Committee Hearing, May 24, 2011

COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PHILADELPHIA2 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE3 Room 400, City Hall6 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Tuesday, May 24, 20117 10:25 a.m. PRESENT: COUNCIL PRESIDENT ANNA C. VERNA10 COUNCILWOMAN JANNIE BLACKWELL COUNCILMAN DARRELL CLARKE11 COUNCILMAN W. WILSON GOODE, JR. COUNCILMAN BILL GREEN12 COUNCILMAN WILLIAM K. GREENLEE COUNCILMAN CURTIS JONES, JR.13 COUNCILMAN JAMES KENNEY COUNCILWOMAN DONNA REED MILLER14 COUNCILMAN BRIAN J. O'NEILL COUNCILWOMAN MARIA D. QUINONES-SANCHEZ15 COUNCILWOMAN BLONDELL REYNOLDS BROWN COUNCILWOMAN MARIAN B. TASCO16 BILLS 110135, 110136, 110137, 110138, 110139 and 11014018 RESOLUTION 110161 - - -20 2

Good2 morning. Let me thank everyone for3 coming here today. We're grateful to4 have the Superintendent/CEO of the5 Philadelphia school system, members of6 her Board that we will ask -- who are in7 her office -- we will ask her to8 introduce. We welcome them all. We9 welcome the PFT and all their members,10 and certainly all who are here, including11 the students, who have been holding up12 signs in the balcony. We're grateful to13 have them here.14 (Applause.)15

Thank16 you very much. So this will formally17 begin our hearings for the School18 District of Philadelphia on their budget,19 and we will ask the Clerk to read both20 bills, the title of both.21 MR. McPHERSON: This is a22 continuation hearing on bills and23 resolution, Resolution 110161, the City's24 Five Year Plan; Bill No. 110135, the25 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Capital Program, 2012 through 2017; Bill2 No. 110136, the Capital Budget for 2012;3 Bill No. 110137, the Operating Budget for4 2012; Bill No. 110138, the wage tax bill,5 and we're going to take testimony today6 on Bill Nos. 110139, an ordinance7 amending Chapter 19-1800 of The8 Philadelphia Code, entitled "School Tax9 Authorization," by amending Section10 19-1806, entitled "Authorization of11 Realty Use and Occupancy Tax."12 Bill No. 110140, an ordinance13 amending Section 19-1801 of The14 Philadelphia Code, entitled15 "Authorization of Tax," to further16 authorize the Board of Education of the17 School District of Philadelphia to impose18 a tax on real estate within the City of19 Philadelphia.20

Thank21 you very much.22 We note that we have a quorum23 this morning, and we will now call on our24 guests, Dr. Ackerman, to introduce25 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 yourself to the record and begin your2 testimony.3

Thank you,4 Chairwoman. Before I --5

Please6 pull the mike closer. We can't hear you.7

I'm sorry.8

Thank9 you.10

I'd like to11 introduce two of our Commissioners who12 are here, and Chairman Archie will start13 with remarks today, but sitting next to14 him is Commissioner Joseph Dworetzky.15 COUNCILWOMAN BLACKWELL:16 Welcome.17

Chairman Archie.18

Good morning,19 Council President Verna and members of20 City Council. As the Superintendent21 said, I am Robert Archie, Chairman of the22 School Reform Commission, and I, along23 with my fellow Commissioner Joe24 Dworetzky, are here today to show our25 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 support and to have me testify on behalf2 of the School District of Philadelphia in3 support of Bill Nos. 110139, 110140 and4 110178 and I believe 110179.5 As we all know and as the6 School District of Philadelphia7 approaches Fiscal Year 2011 through 2012,8 it faces dramatic proposed reductions in9 funding, as well as a legal obligation to10 adopt a budget, a balanced budget, of the11 coming year. Mindful of those12 challenges, the District leadership has13 conducted this year a budget -- this14 year's budget preparation process with15 considerable thought and due diligence.16 It's now time for City Council to review17 and react to the budget plan proposed by18 the School District's management team in19 order to gain a better understanding of20 the School District's current fiscal21 challenges and how Philadelphia education22 programs and priorities are likely to be23 affected.24 To avoid adversely impacting25 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 and eliminating these educational2 programs and priorities, the School3 Reform Commission respectfully requests4 financial assistance in the form of5 increased revenues from the City of6 Philadelphia and this City Council. With7 that as a background, it is incumbent8 upon all of us to ensure the equitable9 allocation of resources, along with10 access to an equal opportunity education11 for all students.12 District managers and staff13 have worked hard to preserve the core14 mission of our public education system15 while building a balanced FY 2011 to 201216 budget for your review. I anticipate a17 lively and informed discussion about the18 proposed budget and its alignment with19 our community academic needs and20 priorities.21 Before I introduce Dr. Ackerman22 and Deputy Superintendent Dr. Leroy23 Nunery and our Chief Business Officer24 Michael Masch, I want to take this moment25 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 to thank Mayor Nutter and every member of2 City Council for the leadership and3 ongoing support you have provided the4 School District during my two years on5 the School Reform Commission. I, as well6 as my fellow Commissioners, deeply7 appreciate all that you've done,8 especially in light of the unforeseen9 economic challenges we have all endured10 and the uncertain future that lies ahead.11 Now I invite Dr. Arlene12 Ackerman, Superintendent of the School13 District of Philadelphia, to review how14 collectively we plan to continue in the15 intense pace we have set for achieving16 the ambitious goals of Imagine 2014 and17 the great strides our students have made18 over the last eight years. Following Dr.19 Ackerman's testimony, Deputy20 Superintendent Dr. Leroy Nunery and our21 Chief Business Officer Michael Masch will22 outline the School District proposed FY1123 to '12 budget and how we pledge to be24 careful stewards of the financial25 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 resources that the City, the Commonwealth2 and the Obama Administration have and3 hopefully will bestow upon us. Thank4 you.5 Dr. Ackerman.6

14 Let me begin by thanking you,15 Madam Chairperson and members of the City16 Council. 1 percentage of the District's schools that2 met AYP standards rose from 9 percent to3 59 percent. 6 For example, in August 2010, we7 proudly reported the following data: 1588 schools made AYP, and that's 59 percent9 of the District's schools, 33 percent10 more schools than last year's total of11 119. 13 The severe budgetary reductions14 anticipated for the next school year,15 however, now characterize our latest and16 greatest challenge thus far. Our purpose17 and priorities are clear. We remain18 committed to building a system of great19 schools where all students can succeed,20 where all have equal access to21 opportunities that matter and people who22 care. 7 In a few minutes, Dr. Nunery,8 our Deputy Superintendent, and Michael9 Masch, our Chief Financial Officer, will10 present the details of our Fiscal Year11 2011-12 budget. 1 these proposed cuts for months now. We2 as District leaders are painfully aware3 that many of the spending cuts in next4 year's budget will cause great pain and5 disruption to thousands of Philadelphia6 families and will threaten the hard-won7 improvements in academic achievement that8 I mentioned earlier. 17 A friend once told me of a18 custom in some African villages where the19 elders would visit to determine how well20 things were going in the respective21 communities. 1 that when children fail, it is a systems2 failure. 6 The truth is, ladies and7 gentlemen, we all acknowledge that the8 proposed cuts will hurt our children. 7 Please know, however, that we welcome the8 support of the City Council and the9 Mayor. )15

At this time,16 Deputy Superintendent Dr. Leroy Nunery17 and Chief Financial Officer Michael Masch18 will present the details of our Fiscal19 Year 2011-2012 budget.20

Good morning. For21 the record, my name is Leroy Nunery and I22 am honored to be working with Dr. 1 School District of Philadelphia since2 July 2010. As a key member of the Office3 of the Superintendent, working closely4 with Dr. Ackerman, my responsibilities5 are broad and they encompass the6 leadership and management of several7 District functions, including Facilities;8 Capital Programs; Procurement; Talent9 Development; Information Technology;10 Charter, New and Partnership Schools;11 Grants Development and Compliance; and a12 wide range of other mission-critical13 District-wide initiatives and activities14 such as the Facilities Master Plan. 19 As Dr. Ackerman just outlined,20 Philadelphia's public and charter schools21 have made significant and steady progress22 for eight straight years, especially23 since we've implemented our five-year24 strategic plan, Imagine 2014. 1 the face of unprecedented fiscal2 challenges, I hope that the members of3 the City Council and the public will4 recognize the enormous dedication and5 effort of District personnel as we strive6 to continually lift achievement,7 transform schools that underperform and8 create new opportunities for educational9 attainment. 11 For several months now and12 especially since early March, when13 Governor Corbett's budget proposal became14 public, our entire senior management team15 at Dr. Ackerman's instruction has16 developed multiple options and scenarios17 that balance three main priorities. One,18 protecting our core educational mission;19 two, terminating, eliminating or20 modifying the services that support the21 educational mission; and, three,22 achieving a mandated balanced budget. to achieve these goals. As our Chief Financial Officer5 Michael Masch will tell you in a few6 moments, the $629 million projected7 budget gap presents Philadelphia with8 dynamic complications and trade-offs. 14 Our three-phased planning15 approach was initiated in January 2011,16 at which time our executive leadership17 acted to ensure the District's fiscal18 stability for the remainder of this19 current academic year. 1 immediate reductions in Central Office2 spending; three, implementing a hiring3 freeze; four, restricting the spending of4 unobligated funds; five, applying surplus5 funds to the net operating budget; and,6 six, consolidating and reducing Central7 Office departments, programs and8 services. 10 But because of the severity of11 our funding shortfall, the second phase12 of planning for Fiscal Year 2011-1213 included planning for extending controls14 on spending; freezing hiring and closely15 examining the intent and the purpose of16 each initiative; initiating reductions in17 force, including a 50 percent reduction18 in staffing at the Central Office;19 reducing central allocations and20 operational supports, for example,21 facilities services for schools; and22 reducing costs through efficiency23 improvements and elimination of24 redundancies. 1 our cost-saving solutions is the recently2 developed textbook inventory that3 complements our normal purchases through4 publishers. Within just three weeks, we5 have saved over $350,000 by supplying6 schools from this inventory. 8 So our efforts to find efficiencies can9 translate into real savings and10 potentially real people. 3 In this current political and4 economic climate, we're deeply concerned5 about the potential disproportionate6 impact that necessary budget cuts will7 have on our children and the state of our8 city and our schools. 14 We also think that all15 financial and all non-financial issues16 pertaining to student success and school17 improvement belong to all of us. )4

Good morning, Madam5 President, Councilwoman Blackwell and the6 other members of City Council. I'm7 honored to be here again with my8 colleagues. 16 As Dr. Ackerman and Dr. Nunery17 and Chairman Archie have noted, we face18 unprecedented reductions in state and19 federal aid at present. 3 Despite those challenges, we4 have done what the Philadelphia Home Rule5 Charter and the Pennsylvania School Code6 require. We have presented a balanced7 budget. 19 The first, as you can see on20 the screen, is our projected enrollment21 for next year. 1 over 200,000. We project 203,000 next2 year at this point. The critical3 difference, as you can see from the mix4 of blue and red in the columns, is the5 fact that the way that we deliver public6 education is changing dramatically, and7 next year under the budget that we have8 proposed, our projection is that one out9 of four public school students in the10 City of Philadelphia will attend a11 charter school and three out of four will12 attend a District-operated school, a13 little over 150,000 in District-operated14 schools and about 51,000 in charter15 schools. 23 Dr. Ackerman has noted our24 academic progress. 1 the record that although there are some2 who have, in the public debates about3 school funding in Pennsylvania, in recent4 months suggested that there is no5 relationship between funding and6 achievement, as the Superintendent has7 noted, achievement in this School8 District has increased substantially. 6 Our point to you is,7 Philadelphia public schools have gotten8 better, and Philadelphia operates in fact9 the largest number of successful public10 schools in the Commonwealth. )18

But this is our19 problem. We always face challenges in20 terms of spending growth and we have been21 able to manage them. 1 stability. We have had not just balanced2 budgets but modest surpluses in the past3 three years. Our problem next year is4 not a spending problem. 7 billion, and that13 represents a $400 million, 15 percent,14 reduction in the resources that the15 School District will have to spend next16 year. 1 under 30 percent of the School District's2 resources. 11 What that means is that the12 resources that would be available to the13 School District next year, unless there14 is a change, will be back at the level of15 2008-2009. 17 Everything that we do - the cost of18 labor; the cost of materials, supplies19 and equipment; fuel for our buses; the20 lighting and heating of our schools; the21 payments that we make to charter22 schools - all of those costs have gone up23 since then. 7 There was about 4 to 5 percent in local8 funding, primarily through the School9 District share of the property tax. 6912 mills in the property tax from the City13 to the School District. So that's why --14 that's part of the reason you see the15 bump up in '07-'08. 2 This is compounded by Governor3 Corbett's proposal to reduce state4 funding by $292 million. A hundred and5 seven million of that would be in the6 Basic Education subsidy, 110 million in7 charter school reimbursement. 15 Fifty-five million in funding16 from the Accountability Block Grant is17 completely eliminated. 10 What is striking about this11 proposal on the part of the Governor is12 that it is such a dramatic break from13 anything that we've seen in the recent14 history of funding by the Commonwealth15 for the Philadelphia public schools. 20 The Governor is proposing a 10 percent21 reduction. 1 billion in cuts the3 Philadelphia School District, which4 educates 10 percent of the Commonwealth's5 school children, is being asked to bear6 25 percent of the cuts in state funding,7 and that is part of a pattern, as you can8 see here. 21 This is compounded by the loss22 of federal stimulus funds coming directly23 to the School District. 1 repeatedly since we released this budget,2 if this was the only problem the School3 District faced, we knew about it, we were4 prepared for it, we had a plan to handle5 it. 8 So as we've noted, taking into9 account the reductions in federal10 funding, the reductions in state11 funding -- and I should note that while12 we're focusing on next year, the state13 has proposed a reduction of $71 million14 in state funding for the School District15 this year, which compounds the problem,16 because we've had to accommodate that,17 and while we'll still have a balanced18 budget, that means that our base going19 into next year is lower. And when you20 add that to the increases in our mandated21 costs, our projection is that we have a22 budget gap of 629 million. And so we23 have proposed a $629 million gap-closing24 plan. 1 it can, to close the gap between revenue2 and spending without touching school3 budgets. And as Dr. Ackerman and4 Dr. Nunery have noted, the first thing5 that we have done is to reduce the6 central administration of the District by7 half, but unfortunately, the central8 administration of the School District9 only comprises four percent of the School10 District budget. 1 charter schools, we are seeking charter2 school budget relief, and we have3 targeted that at 57 million. We have4 asked our collective bargaining units to5 discuss with us ways of reducing our6 labor costs next year so that we could7 achieve another 75 million in gap8 closing. But when all of those9 initiatives are taken into account, we10 still are left with about half of the gap11 to be closed. 1 two-thirds of the operating budget which2 we cannot cut, either because of federal3 laws, state laws or contractual4 requirements.

That includes our debt5 service obligations, which are a quarter6 million dollars; our payments to charter7 schools, which this year are over 4008 million, will be higher next year;9 maximum class sizes that we have agreed10 to. And these are not our actual class11 sizes, but this is what we need to put12 into the budget just to maintain the13 contractual maximums of 30 students to a14 teacher in grades K to and 33 students15 to a class in grades to 12. 18 One principal per school costs19 us $46 million. One building engineer20 per school costs us $21 million. Our21 special ed costs cost us over $24022 million. 3 So what this budget does is, it4 reduces central administrative5 expenditures 50 percent in our central6 offices. When you add in some things7 like temporary borrowing, the net8 decrease is 44 percent. The reduction in9 District-operated schools is about 1110 percent. And then there is a proposed11 increase in this budget of 15 percent for12 charter schools. That is a combination13 of several factors. 23 We have given you the details24 on the spending changes. 9 percent in our operating4 funds. 8 As we have noted, the largest9 share of cuts has to occur in school10 budgets, and these are primarily cuts in11 people, because we are a labor-intensive12 organization. So if this budget is13 implemented as it has been introduced,14 the School District workforce will15 decline by 3,800 positions. 1 leadership team, every cut was agonized2 over for hours in terms of what we could3 bear. 8 It does provide for full Title I9 allocations of over a hundred million10 dollars to the schools. It does11 preserve, with some increase, the reduced12 class size initiative in the School13 District's Imagine 2014 strategic plan,14 but raises the average class size in15 grades K to 3 by about three students per16 class. It does preserve the expanded17 summer school program. 4 As the Superintendent has said,5 we all are painfully aware that these6 cuts will cause great pain and disruption7 to Philadelphia families and threaten the8 hard-won improvements in academic9 achievement that have been attained over10 the past eight years. And, therefore,11 mindful of the budget pressures that you12 face, we are respectfully seeking13 additional funding in the 2011-12 year14 both from local and state sources in15 order to preserve and advance academic16 progress in all of Philadelphia's public17 schools, both District-operated schools18 and charter schools. We recognize that19 the specifics as to methods and amounts20 of additional local funding must be21 decided by the elected officials who22 guide the City. 15 We pledge to invest the funds16 that you entrust to us wisely and17 diligently, to continue to improve upon18 the results that our District and our19 City have achieved together. )23

Will24 you testify as well?25 44 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

No. I'm just2 filling Mr. Archie's chair.3

Thank4 you.5 We will now begin some6 questions from our colleagues in Council.7 Councilman Bill Greenlee.8

Thank9 you, Madam Chair and Madam President.10 Good morning, everyone. I just11 want to try to get some actual numbers in12 some of these cuts just so it's put in13 perspective, I guess. I think the two14 issues that have been raised the most are15 going to the half-day kindergarten and16 also the transportation issues. And it17 might be in here somewhere, so I18 apologize, but how many children will be19 affected, or approximately if you don't20 have an exact number, by going to the21 half-day kindergarten? Does anybody have22 that offhand? I'm just trying to get23 some real numbers here that we're talking24 about, or real children I guess is a25 45 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 better way to say it.2

Thirteen3 thousand.4

Thirteen5 thousand children by the half-day6 kindergarten?7

Yes.8

And along9 the same lines, on the transportation --10 and I know the transportation issue also11 affects private and parochial school12 students, correct?13

Yes.14

Do we,15 again, have numbers on that, how many16 we're talking about here?17

Yes. In regular18 education students in District-operated19 schools, we serve about 44,000 students,20 about 34,000 with TransPasses and about21 10,000 through a combination of primarily22 yellow buses and a very limited amount of23 cab service. Non-public school students24 who receive transportation services from25 46 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 the School District are over 20,000,2 about over 11,000 with TransPasses and3 about 9,000 with bus service.4

Okay.5 Thank you. That certainly puts it in6 perspective on how many children we're7 dealing with here.8 On the state cut issue, I9 thought the biggest or the most -- had10 the most impact of all the slides11 Mr. Masch showed was the disparity12 between some of the schools. I mean,13 which is really striking. I know the14 state is operating time-wise a little15 behind us, but has there been any16 conversations with some of those other17 school districts that have been18 significantly impacted? I know they're a19 lot smaller than ours. And also with the20 elected officials that represent those21 areas? Anything to report on that yet?22

Yes, Councilman.23 We've been meeting with the Pennsylvania24 League of Urban Schools, which comprises25 47 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 superintendents from across the state.2 They all have the same exact concerns,3 that by proportion they are affected.4 Towns like Allentown, Easton and others,5 Lebanon School District, are all affected6 in very similar ways.7 We have a double whammy here8 because of the way charter schools are9 funded. So we have it in both ways, not10 just directly for the District but also11 what will happen for charter school12 funding next year, because as our13 revenues go down, they will also be14 affected. So we are still a unique case.15

But I16 would guess just in cuts, I mean, it17 would seem like there are strength in18 numbers if people work together as much19 as possible. And I know you know that.20 I guess I'm just kind of stating that,21 that sometimes it's just shown as a22 Philadelphia problem, but it's a23 statewide problem as far as children in24 disparate numbers are getting hurt here.25 48 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Nothing against the kids in Upper Merion2 or anything, but it seems like we need a3 little balance here. I know that's a4 political problem, too.5

Councilman, we've6 actually been meeting with this plus7 group that I just mentioned and also8 recently met with all the regional9 intermediate units from around us, again,10 all on the same theme, that we should11 jointly advocate for the restoration of12 funding, that we should also look at13 shared services where it's possible to14 save money, and there are some unique15 opportunities there. But right now we16 all also need to have a single voice on17 what happens to school kids and how the18 funding is allocated. So we're on the19 same page as you are.20

And how21 about the last question on this round,22 the state officials, the elected23 officials of these areas, have they been24 involved at all yet? I'm talking about25 49 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 state reps, state senators.2

We've been talking3 to everybody, both on the House and4 Senate side. We've been to Harrisburg5 several times. We've been working also6 with the Mayor's Office through the7 Mayor's advocacy and lobbying efforts,8 again, to try to put voice to the9 concerns we have.10

Thank11 you.12 I had some other questions, but13 I know probably everybody does, so I'll14 hold.15

Can I16 just ask how much would be needed for17 full kindergarten, how much for18 transportation, so that we don't go back19 and forth on this.20

So get21 that on record.22

Madam President,23 Councilman, the cost of full-day24 kindergarten was a little over 5125 50 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 million. To go from the half-day2 program, as is budgeted now, back to full3 day we would require $25 million in4 additional funding.5 In order to restore the6 transportation cuts in total, we would7 require about 36.5 million to restore the8 bus service for grades 1 to 6 and we9 would require another 23.4 million in10 order to restore the TransPass program.11

I'm12 sorry. To restore?13

The TransPass14 program for grades 7 to 12.15

Could I16 just follow up on that just one piece.17 Has there been conversations with SEPTA18 on the TransPass issue?19

There have been20 conversations. Ever since we used to --21 for those of you who go back long enough22 to remember the discounted school tokens23 that were the predecessor of the free24 TransPasses, it has always been the case25 51 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 that the cost of student transportation2 on SEPTA has been borne by the School3 District and not by the Transportation4 Authority. The Transportation Authority5 does provide us with three and a half6 million dollars to cover administration7 of the TransPass program, but otherwise8 all of the costs are borne by the School9 District. Now, it's a special TransPass.10 It's not -- it's only available during11 school hours and not on weekends and, as12 a result, it has a lower price than the13 regular TransPass, but we are the ones14 who pay that price. We don't get a15 discount on it.16

And has17 SEPTA been open to anything on that, any18 discussion on that, just for the record?19

We've been20 discussing with SEPTA whether there are21 ways that they could be helpful to us,22 but that has mostly been a matter of23 changing the timing in terms of when we24 make payments as opposed to reducing the25 52 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 actual cost of the TransPasses that they2 provide us.3

Thank4 you.5 Again, I had other questions,6 but I know a lot of people do, so I'll7 yield for the moment. Thank you.8

Thank9 you very much. Next is Councilman Goode.10

Thank you,11 Madam Chair.12 Good morning. Let me preface13 my comments by saying four years ago I14 was the primary sponsor of the bill that15 gave more money to the School District16 and changed the split to a 60/40. Let me17 then say that I am prepared to vote for18 additional funds this year. And let me19 start with the first question, which is20 simply how much money do you want?21 (Applause.)22

Well, Councilman,23 that is a tough -- as you know, we have24 identified, I mean, just to be realistic25 53 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 enough, we have identified the most2 troubling of the educational cuts in this3 budget --4

I have it5 right here, Mr. Masch. The question is,6 how much money are you asking for?7

All right.8 (Applause.)9

Councilman, as10 we've noted, just to restore full-day11 kindergarten would require 25 million.12 To avoid the transportation cuts would13 require 50 million.14

I have the15 list, Mr. Masch. I'll ask the question16 one more time. Are you going to make a17 direct request or not?18

As you know, the19 priority list of cuts that we've20 identified --21

Are you22 going to make a direct request or not?23 If you're not going to make a direct24 request, just say I'm not going to make a25 54 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 direct request.2

The priority list3 that we've identified is of $180 million4 of cuts. We would certainly welcome the5 Council's support to provide us at least6 50 to 75 percent of that, if it is7 possible for you and the Mayor to put8 together the votes to do that.9

Let's go10 back to four years ago. The District did11 not make a request. I offered a bill on12 my own that shifted the money, and I13 thank my colleagues for support of that.14 One of the requirements of the bill was15 that before it become effective, that the16 School Reform Commission had to outline17 how the money was going to be spent in18 these areas: early childhood education,19 class size, after-school programs,20 dropout prevention and school safety.21 Can you tell me how the money we gave you22 four years ago has been spent?23

Well, Councilman,24 the total additional funding that was25 55 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 produced by the millage was about $18.72 million. As you know, during that period3 of time, the School District would have4 faced a deficit of over $141 million and5 that would have required reductions in6 early childhood programs, a possible7 reduction in full-day kindergarten at8 that point. None of those cuts took9 place. There were no cuts that took10 place in school safety programs at that11 point, and in fact that year, the School12 Reform Commission mandated that every13 school add art and music to school14 budgets, and as we've noted, we added15 about $7, $8 million to the school16 budgets in order to do that.17 When we were facing -- and, of18 course, as you know, this was not the19 team that was in place at that time, but20 since that time, we have done far more21 than maintain those levels. In the past22 three years since Dr. Ackerman has come23 here and with this School Reform24 Commission, we have reduced class sizes25 56 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 in grades kindergarten to 4 substantially2 down to a level of about 20 to 24 per3 class and reduced class sizes in grades4 6, 8 and 9. That was far more than was5 even on the table back in the '07-'086 period.7 There have been expansions in8 early childhood programs during that9 period of time, and all of the programs10 that you have enumerated have been11 maintained during that period of time.12

And that13 period of time still exists; does it not?14

That's correct.15

So our money16 is still paying for that?17

Well, as you can18 see, $18.7 million only pays for a19 fraction of it. It couldn't pay for all20 the things that were on -- it couldn't21 pay for maintaining services in all the22 areas that you enumerated, but it23 certainly made a contribution.24

So what is25 57 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 our money paying for now?2

It --3

Let me put4 it in context for you. I take some5 exception to the fact that you say that6 taxes have been flat for the last --7 since 2007-2008, without really8 acknowledging that there was a boost the9 year before, and there was about a $6010 million boost the year before; is that11 correct?12

There was, but the13 balance of that --14

There was a15 $60 million boost the year before?16

Right, but only --17

Excuse me.18

But only 19 million19 of that came from the millage shift.20

I understand21 that. We gave a grant beyond that. I22 understand that. In terms of local tax23 and grant funds, there was a $60 million24 boost the year before. So there was $6025 58 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 million each year after, and there's2 still $60 million next year. What does3 that pay for?4

Councilman, these5 funds go into the unrestricted funds --6

They go into7 the pot; is that what you're saying?8

They go into9 the unrestricted funds --10

You're11 saying they just go into the pot?12

Yes. They're13 unrestricted funds.14

We're not15 going to do business that way this year.16 Thank you, Madam Chair.17 (Applause.)18 COUNCILWOMAN BLACKWELL:19 Councilwoman Reynolds Brown.20

Thank you,21 Madam Chair.22 Good morning, School District23 of Philadelphia. I want to go on record24 to say that I will join other25 59 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Councilmembers in looking at how we2 figure out how we hold on to full-day3 kindergarten. And when you consider the4 downside of moving to half-day5 kindergarten, is it fair to say that6 cutting our kindergarten to half day7 leads to more costs down the road? Could8 you comment on that, please?9

Absolutely. We10 know that the benefits and the research11 is clear now on the importance of not12 only full-day kindergarten but quality13 preschool programs, and we know that14 young people who leave the third grade15 without strong reading skills -- and that16 begins in preschool and definitely the17 all-day kindergarten -- levels the18 playing field for young people who didn't19 get quality care. We know that down the20 line, that they will pay for the lack of21 those kinds of quality programs and22 services, instructional services, to23 these young people through the academic24 achievement gains that they can make and25 60 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 whether or not they can keep pace with2 other young people who have had those3 through economic -- the fact that they4 have the economic wherewithal, their5 parents and families, to provide them6 with great quality, great school7 experiences, as well as an all day8 experience at kindergarten. So we know9 that academically they are going to10 suffer.11 COUNCILWOMAN BROWN:12 Consistently over the past many years13 there's been continuing interest and a14 favorable response from the School15 District around arts and culture16 programming. Can you speak to a17 relationship, if any, with University of18 the Arts, Temple University School of the19 Arts and other higher ed institutions20 that could have an important role in21 filling in any gaps in those areas?22

Well, we believe23 that we could certainly do more in that24 area in tapping the resources that -- we25 61 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 have 95, I believe, colleges and2 universities in and surrounding the3 Philadelphia area, and we could do more.4 Certainly in specific schools, many of5 the universities and colleges have6 partnerships. We believe that we need to7 be more targeted in the ask as it relates8 to the arts and music in particular. We9 have not because we've been, in the last10 few years, spending the resources in11 restoring those programs through art and12 music teachers back in all of our school13 programs, especially our elementary14 programs where three years ago many of15 our elementary schools had neither art16 nor music. Now at least they have art or17 music, and in many of the elementary18 schools now, they have art and music.19

So that's20 universal across the system, each one of21 the elementary schools has some form of22 art and music?23

And we have been24 able to maintain that. Even in these25 62 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 cuts, they will have art or music. Maybe2 not as much of it as they've had in the3 past year.4

I don't5 see it here in my questions yet, but just6 give us an update on the pervasive7 interest and concern around school8 violence and the like. You did speak to9 that briefly in the testimony.10

We did. Over11 the last three years, we've seen a 2912 percent decrease in violence. We have13 increased our programs, mainly our peer14 mediation programs in our schools. We've15 put in place restorative justice16 practices in our schools. We have17 focused on 46 of our persistently18 dangerous schools with specific programs.19 And I don't know if Dr. Nunery wants to20 talk about that since that's specifically21 under his purview, but we have, again, we22 believe targeted our resources around the23 most dangerous schools.24 We've increased camera25 63 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 surveillance. I know there's some2 question about that, but in an audit that3 was done by the state, it was one of the4 things that we were told that we should5 do, given the size of some of our6 buildings and the fact that there are7 lots of places that things can happen8 where there aren't adults available.9 So by focusing on a combination10 of facility kinds of improvements as well11 as programs directly related to students12 and professional development for staff13 and principals, I think it's been a14 combination of that.15 Our Focus 46 schools in16 particular, we have a collaborative with17 the Philadelphia Police Department on18 those schools, and it is not only what19 happens in schools but what happens in20 those neighborhoods surrounding the21 schools as young people go to and from22 school.23

So the24 peer mediation, that happens after a25 64 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 school has been identified to be --2 what's the adage to be used?3

Persistently4 dangerous?5 COUNCILWOMAN BROWN:6 Persistently dangerous.7

No. Actually,8 we're trying to put in all of our schools9 a form of peer mediation for all of10 our especially middle and high schools.11 That's our goal. And we've been rolling12 it in over the last couple of years.13

Because it14 is the argument that being proactive and15 teaching conflict resolution skills on16 the front end just because you move into17 middle school has its value before it18 leads to potential problems.19

Right. And20 that's exactly what we're trying to do.21 (Applause.)22

Define23 what "restorative justice" means, what24 that looks like.25 65 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Let's see.2

Is that a3 strategy?4

It's a strategy5 for helping young people who commit acts6 of violence understand the consequences7 not only to themselves in terms of8 disciplinary -- what happens to them if9 they do it but the consequences on the10 victims and what it means to the people11 that they may do harm to. So it's12 getting them to look at this in terms of13 their own behavior but what their14 behavior, the impact and the rippling15 impact of that behavior, on others.16

So is that17 a required curriculum type practice?18 Does that happen only after there have19 been some transgressions against20 students? When does that kick in?21

We've really22 focused, for the first part of this23 implementation, on young people who go24 through the suspension process in our25 66 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 disciplinary schools and for long-term2 suspensions. So that's where we focused.3 Actually, it would be great to put that4 program in all of our schools. I think5 it's really important, and it's another6 reason why -- it's one of those programs7 that I've been really very much8 supportive of, because I think that young9 people don't understand the seriousness10 of their actions as it relates -- often11 they're just worried about the impact on12 them, am I going to get suspended, for13 how long, when do I get back to my14 school, not what it does, the impact of15 bullying, for instance, on a young16 person, on their families and other17 people who may come in contact as18 victims.19

My last20 question on this particular topic and21 then we'll rotate, what does that look22 like in terms of personnel costs?23 Because typically programs that have24 value, we need them. It equals25 67 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 ultimately a bottom-line cost. So if one2 had to look at a number, what is that3 number?4

I know right now5 we only have one person District-wide who6 is providing the professional development7 and the support of these families. We8 have not been able to expand it. But9 certainly it would be great if we could10 get more personnel involved, because11 ideally to do this would be to build a12 capacity in all of the schools through13 professional development, through the14 police officers who are there, school15 police officers, and counselors, who16 could be on the ground where the young17 people are committing the acts of18 violence.19

Sure.20 Okay. Well, thank you for your21 testimony.22 (Applause.)23

We'll24 rotate.25 68 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

If I2 could just piggyback on one of your3 questions. Can you tell us how many4 school police you have? I see in your5 budget you are eliminating 20. Is that6 so?7

Councilwoman, we8 are eliminating -- in this budget we are9 eliminating 20 budgeted but unfilled10 positions in school safety. But we are11 also eliminating, which you don't see in12 the FTE numbers, this budget would13 require us to eliminate 190 per diem14 officers, who don't count in our head15 count. These are officers usually16 retired police who come in on a part-time17 basis and augment the full-time18 complement of school safety officers in19 the School District.20

So did you21 understand that answer?22

No,23 not at all.24

So I think the25 69 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 bottom line what we did, we have per diem2 officers who are sort of like substitute3 teachers. That's where we made our major4 cuts.5

And6 from time to time, do you have the7 Philadelphia police officers assigned to8 some of your schools or the surrounding9 areas of the schools?10

We work with the11 Philadelphia Police with our -- around,12 what's it called, Safe Corridors program,13 where they work with the schools and the14 neighborhoods surrounding our schools to15 and from school. So that's primarily16 where we work with the police, individual17 police officers and police precincts, but18 we do have Chief Patterson, who is on19 loan to the School District this year20 from the Philadelphia Police Department,21 and I can't say how invaluable his22 experience coming to the District has23 been, especially since he has been able24 to use some of his experience, his25 70 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 resources back and forth with the Police2 Department. So that's another way that3 we have gotten support from the City.4

So if5 you don't mind, I'm going to ask my6 question again, because the answer was7 not too clear to me. How many school8 police do you have? It appears from your9 budget, you are reducing 20. So let's10 get back to the question and the answer,11 please.12

Right. The13 budgeted complement for school police in14 school buildings is 439 this year and it15 is budgeted at 419 next year, and that is16 a reduction in complement of 20. That is17 correct. But those are positions that18 are presently unfilled. So that will not19 be a reduction in the number of school20 police officers currently serving in the21 schools, but it means that we won't be22 able to fill those vacant positions.23 But in addition to that, we24 want to fully disclose that we do rely on25 71 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 these per diems, the substitutes, if you2 will, to augment that force, and that is3 where the cut in the school safety budget4 which we've identified to you, which is5 over $3 million, $3.3 million reduction.6 That reduction would come primarily in7 the per diem officers.8

How9 many per diem officers do you currently10 have?11

Two hundred and12 fifty.13

How14 will you determine where they are and15 where they will not be?16

The per diem17 officers?18

Yes.19

I believe that20 we focused -- the schools that get21 priority are our focus -- persistently22 dangerous schools and our Focus 4623 schools. But should something happen and24 we need to shift them, that's where we25 72 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 put them. But those are the schools --2 the Focus 46 schools are the schools that3 get priority, because these are the4 schools that the data tells us over time5 are the trouble spots.6

So do7 we have one police officer at least in8 every school?9 (Someone from audience10 speaking.)11

Just12 come up to the witness table, please.13 (Witness approached witness14 table.)15 CHIEF PATTERSON: Good morning,16 Madam President.17

Good18 morning. Please identify yourself for19 the record.20 CHIEF PATTERSON: I'm Chief21 Inspector Myron Patterson. I'm heading22 up the Office of School Safety.23 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:24 Welcome.25 73 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 CHIEF PATTERSON: Currently,2 that deployment of the officers -- going3 into this year, we had 250 schools who4 had personnel assigned, school police5 officers assigned. That was out of the6 265. Going into next year with proposed7 cuts, what we would do based on the8 incidents that are occurring, normally9 the way it looks, the elementary schools10 have a lesser or less amount of incidents11 which occur there or serious incidents,12 and based on that particular data and as13 we have been doing this year based on the14 needs, that's where we would place the15 officers.16 Deployment, we start out each17 year between the high schools, whether18 four to six officers assigned as a base,19 and based on past patterns and trends, we20 build up from there. And that's the way21 that I have been going through this year22 looking at the particular deployment23 patterns as it relates to placing24 officers in the School District.25 74 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Thank2 you. Thank you very much.3

May I4 ask while you're there, we've been5 inquiring for years about probation6 officers and about probation officers7 being placed in school and expanding that8 so that children or students don't have9 to leave school in order to check in with10 probation officers. Can you tell me11 where we are, what we have and what the12 status of that is now and what it will be13 like in the future?14 CHIEF PATTERSON: Yes. Now,15 Chairwoman, currently I'm working with16 Judge Dougherty's office, being with17 Bennie Price. He's our liaison at this18 particular moment. Currently, these19 probation officers aren't in the schools20 on a daily basis currently.21

They22 are not?23 CHIEF PATTERSON: They are not,24 as far as my knowledge.25 75 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Not in2 any school?3 CHIEF PATTERSON: Well, they4 have assignments. We're reaching out --5 the relationship is building. In6 particular problems, if we have them at7 particular schools, things that come to8 our attention, we are directly liaisoning9 with those probation officers to10 coordinate information to bring students11 around in their particular relationships.12 But it's been an ongoing process this13 year as to where are we going in the14 future, and I do look forward to having15 that relationship on the steady basis16 where we're coordinating as we do. We do17 this daily. I don't want to mislead18 Council that we are not, but we're in19 constant contact and relations with each20 other on a daily basis as we go along.21

Councilwoman --22

Yes,23 because we had them before. We have had24 probation officers in some schools, and I25 76 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 thought maybe we were expanding it, but2 obviously we did just the opposite, we3 took them out.4

Right. They're5 not in like they were before, but I also6 have had discussions with District7 Attorney Seth Williams and he's very much8 interested in working with us to put9 probationary officers back in the10 schools. And I want to say as a11 principal some 30 years ago, we had an12 office in my school for a probation13 officer and it was very helpful, in that14 they were there, the young people didn't15 have to miss school, and we are hopeful16 that we'll be able to expand that program17 once again.18

Do you19 know why we cut them out altogether? We20 had them. I've been fighting for several21 years to expand them, but we had them,22 some at least.23

I'm not sure. I24 just know that Chief Patterson and I have25 77 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 both -- he's been talking with the Family2 Courts and I've been talking with the3 District Attorney about how we expand it.4 It was prior to both of us being here.5

Thank6 you. Would you keep us informed?7

We will.8

If you9 let the President know, she'll make sure10 the information is given to each and11 every member. Okay. Thank you very12 much.13 Councilman Clarke, you're next.14

Thank you,15 Madam Chair.16 Good morning.17

Good morning.18

Just a19 couple of questions. I just wanted to20 follow up on Councilman Goode's line of21 questioning. I was going to ask the22 question, but he did a capable job of23 getting into the crest of the funding and24 increased funding in prior years. And25 78 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 the question I was going to ask -- and I2 think I know the answer, but I'm going to3 ask it anyway. Members of Council and I4 know myself, we've had some levels of5 frustration, particularly since this has6 gone to -- the School District control7 has gone to the SRC and about Council's8 role, significant role, in providing9 support; i.e., financing by the school10 authorization bill, but in terms of11 actually being in the position to12 determine how the money -- where it goes,13 how it's spent, allocating dollars to14 very specific programs or departments.15 And I'm sure that when the issue is16 thrown out there, all-day kindergarten,17 it's very difficult for people to say,18 no, we're not going to support that.19 But I'll ask the question --20 and this is probably a legal question. I21 don't know. If somehow Council and the22 Mayor -- and it's not a commitment to do23 that, because we're not at that point24 yet -- decided that they wanted to ensure25 79 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 that we have full-day kindergarten, not2 necessarily dealing with the3 transportation issue or some of the other4 issues, is there a way that people can be5 assured that that's where that money is6 going to go and not go into a pot and7 ultimately be disbursed to other areas as8 needed?9

I am not a10 lawyer, but we can find out. I believe11 that you probably can. I know that in12 talking with the Pittsburgh13 Superintendent and I was talking about14 the Accountability Grant and the fact15 that we were going to lose full-day16 kindergarten, that was not an issue for17 them because they didn't use the18 Accountability Grant for that. They, at19 the local level, decided that that was20 something that was going to be carved out21 at the local level. So I at least know22 that Pittsburgh does not use the23 Accountability Grant for that. They're24 not dependent upon it. That was not an25 80 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 issue for Pittsburgh. So we should look2 at how they do it there, because at least3 it's being done at least one other -- the4 second largest big city.5

Is the6 Pittsburgh structure as it relates to7 schools versus state comparable to the8 City?9

I think they10 don't have an SRC, but they have a School11 Board, but I think the funding is pretty12 much -- they get about the same amount.13 They get more with --14

Traditionally15 Pittsburgh has gotten a higher per16 student allocation than Philadelphia.17

But I know that18 in talking with them. So I don't know19 what else we could use the Accountability20 funds for, should they be restored, but I21 know that that was not an issue for22 Pittsburgh, because at the local level,23 they've made that a priority, full-day24 kindergarten.25 81 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Let me ask2 this question: Is there a School3 District lawyer in the house?4

Well, let's see.5 He's here. And I want to say while he's6 coming up, we certainly are interested in7 working with you with that, because I8 don't want to be in the situation again9 either that we're depending upon a grant10 that could go away for something as11 important as full-day kindergarten. So12 please know we'll work with you here.13 (Witness approached witness14 table.)15

Councilman Clarke,16 as I understand your question, you would17 like to know --18 COUNCILWOMAN BLACKWELL:19 Identify yourself for the record. Please20 identify yourself for the record.21

I'm sorry. My name22 is Michael A. Davis, School District23 General Counsel.24 As I understand your question,25 82 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Councilman Clarke, you would like to know2 whether or not it's possible for City3 Council to earmark funding for all-day or4 full-day kindergarten?5

Correct.6

I don't know the7 specific answer to that question as a8 legal matter whether that is a power or9 authority that you would have or that the10 School District would have, but what I11 would certainly suggest to you is by12 making your sense of what you would like13 your expectations known, certainly that14 is something the School District would15 have to take into account and be16 responsible for use of that.17

We kind of18 do that every year.19

Point of20 information.21

Point22 of information, Councilman Goode.23

Thank you,24 Madam Chair.25 83 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 We actually required it under2 the last ordinance where we increased the3 millage rate for the School District. We4 specifically asked for the School Reform5 Commission to file a document. It was6 filed with the Chief Clerk on June 19th,7 2007. We're locked in by law to give8 that amount of money in perpetuity under9 state law. You actually testified today10 that that was that School Reform11 Commission, not this School Reform12 Commission; did you not?13

Who, me?14

It could15 have been Mr. Masch.16

If --17

So if we18 give you the money for a given area and19 there's a change in School Reform20 Commission, there is no guarantee that21 the money is going to be spent how we22 want; is that correct?23

No. That was24 certainly not my intent, Councilman.25 84 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

That's what2 you said.3

No. I said that4 there was -- I said that the members of5 the School Reform Commission of the6 Administration are different now than7 they were then. There was no intent to8 suggest --9

So the money10 we gave you four years ago --11

-- that we12 attempted to defy a City ordinance.13

Is the money14 we gave you four years ago being spent15 the way we outlined it?16

I have to say, I am17 not aware of what those specific18 restrictions are. So we need to review19 them.20

So you don't21 know whether the money we gave you four22 years ago is being spent as outlined in23 the ordinance? That's a problem.24 Thank you, Madam Chair.25 85 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Well, can I say2 something here? I can say that out of3 three of the four, I know we've made a4 priority over the last three years since5 I've been here. That's early childhood,6 class sizes are down to 21 -- when I7 came, it was 26. It's now down to 20 to8 1, and after school programs we've9 expanded. Summer schools we've expanded,10 and even in safety.11

I get that.12 That's why we put the money there.13 That's how it's being spent now. The14 money has to stay there because by law,15 we can't take it back. We don't want to16 take a back. In fact, we probably want17 to give more money in some way, but the18 question is, as you even outlined the19 cuts for next year's budget, is what20 we're paying for four years ago still21 being paid for?22

Absolutely. In23 fact, we have gone down even below that,24 the number when we came -- when I came25 86 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 three years ago, with class sizes,2 expanding the after-school program and3 safety. We've increased the amount that4 we're putting toward there, and even with5 the cuts, those were the areas that we6 protected.7

I understand8 that, I believe it, but the question was,9 do you have to do it? And the answer is10 no, because once we put the money in,11 it's guaranteed to be there, and all12 those decisions are made by the13 Administration and the School Reform14 Commission. So if you live up to the15 spirit of the ordinance, that's fine, but16 you don't have to live up to the letter17 of the law.18 And so to answer Councilman19 Clarke's question, the truth of the20 matter is, legally we can't mandate where21 the money goes. So any $25 million we22 give you is not necessarily going to go23 toward full-day kindergarten.24 Thank you, Madam Chair.25 87 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 (Applause.)2 COUNCILWOMAN BLACKWELL:3 Councilman Clarke, you're continuing your4 questioning.5

If I might,6 Councilman Clarke, if I could respond7 further. I would like the opportunity to8 look into ways and structures that we9 could come up with working with City10 Council in order to ensure that your11 expectations are carried out. We know12 that there are grants, there are13 government grants, that come that do have14 restrictions, that do have specific15 conditions or allotments in terms of16 where they want that funding to go, and I17 think we can work that structure out.18

When you19 say "government grants," you mean20 government grants from the federal,21 state?22

Correct. And a23 similar concept to that in terms of24 trying to work out some language that25 88 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 will give City Council what it wants in2 terms of coming back and ensuring that3 those funds were spent in the way that4 you expected.5

Okay. I6 just want to get it on the record. But7 your commitment today is to work on8 something that might enable us to do9 that?10

That is correct.11

Not that12 you can definitely do that?13

Because I don't14 know the specific answer to the question15 that you asked, but I'm willing to look16 and work at coming up with a structure17 that will satisfy your concern.18

Okay. That19 kind of leads me to my next question.20 There was earlier asked for support from21 the City, be it taking over some of the22 responsibility that the School District23 currently has for funding of certain24 personnel or issues, and then I believe25 89 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 there will probably be an additional ask2 for the City of Philadelphia providing3 service, say, for instance, trash4 collection, and that's actually something5 we did when we consolidated Fairmount6 Park and Department of Recreation, and it7 made all the sense in the world. Maybe8 we want to consolidate some of the9 similar services as it relates to the10 School District, and that will obviously11 cost us a little more money. My question12 as it relates to that -- and since we now13 have the lawyer in the house up at the14 table -- do you believe that will have15 Act 46 implications, that if we come up16 with 40 million in in-kind services17 provided from the City, that we'll be18 locked into that?19

I don't believe so.20 I don't believe that would be an issue or21 a problem. Again, something that we'd22 work out through a contract, memorandum23 of understanding, which we typically do24 with other City agencies. I think that's25 90 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 a possibility.2

Okay.3 Because I remember this issue came up4 about police I think in the last5 Administration, and at that particular6 time, it was said that, no, that would7 not have that. So can you put that on8 the list of things that you have to9 confer with whomever you're going to10 confer with?11

Absolutely.12

And get us13 some relatively definitive language,14 because there is some concerns about us15 getting locked into an issue in a time16 when the general economy is doing rather17 poorly, but if things improve, we would18 like to have the right to pare back some19 of that contribution and maybe provide20 additional services to rec centers or21 playgrounds or actually reduce taxes,22 wage taxes, or some of the other things23 that we like to do for our citizens.24

Yes. Understood,25 91 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 and I will do that.2

All right.3 Thank you.4 Thank you, Madam Chair.5

Thank6 you very much.7 Councilman Clarke, you're fine?8

Yes, I am.9

Thank10 you very much.11 I wanted to mention before I12 call on Councilwoman Miller, we've been13 talking a lot about bullying and as that14 relates to violence and truancy. We are15 planning with Upper Darby to have another16 summit with regard to bullying, and as17 you know, we're involved with the Mayor's18 Commission on African and Caribbean19 Immigrant Affairs, and we have20 specifically Liberians who have been21 severely preyed upon, and we have a lot22 of issues with violence and bullying.23 I wanted to know -- I'll24 specifically ask about truancy and where25 92 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 we are. I know that you deal with2 Dr. Schwarz, Deputy Health Commissioner.3 I know you deal with that on that issue.4 I want to know where we are with truancy5 so we can try and keep our kids in6 school. And we also are looking forward7 to a lot of support with regard to8 bullying and violence.9 We have big issues. The10 Commission even adopted a school where we11 had big problems with violence, where an12 African child was severely injured.13 So we're doing all that we can14 with the African and Caribbean community,15 but we want to know a status report of16 where the School District is, what your17 plans are in these areas; that is,18 bullying and violence, and specifically19 where we are with regard to truancy.20 And my last question in that21 regard -- and then I'll call on22 Councilwoman Miller. I try to keep mine23 down as I'm here -- is where you are with24 regard to alternative schools when it25 93 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 comes to behavior.2 (Applause.)3 (Witnesses approached witness4 table.)5

Good morning. My6 name is Tomas Hanna, Associate7 Superintendent for Academic Support.8 Council, thank you for having us. I have9 Erica Washington, who is Deputy for10 Attendance and Truancy as well.11 A couple months ago, you may12 recall, we were here having this13 conversation with regard to the issue of14 bullying and specifically the impact it15 has on attendance and truancy. We know16 that, not in all cases but in far too17 many cases, all young people who are18 bullied or who are the victims of19 violence tend not to come to school20 because they're afraid, and that's21 something we absolutely agree with you on22 that we've got to get better at.23 One of our strategies with24 regard to supporting schools with25 94 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 attendance and truancy is, in essence,2 taking a look at every child by name and3 having a point person at the school who4 is taking a look at the kinds of issues5 that may be impacting this young person's6 ability to make it to school. It could7 be health related. It could be a fear8 factor of coming to school because of9 issues that have happened.10 So that's one way we're doing11 it, sort of taking a look at each young12 person by name and having a point person13 at a school.14 We've been working closely and15 I'm glad you acknowledge the fact that16 we're working closely with Deputy Mayor17 Schwarz's team, specifically with18 Commissioner Anne Marie Ambrose, around19 how DHS and the District come together,20 along with Judge Dougherty at the courts21 to figure out how these three systems22 work together to provide supports for23 young people who struggle to come to24 school.25 95 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Frankly, one of the issues are2 systems, and so when that point person at3 the school is taking a look at sort of4 what's happening, one of the questions we5 have to ask ourselves is, what are the6 interventions that have come -- that7 we've done, that we've put in place to8 help the young person. Sometimes it's9 just basic as the contact home.10 Sometimes the school doesn't have a11 number or an address and we've got to go12 out and sort of find that, right? From13 that point, to issues of violence and how14 we might have to integrate additional15 services for young people.16 You're absolutely right when17 you talk about the Africa/Caribbean18 population, the Liberian young people in19 Southwest Philadelphia. We've been in20 contact with yourself and others to sort21 of figure out how we can take a look at22 that population and what we might be able23 to do to do differently, similar to the24 way we're looking at many other25 96 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 populations in the City that have2 experienced these kinds of issues.3 Erica, do you want to get a4 little deeper where we are or is that5 covering --6

You've covered7 it.8 My name is Erica Washington.9 I'm the Deputy for Attendance and10 Truancy. And I believe Tomas has covered11 where we're going. We are in12 conversations and working regularly with13 DHS, the Department of Human Services, as14 well as Family Court, as well as the15 District Attorney's Office and the16 Mayor's Office of Education looking to17 see how the system will work to address18 the root causes of truancy, because19 that's one lesson we learned this year,20 that children aren't just coming to21 school just because they're scared, but22 there may be simple issues that can be23 corrected on the spot as far as24 transportation, as far as a transfer to25 97 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 another school. There are homeless2 issues, special education issues.3 So we've been working hard this4 year to really connect the dots, find out5 what the root cause of the truancy is,6 and then connecting students and families7 to those resources to eliminate those8 barriers to get them into school.9

So I'm10 reminded of W. DuBois talking about11 preventing the youth from being trained12 to crime, and that it is our13 responsibility to deal with the cause.14 So unfortunately, all these years later,15 we're still there. Just on Saturday16 night we went to a multi-cultural affair17 in Upper Darby, because students, some18 students, live there, some live here.19 They have a two-year program for Africans20 and Caribbeans where they train people.21 They train young people who have just22 come from Africa and the Caribbean, and23 they have a two-year program. They not24 only do college preparatory, but they25 98 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 train them in language and other skills2 that they need so that they're ready to3 deal with public school, and they had all4 these success stories about young people5 and how much they -- how well they're6 doing. And I was just thinking about how7 many kids we have, African American,8 Latino, and how many kids and families9 could benefit from some two-year program10 that allows them to catch up if they get11 a chance. So a 50 percent dropout is12 just so unbelievable.13 So I'm sitting here looking at14 these Africans and Caribbeans and I'm15 saying, my goodness, we have so many16 students left behind and we have to find17 a way to reach them. And I would just18 like to hear about specific programs and19 where they are so that we don't have to20 ask the same questions over and over, so21 that we don't have to reinvent the wheel,22 so that together we're working on23 truancy, bullying, violence, as well as24 alternative schools.25 99 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 I don't know where we are with2 alternative schools. I know we did away3 with the model we had at Miller School in4 my area. Can you just name them, what5 alternative schools exist, and then I'll6 go on to the Councilwoman, and where we7 are.8

I'm going to ask9 Ben Wright to come up, but I can tell you10 that over the last three years, we've11 increased the spending on Multiple12 Pathways. When we talk about alternative13 schools, we're actually dividing them up14 into two categories. One is discipline15 schools, young people who have been16 suspended long term or those that are on17 expulsion, and then we're looking at18 students who left school and are coming19 back.20 For the last three years, we've21 spent approximately $29 to $30 million on22 the latter, the Multiple Pathways,23 because we've increased that24 considerably, and another 60 million on25 100 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 our alternative discipline schools. So2 if you were to compare --3

How4 many are they?5

How many6 alternative?7

Can8 you say what they are? And the President9 wants to --10

I'm sure that11 Ben will be able to tell you. I was12 trying to give you a context for how much13 we've spent, because we've increased that14 spending considerably. And I'm not15 saying it's not good that we did, just16 that 150 million, if you compare that to17 all full-day kindergarten, it's about the18 same. So $150 million we've spent for19 three years on full-day kindergarten, 15020 million for all kinds of -- both kinds of21 alternative ed, Multiple Pathways, as22 well as disciplinary schools. So...23

Good morning.24

Good25 101 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 morning.2

Madam President,3 Madam Chair. The alternative schools --4

Please5 identify yourself for the record.6

I'm sorry. Thank7 you. My name is Benjamin Wright. I'm8 the Assistant Superintendent for Academic9 Division 4, which includes all of the10 alternative schools as well as the11 juvenile programs.12 The current placement for the13 transition programs are Boone, which is14 located in North Philadelphia; Woodhaven;15 Shalecroft (ph), which is in the16 Northeast; DVHS, which is on Kelly Drive.17 We have three sites at Hunting Park and18 Front Street. We have 11 classrooms19 across the City managed by Cornell20 Abraxas. They're in Birney, they're in21 Decatur, Fels, Harrison, Holme, Hunting22 Park, King of Peace, LP Hill and Logan.23 We also have a program at the24 Franklin Mill Mall that is called Phase 425 102 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Learning. And those are for ninth grade2 kids that are overage and under-credited,3 but they're also transition schools.4 The School District manages two5 of its own programs called the6 Philadelphia Learning Academies, and they7 are for students who have been expelled8 for a short period or long period of time9 and are coming back, and these programs10 are located at Front and Hunting Park, as11 well as Miller, E.S. Miller, which is on12 4300 Westminster Street. One of the13 programs serve all the kids from the14 west, southwest and south side. The15 other program is serving kids from the16 central north --17

What's18 that called again?19

PLA South,20 Philadelphia Learning Academy South.21 It's on 4300 Westminster.22

We23 know the school. So all the schools that24 were built for that program, there were25 103 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 three of them. Are they all part of this2 same program? Because those schools were3 designed -- Miller School was -- they4 were designed for special programs,5 Allegheny School, Miller School and6 another school, citywide.7

Right. We8 combined those programs into Miller, the9 two that was on that side of town.10 Allegheny --11

Try12 pulling the microphone closer to you.13

Thank you.14 The Allegheny program is no15 longer there. Those people are in --16 COUNCIL PRESIDENT VERNA:17 Excuse me. Would you mind pulling the18 microphone closer.19

Thank you.20

Thank21 you.22

The Miller23 building is comprised of the school that24 used to be there. It is now combined25 104 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 into one school called the Philadelphia2 Learning Academy South. It's3 approximately 400 students that attend4 that school, seventh through twelfth5 grade. At Front and Hunting Park, there6 are roughly about 800 kids that attend7 that school, but they're managed by8 different people. Part of them are9 accelerated and part of them are10 transitional. And also the other part,11 RETI-WRAP, is in that building, as well12 as PYDA, which is a school for kids13 coming out of placement who have more14 credits and do not need to go back to a15 comprehensive high school. Anyone that16 has between and credits go to PYDA.17 Matter of fact, in February we graduated18 15 of those kids. This summer we're19 graduating 34. The plan program in20 there, the PLA North, Philadelphia21 Learning Academy North, is graduating 13422 kids this summer. PLA South at Miller is23 graduating 75 students. They've only24 been in existence for two years.25 105 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Are2 these private contracts?3

These are4 District-run schools. The private5 contractors are the ones I gave you6 earlier, and those would be Camelot at7 Boone, Camelot at Shalecroft --8 (Applause.)9

Do we10 still have truant officers?11

The truant12 department is totally separate from what13 we do.14

Pardon15 me?16

The truant17 department, the truant officers, are18 totally separate from what we do, but we19 do have truant officers.20

How21 many truant officers do we presently22 have?23

I don't know that24 information.25 106 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

We don't have2 truant officers. They're called3 something else.4

Madam5 Superintendent, please pull the mike6 over.7

I'm sorry.8 Somebody is coming up to answer that9 question.10

Erica11 Washington, Deputy for Attendance and12 Truancy.13 We currently do not have14 truancy officers. We did not go through15 with those contracts this year because16 that work was being done in our schools17 by a position called the parent18 ombudsman. So with our student advisors19 and our parent ombudsman that were20 performing the same services as the21 former truancy officers, we did not feel22 it necessary and actually contractually23 we could not go through with contracting24 work that was being done by District25 107 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 staff.2

Let me3 say that there are many of us work on4 these issues, but we need information.5 We're out here fighting for the same6 things you're fighting for, but we don't7 have information and we're not included8 in your information pool. We would like9 to have this information so we know as we10 go through our communities how we can11 best provide service and how we can12 complement or supplement. As I was13 saying yesterday, we have a meeting14 scheduled with Penn with regard to the15 nursing program to complement and16 supplement nursing services in schools in17 their area, and we're going to be18 contacting other universities as well,19 but it is so much easier if we're20 included in the information pool. Then21 we know how we can be helpful and know22 where we should direct our energies.23 Thank you. Thank you very24 much.25 108 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Councilwoman Tasco.2

Yes.3 Thank you. Good morning -- good4 afternoon. I have a question for5 Mr. Masch.6

Excuse7 me, Councilwoman. The President wanted8 to follow up.9 Is there an ombudsman in every10 school?11

No. In all of12 our empowerment schools. And then in the13 other schools, it was up to the school.14 But in all of our empowerment schools, I15 believe it's 110 schools, we had them.16 In all of our empowerment schools we also17 had student advisors. So we had both18 positions.19

Thank20 you.21

Mr. Masch,22 I just had one clarifying question.23 Maybe it's because I don't understand24 what you've done here.25 109 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 You talk about in your2 testimony you have the limits on the3 School District's ability to make4 spending cuts, and you talk about5 providing -- some of the examples are one6 would be providing the teachers necessary7 to comply with contractual maximum class8 sizes and preparatory time requirements9 and that cost, but then you have on your10 sheet of the cuts to be -- that could be11 restored is the reduction -- restore cuts12 in reduced class sizes.13

Yes. So,14 Councilwoman, what you see on the15 mandated sheet is the amount of money16 that we need just to put one teacher in17 front of every 30 or 33 kids. But we18 don't have class sizes of 30 and 33 in19 all of our schools now. In fact, we have20 lower class sizes. And in the past two21 years, under the Imagine 2014 plan, we22 reduced class sizes in grades K to 3 all23 the way down to a range of 20 to 23. So24 that required about $20 million of25 110 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 additional funding.2 In this budget, we propose to3 raise K to 3 class sizes. So rather than4 being in the range of 20 to 23, 24, the5 range would be in the range of 23 to 26,6 and that yields us a savings of about $167 million in grades K to 3.8 In addition, we had reduced9 class sizes in grades 6, 8 and 9, and10 that program cost us $5 million to lower11 those class sizes. This budget12 eliminates the lower class sizes for13 grades 6, 8 and 9 and keeps class sizes14 lower than they had been in K to 3; that15 is, lower than they were two years ago,16 but higher than they've been for the past17 two years.18 So we have to build this.19 First we need this much money to have a20 class size of 33, this much more money if21 we lower the class size to 26, this much22 more money if we lower the class size to23 23.24

Okay.25 111 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

So we are just2 trying to go back to the class sizes for3 this year. As we were out in the4 community, it's one of the things that5 the parents really appreciated, that the6 class sizes across the District were7 smaller. So when we're asking, we're8 asking to go back to what they are this9 year as opposed to going up by three.10

As you11 held your meetings throughout the City,12 what was the level of participation of13 parents?14

In the community15 meetings that we've held to date, it's16 ranged between 150 to over 300 parents17 per meeting. We have one last meeting at18 Imhotep Charter School this Wednesday19 evening at 7 o'clock, with a particular20 outreach to charter school parents.21

And this is the22 second round of community meetings. We23 had one earlier when this process first24 started. So we probably had all of about25 112 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 18 now.2

The other3 question I had is, the gentleman -- I'm4 reading this information and I'm looking5 at you're trying to control utility6 costs. Have you begun to look at green7 schools and/or the use of solar?8

Councilwoman,9 we've done a number of things along that10 regard. We not only have locked in11 energy costs, both natural gas and12 electricity using long-term forward13 contracts, but we actually just won an14 award for a LEED, L-E-E-D, designed15 school and are looking not only at solar16 but green projects as well.17 I think as we look at the18 Facilities Master Plan that we are about19 to roll out, the combination of green20 schools, green construction, working with21 the City on the Green 2015 plan all will22 come together. So as we either renovate23 buildings or construct any new buildings24 or consolidate buildings that will be25 113 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 solar, green and any kind of energy2 saving will all be a part of how we3 present the plan.4

Thank you5 very much.6 Dr. Ackerman, we just spoke7 about the ombudsman. How is that8 process, how is the appointment or the9 placement of an ombudsman in a school?10 Is it at the request of the principal or11 is it something that the School District12 assigns? And what is the relationship of13 the ombudsman with the principal?14

Ideally, the15 ombudsman is there to work with the16 principal, with the school staff in17 parent outreach. That's what they're18 supposed to be doing. So I believe that19 every staff person who works in the20 school should report directly to the21 principal. I know that the process of22 interviewing ombudsmen comes from our23 Department of Parent and Community24 Engagement. That's where they get their25 114 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 professional development. I don't2 believe that -- do they report directly3 to the principal? Yes, they do. I4 thought they did, because I know that as5 a former principal, I believe everybody6 in the school should report to the7 principal. But there is a close8 relationship with building the pool of9 staff from our Office of Parent and10 Community Engagement.11

Thank you.12

And then the13 principals interview the people.14

Thank you.15 Thank you.16

Thank17 you very much. If all minds are clear,18 we'll break for lunch and report back at19 1:30.20 Thank you, everybody.21 (Applause.)22 (Luncheon recess.)23

We're24 sorry to hold everyone. We're not ready25 115 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 to resume quite yet. We could be another2 20 minutes. Sorry to hold you up.3 Thank you.4 (Recess.)5

Thank6 you very much for your patience. We will7 now renew our hearings with regard to8 School District funding.9 The next question was to be10 posed by Councilman Bill Greenlee. Thank11 you all for your patience.12

Thank13 you, Madam Chair.14 Good afternoon again,15 everybody. I just had a question,16 because one of the things that we hear as17 a criticism -- and I know, Mr. Masch, you18 address this in your remarks -- was the19 whole use of the federal stimulus money,20 and I know you said you prepared for it21 not to -- that it was going to run out,22 that kind of thing. I wonder if you23 could just discuss that a little bit,24 because, again, we hear that criticism.25 116 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 I'm not talking about the validity of it,2 but I was wondering if you could just go3 on record and talk about that a little4 bit.5

Right. Thank you,6 Councilman. Yeah. I was responding to7 comments that we've obviously seen in the8 media that suggest that we should have9 seen the end of the stimulus money10 coming. So I want to assure the members11 of City Council, yes, of course, we12 understood the stimulus money was for two13 years. We did plan for and prepare for14 the termination of that money. We used15 all of the funds we received exactly as16 was intended. But I want to state for17 the record what that means, because there18 are different pots of stimulus money that19 were provided, some to the School20 District and some to the Commonwealth and21 for different purposes.22 The stimulus funds that were23 provided to the School District were24 about 110, 115 million a year for over25 117 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 two years, a little over 81 million in2 Title I and about 22 million in IDA and3 then some smaller amounts of money for4 education technology and for services to5 homeless students. So that comes to 112,6 113 million a year.7 The rules for our use of those8 funds were the rules for those federal9 programs. Now, Title I is a program that10 provides supplemental educational11 services to low-income students, and IDA12 is a program that enables school13 districts to provide supplemental14 services to students with special needs.15 And the rule in both of those programs is16 supplement, not supplant. What that17 means is, you are not permitted to use18 those funds to cover spending you're19 already doing. You can't replace your20 regular operating funds with those funds.21 You can only use those funds to expand22 programs or to start new programs.23 We've also heard it said that24 we should have banked that money. Well,25 118 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 that was not permitted. It was use it or2 lose it during the period.3 And then the other thing we4 heard people say is, Well, why don't you5 use it for something one time, like6 bricks and mortar, construction projects.7 Well, in the final regulations, that8 wasn't permitted either. So we used the9 money as all other school districts used10 it. I read some comments in the press11 and elsewhere that other school districts12 used it on things that were13 non-recurring. Well, all school14 districts, all big city school districts15 in the United States, are facing a need16 to cut back programs because of the loss17 of those stimulus funds. So we all --18 every major school district in the United19 States accepted those funds with those20 rules.21 Now, our plan was to keep some22 of those programs and shift to recurring23 funding. And if you look at three key24 programs that were funded in that way -25 119 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 reduced class size, expanded summer2 school and improved student-counselor3 ratios - we even in this budget did what4 the Superintendent said she was going to5 do when we started the Imagine 2014 plan,6 which was to try to preserve the most7 important, most strategic of these8 initiatives with recurring funding.9 But there was a second part of10 stimulus funding, and it did not go to11 the School District. It went to the12 Commonwealth. And that is funding in two13 other categories called State Fiscal14 Stabilization funds and Education Job15 funds. And those sources between them16 equal about $193 million a year, this17 year, 122 million State Fiscal18 Stabilization fund, 71 million in19 Educational Jobs money. A hundred and20 forty of that 193, about 140 million, the21 state gave us and cut state funding by22 exactly the same amount. In other words,23 we didn't realize any extra money --24

You25 120 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 didn't gain anything.2

No. We had no3 gain. That was a budget relief for the4 state, but not for the School District.5 Now, what's happened is, a new6 Governor has come, and of course he7 wasn't the Governor during that period of8 time. Maybe he didn't know what had9 transpired before, but he came in and10 said, Okay, the stimulus funds are gone.11 What? You expect me to replace them?12 Well, that basically meant that the13 savings the state realized now will come14 at the expense of school districts, 14015 million for us and over 555 million16 across the Commonwealth.17 So those funds, yes, the intent18 of the Congress was -- they understood.19 President Obama and the Congress20 understood in February 2009 that state21 revenues were dropping and that state22 funding during the recession might get23 cut as a result. So they wanted to24 stabilize funding during that period,25 121 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 with the understanding that when the2 recession was over, then the state would3 resume its traditional role as a School4 District funder.5 Now, even there, we didn't6 expect to get the funds restored 1007 percent. We thought we'd get some8 portion of them. But, in fact, the new9 state budget, the one that the Governor10 proposed on March 8th, eliminates all of11 those funds, does not replace any of12 them, and cuts states funding to this13 School District by 100 million besides.14 So, yes, it is true we did not15 anticipate that, but it's not because we16 failed to plan or we didn't understand17 the programs.18 We now have an administration19 in Harrisburg with a very different20 approach to education funding. The fact21 is that the 1.1 billion in education cuts22 is twice as much as the lost education23 stimulus money. So there's no way that24 you can say that if we had anticipated25 122 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 the need to replace the stimulus money,2 then we wouldn't have a budget problem.3

I4 understand. I'm glad, just as an aside,5 you addressed the banking thing, because6 that's what we hear sometimes too. Well,7 you spent the money; you should have8 saved some of that. But that was not9 allowed under the program, right?10

No, it was not.11

Right.12 Thank you.13 Thank you, Madam Chair.14

Point of15 information.16

Point17 of information. Yes, Councilman Green.18

Thank you,19 Madam Chair.20 In the FY11 budget hearings, I21 asked the District, What happens when the22 funding runs out? Do we have a plan for23 far fewer resources from the federal24 government and from state government that25 123 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 will allow these programs to continue?2 The response from the District3 was, Yes, we do, and mentioned an4 increase in state and local funding,5 potential Race to the Top money, some6 other competitive funding and a reduction7 to base operating expenditures as a8 solution to when the stimulus funding9 runs out.10 I'd like to hear more from the11 District about what its plan was last12 year and how it's evolved over the last13 12 months, starting with the increase in14 local funding you mentioned as part of15 the post stimulus plan. I'm trying to16 understand how the District projects17 local tax revenues and whether or not18 they're trued up to PICA. To what extent19 does the District coordinate revenue20 projections with those of the City's, and21 what were your base revenue assumptions22 for real estate tax growth from the City?23 If you could just sort of clarify that24 for me, because the City's projections25 124 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 the last three years were that revenue2 from real estate was going down, and I3 guess I'd like you to explain to us what4 the plan was when you said you had a plan5 last year.6

Yes.7 Mr. Masch.8

Okay. Councilman,9 the answer is in several parts. First of10 all, as I said, we did anticipate some11 additional competitive federal funds. We12 did receive some of those funds in the13 portion of the stimulus called the School14 Improvement Grant program. We were not15 successful as a state in receiving state16 Race to the Top funds in two rounds of17 applications, and that was a major18 disappointment. It would have made a big19 difference for all school districts in20 Pennsylvania, including the School21 District of Philadelphia. It was not a22 City application. It was not a School23 District application. It was the state24 that made the application.25 125 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 We did see their application.2 We thought it was a sound proposal. We3 had hopes that it would be funded. It4 was not.5 There still is a further round6 of stimulus funding. They've gone7 through one round already in the program8 called Investing in Innovation, and there9 will be a second round there. There will10 also be a second round of stimulus School11 Improvement Grant funds. So we are still12 hopeful that we will receive some13 additional federal funds from that14 source.15 As I said in the previous16 response, we did not anticipate that17 there would be a 100 percent failure to18 restore any of the Fiscal Stabilization19 funds, nor did we anticipate that the20 Corbett Administration would propose to21 take the entire amount of Education Jobs22 bill money and reduce State Basic23 Education funding dollar for dollar. We24 did anticipate that they might do 5025 126 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 percent of that, but not 100 percent.2 And then we did not anticipate that there3 would be further cuts that are in excess4 of the losses from stimulus funding.5 As for local funding, the6 dilemma for the School District has been7 that it has not been clear to us how long8 the School District would be under an9 assessment freeze. With the assessment10 freeze, there's no ability for real11 estate tax revenues to grow because of12 changes in the assessed values. So the13 only way that there can be an increase in14 the real estate tax is through a change15 in the millage, either the share of the16 millage for the two partners in sharing17 the tax, the City and the School18 District, or an absolute increase. And19 it's still not clear to us exactly when20 we will see a change there.21 In the past, as you know, prior22 to the recession --23

Mr. Masch,24 I'm sorry. You've repeated the same25 127 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 answer you gave to Mr. Greenlee, and for2 the sake of everybody's time, including3 yours, I'd like to -- I did hear what you4 said before and I know everybody else5 did, and I just want to save us some6 time.7 With respect to local tax8 increases and specifically if you could9 address the part of the question where10 part of the response was increase in11 local funding. And I know you were12 trying to address that when you talked13 about the assessment freeze that the City14 undertook, but in our own five-year15 projections last year, we had real estate16 taxes going down 1.4 percent, 1.5917 percent, 0.57 percent. So what did you18 mean last year when you and Dr. Ackerman19 said increased local funding? Because it20 wasn't part of the City's Five Year Plan21 or any projections that could have been22 provided, and I'd like to understand once23 again what the plan for increased local24 funding was, and if it was to come get25 128 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 more money from City Council, perhaps we2 could have started that sooner than a3 month and a half ago or a month ago.4

Well, first of all,5 Councilman, as I said, it's not been6 clear to the School District when there7 will be an end to the assessment freeze.8 It also has not been clear to the School9 District when the City would move to full10 value assessment and what the impact of11 that would be on assessment, but it has12 been our understanding that that was the13 Administration's plan. We understood14 that until the reforms and changes could15 take place to the property tax16 assessment, Administration and the17 District, with the abolition of the Board18 of Revision of Taxes and the19 establishment of the Office of Property20 Tax Assessment, that the Mayor would not21 have the mechanism within his control in22 order to do a reassessment and a reform23 of the assessment system, but we did24 understand that those were on the25 129 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 horizon. What hasn't been clear to us is2 what the timing would be or, indeed to3 this day, what the impact of that might4 be on our finances, and that has made it5 difficult for us to plan on a multi-year6 basis.7

Okay.8

Excuse9 me. Councilman, you are on a point of10 order.11

Yes, ma'am.12 I accept your response, except13 I refer you to our Five Year Plan, which14 clearly did not anticipate any increase15 in the local contribution to the School16 District as you testified to last year,17 and I still don't feel like I've gotten18 an answer to that question.19 So thank you, Madam Chair.20

You're21 welcome.22 Councilman Greenlee.23

I'm24 finished.25 130 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Thank2 you.3

A long4 time ago, but I was finished.5

Thank6 you.7 Councilwoman Miller.8

Thank9 you. Thank you, Madam Chair.10 Good afternoon. Earlier this11 morning Councilman Goode asked a12 question, and I don't really think we got13 a specific answer about the dollar amount14 that you're requesting from the City. Is15 there a specific dollar amount? You said16 50 to 75 percent.17

Yes. Above the18 11 million that we've included in budget19 reductions that we're expecting, those20 are services and programs that the21 District covered a few years ago when the22 City was experiencing some budget23 reductions. So above and beyond that, it24 would be 75 to 110 million. That would25 131 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 include restoration of full-day2 kindergarten, restoration of all of the3 transportation cuts, restoration of the4 reduction in class size going back to5 what it is this year. And I know that6 the rest of that would be, we believe --7 on this list there has been talk, I know,8 with the Mayor and some of the City9 Councilmembers about the alternative ed,10 so we'd be willing to talk about that.11 But those other cuts -- the use of those12 dollars.13 But our primary and priority14 are restoration of full-day kindergarten,15 transportation and reduced class size.16

Okay.17 What exactly do you do now with18 transportation? Who gets transportation?19

Councilwoman, we20 transport not only District children on21 yellow buses and also giving those who22 are eligible by income TransPasses on23 SEPTA for discount, but we also transport24 by law charter school children and25 132 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 non-public children, children who go to2 schools that are private schools or3 parochial schools. So we have a full4 population each and every day that we5 transport around the City.6

So you7 determine at the Central Office who gets8 transportation, not the school budget?9

Not the school?10 I'm sorry.11

Budget.12

No, not the school13 budget, that's correct. Central Office14 does determine that.15

Well, I16 don't have any children in public school.17 I have plenty of nieces and nephews, but18 when my daughter went to public school,19 she went to Fitler, which was a20 citywide -- children attended Fitler21 citywide.22

Yes.23

And they24 received transportation.25 133 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

That's correct.2

Does that3 still happen --4

Yes, it does.5

--6 through those types of programs?7

Yes.8

Is that9 part of the transportation you will be10 cutting?11

That's exactly12 right, and that's why we've put it in13 close priority to kindergarten, because14 we realize that with the loss of15 transportation, the loss of that16 flexibility, that money would have to17 come out of each household, and if you18 have multiple kids, it becomes expensive,19 but it also limits the amount of choice20 that children have and it also could21 contribute to some of the things that we22 don't want to see in terms of truancy and23 so on. So that's why we are so adamant24 that kindergarten and transportation are25 134 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 really hand in hand in terms of top2 priorities.3

Right,4 because I would wonder --5 (Applause.)6

I would7 actually wonder what would happen to a8 school like Fitler where children attend9 from all across the City. My daughter10 started -- well, it starts in first11 grade. I would not want my first grader12 riding SEPTA --13

Absolutely.14

-- to get15 to school.16

Nor do we. We17 don't want -- she might get great18 experience, but I think the key right now19 is to make sure that children go to20 school on time. We have a good record21 generally on our school buses. As we do22 our Facilities Master Plan, which you've23 probably heard about, the goal is to try24 to rebuild feeder patterns, but even25 135 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 there, you would still need to modify2 transportation and give parents the3 choice that they need to have in order to4 make sure the children get educated where5 they want them to go.6

So as it7 stands now, without the extra funding,8 you will be cutting transportation, and9 the only students that will receive10 transportation are charter and special11 ed?12

That's basically13 it the way it's configured now given14 what's in front of us.15

Okay.16 With your Facilities Master Plan that you17 just mentioned, does what to do with the18 vacant school buildings fall under that19 master plan?20

Yes, it does. So21 existing schools that are vacant are in22 our first phase of work. We've done all23 the analytics, all the demographics.24 We've gone out to the public to vet all25 136 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 of the issues, planning area by planning2 area, across the City, north to south,3 east to west. The first step is to look4 at the buildings that right now are5 vacant and/or dormant, get them6 appraised, see what we can sell, also to7 close some of the annexes that are not in8 great shape.9 Starting in the fall, we'll be10 coming back through the Superintendent11 and the SRC with a number of seats that12 we need to close and/or buildings that13 will affect and vet that with the14 community. And as we select buildings15 and/or look at which ones we go after16 because they're underutilized or because17 they are in poor condition or there's18 some reconfiguration, the public will get19 to comment on that, and then we'll start20 making decisions starting in late winter,21 early spring of next year.22

Right.23 Because you've been doing this now for a24 while. So you're saying late winter,25 137 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 early spring you'll have an actual plan?2

Yeah. We'll have3 a small wave starting now, and then a4 larger wave starting in the fall. But it5 took us -- the reason why it took us the6 time and starting around September is7 because the District had not had a8 Facilities Master Plan in multiple years9 and this is the first time we've taken a10 comprehensive look, looking at11 demographics, looking at movement of12 children and also looking at what we can13 afford.14

Off the15 top of your head, how many vacant16 buildings do we have?17

I think we have18 six right now, and we have a number that19 are underutilized, but the six is on top20 right now.21

Two of22 those six are in the 8th Council23 District.24

Yes, ma'am. We25 138 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 understand that.2

Speed it3 up. Okay?4

We will speed it5 up. We need to talk to you about how6 to -- the priorities that we have or like7 to see in terms of how those buildings8 get reused.9

Okay.10 One alternative school -- this morning11 Councilwoman Blackwell asked about12 alternative schools, and there's a13 program in Germantown on Chelten Avenue14 called the Ombudsman. Is that -- that15 was not mentioned in the list that was --16 plus, we actually need a list. In17 addition to that, we also need a glossary18 of terms, because you guys talk this19 every day and we don't, and we don't20 know -- we can't remember always21 renaissance school, empowerment school,22 what all this means, who they all are.23 But this morning -- and then I saw in24 your booklet that you had a list of25 139 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 alternative schools, but this one program2 called the Ombudsman program was not3 listed. Who funds that? I'm sure you're4 familiar with the program. Who funds5 that? Do you fund that or -- for a6 minute I actually thought that that kind7 of program took the place of CEP, which8 you no longer have, correct?9

No, it did not10 take the place of CEP, but actually11 Benjamin Wright, our Assistant12 Superintendent for District 4, will13 answer the question.14 (Witness approached witness15 table.)16

Good afternoon.17

Hi.18

Thank you.19 Ombudsman is one of the programs that we20 fund through Academic Division 4. It has21 a blended model right now. It has22 transition students as well as23 accelerated students. We can get you --24 transition, those students who have25 140 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 committed an act, like we call them, act2 of -- violation against the Student Code3 of Conduct, number two versus number one,4 and they're placed in a transition school5 after a hearing and then they work there6 for -- we check them out every 30 days.7 We do a periodic review on them. At the8 end of 90 days, they're eligible to go9 back if they've made progress, they've10 gone through the character education11 program, or they stay an additional 3012 and we do another review on them in 3013 days. We also at the end of 180 days,14 they should be ready to go back if they15 had not made it in the 90 day.16 Ombudsman was one of those17 smaller programs that had 60 kids in it,18 and they're also accelerated kids. We19 can get you the brochure, if you would20 like the brochure, of where they're all21 located. Those may change in the22 upcoming school year.23

Right.24 That would be good. So all those25 141 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 programs, all the alternative programs,2 are actually operating today as we speak3 or have people been laid off or when does4 the contract -- someone told me that you5 want to bring lots of these programs6 in-house now?7

Yes. We do plan8 on bringing five of those programs9 in-house.10

Five?11 Okay. So you have a whole list of those12 that are left?13

Yes. We have a14 matrix, a performance matrix, that each15 program has to meet. So in June, we'll16 be going through that matrix. And we've17 done all year long, every quarter, we18 have a review. We have a report card19 review, just like we do for comprehensive20 schools. We also do those for the21 alternative programs. And during the22 course of the year, we do tell the23 providers, if you're not meeting the24 matrix -- if you remember the report that25 142 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 the ARC gave last year about the2 accountability system, we had already3 built that system, so now we tell the4 providers -- they come in and talk to us5 three times a year. So they know pretty6 much where they are. And so when June7 come, we do make a recommendation that8 they be continued or not continued based9 on their performance.10

So all11 the programs still operating -- has12 Ombudsman --13

All of the14 programs at this moment are still15 operating.16

No one17 has been laid off?18

We wouldn't know19 that because we don't operate the20 programs. The providers lay the people21 off. They hire them. We don't hire the22 staff at the schools.23

But they24 still have a School District contract, I25 143 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 guess?2

Yes, they do.3

Okay.4 One other question, not about alternative5 schools. This is about schools'6 discretionary funds. Now, does most of7 the schools receive the same dollar8 amount based on enrollment, or how is9 that determined? When I was reading in10 the book, it said that Title I schools, I11 think, receive -- Title I schools receive12 125,000 up to 1.6 million. What makes13 the difference and who gets the 1.614 million? That's a lot of money.15

Councilwoman, under16 federal law, we must give out Title I17 funding proportionate to the number of18 low-income students -- the relative19 proportion of low-income students in each20 school, and that is what we do. Those21 funds are given out with the number that22 you've cited as the 125,000 as the23 minimum that -- every school receives at24 least that much, but then the amount of25 144 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 money that is provided to schools2 increases depending on whether they have3 more than the minimum number of4 low-income students in the school.5

So some6 schools everybody gets free lunch,7 correct? And that's like a citywide kind8 of -- not citywide. School-wide free9 lunch program. So that school, of10 course, has more than maybe a school that11 gets --12

Right. In about 7013 percent of our schools, we have what's14 called universal feeding. We have a15 special agreement with the United States16 Department of Agriculture. This is17 different from the Title I. But it also18 is looking at the relative number of19 low-income students.20 We have been -- in most school21 districts, a student has to bring in a22 form that's filled out by their parent or23 caregiver to qualify for a free or24 reduced lunch, but in Philadelphia -- and25 145 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 this has been true for over 20 years --2 we do a survey every three to four years3 to determine the estimated number of4 low-income students in each school, and5 in a school in which 70 percent or more6 of the students are projected to be low7 income, the U.S. Department of8 Agriculture has agreed that we can9 provide free breakfast and lunch to all10 students in the school. That means that11 the number of low-income students who get12 to obtain those services is much higher,13 because it's not dependent on parents or14 caregivers filling out the forms and15 keeping them current.16

So with17 the 125,000 -- was it 125? With whatever18 money they get from Title I, the school19 can use that money as they see fit?20

That's correct.21

What22 about the discretionary funds? How does23 that -- what is the normal, average24 amount and how is that determined and25 146 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 what do they use that money for?2

I actually have to3 look up the number for you this year. I4 know we have folks from the Budget5 Office. I'm going to ask them what the6 average is, because it's changed this7 year with the reduction in the8 allocation. We had been allocating about9 $200 million among the schools for10 principals to use as discretionary funds11 in their budgets. That's been reduced by12 about $60 million this year. So it's13 $140 million. And we changed the14 allocation formulas to ensure that every15 school had enough money to operate, to16 run its basic office functions, and then17 any other money was distributed on a18 proportional basis among all the schools.19 But obviously with a cut as deep as 3020 percent, the number of discretionary21 dollars is going to be much less in next22 year's school budgets than it has been in23 the past. And in terms of what the new24 averages are, we will get that number for25 147 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 you hopefully during the hearing.2

You can3 just get it to the Chair if you can't get4 it now.5 A few months ago I asked you6 how much allocation per student do we7 need, and you said 19,000 per student,8 and that's based on what Montgomery9 County and a lot of these other counties10 have. So where are we now? And that was11 before you heard about state cuts. So if12 we needed 19,000, where are we per13 student, so we can understand the gap a14 little bit better? I mean, it's one15 thing to say, okay, I have a $292 million16 gap, but per student, sometimes it's17 easier to understand. Like if we need18 19,000 and we only have 10, then it helps19 us see the difference.20

Well, the way that21 the state defines per pupil spending,22 we're at about $13,000 now, and that's23 increased by a couple of thousand dollars24 over the past decade because the25 148 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 increases in state funding. We think it2 will go down by about a thousand dollars3 a student next year.4 I want to caution that that's5 based on a state definition. And you are6 correct that the state Board of Education7 in December of 2007 did a funding8 adequacy study and in that study9 concluded that to have an adequate amount10 of money to successfully educate every11 child in the Philadelphia schools, the12 state Board of Education said we ought to13 have an additional $4,900 per student.14 So that would have taken us up to the15 number that you were talking about16 before. So obviously we're moving in the17 wrong direction if this budget is enacted18 in the way that it's been introduced19 right now based on available funding20 sources.21 Now, there are other districts,22 even low-income districts, that receive23 higher amounts of funds. The Pittsburgh24 district, for instance, is about $2,00025 149 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 per student higher than us the way the2 state funding formulas have been done.3 That's been an advantage that they've had4 for several decades, and it's reduced in5 recent years as the states tried to make6 funding among school districts more7 equitable. But this gap is still there.8

So what9 are you doing to try and -- what are you10 doing at the state level? Because you11 know what happens, as soon as the School12 District announced the proposed cuts,13 then we started getting calls in our14 offices and people outraged about15 half-day kindergarten, no transportation.16 One man called our office and he was17 yelling and screaming at us, and I said,18 Hey, did you call Governor Corbett's19 office? Did you call your state rep?20 Did you call your state senator?21 So what are you doing on the22 state level? Do you meet with them? Do23 you have a budget presentation with them?24

Councilwoman,25 150 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 we've been to Harrisburg multiple times.2 We have no lobbyists, so we are largely3 doing this on our own, trying to advocate4 not only for what we think is appropriate5 in terms of the funding but also the same6 prioritization list that you have seen,7 we've presented to folks on both sides of8 the aisle.9 We've also been trying to work10 with the Pennsylvania Coalition of11 Charter Schools, because the $110 million12 that was cut out of charter school13 reimbursement is important not only to us14 but to them, and there's a resonance15 there. They agree that they would be16 harmed if we get hurt next year, they17 will feel that pain. But I think it's18 not as if we've not been banging on the19 door. That's why I think some of the20 proposals that have been put forth in21 Harrisburg are starting to respond to the22 fact that efforts here in Philadelphia,23 like protectphillyed.com and all the24 rallies, are starting to get to folks,25 151 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 especially when they see it is a2 universal pain that people are feeling,3 not just black and brown but everybody in4 the City.5

Okay.6 This is my last question. The District7 is to be commended for the progress of8 the public and charter schools, but could9 we have a list per school who is doing10 what, if they've made progress, who they11 are rather than lumping it all together,12 both public and charter? And I have a13 charter school in my district that's14 doing, I think, a wonderful job, Imhotep,15 and I think everybody would agree with16 that. They've asked to be allowed to17 have more students, and I don't know18 whether that decision has been made or19 not, but I know other schools that have20 asked for an increase in the number of21 their students and they've been granted22 that.23 So at some point, we might need24 to just talk about what's happening with25 152 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 a school like Imhotep that -- I can't2 remember how the ranking is, but they're3 ranking pretty close to the top, if not4 at the top, and I don't know why they5 have not been allowed the opportunity to6 increase the number of students that they7 have. It's an excellent program.8

Councilwoman, I9 think it's great. We can not only give10 you that listing in terms of what we call11 the School Performance Index not only for12 District schools but also for charters,13 and we've talked directly with Christine14 Wiggins, founder of Imhotep, about her15 specific request to add seats. So we're16 going to be acting on that soon.17

Okay.18 All right. Thank you.19 Thank you, Madam Chair.20

You're21 welcome.22 And with regard to the23 alternative schools and her request,24 please submit that information to the25 153 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Chair, and the Chair will make sure it's2 distributed to all members of Council.3 The next person is Councilwoman4 Sanchez.5

Thank6 you, Madam Chair.7 Good afternoon. I'd like to8 add to that request. I think in previous9 years when we got our budget information,10 there was additional data provided by11 District in terms of schools, ranking12 charters and some other stuff that's not13 in our data, and I think had that been14 provided this year, a lot of the15 questions, particularly with my Council16 colleague Donna Reed Miller, would have17 been answered.18 So, Madam Chair, if you would19 allow me to request that we get that20 updated information by district as21 they've done in the past, that would be22 very helpful. I look forward to those23 report cards every year.24 COUNCILWOMAN BLACKWELL:25 154 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Certainly. Thank you. Thank you very2 much.3

Thank4 you.5 So I'm going to start with a6 couple of things. I just want to kind of7 echo my concern that I expressed8 yesterday around the severity of some of9 the projected cuts, and very concerned10 about the hysteria that it's created in11 the community, particularly by parents12 and teachers and providers. So I just13 want to say, I'm very concerned and14 getting bombarded.15 Most of the students that were16 here earlier this morning were from my17 councilmanic district. So I want to kind18 of lay some of these -- put some stuff on19 the record that's not correct so that we20 can kind of move on.21 I'm not going to talk about22 full-day kindergarten, because I think23 that out of a $3 billion budget, the fact24 that we're talking about 25 million is25 155 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 just like, if I can use Sandy Shea's2 expression, a no-brainer. So I would3 hope that we're going to figure that one4 out.5 But I do want to talk a little6 bit about the transportation piece and7 for the record ask, of the $50 million8 that -- or the $49 million, how much of9 that is reimbursed by the state?10

Councilwoman, there11 are different rates of reimbursement. So12 for non-public transportation, for13 instance, the reimbursement is over 8014 percent. For bus transportation, it15 ranges in the 50 to 60 percent range. So16 the total level of reimbursement is in17 the 60, 70 percent range, and as we have18 noted in the Budget and Brief and in our19 budget presentations and want to make20 clear for the record here, we are21 reimbursed by the state for22 transportation with a one-year lag. We23 are reimbursed in each year for the24 subsequent year. Since we've provided25 156 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 full transportation services, we will2 receive those full reimbursements next3 year. The cuts in transportation, if4 they are implemented next year, will5 result in a loss of state reimbursement6 in Fiscal Year 2012-13, which means that7 the net savings in the second year after8 a transportation cut would be much less9 than the savings in the first year. And10 we've recognize that, we've acknowledged11 it. We've only made these recommended12 reductions because while I take your13 point about in what was a $3 billion14 budget, unfortunately now only a merely15 $2.7 billion budget, each individual item16 doesn't sound like it's that great, but17 the problem is we have to cut 600 million18 plus, and if we had not proposed these19 transportation reductions, the only20 option left to us would have been further21 reductions in instructional programs.22 And since those aren't on the table, it's23 hard to envision that, but if you had24 seen those cuts, our feeling was they25 157 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 were going to be even worse than the2 transportation cut, because if we had3 transportation but we couldn't get people4 the quality educational programs, then5 the transportation wasn't going to avail6 us that much.7 But that said, we also agree8 that it's a terrible cut, and in9 particular because the beneficial effect10 is going to erode in the second year.11

And I12 guess that's to my point. So this13 particular cut this year will realize us14 what savings this year?15

The savings this16 year is $50 million.17

And next18 year?19

So the savings next20 year would be in the range of about $16,21 $17 million.22

I just23 say that because when we're talking about24 these numbers, there's a lot of zeroes in25 158 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 these, and it's a lot easier for people2 to fathom 16 million than 50 million. So3 I just think it's an important4 clarification, because when we talk to5 parents, there's this notion of $506 million, and really what we're talking7 about is trying to close a gap that it8 will be 6 million.9 I also want to make sure that10 we're not passing the buck to next year11 with some sort of funding scheme this12 year, not looking at next year. So with13 transportation, I just wanted to get that14 clarified.15 I'm a little concerned about --16 and let's get into the alternative17 education. I know that last year when18 the School District, rightfully so,19 looked at creating additional slots,20 there was a lot of discussion about21 current Philadelphia-based providers and22 folks coming in and the disparity between23 the cost of students by the different24 contractors. Where are we as it relates25 159 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 to that? Do we now have a standard? I2 know at that point when we talked about3 it last year, we tried to create a more4 uniformed standard about what the cost5 per student is.6

We do have a7 standard. I'll let Mr. Wright.8

Good afternoon,9 Councilwoman. We have standardized the10 costs across the District in terms of11 each provider. The difference is whether12 it's a full day or half day. Some13 providers work on a half day; some of14 them work on a full day. So we're in the15 process of doing that now as we go16 through the rubric again this year and17 look at the performance indicators that18 are there for each provider. And so as19 we put that together, those costs, we20 would be asking each one to take equal21 costs.22

We like23 to look at those. Right now my24 understanding -- and I asked this25 160 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 question yesterday in our briefing, and2 just to clarify for the record, my3 understanding is that if the proposal4 before us stays, the providers' funding5 will end June 30th even for those who are6 graduating kids after that; is that7 correct?8

Their contract9 ends when it ends. There are some that10 will be graduating their students on11 August the 4th. So we are very much12 aware of that.13

Okay.14 Wait a minute. So that's a concern.15 Because we're saying to folks, You have a16 commitment with us to graduate these kids17 in August, but we're only providing18 funding for June. Is that what you're19 saying?20

No, that's not21 what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that22 each provider had their own contract as23 to when they would graduate students, and24 those contracts are still intact. So no25 161 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 one has changed the contract on that2 issue.3 Now, going forward next year,4 we are going to have to negotiate some5 cuts and some cost-saving measures.6

So based7 on your current proposal about how8 alternative education would look next9 year versus this year, can you highlight10 for me the one or two or three different11 things? Because I know there's a12 discussion about some of this being13 brought in-house. So what would change14 based on what you're proposing now?15

We're basically16 proposing to do five high schools,17 accelerated high schools in-house, three18 middle schools in-house.19

Where20 would these schools be located?21

The high schools22 will be located in current places that we23 have providers operating right now. For24 example, at the AER Center on Front and25 162 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Hunting Park; at E.S. Miller, which is2 4300 Westminster; also at Southern High3 School, which right now there's a program4 there; at Bartram Annex, there's a5 program there; and at Ben Franklin High6 School on the flip side of the schools,7 on Green Street or Brandywine.8 At the same time, we have some9 providers that are very exemplary, so10 we'll be working with them in terms of11 what capacity that they could be utilized12 in to move it forward on a smaller scale13 at a reduced rate per student, and they14 all will be the same.15

Can you16 explain to me the thought process -- and17 we had this discussion before and I'm18 just really concerned because it's an19 issue that we had at DHS when we moved20 from a robust provider system based on21 where we needed these schools to be22 located, the types of kids that they were23 going to service, and then when we go24 back to centralizing, we're going to lose25 163 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 that.2 What is the thought process and3 why -- is this a budgetary decision or is4 this one of let's transition in the long5 run these programs back into the6 District?7

Basically it is8 both. We want to transition in the long9 run because we have created our own10 programs. We have plats and plans,11 Philadelphia Learning Academy South,12 which uses a non-graded model;13 Philadelphia Learning Academy North that14 uses a non-graded model. We have --15

They're16 using what kind of model?17

An ungraded model.18 We have Albertson for middle19 school students. We have a program PYDA20 for high school students who are coming21 out of placement that use a very similar22 model.23 Now, the providers use a very24 similar model as well. So for providers25 164 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 per student in the accelerated side of2 the house, they do differ in terms of3 whether they're full day or half day.4 That's the only difference.5 Now, on the transition side of6 the house, $10,200 for the full-day7 program and $5,297 for the half-day8 program.9 On the transition side, those10 programs are all full-day programs right11 now, and the providers are paid $8,800 as12 a minimum and 10,002 as a maximum,13 keeping in mind that each provider in the14 RFP quoted the cost that they wanted15 associated with their budget to run those16 programs. So the District did not17 legislate the dollars.18

How many19 slots will we be losing in this cut?20

None. We're21 actually increasing 500, because it costs22 the District less to run the program.23 PLA North, for example, they was24 allocated $10,200 for 275 kids, but right25 165 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 now they run 400 kids a piece. So that2 cost is about $5,000 per kid.3

So4 you're saying that we can do it more5 efficiently internally?6

Absolutely.7

We are8 going to have the capacity based on9 teachers -- are we going to have that10 capacity to transition that quickly with11 teachers and everything else?12

Yes, we will.13 When we were given the okay to open the14 PLAs, we opened them in one month. So we15 know we have the capacity. We have the16 training. We have the professional17 development all set up to go. We have18 the administrators in place. So we19 know -- there are going to be some20 hiccups, there's no question about that,21 but, of course, we'll be there with the22 Alka Seltzer to make sure that those23 hiccups are taken care of.24

I don't25 166 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 doubt your intentions. It's just that2 I've been involved in education long3 enough to know that it is taking us a4 very long time to create these very5 unique programs to meet the needs of6 these kids, and you're asking us to have7 a leap of faith that in one year you're8 going to be able to build that capacity9 internally, and it's really difficult for10 me to say that that's possible. It's11 doable over two or three years. I don't12 see it doable in one year.13 So these -- I worked at ASPIRA,14 as Director of ASPIRA, and I had an15 alternative education and accelerated16 program. The kids who come into these17 programs have a variety of special needs.18 We failed them once. We can't afford to19 fail them twice as we try to figure it20 out, when we already have some proven21 track records of graduating these kids.22 So I'm not going to be against23 reform in saying how do you bring that24 stuff internally. I am not going to25 167 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 accept that we're going to do this in one2 year. It's just not possible. I've seen3 what's happened when we attempt to do4 these drastic changes overnight, and the5 kids get caught up in the middle.6 There's a geography issue of where kids7 want to go and how far they're willing to8 go, because many of these kids, as you9 well know, have kids. So you're talking10 about single mothers, single fathers.11 You have adjudicated youth.12 So we're going to have to13 rethink this area, and I know that's one14 of the areas where we've talked about15 restoration, but I want to go beyond16 restoration of funding. I want to go17 to -- part of what makes the portfolio18 work is the mix, is the ability to have19 different slots and different types of20 situations for all the kids. So I want21 to be real careful about how we work22 that.23

Actually, it is24 still a mix, and we will have 4,000 young25 168 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 people who will have access to the2 contract providers, the ones who have3 done the best in our DOL schools. We4 have 4,000 young people. So it is a mix.5 We're actually not transitioning all of6 the contract providers out of the7 alternative mix. That just wasn't8 explicit. And we'll be working in9 schools as they are in all of our DOL10 schools. That's about 4,000 young people11 that will still have access.12

That's13 part of the concern. Again, what I found14 is dealing -- when we were doing some of15 this work is, you don't want to set kids16 back in the same environment where they17 failed the first time. There's a reason18 why these smaller environments are more19 conducive. It's about not putting a kid20 back where he failed again once.21

But many of them22 are already there and --23

No. I24 understand that. There's a pocket of25 169 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 kids that that works for because of their2 situation, but, you know, when I visit my3 alternative schools in my district, I'm4 acutely aware of the fact that it is a5 very different environment in their6 schools, that we're not putting these7 kids back up in that same environment.8 (Applause.)9

Councilwoman,10 we're doing both. So some will remain in11 their schools like they are now and some12 will have off-site centers, those13 providers that have off-site centers. So14 there will be a choice. It's what we're15 doing now, with a smaller number of kids,16 4,000.17

And I18 think before we finish this budget19 discussion, I'd like to see more details20 about what that looks like, because I21 think it's real important that again --22 and I said it, I was one of the first23 folks to say these budget cuts are24 drastic. I'm going to do my part as an25 170 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 elected official to provide as much2 support, but it is going to be with3 conditions, and that's clearly one of the4 areas where, because of my experience,5 has to be worked out.6 (Applause.)7

So I'm8 sure we'll get to some agreement there.9

Okay.10

I want11 to talk a little bit about the ESL impact12 and the cuts. This is one of the areas13 where I always sound as a broken record14 as the Latino on Council. But for the15 last three years, I've been asking for16 what is our bilingual education plan, and17 we've gotten different variations of what18 we're doing around ESL and bilingual19 education, but I'm extremely concerned20 about the elimination of 42 bilingual21 positions. Now, correct me if that's not22 the number.23

Yeah. She's24 going to come up and explain that. I25 171 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 believe it's bilingual counseling2 positions. It's not teachers. We've3 added 63 more teachers. We did not4 reduce those teaching staff.5 (Witness approached witness6 table.)7

Good afternoon.8 Lucy Feria. How are you?9 That's correct. As I was10 coming up and I heard the number, I was11 saying that's BCAs. That's not teaching12 positions. The ESL program will13 continue. It actually saw the least14 reductions. We were watching it closely15 and are very committed to the ESL16 program. So we will continue to have 30117 ESL teachers. In addition, we're18 actually enhancing our programs because19 we are going to open a dual language20 program at Luis Munoz-Marin.21

So the22 cuts in the bilingual piece/ESL piece is23 on the counseling side? So where are we24 seeing --25 172 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Family supports.2 The bilingual counseling --3

Can you4 explain that to me, what that means?5

There are several6 offices that provide services to parents7 and students in schools. The Office of8 Parent and Engagement has another office9 that has two big offices that serve ESL10 students or ELL immigrant families. They11 are the Family Supports, Office of Family12 Supports, as well as the Office of13 Translation and Interpretations.14 In my shop, the Office of15 Multilingual Curriculum and Programs, we16 do the instructional program.17

Okay.18

And, actually,19 we've increased our Office of Translation20 Services. I don't remember how many, but21 it's a big office now. So we felt like22 we could -- the bilingual counseling23 assistants are sort of like instructional24 aides, and what we've done is shifted the25 173 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 resources so we'd have more interpreters2 for schools and for services3 District-wide.4

Okay.5 Well, I'm interested in looking at how6 these cuts -- the one issue that I'd like7 to revisit is -- and maybe Lucy will8 remember since she's been around a9 little. I don't want to put your age out10 there, Lucy, but a little bit -- is the11 designation of bilingual schools that12 allows us to ensure that when we have the13 type of cuts that we're talking about,14 usually first in is first out, and then I15 end up losing bilingual personnel at the16 school-based level. How are we making17 sure that that doesn't happen in those18 schools in the past -- and I don't know19 if it was the '80s rendition of bilingual20 schools.21

Gosh, I think that22 was about in the 1990s. What we are23 currently doing is designating positions24 bilingual. So we have positions based --25 174 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 and the school principals make that2 decision, as well as many of the other3 offices. For example, we have bilingual4 counselor positions, bilingual5 secretaries, bilingual teachers.6

So when7 we make these cuts, if they're last in,8 are they first out?9

Not if they have a10 bilingual designation for the position.11 For example, I have five transitional12 bilingual programs and there are teaching13 positions that are designated bilingual.14 In order to implement the program, we15 would need the bilingual teachers.16

The17 other area that -- last week I had an18 opportunity to sit down with some19 parents -- is the, I guess, the parent20 ombudsman positions. They have all been21 eliminated?22

They have, and23 they're coming back. We eliminated both24 the -- and I guess I want to say, you25 175 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 know, the last thing we want to do was to2 eliminate these positions, the parent3 ombudsman and the student advisor, but4 what we've done is combined the two now5 so that we can still keep parts of both6 of those positions. So there will be7 somebody there who will handle both the8 advising of students who are truant and9 have other issues to support the10 counselor, and they will also work with11 parents. So we've combined the two12 positions.13

So how14 many cuts are we talking?15 (Witness approached witness16 table.)17

So we have18 approximately -- Karen Dunkley, Deputy19 Chief, for the record, of the Office of20 Parent, Family, Community Engagement and21 Faith-Based Partnerships.22 We will have a total of the new23 positions, they're known as school24 improvement support liaisons, and we will25 176 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 have a total 150 of those positions,2 reduced from 177 parent ombudsman.3

So that4 is 20 something you're only losing?5

For parent6 ombudsman and student advisors, we're7 losing 150 of those. So a total of 1708 positions.9

How are10 the qualifications different? Because I11 think one of the uniquenesses about the12 ombudsman was you had people who were13 from the neighborhood, understand. So14 how are the qualifications changing?15

The16 qualifications are actually comparable.17 We did retain the same qualifications to18 ensure that we would not lose those19 people who were connected to communities.20

Okay.21

But there is --22 I mean, we do have a bumping rights23 issue. So the most senior will bump into24 these positions first.25 177 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

Okay.2 So there again, I may get hurt on the3 bilingual and language.4

They will not --5 bilingual designations absolutely remain6 bilingual regardless of seniority. So,7 for example, if you take a school like a8 Cayuga or Furness, it's strictly based --9 as long as the position is designated10 bilingual, the seniority there only11 applies to personnel who are bilingual.12 So they will absolutely be staffed13 bilingual.14

Okay.15 Thank you.16 Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll17 let my colleague -- Bill is busting at18 the seams over here. I will be back.19 Again, this is very drastic.20 We're very much committed to saving where21 we've made progress, but it will be with22 caveats. So I'm there.23

Thank24 you very much.25 178 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 Councilman Green and then2 Councilman Jones. I apologize,3 Councilman Jones. He really took to task4 his point of order, albeit it was a5 rather long point of order.6

Thank you,7 Madam Chair.8 Maria knows a lot of things.9 One of the things Maria knows is10 education, I have to say. That was a11 very impressive colloquy.12 I'd just like to say for the13 record that over the last two years,14 we've learned a lot in this Chamber about15 making tough budget-balancing decisions.16 We went through that at a time when17 School District funding increased year18 after year, and we've disagreed at times19 and we've grappled with serious fiscal20 challenges and trying to find a21 responsible way to do so while preserving22 essential services.23 Our touchstone has been really24 outcomes, productivity and collaboration.25 179 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 And our ability to deal with these2 challenges was enhanced by having3 multiple stakeholders at the table - the4 Administration, City Council, PICA, the5 Controller and others. The City balanced6 its budget using suggestions from all of7 these parties and benefited from diverse8 perspectives.9 It seems likely that the City10 will provide some assistance to the11 School District this year. From my12 perspective at least, it's important that13 any such assistance be accompanied by two14 things. First, a willingness on the part15 of the District to allow oversight that16 is equivalent to the oversight we have17 over City departments, including the18 equivalent of subpoena power, our ability19 to get any information we want when we20 want it, et cetera, and, for example,21 allowing the Controller to have the22 ability to do pre-audits and performance23 audits and look at anything that he wants24 and get information about anything he25 180 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 wants. And it's likely that this issue2 will be go on in 2013 as well. So the3 second commitment is to use the funding4 for programs such as those that people5 have talked about are important today.6 I'm concerned that the items on7 the chopping block include initiatives8 that we know improve outcomes for kids.9 I'm not confident that all of the10 programs we're preserving have a data or11 evidence-based approach that they12 actually do improve outcomes for kids.13 And so it looks to me like we have some14 positioning here rather than linking15 spending decisions to increased or best16 outcomes for children. And I guess we17 can get into that a little bit more in18 the questions, but I wanted to start my19 questioning with that premise and wonder20 whether the School District will be21 amenable to memorandums of understandings22 and other contractual items that are23 enforceable in court.24

Councilman Green,25 181 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 I think we have multiple numbers of2 memorandums of understanding between3 various City departments. So I wouldn't4 find this out of the ordinary with5 respect to the Controller's Office.6 I do recall -- and Mike will7 have to -- what do we have on staff on8 the Controller's Office?9

Well, there are10 seven positions that are currently paid11 for out of the School District budget,12 seven FTEs out of the Controller13 complement that are paid for out of the14 School District budget.15

And their purpose?16

Well, they are not17 staff who are assigned to School District18 audits. They are members of the general19 staff of the Controller's Office. They20 perform their duties at the behest of the21 Controller.22

And the23 Controller's Office does not have24 pre-audit authority like he does for City25 182 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 departments. He can only go back and2 look retrospectively.3

That's correct.4 Under the School Code, the pre-audit5 function is a School District function.6 We have an internal audit unit of our own7 which performs that function.8 As for performance audits, the9 Controller's Office does conduct10 performance audits on a regular basis on11 the School District, and we cooperate12 with them fully.13

So my14 question once again is, is there any15 objection to providing City Council and16 the Controller with the same authority,17 even if we have to do it by contract,18 that we have over City departments?19

Under the School20 Code, the School District is required to21 maintain its own internal audit unit. So22 you would basically be putting these23 transactions through two levels of --24

I'm not25 183 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 suggesting that we would use it to2 perform an additional audit. It's not3 clear to me that we're given all of the4 information we request. It takes a long5 time to even get a hearing on issues,6 whether it's related to bullying or other7 things. We do get them eventually three8 or six months after the fact, but the9 level of cooperation at least -- I'm only10 speaking from my perspective -- would11 have to change dramatically for me to12 want to support additional funding.13

I can only say with14 respect to the Controller's Office and my15 office as the Chief Financial Officer, we16 work extraordinarily closely. They are17 an independent auditor, so it's not --18 it's not cooperative in the sense that's19 inappropriate, but I am -- I can't think20 of an instance in which we have not been21 able to provide the Controller's Office22 with information that they have required.23 They are in fact the auditors of the24 School District and have --25 184 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1

I understand2 what their authority is.3

-- on a day-to-day4 basis.5

The6 Controller was in here the other day and7 specifically raised these problems in8 terms of his relationship with the School9 District and how difficult it is to get10 information in the School District,11 specifically mentioning they have to come12 up with alternative theories to get13 access to buildings just to check the14 equipment there so that they can actually15 perform audits about what's going on in16 the schools. He gave that specific17 example.18 So rather than getting in a19 back and forth, my question is simple.20 Are you willing to give us the kind of21 authority we have over other departments22 in terms of quick access to information,23 the equivalent of subpoena power, et24 cetera, if we're going to provide you25 185 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 with additional resources so that there2 is an accountability to this body?3

I don't think I4 can answer that. I think that we'd have5 to have legal look into that, along with6 the other issue that was raised by7 Councilman Clarke, and it would have to8 be then a School Board decision,9 certainly not staff.10

Okay. I11 accept that. I wanted to make that point12 and say I honestly think that at least on13 the City's side, we've benefited from14 having more information available to more15 people to make suggestions.16 Councilwoman Quinones-Sanchez17 just raised a point that I think was lost18 on us because we don't have details about19 the City budget, and, that is, if you get20 $35 million on a cash flow basis next21 year, you can pay for transportation as22 long as 16 million is there. So I don't23 know whether the School District is24 allowed to do revenue anticipation notes.25 186 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 We can do them and lend the money to the2 School District in a way that doesn't3 make it an ongoing obligation, but it4 seems to me that the transportation issue5 is a $16 million problem as long as we6 can create a financing mechanism and not7 a $53 million problem, because you'll get8 reimbursement at the 60 or 70 percent9 rate as long as that cash is available to10 you.11 In terms of like12 problem-solving together, is there a way13 for us to go to banks together, put that14 extra 35 million in our trans and get the15 money back from you next year when we16 repay them, that sort of thing?17

Councilman, as I18 noted, we are in discussions with the19 Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation20 Authority about the possibility of that21 kind of arrangement to deal with22 TransPasses, but it would be much more23 difficult to do it with respect to the24 bus service. There are certain25 187 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 limitations on us. One is, we don't2 receive the reimbursement 100 percent on3 day one of the next fiscal year. This is4 not to say that it's impossible to do5 this, just it's one of the difficulties6 we're wrestling with with SEPTA. The7 state reimburses us on a bimonthly basis8 over the course of the next year. So9 it's actually a two-year transaction, not10 a one-year transaction.11

Okay.12 However long the transaction is, is there13 a way for us to work together for us to14 provide potentially the cash flow15 necessary for you to continue that, even16 if it's a two-year reimbursement to the17 City?18

We would welcome19 that.20

Okay. So21 really the ask for transportation, as22 long as there's the financial mechanism,23 whether it's through loans from banks24 that we guarantee, whether it's through a25 188 5/24/11 - WHOLE - BILL 110135, ETC.1 shared services arrangement where we2 actually provide the bussing and can get3 reimbursed by the state, it's really a4 $16 million problem?5

If you can give6 us that kind of support, then it becomes7 a $16 million problem.8

Okay.9

What was10 that?11

If we can get12 that support of the advance, the kinds of13 alternatives, then it becomes a $1614 million problem. But right now we don't15 have any of that as surety.16