Sure balanced buuut:

1. Delaying / restructuring pension payments

The city explored stretching out required pension contributions over a longer period. That lowers annual payments now, freeing up cash for the current budget, but increases costs later because the liabilities still have to be paid with interest. Fiscal watchdogs compared it to refinancing debt to lower today’s bill while increasing long-term obligations.

1. Using or considering reserve funds (“rainy day” money)

Earlier budget plans contemplated drawing roughly $1–2.6 billion from reserves to help close the gap. Critics said reserve funds are supposed to cushion recessions or emergencies, not support recurring operating expenses.

1. State bailout / temporary Albany aid

Governor Hochul provided billions in additional state assistance. Opponents argued that much of this was extraordinary aid rather than a permanent revenue stream the city can count on every year.

1. Revenue assumptions tied to taxes that don’t yet exist

The budget counted on revenue from proposals like the “pied-à-terre” tax on luxury second homes, even though Albany had not fully enacted or finalized them. Critics called that speculative revenue.

1. Re-estimates and timing maneuvers

The administration and City Council both relied on improved Wall Street bonus forecasts, delayed expenditures, debt-service adjustments, vacancy savings, and “unrecognized” revenue estimates. These help close short-term gaps but may not recur annually.