Charter Reforms Needed in NYC
Mayor Adams recently established a Charter Revision Commission, providing New Yorkers with an opportunity to offer suggestions on improving city government. Both the Citizens Budget Commission and city Comptroller Brad Lander have put forward ideas to enhance the fiscal health of Gotham.
They are advocating for rules to regulate the Rainy Day Fund, which was created in the 2019 charter reforms. This includes setting minimum annual deposits during prosperous times and guidelines on when to utilize the fund during challenging periods.
According to Lander, the absence of such regulations results in an insufficient amount of money being set aside in the fund, which is subject to yearly budget negotiations.
The Citizens Budget Commission also suggests City Charter rules on pre-funding health benefits for retired city employees, as the costs have grown significantly over the last thirty years with insufficient reserves set aside to cover them.
This lack of preparation makes it easy for present-day politicians to make lofty promises, only to leave future leaders and taxpayers in a difficult position when the bills become due. This could lead to broken promises, cuts in essential spending (such as law enforcement, education, healthcare, etc.), or even higher city taxes.
All of these outcomes are harsh, with the potential to significantly impact the city’s economy and overall quality of life, creating a negative spiral effect.
To prevent another potential crisis, experts at Lander’s office and the CBC propose stringent guidelines on accumulating new city debt, limiting debt-service costs to a maximum of 15% of annual revenues.
While this limit is currently city policy, there is concern that future leaders may disregard it to allow reckless spending, knowing they won’t be in office when the consequences emerge.
One of the proposed charter reforms raises skepticism: Lander suggests ensuring prompt payments to the city’s contracted nonprofit service providers in the city’s constitution.
This move could be seen as favoritism towards entities within Meg Barnette’s Nonprofit New York network — Barnette being the spouse of the comptroller.
Other reforms may be endorsed in the future, but one additional consideration the commission should explore is the elimination of the Public Advocate’s Office.
This position was originally established in the charter to accommodate Andrew Stein as the City Council president position was phased out. However, its actual purpose only serves to provide ambitious politicians with a paid position, staff, and limited powers to further their own interests.
If the Charter Reform Commission can implement more fiscal responsibility and eliminate the advocate role, which is viewed as unnecessary in city government, it would be a beneficial service to the public.
