Update: It was revealed today that Rochester now ranks as the third poorest city in the United States, with Buffalo in fourth place!
I corrected this blog because the original version incorrectly implied that the RCSD suspends its pre-K students. For added clarification, the RCSD provided me with this statement: "We do not suspend prekindergarten students from our Universal Prekindergarten Program in the Rochester City School District. A child can't be expelled from the Universal Prekindergarten program either. We do have a safety procedure that is rarely utilized in extreme cases where after a series of steps have been taken, including parent notification, a student can be asked to refrain from attending the program for a maximum of five days while steps are taken to put in place a safety plan to address serious safety concerns. This is all done in collaboration with the parent." The statement is from Tricia Cruz, a district spokesperson.
Thanks for the comments.
Tim Louis Macaluso
Yeah and where is Mayor Warren? She has proposed something in complete odds with what the Charlotte community wants or needs and has ignored both the issues affecting the neighborhoods around Highland Hospital and the Rochester Pysch Center... guess it was these neighborhoods she did not intend to look out for and assist when she was campaigning. Damn shame!
Some people have medical issues with their back. I think Duffy will do well; has served well in the past; and , would be a great asset to the Rochester Region should he return to this area in the future and take over Parker's position. Duffy, Warren, Brooks, Bronson, Jeff Adair, Wade Norwood, and David Gantt would be a plus for our city. I hope they all will work together in the future.
Craig R. Moffitt
Howard the link you posted is from 2012 and we now have majority full day pre-K with transportation assistance. Again, pre-K is one area we seem to do well, and to make progress over time in areas where it can be improved. That's not to say there are no obstacles or remaining ways to improve, but the full day / transportation obstacle has been largely overcome. Remaining half day programs are to meet the needs of families who did not want full day.
The headline for this article is unnecessarily incendiary. Toddlers are kids just learning to walk and a bit beyond, typically considered between the ages 1 and 2 1/2.
What the article is talking about is pre-K students, ages 3-5.
I'm not arguing that this makes it right for them to be suspended, just that they are NOT toddlers and thus your headline is inaccurate and misleading.
Mayor Lovely Warren seems oblivious to the fact that this port development project is happening at the very site of the fast ferry fiasco. Nobody wants a repeat! We all WANT to believe. But can you blame us for remembering High Falls and the soccer stadium. Medley Center seems a constant reminder that developers often don't walk the talk. Say what you will about Bob Duffy, but I for one never got tired of him constantly repeating how much he loved Rochester.
Everything you wrote may be true, but there are still some very serious issues and problems associated with pre-K programs in Rochester. Some of the most important issues center around the question of who (specifically) is and is NOT being served.
According to information in ate article (at the link below) ... "And even though the state reimburses the district for UPK students, there isn't enough state funding available for full-day classes. Offering mostly half-day classes is the only way the district can offer UPK, and even then more students are enrolled each year than what the district is paid to teach."
"And there is still room for the district's UPK to grow. According to Hooper, the district is only serving about two-thirds of city children who qualify for the program. That may be due to the transportation problems half-day classes can cause. Working parents, many of whom rely on public transportation, wrestle with getting their child to school and picking them up less than three hours later.Many people just don't realize the sacrifices our parents are making trying to juggle this for the sake of their children," Hooper says. "
The outrageous behavior of Kimberly and Beck in regards to transgender health issues has given some people purportedly representing the LGBT community a sudden, and in all probability, short-lived local prominence.
This article is an attempt to cash in on that fact.
Scott Fearing, head of the GAGV ( Gay Alliance of the Genesee Valley ), states that he is embarrassed by the lack of a gay community center. He also states that one is in the works.
He then provides us with no further details, except to mention that he wants to bring LGBTQ-specific senior housing to Rochester, naming three cities where this specific housing exists, without attempting to explain how they came about there.
Where will these projects be located? Which organizations will be housed at a gay community center? As for gay-specific senior housing, isn't that discriminatory?
Nor does Mr. Fearing mention costs.
Does the GAGV have the cash to finance such projects? If not, where will they get the cash? Will they require subsidies and grants?
Is Mr. Fearing aware of the fact that Rochester is the fifth poorest city in the United States and is not about to hand out millions of taxpayer dollars to benefit one small segment of Rochester's population?
Furthermore, how large is Rochester's gay community? Does Mr. Fearing and the executive board of the GAGV claim to represent all of it?
Those questions weren't asked. Probably because there are no answers. Why print the article at all, as vague as it is?
We have a huge problem with exclusionary discipline policies in RCSD, including in my opinion inappropriate arrests inside schools. I and other board members are aggressively working on fundamentally changing our discipline practices. But we NEVER suspend toddlers or any pre-K students. Despite the horror stories nationally, once again one area where Rochester shines is in our universal pre-kindergarten programs. These high quality and developmentally supportive programs are recognized nationally for their excellence.
Didn't Bob Duffy work his way to the top of the Police Force in Rochester,NY over a log career and serve the public in a very professional manner. Wasn't it Bob Duffy and Wade Norwood the only two people in all of Rochester that came to my side when I need help with a problem in my neighborhood ? Wasn't it Bob Duffy that worked his butt off to become Mayor ? Wasn't it Bob Duffy that was asked by Cuomo to be his running mate ? Duffy has openly said that he regretted leaving the position of Mayor in Rochester, NY. Don't we all have choices in where we want to work and when we want to work as well as for whom ?
Am I alone in wishing Lt. Governor "Aw-Shucks" Duffy would just go enjoy his new lake house and multiple pensions and leave us alone??? I'm sure he's a fine man and all, but his tendency to talk a lot while saying virtually nothing (like many-a-politician) makes me want to pull my hair out.
Did anyone NOT see this happening, despite everything Parker and Duffy have been saying to the contrary for months?
The ladies were protesting too much, too frequently. Anything even approaching their integrity and credibility has long since gone up in smoke.
So, tell me again: why is this story even newsworthy?
It certainly isn't surprising.
Is it really that radical to go into a movie like Maleficent with expectations that some esteem for the original story would be upheld? It's Disney working off it's own property—it's not like another studio is making the film where they'd have to carefully toe the line of what's legally safe to use and what belongs to Disney.
Disney went out to the public with the message "Hey! Remember this thing you loved? We're going to give you more of it! More! Hold on to your butts, you're going to get more and it's going to be awesome!"
Granted, we all should have learned a lesson based on the terrible experience of George Lucas bringing us more Star Wars and then having the steaming pile of the prequels shoveled into our collective laps.
Lets see if I understand this. Bob Duffy bought Sandy Parker's lake home. Bob Duffy applied for her job but, got in trouble with the Governor so he is no longer going to run because of it. Sandy Parker (and husband Dutch Summers) then decided that she should stay there until Bobby was available (at 400k per year).
Coincidentally, Bob's back began to hurt him and being chief ribbon cutter for the state was no longer fun. So, Sandy/Dutch can now "install" him in her seat. The fact that her job is as a lobbyist and he cannot lobby for 2 years is a mere technicality that can be overlooked...just like the small ethical lapse of an elected state official buying the home of a lobbyist.
Oh, one last point, one of the advantages of Duffy getting the job is he probably can work for less because he can collect his police pension and state pension at the same time he is working for a business growth group in a state that is dying because of public pension payouts. Sounds like the perfect choice to me.
" the only possible explanation for why a powerful woman might turn evil is to get back at a boy."
In the retelling she had already forgave him the first time. Did it not occur to you the the dismembering of her person (regardless of the gender of the person dismembering her) was the cause of her rage. Or perhaps that betrayal for the sake of power gain was a motivator. Apparently you are too narrow minded to see those aspects of her turning evil.
" Instead, in a disturbing scene, Stefan drugs her, lies with her, and cuts off her wings while she sleeps, leaving Maleficent to wake up the next morning horrified to discover her body has been violated. It's a thinly veiled rape metaphor, which is a rather questionable choice for what's ostensibly a family film,"
There was no sexuality presented in this scene. and to add in your review that he "lies with her" implies they had sex which they didn't. It was a scene of him waiting for the drug to take effect. I think your more interested in attempting to sexualize the scene for your readers just to make your point. Bad show friend, bad show
"For years, Maleficent apparently has nothing better to do than skulk around the forest watching Aurora age, allowing the young girl to come to think of her as a fairy godmother."
What else would she do, she focused her rage and hatred into cursing the girl, so at first naturally she would want to watch her to suffer, to observe her handy work. In the beginning she kept her a live with the knowledge that if she died to soon she would not be able to revel in the misery that she would cause the king (like killing the torture victim too soon)
Aurora thought of her as her fairy godmother because she didn't know any better, and the scene where she explains it is the beginning of the villain understanding that her rage was misdirected.
" Plus, she doesn't even turn into an effin' dragon! Becoming a dragon is Maleficent's coolest power and she doesn't even get to do it -- instead her shape-shifting companion Diaval (Sam Riley) gets that ability."
A little fixated are we? He didn't have the ability she changed him into it. She's a dragon, He's a dragon its a minor deviation in what is obviously an alternate telling where deviations are EXPECTED. Are you so much of a traditionalist that your upset about the dragons fire not being green as well?
"Disney's "Maleficent" emerges as a fundamentally misguided interpretation of the title character, one that seems to misunderstand what drew people to her in the first place. As a fan myself, it's hard to imagine another film this summer being as overwhelmingly disappointing a viewing experience."
Piecing together your review its obvious you went into this movie expecting a replay of the original production. Your too fixated on the original telling and too much of a traditionalist to give the movie a fair review. Honestly you should not have reviewed a movie that you went into with specific expectations based on the previous telling.
The stick's not working any better than the carrot. I say, what the heck, give him another 5 years. Anyone out there who's not a lawyer got any better ideas?
People are not going to travel into the City of Rochester to spend money on looking at trees or open space are they ? City population has declined from 300,000 to about 210,000 residents while the County of Monroe has increased to about 980,000 residents. The City needs revenue to stay in business and to try to use that revenue money to help create jobs, keep the streets safe and better educate our students. When are you folks in positions of power and influence going to get it right ?
I would be for growth and development if the developers paid for it and the residents benefited. Unfortunately this is not true. In two of these projects there will be no taxes as they are not for profits agencies. At Charlotte the developer is looking for millions in public financing and will get incredible tax breaks. Just look at Erie Harbor a 131 apartment project on Mt. Hope where a $49 million project pays $7624 taxes a year or Plymouth Terrace Apartments where $300,000 townhouses pay $144 in taxes. This is why we can not afford the schools, policing, or neighborhood services we the residents want. This seems like a very high price to pay for the millions we gave to the developers to build both of these projects. It is time we stop building projects which sit half vacant and do nothing to resolve the problems which are destroying our neighborhoods.
This is city living. My neighborhood in the suburbs isn't perfect either, but the world doesn't revolve around me. eh hem.
I laugh at the people who live around Highland Hospital. When Highland was planning a new parking garage a few years ago, the residents fought to scale back the size. Now they complain about the on street parking...... duh.
If it's not growing it's dying. Be thankful it's growing.
Website powered by Foundation