Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Recent Changes 'Quiet' School District Elections

 
 
They Really Don't Want YOU To Vote!



Effectively Kept
Unwanted* Voters From Polls

  • No Notice of District Sponsored Voter Registration Drives**
  • No "Candidates Night"
  • No School Board Meeting (Official 'Annual Meeting') On Vote Night
  • No Union Interviews/Endorsements
  • No Postcards Reminding Voters Of Their Polling Locations**
  • Elimination Of Or Changes In Some Polling Locations
  • Changing Official Publications Used To Advertise 'Notice of Annual Meeting' (Who the heck reads 'The Daily Record' or subscribes to 'The Rochester Business Journal'?)
  • No Budget Information Nights At Schools/Neighborhood Groups/Etc.
  • Few Signs, Ads Or Editorials Endorsing Candidates, Supporting Budget & Bus Proposition
  • Stopped Providing Copies of The Budget To The Community As Per BOE Policy 1331***
  • Extremely Late Announcement Of Vote Results (We used to be among first to announce!)

Unions/GCSD Employees  
Controlled May 20th Vote


* "No" voters

** Despite what GCSD website states: "Those interested in registering to vote may do so with the Monroe County Board of Elections, or with the District by special registration offered each spring. County voter registration cards are available at all schools. Prior to each budget vote/school board election, an election notice is mailed to every residence in Greece. It reminds residents of the vote date, District voter registration date and their polling place."

*** District Clerk Duties: "Distributes notices to the public announcing availability of copies of the budget to be presented at the annual District meeting in compliance with the requirements of the State Education Law; "
  

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

That's right we have taken over. No stopping the Union.
Our reach is long and powerful. Nobody messes with the Union. LMFAO.

Anonymous said...

Scats, that is a pretty strong accusation . And if course you can prove it. Lol. Tell us the facts justifying your claim. and an offering of proof to back it up. Actually, I believe you give these groups way to much credit for being able to pull off a stunt like you claim. The credit should go to the 58,000 voters who simply don't care enough to vote.They and they alone are the enablers who allow existing conditions to go unchanged. To me, it's really that simple.

SCATS said...

To 2:07PM ~~ Of course, only someone in the union would think this was "funny."

To 2:43PM ~~ I offered all sorts of proof on the BLOG posted. I even referenced GCSD websites/policies to show where they have BROKEN THEIR OWN POLICY!
It's up to YOU to disprove, at this point ;)

Anonymous said...

So GCSD didn't want people to vote yet they put signs on all of the busses, sent a connect ed message home, and apparently instructed all of the teachers to tell their students to have their parents vote....right, they really wanted to keep it a secret!!!! I'll also add that every school district in the county voted on the same day. It was all over the local news stations, the paper, everywhere. If a taxpayer didn't know when the budget vote was then they are living in a cave.

What's more likely in this scenario, tens of thousands of people don't care so they don't vote, or some silly sounding conspiracy that the district is effectively keeping voters from the polls...sounds like somebody is trying to stir up controversies so they get more readers.

SCATS said...

To 3:26PM ~~ "All of the buses"?? Please prove that. I saw it posted in one bus the day AFTER the vote.

By use of the word "apparently" you admit you have no first hand knowledge about your other example.

Anonymous said...

There was a letter in both of my kids who go to different schools book bags letting me know and I am just a parent not a part of the union or the GCSD. I also received a robo call home!

SCATS said...

To 4:16PM ~~ That is referred to as the "in-school vote" when parents get rallied to support the budget. Guess what? Those households make up the MINORITY of Greece's 35,000+ households.

THE MAJORITY OF THE COMMUNITY WAS essentially IGNORED, based upon past practices.

Anonymous said...

It's all part of Babsie's Expectation Zero plan.

Expect nothing, Do Nothing, Collect your check.
Encourage apathy and get the result you desire.
The voting public is convinced they can expect nothing, and they have accepted that system.

She got the plan from Hilton Central where nobody even runs for the BOE. The public knows better than to mess with the system.

Anonymous said...

I saw buses with vote signs in their back windows all around town the week before the vote. I also saw candidate signs on several yards. I also received the budget newsletter in the mail , not that I find it an interesting read ever but non the less I did receive it and was aware of the vote. I agree people just don't care anymore.

SCATS said...

To 8:39PM ~~ I got 'The Connection' In the mail, too. I saw a few, a VERY FEW candidates signs. Most were on Mt. Read, Long Pond Rd. & Black Walnut. I did not see signs in the bus windows. I'm not sure that's even legal anyway.

Regardless, the points I made in the BLOG are 100% FACTUAL. That's a lot of change for a district that resists it. Also, turnout was the lowest it's been in MANY, MANY YEARS! So, it apprears those changes MADE THAT IMPACT.

Anonymous said...

As to your comment about not seeing any candidates lawn signs this year may I offer this in rebuttal .
Obviously you have no idea how much a professionally produced lawn sign costs. That cost is paid for by the person seeking election to the board. The same applies to media advertising. This is the prime reason lawn signs are a thing of the past. Besides, who in his right mind would spend his or her own money to get elected to a non paying thankless job and set himself up for a " free lunch" on this site in the form of ridicule and personal insults. It's pretty much a fools errand in this town to do as much.

Anonymous said...

3:26 you proved the point. The district very carefully encouraged the right kind of people to remember to vote. The parents and the employees. Anyone without kids in school did not get a robocall reminder. Thanks for letting us know that fact. We did not know that before since we weren't on that list to receive those calls. We can't blame them. They wanted to pass the budget for purely selfish reasons. Even if it didn't pass the austerity budget was the same and they would have rammed that down our throats if there was a failure. So they get to crow about passing the budget and they get to offer sympathy to poor west Irondequoit. The no voters decided not to bother voting. We don't care anymore. If it comes to the same situation as West Iron and we need 60% to pass the no voters all 3300 of us will be sure to be out to vote. You can take that to the bank. So administration, better not try to blow the cap.

SCATS said...

To 5:49AM ~~ I wish you folks would READ MORE CAREFULLY! I NEVER SAID I saw no signs! I said: "Few Signs, Ads Or Editorials Endorsing Candidates, Supporting Budget & Bus Proposition

Of course I'm aware of the cost/expense, but that certainly didn't keep the union guy & his BOE side kick and that other fellow from getting them printed & posted on Long Pond Rd. & Mt. Read Blvd. WHO DO YOU THINK PAID FOR THEM??? In the past, the unions contributed, CARE contributed, etc. to candidate's coffers. PTA's paid for NUMEROUS, LARGE ADS and sometimes signs supporting the budget/props.

Did YOU see the half-page ads one candidate had in the Greece Post this year? He PAID FOR IT HIMSELF!

To 7:38AM ~~ Exactly right! And as for the 3300 "no" votes, THEY ARE THE PEOPLE THAT GCSD TARGETED TO GET THEM TO STAY HOME! Thus, quieting the election. In the past, you could count on that many "no votes" without any problem! Now they can't even get 3000 to show up in total.

Anonymous said...

Unions never monetarily contributed directly to candidates other than to do mailings to their members who live in the town. Care is gone. That only leaves it to Politically involved PTA and the Greece of C,of C , Rotary and Kiwanis to support McCabe and Maloney. I'm sure support came from there as has been the case in the past . Example, 15,000 by Rotary to get Boily elected in 06. With that kind of money could there have been an agenda in mind? No signs vs few signs = same intent. Nice try.

SCATS said...

To 11:02AM ~~ I never said the unions contributed "directly" ... again putting words in my mouth!

There is a BIG difference between "no signs" & "few signs" when the person tries to make it sound like I said "I saw no signs." That is NOT what I said at all. If you are going to try to quote me (with or without the quotation marks) then I expect you to be as exacting as you would want me to be with you!

PS ~~ People who use words like "always" & "never" love to argue & be proven wrong! Either of those is a VERY, VERY LONG TIME! A sure sign of black & white thinking ;)

Anonymous said...

Like I said scats, your INTENT was quite clear. " "DIRECTLY" another clever spin on your contributed remark, It's not working. And as for putting words in your mouth, your talking about MISSION IMPOSSIBLE here.lolWhy all the shouting about the use of never and always when it refers to absolutes. .??


Anonymous said...

Do any if you know it alls on this site really know what a traffic citation represents? It has two distinct and clear functions. One is the fact that it represents a summons to appear in court on a certain date to answer the charge contained in the other function, It is the most important part of the citation . It's called the INFORMATION. This is the part that contains the specific details of
the charge which is used by prosecutors and the courts to determine the severity of the charge and determine the final outcome and disposition of the charge. The issuing officer signs the information thereby swearing as to its content based on his personal knowledge of the stated violation. However, there are exceptions to this part of the information part.
Using the subject of this thread as an example , this is what must now happen. The investigating officer obviously did not witness the alleged allegation so he can not issue a ticket based on personal knowledge.
If he chooses to issue a ticket at the scene, he must also submit a supporting deposition to the court stating that this information is based on INFORMATION AND BELIEF. If available, he can issue the ticket based on information and belief from a witness to the violation. Now, a supporting deposition must be given and signed by the witness and made part if the information.
I think, considering the gravity if this situation, the officer would be wise and justified to wait until accident reconstruction is completed along with other factors being examined by others, before issuing the appropriate citations if called for.
. Time is not so much a factor as is " getting it right" The alleged violator isn't going anywhere and can be cited at anytime after completion of the investigation
Therefore it would be prudent not to second guess the investigating officer at the scene as he has more serious things to deal with at the scene of the accident.
Without being in that situation, it is quite easy for one to be a " Monday-morning quarterback "BTW I am not a member of law enforcement.

Anonymous said...

All the signs I saw in the back windows of many buses the week prior to the vote, simply said to vote. Gave the date and that's all. Did not support any candidates.
And also, if you're "not sure", as my challenge, can you find and quote any law stating that this is illegal?
Union members do make calls from the NYSUT center to suggest people get out and vote - explicit instructions to withhold from any advocacy as to a yes or no vote. Monitored and strictly enforced!
You show a lack of credibility when you admonish the use of "always", "never", "no", and "few", but then assume to know who paid for what signs! Isn't that a bit condescending and assumptive on your part?
Facts of an argument require proof, and while you can assume all day long, the reality is you really have no more proof than anyone else posting here.
Your PS is proof enough of your belief that the only reality is yours, which seems to be entirely BLACK!

SCATS said...

To 2:24PM ~~ "Directly" was in quotes BECAUSE 11:02AM (you??) made their comment specific by INCLUDING THAT WORD! Some of you REALLY need to take reading for comprehension remediation classes.
YOU are among them.

To 3:08PM ~~ As the top "know-it-all" I'd say you posted on the WRONG THREAD. One thing I know for sure, not ALL tickets go through all of the processes you suggest. They'd never get a speeding ticket issued if they did.

To 6:29PM ~~ My use of the word "legal" relates to blocking the view out bus windows with political signage. I'm not sure it is legal from a transportation road safety standpoint, capisce?

The rest of your rant is difficult to figure out exactly what you are referring to, since its references to my previous comments are inaccurate. I never said who paid for the signs. In fact, I asked: "WHO DO YOU THINK PAID FOR THEM?" THEN I stated what happened IN THE PAST.

If I really wanted to make trouble, I'd put in a FOIL request asking to see the legally required list of expenditures, donations, etc. for EACH CANDIDATE in the election. That would likely cause the blood to drain from 3-4 faces.

Anonymous said...

Scats I just realized my mistake. Wrong thread, sorry about that

SCATS said...

TY 10:40AM ~~ I was about to explain that.

Anonymous said...

"but that certainly didn't keep the union guy & his BOE side kick and that other fellow from getting them printed & posted on Long Pond Rd. & Mt. Read Blvd."
And this quote attempts to make what point? I infer that you clearly state whom you think PAID for them, with what proof?!
Using this assumption that your statements of past occurrences is what happened this time is, again assumptive and misguided given that you offered no proof.
As with many of your posts, you blame, infer, allude, pretend to have knowledge beyond the blog participants but then change your story when convenient or necessary. And if anyone bothers to read all your items and then points out the logical errors, you end the links and posts, and make threats, won't post on some assumptive higher authority, or make some asinine accusation. Is that why intended vagueness is your thread of logic?
A blog is a blog, all posters have credibility, no one holds any more bearing than another. All deserve equal weight in their positions, assumptions, ideas, and the assumption that everyone has some underlying knowledge, unless proven otherwise by facts!

SCATS said...

To 7PM ~~ It attempts to make the point that THEY GOT SIGNS. Your "inference" seeks some sort of hidden meaning that wasn't intended, in other words an ASSumption on your part ... again.

The idea that Cunningham would EVER get union support is beyond ridiculous!