DALTON, Mass. — The Central Berkshire Regional School Committee agreed to start an education campaign after the proposed regional agreement failed in three of the district's seven towns. 

 

The item failed during the Hinsdale annual town meeting on May 15, the Peru town meeting on June 1, and Cummington's special town meeting on June 7. The regional agreement needed six out of the seven towns to vote in favor of passing. 

 

Until an updated agreement is approved, the school district will continue to operate under its current agreement and follow state law. 

 

The original agreement, created in 1958, has been amended several times and approved locally but never by the state Department of Education, which is required. 

 

During the School Committee meeting last week, committee members highlighted the lack of trust between the district and towns stemming from the 2019 decision to vote by popular vote for the approximately $72 million Wahconah Regional High School building project. 

 

The towns that voted against the regional agreement wanted to require a unanimous vote, not a two-thirds vote, for all decisions regarding debt incurrence. 

 

Whether this can be done is unclear because two-thirds is state law, School Committee Chair Richard Peters said. 

 

The district has worked for a year and a half with representatives from all seven towns and the Massachusetts Association of Regional Schools on the update to the  agreement, Peters said, and they are 99 percent or 100 percent done if changes can not be made.

 

Rather than going back to the drawing board, Peters recommended bringing in representatives from MARS, legal, and possibly the Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to inform town officials what changes can be made to the agreement. 

 

The district did not do an educational campaign for the agreement, aside from going to select board meetings, Peters said, because the update of the regional agreement was thought to be uncontroversial, as nothing is going to change from what they currently do. 

 

The district may not be able to accommodate every single town without getting a home-rule petition, which could take years, committee member David Stuart said. 

 

"I do want to remember that this agreement is more about the towns than it is about us. We have compliance we have to do within the regional agreement, but this is really their agreement," Stuart said. 

 

"Part of going back and listening to some of the towns or all of the towns is to find out what they're willing to do, what steps they're willing to take if they want to try and change state law if they want to try and get home rule or whatever. It's also on them to take some steps to get what they want in this."

 

Committee members recommended reaching out to parents to encourage them to attend their town meeting and inform them about the agreement details through digital channels.  

 

They also suggested collaborating with select board and finance committee chairs to educate them about the agreement's details and requirements in the hopes of gaining their support. 

 

Some voters may base their decision on the advice of their select board as they often have more knowledge on all the issues that are voted on, School Committee member Art Alpert said. 

 

The failed document incorporates updated language and includes information to meet the requirements of the state DESE.

  

This proposed update agreement that failed was preliminarily approved by DESE, and the commissioner would have been signed off after the towns' approval.

 

The draft more clearly describes the budget and apportionment process and the agreement amendment process. It also includes two pathways for towns to withdraw from the district if they ever choose to do so. 

 

The proposed draft also included "required provisions regarding Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) and pension liabilities." 

 

These provisions ensure that all "member towns carry their fair share of these costs in the event that a town is added or if a town withdraws." 

 

There is also a provision for the agreement to be reviewed every five years in case future changes are needed.