Posted on 12/01/2004 3:13:50 PM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
In a report that could transform New York City's public schools, a court-appointed panel has found that an additional $5.6 billion must be spent on the city's schoolchildren every year to provide the opportunity for a sound, basic education that they are guaranteed by the State Constitution.
Beyond that, the panel found that $9.2 billion worth of new classrooms, laboratories, libraries and other facilities were needed to relieve overcrowding, reduce class sizes and give the city's 1.1 million public school students adequate places to learn.
The report is a major turning point in a lawsuit that could reshape the way education is financed in the state, and is being watched closely by politicians and educators around the nation. Nearly every state has battled over school spending in court, but the case in New York is one of the country's biggest, both in terms of the money at stake and the number of children affected.
Justice Leland DeGrasse, the judge overseeing the case in State Supreme Court, appointed the panel this summer after lawmakers in Albany missed a one-year deadline imposed by the state's highest court to stop shortchanging the city and fix what it called the "systemic failure" of New York's schools.
It is widely assumed that Justice DeGrasse will now draw heavily from the panel's findings as he decides how much more money the city's schools are owed. The state could then appeal, though New York's highest court largely upheld Justice DeGrasse's earlier rulings.
The figure the panel recommended - a 43 percent increase to the city's $12.9 billion school budget - came very close to what the city said it needed. It was almost identical to the amount sought by the plaintiffs in the case and nearly tripled what Gov. George E. Pataki's lawyers had proposed in court. But how much of the money should come from the state or from the city itself the panel did not say, leaving unanswered one of the most daunting and contentious questions facing the lawmakers responsible for coming up with the money. [News analysis, Page B4.]
"We're ecstatic," said Michael A. Rebell, executive director of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity, the group that brought the case on the ground that the city's lack of money, especially in light of the poverty of its students, deprived children of an adequate education. In the 1999-2000 school year, for instance, New York City spent an average of $10,469 per student, state records show, compared with the $13,760 per student spent in the wealthier surrounding suburbs.
"Now," Mr. Rebell said, "we need to roll up our sleeves and make sure the Legislature enacts this reform so that the children can get what they need." The report is a significant step toward a court takeover of what has traditionally been a legislative role: deciding exactly how much money should be spent on schools.
Throughout the 11 years that the case has wended its way through the state's courts, judges have taken pains not to dictate exactly how much extra money should be spent on the city's schoolchildren. But the Legislature essentially forfeited that prerogative by its own inaction, the panel said. "It therefore falls, by default, to the judiciary to fashion an appropriate remedy to ensure that the sound basic education constitutional mandate is honored," wrote the panel of referees, selected by Justice DeGrasse.
Its members are E. Leo Milonas, a former state appellate judge and past president of the City Bar Association; William C. Thompson, a former New York City Council member, state senator and appellate judge, who is the father of the city's comptroller; and John D. Feerick, the former dean of Fordham University School of Law, who was also a president of the City Bar Association.
In its report, the panel called for an unusually aggressive timetable, giving the state no more than 90 days to devise and begin enacting a plan that would eventually put an extra $5.6 billion every year toward running the city's schools. It gave the state four years to reach the full amount, starting with $1.4 billion in the first year, $2.8 billion in the second, and $4.2 billion in the third. The governor has said that the state can eventually raise as much as $2 billion a year from video lottery terminals. How the rest - which would have amounted to an average of an extra $339 on every state income tax return in 2001 - would be raised remains an open question.
The panel also gave the state only 90 days to figure out how to put an extra $9.2 billion towards school construction and repairs, but allowed that money to be phased in over five years. The plan calls for about $1.8 billion in each of the five years.
On virtually every major issue, the panel - which sought dozens of opinions during three months of public hearings - sided with the plaintiffs and dismissed the state's arguments. On the question of running the schools, the state argued that an extra $1.93 billion would suffice, but the panel chose a figure that exceeded what either the plaintiffs or the city demanded.
In fact, the referees said that the governor's methodology was so flawed that when they corrected it, they came up with a number that looked remarkably similar to what the plaintiffs were requesting.
As for school construction, the state argued that it did not need to spend any more than it had been spending. In response, the panel said the state was "refusing to squarely address" the issue and essentially adopted the plaintiffs' proposals whole.
And while the state argued that more layers of oversight would be necessary to ensure that any additional money was well spent, the panel rejected the state's idea to set up a new statewide office that would monitor spending and wield the power to shut down failing schools.
The governor's office called that aspect a particular failure of the report. "We are particularly concerned that the recommendations appear to reject any type of real reform and fail to overhaul the current accountability system, while recommending a substantial infusion of new spending," said Kevin Quinn, a spokesman for Governor Pataki.
Mindful that the report was coming, the governor pushed for a settlement of the case in recent days, but the question of where the extra money should come from continued to be one of the biggest obstacles to a resolution.
Just this week, as settlement talks proceeded, the issue surfaced again. Both the plaintiffs and the governor's lawyers had tentatively agreed to an extra $5 billion a year for the city's schools, according to those involved in the negotiations, but the talks stalled when the state insisted that 40 percent of the money come from city taxpayers.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg refused, arguing that the city should not have to contribute anything more, a position that even the plaintiffs think is untenable. They have argued that the city should pay about 23 percent of the increase.
But the mayor repeated his stance after the report was issued.
"For the city to fund even a portion of this $5.63 billion would require us to cut after-school programs, close libraries and make severe cuts to essential city services, even in the area of public safety," Mr. Bloomberg said. "Such actions would harm the very children this lawsuit is designed to help."
The plaintiffs and the governor's office said that they were eager to continue negotiations. Both parties have repeatedly stated that they want a solution that applies to the entire state, not just to the city's schools, which the courts have focused on. A settlement may be the surest way of achieving that, they say.
Why does the NEW YORK courts say the exact same thing that the ARKANSAS courts just said?
It is time for Tar & Feathers and if that doesn't work, much more drastic measures must be taken to STOP these activist extremist scumbag LAWYERS / JUDGES from overthrowing our Constitution and our country.
Let them know loudly and clearly that we will not tolerate their form of dictatorship!
Nuff said.
Why not make it an even ga-jillion?
I paid to educate my children. I will pay to educate my grand children. I also paid and will continue to pay to not educate any other persons children that cannot afford to get their children properly educated.
I heard Rush talking about this today and I was steaming. No doubt those of us upstate will have our taxes jacked yet again to pay for the losers in NYC. On top of our already sky high property taxes and sales taxes. What a crock of s***.
Most NYC public school "students" (one must use the term loosely) would learn as much or more if they just stayed home watching TV and playing video games. It would save the taxpayers a bundle. And no, giving this sorry excuse for a school system a few billion more won't improve student achievement one iota.
They spend over $10,000 per student already, and THAT isn't enough? I think that's way more than we spend here in Seattle.
In the Catholic grade school I attended from 1956-1964, we had 30-32 students per class, and half the classes were taught by old nuns who ruled with an iron fist. The cost per student was probably about $300-500.
It's always the libraries!
Why don't they start by cutting sex-ed?
ML/NJ
...the after-school programs are just part of the 24-hour State custody of kids that some are after....
There sure is, I just can't get endorsed..
Great! The extra money will help union teachers spend much less time with those annoying children and allow them to pay more dues to support even more ultra-left wing activites.
FReepmail me if you want on or off my New York ping list.
This crap is outrageous.
They need less money and educrats and more Joe Clark!
if NYS would allow real casino gambling - not the Indian reservations, the lottery, quick draw, but real casinos - they could collect this money in the blink of an eye. most of the people in the Atlantic City and Connecticiut casinos are NYers. Casinos in Manhattan would draw people from all over the world as well.
Well said.
Because that would be about eleventy kabillion dollars short.
there is no end to it. corruption is worse in NYC, but in the suburbs, the salaries are outrageous. on long island, $100K plus for tenured teachers is the norm, and they retire with 90% pensions in many cases, milking the system for decades even after they retire. and it goes up year after year, and there is nothing anyone can do to stop it. so long as NYC remains a place with industries like financial services, media, fashion - paying sky high salaries which provide a tax base - people will continue to live here, and pay up.
google billion
This is amazing! Thanks for posting this. What a bunch of rot!
A court-appointed panel yesterday certified that New York City's children have been getting royally shortchanged on school funding to the tune of $5.6 billion a year and placed the onus on the state to make good. To which we say: Show us the money.
And show it to us without forcing the city to foot the bill.
And show it to us without adding to New Yorkers' unenviable position as payers of the highest state and local taxes in the country.
And show it to us without using accounting gimmicks that seem to giveth but actually taketh away when all the attached strings finally are unraveled.
The responsibility for all this showing falls on Gov. Pataki, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, thanks to a rather solid report filed in Manhattan Supreme Court yesterday by the three special masters who were charged with determining how much more money the city would need to provide a sound, basic education to school children.
The masters, Leo Milonas, John Feerick and William Thompson, hit upon the $5.6 billion figure, plus a whopping $9.2 billion in funding to build and repair school buildings, after extensive study and deliberation. The figures were larger than Mayor Bloomberg had hoped they would be, and they satisfied the activist group that challenged the adequacy of school funding in court.
The masters wisely recommended phasing in classroom spending increases over four years and smartly urged no diminishment in mayoral control of the schools. Now the issues will be decided by Supreme Court Justice Leland DeGrasse, and there's every likelihood he will endorse the recommendations pretty much intact.
He should, and then Pataki, Silver and Bruno at last will be barred from further procrastination and avoidance. It was their school funding formulas that perennially deprived the city of the proper resources, while kids, many of them poor, languished in decrepit schools and posted dismal graduation rates. Meanwhile, wealthy districts like Great Neck and Scarsdale have been spending at least 50% more per pupil than the city.
Then, when ordered by the state's highest court to remedy the unconstitutional unfairness, Pataki, Silver and Bruno punted back to the courts, unable to meet their obligations forthrightly. But now, they're going to have come up with the cash. The easy dodge would be to order the city to foot the bill. That must not happen. Nor should the city's demand for the funding be jeopardized by similar claims that are flooding Albany from around the state. The bill is now due. Show us the money.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/257812p-220816c.html
I dug up old class pictures. We had 45 kids to a class. I went to a parochial grammar school for free other than donations at Mass. I went to Cardinal Hayes High School in the Bronx from 1965 - 69. The original tuition was $15 per month. Finances started getting squeazed. Tuition gradually increased $40 per month when I graduated.
it won't matter - many districts have elected reform minded people like you, their taxes and teacher salaries still went up, perhaps at a lower rate, but up nonetheless.
you would have to be willing to do what Middletown NJ did a couple of years ago - when the teachers went on strike because they would not accept a contract with reduced medical benefits, a judge began throwing them in jail. each week, a different group of the teachers were targeted to be placed in jail. within 2 weeks, it was over, the union backed off. I don't see any evidence that the people in any long island district would support that. people are voting with their feet here, selling their homes for big dollars to people who live 3 families to a house to afford the mortgages and taxes (with some help from HUD).
Wow to think that educrats would faint at the mention of 45 students in a class.
Tuition gradually increased to $40 per month when I graduated.
This from another article I am going to post on my website and a link to this thread.
http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/editorial/20965.htm
FUNNY MONEY
New York City spends nearly $13,000 per student annually, making it one of the biggest-spending cities in the nation.
Indeed, Education Week, a benchmark professional journal, already ranks the state No. 1 nationally — right at the top — on funding "adequacy."
Now the panel claims another $5,100 per is needed — a 40 percent jump.
So, we will be paying $18,100 per year, per student
plus another 9 Billion over 5 years in construction costs.
This cannot be true, please tell me this isn't true
http://www.RusThompson.com
Hmmm...
IF that is the finding of the panel, then someone has been pocketing money somewhere.
So that means someoen in the current school administration hierachy needs to be fired.
(They had better think long and hard about the implications of what they've just "concluded.")
And gee, Bloomburg shuts down firehouses and yet wants to build a stadium for more money than he 'saved' by shutting down the firehouses?
Funny, reinstate the firehouses and then dump the remainder cash into the school system.
*grrr*
This is insane.
And you know they're going to make taxpayers pay through the nose.
This is great news, and it should be no problem for the "wealthy" blue states. LOL
And the NY GOP cross-endorses these lefty judges every year.
I am sick of this crap, and we just re-elected almost everyone of these idiots.
The rest of the country going forward and we in socialist NY continue to go backwards.
I would love to send my kids to private schools but we pay so much in taxes no normal everyday person can afford it.
VOUCHERS!! We need school vouchers, competition to the liberal public school liberal indoctrination system....
I know.
I still don't see how Schumer got re-elected.
He hasn't done anything at all.
If teh school system had competition, they'd be more motivated to do a good job.
But NY doesn't like competition.
the problem is, in these school board elections, most of the people who vote are parents with children in the system who want more and more from it because somebody else is paying for part of the cost, and the people who work or who are related directly to those making money from the public education system. in NYS, we can't even get elected officials to have the school votes on the normal election day - because they want turnout supressed.
and look at the Roslyn scandal - that same kind of stuff is going on in almost every district, to some degree. there ought to be a special prosecutor investigating the finances in every district. but not a single elected official (with the exception of Dennis Dillon, but only to a small extent) will even mention the corruption.
Find a new job and move to Pa. They can use your vote there, it might mean something...
Believe me, I've thought about this. As always, the "find a new job" part for both my wife and myself is easier said than done.
BUMP
These are incredible amounts to spend per student. (The lower amount). At twenty students per class, this yields 209,000 per class room, less 50 thousand for the teacher and her benefits, leaves 159380 for the school room and facilities and administration. Thats a lot for a classroom, gold plated toilets? first edition textbooks? really good chalk?
my only advice - you have to try and separate the issue of funding/taxes, from the quality of the education received. you've got to focus on where the money really goes - salaries. higher compensation for the same employees who are delivering the education product today. are they worth what they are getting today? if not, why give them a raise? does any of the money actually make it into the classrooms?
that's the wedge issue. don't let the "pro-education" candidate claim that the taxes are "for the children". if you cede that argument, you won't be able to win just on a message of lower taxes.
If I were king:
NY schools must return $1B/yr for failing to provide an adequate education to 50% of it's students.
Admin staffs must be cut by 50%.
Highschool curricula must be cut by 50%, while retaining all core classes.
The school year must be increased 20 days per year, to afford the time necessary to impart core knowledge.
Minimum standards must be established for teachers to keep their jobs.
Incentives must be established to reward competent teachers.
Kids who misbehave may be dismissed or expelled.
Parents are still responsible to ensure their children receive an education, through completion of Highschool.
Contrast that with our Cincinnati Public Schools which spend almost twice as much per student and are rated Academic Emergency every year. Whats the difference? Figure it out liberals and idiots. Throwing more money at it won't help it even one iota.
Around this part of Ohio, if you love your children and want them to succeed in life, You will find a way not to make them attend Cincinnati Public schools. Discipline problems, rampant drugs, rampant sex crimes, crimes against property, crimes against Teachers, no respect taught in the students homes..for ANYONE, including themselves....its a cesspool, and its a shame.
But no one will fix it and thats the way it will stay. I might add that Cincinnati city leadership are all dims, and have been for years...schools and children are not too much of a priority or even a subject of discussion for them. I imagine its the same thing in Cleveland where the city leadership has also been solid dim for about 20 years. Coincidence? No freaking way. They breed them in the city to vote dim and its the way the city will always be.
I never go into that city cesspool if I don't have a solid reason and it's not broad daylight.
Well, this makes sense. Lawmakers, who are supposed to be the equals of judges in our system of checks and balances, are ordered by a judge to change laws. The lawmakers ignore the judges for over a year. Well! We can't have that. We'll appoint lawmakers of our own and SET THIS RIGHT!.
In this case, a spokesman for the lawmakers should have held a press conference, taken the original order, publically ripped it into shreds and said the judge should call his relevant representative to lobby for the law change.
It is widely assumed that Justice DeGrasse will now draw heavily from the panel's findings as he decides how much more money the city's schools are owed. The state could then appeal, though New York's highest court largely upheld Justice DeGrasse's earlier rulings.
The state should neither appeal, nor bother with a court appearance. The "state" should simply ignore the "ruling." See above for needed press conference. In this case a statement about judge-anarchists that need to be fired should make it into public discussion.
On the other hand, New Yorkers, especially those in New York City, simply love taxes. They can't get enough, so they shouldn't mind anteing up. Heck, they shouldn't even be waiting for laws or suits of judges. They should simply be sending it in as fast as they can. Those outside the city really ought to be left alone, and it's the legislature's job to "fight" for them. See above for suggestion on needed press conference.
The thing I really live about this article is that it simply goes without saying that a judge snaps his fingers, says jump and everyone (including weenie lawmakers) asks, "How high?"
This is usually the reason more money is not the answer. But at the prices they spend, they could hire tutors for most of the kids. Time to let vouchers have a go. Break up the teacher- school board- democratic vote feast and get some serious board members. Then fire principals and have new principals fire teachers. Only solution and vouchers may be a way for it to happen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.