Council member Linda Lee, chair of finance. Uh today we from Mayor's Office of Management and Budget OM. Um and at this time I'd like to introduce my colleagues who are present this morning. We have council member Aldabal, uh Council Member Marte, Council Member Ailas, Council Member Hanks, and Council Member Wong. And I know more are coming. Um so thank you for being here. Um, so as we conclude this preliminary budget season, I would also like to extend my sincere gratitude to the dedicated staff of the city council finance division uh for their tireless and I'll emphasize tireless efforts um in preparing for today's hearing. Uh this work doesn't happen on its own and I want to acknowledge the amazing team of dedicated professionals who make it all possible. Our new finance director Nathan Toth who's over there busy. Uh, managing director Jonathan Rosenberg. Deputy directors Amra Endev, Chima Obisher, Paul Simone, and Isa Wright. Chief Economists Delar Dimniku. Um, assistant directors Aliyia Ali, Julia Haramus, uh, Florentine Kabor, Daniel Kroo, James Reyes, Jack Story, Paul Sturm, and Andrew Wilbur. Finance Council Nicholas Connell, uh my committee council Brian Saro, senior adviser Athena Se, and many, many of the finance analysts, economists, and support staff who have worked behind the scenes to bring everything together. And before I go any further, I'd like to invite our leader, speaker Julie Menon, to share her opening remarks. Thank you so much, Sherley. And I want to really echo your thanks to our incredible finance team and all of the hard work that they put into our budget hearings and the work ahead. So, good morning everyone. Good morning, Director Solomon. We're excited to see you and your team, and we look forward to a productive hearing. Uh this is obviously our 11th and final day of hearings on the admin's proposed $127 billion prelim budget for fiscal year 2027. When this budget process started, we were initially told that we had inherited a crisis, a staggering $12 billion budget gap over two fiscal years. However, by early February, that number began to shift with the administration shrinking the gap by roughly5 billion dollars to about seven billion dollars. Then within days of releasing the preliminary budget and thanks to the support of Governor Hokll, the number changed once again, lowering the gap to 5.4 billion over two years. So the story of this budget leaves us with some fundamental questions that must be answered. First of all, what is the real size of the budget gap? And how do we achieve a fiscally responsible budget that of course upholds our city's obligation to all New Yorkers? These are the questions we intend to investigate today so that New Yorkers can get a more transparent picture of the fiscal challenges that are facing our city. While the preliminary budget is technically balanced, that is only because of a proposed 9.5% uh increase in the overall property tax rate that would raise roughly 3.7 billion in new revenue. But the council has been clear on this issue from the very beginning. Raising property taxes is not on the table as to do so in our opinion would only worsen the affordability crisis. Instead, the council and its finance team have been intently focused on identifying areas of additional revenue and savings to fill in the remaining budget gaps. To that end, at the beginning of March, the council identified nearly $1.7 billion in potential revenue and savings, including through 12,000 vacancy acrals for positions that the administration had budgeted for previously, but were left unfilled uh at the end of February. Yesterday, we were very pleased to see that the independent budget office issued a report that confirmed the council savings around those unfilled vacancies. We believe then, as we do now, that those additional resources meant that the administration's proposal to pull money from the rainy day fund in fiscal 2026 could be avoided. Also, in early March, the council's economic forecast estimated 386 million more in tax revenue than projected. uh by the mayor's OM for fiscal year 2026 and 2027, reflecting a stronger long-term outlook for the city's finances. Since then, throughout dozens of hearings to review city agency budgets, the council and its finance team have continued to dig under the surface of agency budgets to identify other potential savings that, and let me be clear, without in any way cutting critical services. and the council will continue to pursue its mission until we reach an agreement with the administration in June on a fiscally responsible balanced budget that helps make our city more affordable without in any way cutting services. So, Director Solomon, we very much look forward to hearing from you and your colleagues on the administration's fiscal year 2027 prelim budget and how your team intends to address the budget gap. Thank you so much and I now want to turn it back over to Chair Lee. >> Thank you so much, Speaker. Um, so two weeks ago, we kicked off our preliminary budget hearings with the uh IBO independent budget office, controllers's office, and department of finance. Uh, both IBO and the controller expressed concerns with the city's economic outlook and shared their perspective on how the city should make changes to ensure the budget secures New York City's future. A key focal point in the mayor's budget proposal was that the administration inherited an under reportported budget deficit from his predecessor. The speaker, my colleagues, and I have acknowledged that the administration's efforts to address chronic underbudgeting and take positive first steps towards a more transparent budget that accurately and honestly reflects the city's fullcale situation. That is something to be applauded and should not go unrecognized. Um, but we think there is still more work to be done to other parts of the budget to fully meet this challenge. To be short, we think there are still several areas that are overbudgeted and revenues that are underestimated that could provide much neededed resources. And these savings would allow us to avoid drawing down on the critical budgetary reserves and avoid a crushing property tax increase. Objectives that I know both the council and the administration share. Um 8.5 million New Yorkers are currently feeling the strain of rising costs with little relief in sight. To meet our responsibility as public officials, we must avoid making conditions um worse before we can make them better. And we must continue the work of rightsizing the budget to reflect actual costs and finding efficiencies in how the city delivers these critical services. The council is confident that there are unaccounted for revenues in the preliminary plan and outears as well as additional opportunities through improved collections and intentional grants and funds reimbursements to make the city whole. The mayor's directive toward agencies to identify savings is a good step forward, though we think the administration can and should go further in ensuring the city's operations are as efficient as possible. And during our agency hearings this past month, officials highlighted efforts to identify savings. While the full scope of these savings has not been disclosed, it is encouraging to see agencies actively working toward this goal, and I know some of those savings have been approved, so we look forward to hearing more about that. Um, the council still believes there are more acrals and efficiencies available to balance the budget before uh resorting to draining the rainy day and savings funds and raising property taxes. And while looking to Albany for help is worthwhile, we must continue to do more to find immediate solutions within our control to address these shortfalls as underbudgeting is not a new phenomenon. And we have found solutions every time. The preliminary budget makes an effort to address some of the many needs that New Yorkers continue to face amid the rising costs of living in our city, such as expanding child care and early childhood programs, and advancing the universal child care agenda championed by the council to help our families, safeguarding and strengthening the city's social safety net programs, and exploring avenues for implementing a more progressive revenue structure and savings. Despite these proposals, the budget still falls short in how the city will build reserves in the event of further federal funding cuts or potential revenue declines. It does not clearly present any efforts to generate additional revenue and it does not provide transparency in the tracking and securing um reimbursements from state and federal sources. Our responsibility is to deliver a budget that protects the economic safety of our city and meets the needs of all New Yorkers. We remain committed to funding early childhood education, public safety, and investments that make life more affordable while ensuring transparency in management. Balancing the budget cannot come at the expense of our children, seniors, working families, or essential workers. An honest, transparent budget will help us protect those services, address affordability, and uphold our responsibility as fiscal stewards. Um, and be actually he's not here. Um, also I just wanted to recognize a few more of my colleagues that have joined us. Um, Council Member Maloney, Council Member Brewer, Council Member Felder, Deputy Speaker Williams, Council Member Lewis, and and Council Member Epstein. Sorry. And Council Member Hudson. Did I call you before? No. Okay. Either way, I'm going to do it again. Thank you so much. Um, and at this time I will turn it over to committee council to swear in our witnesses. Um, and yeah, sorry. >> Good morning. Do you all affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth before this committee and to respond honestly to council member questions? Right hand. >> Yes, I do. >> You may begin. >> Sorry. Oh, okay. Oh, sorry. Go ahead. Yeah. Good. Sorry. >> Good morning, Speaker Menin, Chair Lee, Leader Carr, members of the finance committee, and all members here with us here today. My name is Sharif Sulleman, and I am the director of the mayor's office of management and budget. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today about the preliminary budget for fiscal year 2027. I am joined today by first deputy director Tara Bard, senior deputy director Latana McKini, deputy director Joshua Goldstein, deputy director Nathan Gustoforf, and deputy director Patrick Dphano. And I'm also joined by this wonderful team of OM professionals behind me who I have the privilege to work alongside each and every day. Let me begin by expressing my appreciation for the partnership between this institution and the administration and ensuring government works on behalf of New Yorkers. My career in public service has always been guided by collaboration, consensus building, and mutual respect. And I look forward to working with the city council in the coming months to achieve a fiscally sound budget. When Mayor Manni took office, he asked me to assess the city's finances amidst repeated claims by fiscal monitors that known expenses were not adequately budgeted. After reviewing monitor reports, analyzing major cost centers, and pressure testing fiscal cliffs with subject matter experts, it was evident that significant underbudgeting had in fact occurred, and it was prevalent across many areas, social services, education, core operations, and more. the chronic underbudgeting meant a gap that existed in the current fiscal year, which was reportedly balanced, and that the fiscal year 2027 gap was far higher than the $4.7 billion stated in the November 2025 financial plan update. Our initial assessment was that the actual budget gaps were in line with what the city and state controllers had estimated. To illustrate the extent of the underbudgeting, consider six areas that had been chronically underfunded by roughly seven and a half billion dollars over fiscal years 2026 and 2027. Those six areas are cash assistance, rental assistance, shelter costs, due process cases, judgments and claims, and the city subsidy to the MTA. Specifically over the two fiscal years, cash assistance was budgeted at $2.1 billion when known expenses are $3.1 billion. Rental assistance was budgeted at $1.8 billion when known expenses are $4.1 billion. Shelter costs were budgeted at $2.6 billion when known expenses are $4 billion. Due process cases were budgeted at $1.1 billion when known expenses are $2.2 billion. Judgments and claims were budgeted at $1.4 billion when known expenses are $2.1 billion. And MTA subsidies were budgeted at $2.2 billion when known expenses are $3 billion. While confronting underbudgeting in these six areas alone would be a significant challenge, we subsequently identified an additional $6.7 billion in unfunded cliffs and mandated spending over the same two fiscal years, including health insurance costs, class the class size mandate, and Medicaid funding. In the interest of introducing transparency, certainty, and less risk in the budget process, we took the issue of underbudgeting head-on, which meant that we needed to solve for unprecedented levels of expense. In total, the preliminary budget includes roughly $14 billion in agency expense changes over two fiscal years, a staggering amount for the opening salvo in any given budget cycle. Inclusion of this level of necessary funding left very little room for programmatic needs. In fact, just 4% or $576 million was invested in core agency operational needs, including, for example, an additional 100 million for the snow budget, $5 million for warming centers and shelter outreach, and almost $24 million for mobile outreach units to help New Yorkers suffering from mental illness. and $54 million to triple baseline funding for HAS's community food connection program. Expense additions of this magnitude required a multifaceted approach to fulfill our chartermandated responsibility to balance fiscal years 2026 and 2027. In addition to recognizing additional tax revenue supported by record- high Wall Street profits and in line with the state's revenue projections, the mayor initiated an aggressive savings plan that will generate 1.7 billion in savings over fiscal years 2026 and 2027 without risking cuts to services that New Yorkers need and expect. The savings effort is driven by executive order 12, which mayor Mamani signed on January 29th. Under the order, every city agency was required to designate a chief a current employee as its chief savings officer who would submit a savings plan to my office and to the first deputy mayor by March 20th. As the mayor announced this morning, agencies submitted their proposals last Friday, identifying more than $1.7 billion in savings, and the city hall and OM teams have begun a comprehensive review of these proposals to validate the savings they will produce. The review underway group savings into five categories. Efficiencies and public services, contracting efficiencies, technology modernization, space consolidation and lease management, and financial adjustments and new revenue. The work of the chief savings officers will not end with this initial submission. This will be an ongoing initiative with savings officers reporting on updates and new proposals every six months. Also included in the $1.7 billion savings initiative is a vacancy alignment exercise which will balance the need for savings with the removal of hiring restraints constraints that had largely been in place since COVID and hampered agency hiring efforts. Many agencies have indicated that they prefer this approach which supports effective agency operations over the slow and cumbersome process that had governed hiring procedures for years. We have also taken several other standard budget actions such as drawing down current fiscal year general and capital stabilization reserves, reestimating prior year payables, and recognizing small savings in certain areas such as pension administration costs. State actions have also helped reduce the gap. Governor Hokll's executive budget included additional child care voucher funding, foundation aid, and decoupling of certain corporate tax provisions from HR1. As announced the day before we released the preliminary budget, the governor's 30-day amendments also included an additional $1.5 billion in additional assistance, including $500 million in one-time unrestricted aid, a restoration of higher reimbursement rates for public health costs, and a reversal of the sales tax intercept for distressed hospitals. We thank the governor for this timely assistance and look forward to the inclusion of this muchneeded assistance in the enacted state budget. Yet, despite the higher revenue forecast, savings, and standard budget actions and state assistance committed so far, we still faced a $5.4 billion shortfall to balance the preliminary budget as required by law. To address that significant shortfall, we proposed a suite of options for consideration by our state partners, including increased taxes on the most profitable corporations, higher transaction taxes on high value properties, and the reversal of various cuts and cost shifts that have reduced state funding over the years. The options we advance seek to reconcile the imbalance of payments between New York City and New York State. The mayor has made the case for recalibrating the city state fiscal relationship, citing that New Yorkers contribute 54.5% of state revenue but only receive 40.5% back. By ending the drain, some of the resources we send to the state would be returned to New York City and used to support critical cash strapped programs and services. Conversations with our state partners are ongoing and we are encouraged by the Senate and Assembly One House budgets, each of which includes a suite of options that equal approximately $5 billion in additional assistance for the city. We thank both houses for advancing these proposals and look forward to working with them as well as the governor and her team on an enacted state budget that addresses the city's fiscal challenges. Now, I would like to share details about the fiscal year 2027 preliminary budget. The preliminary budget presented on February 17th balances fiscal year 2026 at $122 billion and fiscal year 27 at 127 billion. Outyear gaps are projected to be $6.7 billion, $6.8 8 billion and $7.1 billion in fiscal years 2028 through 2030 respectively. To fulfill our chartermandated obligation to balance fiscal years 2026 and 2027 with concrete actions, we were constrained to close the remaining 5.4 billion gap through an additional reserve draw down and an increase to a the average property tax rate from 12.283% 283% to 13.450%. To be clear, these gap closing measures are a last resort proposals born out of necessity and the type of responsible fiscal stewardship this inherited budgetary challenge requires. Our administration is committed to rebuilding and maintaining high levels of reserves to ensure that we can weather an economic downturn. Accordingly, the financial plan replenishes the rainy day fund and retiree health benefits trust fund in fiscal year 2028. Moreover, rather than increase property taxes, our administration wants to finally reform the broken property tax system to make it more equitable, transparent, and rational. To emerge from these significant fiscal challenges on a more stable financial footing will require the administration and the council to continue to closely engage our state partners and I appreciate the efforts undertaken thus far. It will also require continued collaboration to achieve savings and we are committed to partnering with you on workable solutions that meaningfully address the budget gaps without reducing service levels New Yorkers depend on. Turning now to the capital budget. The five-year capital budget totals $113 billion. The preliminary budget makes important capital investments, including increasing livable housing for NICT residents and fully funding the renovation and expansion of Belleview Hospital's adult comprehensive psychiatric emergency program. The capital budget also accelerates the Kensico East View Connection tunnel construction to improve redundancy in our water supply system. In conclusion, I look forward to working as partners over the coming months to both address our very real fiscal challenges and take steps to implement an affordability agenda that transforms the way government serves working families. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify today. And I am happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. >> Thank you so much, Director Solomon. And just want to also recognize my colleagues um council member Carr, Council Member Denowitz, Council Member Ang, Council Member Delar Rosa, Council Member Morano, and Council Member Wrestler. Hopefully I got everybody. Oh. Oh, and Jay Sanchez. Sorry, I have to say Jay Sanchez. Okay, perfect. Um and I will hand it over to the speaker to ask her questions. >> Thank you so much. And I know we've got a lot of questions from colleagues. So, I'm going to do a first round of questions and I'll turn it back over to Chair Lee. then we'll go to colleagues and then we're going to go back in for second or potentially third rounds depending on on how long it goes. Okay. So, thank you so much director for your testimony today and we look forward to this dialogue. Now, as you said, the agency plans were due from the chief savings officer last Friday. Um, I know the administration put out a press release about this this morning ident indicating that you have found $1.7 billion in savings. is a release I believe uh and when I looked at it this morning had about $48 million identified in savings. Could you walk through what the other savings are that then comprise the $1.7 billion? >> Sure, speaker. So, thank you for the question. So, what uh we announced this morning was that the submissions by the agencies was over$1.7 billion dollars. We are doing the painstaking work of going through their submissions, having a dialogue back and forth. What was announced today were concrete examples, highlights of a couple of hundred million. And that process continues as we go on. So in 4 days, what we've been able to do out of those 1.7 billion plus in savings is say at least 200 million has been identified as viable savings that we can book and the process continues. Are you going to be sharing that full list with the council? >> We will continue to work on this. We will share it. It will be identified in the executive budget as a savings plan. We will continue to update as we identify more savings. >> Okay. I think that that is incredibly important. And do any of those savings deal with um acrruels and and if so, how much? >> So, there are savings that we identified today that fall into the buckets that I referenced in my testimony. Acruals weren't the ones among the highlights that we've listed. we know that acrruals uh we will look at and be able to continue the dialogue that we're having on acrruals to see which savings could be booked. >> Okay. So, the city's budget has grown uh $42.8 billion over the last decade. So, it's now $16 billion higher than had it grown at the rate of inflation. Uh revenues remain strong. So what is the administration's plan to find areas of waste and inefficiencies without in any way impacting services? >> Sure, speaker. So that is exactly the um goal that we have through the appointment of chief savings officers and their work is not only to identify short-term savings that will meet the targets that we have in the preliminary budget the 1.5% in fiscal 26 2.5% in fiscal 27. This is really a long-term approach and that is why the executive order makes very clear that the chief savings officers are to continue doing their assessments every six months looking at long range long-term structural savings. That could include more reliance on our talented city workforce as opposed to outside consulting contracts. It could include using data and metrics to make sure that programs are effective and that they're working for New Yorkers as intended. And if they're not, then we need to invest those resources in other priorities. So, >> well, since you mentioned outside consultants, I I definitely want to talk about that because at the DOE hearing, you know, I questioned DOE about this. You know, DOE is now spending 12 billion dollar of its budget on consulting contracts. Um, many of them to these outside consultants. Uh, when I asked, have these consulting contracts been audited? They mentioned that Ernston Young had actually not the the audit the 17 I think it was $17 million that the agency spent in Ernston Young was actually not for an audit of the consulting contract. So you've got an agency with over 3,000 consulting contracts. How can the city possibly identify redundancies and waste or duplicative services if no one is systemically actually auditing and reviewing those contracts? Yes, I think this is a goal that we share, speaker. I know you've been very vocal about this, as has been the mayor. We need to look at consulting contracts. We need to look at the mayor's been very clear and spoke uh often about DOE procurement. We need to look at those contracts. We're committed to looking at those contracts. That work is going on right now as part of the chief savings officers. We've had regular engagement with key agencies through the course of the development of these savings programs. So we know we are focusing on that and we're knowing that management consultants are one thing. There are other kinds of consultants whether they're engineers and architects. So we're doing the painstaking work to see what is required, what can be cut back, what can be insourced. Can you provide a report back to the council of these 3,000 outside contracts and what work the administration will do to look at are there duplicative services? Are there efficiencies that can be had? That seems to me to be when you've got a 12 billion allocation to these consulting contracts and other outside thirdparty contracts. One of the best places to go. We also found out that 6% of the contracts were actually no bid. So that's another area which is of deep concern. >> Yes. And I know this came up during the uh New York City public school hearing uh and I know that you made the request. We have discussed it and we will work on that with you. >> Okay. Want to talk a little bit about the rainy day fund property tax uh issue. So we're deeply concerned as we've said from the beginning that the administration continues to try to balance the budget by drawing on the rainy day fund. We have from the beginning stated our concern particularly when several rating agencies such as Moody's and Croll and Fitch as you know have predicted a negative outlook if this does happen. In addition, we've been very clear about that we are this idea of a property tax increase of 9.5% is also a non-starter for us. So I I really want to get the clearer picture then of the path forward and why does the administration think that raiding the rainy day fund which has never been rated before is something that is still on the table at the moment. >> Sure. So, as I mentioned in my testimony, we worked um hard to bring down the deficit from what was initially in line with the city and state controllers. After recognizing additional revenue, after an aggressive savings plan, after state assistance, after taking standard budget actions, we were able to get the deficit down to 5.4 billion. At that point, we are mandated by the charter to balance both fiscal 26 and fiscal 27. We do not want to raise property taxes. We want property tax reform and that is what we're busy working on. We don't want to draw down reserves. Rather, we want to replenish reserves and we want to grow reserves. This was out of necessity for what was an inherited significant budget challenge that stemmed from chronic underbudgeting. And that is why the 14 billion dollars in agency expenses that was added on top of the existing $4.7 billion gap that was already uh projected from the November 2025 plan required those types of actions to meet our fiscally responsible chartermandated authority to balance the budget. Okay. We would like to avoid that and that is why we want to work alongside you in engaging our >> understood. Understood. And so just so that we're crystal clear on this, again, want to just say our position that we strongly believe there is no reason to draw down excessive reserves. It will then really jeopardize the city's credit rating. Our finance team has actually done a great analysis on this. It shows that by 2030, a downgrade by credit rating agencies would cost the city about 120 million more in interest over the full life of the 30-year bonds. The city would pay an estimated $3.6 six billion dollars extra just in interest alone. So if the rainy day fund is rated so that I just wanted to make sure that we get that data out there. We're very very concerned about that. Okay. So moving on um agency cuts. So so some of the the budget shows that for fiscal year 27 many agencies are being funded at lower levels than what they are budgeted for in the current year. I want to particularly talk about DCWP, my old agency, because and I know council member Epstein will probably do this line of questioning too because they're down by 12.6% from 85 million to 74 million, stripping 33.6 million uh sorry to 74.7 million. My concern there is that obviously you know this is a very important consumer and worker protection function that that agency performs also by limiting its budget and there have been promises to double the agency's budget by limiting the agency's budget. We really then also uh decrease the amount of funds to the general fund because that agency as you know engages in hundreds of millions of dollars of settlements uh as a result of the important work that they do. So that is an area of concern. And then also and I know I'm sure other colleagues will talk about this that they the budget strips 33.6 million from libraries, reduces parks funding despite calling them neglected. So these are all areas of concern that I know my colleagues will also want to hear about today. So I don't know if you have any comment on that. >> Sure. So to clarify many of the examples that you've cited, they're not cuts necessarily. What that is is at adopted last year there were multiple oneshot additions that happened at adopted. This is the preliminary budget. It's the opening salvo. Uh we are looking at the executive budget and what what investments that we can make. You mentioned DCWP. We believe in the AY's mission. The mayor has committed to increasing their budget. In the preliminary budget, there was actually an addition of 600,000 in uh fiscal 26 and 1 million in fiscal 27 to add nine additional uh employees to help meet its mandate. Uh there's obviously more that we can do and we'll continue to look at that as we compose the executive order. >> Understood. Our our point is just we don't really want to do the budget dance on the backs of libraries and others, you know, vital services that New Yorkers depend on. We think we should stop the budget dance on that and just let's get that funding back in. I want to move on to FEPS. Um you know, the administration late yesterday continued the litigation by filing an appeal against the city council. Um, we are deeply concerned about this. As we've said from the beginning, we believe the administration should drop the appeal and reach a settlement uh that really works to protect vulnerable New Yorkers and that also is fiscally responsible. So my question is why is the administration continuing to litigate this matter? >> We continue to have conversations not only with uh the council but also other parties in this litigation. What the filing that happened yesterday was just to meet the court's timeline and to preserve the ability to continue having good faith discussions as we have been having about what the program expansion may look like. Uh those conversations are continuing again uh uh in good faith by filing the instrument with the court was on their timeline and preserve the ability to continue these conversations. >> Yeah, I mean our position is very clear. We believe the administration should drop the litigation. We've been saying this for months. The council is ready to reach a responsible settlement that protects vulnerable New Yorkers and at the same time is fiscally responsible. The continuation of litigation really serves to delay the ability to reach the settlement. So I want to make sure that we note that. I did have a question on FEPs. So h has OM seen DHS shelter savings as as a result of the current city FEPS program? I mean this is something that for example former speaker Chris Quinn has talked about. I know Wyn has done a lot of studies in this area. Any assessment from OM on that? >> So we have seen a decline in families with children the census for families and children and we think that that is largely attributable to FEPS but we've also seen at the same time an increase in the shelter census for single adults. And so as you see in some of the main drivers of shelter reestimate costs, it's one of the six of the main drivers. It's still a significant significant cost center. Uh and so there are differences in the kinds of populations that are decreasing versus increasing and we think the families and children reduction is a result of FEPS. >> Okay. I'm going to ask I have a lot more questions. I'm going to ask one more question before I turn it over to Chair Lee. I I do have questions about agency hiring because the Adams administration placed several barriers to agency hiring which you alluded to in your testimony including two for one limit on hiring vacancies requiring approvals from OM before hiring headcount that had already been approved in the budget. These approvals, as we all know, caused a lot of delays in hiring and led to a real degradation in terms of city services and the workforce as we saw many agencies uh be hollowed out. So, while the mayor rescended the two for one hiring limit, I understand that other restrictions remain in place. So, are there any hiring restrictions that OM continues to impose on agencies? If so, could talk about We have one of the first things when um I when I arrived at OM was I heard very loud and clear from many of our agencies that the two for one hiring restriction was not meeting their operational needs. So in doing this vacancy alignment exercise, we think we're achieving the balance by achieving savings uh through vacancy reductions and then resetting the PS budget for these agencies and then allowing them to hire up to that PS budget without any constraints. Agencies have said loud and clear, waiting for attrition to happen, waiting for a monthly allotment does not allow them to hire up quickly and be nimble enough to meet New Yorkers needs on services. So, uh, the absolute commitment is to is to eliminate the two for one. We're going through the exercise now of aligning the PS budgets and making sure agencies know when they can h what they can hire up to. >> Okay. I have a number of more questions. I have one last question before I pass it to Chair Lee. So, when we had the budget hearings from agencies, numerous agencies reported at their respective budget hearing that they are still bound by the two for one hiring restrictions. So why are agencies still under the restriction when you know the administration indicate it was lifted? So there's like real confusion around that. >> Yes. What I what we are doing now is doing the painstaking work of trying to establish the correct PS budget for agencies to be able to hire up because frankly what has occurred over several several years is a misalignment between vacancies that exist and the PS budgets that are available. uh to be able to hire employees. We are looking to uh with a fine tooth comb understand the vacancies and understand the PS budget changes that have occurred and then set the PS budget and allow them to hire. And last thing before I pass it to Chair Lee, so at a time when agencies are saying they're stretched, thin, I I do want to ask you a question about the IBO report yesterday, because the IBO reported yesterday that the administration is adding 1,900 new positions, but leaving 12,000 existing vacancies unfilled from fiscal year 2026. Is that correct? The 12,000 vacancies that exist as of the end of January 2026 includes a range of different titles. There's teachers in there, there's uniforms in there. We are not looking to reduce teachers. We're not looking to reduce uh our uniform services. We're looking to see where are there opportunities in the civilian workforce non-critical. looking at that and seeing what's respon what's a position that is needed for health and safety what is revenue generating those kinds of specific details to ensure that we can hire up for agency government operations but also achieve savings by achieving that balance >> so can you provide a breakdown of the 1900 new positions that >> we're going through the process now and eventually when we are finished we can we can speak to the council about that pass thank you I'm going to pass it over to chair Lee sorry I just wanted to follow up really quickly on that question because I don't think we're saying in terms of the vacancies, just to be clear, like we know that those are not getting rid of line items, right? So, we're not getting rid of positions or anything like that, but we're just saying um for the ones that were not hired under those line items, how can we find the savings there? So, the 1900 new positions, I'd be curious to see if in that 1900 um for example, DCWP has a lot more work that you know they're going to have to do. Same thing with um DOB. And so, does that include new inspectors? DOI is going to hire I think new attorneys. Um so does that 1900 if you could get back to us on uh what those items are because I know that when we did the um when I attended a lot of the agency um briefings they did mention that you know they're planning on hiring new positions and so I guess my question is is that to replace current line item staff that are already existing or is it just adding on top of that? So >> they are hiring up on the vacancies once the PS budget is established >> running parallel to that will be our normal exercise for new needs as part of the executive budget. >> Right. >> So a lot of what you've heard from the agencies clearly we're hearing too in terms of new need submission requests and that'll take its normal natural course in developing the executive budget. >> Okay. And then just really quickly because I just assumed that the two for one had already gotten into place but then I realized very quickly in the hearings that it hasn't happened yet. And so do you know what the timeline for that is? >> It is coming soon because we are looking through to make sure we're giving agencies the correct budget. Once you have your correct PS budget that you can hire up to. It's not like you have to wait for attrition. The two for one is lifted. Hire up as quickly as you can. >> Okay. So maybe >> and that'll be happening soon. >> Okay. So before FY27 adoption. >> Before FY27 adoption. Yes. >> Okay. Perfect. Um and then can you going back to a previous question that was asked, can you um specify when in terms of the chief savings officer's plans when um you'll be able to share the chief savings officer findings with the council and will it only be in the exact budget or will there be regular like maybe weekly updates that you all are able to share with us? We are evaluating as soon as we have additional updates that are ready to share, we may we we may opt to share them. Um but also in the executive budget, there's typically a savings sort of uh detail savings book. So certainly at the executive budget, but clearly as we go along, we we may have the opportunity to share some of those results. >> Okay, perfect. Um, and just really quickly, um, I kind of wanted to go into this theme of, uh, planning the budgets out, um, because I know that you had mentioned, for example, oneshots, which we know happen every year. Um, and there's always oneshots based on needs and things like that. And so just wanted to know um in terms of >> and this is just one of the examples right for contingency planning for example for potential loss and reduction in federal funding um for the FY26 budget for example it includes nearly 9 billion of federal funding uh comprising over 7% of the city's budget and it's decreasing to just over 7 billion in fiscal 27 and in the outy years which is still over 5% of the city's budget. Um so we know it's typical for the bud budgeted amounts of federal funding in the outy years to be lower than in the current year as OM adds certain federal funding revenue streams when they're more certain. Um so given the federal climate and threats um there is concern that there may be some federal revenue included in the budget that may not materialize or that could be or that there could be cuts. So just to give a sense, can you actually go through the actuals of federal funding that's been received in FY 2425 as well as um pre- pandemic just to give us a sense of usually what the typical um federal funding is that we receive? >> Sure. So I think we we know that we're working through with the federal government making sure that we're claiming um all revenue that is there to be able to draw down. We know that that $80 million that was clawed back on FEMA is the subject of litigation. So, we are looking to continue to get that um funding back. We know that there's about 500 million that we are looking at over the financial plan in claims that we want to be able to continue to submit. And we're also watching to see the benefits of HR1. Um and we know that uh for example um you know SNAP which is a concern for all of us and that is why we tripled uh the community food program at HR in the preliminary budget uh by adding $54 million. So we're taking those steps. We learned the other day that uh the federal government uh as well the uh CMS had approved which we know we're watching at the state level particularly on behalf of H&H uh to make sure that the essential plan um that those funds did not need to move into the general budget but that that that will continue and I think CMS approved that the other day. So um that that was welcome news. So, we're continually watching to see what grant opportunities they may be, claiming funds that have already been budgeted. Um, and also making sure that we have the contingency planning to see if the federal uh the impacts of HR1 and particularly the state um handling of it visav funding that flows through the state to the city is something where the city is protected, >> right, with the grants and everything. Um, and if you could give us the actuals received for 24 and 25, that would be great. If you don't have it today, that's fine, too. >> It's a total of 2.6 billion. >> For which for FY24, it's how much >> for I don't have 24. For FY to date for FY26, 2.6 billion. >> 2.6 >> 2.6 >> billion >> billion. >> Okay. Sorry, my hearing is going Okay. Um, and how much? And just out of curiosity, um, because I know that you all are applying for federal funding. So, um, how much of the current federal like what what do you apply for versus what you receive? Typically, the agencies are responsible for applying for the grants. OM is largely responsible for filing claims uh, specifically for the grants that are managed by OM, including the FEMA grants in specific. Um, as you mentioned before, the current fiscal year budget for federal grants is typically a lot higher because it reflects grants that we already have and funds are added as needed throughout the course of the fiscal year that'll be increased in the outy years. >> So, is your agency or which agency is sort of like the overseer of what agencies are applying for what federal grants? >> Agencies are working directly for applying for the federal grants. OM has two roles as it pertains to to federal grants that's not directly related to agency function. Uh we have a team that manages the FEMA grant as I mentioned to you, disaster recovery grant, community development block grant, and that team acts as an administrator of the the grant specifically and files the claim. We also have a team that does the critical work that you're pointing to in terms of ensuring that claims are done on time and working with the agencies to encourage them to work quickly to get the claims in so to to bolster our cash situation. >> Okay. Um Okay. Okay. So, agencies apply, but they do report it to you in some fashion or form. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay, perfect. Um, and then also, uh, is it possible to get an agency by agency federal funding schedule? And I know you guys have a report annually, but is like what's the schedule per year? How much is each agency expecting? because obviously this city, state, federal all have different timelines and when the funding gets released and so when you're looking at the city plan obviously month by month there's a sort of you know rejiggering of what comes in and out. So >> absolutely we're happy to follow up with that information. >> Okay, perfect. Um and then just in terms of this theme of better planning, um in terms of reestimating the prior year payables, um so every year I feel like the uh the city identifies savings from reestimates in prior year's payables and receivables and then also writing off uh prior year payables allows the city to free up funds allocated for expenditure in prior years that didn't happen. Um so and conversely the city also is required to write off receivables for revenues it has you know budgeted to receive in prior years but did not end up getting. Um and this year this exercise netted the city 500 million in savings which is about how much the city identifies every year. Um so in terms of planning purposes if we know that this is sort of the estimate why not put this into the budget for out years. Yeah, I think um we look to the prior year payables and we it's difficult to project a fixed cost because they're inherently unpredictable and we don't want to overshoot the runway on one side or another and then be short when we're looking to close the fiscal year in balance. However, we know that as you allude to chair, that in the past there's been this general um understanding that we're at 400 500 million. Right. >> Right. >> Uh but but still the unpredictable nature of it. We and we want to make sure we have the sufficient information and work with the agencies to understand what is a receivable, what's a payable, how they're tracking, what the timing is before then we put that up in the financial plan. So that's why it's difficult for us to put it out in in in the future years. >> Um so despite like you said the four to 500 million in net savings from these write-offs each year um do you think that the practice of it is something that needs to be looked at? meaning um if there if there are if it's routine and we are continuously failing at collecting some of the funds for example um what would you suggest the improvement plan B >> we're happy to discuss further with you more but I think uh suffice to say that with a it's it's the scale of the city budget and basically the scale of the contracts the scale of sort of the receivables and payables as we're going forward, the eb and flow of that, right? >> We're constantly working on with the agencies to have a greater understanding of what's coming in, uh, what's going out in terms of contracts. So, we're always happy to have a conversation about that to see how more predictable it can be, but given the scale of the city budget and and the contracts, um, it's it's really not something that's super predictable that you can just go on to future years on. So, speaking of um predictability and the scale of the city budget, what's like the typical burn rate every month that the city pays out, whether it's payroll, contracts, rent, all of that. >> We can come back to you on the specifics of the burn rate per month. I mean, I think that, you know, in terms of OTPS in general, we'd have to break down how I mean, you know, 59 billion in OTPS and we'll have to break down from there how much for rent, how much for heat, light, and power, how much OTPS We're happy to provide it after. >> Yeah. And the reason why I'm asking this question is cuz I'm just wondering who is sort of like the central entity or body within the city that is overseeing all of this, right? And it makes sense to me that it would be, you know, OM, but I'm just wondering if there would be a benefit to centralizing oversight. >> Yeah, it's really the office of management budget and the controllers's office, right? So we work very closely with them to understand what the obligations are, the cash flow. Uh there are regular reports that are shared. Um and also it's the agency, you know, CFOs, it's our office of budget reconciliation that's constantly looking at that, working with the agencies to understand what's coming in, what's going out. >> Okay. Um and so so you do have the central role in monitoring sort of opportunities for reimbursement and organizing the attempts to gain reimbursement for eligible city expenditures. Is that correct assessment? we do have a central role through office of budget reconciling on the agencies to make sure that they file the claims on a timely timely basis to make sure that they it does come in. >> Okay, perfect. Um and what oh just out of curiosity following up to my last question. Well, so I know that maybe it's tough to do the monthly, but what was the last um payroll amount that was sent out by the city in terms of employee staff? Um do you have that figure? >> Well, overall I think PS is at uh 60 billion including fringe. Um we can get you the monthly payroll >> on wages. Yep. >> Okay. 60 million plus fringe. So fringe >> 60 billion including fringe. Mhm. >> Okay, perfect. Um, okay. I'm going to pause here and start um allowing my colleagues to ask questions. Um, but before I do that, I just want to recognize we have some new members that have joined us. I believe Council Member Kaban is on Zoom, Council Member Narcissis, Council Member Krishnan, Council Member Hankerson, Council Member Banks, and Council Member Stevens. Um, and I just wanted to let my colleagues know we have Oh, where's >> Okay. Um, I'm looking for the deputy speaker, but I don't know where she is. >> Okay. Um, so just to remind everyone, we have five minutes on the clock and our colleagues did such a great job the first day of hearings and sticking to the five minutes. We have a lot of folks who want to ask questions. So we are going to do uh round a second round and third as the speaker mentioned if necessary. So um we'll do five minutes the first round and so if members could please please please try as best as your possible ability to stick to time so I don't have to cut you off. So with that are you ready deputy speaker? Okay we're going to start with deputy speaker Williams. >> Thank you. Um I have some questions on the libraries. Hello. Um, at our recent libraries hearing, the three systems outlined $1.2 billion dollars of unmet capital needs and summarized for us the operational impacts of aging facilities in light of the hundreds of millions of dollars in deferred maintenance across the three library systems and the direct link to emergency closures and reduced service hours. How does OMB justify current capital funding levels in the FY27 prelim budget? and what is the city's plan to meaningfully reduce this backlog rather than continue to rely on short-term fixes? Um, and then just follow up to that is the three library systems have identified a 450 million capital need to complete comprehensive renovations and address their most urgent projects across the burrows. How does OMB evaluate this request? >> Sure. I think we all agree that we um um support our libraries, want to support our libraries, want to give them more funding. Um we will work with the libraries clearly on their capital needs. Um the 10-year capital plan includes um 1.5 billion in funding for the libraries to support their capital needs. We know that we can always improve on that and we'll be looking as we uh compose the executive budget on additional assistance that could be provided. Thank you. The fiscal 2027 budget does not include the one-time funding of $30 million that had been distributed to the SIGs and CDF organizations in fiscal 2026. How was the funding split between CDF organizations and the SIGs in fiscal 2026? And will OM provide this critical funding for cultural institutions in fiscal 2027 in the exec plan? Similarly, we are uh uh we appreciate our SIGs. We value our SIGs and what they provide to the culture and the fabric of the city. We uh did not cut DCLA's budget in the in the preliminary budget. Um the FY26 budget is 300 million, 177,000 higher than it was in the November 2025 plan. Clearly, we're looking as we compose the executive budget on additional needs, including those that may have been added at adoption as one shot. >> Yeah, I know. And I know that was the talking point that DCLA has, but it's like it's a funny way to say it, right? Because we know we put the money in at the end. And while it is more than previous budgets, it still is less than what they got in fiscal 2026. And so I'm sure they budgeted for certain things that that $30 million at the end of the day is not there and included in this particular prelim plan that you put forward. Um, sticking to DCLA, the arts and cultural spaces are full of valuable data to run the city's creative economy, which is estimated at over a billion dollars and obviously DCLA does not have the the money necessary to fuel this particular industry. Is there a plan to fund DCLA's ability to measure and manage this data? >> We're working with them and seeing what can be added for uh the executive budget. Um clearly that's something that we know is important to the agency and uh important to the uh the cultural fabric of the city. So we're going to work with them on that. >> So when you go to craft budget specifically around like economic development, do you have a sense as to why culture is not linked to economic development? We will I mean we are making sure that we take a new approach and understand that the mayor's vision will propagate throughout all the city agencies and so through that cultural lens we will work with the EDC and work with other agencies to make sure that uh they um have a lens through culture with the work that they do. Yeah, I think it just should be like more streamlined because there are some things that fall in other agencies that really have to do with culture. Um, but that funding doesn't run through DCLA. So, just trying to understand why these funds at large are not run through DCLA. Um, the other questions I have two questions on revenue. Um, what assumptions are driving the administration's continued optimism about the national and local economy, particularly in the fintech sector given global instability, including tariff rulings and geopolitical conflicts? >> Yeah, sure. I'll start and then I'll turn it over to Joshua Goldstein uh to add. Um, our revenue forecast was based on um a record year on Wall Street, 65 billion in profits. Um and we when we composed our um revenue forecast, we also looked at the strength of various sectors and we were communicating regularly with the state uh in terms of what they put in their financial plan and our revenue projections were in line with what the state had put out. And that was even before we got into the revenue consensus forecast of 700 to $800 million more that the governor reached with the legislature. Um so um I don't know if you want to add anything on fintech or >> Yeah, >> thank you for the question. Um I I think there's two pieces. One um Shu mentioned the record year on Wall Street which was fueled a lot by the massive investment in AI which New York City is definitely benefiting from. I think this year, earlier in the year, Bloomberg reported uh an estimated $650 billion dollars of investment in AI industries just this year. So, we think there's a lot of momentum there, right? That money is going to flow through the system and New York City is definitely going to benefit from it. >> Okay, great. Thank you so much, Deputy Speaker. And next we are going to move to uh Majority Whip Hanks followed by Council Member Marte. >> Good morning and thank you chair. Uh welcome. Uh let's get into it. Uh the administration is seeking to fill 14 spots for the mayor's office of mass engagement. What is the purpose of creating this new office? The mayor's vision is to have uh an office that reaches communities that is able to connect government with communities and that is why and really just inherent in its name the office of mass engagement. Uh and so that is really the purpose is to reach communities where they are to share information about their government and to get uh um New Yorkers involved in their government. >> Thank you. And so how can the mayor and this administration with all that we've discussed today justify the need for this 2 million dollar newly created office? Well, I think when you look at the sub offices within that office, these are longstanding offices that have been in the mayor's office. You look at the community assistance unit. You look at the public engagement unit, the mayor's office of ethnic and community media, office of faith-based and community partnerships, NYC service, civic engagement commission. So the budget and funding is determined about how we want to support those efforts and enhance those efforts to reach New Yorkers in their communities. So all of those offices that I just mentioned have been pre-existing and have their own functions and valid functions to be able to reach different uh portions of our communities. >> Thank you so much. Uh, and fiscal 2027 budget includes 594 million in OTPS for waste disposal, representing 29% of DSNY's total budget, the largest contractual expense. Rising waste export costs continue to strain DSNY's budget. And understanding cost drivers and mitigation strategies is are essential. Uh, beyond inflation and contractual price adjustments, what additional factors are contributing to the increase in waste export costs? >> Sure. So I think it's related to uh so first off uh the spending is expected to be in line with the FY26 preliminary budget at 525 million. Uh I think the sanitation department will always say they're pursuing cost efficiencies wherever possible and that is true. Uh work with vendors for example to rightsize staffing at transfer stations. That's one um approach. Um and that's really the most significant uh cost savings that can be accomplished. We obviously have to also always be looking at the contracts and seeing how we can achieve uh efficiencies and savings in what is a significant significant uh effort to uh for waste disposal in our city. >> Thank you so much. What alternative waste management strategies are OM exploring to mitigate rising export costs and what are the projected savings? Well, I think that we're working with the sanitation department to see what there what options there are. Um, I think that we have a range of things whether they're u um that we're working on including uh containerization, composting, etc. Um, and so we're looking at all different kinds of ways and we're working with the sanitation department on that. So, how do the terms of DSNY long-term waste export contracts impact current and future budget projections? >> Again, it's in line with what we have and 525 million for fiscal year 2026. We're looking at the outy years to have some better certainty of whether those savings that we talked about will begin to take hold. Um, in terms of the staffing at the waste transfer stations and other ways to look at our contract, chief savings officers will be looking at this as well. sanitation department has undertaken a comprehensive review. They're looking at this. This is clearly an area as well where if there are efficiencies and savings to be found. That is an area we want to focus on. >> Thank you so much. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh we've also been joined by Council Member Bush Powers and Council Member Riley. Uh anyone I'm missing? No. Okay. Uh next we're going to go to Council Member Marte followed by Council Member Az. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Speaker Manon, and thank you for being here. Um, the Senate One House bill provides an additional 20 million for an affordable housing relief fund to help stabilize distressed properties in the city that are facing rising insurance, staffing, and maintenance costs and non-payment for rent. The state senate budget also proposed 60 million in Mitchell Lama preservation for the city. How does OMB estimate the additional 20 million in the affordable housing relief funds will impact the city's fiscal 2027 budget? Will additional households be able to utilize this funding? We're looking at that with the Senate as the one houses uh have been released and looking at ways we can continue to work with them in these um last moments in the state budget or the last weeks of the state budget or week um depends on when the state budget will be uh enacted. But we're working with them. But I think there there's a subsection of city yes funding that designates the 20 million for capital improvements to preserve affordable housing. Um but we're looking at what's in the one house and seeing if that's something that's viable for the negotiations in the enacted budget. >> Yeah. And a similar question for Mitchel Lamas. Does this potential funding lower the cost for maintenance of Mitchellama if if at all? >> I think that's part of the conversation with the Senate in terms of the desired result from there. That could be that result. Um but we're working with them to understand how this can be advanced at the conference committee tables. >> Okay. I want to ask a more local question. Um, as part of the Buroughbased jail plan, the Chinatown Jail is now estimated to cost $4.1 billion. Are those is that the accurate estimate that you have right now or do you estimate it continuing to grow even further? Right now, the budget is set. Um, I believe it's all of the BBJ or about 11 billion over the plan, over the financial plan. Um, and I'll turn it to Tara on specifically on Manhattan. >> Um, 16 billion. True. >> 16 billion overall. >> Yes, overall. >> But the plan has the 11.5, but specifically on Manhattan. >> I I don't know if we have Chinat I think you said Chinatown. Yeah, we don't have it specifically. We do know that it is fully funded and we're currently looking at any efficiencies that could be in the program. Um, I would just like to suggest that the community has an alternative plan that can save the city money as well as speed up the potential development of a facility nearby. And I hope that your team uh will be able to meet with uh the communities who are worked on that plan. >> We're always happy to engage in conversation. I think that, you know, we are fulfilling the um uh the law to continue to move forward on BBJ, but always sensitive to community needs and happy to have conversations. Uh but the projects have commenced uh pursuant to the law. >> And switching over to uh Nicha, uh we continue to see the legacy of this city continuing to invest in RAD impact instead of investing in section 9 uh public housing developments. Um, and as we all saw with the public advocates recent report where vacancies are now up to 6,700 units that can house thousands of families and New Yorkers who are currently facing homelessness or housing insecurity. Um, why hasn't the administration prioritized those units in section 9 and especially minimized the days for those apartments to be converted to actually be uh stable housing units? I think the the timeline that they gave us yesterday was more than 400 days for one of those units to be repaired and to be turned online. >> Yeah, sure. So just you know on a personal note you know my um my appointment was at the Nicha Pomman houses where I grew up. So Nicha always has a place for me um and I think visa v the budget we've been added you know 148 million in capital funding for NIH section 9 housing. We know that we can do more. We know that the mayor has uh has committed uh to doubling the capital budget. We want to make sure we're looking at the executive budget and understanding how debt capacity we have to be able to invest uh in more capital. Uh so that's a project a process we're undertaking for the executive budget to see how much more because those 6,000 units we want to bring them online. We know there is a substantial weight list and we want to make sure that we're fixing the stock and making sure that you know units are available for New Yorkers. >> Thank you. Thank you, Chair. >> Thank you. Um, Council Member Vis followed by Council Member Hudson. >> Whoops. Thank you, Chair. Thank you so much. Um, good morning. Thank you for being here. I'm going to ask a couple of different questions on several different topics. So, um, first I'd like to jump into immigration. Um, the preliminary plan includes additional city funds of 6.6 million in fiscal 26, 21.2 2 million in 27, 20.9 million in 28 and 19.2 million baseline starting fiscals 29 to expand immigration legal services. Given, as you know, the ongoing demand for various immigration legal services. Will the restoration of the additional funding that council secured last year for legal assistance be included in the executive plan? >> I think that's something we're looking at for the executive budget. I think the overall budget um is about 19.6 million in city tax levy in 26 19.6 million city tax levy for 27. Um clearly uh there's uh a need and we want to make sure we're working with the mayor's office of immigrant affairs which we are um on on additional support. So we're looking at that for the executive budget to see what can be added. >> Great. Loss of that funding would be catastrophic. as we know even the additional 50 million our providers are underwater and our families are terrified navigating a very complex and everyday worse system and attacks. Um in terms of you know our immigration services are spread across multiple agencies which makes it very challenging right for oversight coordination. Has there been any discussion um around uh consolidating a dedicated agency for immigrant affairs? >> We are working with um the mayor's office of immigrant affairs, the new commissioner to make sure that there is that level of coordination. We know a lot of these programs are also in HR um and they're spread throughout. So clearly there is a need for central uh coordination and uh really out of city hall uh there's been a lot of focus and attention on this naturally. So, so we want to make sure we have a holistic whole of government approach as we're seeking how to have immigration uh uh assistance services to New Yorkers. >> Great. and and we need I if we cannot consolidate, we need um the the the administration needs a way to um sink some teeth into making sure that agencies are doing the best they can to meet the mandates and the needs of our immigrant community, which is 40% of of New York City's population. Switching now to SNAP benefits. I represent a district that has been very impacted by uh stolen SNAP benefits. Uh we know that the state has a $3 million um reimbursement fund that is in the one house bills. Uh what has the city done to prevent stolen benefits to address this issue? And have you had conversations with the state partners about this issue? >> Yes, absolutely. We're aware of the efforts going on in the state with the governor put in the budget and also in the one houses um from the Senate and the Assembly. I think we're supportive of the chip enabled cards um to be able to um have have that extra layer um of um security. So, we're looking at the funding that's been established, working with the state to see what can come out of this enacted state budget on that front. >> Well, I I think um you know, we know food insecurity impacts many communities and particularly older vulnerable adults. Um, and if we can not address the stolen benefits, we're going to need to figure out how to make sure that people get access to food. So, it's going to be a continues to be a serious issue. Can I ask in terms of um some of the other proposals that has put forward in terms of savings, particularly your um the the possibility of uh drawing down on the rainy day fund? Are there other uh major proposals that you are considering outside of drawing down on the RA rainy day fund to address some of this shortfall? >> We are looking constantly at all kinds of different revenue generating opportunities. We're looking constantly at additional savings opportunities. um what we put in the preliminary budget is um was was necessary to meet the chartermandated responsibility of balancing both fiscal 26 and 27 and we're looking at replenishing and the financial plan includes the replenishment of it. So if we can avoid the use of draw down >> sure >> if through savings or revenue we will be open to that >> in particular I you have put there's a lot of proposals on the table I think what I'm specifically wanting to hear is are there other funds that are you are looking also to draw down on as a possibility in addition to the rainy day fund. Well, there are just there are there's the rainy day. Our other reserves, the retiree health benefits trust fund which was drawn down at $229 million in fiscal 27. There was a draw down of the current in-year reserves for the general and capital stabilization fund. So those are essentially the four buckets of reserves that exist and and there was a mix of each that we included or deployed to close to help close the four the 5.4 billion gap. And if if I may close that loop, um c could you could you tell us um what what would happen if these funds are not drawn down on from your perspective? >> Well, I I just think without engaging in hypotheticals, but I think that at the end of the day, we have to have a balanced budget. 45 years of consecutive balance budgets and we're going to continue having balance budgets in the city of New York that are GAP compliant. And so we are going to exhaust every opportunity, savings and revenue, working with our state partners to make sure we achieve the fiscal stability uh so that government can work for New Yorkers. >> Great. Thank you. Um, and just really quickly following up on the savings part of council member Veil's question, one of the things that um, I had actually asked a few of the agencies about is whether they could look into something like group purchasing because, you know, with many things, whether it's supplies, health insurance, whatever it is, we have so much buying power as a city. So, is there a way, and this is something that I asked um at the education hearing as well, and the chancellor was smiling because he's like, actually, we're having those conversations right now. Um, and I know that back when I was on the social service side, DFA actually used to do this and also extend that same rate to their providers. Um, I forget how long ago this was now at this point. And so just wondering if you are having those conversations to look at that as a possibility. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yes, absolutely. Chair, I I just just to elaborate, we have the DASS has this office of citywide procurement that essentially is a central requirements contract for food, supplies, uh fuel, um all the things for goods and services that the city agencies might need. So that's a central sort of place that agencies can procure those those kinds of goods. But also each agency and especially with the chief savings officer um uh effort, they're looking at exactly those things, right? What contracts can be negotiated? Can we get better pricing? Can you partner with city agencies to then basically do one procurement if you have to do something? What are the commonalities? All of those things are currently being pursued. >> Got it. Okay. And then um just going really quickly back to the AI question because I know that there are AI um and technology companies that are actually working with um other mun municipalities across the this country um to look at how they can partner with government to create more efficiencies. And one example I was giving at the NYPD hearing was how um I know a firm that worked with uh CPD um to actually uh create a system to modernize and bring online their overtime as well as how they plan out their shifts. And so it created this whole transparent system that really saved a lot of dollars because they're not, you know, doing multiple shifts at the same time plus looking at overtime. And it was actually very fascinating looking at the system that they built. And so I'm just wondering if we can if we're looking at those kinds of options for uh the city as well. >> Yeah, I think uh as AI technology emerges um you know our government just like governments across the United States are grappling with how to harness it in a way that could be more efficient and could be uh could help with sort of data collection uh etc. uh to make sort of you know uh city employees be able to uh access data in a faster way and do their jobs. It is not by by any means an approach nor should it be a way to eliminate the valuable public servants uh that are working for the city of New York. So, we're looking to harness that in a way that can help scrape data, put reports together, have that analytical tool to be able to do that while supporting the the ability to have our talented, dedicated workforce continuing to do it. >> Definitely. And I actually think it's an opportunity to to sort of expand and increase the workforce or or actually give them different types of skill sets. So, um would love to have that conversation at another time, but okay. Sorry. Uh so we're going to move on to um Council Member Hudson followed by Council Member Brewer. >> Thank you so much chair um and hello director. The council was pleased to see that the preliminary plan addresses the chronic underbudgeting for city feeps and cash assistance increasing funding in the current year and the baseline budget for both programs starting in fiscal 2027. How does OM forecast the growth of the city FEPS program and can you please provide a breakdown of the primary factors driving the cost increases projected across the plan period? >> Sure. Absolutely. So what we've done and I I'm going to start and I'll turn it over to our deputy director Patrick Dphano here. Um we are looking at with the underbudgeting first of all about 2.3 billion was added over the over two years. So in this year it's about 1.8 billion growing to 2.2 2 billion next year, 500 million and pretty much as you see growing out at about that clip about 500 million uh through the plan. We see that there are drivers which is the coming out of the need for stable housing, right? Uh and we see that and we've talked about before how there have been uh families with children uh that we've seen uh exit shelter because of of the vouchers, but we've also seen the single adult population increase. And by the way, the single adult population, the payment for that on the shelter side of the cost is mostly city tax levy. The state contributes $70 million as a capped appropriation when those costs are well over a billion. Um, so we're seeing that projection throughout, but but um out of the need, we've seen growth rates, monthly growth rates of about 4% each month. They start to dissipate as we're going uh uh into the outy years, but they're off of higher bases. So, you're seeing those numbers continuing to grow. Patrick, I don't know if you want to add anything. >> Thank you. So, I mean, that that basically covers the point, but the way we forecasted out, like you said, we've recognized the budget in the baseline in this plan. We're looking at 3 to 4% growth month over month. We're taking that into account when we look outwards. The population that is leaving the case load is not very large. It's about 10% year-over-year and we are looking at the the rental standards when we factor these things. So that's where we've we've come up with what we've added in this plan for the baseline. >> Great. Um thank you and I appreciate all of that. Then that's a perfect segue into my next question which is um when do you believe the program may plateau? What we are trying to do is look at ways at the same time that we are engaging in discussions about the expansion, what we're looking at is ways that we are talking about management of the program as it currently exists which could yield efficiencies, yield savings. We're looking at things like rent reasonleness, for example. We're looking at things like checking legal rents against uh H data. We're looking at ways of um perhaps finding different pathways. Maybe they're renter rears that could be applied as opposed. Right. So all of those things could lead to a plateauing, but they all have to take hold and we're working with the new commissioner and her team to figure out if we can introduce those management um techniques. >> Okay. So no explicit expectation um in terms of date, time frame, anything like that. I'm just clarifying for the >> yeah with those we we hope that we can start to get there in fiscal seven and implementation of all these things we want to we want to implement immediately so we can start to see plateau right now the financial plan does not show that okay >> they have to take hold for that for it to show that >> okay understood and then have any programs been implemented to help long-term city feeps voucher users reach self-sufficiency >> yes yeah I think that particularly for the cash assistance those that are also receiving cash assistance there is employment engagement opportunities. And so that is clearly something we want to continue and replicate. Uh because we do have to have that engagement to ensure that at some point uh a you know after the voucher um um is no longer available that there is that pathway to self-sustain. And then um should that pathway to self sustaining or sustainability um be challenging I would say will OM add funding in the executive plan to support services for city feeps clients to help reduce the length of time people remain in the program >> that's something we will look at and work with our new department of social services on. We want to make sure that we have um a robust effort to make sure we're engaging um folks who need to be stably housed. So, it's something we'll look at. >> All right. Um I have two quick questions on the same topic. Uh how does OM forecast growth for cash assistance? And can you provide a breakdown of the primary factors driving the cost increases across the plan period? >> Sure. So on cash assistance, it's really driven by and I'll turn it over to Patrick in a second, but it's really driven by um case load. Uh and we've seen that particularly after CO um continuing uh to increase um we've seen also some recent uh reductions, but I think cash assistance was also another place where it was significantly underbudgeted. And Patrick, I don't know if you want to talk about the forecast. >> Sure. So coming out of co the cash assistance case load increased signific at a significant rate but there's also important component important components to think about in cash >> I'm sorry do you mind just putting the microphone a little bit closer to your mouth is that better yeah >> there are important components in the cash assistance case load so we get uh reimbured at different rates for different case types so we look at the different case types the growth and what's happened over time and that's how we forecast out uh like the budget director said in most recent two to three months we're actually starting to see a flat line and a slight declination of the case load. >> Okay, great. And chair, I have one last question if I may, and I'd like to be added to the second round. Thank you. Um, does OM anticipate needing more staffing to handle the administration for the projected increase in demand for cash assistance child care vouchers? And if so, will more positions be added in the executive plan? >> It's something we're looking at. We're looking at the state and um the executive budget included funding uh that helps us with the cost for childcare vouchers. Now, we know that there may be additional funding that may be coming. Uh, so we want to make sure that needs are met um so that we can sort of reach families to avail themselves of those vouchers. So, it's something we're talking about for the exe. >> Great. Thank you so much. And thank you, Chair. >> Thank you so much, um, Council Member Brewer, followed by Oh, and we've been joined by Majority Leader Abrau. >> Uh, thank you very much and thank you for your clear testimony. It was very clear. Um, I have a question about the draw downs. Now, you've got the four different buckets. I know them well. The retirees, I'm very supportive of the current retirees. They're certainly very active in my district and elsewhere. How are we projecting for them? I obviously don't want to draw down if they are going to be impacted that we want their senior care. That's my position. Um, so how are you impacting if you are drawing down from that or from any of the other u buckets? How would they be impacted or negatively impacted? How are we going to deal with the retirees? >> Sure. So, we we feel the same way about our retirees. Um the draw down um will not impact retiree health benefits and the continuation of that um continues. The payo in terms of what's paid every month to pay that will continue and the the draw down does not impact that. And in fact, we're looking at whatever is drawn down the financial plan includes that being replenished. So the 229 million for the retirey health is being replenished in 28. The draw down of 229 is happening in 27. Okay. And no impact whatsoever on the payment of retirey health benefits. >> All right. Thank you very much. The other question I have is um just in terms of u making sure that our oversight agencies like uh DOI and the special commission on uh commissioner of investigation at DOE which people forget about. Um obviously I'm concerned about 911. I want to make sure that those informations that have been mandated by the law that we passed get done in a correct spa uh span of time. So are you committed to funding the three million or whatever it takes at DOI and I have to say the special commissioner of investigation is only a $6 million agency and it's a $40 billion oversight job that they have at the DOE. So are you committed to funding these oversight agencies? there other one CCRB etc. >> Yeah, I think that we are actively talking about that now. I think you have a highly competent uh nominee for DOI that I know has been uh that will be before you um to be able to look at all the various uh places that that can be supported. You mentioned the 911 records piece. That's something we're actively talking about of how that can be supported and their their um needs just like other agencies um will make sure that they're evaluated for exec and see what is possible. >> Okay? Because I don't think that the DOI can do the work without the funding because they are so strapped. So I strongly urge that. Um in terms of the law department, the plan as you know uh talks about 5.3 million for 102 positions. I think you know that and these are expected to save 125 million in tort liability. Can you explain how the uh savings was calculated? Can you also talk about how these new positions factor into the number of vacancies that the law department will be required to eliminate as part of your you know basically savings plan. And then also uh we're always concerned about targeting the amount for the law department as part of the citywide savings mandate in terms of tors and all of the uh wonderful people who sue the city. >> Yeah. So um a couple of things on that council member. So we are um we are uh putting forward the plan for 200 once it's fully ramped up 200 new attorneys in the law department. And when you look at the judgments and claims budget, um it was I think six years ago uh was about $600 million and now is at about 1.3 1.4 billion. >> Significant significant increase. So one of the reasons there are many reasons why we want to higher up at the law department. Um, but one of the main reasons is to be able to introduce reforms that can help us that can help reduce the judgments and claims number. And so that can include challenging more cases where appropriate, right? It can also include d-risking by looking at all of our agencies and working with them so that we reduce tort liability. So there are a number of different things that corp counsel Steve Banks is looking to do to assist in drawing in in reducing the judgments and claims number and and they will not be subject to any of the reductions. The 200 lawyers are there for a reason and we don't want that to be the subject of any reduction. >> All right. So you think it's going to work in terms of the numbers that you're discussing? >> I think out of necessity it must work and I know we have a committed partner at Corp Counsel to make that happen. >> Okay. Local R1 140 uh 2023 requires that the city have an all electric fleet by 2038. I think we know that and there are certain requirements. So um I have a great uh respect as you do for the new Dcast commissioner. I've known her for a long time. But has Dcast requested additional expense? In other words, do they they brought I think they need it in order to accelerate the pace of these EV purchases? And how do you balance the city's legal mandates with the local laws that have budgetary constraints? We want a fleet, I guess, as long as Mr. Trump lets us have what we need in terms of EV. Um, but how do we balance the need for the law and the funding in terms of the fleet? >> Sure. I think we share your um desire and of course the the um commitments of the local law. We have about $10 million uh per year in the plan for purchasing electric vehicles for light duty. Uh we want to be able to work she I agree. She is a fantastic commissioner. I've worked with her very closely over the years in city hall. >> Not as many as I have. >> Okay, you got me on that council. You got me on that. >> Not as long as I have. >> Council member Wrestler too and all of us. But so yeah, I mean we're working together with her on that to make sure and really we want to make sure at large just big picture second largest greenhouse gas emissions uh right is coming from the cars and so we want to make sure we're uh electrifying and greening our fleet. >> Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. Um okay, next we have Majority Leader Breu followed by Council Member Epstein. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Mr. Director, for coming to testify today. Local law 195 of 2019, also known as the streets plan or the transportation master plan, mandates expansion of the city's biking, bus, and pedestrian safety infrastructure. DOT's most recent report released last week states that the agency only built 20.8 miles of protected bus lanes in 2025, once again short of the 20 m required annually. DOT was also required to install transit priority signal at 1,000 intersections, but completed only 769. The report noted that DOT installed roughly 18.2 miles of protected bike lanes in 2025. At our preliminary hearing, DOT was hesitant to commit to meeting all the mandated requirements for the streets plan, though it is the law. The baseline 5 million in additional funding for bus and bike lanes is a good start, but I believe more is needed. Will OMB allocate additional funding beyond the 5 million to ensure that DOT has what it needs to meet the requirements of the law? >> So, thank you, council member, and for your strong advocacy for our transit network um for our transit network. Um we we really do appreciate that. As you noted in the preliminary budget, we did add 5 million. Um we have our significant budget challenges. We would like to add more. We believe in creating more bus lanes. We believe in creating more bike lanes and all the things in the streets plan. Um twothirds of the DOT budget is pretty much dedicated one way or the other to streets plan. We want to put more in. We want to put more in for open streets. We're able to put in another 2 million uh on the preliminary budget for that. We need to be able to address our fiscal challenges, understand how we can make those investments which are important to New Yorkers. So, as part of the executive budget, we're going to evaluate uh what kind of additional investments we can make. But clearly, what happens in the state budget is going to be a main uh determinant of what we can do. >> I mean, look, I believe that the streets plan is also important and my belief is important, but the law is also just as important. And so, are you committed to make sure that by the exact budget DOT has what it needs to come into compliance with a law passed by the city council in 2019? We're going to evaluate the city's financial picture and work with the agency to see what additional investments we can make. >> All right. It doesn't sound like an uh the answer I would like for faster and for faster buses in the city. I would like for there to be a commitment by Exec so that Commissioner Flynn has what he needs. I'll I'll move on. We had just we had the 12th snowiest winter on record here in New York City, assuming we don't get any spring blizzards. So needless to say, our roads are in need of a lot of maintenance and resurfacing work. However, according to the PMMR, the average cost to resurface a single lane mile costs 221,693, a substantial 15% increase in just two years. DT has stated that the cost of the cost of petroleum and the fluctuating cost of oil play a large role in the cost of resurfacing lane miles. How will global tensions and the recent spike in oil prices affect BT's resurfacing operations? >> It is a real concern. I mean, we have to look at there is still in the budget the uh the target of the $1,150 uh um surfacing uh miles. Um we want to make sure the total um surf resurfacing budget about 259 million in IFA uh plus the 12.3 million in capital for a total of about 271 million. We're concerned that some of the oil price spikes may have on that number. Uh we're watching it closely. Clearly, we know and there's been the pothole blitz and everything that we are looking to do after a brutal winter to make sure our roads are are as smooth as possible. So, we'll continue to watch it and again with available funds, if we need to replenish, we we will look at that and we'll do Does OMBB plan to allocate more money to DOT in fisc fiscal 27 to account for the rising cost of resurfacing lane miles? >> That's something that we're looking at as part of the executive budget. Again, I think that if we're looking at price spikes in certain things because of inflationary pressures or because of oil cost drivers, then we'll look at that as sort of uh what we need to do so they can meet their goal of 1150 surface lane miles. So, Speaker Menon and Minority Leader Carr and myself wrote a letter to DOT last week. Um, from basically in back in under 2017 under Mayor Delasio, he had funded enough to accomplish 1300 miles in in resurfaced lane miles. It seems that the new targets are 1150. Um, I would like to see DOT get back to resurfacing 1300 lane miles a year. Uh DOT stated during our preliminary hearing that to achieve this they would need increased headcount and resources. Uh would you like for this administration to commit the 1300 lane miles per year? >> We'd always like to do more the fiscal challenges that we have. We have to evaluate um how we could make room for that in addition to all the other priorities that we have. >> And I'll just close with a statement. I would like to see OM commit more additional uh staff and resources needed so that the city can get back to reserving 1300 million miles per year. And of course that we have additional resources for addressing potholes, uh more resources to to address the contracts with street light repairs which have seen um increased timing to getting basic street lights getting done and of course the funding that we need for the streets plan. Thank you so much, Madam Chair. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, we have Council Member Epstein followed by Council Member Carr. >> Thank you, Chair, and thank you for being here. Um, I want to talk about the DCWP budget. We in the plinary budget, you proposed an 8% reduction in the in the in the AY's budget. I'm wondering what the logic and justification for that cut was. >> Well, I think a couple of things. One was the uh the adopt versus the prelim and what we're looking at making sure that they have what they need to comply with various core mission uh updates uh including recent legislative mandates. The we did add money for about nine uh heads to be able to do that and also I believe there was a cancellation of a contract that also was no longer necessary and that's why it was brought down. Yeah, I do want to talk about the the laws we passed in recent years and I know OMD's made suggestions in additional headcounts and the reading I've read based on all the laws that council's passed that uh DCWP would need about 321 uh additional head counts to kind of keep up with just the laws that we passed in the last couple years. That seems like an accurate calculation based on what OM's estimates have been. >> We're looking at that estimate. The laws that were passed are important laws. We know that uh it it it really fits into the worker protection piece of the agency. Um and we need to make sure we support that one way or another. Is is 321 heads the right number? We're assessing that with the new commissioner and seeing what that number should be. >> It does seem like we need additional heads just to the deactivation rule laws. Basically the path we will need additional heads. Can you agree? Maybe 321 isn't the number but it's not a reduction right? I think that we have to look at that number and see what's needed. We added nine. We know somewhere between nine and 321 will be will be probably the sweet spot. >> Can you say how much revenue DCWP is raised for the city in 2025? >> I can get back to you on that. >> How about in 2026? I know the mayor just yesterday announced that a settlement on a case would brought in additional revenue for the city as well. They're clear that there's a lot that we can do with DCWP to include um fines and penalties and restitution from uh from you know companies that um clearly violate local laws uh etc. And the mayor's been very um uh clear on his his goal to make sure we're working closely with the agency to protect Yeah. So I I look I mean I think from our perspective it is an opportunity to see those fines and penalties but it's more also about the justice part of it as well. And so we're committed to that. The question is the resources that we're uh uh committing to it given the financial challenges. >> Yeah. I mean, I appreciate that because investing in DCWP could not only bring additional revenue into the city, but tens of millions of dollars for New Yorkers who are being stolen wages and tips and other resources. >> So, that could bring additional revenue as well into the city. Would you assess that to be correct? >> If people make more money that they pay more tax could the economy >> certainly it could, right? The extent of that we have to see and we have to see what investment we can do to unlock that potential for that additional revenue. Right. Um and whether or not 300 is the right number is something we have to see with the budget. >> I know you you know aware that the mayor proposed last year before he got into office it was going to double the DCWP budget. >> Is that something still in the conversation at this point? It's always a goal to be able to meet the commitments. Um, and we will hopefully emerge from this financial challenge in a capacity and have the ability to do so. >> Yeah. I I would encourage us to look at those revenue raisers as options because I think while it's an investment in staff, if you know if you get a I'm just making up a number, let's say a 5 to1 return on the staff investment on revenues coming back to the city, you know, each lawyer can bring in those additional revenues to to help improve the city coffer. And that's what we've seen really over the last couple weeks of of the administration that a deep investment in DWP could result in additional revenues. and we're talking about how we have opportunities to raise revenue. This seems like a clear place where we could have additional revenue sources coming into the city. >> Agreed. Right. And just on additional revenue, I know we've talked about it's been floating in the ideas of parking revenue. I'm wondering where that conversation is at this point, whether it's through residential parking or parking permits or increasing metered parking. It's a good policy question for discussion and something that um is being discussed, but uh there are no immediate plans to uh to move forward on that. >> And do you think the city has the authority to do either a residential parking or parking meeting system under its own authority >> as opposed to going to for state state legislation? >> Yes. >> Uh it's something we can talk to the law department about. >> All right. Thank you, chair. >> Oh, right on time. Um thank you so much. And we have council member Carr followed by council member Krishnan. >> Thank you chair director. Good to see you. Good morning. Um I want to just first associate myself with the comments of the majority leader about our road resurfacing budget. It's absolutely an imperative particularly given the combined state of the winter that we just had with the reduction in the pace of resurfacing since 2020. And I think that it actually could long-term mean better savings for us if we do this now because the worse our roads are, the more controll controller claims get filed and that cost the city money. So I I think we should absolutely have that in mind as we're talking about resurfacing this budget cycle. Um but I want to focus a little bit on, you know, wealth creation in the city and how important it is. And I asked this question to our colleagues at IBO and also the controller the other week. Um, according to the citizens budget commission report, the city's share of millionaires, people who are very important for the personal income tax collection the city has fell 31% 2010 to 2022. And they say that if we had maintained that share nationally, we would have collected 13 billion more in personal income tax revenue. So given what the mayor is pushing in Albany with respect to these revenue enhancers, these new taxes, um how can we justify that when it may be self-defeating to tax people who can just get up and leave? >> So thank you for the question, leader. Um we are our data shows that in 2023 there were about 36,000 millionaires filed in New York City and that in 2024 the latest data we have available increased to 42,000 millionaires. So we're seeing data that is actually showing growth in the number of millionaires here. >> Well, it's not a question of there's no growth, right? There's growth everywhere. Everyone's showing record numbers of of wealth creation, but we're slowing down. We're not growing as fast as other parts of the country. And that's the issue because people are taking advantage of better better situations with respect to taxation. We So, so to be clear, we want our millionaires to be here. We want our millionaires to stay here. We think that we are pursuing an affordability agenda that lifts um you know quality of life here, affordability here that makes the city a vibrant and diverse place to live and to work and so on and so forth. So we would invite um um more millionaires here. The question the question is how can we make sure that we address the significant budget challenges that we have? The mayor's put forward a vision very clearly to say that for those earning more than a million dollars, a 2% increase in the city uh personal income tax rate could help us there. That means someone who's earning $1 million could pay $20,000 to help uh address the various core functions of government and the affordability agenda. >> I think that, you know, it's very clear that these folks are very mobile, right? They see attack situations that disadvantageous, they can leave. And the alternative that was proposed, the nine and a half percent increase on property taxes, which I know the mayor characterized as something that he did not want to do, is deeply troubling uh to many people. You were a longtime Staten Islander yourself. You understand the perspective of those folks? So, I mean, isn't the real thing that we have to do here not to tax more, but to simply find more savings? And so, do you expect to find more than the 1.7 billion that was announced this morning with respect to the chief saving officer findings? the 1.7 billion is definitely something that's in the preliminary budget and our goal long term is to continue to find savings uh beyond that. Um so that's the goal, but I think when we come to the point of to be very clear, we believe in property tax reform and that is what we want to be able to push. I know it's very important to Staten Islanders in your community. Um and so that is what we're working on a proposal there. The the proposal to increase the average tax rate from 12.283% 283% to 13.45% is something that was included in the executive budget out of necessity to balance based on the charter mandated responsibility. >> Do you have an expectation to of of a number a figure that you would find in addition to the 1.7 billion going into the executive plan? >> The 1.7 billion right now we feel as though we've taken it as far as we can go to say those savings without cutting critical services that we all care about. So, we will take it as far as we can go to find the efficiencies, to find the contract redundancy, to find the program uh uh uh effectiveness and make sure that that continues. And if it's not if it's not effective, then then we move away from those and reinvest those dollars. So, all of those things are being pursued. 1.7 billion is what we have now. We can go beyond that, but you're really going to start talking about cutting services at this point. And what is the status of conversations with Albany about property tax reform and other mandates like the classroom size issue, which is obviously also a major cost to the city. >> On property tax reform, we're working on a bill. We're working on legislation that builds on the advisory commission on property taxes form uh recommendations and we're we're looking at other pieces to put in there in terms of targeted homeowner relief. Beyond that, on class size, as uh the chancellor alluded to the other day, uh and as has been reported, we're working with the state to ensure that first we believe in class size and we believe in in and what that can mean for educational outcomes, but we also are in discussions to say what can we do about the timeline, what can we do about the compliance targets, what kind of um exemptions that may be existing, working very closely with our public unions and also working with other stakeholders in the Department of Education. So, working with the state on that and we'll see what the outcome will be in the final enacted budget. >> Thank you, director. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Sorry. Can I just ask a follow-up clarifying question because I know that you had just mentioned um to council member Carr that there was 1.7 billion in savings that was in the prelim, but I thought it was just the 700 million in savings in the prelim and then today or yesterday was it the mayor had announced 1.7. So, can you clarify the difference? >> Sure. So, it's 1.7 billion in over two fiscal years. Fiscal 26 and fiscal 27. The FY26 number is 7 billion. FY27 number is a little over a billion. So in total 1.7. >> Okay. Um and sorry uh we've also been joined by Council Member P. Sanchez, uh Pyina Sanchez, as well as Council Member Areola, Council Member Meie. Um and next we have Council Member Krishnan, followed by Council Member Wong. >> Thank you so much, Chair and Speaker, and thank you, Mr. director for your testimony today too. Uh I have a few questions. You testified before uh about the department of investigation. Um and uh as you mentioned as well leadership coming in. I had a good meeting with the uh proposed um nominated uh uh director of investigation. Uh we had a good budget hearing uh last week or the week before too. But it's very clear that DOI is with such a sacred and important mission that it has in our city government. It's doing a lot and more and more so uh with far less uh from attorneys as chair Lee mentioned before to investigators that are doubling up and being pulled into different cases. Uh and we've got to do a lot to really correct the funding approach in the past which saw them lose a lot of support they critically need um and support the work that they're doing. But right now in the preliminary budget, uh, OMB had proposed an OTPS PEG for DOI of 664,000 in FY26 and 1.1 million in FY27. They already don't have a lot of money to begin with. Um, and I would argue it not nearly enough given the the size and importance the mandate they have. So, how does OM see DOI being able to fulfill this OTPS PEG while also um addressing its core functions that I know you all support too? Has there been consideration of uh of doing away with this peg and and finding ways instead to increase the department's budget that's long overdue? >> Sure. Thank you, council member. So, I think we all agree that we want to make sure the DOI is appropriately resourced to root out corruption wherever it exists. Um we know that uh the baseline budget is approximately $50 million. Um we do have the fiscal challenge that we have. We want to be able to make sure that the agency is functioning uh in not only sort of supporting the inspector inspectors general throughout the um throughout the agencies but also on um more centralized um approaches. Again, the 911 records was one thing that was mentioned. So, we're going to be talking to the um nominee for DOI uh highly competent individual and seeing what uh her vision is and what her needs are and decide for the executive budget what we can do. >> I appreciate that and my recommendation would be, you know, given all the challenges we face to not balance it in any way on uh DOI just because, you know, historically we're in a new administration now. But the fact of the matter is given the extent of of corruption under the last administration uh the level it reached to at city hall not seen since the Tammy Hall era there's no coincidence um it was far more than coincidental I should say that as these investigations continued where DOI was a critical part making referrals to the uh uh federal prosecutor standing with SDNY at the indictments uh the budget of DOI also saw a nose dive during that time too and this is an agency whose independence has to be protected cannot be compromised in any way. Um but the fact of the matter is over the last four years we have seen its budget reduce substantially as it's done more uh and at even much higher levels of government. Uh and uh my stepping back for a second you know how do you envision approaching this? I mean, one thing we that, you know, came up in the hearing, too, was other cities tie their DOI budget to a percentage of the city budget, which prevents any sort of political interference, uh, which I will say is very clearly happened under the last administration, but it prevents any of that and it allows DOI to function and do its independent job of rooting out corruption based on an objective measure like the city budget. Have you all thought about that? How do you, you know, how do you see that or are there other uh perspectives you've all adopted about how to increase the DOI budget over time? >> Yeah, council member, I think it's we're happy to have, you know, further discussions about that. I know it's a model that exists here in the city and and in in in other offices um that are pegged to a percentage of X budget, etc. So, it's something that we're um you know, obviously happy to talk to you more about, happy to meet with you and talk more about that >> and look forward to that conversation, too. And then shifting gears, um I know that our incredible parks chair will will focus more on the details of this too. Um but I as representing the least the district the least amount of green space in all of New York City, obviously the parks budget is very very important to me too. The challenge has been over the last four years, um you know, we've been in a world where the parks budget has not substantially or in any way really increased since we got the highest budget for parks four years ago. A lot of it relies on one shots. Um and that's as I always say, the parks budget is a workers's budget. Um, and the one shot shouldn't be really funding core services, but really building on baseline services. So, how have you all I know this is important to the mayor, too. How have you all thought about um, you know, there wasn't any increase really in the parks budget in in the in the preliminary budget, but how can we increase that budget and move away from a world of one shots for core positions like rangers and things like that? >> Absolutely. the the mayor has been very clear about his commitment to parks. Um and clearly um the advocates call for the 1% for parks, which we've uh um looked at as certainly a goal that we want to get to. Um and we will make more investments in parks over um you know uh over the course of um our our term for sure, but we're looking at the executive budget to see um the financial challenges that we face, what kind of investments we can make in the executive budget as we move forward. It is a goal that we share to make sure the investments are there. Um, and we just have to make sure we uh we emerge from the fiscal challenges here hopefully with the suite of options and state support and the enacted state budget so we can start to make those investments towards that 1% goal. >> Hope to see us get there. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. >> Thank you, uh, Council Member Wong, followed by Council Member Brooks Powers. >> Thank you, Chair. Thank you, director. Um, I understand the mayor wants to or he supports a rent freeze, but at the same time that in this budget, I'm hearing the property tax increases. And uh, I I'm convinced that you increase property taxes, the property owners would just pass these expenses to the tenants and small businesses, hence in increasing the rent. Um, it seems to be obvious. And then we cannot have any rent freeze if we want to keep raising the property taxes. Is that something you agree on or the goal that we have is for property tax reform to provide the relief that we need from a system that is universally understood to be unequal to be opaque to be regressive. And that is really where we're focusing our efforts. >> Right. >> Okay. Um director, I want to be very clear. Uh, New Yorkers simply cannot afford another tax. Not a property tax increase, not an income tax increase, not a death tax, no new fees to park on their own streets. And enough is enough. At a time when the cost of living is already through the roof, government should not be reaching deeper into people's pockets to solve a problem it created it. This is not a revenue problem. It's a spending problem. And my first question to you is that um if the property tax increase or income tax changes and other proposals do not happen, what is the actual plan to close this budget gap? So our focus right now is working uh together really alongside the council as well to work with our state partners and make sure that the suite of options that were presented both on the revenue raiser side and also on the cuts and cost shift reversal side are make their way into the enacted state budget. We are very um uh you know appreciative of the of the assistance in the in the governor's executive budget and in the legislaturator's one houses already that portends a solution and so we want to make sure that we emerge from the state budget discussions on a more sound financial footing. >> Okay. Has the OM analyzed how property tax increases are passed through to rents, commercial leases, and everyday costs? >> The advisory commission on property tax reform looked at this issue and they looked at and they referred to the fact that the incidence of the property tax on renters is difficult to um uh to pinpoint. But there is an understanding that leases, commercial leases especially that go to small businesses do have that. Um and so there is some level of impact on renters that we have to look at as part of overall reform. >> Okay. Um do you believe that increasing taxes make New York City more or less uh competitive? We think that the suite of options that we put forward for revenue raisers, including um uh tax increases on the most profitable corporations, could help, for example, um achieve in addition to state funding already committed, universal child care, for example, 1.2 billion was committed. We thank the governor and we thank the legislature for their commitment uh to child care and employers uh would be would welcome universal child care to improve the talent pool here in the city of New York, improve the quality of life to be able to draw on that talent pool for their corporations. So that is the those are the proposals that we put forward um which we think could enure to the benefit of all who have a vested interest in making sure that the city uh thrives. >> Thank you. I have one minute left. So one more question. Um the so-called rental payment on water bills is essentially a backdoor tax where money collected through the water and sewer bills is diverted into the city's general fund instead of being used for the system people were paying for. Uh why uh we reach out to the water board in the D and their answer was go ask the OM. So my question is why is OM responsible for this policy and who ultimately decides how much is taken from rate payers on each year? >> It is true that the rental payment is part of the revenue forecast. Um it has been for the past several years. Um and it is uh we we um are not uh um it is not uh impacting rates like it has no we we don't know what the direct correlation is with rates. Uh we will like to allow the water authority to keep those rates at some point or the rental payment rather at some point but right now it's included in the revenue forecast and um at some point when we emerge on a more stable financial footing uh then that may change. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you chair. Um I have more for round two. So >> round two. Okay. Um, we've been joined by Council Member Nurse. And next we have Council Member Brooks Powers, followed by Council Member Riley. >> Thank you, Chair, and hello, uh, Director Solomon. It's a pleasure. >> Um, I'm going to try to race through my questions, so I'm going to just ask them, and I can repeat anything that you need me to. So thanks to the strong advocacy from the Rockaway community, we have been able to secure $50 million in capital funding for the Far Rockaway Trauma Center. Does this administration commit to further advancing this project and committing additional capital dollars to the trauma center in fiscal year 27? In the administration's preliminary budget for fiscal year 27, there are funding cuts to critical alternatives to incarceration and re-entry programs. Why is the administration deciding to cut this funding? Given the need to reduce the Riker's population ahead of the transition to burrow-based jails, does the administration commit to increasing this funding and the executive budget? This administration has champion championed the need for more affordable transportation. One of New York City's best tools to make transit more affordable is via the fairs program. In this preliminary budget, the administration does not include any additional funding for fairs. Can the administration explain why Fairfair's program has not been expanded to the 150% poverty level today? um up to 200% of the federal poverty level and beyond, excuse me, expanded from the 150 today up to the 200% and beyond. How much funding is this administration committing to affordable home ownership opportunities and does the administration look to increase the funding in the coming fiscal years? My last two questions, this um is regarding the insurance reimbursement state and federal issues. So, the federal home rule one bill includes several provisions that eliminate federal funding for specific Medicaid recipients. As a result of the bill, the federal government will no longer provide funding for certain groups of legally present non-citizens beginning on October 1st, 2026. nor will they provide funding for those who are unable to meet work requirements starting on January 1st, 2027. Approximately how many insurance reimbursement revenue do you anticipate health and hospital will lose when these federal cuts take effect? And assuming that the state will not be able to cover all loss funding for Medicaid recipients, what is the administration's plan to support health and hospitals to make up for the lost insurance reimbursement revenue for its patients who will lose their Medicaid coverage? And again, I can repeat anything you need me to. >> Thank you, council member. Um, so a couple of things, let's take them in order. the Far Rock Away Trauma Center is uh so there, as you noted, there's 50 million in capital that is there. There's also 300,000 in expense. We know it's critical to your community. Uh and we want to make sure that we're looking at as part of the executive budget ways that we may be able to go further than that. Um with respect to alternatives to incarceration, don't believe that we cut that. What we're just saying is the preliminary budget is the opening salvo. we understand the connection and correlation with the effort on buroughbased jails. Um and so we have to look at that with our respective agencies and see if that's something as well we can fund in uh in the executive budget. The affordable transit options obviously fairs um clearly this mayor's been very clear about making sure transit is affordable and accessible. uh he's talked about fair affairs as a uh is a great legacy of the administration and council working together uh to make sure the program is expanded. We're looking at that obviously the onetime funding that was included at ADOP, not the opening salvo and prelim, but we're looking at fairs to be able to do that while at the same time pursuing fast and free buses, home ownership um as well. Obviously, we want to do what we can to assist there. There's a lot going on at the state level as well and look at what's been included in the one house budgets. Um, and so we're hopeful that there's also a state component to this where we can help on that. We believe it's important that we're helping particularly first-time home buyers uh be able to uh continue that. and then on HR1. Um, so we've done a number of things on SNAP, like I said. Um, not only SNAP eligibility specialists, we added in the preliminary budget. We also, uh, tripled, uh, the food, uh, connection program at HA at 54 million. On the Medicaid piece, we talked a little bit earlier in my in my QA sessions about the um, CMS and how they approved on the on the on the on the Alysia. Is it Aliesa? the Aliesa population to make sure that uh the state isn't supp supplanting with its general fund those costs and that hopefully is going to lead to the no trickle down effect on H&H when it comes down to the b the the impacts of HR1. So we want to make sure health and hospitals is fully funded. They're the you know first line uh for for many New Yorkers on healthcare. Uh, so we'll continue to hopefully work with the state and make sure those impacts don't trickle down to the city. >> Thank you, director, for your direct responses. I really appreciate it. It was worth the wait. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Member Riley, followed by Council Member Oh, he's not here. Okay. Council member Riley, followed by Council Member Oh, he's not here either. Okay. Council member Riley, just >> Thank you, Chair Lee. Uh, good afternoon, Director. Um your testimony highlights significant underbudgeting uh and the need to close fiscal gaps, but we also know that housing production is one of the most critical long-term cost drivers. So how is OMB ensuring that the department of city pan planning is resource both in staffing and capital planning to accelerate resoning and land use actions that are happening right now within New York City? >> Absolutely. So we wholeheartedly concur with uh the goal on on housing. I mean housing it just runs the gamut. Obviously we for DCP we funded a few things um including sort of uh seed funding from the previous uh resonings etc. We also uh included some money there for some census um uh work that that they need to do. With respect to the housing plan large uh we're looking at the executive budget to see what investments we can make on the capital side. Uh we have uh also created uh internally a couple of task forces. We have the speed task force and we have the lift task force. So looking at ways for public land so we can build on that and also looking at ways to cut through the red tape and the bureaucracy so that we can get to uh you know building housing sooner and get to the supply side of the equation. So all those things are uh hope are you know moving forward. We hope that we can get through the budget challenges so we can make those investments and create debt capacity room so we can make the investments in the housing capital plan. >> And I'm really looking forward to the housing plan and what you guys come up with with speed. But I also want to encourage you guys to look at uh DCP's planners. Um DCP is losing a lot of their planners to the private sector. Housing plan and what you guys come up with speed. But I also want to encourage you guys to look at uh DCP's planners. Um, DCP would live their plans from the private sector plan you guys. But I also want to encourage you guys to look at DC planners with a lot of their plans from the private sector you guys. But I also want to encourage you guys from the private sector. But I also want to encourage you guys to look at the private sector. But I also want to encourage you guys to look at the private sector. But I also want to encourage you guys to look at the private sector. But I also want some privacy doesn't currently on the camp. Tennessee We can talk about Letter Rob. looking at this listed neighborhood. We again have to see something and then we'll come back five 10 minutes. Um so please don't go too far. And then we'll come back. Um, so please don't go too far. And then we'll come back. So please don't go too far. And then we'll come back. So please don't go too far. And then we'll come back again. And then we'll come back. And then we'll come back. Please don't go too far. And then we'll come back tomorrow. Good. Power. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Saturday. Heat. Everybody is very good. Heat. Heat. is open. This is open. Silence. This is open. Fire. Fire. help. Nothing up. Heat. Heat. Excuse me, sir. In the balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. Excuse me, sir. In the balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. Excuse me, sir. In the balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. Excuse me, sir. The balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. >> Excuse me, sir. In the balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. >> Excuse me, sir. The balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. >> Can we find our seats, please? >> Excuse me, sir. The balcony. Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. >> Can we find our seats, please? >> Excuse me, sir. >> Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. >> Can we find our seats, please? >> Excuse me, sir. >> Thank you. Off the railing, please. Thank you. >> Can we find our seats, please? >> Excuse me, sir. Thank you. the rail, please. Thank you. >> Can we find our seats, please? >> Am I Am I allowed to start? >> Can I start? >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Can we find our seats, please? >> Am I Everyone ready to start? >> Can I start? >> You guys are good. Okay. All right. Okay. So, let's resume with um council member questions. And so, uh next we have council member Wrestler followed by council member Morano. You guys are good. >> Thank you so much. Chair Lee for your wonderful leadership this committee has been your men in for your leadership director. It is good to see you. I just want to say on the record you're one of the finest public servants I have ever worked with very grateful that you're in this role. Wonderful leadership. I am biased but I want to congratulate you on director Staten Island. I do want to highlight. We're going to go fast. I do want to highlight a budget. and recognize at the end of the day. So that was a necessity in our product. So last Nobody wants to see the rainy day fund down. There's no question. We need to maintain cash flow. We need to maintain the essential services down. I'd like to shift to just revenue generation. There's no question about 80,000 million park fewer than the number 2.5% any street parking spaces has your team conducted analysis additional It is as I mentioned before absolutely an important policy discussion that we have with all stakeholders. I mean I think the fierce competition is competition right that we need to rationalize our stakeholders. I think working with working with all stakeholders commercial loading zones delivery restaurants right so there's so many so much competition space and clearly so many strategy we don't know clearly March 25th away next year also supporting our small business turnover I went very hard we saw that I the number of actualities dropped to 280,000 a quarter during $25,000 lower mayor Adams cut this significant impendor to cash assist where we have I'm just trying to understand you all of the vacant position. Do we have a breakdown of those positions? asalenc We said that they balance the equation by 50% to your point that there has been many that have been to your city. There was many partly sort of budget you know the approvals we want you to run up to what the operational goals are. So that is what we're focusing over budgetable that is what we're looking at is no PS don't want to imping Can I ask one more question very quickly? We have nearly 10,000 vacant nitro units across the city of New York. 12 increase in the vacant nitro units under Eric Adams. We have over 61 units. We have over housing units that are in city controlled by Eric Adam. These are people who desperately need housing in New York City. Can we get a commitment to actually make sure desperately need something. >> This is a management question. There was no management in the previous administration. We needership city hall and radioH. Thank you for your testimony. Uh Your testimony makes clear that this was inherited. I know council member Riley asked you a bit about the budgeting as well. Now that your testimony is responsible for that, why are we still seeing budgets that come in below or responsible? Why are we still seeing budgets that come in below? We believe we responsible. come up the came after probably something that we didn't believe that we did unpre4.7 million right in terms of everything to the extent that there are exist that would be unknown. We'll have to find a way to address proposing everything that you don't get tax increase in corporate income tax increase. Can you break down how much of that burden will fall on the outer burrow home particularly island versus large commercial properties of that tax reform which you know I support properties well we can talk about it but also answer the question I think I mean I also answer the wonderful necessity. responsibility with respect to the average. You noted only 4% of new spending goes to actual pro programmatic needs. Does that mean 96% of this budget is just backfilling past underestimates rather than service to actual program? It goes toward the program. goes to the program. It goes forward making sure that someone problem doesn't serve anyone. So we need to make sure it's out there reflected and transparent and certain of the budget is important for all of us to make sure we resources are plans and make priorities to understand what all of us see Right. Object code looking. Can you walk us through the timeline of when first determined the budget gap was a mater of when the first determined the budget gap was Even before that in my my uh at my appointment announcement there had been reports that were out there and there were questions that were asked about the fiscal monitor that my gap is actually more my appointments right and so immediately reports the mayor there were questions that were met with people and started to pack and so everything in these major understands so I can deliver an assessment to the mayor, the mayor and to his credit to as soon as he started to understand the extent of the budget, he felt compelled to deliver publicly discuss that what we had said was the underbudgeting was in line with what the city and state controllers had said that the budget gaps were and that's why we were very open about that. Then in the state budget hearing, so-called tin cup day, we went there, we testified after we started to aggressively look and manage what that budget gap would be if we put in a savings plan, if we took standard budget actions to reduce it, etc. That then got us to the 7 billion when we went to the state legislature and testified before the joint fiscal committees. Then next came the preliminary budget at right the day before the preliminary budget the governor committed $1.5 billion and there was an additional hundred million from a school aid run that gave us additional funds right so that is what February 17th we came out with the preliminary budget so in a matter of a month and a half basically we assessed the problem we were frank with New Yorkers about the problem frank with the state legislature about the problem and then we came to that gap that we had to close 5.4 billion in the preliminary budget. That gives you a general sense of the timeline. Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay, great. Um, next we have Council Member Nurses, followed by Council Member Maloney. >> Sorry. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you, Mr. Director. We going to go I I'm not going to ask you those question, but I want you to process it and and and think about it. Um last um Monday, I have a child that got um that killed right in our community in Ships Head Bay and previously we have more problem with that. I want to sit down with you to see what's the plan. What can we do to make sure our children, our youth in our city not killing each other. I know it's a difficult one, but we have to have come up with uh community centers. We have to make sure they have something. Idle hand, idle minds. You know what happened? Is the devil lin I heard, but I'm not repeating that. Anyway, thank you. So there's a study with um state controller um the Napoli um just revealed that New York City is now spending $81,000 per um street homeless person in a town where average take-home pay is about $40,000 and Mayor Mandani want to spend more now right city hall projected it will hit nearly $97,000. So I will call it in the business world pennywise dollar foolish because we can home folks. Do we have to continue doing shelter Mr. Director based on the numbers? So, council member, um we are obl we have a legal obligation to shelter the unhoused um through the Callahan uh case. And so, that is really what drives um the um shelter operation and the shelter cost here in the city. At the same time, we can focus on managing that operation to the best of our ability, but also focus on an affordability agenda. The mayor has been very very clear about the need for more housing and affordability at large through a multitude of different policies. And so that is really where the focus needs to be. Housing supply, housing preservation, >> price, >> housing supply and housing preservations. And we need to manage the existing legal mandate and obligation to the best way we can working with our operational agencies to reduce shelter costs. And by the way, >> shelter, >> well, yes, we also want to make sure that city tax that there's an share that we have with the state. >> One of the things that we put out there with the cuts and cautions that existing in the in the um one house budgets, it used to be for the single adult shelter population in the 1990s, it was a 50-50 split, right? State city. Uh it was capped in the 1990s and then it was reduced further in the 2010. So $70 million that's it capped for single adult. >> Okay. Summer rises right now in summer rises we serve over 100,000 students um citywide with significant demand still unmet. How is OM thinking about the long-term funding structure for this program and is there is a plan to move it forward and more stable um recurring budget line. We believe in what the program offers which is summer enrichment activities and programming for our youth. Um we have uh monies in the DOE budget that was added 16 million in fiscal 26 to round out uh the cost there. So we went from 90 to 106 in fiscal 27 and then the DYCD piece of it as well I think brings it up to about 146 or thereabouts. So that is where we want to make sure that we're investing in the program and we want it to be as effective as possible by drawing as many children as possible there. We know what continue on the surveys. I know the department of education has done surveys what we can do better how we can make sure attendance is to its full maximum potential. Uh but we've made those investments. >> Thank you. Um I want to get in public school enrollment but I have be heard that I want to ask question around it too. Last week, the administration proposed moving be heard under a new jurisdiction which is um created by the mayor, community safety. Thank you for that. But the proposal include a funding increase of 150%. Funding will reach a record of 112.5 million in fiscal 2026 and 135.6 million in fiscal 2027. This increased budget will cover a be herd team in every borrow and um two to three be herd teams in 20 neighborhoods with the highest need. What will be herd's funding structure be under this proposal? How will funding be distributed um between H&H and FDNY? And what will the office of the community safety's oversight role be for the be heard? Will this 150% funding increase be reflected in fiscal 2027 executive budget? >> I know it's a lot. Yes, we are um we are um happy to see that we've launched the office of community safety um and we're uh uniting many offices under that umbrella for central policy coordination so that we can deliver mental health services to New Yorkers. Um that's about the the $260 million for that central apparatus. And as you mentioned, be heard as part of that as part of of the of the policy piece of this which is $36 million in fiscal 26 and 35 million in fiscal 27. With respect to H&H and FDNY, it is a joint responsibility to manage the BH herd program. Um we know that I believe the previous administration has shifted the budget to H&H completely. Um, so we are looking at breaking off the EMS portion and making sure that comes back to the FDNY to make sure that they are appropriately resourced to be able to fulfill um the program's mission. Um, so it is very important work. This administration's committed to it. Office of Community Safety is a great start. We'll continue to build on that. >> Thank you. And thank you, Chair. >> Thank you. We've been joined by council member Feliz on Zoom as well as council member Oay. Um so next we'll go to council member Maloney. >> Thank you chair Lee. One opportunity for cost savings is leveraging rapid advancements in technology which we touched on a little bit so far in this hearing. The city's made prior efforts to modernize and integrate service delivery. But coming from the tech sector, I can say there's a lot of work left to be done. Systems are fragmented across agencies. Processes are archaic. Individuals that are accessing benefits like cash assistance, SNAP, housing support are navigating through multiple different agencies. HPD and other city departments have capacity and process backlog problems and so on and so forth. So, this not only hurts constituents but also contributes to rising costs in administrating our government services. What uh concrete steps has the administration taken or can they take to use technology to streamline and unify processes across agencies as this is a real opportunity to save money but also improve services and and business and and growth. >> Sure. Absolutely. So, first I want to uh say that we we're happy to engage with you and leverage your expertise. uh always love to see when uh someone comes from the tech sector and has ideas and so we're happy to sit with you and understand what your ideas are and explore them. Uh I'm going to turn it over as well to Nathan Gustodorf to talk about some of the work that's being happening through the chief savings officer's efforts which really look at at a core level as well looking at the opportunities you speak of council member right it's looking at it not only to negotiate with one voice on those pricey IT contracts right but to see sort of what can we do on the licensing contracts going forward but also looking at some of our legacy systems across the uh across the city that don't communicate with one another and don't have platforms that are compatible with one another and how can we find efficiencies, long-term efficiencies and compatibility over time without breaking the bank on too much IT cost. Right. So, I'll turn it over to Nathan to speak some about the cost reduction side that we're starting to see, including what we highlighted today. >> Um yeah, thank you. Um thank you, council member. Um, one of the categories of savings that the budget director named in his initial testimony was technology modernization and it's consistent with the policy initiatives of EO2 both in terms of insourcing and uh increasing city government capacity, reducing contracting inefficiencies and modernizing technology to figure out where we can get agencies to rely less on contractors and update their own IT systems and use that to bring down costs. Um, while the details that we can speak about on actual concrete savings initiatives are limited to what was in this morning's press release, that already captures a number of agencies where we have identified opportunities to rely less on outside contractors and instead use in-house capacity and that is generating savings. Um, that's true at the Department of Corrections. Uh, it's true at H&H, uh, emergency management, OTI. So even just in the five days since we released th or since we uh received those cso reports, we've we've already made some meaningful progress on this prong of the initiative. >> And is there any work done being on the um unifying benefit eligibility and uh both for individuals and also as we think about permitting and licensing for businesses? Yeah, I I think that's all going to be part of the project um both from now to the exec uh as we continue to examine agency submissions and then beyond because this is supposed to be a permanent exercise uh in terms of finding long-term operational efficiencies. And I think there's there's been a lot of attention drawn to both the importance and the potential of cross agency work to find meaningful efficiencies especially on the IT side >> and also just on the business side I would add you know SPS we um added um funding and prelim for the best teams. So there's also this engagement component to as you mentioned streamline whatever interactions with government there are and part of that is sort of engagement through programs like that. I'm glad to hear there's thought and investment in this space. I think it's a huge opportunity. In terms of vending, how much money does the city lose each year by having vendors work through CDW as a contracting vehicle rather than direct contracts? And is that something that you've you've looked at shifting? >> It's something we've looked at. We look at I mean something we are looking at, I should say, and we'll be happy to follow up with you on that. >> Thank you very much. And thank you, Chair. >> Thank you. Um, just as a followup cuz sometimes I joke I'm like, "Oh my god, I feel like the city still operates on DOSs, right?" Like old school old school um, computer systems. I don't know. The headshake made me think, is that true? I don't know. But um, looking at it, because this has been one of my biggest pet peeves is that, you know, in terms of thinking about how we're being impactful at the city in terms of how we use our dollars because if, and this is the example I use all the time, is if I'm a whole person, but I'm struggling with I have a severe mental health illness. um homeless in and out of shelters plus I have a drug addiction, right? So, one day I may up in the shelter system and DHS has my information there and then another month after that I may have a serious uh mental health break and then I'll end up in the H&H hospital system and they have my information there. So, I guess just in terms of not just from cost savings, but how do we be better in terms of data and transparency and better serving our city? Is that something that you all are looking into? because obviously we need to protect identity, all of the things with HIPPA, but um is is that something the city is looking into? Because what I would be curious to look at is how many unique clients do we have utilizing multiple services and then what would that tell us in terms of how to better meet their needs and make sure they don't fall through the cracks? >> Absolutely, Chair. I think that's something we need to look at and in fact you know I think our predecessors as well have looked at that many administrations really looked at to see what can we do in terms of the holistic view in serving New Yorkers right the examples that you gave are real examples that can happen and how can that information be at the fingertips of those who are serving those individuals right so that it can be more effective in terms of delivery of those services we need to focus on that at the same time as understanding that we have in some of these uh legacy systems we have um programmers that have been trained on these programs for many years and they're retiring right so how do you have the expertise that you need to serve uh those needs in terms of those systems right so that's also another >> because some of it can't migrate so it would have to >> yes but but yes it's something we'll we'll we want to work on >> yeah and I just um it's interesting because have Do you also on the I know this is not really budget per se but it impacts the procurement system. Have you looked into or has the city looked into some of the laws related to why um Mox for example um is doing things the way in the procurement system the way it's been done. And I asked this because back when Michael O was uh the Mox director a few folks ago um he and I would talk about this and he's like you know there are some of these laws that were put in place in the 70s because of the financial crisis that are not necessarily needed anymore but they're still in place. So how do is anyone in the city looking at some of that stuff to see how we can get rid of these sort of red tape barriers to improve our processes? >> It needs to it needs to be looked at. Um and it's something that clearly we want to undertake and I know you you you want to as well with your colleagues. So it's something we need to undertake with our agencies. >> Yeah. And that's something that I've spoken to uh director Kimu about as well because I know she really wants to look into that as well. So I would love to partner with you guys on that. And then just really quickly following up on um council member Nurse's comments about be heard. So for the 260 million and by the way um as former chair of mental health I really appreciate um the mayor's efforts on looking at mental health holistically and so just wanting to know a little bit more about the numbers because I remember when Beard first rolled out if I'm remembering this correctly the budgeted amount was like 50 or 55 million but the first year they only spent about 25 million and that was because of the issues around trying to find staff to fill a lot of these positions because it is a very difficult job to do. Um and so just wondering h two things really which is what is the breakdown of that 260 million how much of that are already existing programs that you're just sort of rejiggering and then what's the deal with OC because they were supposed to be the ones overseeing this. >> Yeah. So on the 260 million to be clear of the 116 headcount, those are the offices that are moving under the umbrella office of community safety under the new deputy mayor for community safety. So >> So not just be heard, right? >> No. >> Okay. >> So it's a it's the operations for those offices including the office of of community uh health mental health. So um we can follow up with you on the actuals visa v the the people the employees at H&H working on be heard >> versus budget. So actuals versus budgeted we can follow up with you on that. Okay. so that we know are we still having these challenges in hiring in this uh in this title with that is really noble challenging work >> right because I think between that program plus the IMTS and also the state programs that are out there trying to get people housed and in services it's been challenging with the staffing so that'd be great certainly if you could okay um so uh next we have council member Aldabal followed by and then Stevens Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. >> Um and thank you, chair. Um so the preliminary plan included a $550 million reduction in the budget for labor reserve in fiscals 26 and 27. Uh over one-third of the total amount budgeted in the November plan for these two years. Uh this reduction was based on a reestimate. Uh this is not the first time we've seen a a reestimate. Um at last year's budget adoption, OMB also included a $375 million reduction in the labor reserve due to reestimates. Um these reestimates are different than changes that occur when contracts are settled and funds are allocated to agency budgets for wage increases. The mayor stated that the labor reserve has enough aside to pay for annual wage increases of 1.25% starting in 2026 when the existing contracts begin to expire. Um why was there such a large reestimate in the labor reserve? And if it has to do with a more accurate estimate of headcount, um would we not also assume that there would be savings related to the salaries of the over budgeted headcount? >> So a couple of things on that council member. So number one, these these um savings that were taken uh in the preliminary budget are reflective of the way the labor reserve essentially works, which is when there is a pattern established, in this case, let's take the civilian pattern at 16%. Or the uniform pattern at 18.98%. Those reserve funds are put into the labor reserve to then pay for those contracts. We're at about 98 something settled contracts in the last round. And so the labor reserve has funding for also unsettled um contracts that are that are there right. Also at the same time monies that are parked in the labor reserve according to the pattern to then be able to fund those settled contracts there are changes in you know actual experience. There could be headcount changes etc that then change and those are savings that can be taken uh because they were initially budgeted but data has changed etc going forward for settled contracts as you alluded to. Yes. The mayor said there's one and a quarter% that is in the labor reserve for future collective bargaining contracts. Where they will end up is obviously the subject for collective bargaining. It's a need that the city has to um work on to understand that we could um give a fair contract to our talented and dedicated public sector workforce. Um there are also you know pay disparities for specific uh job titles um that have been maintained and you know exacerbated over the year years by pattern bargaining um and you know historic you know structures that have solidified inequities that are often the legacy of gender and race racial bias. Um this is particularly apparent in the cases of the par profofessionals in the DOE and EMTs uh in the FDNY. Uh par professionals in the who work for the DOE both represented by uh uft and and DC37 uh continue to make about $30,000 a year. Um, and they pay they're they play a crucial role in the public education system and they'll be an even higher demand as universal 2K and 3K uh are made a reality. Um, and you know the the DOE is is really having a difficult time both retaining and you know hiring uh power professionals to uh meet the need. Um, and in the fire department, EMTs continue to make uh $18 an hour, which is a a fraction of what firefighters earn despite significant overlap in their roles. Uh, the high rate of medical 911 calls and EMTs are also uh critical, a critical part of the mayor's agenda for overhauling 911 response through be heard and the department of community safety. Um and you know there is a there's a push to uh you know uh elevate those those pay rates. Um and you know the par profofessionals are you know pushing for a uh a $10,000 you know retention payment um so that could stop the bleeding essentially. Um, and just want to know where you are in terms of budgeting for these uh uplifting these uh job titles and eliminating this pay disparity that we've seen. >> Sure, we're sensitive to the equity concerns. There have been other there have been uh equity panels that have been established to look at these types of things. I think that these types of issues are um best reserved for the bargaining table and also we understand there are significant costs as well that are associated with these. So we have to figure out how we can balance that with the financial challenges that we face. Um but we are sensitive to the equity concerns that have been raised. >> Okay. >> Okay. Great. Um, council member Stevens and then Banks. >> Thank Thank you, Chair. A recent report issued by state controller Denopoly showed that New York City is lagging behind the rest of the country and small job creation due to the cost related to starting up a business. SPS is an agency that's charge of assisting small business development, but currently the agency has a extremely high vacancy rate of 23%. which hinders his ability to provide adequate assistance. Does OM vacancy reduction program exempt positions at SBS that'll be able to assist in spurring the economic development? >> So, thank you for the question, council member. So, um SBS is subject to a lot of the savings initiatives that we have. We're looking at what their headcount is relative to what the um savings targets are. We did make several uh investments in small business services. Um I would say that a couple of them I mentioned before the uh the business express service teams. We had a 2 million in fiscal 26 4 million in the years out. So that's uh that's an opportunity to engage small businesses. There are a slew of other programs um that we've done here including some of the resoning commitments that were made on Jamaica uh and Jamaica workforce small business program. So there have been investments in prelim for SPS. We're looking at what their total needs will be in terms of headcount so that they can fulfill their mandate as part of the executive budget process. >> So as so we have been in discussions SBS on what could be done to jumpstart SBS ability to assist small businesses. >> Yes. And in fact on that to assist small businesses again the investment in the best program uh two two million in fiscal 26 and four million in 27 and out is a prime example of how we've invested in small business services to reach small businesses uh and and and support them in any way possible. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is that it council? Okay. Stevens. >> Um, good afternoon. Um, how you >> Good afternoon. >> Um, I just have a couple questions. Obviously, I'm going to talk about those, but um, my first question is just around like, as we know, raise the Age is passed in 2017. Um, and we know that New York City hasn't seen any money from the state um, to fund raise the age. Um and this is um due to um section 54 of the state finance law provision which states c um counties must um either adore a 2% tax cap or submit a state um um a waiver showing hardship at the preliminary budget. ACS um leadership said that it was not up to them to decide whether applying for a hardship waiver, but it was MLB's decision. Given the financial situation, is MLB planning on applying for this waiver this year? If not, why? Um, and is MLB aware of the requirement of the waiver or might consider us being in financial hardship currently? Um, I have a couple more. I'm gonna ask all the qu the raise the age questions and you could just answer um after. Has OM considered applying for a waiver? Um, does the administration believe that raise the age reimbursement process should be considered at the state level? If so, has the mayor been working with state partners to pursue this? Um and is be aware of the current recommendation included in one of the house bills to eliminate the reappropriation authority to state fiscal 2018 to 2019 19 through 2023 to 24 as permitting localities to to submit prior year claims against the remaining reappropriation authorities of raised the age um appropriation and do you believe that the recommendation means we could impact um the city's ability to recoup the past expenses? Thank you, council member. The raise the age um New York City was inexplicably left out um of the assistance other localities >> have been getting. It was clearly has been a hardship in terms of our um ability to implement what the state law mandate was. And so there has been this hardship waiver. We are very happy and we commend and thank the governor that as part of the $ 1.5 billion dollar commitment that she committed the day before the preliminary budget, there was an additional $300 million and that's on a recurring basis for youth programming. Uh and that runs the gamut from, you know, prevention to programming, etc. Um and we that doesn't preclude us at all from applying for the waiver, right? >> Yeah. That's why I'm asking saying I want the 300 million and I also want >> Yeah, we want the 300 million and we want the vote. So, we're in constant conversations with the state about that. Um, obviously if we can get to a point where we don't even have to apply. We know we have a budget crunch and we know that we have these needs. That's an ongoing conversation with the state. If we can get there without having to go through the application, sure. It is in state law. If we need to do it, we'll do it. >> Okay. Okay. Well, I just wanted to make sure that we're we're considering this because, you know, we're we are saying we are in financial hardship. We having hard times now. So, why wouldn't we apply for the waiver to get the additional money? I'm I'm happy that you brought up the 300 um million because um in the preliminary hearing with ACS, we also asked about that 300 million and they were saying they were waiting on OM to give them a plan around what that funding looks like. So, can you talk to us a little bit about what that that budget is going to look like? How is it going to work? you know, we know that that money can go to ACS, the law department, the um um DOP and all these different things. And so, have you already started to think about where this money is going to be placed and how it's going to be allocated? >> Yeah, so we are this is a very active conversation that's going on because we want to make sure that we can draw down the funds that the state has put in in these buckets. And so, we're actively looking at to say youth programming. what are the programs that we have ongoing right now that then we can work with the state agencies responsible to be able to draw down that funding. Um so that is an active conversation. We don't want to leave any any funding on the table and the programs that would qualify the buckets are pretty broad to begin with and that was a product of going back and forth with the state to understand is the maximum flexibility and we thank the state to allow us to be able to access what was committed. So that is an ongoing conversation that we're having with the state division of budget and with the state agencies to be able to make sure and then we'll work with ACS to make sure that the claims are submitted to draw down those funds. >> Yeah. Um and just even to think about going back to raise the age when we talk about I know you said you're in active conversations. When will you decide if we're applying or not? And um you know I don't think that we should just continue to have active conversations. I think we have to start moving on this. And so when will you start to decide and make these decisions cuz you know there is a sense of urgency I mean as we're talking about budgets. So just trying to make sure that we have clarity and and what does that and so I can continue to follow up because I you know if you know me I will be following up. >> Yes. No absolutely I mean all of it is imminent and we're working with the state on all the moves that we make on this front and on all front. So it is an active conversation with the state about >> So you don't have an idea on like when you will be making a decision on on it? I mean, >> it's all part of the discussions about state budget and we're moving forward on that. >> Okay, great. So, when would you like me to follow up? >> Anytime you wish, council member, I'm always happy to talk to you, council member, >> because that's a few more followup. So, I'll be I'll be in contact. Thank you. Two weeks. >> No, not two weeks. It's a week. I'll be calling next week. Thank you. >> Okay, awesome. Council member Banks, followed by Council Member Lewis. Thank you, chair, and uh thank you, director, and to your team. >> Thank you. >> Uh pertaining to uh Nicha, I just want to get my questions out and then you can answer. Uh hopefully we'll get a clear response uh from you. Uh the state one house budget uh proposals uh proposals include an additional 1.25 25 billion in capital funding for uh NICHA uh to support maintenance needs and additional an additional 100 million for Mitchell Lama and the housing authority assistance. Nitra buildings require nearly 80 billion to be able to reach a state uh the state of good repair. Uh the council's uh appreciative of the uh house's uh inclusion of funding uh to start the needed uh budget budgetary needs uh for the repairs in NICHA. Uh my questions are directed to as has the administration pushed the governor to increase spending for NICHA one. Uh has there been any discussion of which developments or NICHA programs or where these funds will be applied to? Uh the and has the administration added uh the uh 6 61 uh 6 sorry 661.6 million uh for section 8 conversions like pack and the preliminary plan and why did the administration not support traditional public housing uh section 9 with similar investment? Uh does this allocation uh for conversions mean the administration is doubling down on the Adams administration approach uh to partially uh privatized public housing? And five, what investments does the administration plan to make in traditional section 9 housing? And just to also backtrack on the uh capital needs uh when it comes to uh pack impact, NICHA has a capital needs uh well sorry NICHA's capital needs have been estimated at over 78 billion uh for for years. We've been seeing that number thrown out. But despite more than 31,000 units undergoing RADP pack conversions and billions of dollars being invested, why hasn't the overall capital need decreased? Um, and has the administration uh considered baseline funding for NICHA? Uh, is the administration considering uh baseline funding for NICHA uh in this city budget? and uh rather than continuing to rely on a one-time or project based capital investment um and when it comes to infills uh infill development revenue is the city generating revenue uh from the infield development within Nicha land and if so how much revenue has been generated to date and uh how has this money been allocated specifically uh in being uh reinvested back into Nitra developments um and hopefully we can get some clear answers from you cuz we I didn't get them from NICHA yesterday. >> Thank you, Council Member Banks. Um, so first, as I said before, grew up in NICHA. I know the impact what it could be. Um, so we are looking at a number of different avenues. So number one, current budget, $4 billion currently exists on the section 9 part, right? That's from fiscal 26 to fiscal 27, fiscal 20 uh uh 35. There is the mayor has made uh uh uh very clear his commitment to being able to double the capital commitments to NICHA. It's not only about pacted and RAD, it is about section 9. We want to make sure that we're making those investments. The preliminary budget was the opening salvo, right? We know for the executive budget, we're looking very closely at our debt capacity to make room for priorities like housing and NICHA's part of that. Excuse me. I'm going to turn it over to Tara in a second, but what I also wanted to say is we are heartened by what the state uh legislature put in their one house budgets. Uh Deputy Mayor Bozark is in constant communication with state partners about additional investment, additional revenue from the state and NICHA and over the years there have been some level of capital commitments that have come down from the state that then matched city commitments that have been put up. We hope to continue that and have a real partnership with the state so we can make those investments. Tara, you want to add? >> Uh, sure. Just a few things to add. Um, to your first question, the 661 million was added at the preliminary plan for the section 8 conversions, but there were also section 9 investments made in this prelimin as well. That >> 48 million, >> correct? So, that was heat pumps and then funding for the one Long Island City zoning specifically to section 9. Um, >> yeah, but it's far less than what you're putting in section. >> Understood. Understood. And it's a plan that we're working on. >> Hopefully, we get some more clarity. And when it comes to the um the nitro developments that have been converted over to Rad Pack or the 31,000 uh units, uh we need to get clarity as to uh uh with those units. uh what has been the revenue created from that? Um or why hasn't the uh capital needs been decreased uh the 80 or 78 billion? Uh we would love to get more clarity on that from you. >> Happy to follow up with you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. So now we have council member Lewis followed by nurse and then Pyina Sanchez. >> Thank you chair. Thank you director and to your whole team. I have four quick questions. I hope I could belt it out. All right. uh given there are opportunities to leverage existing city-owned infrastructure including libraries and other one-story municipal properties for mixeduse development that includes affordable housing. Is OM actively evaluating these opportunities and what level of funding and inter agency coordination particularly with DCP for zoning modifications is being planned to advance these types of projects and if OMB could detail what funding has been allocated in the preliminary budget to support site identification, feasibility analysis and eventual capital construction once sites are identified. Thank you, council member. So, yeah, the um >> I have two more questions after that. Oh, >> okay. So, I'll be quick. >> Thank you. >> Land um land inventory fasttrack um or lift task force is doing exactly that. Looking at areas of public um where um public um land, public spaces, public sites across the city that could potentially be redeveloped for housing. Um the Lyft task force is uh hopefully going to release a uh preliminary report by uh July 1st that is going to lay out the pathway for getting to developing 25,000 units on public sites over the next decade. Um so that's something we look forward to. I think when you mentioned the libraries up front, aside from the recent project, recent projects at Sunset Park and Inwood, um we're also moving forward on Grand Concourse, the Bloomingdale Library, uh and Health Clinic on the Upper West Side and the new Utrect. >> So, all that's in FY27. >> All of this I don't know is in if it's FY27, but we're actively working on it with the Lyft task force. >> Okay. We could actively talk about this after the hearing. Would love to hear more. All right. Uh New York City has taken an an important step in establishing a national model for a community- centered approach to studying reparations. Uh thanks to the Commission on Racial Equity. Yet, as CORE transitions from research into implementation, it's now facing a structural funding gap due to absence of previously anticipated outyear commitments. Initially, they were told 2 million in fiscal year 26 and 4 million in the outy years. I wanted to know if OM could commit to baselining the funding and the financial plan. And I'll ask my last question quickly. >> We're looking at it as part of the new of the new needs for exec. Obviously, the core functions are um are significant and important work, critical work. Um and so we want to be able to support them uh as much as possible to complete their work. Uh and we are evaluating their needs for the upcoming executive budget. it would be important to know the likeliness of the evaluation. So look forward to following following up on that. Um and through the city council city of all initiative five billion was added for housing and infrastructure investments to complement the resoning passed by city of yes. I wanted to know how much city of yes funding is allocated to to the city has been spent already and can you provide a breakdown of this spending for both expense and capital programs with D, HPD, NICHA, HR and CCHR? >> I'll turn it over to Tara Bard to address that. >> Uh, sure. So, for the most part, the funding for City of Yes that was added to HPD's capital budget was put in lump sums in terms of the programs that they would be doing to support all of the additional units. Um, in total in capital, $4.9 billion has been spent. Um, in terms of spending to date in these UVAs, we're at $1.3 billion. Um, and we can give you the details for CCHR as well as D and some of the other agencies. >> Okay. I look forward to following up. >> All right. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. Next, we have Council Member Nurse, followed by Council Member Sanchez, and then Areola. >> Thank you, Chair. >> Uh, good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. >> Um, my questions are around um civil and human rights. I'm a little concerned that the preliminary plan doesn't have as much funding to follow up on the commitment that the administration has said they have to civil and human rights. Um, specifically CCHR, CORE, EPC all are currently underfunded and underst staffed. Um, EP EPC and core have just started to fill their vacancies. Um, I think EPC doesn't even have Wi-Fi, which is kind of sad, you know. Um, and so for CCHR, the average wait time for closing their cases is over 600 days. Um, we understand some cases are complex, but even after intake, with the eight people it has answering these calls, um, it can be about 2 months before New Yorkers who have been discriminated against or had their rights violated to get a response. So, do you do you think that's an acceptable wait time for New Yorkers? No, I think we need to do all we can to make sure that those missions are fulfilled and those important agency operations are continued and supported and well resourced. I think that we have to look at ways that we could uh add money and uh to their budgets to be able to accomplish their goals. Um it's not okay if there's no Wi-Fi uh and things like that for example. Those are like basic functions. So we have to see even if there are other agencies that are lending a hand right to be able to produce that. So that's something we'll look into. >> I have some other questions. So it sounds like you agree they need more resources so that >> and we'll evaluate it with the executive budget. Yes. >> Who are doing 15,000 calls a year um can respond faster than two months. Um >> so will you will you be cutting uh EPC has I think one one vacancy. Um, will you be cutting that? >> We're looking at when we're doing the vacancy alignment exercise, we're looking with uh a fine tooth comb to see in cases like that where you have a very small and you have one vacancy like it it's it's diminishing returns, right? So this that's exactly the kind of example where it doesn't make sense to achieve this goal, right? So, we're looking at that and yeah, I mean, one vacancy I you know, >> yeah, I mean, especially since they're supposed to be helping our city workforce. So, I think we should not be cutting that. So, it sounds that sounds great. Sounds like we're in alignment. One of the other things that came up at our preliminary budget hearing is a lot of these commissions are burdened with a lot of um administrative tasks that maybe they could be sharing or pooling such as like HR staff um any other kind of requirements that they need to do. Maybe there could be some staff that is taking care of a bunch of these commissions where we can have some savings rather than each one have to have that. Is that something you're looking at? >> Yeah, a shared services model is something in general that we'd like to approach and look at and part of really central to the work of the chief savings officers as well, right? Where are those commonalities? Where can we come together on a shared services model that can achieve the same results but can can save save at the same time. So, >> okay. Okay, that's great. And I mean, every year for this this um particular hearing and this was something I asked uh Jock every single year, you know, the rainy day fund is is not defined and every administration can decide how to define when it's raining or not. Um I personally disagree with that. I think we should have some clearer definitions on how and when we're using this. Do you think that that is something that we should be working on? >> So the general municipal law has very clear guidelines of when the second 50% can be tapped into, right? The 980 that was drawn down here was 50% of what the the total was. But the law is pretty clear on the circumstances and the determinations that need to be made before any additional draw is done. Part of an ongoing dialogue. Obviously, we don't want to be in a position to draw down any reserves. We're hopeful that the result from the state budget will get us there. >> Yeah, I I still think we should be we should have more conversations collectively between the two sides of the hall and and really get on the same page about what it means to draw down even before we get to that 50%. >> Sure. >> Um I think New Yorkers deserve to know what that means. When is it actually raining or not? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member Sanchez, followed by Areola, and then uh Council Member Oay is our last one for round one. >> Uh thank you, Chair, and good morning, director. Congratulations. First, just want to echo uh Council Member Wrestler's remarks of my deep respect for you and the team that's surrounding you. >> Thank you. Um, I I want to start with thanking Speaker Menin uh for being firm in the need to expand the city FEPS program in a responsible manner to keep vulnerable families housed and move out of shelter, help them move out of shelter faster and for being really leaned in on good faith discussions that we have been having as you mentioned. But I want to use this moment to read a text message that I received last night at the very same time that I learned that the appeal had been filed. This is from an expecting mother of three in her third trimester who lives in my neighborhood who is working full-time. I've been doing everything I can. I'm just so worried. I just don't want to be evicted from my home. This expansion could remove that stress from her life. And I know that we share that belief. I just want to echo the speaker's remarks that the administration is making a choice to continue Mayor Eric Adams appeal. you could drop it and we could just continue negotiations without that looming. We remain at the table. Conversations have been going have been ongoing and I hope that we can reach a responsible resolution. So the question is would would the city drop the suit? >> Thank you, council member. We want to continue to have the good faith discussions that we have been having. I think the court deadline, the court timeline uh required that we uh confront the issue of having to file the instrument or not to preserve sort of the continuation of those good faith discussions. It was filed. But our intent is to continue to have the discussions and be at the table and see how we can come to an agreement on any such expansion. at the same time is looking at the current program and looking at ways we can effectively reasonably manage some of the pieces there whether it's on rent reasonleness renters uh legal rents different things that I know the commissioner's committed to looking at so we could you know stabilize the current program >> thank you thank you director and I look forward to those continued conversations uh the November 2025 environmental control board report showed that from between fiscal 18 and 25 the department of buildings was owed more than $300 million in fines and acred interest accounting for onethird of all outstanding ECB judgment debt. Similarly, at yesterday's preliminary hearing with HBD, the commissioner testified that they are only collecting about 20% of leanable charges issued between fiscal 24 and 25. That's 80% of the fines and fees that HPD is issuing are not collected. First, are these numbers correct? If not, can you correct me? Second, uh given the multi-billion dollar funding gap we are talking about, what steps could the city take to recoup this uncollected revenue, can you work with us to ensure that as many fines and fees as are reasonable can be in indeed leanable against properties? Uh and relatedly, can you work with us to ensure that fine levels are appropriately serving as deterrence? >> So, thank you, council member. So, first I want to say the the mayor has been committed to and has taken action as you know against bad landlords, right? And so we are making sure that we are doing all we can to ensure um a humane living conditions uh across the board um for the rental stock and so there have been key actions taken there. We have been working with the department of finance and with our housing team to make sure that uh unpaid ECB violations that there can be um leans placed against those buildings, right? And that is one of the most effective tools to make sure that the ECB violations are indeed paid. So we're doing everything we can that is a stick right that we can use but also we're using other things like the normal collection efforts that you have in the department of finance whether through collection agencies or etc to try to drive these to a conclusion because that is the way that we hold uh landlords accountable uh for um you know uh the upkeep of their building so essential to um tenants and living conditions. >> Thank you. in my last second and I'll I'll have questions about street vending in the next round. Uh but I just wanted to clarify uh yesterday HPD testified that some $130 odd million dollars were being reduced from their expense budget uh in connection with herk funding uh for for the migrant shelters. Is that going to show up somewhere else in the budget or is that a reduction that the city is going to see? Uh period. >> Um I'll start and I'll kick it to Patrick to see what that was. is I think just speaking in general about the asylum seeker population. Obviously, we have the budgeted amounts that are in there based on about a third I would say about like 30,000 I think asylum uh seekers that are in the census. We're seeing more uh exits than we are seeing entries and so some of the funding was allocated in different agencies. I just want to check on whether or not HPD had that. So I I think what you're talking about is not necessarily a reduction. It's that we don't place it in those agencies in the out years. So it's you know what is there now is for this year and then we look at the following years for asylum seekers and budget at that time. >> Okay. So any reductions we should be seeing in the out years or and we will not be seeing in other agency budgets. >> The way it works is the asylum funding is in DHS and then we allocate it as necessary. We we forecast the current year and the next fiscal year and then we allocate that funding as necessary. So it's not a cut per se. It's just the funding is there this year and then as we get to next year we will evaluate and move it if it's necessary there. >> Okay. I'm not totally following because this is HBD funding for for the herks. So I'd love to just follow up and thank you chair for the time. >> Great. And I have you for round two. Um okay we have council member Areola and then council member Ros. >> Thank you so much chair. Thank you director. I heard you testify in the very beginning that there's a $5.4 billion shortfall that needs to be closed. Correct. >> Correct. Uh, I heard you answer Council Member Alderall's questions regarding EMS and Paris and kick it to collective bargaining, which we've heard for the last four years, which is why this body is currently discussing legislation to make the city of New York and the administration do what we know they can do, which is give a living wage to people who deserve it. I heard you listen to to uh, Council Member Wong's reasoning why we cannot have an estate tax. We cannot have a and people paying to park in front of their homes. We cannot have additional taxes put on our homeowners. It It's just an absolute hard no. People are having a hard enough time living here as is. Yet I didn't hear you say anything about how you can justify that we have a chief savings officer in every agency including the fire department which has been stagnant with funding for the four years that I've been the chair of the committee and have been have rigs that are falling apart um ambulance bays that are falling apart firehouses that are falling apart and yet there's nothing in the budget that says they're getting extra money to to fix those to remedy those issues. However, the mayor is funding new departments within the mayor's office with hefty budgets to make good on his campaign promises. Some of which you could say, one of which you could say is a political arm of this of the body which should not be paid for by taxpayers dollars. So why are we taking taxpayers dollars and not giving them to our our EMS, our Paris, our municipal workers who were promised their jobs back and submitted all their their applications to get their jobs back and lines were created for them to come back and yet they've fallen into limbo with no one to contact anymore to see where they are with that paperwork. And yet the other agencies which are vanity projects for the mayor and campaign promises are being funded amply while all our other agencies are under the knife. And you say scalpel but I say it's more like a huge knife. >> Well, a couple of things council members. So first I think that we are attuned to the equity um issues with respect to EMS. You've heard the fire department commissioner testify to that effect and we know that uh that there are real issues that are there. The question is whether or not at the bargaining table we can understand how we can reach an agreement uh and that is an ongoing conversation. Right? So we know that that exists. We also know that the fire department particularly on the civilian side has taken significant um pegs previous peg rounds etc. So we know that there are limited opportunities that we c that we have to basically go and do what we can with respect to cutting more. We're not looking to cut more. We're not looking to impact those services. We want to make sure that there are sufficient mechanics, for example, to service the rigs and so on and so forth. So that is what we're looking at. There are other things that the chief savings officer from the fire department actually stepped forward with. One of them was listed on the examples that we have today. treatment in place, common sense kind of approach where you can bill Medicaid or you can build commercial insurance when treatment is done on the spot, right? And so there's state and federal approval for that. That's one of the examples that's listed on the list. So those are the kinds of things we're looking at, not trying to squeeze more out of what we know has been a hit on the civilian side. With respect to talking about the office of mass engagement, as I mentioned earlier, the office of mass engagement is made up of a collection of offices that have existed in many, many administrations. And those administrations have included a community affairs unit that is very important to reaching out to communities all over the city. Public engagement unit, very important, civic engagement unit. So many offices that reach New Yorkers where they are. And as any incoming administration, there's an office that has new needs and we're looking at fulfilling those new needs so we can fulfill the vision. But it's not like we're creating new offices that haven't existed in previous administrations as well. And it's for community engagement, making sure government is connecting better with those communities. So I would just say that on that. So very clearly we understand affordability as well to your first point as well is an issue. That's why we have an aggressive affordability agenda. Plan by plan, there's been significant chronic underbudgeting. The expenses are outpacing the revenues in the city of New York. We have to find a way to be able to achieve that fiscal balance. chair, just to close out. >> So, so how will you address the municip municipal workers who should have been rehired? Our EMS workers who deserve u a a a pay raise so that they can have a fair living, our paras to have a pay raise so they can make a fair living wage. and and also having worked for CAU, I can tell you that the comm the office of community engagement is doing nothing the same as what was CAU. We were engaging with community groups with community boards. We were not a community organization with political people who were campaign managers coming in and building an a an a workforce, an army so to speak to go out and promote an agenda. >> Government agencies cannot participate in political activities and >> that is absolutely my point >> and this is engagement in communities council member. >> Well, we shall see. Thank you. >> Okay, council member Oay. Good afternoon, director and folks from the administration. Thank you, chair. You know, I join the admin as well as a majority of New Yorkers who have been advocating to tax the wealthiest New Yorkers in terms of creating a new revenue stream here in the city. Um, you know what I really appreciate and I saw this mayor posted a video today announcing some of the cuts that you're making in terms of waste in our government. I agree there is waste within our government. You guys are kind of like the woke doge. uh which I really appreciate and I have some more woke doge ideas for you. Um I know that the mayor has made a commitment uh to promise to disband the NYPD's strategic response group uh since its inception in 2015. The SRG's budget has ballooned. And this is the same budget that has allowed the SRG to become a militarized force that continues to show up at protests and uses force to curtail the First Amendment rights of New Yorkers. Additionally, this is the same group that led the city to paying out millions in settlement fees due to the unconstitutional use of force that brutalized protesters in Moth Haven. It seems like continuing to balloon the budget of this unit while running the risk of the unit continuing to use harmful tactics that could potentially lead to lawsuits is a fiscal risk. Um, I know that the mayor has recently com committed uh to to disbanding the SRG, but I wanted to ask you specifically, how much has the city spent on the SRG both on the budget level and through settlement payments since its inception in 2015? Thank you, council members. So, the SRG uh budget is 66 million26 and um 66 million in 27. Um, that is the budget. We can get you we can follow up on the second part of your of your question. Um, but I think the mayor's positions on the SRG are clear. Um, and that's an ongoing conversation between him and the police commissioner. >> And I don't have a calculator in front of me, but what's 66 + 66? I'm bad at math. I'm sorry. >> 66 + 66 equals 132. >> We just cut $132 million from the city budget. Thank you very much for for the answer to that question and I I can't wait to stand with the mayor on that announcement and disbanding the SRG. >> I was going to do some mouththing, but never mind. Okay. Um Okay, we're going to go to round two. Um and we're going to start with uh Council Member Hudson. Thank you so much uh Chair. Okay. So, as followup to my previous line of questioning, I just want to clarify that people receiving cash assistance should be receiving state funded rental assistance or state FEPS. Is that correct? This is for cash assistance specifically >> that people receiving cash assistance should also be receive they could be eligible for the housing assistance voucher program from the state if that's what you're talking about. >> Yes, >> they could be. >> Okay. Because I just want to Yeah. make a a clear >> the HAVP so-called program. Yeah. >> Right. >> For sure. >> So, so for people who are in the city FEPS program and aren't receiving cash assistance, I'm just trying to make the distinction between city feeps and state FEPS. >> So, for the people who are in the city FEPS program and are not receiving cash assistance, um what are you doing to achieve self-sufficiency? because I think the answer you provided earlier maybe included the folks who are receiving cash assistance. >> Got it. Understood. I'm going to turn it over to Patrick to address that. >> Thank you. >> So there are a number number of different facets in sort of what you're asking. So you are supposed to be eligible for city feeps but uh sorry for cash assistance when you're on city feeps but you don't necessarily have to be on it. So when the budget director was talking about if you are on city fees you know there are those engagement programs. I think some of the things that we are trying to do is increase that that level of engagement even for those that are not on cash assistance to make sure they can get that self-sufficiency to uh eventually roll off. >> Okay. So then it it addresses everyone I would say. >> I mean the goal is to have everybody get this type of you know workforce training or other engagement. Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. And then um Urban Resource Institute or URI launched its people and animals living safely or PALS program in 2013 to provide a co-living environment for people in domestic violence shelters and their pets. Research shows 50% of survivors cannot leave an abusive situation unless they could bring their pets. For the first time since the program launched more than a decade ago, the city agreed to provide $250,000 to support PALS at the recently opened Magnolia Gardens shelter and support PAL's experts and and supplies for pets on site. However, URRI was informed that OM cut the funding line and DSS was not involved in the cut according to their testimony. Why was this funding cut and is it planned to be restored in the executive budget? Um, council member, it is true that the prior administration made a commitment in this regard for the 250 uh,000. There was it was never funded um, at the time. So, it's not a matter of a cut. Don't believe it was funded in the first place. We will evaluate it obviously um, knowing it's a priority for you, but also knowing the the benefit that it can provide for the executive budget. >> Great. Thank you so much. And I also want to echo the sentiments earlier of um just the and I have you know deep respect for uh former director Jacques but the the tone with which you're answering the questions I think has not gone unnoticed. Um and I just want to say that we appreciate it for you and and your whole team. So thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um >> and thank you chair. Appreciate >> Oh yeah. No, of course. Um I forgot uh for round two we're doing three minutes. Um, so but if obviously if you guys have other questions just let me know. Um, and so we're moving to Deputy Speaker Williams. Thank you. Like which questions to ask based off of what people already asked. Okay. Um, how many agencies have submitted savings reports pursuant to the executive order and which if any are outstanding? Um, all agencies that have, and I'm looking at Nathan, I believe, all agencies that have received targets have submitted have submitted proposals. Uh, >> yeah, I would just say um, uh, there there are a few different streams. So, uh, every agency has a chief savings officer. Uh we have reports from every agency consisting of uh the reports that were directed to be issued under the guidance accompanying executive order 12 as well as uh various work streams that they put together with their respective OM task forces to identify savings options. >> What guidance was provided to chief savings officers and identifying and structuring savings proposals? What criteria will the administration use to determine which savings are incorporated into the executive budget? And then if you could summarize the types and total value of savings proposed to date, including how much is recurring versus one time. >> Um, so let me sort of go in reverse order. Um, in order to meet the most urgent objective, which is balancing the budgets for fiscal years 26 and 27, the agencies were prescribed the targets that you're familiar with. All agencies, well, nearly all agencies submitted proposals that either meet or approach those targets depending in some cases a little bit on how you account between the years. Um we are now in a stage of evaluating the viability of those proposals which is a fairly painstaking process but all the agencies are doing their parts in terms of trying to meet the targets. The guidance that they were given directs them to consider uh the sorts of uh functional opportunities that the budget director mentioned earlier in terms of uh that are consistent with this administration's um policy priorities. Right? So insourcing, minimizing contracting expenses, finding program efficiencies, technology modernization, uh even things that are seemingly sort of anodine like lease consolidation. Uh those are all driving the process. We've gotten a lot of comments on those kinds of opportunities. And it is um honestly a mix of short-term and long-term savings again because of the dual objectives of meeting the current targets and finding long-term efficiencies. But a lot of the opportunities identified uh would create permanent savings once fully vetted and implemented. >> Yes. And then what criteria are you all going to use to evaluate what they submitted to make a determination on what actually gets incorporated into the exact budget? >> There are a few different kinds of criteria. So the first uh set of criteria so to speak is just viability and that's really a technical assessment on uh whether the proposals can be implemented and how much they will actually achieve in savings. And then there are more policydriven criteria. Um and these tie back to the cso reports looking at um you know each agency's respective key performance indicators looking at the constituencies served uh the success and relative ut utilization of programs uh and other sorts of indicators that are somewhat more qualitative and evaluative. >> Yeah. But what are the qualitative metrics though like specifically like I know you listed them but like what about them? Like what about utilization? Like what about like constituency serve? Like >> so that's so it's agency by agency but if an agency comes back to us >> so agency by agency you're making a different determination on how to evaluate whether or not their cost savings will be adopted into the exact budget. >> The agencies report back they all have their own key indicators right because they have >> I know but like you all they had to submit it to you and the OM ultimately will review and make a determination on what gets included in the exec. And so I'm trying to understand specifically like what criteria whether it's qualitative or quantitative and then like what type of metrics within the qualitative I guess criteria are you using to make a determination like if I'm said agency and I I produce something to you and I say I'm going to save money in I don't know some particular program how is OM evaluating whether or not that particular program should in fact be cut and included that particular cost saving be included in the exact budget. How are you all evaluating that? >> Well, we're looking at it from a number of different perspectives. Number one, when we look at KPIs and metrics, we're looking at how many New Yorkers are served and for what purpose, right? For example, we're looking at are there other programs that actually perform the same service? Is there redundancy? We're looking at other impacts. Are there state or federal mandates, for example, that are uh mandating this program to move forward? Are there opportunities for grant opportunities from state or federal government, right? What has been the success or lack thereof in the mayor's management report had that that has gone out? So it is a range of different looks that we are asking the agencies and part of the engagement to say bottom line question is this program effective because of all those things and if it's not then can it be cancelled for reinvestment elsewhere >> okay it would be helpful if you guys can send that information like I really want to know like specifically what are you using to evaluate each agency's cost savings proposals um and you just mentioned like whether or not they could apply to grants, but then I think someone testified that you defer to the agencies to apply to federal grants. So then what is that? Is it that OM goes to the agency agency and say hey apply to this grant or I don't understand that if OM technically is not a part of the grants process but then you're assessing that's confusing. Yeah, I I don't I don't perhaps we um um did not uh explain it as clearly enough as we could have typically when it came when it comes to grant opportunities. It is a sort of an overall joint effort. Yes, OMB has more of the centralized role when something is budgeted and we're making sure that there are claims against it. But if we have this engagement with the agencies and we know that there are grant opportunities that are not being pursued then that is a conversation with the agencies to say how can we then pursue those to get you the financial support that you need for those particular things. So it is a joint effort even if the effort lies with the agencies to actually do the grant application and do the grant writing right. So but it if there's an opportunity to pursue that sure we're going to talk to the agencies about that and OMB's involved in that. Sheriff, if I just ask one more question and be added to round three. Um the racial equity plans that are overdue, although I um appreciate the mayor's willingness to um commit to releasing something within the 100 day, I know that something hopefully will be released soon. However, um my continued concern about the racial equity plans maybe over the last two plus years at this point is that they are supposed to be attuned to the budget >> and other cities like Chicago, I hate to say it. Um our good friends in Chicago are doing so much better than us. They have the exact same office, mayor's office of equity and racial justice, they have the exact same OM type of style office. Um, and what they do is that their racial equity plans, the MOERJ um, director in Chicago and the OMB director are literally sitting in a room together talking about the racial equity plans as it pertains to looking at the city's revenue and expenses and making sure that there's some type of equity analysis um, that gets conducted before we even go into to prelim or exec. And so um, again, I know those plans are not released. So even though you guys have plans behind the scenes um but would love to understand what equity analysis are conducted before you propose um any new revenue streams andor how you intend to allocate and appropriate funds across various agencies specifically from an equity lens. Is there any type of analysis that you're currently using? And if you're not currently using a specific analysis, do you plan to use an analysis of this type of kind? Maybe using the racial equity plan to sort of guide your decision in the future. >> Yeah. So, thank you for touching on these very important points because so number one, the mayor committed that we're going to release in the first 100 days the preliminary plan. So, we're coming up on that soon. Um we are looking at and OM is oriented and will be even more oriented with more specificity as these plans are released and plans are coming from the agencies to build in the equity lens as we're evaluating especially on the new need front right because that's coming in it's a new need we want to understand how is this advancing equity so that is something that will is going to be built into the structure in a more formulaic way to understand how the investments are being made the and it can run the gamut. I mean it's things if you look at sort of a recent announcement on the community uh parks benefit initiative $50 million right inherently those go to fund open space in underserved communities that we saw a lot of this during co where there was a not you know an equitable distribution of services across right that and there was an you an effort by the by the Delasio administration to do that and make progress on that and so now that we're seeing that embedded in the racial equity plans. It's incumbent on OM to make sure we're doing that and and have it on our list of things that we're looking at, but working with the agencies on the existing flow, that's the key, right? The existing budget and where things are allocated now that back and forth and how do we address it that way. New needs is one thing, existing resources, we have to manage that together. And understanding that in a world of a dwindling pot, that task becomes a lot harder to figure out. But we can get there. We will get there working together with agencies and frankly with with you and your colleagues because you've championed this and and we're willing to be partners on this. >> Okay. Third round. Thank you. And thank you, Deputy Speaker, because your work and dedication nationally, I will say, um, to a lot of the budget equity pieces is extremely important for New York City. So, I appreciate that so much. Um, and then I forgot to ask these questions on the first round. This is on behalf of Council Member Tiffany Koban, who is not able to be here in person. So, there's just a few questions that she had wanted me to ask on her behalf. So, I'm going to read these. Um last week the mayor officially appointed Reita Francois to lead the newly created Department of Community Safety. Um her first question is the department of community safety introductory report proposes tripling the funding of mobile crisis teams such as ACT and IMT. What is the exact dollar amount corresponding to the tripled funding? Um so on ACT and IMT the funding is sort of um um the OCS budget first is the 260 million as we talked about. >> Um we could follow up with the council member and you on the exact amounts for ACT and IMT. >> Okay. I think it's under DOH. So >> yes. >> Um okay. And then the second if you could get back to us on that that'd be great. And then the second question that she had was how much is anticipated to be added in the executive plan for this department for PS and OTPS. So we are looking at that now in terms of right now the first step was to create the office which has happened move over the existing offices that's the 260 looking at then what the deputy mayor needs for her team to manage and coordinate policy across and that that's something we're evaluating for the executive budget. >> Okay. Um, and then her third question is, is the administration planning to move all the mobile crisis teams funding from DOH to this department? If yes, when will the change be reflected in both agencies budgets? >> Something we're looking at, make sure that the that the deputy mayor has an opportunity to to get settled and and and understand what the central policy coordination uh should be. >> Okay. And I guess my follow-up question to council member Kaban's question is um I'd be curious to see what the answer to that question is because I know that there are certain licensing and other things that are required um that are sitting with DOH. So I'd be it'd be interesting to see if you have clarity around that. Okay. Um perfect. So next I'm going to go to Council Member Wong. Um, thank you, chair. Um, I I would like to start with a CUNI question on their infrastructure. Uh, many of CUNI's buildings have extensive capital needs, including leaky roofs and broken elevators. These maintenance issues severely impact the safety and accessibility of the campuses, which is in turn impacts the student success in higher education. My question is what investment has the administration made to address the structural maintenance and accessibility issues? >> Sure. So I think um you know my time at CUNI as well um I was able to understand full well that the um you invest in our community colleges. Um you that helps you improve in so many different ways. It tracks enrollment. it uh improves morale and boosts morale for faculty and for students alike. And CUNI is an engine of upward mobility. Um and so we have to find a way to support it. They are uh asking for and have pegged through their state of good repair analysis $200 million that would be needed on an annual basis for state of good repair. We are looking at that within the confines of the budget challenges that we have and we hope to invest in CUNI because honestly it's a great investment for the city and state of New York. >> Okay. I understand that the 200 million is split evenly between the city and the state. Is that right? >> Well, typically what would happen is investment in the community colleges is put up by the city and then the state matches on a reimbursement schedule. Um the so the city is looking for the the CUNI is looking for community colleges $200 million for state of good repair which is calculated based on a percentage of the replacement value of the actual building stock itself. And so they're asking for 400 million from the state for the senior colleges. So together hopefully we can meet those needs and therefore critical system upgrades, you know, chillers, building systems HVAC windows lab improvements. So all those things are critical to making sure that we improve boost enrollment which will help CUNI continue to fulfill its mission. >> Is this in the executive plan uh for these capital needs? >> We're working on it for the uh executive plan. We haven't made any final decisions. All things capital, we're trying to keep we're trying to make room in our debt capacity limit uh because there's a constitutional limit on how much debt we could incur on the capital side. So, we want to make sure we leave room for housing. We want to make sure we leave room for CUNI, etc. So, we're figuring all of that out. >> Okay. Thank you. Um my second question is the city's budget has grown 42.8 billion over the last decade. It is now 16 billion higher than has grown at the rate of inflation and revenues remain strong. Uh given how much we spend and the strength of revenues, why isn't the city able to provide critical highquality services without raising taxes? That's exactly the kind of effort we're undertaking with the chief savings officers to say what kind of savings can we achieve without cutting services, looking at redundant contracts, looking at ways to root out ineffective programs, looking at way to do more insourcing. All of those things are trying to get exactly at that. Can we can we have um some uh savings that are produced so that the expense and revenue imbalance comes greater into line? >> Thank you. Thank you, chair. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Stevens. >> Hi, I'm back. Um, I just have um two quick questions. Um, and just thinking about um I know CMS has brought up a couple of times, but organizations CMS organizations rely on like um legal aid, CGI, legal services to meet the needs of eradicating gun violence. Um, and the last the last administration pegged them at $1.5 million, which basically eliminated this program. Um, and I know that we're in the process of transferring a lot of these services over from DYCD to the Office of Public Safety. I'm just wanted to one just say, are you aware of that? And is there any talks about restoring this PEG that was put in by the last administration that pretty much took away the legal services part of this work of of the CMS groups? >> Yeah, I do important work and we're trying to figure out in the executive budget how we can make sure they're well resourced for that effort. Um it is an ongoing conversation based on the budget challenges we have. I hope we can get there. >> Yeah, I know we have budget challenges, but like you know if we have programs and we're not fully funding them, we know that we're setting them up to not be successful. And uh my next question is one that you know for me has been I've been really disheartened us to hear so much talks about affordable city an affordable city but we really haven't been talking about affordable city for young people. The unemployment rate for young people is at an alltime high of about 21%. And for black youth New Yorkers between the ages of 16 to 21, I believe we're at like 24%. Which is extremely high. And you know, we keep talking about affordable city, but honestly, we're not talking about affordable city for young people. Um, and especially programs like the cornerstones and beacons, which are typically holistic programs that that support families and young people from a wide range of ages um ages. We haven't really seen any investments in this and I know we're in a tight budget, but I like to say this all the time. If we invest in our young people on the front end, we won't have to invest in them on the back end, which we are now seeing because we have triple the number of young people in secured detentions. So, how are we looking at this budget to ensure that it's affordable for all people, including young people who often feel like they're not part of this conversation? >> Yes, definitely. I mean, we concur with everything that you've said there. I mean, we need to be able to uh create more jobs for youth. We know and aside from the summer youth employment program, which we know there's investment in, so on and so forth, but what is it systemically, structurally that we can be doing not only on the educational front, but also to make sure that we're uh uh you know, working with our corporate community to be able to see what kind of availability there are in jobs there. This is coming back to CUNI. another the hu huge priority for the chancellor of career connected learning in curriculum. So we have to see how we can boost that so that we're making sure that students that are flowing through CUTUNI are getting internships apprenticeships connections with private sector employers. So that is something in the beyond program that we're looking at to be able to >> and we also have to be thinking about young people who might not be in CUNI and people who who are not there and so how are we meeting them? Where are we at? I bring this up just in the sense of like I want us to make sure as we're thinking about equity in the budget, we're also talking about young people and having them be a part of the conversation and although it is a very tight budget currently, I do not want us to to not invest in our young people because in that mistake, which we've already done, we have seen that we have over 300 young people in secure detention every night and we're expanding our secure attention detention centers because of our lack of investment. So, thank you. >> Thank you for lifting that up. Thank you, Council Member Stevens. Um, and next we have Council Member Ald. >> Hi. This is a I guess I'm going to ask the same question in a different way, but you know uh with the initiatives that the mayor announced um are dep you know they're dependent on you know the a municipal workforce that already has existing challenges with vacancies and funding. um and there's nothing in the mayor's uh preliminary budget to address these challenges. Um which make these initiatives um you know un underfunded or unfunded mandates. Um what plans are in place to prevent and I've been I've been bargaining contracts for 36 years so I know how collective bargaining works. Um, but if there isn't a commitment from from the mayor, from the administration to uh create equity, uh, pay equity in the municipal workforce, um, there's no amount of collective bargaining that's going to get us there because, you know, uh, pattern bargaining does not deal with those dis just those structural pay disparities. ities. There has to be funding for it. Um, and I want to know what plans are in place to rectify that. Um, and prevent further vacancies and retention issues in some of these jobs that I mentioned, par professionals, EMTs. There are others. >> Sure. But um >> those are just two examples of where we we have we've had real difficulties in retaining uh EMTs, recruiting EMTs and par profofessionals with an expanding now you know uh mandate for them you know to do this work. >> Sure. Absolutely. And as someone who as you noted, you know, you've done decades in collective bargaining, so you know what can happen at the bargaining table. And I think you can look to examples just in this last round of bargaining where there have been equity funds that have been established through the collective bargaining process and through the table within the overall framework of the pattern. We understand pattern bargaining is not perfect, right? And we understand that and there are way but it's been the way that collective bargaining has gone. There are bespoke equity issues that we have to look at through the collective bargaining process. We also know that the we have the budget challenge. So that doing things outside the collective bargaining process exacerbates the funding challenge. Um so we have to be sensitive to that and figure out how to move forward. As I noted the equity issues in EMT, we're attuned to that. We're attentive to that. We understand the fire commissioner has come out with her position on it very strongly and we hope at the bargaining table we can we can come to a conclusion >> but are you going to budget for it's a budget question you know I mean the the you have to budget for potential you know increases or pay equity you know to address those pay equity issues That's unfortunately the challenge and we know for example I know that there are significant costs associated with both uh EMT and the PAR professionals and we have to see how we can make it all work within the budget constraints we have. You know, again, in order for these programs to work, be heard, community safety, you know, uh you need to have this work force, a workforce in place that's going to be able to, you know, perform uh those job duties. Um and in you know areas that are underserved you know em you know response times for EMTs you know it it just continues to grow uh creating also disparities in in in many communities. So I I just want you to really uh just want to know what the plan is to to deal with that. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, next we have Council Member Lewis, followed by Wrestler, and then Pete Sanchez. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, I just have uh two follow-up questions uh for some folks in my community. So, uh, Trauma Recovery Center was previously discussed and was told was effectively earmarked for the East Flatbush section in central Brooklyn. uh that this continues they this particular area continues to face significant needs related to community violence and trauma yet there does not appear to be a clear commitment reflected in the FY27 preliminary budget. Can OMB clarify whether funding for this project has been included and if not why has it not been prioritized and can OM um share for the council and the public um if we could rely on OMB's outyear commitments and will OM commit to greater transparency and accountability and how these commitments are reflected and maintained in future financial plans? We're happy to follow up with you, council member, on the specific location that you are referencing. I mean, obviously, I know it's important to you and and you know, in your community. So, >> well, central Brooklyn as a whole. >> Well, certainly. Um, and this is important a priority for us, too. We have to see what we can do in the executive budget going forward. So, we're happy to follow up with you on that. Um, and as the um whole, you know, I mean, office of community safety takes hold and obviously the other pieces as well on the community safety front. uh we are are looking at all those opportunities for for funding hopefully if we get to a more stable budget situation as well. Um so we're happy to work with you on that. And then in terms of transparency in the out years, I mean that's really what we're trying to do with all of the recognition of the unfunded or the underbudgeted needs is to uh is to really introduce transparency uh certainty derisking in the budget. If we can see the numbers in the outy years, we can effectively plan for it. You can effectively see how you're bending the curve and how policy interventions are getting at the the the crux of what is uh a higher trajectory on some of these programs. >> All right. Thank you so much. Thank you, Chair. >> Thank you. Okay. Next, we have Council Member uh Wrestler, Sanchez, Brewer, and then Epstein. >> Great. Thank you so much, Chair Lee. Um five plus hours in. How are we feeling? >> Great. You lost Tara. >> Hopefully she did, but she'll be back moment. >> You'll be okay. >> Yes, certainly. >> You sure? >> Yes. >> All right. Do you want me to wait until Tara comes back? >> I'm in your hands. >> All right. There we go. If you say so. Um, so I wanted to just highlight a few things as we continue continue to focus on some savings opportunities. Um, firstly, uh, city agency leasing. Uh, as I've mentioned in my previous remarks, we saw dramatic headcount reduction under the Adams administration. Um, that is continuing and yet we saw the amount of space that the city lease actually increase um, despite more remote work efforts uh, expanding across the workforce. That makes no sense. I I think there were a number of corrupt real estate deals that Eric Adams and Jesse Hamilton and others advanced during the previous administration that expand that explained some of that lease space. But there are real opportunities for savings. How do we maximize efficient uh expeditious savings opportunities and incentivize agencies to want to reduce their footprint when I think generally they don't receive the savings in their own budgets when there are reductions in space. Yes, thank you so much for that. The um effort of the chief savings officers is looking exactly at that. There's is a particular focus on that in some of the examples that were highlighted in the mayor's press release this morning. >> They were small amounts of money couple thousand. It was >> we'll get there but we're looking at that office print. We're also looking in fact, you know, OMB we had uh we had Yeah. So we had that too. So we are looking at that and lease space looking at other areas in consolidation um and trying to figure out what's needed what's not needed for those savings at large that what we need I know you know whether it cruise to the agency budget versus not but overall as a city we need those savings. I think that we need I I I I'm I'm hopeful that the chief savings officers will help, but I think we need centralized coordination between your team and DASS to actually bring the hammer down because there's this is an area where we can absolutely achieve consequential savings. Um if there's some more aggressive management >> in you may we trust. >> In you may we trust. Agree. Um no argument there. Um although maybe Gail claims she knows knows her longer than we do. Um so I'd like to shift to uh a couple other savings opportunities. Contract savings speaker raised this. It's been a you know as the contracts chair we've been looking a lot at this too. We saw we often see appreciated that highlighted in this morning's announcement included a number of uh efforts to insource consulting contracts that don't that are unnecessary that we can bring that capacity in house. wondering if there's a broader, more comprehensive review happening from OM and consultation with Mox and potentially others to evaluate whether some of these consulting contracts that are just not the best use of resources and are costing us a lot of money. I mean, DOE spent $760,000 on that magical 3K report about the future of 3K that we waited on for two years that taught us nothing. Department of Sanitation spent $1.6 million on a deote contract to teach us that trash should go in bins. I mean like I'd like us to be a little bit more aggressive on this and wondering if there is a comprehensive review taking place. >> There is absolutely a comprehensive review taking place and that is through the chief savings officers and we're making sure we're getting that holistic view. We have talked to Mox for example to your point and looked at for example let's look at the categories of these different um contracts right professional services you have a bucket of contracts that I think is in excess of a billion dollars right but within that you have a multitude of different contracts you mentioned some management consultants that put out reports okay we look at that but under professional services you're also getting engineers and architects that are looking at things that are critical to scoping and capital projects and so on. >> We're not abolishing all of them. It's just an opportunity for saving. >> But that is exactly right. Looking at that as a methodical view to say what's under professional services. And by the way, there are some requirements contracts with some of the big management consultant firms that you can have cost avoidance. Don't don't like let's stop and look at even if you have a program and you have a management consultant contract. Can you do this in-house? not only in your own agency but can other agencies within the city framework lend those particular services or other adjacent city organizations or covered entities can they be able to provide value there too so I hope that shows that we are 100% looking at that and the chief savings officer getting to it with a more granular focus >> I really appreciate can I ask one savings question one more which is DOC headcount uh 80% of DOC headcount is in uniform which seems unnecessarily really high. Uh we have corrections officers in the bakery at uh at uh Riker's Island when we should have civilians that would cost a whole lot less for the city of New York and probably have higher retention as well. Um I believe freedom, you know, right now we're it's 7,000 out of the 8,800 positions are uniform headcount. Is there a broader reviewer analysis happening? We have great new leadership at DOC to revisit whether there's a better calibration between a civilian and uniform headcount that should be happening at that agency that might be able to save us resources. >> Commissioner Richards is taking a fresh look at that and obviously we have the remediate remediation manager as well. So there has to be a joint conversation there. But that's exactly the kind of thing he's looking at to see if if there are ways to improve sort of overall the functionality of the agency and understand where we are, what we need in terms of fixed posts and and other needs within the Department of Corrections. >> Thank you very much, director. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Sorry. Um, next we have Council Member uh Sanchez Brewer and then Epstein. >> Thank you, Chair. Um, lost my question. And I was like, "No." Uh, hello again. Back for round two. Okay. On street vending. In January, this council overrode the previous mayor's veto and enacted sweeping street vending reforms, including dramatically increasing access to both food and general vendor licenses and permits at the Department of Health and Consumer Worker Protection, respectively, and ensuring sufficient enforcement capacity at the Department of Sanitation. and at SPS expanding outreach and education as candidate, then mayor elect, and then as mayor, uh Mayor Mamdani committed to supporting the critical work of implementing these reforms and ending halalflation. Uh and while an executive director for street vending services has been identified, very excited about Karina. The proposed preliminary budget does not include new needs in any of the other agencies in connection with implementing these reforms. We think uh that well, DOH has four lines. We think there we need 12 more. DC DCWP's fiscal impact statement on this bill uh said they needed 26 more lines. DCNY we think we need 30 more enforcement agents. And then at even at SBS uh Kadina is going to need three more staff. So recognizing that my colleagues on the council are very good at highlighting all the places where we should do more and spend more. I do want to note that IBO estimates that licensing these vendors could bring $60 million in revenue to the city of New York. So, one, on the staff lines, do you agree with these numbers? And two, um, how does the administration plan to comply with local law 54 of 2026? >> Yes, absolutely. So, thank you. I know this issue is near and dear to your heart, and I know that, um, you know, the enactment of the local law was a couple of weeks, I believe, before prelim came out. So, it was sort of like, you know, um, uh, it was a tight window to try to evaluate the full needs. and we're we're going to evaluate those needs as we have exec that's coming up. Um and you know, street vending is part of the fabric of our streetscape and of our um uh culture really in New York City. So, we want to find a way to um obviously we have to find a way to comply number one with the law, right? But also to support the effort in a way that um you know uplifts the sort of vibrant street vending community. Um so we look forward to working with you on that. >> Right. Thank you so much. I look forward to seeing seeing more reflected in Exec. Um and then my second set of questions is, you know, again, uh talking about this moment of transition. The mayor has said that he would honor prior commitments made through resonings and those kind of discussions. So, I just wanted to check in on updates uh first on the Kingsbridge Armory uh redevelopment that we voted uh to affirm in no October. Um there one one of the commitments in there that's most important to me uh given community violence in my neighborhood is 100 after school seats through the compass programs um and small business supports for the businesses that are feeling pressure because of the Kingsbridge Armory redevelopment. Wanted to check on that status and and if I may finish the question chair um in city of Yes 2024 uh there were 200 lines added for DCP buildings and uh HPD staff lines. I heard from buildings in HPD yesterday, but can you update us on the DCP lines? Um, and then just got off the phone with DCP Harlem River North study is happening. So, thank you. And then the the last question is on Jerome resoning 2018, there were some unfulfilled commitments regarding small business supports. >> We'll be happy to follow up with you on all of that. I think that um in the preliminary budget we did put in just in terms of a to show sort of commitment on previous points of agreement memos and and we we did the seeds uh investment. I think it was uh Jamaica and for Long Island City. So as a general rule, we know that um uh in order for these resonings to occur, there are agreements and those agreements uh you know are important to you and your colleagues. So, we're trying to figure out how we can honor those. Again, we did that for seed. We'll continue to do that for these others, but I do want to talk to you more closely about Kingsbridge and all the other things you've raised. Happy to. >> Excellent. Thank you. This is We're going to get it done. Thank you, Chair. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Go ahead, Council Member Brewer. >> Thank you very much. You're very impressive, sir, because you haven't moved one of those pieces of paper. It's all in your head, and you have a big book, and none of those damn pages have moved. Um, I hope these questions weren't asked because I would had to go to immigration, but I did with IBO a few years ago a report that said $2 billion uncollected fines and fees and then just recently the uh Amazon was brought to light by streets blog only 10 million. So I guess my question is I know some of it is uncollectible but it's hard for people to hear uncollectible when they're paying. So what are we doing? And I know finance oath everybody's involved but how are we making sure that we have more collecting than what is two billion a year is a lot not to collect. >> It is a lot and I know that you've highlighted this many times council member and uh we take that to heart um that that is an opportunity that we don't want to leave um you know unexplored. And so we've been working with the Department of Finance to make sure that they are upping their communications with all of the entities or all of the um respondents, if you will, to the ECB violations with the with the with the understanding what was raised before about about buildings and violations on those buildings and be able to place leans. But there's a whole other sea of other uncollected debt that we want to make sure we're using uh either payment plans or ways first to try to understand how people can pay and pay you know on a plan. But then we also have collection agencies obviously um you know on contract there and there are different levels of getting there. So we're exploring that as well how to how to improve that perhaps using um AI and and you know other things to improve those collections. I think at the same time one of the things that included in the preliminary budget is an ECB amnesty program. We've done it before. We think we can do it again more targeted approach to generate that kind of revenue and make a dent against that 2 billion. >> All right. So you are suggesting an amnesty program depending on how it would work. >> Absolutely we are and we want to be careful about the breath and approach to it because again we don't want to sort of we want to hold folks accountable too. So those, you know, dilapidated buildings that we're looking at to place lean so that, you know, tenants have livable, humane conditions, like we don't want to just give them a free pass either, right? So we want to we want to make sure we're being methodical about >> You'd think Amazon could pay. >> Well, >> I know. I'm just saying they owe $10 million. >> Yes. We have to I think we have to engage with them on a different level. >> They need to pay. >> They need to pay 100%. So we have to look at engaging with them on a different level. Exactly. Insurance. I know this came up previously. Um it's happening on the state discussion, local discussion. How are you looking at this? I know the speaker has a bill to try to make it uh more transparent in terms of what's out there. How are we looking at the issue of insurance in terms of less having to be paid? >> You mean health insurance? >> Yes, health insurance. No, just generally. I know the city's indemnified. I know that. But I'm just saying when you build a building, you got to have this high insurance rates. It's like everything you do is caught up with the insurance companies and in one way or another the city is paying. Is that something that's on your radar or that's not OM? >> Absolutely on our radar and actually talking about it in the housing context uh because we want to make sure that we're firing in all cylinders when it comes to supply um and on preservation. So, we want to make sure that any of these loans um uh or or any of these projects um have the ability to do that. There are some interesting ideas about how to do it. Yes. And that our housing team has those conversations are going on. We're not settled yet on approaches, but yes, it's on our radar. >> All right. One other quick question. So the I think the state's going to come up with five billion. I believe that not through any of the uh situations that you have today. Although Syracuse, Buffalo, and Rochester are worrisome for the governor having spoken to about them because you know New York gets money and then what about those cities that are also in so maybe you could give some money to them a little bit and then they would be happy and the governor would be happy. It's an idea something to think about. But what I'm saying is um if they don't come up with the five billion, are you think you're going to have to do a PEG program? I know your suggestion is to try to do the uh borrowing here and there, but would you have to do some expense cuts? do you think or you would stick with what your program is? >> So, >> I do think they're going to come up with the five, but we'll see. >> I am equally optimistic that we're going to get there. Um, and I think that we've been having positive conversations throughout and between the executive budget and the one house budget significant significant progress has been made. Obviously, the final analysis is what counts, >> right? >> Um, and you know, we then have to work really closely together to figure out how we'll balance if we don't get there. social adult daycare centers. You know what they are? They're horrible. They have uh taking people's blood pressure every minute and then they charge them Medicaid and they don't go to social uh support with the regular centers. I'm just saying look at them. It's a state issue, but they charge Medicaid every day. And it seems to me we pay part of that. I would look at that as a revenue enhancer just to get rid of them and the state and the city would save money. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Council member Ste. >> Okay. Okay. I know you've been here a long time, so I just wanted to go back to the revenue. I know we've heard a lot about this like un unrealized revenue, taxes, like we, you know, almost a billion dollars from HPD, DOB fines, parking fines. What of that do you think is potentially realized uh in the next fiscal year? Although, you people say it's up to four billion dollars in a rears at this point that's owed to the city. I mean we do do you have any uncle? Yeah, >> I'll turn it over to Joshua Bolstein and address some of that. >> In terms of right ACB we've talked about and and we we all know the challenges in collecting and we I I think the number that uh one of your members said is something like 45% or something and it's really it is low and it's a challenge. We are constantly working on it. In terms of parking, right? Um that's another most of that money actually gets collected. It just takes time, right? You you have since you do actually have enforcement mechanisms like the marshalling program, the booting program. You actually do get most of that money in. >> So I only get I just have a little left time. So, so you you're representing here that on the parking side you're collecting most of the money, but you're making some deals with big companies so they can get unlimited parking and you're giving them some kind of deals. Is there attempt to re-evaluate that because basically the Amazons of the world, the you know FedExes of the world, you have these deals that they pay a portion of it. So, >> yeah, that was I know what you're talking about. It's a stipulated fine program. the DOF so as former DOF commissioner yes I know that the issue is >> is one of is it diminishing returns right the reason why this program is in place is because of the administrative apparatus needed to adjudicate those it's not so much letting them off the hook it's what's the best deal for the city of New York to be able to >> I hear you but just think about that h impact that it has on the city of New York if there if people continue to double park and there aren't implications so I thinking about those fines and those impacts that it has on her daily life, >> the ECB fines, DOB, those like people just don't feel like the city's doing anything to deal with all these arars. And if there's an opportunity here, if there's legislative changes, we need something from Albany to be able to you utilize these tools in your tool belt. I think it's really important. Um, and I don't I just feel like we're not using enough tools and we need to figure out what we can do. And then we've heard a lot from nonprofits around outstanding money that's being o that they're owed and that OMB is holding up a lot of their contracts years back contracts like tens of millions of dollars for small nonprofits. Can we commit to kind of moving that process forward for them to help them because they're are having budget problems now because they're not getting paid from 2022 or 2023 contracts and we're, you know, 2026 and going to 2027. Yeah, we we've made some progress on advanced payments. Um we know there's more to do. We know that these organizations provide very essential services on tight budgets. We need to make sure we we do more. Um but we have done some on advanced payments. There's been previous commissions and working groups on this. We know the council's very passionate about this. So, we'll continue to work on it to get them the resources. >> We can't rely on these groups to do the work we need in our communities if we can't pay them. That's right. At some point, they're just going to go under and it's going to be worse for all of us. >> Understood. Yeah. Great. >> Thank you. And we've been joined by Council Member Schulman, and I'm going to pass it over to our deputy speaker. >> Okay, I'm back. Um, I I feel you kind of answered this question today, but um, how is the administration accounting for the fiscal impact of federal policy changes already affecting New Yorkers, including SNAP eligibility, reductions in essential plan coverage, declining vaccination rates, federal student loan caps, and declining international student enrollment, expanded work requirements for public benefits, and cuts to climate and infrastructure funding? Where in the budget are resources allocated to respond to these impacts and how is the city planning to absorb or off offset them? >> Sure. So um one of the things that we did so on food uh and mentioned before we did we increased the number of SNAP eligibility specialists in the preliminary budget. Um we also tripled the food budget um uh to $54 million for the HR community food program. We also included I think 3.1 million for the get the good stuff food program. Uh so on food that's what we've been able to do. on health care and Medicaid. Again, it flows through the state and we were um again happy to see the decision by CMS um center for Medicaid and Medicare services that they will not require on the on the Aliesa population uh to be removed from the essential plan so that the state doesn't have to incur that cost from its general fund which obviously helps prevent the trickle down effect to health and hospitals on sort of pass along cost cuts and impact You mentioned too some of the stuff on our students on CUNI for example and the stuff the stuff the provisions that are coming from uh you know HR1 with respect to loan caps and so on and so forth and thankfully the worst of that bill was avoided which was uh PEL hits right uh so PEL grants are there but on the student loan side we know the payment plans are going to become more restrictive and less affordable so we have to be able to find a way to help with the apparatus at CUNI to help with that loan counseling so that outstanding debt um doesn't uh just accumulate and accumulate. >> So in the exact those things will be reflected. >> We're looking at that for the executive budget given the fiscal challenges um you know along with other needs in all of these other areas. But we have made progress on SNAP and food uh in the preliminary budget and we hope to build on that in concert with the state because the state's done a lot here too on food. >> Thank you. Um why does the administration continue to project lower costs for waste export and organics processing than IBO estimates? And then given the rising costs, why are outyear projections flat or declining? Um effectively creating a funding cliff. >> Yeah, it's something we're actively looking at. I think that the reason is we're looking with DSNY to actively manage what those savings ideas that that were out there, right? So, the chief savings officers are looking at that, but also savings that have already been in place about staffing needed at the at the export facility. So, it's something that we have a policy intervention to actively manage. It's not like we know the expenses are going to increase. We're trying to manage them and have it plateaued. >> Okay. Um, and did not have this question already written down, but Department of Sanitation budget like it's the lack of transparency. And I think this goes back to the hill that I'll die on for the next four years, which is around like budget equity and how unequitable our budget process is as a city. It's so hard to even figure out how we're even allocating money from a userfriendly average New Yorker perspective. Um, as you know, OMB is perpetually not in compliance with the charter that mandates way more units of appropriation than you all ever do budget to budget. Um, which really doesn't even allow us to make an assessment on whether or not you are truly allocating or generating revenue in equitable ways because we can't even see it um or see it in real ways. Obviously through coding and a whole bunch of other weird things that people have to do behind the scenes in spreadsheets some things can be um ascertained but it's just really not transparent way. So to the sanitation budget um is there a way for you to disagregate um the budget by way of garages garage to garage? like can you share like how much a particular garage is getting um in Midtown Manhattan versus South Bronx versus Staten Island? Um it's a question that the former deputy speaker actually asked many times um and Department of Sanitation nor OM could ever really provide um clear information on how money gets spent from garage to garage. Um and clearly we can't see it um because that is not how the budget looks visibly to us because there's no specific units of appropriation by geographic location. >> Yeah. Um we're happy to look into that specific area. I know I think I think um there was a brief conversation that we had about this. I think it it's the deployment the nature of the deployment of the uniform sanitation personnel that I think that the results of that may be skewed because you can move around the the various pieces but let me come back to you on that. I think that was >> yes and equally to that point around the metric for like regular cleaning. So I know Department of Sanitation has a metric to determine tonnage when like a new building comes, regular trash pickup and resources do get allocated to adjust if you have more population in a particular community there is like some type of methodology that they use. But there, as far as I know, given my many conversations with chiefs in Department of Sanitation, there is no metric to um determining how to allocate resources by like just regular cleanup. There's no way like if you have a community that has more people in the community outside of like the regular trash pickup that you have to do, the department doesn't have a way to um even make an assumption on whether or not a garage should get more money or not for regular regular just cleanliness. There's no particular metric that Department of Sanitation uses. So would be great if that could also be figured out because I think it'll help to address a lot of concerns that members have around cleanliness in their communities which again is different from a regular trash pickup from a building or from someone's house. And there's no metric for them to determine whether or not more resources should be allocated to particular communities. >> Yeah, I I I I totally hear you on that. We are looking I mean it's it's interesting because you do see some uh instances where there are there have been specific um um deployments to address acute cleanliness issues in particular areas. Um it's been done on an ad hoc basis. It hasn't been done across the board. But if I'm what I'm what I'm hearing is that there should be a more systematic way to rate and to look at conditions. >> I think so. It's based off of one day the chief, you know, calls whoever in central and says, "Hey, I need an extra garage, a extra truck for trash pickup." And then based off of whatever resources are available in the city, then whomever higher up makes a decision. Okay, fine. for garage for Queen South, you get two trucks today to do extra cleanup, but it's it's like it's no um specific way to make a determination on like the resources that certain garages truly need. It's like on a request basis and whomever again higher up making a decision on whether or not a extra you know truck should be allocated on any given it's like did not make any sense to me that almost every single day or I don't even I don't even think it was weekly maybe it was weekly but it was not more than weekly like these chiefs have to make requests and then have to then hear from whoever higher up whether or not their request is even going to be you know properly received to get any additional resources. Um I just have a few questions on child care really quickly. How does childcare vouchers factor into the administration's plan to expand access to free or reduced cost care for children's ages 0 to six? >> So we were um appreciative we are appreciative and we were happy to reach an agreement with the governor um on day eight um 1.2 2 billion. Of the $1.2 billion, there was $475 million that was committed uh that would go to help fund uh childcare vouchers. Um and that is to uh ensure that the existing number of families remained on um the the eligibility roles. We are uh acutely aware that there is a waiting list and a need that is there to expand There may be additional state dollars that end up coming through which we're hopeful for and that we are hoping is enough so that we could start to reach families on the wait list. We don't know if it will be enough. The program is already operating with a cliff that we've uh that we funded um like an unbudgeted amount. So, we're looking at making sure that we can continue just with the current eligibility rules. We'd love to get to a point where we're reaching additional um families. >> Yeah. So um to that point, what level of voucher utilization is projected in the out years and then exactly what you said with additional state funding and also the existing weight list that you just noted, how does the administration plan to scale across and ensure eligible families are served? >> Yeah, I mean I think it's our all of our goals to make sure that it's served. It's a question of budget and we have to figure out how we're going to be able to fund that. Clearly, we got there on making sure the 475 475 million helped us with the current eligibility. Again, if there are additional from the child care block grant funds that are statewide that we'll find out if more of it is coming to the city. If it's more than what the current cost is for the eligibility families, we can then hopefully move forward to expand. And lastly, not really a question, but like a statement of, you know, just thinking about something. Um, I just had a conversation with Deputy Mayor Kirsten. I think I'm saying her name correctly. Um, this was about paving and I know that the city is currently using the 311 data once again to decide which communities to allocate resources to, which ultimately to me, even though the work is being carried out by agencies, I also look at this as like a budget thing. like how are we allocating resources across New York City? And while 311 is a great system that is also imperfect, the over reliance on the city to use 311 data to make a determination on how to allocate resources is also inequitable because we know that certain communities use 311 more than other communities. And just because certain communities send a thousand and1 311 complaints about potholes does not mean that the community that sends none does not have potholes. And so I know um you know based off of my very brief conversation with her, she is looking at ways to see where they're getting the most 31 complaints and you know trying to figure out a way is can they go to a particular community if they have no complaints. I know it's a big city um with a lot of people and we have to find the most efficient ways to address concerns and allocate resources, but I just want to encourage the administration to not have an over reliance on 311 data when determining how to allocate resources. And I've had success because I actually have a district that for the most part is very active and they do a lot of 311 complaints. I also educate the community on the importance of data collection. And even though 311 doesn't always solve your problems and is very frustrating, the data is really important to again how you all determine how to allocate resources. I've been able to get extra cameras for illegal dumping because I had the most 301 complaints for illegal dumping. But it's still not a fair system because again, not all communities use 31 in the same ways. And so I do hope that this is something that you can think about in the many metrics and data points and things that you all use when you're analyzing the budget to think of other ways to ensure that we are allocating whatever resources from whatever agency fairly across the city across the entire um city and not just specific communities. We will absolutely take that back and have that discussion. >> Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Um, and Council Member Schelvin just has a few questions on DHM. >> Thank you. Um, hi. I'm sorry I wasn't here earlier, but I was watching virtually, so and I had some other hearings um to attend. So, the So, I'm chair of the health committee. Um, and welcome. The CO 19 pandemic highlighted the importance of preparedness, supply chain stability and surge capacity ac across the public health system. Maintaining adequate stockpiles of personal protective equipment PPE, ensuring healthcare workforce readiness and preserve preserving surveillance infrastructure such as testing and tracing capacity remain essential to protecting New Yorkers from future public health emergencies. The fiscal 2027 preliminary plan includes $25 million for emergency preparedness and response. Does the fiscal 2027 preliminary budget accurately reflect the full cost of maintaining public health emergency preparedness and response capabilities? >> We are uh always constantly working with the department of health and mental hygiene on this. We know that um regarding funding needs and emergency preparedness, this constantly comes up in their new needs and we're evaluating on the executive budget. Um we know that since co there have been valuable lessons learned. Um and we know that um we also have to be cognizant of the fact that there have been cuts which we're hopeful now that thank you again to the governor's commitment to reverse some cuts and cost shifts to article six public health funding. There's more that can be done clearly at the federal government to have contingency plans so that emergency preparedness in the event of any >> public health emergency can be can be solved >> especially as CO 19 funding is going away. Exactly. Exactly. >> Um, how does OMB evaluate whether the city has sufficient surge capacity in the event of another public health emergency, including funding for temporary staffing or emergency contracts? >> Well, we uh again engage with the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to en ensure that we know what their needs are and what preparedness means and what they need to be well resourced. I think that they have uh plans on the books. We want to make sure we act actualize those plans uh and what the resources there are. Obviously, we have a budget challenge. We need to make sure how we can get there in the executive budget, but um it's a priority. >> Yeah. Because we, as you know, we can't rely on the federal government anymore and we have to be an entity onto ourselves and I know that the Department of Health just recently joined the World Health Organization on its own. So, these are things that, you know, needs that may not have been there before. So, I just wanted to. >> All right. Thank you very much, chair. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we are nearing the end. Um, so I just have a couple questions that uh I was asked to ask um in terms of education. Um, so as you know with the conversations at the state level um looking at foundation aid formula for for ELL's which was switched from 0.53 to 6 um and added a weight for students experiencing homelessness and living in foster care. Um the Senate version also included in the one house bill um increased school aid for pupil transportation and the assembly includes further proposals for additional funding for 3K and class size. Um, IBO estimates that the ELLL proposal would add 69 million of foundation aid funding in FY27. And IBO also estimates that the Senate proposal for the added weight for students experiencing homelessness and living in foster care would add 93 million in funding for FY27 and that the assembly proposal would add 486 million. the fiscal policy institute found a similarly robust estimate for these proposals. Um and have just the question is have you conducted your own estimates for these proposals and if so what are they? >> Yeah. So thank you chair. So we we are as you know supportive of the additional weights >> that we have and the chancellor has been very vocal about this and he's testified to >> uh Albany about that um and the additional weights in particular for ELLL or service uh to homeless students etc. So in terms of what's in the one houses we know that they've put in those funds to be able to support that. It's important for the assembly and the senate to be able to do that. So, we're um looking at their numbers. I mean, I think the ELLL the 69 million I think is fairly in line. Uh the other one we have to look at in terms of what we're what we're seeing and we'll be able to get back to you. >> Okay, perfect. Um how about any other thoughts on the funding proposals in one house? Is the are are you advocating for these proposals to be included in the state enacted budget? I'm guessing I know the answer but just wondering. >> Yeah, in general, um we are very um heartened by the executive by the executive budget and as well as the one house budgets which look to add $5 billion each and there's a suite of different proposals. Some of them overlap. Uh some of them are different in terms of the ways that the Senate and Assembly got there. Um but we think that there is significant and important and timely consensus around reinstituting some form of aim aids and incentives to municipalities for example that we haven't gotten since 2010 um as a city. Um, so things like that, things like other um, you know, the reversal of cuts and cautions I mentioned before the adult shelter reimbursement, single adult, that's going back to the 1990s 50/50 split. Um, on the on the raise the age funding and foster care reimbursement, also a reversal of those. So between that and the suite of tax options that were put out there um and pretty much alignment on those except for I think the Senate put in the gold bullion uh tax exemption whereas the assembly didn't. But um I think by and large they get to the five billion and we're hopeful that in the final analysis it's included. >> Perfect. Okay. And just really quickly on early childhood education, um 300 million was added in fiscal year 26 to cover a budgeting shortfall for early childhood education programming. Can you detail and elaborate on the areas in the budget that had previously been underbudgeted? >> Sure. It's really just the early childhood education um apparatus. So we know for example the actuals the year prior was about 2.5 billion and then this year it was 300 million short. Um and then there was another 80 million that had to be added because I think a head start uh seats went away. So that is why you see 3 to 380 but that was literally going to fund the existing operation of early child education for UPK and for 3K >> um and to stabilize that. The child care deal that was done with the governor was also to help stabilize but also to expand on the 3K so that we make sure we're getting to the contracted providers and make sure that those fill rates will be funded if as we do more outreach and get those you know children in those seats and then of course the 2K expansion as well and childcare vouchers which I mentioned before that's what makes up the 1.2 2 billion, but the 300 and 380 that was added was just purely unbudgeted amount to keep UPK and 3K existing levels going. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Um, and then how would you use this uh the budget for that amount? Sorry. That is, I think, a number of things, including that there is the appropriate staffing in the early childhood education department to make sure that we're doing the kind of outreach to communities that we need to do the painstaking work of making sure that invoices are processed and that vendors are getting paid and that we understand what the fill rates are in each of these communities and sighting and everything else related to how to have a robust early childhood education apparatus. Um and it had taken some hits in the pegs over the years. Uh but clearly as a main priority of the administration, we're making sure that they have the resources resources they need so that it's a functional program. >> Okay. Um so just to clarify, so you have 235 million for new UPK um or 3K is >> Yeah. So the 235 million is part of the state agreement that is really funded for the expansion. So, as some of the way the contracts are these set up, it's like if you reach um over 70% I believe in fill rate, then it triggers another level of funding in the contract. So, we're trying to figure out if our efforts are going to be successful um to actually when our efforts are successful, I should say, that those fill rates and those students in those seats, those three-year-olds will then trigger contractual requirements for more payment. So, that is where it ties into expansion. And a piece of that was also to fund some of the collective bargaining um okay increases that had to go in that weren't for um a segment of the of the um of the early childhood population or workers. So that was the 235. >> Okay. Thank you for that. Um and was the full level of the early child uh care providers um contracts not previously reflected in the budget? there was underbudgeting. >> Okay. Um, I just want to quickly go back to um, Council Member Brewer's point, and this is something that is more state related, which I know, but I can't help but think that if we were to work on this to fix the issue around the um, daycare programs cuz I used to run one. I I will say I don't think all of them are bad because I think there are definitely a lot that are great. But there's been fraud I think that we've been trying to flag for the state on this issue since what at least 2010 or before, right? Which is literally um decades of uh Medicaid that could have been recouped from a if if if there was actually more oversight on a lot of these adult daycare programs. And so just wondering um and this is a conversation for future, but I would love to look at this a bit more because I think those Medicaid dollars are going to be crucial for us to look at more carefully in the future. Um and maybe this is something we can collaborate on because I think that's going to translate to more dollars either in the state budget which will trickle down to the city budget. So um definitely want to take a look at that with the fine tooth. Yeah. >> Um okay. And then just my last couple questions. Uh for the salary history ban and salary caps that the city has. Um so the council has heard there are current non-union city employees who are being told that when they are offered new positions at different agencies and switch over even if it's in the different title um you know uh grades. OM caps the new salary that the agency can offer to no more than 10% the applicant's existing salary even if the salary range goes higher than that amount. So is that true or if not and would this run counter to the 2017 um salary history ban that was passed by the council? We typically the 10% um cap is applicable to existing employees that are staying within um the same title and assuming additional responsibilities. Um there are exceptions that are made on certain circumstances, but clearly um when you talk about current employees who are promoted to new titles that are subject to the contractual salary um requirements of that title and not restricted to the 10%. So um that's what we know. If you're hearing something different, we'd love to clarify >> what that is. But it's really about existing employees, existing uh titles, not going to get a new job at another agency, then you're subject to the salary band and range of that is and and won't necessarily be subject to the 10%. >> Okay. Yeah, because we heard that it's when they move agencies. So, if that I I'll I'll let you know if there are specific incidences of that, but yeah. Okay. Um, so really quickly, I know that um, in the there were a few council members that had actually asked this question because I think oftent times we pass legislation. And so I just wanted to ask for the record um, if OMB is willing to commit to fully funding all the enacted laws in the budget and if not, what is the admin standard for determining which laws are actually implemented? Because I know that there are some that are tied to funding. Um, and so just wanting to know how you plan on making sure that you're meeting the laws. I know that a couple council members had asked um similar questions related to this. And so I just wanted to ask more generally speaking about laws that are passed. >> Sure. And just speaking in general, I mean, I think that one way or the other um expenses have to match has to match revenues. And so it just comes down to sort of the fundamentals in the budget, how we're able to comply with legislative mandates, comply with other needs that the city of New York has to continue core government operations. Um, and then at that point in time, you understand what is for discretionary investment. And at the end of the day, expenses have to add up to revenue. So in some cases uh where there are mandates there are opportunities as well to be able to um understand how we're going to balance and make the trade-offs. It's going to be more expense uh reductions which could be through savings. We don't want to cut services but at some point after the 1.7 billion uh on the chief savings officers you start to go beyond that then you're really talking about all of the things we talked about. How do you close the budget? So if you fit in legislative mandates in there, it still comes down to the equation of how can it be affordable within the envelope of the city's budget, >> right? So then knowing that there is an envelope and there are limitations, what are the metrics or how are those decisions made in terms of which things to um say, okay, this is more of a priority versus this. Even though yes, technically speaking, we want to make sure all the laws are being followed, but what are some of the metrics you use to make those decisions? Well, by and large it is trying to commit to complying with all laws because we respect obviously the laws that are passed. At the same time though their extent of investment has to has to vary and be right sized with the budget. So it may not be fullcale implementation. It may be a phased approach, right? It is as much as the expenses will dictate. So, but but of course, if there's a law on the books, we have an obligation to see if we can make progress on it, but it may not be fully available, fully compliant because the trade-offs may be cuts in other areas that weren't the intent to begin with to cut. >> Right. Exactly. So, if you could uh if at all possible, um give us some sort of um idea or sense back to the council because I I just I hear what you're saying. um and obviously in a much much much smaller scale when I ran my um nonprofit organization pales in comparison obviously to the size of the city's budget but I think the concepts of it are very similar right you have to meet payroll there are certain expenses you have you have vendors that need to get paid um and there have been tough situations where because of the contracting process cash flow became a huge issue for us and we weren't sure if we were able to pay staff so I feel like you know but in that in that sort of you budget, there are ways that you prioritize when to do what and so I'm just trying to get a better understanding of how that decision gets made. >> Sure. >> Yeah. So, if you can provide something that'd be great. Um, and then also, what recent changes in the economy has OMB observed that led to um a noticeable increase in the sales tax revenue forecast? Yeah. I'll start and I'll ask Josh to come in, but what we've uh you've heard this term often, you have a K-shaped economy. >> Yes. >> Yeah. So, you see consumption at the high end on the high earners are driving a lot of that. You also see inflation, inflationary pressures, right, which are driving. So, you pay more for something, you're paying more in taxes, right? And also driven by higher sales taxes that we're seeing from purchases from tourism. So, those are the three main drivers. I don't know if you would add anything Josh. >> Got it. >> Okay. >> No. Okay. Um, and sorry, just going back to my previous question. Um, can you identify um any laws recently in the last two years that were not be able to that were not fully funded? Um, and can you provide that list to the council? >> Just an example of two laws not fully funded. We'll go back and look at it and we'll obviously come back and have the conversation. >> Okay, perfect. Oh, did you have another question? >> Okay, sorry. I'm going to pass it over to Council Member Nurse for a question. >> Quickly, chair. Um, one of the thing that we're dealing with with sanitation department, um, those trucks, I don't know what to say about it. Do we have extra budget? how that we decide to where which station we're going to have different trucks and to tell you honestly New York City we have a problem it's not being clean so I want to know Mr. director, do we have a plan to look into sanitation? Because sanitation represent us when you come to New York City, we have it has to be clean and we have this problem we're dealing with. And if we don't look into it, New York City is not going to be clean and sanitation represent us. Even the look of the trucks, many of them already out of they should be out somewhere, not in running in New York City. So, do you have anywhere you can squeeze to increase funding to make sure New York City trucks are in repair and the folks that doing the work is being done? Do we have anywhere room to wrigle when it come to funding for us? Well, thank you, council member. The uh deputy speaker um also raised uh this issue about how do we know how a budget is allocated to different garages across and cleanliness and so on and so forth. So, it's an issue we're going to look at and follow up. But in general speaking, yes, investment in sanitation is needed. Clearly, the snow budget um it hasn't snowed for the past five years. This year, we got hit with a lot of snow. the snow budget which is based on a charter five-year average per person in the city charter was like 84 million. We had to add a hundred million for snow removal because the sanitation snow budget didn't have it. So we are looking at ways that we can invest more in sanitation. Um and hopefully it stopped snowing so more of that can be for that. But to your point in all seriousness it is important uh that we look at cleanliness metrics and see where we can make more investments. And the trucks themselves need to be uh a good presentation of city services at work. >> This is power wash. Do we have any funding for that too? Because the New York City if we don't clean, you know, I'm a nurse. I'm a registered nurse. So cleanliness mean a lot. Yes. >> In New York City, in order to present ourself, we have to put funding towards sanitation. Point blank. We have to do more on that one. and in school, right? You know, I love school. My public school enrollment has been decline I mean declining in recent um years. How is OMBB working with DOE to rightsize the budget in in a way that reflects current enrollment realities that I would like to see in every community especially. We have to review our community, make sure that we have equity in resources when it come to our school building, public school. And I'm done with that before the chair kicked me out. >> Yeah, the the Chancellor Samuels addressed this in his testimony a couple of days ago. Um, no decisions have been made on the so-called hold harmless funding. It's something we're looking at and reviewing along with DOE. We obviously want to make sure all schools can get their adequate resources. Um, but no decisions have been made on changing hold harmless at this moment. >> You know why I'm concerned about this? Because usually the black and brown communities, the vulnerable communities feel like we're not being the resource is not coming to them and our children. I think that's one thing I would say that's the right of human being in New York City. Every child deserve the best quality education. So look into that for me so all the resources can allocated fairly and certainly >> equally. I mean equally. Thank you, chair. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, people keep coming back. We got Council Member Hanks. >> I'm very sorry, Chair, but thank you very much. First first and foremost, well done. You answered many of the questions even though I wasn't here or we we were watching. So, I just have two questions for you. Um, as a follow-up question to the Office of Mass Engagement, are there any other agencies that either can be consolidated or develop new agencies to lower costs or increase operations with similar existing budgets as a method to offset uh short or long-term costs? >> I mean, I think I think it's the effort of the chief savings officers that we're looking at ways to do that. Um we want to make sure that we are being smart about the allocation of resources and again there was a question before about shared services and looking at ways to do that. So yeah >> is there a place in which we will get a report from the um cost-saving officers. I'm sure this was being asked over and I'm so sorry but okay my second question uh does OM understand the the fiscal damage that can occur to the the recent geopolitical events and the and the lack of funds from the federal government? This is also something that has been asked, but uh and other sources of income and can the council develop programs um along with the administration to help bridge these gaps in in in uh financing some undiscovered or how can we discuss the possibility of preventing such fiscal issues in the future? >> Sure. Yeah. I mean the revenue forecast that we put out was um largely in line with what the state had put out. Um and in fact I know in the council's own analysis uh it was generally in line uh there too. Clearly there are geopolitical events that we're watching very closely um that could um that could have some market impacts. The revenue forecast is a continual process and we'll continue to look at it and understand what collections are. elections have been strong and so we'll look at what um may need to be adjusted if anything uh upward or downward just like we're looking um constantly at all the economic factors and conditions but we're watching very closely what happens given the war in Iran uh and other factors including monetary policy like tariffs etc. >> Thank you so much. Thank you chair. Thank you the council. Great job. >> Thank you. Thank you council. Lots of Staten Island love. I see. Um actually, can I follow up on the council member's question? So, in terms of um the changes in the forecast, um because we want to be able to better understand how you guys are assessing that. So, would you be able to send us a forecast memo with assumption tables and methodology to the council in the next few days? Well, the preliminary budget has pretty much all of that information. Um, if there's not if there's like >> not just at like one point in time. So, I just want to know the behind uh thinking and methodology as well as the forecast >> the uh >> in terms of how you forecast, sorry, assumption tables and methodology. >> We put out we put out a methodology book every year that has it's it's quite a book. It's a great resource actually. I'd recommend it. It's about 350 pages of our methodology and and how we actually go about and it's a really good resource. I'd recommend it. >> Okay. And when was that last updated? It's on an annual basis. You're saying >> I think the fall of last year about probably five or six months. It gets updated every year. >> Okay. And so >> talking about in terms of going forward, >> right, >> like the budget director was saying, the preliminary budget includes all of our assumptions through again essentially, you know, mid January. We're going to be updating that with the executive budget. We we don't have anything concrete at this point as as um where this is in process. >> Okay. Um and this is the case with the sales taxes, everything, right? Yeah, it's all it's all combined. It's it's we put together a macro forecast, uh a city forecast, a tax revenue forecast that's in process right now that we're taking in all the information that we can and trying to uh um assess. >> Okay. So, within the year, you guys don't change it at all. >> The me the methodology book. No, that's that's >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Let me see if Okay. And just really quickly on over budgeting um social security contributions. So in FY25, the city spent about 2.5 billion um on federal payroll taxes to social security and Medicare and a similar amount was spent in FY24. And currently the preliminary plan includes about 2.9 billion budgeted for this expense in FY26 or about 16% higher than was spent last year. And then similarly, the plan proposes over three billion for FY27. So based on the currently budgeted salaries and wages of roughly 35 billion for FY26 and based on the current Social Security Medicare payroll tax rate, um total spending this year should be only be at about 2.7 billion or 200 million less than budgeted and that is assuming full employment with no vacancies. Um FY27 also appears to be overbudgeted by about 250 million. And so question the first question around this is why do the budgets for these amounts seem so out of proportion to the recent actual spending? >> I don't know chair that I would characterize it as over budgeting. I think what we try to do is do our best to forecast what the actual um FICA contributions will be. I think we look at things like, you know, overtime and try to assess where overtime is going to land because that obviously has an impact. We also look at city employees don't join the pension system immediately sometimes, right? you join later and you buy back time and when you join it's like that's when the FICA contributions kick in and it's like whether you're maxing out on deferred comp and all kinds of stuff that will dictate that. So I think that's something that we also look at. We try to project as best as possible so it's not like we're overbudgeting so that we have a cushion one way or the other. We're just making sure that we're trying to accurately assess what behavior might lead to and that and that's sort of the methodology that we have. And then in the terms of the category you mentioned with folks that may be signing up later for pension and all of those things, what's the average time period that it takes usually for someone to get onto that plan? >> That's for a city employee. >> That's a good question. I mean, I think we'd have to go to the pension systems for some data on buyback applications. >> Okay. because typically when that happens but t but but generally speaking if you're appointed in a civil service title >> right >> if you don't join right away 6 months after your appointment you're uh mandated in and that's by operation of law >> um into a pension system right >> but for other titles like managerial titles there's a choice you can join the voluntary deferred contribution program or you can join the pension system so it really depends on the kind of title um and you know I think agencies do a good job of orienting mentation up front to get folks to to go forward, but it just naturally some folks will wait and not join and that that impacts it. >> Okay. If you have any data around that, that'd be great. Just to figure out um maybe by the title managerial versus not and then also in terms of what the average time is. I'd be curious to just see what that looks like. if you could provide that. And then um how how are the estimates which you sort of just went into right now for the payroll tax contributions determined which is just when they join all of those things or what >> pretty much the same thing. Yeah, we're looking at sort of the eb and flow of you know overtime and when they may join and and try to make our best projections based on that and headcount um hiring flow. Yeah. >> Okay. Um, and I think this has been mentioned a few times today about how property tax inequality obviously the system I think both of us share um on both sides of city hall recognize that the the process itself needs to be reformed. Um, and so just wanted to know um if you could share what property tax reforms your office has considered maybe in your previous role, I don't know. um or how would they affect the budget and how would they help New Yorkers who are unfairly burdened? >> Yeah, so we're we're working on the proposal as we speak. Um I think that as we've mentioned, it is um uh modeled after the advisory commission recommendations. And so things that are major drivers of the inequity like assessed value caps that have led to sort of the uneven growth in tax bills over the years uh looking at that looking at fractional assessments. But then so those are the structural reforms salesbased on co-ops and condos versus comparable rentals and then looking at it from there to say if you do the structural reforms how can you layer on homeowner relief programs for primary residents. homestead exemption as a primary exemption tool to give uh you know percentage break off of the property tax bill but then a circuit breaker to say let's look at the ratio between income and between property tax paid and then how can you provide some credit for the amount above what's determined to be in excess. So that just gives you a flavor of the kinds of things that we're looking at but clearly there's more that we want to do. We're addressing the residential class. We need to look at other things. We need to look at the incidents on renters. We need to look at so much in the property tax system. That's what we're busy at work trying to do. We'll have a proposal soon. And of course, we'll be in touch on what is in that proposal. >> Okay, that was going to be my next question was timeline because I know that we've been, you know, the city's been talking about this for for several years and so just wondering um when the timeline would be for that. >> Yeah, it's going to be soon. I think um it probably, you know, as an incoming mayor to say that he's going to tackle property tax reform and come up in a proposal >> um in the first few months of the administration, I think is uh significant and we'll be able to do that and be able to explain our approach. >> Okay, perfect. Dare I say, I think I might be done. We might be done. Yay. Um okay. Uh but yes, um thank you so much. I want to thank the staff of the admin. Um Godspeed. I will keep praying for these chief savings officers because it seems like we're putting a lot on their shoulders, but we look forward to seeing that report and obviously ongoing conversations. So, thank you so much, Chair. I appreciate it. >> And with that, I'm closing out today's hearing.