| Printable Version

Letters 96
EPP May 1996 Letter on NYC Public School Facilities and Textbooks

May 23, 1996

Honorable Sheldon Silver
Speaker
New York State Assembly
Albany, NY 12248

Dear Speaker Silver:

On behalf of the members of the Educational Priorities Panel, we are writing to state our support for Speaker Vallone’s proposal to continue the personal income tax surcharge for the purpose of rebuilding schools and purchasing textbooks. Our support, however, is contingent on the funds going to the priorities identified and scheduled under the Board of Education’s Five Year Capital Plan. In addition, safeguards should be put into place so that current capital budget allocations for schools are not reduced because of this new source of funds. If approved, these funds should not become the sole source of funding capital improvements for schools.

EPP also supports, however, a much greater investment in textbooks. We are concerned that the $50 million that would be allocated for the purchase of textbooks over three years is insufficient to provide even one new textbook per child per year. We also urge that the plan include strategies to encourage students to return books at the end of the school term, as the rate of textbook loss is now unacceptably high. We believe this textbook investment is critical. As a cautionary tale we’d like to cite Kansas City where there was a tremendous negative backlash when a heavy investment in rebuilding schools did not translate into student academic improvement. The idea that school repairs will automatically translate into better instruction is illogical. Would repairing police stations automatically translate into a reduction in crime? EPP wants to assure that a proposal to invest in New York City’s school system yields at least some small improvement in student academic performance, so as not to jeopardize future investment in public education.

We believe that the success of the Safe Streets, Safe City initiative in beefing up the police force and contributing to crime reduction increases the political viability of this plan. EPP wants taxpayers to be as satisfied with the results after three years of rebuilding schools as they have been with the results of Safe Streets, Safe City. Thus, we assume the same care will be taken in drafting this legislation as was taken with the Safe Streets initiative, so that it will not be marred with accusations of inequitable distribution of funds or of supplanting.

Although we do not know at what stage of negotiation you are on this proposal, we would also like to let you know that we support the alternate proposal of granting independent bonding authority to the school system to provide a consistent and adequate funding source to keep schools in good repair. EPP also is on record as favoring the elimination of school repair as a centralized function of the Board of Education. We believe more accountability and efficiency will be achieved if community school districts are made responsible for their own minor maintenance and repair programs. The central board's Division of School Facilities' functions would then be limited to monitoring of district and contractor performance.

While we applaud efforts to improve school facilities and update textbooks, EPP members feel strongly that quality education for children requires investment in other areas as well. At minimum, students need well-prepared teachers, strong educational leaders and class sizes small enough to permit adequate student-teacher interaction as well as individualized attention. Thus, we believe that greater investment in on-site staff development, better training for principals and class-size reduction are essential for real school improvement.

We look forward to working with you to achieve the ends outlined above. Please let us know how we can be of further assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,
Jan Atwell, Chairperson
Noreen Connell, Executive Director

Printable Version