Foster To State Ed Chief: Better Way To Supervise Schools

From Democratic mayoral candidate Mary-Jane Foster

Foster Calls on Education Commissioner for “New Approach” to Takeover

Democratic candidate for mayor of Bridgeport Mary-Jane Foster hand delivered a letter to Commissioner of Education George Coleman this morning and asked for a ‘new approach’ to the education situation in Bridgeport. The letter appealed to the Commissioner to stop pursuing a ‘reconstituted’ school board approach and offered that if they were truly concerned with the Constitutional ramifications of their actions, the Commissioner’s office would pursue ‘the state takeover option’ of seeking a special magistrate and a vote by the Connecticut General Assembly. The benefits of this approach are ‘transparency’ and a transparent transaction where Bridgeport would receive money allocated by the General Assembly.

“The new authority should reflect the city of Bridgeport in terms of diversity and in terms of being heavily weighted by parents,” stated Foster. “I am offended by the idea that bureaucrats in Hartford would determine what is best for our children and not include the parents of those children. We have already seen evidence of that in how this was carried out. We should not allow our parents and children’s voices to be lost in the plan going forward.”

In addition, Foster offered several ideas to Commissioner Coleman if the State refuses to consider slowing their efforts to usurp the school board and Bridgeport’s right to local rule and control.

Campaign Manager Jason Bartlett, a former state representative who worked on these issues in the Connecticut legislature said, “Since they will be coming back to special session to work on State budget matters, there really is no reason that the General Assembly could not hold hearings and draft legislation to correct what I believe are extra constitutional actions taken by the State school board and endorsed by Bridgeport’s mayor and local board of education. Setting aside elections is not good precedent in the State of Connecticut. There are better actions available on the table and we should take a breath and consider those. Mary-Jane Foster is right to offer these corrections and we hope the commissioner is listening.”

The letter to Commissioner Coleman follows:

July 8, 2011

The Honorable George Coleman
Interim Commissioner of Education
165 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106

Dear Commissioner Coleman,

I am writing to express my disappointment and dissatisfaction with the recent State Board of Education vote to reconstitute our Bridgeport Board of Education under Public act 10-111, Sec. 21-h of the Connecticut General Statutes. I am also including my recommendations for going forward in order to achieve the best outcomes on behalf of the children of Bridgeport.

In your capacity as Commissioner, I appeal to your sense of fairness and call upon you to use your authority to safeguard a process where politics has no place. The State Board’s vote and any appointment of members will set aside past and future elections by the voters of Bridgeport. Silencing the voice and will of our citizenry has no place in government. Connecticut Public Act, subsection (d) of section (21) provides for the State takeover of municipal Board of Education in case of either consistently failing schools, or “any special act, charter or ordinance granting the Commissioner of Education the authority to reconstitute the local or regional board.” Such a law arbitrarily supersedes the authority of an elected board, effectively removing the democratic process from the education of Bridgeport’s children. When action as dramatic as this takeover occurs, we all have an increased obligation to protect the process to insure transparency, inclusiveness, and equity. To date, that is not the legacy of this action.

The proponents of the takeover have said our board is dysfunctional. But a cursory review of the Board of Education minutes reflects a very common 6-3 majority vote. In addition, the Mayor and Superintendent of schools have enough control of the Board that the Superintendent’s recommendation to not pass the budget won by an 8-1 vote. The Board functions regularly if not always harmoniously–so goes a robust democracy.

Furthermore, the State Board failed to follow procedural rules of Section 21-h, subsection (d) by failing to require the local board to complete training described in subparagraph (M) of subdivision (2) of subsection (c) of the same section.

Please explain why Bridgeport could not have been handled in the same manner as the state takeover of Windham, which recently occurred. The statute provides due process and notice and, in practice, local commitment to change as well as accountability. It is sanctioned by and voted on by the General Assembly. It is my belief that the General Assembly action would have been fairer and come with significant dollars and/or resources needed to assure better outcomes and change.

Finally, what is your timeline should you move forward with appointments?

I would like to make the following recommendations:

· No incumbent Board members should be appointed;

· Board of Education must reflect the diversity of the city of Bridgeport;

· New Board members should include parents of Bridgeport schoolchildren; and a

· Majority are Bridgeport residents.

I believe that the residents, parents, and children of Bridgeport deserve to be heard and respectfully request that the entire State Board of Education hold a public hearing for such purpose next week in the city of Bridgeport.

Thank you for your consideration of these ideas and I look forward to hearing your response.

Sincerely,

Mary-Jane Foster