Talk is cheap; managing a school system is not

The local silly season has started. Several potential candidates for office are jockeying for position and press coverage, and when it comes to education they have already begun to spout talking points that sound good but have no substance. Like President Donald Trump, they are playing to their supposed bases, and testing sound bites.

“Maybe a solution is a large, one-time payment or a loan from Yale University or a state or federal bailout.” That’s original thinking; why not add to the long-term debt with another loan? “I love New Haven.” Duh!

“The city needs to particularly give more support to neighborhoods that have been neglected for many years.” Which neighborhoods, what neglect?

“Other cities around the country, limited in taxing power, have used modest fees on outside use of services that could benefit New Haven revenue.” That’s a new idea, raise taxes by calling them fees. I can see the masses flocking to support that idea.

“This is an issue of social, economic and racial justice.” What?

Another candidate wants to “eradicate homelessness and poverty.”

And my personal favorites — “Our top priorities have to be more pre-K programs, reduced class sizes and an extended day.” Sure, we all agree. Now tell us how to pay for it.

And, “The school board is dysfunctional.”

Let’s talk about dysfunction for a moment. In the past this school board had absolutely zero say in how this school system was run, and instead allowed the superintendent and mayor to usurp its statutory responsibilities. What New Haven families received was a nonfunctioning, dysfunctional board which allowed a multimillion-dollar ($20 million) deficit to build.

When I joined the board three years ago, we were not receiving monthly financial reports. It took over two years to finally begin to get rudimentary financial statements. Now that is the definition of dysfunction.

Every contractor in the school system — and there are many — was operating without signed contracts. I know that sounds crazy, and I tell you it was. We were being asked to approve contracts which were already 10 months into their 12-month terms. No board oversight whatsoever. It took us nearly 18 months to get the administration to bring contracts to us for approval before vendors went to work. Does this sound like dysfunction?

After the charter was changed, it took nearly four years for the board to update its bylaws to correspond with the changes. Even the simple job of getting minutes for meetings was six months behind.

This current board is far from being dysfunctional. We have made a lot of progress over the last three years. We have managed to reduce a $20 million deficit to $9 million and counting. Perhaps all members don’t agree at all times on all issues. And yes, sometimes we don’t approve spending requests from the administration based on our continued diligence to reducing that black hole. And maybe those disagreements become a little more public than some would like, though I love it since I believe in democracy and transparency. But that is how board oversight and democracy works. It may be messy at times but it is the best system we have for true freedom.

I think one potential candidate summed it up quite well when she said, “There’s a lot I don’t know about the budget, but I’m sure as hell going to learn.” Perhaps all the candidates should be that honest with the public.