[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6469077,"mediaKeyId","5781265-41ce5cf66e6e473d890d016708d0ae9a","parentId",5781265,"title","Parents and residents raise safety and budget concerns during Rochester speaker forum","audioSeconds",281,"startMs",262000,"endMs",543000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5781265-41ce5cf66e6e473d890d016708d0ae9a&start=262&end=543","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5781265-41ce5cf66e6e473d890d016708d0ae9a/thumbnail_262000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6469077/New-York/Parents-and-residents-raise-safety-and-budget-concerns-during-Rochester-speaker-forum","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469077-2da1e583d74b73eaba9d4e068ea44fd9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770501189&Signature=oxCoiaqoI9QzBAsHwLxRfAkwzVBrNCmdzu5lnstYRjXc8pqCd9QCCMs-IKm-ZlzM73xj-gsG15jhXko~2zHGSb04ZMTAW-V~3hAAfr8UThbZ9~meZbILZNczMK5f~WsLkUR-wlGDx21l2Je2364Z-qHJ0ufrahnVQwYC90C4JupAhWIayX-h9o5ELu9XswaF2aeOqGKLcQATp9bw~5lpVKkFZLpHcVBiDhAgBTUJVUcJPkZWMJH1zI8ds-~92f--RPRE80k41a1AoK7jCfwUP9kv7mB4z~sQZLL1ykbxQltJh8cbMhM3R5UOuDp1hxL4uVz6Xk2vPepDBQPldb5~UA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Rochester City School District","date","2025-09-18T00:21:02.657Z","article","Two residents used the Rochester Board of Education's Sept. 16 speaker forum to press officials on student safety and district spending before the board's work session on governance.

Maria Gonzalez, who signed up to speak during the public comment period, told the board she had planned to discuss the budget but instead raised concerns she said affect students’ safety: “Freddie Thomas, since he started, been having fights outside by. The police has been involved, and the kids are bullying others and fighting,” Gonzalez said. She asked the board to “check that out because it's too early to have already problems with Freddie Thomas.” Gonzalez also described an ongoing issue at “number 50 school” affecting her goddaughter and asked the district to follow up.

Laurie Thomas addressed district funding and budget priorities. Thomas said preliminary figures show New York State aid for the Rochester City School District at $843,736,370 and asserted that state aid accounts for “almost 77% of the approved budget.” She criticized spending levels and wrote in part, “The money you are asking for does not come from the state, it comes from the people… We, the people, supply the funding you have misused to miseducate our children for far too long.”

What the board noted

Board President Dr. Lesli Simmons acknowledged the comments and said Superintendent Kevin Rosser, who was arriving from another meeting, would receive the public speakers’ concerns. The board then recessed briefly to proceed to the scheduled work session.

What was not decided

Speakers asked for help and investigation; the transcript records the public comments and the board’s acknowledgement but does not show a formal motion or follow-up plan adopted at the meeting. The board did not discuss or vote on any budget changes or specific safety actions during the speaker forum portion.

Ending: The public comment period concluded before the board’s work session; attendees will need to watch subsequent board meetings or contact district staff for any formal responses or follow-up actions from administration.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Rochester Board of Education Public Speaker Forum & Board Work Session | September 16, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Two public speakers at the Rochester City School District's Sept. 16 speaker forum urged the board to address student fights linked to 'Freddie Thomas' and criticized district spending and the approved budget share funded by state aid.","taxTitle","Rochester City School District, School Districts, New York","taxId",14389,"location","New York","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6469083,"Rochester board narrows governance guardrails to three priorities after community listening",8587,2315000,10902000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5781265-41ce5cf66e6e473d890d016708d0ae9a&start=2315&end=10902","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5781265-41ce5cf66e6e473d890d016708d0ae9a/thumbnail_2315000.jpg","/articles/6469083/New-York/Rochester-board-narrows-governance-guardrails-to-three-priorities-after-community-listening","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6469083-932befb39cc810218a04c0d16c7bf515/orig.mp4?Expires=1770501189&Signature=VnYIfE6w7yaWLInzeUWUcPOLD0SZ~-jGsiQ-l6YYr~8~ewzpXxkE18ODNXl7s9H6h7JZbdRvvl6MHLaDITv5qMpG~xqTUGhM1vVqYBHGsJe-PHj9h9zewRUsDcxypYCYBaJ~yo-emLFPIIpcJ6nj69cXYNc6cD1PQvSHer~wJxQT7ENiKmNTmiREQGWgQWnG6gKTqVOGXtCshAHsHWR2gSKBNe~Yfi3xb5VOpSzX8hR~0kPLQ4SvapFIq16eBrc95KPbNT~EA5xP53YqBkvPoRwCWPHkaKlHoFUPgcTXypjrsfQtQtOJTOqMfAPuyyceJqB5sYPiNGVCd5gLiWnngw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Rochester Board of Education on Sept. 16 used a facilitator-led work session to turn months of community listening into a short list of governance guardrails for the superintendent, then asked district staff to produce measurable interim indicators so the board can monitor progress.

The session, facilitated by Ray Hart, executive director of the Council of the Great City Schools, and Cindy Ellsburn, the council's manager of government services, focused on converting community values into “shall not” guardrails that constrain superintendent decisions. Hart summarized the approach: “student outcomes don't change until adult behaviors change,” and framed the exercise as a governance tool to protect nonnegotiable community values while the superintendent pursues district goals.

Why it matters: The board is separating its governance role from district management and creating specific, measurable constraints it expects the superintendent to respect. The guardrails will shape what the superintendent proposes and what the board will monitor, including how administrators report academic and operational data to the board and public.

What the board prioritized

Board members worked individually, in pairs and in small groups to draft guardrail language from the community listening synopsis. They then used a ranked-point voting exercise to prioritize seven candidate guardrails the groups produced. The board’s top three priorities were:

- Guardrail 1 (85 points): The superintendent shall not allow inequitable implementation of student-centered, evidence-based academic and social-emotional curriculum, programs and practices.

- Guardrail 2 (50 points): The superintendent shall not make any major districtwide or school decisions without seeking input from stakeholders that represent the school, home and broader community.

- Guardrail 3 (40 points): The superintendent shall not allow conditions that fail to foster student and staff psychological and physical safety.

Board members and facilitators emphasized that the draft language can be word-smithed and clarified before the guardrails are finalized. Cindy Ellsburn told the board staff will help turn the selected guardrails into interim, measurable indicators the superintendent can report on regularly.

Discussion, direction and next steps

Discussion points included how to scope the guardrails (broad vs. specific language), how monitoring reports should be presented to be accessible to parents and the public, and whether the district should extend the timeline for existing student-outcome goals to give new administration time to implement changes.

The board directed the superintendent and district staff to: develop interim measures and monitoring reports tied to each selected guardrail; return a proposed timeline for implementation; and provide current baseline data so the board can decide whether to extend multi-year goal timelines. Facilitators noted monitoring reports should use plain language and include measures that let the board determine whether the superintendent is interpreting the guardrails as intended.

Votes, formal actions and other outcomes

The guardrail prioritization was completed by ranked-point vote during the work session; the board did not adopt a final written policy at the meeting. The board instructed administration to prepare measurable interim guardrails and monitoring reports for future meetings.

A procedural motion to adjourn was moved by Commissioner Michael Griffin and seconded by Commissioner Santiago; the chair called the voice vote in favor and declared the meeting adjourned.

Ending: The facilitators and board said the guardrails and subsequent interim measures will be refined with administration and reported back to the board; the district will supply baseline data to inform any decision about extending goal timelines.","At a Sept. 16 work session facilitated by the Council of the Great City Schools, the Rochester Board of Education drafted and prioritized three board-level guardrails for the superintendent to follow and directed administration to develop measurable interim indicators for monitoring progress.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Parents and residents raise safety and budget concerns during Rochester speaker forum

Rochester board narrows governance guardrails to three priorities after community listening