From the very beginning, following a tainted election, there was never any groundswell of support from residents for Maureen K. Bright as superintendent of the Hicksville School District. However, given the circumstances, many believed the abrasive reputation that followed Bright would fall to the wayside as more pressing issues would arise and people would be dealt with on a much broader scale. Unfortunately, it's a wish that never came true.

Instead, at school board meetings these days, steel looks and condescending tunes, along with heavy legalese from well-paid attorneys, are what greet Hicksville residents who wish to know more; more about why many community requests have not been honored; why administrative costs continue to spiral as teachers' salaries remain woefully inadequate compared to other districts; why the turnover ratio of our teachers is the worst in Nassau County; why highly qualified teachers (those holding master's degrees or doctorates) do not come here to teach our children; why residents were not made aware of sexual predator information which was given to their the board of ed; and why the middle school principal, revered by many in the community, abruptly resigns only six weeks before graduation ceremonies.

As a result, Maureen Bright's legacy as superintendent of the Hicksville School District will, sadly, be remembered as one of oppression and disconnection toward a town in dire need for someone to resurrect its school's image - a woman whose biggest asset to this district was a proficiency toward understanding school bylaws and little else. No more than a one-dimensional act of chest thumping intimidation within one's own faculty, which has taken precedent over more important issues. The approach has been a terrible disservice to the taxpayers of Hicksville as it fosters an environment where teachers not only work in fear but administrators with good ideas or contrary opinions are quickly deemed insubordinates and jettisoned out of the district.

Just ask any Hicksville teacher, many who continue to feel the slings of undue influence placed upon them from this administration and you'll soon realize why few are willing to offer any ringing endorsements for their superintendent.

If there was ever a golden opportunity to galvanize a movement among such an ethnically diverse school district poised for change, clearly it would have been during Maureen Bright's tenure - a unique chance to heal prior wounds, thrown away by a superintendent too busy writing up frivolous charges in order to build suspect cases against decent people. But then again, that challenge would be for real leaders, the ones who realize that the importance of their job extends much further than just the paycheck they bring home, not the ones who deny scoreboard dedications in memory of cancer stricken children or the ones who refuse to grant honorary posthumous diplomas to grieving families searching for closure. They are qualities that can only come from people whose heart doesn't allow them to view their kindness as a weakness.

Members of the present Hicksville Board of Education will be quick to refute such harsh accusations against Bright. They will say all the right words and act the part of a concerned group but make no mistake - they have worn the face of Maureen Bright for the last five years. How else could there be unanimous decisions in nearly all motions, which are deliberated in executive meetings? Clearly, some board members must have had contrary opinions on certain issues, no? Why else would tenured chairpersons of the English and science departments leave for other districts? Why else would facility managers continue to leave on a regular basis from our schools? They are all byproducts of an administrator who has failed to curb what seems to be an insatiable thirst for control over her constituents, as well as creating a policy of deep insulation from residents.

All these variables have set up roadblocks toward improvements within our district. Yet here we are, upon the conclusion of another abysmal school year with Maureen Bright at the helm, as woeful test scores and disarray among administrators continue their regular pattern.

In 2002, when the administration was given a referendum bond by taxpayers to improve facilities, the board credited Bright for the management of such funds. However, during that same time, severe problems of deterioration were cited regarding parts of the infrastructure at the high school, which details were not immediately revealed to the public. As a result, all monies needed to make those repairs did not come from the referendum bond, which has been assumed by many. Instead, they needed to be funded by a Capital Reserve Fund, which required the approval of the State of New York for such an emergency. Since it was June, the work needed to be done before the upcoming school year and required many overtime hours by workers who had to be pulled off other school projects. Taxpayers were left to wonder how such a serious condition could have gone unforeseen by an administration, which proudly claims to have its finger on the pulse of this district.

This was not the first time Hicksville taxpayers were left holding the bag. Since 1998, following the installation of two co-generators (one at the high school and the other at the middle school), at the cost of nearly $3 million to taxpayers, there have been numerous problems with an energy system that was originally intended to be a more efficient way to heat the schools. However, due to poor ventilation along with the absence of essential gas line hookups, the units, which have only been used sporadically, have failed to live up to their billing. While Bright was not the superintendent at the time, she was part of that administration in a different capacity and was clearly made aware of those problems.

Nevertheless, since becoming superintendent Bright has failed to address this situation, refusing to offer any framework for reform or ideas on how to fix the generators while boilers continue to do the majority of heating throughout the schools.

Bright has also played nice with the board and it has paid handsome dividends as they have forked out over $60,000 in raises to her during her tenure as superintendent. An ironic twist to the "ability to pay" policy which is practiced by this same group when negotiating teachers or nurses contracts. Bright's original contract guaranteed annual salary increases of 5 percent but under the recommendation of legal counsel, that item was later rescinded by the board when it renegotiated with her. In fact, in 2005, a year prior to the end of her initial agreement, the board awarded her a new four-year deal through 2009, which now hovers around $250,000 annually. Many residents feel the cozy relationship between the superintendent and the board of ed has become a conflict of interest and compromises the checks and balances of the two groups which are desperately needed when it comes to making such important decisions.

However, Hicksville residents must ultimately bear most of the responsibility for what has transpired over the years. While this administration has been able to capitalize on the town's recurring trend of apathy and disassociation from school issues, we have only ourselves to blame for allowing it to happen. As residents, we need an abrupt change towards our involvement with our educational process in order to revitalize school policies as well as town morale.

Board member seats need to be held by those people who hold good intentions for all in the community which are void of personal agendas. Their motives must be true and their work ethic just as strong or we risk facing more of the same. And in that case, a Bright future can only mean dark days for Hicksville.

Steve Culhane