City’s Education Funding Plans Face Criticism
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
Supporters of the lawsuit that resulted in increased funding for the city’s public schools are trying to force the city to rewrite its plan for how to spend the money, and one source said there has even been talk of another lawsuit if the city does not relent.
The original lawsuit, brought by the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, ended last year with a state agreement to pour $5.4 billion extra dollars into the city schools. The city made its first proposal for how to spend a portion of those funds, the $228 million governed by a state accountability plan, last Friday. The CFE’s executive director, Geri Palast; the city teachers union; an advocacy group, Class Size Matters, and the lawsuit’s original plaintiff, City Council Member Robert Jackson, have all criticized the plan.
“There’s a fundamental clash here between the way the city went about doing this and what the clear intent of the law was,” another critic, Michael Rebell, who was the lead lawyer for the CFE, said.
One portion of funds, $17 million, will finance a new testing program. The city says the plan meets the goal of raising students’ “time on-task,” but the president of the teachers union, Randi Weingarten, challenged whether a testing system would contribute to instruction.
Another portion of the funds, more than $133 million, will be allocated at principals’ discretion. A Department of Education spokeswoman, Debra Wexler, said officials worked closely with principals to guide their choices, which were restricted by the state goals. The city describes the funding as guided empowerment, but critics, including Mr. Rebell, characterize it as a lack of a coherent plan.
A final plan is due to be submitted to the state July 15, following a series of hearings this week. Ms. Wexler said the department would listen to the public feedback and “make refinements to the proposal as appropriate.”
Ms. Palast, Ms. Weingarten, and Mr. Jackson said that if the plan was not revised, they would urge state officials to reject it.
Ms. Palast said litigation would be a last resort. “Before we consider further court action, we must raise a ruckus here and now,” she said.
