Letter: In Response to: Dalton Finance Committee — Thank you

Letter to the EditorPrint Story | Email Story

To the Editor:

I debated if I should submit a response to this letter or if I should just let it go. I felt a response was needed as the author of the letter published June 30, 2025, Ms. Schmidt, is an elected official of the Dalton Finance Committee. Her comment that a Request for Information is a form of harassment is outlandish and an insult to open government.

I assume I am one of the requestors who is "harassing" the Finance Committee by using the state law of public records to receive information from a committee which is not transparent. As the public reads this letter, know that the Finance Committee members use their personal email accounts for committee and town business. According to the secretary of state, as published in a guide for members of public boards in 2022, private email use is a public record if used in the course of committee business: https://www.mass.gov/info-details/guide-for-members-of-public-boards-and-commissions-chapter-9

Examples of the requests I made include:

1. Public records request for email contacts for all Finance Committee members. Once elected, officials should be reachable to hear from residents. Chair [William] Drosehn did not want to provide the information so the request was made. In addition, the request made was not delivered timely per the state law (within 10 days).


2. Public records request made related to the police budget and related email communication from the Finance Committee chair and Vice Chairman Tom Irwin. In this case, the emails sent/received by Vice Chairman Irwin were not delivered. Since he uses a private email address, I assume he believes that he does not need to respond to the request by the Dalton Records Access Officer. Therefore, an appeal has been submitted to the state supervisor of records and this is pending a decision which will be reached within 10 days.

So if Ms. Schmidt believes that this is harassment, all I can do is disagree. I call it forcing open government which is the right of the citizens of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and required under the General Laws of the Commonwealth.

If our elected officials believe that the public should not make these types of requests, we should be cautious as to who we elect to office.

However, I do agree with Ms. Schmidt to a point. Members of our Finance Committee do deserve a thank you but only a few. Others should be more transparent and lead in their role as chair and vice chair or the committee should relieve them of that responsibility.

Joe Diver
Dalton, Mass. 

 

 

 

 

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Pittsfield Council OKs Underground Fiber Network

By Brittany PolitoiBerkshires Staff

PITTSFIELD, Mass. — More underground fiber internet cables will be installed in Pittsfield. 

On Tuesday, the City Council approved Gateway Fiber's request to install an underground fiber network infrastructure within the city's right-of-way.  

The company was given the go-ahead for an aerial network last year alongside Archtop Fiber, marking the beginning of construction with a ribbon-cutting at the Colonial Theatre. Gateway Fiber will offer subscription plans ranging from $65 to $150 per month, depending on speed. 

Wards 3 and 4 will see the most work in the first phase, according to an underground fiber deployment plan.  Fourteen streets in Ward 4 will see underground fiber deployment; 13 streets in Ward 3.  

Ward 4 Councilor James Conant voted in opposition for personal reasons, as he signed up for Gateway Fiber briefly last year and said he had poor service and poor communication from the company. 

Some councilors and community members appreciated bringing competition to Spectrum internet services. Ward 5 Councilor Patrick Kavey pointed out that it costs about $90 per month for 500 megabytes per second with Spectrum, and that all three fiber services that have come to Pittsfield are cheaper. 

Operations Manager Jennifer Sharick explained that they were seeking approval for underground fiber deployment as part of the next phase in Pittsfield. The city was found to be a "very" viable community for underground fiber. 

Gateway Fiber, she said, originally served a community of 250 residents outside of St. Louis, Mo. 

"Following the pandemic, we saw the need, and what people need for fiber and reliable internet service to bring residents and businesses the opportunity for connectivity," Sharick said. 

View Full Story

More Pittsfield Stories