The Good, the Bad, the Odd: Eight Takeaways from Kraham’s 2027 Budget Proposal and Address

During my four years as Binghamton’s Deputy Mayor, I led and managed the annual budget process. It was one of my favorite exercises every year (says the policy nerd).

Mayor Jared Kraham gave his 2027 Budget Address this past Tuesday (September 15) in City Council Chambers. I’ve spent some time the last two days reviewing Kraham’s full budget proposal.  Based on my experience—and my own values and personal interests—here are eight key takeaways that you won’t see in the local media coverage.

Reading Kraham’s Address, I was struck by his temperament and tone. In a hyperpartisan environment, where one gains by chopping off the knees of perceived enemies (or phantom bogeymen), I have to be honest and acknowledge Kraham strayed entirely from this tactic. Whether Kraham has made a genuine shift or a strategic concession to a unanimous Democratic City Council that has successfully exercised their political muscle the last two years, I applaud him for this new approach and encourage more of it. This is a welcome change that serves our community better than the bait-click, cut-throat hyper-partisanship that sadly dominates our politics today.

Anybody who knows me understands that this hits with accuracy and force my public policy G-spot (sorry, but I really wanted you all to understand my profound excitement).

I have been advocating for a citywide reassessment for more than a dozen years. Former mayor Rich David, a real estate investor, had no interest in fixing a broken system that delivered him and his development buddies absurdly low tax bills while soaking homeowners. Neither did his rubberstamping GOP-led Council, led by Tom Scanlon and Sophia Resciniti.

So I was delighted to learn a few years ago that a few candidates running for City Council—Robert Cavanaugh, Rebecca Rathmell, and Nate Hotchkiss—were fully on board with fixing this broken, outdated, inequitable system during their first term. When Democrats swept every Council seat, we worked together and delivered on a key policy reform (and promise) that is foundational to good governance and housing justice. City Council unanimously passed a local law this summer, thanks to the leadership of Councilmembers Robert Cavanaugh and Rebecca Rathmell, that requires citywide reassessments on a periodic basis (every five years). Per the new law, the first citywide reassessment since 1993 must be completed by December 2029.

I want to personally thank Mayor Kraham for including in his proposed budget the financial resources needed to start the process in 2027 in order to comply with the new law.

Look, I don’t need to be buds with Jared and I’ll continue to disagree with some (most) of his policies and decisions. But I have no problem thanking him for supporting the Council’s action and understanding the value of creating a fair, just, and equitable system for how we distribute the annual tax burden. Because using 1993 assessments to calculate all these years who pays what amount in property taxes has been a shameful exercise of fraud, and that needs to end. I’m glad and thankful that after all our education, Jared agrees with this goal.

Kraham’s proposed budget includes a tax increase of roughly 3% for homeowners, and 5% for non-homeowners. He rightly places most of the blame on increases in both health insurance costs and pension payments—the two biggest drivers on the expense side year in and out (and which a mayor has little to no control over). Kraham also credits “sound budgeting decisions” over years that minimized the blow to taxpayers. Kraham is reaching on that one.

What Kraham failed to fully (and accurately) explain in his address or press release is that New York State significantly boosted state aid (which is called “Aid to Municipalities (AIM))” for this coming year. AIM is the second largest revenue line in the City’s budget (following sales tax and excluding the tax levy).

Since 2013, AIM for Binghamton has been stuck at $9,250,000. Thanks to the State, Binghamton will now receive an additional one-time injection of about $3,222,000, according to Kraham’s budget proposal. This one-time boost exceeds the combined year-over-year increases in health care costs and pension payments, about $2,600,000.

Without this “AIM boost,” Kraham would have had to either (1) increase taxes about 10% for homeowners and 17% for non-homeowners; (2) eliminate many positions across City Hall; or (3) abandon most, or all, of his proposed investments in public safety equipment and buildings, youth programs, neighborhood planning efforts, park improvements, and housing.

Let me add a caveat here. Trump’s policy agenda and budget decisions—laser-focused on advancing the priorities of billionaires, warmongers, the fossil fuel industry, racist xenophobes, an extreme religious right, and his own pathetic ego—will continue to place serious pressures on local, county, and state budgets everywhere. For example, Kraham’s proposed budget already shows significant spikes in gas and utility costs (inflation + Iran War). Street lighting allocations were relatively consistent for eight years, under $300,000 (they were $250,000 in CY2022 and $277,000 in CY2024). They spiked to $625,000 in CY2027. That’s an increase of 150% in five years. As the negative effects of Trump’s draconian budget cuts and asinine policy decisions continue to flow down to local governments, the pain is going to get much worse—for residents and taxpayers.

We got lucky this year with a gift from the State, but I doubt that generosity can be sustained. If this “one-time boost” of AIM doesn’t become recurring, Kraham will have a hefty budget gap to close next year.

There were roughly 600 full-time employees for the City when I worked in the Mayor’s Office, and less than half (270) were police and fire positions. The numbers haven’t changed much since.

I mention this because the State has two pension systems: one for police and fire, and another for all other public servants (for example, parks and public works employees, engineers, administrative staff, code officers, etc.).

The retirement payment in Kraham’s proposed 2027 budget for “all other public servants” is $1,800,000—exactly the same as 2026. Alternatively, the retirement payment for police and fire jumped $900,000 to $8,571,000, and accounts entirely for the increase in pension payments that Kraham blames for a tough budget year.

Look at Kraham’s media release and the resultant local media coverage and you get the sense that Kraham wants to be the Guliani of Binghamton (like, the late 1990s Guiliani, not the batshit crazy 2020s Guiliani). Investments in public safety (which everybody immediately perceives as “cops”) is the lead, because that’s the brand, right?

But for the first time in nearly 12 years, the proposed budget for the Binghamton Police Department is the same as the year before (okay, Kraham proposed an increase of less than one half of a percent). Given the Police Department’s budget increased a whopping 29% from 2021 to 2026 (and that does not reflect the spike in pension costs or the more than one million in pandemic recovery funds (ARPA) that Binghamton mayors David and Kraham funneled to the police department), we are fine with no increase. I’d actually recommend a steady decrease, with resources shifted to fund civilian mental health crisis response teams and measures that actually prevent crime (more youth programs, permanent supportive housing and vouchers, etc.)–practies that have proven very effective in other US communities (and other countries). But I digress; that’s for another essay.

I only mention this because it shows the power of messaging—and how most local media outlets, lacking the time and resources to do actual analysis and digging, simply echo the press releases of our mayor (and our county executive).

Every annual budget includes a table of water and sewer rates for Binghamton users. When compared to the tables in the 2026 approved budget, every water and sewer rate is higher in Kraham’s 2027 proposed budget. (I’m being careful with the wording here, because Kraham does not make it clear when these higher rates go into effect; they might have already jumped this calendar year.)

I’m not against reasonable increases if they are essentially needed, but I know times are tough for folks so avoiding them if possible would be best. What bothers me is that Kraham is continuing Rich David’s practice of refusing to inform users about these rate increases (and again, because both understand local media outlets lack the resources to investigate and report such increases).

So yeah,for Binghamton users, water rates are going up about 6% on the first 1,000 cubic feet of water used and 17% for every 100 cubic feet afterwards. The fixed capital improvement fee is jumping 3% as well.

Sewer rates are very similar: an increase of 5.5% on the first 500 cubic feet and about 10% increase for every 100 cubic feet afterwards. Small increase to the capital improvement fee as well.

The City of Binghamton has rarely made cash investments in local events as formal sponsors. Instead, the City annually commits hundreds of staff hours (if not thousands) to support these special events, like Porchfest, LUMA, and the St. Patrick’s Day Parade. It’s really incredible the level of commitment demonstrated by employees in these four key departments—Public Works, Parks, Police, and Fire—to make these events possible.

But things changed in his 2026 Budget when Kraham started allocating tax dollars to three local events: LUMA, Porchfest, and the Philharmonic Anniversary.

Look, I know and admire deeply many who organize these wonderful, celebratory events that help foster community and connection—and some events draw tourists and have a real positive economic impact. I’m also not staunchly opposed to these investments. But they raise thoughtful (tricky?) questions, and my goal with these annual “hot takes” of the mayor’s proposed budget is to also educate and inform—and that includes spotlighting budget changes and new trends (good and bad).

The biggest concern for me is the question other event organizers will ask, “If the City gives to that event, why not give to mine?” And seems we’re sliding down that rabbit hole, since Kraham is increasing the amount of tax dollars committed to celebrations from $80,000 (three events) in his 2026 Budget to $135,000 (six events) in his proposed 2027 Budget.

Personally, I also think public resources ought to be allocated in a manner that advances equity and inclusion. What would that look like when it comes to local events and celebrations? Could City Hall design an event sponsorship program that allocates limited resources transparently and equitably? Could the mayor and Council enlist more corporate sponsorships for small local events, and state and federal grants for large events that generate real economic impact?

I am genuinely interested (with an open mind) to see how City Council engages this request from Kraham, and thinks about this new trend with some ominous fiscal challenges looming in the coming years.

This is minor, but last year I asked during my budget review (with a lot of sarcasm) why Kraham is paying a “Website and Social Media Coordinator” $54,000, burying them in the IT Department, and then still failing to meet many basic transparency benchmarks.

Rest assured. The position has been unfunded in Kraham’s proposed 2027 Budget.

But don’t rest too long. Alas, a new position is being proposed in the Mayor’s Office, “Director of Community and Public Affairs,” at a much higher salary of nearly $67,000.

Maybe Fred Akshar’s cousin or niece needs a job?

Tarik Abdelazim is a local advocate for housing justice, racial justice, and good governance. For 12 years, Abdelazim honed his policy expertise helping urban and rural communities across the country tackle vacancy and disinvestment as a senior leader with the Center for Community Progress. Prior to his national work, Abdelazim served in Binghamton’s City Hall from 2006 through 2013 as the Deputy Mayor and then the former Director of Planning, Housing, and Community Development. Abdelazim is a frequent contributor to this site.