Welcome, everyone. My name is Naveed Hasan, and this is a public meeting of the Government Affairs Committee for the Panel for Educational Policy on Thursday, April 16th, 2026. It is now 12:10 PM, and we'd like to get started. Thank you everyone who is in person and people who are logged in on Zoom. The agenda is fairly open-ended, but it is timely because of what is happening in terms of budget creation right now, both in the city and in Albany. And all of our legislative priorities, including education funding, school buses,
school governance, and the new rollout of childcare, are impacted by what our lawmakers are able to get done. So I'm looking forward to hearing from everyone in the room. I have a couple of things that I'm going to mention, but really this is a collaborative project, so let's get started. Thank you. I guess given that there's only a handful of us, I would just love to have quick introductions for everyone who is here. So I'll start with Chair Faulkner. Yeah. I'm Greg Faulkner, chair of Panel. Hi. Randi Levine. I'm the policy director at Advocates for Children of New York. Thank you for inviting me. And I think we're now in the Zoom room, so panel member
Aubert. I'm Shirley Aubert, Queens Borough president appointee to the PEP. CC3 co-president Rackmill. Good morning, everybody, panel members. And panel member Ho. And Randi. Good morning to you. Alice Ho. So thank you, everyone. We all know each other in some capacity, hopefully, and in significant capacity from working together on either district
level or city level projects. I had a very sort of cursory agenda on purpose, but I was hoping to get more input. And I'm still open to receiving any kind of written input, from advocates, from individuals who are dealing with specific legislative issues, so that we can format something for the panel to approve as our legislative priorities. Getting consensus on it at the meeting and then forwarding it to the powers that be. So, I guess I'll just quickly read what's on there.
We have legislative priorities, which I just mentioned, which include things like transportation, school funding, and immigration, which is something that I've been working a lot in. School funding is a separate item broken out because of our budget discussions and the priorities for families that sort of need better addressing, especially foundation aid. The third item I have is the childcare rollout. This is something new to us at the PEP because it's sort of a new initiative of the city and making sure that we understand all of the various
dimensions, including funding and staffing and sighting of programs, is something of interest to panel members, I think. To see how two K and younger will eventually be universal throughout the city is important to make sure that we serve the needs of all kids, including students who may be disabled, and to make sure that the staff is properly compensated for the work that they do, regardless of the setting in which they're working. And finally, I'm always interested in input on changes to system governance, mayoral accountability, mayoral control, how it would
work, how people think it would work better for schools, for families, for staff, to give sort of some written input to the governor, to the state Senate and state assembly to take into consideration when they're making these choices. I guess the one thing I'll say on that is I'm not a very big fan of combining that decision with the budget process. This is really a very big and important issue that deserves its own attention. So whether that happens or not, we should give our input. So thanks. And I'll open it up for anyone who has comments, and then I'll provide some input
on a lot of those issues towards the middle of this meeting. So given that one of our super advocates is here, I'll ask for Randi Levine, who is at Advocates for Children. What is your title again? I keep forgetting. But we'll ask her for what her sort of list of priorities are. Thank you. Thanks, Naveed, and I think that you have named several of them. Do you want me to go into any more detail about them now or just name, like about funding? Given that it's a small audience, please. Yeah, whatever detail you're comfortable sharing, and then we'll of course take all the written input you have and use it to forward to the panel.
By the end of this week, I'll send it. Great. Well, right now, one of our top priorities as the state finalizes its budget is our foundation aid funding. So I think a lot of you know the foundation aid formula was first put together more than 20 years ago and is supposed to be providing adequate funding and equitable funding throughout the state. But so many parts of it are just completely outdated and in need of updates. And last year, the state had talked
about doing a comprehensive review of the formula, and there was a 300-plus page report that was published with lots of changes. However, the limited and inadequate changes in the final budget, there were just a few, ended up-Hurting New York City public schools' funding resulted in New York City public schools receiving $314 million less than we would have had the state not made any changes to the formula at all. And so we are looking for some important, long overdue
changes in this year's budget, and also to make sure that New York City students don't get short-changed. We are pleased to see that the Assembly and the Senate one-house budget proposals, both for the first time, propose adding a weight for students who are homeless or in foster care. Currently, the formula does not take into account the needs of those two populations at all. So we would love to see the final budget include a new weight for students who are homeless or in foster care. And both the Assembly and the Senate one-house budget proposals also would increase the weight for English language learners.
And so we are very supportive of that as well and hope that the final budget will include those two changes. Thank you. That's actually really helpful to know. Do you know if they implement these changes for the weights, does it fill the gap for the cost of living shortfall that we have from last year? The IBO and DOE said that they agree with this assessment. I will say, estimates that the Assembly's version of the new weight for students who are homeless or students in foster care would
result in an additional $486 million for New York City public schools. And so, if we go with the Assembly's version, that would bring us many more dollars than the Senate's version. The estimates are between $73 and $90 million. They have a much lower weight proposed. And then for the increase for English language learners, we're talking about 60 something million dollars. So the combination of those factors would help a lot with the changes
last year to help ensure that we don't move back the way that we did last year. Yeah. Thank you. I think the panel did a letter last year on these topics. So I was wondering if we want to reissue that letter. Yeah. With the updates. Okay, yeah. So we can update it and just have that letter reissued. One more thing. While we're waiting, I'm going to ask our two panel members who are online, Shirley and Alice. There were some
legislative items that were recommended by members of the public at our meeting. I only recall one of them. Does anybody else remember these two items? There was a parent at the end. We're going through our file now, but I don't know if any of you offhand might remember what those items were. Are we talking about last night? Say it again, Alice. Are we talking about legislation that was brought up at last night's meeting? Yeah. There was a parent during the open public comment that mentioned two items. I think one of them had to do with funding and the requirement for funding around charter schools, and I think
the other item was the council passed legislation around security- The- ... for the school. That buffer zone, that bill, I forgot what the title is. I'll look it up and put it in the chat. But it's about- The buffer zone dealing with protesting around- Yes ... not school? Yes. Is that what you're talking about? That was brought up. There was another one. I just wanted to make sure that we... If we can't do it now, we'll do it at another point, that we include those comments that came from the public. Well, let's be clear. Processes, usually there's a follow-up within internally, right? Like Laura, Pete get that information,
and if we have to do follow-up, what we have to do is talk to them to make sure, because it's on record. It's on public record, right? So, the assumption is that somebody is following up. It's up to us if we want to include it into this arena. My concern is, one, just like earlier, I'm curious maybe how far are we opening up things, and if I must be honest, my general sense of working with funding is how transparent are people in general.
So I don't know if you all had the same experience I've had in school systems. So I can only share of my own. I have less distrust of funding because I fortunately had an elementary school teacher who, when I sat on the FLT, she provided us even transparency to the Nth degree. I knew people's salaries, for example, right? Alice, we can't hear you right now. I will be transparent in that I knew people's salaries in my elementary school level, as an example, right? When I get that kind of transparency, I know
that I can trust. And so one of the things that I'm very curious about is other people's experiences, because when I get that kind of transparency, I immediately feel I can trust. Oh, okay. So, I'm sorry you guys can't hear me very much. Let me get to my point of destination, and I will defer. Give me about 20 minutes. You guys continue. Okay. I'll join in. Shirley, I interrupted you. Can you continue what you were saying? It's okay. It was about the bill. I've got to look it up, but the exact title of the bill that was passed is regards to the buffer barrier zone for protesting,
umAround schools, in particular, they were talking about. They want to protest against the passing of that bill or get it changed or revoked, et cetera. But I'll look it up and put it in the chat so I could give... Because it limits protesting to be three blocks away from schools now with that bill. They're calling it the buffer zone, which they feel is hampering free speech. Yeah. Thank you, Shirley. I've gotten a lot of input on that. There's actually, I think, a rally happening right now on the city hall steps- Yes ... unfortunate timing.
Yes. But it's for houses of worship and schools, and possibly other places. And if you look at a map, that's almost every block, on every side of every block. It might have a very significant chilling effect on free speech and also targeted enforcement of that. So we have to think about how that's implemented. We should probably say something about that. My understanding is, thanks to our new committee member, that they've just asked for a plan. They've asked the NYPD to come up with a plan to provide security. So I thought that they were actually implementing a plan, that they were actually going to restrict protests.
I think at this point, they're actually asking just for a plan. Do you know something different? So that will- It's good. Good afternoon. Naquan McLean, CC16. So, in reference to what Shirley is talking about, it is a bill that was passed that is now on the desk of the mayor to sign into law. The particular reason that we're pushing back against it is because it doesn't say how far the buffer zone will be, right? The buffer zone will be designed by the police department. So the police department can decide how far they
consider this zone to be. When we think about our schools and we think about even this building, 3 building, we come here often to voice our concerns. We come here often to protest, to have visuals, to do what is in our right to do. And for us to now say this possibly cannot happen anywhere near a school, there are schools, to Naveed's point, on every block or every other block.
So, what we're asking the mayor to do is to veto it, and we're then asking the city council to uphold the veto. There is a rally happening right now. I was at the rally and ran over here because I just think that this is a real important conversation that we need to make sure that parents and parent leaders are aware of when we think about school walkouts and we think about the different things that our students do, this could impact them or will impact them if it proceeds in the way it is at this time. So thank you- Excuse me. It's 100 feet, right? It's 100 feet?
So you're questioning which 100 feet it would be when you say we're not really sure how the NYPD would be implementing? Because there are those who believe that schools should be safe places, both physically and psychologically, for all students, and that if you're arriving at a place of worship or school, much as Ruby Bridges was met with an angry mob at William Frantz Elementary School in New Orleans, that nobody should be arriving to school and met by a vicious mob who's opposed to them based on their race, their religion, their-
Let me be very clear that we're not talking about race, religion, and we're not talking about churches or synagogues. We're talking about schools. And I know well, aware about Ruby Bridges and what we're saying, we're talking about peaceful protests or peaceful... I have not been at a rally at a school that has been out of control, violent. I have not been at a rally at 3 that has been out of control or violent. And the law does not, the way the law is written now, it does not determine what the feet are.
The precinct is supposed to come up with a plan- Okay ... on how far they believe the buffer zone should be. So it's up to each NYD precinct to figure out the buffer zone, and it could be 300 feet if the precinct wants it to be? Right. Got it. Okay. Thank you for explaining that, Naquan. Hello, by the way. I'm just thinking about the intent behind it and balancing safety and free speech, which is always a huge challenge. Thank you, Naquan and Jill and Shirley and Alice on that issue. I was going to follow up with Randy, but I think she's in a call right now. But when she comes back, we'll ask for further
education funding priorities that she has. Naveed. Yeah. I put it in the chat, but the third one also is the bill that would reimburse up to 35 million to non-public schools for the cost of video surveillance and cameras. That was the last thing that came up on the PEP last night from the public comments. Yeah. Thank you, Shirley, for that. That was what I was trying to look for. The other thing I was just going back for a moment on the last conversation. I believe the mayor, somebody correct me, has a certain amount of time to sign this.
So if we want to have an impact, we may want to think about doing something right away, because I think the mayor has, what, 10 days? Well, the mayor has to the 25th of April to veto it, so next Saturday. So if the PEP wants to do something That if we want to impact, we need to do something now, if we want to make a statement or do an advisory because your mayor's going to make a decision about signing the bill. Yeah. Especially if they're thinking about using public funding for private security where we need funding in our schools. That's a discussion that requires more attention and from everyone
who's involved in getting resources for schools. So let's do that as soon as possible. Right. I'll walk over as soon as this meeting ends to the rally to see who's involved and interested in helping with that. Thank you. I guess at this point, I want to bring up a couple of things that are of significant importance to our immigrant communities. But anyone who may be targeted by immigration enforcement. There's a huge push that I've been involved in helping with in the small part, but then it's an entire statewide effort to get Albany to pass New York for All. New York for All will prohibit local law
enforcement from collaborating or sharing resources in any way with federal civilian immigration enforcement. This has been a terrible uphill battle because of marginal upstate representatives who fear that this might hurt their reelection chances, is what I heard from the governor's office. And what I don't understand is they also have employees of different immigration statuses and who are not showing up, who just disappeared at this point. They're unable to run their businesses, but, they're not being vocal enough with their local legislators to provide these protections so that people do all of the things that we've told them to do, include
paying taxes and reporting issues like domestic violence to people who can help them, as opposed to just hiding and sending their kids to school, bringing their kids to school. Something that we could really get done if we finally get New York for All passed. In place of that, the governor has proposed something called Local Cops, Local Crimes, which is very narrow. Personally, it's great if that passes, but it doesn't cover at least 80% of the things that New York for All would do. And that law already has significant support in both the House and the
Senate, and the Assembly. The other immigration bill that's of significant importance is the Access to Representation Act, which would provide funding from the state and city to immigration lawyers to serve people in civilian court to do immigration legal work. It's not something that the Constitution provides for because it's not a criminal proceeding. So that is another thing that is of long-standing need. And we've had a lot of difficulty getting any traction on that. So I'll mention those in the summary of this meeting that we have for the PEP and hopefully
we can add those to the letter. If anyone has any questions or input on immigration laws. There's more things. I will put it in the summary email and send it to everyone in this meeting and on the PEP. And also I would like to recognize panel member Parsons. You can feel free to unmute and introduce yourself if you would like. Good afternoon, everyone. Bernita Parsons from CEC Rep. So happy to just listen in and hear what the committee has to present. I know it's crunch time. We almost at June and, thank you so much. Just listening in. Thank you.
And so Brandy, welcome back. Thank you. What else was on the list of priorities that you had other than Foundation Aid? I was glad to hear you mention transportation and I'm grateful to the PEP's leadership for ensuring that the PEP did not rubber stamp a five-year extension of the school bus contracts. We know there's a conversation taking place now at New York City Public Schools and at City Hall about the various paths forward. We know that for one of those paths, rebidding the contracts, that path will be easier
if Albany passes a bill to ensure that the city can rebid school bus contracts with employee protection provisions still in place. And so I think there's still a conversation happening about whether that bill can move forward post-budget in the truncated legislative session that we have left. And then was also glad to hear you talk about the rollout of the expansion of early childhood education, and that's something that we're paying attention to as well. And with respect to children with
disabilities, we're not done making 3K and pre-K for all because we still have preschoolers with disabilities who are sitting at home without the seat that they need or are not getting the services that they need. And so there's more work to do there. There are a couple of bills in Albany that I think can take-- that will be steps forward to helping with that. But want to make sure that as we look at that as a whole, we're thinking both about the three and four-year-olds with disabilities and now the younger children with disabilities as well. Thank you. And especially on the school transportation issue, I remember we've
worked at least a couple of hundred hours that I spent on it, probably thousands on your side. We had a really interesting collaborative process with government agencies, including the DOE, and I guess even reluctantly, the old city hall. I would like to see that work not be done in vain. Right. So we have to really make sure, and I wonder if you have any updates on what's happening with the EPP law from your perspective. Is that something that is passable? We need to get it done, I think this session, right? Yeah, the timing is important here, and I think it's taking a back
seat right now to the budget conversations, which, of course, are very important. And the longer the budget takes, the shorter the remaining time of legislative session will be in place to pass other legislation. But we are starting to talk about preparing, and having those conversations with New York City public schools and City Hall, so that if that is an important part of moving forward the busing strategy, we can be prepared to go. I think that sort of leads into a little bit of a discussion around how we can
continue that collaborative work, Greg. Is it with the DOE's government inter-gov team, right? To make sure that they know that they also have to push from the administrative side to let City Hall know that these are things that are ongoing projects. They are things that will generate value both for the budget and release money to provide both better services and possibly save us money. So it's a win-win for all of us. So let's see if we can raise that. No, I actually agree. And it's funny, I was having this conversation with
deputy chancellor because the contract is moving forward. I think we have only about maybe a year and a half. No, more than that, two years. Yeah. But we're moving ahead, and I think this really needs to be considered so we're not caught in a situation where we're now reacting because time is moving. One of the things I think we ought to seriously consider as a committee, and whether we do it now or when we do it, we ought to really press for an expansion of the NYCSBUS system and begin what that process is. Now, that's a complicated process, but I think we ought to begin having those conversations and begin to put that
pressure out there. I imagine it's going to cost money. It takes a lot. I know when this process began, I spoke to the head of NYCSBUS about the feasibility of the expansion of their routes. They actually, at that point, didn't have capacity. But there was a lot of momentum for a one-year contract. One of the reasons we pressed for the two and a half years was to give us the time to really begin planning. So I think if this committee were to begin to put those conversations out there and then have the conversations with the unions and with
everybody, we won't be caught in a situation where we're now having to react to something. I think we have time now to begin some thoughtful planning around how we can really address this whole situation. So I would definitely encourage that. And I want to thank Randy and the committee for the work that you've done. We've been able to form a partnership and it was historic. What, 45 years of five years on the panel. I was so proud of the panel because we got the pressure, and the panel said, "Absolutely not. We're not budging." I don't think they believed us, so we
had to pass a resolution to cement the notion that we weren't going to rubber stamp something that was not going to be in the best interest of the children in the city of New York. So, that conversation is here now. It's here again, and we need to begin to do the planning to make sure that we're ahead of the game on this. So, appreciate it. Yeah. And I think panel member Iskierto is the go-to person for school transportation. So hopefully she'll continue this work. I think we definitely need the law updated and to have confidence that it'll get done so to make sure that we can do rebidding too.
Are you suggesting to, or do you even know that, is it a possibility for NYCSBUS to take over all school transportation? That might be the dream. But I think we have to plan. I think there are others who are planning. I'll say it publicly. I think the bus companies are aware. They've been coming to all of our meetings and showing up and presenting testimony. So, I think it's a conversation. Like, whether we decide now, I think we ought to have that conversation, look at what the next step is for us. It was a rough time. And we kind of went, "Wow." It's a little bit of relief. I think it's upon us now that we have to start now to really look at...
Ideally, I would love to see the NYCSBUS system expanded, but that's going to take money. It's going to take time. It's going to take hiring. It's a massive undertaking. But we have to decide whether or not we want to go there. Let's be ahead of the curve and let's say that's what we want. If that's what we feel would work, let's talk to folks. And if that's what we think is going to work, let's press for it. Yeah. First of all, just want to recognize all the parent leaders who have made their voices heard on this issue for so long and are doing amazing mobilizing and organizing around
it. And I think from Advocates for Children's perspective, the method of getting there is less important than the end game of improving school bus service for students. And so we're open to any route that is going to get there. I appreciate the last comptroller, in December, released a report outlining different paths, and one of those was NYCSBUS, one of those was rebidding the contracts, and I think that those are all paths that are worth exploring. I think from
my understanding is that it will take time if someone wanted to do a full expansion of NYCSBUS. And so I think that's why we're still thinking about the EPP legislation because there are paths, and we might not be able to do everything through one path in two years. So keeping multiple paths on the table, while definitely being broader than just talking about rebidding as the only path, because we know that NYCSBUS is a path forward as well. Thank you And isn't this why we appreciate Shirley for helping to put that
resolution forward of trying to create more opportunity using Omni? That we want to expand that so that we are giving more alternatives and not just busing. I see that as also a collaboration when our ODP and what we're trying to do with adding D75 co-location sites to more communities, reducing the need for longer distances in busing and the need for busing. I'm so proud of the work that we've been doing because I am seeing us coming at it from multiple angles and trying to address our second largest funding
issue, which is transportation. So I applaud each of you on this call because I've seen you all come to the table with something to try to address our transportation issues. That being said, now that you guys can hear me, let me know if you can't, I wanted to go back to the statement you guys had. Thank you, Shirley, for putting it in the chat. After reading the actual legislation, it's a little different than what was actually stated, and I want to give you guys time. I don't know how long at the steps of City Hall that they're doing these, I guess it's a protest, but exactly those words were what
concerned me when it was stated yesterday. It's the intent. It's the intent to state that we want to focus on places of gathering where students are the primary constituency. Is this an area that 100 feet is enough or whatever distance is enough that these young individuals who are socially, emotionally, not yet developed, are then exposed to people who are clearly
opining things that most likely are not relevant to the child directly? It's one of the things I've got to put on record that changed with even this administrative cycle, where I feel like more campaigning was done on school facilities, even having the electeds come in and go to the school classroom for a day. And I can't remember who put that out there, that we had a number of our candidates in the classrooms, really campaigning in the classrooms. So I'm going to put that out there as
one of the things to review as well, that back in the day, even if you were running for an SLT position, you couldn't outwardly campaign, if you will. And that was our parents being told, "Don't do that." So it felt weird to me in this election cycle when we, and I'm trying to remember who started that, but just one by one, most of the candidates came into the schools and spent the day in a school. And my gut is telling me the campaigning part only benefits if civic responsibility comes out of it,
civic understanding comes out of it, and I'm not sure that has actually happened. So I want that on record that I kind of feel like with this election cycle, we need to see it carried forth of what was the benefits of inviting electeds into the classroom and if students are starting to have a better understanding of what electeds can do. Because if that were the case, I think participatory budgeting will become a lot more popular. Civics for all will become a lot more popular. And instead, what I'm seeing are resolutions being put out
by CCs indicating that our cafeterias are being used for election cycles for those, I can't remember, the early voting election cycles, and that's taking up space in the cafeterias or the auditoriums that keeps the kids from having their nutritious meals. Instead, they have to do bag lunches during those times. So it's an interesting dichotomy of balancing that act of we are seeing more
elected official propaganda going on in the school systems, and yet I'm not seeing as much explaining to me the student benefit yet. Thank you, Alice. That sort of feeds into the final topic that was on my agenda, and we can circle back to other things later, but Could I just...? The items that was discussed, and that is the whole item of using schools as polling sites. And there were a lot of CCs that we got feedback were concerned that it was disruptive. I don't know that to be the case, but it might be something we would want to look into and
see whether that has any merit. Yeah. So, what I meant to say is that because all schools are just a city agency, they can decide to do things like this without really running it through people who are directly impacted, right? So that's a question that I continue to have, right? And I welcome any input on what we can do to make schools serve local communities better, in a way that's really empowering to the SLT, the PTA, the CEC. What is the feedback that can be most effective in this cycle where it seems to be part of the budget process? And this is timely, right? We need to get this out there along with the school
buffer zone input. That's something I want to do in the next couple of weeks. So open to any input on that if anyone in the call or in the room has things they would like to say. Thanks. I think maybe we should draft something around the buffer zone, because that's happening right away. Maybe we can come back and we can authorize the committee to come back with something that we at least take a position or draft a letter to the mayor incorporating some of the opinions here. And essentially say that I think we want to have public access, safe public access. We don't want to restrict protests. So I think if we could craft something that everybody can kind of agree with
or we can choose not to, and the bill will be signed, but if we want to have input as a committee, I think we need to do something in the next few days. So, going back to childcare rollout implementation, is there any specific concerns that funding or staffing-wise advocates for children or any of the coalitions have that can be directly expressed as part of the budget process? And I think in the broader community, there's an active conversation happening about compensation, and that there are folks working on that right now as part of the state budget
process, and then a conversation happening in the city as well. For advocates for children, we are pushing to ensure that children with disabilities will get what they need in 2K. And as I said, more work to do for the preschoolers with disabilities as well. The city has a legal obligation to provide them with their mandated services. And New York City Public Schools testified last month that only 63% of preschoolers with IEPs were getting their full mandated services.
So we want to ensure that investments are made to meet that full need, and that the city is planning for children with disabilities in 2K to have an accommodations process, to have funding available to meet whatever the individual child's needs are so that they can be fully included in the 2K program. Well, one of the things that I wanted to raise is, which I got here late, so I'm not sure if it came up, mayoral control. We know that this mayor ran on saying that he was going to do something different with mayoral control.
And then we know at the ninth hour, the day before he was appointed, when he announced the chancellor, he walked it back somewhat. But he also then said about co-governance. So I would love to see conversations among this committee about what co-governance look like, what your thoughts around co-governance look like. We, for years, have been pushing for a balance. We are the only part of New York State other than, I think, there's another part that have a somewhat similar, I want to say Yonkers or Buffalo, have a somewhat similar mayoral control, but
don't have the full mayoral control like what we have. And we know that it's up for renewal, and we know that it's most likely if they don't take it out the budget, going to be in the budget. We want to make sure that we are really looking at some things. So I want to lift a couple of things here. Some of the things that we need to consider is, one, our student PEP members should be allowed to vote. The work that we do each and every day involves them. It's for them. They should have a voice. The same way as in participatory budgeting, they get to vote, we should be
making allowances for our students to vote. I think the other thing that is top of mind for me is A190, and the A190 process. As we see school utilization, and we've seen what's going on in District 3 and District 2 and other districts across the city, what just happened in District 16, which was different, right? But when I think about 2000, I've been on the CEC in April since 2014. So I've seen a lot of chancellors, I've seen a lot of things happening. But I remember back in 2016 when Carmen Fariña
was trying to grapple with the low enrollment in some districts, and she began to do something called consolidations. And District 16 was one of the first districts to have done consolidations. Some were successful, some were not. But the successful ones was when the community came together and worked unitedly. So one of the things that I want to propose and that we have been proposing is around the A190 process of school utilization. Giving the CEC more authority over that. We got the law changed where the CEC can submit
a resolution or can weigh in, but it should be the same way A185 is with zoning. If the CEC says no, then it's no, and the DOE has to come back and engage that community differently. And we can get to the end result. If this is good practice and it's going to be beneficial to students, then we should be able to get people on board. So that's what I wanted to say. Just following up on that. Yeah, thank you. This is something that a lot of CECs have said to me in terms of lack of real authority that they have, and then the responsibility that
falls on them at the last minute when proposals are presented. Them getting blamed, the PEP getting asked to adjudicate on 1,600 different issues across the city doesn't seem appropriate. So we should definitely have that discussion. Why can't we include that? Because I actually agree that these proposals should initiate at the CEC level, and that then it should have to pass the CEC, then come to the panel for final approval. So maybe that's something we can include right away as part of a legislative package. We'll make that a suggestion or you pass a resolution, because I actually think
that makes a lot of sense. Thing that's both timely and that's very necessary based on what we as parents need the city to understand would work better for us. It actually would enforce engagement because one of the things we hear repeatedly when we go to these community forums and these joint public hearings is the feeling that there wasn't really an engagement from the community. I think starting it with the CECs would almost foster or require that that local engagement take place in order to gain the support of the local CEC.
And I think we'd be more confident that that actually took place. So I think if we can include that right away, that would be a good idea. And it's not unnormal, right? The regulation for 2590E, which is the regulation that CECs are subject to, already have a piece in there around rezoning. We have already went into this and started changing it to add. It's really just adding now this part of it. And we get zoning done, right? But it's because the way the Department of Education engaged to get zoning done.
That's all we're saying. I'm not saying that we don't need to do mergers, consolidations, and those type of things. I think that needs to happen. But I think the way we do it and the way we engage our community around it, a lot of times, the first time you hear of something's wrong with your school or something's wrong with your enrollment is when district planning comes in to say they have to make a change, right? And that goes back, and I won't even go on that rant, around the functionalities of SLTs. And if SLTs was having real conversations- Mm-hmm ... that they're supposed to have, we would find ourselves in better places when
these proposals come up. We agree with you. Can I just jump in with a question about that? What would, in just a discussion about this, some of the challenges that there might be with CECs being the ones to originate proposals when oftentimes either CECs are-- we all know about the low turnout rate in elections and who ends up seated on CECs, and also CECs with vacancies and sometimes the difficulty with filling vacancies when phase reviews of potential candidates take a very long time.
I'm just thinking about some of the challenges in terms of CECs and their own governance. With the class size law and that impending deadline and some of the dysfunction on some CECs. Not ours, of course, or Naquan's. But I get if people feel they have a meaningful role, that it'll encourage participation. I've seen that through the local community boards. When the community boards were given, in those communities, where they actually have a real leadership role, all of a sudden, the participation goes up, the accountability goes up.
Mm-hmm. I would bet if we empower the community board, the local CECs, that we'll see more candidates, we'll see people, a higher voter participation, because people will actually see that there's a-- When people see that there's real action happening and things that matter are happening, I think it encourages people to get more involved and more engagement. Interesting. Yeah. Thank you. I want to quickly say I'm in total agreement with Greg. CECs are visible and invisible at the same time. They don't have-- We only advisory, and I think-- Well, not
we. I'm former CEC president on 10. When they don't have functionality as a body, as a council, then that's where it falls in the cracks. And I think they need to be more of accountability for CECs instead of just it being there as something as it's complimentary for the PEP or that we have it there because it needs to be done. It has to-- Not obligation wise. CECs need more functionality and accountability to certain things, and this
would be the first step into that. Also, I want to- Is there any way to-- Sorry. Go ahead. Yeah, go ahead. No, go ahead. Go ahead. I'm just wondering if there's any way to sort of convene like a CECs conference where ideas and suggestions were sort of elevated- Yes ... grassroots wise in terms of how CECs feel about this and how they feel like it would work. It's tricky because obviously often, members on CECs may have children in impacted schools, and so they may have dogs in the fight, so to speak.
But I feel like the best people to ask about this, obviously you have experience, you said CEC 10 and Naquan since 2014 and Naveed. All of us here do. But I would love to gather, after we've been through these A190 processes the last few years in our district, I feel like it would be great to get a bunch of smart people who have done the work in a room together. Sounds good, yeah. To talk about this stuff. That sounds- I don't know if we're allowed to- Yes ... at OML, but- Like a CEC of CECs. Yes. I agree. That needs to happen ASAP or
yesterday, because in the Bronx specifically, we have a lot of turnaround rate.With members Mm-hmm And we know that sometimes, schedules and life circumstances keep them out, and some of them don't even know how they even got there or understand their whole roles and responsibilities. Yes. And quick trainings during the summertime does not help at all. Doesn't do it. No. It doesn't give you the practical information- No ... you need, and you have- No ... turnover. You have members, and through no fault of their own because they're
new to it, especially if they have- Correct ... a kindergartner or first grade and they're new to the system, they don't have basic understanding of how funding works at all. Correct. That it even has any tie to enrollment. Correct. They don't understand sort of the roles. They may be liaisons, but not able to get to know their school communities. Correct. So there's so much disparity between how activist some CECs are, how some aren't. Yes. I feel the training, the onboarding is really poor. Agreed. I would love to see a better job done by FACE or
whatever agency to really practically teach us about budgets so we can spend money effectively and wisely on behalf of parents in our communities. We don't fully understand. We have a purchase order deadline today and won't be able to spend all of the money that we have that we intended for parent engagement because we didn't really have knowledge on what we could use it for and when it had to be done by, and I feel like none of the training is practical in nature. It's more theoretical. Anyway, that's another- Agreed ... topic, I guess. That's it.
So thank you for- Yes ... thank you for listening. Thank you. We learn from each other in forums like this. I learn more than I do at onboarding or professional trainings. It's always a pleasure talking, Jill, and let's follow up on that right after budget season so we can make sure that this goes well and bring it. I have two hands, Shirley and then Alice. Please, thank you for waiting. Alice, if you want to continue on CECs, you can go before me. I want to go back to the bills because I want to go back to the bills. I have one, two- I do want to talk bills, but if anything, funding. It's funding season. That one bill that you brought up,
let's talk about that particular bill. I also will have some input, but I want to hear yours, too, because you found it first. When it comes to the CECs, Jill, I think I remember meeting you when we had to close shop of a school in your neighborhood, and I felt really bad because my heart just went out to that principal. But I'm going to tell you only just from personal experience what I found to be helpful in these roles of leadership. You still have to take the lead from the principal. And, what I wasn't able to convey earlier on the street was I have been very fortunate to have had levels from elementary all the way to
high school and still now in high school. I see the difference at each level. They are not the same. They are not equal. And what was really helpful was a principal that trusted us as parents with information, powerful information. I knew the salary of every single person in that actual campus, and that makes a huge difference because then you also can see, and this is where I'm in the budgeting game now because I can brick and mortar it all the way up of now I understand what makes up a CEP, and I've had to serve three different
SLTs. And so it really does come down to, to a certain degree, parents still have to be responsible of, if you really want to have a say in what's going on, you have to really become a partner to the local PTAs and the principal. Unfortunately, it lies on the principal. Then you go to her supervisor, which is the superintendent. There's a hierarchy here. There is governance here. People are actually not taking the policies and procedures that are actually there, and that's what's unfortunate.
Our PEP website, as well as the DOE website, there's a plethora of information. But genuinely, if we were to really read, there's a lot of good insight on how to proceed. Naquan, for example, I think I first saw him because he was advertising Mark Rampersad's safeties about three years ago. And, I thought, "Who's this District 16 who's putting that information out?" And I'm not sure other districts were putting it out. And I'm like, "What is up with this?" It starts with
us as parents. Are we just doing the bare minimum or delegating it out or finding that other person going, "I agree with you, so why can't we get more in the room? What are they not seeing that I'm seeing? Thank you for coming. Thank you for continuing to engage the way you did last year," when I remember seeing-- It's so disheartening to have to close a school. And those are the moments that I remind myself, I'm here doing this work, having a seat, because it isn't fun to have to close schools.
That means we're learning from failed attempts to try to create community. And with each one, let's try harder to help those who haven't failed yet and go, we have cautionary tales in front of us, right? And then we also have great examples with you and Naquan, who I appreciate every time it's like I go to a meeting by the DOE and there's attendance. Just attendance. Is that any different when your school is-- I have seen principals show me their spreadsheets of attendance records and
poor attendance, them using AI, them using spreadsheets, them creating rewards or punishments because there isn't enough attendance in a school.Right? And it starts with that. Those principals know attendance matters. Their funding is based on enrollment. So let's get back to funding now, and it goes back to the principal. What the principal is relying on is enrollment. Never forget that. First and foremost, it doesn't matter which kid. Actually, it does. But your student funding is about what type of kid comes in
because there's more money associated with it. No, I understand it. I just feel like a lot of my members don't. So when the A190s are around enrollment issues and what type of budget a school has, there's a lot of education of members that has to occur and it to be entrusted with. Anyway, but I would love to talk to you more- Oh, and let- ... and to Naquan more about this. Yeah. This is your meeting. Let me just say this. Um. Let me say this, just for clarity, I am not saying that CECs are supposed to lead on utilization. What I'm saying is the same way when there's a rezoning- Yes ... district planning meets with the superintendent, they see an issue, they come
to the CEC and say, "This is the issue." So that's the same way. The superintendent is the educational instructional leader for the district. They should be working closely not only with CECs, but President's Council and their DBX, right? Right. So that everyone is on the same page. And understands the issues. Because CECs in state law already have the authority around zoning, what I'm saying is the superintendent, district planning comes to the CEC, this is the proposal, this is what we thinking. Collaboration. I met with my district planning rep and my CEC. It wasn't, and my superintendent. It wasn't a separate meeting.
They may have had separate meetings, but once a week we met, and we were all on the same page of what needed to happen. And we had community meetings, somewhat like what the chancellor did in District 3. But I think if it follows all the way through, everybody's not going to agree, and that's not what we're trying to get people all to agree on something. We have to do what's right for students- Mm-hmm ... and that has to be the ultimate goal. But when everyone is in the loop, no one can say they did not know. They can say they don't agree, but they can't say they did not know. And the way to do that is to have CECs have public meetings every
month. It should be on the agenda. Before I go back to the bills, so Naquan touched what I was talking about. There is systems in play, and people are not understanding the systems. At the district level, Residents Council, who are directly supporting PAPTAs, they are the PTA presidents in the district who sits on SLTs and sit on the district leadership team. So these conversations should be happening, and each stakeholder sitting on the DLT, and the parent organizations at the district level
should be working together, especially by the regs, quarterly meetings between President's Council and CECs, right? And they should be bringing it back to their schools, right? So not only are you having CECs having those discussions, you have President's Council, it should be coming up at the district leadership team to force those stakeholders to be talking about it on the SLTs, right? DLT are supposed to be supporting SLTs. And we need to make sure there's accountability. That's where it's lacking, making sure that the people are doing what the system is required of them and what is best for the system, and that's where all these lack
of communications because they're not working and gelling together because we're all pieces of the entire puzzle, right? But I'm going to go back to the bill because... So I'm going to go to the last one that I posted about the 35 million. I'm not supportive of reimbursing up to 35 million. We can't reimburse our own families. We are cutting money to the budget for New York City public schools. The city doesn't have enough money. That's why they're cutting budget to the-- We need more money. So reimbursing outside non-public school, we can't. I don't think-- That is not fiscal-- We can't even do it for our
own. We're going to do for others. That is my stance on that one. When it comes to the perimeter buffering, I think that the city council need to play out a guideline or a playbook that for the NYPD, so that the barriers, if it's placed, are not impeding free speech. Right? Because Jill, I think you gave an example. Somebody gave an example about 100 feet versus 300 feet. No. You have to-- Guidelines on how far the barriers have to be,
which would not prohibit free speech, right? So I think we need to give precincts, NYPD, a guideline, right, instead of making it arbitrary. Mm-hmm. If these buffers, because there are already laws in effect about governing how protests should be. Right? There are laws that must be followed regarding protests and having people process it already. So now we want to establish distances if they have to come up with what is reasonable that won't inhabit people's voices if we're going to go there.
And that's my comment regarding to the bills. I concur, Shirley. So thank you so much, Shirley. I am going to get from Learning Times the chat, and compile a summary of what was discussed. But I think I'm very grateful for everyone's input here and discussion, and sort of a sense of timeline on what things need to be done in the next couple of weeks in terms of at least getting a letter out from the PEP with all of the things that we've covered, and then setting up some medium-term timeline to do planning for longer
projects. Given that we are now at an hour into the meeting, does anyone have anything else that they would like to say? Otherwise, we will wrap up. I do have one more. Okay. And also, we have to recognize the breaking down of communications is not ensuring that all our stuff are in place. If there's no SLT, it's not functional. If there's no PAPTAs, your CEC is not functional. President's Council, whatever the case is, we need to ensure that is the first step, make sure they're functional so the system could, the wheels could keep turning.
If there's a breakdown in any of these things, then this is where, a lot of times, where communication is broke down. Besides accountability, communication, and transparency also are factors of people, whether they know, they don't know what's going on. And I'm going to- Thanks, Shirley. That's something that's always been an issue. I live in Harlem, and we had schools that have not had PTAs in years, and I feel like that responsibility should fall in part on the resourced organization, which is the DOE, to make sure that they're in the room at least once a quarter to see what's
happening and how they can support. So that should be part of schools' governance. That's it. I want to thank everyone for attending this meeting. And at this time, at 1:11 PM, I'm adjourning the Government Affairs Committee meeting for April 16, 2026. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you, Shirley, Naquan, and Alice. I learn a lot