Withholding the financial numbers from the public wasn’t the only thing the Board wanted to censor last night. In a concerted attack against the rights of students and freedom of the press, the Board, through their spokesman Dr. Tony Ciaglia, attacked the school newspaper, Flashings. Ciaglia had submitted a "new letter of intent" to the students for their input. This copy, given to the Board had been stamped draft in a transparent attempt to keep it from the public. Grover clearly stated that the public was not entitled to see the new letter of intent, that the Board was not bound to accept any recommendations from the students and that he wanted a vote on the new letter of intent as soon after Friday as possible. The District Clerk said she could post notice of a special meeting as soon as it was necessary. A resident asked if the new letter of intent had to be signed. Superintendent Moffett said she didn’t know and would investigate it. Grover said he didn’t know but he imagined somehow or other it would. Moffett then said, "It gets agreed to." When Lilker asked if the old letter of intent was still in effect, Grover said he imagined it wasn’t. Superintendent Moffett signaled Clerk Bediako to go outside the room with her, which she did. When they came back, Moffett whispered something to Grover and Grover announced that the Board would just adopt the new letter of intent without voting..

The original letter of intent was approved when Board Vice President Renken was principal of the High School. It apparently served the district well, as Renken during the past thirty years never commented on this policy and indeed Flashings flourished while he was principal. Renken sat silent through most of the evening’s discussion.

The controversy regarding the censorship of the school newspaper, Flashings, continued. Ciaglia claimed the "school lawyers" said that it was not legal for the students to have any input into the choosing of the advisor. Ciaglia also claimed that the lawyers said that the students could not be responsible for the publication of the newspaper, because that would mean that they were responsible for the paper and the ink. Clearly, the newspaper has been published for thirty years without the students being responsible for the ink and the paper. The past administrations and school Boards clearly understood the responsibility of the students was not to supply the ink and the paper. Renken knew that and remained silent. Ciaglia said the core issue is protecting the students and the district and not censorship. Grover claimed that because a student signs up to be on the school newspaper, doesn’t mean the student is a reporter, explaining that "because you sign up for the football team, doesn’t mean you get an NFL contract."

Adam Gaffney, the editor of the Flashings claimed that the new letter of intent would make every article written subject to censorship. Board member Muscara, claimed that "certain issues, not every issue is going to be questioned." Ciaglia stated that "the content must be consistent with the district’s educational mission." (The Mission Statement of the District states in part that the primary purpose of our school system is to "… assist every individual to become an informed and productive participant in our democratic society." - ed) When Gaffney said that this was extremely broad, Ciaglia explained it by saying that, "It is the publisher’s frame of reference." Ciaglia claimed that if the district is paying for the paper they should have the right to say what the publication is like. Grover seemed to be worried that the award winning paper would suddenly look like the National Inquirer, saying that, "If it took on that face, we would want to be able to do something about it."

The deposed student advisor to the Flashings, Ira Schildkraut attended the meeting. Before Schildkraut was allowed to speak, Board President Grover, grilled Schildkraut regarding his residence. Incredibly, Grover didn’t know that Schildkraut, a thirty plus year veteran of the district and advisor the to Flashings for the past thirty years was also a district resident for the past thirty two years. Schildkraut told the Board that the new letter of intent would destroy the school newspaper and freedom of the press. He said, "Let’s not play games. This (the letter of intent) is designed to obliterate the first amendment rights of students at Freeport High School." "The wording is so purposefully broad and vague as to allow the rejection of any article at any time."

The meeting concluded with the board making believe they were going over the agenda for the November 17th action meeting and then adjourning into executive session for one matter of personnel.