Transcript: Mayor de Blasio, Chancellor Carranza Announce Record-High 55,011 Students Taking Advanced Placement Exams

February 26, 2019

Mayor Bill de Blasio: Wow, Darley, you are a great public speaker. I'm like – so, first of all, I am impressed by anybody of any age who says their favorite class is pre-calculus. That was not my favorite class. So, Darley, you are more advanced than I was at that age, and I want to give you so much credit for, you know, trying something that was really difficult – that first AP class – and then realizing your talent, your abilities, your potential, and going for more and more and more. This is exactly what we hoped for and we dreamed of when we started down the path of AP for All. We said, there are so many kids in our schools who had tremendous potential, but their potential was being ignored because in their schools there was no AP class, and we were sending a horrible message to kids who had great talent that they wouldn't get the opportunity that some other kids got. And Darley, you're a great example of what happens when our young people are exposed to more and more opportunity. I'm so happy for you. Congratulations on getting accepted to several colleges, right? Excellent. When are you going to decide? 

Darley Verdesoto: I don't know. May? 

Mayor: May – okay, well, I'll be waiting. And the envelope, please –

[Laughter]

And I want to say to your classmates also, congratulations to all of you, because I know everybody is working so hard to achieve your goals and your future. So, congratulations, and thank you for all your hard work, because you're making us proud as New Yorkers. Let's give them a round of applause too.

[Applause]

Now, the Chancellor and I just visited an AP classroom – AP English class – and we saw the kids engage in an extraordinary conversation, an exemplary conversation – thoughtful, articulate, respectful of different opinions, exactly what we'd like to see throughout our society. But we were seeing it from kids who are 16 years old, and it is really inspiring to me of what it means for the future of our city in the future of our country, to see that kind of dialogue. That's what happens in an AP class. And that's an example of kids pushing themselves to go farther and learn more and you can see the results before your very eyes. We know that when we invest in our kids, when we actually listen to what they need and what their parents need, when we understand that they can go farther and we show we care about them, we believe in them, were ready to invest in them, it makes a huge difference.

Human beings are really quick to pick up on the signals. If you're investing in them, it means you value them. If you're not investing in them, it sends the opposite message. So, what we're doing here in this school and what everyone has done is something to be very, very proud of. And I’ve got to tell you, this is this school is one example of something that's happening all over in New York City, and that's what we're here to talk about, because we're announcing today that we have a record number of New York City public school students who took AP exams in 2018 – over 55,000 of our students took the test in 2018. A record number passed in 2018 – we saw an increase in the number of students passing AP exams in every borough and an every background, and it shows that this is the kind of approach that actually works and lifts our students up. 

I want to thank everyone here at the Civic Leadership Academy. A special thanks to the Principal, Phuong Nguyen for her great work. Let's give her a shout out – congratulations.

[Applause]

And I think – am I right, the students here with us are from AP U.S. history, is that right? So, this is – we are part of your history lesson for the day. We are making history, so that then you can talk about the history we made right here. So I want remind people of the history of this city, and it's a problem – it was a problem that some high schools, not just for years, for decades, for generations, had AP courses and others had none. Let's be really clear – high schools in the city never had a single AP course. Lot of great kids in those schools never given the opportunity. If ever there was a tale of two cities, just look at advanced placement courses over the years in New York City and you see, unfortunately, a perfect example of that divide. For us it was unacceptable – we’re not going to make decisions on people's future based on their zip code. There are kids ready to excel at every level in every neighborhood on every block. This is part of the ideal of this city, the values of the city to recognize the talent and ability in everyone, but our school system wasn't doing it for a long time. It's our job to fix that, and that's what Equity and Excellence is all about. And Equity and Excellence came down to a real simple concept, we had to make sure that every school was being treated with the same sense of focus and priority – so, that's investment – but we also wanted to bring the entire school system up – that’s excellence. AP for All is the epitome of this idea – highest level courses available in any high school, anywhere in the country. We said our students can reach that level, and they need that right in every neighborhood. That's what we've achieved with AP for All, and it's growing all the time. It only started in 2016, but it's growing steadily, and the results keep proving that this is the right idea. 

So this was one of the first schools to get AP courses that hadn't had them. The number of kids here, just since 2016, we’ve seen constant increase in the number of kids taking the test and passing the test. Today, in New York City, since this initiative started just three years ago, 252 schools have new AP classes. Now, again, I want to be clear – some of those schools never had a single one, others had some AP classes but not enough. But now, 252 schools have benefitted. And it's not just the way it helps shape the minds of our students and helps them grow and reach their potential, it’s also when you're applying to college and you have those AP courses on your transcript, I assure you colleges pay a lot attention to that. It is a signal to them to accept students when they see that. And it’s not just that – it’s that you earn the college credits and then you don't have to pay for them later. I think we can all agree – I’m going to do a show of hands – how many of you would like to pay less for college if you go to college? Who wants to pay less for college? Okay, we have very strong majority. 

[Laughter]

So, the AP courses also help to lighten the financial burden later on, and that's huge. 

So in the last few years, here's what AP for all has done – the number of students taking at least one AP exam in New York City has increased by over 92 percent. I’m going to repeat that – the number of students taking at least one AP exam in New York City has increased by over 92 percent in three years. That's how fast change can come. The number of students passing at least one AP exam has increased by 65 percent. Our kids are applying themselves, and it’s making a difference, and it's happening really, really fast, and this is good news for New York City. So, I've said more than once, our goal is to be the fairest big city in America, AP for All is one of the best examples of how to create a more fair and just society, starting with our youngest residents who are our future. 

I would finish in English and say this was possible – it was possible to move our school system this quickly because of mayoral control of education, or, as some call it, mayoral accountability, which I think is another very good phrase. We could have an initiative, we could decide on it, act on it, put it in place, and see amazing results in just a few years’ time. That was true with pre-K for All, 3-K, AP for All, Computer Science for All – all the big initiatives are happening with lightning speed because there's actually accountability, there’s actually the ability to get things done, and that's what mayoral control is all about. 

Just a few words in Spanish –

[Mayor de Blasio speaks in Spanish]

With that, I’m going to turn to someone who cares about equity so deeply, who knows – he was – you know, the Chancellor said something yesterday in a conversation that was very powerful – the schools that he went to as a kid would have been considered troubled schools, would have been schools that were considered the ones that need a lot of help. The schools he taught in as a young teacher, the same. But he is an example of the talent and the ability that resides everywhere – may have started in a troubled school, but he became someone who ultimately would make sure that 1.1 million kids got the education they deserved. 

Our Chancellor, Richard Carranza –

[Applause]

Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Good afternoon – it’s almost afternoon – well, it’s close enough. Buenas Tardes. Mr. Mayor, I want to thank you for being here today, and I want to echo some of your congratulations. We have not only one, but three principals here today. So, I want to thank our host, Principal Nguyen, thank you so much. But we also have with us Principal Badillas and Principal Bleiberg. So, thank you. There are three schools that exist within the confines of this building, and it's a great example of when you have a collaborative culture that all boats rise. So I want to thank you for your collaboration and for being here. I also, Mr. Mayor, want to recognize our First Deputy Chancellor Cheryl Watson-Harris for being here. Thank you. And I also want to thank the Vice President for the College Board. You know, the College Board has been a tremendous partner to the New York City Department of Education. And in every city that I've lived and worked in, they've been a true equity partner in making sure that more and more students have access to higher-order thinking skills, but the coursework to get them to college. So, I want to thank David Adams for being here, and I know that President Coleman, if he could, he would be here. I just spoke to him yesterday, he’s on the other coast. But thank you for your support as well. And finally, I want to give a big shout out – and she's going to be very upset cause she does not like the spotlight, she likes to fly under the radar – but I need to tell you that this big shout out goes to our Deputy Chancellor Lashawn Robinson, because AP for All, it's part of our Equity and Excellence agenda, but AP for All is her brainchild, it's her baby, she’s nurtured it, she's raised it, she’s created systems to sure that we're able to implement it. So, I want to say to her, without your work, Lashawn, we wouldn't be here celebrating this. So, thank you.

[Applause]

So, at the beginning of every school year, I share a quote – and, if you don't believe me, the beginning of the next school year, check my Twitter – and it's an anonymous six-year-old student, and she says the following – my teacher said I was smarter than I was, so I was. Now, it's my favorite quote as well. 

Mayor: I love it. 

Chancellor Carranza: It’s my favorite quote because it captures how I, and, increasingly, we, think about how our students are and what they're capable of when we set the bar high, we know our students will reach it. It's never about bringing the bar to students, it’s about help to lift students to reach the bar we've set. And as the Mayor shared with us today, we've surpassed that bar. We are continuing to raise that bar and provide supports for students to meet those high expectations that we have. The quote also exemplifies what we mean when we talk about Equity and Excellence for All. It's not equity and excellence for some, it’s not equity and excellence for those that have always had it, it's not equity and excellence when we hope that some would get it – it’s about equity and excellence for all. And this initiative and the results that we're sharing here today give us a great indication that we're on the right path in New York City. 

Here at Civic Leadership Academy, there are six AP courses up from just two prior to AP for All. Also here at Civic Leadership Academy, the number of students taking AP classes nearly doubled and the number of students passing has increased seven fold. Also here, there's a culture of high expectations and, as the Mayor mentioned, we had the pleasure of sitting in a class and listening to our young people really debate a topic that's very current for today and do it in a very professional, in a very enlightened way that made a lot of sense. But I'll tell you one of the things that I was so impressed – when I arrived and I had my conversation with a Principal Nguyen, she shared the path to ensuring that students have an opportunity to take AP classes, and the opportunities provided is a pathway of courage for our leaders. And why do I say it's a pathway of courage? Because often it means that you have to disassemble predisposed ways of thinking – that certain kids should be in certain kinds of classes, that the only way to get these higher-order thinking skills are through placement in an honors class or a gifted class. And she said, no, no, no, no – every student can do it. And they went about the hard, often politically tenuous work of saying, we're going to de-track and we're going to make sure that we set high and provide a pathway. And don't take my word for it, look at the results right here at this school. So I want to thank you for your courage and your leadership in being an equity warrior for all of our children. 

What is happening here is also reflective of what's going on across our great city. With AP for All, we’re telling our young people that we believe in them, that they are college material. With AP for All, more students than ever before are taking and passing AP exams across the City in every borough, across all ethnic groups. And as a parent who just finished paying for the college tuition for one of my children and is about to start with the next, I will tell you, Mr. Mayor, not only do students want to pay less than tuition, us parents do too. 

Mayor: Amen.

Chancellor: So, walking into that freshman year with a bunch of credits in your bank makes sense. 55,011 students are taking at least one AP exam – up 11.4 percent in one year. Now, think about this, because, in New York, we deal with millions, but 55,000 students are bigger than most school districts across the country. In fact, you'd be considered a top tier large school system if you have 55,000 students. And in New York, we have 55,000 students that are taking an AP exam for the first time. The number of students that are passing at least one exam rose 10 percent, almost 11 percent. And when we look at where we see the biggest gains in what groups of students, in what schools, we're looking at one of my priorities as a Chancellor in action – advance equity now. This is what advancing equity now looks like. AP for All is closing opportunity gaps, and I want to take just a moment to step back and share a little more about why AP for All is so important. You see, it's about these individual classes and the college credit and the message it sends to students, but it's much more than that. AP for All is a lever to success for our students – it is a pathway. Offering AP courses means that you need to strengthen the pathway for those AP courses. You just don't offer them and hope that students will go. You have to create the pathway, like our principal has done here. It means you need to raise the bar for your students and the adults that work with students, our teachers, not just in that AP classroom, but in basically every aspect of what the classrooms look like in your high school. It means that from the time a student walks in the door in the ninth grade, there's an AP mentality, there’s a college going culture, there’s a reaffirming environment that says that you can do that. AP for All can transform the culture and instruction in a school building, and, don’t, again, take my word for it, look at what's happening right here in this school.

So, I want to thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank you for this amazing investment, because if you look at how schools are funded, this isn't something that you will find on a line item in terms of a structured investment. This comes from enlightened leadership. And under mayoral control, mayoral accountability – I would also say mayoral vision for what we want our students – this can only happen in this kind of an environment under mayoral control. So, thank you, for your investment. 

Needless to say, a program this vast, and we're talking about – think about this for just a minute – 252 schools, 82 of which had no AP courses before this initiative began is only possible again, because of the enlightened leadership of a mayor who puts education first. And because our mayor is who he is and what he believes in, I also think it's important to recognize that that empowers us educators to do the hard work of creating opportunities for all. So, I want to thank the educators who are teaching, the educators who are supporting. I want to thank the administrators who are creating these opportunities. And more than anything, I want to thank these individuals standing right behind me, our students, for taking the challenge of taking a rigorous course of study and doing it with a smile on your face.

[Laughter]

Mayor: Not everyone has a smile.

[Laughter]

Chancellor Carranza: So, to our students here at Civic Leadership, and across the city, I want to say just these few words – you belong here. And when I say here, I don't mean just in your school. You belong in an AP courses, you belong in a college-going course of study. We have high expectations for you. We'll be there to support you every step of the way. We'll be there to motivate you every step of the way. We believe in you, even though sometimes you may not believe in yourselves. And I want to say to you, congratulations for this incredible achievement. And also, following the footsteps of our mayor, I want to say just a few words in Spanish –

[Chancellor Carranza speaks in Spanish]

Thank you very much. 

Mayor: One of the things I took away from what the Chancellor said is, that I am envious that he is no longer paying college bills. 

[Laughter]

Chirlane and I are still paying college bills, and we are looking forward to being in the same status of you. To Cheryl and Lashawn, thank you. Again, all this success and this progress took a lot of hard work for years and years. So, thank you to both of you for all you've done to get us to this day. I want you to hear from one more person, and he is an expert – if ever there was an expert on this topic, we are about to bring forward and an expert, because the College Board is where we look to understand what our young people need to be prepared for college, how they can get into a college that works for them, and, again, how they can also make it affordable by having those AP courses early, taking some of the burden off what they have to pay for later. 

So we have an expert, for sure – the Vice President of the College Board, David Adams.

[…]

Mayor: So let’s start with AP-for-All, and education topics. Yes?

Question: [Inaudible] almost a billion dollars, the renewal problems coming to end, can you talk about that? And it’s going to continue in [inaudible] but just without the label.

Mayor: Well, first of all, 45,000 students benefited from the Renewal initiative. I want to make this very clear, because I think; I think some of what has been written about it misses the fact that over four years the money that was spent was helping students in real time to have better outcomes. So, 45,000 students – what did the money go to? It went to 100 percent fair student funding in all of those 94 schools, it went to community school initiatives at all 94. It went to summer programs, tutoring programs, mental health clinics that were available to kids in those schools, all sorts of things that we would like to see in more and more schools, and a lot of kids benefited, which is why you see across all 94 schools in total a lot of progress that was achieved in terms of increase graduation rates, better test scores, better attendance. So, look, the students of New York City benefited in many ways. At the same time we realized there was a good way to do this going forward, because we had a better structure in place for the whole DOE, and we also learned valuable lessons. Somethings that worked really well, and some things that didn’t work as well, but either piece will help us to do better in the future, so you know, I am convinced it was the right road to go down, and I’m convinced now that we have a structure that can continue to take the lessons we learned and act on the them.

Question: Chancellor Fariña, [inaudible] she‘d walk into a school and she’d see that people were choosing to [inaudible] were choosing to leave the school. Only 25 percent of these schools had seen improvement. When you measure that, the fact that 25 percent of these schools were seeing improvement and that people were – that students were leaving these schools [inaudible] schools. Does that, does that – do the two correlate?

Mayor: No, I think –

Question: [Inaudible] people were leaving.

Mayor: No, I just disagree with your characterization respectfully, and I’m sure the Chancellor would like to get into this too. To say, to say that 25 percent is absolutely a mischaracterization of what happened here. Go back to 45,000 students, that’s what matters here. We said it from the beginning that we wanted as many of these schools to succeed as possible, but we also understood some might end up being closed or merged, and some were, but it was not for lack of trying and I think what you – when you look at what happened before, the previous policy was destructive. It was a policy a close first, and ask questions later, and a lot of schools got closed, and it cost tremendous disruption in communities, a lot of kids suffered because they were left in the transitional years without support. Folks at the community level felt something had been taken away from them without an honest effort to fix it. These are in a lot of cases are communities that never got their fair share of investment. So this just doubled down the way it was done before, just doubled down on lack of investment. We did not say everything would be perfect, we said we were ready to go out there and create real investment, help kids right now, and see how many schools could really turn around. I would challenge you, and say the numbers speak to an opposite reality, which is almost three quarters of these schools have made real progress and we believe will make sustained progress. And if I said to you most things in the world we invest in if we got three quarters of the things we were trying to fix to work, and the other quarter we didn’t get the results we wanted but we still learned valuable lessons, we still helped kids, I would argue that was a good investment. We could not keep doing things the way we did them before, it was not working. Other questions, yes?

Question: What mayor do you think [inaudible] what didn’t work about the approach of the program in the schools that clearly show progress [inaudible]?

Mayor: Sure, I’ll start and again let the academics come in behind me. The – first of all, just let me frame the playing field. These were the 94 schools in New York City that were having the biggest problems. We understood it was a tough situation, this was not go into any of our 1,800 schools randomly and see how you can make them better. These were the 94 schools with the biggest problems. I would note that the State of New York believes today, in recent information that came out, that only four of the 94, the four that are remaining of the 94 still have these foundational problems. So from the point of view of the State of New York there’s actually been an overwhelming progress among the ones that continue. And I would argue to you that some schools had gotten to a point where even with investment it could not be turned around, it’s as simple as that. They either gotten too small or there were reputational problems or other insurmountable problems, but we are not shocked unfortunately that by the time this administration came in and tried to engage some of these schools, some of them were at a point where, you know, a good faith effort just wasn’t going to be enough in time. But for the others, you know, for 70 plus schools, we saw real progress, and the kind of progress that will continue. So to be specific, I think, you know, what we look for of course is can we increase the graduation rate, can we increase the test scores, can we increase the attendance level, can we get energized educators in, principals who are ready to take on the challenge.

If you look across the schools that did continue to move forward to 70 plus, the answer was yes. That was consistently true, that we could do a number of those things. So, I understand why some might say it was a major investment, but I want to remind people you don’t get something for nothing. If you’re talking about the very toughest schools in New York City, they are not going to better without investment, it’s as simple as that. And by the way, the whole, the previous administrations notion of close and replace, well what happened? A lot of the schools they replaced with, the much wanted small schools, a lot of them ended up on the renewal list. So, that was not the answer onto itself. We had to do something different. The last thing I want to say before turning to the Chancellor and his colleagues is – the State of New York when they came out with their most recent schools in need, for the first time more schools outside of New York City were on that list, than inside New York City. Now, a lot of us had been here for quite a while. If you had said to me 10 years ago a day would come when there would be more troubled schools outside of New York City than inside of New York City, I would have said that was a very lofty goal. Well, its 2019, and it’s happened, and we expect a lot more progress quickly.

Chancellor Carranza: So, thank you. So just some more detail to what the Mayor has talked about. So, let me just say in terms of context, you know, unequivocally without question the issue of empowering, turning around schools across the country is an issue that no one has solved at 100 percent, let’s be really clear.  And I feel that I have the ability to say that, because I’ve lived and worked in five different school systems, in five different states from the West Coast to the East Coast. So, anyone tells you that they found the silver bullet; they’re going to sell you the Brooklyn Bridge next. It does not exist. And every solution, potential solution is really predicated in the conditions of the local environment. So, I commend the effort that was made in 2014 around identifying the portfolio schools, schools by the way which did not exist in the wealthiest areas of our city, these were not privileged communities, these are schools in some of the most historically underserved communities in our city.  And I think it was absolutely appropriate that we would take those schools and say we’re going to invest, we’re going to empower, and we’re going to do the work of making conditions better for students, and the notion that if you’ve invested $700 million that if you had not put that money into these schools that you somehow could have saved the money is, it’s just a red hearing. These are needs that exist in that community in of themselves. That being said, we learned some things from renewal, and you know, I’m 10 months into my tenure, and I will tell you that coming in I had some ideas about renewal based on my experience and what I was seeing from an external lens and the ability to sit with educators, parents, students in all five boroughs, the ability to triangulate my perspective with the data that I now have access to as a Chancellor, and to do the real root cause analysis, I can tell you there were some things that didn’t work.

One of them was a structure that we had in the DOE. Quite frankly, principals and putting on my principal hat, principals were receiving direction from multiple sources, they had the direct supervisor, they had the turnaround person, they had sometimes another individual that would give them in some cases conflicting direction in terms of how they were to go. We solved that issue when we reorganized the Department of Education; we created Executive Superintendent positions aligned with Superintends, aligning resources and direction to go forward. It was a structural issue that was one of things that was not effective. We also had as part of that approach a very much one size fits all. There was a certain model that was implemented and we didn’t take as much necessary time as we should have to understand the complexities and the nuances of each particular school. Quite frankly, some schools didn’t have the right leader. And this is not a – this is no way something negative against the principals that were in place, but not every principal is a turnaround principal, and not every principal can be in any particular school. You have to match the skill set with the needs of the community, with the needs of the school, and the job at hand. And quite frankly, we didn’t have in every case the right leader, and in some cases I will say we didn’t take quick enough action to get the right leader in those particular schools. As I spoke with parents and students and community members, one of the things that they appreciated was the investment of resources in their school community. But one of the things that came as an unintended consequence was the stigma of the renewal label, and once a school was labeled as a renewal school, there was certain stigma that came with that, not the resources, but this notion that you have a certain amount of time, if it doesn’t improve there are certain consequences. People felt that that precluded students from actually considering whether they would go to that school or not.

Chancellor Carranza: And again, I would say in general one of the big lessons learned that we had from the Renewal program is that you have to take a systemic approach to making sure that you understand the needs, the challenges, the obstacles that schools and their communities are facing, and then in a just in time way, allocate resources, capacity, coaching, and capacity building so that the school continues on a path to get better. Those are big things that we very honestly have said were things that we’ve taken on as learnings from the Renewal program and are excited about the next step of the work as we go forward.

Mayor: Yes?

Question: [Inaudible] Renewal program essentially achieved its goals in three quarters of the schools, why not continue it? Why not add [inaudible] schools [inaudible]?

Mayor: Very fair question but I think it is – so let me preface very quickly, many of you have heard me talk about my admiration for the Franklin Delano Roosevelt and there’s a reason I say that in this context. The New Deal transformed this country, many elements of which are with us to this day like social security.  We remember social security because it’s with us to this day. We do not remember some of the initiatives that they tried and did not work. They learned in the Roosevelt administration, you know, by trial and error in many cases but they had a very clear understanding, be bold, be aggressive, be creative. If you read about that time, they absolutely understood what they were doing.

We believed the previous approach was broken. It came with huge negatives. A very negative effect on students, and parents, and communities, and it wasn’t producing the kind of turnaround and results that had been desired. We had to do something new. So then the question became, where do you go? And as the Chancellor said, there was not some off the shelf model we could turn to. We did not see a believable model elsewhere in the country because many school systems had struggled with this, so we created our own and we built it on the building blocks that we believed were proven across the board, you know, in other circumstances, like the power of investment, the power of adding more time in class, more afterschool, more summer programming, all of the things that we believed were proven tools and clearly raising the funding per school, community school approach.

So that’s why in retrospect I believe it was the right thing to do at the time because it’s what we knew – it’s what we had, it’s what we knew, and it was thing that made sense to try. Why don’t we continue that exact model now? For the reasons the Chancellor said. One, it had to be a more individualized approach per school. Two, instead of the – what we thought was benefit having a centralized approach to Renewal Schools. It proved to come with unintended consequences. And the third factor is we went from an organizational structure that proved to be unwieldly. I think it was true for the one we started out with in this administration. I think it was true for the organizational structures in the previous administration.

In the mayoral control era, which is now about 15-years-old, there’ve been a certain amount of trial and error over both administrations trying to figure out what makes sense structurally. We went from a world that was about individual districts, to a whole school system that still had districts, and we had to figure out what would work. For the first time – and I was involved from the very beginning, I was school board in 1995 before mayoral control – this is the first time I’ve been convinced that the team has actually gotten it right and has a very straightforward organizational structure that allows specific strategies to get to schools quickly, and be implemented, and be held – you know, be – create an atmosphere of accountability. So my argument is, we had to evolve to be able to figure this out and now the lessons we learned can be applied through our overall leadership team. We don’t need a separate approach anymore. Go ahead.

Question: Can you help me understand, so then what’s specifically is different about the next strategy?

Mayor: Again, instead of a centralized team that does Renewals, or designating schools as Renewals, we’re going to deal with schools within their district. They need extra help. They’re going to get extra help via their superintendent, via their executive superintendent, right up to the leadership here. There is going to be a constant focus on those schools but they’ll be within a broader portfolio of the district. And the tools are going to be available. If we – obviously that – you know, all the schools in question have 100 percent fair student funding now, that’s going to continue. They became community schools. That’s going to continue. And as we look other schools that have needs, we will have those kinds of tools available to add into them what they need, please.

Chancellor Carranza: I’ll add to that. So that’s a really fair question, Alex, and I want to thank you for asking that. So let me put my practitioner hat on, okay, I’m not the Chancellor, I’m just a practitioner. The art and craft of school improvement is not a program. I want that to really set in. It’s not a program. You don’t pull it off the shelf, you don’t pay extra for it and implement it. It’s not a program.  So I  kudos to this administration in 2014 saying that there is a group of schools that we need to radically change direction in and implement a program to shift the paradigm that existed which is, let’s blame, let’s close, and then let’s create something different without having a real research base. So Renewal was effective, it was necessary, I give kudos to having a Renewals approach. Now, where we are now in 2019 versus where we were in 2014 is a markedly different place. We have a new organizational structure. We have new lines of accountability. We have an ethos now, and we have an Equity and Excellence Agenda for All with numerous goals imbedded in that Equity and Excellence Agenda, lots of different kinds of initiatives that we have. And the real work of school improvement is not a program. It’s a continuous process of looking at where are you? What are the conditions? What are the changing conditions? And then how are we as a system responding to help you get better?

Now the good news, when this work started in 2014/2015, we were proving a concept as the Mayor says. There was a concept to be proved in New York. We really don’t care what was happening anywhere else. It’s interesting, but nobody can know what’s like to live in Queens, unless they live in Queens. So we were proving a concept that in New York City, with our children, with our conditions, in our neighborhoods, with all the things that happen in New York City, we could actually move schools in a very positive direction and we have evidence that that is happened in New York City. So we’re taking those lessons learned. What helped you pay attention to the leadership? What helped? You have to have teachers that are qualified in their subject area and that are highly qualified. Our recent agreement with the teachers union in UFT, which gives us the ability to stipend certain content areas where schools have not been able to fill those teaching positions is an example of how we changed conditions. You have to pay attention to what the curriculum is in that particular school. This school is a great example of how they changed from tracking kids in certain ways to providing opportunities in a different way. That’s different. You also have to pay attention to empowering communities and having conditions for community empowerment. Our community schools that is solidly in place now is a model for how we help to empower communities. The work that we’re doing around empowering parent voice, and the Mayor and I spending time with parent leaders across the city and all five boroughs is a good example of that. That is not a program. That is now a way of work for us in New York City. And so the question of what is the new program is really an outdated – with all due respect – an outdated perception of what the work of school improvement, continuous school improvement really is. It’s not a program, it’s not a moment of time. It’s a continuous cycle of working the work. 

Mayor: Let’s see if there is a little bit more on this, because we’ve got a bunch to cover today, so let’s go quick through anything else on education, go ahead.

Question: I’m unclear on the transparency angle of this. Removing the Renewal label, how do parents know that this is still a school that is in danger of closing, that has issues –

Mayor: No, no, no, let’s – I don’t know what has been lost in translation or what we’ve sent out, and I will look to see if we left any lack of clarity, there’s no danger of closing. The schools that – there were some closed, earlier on in the program, there were some merged, there is a few more that we think will have to go through a merger. We’re being very open about which those schools are right now, but we’re going to be able to maintain those schools communities at the same time. Which is one of the differences with merger - by the way - the school community has a continuity. But no, that’s it. The ones that continue on, continue on. We believe that they are all poised for future success. No more closures planned with them. We have schools now that we’re going to continue to work on beyond those schools that need help but our goal is to take the lessons we’ve learned and help each of them succeed. So I – this completes the original sequence and the closures that were going to happen, have happened.

Question: I just want – it seems like a broader issue here. I mean, you could argue that the reason that there are struggling schools, or failing school in New York City, is by its design, right? I mean we funnel the low performing students into the same schools with extreme academic segregation across the school system. So I’m wondering if you are, you know, open to changing that? If you see that as a path to school improvement here?

Mayor: I think the – and I’ll be quick here, because again we have a lot to cover on other topics but there is a much bigger discussion that we will have in this city and we’ve put forward some pieces of it, and there is a lot more to come, on how to make sure our children learn with each other and how to have the most diverse classrooms that we can have. But that should not be mistaken for the primary way or the only way to ensure that kids get a great education. We have kids in every kind of community who are ready to achieve their potential. They need investment. They need high quality teachers. They need the best possible principals. This is the path forward, first and foremost, that’s what Equity and Excellences is all about.

So I want to caution your construct, which I believe is totally sincere, but I think it leaves out a piece of the equation. You talked about a world in which kids were in schools that didn’t get investment. Now I wouldn’t say that they were “funneled”, I would say they often times lived in the neighborhood where the school is, and now you’re talking about the whole history of this city and this country where there is inequality, on a racial level, and on a social level, on an income level. We’re trying to address inequality more foundationally. But we also don’t accept the idea that any school cannot be made strong regardless of the economics of the community. This is in many ways – a lot of people are talking about this in race terms – it first and foremost should be talked about in class terms, I would argue. If you’re in a community that has been economically disadvantaged, we’re not giving up on that community. We’re investing in that school. We’re bringing in more teachers and teachers with different specialties than ever were available before because of the Bronx plan. Where we brought schools up to 100 percent fair student funding, that never used to happen in a lot of disadvantaged communities. The whole thrust of Equity and Excellence unquestionably helps the schools that have had the toughest times the most, Pre-K, 3-K, AP for All, etcetera. So that’s the core of how we change things. Okay real quick, on anybody else, over here?

Unknown: Last one on education.

Mayor: Let’s do – No, I’m going to let the ones that put their hand up, and we’ll try to answer quick, so both of us will take the lightning round approach. Go.

Question: One of the terms that you’ve often used in your approach to failing schools is a war room type of mentality throughout your campaign and in the first term. And I’m just wondering, given that you are not – it doesn’t sound like your establishing any kind of structure like that, does that mean you’re abandoning –

Mayor: No, no, no, no. No. No. No. No. No. No –

[Laughter]

Just wanted to make it really hard for him to quote me otherwise – no. The war room is the leadership structure. So, you have – it’s real simple – Richard, Sheryl, executive superintendent, superintendent, principal, really clean line. And when there is a school that needs particular attention, everyone in that line knows about it, literally. If you quiz Sheryl right now on the schools, the 73 I think it is from the original 94 that continue on, she will be able to tell you what we’re doing in them. So the war room is embedded in the leadership structure. It’s very specific.

Question: I have a question about the four yeshivas –

Mayor: Yes.

Question: That were denying access to investigators. What’s going on with that [inaudible] being selected [inaudible] –

Mayor: I’m going to say what I think is the simple answer. Dates have been selected. We’ve been clear. They all must happen in March and they will happen according to our standards, our approach to evaluation, if any one of those dates is not kept, if there is any effort to interfere with our approach to evaluation, that will immediately end that process, and we’ll report that to the State Department of Education, and we will recommend that additional action will be taken. Okay real quick.

Question: Mr. Mayor, I’m curious if you’ve looked any further into the situation Forest Hills High School with the teacher and the [inaudible] –

Mayor: I have not. I will let the Chancellor speak to that.

Chancellor Carranza: Yeah, so we are very much pushing in there. So we – our Executive Superintendent Dr. Spencer, the Superintendent Dr. Composto, are working very closely with that school community. I’ve also been in touch with the president of the UFT, the president of the CSA, so we’re all working collectively to address the issues that have been identified at that school and I have great confidence that we will be able to move through that.

Mayor: Last call, education, once? Twice? Okay, thank you to all of you. Go back and keep getting educated.

[Applause]

[…]

Mayor: I’m joined by First Deputy Mayor Dean Fuleihan and his senior advisor, Sherif Solomon, so they can sit down – you are allowed to sit down now. I have a little quick opening comment. I think a number of you have seen my written statement on the MTA, but I want to say just a couple of other things up front both in English and Spanish. So, the Governor and I today made a major announcement related to the MTA and I want everyone to know this is something I thought long and hard about to say the least. You know I started out as school board member and a council member representing neighborhoods in Brooklyn. And I have a particular sense of concern when it comes to the needs of over seven million New Yorkers who live in the outer boroughs. There were a number of congestion pricing plans over the years that I did not think made sense. But things have changed and I want to explain why I think this proposal does make sense.

First of all, the extent of the crisis – we are dealing with a crisis with our subways and buses like we have never seen before. This is a fundamental challenge to the future of this city. We cannot allow the status quo, particularly with our subways to continue. It’s causing too many problems for hardworking people in this city, it’s disrupting their lives profoundly, it’s an unacceptable reality. So, right there, it’s clear that we have to do something different. The urgency of the situation is such that I think we have one great opportunity to get this done in this legislative session. I think if we lose this window we will regret it for years and years to come. I believe the greatest opportunity is to get this done by April 1st in the state budget. Historically, that has been a time to get a lot of important things done. I remind you, 2019 is not an election year, 2020 is an election year. If we are going to get something tough and complex done, we need to get it done now. But more importantly than the political backdrop, we can’t wait another year to address the problem. It’s gotten worse and worse and demands a solution. Now the needs have gotten so great, the physical needs of the MTA have gotten so great that I’ve come to the conclusion there is no way to achieve what we need without congestion pricing.

Everyone knows, my ideal would have been a millionaires’ tax. I have spent the last months talking to the Governor, to Speaker Heastie, to leader Stewart-Cousins, to many members of the Senate and Assembly and I’ve come to the conclusion that this moment there is not the support necessary for the millionaires’ tax. I hope there will be in the future. But we have a crisis right now and it has to be addressed right now. Now, to the specific proposal, I’ve said for a long time, the precious approaches to congestion pricing did not address important issues of fairness. This new proposal I that I have offered with the Governor does address the needs of outer borough communities that deserve more investment, particularly in transit deserts. Money will be allocated and prioritized under this plan for outer borough communities that need more mass transit. This plan includes a lock box. I have been very vocal about the past some of the revenue meant to help our subways and buses got moved to other uses. This plan will have a legally binding lock box to protect against that. This plan addresses the reality of hardship. There are New Yorkers who will need special consideration under a congestion pricing model and this plan allows for that. So let’s be clear by putting a plan on the table with the Governor what I am saying is the time for action is now, we need the State Legislature to engage and come to a decision. We’ve got just over four weeks to get this done. And I hope all New Yorkers engage in this discussion. I am going to engage in it intensely, I’m going to be talking to my fellow New Yorkers all over the five boroughs about how important this is. Because the one thing that is clear is the legislature has the final say. They have to vote, they have to agree, this is a plan and a proposal but the ultimate plan will be a piece of legislation and then we will know the final specifics. But the legislature has to act. I’m going to work very constructively with them and the Governor but with a sense of urgency.

You know the famous line from Apollo 13 – failure is not an option. We cannot miss this opportunity. And I am going to be talking to a lot of people who like me have often had criticism of congestion pricing, people who are skeptical of it and continue to be skeptical of it. I’m going to talk to them as someone who has been skeptical of it and say that I got to this decision because we are running out of time and we are running out of options. So, I conclude and I will say a few words in Spanish – what’s clear is that in the past there were leaders who had the opportunity to address the problems of the MTA and did not do so. This generation of leaders have to break the mold. This generation of leaders has to be the one who fixes this problem. I’m stepping forward ready to do it and the Governor is stepping forward, I know the legislature cares deeply. Together I believe this is the moment when we will once and for all set our subways and our buses on the right path for the future.

A few words in Spanish –

[Mayor de Blasio speaks in Spanish]

With that, I will take questions on congestion pricing and the MTA.

Question: Mayor, you said that the lock box is a key part of what convinced you to change your mind on this position, but the Governor has been talking about a lock box for a couple of months in terms of the crisis level for the subways and buses – that’s not new either. So when did you decide to come on board? You’ve been either opposed of agnostic for five years.

Mayor: I have been deeply concerned the whole time and there’s been a series of discussions and really it’s culminated in the last days. I’ll tell you why. One, as I’ve said I’ve been very open about the fact that I think the ideal solution is a millionaire’s tax. I have had conversation after conversation including a long conversation with Majority leader Stewart-Cousins at her office in Yonkers on Friday and long conversation by phone with the Governor on Saturday. I have been continuing to press to see which options were realistic and how we could get the job done. And in the context of those discussions I came to the conclusion that there was not a pathway for the millionaire’s tax in this session but there was a pathway for congestion pricing. So that’s a very practical element. But to the other points, I‘ve heard a lot of different things said but it’s very different to put pen to paper and come to an agreement. The Governor and I had a number of very construction conversations where I said I need to know that we will together, ensure a real lock box, legally binding lock box, to serve our subways and buses that we will have dedicated funds, cannot be diverted, for the outer borough transit deserts and we will have hardship considerations acted upon. I got the pieces of the equation I was looking for, I got it in writing. And I am convinced that this is a plan that can work. But I had to first feel, what I thought was the ideal solution wasn’t workable.

And second believe that this solution could be structured in a way that is fair to the people of this city and I do believe that now. Marcia.

Question: Mr. Mayor, I have two questions. The first one has to do with the hardship carve outs. I know that when you went to Albany to talk to [inaudible] committee on cities, you talked about the need for people who have disabilities or medical [inaudible]. Could you elaborate about the kinds of hardship exemptions you have a promise for, like what you were promised [inaudible]?

Mayor: Sure, I do. Thank you, Marcia. Look, I emphasize the Legislature has the final say in the development of legislation, where the Governor and I have common ground is that we have to address hardships. Disabilities are a key example. Folks with a tough medical condition who have to go constantly to those hospitals within the central business district, there are folks who are going to experience a hardship and not have the means to address it. We don’t want to keep them from health care, we got to make sure they are accounted for. So details will come out in the legislative process but there is a sense of common cause, the Governor and I have that we must address that issue.

Question: Is it just for people with medical disabilities or people who can’t afford it, emergency vehicles, what do you see –

Mayor: Well emergency vehicles, as I’ve said, I’m sure you have seen the statement today, emergency vehicles, obviously and absolutely will be exempted. But those two examples, again I want – there is going to be time for legislative process, I want to respect the rights of legislature. But you’ve hit the two examples that are most important to me – folks with disabilities, folks with chronic medical conditions who have to go those hospitals and don’t have a choice. They have to go to those specific hospitals on a regular basis.

Question: My second question –

Mayor: Yes.

Question: So, one of the things that lawmakers last week at a hearing, expressed concern about, was the fact that they are being asked to vote without knowing what the prices is going to be, what the charges are going to be, what people will pay to come into the Central Business District. Do you have any idea what that will be and what will you tell people who say how can we vote on something when we don’t know what our constituents are being asked to pay?

Mayor: So look, part of what will happen in the legislative process is determining what’s a fair way to move forward. There are a lot of things that go into the consideration of what the ultimate charge would be. And I think the process that is laid out here is fair. And clearly there will be lots of checks and balances, lots of dialogue before getting to an ultimate decision. So I am comfortable saying to the legislature, this model that has a plan for how that will be determined is fair. If legislators say we want more information, that will be part of the give and take of legislate process. But I am not here today to offer examples. It is something that has to be worked through.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: In the proposal there is a plan for how it will be evaluated and determined and it has to be done by next year. By the way, the technology being put in place and the logistics is going to take the rest of this year into next year anyway you slice it.

Question: [Inaudible] Governor [inaudible] MTA [inaudible] your support?

Mayor: I am not going to go chapter and verse. I’m only going to broadly characterize. I said to the Governor, there had to be accountability in this plan. There had to be respect for the city’s needs and a sense of common purpose, common approach. So for example, when we talked about how to actually implement congestion pricing, it’s quite clear in the plan that the City will have the equal ability in the implementation process to ensure that our streets are handled properly and our needs are accounted for. It’s clear that those areas of concern, the lock box, the outer borough transit deserts, the hardship cases, will be addressed. There – I think in this plan is a real balance, takes away a lot of the question marks and it makes clear the central thing I’ve been saying over these years – new, major funding sources for the MTA are what will change the situation, nothing short of that. And that’s what’s clear in this plan. Juliette.

Question: Mr. Mayor, so what’s you understanding of the marijuana tax? Are you assuming that the legislature will also pass that this year?

Mayor: Yes, I would say Juliette – one even though it’s not done yet, I do believe marijuana will be legalized this year. Obviously the City has put forward a plan of how we think it should be done the right way. But there will be clearly revenue. I think a portion of that revenue should go to the MTA. I think another portion should go for other uses related to the legalization of marijuana. But I remind you that everything will take some time to implement. But I think you are still going to see that this year.

Question: And then the internet, is that a sales tax?

Mayor: Yes it is. It’s an internet sales tax and we can get you the details. There is some sales taxes that now apply to internet transactions. This is a new one for certain types of transactions and in my view that’s a fair tax and it should all be dedicated to the needs of the MTA.

Question: Like what kinds of products?

Mayor: We will get you that detail.

Question: So can you explain a little bit more about how the outer borough transit desert will be served by this. Park Slope, no offense, isn’t an outer borough.

Mayor: I didn’t say it was.

Question: -- Isn’t really a transit desert but will places like Bellerose or Marine Park get a new –

Mayor: Well, that’s the whole point. That’s the whole point, was to – we know the places in the outer boroughs that don’t have enough mass transit and I don’t think it’s about developing new train lines in the first instance. I think first and foremost it’s about bus service in a lot of places. And having the resources to provide more and better bus service is one obvious, immediate example, more lines, more frequency, more select bus service. Overtime it obviously could allow for additional subway lines, but that’s something that would be in the farther future. But the point in all of this is, and I am going to harken back for those of you who were around and remember Mayor Bloomberg’s proposal, which I opposed as a Council member – there was no guarantee for the outer borough folks who are most affected by it and first and foremost folks from Brooklyn and Queens. And this is going to allow us a template to get that done, to say we are going to have a new pool of money specifically to address parts of the outer boroughs that do not have enough mass transit. That will have to be honed in the legislative process but this gives us a frame work to get there.

Question: Do know how much [inaudible]?

Mayor: Say again?

Question: Do you have a number of how much?

Mayor: We are going – it obviously has to be a very substantial amount. This plan will ultimately account for a bigger amount of money for the MTA then anything we have seen previously. But that’s part of the legislative process to get the exact numbers right.

Question: On the same issue, I understand why there would be a lack of specificity given that the Legislature has to do its work but I guess how can you be sure that the – you’ve been given kind of a generic guarantee about the outer borough funding, how can you be sure that it’s going to be sufficient and is there a chance that if there’s not you might withdraw your support?

Mayor: It’s a fair question but I want to accent the positive. That I believe after you know, discussions, the Governor and I have had over months and also I’ve had this conversation over months with the legislative leaders, that there is a growing consensus here. It’s not done, a lot of detail to work through. You know, a little over a month on the clock. But I have been saying to you guys, I’ve been projecting it over and over again, including in the State of the City, that April 1st is D-Day, so I am trying to add to that momentum. Governor and I have come to an agreement, I think that is a pretty momentous occasion. And it’s a fair frame work for moving forward. The legislative process must be respected and that’s where details get worked out. But my view is we will get there. Now obviously I have to believe in the final plan. I think that gives an incentive to everyone to honor what’s in here. I don’t think the other actors would want to see someone who represents 8.6 million people believe the plan was not fair and consistent. But I think in the end everyone is acting in good faith and I believe we will get there. Yes?

Question: Mayor, does this announcement end any possibility of the City taking over the subway as the City Council Speaker suggested?

Mayor: I don’t think we can ever say, finally, what’s going to happen in the future of the MTA. I think this announcement increases the chances of getting the current structure of the MTA to work under a governance controlled by the State, which I believe is the right way to address the immediate crisis. And with the right resources to actually get the job done. If everything in this plan was implemented, I think it would for the foreseeable make moot any discussion of city control. If it’s now, then that issue remains real.

Question: So right back to the charge question again [inaudible]. What’s the mechanism by which that number will be arrived at? Will you and the Governor propose it or will it be like an Albany free for all about this number?

Mayor: No in the proposal there is a process laid out that has to be concluded by the end of next year and again, just getting the technology and logistics in place is going to take us well into next year anyway.

Question: What’s the process?

Mayor: Well it’s delineated in the proposal. There will be you know, a review of all of the factors involved to come up with a number. And that number has to be determined by the end of next year. To get there – again, I don’t, I want people to understand when you are going to engage a legislative process, the Assembly and the Senate have to be comfortable with the methodology. That’s a lot of checks and balances and they ultimately have to be comfortable with what happens in the end. So, that dialogue will ensue but we’re presenting this as the way to both get the physical work done and ultimately come to a specific number based on facts and we think this is the right way to proceed.

Question: What role do you think you’ll play, the City will play in the reorganization of the MTA which has a management structure [inaudible] in your discussion with the Governor about this proposal, did you guys determine who actually has the responsibility over the MTA?

Mayor: You know, it’s clear – I said this in my testimony in Albany. I would like to see the governance structure change so that it’s even clearer what we’ve all known for decades that the Governor and the State of New York are in charge but they’ve been in charge without the authority being clear and the accountability being clear. That’s changed in the last couple of years in terms of public debate but you still have a governance structure that doesn’t do what it needs to do.

And as you just said, we all know the MTA has not functioned well enough, time to do something different. I suggest the mayoral control model where you have a board with a state majority. I think other representation is helpful. I think checks and balances are good, dialogue is good but ultimately the Governor has to have the ability to implement his vision. That’s what I support.

Question: Mayor, the last couple of years, the number of times you said the phrase millionaires’ tax to use –

Mayor: Several –

Question: Incalculable –

Mayor: Incalculable number.

Question: And the Governor [inaudible] –

Mayor: [Inaudible] exactly. Marcia, I agree with you. It’s been at least a million.

Question: The Governor always said to us it was a nonstarter in Albany. You disagree with his assertion but on Friday you met with Andrea Stewart-Cousins [inaudible] and she said it was a nonstarter in Albany. What was it that she said to you –

Mayor: It’s not just her. I’ve been talking to Speaker Heastie. I’m saying this – you asked the question, or someone asked the question, what happened very recently. It was a series of meetings and discussions in the last days that really sealed for me on both recognizing that today, this moment, we’re not get the millionaires tax but also recognizing that we could get a fair plan around congestion pricing. And I know you guys like to know to tick tock of things. I respect that. I was trying to say very clearly to you a series of recent conversations really convinced me.

But, there was a time in Albany that the going assumption among a lot of the media and the political class was we could not get 421-a reform. At first we couldn’t. Two years later we did. There was an assumption in Albany and the political class in the beginning of 2014 that we would not get the money for Pre-K for All. True, we did ultimately did not get the tax on the wealthy for Pre-k for All but lo-and-behold we did get the money for Pre-K for All.

In January, February, March of 2014 everyone said that was not going to happen, but in April of 2014, it did happen. So, I don’t think this stuff is static. I think we can all agree as we watch the political landscape nowadays that anything is possible. I don’t think the discussion of the millionaires tax is over by any stretch of the imagine for the future. But I believe that since we must get something done by April 1st – and I’ve said that a whole lot of times, almost as many times as I talked about the millionaires tax – that I believe practically speaking this is the way to get us to that April 1st goal. Marica?

Question: Mr. Mayor, this is a question for you and also for Dean Fuleihan who’s had a fair amount of experience –

Mayor: A little bit.

Question: So my question to you is this – do you think that the Legislature will actually pass congestion pricing, and Dean what do you think the chances are and how difficult it would be to do?

Mayor: So, I want to start and I’ll pass to Dean. I am a big admirer of both legislative leaders. I know them both really, really well. I think Speaker Heastie is one of the people in all my time in government that is one of the most responsible particularly around real numbers. You know, he was a math and accounting major and it shows. He really thinks in terms of the bottom line and recognizes the danger that the MTA is in that we must have an infusion of funding. How we get there – he will lead his body to whatever decision they make but I have no doubt he understands the extent of the crisis and the need for a solution.

Andrea Stewart-Cousins also is one of the most level headed clear headed leaders I have ever worked with. She understands that it is a threat not only to New York City but the whole metropolitan area if we don’t get this right. So, there’s a lot of work to be done. There’s a lot debate to be had. But I believe both of them understand the extent of the crisis and want to find a solution in time.

Come on Dean, she wants to see you.

First Deputy Mayor Dean Fuleihan: The Mayor answered it. And this is the perfect timing and the Mayor’s had conversations and we’ve had conversations with legislative leaders and the legislative staff. So they know what a priority this is. We’re respectful of what has to happen in that process – you’re right, I had a lot of years there and that’s a key part of this. And this is a framework – and now the Mayor is saying okay within this framework let’s figure out how we move this within that time period which has been the consistent of the city.

Question: So what are the odds?

[Laughter]

Mayor: Nice try. No, we’re confident. We’re confident that everyone wants to get to a solution. Marcia, I think this is the crucial point. We’re confident that everyone wants to get to a solution. I have not talked to a single person in Albany who says it is not a crisis or we got plenty of time. So when I say April 1st is D-Day it is something that reflects what folks in Albany recognize too. If we don’t get this done now, we will rue the day – we’ll live to regret it. Juliet?

Question: You’ve floated an idea of a bond [inaudible] –

Mayor: Yes.

Question: Was that ever part of the conversation?

Mayor: It still could be part of the conversation. I think a transportation bond act is another valuable possibility but that is part of the legislative process. By the way there may be other ideas that we haven’t even all thought about that could come into play –

Question: [Inaudible] get this out there and on paper and have a framework and is a lot of this very changeable or are these committed items?

Mayor: I think when the Governor of the State and the Mayor of the City agree on a framework, it creates real momentum and there’s three funding pieces here. I said we were going to need more than one way to get this done. There’s three funding pieces here. I think a lot of debate will be about this proposal and that’s good. It does not preclude other options being added by any stretch of the imagination and mixing and matching until we get to an outcome that people can agree to.

Question: [Inaudible] your concerns about the congestion pricing were largely consistent over the years. What did it take – and I know you’re saying there’s an urgency now – but I mean really the subway has kind of been in crisis for a long time. So was it just basically that the Governor kind of finally came around and gave you the assurances that you needed –

Mayor: No, I think it was also – look at the arch of this because it’s really important. The Bloomberg plan – someone help me, 2004, 2005? I don’t remember the exact year.

Unknown: 2007.

Mayor: 2007, I’m sorry. The Bloomberg plan did not address outer borough transit deserts, it did not address hardship. There was no lockbox. We talked – a lot of us at the time said show us a lock box, show us outer borough transit investments. The then-Mayor did not agree to that.

The Move New York plan which I thought was a smart plan, but also did not in my view speak to the larger issues. The first true step forward from my point of view was when the Governor’s commission suggested moving off the bridges, which, to me, as someone who represented Brooklyn as a Council member, was a very important recognition of the history of our borough and of Queens, and a way to think differently about the structure. So if someone was coming across the bridge and going somewhere that was not the Central Business District, they would no longer be penalized.

I thought that was a major step forward. To be very blunt, Yoav, in all my years of looking at this issue, never thought of that. It was that commission that was the first time I’d heard anyone suggest that notion. Maybe I missed something, but that’s my own experience.

That to me started to open my mind but again I still believe the millionaires tax was the better option. I believed it achieved a lot of things particularly effectively. And I fought for it and I have spoken about it and the polling has been favorable and I’ve tried to move the leadership in Albany but I respect the State government gets to make choices. There was not enough receptivity.

So, it’s a combination of the steady improvement in the plan especially the specifics in this agreement and the fact that what I could not abide was missing the deadline of this year. In a world of tough choices, the worst of all worlds would be if 2019 passed and there was not a funding solution for the MTA.

Question: You and the Governor don’t often see eye to eye on things –

[Laughter]

Mayor: What? That’s right.

Question: [Inaudible] Amazon helped pave the way for working together on this?

Mayor: No, we’ve talked a lot. You know, even in times of real disagreement we still talk. We’ve known each other for so long. We talk all the time. And our teams talk all the time. I think there’s been a recognition over the months that we had to find a solution here one way or another.

So, you know, I’ll remind you that when we got to the mayoral control discussion two years ago – there was a point where the Governor and I had a host of disagreements going. We still managed – we talked literally multiple times a day to get to a positive outcome on mayoral control because we both agreed it had to happen. So, I don’t think there’s like a perfect – I appreciate your question but I don’t think it’s like one thing did it. I think it’s an ongoing reality [inaudible] on this one. I heard him about what he thought was real and not, what could be done.

He heard me on what mattered to me and what I thought was necessary to be fair to folks particularly in outer boroughs and we got there.

Question: Mayor, you said that you got certain things [inaudible] –

Mayor: Yes.

Question: [Inaudible] tell us what you got in writing?

Mayor: In writing is the lock box, in writing is the recognition of hardship and the need to accommodate folks with a hardship, in writing is dedicated funding for outer borough transit deserts.

Question: Mr. Mayor, the taxis and other for-hire vehicles recently had additional taxes and fees [inaudible] imposed on them. Is there a carve out for them in this?

Mayor: Yeah, this proposal – again, there will be a legislative process but I’ll tell you about what I believe and what’s in this proposal – does not do anything further than the surcharge that was previously agreed upon. So I think that surcharge made sense but there should not be a need for additional. Okay, last call on congestion pricing, MTA – going – yes?

Question: So, the taxis and for-hire vehicles [inaudible] go in and out of the –

Mayor: The surcharge was already agreed to previously. That’s a specific surcharge different from what will happen under a congestion pricing schema. I think that surcharge was right to help fund the MTA and I think that is sufficient.

Question: The plan spoke about fare evasion but didn’t really elaborate how enforcement will be done. I’m just wondering how big of a problem you think fare evasion is for the MTA and what specific changes you envisioned for how it would be –

Mayor: Let me speak to that but I want to just go one step back to Marcia’s previous question on things in writing. Another thing in writing was that implementation of congestion pricing would be done jointly with the City and State. We raised a lot of concerns about our streets and we needed to do to protect our people and make our streets work and that we could not have it done without the City being fully a partner. That’s in the agreement as well.

Question: [Inaudible] decide where it goes –

Mayor: Well, this is specifically about congestion pricing. We’ve actually had a cooperative reality in Select Bus Service –

Question: I thought that because [inaudible] service in the outer boroughs it might include buses [inaudible]

Mayor: That is again – let me try and keep it simple. The implementation of congestion pricing would be done jointly in terms of logistics and ensuring that the City’s needs and interests and our streets were protected. Select Bus Service was already, before we ever talked about any of this, the routes were always decided between the MTA and the city. Okay, hold on, hold on. Let me do this and I’ll come back to you.

On your question, look, there’s always been fare evasion. It’s not acceptable. I’m really clear about this. It is not okay. There are all those straphangers who pay their fare every single day and drive them crazy when they see people evade the fare. We believe our approach to enforcement that we’re using now is actually going to lead to more officers being available and present and visible to stop fare evasion because we’ve moved to the summons approach away from the arrest approach.

The irony of the arrest approach was it was taking our officers out of the stations for most of the day while they processed the arrest. Now they’ll stay and make their presence felt. But we want to make sure that fare evasion is addressed across aboard. So the plan talks about physical measures to help stop fare evasion and what the DAs need to do, what the police need to do, what the MTA needs to do, what the State needs to do, what the City needs to do.

We all want to work on ensuring that this problem is addressed.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: Anything that gets put up – so imagine for a moment in the middle of New York City with everything going on, with everything underground, etcetera, if the MTA could just come in and do whatever the hell it wanted chaos would ensue. So this says nothing happens without the City’s sign off and the City’s involvement to make sure it’s done the right way for the interest of New York City. That’s part of this plan.

Last call – MTA, congestion pricing, going once, going twice, other topics. Yes?

Question: Murders are up 54 percent this year and other index crimes are up as well. Just wondering if you – what your thoughts are on this [inaudible] –

Mayor: We are going to talk about this next week. We take it very seriously. Now, look, we’re still early in the year. I want to be clear – every time we talk about these statistics, let’s start by saying these are human beings we’re talking about and we never want to lose anyone, we never want to see anyone injured. We take it all very seriously. And the NYPD is formulating right now plans to address some of the specific problems areas we’re seeing.

In the past, when we’ve seen challenges the MTA makes really quick – I’m sorry, PD makes really quick adjustments and makes a very big impact. So, Commissioner O’Neill will talk next week about the changes we’re going to make to address some of these problems and some of the particular problem areas.

It’s early in the year. We don’t like some of the things we’ve seen. Other areas of crime are continuing to go down and obviously we’ve had five years of steady decreases in crime so everything that we’re seeing overall still gives us confidence. But we’ve got to address this immediate problem.

Yes?

Question: Now that you’ve changed your position on congestion pricing from not sure about to backing it, when running for President –

Mayor: Wow, that’s a segue. Segue Award for 2019. Phillips is like that was a desperate act – go ahead.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: My friend, I haven’t ruled it out. When I have something to say, I’ll let you know.

Question: But are you closer –

Mayor: That’s all I say.

[Laughter]

Question: Mr. Mayor, [inaudible] the topic of carriage horses and the –

Mayor: Yes.

Question: – and the construction on Central Park South. Some of the people who love the carriage horses say that they – that this is directed towards them, to displace them and move them into the park. Can you summarize what your position is on that, the construction that’s going on there and [inaudible]?

Mayor: Well, I want to make sure I’m not misunderstanding your question. What we put forward was a new policy to move horses into the Park. I’ve said from day one horses do not belong on the streets of New York City. It’s not fair to the people. It’s not fair to the horses. It’s not fair to the drivers. Horses do not belong in the middle of Midtown Manhattan traffic. So we want to get them off the streets, into Central Park, and now that Central Park is car-free it makes it a lot easier. So, that’s what we did through our policy, we think it’s fair. There was legal action, we won. We’re moving forward. Yes?

Question: But don’t you need to be getting approval to start changing things in the Park and on the street?

Mayor: We actually are the government, you know, we –

Question: Isn’t there a process?

Mayor: So, some – it depends on the individual thing. This – and Dina and Sherif may have some specific knowledge I don’t have – but in this case we were able to act administratively to move the horses into the park. This was not something that required legislation.

Question: Is that an executive order?

Mayor: It’s several different things but it’s not something that requires legislation.

Question: Do you have like a guess on how many people you think will come out to vote today for the special election?

Mayor: I don’t have a guess. You know, I understand that a special election on a cold day in February is tough one, but I do want to say to all New Yorkers – Chirlane and I voted this morning, get out and vote, the Public Advocate race matters, the Public Advocate position matters. It’s one of the jobs that matters in the city because the Public Advocate speaks up for everyday New Yorkers and neighborhoods and sometimes the Public Advocate becomes Mayor so it’s an important position.

Question: Question about the NYCHA monitor. In a prior case where he acted as a receiver he was essentially forced to resign after he was accused of racking up bills and failing to reveal a conflict of interest in the case. Given that the city is going to be footing the bill for him, I guess I’m wondering if you have any concerns about his appointment or any second thoughts about giving HUD the power to pick him without a judge’s oversight?

Mayor: This structure that we agreed to, I think, was the right plan under the circumstances. The – and – you can always, if something doesn’t make sense, there’s always recourse, but, look, so far, here’s what I’d say. In our dealings with Mr. Schwartz, he seems to be a very professional person, trying to achieve positive outcomes in a cooperative manner. That’s certainly the history that we’ve heard about in other places where he’s worked. The specific issue you raise was not something that I’m aware of previously, and I don’t think my team was aware of. We’ll certainly look at that, but the bottom line here is he has been appointed by HUD, there is still a lot of work going on on the specifics of his plan, his contract, how much it will cost. A lot of things have not yet been worked through or approved. So, we’ll look at that but my hope is that what we’ve seen previously in his work [inaudible] well for what’s going to happen in terms of fixing the challenges in NYCHA. This is ultimately about whether we can make life better for 400,000 people and I think a good monitor will help us do that.

Question: Mayor, also on NYCHA, could you just tell us about the lead, the work that was done with the lead this week?

Mayor: Absolutely. So we have 5,800 apartments in public housing where our recent inspections show there was a child under six and some issue with the paint, or at least a concern there might be a problem with the paint. So, in terms of those 5,800 we said that we’ve have to get those remediated by the end of February. And I want to give a lot of credit to our General Manager Vito Mustaciuolo who’s been leading this effort. He’s got 200 workers working round the clock, and as of last night we were very close to 5000 of the 5,800 being done. The remainder will be addressed in the course of this week. We will have several hundred where multiple attempts were made to get access to the apartment and the residents would not allow access. I want to emphasize how big a problem that is. The residents, who won’t allow access, unfortunately are putting their own children in danger, and we cannot allow that. So we are going to take legal action to get access into those apartments. I don’t think that will be complete this week, I think that will be something we’ll have to act on in the coming days. But for all the apartments where we were given access, they will be completed by the end of the week. Okay, last call? Yes.

Question: Mayor, do you find a lengthy news conferences exhilarating or exhausting?

Mayor: Exhilarating.

[Laughter]

I want my smile to have one of those sparkle things that happens at the end.

Question: [Inaudible]

Mayor: Yeah, that was good, yes?

Question: I just want to make it clear—

Mayor: Yeah, I just want to say, getting back to Renewal schools, right?

[Laughter]

Question: Did you guys determine who has control of the MTA in your call on Saturday?

Mayor: Again, this is – let’s be clear, right this minute, for all intents and purposes, I’ve said it, I’ve said it a million times: the Governor and the State practically control the MTA right this minute. Well known fact, most New Yorkers now get it really thoroughly. The governing structure should be further clarified to give the Governor a working majority on the board and the ability to make greater changes in the MTA.

Question: That was a joke.

Mayor: Oh.

[Laughter]

You did it – you’re very deadpan. It sounded –

Question: Indoor world record for the longest press conference.

Mayor: Longest press – I’m been trying – the people from the Guinness Book of World Records are here to authenticate this press conference.

You have got to deliver it with a little bit of arched eyebrow or something – arch your eyebrow.