In the recent past, it has become clear that this stance can cut more than one way. At the same time that it denies the mayor direct political control, it also provides him an alibi in terms of accountability. I don't have control, Giuliani says, so I am not responsible. But because he does have the control of the purse strings, he can also make it financially impossible for the public schools to move ahead. This is particularly a problem with respect to the problem of underfunding by the state, since the state feels, with some justification, that everytime they increase funding to NYC public schools, the mayor decreases city funding by the same amount.
The UFT recently adopted a position that would attempt to deal with this quandary. Our proposal is to give the mayor a majority of the appointments to the Board of Education, but to keep the Board as an independent agency. Would that work? I don't know, but it seems worth a try, given the current dilemma.
The UFT does not support the position that Hillary took, therefore, of direct mayoral control. To be fair, however, it is also the position of all the Democratic mayoral candidates. There are issues here that extend beyond the reign of Giuliani.
<< Speaking of opportunism, Leo, what do you make of Hillary Clinton endorsing Rudy's position on abolishing the NYC Board of Ed, and putting the schools under mayoral control? What's the union's position on this? Doug >>
Leo Casey United Federation of Teachers 260 Park Avenue South New York, New York 10010-7272 (212-598-6869)
Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never has, and it never will. If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet deprecate agitation are men who want crops without plowing the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its waters. -- Frederick Douglass --
-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20010711/8869864b/attachment.htm>