On the Closing of St. Louis Public Schools Buildings

The St. Louis Public Schools Board of Education meets Tuesday, January 12th at 6:30 PM to vote on the proposal to close 11 St. Louis Public School Buildings. While the Board of Aldermen passed a resolution in December condemning the closure of these schools at a meeting that I could not unfortunately attend due to being very sick with COVID-19, my perspective is somewhat different than the opinion expressed in that resolution.

Our Kids Must Matter More Than Buildings

First, while I understand that these proposals to close schools seem abrupt to some, the first time that Dr. Adams discussed the potential closure of Fanning Middle school, located in Tower Grove South, with me and with our community, was nearly two years ago. Like many schools in St. Louis, Fanning has not only seen declining enrollment but has also experienced rapidly deteriorating building conditions. The proposal was tabled then, almost as quickly as it was proposed, but without significant capital funds to address the structural issues with the building that have rendered increasingly large swaths of the building unusable, closure would always be a possibility.

No one wants a vacant school building in their community. Vacancy runs all too rampant in our city. I’m not naive to the differences in future prospects for redevelopment of vacant school buildings on the Northside versus neighborhoods like Tower Grove South that have hot housing markets. I also think that no student should be going to school in substandard and unsafe buildings. We are currently paying for buildings when we should be paying for kids.

If school consolidations mean students go to school in safer buildings, I’m for that. If they mean we get a nurse in every school, I’m for that. If they mean we have more certified teachers and less permanent substitutes teaching students, I’m for that. And if they mean a social worker in every school, I’m for that too. These are all things that are made possible through the cosolidation plan.

School closings are heartbreaking and speak to larger issues in our community. And I think we need a long-term plan for right sizing the school district. As others have stated, even with this round of school closures, SLPS still has more buildings than comparably sized districts in St. Louis County. SLPS has a student population of 18,000 students in 68 buildings. By comparison, Rockwood has 22,000 students in 31 schools, Ferguson-Florissant has 11,000 students in 24 schools, and Hazelwood has 18,000 students in 29 schools. We need a comprehensive plan for how many schools are needed and where. This needs to include charter schools too, that currently enroll 11,000 students in 34 buildings (and growing), even as SLPS experiences a decline in student enrollment.

Saving Sumner

With that said, I do think that we need to muster our collective energy to save Sumner High School, the first High School for African-American students west of the Mississippi. Allowing this closure is akin to throwing in the towel on Black Students and Black history in our community. This cannot be allowed. It will cost $4.5 million to renovate Sumner and $2.5 to operate annually. Given the tax breaks that the Taylors’ and Square, and other wealthy individuals and corporations have received in recent years, there needs to be a collective call to our corporate community to fund these renovations, preserve St. Louis history, and make Sumner a school of the future, while also recognizing that philanthropy cannot be the long-term solution to our public school district funding woes. To truly create a financially sustainable school district for the long-term, our corporate community must pay their fair share of taxes.

We Cannot Change the Past but We Can Learn From It

I agree with St. Louis Public Schools School Board President Dorothy Rohde-Collins on the myriad of circumstances that have contributed to declining student enrollment and poor conditions of buildings that have led to this round of school closures. Declining population in the City of St. Louis, the proliferation of charter schools, and a tax-incentive system that favors the wealthy and well-connected at the expense of our public schools, all have played a role. As an elected official who, even as a vocal critic of our tax-incentive system, has voted for more tax-incentives than I should, and as former proponent of the charter school system, I’m am not too proud to admit my own role in perpetuating this crisis. Taking responsibility for our own complicity is the first step in moving forward.

As a Board of Aldermen we must take responsibility for our role in creating the conditions that lead to school closures through the over use of tax incentives. We have unprecedented levels of development happening in our City. At the same time, the bulk of these incentives are going into the most stable and affluent areas of City, often subsidizing luxury housing with no requirements for affordable housing set asides. In fact, the development strategy for the City has been so blunt as to even equate residents with kids in public schools with criminals insofar as their “drain” on city resources. Our kids cannot wait 10 or 15 years to realize the tax revenues from the unprecedented levels of development occurring in our City right now. Our schools should benefit from this development now. The good news is these mindsets are changing, and the appetite for meaningful tax incentive reform is increasing too.

The Role of the Board of Aldermen

While there are state laws that need to change with regard to our tax incentive system, we do have a lot of local control also. First, we can start these reforms by actually having a plan for incentive use. Right now the City strategy for development and incentive use is largely developer driven, and the concept of “Aldermanic Courtesy” means that it is looked down upon to vote against tax-incentives in other wards. In lieu of having a comprehensive strategy for development incentive use, the Board of Alderman could also stop subsidizing luxury apartments, and stop issuing single family abatements in stable neighborhoods for any project that is not affordable housing. A 2016 study commissioned by the City of St. Louis also gives a lot of other recommendations for reform if we are willing to take the report off of the shelf and work toward implementation.

Over my six years on the Board, we’ve developed a strong and growing coalition who is willing to buck Aldermanic Courtesy and take a more critical eye toward incentives, while greatly changing community sentiment toward these tax breaks. It is possible that we may hold the majority of members on the Board, or very close to it, after this round of elections. With community and school district support, we can codify real reform into law to support our schools.

The Role of the Mayor

The Mayor of the City of St. Louis also has an important role to play in reforming our tax incentive system. In the City of St. Louis, requests for tax-incentives are vetted through the Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority (LCRA), that make recommendations to the Board of Aldermen for the level of subsidy given to development. Currently, the majority of the seats on LCRA are held by bankers, real-estate developers, or real-estate attorneys. SLPS currently has no representation on this body that makes decisions that impact their tax revenues. Given that 60% of property tax revenues go to SLPS, whoever the next Mayor is should give 60% of the seats on this Board to representatives from SLPS so that they have real input into the allocation of tax subsidies that impact their revenues and the education of our kids.

Additionally, as the Board of Aldermen works to create a strategy for tax incentive allocation, we need a Mayor who is not only willing to work with the Board on developing this strategy, but also who is willing to use the veto pen when and if subsidies are granted that are in violation of this plan.

Using The Bully Pulpit

While outside the scope of City government, there is another strategy that I think those of us in City government must be willing to put our support behind — expanding Special School District (SSD) into St. Louis City. If City residents were to approve the same tax as is currently paid by county residents, it would mean an estimated $70 million per year for special education services in St. Louis City. SSD currently has nearly a $300 million surplus. Additionally, the SSD funding mechanism provides for a capital fund that could be used to renovate closed SLPS buildings into SSD buildings. I think this would also lessen the number of families who move out of St. Louis City in order to access SSD services as well, ameliorating population decline in the City and declining enrollment in SLPS.

In Sum

The closing of public schools is an incredibly difficult decision that our school district leaders have to make. No one wants to make this decision. In many ways, circumstances beyond the control of SLPS have led to the need to make this difficult decision. We cannot change the past, but what we can do is rally to save Sumner High School while also making the conscious decision to chart a different path that centers our kids and their futures. What we can do is use this moment as a wake up call to come to the table, own each of our responsibilities in bringing SLPS to this point, and commit to a different course of action to truly invests in our kids.