Testimony on The Proposed
Five Year Capital Plan for 2000 - 2004

NYC Board of Education Hearing, March 2, 1999

 

Good afternoon! My name is Evelyn Jones Rich. I am Chair, Education Committee, New York City Americans for Democratic Action. NYC ADA is the local affiliate of Americans for Democratic Action, an independent liberal political organization, founded in 1947, and dedicated to promoting individual liberty and economic justice. Our founders included Eleanor Roosevelt, David Dubinsky, John Kenneth Gailbraith, Arthur Schlesinger Jr. and former Vice President, Hubert Humphrey.

 
ADA is dedicated to achieving a fair and just society using the tools of education and political action. NYC ADA reflects the liberal, labor agenda in New York City through its involvement in issues which affect the quality of life for all New Yorkers.
 
We're here this afternoon to assert that physical space is an essential ingredient in creating a climate conducive for teaching and learning in our City's schools. Most of us work in attractive spaces. In some instances, these spaces may be more attractive than our homes where we spend much more time. Yet, we have neglected the spaces in which our children work - and, indeed, school is work for them. They are legally required to attend school. However, over the years we have failed to maintain their workspaces at a level comparable with our own! In so doing, we send them a mixed message. On the one hand, we deplore limited academic outcomes, particularly among children of color in SURR and low performing schools as well as a general overall student failure to achieve at rates competitive with their peers in other industrialized nations. At the same time, we limit the funds to build new schools and to maintain and expand existing ones.
 
For these reasons we see that the Proposed Plan has been increased to $11.2 billion while noting that the New York State Comptroller estimates the need at $28 billion. We applaud the homework you have done to lay the foundation for the next five years. This includes the evaluation of every building currently used in the system with the creation of the database to serve as a baseline for renovation and repair projects. We note as well that you have collected, analyzed and evaluated enrollment (both current and projected) as well as utilization, housing and demographic data to identify the need for additional seats.
 
Overall, the Plan provides that 114 schools will receive new roofs, 171 schools would be fitted with new windows, 150 would have their coal burning furnaces replaced, and 64 new schools would be built.
 
We comment briefly on the three major thrusts of the Plan:
 
1. to upgrade existing facilities which for us also must include maintaining them adequately as well;
 
2. to build new schools adding 75,000 new seats by 2002;
 
3. to respond to the impact of new instructional initiatives on school buildings.
 
I. Maintaining and Upgrading Existing Facilities
 
Allocations for maintenance appear to be insufficient. The Plan increases maintenance - routine, preventive and emergency - from $137 million in FY'2000 to $274 million in 2004 - a small part of the Board's budget. Current NYS guidelines set rigid time limits within which major repairs can be made. There are no funds specifically earmarked for minor maintenance which is intrinsically linked with maintenance in the broadest sense of the term and is considered an operating rather than a capital expense. Thus NY City schools are wholly dependent on NY State funding which currently has been folded into a block grant (with reduced total funding). We believe that minor maintenance should be a discrete expense item and decentralized with individual schools assuming responsibility for this item and with NY City providing supplemental funds. Our experience in both the BOE and CUNY makes us believe that parents, teachers and principals can get this job done more effectively than the Central Board.
 
We hasten to point out what other advocates will also note - the need to upgrade science labs in all (middle and high) schools consistent with the requirement that all students take science regents examinations beginning with June 1999. The Plan provides for only one-third (1/3) of the needed science upgrades.
 
We applaud the move to allocate Funds for Restructuring, enabling more efficient use of underutilized schools. The creation of 5200 additional high school seats is welcome, particularly in Queens where over-utilization is a serious problem.
II. Build New Schools
 
The Plan calls for the creation of 75,600 new seats by 2002. We would like to see that number expanded significantly. We suggest the following to hasten the process:
 
  • revisit the Building Aid formula to eliminate the gap between reimbursement to NYC and the rest of the State for capital costs;
  • provide competition for the School Construction Authority (SCA) by using the Dormitory Authority and other public sector agencies;
  • revisit the Building Aid formula to eliminate the gap between reimbursement to NYC and the rest of the State for capital costs;
  • reject the basic concept of reimbursable facilities funding which does not work in low-wealth districts which have limited ability to initiate capital projects.
  • resurrect the Educational Construction Fund and link it with private sector initiatives to build low and/or moderate priced housing;
 
III. Respond to the Impact of New Instructional Initiatives on School Buildings
 
Year round schooling is a concept whose time has not yet come! Current plans call for reduced instructional time per student to permit back-to-back scheduling. More - not less - instructional time is needed. A pilot program with legislative support which, thus far, has not been forthcoming could provide new insights.
 
Implementation of universal pre-kindergarten programs and the reduction of class size at K-3 are essential to prepare the foundation for improved academic achievement throughout students' school careers. Universal Pre-K provides every 4 year old with the opportunity to attend a half-day pre-kindergarten by 2002. During the program's first year, many more children applied than the 19,000 enrolled. Simultaneously, New York State is committed to reducing class size in grades K-3 and expanding kindergarten classes, where necessary, to a full day. Governor Pataki's proposed FY'2000 budget currently folds all three initiatives - universal pre-K, all day kindergarten classes and reduced class size at K-3, into a block grant. All of these programs have been seriously threatened by the absence of classroom space (and trained teachers). We propose that innovative ways of funding new construction be explored as well as the acquisition of current space.
 
For example, New York City owns schools which were handed over during a period of under-utilization in the 1980's. Now used by other City agencies, these schools should be identified and returned to the Board of Education.
 
Decertifying special education students who have been improperly labeled and placed in restrictive environments could free up space for implementation of these important new early childhood initiatives.
 
Identifying currently underutilized buildings are yet another way to identify new space. The creation of new theme schools could operate in underutilized buildings, paving the way for restructured early childhood classrooms.
 
Expanding Early Childhood Centers from ten (10) to twenty (20). They can be constructed quickly, require very little land and no specialized facilities.
 
Finally, the creation of a plan for capital construction and repair is only a first step. Actually, implementing the plan requires both a will and the funds to follow-through.
 
We support the idea of using tobacco funds for school construction and maintenance. So, too, for portions of the anticipated budget surplus. We also like some of the ideas of the NYS Comptroller re debt reform, recognizing that NY City is approaching the limits permitted under the Transitional Finance Authority.
 
Finally, NYC ADA believes that the Proposed Capital Plan is a good first step. To produce the space in which our children can learn requires the oversight and commitment of all of us - as parents, professionals and communities - recognizing that we get what we pay for.

 

Home.