|
Speeches
Contact: 212.669.4813
January 29, 2009
Testimony of Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum
Public Hearing on School Governance
Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum said, “Thank you, Assemblymember Nolan and Committee members for inviting me to this hearing and for holding this important discussion.
In the fall of 2007, I appointed a commission at your request to independently assess school governance in New York City. On September 4th, 2008 I received the final report of the Commission on School Governance.
The Commission on School Governance heard hours of testimony from individuals and organizations that represent broad and diverse constituencies, as well as the views of parents at forums held in all five boroughs and at three public hearings. Additionally, we commissioned eight academic papers from top experts on the issue, so that the Commission could better understand and learn from the experiences of other cities.
I am also pleased to report that just a few weeks ago, the Brookings Institute Press published a new book, When Mayors Take Charge: School Governance in the City. This book, which acts as a companion to the Commission’s final report, contains a letter from me, a prologue from the Commission’s chairperson Steve Aiello, the articles we commissioned from leading experts, and two new articles from the executive director of the Commission, Joe Viteritti. This is the only book that examines Mayoral Control in New York City.
Overall, I agree with the Commission’s findings and recommendations: We should maintain mayoral control, but the law must be amended to ensure greater public accountability and meaningful input from parents and the community.
In order to maintain mayoral control, the mayor must have the majority of the appointments on the Panel for Education Policy. But I support the idea of fixed terms for its members, and I believe that the Panel should be comprised of people with relevant backgrounds and a stake in the education system.
However, I am opposed to the Commission’s recommendation that the Panel for Education Policy be involved in collective bargaining agreements. Third-party approval would undermine collective bargaining by empowering an entity that is not involved in the process.
It is clear that we need to have more oversight over the finances and data produced by the Department of Education (DOE). I enthusiastically endorse the idea that the Independent Budget Office serve as an outside evaluator to monitor and assess the data produced by the DOE, such as test scores and graduation rates.
And, since the DOE spends billions of public dollars, they must follow the same procurement procedures as every other city agency does.
For mayoral control to be most effective, the local geographic school districts created decades ago should be re-established and re-invigorated. Parents desperately need help when they have problems or questions. A central call center, like the one the Mayor just announced, is a step in the right direction but cannot substitute for viable local resources. And the superintendents must be more accountable to the districts they represent. Members of parent associations should be given the chance to run for the Community District Education Council.
As you know, it is difficult to legislate greater opportunities for community and parental input. By recommending that the Panel be given more independence, district offices reestablished, the eligibility criteria for the CDEC expanded, and that the state legislature establish standards of meaningful public input, the Commission’s report lays the groundwork for stronger community and parent participation. But there is much more to be done. The State’s Contracts for Excellence model for parental involvement, cited in the report, is a good start and an approach with which the State Senate has experience.
Meaningful public participation under mayoral control is one of the essential checks and balances which must be fortified in the new law. The public participation law and regulations that were created for use in implementing the Contract for Excellence and the Campaign for Fiscal Equity settlement require consultation with the public and stakeholders in the development of a proposal; public hearings in every borough; adequate public notice of the proposed decision and hearings made available to the public in a variety of languages, electronically, in the media, and in schools and Department of Education offices; provision of transparent and accessible data and information regarding the decision to allow the public to evaluate the basis for the decision; 30 day comment period; public posting of the decision; public right to appeal the decision; a complaint process for improper implementation; and audit by the City Comptroller.
Such a comprehensive process could be reserved for decisions with broad budget implications and widespread impact across the District. Elements of this approach—adequate notice, consultation with or comment by parents and relevant stakeholders, provision of information, public forums, right of appeal and process for complaints—can be incorporated at the community school district, CEC, and school levels or for lesser citywide decisions.
According to the Commission’s report, an increased capacity for change is the “single most important and measurable advantage of mayoral control.” The New York City school system has seen more change in the last few years than it has in generations. We are now at a point where we can determine what changes will improve the school governance structure for New York City.
Some may believe that the Commission’s final report does not adequately assess the current governance arrangement under Mayor Bloomberg and Chancellor Klein. Although I understand this criticism, the purpose of this effort was to develop a framework for the future regardless of who is appointed mayor and chancellor. I think the Commission has done that.
Moreover, there are those who will disagree with the findings in the Commission’s final report, but there is no question that, by and large, its findings reflect the views of stakeholders expressed throughout this process. Passions and tensions run high when debating the issue, but the debate must take place. The Commission has established a framework in which this debate can and should continue. I’m confident that through an open and deliberative discussion, school governance in New York City can be improved.”
|
