SORRY SAGA OF SCREWED-UP SCHOOL Former Newsday reporter Jonathan Mandell has written a compelling account of his efforts to help build a journalism-themed middle school in Carroll Gardens and now Park Slope. It's sure to reinforce the cynicism held by many folks toward public school administrators and teachers. Mandell pitched the idea for the school to former District 15 superintendent Frank DeStefano in 1995. "The skills the best journalists master are the same that you need to be a good student: the ability to learn quickly, research efficiently, write clearly, and to be engaged in your community and aware of what is happening in the world," the former reporter wrote.

"One of the best things about journalism, I thought, is that it is about every subject on earth; anything you are interested in, you can write about. So why couldn't educators use journalism to motivate kids not yet interested in school?

"A kid who has memorized 100 rap songs, say, but does not do his homework does not have a problem learning-the problem is getting him motivated to learn academic subjects. What if teachers asked that adolescent to transcribe those rap songs, to provide a glossary of rap terms, to interview a rap singer, to write his opinion about the controversy over rap lyrics?"

DeStefano adopted this excellent idea, but his administrators and their teachers proved unable or unwilling to make it work. The result was a promising start but a frustrating and fast demise for the Manuel de Dios Unanue School of Journalism, named for a Spanish-language journalist assassinated by drug lords. The school's name encouraged Latino journalists to help, but there were whispers that it discouraged white parents from sending their kids to it. District 15 officials couldn't say that publicly, but we'll admit to believing the school was in predominantly Latino Sunset Park. In fact it was on Henry Street. The name, of course, wasn't the main problem. It was the people who ran the school.

The first director had no background in journalism and refused to return Mandell's calls. So did the superintendent. The reporter so instrumental in developing the school found himself shut out. Despite repeated requests, he wasn't even invited to visit the school until six weeks after it opened in September 1998.

Mandell eventually was introduced to the school's PTA by the director, who said, "Jonathan and I have been working closely together over the past few months." "I was speechless at the audacity of her lie," the reporter wrote. The director also disbanded the school's planning committee, a star-studded group of journalists and professors who'd volunteered their time. (You know how educators are always calling for business people and professionals to help public schools? The truth is some principals would rather not be bothered.)

The sixth grade's first project was to write to Barbara Walters and Diane Sawyer and beg for them to do a segment about the school, "which struck me as more apt for a school of public relations," Mandell wrote. The supposedly journalism-themed school didn't even get newspapers delivered to it. In one journalism elective, a teacher showed TV sitcoms for an entire period. Mandell surmised, "Since none of the teachers had any background in journalism, most seemed to have simply come up with something they wanted to teach and called it journalism."

Mandell later arranged for a day of classroom visits by professional journalists. They all came, but the director was absent and never followed up. The director was later replaced. The school was merged with two other themed middle schools, renamed, and moved into John Jay High School in Park Slope. This year, the school was broken into three schools (journalism, law, and research) again, but kept in John Jay.

All of the original teachers are gone. So is the first director and her replacement. Only 22 percent of sixth-graders at the school passed the state's reading test last year. And a visit by Advocates for Children found "chaotic" conditions at the school, with arguments breaking out in one classroom and children storming out. Mandell, to his credit, again offered to help the school. He e-mailed. He called. He waited for a month. He is still waiting. (Mandell's story is at http://www.gothamgazette.com/commentary/146.mandell.shtml.)

CAR-FREE PARK POLITICS REVEALED Suspicions that politics, not practicality, are to blame for the city's refusal to conduct a trial car ban in Prospect Park were aroused when the Department of Transportation implemented a much more ambitious experiment in Manhattan without the City Council-funded study it's demanding for Brooklyn. Without a public hearing or even a request from motorist or business groups, DOT paid for its own study of crosstown traffic and then banned left or right turns from 10 cross streets in Midtown, which carry tens of thousands of vehicles daily.

Yet the agency's answer to a popular 10-year campaign to ban the much smaller number of cars that use Prospect Park was to demand at least $250,000 from the City Council, which is trying to close a $6 billion budget deficit. DOT spokesman Tom Cocola said the agency paid for the Manhattan study because of the obvious traffic problem there. The implication was that since motorists are not having problems in Prospect Park-indeed, they breeze right through it-there's no urgency. One can only conclude that DOT's priority is when motorists are having a problem, not when they are causing one.

Car-ban advocate Clarence Eckerson of Carroll Gardens believes the $250,000 study being sought is inflated in cost, is a delaying tactic, and is unnecessary given that a similar study was done about seven years ago. Five councilmembers-David Yassky, Yvette Clark, Bill deBlasio, James Davis, and Angel Rodriguez, who has since resigned-announced in July their support for a three-month trial ban, as did the Park Slope Civic Council. But at an August meeting with DOT hosted by Borough President Marty Markowitz, councilmembers from southern and western Brooklyn objected.

The most animated opponent was Simcha Felder of Borough Park, presumably looking out for his Orthodox constituents who often drive but rarely walk or bike through the park on weekdays. We wonder if Felder would likewise tolerate hordes of motorists barreling through Borough Park on Saturday mornings.

MIGHTY CASEY STRUTS OUT Department of Education lifer Bill Casey, who worked under Chancellors Rudy Crew and Joel Levy after being rudely and unwisely booted as superintendent of District 15 by a scheming school board, has decided to retire after 37 years in the system. So has Brooklynite Burt Sacks after 33 years, many as a liaison to community school districts. "Both men felt marginalized under Chancellor Joel Klein, whose inner circle does not include many old-timers," The New York Times reported.

Casey was our principal when this columnist attended P.S. 321 in Park Slope. As a local reporter covering District 15 a dozen years later, we reminded him of our past connection, never expecting him to remember. To our shock, he did. He remarked that he still couldn't believe we wore shorts to the graduation ceremony. "It was very hot that day," was our reply, though in truth we didn't even recall a ceremony for finishing fifth grade.

Also from the small world department: We played on the 1987 city champion Midwood High School tennis team with Burt Sacks' son Justin.

SPEAKER REBUTS DAVIS We had breakfast with City Council Speaker Gifford Miller in Brooklyn Heights on December 6 and asked if Councilman James Davis's vote against the 18 percent property tax hike would affect Davis's chance to chair a council committee. "In order to get a committee chairmanship you have to have the support of all your colleagues," Miller said. "It will be up to his colleagues." Translation: Miller will probably make Davis vice chairman of the council's Outhouse Maintenance Committee.

Davis was the only Brooklyn Democrat to vote against the tax hike. He said he did so despite threats and intimidation from Miller that dissenters would be punished, presumably when committee assignments are handed out. Miller, despite his comment that committee choices are made by the council at large, essentially controls the process.

The speaker also doles out discretionary money that councilmembers can distribute to non-profit organizations in their district. In the last budget, the standard amount was $80,000, but favored councilmembers got several times that. Miller did not say what the fallout might be for Davis. All he said was, "It's my job to try to persuade people that (the 18-percent hike) is the right thing to do… I believe the responsible and courageous vote was to vote for this."

BRAMWELL GOES TO TOWNS One of our spies spotted Rep. Ed Towns lunching with former Brooklyn Republican Chairman Arthur Bramwell at the Park Plaza Restaurant in Brooklyn Heights on Friday, December 6. We thought the pairing was odd, since Towns is a Democrat, so we e-mailed Towns aide Karen Johnson for the details.

She replied, "I can unequivocally say that Congressman Towns was nowhere near the Park Plaza diner on Friday and he did not meet Arthur Bramwell on Friday or any other day." We replied, "It must have been Towns's twin brother." Johnson, perhaps rethinking her use of the word "unequivocally," double-checked and discovered that Towns does not have a twin brother.

She then wrote back, "Sorry, the congressman was at the Park Plaza on Friday, but met with an old friend, Roland Hill, who is over 90 years old and served on our staff." We checked back with our mole and were told there were three people at the table, Bramwell being the third.

FIDLER NOT COZYING UP TO COUNTY Our first hint that Councilman Lew Fidler was upset with a column we published in this paper's southern Brooklyn editions came at 8:14 a.m. on a Thursday morning, moments after it hit the newsstands, when he called and bellowed, "I hope I'm waking you up!" Ah, the life of a political columnist. We'll say this much: it ain't boring. Fidler said we misunderstood his statements in the wake of a Crain's Insider report that the victory of the Sunset Park council candidate he supported, Sara Gonzalez, would boost Fidler's chance to become council speaker in 2005.

Two weeks ago, Fidler had alerted us to the Crain's story, said he was very happy about it, and explained that he had endorsed Gonzalez after meeting with her and satisfying himself that she would "be part of this Brooklyn thing we're trying to put together." In that context, we understood "this Brooklyn thing" to be an effort by Fidler to unite the council delegation behind his bid for speaker in 2005, when Gifford Miller will be forced out by term limits, and that he'd secured Gonzalez's vote. That was not the case. Upon rousing us from bed on Thursday, Fidler explained that "this Brooklyn thing" was simply his effort to unify the delegation to advocate for the borough during council budget negotiations and the like.

It hadn't occurred to us that any Brooklyn councilmembers were putting other boroughs first, but Fidler's point was that the Brooklyn delegation has in the past been "all over the place" while Queens members, for example, has stuck together in advancing its interests. Whatever the case, there was no quid pro quo with Gonzalez whereby she would back Fidler for speaker if he backed her in the November 5 special election, Fidler said. He said the speaker's race was never mentioned, nor did the subject of his impending bid for reelection as delegation chairman come up.

In fact, it's much too early to talk about the race for speaker, what with the entire council up for election in 2003, he added. "The fact that Crain's looked at this the way they did, the way many people did, doesn't mean that this was an agenda," Fidler said. "I don't allow myself the fantasy that anything I do today is geared toward some race in 2005. I was tickled that Crain's thought of it that way, because I thought it said incredibly flattering things about how people perceive my role in the next council."

We won't suggest that it was a hidden agenda, lest Fidler call us even earlier this Thursday morning. But it is rather obvious that Fidler simply picked the candidate most likely to defeat Eddie Rodriguez, who was strongly backed by Councilman Bill deBlasio, Fidler's friendly rival. Fidler's second, even more vociferous complaint was about our suggestion that the late Assemblyman Tony Genovesi would object to Fidler's recent associations with Clarence Norman's Brooklyn Democratic organization, which Genovesi fought so assiduously until his untimely death in 1998.

Our assertion that Fidler has been "cozying up" to Norman was based on several recent events, including Fidler's support for Gonzalez, whose campaign was cheered on, and to some extent helped, by Norman's right-hand man, Jeff Feldman, the executive director of County. Also, Fidler had just helped shepherd a Supreme Court judicial candidate through Norman's informal selection process, whereas Genovesi used to run slates of candidates against Norman's. Furthermore, Fidler recently called upon Norman to guarantee an agreement protecting Fidler's interests in his Flatlands/Sheepshead Bay political tussle with Laurie Garson and Renee Hauser. Fidler also voted in September to give Norman another two years as county leader. From Fidler's point of view, there were rational reasons for all of the above and they do not amount to "cozying up" to Norman.

Specifically, Fidler said, Gonzalez was not Norman's candidate, was not officially endorsed by County, did not receive free legal help from County-affiliated lawyers, and was supported by Councilman James Davis, an enemy of County. (While that is true, Feldman did help with Gonzalez's petitions and was at least marginally involved with her campaign, which we don't think would have happened without Norman's approval.) Running a judicial candidate (Mark Partnow) through Norman could also be defended as a practical approach, since there weren't enough anti-Norman votes at the Brooklyn judicial convention to award insurgent candidates a Democratic nomination. (One attempt was made, but failed.)

On the Renee Hauser matter, Norman didn't make an alliance with Fidler but simply enforced a peace agreement between Fidler and Hauser that the latter violated, in the opinion of Fidler, Norman, and others. Voting to reelect Norman as county leader was an appropriate gesture, given that Norman had kept his word as guarantor in the Hauser-Garson matter-and besides, Norman had no opponent, Fidler noted. So there are the facts. Does that amount to "cozying up" to County? Fidler said it doesn't. "I work with them when they're right and work against them when they're wrong," Fidler said. He noted that in 2001 he backed Marty Markowitz for borough president over County's candidate, Jeannette Gadson, and supported Peter Vallone and then Freddy Ferrer in the mayor's race, while County sided with Alan Hevesi and Mark Green. This year he was behind Bill Mulrow for state comptroller, not County's choice, Hevesi.

Fidler, at the last meeting of district leaders, also backed an effort to reform the way Norman selects Supreme Court judges. "When it came to a push-comes-to-shove vote…my hand went up. I'm sure that would not be considered a cozying-up-with-county vote." Regardless, we didn't intend to imply that Fidler had lost his independence, and perhaps we went too far to suggest Genovesi might be fidgeting in his grave. We do think it's clear that Fidler is not the antagonist to County that Genovesi was. Nor is he obliged to be.

Maybe we're just longing for the kind of viable and savvy opposition to County that Genovesi was able to mount, so we're not resigned to writing about shoestring efforts by the likes of Sandra Roper and Wellington Sharpe, whose anti-Norman slate disintegrated pathetically in courtrooms and voting booths last summer.

Borough Politics Archive

2002
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
Novemer 25 column.
Novemer 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.
October 28 column.
October 21 column.
October 14 column.
October 7 column.
September 30 column.
September 23 column.
September 16 column.
September 9 column.
September 2 column.
August 26 column.
August 19 column.
August 12 column.
August 5 column.
July 29 column.
July 22 column.
July 8 column.
July 1 column.
June 17 column.
June 10 column.
June 3 column.
May 27 column.
May 20 column.
May 13 column.
May 6 column.
April 29 column.
April 22 column.
April 15 column.
April 8 column.
April 1 column.
March 25 column.
March 18 column.
March 11 column.
March 4 column.
February 25 column.
February 18 column.
February 11 column.
February 4 column.
January 28 column.
January 21 column.
January 7 column.

2001
December 10 column.
December 3 column.
November 19 column.
November 12 column.
November 5 column.
October 22 column.
October 1 column.
September 6 column.
September 4 column.
August 30 column.
July 23 column.
July 2 column.
June 25 column.
June 11 column.
May 28 column.
May 21 column.
May 14 column.
May 7 column.
April 30 column.
April 23 column.
April 9 column.
April 2 column.
March 26 column.
March 19 column.
March 12 column.
March 5 column.
February 26 column.
February 19 column.
February 12 column.
February 5 column.
January 29 column.
January 22 column.
January 15 column.
January 8 column.
January 1 column.

2000
December 25 column.
December 18 column.
December 11 column.
December 4 column.
November 27 column.
November 20 column.
November 13 column.
November 6 column.
October 30 column.
October 23 column.
October 16 column.
October 9 column.
October 2 column.
September 25 column.
September 18 column.
September 11 column.
September 4 column.
August 28 column.
August 21 column.
August 7 column.
July 31 column.
July 24 column.
July 17 column.
July 10 column.
June 26 column.
June 19 column.
June 12 column.
May 15 column.
May 8 column.
April 24 column.
April 10 column.
March 13 column.
March 7 column.
February 21 column.
February 14 column.
February 7 column.
January 31 column.
January 24 column.
January 17 column.

1999
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
November 25 column.
November 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.