Next month the East Longmeadow Town Council will meet and vote on a petition to end the local mask mandate.
I want the Councilors to know that local businesses support the petition. If you know a local business owner who supports ending the town’s mask mandate, please ask him or her to sign my letter to the Council.
I don’t need the original signature. A photocopied image of the signed document will suffice. It can be emailed to me at firstname.lastname@example.org or faxed to 413-647-0018.
Alternatively, business owners can simply copy and paste the contents of the letter (written out below) and email it to me using the company’s email address.
Town Council: I am an East Longmeadow business owner and I support the petition to end the town’s mask mandate. Since the mask mandate began, my business has experienced some or all of the following negative effects: (1) I have lost customers and income. (2) I am constantly burdened by the need to enforce mask compliance on my customers and staff. (3) Despite my best efforts to enforce the mask mandate, I constantly worry about being reported to or fined by the health inspector for non-compliance. For these reasons, I respectfully ask the Town Council to end the mask mandate.
Signing the letter does not obligate the business owner to appear at the meeting or take any other action. I will submit all letters to the Councilors in a private manner and I will do nothing to publicize the names of the business owners who sign.
Feel free to contact me directly with questions or concerns.
On October 4, nearly 160 East Longmeadow voters filed a petition with their Town Council demanding an end to the defunct Health Board’s mask mandate. The petition is based on the “Citizen Relief Mechanisms” contained in Article 8, Section 8-2 of the East Longmeadow Home Rule Charter. According to the Charter, the Councilors must call a public meeting and vote on any petition presented to them by at least 100 members of the town’s electorate. The Councilors can and should end the mandate for several reasons.
The Health Board Likely Violated Open Meeting Laws by Failing to Give Notice of Its Mask Mandate Vote
According to Massachusetts’ Open Meeting Law (G.L. 30A, § 20(b)), public bodies such as the Health Board must post notice of every meeting at least 48 hours in advance. The notice must include ”a listing of topics that the chair reasonably anticipates will be discussed at the meeting.”
Although a public body may consider a topic that was not listed in the meeting notice if it was not anticipated, the Attorney General strongly encourages public bodies to postpone discussion and action on topics that are controversial or may be of particular interest to the public if the topic was not listed in the meeting notice.
On August 26 the Health Board voted to impose a local mask mandate on the town. It is very likely that the Board members anticipated discussing the measure prior to the meeting. The measure is unquestionably “of particular interest to the public” and even “controversial.” Nevertheless, the notice posted prior to the meeting contained no mention of the topic.
A formal complaint has been filed with the Town and the Attorney General’s Office.
The Board’s actions are a violation of the state’s open meeting laws and should be immediately redressed. However, the Board is vacant and it is unclear when new members will be appointed. Therefore, the Council should resolve the matter.
(It should also be noted that the Health Board failed to comply with M.G.L. c. 111, § 31, which is the statute the Board cites as its authority for imposing the mask mandate. That law clearly states that Massachusetts health boards must submit copies of “all rules, regulations and standards which have been adopted” with the Department of Environmental Protection. To date, the department has not received a copy of the order.)
The Town Council Has Legal Authority to End the Mandate
The Council’s authority is extremely board. Article 1, Section 1-3 of the Town’s Home Rule Charter states that “All legislative powers of the Town shall be exercised by the Town Council.” There is no definition of “legislative powers” in the Charter, but Black’s Law Dictionary defines the phrase as follows:
Legislative power – The power to make laws and to alter them at discretion; a legislative body’s exclusive authority to make, amend, and repeal laws.
Such authority unquestionably gives the Councilors the power to alter, amend, or repeal the current mask order—especially in the absence of a Health Board.
Article 2, Section 2-5 expands the Councilors’ authority even more by giving them all “general” and “corporate” powers. This essentially means that the Council can act on behalf of the Town however it chooses so long as it does not violate the law or act in contradiction to other provisions in the Charter.
The Mask Mandate Hurts East Longmeadow’s Small Business Owners
The mask mandate negatively affects local businesses. Many small business owners have lost clientele and income due to the mandate. Business owners are tired of imposing masks on their customers and employees. They also resent the ever-present threat of being fined by the Town’s Health Inspector. A number of East Longmeadow business owners intend to state their grievances to the Councilors either through written statements or in person at the public hearing.
The Health Board justified its mask order by stating “we know that masks slow or prevent transmission of all COVID-19 variants so far.” (See the third paragraph of the order.) The statement is not supported by any sort of data or evidence.
In fact, there is no evidence that mask mandates slow the spread of COVID-19. Dr. Damian Guerra, a bio-statistician, has written a letter to the Councilors summarizing his nationally publicized study in the International Research Journal of Public Health. As stated in Dr. Guerra’s letter, his extensive study “found no association between either reported mask use or US state mandatory mask policies and COVID-19 case growth.”
Here are just a few key points from Dr. Guerra’s study:
Randomized control trials have not clearly demonstrated mask efficacy against respiratory viruses, and observational studies conflict on whether mask use predicts lower infection rates.
Case growth was not significantly different between mandate and non-mandate states at low or high transmission rates, and surges were equivocal.
Mask mandates and use are not associated with slower state-level COVID-19 spread during COVID-19 growth surges.
These finds are completely contrary to the Health Board’s stated justification for imposing masks on East Longmeadow residents.
To read Dr. Guerra’s letter in its entirety, click the link below:
The Council should hold a public meeting on the petition in the coming weeks—hopefully in late October or early November. If you’d like to participate by speaking at the meeting or even submitting a written statement to the Councilors, please let me know. If you’d like to assist with the “Unmask East Longmeadow Campaign” feel free to send me an email at email@example.com.
East Longmeadow voters have a “citizens relief mechanism” in the town’s Home Rule Charter. According to Article 8, Section 8-2 of the Charter,
The Town Council…shall hold a public hearing and act with respect to every petition which is addressed to it, which is signed by a minimum of 100 voters and which seeks the passage of a measure. The hearing shall be held by the Town Council or…by a committee or subcommittee thereof and the action by the Town Council…shall be taken no later than 3 months after the petition is filed with the Clerk of the Council…
In accordance with this section of the Charter, I have formed a petition to end the mask mandate imposed on our town by the recently resigned health board.
If you are an East Longmeadow voter who is opposed to the current mask mandate, please print and sign the petition.
Please join us this Saturday (September 25) from 11 to 12 at the corner of North Main Street and Mapleshade Avenue for an “Unmask East Longmeadow” sign standout. There will be free coffee and donuts. Stay the full hour and just stop by for a few minutes. Any support is appreciated.
Next Town Council Meeting
There will be a town council meeting next Tuesday (September 28) at 6pm. The meeting will be held via zoom. The councilors will must likely discuss the need to replace the town’s health board which recently resigned. It will be an excellent time to address the councilors during the public comment session and let them know that you’re opposed to mask mandates. Please added your name to the list of speakers by contacting the council’s clerk at 413-525-5400, ext. 1001. If you can’t attend the meeting, then at the very least email the councilors and the town manager and let them know that you do not want a health board that will continue the mask mandate.
Unmask East Longmeadow Petition
Please sign and share my petition to Unmask East Longmeadow. I have not been allowed to post the petition on any of the town’s Facebook forums and no media outlets have been willing to cover the story. So I need your help to spread the work. The more signatures we get, the most weight the petition will have when it is presented to the town council.
Our legal challenge to the statewide school mask mandate is filed. Thanks to all the parents with the courage to add their names as plaintiffs. Proceedings should start in the coming weeks. Wish us luck!
For the full text of the complaint, click the link below:
The East Longmeadow health board resigned. The board is comprised of just two members, a doctor and a nurse. The town manager and town council are searching for replacements. (1) please email or call the town manager and councilors and let them know that you do not want anyone on the board who will continue the mask mandate. (2) If you know a doctor or a nurse who is against the mask mandate, please encourage him or her to apply for board membership.
Many parents have contacted me about legally challenging the statewide school mask mandate. I’m working with Attorney Ryan McLane to prepare a class action lawsuit for that purpose. The more parents who join as plaintiffs, the more weight our case will carry in court. Please use the link below to add your name as a plaintiff. Please share this link and feel free to contact me with your questions.
On August 20, Massachusetts Education Commissioner Jeffrey Riley issued a press statement informing the public that he will ask the Board of Education for authority to impose a mask mandate on all Massachusetts school children.
However, neither the commissioner nor the board has legal authority to implement public health policies.
The board shall establish policies relative to the education of students in public early childhood, elementary, secondary and vocational-technical schools.” (Emphasis added.)
The Board’s duties, according to the statute, are confined to such matters as establishing certification standards for teachers, reviewing federal grant applications, and auditing the academic performance of schools. There is no power granted anywhere in the statute allowing the Board to create policies to slow the spread of a contagious disease or to increase vaccination numbers. The legislature has already established regulations for such matters. See G.L. 71, § 55 and G.L. c. 76, § 15, respectively. Commissioner Riley and the education board do not have the authority to go beyond the scope of these laws.
G.L. c. 69, § 1B does state that “The board shall establish standards to ensure that every student shall attend classes in a safe environment.”
However, anyone who reads the sentence in its full paragraph can see that it applies to only the structural environment of the school buildings.
The full paragraph is as follows:
The board shall establish minimum standards for all public early childhood, elementary, secondary and vocational-technical school buildings, subject to the provisions of the state building code. The board shall establish standards to ensure that every student shall attend classes in a safe environment. (Emphasis added.)
Nevertheless, Riley’s press release expressly states that
The purpose of the [mask] policy is to encourage higher vaccination rates among students.
To further this point, he quotes Lt. Governor Karyn Polito:
Our goal remains to get as many people as possible vaccinated. We hope that by instituting vaccine benchmarks among school populations we will create a real incentive for students and staff to get vaccinated so they can remove their masks.
This statement implicitly acknowledges that masks are a chronic burden to students. Since the state of emergency ended in Massachusetts, the executive branch no longer has the authority to impose such a burden on anyone.
Parents across the state need to speak out and challenge these measures now before they are implemented. If they are put into force, they need to be immediately disputed in court.
Please sign my petition to keep masks optional for kids in East Longmeadow schools.
This month the East Longmeadow School Committee unanimously voted against mandating masks for students. Since that vote, a small but loud group of residents has started a petition to mandate masks in the town’s schools.
I started this petition for East Longmeadow residents who support the school committee’s decision to make masks optional for our kids. My hope is to collect more signatures than those seeking to impose masks on everyone and to show the committee members that East Longmeadow parents want the right to choose on this issue.
If we don’t speak up now, masks could once again be forced on our children.
Implementing diagnostic and screening tests for unvaccinated students and staff,
Hosting on-site vaccination clinics during either summer orientation or the start of classes.
This month, school committee’s across the state will vote on whether to accept or reject the commissioner’s recommendations.
If your school committee chooses to implement the proposed in-school COVID tests and/or vaccine clinics, it’s important for parents to understand their right to informed consent.
Generally, children can be subjected to diagnostic tests and medical treatment (e.g., vaccination) only with their parents’ consent.
If you do not agree to subject your children to the proposed measures, then you should state that to his or her school in no uncertain terms.
Below is a template for a letter that you can send to your child’s principal and school superintendent making it clear that your child is not to be tested or vaccinated without your approval:
[Insert superintendent’s address.]
[Insert school’s address]
RE: Legal Notice Concerning DESE/DPH COVID-19 Guidance for Districts and Schools
Superintendent ____________ and Principal _____________,
On July 30, 2021 the DESE Commissioner, Jeffrey C. Riley, released a memorandum entitled “DESE/DPH COVID-19 Guidance for Districts and Schools: Fall 2021.” See attached. In the memorandum Mr. Riley recommends the following:
“COVID-19 testing – Districts and schools are highly encouraged to maintain or establish a robust plan for COVID-19 testing in schools, including both diagnostic testing and screening (pooled) testing for students and staff.”
“Back to school vaccination clinics – We urge all schools…to host an on-site vaccination clinic during summer orientation events or when classes begin.”
My daughter/son, [insert student’s name], will enter ____ grade at [insert school’s name] this fall. It’s unclear whether the school will implement Mr. Riley’s recommendations. Nevertheless, let this letter serve as notice.
No one is to administer COVID-19 testing on my child. If you do, I will take immediate legal action against the town, the state, and any agency or individual who carries out the testing. Likewise, under no circumstances is my child to participate in a school vaccination clinic.
As Mr. Riley’s memorandum points out, “even for those students not yet vaccinated, the apparent risk of COVID-19 to children remains small.” His statement is followed by four citations to studies confirming that the virus is not a serious threat to kids.
Therefore, the recommendations are needless as well as physically and emotionally harmful to children. My child is not to be subjected to them.