Tim is on the right track here. The focus belongs on the three board members who did this to Rochester: Malik Evans, Melisza Campos, Jose Cruz. Why?
While we wish her good health, and every kind of personal well being, Cynthia Elliott is not an appropriate choice to lead the city school board. Readers of this publication are very familiar with the reasons.
There was her celebrated and repeated public bursts of profanity at a board meeting, and later to media, just prior to the 2009 election. There was her climb down from the stage to intimidate a union leader, who expressed an opinion that offended her at a board meeting. There has been her too frequent failure to perform the most basic board responsibilities, attend meetings, attend important job interviews, and prepare for board work. Health, which did not prevent her from running again last year, does not account for most of this. There has been her regular and cynical resort to appeals to racial animosity. There was her indecent circulation of the troubled musings of a child of a prominent union leader, about that union leader's divorce. There is her support for abolishing the school board she collects a salary to serve on, and continues to run for, coupled with her disproportionate contribution to making that board a laughing stock, which fuels the mayoral control movement. This is just a partial list.
When it is politically convenient , some people excuse Elliott's conduct by saying "well, she is just so passionate in her concern for children...." This is not just hogwash, it is offensive hogwash. There is zero evidence she cares more about kids than any board member she has served with. Quite the opposite.
I have served on 3 elected public school boards, and I served with Elliott, Evans, and Campos. I observed Elliott's performance to be almost completely devoid of either decency or good faith. I know Evans and Campos observed the same thing, and we talked about it many times. It is deeply disappointing, even shocking, that these two board members would do such a manifestly irresponsible thing.
We can speculate about motives. Cruz ran against Gantt in 2012, rendering his support for Elliott particularly hypocritical. Campos supported Cruz. Both barely won their last board primary. Evans endorsed Richards, believing he was on the winning side. Perhaps these three were trying to get right with Gantt. Evans resents Willa Powell's run for assembly in 2010, which he believes cost him the seat won by Harry Bronson (BTW, Howard, Joe Morelle is no ally of Powell), Why would the board elect and then rebuke Van White? Is Gantt's Mayoral Control law, or a state takeover of city schools on tap? Elliott's antics in a more visible position might grease the skids. We can only guess.
We can be sure of this, however. Whatever silly political game playing led to this, it was not done in the public interest. Evans and Campos face reelection next year. I like them personally. We worked well together. They have sought and had my support in the past. I want a better explanation than they have given, and so do a lot of other people. The Democratic Committees in the southeast part of the city, whose members have expressed concern about Elliott before, might be a good place to start. We can't blame this one on Gantt, folks. The board members who did this must be accountable.
David Gantt part II and III.
I don't see a problem here. Her uncle was a state trooper who has provided security for three NY governors. She is an African-American woman with a young daughter and there's no shortage of possible threats against her. I would hardly expect her or her security to announce publicly when someone's made a threat; security doesn't do that. With the attempted assassination of Gabby Giffords three years ago on Wednesday, nine publicly reported assassination plots against the President in the last five years, mobs of so-called "patriots" heckling and threatening members of Congress at town hall meetings, over a dozen threats against members of Congress for their views on the Affordable Care Act (both Democrats and Republicans) and the general tenor of our culture, I think it's a prudent step for Mayor Warren to employ close protection officers. Mayor Byron Brown of Buffalo has been protected by at least two police officers for the last four years. The mayor of Pittsburgh has historically had two police officers accompanying them and the mayor of Cleveland has three homicide detectives with them around-the-clock and a fourth officer at their home. All of these cities are close to the size of Rochester and their mayors have the same level of prominence the mayor of Rochester does. It's necessary. Who pays for it is another story. But even if the public has to, it's a good investment.
I see nothing wrong with her hiring her uncle. He has the qualifications . Why she needs personal protection? Have any of you guys ever been to her neck of the wood ?
"It just looks bad."
Are you kidding? Does it look any worse than the hundreds of cousins, nieces, nephews, brothers, sisters, aunties, uncles, sons, daughters, and mother-father-sister-brother-in laws who have been hired by family members, and/or friends (pre-Lovely Warren Era) within the Rochester Police Department, Rochester Fire Department, other City Departments , and in the Rochester City School District? If the charge is nepotism, and if it's true, is this something brand-new, or is it as old as the city itself? Sounds to me like the topic would be great for some interested investigative journalist to look into. Perhaps you (Ms. Fien )and Rachel Barnhart could team up together, and take on what I'm certain would prove to be a very interesting assignment (to say the least), or are your printing presses only set to pump out super-sensationalized, yellow journalism about the Warren Administration? I'm just asking.
City Newspaper and the rest of the Warren haters need to get a life.
Warren is clearly demonstrating that she is unqualified to be mayor. Every day brings a new problem. First, she tout her police chief candidate would come for a 25% salary reduction and higher taxes. A little naive? Now we have an appointee that did not bother to tell her that he had a DUI charge just last year, a lawyer appointee with conflict of interest problems, and on the same day, evidence of nepotism. I guess she thinks Rochester is going,to be her personal piggy bank. I guess she learned from Maggie. What's next? It would. E best if she resigned now instead of subjectingmthemcity to another incompetent mayor.
Ok, so now Mr. Cruz and Ms. Campos, after opposing Mr Gantt last year and Ms. Warren this year, are now doing their bidding? This line of reasoning is ridiculous. It may be that Campos, Cruz and Evans have decided that they are not going to be pawns of the RTA, and are actually serious about educating African American and Latino students.
I NEED Y'ALL TO HELP ME OUT WITH THIS. IS IT JUST ME, OR IS THE ARTICLE BELOW STRANGE IN SOME WAYS?
First and foremost, I want to be clear about the fact that my questions (above and below) have absolutely nothing to do with me supporting a particular school board member(s). As many of you know, I am unequivocally convinced that ALL of them who were up for reelection recently, as well as those who will be up for reelection two years from now --- should be replaced. If there is any governmental entity in which FRESH, NEW, BOLD, KNOWLEDGEABLE, COMMITTED LEADERSHIP is desperately needed --- it certainly is the Rochester Board of Education. Still, I just don't get parts of the article below.
For example, is it just me, or does it seem that Willa Powell is being portrayed by journalist Tim Macaluso as the "victimized, great-white-hope?" --- i.e., "The loss had to be tough for Powell to take, since she has frequently supported the board members who ended up voting for Elliott last night. Powell's colleagues seemed to have trouble looking Powell in the eye during the meeting."
And can someone please help me to understand this one: "Powell's loss may be more about her lack of support at City Hall and in some corners of the Democratic Party. Elliott and new mayor Lovely Warren share a benefactor in David Gantt, a state Assembly member and one of the area's most powerful and influential politicians." WHAT??? Is this guy really serious? Is he actually suggesting, or am I misunderstanding --- that Campos, Cruz, and Evans voted for Cynthia Elliot because they are afraid of, or beholding, or pandering to Lovely Warren, David Gantt, and their "corner of the Democratic Party." What about Powell's ally --- State Democrat Party Majority Leader, and Chairman of Monroe County's Democrat Party, Assemblyman Joe Morelle? Is he NOT "one of the area's most powerful and influential politicians?" Seriously, am I missing something here?
Additionally, it's fine to have principles, but should the idea of being "principled" NOT be consistent? I mean (relative to leadership) --- if someone decides that he or she can't vote for a particular Board member (based on the Board member's past position on a critically important issue) --- then is it not a fundamental contradiction for such person to have declared that he or she would "never" support Dr. Bolgen Vargas as Superintendent of the Rochester City School District, and then, when it's time to vote, actually turn around and vote in favor of his appointment?
Lastly, is the article below an example of race-based, "yellow journalism," which I observed people writing about here (on face book) a couple of days ago, or am I off-base?
I"M JUST ASKING. HELP M E OUT.
Do you remember what you "read earlier," which is now "missing"? I'm really interested in knowing --- because certain parts of the article are very strange.
From the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:
"Religious discrimination involves treating a person (an applicant or
employee) unfavorably because of his or her religious beliefs. The law protects
not only people who belong to traditional, organized religions, such as
Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, and Judaism, but also others who have
sincerely held religious, ethical or moral beliefs."
Yes, I think it applies here!
But, please understand that this man is already rich and that this "job" is mainly for the benefit of others.
The spirit of this protection belongs on the factory floor, office, etc. where we must all strive to be more respectful and tolerant of others.
The answer to your question is yes. We decided that the first version of the blog needed some work, so it was taken down and reworked. We've now noted the change at the top of the blog. Thanks for pointing out.
City news editor
If the duck people don't like gay people, they shouldn't be working in show business. I guess they don't mind the gay hair stylist teasing their beards...I guess greed wins again.
Tim, was this post edited? It seems to be missing something that I read earlier in the day.
Education sure is in the news a lot, both here and at the D&C. We can all feel proud because this means that our local news media is taking care of its commitment to education, right? But are we really? Perhaps we have lost something important along the way.
I have enjoyed reading old D&C newspapers from the 1920s, 30s and 40s. Education policy was an important issue then too, and these issues were fully covered, just like today.
But today something is sorely missing—news about city schools and schoolchildren and the daily activities and stories of their lives—the field trips, the major lessons, the celebrations, the hikes, the competitions, the discoveries. It was not simply that these old-time print journalists valued education: they valued children. And it wasn’t news that was buried away, either.
Perhaps if our local newspapers allocated more print space to stories about city kids, as a community we would be showing that we value their experiences and that as a community we are with them on the journey of their lives. Not just in theory—but in practice. And not just for the high achievers, but everyday kids too.
When was the last time that City Newspaper devoted many column inches to just plain stories about city kids? You have devoted volumes to stories about their troubled lives and more than enough stories about the policy fads and gimmicks promoted by the careerists and the "professionals."
It's called "back-to-basics" and may be worthwhile even for City Newspaper to consider.
Will drones be allowed to operate freely without any oversight? Will they be allowed to fly over and photograph whatever they want? How will the privacy and safety of New Yorkers be protected? In November a drone crashed into Lake Ontario. The cause of the crash has not been made public. What if one of these things crashes in a populated area?
Hmmmm - they are going to clean up a hazardous site and add to the tax base. Why would anyone opposose this development? For those concerned about this being inconsistent with the character of the village, are you implying that the existing eyesore is better?
According to an editorial in this newspaper, "If we're going to continue to be able to govern ourselves, we'll have to be willing to listen to one another and respect other viewpoints." While it's true that the capital-C Constitution restrains government, not citizens, there is nevertheless another part of our social compact, a small-c constitution by which we respect our neighbor's right to speak his mind. If you disagree with him, then the appropriate response is a reasoned refutation — not name-calling or a witch hunt.
A&E's volte-face is a resounding defeat for political correctness. And it is a thumping humiliation for extremist groups that sought to silence America's favorite patriarch.
As for the Bashir incident, there is no comparison whatsoever. He called for a human being to be physically assaulted and degraded. (And, of course, he had no audience to speak of anyway.)
Please keep in mind that this is the same network that brings us such stellar entertainment as "Dog the Bounty Hunter" and "Parking Wars".
Perhaps they need to consider changing their name from "Arts & Entertainment" to something more descriptive of their programming....
So what's the problem? This article is all over the place.
Website powered by Foundation