HOLYOKE –  The Holyoke School Committee met for their regularly scheduled meeting on the evening of Jan 11, where they discussed the possibility of the district’s transition to a hybrid learning plan and plans for a temporary shelter at the Holyoke High School Dean Campus.

The meeting began with Vice Chair Mildred Lefebvre reading public comments from a few community members. The first was from the parent of a student who was concerned about the plan to return to in-person learning. The parent said the positivity rate, they felt, led it not being safe to put teachers and students back in school.

“I suggest waiting until teachers can be vaccinated,” they said. The second comment was another parent who also expressed their concern about in-person learning. They said the proposed schedule did not consider working parents and the positivity rate was too high for them to return to school at this time.

The third parent who expressed concerns was the mother of two special needs students and said extending their school day in the middle of the year did not make sense. “I have a feeling with the extended hour day I’m going to have to pull them out and homeschool because it’s just going to be too much time on a screen for our family between school, therapy sessions, leisure time, etc,” she said.

Dr. Alberto Vazquez Matos, superintendent for the district, then gave an update and said they had a target date in January to bring some students back to in-person learning, but that had been pushed back. The new proposed target dates to get select students back to in-person learning, he said, was now in February, but didn’t elaborate on a specific date. He said the results of the community survey sent out to parents asking parents to indicate whether they preferred hybrid or full remote learning resulted in 661 “students in grades pre-K to two” requesting a hybrid learning model. This, he explained, was 46 percent of students in those grades.

Families who choose to participate in the hybrid learning model would be assigned to cohort C and attend in-person learning four days out of the week. Vazquez Matos said those students would be assigned an in-person teacher. However, students and families who chose to remain in the remote learning cohort, cohort D, would be assigned a remote-learning teacher.

Students in grades 1-12, however, who choose to participate in the hybrid learning model would be assigned to cohort A or B and only attend in-person classes two days out of the week. For the reminder of the days, they would attend class virtually. Those in grades 1-12 who wish to continue remote learning only will be assigned to cohort D and “join the class virtually with their in-person peers.”

Cohort A would attend in-person classes on Monday and Tuesday, while cohort B would attend classes in-person on Thursday and Friday. Wednesday, Vazquez Matos explained, would be a remote day for all students in the district as it was needed for deep cleaning.

He then went on to explain the “newly adjusted school day,” which was slated to begin on Jan. 19. The restructure, he said, “would allow students to be more engaged with their peers and teachers.” Instead of their original schedule, which allowed for synchronous learning from 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. and then up to two and a half hours of asynchronous learning, Vazquez Matos said the new schedule would allow for a six hour school day with four to five hours of synchronous learning “scheduled throughout the day.” However, Wednesdays would remain the same and allot for no more than “three hours of synchronous learning for grades K-8 and up to four hours for grades 9-12.”

During a brief technology malfunction, the committee allowed Pete McAndrew, the president of the Holyoke Teachers Union, to provide public comment. He expressed concerns from teachers regarding the return to school too soon, but emphasized that they agreed that children benefit from in-person instruction. However, he said teachers were concerned about the high rates of COVID-19 transmission.

McAndrew said while the district had granted some permission to teach from home, the anxiety for those not able to work from home and having to choose between going into school and keeping their job was extreme. He added that staff members also felt it was too soon to return to in-person learning. “What we’d like to see, all of us, is a gradual reintroduction of not only students, but staff, to meet the needs of those students who we know need our support,” he said.

Vazquez Matos then resumed his presentation with regards to the city’s health metrics. He said while Holyoke was in the red at the moment, the state metrics said that should a community be categorized as red they were not forced to do remote learning, but could also pursue a hybrid option as well. He then showed a monthly count of both students and staff who had tested positive for COVID-19, with there being a total of 123 in the month of December 2020. Of the 123 that had tested positive in December 2020, six students were in-person learners, 92 students were remote, two staff were remote and 23 staff were in-person.

Following Vazquez Matos’ presentation, at large member Erin Brunelle, said she was struggling, not with the amount of synchronous learning the students would be doing, but the “camera’s on policy.”

“We have a very significant disparity in wealth and what people have and don’t have in this community, and what their living accommodations may be. We don’t know, some of our students may very well be attending class in the vehicle or hiding in a bathroom from God knows what,” she said. “So I really think we need to be a bit more empathetic and sympathetic, and I don’t think that people should have to reach out and ask for an exemption.” She added that she felt teachers shouldn’t have to teach from the building if their students were remote learning.

After discussion regarding the reopening plan, member Devin Sheehan brought up that the Holyoke High School Dean Campus “may be used as an isolation and recovery site.” Vazquez Matos clarified the state’s plan for an “emergency, temporary shelter for COVID impacted individuals.” He said there would be criteria to participate in the shelter such as a background screening and COVID-19 testing. He said there would be a maximum of 40 beds, would be short term and would be finished by early March. He also emphasized that there would be extra security to ensure that students would not interact with anyone staying in the shelter.

Sheehan pointed out there are students currently at the campus, but Vazquez Matos said a divider would be built to ensure there would be no access between students and those staying in the shelter. However, Sheehan said while he understands, he had “real concerns that we would be using a site that currently has students in it.”

Mayor Alex Morse expanded on the topic slightly and there had been “an uptick of homelessness across the state and here in Western Mass.” He said due to Holyoke not having a permanent shelter, the plan was to have the temporary shelter in place until the end of March. This, he said, would lead to “long term planning” with Friends of the Homeless to have a more permanent shelter in a different location in the city. Morse said the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency (MEMA) decided that the campus would be the best site out of three that were evaluated due to the fact that the gym was separated from any classroom spaces.

“There’s no risk or expectation that this would go beyond the dates in the MOU,” he said. Morse added that he was supportive of the idea, the state had given the funds for the project and that the state had adequately answered all questions and/or concerns that had been brought forth by the city.

Member Rebecca Birks said while she “loved the city was stepping up to help,” she didn’t feel as though the temporary shelter was safe or appropriate in the school setting. Each member of the School Committee went on to voice their disapproval of the plan with Brunell being the most vocally opposed to the idea, saying that had Sheehan not brought up the plan, they would likely not have discussed it at all.

“Just because Holyoke is under receivership does not mean that the School Committee should not have been made aware of this. Never would this have gone past the School Committee’s agenda if we were not in receivership. I fully support the city of Holyoke getting a homeless shelter, that’s not what this is about,” she said. “You’re talking about putting a homeless shelter in a building where there’s school children, one of the few buildings in the city that is currently housing school children.”

She added that after listening to a representative from the Board of Health, Morse and Vazquez Matos speak about the plan, it “sounds like the planning on this did not start last week.” She said, “It sounds like the planning for this has been in the works for I don’t know how long.”

Vazquez Matos said he did not use the word receivership in a disrespectful way, but to explain why the decision wasn’t brought before the School Committee. “The statute is clear as to who is responsible for making those decisions, that’s why it doesn’t have to come to the School Committee for a vote,” he said. However, he emphasized that he did believe it should come before the committee for input. Vazquez Matos added that he and his colleagues were taking notes as they were “all in this together.”

Many members of the committee brought forth concerns about people from other communities surrounding Holyoke such as Northampton or Chicopee would use the shelter and take priority away from Holyoke families in need. However, Vazquez Matos said priority would be given to families in the Holyoke Public Schools system.

Board of Health Director Sean Gonsalves added that the intention of the shelter was to cater to Holyoke families.

“If there were to be someone from another district, say Springfield or South Hadley, it would not be over Holyoke families, but they are also not going to make up the majority of the population,” Gonsalves said.

When asked if the Dean community had been consulted, Vazquez Matos said while they were still in the planning phases it was the hopes that the both the school and Holyoke community would be consulted by the end of week of Jan. 18.

Vazquez Matos also clarified that given the new dates for the district’s staggered approach to bring back students to the school, students would not be returning to schools until almost March.