Arne Duncan still arguing for mayoral control -- when the trend is in the opposite direction

Arne Duncan - a fan of mayoral control

In the Sunday Daily News , former Secretary of Education Arne Duncan argued for the extension of Mayoral control.  The official legislative session is supposed to end Wednesday and Mayoral control expires at the end of the month.  Yet considering Arne's unpopular and controversial policies this probably is not the most effective endorsement.  He wrote:

"Mayors who are in control of their schools are directly accountable for the success of those schools. Education becomes a key to the Mayors' success. To put it another way, parents are hard to fool and parents vote."

Really? This certainly is a change of tone from Duncan’s earlier condescending remarks that parents only opposed the Common Core standards after finding out that “their child isn’t as brilliant as they thought they were, and their school isn’t quite as good as they thought they were.”

If NYC parents are so hard to fool, one wonders why can't they have the right to elect a school board as voters do in most of the country? 

Mayor de Blasio and Chancellor Farina have offered their own unconvincing arguments.  The Mayor has said an era of “corruption and chaos” would return if mayoral control is not renewed: 

“Unfortunately a lot of chaos went with that. A lot of corruption went with that. A lot of patronage ... a lot of people went to jail, we’ve got to make sure we never go back to those days.”

Chancellor Farina’s hand-wringing is  even more extreme:

Managers, appointed by the local school boards, inflated the price of contracts to generate lucrative kickbacks that took money directly away from students and siphoned money from taxpayers. One district alone stole $6 million from students, paying 81 employees for jobs they never showed up to. In another, school safety was entrusted to a high-level gang member.

Yet as Patrick Sullivan points out in this blog, mayoral control in NYC has not ensured a lack of corruption.  In fact, several  multi-million dollar fraudulent DOE contracts were paid out while Mayor Bloomberg was in charge, far more costly than anything was stolen during the days of the local school boards.  A huge, potential billion dollar contract was awarded by the DOE in 2015 to a vendor that had engaged in a massive kickback scheme, only to be rejected by City Hall after the media had called attention to it.    Moreover, local school boards lost all power to hire or to award contracts in 1996, years before mayoral control was established, as well as the power to appoint district superintendents. All that authority was given to the Chancellor.  More on that here.  

Arne Duncan famously said in March 2009, “At the end of my tenure, if only seven mayors are in control, I think I will have failed.”"  In fact, no school district in the country adopted this governance system since Duncan made this statement – with Washington DC the last to do so in 2007, according to Wikipedia.

Just this spring, the Illinois Legislature voted to revoke mayoral control in Chicago, Arne’s home town and the first city to adopt the system.  As Chicago residents also found out, mayoral control is no defense against wrong-headed policies, mismanagement or corruption.  In fact, one could argue that autocratic rule makes it even more likely.  Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s first hand-picked CEO of the Chicago public schools, Jean-Claude Brizard, lasted only a 17 months in the job; and the second, Barbara Byrd Bennett, who closed 50 Chicago schools in one year, is now serving an 4 ½  year sentence for kickbacks and self-dealing.

In 2015, Chicago voters overwhelmingly approved an advisory referendum to return to an elected school board, and a bill to do so was introduced in the Legislature.  As one of the co-sponsors, Illinois State Representative Greg Harris explained:

There is only one school district in the State of Illinois that does NOT have an elected school board, and that is the Chicago Public Schools.  Currently all members of the Chicago Board of Education are appointed by Mayor and are not accountable to the parents, students or communities they serve. It is time for a change. That is why I am proud to cosponsor HB 4268 which would change Chicago’s school board from appointees to an elected school board.

We know about the recent pay-to-play scandals rocking CPS. But for our neighborhoods there are so many other reasons that we need to take back control of our schools. We have seen our neighborhood schools losing resources for enrichment programs such as music, art, sports, foreign languages, advanced placement and special education. This year, CPS is proposing over $8.7 million in cuts to schools in our area.

It is also worth noting that at the same time the Board is cutting our schools and asking for a property tax increase, we will be paying $238 million in termination fees to banks and investors to get us out of interest rate swaps and other financial deals that the CPS Board itself instigated.

Mayor Ras Baraka of Newark

Chicago is not alone in its intention to go back to elected school boards.  Detroit just reinstated an elected school board  with the support of its mayor, after many years of "emergency managers" under state and mayoral control.  At least two major cities have successfully resisted adopting mayoral control despite attempts by their Mayors to exert more power: Los Angeles in 2006 and Seattle more recently in 2016. The Mayor of Newark, Ras Baraka, has convinced the New Jersey Governor, Chris Christie, to allow their elected school board to resume authority after 21 years of state control.

So why do Duncan and others of his political persuasion keep promoting this inherently undemocratic system?  Bill Gates poured $4 million into the campaign to allow Mayor Bloomberg to keep control in 2009, as the NY Post then reported for the following reasons:

Microsoft founder and philanthropist Bill Gates — a pal of fellow billionaire Mayor Bloomberg — has secretly bankrolled Learn-NY, the group that joined the campaign led by The Post to extend mayoral control. “You want to allow for experimentation.” The cities where our foundation has put the most money is where there is a single person responsible.

Another big supporter of mayoral control, Bill Gates

Surely, it is always easier to only convince one person in charge to allow for untested policies to be imposed on our public schools and students, in the name of “experimentation,” without having to deal with school boards whose members may have different views.  Indeed, the top-down methods preferred by Gates and corporate reformers are far easier to implement without any of the limitations that messy democracy might require.

So what is the alternative?  As much as I’d like a citywide elected school board to replace the rubber-stamp Panel for Educational Policy, elected school boards are no panacea.  In Denver and more recently in Los Angeles and Oakland wealthy financiers, corporate executives and the charter lobby have combined to spend millions to elect school board members who complacently fall in line with their plans for privatization.  (Watch this terrific video if you haven’t yet of Kate Burnite, a recent Denver high school graduate, excoriating the school board for being in the pocket of Democrats for Education Reform and other privateers.)

Perhaps the simplest alternative would be for the NYC Council to be given the authority to provide some measure of checks and balance in an amended system of mayoral control known as municipal control.  Unacknowledged in all the heated rhetoric about the need to retain mayoral control in its current form is that the Department of Education is the only city agency where the City Council has no real power to affect change – or to exert any counterbalance against damaging policies.  

Right now, the City Council can only influence education by passing bills to try to influence policy through more reporting and/or through the overall budget.  The members have no ability to pass legislation when it comes to school closings, charter schools, testing or any of the myriad issues that deeply affect NYC students. The provision of municipal, local control would be a good first step—and because of strong campaign finance laws in NYC it would be difficult for privateer billionaires to hijack Council elections as they have done in school board elections elsewhere, and in the case of the GOP- and IDC- controlled NY Senate. 

Yet the members of the City Council would have to speak up more strongly to gain this counter-balancing authority over the DOE and our schools.  And the State Legislature tends to be very proprietary about retaining their prerogatives over NYC schools, and all too willing to use it as a bargaining chip, as occurs each time mayoral control comes up for a vote.   

The worst outcome of all would be for the Mayor and the Democratic leadership in the Assembly to trade mayoral control for more charter schools or tuition tax credits, as the Governor and the Senate GOP and IDC leaders seem intent on trying to extort.  Let’s hope this doesn’t happen – make your calls now to your Legislators, if you haven’t yet done this already; more on how to do this here.

A busy day: Protesting billionaires pushing charter schools & then winning our lawsuit vs the DOE on School Leadership Team meetings

Yesterday was quite a day.  In the morning, I protested with AQE and the Hedge Clippers folks, outside an event at the Harvard Club, where Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker was speaking about the referendum to raise the cap on charter schools in his state called Question 2.

This effort has been funded with millions of dollars in "dark money," and we were there to make them feel uncomfortable.  Jeremiah Kittredge of Families for Excellent Schools walked into the building while we were chanting, "Governor Baker epic fail! Our public schools are not for sale!"  FES has poured at least $13.5 million into this election -- without disclosing its donors, although one can assume the money comes mostly from the usual suspects -- Walton family members and NYC hedge fund operators.

After the meeting, Baker was scheduled to meet with Bloomberg, trolling for even more bucks -- after Bloomberg had already given $240,000 to the effort.  Meanwhile, all over the country, from California to New York, Washington to Georgia, billionaires are trying to buy  school board races, judgeship elections, referendums, and control of the NY State Senate - all with the same nationwide goal of privatizing public schools, and wresting them from democratic control. 

Then I returned back to my office and learned that the Appellate Court had finally ruled on our lawsuit to keep School Leadership Team meetings open, which the DOE had closed to the public starting in 2013. To make a long story short, we won!  Here is our press release, and here are articles about the decision in the Daily News, the Village Voice and Chalkbeat.  

The backstory is this: In order to test DOE's determination to close these meetings, and to challenge a particularly weak decision by another judge who ruled for DOE in the Portelos case, retired teacher Michael P. Thomas asked to attend an SLT meeting at Portelos' former school, IS 49 on Staten Island, in March 2014.  After initially getting permission, the SLT Chair turned him down, and he was blocked when he tried to enter the building.  

He then sued the DOE on May 17, 2014, and Class Size Matters and Public Advocate Tish James intervened shortly thereafter to represent parents and the public's right to know.    Judge Peter Moulton ruled in our favor in a slam-dunk decision on April 2015, but the Chancellor Fariña told principals to ignore the decision and appealed it.  

The Appellate court heard arguments from both sides on January 21, 2016 -- and took nearly a year to rule.  But finally, in another slam-dunk, unanimous decision, they reaffirmed the lower Court ruling that SLT's are public bodies in state governance law, and thus their meetings must be open to the public. Much thanks goes to Michael Thomas, Tish James and the attorneys from NY Lawyers for Public Interest and Advocates for Justice who represented the Public Advocate and Class Size Matters in court.

Yet what has been particularly galling to me throughout has been the DOE's lame argument that they could close these meetings because SLT's, made up of half parents and half school staff, were purely "advisory" bodies.  This sort of dismissive -- and frankly illegal -- attitude towards parent participation in decision-making has continued over from the Bloomberg administration.

In 2007, when Chancellor Klein tried to strip the authority of School Leadership meetings by rewriting the Chancellor's regs, I helped Marie Pollicino, a parent SLT member from Queens, submit an appeal to State Commissioner Mills.  Mills also found in our favor, forcing Klein to rewrite the regs and recognize the authority of SLTs to write Comprehensive Education Plans for their schools and be consulted on a range of issues, including a school-based budget aligned with the CEP, as the law clearly requires. (A timeline of these events  is on Class Size Matters' website.) And yet now, despite Mayor de Blasio's promise that parents would finally be respected and their input taken seriously, it was happening all over again.  De Blasio also promised increased transparency as to education spending, but that pledge has been ignored as well.

Sadly, even now Chancellor Fariña and the DOE attorneys seem uncertain as to whether to concede after two, overwhelmingly decisive court opinions against their position. In the Daily News, a DOE spokesperson is quoted as saying, "The state Legislature never intended to mandate that SLT meetings be open to the general public.  We are considering our options.” Really?  If so, why does NY State Education law 2590-h say  that each school must "provide notice of monthly [SLT] meetings that is consistent with the open meetings law"?  

And why did the previous Chancellor, Dennis Walcott agree that these meetings were open to the public?  After a principal kicked a Riverdale Review reporter out of an SLT meeting in January 2013, the DOE spokesperson repudiated this action after consulting their legal department, saying that "Generally, these meetings are open to the public except if an executive session is being held."  A power point is still posted on the DOE website from the Walcott era, which states "SLT meetings are open to the public.  Teams may find that observers from within the school community or beyond wish to attend SLT meetings." 

Let's hope that DOE doesn't appeal the Court's ruling once again.  Meanwhile, please share this decision with other parents, community members and reporters -- and let them know that as of yesterday, they have a right to attend any School Leadership Team meeting they choose.

 

Does DOE have a race problem? Preet Bharara says yes

Yesterday,  US Attorney Preet Bharara sued NYC DOE for taking no action against a principal, Minerva Zanca, who allegedly discriminated against three black  teachers at the Pan American International High School in Elmhurst - making outrageously racist comments and urging the Assistant Principal to find their performance unsatisfactory so they could be fired. The DOE's refusal to act continued even after protests at the school, the media ran stories about the case in July 2013, the teachers filed lawsuits, and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found in their favor in May 2014.

See Norm Scott's blog today about a letter sent to the Superintendent and several DOE administrators from the teachers at the school in June 2013..  The staff complained about the principal creating an "abusive environment and culture of fear",  cuts to programs for students with interrupted formal education [SIFE],  and an  increase in class sizes, leading to the decision of many teachers to flee the school.

When the DOE took no action, this was followed by a petition that garnered more than 45,000 signatures, highlighting the racist behavior of the principal, press releases from the school's staff, and rallies at the school in July 2013 which were covered by the media, when these teachers filed complaints.   See below, a TV news segment from Channel 11 news and Channel 7 news, with interviews with two of the teachers and the assistant principal involved.

Norm also mentions that the other Assistant Principal at the school at the time, who didn't go public with any complaints was Monica Garg, now the controversial principal of Central Park East II.

According to the US Attorney's office, the DoE refused to act even when the EEOC tried to resolve the issue through conciliation. At that point the EEOC referred the case to their office.

The allegations in the legal papers are stunning.  Here is the press release and here is the legal complaint.

The Chancellor is ultimately responsible for inaction, but in my experience the DOE attorneys are also profoundly incompetent and irresponsible. Read the articles here:  Buzzfeed , NYPost,  Mo4ch News, and the  NYTimes.

The Perdido St blogger contends that these unfair attacks on teachers are rampant at NYC schools, compounded by the fact that they no longer have the right to grieve unsatisfactory ratings by administrators and enough U ratings can lead to loss of their jobs - though the blatant racism exhibited in this case makes it more offensive (and if true, clearly illegal).  CORRECTION: Arthur Goldstein points out that the lowest ratings are now called Ineffective, not U, that all teachers can appeal Ineffective ratings, though only 13% to a panel that includes a neutral arbitrator. The rest are appealed back to the DOE.

This case provides the most telling evidence yet that the DOE has a real blind spot when it comes to race, or worse.  Add to this the administration's slowness to take action to improve diversity and integration at public schools until recently, and their refusal to change the admissions policies of five of the specialized high schools and the evidence grows. More on this soon. 

Are 5,485 classes this fall that violate the union contractual class sizes a cause to celebrate?

Update:  I've added videos of Assemblymember Jeff Aubry and CM Donovan Richards.  More on the press conference, including some quotes from me in the Daily News, Chalkbeat,  Schoolbook, NY Post and PoliticoNY. See also the UFT website for more stats.


Today, Michael Mulgrew, the President of the UFT,  organized a press conference on the steps of Tweed about class size.  He thanked our   legislators for bringing home more education funds for NYC schools in last year's state budget, and the Mayor and the Chancellor for seeing that much of it went to schools.  He applauded the fact that there were fewer class size violations during the second week of school than last year, 5,485 compared to 6,447 the year before.  Then he added that we needed to  push to ensure that the full $2 billion extra that we are owed by the state as a result of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity decision in 2003 -- 12 years ago-- is finally provided to our schools.

According to UFT data, more than 3,400 high school classes exceeded the 34 students permitted in the teachers contract, and in elementary and middle schools, more than 2,000 classes exceeded thecap with class size limits range from 25 in Kindergarten to 32-33 students.  Which means that  about 150,000 students -- or more than 10% of all students -- may be disadvantaged by being crammed into classes of more than 32 or 34 kids per class. 

Guillermo Linares, Donovan Richards, Nick Perry, Bill Perkins and me.

Also speaking with passion and conviction about the need to reduce class size and the importance of NYC schools getting their fair share of funding were Assemblymembers Keith Wright, Guillermo Linares and Nick Perry; and Senators Velmanette Montgomery and Bill Perkins.

Assemblymember Keith Wright pointed out that "“There’s no secret to improving schools," merely great teachers and small classes.  "We have great teachers and now all we need is smaller class sizes." Senator Perkins said,  "Even Stevie Wonder can see that class size matters."

 Here's Assemblymember Jeff Aubry on the inequities of class size in NYC compared to elsewhere in the state:

Of course money matters!

,

City Council Education chair Danny Dromm, and Council Members Alan Maisel, Julissa Ferreras, Mark Levine, Corey Johnson spoke about how class size matters and their commitment to fair funding.  Council Member Donovan Richards of Queens said it was a matter of social justice, and that he almost fell through the cracks because of class size at Jamaica high school (now closed.).

Council Members Dromm and Maisel, both former teachers, said they simply couldn't do their best with the large classes they were assigned.



When it was my turn, I said that Cuomo has a moral obligation to fulfill the judgement of the state's highest court, which found that NYC kids were deprived of their constitutional right because of excessive class size. I pointed out the smaller classes were the top priority of parents in the DOE own surveys, and a top priority of most teachers as well.

But I added that the Mayor and the Chancellor also have a real responsibility to reduce class size in our schools, especially since they had made repeated promises to do so, that have gone so far unmet.  Here are some of the pledges they have made,  in relation to another contractual commitment -- the Contracts for Excellence law passed in 2007 that required NYC to reduce class size in all grades:

Bill de Blasio on June 14, 2013, at a Mayoral forum at Murry Bergtraum HS  at which he promised to commit to specific class size goals and if necessary, raise funds to pay for this.  You can see how he checked off the form and signed it himself:

Bill de Blasio in July 2013,  in his completed KidsPAC candidate survey, in which he promised to set reduced class size goals to achieve by the end of his first term, which he has failed to do, as well as achieve the city's original Contracts for Excellence class size goals of 20 in K-3, 23 in 4th-8th grade, and 25 in HS classes:

DOE in December 2015, in their official response to public comment to their C4E plan.

For the 2015-16 School Year, NYCDOE will focus Class Size Reduction planning efforts on the School Renewal Program. The criteria for selecting Renewal Schools is [sic] aligned with C4E goals to target schools with the greatest needs.  

DOE, now, in their current C4E power point (see slide 14):

Yet we have reports of many schools on the Renewal list that have huge class sizes, including some  that violate the union contract. At PS 111 in Queens, Kindergarten class sizes have risen to 27 this fall,  and to 30 in 1st grade.  Long Island City high school, another Renewal school, was reported as having the 4th highest number of class size violations, at 140.  

We have repeatedly asked DOE for a list of Renewal schools where they have actually lowered class size, and to what levels, without success. Reporter Patrick Wall of Chalkbeat tried as well: 

"Education department spokeswoman Devora Kaye said the city shares the goal of reducing class sizes. She would not say whether the city has set any specific targets around class size, or what steps it is taking to create smaller classes in Renewal schools."

Meanwhile, here is the list of Renewal schools with the most UFT class size violations as of September 18:

According to the UFT, Long Island City, Richmond Hill, and Martin Van Buren HS have since reduced their contractual violations to zero or nearly so. But violations mean classes of 35 or more, and reducing them to zero could mean class sizes at 34 - far from the C4E goal of 25 or less. 

These class sizes are unconscionable for students who are way behind, in schools in danger of closing, whose classes should be capped at 25 or less to give them a real chance to succeed.   This is especially true as the city has a surplus of $7 billion, the Mayor promised us he would reduce class size and yet has been silent on this since his election, and the DOE specifically claimed they would focus their efforts at lowering class size in the struggling schools.

At the end of the press conference, Michael Mulgrew was asked about the fact that the Chancellor Farina does not agree that reducing class size should be a priority; and how she has made that clear to parents at numerous town hall meetings.  He responded that  the union will "keep pushing" and emphasize that "we are willing to work" with the administration on class size.  Let's hope they push hard, and make progress with a Mayor and a Chancellor who are not on the same page as parents and teachers on this critical issue.

On Nov. 15, we will see whether class sizes have significantly declined this year citywide or in  the Renewal schools, when the city releases their annual class size reports.