NYC Council budget alternatives are non-starters

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T

By Post Editorial Board

As Mayor Adams is slashing agency spending to balance the budget, the City Council just offered its big idea: spend away, using reserve funds meant for a true crisis — and look to hike taxes.

Kick the can down the road, in other words, while hoping for a "long-term solution" that would make the city even more unlivable.

That's even worse than Adams' own failure, in "finalizing" this year's budget back in the spring, to fully budget for illegal-migrant costs that he knew were baked-in.

But at least the mayor was then hoping President Biden would finally cough up major cash to help cover the migrant costs, or maybe take Adams' hint and "decompress" the crisis by abandoning his "wave them in" policies.

(Which doesn't forgive Adams' decision to settle an entire round of union contracts by giving solid raises without requiring any productivity savings.)

The council, instead, dreams of kicking New York's economy while it's still down.

Finance Committee chief Justin Brannan (D-B'klyn), for example, would end or reduce various tax breaks and wring more in fines and fees from cash-strapped residents and businesses.

Oh, and: tapping the city's rainy-day fund would be a one-shot stopgap that does nothing to reduce the recurring spending that's fueling the growing budget deficits.

City spending has grown 52% over the last decade; can anyone point to what benefits that's brought?

Meanwhile, Gothamites across all classes are fleeing the city thanks to high taxes, crime, dysfunctional schools and a deteriorating quality of life, all brought on by misguided progressive policies.

If the City Council truly wants to help, it'd find some cuts of its own — say, cutting back subsidies for city retirees' health plans, or finally ending the lunatic "replace Rikers" boondoggle.

Any and all ideas on reducing outlays on migrants would help, too.

Do something to earn your $148,500-a-year salaries.