An editorial in the Times Herald-Record yesterday, Legislation guts power of voters on school budget, criticized a bill which passed the NYS Senate recently.

The state Senate this week passed a bill that should be subtitled the "Don't Bother to Vote on Your School Budget" bill. It makes sure that when voters go the polls in May, a vote against the proposed budget will result in a so-called "contingency plan" that will require just about the same amount of taxation if not more.
...

The editorial doesn't explain so well what the actual change is. The change is that the "contingency cap" will be calculated using an average of the CPI over five years. If the old calculation were used this year, it would have allowed for a 0% increase in the cap, but with this change the contingency cap will increase by 3.5%.

An informative article from the Chappaqua-Mount Kisco Patch cites the actual bills which Senator Oppenheimer sponsored and which were passed by the Senate on March 16, 2010. The bills are expected to pass the assembly by a veto-proof margin.

Here is information from the NYS Senate about S5523A, which is the bill which includes the actual ammendment to the contingency calculation:

45 a. The contingency budget shall not result in a percentage increase in
46 total spending over the district's total spending under the school
47 district budget for the prior school year that exceeds the lesser of:
48 (i) THE AVERAGE OF THE PREVIOUS FIVE YEARS OF the result obtained when
49 one hundred twenty percent is multiplied by the percentage increase in
50 the consumer price index, with the result rounded to two decimal places;
51 or (ii) four percent.

Some sharp commentary on this issue comes from Jerry Moore:

...
Why doesn't the legislature just take away our right to vote on school budgets? This gives schools a 3.5% increase above the current contingency rules. But you only think there are rules. The only rule is that no rule will keep public schools from increasing spending faster than the rate of inflation. And while the 5-year average sounds fair, public schools will be the first ones calling it unfair when they face inflation of 4, 5 or 6% with a 5-year average of less than 3%. Do you think the legislature and schools will leave the rules in place?

I'll tell you how this works. Schools want the power to increase spending faster than current rules allow. But, they don't want to appear blatant about it. They want to make it appear as though the proposed change is an improvement over the current method. It's fairer. So, the 5-year average is born. It is fully supported by public schools and administrators. But this isn't a change based on principle. It's a change based on expediency. And as soon as the rule works against them, then they'll come up with a new fairness doctrine.

Make no mistake about this change. It's an unfunded mandate when it comes to YOUR POCKETBOOK. It's a mandatory tax increase and a disenfranchisement of your right to vote under the rules of the game that have served public school interests for more than a decade. Now that the rule is about to give you a break, the rule is being changed...

I've omitted Moore's more incendiary comments. Do visit his website for more. You may not agree with his positions, but he has been following school budget issues in NYS for many years, and shares many keen observations.

Some historical information about contingency caps (including a nice graph of the caps leading up to 2009-10) is available at this NYSUT web page. (Note that it is a news release from over a year ago.)

The Newburgh School District operated on a contingency budget for the 2008-2009 school year.