Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Monitor Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State monitor releases draft 2025–27 academic and fiscal plans and schedule for public feedback
Summary
State monitor Jaime Alaseya presented a draft academic plan and fiscal recommendations for 2025–27, outlined monitor responsibilities, proposed board governance and personnel recommendations and set a June 26 public hearing on the draft.
State monitor Jaime Alaseya presented a draft academic and fiscal plan for the Rochester City School District on June 10 and invited public feedback ahead of a scheduled June 26 hearing.
Alaseya reviewed the monitor’s statutory responsibilities — including developing proposed academic and fiscal plans, reporting to state offices, recommending cost savings and monitoring compliance — and noted the monitor role was extended through May 2027 by recent legislation. He said the monitor and fiscal consultant aligned recommendations to the district strategic plan rather than issuing standalone directives.
The draft academic plan contains 44 recommendations (9 for turnaround leadership, 6 for talent development, 20 for instructional transformation, 4 for culture shift, and 5 for systems/resources). Alaseya highlighted new or revised academic recommendations: board professional development with NESBA (after consultation with NYSED); requiring roll call at business and special meetings; supporting the new superintendent’s transition and annual evaluations; monitoring the East Upper/East Lower transition from EPO control back to district control; and auditing bilingual and ENL curricula against the next-generation standards. He also described concerns and recommended clarification around the district newcomer program (referred to as RIA) — recommending increased integration opportunities rather than program closure.
On fiscal matters, Alaseya reported the district has reduced fiscal recommendations (from 54 to 33 since an earlier monitor plan) and highlighted three new fiscal recommendations: appointing a chief financial officer and budget director by October; completing a true position-control system (in coordination with Human Capital and IT) ahead of Oracle implementation; and continuing to monitor federal-fund allocations and prepare contingency plans for reductions. He urged submission of a monthly vacancies analysis to the executive cabinet, the fiscal consultant and the state monitor by 12/31/2025.
Alaseya emphasized the need for board cohesion and role-modeling, citing interpersonal training and a conflict-of-interest policy the monitor supported. He noted the facilities-management plan (FMP) and joint projects total about $475 million and asked the board to be actively engaged in oversight. He said the draft will be refined after stakeholder input and a public hearing; a final plan will come to the board for approval in July.
Board members asked questions on FMP oversight, Oracle implementation and the timing of CFO appointments. Several commissioners raised concerns about state recommendations affecting newcomer programming and signaled they would present opposition and gather community testimony at the June 26 hearing. Parent representative Monica Graham asked how parents can attend and provide input; Alaseya said the June 26 hearing will be held in the boardroom and he offered to attend additional parent meetings as requested.
Alaseya closed by inviting written feedback (his email was provided in the presentation) and asking that the board and community provide input before the public hearing and final vote planned for July.
