Though the subject of "hats" may seem trivial, the underlying issue of respect, for both teachers and students, that was prescient at the Thursday, Sept. 10 Mineola Open Board of Education Meeting, was very serious.

The problem began on the first day of school when High School Principal Jay Lewis announced at an assembly the newly amended Dress and Grooming Policy for the Mineola School District.

"Mr. Lewis has implemented the policy before it was approved by the board. While we understand his reasoning for doing so, we don't agree with implementing the policy before the rule was passed," said a statement authored by the Student Organization.

The Student Organization (SO), the student government of the Mineola High School, not only disagreed with the policy, but expressed extreme disappointment in what they feel was their lack of involvement in the process.

"Our job as SO is to voice the students' concerns and opinions," read the SO's statement, "Unfortunately we were not informed of the board's intent until the first day of school. Perhaps if the SO officers were informed prior to the open board meeting, it would have demonstrated that there will be more communication between the board and SO when important issues are being addressed."

"Nothing has been enacted," said Superintendent of Schools Dr. Harry Jaroslaw the day after the meeting, noting that there is a mandatory 60 day review period, in which the policy must be read at two public meetings, to effect policy changes.

Instead he said Lewis made an administrative decision. Though Lewis could not be reached for comment, it was suggested by some at the meeting that the principal opted to enact the policy now, rather than during the school year, so that the situation could be settled expeditiously.

As for the issue of involvement, Jaroslaw said that the members of the SO should have been notified, however he saw no need for an apology from the board, as was suggested by one of the parents at the meeting.

Attending the meeting were parents, teachers and several dozen students, many of whom spoke against the policy.

The SO in representation of the student body has taken a stand against the policy for reasons such as the right to dress the way students want and for practical reasons, such as the temperature in the classrooms necessitating extra clothing.

"We represent the student body and we wanted to address their concerns," explained SO officer Kate Nelson of the reason for her and her fellow officer's presence at the meeting.

Added SO officer Edwin Chacko about his reason for attending the meeting, "First of all I want to support the student body and second, I want to re-enforce my personal opinion on the subject."

"The board in its role as policy maker is looking to enhance a respectful tone in the building," said the superintendent of the reason for the board's consideration of the policy.

The policy states that students are not allowed to wear clothing that presents a threat to anyone's health or safety, causes damage to school property or impedes the educational process.

Buttons, armbands and other symbols of expression would be allowed as long as they did not contain obscene or libelous material.

The particular issue that was the source for the most arguments during the meeting was the rule that hats and "outer garments" were found to be disrespectful, improper and potentially disruptive to the educational process, and therefore were no longer allowed in the classrooms, unless for medical or religious reasons.

SO member Christina Tsabasis was one of those who even after the meeting questioned what the definition of an "outer garment" was.

Jaroslaw explained that for the most part the term "hat" refers to a baseball cap and "outer garments" refer to overcoats. He stated that these policy measures are meant to address the issue of respect and not any other issues such as security.

Also being considered by the board is a policy that prohibits students from bringing cell phones and beepers to school. If these devices are brought to school they would be confiscated until a parent comes to pick them up or the end of the school year.

After the meeting SO members expressed disappointment in the results, though their appearance at the meeting may have yielded a promising result. According to Jaroslaw the board has decided to invite the SO officers to the Oct. 1 work session, where they will be given 30 minutes to state their side of the story.

If by then there is still no resolution the students are ready for action. Warned SO Officer Kate Nelson, "We will be back."