Proposed Lancaster 2020-21 school budget

[Lee Chowaniec]

In a recently mailed letter from the Lancaster Central School District (LCSD) President and Board of education residents are asked to support a 2020-21 proposed budget that would allow the district to continue to offer the same opportunities to our students that we have grown accustomed to providing. The proposed budget maintains all programs and staffing while reducing the tax rate.

I have been an avid supporter in approving the last 10 years of proposed budgets because the district had made great strides in achieving educational improvement success; success recognized on local and national levels.

I am dismayed by this years proposed budget by the increase in spending, estimated unfounded revenue sources, the disingenuous use of the ‘new’ tax rate percent and its use to estimate tax liability and the use of exemptions to justify a tax levy increase (4.62%) which is far above the 1.81% Consumer Price Index (tax cap).

At the May 11th board of education meeting, trustees adopted a $114.5 million spending plan that maintains all current educational offerings and instructional programs while remaining within the property tax levy cap limits.

The budget reflects an increase of 4.54 percent and calls for an estimated tax rate decrease of $3.03 per $1,000 for Lancaster. The 2019-20 tax rate was $17.92/$1,000 of assessed value, and the estimated 2020-21 tax rate is $14.89/$1,000 of assessed value. This estimated tax rate is the lowest rate in ten years. It is indeed. However, I have yet to talk to anyone whose assessment has not been increased from that of 10 years ago (last reassessment). And, the final assessment roll has yet to be finalized.

Where many low-income families and seniors are experiencing financial hardships, a proposed school budget with a 4.54% increase in spending is unacceptable. The Program Budget portion of the total budget increases in spending by 5.38% - 4.3% increase in instructional and non -instructional salaries and 5.21% in benefits for program functions. Equipment, contractual expenses including occupational therapy and tuition spending increases by 38.1% ($2.76 mil to $3.81 mil)?

The annual budget hearing will be held through video conference on June 1, 2020, at 7 pm. Video access instructions will be available on the districts website prior to the meeting.

Budget voting to take place by absentee ballot and by June 9, 2020.

[grump]

Same old story. “We’re lowering the tax rate so we’re fiscally prudent & you should trust us.” NOT!! It’s the levy folks, it’s the levy!

[walking tall]

In a recently mailed letter from the Lancaster Central School District (LCSD) President and Board of education residents are asked to support a 2020-21 proposed budget that would allow the district to continue to offer the same opportunities to our students that we have grown accustomed to providing. The proposed budget maintains all programs and staffing while reducing the tax rate.

I have been an avid supporter in approving the last 10 years of proposed budgets because the district had made great strides in achieving educational improvement success; success recognized on local and national levels.

I am dismayed by this years proposed budget by the increase in spending, estimated unfounded revenue sources, the disingenuous use of the ‘new’ tax rate percent and its use to estimate tax liability and the use of exemptions to justify a tax levy increase (4.62%) which is far above the 1.81% Consumer Price Index (tax cap).

At the May 11th board of education meeting, trustees adopted a $114.5 million spending plan that maintains all current educational offerings and instructional programs while remaining within the property tax levy cap limits.

The budget reflects an increase of 4.54 percent and calls for an estimated tax rate decrease of $3.03 per $1,000 for Lancaster. The 2019-20 tax rate was $17.92/$1,000 of assessed value, and the estimated 2020-21 tax rate is $14.89/$1,000 of assessed value. This estimated tax rate is the lowest rate in ten years. It is indeed. However, I have yet to talk to anyone whose assessment has not been increased from that of 10 years ago (last reassessment). And, the final assessment roll has yet to be finalized.

Where many low-income families and seniors are experiencing financial hardships, a proposed school budget with a 4.54% increase in spending is unacceptable. The Program Budget portion of the total budget increases in spending by 5.38% - 4.3% increase in instructional and non -instructional salaries and 5.21% in benefits for program functions. Equipment, contractual expenses including occupational therapy and tuition spending increases by 38.1% ($2.76 mil to $3.81 mil)?

The annual budget hearing will be held through video conference on June 1, 2020, at 7 pm. Video access instructions will be available on the districts website prior to the meeting.

Budget voting to take place by absentee ballot and by June 9, 2020.

I agree with Lee. However a little historical context.. LCSD has always been lauded for its frugality in the ratios of per students expenses by State Auditors and the district has enjoyed tremendous success for its programs and academic standings. Teachers, administrators and others connected within the district have certainly stepped up during the last almost 90 days and will continue to do so to get to the end of the school year. Uncharted territories for all for sure. However, every walk of life has had to step up as well.

As a long time supporter of this District's previous budgets and programs during normal times , I was pleased and proud to do it. This time I feel administrators and the School Board misses the mark to understand the gravity of the proposed budget. To Lee C's point, it is disingenuous of the administration and Board to assert that this is the lowest tax rate in 10 years without more details. At the very least they should have coupled this "rosy" picture with the actual impact that anyone who realized a $10,000-75,000 or more re-assessment increase would be realizing under this "rosy" tax rate. As they say, "The devil is in the details". A personal example of this is examining my previous evaluation of $ 180K less the Star Program discount had me paying about $ 2,675 in school taxes. Under the proposed budget plan, my assessment was kicked up to $ 240K less a Star Program discount to $ 210K of assessed value. At the new "rosy" $ 14.89 per K tax rate, my tax bill will now be approximately $ 3,125. This is a $ 450 increase in taxes.

Personal situation aside, I spoke of this coming tsunami a few weeks ago thru this platform and my worst fears were realized. I believe shared sacrifice was required here. I saw that salaries for educators and administration and infrastructure services all increased rather than examine the potential for keeping these items at 2019-2020 levels. Granted state funding would still have left a shortfall, but without the realization that the community is requiring to step up to help pay for those shortfalls, the administration and School Board has continued to want to continue labor expectations and program continuance. Other portions within the budget were remaining flat or reduced. Items in the budget beyond their control is a necessary component that I understand that need to be paid for.

Students as well will have to understand that is a matter of economics, during a tough time. Programs and opportunities may have to be curtailed in the short term. Children who grew up during the Depression were part of the communities that required sacrifice. It's been pounded thru our heads during this experience, that we'll all get thru this together. Well I for one, for the first time will vote no to the proposed budget because of the way in which the budget was presented and assuming that community members will understand the impact recent re-assessments will have to their personal bottom line. Had the district provided examples of impacts to increased assessments to inform the community properly, I would have found it more palatable. By asserting that this proposed budget is the lowest tax rate is factually true, but is only a half truth. For this I cannot forgive the District I truly admire. NOT THIS TIME DISTRICT--SORRY!

[mark blazejewski]

A commentator posted this information on another social medium. I present the reader the posted information, without any comment from myself...

The Lancaster school district is trying to promote this budget as the lowest tax rate in 10 years. While that statement is true, it is also very misleading because the town of Lancaster just went to 100% full value assessment on properties. Previous years, properties were assessed at 77% value. So overnight property assessments went up 23%. So with this drastic increase in all property values, it lowered the tax rate. While the school district is patting themselves on the back over this ruse, the budget increase over last year is 4.58%, the largest increase in spending over the past 6 years. Be aware voters, you may live in another town, but you can probably bet that your municipality and school districts are going to pull the same stunt. Remember "Liar use number, but numbers don't lie".

What I don't like is that there were no public hearings concerning the budget, due to the virus. Now they are going to have an online public hearing before the vote, but good luck on being able to ask any questions. Also I have inquired to the district as to who will be present during the mail in vote counting, and how are the counters going to be selected? The districts response was "we're still working on it". Okay, I understand this is all new to them, but the district has also had several weeks to address this process.

Today I received the LCS budget flyer and looked it over very closely. On page 9 under "Sample Tax Bill based on Property Values" the information there is very misleading and outright false. You'll see 4 columns listed there, showing the tax change based on the value of your residence. What you need to realize, is that a home assessed at 100k, 200k or 300k in 2019, wasn't assessed at full market value - like it is now under the current full value assessment in place in Lancaster. So for example, a house assessed at 100k in 2019, was only assessed at 77% of market value. But in 2020, that same house is assessed at full market value, or 100%, which is now assessed at 123K. 123 x $14.89 equals $1831.47, which is actually $342.47 higher than what the budget flyer states. That the homeowner would see a tax decrease of $303 is TOTALLY FALSE. A 200k home is now assessed at 246K and will see a tax bill of $684.94 higher than stated in the flyer, not a decrease of $606. A 300k residence will now be assessed as a 369k property and the tax bill will be $5494.41, not $4467 as stated in the budget flyer. An increase of $1027.41!

[Lee Chowaniec]

Spot on, Walking Tall!

In reading your school budget posts over the years, we appear to be in agreement that we advocated for school budget approvals based on the district’s academic achievement accomplishments and for its being recognized statewide as being one of the most cost-efficient as well.

At a time when the country is going through a period of historic hardship, I look at this proposed budget as being nothing more than a wish list – no cuts to programs or staffing and with a 4.54% spending increase.

For the district to then estimate a tax rate when the reassessment appeal process has not been completed and where the final tax roll has not been determined is cavalier at best.

I would differ with the projected tax increases of the two posters. The great majority of taxpayers are going to see an increase in taxes – unlike the school district’s tax rate model presented. There will be a STAR / Enhanced STAR tax adjustment that will impact final tax liability. In my townhome community assessments increased from 38% to 70%. Some will see tax increases in the hundreds of dollars. Some in the community will see increases in the thousands.

The school district most likely will declare that an estimated 85% of the budget is mandated and the only way to cut spending is to cut programs and/or staffing. Taxpayers likewise have mandated living expenses they have to meet and have to make sacrifices in time of hardship. A school board member once remarked that if families gave up buying one pizza a month to pay for the proposed budget spending increase that year, the budget would be approved. Does he and/or other individuals in this town fail to realize there are families who wish they had the means to be able to purchase a pizza every month.

As Walking Tall so aptly put it, “Not this time.”

[gorja]

2020-21 STAR exemption

Enhanced exemption amount - $69,800 Basic STAR - $30,000
https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/property/star/star14.htm

Maximum STAR savings

Enhanced STAR - $1,032. Basic STAR - $473.
https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/property/star/muni14.htm

So, ($69,800 x $14.89)/1000=$1,039.32 We Enhanced STAR recipients
don't get the full value of our exemption

[Lee Chowaniec]

2020-21 STAR exemption

Enhanced exemption amount - $69,800 Basic STAR - $30,000
https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/property/star/star14.htm

Maximum STAR savings

Enhanced STAR - $1,032. Basic STAR - $473.
https://www.tax.ny.gov/pit/property/star/muni14.htm

So, ($69,800 x $14.89)/1000=$1,039.32 We Enhanced STAR recipients
don't get the full value of our exemption

Everything is fluid right now and estimates and claims are self-indulgent. The site you quoted from also has the following disclaimer:

The above exemption amounts were determined using the latest data available. As more current data becomes available these exemptions are subject to change.

If, in the future, a revised exemption is determined that differs by five percent or more than the exemption indicated, a new exemption will be recertified to that municipality.

Any recertification will occur before the last date allowed by law for the levy of school taxes.

Updated: April 21, 2020


It would be disappointing to learn that the result of a $286,000 reassessment program resulted in property owners receiving an Enhanced STAR tax reduction in the same amount as the previous year with a town 77% equalization rate.