One of the “KEY” sentences is something we are stuck with all across the state. UNFUNDED MANDATES. So many people do not understand what they are so here is a perfect example.

the Legislature has passed numerous pension enhancements and other mandates which the state did not fund, leaving the financial responsibility to the city, which Albany deals with as a large piñata which may be punctured as well.

Cities, Towns and Counties have to deal with the financial decisions Albany politicians make, while they benefit from the financial donations and political payoffs fromn the unions, we pay through high taxes and commuter taxes.

No Commuter Tax Comes at High Price

Eight years ago, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver steamrolled the repeal of the commuter tax through the New York State Assembly. The tax, which was levied at the rate of 0.45 percent of the salary of people who did not live in the City of New York but worked here, had brought in over $300 million a year to the City of New York, a sum that would have increased substantially due to inflation and prosperity. The rationale for the tax was that commuters received police, fire, sanitation and other services while they were in the city, and should therefore pay a small share (about 10 percent) of what city residents pay in the city income tax.

The cumulative sum the city has lost due to this one legislative decision is now estimated at $4 billion and increases by a larger sum each year. The Legislature’s vote to repeal the tax moved the city budget further from the structural balance which mayors have sought to attain. In addition, the Legislature has passed numerous pension enhancements and other mandates which the state did not fund, leaving the financial responsibility to the city, which Albany deals with as a large piñata which may be punctured as well.

To be fair, the state Senate and Governor Pataki also supported repeal of the tax. They are upstate Republicans and the commuter tax affects some of them adversely. It is the Democratic majority in the Assembly that we look to to protect the interests of New York City. If the city is unable to secure its fair share of additional state funds, the least the Assembly can do is to see to it that the city is not injured by damaging new legislation aimed at our tax base.

In the spring of 1997, there was a special election for a state Senate vacancy in Rockland County, caused by the departure of the Democratic incumbent. The Republican candidate to fill the vacancy came out for repeal of the commuter tax, which is predictable. So did the Democrat. The Republican then challenged the Democrat to get his house, the Assembly, to go along with repeal.

The Speaker swallowed the bait, and pressured New York City Democrats under his thumb to support the bill. His deputy, Manhattan Assemblyman and County Leader Denny Farrell, co-operated with Silver, but a number of local Democrats rebelled.

It is alleged that Silver’s decision was based in part on personal animus toward Mayor Giuliani, who held the Speaker in ill-concealed contempt. Mayor Giuliani felt that way about a number of people, as did Mayor Koch. I do not know what is inside Mayor Bloomberg’s mind, but he generally holds his tongue when speaking of other political leaders, and that may be a virtue in terms of protecting the City of New York from the rage of others.

However, if a person believes public service to be a noble and honest profession, and acts honorably in his/her own affairs, it is impossible to have high regard for those who degrade the offices they hold through conflicts of interest, submission to lobbyists, failure to supervise employees, politically motivated appropriations for porkbarrel projects and other varieties of inappropriate behavior.

Nonetheless, there is value in discretion, and part of the game is going with the public pretense that officials, especially those of the same party, like and respect each other. In reality, their personal feelings are often quite the opposite, sometimes because of personal rivalry, and sometimes on the grounds of ethical deficiencies by some practitioners. What is particularly frustrating to the good guys is that bad behavior is no barrier to political success. Bad guys are often more ingratiating and better infighters than reformers, who can be arrogant wonks and nerds convinced of their own super-powers and consequently disdainful of others. Public probity does not correlate with personal charm. Please do not ask us to graph it.

In any event, the Speaker will have great influence over determining mayoral control over the schools, a decision to be made in 2009. He has significant power over the state budget, and the clout to pass, or not to pass, all state legislation. The chances are that, having bested the governor in their first clash, he will co-operate to the extent he thinks appropriate in the interest of a strong Democratic showing in 2008 and the capture of the state Senate. Silver also has more support in his own caucus because has supported them against a governor whom some view as arbitrary, arrogant and abusive. Others think Spitzer is the last, best hope for reform of a rotten government; that he was elected with a sweeping majority, and that he should be given a chance to be an effective governor. The points being made are not mutually exclusive.

Some, probably most, legislators are honest and decent, within reason. Others take money and favors for their votes, whether through their campaign committee, which is legal, or directly, which is a crime. Pay-for-play behavior is not necessarily punishable under the law but its prevalence is an open sore on government. What is unusual with regard to the repeal of the commuter tax on May 17, 1999, is that the vote was not the result of pressure from lobbyists or contributors, the usual suspects in matters of this sort. The push came from the Speaker’s office, and the obedience of the slavish munchkins who wanted to be or stay on his good side. They voted to repeal the tax despite its enormous cost to the city some of them are supposed to represent.

Revenge for petty slights is a predictable part of politics, and it may not, on occasion, be altogether unjustified. But $4 billion is a terribly high price for the City of New York to have to pay for one man’s nose being put out of joint by one other man, probably unwittingly.

Henry J. Stern is the former New York City Parks Commissioner.