 |
 |
 |
News and Announcements | |
Legislative Agenda | |
Programs | |
Executive Team | |
School Districts | |
Useful Links | |
Home | |
|
|
| 2008-2009 Legislative Agenda | |
With the political pressure mounting to do something about rising property taxes combined with the threat of property tax caps without addressing the why costs are escalating, this year our association embarked on a legislative strategy to inform district residents of the limitations our school boards have faced in controlling costs. Three articles were posted in the Poughkeepie Journal newspaper. The common theme was about costly mandates and the need for legislators to change them to allow boards to better control costs. Article 1: Why Are Your School Taxes So High?The Dutchess County School Boards Association, including all 13 Dutchess public school boards and BOCES, agrees, along with our taxpayers, that our school taxes are too high. The current national fiscal crisis hits New York state particularly hard, as evidenced by the governor's proposed reductions in state aid to public schools, which may have significant effects on local property taxes. We believe it is critical our constituents understand what causes costs to be so high and the challenges facing your school boards and administrators, especially at this time. Subsequent columns will further explore this topic. Schools districts are required to abide by all laws and regulations. Districts do not create these laws or regulations. However, those who create them are not accountable for the new costs these regulations create. These are mandates, and they are not entirely funded by state or federal money, but to varying extents by property taxpayers. With each new mandate, its financial impact on districts and taxpayers should be considered, but it is not. And each time a mandate is created, it does have a financial impact on a school budget, often a significant one. For years some of these mandates have generated costs that have risen much higher than the cost of living. Mandates come from the following sources:
Public opinion can overcome strong political forces resisting mandate changes. Improved efficiencies and cost containment, our goals as we develop our 2009-10 school budgets, can curtail property tax increases, but do not fix the causes of spiraling costs. Without mandate relief, large cost drivers will continue in subsequent years, forcing more slashing. Since burdensome mandates must be eliminated sometime and our state is in fiscal crisis, there is no better time for change than now. We ask for your help in demanding legislative relief from unfunded mandates. If legislators and other representatives can pass laws that increase costs, they can also repeal those laws. In the meantime, school districts will receive large reductions in state aid in the upcoming school year without relief from mandated costs. Your school board's priority is to trim costs it can control before reducing or eliminating programs and employees. However, cost trimming alone cannot offset cost increases and the significant school aid reductions. We ask for your help in determining how your local school budgets will be reduced to respond to decreased aid without destroying the educational opportunities for our children while still complying with the law. In future columns, we will detail labor cost issues - including pensions, salaries and benefits - contract negotiations determined by law, funding for special education and non-public schools and other cost drivers. Christopher Como
Article 2: High school taxes, by law: The high cost of laborThe Dutchess County School Boards Association, comprised of all 13 Dutchess County public school district boards of education and BOCES, agree our school taxes are too high and have been growing at rates that exceed other regional costs. It is a board member's responsibility to balance the sometimes competing needs of students, school employees and taxpayers, while complying with New York State law. This is the second of three Valley View articles outlining the reasons school taxes are so high. The first centered primarily generally on mandates and their effect of driving up school taxes and the need to change them This article will focus on labor related expenses. Approximately 70% of school expenses are dedicated to salary and benefits of employees. This large percentage is to be expected since education is a people-intensive process, but it also means that employee-related costs have a huge impact on our total expenditures and budgets. The following are just a few of the labor related items contributing to higher school taxes:
All the above issues created by laws cost districts real money and can be resolved by legislative action to change those laws, WITH NO COST TO NEW YORK STATE TAXPAYERS. Considering the current fiscal crisis, containment of costs would go a long way toward containment of taxes. BY LAW, school districts must individually negotiate all employee compensation with their local unions. To resolve differences that become impasses, the final source of arbitration BY LAW is a state Public Employee Relation Board, independent from unions or school boards. Historically this group looks at local labor market conditions by comparing school districts and does not take into account regional consumer cost of living indexes or what the district can afford, even for those on austerity budgets where taxpayers have rejected proposed schools budgets. This has contributed to an unusually high rate of salary and benefit increases as compared to most taxpayers. This past summer another unfunded school mandate was overwhelmingly passed and BECAME LAW. It enables school employees to take up to four hours a year as paid leave for mammogram or prostate exams. This forces districts to hire substitutes and interrupts student learning. Also the collective bargaining process is undermined by giving away benefits that should be negotiated between school boards and their employees. We urge you to ask your state legislators to provide us the ability, via their legislative will, to contain such costs BY LAW, and to hold those legislators accountable during their terms of office. If you wish to understand more details of these issues, please contact any of your local school board members. Kelly Lappan
Article 3: The cumulative effect of mandates on school taxesThis is the last of three articles by the Dutchess County School Boards Association, comprised of all 13 public school Boards of Education and BOCES, outlining some of the key reasons school taxes are high. The first introduced mandates, the organizations that create them, and the difficulties school boards face complying with them. The second article discussed spiraling costs associated with laws pertaining to school employees. This article discusses additional mandates, whose cumulative effects also significantly increase school taxes. Schools must comply with laws and regulations, regardless of funding,. School boards cannot change them. If there is a non-reimbursed expense, the law is a mandate with the cost passed onto our schools and taxpayers. Many reimbursements to school districts in the form of state or federal aid have stringent government regulations that can cost far more than the aid. The largest federal mandate pertains to required special educational services under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. These services are increasingly costly, have never been funded at the promised 40% rate, and now only 17% is paid by the federal government. The 23% difference poses a substantial financial impact on taxpayers. Additional state special education provisions and the unfunded testing stipulations of the federal No Child Left Behind law force more expenditures. Although none yet exist in Dutchess County, charter schools were intended to provide an alternative to public schools while using public funds. These schools are free of most of the costly mandates we discuss, but they receive the same state aid per pupil. This harms local districts by diverting state aid and forces state taxpayers to fund an unfair concept. School districts are required to provide an adequate and free public education to children in their district. Private education is an option to parents who can afford it. New York requires your tax dollars to subsidize private school costs by supplying textbooks, health related services, computer hardware and software, and transportation within state required distances. Private schools bear almost no responsibility for the education of students with disabilities, and, beyond federal requirements and district control, our state dictates public schools to absorb the tremendous costs of services provided to special education students voluntarily enrolled in private schools. New York is the only state that obligates school districts to hire four separate contractors for school construction projects instead of one. Elimination of this law is estimated to save 10% of construction costs. Last year our state legislature modified the 40-year-old limit, below which projects would be exempt from this requirement, from $50,000 to $500,000. This is still outlandishly low for most projects and has no real effect. Every year legislation adds more requirements on schools. Many are well-intentioned and benefit students and society, but come at a cost. Topics like skin cancer awareness and shaken baby syndrome have been added as mandatory curriculum changes. There are also new administrative reporting and health-related demands like posting signs indicating the location of heart defibrillators, measuring and reporting body mass index, and distributing bus idling rules. A trend is emerging that makes schools significant providers of health care for children. All these types of items have accumulated into long lists and consume scarce time and resources. The power of public opinion can be enormous. Laws have been accumulating for years that force increasing costs upon schools and our taxpayers that school boards cannot control and which continue to rise each year. WE URGE YOU to ask your state and federal legislators to provide us the ability to contain education costs BY CHANGING LAWS THAT THEY HAVE CREATED. If you wish to understand more details of these issues, please contact any of your local school board members. John Rudy
|