Mayors Seek to Take Charge of Schools
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Sunday, January 7, 2007; 5:44 PM
WASHINGTON -- The statistics tell a sorry tale about the public schools in America's capital. A majority of fourth- and eighth-graders are failing to read or do math at basic levels. Roughly four in five schools are not meeting achievement goals under the federal No Child Left Behind law. Just 43 percent of students graduate from high school in five years.
The new mayor, Adrian Fenty, got an earful about the situation during last year's campaign. "I heard repeatedly, 'Fix the schools.' It was a tidal wave," Fenty said.
So he is trying to do what a dozen other city leaders around the nation have done: gain control over the schools. For Fenty, that means convincing the city council and Congress to support his plan to require the superintendent to report to him and to further limit the authority of the elected school board. A majority of council members have signaled a willingness to back the new mayor.
The problem for Fenty and his colleagues is that mayors generally lack the power to overhaul schools.
"Mayors are held accountable for something they have no responsibility for," said Fritz Edelstein, who recently stepped down as a senior adviser to the U.S. Conference of Mayors.
In most places, elected school boards and the superintendents they hire govern school districts. It is a structure set up about a century ago to insulate schools from political strife and corruption in city government.
Yet it has not always worked as planned.
For example, before a mayoral takeover of New York City's schools, an investigation into a Bronx school board Bronx found that members routinely misused district personnel and resources _ once ordering X-rated pay-per-view movies.
Those kind of problems, plus low voter turnout for school board elections and sagging test scores, have fueled a movement since the 1990s for mayoral control of schools. Besides New York, it has happened in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland and Harrisburg, Pa.
The California Legislature gave the Los Angeles' mayor partial control over schools. But a judge last month struck down that law, saying it violated that state's constitution. The mayor is appealing.
Mayoral control of schools is being debated in Albuquerque, N.M., and Seattle too.
City leaders and their allies make the case that better schools help make cities prosper. Mayors say they are better equipped to take on the infighting, inertia and high turnover rates associated with school boards and the superintendents who report to them.


