Explain our analysis of underfunded mandates. Explain our analysis of underfunded mandates

Explain our analysis of underfunded mandates.

• Explain our analysis of underfunded mandates.

• Illustrate the need for legislation which requires calculating local costs associated with bills before they are enacted.

• Illustrate the need to review current mandates to see if there are alternatives to reduce costs.

• There are ‘low-hanging’, less politically driven mandates that can be adjusted to reduce tax payer costs immediately.

• Illustrate the need to slow down APPR implementation, which could be one of the largest underfunded mandate to date.

• Specific Focus

• Rolling back underfunded mandates, by making lawmakers aware of their actual costs

• Sharing cost saving ideas among the R.E.A.D. districts
• TRS and ERS pension fund shortfalls

Be informed:

• Be informed:

• We need to understand where and how funding is spent.

• Responsible leadership:

• We represent taxpayers. These mandates are paid for by local property taxes.

• Accountability and transparency:

• School districts must show how they spend money.

R.E.A.D. created a template that itemizes and presents information on estimating the cost of Underfunded mandates.

• R.E.A.D. created a template that itemizes and presents information on estimating the cost of Underfunded mandates.

• Over 90 mandates are included, segmented into categories:

State, Federal and SED mandates are included.

• State, Federal and SED mandates are included.

• Does not include mandates which R.E.A.D. feels are necessary district obligations.
• Does not include costs associated with Benefits (retirement system, health, etc.), Wick’s Law (over the life of the loan), Triborough and other major benefit, negotiation or construction costs.

• The compilation is an objective view of mandate costs.

• Each mandate has cost consequences whether or not they are beneficial.
• The list is continuously updated and revised to be a more accurate representation of mandate obligations.
• The most recent revision is an update developed in December 2009.

Each district compiles their own data.

• Each district compiles their own data.

• NYSBBA and Westchester Putnam School Board Association (WPSBA) are helping to coordinate the effort.

• Definitions for mandate have been developed so that districts are consistent in identifying costs associated with mandates.

• Methods for estimating personnel hours and other costs, ST3 locations, etc. are provided to make cost calculations easier.
• Templates for estimating testing costs and Wick’s law costs are provided.

Categories, descriptions, and account codes

• Categories, descriptions, and account codes

• are provided.

• School districts provide actual amounts.

• Aid is subtracted from total costs.

In FY ‘08-09, the total cost for these Underfunded mandates for seven districts was $94.4 million, or an average of 20% of the entire school budget.

• In FY ‘08-09, the total cost for these Underfunded mandates for seven districts was $94.4 million, or an average of 20% of the entire school budget.

The numbers add up quickly for eight school districts...

• The numbers add up quickly for eight school districts...

• Over $587,881 in testing costs.

• Over $151,460 in internal audit costs.

• Over $541,093 in data warehousing costs.

• Over $287,338 in special education legal costs.

• Over $66,185 in Special Education (STAC) reporting.

• Over $118,000 in clerical costs associated with professional development & monitoring highly qualified teacher requirements.

• Over $209,779 in inspections, monitoring, and compliance (OSHA, DEC, elevators, fire safety, extinguishers).

Underfunded mandate reduction act, following the lines of the federal paperwork reduction act.

• Underfunded mandate reduction act, following the lines of the federal paperwork reduction act.

• Requires a cost estimate for each new mandate from the legislature or the education department. These costs would be calculated for the different types of local districts and accumulated for a statewide total mandate cost.

• Legislation to reduce the cost of the new comptroller’s audits, which have cost taxpayers more to conduct than they have saved.

• Reduce the frequency to every two years
• Streamline the requirements on districts who have had clean records for two cycles, to a half-cost audit.

• Support for the bill allowing amortization of TRS payments (Member Abbate’s Bill Number A06309 - Same as State Senate Number S 4067).

• Delay introduction of APPR until costs associated with implementation such as data collection, reporting, training, etc. are known and mechanisms for paying for these costs are implemented.

• Estimated costs for 6 Rockland districts are $2.7 million per year. Extrapolated to 675 school districts the cost per year could be over $306 million per year.