also announced the resignation of Gary Carreiro, treasurer/collector of 11 years. Carreiro has taken a position with the Town of Dartmouth.

The board will hold a special meeting to discuss these two personnel matters, and also to discuss the recently released DPW Organizational Structure Report so the Town can move forward with the recruitment of a new DPW director.

In other news, the selectmen voted to appropriate $27,737 in remaining Community Preservation Act funds to execute a four-phase proposal to stabilize the exterior “envelope” of the Marion Town House.

Dawson said T2 Architects has devised an initial project broken down into four phases – assessment, schematic design, cost estimating, and report – in order to proceed with the preservation of the Town House, as Dawson put it, “in a more logical and manageable fashion.”

While consulting with the same team that performed the initial study of the Town House renovation project, Phase 1 will be an updated assessment of exterior deterioration, air and water filtration, and windows. Phase 2 will result in updated drawings for roof replacement, window and door replacement, siding, and trim, and waterproofing of the basement. Phase 3 will develop a cost estimate for each element of the work and determine how to phase the projects over time. Phase 4 will be a final report with plans, section and diagrams, costs, and a schedule of implementation.

“Whatever we need to do to protect the envelope of the building,” said Dawson. “I think we can all agree that that is the most logical first step to take.”

The cost of this endeavor cannot exceed the $27,737 amount appropriated that night. The funding will come from the remaining $140,000 in CPC money already appropriated.

“It seems to accomplish what we wanted,” said Waterman.

Also during the meeting, the board continued the public hearing for the Board of Assessors’ reclassification hearing until November 20 because, according to Hills, the assessors were not yet ready to hold the meeting.

In other matters, the Town will offer a short-term solution for leaf disposal for residents, possibly starting as early as this weekend of November 10-11 and continuing until the end of November and possibly longer, if needed. The time for residents to bring leaves (no brush or other debris) and certainty of the dates has yet to be determined, so residents should check the Town website frequently as the details, once finalized, will be posted.

There will be a recycling workshop for residents on Wednesday, November 14, at 7:00 pm at the Marion Music Hall.

The next regular meeting of the Marion Board of Selectmen is scheduled for November 20 at 7:00 pm at the Marion Town House.

Marion Board of Selectmen

By Jean Perry

The Marion Conservation Commission gave itself extra time Wednesday night to meet with town counsel to discuss its obligations regarding bylaws and permits not under their direct jurisdiction.

Town Counsel Barbara Huggins Carboni met with the commission on October 24 to flesh out the regulations guiding the commission’s decisions when contemplating applications lacking permits from other town departments.

“The short answer is [the commission] doesn’t have a roving authority,” said Carboni. She cautioned the commission to be “mindful,” however, of the status of other town permits the applicant may be required to pursue.

Carboni stated that the commission is not making a “substantive” decision about whether a bylaw applies, but that a determination needs to be made by another department. She further clarified that the regulations state that a permit must be either applied for or obtained. However, she noted that upon receipt of an opinion from the department having jurisdiction over the permit in question, the commission must accept that department’s ruling.

Carboni suggested the regulations are in place because the commission has such a small window within which they must make their decisions. Often the information from other permitting entities may not be available within that timeframe, and, therefore, the commission must have the ability to deny without prejudice an application for lack of information. It is within the discretion of the commission, acting in good faith, if it feels a bylaw applies and that permit has not been applied for or obtained, to deny the project.

When asked who has the burden to inform applicants about the possible applicability of permits, Carboni suggested that applicants should, ideally, have good professional advice. Otherwise the regulations assume there is awareness on the part of the commission as to what other permits are required. Carboni concluded, “Some board has to decide first.”

Later in the meeting the commission met with Mark Ross, of 195c Converse Road, whose project was the impetus behind the meeting with Carboni. The commission discussed at length how to handle the question of Ross not having any other permits in hand concurrent with the Notice of Intent application, even after the public hearing was closed on October 10.

Ross agreed to waive the 21-day deadline for the commission’s decision, and will request re-opening the public hearing at the commission’s next meeting on November 14. This will allow the commission to hear new information from town departments regarding the other permits required for the project.

In regular business, the commission heard a Request for Determination of Applicability from David Davignon on behalf of the ZPT Energy Solutions solar farm at 178 Wareham Road.

Davignon provided revised plans that showed a possible Isolated Land Subject to Flooding wetland located outside the area of work on the property. Members of the commission had visited the site, and in reporting their findings, Vice Chairman Shaun Walsh exclaimed with enthusiasm, “[We noticed] two natural springs with water bubbling out of the ground!”

While Davignon acknowledged natural springs are rare in the area, he maintained that the wetland area was non-jurisdictional. The threshold for an isolated wetland to be protected by the Wetland Protection Act, a volume of a quarter-foot of water would need to be established. The commission agreed this was very unlikely.

Davignon had not done topographic measurements in the wetland for the volume calculations, but reminded the commission no work is contemplated near the wetland and it would have no buffer zone in any case. The commission issued a Negative determination.

The commission issued a Negative determination for Camilla Mathew, Trustee at 20 Cottage Lane, to construct a new 34.5-foot by 25-foot three-bay garage and improve an existing driveway.

Jonathan Tracy received a Negative determination for the removal of three trees within a buffer zone, with the condition the stumps are left in place.

The Town of Marion received a Negative determination for the mechanical clearing of a 15-foot wide by 60-foot long recreational shellfishing access path on a paper street known as Holmes Road.

Stevie Carvalho of Farland Corp, representing Diana Cress, received a Negative determination for the razing and rebuilding of a single-family dwelling at 114 Point Road.

The next meeting of the Marion Conservation Commission is scheduled for November 14 at 7:00 pm in the Marion Town House.

Marion Conservation Commission

By Sarah French Storer

The Old Rochester Regional School Committee on October 24 got familiar with the state’s new accountability measures for the next generation MCAS, with Assistant Superintendent Dr. Elise Frangos explaining the Department of Education’s (DOE) shift in focus on accountability and progress versus performance scores.

The DOE has added a number of new criterion-referenced components that, in addition to test scores, contribute to the overall score the state gives to each school district. The new accountability measures aim to track accountability percentiles and progress towards targets by providing information about, not only school performance, but also on what Frangos referred to as “student opportunities beyond test scores.”

“And the focus now is on raising the performance of each school’s lowest performing students,” Frangos said.

In the past, the district focus was on specific subgroups such as high needs, students with disabilities, and other demographics broken down from the overall student scores.

“Right now the focus is, how do we bring the lowest performing students up regardless of what subgroup they belong to, so that is a distinct shift with the new system,” said Frangos.

The state has discontinued rating schools by levels 1-5, and instead is now classifying schools by district level data and not comparing the school to others. The measures still prioritize student growth, Frangos said, but new accountability components include data that reflects chronic absenteeism and high school graduation rates, as well as English language learners (ELL), which currently does not apply to ORR with so few in the district.

As for absenteeism, “If a student is not present in school … we cannot teach them and he or she cannot learn,” said Frangos. The state is now looking at the percentage of students who are chronically absent, missing 10% or more school days during the school year. “That puts us at an unfortunate rating by the Department of Education,” stated Frangos.

“It does not matter if it is an excused or an unexcused absence,” said junior high school Principal Kevin Brogioli. “From the school level, you can have a medical reason to be out for two months and be legitimately excused from us, but it doesn’t change the state’s view of things.”

That means family vacations, family engagements – “Those all count against the school.”

Frangos reviewed the weight of each indicator that all factor into the final rating for a district like ORR without ELL students – performance on math, ELA, and science count 47.5% towards the school as a whole, while student growth weighs in at 22.5%. High school completion

makes up 20% of the rating, and the “additional factors” category that includes chronic absenteeism and the total number of students completing advanced coursework makes up another 10%.

At the elementary and junior high school level, Frangos pointed out, “High chronic absenteeism can drag down our performance.”

As the ORR School District digests this new data and accountability system, Frangos said, “We are going to be focusing on, first of all, who are our lowest performers and how do we raise their achievements…? How do we help them any way possible?”

Superintendent Dr. Doug White wanted the school committee to understand that the district was not aware of the new accountability system until August of this year, well after students completed the MCAS before summer break.

“It did give us some pause because we didn’t quite know about these criteria for these measures,” said White.

Overall at the junior high, the school earned a 40% for the criterion-referenced target percentage; in other words, the junior high did not quite meet that desired 50% mark indicating a school is meeting its targets, rather it scored just under in the “partially meeting expectations” rating. Extrapolating the results shows where the school fell short in specific areas such as performance in ELA for all students, which earned 0 out of 4 possible points, an indication that growth targets were not met, although the lowest 25% of performers earned a 2 out of 4, showing no growth (same as last year) performance improvement. In math, both groups earned a 2 out of 4, and all students in science earned a 2 out of 4. In the area of growth, all students and the lowest 25% scored 2 and 3 out of 4, respectively, in both the ELA and math subjects. When it came to absenteeism, however, all students earned 0/4 and the lowest performing 25% received 1/4.

The high school was given a 48% overall rating, just under the 50% meeting expectations rating. ELA performance was at 4/4 and 1/4 for all students and the 25% lowest performers, respectively, and in math, the scores were 1/4 and 0/4. Science was 1/4 and 4/4. In growth, the high school in ELA got 2/4 and 1/4, in math 2/4 and 2/4, and a 3/4 for graduation rate. For chronic absenteeism, the school scored 4/4 for all students, and 0/4 for the lowest 25% performing students.

“So we received partially meeting targets for both high school and junior high,” said Frangos.

White broke down the meaning of the numbers 0-4: a 0 or 1 means a drop in performance or growth, a 2 means no change, a 3 is meeting the target, and a 4 is exceeding the target.

“What is the key here?” said high school Principal Mike Devoll. “My takeaway is attendance.” And as Frangos later pointed out, whether the absences are excused or not excused, “There’s no negotiating it: there’s no way around it.”

In concluding, Frangos offered, “I think these tests give us sort of a dipstick – a pulse on how we can help kids. … We need to really make sure that our kids get the skills that they need for a 21^stcentury world, but also notice and recognize … their capacity to learn and push themselves.”

Also during the meeting, the committee revisited the topic of appropriating stipends to the elected members of the ORR School Committee, but in the end during a 5-3 vote, the committee opposed the motion to bring the topic forward to the committee’s budget subcommittee for consideration, choosing to not pursue a stipend for themselves.

The next meeting of the Old Rochester Regional School Committee is scheduled for December 5 at 6:30 pm in the junior high school media room.

Old Rochester Regional School Committee

By Jean Perry