It turns out that Jerry Jennings' brains, charm and extensive political skills were not enough to save Albany from teetering on the brink of financial ruin. His legacy as mayor will be debated. But the profound seriousness of Albany's fiscal situation is a matter of record.
The first sighting of the looming crisis was the acknowledgement that the city is facing a gap of $15 million in next year's operating budget, a hefty figure approaching 10 percent of what it spends. (For comparison, a comparable state deficit would approach $20 billion).
The deeper problems still go unmentioned. For years, city budgets have been balanced by gimmicks and borrowing for operating expenses. No one seems to know what the accumulated operating deficit really is.
The borrowing continues, call it "pension smoothing" or something else, Future revenues have already been spent, call them "spin-ups" or something else. The need for schools, firefighters, parks, police, all municipal services is growing, while the tax base is shrinking.
All this has happened on the watch of a talented mayor, the special friend and favorite mayor of our powerful and shrewd governor. Albany has received a kind of special treatment from the state government on budget matters, ranging from hefty state participation in Albany capital projects to repeated one-shots and gimmicks — more so than other municipalities.
What Jennings could not get done was a thorough and systematic reform of city finances. But no mayor has been able to do that.
Jennings has made a political/fiscal argument that is just true enough to allow Albany to point fingers and fail to clean up its own act. Jennings strenuously argues that Albany is uniquely burdened by the presence of state government and the huge number of tax-exempt properties that result.
As a statement of fact, that is a real problem. But Albany's economic prospects are, on balance, greatly improved by the presence of state government. Look at Utica or Poughkeepsie for what other cities look like. And most other cities have similar tax base problems, largely because their private-sector property taxpayers disappeared. Syracuse and Carrier, Yonkers and Otis, Rochester and Kodak all suffer from collapsed tax bases. It's not enough to list the many internal and external reasons for Albany's precarious situation. Somebody had better do something about it.
This would normally be a moment for the political, business and labor leadership of Albany to, well, at least talk about what's coming down the road. More so, you would think, because there will be a mayoral primary election in 15 days. Two talented candidates are vying for the Democratic nomination, which is tantamount to taking office.
The silence is deafening. The candidates seem to agree that the state should give them more money. Who doesn't?
Beyond that, there seems to be no concrete plan for internal budget reform — how about requiring a public four-year budget so no one can act surprised when the stuff hits the fan? — or an end to borrowing for operating expenses. No one seems willing to refuse more "pension-smoothing" borrowing. But they do resist a forthright discussion of fiscal reality and its impact on the lives of Albany's residents.
Albany's not alone. Democracy is grinding its way to new leadership. The best way to improve the chances of avoiding catastrophe, and even bankruptcy, is to first acknowledge the problem. That's why we have debates and elections. In the end, we get the government we deserve, and earn. Fifteen days to go.
Richard Brodsky, formerly a state assemblyman, is a fellow at the Demos think tank in New York City and at the Wagner School at New York University.