The Regents Priority Legislative Program is designed to focus effort on major initiatives and address issues that are important to the agency. The proposals are limited in number so that the resources and energy of the Board of Regents, the Commissioner and the Department staff can be directed toward these major initiatives. The legislative priorities are linked to the Strategic Plan and the Regents Budget proposal.

• The Regents Priority Legislative Program is developed using a process that spans several months and is guided by the Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioners, and the Legislative Coordinating Team. The process that leads to final adoption of the Regents Legislative Priority Program is as follows:

• The Regents, Commissioner, and Department staff research and discuss issues through interaction and consultation with the public, advocacy groups, parent associations, and many others. Recent Regents actions are considered, such as the report of the Task Force on Teaching; the Task Force on Leadership; the Commission on Libraries; the Task Force on Postsecondary Education and Individuals with Disabilities; and the Subcommittee on State Aid. Unfinished work from the previous year is reviewed and problems or opportunities presented in current or proposed federal actions are examined.

• The Commissioner meets with the Deputy Commissioners to discuss and evaluate the proposals.

• The Commissioner recommends the priority list to the Regents in October.

• Suggestions from the Regents Public Policy Conference are considered and the proposals can be adjusted.

• Final approval by the Board of Regents takes place in November.

Strong libraries play a vital role in community revitalization, economic development, and quality of life by supporting individual initiative, economic growth, and lifelong learning. Libraries provide a broad range of research and other materials, family literacy programs, and summer reading programs that reinforce students’ learning. New Century Libraries will provide more State support for all types of libraries, helping schools raise the academic achievement of all students and closing the gaps in student performance.

The New Century Libraries initiative touches all parts of The University of the State of New York – providing services to individuals with disabilities; helping children and schools reach the new learning standards; connecting higher education institutions throughout the State, country and world; providing professionals with access to the most current information in their field through research journals and internet connections.

Seventy percent of New Yorkers use their local public library, but more than one million New Yorkers are without a public library.

New Century Libraries will invest $107 million in New York’s libraries to realize the vision of the Regents Commission on Library Services and implement the Commission’s plan for statewide library service in the 21st century.

New Century Libraries includes ten initiatives based on the recommendations of the Regents Commission and adopted as Regents policy:

The New Century Libraries initiative for 2003-2004 proposes $107 million in State funding for library programs as follows:

• Library aid to localities for library programs: $72 million
• Capital funds for public library construction: $20 million
• State Aid to schools for public school library support aid: $15 million

Funding for specific programs is as follows:

*Includes $4.6 million for Core Academic Collection for Higher Education (CACHE).

With higher standards in place, more and more students with disabilities are graduating from high school and expressing an interest in a postsecondary education. The lack of college and university support services for students with disabilities, coupled with physical barriers to full access to campuses, have worked together to deny many of these students the opportunity to pursue a postsecondary education. Many disabled students who qualify for admission choose to attend college by the services that are offered rather than the strength of the academic programs.

This proposal, generated from recommendations made by the Task Force on Postsecondary Education and Individuals with Disabilities in Goal 8, reflects the spirit of legislation introduced in the 2001-02 legislative session as S.6527/A.9049, while incorporating several amendments. These amendments were made in consultation with representatives of SUNY, CUNY, the independent colleges and universities, and the degree granting proprietary colleges.

The proposal will afford individuals with disabilities increased access to postsecondary education by establishing a funding program for the improvement of disability services at institutions of higher education.

The proposal, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, specifies that the program, when funded, will require $15 million. The total allocation will be divided into four sector-specific amounts. The amount for each sector will be derived via a formula based upon the total number of enrolled students (full-time and part-time, undergraduate and graduate) from two years prior to the date of the allocation.

The State University of New York and City University of New York will each directly administer its individual funds through a self-developed application/distribution process. Funds allocated for the independent sector and the degree-granting proprietary institutions will be administered by the State Education Department via a request for proposal process. All funds must be used to do one or more of the following:

• Provide base funding for capacity building;
• Recruit students with disabilities; and/or,
• Support recruitment programs that establish targets for recruitment of students with disabilities.

An annual report will be submitted to the Board of Regents, Chairs of the fiscal committees of the Senate and Assembly and the Division of the Budget to focus on effectiveness and future plans.

The Board of Regents has established two major goals for education in the State: to raise the academic achievement of all students and to close the gaps in student performance where they exist. While schools have been successful in raising the achievement for most students, there are still large gaps in student performance, in all areas of the State.

One way to accomplish this is to improve the school funding system. Another is to expand access to quality health and mental health interventions that will support children’s efforts to achieve the higher standards.

The Regents are committed to helping students achieve higher standards. To do this we must continue to build educational capacity. The following proposals are aimed at this goal.

Chapter 198 of the Laws of 1978 allows school districts to conduct projects for the purpose of improving the health of children of the district, including preschool children. Except in the case of the cities of New York, Buffalo and Rochester, where other provisions of law authorize the delivery of school health services by city or county health departments, this law does not apply to a school-based clinic that would be operated by an entity other than the school district, such as a hospital.

Further, Section 414 of the Education Law authorizes specific uses of school property, and the list of authorized uses does not include the siting of health clinics or mental health clinics operated by entities other than school districts. This omission in Section 414 was interpreted many years ago to mean that it is illegal for a school district to allow the use of its property by outside organizations to deliver health services, and while that interpretation seems dated, it continues to engender confusion over the legality of siting health clinics operated by outside entities in school buildings. The result is a major impediment to collaborative arrangements between school districts and health care providers that would site health care clinics in school buildings.

This proposal will provide for use of school space for school-based health clinics, including dental and mental health clinics, that are operated by entities other than the school district, subject to the approval of the board of education of each district, by:

• Amending Education Law Section 414 to provide express authorization for all school districts to use school space for school-based health clinics, on the condition that such clinics provide improved access to students and their families, including preschool children, to health services.
• Restricting the provision of services addressing reproductive health in a manner consistent with Chapter 198 of the Laws of 1978 (School-based Health Clinics).
• Providing statutory authority for the use of school space, but prohibiting the use of school district building aid to build space specifically for this purpose.
• Applying Department of Health and Office of Mental Health standards for school-based services.

There are no cost implications.

The Regents proposal on State Aid to school districts for school year 2003-04 is the fourth year of a five-year proposal. It builds on previous years’ efforts to improve the school funding system to close the gap between actual student achievement and that needed for all students to meet State learning standards. Proposed goals for this year’s proposal are to:

• Target aid to needy districts (that is, high-pupil-need, low-fiscal-capacity and high-cost districts);
• Simplify the aid system; and
• Provide stability and sustainability in funding.

With greater numbers of school professionals approaching retirement, the need for teachers and administrators is projected to increase dramatically in the next five years. In a recent survey, 57 percent of superintendents said they will retire within that time. To attract, prepare, and keep the best professionals where they are needed the most, New York needs a package of financial, education, and work-place initiatives. At a time when the administrative ranks in school districts are being seriously depleted as a result of retirements and other causes, any disincentives for effective administrators to remain in their positions or to attract competent and dedicated individuals to administrative positions should be eliminated.

These initiatives are designed to ensure both the quality and supply of the teaching workforce and the administrative leadership in our schools. The teaching proposal is focused on our hard-to-staff subject matter areas and hard-to-staff schools. The leadership initiatives are designed to attract and retain school administrators.

It is expected that the teacher and administrator shortage will worsen over the next several years. For both urban and rural hard-to-staff schools, and, in some instances suburban schools, the challenge will be to find ways to attract candidates with certificates for public school service. Retiring and retired New York State public employees have been discouraged from pursuing such a second career because of statutory limitations on the salary they can earn while receiving a retirement allowance. Since many retired public service employees are qualified or expected to qualify to enter or to re-enter the teaching and educational leadership fields, the barriers that hinder their return can be diminished. This proposal will:

• Allow the Retirement and Social Security laws to permit, without the imposition of a salary cap, the employment of retired public employees who hold or will hold an appropriate school certificate.
• Limit the length of time a retired public employee can participate.
• Sunset the law in five years so its impact can be determined.

The 38 district superintendents of New York State function in complementary roles as the representative of the Commissioner of Education in the field and as the Chief Executive Officer of the BOCES. When the BOCES Reform Act was enacted by Chapter 295 of the Laws of 1993, a cap was imposed on the total salary a district superintendent of schools may earn from the State and the BOCES. The salary cap was set at 98 percent of the Commissioner’s salary in the 1992-93 State fiscal year, which translates to a cap of $128,625 in total salary. No adjustments have been made to the salary cap since 1993.

This has resulted in high turnover and difficulty in attracting qualified candidates to serve in this critical educational leadership position, since component districts in many areas of the State are paying their school superintendents higher salaries than district superintendents may receive. In fact, in the last eighteen months, seven district superintendents have left and one more is expected to leave in the next few months. Twenty-one of the 38 district superintendents are now at the statutory salary cap.

This proposal would allow a BOCES Board to increase the salary for the district superintendent. The State salary of a district superintendent of schools would remain at $43,499, but each BOCES Board could increase the supplemental salary it pays to its district superintendent up to a new cap. This new cap would increase annually above the existing salary cap level, up to a limit of 98 percent of the Commissioner’s salary in the current State fiscal year.

The current state of school leadership, particularly related to school superintendents and principals, reveals that it is necessary to ensure that sustained, continuous, strong leadership will exist in the school districts in New York State.

Under current law, school administrators receive the same pension credit for twelve months of work as teachers receive for ten months of work. Accordingly, pension accruals do not reflect the extra two months of work required of superintendents of schools and other school administrators.

This proposal would promote retention of school leaders and make positions in school leadership more attractive to teachers by providing equity in the award of retirement service credit to those administrators and supervisors whose positions require service beyond the ten-month school year. These administrators are now awarded service credit as if they worked only ten months.

In the 2002 legislative session, the Legislature enacted interim legislation, Chapter 425 of the Laws of 2002, that made amendments necessary to enable the Department to provide the United States Department of Education (USDOE) with the assurances of compliance required to secure Title I funds and other federal funds. These funds are critical to the ability of school districts to implement Regents reforms in schools with concentrations of students in poverty, and to proceed with implementation of key components of the NCLBA in the 2002-03 school year, so that such federal funding will continue to flow. Chapter 425 contains a one-year sunset and needs to be re-enacted in the 2003 legislative session in order to preserve New York's funding under the ESEA and continue implementation of key components of the NCLBA relating to supplemental educational services and unsafe school choice.

Key components of this legislation would include:

Authorizes local educational agencies to contract with the approved provider selected by the parents for supplemental educational services to be provided to students attending schools that have been identified for school improvement for more than one year or that have been identified for corrective action. Provides the State Education Department with authority to approve providers of supplemental educational services and to adopt regulations to establish procedures for such approval. Eligible approved providers could include public schools, BOCES, institutions of higher education and community-based organizations (CBOs).

Unsafe School Choice

Implements NCLBA requirement, which is a condition of receipt of any funds under the ESEA, that any student who attends a persistently dangerous public school or who has been the victim of a violent criminal offense, as defined in State law, shall be allowed to attend a safe public school within the local educational agency. The bill provides that the determination of those schools that are "persistently dangerous" will be made by the Commissioner based on at least two years of data from the uniform violent incident reporting system. The bill supplies a definition of the term "violent criminal offense," for which there is no uniform definition under State law.

Gun-free Schools

Conforms to amendments to the Gun Free Schools Act that must be made in State law to preserve New York's eligibility for funds under the ESEA. Requires that school district policies providing for a one-year suspension of students who bring a firearm to school be extended to students who possess a firearm at school. Requires that school districts have a policy of referring students who bring a firearm or weapon to school or possess them at school to the juvenile justice system or criminal justice system. Establishes definitions of terms such as "firearm" and "weapon" for this purpose.

The legislation would address other amendments in State law that are required to come into compliance with the NCLBA. To date, we know that conforming amendments need to be made in State law to reflect changes in the McKinney Act relating to homeless children. Certain other conforming or clarifying changes may be needed relating to students with limited English proficiency, transportation of students to schools selected by parent choice, and smoking in school buildings. In addition, additional points of conflict with State law may surface as a result of USDOE's interpretation of the NCLBA in regulations or guidance, which are still in their preliminary stages.

It may be necessary to amend relevant State law to conform to anticipated amendments in the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, as appropriate. As reauthorization efforts proceed, interpretation regarding the full effect of federal amendments upon State law will become known.