Recently, a petition was submitted to the East Williston School District with fewer than the required number of signatures, asking that the method of electing school board members be changed. Since the inception of the EWUFSD the method of electing candidates has been for each candidate to run for a specific seat. For example if two seats are up for re-election, each candidate running decides which of the two seats they would like to be elected to.

Additionally, a "gentleman's agreement," unenforceable by law, has been typically observed by candidates when selecting a seat to run for. This "gentleman's agreement" suggests that two of the board members reside in East Williston or Mineola, two of the board members reside in Roslyn Heights, East Hills or Albertson, and the fifth board member resides in Old Westbury. This "gentleman's agreement" acknowledged the need for representation on the school board of all members of the community.

I attended a meeting on September 20 that had been arranged by the EWUFSD board of education to discuss this issue. This meeting was arranged in response to the petition, despite there being an insufficient number of signatures on the petition. As I listened, I could not hear a single reason being offered to change the method of electing school board officials. There was no discussion of the children being better served with a different method of voting, or that education would improve with a different method of voting.

At the end of the meeting, Eleanor Zatlin stated that the reason to change the method of voting was so that the "wrong" candidate would not get elected. Mrs. Zatlin was elected to the EWUFSD Board of Education three times under the current method of electing candidates. Is she suggesting she was the wrong candidate to be elected three times? Mrs. Zatlin was not re-elected in 2003, when she decided to run against Mr. Louis Karol for his seat, rather than run for the seat on the board that she occupied. The 2003 election had one of the highest voter turn-outs ever seen in this district. Is Mrs. Zatlin suggesting that the voters elected the wrong candidate by electing Mr. Karol? If the voting had been "at-large," as Mrs. Zatlin's petition is requesting, the two individuals with the highest number of votes would have become the two new board members. Thus, is Mrs. Zatlin suggesting that the third candidate, Mrs. Ellen Ritz who ran unopposed for Mrs. Zatlin's seat is the "wrong" person to have been elected? Is Mrs. Zatlin suggesting that the members of the East Williston Union Free School District are not capable of electing the "right" candidate?

The number of districts that elect school board members in Nassau County by the "specific seat" or "selected vacancy" method that we currently use is 25. The number of districts that elect school board members in Nassau County by the "at large" or candidates with the highest number of votes received for all vacant seats is 29. The evenly divided method of electing candidates in Nassau County suggests there is no "right" or "wrong" way to elect school board members.

This issue, which is a distraction and takes time from issues of great import to the community and to the education of our children, should be concluded.

The request, to hold a special election to decide if the method of electing our school board candidates should be changed, should be denied. The cost of a special election is several thousands of dollars. That money would come from our school budget, from the taxes that we pay. Is that how we want our precious dollars for education to be spent?

Janet B. Serle, M.D.

Although this may seem a small issue and relatively unimportant as compared to the massive scandal and theft in the Roslyn School District I feel it also needs exposing.

I am writing on behalf of the part-time bus drivers who are not unionized as are full-timers, but are just as important in keeping our children safe on the bus.

They are called "temps," even though they may have worked for years and at least one has worked for 10 years.

The administrators who have been hired on a temporary basis to replace those who have left are called "interim," and their extravagant salaries reflect the difference.

The board of education seems not to have any constraints about the large amounts spent for their own comfort levels (i.e. three separate law firms) while taking away the existing benefits needed by the most vulnerable of their employees.

Shame on the Roslyn board of education. Without any negotiations it has arbitrarily removed from them the benefits they had and others still retain: vacation days, sick days, funeral/mourning days as well as their life insurance. The board of education has also hiked the cost of their health insurance four fold.

Was this to show the community that it was making cuts?

Why did the board of education do this? Because it could. Not having a union to represent them they are the most vulnerable of Roslyn School District employees and doing this was not hard.

Besides being known for the scandal does Roslyn also want to be known as the district lacking compassion? Is this what we want to impart to our students?

I and many others implore the board of education to reconsider and restore the humane and necessary benefits to the hard-working people.

With the coming of the new year we can all benefit from doing acts of kindness.

Carolyn Horowitz