No Blank Check on School Reform

As the legislative branch of the city's government, the D.C. Council has two functions: to introduce and consider laws, and to conduct oversight. In the area of education and school reform, these roles have substantially widened, along with the mayor's broader authority over the public schools and the transformation of the traditional school board into a state board of education. Of course, the council has stepped up to vigorously handle the additional responsibilities of school reform.

Our motivation for being an active partner in education policy is rooted in the larger role we took on in approving school reform legislation. Previously, the body was forced to mostly watch from the sidelines. But in January 2007, I placed education under the Committee of the Whole's jurisdiction, giving each council member a voice in this important matter. The COW has a principal oversight role over all education agencies, and council members understand that we no longer accept the status quo. But we also expect financial prudence, due process and checks and balances.

Recently, the media have focused on council actions to meet its obligation to approve contracts, budgets and programs submitted by the mayor. In far too many cases with school improvements, the council has been pressured to approve contracts retroactively or under unreasonable time constraints, without the benefit of analysis, transparency or sufficient information necessary to protect the interests of D.C. taxpayers. Nonetheless, we have acted expeditiously to avoid a delay in work, while still being fiscally prudent. For example, a Council-directed renegotiation of just two contracts resulted in a savings of almost $1 million in public funds.

A review of contracts for facility improvements also revealed the extent of an education policy shift toward the prekindergarten-to-eighth-grade school model. A comprehensive strategy for the implementation of this concept is still needed, and more evidence is required to ensure that the positive outcomes claimed will result.

The lack of a facilities master plan for schools from the mayor is at the heart of the problem of policy shifts showing up as contracts. The council agreed to two delays in the delivery of the plan because of changes in school administration and staff. The plan is scheduled for completion by Sept. 10, but no public discussion has occurred. Without a plan, there is little context in which to review hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts for school improvements and the related redirecting of funds from other projects. The recent deluge of contract approval requests resulted from late decisions on school consolidations and unreasonable expectations of what facility improvements could occur in a few months. In addition, the proposed reprogramming of money to support these contracts meant partially defunding 23 previously planned school modernization projects without having information on their futures.

Beyond education, the council has oversight responsibility over the full range of District programs and policies. And the council has proposed a number of changes that we believe will make the city a better place. The council will continue to provide appropriate oversight of all matters on behalf of D.C. taxpayers. I believe they deserve, appreciate and expect this.

-- Vincent C. Gray

Washington

The writer is chairman of the D.C. Council.