Usher in school reform

Today, the D.C. Council votes on legislation that would begin to usher in reforms for D.C. Public Schools. The bill would, among other things, make the superintendent a Cabinet post, permit the mayor to hire the superintendent (with council confirmation) and change the Board of Education into an advisory panel. We endorse the measure because its passage would — for the first time since home rule was instituted — empower the council and the mayor to solve key management and governance problems regarding public education.

Some council members have said they support school reform, but they really don’t. Republican Carol Schwartz, for instance, sprung to the legislature from the school board, so she will likely vote no today. Similarly, Democrat Adrian Fenty has not lived up to his 2000 campaign promise to “work with the mayor, every appropriate branch of local government and concerned citizens” to improve students’ academic abilities and school reform. Like Mr. Fenty, Democrat Jim Graham opposes public vouchers. He also made an campaign promise — “We have a system that is broken. It must — and can be fixed,” Mr. Graham said in 1998 — that he hasn’t lived up to. Yet another Democrat, Kathy Patterson, has the luxury of living in a ward whose schools rate high academically and whose parents are active in neighborhood schools.

All four lawmakers are expected to cast no votes today for one of two reasons: They do not think the mayor is up to the challenge; or they want to strengthen the status quo. Regardless of their excuses, “In the final analysis, District taxpayers must hold all of its elected officials accountable for their significant investment in public education. The city’s children deserve the most effective and efficient utilization of the District’s limited resources.” Those were Council Chairman Linda Cropp’s 1998 re-election comments. She, too, might vote no. But schools are worse now than they were when Mrs. Cropp and Mrs. Schwartz were addressed as “Madame Board Member.”

The historic school-reform legislation would bestow upon the mayor and the council a shared responsibility of management and oversight regarding public education. As things have stood since the 1960s (when D.C. schools were shining examples of academic achievement and efficiency), all the mayor and the council can do is say yes or no to lumpsums of money, with the superintendent and the school board spending that money anyway they please. In too many instances, school officials allow funds to languish. “The authority to allocate specifically for [textbooks and other] functions” is part of what’s missing in management and governance, Mr. Evans said to us yesterday.

Tinkering at the edges has not changed the bottom line. Today, when lawmakers take the dais, they can vote for solutions or become part of the problem. We encourage them to vote yes.