Просмотр новости
Найдите то, что Вас интересует
Спутники
РН
SpaceX
Роскосмос
NASA
СпутникиРНSpaceXРоскосмосNASARochester, as part of the "Big Five" cities in New York State, has a unique School Board governance model. Whereas all other school districts in the state have direct citizen votes approving or rejecting budgets proposed by the Superintendent and their staff, we elect commissioners to act on behalf of the citizens who pay taxes to operate the district. In that light, I focus on the skills, abilities, knowledge, life experience, and objective fiduciary responsibility that commissioners bring to the role. There isn't any reason that our school board can't have non-voting members or student/parent advisors to help them evaluate the budgetary impact of their decisions. It's no secret that the RC SD has continued to fail at its mandated task for more than five decades. I continue to promote the idea that RCSD success rests on a three-legged stool: parents, The RCSD, and the Community. Let me be clear: I'm not only calling out one specific candidate/commissioner. The Board of School Commissioners has individuals with personal, political, and social agendas that have no place in a group of people taxpayers put their trust in to use our taxes to create successful, academically competent citizens. Until that happens and we get individuals on the board who are competent and mature, our children and taxpayers will continue to suffer.
Soon after young Isaiah Santiago was elected to the Rochester Board of Education, it became abundantly clear that he was in over his head (to listen to the article, click on the following link – when the article comes up, click on this symbol ⧁ above the title). His remarks (“In narrow vote, RCSD board opts for new leadership,” Rochester Beacon, 1/5/25) quoted below are clearly indicative of political confusion, and are possibly reflective of disingenuous, attempted-scheming on his part.
His comments are riddled with blatant contradictions, e.g., it is noted that “he believes the new president will be a good leader, [yet] he still has reasons for concern.” He was quoted as having said: “I support new leadership, but I don’t trust leadership that doesn’t have trust behind it.” What? Is that some sort of riddle? I mean, he’s literally saying, or at least implying that he “supports” leadership that he doesn’t “trust,” which is very, very strange. If, again, as he is quoted as having said – he “knows that (the new leadership) will push for the best for our students, our parents, and our families” – why would he not “trust” them? I don’t get it. Maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t think so.
Furthermore, he noted that he “disagrees with the way that they became leaders on the board.” How is that? They became leaders in the exact same manner that all others (in the past) have become leaders. That is, they convinced two other colleagues to support them as leaders (therefore establishing a majority vote), period, that’s it – that’s all.
How could there possibly be a so-called ” ‘lack of integrity’ in the way the elections occurred?” We watched the elections (in real time), as they were occurring. They were conducted in the exact same manner that they have always been conducted. Because he allegedly “asked board members about their intentions toward leadership in December but received no confirmation one way or another or he felt messages were outright ignored” has absolutely nothing to do with “integrity in the way the elections occurred.” Board members are obviously not obligated to answer to him regarding “their intentions toward leadership.”
Santiago was reportedly “surprised when new members put their names forward for the president’s seat,” and? With regard to “his belief that [so-called] backdoor deals helped to secure the [new] positions” – if that is in fact true – so what? Again, that has always been the case.
He was also quoted as having said “some of the decisions that were made outside of the president’s seat I disagree with – outside of the president’s seat“? What? What does that even mean? “He claimed “there was a political deal with this president to give certain people what they want, like with the vice president decision, like the chairperson of the audit, the chairperson of policy.” Again I ask – and? What’s new? Such “deals” and decisions are par for the course (so to speak).
How in the world could “deals that were decided with the four majority board members cause division” – when everyone who is paying attention knows that division has existed on the Rochester Board of Education decades before Santiago was born, as well as throughout his short tenure. So, what is this youngun really trying to say – other than – he is a staunch political ally of Elliott and Lebron, which again, anyone paying attention – already knows. I tried to warn him: To listen to the article, click on the link below. When the article comes up, click on this symbol ⧁ right above the title. https://medium.com/@howardjeagle/an-open-letter-to-young-blood-general-ideas-and-good-e855933cda27.
Howard Eagle
| # | Наименование новости | Тональность | Информативность | Дата публикации |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | В России объяснили закрытие КПП с Прибалтикой | 0 | 5 | 01-07-2026 |
| 2 | Остров Стамбул. Крупнейший город Турции получит новый статус | 0 | 7 | 04-07-2026 |