HANOVER –An update on the school’s renovation and expansion program, being funded in part by the Massachusetts School Building Association (MSBA), as well as ongoing regional agreement revision, by the South Shore Tech School Committee on Wednesday Feb. 15, also expanded – into a discussion about the future of vocational education and how the school should prepare for that.
The district was admitted to the MSBA program about a year ago.
Superintendent-Director Dr. Thomas J. Hickey had reported that the Building Committee has submitted a draft request for services document to the MSBA so that panel can hire a design firm for the project, expecting a month or so to pass before the MSBA takes action on it.
“The trajectory for 2023 is that we will probably spend from now through June going through the process of bringing the design team on board,” Hickey said. “By June … we’ll have formed our project team and the second half of 2023 will be focused on the design. We should be at the tail-end of this calendar year with first instances of models [and cost estimates for a new and/or renovated school].”
Visioning sessions with members of the school community are being eyed as a source for discovering what the district’s needs are. The models will give an idea of what this final project cost might be. An opening is eyed for 2028.
SST is anticipating that 55.16 percent of the total cost will be reimbursed by MSBA although the construction reimbursement amount has not been determined as of now.
“Towns want to come here if they don’t have vocational schools to go to, but yet there are kids who want to come to a vocational school to get an education,” Whitman representative Dan Salvucci said, pointing to Marshfield, in particular that has expressed interest in, and is negotiating to, join the SST region. “That’s the trend nowadays.”
He suggested the impact of that be considered.
“We may build a school that’s bigger … with a lot more space than we need for the students we have, but future needs…
That point was echoed by Scituate representative Jack Manning.
“I don’t know if you’ve been watching the news, but, of late, vocational ed has been getting support,” he said, holding his thumb up.
The comment came during another ancillary discussion of bills now before the state legislature on bills concerning access opportunity and capacity in vocational education. Hickey has recently sent a letter to area legislators concerning bills HD485 and SD1697.
“This bill seeks a lot of things,” he said. “But I do believe the timing is right to at least raise the issue.”
He recalled that committee members often speak of the days when regional vocational schools were opened in the 1960s and 1970s began with substantial state investment and not as much burden on the local towns.
“This bill attempts to do a few things,” Hickey said. “The most notable … is that it seeks to set up a program that puts at least $3 billion aside for brick and mortar improvements to regional vocational schools, county agricultural schools and high schools that have Chapter 74 programs.”
The funding source would be the recently passed Fair Share Amendment.
“In order for our schools to be modernized and expanded to meet state demand, capacity must be improved, and we should take an ‘all of the above’ strategy,” Hickey said, offering programs at night, programs to students who do not attend the school full time, and the school should get state funding for equipment.
The missing link is direct state funding to help taxpayers in the district offset the cost of a substantial capital project, according to Hickey.
“That’s what this bill would do,” he said. “The state’s economy benefits when it invests in its regionals and its county agriculturals, and if the state’s willing to do that, local municipalities don’t have to make that tough choice [in deciding whether to construct a new building].”
Hickey said that is why the district has to build the most modern building it can afford, while projecting honestly to themselves what the increased operating costs could be.
MSBA has agreed to subsidize a new or renovated SST with enrollments between 645-805 students with the current 8 member district, or as many as 975 students with Marshfield becoming a member. The school’s enrollment is approximately 650 students currently with a waiting list.
“Very few building projects are taking an existing school population and projecting that it’s going to increase by a third,” Hickey said, noting several such projects are being built to serve a smaller population. “We are bucking that trend and we’ll know so much more by the end of this calendar year [about feasible options].”

HANSON – The Select Board voted at its Tuesday, Feb. 21 meeting, to accept a citizen’s petition to lay out three private ways as town roads and to refer to it the Planning Board as part of the process of obtaining a Town Meeting vote.
The petition involves Alden Way, Gray Lane and Stringer Lane.
“Those three roads right now in the neighborhood are private roads,” Town Administrator Lisa Green said. “We have received a citizen’s petition for the town to accept these as public ways.”
Citizens petitions go before Town Meeting for a vote, but there is a legal process that must be followed, including that the Select Board vote its intention to lay out the roadways as public.
“Regardless of what you vote here tonight, because it’s a citizen’s petition, it still goes on the [Town Meeting] warrant,” she said. “Depending on your vote here tonight … during Town Meeting, when the citizen’s petition comes up, town counsel will speak regarding the status of the petition.”
Environmental Partners has conducted a study of the roadway conditions including drainage, and what it would cost the town to make improvements to drainage.
Town Highway Director Jamison Shave has also provided a letter outlining costs should the town accept some of the town’s private ways as public, based on a visual assessment. There will also be legal costs involved because of deed work required.
Once the Select Board votes to accept, the petition goes to the Planning Board to begin their process.
“Once that process takes place, the next process would be Town Meeting,” Green said, followed by counsel establishing easements and deeds, if necessary.
“Obviously cost is a factor,” Select Board Chair Laura FitzGerald-Kemmett said.
“It’s hard to estimate those costs because it’s going to be based on easements, possibly acquired land, things like that,” Green said. “If necessary, we may have to have surveyors go out there just to make sure the property lines are correct, to establish the frontage on each of the roads.”
Green summarized that the three roads could represent “considerable costs,” noting that the recent taking of the Sleeper property cost the town more than $13,000 in legal fees.
“I do want to remind you that the Sleeper property is not the ‘poster child’ for costs,” FitzGerald-Kemmett said. “We had people who had died [and] we had to research their heirs.”
Green said that would represent a “worst-case scenario” to provide an idea of what the town could face.
“We don’t know what we’ll face when we look at titles,” she said.
She asked Green to seek out an estimate from town counsel.
The entire process must be completed 45 days before Town Meeting
Vice Chair Joe Weeks asked why all of that must be completed before Town Meeting.
FitzGerald-Kemmett said town counsel would argue the town had not legally followed the process for road acceptance, regardless of whether or not it is spurred by a citizen’s petition.
“You can’t circumvent what the regulations are for going from private to public [roads],” she said. “Town Meeting is going to ultimately decide, that’s how it should be. We just offer up what we think is in the best interests of the town.”
Planner Tony DeFrias said the process, is required by law and is strictly outlined.
“These aren’t formalities, but they must be followed strictly, and there’s even a court case regarding it,” he said.
Selectmen, in deciding to support the citizen’s petition must submit it to the Planning Board, which has 45 days to review it and any documents pertaining to it. They must make some kind of recommendation back to the Select Board, who would then have another meeting to move it on to Town Meeting. Within 120 days of closing the meeting, the town has to work toward getting easements, any road or easements required.
“Where I can get expensive long-term easements or second mortgages,” DeFrias said it could mean extra steps at the bank, but that must go through attorneys, but once it is accepted as a private way it gets priority for maintenance over other unaccepted roads and attains town funding for maintenance need, becoming eligible for state Chapter 90 funds.
Shave has determined the road is in “pretty good shape.”

The building timers were shutting down the lights as the Whitman-Hanson Regional School Committee wound down a four-hour meeting Wednesday, Feb. 15 by voting to reject, by a 4-5 vote, a public documents request by School Committee member Dawn Byers.
Voting in favor were: Byers, David Forth, Fred Small and Steve Bois, Voting against were: Christopher Howard, Christopher Scriven, Hillary Kniffen, Glen DiGravio and Michelle Bourgelas. Member Beth Stafford had to leave the meeting early and did not cast a vote.
Byers had sought a salary line breakdown by position – not including names – building location and funding source for all staff in the district and supporting documentation in the FY24 budget.
“Everything that [Business Director John Stanbrook] gives you is uploaded the next day to the website,” Superintendent of Schools Jeff Szymaniak. “It will be attached to the budget.”
On Thursday, Feb. 16, Byers said she had received an acknowledgement “in the affirmative” of a previous public records request, which she made Feb. 8.
“No citizen needs to give reason why they’re submitting a public records request,” she said a few times during the meeting as well as after.
During the meeting, Byers read from a prepared statement that she had not asked for her name to be put on the agenda.
“The administration has the salary totals, and should provide the context behind how they arrived at those totals,” she said. “The budget policy itself gives a directive to provide a budget that is clear and understandable; Information retrieval in order to accomplish this is not a directive to the superintendent.
“My question is simply where the money is being spent in our budget,” Byers said, noting she had filed a FOIA request on Feb. 4. “The administration has the salary totals and should provide the context behind how they arrived at those totals.”
She explained that, in her accounting background, this is standard procedure, to reconcile totals with the detailed data. Byers said she has spoken with Jim Hardy at the Mass. Association of School Committees (MASC) about her request.
“Ironically, a member of this committee just unilaterally obstructed access to public record to ascertain my question was simply where the money was […] in our budget,” she said and sent another FOIA to the state.
Hardy, in fact described the action of putting Byers’ name on the agenda as “a bit harsh,” she said. “‘The information is public, it exists, and the district has to provide it,’” he informed her.
She said, as some committee members were observed rolling their eyes, that she was far from humiliated and would not stop advocating for educational equity and proper school finance. Byers said a similar request last year was complied with without question or hesitation and asked why things were different this year.
“We’ll go through the long version, then, if that’s what we want to do,” Howard said, adding that the budget subcommittee did not see the need, but was not entirely clear about the request and clarification was sought.
“We were really trying to understand how [the Hanover budget example] would help us,” he said, adding that Szymaniak explained Business Manager John Stanbrook was “very tight on time” and that it might be necessary to have a working group look at equity.
Howard, also reading from a prepared statement, said his understanding was that Byers had called Szymaniak to ask for the same information, after the budget subcommittee had discussed it for a second time, suggesting that if he did not provide it, she would make a FOIA request.
They decided it made sense to bring the matter to the full committee and not to do anything at the time.
Howard had consulted school counsel about the manner in which the email alleging obstruction made a public records request and was told that was not the proper way to do it.
“I encouraged her, as any other citizen, to make a public records request,” he said, adding counsel had advised that the will of the committee should direct the administration’s efforts.
Budget Subcommittee Chair Forth offered his perspective, saying that Byers’ January request was mentioned by the superintendent without specifying a name, as they discussed the line items and how they might be broken apart and presented as well as how it would work for transparency, optics and use of Stanbrook’s available time.
“I wanted to get more information and try to understand that committee member’s perspective more,” Forth said. “I did not ask the superintendent or Howard who that School Committee member was, because in February 2021, Ms. Byers had made a similar recommendation when the former chairman was in charge and wanted more transparency between line items.”
He asked Byers after the recent joint budget meeting with selectmen and finance committees if she was the one making the request and requesting her to email the example so the subcommittee could review and discuss it.
Forth said he didn’t think the subcommittee could make the decision to provide the information, based in part on the time constraints facing Stanbrook and recommended it be discussed at the School Committee level and decide whether it is something that could be implemented this year, or would have to wait until next year.
Kniffen, while saying she did not believe the request was “malintended at all,” said it could place teacher salaries in public view where tenured teacher salaries are higher and expressed concern about why the information was sought and how it might be used.
Howard said there have been other requests for information left to the will of the committee.
The information Byers is seeking is aimed at determining which teacher salaries might be shifted to ESSER funds in the budget.
While Hanson prints teacher salaries in its annual report, Whitman does not.
DiGravio said he understands the idea of having the line items available to provide data for a better decision.
“I don’t see any benefit in having [teachers’] names,” he said. “Is there any way that their names helps us make a better decision?”
Byers thanked him for the point and noted the Hanover example from her first request does not provide a single staff name.
Bourgelas asked how Byers was able to obtain the same information so easily last year, including names and asked why there was a procedural change. Howard said he wasn’t certain and wondered why it went before the Budget Subcommittee twice.
He said he felt very confident that if the same people were on the Budget Subcommittee last year, they would have handled it the exact same way.
Forth also said any questions about a disparity in salaries between tenured and newer teachers could be explained by the recent cuts in positions to balance the budget.
“It’s not a matter of teachers being overpaid, but they’ve been here for X-amount of years and the teachers who aren’t get pink-slipped, so I think that’s context, too, when you’re looking at the grand scheme of things,” he said.
Szymaniak’s said he did not recall what was different this year from Byers’ request last year.
“I get a lot of requests for a lot of information,” he said. “I do the best that I can to accommodate all 10 folks on the committee. I don’t remember that last year.”
Byers said it was not Szymaniak she dealt with last year, it had been Stanbrook.
He is also concerned about the culture surrounding the budget process.
“My staff is fragile right now, and folks are talking about salaries,” Szymaniak said, noting every document that goes out is placed on the web site. “I’m a little protective of my people.”
He said the Budget Subcommittee is also new this year and he wants all information requests to funnel through there.
Whitman Finance Committee liaison Kathleen Ottina said she was one of the sources of Szymaniak’s frequent requests and thanked him for his response to her questions.
“It’s not to be snoopy, it’s to be able to answer the questions that people have,” she said. “You have a lot of major line item shifts that you’ve never had before – ESSER I, II, III, a lot of grants – a lot of moves taking place.”
She said she would advocate for the school budget, but needs information.
Kevin Kafka questioned the intent of the request.
“If you go in a data direction … then it becomes analytical, it becomes evaluative,” he said. “I just think we need to stay away from that.”
Kniffen said some teachers – such as gym teachers – are the only ones at a school.
“You don’t have to put out their names, people are going to find out,” she said. “Being a teacher right now is pretty miserable. We talked about morale last week, The public is always looking for something negative. … When we’re trying to get support for a budget, that’s not going to help at all.”
Byers had also objected to being listed on the agenda by name (simply as “Requests by Ms. Byers” with no other explanation).
“We’re at a little bit of an impasse on this one, so I didn’t want it to get in the way of the committee,” Chair Christopher Howard said, explaining that Byers had brought a concept of providing a line-item detail of every district employee’s salary to the Budget Committee a couple of times.
“I’m now putting this at, ‘What is the purview of the committee because I think we need to make clear if we’e going to create something or do something that’s going to take some time and effort.”
He did, however, defended Byers’ reaction to being specifically named on the agenda.
“I can recall two years ago where I felt unfairly targeted and harassed at times by the former chairman, who would put me on agenda items and executive sessions,” he said. “I feel like also today, in particular … more animosity in the room and I’ve seen a couple remarks I consider condescending to Ms. Byers. I don’t think that’s appropriate and anything we should be doing. We should be respectful as committee members.”
He said Byers had made a valid request.