Dear Dr. Foresto, Dr. Balachandar, Mrs. Vartanov, and Mr. Perlman,
We are not addressing Jill Citron in this letter because her position is clear—this renaming proposal is her initiative, and she has made it a political game rather than a community-driven decision. The responsibility now falls on the rest of the Board to demonstrate leadership, transparency, and a commitment to fair governance. This is about the integrity of the process, not personal agendas.
On behalf of the growing opposition to the proposed renaming of Cantiague Elementary School, we urge you to VOTE NO on this rushed and flawed proposal. This decision is being pushed forward without public support, transparent financial disclosures, or a formal policy for renaming schools. It is now facing national scrutiny, legal challenges, and increasing pressure from cultural and historical organizations.
The petition opposing the renaming now has 574+ signatures and continues to grow. The New York Post has picked up the story, ensuring this is no longer a local issue. Additional media outlets are being engaged ahead of Thursday’s meeting. The Board must recognize the ramifications of pushing through an unpopular and controversial decision without following proper governance procedures.
And Dr. Foresto, before you carry on with your “A representative from the Jericho district said the group is anonymous, and it has not been confirmed that they live within the district. Similarly, they said the online petition has signatures with anonymous names and fake identities, such as “Mickey Mouse,” which are not confirmed residents.” You know exactly what you’re doing by making this claim—it’s a blatant attempt to discredit real community voices based on one random name. The fact remains: 574+ verified signatures exist, tied to real names and real email addresses, proving overwhelming community opposition to this renaming. Dismissing those voices because of one outlier is not just dishonest—it’s an insult to the people of Jericho who are speaking up.
The Legal, Financial, and Political Consequences of Passing This Vote
Legal Challenges Are a Known Option
If the Board moves forward without clear community engagement, there are well-established legal pathways that have been used in similar cases. An Article 78 proceeding remains an option for:
- Failure to follow standard governance procedures
- Lack of transparency in decision-making
- Potential Open Meetings Law violations if coordination between Board members, the PTA, and the Jericho Educational Foundation is uncovered
The Board is well aware that such legal avenues exist and have been used in previous instances where governance failures occurred.
Tribal and National Opposition Will Continue to Grow
The Matinecock Tribe has been contacted, and we will continue to reach out to additional tribal and legal organizations, including but not limited to:
- The Shinnecock Nation
- The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI)
- The Indigenous Language Institute
- Stony Brook University Department of Linguistics Algonquian Language Revitalization Project (ALRP)
The renaming of a school with indigenous ties without consulting these groups raises serious ethical and legal questions.
Financial Transparency Remains in Question
There has been no disclosure of how this renaming will be funded. The option exists to file Freedom of Information Law (FOIL) requests to obtain:
- Email communications between Board members, the PTA, and the Jericho Educational Foundation
- Cost estimates or budget allocations related to the name change
- Internal meeting minutes discussing the renaming before it was made public
If such requests reveal undisclosed financial commitments, it will raise further accountability concerns.
This Vote Will Have Long-Term Political Consequences
Board members who vote in favor of this renaming will be publicly documented and held accountable in the next election cycle. The Board should expect ongoing community engagement, voter mobilization, and continued media coverage surrounding this decision.
The Process Has Been Rushed and Contradicts Previous Board Actions
The student cell phone policy took five months of public meetings, surveys, and research before a final decision was made. In contrast, this school renaming proposal has been forced through in less than three months, without:
- A formal policy
- An independent cultural or historical assessment
- A community-wide survey
- Financial Analysis
There is no justification for this discrepancy other than political maneuvering.
The Board needs to VOTE NO and establish a clear, transparent policy for renaming schools before even considering a decision of this magnitude. If this renaming effort fails, it is the Board’s responsibility to ensure that no future proposal follows the same flawed process.
Three Votes Can Stop This
Jill Citron’s position is clear. That leaves four of you with a decision: stand with the community and uphold the integrity of Board governance, or push through a rushed, politically motivated decision that lacks transparency and public support.
This is a defining moment for the Board.
Vote NO on Thursday.
Sincerely,
Jericho Voice
