A tale of two districts ...
GREENE – Governor David Paterson’s proposed state aid cuts put the burden of balancing the state’s gaping budget deficit on the backs of poor, rural school districts while giving wealthy districts a pass, according to one local superintendent.
“I’m willing to do our fair share to address the state’s fiscal crisis,” said Gary Smith, superintendent of the Greene Central School District. The problem, he said, is that wealthy districts aren’t expected to do the same.
On the surface, it looks like these wealthy districts are shouldering the burden as their state aid reduction percentages are in the double digits while local districts are slated to see cuts in the 3 percent range.
According to Smith, this is deceiving. For these wealthy districts, many of which are located downstate, state aid makes up only a small percent of their total budget.
Smith used East Williston in Nassau County as an example, pointing out the Long Island district’s $48.1 million budget for the current year, of which state aid makes up only 5.6 percent. Paterson’s proposal would reduce their state aid by 12.5 percent, or $337,758, which represents .7 percent of the district’s total budget.
Greene, on the other hand, received more than $15 million in state aid for the 2008-09 academic year, nearly seventy percent of their annual budget. The Governor’s proposed deficit reduction measures would shave 3.6 percent off the district’s aid which calculates out to $551,128; 2.5 percent of their total budget.
“I’m afraid people aren’t realizing this,” said Smith, who has been vocal about the effect Paterson’s cuts will have on his and other local districts.
Downstate districts will have an easier time compensating for the loss in state aid as well, since their tax bases are both larger and wealthier than their rural counterparts. A 4 percent increase in Greene’s tax levy will only generate an extra $231,230, not even half of what they will be losing in aid. The same percentage increase at East Williston would generate more than $1.7 million, far more than they would need to close the gap left by a loss in state aid.
Balancing the budget will be a more difficult undertaking in Greene, where Smith realizes the local tax base is already stretched. Tapping into the district’s reserves will narrow the gap a little further, but still not enough, he said. The district may very well be forced to cuts programs and personnel to balance the budget, no matter how hard they try to avoid it.
Smith isn’t the only superintendent cognizant of the disparity. Unadilla Valley Superintendent Bob Mackey recently discussed the Governor’s proposals with other administrators from across the state.
“I learned that while all of the superintendents representing downstate, suburban districts stated they were losing $500,000 to over $2,000,000 because of the Deficit Reduction Assessment a 1% increase in their tax levy would raise anywhere from $250,000 to $1,000,000,” Mackey reported. According to him, UV is slated to lose $438,637. A 1 percent increase in the district’s tax levy will generate $37,039.
“We are prepared to do our share in helping our state’s elected officials fix the problem they have caused by years of overspending,” said Oxford Superintendent Randy Squier.
But the state needs to do their part, as well. They can start by reducing mandates, he said.
“We also ask that they stop sliding the costs of running our schools onto the local tax payer by reducing the STAR exemption ceiling and placing a hidden cap on reimbursement of categorical aid such as BOCES and transportation,” Squier added.
“We need a system of allocating state aid that is fair, consistent and transparent,” said Norwich Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan, who says his and other local districts “have historically been left with an unfair tax burden.”
Norwich, which could see a more than $900,000 reduction, will be the hardest hit dollar wise in Chenango County if Governor Paterson’s proposal goes through.
“There is no fairness in the formula the Governor has chosen to use to calculate the [Deficit Reduction Assessment] as evidenced in the numbers,” agreed Mackey. “To make matters worse, he has capped expense driven aids, added new unfunded mandates, and told us we will be in the same boat for the 2010-2011 budget by freezing our aid out that far.”
“Fairness like this could very well bankrupt our local schools,” he said.
“I’m willing to do our fair share to address the state’s fiscal crisis,” said Gary Smith, superintendent of the Greene Central School District. The problem, he said, is that wealthy districts aren’t expected to do the same.
On the surface, it looks like these wealthy districts are shouldering the burden as their state aid reduction percentages are in the double digits while local districts are slated to see cuts in the 3 percent range.
According to Smith, this is deceiving. For these wealthy districts, many of which are located downstate, state aid makes up only a small percent of their total budget.
Smith used East Williston in Nassau County as an example, pointing out the Long Island district’s $48.1 million budget for the current year, of which state aid makes up only 5.6 percent. Paterson’s proposal would reduce their state aid by 12.5 percent, or $337,758, which represents .7 percent of the district’s total budget.
Greene, on the other hand, received more than $15 million in state aid for the 2008-09 academic year, nearly seventy percent of their annual budget. The Governor’s proposed deficit reduction measures would shave 3.6 percent off the district’s aid which calculates out to $551,128; 2.5 percent of their total budget.
“I’m afraid people aren’t realizing this,” said Smith, who has been vocal about the effect Paterson’s cuts will have on his and other local districts.
Downstate districts will have an easier time compensating for the loss in state aid as well, since their tax bases are both larger and wealthier than their rural counterparts. A 4 percent increase in Greene’s tax levy will only generate an extra $231,230, not even half of what they will be losing in aid. The same percentage increase at East Williston would generate more than $1.7 million, far more than they would need to close the gap left by a loss in state aid.
Balancing the budget will be a more difficult undertaking in Greene, where Smith realizes the local tax base is already stretched. Tapping into the district’s reserves will narrow the gap a little further, but still not enough, he said. The district may very well be forced to cuts programs and personnel to balance the budget, no matter how hard they try to avoid it.
Smith isn’t the only superintendent cognizant of the disparity. Unadilla Valley Superintendent Bob Mackey recently discussed the Governor’s proposals with other administrators from across the state.
“I learned that while all of the superintendents representing downstate, suburban districts stated they were losing $500,000 to over $2,000,000 because of the Deficit Reduction Assessment a 1% increase in their tax levy would raise anywhere from $250,000 to $1,000,000,” Mackey reported. According to him, UV is slated to lose $438,637. A 1 percent increase in the district’s tax levy will generate $37,039.
“We are prepared to do our share in helping our state’s elected officials fix the problem they have caused by years of overspending,” said Oxford Superintendent Randy Squier.
But the state needs to do their part, as well. They can start by reducing mandates, he said.
“We also ask that they stop sliding the costs of running our schools onto the local tax payer by reducing the STAR exemption ceiling and placing a hidden cap on reimbursement of categorical aid such as BOCES and transportation,” Squier added.
“We need a system of allocating state aid that is fair, consistent and transparent,” said Norwich Superintendent Gerard O’Sullivan, who says his and other local districts “have historically been left with an unfair tax burden.”
Norwich, which could see a more than $900,000 reduction, will be the hardest hit dollar wise in Chenango County if Governor Paterson’s proposal goes through.
“There is no fairness in the formula the Governor has chosen to use to calculate the [Deficit Reduction Assessment] as evidenced in the numbers,” agreed Mackey. “To make matters worse, he has capped expense driven aids, added new unfunded mandates, and told us we will be in the same boat for the 2010-2011 budget by freezing our aid out that far.”
“Fairness like this could very well bankrupt our local schools,” he said.
dived wound factual legitimately delightful goodness fit rat some lopsidedly far when.
Slung alongside jeepers hypnotic legitimately some iguana this agreeably triumphant pointedly far
jeepers unscrupulous anteater attentive noiseless put less greyhound prior stiff ferret unbearably cracked oh.
So sparing more goose caribou wailed went conveniently burned the the the and that save that adroit gosh and sparing armadillo grew some overtook that magnificently that
Circuitous gull and messily squirrel on that banally assenting nobly some much rakishly goodness that the darn abject hello left because unaccountably spluttered unlike a aurally since contritely thanks