Video of yesterday's Council budget hearing as well as briefing papers are posted here.
The lack of commitment
to reducing class size that plagued the DOE through the Bloomberg years and that
continues under the new administration was in full display during the City
Council budget hearings today at City Hall. So was a
lack of transparency, which if anything has worsened under our new Mayor.
First class size: In response to the questions from
the Chair of the Finance Committee Julissa Ferreras about class size
in Renewal schools, Chancellor Farina responded that while class size is about
22-23 in the early grades, instead of lowering class size she will install
reading specialists. Middle school class
sizes are around 29, but she is introducing guidance counselors in these schools
instead, which she considers more important, and in high school, they look at credit
accumulation; (like at Dewey HS?)
Though we
found that 60% of Renewal schools had at least some classes that were 30 or
more, the Chancellor said that “We do not have large class sizes in Renewal
schools generally, because unfortunately (?) enrollment in these schools has
not been as high as it should be.”
Later she
went on to say that some Renewal schools are going to purposely INCREASE class
size, so that they could also do small group instruction (which was eliminated
from schools with the new UFT contract.)
She said the same change would happen in many of the PROSE schools, now able
to violate the class size limits in the union contract, by giving lecture
classes or team teaching, supposedly so that they can also work with struggling
students in smaller groups at other times.
One school apparently combines physics and chemistry – in one room at
one time. Others combine four classes
into one. How any of this will help kids
learn I have no idea, but this appears to be Farina’s favorite innovation. If it is innovation, it appears to be going in
the wrong direction.
Transparency: CM Ferreras
also asked the Chancellor why the capital plan was released over two months late this
year. (It is usually released at the beginning
of February but this year was not released until May.)
The Chancellor said they went over it with “a fine tooth comb” and it
was “revised and revised.”
In fact, almost
nothing in the plan changed except for adding thousands of new preK seats, as
Deputy Chancellor Elizabeth Rose admitted in her testimony later in the day. The DOE did not change the number of K12 seats, nor did they site any of the 4,900
seats (supposedly for class size reduction) that were added in January 2014.
Ferreras said the
lateness of the plan was unacceptable, that legally they were required to submit it by March 1, and the DOE had hampered the
Council’s opportunity to look through the plan carefully.
Chair of the
Education Committee Danny Dromm pointed out that the total of $13.5 billion spent has not
changed the November plan, which was a shame, since the Mayor has announced his intention to add 200K new
units of housing, and the plan was already by DOE admission, 16,000 seats
short. What are the plans going forward
to address the need, considering this shortage?
Farina was less than
direct in her response. Where there are
possible areas for sale, or lease, they will take advantage of it, she said; where they
might be less enrollment, we could shift around spending. Ray Orlando, DOE budget director added, we
have the Education Construction Fund for development potential. We know must keep up with neighborhood
growth. Farina said, some developers are coming
to us with plans where schools will be put into their developments. (like
where?)
Dromm asked why
there was a decrease in the number of new seats since the city’s last ten year
capital plan. Orlando: you should ask Deputy
Chancellor Elizabeth Rose. The ten year
capital plan is updated every April. There are more opportunities to improve.
When Deputy Chancellor Elizabeth Rose appeared in the afternoon to testify about
the capital plan, she was no more forthright in her
responses. She had no answer for why the
plan was months late, only that, fortunately, after being aligned with the city's ten year capital plan, it had changed very little. (!!)
She had no answer for why the DOE still has not sited any of the 4,900
seats for class size reduction, first proposed a year and a half ago in January 2014, only they were still going over the "criteria" for where to put them -- even as they located 6800 new seats for preK in the last few months.
She had no answer for when the DOE would close the gap despite their admitted need for 16,000 more seats. (The real need is much larger.)
She continually described the crisis of school overcrowding that exists in nearly all parts of the city, with nearly half of all students attending schools at 100% utilization or more, as "pocket overcrowding".
She had no answer for why the recommendations
of the Blue Book working group appointed last year to improve the DOE’s
utilization formula for school overcrowding had not yet been released. (Reportedly,
their recommendations were made last December.)
Here is a sample of her exchange with Dromm on this issue:
Dromm: The recommendations
of Blue Book task force were ready months ago. When will they be released?
Rose: We’re looking
forward to releasing them soon as soon as we can.
Dromm: What is the cause
for delay?
Rose: We are
continuing to work this through our agency, what this mean for us.
Ferreras: I’m really
sorry, but you’re not giving us a date. We need to understand and get an
answer. Either tell us when they will be released or explain the delay.
Rose: We are
continuing to work on this and look forward to sharing them with you.
But the lack of transparency around this issue didn’t
compare with the complete misinformation offered by Rose and SCA President
Lorraine Grillo about the state’s contribution to the funding of the plan.
Dromm pointed out that schools are
a far smaller percentage of the new ten year city capital
plan compared to the previous 2008-2017 ten year plan – only 28% compared to
34%, under Bloomberg. (For more in this, see
my testimony.) This is regrettable given that the Mayor
has said education is a priority, Dromm added. He then asked
where the funding for the plan comes from.
Grillo responded that previously, the state had paid for 50% of
the funds for school construction but that now, the city has taken over entire
funding since state building aid is "expiring."
Rose agreed, claiming that the city's portion of ten year capital plan for
schools has more than "now
more than doubled." Because of this, the city will be covering the entire
cost, spending $20.3 billion for school construction and repair compared to
$9.8 billion before.
But none of that is true.
As the
Independent Budget Office reported today, the state formula for building aid for schools has not changed
one iota.
The state is still reimbursing the
city for 50% of the cost.
The only
change is that the city is now floating the bonds rather than the state, with
minimal if any change in cost or risk to the city.
Why is the administration hiding this fact?
The Office of Management and Budget has also inexplicably
taken out all information concerning the state contribution to school
construction and repair out of their ten year capital plan report, as opposed
to every ten year plan produced during the Bloomberg years.
See the
new 10 year capital
plan put out by OMB:
 |
| Education spending in Ten Year Capital strategy (FY 2016-2025) |
 |
| Education spending in Ten Year Capital strategy (FY 2008-2017) |
Why is the DOE now hiding the billions they receive from the state? Is it
their excuse for the inexcusable spending cuts to education they are planning to make?
Whatever the explanation, the misinformation provided today at City Hall
was truly regrettable, and yet more evidence that the officials who are
supposed to be working for parents, concerned citizens, and taxpayers, are
either astonishingly ignorant or refusing to tell us the truth.
