mayoral control clash

De Blasio skips Senate hearing, angering lawmakers with mayoral control on the line

PHOTO: Monica Disare
Mayor Bill de Blasio holds a press conference to call for an extension of mayoral control.

In the ongoing tussle over school governance in New York City, Mayor Bill de Blasio offered a compromise Wednesday — and said he was resting his case.

The mayor reduced his request from seven years of continued control to three, the amount the Democrat-controlled state Assembly voted in favor of this week. But he also announced on Wednesday that he would not attend the second scheduled mayoral control hearing on Thursday, backing out of a long-scheduled event and drawing the ire of Senate Republicans who will vote on any extension.

In a press conference Wednesday afternoon, de Blasio defended his education record alongside prominent New York City business leaders who urged state lawmakers to renew the mayoral control law. De Blasio also pointed out that he already sat for one lengthy Senate hearing on mayoral control earlier this month.

“I think to go to Albany and spend four hours answering any and all questions, literally every single question that was offered, I think that was a great show of respect and we covered the subject matter well,” he said.

Still, his decision to skip the second hearing immediately drew criticism from Senate Republicans, who stand in the way of a long-term extension and others who are wary of de Blasio’s education agenda.

The most powerful member of the state Senate, Majority Leader John Flanagan, sent out a swift response saying he is “extremely disappointed” by de Blasio’s decision. Flanagan, a Republican who formerly headed the Senate education committee, also criticized de Blasio when he did testify at a state hearing on the issue two weeks ago, calling his knowledge of city schools “disturbing.”

The current chair or the Senate education committee, Republican Carl Marcellino, was also “disappointed” that the mayor will not attend the second hearing, according to a statement from his office.

Several advocacy groups opposed to de Blasio’s education policies joined the fray Wednesday, and planned to rally outside Thursday’s hearing.

“Mayoral control was put in place to bring accountability to public education, not to allow City Hall to escape scrutiny,” said Jenny Sedlis, the executive director of StudentsFirstNY, a pro-charter school group that has frequently battled with de Blasio. “The mayor wants the authority without taking responsibility for his failed education record.”

Even de Blasio’s allies questioned his decision to miss the hearing.

Assembly Education Committee Chair Catherine Nolan said she thinks is it “outrageous” that the Senate would expect him to testify again. Still, she said:“If I were the mayor, I would have went.”

De Blasio’s move ensures a bumpy ride over the next few weeks as the state legislature decides whether to extend mayoral control and, if so, for how long. The back-and-forth between de Blasio and state lawmakers has been underway since last year, when the mayor asked for a permanent extension of mayoral control and got one year instead.

People on both sides of the debate tend to agree that mayoral control is an improvement over the previous system of many local school boards, and that de Blasio is likely to get an extension. De Blasio often argues that mayoral control has allowed him to tackle big projects, like universal prekindergarten, and that it makes him accountable for progress in city schools.

However, his adversaries in Albany also realize signing off on a long-term extension would mean sacrificing a political bargaining chip.

The Assembly passed a bill on Tuesday extending mayoral control for three years. Over 100 business executives also signed a letter to lawmakers asking for a long-term extension, and many of those appeared with de Blasio at City Hall today.

“There is no justification for exposing more than a million students to the turmoil that would result from the expiration of a system that has served the city well,” the letter reads.

Who Is In Charge

CPS to enforce nine training sessions for local school council members

PHOTO: Elaine Chen
Local school council members at a training session on Tuesday

In a classroom at Bogan High School Tuesday, trainer Jose Ortiz quizzed four local school council members on why they have to hold public meetings before approving their school improvement plan, a key document outlining school priorities and direction. The room fell silent.

“Because,” he answered himself, “the worst thing that the local school council could do is not consult the community.”

Ortiz’s training session illustrated the challenges that Chicago Public Schools faces in ensuring that all members of the powerful councils understand their roles and responsibilities.

The district requires those who help govern its 646 schools each attend around 18 hours of in-person training, or nine online modules. But not everyone complies: Ortiz said that last week, around 10 people attended each module he taught, and on Tuesday, only four people sat through his class. Most council members take the training online, but the effectiveness of those modules is questionable, council members said.

In a district whose school board is appointed by the mayor instead of elected by city residents, the councils, as Ortiz pointed out, serve as important channels enabling residents to drive the direction of their children’s education. Normally consisting of 12 members, including the principal, teachers, parents, and community members, the councils hire and evaluate the principal, approve the budget, and help craft two-year school improvement plans for their schools.

Chicago schools have another problem with the councils: 47 percent of schools have failed to field enough candidates to fill seats, which then allows sitting council members to fill the vacancies. That means less electoral control for residents. It’s unclear if the training requirement deters people from seeking council seats.

Nevertheless, district officials said that this year they will enforce the training requirement and will contact members who fail to finish it.

“We are going to start removing people this year, but it will be after contacting them by email, through phone and then giving them an opportunity before we schedule a hearing, and then we will consider removing them,” said Guillermo Montes de Oca, director of the Office of Local School Council Relations.

As Ortiz continued with his training, he asked if members remember approving their school improvement plan in the past school year. The attendees looked at him with puzzled faces.

“Oh yes, I remember now,” said Andrea Sanchez, a council member at Richard J. Daley Elementary Academy. But, she added, “it’s just overwhelming because you’re looking at numbers and pages, especially when you’re not used to seeing it.” Sanchez has been a council member since December, but she had attended only one out of the nine mandatory training modules before Tuesday, because most of the two-hour sessions were held in various locations throughout the city far from her home.

According to the Illinois School Code, council members must finish all modules within six months of taking office, so newly elected members who take office on July 1 have until Dec. 31 to complete the modules. CPS has never removed a council member for not finishing the training, said Guillermo Montes de Oca. However, that’s changing.

This year, CPS has also been encouraging council members to finish the modules by July 31, he said, because “if you’re going to be seated, discussing the budget and everything, you need to be informed.”

Sanchez said she didn’t know know about the six-month deadline until Tuesday. She wishes the nine modules would be held all at once at her school. “The information in the modules should be given to us right away [upon joining the council],” she said.

Montes de Oca said that the Office of Local School Council Relations encourages council members to take the training online. Especially because the office only offers a few modules per month, to meet the July 31 deadline, council members would have to take most of their training online.

But the attendees Tuesday seemed to prefer the in-person trainings . Denishia Perkins, a council member at Shields Middle School for almost two years, said that she had taken all the training modules online, but they “didn’t do much for me.” The online training consists of clicking through slides of bullet-pointed information and then taking a short quiz at the end of each module.

“It’s so possible to get elected and not know about this stuff,” Perkins said. So she decided to attend the in-person training on Tuesday.

Sanchez said of Ortiz’s class, “It felt one-on-one, and he’s really explaining it to you.”

The trainings are not the only impediment to filling local school council seats.

A representative from the parent group Raise Your Hand told the Sun-Times that people may not want to run for a council position because “people are a little frustrated at the weakening of the local school council.” Currently, 50 percent of principals’ evaluations rely on CPS’ data and metrics, when previously the evaluations relied solely on the council members’ judgment.

Sanchez said that the work of councils are just not advertised enough, and many parents like  her already are involved with jobs or other organizations.

“I don’t think the parents know that we’re that important,” Sanchez said. “I didn’t know either.”

performance based

Aurora superintendent is getting a bonus following the district’s improved state ratings

Aurora Public Schools Superintendent Rico Munn. (Photo by Andy Cross/The Denver Post)

Aurora’s school superintendent will receive a 5 percent bonus amounting to $11,820, in a move the board did not announce.

Instead, the one-time bonus was slipped into a routine document on staff transitions.

Tuesday, the school board voted on the routine document approving all the staff changes, and the superintendent bonus, without discussion.

The document, which usually lists staff transfers, resignations, and new hires, included a brief note at the end that explained the additional compensation by stating it was being provided because of the district’s rise in state ratings.

“Pursuant to the superintendent’s contract, the superintendent is entitled to a one-time bonus equal to 5 percent of his base salary as the result of the Colorado Department of Education raising APS’ district performance framework rating,” the note states.

The superintendent’s contract, which was renewed earlier this year, states the superintendent can receive up to a 10 percent bonus per year for improvements in state ratings. The same bonus offer was in Munn’s previous contract with the district.

The most recent state ratings, which were released in the fall, showed the state had noted improvements in Aurora Public Schools — enough for the district to be off the state’s watchlist for low performance. Aurora would have been close to the five years of low-performance ratings that would have triggered possible state action.

“I am appreciative of the Board’s recognition of APS’ overall improvement,” Superintendent Munn said in a statement Wednesday. “It is important to recognize that this improvement has been thanks to a team effort and as such I am donating the bonus to the APS Foundation and to support various classroom projects throughout APS.”

This is the only bonus that Munn has received in Aurora, according to a district spokesman.

In addition to the bonus, and consistent with his contract and the raises other district employees will receive, Munn will also get a 2.93 percent salary increase on July 1. This will bring his annual salary to $243,317.25.

At the end of the board meeting, Bruce Wilcox, president of the teachers union questioned the way the vote was handled, asking why the compensation changes for teachers and compensation changes for other staff were placed as separate items on the meeting’s agenda, but the bonus was simply included at the bottom of a routine report, without its own notice.

“It is clear that the association will unfortunately have to become a greater, louder voice,” Wilcox said. “It is not where we want to be.”