GothamSchools — daily independent reporting on NYC public schools

follow the money

Three answers to look for in Cuomo’s budget proposal today

Gov. Andrew Cuomo is set to unveil his annual budget proposal this afternoon. Several important education issues are on the table.

When Gov. Andrew Cuomo releases his budget proposal for 2013-2014 later this afternoon, education observers around the state are hoping to have many questions answered.

While Cuomo has made headway on the education policy centerpiece of last year’s budget proposal, teacher evaluations, new issues are arising — including that New York City still doesn’t have a new evaluation system. Meanwhile, there is uncertainty over how much funding districts will receive from the state now that aid increases are determined differently than in the past. And Cuomo’s competitive grants program will likely get a fair share of attention, three weeks after he announced that he would be using grants to fund a slate of ambitious — and pricey — new education programs and services.

Here are three questions that Cuomo’s budget address is likely to address:

1. How much money will there even be? That’s a question that officials at the State Education Department are grappling with from their headquarters across the street from Cuomo’s office. The answer will depend on how conservative Cuomo’s budget officials were when they calculated personal income growth, the data point used to determine how much school aid increases.

Last year’s number — 4.1 percent — was based on a five-year average of personal income growth in the state and brought in $807 million for districts in the 2012-2013 school year (total state-funded school aid for this year is $20.3 billion). But now the state has switched to a model that considers only single-year changes in personal income. That model, budget experts say, is more volatile, leading to more uncertainty in the amount of state aid available to school districts.

This year’s state aid number will could likely fall by at least $100 million, based on early projections. But it could be even lower if Cuomo decides to use a more conservative projection that James Tallon, a member of the Board of Regents, has warned about.

Tallon, chair of the Regents’ state aid subcommittee, told his colleagues last week that his staff crunched personal income growth numbers and found that personal income grew by just 3 percent last year. The difference could mean schools could receive closer to $600 million — 25 percent less than the state parceled out last year.

“The signal I want to wave at everybody is, if I just took the most negative reading of the current numbers, the governor could come in at 3 [percent], which would take me … to $600 [million],” Tallon said.

Tallon and the Regents are proposing that Cuomo stick to his early projection of 3.5 percent growth, and there is additional pressure from outside groups to do the same.

There remains the issue of whether the state is adequately funding high-need districts. The state’s highest court ruled in 2007 that those districts should get a higher share of state education funds, but after two years of increasing their funding, the state pulled back on fulfilling the mandates set out in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity ruling. Now, advocates are threatening a second lawsuit to claim $5 billion in promised but undelivered funds. Whether that pressure has had an impact on Cuomo’s budget proposal is yet to be seen. But a plan that does not pay special attention to high-need districts is sure to stoke the ire of those who say the state is not complying with its court-ordered funding priorities.

2. How much of the money will have to be won? One of the concerns that Tallon and others at the State Education Department have is that Cuomo will continue to expand his competitive grant program at the expense of the general state aid that goes to all districts. The grants are a funding policy that he’s embraced since his first days as governor, to some dissent. As part of the program, districts apply and qualify for additional aid on the condition that they agree to spend the money in specific ways.

This year’s budget will include at least $75 million in the competitive grants, based on funding set aside in last year’s budget. But Cuomo wants to use the grants to push for a lot of ambitious programs, including early childhood education, extended learning time, and schools that partner with outside organizations to provide extracurricular, health and mental services.

The scale of his grant proposals have left some wondering if he’ll go beyond the $75 million number. ”He may make it bigger at the expense of other things in the budget,” Tallon said. “I hope not. ”

It wouldn’t be the first time that Cuomo’s grants programs put him at odds with state education officials. Last year, Commissioner John King told legislators that he thought Cuomo should scale back the program and allocate more of the money to cash-strapped districts.

King, Tallon, and the rest of the Regents want Cuomo to focus the $75 million on Universal Pre-Kindergarten and leave the general state aid alone.

“We just think there is just such compelling evidence for the potential of early childhood education that we would like the state to make a big bet on that — and a multiyear bet,” Tallon said.

3. How will Cuomo deal with the teacher evaluations issue? In last year’s budget deal, Cuomo used another carrot-and-stick approach to get districts to submit teacher evaluation plans, tying increased state aid to the plans. With the exception of New York City and a handful of other districts, the strategy worked.

But it left districts awaiting a messy situation next year, when most of the plans expire and unions and districts without new contracts will have to return to the negotiating table. In his annual address earlier this month, Cuomo said he would continue to pressure districts to have new evaluations each year by withholding state aid if they don’t renegotiate their plans after they expire.

“We want to keep in the model that in order to get the additional aid, you have to continue the evaluation process,” Cuomo said. Today’s budget proposal will provide a peak of how much he’ll look to withhold for districts that do not readopt evaluation systems next year.

  • Kentmarco915

    Cuomo looks like FOOL. Dangling $$$ that exists for our kids is sick. He is really a sick guy. Give the $$$ for the children and stop being ridiculous. Cuomo, the union and city haven’t gotten along in decades, if ever. Get over it. The evaluation thing is a joke. The administrators are to dumb to even follow it. They’re better off writing “S” or “U”. They can simply handle that.

  • Larry Littlefield

    The real issue is how much will those at the top, particularly on Wall Street, continue to be overpaid?  And what effect this will have on the state and city budgets?  Recapping recent history:

    There was an explosion of executive pay and Wall Street compensation during the 1990s stock market bubble, based on all the “shareholder value” that was allegedly being created.  The same bubble that was used to justify higher pay for those who were already the highest paid, was also used to justify enriched pensions for those who already had the richest pensions — public employees.  With an announced cost of zero.

    The stock market bubble deflated, but executive pay did not.  Now there was no “shareholder value” justification.  It was replaced by “if executive A got last year then X executive B deserves X plus 10 percent this year,” as the executives who sit on each other’s boards inflated each others pay.  Just as politicians and public employee unions negotiated pension deals with each other, with the general public to be sacrificed to pay for it later.

    In New York, the ongoing excess pay at the top has helped to cushion the blow of the irrevocable retroaction pension deals for public employees, leaving less damage (thus far) for most New Yorkers compared with the 1970s.  But excess executive and Wall Street pay, unlike the pensions, is not guaranteed into the future.  Either it will come down, or people and businesses will eventually take their business to a more honest and affordable financial center.

    While New Yorkers are less and less dependent on Wall Street for jobs, the city and state are more and more dependent on excess pay and profits (and fines) from there for revenues.  Recently some Wall Street firms have started cutting pay and employment.  To deliver the some of the investor returns that had been promised but not delivered for 15 years.  Since the alternative may be to lose our role as a financial center altogether, this is a good thing in the long run.  But I wouldn’t count on taking the nation’s highest level of school spending higher in the short run.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Oh, and I still maintain that the competitive grants are just a political sideshow compared with the overall financial situation.  The executive/financial class and the political/union class will continue to point the finger at each other, but continue to drain the rest of us.  The serfs.  And future generations.  So it has been.

  • Overmann

    S or U is fine by me.  The Danielson model is absurd and my AP insists on grading me by this rubric.  She shows me the entire checklist according to the Danielson model but then rates me either S or U in the end.  So what’s the point?  and is this legal?  Why am I being observed with a Danielson model?

  • Guest

    Unless your are in a tester school, they can’t use danielson and you are a S or U.

  • Larry Littlefield

    Aside from informal, verbal feedback it’s pretty much been S or U for me, in the public and private sectors.  And the Catholic schools seem to have an S or U system too, based on what I observed.

    The difference?  S means you keep working, but U means get a different job, because you will soon lose the one you have.  In the Catholic schools on rare occasions the worst teachers are simply not asked back at the end of a school year. That was the U equivalent.  It was S for everyone else.

    So we agree on this:  it is enough for managers to identify those employees who are so bad they don’t want to have them on board anymore.  Asking them to rank other workers according to some system just has a negative effect on morale, and is difficult in something as qualitative as teaching.  And publishing teacher ratings is something no sane organization would do.

    The more complicated it is, the worse it will be.  After a year or two it will be on the books but not used anymore, like Civil Service tests.  Principals won’t like it any more than the teachers.

    But that doesn’t mean I’m happy with the approach of the union.  The union wanted “objective” measures until they were proposed, with the change in test scores.  Then it was against them.  Then Walcott says he turned down a deal because it would have reduce the subjective discretion of principals.  Then suddenly all the commentators are against such subjective discretion. Round and round. Bloomberg, Cuomo and Obama were fools to enter this swamp.

    It’s basically S and U with no Us, but (and this is the key) with the right of active and retired public employees to hand out Us to the rest of us.  By exercising their right to take their business elsewhere as consumers if they aren’t happy with the cost, quality and service.  And then you are out of work.

  • East Sider

    NYS leads the nation in both per capita dollars spent and disparity of spending among districts … the suburban districts spend over 20K per kid and the rural, low wealth districts less than half … the high wealth suburban districts receive very little state funding – mostly local property tax revenue … the 100 or so districts (from the 700 in the state) approaching insolvency are rural low tax and a few other low tax districts – NYC funds through a combination of state aid and local revenues – although the Fiscal Equity lawsuit was sustained the governor and the legislature has basically frozen the dollars.

  • Larry Littlefield

    I just checked out my compilation of the Census Bureau’s FY 2010 education finance data.  Without an adjustment for the cost of living, there was not a single school district in the state that spent less per child than the U.S. average of about $12,500   The closest was the Berne Knox Westerloo district at $12,547.

    Adding a cost of living adjustment there were two below average districts:  Floral Park/Belrose and Franklin Square, at $11,001 and $11,391. Nearby Elmont was also low.

    But what has that got to do with New York City, which spent $23,472 without adjustment and $17,657 with adjustment?

  • I noticed that…

    They are 90 something schools in the Teacher Effectiveness Program  trying the Danielson.  It is a pilot program in those schools. The members and administration agreed to be in the pilot program.  Ask your chapter leader if your school is in that program.  If not in the program, then you are not supposed to be observd using the Danielson.  However, the school can have PD on it.

Tips, questions, feedback?

Contact us at .

Word from Our Sponsor

Follow GothamSchools

RSS
Subscribe to the daily email digest:

Chalk It Up

Recent Comments

1 comment so far today

Archives

May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Apr  
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031