Tag: City Hall

The City of New York expects to end the current fiscal year with a $4 billion surplus. That means that a few years ago, the city took in about $4 billion more than it spent. Under the current four-year plan, the city will have balanced budgets in Fiscal 2008 and Fiscal 2009, and then Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn will depart. Does that mean the City of New York plans to spend what it takes in during the next two years? No. The City is planning to run a deficit for the next two years, spending more than it takes in while drawing down the $4 billion. As a result, catastrophic tax increases and service cuts are baked right into the plan, but not for two years. And, to make matters worse the State of New York, seeing that $4 billion sitting there and plans to hand it out inside New York City like it is free, has decided to spend half of it itself — outside New York City — by shifting state money to the city’s disadvantage. And Bloomberg and Quinn, by proposing all kind of goodies, are egging them on.

In the last recession, the City of New York jacked up property tax rates by 18 percent. Later, Mayor Bloomberg elected to send homeowners a check for $400. Now Speaker Quinn wants to send renters a check as well. Meanwhile, the current four-year financial plan has the city spending $4 billion more than it takes in over the next two fiscal years (wiping out an existing surplus), and then facing a fiscal crisis. Ms. Quinn, if you are Mayor at that time, do you plan to increase property tax rates another 18 to 20 percent, perhaps to be followed by even bigger checks later in your term? Mr. Bloomberg, since that is what you have done, would you recommend that the next Mayor do the same? Should this process of higher rates and special handouts continue indefinately?

Last Sunday’s New York Times brought what those who like lots of regulations would have to consider “good” news. The Dance Studio of Park Slope, which has operated in open and notorious violation of the New York City zoning resolution since 1981, has lost its lease and will close in October. Yet somehow, the Times does not report the locals celebrating. “In February, after months of finding only spaces that were too small or too expensive or needed extensive renovations, she wrote a letter to the parents of her students appealing for help. Many of the parents, some of whom have sent a series of children to the studio, and some of whom were students there once themselves, responded by canvassing the neighborhood and telling Ms. Kliegel’s story to merchants, in the hope that someone who owns a suitable space would come forward.” What, you mean they don’t see that businesses like hers shouldn’t be allowed? Or perhaps it is only new businesses like hers that shouldn’t be allowed.

To judge by the reaction at a recent public meeting, people aren’t going to be driving to the Nets arena on one-way Park Slope avenues anytime soon. So how should they do it? If Brooklyn is going to have a gathering place for 20,000 people, and may I remind the reader that hosting large gatherings has been one of the prime purposes of cities from the beginnings of history, then the intersection of Atlantic and Flatbush is the right place to put it — because of transit links to a huge swath of the region, not road capacity. So those who do not live within walking distance to a rail transit station should drive to one, park, and ride the rest of the way in.

In light of recent land use planning controversies, especially in Brooklyn, city dwellers and transit riders might be interested in a recent article in Multifamily Executive magazine, a publication for those who invest in and develop multi-family housing. According to an expert in the field “development sites in transit zones have become the new beachfront property: prized, scarce footage with scant new supply.” You wouldn’t have heard this 20 years ago, when everyone thought transit was only for those who were too young, old, sick or poor to drive, those left behind as the better off migrated from obsolete, poor urban areas to vibrant, modern, auto-oriented areas. But there has been a sea-change in attitudes and preferences, and developers all across the country are trying to respond.

In my previous post here, I described, and provided in a spreadsheet, my tabulation of 2006 local government and payroll data from the U.S. Census Bureau, which was released on March 5th, and related private-sector employment data. This data show that relative to its population New York City continues to have far more people working in hospitals, both public and private, than the national average, while the rest of New York State has far more people than average working in public schools. One thing that has changed from past years, however, is that New York City’s public schools are not as under-staffed, and its instructional employees as underpaid, as they once were, though the pay level remains below the national average if overall wage levels Downstate are considered.

DOT is proposing turning 6th and 7th Avenues in Park Slope into one way streets, like 8th Avenue and Prospect Park West, and narrowing 4th Avenue from three moving lanes in each direction to two. A look at the map shows the potential borough-wide rationale. Vehicles from a huge swath of southern Brooklyn funnel into Ocean Parkway and the Prospect Expressway, and currently have two main options heading to and from the Downtown Brooklyn area and the free East River bridge: Prospect Park, which some advocates want closed to vehicles, and 4th Avenue, designated for most of Park Slope’s new housing. The Prospect, however, also has a direct exit from/entrance to the south at 8th and 7th Avenues. The former is a one way street with timed lights and, therefore, higher traffic capacity. But 7th Avenue is not, and since one-way Prospect Park West does not have easy access to the Prospect/Ocean Parkway, it is a poor substitute for 7th Avenue. Other rationales have been discussed, but I suspect diverting some traffic and making 4th Avenue seem more like a pedestrian-friendly street and less like an industrial arterial is one of them. It may also be that the extensive studies of closing Prospect Park to traffic in recent years led DOT to try to come up with an alternative. I’ll warn the reader that I am not a traffic engineer, and know less about this subject than the topics I usually post on, but what it’s worth my opinions are below.

All I know about it is what I read in the newspaper, but it appears the new firefighter contract is better than the prior one. Some of the more recent damage to new hires is undone, though it some of it will come out their pockets in other ways. They'll still be behind those with seniority by the wage increases in the last two contracts, however. Moreover, there will be bonuses for pay in tougher jobs, something I agree with. The problem with merit pay is that not all managers will handle discretionary increases correctly in a public sector context, especially in titles where workers must work independently and the quality of their work is hard to judge. But some jobs have inherent merit, and if someone is capable of doing them (or if they are dangerous), compensation should be adjusted accordingly.

New York City is known as a place with low property taxes, thanks to its virtually unique sky-high local income taxes. Yet there is one class of property for which the city’s property taxes are not low – commercial buildings without special tax breaks. While it has many liabilities, the property tax has one key advantage – it is hard to hide the asset being taxed, and difficult for it to move to a lower-taxed jurisdiction. But like trees, commercial buildings do move slowly over decades as new ones are built in some places and not built in others, while old ones are torn down or converted when they become obsolete. Does this have a negative effect on the New York City economy? We may be about to find out the answer.

In response to yet another demonstration that New York City residents pay above average state and local taxes, Mayor Bloomberg told the New York Post that “New Yorkers pay more taxes because they get more services.” But if you tabulate how much New York City spends on different type of services, as share of its personal income, you see that isn’t really so. The Independent Budget Office shows that the local share of Medicaid and welfare, which most places don’t have to pay, jacks up New York City’s taxes, in part because our Medicaid program is so expensive, in part because having a local share shifts the burden of the poor to those who live and work near them. That’s us.