Here is my letter in response to their counsel's letter (posted below). (Their counsel? G-d forbid someone get on the phone or say something in earnest? Don't my taxes pay their salary?)
Feel free to voice your outrage directly to the school board, Mr. Leprine & Dr. Kreutzer:
mlipton@KLSD.LHRIC.ORG, jhharckham@aol.com , wschloat@aol.com , petertreyz.dds@gmail.com, Michael.gordon@klgates.com , CDAY@KLSD.LHRIC.ORG, Peter.breslin@towerswatson.com, pkreutzer@klschools.org and rleprine@klschools.org
To all concerned,
First, I would like to formally voice disappointment to see that Dr. Kreutzer, and the School Board, chose to hide behind counsel as opposed to simply address the matter directly. It would have been one thing to include counsel in the conversation to understand the law, but it is another thing to use the law as a means to get out of having to do what is right. Secondly, you continuously avoid the subject of anti-Semitism with reference to the June 2011 incident, which involved former and (at the time) current students, the allegation of Bella Flannagan who went on the record, my daughter's situation etc. And yet, your very public stance is a zero-tolerance policy.
How is it that your zero-tolerance policy has any validity when you refuse to see what's right in front of you? Even if the anti-Semitic jokes that overheard in the locker room could not be substantiated, the fact that swastikas were painted on a Jewish student's home, the "Welcome to Lewisboro" sign on Route 123 reads "Welcome to Jewishboro," and a student told the press that swastikas are drawn by peers cannot be ignored. Neither can the fact that a 5th grader is scared to attend middle school because you have a principal that has repeatedly chosen to avoid pursuing instances of anti-Semitism until threatened.
And, while you may choose to believe that putting anti-Semitism is quotation marks was not meant as insulting or demeaning, the fact remains that it was. What's even sadder is the fact that rather than apologize for a misunderstanding, you have chosen to defend Mr. Leprine.
While it's wonderful that the District "routinely reviews its curriculum," perhaps it would be best that it compares the curriculum with the actual behavior of its students, as well documented in local and national media. You had students paint swastikas on another student's home. How is that a demonstration of "human rights, civility, citizenship, patriotism and character education?" Yes, perhaps it meets with the bare minimums of the federal and state law, but thatdoesn't mean that it meets with the values you claim to teach. Since when is doing the bare minimum enough? Certainly not for a school district that boasts such high standards.
Would it really be so difficult for the District to acknowledge the fact that there have been incidents reported and to put a special program together to address those needs? Or, at the very least, acknowledge that they are aware that there may be Jewish students who have been made uncomfortable by recent events and to address anti-Semitism on a larger scale?
At no point did I direct Mr. Leprine, or anyone else, to penalize the children involved (save Steve Mangione when he sent that hateful message, because there was no denying who it was, what was said, etc). All that I am asking is that the school recognize that there is an issue, it's been demonstratedand alleged, there are students who do not feel safe to be who they are as Jews, and that the programs brought in may address bullying but not anti-Semitism successfully. Would it be so difficult to contact an organization, which has a long-standing, established reputation and history of educating people of all ages about anti-Semitism and defamation like the Anti-Defamation League? http://regions.adl.org/new-york/programs/no-place-for-hate.html
Another example? I've had to contact Fran Cortina and the school repeatedly to request that when lunch at JJMS contains pork or milk and meat combined to allow an option that does not contain pork or milk & meat. And yet, has come home without having eaten lunch on several occasions because the cafeteria staff as refused to give him an option. He has not been allowed to swap the meal for a salad, or a sandwich, etc. Is that as black and white as calling him a dirty Jew? No. But does it demonstrate a lack of understanding to what it means to be Jewish and a lack of respect for that? Yes.
Legal counsel has no evidence that the environment in the District is safe for Jews either. How can legal counsel allege that when a student doesn't feel safe? When 5th graders are advising one another not to reveal their identity for fear of antagonism in their current and future schools in the district? When children can paint swastikas on a home and, while the law handled those individual, the District did nothing other than send a paragraph home to educate the student body on why it was wrong?
Lastly, I do not believe for one second that Mr. Leprine's inclusion of quotation marks was to indicate that what I was reporting was an allegation.
The District will have to respond sooner or later to anti-Semitism in our school District. The question is, beyond swastikas, Jewish jokes being told in locker rooms, 5th graders afraid to expose their religion and anti-Semitic graffiti on signs coming into our town, what more will it take to make the District respond? Will it be our ethics and morality that will dictate such action, as it should? Or will it be a more violent act of anti-Semitism? And how many of us Jewish parents have to wait for our children to become the subject of such violence in order to prove to the District that anti-Semitism exists?
I will not stand idly by to wait and see what's next. Once a school district can tolerate swastikas etc and not react, I know what's next.
- Rica Mendes
No comments:
Post a Comment