Albany Slams Industry

Pattern of Obstruction and Opposition Threatens City’s Economic Future

A New York Building Congress Viewpoint

The June defeat of the New York Sports and Convention Center (NYSCC) at the hands of the previously obscure three-member New York State Public Authorities Control Board served as a vivid illustration of how easily New York City’s economic agenda can be frustrated by Albany’s uniquely dysfunctional style of governance.

Time after time, New York City finds itself at the mercy of a handful of State leaders more concerned with political brinkmanship and expediency than enlightened
government. As a result of such distorted priorities, vital initiatives – ranging from mass transit and educational funding to long-term economic development
projects – are foiled by a consistent pattern of obstruction and opposition.

While the NYSCC is the most visible City-shaping investment to be derailed
in Albany, other recent projects and capital programs of great importance to the City’s future have met the same fate. 

Plans to expand and renovate the United Nation’s East River campus, for example, have been stalled for months by a small band of legislators representing districts far away from the U.N.’s home. The project has been stalled not on its merits or by financial concerns, as the plan calls for no City or State money (see page 3 for a larger project update). Rather it is endangered solely because a few outside legislators have decided to use recently unpopular decisions by the international body to score cheap political points with their constituents.

Just as troubling, Albany’s broken political processes also work to frustrate private investment, such as in desperately needed new power plants, which are critical to ensure New York City has enough electricial generating capacity to fuel a growing economy. Article X legislation, the mechanism by which power plants are approved, expired more than two and a half years ago and has not been renewed, even though it was widely recognized as successful. The situation has become so dire that in May, the Chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission said the ongoing impasse will cost New York jobs and tax revenues due to lack of infrastructure.

And despite mutually agreed upon long-term needs, such as mass transit maintenance and expansion, as well as the construction and renovation of public schools, Albany continues to under-fund these capital programs and dodge its duty to identify reliable sources of dedicated, long-term financing. In the case of schools funding, its delaying tactics continue despite a court-mandate to increase funding in the City’s schools. It seems that Albany legislators would rather have the judicial branch tell them how to spend their money than to do the job themselves.

Of course, this “culture of inertia” as Senator Charles E. Schumer recently described the City’s inability to undertake great civic projects, does not solely reside in Albany.
Opponents of New York City projects have come to rely upon a litany of procedural hurdles, including ULURP, environmental impact reviews, landmarks and of course lawsuits to kill important projects. While each of the regulatory processes serve useful purposes, all too often they are used by narrow interest groups to scuttle proposals that
otherwise enjoy popular support.

Despite the barriers on the local level, however, New York City government, led by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, is having success, at least when Albany is not involved. Since taking office, the administration has demonstrated a tremendous vision for a prosperous City and introduced the most ambitious initiatives in decades.

In cooperation with the City Council, the administration has adopted innovative zoning changes that will transform Manhattan’s far West Side, inject new life into commercial business districts outside Manhattan and revitalize the City’s waterfronts. The City also is achieving an ambitious plan to dramatically increase its housing stock and provide affordable homeownership opportunities in all five boroughs.

The problem is that all too often, the road to prosperity leads through Albany where political land mines await. In large part, this disheartening state of affairs is an outgrowth of the City’s fiscal crisis of the 1970s when the State took charge of municipal finances. 
What does this mean for the industry? The New York Building Congress believes that it is not too late. We can still realize an era of unprecedented growth as long as we act now. It is vital that the industry’s political agenda remain focused on championing projects and capital programs based on merit. 

But we also must be prepared to take additional measures, as reasoned advocacy is rarely enough. First, we should lend our voices to the burgeoning chorus of good government groups urging reform in Albany. We also must consider working with our partners in City
government to recapture home rule for New York City. As residents and workers in this great City, we know best what is required to ensure long-term prosperity.

Finally, this industry must be willing to withhold support from legislaters who demonstrate a hostility toward a forward-looking development agenda in New York City or who demonstrate no appetite for making politically difficult but important decisions concerning adequate funding for critical capital budgets. 

Absent a more proactive approach in our dealings with Albany, New York City could squander a critical opportunity to once again transform itself while ensuring it remains the world’s foremost international center of commerce, entertainment and tourism.