Setting the Record Straight: Responding to Donna Carey's Outburst
In response to Donna Carey's emotional and inaccurate public statement about the July 8th BOE meeting, we clarify the facts and reaffirm the importance of transparency and civil dialogue.
The July 8, 2025 Hardyston Board of Education meeting had real debate: public votes, on-the-record disagreement, and legitimate questions about language, cost, and priorities.
Then Board President Donna Carey released a public statement that raised more eyebrows than answers. What should have been a simple clarification turned into an accusatory outburst packed with personal attacks and broad attempts to discredit critics.
So this post does what that statement did not: stick to the facts.
📌 Let’s separate reality from rhetoric.
✅ Tony Alfano really did say:
“I took that out because I didn’t like it.”
This wasn’t made up. It was said aloud, during the meeting, in front of the public. That quote is on video and in the transcript.
✅ Nick Demsak really did push back - with facts.
Demsak calmly explained what “equity” and “inclusivity” mean in K-8 education: not political jargon, but fairness and belonging. Carey wants to reframe the conversation as a political fight - it wasn’t. It was a policy debate.
✅ The vote to reinsert the original language failed 4-3.
That number isn’t up for interpretation. The majority of the board chose to remove terms that speak directly to whether students feel accepted and treated fairly. It’s fair - and necessary - to question that.
🧾 What actually happened with the vendor conversation?
Carey now claims she was merely “exploring” free options for third-party survey tools. But when directly asked during the meeting to name one, she couldn’t. No provider. No framework. No plan.
Yet the policy moved forward, including language about using third-party vendors - without confirming who they are, whether they’re vetted, or how this would be funded.
That’s not transparency. That’s hoping the details work themselves out later.
❌ Her “rogue website” claim? Just another smokescreen.
Carey tried to discredit this platform by suggesting it mimics official school communication. That’s flatly false.
This site explicitly states:
“This domain is not affiliated with the Hardyston School District and should not be seen as an official endorsement.”
Carey’s response didn’t refute the facts - so she attacked the messenger.
👎 And then, the personal attacks…
In perhaps the most revealing part of her statement, Carey accused a former board candidate of having a “vendetta,” called this article “malicious,” and dismissed public concern as the product of “bitterness.”
Let’s be clear: holding elected officials accountable isn’t bitterness. It’s democracy.
This wasn’t just an overreaction - it was a meltdown, using her title to lash out instead of lead.
👻 And now… anonymous smear comments?
After Carey’s statement, anonymous comments popped up online, echoing the same tone and doubling down on personal attacks instead of addressing the record.
One read:
“Wow, is this the guy who came in last place in last year’s BOE election? He now seems to be very upset against the people who beat him who the voters elected over him. Now, his current online manifesto is demanding that ‘equity’ not be removed from the Hardyston School District’s policy’s. This is just one of many factors that shows his ideology is strictly from the left.”
Another anonymous user wrote:
“This isn’t nearly as disturbing as some of the other things I’ve heard about this man and his pals. Be very concerned about who your new members may be. My children are grown but I’d be taking them out if these rumors are true. Not nice people. Really really sad.”
Let’s call these what they are: not policy arguments, but unsubstantiated smears and vague fearmongering meant to intimidate.
And yes, that speaks volumes.
When leadership creates or enables a culture where the response to disagreement is anonymous character assassination, it’s no longer about kids - it’s about control. If simply defending the word equity in a school policy brings this kind of vitriol, it raises serious questions about what kind of leadership culture is being fostered.
Hardyston doesn’t need political purity tests or conspiracy whispers in a comment section.
We need facts. We need professionalism. And we need leadership that isn’t afraid of honest questions.
🧭 Final Thoughts
Public service requires maturity. It means listening to criticism without assuming conspiracy. It means answering questions without resorting to character attacks.
The questions raised on July 8 - about what “equity” means, who will run the survey, how it will be funded - are all legitimate. If Carey can’t address those without resorting to name-calling, perhaps the real issue isn’t the article - it’s the mirror it holds up.
This response isn’t about politics. It’s about transparency, accountability, and basic respect for the public.
We encourage everyone to watch the full meeting, read the transcripts, and judge for yourselves.
Because facts - not outbursts - are what our students deserve.