Wage changes vary widely from region to region, as highlighted by the Brookings Institution’s MetroMonitor report, which parses economic data on the country’s 100 largest metropolitan areas. The report compares the change in real average wages for the 100 regions from Q4 2008 to the Q1 2009.

The picture is even worse in upstate New York, where average wages FELL 2.3% in Rochester and 2.2% in Syracuse.

In fact, the Rochester metro area had the largest wage DECREASE of the 100 metro areas in the study.

As a comparison, the Brighton teachers’ contract provided 4.4% / 4.2% / 4.0% compounded increases over the last three years.

Click here to read the full article:

http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/107267/pay-cut-cities.html?mod=career-salary_negotiation

The Democrat & Chronicle, December 15, 2008, discussed a potential halt to increases in NYS Aid to Education and possibly even a decrease in the amount from last year (2008/09 school year).

The following chart was included in the article:

Note that Brighton received a 55% increase in NYS Aid from 2004-2008.  (Of interest:  Pittsford received a 72% increase….makes you wonder how the aid formula works?).

The issue that the ASI-Brighton reader must understand is: The higher the aid dollars, the lower your school property tax becomes WHILE the District can spend more money. Don’t roll your eyes…you need to understand why:

The “Budget” is an expenditure plan.  It says the District plans to spend (say) $10,000.  Where does the revenue come to meet that expense?  It comes from a variety of sources…sales tax; rentals; Investment income;, NYS Aid and property taxes.

Let’s say that the above revenue items BEFORE property taxes totals $7,000 including $1,800 in NYS Aid.  That means that the Property Tax Levy will be $3,000 ($10,000 - $7,000)…spread over all of us taxpayers…to pay for the $10,000 budget.

If in the above example, NYS Aid is increased to $2,000, then the Property Tax Levy is reduced to $2,800.  As NYS Aid goes up, the Property Tax Levy goes down.

What’s really interesting is that the District can spend more money as the Aid increases while keeping the Property Tax Levy at a relatively acceptable increase.  Here’s how:

Let’s say the District “knows” that NYS Aid will increase from $1,800 to $2,000.  The District can then increase the Budget (remember…it is an expenditure plan) by $200 and still deliver the SAME Property Tax Levy as they had last year!

That’s why the Legislators (and unions) want to maintain increases in NYS Aid.  You, the taxpayer, get a relatively constant, and acceptable, property tax increase while budgets can increase by the 10 year average of 6.5% in Monroe County.  You don’t “see” NYS Aid when you pay NYS income taxes.  You “see” your property tax bill.

Now….the NYS Aid increases appear to be coming to an end.  Will you vote “Yes” for a major property tax increase to cover a decrease in NYS Aid?

The Nov. 13 Wall Street Journal article paints a very dark future for the NY State economy.

NYS has been highly dependent on Wall Street profits to generate tax revenue.  As we all know only too well, the party is over.  The WSJ does not think the “good times” are going to return.  Increased regulatory controls will limit the huge profits that Wall Street has generated during the last decade.

Read the full article at:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122653542508722577.html

With State school aid and Medicare the primary two expenditure categories in the NYS budget, these two costs must be reduced.

What does this mean for local property taxes?  As state school aid declines, local property taxes must increase …unless school budgets are reduced.

The D&C, Nov. 13, 2008, reported that Gov. Paterson has proposed a reduction in NYS school aid for the current (2008/09) school year.  Is the educational sky going to fall?

Personally, I am opposed to mid-year adjustments in NYS school aid

However, NYS embarked on unprecedented expansion of school aid under Gov. Spitzer (2007/08).  As usual, the NYS legislature did not critically look at our state’s financial health.   Let’s remember that NYS school aid comes from NYS taxes.  I warned of this eventuality at a Board meeting last year.  Unfortunately, it is “time to pay the piper”.

We can look at the NYS school aid numbers in a more understandable manner using the actual NYS aid percentages.  Let’s say:

In 2006, your rich uncle gave you $1,000.

In 2007, this nice uncle gave you $1,047…a 4.7% increase.

In 2008, this very generous uncle gave you $1,229…a huge 17.4% increase over 2007.

In 2009, this uncle promised you $1,379…another large 12.2% increase over 2008.

Today, the uncle’s financial condition is in the toilet so he says he has to cut back on his promise.  You, of course, tell him that you counted on that money and it has already been spent.  He is sorry, but he is in serious financial difficulty.

He says he must reduce his gift by $108 (7.8%) of the $1,379 that he promised.  You still will get $1,271.

$1,271 is a 3.4% INCREASE over 2008.  It is a 27% increase over 2006.

Yes, it is not the 12.2% that you thought you were going to get.  But for the current economic times, you can argue that 3.4% is a reasonable increase.

Of course, the primary problem is that you (the District) have already allocated all of the anticipated revenue.

Certainly, deciding where the District is going to find $983,000 (the proposed reduction amount) in mid-year is a serious task.

However, the FAIR Plan was rescinded.  This means that next year, the District will receive the normal (approx.) $1 million from the Sales Tax that was not budgeted this year.  The District will also receive an (approx.) $200,000 payment for back Sales Tax revenue that was not received this year.

Is the educational sky falling this year?  I believe there is a combination of financial approaches that will allow Brighton to weather the school aid reduction this year without affecting program or teachers.

The more pressing question:  How will the District deal with a 3.4% (or less) increase in NYS school aid next year?

Kent Gardner, the respected president of the local Center for Government Research (CGR) believes that the 4% property tax cap proposal is a needed “good start”.  Read his entire August 17 D&C editorial at:

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080817/OPINION02/808170350/1039/OPINION

The August 18 D&C Editorial Page agreed with Tom Golisano that 4% is far too high and 2% would be much more realistic and effective.

USAToday, weekend edition August 1-3, ran a front page article showing that state and local government spending has been rising three times as fast as revenues. State finances are nearing a crisis.

See: http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20080801/1a_lede01_dom.art.htm?loc=interstitialskip

From June 2007 to June 2008, state and local governments have ADDED 264,000 jobs while the private sector LOST 431,000 jobs.

According to USAToday, “a large share of the new workers are teachers, police officers and prison guards”. “A key factor driving higher spending: new employees and higher compensation.”

The article is not clear on which teachers are included in governmental hirings (state colleges, city school districts?).

However, from my perspective, the more critical issue is that SPENDING, by state and local governments, as well as local school districts, appears to be completely insensitive to the economic condition of the taxpayers that are providing the revenue to meet this “binge” spending.

I recall a conversation I had with a Brighton administrator. I suggested that the teacher and administrator contractual increases were completely out of line with Monroe County businesses. His response (paraphrased): “We do not compare ourselves to business. We compare ourselves to other educational institutions.”

I see this response as insensitive to the prevailing economic environment of the taxpayers who are paying for the spending.

If you work for the state and noticed that your Web browser was a bit slow Thursday afternoon (July 31, 2008), there’s probably a good reason: A think tank that frequently criticizes state spending has posted the salaries of all 263,000 state workers online.

The Empire Center’s SeeThroughNY site (http://www.seethroughny.net/) also posted teacher and superintendent contracts for all but a handful of New York’s 733 school districts, plus state contracts, pork-barrel items and the Legislature’s operating expenses.

“This has never been online before,” said Empire Center Director Edmund J. McMahon. The site drew 1,000 visitors in the first hour it was up and received 6,000 page views, or requests to look at a given Web page.

Note: This site is included in our Sites Of Interest section in the left sidebar. The site was experiencing technical problems due to extremely heavy traffic volume.

I attended the Tax Cap rally today (July 29) where Thomas Suozzi, the Nassau County executive who heads the state Commission on Property Tax Relief, and Business Council of New York State Inc. CEO Kenneth Adams spoke along with Maggie Brooks and Sandra Parker.

You can read more about this tax cap proposal and read the full report at:  www.taxcapnow.org

One startling point: 1.2 million people have left NY State since 2000. And that creates an increased tax burden on the remaining population.

Mr. Suozzi repeatedly stated that this “cap”, while not a complete solution, was a first step to slowing the property tax increase.

Thomas Golisano made a presentation against this cap proposal. In his opinion, it will not address the problem. He believes that the 4% ceiling is far too high to be effective. See my Post below: “Tax Cap Meaningless” that agrees with much of Mr. Golisano’s position.

I briefly spoke with Mr. Suozzi after the presentation and expressed my concern that increasing the NY State Aid to Education simply shifts the tax burden from property tax to income tax.

He asked me what will happen to local school taxes IF NYS Aid drastically falls next year because NYS does not have any money? Our local property tax burden would obviously SKY-ROCKET. He stated that is one of the reasons why this tax cap proposal needs to be implemented.

In a previous Post, I reported a USAToday article from the US Census Bureau that put Rochester, Buffalo and Syracuse in the top 10 cities losing population from 2000 to 2007.

The Rochester Business Journal, July 11, 2008, covered the Census Bureau data in more detail.  The data shows that the Monroe County TOWNS losing population around Rochester include BRIGHTON (-3.5%), Irondequoit (-4.5%), Gates, Greece and Perinton.

The towns gaining population include Webster (+8.9%), Pittsford (+3.9%), and Penfield (+2.5%).

While Brighton does not have the vacant land for building, and therefore the ability to add significant population, it should not be shrinking.

For over 25 years, I have heard (the myth?) that Brighton is one of the most desireable suburbs because of the school district.  Now, we are LOSING population.  What does this imply?  Is the Brighton School District no longer perceived as being significantly better than Webster, Pittsford or Penfield?

The “tax cap” currently being discussed by our dysfunctional NYS Legislators is a scam on NYS taxpayers. Here are four reasons:

1. It is NOT a cap.

2. It reflects property taxes - NOT school budgets.

3. The higher NYS Aid to Education, the more the local property tax burden can be reduced.

4. 55% of the school budget voters can override the 4% property tax increase.

Let’s look at each reason in more detail.

1. NOT A CAP: The proposal recommends a 4% property tax INCREASE PER YEAR. A legitimate “property tax cap” would be based on a percentage of property assessed value. With this proposal, your property tax can continue to increase at a very healthly 4% compounded annually. In five years, a 4% annual increase results in a 21.6% increase!

2. NO SCHOOL BUDGET CONTROL: This proposal does not control school budget increases. School budgets can increase based on NYS Aid To Education while the property tax increase is held to 4%. See #3.

3. NYS AID TO EDUCATION: School budgets reflect a SPENDING plan. Revenue to support the spending plan is derived from:

• Sales Tax
• Investment Income
• Rentals
• Other Income
• Fund Balance
• and the BIGGY….NYS Aid To Education

Then, subtracting all of the above items results in a balance that must be paid by the Property Tax Levy.

Therefore, the more NYS Aid To Education, the less the Property Tax Levy.

The problem: YOU pay for NYS Aid To Education through your NYS income tax.

Legislators often state they will only support the “cap” IF Aid To Education is maintained or increased. So your NYS income tax goes UP while your local property tax may hold at a 4% annual increase.

By the way, NYS Aid to Brighton INCREASED 12.2% in 2008/09 and 17.4% in 2007/08. HUGE increases that held down the property tax increase.

4. 55% VOTER OVERRIDE: During the last Monroe County school budget voting, only one district had less than 55% of the voters approve their budgets. And that one district was at 54%.

This proposed 4% “cap” is a “feel-good” idea that will have little, if any effect on putting a damper on your total NYS tax burden.