NY POST

"SAVE N.Y. BANKS: CUT PORK INSTEAD"

By DARRYL C. TOWNS

March 26, 2007 -- NOBODY likes taxes, but we all agree that everybody should pay his fair share.

The state Assembly this month passed a budget that included proposals to close "tax loopholes" - tax-law provisions that, according to Gov. Spitzer and legislative leaders, have allowed some banks and businesses to get unintended tax breaks and cheat the state treasury.

Some of those loophole closers make sense, but others - which come down especially hard on banks - need a second look.

If our aim is to collect more tax dollars, it's natural to focus on banks.

After all, as bankrobber Willie Sutton said, that's where the money is.

But let's face it: The banking industry is the foundation of New York's economy.

According to the Partnership for New York City, banks and other financial-services firms are responsible for almost a quarter of the economic activity in our state - providing 700,000 jobs statewide and almost $90 billion a year in wages.

We don't want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

And that doesn't mean rejecting fiscal fairness.

Digging deeper into the list of supposed loopholes, I've found some that were clearly deliberate provisions of tax law - written to ensure that New York City would remain the financial capital of the world.

For example, one proposal would impose a unitary tax system on New York-headquartered companies, including banks.

That reverses the centerpiece of a long-held economic-development policy under which out-of-state affiliates are not required to file New York returns as long as they deal with their New York affiliates on fair-market terms.

This change would have the unintended result of discouraging U.S. banks from putting their headquarters operations here - and of discouraging foreign banks from locating subsidiaries in New York.

With London, Sydney, Hong Kong and Shanghai nipping at our heels, the old policy may be even more important for New York in the future than it was when first enacted.

Perhaps we should look elsewhere for real loopholes.

For example, consider some things we learned just this month, after a court ordered the state Department of Economic Development to turn over records of how tax breaks are being allocated under its Empire Zone program.

Under Empire Zones, taxes and regulations are loosed in particular communities across the state to encourage economic development.

Thanks to the court order, we now know that in 2007 an estimated $558 million in tax breaks will go to businesses in these zones.

That adds up to far more lost revenue than the state is estimated to pick up from closing all the bank-tax "loopholes."

In all, less than 2 percent of the state's 504,000 businesses benefit from Empire Zone treatment, leaving the rest of us to pay the full tax bill.

What businesses get these huge Empire Zone tax advantages?

They include a New Jersey power company, politically connected law firms, real-estate developers, and big-box stores like Lowe's and Home Depot.

In fact, it's reported that multimillion-dollar tax breaks have gone to firms that failed to create even a single job.

There is mounting evidence that Empire Zones, intended to encourage start-up businesses and job creation in distressed areas, may be generating whale-size tax loopholes for favored companies without contributing much of anything back to the state economy.

My conclusion: Instead of hastily ending a long list of bank tax breaks, many of which may make economic sense, Albany must stop the budget clock, count to 10 and reconsider.

We still have time to get this right.

Banks, like everyone else, must pay their fair share.

But let's make sure we look at the whole picture and do what is both fair and smart.

Darryl C. Towns (D-Brooklyn) chairs the state Assembly's Committee on Banks.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03262007/posto...owns.htm?page=1

FROM THE WEB-EDITION OF THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION

ITEM: On the eve of the possible long-awaited confirmation of Assemblyman Alexander “Pete” Grannis, D-Manhattan, as DEC commissioner by the Senate, Spitzer said the agency will be more “proactive” during his administration.

Comment by John Galt — March 27, 2007 @ 9:24 am

To be very truthful, this “government by press release” that we are continually getting from this “STEAMROLLER” is wearing quite thin, out here in the countryside, anyway, where we are a bit more “substance oriented” …..

And after too many years of George Pataki playing “presidential politics” with the Office of NY Governor, which office has very limited powers given to it by WE, THE PEOPLE in OUR Constitution, we are just completely “out of tolerance” for this “STEAMROLLER” doing some more of the same ….

Pursuant to section 3 of Article 4 of OUR Constitution, the job of governor of NY is to “communicate by message to the legislature at every session the condition of the state, and recommend such matters to it as he or she shall judge expedient” and “the governor shall expedite all such measures as may be resolved upon by the legislature, and shall take care that the laws are faithfully executed ….”

And that is just about it, outside of having “the power to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons after conviction, for all offenses except treason and cases of impeachment, upon such conditions and with such restrictions and limitations, as he or she may think proper, subject to such regulations as may be provided by law relative to the manner of applying for pardons” …..

Which constitutional language makes it clear that this “STEAMROLLER” in bound by the law, as it comes from OUR Legislature, as imperfect as it may or may not be, even in the case of granting reprieves and pardons after conviction ….

And not by his personal whims as to how things “should be”, in his “STEAMROLLER’S” view of life here in upstate NY, where one of the biggest threats to OUR health, safety and well-being is the NYSDEC ….

And with respect to the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, that state agency, which we would say, based on evidence, has been corrupt and inept since DAY ONE, was created by WE, THE PEOPLE, through OUR Constitution back in 1969, when this “STEAMROLLER” was still just a pup in short pants …

And that “creation” is to be found in CHAPTER 664 of OUR laws, which thoroughly bind this “STEAMROLLER”, as follows:

An ACT to repeal and reenact chapter forty-three-B of the consolidated laws, to amend the public health law, and to repeal certain articles, titles, parts and sections of the conservation law, the public health law, the agriculture and markets law, the executive law, and chapter seven hundred one of the laws of nineteen hundred fifty-two, entitled “An act providing for joint action by the states of Delaware, New Jersey and New York and the commonwealth of Pennsylvania in developing, utilizing, controlling, and conserving the water resources of the Delaware river basin in order to assure an adequate water supply; authorizing the governor, for these purposes, to enter into a compact on behalf of the state of New York with the states of Delaware and New Jersey and the commonwealth of Pennsylvania and to apply on behalf of the state of New York to the congress of the United States for its consent thereto; creating the Delaware River basin water commission and specifying the powers and duties thereof, including the power to finance projects by the issuance of bonds; providing for the appointment of the state of New York members of the said commission; approving an integrated water project; requiring the commission to prepare and report plans and specifications for specific projects; and requiring certain prior approvals by the legislature of the compacting states,” in relation to environmental conservation generally; Became a law May 31, 1972, with the approval of the Governor. Passed by a majority vote, three-fifths being present The People of the State of New York, represented in Senate and Assembly, do enact as follows:

With respect to the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation, section 3-0103 of the NYSECL provides as follows:

Commissioner of environmental conservation - The head of the department shall be the Commissioner of Environmental Conservation, who shall be appointed by the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and hold office at the pleasure of the Governor by whom he was appointed and until his successor is appointed and has qualified …..

There is all the power and authority that WE, THE PEOPLE granted to this “STEAMROLLER” with respect to OUR state DEC; he can appoint a commissioner, and that really is that …..

Once that commissioner is in office, HIS or HER job is defined by section 3-0301 of the NYSECL as follows:

General functions, powers and duties of the department and the commissioner.

1. It shall be the responsibility of the department, in accordance with such existing provisions and limitations as may be elsewhere set forth in law, by and through the commissioner to carry out the environmental policy of the state set forth in section 1-0101 of this chapter.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/nycodes/c37/a7.html

If one studies that law, one finds that the DEC is required by us, WE, THE PEOPLE, to be pro-active, and if one considers the law, which came to the “STEAMROLLER” from OUR Legislature, one finds that it is indeed well-written, and it is quite comprehensive, and all-inclusive ….

And if one then studies the actual history of this seemingly corrupt and inept state agency as it has developed over time, by referring to court decisions against the DEC, of which John Galt has many, and such lengthy documents as the transcripts from the Dailey Mine hearings up in Hoosick, NY, and the Lane Mine hearings from Nassau, NY, one finds that it is politics that interferes with what this agency is supposed to be doing ….

And since OUR law does not allow for politics to interfere with that agency, we start to get concerned with what this very political “STEAMROLLER” is stating above here, AS IF IT WERE SOMEHOW HIS CHOICE as to what the DEC does on a daily basis, when it is not at all ….

We did not give him this power, in the first place ….

And we are certainly not giving it to him now, at least while the NY Constitution and NYSECL remain written as they presently are ….

TO SECURE FOR US THE BLESSINGS OF FREEDOM ….

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4204#comments

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

8. March 27th, 2007 11:50 pm

speak freely, openly and loudly; just don’t get your nose bent out of shape when people, including the NYPD listen, if you don’t want folks to listen, whisper behind closed doors.

— Posted by dougk

10. March 28th, 2007 6:44 am

“If you don’t want folks to listen, whisper behind closed doors ….”

There it is, America …

THE SLOGAN FOR OUR TIMES, which should be posted on large billboards from one end of this state to the other …

And you read it first in the pages of the NY TIMES, although not as a policy the NY TIMES endorses, which has the editors of NY POST bent so far out of shape, the wags up here say they now look like fancy pretzels!

And it is true, this SLOGAN FOR OUR TIMES …

As was the case in Communist China when the madman Mao ruled, and also in Russia when Beria’s goons were everywhere, “LISTENING IN” on what people were saying to determine who next to “remove from society” to keep a dictator in power, people in upstate NY DO WHISPER BEHIND CLOSED DOORS in fear when they are talking about CORRUPT GOVERNMENT up here, because of what happened to that engineer, where before, when there was law, and contitutional rights in NYS, these same people would have been putting their words in writing in the form of an Article 78 lawsuit against these same CORRUPT public officials, and then pursuant to section 6 of the BILL OF RIGHTS of the NYS Constitution, these same citizens who are now in hiding, whispering in fear behind closed doors, would have been bringing the results of these Article 78’s before a grand jury for further action ….

And with that said, it is worth taking a look at that specific constitutional language in the BILL OF RIGHTS of OUR NYS Constitution:

§ 6. No person shall be subject to be twice put in jeopardy for the same offense; nor shall he or she be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself or herself, providing, that any public officer who, upon being called before a grand jury to testify concerning the conduct of his or her present office or of any public office held by him or her within five years prior to such grand jury call to testify, or the performance of his or her official duties in any such present or prior offices, refuses to sign a waiver of immunity against subsequent criminal prosecution, or to answer any relevant question concerning such matters before such grand jury, shall by virtue of such refusal, be disqualified from holding any other public office or public employment for a period of five years from the date of such refusal to sign a waiver of immunity against subsequent prosecution, or to answer any relevant question concerning such matters before such grand jury, and shall be removed from his or her present office by the appropriate authority or shall forfeit his or her present office at the suit of the attorney-general.

The power of grand juries to inquire into the wilful misconduct in office of public officers, and to find indictments or to direct the filing of informations in connection with such inquiries, shall never be suspended or impaired by law.

THE POWER OF GRAND JURIES IN NYS TO INQUIRE INTO THE WILFUL MISCONDUCT IN OFFICE OF PUBLIC OFFICERS IN NYS SHALL NEVER BE SUSPENDED ...

EXCEPT …

IT HAS BEEN ….

THROUGH FEAR …

BY “STEAMROLLER” SPITZER and the NYS POLICE STATE ….

Because where there are no witnesses, well, hey, you do the math ….

And at least one person is cheering for that right here in the pages of the NY TIMES ….

And his cheers are being echoed by a whole host of corrupt public officials in NYS who never need fear being hauled before a grand jury themselves, BECAUSE RETALIATION AGAINST POTENTIAL WITNESSES AGAINST THEM IS THEIR WEAPON, against us, as this case with the engineer is evidence of, and so long as the maws of the GULAGS beckon, to us, if we dare speak above a whisper, down in our basements, as if we were Russians, or Chinese, or ordinary Germans in the time of Hitler, these corrupt politicians will be safe ….

Which is what POLICE STATES generally exist for, to protect POWER, and not people …

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...lance/#comments

Crains New York Business.com

"Spitzer's approval ratings beginning to wane"

By: Catherine Tymkiw

Published: March 27, 2007 - 5:58 pm

Gov. Eliot Spitzer isn't winning any popularity contests.

His approval ratings are beginning to wane as New Yorkers signal disappointment with his health care stance as they mull over his first few months in office, according to two polls released this week.

Nearly one in five registered state voters are unsure about how to rate the job Mr. Spitzer is doing, according to a WNBC/Marist poll released late Tuesday.

Among those respondents who voiced an opinion, 43% give the new governor high marks, while 38% rate the job he is doing as fair or poor.

He received the worst marks from African-American voters - only 39% of those surveyed think he is a good leader, compared with 63% of white voters and 66% of Latino voters.

The WNBC/Marist results mirror findings from a poll released Monday by the Siena Research Institute.

That survey showed Mr. Spitzer's favorable rating slipping 12 points in the past month to 62%.

Health care and the budget are the main drivers behind his sliding numbers.

Only 45% of voters statewide think the governor can be trusted to do the right thing on health care, according to the WNBC/Marist poll.

The budget battle is also taking a toll on his job performance, with only 47% of voters saying he's doing an excellent or good job, down 11 points from February.

On the flip side, the number of poll respondents who think he's doing a fair or poor job rose 15 points to 39%.

"Clearly over the last month there have been millions of dollar spent supporting and opposing various proposals in the governor's budget," said Siena spokesman Steven Greenberg.

While 90% of voters believe an on-time budget is important, 80% of those surveyed say it's more important to have a "good" budget rather than an on-time budget.

On the upside, the WNBC/Marist poll revealed that, for the first time since 2002, more voters think the state is moving in the right direction by a margin of 49% to 43%.

That contrasts with the Siena poll, which showed respondents evenly split, 37% to 37%.

Siena polled 622 registered New York state voters from March 19 to 22, with a margin of error of +/-3.9 percentage points.

WNBC/Marist surveyed 641 registered New York voters from March 20 to 22, with a margin of error of +/-4%.

David Jones contributed

http://www.newyorkbusiness.com/apps/pbcs.d...E/70327016/1097

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

March 28th, 2007 7:29 am:

Paranoia strikes deep ….

Into your heart it will creep …

Starts when you are always afraid ….

Step out of line, the “STEAMROLLER” and G. Ollie Koppel and Dougk and the NYPD will come and haul you away ....

LONG LIVE PUBLIC CORRUPTION IN NYS!

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...lance/#comments

Village Voice - Runnin' Scared

"Roman Holiday - New York's ambassador lives high, large, and loose"

by Tom Robbins

March 27th, 2007 11:59 AM

With just two months to go in his job as the state's economic development czar, Charles Gargano hopped on an Alitalia Airlines flight last October 20 and flew to Rome.

His ticket included an open return, from Rome's Da Vinci airport to JFK.

The cost, $3,579, was billed to Gargano's state-supplied corporate American Express card.

But the purpose of the trip—one of at least six that Gargano made to Italy on the public's dime while overseeing state economic development activities—is unknown.

Gargano, the dapper former ambassador to Trinidad and Tobago during the Reagan administration who helped former governor George Pataki raise much of his campaign cash, never bothered with the required paperwork.

Under rules in place at the Empire State Development Corporation, where Gargano served as chairman from 1995 to 2006, he was supposed to submit a "Pre-Trip Authorization" memo and another detailing what he spent and why.

He did neither.

The only explanation offered was a one-line entry from his secretary to the accounting department:

"This charge is for airfare to Italy for last minute request for Chairman to speak at an event."

What event?

Whose request?

Officials say they don't have a clue.

"We have no information on it, no backup that we've been able to find," says agency spokesman A.J. Carter.

Gargano, who was born in Italy and is reportedly building a home there, also isn't saying.

He failed to respond to messages left for him at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, where he remains a powerful commissioner thanks to a new six-year reappointment Pataki bestowed on him during the former governor's final weeks in office.

As state development honcho, Gargano was a controversial figure, often criticized for his favorable treatment of political allies.

Last month, the Voice reported that Gargano's nephew had lobbied his uncle's offices on behalf of a client seeking a long-term state lease ("The Magician's Nephew," February 14–20).

"As far as I know, all of his expenses were related to state government business," says Vanessa Cuti, a former state economic development aide.

But a Voice review of Gargano's expenses found that the impromptu and costly jaunt to Rome was one of several cases in which Gargano had the public pay his fare and ignored his own agency's stiff standards on expense reimbursement.

Last July, Gargano socked the state with a $410 bill for a flight from Nantucket to New York for what his secretary described as "a last-minute interview request with Brian Williams of the NBC Nightly News."

(The interview didn't air until September 11, 2006, when Gargano was part of a story commemorating the fifth anniversary of the attacks.)

In June, the ambassador billed the state for a flight to Quebec, at a cost of $487.

Although his secretary told the accounting department that the trip was personal and would be reimbursed, Gargano never paid back the funds, officials say.

In September 2005, while Gargano was traveling with Pataki on a trade mission to China, he took a side jaunt to Helsinki to visit real estate tycoon Earle Mack, a major Pataki campaign contributor who had recently been named ambassador to Finland by President Bush.

The $1,496 cost was justified, his secretary wrote, since Gargano was "addressing potential investors in New York State."

Back in New York, Gargano liberally used his corporate AmEx card to pay for meals at many of the city's poshest dining establishments—rarely explaining why.

While the state's economic development chief was expected to rub elbows with top business leaders—the kind of people who don't normally lunch at Papaya King—he was also obligated under agency rules to name his dining companions and the business subject discussed.

But the filings show that Gargano spent $16,000 from 2001 to 2006 at top restaurants, listing expenses as meals shared with unidentified "business executives."

At San Pietro's, a pricey midtown Italian restaurant where Gargano is a regular, the ambassador has charged more than $4,000 for 15 lunches since 2001, only twice disclosing his fellow diners:

One event was a 2003 lunch with Pataki aide Lou Tomson; at the other he gallantly let the state pay for a $139 lunch in June 2004 with CNN talking head Margaret Carlson.

On July 11, 2005, he signed for a $673 meal there—with parties unknown.

Last summer, Gargano had the state pay for a $308 lunch at prestigious Le Cirque with other unnamed guests.

A week later he used the card to pay for a $415 dinner at Campagnola, a swank Upper East Side bistro, again with anonymous "executives."

Gargano had the state pay for a half-dozen meals at Bobby Van's, a chic steakhouse in Bridgehampton, Long Island, which happens to be around the corner from a sprawling beachfront villa Gargano owns there.

He enjoyed a $134 lunch at the restaurant last June, and a $109 lunch in October—both with unnamed execs.

It's not as though Gargano lacks his own funds.

Financial disclosure filings he made with the state's ethics board show that his holdings in stocks and real estate, mostly with Long Island projects he co-owns with his son Lawrence, soared during his years in office (actual dollar amounts are not disclosed to the public).

And in his last year as chairman of the state's development corporation, Gargano's salary was $160,760.

He is also still owed $28,854.42 in unused vacation pay, according to agency officials.

But the ambassador shouldn't count on collecting it all.

"Before he gets that money, we will deduct whatever he owes in outstanding expenses," says Carter, the agency's spokesman.

tom robbins

http://www.villagevoice.com/nyclife/0713,r...s,76188,15.html

"State of confusion over this split - Economic development agency divides Capital Region between upstate, downstate"

By CHRIS CHURCHILL, Business writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, March 28, 2007

ALBANY -- New York has two economic "czars" -- the co-chairmen of Empire State Development Corp.

Daniel Gundersen, based in Buffalo, is working to grow the economy in upstate New York, while Manhattan-based Patrick Foye is handling downstate initiatives.

But neither will handle the entire Capital Region.

That's because the agency considers Albany and Rensselaer counties part of downstate New York, while Schenectady and Saratoga counties are upstate.

The division, in part, fulfills a campaign promise by Gov. Eliot Spitzer to focus attention on New York's struggling economy upstate, where cities such as Buffalo and Rochester have been plagued by disinvestment and job losses.

But in the Capital Region, the division has confused some and amused others.

To Gundersen, the distinction is not particularly relevant.

Interviewed Tuesday at Small Business Day, an annual event sponsored by The Business Council of New York State Inc., Gundersen said he and Foye are both concerned with growing the entire state economy.

"Anywhere you draw the line, you're going to have that issue," he said.

There's general consensus locally that the Capital Region economy is in better shape than many parts of upstate New York.

Still, to some, it sounds strange to consider Albany downstate.

Bill Hooton, president of Capital District Trade Strategies in Albany, which runs the Capital District World Trade Center, said Albany just feels upstate, though he noted New York City is an economic lifeline for the Capital Region.

In Schenectady, Charles Steiner, president of The Chamber of Schenectady County, conceded he would prefer his area wasn't divorced from the rest of the Capital Region, especially as his group is stressing its connections to Tech Valley -- an 18-county region stretching through the Hudson River valley north to Canada.

"We are with the Capital Region, as far as I'm concerned," he said.

Steiner, however, credited Spitzer with recognizing that the upstate economy is fundamentally different from the economy in the New York City area, and said he hoped Schenectady County could benefit from initiatives developed from that recognition.

There has been confusion about where, exactly, the line between upstate and downstate has been drawn.

A spokesman for Empire State Development said in February that the entire Capital Region would be considered downstate; other reports have placed Saratoga County downstate and Schenectady County upstate.

But Gundersen said officials decided to place Albany and Rensselaer counties with the Hudson Valley, declaring points north and west upstate.

Christine Pritchard, a spokeswoman for Spitzer, said it's not as if a sharp line has been been drawn.

Instead, she said, Gundersen and Foye are sharing Capital Region economic development efforts.

Linda Hillman, president of the Rensselaer County Regional Chamber of Commerce in Troy, doubted that it all mattered.

"It's just kind of an artificial border," she said.

"We're all in New York state."

Indeed, during a panel discussion Tuesday at Small Business Day, Gundersen and Foye -- joined by state Labor Commissioner M. Patricia Smith -- said they are planning changes to the development corporation that would benefit all of New York.

The men, speaking to a crowd of small-business owners and their Chamber of Commerce representatives, said they will make the agency more accessible, open, friendly and efficient.

And they said they'll work together to make the changes happen -- both upstate and down.

Chris Churchill can be reached at 454-5442 or by e-mail at cchurchill@timesunion.com.

Manhattan Institute For Policy Research

Civic Report - No. 5 January 1998

"Debt & New York’s Public Authorities: Borrowing Like There’s No Tomorrow"

William J. Stern is a Contributing Editor of City Journal and former head of the New York State Urban Development Corporation under Governor Mario Cuomo.

Edwin Rubenstein is the Research Director of the Hudson Institute.

In 1975 the Urban Development Corporation (UDC), a public authority created in the late 1960s by the New York State Legislature, achieved a dubious distinction: it became the first major issuer of municipal bonds since the Great Depression to default on its obligations.

The results were catastrophic.

Private capital markets shut the door on the state virtually overnight, and New York City was thrown into a fiscal crisis whose destructive effects can still be seen today.

Unfortunately, when it comes to debt, New York has a dangerously short memory.

Just two decades after the UDC fiasco, no other state can begin to match our borrowing.

According to 1995 figures (the latest available), New York’s debt burden of $68.5 billion outstrips that of (much more populous) California by 50 percent; as a percentage of overall personal income, it exceeds the debt burden of Texas by 400 percent.

Worse, New York’s appetite for borrowing shows every sign of growing.

Since 1985 the state’s debt burden has shot up an astounding 241 percent, a fact that goes a long way toward explaining why the respected Moody’s Investor Services gives New York’s bonds the second-lowest investment rating in the nation, only a notch above that of Louisiana.*

Who is to blame for this staggering load of debt and the threat that it poses to the state’s economic health?

The chief culprits are all-too-familiar: New York’s ever-expanding public authorities and the politicians and interest groups in Albany who benefit from their profligate ways.

Not All Debt Is Bad

Getting to the root of the problem requires that we first make some distinctions, because not every part of New York’s $68.5 billion in debt is equally troubling.

In the first place, there are general-obligation bonds, the most traditional—and restricted—form of state debt.

Such bonds are issued only upon the approval of the state’s voters.

Moreover, under the state constitution, only one general-obligation debt question may appear on the ballot each year.

To their credit, New Yorkers have been fairly skeptical of these measures.

Between 1974 and 1996, they approved only six out of eleven of them, with the environmental bond issue of 1996 being the first to win their endorsement since 1988.

Over the last decade, debt in this form has constituted a declining percentage of the state total; today it amounts to a manageable $5.2 billion.

The state also sells long-term bonds to finance the Local Government Assistance Corporation (LGAC), which was created in 1991 to help localities fund their operations when, as is increasingly the case, the Legislature fails to pass the state budget on time.

Debt service for the LGAC is covered by one percent of the proceeds from the state sales tax.

Admittedly, the LGAC is a regrettable expedient, made necessary by the irresponsibility of leaders in Albany.

But given political reality in New York, such borrowing is a reasonable way to ensure that the state’s residents are not forced to endure regular interruptions in basic services.

Moreover, like general-obligation bonds, LGAC bonds account for a small fraction of overall state indebtedness—just $4.3 billion.

Even when we arrive at the state’s public authorities, there is a certain amount of fairly innocent borrowing.

Under the state constitution, New York may guarantee, with its full faith and credit, the bonds of only three of its public authorities—the Thruway Authority, the Job Development Authority, and the Port Authority.

Such guaranteed debt, unlike debt issued by other authorities, is subject to voter-approved caps and other restrictions.

As a result, it has never gotten out of hand and today amounts to a mere $400 million.

Too Much of the Wrong Kind of Debt Is a Serious Problem

So-called “moral-obligation” debt issued by the public authorities has a more colorful history, but it, too, does not pose a problem today.

Such bonds are secured not by the state’s full faith and credit but by its non-binding promise—or moral obligation—to use state revenue to make up any shortfalls in debt service.

During the 1960s and 1970s, this pledge enabled the authorities to overcome Wall Street’s reluctance to buy non-guaranteed revenue bonds.

After the state was forced to assume responsibility for the UDC’s debts in 1975, however, the Legislature put an end to this practice.

Accordingly, New York’s moral-obligation bonds, $8.2 billion of which are still outstanding, have long been shrinking as a share of total state debt.

Taken together, the sorts of borrowing described thus far comprise slightly more than 25 percent of New York’s total indebtedness.

All the rest of the debt burden—and here we reach the heart of the problem—comes from just two other forms of borrowing by the state’s public authorities.

The largest category by far, today accounting for $32.4 billion, consists of revenue bonds.

Generally speaking, an authority issues such bonds in order to finance a specific project and then uses the proceeds generated by that project to cover the debt service.

Toll revenue, for example, pays off bonds for the Thruway Authority, just as payments to hospitals take care of bonds issued by the Medical Care Facilities Agency.

In principle, of course, using revenue bonds to link debt to particular projects is an economically sound idea; it means that those who benefit are the ones who pay.

In addition, because revenue bonds do not rely on the state itself for repayment, they do not directly affect the state’s fiscal affairs.

Regrettably, however, even a sensible financial instrument can be abused.

Because revenue bonds do not even require the approval of the Legislature, they escape all forms of popular scrutiny.

New Yorkers, in short, never get a chance to vote down revenue bonds, as they often choose to do with general-obligation debt.

To understand what this means in practice, consider that Albany may soon allow the state’s Long Island Power Authority to issue $7 billion in revenue bonds in order to buy a portion of LILCO and retire debt acquired by the company’s Shoreham nuclear plant.

If approved, it will be the largest single-debt offering by any state or municipality in U.S. history—and the citizens of New York will have had no real say in the matter.

At the same time, the public authorities that are accumulating this debt receive very little oversight from Albany.

The Public Authority Control Commission ostensibly does this job, but it has few investigative or disciplinary powers.

Nor do the responsible committees of the Legislature do any better, almost never holding hearings or issuing reports.

With so little supervision, the day may well come when one of the authorities can no longer meet its obligations with its revenues alone, at which point the Legislature, despite having no legal responsibility for this debt, would have to step in.

This, in fact, is exactly what finally happened with the UDC in 1975.

Though the agency was supposed to be self-supporting (through the rents collected on its projects), when its bonds failed the Legislature realized that the credibility of all state debt was at stake.

Public authorities may be financially independent on paper, but the state always has responsibility for them in the end.

The Most Dangerous Form of Debt Is Also the Fastest Growing

If there is nothing especially objectionable about revenue bonds in themselves, the same cannot be said of the fastest-growing form of borrowing by the state’s public authorities: lease-purchase agreements.

Under these deals, which now total some $18 billion, authorities issue debt in order to purchase or construct facilities or purchase equipment that is, in turn, leased back to the state at a price that can cover debt service.

Unsurprisingly, such arrangements are often little more than a fiscal shell game.

During the Cuomo administration, when this outrageous practice peaked, Albany “sold” Attica Prison and a portion of Interstate 287 to the UDC.

The state got a quick $200 million, which helped balance the budget.

And New York taxpayers?

They found themselves saddled with a serious long-term liability: a commitment to pay $600 million over the life of the 30-year bonds issued by the UDC.

Short of outright malfeasance, it is hard to imagine a more flagrant misuse of capital funding.

A Self-Serving Elite Blocks Solutions

Can anything be done to end such reckless borrowing?

Many have suggested amending the New York State constitution in order to make all debt subject to approval by the voters and to impose a cap on debt based on some percentage of either the state’s overall personal income or its gross domestic product.

Such amendments would have to come through a state constitutional convention or the Legislature, and would then need to be ratified by the voters.

Both these ideas, taken on their merits, have much to recommend them.

Politically, however, they are nonstarters.

In the first place, New Yorkers are uninterested in calling a constitutional convention, as they showed at the ballot box this past November.

More fundamentally, even if such a convention were held, it is unlikely that it would do anything about the state’s borrowing problems.

The fact is, any constitutional convention would be controlled by the very same political insiders in Albany who ran up the state’s debt in the first place.

Needless to say, these insiders are the reason too that no meaningful constitutional amendment related to debt is likely to come from the Legislature.

Why are New York’s political leaders so determined to protect the borrowing powers of the authorities?

The answer lies with the state’s “nomenklatura,” a term first used to describe the small class of politically connected individuals who benefited personally from the centrally controlled economies of the Communist bloc.

In much the same way, New York’s public authorities, with their virtually unlimited ability to spend, offer extraordinary benefits to those with the necessary political access.

Our nomenklatura consists of a long list of prominent consulting, accounting, public-relations, and law firms, all of whom take in millions of dollars in revenue from the various debt-financed projects of the authorities.

What’s in it for the state’s politicians?

All the rewards at the disposal of the nomenklatura, from campaign contributions and favorable press coverage to lucrative jobs once they leave office.

With the public largely indifferent to the uncontrolled borrowing of the state’s authorities, it is not surprising that leaders in Albany have been unwilling to antagonize such attentive friends.

A Federal Flat Tax May Be The Only Answer

That leaves the possibility of getting at New York’s debt problem from the federal level.

Here one idea is key: doing away with the tax-free status of interest on municipal bonds.

Simple though it may sound, this would instantly impose discipline on the state’s borrowing.

Faced with having to pay a much higher rate of interest to attract investors, Albany would have no choice but to restrain itself.

Otherwise, debt service would skyrocket both for the state and the authorities themselves, making necessary either higher taxes or increased fees for authority services—alternatives unattractive to the state’s political class.

The trick here, as with proposals at the state level, is how to achieve such a reform politically.

Getting rid of the preferential treatment for municipal bonds could succeed on its own and would certainly be worth trying.

Unfortunately, the few who would be hurt by such a change are far more likely to exert political pressure than the many who would benefit from it.

Its best chance of success would be as part of a broader movement, one with widespread popular support.

Here, the brightest star to which it might be hitched is the growing movement for a flat federal income tax.

If such a plan were to pass, income from municipal bonds would be treated just like income from any other source.

It is, of course, a sad commentary on political life in New York that our best hope for reform lies outside the state.

But unless New York experiences another crisis in borrowing—what is known as an “event” in the lingo of the bond market—it is unlikely that the Legislature will rein in the authorities any time soon.

Only the immediate prospect of economic chaos seems capable of shaking Albany from its self-interested slumber.

* New York City and other localities, it should be noted, share the state’s bad borrowing habits and have accumulated some $50 billion in debt on their own—but that’s a subject for another day.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_5.htm

"Home sale prices dip in February - Realtors say 7 percent slide not too alarming given national trends"

By CHRIS CHURCHILL, Business writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, March 27, 2007

The median sale price for single-family homes in the Capital Region last month fell 7 percent from a year ago, the latest sign that the area's real estate market is cooling.

According to the Greater Capital Association of Realtors Inc., the median sale price fell to $175,000 last month from $188,000 in February 2006.

The drop came as the overall number of sales remained roughly the same.

Officials with the association said the price drop did not suggest trouble for the regional real estate market so long as it does not continue.

"We were coming off record years locally," said Doug Engels, the association's president and a broker and co-owner at Weichert Realtors Northeast Group.

"To be off a little bit, given what's going on nationally, I'm not sure is reason for concern."

The statistics are based on closed, or completed, sales and include Albany, Montgomery, Rensselaer, Saratoga, Schenectady and Schoharie counties.

Prices in the most populated counties for the most part were stable for the month, while some outlying counties saw a drop.

Median sales prices in Montgomery County, for example, fell 32 percent, from $91,250 to $62,000.

Those numbers, however, represent a small statistical sample, as Montgomery County only had 14 sales close during the month.

The February numbers -- mostly representing sales activity from December, as it typically takes about two months for a sale to close -- come from one of the slowest months of the year for real estate agents, and represent a small percentage of the overall homes sold each year.

While the early part of the winter was unusually warm and therefore conducive to home shopping, the region's overall sales for the month increased just slightly, from 802 to 806.

Still, it's important to note that overall for the first two months of 2007, sale prices in the Capital Region are even with where they were a year ago, at $185,000.

"The market is still very active, but the appreciation has leveled off," said James Ader, the Realtor association's chief executive.

"And we knew that it would level off."

"Because if it didn't, no one who lives here would be able to afford to live here."

Churchill can be reached at 454-5442 or by e-mail at cchurchill@timesunion.com.

NY POST

"GOV. STEAMROLLED INTO A BIG SOFTEE"

March 29, 2007 --

ALBANY - Gov. Steamroller has become Mister Softee this week as plunging poll numbers, Republican recalcitrance, and the approaching April 1 budget deadline forced Eliot Spitzer to change himself into George Pataki.

That was the widespread view at the Capitol yesterday as lawmakers, lobbyists and good-government activists agreed that Gov. Spitzer - who had vowed to change everything in Albany on Day 1 - voluntarily enlisted in Albany's hyper-secret, special-interest-dominated, business-as-usual culture that defined his predecessor - and for no good reason.

The big winner in the new budget accord was the supposedly weakened Senate Majority Leader, Joseph Bruno (R-Rensselaer), insiders agreed.

Bruno, despite a shrinking majority and a criminal probe of his private business dealings, relied on his instinctive sense that Spitzer was a bully who would blink rather than fight beyond the budget deadline.

And he parlayed that into a nearly $1 billion windfall for Long Island schools and his leftist allies in the totally self-centered hospital workers union.

The record-high, $123 billion budget deal neither reforms nor reshapes New York's notoriously special-interest-driven spending plan, other than at the edges.

And it doesn't do anything about the state's perennially dysfunctional government - which remained embarrassingly on display at the Capitol yesterday.

Those who know Albany well know legislative leaders wouldn't be crowing about a "good budget deal" if Spitzer had, in fact, achieved major reforms.

To their credit, Spitzer's long-time allies in the "good-government" community didn't pull punches in their assessment of the governor's sellout.

"New York has yet to see the fresh face of Albany described by then-candidate Spitzer: in fact, this budget process takes us backward in the journey to a more transparent, open state government," said League of Women Voters legislative director Barbara Bartoletti.

Citizens Union Public Policy Director Doug Israel, noting that Spitzer is expected to use the Pataki-favored technique of employing "messages of necessity" to rush massive budget bills through the Legislature, said the practice "prevents not only the public but legislators as well from reviewing the most important legislation they will pass all year.

"There is no compelling excuse, it is bad government," Israel continued.

Late in the day, Common Cause and the New York Public Interest Group also expressed their "disappointment" with the budget process.

fredric.dicker@nypost.com

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03292007/news/...c_u__dicker.htm

NY TIMES

News Analysis

"'Steamroller' in Albany Learns How to Concede"

By MICHAEL COOPER and DANNY HAKIM

Published: March 29, 2007

ALBANY, March 28 — Gov. Eliot Spitzer brought a hard-charging style to Albany, taking on adversaries personally and directly, even lambasting lawmakers in their home districts.

But the State Legislature knows how to play hardball too, and the rookie governor is having to meet them halfway on his first budget.

So after Governor Spitzer waged a lonely, bruising political battle to try to reduce Medicaid costs — and was attacked in millions of dollars of television ads paid for by the health care union and a hospitals association — he ended up agreeing to restore many proposed cuts as part of the budget deal he is hammering out.

In a news conference Wednesday afternoon, Mr. Spitzer claimed a victory of sorts, saying that the agreements he and legislative leaders had reached so far had given him much of what he wanted.

But he acknowledged that he had had to alter many of his key proposals to win the support of lawmakers.

“The overall level of spending, obviously, it is a bit higher than I had initially wanted,” Governor Spitzer said.

“As I’ve said to a number of you over the course of today, you do not turn a battleship inside a bathtub."

"It takes a bit more than one budget cycle to get us down to the spending levels we want.”

Talks are still under way as the governor and the Legislature struggle to meet the April 1 budget dealine.

But both sides say the Legislature has succeeded in increasing Mr. Spitzer’s proposed budget by nearly $1 billion — about the amount it usually adds to a governor’s budget.

And now lawmakers in both parties are questioning privately whether the governor’s alpha-dog style has been all that effective.

State Senator Joseph L. Bruno, the Republican majority leader, who led the main opposition to the governor’s budget and sometimes found himself at the business end of the governor’s public tongue-lashings, seemed pleased.

“You know, I’ve stated before and others have stated, when you want to talk about numbers — depends on how you count,” Mr. Bruno said at a hearing, to much laughter.

“You understand that, I understand that, this governor’s learned it quickly.”

The counting was still not done on Wednesday night.

While there were many areas still to be agreed on, the agreements drove total spending for next year up to more than $121.6 billion — making it the ninth-largest increase of state-financed spending in the last 40 years, according to the Empire Center for New York State Policy, a conservative policy group.

Civic groups — which have been largely supportive of Governor Spitzer so far — were decidedly cool to the few details that emerged from the budget negotiations.

The Citizens Budget Commission, which praised many of the governor’s proposals, called the agreed-on Medicaid cuts “modest,” and said the price for achieving them was high in terms of increased spending overall.

Numerous civic groups complained about the secrecy of the budget talks, saying that it looked as if, in the rush to make the April 1 deadline, the governor would have to waive the constitutional requirement that gives lawmakers three days to study laws before voting on them.

There were many contentious issues left to be resolved — any one of which could derail the chances of passing a budget by Sunday.

These included whether to allow more charter schools in the state, whether to add a nickel deposit to cans and bottles of non-carbonated beverages, whether to give a tax break to people who send their children to private and parochial schools, and whether to give pay raises to judges.

But in a number of areas, Mr. Spitzer argued that the agreements he won would yield dividends in the future, even if they did not look significant at first.

His plan to create a new school spending formula to send more money to New York City and other high-needs districts survived, with some significant changes.

But the Republican-led State Senate got him to double the amount of operating aid being sent to Long Island’s school districts, and to increase aid to other wealthy districts.

This allows the governor to boast that he has boiled the state’s many arcane formulas down to one understandable, predictable formula, and that he has broken the historic system of dividing school aid by shares — a system that always gave New York City close to 39 percent of new school aid and Long Island between 12 and 13 percent.

Senate Republicans lost their fight to change the new formula to enshrine the current share system, but were nonetheless able to win an agreement to add $420 million outside the formula to make sure Long Island gets its traditional share next year.

“In terms of operating aid, what we call above the line, I believe our share will be at least what it was in the past” said Senator Dean G. Skelos, a Long Island Republican.

“Maybe a little more.”

Still, even if shares survive in some form next year, analysts argue that the new formula is significant.

“I think if you succeed in changing the formula through the statute — putting in place a new aid formula that actually breaks shares — that is significant,” said Edmund J. McMahon, the director of the Empire Center.

And when it came to the fight over health care spending — the biggest public battle of the budget — the governor said that he was restoring about $350 million out of his $1.3 billion in proposed cuts.

Details were sketchy, but people with knowledge of the deal said the largest components involved restoring most of an annual inflation adjustment to Medicaid payments made to hospitals and nursing homes, and allowing the expiration of a tax on hospitals that he had proposed extending.

During the budget battle, the leaders of two powerful health care groups, 1199 United Healthcare Workers East and the Greater New York Hospital Association, were singled out for criticism by Governor Spitzer in front of hundreds of business and civic leaders at a power breakfast early this month.

On Wednesday they gleefully sent out a news release claiming that the governor’s concessions would amount to the restoration of nearly 70 percent of his proposed cuts to hospitals and nursing homes.

But Mr. Spitzer said that “their 70 percent is just way off.”

“The hospital reductions are over 50 percent of what we had initially proposed, over 50 percent, and that is an important number,” Mr. Spitzer said.

But the governor won changes to how health care spending is distributed that he argues will yield benefits in time, and he got the State Senate to agree to pass a False Claims Act that he says will help Albany significantly recoup losses from Medicaid fraud.

The governor agreed to the Senate’s demand that property tax relief be sent directly to homeowners in the form of rebate checks.

And while he held firm to his demand that it be focused on the middle class, he agreed to extend the relief to more high earners at the request of the Senate.

In the end Mr. Spitzer, who referred to himself earlier this year as a “steamroller,” did not flatten out everything in his path.

He gave ground in some areas and won ground in others.

“There’s no steam in the roller,” State Senator Martin J. Golden, a Brooklyn Republican, said.

“You can’t do it on your own."

"I think he’s learning that.”

Nicholas Confessore contributed reporting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/nyregion...amp;oref=slogin

"Don't rush the budget"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Thursday, March 29, 2007

As an advocate of reform, Gov. Spitzer is naturally anxious to have an on-time state budget in his freshman year in office.

But Mr. Spitzer should recall what he was saying only a few days ago, when meeting with editorial writers from around the state at the Rockefeller Institute in Albany -- namely, that getting the budget right is more important than getting it on time.

Ideally, Mr. Spitzer and legislative leaders should be able to do both.

But in practice, that's not always attainable.

Thus, while there are some signs that the tentative budget agreement reached on Tuesday may represent a sound and timely budget, there are too many unanswered questions to say for sure.

For that reason alone, Mr. Spitzer should avoid issuing so-called messages of necessity, which governors can use to bypass a three-day waiting period before the Legislature begins to vote on budget bills.

Instead, lawmakers and the public should be given the opportunity to study the budget details and voice their opinions before the voting begins.

Mr. Spitzer's first budget includes three major changes in two major funding areas.

There's no reason to rush when the stakes are so high.

One major change involves New York's expensive Medicaid program, which Mr. Spitzer proposed to cut by $1.3 billion, largely by shifting the emphasis away from hospitals and nursing homes toward community centers and home care.

The compromise worked out Tuesday among the governor, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno restores $350 million in those cuts, but at what cost to Mr. Spitzer's priorities?

A second change would, if enacted, be historic.

It would collapse the state's complex school aid formulas into a single one that would direct more aid to high-needs districts, while leaving affluent suburban districts with a lesser share of the aid package.

The goal is to help high-needs districts close the achievement gap with suburban districts by providing them with the funds to improve classroom performance.

Yet the compromise reached Tuesday increases funds for the suburbs, and raises the total increase in school aid to $1.9 billion.

How will that help to close the gap?

The third change is a bold, new approach to accountability for school districts with high needs but low test results.

In exchange for a higher than average share of new school aid, these districts would be subject to contracts of excellence that place school boards and district administrators at risk of losing their jobs unless student performance improves.

But now that suburban districts are also getting more aid, largely because of pressure from Republican senators who represent districts on Long Island, where is the accountability for them?

Three big changes, three big questions.

Now it's time for answers.

Rochester Democrat & Chronicle

"Budget's too fat - Our reform governor cut a deal but gave back too much."

(March 29, 2007) — Gov. Eliot Spitzer was elected by millions of New Yorkers tired of Albany excess and special-interest politics overwhelming the common good.

They saw him as an agent of real change.

They might have to take another look following release Tuesday of a budget "framework'' that raises spending nearly $1 billion over the governor's already too-padded budget.

Simply put, this isn't the reform New York voters demanded.

Spending in this tentative budget, parts of which will now be reviewed by legislative panels, is far too high.

The governor's proposed budget, even before legislators and special-interest lobbies got hold of it, was excessive, more than 6 percent over last year's, which itself was rightly assailed as a spending spree in then-Gov. George Pataki's last year.

The concern now, justified by history, is that legislators charged with examining the deal will find many more ways to spend than places to cut.

That must not occur.

Not only should this budget be done by the statutory deadline of April 1, but it must come in no higher than Spitzer's original $120 billion figure.

To do otherwise will, as the state comptroller has suggested, worsen both the deficit and the debt, deepen the budget problems next year and inhibit long-term efforts to improve the lives and prospects of all New Yorkers.

Does getting spending under control mean that Rochester-region hospitals have to absorb all the cuts Spitzer put forth in his budget?

No, local hospitals made a strong case that the governor was using a bludgeon where a laser was called for.

But it does mean that, across a wide spectrum, Spitzer gave back too much to the howling special interests.

The cuts to Medicaid that did make it into the "framework'' are only a start on reform of this bloated program.

The governor wanted wealthier school districts to take an aid hit so urban schools could get more.

He compromised on that.

He wanted to close loopholes in business taxes.

He compromised on that.

It was horse-trading done the usual, closed-door Albany way.

But when the doors opened, spending had increased yet again.

That's not reform!

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/apps/p...40/1041/OPINION

NY POST

"NOTHING'S CHANGED"

March 29, 2007 --

Well, that didn't take long.

Eighty-seven days, to be exact.

The governor who swept into office on a pledge to "change everything" about Albany - most especially its backroom-brokered, special-interest driven budgeting - has managed to change . . . virtually nothing.

The fine print in Eliot Spitzer's inaugural spending plan - a $122-billion, three-times-inflation behemoth - was being negotiated last night.

And while there are no compelling reasons to believe a final budget will be adopted by the April 1 deadline, the broad brushstrokes made public yesterday make one thing clear:

Gov. Steamroller got squashed.

The plan is a spending riot.

There is no real tax relief for anyone.

Schools will be bathed in cash, getting an extra $7 billion over four years - even as New York already spends far more per student than almost every other state.

Future-year budgets get thrown out of whack: The Citizens Budget Commission says that, at this rate, Albany will be $4.5 billion short of cash in just 18 months.

Spitzer's vows to jumpstart the anemic upstate economy are also fated to fall by the wayside.

Without tax relief, the region will continue to see a dearth of private-sector, job-creating investment.

Worst of all, Spitzer wholly failed to fix Albany's broken culture.

Was the "health care" cartel finally brought to heel?

Has the distribution of local school aid been rendered unambiguously free of partisan politics?

Emphatically no - on both counts.

But in the rookie governor's own words, those were to be the touchstone accomplishments of his first budget.

In the end, Spitzer was left muttering about how difficult it is to turn a battleship in a bathtub - as state Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, in particular, parlayed grossly irresponsible negotiating positions into yet another payday.

Stay tuned next year for Round 2, when lawmakers set out to reverse whatever modest gains Spitzer might have wrung from them in his first outing.

Case in point: Spitzer managed a modest win over the "health care" workers by cutting a $73 million union slush-fund contribution negotiated five years ago by former Gov. Pataki.

The hope was that the cut would kick-start big savings down the road - but will anyone bet it won't be back in the budget in 2008, a legislative election year?

Spitzer might; no one else is likely to.

In any event, where are the tectonic policy shifts Spitzer promised time and again during his campaign?

The campaign theme was "Day One, Everything Changes."

Well, it's Day 88.

We had high hopes.

They are fading.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03292007/posto...editorials_.htm

Newsday

Editorials

"Thumbs up for budget - Spitzer won key reforms, but NY must pay a price for higher state spending"

March 29, 2007

At least it's a start - a reasonable start.

True, the tentative state budget deal is more than the state can afford.

It was cobbled together behind closed doors, so it's hard to tell just how much it will add to future deficits.

And most of the new money added to Gov. Eliot Spitzer's initial plan was a sop - as usual - to the state's wealthiest and most powerful special interests.

But New Yorkers should hold their nose with one hand and give the deal a thumbs-up with the other.

Why?

Because, for all its flaws, the agreement moves the state forward toward long-sought reforms that were Spitzer's top priorities.

And because, given the strength of the opposition he gamely fought, Spitzer made as much progress as possible in one year.

The budget also may be on time as well.

But the costly compromises with the Republican State Senate and Democratic Assembly demand that Spitzer, the legislature and local agencies prepare immediately for deeper cuts in the future.

If not, the record property-tax cuts and school-aid increases could disappear next year in a wave of red ink.

For now, many districts and homeowners - especially those with relatively lower property values and incomes - can enjoy the largesse.

As a result of legislative pressure, particularly by Senate Republicans, $500 million will be added to Spitzer's $1.2-billion school-aid plan.

Much of this ensures that more Long Island districts will exceed the 3 percent minimum increase.

The boost for Long Island is mostly fair.

Nassau-Suffolk is not as rich as many in Albany think.

But what's most important, overall, is that Spitzer finally achieved something that has eluded at least three governors - a formula for distributing aid that is based on educational and economic need, not political power.

The same can be said for property-tax relief and Medicaid reform.

Long Island's GOP delegation successfully lobbied for direct property-tax rebate checks to homeowners, but Spitzer won on the larger principle of basing relief on income.

And while Spitzer's health-care cuts largely reflect medical industry wishes, he won broader reforms that will pay off down the road.

With all the spending this year, they'd better.

http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpa...rials-headlines

The New York Observer Politicker

"Mike Long, No Longer a Fan of Spitzer"

Conservative Party Chair Mike Long, you'll recall, took the extraordinary step not too long ago of championing Spitzer's tough bargaining position against the Republican-controlled but fiscally profligate state Senate during the budget negotiations.

But now, in light of this week's big compromise, Long is taking it all back.

"Nothing changed," Long told me.

"Clearly."

"I mean, the governor had promised everything was going to change on Day 1."

"It was still negotiations behind closed doors."

"I think it comes out that Eliot got rolled."

Was there something wrong with Spitzer's bargaining strategy?

"The strategy should have come in with some of the promises he talked about and come in low with the budget and we might have come out of this a little bit better."

-- Azi Paybarah

http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2007/03/...of-spitzer.html

"Budget forged in back room - Spitzer assures on-time passage after marathon deal-making session"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, March 30, 2007

ALBANY -- Legislative leaders and Gov. Eliot Spitzer cut a number of back-room deals in a marathon negotiating session Thursday as they stitched together a roughly $122 billion budget.

Spitzer said it would pass by the start of the fiscal year Sunday.

Ditching his pledge of greater transparency and openness, Spitzer met for more than six hours with top lawmakers behind closed doors.

The governor said later he felt obliged to take steps to assure a budget is delivered by the April 1 deadline.

"Do we all wish there had been more public articulation?"

"You bet," Spitzer said.

But he said a "wide chasm" between his plan and the Legislature's had to be bridged somehow.

The talks gave the group the chance to discuss $170 million in pork barrel spending for legislators.

Also, outside public view, they talked about why judicial pay raises won't occur without legislative pay raises.

According to participants and people briefed, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, was holding up judicial raises by calling for a pay commission that would also deal with lawmakers' compensation.

Silver denied the matter came up in the private talks and said he did not have an agenda for the meeting.

However, Spitzer, Silver, Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno, R-Brunswick, Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, R-Schenectady, and Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, D-Queens, worked through a three-page list of big-ticket items that could be included in next year's budget, including judges' pay.

According to other sources willing to discuss the private talks, including some who produced agendas, several deals were nailed down, such as adding 100 new charter schools and postponing debate on an expanded bottle bill.

The group agreed to fund $100 million on stem cell research for another five or six years, Silver said.

But instead of a controversial embryonic stem cell program, participants in the talks said, the leaders agreed to fund "emerging technology," which could include all sorts of stem cell work.

Continued funding of the stem cell program hinges on the conversion of HIP, a health care insurer in New York City, into a publicly traded company.

Budget planners assume the state would collect hundreds of millions of dollars in stock by allowing the conversion.

The behind-the-scenes deals included some wins for Bruno and Tedisco, who pushed for corporate tax cuts.

They got three tax breaks worth $150 million, including across-the-board cuts for all businesses worth $75 million, a $25 million cut in corporate franchise taxes for manufacturers and $50 million by taxing corporations only on sales.

Spitzer won the closure of three corporate tax avoidance loopholes.

The moves would kill the deduction for some dividends from real estate investment trusts and regulated investment companies.

The combined filing loophole will be closed so that big companies can no longer make it appear their New York units are unprofitable.

The leaders pushed aside doing a bottle bill now, Spitzer said, because an agreement was not within reach on requiring deposits on water and sports-drink containers.

Spitzer counted on $25 million from the expansion in the new fiscal year and $100 million in future years to help pay for a $250 million environmental protection fund.

Environmental activists were dejected at the news, saying the best chance for the "bigger, better bottle bill" was within a budget.

A capital projects agreement also was not reached.

Spitzer seeks $300 million to fund an R&D computer chip center for Sematech, potentially in the Capital Region, two sources close to the talks said.

Another deal struck behind closed doors involves the new rebate program that will result in $1.3 billion in checks going out during the fiscal year to property owners.

Such taxpayers will get 60 percent of their STAR savings in a rebate check if their household income is $90,000 or less upstate or $120,000 or less downstate.

The rebate check will be about twice the size of this year's check for those in those income brackets.

The percentage of STAR savings phases downward as income levels rise.

But checks will go out to households with up to $250,000 in income, a win for Senate Republicans who wanted a broader reach than Spitzer's "middle class" tax break vision.

An unusual pact was also struck in Spitzer's office -- essentially a truce that will allow both Spitzer and Bruno to publicly declare victory in the fight over the governor's proposed $1.3 billion in health care cuts.

In the end, $355 million of the cuts were restored, largely because of Bruno's efforts.

Asked if the deals would have come together if the talks were in the open, Spitzer, looking tired, paused, then said:

"You know, I wish I knew the answer to that."

Representatives of government reform groups were upset with the governor's private dealings with lawmakers.

"We are saddened," said Barbara Bartoletti, legislative director of the League of Women Voters.

Tedisco, who entered the session bemoaning the secretive nature, said it turned out to be very productive.

"I think you saw some history today," he said.

"I think he found a formula that works."

"The next step is to take it public."

M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

2 days to the April 1 budget deadline

Making deals

Private talks among Gov. Eliot Spitzer and legislative leaders yielded new budget deals, including:

100 more charter schools, half selected by the Regents and half by SUNY

$22 million in extra funds for districts with charter schools

$100 million for "emerging technology" (stem cell) research

No expanded bottle bill

A property tax rebate program for households with up to $250,000 in income

Closure of three key corporate tax avoidance schemes for $450 million in new revenues

$150 million in new corporate tax breaks

"Medicaid fraud protection act would end senseless era"

Fred LeBrun, poltical analyst, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Friday, March 30, 2007

While much can happen between now and a final budget and everything can blow up, New York will probably become the 17th state to have a whistle-blower law designed to expose Medicaid fraud.

It's overdue.

New York's $45 billion Medicaid program is by far the largest in the country, $10 billion bigger than second-place California.

Congressional estimates put fraud at as much as 10 percent of a state's program, so the need for better tools to dismantle this gravy train are obvious.

The statute, which would include profit and protection for whistle-blowers, is called a False Claims Act.

The state's version presumably would mirror the federal model.

The feds have been pushing states hard to adopt it for obvious reasons: Half of New York's Medicaid funding comes from the federal government.

But the feds also are offering a sweetener -- allowing the states to keep 20 percent more of what's recovered if they have their own law.

They now can keep 50 percent.

So passing this law will mean more recovered money will stay in New York's pocket.

Still, Taxpayers Against Fraud, a national nonprofit watchdog group, cautions that pursuing a false claim is a long and complicated process.

The whistle-blower basically is suing on behalf of the government.

A special lawyer is needed; the lawyer works on contingency, usually 35 percent of the whistle-blower's share.

But since we're talking about claims that average in the millions at settlement, the rewards fit the complications.

Eliot Spitzer, both as state attorney general and now as governor, has pounded home the need for such a statute.

It's a key to breaking down major Medicaid fraud, which we know is going on but we can't get at because it provides protection and reward for those on the inside who are most likely to know intimately about misdoings.

Oddly enough, Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno and his conference have been the major impediment to the state passing a false claims act in the past, claiming all sorts of cockamamy reasons why it shouldn't happen.

Such as, that it's nothing more than a windfall for lawyers.

Good heavens, I mean, what isn't?

In addition, this year the Senate claimed that since there's already a federal False Claims Act, we don't need a state one.

While it is true that in a handful of cases a year, New York benefits from fraud being successfully prosecuted nationally, suggesting a state law would be redundant is absurd.

A New York false claims act means cheating New York hospitals and providers, insurance companies and pharmaceuticals, will be scrutinized from inside New York's health care industry, by workers who know exactly what they are looking at.

Stuff that even auditors might not recognize.

President Reagan put contemporary teeth to a false claims law first enacted by Abraham Lincoln to hold unscrupulous suppliers to the Union Army accountable.

Which is what makes the state Senate's resistance to a false claims act bizarre; nationally, such a statute has been hallmark legislation for conservative Republicans, a banner they proudly wave.

But not in New York.

At any rate, it does appear Senate opposition has been beaten down finally and appropriately.

This is a major coup for Spitzer's Medicaid reform plan.

The other piece the governor was adamant about was funding an enhanced Medicaid inspector general's office with more fraud investigators.

Bruno's Senate dropped the funding for more staff from its budget bills, although this probably was just a bargaining chip.

With so much at stake, it would be mind-boggling for the Senate to put roadblocks in front of fraud recovery.

Jim Moorman, president of Taxpayers Against Fraud, says that every reason raised across the country to deny a healthcare false claims act falls apart under scrutiny.

In Missouri, for example, some physicians have claimed such a law would chase doctors out of the state.

"We're optimistic about New York this year," said Moorman.

"But over time, we're confident every state will have a false claims act because it is so clearly in their best interest."

"New York is important because it is the largest state in the country not to have one, and with a Medicaid program the largest by far."

A dubious distinction we would love to whistle blow back to second or third place.

LeBrun can be reached at 454-5453 or by e-mail at flebrun@timesunion.com.

Comment by John Galt — March 30, 2007 @ 7:09 pm

Not to purposefully jump in here “off-topic”, but in following this unraveling, continuing story of this rush to pass this budget before anyone even knows what is really contained deep in its bowels, I am reminded of another budget bill from circa 1991, that is directly linked to a TU editorial or story entitled “State DEC undermines home rule”, first published Friday, March 3, 2006, wherein is stated in relevant part:

“New York prides itself as a home-rule state.”

“It’s in our constitution.”

“Effectively that means that when a state law or governmental action is going to affect a locality, a home-rule message of support is sought from the grass-roots entity, usually a town or city.”

“Not that this has done Nassau, or East Nassau, any good at all.”

“Nobody’s asked them if they want another mine in town, or any mine at all.”

“Worse, the DEC has relied for years on a self-generated technical memo from the early 1990s that states the DEC will process mining applications regardless of local zoning objections.”

“That memo needs to be discarded, and the conservation law rewritten.”

And how on point the TU was with that last statement!

And it all goes back to the cover sheet of an exultant PROCLAMATION published all over the State of New York on or about June 17, 1991 by ESCAPA, the “Empire State Concrete and Aggregate Producers Association, Inc.”, to trumpet its coup of burying an amended version of the New York State Mined Land Reclamation Law deep in the bowels of a lengthy “budget bill” that was before the New York State Legislature that year so that ESCAPA could have the law changed to suit its whims and needs, despite the NY Constitution:

WE DID IT! MINED LAND RECLAMATION BILL PASSED WITH STATE BUDGET!

A typical “BACK-ROOM DEAL” between LOBBYISTS, GOVERNMENT LAWYERS and POLITICIANS ON THE MAKE up here that then became the basis for how the “law” would be “interpreted” subsequently in the State of New York, which brings us to that TU editorial above …..

In a memorandum to ALL MEMBERS attached to that cover sheet above dated June 17, 1991, David S. Hamling, the then-Managing Director of ESCAPA stated as follows with respect to how “business” is really done in the State of New York, DESPITE THE NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION AND ANY LAWS TO THE CONTRARY:

“The Governor has signed the negotiated Mined Land Reclamation Law amendments into law as part of the State Budget!”

“This is a major piece of legislation which will dramatically improve conditions for the aggregate industry.”

“After many years of trying, the bill has finally passed and its provisions will become effective on September 1, 1991!”

“A fact sheet describing the major changes in the law is enclosed.”

“ESCAPA expects implementation of the Mined Land Reclamation law will SUFFER SOME ‘GROWING PAINS’, so we have developed a strategy to smooth the transition.”

“OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS WILL ACT ON THE STRATEGY ON JUNE 18, 1001, AND WE WILL KEEP YOU ABREAST OF PROGRESS.”

“AS THE IMPACT OF THIS NEW STATUTE UNFOLDS, OUR RELATIONSHIPS WITH BOTH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WILL CHANGE, SO WE ARE URGING DISCRETION IN THE EARLY STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION.”

“YOU MAY BE ASSURED, HOWEVER, THAT ESCAPA WILL AGGRESSIVELY PROTECT YOUR INTERESTS IN THIS PROCESS.”

“The regulatory climate for OUR industries is improving!”

“THIS IS AN IMPORTANT VICTORY, AND ONE THAT WAS ONLY POSSIBLE BY THE COMBINED EFFORTS OF OUR MEMBERSHIP.”

“CONGRATULATIONS!”

And that is how easy we get screwed here in NYS, despite our Constitution, which really has become a joke, with these latest budget goings-on right now ….

I wonder how much more we are getting screwed right now …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4266#comments

NEW YORK STATE CONSTITUTION - ARTICLE VII - State Finances

Section 1. For the preparation of the budget, the head of each department of state government, except the legislature and judiciary, shall furnish the governor such estimates and information in such form and at such times as the governor may require, copies of which shall forthwith be furnished to the appropriate committees of the legislature.

The governor shall hold hearings thereon at which the governor may require the attendance of heads of departments and their subordinates.

Designated representatives of such committees shall be entitled to attend the hearings thereon and to make inquiry concerning any part thereof.

Itemized estimates of the financial needs of the legislature, certified by the presiding officer of each house, and of the judiciary, approved by the court of appeals and certified by the chief judge of the court of appeals, shall be transmitted to the governor not later than the first day of December in each year for inclusion in the budget without revision but with such recommendations as the governor may deem proper.

Copies of the itemized estimates of the financial needs of the judiciary also shall forthwith be transmitted to the appropriate committees of the legislature.

§ 2. Annually, on or before the first day of February in each year following the year fixed by the constitution for the election of governor and lieutenant governor, and on or before the second Tuesday following the first day of the annual meeting of the legislature, in all other years, the governor shall submit to the legislature a budget containing a complete plan of expenditures proposed to be made before the close of the ensuing fiscal year and all moneys and revenues estimated to be available therefor, together with an explanation of the basis of such estimates and recommendations as to proposed legislation, if any, which the governor may deem necessary to provide moneys and revenues sufficient to meet such proposed expenditures.

It shall also contain such other recommendations and information as the governor may deem proper and such additional information as may be required by law.

§ 3. At the time of submitting the budget to the legislature the governor shall submit a bill or bills containing all the proposed appropriations and reappropriations included in the budget and the proposed legislation, if any, recommended therein.

The governor may at any time within thirty days thereafter and, with the consent of the legislature, at any time before the adjournment thereof, amend or supplement the budget and submit amendments to any bills submitted by him or her or submit supplemental bills.

The governor and the heads of departments shall have the right, and it shall be the duty of the heads of departments when requested by either house of the legislature or an appropriate committee thereof, to appear and be heard in respect to the budget during the consideration thereof, and to answer inquiries relevant thereto.

The procedure for such appearances and inquiries shall be provided by law.

§ 4. The legislature may not alter an appropriation bill submitted by the governor except to strike out or reduce items therein, but it may add thereto items of appropriation provided that such additions are stated separately and distinctly from the original items of the bill and refer each to a single object or purpose.

None of the restrictions of this section, however, shall apply to appropriations for the legislature or judiciary.

Such an appropriation bill shall when passed by both houses be a law immediately without further action by the governor, except that appropriations for the legislature and judiciary and separate items added to the governor's bills by the legislature shall be subject to approval of the governor as provided in section 7 of article IV.

§ 5. Neither house of the legislature shall consider any other bill making an appropriation until all the appropriation bills submitted by the governor shall have been finally acted on by both houses, except on message from the governor certifying to the necessity of the immediate passage of such a bill.

§ 6. Except for appropriations contained in the bills submitted by the governor and in a supplemental appropriation bill for the support of government, no appropriations shall be made except by separate bills each for a single object or purpose.

All such bills and such supplemental appropriation bill shall be subject to the governor's approval as provided in section 7 of article IV.

No provision shall be embraced in any appropriation bill submitted by the governor or in such supplemental appropriation bill unless it relates specifically to some particular appropriation in the bill, and any such provision shall be limited in its operation to such appropriation.

§ 7. No money shall ever be paid out of the state treasury or any of its funds, or any of the funds under its management, except in pursuance of an appropriation by law; nor unless such payment be made within two years next after the passage of such appropriation act; and every such law making a new appropriation or continuing or reviving an appropriation, shall distinctly specify the sum appropriated, and the object or purpose to which it is to be applied; and it shall not be sufficient for such law to refer to any other law to fix such sum.

§ 8. 1. The money of the state shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking; nor shall the credit of the state be given or loaned to or in aid of any individual, or public or private corporation or association, or private undertaking, but the foregoing provisions shall not apply to any fund or property now held or which may hereafter be held by the state for educational, mental health or mental retardation purposes.

2. Subject to the limitations on indebtedness and taxation, nothing in this constitution contained shall prevent the legislature from providing for the aid, care and support of the needy directly or through subdivisions of the state; or for the protection by insurance or otherwise, against the hazards of unemployment, sickness and old age; or for the education and support of the blind, the deaf, the dumb, the physically handicapped, the mentally ill, the emotionally disturbed, the mentally retarded or juvenile delinquents as it may deem proper; or for health and welfare services for all children, either directly or through subdivisions of the state, including school districts; or for the aid, care and support of neglected and dependent children and of the needy sick, through agencies and institutions authorized by the state board of social welfare or other state department having the power of inspection thereof, by payments made on a per capita basis directly or through the subdivisions of the state; or for the increase in the amount of pensions of any member of a retirement system of the state, or of a subdivision of the state; or for an increase in the amount of pension benefits of any widow or widower of a retired member of a retirement system of the state or of a subdivision of the state to whom payable as beneficiary under an optional settlement in connection with the pension of such member.

The enumeration of legislative powers in this paragraph shall not be taken to diminish any power of the legislature hitherto existing.

3. Nothing in this constitution contained shall prevent the legislature from authorizing the loan of the money of the state to a public corporation to be organized for the purpose of making loans to non-profit corporations or for the purpose of guaranteeing loans made by banking organizations, as that term shall be defined by the legislature, to finance the construction of new industrial or manufacturing plants, the construction of new buildings to be used for research and development, the construction of other eligible business facilities, and for the purchase of machinery and equipment related to such new industrial or manufacturing plants, research and development buildings, and other eligible business facilities in this state or the acquisition, rehabilitation or improvement of former or existing industrial or manufacturing plants, buildings to be used for research and development, other eligible business facilities, and machinery and equipment in this state, including the acquisition of real property therefor, and the use of such money by such public corporation for such purposes, to improve employment opportunities in any area of the state, provided, however, that any such plants, buildings or facilities or machinery and equipment therefor shall not be (i) primarily used in making retail sales of goods or services to customers who personally visit such facilities to obtain such goods or services or (ii) used primarily as a hotel, apartment house or other place of business which furnishes dwelling space or accommodations to either residents or transients, and provided further that any loan by such public corporation shall not exceed sixty per centum of the cost of any such project and the repayment of which shall be secured by a mortgage thereon which shall not be a junior encumbrance thereon by more than fifty per centum of such cost or by a security interest if personalty, and that the amount of any guarantee of a loan made by a banking organization shall not exceed eighty per centum of the cost of any such project.

§ 9. The state may contract debts in anticipation of the receipt of taxes and revenues, direct or indirect, for the purposes and within the amounts of appropriations theretofore made.

Notes or other obligations for the moneys so borrowed shall be issued as may be provided by law, and shall with the interest thereon be paid from such taxes and revenues within one year from the date of issue.

The state may also contract debts in anticipation of the receipt of the proceeds of the sale of bonds theretofore authorized, for the purpose and within the amounts of the bonds so authorized.

Notes or obligations for the money so borrowed shall be issued as may be provided by law, and shall with the interest thereon be paid from the proceeds of the sale of such bonds within two years from the date of issue, except as to bonds issued or to be issued for any of the purposes authorized by article eighteen of this constitution, in which event the notes or obligations shall with the interest thereon be paid from the proceeds of the sale of such bonds within five years from the date of issue.

§ 10. In addition to the above limited power to contract debts, the state may contract debts to repel invasion, suppress insurrection, or defend the state in war, or to suppress forest fires; but the money arising from the contracting of such debts shall be applied for the purpose for which it was raised, or to repay such debts, and to no other purpose whatever.

§ 11. Except the debts or refunding debts specified in sections 9, 10 and 13 of this article, no debt shall be hereafter contracted by or in behalf of the state, unless such debt shall be authorized by law, for some single work or purpose, to be distinctly specified therein.

No such law shall take effect until it shall, at a general election, have been submitted to the people, and have received a majority of all the votes cast for and against it at such election nor shall it be submitted to be voted on within three months after its passage nor at any general election when any other law or any bill shall be submitted to be voted for or against.

The legislature may, at any time after the approval of such law by the people, if no debt shall have been contracted in pursuance thereof, repeal the same; and may at any time, by law, forbid the contracting of any further debt or liability under such law.

§ 12. Except the debts or refunding debts specified in sections 9, 10 and 13 of this article, all debts contracted by the state and each portion of any such debt from time to time so contracted shall be subject to the following rules:

1. The principal of each debt or any portion thereof shall either be paid in equal annual installments or in installments that result in substantially level or declining debt service payments such as shall be authorized by law, or, in the alternative, contributions of principal in the amount that would otherwise be required to be paid annually shall be made to a sinking fund.

2. When some portions of the same debt are payable annually while other portions require contributions to a sinking fund, the entire debt shall be structured so that the combined amount of annual installments of principal paid and/or annual contributions of principal made in each year shall be equal to the amount that would be required to be paid if the entire debt were payable in annual installments.

3. When interest on state obligations is not paid at least annually, there shall also be contributed to a sinking fund at least annually, the amount necessary to bring the balance thereof, including income earned on contributions, to the accreted value of the obligations to be paid therefrom on the date such contribution is made, less the sum of all required future contributions of principal, in the case of sinking fund obligations, or payments of principal, in the case of serial obligations.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this subdivision shall be deemed to require contributions for interest to sinking funds if total debt service due on the debt or portion thereof in the year such interest is due will be substantially the same as the total debt service due on such debt or portion thereof in each other year or if the total amount of debt service due in each subsequent year on such debt or portion thereof shall be less than the total debt service due in each prior year.

4. The first annual installment on such debt shall be paid, or the first annual contribution shall be made to a sinking fund, not more than one year, and the last installment shall be paid, or contribution made not more than forty years, after such debt or portion thereof shall have been contracted, provided, however, that in contracting any such debt the privilege of paying all or any part of such debt prior to the date on which the same shall be due may be reserved to the state in such manner as may be provided by law.

5. No such debt shall be contracted for a period longer than that of the probable life of the work or purpose for which the debt is to be contracted, or in the alternative, the weighted average period of probable life of the works or purposes for which such indebtedness is to be contracted.

The probable lives of such works or purposes shall be determined by general laws, which determination shall be conclusive.

6. The money arising from any loan creating such debt or liability shall be applied only to the work or purpose specified in the act authorizing such debt or liability, or for the payment of such debt or liability, including any notes or obligations issued in anticipation of the sale of bonds evidencing such debt or liability.

7. Any sinking funds created pursuant to this section shall be maintained and managed by the state comptroller or an agent or trustee designated by the state comptroller, and amounts in sinking funds created pursuant to this section, and earnings thereon, shall be used solely for the purpose of retiring the obligations secured thereby except that amounts in excess of the required balance on any contribution date and amounts remaining in such funds after all of the obligations secured thereby have been retired shall be deposited in the general fund.

8. No appropriation shall be required for disbursement of money, or income earned thereon, from any sinking fund created pursuant to this section for the purpose of paying principal of and interest on the obligations for which such fund was created, except that interest shall be paid from any such fund only if, and to the extent that, it is not payable annually and contributions on account of such interest were made thereto.

9. The provisions of section 15 of this article shall not apply to sinking funds created pursuant to this section.

10. When state obligations are sold at a discount, the debt incurred for purposes of determining the amount of debt issued or outstanding pursuant to a voter approved bond referendum or other limitation on the amount of debt that may be issued or outstanding for a work or purpose shall be deemed to include only the amount of money actually received by the state notwithstanding the face amount of such obligations.

§ 13. The legislature may provide means and authority whereby any state debt or debts, or any portion or combination thereof, may be refunded in accordance with the following provisions:

1. State debts may be refunded at any time after they are incurred provided that the state will achieve a debt service savings on a present value basis as a result of the refunding transaction, and further provided that no maturity shall be called for redemption unless the privilege to pay prior to the maturity date was reserved to the state.

The legislature may provide for the method of computation of present value for such purpose.

2. In no event shall refunding obligations be issued in an amount exceeding that necessary to provide sufficient funds to accomplish the refunding of the obligations to be refunded including paying all costs and expenses related to the refunding transaction and, in no event, shall the proceeds of refunding obligations be applied to any purpose other than accomplishing the refunding of the debt to be refunded and paying costs and expenses related to the refunding.

3. Proceeds of refunding obligations shall be deposited in escrow funds which shall be maintained and managed by the state comptroller or by an agent or trustee designated by the state comptroller and no legislative appropriation shall be required for disbursement of money, or income earned thereon, from such escrow funds for the purposes enumerated in this section.

4. Refunding obligations may be refunded pursuant to this section.

5. Refunding obligations shall either be paid in annual installments or annual contributions shall be made to a sinking fund in amounts sufficient to retire the refunding obligations at their maturity.

No annual installments or contributions of principal need be made with respect to all or any portion of an issue of refunding obligations in years when debt service on such refunding obligations or portion thereof is paid or contributed entirely from an escrow fund created pursuant to subdivision 3 of this section or in years when no installments or contributions would have been due on the obligations to be refunded.

So long as any of the refunding obligations remain outstanding, installments or contributions shall be made in any years that installments or contributions would have been due on the obligations to be refunded.

6. In no event shall the last annual installment or contribution on any portion of refunding debt, including refunding obligations issued to refund other refunding obligations, be made after the termination of the period of probable life of the projects financed with the proceeds of the relevant portion of the debt to be refunded, or any debt previously refunded with the refunding obligations to be refunded, determined as of the date of issuance of the original obligations pursuant to section 12 of this article to finance such projects, or forty years from such date, if earlier; provided, however, that in lieu of the foregoing, an entire refunding issue or portion thereof may be structured to mature over the remaining weighted average useful life of all projects financed with the obligations being refunded.

7. Subject to the provisions of subdivision 5 of this section, each annual installment or contribution of principal of refunding obligations shall be equal to the amount that would be required by subdivision 1 of section 12 of this article if such installments or contributions were required to be made from the year that the next installment or contribution would have been due on the obligations to be refunded, if they had not been refunded, until the final maturity of the refunding obligations but excluding any year in which no installment or contribution would have been due on the obligations to be refunded or, in the alternative, the total payments of principal and interest on the refunding bonds shall be less in each year to their final maturity than the total payments of principal and interest on the bonds to be refunded in each such year.

8. The provisions of subdivision 3 and subdivisions 7 through 9 of section 12 of this article shall apply to sinking funds created pursuant to this section for the payment at maturity of refunding obligations.

§ 14. The legislature may authorize by law the creation of a debt or debts of the state, not exceeding in the aggregate three hundred million dollars, to provide moneys for the elimination, under state supervision, of railroad crossings at grade within the state, and for incidental improvements connected therewith as authorized by this section.

The provisions of this article, not inconsistent with this section, relating to the issuance of bonds for a debt or debts of the state and the maturity and payment thereof, shall apply to a state debt or debts created pursuant to this section; except that the law authorizing the contracting of such debt or debts shall take effect without submission to the people pursuant to section 11 of this article.

The aggregate amount of a state debt or debts which may be created pursuant to this section shall not exceed the difference between the amount of the debt or debts heretofore created or authorized by law, under the provisions of section 14 of article VII of the constitution in force on July first, nineteen hundred thirty-eight, and the sum of three hundred million dollars.

The expense of any grade crossing elimination the construction work for which was not commenced before January first, nineteen hundred thirty-nine, including incidental improvements connected therewith as authorized by this section, whether or not an order for such elimination shall theretofore have been made, shall be paid by the state in the first instance, but the state shall be entitled to recover from the railroad company or companies, by way of reimbursement:

(1) the entire amount of the railroad improvements not an essential part of elimination, and

(2) the amount of the net benefit to the company or companies from the elimination exclusive of such railroad improvements, the amount of such net benefit to be adjudicated after the completion of the work in the manner to be prescribed by law, and in no event to exceed fifteen per centum of the expense of the elimination, exclusive of all incidental improvements.

The reimbursement by the railroad companies shall be payable at such times, in such manner and with interest at such rate as the legislature may prescribe.

The expense of any grade crossing elimination the construction work for which was commenced before January first, nineteen hundred thirty-nine, shall be borne by the state, railroad companies, and the municipality or municipalities in the proportions formerly prescribed by section 14 of article VII of the constitution in force on July first, nineteen hundred thirty-eight, and the law or laws enacted pursuant to its provisions, applicable to such elimination, and subject to the provisions of such former section and law or laws, including advances in aid of any railroad company or municipality, although such elimination shall not be completed until after January first, nineteen hundred thirty-nine.

A grade crossing elimination the construction work for which shall be commenced after January first, nineteen hundred thirty-nine, shall include incidental improvements rendered necessary or desirable because of such elimination, and reasonably included in the engineering plans therefor.

Out of the balance of all moneys authorized to be expended under section 14 of article VII of the constitution in force on July first, nineteen hundred thirty-eight, and remaining unexpended and unobligated on such date, fifty million dollars shall be deemed segregated for grade crossing eliminations and incidental improvements in the city of New York and shall be available only for such purposes until such eliminations and improvements are completed and paid for.

Notwithstanding any of the foregoing provisions of this section the legislature is hereby authorized to appropriate, out of the proceeds of bonds now or hereafter sold to provide moneys for the elimination of railroad crossings at grade and incidental improvements pursuant to this section, sums not exceeding in the aggregate sixty million dollars for the construction and reconstruction of state highways and parkways.

§ 15. The sinking funds provided for the payment of interest and the extinguishment of the principal of the debts of the state heretofore contracted shall be continued; they shall be separately kept and safely invested, and neither of them shall be appropriated or used in any manner other than for such payment and extinguishment as hereinafter provided.

The comptroller shall each year appraise the securities held for investment in each of such funds at their fair market value not exceeding par.

The comptroller shall then determine and certify to the legislature the amount of each of such funds and the amounts which, if thereafter annually contributed to each such fund, would, with the fund and with the accumulations thereon and upon the contributions thereto, computed at the rate of three per centum per annum, produce at the date of maturity the amount of the debt to retire which such fund was created, and the legislature shall thereupon appropriate as the contribution to each such fund for such year at least the amount thus certified.

If the income of any such fund in any year is more than a sum which, if annually added to such fund would, with the fund and its accumulations as aforesaid, retire the debt at maturity, the excess income may be applied to the interest on the debt for which the fund was created.

After any sinking fund shall equal in amount the debt for which it was created no further contribution shall be made thereto except to make good any losses ascertained at the annual appraisals above mentioned, and the income thereof shall be applied to the payment of the interest on such debt.

Any excess in such income not required for the payment of interest may be applied to the general fund of the state.

§ 16. The legislature shall annually provide by appropriation for the payment of the interest upon and installments of principal of all debts or refunding debts created on behalf of the state except those contracted under section 9 of this article, as the same shall fall due, and for the contribution to all of the sinking funds created by law, of the amounts annually to be contributed under the provisions of section 12, 13 or 15 of this article.

If at any time the legislature shall fail to make any such appropriation, the comptroller shall set apart from the first revenues thereafter received, applicable to the general fund of the state, a sum sufficient to pay such interest, installments of principal, or contributions to such sinking fund, as the case may be, and shall so apply the moneys thus set apart.

The comptroller may be required to set aside and apply such revenues as aforesaid, at the suit of any holder of such bonds.

Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this section, the comptroller may covenant with the purchasers of any state obligations that they shall have no further rights against the state for payment of such obligations or any interest thereon after an amount or amounts determined in accordance with the provisions of such covenant is deposited in a described fund or with a named or described agency or trustee.

In such case, this section shall have no further application with respect to payment of such obligations or any interest thereon after the comptroller has complied with the prescribed conditions of such covenant.

§ 17. The legislature may establish a fund or funds to aid in the stabilization of the tax revenues of the state available for expenditure or distribution.

Any law creating such a fund shall specify the tax or taxes to which such fund relates, and shall prescribe the method of determining the amount of revenue from any such tax or taxes which shall constitute a norm of each fiscal year.

Such part as shall be prescribed by law of any revenue derived from such tax or taxes during a fiscal year in excess of such norm shall be paid into such fund.

No moneys shall at any time be withdrawn from such fund unless the revenue derived from such tax or taxes during a fiscal year shall fall below the norm for such year; in which event such amount as may be prescribed by law, but in no event an amount exceeding the difference between such revenue and such norm, shall be paid from such fund into the general fund.

No law changing the method of determining a norm or prescribing the amount to be paid into such a fund or to be paid from such a fund into the general fund may become effective until three years from the date of its enactment.

§ 18. The legislature may authorize by law the creation of a debt or debts of the state to provide for the payment of a bonus to each male and female member of the armed forces of the United States, still in the armed forces, or separated or discharged under honorable conditions, for service while on active duty with the armed forces at any time during the period from December seventh, nineteen hundred forty-one to and including September second, nineteen hundred forty-five, who was a resident of this state for a period of at least six months immediately prior to his or her enlistment, induction or call to active duty.

The law authorizing the creation of the debt shall provide for payment of such bonus to the next of kin of each male and female member of the armed forces who, having been a resident of this state for a period of six months immediately prior to his or her enlistment, induction or call to active duty, died while on active duty at any time during the period from December seventh, nineteen hundred forty-one to and including September second, nineteen hundred forty-five; or who died while on active duty subsequent to September second, nineteen hundred forty-five, or after his or her separation or discharge under honorable conditions, prior to receiving payment of such bonus.

An apportionment of the moneys on the basis of the periods and places of service of such members of the armed forces shall be provided by general laws.

The aggregate of the debts authorized by this section shall not exceed four hundred million dollars.

The provisions of this article, not inconsistent with this section, relating to the issuance of bonds for a debt or debts of the state and the maturity and payment thereof, shall apply to a debt or debts created pursuant to this section; except that the law authorizing the contracting of such debt or debts shall take effect without submission to the people pursuant to section eleven of this article.

Proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to law, as authorized by this section as in force prior to January first, nineteen hundred fifty shall be available and may be expended for the payment of such bonus to persons qualified therefor as now provided by this section.

§ 19. The legislature may authorize by law the creation of a debt or debts of the state, not exceeding in the aggregate two hundred fifty million dollars, to provide moneys for the construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement and equipment of facilities for the expansion and development of the program of higher education provided and to be provided at institutions now or hereafter comprised within the state university, for acquisition of real property therefor, and for payment of the state's share of the capital costs of locally sponsored institutions of higher education approved and regulated by the state university trustees.

The provisions of this article, not inconsistent with this section, relating to the issuance of bonds for a debt or debts of the state and the maturity and payment thereof, shall apply to a state debt or debts created pursuant to this section; except that the law authorizing the contracting of such debt or debts shall take effect without submission to the people pursuant to section eleven of this article.

http://www.senate.state.ny.us/lbdcinfo/senconstitution.html

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

March 30, 2007, 1:00 pm

"Transparency and Accountability"

By Michael Cooper

In the next 36 hours lawmakers in Albany will be asked to approve hundreds of pages of budget bills that they have not yet read, because they have not been printed.

Key details of how some of the most important aspects of the budget work – the division of education aid and the way the property tax rebate will work – are still being worked out.

It all brings to mind a news conference that Gov. Eliot Spitzer held in January with the Legislative leaders, Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, to announce what they called “sweeping” budget reforms.

From the press release:

“The drive to improve accountability in state government begins with the budget,” said Governor Spitzer.

“For decades, the budget process has been characterized by secrecy, gamesmanship and a lack of accountability."

"These common-sense measures are an excellent first step toward opening up the process and helping ensure timely budgets with greater transparency and accountability.”

Speaker Silver said, “With this agreement, we move our state’s budget process into the 21st Century with a strong constitutional emphasis on mutual respect between the executive and legislative branches in forging a fiscal plan for our state."

"We will continue to rely upon the joint conference committees."

"We will have a more transparent, more easily understood budget process."

"We will enact a fair, balanced and on-time state budget this year that addresses the needs of working families in education, health care and job creation.”

Majority Leader Bruno said, “These budget reforms will help bring greater openness, transparency and accountability to the state budget and help ensure that it is passed on time."

"The agreement includes many proposals that the Senate Majority has sought including greater itemization of state spending, budget conference committees, accelerating the budget process and getting an agreement on state revenue projections.’’

Comments

March 31st, 2007 9:14 am

As one of this state’s many disabled combat veterans who took an oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution, and then did some bleeding in Viet Nam as a result of that oath, it is difficult for me to find the words to adequately express my total disgust with not only the NY Legislature, which has no integrity, and this “STEAMROLLER”, who has even less integrity than the state legislature, but also with the citizen body of this state who are totally ignorant about the provisions of OUR state Constitution regarding preparation of the annual state budget, and so allow this absolute crap that is going on in Albany right now to continue year after year, with all of this hidden “negotiating” going on, as usual, “behind closed doors”, when the provisions of Article VII of OUR state Constitution demand and mandate transparency …

ART. VII, Section 1. For the preparation of the budget, the head of each department of state government, except the legislature and judiciary, shall furnish the governor such estimates and information in such form and at such times as the governor may require, copies of which shall forthwith be furnished to the appropriate committees of the legislature.

The governor shall hold hearings thereon at which the governor may require the attendance of heads of departments and their subordinates.

Designated representatives of such committees shall be entitled to attend the hearings thereon and to make inquiry concerning any part thereof.

Itemized estimates of the financial needs of the legislature, certified by the presiding officer of each house, and of the judiciary, approved by the court of appeals and certified by the chief judge of the court of appeals, shall be transmitted to the governor not later than the first day of December in each year for inclusion in the budget without revision but with such recommendations as the governor may deem proper.

ART. VII, Section 3. At the time of submitting the budget to the legislature the governor shall submit a bill or bills containing all the proposed appropriations and reappropriations included in the budget and the proposed legislation, if any, recommended therein.

As an older common NYS citizen with the same H.S. education that all other New Yorkers supposedly have, and likely, less education than these more modern New Yorkers supposedly have by even the third or fourth grade, according to all the propaganda put out by the powerful teachers’ unions to support their calls for more and more state money to be jammed down their pockets each year by alleged ignorant people like me, I find this above constitutional language to be easily understandable and comprehensible …

And one would think that a couple of real hot-shot lawyers like the “STEAMROLLER” and Sheldon Silver would be able to comprehend it, as well ….

BUT ….

Here it is, almost April, and we have no budget bills before the Legislature, despite that easily understandable constitutional language, and notwithstanding that, they are still poised to pass the budget, because the “STEAMROLLER”, Silver, and “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno are telling them, puppets that they all are, that they must do so ….

In a “representative” form of government such as ours is, a cowardly legislature must in fact be “representative” of a cowardly population, elsewise we would not have a pack of cowards sitting there in the legislature in Albany, making a complete and total mockery of rule of law here in NYS …

And as a disabled veteran, it is my thought this morning that fighting and dying to protect cowards is nothing but a waste of good, red blood ….

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...ility/#comments

"More of the same"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Saturday, March 31, 2007

For this, we had an election, one of landslide proportions yet, and promises of how different everything in Albany was going to be?

There are some new additions to the cast of characters in state government all right, and they spent the week reviving the worst of ways to put together a state budget.

Thursday's developments in particular -- six hours of closed meetings, interrupted by Gov. Spitzer's pronouncement that neither he nor the rest of what's now five men in a room could say just what was going on -- qualify as a disgrace.

There was the governor, usually so confident and in command, absolutely desperate to get a budget approved by Sunday's deadline.

It was a disheartening retreat from his declaration earlier in the week that getting the budget done right was more important than getting it finished on time.

The public that reasonably asks why New York can't simultaneously have sound fiscal management, compliance with deadlines and budget negotiations out in the open has been had.

A $122 billion spending plan put together in secret undermines, and in a very mocking way, the very point of the so-called reform of the budget process Mr. Spitzer and the leaders agreed to just weeks after he took office.

Has Mr. Spitzer truly forgotten what his election was supposed to represent?

Or was his answer to a question about whether agreement on a budget would have been possible, at least this soon, if negotiations had been conducted in public an expression of fatigue more than anything else?

"You know, I wish I knew the answer to that" is, in either case, a far cry from "On Day One, everything changes."

And then there's the leader of the Assembly's Republican minority, James Tedisco of Schenectady.

"I think you saw some history today," he says.

"I think he found a formula that works."

"The next step is to take it public."

This works?

Please.

Even the genuine accomplishments of this budget deal, like cutting Medicaid spending by $1 billion and reducing the annual rate of growth from 8 percent to 1 percent, are diminished by the way it was reached.

And what's bad about the budget, like doubling the number of charter schools that will be allowed in New York, from 100 to 200, becomes all the more suspicious when it's the product of a backroom deal.

Questions will linger for some time over why Mr. Spitzer's $1.3 billion in property tax relief, mostly for the middle class, had to be whittled down by $200 million so more school aid could go to Long Island, the place where Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno is so fiercely determined to hold on to his slim majority.

Oh, and why did $100 million for stem-cell research have to become funding for "emerging technologies"?

Any conversation in which the leaders of state government can't bring themselves to earnestly embrace the potential scientific triumph that stem-cell research represents is more discourse that needs to occur publicly.

Of all this, of what he had wanted and what he has had to settle for, Mr. Spitzer says, "Rome was not built in a day."

Nor was Albany's storied dysfunction achieved overnight, a collection of embarrassments and disappointments that go well beyond late budgets, and to which Mr. Spitzer has become a most prominent contributor.

New York Observer Politicker

"Mondello on Spitzer's Meltdown"

March 30, 2007

At a Queens County Republican dinner in Flushing last night, state GOP Chairman Joe Mondello made the following prediction:

Eliot Spitzer will self-destruct.

-- Azi Paybarah

http://thepoliticker.observer.com/2007/03/...s-meltdown.html

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG

Sen. Michael Nozzolio, R-Fayette, said the DEC can’t be treating businesses as if they’ve been caught in a radar trap.

Grannis said he doesn’t see the department being out to get violators and would use aggressive enforcement as a last resort.

Comment by John Galt — March 31, 2007 @ 6:24 pm

ITEM: Grannis said he doesn’t see the department being out to get violators and would use aggressive enforcement as a last resort.

You’re damn right Grannis doesn’t see the NYSDEC as being “out to get violators” ….

To the contrary, based on our very long involvement with the NYSDEC as concerned citizens pursuant to section 3-0301 of the NYSECL, what we have documented is that the NYSDEC coddles violators, and it uses aggressive tactics, instead, against people like us, as can be seen from the language of this DEC memo in our files pertaining to the harassment of one of our community, the licensed professional engineer Paul R. Plante, who was in fact later incarcerated in the secure mental facility of the Stratton VA Hospital on August 22, 2001, just days after he sent a letter to the NYSDEC central office charging false statements were being made by the DEC Region IV office and a pet DEC consultant concerning this same solid waste transfer station in the Town of Poestenkill, Rensselaer County, State of New York:

New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Memorandum

TO: Director Wayne Brewer, Environmental Conservation Police

FROM: Captain E.T. Washburn, Environmental Conservation Police

DATE: February 13, 1998

I have assigned Lt. Paul Bernstein and ECO Karen Staniewski to investigate Paul Plante.

Please be advised that the Attorney general’s Office has been looking into this site and are reviewing DEC Solid Waste files.

And this harassment of Plante by the DEC Police occurred after Assistant New York State Attorney General KATHLEEN LISTON MORRISON filed an October 14, 1993 affirmation with Judge Williams of Albany County Supreme Court, in an open proceeding witnessed by the TU’s own Michelle Morgan Bolton, wherein was stated:

“I have read the Verified Petition, the Department permit file, and the relevant statutes and regulations.”

“The state respondents admit that the Department (NYSDEC) erred in issuing the permit when it had an incomplete application under Environmental Conservation Law (”ECL”) Article 70, the Uniform Procedures Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder in 6 NYCRR Part 621, the Solid Waste Management Act, ECL Article 27, and the regulations promulgated thereunder in 6 NYCRR Part 360, and failed to comply with the requirements of Article 8, the State Environmental Quality Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder in 6 NYCRR Part 617.”

For those who are unaware of the DEC permitting process, what Ms. Morrisson was saying to Judge Williams was that in issuing this permit, the NYSDEC had violated every single law and regulation which applied to the permitting of that facility ….

And yet, the permit was still issued ….

And no one at the NYSDEC was ever reprimanded, or dismissed, or jailed ….

To the contrary, the NYSDEC then turned on us …

Which has me saying back to this Sen. Michael Nozzolio, R-Fayette, that DEC can’t be treating citizens as if they’ve been caught in a radar trap when they expose on-going corruption at the NYSDEC ….

And it is not at all comforting to hear this Grannis dude telling all of us that he will use aggressive enforcement only as a last resort, when pursuant to ECL 3-0301(1)(i), it is the duty of the DEC and its commissioner to:

Provide for prevention and abatement of all water, land and air pollution including but not limited to that related to particulates, gases, dust, vapors, noise, radiation, odor, nutrients and heated liquids ….

What we do not need in the State of New York today is another “door-mat” DEC Commissioner, and yet, this Grannis dude sounds like he intends to be exactly that ….

Which does not bode well for our ground water and air out here in the APPALACHIA in upstate NY that the DEC has created with its negligence, and its coddling of environmental polluters and violaters ….

And so ….

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4268#comments

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG

ITEM: Sen. Carl Marcellino, a Long Island Republican and chair of the Senate EnCon Committee, told Grannis that the task before him is a big one.

“The DEC’s image, as you heard in Finance and was touched on during the EnCon hearings, needs to change,” Marcellino said.

“There are regions of this state that look upon the department that you will be heading as the enemy."

"That’s not good.”

“Everybody laughs, but it really isn’t funny when people look at the government as their enemy…we need to work together to change that.”

Comment by John Galt — March 31, 2007 @ 7:01 pm

JOHN GALT REPLIES: The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation is indeed the enemy out here in the countryside in Rensselaer County, where the NYSDEC is considered to be the biggest threat to our health, safety and well-being, above the Rensselaer County Health Department, even, which is really saying something …

And that image certainly does need to change, but it does not appear from his own comments that this Grannis actually intends to do any changing, where he stated that he does not intend to use aggressive enforcement against environmental polluters and violaters ….

And that is entirely consistent with what this “STEAMROLLER” told the NYS Business Council on September 21, 2006 up at Bolton Landing on Lake George:

“Ken, I look forward to working with you to make New York the best place to do business in the world.”

“But today, I want to speak about what I believe should be our first priority, and that is making New York companies more competitive by improving our business climate.”

“And we will streamline regulations to make them friendly to business.”

“As Governor, I will ensure that the Governor’s Office of Regulatory Reform places renewed focus on breaking the regulatory logjam in the State’s permitting process for new development.”

“We have much more to accomplish than what I discussed today if we are to restore our State to its historic position of economic strength.”

“But the starting point of any economic development strategy is creating a climate that is friendly to business instead of hostile to it.”

“It’s time that our State government becomes part of the solution, not part of the problem.”

http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...mp;#entry640897

Well, it sounds like the “STEAMROLLER” has a perfect lackey in this Grannis to help him carry out his and the NYS Business Council’s wishes ….

Despite it being the duty of the NYSDEC and its commissioner to:

3-0301. General functions, powers and duties of the department and the commissioner.

1. It shall be the responsibility of the department, in accordance with such existing provisions and limitations as may be elsewhere set forth in law, by and through the commissioner to carry out the environmental policy of the state set forth in section 1-0101 of this chapter.

And …

3-0301(1)(i) Provide for prevention and abatement of all water, land and air pollution including but not limited to that related to particulates, gases, dust, vapors, noise, radiation, odor, nutrients and heated liquids ….

And so ….

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4272#comments

"Spitzer's steamroller looks to be running short on steam"

Fred LeBrun, political analyst, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, April 1, 2007

"Rome wasn't built in a day," our exhausted governor acknowledged late Thursday after marathon closed-door negotiations with legislative leaders resulted in the outlines of a new state budget.

That equally exhausted cliche was a tacit acknowledgment that the results of those negotiations were a far cry from what Eliot Spitzer promised New Yorkers, from what he confidently predicted he would do with his first budget.

"Rome burned in a day -- but wasn't built in a day," he added.

Meaning what, I can't say.

But can you smell something burning?

I can, and it's not Rome.

Could it be that the bearings in Eliot's celebrated steamroller have seized?

Or maybe it's that bonfire piled high with "On Day One, Everything Changes" bumper stickers and posters.

This first budget has turned out to be a disaster for the brash, the bold, the progressive governor.

Much of what he predicted wouldn't happen did.

Much of what he said he could get done he didn't.

Conspicuously, the who man rode into town like Elmer Gantry preaching reform, openness, transparency, inclusion, public legislative conferences and hearings, has resorted to repeated behind-closed-doors bargaining with the same few suits that he railed against back at election time.

process -- and this entire session so far, for that matter -- has been neither open, nor transparent, nor has the public had a chance to say a peep until it was too late

Unbelievably, the brinkmanship governor who spoiled for a fight over the appointment of Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, rolled over and played dead just to get a so-called "on time" budget.

Like last year, an on-time budget is mostly a fiction anyway.

Resolving a few big-ticket items and a general, conceptual agreement still leave a lot of empty spaces.

The devil is always in those darned details.

Besides, we've been through budget making so many times we should know the difference between baloney and good salami.

Earlier last week, Spitzer had this to say:

"Everyone would like an on-time budget."

"Getting an on-time budget has become rightly or wrongly one of the measures of our capacity to run the ship of state as it should be run."

"It is more important to get it right.

"Timeliness is good, but being correct is better."

Three days later, he picked the wrong one.

We got timely, but we surely didn't get correct.

Or we would have had a full-blown debate over charter schools and whether this educational experiment deserves the expansion that has been granted without that public discussion or any reliable measure of past performance.

And an expanded bottle bill covering fruit juice and water bottles would have gotten a solid airing.

One poll shows 54 percent of New Yorkers are in favor of such a bill.

But it got yanked off the table before any serious negotiations even started.

A clear signal, incidentally, that will make passage of such a bill in the future nearly impossible.

The bottlers and wholesalers will never let it happen it now, even if they were given a greater share of nickel deposits.

Stem-cell research?

We went from great hope for a major commitment in this state, to a modest effort that shies away from controversial embryonic stem cells to "emerging technology."

That's not where we were supposed to go.

That's not a version of correct that I can swallow.

So far, the winners and losers in this budget cycle are obvious.

Eliot, because he set the agenda and came up way short, is the loser.

Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno, who should be the imperiled and shaky leader of a doomed conference, is the big winner.

He got what he needed to stay alive and made the governor look foolish in the process.

At this point in their dismal history, it doesn't get better than that for Republicans.

Assembly Speaker Shelly Silver was just there and not much more, tethered to the losing side.

Even though Eliot caved for a timely budget and compromised far more than he should have, my prediction is that his poll numbers will continue to slide.

The public is going to be disappointed.

This isn't the Eliot Spitzer we elected, the Eliot Spitzer who promised to shake up Albany.

Early last week, he had this to say about his drop in popularity from 70 to 62 percent, according to a Siena poll:

"I would gladly trade away an awful lot of that transitory popularity in order to make the tough decisions that are necessary to move us in the right direction."

Bold talk.

But when the chips were down, that's all it was.

Fred LeBrun can be reached at 454-5453 or by e-mail at flebrun@timesunion.com.

"Frenzy yields core of budget - $121 billion plan includes a $1.8 billion increase for education; critics call process 'a mess'"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, April 1, 2007

ALBANY -- The Legislature hastily passed a package of budget bills Saturday night hours after they were printed, and hoped to complete the spending plan by today, the start of the new fiscal year.

The total budget is valued at about $121 billion by the Division of the Budget, but the entire plan may not be put together for a few more weeks to allow for more wrangling over hundreds of millions of dollars in capital projects money, pay raises and tuition tax credits.

Portions getting passed this weekend included the core ingredients of a budget, including a whopping $1.8 billion increase in education spending that will boost Albany aid by 17 percent and Schenectady's by 25 percent.

The total aid to schools reached $20 billion, a figure that still paled next to the Medicaid budget, which grew about 1 percent to $47 billion.

Gov. Eliot Spitzer considered it a victory.

Indeed, the governor, making rounds in the Capitol to meet with lawmakers during delays in bill printing, summed up the deal in the most positive terms.

He said he was pleased he won a new way of funding education, 70 percent of the health care cuts he demanded, $450 million in corporate loophole closures and a progressive tax rebate plan.

"We're thrilled at the timeliness of the budget," he said.

"We had enormous policy successes."

Yet, the budget watchdogs -- and several lawmakers -- called the process a "mess."

Several Assembly Republicans voted against parts of the package and criticized the budget's size.

Although the Legislature broke to return today to vote on remaining bills, Spitzer said he considered the budget substantially on time.

Spitzer issued "messages of necessity" to allow thousands of pages of bills to be passed quickly and without aging the required three days.

Still, a separate spending bill is expected to be fashioned in the weeks ahead to deal with unfinished business and clarifications.

Much was missed by drafters and negotiators in the sprint to get a budget in place by the April 1 start of the 2007-2008 fiscal year.

The follow-up legislation will likely include parts of the $170 million in member items being added by the Legislature -- discretionary money for priority and pork projects of lawmakers.

Lawmakers amended budget bills Saturday to attach hundreds, if not thousands, of member items for passage.

It will be up to Spitzer to veto or keep them.

The upcoming bill will also likely include capital projects, including a $300 million pot Spitzer desires for a computer chip research and development center.

Some say the beneficiary will be Sematech in Albany.

However, deals for local communities were expected to be passed by today, including forgiving a roughly $9 million state loan to the Saratoga Economic Development Corp. for the Luther Forest Technology Campus, site of a proposed computer chip manufacturing plant.

Also, the budget had provisions that assure Saratoga County $1.2 million and Saratoga Springs $3.7 million in video lottery terminal revenues from the racino at Saratoga Gaming and Raceway.

Spitzer had pushed to get a budget accomplished by midnight Saturday, compromising on his $120.6 billion budget plan and agreeing to more than another $1 billion in spending by lawmakers, including $355 million to Medicaid and $440 million to public education.

The enacted budget raises state fund spending by about 9 percent, roughly three times the rate of inflation.

Negotiations were still going on Saturday as budget bills were being drafted and printed.

"We are where we are which is, I hope, a greatly improved budget for the people of the state of New York," said Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunwick.

Spitzer won his fight to direct aid to neediest schools.

But Senate Republicans successfully pushed for more school funding for Long Island.

That ended up being $100 million for districts with the highest taxes, $75 million for Nassau and Suffolk counties and a portio of the rest for Westchester and Rockland counties, a sum that rankled some Assembly Democrats.

Only about 140 districts were considered too wealthy to get more than a cost-of-living increase.

Most got big boosts, particularly in urban areas: Albany County's schools as a whole got $190 million, up $20 million from last year.

Albany city schools got $65.3 million, a 17.6 percent increase, along with $2.5 million in extra "transitional" money for playing host to charter schools.

The money came from an account of $22 million for school districts with charters.

Schenectady County schools got $139 million, up $20.7 million.

Schenectady city schools received a 25 percent raise in funds, to $65 million, and $1 million in transitional aid.

Spitzer won the right to add 100 charter schools.

But Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver won a provision requiring charters with 250 students in the first or second year of operation to be automatically unionized.

It was also win for the New York State United Teachers and Civil Service Employees Association.

Also, charters will have to make a good faith effort to educate handicapped students and not push them back to the public system, also a union priority.

But charters will not have to honor State Education Department building codes, pay prevailing wages or be managed only by nonprofits, terms the teacher union was pushing.

The budget also comes with $1.3 billion for rebate checks to property taxpayers, allowing people with up to $250,000 in household income to get some cash back from Albany.

Besides the $300 million tied to Sematech, Spitzer had sought another $300 million economic development account.

Several government officials said the Spitzer has been considering setting that pot up for use for his priorities and for lawmakers, particularly members of the two minority conferences -- Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the Assembly.

The budget also included $100 million for stem cell research, with another $500 million coming over the following five years.

"It is an excellent program," said Robin Elliott, executive director of the Parkinson's Disease Foundation.

It will allow research, including embryonic stem cell work, but not cloning.

Agriculture lobbyists were heartened to see $30 million for dairy operations, although it fell short of the $60 million the industry wanted.

But restraint was needed somewhere, said Diana Fortuna, president of the Citizens Budget Commission, one of several analysts who described the budget as too plump.

The budget is more than $8 billion bigger than last year's $112.6 billion package.

She also said it was passed too hurriedly.

"The rush to pass legislation before the public or even lawmakers have a chance to consider it is a continuation of business as usual," Fortuna said.

"The budget process is still a mess."

James M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

"How everyday New Yorkers will fare"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Sunday, April 1, 2007

Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno summed up much of this year's budget negotiations during a meeting last week, as politicians were debating whether the budget they were crafting with Gov. Eliot Spitzer was good, bad or indifferent for most New Yorkers.

"When you want to talk about numbers,'' the Brunswick Republican said, "it depends on how you count them.''

It also depends -- a lot -- on who you are.

Are you rich, poor, young, old, self-employed or a state worker?

Do you own a large home with a high tax bill, or do you rent?

Those are the kind of factors that will determine whether this year's state budget will have much of a direct, immediate impact on your finances.

The state budget is a creature of the institutions it funds, and it can be hard to see how and where it trickles down to an individual's finances.

There are some exceptions this year: More than 1 million more New Yorkers will have some kind of health care coverage.

Homeowners may get property tax rebates ranging from a few hundred dollars to almost $1,000.

But that doesn't mean their annual tax bills will shrink, given the speed with which the underlying tax rates are growing.

With that in mind, and realizing the budget may not be finalized by the time you read this, we've attempted to show what the budget may actually mean for real New Yorkers, using some hypothetical Capital Region residents.

John Q. Public Employee: The budget will expand your ranks, with 2,458 new jobs for the state work force this year.

For example, Spitzer wants to hire 322 more people in the Department of Transportation, 109 in the Department of Environmental Conservation, and 226 at the Office of Children and Family Services.

It will reverse what unions said was a trend under former Gov. George Pataki to outsource jobs.

Salaries vary widely, but a typical DOT engineer can make between approximately $50,000 and $62,000.

You get a slew of stable, good jobs and expanded political clout as your numbers increase.

Mike and Mary Homeowner: You earn the state's median average income of about $59,000 and live in a $200,000 home in North Colonie.

Last year, you got an extra $123.66 back on your School Tax Relief (STAR) rebate on what was a school tax bill of about $3,200 after the initial STAR reduction.

Under this budget, you'll get 60 percent more, or an additional $74 on the rebate.

This year, with the added rebate you should get another $123.

But don't spend it yet.

What the government giveth, the government taketh away.

There's no telling what next year's base-line school tax will be.

Thus your actual bill may drop or increase regardless.

The rebates vary by school district.

Other districts, typically those with higher tax rates, may see higher rebate.

Bethlehem for instance got a $173.88 rebate.

Senior citizens get an even bigger rebate.

All told, Albany County taxpayers earning less than $90,000 should get an average rebate this coming fall of $373.

Making for a total savings of $994, according to state estimates.

Those earning between $90,001 and $150,000 would realize a total savings in Albany County of $900.

This rebate is different from last year's, since it's tied to incomes.

Those upstate residents who earn up to $90,000 get the full 60 percent increase.

That percentage lessens as incomes rise, up to a $250,000 income level, then the extra increase goes away.

Fran Family, Buys Own Health Insurance: You earn $65,000, live in Lansingburgh, and pay a $960 monthly premium for your spouse and two children (one of the lowest rates available, according to state data).

Now, though, because the eligibility cap has gone from 250 percent to 400 percent of the poverty level (around $20,000 for a family of four), you're eligible for a substantial insurance subsidy through the Child Health Plus program.

You will save from several hundred to several thousand dollars a year.

Pat, The Small-Business Owner: You own a dry cleaning business in Ravena.

One of your competitors is a national company that pays its taxes in Delaware rather than New York, giving it a big break.

Now, though, with combined filing, your competitors will have to pay Empire State taxes, too.

The playing field has been leveled just a bit.

Robbie Renter: You rent an apartment in Troy for $600.

There's not a whole lot new for you in this budget, and as advocates have noted, not much has changed since the 1980s, when an income tax break was instituted for those who earn less than $18,000.

Sally Student: If you're in an underperforming school district, you could see some changes in the classroom, depending on details, due to the governor's Contract for Excellence plan.

Districts with low test scores, such as Albany, may get extra money, but they have to agree to take specific measures to increase learning, such as reducing class sizes or increasing after-school programs.

-- By Rick Karlin

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG

"Assembly Back Tomorrow, Too"

April 1, 2007 at 12:29 am by Jay Jochnowitz, State Editor

The Assembly just wrapped up its budget bill passing for the night (early morning, actually) and will return at 8:30 a.m. to deal with the health and education budget bills.

The problem is in part a printing issue; the education budget isn’t expected to be printed until somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 a.m.

So, rather than keep members at work overnight, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, followed the lead of Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunswick, and sent lawmakers home.

Comment by John Galt — April 1, 2007 @ 8:46 am

As an older person, who Mike calls a “country bumpkin”, which is really an innocent faux pas on his part, since we natural-born country folks up here are yokels, not “bumpkins”, that being a term that applies to NYC people who move up here and then spend hundreds of dollars on designer outfits that make them look like Canadian lumber-jacks, so no one will know they are really from NYC, I have to wonder at how “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno has become the “BOSS” of the legislature down there in Albany, when the NY Constitution does not give him any such authority …

And I further have to wonder at how people in this state can tolerate any of this absolute crap that is going on down there right now with respect to the budget, when the language of the NY Constitution on the process is so clear …

And with respect to that process, § 5 of ART. VII of OUR NY Constitution states in language easily understood by fifth graders out here in the countryside that with respect to the budget submitted to them by the governor pursuant to section 2 of ART. VII that:

“Neither house of the legislature shall consider any other bill making an appropriation until all the appropriation bills submitted by the governor shall have been finally acted on by both houses, except on message from the governor certifying to the necessity of the immediate passage of such a bill.”

Now, to us, the term “house” of the legislature means all of its members, and not just the “IRON DUKE”, or Silver, for that matter, or “Worthless Jimmy” Tedisco ….

The “IRON DUKE”, admitted “heavy-hitter” that he is, is but one member of the state senate, and in reality, despite his HUGE puffed-up ego and sense-of-self, that is all he is, one voice out of many …

And as to the “budget needs” of the legislature, of which “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno is but one member, not even in the lawful “chain of succession” in the case that the governor and lt. governor cannot serve, section 1 of ART VII states:

“Itemized estimates of the financial needs of the legislature, certified by the presiding officer of each house, and of the judiciary, approved by the court of appeals and certified by the chief judge of the court of appeals, shall be transmitted to the governor not later than the first day of December in each year for inclusion in the budget without revision but with such recommendations as the governor may deem proper.”

Simple, simple language, and yet, here we are, watching once again as the “THREE MEN PLUS TWO” do the “Albany Budget DANCE” all over again …

And with respect to the timing and openness and transparency of all of this, sect. 2 of ART. VII states:

“Annually, on or before the first day of February in each year following the year fixed by the constitution for the election of governor and lieutenant governor … the governor shall submit to the legislature a budget containing a complete plan of expenditures proposed to be made before the close of the ensuing fiscal year and all moneys and revenues estimated to be available therefor, together with an explanation of the basis of such estimates and recommendations as to proposed legislation, if any, which the governor may deem necessary to provide moneys and revenues sufficient to meet such proposed expenditures ….”

Sect. 2 further states:

“It (the budget submittal) shall also contain such other recommendations and information as the governor may deem proper and such additional information as may be required by law.”

Again, language that is quite simple and easy to understand, as any fifth grader out here in the countryside would tell you …

And if things were actually to be done in this way, well, we would have both transparency and openness in the process, since these are not “SECRET DOCUMENTS”, rather, they are public documents mandated by law in this state, and these public documents would be in the hands of EVERY member of both houses of the legislature by February 1st, 2 months ago, now, which means that they would be in the hands of the “media” and by extension, us, the people!

Now, with resepct to all of this BACK-DOOR DEALING with “add-ons” to appease all of the special interests who have access to these BACK-DOOR budget negotiations in violation of the process spelled out in plain and simple language in OUR NY Constitution, sect. 3 of ART. VII states:

“The governor may at any time within thirty days thereafter and, with the consent of the legislature, at any time before the adjournment thereof, amend or supplement the budget and submit amendments to any bills submitted by him or her or submit supplemental bills.”

The key language in that sentence, of course, is “WITH THE CONSENT OF THE LEGISLATURE”, and here is where we, the common, voiceless, powerless people out here in NYS are really being screwed, since the “legislature” in NY itself is nothing but a concept, not an actuality, and the “members” of the legislature are really nothing but a bunch of little puppets in thrall to “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno, Shelly Silver, or in the case of Jimmy Tedisco and his bunch of puppets, in thrall to the LORD CORNBURY STEAMROLLER, himself …

And so ….

LORD CORNBURY does not have to comply with any of the provisions of ART. VII of OUR NY Constitution ….

And he certanly does not have to ask the whole legislature to give him permission to “amend or supplement the budget and submit amendments to any bills submitted by him or her or submit supplemental bills”, since the legislature is nothing but a lump of putty in the hands of its BOSSES ….

Rather, having the legislature in thrall to him and the BOSSES, he just takes the permission as a matter of IMPERIAL RIGHT, and then the DANCE begins …

And so …

Ulla, take my advice, get out of this state while you have a dime left to your name …

Go out to Oregon, the people out there are more independent in spirit than they are here, and a lot less cowardly, being the stock of pioneers themselves, and as a consequence, the government out there is not so cowardly, or unethical, or just plain worthless ….

And take as many young people with you when you go, as you can, because there is no real future for young people with integrity in this state so long as this HIGH-PRICED CHARADE down there in Albany continues year after year, as it is this year …

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4279#comments

Comment by John Galt — April 1, 2007 @ 4:57 pm

I just finished reading “Frenzy yields core of budget - $121 billion plan includes a $1.8 billion increase for education; critics call process ‘a mess’” by JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union, first published Sunday, April 1, 2007, wherein was stated:

“The follow-up legislation will likely include parts of the $170 million in member items being added by the Legislature — discretionary money for priority and pork projects of lawmakers.”

“Lawmakers amended budget bills Saturday to attach hundreds, if not thousands, of member items for passage.”

And that brings me right back to the NY Constitution one more time, to what I consider to be the REAL LAW here in this state concerning the expenditures of OUR state monies, and that law goes right to the very legality of any of this $170 MILLION in PURE PORK that the members of the NY Legislature are apparently going to push through, to benefit themselves and the special interests who they suck up to for money …

With respect to these “hundreds, if not thousands, of member items for passage”, sect. 7 of ART. VII of the NYS Constitution states as follows:

“§ 7. No money shall ever be paid out of the state treasury or any of its funds, or any of the funds under its management, except in pursuance of an appropriation by law; nor unless such payment be made within two years next after the passage of such appropriation act; and every such law making a new appropriation or continuing or reviving an appropriation, shall distinctly specify the sum appropriated, and the object or purpose to which it is to be applied; and it shall not be sufficient for such law to refer to any other law to fix such sum.”

So with respect to openness and transparency and accountability, not to mention the very constitutionality of any of these PORK BILLS, each and every one should be scrutinized by the press, and by the public, as well as by each “lawmaker” who votes “yes”, to be sure that the OBJECT OR PURPOSE of each appropriation is well stated, and if that takes the next ten year to accomplish, so be that …

Which brings us to perhaps the more important constitutional provision governing the expenditure of any state monies at all, which are our monies, in trust to the legislature, only, and that law is stated in sect. 8 of ART. VII of OUR NY Constitution as follows:

“§ 8. 1. The money of the state shall not be given or loaned to or in aid of any private corporation or association, or private undertaking; nor shall the credit of the state be given or loaned to or in aid of any individual, or public or private corporation or association, or private undertaking, but the foregoing provisions shall not apply to any fund or property now held or which may hereafter be held by the state for educational, mental health or mental retardation purposes.”

I suspect that if each of these PORK BILLS were scrutinized for compliance with this constituional requirement, that many or most of them would be unlawful or illegal or unconstitutional appropriations by the members of the legislature, which should then be grounds for removal from office, if not immediately, then certainly in the very next election for which they must stand ….

If members of the legislature cannot and will not uphold the provisions of OUR NY Constitution, then they are a danger and a threat to our constitutional form of government here in NYS, and for that reason, they should not be serving in OUR state government ….

If the OATH to OUR Constitution means a thing to any of these state legislators, be they in the assembly or the senate, then, by God, they had better demonstrate to us that they know what OUR Constitution means and says about how OUR state tax monies are to be expended, and the way that they do that is by action - abide by the language of the constitution in all that they do, or GET OUT ….

Un-*** the seat and let a better person take on the duties, man or woman don’t matter, so long as the next one will acknowledge and abide by OUR Constitution …

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4286#comments

"Half a day late, sort of - Lawmakers finish the budget just after deadline, but intend to add $1B in weeks ahead"

By JAMES M. ODATO, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Monday, April 2, 2007

ALBANY -- Late on the morning of a new fiscal year, the Legislature on Sunday completed passage of an enormous spending package and planned to continue adding to it in the coming weeks.

The lawmakers passed a roughly $121 billion budget, with pages still warm from being printed, rankling some members and the government reform groups that hoped Gov. Eliot Spitzer's way of doing things would be much more open.

The budget that will finance state government for the next 12 months was touted by leaders as something of which to be proud, although you could not find a senator or Assembly member sure of the spending plan's actual size.

The package came with the expectation that legislators will work out another bill in concert with Spitzer after they return from a two-week vacation that starts today.

The new legislation would add upward of $1 billion for capital projects such as road construction, a computer chip research center in the Albany area and more pork for members.

"Spectacular," Spitzer said as he shook Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's hand for completing the budget 11 hours past deadline.

The Senate finished about an hour earlier.

Both chambers applauded themselves for getting the job done essentially on time.

"This budget is very good for the state of New York," Spitzer said, just three weeks after complaining that the Senate GOP was being "profligate" by proposing what he called unaffordable increases over his $120.6 billion budget plan.

"Obviously, however, the process that produced the budget was flawed."

The governor, who was criticized by government watchdogs for negotiating his first budget behind closed doors, pledged to do better next year.

Lawmakers added more than $1 billion to Spitzer's plan and forced him to dilute many of the reforms he sought to rein in spending.

Already, the budget is sprinkled with hundreds of initiatives demanded by legislators.

Spitzer will have to decide whether to veto them.

These include member items from a pot of $170 million the Legislature added for pork projects for things such as $10,000 for Proctor's Theatre in Schenectady and $10,000 for the Saratoga Anniversary Committee.

Spitzer has said such projects must be spelled out in the budget.

Lawmakers simply listed grant sums and recipients, but said more detailed explanation will be put on the Internet.

The bills also include "aid to localities" added by the members for a range of desired spending -- $350,000 for the Maple Producers' Association, much of it to set up a sugarhouse at the State Fair, for instance.

The extra aid also included $600,000 for the Tech Valley High School project Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno has supported in the Capital Region and $500,000 for a regional center for autism at the University at Albany.

In a three-way agreement, $548,000 is in the budget for Schenectady County Community College for homeland security training.

Bruno, R-Brunswick, and Silver, D-Manhattan, both said the Legislature needs to keep talking about a pay increase for judges, something Spitzer wanted.

The judiciary has gone without pay increases for eight years; they are paid less than some legislative staffers.

Silver said the conversation should include the broader discussion of legislative and executive compensation and that he hopes it gets resolved later this year.

Bruno said the Legislature will have to discuss $600 million that Spitzer sought for economic development but was rejected by the Legislature.

The two $300 million pots include one for a high-tech computer chip center, which sources have said is a Sematech project in Albany.

In all, about $1 billion in capital projects need to be part of another bill, Bruno said.

"I don't remember before having this much success," Bruno said.

"We did OK."

He credited the Senate Republicans for pushing for open conference committees, chiding Assembly Democrats for not showing up for two key sessions.

He also suggested the Senate GOP drove Spitzer to agree to add $440 million in education aid, restore $350 million in proposed health care cuts, and setting up a $1.3 billion rebate check program for property taxpayers.

Bruno pushed for more school money to protect the Republican bastion of Long Island, winning an extra $100 million for highly taxed school districts in Suffolk and Nassau counties.

Assembly Democrats from Westchester County wrote an angry letter to Spitzer on Sunday seeking changes in the "high tax aid."

The letter came after the delegation realized almost three quarters of the account is going to Long Island with just $10 million for Orange County, $4 million for Dutchess County, $4 million for Ulster County, $1 million for Rockland County and $1.6 million for Westchester County.

Silver said Spitzer, a fellow Democrat, did well in his first budget battle.

"The governor has a tremendous set of victories here," he said.

The speaker's own scorecard included a few buzzer-beaters as he worked some late-stage deals on how school funds can be used.

He also turned back the governor's plan to provide tuition tax credits for parents who send their children to parochial and private schools.

But the speaker noted that such schools will be getting a total of $39 million statewide to help them pay for state-mandated services.

He also diluted Spitzer's ability to add 100 more charter schools.

Language in the education budget bills calls for unionization of any charter schools with 250 or more students during their first two years of operation.

In a provision that would have an impact in districts such as Albany, Silver got an amendment that new charter schools can't immediately open if more than 5 percent of a district's students are already enrolled in the alternative schools.

There has to be a determination that another school would be advantageous to the youngsters.

The budget, negotiated largely in private among Spitzer and the legislative leaders and passed before details could be read, came about via a process that was "the worst ever," said Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco, R-Schenectady.

Many of his members voted against components and the entire minority conference objected to Spitzer exerting his power to allow immediate passage of freshly printed bills by issuing "messages of necessity."

That allowed the Legislature to disband the rule that bills must be aged for three days before a vote.

A few lawmakers, notably Assemblyman James Hayes, R-East Amherst, worried the budget's nearly 9 percent increase in state funds will lead to higher taxes and more job losses.

"Everybody feels great, like they got this brand new platinum credit card," said Assemblyman Joseph Saladino, R-Massapequa, whose district benefited from big infusions of state aid for schools.

"But eventually the bill will arrive."

Deficits -- the difference between expected revenues and spending obligations -- will grow by $1 billion a year in upcoming fiscal years, according to the state Division of the Budget.

The projected gaps are $3.3 billion next year, $5.5 billion the year after and $7.3 billion in 2010-2011.

M. Odato can be reached at 454-5083 or by e-mail at jodato@timesunion.com.

NY TIMES EMPIRE ZONE

April 2, 2007, 1:26 am

"A Budget Is Born"

By The Empire Zone

Gov. Eliot Spitzer leaving the New York State Assembly chamber Sunday after his budget passed. (Nathaniel Brooks for The New York Times).

Comments so far...

April 2nd, 2007 6:23 am

It is a gross injustice to all of your readers out here to feed us hype and propanganda telling us that “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer’s budget passed, when the actual details of this alleged budget are yet to be determined ….

What we have had with this first “STEAMROLLER” budget, and what we have been tracking, and detailing, and witnessing, as citizens of this state is a gross and wilful violation of OUR constitutional law here in the State of NY by this “STEAMROLLER”, and the members of the NY Legislature ….

And with respect to that process, § 5 of ART. VII of OUR NY Constitution states, with respect to the budget submitted to them by the governor pursuant to section 2 of ART. VII that:

“Neither house of the legislature shall consider any other bill making an appropriation until all the appropriation bills submitted by the governor shall have been finally acted on by both houses, except on message from the governor certifying to the necessity of the immediate passage of such a bill.”

It is our understanding that this “STEAMROLLER” improperly used “messages of necessity” to ram God alone knows what through the legislature with this budget at the very last minute, and your newspaper would be doing us all a great service by publishing each and every one of these “messages of necessity” signed by this “STEAMROLLER” so that we all can see exactly what it was that the “STEAMROLLER” was certifying as necessary, and WHY?

What emergency were we all facing, or what emergency was the “state” facing that required a “message of necessity” from the “STEAMROLLER” to the legislature?

As to the term “house” of the legislature as mentioned in ART. VII, sect. 2, that means all of its members, and not just “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno, or Sheldon Silver, for that matter, or “Worthless Jimmy” Tedisco ….

And as to the “budget needs” of the legislature, section 1 of ART VII states:

“Itemized estimates of the financial needs of the legislature, certified by the presiding officer of each house, and of the judiciary, approved by the court of appeals and certified by the chief judge of the court of appeals, shall be transmitted to the governor not later than the first day of December in each year for inclusion in the budget without revision but with such recommendations as the governor may deem proper.”

Simple, simple language, and yet, here we all were, watching once again as the “THREE MEN IN THE BACK-ROOM” did the “Albany Budget DANCE” all over again, with everything a great big secret from us, despite the language of our constitution that mandates otherwise …

And with respect to the timing and openness and transparency of all of this, sect. 2 of ART. VII states:

“Annually, on or before the first day of February in each year following the year fixed by the constitution for the election of governor and lieutenant governor … the governor shall submit to the legislature a budget containing a complete plan of expenditures proposed to be made before the close of the ensuing fiscal year and all moneys and revenues estimated to be available therefor, together with an explanation of the basis of such estimates and recommendations as to proposed legislation, if any, which the governor may deem necessary to provide moneys and revenues sufficient to meet such proposed expenditures ….”

Sect. 2 further states:

“It (the budget submittal) shall also contain such other recommendations and information as the governor may deem proper and such additional information as may be required by law.”

Again, language that is quite simple and easy to understand, as any fifth grader out here in the countryside would tell you …

And if things were actually to have been done in this way, well, we would have had both transparency and openness in the process, since these are not “SECRET DOCUMENTS”, rather, they are public documents mandated by law in this state, and these public documents would be in the hands of EVERY member of both houses of the legislature by February 1st, 2 months ago, now, which means that they would be in the hands of the “media” and by extension, us, the people!

Now, with resepct to all of this BACK-DOOR DEALING with “add-ons” to appease all of the special interests who have access to these BACK-DOOR budget negotiations in violation of the process spelled out in plain and simple language in OUR NY Constitution, sect. 3 of ART. VII states:

“The governor may at any time within thirty days thereafter and, with the consent of the legislature, at any time before the adjournment thereof, amend or supplement the budget and submit amendments to any bills submitted by him or her or submit supplemental bills.”

The key language in that sentence, of course, is “WITH THE CONSENT OF THE LEGISLATURE”, and here is where we, the common, voiceless, powerless people out here in NYS are really being screwed, since the “legislature” in NY itself is nothing but a concept, not an actuality, and the “members” of the legislature are really nothing but a bunch of little puppets in thrall to “IRON DUKE” Joe Bruno, Shelly Silver, or in the case of Jimmy Tedisco and his bunch of puppets, in thrall to the “STEAMROLLER”, himself …

And so ….

The “STEAMROLLER” did not have to comply with any of the provisions of ART. VII of OUR NY Constitution ….

And he certanly did not have to ask the whole legislature to give him permission to “amend or supplement the budget and submit amendments to any bills submitted by him or her or submit supplemental bills”, since the legislature is nothing but a lump of putty in the hands of its BOSSES ….

So, having the legislature in thrall to him and the BOSSES, the “STEAMROLLER” just took the permission as a matter of IMPERIAL RIGHT, and then the DANCE began …

Which brings us right to the here and now, with the legislature coming back in ten days or so to approve some $170 million in “pure pork” that was added on at the last moment, in violation of our constitution ….

And so …

— Posted by Livyjr

http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/0...s-born/#respond

NY POST

"DEAR ELIOT: YOU IGNORED SOUND ADVICE"

By FREDRIC U. DICKER State Editor

April 2, 2007 --

Dear Gov. Spitzer,

This is a sad follow-up to the open letter I sent you in November in the exciting, hope-filled hours before a historic landslide victory gave you a popular mandate to carry out the reforms you repeatedly promised you were all about.

I wrote then that it was urgent that you move quickly to reverse the "decay, decline, dysfunction and corruption" in state government.

I outlined a to-do list of 15 suggestions you could follow to address those problems - and deliver on your repeated pledges to turn this state around.

Maybe if you had taken some of my suggestions you could have avoided the disturbing, business-as-usual mess that engulfed and embarrassed our state during the past week - as you desperately abandoned your reform pledges in an unsuccessful effort to get an on-time budget.

Frankly, the price paid for your failure - in terms of the public's money and the severe damage to your reputation - could hardly be higher.

A budget hike three times the rate of inflation that adds an extra $1 billion to next year's projected deficit isn't the fiscally responsible budget I urged - and you promised.

The Soviet-style secrecy that defined the budget talks - along with your willingness to use "messages of necessity" to assure that neither individual lawmakers nor the public would know what was in the budget - stole the breath away from your most loyal reform-minded supporters.

My original letter urged you to rein in runaway state spending and slash the state's huge income, sales, gasoline, business and property tax burden to "make New York competitive again so that people want to move here and not leave, as they have by the millions over the past three decades."

Looking at the massive size of this something-for-everybody budget, it's obvious you didn't take that recommendation seriously.

Governor, there's plenty of time left to get your administration on the right track.

But to succeed, you're going to have to do things differently, admit your mistakes, and be open to suggestions from reform-minded people who have been around state government longer than you.

Go back and read my suggestions.

You've already shown you can do a lot worse.

fredric.dicker@nypost.com

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04022007/news/...tate_editor.htm

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION - Capitol confidential

“'Timely' But Via A 'Flawed' Process"

April 1, 2007 at 12:46 pm by Elizabeth Benjamin

That is the verdict on this budget from Gov. Eliot Spitzer and LG David Paterson, who put out a formal statement after the Senate and Assembly finished passing all the bills and high-tailed it out of town for a two-week vacation.

Spitzer and Paterson declared themselves ”pleased that lawmakers approved a timely budget that addresses virtually all of our top priorities this year.”

They also acknowledged that the budget process was “flawed,” which is an all-purpose phrase for “secretive” and “rushed,” or any other of the several dozen negative adjectives that have been used by editorial pages and good government groups to describe this budget battle.

Spitzer and Paterson said the administration will be able to “start the process sooner” next year,” providing “the time to seek greater input from lawmaker and the public.”

“We are pleased that lawmakers approved a timely budget that addresses virtually all of our top priorities this year.”

“This budget includes a major property tax reduction targeted to the middle class.”

“It provides an historic level of investment in schools through a new aid formula based on need, implements new accountability measures and expands the number of charter schools.”

“It implements sweeping reforms in health care that will help control costs while improving public health."

"This includes providing access to health care coverage to all children in New York.”

“It increases financial aid to distressed cities upstate.”

“It funds important economic development initiatives, including nanotechnology, stem cell research and broadband access, and cuts business taxes.”

“This budget is very good for the State of New York."

"Obviously, however, the process that produced the budget was flawed."

"Next year, we will be able to start the process sooner and have the time to seek greater input from lawmakers and the public.”

“We commend the leaders for working cooperatively and compromising, and we thank the respective staffs for their extraordinary effort in working around the clock during the last several days to enact a timely budget.”

Comment by John Galt — April 2, 2007 @ 7:57 am

I read all of the various blather that Rex Smith extols in his editorials as to what the purposes of a newspaper in an alleged free and supposedly democratic society really are …

And I consider his words …

And then I look for the results …

And all I really ever find is a “bunch of nothing” with respect to substantive analysis of things like this present budget process ….

To the contrary, all we seem to get from the TU in the print edition in that regard is just a bunch of regurgitated, highly misleading press releases from people like the “STEAMROLLER”, Sheldon Silver and Malcolm Smith that actually require us to be absolutely brain-dead to believe a single word that they are saying in those press releases, re-printed in the TU as “news”, when it is nothing but pure propaganda and BULL **** ….

And please, do not get me wrong as to the service that you are providing in here in this BLOG by publishing these press releases, so that they are in effect, now “frozen in time” in here, so that we all can then study their wording at our leisure to see who it was that said exactly what …

But what always happens, like topo gigio is stating right above here, is that once the press releases are issued, this “Albany crowd” then does beat feet out of town …

And the smoke clears …

Everybody then puts their thumbs back into their mouths …

Or wherever …

And we all forget that the “STEAMROLLER” and OUR state legislature just SUBVERTED our constitutional processes, blatantly, and right in our faces, as well …

And then, having forgotten the minute after the press releases are published that they are openly lying to us, after having just subverted OUR government, they are free to just keep on screwing us and screwing us and screwing us, and they do ….

For at least 20 years now, and they just did it to us again, yesterday and the day before ….

Because there is no disincentive not to do so, especially when we all just suck up this crap that is spewing from the mouths of the “STEAMROLLER”, Sheldon Silver and Malcolm “THE MOUTHPIECE” Smith in these various press releases that have just been posted in here in the last so many hours ….

The budget process was not simply flawed …

To the contrary, it was done in an apparent intentional un-lawful and un-constitutional manner that now establishes un-lawful and un-constitutional conduct by this governor with the connivance of this legislature as the “NORM” here in NYS ….

Which is the death-blow to our constitution and our BILL OF RIGHTS that the special interests buying and selling our legislature and the services of the “STEAMROLLER” every business day of the week desires ….

And so ….

By the editors of this newspaper not calling a spade by what it actually is, but passing it off instead as merely another card in a deck of many, they do not fulfill the “purposes” of a newspaper as editor Rex Smith would have us believe that they are ….

A real source of fact, truth and exposition of government corruption and subversion of OUR democratic processes here in NYS …

And so …

I have read the comment by the man they call the “Cowboy”, where he says that you people have no control over Rex Smith, and I accept that ….

But I would appreciate this post being posted in here, so at least my feelings on this issue can be made known to other concerned citizens of this state who take the time to read this BLOG …

Which is one of the few places where one get get an opportunity to see what real people out here in the countryside of NYS are really thinking …

About the absolute stink of what goes on down in Albany, IN OUR NAME, and on OUR DIME …

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4285#comments

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION BLOG

"Plot thickens in ‘Intimigate’"

March 30, 2007 at 12:32 pm by Tim Blydenburgh

A Rensselaer County judge is poised to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate allegations the GOP used city offices and equipment for campaign purposes.

Some have dubbed the scandal “Intimigate.”

Former county employee Colleen Regan, who once served as Sand Lake town supervisor, has said she was used to record an attack message at City Hall in 2005 to be used against Democrats in the elections that year.

The messages were phoned to the homes of some voters.

Regan’s affidavit said that County Legislature Majority Leader Robert Mirch, R-Troy, picked her up in a city vehicle and took her to City Hall.

In the message, she was told to pretend to be a woman named Tonya and record a message that one Democratic candidate stole money and another made sexual advances toward the fictitious woman.

Regan, in her March 13 complaint filed with the state Division of Human Rights, also alleged sexual harassment, saying she lost her job with the Republican majority of the County Legislature on Oct. 26 after resisting a supervisor’s sexual advances.

“These allegations include the use of county and city personnel and resources to engage in political activity which included the recording of two telephone messages used to fraudulently influence the outcome of an election in the city of Troy,” County Legislature Minority Leader Virginia O’Brien said Tuesday in her letter to District Attorney Patricia DeAngelis in asking for a investigation.

Mirch said the incident never happened and Regan is a disgruntled ex-employee.

DeAngelis handed the matter over to Judge Patrick McGrath who said this morning he had yet to appoint a special prosecutor.

– Bob Gardinier

Comment by John Galt — March 30, 2007 @ 8:01 pm

With respect to Bobby Mirch and these allegations above here which include “the use of county and city personnel and resources to engage in political activity to fraudulently influence the outcome of an election in the city of Troy,” at p.455 of a 600-plus page RECORD on file with the 2d Circuit Court of Appeals in NYC, there is a July 13, 2004 letter on “Chambers of the County Judge” stationary, signed by Hon. Patrick J. McGrath, County Judge, which reads in relevant part as follows:

“This will acknowledge the court’s receipt of your letter dated July 9, 2004, and the attachments thereto, all of which I have reviewed.”

“Needless to say, your allegations are disturbing, especially as they encompass potential federal, as well as state, criminal charges, in that they include, among others, an allegation of false imprisonment in a federal facility, Stratton VA Medical Center.”

This letter from Judge McGrath refers to an incident that happened on August 22, 2001 where the former Rensselaer County Environmental Health Director was “seized” in the lobby of the Stratton VA Hospital emergency room based on a fraudulent “involuntary psychiatric commitment order” that originated at Samaritan Hospital in Troy, and was then faxed to the Rensselaer County Office Building, which was “locked down” at the time, and the Office of the Rensselaer County District Attorney, from whence it made its way via fax over to the VA Police at Stratton VA Hospital, where it caused this former engineer to be taken into custody and incarcerated in the secure mental facility of the Stratton VA as an alleged “dangerous mental patient” …

Rensselaer County personnel were used to secure this fraudulent psychiatric commitment order, and to stage the bogus “lock-down”, which was witnessed by scores of people entering the lobby of the Rensselaer County Office Building on August 22, 2001, where Bobby Mirch was noted as being “in attendance” ….

That letter from Judge McGrath was simply “blown off” by the Office of the Rensselaer County District Attorney and the Office of the NYS Attorney General, and no one involved in that episode from the county staff ever had to face any charges, despite Judge McGrath’s stated concerns about violations of federal and state criminal statutes ….

Funny how it all goes, isn’t it?

And so …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/localpolitics/?p=25#comments

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG

"Final Bills Get Messages"[/size]

April 1, 2007 at 10:34 am by James M. Odato

The final bills needed to adopt a budget received the messages of necessity from Gov. Eliot Spitzer and both chambers began the speech-making prior to passing the outstanding spending legislation on a $121 billion plan.

Assembly Republicans railed at the pace of growth in spending and the violations of open budgeting.

Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, D-Queens, defended the process.

“We did have some disagreements,'’ Smith said, saying what was produced was a budget where “everybody wins.'’

He said the Legislature and governor should be “proud'’ of the result.

Assemblyman James Hayes, R-East Amherst, didn’t concur.

He said the result was a “stunning collapse.”

Comment by John Galt — April 2, 2007 @ 7:10 am

ITEM: “The final bills needed to adopt a budget received the messages of necessity from Gov. Eliot Spitzer ….”

Your newspaper would be doing us all a great service by publishing the exact language of each and every one of these alleged “messages of necessity” that are reported on right above here, or by providing us with links to these alleged” messages of necessity”, so that each and every citizen in this state can see for him or herself exactly what “emergency” we were all allegedly facing that required these bills to be rammed through our legislature at the very last minute ….

With respect to that process of using a “message of necessity”, sect. 5 of ART. VII of OUR state Constitution provides:

“§ 5. Neither house of the legislature shall consider any other bill making an appropriation until all the appropriation bills submitted by the governor shall have been finally acted on by both houses, except on message from the governor certifying to the necessity of the immediate passage of such a bill.”

CERTIFYING TO THE NECESSITY OF THE IMMEDIATE PASSAGE ….

What, pray tell, “STEAMROLLER”, was that?

Preservation of your massive ego as a “STEAMROLLER”?

Or what?

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4280#comments

"Bruno's district reaps benefit - State budget includes more than $3 million for community projects"

By CAROL DeMARE, Staff writer, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, April 3, 2007

With the state budget behind him and several key spending victories under his belt, Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno unveiled more than $3 million in pork for his district on Monday, including $260,000 for the Troy-based Arts Center of the Capital Region.

The arts center grant, earmarked for improvement projects, was the largest of the member items distributed by the Brunswick Republican, according to his office.

In 1995, the center acquired five Victorian-era mercantile buildings on Monument Square and began a $5.3 million project for a multi-arts center.

So far, the basement and first and second floors have been converted into studios, a theater, and office and gallery space.

Work is planned to renovate higher floors.

Several agencies received $75,000 grants from Bruno, including the Legal Project of the Capital District Women's Bar Association, which focuses on domestic violence programs and last year helped 716 victims throughout the Capital Region.

Lisa Frisch, the Legal Project's executive director, said Bruno and the state Assembly came through in 2005 when it faced "significant funding challenges" after losing a $400,000 federal grant.

The support continues, she said.

The money will provide free legal services in Family Court and in divorce cases for domestic violence victims.

With 72 attorneys who volunteer and four staff lawyers, the grant will cover court fees and other litigation costs.

Other agencies that received $75,000 grants were the Center for Disabilities Services and the YWCA of Troy-Cohoes.

The Troy Savings Bank Music Hall received $90,000 to fund the first phase of its renovation project.

Bruno also doled out grants to various municipalities, youth sports leagues, senior programs and volunteer fire companies.

Bruno cast himself as a big winner in the budget who successfully pushed for fewer cuts to hospitals, tax rebate checks and more school aid for Long Island, a power base for Senate Republicans.

Republicans lost five Senate seats in just over two years and holds a 33-29 edge.

Bruno is also the subject of a federal investigation into his private business interests.

"My members were all going to desert and leave," Bruno said on WROW (590 AM).

"Whatever happened?"

"I don't hear that rhetoric (anymore)."

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Here's the list of Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno's member item grants for 2007-08.

The grants total $3,042,000.

Agricultural Stewardship Association: $5,000 for Farmland Protection Project

AIDS Council of Northeastern New York: $10,000 for mental health counseling for HIV/AIDS clients and for a food pantry program

Albany Medical Center Foundation: $10,000 for Healing Arts Program for children with cancer

Altamont Program Inc.: $50,000 for transitional case management for coordination of services

Alzheimer's Association: $50,000 to fund programs and services

Arts Center of the Capital Region: $260,000 for capital improvement projects

Arvilla E. Diver Memorial Library: $25,000 to stop erosion of embankment

Averill Park Pop Warner: $9,000 to buy new helmets

Ballston Area Community Center: $25,000 for a new gymnasium ventilation system and outdoor playground equipment

Ballston Spa Soccer Club: $10,000 to continue programs

Ballston Spa, Village of: $20,000 to buy a new furnace for Union Fire Company

Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Capital Region: $40,000 for youth mentoring programs

Brunswick Bulldogs Youth Football & Cheerleading: $5,000 to purchase equipment

Brunswick Girls Softball: $7,500 to purchase uniforms and equipment

Brunswick Little League: $10,000 to purchase uniforms and equipment

Brunswick, Town of: $15,000 for lighting project at ball fields

Capital District Community Gardens: $50,000 to fund gardening education and job training center

Capital Region Action Against Breast Cancer: $10,000 to fund education and support services for breast cancer survivors and caregivers

Capital Region Youth Tennis Foundation: $5,000 for tennis programs for low-income youth

CAPTAIN Youth & Family Services: $58,000 to upgrade equipment

Castleton Volunteer Ambulance Service Inc.: $25,000 to purchase communication equipment

Castleton, Village of: $10,000 to establish a community outreach program

Catholic Charities Caregivers Support Services: $40,000 for respite services

Center for Disabilities Services: $75,000 for respite services

Chamber of Southern Saratoga County: $25,000 for computer equipment and Web site upgrades

Children's Corner Day Care Center: $10,000 for programs

Cornell University Cooperative Extension of Saratoga County: $45,000 to purchase two vehicles

East Greenbush Pop Warner: $30,000 to purchase new equipment

Families in Need of Assistance Inc.: $10,000 to serve people in need of health and welfare referrals

Girl Scouts of the Adirondack Council Inc.: $25,000 for Capital Campaign

Grafton, Town of: $50,000 to renovate meeting area in Town Hall

Greenbush Youth Soccer Club: $30,000 to fund capital improvements at soccer field

Halfmoon Fire District # 1: $17,000 to purchase a thermal imaging camera

Hoosic Valley Stampede Football & Cheerleading: $10,000 to purchase uniforms and equipment

Hope 7 Community Center: $15,000 for operation costs and to fund food pantry and children's programs

Johnsonville Volunteer Ambulance Service Inc.: $37,000 to replace pagers and buy new radios

Lansingburgh Cardinals Travel Baseball: $4,500 for league expenses and equipment

Lansingburgh Historical Society: $20,000 to repair and replace roof

Lansingburgh Independent Baseball League: $21,000 for improvements to baseball complex

Legal Aid Society of Northeastern New York Inc.: $30,000 to provide legal services to low-income residents

Legal Project of the Capital District Women's Bar Association: $75,000 for domestic violence programs

Literacy Volunteers of Rensselaer County: $14,000 for volunteer recruitment and training

Mechanicville, City of: $100,000 for economic development initiatives

Milton, Town of: $50,000 to enlarge town's community center

Mothers Against Drunk Driving: $5,000 for educational programs and volunteer training

Nassau Baseball Association Inc.: $15,000 for improvements to fields and addition of restrooms

New York Heartbreakers Travel Softball: $5,000 to purchase uniforms and equipment

North Greenbush, Town of: $100,000 for a water district project

North Hoosick Fire Department: $20,000 for a generator and equipment upgrade

Palms of the Oasis: $10,000 for programs to benefit at-risk youth

Pittstown Volunteer Emergency Corps: $15,000 to upgrade equipment

Pittstown Volunteer Fire Company: $28,000 for safety and mechanical upgrades to the pumper tanker

Quaker Springs Volunteer Fire Company: $20,000 to support farm rescue project

R.O.U.S.E (Rensselaer Organizations United for Senior Endeavors): $75,000 for mini-repair program

R.O.U.S.E: $10,000 for Nassau Senior Housing renovations

Rensselaer County Bureau of Public Safety: $28,000 for replacement generator and fuel tank for Grafton radio tower

Rensselaer County Department for Aging: $37,000 to buy two vans

Rensselaer County Department for Veterans Affairs: $54,000 to buy a handicapped-accessible van

Rensselaer County Industrial Development Agency: $20,000 for a sewer line extension

Rensselaer County Soil and Water Conservation District: $25,000 to upgrade the district's conservation field vehicle

Roarke Center: $20,000 to fund emergency assistance programs

Sand Lake, Town of: $25,000 for handicapped equipment and improvements to Town Park

Saratoga Bridges: $50,000 for family support services programs

Saratoga County district attorney's office: $50,000 for training programs and seminars

Saratoga Lake Protection & Improvement District: $30,000 for Eurasian Milfoil Project

Saratoga P.L.A.N: $100,000 for trail improvements and connections in Malta and Luther Forest

Saratoga, Town of: $15,000 to purchase communication and training equipment

Schodack Landing Fire Company: $15,000 to replace fire hoses

Schodack, Town of: $20,000 to fund emergency access systems

Sexual Assault & Crime Victims Assistance Program: $75,000 to fund sexual assault prevention and intervention programs

Shenendehowa Senior Citizens Inc.: $40,000 to fund Care Links Program for seniors

Soldier's Heart: $25,000 to fund outreach programs for soldiers returning from war

South Glens Falls, Village of: $25,000 for improvements to Coopers Cave

South Troy Little League: $15,000 to construct a T-ball field, dugouts and bleachers

Southern Rensselaer County Baseball Association: $10,000 to purchase a new septic system

Spring Youth Baseball Organization: $30,000 to make safety upgrades, buy backdrops for home plate and pave

St. Paul's Center: $25,000 to fund programs for homeless mothers and children transitioning to housing

Sunnyside Center: $50,000 for after-school and summer youth programs

To Life!: $50,000 to fund Greater Access Through Education

Troy Boys and Girls Club: $50,000 to renovate Camp Barker facilities

Troy Central Little League: $10,000 to replace a fenced-in backstop for home plate

Troy Flag Day Parade Committee: $10,000 for 40th annual parade costs

Troy Savings Bank Music Hall: $90,000 to fund phase one of renovation project

Twin Town Senior Baseball Club Inc.: $15,000 to construct practice cages and improve field

Unity House: $45,000 to fund Unity House Law Project serving domestic violence victims

W.B. Neilson Hose Company No. 4, Mechanicville Fire Department: $22,000 to purchase new firefighting equipment

Waterford Fordians Summer Baseball League: $20,000 to purchase a new batting cage, uniforms and equipment, and for field improvements

Waterford Rescue Squad: $5,000 for two new stair chairs for patient transport

Waterford Town Police Department: $10,000 to purchase four new automated external defibrillators for police units

Waterford, Town of: $60,000 for repairs to municipal swimming pool

World Awareness Children's Museum: $50,000 to fund its capital campaign for building, purchasing and renovation costs

YWCA of Troy-Cohoes: $75,000 to fund its women and children of the community programs.

http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp...wsdate=4/3/2007

ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG

Comment by gecannonphd — April 2, 2007 @ 6:12 pm:

I do find his letter to the Gov. somewhat pompous.

Gov. Spitzer is the governor and Mr. Dicker is a reporter.

Unless we ignore status,position, and clout, Mr.Dicker is not at the same level as the Governor.

Comment by John Galt — April 3, 2007 @ 7:25 am

As Sallust said: “Only a few preferred liberty; as for the rest, all they wished for was a kind master” ….

And obviously, gecannonphd is in the latter category with this most ridiculous assertion that somehow, in some undefined way, as governor, this “STEAMROLLER” is up on some “high pedestal”, like a Persian diety, Ahura Mazda, perhaps, with people like gecannonphd on their faces around the pedestal of his statue with their faces firmly into the dirt, as is proper of real slaves …

With accomplished grovelers and dirt eaters and bootlickers here in NYS like this gecannonphd in the vocal majority here in NYS, it’s no wonder all these foreign TAY-RISTS have arrived at the conclusion that America is chock full of cowards who the TAY-RISTS could go through in a matter of hours, like **** through a goose …

I hope the descendents of Alaric and his crowd aren’t out there listening in ….

With people around like this gecannonphd, NY wouldn’t even last the day or two that Rome did at its end, before throwing open its gates, so that it could be devoured in rape and flames …

And so …

My God, how DARE that Fred Dicker, a mere scribe, actually get up off of all fours, and make an assertion to “STEAMROLLER” Spitzer, who is so far above us all, that all we can see of him is his penumbra on the horizon, like the light of God, or god, him or herself ….

Shame, shame on Fred Dicker …

Yeah, right, gecannonphd ….

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4288#comments

FROM THE ALBANY, NEW YORK TIMES UNION CAPITAL CONFIDENTIAL BLOG ...

Comment by Roger Murdock — April 3, 2007 @ 8:20 am:

The goals Governor Spitzer has established are not purely in the domain of the budget process.

Those of us who are old enough to remember the years before Pataki used the budget to take public policy hostage know that what the Governor is trying to accomplish are public policy changes that should be effectuated in the three months of session post-budget.

Work to change the programs now, and then negotiate the next budget to fulfill the financial aspect of those changes.

These policy changes can be made in an open, negotiated atmosphere, with public hearings, town hall meetings and real debate.

The budget process becomes cleaner and easier when it is about funding programs and not re-writing policy.

Comment by John Galt — April 3, 2007 @ 4:57 pm

Roger Murdock, whoever you are, thank you for stating this truth so succinctly ….

“The goals Governor Spitzer has established are not purely in the domain of the budget process” …..

Which means exactly as you are stating, NO POLICY CRAP AT BUDGET TIME ….

Just the facts, the numbers, the hearings, etc., just as the process is spelled out in Article VII of OUR constitution, which, with respect to the state budget process, is just as binding on the “players” as the rules printed on the inside of the box cover to a game of Monopoly are binding on the players of that game, if you don’t want your eye to be blackened by someone else because you are a cheater …

I myself have lived through a slew of governors, with Nelson Rockefeller in there at one time, and a bunch of others whose names really do escape me right now, because they were not all that memorable, which I see as a desirable trait in a NY governor …

Out of sight, out of mind, someone who is down there, “taking care that the laws are faithfully executed”, which is the duty of the NY governor per OUR constitution …

And then, we got into Mario Cuomo, with his pet shill, Dr. Arnold Chartock, and then Pataki, and now this LORD AHURA MAZDA CORNBURY STEAMROLLER Spitzer ….

And along the way, certainly starting with young Andy Cuomo’s dad, Mario, as I recall it, a “new generation” started coming “into power” down there in Albany, and all of a sudden, constitutional process went right out the window, and back then, of course, there was really no way for “common people” to do much about it ….

Our voices had no way of being heard, even in our own communities, and there was no way that someone from Rensselaer County, where I am, would likely know what someone in Schenectady County was thinking, unless it so happened that one had family or relatives out that way …

So we were then powerless, because to “organize” people, you had to have means far beyond what the common person then had available, and so, constitutional process went out the window, and it was replaced by this farce which we have right now, today, and what has happened is that the farce has become, “THE ONLY GAME IN TOWN” ….

And those who “play the game”, as a part of their own livelihoods defend the game, especially Joe Bruno’s crowd over here, who in the words of Bruno “constituent consultant” Robert “BOBBY” Mirch in the TU local politics BLOG, consider politics a “blood sport” ….

http://blogs.timesunion.com/localpolitics/?p=15

Which it is over here, thanks to them, and we are where we are right now, with these politicians openly looting our state treasury, and then charging us for the looting they are doing by handing us the bill ….

And people continue to not only accept this crap, but they go the one step further and defend it, except for you ….

Yours is the first coherent analysis of the present situation that I have read in here, with respect to this issue of policy, and for that, as an older person who longs for peace, quiet, law, and real order in my life, and in my community as it used to be, back when we had some law here in NY, I thank you for that …

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4301#comments

NEWSDAY

"AP New York - Republican Bruno crowing over new budget"

By MARC HUMBERT, AP Political Writer

April 2, 2007, 12:58 PM EDT

ALBANY, N.Y. -- The state Legislature's top Republican was crowing Monday over a new state budget he and GOP colleagues managed to stuff with more money for areas of the state crucial to his party's interests.

"Whatever happened?"

"Two months ago my days were numbered," said state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno.

Bruno's comments, during a radio interview, came less than a day after the Republican-led state Senate and Democratic-controlled Assembly completed work on a new state budget that could well top $121 billion once the ink is finally dry.

Democratic Gov. Eliot Spitzer hailed the spending plan as a major advance in his drive to move the state toward a more fiscally responsible status by limiting the growth of Medicaid spending and implementing new education aid formulas.

Others had a different view.

James Tedisco, the Assembly's Republican minority leader, said that despite Spitzer's record-setting election win in November, he wound up being taken to the cleaners by Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, a Manhattan Democrat, in the first budget battle of his administration.

"He couldn't hold the line this year on spending."

"He illustrated to the (legislative) leaders out here and to the press out here he can be rolled and that's a very bad precedent," the Schenectady Republican said during an interview with Albany's WROW-AM radio where Bruno was also interviewed.

The new budget, for the state fiscal year that began on Sunday, is expected to raise state spending by about 9 percent, almost three times the rate of inflation.

Tedisco said the heavy spending will "endanger the economy of the state for years to come."

Not so, said a Spitzer aide when asked about the Bruno and Tedisco comments.

"When the dust settles, people will see that the budget accomplishes many positive things for the people of this state, starting with its historic investment in education that's linked to important reforms - a new aid formula and accountability measures," said Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson.

Tedisco said Spitzer's lofty goals of bringing about major fiscal reform had fallen victim to the "twin buzz saws" of "the insatiable spending levels of the New York state Legislature" and special interests groups.

Tedisco said Bruno and Silver were to blame for that.

Bruno, defending the higher spending he and Silver managed to tuck into the budget for schools, hospitals and nursing homes, said Tedisco was being too negative and that was a reason the Assembly GOP had so few seats.

"I like Jimmy a lot, but it's the negative attitude that has caused them to lose members every time they run and that's a problem" said Bruno.

Republicans have just 42 seats in the 150-member Assembly.

For Bruno, the budget's increased school aid for Long Island and heftier property tax rebate checks that are politically popular in upstate New York, both traditional GOP strongholds, gave him a chance to strut a bit after some setbacks of his own.

Bruno has seen his own GOP ranks thinned in recent elections - Republicans have lost five Senate seats in just over two years and now hold a 33-29 edge there - and he is also the subject of a federal investigation into his private business interests.

"My members were all going to desert and leave," Bruno said Monday. "Whatever happened?"

"I don't hear that rhetoric (anymore)."

Spitzer began a statewide budget-promotion tour Monday with a stop in New York City to trumpet the higher state spending on schools.

Under the new budget, state aid to local schools will grow by more than 10 percent to almost $20 billion.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/new...egion-apnewyork

"And the budget winner is?"

Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Tuesday, April 3, 2007

As a former attorney general, Eliot Spitzer knows how to persuade a judge and jury to see the merits of his case.

But now that he is governor, he cannot rely on those skills to persuade the Legislature, or the average New Yorker, to see things his way.

There's a perception -- rightly or wrongly -- he didn't do as well as he should have with his first budget and, worse, that Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, R-Brunswick, proved to be the craftier negotiator.

Mr. Spitzer doesn't see it that way, of course, and for good reason.

He managed to institute two major reforms: major cost containment on Medicaid, and a historic change in the way school aid is distributed.

So why isn't he getting more credit for both?

One reason is that there were too many reminders of Albany's old ways -- three men in a room, messages of necessity, late-night votes, scarce details and special-interest politics -- that Mr. Spitzer had promised to end.

But another reason is that the governor's major goals are long-term ones, and the results aren't immediately apparent.

Until they are, they can't be fully measured in dollar terms.

But they are great beginnings.

If Medicaid costs are curbed, one of New York's most expensive programs will be tamed.

But it will take more than the $1 billion in cuts included in this budget.

It will require examining the program, what it pays for which services, and what services are no longer justified.

That is a long-term challenge.

Similarly, changing the school aid formula to direct more money to high-need districts will have to be insulated from the politics of old.

Regrettably, that didn't happen, as Mr. Bruno successfully pushed for more funds to be directed to affluent Long Island schools, where the Republicans hope to maintain their base.

That kind of self-interest politics is all too typical of Albany.

Yet this year, there was an even more cynical twist when it was discovered that the new formula would deny Westchester County schools a significantly higher share of state aid.

In the past, Mr. Bruno might have fought to get these districts more aid, just as he fought for Long Island districts.

But Westchester's longtime senator, Republican Nick Spano, lost to a Democratic challenger, and now they will pay the penalty.

How craven.

Mr. Bruno has been fighting budget battles for years, and he was ready for this one with the new governor.

While Mr. Spitzer wanted property tax relief to go mainly to middle-class homeowners, Mr. Bruno successfully argued for sending rebate checks directly to a bigger group of property owners.

Thus, the middle class will get less relief than Mr. Spitzer envisioned.

But Gov. Spitzer may well prove to be the more astute negotiator in the end.

In exchange for ceding Mr. Bruno some ground on Medicaid cuts, property relief and aid to Long Island schools, he managed to push through the fundamental reforms he wanted to put in place all along.

And now the framework for these reforms is there.

Yet the real test is to come next year, when Round 2 begins.

And when it does, it will behoove Mr. Spitzer to heed the advice of an old boxing pro, Kevin Rooney, who once famously advised Mike Tyson to start throwing punches "with mean intentions."

NY POST

"N.Y.'S BROKEN BANK"

By MICHAEL R. LONG

April 3, 2007 -- THE ink actually rubbed off the printed versions of the new budget bills handed to legislators as they were asked to vote on it.

Unfortunately, it's the rest of us that have to live with the stain - the outrageous state spending that this budget continues.

New Yorkers will pay for this budget - and their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren will most likely pay as well.

Lawmakers have fought hard to keep spending at record levels - all the while telling us what great things they are doing for us.

And they'll assuredly add more spending when they return after their two-week vacation.

Headlines across the state salute the spending, when just a few days ago they called for less.

Now many are reading the fine print to find what's in the budget for them - as if it doesn't matter where the money is coming from, as long as it is coming to them.

My question: Why are they taking our money, just to give us part of it back?

It is far better management to cap the spending and let us keep our money, instead of sending a portion back to us . . . minus the costs of paper, postage and all the public employees who do the "handling."

Gov. Spitzer made promises during his campaign - and has failed to live up to them.

Earlier this year, he called for a spending hike of almost 8 percent; now that he's cut a deal with the Legislature, the not-quite-final-budget is up by nearly 9 percent - with another billion in capital projects coming in a different bill.

Pay raises for state judges and lawmakers may come, too.

Has anything really changed?

Well, not the behind-closed-doors process to reach budget agreement - the public still has no real chance to review the deal before it's rushed through.

And certainly not the spending.

The governor and Legislature continue to spend our money and tell us that they are doing what is good for us.

The governor proposed a tax deduction for those who send their children to private school.

It's nowhere to be found in this budget.

Parents pay state taxes that fund an education system they don't use, yet they can't get a $60 deduction on their taxes?

There are some positive steps.

The budget now includes member-item pork for all to see.

Now we, the taxpayers, must insist that member items are eliminated.

If a community-boxing academy is a positive force in the neighborhood, that neighborhood should be able provide the money.

The governor and Senate ignored the howls of the teachers unions and Speaker Sheldon Silver and doubled the number of charter schools.

Spitzer also found a way to reduce corporate-tax rates.

The governor may also have gotten some structural change in Medicaid reimbursements.

But Medicaid spending is still out of control, with New York spending approximately $47 billion a year, still more than California and Texas combined.

The devil is always in the details, and we don't have all of the details in this year's budget.

But the bottom line is certain:

At $122 billion or more, spending is still out of control - at a level that the taxpayers of New York won't be able to sustain.

How will the governor close the deficits, estimated by the Division of the Budget at $3.3 billion next year, $5.5 billion the year after and $7.3 billion in 2010-2011?

In a year when real change could have taken place, New Yorkers - and their children - are left with nothing to take to the bank.

Michael R. Long is the chairman of the state Conservative Party.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04032007/posto...ael_r__long.htm

NY POST

"OFF THE TRACKS - BUDGET DERAILS SPITZER'S REFORM DRIVE"

By JAMES TEDISCO

Spitzer: Turned out not to have the will to say, "No."

April 3, 2007 -- LAST November, Eliot Spitzer was elected with a large mandate to change the way business is done in Albany and to reform state government.

In his first 50 days, he was fulfilling that mandate - delivering significant workers' compensation reform, ethics reform and a civil-confinement law for the most dangerous sex predators.

But the budget process just knocked the reform train off the tracks.

This record $122 billion budget spends too much, borrows too much, taxes too much and reforms too little.

And the process of putting it together was even worse - behind closed doors and at the last minute.

Lawmakers were ultimately handed thousands of pages of budget-bill copy to read minutes before they were expected to vote.

The paper was literally hot off the press.

If ever an area of New York state government was in critical need of reform, it's in the fat and the farce of the budget process.

And it is in here that Gov. Spitzer stumbled on his promise of reform.

In his State of the State Address, Spitzer promised to "rein in spending," but his initial budget proposal increased spending by 6.3 percent over the prior year, more than twice the rate of inflation.

The governor had promised that he and lawmakers "will finally learn to say 'no' to budget requests we simply cannot afford[/u]."

I applauded then, and again on March 5, when he said:

"Until you've said 'no,' you haven't really figured out how to govern effectively."

Yet despite those bold declarations, he just allowed the legislature to stuff another $1 billion into an already bloated spending plan, which is projected to result in a $3.2 billion budget deficit next year.

So much for the hope that Spitzer would be strong enough to pull back the reins on the decades-long spending binge that has weakened New York's competitiveness.

Consider: New York's population is only 6 percent larger than Florida's, yet we spend 60 percent more.

Is it any wonder that Florida has a booming economy and no income taxes?

New York leads the nation in Medicaid spending; we spend more than twice the national average.

We lead the nation in per-pupil education spending.

We pay the highest state and local taxes in the nation.

We pay the highest gasoline taxes.

We have the second-highest state debt in the nation, behind much larger California.

But when it comes to job growth, we rank near the bottom.

Add in the high cost of living here, and it's no surprise that each year hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers leave the state for greener pastures and better opportunities.

According to the Empire Center for New York State Policy, more than 1.2 million New York residents have moved to other states since 2000 - the biggest such loss experienced by any state.

In the same period, state spending increased by more than $30 billion.

For these reasons, a majority of my Assembly Republican colleagues and I voted "No" on most of the budget.

I voted "No" on eight of the 10 budget bills (I voted for the education bills that included property-tax-rebate checks).

At some point, we need to be honest with ourselves - enough is enough.

We need a leaner, more efficient and less costly government.

We need to reduce the excessive tax burden on families and businesses so that we can create job opportunities and prosperity.

We don't need budgets that hike spending at rates more than three times the rate of inflation, as this one does.

Will the governor find the will next year to rein in taxes and spending?

New Yorkers who are contemplating packing up the U-Haul should first contact their elected officials and make their voices heard.

That may be our only hope.

James Tedisco is the Republican leader in the state Assembly.

tediscj@assembly.state.ny.us

http://www.nypost.com/seven/04032007/posto...mes_tedisco.htm

THE NEW YORK SUN

"Spitzer To Seek Tuition Deduction on the Rebound"

By JACOB GERSHMAN

Staff Reporter of the Sun

April 2, 2007

Governor Spitzer is aiming to rebound after a grueling budget battle, with plans under way to consolidate local government, to announce a commission on public higher education, and to push legislation — including his proposed $1,000 private school tuition tax deduction — that was excluded from the final budget.

The Spitzer administration is looking forward to resuming the governor's role as unfettered state executive after spending time as one man in a crowded negotiating room with a deadline hanging over his head.

The passage of the budget gives the administration some breathing room to allow newly staffed agencies to carry out policy directives that were put on hold during the months-long budget process, which ended during the weekend.

"Immediately, the staff is going to begin advancing an agenda … that has been partially consumed by budget negotiations," a spokeswoman for the governor, Christine Anderson, said.

"There's no break."

"It keeps going."

The centerpiece of the governor's agenda over the next several weeks is a rollout of the administration's plan to consolidate New York's sprawling local government, a decades-old problem for the Empire State that is one of the reasons New Yorkers pay higher local taxes than other Americans.

In his State of the State address, Mr. Spitzer said New York must "consolidate New York's multiple layers of local government — those 4,200 taxing jurisdictions that cost taxpayers millions each year in duplicative services and stand as yet another impediment to change."

Mr. Spitzer's special adviser and good friend, Lloyd Constantine, is in charge of the effort and has been in talks with counties about combining or dissolving towns and villages, merging or eliminating services, departments, and positions, and sharing buildings and equipment.

The plans could have an impact on everything from trash collection to school busing to property tax rates.

Next to reorganizing the bureaucracy of Medicaid, Mr. Spitzer's efforts to consolidate local government could be his most important first-term strategy to lower public costs.

Because the plan is outside the budget process, Mr. Spitzer will likely have more control over its outcome.

Administration officials say Mr. Spitzer is intent on picking up pieces of his executive budget that wound up on the cutting-room floor during negotiations with Senate and Assembly leaders.

Ms. Anderson said Mr. Spitzer would renew a push for a bill that would give families a $1,000-per-child tax deduction — worth on average $50 to $80 — to offset costs of private and parochial school tuition.

The measure was strongly backed by Edward Cardinal Egan, who came to Albany last month to urge its passage, arguing that parochial and private schools save the state money by educating hundreds of thousands of children.

"It is not a whole lot," Mr. Egan said during his visit, the Associated Press reported.

"But it is at least a statement of a beginning toward what is clearly justice."

Teachers unions are opposed to the tax deduction, saying its approval would put the state on a slippery slope toward tuition vouchers, siphoning state funds from the unionized public school system.

Administration officials say the governor will also try to breathe life back into his proposed expansion of the state Bottle Bill that would add nickel deposits to noncarbonated beverages and would require beverage companies to direct unclaimed deposits to the state's Environmental Protection Fund.

A number of Republican lawmakers have said the expanded bottle bill is essentially a tax on the companies.

The administration predicted that the deposits would annually add $100 million to state coffers and had factored the savings into its revenue forecasts.

With the final budget adding another $1 billion to next year's deficit, Mr. Spitzer is under pressure to come up with ways to close the increasing gap.

Mr. Spitzer is also preparing to announce a public higher education commission that will advise the administration on a new tuition policy for the State University of New York and the City University of New York and design benchmarks for comparing SUNY and CUNY to peer public institutions across the nation.

During his campaign, Mr. Spitzer pledged to transform the SUNY system, whose reputation he said didn't match up against other public university systems.

Ms. Anderson said Mr. Spitzer would eventually propose a bill legalizing gay marriage but the measure is not one of his immediate post-budget agenda priorities.

http://www.nysun.com/article/51607?page_no=1

NY DAILY NEWS

The Daily Politics

April 3, 2007

"The Daily Politics of the future"

The indefatigable Liz Benjamin has gone public with the good news: She will be taking over as full-time chief blogger of The Daily Politics as of next week.

Many of you will be familiar with her prolific work at Capitol Confidential, where she covers the Albany political scene like white on rice.

As she explains in her farewell post at CapCon, Liz plans to divide her time between Albany and New York City.

Errol Louis and I, who have been "filling in" as part-time bloggers since the departure of esteemed predecessor Ben Smith, are glad the DP will be in such capable hands -- and expect to keep on posting from time to time.

Posted by Bill Hammond at 3:47 PM

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/dailypolitics/

And from Elizabeth Benjamin at Capital Confidential:

Starting April 10, you can reach me at Ebenjamin@nydailynews.com. In the meantime, you can always drop a line at embenjamin2001@yahoo.com. The cell will remain the same: 518-424-0356.

http://blogs.timesunion.com/capitol/?p=4307#comments

THE ALBANY PROJECT

"Revisiting Empire Zones"

by: MattK D1

Mon Apr 02, 2007 at 22:33:19 PM EDT

I came across an article posted a couple of weeks ago, shortly after DragonFlyEye's TAP diary on Empire Zones.

In this article, the Binghamton Press & Sun Bulletin notes, regarding the two companies that received the top two largest amounts of Empire Zone tax benefits in Broome and Tioga counties from 2003 to 2005:

Huron Real Estate Associates in Endicott received $20.2 million in Empire Zone tax breaks ...

Yet the company created 17 jobs during the period, equating to about $1.2 million for each new hire.

Endicott Interconnect Technologies received $8.8 million in tax credits and created 83 jobs.

Got that?

$1.2 million per realtor, for a total of 17 new real estate professionals.

I have seen elsewhere some Zone apologists argue that some tax breaks go into equipment that somehow will later magically transform the area's economy.

From what I've seen, most realtors are kitted out with a phone, a desk, a bad jacket, and a late model Lincoln or Olds.

Anyway, it gets worse.

In March 2006, Huron laid off 21 workers.

This translates a net loss of three jobs, or nearly $7 million per person fired.

Oh, did I mention it gets worse?

In August 2006, two maintenance workers who were not properly trained or informed by Huron about the heating system they were working on got killed when the pipes they were working on exploded.

But here's some good news!

Apparently the 10,000 gallons of anti-freeze that escaped through a broken pipe in a cooling system on the campus in January 2006 has degraded.

Actually, about half of that was contained.

It's the other half that seeped into the ground or washed down the storm sewer and into the river that degraded.

So aside from anything living that may have gotten poisoned as the thousands of gallons of ethylene glycol (refrigerant that can damage the heart, nerves and kidneys) made its fairly quick transformation to formaldehyde, then on to harmless elements, everything's cool.

And besides, the whole place is atop a 300-acre plume of subterranean chemicals left by previous tenants, IBM.

So what's a few thousand gallons of anti-freeze, here or there?

So, to sum up, $20.2 million in this area buys you three fired realtors, two dead maintenance workers, and ten thousand gallons of spilled anti-freeze on top of a toxic waste site.

We should be doing better than this.

http://www.thealbanyproject.com/showDiary....128?diaryId=618

"Spitzer overture derails budget - Insiders say governor's attempt to get funds for legislative minorities stalls capital project plans"

By JAY JOCHNOWITZ, State editor, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, April 4, 2007

ALBANY -- As state budget talks were going down to the wire, Gov. Eliot Spitzer threw an unheard-of idea on the table: borrow tens of millions of dollars and give them to legislators in the Senate and Assembly minorities for projects in their districts

Partly as a result of Spitzer's proposal -- by the standards of Albany tradition, political heresy -- a capital budget with about $1 billion in borrowing was left out of the final budget

For now, that means money for at least one key Spitzer initiative in Albany, and dozens of local economic development projects around the state, is on hold

Insiders from both sides of the political aisle said the money Spitzer wanted to give out -- at least $60 million for the Assembly Republicans and Senate Democrats -- was the Democratic governor's way of saying thanks for lawmakers' support.

Many of the lawmakers backed Spitzer's push for New York City Finance Commissioner Martha Stark to succeed former state Comptroller Alan Hevesi following a fraud scandal.

Insiders in both the governor's and legislative circles say Spitzer was grateful for support from Senate Democrats and promised them money for pet projects.

When Assembly Minority Leader James Tedisco got wind of that, they say, the Schenectady Republican pointed out to Spitzer that 25 of the 41 members of his party supported Stark, too.

It was already known by mid-March that Spitzer was breaking with tradition and directly inviting minority lawmakers to submit requests for capital projects, a move that irritated Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, and Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno, R-Brunswick.

The two leaders were displeased anew when Spitzer proposed putting the money in the capital budget, insiders said.

"Shelly and Bruno both said no," said one senior legislative aide.

"That's crazy."

"We've never done it that way."

Bruno and Silver were also put off, legislative insiders said, at what one described as a "minuscule" share for their majority conferences.

An exact figure wasn't available -- the numbers and the key discussions all took place behind closed doors among the leaders in the final days of negotiating the 2007-08 budget -- but the senior aide said that compared with the governor's share, the leaders felt they were being offered "table scraps."

Further contributing to the breakdown was Spitzer's desire for a tax credit for private school tuitions -- which Silver strongly opposed -- and Silver's insistence that any talk of judicial pay raises also include the issue of increases for lawmakers.

Silver has denied linking those issues, though he has supported the idea of a commission to study pay raises for judges, legislators and other elected officials whose salaries are fixed by law.

Spitzer, several people familiar with the discussions said, offered to have a proposed commission on judicial pay hikes look at legislative salaries as well, if he got the tuition tax credit.

Silver rejected that, they said.

The delay in doing a capital budget puts on hold two $300 million funds Spitzer wanted.

One is said by insiders to be for "Sematech II," a high-tech computer chip center in Albany.

The other, people familiar with it said, had yet to be specified.

Jochnowitz can be reached at 454-5424 or by e-mail at jjochnowitz@timesunion.com.

NY SUN

"Spitzer is a subverter of our state government"

Reader comment on: Spitzer To Seek Tuition Deduction on the Rebound

Submitted by John Galt, Apr 4, 2007 07:59

As one of this state's many disabled combat veterans, and as one who was born here in NYS, and as one who has studied extensively about our state's history, it's Constitution, and its laws, so as to be a better, more-informed citizen, I find myself taking great exception to this statement in your newspaper that "the Spitzer administration is looking forward to resuming the governor's role as unfettered state executive".

In point of fact, NYS does not have an "unfettered state executive", and any assertions to the contrary by Christine Anderson or the Spitzer administration are simply empty statements that border on the seditious, a bold attempt by this "STEAMROLLER" and his crowd to subvert the processes of OUR state government, from which springs forth OUR democracy here in NYS, and this taking place right before our eyes, as was just the case with this bogus budget process, which was done in open violation of ART. VII of OUR state constitution, to be quite frank about the matter.

According to our own history, NYS has had long experience with "governors", going all the way back in time to the director general, who administered New Netherland under the Dutch from 1624 to 1664; and then the royal governors, including the infamous Lord Cornbury, who administered the colony under the British until 1776, at which time New York severed its ties forever with Great Britain when its representatives signed the Declaration of Independence, and thereby, gave us the blessings of freedom which we are to enjoy in this state to this day, and tomarrow as well, through the body of OUR state constitution.

As to the very limited office of governor in the State of New York, in April 1777, the Convention of Representatives of the State of New York (renamed the Fourth Provincial Congress) adopted the first State constitution, and New York's constitution of 1777 created the office of governor "to take care that the laws are faithfully executed" and right up to the present time, that is essentially all that the governor of the State of NY is given to do by the people of this state, through section 3 of ART. IV of our state constitution, and nowhere have we given him any authority at all to just willy-nilly step outside of the "law" and become "unfettered" with respect to dissolving our towns and villages here in up-state NY.

In point of fact, the forms of our local governments here in NYS are spelled out in great detail in OUR state constitution, and nowhere does OUR state constitution give this "STEAMROLLER" any authority to unilaterally combine or dissolve OUR towns and villages.

To the contrary, ARTICLE IX of OUR state constitution, entitled "Bill of rights for local governments", states in Section 1 as follows: "Effective local self-government and intergovernmental cooperation are purposes of the people of the state", and as "people of the state" outside of NYC, we disabled veterans especially take this constitutional language quite seriously, just as we do every other word that is written in our constitution, and after this budget fiasco, where the "STEAMROLLER" took our constitution and wadded it up into a litle ball and threw it into the trash, right before our eyes, as if it and we did not matter, our name for him has become "PUBLIC ENEMY NO. 1" up here in the countryside, and rapidly, through the miracle of the internet, the word is now getting out that this "STEAMROLLER" Spitzer is the greatest threat to our democracy and constitutional way of life here in up-state NY that there has been since we gained our independence from Great Britain back in 1776.

And if this "STEAMROLLER" intends to persist in this misplaced belief of his that he really is "unfettered" as NYS governor; that he really is "entitled" to be outside of OUR laws, free to do as he pleases with respect to spitting on OUR constitution, as he just did with respect to the state budget, then it seems that we are in for some interesting times ahead, just as was the case back in the early-1700's, when the people of the state got together to have LORD CORNBURY himself removed as colonial governor for transgressing on our rights, and in this case, thanks to our constitution, we can simply start lobbying our state legislature to remove the "STEAMROLLER" from office for gross and abject failure to live up to his constitutional oath to "take care that the laws are faithfully executed", which starts with OUR organic law as it is spelled out in the entire body of the NYS Constitution.

And so ....

http://www.nysun.com/comments/18564

"Web gives new forum to vox populi - Advocacy groups push views in the state as messages sometimes overwhelm legislators"

By RICK KARLIN, Capitol bureau, Albany, New York Times Union

First published: Wednesday, April 4, 2007

ALBANY -- Sometime soon, Gov. Eliot Spitzer will receive a petition signed by thousands of people who oppose a plan to merge the State University of New York's Upstate Medical University Hospital with Crouse Memorial Hospital in Syracuse.

The fact that it's a petition is nothing unusual.

But the way it will be delivered -- via a Web page -- is.

It marks the latest development in the electronic arms race that advocacy groups are fighting.

As well as saving countless trees, the Web-based petition gets around the spam blockers that politicians have put up on their computer systems in recent years due to the barrages of automated e-mail letters from special interest groups.

Sponsored by United University Professions, the union representing SUNY employees, the petition (located at http://www.thepetitionsite.com; type "United University Professions" in the search box) urges Spitzer to abandon the Syracuse merger plan.

It includes an interactive feature that allows participants to sign their names and add personal comments, which supporters say lends a personal touch and lets the recipient know that participants aren't merely signing and passing along a scripted form letter.

The proposed merger between the SUNY and Crouse hospitals was recommended by the Berger Commission, which was created under former Gov. George Pataki to find ways to contain health care costs and cut down on excess hospital and nursing home beds.

Spitzer supports the Berger plan, but it has prompted protests from groups including unions that represent hospital and health care workers.

It should come as no surprise, then, that merger opponents would launch a petition drive.

Decades ago, such petitions would be painstakingly gathered by volunteers who hit the streets with paper and pen.

Then came the era of mass faxes, followed by e-blasts, or mass e-mails meant to influence lawmakers on a given topic.

In New York, the Commission on Independent Colleges and Universities brought E-blasting to a new level in 2004 when it got students and parents to send 1.4 million messages to the governor and lawmakers urging them not to cut the popular college Tuition Assistance Program.

The cuts were avoided and CICU officials say part of the success was due to the electronic messages, including some 40,000 from parents of students who threatened to vote against those who would cut TAP.

But the e-blasts eventually revealed a downside, according to CICU President Abraham Lackman.

As more groups used the technique, lawmakers found their e-mail inboxes clogged.

"It's a little overwhelming," agreed Tim Gordon, I-Bethlehem, a freshman Assemblyman who sometimes marvels at the sheer volume of e-mail he gets from interest groups.

On Tuesday, he said, he missed a lunch cancellation note, which was lost in the mass of daily messages.

E-blasts can be downright annoying for lawmakers who use hand held devices like BlackBerries.

On busy days, they can vibrate and ring non-stop incessantly, added Lackman.

"They were used to a world where they would get between 50 and 100 e-mails a day," said Lackman, who spent years as secretary of the Legislature's Senate Finance Committee.

"But some days the BlackBerry would be buzzing (non-stop)."

The result: many of these e-mails are now blocked, filtered or just ignored.

Web petitions, though, can come in the form of a single e-mail and can get around the spam blockers that identify, isolate or even stop mass e-mails.

Spam, of course, is in the eye of the beholder, and Spitzer spokesman Marc Violette stressed that the governor's office uses spam blockers that allow legitimate message to get through.

Still, there is an element of gamesmanship here, with advocacy groups constantly looking for ways to stand out and grab a politician's attention, without being so annoying that their message is blocked or ignored.

"It's always a battle," said Toby Berkowitz, interim dean of Boston University's School of Communications, who has followed electronic communications.

UUP spokeswoman Denyce Duncan Lacy said her union still uses mass e-mails, but the interactive Web site represents yet another approach.

Since it was launched late last month, over 2,800 people had signed the petition as of Tuesday afternoon.

To help gather support, she said, the petition is working with Facebook, the student social networking Web site.

Facebook users who live in the 27 counties served by the medical center can see a link that allows them to sign the petitions as well.

"Those students may either be potential patients or potential medical school students," said Duncan Lacy.

And, she added, "We're not killing as many trees."

Rick Karlin can be reached at 454-5758 or by e-mail at rkarlin@timesunion.com.

"April 4, 2007 - New York Voters Say 'Steamroller' Has Sputtered, Quinnipiac University Poll Finds; More Say State Budget Deal Was Too Costly"

New York State voters give Gov. Eliot Spitzer a 48 - 27 percent approval rating, with 25 percent undecided, and say 47 - 36 percent that his "Steamroller Style" is good for the people, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

These numbers are down from a 61 - 11 percent approval for Gov. Spitzer in a February 13 poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University, when voters said 61 - 24 percent that the "Steamroller Style" was good for the people.

In today's survey, 47 percent of voters say the steamroller tactic contributes to legislative gridlock, while 23 percent say the tactic is working.

Voters give legislative leaders very low marks, a split 30 - 30 percent approval for Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and a negative 27 - 34 percent for Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno.

The State Legislature gets a negative 34 - 43 percent score.

Spitzer allowed the Legislature to put too much spending back in the budget, 33 percent of voters say, while 30 percent say the Governor reached a fair compromise.

"There's nothing like a knock-down, drag-out New York State budget battle to take the steam out of even the most vigorous steamroller."

"Budget stories dominated the media and Gov. Eliot Spitzer's job approval numbers sagged, " said Maurice Carroll, Director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

"On the budget, did Gov. Spitzer cave or win a 'fair compromise?' Slightly more voters say he gave away too much."

"The Governor is still some sort of steamroller, New Yorkers think, but they doubt that the tactic is working."

"Men still think it's a good idea."

"Women, less so," Carroll added.

Other legislators are more involved in the budget process, 36 percent of New York State voters say, while 32 percent say the practice continues of "three men in a room" making all the decisions.

"Remember how, during the campaign for governor, we heard that Albany's infamous 'rule of three' would end?"

"A lot of New Yorkers think it's still in place," Carroll said.

Voters approve 45 - 30 percent of the way Spitzer is handling the state budget, but disapprove 46 - 31 percent of the way he is handling health care.

Of the 81 percent of voters who heard at least a little about Spitzer's proposed restructuring of health care funding, 39 percent oppose it while 36 percent support it.

And voters say 64 - 28 percent that proposed cuts or freezes in health care spending will endanger the quality of health care.

Ads attacking Spitzer's health care proposals were seen by 72 percent of New Yorker State voters, but only 39 percent of that group believe the ads, while 46 percent say the ads misrepresent the issue.

And voters say 39 - 26 percent that Sen. Bruno was catering to hospital lobbyists rather than trying to protect health care when he challenged Spitzer on the budget cuts.

Voters approve 53 - 17 percent of the job State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is doing, compared to 42 - 16 percent February 13.

From March 28 - April 2, Quinnipiac University surveyed 1,548 New York State voters with a margin of error of +/- 2.5 percent.

The Quinnipiac University Poll, directed by Douglas Schwartz, Ph.D., conducts public opinion surveys in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Florida, Ohio and nationwide as a public service and for research.

For more data -- http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x271.xml, or call (203) 582-5201.

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1284.xml?Releas...;&strTime=0