Lancaster school taxes ! High and Higher .

[Greg Sojka]

3.2 % raise for the $103 million dollar Lancaster school budget . I found more information on the Facebook page Civilized Citizens for Lancaster . I tried to cut and paste but could not get it to transfer. Very interesting charts and graphs to compare the other school districts.

[gorja]

Some people have short memories as their school taxes went down in 2016 not up.

2015 tax rate - 17.037412 per thousand assessed
2016 tax rate - 16.963817 per thousand assessed

[Greg Sojka]

Gorja, YES ! Memories are short . NYS did not agree with Superintendent Valley and I believe said Lancaster residents deserve a tax cut because they have 20 million in the rainy day fund. It must be a burden for superintendent to deal with Lancaster residents who have an average family income of 65,000 and worry about a measly 3% wanted increase, while superintendent Valley Make almost 4 times that plus benefits and pension. I will try and find that article but I must get back to work .

[gorja]

Gorja, YES ! Memories are short . NYS did not agree with Superintendent Valley and I believe said Lancaster residents deserve a tax cut because they have 20 million in the rainy day fund. It must be a burden for superintendent to deal with Lancaster residents who have an average family income of 65,000 and worry about a measly 3% wanted increase, while superintendent Valley Make almost 4 times that plus benefits and pension. I will try and find that article but I must get back to work .

I have read the comptroller's report. He pretty much said the same thing to other area school districts regarding their fund balances.

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/.../lancaster.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...6/clarence.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...2016/depew.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...4/iroquois.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...2017/alden.htm

[Neubs24]

Is this a preliminary budget or the final budget? If its not the final budget then I'm not too concerned yet.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Greg Sojka wrote:

3.2 % raise for the $103 million dollar Lancaster school budget . I found more information on the Facebook page Civilized Citizens for Lancaster . I tried to cut and paste but could not get it to transfer. Very interesting charts and graphs to compare the other school districts.

Here it is Greg which is nothing more than a copy and paste from last week’s Lancaster Bee publication:

Residents in the Lancaster Central School District may see as much as a 3.2 percent rise in their school taxes this year, according to Jamie Phillips, assistant superintendent for business and support services, who laid out preliminary budget figures for Board of Education members at a work session Monday.

She said that number, which would be the maximum the district could raise taxes without exceeding the state-mandated property tax cap, would be an approximately $1.85 million increase over last year’s levy of $49.4 million.

According to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s proposed budget, Phillips said Lancaster will receive about $35.4 million in state aid for 2017-18, a figure that she didn’t expect the district to receive, given last year’s numbers.

She indicated that in 2016-17, the governor estimated the district’s aid at $35.1 million, but LCS ultimately received only $34.3 million, or about $260,000 less than the $34.5 million the district budgeted for. She said the state Legislature’s estimate for 2016-17 was even higher at $35.9 million.

“It’s just reinforcement that our calculations and our inclinations on what we’re going to receive in aid are a little bit more accurate,” she said, arguing that inaccuracy in state calculations stems from actions such as estimating transportation costs without including expenses that the state doesn’t pay for.

Did you go to the budget work session, Greg? I missed this one but I can tell you from years of attending the budget work sessions that these budget work sessions are just that, work sessions to overview requested department appropriations and where 85% of the budget is from mandated policies/programs. But, you know that and you know as well that the 3.2% increase in the tax levy is a max increase under the tax cap limit – taking into consideration town growth, exemptions, exclusions, etc.

Ms. Phillips made it quite clear that fund balance and reserves will be used to balance the budget as have been used in the past several years in Lancaster from a total of $9 - $10 million every year but the last one.

Gorja, YES ! Memories are short . NYS did not agree with Superintendent Valley and I believe said Lancaster residents deserve a tax cut because they have 20 million in the rainy day fund. It must be a burden for superintendent to deal with Lancaster residents who have an average family income of 65,000 and worry about a measly 3% wanted increase, while superintendent Valley Make almost 4 times that plus benefits and pension. I will try and find that article but I must get back to work .

How do you know that the district has $20 million in the rainy day fund?

In 2009, there was $41 million in the rainy day fund and the Comptroller said to spend it down – and the district did as it received $25 million less in state aid because of GEP.

Some of us thought it was a damn good thing that then Superintendent Ed Myszka seen the shortfall coming and squirreled some money away; where the district closed a school, cut back on staffing (through attrition & earlier retirement incentives) and tighten the screws on non mandated appropriations.

Your attack on District Superintendent Vallely is where you are really going with this BS. Dr. Valley makes nowhere near 4 times $65,000. The pension and benefits claim is disingenuous as all district staff receive like considerations based on position and tenure.

Dr. Vallely is but one individual. Perhaps you should examine the second budget work session documents, Greg, and see what the increase in staff salaries (teachers 4%, non instructional 3.4%) and benefits for all are.

People all talk about teachers being underpaid. Maybe that’s true for the first 10-15 years, but with 21 years of tenure teachers earn $93,500. If eligible for retirement teachers (of today) after 30 years will be earning $100,000 and receiving 2/3rd’s retirement pay of near $67,000 and pay no state taxes. But let’s just focus on a speck on an elephant’s ass because you don’t like the man. He is being paid market value.

Lastly Greg, the school puts out a good product and for that reason some of us are willing to spend a little more - and this comes from someone having no children / family member children attending Lancaster schools, retired and on a fixed income. When the 'final budget' is approved and you don't like the number, vote 'no'.

[Greg Sojka]

Lee, the median annual school superintendent salary is $151,377 as of 2/22/17 . Lancaster high school is ranked # 14 . I find it hypocritical that you give the superintendent a pass or a nod and yet at many town meetings you complain about trivial things like Walmart trailers at Christmas. The Lancaster Teachers are in the trenches everyday with lesson plans, state testing , and are not getting the support from the superintendent. Are my facts wrong Lee? Are they alternative facts? NYET!!!!

[jennifer7]

Reading posts on Facebook, Twitter, Vine, Looks like WNY's Population loss's are going to be even be more masive then ever and yesterday at Ted's in Tempe AZ
It was packed with WNYer's visting and looking for new homes in AZ, They all are saying they can't afford to pay the taxes anymore and the economy is horrible. The Manager of Teds said he's never seen so many people from WNY in AZ

[WNYresident]

I won't say massive but I will say the population loss of net tax payers/businesses will continue. We will still have groups who will push to import refugees and so forth. All which tend to be a drain financially to those already here including competition for what jobs may be available. Let us not forget the cost of county social services, housing and schooling.

[Lee Chowaniec]

Lee, the median annual school superintendent salary is $151,377 as of 2/22/17 . Lancaster high school is ranked # 14 . I find it hypocritical that you give the superintendent a pass or a nod and yet at many town meetings you complain about trivial things like Walmart trailers at Christmas. The Lancaster Teachers are in the trenches everyday with lesson plans, state testing , and are not getting the support from the superintendent. Are my facts wrong Lee? Are they alternative facts? NYET!!!!

You are cherry picking and using data that favors your position. What is the salary of a District Superintendent with 5,800 students and ranked within the top ten according to Business First (BF) and has been recognized by BF as either first or second in cost-efficiency for the past decade?

Lancaster High School was ranked 14th and that was not bad considering 3 Williamsville schools, City Honors, Hutch Tech and Fredrick Law Olmstead were involved in the rankings.

Give some reasons for your claim that teachers are not getting the support they need from the Superintendent.

Since the 2010 property reassessment program took place my town taxes were $9 less in 2017 than in 2011 and my school taxes are $60 higher for the 2016-17 tax year than in 2011. However, everything is relevant. I do not own a home assessed at $300,000 or more and do get enhanced STAR.

Setting the politics aside, we have a great school district and if the final budget comes in within the tax levy limit (and half of what is allowable by law) I will again support the budget proposal. The real hypocrisy is your implying that the final budget will mean a 3.2 % increase in the tax levy and then inferring that Dr. Vallely is to be held responsible for its approval when indeed its approval (or decline) comes from the Board of Education. If memory serves right, I believe the entire 7 member Board recommended its approval last year.

[Lancastermom]

I have read the comptroller's report. He pretty much said the same thing to other area school districts regarding their fund balances.

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/.../lancaster.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...6/clarence.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...2016/depew.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...4/iroquois.htm

http://www.osc.state.ny.us/localgov/...2017/alden.htm

So how does that make it OK? Shouldn't taxes be a priority also?? Yes we need to hold onto funds. While the district was called out for having too much money in reserve, it should be used to reduce the tax rate instead of the proposed up to the tax cap. Common sense

[gorja]

So how does that make it OK? Shouldn't taxes be a priority also?? Yes we need to hold onto funds. While the district was called out for having too much money in reserve, it should be used to reduce the tax rate instead of the proposed up to the tax cap. Common sense

I agree some should be used to reduce the tax rate. But you never know from year to year what's coming from the state, it's nice to have a nest egg on hand when the state decides to make reductions in aid, just my opinion

[Lancastermom]

I agree some should be used to reduce the tax rate. But you never know from year to year what's coming from the state, it's nice to have a nest egg on hand when the state decides to make reductions in aid, just my opinion

The state I think and I may not be certain has given the district a good idea of what they'll receive. The state always plays games, we both know that and it is always different year to year. Meanwhile a proposed budget up to the allowed increased amount while our district and others was called out for having too much in it's reserve fund should do the right thing and use some of that money and give it back to the taxpayers in a smaller increased proposal especially when once they get final numbers from the state if they don't have it already they're on target with state funds

[shortstuff]

I agree with Lancastermom. The reserves should act as buffer to offset the tax increase. To propose an increase to the cap limit is not fiscally appropriate. We know this is a proposed budget.

[Lee Chowaniec]

The District is not proposing an increase to the tax cap limit. It is stating that considering the Tax Levy Limit Calculation formula (town growth factor, IDA PILOTS, and other exclusionary line items in the budget) that its allowable tax levy cap is 3.72%. I also agree that increase percentage is too high and especially if the District gets an appropriate increase in state aid and if Greg is right in stating that the District has $20 million in rainy day funds; and now that GEP has ended.

The District should be questioned on what is in the rainy day fund as Greg has remained moot on how he knows this – and an answer should be provided. The Town includes its Reserved and Un-appropriated Fund Balances in its budget report.

At the first budget work session increased spending in Department requests and increases in non-instructional staff totaled $357,476. At the second work session increased spending in contractual instructional services, BOCES, health, athletics, library, etc increased by $2.45 million over last year. Of that increase $1.6 million (64%) is for salary increases. So as of now the District is looking at approximately $3 million in increased spending.

According to the Lancaster Bee’s report on the second budget work session:

Residents in the Lancaster Central School District may see as much as a 3.2* percent rise in their school taxes this year, according to Jamie Phillips, assistant superintendent for business and support services, who laid out preliminary budget figures for Board of Education members at a work session Monday.
She said that number, which would be the maximum the district could raise taxes without exceeding the state-mandated property tax cap, would be an approximately $1.85 million increase over last year’s levy of $49.4 million.

According to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s proposed budget, Phillips said Lancaster will receive about $35.4 million in state aid for 2017-18, a figure that she didn’t expect the district to receive, given last year’s numbers.

She indicated that in 2016-17, the governor estimated the district’s aid at $35.1 million, but LCS ultimately received only $34.3 million, or about $260,000 less than the $34.5 million the district budgeted for. She said the state Legislature’s estimate for 2016-17 was even higher at $35.9 million.

“It’s just reinforcement that our calculations and our inclinations on what we’re going to receive in aid are a little bit more accurate,” she said, arguing that inaccuracy in state calculations stems from actions such as estimating transportation costs without including expenses that the state doesn’t pay for.

So if the projected spending increase over last year is $3 million and with an allowable tax cap limit increase of 3.72 that would bring in $1.85 million, with no real information on what the District is going to receive in State Aid, and knowing that in the budget years of 2011- 15 the District was using $9-10 million dollars of rainy day funds to balance budgets where they were shorted in State Aid by $25 million (even using near $7 million last year with GEP gone), and considering this is budget review time where no budget proposal has been put forth for the BOE to vote approval on and pass on to the public for their approval, this is all speculation and much ado about nothing.

I heartedly agree the District should be questioned on ‘rainy day’ reserves before anyone casts dispersion on anyone or makes unfounded allegations.

* 3.72 percent