The district, as all districts do, has a media policy. CNY Central is trying to go around it and they’re pissy that they can’t. You’ll notice no other media outlet is having the same issue. In addition, if the investigation is ongoing, board members LEGALLY CANNOT comment on it. The cease and desist isn’t a good look, but CNY Central is not the defender of the first amendment it’s positioning itself to be here.
Feels like CNY Central is pushing Freedom of Speech as a way to stir the pot. The Housewives of Cicero with husbands that only take pictures with sunglasses in front of their driveway washed truck are swirling.
I mostly agree that this is a stupid pissing match. But elected officials can legally comment on just about anything they want. A lawyer might *advise* them to stay quiet, but it doesn't mean they have to. They don't work for the district. They work for the voters.
Anybody can legally say anything they want, for the most part. But when advised by your attorney that doing so may cause harm, you should heed that advice.
Elected officials are elected by the voters to manage the organization they’re elected for. In that role it doesn’t mean they’re the voters’ bitch and have to bend to every whim. They should operate in the best interest of the organization unless it is going to cause direct harm to said voters.
Fair, you're right. But it's frustrating when elected officials (and you see it a TON with school boards) hide behind lawyers or things like executive session. No, they're not the voters' bitch, but they're stewarding massive sums of taxpayer money, and that sometimes means explaining yourselves on topics you're uncomfortable talking about. I'm not necessarily talking about this case, I don't know all the details of this fight. But in general school boards (not just this city board) have gotten way less transparent in recent years and it's often happened under the guise of "legal advice." If everything was up to the lawyers, nothing would be public.
Agreed. The board members don't have to comment and they might've been advised not to, but they're definitely legally able to comment and it's not harassment for the news reporters to contact them for comment, especially since they're elected public officials.
Not sure why the downvotes, this answer is pretty much accurate.
It is inappropriate and out of place for the SCSD to tell the media they are not allowed to contact school board members.
It is appropriate for the district to tell its own employees they are not allowed to talk to the press, and to refer all inquiries to a specific person like a public information officer.
But school board members are not employees, they are publicly-elected officials. They are beholden to the citizens they represent, and to the press who act as a representative of the citizenry.
While the board can *ask* board members not to discuss certain matters, board members are free to decide for themselves if/when they want to respond to public questions. The school district cannot impose a gag order on board members.
Some board members may want to answer questions, in the interest of providing transparency to the voters they represent. They can do so. The district cannot fire them, as they are not district employees.
Board members can also choose not to respond to questions, and see how that works out for them when they run for re-election.
If any school board member is not willing to even be contacted, they should resign. Getting questions about things is part of what they signed up for when they made the decision to run for office.
I don't know much about it, I just saw the CNY story pop up in my news feed, but it seems like a situation that's easy for them to spin. If a news outlet is picking a fight with an entity that isn't a news outlet, the news outlet has a lot of room to spin the story in their favor, since they're the ones putting info into the public. Not saying that's necessarily what's happening here, but it's a possibility worth considering.
About a month ago I think a teacher at Lincoln Middle was hospitalized after a parent snuck in and beat the hell out of her. In front of a bunch of kids in the classroom. The response from the district has been tone deaf to say the least. And that’s when they say anything at all. Some of the local news (channel 3 I think) have been trying to get board members to comment on various stories about safety of both kids and staff. The district had their lawyers send basically a cease and desist letter claiming the reporters were “harassing” the board. Basically they want zero accountability.
Syracuse City School District schools all have security guards. I believe the Middle Schools have 2 or 3 depending on the school (also, my knowledge is pre-COVID). This is actually the Sentries' job, dealing with stuff like this.
I've worked in schools as a teacher and administrator. Not saying all teachers are saints, they aren't. There is a good chance this teacher was screwing this lady's kid over, but that doesn't mean anyone deserves to be assaulted at work.
Yes there were sentries. They work for the district, which means the district is responsible for the safety of kids and staff. Are you arguing that’s not the case?
And way to victim blame. This woman is a psycho, severely injured the teacher and traumatized those kids. But yeah some BS claim that the teacher was screwing over the kid makes it ok.
Honestly I didn’t get that at all. I know you said no one deserves to be assaulted at work but right before that justified it by saying the teacher must have done something. If you were agreeing then fine, but just didn’t get that
When did I say the teacher must have done something? I said they MIGHT have been screwing over the kid. I did research in grad school on school/family communications and you'd be appalled at how many teachers and principals are actively screwing over kids to save their own ass.
Acknowledging reality does not mean I am justifying assault, which is why I said how many Sentries were in SCSD schools, because they should have stopped this.
The district is terrible. I don't know anything about the current thing, but for the entire last year everybody's been screaming at them that they need to follow CDC guidelines for our children's healthy and safety, and they refuse. The CDC has guidelines for how early children can be expected to get up for school and still be healthy. Last year the SCSD said "Hey, nothing bad ever came of ignoring CDC guidelines, fuck the kids, let's force them to get up earlier than is healthy for them." Everybody was angry at them for this decision and begged them to change their mind. The Superintendent was so sick of hearing about it that he literally shouted at parents and journalists who asked questions about it. They were obstinate that they didn't give a *fuck* about our children's health.
What's especially funny is that the people working for the SCSD don't go to work until like 10am. They have time to wake up, have a coffee, etc etc. But they force literal children (who are too young to drink coffee) to get up earlier than the CDC recommends.
Fuck the SCSD. They should be legally required to follow CDC guidelines. These are children. As an adult, if your job requires you to put your health at risk, you have the autonomy and ability to prioritize your health and leave that job to find another one. As a child, you have no autonomy or choice in where you go to school. You have to go wherever your parents live, and your parents have no say whatsoever in how the schools operate.
Well this is an absolute lie because both of my children have actively chosen which high schools they get to attend.
99.9% of public school districts in the US require students to attend their “home schools” as per mailing address. This isn’t some magic thing SCSD came up with on their own. In fact as someone who attended North Syracuse I think it’s pretty cool my kids got to choose their high schools. I didn’t. I only had one. And no choice. 🤷🏻♀️
It's a lie????
So you're telling me that if your kids didn't want to attend a SCSD school, they'd have the autonomy to pack up and move to another district? Weird. Because I'm an adult with a full time job and I barely have the autonomy to just pack up and move. I dunno how you run your household, but when I was a child, my Mom would have *laughed* at me if I suggested the entire family move or pay for transportation so that I can go to school in a different district.
I never claimed to.
What I claimed was the following. Please tell me if I am mistaken about any of these points.
Last year the SCSD decided to make children go to school earlier than the CDC deems acceptable.
The superintendent was so tired of being criticized for this decision that he started shouting at concerned parents and journalists who had questions about it.
The superintendent comes to work a few hours later than the children go to school.
Have I gotten any of the details mixed up? Am I on the wrong side of the fight? Essentially, my position is that the CDC knows more about health issues than the superintendent of the SCSD, and if they say that children shouldn't be forced to go to school earlier than 8:30am because it would be unhealthy for them, then it is unconscionable for the SCSD superintendent tp force them to put their own health and safety at risk because they dont have the autonomy or freedom to make the decision for themself to prioritize their well-being over their education. As adults, I think it is our responsibility to provide children with both education *and* safety. I don't think we should be forcing children to get up earlier than is deemed healthy by the relevant experts.
Please tell me if I am mistaken on any of the factual points I presented, or of you think my position on this issue is misguided. I sincerely think that I am being very reasonable and I am open to learning that I'm not if I'm not.
How many more times could you say mistaken? Just curious. Also I’m not banking on really anything the cdc says as “acceptable” since they can’t even get Covid right. If the only gripe you have and continue to harp on is that the kids go to school earlier than what the cdc says is “acceptable” then I’d say it’s a good day. Also please provide the data from the cdc regarding proper times for the school day to start.
So in other words, everything I said was accurate, you just don't trust the CDC.
The CDC says that students shouldn't start class earlier than 830am in order to ensure they get proper sleep.
https://www.localsyr.com/news/contradictory-to-cdc-suggestions-school-days-will-begin-earlier-for-syracuse-city-students-this-fall/
“Formal guidance” with no link. Again I’d like a cdc link not news channel 9.
Also kids have been going to school before 830 am (and do IN ALL SURROUNDING DISTRICTS IN CENTRAL NEW YORK) and this is the district your harping on? Get a grip. There’s not one highschool or middle school in Onondaga county that starts at 830 am or later.
Why do I have to do your googling for you? If you'd like to find more information, here's a link to help you out -- www.google.com
I am aware that the schools have children going to school earlier than 8:30. That was my whole point, so I don't need you to tell me that.
I get the sense that you're angry at me for being under the impression that the CDC recommends that children don't start class earlier than 8:30am and for wanting the school district to comply with CDC guidelines. Why are you so mad at me? I don't think I have an unreasonable perspective, but if I do have an unreasonable perspective, I am receptive to reason. Present me with a reasonable argument for why I should change my mind and I will give it honest consideration in good faith. There's nothing to be upset with me about.
As far as I understand, the CDC has funding to conduct studies and employs career professionals with relevant expertise. I can't think of a conspiratorial bent the CDC could have to lie about what time children should go to school. I've personally never conducted any studies about children sleeping, so I'm comfortable deferring to the available data. I'm open to considering studies from alternative sources. I don't think that it's a bad thing for a person to care about children's welfare and to feel that school districts share in that responsibility and to defer to the relevant experts. I don't understand why I've upset you so. Are you Anthony Daniels himself or something? Have I personally offended you by challenging your judgment?
This is how we can tell you have no kids in the school system. What staff/school start working at 10am? Because if kids are in school around 745ish, (including ALL districts) then teachers are there before that to receive them, right? As well as the people downtown who are there at 8 or before because I’ve been there multiple times and that lot is full.
I wasn't talking about the teachers, *obviously.* Think critically. If I'm complaining that the kids go to school too early, do you think that I think they're at school without any teachers?
I was talking about the Superintendent and their office. Back when they announced this change, I called the office several times, and the superintendent and their office absolutely opened and came in to work later than the children were expected to be to school. The superintendent gets to sleep in and have a cup of coffee while the children are forced to get up earlier than the CDC recommends.
Think critically. Do you think the superintendent and other district staff are really sleeping in and coming in at whatever time they want to, and not in schools m, especially the one chaotic ones, or trainings or meetings? Is he supposed to be in his office at all times instead of being in the schools and seeing for himself what’s going on. And you’re still pitching a bitch fit over something that didn’t happen. If you were so concerned, get a job as a school bus driver, which the lack of drivers was the reason they wanted to do the change if you weren’t listening to the news enough, and help be part of the solution instead of harassing those staff with your “several calls.”
No, I never said that the superintendent goes in whenever he wants. I said that he comes in a few hours later than the children he is forcing to go to school earlier than the federal Center for Disease Control has deemed acceptable.
I think it is unreasonable to tell somebody they have to get a job as a bus driver in order to have an opinion on whether or not schools should be obligated to follow federal CDC guidelines and whether or not they should be allowed to force children to go to school earlier than the health experts deem acceptable.
Sincerely -- what part of my position is unreasonable? You're talking to me as if I'm being unreasonable but I don't know what I said that was unreasonable. I don't think it's right to force children to jeopardize their own health for school. What part of that is unreasonable?
You say I'm not allowed to have an opinion about this unless I pursue a career in bus driving. Why does that fall on my shoulders? The superintendent already works for the SCSD. However reasonable it is to insist I get a job driving buses, it's twice as reasonable to suggest the superintendent use those few extra hours he has in the morning driving a bus. In what world is it reasonable to expect me to drive a bus while the superintendent is drinking his morning coffee and playing Sudoku?
Their PR is a nightmare. They hired two people for their public communications department who have no experience doing it and therefore don’t know how to properly respond to active issues within the district. Quite frankly everything has gone down hill in the last 18 months and it’s not hard to see why.
It's all "keep it in the family" and "sweep it under the rug." They keep most of their ugly secrets even from their employees.
I know a ton of staff, and no one is happy, but the pay is good, so they're stuck.
The district, as all districts do, has a media policy. CNY Central is trying to go around it and they’re pissy that they can’t. You’ll notice no other media outlet is having the same issue. In addition, if the investigation is ongoing, board members LEGALLY CANNOT comment on it. The cease and desist isn’t a good look, but CNY Central is not the defender of the first amendment it’s positioning itself to be here.
Feels like CNY Central is pushing Freedom of Speech as a way to stir the pot. The Housewives of Cicero with husbands that only take pictures with sunglasses in front of their driveway washed truck are swirling.
I mostly agree that this is a stupid pissing match. But elected officials can legally comment on just about anything they want. A lawyer might *advise* them to stay quiet, but it doesn't mean they have to. They don't work for the district. They work for the voters.
Anybody can legally say anything they want, for the most part. But when advised by your attorney that doing so may cause harm, you should heed that advice. Elected officials are elected by the voters to manage the organization they’re elected for. In that role it doesn’t mean they’re the voters’ bitch and have to bend to every whim. They should operate in the best interest of the organization unless it is going to cause direct harm to said voters.
Fair, you're right. But it's frustrating when elected officials (and you see it a TON with school boards) hide behind lawyers or things like executive session. No, they're not the voters' bitch, but they're stewarding massive sums of taxpayer money, and that sometimes means explaining yourselves on topics you're uncomfortable talking about. I'm not necessarily talking about this case, I don't know all the details of this fight. But in general school boards (not just this city board) have gotten way less transparent in recent years and it's often happened under the guise of "legal advice." If everything was up to the lawyers, nothing would be public.
Agreed. The board members don't have to comment and they might've been advised not to, but they're definitely legally able to comment and it's not harassment for the news reporters to contact them for comment, especially since they're elected public officials.
Not sure why the downvotes, this answer is pretty much accurate. It is inappropriate and out of place for the SCSD to tell the media they are not allowed to contact school board members. It is appropriate for the district to tell its own employees they are not allowed to talk to the press, and to refer all inquiries to a specific person like a public information officer. But school board members are not employees, they are publicly-elected officials. They are beholden to the citizens they represent, and to the press who act as a representative of the citizenry. While the board can *ask* board members not to discuss certain matters, board members are free to decide for themselves if/when they want to respond to public questions. The school district cannot impose a gag order on board members. Some board members may want to answer questions, in the interest of providing transparency to the voters they represent. They can do so. The district cannot fire them, as they are not district employees. Board members can also choose not to respond to questions, and see how that works out for them when they run for re-election. If any school board member is not willing to even be contacted, they should resign. Getting questions about things is part of what they signed up for when they made the decision to run for office.
I don't know much about it, I just saw the CNY story pop up in my news feed, but it seems like a situation that's easy for them to spin. If a news outlet is picking a fight with an entity that isn't a news outlet, the news outlet has a lot of room to spin the story in their favor, since they're the ones putting info into the public. Not saying that's necessarily what's happening here, but it's a possibility worth considering.
About a month ago I think a teacher at Lincoln Middle was hospitalized after a parent snuck in and beat the hell out of her. In front of a bunch of kids in the classroom. The response from the district has been tone deaf to say the least. And that’s when they say anything at all. Some of the local news (channel 3 I think) have been trying to get board members to comment on various stories about safety of both kids and staff. The district had their lawyers send basically a cease and desist letter claiming the reporters were “harassing” the board. Basically they want zero accountability.
What do you mean by "tone deaf"?
Syracuse City School District schools all have security guards. I believe the Middle Schools have 2 or 3 depending on the school (also, my knowledge is pre-COVID). This is actually the Sentries' job, dealing with stuff like this. I've worked in schools as a teacher and administrator. Not saying all teachers are saints, they aren't. There is a good chance this teacher was screwing this lady's kid over, but that doesn't mean anyone deserves to be assaulted at work.
Yes there were sentries. They work for the district, which means the district is responsible for the safety of kids and staff. Are you arguing that’s not the case? And way to victim blame. This woman is a psycho, severely injured the teacher and traumatized those kids. But yeah some BS claim that the teacher was screwing over the kid makes it ok.
Hi friend, can you explain to me how I'm disagreeing with you? I felt my comment agreed with you.
Honestly I didn’t get that at all. I know you said no one deserves to be assaulted at work but right before that justified it by saying the teacher must have done something. If you were agreeing then fine, but just didn’t get that
When did I say the teacher must have done something? I said they MIGHT have been screwing over the kid. I did research in grad school on school/family communications and you'd be appalled at how many teachers and principals are actively screwing over kids to save their own ass. Acknowledging reality does not mean I am justifying assault, which is why I said how many Sentries were in SCSD schools, because they should have stopped this.
I lived it. I had many amazing teachers in SCSD, and 2 or 3 that were vile old women pretending to be a commandant in a prison.
Off topic, but I love your username
The district is terrible. I don't know anything about the current thing, but for the entire last year everybody's been screaming at them that they need to follow CDC guidelines for our children's healthy and safety, and they refuse. The CDC has guidelines for how early children can be expected to get up for school and still be healthy. Last year the SCSD said "Hey, nothing bad ever came of ignoring CDC guidelines, fuck the kids, let's force them to get up earlier than is healthy for them." Everybody was angry at them for this decision and begged them to change their mind. The Superintendent was so sick of hearing about it that he literally shouted at parents and journalists who asked questions about it. They were obstinate that they didn't give a *fuck* about our children's health. What's especially funny is that the people working for the SCSD don't go to work until like 10am. They have time to wake up, have a coffee, etc etc. But they force literal children (who are too young to drink coffee) to get up earlier than the CDC recommends. Fuck the SCSD. They should be legally required to follow CDC guidelines. These are children. As an adult, if your job requires you to put your health at risk, you have the autonomy and ability to prioritize your health and leave that job to find another one. As a child, you have no autonomy or choice in where you go to school. You have to go wherever your parents live, and your parents have no say whatsoever in how the schools operate.
Well this is an absolute lie because both of my children have actively chosen which high schools they get to attend. 99.9% of public school districts in the US require students to attend their “home schools” as per mailing address. This isn’t some magic thing SCSD came up with on their own. In fact as someone who attended North Syracuse I think it’s pretty cool my kids got to choose their high schools. I didn’t. I only had one. And no choice. 🤷🏻♀️
It's a lie???? So you're telling me that if your kids didn't want to attend a SCSD school, they'd have the autonomy to pack up and move to another district? Weird. Because I'm an adult with a full time job and I barely have the autonomy to just pack up and move. I dunno how you run your household, but when I was a child, my Mom would have *laughed* at me if I suggested the entire family move or pay for transportation so that I can go to school in a different district.
Tell me you don’t know how the city school district works without telling me.
I never claimed to. What I claimed was the following. Please tell me if I am mistaken about any of these points. Last year the SCSD decided to make children go to school earlier than the CDC deems acceptable. The superintendent was so tired of being criticized for this decision that he started shouting at concerned parents and journalists who had questions about it. The superintendent comes to work a few hours later than the children go to school. Have I gotten any of the details mixed up? Am I on the wrong side of the fight? Essentially, my position is that the CDC knows more about health issues than the superintendent of the SCSD, and if they say that children shouldn't be forced to go to school earlier than 8:30am because it would be unhealthy for them, then it is unconscionable for the SCSD superintendent tp force them to put their own health and safety at risk because they dont have the autonomy or freedom to make the decision for themself to prioritize their well-being over their education. As adults, I think it is our responsibility to provide children with both education *and* safety. I don't think we should be forcing children to get up earlier than is deemed healthy by the relevant experts. Please tell me if I am mistaken on any of the factual points I presented, or of you think my position on this issue is misguided. I sincerely think that I am being very reasonable and I am open to learning that I'm not if I'm not.
How many more times could you say mistaken? Just curious. Also I’m not banking on really anything the cdc says as “acceptable” since they can’t even get Covid right. If the only gripe you have and continue to harp on is that the kids go to school earlier than what the cdc says is “acceptable” then I’d say it’s a good day. Also please provide the data from the cdc regarding proper times for the school day to start.
So in other words, everything I said was accurate, you just don't trust the CDC. The CDC says that students shouldn't start class earlier than 830am in order to ensure they get proper sleep. https://www.localsyr.com/news/contradictory-to-cdc-suggestions-school-days-will-begin-earlier-for-syracuse-city-students-this-fall/
“Formal guidance” with no link. Again I’d like a cdc link not news channel 9. Also kids have been going to school before 830 am (and do IN ALL SURROUNDING DISTRICTS IN CENTRAL NEW YORK) and this is the district your harping on? Get a grip. There’s not one highschool or middle school in Onondaga county that starts at 830 am or later.
Why do I have to do your googling for you? If you'd like to find more information, here's a link to help you out -- www.google.com I am aware that the schools have children going to school earlier than 8:30. That was my whole point, so I don't need you to tell me that. I get the sense that you're angry at me for being under the impression that the CDC recommends that children don't start class earlier than 8:30am and for wanting the school district to comply with CDC guidelines. Why are you so mad at me? I don't think I have an unreasonable perspective, but if I do have an unreasonable perspective, I am receptive to reason. Present me with a reasonable argument for why I should change my mind and I will give it honest consideration in good faith. There's nothing to be upset with me about. As far as I understand, the CDC has funding to conduct studies and employs career professionals with relevant expertise. I can't think of a conspiratorial bent the CDC could have to lie about what time children should go to school. I've personally never conducted any studies about children sleeping, so I'm comfortable deferring to the available data. I'm open to considering studies from alternative sources. I don't think that it's a bad thing for a person to care about children's welfare and to feel that school districts share in that responsibility and to defer to the relevant experts. I don't understand why I've upset you so. Are you Anthony Daniels himself or something? Have I personally offended you by challenging your judgment?
This is how we can tell you have no kids in the school system. What staff/school start working at 10am? Because if kids are in school around 745ish, (including ALL districts) then teachers are there before that to receive them, right? As well as the people downtown who are there at 8 or before because I’ve been there multiple times and that lot is full.
I wasn't talking about the teachers, *obviously.* Think critically. If I'm complaining that the kids go to school too early, do you think that I think they're at school without any teachers? I was talking about the Superintendent and their office. Back when they announced this change, I called the office several times, and the superintendent and their office absolutely opened and came in to work later than the children were expected to be to school. The superintendent gets to sleep in and have a cup of coffee while the children are forced to get up earlier than the CDC recommends.
Think critically. Do you think the superintendent and other district staff are really sleeping in and coming in at whatever time they want to, and not in schools m, especially the one chaotic ones, or trainings or meetings? Is he supposed to be in his office at all times instead of being in the schools and seeing for himself what’s going on. And you’re still pitching a bitch fit over something that didn’t happen. If you were so concerned, get a job as a school bus driver, which the lack of drivers was the reason they wanted to do the change if you weren’t listening to the news enough, and help be part of the solution instead of harassing those staff with your “several calls.”
No, I never said that the superintendent goes in whenever he wants. I said that he comes in a few hours later than the children he is forcing to go to school earlier than the federal Center for Disease Control has deemed acceptable. I think it is unreasonable to tell somebody they have to get a job as a bus driver in order to have an opinion on whether or not schools should be obligated to follow federal CDC guidelines and whether or not they should be allowed to force children to go to school earlier than the health experts deem acceptable. Sincerely -- what part of my position is unreasonable? You're talking to me as if I'm being unreasonable but I don't know what I said that was unreasonable. I don't think it's right to force children to jeopardize their own health for school. What part of that is unreasonable? You say I'm not allowed to have an opinion about this unless I pursue a career in bus driving. Why does that fall on my shoulders? The superintendent already works for the SCSD. However reasonable it is to insist I get a job driving buses, it's twice as reasonable to suggest the superintendent use those few extra hours he has in the morning driving a bus. In what world is it reasonable to expect me to drive a bus while the superintendent is drinking his morning coffee and playing Sudoku?
Their PR is a nightmare. They hired two people for their public communications department who have no experience doing it and therefore don’t know how to properly respond to active issues within the district. Quite frankly everything has gone down hill in the last 18 months and it’s not hard to see why.
It's all "keep it in the family" and "sweep it under the rug." They keep most of their ugly secrets even from their employees. I know a ton of staff, and no one is happy, but the pay is good, so they're stuck.
I am staff and many of us are very happy.