No excuse for continued inequity in regards to school’s state aid, according to financial expert
NORWICH – The Chenango County School Boards Association met Thursday for its annual fall dinner, which featured a presentation by Dr. Rick Timbs of the East Syracuse Statewide School Finance Consortium.
Unadilla Valley Board of Education member Sandy Cooper introduced Timbs, the retired district superintendent of the Erie 2 – Chautauqua-Cattaraugus BOCES in western New York, which is comprised of 27 school districts serving approximately 45,000 students. As such, Timbs has served as a representative of the Commissioner of Education and “was often asked to address educational, institutional and financial issues in school districts statewide,” said Cooper.
Timbs’ two-hour presentation included detailed information on inequities in the state’s educational aid formula and cuts over the past two years that have severely impacted low and average wealth school districts across the state. The distribution of state aid, according to the former superintendent, athletic director, principal, educator and union president, could be altered in such a way that it would be much less harmful to those districts.
Said Timbs, “This could be changed if someone would just do it.”
Low and average wealth districts have been forced – due to cuts in state aid – to drastically reduce staff and dip into their fund balance, stated Timbs, and districts such as those that comprise the DCMO BOCES region are “running out of both.” If these conditions continue, he added, the quality of education offered will suffer.
“These districts have been severely disadvantaged,” said Timbs. “You’re getting the short end of the stick, I think ... there’s no excuse for this continued inequity.”
There are three questions, he added, that state government must address: where is the mandate relief? Where is the equitable funding distribution? And where is the sound basic education?
“The truth is, all kids should be treated fairly, no matter where they live,” stated Timbs. “In his budget presentation for the 2011-2012 school year, Governor Cuomo said we must ‘ensure adequate funding to high-need districts which historically have not been adequately funded.’ This is what we call rhetoric.”
According to Timbs, state aid cuts have a greater negative impact on lower wealth districts than wealthier ones. When state aid is frozen, a wealthy school district with an annual budget of $20 million; receiving 10 percent in state funding and 90 percent in local funding; and with a proposed budget increase of 2 percent; would see a local tax increase of 2.22 percent, reported Timbs. A poor district with the same budget, receiving 75 percent in state funding and 25 percent in local funding, with the same proposed budget increase, would see a local tax increase of 8 percent.
Poor districts, he added, may receive more state aid than wealthier ones, but it’s simply not enough for them to get by, and that’s the dilemma.
“Shouldn’t everyone have a fair shot, a fair chance at education, no matter their zip code?” asked Timbs, who added that – at this point in time – districts that have the least are being asked to sacrifice the most. In regards to staff layoffs and the use of fund reserves to offset state aid cuts, Timbs asked, “How many times can you lay off the same person?”
As for a state government proposed 2 percent tax cap, Timbs reported that 52 percent of the state’s districts above the cap are average to low wealth; 43 percent of districts are high poverty and 67 percent of all districts were above the cap.
Sadly, this disparity between poor and wealthy school districts is nothing new, according to Timbs. In the 1972 Fleischmann Commission Report, it states, “It is repugnant to the idea of equal educational opportunity that the quality of a child’s education ... is determined by accidents of birth, wealth or geography; that a child who lives in a poor district is ... entitled to a lower public investment in his education than a child in a rich district. It is unconscionable that a poor man in a poor district must often pay local taxes at higher rates for the inferior education of his child than the man of means in a rich district pays for his superior education of his child ... incredibly, that is the situation today in most of the 50 states and that is the case in New York.”
In the end, said Timbs, it all comes down to inequity in the distribution of foundation aid, state aid cuts and the restoration to state aid cuts.
“You’re taking a beating all the time and the state government is not doing anything,” he added. “Is [state aid] distributed correctly? No. Is there more aid for a kid in a wealthy district? Yes. Can you survive? No.”
As for state government, Timbs asked what those in attendance thought the plan was, moving forward.
“Maybe not having a plan is their plan,” he added.
Unadilla Valley Board of Education member Sandy Cooper introduced Timbs, the retired district superintendent of the Erie 2 – Chautauqua-Cattaraugus BOCES in western New York, which is comprised of 27 school districts serving approximately 45,000 students. As such, Timbs has served as a representative of the Commissioner of Education and “was often asked to address educational, institutional and financial issues in school districts statewide,” said Cooper.
Timbs’ two-hour presentation included detailed information on inequities in the state’s educational aid formula and cuts over the past two years that have severely impacted low and average wealth school districts across the state. The distribution of state aid, according to the former superintendent, athletic director, principal, educator and union president, could be altered in such a way that it would be much less harmful to those districts.
Said Timbs, “This could be changed if someone would just do it.”
Low and average wealth districts have been forced – due to cuts in state aid – to drastically reduce staff and dip into their fund balance, stated Timbs, and districts such as those that comprise the DCMO BOCES region are “running out of both.” If these conditions continue, he added, the quality of education offered will suffer.
“These districts have been severely disadvantaged,” said Timbs. “You’re getting the short end of the stick, I think ... there’s no excuse for this continued inequity.”
There are three questions, he added, that state government must address: where is the mandate relief? Where is the equitable funding distribution? And where is the sound basic education?
“The truth is, all kids should be treated fairly, no matter where they live,” stated Timbs. “In his budget presentation for the 2011-2012 school year, Governor Cuomo said we must ‘ensure adequate funding to high-need districts which historically have not been adequately funded.’ This is what we call rhetoric.”
According to Timbs, state aid cuts have a greater negative impact on lower wealth districts than wealthier ones. When state aid is frozen, a wealthy school district with an annual budget of $20 million; receiving 10 percent in state funding and 90 percent in local funding; and with a proposed budget increase of 2 percent; would see a local tax increase of 2.22 percent, reported Timbs. A poor district with the same budget, receiving 75 percent in state funding and 25 percent in local funding, with the same proposed budget increase, would see a local tax increase of 8 percent.
Poor districts, he added, may receive more state aid than wealthier ones, but it’s simply not enough for them to get by, and that’s the dilemma.
“Shouldn’t everyone have a fair shot, a fair chance at education, no matter their zip code?” asked Timbs, who added that – at this point in time – districts that have the least are being asked to sacrifice the most. In regards to staff layoffs and the use of fund reserves to offset state aid cuts, Timbs asked, “How many times can you lay off the same person?”
As for a state government proposed 2 percent tax cap, Timbs reported that 52 percent of the state’s districts above the cap are average to low wealth; 43 percent of districts are high poverty and 67 percent of all districts were above the cap.
Sadly, this disparity between poor and wealthy school districts is nothing new, according to Timbs. In the 1972 Fleischmann Commission Report, it states, “It is repugnant to the idea of equal educational opportunity that the quality of a child’s education ... is determined by accidents of birth, wealth or geography; that a child who lives in a poor district is ... entitled to a lower public investment in his education than a child in a rich district. It is unconscionable that a poor man in a poor district must often pay local taxes at higher rates for the inferior education of his child than the man of means in a rich district pays for his superior education of his child ... incredibly, that is the situation today in most of the 50 states and that is the case in New York.”
In the end, said Timbs, it all comes down to inequity in the distribution of foundation aid, state aid cuts and the restoration to state aid cuts.
“You’re taking a beating all the time and the state government is not doing anything,” he added. “Is [state aid] distributed correctly? No. Is there more aid for a kid in a wealthy district? Yes. Can you survive? No.”
As for state government, Timbs asked what those in attendance thought the plan was, moving forward.
“Maybe not having a plan is their plan,” he added.
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