A report released yesterday by State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli provides details into the current ability of the State to fund road and bridge projects.

“Since 1991, just 34.9 percent, or $11.6 billion, of the money in the state’s Dedicated Highway and Bridge Trust Fund went directly toward the repair and improvement of the state’s deteriorating roads and bridges, according to a report released by State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli today at a press conference on Long Island. DiNapoli’s report notes that the Division of Budget projects the percentage of capital spending will decline to 21 percent in fiscal year 2013-14. Approximately $3.9 billion will need to be transferred from the state’s General Fund to the Highway and Bridge Trust Fund over the next five years to meet the Trust Fund’s obligations.

“Only one-third of the money in the Highway and Bridge Trust Fund has actually been used to pay for highways and bridges,” DiNapoli said. “The rest has been siphoned off to pay for debt service on back-door borrowing and to fund operational costs for the DMV and the state Department of Transportation.

“This money should be going toward keeping our roads and bridges safe, not to fund state agency operations. The bridge closing in Crown Point is just one more example of why this is so important. If this trend continues, the state will have to transfer nearly $4 billion into the Trust Fund over the next five years. Using this dedicated capital money to pay for operations and debt service is just one more gimmick on the list of New York’s bad fiscal choices.”

From FY 1993-94 through FY 2008-09, only 34.9 percent, or $11.6 billion of Dedicated Highway and Bridge Trust Fund spending was on capital projects while 37.7 percent, or $12.6 billion, went to fund state operations for the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Department of Transportation. The remaining 27.4 percent, or $9.1 billion, of spending paid for debt service.”

To read the rest of the Comptollers release or to hear audio from his press conference click here.

Andy Soltis of the New York Post reports - “Hard-hit New York and New Jersey homeowners not only pay more in property taxes than anyone else in the nation, they also give up a bigger percentage of their income for it.

New census data show that residents of four counties in the Empire State and six in the Garden State paid an average of more than 7 percent of their income in real-estate taxes.

The national average is 2.85 percent.

The worst proportional tax bite in the nation falls on New Jersey’s Passaic County.

The average homeowner there has an annual income of $85,088 and pays $7,095 a year in real-estate taxes.”

To read the rest of the stor click here.

Steve Israel writes on today’s HudsonValley.com -”America may finally know if the controversial gas- drilling method known as “fracking” is safe or harmful.

The House of Representatives Wednesday approved a bill sponsored by Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-Hurley, that urges the Environmental Protection Agency to study the effects of hydraulic fracturing – or “fracking” – on drinking water. The Senate is expected to soon do the same, and President Obama will then sign the bill into law, said Hinchey.

“Fracking” has become part of the local vocabulary since natural gas companies have targeted the Marcellus shale deposit, which sits thousands of feet below Sullivan County.

The industry, citing an accident-free record in New York, says the horizontal drilling method is safe. Critics, citing incidents in other states like Pennsylvania, say it pollutes ground and drinking water.”

Debra J. Bloom of the Syracus Post Standard reports - “Nine Central New York energy-saving projects are receiving federal stimulus money.

Gov. David A. Paterson announced Thursday[dgr: oct. 29: ] that $24 million in stimulus money will support 87 energy conservation projects across New York. He said these projects will reduce energy and operating costs by more than $6.5 million annually.”

to read the rest of the story click here.

Joseph Spector writes on today’s LoHud.com -”Gov. David Paterson indicated Thursday he wants state lawmakers to pass legislation that would link property taxes to household incomes as a way to lower New Yorkers’ bills.

There’s just one problem: The state doesn’t have the money to pay for it.

Paterson said Thursday during a meeting of legislative leaders in Manhattan that the state’s two-year budget gap has increased to $10 billion, compared to about $6.7 billion in July.

Paterson has called lawmakers back to the Capitol on Nov. 10 to close the current $3.2 billion midyear budget deficit. He has proposed cuts to health care, education and increases in revenues. He expects to release his midyear fiscal update Friday.”

To read the rest of the story click here.

The Governor continues to push for real action from the legislature when they return for special session in early November. Glenn Blain of the Daily News writes -”Gov. Paterson vowed Thursday to bring lawmakers back to the Capitol - and keep them there until they agree to cut the budget.

“They’ll come back and we’ll stay there until we get it done,” he said after meeting legislative leaders in his Manhattan office.

Paterson also said the state’s budget deficit had reached $3.2 billion, up slightly from the $3.1 billion he predicted last month.

New York’s estimated 2010-11 budget deficit is $6.8 billion. In July, state Budget Officials pegged the current year deficit at $2.1 billion and $4.6 billion for the upcoming fiscal year.

To read the rest of the story click here.

To send a letter to your legislators and legislative leaders asking them to support the Governor’s spending cuts click here.

Dr. Scott Gottlieb writes in The New York Post that the health care reform envisioned in the Senate bill could actually increase costs on most people who buy private health insurance.

He writes:  “It’s increasingly clear that the initial impact of President Obama’s health-care reform will be to raise the cost of health insurance and the number of uninsured Americans, perhaps sharply.

You see, the parts of the reform package that promised to reduce insurance costs, and get more people insured, kick in years after the legislation would start imposing hefty new costs on consumers.

Obama has endorsed the bill produced by the Senate Finance Committee, which is being tweaked for a vote by the full Senate. The plan’s core element — the creation of state-based exchanges for the purchase of subsidized coverage — won’t change, nor will the basic schemes on how Democrats plan to pay for it.

Yet it prescribes added pain first, and promised relief only later.

Starting in 2010, the bill would impose annual fees of $2.3 billion on brand-name drugs and $4 billion on medical devices, plus $6.7 billion on certain insurance providers — and more than $100 billion in cuts to what Medicare pays to health-care providers. These costs will immediately shift onto consumers, in the form of higher prices on medical products and rising premiums.

Meanwhile, the promised subsidies to help pay for insurance don’t fully kick in until 2014. (And those subsidies only go to people earning below 300 percent of the poverty line, or about $66,000 for a family of four.)

Front-loading these taxes and cuts in reimbursements is the only way Congress has found to keep the nominal cost of ObamaCare below $900 billion. It’s a gimmick: The bill uses 10 years of revenue to pay for about five years of benefits, since the subsidies don’t fully kick in until after 2014.” 

Worse, it’s a gimmick that imposes a stiff price on the public: The taxes and spending cuts of the early years will force the cost of private insurance up immediately, prompting some Americans to drop coverage before they have any access to the plan’s subsidies. (And putting some form of government-run “public” insurance option into the bill can’t change this grim equation.)

Read the rest of the column.

Interested in how federal health care reform will impact your business?  The Business Council presents Forum 2009: Federal Health Care Reform - Understanding the Impact on New York’s Businesses to provide information to businesses and other interested stakeholders. Including: understand how any changes will affect coverage options for employees, result in new taxes or surcharges, impact access to health care services, and affect your bottom-line.

Sign up today click here.

Monroe County will see big savings thanks to lower interest rates on this year’s county borrowing, according to the Rochester Democrat & Chronicle.

Reporter Jill Terreri writes:  “The county borrowed $75 million at the lowest rate it has received in six years, despite having one of the worst credit ratings in the state.

The bonding, which covers county operations for 51/2 months until federal and state grants are received, closed Wednesday.

The interest on the bonds is 1.91 percent. Last year, the county paid 6 percent interest on an $80 million bond issue.

The county will pay $1.4 million in interest on these bonds, compared with $4.8 million last year.”

Read the story.

New York’s population loss is a serious threat to the state’s economy, according to an editorial in The New York Post.

The Post writes:  “As Gov. Paterson and legislative lead ers meet today to tackle a multibil lion-dollar budget shortfall, they should note a new report’s warning: New Yorkers are fleeing in droves — and it’s wreaking havoc with the public fisc. 

The report, by the Empire Center for New York State Policy, shows that some 1.5 million people left the state between 2000 and 2008 — including 1.1 million from New York City alone.

And they took their tax dollars with them: In 2006, for example, the state lost some $4.3 billion from newly turned ex-New Yorkers.

Actually, folks have been fleeing for years: In 1950, New Yorkers represented nearly a tenth of the nation; now they make up less than a fifteenth.

It’s cost the state a fortune.”

The editorial calls on the state to cut spending.

A story by Kara Rowland in The Washington Times, says that the split between the GOP and Conservative candidates in the special congressional election in New York’s 23rd district is turning into a litmus test for Republican candidates in other House races looking to prove their Conservative credentials.

Rowland writes, “Liz Lauber, running in the Republican primary for a House seat in Missouri, this week made support for Mr. Hoffman a campaign issue, calling on five-term Republican incumbent Rep. Todd Akin to endorse and donate money to the Conservative Party nominee who is running in a special election Nov. 3.

Mr. Akin did endorse Mr. Hoffman, though his office said it was not a response to Mrs. Lauber’s challenge but rather to calls received from constituents asking where the congressman stood on the race.

“The New York special election is becoming a referendum for the heart and soul of the Republican Party across the country,” said Mrs. Lauber, a former congressional staffer. “I stepped up to the plate and threw my support [behind Mr. Hoffman] because I’m listening here to what people are saying at home.”

Read Rowland’s story.