Members of a vital public body in Amherst must find a way to put their house in order. The well-being of a school district demands it. Their selection by voters requires it. Salvaging a sense of self-respect begs it.
They must put their personal differences aside and work for the common good of the Amherst-Pelham Regional School District.
Enough with the finger-pointing. Regardless of how justified they feel, or how wronged, they should just stop it – and get down to the business of seeing to it that Amherst’s reputation for excellence in public education is nurtured not just for the year ahead, but for the next decade.
The desperate private plea that emerged from within the Amherst-Pelham Regional School Committee late last month, detailed in a story Friday by Gazette reporter Scott Merzbach, suggests this panel has hit rock bottom.
In the Aug. 22 letter to Mitchell D. Chester, commissioner of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, five members of the committee, writing outside of formal and proper committee channels, begged for help in resolving “dysfunction” that has left the panel unable to perform the public’s business. The letter was signed by Laura Kent, Katherine Appy, Sarah Dolven, Anastasia Ordonez and Phoebe Hazzard.
The letter declared “a crisis in our community” that needs immediate attention from Chester’s department – help that will not be coming, the office replied, because such assistance falls outside its jurisdiction.
This committee must, through a recommitment to the best interests of students, teachers and staff, heal its wounds and regain public trust.
This past week, members held a retreat designed in part to repair relations. That session is said to have ended in shouting.
One of the most respected leaders in Amherst, state Rep. Ellen Story, who once served on the school committee, was copied on the Aug. 22 letter to Chester but already knew of the internal friction. She said this week that relations within the committee are worse than any she’s witnessed in her 44 years in town.
It is clear from its contents, and candor, that writers of the letter didn’t intend for it to become public. These members, all of whom voted for the recent $309,000 settlement with former Superintendent Maria Geryk, presumably wouldn’t want residents to know they believe the conflict leaves the district at a point of “stagnation.”
That would not be the message they’d like to send to families considering enrolling in the district, much less those already here.
The letter also makes plain that they settled with Geryk not solely as a legal expedient, but because they believe the former school leader was forced to resign by a unfair campaign of harassment, including actions by “certain members” of the committee. The letter is brutally frank about the conduct they claim contributed to her departure, and to their own disillusionment with public service.
Just as Geryk claimed to be worn down by personal attacks and in emotional distress, the letter’s signers cited their own fatigue. Indeed, Kent resigned as chairwoman soon after for that reason. Dolven is gone as well, having quit five days before the date of the letter.
As Story suggested in an interview this week, accepting public office demands that people set personal agendas aside. “Hopefully, when you are elected your goal is to work toward benefiting the schools, not to wreak havoc as a member of the School Committee,” she said.
With that, Story appeared to be siding with the writers of the letter.
But for the good of the town, it is time to get past that.
If members of the committee cannot pledge to work together, they should resign and allow voters in the district’s towns to provide new representation.
We appeal to committee members to end this feud. Get on with doing what’s best for the district’s students. Now.