Buffalo Comptroller Appeals Court Ruling on Infrastructure Funding

The ongoing conflict between Buffalo’s Acting Mayor, Chris Scanlon, and Comptroller Barbara Miller-Williams escalated as Miller-Williams announced her intention to appeal a court ruling that compels her to finance city infrastructure projects. In September 2023, Judge Emilio Colaiacovo ruled that the Buffalo Common Council has the authority to approve funding, stating that the comptroller does not possess the power to refuse financing for capital improvement projects.

Miller-Williams, who disagrees with the ruling, argues that the city charter does not obligate her to issue the funds. “It was ambiguous at best,” she stated. She emphasized her interpretation of the charter, which she believes does not mandate her to finance the projects. The ruling follows the Common Council’s appropriation of $57 million for various infrastructure initiatives. Despite this approval, the comptroller has withheld $28 million due to concerns that it exceeds the debt limit set by her office.

The funds in question are earmarked for essential services, including the acquisition of police and fire vehicles, as well as funding for building improvements, demolitions, and tree removals throughout the city. Miller-Williams contends that her appeal is aimed at safeguarding the city’s fiscal stability. “Let me be very clear, this appeal is not about politics or personal disagreements,” she remarked. “It’s about preserving the integrity of the city charter and ensuring independent fiscal oversight for future generations.”

The court’s ruling characterized the comptroller’s refusal to release the approved funds as a “dereliction of duty.” Scanlon, who initiated the lawsuit, criticized the comptroller’s decision to appeal, labeling it “negligent.” He expressed skepticism regarding her claims that the appeal is not politically motivated, suggesting that the comptroller’s actions may stem from ego rather than fiscal responsibility.

Mitch Nowakowski, chair of the council’s finance committee and a co-plaintiff in the lawsuit, described the appeal as “political chicanery,” implying that it serves a purpose beyond fiscal oversight. Both parties have sought external legal counsel to support their positions, with Miller-Williams indicating that her legal expenses have reached approximately $8,000. Scanlon did not disclose specific figures related to his legal costs but highlighted the financial implications of the delay on capital projects.

He warned that the postponement due to Miller-Williams’ refusal to secure financing could lead to increased costs for taxpayers, estimating that projects originally budgeted at $48 million could escalate to between $55 million and $60 million. “Every day that goes by, these projects cost more and more money,” he stated.

As the situation unfolds, Scanlon plans to consult his attorneys regarding the appeal process and potential next steps, while the community watches closely to see how this dispute will impact the city’s infrastructure plans and fiscal health in the months to come.