Testimony on the Expense Budget for 1999-2000

 

NYC ADA's interest in and concern about the Chancellor's Budget Request grows from our awareness that an educated citizenry is the best protector of a democracy and the best guarantee of economic security for the individual and his or her family. Budgets are both economic and political. A review of the Chancellor's 1999-2000 budget request is a social studies lesson for all of us here. There are two basic questions as in all social studies class.

 

First, what do the facts say? And, then, what do the facts mean.

 

Governor Pataki's proposed NYS budget for FY'00 of $72.7B includes an increase of only $18 million over last year for NYC public schools ($4.19 billion out of $11.91 billion). Yet NYC's needs far exceed the funds allocated. The big 5 School Districts educate 62% of all pre-Kindergarten children, 86% of all Limited English Proficient pupils, 41% of all Special Education students and an overwhelming number of students in poverty (with 81% of NYC students eligible for free or reduced lunch). A State budget surplus between $1.8 and $3 billion is anticipated, with the Governor recommending 3/4 for debt reduction.

 

NYC's preliminary FY'00 budget is $35.5 billion with an anticipated surplus of $1.1 billion. About 4.1 billion, an amount similar to that of NYS, has been earmarked for public schools. Simultaneously, however, the intent appears to be to use the surplus to reduce anticipated budget gaps in future years.

 

An overview of the Chancellor's budget request tells us that the facts continue to say that our school system primarily serves adults. Students continue to be its overlooked and often neglected constituency.

 

We acknowledge that significant reforms have been put in place over the past several years. We now know how much is spent on administrative costs as contrasted with instructional costs. School based budgeting has made it easier for us to see funding allocations for student needs. Yet, allocations for school building maintenance are non-existent while the Board waits for NYS to continue to carry the load fully. Projected new construction in the Capital and budget awaits State and Federal initiatives. The message is that students are not valued, that safe and attractive learning environments mean little or nothing, and that adults continue to reap the benefits of lucrative contracts while kids continue to learn in unacceptable physical spaces.

 

My colleagues in a host of civic groups joining me in testimony here this afternoon will tell you that additional funds are required across the board. These funds should ideally be targeted to children in the classroom. They should be spent to expand pre-kindergarten classes, to reduce class size, to introduce and/or continue tried and proven reading initiatives, to expand sports programs, to increase parent involvement and after-school programs, and to continue effective staff development programs.

 

And, they are all right! Yet, NYC ADA is here to argue that teacher recruitment, training and retention is the single most important aspect of improved student outcomes. We are here to challenge you to spend the money where it will reap benefits and serve children rather than adults.

 

Both broad titles and specific items in the Budget make it difficult to compare new initiatives and often to identify continuing ones. We however urge:

 

rejection of the Charter School experiments scheduled for Districts 13 and 22;

 

significant expansion of staff development programs throughout the system;

 

adoption of a multi-year budget especially in the area of instruction;

 

creation of the position of Building Manager for sites hosting two or more schools within a school.

 

Charter Schools are not public schools. They are publicly-funded schools. They are not accessible to all students. The Chancellor's opposition to the Legislature's Charter School Law was correct. Like vouchers, they abandon the large numbers of students in failing or low-performing schools who have no other alternative. All efforts should be directed toward making our public school system worthy of the students they serve and effective in preparing them for workplace in the next century. The $2.5 million in funds for experiments in District 13 and 22 deny all students those attributes which drive support for charter schools. We oppose charter schools because they are too exclusive, too often respond to economic profit demands, encourage high staff turnover, and balkanize communities when established along ethnic, racial, and religious lines. We challenge their recruitment strategies, their often sectarian curriculum and lack of accountability.

 

The energy required to sustain charter schools can be better used to improve traditional public schools and the creativity and innovation so easily attributable to them can flourish in a supportable public school environment.

 

Recruitment of talented, qualified staff to instruct students in the next decades requires innovative and continuous staff development programs to sustain them in an educational environment. Less than 3% of the $1,147,000 budget request has been assigned to staff development ($34.1 million). New standards for teachers as well as students require that close attention be paid to this too often neglected area. As the current teaching population ages and retires, the need for on the job training and retraining is increasing. Research verifies that good teaching matters, that poor and minority students who now constitute 84% of the system can and will achieve at the same levels as other students if they are taught at those levels. The most significant factor in student achievement is the teacher! If we can assure that poor students of color have the same quality teachers as other students, about half of the achievement gap would disappear. If we assigned our best teachers to the students who need them the most, the evidence suggests we could close the gap entirely.

 

All too often schools in the most economically deprived and depressed areas cannot plan ahead because they have no idea of future resources. An all-important factor in promoting positive change in the system is the adoption of the multi-year budget. The old adage that one plans to fail, if one fails to plan, is appropriate. Staffing is key and quality staffing is essential if students are to have the quality staff required to achieve acceptable academic outcomes. The ability to identify and to commit to staff early would have a positive impact on instruction.

 

Factors which work against innovation and change include the friction and petty conflicts arising from supervisory staff protecting their own turf. All too often students are deprived of opportunities to learn and grow, because adults cannot reach a fair compromise.

 

Experimental schools which host two or more schools often fall prey to internecine struggles between staff because each seeks to protect his/her own interests. An impartial building manager would significantly limit -- if not terminate -- such struggles. This is a small, doable request which could have far-reaching and positive results.

 

Expense Budgets are wish lists, as we know! Yet, small dreams do not have the power to move men and women. For our children's sake and for ourselves and our City, let's dream some big dreams and then make them come true! This is the challenge and gauntlet we in NYC ADA lay down to you.

 

Home.