Wouldn’t it be nice if the upcoming Board of Education election in Great Neck was based on more than names appearing on lawn signs?
I would love to see a debate between the candidates in which they share an idea or two and give the community an opportunity to select the “best” of what appears to be available at this moment. This may just be wishful thinking on my part, as I imagine I would sooner see a unicorn galloping down Middle Neck Road than an exchange of ideas, or for that matter, any ideas offered by either candidate.
No one is talking about how to de-politicize the Board of Education and return to the previous system of elections in which individuals ran for a seat—not against an incumbent—thus empowering the community to elect top vote-getters in apolitical elections. No one is talking about the need to establish a conflict-of-interest policy that prohibits sitting members of the Board of Education from accepting financial support from the Great Neck Teachers Association (a.k.a the teachers’ union) given that these board members are responsible for negotiating contracts with the union. No one is talking about the need to expand the Board of Education to seven seats to ensure that this community is better represented by parents and taxpayers alike.
No one is talking about the need for a working group that’s charged with exploring the distribution of resources across the district, school by school—not for the purpose of shifting funds away from programs, but rather to ensure that children in every school have the same opportunities. No one is talking about what needs to be done to improve North High School’s rankings or what can be learned from South High School’s continued success. No one is talking about the exorbitant amount of money spent on tutors and academic programs outside of school in order to ensure success inside school.
No one is talking about the district’s continued failure to provide financial projections that clearly articulate what is anticipated in future year costs so that all taxpayers can better understand the financial position of the district. No one is talking about the district’s ongoing spend-down of reserves each and every year in order to fund the operating budget. No one is talking about what it will cost to recruit new teachers at competitive salaries. No one is talking about what it will cost to bring our school buildings and athletic facilities into the 21st century.
No one is talking about the need for better and more transparent communication from the administration. And while I support the current board president, no one is talking about the vow of silence the current Board of Education appears to have taken or why this elected body has yet to implement a strategy around community engagement.
And so, here we are, left with what I view to be an impossible choice. Do we re-elect a candidate who has served in silence for years while collecting a District pension and has nothing but meetings to show for her service? Or do we elect a candidate who has little to show with respect to community engagement or knowledge of the issues?
As someone who has stood in a candidate’s shoes before, and lost (though I still take great pride in knowing that last year’s election led to Barbara Berkowitz losing her gavel!), I recognize it is an awesome responsibility to run for office. I also recognize that that responsibility requires candidates to learn about the issues, to do their homework (just as we expect every child to do), and to engage in a process that educates the public about where they stand on District-specific issues.
Like it or not, an election based on lawn signs and ill-informed surrogates ultimately means that this community loses, no matter the outcome on May 17.
Michael S. Glickman
Great Neck
The premise of this letter is misleading and I am surprised that Mr. Glickman, who otherwise seems an informed interlocutor, is leaving out one important fact. There is only one candidate in this school board election who has refused to join a debate and that is Mr. Emil Hakimi. Many prospective voters including myself are utterly perplexed at his refusal to engage his opponent Donna Peirez directly in a public debate forum. Ms Peirez has already participated in one such forum, but Mr. Hakimi’s “chair” was vacant as he refused the invitation. Rather, Mr. Hakimi limits himself to small gatherings in private forums of voters which are no doubt deemed “friendly” and do not challenge him vigorously. He has issued a letter and a few videos stating his positions, but for many of us that is not enough and they raise more questions than they do answers. I do not understand his positions on a range of issues and his constant use of “culture war” buzzwords demands clarification and challenge. I wish for both candidates to be held to account for their views, not just Mr. Hakimi, and I can see no better way to do so than a debate in which neither candidate controls the flow of questioning from the electorate. Hakimi has stated publicly that he does not wish to engage in a debate under the auspices of what he sees as biased or hostile organizations (I am paraphrasing). I have challenged him, in response to a comment Mr. Hakimi directed at me on Facebook, to name an organization of his own choosing to sponsor a debate, and issue an invitation to Mr. Peirez. He did not acknowledge the comment. He may not have seen it but he will see this. This debate is of utter importance to the increasingly fractious people of Great Neck and the electorate deserves a chance to get to know both candidates and their positions and their temperaments. The impression that many voters I speak with hold is that Mr. Hakimi is being advised not to debate Mr. Peirez because he is not up to speed on the issues. It is just an impression but perception is reality. Mr. Hakimi has invited individual people, including myself, to engage in private conversations so that we might be able to question him directly. While I appreciate his openness to engage directly, I did not feel comfortable doing so. This community in its entirety deserves the opportunity to watch both candidates lay out their positions in contradistinction of the other in a public setting. Time is running out. Many people outside of Mr. Hakimi’s own circle have no familiarity with him. Voters throughout Great Neck, while if they do not know Donna Peirez directly, at least have knowledge of the board’s record of achievements and that she has a long and respected career in education. Having said this, some have recently questioned her ties to the union and whether this is not a conflict of interest with regards to her role on the board (Mr. Glickman outlines this above). This should be challenged vigorously in a debate setting where people can then decide for themselves what is or what is not appropriate. There should be nothing off the table. Time is running out and I do believe it is a fiduciary responsibility of any candidate to participate in a debate when the opportunity affords itself. Great Neck residents deserve no less and the contentious nature of this election demands it.
Dear Mr. Loren
Donna Peirez also did not have the proper experience to serve the BOARD OF EDUCATION when she started and she still doesn’t.
The forum presented to the candidates is clearly run by politically motivated actors that cannot see a common ground to unite our community. Emil made the correct decision not to participate. The community should put together a non partisan group to host candidate forums in future elections.
To say that Ms. Peirez has “nothing but meetings to show for her service” is a misrepresentation. Behind-the-scenes work is still work. Meetings and discussions and policy changes are work. In fact, it is only recently that members of the BoE have needed a freaking publicity relations campaign to defend the work they do.
You make interesting points, Mr. Glickman, but they’re totally obscured by other aspects of your snark.
Great Neck education, Library and Park
Systems are under attack. It is driven
by autocratic forces, who would impose
Their demands and destroy Democratic
Institutions and the Rule of Law.
It is useless to ask for debate or engage
their people. They are a scorched earth
Crowd. Vote for Donna and defeat the
Efforts to take over our schools, Libraries and Parks. Ron Brinn
Great Neck