 |
| Search |
|
|
|
|
Editorials
As the saying goes, “Stupid is as stupid does!” Our inept and dysfunctional New York State government once again fills that role by keeping the Lancaster Central School District on the Contract for Excellence program.
Despite spending the required two years to correct a state mandated Contract for Excellence (C4E) program dictate, based on participation rate failure and not for academic performance, the Lancaster Central School District (LCSD) faces a revenue crisis.
Having fulfilled its C4E two-year obligation, LCSD should have been removed from the C4E list. It was not removed from the list due to new state criteria and language. Therefore, only 25 percent of the $2.4 million added state money could go for tax reduction.
The district is hopeful that that their and public petitions to state legislators will work to have LCSD removed from the list of C4E schools.
How indeed can Superintendent Ed Myszka tell his constituents that the school district is getting $2.4 million more in state aid this year than last year and will still have to raise their taxes by $2.13 per thousand of assessed valuation.
Is the state’s decision to continue having Lancaster on the C4E list unfair? You betcha!
Outside of school officials, has anyone really thought about the cumulative and lasting costs that have and will continue to be borne by the C4E mandated program? Last year, five reading teachers and new programs were added, funded by $1.9 of dedicated C4E grant aid.
How indeed can Superintendent Myszka go back to the public if LCSD is removed from the C4E list and not come up with a reasonable budget that is in line with today’s inflation rate and/or indicates performance numbers are increasing?
Past budgets and performance
With the 2007-08 6.55 percent increase, the Lancaster School District has increased spending by 20 percent in the last three years, at a time when town growth and school enrollment has stabilized. The brunt of that money has gone for salary and benefit increases.
In today’s private sector, such financial demands where public funds are not available would have led to drastic cost-cutting policies – layoffs, salary and benefit givebacks, etc.
That’s what happens in the private sector where there is no Taylor Law or state mandated programs and where businesses have no public pockets to pick.
Many homeowners overburdened by federal, state, county and local taxes don’t care how the school arrives at a reasonable budget with a reasonable tax levy.
More importantly, has the skyrocketing budget spending affected school performance? The Business First school rankings will be out shortly, it will be interesting to see if we are getting a bang for our buck.
While spending had increased significantly over the past three years, Business First has ranked LCSD 14th in the 2004-05 school year and 15th in years 2005-06 and 2006-07.
Although Lancaster is not suffering academically, the influx of state aid and property tax revenues has not improved the school districts ranking.
Mandates
We are always told that state mandates make up approximately 85 percent of the school budget, leaving very little else for school officials to “whittle down”. However, included in the mandated portion of the budget, and the brunt of the expenditures, are contracted salary, health care programs, retirement costs, sick and leave of absence benefits, etc.
In other words, generous programs and benefit packages that far exceed that of most private sector worker / retired taxpayers and that they have to pay for.
Spending by the school district increased by over 20 percent in the last three years. The Lancaster School Board adopted a 2007-08 budget that increases spending by 6.55 percent ($4.7 million).
The $76.37 million budget’s increase was primarily offset by the increase in 2006 property assessments and increased state aid, resulting in a 25 cent per thousand assessed property increase “An incredible value,” said School Board President Ken Graber a year ago.
Really? Who pays those property taxes? Why, we do! Who is the state? Why, we are!
Superintendent Myska says we are going to be in a whole lot of hurt should the school district not be removed from the C4E list.
We taxpayers are going to be in a whole lot of hurt if the school district and the Civil Service Employees Association (CSEA) continue to negotiate future contracts that are unreasonable by today’s standards in the private sector and are no longer affordable.
LCSD had been restricted to spending approximately $1.9 million of C4E state funding in the 2005-06 and 2006-07 school years for added staff and new programs. They were placed in the C4E program because of not meeting a required participation percentage.
“It had nothing to do with performance,” school official declare. Yet the last year two years they spent the grant money to add staff and programs. Sadly, the school district, through its taxpayers, will be paying for the added staff and programs when the state seed money is gone.
I guess the question is, why were the 2005-06 and 2006-07 aid expenditures made in the first place if performance was not an issue?
More importantly, why should the added staff / programs be allowed to continue if the school district experiences no measurable performance improvement indicators?
When examining the Business First rankings, test scores and other performance indicators, there is no reason for belief that Lancaster has progressed in a manner befitting the amount of money spent over the past several years.
NEXT: Part II: Budget impacts from salary and benefit programs.
© Copyright 2008 by Speakupwny.com
Top of Page
|
|
|
Editorials
Latest Headlines
|
|
Web hosting By
www.olm1.com
Part of
www.onlinebuffalo.com
[where: 14206]
|