Rebuttal to Dr. Christopher Foresto’s Hypocrisy on Cantiague’s Historical Significance

Rebuttal to Dr. Christopher Foresto’s Hypocrisy on Cantiague’s Historical Significance

At the February 11, 2025 Jericho Board of Education meeting, Board President Dr. Christopher Foresto dismissed the historical significance of the name Cantiague in favor of renaming the school after Henry Grishman. This decision contradicts Foresto’s own background as Second Assistant Chief of the Jericho Fire Department, an institution that acknowledges and preserves the deep historical roots of Jericho—including its Native American history.

Foresto’s role in the Jericho Fire Department means he is well aware of the historical significance of the name Cantiague. The Long Island Fire Trucks website documents the history of Jericho, explicitly referencing Cantiague Rock, Cantiague Rock Road, and the indigenous origins of the name. Yet, despite this awareness, he chooses to ignore this history to push a personal agenda in favor of Grishman.

1. Foresto Cannot Claim Ignorance of Cantiague’s Historical Importance

The history of Jericho, which is widely available and even referenced in local fire department records, clearly establishes the importance of the name Cantiague.

• • Cantiague was originally the name of an indigenous Matinecock settlement and has been preserved in road names, historical markers, and public institutions.

• • The historical marker for Cantiague Rock, located at West John Street and Cantiague Rock Road, marks the spot where Robert Williams purchased land from the Matinecock people in 1648.

• • The name Cantiague is one of the last remaining ties to the Native American heritage of the area.

If Foresto, in his role as a fire department official, recognizes Jericho’s deep historical roots, how can he justify erasing one of its most significant indigenous place names?

2. Acting as a Proxy for Grishman Instead of Serving the Community

Foresto’s actions suggest that he is not acting in the best interest of preserving community history but is instead following a personal directive from Henry Grishman. His outright dismissal of Cantiague’s significance raises serious concerns about his ability to act as an independent and objective board president.

At the meeting, Foresto cited a standing ovation for Grishman at the prior month’s board meeting as if that alone justified the renaming of the school. 

• • A standing ovation is a sign of appreciation, not a referendum on renaming a school.  
  • Rather than considering alternative ways to honor Grishman, Foresto appears to be pushing an agenda that disregards community concerns and historical preservation.

• • Instead of acknowledging his own knowledge of Cantiague’s history, he has chosen to sideline historical significance to cater to Grishman’s wishes.
  • Community members can respect Grishman’s service while opposing the renaming of Cantiague. 

• • His actions suggest that he is prioritizing personal relationships over sound governance and community input.
  • The board cannot selectively claim public sentiment when it supports their decision while dismissing public opposition through petitions or direct feedback. 

If Foresto is willing to ignore documented history to serve Grishman’s interests, then his leadership and objectivity as board president should be called into question.

3. The Board’s Inconsistent Stance on Historical Preservation

The Jericho Board of Education cannot claim to respect history while actively erasing it.

• • The board recently claimed to oppose regionalization efforts on the basis of maintaining local control and preserving Jericho’s unique identity.

• • Yet, when it comes to honoring indigenous history and preserving a name that has existed for over 375 years, they suddenly have no interest in local history.

• • This inconsistency exposes the board’s hypocrisy—they claim to fight for historical preservation only when it aligns with their political interests.

4. Foresto’s Dismissal of the Change.org Petition Further Proves His Bias

At the same meeting, Foresto mocked the Change.org petition against renaming the school, claiming:

1. 1. It does not represent district parents—despite the geographic data showing signers overwhelmingly live in or near Jericho.
   2. He did not recognize the names—laughing at a single name like Mickey Mouse while ignoring legitimate signatures, particularly ethnic names.

1.  

This reaction exposes a deeper issue within the board’s approach to community engagement. If the board president openly mocks names he doesn’t recognize, what message does that send to minority families in the district?

• • It becomes clear why many residents, particularly from underrepresented backgrounds, hesitate to attend meetings or speak publicly.
  • Anonymity becomes the only safe way for some to voice concerns without fear of ridicule or dismissal.
  • This is a systemic failure of leadership—when elected officials make it clear they don’t value all voices, fewer people will feel comfortable participating.

Foresto’s mockery of unfamiliar names is not just a critique of a petition—it is a reflection of why diverse voices are often missing from these discussions. If he truly wants a representative dialogue, he should be fostering inclusivity, not discouraging participation.

If Foresto only values input from those he personally recognizes, how can he claim to represent the entire district?

5. If the Board Wants to Honor History, It Must Keep the Name Cantiague

Foresto and the Jericho Board of Education must decide:

• • Do they genuinely care about history, or only when it serves their personal agenda?

• • Are they willing to erase one of the last visible ties to Jericho’s indigenous past to satisfy Grishman?

• • Will they ignore their own knowledge of local history, despite its documentation in town archives, fire department records, and historical markers?

Conclusion

Dr. Christopher Foresto cannot claim ignorance of Cantiague’s historical importance given his role in the Jericho Fire Department and access to well-documented local history. By ignoring these facts, he is actively choosing to erase history in favor of personal loyalty to Henry Grishman.

If the board truly values history and local identity, then it must preserve the name Cantiague and seek alternative ways to honor Grishman without erasing a name that predates Jericho itself.