Service cuts in New York City occur when the government reduces or eliminates funding for public programs to address budget gaps, fiscal cliffs, or the need for greater operational efficiency. This page covers CBC’s work on the Program to Eliminate the Gap, strategies for improving agency efficiency, the impact of federal aid on essential services, labor cost reforms, and the prioritization of critical municipal operations.
This page was created with AICBC Insights uses AI to group, analyze and present data and recommendations from CBC's publications. Always reference the cited sources to verify important details..
The City should implement an additional PEG in the Executive Budget and shrink or eliminate programs that the available resources cannot fully support.
To be fully transparent, the budget should include funding for all planned programs and acknowledge that under- and un-funded programs will shrink or end.
The City Council should ensure that its proposals for added or modified spending are affordable based on fully funding or reducing the current set of planned programs.
The Administration should continue with its original plan to implement a PEG in the Fiscal Year 2025 Executive Budget.
The City should prioritize and fund effective and impactful programs, shrink or eliminate less critical and effective programs, and increase efficiency.
Key Data
As of April 2025, the city relies on $7.4 billion in federal aid to support essential services like child care and family shelters, making these programs vulnerable to federal budget cuts.
As of February 2024, the city's fiscal outlook is challenging, with projected budget gaps for fiscal years 2026 through 2028 estimated between $8.8 billion and $9.7 billion if current service levels are fully funded.
In the January 2024 report on the November 2023 savings plan, 20 percent of savings came from program reductions that may directly affect services, while 80 percent came from other sources like efficiencies and re-estimates.
As of December 2023, the city's financial plan showed a $7.1 billion gap for fiscal year 2025, which could rise to $10.6 billion when accounting for fiscal cliffs and underbudgeted programs.
As of April 2023, the city's fiscal challenges were significant, with future shortfalls for fiscal cliffs and underbudgeted programs projected to reach $6.8 billion in fiscal year 2025 and $10.0 billion by fiscal year 2027.
New York City faces significant fiscal challenges, including population decline and budget gaps that threaten future service levels. To restore competitiveness and stability, the city must prioritize sustainable spending, improve management efficiency, and eliminate ineffective programs.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
Leaders should choose to trim spending to sustainable levels, build up rainy day funds during good times, and negotiate labor deals that balance fair wages with fiscal reality.
Leaders need to choose management systems that deliver results and hold officials accountable to ensure services work.
We must make the hard choice to eliminate ineffective initiatives, regardless of their political popularity, to focus on evidence-based programs.
We need to first choose to get our roads, bridges, and buildings into good shape or we will have no foundation on which to build our future economy.
Key Data
$115 Billion
— The city's annual budget that only 11% of New Yorkers believe is being spent wisely.
100,000
— The number of net residents New York City lost to Florida between 2018 and 2022.
$13.7 Billion
— The amount of personal income lost to Florida due to net migration between 2018 and 2022.
11%
— The percentage of New Yorkers who say the city is wisely spending its annual budget.
New York City faces significant financial risks from potential federal budget cuts that could threaten essential services like child care, housing, and education. To mitigate these impacts, the city must adopt disciplined fiscal policies, including restraining new spending and bolstering reserves, to ensure it can maintain critical operations during economic uncertainty.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The city should hold the line on new spending by ensuring the Executive and Adopted Budgets do not add or expand programs to avoid growing obligations it cannot afford.
The city should buttress the fiscal year 2026 General Reserve by adding at least $1 billion to help absorb the immediate blow of federal cuts.
The city should strengthen the Rainy Day Fund by adding $500 million, ensuring it is reserved for a short-term emergency like a recession rather than mitigating recurring federal cuts.
The city should restrain spending growth through a “Program to Eliminate the Gap” to streamline administrative overhead and increase efficiency to minimize service disruptions.
The city should end budget-estimating gimmickry to ensure New Yorkers receive accurate and reasonable estimates of revenue and expenses.
Key Data
$7.4 billion
— Amount of federal aid the city receives that supports vital services like child care vouchers, family shelters, school food programs, and education.
$4 billion
— Amount of annual underbudgeting that drastically understates the size of future budget gaps.
$10 billion
— Potential size of future budget gaps that may occur even without federal cuts or a recession.
$1.4 billion
— Annual federal operating support that the New York City Housing Authority depends on.
$91 billion
— Amount the state receives annually from Washington, which supports Medicaid, the Essential Plan, and education.
$1.1 billion
— Amount the city spent more on fiscal year 2024 obligations than it took in.
New York City's Fiscal Year 2025 Preliminary Budget faces a $3.6 billion shortfall, necessitating difficult decisions to either fully fund programs or implement service reductions. To achieve fiscal stability, the City must prioritize essential services while transparently shrinking or eliminating programs that cannot be sustained by available resources.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should implement an additional PEG in the Executive Budget and shrink or eliminate programs that the available resources cannot fully support.
To be fully transparent, the budget should include funding for all planned programs and acknowledge that under- and un-funded programs will shrink or end.
The City Council should ensure that its proposals for added or modified spending are affordable based on fully funding or reducing the current set of planned programs.
The Administration should continue with its original plan to implement a PEG in the Fiscal Year 2025 Executive Budget.
The City should prioritize and fund effective and impactful programs, shrink or eliminate less critical and effective programs, and increase efficiency.
Key Data
$3.6 billion
— The funding shortfall in the fiscal year 2025 budget needed to maintain current program levels.
$2.2 billion
— The amount of the City-funds fiscal cliff, which includes funding for housing vouchers, childcare, and homeless shelters.
$675 million
— The amount of the federal-funds fiscal cliff, primarily for Department of Education programs.
$800 million
— The amount attributed to chronic underbudgeting, including uniformed overtime and MTA subsidies.
$8.8 billion to $9.7 billion
— The estimated budget gaps for fiscal years 2026 through 2028 if current service levels are fully funded.
$194.9 million
— The total value of PEG restorations for fiscal years 2024 and 2025.
The November 2023 Program to Eliminate the Gap aims to address multi-billion-dollar budget gaps, with 20 percent of savings coming from program reductions that may directly impact services. While most savings are achieved through efficiencies, re-estimates, and funding shifts, the city must continue to identify data-driven strategies to streamline operations and reduce costs without compromising essential services.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
City agencies should use a data driven approach to identify less- or in-effective programs and inefficient processes that can be shrunk or streamlined to reduce costs.
Agency leadership should collaborate with line staff to determine how programs and services can be delivered more efficiently.
Returning to standardized procurement practices wherever possible should increase competition and drive down the cost of providing services.
Agencies should continue to identify efficiency savings that do not affect critical program services.
These efforts to identify efficiencies should be continued and strengthened.
Key Data
20.0%
— Share of the November 2023 savings plan coming from program reductions that may directly affect the level of services provided.
2,407
— Number of full-time positions eliminated in fiscal year 2025 through vacancy reduction and hiring freeze initiatives.
$102.5 Million
— Total savings over four years achieved by reducing the subsidy to New York City Health + Hospitals.
$22 Million
— Annual savings generated by an across-the-board cut of 5 percent to the operating subsidies for each of the library branches.
$41.7 Million
— Estimated savings in fiscal year 2024 from the cancellation of five Police Academy classes.
58%
— Share of fiscal year 2025 City-funded spending that was not subject to the PEG, including central costs and asylum seeker spending.
New York City faces a significant budget shortfall, with projected gaps reaching up to $10.6 billion for fiscal year 2025 when accounting for underbudgeted costs. To address this fiscal challenge without raising taxes or depleting reserves, the city must prioritize critical services, improve operational efficiency, and collaborate with labor unions to reform work rules and benefit structures.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The city should prioritize key services, relentlessly manage them to get results, and operate effectively and efficiently to grow financially stronger.
The city should pare down to the most critical services for migrants and asylum seekers and provide them cost-effectively.
The city should engage labor to implement changes to work rules, job titles, health insurance, and other benefit structures to deliver services efficiently.
The city should maximize efficiency and minimize the impact on New Yorkers when making difficult budget decisions.
Key Data
$7.1 billion
— The city's financial plan shows a budget gap for fiscal year 2025.
$10.6 billion
— The potential budget gap for fiscal year 2025 when including fiscal cliffs and underbudgeted areas.
20%
— The portion of the most recent Program to Eliminate the Gap savings that will touch current services.
5.3%
— The decline in New York City's population from 2020 to 2022.
New York State Budget Fiscal Year 2024 Major Actions and Fiscal Risks As of First Quarter Update New York City Fiscal Year 2024 Adopted Budget and Outlook
New York City faces widening budget gaps that threaten future service levels, necessitating immediate prioritization of essential programs and increased operational efficiency to avoid substantial service cuts. Leaders must shift existing vacancies to needed areas rather than adding new positions and should incorporate additional savings into the Adopted Budget to address the fiscal reality.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should immediately start to prioritize essential programs, increase its operational efficiency, speed up critical hiring, and shrink lower impact programs to avoid the alternative of substantially cutting services.
The City should be shifting existing vacancies to where they are needed, not adding new positions.
The City's leaders should not pretend the City can have and do it all.
The City should make every effort it can immediately and include additional savings in the Adopted Budget.
Key Data
$4.2 billion
— Budget gap projected for fiscal year 2025.
$7.0 billion
— Budget gap projected for fiscal year 2027.
$6.8 billion
— Future shortfall projected for fiscal year 2025 when including underbudgeted programs and fiscal cliffs.
$10.0 billion
— Future shortfall projected for fiscal year 2027 when including underbudgeted programs and fiscal cliffs.
$1.0 billion
— Amount of existing City-funded programs not funded in the fiscal year 2024 budget.
23,000
— Number of existing vacancies in the City.
New York City's Program to Eliminate the Gap is a necessary step to address looming fiscal deficits, though it must be paired with operational efficiencies rather than service reductions to ensure long-term stability. By leveraging the city's 23,000 vacant positions, agencies can meet savings targets without resorting to layoffs or compromising essential public services.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should initiate the Program to Eliminate the Gap to avoid making massive cuts in the future.
Savings programs should not include layoffs and should avoid meaningfully impacting services where possible.
Agencies should utilize the ample vacancies exceeding 23,000 Citywide to meet savings targets and hire critical positions.
The City should prioritize improving operational efficiency as the best approach to preserving services.
The City should make work rules and job titles more flexible to increase operating efficiency and reduce ongoing costs.
Key Data
$6.5 billion
— Budget gaps reported for fiscal year 2027.
$8.8 billion
— Amount the City may need this year and next.
$14.0 billion
— Future budget gaps that may be exceeded by fiscal year 2027.
23,000
— Number of vacant positions Citywide that can be used to meet savings targets.
New York City faces a precarious long-term fiscal outlook with widening budget gaps, necessitating immediate action to restrain spending and avoid significant future service cuts or risky tax increases. To preserve essential services for residents, the City must prioritize improving the quality and efficiency of its operations rather than relying on illusory savings or re-estimates.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City must start taking action immediately to restrain spending over the long run to reduce the future gaps and avoid significant service cuts.
The City should both hire for critical functions and eliminate many more, ultimately unneeded, positions to improve fiscal health.
The City and agencies should have flexibility to shift vacant positions across and within agencies to units and titles that have critical staffing needs.
The best way to preserve services for New Yorkers when they need them most is to improve the quality and efficiency of the City’s operations today.
More transformative changes are needed to ensure future stability and avoid service reductions.
Key Data
$4.6 billion
— Budget gap projected for fiscal year 2025.
$5.9 billion
— Budget gap projected for fiscal year 2026.
24,000
— Number of vacant full-time positions remaining in the City.
$350 million
— Annual savings expected from eliminating 5,000 vacant civilian positions.
$8 billion
— Potential budget gap in fiscal year 2025 absent a recession.
$10 billion
— Potential budget gap in fiscal year 2026 absent a recession.
New York City faces a potential $9 billion fiscal disaster by 2026 due to budget gaps, employee raises, and fiscal cliffs, which could necessitate massive service cuts or tax increases if left unaddressed. To avoid this, the city must prioritize programs, improve service efficiency, and save for future economic downturns rather than expanding services with temporary revenue.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The mayor and council must resist the temptation to use additional tax revenue to expand services and instead deposit this money into the Rainy Day Fund for the next recession.
The city should schedule $500 million annual deposits to the Rainy Day Fund, which could come from the budgeted General and Capital Stabilization Reserves.
The executive budget should address the budget’s fiscal cliffs where ongoing programs are funded with nonrecurring city and federal COVID-19 funds.
The city must lower costs, ideally by improving efficiency or by reducing lower impact programs, by streamlining processes, leveraging technology and fostering cross-agency collaboration that eliminates redundancy.
The city should use this next round of collective bargaining contracts to further increase productivity, which would generate savings to fund raises and stabilize the budget.
Key Data
$9 billion
— recipe for fiscal disaster by 2026 if nothing is done
$17 billion
— three-year revenue shortfall based on the past
$900 million
— fiscal cliffs next year
$1.5 billion
— annual savings from a 3% Program to Eliminate the Gap for Productivity
$4.3 billion
— cost of 3% annual raises in the third year
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a structural annual deficit of at least $2.0 billion, necessitating a review of its financial plans and potential service adjustments. The budget update must clarify the status of planned service reductions and fare increases to determine how the agency will manage its long-term fiscal stability.
Key Data
$220 Million
— Planned service reductions for 2023.
$206 Million
— Planned service reductions for 2024.
$206 Million
— Planned service reductions for 2025.
$632 Million
— Total planned service reductions from 2021 to 2025.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a $2.7 billion annual structural deficit that requires immediate action to avoid drastic measures like service cuts or fare hikes. To ensure long-term fiscal stability, the agency must implement operational reforms, such as increasing productivity and reforming conductor deployment, to save up to $2.9 billion annually by 2024.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The MTA must implement service cuts starting in 2023 to ensure federal aid covers the structural deficit through 2026.
The MTA must implement a two-year wage freeze starting next year to address the structural deficit.
The MTA must implement the regularly scheduled 2021 and 2023 fare increases to keep up with inflation of costs.
The MTA should continue the smart practice it adopted in 2009 to increase fares and tolls biennially to keep up with inflation.
The City should undertake robust efforts to promote its Fair Fares program, which provides half-price transit service to lower income residents.
Key Data
$2.7 billion
— The MTA's annual structural deficit, representing the gap between recurring income and expenditures.
$2.9 billion
— The amount the MTA could save annually by 2024 through identified operational reforms.
50 percent
— The magnitude of service cuts greater than the MTA’s mid-pandemic ‘doomsday’ scenario that would be required if the agency fails to implement cost-saving reforms.
Federal aid provides a critical opportunity for New York to stabilize finances and avoid harmful service cuts by restructuring government operations rather than funding new programs. By implementing efficiency initiatives and productivity enhancements, the city and state can address future budget gaps of $5 billion annually while preserving essential services.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
Spread federal funds over the next several years, to balance budgets and provide time to restructure government in ways that preserve services and increase fiscal sustainability.
Focus the state’s education aid on high-need districts instead of increasing funds to wealthy ones to provide significant savings.
Eliminate unproductive economic development programs and temporarily change financing of some capital programs, all actions that could narrow future budget gaps — without raising taxes.
The city must not use the funds to reverse the progress made shrinking the workforce.
The city should over two years phase in efficiency initiatives, totaling 3 to 5% of city-funded agency spending.
Sanitation routes could be lengthened so that trucks are filled before they are tipped to reduce labor costs.
Fire engine companies all could be staffed with four firefighters, instead of some having five, to reduce labor costs.
The 108 union-administered benefit funds could be consolidated to reduce labor costs.
Employees could contribute to their health insurance like state employees and those in the private sector to reduce labor costs.
Key Data
$1.9 trillion
— The total value of the federal aid package provided to the state and city.
$25 billion
— The amount of federal funds that will erase more than 40% of the state's pandemic-related revenue shortfall.
$5.9 billion
— The amount of extra funds the state could have on hand by the end of fiscal year 2023 if it adopted the budget without proposed personal income tax increases.
4%
— The projected decline in property tax revenues due to the hard-hit real estate sector.
$5 billion
— The amount of annual budget gaps the city faces in the future.
$1 billion
— The amount of annual labor costs that could be reduced through productivity enhancements and benefit changes.
New York State's budget process lacks transparency regarding spending reductions and withholdings, leaving the public and legislature unable to assess the impact on specific agencies and programs. Furthermore, the proposed state budget includes unnecessary executive powers that undermine legislative authority and should be removed to ensure proper fiscal oversight.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The Division of the Budget should publish on its website timely and complete information about funds that were withheld and repaid as part of the fiscal year 2021 State budget midyear adjustment process.
This information should be provided monthly and broken out by agency or recipient, and major program.
The State should omit from the Enacted Budget three extraordinary budget powers that are unnecessary and inhibit the Legislature’s ability to exercise its appropriate role in the budget process.
The State should provide detail of the 5 percent cuts being made for fiscal year 2022 and beyond, including a clear summary of all dedicated fund transfers to the State’s general fund.
Key Data
$700 million
— Withholdings beyond a statutory payment date in calendar year 2020.
$628 million
— Total Transportation withholdings identified in the Assembly Majority’s “Yellow Book.”
$584 million
— Portion of transportation withholdings listed as “non-statutory, non- 18b Transit Operating Aid, Mobility Tax.”
$426 million
— Amount withheld from and to be repaid to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA).
$98 million
— Amount cut from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority in fiscal year 2021.
5 percent
— The reduced level of most local aid payment withholdings.
Managing the City’s fiscal crisis well will be a critically important duty of the next Mayor and a primary determinant of how the city survives the current crisis, and ultimately thrives in the future. Managing NYC’s Fiscal Crisis: A CBC Mayoral Candidate Forum featured a 10-minute conversation with each candidate,…
The COVID-19 pandemic caused significant disruptions to New York City's public services, leading to curtailed inspections, delayed repairs, and reduced capital project spending. These service interruptions, coupled with increased demand for emergency medical services and sanitation, highlight the urgent need for more robust performance metrics and flexible resource allocation to ensure effective service delivery.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should orient the structure of the Fire Department and its allocation of resources away from firefighting toward medical response to better handle the high volume of medical incidents.
The Department of Sanitation must implement more flexible routing and work rules to allow for the quick redeployment of resources in response to changing waste generation patterns.
The City should prioritize the implementation of robust performance metrics to better foster an understanding of City services and their effectiveness.
The City should conduct resident feedback surveys to collect high-quality data on key quality of life indicators that are currently missing.
The City must improve its reporting on the effectiveness and efficiency of services to address the current lack of adequate data.
Key Data
$1.5 billion
— Capital expenditures in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020 were the lowest in a decade, down from $2.6 billion in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2019.
53 percent
— The Department of Environmental Protection inspected only 53 percent of catch basins in fiscal year 2020, down from 103 percent the prior year.
15,124
— In the first quarter of fiscal year 2021, the City received 15,124 complaints about missed garbage collection, a 44 percent increase over the first quarter of fiscal year 2020.
25 percent
— The number of segment 1 medical incidents, which are the most severe, increased by 25 percent from 26,231 to 32,821 during the pandemic.
9.3 tons
— Tons of refuse collected per truck shift reached a low of 9.3 tons in fiscal year 2020, remaining below the contractual target of 10.7 tons.
New York City faces a $1 billion labor savings target, and the city should prioritize operational efficiencies and benefit rationalization over widespread layoffs to maintain essential services. By implementing reforms such as health insurance premium sharing, consolidating welfare funds, and adjusting staffing models for ambulances and fire engines, the city can achieve necessary savings while avoiding service-disrupting workforce reductions.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should work with the MLC to consolidate welfare funds to leverage economies of scale for prescription drugs and other medical benefits.
The City should seek State legislation to eliminate the VSFs and have the assets transferred to the main pension funds.
The City should be given the flexibility to shift at least half of the ALS ambulances to a one paramedic, one EMT staffing model.
The City could make four firefighters the standard staffing for engine companies.
The City should not continue to pay teachers full salary unless they are actively in the classroom providing instruction.
Key Data
$1.1 billion
— The amount of labor savings in fiscal year 2021.
$1.8 billion
— The amount of labor savings in fiscal year 2024.
$1.1 billion
— The amount spent on uniformed-agency overtime in fiscal year 2019.
$1.2 billion
— The estimated annual value of the taxpayer-provided TDA guarantee.
$2.2 billion
— The annual cost of pre-Medicare retiree health insurance benefits in fiscal year 2020.
$1.3 billion
— The projected City payments to welfare funds in fiscal year 2020.
The NYPD budget reduction of $474 million, while significant, relies heavily on unrealistic one-time overtime savings rather than structural changes, with only $82 million in recurring annual savings. To achieve meaningful long-term reductions, the city must implement a concrete operational strategy and negotiate far-reaching overtime reforms with labor unions.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
To achieve the steep reduction currently budgeted, overtime reforms would need to be far-reaching and potentially negotiated with labor unions.
The City must implement a plan or operational strategy to accompany overtime reductions, as prior efforts have only succeeded in slowing growth rather than decreasing expenses.
Key Data
$474 million
— Total reduction in the NYPD City-funded budget when measured against the Executive Budget for Fiscal Year 2021.
$82 million
— Recurring annual reduction to the operating budget, mainly achieved through hiring reductions.
$354 million
— Amount of the total budget reduction attributed to overtime expenses.
$81 million
— Savings achieved by cancelling the July Police Academy Class.
1,404
— Total reduction in the NYPD workforce for fiscal year 2021.
$345 million
— Decrease in the NYPD operating budget from fiscal year 2020 to fiscal year 2021.
Watch the original segment here . Budget watchdogs say labor and City Hall should target health care costs first. "The city pays the full premium for employees, retirees and their families. It's a deal that no other New Yorker in the private sector has," said Maria Doulis, vice-president at the…
New York City's fiscal year 2021 budget relies on achieving $1 billion in labor savings and $350 million in agency overtime reductions to avoid the potential layoff of 22,000 municipal employees. Alternative strategies such as attrition, increased productivity, and negotiated fringe benefit changes could potentially achieve these necessary savings without resorting to workforce reductions.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should utilize attrition, increased productivity, and negotiated fringe benefit changes to achieve necessary budget savings without resorting to layoffs.
The City must successfully negotiate $1 billion in recurring savings with municipal labor unions to avoid the potential layoff of 22,000 employees.
The City must ensure that reductions approved as part of agency savings programs, such as the $350 million reduction in NYPD overtime, are successfully implemented.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Recurring savings target from municipal labor unions.
22,000
— Number of municipal employees facing potential layoffs if labor savings targets are not met.
$350 million
— Reduction in overtime at the New York City Police Department approved as part of agency savings programs.
$88.2 billion
— Total budget adopted by New York City leaders for fiscal year 2021.
0.1 percent
— Growth rate of adjusted city-funded spending in fiscal year 2021.
$2 billion
— Amount by which inflation-adjusted city-funded spending in fiscal year 2021 exceeds fiscal year 2018 levels.
$1 billion is the target reduction in the NYPD budget that became the focal point of recent budget negotiations. Was this cut actually made in the NYC Adopted FY2021 Budget? CBC's Adrian Pietrzak and Ana Champeny discuss the NYPD's budget and how it's going to change in the coming year…
The FY2021 budget relies on questionable savings and lacks the necessary structural changes to address long-term fiscal gaps, creating a significant risk of future layoffs and service reductions. City leaders must prioritize recurring efficiency savings and aggressive attrition to avoid these drastic outcomes as the fiscal crisis continues.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
City leaders must implement a program of recurring efficiency savings and aggressive attrition to avoid the risk of drastic service reductions and layoffs.
City leaders should focus their management on actions that reduce the yawning multiyear budget gaps to prevent the need for service cuts.
The City must provide specific details on the actions needed to produce $1 billion in savings to avoid relying on questionable budget assumptions.
Key Data
$300 million
— The amount by which the City aims to reduce police overtime, which is considered highly unlikely given the weak history of overtime management.
$1 billion
— The amount of savings the City aims to produce through collaboration with labor unions, for which the budget currently lacks specific action plans.
CBC hosted a special panel discussion of prominent fiscal experts who helped New York overcome some of the most dire crises of the past. They provided insights and lessons from past experiences to help us understand and navigate the looming crisis. Stephen Berger Chairman, Odyssey Investment Partners; Former Executive Director,…
New York faces acute fiscal stress due to the pandemic, requiring governments to evaluate options like expenditure reductions, tax increases, and asset sales to balance budgets. These strategies involve difficult trade-offs, such as balancing immediate service needs against long-term fiscal health and intergenerational equity.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
Governments should minimize the negative impact of capital expenditure cuts by targeting projects that are not for essential infrastructure, such as 'political pork' or desirable expansions that can safely be postponed.
Policymakers should avoid shifting costs in a manner that inappropriately burdens local jurisdictions for services that should be financed from the broadest possible tax base.
When selling assets to raise resources, the fiscally prudent policy is to use proceeds to create equivalent value on the balance sheet, such as for capital investments or reserves.
Governments should avoid long-term borrowing for operations, as it violates the principle of intergenerational equity by requiring future taxpayers to pay for services consumed by current residents.
The Citizens Budget Commission has recommended using no more than two-thirds of any rainy day fund in the first year to ensure resources remain available if difficult times continue.
Key Data
$100 million
— Amount of capital spending avoided that saves about $6.5 million annually in debt service.
$6.5 million
— Annual savings in debt service achieved by avoiding $100 million of capital spending.
two-thirds
— Maximum portion of any rainy day fund recommended for use in the first year.
30-year
— Term of bonds used to calculate the $6.5 million annual debt service savings per $100 million of avoided capital spending.
Establishing a rainy day fund would allow New York City to save money during prosperous times, providing a financial cushion to avoid harmful service cuts and tax increases during economic downturns. This charter amendment would enable the city to manage its budget more effectively by utilizing saved funds to maintain essential services when facing potential revenue shortfalls of at least $15 billion.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
Voters should vote yes to approve the change to create a rainy day fund, which would allow the city to save during prosperous times in order to stave off budget cuts or tax increases in times of crisis or recession.
Voters should vote yes on Ballot Question 4 to create a rainy day fund, which can help protect New Yorkers from the most harmful service cuts or counterproductive tax increases.
Key Data
$15 billion
— Projected multi-year revenue shortfalls that could result from a recession, necessitating service cuts and tax increases.
New York City faces potential cumulative tax revenue shortfalls of $15 billion to $20 billion during a recession, which historically forces the government to enact harmful service cuts and tax increases. Establishing a Rainy Day Fund with a target size of $10.8 billion would provide the necessary fiscal stability to avoid these service cuts during future economic downturns.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City and State should authorize the City to use an RDF by codifying its parameters and amending State law and the City Charter to permit it, which would help avoid harmful service cuts.
Legislation to establish the RDF should specify the target size, required deposits, and permitted withdrawals to ensure the fund is used to prevent service cuts.
The target size of the RDF should be 17.2 percent of the pre-recession year tax revenue to ensure sufficient funds are available to avoid service cuts.
Minimum required deposits should be at least 75 percent of the annual tax revenue growth in excess of 3 percent to build a reserve that prevents service cuts.
Withdrawals should be permitted during an economic contraction or a severe emergency to provide stability and avoid service cuts.
Key Data
$15 billion to $20 billion
— Cumulative tax revenue shortfalls over three years in a recession, which historically lead to service cuts.
17.2 percent
— The target size of the RDF relative to pre-recession year tax revenue to ensure funds are available to avoid service cuts.
$10.8 billion
— The recommended RDF target size in fiscal year 2020.
75 percent
— The minimum required deposit of annual tax revenue growth in excess of 3 percent.
$8.5 billion
— The potential balance of the RDF if the deposit requirement had been in place during the current nine-year expansion.
New York City's implementation of a Program to Eliminate the Gap (PEG) aims to generate $750 million in annual savings to prepare for potential economic downturns and fiscal risks. By focusing on operational efficiency and program redesign, the city can reduce costs while minimizing negative impacts on public service delivery.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
OMB should set agency targets that generate savings in excess of the $750 million annual goal to provide options for mayoral priority setting and better position the City to identify additional savings.
Savings from the PEG should be derived exclusively from agencies and should focus on increasing efficiency in operations and service delivery to lower costs while minimizing negative impacts on the public.
To reduce negative impact on the public, cost reductions should be informed by clear priorities and data that compare the savings achieved to the reduction in service levels, quality, or relevant outcomes.
The City should reevaluate existing fees to ensure they are keeping pace with rising costs for relevant services without reaching economically counterproductive levels.
Agency executives, managers, and front line staff should take the lead on identifying savings to optimize programs, services, and operations.
Key Data
$155 million
— Average annual efficiency initiative savings for fiscal years 2016 through 2019.
0.25 percent
— Portion of the City funds budget represented by average annual efficiency initiatives for fiscal years 2016 through 2019.
$750 million
— Mayor's stated annual target for the Program to Eliminate the Gap (PEG).
1 percent
— Portion of the City funds budget represented by the Mayor's $750 million annual PEG target.
$10 to $12 billion
— Estimated annual out-year budget gaps if a recession occurs.
New York City's Access-A-Ride paratransit program is the most expensive in the nation, with a 2014 cost per trip of $71 and a high volume of registered users. To improve financial sustainability, the MTA should implement strategies such as shifting ambulatory trips to broker car services, increasing the use of feeder service, and pursuing Medicaid reimbursement for non-emergency medical transport.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
Moving all ambulatory customers with BCS could save the MTA up to $126 million annually.
If the MTA were able to replace all current trips originating within the taxicab “hail zone” in Manhattan, the agency could save up to $28 million annually.
By altering its service design and contracting a single, full-service broker the MTA could consolidate the multiple management layers, which could save up to $30 million annually.
Doubling the fare could save as much as $184 million annually by reducing trips and increasing fare revenue.
If the program were redesigned to limit fraud and encourage wider use of the fixed-route system by paratransit customers and reduce trips 5 percent, the program could save $22 million annually.
Increasing the share of feeder service to 5 percent could save up to $20 million annually.
Changing the Medicaid reimbursement policy could generate an estimated $14 million annually for the MTA.
Key Data
$461 million
— Total cost of the Access-A-Ride program in 2015.
$71
— Highest cost per trip among 29 cities with paratransit programs in 2014.
17
— Number of people registered to use the service per 1,000 residents.
$126 million
— Potential annual savings from shifting all ambulatory customers to the broker car service program.
$184 million
— Potential annual savings from doubling paratransit fares.
$28 million
— Potential annual savings from replacing all current trips originating within the Manhattan taxicab hail zone.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces significant revenue risks during potential economic downturns, which could necessitate difficult choices between service reductions, fare increases, or reallocating capital and benefit funds. To mitigate these risks, the agency should adopt more cautious revenue projections, establish a formal rainy day fund, and prioritize efficiency gains to align expenditures with available resources.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
More cautious economic and revenue assumptions seem appropriate, and new policies regarding reserves would be a constructive step.
Accumulation of general reserves should be permitted, and an explicit rainy day fund established covering a larger share of total expenses before releasing future reserves to reduce other long-term liabilities.
Greater restrictions on diversion of OPEB funding and a firmer commitment to PAYGO capital allocations would reduce the risks associated with reallocation of those items.
Finally, continuing to increase planned efficiency gains beyond current targets for future years would help bring expenditures in line with the revenues available when a downturn occurs.
Key Data
$1.5 billion
— Cumulative revenue shortfall over a four-year period in an illustrative recession scenario.
$616 million
— Revenue loss in Year Three of an illustrative recession scenario, representing a 3.9 percent shortfall.
4,780 employees
— Number of staff that would need to be laid off to cover projected shortfalls in Year Three.
6.7 percent
— Percentage of the workforce that would need to be laid off to cover projected shortfalls in Year Three.
$20 billion
— Current unfunded OPEB liability of the MTA.
$1.3 billion
— Annual savings achieved by the MTA's expenditure growth curbing program as of 2015.
Proposed legislation to provide grants for higher wages and benefits to school transportation employees should be rejected because it undermines the integrity of the city's competitive bidding process. Funding these payments would necessitate reducing funding for other municipal services, as the savings from current contracts have already been allocated to other city needs.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City Council should reject proposed legislation that would provide grants to pay higher wages and benefits to certain school transportation service employees, as paying for these grants would require reducing funding for other municipal services.
The City Council should reject the proposed grants because they would constitute supplementary payments to City contractors over and above the terms of legally binding, competitively bid contracts, in exchange for no additional services.
This presentation was given during CBC's Conference on The Most Important Economic and Fiscal Decisions Facing the Next Mayor , which took place on December 6, 2013.. CBC provides a framework for curbing expenditures effectively and provides 8 options for savings: Implementing health insurance premium-sharing; Consolidating union welfare funds;…
Binding arbitration for public unions often results in generous wage awards that strain municipal budgets and force local governments to consider service cuts or tax increases. To protect local fiscal health, the definition of a municipality's 'ability to pay' must be strictly tied to recurring resources rather than relying on fiscal gimmicks or service reductions.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
“Ability to pay” should be defined as the capacity of a locality to pay all costs of the imposed contract from recurring resources (including savings from productivity gains) without increasing taxes, making service cuts or employing fiscal gimmicks.
New, more specific decision criteria should place greater emphasis on the fiscal condition of local governments to avoid service cuts.
Revising the binding arbitration law to strengthen localities' position is necessary to incentivize union leaders to negotiate and avoid service cuts.
The changes should include time limits and deadlines that avoid the uncertainties and risks arising from delayed, retroactive wage awards that can force service cuts.
Key Data
4.5% and 5%
— Wage increases awarded to New York City police officers for the 2004-2006 contract, which exceeded negotiated rates for other unions and strained municipal budgets, potentially necessitating <b>service cuts</b>.
2%
— The annual raise limit proposed by Governor Cuomo for localities meeting the definition of 'fiscally distressed,' intended to prevent excessive costs that lead to <b>service cuts</b>.
The potential loss of the Payroll Mobility Tax, which raised over $1.4 billion in 2011, could create a $459 million budget deficit for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. To address this shortfall, the agency would likely be forced to implement significant service cuts or substantial fare increases for Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North Railroad commuters.
Key Data
$459 million
— The potential hole in the MTA budget in 2012 if the Payroll Mobility Tax is not collected in suburban counties.
$1.6 billion
— The operating cost of the Long Island Rail Road in 2012.
$1.3 billion
— The operating cost of the Metro-North Railroad in 2012.
The city should prioritize funding for child care and after-school programs by phasing out the reimbursement of Medicare Part B premiums for retired municipal workers and their spouses. This shift would redirect resources from an overly generous benefit that costs $280 million in fiscal year 2013 toward essential services for children.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should begin a phase-out of the reimbursement of Medicare Part B premiums for some retired municipal workers in next year’s budget.
Reducing the reimbursement of Medicare Part B premiums by 50 percent in each of the next two years would save $140 million in fiscal year 2013 and $310 million in 2014.
It’s time to consider redirecting budget resources toward the needs of our city’s children and away from areas of overspending.
Key Data
$100
— The monthly standard premium for Medicare Part B benefits.
$85,000
— Annual income threshold for individuals to pay a larger Medicare Part B premium.
$170,000
— Annual income threshold for married couples to pay a larger Medicare Part B premium.
$320
— The maximum monthly Medicare Part B premium for higher income earners.
$280 million
— The cost of providing Medicare Part B reimbursement to New York City taxpayers in fiscal year 2013.
$380 million
— The projected cost of Medicare Part B reimbursement by fiscal year 2016.
NY1 For the past five years, City Hall has cut from the budget because it says it can't afford those programs. Those cuts are based on complicated revenue forecasts done by City Hall and others.
New York City's fiscal strategy relies on recurring budget gaps driven by the rapid growth of health insurance, pension, and debt service costs, which necessitates ongoing service cuts and workforce reductions. To avoid future instability, the city must implement structural reforms to these three major expense categories rather than relying on temporary measures.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City’s leaders must work with the Municipal Labor Committee to reform health insurance arrangements.
Employees and retirees should be required to pay a share of their premiums in order to both lower taxpayer costs and to give the workers a stake in containing future premium increases.
The City Council should join the Mayor in backing the pension reform bill that has been introduced by the Governor.
The Mayor and City Council should make slowing the growth of debt service a higher priority.
Resources should be directed toward the rehabilitation of essential infrastructure, like schools, roads, bridges, water mains and sewer pipes.
Key Data
$4.8 billion
— Projected budget gap for fiscal year 2013.
$30 billion
— Total savings from pension reform over the next 30 years.
$625 million
— Savings from adopting a premium-sharing arrangement for health insurance beginning in 2012.
$5.4 billion
— Projected spending reduced by agencies since 2008.
9,450
— Number of positions proposed for elimination in the Executive Budget.
$23.1 billion
— Expected spending on health insurance, pension contributions, and debt service in 2015.
New York City can avoid 4,300 teacher layoffs, 20 fire company closures, and various social service cuts by adopting a labor agreement template similar to the one reached between the State and the Civil Service Employees Association. Implementing these measures, including wage freezes, furloughs, and health insurance premium contributions, could generate $1.4 Billion in savings for the city in fiscal year 2012.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should extend the wage freeze to a third year to achieve $388 Million in savings in 2013.
Implementing a five-day furlough for all municipal employees would save $400 Million in 2012.
Requiring city employees and retirees to contribute to health insurance premiums would save $735 Million.
Adopting the State’s long-standing policy for retiree premium-sharing would save an additional $290 Million in fiscal year 2012.
Key Data
$3.8 Billion
— Five-year savings if the State agreement is adopted by all State employees.
$1.4 Billion
— Potential savings for New York City in fiscal year 2012 by following the State agreement template.
$388 Million
— Savings in 2013 from extending the wage freeze to a third year.
$400 Million
— Savings in 2012 from a five-day furlough for all municipal employees.
$735 Million
— Savings from requiring city employees and retirees to contribute to health insurance premiums.
$915 Million
— Savings from health insurance contributions by 2015.
New York City faces significant budget cuts to essential services like fire companies and social programs, which could be avoided by reforming costly retiree health insurance benefits. Implementing changes to premium reimbursements, vesting requirements, and cost-sharing could generate $950 million in savings, preserving the city's trust fund and preventing service reductions.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The city should end reimbursement for Medicare Part B premiums to bring the city in line with the public-sector norm.
The city should increase vesting requirements for the rest of the city workforce to align with the 15-year requirement already established for teachers.
The city should require retirees to share in the cost of their premiums, as New York state has required since the 1980s.
Key Data
$1.5 billion
— Retiree health insurance cost in the current year.
$2.2 billion
— Projected cost of retiree health insurance by 2015.
50 percent
— Growth in retiree health insurance costs over four years.
$70 billion
— Existing unfunded liability for retiree health-insurance obligations.
$1.2 billion
— Total withdrawals made from the Retiree Health Insurance Trust fund to help close budget deficits.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority implemented service cuts in June 2010, including restructuring subway routes and altering bus services, to generate approximately $100 million in annualized savings. These measures, alongside broader efficiency initiatives like reducing overtime and consolidating administrative services, are part of a strategy to address projected budget gaps that were expected to reach nearly $1.2 billion by 2013.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The MTA should prioritize efficiency improvements for its two large bus systems, as they are inefficient compared to other large U.S. bus systems and represent a major portion of operating expenses.
The MTA should address the high vehicle maintenance and non-vehicle operations costs within its commuter rail systems, as these are the most troublesome functions.
The MTA should use benchmarking to identify areas where it is out of line with other large urban transit agencies to prioritize new efficiency initiatives.
The MTA should continue efforts to terminate redundant staff, such as former token booth clerks, to achieve efficiency improvements in non-vehicle operations.
The MTA should explore operational practices in Chicago to identify potential new efficiency initiatives for its subway system.
Key Data
$100 million
— Annualized savings projected from the service cuts that took effect in June 2010.
$525 million
— Recurring savings expected from efficiency measures and service cuts.
$935 million
— Total savings projected for 2014 from all combined efficiency and service cut initiatives.
$1.2 billion
— Projected budget gap for 2013, which necessitated the efficiency and service cut measures.
$8 billion
— Total operating expenses for the five MTA passenger transport divisions in 2009.
New York's Medicaid Redesign Team has proposed a package to reduce program spending by implementing provider payment rate cuts, stricter eligibility requirements, and utilization controls. These measures, including a new program-wide spending cap, aim to control costs while maintaining care quality, though long-term sustainability remains a challenge.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The effective savings measures should be implemented speedily, and the new cap should be tested carefully in the coming year.
Future efforts should be pursued to reverse the new assessments that push up the cost of care.
Future savings in line with the goal of the innovative cap strategy will require broad changes in the way providers are paid and even greater efforts to limit excessive utilization.
A longer term look at options for malpractice reform may ultimately be more beneficial than the current short-term proposals.
The state should expand the spending cap to include programs currently administered by the Office of Mental Health and other agencies to ensure the cap's effectiveness.
Key Data
4%
— The projected reduction in state Medicaid spending under the new proposal.
6%
— The average annual increase in Medicaid spending between 1995 and 2010.
30%
— The amount by which New York's nursing home rates exceeded the national norm in 2007.
76%
— The increase in per recipient costs in the Certified Home Health Agencies program from 2003 to 2008.
40%
— The increase in spending on personal care services from 2003 to 2008.
0.5%
— The percentage of total nursing home spending recovered by New York through asset recovery efforts.
New York City has implemented billions in budget-balancing actions since 2008, relying heavily on revenue increases and funding shifts rather than direct spending cuts to manage deficits. To avoid further reductions to essential services like education and social programs, the city should prioritize structural reforms to pension fund contributions and employee health insurance premiums.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
Anticipated State actions will require substantial new cuts in agency budgets unless ways are identified and approved to reduce spending for pension fund contributions and health insurance premiums for employees and retirees.
The “all other” category consisting largely of pension fund contributions and health insurance premiums should be reduced with new initiatives.
Unions must be willing to accept changes in collective bargaining over health benefits.
Wide support must be garnered to push the State Legislature to authorize changes in future pension benefits.
The City should adopt a strategy for dealing with hard times that spares education and other priority services from new and deeper cuts.
Key Data
$3.4 billion
— Total budget balancing actions (PEGs) proposed in the last two fiscal years.
$2.4 billion
— Projected deficit for the next fiscal year.
$926 million
— The single largest expenditure cut, which occurred at the Department of Education.
$593 million
— Revenue-raising measures identified in PEG documents.
$121 million
— Expenditure reduction in the Sanitation Department.
$103 million
— Expenditure reduction in the Administration for Children’s Services.
A Panel Discussion A recent report by the Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) found that elderly and disabled beneficiaries comprise fewer than one in four Medicaid enrollees in New York but account for nearly three of every four program dollars spent. Achieving cost savings among this population, while preserving access to…
New York City has been forced to implement $3 billion in budget cuts, disproportionately impacting youth services and staffing, while pension costs have surged from $4.9 billion to a projected $8.1 billion. To address this fiscal imbalance, the city must reform pension systems for future workers and increase cost-sharing for health insurance premiums to avoid further service reductions.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The Legislature must enact a new pension system for future uniformed workers that includes a minimum retirement age, excludes overtime from pension calculations, and requires higher employee contributions.
Union leaders must agree to more cost-sharing for health insurance premiums to alleviate the burden on the city budget.
Retirees should be paying for a share of their benefits similar to arrangements in the private and nonprofit sectors.
Key Data
$3 billion
— Reduction in planned spending for fiscal year 2012
21%
— Staff reduction in the Agency for Children's Services
$8.1 billion
— Projected annual pension fund contributions in fiscal year 2012
$6.6 billion
— Total pension contributions cost to New York's taxpayers last year
$1.2 billion
— Retiree health insurance cost to New York taxpayers last year
The fiscal year 2011 budget includes over $1 billion in agency spending cuts, resulting in the loss of 4,200 jobs and reductions in health, welfare, and library services. Rather than relying on these service cuts, the city could achieve significant savings by reforming public employee fringe benefits and scaling back the $43.5 billion capital commitment plan.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City should take a stronger stance on reforming health care and retirement benefits for its workers to avoid service cuts.
The City should require employee contributions to health care premiums of 10 percent for individuals, 25 percent for families and 50 percent for retirees to generate savings.
The City should create a new pension tier that requires greater employee contributions and a longer vesting period to achieve annual savings.
The City should scale back the capital commitment plan to reduce growing debt service costs.
The City should focus capital spending on state-of-good-repair work for aging infrastructure while trimming less urgent development projects.
Key Data
4,200
— Jobs lost in the Program to Eliminate the Gap.
1,100
— City employees facing layoffs.
$100 Million
— In service cuts to health and welfare programs.
$231.7 Million
— In proposed budget cuts restored by the City Council.
$165.2 Million
— In new initiatives added by the City Council.
$43.5 Billion
— Total capital commitment plan for fiscal years 2010-2014.
New York City can avoid laying off 18,000 employees by implementing five policy changes, including adjusting health insurance contributions, increasing work hours for civilian staff, and reforming pension and overtime management. These measures would generate $2 billion in annual savings, preventing the need for service cuts while addressing inefficiencies in city operations.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The city should share costs for health insurance premiums by requiring 10% contributions from workers, 25% from dependents, and 50% from retirees to align with private sector practices.
The city should adopt a 40-hour workweek for the 70,000 civilian municipal employees currently working fewer hours to reduce the need for additional positions.
The city should create a new pension tier for future workers to offer a more affordable benefits package that avoids the need for teacher layoffs.
The city should better manage overtime by replacing it with workers on regular schedules, particularly in the Police and Fire Departments.
The city should stop paying teachers who do not teach by speeding up the review process for those in the 'rubber room' and limiting time spent in the Absent Teacher Reserve.
Key Data
18,000
— Number of city employees, including teachers, police, and firefighters, facing layoffs under the preliminary budget.
$2 billion
— Total annual savings projected from implementing five specific policy changes to avoid service cuts.
$3.4 billion
— Annual cost to taxpayers for city employee health insurance premiums.
$500 million
— Annual savings generated by requiring civilian municipal employees to work a 40-hour workweek.
$7.1 billion
— Amount the city must contribute to pension funds for city workers next year.
$1 billion
— Total amount spent on overtime by the city in the previous year.
The Mayor's preliminary budget for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 addresses a $4.1 billion gap by implementing an "Agency Program" that eliminates 4,286 jobs and reduces services like pool operations. While the plan avoids broad tax increases, it relies on optimistic revenue projections and raises concerns regarding the potential for significant state aid reductions and the continued protection of Department of Education staffing levels.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The City needs a realistic plan for how to deal with inevitable cuts in State aid rather than relying on a contingency plan that assumes the worst.
The City should reconsider the decision to use the Retiree Health Benefits Trust as a rainy day fund and instead link withdrawals to growth in the current year liability.
The City should evaluate whether the "sacred cow" status of the Department of Education is justified given the current fiscal situation.
Key Data
$4.1 billion
— Budget gap for fiscal year 2010-11.
4,286
— Number of jobs to be eliminated by the end of fiscal year 2011.
$371 million
— Savings from the "Agency Program" in the current year.
$799 million
— Savings from the "Agency Program" in the next year.
$1.3 billion
— Estimated loss of aid in fiscal year 2011 based on the Executive Budget.
New York State faces a massive, growing budget deficit that cannot be solved through tax increases, borrowing, or passing costs to local governments. To avoid future, more painful measures, the state must implement aggressive spending reductions, particularly in Medicaid, personnel compensation, and education aid.
Recommendations related to Service Cuts
The state must implement aggressive spending reductions now to avoid more painful across-the-board cuts in the future.
New York should reform Medicaid spending to address growth rates and high per-beneficiary costs.
The state should curb personnel costs by addressing overly generous fringe benefits and pension contributions.
New York should reallocate education aid by eliminating funding to wealthy districts that have abundant resources.
Key Data
$4.6 billion
— Next year's projected budget gap.
$18.2 billion
— Projected budget gap by 2012-13.
$26 billion
— Current annual education aid to local school districts.
$7,746
— Medicaid expenses per beneficiary, which is 67% above the national average.
36%
— Expected growth in Medicaid spending over the next three years.
$58 billion
— Planned outstanding state-supported debt by 2013-14.
No results for your current filters. Manually edit your filters, or
clear the filters.
Share Feedback
Give a star rating, write a comment of at least 10 words, or both.
