February 2006

Vol. 11 #2

This legislative session has begun with a swift and severe assault on public education, and public employees. The rebate gimmicks and backdoor voucher schemes reveal the degree to which the Governor endorses the wrong priorities. Rather than these misleading and misguided schemes, we must invest in the programs that have been proven to improve academic achievement particularly for the most at risk students. At a time when the State is experiencing a budget surplus of approximately $3 billion, it is all the more inexcusable that the Executive is squandering the opportunity to make a real and meaningful difference. The surplus has generated more than what is necessary to begin the phase in of funding for the CFE court decision to provide a sound basic education for public school children.

We are already fighting against several of the Executive's most egregious proposals including his backdoor private school voucher scheme, thinly disguised as an "education tax credit," which would siphon off hundreds of millions of dollars from the public school system. While defying the State CFE court order to provide a sound basic education for all public school children the Governor has taken a giant step backward, choosing to promote the kind of tax initiatives that play well to conservatives who will be influential in a national primary campaign. At the same time, further damaging public education, he has proposed a $400 "rebate" to bribe residents to comply with a spending cap and vote no on school budgets, thus requiring districts to operate under a contingency budget with the threat of program and service cuts and staff layoffs.

Also, we are battling against the unregulated increase of the charter school cap and a one day only, take it or leave it budget vote for school districts.

The administration has once again under funded higher education and relied upon tuition increases to generate operating aid and has left our teaching hospitals in a dire financial situation.

Please join us in this critical fight against bad public policy by reading the information in this Update and by following the "PAC ACTION" recommendations to make our voices heard in Albany and in your districts. Contact local union leaders and activists in your areas to help with this effort which will directly affect the fate of public education in New York .

In solidarity,

Alan B. Lubin
Executive Vice President

In his Executive Budget, the Governor has proposed a $500-per-child education tax credit for parents of children in underperforming school districts. The $400 million tax credit program is nothing but a thinly disguised voucher scheme that thoroughly undermines the foundation of the educational structure that the vast majority of the State's students (85%) rely upon. This proposal also undercuts the widely shared agreement by State lawmakers that increased resources are needed to bolster high needs public schools throughout the State. The 2003 CFE lawsuit court ruling emphatically stated that New York City 's children are not receiving the sound basic education guaranteed by the State Constitution. Since then, elected officials of both parties, the court appointed special masters and education advocates agree that the problem is statewide and the solution must apply to all of the State's public schools in need.

The effect of the proposed voucher scheme will be to divert hundreds of millions of critically needed financial resources from deserving public schools that serve the vast majority of the State's students in order to fund private and religious schools that are not accountable for the quality or content of their curriculum and may exclude students that don't meet their eligibility criteria.

The Truth about the Executive Budget
Tax Credit Voucher Proposal
(talking points)

The 2006-07 Executive Budget proposes an education tax credit to taxpayers who have eligible dependants that reside in a school district where at least one elementary or secondary school is not meeting the requirements of the No Child Left Behind program. This education tax credit could be applied towards fees incurred for instruction outside the regular school day or towards tuition expenses for the eligible dependant to attend a qualified non-public elementary or secondary educational institution.

Here are some things you should know before you make up your mind:

• Public schools educate all of New York 's students. Public schools have a constitutional obligation to provide a public education to students of all backgrounds regardless of race, socioeconomic circumstances, beliefs or disabilities.

• Educational Tax Credit is one of the many names for school vouchers that aim to funnel public funds towards financing private education for specific students. An educational tax credit that can be used towards tuition for a private school education while diverting funds away from the public school system violates the State's obligation to provide a quality education for all students in the State of New York . It continues the trend of under high needs school districts. Inevitably in every instance when vouchers have been submitted to the public for a vote they have been decisively rejected. That is why voucher advocates are packaging them in terms of education tax in an attempt to mislead the public and look more benign.

• The defined "Qualified educational expenses" that would be eligible for the use of educational tax credit vouchers are unaccountable. The Executive Budget states that an adequate use of such funds would be outside school tutoring; however, such tutoring, by definition, can be performed by anyone who is not an ancestor or sibling of the dependant. Thus, not only is there no requirement for a certified educator, or even an individual with any academic knowledge of the school district's curriculum to provide this tutoring, there is no means of assessment of the effectiveness of said tutoring. Therefore, there is no guarantee that education tax credits would improve a student's understanding of the curriculum and no means of testing its usefulness.

• Public schools are accountable to the taxpayers, private schools are not. They must maintain open and transparent financial records . The public knows how their tax dollars are being used and that the school district is accountable to the taxpayers in every aspect of its operation. Private schools have the prerogative to accept, reject, and dismiss students according to their own guidelines and have no accountability to the public for their actions. Furthermore, private schools are not subject to the performance requirements that regulate the public school system, and they lack the operational safeguards that protect children in the public system. It is any parent's right to send their child to a non-public school, however, providing taxpayer dollars to finance an individual's personal choice is a bad policy.

• Public schools are held to high standards by State and national achievement requirements . They are under constant scrutiny to ensure that they are performing to the best of their abilities.

• Public schools hire only certified, qualified teachers.

• Students need adequate school funding and proven reforms, not unproven schemes, in order to succeed. What do the vast majority of students need to achieve high academic standards? Certainly not a rebate gimmick or backdoor voucher. We must invest in the programs that have been proven to improve academic achievement particularly for the most at risk students. These investments should include:
• high quality curriculum;
• standards based professional development;
• modern labs;
• appropriate lower class sizes in overcrowded schools;
• academic intervention services and;
• the expansion of early children education.

The proposal of an unaccountable educational scheme in the State of New York not only hurts the already cheated students of the public school system, it sets an appalling precedent for educational policies of the future. It is not too late for every child in this State to be given a fair opportunity to succeed by making the necessary resources available to those students

Private and religious schools

• Do not have to comply with higher academic standards required by the State Board of Education.

• May deny any student admission based on religion or other criteria that is not consistent with the school's eligibility criteria.
• Violate the separation of church and State – public taxpayer's dollars pay for religious studies as part of school curriculum.
• Are not accountable to the public taxpayer for their finances; e.g. where and how their money (your money) is spent.
• Are not required to hire certified teachers.
• Are not required to provide services to students with disabilities or special needs. They can transfer the responsibilities and cost to the public school district.

One of the most outrageous proposals in the Executive Budget is the Governor's Flex Aid and STAR -Plus programs. The Governor wants to bribe the taxpayer with a $400 check to vote "no" on the school district budget. Under the Governor's proposal, if a district's budget is defeated, the school district would have to comply with a spending cap. Also, the district would receive a minimal increase in operating aid the following year. The proposal essentially means: vote "no" and "I'll increase your schools operating aid and I'll write you a check!"

If, however, a community supports the district's budget proposal, by voting "yes," the Governor penalizes the district by freezing the school's aid the following year, forcing districts to raise property taxes in order to pay for necessary programs and services.

Although regular aid is recommended to be increased modestly, the operating aid needed to fund school programs and services is frozen under the Governor's proposal. The only way districts can get the nominal increase in the following school year is if they cap spending at a level that is inadequate to support existing programs.

This is the impossible choice! During time when the quality of education is being questioned, the Governor proposes freezing operating aid, capping district spending and buying off property taxpayers. Supporting a spending cap would perpetuate the glaring inequities in high needs schools already identified by the court in CFE. This proposal also undermines the importance of increased State support to public education in order to reduce the burden on the local property taxpayer.

Reject the Governor's Flex Aid and STAR -Plus proposals. We cannot bribe the public to vote "no" and we cannot allow the Governor to tie future increases in State aid to a spending cap where school districts continue to face increasing costs for pensions, health insurance, energy costs and the additional costs associated with providing students and teachers the tools they need to meet the State's rigorous learning standards.

The Executive's call for limiting school districts to one budget vote before automatically going to contingency budget would devastate our school districts. NYSUT vehemently opposes this change to the school budget vote process and this interference in local decision making. Of the 679 total budget submitted to voters last year, 112 were defeated on the first vote. Overall there are 40 districts currently operating on a contingency budget and those 40 districts made almost $69 million in cuts in education spending. Think of the additional programs and services and layoffs that would be lost to our schools if the Governor's one vote proposal became law.

NYSUT also opposes forcing bond votes on the same day as a school budget vote. This proposal could prevent districts from taking advantage of the summer construction season. This provision could also create more controversy over bonding and potentially lead to school budgets not being passed. Further, upon defeat of a bond vote, a school district would have to wait another full year to consider another bond proposal.

The Executive has missed a great opportunity to provide the funding necessary to restore the long term structural under funding that has plagued higher education for the past several years. He has once again not provided the resources necessary to adequately fund higher education and relies on tuition increases to generate operating aid and has left our teaching hospitals in a questionable financial situation. The Executive Budget did not provide the resources necessary for increased enrollment, and the academic and professional faculty lines required to serve these new students. Based on the Governor's proposal SUNY and CUNY have to impose tuition hikes of $500 and CUNY would have to impose tuition hikes of $300 to generate needed operating aid. The budget also would open the door for trustees to propose annual tuition hikes tied to inflation.

According to UUP President Bill Scheuerman, "the university cannot afford to continue the trend of teaching more students with fewer full-time faculty; it is not able to offer courses to allow many students to graduate within four years without more full-time faculty. While SUNY's student enrollment has risen by 44,000 in the last 12 years, the number of full-time academic faculty has fallen by nearly 1,200."

According to Professional Staff Congress President Barbara Bowen, 75% of the total increase provided in the Executive Budget for CUNY is financed through tuition increases. " In inflation adjusted dollars, public ( New York City plus NY State) funding for CUNY dropped 30% from 1990 to 2006 while tuition has increased 98% ." 

We are asking the Legislature to restore appropriate funding to our institutions of higher education. The total gap between the Executive Budget and what is appropriately needed to fully fund CUNY is $65.7 million. For SUNY the gap represents $153 million more for the amount necessary to properly fund mandated costs, enrollment growth and more full-time faculty. Community colleges need a minimum of $150 dollars per Full-Time -Equivalent (FTE).

The Executive has proposed to significantly increase support for charter schools. In addition to adding 150 charter schools, the Executive further drains needed resources from our public schools by providing a variety of other support to charter schools.

Both nationally and within New York State , the data collected on charter school performance in comparison to general public education schools is mixed at best. The most recent non-partisan national study, conducted by the Economic Policy Institute, finds that out of 19 studies conducted in 11 states, charter schools did not out-perform general education public schools; and that charter schools may actually be less effective.

Within New York State , charter school students, in many cases, are performing below their general education counterparts on State assessment tests in English Language Arts and Mathematics. The data that has been collected by both the New York State Board of Regents and the United States Department of Education, indicates that charter schools have not distinguished themselves from public schools in terms of innovative technique, or by raising the level of achievement on State assessment tests.

NYSUT strongly opposes:

•  Increasing the statewide cap on charter schools from 100 to 250 schools.

•  Language clarifying that charters surrendered, terminated or revoked or charters that have not been renewed or extended would not count against the statutory cap.

•  Language clarifying that the charter schools authorized by New York City 's Chancellor will not count against the statutory cap.

•  Giving the SUNY Board of Trustees authority to approve not-for profits as chartering entities.

•  Giving charter schools access to building aid and dormitory authority financing.

The latest large-scale comparative study conducted by the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana, compared fourth - and eighth-grade math scores of more than 340,000 students in 13,000 regular public, charter and private schools on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress. When statistically adjusted for the effects of income, school and home circumstances the comparison of fourth-grade math public school student performance in math to private and charter schools students and found that public school students outscored private and charter school students in fourth-grade math.

NYSUT.ORG. Copyright New York State United Teachers. 800 Troy-Schenectady Road, Latham, New York, 12110-2455. 518.213.6000.