- Home
- About Albany Data Stories
- Albany's AIM Funding
- Albany's Budget 2017-2025
- Albany's Vendors
- Albany's Population
- Albany's Poverty
- Albany's Taxable Property
- Albany's Developable Land
- Albany's Vacant Buildings
- Albany's Housing
- Albany's LowInc Housing
- Albany's APD Complaints
- Albany Crime Reports Pt 1
- Albany Crime Reports Pt 2
- Albany's Speed Cams Pt 1
- Albany's PILOT program
- Albany's Financial State
- Albany's Open Data
- What's Next
What STATE funding does Albany receive & is it equITABLE?
Background
New York provides two streams of funding to cities - Aid and Incentives for Municipalities (AIM) and Temporary Municipal Assistance (TMA). In Albany when we speak about receiving money from NY State these are two of the primary vehicles.
Anyone can download the data - the summary spreadsheet at the bottom shows the AIM and TMA funding for each city. https://www.osc.ny.gov/local-government/data/aid-and-incentives-municipalities-aim-and-temporary-municipal-assistance-tma
Our goals were to understand this funding, compare Albany's funding versus other cities and determine if the funding is equitable or out of balance.
You can use the spreadsheet below to follow along with the analysis if you want.
A few basic facts about AIM funding:
- AIM funding has remained unchanged for each city for years. The 2017-18 budget has the same funding by city as the 24-25 budget. Note that leaders have attempted to give visibility to the situation; Albany, Schenectady and Troy Mayors Sheehan, McCarthy and Mantello wrote this op-ed (paywall) nearly a year ago.
- 61 cities receive AIM payments, those cities have an aggregate population of 2.267 million people
- New York City is not a part of the AIM program
- Statewide AIM payments are $647 million and statewide TMA payments total $45 million.
AIM Funding Analysis
This brings up a few questions - is the distribution equitable? And if the distribution is not equitable, how inequitable is it? Let’s dig into the AIM program.
The first thing that we will do is add in a population value (using US Census 2023 population figures) and examine the distribution of aid of the top 15 cities by population.
Even the most casual examination suggests an imbalance in the funding. For example, Albany has 70% of the population of Syracuse but receives 17% of the AIM funding. Given this, let’s extend the analysis and look at AIM distribution on a per capita basis.
The variability (and unfairness) of the AIM funding stands out when looking at per capita distribution. Statewide the AIM funding per capita is $285 per person ($647mm of funding for 2.267mm people).
Given this there are winners and losers that are significantly above the average. These are all cities with population greater than 50,000 listed with their Per Capita AIM payments.
In this analysis Albany has received $113 million less AIM funding in reality versus a hypothetical scenario where funding was distributed on a consistent per capita rate. Buffalo has received $580 million more and Syracuse $211 million more than a consistent distribution scheme.
Adding in the Capital City Funding significantly changes Albany’s per capita state funding from $125/person to $273/person. Sorting New York cities by state funding per capita, Albany moves from 8th to 6th when you add in the Capital City Funding, behind Utica ($283/person) and slightly ahead of Troy ($271/person).
The 2025 City of Albany Proposed Budget suggests an increase in Capital City Funding: “...this budget includes Capital City Funding of $20 million.” How would that change the funding?
With this increase in funding, the City of Albany would be the 5th highest funded city on a per capita basis, behind Rochester ($426/person).
Summary
- New York State distributes $647 million of AIM funding per year using distribution levels to cities that have remained unchanged over a decade
- Distributions to cities show an incredible imbalance with no reasonable explanation for the imbalance that shows up based on size of city
- Albany’s imbalance, when measured against a consistent, statewide per-capita distribution measure demonstrates an underfunding that is greater than $100 million over the last seven years.
- Capital City Funding – historically and proposed 2025 – does close the funding distribution gap to a significant degree.
Additional Explorations
We can envision some additional questions that we may want to answer in the future. We also ask any of our readers to ask follow-up questions as well:
- Does the Temporary Municipal Assistance (TMA) funding streams carry the same imbalance and, if so, what is the level of unfairness?
Questions or comments? email us at AlbanyDataStories@gmail.com
