court does not prescribe the precise spending measures that must be taken. The following examples are given to sketch the breadth and depth of the public schools' needs. a . B e t t e r Te a c h e r s a n d A d m i n i s t rat o r s If the New York City public schools are to compete successfully with surrounding suburban schools for qualified teachers [187 [187 Misc.2d Misc.2d 78] 78] and administrators, more resources will have to be made available to increase salaries and improve working conditions. Given that New York City has approximately 78,000 teachers, even a modest increase in teachers' salaries will be costly. If the average raise were $5,000—which would be a good deal less than the current average wage differential between the City and its suburbs—the annual increase in teacher pay (not including benefits) would amount to $390 million. Other initiatives to attract teachers and administrators, such as subsidized housing, loan forgiveness, or moving stipends, would require additional funds. Professional development is an important and effective means of improving the performance of existing teachers. The experience of District 2 demonstrates that effective professional development requires a significant financial commitment. BOE requested $34.1 million in additional professional development funds for the 1999-2000 school year. Credible evidence indicates that this request understated actual need in order to be "politically acceptable." Only about $14.1 million of this request was provided. b. Improved School Buildings Remedying the disrepair and overcrowding that plague New York City's public schools may require billions of additional dollars. As described above the State has consistently underfunded BOE's capital and maintenance needs. Because BOE is currently doing only emergency repairs to its buildings, it is difficult to determine exactly how much more maintenance spending is necessary to repair existing buildings. A conservative estimate can be gleaned from the 2000-2004 Proposed Plan, which sought $327 million annually in order to establish a regular and reliable cycle of preventive maintenance. However, the credible testimony at trial indicated that even this amount was too low. BOE also lacks sufficient capital funds. Again a conservative estimate can be gleaned from the 2000-2004 Proposed Plan, which sought $11.2 billion for capital spending during the Plan period. The credible evidence at trial demonstrated that this amount was insufficient to address all of the City public schools' capital needs. As in past plan periods, State funding has lagged far behind BOE's capital needs. c. Other Resources Other potential costs are harder to quantify based on the record produced at trial but are nonetheless real. For example [187 [187 Misc.2d Misc.2d 79] 79] BOE needs additional funding for library books, school supplies, and instructional technology. Substantial funds are necessary to provide the expanded platform of educational resources necessary to boost the achievement of all at-risk children. While many of BOE's programs for at-risk children have shown to produce positive results, only a fraction of New York City's public school children have access to such programs. The State has mandated that universal pre-kindergarten be made available to all eligible children by 2004. However, while this initiative has been well funded compared to other programs in the expanded platform, it has still lagged behind the amount necessary to ensure that New York City meets the deadline. Project Read has thus far been funded entirely by the City and the amount allocated has been insufficient to reach all the students who need such services in order to achieve literacy. Similarly, BOE is able to make summer school available only to the neediest of the needy, leaving the majority of at-risk students unserved. C . C a u s at i o n a n d t h e H i e ra r c h y o f G o v e r n m e n t a l A c t o r s Defendants offer two additional arguments in support of their assertion that no causal link exists between inadequate State funding and the failure to provide New York City public school students with a sound basic education. First, defendants assert, as their counsel phrased it in closing argument, that "the money is there," i.e., that the State's funding of public education is adequate to provide all students with the opportunity for a sound basic education. Any failure to provide such an opportunity, according to defendants, is caused by BOE's inefficient spending of the funds available to it. Defendants point out that New York State's per pupil expenditures are the third highest among the States. The New York City school district has consistently been among the highest spending large school districts in the Nation. Second, defendants argue that the City of New York's local contribution to its own public school district is lower than the State-wide average and argue that any failure to provide a sound basic education must be attributed to the City's failure to adequately fund its schools. Defendants presented evidence that New York City's provision of local revenues is about $4,000 per pupil, while the State average is approximately $6,200 per pupil. Defendants further argue that the State has increased its contribution to the City's public schools in recent years [187 [187 Misc.2d Misc.2d 80] 80] while the City's local effort has declined since 1986. Defendants decry this decline, particularly in light of the City's recent budget surpluses and tax cuts. The short dispositive answer to both of these arguments is that the State Constitution reposes responsibility to provide a sound basic education with the State, and if the State's subdivisions act to impede the delivery of a sound basic education it is the State's responsibility under the Constitution to