If You're Explaining...You're Losing

The Last Word On Regionalization Before Tuesday's BOE Election

The Progressive apparatus is working overtime to set the narrative around regionalization, attempting to sell it as something harmless and non-threatening. A vocal leftist on Somers Parents, has been one of the loudest voices pushing this narrative. But it’s not just him — Amanda Kandel, Chad Olsen, and Harry LeFevre have also been instrumental in downplaying the issue. In fact, during the most recent Board of Education meeting, Kandel and LeFevre conveniently gave an impromptu closing remark, claiming that any concerns about regionalization were based on “misinformation” and urging the community to reach out to them for the “truth.” If that wasn’t enough, they directed people to the FAQ on the school’s website, which reads like a cut-and-paste job from New York State Board of Education talking points, rather than an honest, transparent response to community concerns. They’ve made it clear that they want to control the narrative.

A recent Facebook post by a local liberal attempted to downplay the growing concern over school regionalization, mocking it as a manufactured crisis invented by Republicans. He calls it “just a collaboration forum” and insists that nothing is being forced, no money will be redistributed, and no power is being taken away from Somers families. But let’s be clear: when someone is explaining this hard, it usually means they know they’re losing the argument.

If you enjoy a Charlie Kirk-style takedown of progressive spin, keep reading.

Claim: “Regionalization is simply a collaboration forum.”

Fact Check: The state initially introduced regionalization under an “emergency order,” with participation in the associated and onerous “Regionalization Strengths and Needs Tool” presented as optional. Despite this, our board president chose to opt Somers into the process, unilaterally committing our district and teachers to this initiative. The real cost? Time and focus taken away from our students.

Claim: “Participation is completely optional. We do not have to agree to anything.”

Fact Check: The "Strengths and Needs Tool" is optional today. However, it is TBD on what the state will do with Regionalization. What is actually needed is a board with cajones (sorry, Chad is not your guy) who will oppose Regionalization once the state tries to enforce it. As mentioned in earlier posts, other districts are opposing it and that will require an Article 78 petition. There is no shot in hell that our liberal board is going to do that.

Claim: “The Board of Education has not yet decided to take part in any projects under regionalization.”

Fact Check: The board has already made a key decision, not to opt out. That alone puts Somers on the regionalization path. Even without a formal project in place, staying in the framework means the board has accepted the premise and future potential obligations of regionalization. Not to mention they have prioritized teachers and administrators' allocation of time away from the students.

Claim: “Opting out would give us LESS access to decision-making on topics that concern us.”

Fact Check: This inverts the truth. Local control is the highest form of decision-making. Being part of a 30+ district consortium dilutes our voice and forces Somers to negotiate with districts that may not share our values or priorities.

Claim: “Regionalization could save us money.”

Fact Check: No evidence has been provided to support this. Centralized programs often lead to more bureaucracy, less efficiency, and hidden costs. Any potential savings must be weighed against the real risk of reduced academic quality and local oversight. When was the last time NY State managed a budget effectively or saves you money?!?!

Claim: “Concerns about regionalization are based on a superficial and inaccurate reading of the rules.”

Fact Check: This is false and condescending. Concerns have been raised based on NYSED’s own documentation and real patterns seen in how similar state initiatives evolve. There is nothing “superficial” about questioning a program that could fundamentally reshape local education.

Claim: “This is just like what Republicans did with DEI and IB — using fear to divide the community.”

Fact Check: Disagreeing with a state-directed agenda is not fearmongering. It's about preserving academic focus, local values, and budget transparency. Raising valid questions about long-term impacts isn't partisan, it’s responsible governance.

Claim: "...they say that Somers’ Superintendent will report to Albany.”

Fact Check: I doubt Ritacco, Rinaldi or Vala made this statement because it is factually incorrect. The Superintended would report to a Regional BOCES Superintendent, who reports to Albany, not Somers. The reality is that the practical effect of regionalization is that the district, and by extension, the superintendent, becomes more aligned with Albany’s directives than Somers' own locally elected board.

THE LIBERAL APPARATUS IS TRYING TO SET THE NARRATIVE! KNOW THE PEOPLE WHO YOU SHOULD NOT TRUST!