Our next step in the fight for equity is to do an e-blast. Below, you will find addresses and a sample text.
Please edit the text to personalize it. Our goal is to get these emails out by Friday.
Simply follow the instructions to send. Then personalize and sign!
COPY AND PASTE THESE ADDRESSES INTO YOUR “To:”
firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; FarrelH@assembly.state.ny.us;firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org;email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com;
COPY AND PASTE THESE ADDRESSES INTO YOUR “cc:”
Equitable Fiscal Stabilization Aid Distribution
TEMPLATE TO ADAPT:
I am writing to you, in light of your role as a leader in the budgeting process this year.
I am extremely concerned that the formulas used in the past, which inequitably distribute aid, will be used to distribute the $203 million Fiscal Stabilization Aid, and/or that the political process will be manipulated in a way the skews the distribution towards constituencies based on influence, rather than real fiscal need.
It is IMPERATIVE that the process used is based on criteria that indicate fiscal distress. DO NOT USE THE FORMULA to disburse aid because it will not provide relief to those that are truly in need. Rather, USE CRITERIA such as:
- Low fund balance
- Onerous GEA cut per pupil
- GEA cut that is more than 10% of the district`s state aid
- Significant staff/program reductions in the past 3 years accompanying GEA cuts
- Theoretical tax rate increases in the double digits (10% or more) to recoup GEA reductions (which have led to the aforementioned disappearance of fund balance and significant staff/program reductions)
Although the first priority is to develop a transparent process that fairly distributes aid to schools that truly need it, long-term the legislature MUST re-evaluate the formula to more equitably distribute state aid by
- Assessing GEA reductions, should they continue, more equitably
- Re-evaluating the scheme by which schools are arbitrarily categorized as low, average, or high needs and funded at drastically different rates, to the detriment of those average needs districts close to the line that places them in the high needs category
- Re-examining the funding ceilings and floors
The consequence of not dealing with this issue is to create a destabilizing chasm between an ever-shrinking population of `haves` and an ever-growing population of` have-nots`, both at the individual and community level. I believe that NO-ONE wants this to happen, but that it will take your leadership to prevent it.