“It is hereby found and declared that the city [of Buffalo] is in a state of fiscal crisis, and that the welfare of the inhabitants of the city is seriously threatened. The city budget must be balanced and economic recovery enhanced.” — NYS Public Authorities Law, 2003
A consensus exists in Buffalo City Hall. The acting mayor, members of the Common Council, and the City Comptroller all agree the city’s budgetary problems have reached a crisis stage. What to do about the crisis is the $40-60 million question.
The Buffalo Fiscal Stability Authority (aka BFSA, the Control Board) is a state government agency established to oversee the finances of Buffalo. City taxpayers pay for the operations of the Authority; $936,165 in the current fiscal year. They work out of rented space in the Ellicott Square Building with a staff of five.
The most recent meeting of the BFSA was held last week. The agency produces a voluminous “Public Board Book” for each meeting. The March 10th edition ran 124 pages including 58 pages of details about the Authority itself and minutes of its previous meeting. Another 48 pages are devoted to reporting about the Buffalo City School District; the Buffalo Urban Renewal Agency; and the Buffalo Municipal Housing Authority. The details of the Book are something that only an accountant could love or appreciate.
And then there is the BFSA’s review of the City of Buffalo’s 2025-2028 Financial Plan. The BFSA goes into great detail about main issues including the projected operating deficit and the current year activities taken to deal with it. The city says that it used $17.2 million of remaining federal American Recuse Plan Act (APRA) funds for that purpose. The original 2021 grant provided $331.4 million. The city has used more than half of that money to fill budget holes over the past four years; originally, they were only planning to use about one-third of the total grant for that purpose.
The Authority’s staff goes into great detail about the budgetary shortfalls that have existed because of revenue overestimations and expenditures underestimations. Many of the highlighted issues are the same as those that have haunted the city in recent years. The BFSA concluded that “[t]he City adequately addressed the current year [known] budget gap of $17.5 million through the reallocation of unobligated APRA funding to general fund revenue replacement.”
The $17.5 million gap relates to the failure to enact a hotel occupancy tax; reduced projections on fees relating to the sale of cannabis; and the limited availability of fund balance. The BFSA accepts the city administration’s contention that further reduction in cannabis sales taxes; parking meter fees; and traffic violation fees will be taken care of by ”other budgetary variances.” The control board accepts the city’s explanation that they will receive the full $11 million in casino revenues even though there is no new Compact between the state and the Seneca Nation that will actually determine what revenues the city will receive going forward.
Despite the city’s projections the BFSA suggests that there are still $6.4 million in “Potential Overestimated Revenues.” There might be additional negative details about revenues and expenditures that we will not hear about until near the end of the fiscal year in June. That has happened more than once in recent years.
The city administration has reported to the BFSA that Police Department and Fire Department expenditures are expected to exceed budgeted amounts by about $5 million. Anticipated reductions of $9.8 million in spending in all other departments, they claim, will offset that deficit according to city projections.
The control board concludes its review of city finances with this weak observation:
“We recommend the City Administration carefully develop a 2025-26 budget and related four-year financial plan that includes reasonably estimated revenues and appropriations, and develop a clear plan to address the operational imbalance as forecasted.”
Well, we should certainly hope so.
The BFSA has repeatedly punted on the reality that the city is, in the words of its enabling legislation, “in a state of fiscal crisis.” The reason relates to the lack of a working quorum of members. The law provides for nine directors. The mayor and county executive are ex-officio. The terms of two of currently serving directors expired eight years ago; only one has a term expiring in the future. There are four vacancies. The governor appoints the membership.
At this moment the analytic work of the Authority is obtuse and is of little real benefit to the taxpayers who are spending nearly one million dollars per year to keep it functioning.
This column has pointed out concerns for the 2025-2026 budget amounting to a $40+ million gap because of the use this year of non-reoccurring revenues such as federal relief funds and fund balance. Filling that void will require very difficult action not seen in City Hall in recent years.
The rubber will meet the road on April 8th when acting Mayor Chris Scanlon presents his proposed 2025-2026 budget. The Common Council has extended the timeframe for its consideration and approval of the spending plan. The control board will do another one of their reviews. What happens then is anybody’s guess.
Sean Ryan’s fiscal plan
A couple posts ago I offered Buffalo mayoral candidates the opportunity to share their platforms with Politics and Other Stuff readers. State Senator Sean Ryan held a news conference on the subject last week. His proposal does not get into numbers. Here is a link: SEAN RYAN ANNOUNCES MAYORAL FISCAL POLICY PRIORITIES
Bluesky @kenkruly
Twitter/X @kenkruly
Threads kenkruly
