From WXXI news.

Excuse me, this is Connections.

Easy for me to say.

I'm the host, Evan Dawson.

Well, in this episode, we're sitting down with candidates for New York State Assembly district number 136.

And this is the last of our candidate conversations.

Democratic incumbent Sarah Clark and Republican challenger Clianda Florence are here to talk about their platforms, their perspectives on state issues, what they would like to prioritize for this district.

We always invite your feedback when the candidates are on.

And throughout this election season.

We've been glad to hear from a lot of people in our community who appreciate these conversations.

It's a chance to hear the candidates unscripted at length on the issues, the questions that we ask, and the questions that you, the listeners and the viewers ask.

Let me welcome our guest.

Now, Clianda Florence is with me in studio, the Republican in the race for New York State Assembly, district number 136.

Thank you for making the time.

Thank you for having me.

And Clianda Florence, this website is Friends of Clianda Florence.com.

And let me welcome the incumbent, the Democrat Sarah Clarke who is joining us.

Sarah welcome.

Thank you for being with us.

Thank you for having me.

And Sarah's website is Sarah Clarke for assembly.com.

All right.

Sarah, I'll start with you.

You have a chance to win reelection for the New York State Assembly in this race, why did you decide to run again?

Tell people a little bit about your background and yourself and why you are running again.

Sure.

So I'm a mom of three, living in the city of Rochester.

I grew up in the city of Rochester, spent, you know, 20 years, almost 20 years working in the United States Senate.

But decided to run to really center families, to really center children, and ensure that everyone in New York could thrive.

And I feel as a delegation, our state delegation has done a really good job of delivering record investment into Rochester on multiple levels, both in the capital projects in our downtown and our neighborhoods, but also, in programmatic and operating.

Our nonprofits are community based organizations.

And I feel like our work is not done.

So I want to keep doing it.

And especially for me, childcare is something that we've really started to create that path to universal child care.

And we're so we're really on it, really moving forward.

And, I want to see it all the way to the end.

But I'm just excited to keep doing the things that ensure all our families can thrive, regardless of where they live, regardless of what zip code they're in.

I'm just super excited to get back to the work on the floor.

Instead, the floor is yours.

Tell the audience a little bit about your own background and why you decided to run.

Absolutely.

So my name is Clianda Florence, and I'm not just, a mother and a resident here of Rochester, but I am running number one because of legacy.

I come from a family.

My grandfather was a late civil rights activist here, and one of the things he talked to me about was legacy.

How are you going to build your legacy?

What is going to be left when no one else is here?

What can they look back to?

As a mother, I also believe that it is important to not only do for my children, but other children as well.

I've been in education for over 20 years.

Within the walls of education, I've seen the decline in our literacy rates that continue to be generational.

From there, I began to better understand that parents felt disconnected, disjointed, and as a result, I began to want to travel amongst the education, what I call walls.

So I've taught in the CSD Buffalo, Charter Greece.

And from there I began to also see the importance of building my own.

So I created my own nonprofit called Let's Get Lit that I've been doing for four years, which is, family forward, family focused, nonprofit that creates opportunities for families to see and learn together.

Why literacy is our most important issue right now.

Well, throughout these primaries, the primaries leading into the general election, our audience typically likes to ask some version of, well, what kind of Republican are you?

What kind of a Democrat are you in general?

Or what kind of a Republican are you?

Are you a Trump Republican, a Maga, Republicans?

Something else?

How do you see yourself?

I see myself as Linda.

The type of Republican that I am is a conservative Republican that believes that there is a foundation, a family of God.

Small business and small government.

I see myself as a change agent.

I see myself as someone who is transformative.

I also see myself as someone who works alongside the community.

I see myself as a Republican who has changed the tide of our community, through the walls of education, through the walls of civic responsibility and community engagement.

Yeah, certainly.

You got the harder mission in a district, with, the registration.

It is what it is.

There aren't.

And you talk about in doing the work you've done over years in the city of Rochester, there's fewer Republicans in the city.

What makes you a conservative?

Well, first thing we want to identify is not fewer Republicans in the city.

I believe that people are looking for candidates that they believe can do the work, that can encourage them to see the greater good of being a part of, voting.

I believe that what I'm doing is not only important and necessary, but it's something that people want to begin to come alongside.

And for so long, people have been involved with a federal lens that they forget the local responsibility that they have.

And what I've been doing on this trail is getting people to not look at people's party lines.

They need to look at people because many of our people have been voting ill informed.

They've been voting based on tradition.

They've been voting based on what they've been normally taught to do.

And if you ask them, name three things about the person or persons you're supporting and why they can't tell you.

So instead of leading with my party, I've led with what I've been doing, and that has been reshaping the mindsets of voters.

I'm curious to know what you think about Republicans on the national level as a Republican yourself, are you a fan of this president?

Well, again, right now, my goal is not to try to woo people on the federal level.

I think we spend too much time having conversations about things we cannot directly, change right now.

What we do need to spend more time talking about is a what has been going on locally.

Why haven't people been coming out to vote the way that they should in local elections?

And what can we do to change that time?

But part of what I want to understand is you're you're talking about the idea that I think in your mind, there could be a lot more people proud to be Republicans in the city of Rochester.

It doesn't have to be.

Democrats win all the urban elections after the Republicans only won in rural areas.

It doesn't have to be there.

No, absolutely.

And the most high profile Republican in the country is Donald Trump.

He's pretty well known to every one of the voters in your district.

And so I think it's instructive to know if that's the kind of thing that you aspire to.

Did you vote for this president?

Well, again, I think that we are spending too much time once again talking about the president.

But if we don't begin to educate people about what is going on locally, we are in my opinion, we're focusing on the weeds.

And if we don't begin to remove the weeds of the conversation in local elections, this is why people get stifled and they don't vote.

So let me ask you a different question.

Who's your political hero?

Oh my goodness.

I have several political heroes.

One is my grandfather.

Because I found out that he ran for New York State Assembly in 1972, and I did not find that out until I started to sojourn on my journey.

And I went to the U of our.

And I was teaching some young people, and I found out, that was something that just really inspired me to understand that this is truly legacy and that is something my grandfather stood on, is about making impact on very levels from a micro, meso macro approach.

And that's what I've been doing.

And that's who is my, hero.

Okay.

Very good.

Well, let's turn to, the Democrat in the race, Sarah Clarke, and I'll work backwards.

Same kind of questions.

Who's your political hero?

Oh, I have so many.

You know, I had the pleasure of working for both Senator Clinton and Senator Gillibrand, but I also work for mayor Bill Johnson.

I got my sort of political start when he was mayor and in his town hall or in his city hall.

And I feel like all of that, you know, sort of combined with getting to be in the shadow of Louise Slaughter for so long has taught me so much about trailblazing, has taught me so much about how you find your strength, both as a policy.

You know, this that's my job is to go create policy, go vote on policy.

And they all loved it.

They all called themselves policy wonks and really got into the weeds of it and, and could see how changes to elevate those who feel this connected to government and feel this helped by government.

Those changes can be transformational, local level all the way up.

So they are all my heroes in many ways.

And I've gotten to learn from so many, so many different things from each one of them.

They're all a little different in their styles.

And it's been a pleasure and, an amazing I feel blessed to have been able to, to, to soak up a little bit from all four of them.

What kind of a Democrat do you consider yourself?

I consider myself a, I guess, a pragmatic progressive.

I really believe that government needs to work for those least who feel least accessible to it, or at least connected to it.

It shouldn't work for those only at the top.

I believe government does have a role.

Obviously, constitutionally, we have a role in public education, but we have a role in so many ways to support our communities in a collective and community based way.

And so I have focused on both how we do that at the community level, but also how we ensure that at the top is level, the top, top level of state government, that what we are doing really focuses on the the person and the people who need services the most.

That sort of collective, way that we create our cities, our towns, our counties and even our communities and neighborhoods.

I wish we didn't have national conversations.

I wish we could always keep it local.

But I can tell you at the state level, we are dealing with some of the largest cuts ever, from the current president around, health care, around, food access, around higher education.

And these are just overwhelmingly hard things that have traditionally been bipartisan, traditionally been things that have been supported, that we as a state are scrambling to figure out how to help those who are impacted the most.

We're going to get back to that issue in just a second.

And just briefly, you know, similar to what I asked your opponent in this race, when it comes to a popular moment on the scene and DSA is having a moment, are you happy to see them having a moment?

Do you find yourself aligned with with some or all of what DSA is doing?

I think they're they're pushing a conversation that needs to be pushed around.

Affordable housing, around how you can work 40 hours a week and still not afford your basic needs.

And they're they're having an impact of sort of the collective frustration that our young generation is feeling.

But honestly, all the way up to our seniors, and our older New Yorkers, there is a huge issue in salary discrepancies in, the, the, the dignity of work and what it means when you put in 40 hours but yet come home and can still not put food on the table, or you're choosing prescription drugs over, rent or whatever it may be.

So I enjoy that those conversations, because of DSA sort of rise, have moved to the forefront.

But I am not in DSA and I'm not part of DSA.

Okay.

So let's let's talk about some of the issues animating these campaigns.

And, Clianda Florence has talked a lot about, for example, public safety.

I want to start there.

Yes.

What are we getting wrong, in your view, with public safety?

We've moved away from community.

There was community policing when I grew up.

So everything was housed in the community where community policing was strategy.

People began to know who people were.

When I went to Wilson High School.

We all knew everybody.

We knew hoppy and everybody else in the Genesee section.

When we move things out of community, we begin to become disjointed.

And that ties into education.

So when you see that there is, disconnect within community, we moved away from community schools.

We're just now trickling back into that when that also interrupts parent access.

So when people don't have access to the systems, to the resources that we are supposed to have, what does it cause?

It causes disappointment and causes people, not to know who is who.

And it also creates this false narrative that it's a us against them mentality.

We also have an issue with bail reform.

So when we look at what the intent of bail reform was and then what it became, and not be willing to address that, that is become problematic as well.

And when we begin to see, especially from me, I look at it from the lens of an educator.

I look at reform or policies like a lesson plan.

You have it in your mind about how you want something to go, but as you begin to work through that thing and you see that wait, I intended it to be this, but now that it's actuated, it is being that what do we need to do to shift it to meet the original need and tension versus reality?

Yeah.

So what's the short definition for what the intention was versus the reality of bail reform in your mind?

In my mind, I believe that bail reform was initially created to give access to people, especially to people who they deem are in poverty, who don't have the access or the resources to obtain bail, obtain good lawyers, and that it's supposed to create an avenue for them to get proper representation, to be able to not only, get into a situation that is, I think when I talked to someone, they said something about, something as minimal as shoplifting, being treated as the same regard as someone who was caught with a gun or who has done something more egregious.

And everybody was treated the same way.

So bail reform was supposed to create a linear approach to give equity to everyone, and so was it.

And what's happened?

Well, what's happened is we see it in our communities.

We see the devastation when, domestic violence, for an example, has been on an uptick.

Why?

Because people who were the perpetuation of the violence began to be let out.

They were not held accountable.

And then now someone either gets hurt or they're killed.

Someone steals a car, they get a slap on their wrists, they're back out.

They're doing it again.

So when we don't begin to see accountability with the reform that we intend, and then when we say, well, it was a judge's fault, so it's your job when we enact something just like my job as a teacher, if I'm to create policy and I say that it is the parents that need to understand something better, it's my job to make sure that that policy is broken down to its simplistic form, to where the judges will not be caught up in the gray area.

They know exactly what they can and cannot do when it comes to the confines of what this policy was intended to do.

So everybody's been passing the buck.

When you talk about bail reform and how it has negatively impacted domestic violence education in our community.

Okay, so let me turn to Assembly Member Clark.

Let's just start on that domestic violence portion.

Do you agree that there are people committed in committing violent acts of domestic, abuse and are simply just being let right back out into the community?

Well, I hope not.

And I think that, you know, we've had conversations with our new district attorney, and he's been pretty adamant about doubling down on both his department and ensuring that people are understanding the difference between violent felonies, misdemeanors, and ensuring that when we can ask for the highest, bail or whatever it may be, that that they have those tools in the toolkit.

I mean, one of the things that we have done at the state level around domestic violence is it started as the Strive Grant, which are 20 communities across the state, including the city of Rochester, which is using a Lafferty based and evidence based, assessment tool at every every time that there's a law enforcement involvement in a domestic situation and it is having much better, as we started to roll it out, a much better impact on ensuring that those who are in danger and those who, can see some escalation happening are most protected.

So between those two changes, we are hoping to drive those numbers down.

You know, bail is not the consequence, right?

Bail is pretrial.

And we have changed it three times to ensure that the tools that are needed, both in recurring crime, those who are, already facing one charge and then get caught up in another one, that bail immediately becomes, eligible for anything, even a misdemeanor.

And all the, language around what what judges can consider when setting that pretrial bail or, release or whatever it may be, that all the factors are based on what, other states have in terms of a dangerousness standard.

So how often they're committing crimes, are they accessible to gun, you know, do they have access to guns.

Were guns used in their crime?

Have there been violent felonies?

Is there a restraining order, or order protection, like all those have been clearly defined out, as ways to cheat for judges to use it.

You know, our goal is that not only, is it more uniform because we are seeing implemented different ways across the state, we've pushed into our Office of Court Administration to to better train and ensure that all judges are working from sort of the same playbook.

But that, you know, we are also looking to see where we can continue to improve, whether it's lethality assessments and domestic violence, the youth part and youth diversion, that we've seen success in for some of our, our younger, folks who are caught up in the system to ensure that we are putting, you know, the goal, particularly for our youngest, is to ensure that they get put on paths, out of the, incarceration system.

But, these are all things that we are working on it, and we have seen some reduction there.

So that has been successful.

As we've seen it, I'm late for our first break.

It's a very short one.

We're going to come back.

We're going to talk about child care.

We're going to talk about education and parent choice.

We're going to talk about a wide range of issues with the candidates for New York State Assembly, district number 136.

You just heard the incumbent, Sarah Clark, the challenger in studio with me, Clianda Florence.

We'll come right back on Connections.

Support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Bob Johnson Auto Group.

Believing an informed public makes for a stronger community.

Proud supporter of Connections with Evan Dawson.

Focused on the news, issues and trends that shape the lives of listeners in the Rochester and Finger Lakes regions.

Bob Johnson Auto group.com.

President Trump plans to open up most of the nation's last pristine forests to road building for logging, but loggers say access to the trees isn't the biggest issue.

It's things like fuel costs and finding workers.

There's not a ton of people that want to wake up at 2 a.m.

and drive a log truck for the same price that you could go work at McDonald's for that story on All Things Considered, from NPR news.

This afternoon at four.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson, so assembly member Sarah Clarke, you said one of the issues that animates you most is child care and a path, as you say, to universal child care, we're not there yet, but we know about the state pilot program.

Can you describe where we are now versus where you think we can realistically go soon?

And if we've got the resources to get there?

Well, we through the through some legislation we had created sort of post-Covid was to create the childcare Availability Task Force, which put a map together to universal child care.

Where we have seen probably I mean, we have done things around the edges, around presumptive eligibility, helping families get access quicker.

You know, higher pay for those who do nonprofessional hours, nights and weekends, and other sort of around the edges thing to make the childcare system work better.

But where we have seen the biggest jumps is in New York City, right.

They well, statewide, we've unveiled, you speak for every family who wants it starting in 2028.

But in New York City, they've also, had three K for any family who wants it and then have now opened up to K. And these are not income based programs.

These are accessible programs for every family, who need childcare, because we know childcare is not only, inaccessible for those who can least afford it, but it is becoming inaccessible for families across the broad spectrum and influencing even the right for parents to go to work.

Parents leaving the workforce.

And it has become a real issue.

So the whole point is to move it out of an income based system and ensure access for high quality early childhood education in a variety of settings center based, home based, you know, we've had legal exams, which is, you know, smaller friends and family that have just a couple children, but making sure they're all high quality and making sure they're all accessible to families who have children.

We are now the next step is to really push that rest of state to ensure the rest of the 57 counties, can get the same kind of quality access to child care that we are seeing unveiled in New York City.

Okay.

Miss Florence, do you want to respond to some of that?

Absolutely.

Some of the things I think that we oftentimes just focus on is just access and money, and we think that money and access is the, I would say the magic wand to make everything right, but we don't take the time to look at the roots.

Education trust released a report in two.

I want to say this was 2024 and 2020 3rd April of 2023.

And what just identified in that, that the state has been negligent on addressing is the crisis we're having, not only with pay of individuals who are giving these services, but the lack of preparation of pre-K, three pre-K for going into kindergarten.

And then how does that bridge to the crying crisis that we are now seeing in the educational, system?

So it is good, and I do agree with her that we do need to create varied access points, but the problem is, if the state doesn't do anything to make those varied access points, accessible to where people don't have to jump through 17 hoops to get their daycare started.

If you don't go into these daycares and you don't recognize that they don't even have actual ABCs up anymore.

So how are we saying that we're given money to get them there?

But what are we getting our children to, especially in urban environments?

So in a moment, I'll ask Assemblymember Clark if she wants to respond.

But let me just follow up that point that because you said earlier this hour that as a conservative yourself, you think the state spends too much money in general.

Not only do we not just spend too much money, but it's too much money spent without accountability.

Look to it.

So.

So are we spending too much money on child care?

I don't want to say that we're spending too much money on child care.

I think we're not preparing our children.

We don't have people in place that are going to be able to equip our children at the same amount that we're spending money at, and there's no accountability.

So if the state is not going into these childcare places to evaluate, how is my money being spent?

It's one thing to say, you know what, Evan?

I'm going to give your family $20,000 to go and send your child to daycare.

But then when you get there, you see there's nothing.

What are they being prepared for?

You got them there.

That's the first step.

That's getting them in the door.

But once they get in there, how are we building the foundation of this access?

Access with nothing in the house is not a house.

I just want to understand.

Understand two things.

Then before I send it back to your opponent here, how do you then create what you're describing?

A more accountable system with better results?

What's the mechanism for doing that?

Well, as a teacher, when I was in the classroom, there was a Danielson rubric.

For example, this Danielson rubric is what educators had to look at to give them guidance of how they should be when it comes to teaching and learning, what it should look and what it should sound like.

If we don't have anybody in the state that has education background, early education background, and we're spending money on task force, but none of them have any early childhood or education background, you will see the result is just push money.

We just want to create access because we believe that that's all it is.

But if we don't sit down, talk to parents and ask them, what is it that you want for your child when they get into daycare, then ask day care providers, what are some of the stumbling blocks that you're having that's creating these outcomes?

Because it doesn't make sense to get children in the door, and then there's no rubric that's guiding our state members.

So when they go behind closed doors where these child care people can't go in, parents, you're now supposed to be their voice.

But if you're not informed, how do you then be the voice when you're ill informed on what to voice for outside of money?

And if New York State is spending too much money in general, but this is not an area you would necessarily cut spending for.

Where are you?

If you're elected and you and you can get your way here, where's New York State going to make significant spending cuts?

Fourth.

I believe that's a tough topic.

I will have to really begin to look at things from a holistic lens, because it's easy to ask someone on a fly.

You know what?

What do you want to cut?

But it's not that simple.

I believe that we need to do, a needs assessment.

We need to begin to understand and have conversations with the community to see where is it hurting for you, what are your needs?

So then I can go and inform my decision and not just make a blanket.

Emotional, pull based on either what a party or a group is saying.

You really need to get to the people to understanding.

You got to walk in some of those places to be able to say, for example, our ESD just got a tick up tick 1.12 billion to more than that billion dollars, with less than 30,000 students.

That has had perpetual generational failure.

And they get more money.

That is asinine.

And there is no fortune 500 company that will begin to perpetuate that type of failure with losing children every year.

But yet their budget growth, that is where we are not spending properly, and we're not investigating if we don't see where the money is going and do a forensic analysis to say, for example, if you got $1.12 billion and you're saying you are cutting people, why are you cutting people when you are not getting the results?

Because education trust says that only 11% of third eighth grade students are proficient.

That's an example of where and why you can't just say, I'm going to go cut without doing a forensic analysis of how have you been successful?

Where have your needs been?

But how are you top heavy that's demanded more money and it's not getting to the children that everybody say that it's supposed to get to is get into adults that's out here doing what we don't know, and nobody's doing an accountability check.

We keep throwing money like Oprah was giving out cars.

We're throwing money like it's confetti for kindness.

That with no guidance is ignorance on our part, mismanagement on our part.

As leaders.

Okay, Assembly Member Clark, a lot of room for you.

If you want to respond, maybe start by if you would also cut funding for the Rochester City School District because of their results.

I mean, at the end of the day, we're constitutionally mandated right to fund our public schools, who have to take every student in regardless of ability and regardless of any other factors.

So that the increase that we've seen over the years, a part of it is fully funded foundation aid, which was the basis from a lawsuit on inequity in public education.

The second piece to that is that it is an inflationary increase, right?

That is still we haven't talked about it, but so much of those dollars are literally going to the increase in health care costs that has to be paid for every district employee, and some of these other costs that are sort of outside of the district's control, it does not mean that we should not take a huge look.

You know, we've continued the fiscal monitor there, to ensure, an oversight on spending.

And I, you know, as a city school district, my, graduate myself, having gone to East High School, you know, we've we know that, you know, what we saw out East when they had their partnership with you.

And and ensuring that we're pushing those materials out.

But I agree that we all need to have really strong oversight over the city school district, what they're doing.

It's actually why I'm not there today.

I'm in New York City visiting the, South Bronx Literacy Academy.

And we brought district, folks with us who are, in charge of the Ela and literacy, components in the district as we look to really address some of these really systemic issues of why education outcomes are not better in the district, there are a multitude of reasons, I agree, oversight from the state level all the way down to our school board, down to, the city of Rochester that funds a good portion of the city school district.

There really needs to be strong, transparency from top to bottom of where money is being spent, how it's being spent.

But the increases every year are really inflationary at this point.

And there's so many other of these extra costs that are we are seeing just get exorbitant in the district.

And I think need to figure out a different path forward to to fix some of those things.

I want to say on the childcare piece, a couple different things, the, the, the gathering of sort of state agencies, stakeholders and childcare, parents and families, have come up with a wage scale that we are hoping to be adopted in the, state budget this year because it is true that the the wages of the childcare workforce, as we just heard, from the update we heard on, WXXI, on the loggers out on the West Coast and the they can make more at McDonald's.

It is true for childcare workforce as well.

They can literally make more money in fast food restaurants than they can in childcare providing settings.

So we need to really address the wages.

And I think that the universal piece of this is so that we can get to the point where we can put more resources to make sure they are getting to, the providers and their workforce.

The second piece to that, though, is more requirements around qualifications, high quality, whether it's school based or certification based, ensuring that there is some baseline, for our providers and some accountability in terms of how they're teaching that it is high quality.

These are the most formative years for a child.

And we need to sort of be on all the same page and have some accountability that we know the Office of Children and Families is overseeing right now and undertaking at a large level, and I've been able to chat with both at home providers and center based about what that will look like.

Can we have some experience be built into their.

It's not just school based.

There's multiple factors, that will allow us to be satisfied that the providers and that the childcare workforce is meeting the quality that we want and need and that families and children want and need.

Well, let me shift back to Miss Florence and just ask briefly if you want to talk a little bit more about education and parent choice.

So those are big issues in your campaign.

We were just talking a little bit about education.

This might be a good place for you to explain a little bit more about your thoughts there.

My thoughts, they are very, very clear.

I've been in the education field for over 20 years, and as I've been out on this campaign and just the work that I've been doing, as an educator, parents have felt that they are no longer seen as viable partners within the triangular relationship when it comes to choice for their child.

Knowing what those choices are and being informed and being able to be welcome to advocate, not just when it's problems within the classroom.

Parents have the right to choose whatever schooling they want public, private, parochial.

Homeschooling.

What I think is a tragic travesty as well as, problematic, is when we try to make parents believe that the only choice we have is a public school.

Only Rochester, our CSD, but yet we don't have that same tenacity and zeal.

When we talk about urban suburban, we only have that tenacity and zeal when we talk about charters.

And I think there's a great disparity because a lot of parents have said to me, Cleon, the problem I have is I don't even know when the urban suburban choice part is available and accessible.

I know a lot of homeschool parents who are struggling with what are the requirements, and I'm having a hard time with trying to work through all of this stuff so my child can have what they need.

You have micro schooling.

There's so many ways to get to the end result, and there is no one size fits all.

Public school is a choice.

Public is inclusive of the Ccsd and charters.

They're both public schools, so when we don't begin to give parents that equitable choice and we try to diminish that, and we try to make them believe that their only choice is public schools and then public school educators, leaders are going around tainting the well from other people to be able to give children another choice.

Again, numbers don't lie.

And when we begin to look at, well, they can't lie, let me take that back because we can begin to, do.

But do you think these make it clear?

But these numbers have been generationally clear.

And this is where the tragedy is, because as a mother myself, my children, right now, I have a son and a client, as a son that graduated from McQuaid and a daughter that graduated from Spencer Port, I said that I don't want something from my children that I wouldn't want for someone else.

I just like I had the right to choose.

Everybody should have the right to choose.

None of us will put our children willingly in a burning building.

None of us will send our children in a dilapidated building and tell them, you know what?

Here, I want you to go be well, learn.

Go on.

And you say to me that we want a strong Rochester, a strong Monroe County, a strong New York State.

And we begin to sit here and say with open eyes the parents that the our Ccsd is the only way.

That is a tragedy.

That is misfortune for our parents.

And many of them are feeling like they can't even walk into the schools.

So you would not send your kids da CST again, it's a choice.

I didn't choose to send my children to our Ccsd because as a graduate of, Wilson Magnet went to three school, went to 44 school.

The type of schooling that I was under is not what it is right now.

And they had less money.

So the leadership is different.

We have a lot of difference when it comes to, how we follow up with curriculum and being able to get real results and leadership.

When you have leadership changing every 2 to 3 years, you're not going to be successful.

So for my children, that was not my choice.

So I want to tell other parents, just like I chose you have the right.

And don't let anybody tell you that you only have one choice.

All right, Miss Clark, go ahead.

I mean, I think for me, the the biggest thing as a state legislator is that we have to focus on, funding the public school system.

It is, again, what is embedded in the state constitution, to make sure that we are funding it.

I know that parents are struggling.

You know, one of the things when we had the new superintendent, conversation and we were talking about who, who are the most important people in the school building.

And honestly, one of the things we said was the person who's in charge of the door, because if a parent does show up at a school, if a parent does want to have a conversation and they don't feel welcome in the school building, that is wrong.

We've, you know, secured extra state dollars for the Rock the future program, parent cafes.

Because you know, what we were seeing over and over again is that when you do parent, when you try to reach out to parents to get them more involved, it is often done at a certain time, in a certain way that leaves behind so many voices and you sort of get the same people showing up, but you don't get the broad, voice of every parent who really wants to feel like they're having their effecting change in the district, and in the schools that their children are in.

We we have to continue the public education.

Right?

It is the supposed to be the equalizer, when it comes to, ensuring that every child can thrive and meet their, their God given potential.

But so we have to be purposeful.

And if you look at, you know, the, the dichotomy between the city school district and the other two districts in or other three districts in, the assembly district, which are east and west around McQuaid and Brighton, it is.

Such a huge change, just, you know, a mile often down the road, not even a mile, sometimes in school outcomes and educational outcomes.

And so we know the public school model can work.

And we know it can be the great equalizer.

And the great fundamental difference between, a child.

But in a child's life, we have to figure out the city school district.

I to, you know, went my whole life, to city schools.

And they are different from where when I attended to what they are today.

But we have a lot of committed folks and a lot of things to to build on that I think we need to continue to do when it comes to parent choice, it is both parent involvement and parent choice.

But you take school seven, which is, in my neighborhood and we are, you know, we I know our Ccsd has put it on their community school list.

You know, you have to look at some of the barriers, too, about why parents are choosing what parents want in their school.

They do want neighborhood community based schools.

We want is doors open after the bell goes off and kids go home to ensure that we're also not just helping the students, but their families in the neighborhood and become an anchor like they should be.

But one of the reasons that parents are picking schools further away is transportation policy changed.

It used to be a half mile, and now it's a mile and a half.

And so parents who are busy, who have to get to work, they want a school bus, they want transportation options, and they're choosing further away schools because they get a bus.

And that can that really takes away from the focus that we're trying to do of creating these strong anchor schools in a neighborhood and in a community to ensure that it is not just educating our children, but that it is becoming the place for all services.

But you look at schools seven and they're tipping 30% in special ed.

This is not we're not seeing that in other schools.

And they don't have a choice.

They don't have a choice about whether they can try to meet those students needs.

They have to.

And in our other school options and other school settings, they don't always have to meet those needs.

And so, you know, you take some of our charter schools and you see maybe a 10% in special ed, you see 30 to 50% in the district.

What are we doing about that?

How are we changing how we teach?

Who can that be absorbed everywhere?

And are those students not going to get lost when it becomes too challenging or too hard to educate?

We have to figure this out.

We have to right side the district.

And I think there are big changes coming down the pike right now as we look to see how we can make sure we're doing that.

And Clann Florence, if you could do this in a minute or less, I'm way left for a break.

I you got your notes.

I know you want to jump back and go ahead.

I sure can.

We need to be realistic, too, about numbers.

And this is why it's so important to understand when we look at, for example, because of most of the students that make up the Ccsd in charter schools are African American students.

And and I know this is 2018, 2019 numbers.

But when I flip the page to 2023 now 2026, not much is changed.

Rochester Black students third grade 18% proficiency Brighton black students 30% East.

Ironically 36% West around 53%.

So for us to sit here and say that, children are doing better, this is a county wide issue that majority of African American students are struggling everywhere for all students, 18% for Rochester, 61% for Brighton, 40% East, around 2.67% and West around a. Quite.

So when we began to really talk about the disparity, let's talk about it realistically.

When you know that a charter school doesn't even get half of what the city school district gets, then that's not equity 30,000 to 14,000, then we need to up the bar for charter schools to get the same, because we need to stop misinforming the community.

The reason why charters cannot, afford to be able to service more students with disabilities is because they don't get the funds for it.

So we have to begin to tell the true story and not, unrealistic.

And as Malcolm X said, you have to be careful of how people will use media opportunities to misinform our community.

All right.

30s Assemblymember Clark, that I must break.

Go ahead.

I mean, what are the reasons we are here today to look at the South Bronx Literacy Academy is that when parents were looking at, literacy as a as a fundamental block, they really wanted the public school option because and it is a public school here, and it was, transformational around children.

They had more boys there than they do girls.

It was one of the first questions we asked, but it is fundamentally changed to the science of reading, how literacy is taught.

And the ultimate goal is to be able to push that into all of the public schools in the New York City base.

It's also about building platforms for afterschool programs, for libraries, for rec centers or whatever it may be, is like, we have to look at this as a holistic landscape of how we're ensuring that wherever a child enters a place or space that we're all working from the same, model to know where that child's at and what we can do to continue their, on their path, whether it's literacy, whether it's math proficiency, whether it's, any of the, the school support that they need.

But one of the really important pieces is the educators, the education of the educators.

And really changing that curriculum to both be a, science of reading within literacy, but then pushing literacy into every teaching, curriculum that is out there, not just those teaching literacy, but ensuring that we're all talking from the same space.

It is similar to what we saw in Mississippi that flipped from, you know, almost last in the country to ninth in the country in literacy.

You know, first for Latino children and third for black, for black and brown children.

They are seeing huge improvements.

And what the Literacy Academic Collective has done, and what we're pushing into our Ccsd is based on the Mississippi model to release, sure that we are taking that same path to see huge changes.

In terms of what we're seeing in literacy.

All right.

We're way late here.

It's Sarah Clarke, clean to Florence, running for New York State Assembly and district number 136.

Your questions for them after this last break, support for your public radio station comes from our members and from Mary Cariola center, proud supporter of Connections with Evan Dawson, believing an informed and engaged community is a connected one.

MaryCariola.org who's running?

What do they stand for and how does your vote work?

Get candidate profiles, conversations and election information from Sky news.

Know before you vote.

Find it all at Sky news.

Talk.

This is Connections.

I'm Evan Dawson.

We got seven minutes to do this.

So this is not lightning round.

We don't do lightning round the Connections.

But we got to work quickly here.

So shorter answers bill in Rochester.

Go ahead Bill keep it tight on the phone.

Thanks Evan.

Yeah a couple comments.

First, Miss Clark was talking about, daycare, and I understand we need to increase the, pay for daycare providers.

However, you know, families healthy, paying 20 grand a year for daycare.

So who's going to pick up the extra cost?

It's going to be the parent.

If it's the government, where are they going to get the money?

And then with regard to charters versus, public schools, you know, you need to introduce a competitive element into education that's going to raise standards for everybody.

I Bill, thank you very much.

So, Assembly Member Clark, he says, look, where is the money coming from?

Parents are already paying a lot.

How do we do it?

Can you do that?

In the short answer, I mean, I would say that I agree that this has been the biggest issue of, and we've used the stabilization grant model, which, you know, through Covid helped, augment salaries at the state.

So the state took it up, but went directly to child care workers in provider settings.

We don't have a choice but to look at models in which the state, helps invest in that.

And whether that is, you know, what we're really looking for is a dedicated revenue stream to do that.

You know, businesses have been looking to see, you know, whether it's tax credits or whatever, but figuring out ways that, you know, they can be more involved, given that this is also an economic development issue for businesses.

We agree the that there is no more money from families that can help pay for that.

But we also know that the number one reason people can't access child care is because of child care workforce.

And the reason there is no, no growth in the workforce is the pay.

So we have to figure it out.

But it cannot fall on families.

And we know providers are making razor thin margins.

Plan to Florence agree or disagree?

I would say I agree disagree.

I agree she makes some very strong points when it comes that families are being pushed on every hand.

I disagree because if we again throwing money like it's confetti and giving it to a burning building, we'll take that $750,000.

That was awarded to the city school district that already had a $1.2 billion budget, and they don't need another $750,000 when they only have 24,000 students in the school.

So if we begin to again, if we're taking a forensic analysis of what is being disseminated amongst Rochester, Monroe County and asking ourselves, how can we redistribute the funds that are being disseminated, and we begin to be more conscientious about how we're throwing this money, like confetti versus really doing that analysis and saying, this is where it needs to go and why.

And we need to take away from this $1.12 billion, for example, and say, how can we reallocate this a pre-K three and four.

Just an example.

All right, Jesse, by email says, national policies of this presidential administration are impacting our local neighbors in devastating ways around Snap health care, Medicaid.

It is important for voters to understand whether your guests support the policies of the administration that are hurting our community.

Do you agree that this administration's policies are hurting local communities?

I agree that there are some policies that are being hurtful to the communities.

However, there are some policies that are helping the community, and that's what I believe.

Governor Hoke, I'll just agree to the tax credit for education.

She wants to buy into that.

So that's an example of something that the administration is doing.

We have to begin to not throw the baby away with the bathwater.

But what's an example of something you think that you disagree with?

What's her, again, the medical piece is very is hurting, Medicaid cuts.

Pardon me?

Medicaid cuts.

Yes, I agree because my mother just passed away from cancer.

I met and talked with several other families that are struggling right now because they can't get dental.

What is it?

I believe it's called Essential Plan right now.

Central point had the central plan through Excel has been they have been talking to them for years about how their Excel is essential plan dental side is horrible.

The waiting list right now for the U of ours dental school, Eastman Dental, two years out.

So we have all these people that are here locally that don't have access.

So I agree with you all that there are some things that we do need to push back and be vocal about.

But there are some things that are doing well and we need to elevate, Assembly Member Clark, you want to respond to Jessie's email?

Go ahead.

Yeah.

I mean, we saw 450,000 people get kicked off the essential plan due to Medicaid cuts.

It's only going to get worse.

After the election on Jan one.

And we continue to see the eroding of the Medicaid.

You know, we have tried to come up with creative ways, to, to help, both with social determinants of health and the 1115 waiver, but also, you know, having one of the most expansive programs for Medicaid.

And we've been supported by the federal government, in terms of, our ability to do that, the ability there cutting dollars that we just don't have the ability to replace.

And so the question ultimately becomes is, what will this, what will this outcome be in our community?

How will be felt?

But that doesn't even include where we have seen thousands of people who will no longer who are no longer receiving Snap and essential food basics, the the changing on homelessness dollars that are telling us that we will get them unless we criminalize homelessness, whether it's addiction, mental health services like these are all pressures that are being put both at the local level and at the state level, that we are scrambling to figure out how we can sort of stop the bleeding, as we're also trying to talk about things that are super important, like education policy and strong neighborhoods and all these sort of things.

But it's almost like, you know, that the bleeding is coming at us at such a high rate.

And we are saying as a state who, you know, folks would already classify as too high tax as it is.

And how do we plug these holes?

How do we ensure basic services and needs are being met for our, for our residents?

And it is it is a baffling and really hard situation to manage as we head into 2027, with even more cuts coming down early.

Voting has already started by Election day is November 3rd.

We know where you're going to be on election night.

It's on your platforms and we tell the candidates, whatever happens on Election Day, come back, talk to us in the future, stay active and be on this program.

This is your public square.

The websites for the candidates.

Friends of Clianda florence.com is the website for the Republican in the race.

Clianda Florence.

Friends of Clianda Florence.com Sarah Clarke for assembly.com.

The website of the incumbent.

I want to thank them for being with us.

The Democratic incumbent, Sarah Clarke.

Thank you for making time for the program today.

Sorry I was not in studio, but thanks for having me remotely and we thank you for making it work.

And Clianda Florence in studio.

Thank you for making time.

We'll see you soon.

We appreciate your time.

Thank you.

We really appreciate all of the outstanding questions, comments from listeners, from viewers, from our audience members on various platforms.

As your public square, we try to bring the candidates together, and let's salute Clianda Florence and Sarah Clarke for coming on the show together.

They're running against each other.

But that's democracy.

Good for them and good for you.

For participating.

Hoping you've been educated by these conversations from the whole team here.

We'll talk to you tomorrow.

This program is a production of WXXI Public Radio.

The views expressed do not necessarily represent those of this station.

Its staff, management, or underwriters.

The broadcast is meant for the private use of our audience.

Any rebroadcast or use in another medium without expressed written consent of Z is strictly prohibited.

Connections with Evan Dawson is available as a podcast.

Just click on the Connections link.

At WXXI news.org.