Mike Klonsky reviews the 20-year history of mayoral control in Chicago and concludes it has been a disaster. His account should serve as a warning to other cities.
Under mayoral control, democracy was lost. The schools became a patronage mill. Chicago launched Paul Vallas and Arne Duncan, both of whom claimed miraculous results that were non-existent.
“Duncan’s funneling of federal dollars to promote this so-called “reform” agenda, required big-city mayors to serve as enforcers, leading Obama’s appointed secretary of education to declare in 2009: “At the end of my tenure, if only seven mayors are in control, I think I will have failed.” Today there are basically three left: Chicago, New York and Washington, D.C. In a dozen other cities, mayoral control has been junked or thrown out by the courts.” (Cleveland, D.C., and Boston also have mayoral control.)
Klonsky says it is time to have an elected school board after 20 years of failure.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Mike is absolutely right. The undermining of democratic rights and elected govt. is a disastrous direction.
LikeLike
Paul Vallas has appeared on the short list to be considered as a candidate for Supt. of LAUSD. He, like John Deasy, had questionable academic creds…but Cortines and the BoE doesn’t seem to mind.
LikeLike
Aahhh Chicago where I heard the CEO of Netflix openly say that the key to reforming education was getting rid of the elected school board.
LikeLike
Will, getting rid of the local elected school board didn’t do much for Chicago, did it?
LikeLike
HOW PUBLIC SCHOOL GOVERNANCE WORKS IN CHICAGO:
Jesse Ruiz, a current appointee to Chicago’s unelected School Board, appeared at a forum held at the City Club of Chicago last February 2, 2015. It was a discussion about whether Chicago should keep its appointed (by the mayor) school board, or return to the old system of having citizens elect a board. The return to an elected board was overwhelmingly endorsed by Chicago’s citizens in a non-binding vote last spring.
In defending the unelected Chicago School Board upon which he sits, Jesse opened his mouth and made some “WTF-did-he-just-say?!” statements that were, thankfully, captured for posterity on video.
NOTE: Earlier this summer, Jesse was also briefly the interim Chicago Schools CEO (not Superintendent… schools are a business in Chi-town) when the then-CEO Barbara Byrd-Bennett had to resign after prosecutors announced an investigation of her conflict-of-interests in spearheading a multi-million-dollar contract to a principals’ training organization that she had ties to… but that’s another story.
Anyway, back to Jesse Ruiz, who, years ago, was also appointed to the Illinois’ State Board of Ed, where he served for several years. At Ruiz’ aforementioned appearance at a City Club of Chicago forum, Jesse started talking about how hundreds of school districts in Illinois had elected boards, and while serving on the Illinois board, he got along well with the members of those elected boards—he calls them his “colleagues”.
However, Ruiz nevertheless argues that Chicago must not have an elected school board, and made the following justification:
(here’s the video.. go to about 06:58 – 07:35)
(06:59 – 07:35)
JESSE RUIZ, Chicago Board of Ed.: “But for our city, I honestly do believe that it would be best left as it is, as an appointed school board, because it’s an incredibly complicated and diverse district. There are very difficult decisions to be made, and sometimes they’re not very popular decisions, and I would have to—I WOULD HATE to have to worry about my next election when making a vote.
“I NEVER worry about that. I’ve NEVER HAD TO worry about that, or worry about WHO, WHO… uhhh… I am pleasing, or un-pleasing with my vote. All I worry about is what’s best for the students in the city of Chicago. And so therefore, that’s the system that I prefer.”
—————————
I don’t know about your, but Jesse’s really “un-pleasing” me with his justification for the 20-years-and-counting cancellation of popular democracy in the governance of Chicago’s public schools, and where the corporate reformers and profiteers that bankrolled Rahm Emanuel’s election now drive the policy… and not Chicago’s citizens.
How about you? Are you as “un-pleased” with Board Member Ruiz’s comments as I?
You can extrapolate this Chicago scenario to other situations… say… that of Hitler after he passed the 1933 “Enabling Act” that dissolved the Weimar Republic and its democracy in early 1930’s Germany. I can just see Adolph sitting around with Goering and Goebbels shooting the breeze.
HITLER: “But for the Reich, I honestly do believe that it would be best left as it is, subject to my dictates as Fuehrer. There are very difficult decisions to be made, and sometimes they’re not very popular decisions, and I would have to—I WOULD HATE to have to worry about my next election when making a vote.
“I NEVER worry about that. I’ve NEVER HAD TO worry about that, or worry about WHO, WHO… uhhh… I am pleasing, or un-pleasing with my vote. All I worry about is what’s best for the citizens of the Third Reich. And so that’s the system that I prefer.”
Yeah, I BET you do, Adolph.
You could write the same parody for Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, or whatever undemocratic dictator you choose.
But seriously, that’s how democracy works. When some policy implementation is unpopular and “un-pleasing” with the citizen-taxpayers—no matter how much Board Member Ruiz, or his corporate masters, or how much any elected official is desirous of such implementation—that fear of being removed from office in an upcoming election is a necessary check-and-balance, one that reins in Ruiz and his fellow Board members from doing something that the voters—his ultimate “bosses” in a democracy—do not want to happen. The will of the people will prevail in this scenario… theoretically, at least.
This was particularly relevant when Ruiz and his unelected Board closed 50 traditional public schools—with them replaced by privately-run charters—despite overwhelming polling saying that the tax-paying citizens of Chicago would be very “un-pleased” by this. (I know, I’m beating the “un-pleased” joke to death… that was the last one.)
At the very least, these schools being closed had elected Local Schoolsite Councils (LSC’s) made up of parents and community members, with albeit minimal decision-making power. The privately-managed charters that are currently in the process of replacing them, however, have no such LSC’s, and thus, the parents have ZERO input. Parents are barred from the meetings of that board, which are held in secret, and chaired by businessmen who have ZERO experience as teachers and/or administrators.
LikeLike
…and once again LA emulates the worst of Chicago education politics…notice below that former LA mayor Villaraigosa who is in Eli Broad’s pocket and who supported John Deasy and the charterizing of LAUSD (and strived to be the prime ed decider ala Rahm and Bloomberg), who is now presumed to be running for Governor, turned up on the Search Groups list of viable candidates to be Supt of LAUSD.
In LA yesterday, we learned, as added insult to our freedom, that the search group soliciting for a new Superintendent for LAUSD, chose 43 candidates, and at least 8 are prominent, and very dangerous charter school operators and/or supporters who are non educators. These listed are only the people i am informed about (and who should never have appeared on the list)…most are Broad Academy people, and others are Wall Street oligarchs.
Caprice Young, Eric Holder, Thelma Melendez, Henry Cisneros, Marshall Tuck, Paul Vallas, Antonio Villaraigosa, Ted Mitchell, John King, MaryEllen Elia, Some of these are proven failures in past jobs, some are proven free marketeers, some are borderline dishonest, some have worked for the most questionable people like Fetullah Gulen, some have been fired for their behaviors, some are not educators, and the Broadies among them are openly pro charter, so why are they named for this top job?
At least 1 out of 4 choices of the 43 (many I just do not know) are such misfits to oversee the second largest public school district in the nation that it is almost laughable, but I have tears in my eyes. As you will see, some are prominent politicos and are Democrats.
This search committee, chosen by Ramon Cortines and the BoE, is so inept that few showed up at the ‘rigged’ public meetings set up only for community anger release and phony input. And all of this once again is paid for by we impotent taxpayers, with a base bill of $250,000…and this in a time when the district reports it is near bankruptcy.
We are once again ruled by the heavy and dictatorial hand of Eli Broad and his vulture investor partners.
One explanation of how this all comes to pass, is the linked article by Chris Hedges wherein he writes about TPP and how this treacherous legislation, finally available for all to read, will include a takeover of all public agencies including the Post Office and also public schools.
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_most_brazen_corporate_power_grab_in_american_history_20151106/
Keep thinking ALEC and the oligarchs.
LikeLike
This “City Club of Chicago Forum” on Elected-vs.-Appointed-School-Boards could be subject of an article in its own right, as in watching it, there’s so much there to consider.
Later on at this forum, Ruiz claims that keeping the board appointed also keeps forces from “inserting more politics” into Board operations, and prevents union-backed candidates from having influence on contracts.
Jesse insists, “I don’t have to raise a dime from anybody. I don’t have to worry about my next campaign…” to get elected or re-elected.
Jitu Brown, a community activist, and proponent of having an elected school board, counters this, referencing the cushy no-bid contracts, where school buildings / annual school budgets are turned over to the Charter Management Organizations like the “Academy for Urban School Leadership” (AUSL), while former/future AUSL officials are serving on the board.
Can you say “conflict of interest”?
Jitu also references the community’s grassroots fight to keep open Dyett High School, the only remaining traditional (non-charter) public high school (“open-enrollment”) in the Bronzeville neighborhood.
( 30:24 – 31:42 )
( 30:24 – 31:42 )
JITI BROWN: “I got a question for you, though, Jesse.”
JESSE RUIZ: “Yes?”
JITI BROWN: “How could it be any more ‘POLITICAL’ than it is RIGHT NOW?? I mean HONESTLY! You have the Chief Operations Officer for Chicago Public Schools who’s the former CEO of ‘The Academy of Urban School Leadership.’ (AUSL charter chain)
“You have the Board President of the Chicago Board of Education, who is the former Board President of ‘The Academy of Urban School Leadership’ . They (AUSL) get schools (turned over to them) with no-bid contracts. They (AUSL) just—and despite the fact that they (AUSL) have (failed initially and) had to turn around THEIR OWN turn-arounds at two high schools TWICE! They (AUSL) have had to restart Phillips (High School) TWICE! They (AUSL) have had to restart Orr (High School) TWICE! How could it be more… (political)’?
“Right now, right now, the mayor of Chicago… was… this morning was at (Charter School organization) LITTLE BLACK PEARL, which is a politically-connected arts organization when we have been fighting like wet cats for (to save) Dyett High School (as a traditional non-charter school), in Bronzeville, saying that we don’t want to lose our last open-enrollment neighborhood high school, and the mayor is getting a political endorsement at (from) an (privately-run charter) organization that is submitting an application for (taking over) Dyett (High School)???!!!
“Do you ACTUALLY THINK that we that this is FAIR??!!
“How could it possibly be MORE ‘political’?
“You just had a (CPS) board member (Deborah Quazzo, was later forced to resign over this) who was caught taking profits, her company taking profits. So how can it be more ‘POLITICAL’ than it is right now???!! I mean, HONESTLY!!”
Jesse doesn’t address a single one of the facts or points that Brown makes… presumably conceding them.
Instead, Jesse then counters Brown by saying that he doesn’t want CPS to be like LAUSD, where it is expensive to run a board that manages lots of schools, and has a messy, expensive election process, with money outside the city coming in from New York billionaires. (Hey, I don’t like that either.)
JESSE RUIZ: “I’d rather not see that happen for my city and our schools.”
(Jesse, a messy democracy is better than no democracy, which is what you have in Chicago.)
Jesse Ruiz makes the stupid argument that an electoral system “costs millions” of dollars that “could be used to educate kids.” You could say the same exact thing about the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Reps, State Senates, State Assemblies… and multi-million-dollar elections for who would serve on them.
“Hey, think of the money that we could save if the President / Governor appointed the members of the Senate, or the House of Reps, or the State Senate, or the State Assemblies. We could then use that money saved to go towards public works that benefit citizens.”
Asinine!!! Boy that argument really “un-pleases” me!!! (O.K., that was the last “un-pleases” joke)
Brown, no-dummy-he, fires back a Ruiz.
While noting the messiness of democracy, with unions and special interests participating, Brown cites LAUSD’s accomplishments:
(32:20 – 32-45)
(32:20 – 32-45)
JITU BROWN: “But what you CAN say is that Los Angeles (LAUSD’s school board) has passed some of the most progressive (school board) legislation in this country. Their ‘A-thru-G’ legislation that says that where that child goes to school, they have to have curriculum that prepares them for college…. They (LAUSD officials) have it, and are addressing it (college requirements). But (in Chicago), we (instead) are addressing it by closing schools, and by displacing families.”
LikeLike
…and Kevin Johnson, also known as Mr. Rhee, tried 2 x to gain “strong mayor” control. Thank goodness he’ll be gone soon. Hopefully, to jail. This is not England…there are no Queens.
LikeLike
There is no shortage of American royalty. There is the Bush Dynasty for example. Then there are the Kennedys.
LikeLike
I think the Bushes are going to learn a lesson via Jeb that they are no longer idolized. Unfortunately, the Clintons are somewhat of a Dynasty as well.
Strong Mayor. How they ever pulled that wool over voters’ eyes is beyond me.
LikeLike
The reason we need elected school boards is to avoid what has happened in Chicago, corrupt collusion of the worst kind. It has allowed the mayor and school board to destroy too many public schools without any democratic input. Chicago’s system allows for endless hand washing and cronyism. Democracy may be less efficient, but it is far better for citizens than a corrupt dictatorship.
LikeLike
Public education is being destroyed in Newark without benefit of mayoral control. It is approximately one third down.
LikeLike
Idiots are in charge. Mayoral control of schools is one the most stupid idea ever. Ask: CUI BONO? Then look at the players.
LikeLike
Diane, as a historian, please try and check to get some of the facts of history straight. You wrote, “Klonsky says it is time to restore an elected school board after 20 years of failure…” You cannot “restore” what never was. Chicago has never had an elected school board. Prior to the mayoral control version of reality, Chicago’s mayor had the power to select from a list of candidates for the Board of Education compiled by the citywide local school council grouping. There was no “election” then, or before then. When we began covering the Board of Education 40 years ago, the members of the Board were appointed by the mayor, as the Board members had been for about 130 years at that point. Mary Herrick’s “Chicago’s Schools, A Social and Political History” is helpful about this. What changed with the Amendatory Act of 1995 was that the mayor was given the power to appoint not only the (then) so-called “Chicago School Reform Board of Trustees,” but also, for the first time, a “Chief Executive Officer” (who didn’t have to have any education credentials.” The Amendatory Act also stripped the Chicago Teachers Union and the Cook County College Teachers Union of (a) the right to strike (for two years) and, more importantly, (b) the right to bargain over issues like class size and other “education quality” stuff we had in our union contract prior to 1995.
LikeLike
Thanks for the correction, George.
LikeLike
St Louis Public School district is run by a board appointed by the Governor, Mayor and Pres of Board of Alderman. The elected board has no power.
LikeLike
Chris, that arrangement has not served St. Louis well. I remember when Alvarez & Marsal were invited to run St. Louis schools, and they collected $5 million and moved on to greener fields.
LikeLike
Unilateral Mayoral control is not the only way that voters are disinfranchised. The story essentially impled that Mayoral control is the only form of voter disinfranchisement. Another correction, it was an elected school board that hired Alvarez and Marsal along with MJLM.
LikeLike
Boston lost its elected school committee in 1989. We elected a new mayor last year in an election where one candidate declared publicly his faith in charters and the other did not. It was the person who did not make a public profession who was chosen by the electorate. However, Mayor Walsh simply was not public about his fealty to the reformista movement. Parents filed an FOIA to get information about what has been happening behind the scenes. It ain’t pretty, and we all know who the protagonists are:
“QUEST has been requesting data from BPS about the new Home Based assignment process that began in 2014-2015 after two years of community process. Despite a Boston School Committee vote requiring an annual review of the Home-Based lottery data in March of 2013, none has been released. When the mayor announced his plan for a new assignment process called Unified Enrollment, QUEST became concerned. What are the consequences of changing a new assignment process with no public analysis or real public engagement and no data to show that the current assignment process needs to be changed?
Due to this, QUEST used the Massachusetts Public Records Act to gain access to some of the documents regarding the Unified Enrollment plan and process. The released documents are linked below.
These documents raise many more questions than they answer.
• City Hall and The Compact withheld nine documents and have not released meeting minutes, claiming at a school committee meeting they don’t take minutes, in direct violation of their own by-laws.
• BPS Facilities Plan is moving forward in private discussions with charters schools and private Catholic schools. Publically, the Mayor’s Office has never once mentioned that this process will combine those non-BPS school systems. The documents, however, show that Mayor Walsh and the Compact have been discussing leases for BPS school buildings and co-locations for the past six months. The Mayor has continued to mention in press interviews repeatedly that BPS will have to consolidate and close schools. Finding references to leases and co-locations, therefore, is particularly alarming.
• The Compact, which BPS is an active member of, is proactively seeking funding from the Walton and Gates Foundations. We learn that the Walton Foundation is “most interested in Enroll Boston and a tri-sector facilities plan.” Why are outside foundations and corporations interested in Boston’s public buildings?
• BPS is investing in the Compact using BPS monies and funders to prioritize the Compact’s requests at the same time BPS schools face huge cuts.
• Why does the Compact ask for “air cover” from the mayor?”
https://www.facebook.com/questbps/
The documents can all be founded at this link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/cqq7ejimaprg675/AADaZ3notXfzIzpM4P26TJ8Ra?dl=0
LikeLike
And here’s a parent’s take:
https://publicschoolmama.wordpress.com/2015/11/
LikeLike
And now Boston has the notorius Tommy Chang, a Broad Academy business model grad, as Superintendent. And they are about to charterize dozens of the public schools.
Chang was removed from LAUSD for his part in the $1,3 Billion iPad scandal, implemented by his boss and fellow Broadie, John Deasy who now being investigated by the FBI and the SEC. How come Chang was so appealing to Boston’s Mayor?
LikeLike
from Chicago Public Schools parent & activist Julie Vassilatos:
“The Frightening Implications of School Choice”
http://www.chicagonow.com/chicago-public-fools/2015/11/the-frightening-implications-of-school-choice/
JULIE VASSILATOS: “Severing community bonds intentionally is something totalitarian regimes do. Because it weakens communities, it weakens individuals, it weakens their democratic voice and power.
————————————–
JULIE VASSILATOS: “But in a choice district, parents and kids rarely have the one option they most want–a strong, well resourced, nearby, neighborhood school. I think there’s a reason for this.
“We’re veterans of choice in our family. I can tell you what I see in my neighborhood.
“This is what school choice looks like: no schoolmates in your neighborhood for your whole life.
“It looks like children traveling several hours a day to get to and from their schools.
“It looks like very little political and residential investment into the heart of neighborhood communities.
“On our street alone we have kids in 4 different schools. My children’s neighborhood friends on nearby streets attend 4 separate other CPS schools. These kids travel for up to three hours per day getting across town in all different directions. And we their parents, living on just a few blocks, pour our energies into schools in 8 different areas.
“There’s something significant going on here and I don’t want you to miss it. Please pay attention to this.
“With the choice model, what CPS is doing is investing in severing community. CPS has chosen a school model that fractures and breaks down local bonds among families and within neighborhoods.
“But consider: severing community bonds intentionally is not something democracies do. Democracies require stable communities with strong institutions that are of, by, and for the community. Democracies are built on strong stable localities.
“Severing community bonds intentionally is something totalitarian regimes do. Because it weakens communities, it weakens individuals, it weakens their democratic voice and power.
“Indeed, we see weak democratic process here in Chicago!
“When thousands of ordinary voters raise their voices against charter schools coming into their community, as in Noble’s proposal on the southwest side, CPS does not heed them. When they beg for their neighborhood school to get proper investment and support–even just to fix a broken, carbon monoxide spewing boiler–CPS does not heed them.
“When the democratic process brings a charter expansion moratorium to City Hall signed by 42 aldermen and backed by thousands of CPS families, neither the mayor nor CPS heeds this.
“When the democratic process produces a beautiful community school revitalization plan as in the case of Dyett, neither the mayor nor CPS heeds this.
“When the people of Chicago say by an 85% margin in a vote that they want an elected school board, does that matter to city and district leaders?
“No.
“Our voices mean nothing to our school leaders. They continue to babble nonsensically and expect that we will just nod our heads and bob along obediently.
“How else can we possibly make sense of Forrest Claypool attempting to enlist parents to defend the terrible, unconscionable budget choices CPS has made–now expecting us to write to Springfield on his behalf?
“How to parse Rahm’s “reaching out his hands” to teachers–even as he threatens historic, massive layoffs?
“These people don’t care about our opinions, even though they are elected and appointed to serve us, not the other way around. But no matter–they can almost count on the fact that we will not oppose them in an organized way, because they have severed so many of our community connections by scattering our schools, our children, and our alliances. They have gutted many communities entirely of their beating internal organs by shuttering their schools. All of this motion, all of this churn, all of this choice keeps us moving, nomadic, unconnected.
“Most of us are savvy enough to know that the future goal and end game of “school choice” is the breakdown of a fully funded public school system in favor of full privatization. But there’s more going on here, and it has to do with the breakdown of our democratic voice as we are spoon-fed false promises of individual consumer preference.
“Is this a trade we’re really willing to make?”
LikeLike