The Enterprise-Pilot, instead of providing its own coverage of board of education meetings, has recently taken the easy but mistaken path of merely running the press releases issued by the school board or school administration, purporting to present "highlights" of board meetings. Since the source is not indicated, the reader is given the false impression that the article is the newspaper's own version. This is a regrettable practice, since the Enterprise-Pilot (unlike the other local paper) used to provide more thorough coverage of board meetings, prepared by its own staff.

Why does it make any difference? The answer is that the board's tailored press release contains only what the board or administration wants the public to know¬mainly the comments of the superintendent and principals¬and excludes many other matters which a newspaper ought to recognize as newsworthy. Worse still, the press release sometimes falsifies what actually transpires at meetings.

A flagrant example of false reporting appears in your Jan. 28 "news story" (i.e. the school board press release) concerning the board's Jan. 19 meeting. Apart from the board action to name the new gymnasium after Mr. Imhof, certainly a main topic at that meeting was the disclosure of a three-option kindergarten plan. As disclosed by Roosevelt School Principal Moller in his statement to the board, parents would be able to choose either (1) half-day kindergarten plus one "extended day" per week, (2) full-day kindergarten every day, or (3) an experimental two-year plan, whereby a group of students would stay with the same teacher through full-day kindergarten and first grade.

This news about a third option¬and it was news for the board¬led to considerable discussion. Several board members, including the board's president, raised vigorous objections to the fact that they were hearing about the proposed three-choice kindergarten plan for the first time, and they had not even been given the opportunity to discuss it before it was made known to the public. A parent also spoke about the confusing kindergarten options and asked if students would wind up at different levels, etc. The discussion led to apparent agreement that there was a need for further review of the proposed options. The assistant superintendent explained the merits of the two-year option, and the superintendent agreed that the board should have been consulted before the announcement.

None of this appears in the press release. The handout published by the Enterprise-Pilot not only omits the entire discussion¬it inexcusably presents a false version of what Mr. Moller actually stated at the meeting, proving that local papers should not rely on the official handouts. Here is the entire reference to the matter in the board press release, under the heading "Principal's Reports": "Two options will be available: the present extended day and a new full-day option. These options will be offered on the basis of parent request and with limitations. An informational meeting on the kindergarten options will be scheduled shortly." This is a pure fabrication, since Mr. Moller's statement was quite different, as anyone at the meeting could confirm. If you had covered the story, I am sure readers would have had the benefit of an accurate report.

Another discrepancy between the press release and what was actually said at the Jan. 19 meeting: According to the release, Dr. Scott said "extra help sessions will be provided" for students who failed the English Regents exam in January. Once again, this not what was stated at the meeting. In fact, Dr. Scott told the board that students failing the exam would be removed from their regular English class and put into a separate section, with less literature and more drill.

Furthermore, there is no mention in the official press release of comments by board members on other issues; nor does the handout mention any of the matters raised in public comments¬such as the disturbing fact that the high school newspaper has not been published at all this year (apparently because of "politics among the students," according the Principal Scott).

I know that the hard-working editor herself cannot be in two places at the same time, but a local paper has to find ways to cover bodies such as the school board whose discussions and decisions have an impact on the community, and the public deserves honest reporting instead of self-serving handouts. Since the other paper does not even pretend to cover the school meetings thoroughly, people have tended up to now to rely on the Enterprise-Pilot's reports on the board. I urge you to change your policy and start covering the meetings again.

As for the school board: If the board wants the public to trust in the veracity of its communiqués, minutes or meeting summaries, the board members themselves will have to exercise greater care in reviewing materials issued on their behalf.

Charles Gaulkin

Editor's Note: This letter was written in response to the article about the Syosset Fire Company which first appeared in the Syosset-Jericho Tribune and was reprinted in the Jan. 28 issue of the Oyster Bay Enterprise Pilot.

-DFK

I am writing in response to the front-page article in the Jan. 15 edition about the Syosset Fire District and the allegations of financial misconduct.

The state auditor's report cites problems that you state "basically fall into two categories - those caused by insufficient record keeping and those involving exorbitant expenditures." The article then cites examples from the state report. Most are procedural faults that are not unique to the Syosset Fire District, but common in both the public and private sector. As a taxpayer I am also concerned about areas of mismanagement and exorbitant expenditures. I put my trust in my elected officials to provide me with the best possible service for my tax dollar and like all others I would like to see my property taxes lowered.

After reading the article I felt compelled to let the taxpayers and residents of the Syosset Fire District know that they are getting the best possible service for their dollar.

I am currently the first deputy chief of the Syosset Fire Department. This is an unpaid position and I, along with three other chiefs, am responsible for providing fire protection and emergency medical service for Syosset, Woodbury and parts of Muttontown, Jericho, Oyster Bay Cove and Laurel Hollow. The Syosset Fire Department answered 1,800 calls for service in 1998, such as house fires, auto accidents and ambulance calls. Not only does the Syosset Fire Department respond to emergencies in our community, we also have sent equipment and firefighters to the Westhampton brush fires, the ice storms in northern New York State, the Avianca plane crash, and high-angle and building collapse rescues in Farmingdale, Port Washington and New Hyde Park. We also promote fire prevention and fire safety in our schools and have a fire prevention open house each October. All of this is performed by unpaid professional firefighters who are as highly trained as those in New York City.

The state audit cites fire district spending for repair and maintenance of two "racing trucks" and a trailer used to transport these vehicles. The state audit states, "There is no express authority for the acquisition of equipment and vehicles for the utilization by the fire department in competitive events, nor is there express authority for fire department personnel to participate in such events at fire district expense." The drill team trucks are not used in daily fire fighting operations, but they indirectly affect those operations. The team promotes training, teamwork, camaraderie and recruitment of new volunteer firefighters.

The state audit also probes the annual installation dinner at cost which amounted to $74,000, further stating, costs relating to this affair were considered wasteful, such as $9,000 for souvenir pens, a photographer's fee of almost $3,000 and an $11,000 band. This annual dinner is the only way the fire district can say thank you to the 120 unpaid professional firefighters in the Syosset Fire Department. Firefighters who risk their lives every day to protect you. For $74,000 or roughly $600 a firefighter, you, the community can also say thanks to my members who unselfishly give up their time away from their families on holidays, during snowstorms and hurricanes, in the middle of the night or just during dinner with their wives and kids. Is that wasteful? Countless lives have been saved and millions of dollars in property protected annually.

The fire district is not without its faults and many of these have already been corrected. I want the community to know that we are here for you. Visit our firehouses, see what we have to offer you. Heck, why not volunteer and become a firefighter?

Nicholas Favata