0:00During the public comment sessions, Mike Dy, a resident of Brookfield Avenue, articulated the community’s frustration with the board’s decision to form a co-op arrangement with Tenafly. Dy highlighted that Glen Rock had sufficient numbers to support a standalone varsity hockey team for at least the next two to three years, excluding the sixth-grade cohort. He emphasized a lack of communication and involvement from key stakeholders, including students and parents, stating, “it was a little disappointing to hear that this process… took place without anybody knowing about it until July 24th.” Dy also raised logistical and procedural concerns, noting that the application deadline for the co-op was April 15th, yet discussions were only occurring late in the summer. This delay left the team without a coach as the new season approached, leading to concerns about readiness and preparation.

17:53Bill Szon echoed Dy’s sentiments, arguing that the rationale for a co-op—typically based on insufficient numbers—did not apply given the current player count. He stressed the importance of allowing students to play together, stating, “to tell these kids… that just seems really unfair to me.” Another speaker, Mike Carlile, questioned the procedural aspects of the application process, pointing out that it seemed misaligned with the requirements set by the New Jersey State Interscholastic Athletic Association (NJSIAA). Carlile expressed concern that delays could result in a lack of coaching and ice time, jeopardizing the upcoming season.

30:30Christina Kunto raised additional concerns about the leadership vacuum left by the resignation of the hockey coach in May. She criticized the interim athletic director for not engaging with students or communicating effectively regarding their concerns. Kunto drew attention to the logistical challenges posed by shifting practice locations from the Ice House to an outdoor rink, which she described as inferior in quality. She noted that, unlike other sports teams, the hockey team was being asked to use subpar facilities, which she believed was unfair to the athletes.

The issue of the co-op arrangement also brought up concerns about team identity and pride. One speaker expressed that moving forward with the co-op would essentially result in “handing over our players to Tenafly,” diluting the Glen Rock team’s identity and undermining the pride associated with wearing the Glen Rock jersey. Another parent highlighted logistical challenges, particularly the distance and traffic involved in reaching the proposed co-op location at McKay rink, which many players who participate in travel hockey did not use.

Megan Almond, another community member, highlighted the broader reputation of the Glen Rock hockey program within New Jersey. She noted that the proposed co-op was shocking to many outside observers who knew Glen Rock hockey as a strong program. Almond also brought up the aspirations of female athletes, mentioning that her daughter had put together a proposal for a girls’ varsity hockey team but had not received timely or adequate responses from the athletic director or school administration.

Brad Boki, another parent, expressed dismay over the potential folding of the Glen Rock hockey program. He emphasized the irreplaceable experience of playing hockey with local classmates and insisted that the community had the desire to maintain Glen Rock as a unique hockey program. Boki pointed out that the parents and players were unified in their opposition to the proposed co-op.

The public comments session ended with various parents reiterating their commitment to preserving the integrity of the Glen Rock hockey program. They urged the school board to engage more directly with the families and players, emphasizing the emotional connection the athletes had with their team and their desire to continue as an independent program. The community’s appeals underscored the need for timely decisions regarding coaching and logistics for the upcoming season.

17:53In addition to the hockey co-op discussion, Adam Bloomfield spoke about an appeal for his son, an incoming junior, to advance from College Prep US History to honors US History. Despite meeting the prerequisites outlined in the Glen Rock High School program of studies, the appeal was denied, prompting the family to seek further clarification. Bloomfield expressed frustration over the perceived lack of discussion regarding his son’s progress and the absence of a transparent evaluation of his writing skills, which were cited as a concern by the supervisor. He concluded with a plea for fairness in evaluating his son’s capabilities.