An article in your editorial section, “Great Neck Library Lawsuit Brought to Light,” penned by Rebecca Rosenblatt Gilliar, appeared over the Halloween weekend, appropriately so, as it contains tricks but no treats and is not truthful. This  has caused me, Marietta DiCamillo and Marianna Wohlgemuth to respond.

We had tried to maintain a low profile in the current, very divisive Library election, which has been labeled a cultural war, or that it is based on political lines, or a gigantic power play. Sadly, Ms. Gilliar felt obliged to bring us into the mix. This response will appear after the dust has settled and the votes have been counted, but we believe the public has a right to know the truth concerning Ms. Gilliar’s innuendos, half-truths and outright false statements.

• NO lawsuit, we repeat, NO lawsuit, was ever served on the Library, trustees, or staff on behalf of Ms. DiCamillo, Ms. Wohlgemuth or Dr. Smith. The Board of Trustees agreed voluntarily to follow the bylaws by not installing the puppet board member who, against the governing bylaws of the Library had been appointed to replace the resigned seat of Ms. Chelsea Sassouni. Their decision to do so nullified the necessity of the lawsuit. Ms. Gilliar should check her facts.

• Every member of the Library Association is entitled to serve as a trustee or member of the Nominating Committee provided they are members in good standing of the library association and over the age of 18. They are entitled to be given fair and equitable consideration, regardless of their losing in prior years. The Nominating Committee does NOT discriminate on any level. Ms. Gilliar should check her facts.

• On Free Speech we do agree wholeheartedly with Ms. Gilliar. Free Speech is a treasured commodity. Banning books, book burnings are words used to trigger fear of losing our valued First Amendment rights. After all, many wars have been fought because of it. Ms. Gilliar might be interested in learning the ability of the public to comment on a resolution has been eliminated by President Hu.

An attendee at a Board meeting is permitted, a grand total of three minutes to speak to any/all items on the agenda to be voted on. I have found myself speeding through the agenda hoping to make my salient points only to be told “thank you for your comments.” One must then sit quietly; hands clasped in lap and listen. Then, if attendee is still awake, free speech is again enacted. One is permitted three minutes to discuss anything relevant to the library EXCEPT the prior agenda items. Years past, during more enlightened times, a member of the association was able to voice their concerns over an agenda item during the discussion, before the vote. Ms. Gilliar should check her facts.

• As the foot high stack of court documents Ms. Gilliar reviewed will confirm, the Board of Trustees initiated the action demanding our immediate removal as members of the Nominating Committee. Oddly, although a defendant, the entire Nominating Committee was not required to be removed. Why? Ms. Gilliar should check her facts. The Nominating Committee is a committee of five, a quorum consists of four and an affirmative selection necessitates a majority. Do the math. Two votes are not the majority. Ms. Gilliar, should check her facts.

• Last, Ms. Gilliar’s recall of the 2020 election is certainly selective. She should remember vividly the two votes cast as a write-in for herself. The loss being an ironic twist of fate. Our reason for the write-in vote was simple and pure. We knew, according to the bylaws, without a quorum of four, the Board of Trustees would have had to appoint two people to the Nominating Committee, opening the door to the potential of an unfair advantage. Would the 2021 election also have no nominees for the Nominating Committee? Would Ms. Gilliar be as vocal if she had been able to enlist six people to vote for her, thereby winning?

• Oh, yes, Ms. Gilliar did check her facts, we are most definitely sisters. The proudest damned sisters in the world.

Marietta DiCamillo
Marianna Wohlgemuth