New York

Readers of New York’s newspapers might believe their home is the nation’s capital of bad management. For months on end, they’ve been reading an array of articles that mock the state’s conflict-laden budget process. One 2004 study labeled the New York legislature as the least deliberative and most dysfunctional in the nation. And that may very well be true.

But it’s just one part of the story. Overall, New York’s capacity for good management has been improving steadily in recent years — even in finance. Bad as the budget process genuinely is, other tasks are handled fairly well. Revenue estimating and the long-term projection of spending decisions both have become significantly more transparent and useful. Contracting and purchasing processes are far more rational and professional than in the majority of states around the country.

Credible strategic planning at the agency level, once a non-starter in New York, has been gaining momentum. There’s growing interest in performance measurement, and reasonable attention to capital planning and other basics of infrastructure.

Money C+ Long-Term Outlook Budget Process Structural Balance Contracting/Purchasing Financial Controls/Reporting People B- Strategic Workforce Planning Hiring Retaining Employees Training and Development Managing Employee Performance Infrastructure B+ Capital Planning Project Monitoring Maintenance Internal Coordination Intergovernmental Coordination Information C+ Strategic Direction Budgeting for Performance Managing for Performance Program Evaluation Electronic Government • Population (rank): 18,976,457 (3) • Average per capita income (rank):    $36,574 (5) • Total state spending (rank):    $119,198,996,000 (2) • Spending per capita (rank):    $6,230 (2) • Governor:George Pataki (R) • First elected: 11/1994 • Senate: 62 members: 27 D, 35 R • Term Limits: None • Assembly: 150 members: 104 D, 46 R • Term Limits:None

With a mature road system, the state last year devoted almost 98 percent of its $1.5 billion annual road budget to maintenance and repair. The percentage of roads in good condition has gone from 53 percent a decade ago to 64 percent last year. Although the state still has trouble getting some of its road projects finished on schedule, it has made good use of incentive-based contracts to improve that spotty record.

Last summer, for example, the Department of Transportation asked contractors for bids on a repair project for Route 7, near Albany. Contractors who wanted to work on the project bid not only on the cost but also on the number of days it would take to get the job done. Ultimately, the winner was selected under an agreement that provided for penalties if the repairs took longer than bid and a bonus if the job was done in fewer days. The contractor finished work a week early.

Another positive for the state has been its attention to workforce planning. The Office of Civil Service and the Office of Employee Relations have encouraged agencies to work on transferring knowledge from employees who are about to retire and to plan for their replacement. A Web site has been set up for managers in the state’s 70 agencies to share their experiences.

In general, New York’s personnel practices are a remarkable mixture of good and bad. The state’s disciplinary processes are “torturous,” in the words of Richard Martin, director of research for the Governor’s Office of Employee Relations, and it takes far longer to terminate someone than in most other states. But technology has been used to overcome some of the delays inherent in a very rigid and test-bound civil service system. The state now takes an average of 46 days to get applicants on a hiring list — not great, but a striking improvement from six years ago, when the process took a full year.

Labor-management committees in New York have developed a number of successful training initiatives, and attention to this process is top-notch in many agencies. Sadly, since the state’s workforce training is tied to its labor agreements, training pretty much ground to a halt from April 2003 to July 2004, when all of the state’s unions were working with expired contracts. The state still hasn’t reached an agreement with six of its smaller bargaining units.

And then there’s the budget. The process is indisputably broken, and discussions of reform have so far been unproductive. This serves only to exacerbate the seriousness of the projected $6 billion gap between state revenues and expenditures and all but dictates the repeated use of one-time revenue gimmicks each year to pay current bills.

The 2005 budget was signed four-and-a-half months after the fiscal year began, in a sea of vituperative battles between the legislative and executive branches. In the summer of 2003, the legislature overrode 120 of Governor George Pataki’s vetoes. Last year, even after the budget finally passed, Pataki vetoed 195 line items. The legislature failed by one vote in the General Assembly to override them.

Note: This corrects the number of Republican state Senate members from the version that appears in Governing.

For additional data and analysis, go to: http://results.gpponline.org/newyork

Copyright © 2005, Congressional Quarterly, Inc. Reproduction in any form without the written permission of the publisher is prohibited. Governing, City & State and Governing.com are registered trademarks of Congressional Quarterly, Inc.