EdVANTAGE Blog

Governor Paterson’s difficulties overshadowed the state budget process in Albany news last week.

But the Administration and Legislative Leaders did reach agreement on a revenue forecast.  A coalition of education groups sponsored news conferences around the state to draw attention to choices schools are facing as they assemble their budget plans.

The Council’s summary and analysis of the Governor’s budget proposals was mailed to superintendents and Legislators last week.

In Reverse on Revenues
In many past years, the Legislature’s economic and revenue reviews led to consensus that the economy was performing better than the Administration had been able to predict, and identified revenues that could be used to increase funding above levels the Governor had proposed.

This year, the opposite is true.  All parties have concluded that the Governor’s revenue estimates have proven too optimistic.  They reached consensus that the state would take in $850 million less in revenue than the Executive Budget anticipated.

The consequence of this is that the first $850 million in spending reductions or additional revenue which the Legislature agrees upon will go, not to restore School Aid funding or other programs, but to fill the hole that has emerged in the Governor’s proposed budget.

The four-page summary of the consensus forecast is available here.

Budget Impact News Conferences
Last Thursday, the Council joined with an assortment of groups including NYSSBA, NYSUT, SAANYS, NYSSPTA, and the Alliance for Quality Education to conduct news conferences in 18 locations around the state on the impact of education budget cuts.

Coverage was spotty, with the events partly overshadowed by Governor Paterson’s troubles and the surprise announcement that day that New York is among 16 finalists in the competition for federal Race to the Top funding.

Still, the events did help draw attention to the painful choices some district leaders are confronting.

Here are some samples:

Albany
Jamestown
Plattsburgh
Syracuse
Troy

Leading up to March 4, some concerns were raised that the events might provoke a negative reaction against school leaders, for asking for more money when the state is broke.  It was a fair concern.

In our solo advocacy, we typically ask for both funding and flexibility, to help maximize resources and control costs.  The latter theme is harder to raise when participating in some coalition efforts.

But one point I have stressed is that whether advocating for funding or flexibility, the arguments are essentially the same — school leaders are facing dreadful choices, state actions can give them opportunities to make better choices.

It’s also the case that for some districts, their choices are so dire, more state funding is only action that could significantly help this year.

Further, groups in other fields are advocating for reduction of cuts.  If schools hold back it could risk being interpreted as evidence that the problems they face are not so difficult, and undermine chances for winning either more funding or more flexibility.