An Open Letter to Mayor Robert J. Duffy

<p>Dear Mr. Duffy,</p > <p>As darkness falls over the City &#8212; I imagine that you have completed your political rounds (running to and fro, spewing political rhetoric concerning your love for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and for the principles that he advocated and lived by).</p > <p>Well sir, I feel totally, absolutely, unequivocally, certain that if Dr. King was a citizen of Rochester, New York today &#8212; he would be fighting you tooth and nail regarding your unprincipled, despicable attempt to strip the people of Rochester of our Constitutional right to vote for representatives on the Rochester Board of Education.</p > <p>I am quite sure you recall that Dr. King spent a significant portion of his life fighting against Jim Crow laws that deprived mainly poor people of color of suffrage rights.</p > <p>In any case, I hope that you had a happy Reverend, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.</p > <p>As a City of Rochester, New York State, and United States of America, tax-paying, politically astute and involved parent, citizen and grassroots community activist &#8212; I am writing concerning a situation that occurred on January 15, 2010 (the actual day of Dr. King’s birth in 1929).</p > <p>As you know, I was in attendance at City Hall during your press conference on January 15, 2010. I must say that it was somewhat awkward, especially since it likely would have been perceived as inappropriate and disrespectful for me to respond &#8212; when (during the course of the press conference) you acknowledged my presence, and noted that I oppose mayoral control of the Rochester City School District (RCSD), and then asserted that you are “willing to debate [me], Van White [or] anyone else” regarding the issue of mayoral control.</p > <p>I just wanted you to know that (like yourself, or at least like you claim to be) &#8212; I am definitely willing to engage you and/or anyone else in debate around this critically important issue (anytime, any place, under any rules, circumstances or conditions). If debate is your desire: Let’s do it. I am quite certain (since he has been publicly requesting to do so) that Commissioner White would also be more than willing to debate you and/or the “experts” that you have been flying in and out of town (more than likely at taxpayers’ expense). In fact, as you know &#8212; your Chief of Communication, Mr. Gary Walker, has attempted to dismiss the Commissioner’s request for civil debate by declaring that he is desirous of creating a public “spectacle.” Walker’s comments remind me of the time when Malcolm X’s house was firebombed during the 1960’s, and media operatives (such as Mr. Walker) attempted to validate a theory that Malcolm had staged the firebombing himself. As Malcolm stated at the time &#8212; “if [Commissioner White] wanted to put on a show &#8212; [he] certainly could have found a better way to do it” than by challenging you to a debate about this vital issue, which parallels and surpasses the seriousness of Malcolm’s home being firebombed. I hope you understand the analogy. If not, I would be happy to elaborate. After having said all of that &#8212; this critical issue is not about individual debates. Instead, what’s really needed, and what a huge sector of Rochester’s population is asking for &#8212; is broad-based, serious, community dialogue.</p > <p>You seemed overly confident at your January 15th press conference regarding your ability to razzle-and-dazzle your most loyal cheerleaders (major media &#8212; for more than an hour) &#8212; concerning, in many cases, pure, polished, political rhetoric, which has absolutely nothing to do with educating our children well. I hope you didn’t go away and pound your chest &#8212; because those of us who are not cheering for you, or duped by your smooth rhetoric &#8212; found large holes and glaring contradictions regarding that which was presented by you and your main henchmen (David Gantt and Joe Morelle) during the press conference. If you would like for me to explain why I referred to your political pals as henchmen &#8212; I would be happy to do so. By the way, it is just plain scandalous that you are asking these men and others (who compose that which is widely accepted in many local, regional and national political circles as being one of the most dysfunctional, so-called “governing” bodies in the nation, that’s right, the infamous New York State Legislature) &#8212; to make a determination regarding whether or not the citizens of Rochester should be stripped of our Constitutional right to vote for local representatives. The New York State Legislature is a body that absolutely cannot effectively or efficiently govern itself &#8212; one that (for four weeks) couldn’t even decide which Political Party was in charge of its upper chamber; one that can’t effectively address its own huge budget deficit; can’t reduce taxes; spent $170 million in the 2009-10 budget (in the midst of a full-blown recession) on so-called “member items” &#8212; not to mention corruption convictions of State Legislators such as Anthony Seminerio, and the criminal who led the New York State Senate for decades &#8212; none other than Joseph Bruno. This is the gang that you apparently believe are qualified to determine whether or not the people of Rochester should be stripped of a hard won, blood stained, Constitutional right? You have got to be kidding. One of the most fundamental and glaring contradictions relative to this whole scenario is that, as it relates to malfeasance, every single thing that you are accusing the Rochester Board of Education of &#8212; the New York State Legislature is also guilty of (ten-fold). So, as I stood there watching Gantt and Morelle pompously poised at your side on the 15th, again, all I could think was: ‘These guys have got to be kidding.’ The following represent just a couple of the most blatant, specific, contradictions during your lengthy press conference, which of course Gary Walker’s cheerleading, media-pals missed and/or would not dare report &#8212; even if they hadn’t missed them:</p > <ol> <li>Although you have been clearly touting elimination of an elected Board of Education, at one point Mr. Morelle exclaimed that under your scheme there “will be a directly elected board for governance.” Apparently, either this was a slip of the tongue or a trick of the tongue. That is, Morelle said the governance board would be elected, but he did not say who would compose the electorate. Perhaps he believes that he can arrange for the smart people of Irondequoit to become those who choose the governance board for the dumb people of Rochester.<br /> <br /> <p>Where Mr. Gantt is concerned, he has outright abandoned and is thoroughly disrespecting a huge sector of his constituents &#8212; by claiming that he will introduce a bill, and he “don’t care who likes it or not” &#8212; because he will get __________? Since you know better than I &#8212; you fill in the blank. Many, particularly in the African American community, are of the widespread belief that David Gantt does not do anything, especially if it’s politically risky (and this situation is indeed very risky) without getting something in return. This leads to the next glaring contradiction regarding the position that you articulated at your unusually long press conference:</li > <li>You claim that prior to initiating dialogue with parents and other community members, you want to “wait and see if an affirmative decision” comes forth from the Governor &#8212; relative to introducing a “program bill.” Yet, your constituent-abandoning henchman declared that “I intend to put a bill in &#8212; whether there is a program bill or not.” Thus, Mr. Mayor, unless henchman #1 (whom you all supposedly, affectionately, refer to as “the dean”) is just blowing smoke &#8212; obviously, open, “transparent” (your word) &#8212; community dialogue should already be well underway, and you should not make the mistake of believing that it is adequate to engage in so-called “transparent” dialogue via WXXI and other such venues, in which Mr. Walker (the ex-newsman) likely has inside connections in the highest of places. No sir, you must face the people, and since you have declared that “education is the hill that you are willing to die on,” politically speaking &#8212; don’t be surprised if it is the hill that the people of Rochester, particularly those who are parents, and whose children’s lives you seem to think that you can play with, and kick around like a political football &#8212; choose (politically speaking) to kill you on.</li > </ol > <p> Sincerely,<br /> _______________________________<br /> Howard J. Eagle<br /> Rochester City School District parent of two students<br /> Local, State &amp; Federal taxpayer<br /> Career educator (retired Rochester City School District Social Studies Teacher &#8212; 23 years)<br /> Chairperson (Activists Against Racism Movement’s &#8212; AARM’s Education Committee)<br /> Steering Committee member (Community Education Taskforce)</p >

<p>Dear Mr. Duffy,</p> <p>As darkness falls over the City — I imagine that you have completed your political rounds (running to and fro, spewing political rhetoric concerning your love for Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and for the principles that he advocated and lived by).</p> <p>Well sir, I feel totally, absolutely, unequivocally, certain that if Dr. King was a citizen of Rochester, New York today — he would be fighting you tooth and nail regarding your unprincipled, despicable attempt to strip the people of Rochester of our Constitutional right to vote for representatives on the Rochester Board of Education.</p> <p>I am quite sure you recall that Dr. King spent a significant portion of his life fighting against Jim Crow laws that deprived mainly poor people of color of suffrage rights.</p> <p>In any case, I hope that you had a happy Reverend, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day.</p> <p>As a City of Rochester, New York State, and United States of America, tax-paying, politically astute and involved parent, citizen and grassroots community activist — I am writing concerning a situation that occurred on January 15, 2010 (the actual day of Dr. King’s birth in 1929).</p> <p>As you know, I was in attendance at City Hall during your press conference on January 15, 2010. I must say that it was somewhat awkward, especially since it likely would have been perceived as inappropriate and disrespectful for me to respond — when (during the course of the press conference) you acknowledged my presence, and noted that I oppose mayoral control of the Rochester City School District (RCSD), and then asserted that you are “willing to debate [me], Van White [or] anyone else” regarding the issue of mayoral control.</p> <p>I just wanted you to know that (like yourself, or at least like you claim to be) — I am definitely willing to engage you and/or anyone else in debate around this critically important issue (anytime, any place, under any rules, circumstances or conditions). If debate is your desire: Let’s do it. I am quite certain (since he has been publicly requesting to do so) that Commissioner White would also be more than willing to debate you and/or the “experts” that you have been flying in and out of town (more than likely at taxpayers’ expense). In fact, as you know — your Chief of Communication, Mr. Gary Walker, has attempted to dismiss the Commissioner’s request for civil debate by declaring that he is desirous of creating a public “spectacle.” Walker’s comments remind me of the time when Malcolm X’s house was firebombed during the 1960’s, and media operatives (such as Mr. Walker) attempted to validate a theory that Malcolm had staged the firebombing himself. As Malcolm stated at the time — “if [Commissioner White] wanted to put on a show — [he] certainly could have found a better way to do it” than by challenging you to a debate about this vital issue, which parallels and surpasses the seriousness of Malcolm’s home being firebombed. I hope you understand the analogy. If not, I would be happy to elaborate. After having said all of that — this critical issue is not about individual debates. Instead, what’s really needed, and what a huge sector of Rochester’s population is asking for — is broad-based, serious, community dialogue.</p> <p>You seemed overly confident at your January 15th press conference regarding your ability to razzle-and-dazzle your most loyal cheerleaders (major media — for more than an hour) — concerning, in many cases, pure, polished, political rhetoric, which has absolutely nothing to do with educating our children well. I hope you didn’t go away and pound your chest — because those of us who are not cheering for you, or duped by your smooth rhetoric — found large holes and glaring contradictions regarding that which was presented by you and your main henchmen (David Gantt and Joe Morelle) during the press conference. If you would like for me to explain why I referred to your political pals as henchmen — I would be happy to do so. By the way, it is just plain scandalous that you are asking these men and others (who compose that which is widely accepted in many local, regional and national political circles as being one of the most dysfunctional, so-called “governing” bodies in the nation, that’s right, the infamous New York State Legislature) — to make a determination regarding whether or not the citizens of Rochester should be stripped of our Constitutional right to vote for local representatives. The New York State Legislature is a body that absolutely cannot effectively or efficiently govern itself — one that (for four weeks) couldn’t even decide which Political Party was in charge of its upper chamber; one that can’t effectively address its own huge budget deficit; can’t reduce taxes; spent $170 million in the 2009-10 budget (in the midst of a full-blown recession) on so-called “member items” — not to mention corruption convictions of State Legislators such as Anthony Seminerio, and the criminal who led the New York State Senate for decades — none other than Joseph Bruno. This is the gang that you apparently believe are qualified to determine whether or not the people of Rochester should be stripped of a hard won, blood stained, Constitutional right? You have got to be kidding. One of the most fundamental and glaring contradictions relative to this whole scenario is that, as it relates to malfeasance, every single thing that you are accusing the Rochester Board of Education of — the New York State Legislature is also guilty of (ten-fold). So, as I stood there watching Gantt and Morelle pompously poised at your side on the 15th, again, all I could think was: ‘These guys have got to be kidding.’ The following represent just a couple of the most blatant, specific, contradictions during your lengthy press conference, which of course Gary Walker’s cheerleading, media-pals missed and/or would not dare report — even if they hadn’t missed them:</p> <ol> <li>Although you have been clearly touting elimination of an elected Board of Education, at one point Mr. Morelle exclaimed that under your scheme there “will be a directly elected board for governance.” Apparently, either this was a slip of the tongue or a trick of the tongue. That is, Morelle said the governance board would be elected, but he did not say who would compose the electorate. Perhaps he believes that he can arrange for the smart people of Irondequoit to become those who choose the governance board for the dumb people of Rochester. <p>Where Mr. Gantt is concerned, he has outright abandoned and is thoroughly disrespecting a huge sector of his constituents — by claiming that he will introduce a bill, and he “don’t care who likes it or not” — because he will get __________? Since you know better than I — you fill in the blank. Many, particularly in the African American community, are of the widespread belief that David Gantt does not do anything, especially if it’s politically risky (and this situation is indeed very risky) without getting something in return. This leads to the next glaring contradiction regarding the position that you articulated at your unusually long press conference:</p></li> <li>You claim that prior to initiating dialogue with parents and other community members, you want to “wait and see if an affirmative decision” comes forth from the Governor — relative to introducing a “program bill.” Yet, your constituent-abandoning henchman declared that “I intend to put a bill in — whether there is a program bill or not.” Thus, Mr. Mayor, unless henchman #1 (whom you all supposedly, affectionately, refer to as “the dean”) is just blowing smoke — obviously, open, “transparent” (your word) — community dialogue should already be well underway, and you should not make the mistake of believing that it is adequate to engage in so-called “transparent” dialogue via WXXI and other such venues, in which Mr. Walker (the ex-newsman) likely has inside connections in the highest of places. No sir, you must face the people, and since you have declared that “education is the hill that you are willing to die on,” politically speaking — don’t be surprised if it is the hill that the people of Rochester, particularly those who are parents, and whose children’s lives you seem to think that you can play with, and kick around like a political football — choose (politically speaking) to kill you on.</li> </ol> <p> Sincerely,<br /> _______________________________<br /> Howard J. Eagle<br /> Rochester City School District parent of two students<br /> Local, State &amp; Federal taxpayer<br /> Career educator (retired Rochester City School District Social Studies Teacher — 23 years)<br /> Chairperson (Activists Against Racism Movement’s — AARM’s Education Committee)<br /> Steering Committee member (Community Education Taskforce)</p>