67.0°,
Partly Cloudy V.S. District 13 makes masks optional after mandate
At a special meeting last Thursday, the Valley Stream District 13 Board of Education voted to lift the district’s indoor masking requirements once the statewide mask mandate expires or is struck down in court, with no further action needed by the board.
Gov. Kathy Hochul’s mask-wearing directive, which applies to businesses, stores and schools, will remain in effect until the state’s appeal of a State Supreme Court ruling striking down the mandate is decided. The state has until March 2 to file court papers.
The meeting was convened to discuss changes to the school’s reopening plans. But the board’s goal of talking through practical adjustments to the school’s public health procedures made back in September instead turned the tide on an ongoing debate among parents over optional mask use in schools.
During the public comment period, Vincent Caposio, a District 13 parent and proponent of the choice movement, proposed that the board vote on making masks optional once the governor’s mandate ends.
“I don’t think that’s a crazy request . . .,” Caposio said. “Can we vote now as many other school districts have done in Nassau County? . . . Please, someone make a motion to vote that when the mask mandate is over from the state, we can go back to being optional.”
Trustee Gerardo Cavaliere made the motion, which passed 5-1, with one abstention, by Trustee Anthony Bonelli. Trustee Milagros Vicente cast the dissenting vote.
As to her reason, Vicente said, “My vote does not necessarily mean I will not, later on, say [masks] should be optional. However, at this moment, the board is being pressured to make a decision, and we haven’t heard from everybody in the community. We’ve gotten letters that people want masks, and we also got people that don’t want masks. As an elected official, I think it’s important that we hear more from the community before I base my decision on pressure from one group.”
That pressure rose to a fever pitch at the last board meeting on Jan. 25 when a group of parents refused to wear masks during the meeting — at which masks were required — in protest of what they said was a legally dubious health requirement imposed on their children.
A day before, on Jan. 24, Nassau County State Supreme Court Judge Thomas Rademaker had struck down the state’s mask order as unconstitutional, but the state swiftly submitted an appeal, and a stay was put in place while the appeal makes its way through the courts.
Parents, nevertheless, seized on Rademaker’s ruling, which allowed students to, at least for a day, attend school without masks, if they chose to do so. At the Jan. 25 meeting, Caposio said, “My kid went to school without a mask, and no one said anything at all. She went to school with no mask all day…The parents are asking you to join numerous other school boards who already voted to restore parental choice…”
“I asked the principals [Jan. 25] to not put children in a position where they would have to choose between the [directives] of their teacher or family member,” Superintendent Dr. Judith LaRocca said. “We follow the advice that we had at the time, and today with the stay, the mask mandate remains in place, and tomorrow, we will have masks.”
“Will my child be denied an education tomorrow if she doesn’t wear a mask?” Gina Cotrone asked. The question ignited a heated back and forth between parents, trustees and the superintendent, revealing a growing culture war over masks. Some parents of the choice movement are pushing a narrative of victimized families trying to take their personal rights back. Meanwhile, other parents, recognizing the need for the school board to follow statewide, evidenced-back health and safety measures, urged the board to stay the course.
The superintendent assured parents that school officials would never deny a child’s right to an education, but a child without a mask would be sent home, according to policy.
A few parents could be heard heckling and goading board members to act to make masks optional, even though the board insisted on waiting for further instruction from the state, leading to last Thursday’s special meeting. While tensions have cooled since then, and with the board having taken an impromptu vote on the question of mask-wearing, other parents were unsettled at what seemed to be the board yielding to pushback by a vocal minority of parents without first hearing enough community input.
“I noticed that masking was not on tonight’s agenda, so I’m asking since this was not put forth on the community, that a motion to reconsider this decision be put forth,” said parent Evelyn Pineiro, noting that the board should consider those children in families who are not eligible to be vaccinated before safeguards are dropped. The motion to reconsider was proposed by trustee Vicente and struck down.
