Recently, Hoboken Board of Education candidates were questioned on a number of issues concerning public school education in Hoboken. Today is Part 1 of a two part analysis of the candidates' responses. The original answers to the surveys can be accessed on Hoboken Patch (Responses 1; Responses 2).
Part 2 of this summary will be published on Friday (October 31), and a final ranking will be published shortly afterwards.
This year, the candidates for three open spots are:
- Leslie Norwood (incumbent)
- Antonio Grana (incumbent)
- Elizabeth "Lizy" Velez
- Russ Koyfman
- Laura Block
- Tim Smith
Here’s a concise comparison of the candidates’ responses to Longer Question 2 (Biggest Challenge), Longer Question 4 (Overall Impression of the District), and Longer Question 6 (Facilities Plan and Buildings):
Longer Question 2 – Biggest Challenge Facing Hoboken Schools
Similarities:
All five candidates agree that space and facilities are the district’s biggest challenges. They consistently connect enrollment growth with aging infrastructure and the need for expansion. Everyone acknowledges that the district’s academic performance is strong and that physical capacity must now catch up with success.
Differences:
Velez, Graña, and Norwood take a strategic, policy-oriented view, discussing data, financing models (like Public Private Partnerships), and long-term planning.
Block and Smith focus more generally on learning more about facilities and securing funding, showing less familiarity with specific policy mechanisms.
Velez emphasizes community engagement and communication after the failed referendum.
Graña stresses his state-level experience and coordination with developers and the city.
Norwood highlights the academic implications of facilities design, tying space needs directly to educational quality.
Longer Question 4 – Overall Impression of the District
Similarities:
All five praise the district’s trajectory, academic performance, and dedicated staff. Each expresses pride in Hoboken’s progress and optimism about its future.
Differences:
Norwood provides quantitative data (AP scores, rankings) and links them to district initiatives, reflecting a data-driven, governance mindset.
Velez focuses on special education inclusion and her personal experiences as a parent.
Graña centers his response on confidence in district leadership and his insider’s perspective as a current trustee.
Block’s answer seems incomplete or repeated from another question, offering little substance beyond a general desire for collaboration with the city.
Smith is positive but brief, noting the district is doing “an excellent job” without elaboration.
Longer Question 6 – 2022 Facilities Plan and Future of Buildings
Similarities:
All five agree that facilities need improvement and that space constraints persist. Most supported (or would have supported) the 2022 plan conceptually.
Differences:
Velez, Norwood, and Graña voted for or supported the 2022 plan but criticized its lack of community input. They see future solutions requiring both transparency and creative financing.
Block also supported the plan but focuses mainly on securing funding, offering less about process or engagement.
Smith opposed continuing the same approach, emphasizing that the community’s rejection must be respected and that future efforts must start from consensus rather than advocacy for the old plan.
Norwood provides the most detailed analysis, citing building age, capacity data, demographic projections, and state requirements—showing deep understanding of both facilities management and governance.
Summary
Consensus: Space and facilities are the dominant issue; the district’s performance is strong.
Differences: Norwood, Graña, and Velez are strategic and data-informed; Block and Smith are community- and parent-oriented but less specific on governance.
Distinctive Strengths:
Norwood: Most detailed and policy-grounded.
Graña: Experienced, pragmatic, systems-level thinker.
Velez: Analytical advocate with empathy for diverse learners.
Block: Genuine community volunteer.
Smith: Grounded listener emphasizing community consensus.
