Thank
you, Mr. Chair, for allowing myself and my colleagues to address you
this evening on an item that is of such consequence. While I imagine
nothing any of us say here this evening will sway the opinions of the
councilors, as the matter lies before the voters, it is important
that a realistic assessment of this proposal be heard.
While
I will readily admit that I was not paying attention in 1985 to the
rewriting of Worcester's charter, as I was twelve at the time, it does seem clear that the intent
of the commission was to broaden representation. At the very least,
the commission was concerned with broadening geographic
representation across the city. It may interest you, therefore, to
learn that every district in the city is currently represented on the
Worcester School Committee, save Councilor Clancy's district, which
Mr. O'Connell misses by the width of a street. Mr. Eddy's district
has multiple members on both bodies. I submit to you, Mr. Chair, that
this has more to do with other aspects of Council and Committee
work--the designation of the position as part-time with corresponding
pay, yet the need for flexible work hours--that cause public service
in this city to be, to some degree, a luxury that can only be
afforded by some.
I
suspect, however, Mr. Chair, that this item stems less from
geographic concerns and more from identity concerns. Both bodies are
entirely white, are overwhelmingly male, are largely over the age of
fifty. We can all agree that the City of Worcester does not look like
that.
If,
however, it is this that concerns the Council, and it is this that
led to the charter being changed in 1985, we have only to look at the
composition of this body now and over the 26 years since charter
change to see if this proposed solution has a potential for success.
I
submit to you, Mr. Chair, that it does not. Twenty-six years after
charter change, the numbers on the Council are stark: the body
remains overwhelmingly white (and historically so), overwhelmingly
male, and largely over the age of fifty. Further, Mr. Chair, former
Councilors who are people of color won at-large, not district, seats.
District
representation has not changed this.
While
I share the concerns of the Council on having elected bodies that
reflect the composition of the city, I am appalled to once again have
a proposed solution be one that has already demonstrably failed.
I
also find it of grave concern that the Councilors proposing this give
no consideration to the difference between our two bodies. There is a
difference in our jobs. While both bodies hire and evaluate the chief
executive, and both bodies have financial oversight, the Worcester
School Committee has further authority in setting policy for the
Worcester Public Schools. The Worcester Public Schools are a single,
functioning system, which must have a single-minded policy direction.
This
also, Mr. Chair, ignores the representative ground-level bodies that
serve the Worcester Public Schools now. The Citywide Parent Planning
and Advisory Council by its bylaws serves as a congress of schools.
Every school has a seat at this Council and it provides a voice for
each and every school--not just some schools, as would be inevitably
the case with district representatives. As it is an ongoing challenge
to ensure representation for each school, I have put an item on
Thursday's School Committee agenda, requesting the administration
assist CPPAC in ensuring representation for all schools.
Further,
Mr. Chair, it ignores the site councils required by the Education
Reform Act of 1993. Far from being window-dressing, the site councils
of elected teachers, parents, and community members. It is empowered
with reviewing the budget, often including capital spending, and with
advising on policy for the school. As many members of site councils
are not aware of the power vested in them by the laws of the
Commonwealth, I have put an item on Thursday's agenda calling for
training of site councils, so members are aware of the power they
hold.
This
is, one should note, remarkably similar to the neighborhood councils
called for by the 1987 revision of the charter--a part of the charter
never fulfilled.
I'm
also horrified by the prospect of making capital decisions based on
political clout rather than district need. When this Council voted
additional, badly-needed capital funds for the Worcester Public
Schools, the School Committee turned to the administration and asked
for a list reflecting NEED, not political pull. It would poorly serve
the schoolchildren of this city to have roof repair, window
replacement, and classroom repainting apportioned by who owes whom
what.
It
is that prospect, more than anything, that has made me feel I needed
to come and speak before you tonight. To have a proposal before the
voters of this city that would create new inequities, set up new
competitions for resources, within the schools of this city is
something that I cannot be silent on.
I
ask you, therefore, Mr. Chair: if you and your colleagues are indeed
concerned about representation in this city, do not present a ballot
question that will not solve the problem and will make inequities
worse. Look at comprehensive resolution to why people do and do not
run for office in Worcester, and set out in a direction that will
create a government that looks like its city.
This
proposal does not do that.
Not sure what this is about? Might you provide a two sentence big picture?
ReplyDeleteKirsten,
ReplyDeleteCertainly! The mayor and seven other city councilors have put a ballot item on November's local ballot, asking if voters wish to have five district members added to the Worcester School Committee.