MAYORAL CONTROL LOOKS LIKE IT IS GETTING ANOTHER ONE YEAR EXTENSION; WHY?

The Daily News reported that there is pretty much a deal in Albany to give Mayor Bill de Blasio yet another one year extension of mayoral control of the schools.

Prior to the breakdown in [budget] talks, lawmakers had already agreed on a proposal that would grant Mayor de Blasio a one-year extension of the law giving him control over the city schools, which was set to expire in June.

Politico New York also reported on the deal:

State legislators are expected to include a one-year extension of Mayor Bill de Blasio's control over New York City schools into the late budget deal, city and state officials said Wednesday.

Later they add:

But the late addition of an extension, quietly inserted into a chaotic budget process, may save City Hall some embarrassment in the long run.

For the last two years, Senate Republicans have used the debate over renewing mayoral control as a months-long — and largely unfavorable — referendum on de Blasio's education agenda.

In turn, de Blasio and his allies have accused Republicans, most of whom do not represent New York City, of naked political calculation at the expense of students.

Now, both the Senate Republicans and de Blasio will be able to skip over those uncomfortable negotiations entirely.

Note to the Legislators in Albany from a NYC teacher:

The schools in NYC are a mess in many ways. The increased high school graduation rate is based on virtually eliminating standards in many high schools. Money from Albany doesn't get to the classroom in too many schools.

Doesn't anyone up in Albany see that virtually nobody would shed a tear if Mayor de Blasio lost control of the schools and Chancellor Farina was sent back into retirement? Mayoral control is a disaster. Does anyone up there read a newspaper or a blog?

Some politicians do understand what is going on as there is a bill in the State Legislature in Albany (S 3730) (A6440) to change the makeup of the 13 member Board of Education (known unofficially as the Panel for Education Policy) by taking away four appointees to the Board of Education from the Mayor's current total of eight and giving those four appointees to the City Council.

I would support that bill as a necessary huge step in the right direction as it would take away the Mayor's majority over the Board and allow the Board of Education, not the Mayor, to appoint the Chancellor. This surely would limit the mayor's power over education. That would surely be an improvement.

Here is the Senate's rationale:

To distribute the appointing authority of the board of education of
the city school district of New York City among each borough
president, city council, and mayor of NYC, to give parents and
education professionals a greater voice in the process, and to grant
the authority to appoint the city school district chancellor to the
board of education.

This would seem to make sense to anyone following education news over the last fifteen years.

However, I don't see the UFT using its lobbying voice to push this bill up in Albany.