New York Governor Spitzer Proposes Major Education
Policy and Funding Reforms
Governor Eliot Spitzer has proposed an overhaul of
New York’s education finance system that will
tie far-reaching accountability reforms to the “the
largest infusion of resources” in state history
and change the entire funding formula in a way that
aligns dollars with the needs of children.
Above and Beyond the CFE Ruling
In releasing his first executive budget on January
31, Governor Spitzer announced his historic aid increase
for New York’s schools, making it clear that his
“Contract
for Excellence” was a statewide agenda. Spitzer’s
budget provides a $1.4 billion statewide increase
in school funding for the upcoming year, increasing
to $7 billion after four years. New York City, between
the Governor’s proposal and the $2.2 billion in
additional City money proposed by Mayor Michael Bloomberg,
would see an increase of approximately $1.2 billion
for 2007-2008, rising to $5.4 billion after four years.
If fully funded, the Governor’s budget would go
above and beyond the “constitutional floor”
laid out in the New York Court of Appeals’ November
ruling in Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) v. State,
which mandated an additional $1.9 billion for New York
City schools.
“We applaud Governor Spitzer for proposing the
most comprehensive school funding accountability system
ever seen in New York State,” said Michael A.
Rebell, executive director of The Campaign for Educational
Equity and former counsel for the plaintiffs in the
CFE case. “The courts in the CFE
case were firm that real accountability must accompany
any increase in funding. This proposal is a big step
toward compliance with the CFE mandate.”
Geri Palast, Executive Director of CFE,
praised the Governor’s proposal and noted, “CFE’s
work is far from done. We will be a full partner with
Governor Spitzer in enacting this long-awaited budget
and reform initiative.”
Contracts with Districts
The Spitzer camp is calling its set of reforms a “contract”
with districts. In exchange for truly adequate funding,
districts receiving major sums ($15 million more or
a 10 percent increase over the previous year) are required
to develop a comprehensive plan for how they will direct
their funding and implement their educational programs.
As Spitzer explained, “The Federal No Child Left
Behind Act sadly demonstrated that accountability without
resources is a false promise. But we also know that
resources without accountability are a recipe for waste.”
Spitzer urged investing dollars in programs and strategies
that are proven to work, such as reducing class sizes
and improving the quality of teaching, and said each
district will have to select from “a menu of approved
strategies and initiatives.” Under the plan, districts
will also have to produce real measures of performance
improvement to evaluate success. The comprehensive plan
will come out of a public process that will involve
every education stakeholder in the district.
Landmark Reforms
A landmark piece of Spitzer’s address was his
call for a new “foundation” funding formula
that will ensure education dollars match the actual
needs of schoolchildren, not the needs of politicians.
The state’s current formulas have been notoriously
subject to political manipulation. Spitzer seeks to
replace these “byzantine and politically driven
school aid formulas that are annually manipulated to
produce predetermined results” with a “more
efficient, transparent, and reform-minded” school
aid formula.
“Rhetoric has been flying around for years to
fix the state’s arcane and unfair funding formulas,
but Spitzer has put a real proposal on the table to
actually do it with a foundation formula that offers
a fair and simplified way to distribute dollars,”
Rebell said.
Spitzer also proposed to establish universal access
to high-quality pre-kindergarten programs within the
next four years.
While it is difficult to predict what may emerge from
the legislative process come April, “A Contract
for Excellence” holds the potential to meet each
aspect of the highest court ruling in the CFE
case—adequate funding distributed based on actual
student need plus rigorous accountability.
Prepared by The
Campaign for Educational Equity
|
