November 2007 Vol. XXI, No. 11

ASSOCIATION BOARD MEETS WITH
GOVERNOR’S OFFICE

*Please note:
Dawn Fucheck,
Newburgh CSD
was also present
at this meeting.
 Her name was
 inadvertently left
out of this article.
We apologize
for the oversight.

In preparation for the coming year, the Board scheduled meetings with several key members of the Governor’s staff to discuss the Governor’s and the Association’s legislative priorities. On October 15^th, they met with Deputy Secretary for Education, Manny Rivera, and Director of Education, Duffy Palmer. In attendance representing the Association were Annette Saturnelli, Supt. Newburgh CSD, Michael Pacella, Business Official Newburgh CSD, Thomas Woodhull, BOE Newburgh CSD* and SCSD Board Member, John Xanthis, Supt. Port Jervis CSD, John Bell, Ass’t. Supt. Port Jervis CSD, Eva Joseph, Supt. Albany CSD, Paul Padalino, Supt. Watervliet CSD, Peggy Wozniak, Supt. Binghamton CSD and SCSD Board member, William Lynch, Supt. Fulton CSD and SCSD Board Member, Charles Winters, SCSD Education Finance Consultant and Robert Biggerstaff, SCSD Executive Director. 

The topics of Charter Schools and the Contract for Excellence (C4E) dominated the discussions. Eva Joseph spoke eloquently about the enormous impact Charters have had on her district, both fiscally and administratively. Now, with 100 new Charters having been approved, this is an issue which will undoubtedly begin to vex more small city districts in 2008 and beyond. Charters have a disproportionate impact on the small city districts. For example, Buffalo is more than four times the size of Albany. Nevertheless, it supports only $14 million in Charter School costs as opposed to Albany which supports $22 million in such costs. Moreover, the erratic census of Charters throughout the school year has rendered accurate forecasting and planning for the district almost impossible. Currently, Albany, Lackawanna, Niagara Falls, Schenectady and Troy are the five small city districts impacted by these problems. The Association will be proposing amendments to the Charter School Law in conjunction with these five and will be urging the Executive to support meaningful reform in 2008. 

On the issue of C4E, Manny Rivera acknowledged that some regulatory and statutory changes were needed to make the accountability portion of the Governor’s Education Reforms more workable. Annette Saturnelli pointed out that the C4E requirements were in flux and that constant changes were hard to keep up with and jeopardized districts’ access to the funding. Rivera responded by saying that it was not the Governor’s intent to micro-manage districts. Charles Winters said that C4E regulations do not recognize prior efforts of districts to improve performance and do not distinguish between degrees of school failure. John Bell noted that his district, Port Jervis, was on the C4E list because of a minor issue, i.e. a small number of special education students failed to be tested. He said “the C4E net was too fine.” Rivera concluded the meeting by observing that the State faced a $4 billion deficit in 2008-09 and needed to address that realistically. The Governor and the Legislature are required to take the first step in that process by November 30^th by reaching a consensus figure for projected State revenues. He also mentioned that the Governor would be looking at reforms in the areas of special education and ELL.  

The Board also scheduled a meeting on November 1^st with Paul Francis, Director of the Division of Budget. DOB staff also in attendance included Deputy Director, Kim Fine and Education Bureau Chief Daniel Sheppard. Representing the Association in addition to most of those at the Rivera meeting were Thomas McGowan, Supt. Glens Falls CSD and SCSD Board Member, Robert Lupinskie, BOE Glen Cove CSD and Fred Wachtmeister, BOE Plattsburgh CSD and SCSD Board Member. Paul Francis spoke about the looming State deficit. During the past several years, year end surpluses helped the budgeting process considerably. This year will likely end with no significant surplus and the coming fiscal year’s revenues will be greatly stunted by the sub-prime mortgage crisis on Wall Street, whence 20% of the State’s income tax revenues come. The Governor has promised no new taxes in 2008-09 but will continue to close corporate tax loopholes, which will improve the revenue picture somewhat. Francis recognized that 2007-08 Budget negotiations preserved the ‘shares’ concept in distribution of State Education Aid. To accomplish that, $100 million in new aid was dedicated to Long Island and over $80 million to NYC, over the 2007-08 Executive Budget. He also said that the Governor was committed to keeping State spending growth to 5% over the long term and that to accomplish that no part of the Budget was ‘off the table’ for reductions. As for the effect of the deficit on the Governor’s proposals for Education Aid in 2008-09, it was too early to tell what might happen. 

On the issue of C4E, Peggy Wozniak detailed the need for greater flexibility in use of funds. Without such flexibility, districts’ prior successful efforts to improve performance would be needlessly abandoned, thereby wasting dollars and time expended on such programs. The meeting concluded with a promise that Association would be developing specific proposals for the Governor’s consideration this month on C4E, Foundation Aid, Charter Schools and the Constitutional Debt Ceiling.

BOARD SETS PRIORITIES FOR UPCOMING LEGISLATIVE SESSION

To: NYSASCSD Board of Directors
Fm: Robert Biggerstaff, Executive Director
Date: October 30, 2007
Re: Association Legislative Priorities for 2008

The following are the Legislative priorities for 2008 adopted on a conceptual basis on September 26, 2007 by the Board:

1. Foundation Aid and State Aid Amendments

    a. Regional Cost Factor reform- the current regional cost factor shows little cost of living difference between, for example, districts in the greater metropolitan area and the mid-Hudson area. This defies reality and results in a number of high need/low wealth small city districts on save harmless. Regional costs should be subjected to a State funded study aimed at developing a cost factor reflecting the actual cost of doing business for school districts. 

    b. High Tax Aid amendment- inclusion of non-resident incomes in computation. This will result in a fairer distribution of this aid, less over-aiding of wealthy districts and greater targeting of truly poorer and highly taxed districts. This data is now accessible by virtue of the data collected under the Middle Class STAR program.*

    c. Adjustment of wealth measure floor- Foundation Aid arbitrarily establishes a wealth floor of .50. A number of small city districts are significantly below that level and should not be penalized by the assumption of higher wealth than actually possessed.

2. Contract for Excellence Amendments

    a. Continuation of 25% cola exemption or sliding scale for poor/needy districts for a total exemption between 3 and 6%- the yearly increase in fixed costs are between 5% and 8% for most small city districts and higher for some others- failure to continue and liberalize the exemptions will create havoc in those C4E districts which will be forced to cut or scale back essential programs.

    b. Calculate exemptions’ % (25% cola or 15% experimental) based on total Foundation Aid increase rather than total less 3%- districts experiencing fixed cost increases  far in excess of the 3% save harmless amount need greater flexibility in C4E dollar spending.

     c. Adjust the amount of C4E money to be spent to reflect the severity of performance deficiencies- A district with adequate spending that barely registers a single performance issue is required to spend the same proportion of its Foundation Aid increase on new programs as a district in which the spending is very low and the performance issues are many, severe and prolonged.  It would not be difficult to use the data from the formula itself as one guideline on whether added spending is the only appropriate response to student performance issues.  The formula data show that new spending is in fact needed in all of the big five cities and many other urban areas.  However, the nature of the accountability system is such that many districts end up on an accountability list briefly even when their overall spending is adequate.  For these districts, the current accountability language in the law makes no sense and needs to be amended.

    d. “New program” definition to include programs started/approved/mandated by SED within past three years- failure to enact this definition will cause elimination of effective programs already in place and shown to improve student performance.

3. Charter School Reforms

    a. State funding for stranded costs- such costs are at minimum 2/3 of the AOE paid to Charter Schools. Failure of the State to aid these costs results in significant local tax increases. The current level of funding is woefully inadequate and assumes that these costs disappear with time. This is not the case- such costs are the fixed costs of infrastructure and operations which do not vary with student census

    b. Separate tuition rates for elementary and secondary Charter Schools- there is a significant difference between the cost of elementary and secondary education. Charters are paid at AOE which is a blend of those costs. Most Charter Schools operate only at the elementary level and receive significantly more dollars than actual costs justify. This surplus has been simply drained off into private pockets by private companies and officers operating these Schools. This rip off of public education dollars is a fraud on the public.

    c. School board approval for new/renewed/amended Charter Schools- Public School Boards and administrators are statutorily responsible for oversight of Charter Schools and for managing local tax levies and tax rates. The growing costs of these schools constitute a State mandated property tax over which local taxpayers have no input. Moreover, these Boards and administrators have no power to control the creation, amendment, operations and costs of Charter Schools. Responsibility without adequate control means that no one is charge of these schools or knows what is going on in them from day to day. As a result, a number of Charter Schools are failing, misspending their resources and simply not achieving meaningful results. The students and the public are the big losers- educational opportunities are squandered and public money is wasted.

    d. Administrative reforms- numerous problems have arisen over the last decade created by the lack of control and oversight for Charter Schools. These problems were never contemplated by the Legislature and have been left to run rampant through the lives of students, school administrators and our communities. The experience of the Albany School District clearly demonstrates the havoc that misadministration and lack of oversight have caused. The Association will be developing proposals to address these problems and would welcome the opportunity to coordinate with the Governor and the Legislature to find remedies on which we all can agree.

4. Debt Ceiling Reforms

    a. Constitutional Referendum- the Constitutional 5% debt ceiling should be repealed and a statutory 10% ceiling enacted in its place. Non-city districts all have 10% statutory debt limitations. The 5% ceiling has chronically inhibited or prevented many districts from providing and managing their educational infrastructures, inhibiting necessary construction, renovations and other improvements critical to a successful district

    b. Exclusion of building aid from debt ceiling computation- Non-city districts, unlike the small city districts, do not have to include any amounts received in building aid in the computation of the ceiling under Local Finance law § 1020.20. This effectively limits the amount of debt subject to the ceiling in non-city districts by more than two thirds, when compared to a small city district. This inequity of treatment needs to be addressed.

    c. Dormitory Authority financing of small city school construction projects- statutory authority for small city districts for small city districts to access the Dormitory Authority financing outside the ceiling would eliminate the debt ceiling problem. Precedent for this treatment of municipal debt is found in the NYC Stabilization Reserve Corporation Act.

CENTER FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING
UPDATE

CENTER FOR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANNING - UPDATE -

Lonnie Palmer reports there is a lot of interest in the Center and he is glad to see people “asking informed questions.” The data is driving these questions and will help districts to dedicate their precious resources to those areas that can see results.

The Center for School Improvement Planning has been busy these past months working to gather, analyze and present a myriad of school fiscal and academic data to its Pilot Districts. The aim of the Center is to provide districts with a clear picture of particular strengths and areas with room for improvement. This picture is a valuable inventory, especially for those schools being asked to create new programs and account for additional spending under the Governor’s Contract for Excellence initiative. The Center will also be available as a consulting resource for districts’ planning and implementing changes.

Most recently, the Center has been in discussions with ACT, provider of programs for 8^th-9^th, 10^th and 11^th graders to improve student focus on educational and career goals. ACT programs are currently in use in 14 small city districts. ACT and the Center are planning to jointly write a grant proposal to obtain federal funds to make these programs more readily accessible to small city districts. More detail on this effort will follow in the coming months.

In addition, the Association will be sponsoring the Learning Solutions Forum in conjunction with NYSCOSS and NYSSBA. The seminar will be held on Saturday, January 12, 2008 at a location to be announced. That date is the day before the NYSCOSS Midwinter Meeting at the Desmond Hotel in Albany and the location of the seminar will be held nearby. Some other details include:

Forum Convener: Dr. Joseph Bowman, NYS Board of Regents (Members of the Board of Regents and SED leadership expected to attend)

Featured Speaker: Quality Quinn, International Education and Literacy Expert

Discussion topics include:

• Developing a better capacity for understanding and quantifying district needs
• Contract for Excellence and other new funding opportunities
• Alternatives to long-term budgetary commitments
• Cost-effective, Web-based capacities that enhance learning and teaching
• Hosted by Compass Learning

Any questions about Center activities can be directed to Bob Biggerstaff at the Association’s offices (518-475-9500, reb@biggerstaff-firm.com).

UPCOMING
EVENTS

November 26, 2007
1:00pm
Board of Directors Meeting and meeting with Commissioner Mills
Fort Orange Club, Albany, NY

January 12, 2008
9:30AM to 4:00PM
Joint Association Seminar- NYSASCSD, NYSCOSS and NYSSBA
“Learning Solutions Forum”
Location: to be announced

January 13, 2008
1:00pm – 3:30pm
Board of Directors meeting in conjunction with NYSCOSS midwinter meeting
Desmond Hotel, Albany, NY

March 11, 2008
8am – 12pm
Legislative Breakfast
Fort Orange Club, Albany, NY

June 1-2, 2008 (tentative)
Annual Conference
The Otesaga, Cooperstown, NY (tentative)