Home >  Local News >  Neighborhoods

Second of two parts

Monday, April 28, 2003

By Jane Elizabeth, Post-Gazette Education Writer

CLEVELAND -- Hilton O. Smith remembers, and not with fondness, when the Cleveland School Board was a form of entertainment instead of government.

	Mayors in the Schools Across the nation, big-city mayors are being given new authority to exert control over their school districts. In some cities, including Cleveland, the mayor appoints the entire school board as well as the top administrator. In Washington, D.C., the mayor appoints some of the board members, and the rest are elected. Today, we look at the results of these reform efforts in Cleveland and Washington. The districts' experiences shed light on what could happen if Pittsburgh's mayor were to get a stronger role in the local schools -- one of the ideas being considered by Mayor Murphy's task force on the city schools, which is due to issue its report in May. The task force was formed after three local foundations withdrew their funding from the schools last year, declaring that they were fed up with the schools' financial and academic problems, and the bickering among school board members and the superintendent. More in the series Today: • D.C. schools still struggling after starting 'hybrid' board • Graphic: Mayors and school districts Day One: Will Pittsburgh join in trend to give more control over board members?

"Used to be you could get some popcorn and just enjoy yourself," said Smith, who's lived here since 1968, when he moved from North Carolina to work in former Mayor Carl Stokes' administration.

It would be difficult to find anyone who doesn't agree with his wry characterization of the old Cleveland board. The caterwauling, turf-protecting, grandstanding board members led the district into such a shambles that in 1995 the state of Ohio took control of the schools.

And then, even the state gave up.

The district had only a 35 percent graduation rate, a knotty federal desegregation order, a revolving door of superintendents, 451 laid-off teachers, and a $152 million debt.

"The state wanted us like I want leukemia," said Richard DeColibus, longtime president of the Cleveland Teachers Union.

That's when the mayor stepped in.

Michael R. White, a popular Cleveland mayor who served three four-year terms, heeded the pleas of community groups and began seeking legislative support for a mayor-appointed school board.

In August 1997, Ohio's governor signed a bill that gave the mayor control of Cleveland's school board. In front of a cheering, emotional audience at Glenville High School, the first mayor-appointed board was sworn in on Sept. 9, 1998.

Those nine board members were hired from a stack of 238 applications -- far more candidates than had ever registered to run in an election.

Among the current board members are a restaurant owner, a doctoral student at Case Western Reserve University, a non-profit organization consultant, two attorneys and a financial planner. Four members have children in Cleveland public schools.

With the inaugural board's term coming to an end, Cleveland's new mayor, Jane Campbell, today begins interviewing candidates for a new board to be installed by June 1.

By law, applications are reviewed by an 11-member nominating committee that includes three members appointed by the mayor; the remainder represent other interest groups. The nominating committee whittles the application list to a number requested by the mayor -- this year, it's 27. From those, the mayor appoints the nine members.

The mayor also chooses a superintendent, now called a chief executive officer. Barbara Byrd-Bennett, a former school superintendent in Brooklyn, was hired in 1998 by White as CEO of the 77,000-student district.

Many observers believe that Byrd-Bennett, charismatic and well-liked by Cleveland residents, is the major reason for the popularity of the new system.

Last year, voters had to decide whether to keep the mayor-controlled system or return to an elected school board. Byrd-Bennett, who earns $270,000 annually, said she would leave her position if voters decided to end the new system.

"It wasn't a threat," she said. "I'm 50 years old and I've been doing this work for years. You reach the point where you say to yourself, how do I want to do this work?" It was not, she decided, under the direction of a political board.

In November, Cleveland residents overwhelmingly voted to keep the mayor-appointed board, and Byrd-Bennett remained. This year, she became the most enduring superintendent in Cleveland's history since 1978 -- easily beating out past leaders who usually stayed only a year or so.

But it isn't all about the CEO, DeColibus and others insisted. The board consists of professionals -- by law, at least four members must have experience in education, finance or business management -- who have their duties spelled out for them.

They are directed to set policy, approve the budget, set goals and accountability standards, and promote parent and community involvement in the district.

Votes are almost always unanimous, quick and taken after little or no discussion -- quite a change from the raucous meetings of past decades.

But the appointed board's speedy, all-business meetings have been the source of criticism from some school activists, who say they're disturbed by the Stepford-like harmony.

"I have never heard a 'no' vote," said Tim Walters, director of the Alliance for Children's Education, a group formed seven years ago to promote community and parent involvement in schools. "How do they reach these agreements? I can't get my own family to agree."

The lack of discussion also bothers Lucille Short, a longtime activist who now chairs the District Advisory Council, a parents' group that deals with Title 1 spending, a federal program that provides funds to low-income students.

"Not that I want fights," said Short, who attended Cleveland public schools, as did her children and grandchildren. "I would just like somebody to spell out in detail what they're talking about, why they made their decision the way they did."

Hilton Smith, who now is the board's chairman, has heard those complaints and has a ready defense.

"It's because we work just like a corporation," he said. "We don't argue in public. When we have disagreements, we deal with them in-house ... We've already made our decision." Because members are careful not to meet in a quorum when they discuss issues outside public view, they don't violate the state's Sunshine Act, he said.

Smith said community members have plenty of opportunity for input, including at the board's twice-monthly meetings.

Other complaints about the board are that it includes no Hispanic members and that some Cleveland neighborhoods are overrepresented.

Board supporters say that such complaints are rare, and made only by a few vocal dissidents.

DeColibus, whose union initially opposed the mayor-appointed board but later changed its stance, wouldn't want to go back to the former system.

"There's something to be said for democracy," he said. "When you give away your right to elect your own board, that's not something to be taken lightly. But it worked here."