No more education cuts to our schools! our children can't afford them

Over the last few years, public school budgets in New York City have been cut at least four times – and our children are suffering. The results have been sharp increases in class size, and the loss of many valuable afterschool, arts and tutoring programs. In the early grades, classes are now larger than they have been in more than a decade.

The Governor has proposed to cut education by $1.5 billion statewide, on top of last year’s cuts of $1.4 billion. More than half a billion dollars would be slashed from NYC schools. These would amount to the largest education cuts in state history. The mayor has proposed eliminating over 6,000 teaching positions, which would likely increase class sizes to levels not seen in a generation or more.

These education cuts are opposed by 60% of NY state voters. In order to protect our children from more educational damage, please sign a petition now, urging the Governor, the State legislature, the Mayor and Speaker Quinn to adopt the following proposals:

• The state income tax surcharge on the wealthiest New Yorkers should not be allowed to lapse. Even after keeping the surcharge, the wealthiest one percent of NY households would still pay a smaller share of their income in state and local taxes than other New Yorkers. Retaining the surcharge on individuals making more than $200,000 and households over $300,000 would yield an extra $1 billion in state revenues this year, and an extra $5 billion next year – and prevent the need for any cuts to education.

• ·There should be an additional NYC tax surcharge on households earning over $1 million a year. Over the past thirty years, the top NY State income tax rate has been cut in half, and the income distribution in NY State and New York City is now the most unequal in the nation. Millionaires can afford to contribute their fair share, so that no further damage is done to our children’s futures.

Thanks!

Charter Schools Mysteriously Survive the Budget Ax that Falls Hard on "Regular" Public Schools

A memo from the law firm White, Osterman & Hanna to the New York Charter Schools Association (circulated on nyceducationnews) urges members to file a "Request for State Aid Intercept" with the NY State Education Department to preserve their "legal right" to increased per-pupil funding--a right they seem to have acquired through a combination of stealth statutory insertions and legislative inattention in the confusion of budget negotiations. So, we'll be looking at even more money being taken out of our schools to satisfy the hungry Charter School Monster that's devouring the public school system.

HERE'S HOW IT WORKS:

• The Governor and the Legislature intended to freeze 2010 aid payment to charter schools at 2008 levels, and such a freeze was actually in the Governor’s budget and in the relevant Assembly and Senate bills (that seems eminently fair and just, given what they've done to "regular" public schools in the same period).

• Somehow, those provisions were not enacted into law.

• Therefore, charter schools now will now get increased funding by operation of law (a statutory formula found in §2856 of the Education Law, according to the White Osterman memo and I’ll take their word for it)

• Charter schools have a mechanism, kindly provided by the State Education Department on a handy form, for “intercepting” from school districts money due to them under the funding formula, which apparently inexorably “mov[es] forward” to ever increasing levels of funding unless stopped by vigilant legislators.

Some quick research reveals that financing uncertainties are probably the biggest impediment to the spread of charter schools. (for an overview, see the paper presented by Jonathan Kivell of United Bank at the Charter Schools Facilities Finance Conference hosted by the Federal Reserve Board in September 2008). Several states (e.g., Colorado) help charter schools through "Intercept” programs that guarantee payment of principal and interest on charter school bonds by literally "capturing" funds allocated to school districts.

New York caters to charter school operators’ dislike of uncertainty by guaranteeing their per-pupil allocations through State Aid Intercept. Nothing wrong with that in principle because after all, we wouldn’t want to disrupt kids’ education by not giving their schools money they have already taken into account in planning the school year.

No, sir—that would be unfair to the kids, though we do allow it for “regular” public school kids……to wit, the great “midnight raid” of February 2008, when each NYC school principal woke up to find out DOE had snatched a pile of money from his/her school, literally in the middle of the night.

The biggest thorn in the side of charter school operators, however, is facilities funding--most states (including New York) bar or restrict direct public funding for it. But even here, there’s government help: US DOE has a program—the Credit Enhancement for Charter Schools—which provides full or partial guarantees of principal as well as interest (pretty generous, really) to lenders that finance construction or renovation of charter schools. But why bother with all that paperwork and uncertainty (it’s a competitive program) when you can just snatch space from hapless "regular" public schools?

LESSON: IN PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS, ALWAYS LOOK FOR THE BACKSTOP--IT'S ALMOST INVARIABLY PUBLIC FUNDS.

WHAT YOU CAN DO: WRITE AND CALL GOVERNOR PATTERSON (1-877-255-9417, press 1), AND YOUR STATE LEGISLATORS --ASK THEM TO STOP CATERING TO CHARTER SCHOOL INTERESTS AND TURNING PUBLIC SCHOOL CHILDREN INTO SECOND-CLASS CITIZENS.

Here's my sample letter:

Dear XXXXX:

It has come to my attention that provisions freezing 2010 payments to charter schools at 2008 levels, contained in the Governor’s budget as well as in Assembly Bill 9707 and Senate Bill 6607, were never enacted into law. UNLESS YOU ACT, charter schools will be entitled to increased funding, which they intend to capture under the “intercept” procedure provided by state law. That would be both contrary to legislative intent and grossly unfair to our “regular” public schools, which have been asked to absorb budget cut after budget cut. Please do whatever is necessary to prevent this injustice when the Legislature reconvenes.

OH, AND YOU MIGHT ALSO ASK WHY THERE ISN'T AN "INTERCEPT" MECHANISM FOR THE CFE FUNDS THAT ARE NO LESS "DUE AND OWING" TO NYC SCHOOLKIDS THAN INCREASED PER-PUPIL FUNDING IS "DUE AND OWING" TO CHARTER SCHOOLS.

Teachers at PS 193K; Budget cuttin', it's got to stop!

We've tried petitions, phone calls and protests. What's left? See how teachers from PS 193 in Brooklyn are making their voices heard:

....your child's class will grow till you sob;
Growing larger until it's a mob...
In September, wait till you see
how the budget affects you and me;
Don't expect to see the school you once knew.
Hey Chancellor Klein; we're talking to you!"

Merriman's appeal: political payback time for the charter school lobby

James Merriman of the Charter School Center sent out an alert to charter school leaders over the weekend, urging them to attend an important meeting tomorrow with Deputy Mayor Walcott to which the Mayor is invited as well.

At the meeting, the charter school lobby will ask the city to voluntarily increase funding for charters out of the city’s discretionary funds, if the state maintains the freeze on per pupil charter funding that occurred last year.

Merriman’s appeal is nakedly political, and he writes that the mayor needs to pay them back for their support for his re-election and extension of unlimited mayoral control (as well as the charter cap lift, though why that benefited him more than them is unclear.):

The Mayor has been a strong supporter, but it is your unprecedented record of success that has allowed him to hold up New York City as a model of educational achievement. It was your results that helped make such a strong case in Albany for the recent cap lift. It was your parents who rooted him on during the mayoral control battle and his re-election campaign. We've been there for him and now he needs to be there for us.

Meanwhile, even if charter schools have suffered a one year freeze, our district schools have had their budgets slashed to the bone. If the 4% cut now being proposed goes through, their budgets will have been cut by 12% since 2007.

As it is, the overall charter school budget is still growing fast -- because of increased enrollment, which is estimated to grow another 31% next year. Even if the per student freeze is maintained, charter school funding will cost the city an estimated $545 million next year.

If the mayor accedes to the charter lobby’s demands, it will be yet another sign how politics rules at City Hall; and how charters continue to get favorable treatment compared to district schools.

Much larger cuts to school -based positions compared to central administration

In recent years, Chancellor Klein has repeatedly made the claim that he has cut a disproportionate amount from central administration compared to schools.

See for example, his May 24^th testimony to the City council here:

Each time, we’ve worked to minimize the impact on schools and students. Between 2008 and this school year, we have cut the central administrative budget by nearly 20-percent—more than double the reduction to school budgets. This has included a headcount reduction of 550 positions in central and field offices….

Meanwhile I did some calculations based on the DOE’s financial status reports. I looked at full-time positions on payroll, by category, in each year's May report (except for 2008, when I drew from the April report, since there was no report in May.)

Since 2008, the number of full time positions at central administration has been cut by 2.2%. (click on the charts to enlarge them.)

But the number of full time school-based positions, including total general education, special ed instruction and school leadership, as well as categorically- funded positions, have been cut nearly three times as much. This is the period over which school budgets have been slashed to the bone.

If one doesn’t count the categorical positions that were funded primarily through the federal stimulus program, the headcount reductions at schools would be five times as large as those from central administration.

The disparities are even greater if you look further back in time.

Between 2006 and 2010, the number of full time positions at central administration has grown by 7.4%, while the number of full-time school personnel has shrunk by nearly the same percent -- 7.5%.

See also today's NY Post on how the number of DOE employees being paid $150,000 or more has mushroomed by 25% this year.

Parents and teachers protest budget cuts

How the DOE missed the boat on enrollment growth, leading to inequitable budget cuts

See this article in today’s Daily News – showing that the DOE now is going to impose even bigger mid-year budget cuts than the maximum of 1 percent promised, to the 740 schools where enrollment increased – despite their supposed “fair student funding” formula. I have posted the memo here.

Here is an excerpt:

“For schools experiencing growth in enrollment, given the mandates related to special education, we will fund 100% of the increase in dollars related to an increase in special education enrollment. However, given the decline in the overall DOE discretionary budget and the decrease in the percentage of dollars returned by the schools with enrollment declines, we can only fund 55.5% of the increase in FSF attributed to the increase in general education enrollment.”

In other words, schools that have growing enrollments are getting screwed.

The even more critical issue is DOE’s explanation for this situation: that citywide, enrollment is growing this year for the first time since 2002 – not even counting charter school growth, which has been rapidly expanding.

“For the first time since 2002, enrollment has increased. During the current school year, NYC public schools saw an increase in total pupil enrollment of about 1%. This means that in addition to the annual redistribution of dollars from schools with register losses to those with register gains, we will need to add dollars to the FSF budgets.”

Overall, according to sources, there are about 10,000 more students than last year. Yet the DOE hadn’t budgeted for this, even though we’ve been warning them to expect this for years.

Actually, elementary and middle school enrollments started growing last year, according to our calculations -- if charter schools in DOE buildings are included.

Indeed, many public officials, parents and advocates, including the City Comptroller and the Manhattan Borough President, warned them of imminent enrollment growth, based on higher birth rates, more development, and families wanting to stay in the city, because of the lower crime rate. This, we warned, would likely lead to even worse overcrowding, given the inadequate capital plan, rather than the mere “pocket overcrowding” that DOE educrats love to describe.

We also told them that the enrollment projections provided by their consulting firms – Grier Partnership and Statistical Forecasting – should not be trusted. FYI, the latest Grier report predicts that enrollment would not increase in NYC schools until 2017, and SF until 2016 – at least seven years away.

Here is what we wrote in our report, A Better Capital Plan, in October 2008:

"Although a detailed demographic analysis is beyond the capability of this report, there are signs that especially in the early grades, increased enrollment and overcrowding may already be upon us, and this trend may worsen over the coming years."

And yet as usual, the DOE ignored what we were saying. The mismanagement, incompetence and unfairness of all this cannot be understated. And it prefigures even worse conditions in our schools for years to come.

School overcrowding and rising class sizes: who is to blame?

In response to questions and complaints about increased class sizes and overcrowding at schools all over the city, DOE officials commonly have blamed parents, for insisting on sending their kids to popular schools.

Yet their refusal to take responsibility for the problem, though typical, belies the reality: that the vast majority of K-8 students attend their local zoned neighborhood schools, and DOE completely controls how many students are assigned each high school through through OSEPO (the Office of School Enrollment, Planning and Operations).

So what are some of the real sources of the increased overcrowding?

1- The administration's disinterest and disinvestment in keeping class sizes low. Despite a state law requiring NYC to reduce class size in all grades, there are now 1600 fewer classroom teachers, and 10,000 more out-of-classroom staff since the Mayor took control of our schools, including many more highly paid administrators, and 2,000 additional school secretaries. Moreover, numerous audits and reports from the State Comptroller, the City Comptroller, and the State Education Department have found fault with the city's failure to spend state funds specifically targeted to class size reduction according to the intent of the law.

2-As described in numerous reports, their failure to adequately plan and build new schools for communities that have seen increased enrollment, especially in the younger grades. (For the latest reports from the City Comptroller and the Manhattan Borough President, see here and here.) This has also led to a significant increase in the percentage of students attending overcrowded schools, as well as more Kindergarten students being forced to attend schools outside their neighborhood schools.

3. At the high school level, the growing number of new small schools have caused our large comprehensive high schools to be increasingly flooded by students excluded from the small schools, which have capped enrollment and class sizes at lower levels. The reality is that different high school (and sometimes middle school) principals have different deals with the Department of Education, with many selective smaller schools (and charter schools housed in DOE buildings) allowed to cap enrollment at lower levels so that they can keep class sizes under 25, while other principals are inundated with so many students it is difficult for them to keep to the union contractual limits of 34.

The increased number of small schools jammed into existing school buildings has also directly contributed to more overcrowding overall, as each new small school and charter school eats up classroom space with more administrative and cluster rooms. More than one fourth of all NYC principals report that the insertion of new schools or programs into their buildings have led to more overcrowding in their schools.

4. Large budget cuts imposed at the school level by the city in recent years, including this fall, have made it harder for principals to keep sufficient teachers on staff , while the salaries of Tweed bureaucrats and consultants continues to grow apace.

All of these phenomena result directly from the flawed priorities, policies and budgetary decisions made by this administration. The DOE's attempt to blame parents for the resulting overcrowding is yet another way in which the accountability promised by mayoral control has failed to materialize.