No CFE funding agreement in sight 

By MICHAEL HIRSCH

With the July 30 deadline to comply with a court order only six weeks away, it is becoming less likely that there will be a legislative plan to secure the funding, accountability and reforms the Court of Appeals demanded in its June 2003 decision upholding the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit.

That, of course, means city schools will go another year without the funding they need. It could also begin a nightmarish chain of events.

Expressing the feelings of most legislators, Senate Education Committee Chair Steve Saland emphasized that a court-imposed funding formula would be a disaster.

Speaking at the Spring Education Conference in May, he predicted there would be a plethora of lawsuits from every corner of the state challenging any decision made by a special master if Judge Leland DeGrasse is forced to appoint one. 

Samira Ahmed, deputy director for the CFE, agreed with Saland. She said it was crucial to come up with a legislative solution to avoid further delays that would occur if the July 30 deadline is missed. 

As the New York Teacher went to press on June 17, here is what was happening in the CFE case:

• The three major players in the state legislative process who routinely make the budget decisions - Gov. George Pataki, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno - are far apart in their spending and reform plans and seemingly adamant in their positions. 
• Bruno has announced that the Senate will recess on or about June 22 or June 23 - even if there is no agreement. It is not clear when senators will return to Albany. The Legislature, which has been consumed with how to solve CFE, has not yet passed a budget.
• Meanwhile, parents and educators are running out of patience. A rally protesting the Legislature’s non-action was to take place on June 17 at Madison Square Park in Manhattan. 
• If there is no agreement, the matter will be put in front of a court-appointed special master, who would propose a resolution to the court. Justice DeGrasse has indicated he will appoint a three-member panel instead of one individual.

How long would this take? No one can really predict how much time, but some legal observers say it could take years.

"This is a nightmare in the making," UFT President Randi Weingarten said. "Even in the face of the Court of Appeals ruling that the state had an obligation to provide a ‘sound, basic education’ for New York City students by July 30, the leaders in Albany have not been able to get this done. 

"It is very disappointing, but we will continue to work with all parties to try to make this happen."

Pataki, Bruno and Silver have each announced their spending plans to comply with the court order.

According to Weingarten, all three plans contain some solid components, but she said the union prefers the Silver proposal, which boosts state aid to high-risk state districts in general and to New York City schools in particular by some $4 billion over five years. 

Silver’s plan, announced in early June, would grant city schools $557 million in the first year, along with an added $1.3 billion for new construction in the first year. Weingarten said that figure "establishes the magnitude of the state’s responsibility to provide a sound basic education for all our kids, supplemented, of course, by federal funds and a strong local commitment."

The Assembly plan endorses high educator salaries and the School Enterprise Zone proposal that Weingarten made at the Spring Education Conference as an appropriate way to spend CFE funds.

She added one caveat: The speaker’s insistence that much of the funding come through a flat foundation grant (without programmatic restrictions) meant dollars could be siphoned away from proven programs that respond to the goals of fiscal equity and into the latest DOE boutique project. 

"If the state is to combine aid categories into a ‘foundation grant,’ we will need even clearer accountability standards, planning and programs to ensure that these new dollars are spent on things that actually help kids learn, particularly on retaining experienced teachers and creating school enterprise zones," Weingarten said.

The Bruno plan is less generous than either Pataki’s or Silver’s. While both he and the governor do target funding to proven programs that respond to the imperatives of the CFE suit, Bruno would offer city schools just $1.76 billion over five years, with promises of added dollars down the road for capital spending. 

Although totally at odds with the court order, Bruno’s plan would give to the city a smaller percentage of operating aid than the city received under the formulas already rejected by the court in CFE and, in fact, pour more into suburban districts. 

The governor’s Zarb Commission recommended increasing school funding between $2.5 billion and $5.6 billion. Other studies projected the cost of providing a "sound basic education for city students" at up to $20 billion.

Besides the dollar differences, the three state officials are butting heads over how the increases would be funded. The governor wants to fund school aid with revenue from legalized video lottery gambling collected in terminals scattered throughout the state. 

The gambling initiative is anathema to the speaker, who labels it "a regressive tax on the poor." Silver favors instead funding the increase to schools through general revenues, which the Democratic leadership believes will increase through the natural growth of the state and national economy. Silver rejects new taxes, including a progressive stock-transfer tax supported by the UFT and other city unions.

The UFT earlier recommended an initial measure targeting $1.5 billion. The funds would be split between increasing salaries to narrow the wage gap between city and suburban pay scales and stanch the flow of experienced teachers, and creating a School Enterprise Zone composed of 200 low-performing schools, whose students would receive a plethora of special services and be a model for how to improve inner-city education.