Massachusetts
Sudbury may be next Massachusetts town to take down ‘one-sided’ historical signs
Sudbury is exploring whether it should become the next Massachusetts town to remove signs commemorating the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and if there’s a better way to present the complicated history.
What to do with the tercentenary markers has long been a topic of discussion in Sudbury. The conversation has ratcheted up over the past few months after three signs came down in neighboring Concord in late January.
In 1930, the Massachusetts Bay Colony Tercentenary Commission distributed 275 cast-iron markers to 95 cities and towns across the Commonwealth to recognize the 300th anniversary of the original colony’s founding.
As time has gone on, many signs have been lost or fallen into a state of disrepair. The markers have also become a talking point as communities grapple with whether they convey an accurate history or fall short.
Michael Wallace, tasked with leading discussion on the issue for the Historical Commission, moved to affluent Sudbury, a Greater Boston suburb of roughly 19,000 people, in July 2023 and joined the Commission last November. The conversation around the historical markers predates his time in town, he said.
Sudbury, incorporated in 1639 with a population of 476, is one of the oldest towns in New England, according to its town website.
Wallace told the Herald that it’s “Impossible to say” how far away the town is from seeing its five markers come down if it takes that route.
“The goal is to build consensus,” Wallace told the Herald in a phone interview on Friday. “This is about our town’s history and its public history. It’s the history that we tell about ourselves.”
“It’s good to reach a position where everyone feels good about that,” he added. “100% of the people can’t feel 100% happy, but to arrive at some place where there is a consensus that what we are doing is reflective of our town and our history.”
The Sudbury Clergy Association, in a letter in January 2022 to the town’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Commission, said it was “concerned about the representation of First Peoples (Indigenous People) in public markers.”
Three of the signs, clergy members wrote, “suggest, without providing any context, that during the so-called King Philip’s War, colonial settlers were defending their land from attacks by First Peoples.”
The conflict, known as the Sudbury Fight, was fought in town in 1676 and could be looked at differently than in 1930, clergy members added.
“Since First Peoples resided on this land for thousands of years before colonial settlers arrived, in the broader context,” the letter states, “they can be understood to have been defending their ancestral land from invasion by colonial settlers.”
Wallace said a tercentenary marker that commemorates the establishment of the original Sudbury plantation is “controversial in the sense that it’s only speaking about the Puritans … It doesn’t reference the fact that there’s a Native American population that was here long before any white settlers.”
The state Department of Transportation notified the Historical Commission in the spring of 2023 that it planned to “remove, restore and reset the Sudbury Fight” marker on Route 20. Members responded with a letter requesting the sign not be put back up.
The controversial marker was reinstated because MassDOT only has a say in repairing and maintaining the signs and not removing them permanently.
A local nonprofit, Athina Education, held a forum in April 2023 on the markers, which included Nipmuc citizen Andre Strongbearheart Gaines Jr. as a panelist. He said the signs are one-sided, highlighting how none of them convey that after King Philip was killed, his skull was placed on a rod for over 20 years.
“We’re talking about taking signs down, this is what I’m thinking about,” Gaines said. “How do you think our people felt walking by that skull every day? It’s the same thing with these signs.”
“They’re grim reminders of the assimilation, the colonization … the brutality that was set forth in law,” he added. “Why is it so hard to understand that these signs are signs of brutality?”
Critics have also taken exception to the signs carrying a depiction of the Massachusetts state seal originally adopted in 1898. It features a disembodied arm of Plymouth colony military adviser Myles Standish holding a sword over the head of a Native American figure in a peaceful stance.
A state commission tasked with rethinking the seal and motto disbanded without any specific recommendations after two years of work.
Concord officials removed their three tercentenary markers in late January after their Historical and DEI Commissions argued the signs had harmed Indigenous people and didn’t accurately reflect what happened when settlers founded the town in 1635.
State highway crews restored 21 historic markers found in 10 cities and towns, all in central or western Massachusetts, in 2019. At the time, the agency recovered roughly 174 of the original 275 signs.
One sign in the Cape Ann town of Gloucester, on the North Shore, was unveiled in July after it received a fresh restoration. It had “rusted and disintegrated almost beyond repair,” officials said in an advertisement for the event.
Gloucester’s three other signs are also being restored at an individual cost of $3,250 in state Community Preservation Act funds. A document outlining the project indicates a local historian provided “more accurate language” for the markers.
“Scattered across the state, these markers punctuate the land with an array of familiar myths,” the document states. “Seen in this light, the restoration of the Tercentenary Commission markers to their original condition is an opportunity for a reexamination of how we interpret and communicate public memory and how we can make our heritage more inclusive.”
In Sudbury, the Historical Commission is set to meet with the Historic Districts Commission in late October to discuss recommendations that will be made to the Select Board, which has the final say on the markers’ fate, Wallace said.
“Whether you think they are discriminatory or not, they were erected in the 1930s in a particular context of slower automobiles and slower roads,” he said. “Around the state a lot of these signs are missing, many are in bad condition. … These aren’t things really engaging to the public anymore, so it’s exciting to think about what we can do that’s better.”

Originally Published:
Massachusetts
Farm Bill provision threatens Massachusetts animal welfare rules – AOL
The Farm Bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives April 30 could undermine a Massachusetts law aimed at preventing animal cruelty.
The sweeping agricultural bill includes a section called the “Save Our Bacon Act,” which prohibits state and local governments from having farm animal welfare protections that extend to products originating in other states.
The measure specifically targets Massachusetts and California state laws that prohibit certain farm animals from being held in extreme confinement.
Massachusetts Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, both Democrats, released a statement opposing the inclusion of the measure in the Farm Bill.
“This is a highly controversial and poisonous policy that ignores the will of the people. These state laws were overwhelmingly supported by a popular vote — they shouldn’t be overridden because of big-dollar lobbying,” the senators said in their statement. “We have significant concerns about the House-passed Farm Bill, including this overreaching and harmful provision that should not be in the Farm Bill and needs to be removed.”
What is Massachusetts’s Question 3?
In 2016, Massachusetts voters passed Question 3, or an Act to Prevent Cruelty to Farm Animals, with 78% of the vote.
The measure banned the sale of eggs, veal or pork from animals that were “confined in a cruel manner.” It eliminated enclosures that prevented an animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending their limbs or turning around freely.
All of these products sold in Massachusetts must be compliant, regardless of whether the animals were raised on farms in or outside Massachusetts. Therefore, out-of-state farms must comply with Question 3 in order to sell their products in Massachusetts.
Town Line cares for 50 cows, reserving some each year for meat to sell at its farm store.
The law is similar to California’s Proposition 12, which also lays out specific freedom of movement and minimum floor space requirements for how veal calves, breeding pigs and egg-laying hens are kept. It also doesn’t allow the sale of any products from animals confined in ways that don’t meet their standards, including those produced in other states.
What is the Save Our Bacon Act?
The Save Our Bacon Act seeks to block California’s and Massachusetts’s laws on out-of-state producers by saying that no state “may enact or enforce, directly or indirectly, a condition or standard on the production of covered livestock other than for covered livestock physically raised in such State or subdivision.”
The legislation would apply to any domestic animal raised for the purpose of human consumption or milk production, but not animals raised primarily for egg production.
Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, originally introduced the Save Our Bacon Act in July 2025.
“California’s Proposition 12 and Massachusetts’ Question 3 pose a major threat to family farms and food security — both in Iowa and across the country,” she said in a press release at the time. “The Save Our Bacon Act reaffirms livestock producers’ right to sell their products across state lines, without interference from arbitrary mandates.”
The act was added as a section in the Farm Bill, which was then passed by the House on a vote of 224-200. The bill next heads to the Senate, where its fate is unclear as lawmakers both across and within party lines have butted heads on several provisions.
This article originally appeared on Telegram & Gazette: Farm Bill provision threatens Massachusetts animal welfare rules
Massachusetts
Smoke from North Attleborough fire visible for miles
Fire broke out at an apartment building in North Attleborough, Massachusetts, on Monday afternoon, sending a column of smoke high into the air.
NBC affiliate WJAR-TV reports the smoke was visible from miles away from the building on Juniper Road.
More details were not immediately available.
This is a developing story. Check back for updates.
Massachusetts
Life Care Center of Raynham earns deficiency‑free state inspection
Life Care Center of Raynham has received a deficiency‑free inspection result from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, a distinction awarded to a small share of the state’s licensed nursing homes, according to a community announcement.
The inspection was conducted as part of the state’s routine, unannounced nursing home survey process overseen by the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. These comprehensive, multi‑day inspections evaluate multiple aspects of facility operations, including staffing levels, quality of care, medication management, cleanliness, food service and resident rights.
State survey records show that Life Care Center of Raynham met required standards during its most recent standard survey, with no deficiencies cited, based on publicly available state data.
The announcement states that fewer than 8% of Massachusetts nursing homes achieve deficiency‑free survey results. That figure could not be independently verified through state or federal data and is attributed to the announcement.
In addition to the state survey outcome, the facility is listed as a five‑star provider for quality measures on the federal Medicare Care Compare website. The five‑star quality measure rating reflects above‑average performance compared with other nursing homes nationwide, according to federal rating methodology.
Officials said the inspection results reflect ongoing compliance with state and federal standards designed to protect resident health and safety. According to the announcement, the outcome is attributed to staff performance and internal quality practices.
This story was created by Dave DeMille, ddemille@gannett.com, with the assistance of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Journalists were involved in every step of the information gathering, review, editing and publishing process. Learn more at cm.usatoday.com/ethical-conduct.
-
San Francisco, CA2 minutes agoCalifornia ‘Fans First’ bill aims to cap skyrocketing concert ticket prices
-
Dallas, TX8 minutes agoRanking Every Cowboys Position Group By Overall Talent and Depth
-
Miami, FL14 minutes agoSevere weather, flash flooding possible in South Florida on Tuesday
-
Boston, MA20 minutes agoCanvas reportedly reaches deal with hackers for stolen data – Boston News, Weather, Sports | WHDH 7News
-
Denver, CO26 minutes agoFormer Denver Bronco Craig Morton, who became the first quarterback to start Super Bowl for 2 franchises, dies at 83
-
Seattle, WA32 minutes agoSeattle weather: 80s on the horizon before a long cooldown
-
San Diego, CA38 minutes agoOpinion: Proposed federal rule would hammer beauty industry
-
Milwaukee, WI44 minutes agoWhat the Bucks can learn from this year’s playoffs: Eastern Conference First Round