Emotions Run High Over Mask Mandates At Sag Harbor Board Of Education Meeting

There were tears, there was shouting. There were emotional pleas and cries of indignation, accusations of inappropriate behavior and abusive measures, a reference to Dr. Anthony Fauci as a “cult leader,” and an impromptu attempt to float a resolution that caused momentary confusion before being summarily and unanimously voted down.

On Monday evening, February 7, more than 20 members of the Sag Harbor community spoke out publicly at a virtual School Board meeting in what became, over the course of more than three hours, by far the most contentious and emotionally charged meeting the district has held in recent memory.

The lightning rod issue was the mask mandate that has been in place for New York State public schools since the return to in-person learning in the fall of 2020.

Many of the parents who spoke during the public comment portion of the meeting expressed their opposition to the mask mandate, sharing personal stories of how they believe masking has negatively impacted their children when it comes to their mental, physical and emotional well-being, and educational development. Several of them implored the board to call an emergency meeting later this month, in the event that Governor Kathy Hochul decides to let the school mask mandate expire.

Late Wednesday, it was reported by several news agencies that Hochul would allow the state’s indoor mask mandate for businesses expire on Thursday, but she is not expected to make a decision regarding masks in schools until after the February break, according to a report in Newsday on Tuesday.

If Hochul keeps the school mask mandate in place, it would remain in effect as governors in neighboring states of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Connecticut have announced they are ending their versions of the statewide masking requirements for schools.

If Hochul decides to let the mask mandate expire between now and the next Sag Harbor Board of Education meeting — scheduled for March 7 — Superintendent of Schools Jeff Nichols and the board agreed they would call the “emergency meeting” that the parents were requesting to address the issue. Because a mask mandate was included in the district’s reopening plan, there would need to be a resolution to amend the reopening plan in order to make masks optional.

Several parents who spoke at Monday’s Zoom meeting expressed frustration that Nichols would not outright agree to or support changing the district’s reopening plan as soon as Hochul drops the school mask mandate. At one point during the meeting, board member Yorgos Tsibidiris made a motion to enact what would essentially be a mask choice trigger law. It was a move that caused momentary confusion among the board members and administrators.

“Could we modify the reopening plan tonight conditioned on the state changing the mandate?” he asked. “I’d like to make a motion that we do that right now.”

Board President Brian DeSesa responded by saying it was not something the board could do “procedurally at this point,” saying Tsibidiris would’ve had to propose a resolution earlier. After a bit more discussion, Tsibidiris then asked, “Can I make a motion?” to which board member Jordana Sobey replied, “Someone would have to second it, but go ahead.”

After a few uncomfortable moments of silence followed by discussion, Vice President Sandi Kruel seconded the motion, despite, just a few seconds earlier, having called what Tsibidiris was proposing “reckless.” She said she was only doing so out of “respect” for her fellow board member.

When DeSesa then called for a vote, it was summarily voted down by every other board member, including Kruel.

While the board struck down Tsibiridis’s proposal, no member expressed opposition to calling an emergency meeting to take action if Hochul dropped the mandate before March 7. Several board members, most notably DeSesa, even indicated support for removing the mask mandate from the re-opening plan if and when Hochul makes that call.

But Nichols and several other board members pointed out that the issue was not as black and white as parents wanted it to be.

Nichols noted that part of the reason why the district has been able to relax some of its other mitigation strategies — such as lengths of time for isolation and quarantine, allowing for spectators at indoor sporting events, and changing social distancing requirements from 6 feet to 3 feet — is precisely because of the mask mandate.

Doing away with the mask mandate could potentially mean the return of increased social distancing requirements, which would then mean that all of the students in some classes would not technically fit in the classroom at the same time. That could necessitate a return to hybrid learning.

And while Nichols said he expected that Hochul would address those issues before dropping the mandate, it was an illustration of how the situation was not as simple as it may seem.

The meeting, which had been largely civil early on, began to unravel following Tsibidiris’s failed motion.

Sobey became the target of vitriol from several parents after she shared her thoughts on the challenges to dropping the mask mandate, reminding the audience of talking points that Hochul has repeatedly returned to when she’s asked to describe her thinking around dropping the mask mandate in schools.

“I can’t wait for the day when my kids can go to school unmasked safely,” Sobey said. “Trust me, I’m getting tired and absolutely don’t think masks will be used forever. But as far as I can tell, no one who spoke here is a physician or public health expert.

“Governor Hochul has flat out said that mask mandates might come down to vaccination rates, and she’s said that, right now, the rates are not high enough to lift the mandate,” Sobey continued. “I don’t have the latest numbers for Sag Harbor, but the numbers for the younger age group a few weeks ago were not impressive. So, please, vaccinate your kids. Vaccination is how we are going to get through this.”

Those comments evoked an immediate and visceral emotional response from several parents, with some describing her tone as “condescending,” and others taking issue with her plea in favor of vaccination.

Elementary School PTA President Alicia Tsibidiris, whose husband serves on the School Board, was the first to weigh in during the public comment portion and quickly became emotional, crying as she described how upsetting it was for parents to miss out on in-person classroom visits, and how children were “hyperventilating” because of the masks, while referring to the mask mandate and other mitigations used over the past few years related to COVID safety as “extreme, abusive measures.”

Heidi Tolley, another parent with children in the district, sobbed as she spoke about the detrimental effect masking has had on her children, including her son, who has a health condition and was granted an exemption from wearing a mask, which she said she was grateful for.

Ike Birdsall — who, like parent Christine Mazzeo, has appeared at previous board meetings to express his opposition to the mask mandate — used the words “evil” and “dictatorial” to describe the mask policy, and referred to it as “child abuse.”

The remarks toward Sobey became heated enough that board member Alex Kriegsman eventually spoke up in her defense, saying it was “unfortunate to see people making personal attacks.” He pointed out that Sobey is a “mom and hard-working attorney” who, like the other members of the board, was serving as a volunteer.

“If folks don’t agree, that’s their right,” he said. “But we’ve listened to you all, and no one has made a personal attack. So I don’t appreciate that.”

Kruel followed up by saying, “We need to have respect and compassion in these times.”

Kruel also pointed out that district architect Saverio Belfiore, who was at the meeting solely to provide information to the board and the public about a potential plan to upgrade the unit ventilation systems, had been present at the meeting from the start, along with the school budget administrator, Jen Buscemi. Both Belfiore and Buscemi had to wait three hours before they were able to present.

After listening to the public and the ensuing back and forth with several board members as well, Nichols presented his superintendent’s report, starting off, as he usually does, by sharing the latest COVID-19 numbers before trying to address some of the questions and concerns that were brought up by parents.

He acknowledged that parents seemed eager for him to offer some definitive metrics that would sway him one way or another regarding supporting making masks optional if and when Hochul drops the mandate, but said he would continue to take the approach that has guided his decision-making during the pandemic from the start.

“I’ve always taken the approach that we’ll address our mitigation measures according to what we see locally, and we’ll do it in a measured way,” he said. “A lot of people will say to me, ‘What are the circumstances that would make it okay?’ and I said we’d reference the CDC, Suffolk County Department of Health, and our school physician and make a recommendation. I can’t name one metric. It has to be a thorough analysis.”

On Tuesday morning, Nichols explained how using one metric as the deciding factor, such as the daily test positivity rate, can be problematic.

“Let’s say another variant emerges, and it’s similar to omicron, but it’s not yet on our shores, and the test positivity rate goes down to 3 percent, and that’s the metric [for making masks optional],” he said. “Does it make sense, when we know that within the next week or two that variant will arrive on our shores? That’s why we have to look at multiple perspectives to make a decision.”

When asked Tuesday morning of his thoughts about the emotionally charged nature of Monday night’s meeting, Nichols offered a diplomatic response.

“People feel very passionately about COVID mitigation measures in schools,” he said. “There are parents who feel as though the school could be doing more, and there are parents who feel as though the school is overreaching in terms of what protocols we’re putting in place.

“When they feel that passionately about it, sometimes things can get elevated in terms of the tone and tenor of the comments.”

Nichols said he attended a PTA meeting on Tuesday morning — which he said he typically does not do — and addressed what happened at the meeting to those in attendance.

“I said that part of civil discourse is that we can agree to disagree, agreeably,” he said. “That’s always my hope. I think at times last night, in their passionate pleas for their positions, I think there were some insults I heard directed at certain people, and I don’t know that that’s necessarily productive.”

He added that follow-up conversations that took place at the Tuesday morning PTA meeting were “positive and productive.”

Before concluding his superintendent’s report at the board meeting on Monday night, Nichols said that he hoped the district would be in a position to adjust mitigation measures soon but cautioned against making any predictions about when that would be and how it could play out.

“One of the things I’ve learned with this pandemic is that you never know what it’s going to look like three, five, seven or nine weeks out,” he said. “I’d like to thank all of our school community for really doing a great job in following our safety protocols to date. I do think that cooperation and patience has saved lives, and I’m very thankful for that.”