Sign up for Chalkbeat Philadelphia’s free newsletter to keep up with the city’s public school system.The Philadelphia school district’s plan to close schools and modernize others has a $3 billion price tag. Right now, the district can’t pay for it. And its plan to raise that money might end up being wishful thinking.Last week, members of the Board of Education voted to approve the plan to close 17 schools, and modernize nearly 10 times that number. But they had serious questions about the district’s plan to fund it. Even Superintendent Tony Watlington, who pushed the board to approve the closures and upgrades, has acknowledged the funding hole. Watlington has said he wants to raise $2 billion from local, state, and federal government as well as philanthropic grants to pay for school upgrades over 10 years to ensure buildings are well equipped to receive more students. The remaining $1 billion would come from the district’s capital borrowing cycle.But major questions loom over how the district would ever raise that much money. The district already has a $300 million budget deficit. The Fund for the School District of Philadelphia, the district’s nonprofit fundraising partner, has raised $70 million since 2015 — or less than 3% of the plan’s total cost. The City Council has blasted the school closures and its relationship with the district has broken down. And Pennsylvania Senate Republicans, who control their chamber, have opposed sending significantly more money to the state’s largest district.“We’ve never raised money at this level,” said board member Crystal Cubbage, who voted against the plan, at the board’s meeting last week.All those difficulties could lead to the district to consider a watered-down version of the plan that leaves out many of the improvements Watlington wants. And they could pile further financial pressure on the district, which in addition to its fiscal problems has been losing students for years and is planning to cut hundreds of school-based jobs. Watlington has stressed that the aim of the facilities plan is to ensure all students have better access to academic opportunities and go to school in high quality buildings.Under his proposal, some buildings would get bathroom renovations and updated classrooms. Others would get electrical upgrades and new heating and cooling systems. In some buildings, the district has promised accessibility improvements, elevator replacements, new gyms, and fixed roofs. The plan’s high cost is a departure from school closures elsewhere that are often meant to save districts money. Watlington has said cost-cutting is not a major aim of the facilities plan, but rather the goal is to shuffle enrollment so that the district can spend money more efficiently.School leaders have said the facilities plan could still change even after the board’s vote to approve it. No schools are scheduled to be closed until the beginning of the 2027-28 school year.State, city officials could reject additional facilities fundingWhen Watlington initially presented the facilities plan earlier this year, he said there was an alternative version that would cost significantly less, take longer, and leave more students in low-quality school buildings.That plan would cost $1.85 billion over the course of 16 years, and the district could pay for it through its own borrowing. However, it would only reduce the number of school buildings rated unsatisfactory or poor from 85 to 45. And it’s unclear if the district’s list of schools to close and colocate would change under this cheaper version of the plan.That alternative plan also did not include additional investments that Watlington has recently pledged in certain areas where members of City Council have opposed the plan. It’s unclear if district officials have tweaked the alternative plan in recent months. District officials did not respond to Chalkbeat’s questions about it, and board members did not ask about it ahead of the April 30 vote to proceed with the facilities plan.But regardless of which plan district officials turn to, closing schools while asking for more funding is already deeply unpopular with some members of City Council. Last week, City Council Education Committee Chair Isaiah Thomas and several other elected officials interrupted the school board’s meeting and called for the resignation of those who voted for the closure plan. And many have questioned the district’s stated need for more funding while it plans to close schools.Without significant improvement in average academic performance, Councilmember Jeffery Young Jr. said during a city budget town hall in Southwest Philadelphia Tuesday, “why would we continue to put that money in the district?”The district has also historically been underfunded by the state. Though Gov. Josh Shapiro has approved budgets increasing funding for Philly schools each year since taking office, his budget proposal for next year still leaves the district underfunded by more than $3 billion, according to a formula adopted by a bipartisan state commission. The district will likely need the support of Republican lawmakers to get more state money.So far, the school closure plan has brought goodwill from at least one key Republican state lawmaker. After the closure vote, Sen. Kim Ward, a Republican and the president pro tempore of the state senate, posted on social media that she was glad Philly’s schools “recognize the need for reform” and that she was “optimistic” about working with officials to “ensure Philadelphia students are set up for success.”Rebecca Redelmeier is a reporter at Chalkbeat Philadelphia. She writes about public schools, early childhood education, and issues that affect students, families, and educators across Philadelphia. Contact Rebecca at rredelmeier@chalkbeat.org.
