Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 11 June 2013

Created: 11 June 2013

Last Updated: 11 June 2013

Hits: 4105

NYS Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli was in Scarsdale on June 6, 2013 to address the League of Women Voters of Westchester and I stopped by to see what he had to say about ballooning pension and retirement fund payments, unfunded state mandates and the tax cap that are decimating local school and village budgets.

Before he turned to the issues that mattered to me, he provided an outlook on our economy, reporting that "statewide numbers are trending toward recovery with all of the indicators on the positive side." He called it a "tenuous recovery in slow motion" and told the group that unemployment numbers in the lower Hudson Valley were at 6.7%, better than the statewide statistic of 7.8%. He added that "Sequestration is causing problems for the NYS economy and in the next five years we could lose $5 billion dollars if this is not resolved."

Turning to local issues he agreed that these "are tough times for local governments and school districts," and offered little consolation for local municipalities. In fact he said, "local stress is going to be the new normal. Healthcare and pensions will continue to go up and in the long term there will be impacts that will cause policy changes. With 2/3 of the school budgets that exceeded the cap defeated, the tax cap is going to force tough choices about spending."

According to DiNapoli, when Governor Cuomo put forth the 2% tax cap "there was an expectation of mandate relief to make it easier to comply. However, mandate relief did not occur."

What to do? Unable to offer any financial benefits to strained school and village budgets, his office is publishing a list of "those cities under the most stress." Since, according to Di Napoli, the state does not "have money for bailouts, stress reporting will be an early warning system" for those facing possible bankruptcy.

Telling the group that a "well-funded pension plan is important for everyone," he claimed that New York has "the best funded pension plan," and has taken five years to work through losses suffered in 2008. He reported that for the past year they had a 10% positive return and after 2014 local schools and governments should see a reduction in the increases in payments for the fund.

During the Q&A, time ran out before I could ask further questions about what mattered most to Scarsdale. I chased him down as he was leaving and told him about the resounding defeat of our local school budget for the first time in over 40 years, partially due to increased pension and retirement fund payments and state mandates. A resident of Great Neck, another district that prides itself in great schools, DiNapoli looked genuinely surprised about the news. I asked him if there was any hope that Governor Cuomo would negotiate with the unions for pension reform and he answered, "labor law is tricky stuff," and conjectured that "nothing will happen until after the election." We also discussed the tax cap and he said that in Massachusetts, when a cap was passed, the state came up with funds to shore up local budgets, which was not the case in New York.

So what's the long and the short of it? Though he is clearly articulate and competent, DiNapoli doesn't appear to have answers. So let's take it to Albany and lobby our state senators and assemblymen, along with Governor Cuomo, who is balancing the state budget on our backs. The tax cap may have made him a hero to some, but to anyone who's attended a school or village board meeting this year, Cuomo is anything but heroic.

Meanwhile, State Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins just announced the passage of a bill in the state senate requiring the state to pay for unfunded mandates.

The bill requires the state to fund any mandated program imposed on local governments and school districts and would protect local municipalities from bearing the cost of programs created and/ or originated by the State, allowing local officials to set their own priorities without the possibility of future unfunded mandated programs disrupting their budgets.

"Unfunded mandates create real struggles for local governments and school districts, so any steps we can take to relieve those burdens are welcome news. Cash-strapped local governments have had to make difficult choices through the recession and unfunded mandates have made that task even more difficult. This legislation places the responsibility of funding State mandated programs where it belongs, on the State," said Democratic Conference Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins.

The legislation, S.1294, defines an unfunded mandate as "any state law, rule or regulation which establishes a new program requires a higher level of service for an existing program which a municipal corporation is required to provide, and which results in a net additional cost to such municipal corporation." It requires the state to provide school districts and local governments "compensation or funding... of the full amount of the net additional costs" of any unfunded mandate it imposed upon localities.

Details

Published: 17 June 2013

Created: 17 June 2013

Last Updated: 18 June 2013

Hits: 4409

The battle over the 2009 Westchester County Affordable Housing Settlement and $7.4 million in community block grants for Westchester continues. County Executive Rob Astorino is now claiming that HUD is reaching beyond the scope of the original agreement and demanding that Westchester build 10,678 units as suggested in a 2005 Affordable Allocation Plan, rather than the 750 required by the settlement. Astorino is also charging that Westchester communities, outside the 31 named in the settlement, will also be required to construct affordable units.

In response, James Johnson, the Federal Monitor for the case has written to Astorino to demand that he remove these "misleading statements" from County press releases and the County website. In his letter, Johnson explains that in March 2013, in an effort to resolve issues around the suit, the Monitor sent letters with preliminary findings on zoning and requests for additional information to the individual municipalities. These letters included the benchmark counts for affordable units as set in the 2005 report. According to the Monitor, the court found that though these allocations "do not carry the force of law, passing a zoning ordinance that prohibits multi-family or high-density housing is calculated directly or indirectly to thwart the fulfillment of the need of the town and region, presently and in the future."

Johnson concludes that these benchmarks "neither expand nor supplant the County's obligation to build the 750 units" and that in fact, "the Monitor does not have unilateral authority to upwardly revise the number of units required in the settlement."

However, Johnson does reassert that the County is obliged to conduct an analysis of impediments to fair and affordable housing that includes an analysis of local zoning ordinances. The study must "identify zoning practices that would, if not remedied by the municipality, lead the county to pursue legal action." HUD expected to have an acceptable analysis from the County in 2009, however the Monitor says that in the past three years, the "County failed to submit an A1 deemed acceptable to HUD." But according to Astorino, "The County has conducted several comprehensive reviews of all 853 zoning districts in Westchester and found no evidence of exclusionary practices based on race or ethnicity."

Democrat Ken Jenkins, who chairs the County Board of Legislature also got involved in an effort to end the impasses and secure the release of $7.4 million in Community Development Block Grants from Fiscal Year 2011 that HUD is threatening to reallocate unless the County complies with the suit. Jenkins, said, "Instead of race-baiting and issuing false and discriminatory statements regarding the Housing Settlement, County Executive Astorino should be working with all parties to comply with the settlement and lead our communities on a path that ensures fair and affordable housing will be a big component of a strong and prosperous future. Instead of promoting amicable cooperation here, he's fostering animus and conflict, which can only be detrimental for everyone involved. This unproductive and misleading rhetoric regarding the settlement needs to end today."

In the meantime, Federal Monitor Johnson's letter tells Astorino that if he fails to correct the website and his statements, the Monitor "will ask the Department of Justice to include this unresolved issue in its status report to the Court to be filed on June 14."

Details

Written by Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 04 June 2013

Created: 04 June 2013

Last Updated: 04 June 2013

Hits: 5718

The mood of the audience was decidedly mixed at the June 3rd meeting of the Scarsdale School Board when the Board was assembled to propose a revised budget. In attendance were representatives from the "no" camp who brought in over 1,700 votes to defeat the first budget as well as representatives from the PTA's, interested community members, leaders of Maroon and White, school administrators and faculty. Despite the limited timeframe, Board President Liz Guggenheimer invited community comments and the level of anger expressed by some was surprising in light of the considerable cuts in the proposed budget.

First to take the mike was Mitchell Gross with a statement condemning the district for holding a health insurance reserve fund. He said that the reserve was a "fictitious account" in violation of NYS law and charged the district with violating reserve policies which dictate that a district hold no more than 4% in reserve. He claimed the district had "failed to disclose these reserves" and called it a "material and serious violation" made by the district to "mislead and misrepresent the public to obtain a positive outcome on the budget." He conjectured that this "may constitute securities fraud" and "jeopardize the district's credit rating." He then asked for Dr. McGill's resignation, called for new auditors and asked the district to consider the consequences of a budget that is not in compliance with the law.

Matt Callahan said "we're in a tight spot" and questioned the funding for the Teen Center. He told the Board that they "completely ignored Dr. McGill's recommendation not to fund it" and questioned "how many use it."

Middle School PTA President Pam Fuehrer spoke in defense of funding for the Center for Innovation and said that two center projects, service learning and time block management, directly impact student learning. She also mentioned the enthusiastic response to the food bank and said "the projects that came out of the Center were fantastic." She asked the board to put back another $25,000 into the budget for the Center for Innovation and added, "I think the helping teacher is important as well."

PT Council President Gail Hutcher appreciated the Board's response to the defeat and said, "the Community wants more transparency and greater fiscal restraint." She urged that "Savings should not come from class size or core curriculum," and warned that "quick cuts could impact education." She asked for the Board to "look for cuts that can be reinstated."

Marian Green ,a past President of CHILD, asked the Board to consider requiring tuition for the 85-95 staff children who attend the Scarsdale schools and also requested more information about the number of district cars and who drives them.

Bob Berg, who had led the opposition to the first budget, vowed to vote in favor of this second proposed budget" and "to urge fellow Scarsdale voters to come to the polls on June 18 and vote for the budget as well."  He called the budget process a "tough slog" and said, the "messy budget vote is a watershed and cathartic event in Scarsdale's history. For the first time ... the voters of Scarsdale could no longer be hornswoggled into blindly rubber-stamping yet another spendthrift budget with platitudes that "it's for the children." "This year, the budget process and its aftermath have revealed a dysfunctional school board, brow-beaten by a domineering superintendent into quiet acquiescence." He urged the Board to "take control and fulfill their fiduciary duties to the voters by asking the hard questions and not be belittled or marginalized for doing so." He ended by saying, "While I support the proposed budget and will vote for it in order to avoid Armageddon, the time has come for accountability, transparency, and new leadership."

Former School Board member Mitchell Otten said that some good ideas had come out of the process including, "zero based views, broader categories of consultancies and contractors, the need to understand levers that you do have and for more views backwards and forwards for implications of decisions made today." He told the Board that the "need to find a way to demonstrate our excellence with metrics."

Alice of Catherine Road also discussed the impact of staff children on the budget. She said, "Over 85 kids are here whose parents are teachers in the school. At $20,000 per kid that's $1.7 million in total cost. In tough times we should ask for tuition. We don't want to keep seeing our taxes going up."

In response, Dr. McGill offered an explanation of the policy on staff children. He clarified that faculty and employee children attend district schools and the Board has felt "that these children added economic diversity to our student body. This is a way of attracting faculty and telling them they are appreciated." He also said, "They earn us per pupil aid from Albany" and that the "financial burden to Scarsdale taxpayer is not significant." Linda Purvis explained that employee's children are placed where they will fit in, and additional teachers are not added to accommodate them.

Jim Labick, another leader of the opposition campaign also vowed to vote yes this time. He said, "I have lived here for 36 years and never voted no. I voted no this time because I wanted to send a message to the union that we don't have a blank check. Keep the contract to two years. I believe that the Board of Ed has listened and heard. Let's get real – I am voting yes and I am going to ask everyone I know to vote yes. I trust the Board of Ed to do the right thing and that's why I am voting yes."

Following the meeting, the Coalition for Scarsdale Schools sent Scarsdale10583 the following statement: "The Coalition for Scarsdale Schools thanks the Board and Administration for their hard work in developing a revised budget for 2013-14 that excludes the Center for Health, Fitness and Learning that had been proposed, and reduces the Budget by over $1 million. The revised Budget reflects difficult decisions, and now deserves voters' full support in the vote on Tuesday, June 18th. We urge ALL registered voters in Scarsdale and the Mamaroneck Strip to VOTE YES June 18th at the Middle School. We cannot risk a defeat of this second Budget, which would result in a state-mandated contingency budget with draconian cuts to educational programs, and would be disastrous for the entire Scarsdale community. It is imperative that we now come together to sustain a community institution of which we are justly proud. The stakes for the Scarsdale community are too high for voters to stay home."