A strong contingency of parents opposed to a district-wide uniform policy converged upon the North Arlington High School cafeteria last week to have their voices of opposition heard by the board of education.

A crowd of about 50, some of which became passionately vocal against the idea of their children having to wear a relaxed style of uniform next school year, came in the wake of survey results that ultimately would give the power to the board of education to move forward with the policy.

A letter sent out to parents in February by Superintendent Oliver Stringham highlighted his views as to why uniforms, in this case just shirts, would be appropriate for elementary-aged students in the district. He cited reduced school wardrobe costs for parents, a strong sense of self-pride and enhancement in school safety.

"Clothing competition is eliminated, thus significantly reducing teasing, bullying and lowered self-esteem," said Stringham. "The cost of a school wardrobe is significantly reduced. School safety is enhanced."

Attached to that letter was a survey, which would assess the opinions of district parents and in turn, if more than 70 percent responded positively to it, the board would move ahead with implementing the policy. It would call for the board purchasing one shirt per child next year, while assessing those that may be economically disadvantaged and possibly provide more.

According to a follow-up letter sent by Stringham on March 6, each elementary school in the district slightly exceeded the 70-percent approval. At Jefferson School, 74 percent responded positively and 78 percent and 72 percent came back with a yes at Roosevelt and Washington schools, respectively.

"You clearly demonstrated your desire to participate in this decision and let us know what you wanted," he informed parents in the letter. "Our plan includes a phasing in of the uniform policy during September. Uniforms will be mandatory effective early October 2008."

Parents, however, that had the first chance to confront the board after the survey results were released and the call for a mandatory uniform policy was affirmed clearly displayed their angst. Objections ranged from the costs that would be associated with it, perceptions that the survey was just for opinion and that alternative anti-bullying techniques should be implemented, not uniforms.

Denise Callahan, a teacher in the district as well as a parent of a Roosevelt School student said she wouldn’t want to deter the consensus of parents that agree with the policy from following the proposed mandate next year. However, she pushed the board on including an opt-out policy for those opposed to it, something she said she would subscribe to. Citing reasons from Stringham’s letter as to why the uniforms would be beneficial, she said there are logical alternatives that could and should be implemented.

"Why do we put money into teaching character education to our students, teaching tolerance? Because my gut instinct is that’s what we’re afraid of…who is getting made fun of and who’s not," said Callahan. "So teach the kids acceptance, teach kids that everyone is different, teach the kids that there’s more to life than the way we dress. The person inside is what matters."

Some taxpayers in the district approached the board claiming they had not even known about the uniform policy until they heard it through word of mouth. A mother whose daughter is enrolled in the high school, which will not be a part of the uniform policy, said she’d rather see her tax dollars going toward education.

"I’m only finding this out because people are having conversations, but it’s my tax dollars as well," she said. "Every year, my children have come home and said we can’t have this because there’s no money. It’s on and on and on and we’re going to spend money on shirts?"

Valerie Haag, another teacher and parent of an elementary student supported the opt-out policy and asked the board to consider issuing student identifications and lanyards to quell the issue of safety cited in Stingham’s letter.

Board members, although hearing citizen concerns, did not have answers for many of the parents’ questions, particularly ones asking to provide hard evidence as to how uniforms would make the elementary schools safer and enhance learning. Board president George McDermott, prior to closing the hearing of citizens abruptly before motioning for closed session, said he would research the viability and cost of lanyards and IDs and try to have answers to residents by the next meeting.

The opposition by the remainder of parents (25-plus percent at each school) that don’t support the uniforms is reminiscent of a failed attempt at implementing the uniform shirts seven years ago. Then, surveys also showed that a majority of parents supported the idea, but strong opposition from the remainder of the district killed the plan.

According to the New Jersey state statute governing uniform policies in state school districts, the district may have the option to permit a clause of opt-out for parents who choose not to follow the proposed uniform policy. Opposed parents say the proposed policy is already in violation of state statute because the idea was the brainchild of the board of education. According to the statute, the policy must be requested by either a teacher, principal or parent for consideration by the board.