Parents and students took the microphone at the March 15 School Committee meeting to express deep concern that Harvard schools might stay open on Yom Kippur and Rosh Hashanah in future years.
The debate was sparked by a discussion of the school calendar that began near the end of the committee’s March 1 meeting. At that time, School Superintendent Thomas Jefferson noted that Harvard schools had a practice, although not a policy, of closing on the Jewish high holidays, as well as on Good Friday. His proposed calendar included all three holidays.
The March 1 discussion had continued, with committee member Patricia Wenger commenting, “I have to bring up the religious holidays … We’re a public school. We have policies based on the separation of church and state. At what point do we stop?” As Harvard becomes more diverse, she said, the question of religious holidays could become much more extensive.
Chairman Keith Cheveralls then pointed out an entry in the district’s official policies stating that the observance of religious holidays is not the responsibility of the public schools. Member Piali De recalled that the practice of closing on the Jewish holidays had been initiated at the request of parents several years ago.
Member Stu Sklar stated, “Then we should have school on Dec. 24 and get out a day earlier [in June]. It’s a religious holiday … If we are going to have no religion, then let’s be consistent.” (Dec. 25—Christmas—falls on a Saturday in 2010; Dec. 24 was set as the first day of the winter vacation.)
Although the March 1 meeting adjourned without either a motion or a vote on the issue, the topic produced a flurry of letters and e-mails in the two weeks between School Committee meetings, both from parents and from local religious leaders.
Opening the discussion on March 15, Sklar moved that the calendar for 2010–2011 follow the current practice of closing for the religious holidays; additionally, he proposed the formation of a committee that would include members of the School Committee, the public, administrators, and teachers “to thoroughly examine the issue.” The proposed committee would be expected to present a policy recommendation on religious holidays by the end of June this year.
Before voting on that motion, Cheveralls called for public comment, beginning with students. Bromfield students Caren Hoffmann, Rachel Leicher, and Lilly Ritter spoke of the importance of the high holidays to their Jewish faith. Hoffmann explained, “They are days when I spend time with my family, focus on my religion, and repent my sins.” All three students emphasized that missing school would be stressful and take away from the religious experience of the holidays.
Among the adult residents who spoke, Holly Rothkopf expressed her hope that the school calendar would honor “the fundamental values of religious tolerance and respect” for all religious viewpoints. Bruce Leicher asked the School Committee to show leadership in expanding, rather than limiting, respect for diversity.
Richard Backer, who had been among the first to respond in writing after the March 1 meeting, told the committee that he had contacted the Anti-Defamation League of New England and the civil rights section of the state attorney general’s office about the issue. In his written communications, Backer asserted that Jewish children “will feel victimized and singled out” if the holidays are eliminated from the school calendar. And in a later e-mail, he called the possible action of eliminating the Jewish holidays as school holidays “outrageous and blatantly discriminatory.” Contacted later by the Press, Backer clarified that he had not filed a formal complaint; he said he had called the attorney general’s office only for information.
Cheveralls reported, “A complaint has indeed been filed with the attorney general’s office, alleging that the School Committee was taking action tonight to remove the Jewish holidays whilst retaining the Christian holidays. I’ve been in contact with school counsel to clarify the actual intent here this evening was no such thing.” He said he would respond both to the complaint and to the ADL in writing. Speaking both for himself and for the committee, Cheveralls also apologized for any perceived insensitivity.
After the public commentary, Cheveralls read into the record the correspondence he had received on the issue. A letter from Derrek L. Shulman, regional director of the ADL stated, “As I am sure you know, federal and state law require schools to make reasonable efforts to accommodate the sincerely held religious beliefs of their students and employees.” The committee also received letters from the Reverend Greg Schmidt of the Congregational Church of Harvard, the Reverend Dennis J. O’Brien of Holy Trinity Catholic Parish, and the Reverend Wendy Bell of the Harvard Unitarian Universalist Church.
Later, in a conversation with the Press, Backer expressed disappointment that Cheveralls did not read into the record any letters from area rabbis on the issue. He cited in particular a letter from Rabbi Michael Luckens of Kerem Shalom in Concord, who had met with the School Committee in 2004 when the current practice was first established.
After the public commentary, members of the School Committee took up the motion before them. Explaining the background of his motion, Sklar said that he had spoken to several lawyers. “You can’t close school for religious holidays,” he stated. “That’s the law of the land. But you can close school for economic reasons.” He noted that the courts have considered low attendance a valid economic reason, so that it is acceptable to close on days when many students and teachers are expected to be absent. Sklar suggested that further discussion could help to determine what the appropriate demographic threshold for closure might be.
Piali De took a different approach, saying she had planned to propose recognizing other world religions—Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Sikhism—with three additional holidays. She emphasized the educational value of including these holidays, even if only for a single student.
Cheveralls asserted that “the fundamental problem that was not addressed correctly in 2004,” when the School Committee first voted to close for the Jewish holidays, was the failure to make policy congruent with practice. He also noted that changes in the calendar must be discussed with the Harvard Teachers Association in a timely manner, as specified by contract.
The committee then voted unanimously to keep the current practice for another year, while establishing a committee to consider the issue more fully and report by the end of June.
