Thank you, Chair Dinowitz, for holding this important hearing today. Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso commends the Council for prioritizing this discussion as we transition into a new mayoral administration and State legislative term. Today sends a broader message to the City and the State about how our New York City Public Schools (NYCPS) should operate, and about who should be at the table making decisions for a system that serves close to one million students.
While BP Reynoso acknowledges the significant changes implemented under Mayoral Control for NYCPS since 2002, and the City’s move away from a disjointed and corrupt school board system, he also recognizes the overwhelming feedback from parents, teachers, students, and other stakeholders who continue to lack meaningful representation and voice under the current governance model.
This is not a matter of opinion, it is documented. Just two years ago, the New York State Education Department published a nearly 300-page report informed by borough-wide listening tours held across the city with overwhelming attendance. Through that process, and through direct engagement with our office, Brooklyn parents, educators, students, and trusted community partners consistently shared their frustration with being excluded from decisions that directly impact their schools. The report concluded that the majority of public hearing participants do not feel heard or included in these processes.
At every level of school governance, participation is not meaningfully supported and, too often, actively discouraged.
- School Leadership Teams (SLTs) comprised of UFT chapter chairs, PTA presidents, representatives of community-based organizations, and other elected parents and teachers, have no formal role in administrative, fiscal, or policy decisions. Their role is limited to reaching “consensus” under Chancellor Regulations A-655.2 Many SLTs remain out of compliance with these regulations due to challenges in recruiting and sustaining active parent participation. Parent-Teacher Associations (PTAs) and Parent Associations (PAs) are similarly limited, able to participate only at the discretion of their school principal.
- Community Education Councils (CECs) made up of parent-elected members and Borough President appointees, continue to experience historically low election turnout.3 Representation across neighborhoods is often inequitable, even within the same district. The New York City Public Schools Family and Community Empowerment Office (FACE), which manages and supports CECs, presents an inherent conflict of interest. CEC powers are limited primarily to voting on school zoning, name changes, and some aspects of building and superintendent evaluations. For major proposals such as co-locations, school mergers, and closures, CECs have no mandated vote.
- The Panel for Education Policy (PEP) is dominated by mayoral appointees, outnumbering parent-elected and borough president-appointed members. Despite recent reforms, it continues to serve largely as a rubber stamp.4 PEP members themselves have publicly stated that they cannot meaningfully influence outcomes.5 NYCPS-led briefings lack transparency, communication is limited, and members are often asked to vote on preliminary budgets or major contracts without sufficient time or materials to make informed decisions. Citywide Councils such as the Citywide Council for High Schools, District 75, Special Education, and English Language Learners have no formal representation on the PEP, despite often representing the most vulnerable student populations.
Lastly, students are either excluded entirely or included only as “token” member to these governing bodies. They are the heart of this system and being young or inexperienced should never make their voices any less important. If we are truly a system built to support our youngest and brightest future citizens, we must foster true and authentic representation for them.
It is for these reasons that Borough President Reynoso calls on the Council to join the 44 organizations and partners calling for establishment of an independent commission, composed of stakeholders from across the system, to draft a new governance model and proposal to be submitted to the State. While we cannot go back to time a time of corruption and mismanagement of taxpayer dollars by school boards, we can aspire to a more democratic model of school governance – one where all parties, are heard, valued, and appreciated for their experience.
