COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, February 17, 2026

Thank you. I just wanted to underscore that there was a -- there was a comment made about real estate value. And I do not want our children's to be sacrificed in order for developers to be able to access that land. I'm a scientist. And when we think about progress in science, we don't have to -- just because we can, doesn't mean we should, right? Or else we would have eugenics, right? Just because we can, doesn't mean we should. And I want us to deeply understand what message are we sending our children that we have a high-functioning school with resources that could -- that is a jewel in the crown of Pennsylvania. And here we are rethinking it because it fits into a framework that you might have. We have anomalies in every framework; we have exceptions in every framework. So I highly recommend, and I'm happy to be supportive in any way for us to reconsider Lankenau. There are many other schools that I don't have time to talk about. We'll come back to them. But this one specifically, given where we are in the world, sends a message how importantly we're taking our environment. So thank you very much. Thank you, Council President.

Your feedback is well taken.

Member Lozada.

Thank you, Council President. I guess my first question -- first, thank you for being here today. I guess my first question is very similar to everyone else's, right? But before I even ask any of all of these questions I have, I want to know if we are firm on the date of end of February to present this plan to the Board. And, you know, how long will they have to consider? I just want to know, is that firm? Why do we have to have this plan to the Board by the end of the month? And is that a firm date?

Yes. Firstly, I think the superintendent has communicated to the village, and I think there's a buildup --

I can't hear him.

-- to that time. Can you hear me? Can you hear me now? Okay. Yes. firstly, I believe the superintendent has communicated -- I mean, we long communicated that by the end of the winter for this school year, that there will be a draft or recommendation to the Board. The Board will not vote on whatever the recommendations are, but we will deliberate and we'll definitely take public comment at that meeting. Thereafter, at some point, the Board will likely call the question and then officially vote on a resolution 12 attaching the -- attaching the facilities planning process to it. So as to when the Board will vote on it, I can't speak to that right now, but just for everybody to know, there will be no 18 vote and the plan will not be codified by way -- by way of resolution until after the February 26th.

Okay. So I think many --

Point of information. It's a point of information. So how would you deal with amendments? How would you deal with additional input in the event that the project moves forward on the 26th? And I know that the town hall is taking place, right? Which people will still be providing additional information. So once it goes from Dr. Watlington, from the school district to the actual board, how this still will be a transparent process that allows individuals to provide feedback and recommendations in terms of the Board having an opportunity to amend? Because you may hear some great things beyond what's being recommended initially and say, Hey, you know what, as a board, we sat around the table and we looked at some other things, and based upon additional information, we want to take these things in consideration to add to the recommendations process.

What I could share which has been shared earlier. The board members -- board members have been at the convenings. Board members are in tuned. I'm here today before the football has been handed off. And our expectation is that the superintendent in the spirit of the resolution has done the engagement that will inform, you know, what the plan is and the things to consider even if they're not in the plan. So --

We just got here in terms of us doing -- I'm not saying we just got here. I mean, to be frank, in all due respect, we got a call the weekend of Dr. King Holiday to be with the district that Monday, and there was an announcement being made that Thursday. And so we all had to ram -- and, you know, and just having the frank conversation from one body to another, you know, we had to all begin doing our due diligence as quick and soon as possible, which separate from you, the district, reaching out to the -- our various constituencies, we had to go out and also address our constituencies. Why? We are still going through this process and unraveling such a huge undertaking that's going to impact generations to come. And so that's what you're actually hearing. So we don't feel like, to be frank, and I don't think this will be the case, but we're just doing the dates.

Oh, no. Oh, no. 21

And so that's what you're hearing from Member Lozada.

Yeah, definitely. I don't understand. I'm trying to understand what's the rush here. We -- I came in November of 2022. I was assigned to the education committee. From day one, we've been asking about a facilities plan. It's taken us all this time, now you guys come up with a plan and now we want to rush through it now. And now all of a sudden, there's this sense of urgency to get through this plan, which I don't understand. So I appreciate you being much more clear, I guess, than I was. I don't have the patience for all of that. But being that percent 18 of the -- of the school closures are 19 going to happen in the 7th Council 20 district, I found it really important to make sure that I participate in both the online meetings as well as the in-person meetings. One of the things I want to bring to your attention is, I think the school district has to consider the fact that many of our families are not -- don't have access to online -- to the internet. And so they can't participate in those online meetings. Second, there seems to be a pattern of when these questions that are being brought to your attention, whether it be from this legislative body or the community at large, they -- we dance around them or we don't answer them. And so my question, Mr. President, is: is there going to be someone who is going to be reviewing these questions that are not being responded to? And will we submit them? Can we submit them back to the district, so that we can get a response?

Yes. We are working with chairman of Education, Isaiah Thomas, and our tech team to take all the information, issues and concerns of members. And we have been working with the district, as well as making sure they get the information in a timely fashion.

I appreciate that. There was one project team, nine advisories, 35 principal visits, 47 listening sessions, almost 1400 surveys. I've been to these meetings, none of my constituents say they participated, none say they were able to be a part of a real process. I receive letters from students that had expressed very serious concerns, and I think they deserve a response. My question to you is: are we going to receive, or can we receive a list of who responded to these surveys? Where did they come from? What were their ZIP codes? What was the real verbal and written responses? In the 7th Council district, I've talked to many families who say, you know, yeah, we heard there was a meeting after the meeting happened in the middle of the summer, and there was a lot of school district folks there, but there were three families. And so when we talk about these guiding principles, you're -- they're not guiding principles that come from people in my district. And so I want -- I want to know -- I want to know how? How do we get our families to have a real opportunity in this process? It can't be an online meeting and one meeting in the community. We are going to have to have multiple meetings to be able to better understand what is happening. In the 7th Council district, I represent three of the five most violent school, my police districts. I represent some of the lowest performing schools. Every single one of these says that -- every one of my schools in here, the majority of them say that they're in high risk, very vulnerable neighborhoods. And so the decisions that you-all are making to close my schools, send my kids to the most dangerous neighborhood as opposed to away from that neighborhood. And so I'm just trying to understand where the common sense is, right? Some of these decisions that are being discussed here, or presented here, just don't make any sense. We have schools that are right beside each other that are not -- we're not considering relocating or merging. We have schools like in other places where the buildings that are -- that are being considered to be K-8 cannot handle that -- the -- those sized children. We know these kids are big now, right? So how are we asking -- how are we asking Cramp and Elkins to serve as a pre-K-8 when we know those schools are not capable of holding those students?

We talked -- we just had a major storm. SEPTA could not handle the storm -- the transportation situation. Is -- has SEPTA been brought to the table to have a conversation about how our children are going to depend on them. Because for some of you, 1.2 miles is nothing. That's a 30-minute walk for some of my kids. 30 minutes. And we're sending them into a completely different neighborhood. And it is a dangerous neighborhood. We talk about safe paths; I have like a million questions. We don't talk about safe paths, but we have safe paths now. In the 7th Council district, safe paths mean nothing. I have principals who leave the school to walk into neighborhoods, dangerous neighborhoods by themselves to walk children to school. They -- I want to know what's the plan? We can't -- this submitting to the Board on -- in the end of the month, I don't think it just is -- it doesn't work. It doesn't make sense. You're putting our kids into more dangerous spaces as opposed to away from them.

Point of information.

Talk about 33 students -- I'm sorry. 33 students in a classroom. Many of my students have IEPs. How are my teachers supposed to deal with these children? I don't understand this. Sorry, Mr. President, I have a -- there was a million questions. I probably have a million more.

No, go ahead. The Chair recognizes Councilman Isaiah Thomas, point of information.

Sure. If I could just add an attachment to those list of questions, because I was inspired. And I know board president, you have to go soon, that's why I wanted to get this in there now. In the midst of listening to Councilmember Lozada, and all of the concerns, when -- we know that you plan on presenting the plan February 26th, when does the school board plan on voting on the final plan?

He said he not sure.

Yeah, I -- what I -- what I can share. I do think I want to put more meat on the bones to what the role of the Board is, and what I foresee as the Board president of how the Board tends to operate. I do think the Board wants to wait until all the engagement and not have a pre -- a date, right? I think that if we were to come here and say how we're going to do it, I think you -- then you can checkmate. You guys already had this plan; you already know where you're going to vote. It's very important for the Board to engage and hear this energy that you're bringing, but also from the village as well. I would -- I would also like to clarify what I think this is going to be. I think this is going to be a resolution based off of what we know now: a plan that is dynamic that can evolve over time. I think that's what we're going to get. I don't think you're going to get, when the Board votes, the plan is set in stone and everything's done. I think that we all understand that things change, facts change, funding changes, enrollment trends change. But for the Board, I think the Board will be willing to vote on something based upon what we know from the village, based upon what we know about our enrollment trends of the direction we're headed in. And just for everybody's perspective and understanding, there are going to be other board actions that are probably going to be set forth in the resolution to let people know where the future decisions are going to be made and where to advocate and where for City Council to push. So for example, our capital budget this year, it is my hope that we can start working on this plan this year, so that the district has what it needs to bring a capital budget so we can start doing these things with all -- with all speed -- with all speediness, right? Also, there's going to be policy changes around potential catchment. Again, I don't know, because the football hasn't been given. The resolution's likely going to call out those moments that are public actions, that the village can come, you-all can come, as we continue to build this plan. And that's the best I can do for you because we don't know the future. But if we don't do nothing and signal a direction, I think if we continue doing the same thing, expecting a different result, which I would argue is chronic underachievement, we are -- we are doomed. And so I think that's -- I hope that answers some of the question of what this will look like. That there will be future votes, future considerations that are going to be attached, just like Accelerate Philly is attached to our budget right now, that's attached to Board actions, and that this will be a dynamic plan.

So, Mr. Chairman, what I'm going to take at face value, and I'm going to defer back to Member Lozada, and we've been working with you, work with Dr. Watlington, and I just expect that as we continue to work as a body, right, this is the beginning of that process and I still believe it's pretty rushed. But nevertheless, we will continue to huddle today as we have this dialogue. But we've been working extensively. Like this is just a hearing for the public, but our team has been taking this apart over the last two weeks in doing our due diligence and this process and we expect to continue to keep that line of communication moving forward. Member Lozada, as you wrap up, please.

Yes. And I recognize that this is an ongoing process. We're talking about $384 million that you're talking about investing into the -- into the 7th Council district. I want to know, is it -- of that 389 million, is -- what's the real number, right? Is it $4 or is it 100 million, right? I don't know. But I need to figure -- I want to -- I want to know what's a real number, and I also want to respond to all of my other questions that I answered -- that I asked. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Dr. Watlington.

Please respond back to the Chair with her answers to the questions in writing. You would like them in writing? Dr. Watlington, would you like --

They need them now.

Oh, you can have them now. Absolutely. Response to Member Lozada, please?

Yeah. Councilmember Lozada, thank you for the questions, plural. I'm going to try to get all of them briefly. Number one, let me assure you, this is not a dance between now over the past five weeks and the time between now and February 26th. I promise you this is not the Tamia or the Cupid Shuffle. We are really listening to feedback and being very thoughtful about what we do with it. Prior to February 26th, I think President Streater just spoke to what he intends to do with his board after February 26th. We're also saying quite candidly, if there's a better way to push in more -- to better utilize our resources to push in more high- quality academic and extracurricular programs across all neighborhoods and zip codes, we are absolutely open to it, and we want -- we want to hear it. Any and every alternative option. Third, all the surveys and the data are on our facilities planning website. It's available off of the main page of our district website. If Council would like a deeper dive into that survey, we are happy to provide it, a deeper dive on the record; and I think that's what you've asked for. I'll ask our chief of staff, Sarah Galbally, and Chief of Communications, Alexandra Coppadge, if they will be sure we follow up on in a timely manner. Yes, we are working on an ongoing basis with SEPTA. I'm personally in communications with SEPTA on an ongoing basis around -- as we move forward with potential recommendations. And in terms of enrollment and whether the said schools you referenced can house the student populations, this plan commits us to spending whatever resource outlined in the plan to make sure we can accommodate the students without delays or without overcrowding. Thank you.

Thank you. Council President, can I just ask one last question? Stetson has had a request for a leaking roof. More than 12 times, they've put in a request. That roof is still leaking. Can I have someone please today commit to going to Stetson and checking their leaking roof?

Yes. We'll make that happen, yes. Thank you.

That's called good constituent services.

Council President, may I be excused?

The Chair recognizes Council Rue Landau, then Councilman Kendra Brooks. Matter of fact, Kendra Brooks says she has to have to make a service. Sorry, Member Brooks, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Council President. So I'm -- so I'm so glad that we are having this meeting, right -- this hearing right now. So many folks know that this is how I came into elected politics around school closures, I've been here --

Member Brooks, speaking into your microphone with that strong voice you have.

I led the fight against closure of my daughter's school during the last rounds of closures nearly a decade ago. And we have felt this effect of these closures since then, and I have only recently began. We just saw the turn of the corner of this history, you know, where these school closures were painful to communities and hurt the academic process and the city, and it's led to a yearlong --years of long fights around local control, which we won. So it was kind of disappointing to be back here again. You know, anytime a school closes, the community pays the price. A closure, a merger can impact every aspect of a child's life. It impacts a school safety, the class size, staff-to-student ratios, relationships among all parties involved. And it has had a negative long-term effect on the type of family-sustaining investment neighborhoods received. And I'm going to kind of speed this up to get to the point. And, you know, for me, I'm hoping today to hear directly about the closures and the proposed -- the impact of these proposed decisions. And I'm listening to my colleagues, and, you know, agreeing with some of the factors that they're bringing up. So, you know, my first question is: in the last decade, and the 2020 -- 2012 school closures have led to a profound lack of distrust among community in the school district. The reputation of the district and trust within the community is like to take another hit. If these closures go through, what is the district going to do to rebuild that trust with the community moving forward? And I'm going to go through my questions and then you can answer them at the end. And what has the state and city -- how has the state and city increased funding support factored into these proposed closures? Even with this proposal, I'm not seeing where this fundamentally affects the deficits that we will face in years ahead. And what does the school doing -- school district doing to prepare for this? And I'm going to skip around. What is the driving force behind these closures in predominantly black and brown neighborhoods, and how much of these decisions can be attributed to the lack of family sustaining investments in neighborhoods for the proposed closures? And what role does charters and cyber school play in these communities where these charters have been proposed? I have a few more. What community support is planned for the students who will be going to new schools and what pre-planning has be done -- been done to ensure that these are done with minimal disruption to students? Because we know that students forced to move schools often struggle to keep up with their peers who have had consistent school location. What is the estimate cost to ensure that affected students do not fall back academically, and what does this investment look like, including any cost estimates the district has undertaken to ensure they won't? And my last one, the school district has a lot of vacancies, and because of vacancies, it by default saves money. So it has staffing surplus plus, what does it do -- what does it do with that surplus plus? And is it collected for the entire school district or held for each individual school? And how has this impacted the overall budget discussion? And I have other questions, but those are the ones I need right now.

Thank you, Councilmember Bass (sic). Let me try to get to each one of those questions and do it in a timely manner. First to rebuild trust, we've taken a three-and-a-half-year process to try to do just that. Engage people in every step of the way. We engage nearly 3000 Philadelphians in the development of our strategic plan entitled Accelerate Philly, more than 30 community members were on a district-wide project team related to the specific facility's plan, 170 individuals representing a lot of different walks of life and regular folks here in the city were part of the nine advisory groups, we've had over 14,000 survey responses. And to be rebuild trust, we wanted to put out a set of recommendations five weeks ahead of taking any recommendations to the Board of Education so that it wouldn't feel like a dance; that we're actually listening and we are listening. And we intend to take the feedback that we hear and to think about what that might mean before we take recommendations on February 26th. I'm sorry.

I just want to kind of throw it to the process. I know there are a lot of meetings that happened to in every district going online, individual, but since this has been recommended, in my experience firsthand working in school closures, the individual conversations that need to be had with school communities, I see lacking. That's where we got the key component to whether we kept schools open or they were closed. And that's where the meat and potatoes happen. When I think about the number of schools that are being closed in various districts, the conversation from the parents and folks in their communities make a difference on the information that we wouldn't necessarily have. Like when we talk about safety plans, like certain dynamics, consultants wouldn't just know, because it's information that you would only know for communities. So I'm very interested now that the recommendations are out, how are these individual conversations going to happen within the school communities, including the district Councilmembers to make sure that we not -- we aren't mistakenly harming people -- you know, young people and communities in our closures.

Thank you, Councilmember Brooks. I think I would say that in addition to in-person and virtual opportunities for parents and community members, for each of the current 13 recommended school closures to be 14 engaged, we've added three 15 additional opportunities for people 16 to talk directly to me. I won't be 17 on the sideline this afternoon at 18 Ben Franklin High School, I will 19 lead that town hall. I'll do the 20 same thing at Kensington CAPA on Friday. And over the weekend, I am going to facilitate an online opportunity as well. And I will stay as long as people ask us to stay. And we won't leave until -- well, hopefully, we won't be there midnight. But we won't leave until -- I won't leave until people say we're ready to go home.

And can I get a point of information? Member Brooks, is that okay? Will there be a process where you would have -- which recommended in one column from the community and neighborhood stakeholders versus what actually gets implemented in another cap -- in another column?

I think absolutely, Mr. President.

So people could see that yes, these were recommendations that came from the people and this what we actually done or didn't do, but you actually see what actually is being implemented.

We are absolutely committed to saying here are --

We heard from you?

-- the first -- here's the recommendations we put on the table, if you will, five weeks in advance of going to the Board of Education, President Streater and his board. Here is a summary and we've gotten lots of it, an executive summary of the feedback that we've heard across stakeholder groups across the city, and here are the recommendations that were taking on February 26th, including specifically how feedback informed those recommendations. Yes, sir. I think that's transparent and fair. Absolutely.

Thank you. Member Brooks?

May I just answer really quickly your other questions? I'll do it very quickly. You talked about what's the driving force relative to black and brown students? Because the district is 50 percent African American -- African American, about a third Hispanic or Latinx, any changes are going to have an impact on black and brown children. And while I'm very proud that we are making significant progress, we can do 5 to 10 times better in the nation's sixth largest city. I want to remind all of us that the majority of our children in Philadelphia still do not read and do math on grade level, despite all the progress we're making. And so we've got to push harder to push those resources in so that we can get there. In terms of the charter, I didn't understand the full question, but I'll just quickly -- charter Impacts. Philadelphia is different than New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles, in that, in our city, we have about 60 percent of the public-school children and district-operated schools, 40 percent in charter schools, whereas the other big cities across the United States are very different from us. Their ratio is 80 to 20. I wasn't sure if that was the spirit of your question or if I missed it?

No. 13 Like my major concern is, like, in the last round of student school closures, where I live, most of those schools end up being charters. What is this -- what's different about this particular school closure process? And are we guaranteed that won't happen?

I don't think we can guarantee it, and I'll tell you why. I spent a lot of time with my mentor, Dr. Constance E. Clayton, the year before her death. And she told me about a time where not only was this the fourth largest school district in the nation, the lion's share of children went to district-operated schools. As decisions have been made over time, that out-migration of children from district to charter schools has continued. The only way that I know to turn that around and to grow the district enrollment is to improve student attendance in the district-operated schools, improve test scores of the district-operated schools, get the graduation rate up and drop-out rate down. That's why we are so --

And public safety.

-- bullish about trying to improve.

And safety.

And safety, to your point, and that which is our number one priority, safety and health and wellbeing of our students and staff. But could it result in some choose -- parents choosing other options? That's already happening. We are hopeful that as we reinvest our limited resources into the schools and the district-operated schools, that we can improve outcomes, and get better, and have more parents to choose the district as they did two years ago.

Thank you.

Thank you. The Chair recognizes Councilman Rue Landau, and we'll go into our second round.

Okay. Thank you. Thanks -- thank you, Council President. Thank you, Dr. Watlington. I'm looking for more details on what's missing from this plan. I mean, we -- we've all stated some obvious facts. We really need $7 billion to fix all of our facilities. This is a $2.8 billion plan. And I'm looking for details on what was decided and why. And in specifically, I believe last time we went through this, there was detailed descriptions of what needed to be updated and which school and why, and parents had access to that. You could see this school needs X amount of money, this is the investment that needs. And maybe that we are going to give them X, but right now, we're in this amorphous state where we don't know exactly what investment -- what increased investment is happening under what was already proposed. So what increased investment and why? And we don't have any of those details. They are not out there in the public for us. So none of us have any understanding as why this is happening. This should all be public so all of the public can see. And I say this in a sense that I know that in his testimony, Jerry Rosen is going to come up and say this amazing term that we all hear. We heard it throughout school when we were younger, and the kids are hearing it now, show your work. We do not have the answers as to why you made these decisions. We don't even have a delineation of what's wrong with each school and what needs to be fixed. And the school district needs to do exactly what we are asking every single student to do: Show your work. It's the only reason -- it's the only way we can know that these decisions are sound, and it is the only way for us, and the public, and you, and the school board to hold you accountable to what -- to what is happening here. I also want to know that after we do these investments, what changes? Are there going to be -- is there going to be adequate outside space? We -- finally, we have a governor who's talking about what we've been saying for a long time, "Everybody needs recess." All the students need recess. Will there'll be adequate playgrounds? Are there adequate stem spaces? This proposal still leaves 30 percent of the K-8 students without adequate space. This is the proposal that is finished and done, and still 30 percent of the kids won't have adequate space. So as we've talked about schools melding together and starting to crowd a school that is working, we need to understand it. And the final thing I want to say is, I appreciate your saying that this will change over time, but I think it is extremely important that we look at communities and what is changing. And we know that change takes time, so when we look at places like the 7th Councilmanic district, we are seeing change happen, and we are seeing a community gets stronger. We should keep those schools there, and keep investing in them, and keep investing in the community, instead of closing them and telling kids to go some other place. We have to imagine a future with hope and investment and prosperity where everybody thrives. That's it.

Thank you, Councilmember Landau. The best way, I'll end -- I can answer the question is in terms of show you the work -- show our work, which is kind of what our new math curriculum is all about, is I just want to note that on our facilities planning website, we have very meticulous and detailed information about every school. And if there's every one of the district-operated schools to the tune of 249 schools. And so while we may not in the time we have here today be able to talk -- have the time to go into very detailed explanation, if Council wanted to pick one or two, we'd be happy to do a deep dive and show all the work, get out some marker paper if the Council President would allow us, because we have all the information, and we're prepared to talk about it. I can assure you we're not hiding anything. Also, when we think about what's missing, here's how I want to answer that. We absolutely can improve this district if we push more high-quality academic and extracurricular resources in. There are districts around the country, including the past districts that I've worked in, where all children have access in their schools to algebra and middle schools, all. There are districts that I've worked in that are not Rockefeller rich, and they don't have quite the cache of a big city like Philadelphia. And these are some high-level poverty districts, where we don't -- we didn't close schools down when the temperature got above a certain degrees because we had working air condition. And these were not Rockefeller-rich districts. The fact that we still have to -- we've made great progress, but there schools we have to close down. In the past couple of weeks with this cold spell, we've been shutting schools down because of pipes bursting in some of the schools, and we -- and at 2:00 in the morning, the boilers break down. Those kind of things will get better over time in terms of student attendance. But let me be clear, we -- this is not a plan to make all of our schools a Taj Mahal. But we will absolutely, if funded to the point of -- to the tune of $2.8 billion, we'll reduce the number of unsatisfactory and poor-school ratings from 85 to 0. And I'm not opposed to if there are some closures that we've recommended that Council wants to say, Hey, take this off and put somebody else on there, we're open to receiving that feedback as well.

Can I just jump in? A couple of things. One, it is absolutely no secret that we haven't been providing algebra to 5th graders or young kids up until now. That -- this -- the fact that this is coming up now is ludicrous. We've known this, we knew this was a problem when you changed the admission's criteria, not you, your predecessor, four years ago. This is not a secret. This is like, I thank you for finally addressing it. Absolutely, we should, but this isn't something that came up now. The second thing is, I'm all for spending even more than the $2.8 billion. I don't think this is enough, personally. And the last thing I want to say is bless Channel 64. I've got to tell you; there's a lot of people watching this right now who are blowing up my phone, that your facilities master plan is not online. Thank you.

So just for the record, the facilities master plan should be online. Is that correct?

Yes.

Okay. So we're going to go into our second round. And I do, because we still want to thank the superintendent, though, for you inheriting some past wrongs. And, you know, I'll tell you privately, I'll still tell you publicly, you didn't have to stay. We usually have a new superintendent per each new administration, which really doesn't provide stability for our children. And so, same thing I tell you privately, I still tell you publicly --

Thank you.

-- at least thank you for stepping up and having the shoulders to deal with some of the tough decisions, specifically like Councilman Rue Landau saying, or Cindy Bass saying, how do we live in an environment where all children -- I didn't even know that was the thing that all children don't have the ability to take algebra. I had -- I hate algebra, but that's a different conversation. But I didn't even know that was the thing that is not even standard that you take algebra. And the fact that that's part of the conversation still within itself, of us trying to grapple with a very, very difficult and complex issue. Because we could sit here and do the whole sound bite thing and, you know, sound good, but we know this is a complex issue that we got to get done right. As we go into the second round, I'm going to add -- I'm going to push through, because we have public comment. And so I'm going to ask for Councilmember, Dr. Phillips, did you -- did you take the light off? It was -- it was on.

Oh, I'm still on.

Councilman Dr. Anthony Phillips.

Thank you. I just want to ask a really solid question for me, which is really important. You may not -- Dr. Watlington, you may not have the prepared plans for what co-location is going to look like from an operational standpoint, as well as a maintenance standpoint, and a building standpoint, is for every school that you recommended for co-location, including Building 17 in our district, you -- do you have 18 a sense of when you provide that 19 information to us? So that's one 20 question. 21 The second question is: you -- there are several schools that, of course, are relatively unsatisfactory in building structure, or fair, or not -- you know, not so good in terms of the rubric, but the question becomes, what's the rationale of that one particular school over another particular school. And then lastly, what are the decision's deadlines between now and the -- when the Board votes? What does the district consider locked in versus subject to change? And so those are things that, you know, I'm just, you know, want to hear from you about before.

Thank you, Councilmember Dr. Phillips. I do want to take it with the Council President's permission that the responses to a little bit more deep level, to your point, Councilmember Landau, and I'm going to invite Senior Advisor for Strategy, Claire Landau, and Colonel Oz Hill, our Deputy Superintendent of Operations to come join me. And we'll go a little bit deeper per your -- the spirit of your questions. Let me just say last question, Dr. -- Councilmember Dr. Phillips, are all the decisions locked in? If I'd said yes, they're locked in, then this will be a token dance; and this is not a token dance. We are reviewing every single one of the facilities master plan and recommendations relative against the feedback that we've heard over the past few weeks, and that we'll continue to hear up until February 26th. The second --

So that -- does that mean that you're not wedded to $2.8 billion?

No. We absolutely, there's more than one way to get to $2.8 billion.

Okay.

And that's why I've said if there are schools that Council wants me to take off the list and add others on that list, we are open to you telling me what those are.

Okay.

But we cannot get to a place where we address our 35 percent non-utilization rate in buildings if no changes are made.

Do you want to explain why? And I think it's -- if you -- if you're okay with $2.8 billion, that's fine.

Could you speak into the microphone, Dr. Phillips?

Thanks, Council President. $2.8 billion, if that's your rationale, that's fine. But then how do we explain that to the -- to our -- to the residents of Philadelphia, just to make sure that everyone's very clear about the why behind only $2.8 billion versus $4 billion, 5 billion, whatever it might be.

Absolutely. One, we recognize that $1.8 billion is not in the budget, from the city or the Commonwealth. Two, we believe that everything we propose, whether a strategic -- a strategic plan five -- three- and-a-half years ago, or a facilities master plan, we always like to present options. And for me, I think the children of Philadelphia always deserve the Cadillac option. If we can't get the Good American Cadillac option, if we have to, we can come down to a good Lincoln, a new Lincoln. If you can't get the Lincoln, you have to come down to a Chevy. I sure hope that we don't have to come down to get a used Chevy, because the children in Philadelphia deserve a Cadillac.

Thank you.

Cadillac Education Services.

I figured that was probably the reason, right. And I think it's just really important that folks -- you explained that because -- oh, I figured that was probably the reason, because folks need to understand that rationale. What and how hard it is, and that needs to come from you, because the reality matters is that we've been fighting for $7 billion to fix all of our schools for how many years now? Probably over a decades, and we're still not there. And so you're choosing 2.8 as the line of the sand.

And part of that thinking, Councilmember Dr. Phillips, is it would take 2.8 to reduce poor and unsatisfactory school ratings from 85 to 0. If the Commonwealth had an appetite to do more, we'd go off the next set of schools. But we think that's the floor, the minimum, that we ought to do at this once in a lifetime facilities master plan opportunity. See, Colonel Hill and Senior Advisor Landau could speak more specifically, if you'd like, about the rationale of one school versus the other, or if there's a question you had about co-locations, if you'd mind --

And that in co-location --

If you don't mind, sure.

-- if the operation's behind that maintenance. Thank you.

Do you mind repeating, in the spirit of the question, Dr. Phillips?

Just real quick, what is the rationale behind one under performed -- under maintenance school, over another school? How did you choose that? Because there's multiple fear and unsatisfactory schools. Why'd you choose one to be closed versus others? And then lastly, do you have a plan that you're going to be sharing out eventually on what co-location is going to look like from a maintenance and operations standpoint? What do you have to change in the building, and how do you make sure it's operative in a way that is fair to the students for schools like Building 21? COLONEL HILL: Thank you very much, Councilmember Phillips. Oz Hill, Deputy Superintendent of Operations. I'll take the latter part of the question first. We have amassed experience recently in combining or co-locating school communities. Specifically, we did that as we went through the renovation process with Frankford High School, taking that 9th grade class and putting it into Clemente for a two-year period. Through that process, we understood how to segregate the student bodies. We created separate entrances and egress points, and then went through the process of branding the areas of the school where they would be. So we've amassed that information in terms of how to do it right. When we look at the co-locations, we went and we took, as Dr. Watlington shared previously, that quantitative data as well as the qualitative data. And then that was combined with the themes. And once we looked at all of that mass of data, we came up with the recommendations regarding co-locations.

I mean, yes. But then you have to come up with a plan for every one of these other co-location recommendations. Do you have a timeline on when you're going to be able to give -- if the, like, do you have a sense of what that would look like? A skeleton, a draft of what a co-location for Building in 18 Martin King High School would look 19 like? Or it's just a recommendation 20 out of the air right now? 21 COLONEL HILL: Certainly, we have established a timeline, a general timeline based on the school year/fiscal year, when the co-locations will take place. We -- what we also have, which becomes critically important, is a planning year for 2026 and 2027. And I want to emphasize that the lived experiences, the detailed planning, the nuances of the students, faculty, staff, and family members that have been in these schools for years, becomes important. And so we need that input to really finalize all of the detailed planning required to do this well.

And in the spirit of nothing for us, without us, Councilmember Dr. Phillips, we've not pulled any schools together for a formal conversation about that, because one, we don't want to get ahead of the Board of Education, and we'll need to get some final -- final, final -- in concrete final approved recommendations before we do that, and then we'll have a runway of not less than a full year to bring up all those folks together, just as the colonel said.

I have a question regarding -- you've finished, Dr. Phillips?

Yes, I have.

Thank you. I have a question regarding, so we go and do a $2.8 billion investment, right, and we know how we got here, because historically we have old buildings, right? So the question is, in the spirit of the fair maintenance and keeping our facilities in the best conditions, just give me for the record the number of plumbers, electricians, painters, the team that will be making sure that this investment is an investment worthwhile for the long haul. So the next generation won't be sitting here saying, we got to close schools down, because we didn't invest in making sure the maintenance and upkeep of the buildings remain high quality over the next 25, 30, 40, 50 years. And then also, who will be responsible for -- and this is a lot of development now. This is my way out. Who's going to be making sure that projects stay on time, under budget, right, and making sure the implementation and contract management all benefits the district?

I will be ultimately responsible for making sure that projects are completed on time and on budget.

Okay.

Just as those four new schools were built on time, on budget under Colonel Hill's leadership over the past four years or so. And I'll ask him to speak to your question about the numbers of plumbers, electricians, et cetera. COLONEL HILL: Sir, I would like to suggest that we take that as a homework assignment so that I give you accurate detail.

Thank you. Just please report to the Chair the information, and he'll make sure, well, to submit to members of Council. And then also the role of the trades, give me an update role of the building trades will play in terms of, you got eight abandoned properties that will be transferred to Council, and then you also have a proposal of 20 new properties in their role in terms of facilitating this process moving forward.

There's been some thoughtful conversations and interactions around career technical education and building trades, and I'm going to ask Ms. Landau, our senior advisor for strategy in the school district, if she'll talk about that strategy in particular.

Thank you.

Thank you. Claire Landau, Senior Advisor for Strategic Planning. Thank you, Council President. We have in our strategic plan work happening on our career and technical education programming in particular, and enhancing that, and working with our trades to make sure that there are more opportunities for partnerships and growing all of our career and technical education opportunities. And that is certainly going to be part of what we are looking at in how we think about the career and technical education support.

So we partner with, let's say -- I know it's not my district, but it always boggled my mind. You have YouthBuild is a high school where young people build houses. And it just boggled my mind, is there a pipeline between such a program with the trades and the work that they're doing with the school district? Has something like that been explored, or what would this look like in terms of pathways for our young people? And for the record, I do come in the district with partnering with myself and the bell of a district to help young people get their driver's license so they can get in the trades, so I do know you have been doing work in this area, but I just want to go on a record and see what this look like for the future.

Before I ask Senior Advisor Landau to say something specific. As an example, South Philadelphia High School, let me say that we are currently in meetings with the Carpenters Union in Philadelphia looking at the current enrollment at schools like Swenson and Mastbaum. We're taking a look at how do we make sure those opportunities through this process are available -- more available, for example, in southwest Philadelphia. We are in communications meeting directly with the leadership there, and more will be coming out about that over time, because we're thinking about how do we repurpose some of the existing classrooms in some of the schools across the city. For good-paying jobs, where we kind of take away some of the barriers for our graduates to be able to get into the Carpenters Union. I'll ask Senior Advisor Landau to say a few words specifically about some of the planning for South Philadelphia High School.

We have -- and I hear you on the question specifically about what some of these pathways will look like. One of the things that you'll see is for instance, South Philadelphia High School, you'll see a major investment there to make that a hub for career and technical education. We want that to look like a hub you'd see anywhere in the suburbs and something that we can be working with trades, working specifically there on advanced manufacturing as a real point of pride for the city and take in your feedback and questions about just making sure that pipeline is clear.

Okay. Thank you.

Mr. President?

Yes.

I want you to think about our partnerships with the Navy Yard, Maritime and some of the, you know, really exciting opportunities there. We're in communication with Penn Medicine in terms of not just getting some programming in some of the schools in West Philadelphia. The training kids to become certified nursing assistants where, you know, you go to our schools and you learn to become a certified nursing assistant. Great opportunity. But we know that many of these individuals clean hospital beds every day, and then when they get sick, they can't afford to lay in the same beds that they clean every day. We are talking about those high-paying 50, 60, $70,000 jobs, many of which may not require a high school -- I mean, it requires a high school diploma, but may not require a two or four-year degree, but some kind of industry certification. Colonel, do you want to add anything to that? COLONEL HILL: Yes, sir. I would just like to share that as we have imagined what the career and technical education investment in hubs could be, we not only went to all of the partnering institutions that the superintendent shared, but we also went to Kensington, to the Energy Coordinating Agency and looked at their facility that they have and borrowed some of the lessons learned there in terms of what could be possible for our students.

And I last -- before I turn over to my members, has there been a third party or independent cost estimate regarding this particular proposal? Like, have your outside eyes just say, Hey, we are going to take a look at the $2.8 billion estimate for this type of investment from a outside perspective, just to take a look at it.

You want to take it, Colonel? COLONEL HILL: Yes, sir. Absolutely invite the external view as we've gone through the process --

I didn't ask you did -- do you invite? I'm asking has it been done? That's all I was asking. COLONEL HILL: Yes, sir. We have had the benefit of objective external look at the budgeting associated with the investments that the plan proposes --

And what firm? What third party firm or independent firm has that been? COLONEL HILL: Sir, we contacted both the DLR Group as well as --

What is it called again, sir? COLONEL HILL: DLR Group. They do a lot of construction and renovation in the K-12 space. Additionally, we stayed locally and we also looked at the resources from the Aramark Engineering and Solutions Group in terms of their approach to our investments.

So are we -- do we have contracts with these two companies?

And Mr. President, let me be clear. I want to be -- we want to be clear. We actually put out a request for proposals, and we went through a competitive process.

Okay.

We didn't just go find somebody on the internet, or call up somebody who's a friend, or somebody in the district. We went through a competitive process, took it to the Board so that we could get best-in- class support.

So is RFP right now on the street now?

No, we put the RFP out well early in the process. We can submit for the record how that was done and how we arrived at those.

No, I'm okay with that part.

Okay.

I'm just saying, are we currently contracting with the two companies just mentioned, that's doing a third-party independent cost estimate review? That's the question.

Yes.

Okay. That's all I just wanted.

Categorically, yes.

Okay. That's all I have. We are in the second round. The Chair recognizes Councilman Isaiah Thomas.

Thank you, Council President. A couple of quick questions. First of all, Council President, you were talking about co-locating, Frankford was used as an example. I just want to put on the record that Frankford, you know, that's my folks. I went to Frankford High School. I know them well. We have a cooperative sponsorship -- cooperative partnership with them as a former athletic director. They did kind of struggle with that transition. It wasn't like the easiest one. And then we also have the example of SLA and Ben Franklin, which is like another example of where we struggle with the initial co-location. Clearly things are doing better now in both examples, but I just wanted to put that out there on the record. And if I have time, I'm going to come back to co-locating. Council president has talked -- spoke a little bit about who's going to do the work around the facilities. You talked about the four new schools that were built. Those four new schools were built in partnership with PIDC, right? COLONEL HILL: Three of them. Yes, sir.

And so, when we look at this facility's plan, the modified version, the current version, clearly the daily maintenance is going to happen by the school district. In the plan, there's talks about building new buildings. Would the district build those buildings yourself, or do you plan to partner with somebody like PIDC to build new school buildings? COLONEL HILL: Sir, that determination specifically hasn't been made at this point in time. However, I will share that the relationship with PIDC was instrumental and invaluable in meeting the construction demands of Amy at James Martin, Thomas Holme, and Cassidy.

Well, I'm going to defer to Council President when it comes to that stuff, because he's been phenomenal as a district Council person, as well as the Council President when it comes to contracts, minority inclusion, diversity numbers and things of that capacity. But I do support him in his effort to make sure that we hit those numbers. And I think it's important that we remain transparent as it relates to not just who's going to do the maintenance on a daily basis, looking forward to the numbers around plumbers and things of that capacity, but also when we put them RFPs out there, how will that process go? And who's going to get those contracts? Because we do have an opportunity to make a lot of millionaires, if we're going to spend this much money on school building facilities. And I want us to be very intentional to make sure that those dollars get reinvested in those same neighborhoods that we're fighting for right now. So I just want to put that out there. When it comes to coordination, based on the plan, if adopted as is, it will create eight new school buildings. I'm wondering what has been the level of communication and coordination with the mayor, the admin, the mayor's Office of Education, and how much of a priority has it been communicating with the executive branch of government to get new buildings? Is it in the midst of your dialogue with them, have they communicated essentially urgency around getting space for housing? Is it about, I don't know, one of the things I talked about was cutting down transportation costs, which is already at 120 million. So what has been the communication with the mayor and the admin as it relates to this facilities plan, and what has the admin communicated to be the priority as you navigate through this process?

We've been very intentional, Councilmember Thomas, about communicating on an ongoing basis with the mayor and the mayor's office, Council President, members of Council who are representing both the executive and legislative branches. And we're committed to doing that. We are aware, just like Council, it's been no secret to us about the mayor's vision for -- aggressive vision for housing -- building more housing in the city of Philadelphia, and have recognized some intersections between the facilities planning process draft recommendations in that vision.

So I just want to be clear and put this on the record. This was one of my number one objectives here today to have this conversation. I've listened to a lot of stakeholders, union members, parents, community advocates, partners who work in after-school programs, out-of-school program stuff, there is a belief that there is a conspiracy amongst all of us to push poor people out of Philadelphia, to push people of color out of Philadelphia. And the narrative online right now is that this facility's plan puts that on steroids. The reason I think it's important that I'm putting on a record how I feel, and other people can do the same thing, there is no 21 conspiracy here from the members of City Council in the education committee to push poor people out, to close their schools, to increase violence, or to do a lot of the other things that folks have feel like have happened in the past when decisions like this have been made. I do support the mayor's vision to separate the conversation around the current school's plan and the vacant school buildings that existed before any of us got the position that we have right now. I want to be clear, I support that because the blight hurts our communities, I support it because the decisions that was made before we got here were reckless: to leave those buildings abandoned, and I support action around getting rid of asbestos, mold, and things like that. But Council President, I could probably speak for you on this one, and a couple other members who I have a close relationship with. Let's be very clear, there is no 24 conspiracy from this legislative body to work with any legislative body, executive branch, or quasi government organization to put black people, poor people, people in color, Latino folks in a position where they feel like they've been displaced, where we feel like they've been pushed out of city, or they feel like we're trying to have more violence in their neighborhood. That's not what we're looking to do. The goal of today's conversation is to make sure that there's clarity around how we got to this point, but more importantly, to allow impact -- input from constituents. So, Council President, I thank you for your leadership. And as I close out, I also want to put on the record that because of your leadership and us working together with district Councilmembers, today will not be the last time for people to come before this legislative body to tell us how they feel around this issue. So we're going to do our due diligence to make sure that we address this. And, Council President, I also commend you because I personally know you got a lot of pushback for this, but it's important that the public understands that not only is this a legacy vote, that we are willing to hold up funding from the city of Philadelphia if a plan is not put in place that we feel like best serves the interest of the people that we represent. So it's important that I put that out there as, the chair of the Education Committee, and it's important that the general public understands that everything we're doing is reflective of the people of Lankenau, right? Lankenau was never a school that I was thinking about. I wasn't talking about it, it wasn't on my radar. But man, look at the letters that we've gotten, the emails that we've gotten. When we represent the people of Philadelphia, the package over there, Councilmember Lozada, when we represent the people of Philadelphia, we cannot ignore this type of outreach, this type of organizing effort, and this level of advocacy that's coming to district members, as well as members in leadership, that's pretty much begging us not to ruin their lives. They're not saying, don't keep my school open; they're saying, keep my child alive. They're saying, please don't ruin our community and our neighborhood. And I want to be clear that that is the focus of this legislative body. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you, Chairman Thomas. Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, then Councilmember Jim Harrity. Well, let me -- you-all just showed up. So Jamie Gauthier, then Jim Harrity, and then also Member Young. Point of Information, Councilman Quetcy Lozada.

I want to thank Councilmember Thomas for that, but I also think it's important to say that communities feel that way because of our inability.

Yes.

Or some people's inability to assume accountability about what they have allowed to happen in certain neighborhoods like mine, right? And so we have to be able to respond to the fact that we have caused government-inflicted trauma in certain neighborhoods like the 7th Councilmanic District, and we are here, our schools in the 7th Councilmanic district are where we are today, because we have not been able to respond to the social detriments that are occurring on the outside of those buildings. And that's the fact. So if people feel that there's a conspiracy, it is because they are watching what we're doing. They are watching what we are allowing in their neighborhoods, and they feel that way. So it is our responsibility to assume accountability first and be transparent. That's why transparency is so important, because there cannot be any room for people that have been disinvested in for so many years to feel like we are now allowing this to happen, because we don't want them in those neighborhoods.

The Chair now recognizes Councilman Jamie Gauthier, then Member Harrity, then Member Young.

Thank you, Council President. For this round, I'd like to examine your closure recommendation for Motivation High School. Motivation High school's building condition is fair. It's program alignment by your own data is fair. Academically, it is a school that performs well. The primary issue that you identified is utilization, which is listed at 15 percent. However, 300 KIPP students occupy the building that also includes Motivation High, and that seems to have been excluded from your calculation. So first, will the district revise the utilization formula to accurately reflect full-building occupancy? And if not, why should Council have confident that your utilization scores were applied factually and rigorously across any of the closure recommendations that you've put forward? Lastly, if vulnerability scores are not what's driving this closure recommendation, if the building condition is not what's driving this closure recommendation, if program alignment is not what's driving this closure recommendation, and your utilization metrics contain errors, I need you to tell us what variables actually are driving these recommendations? Especially because -- especially because your recommendation is that Motivation moves to Bartram, which deserves investment, but currently has a much worse building condition. So I would like for you to explain this recommendation that no one in the school community or the broader community understands. And then before you answer, I have a very quick point of information that I want to get on the record because we keep skirting past it. The Council President noted in his opening comments that there's a disproportionate impact on black and brown neighborhoods in that 68 percent of the students in these schools that you're recommending for closure are black or brown. You keep countering that and saying that that's inevitable because 51 percent of the students in the district are black and brown. There is almost a percent 19 difference between the 51 percent 20 number that you are given and the 68 percent impact that is in your plan, and it's not something that should be skirted over. So after you answer the questions about Motivation, I want you to tell us why that percent disparity that is over and above the population of the district is okay with you.

Thank you, 6 Councilmember Gauthier. The first 7 thing I would note is that the 8 recommendation is consistent with 9 the guiding theme about investing in 10 neighborhood high schools, in this 11 case, Bartram in particular. 12 Number two, while we are 13 aware that there is another school 14 that operates inside of that school 15 facility, we didn't include it in 16 our building utilization numbers 17 because as the district 18 superintendent, I was hired annually 19 held accountable for performance of 20 students in the district-operated schools. What happens? I think all 200,000 children in Philadelphia or all of our children, I just don't have oversight and accountability for all 200,000. I have direct oversight and accountability and an expectation to improve reading and math performance for those who are in district-operated schools. So everything I do, I focus on, first, my fiduciary and evaluation responsibility to improve outcomes for district-operated schools, because that's who I have authority over. And accordingly, in order to get more resources pushed into Motivation in particular, you will never, ever have the kind of robust opportunities that Northeast offers, that Lincoln offers, that George Washington offers in terms of robust programming in schools that are so small that you have 30 or less students in a grade level. It doesn't mean it's not a very fine school. Again, the North Star for me is how do I push it more resources, and how do we get reading and math performance that's improving to sky rocket times 5 faster? 6

7 Can I pause you for a second? 8

Yes, 9 ma'am. 10

So because there is a theme in the plan around improving comprehensive neighborhood schools, the logic of the recommendations is that even when we have a high-performing small program, even when it's in a fair building, we would essentially shutter it and move it to a worse building, even though we don't necessarily have the money in hand to improve the worst building. We'll shutter the high-performing academic program first, and then we'll move the program to a worse facility, and then worry about getting those resources in the future; is that the logic of the plan?

I want to look -- suggest looking at it a little bit different, if I might. Given the choice to invest resources in all of the comprehensive- neighborhood high schools, and make an appropriate investment in the small, smaller, or boutique high schools, I'm going to submit to the -- this Council that we just don't have the resources to do all of it. I'm not saying I'm right here in terms of the school selected. So we think it makes -- we have historically thought that it makes sense to put a $54 million investment in Bartram and bring Bartram up to the level that we can offer the same kind of programming in Southwest Philadelphia that we're offering right now in Northeast Philadelphia. Because if we don't do something different, we'll always have that disparity.

Can I get a point of information real quick for clarity? So there would be additional academic programming at John Bartram High School to also --

Specifically, in career technical education.

Say it again, I'm sorry.

Specifically related to career and technical education programs.

So it'd be new CTE programming and then also magnet school children attending the same school as well?

Yes, sir. And we think we can do it really well.

Share it.

That's how Motivation started.

It just sounded backwards to me. You shutter a well-performing school in the -- in the near to the present tense and then move it to a school that deserves investment, but that you have not identified the investment for it yet, that will come sometime, you know, within the next decade, maybe. It just seems backwards to me. And then secondly, I would really like for you to specifically address the disparity issue because there is a big difference between the 51 percent number that you're given, and the 68 percent number that -- in terms of the impact of the plan on black and brown students.

Thank you, Councilmember Gauthier. The reason I made the comment to the Council President earlier is that because this is a majority black and brown district, any way you slice the pie, anybody who -- in any decisions that get made relative to -- I believe, relative to changes in current school configurations will have some disproportionate impact, positive or negative, on black and brown children. Now, for me, I see, and I'll just speak as a superintendent here, we've had almost a 13-percentage point increase in 3rd grade math performance. If we look at 3rd through 8th grade math performance over the past three- and-a-half years, we have almost a nine-percentage point. Outperforming the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania average, outperforming the national average. But black people here in our schools, the majority do not do math or reading on grade level. And so we ought to call the question and say, we've already done a number on black and brown kids in this city and in public education across this country, and that's why I'm so adamant, let's do something different. Let's make -- let's do less and go deeper so that we can really accelerate, because we've got teachers and leaders and students and others who are just ready to accelerate even more. I'm not saying I'm right, but that's the way I see the world.

Respectfully, that does not answer the question. The population of the district is 51 percent black and brown, according to your testimony.

51 percent African American.

As Council President stated, and that was also reported by the inquirer, the impact of your proposed recommendations would have a -- it shows a disparate impact on black and brown students to the tune of 68 percent. That shows a disparity that is present within your plan. Speak -- please speak to the disparity.

Yes. Let me say this, because of the demographics of the school district, there are not a lot of majority white schools in the School District of Philadelphia. It's just the sheer numbers. There just are not. And when you look at the percentage of non-African American, non-Hispanic or Latino children, you just don't have that number of schools that you could go close, even if I said, okay, I'll take all these off the table, and let's go close some other ones, you would never have enough for that impact not to hit black and brown people in the city. It's just our demographics.

I don't think we should be okay with that. Thank you, Council President.

Member Harrity, then Member Young.

Thank you, Council President. And I apologize for having to leave. I had to go to a janazah for a friend of mine who passed. So I apologize if some of my questions may be repetitive. But, you know, I'd like to -- just start off by just saying that, as I said earlier, and has Councilwoman Gauthier just bought up that the schools are disproportionate in black and brown neighborhoods, where we're taking them away. And I would absolutely argue that is because of the school district's disinvestment in them schools. The fact that we have all this deferred maintenance that we put off, put off, put off to where it's now at a point where we could never actually do it. And it just goes to show you that -- you know, and I get it. When I first went up to the Senate with Senator Street and found out how they actually did school funding, it didn't take a rocket science to figure out why my schools and my neighborhood weren't like other schools, it's because it goes by real estate tax. And in a neighborhood like mine, where most people are on the homestead and are not paying real estate tax, they are not coming in. It just seems to me that they're the neighborhoods we always end up cutting from. But the fact of the matter is, we wouldn't have to cut if we would've invested in them in the first place. The 7th District is where I live, but I went to Bartram. I wasn't smart enough to get in Motivation, but I did go to Bartram Business, which is also another school that was cut years ago. Bartram, when I was a kid, you had Motivation, you had Bartram Business, you had Bartram Main, and on top of Bartram Main, you had the CTA Auto Mechanics. I can't tell you how many guys I grew up with that went to Bartram that owned their own auto mechanics shop now because of what they learned there at Bartram. So I'm glad we're trying to get some of that back. But for me, part of the reason that some of these schools are succeeding better than our other schools is because they're smaller. It's not rocket science. The teacher has more one-on-one time with the student. Look, I get it. We all want to be fiscally responsible, right? We all want to -- but -- and again, maybe it's because I'm just a regular guy here, the union guy on Council, some of this stuff just doesn't get to me, it doesn't register sometimes. We keep cutting from these neighborhoods, and we see the direct result from it. We see crime, we see things of that nature. I just -- I just want us to think more about the actual kids as we're saying. These kids -- some of our kids can't go to other schools. That's life. That's reality in the city of Philadelphia. Our kids can't go from one neighbor to another because there's stupid old beefs that are out there. And I get that, but that is our kids' faults. We got to protect our kids whatever way we can. And Bartram Motivation that -- like that's a school that did so much good for so many kids. My sister went to Bartram Motivation; she also got to go to college because she went to Bartram Motivation. You understand that for me, that's the way to get out, is through the education, and we just need to -- we need to think long and hard. I get that we need to make sure that the schools are, but like we said, some of these schools are foundational. They are legacy in the city of Philadelphia. And I know, I didn't even ask the question yet. So just in frustrations, because this is what's coming to us. These are questions like; we're not bringing this stuff out of the air. So some of the schools have mentioned that changes in administration and requirements for reasons of decreased enrollment. Can you talk about how the school district administration process, the lottery, changed over the last few years and why these changes implemented? And what's -- why were these changes implemented? And what goals do they aim to accomplish? Because as far as I can see, what it's aiming to accomplish is closing some of our good schools.

May I speak to that, Mr. Chairman -- Mr. President?

Absolutely, Dr. Watlington.

Relative to Councilmember Gauthier's question and yours, Councilmember Harrity, the lottery was designed to give more children choice opportunity, and to make sure it's as equitable as possible. The second thing I want to just note, Dr. Clayton and I used to talk about how, when she was superintendent in the early '80s, it was like 20,30, 40,000 children in district-operated schools, fourth largest in the country. Let me tell you what's happened. In addition to the historic underfunding, if you go -- if you look at our enrollment in this city, there were 200,000 public school children in Philadelphia a decade ago, about the time that Bill Height came here. Guess what? There's still just about 200,000 public school children. Public school population isn't shrinking very -- at a very high volume. What's happening in Philadelphia is different than New York, it's different than Chicago, it's different than Los Angeles, and it's somewhat different from Miami, some of the other bigger school districts. What we are experiencing is kids over time leaving district- operated schools to go to publicly- funded charter schools. And I never get into debate about one or the other, but I was hired by the Board of Education to move the needle in district-operated schools, and so that's why I'm focused there. The second thing, when we talk about the impact on black and brown students, I will also tell you that one of the other things that Dr. Clayton and I used to talk about is in the School District of Philadelphia at present or before her death, we weren't experiencing a white flight. What we're experiencing is as a black flight issue, black kids leaving the school district. So really, our plan is to grow that black enrollment by I improve -- improving outcomes, because if I'm a parent, I'm going to say, look, tell me who's getting the best reading and math performance? Who's graduating these kids ready to go to the University of Pennsylvania, like the Council President, and then to Harvard? And I say, I'm going to send my kids with who's getting the best result. And I would encourage kids to do that. That's why we are so focused on improving those district-operated schools because we have responsibility for improving outcomes. Anyway, I just -- Senior Advisor Landau can walk you through an example, Blankenburg School, for example, if she would just say a quick word about what that looks like at a Blankenburg.

Yes, thank you. So we certainly see an alignment between the number of charters that are in a certain area and the number of vacant seats that we see. I believe they're -- so for a good example would be Blankenburg, where right now there are 150 students that are from the catchment going to Blankenburg. There's four -- 543 in the same catchment that are going to charters. Ten years ago, those numbers were flipped, but we're seeing that in districts, I believe there are 10 charters in Council District 3, where we have a lot of students that are choosing charters. And because they don't go equally to charters, we then have district schools where there's very low enrollment, and some of those impacts are more pronounced. I think Blankenburg is a good example of that.

And so we have to address the fact that we've lost 60,000 children to charters over multiple decades. And it has some impact on the district-operated schools, and our budgets and facilities. And charter should not -- I just want to --

You said yourself parents want to send their kids to schools where the math and grades are up, where kids are going. I would say that the fact that more people want to send their kids to charter school rather than public school, I think we should learn from that and ask why is that? Well, I can tell you why. Because they're safer on most counts and they have a better education.

May I just say we've looked at the data --

I'm not saying -- no, I'm not saying -- oh, listen, I'm not saying it. I'm saying -- what I'm saying is you can't argue with kids transferring to other schools because parents want their kids to be safe and stuff like that. I'm for the public schools. I'm went to public schools. I'm for public schools. I'm not saying anything about closing public schools down. Now you see how what I'm saying about it. What I'm saying is we should change the way we're educating our kids, if the kids don't want to go to those schools. So if we're not getting the numbers, it's because of the education. That's what you just said yourself.

So if I may, Mr. President, just --

Not the schools that they're -- I'm not talking about --

The Chair recognizes Dr. Tony Watlington.

Mr. President, for the record, I do want to note in the record that I personally have not seen a report that in the aggregate -- I've heard people say it, but I've not seen a verified report that charter schools are safer than district-operated schools. I've not seen that in evidence. Second, I can tell you that the multiple years of investment in charter schools, charter schools do not get better academic results than district-operated schools. I can tell you, in fact, in the aggregate, the top quartile -- we've looked at the data very deeply, the top quartile of district-operated schools, our data suggests outperform the top quartile of charter schools in Philadelphia. And I'm not anti-charter because I believe in choice -- appropriate choice with accountability because I came from that experience in my previous job. And number three, when you look at when our children graduate from district schools and charter schools, Mr. President, if you look at who persists in that second year of college, beyond the first year, district-operated graduates have a higher persistence rate. Don't take my word for it, we'll submit it on the record. But the way we know this is through the clearinghouse data that comes out every year.

All I wanted was we need to think about keeping kids. Because if kids are jumping ship --

I think what he's saying --

They used to be in public school now they're switching over to charter school. Why?

I think we're turning that tide too, Councilmember Harrity. And that we were really pleased to see last year, for the first time in a decade, with the support of some verifying principals and school leaders, in partnership with unions and others. I see Dr. Robin Cooper over there, with the CASA Union. Those leaders are focused on making these district operator schools better. Test scores are up, graduation rates up. And, you know, I don't want to stick -- I don't want to say we won the war, Mr. President, but when we cut that dropout rate by more than half, and we know that the cost for every dropout to this city in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is $405,000 through incarceration, no 7 healthcare, social supports, et cetera. I would say the district operated schools are doing some phenomenal work. In fact, we're among the most improved big cities in the nation. And I just think we've got to tell that story. But thank you for the feedback. Yes, sir.

I hope that's the case because I --

Member Harrity.

-- would like to get the kids back to public school.

Can you speak to the microphone, Member Harrity.

I'm sorry. I thought my voice was okay. I hope that's the case, because what I'll -- all I'm trying to get at is how do we get those kids back? How do we make them feel like they won't -- instead of cutting their schools. We're going to close schools because we lost schools -- kids to public school -- well, to charter schools. I want to know why we lost them so we can get them back into our public schools so we don't have to close public schools. And part of the stuff that I was getting in my office is what I was saying, was that they say that some of the policies on how the kids are picked and how they get to go to that school is what is holding them up. They had more kids the old way is what I was told. That was all I was getting at. All I want to do is keep the kids we got and keep our schools.

Thank you, sir.

That's our Chairman of Labor over there. You see all them PFT folks out there, CASA and all that. So -- but thank you very much, Member Harrity, your passion. We have three more and then we're going to go into public comment. And so I want to acknowledge the presence of my majority leader, Councilwoman Katherine Gilmore-Richardson. So in the queue is Councilmember Jeffrey J. Young, then Councilmember Dr. Nina Ahmad, and then the majority leader will wrap us up, Councilmember Katherine Gilmore-Richardson. Press your button, ma'am. Okay. It's pressed now. We see it now. You got to be on point back there. Councilmember Jeffrey J. Young.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. I like to think that, you know, I'm a logical and practical person, but as I'm reviewing this plan, like it just -- a lot of things aren't connected for me. So I just want to ask some questions based on how to connect, you know, the rationale behind this. I know my colleagues alluded to, you know, asking you all the rationale behind it, but just listening to the conversation, it seems like that smaller class sizes seem to be a bad thing, and I don't know why that seems to be a bad thing, right? That's -- I mean, I don't understand that. Like, do you get more attention? So let's -- you know, I just want to put that out there. So I do not think smaller class sizes are a bad thing when you have that one-on-one attention. I mean, this plan has a lot to take in, particularly when you look at the effect that it has across the city. And I like -- you know, you guys you give us information that's based on our council districts, but unfortunately, right, well, unfortunately, our council district lines aren't -- don't match your catchment lines, right? And so I have folks who live in my council district but go to school in Quetcy's district and vice versa, right? So to kind of -- you know, you slice it up to try to make it individualized, but that doesn't really get the full story about how parents that go to Moffet now have to send their kids to, what's that, Hackett, when Adaire is in my district, which is actually closer, right? And a better school, might I add, right? So -- right? So -- and then we're closing. So I think there's another story about, you know, we're not closing, you know, comprehensive high schools, but you're closing Penn Treaty, right? Which is a comprehensive neighborhood high school, which those kids from Adaire, right, would transition to go to, right? So they're closing their high school. They have no 12 neighborhood school in that community once it's closed. Now, if I go to Adaire, I go to go to Kensington. Just think about it. I don't know who -- folks who came up with this plan if they're from Philadelphia or had that idea in mind. But if you live in Fishtown, right, you're -- you got to see your kid in Kensington High School, that's something to really just think about, right? I really think we have to make sure that Philadelphians are taking a look at this plan. So my question is -- I know Councilmember Thomas alluded to this, right? We have some, you know, closures of magnet schools that are middle schools, right? But then we have some expansion of others that are middle schools. And it looks like the ones that are being expanded, right, which is, you know, great school, one of the best schools in the country, right? That's being expanded while -- and that -- and that population is a primarily white population, right? And then you're closing other magnet middle schools. The magnet middle school I went to, AMY Northwest, I went there for 6th Grade, right? Closing, right? Conwell, closing. Like the -- you seem like, you know, other magnet schools -- if the idea is to -- I'm trying to look back at your -- the themes here. This is to create more academic opportunities. It seems like you are taking away those academic opportunities for black and brown kids in the city of Philadelphia, right? Because if I'm going to these smaller magnet middle schools, I just think that, you know, it just -- I can't -- I can't wrap my head around why is this logical? Like, why is it logical? Why is it okay to have middle school for some but not others? If your data says, right, you keep -- you know, you always say, our data says better -- less transitions, this, that, and other. Why is it okay for this school but not that school, right? And I'm just -- you know, show me what the data says about that. Like, why is it okay to expand Masterman but to close Conwell, to close AMY Northwest? And why is it a -- why is that okay, specifically?

And I want to -- I know my bell rang, because I got a lot on my mind with this. The catchment lines. I would ask that you include community members and other stakeholders when deciding what these new catchment lines will look like. Because this has to be equitable in every facet possible because of -- we are -- you -- this is going get beat down your throat. We are a city of neighborhoods. And although -- right -- I mean, you're closing a school that's in council district -- VICE CHAIR RICHARDSON: Councilmember Young, Thank you.

I'm sorry. It's just a -- VICE CHAIR RICHARDSON: I received it. And we have given you three additional minutes, I just ask that you wrap up with your question.

All right. I'm going to wrap up with a question. I'm feeling like Councilmember Harrity right now, right? Because there's just a lot going on here that does not make sense to me, right? As someone, again, I think is very practical and logical. So the question is, yes, how does closing black and brown magnet schools provide the best opportunities for Philadelphia's children?

Thank you, Councilmember Young. First, you referenced, is school size a bad -- small class or school size a bad thing? And here's the bottom line to the point answer. No, it's not a bad thing in well-resourced schools. When you have schools that are not well-resourced and do -- that do not have very strong stable populations over -- teaching population and staff populations over time where you have turnover, what happens is you'll never be able to offer in those places that same quality of academic and extracurricular programs that we have at Northeast, George Washington, and Lankenau.

You keep mentioning those schools. Those are large schools. What -- like -- so does closing those schools then -- so the schools that you're closing, do they have issues with teacher retention? Do they have issues with providing all these things that like -- because if that's your rationale, then show us that that is the -- you know, that's what's happening here. That's what's happening at Conwell and Amy Northwest and Parkway Northwest and Lankenau. Like these are great schools for our residents.

If resources were not an issue, we could pump in the resources that will allow a small school to offer robust programming. And I'm not just talking about algebra in the middle grades. You talk about foreign language, the best career -- technical education programs. But that's the problem we're solving for. Right or wrong, I'm not saying that my way of seeing the world as we look at the research is the right way, but that's the straight answer. Second, to your point about it looks like we're being hypocritical in the middle grades space, I would just say in the criteria-based schools where there's a high demand year-over-year, there are a lot more parents requesting these schools and saying, Look, we want to go to these schools. So we say, Hey, that makes sense. If we can make these five through 6 schools like Carver Engineering and 7 Science, if there's a high demand, 8 put the resources there. Because 9 again, we're trying to grow the 10 school district enrollment. 11 If, on the other hand, you 12 look at schools that are not as a part of some of those choice schools that people are trying to get into, and the schools where people are leaving, and if you look at the line graph, we have schools where the population has gone down year after year. You know, we can't ignore that trend. And so we need to put the resources where we think we can grow and not where we're shrinking. And so it's not that we value some of those criteria schools more, it's just that we know there's a demand to go there.

Of course, it's the best school in the state. Who don't want to send their kid to Masterman, right?

And we don't want -- you're right, sir. And we don't want to divest in those other schools. We just need to run a different play because the play we're running isn't helping us to score.

This play makes no sense.

Understood.

To be honest. VICE CHAIR RICHARDSON: Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you. VICE CHAIR RICHARDSON: Councilmember Young, are you good?

I mean, ultimately still the question is, again, like how does this plan ultimately -- like how does closing these black and brown magnet schools provide the best opportunities for Philadelphia's children, right? That's it. Like these are some of the best schools in the city. Why does closing some of the best schools in the city -- how does closing some of the best schools in the city make our city's education better?

We believe over time we will give kids more and not less by pushing more high quality academic extracurricular resources into less schools. VICE CHAIR RICHARDSON: Okay. Thank you very much, Dr. Watlington. I'm just arriving, so I apologize for the delay. The Chair now recognizes Councilmember Squilla, who I'm looking at, who's next in the queue. And then after that, based on presence in the hearing, I see Councilmember Ahmad, and then me, and then I'll defer to Councilmember Lozada. I'll go last. Okay. So Councilmember Squilla, Councilmember Ahmad, Councilmember Lozada. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for being here. And I know this is a charged conversation, and when you're dealing with parents and children in schools, it's always a challenge. And I want to thank you. Because I know I gave you specifics on our concerns in my district, in the first district and city challenges. But I want to be more general in these questions in that, during the numbers that we see, the modernization of schools that have challenges, the number always is, if we get all the money we ask for, this is what we're doing. How are we prioritizing what schools get what? And how are we also prioritizing what schools that are in basic needs now -- that have basic needs now being done?

Thank you, Councilman Squilla. Let me just say two things to Councilmember Young's point. Thank you for the feedback, and I didn't answer your question directly. The last one. I apologize, sir. Yes, we want parent and community feedback on catchment areas. Councilmember Squilla, with regard to how we prioritize -- if we don't get -- is the spirit of your question, if we don't get the full 2.8 billion, how do we prioritize which schools get in the hopper and which get in line first. I'm going to ask senior advisor Landau to speak a little bit to that strategy.