Board hears Rockefeller Institute Foundation Aid study and potential budget implications for district

Board member Kelly presented findings from a recent Rockefeller Institute study on potential changes to New York State—s Foundation Aid formula during the Dec. 10 meeting, highlighting a set of recommendations that, if adopted broadly, could affect district aid and budgeting.

Kelly summarized five notable recommendations in the study: switching the inflation factor from the national Consumer Price Index to a Northeast-focused CPI and using a five-year average rather than year-to-year changes; replacing the current regional cost index (which the presenter described as based on building trades wages) with a comparable-wage index that focuses on teacher wages; adjusting the wealth index computation to change how districts' relative wealth is measured; phasing down or eliminating certain "save-harmless" protections over three to five years; and permitting higher reserve fund balances for districts that receive increased aid (Kelly said the report suggested raising allowable reserves to 10% for districts expected to receive new aid).

Kelly warned the board that under one scenario in the Rockefeller analysis, the district could face a reduction in its save-harmless transitional aid of roughly $866,000 over the phase-down period—though she and others stressed the study is a set of recommendations to inform the governor and legislature, not a finalized policy. "If all this stuff was passed ... we could be at risk," Kelly said, adding that some changes could help the district while others could reduce its aid.

Kelly also described the proposed regional-cost-index change as more education-specific and said the comparable-wage index would better reflect teacher wages than the current index, which she said is based more on trades (carpenters, electricians). The presenter noted the report—s authors recommended evaluating each change independently for collateral impacts and warned that implementation would likely play out over multiple years.

Board members and staff discussed uncertainties around state and federal funding streams and cautioned that any change in formula elements would flow through many districts differently. The board concluded the recommendations were worth monitoring as the governor—s budget process proceeds but made no formal action.

Ending: Kelly and other board members said the district will track Albany developments and assess implications for multi-year budget planning.