In June of 2017, I wrote post about NYCERS's budget history and a recent explosion of spending. Since then the growth of budget has lost all touch with reality. I have added new data both current and historical. Currently I do not have access to the records from 1997 to 2004.
I will let the numbers in the table below speak for themselves.
Prior to FY-1997, the NYCERS admin budget was part of the overall NYC budget adopted by the City Council.
In 1996 the state legislature authorized the NYCERS Borad of Trustees to adopted the annual admin budget for NYCERS and to pay all expenses from the assests of the pension fund. From 1997 to 2005 the NYCERS admin budget increased by 294.25%. Most of that increase was in place by 2001, the year the dot-com bubble hit Wall Street. That, in turn, created pressure to keep the growth in the budget below the inflation rate.
It is reasonable to question the need for such a significant increase in the NYCERS admin budget over this nine year period, if you were not aware of what disparate shape NYCERS was in 1996.
It is, however, absolutely clear that NYCERS was radicallly well equipped to do its work in 2005, probably far better than any other city agency. As an example, in the aftermath of 9/11 attack, a major division of OMB worked out of the NYCERS's office for over 6 months. They thought they had died and went to heaven.
The FY-2006 budget was the last budget I prepared before I left NYCERS. It had a 1.4% increase. You will notice in the following year, FY-2007,a significant increase in staff.
On May 14, 2020 in the midst of the pandemic, the NYCERS's trustees adopted FY-2021 admin budget of $89.7M. Then, on Decemeber 10, 2020, the trustees increased that bduget to $98.3M, an $8.6M increase.
On April 8, 2021 the trustees adopted the FY-2022 admin budget of $135.7M, a $36.4M increase.
As of January 1, 2022 most of the publically elelcted trustees on the NYCERS Board of Trustees will be gone. The Mayor, the Comptroller and four of the five Borough Presidents will all be new people. One current Borough President and the Public Advocate wiil probably be on the ballot in November. Most likely,four years from now all of the public trustees who voted for this qusetionable $135.7M budget will be gone.
On May 12, 2022 the Tustees adopted the FY-2023 Admin Budget with a $10.5M increase (7.78%, previous year it was a 37.94% increase).
| Fiscal Year | F/T Count | P/T Count | College Aides / Hourly | PS Budget | OTPS Budget | Fringe | Total | % Increase |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 485 | 30 | 16 | $43,016,089 | $90,436,500 | $12,942,144 | $146,394,733 | 7.92% |
| 2022 | 474 | 27 | 16 | $38,397,943 | $85,531,063 | $11,719,465 | $135,648,471 | 37.94% |
| 2021 | 438 | 27 | 16 | $36,842,549 | $50,210,145 | $11,283,945 | $98,336,639 | 7.10% |
| 2020 | 438 | 27 | 16 | $35,262,139 | $45,862,557 | $10,689,350 | $91,814,046 | 4.97% |
| 2019 | 428 | 35 | 0 | $33,592,612 | $43,532,302 | $10,344,565 | $87,469,479 | 39.44% |
| 2018 | 411 | 35 | 0 | $31,704,410 | $21,832,718 | $9,194,015 | $62,731,143 | 3.55% |
| 2017 | 401 | 35 | 0 | $31,056,080 | $20,916,796 | $8,605,288 | $60,578,164 | 4.81% |
| 2016 | 392 | 35 | 0 | $30,233,989 | $19,407,619 | $8,155,517 | $57,797,125 | 4.70% |
| 2015 | 392 | 5 | 30 | $29,131,972 | $18,154,572 | $7,915,476 | $55,202,020 | 3.68% |
| 2014 | 383 | 5 | 30 | $26,813,635 | $18,761,240 | $7,669,819 | $53,244,694 | 2.18% |
| 2013 | 380 | 5 | 20 | $26,623,635 | $17,951,822 | $7,532,499 | $52,107,956 | 1.93% |
| 2012 | 372 | 12 | 0 | $25,756,827 | $18,781,428 | $6,603,649 | $51,122,139 | 1.14% |
| 2011 | 372 | 12 | 0 | $26,046,827 | $18,492,228 | $6,006,573 | $50,545,628 | 2.76% |
| 2010 | 372 | 12 | 0 | $26,046,827 | $17,777,228 | $5,362,640 | $49,186,695 | 1.88% |
| 2009 | 371 | 13 | 0 | $25,189,842 | $18,208,861 | $4,879,903 | $48,278,606 | 6.22% |
| 2008 | 371 | 13 | 0 | $23,597,857 | $17,259,313 | $4,799,066 | $45,656,236 | 10.80% |
| 2007 | 364 | 13 | 0 | $22,616,783 | $14,258,471 | 4,375,788 | $41,251,042 | 5.73% |
| 2006 | 342 | 13 | 30 | $20,255,911 | $14,683,855 | $ 4,076,823 | $39,016,589 | 1.01% |
| 2005 | 342 | 13 | 30 | $19,737,687 | $14,851,355 | $3,887,624 | $38,476,666 | 295.25% |
| **** | ||||||||
| 1980 | 219 | 0 | 0 | $3,558,977 | $1,079,851 | na | $4,638,828 | na |
| 1981 | 222 | 0 | 0 | $3,507,806 | $1,020,374 | na | $4,528,180 | -2.39% |
| 1982 | 220 | 0 | 0 | $3,970,212 | $1,177, 748 | na | $5,147,960 | 13.69% |
| 1983 | 224 | 0 | 0 | $4,429,362 | $1,230,672 | na | $5,660,034 | 9.95% |
| 1984 | 231 | 0 | 0 | $5,026,847 | $1,194,237 | na | $6,221,084 | 9.91% |
| 1985 | 239 | 0 | 0 | $5,446,600 | $1,241,976 | na | $6,688,576 | 7.5% |
| 1986 | 247 | 0 | 30 | $5,916,793 | $1,423,743 | na | $7,340,536 | 9.76% |
| 1987 | 245 | 0 | 30 | $6,621,803 | $1,881,300 | na | $8,167,220 | 11.26% |
| 1988 | 265 | 0 | 30 | $6,621,803 | $1,881,300 | na | $8,503,103 | 4.11% |
| 1989 | 285 | 0 | 30 | $7,849,731 | $1,932,351 | na | $9,782,082 | 15.4% |
| 1990 | 280 | 0 | 30 | $8,284,883 | $2,578,693 | na | $10,863,576 | 11.06% |
| 1991 | 229 | 0 | 30 | $6,826,473 | $2,475,205 | na | $9,301,678 | -14.38% |
| 1992 | 225 | 0 | 30 | $6,646,549 | $2,216,262 | na | $8,862,811 | -4.72 |
| 1993 | 223 | 0 | 30 | $6,858,991 | $2,198,882 | na | $9,057,873 | 2.20% |
| 1994 | 194 | 0 | 30 | $6,778,541 | $2,183,101 | na | $8,961,642 | -1.06% |
| 1995 | 167 | 0 | 30 | $6,202,062 | $2,080,504 | na | $8,282,566 | -7.58% |
| 1996 | 154 | 0 | 30 | $6,199,709 | $2,573,715 | na | $8,773,424 | 5.93% |
| 1997 | 200 | 0 | 30 | |||||
| 1998 | 230 | 0 | 30 | |||||
| 1999 | 270 | 0 | 30 | |||||
| 2000 | 290 | 0 | 30 | |||||
| 2001 | 320 | 13 | 30 | |||||
| 2002 | 320 | 13 | 30 | |||||
| 2003 | 334 | 13 | 30 | |||||
| 2004 | 334 | 13 | 30 |
No comments:
Post a Comment