Listen to article \u2022\u00a00:00 min<\/p>\n
There is no such thing as a good school closure plan, and the Philadelphia School District proposal \u2014 scheduled to be voted on Thursday \u2014 is no exception. Local schools are important to communities across the city, and many residents still feel the pain of the last round of closures in 2013.<\/p>\n
But City Council members and state legislators who are now menacing the district<\/a> and making ominous pronouncements about withholding funding are a day late and a dollar short.<\/p>\n The facilities master plan is not a rushed endeavor, and hardly a surprise. School officials have been talking about closing and rebuilding schools for years<\/a>. The proposal is a much-needed effort to modernize and rightsize the district.<\/p>\n While politicians are happy to grandstand in favor of keeping specific schools open, they are less forthcoming about which schools should be closed instead. It is easy to say, \u201cSave Lankenau.\u201d It is harder to follow that up with \u201cand close Roxborough<\/a> High School instead.\u201d<\/p>\n Council is also a large reason why the district is in such a financial pickle to begin with.<\/p>\n \u00bb READ MORE: Philadelphia school closure proposal is not perfect, but it is necessary | Editorial<\/a><\/p>\n Members have routinely increased the city\u2019s homestead exemption<\/a>. While this helps protect homeowners, many of whom have low or moderate incomes<\/a>, from big tax bills, it is a choice that has undermined the fiscal stability of Philadelphia\u2019s schools. The tax break now adds up to more than $300 million per year<\/a>, roughly identical to the district\u2019s projected deficit.<\/p>\n The median property tax bill in Philadelphia is under $2,500<\/a>, compared with nearly $4,000 in Upper Darby<\/a>, a suburban township with similar income levels as the city.<\/p>\n Most Pennsylvania school districts can raise property taxes on their own, a power that has not been granted to Philadelphia\u2019s school board. It is unlikely the city would have such a long list of supplemental school taxes \u2014 from the liquor-by-the-drink fee to the sugar tax to the recently proposed ride-share levy \u2014 if the school board were able to increase the rate without Council approval.<\/p>\n Council also has had ample opportunity to raise concerns about the district\u2019s spending. After all, Superintendent Tony B. Watlington Sr. and Board of Education Chair Reginald Streater report for budget hearings every year. It has long been apparent that an influx of federal COVID-19 relief funds had papered over a serious shortfall. If Council members wanted the district to cut back earlier to avoid asking for more, they could have spoken up.<\/p>\n That\u2019s not to say the district\u2019s plan is flawless, or that its leadership is without fault.<\/p>\n \u00bb READ MORE: Americans continue to bear the cost of Trump\u2019s chaos | Editorial<\/a><\/p>\n