PVRHSD board meets March 22; critical mayors await response

Following nearly three hours of emotional debate March 8, plus efforts by several trustees to delay the naming of new school mascots, the Pascack Valley Regional High School District Board of Education voted, 5–4, to approve the Pascack Valley Panthers and the Pascack Hills Broncos.

MONTVALE, N.J.—After their unprecedented call for an independent investigation into the Pacack Valley Regional High School board’s decision-making process leading to new mascots at Pascack Hills and Pascack Valley high schools, the district’s four mayors say they’re still waiting for a substantive response.

Mayors Michael Ghassali of Montvale, Glen Jasionowski of River Vale, Carlos Rendo of Woodcliff Lake, and John Ruocco of Hillsdale issued a joint letter March 10, two days after the school board voted, 5–4, to run with recommendations advanced by committees at both schools and ratified by student votes for the Pascack Hills Broncos and Pascack Valley Panthers.

The letter was the mayors’ third letter addressing the mascot issue, which has riven the district’s students, parents, and taxpayers of four communities. In this letter, the mayors questioned the mascot-changing process—and Superintendent P. Erik Gundersen’s role in it.

The letter focuses on the board’s initial June 22, 2020 meeting decision to retire the Hills Cowboy and Valley Indian over concerns that they were not in keeping with the times and district values of inclusivity. It cites emails sent by the superintendent and alleges a biased agenda toward replacing the mascots.

It also cites an email sent June 22 that the mayors claim shows the superintendent limited the public comment to mostly those favoring the mascots’ replacement.

“As such on behalf of the communities that we jointly serve which comprise the Pascack Valley School District, we recommend and seek that the entire process as well as the decision-makers’ participation in the process be fully investigated by an independent board created by the current BOE and to include community members, from which the superintendent, the BOE president, and any other BOE members found to have been complicit in this highly irregular conduct must recuse themselves,” the mayors wrote.

“We are dismayed to have to seek such action as this time when our student body is facing the many significant challenges of our times. However, we believe it would be unconscionable not to hold our BOE responsible to them and to the taxpaying community especially at this time,” they added.

“The [board] and the process failed our student body which should have been given the opportunity at a much more appropriate time to allow for inclusivity and diversity in the decision-making process. To have denied the entire student body the ability to share their unique and individual perspectives as to the mascots and the failure to give the students the option to retain their school mascots was disingenuous and fell short of what we would expect from the academic community,” the mayors wrote.

We reached out several times to Gundersen and board president Tammy Molinelli for their views.

District spokesman Paul Zeller replied, “Thank you for giving us the opportunity to address this matter. However, the Board has not met since the mayors issued their letter so we do not have an official response at this time.”

On March 10, Molinelli told Pascack Press, “I’ll do what I can to provide you with a response ASAP, however, I can’t speak on behalf of the full board without full board agreement. I will have limited availability starting tomorrow until Sunday the 21st [of March]. Dr. Gundersen may also provide a reply. Enjoy the day.”

The board next meets Monday, March 22 at 7:30 p.m.

The mayors told Pascack Press on March 16 they were informed that their letter was received. However, by press time, they’ve had no further response or communication by the BOE or superintendent.

Especially given that the mayors acknowledge in their pointed letter of March 10 that the mascot change falls within the regional board’s purview, we asked the mayors about their repeated criticism. They said:

“The mayors do not normally seek to tell the Board of Education how to conduct its business. In this case, the public outcry over a decision on a topic that has historically drawn great public interest from students, parents and alumni (many of whom are residents who pay taxes to support the schools) called for a response from the elected leaders of the municipality.”

They said, “The manner in which the BOE’s decision was made has highlighted transparency issues for the BOE to investigate. We trust the BOE to appreciate the gravity of the situation and to develop procedures that will prevent decisions from being made hastily on issues that are known to be controversial and of great interest to the school community.”

Asked what course of action they would recommend to the BOE, the mayors were blunt. “Allow the BOE to investigate the circumstances surrounding the June 2020 decision and ‘back test’ it against traditional standards of transparency and freedom of expression.”