Sounds like a really classy piece of work. This is an example of RCSD leadership/direction? No wonder it's such a disgrace. And it's tough to blame the D&C too much; they'd pretty much endorse a cinder block as long as it had a "D" next to it.

When a board member repeatedly violates their own code of conduct, how can we expect students not to do the same?

I'm proud to have supported Nancy Sung Shelton in the Democratic primaries. Any Democrat that voted for Cynthia needs to ask themselves what type of party we're trying to be and what type of city we want for our children. We all knew about Cynthia's childish outbursts, her inability to control her emotions, and her blatant disregard for the rules that govern her position. Sadly, many of us ignored these alarms in favor of "party unity" - she is a Gantt puppet after all. It is now obvious that her virtual lock on re-election has emboldened Ms. Elliott to amplify her shenanigans. This latest outburst has ensured that Howard Eagle will be getting my vote. I hope all of my fellow city residents reading this do the same. Our kids need positive role models on School Board, not Cynthia Elliott. Besides, it's time for Mayoral control.

MAT wrote: "Besides, it's time for Mayoral control."

Are you sure about that MAT? The mayor endorses Cynthia Elliott, and stands by that endorsement, and you think mayors make better choices about who should run the schools than the voters? (Mayoral Control usually means mayoral appointments to School Boards. Only rarely does it mean abolition of the School Board in lieu of a Chancellor who reports directly for the mayor.)

Cynthia Elliott's recent behavior at a RCSD board meeting was unbelievably gross and ignorant. Ms. Elliott holds an important position in our children's education and well-being. Such disgusting behavior in a public forum, even if whispered, must be thoroughly condemned.

It is not my place to advise Ms. Elliott on the selection of language in her private life; and if she is comfortable speaking obscenely when home, that is none of my business. This is America; Ms. Elliott may live as vulgarly as she pleases in private.
 
However, Ms. Elliott is an elected public servant �" a member of the School Board!! �" and the word she uttered was not a simple “swear word”, it was an obscenity by anyone's definition of what is obscene. It is, in fact, a sad continuation of despicable public behavior; surely, Ms. Elliott's unwarranted infantile acting-out  negatively impacts impressionable youths and she should be censured by her colleagues on the board.
 
This issue serves to underscore one more valid reason why control of the RCSD should be removed from low-paid & contentious rank amateurs and placed under the firm control of the Mayor's Office.

It is likely that Elliott will be re-elected next week. Remember, Cynthia, your job is just a temporary position; and taxpayers & educators will watching you and expecting you to fulfill your duties in a professional and courteous manner. In case you forgot: You are a Role Model. Please educate yourself as to what actually is Appropriate Behavior and learn to act accordingly.

It's too bad that Ms. Elliott doesn't see herself as a role model for the children of Rochester.

LouisRichards wrote "This issue serves to underscore one more valid reason why control of the RCSD should be removed from low-paid & contentious rank amateurs and placed under the firm control of the Mayor's Office."

Are you sure about that Mr. Richards? The mayor endorsed Cynthia Elliott, and stands by that endorsement, and you think mayors make better choices about who should run the schools than the voters? (Mayoral Control usually means mayoral appointments to School Boards. Only rarely does it mean abolition of the School Board in lieu of a Chancellor who reports directly for the mayor.)

If Ms. Powell understands some of the Mayor's options, I expect the Mayor understands all of them; and, likely, more thoroughly than Ms. Powell.

Though the mayor continued his endorsement of Elliott, he clearly denounced her behavior. His disapproval was printed in every paper and broadcast on every TV channel.

With regard to replacing the school board, I would rather try something new that has worked quite well in many cities throughout of nation, than sit idly by wringing my hands in sorrow. Even if we replaced the entire RCSD board with blow-up dolls, I doubt "education" in Rochester could get much worse.

I'm so disappointed in Mayor Duffy for playing the role of Elliot apologist. Don't hitch your wagon to that horse mayor. She might lead you to ruin.

Louis Richards wrote: "With regard to replacing the school board, I would rather try something new that has worked quite well in many cities throughout of nation, than sit idly by wringing my hands in sorrow."

If you look carefully at every district that made any improvement at all in education with the adoption of mayoral control, you will find that in every instance the mayor deployed many more dollars toward education upon receiving mayoral control. Why? Because those mayors understood that once schools were their responsibility, they had to make those schools better. Not only does Mayor Duffy not have the money to deploy, he begrudges the money he is required to provide under state law. How would mayoral control achieve the desired results under these circumstances?

Willa Powell does not deny that mayoral control has improved many school districts and states: “ … in every instance the mayor deployed many more dollars toward education upon receiving mayoral control”. Too often, Democrats hold to the practice of throwing-out money in hope of solving a problem and I am glad that Ms. Willa does not buy into that philosophy. I believe in fiscal restraint.

However, I am not only entitled to my opinion, I have paid a hefty School Tax for that privilege and I believe that ALL options, including the elimination of the RCSD School Board, should be reviewed in an attempt to improve education in Rochester.

Reasonable people may differ. Louis Richards and I agree that "the practice of throwing-out money" won't solve our problems, and that "ALL options... should be reviewed in an attempt to improve education in Rochester". Those are important points of agreement.

I want to underscore, however, that the ONLY circumstances where mayoral control has contributed to the solution have included massive infusions of new money by those newly responsible mayors. Our mayor has made it pretty clear (from his remarks about how much local property tax revenue goes to schools) that he only views the District as a potential revenue source.

I had an open mind about mayoral control for a long time. Having reviewed that available data on that option under current conditions, however, I don't see how it would result in an improvement. Mayoral control is too easily given, and too hard to wrestle back (I'm speaking of voting rights now) to discuss this casually. Suppose the idea sounds good to you because you trust the current mayor. What happens when some future mayor, whom you don't trust or agree with, is holding the reigns?