Hochul Unveils $227B State Budget For 2024: What It Means For NYC

NEW YORK CITY — Gov. Kathy Hochul’s behemoth upcoming $227 billion state budget confronts some of New York City’s most pressing issues, but leaves many details up in the air.

The proposed 2024 budget unveiled Wednesday by Hochul includes a multi-year bailout for the cash-strapped MTA, money for the city to address the migrant crisis and a renewed call to tweak the state’s bail laws.

“It’s a thoughtful plan that furthers our progressive values in our priorities as New Yorkers, but also ensures fiscal responsibility,” she said.

But much in the executive budget that would affect New York City could prove contentious as lawmakers and advocates pore over it in coming weeks.

Here are some major takeaways for New York City.

Saving MTA from a ‘fiscal cliff’

A potential payroll tax increase is part of a potential longterm fix that Hochul proposed for the MTA’s perilous financial position.

Hochul, in her speech, said the coronavirus pandemic cratered the MTA’s ridership and left it in dire straits. She said a solution must not rely on service cuts.

“We have to face the harsh reality of MTA’s fiscal cliff,” she said.

The budget’s proposal is a multi-pronged approach that differs from the federal bailouts that kept the MTA afloat during the pandemic.

Chief among them is raising the state’s payroll mobility tax from 0.34 percent to 0.5 percent, Hochul said. Doing so will yield $1 billion for the MTA, she said.

The MTA would also receive a share from future casino revenues under the proposal, in addition to increased contributions from the state and New York City.

Paying for asylum seekers

Hochul left it unsaid during her speech, but the budget proposal offers a potential, if vague, solution to the city’s projected $1 billion in costs from the migrant crisis.

Buried within the 2024 budget book, is a proposal to raise $1 billion in “extraordinary funding.”

“The Budget creates a framework for the financial burden of such services to be evenly split between the levels of government: ⅓ New York City, ⅓ State, and ⅓ Federal,” it states.

“This includes the State reimbursing a share of shelter and Humanitarian Emergency Response and Relief Center costs, continuing the National Guard deployment, and funding health care needs.”

Mayor Eric Adams has vocally called for more state and, especially, federal help to pay for the 42,000 and counting asylum seekers who have entered the city over the past year.

He didn’t address Hochul’s proposal as of publication.

When pressed by reporters on what would happen if the federal government doesn’t follow through, Hochul noted many top leaders in Congress hail from the city.

“We’re going to keep asking the federal government for assistance,” she said.

Another bail reform fight?

Bail reform could yet again emerge as a major issue during the budget process.

After months of Adams and many critics blaming bail laws for an uptick in crime, Hochul called for a “thoughtful conversation” with lawmakers about them.

The reforms have achieved “progress,” Hochul said, referring to keeping people accused of low-level offenses out of jail.

“But conflicting language in the law leads to confusion and a lack of accountability for the judges to make their determinations,” she said. “So, let’s just simply provide clarity. Let’s ensure judge consider factors for serious offenders; let’s leave the law where it is for low-level offenses.”

The conflicting language in question is, according to Hochul, a provision that requires judges impose the “least restrictive” release conditions. She argued there’s an “inconsistency” between it and other parts of the law.

Calling to remove the “least restrictive” provision didn’t sit well with advocates with The Legal Aid Society, who already bristled at what they considered inadequate proposed funding for public defenders.

“Moreover, in addition to ignoring our funding needs, the Governor’s call to remove a well-established provision of law requiring that judges consider the ‘least restrictive’ alternative in bail-eligible cases will only lead to the caging of more New Yorkers of color at Rikers Island, a facility imperiled by a range of crises,” they said in a statement.

“We also question the constitutionality of this proposal, as it likely violates United States Supreme Court precedent protecting the presumption of innocence.”