Faced with an ever-growing list of unfunded state mandates, the Great Neck Public Schools board of education has proposed a 6.45 percent increase for the 2001-2002 budget. If adopted, next year's budget will go from this year's $110,823,000 to $117,980,000. Of this total, 6.84 percent will have to be raised by real property tax.

It is anticipated that the district will receive only about $6,234,000 in state aid. As noted in the budget, ''State aid is based on the governor's recommendation. The precise amount of state aid to be received can only be determined subsequent to the action of the governor and the Legislature.'' For this current budget, the district received only $5,984,000 in state aid.

Presenting the preliminary working budget for July 1, 2001 to June 30, 2002, Board of Education President Judi Bosworth emphasized the stress placed on school districts to comply with the increasing demands of the state, mandates that must be funded by the individual school districts. ''We send so much money up to Albany and we are not getting it back,'' said Ms. Bosworth. ''We do understand that other districts need help ... we are not complaining about that ... but we should at least be allowed to do what we have to do without unfunded mandates.''

In an interview after the budget was introduced, Ms. Bosworth said that the school district ''has not yet recovered from 1989-1990 school year mid-year cuts.'' At that time, the Great Neck public schools were slated for $8,000,000 in state aid. Today, the number barely reaches the $6,000,000 mark. ''The state talks about increases in the education budget, but Great Neck is not seeing it,'' Ms. Bosworth said.

Yet, in spite of this huge state funding decrease, the state continues to place unfunded demands on the school districts. Infrastructure mandates and testing mandates are at the top of that list. Board trustee Lawrence Gross addressed the infrastructure issue at the board's March 19 meeting. Under the state's ''rescue legislation,'' the district must make certain repairs, at the expense of the district, and, as well, much paperwork is required, also at the expense of the district.

The infrastructure repairs are estimated to cost Great Neck $9,000,000. Along with this, a five-year facilities plan is mandated, and the district must hire an outside engineer to identify infrastructure areas needed to be addressed. The list must then be sent to Albany, along with a remediation plan. All of this, of course, is an unfunded mandate --- a process that must be followed, but at the district's cost.

Ms. Bosworth stressed that it would have been far more cost effective if the district would be allowed to do what is needed, on their own. And, indeed, they would do the work on their own, for as she stated, ''We are dealing with 50 to 74-year-old buildings ... things happen ... there is a cost in maintaining old buildings ... and there is no state help.''

For the infrastructure work, the board of education considered a $10 million bond, but decided that they did not want to saddle the community with a large amount of interest for a small bond --- the interest would be $4 million. So, instead, the infrastructure work will go through the budget process, with an extra $1 million each year for next five years. ''This (proposed) budget reflects that plan to remediate,'' said Ms. Bosworth.

The other major unfunded mandate putting pressure on the budget is the new state required testing, mandating test after test for fourth and eighth graders, as well as requiring specific Regents exams in order to graduate high school. ''One of our board goals is to be in full compliance with all state mandates,'' said Ms. Bosworth.

These new state assessments require a great deal of academic intervention to ensure students do well and are able to pass Regents exams and graduate. And, as well, Ms. Bosworth said that there is a ''tremendous cost involved with the fourth and eighth grade tests.'' In the past, when the school district was permitted, they were able to test for about $10 per child, but now the mandated tests cost $60 to $80 per child. These costs, of course, bump up the budget, and causing further increases are transportation costs for academic intervention in the form of before school elementary programs.

And so, state mandates continue to force more and more budget increases. For example, Ms. Bosworth explained that increasing the budget by $1 million each year for infrastructure work actually increases the budget by 1 percentage point. The mandated $200,000 for social security and $800,000 for health insurance adds yet another percentage point. The special education transportation based on committee on special education recommendations costs the district $400,000 and brings the budget up another half percentage point.

The bulk of the budget expenses, as always, goes toward the district's educational programs. A close look shows that the majority of the budget, 72.35 percent, is allocated to instruction, and it was noted that this certainly guarantees small class size. After that, 11.47 percent goes toward buildings and grounds, 6.07 percent toward transportation, 4.20 percent toward general support, 2.58 percent toward debt service, 1.68 percent toward adult education and recreation, and 1.65 percent toward capital projects.

Great Neck Teachers Association President Nancy Chauvin spoke for the GNTA, stating that they are ''delighted that almost 75 percent of the budget goes for direct instruction.'' She further commented that she ''appreciates being involved in the budget process on all levels ... the building level and with the administration.''

Ms. Chauvin continued expressing support of the budget, saying that ''there are no surprises, nothing is hidden, as always.'' And she emphasized that the budget ''recognized and addresses the realities of the educational world we're living in.'' She said that if the preliminary budget is actually the budget that will be presented to the public for a vote, she is certain of GNTA support.

Responding, Ms. Bosworth stated the budget is one part of the success of the school district, and that teachers, and administrators, and parents play a large role in this success too. She said that ''we are so fortunate to live in a community that supports the value of public education ... and we depend on input of all residents to reflect these values.''

Ms. Bosworth also explained that the preliminary working budget is proposed by the administration and ''reflects the interactive process with the board of education ... and results in a document that reflects board philosophy.'' She again spoke of welcoming public input so that the final budget will be one that not only reflects board philosophy, but ''is a document the community can embrace and support.''

As far as actual funding for the budget, for the school year 2001-2002, 92.12 percent of the $117,980,000 budget would have to be raised by property tax. Only 5.28 percent is projected to come from state aid, and another 2.60 percent would come from ''miscellaneous'' sources.

This 2001-2002 preliminary working budget was presented to the public for the first time at the board of education's March 19 meeting. There will be further budget hearings before the budget is adopted by the board on Tuesday, April 24, and then put to a vote before the public on May 15.