The School Committee, on Wednesday, Oct. 8 approved, by a vote of 9-0-1 – with member Rosemary Connolly abstaining – to modify the memorandum of understanding with the Hanson Police Department to allow School Resource Officers to use body cameras while on duty in the schools.
“Every year, at the beginning of the school year, we gather as a team to talk about school safety and introduce new staff to our public safety officials – the four chiefs, their deputies and whoever else wants to attend that meeting,” said Superintendent of Schools Jeffrey Szymaniak, introducing Hanson Police Chief Michael Miksch and Deputy Chief Michael Casey to discuss body cams with the committee.
He announced to the School Committee that Hanson police have been wearing body cameras as part of their regular duties for about a month, and will be as part of School Resource Officer duties.
“Since this is a change to our MOU, to our school resource officers in the building, I asked both Mikes to come in and speak on this, because I think there can be a lot of misinformation, if it doesn’t come right from the folks that are having their officers wear these devices for the safety of themselves and for the safety of the public.”
Miksch said Friday that cameras would only be turned on when an officer Derek Harrington, as per the department’s policy. He said he chose not to purchase the variety of body camera that is always on or automatically activated when an officer draws a weapon.
Miksch and Casey provided a copy of the department’s body camera use policy as well as the school resource officer’s job description before the meeting.
“We work really well collaboratively,” Szymaniak said of the Hanson police. The department has jurisdiction over the high school because it is wholly located in Hanson.
Miksch noted that, following the George Floyd killing in Minneapolis in 2020, Massachusetts passed a police reform act.
“Many of the things in that act were actually things that – I’ve been a police chief since 2010 – police chiefs in Massachusetts were pushing for,” he said, reassuring the committee that interaction with police officials from across the country have shown him that officers in Massachusetts are probably the most well-educated well-behaved officers. “What we wanted to come out of that was to help improve policing in Massachusetts and give officers more tools, better equipment and better training to do the job.”
While no police career is perfect, Miksch said, the Northeast – the New England states and New York, are unique in how they handle policing versus other parts of the country.
“That being said, there’s always room for improvement, and it’s always good to have self-reflection,” he said, saying a notable thing that came out of the reform law was a push for body cams. Miksch said he was among police officials who were initially skeptical of the cameras.
“Why can’t you just believe me, you’re supposed to,” he said the thinking was. “But a funny thing’s happened since I’ve started talking to the other departments and even, I think, my own officers will agree with me at this point – they’re actually a great tool.”
Miksch aid officers he’s spoken to from around the state have said that, when unruly people are told they are being recorded, they begin to behave and cooperate better,
“It’s actually a de-escalation technique, now,” he said. “It’s great. It’s where the state’s going, too. … We’re going to have them for at least the next five years, because that’s what Town Meeting approved and that’s the contract we signed with Motorolla. ”
More departments are adopting them as their towns receive funding or grants, as well, according to Miksch. Hanson’s contract with Motorolla was a two-year process, researching cameras, working through the state bid system, negotiating with the company and implementing the cameras. The sergeants have tried them in an effort to get used to working with the devices.
Miksch and Casey showed a video of Hanson officer working to communicate with a Brazilian motorist, who only spoke Portuguese, to communicate that the man had been driving too fast. The first month of the cameras’ use has allowed the department to determine what can be edited on the videos and what the department can and cannot release from video.
Szymaniak also had a chance to express his concerns, but the cameras have not been used at WHRHS until, at the superintendent’s request, Miksch and Casey could come in and discuss it with the School Committee.
While the SRO has not worn one yet, other officers called to the school for any reason – officers assigned to football games – use them and wear them.
“The camera isn’t actually always on,” Casey said. “But the camera is always on when there is a police action taken. Never are we going to deminish or replace [an] officer’s discretion. Never are we going to have this camera interfere with the common interaction we’ll have with the public, staff [or] students. …It allows us to capture the audio and video when it is activated.”
School Committee members had questions about use of cameras by Hanson, but not Whitman, police, how it would work and whether is was an example of inequity as well as student privacy especially for students on individual education plans, who might have more challenging interactions based on behavior.
Casey said that only when the camera is activated will one be able to hear and see the audio/visual recording.
“We’re not going to have the camera on during medical responses, during interaction with students that may have difficulty understanding the circumstances,” he said. “There’s a broad band of discretion that our officers are going to continue to use.”
Miksch said Friday his department also trains regularly on communicating people on the autism spectrum.
Szymaniak also pointed out that most schools – as well as other public buildings already have video surveillance. Miksch said sound recording is permitted, but the public must be made aware sound recording is being done.
Interaction with juveniles are always confidential as well.
“If Whitman doesn’t have it and Hanson does, how does that effect equity … are we providing the same service to the two towns?” asked Rosemary Connolly.
“It’s a department preference,” Casey said.
Szymaniak said area departments now using body cameras include Bridgewater, Carver, Hanson, Halifax, Hanover, Hingham, Holbrook, Lakeville, Middleborough, Wareham, Weymouth and the Massachusetts State Police. Several others are either researching or searching for funding.
“These cameras are showing you exactly what has transpired,” Casey said. “Not only for the protection of the victims, the suspects, the idividual parties involved – staff, students, public and police officers – we want that accountability. We want that transparency.”
Szymaniak also said state law limits what SROs can do, as well,
“SROs and police can only be involved in schools for violent offences,” he said. “They can take a report of vandalism, but they really can’t do much in schools and the law prohibits that. … When Derek is walking around the building, he’s not actively policing. … He really can’t even break up fights [or] search lockers.”

HANSON – The state of free cash and its impact on next year’s budget, a property review on Phillips Street and a second pass at a nips ban were the focus of most discussion by voters at special Town Meeting on Monday, Oct. 7
The session, which got underway with 215 voters present, began with $214,713.44 in School Stabilization; $2,717,390 in certified free cash; $76,000 in overlay surplus – the fund controlled by the assessors; and $1,491,814.70 in stabilization.
“If everything proposed in the warrant tonight, we will spend $164,416, leaving $50,297.44,” Moderator Sean Kealy said of the School Stabilization account. “The plan, at this moment, is to spend $279,658.17 [in free cash], leaving us with a balance of $2,437,731.83.” The plan for the evening was to spend all $76,000 in overlay surplus, Kealy reported.
A Steven Street resident noted that several town positions unfunded at the May Town Meeting were back on the warrant for funding, but that the Finance Committee had voted against recommending such action. He asked for an explanation and about what might have changed since May.
Finance Committee Chair Kevin Sullivan made clear that the town is still not out of the financial woods, taking a “roundabout way” to illustrate where the town is financially.
“I think a lot of people saw that free cash number and assumed that we had the money to make adjustments based on what we did in May,” he said.
At the annual Town Meeting in May, the Committee made a “calculated decision” to reduce hours in order to set the town up for fiscal success during the fiscal year that began July 1.
“Free cash is higher than it had been expected, due to several different things that are one-time occurrences,” he said.
Among those occurrences were:

• $1.1 million in budget turnbacks and closed-out articles from previous years;
• $871,000 in local receipts, which Sullivan said was well above original estimates; and
• About $140,000 in state aid that was above original estimates.
  “These are one-time, finance boosts giving us that $2.7 million,” he said. “I know people saw that $2.7 million and said, ‘why are we sitting on it?’ but here’s the second part of the answer: right now, the town accountant is already anticipating a deficit of over $2 million right now – that’s level-funding. That’s no pay raises. That’s no cost of living increases.”
  The fact that some of those raises have been negotiated in contracts and increases are automatic, complicates the finances even more.
  Sullivan counseled voters that to spend that free cash now would be unwise because the town will need every cent of it to support next year’s budget unless the town passes an override. The wiser course, Sullivan advised was to disapprove every request for reinstatement of hours.
  “If we reinstate these people, we may have to cut full positions in the spring,” he said. “This is a temporary measure to ensure that people remain employed.”
  While the hours-restorations listed under Article 2 were not approved, the restoration of hours for both the Conservation and Health agents were later approved under Articles 20 and 21, based on the enforcement orders, site visits and inspections both positions are charged with making – particularly the public health responsibilities of the health agent – and the change in funding source for the Conservation Agent to notice of intent funds.
  The $2.7 million may make the town appear to be cash-heavy, but it is not, Sullivan said.
  “The Finance Committee decided that, in good conscience, we could not recommend reinstating [hours to] any positions,” he said.
  Sullivan also reminded voters that a vote on the South Shore Tech Regional Agreement will be soon coming up for a vote in Hanson, with about $1million for a new school building riding on the outcome.
  “I would urge all of you to think where we’re going to be in May,” he said. “There are a lot of things at play.”
  Frank Milisi of Brook Street then asked what the Finance Committee is expecting from the schools where the next budget is concerned.
  Sullivan said he could not speak to what the School Committee is going to do and reminded voters that the schools have until December to submit a budget.
  “We’re going with some historical numbers … but I can’t say with certainty what level,” he said, adding that his committee is looking at a ballpark number.
  “Any money that we spend right now in free cash, we’re going to have to pay back in May,” Melisi agreed. “It’s especially important if the school budget comes in higher than what they’re predicting.”
  Sullivan said Town Accountant Eric Kinsherf is calculating the school budget at 7 percent, which is close to the process used to calculate the current school budget.
  Transfer station Supervisor Chris Callaghan, permitted to speak on the issue despite not being a resident because the issue affects him, asked when the cost of the new SST building would be assssed.
  SST Superintendent-director Dr. Thomas J. Hickey said the project, if approved at January’s special election, would include short-term borrowing, so the $1 million would probably roll on for fiscal 2029 or fiscal 2030.
  “We’re in front of the MSBA at the end of this month, and we intend to put out more specific numbers, hopefully in the first week of November,” he said. “But I would expect that there would be some short-term borrowing.” He also said his school committee would be looking at, with the 55-percent reimbursement rate for feasibility, the district “would be sitting on some stabilization money” once the feasibility process wraps up. Hickey said he hopes to be able to use any leftover cash to hopefully cover the interest for fiscal 2026 and ’27.

Rumor vs. intent
While real financial concerns were behind discussions about the use of free cash and control of nip bottles, a perceived threat to the community – not intended by the article before Town Meeting – took up the lion’s share of debate about a $955 appropriation to fund a review of town-owned property on Phillips Street. Both the Select Board and Finance Committee had voted unanimously to recommend the article be passed.
Voters approved the article by a vote of 127-96.
Because of the street’s proximity to the MBTA station on Main Street, social media chatter has been equating the article with an attempt to equate it to the MBTA Communities plan rejected by the May Town Meeting. The Community Preservation Committee, meanwhile stressed it only wants to study if the land can be used for anything.
Discussion became so heated, with suggestions of impropriety and/or hidden agendas voiced, that Kealy halted debate after long-time builder and High Street resident Thomas Peters, who has been involved in construction of “many 40B projects,” alleged the motive behind a study was an attempt by the town to obtain state funding for such a project.
Housing Authority member Mike Jones said the land had been deeded to the authority a long time ago, but never donated to Conservation. Jones added a firm had been hired to determine whether or not the land is wetlands.
Peters said 40B building projects have been placed on unbuildable land at state direction, and asked if the article falls under state funding.
“We had a similar property on West Washington Street, Jones said. “[We did] a similar scenario, and deemed we can’t build anything on it, it’s unusable, and we donated it to Conservation. I’m not saying that’s what’s going to happen to this, but we’re just looking at this … to see if we could do anything with it. It’s all we’re doing.”
Planning Board Chair Joe Campbell said there have been no 40B discussions about the property, nor on the table in front of the board.
“Before we get too far down this road, I think we’re venturing into kind of speculative territory,” Kealy said. “I get to make that decision.”
Select Board Vice Chair Ann Rein said that “somewhere, out on the internet,” a rumor is circulating that the board is trying to bring the town into compliance with the MBTA Communities program.
“I think this is part of what he is talking about,” she said of Peters’ allegations. “We have heard zero about this land being used for anything MBTA-related.” She also reiterated her own opposition to the MBTA Communities program.
Peters also spoke of mosquito breeding grounds and impact on water mains in his objections before debate was curtailed.
Nip ban upheld
Another issue that resurfaced Monday was the ban on miniature single-use booze bottles, or “nips ban” approved at the May Town Meeting, as an effort to repeal the measure was brought before the session as a citizens’ petition by Ketan Patel and 226 others.
The repeal eventually failed by a vote of 97 in favor of repeal and 107 against repeal.
Another of the non-resident petitioners permitted to address the Town Meeting, Patel said the ban would impact consumers’ freedom of choice; harm local retailers; has been a state-wide failure 10 of 13 times; consumers will only purchase alcohol in containers the next size up – which, they argue, has repercussions for road safety as well as litter – and nips make up 30 percent of liquor sales, especially since surrounding towns do not have nip bans in place.
“The Hanson community is not Chelsea or Brookline or Boston,” he said. “We don’t have those downtown areas. Originally, when this ban was passed, it was comparing Hanson to those communities.”
While litter is a problem, he said Hanson retailers performed a roadside cleanup over the weekend and found litter from Dunkin Donuts, NesQuik bottles and all sorts of plastics.
“We are not banning that,” he said. “We are talking about adults. We have laws for drunk driving, and everything else. Just banning something is not a solution.”
Scott Semchenko of 135 Spring St., who works at Luke’s Liquors, also called 14-58 by a lot of Hanson residents, said the only thing a ban accomplishes is hurting small businesses in Hanson and will be lost revenue to the town.
“This ban has real impacts on families like mine, who are trying to get by,” he said. “We need real solutions that focus on all kinds of litter, not scape-goating small businesses.”
Steve Smith, of North Street, who proposed the original nip ban in May countered that Hanson does not receive tax funds from nip sales. He also rebutted the other points Patel made, including drops in sales, and corrected that 30 percent of all purchases include nips – not are made up of nips; the bottles do make up a large percentage of litter, he said; the bottles are not recycling because the nip bottles do not fit in recycling machines – and people toss them out car windows anyway. He argued larger bottles are less likely to be thrown on roadsides, and are less likely to be consumed while driving.
Diane Thomas of Monponsett Street also spoke in favor of maintaining a ban.
“Living on Route 58, since the ban, there have been a lot fewer nips in my front lawn,” she said.
Patel countered the ban does not go into effect until Jan. 1.
Other proponents of Patel’s petition acknowledged the town certainly has a litter problem, but argued it does not involve only nips.

WHITMAN – In the end, it was their equal commitment to working toward a school budget that best serves all Whitman students that made the decision so difficult.
“It;s awful,” School Committee Chair Beth Stafford said after nine of 13 applicants for the two vacant Whitman seats on the W-H School Committee that made the choice so hard. Heather Clough, Kevin Mayer and Charles Slavin III did not attend the meeting. “We have quite a difficult decision, I think. We had some great people.”
Those who did brought strong backgrounds in education, law, small business, real estate, special needs parenting and education and technical fields.
“This is difficult,” Stafford said of the applicants’ experience. “I had to sit in that chair before and it’s very difficult, what they had to do, but I think we learned so much more about them than you do in a regular election.”
The election metaphor was mentioned more than once.
“It’s like going into a ballot box,” said Select Board Chair Carl Kowalski.
“Pretend you’re going to a ballot box, who are you going to vote for,” Stafford said. “When you say a name, you have confidence in that person you are selecting.”
The five Whitman Select Board members and four Whitman members of the School Committee were then asked to put themselves in the shoes of a voter for the two ballots, as each gave the name of the applicant they supported. Ballots were cast until a candidate received a majority of five votes for each vacancy.
“We’re not going to ask questions,” Stafford said in response to a question from School Committee member Rosemary Connolly.
Kowalski placed all names in nomination toward the two rounds of votes.
The nine interviewing candidates: Stephanie Blackman, P. Christopher DiOrio, Nicholas Femia, Anna Hourihan, Chris Marks, Annemarie Odle, Ginger Sullivan, Ryan Tressel and Danielle Winn, each had 10 minutes, with Stafford timing them, to speak about how they would support the district’s towns and students.
“Thank you very much, guys,” Stafford joked, as the candidates filed back into the Select Board’s meeting room. “You have made it awful.” In May, of any of the candidates wish to go on, can try again by campaigning for the seats when they come up again in May.
The first ballot was to fill the seat vacated by the death of Fred Small in late July. At the end of the first ballot, Stephanie Blackman and Chris Marks were both short of the needed five-vote majority on Ballot 1, but Select Board members Justin Evans and Shawn Kain added their support for Blackman, along with School Committee members Dawn Byers, Steve Bois, Rosemary Connolly and Stafford,
“Stephanie, you won a seat,” Stafford announced.
Ballot 2 followed the same route, ultimately giving a seat to Marks in a second run at the seat vacated by David Forth’s resignation. DiOrio with two votes and Marks with three votes were the top vote-getters in the first round, with Marks ending up with Byers and Kain shifting their votes to Marks to put him over the top. DiOrio ended up with four votes.
“I hope everybody thinks about it, watches, comes to our meetings, we appreciate an audience when we have school committee meetings,” Stafford said to the candidates who came up short. “We appreciate input, we always like input. Stay with it and don;t get discouraged and try again.”