We are an all-volunteer, community group--no budget, no highly paid consultants. We strive for accuracy and link to the publicly available information that we draw on so that you can form your own conclusions. If you seen an error, please reach out to osot.info@gmail.com, and, if you can, please provide a link to the correct information.
Jump to a question:
Mohawk Superintendent Sheryl Stanton has said at many public gatherings that the root problem is that “we’re 25% overemployed”—as if employment in good, working- and middle-class jobs is a problem. We do not believe that our teachers and paras are to blame, nor are our children, nor is our need to work for a living. We are deeply skeptical of Stanton’s suggestion that a higher unemployment rate leads to sustainability.
The problem is that the state has not met its obligation to its citizens (even the state’s wealthiest towns are laying teachers off and proposing enormous tax increases, according to The Boston Globe).
All four of them: BSE, Colrain, Hawlemont, and Sanderson, leaving one super-sized campus for our 250-square mile district, the largest district by area in the entire state.
The plan is to cut 65 jobs (see slide 140 here). From what we’ve been able to determine, it looks like about 80% of these cuts, or 52 positions will be at the elementary level. That’s about 13 per school.
So, think of everyone you know who works at your local school, think of their names and faces, and then imagine 13 of them without work.
Neither 2D8T nor the School Committee have done the work to answer this question.
However, it stands to reason that cutting a quarter of the workforce of the area’s largest employer will be felt widely.
The loss of paychecks means less to spend in small businesses and restaurants. (Case in point: Have you ever seen Shelburne Falls right after school gets out? The shops and streets are busy with grandparents, parents, caregivers, and groups of older elementary students walking home from BSE and shopping. This is a tradition that generations of families have enjoyed.)
Towns without schools often see their property values decline. Because there is no other comparably sized educational employer in the area, teachers and paras who see their jobs cut will have to travel widely in order to work; many will likely move away, or, if they have kids in the district, will pull them to attend schools closer to their place of employment. This will accelerate the district’s drop in enrollment, which will further reduce our state funding, which will mean the district has to rely even more on raising property taxes on properties that are losing value…and so on in a vicious downward spiral.
Well, it depends on how far back you want to look. Compared to the late-90s, yes. But 2D8T’s own research shows that elementary school enrollment has been holding steady--even growing!--for about a decade, and total enrollment has been significantly increasing for the last five years. There is a slight downturn from 2025 - 2026: the same period during which district leadership has been insisting school closures and job cuts are inevitable. This is a picture of a district that has turned the corner—thanks to our educators and staff. Now is the time to do everything we can to support our schools, our teachers, and our towns, not foreclose upon them.
At a community meeting at Sanderson Academy in December 2025 members of 2D8T and the School Committee confirmed that no one will see their tax bills go down if we shut all the elementary schools. And members of Colrain's finance committee have told their constituents that closing their school won't save the towns anything. It appears that there is no savings to the School Committee's plan!
A big part of the answer is that we would need to build something new at Mohawk. 2D8T’s back-of-the-napkin estimates range from over $30 million to $145 million (see slide 114 here). These are very preliminary numbers, and the final cost is yet to be determined.
At the same time, Franklin County Tech is proposing a $246 million building project, a cost that will also have to be borne by the towns.
This is flat untrue. The state may reimburse us for 70% of the reimbursable costs. What the School Committee and 2D8T have yet to say out loud is that the reimbursement rate for total costs has historically been around 44%—which means that, according to 2D8T’s preliminary estimates, the district’s taxpayers would have to pay up to $81,200,000 to house our students. And this figure does not include paying for the new Franklin Tech campus.
Once those schools are closed, the full cost of maintaining them and/or converting them for another purpose will be borne by the taxpayers of those towns—no state reimbursement, no school district help.
But there's an exception for Sanderson Academy. The School Committee will transfer ownership of the building to Plainfield, not Ashfield--and so Plainfield will be solely responsible for maintaining, and paying for, the building and its grounds (See slide 20 here.)
In December, 2025, the Massachusetts School Building Authority admitted the district into its Eligibility Period—the first step in planning, authorizing, estimating, funding, building, and reimbursing new construction. It is a long and complex process (for more, see the MSBA’s site here) and the district has not been clear on either the timeline or the costs. (Aside from the cost of the building, there’s a cost associated with undertaking the MSBA’s process itself—again, the district has been unclear what the cost is or when we’ll learn of it, though it sounds as if we’ll have an opportunity to vote on it because it will be paid for by our taxes.)
It is the MSBA timeline that drives the eight-town vote on whether or not we close our schools. (Note: each step in those green boxes has a yet-to-be-determined cost attached to it...which we are also going to have to pay).
While the School Committee has decided that closing schools is the only path they’ll pursue, the ultimate decision lies with us, the voters.
The School Committee wants to hold special town meetings (typically very poorly attended) and has indicated that these would be held in later November (or smack in the middle of the holiday season, when many folks are traveling) of 2027.
In order for any of this to pass, all eight towns will have to unanimously vote to shut our schools.
Part of the vote will also involve rewriting the school-district’s charter, which is essentially the document laying out how the district will be governed.
2D8T is working on that as of spring, 2026, but it sounds like two of the big changes will be in the balance of power between bigger and smaller towns and scrapping the requirement for unanimous votes. We will update this as we learn more.
It's a long way from the edges of towns like Hawley, Heath, Plainfield and Colrain to the proposed site of the new school.
According to 2D8T, the best way to save money on bussing is for a single run, which means that K–12 students would all be on the same bus.
Additionally, moving to a single campus would increase the number of students who are on the bus for more than two hours a day, from 23 students to 39 students.
While no elementary-school child is currently on the bus for more than an hour each way, the School District’s plan would mean that ten K–6 children would spend two hours a day on the bus. Eight of these would be the very youngest children, in K–3. By the time they graduate, these students will have 4,320 hours of their life, or six solid months, on a bus.
What might this mean for you? What happens if your student misses the bus? How long will your car ride be, and what effect will this have on your ability to make it to your job on time? What happens if your student needs to get picked up in the middle of the day, or from an after-school event that gets out before the working day is over? How would you make this work? Would you be able to be a part of your child’s school life?
This is a great question—one that the district has no answer for. One would imagine that fewer teachers, larger classes, and less support will lead to more educator burnout, whose costs will ultimately be paid by our children. In fact, according to Hanover Research (one of the four consultants the School Committee has hired), elementary education suffers in schools with more than 400 students.
These are some of the most important questions to ask, because schools are the foundations of our towns’ culture, identity, economy, and future.
Unfortunately, neither the School Committee nor 2D8T have ever publicly addressed any of these questions.
We believe that our towns have no future without children, and there are no children without good, local schools. There is nothing sustainable about shutting the future down.
Yes, there is hope—but it is going to take all of us. Remember, closing our schools does not fix the root problem. Here are a few bright points to consider:
Nearly every district in the entire state is in trouble. While this might sound like bad news, it means that this is not Mohawk’s problem to fix alone. This is a moment for state-wide collaboration and solidarity. It is a moment of real opportunity.
Our western Mass elected representatives know how dire the school funding situation is, and State Senator Jo Comerford has even sponsored a bill, An Act to Provide A Sustainable Future for Rural Schools, which would create a Rural School Aid Fund and would receive $60,000,000 each year from the state’s General Fund to aid districts like ours. This would be transformative.
In 2022, Massachusetts voters passed the Fair Share Amendment (or Millionaire’s Tax), which asks the richest among us to pay a very small increased tax on that part of their income over $1 million. That tax revenue is earmarked for infrastructure and schools—and it is bringing far more than estimated (more than $2 billion a year). Franklin, Hampshire, and Berkshire counties voted overwhelmingly for the amendment, but nowhere was it more popular than in Franklin County, where it passed with 68.1% of the vote. Nevertheless, we are not yet getting our fair share of the Fair Share amendment.
There is widespread, state-wide momentum to fix Chapter 70 funding—literally everybody knows that it is broken. Here’s a good rundown from the Massachusetts Teachers Association.
Grassroots involvement. This is where you come in.
The Mohawk School Committee is working hard to make every one of us feel like closing schools is inevitable (perhaps you’ve seen one of their many ominous flyers that says “Change is Coming”). But it is not. The future of our schools and towns is only inevitable of the School Committee convinces you to give up.
Nor is there anything inevitable about the direction the School Committee has chosen. Imagine, instead, if they had spent that $650,000, 2+ years, and hundreds of volunteer hours in grassroots community organizing, celebrating our schools and teachers, working with the Massachusetts Teachers Association (the folks who brought us the Fair Share Amendment), and directing our collective democratic voice at Beacon Hill—imagine what such a school committee could accomplish.
But they haven’t. That’s a shame. But it doesn’t change the fact that the power is really with us, the voters.
So get and stay informed—join our monthly newsletter where you’ll find calls to actions, maybe join our action group (send an email to osot.info@gmail.com if you’re interested).
But don’t stop there, or take our word for what’s happening to our district. Make up your own mind. Sign up for 2D8T’s newsletter.
The Greenfield Recorder’s Madison Schofield is doing an excellent job reporting on our schools—keep your eye out for her byline.
Go to Mohawk’s School Committee Meetings and 2D8T’s meetings, and make sure to ask questions (don’t be intimidated by the tone, and make sure they answer your question).
Talk with your friends and neighbors, teachers and paras.
Or maybe you’d like to run for School Committee—if you’d like to run on a pro-student, pro-teacher, pro-education ticket, we’d love to help. You can see whose term is coming up here.
Unfortunately it is true, and has immediate implications for enrollment, school and town finances, equity, trust in our school committee and administration, and on where we will be able to send our children next year. (Be prepared–this is a long section.)
During the May 13, 2026 School Committee meeting, Sheryl Stanton and William Lataille presented a proposal to limit, and in the case of Colrain and BSE, nearly eliminate, the option for students to choice-in to our elementary schools. (A full recording of the meeting can be found here. The discussion on school choice begins at the 1:58 mark).
The principals of each school had submitted the number of open choice seats that they wanted: 29 for Sanderson, 49 for Colrain, and 15 for BSE.
Instead, Stanton and Lataille presented a proposal where Sanderson stays at 29 seats, Colrain is allowed only 6, and BSE 4, which will remain the status quo until the School Committee votes to lift the choice cap.
It appears that the school principals had no idea that Stanton and Lataille were planning to override their requests.
Why is this a problem?
As you likely know, the main source of state funding for education is through Chapter 70 funding, which is based in part on enrollment (for a good primer on Chapter 70 and rural schools, see this).
But another way that schools may receive funding is through the school choice program.
In Massachusetts, every student has the right to choose in which district they want to enroll, as long as their school of choice accepts choice-in students. No district can restrict a student’s decision to choice out. State funding follows the student to whatever district they decide to attend.
For example, if a Mohawk student choices-out to Pioneer, that student’s state funding goes with them. In effect, Mohawk pays Pioneer tuition for that one student. If a Pioneer student chooses to come here, then Pioneer pays us.
According to the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, Mohawk Trail received $983,016 in tuition from students who choiced-in to the district in fiscal year 2026. We paid $690,764 for students who choiced-out. This is a sign of our district’s success, and testament to the excellence of our teachers, paras, and staff: more students choose Mohawk than choose to leave, and we gained almost $300,000 in funding.
By severely restricting school choice, Stanton and Lataille have deliberately engineered a crisis that will do three things:
Our enrollment will immediately plummet—especially in Colrain, which stands to potentially lose 43 students.
Along with that plummeting enrollment, we will lose hundreds of thousands of dollars in state funding.
Taken together, Stanton and Lataille’s plan will create a fiscal crisis forcing the district’s voters to close schools or see truly astronomical property tax increases. Stanton and Lataille will then be able to single Colrain out as underenrolled and argue that closing it is the only path to sustainability. This is the ultimate point: to force school closures, by any means necessary, beginning with Colrain, which may close in as little as two years.
Furthermore, Stanton and Lataille rammed this through in the sneakiest, most undemocratic way possible. They brought their proposal forward with the bare minimum of public notice, at the last minute before the District is required to tell the state how many choice seats will be available for next year, when the School Committee could only barely reach quorum, with no meaningful opportunity for public comment, debate, or involvement. In fact, Lataille said during the meeting, “I know it’s unpopular, I know you don’t want to hear it, and I know we don’t want it to get out to the public, but the only way we’re going to do this [become financially sustainable] is to close a school.”
And choice provides Mohawk with more than just increased funding.
Maya Winfrey (one of Shelburne’s representatives who voted against Stanton and Lataille’s proposal) brought up how school choice is one of the main avenues for diversifying our elementary schools. “As a person of color, who has kids of color who go to school, we live in a really white community, and I think it’s a great benefit to have people who come from other areas to BSE…a place where kids can not feel isolated. It’s more diverse, it’s more rich, the experiences are broader.” Stanton’s response: “Absolutely, there are a few downsides,” and “school choice brings great diversity and experience to our district…and now we are in a different place and I don’t know that we should be continuing to do that.”
It has so far been the norm to allow a younger sibling to choice-in to the same school as their older sibling—but that will no longer be allowed, splitting up families and making parents’ morning commute increasingly difficult.
And no longer will any child be allowed to choice within the district, say, from BSE to Sanderson; every child will have to stay at their assigned school. This will be especially hard on staff, many of whom choose to bring their children to the school where they work.
If Stanton and Lataille’s plan is allowed to continue and Mohawk gets a reputation as a district that does not allow choice, the damage will be done for years, even if the School Committee does vote to open choice back up.
When pressed by members of the School Committee on these issues and many more, Stanton and Lataille made it clear they have no plan to address any of them, and would only repeat that choice has to be capped to force Colrain to close in the next two years.
There is good news: this was an extremely contentious vote and only barely passed. Rachel Hinkel-Wang (Ashfield), Maya Winfrey (Shelburne), and, notably, School Committee Chair Martha Thurber (Buckland) all voted against Stanton and Lataille’s proposal. (Though Thurber later confirmed that she voted against the proposal because it did not throttle choice enough.)
Furthermore, the School Committee did pass an amendment to Stanton and Lataille's proposal that would restore about half of the choice seats to BSE only--making it clear that Colrain is their target.
We can get the School Committee to repeal this decision—but it is going to take community participation and action. If you haven’t already, send a letter to the School Committee urging them to repeal their decision, and join us at the next School Committee meeting at Mohawk, 6PM June 10th, as we gather to encourage the School Committee to do the right thing.
It largely was--and the victory is due solely to the fact that the community showed up in partnership with MDEA (the Mohawk Trail educator's union) in overwhelming numbers.
So what happened?
Thanks to community participation we discovered that Stanton and Lataille either misstated or misunderstood the June 1 deadline, and when we contacted the state, we learned from Robert F. O’Donnell, director of school finance for the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, that “the June 1 deadline only applies to school committees that decide not to participate in school choice. Decisions around the number of available seats and the number of seats in each school do not have to happen by June 1.”
We then launched a letter campaign urging the School Committee to reinstate school choice—and you sent 885 of these letters out—which succeeded in getting a re-vote on the June 10 School Committee agenda.
And then at least 50 of you showed up in-person to the 6/10 meeting, with dozens more tuning in online (enough to hit the district’s cap for digital attendees—we heard reports that folks were unable to log on). It was a standing-room only crowd, and we were thrilled to see a bloc of educators from the MDEA union, all wearing their green union shirts.
Thirteen people gave public testimony, eloquently giving voice to how important our schools are for our communities and poking holes in the School Committee’s narrative that the towns want their schools closed. Each speaker was followed by a round of sustained applause from the crowd.
And then the process of making motions and voting began:
Superintendent Stanton made the first move and brought a motion to add back a very limited number of choice seats to both Colrain and BSE. Those Colrain and BSE educators with children would have priority for these few seats.
Colrain representative Dennis DePaolo then made a motion to amend Stanton's proposal by restoring all Colrain's choice seats in addition to the handful of seats Stanton proposed adding.
At nearly the same time, Ashfield representative Rachel Wang made a motion to amend DePaolo's motion by also restoring all of BSE's seats on top of the handful of seats Stanton proposed adding.
With all the motions and amendments on the floor, the voting started, in reverse order, beginning with Wang's amendment, which failed to pass, though Wang, DePaolo, Willow Cohen (Shelburne) and Maya Winfrey (Shelburne) all voted for it.
Next up was DePaolo's amendment to restore all all Colrain's choice seats in addition to the handful of seats Stanton proposed adding. This just passed, with Kit Bayer (Ashfield), Wang (Ashfield), Charles Leach (Buckland), DePaolo, Cohen, and Winfrey voting for it.
Once DePaolo's amendment passed, the School Committee voted on the fully emended motion: restoring all all Colrain's choice seats in addition to the handful of seats Stanton proposed adding. This passed overwhelmingly. Wang (Ashfield), Bayer (Ashfield), Leach (Buckland), Smith (Charlemont), DePaolo (Colrain), Bjorklund (Plainfield), Cohen (Shelburne), and Winfrey (Shelburne) all voted for the amended motion. Those who voted against include: Thurber (School Committee chair, Buckland), John Chivers (Colrain), Suzanne Crawford (Hawley), Robert Sears (Hawley), and Budge Litchfield (Heath).
The are two take-home messages here:
The towns and schools that organize wind up with a strong say in local government.
The newer cohort of School Committee members seems more willing to govern democratically and work with members of the community. The more established cohort seems fixated on school closures and job cuts by any means necessary.
We are a grassroots, community group of volunteers—no fancy consultants, no large budget, just a sense of Hilltown pride and the willingness to stand up for our friends and neighbors. We’ll be updating this information as we learn more—if you learn something and want to share it with us, especially if you have a document or news article we can link to, please reach out to osot.info@gmail.com.
