Freeport Schools
Do They Know Where Your Children Are?

By Stewart S Lilker

The primary purpose of the Freeport Board of Education meeting of June 19, 2001, was to adopt three district policies: Project Save; the federally mandated Internet Acceptable Use Policy and the newly state mandated Comprehensive Attendance Policy. The ineffective leadership of the district’s superintendent and cabinet and the school board’s continuing irresponsible disregard for its students and the laws continue to make the Freeport School District a District to leave for both parents and educators.

On Monday, June 17, 2002, the attendance committee met to review the proposed attendance policy. Even though the committee meetings are subject to NYS Open Meetings Law, Superintendent Eversley did not post the time and place of this meeting anywhere in the district. The committee, under the direction of the Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum, Tony Ciaglia, left unchanged the 48-hour provision the district was about to give itself to notify a parent if their child didn’t show up for school. On Wednesday night, June 19th, the policy was put back on the table for a board vote.

Before the vote, your reporter asked outgoing board president John Muscara, "The Attendance Policy still says that the district has 48 hours to advise a parent [that their child is absent]. Does the School Board and the Superintendent agree with that?"

Muscara replied, "It says 48 hours."

Your reporter asked, "Is that written in stone?"

Muscara answered, "Yes."

Your reporter asked the Superintendent, Dr. Eric Eversley, "Could you tell me when the public hearing was held for the attendance policy?"

The state regulation regarding the adoption of the new attendance policy called for a public hearing to be held before the policy was adopted.

Ciaglia answered for the Superintendent, "There was no public hearing for the attendance policy, because none was required." Eversley didn’t correct him.

Your reporter responded, "There was a letter sent by the state, from James Butterworth [The Assistant Commissioner of Education]. It says that the school district must establish a target date for the public hearing and one public hearing prior to the adoption of the comprehensive policy must be held. This district never scheduled a hearing." The letter was dated November 2001. Superintendent Eversley remained silent.

Board member Cattano said he wanted to discuss the 48-hour issue and asked for the clock to be stopped. Board member Ellerbe, the official timekeeper of the board, refused to stop the clock and refused to allow Cattano to speak. Cattano backed off.

After your reporter left the microphone, Cattano forced the issue. He said, "I want to comment on Mr. Lilker’s comment. I think that 48 hours to notify a parent is too long. I think it is way too long. As a parent, if my child is not in school or cutting class, I’d like to know right away. If that child didn’t show up for school that day, I would like to know within an hour that my child is not in school. I think 48 hours gives too much latitude for bad things to happen."

Superintendent Eversley finally spoke up, unbelievably telling Cattano, "I agree with you. The way I read that is 48 hours is the outside time, not the goal. I think it has to be better than that."

Cattano replied, "It’s out there at 48 hours."

Superintendent Eversley, the man directly responsible for the welfare and safety of over eight thousand children, made what was to be his final comment before the vote on the attendance policy. He said two words, "I understand."

Board president Muscara jumped in, "At this point, we have to adopt this policy."

Board member Raab followed up saying, "How they respond to an absentee in the High School or Junior High might be different to an absentee in the elementary school." Then he tried to change the subject and began talking about the agenda.

Muscara jumped back in, "I want to go back to the 48 hour thing. I want to poll the board as far as where we stand. Do we want to keep that number in, or do we want to change?"

Ciaglia added to the mix, "It just says within 48 hours. That doesn’t mean that it has to be at the 48th hour."

Board member Ellerbe added, "That’s how I read it."

Ciaglia then did what he is famous for, making up an explanation as he went along. He explained, "This gives us sometime within that 48 hours to make notification. There could be any number of things that occur that would constrain you. If you said twenty four hours, there might not be, in terms of clock time, enough leeway to do that, so the reason we put in 48 hours was to give us a time frame, within, which to do it. Not everybody’s got to be notified 48 hours after the fact. It’s within forty eight hours."

Board member Raab made some inconsequential comments and then Ciaglia continued, "Each school can develop the procedure within forty eight hours. They could tighten it up.... They could compress that time frame to suit the local conditions. Twelve hours might be feasible at Columbus Avenue [pre K] or one of the Magnet Schools [elementary grades one to four]. Forty eight hours would give them the magnitude of the student body, the volume of issues that arise, might be feasible, but that’s an outside limit."

Ellerbe gave his version of what transpired at Monday’s secret Attendance Committee meeting. "I was present at the meeting on Monday. There was one or two building administrators there. Clearly, this document is a policy document and yet their interest was a procedural component of implementing the policy. That they needed that discretionary time or discretion to implement the policy. And that was their best judgment, that 48 hours was --- (unintelligible) --- they needed to do it within the forty eight hours."

Board member Cattano, whose daughter attended private school from the fifth grade until she graduated this year, told the board, "I disagree with that very strongly. If you put out a forty-eight hour window, I’ll bet you more times that not, it’s going to be at the end of that window. My daughter, when she is late for, or misses, or whatever, I am notified within an hour. And it’s never failed, never. And they have less staff than we do here.

Cattano, straining to control his anger, continued, "As a parent, if my child is not in that school, I want to know right away, because between that 48 hour period, God knows what could happen. I want to know right away. And if my child is cutting a class, I want to know right away, so I can get on it as a parent. I don’t agree with that window, because I know what is going to happen. They are going to work at the end of the window. It’s human nature. I don’t agree with it. They have the staff to do it. Come on. The sweat isn’t pouring off their heads."

Board member Sunday Coward finally entered the fray. "I have to sit here and say, who are we talking about, inmates or students? And what are we trying to do here? When you keep slapping a kid on the head and we have, obviously, the lack of faith in the Administrators, because you think they are going to go to forty eight hours, but as somebody who writes different kinds of reports, as I am sure everyone does, you have to give yourself a window and you have to be realistic. And you have to understand that anything can happen during a school day that will stop your to do list. And contacting a parent is important. And those things are things that can be built into the curriculum. The teachers, when they go on, word passes through. Twenty four hours, you’re putting yourself in this window and then what happens when the teacher doesn’t meet it. Then you’re going to go back to the teacher and say, ‘you missed those twenty-four hours. You didn’t follow our policy.’ Where is the pro-active part? Where is where people aren’t put on the defensive and have to explain their actions all the time? I sit here and I just say, who do you think our students are? Because I know who they are. And I know that they can be, but with that kind of language coming from us, the policy makers, I know what they are going to be, cause you are pushing them up against the wall and the only thing they’ll do is lash out. So give them opportunities. It’s not if you’re part of the solution, you’re part of the problem, because then you have no room to negotiate anymore, because you set those parameters. And in all fairness Dr. [Cattano] I just have to question, who do you feel our students are?

Ellerbe, not understanding the role of the Board as the district’s policy makers said, "This task force that developed this document, comprised of teachers, administrators, parents, it was a collective group of the community that came up with this document. I would trust their wisdom against the board’s."

When Board member Raab began rambling on about drugs, box cutters and prisons, he was cut off and reminded by Ellerbe that the discussion was about the 48 hour limit to advise parents that their children weren’t in school.

The discussion ended. When the board voted on the Attendance Policy, the vote was four in favor and Cattano against.

The leadership of the district had given itself, according to their newly adopted attendance policy, 48 hours to notify a parent if their child had gone missing from school.

FreeportNYNews polled various members of the community, school community and the library staff for their comments on the 48-hour limit. All except one brave mother of three was willing to allow their name to be used.

One secretary in the district’s administration building told your reporter, "I think one hour is all they need, but I could understand two. When my children went to school, I wanted to know right away if they didn’t show up."

The staff at the Freeport library was unanimous in their disbelief at the 48-hour policy. One staff member just shook their head in disbelief. Another said, "I don’t know why they can’t notify a parent after first period." Another said, "What are they kidding, I could see maybe two hours." Another one said, "I want to know right away."

Your reporter asked a student who attended an out of district school if her father would "take apart the school" if it took all day to notify him that she wasn’t in school. The student smiled and said, "He would." Your reporter is a friend of the father.

A grandmother who sent her children to the Freeport schools and now sends her grandchildren to private school because of both the safety issue and achievement issue told your reporter, "They used to call me right away when my children didn’t show up for school. What happened? Are they kidding?"

Your reporter approached his neighbor, Theresa Duran, in her Freeport driveway. Mrs. Duran is a mother of three young, well behaved and delightful children. "Theresa, did you know the Board just passed an attendance policy that gives the district 48-hours to tell you your kids didn’t show up for school." Mrs. Duran stopped in her tracks, paused for a moment and exclaimed, "What, are they crazy!"