Board approves indemnification resolution after heated public comments and legal citations

The Rochester City School District Board of Education approved Resolution 5 52, authorizing indemnification or legal defense, at a special meeting on March 6, 2025, following debate in open session after executive session.

The resolution was moved by Commissioner Elliot and seconded by Commissioner Lebron Harris during the public meeting. Commissioner Griffin spoke at length against approving indemnification for actions he described as outside the scope of official duties, citing several legal precedents by name: "We have a matter here that came back from the city of Rochester, a matter of Zelensky versus Board of Education 20 20 ... City School District of Albany 20 19 ... [and] commissioner's decision number 17,829 ... affirms that school districts cannot allocate public funds for board members facing personal legal challenges," Griffin said.

Commissioner Griffin said those authorities support a limit on using district funds for personal legal matters, and told the board that the incidents under discussion were not within the line of duty. Commissioner Lebron disagreed with relying on internet searches to interpret the law and said the matters under discussion were not criminal and required careful legal review.

The discussion became heated and personal during the public session. Commissioner Santiago, who earlier said he was elected to fight for students and denied using a racial slur, described attempts at reconciliation and said he remained open to mediated conversations. Commissioner Patterson publicly demanded a direct apology if a racial epithet had been used and said he would consider withdrawing a petition only if a public admission and apology were made; Patterson also said he would consult with Dr. Rosser before dropping any formal action.

President Elliott urged members to limit public statements and suggested legal questions be handled in executive session. The resolution was put to a vote and the presiding officer declared the motion carried. A roll call was requested; the transcript records Commissioner Lebron voting Yes during the roll call sequence and also records at least one unnamed Nay, but the transcript does not record each individual board member's vote in a fully explicit roll-call list for the entire board in the public text.

The transcript shows board members invoked legal precedent and noted that indemnification is not available for intentional misconduct, but members disagreed about whether the incidents under consideration fell inside or outside the line of duty. The board approved Resolution 5 52; the motion was recorded as carried on the public transcript and the meeting proceeded to adjourn.

The transcript does not include the precise text of Resolution 5 52 beyond its description as an indemnification/legal-defense matter, nor does it record the dollar amounts or counsel fees associated with any potential defense.