Editor’s Note: This op-ed was written by Stephen Olbrys Gencarella, Ph.D. of Lyme.

It has been six weeks since I wrote a letter to the editor regarding how Christy Zelek, an Unaffiliated candidate for Lyme First Selectwoman, plagiarized DTC chair John Kiker. It has been six weeks of silence. I think it is safe to assume that Ms. Zelek has no intention of offering an explanation or an apology for her dishonesty. Perhaps she confuses cowardice with leadership.

Accordingly, in penning this op-ed, I request a written response from Ms. Zelek. As a lifelong Democrat and a potential constituent, I seek assurances that the leader of my town forefronts honesty. I also intend to explain to my fellow Democrats what plagiarism is and why its specific use in this case of local politics matters. I apologize upfront for the length.

There are many excellent primers on plagiarism, but I will draw from a source meaningful to this case, namely the Lyme / Old Lyme Parent-Student Handbook. That handbook succinctly defines plagiarism as “the act of presenting someone else’s words, work, or ideas as one’s own” and encompasses the “use of quotations, ideas, or work without proper citation” (2025, page 14).

Generally, it is not considered plagiarism when a candidate repeats political platitudes, phrases, clichés, or simple statements that describe a platform in partisan terms—what Tom Beyer calls “messaging” in a response to my original letter. It is plagiarism, however, if a candidate uses the specific words of another without attribution, and especially if they represent those words as their original expression.

Ms. Zelek’s full introductory statement to voters is as follows:

“I am grateful to have received the support of the Lyme DTC. I’m running for office because I love this town. My priorities will include keeping our town the beautiful, historic place it is; keeping our financials in check; keeping our taxes low and supporting our schools; and continuing to address our town’s capital needs, such as our roads, bridges and town equipment” (LymeLine, July 24, 2025).

Most of this is just common and harmless political phrasing. Indeed, it’s more notable for what is missing, such as even a modicum of support for Lyme’s LGBTQIA+ youth, veterans, immigrants, lower-income families, first responders, and social programs for children.

But as I explained earlier, the phrase “I love this town … keeping our town the beautiful, historic place it is” is directly lifted from chairman Kiker’s statements in Lyme Matters, the DTC newsletter. Those patterned words and sentence structure are unique to Mr. Kiker, who employed them repeatedly over the course of several years in specific contexts and who often signed his name to them. So, the use of that phrase is not general “messaging” akin to “God Bless America” (as Mr. Beyer contends). It’s taking someone else’s quotable words without citation and representing them as one’s own.

Why does this matter?

As I’ve noted before, Ms. Zelek’s use of Mr. Kiker’s words raises questions about the nature of her campaign and who would actually be in charge of the town. It is reasonable to wonder, further, if Mr. Kiker wrote that statement for her, recycling his own language, but that would raise the subsequent question of why Ms. Zelek did not compose her own introduction to voters, which is not difficult work.

It’s important to recognize that Ms. Zelek is asking to be elected First Selectwoman. Yes, Lyme is a small town, but the office she seeks is the equivalent of being hired as the CEO of a small company or the president of a small college. It is a position that must have command of financial and legal matters, demonstrate good judgment in appointments, well represent the town to other municipalities, and provide calm and skillful leadership in the case of a crisis such as a hurricane or an ICE raid.

By her own admission, Ms. Zelek has not served on any town board, commission, or regional association. Instead of following a normal trajectory of requisite—or at least relevant—experience to First Selectwoman, she has instead posited that her primary qualifications for the town’s top job are her “leadership positions in parent-teacher groups at the high school, middle school and elementary school” (LymeLine, July 24). In other words, Ms. Zelek is asking voters to judge her readiness for leadership and to grant her public trust and authority according to her contributions to an educational community.

It is unthinkable that someone who has dedicated such time to educational support would not comprehend the nature and problem of plagiarism. Indeed, I trust that Ms. Zelek, as the longstanding president of the PTO and PAB, understands the significance of this issue better than most people, especially as it concerns modeling proper behavior for youth. I trust that she understands the crisis that we teachers are facing in the rampant and escalating practices of dishonesty among students. I trust that she knows we educators implore young people not to risk plagiarizing and to err on the side of caution if there’s a chance it could happen.

And that is why it is so disappointing that given the opportunity to introduce herself to voters, she opted to take the course of action that she did. It was a failure of principled leadership—and by her own stated standards.

I assume that many Democrats in Lyme will simply circle the wagons and find a way to excuse this behavior. So, to them, let me ask: If plagiarism is wrong when done by Melania Trump or Pete Hegseth or Benny Johnson, is it not also wrong when people on our side commit it? And do we or do we not as Democrats wish to restore the value and virtue of honesty in public life?

I will close with a relevant citation from the Honor Code of the Lyme-Old Lyme High School:(http://lolhsnews.region18.org/uploads/2/1/7/9/21791640/honor_code_8_17.pdf):

“We believe in taking ownership and pride in our actions and choices by demonstrating our Core Values of Accountability, Integrity, Respect, and Perseverance. In addition to abiding by the rules set forth in the student handbook, LOLHS Honor Code is founded on the following pillars of character:

Honesty is demonstrated by:

• Refusing to lie, plagiarize, steal, or deceive in any way”

Despite its widespread decline in adherence, especially among politicians, it is still the right message. And I wish all local candidates and elected officials supported by my party lived by it.

Editor’s Note: This is the opinion of Stephen Olbrys Gencarella, Ph.D.