Innuendo, Rivalries, Haunt Elmont School Board

By Daniel J. McCue

A letter written by Sheril Bailey, president of Elmont Interschool Council of PTAs, has become the talk of the community after portions of it — distributed by persons presently unknown — were given to several individuals who were never intended to see it and also printed in this newspaper.

The letter, written by Bailey to the members of the Elmont School Board, was an expression of the author's dismay over the tenor of recent school board meetings, meetings awash with an atmosphere of distrust and agitation.

"On Tuesday, Sept. 16, we attended a general board meeting and felt compelled to write to you," Bailey wrote on behest of the council. "We strongly feel that you must regain control of the audience participation section of these meetings.

"The audience participation section of the meeting used to be the time that issues relevant to the school administrators, the teachers and students were brought to the attention of the school board. Over the past few years, these meetings have become a mockery of how a town meeting, which is what the board of education meeting is structured on, is to be conducted.

"We believe in freedom of speech," the letter continues. "But have observed over the years, the development of a small group of like-minded people who control the topics discussed, the tone of the meeting and show an overall lack of respect toward all of the members of the board. This is disappointing, because despite any biases held against individual persons on the board, every board member contributes a tremendous amount of their time to the community and to the school. This small group makes accusations against board members on a regular basis... "

The letter, as received by this newspaper, continued for two more paragraphs, ending with the line, "This behavior must stop if you are going to maintain some sense or order and are to regain the respect of the community."

It was signed, and accompanied by a request to publish it in a future edition of the Three Village Times. It appeared in the Oct. 31 issue, and promptly set off a firestorm in certain sectors of the community, which saw the PTA's position as akin to stifling their First Amendment right to free speech.

Shortly thereafter, Bailey called the editor of the paper to ask for a retraction, stating that she had written the letter to communicate confidentially with the board and that she was not the one who sent it to the newspaper.

During the same phone call, Bailey said that the content of her original letter had been altered, that several paragraphs were, in fact, missing, though when asked what the changes were, she declined to comment.

Subsequently another version of the letter appeared at this newspaper's offices. This one, a page longer in length, seemed to clarify the PTA council's position as it contained the following recommendation.

"The interschool council strongly recommends another approach to the question and answer period of the meeting. We feel it would be most valuable if people write out a note with their item of discussion, this note will be read by the district clerk and answers will be given to the audience by the appropriate member.

"For the past two-three years, interschool has used this method for candidate's night. Questions from members of the audience are written down on paper. These questions are then posed to the candidate by one person, the candidate to whom the question has been directed then responds. This method of question and answer has proven very efficient and has been very successful with the community.

"We do not feel that it is fair to the majority of the people attending the meeting to have to wait long periods of time in order to have an opportunity to speak. There are times when members of the audience feel intimidated and are afraid to approach the microphones. We feel that our recommendation above is an excellent solution to a problem for which no other solutions have been offered.

"The council recommends a monthly update on the curriculum be given at every general board meeting.

"We would like this letter put on the agenda for next month's general board of education meeting. We would like it to be read in its entirety at that meeting and that our recommendation be put out for a vote at that same meeting.

"We would like to remind you that it is crucial that a school board meeting be conducted in an orderly and respectful manner, Board members must be thought of as people having integrity, must set the correct tone and most not tolerate juvenile behavior."

The letter, and the reaction it inspired, has thrown a harsh light on the inner workings of the Elmont School Board, a board where political differences have erupted in open hostility.

Several interviews, most of them conducted on background, seem to place the seismic line between long time school board members Meg Hanna and George Paterno, both known to have strong and differing opinions about what's right and what's wrong with the school district.

Poisoning the relationships on the school board further, have been a rash of incidents over the past few years that have resulted in an erosion not just of trust, but civility on the board. A number of individuals close to the board said suspicion is ripe in its ranks thanks to a series of leaks of supposedly confidential information, information that may or may not have been distorted before it was disseminated to the community.

As a result, the board is now often hard pressed to compromise on any issue, and many fear that the growing animosity, as well as "the feeling that someone always has to get even with somebody else," as one person said, is causing people to become fed up with the board, fed up with attending board meetings, and "destroying the reputation of the community."

One by-product of the current controversy may well be a highly contentious school board election campaign this spring. Up for re-election in six months time are school board president Edward Tupper, Meg Hanna, and Robert Burgess.

"Given the nature of school boards, a certain amount of contention is always a possibility," George Paterno said last week.

The spark that ignited the current controversy appears to be an accusation of fiscal malfeasance by the board that has simmered for at least the past two years.

That accusation, leveled by Elmont residents Bruce and Edna Paskoff, among others, involved the expenditure of district "travel money" by members of the Elmont School Board. Those allegations of wrong-doing have never been proven, but they remain fodder for a vocal group of school board meeting attendees.

According to Paterno, he and former school board member Michael Hardial, pushed for an investigation of those allegations. "Not to point the finger of guilt," Paterno said, "only to determine whether they were true or false, so that we could get on with the business of attending to our students' needs.

"Unfortunately," he added, "there was a lot of opposition to our suggestion."

[Note: Current school board president Edward Tupper could not be reached for comment. Superintendent Dr. Arnold Goldberg respectfully declined comment on the entire matter.]

That disagreement, apparently got the dysfunctional ball rolling, a ball whose momentum is stoked by vocal opponents of the school board majority. Bailey's letter, then, exacerbated an already tenuous situation.

"If Sheril Bailey says she didn't circulate the letter to anyone but school board members, then I have to give her the benefit of the doubt," Paterno said. "What bothers me is that a lot of community members seem to have read that letter long before it ever wound up in the school board's hands.

"Now the PTA is upset about the release of confidential information? It appears that it was a public letter long before we ever got it. Unfortunately, this is looking more and more like a case of someone deliberately stirring the pot."

What makes the entire controversy so strange is that the position of the PTA council and the recommendations made in regard to making school board meetings more orderly, were apparently public knowledge long before the now famous letter was written. In fact, the PTA had held meetings with building principals and said essentially the same thing.

As for the letter itself, it was reportedly delivered to the district only one day before it was enclosed in the individual board members packets. The envelopes containing the letter were sealed with tape and never opened by any member of the administration.

And yet somehow, at some point, someone got hold of a copy of the letter and evidently circulated it to foment a confrontation at the very next school board meeting.

Edna Paskoff, for one, said she felt the proposal by the PTA was nothing more that a ploy to take away the freedom of speech rights of residents who attend board meetings and attempt to speak out against the board.

Others hold that the as things stand now, the question and answer period is dominated by a small clique, which controls the topics discussed at school board meetings and shows an overall lack of respect to board members. They believe that utilizing the cards Bailey suggested would improve the general decorum of the school board meetings.

Paterno and others have tried to reach some kind of compromise, combining the current method of public comment with the use of cards by some community residents who may feel intimidated at board meetings.

The issue was anticipated to be a topic of discussion at this week's meeting of the board of education at the Covert Avenue School Tuesday night.

Though it will probably never be known who circulated the Bailey letter, all parties to the controversy said that they believe the time has come to move on.

"Collectively we all have one over-riding concern, and that's the children of this school district. We can't allow ourselves to become distracted by all this nonsense," he said.