This bill would grant student members of the right to vote on the decisions the councils take. If passed, out of the 13 votes per council, students would hold two of them. 

CECs consist of elected community members who evaluate the efficacy of educational programs, recommend improvements, approve zoning lines and weigh in on all things related to public education. State law currently requires that two students, serving in student government and nominated by their superintendents, serve on each of the 32 councils and one on each of the four citywide councils.鈥� 

Students on these councils attend the meetings, offer feedback and consultation, share informed perspectives 鈥� perspectives that carry unique weight because of their lived experience 鈥� yet when the time comes to decide, they have no voting power. 

This dichotomy reveals how鈥� deeply shapes our civic relationship with young people. For decades, institutions have them from the democratic process or included them only in token ways.  

Ironically, CECs themselves perpetuate this pattern. Not only do they deny students voting power, but they have also failed to comply with state law requiring student representation. As of 2024, only 14 student seats were filled, leaving at least two-thirds vacant. An honest reflection of the law makes that not surprising. Would you sit on a council if you were the only non-voting member? 

This bill addresses both problems. It increases the number of students on each council and ensures that students not only inform decisions about policies affecting their daily lives but can cast votes on those decisions.鈥疘t also broadens access by removing a requirement that the student members serve in student government.

When considering the utilitarianism of this bill, it is easy to understand why it hasn’t generated a lot of attention 鈥� it seems like an obvious 鈥榊es.鈥� But pragmatism alone doesn鈥檛 guarantee success. Lawmakers introduced this bill in 2023 and three years later, it has yet to pass.  

This is particularly concerning as the new mayor and chancellor vow to improve our current governance model that gives the mayor control over our system. CECs are contingent on mayoral control and are expected to provide vital input to both the mayor and chancellor. Giving students a real seat at the table is a simple but important first step they could advocate for. 

The lack of traction likely stems from limited awareness, paired with to fully embrace the burgeoning movement for youth voice and enfranchisement.   

Fortunately, young people deserve the right to inform and influence the policies and practices that affect their daily lives.  

For those of us working in the youth civic and democratic ecosystem, we鈥檝e witnessed young people鈥檚 perspectives and impact on鈥痯olicy from communities to the . We trust their judgment and benefit when we listen. This bill asks lawmakers in Albany to extend that trust.  

Research on adolescent development reinforces this need. By their early teens, young people鈥檚 brains are developing in ways that heighten their focus on . 

Evidence from the field and research alone will not secure this bill鈥檚 passage. Advocates must also demonstrate what this looks like in practice. , the original author of this bill, demonstrates that reality better than anybody in the city. 

For three decades, BroSis has in New York City. These efforts show how capable young people are and how essential their voices remain in galvanizing change. Young leaders bring insight into systematic challenges in ways that very few decision-makers can fathom, such as longstanding racial disparities in education as well as emerging challenges like artificial intelligence. 

EdTrust-New York has seen the same impact. Through the developed in partnership with BroSis and Adelante Student Voices, students have shaped policy conversations on school discipline, suspension rates and equity across the state. Their contributions have improved both the quality and urgency of those discussions. 

Together we view this bill as a catalyst for better informed education policy and a mechanism to ensure direct student representation. It will also help build civic ownership among young people. 

The bill will ensure the education reflects what students actually need. It also signals to young people, who are growing from the lack of access to the democratic process, that New York City is committed to engaging them and elevating their civic power.鈥� 

The strength of this bill lies in its practicality, but we should not mistake simplicity for insignificance. As advocates and policymakers consider how to improve mayoral control, they should take this simple and meaningful first step. This bill deserves full-throated support from anyone in New York City who values young people鈥檚 perspectives and believes they must play a meaningful role in the civic process.鈥疞et鈥檚 give high school students, not just a seat at the table, but a vote.

As Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani as his new schools chancellor on Wednesday, he also reversed course on one of his main K-12 campaign pledges: He no longer plans to of the nation鈥檚 largest school system.

Instead, he will ask Albany to extend the governance model when it comes up for renewal in June. He said he will work alongside Samuels, a veteran New York City educator, toward a version of mayoral control that will 鈥渆ngage parents, teachers, and students in decision-making,鈥� Mamdani said at a press conference on the northern tip of Central Park just hours before his inauguration.

His stance on mayoral control represents a major about-face for the city鈥檚 new chief executive. But Mamdani鈥檚 views on school governance compared with other mayoral candidates, and the idea to ditch mayoral control entirely had many skeptics, especially when paired with Mamdani鈥檚 sweeping plan to build a free child care system.

Mamdani acknowledged the challenges of the massive system he鈥檚 inheriting, with its $43 billion budget, roughly 150,000 staff, and nearly 900,000 students. While literacy rates are improving, he said, nearly 45% of the city鈥檚 students in grades 3-8 remained below grade level, . Roughly And thousands of teachers are needed to meet , particularly in hard-to-staff positions for special education, bilingual education, math, and science.

He said he now realizes that New Yorkers should direct their concerns to him.

鈥淚 will be asking the legislature for a continuation of mayoral control,鈥� Mamdani said, 鈥渁nd I will also be committed with my incoming schools chancellor to ensure that the mayoral control we preside over is not the same one that New Yorkers see today.鈥�

Under the current governance model, the mayor unilaterally selects the schools chancellor and appoints the majority of the Panel for Educational Policy, a board that votes on school closures, contracts, and other major changes to Education Department regulations. The panel is typically considered a rubber stamp of mayoral priorities, though Mayor Eric Adams left some vacancies on the board, resulting in

Mamdani pledged to incorporate community involvement in a way that will not be 鈥渃eremonial or procedural, but tangible and actionable.鈥� He wants to restructure parent meetings for community education councils so that 鈥渨orking parents can actually attend them鈥� and improve awareness of these elected parent boards that oversee school zones and advise on policy. Voter turnout for these boards .

Mamdani also promised to 鈥渋mprove the parent coordinator role to be a meaningful organizer of parents, rather than an administrative coordinator reporting to a principal.鈥� The responsibilities of parent coordinators, a role created in the initial deal allowing for mayoral control, . Many do a tremendous amount of organizing already, particularly when it comes to helping homeless families, but many in the role have long complained about its low wages.

Mamdani said he chose Samuels because 鈥渢his moment demands a new generation of leadership鈥� that 鈥渦nderstands our schools鈥� and has a 鈥渢ransformative vision鈥� on how to lead them.

As superintendent of Manhattan鈥檚 District 3 stretching from the Upper West Side to part of Harlem, Samuels oversaw , combining schools with different demographics as in one of the country鈥檚 most segregated school systems. He initially used that approach , where he also spearheaded a move away from gifted and talented programs that separate kids toward schoolwide enrichment models, . Samuels started out as a teacher and principal in the Bronx.

Mamdani made clear on Wednesday that he for kindergarten students, but that he has season.

Samuels鈥� work overseeing the Adams administration鈥檚 literacy curriculum mandate, NYC Reads, led to an increase in test scores, Mamdani pointed out. Samuels also secured more than $10 million in grants across districts 3 and 13 to advance integration efforts through admissions policies, mergers, and rezonings.

鈥淓quity is not an abstract idea. It鈥檚 a set of choices we make together in policy,鈥� Samuels said. 鈥淏ut what matters is not just what we do, it鈥檚 how we do it, by listening to educators, by respecting families, by seeing students, not just as data points, but as whole people with enormous potential.鈥�

In recent weeks, some parent groups had been calling for Mamdani to maintain stability of the school system and .

Liss will be the new child care office head

Mamdani also announced that Emmy Liss will serve as executive director for the mayor鈥檚 Office of Child Care, a position that will be critical in realizing Mamdani鈥檚 pledge to bring free child care to New Yorkers.

Liss was the chief of staff for Josh Wallack, a top aide in the de Blasio administration who oversaw the Education Department鈥檚 rollout for prekindergarten for 3- and 4-year-olds

鈥淲hen I worked on the expansion of universal 3-k and pre-K, I saw firsthand what it means when city government comes together to deliver the families with the vision of universal child care,鈥� Liss said on Wednesday. 鈥淲e have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to come together again, to double down on the city鈥檚 investments and to design and implement a program that truly meets the needs of families and sustains our child care providers and educators.鈥�

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

The proposal, recommended to the state legislature by a panel of leaders from around the city calls for creating a powerful new government agency, the Indianapolis Public Education Corporation, handing charters a measure of control over citywide education decisions they have never had. 

The corporation 鈥� Indiana鈥檚 legal term for a school district 鈥� would oversee a unified transportation system for all schools; along with the ability to decide which schools are not serving students. The agency would also oversee a single enrollment system. 

The plan, which still needs approval by the state legislature, is a big win, in some ways, for charter schools that have grown rapidly in recent years and now educate more than half of Indianapolis鈥� students. 

Along with gaining transportation for students, charters will have representatives on the new board with equal standing to district officials for the first time in shaping Indianapolis school policy.

That power, though, is taken from the Indianapolis Public Schools district, whose schools could be closed by the corporation and which already saw the state legislature shift property taxes away from the district to charters earlier this year. 

Robert Enlow, CEO of the national charter advocacy group EdChoice, based in Indianapolis, called the recommendation 鈥渉istoric鈥� in its support of charters.

鈥淚t is a bold and courageous direction that represents a groundbreaking pathway,鈥� Enlow said after the vote on Wednesday.

But the proposal has tradeoffs for all sides, which have already sparked howls of opposition from voters and other charter advocates, as well as worry from the district聽about how the legislature could change the plan.聽

That more power could go to charters has enraged some residents since leaders started discussing the new plan this summer. Right before the vote, Rev. Clyde Posley, president of the General Missionary Baptist State Convention of Indiana, spoke on behalf of several clergy calling the entire effort a 鈥渉eavy-handed public overreach鈥� in support of 鈥減rivate agendas.鈥�

鈥�(It) not only invites scavengers and investors to pillage off the plight of a broken school system,鈥� Posley said. 鈥淚t is not only wrong, it is vicious.鈥�

Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Aleesia Johnson, who worked on the plan for several months, urged residents to keep fighting as the plan goes to the legislature, but said change is necessary.

鈥淭he proposal tonight is an imperfect solution for a challenging set of realities,鈥� Johnson said before voting in favor of it..

Those realities include growing pains from the rapid rise of charters in a city with a stagnant population. Many charter schools don鈥檛 offer buses, forcing students to use public transport or be driven by parents who have pleaded for buses for their children.

The city also has about 50,000 school seats for 41,000 students, leaving 9,000 open, while the Indianapolis Public Schools faces a budget deficit that will require a tax increase from voters.

Whether the plan will pass as is by the Republican-dominated, pro-charter legislature is unclear. State Sen. Jeff Raatz, chairman of the Senate Committee on Education and Career Development, had no immediate comment. 

Bob Behning, the chairman of the House Education Committee who wrote the bill forcing Indianapolis officials to work out a partnership, said he was 鈥減leased with the decision.鈥� He did not elaborate on details of the plan, some of which he has opposed. 

The new corporation would move toward mayoral control of schools, which cities across the U.S. have tried with varying success. It would have an executive director and a nine-member board  appointed by the mayor – three chosen from the Indianapolis Public Schools board, three charter school leaders and three others.

That proposal for a mostly-unelected board immediately drew protest from residents, many with the Central Indiana Democratic Socialists of America. After constant shouts of 鈥淯nelected!鈥� and 鈥淭his is a sham!鈥� residents called for the city鈥檚 voters, not the legislature, to approve the new corporation. One climbed onto the platform where the panel was seated and was removed by security. And audience members chanted 鈥淪hame!鈥� as the panel ended its meeting.

Charter schools are also raising opposition, including the recommendation that every charter must share money and participate in the new busing system, even as the overall recommendation would give them more power. 

One charter school advocacy group, the Indiana Charter Innovation Center, called that an 鈥渦nfunded mandate.鈥�

鈥淭he proposals put forward would place significant burdens on charter schools without providing funding, would reverse major legislative progress, and would create a structure that pulls decision-making farther from the schools and families most affected,鈥� the center said in a social media post.

The center also objected to the recommendation to limit charter authorizers 鈥� organizations that oversee charters and decide which can open 鈥� just to the mayor鈥檚 office, the state charter board and, as a recent development, the Indianapolis Public Schools board. 

Andrew Neal, a member of the panel making the recommendation, said requiring all schools to be part of the plan is 鈥渁 significant equity issue.鈥�

鈥淚 know there are some individuals out there who fear how that will impact their schools, or how that will impact their systems,鈥� Neal said just before the vote. 鈥淏ut I am telling you, this is an opportunity for students鈥he ones that because of a fragmented system, continue to fall through the cracks.鈥�

Stand for Children, an education advocacy group that has led the push for busing, said parents will appreciate the new system.

One parent, Christa Salgado, has repeatedly asked state and local officials for help with transportation after driving her son to school every day took a toll on her and her son had to move to live with his father.

鈥淚 had to drive across the city about 30 minutes back and forth in the morning, and then in the afternoon to pick him up, as a single mother,鈥� she told the panel just before Wednesday鈥檚 vote. 鈥淭his was unsustainable, and unfortunately, I could only do this for a year.鈥�

The district still isn鈥檛 sure, with the final result still up to the legislature, what impact it will have on its authority and budgets. But superintendent Johnson voted in favor of the recommendations, while urging residents to put pressure on the state legislature to make sure the district doesn鈥檛 lose too much to charters.

 鈥淚f we continue to have an elected board with just the same oversight as they do today鈥�,鈥� she conceded, 鈥渢he challenges of incoherence and thinning resources will remain.鈥�

The election of a progressive mayor who has said he wants to end mayoral control of New York City schools might seem like a bellwether.

The next largest school systems, Los Angeles and Miami-Dade County, have been run by elected boards for years. Chicago is transitioning to a fully elected board after decades under mayoral control.

But don鈥檛 .

New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani hasn鈥檛 laid out clear plans, and his references to 鈥渃o-governance鈥� could mean a lot of things, including an ongoing role for the mayor.

Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, another progressive, supported a when she ran in 2021, but once she was in office.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, a former teachers union organizer, has in support of union priorities.

And in Indianapolis, some community groups are in an increasingly fractured school system.

Many large cities have repeatedly overhauled their school governance of the previous model. Now a new set of existential threats 鈥� declining enrollment, looming school closures and layoffs, persistent academic challenges, and threats from the Trump administration 鈥� are reviving conversations about who can claim to exercise legitimate power over schools.

Who gets to make decisions on behalf of students and families feels particularly high stakes in this moment.

Yet there is little evidence that voters consistently prioritize student outcomes at the ballot box, whether they鈥檙e voting for mayors or school board members. Nor is there strong evidence that any particular system consistently delivers better results for students, better financial management, or more responsive leadership.

鈥淚t鈥檚 like getting dirty and changing clothes and expecting to smell good without taking a bath,鈥� said Jonathan Collins, a professor of political science and education at Teachers College, Columbia University. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 what you鈥檙e doing when you change your governance structure.鈥�

School closures put focus on who makes decisions

Education reform policies such as expanding school choice, closing low-performing schools, and welcoming charter schools have been supported by both mayors and elected school boards, sometimes under threat of state takeover. Those changes have reshaped communities in complicated ways.

New schools proliferated, and students got more opportunities. At the same time, the connections between neighborhoods and schools have frayed, competition for students and funding is fiercer, and multiple entities are now responsible for school oversight. These new realities are testing old ways of running schools.

In Indianapolis, the mayor already authorizes charter schools independently from Indianapolis Public Schools, which is run by an elected board. than district-run schools. Legislation from earlier this year that would have failed, but a state-created advisory group, chaired by Mayor Joe Hogsett, is charged with figuring out how city schools should share buildings and transportation services.

The Indianapolis Local Education Alliance is also considering proposals that would in school governance, including appointing most or all of the board.

Historically, groups associated with education reform have . Yet the Mind Trust, an influential pro-charter nonprofit that supported an appointed board in the past, hasn鈥檛 taken a position yet. Several potential Indianapolis mayoral candidates for 2027 are charter skeptics and supporters of an elected board.

Cleveland, where , is grappling with similar challenges.

As in Indianapolis, a large share of the district鈥檚 school-age children attend charter or private schools after decades under the , and enrollment in district schools has plummeted. Supporters of mayoral control sometimes , but Mayor Justin Bibb鈥檚 is causing some community members to demand a greater voice.

reported an exchange at a recent community meeting between Bibb and teacher Sarah Hodge.

鈥淎re you gonna go with us on the plan to make sure that the voters are re-enfranchised to vote for their school board?鈥� Hodge said. Bibb responded that voters can seek a new system if they wish, but he has full confidence in his appointed board and in schools CEO Warren Morgan.

The ability to push ahead with a school closure plan is one of the benefits of mayoral control, said Aaron Churchill, Ohio research director for the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a center-right think tank. He contrasted Cleveland with Columbus, where the elected school board has moved more slowly in response to many of the same pressures.

鈥淭hey鈥檙e controversial, they鈥檙e hard to do, and it does take leadership,鈥� Churchill said. And there is still a democratic check on the process. People vote for the mayor, he said, and most people know who their mayor is 鈥� unlike their school board members.

Hodge has a very different view. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not bold to upset the entire city,鈥� she said in an interview.

She believes an elected school board would listen to parents and ultimately come up with a better plan for what she agrees are necessary closures.

Hodge is working with a small group of other teachers and activists to . But Ohio鈥檚 Republican trifecta state government is unlikely to go along willingly.

Hodge and other Cleveland activists have watched conservative groups like Moms for Liberty exert their influence on school boards. She wonders why people in Cleveland have fewer rights.

鈥淚f the people of Cleveland want to make an idiotic decision, that鈥檚 our right,鈥� she said. 鈥淪ince when do legislatures get to tell people, 鈥榊ou don鈥檛 get to vote. You鈥檙e too terrible to make decisions for yourself?鈥欌��

Voters often don鈥檛 care much about test scores

If mayoral control of schools is undemocratic, elected school boards raise their own questions about representation.

Most school board members are elected by small numbers of voters who don鈥檛 have children themselves and who 补谤别苍鈥檛 . Once in office, they , surveys show.

Vladimir Kogan, a political science professor at Ohio State University, said that鈥檚 because voters don鈥檛 give them any incentive to do so.

Voters in school board elections might care about home values, taxes, jobs, or 鈥渟ymbolic virtue signaling that they are [on] team red and team blue,鈥� Kogan said, before they care about how well schools are serving students.

School board elections are one of the few places parents can pull on the levers of power, said Keri Rodrigues, a Boston parent and president of the National Parents Union, an advocacy group. But they can turn out to be 鈥渄emocracy in name only.鈥�

It doesn鈥檛 have to be that way, said Scott Levy, author of 鈥淲hy School Boards Matter.鈥� Many school board members would benefit from more training, including on how to understand academic data and budgets.

鈥淚f you look at education reform efforts, you can find every permutation except investing in school boards,鈥� he said.

But if school boards don鈥檛 spend enough time on schooling, it鈥檚 not clear that mayors who do reap big benefits.

Kogan points to former District of Columbia Mayor Adrian Fenty. Public opinion polls at the time showed under his controversial appointed chancellor, Michelle Rhee. But he : that accompanied the overhaul of D.C. schools.

鈥淩eformers have a wrong theory of change about mayoral control,鈥� Kogan said. 鈥淭he idea is that mayors are more visible, and it鈥檚 easier to hold them accountable. That assumes that voters care about academics.鈥�

Progressive mayors want a role in schools

Fights over who gets to control schools often reflect racial and political divisions. Predominantly white business interests, Black- and Latino-led community groups, and teachers unions wrestle for influence. Republican legislatures try to control Democrat-led cities.

Mayoral control spread in the 1990s and 2000s as white flight and shrinking tax bases undermined school systems. Mayors, the thinking went, could elevate the importance of education, marshal resources, and insulate governance from the influence of teachers unions.

Some of these political assumptions have eroded as voters choose more left-leaning mayors.

In last year鈥檚 鈥� held amid a that 鈥� the mayor鈥檚 union-backed allies picked up only four of the 10 elected seats. But with 11 appointees on the 21-member board until 2027, Johnson still controls the school board.

During recent union contract negotiations, to hire more staff and cover a larger share of pension costs, which district leaders feared would be financially unsustainable. The , not the board, to .

Wu, Boston鈥檚 progressive mayor, became a firm believer in mayoral control once she was in office. During a , a caller reminded Wu that the idea of an elected school board 鈥済ot more votes than you.鈥�

Wu pointed to frequent superintendent turnover and the recent threat of state takeover to argue against the idea.

鈥淲e need to have a focus on stabilizing and getting our school facilities up to date and mental health supports and some of the academic changes that we鈥檙e making,鈥� Wu said.

Voters haven鈥檛 penalized Wu 鈥� she .

New York parents, community groups want more say

Mayoral control in New York City is up for renewal in 2026. If Mamdani goes to Albany and advocates for less authority, he鈥檒l be the first New York mayor to do so.

When Bloomberg, a billionaire businessman, successfully lobbied for mayoral control in 2002, people were concerned not just about student achievement but basic safety. Some of the city鈥檚 local community boards, which ran 32 regional school districts, were corrupt or dysfunctional.

Bloomberg gained the sole ability to appoint the chancellor and the majority of the city鈥檚 school board. He adopted a that included charter school expansion and greater school accountability. Test scores and other metrics improved. New York City represented a 鈥渧ictory lap for mayoral control,鈥� said Collins, the Columbia professor.

But Bloomberg also introduced Lucy Calkins鈥� now-discredited . Outgoing Mayor Eric Adams, who was elected on a public safety platform, 鈥� but the rollout . Now Mamdani, who ran on affordability, may give schools and teachers more autonomy.

鈥淭hat whiplash is a real problem,鈥� said Jonathan Greenberg, a Queens parent and member of the Education Council Consortium, a coalition of parent leaders. 鈥淪o much of the really deep-seated changes we think need to happen take more than two years or more than four years.鈥�

Mayoral control , with the school board, known as the Panel for Educational Policy, expanding and exerting more independence.

Finding the right balance for an exceptionally large and complex school system may not be easy. The coalition is proposing a short extension of mayoral control 鈥� but with the mayor no longer appointing the majority of school panel members.

Greenberg hopes that policy experts can help the city design a system that allows for community control and a healthy central system that can do things at scale.

Low voter turnout in both mayoral and school board elections should be treated like a crisis, Collins said. A better system would allow for more meaningful participation, and not just at the ballot box.

Unless more people are engaged, Collins said, 鈥渢here鈥檚 going to be a small fraction of people who decide who serves, and the people who are serving are going to be disconnected from the true needs of the folks who are sending their kids to school.鈥�

Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.

Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani has said he opposes mayoral accountability, calling it undemocratic. But real democracy in a city of 9 million people and a school system serving 1 million students isn鈥檛 about diffusing power: It鈥檚 about making responsibility clear. Democracy depends on knowing exactly who is in charge and giving stakeholders the ability to demand results.

Under the current system, parents and voters have a direct line to leadership. They can advocate to the person responsible for the system. And if that leader fails their children, they can vote them out. That鈥檚 democracy in action: clear, direct and fair.

New Yorkers must not forget the chaos that mayoral control replaced. Before 2002, New York City鈥檚 schools were governed by 32 local boards that often worked at cross purposes and sometimes in open conflict. Decisions about budgets, staffing and curriculum were fragmented and inconsistent from one district to the next.

Some boards were run by dedicated community members, but too many were dominated by political operatives. Nepotism and corruption were rampant. Jobs went to friends and relatives instead of qualified educators, and investigations uncovered board members steering contracts to allies or hiring individuals with criminal records to work in schools. 

Millions of dollars meant for classrooms vanished into a cloud of bureaucracy and self-dealing. Parents were left powerless. When a school failed, they didn鈥檛 know whom to call: the local board, the superintendent, the central office or City Hall? No one was clearly responsible, so everyone passed the buck. Student performance stagnated, and inequities deepened. Children in wealthier neighborhoods got attention, while kids in lower-income communities were left behind. 

That system was nothing like a democracy 鈥� it was dysfunction junction.

Mayoral accountability changed that. It created a single, unified chain of command: one person with the authority to make decisions, drive reform and be held responsible for outcomes. This clarity made major progress possible. Under mayoral accountability, the city鈥檚 graduation rate rose from 46% to over 81%, while the share of graduates earning Advanced Regents diplomas increased by more than 20%. SAT participation nearly doubled, and pre-kindergarten enrollment skyrocketed from fewer than 14,000 to over 64,000 children. Even overcrowding declined, with fewer schools exceeding capacity at every level. 

These gains didn鈥檛 happen by accident; they happened because a single accountable leader could coordinate agencies, funding and policy to get results for students.

Critics claim that mayoral control concentrates too much power in one office. In truth, it concentrates responsibility 鈥� and that is the foundation of public trust. A system serving a million students with diverse needs cannot govern its schools by committee. It requires decisive leadership that is ultimately answerable to voters.

That doesn鈥檛 mean the system is perfect. It must become more transparent, more responsive and more inclusive of parent and community voices. But strengthening transparency is not the same as dismantling the structure that makes improvement possible.

Ironically, without mayoral accountability, even Mayor-elect Mamdani鈥檚 own priorities, from expanding equitable access to early childhood education to addressing systemic inequality, would be undermined. Without clear authority to align city agencies and resources, those goals risk becoming aspirational rather than achievable.

Mayoral accountability is not the enemy of democracy. It is the mechanism that makes democracy effective. Parents deserve a system where they know who to challenge, who to advocate to, and who to hold responsible for results.

As City Hall and Albany debate the future of this system, one message should be clear: New York cannot afford to go backward. Dismantling mayoral accountability would not restore democracy, it would simply revive dysfunction. New York City鈥檚 students deserve a school system that is transparent, coordinated and accountable. The next chapter of educational progress depends on leadership that embraces those principles, not abandons them.

With an open mind and a broad vision, Mayor-elect Mamdani has an opportunity to build on what works, fix what doesn鈥檛, and continue moving our schools forward. The future of 1 million children 鈥� and the faith of millions of parents 鈥� depends on it.

showed that candidates backed by the powerful Chicago Teachers Union won four seats, one of them unopposed. Meanwhile, pro-school choice candidates backed by wealthy donors won three seats, with three seats won by independent candidates.

The independents include a rapper who beat three opponents on the city鈥檚 South Side. said he ran to ensure that every school gets a registered nurse, a librarian, counselors, tutors, support staff and quality arts instruction.

The 10 new board members will join 11 others who will be appointed in coming weeks by Mayor Brandon Johnson, a former teacher and union organizer.

鈥淭here’s a lot going on here,鈥� said Hugo Jacobo of , a nonprofit that supports independent school board candidates.

Groups that advocate for charter schools spent about $3 million on the race, The Chicago Sun-Times , with the union spending about $1.6 million on its endorsed candidates through its own political action committees and at least eight other PACs. Other estimates show the union spending more than on the races.

The union鈥檚 preferred candidate came up empty in District 3, one of Chicago鈥檚 most politically progressive areas. A reform-oriented candidate, , beat union-endorsed candidate by 12 percentage points, despite a reported $300,000 in donations. The union painted a more positive picture Tuesday night, with President Stacy Davis Gates , 鈥淏illionaires spent a lot of money to get three out of 21,鈥� referring to the larger board that will eventually be seated. 鈥淚 keep telling you, it鈥檚 cumulative. It keeps getting bigger and it keeps growing. And we want more people for this group project.鈥�

Tuesday鈥檚 results push Chicago Public Schools, the fourth-largest school system in the United States, into a new phase, with observers saying a fully elected board could improve schools and make them more responsive to parents and taxpayers. 

But whether the shift will curb the system鈥檚 recent chaos is another matter. 

Last month, the entire seven-member board resigned after Mayor Brandon Johnson threatened to oust schools CEO Pedro Martinez. Johnson had appointed six of the seven members . 

He brought in a new board, but a week later the newly appointed president, the Rev. Mitchell Ikenna Johnson, after news reports revealed he鈥檇 written antisemitic and sexist posts on social media and posted that he agreed with a theory that the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were an 鈥渋nside job.鈥�

Tuesday鈥檚 split result, while offering what will likely be a variety of perspectives on finances, management and curriculum, is bound to be just the beginning of a new, and perhaps even more tumultuous era 鈥� for one thing, all 21 seats, including the 10 from Tuesday, will be on the ballot in 2026.

“This first cycle was really a warm-up for 2026, when all 21 seats are up for election and the stakes are real,鈥� said Peter Cunningham, a former head of communications for the district and founder of the nonprofit .

Cunningham, who also served as a spokesman for U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan, said Tuesday鈥檚 election 鈥渂ecame a referendum on Mayor Johnson and the teacher’s union because of the chaos at the board over the last few months. They did not get a clear mandate to pursue their more controversial policy proposals, but they will likely do it anyway because this is their last chance to control the board.”

The range of ideologies among fully elected board members could fuel further drama, said Meredith Paige, a mother of two high schoolers and leader of , an advocacy group.

鈥淭he chaos is going to continue,鈥� she said.

From appointed to elected board  

For nearly 30 years, Chicago鈥檚 mayors have enjoyed the right to appoint and dismiss board members, with the city standing for decades as one of just a handful with mayoral control 鈥� New York City, Boston, Washington, D.C. and Detroit are among others where mayors still wield considerable power over school policy. 

Until now, Chicago Public Schools was also the school district in Illinois that didn鈥檛 have an elected board. But the state legislature in 2021 ordered the city to transition to a fully elected, 21-seat board. 

It may take a while for the changes to sink in with voters, said Paige, who canvassed in neighborhoods last week and met 鈥渁 lot of people who had no idea that there was a school board election.鈥� Others believed Chicago already had an elected school board. 鈥淪o that’s been a problem the whole time,鈥� she said. 鈥淓ven now, parents don’t understand how this is going to work.鈥�

Among the first business items the hybrid board will face in coming months: whether to terminate the contract of Martinez, the schools CEO, who has served since 2021. They must also decide whether to approve Johnson鈥檚 push to borrow hundreds of millions of dollars to defray short-term expenses, including a $175 million pension payment for non-teaching employees.

The district faces a projected deficit of $505 million next fall, due partly to rising healthcare costs and the expiration of federal ESSER pandemic funds. Johnson鈥檚 predecessor, Mayor Lori Lightfoot, also shifted hundreds of millions of dollars in pension costs from City Hall, which had historically underwritten them, to the district.

And the city is also hemorrhaging students: enrollment has dropped by 20%, or more than 80,000 students, since 2010.

In July, Martinez and the school board proposed a $9.9 billion budget that aimed to close the deficit through staff cuts and freezes affecting nearly 250 jobs. The board authorized the budget as written, but relations between the mayor and the district soured. 

Johnson has proposed taking out a $300 million loan to fund teacher pay increases and pension contributions, and he in October for comparing his critics to confederates who opposed freeing slaves 鈥渂ecause it would be too expensive.”

Even if both sides agree on a new source of spending, the district and the union are also engaged in a contentious negotiation over the terms of the next teacher contract. One estimate said paying out an expected series of teacher raises and taking on more pension debt from the city could increase its deficit to nearly $1 billion. 

Despite Johnson鈥檚 bid to fire Martinez, the CEO remains popular, said Jacobo of Chicago Democrats for Education. 鈥淗e’s the only one really concerned about the financial situation of our city and our school district system, so people want someone responsible like him to stay.鈥�

Paige, the parent advocate, agreed. 鈥淭he mayor and CTU want to fire the CEO, who has brought a lot of stability to the district. So there’s a lot of frustration over that.鈥�

She said the bitter, two-week in 2019 is also having lingering effects: 鈥淭here’s still a lot of toxicity in the system over that 鈥� and just a general鈥� she hesitated, 鈥溾�榝rustration鈥� is the nicest word I can think of right now 鈥� that the mayor seems so disconnected from reality of the financials that he wants to put the district in peril to pay the teacher’s contract.鈥�

The state legislature has given Chicago until 2027 to transition to a fully elected board, and despite the challenges, Jacobo said the change will be welcome.

鈥淚’m very glad that there will be a number of these new school board elected members who honestly are just not beholden to anyone but the parents, the voters in their district,鈥� he said. 鈥淎nd when they talk, when they speak, it’ll be with a perspective of what is best for their community. I think it’s one step forward, but a lot of work to go.鈥� 

The decision comes with a contentious cap on the number of students in the classroom 鈥� topping out at 25 at the high school level 鈥� with the final goal to be reached by 2027. 

The agreement also increases the size of the panel that votes on education policy, partly an effort to curb the mayor鈥檚 power while including more parent voices. But many say the changes are not enough, that the current system cannot account for the needs of such a wildly diverse group of students.

Tajh Sutton, twice elected to the Community Education Council in District 14, which covers large swaths of Brooklyn, said she would love to abandon mayoral control in favor of a system that would allow communities to develop programs that suit their specific needs.

“The mayor is not deeply invested in the majority of our kids,鈥� she said, adding the current system makes it difficult for residents to get his attention. 鈥淲e need more student, parent and staff voices. We have some really good ideas about how to improve public education as a whole and we really want to see citywide systematic change.鈥�

Paullette Healy, of Bay Ridge, said Adams is too focused on improving the gifted and talented program, neglecting others that impact a far greater number of students, including her son, who has autism. The mayor鈥檚 four parent appointees to the expanded Panel for Education Policy must include at least one, like Healy, whose child attends a District 75 school, which serve students with the most significant disabilities. Parents of children with any kind of disability and those in bilingual or English as a second language programs must also be newly represented.

鈥淭here are a barrage of special ed concerns,鈥� said Healy, who sits on the Citywide Council on Special Education. 鈥淕ifted and talented is not mandated. Special ed is.鈥� 

And while the cap is popular with teachers and the union for making classrooms more manageable and for requiring a sizable staffing increase, skepticism remains about its funding 鈥� and whether the shift will bring about major educational gains. 

Adams initially denounced the idea, saying before the vote that, 鈥渦nless there is guaranteed funding attached to those mandates we will see cuts elsewhere in the system that would harm our most vulnerable students in our highest need communities 鈥� including the loss of counselor positions, social workers, art programs, school trips, after-school tutoring, dyslexia screenings, and paraprofessionals.鈥� 

New York City Schools Chancellor David C. Banks agreed, worried class size will become too high a priority in a district facing other pressing challenges, including a 40 percent absenteeism rate.

鈥淢ake no mistake, it will lead to large cuts in these critical programs,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his should not be a choice that school leaders have to make.鈥�

But the mayor softened his stance Friday. 

鈥淲e are optimistic that there is a way forward on key elements, including ensuring we achieve the shared goal of smaller class sizes without forcing the city into a fiscal crisis and impacting programs for our most vulnerable students,鈥� he said in a statement.

State Sen. John C. Liu, chairman of the Senate鈥檚 New York City Education Committee, said the cap will, in fact, be funded by $1.6 billion in additional money NYC schools will receive as part of long-awaited action on . Liu called the move, 鈥渁 huge victory for NYC school kids that will finally fulfill the long-overdue constitutional duty of providing students with a sound, basic education.鈥�

Adams may have made peace with the legislature鈥檚 plans, but Mona Davids, president of the New York City Parents Union, has not. She chided lawmakers for putting too many constraints 鈥� and demands 鈥� on the mayor, undermining his authority and making him responsible for a costly directive. 

鈥淭he only people who benefit from this bill are the United Federation of Teachers,鈥� she told the . 

Farah Despeignes, president of the Community Education Council in the Bronx鈥檚 District 8, warned the class size reduction alone won鈥檛 translate to improved results. 

鈥淚f you have a mediocre teacher, they won鈥檛 be any more innovative with a smaller class,鈥� said the former educator. 鈥淏ut if you have a well-trained teacher, you get more out of it: This teacher is already doing good work and will have more time with the students. I don鈥檛 want people to think outcomes will automatically be great with a smaller size class. That鈥檚 not the only issue.鈥�

In addition to the specific parent representatives, the mostly appointed Panel for Education Policy, or PEP, will grow from 15 to 23 members. Also, the mayor and borough presidents will no longer be permitted to remove those members who don鈥檛 support their initiatives as has . And PEP members will serve one-year terms and can be renewed. 

While some embraced the change as a check on Adams鈥檚 power, Jonathan Greenberg, president of the Community Education Council in District 30 in Queens, said many parents would like to see a new model, a break from mayoral control 鈥� and from the 32 community school boards that preceded it. 

鈥淭here is an urgent need for a task force to study and recommend a new alternative,鈥� he said. 鈥淚 would like to see a more democratic system where those responsible for the system are chosen for that purpose.鈥� 

The state has been granting mayoral control over the city鈥檚 schools since 2002 when it first went to Mayor Michael Bloomberg. This year鈥檚 decision was delayed as lawmakers considered additional parental involvement, a core feature of the previous, more decentralized but .

Sutton, of Brooklyn, remembers clearly the school board misconduct that rocked her community when she was a student. Even so, she believes mayoral control is far too centralized. 

Each of the three mayors given this privilege, she argued, have used children as political pawns to further their own ambition. She faulted Bloomberg for pushing for privatization with public and charter schools occupying the same buildings and said while Bill de Blasio campaigned on student equity, he couldn鈥檛 close the opportunity or achievement gap. Adams may be only months into his first term but Sutton sees the mayor and his chancellor as already showing an affinity for charter schools, which are publicly funded but independently run.

But no matter who is in office, parents remain sidelined, Sutton said, frustrated about the removal of mask mandates, the lack of reliable transportation for special needs children, unaddressed language barriers and a host of other concerns. 

鈥淎 lot of parents have come to see mayoral control as a huge hoop we have to jump through,鈥� she said, adding that parents must not only advocate at the school level, but at the district and city level, hoping to catch the mayor鈥檚 attention on social media. 鈥淚t shouldn鈥檛 be this one politician who is completely inaccessible.鈥�

Despite a steep pandemic-related decrease in the student body, in the NYC school system in 2020-21. Of those, 13.3 percent were English language learners, 20.8 percent were students with disabilities and 73 percent were economically disadvantaged. 

More than 40 percent of students were Hispanic, 24.7 percent were Black, 16.5 percent were Asian and 14.8 percent were white: More than 138,000 were in charter schools. 

The four-year graduation rate was 81.2 percent in August 2021 with a 4.8 percent dropout rate that year. 

The schools are run on a $38 billion budget.

From top to bottom, our governing institutions have been significantly eroded by on the of our , the growing influence of , conservative , of governing norms, legislative processes, and a bevy of other worrying trends. 

The depth and breadth of the problem are most visible at the elemental level, where the American democratic spirit is ostensibly most fervent: our thousands of school boards. These little local legislatures have been revered as cornerstones of American democracy . In theory, they provide local schools with democratically elected leadership that is maximally responsive to local needs and the public interest.

And yet, the has brought where local school board have into screaming matches with threats of violence over issues both (e.g. ) and/or (e.g. over or ). Things have gotten that the National School Boards Association , asking for the federal government to do more to protect elected local leaders from . Rather than calming the waters, this just prompted further outrage 鈥� particularly from conservative politicians in Washington, D.C. who cast it as an assault on parents鈥� free speech 鈥� and from the NSBA. 

Problems like these are why, in recent decades, some major cities 鈥� places like Washington, D.C., Chicago, , and New York City 鈥� moved away from elected school boards. The idea had a three-part theory of action: 1) it makes school governance more coherent by unifying control of city schools under mayoral leadership, 2) it insulates education decision-makers from political pressure and 3) it gives mayors a reason to prioritize school funding and improvement. 

The returns from this experiment have been largely encouraging. According to , Chicago schools are 鈥渄ramatically outperforming not just the other big poor districts, but almost every district in the country, at scale.鈥� Research on public schools in D.C. 鈥� 鈥� has also found . 

And yet, , the mayoral control in cities has faced from a cacophony of claiming that returning public education to school board control would an elemental part of U.S. democracy 鈥� representative government at its most profoundly local level. 

As the country wrestles with a national crisis of democracy, it seems odd to focus outrage and energy towards shifting local school governance from the control of elected mayors to elected school boards 鈥� precisely at a moment when school boards across the country are providing daily proof of their weaknesses as institutions. 

Aside from the novelty of , there is nothing particularly exceptional about this latest spate of outrage. Remember the furor a few years ago over how the Common Core State Standards were ostensibly going to push schools to conduct mass retinal scans, promote student promiscuity and advance the cause of global communism? Sure, school board meetings are often sleepy for months 鈥� even years 鈥� but whether it鈥檚 or or or or , periodic eruptions of dysfunction are pretty much a given.

And those are just recent examples. . School boards have long been complicit, for instance, at designing and maintaining racist, inequitable structures in public education 鈥� including decades of segregated schooling. Who did Oliver Brown and his fellow plaintiffs have to sue to begin the long, slow, difficult, haphazard work of integrating American schools? . It was the same in Washington, D.C., where Spottswood Thomas Bolling . Indeed, over and over again, the required (and still regularly requires) 鈥� and appealing to a higher authority over 鈥� local school boards.

It鈥檚 a reliable rule of education politics: elected school boards are almost always most responsive to vested and/or interests in their communities. Consider, for instance, the Los Angeles Unified School District. For most of the last decade, their school board has faced criticism from experts, from community groups, and pressure from the to focus more resources on historically marginalized communities. And yet, nonetheless, the board has to away from those communities. School boards 补谤别苍鈥檛 designed to prioritize the less powerful, organized and noisy.

So 鈥� why, in light of significant educational progress in places that have experimented with other forms of school governance, is it suddenly so important to shift more power to local school boards? Notably, pushes in this direction in Chicago and . have sparked as are . In , at least, a move away from mayoral control would almost assuredly strengthen the voices of white, privileged voters 鈥� who would have a better chance of swaying the outcomes of a handful of , ward-by-ward school board elections than the citywide mayoral race.

Indeed, what constitutes a democracy? Can it really be reduced to whether the public elects a mayor or a board to run the schools? Of course not. Institutionally speaking, modern democratic governance requires choosing leaders through regular, free, and fair elections 鈥� but it also requires the expertise of civil servants and other experts chosen by those leaders. That鈥檚 why, for instance, we don鈥檛 hold a national referendum every time the Mine Safety and Health Administration wants to adjust its regulations, nor do we establish elected panels to determine how much radium is safe to drink in our water supply. 

So: you should absolutely be concerned about the state of U.S. democracy. It cannot long sustain when voting rights are selectively narrowed to grant partisan advantage, or when bills with majority support in both houses of Congress are regularly filibustered dead, or when lawmakers efforts to a on the .

But if you鈥檙e looking for a way to ensure that our schools have elected leadership that鈥檚 fair, equitable and democratically accountable, school boards pretty obviously 补谤别苍鈥檛 the way to go.