Testimony of Richard T. Anderson, President New York Building Congress before New York City Council Executive Budget Hearings
Published on May 28, 2002 by
Members of the City Council should closely examine the 2003 Executive
Capital Budget and Four-year Capital Plan. The New York Building
Congress continues to have serious concerns about the City’s capital
planning process and especially the limited financial resources
devoted to infrastructure maintenance and improvements. We urge
the City Council to review the capital budget in detail, and to
establish a more thorough and formal evaluation procedure.
Members of the Building Congress, who are leaders of the City’s
design, construction and real estate industry, know the infrastructure
needs of New York City and frequently are involved with many aspects
of capital programming and budgeting. In our collective judgement,
the City’s cannot take comfort in any aspect of its infrastructure
program. Total commitments for 2003 of $7.2 billion may seem adequate
in the face of the current budget realities; but actual spending
will be considerably less and could be reduced even further by financial
constraints.
In actual, as well as real dollars, the City’s capital spending
is being reduced considerably from the levels contained in the Adopted
Budget of November 2001. This is occurring at a time when the City’s
capital needs are not being adequately addressed. Current levels
of capital investment are insufficient to keep existing infrastructure
in a state of good repair and do not come close to meeting the City’s
needs for future growth.
The City of New York must not view its capital program as just
another expenditure category. If the capital program is reduced
proportionally with the overall budget, New York faces a bleak future.
The urgency of the moment must be to secure new sources of financing,
particularly dedicated taxes and user fees such as those employed
by the New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, or perhaps
through value-capture techniques. If there ever were a time to consider
new financing strategies on a comprehensive basis, this is it.
Working with the Mayor, we urge the City Council to evaluate the
current three-tier capital planning process. We recommend the following
steps:
Develop a more dynamic capital needs assessment. The current
Ten-year Capital Strategy, Four-year Capital Plan and Annual Capital
Budget process must move beyond an extrapolation of agency capital
requests to dynamic planning and priority setting. The City Council
should have a committee or sub-committee directly responsible
for working on this process with the Office of Management and
Budget and the Department of City Planning.
Take a fresh look at capital financing. Innovative new approaches
to infrastructure funding must be explored, perhaps drawing on
successful techniques elsewhere. These include privatization and
dedicated user charges, including variable pricing programs such
as Port Authority trans – Hudson tolls and technological improvements
like E-Z Pass.
Build public support through an investment approach. Few New
Yorkers know about the Capital Budget and the planning process
for it. Through a more investment-oriented approach, the Mayor
and Council can energize a lethargic process. Since responsibility
for infrastructure is shared by City, State and Federal agencies,
it is all the more important for the City to have a "consolidated
capital improvements program," including all capital spending
in the City. This should be prepared annually for the Mayor and
Council and more fully reflect who builds New York and what is
needed to do the job effectively.
In our judgement, the City Council should not accept the current
approach to capital improvements, making only limited adjustments
each year and attempting to patch together financing in the face
of myriad obstacles. This practice inevitably leads to "managed
decline," especially under the pressure of fiscal austerity.
That will contribute to a downward spiral in which economic development
and quality of life in the City of New York will be severely affected.
On behalf of the 1,500 members of the New York Building Congress,
we call on the City Council to take the lead in appropriately balancing
today’s needs with those of the future. All of us can point to the
benefits today of investments made by previous generations of New
Yorkers. It is incumbent upon us to do likewise, because to do less
will lead to a dim future for our children and grandchildren.
Members of the City Council should closely examine the 2003 Executive
Capital Budget and Four-year Capital Plan. The New York Building
Congress continues to have serious concerns about the City’s capital
planning process and especially the limited financial resources
devoted to infrastructure maintenance and improvements. We urge
the City Council to review the capital budget in detail, and to
establish a more thorough and formal evaluation procedure.
Members of the Building Congress, who are leaders of the City’s
design, construction and real estate industry, know the infrastructure
needs of New York City and frequently are involved with many aspects
of capital programming and budgeting. In our collective judgement,
the City’s cannot take comfort in any aspect of its infrastructure
program. Total commitments for 2003 of $7.2 billion may seem adequate
in the face of the current budget realities; but actual spending
will be considerably less and could be reduced even further by financial
constraints.
In actual, as well as real dollars, the City’s capital spending
is being reduced considerably from the levels contained in the Adopted
Budget of November 2001. This is occurring at a time when the City’s
capital needs are not being adequately addressed. Current levels
of capital investment are insufficient to keep existing infrastructure
in a state of good repair and do not come close to meeting the City’s
needs for future growth.
The City of New York must not view its capital program as just
another expenditure category. If the capital program is reduced
proportionally with the overall budget, New York faces a bleak future.
The urgency of the moment must be to secure new sources of financing,
particularly dedicated taxes and user fees such as those employed
by the New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, or perhaps
through value-capture techniques. If there ever were a time to consider
new financing strategies on a comprehensive basis, this is it.
Working with the Mayor, we urge the City Council to evaluate the
current three-tier capital planning process. We recommend the following
steps:
Develop a more dynamic capital needs assessment. The current
Ten-year Capital Strategy, Four-year Capital Plan and Annual Capital
Budget process must move beyond an extrapolation of agency capital
requests to dynamic planning and priority setting. The City Council
should have a committee or sub-committee directly responsible
for working on this process with the Office of Management and
Budget and the Department of City Planning.
Take a fresh look at capital financing. Innovative new approaches
to infrastructure funding must be explored, perhaps drawing on
successful techniques elsewhere. These include privatization and
dedicated user charges, including variable pricing programs such
as Port Authority trans – Hudson tolls and technological improvements
like E-Z Pass.
Build public support through an investment approach. Few New
Yorkers know about the Capital Budget and the planning process
for it. Through a more investment-oriented approach, the Mayor
and Council can energize a lethargic process. Since responsibility
for infrastructure is shared by City, State and Federal agencies,
it is all the more important for the City to have a "consolidated
capital improvements program," including all capital spending
in the City. This should be prepared annually for the Mayor and
Council and more fully reflect who builds New York and what is
needed to do the job effectively.
In our judgement, the City Council should not accept the current
approach to capital improvements, making only limited adjustments
each year and attempting to patch together financing in the face
of myriad obstacles. This practice inevitably leads to "managed
decline," especially under the pressure of fiscal austerity.
That will contribute to a downward spiral in which economic development
and quality of life in the City of New York will be severely affected.
On behalf of the 1,500 members of the New York Building Congress,
we call on the City Council to take the lead in appropriately balancing
today’s needs with those of the future. All of us can point to the
benefits today of investments made by previous generations of New
Yorkers. It is incumbent upon us to do likewise, because to do less
will lead to a dim future for our children and grandchildren.
Members of the City Council should closely examine the 2003 Executive
Capital Budget and Four-year Capital Plan. The New York Building
Congress continues to have serious concerns about the City’s capital
planning process and especially the limited financial resources
devoted to infrastructure maintenance and improvements. We urge
the City Council to review the capital budget in detail, and to
establish a more thorough and formal evaluation procedure.
Members of the Building Congress, who are leaders of the City’s
design, construction and real estate industry, know the infrastructure
needs of New York City and frequently are involved with many aspects
of capital programming and budgeting. In our collective judgement,
the City’s cannot take comfort in any aspect of its infrastructure
program. Total commitments for 2003 of $7.2 billion may seem adequate
in the face of the current budget realities; but actual spending
will be considerably less and could be reduced even further by financial
constraints.
In actual, as well as real dollars, the City’s capital spending
is being reduced considerably from the levels contained in the Adopted
Budget of November 2001. This is occurring at a time when the City’s
capital needs are not being adequately addressed. Current levels
of capital investment are insufficient to keep existing infrastructure
in a state of good repair and do not come close to meeting the City’s
needs for future growth.
The City of New York must not view its capital program as just
another expenditure category. If the capital program is reduced
proportionally with the overall budget, New York faces a bleak future.
The urgency of the moment must be to secure new sources of financing,
particularly dedicated taxes and user fees such as those employed
by the New York City Municipal Water Finance Authority, or perhaps
through value-capture techniques. If there ever were a time to consider
new financing strategies on a comprehensive basis, this is it.
Working with the Mayor, we urge the City Council to evaluate the
current three-tier capital planning process. We recommend the following
steps:
Develop a more dynamic capital needs assessment. The current
Ten-year Capital Strategy, Four-year Capital Plan and Annual Capital
Budget process must move beyond an extrapolation of agency capital
requests to dynamic planning and priority setting. The City Council
should have a committee or sub-committee directly responsible
for working on this process with the Office of Management and
Budget and the Department of City Planning.
Take a fresh look at capital financing. Innovative new approaches
to infrastructure funding must be explored, perhaps drawing on
successful techniques elsewhere. These include privatization and
dedicated user charges, including variable pricing programs such
as Port Authority trans – Hudson tolls and technological improvements
like E-Z Pass.
Build public support through an investment approach. Few New
Yorkers know about the Capital Budget and the planning process
for it. Through a more investment-oriented approach, the Mayor
and Council can energize a lethargic process. Since responsibility
for infrastructure is shared by City, State and Federal agencies,
it is all the more important for the City to have a "consolidated
capital improvements program," including all capital spending
in the City. This should be prepared annually for the Mayor and
Council and more fully reflect who builds New York and what is
needed to do the job effectively.
In our judgement, the City Council should not accept the current
approach to capital improvements, making only limited adjustments
each year and attempting to patch together financing in the face
of myriad obstacles. This practice inevitably leads to "managed
decline," especially under the pressure of fiscal austerity.
That will contribute to a downward spiral in which economic development
and quality of life in the City of New York will be severely affected.
On behalf of the 1,500 members of the New York Building Congress,
we call on the City Council to take the lead in appropriately balancing
today’s needs with those of the future. All of us can point to the
benefits today of investments made by previous generations of New
Yorkers. It is incumbent upon us to do likewise, because to do less
will lead to a dim future for our children and grandchildren.