Terrified that NY State may actually do the unthinkable-that is, enforce the cigarette taxes against the black marketeers-a group of around 50 Indians whooped it up in front of City Hall yesterday. As Daily Politics reports: "Mayor Bloomberg's going to have some company at City Hall this afternoon, thanks to comments he made about Gov. Paterson and collecting cigarette taxes from Native Americans."
All of this is, of course, a classic case of misdirection-trying to take the focus away from the fact that these Indians are little more than colorful scofflaws. But instead of being ashamed of their illegal tobacco operations-often run by former drug dealers-they go on the offensive-and offensive they are: "As Jim Odato noted in the Times-Union today, "As the Sept. 1 effective date of taxing Native American cigarette sales nears, tempers are rising in Indian Country. Even historically cool-headed leaders are angry, and were amazed that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg fanned the flames by saying Gov. David Paterson should stick to his tax policy by donning a cowboy hat, grabbing a shotgun and standing in the Thruway to lay down the law."
Perhaps the mayor was a bit politically incorrect-but his statements were in response to the threat of potential violence-something that isn't purely hypothetical, as we have seen: "Seneca Indians set bonfires and threw rocks along the New York State Thruway - shutting down a 30-mile stretch for more than 10 hours - in a protest over new taxes on tobacco and fuel sales on reservations. It was the second protest in as many days. Fourteen people were arrested. The protest closed part of the Thruway, which borders the Cattaraugus Indian Reservation, between Hamburg, just south of Buffalo, and Dunkirk. The protests were prompted by an appeals court ruling last week that the state is permitted to tax cigarettes and gasoline sold by reservation retailers to non-Indians." (1991)
So, the rioter's veto is alright, but those who say that the governor should respond with force must be called to task. The mayor's spokesman gets the legalities right at the DP blog: "Responded Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser: “The Supreme Court has ruled several times that Tribes have no right to sell cigarettes in violation of State tax laws - and Congress has now reinforced that with a new Federal law as well."
But that didn't stop a little Indian razzmatazz-as Frank Lombardi reports on DP (watch the video): "Here's Ginew Benton, an Ojbway-Cree and resident of the Shinnecock Reservation on Long Island, leading a chant for "leadership" during this afternoon's protest on the steps of City Hall. More than 50 representatives of Native American tribes and groups condemned what they denounced as “racist” and insensitive stereotypical remarks about Native Americans. They denounced Mayor Bloomberg’s Aug. 13 comments on his weekly WOR radio show with John Gambling, cracking that Gov. Paterson should put an end to unpaid cigarette taxes on upstate reservations by, ”Get yourself a cowboy hat and a shotgun” and stand in the middle of the NY Thruway and enforce the law. The protesters said that for them, cowboys and shotguns evoke the perpetrators of massacres of Indian tribes in American history and are no joking matter."
Violating the law for the better part of two decades isn't a joke either-and if the tribes want others to show them a degree of sensitivity then they need to clean up their own act. Lawlessness gets them zero sympathy in these quarters, pardner.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Indian War Whoop
The Indian push back against the right of the state to collect the tax money it is owed continues-and the tribes lack any sense of irony in their outrage. It's as if we were in some kind of time warp where the white man is looking to confiscate Indian land and commit genocide. The Times Union has the story: "As the Sept. 1 effective date of taxing Native American cigarette sales nears, tempers are rising in Indian Country. Even historically cool-headed leaders are angry, and were amazed that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg fanned the flames by saying Gov. David Paterson should stick to his tax policy by donning a cowboy hat, grabbing a shotgun and standing in the Thruway to lay down the law."
Of course, this is just a bit of hyperbole-and the mayor was responding to the possibility that the Indians would reprise their act of vigilantism that took place in the late nineties. But the tribes continue to argue that they have some sort of sovereignty rights-something that the SC decision of 1994 should have disabused them of: "Other events going against the Indian nations have followed: Enactment of a federal mail policy that closed off cigarette shipments, forcing hundreds of layoffs in Seneca territory; a decision by a federal appeals court that denied the Oneidas from seeking damages from New York for wrongful taking of their land; and a state budget that earmarked $150 million this year by enforcing tax collections on tribal cigarette operations."
What a shock! The Indians are citizens of NY State and need to comply with its laws. But now they want to play the race card: "What's wrong with a Jewish man egging on a black man to shoot an Indian?" said Onondaga leader Oren Lyons, a traditional chief the past 44 years. The 80-year-old former college lacrosse teammate of Jim Brown spends most of his time at the reservation just south of Syracuse, except when he travels as a crisis negotiator and human rights activist. He said of Bloomberg: "I had a lot of respect for that man and what he's done in New York City, but now . . . His people went through a holocaust and they have a museum in Washington, D.C., to show the pictures. We don't have a museum to show the holocaust; they wouldn't show the pictures."
Now no one would argue with the fact that the Indians took a drubbing over a hundred years ago-but if you want to consider that those were wars between two soveriegnties, than that issue was resolved when the Indians lost; and since then, in recognition of their mistreatment, various state and federal programs have been put in place to assist the tribal members in being integrated into American society. But when it comes to the sale of cigarettes, the Indians want to have their tobacco and smoke it.
Hence there confused desperation: "People talk about this (as) an uprising," Lyons said. "But what would the state of New York say if Vermont came in and said we're going to have to tax you 80 percent of your income? You think they might stand up and fight? What options are there with the Indians if you can't go to court?"
Well, that's exactly what did happen under the old Articles of Confederation-one state imposing a tariff on the movement of goods from another state-and the resulting US Constitution resolved the issue. But once again, Indians are raising a totally bogus sovereignty question in order to avoid their obligations under the legally binding state law.
As the Journal News points out: "The Seneca Nation on Friday filed an injunction in federal court to delay the collection of cigarette-tax revenue on reservations. Earlier in the week, the tribe filed a lawsuit challenging the validity of the state's plan. "We had hoped to come to an understanding where the parties would have an orderly and agreed upon processing of the merits of our claims," said Barry Snyder, the president of the Seneca Nation in a statement. "Unfortunately, the Nation now finds itself in the position of needing emergency relief from the federal courts to keep the State from implementing this illegal tax scheme."
"Illegal tax scheme?" What this amounts to is a declaration of war against the duly constituted and sovereign authority of NY State-and deserves as forceful a response as the governor and the legislature can muster: "If successful, the state's enforcement would end a decades-long struggle of state officials to collect the revenue. The last attempt, in 1997, resulted in Seneca tribe members in Cattaraugus County occupying Thruway overpasses in protest. Fourteen people were arrested and two state troopers were injured during the protests."
That's what Mayor Bloomberg was referring to-a bold flouting of legal authority that, if not stopped cold, will lead to the subversion of state authority. Put simply, it is a call to insurrection-and no different, given the tax implications, as a direct raid on the state treasury: "The state approved a plan in June to collect the revenue by taxing the wholesalers who sell cigarettes on the reservations, which would lead to higher prices there. Members of the tribe would not be taxed for buying cigarettes on the reservations and could opt into a coupon program. The proposal was coupled with a $1.60 hike in the per-pack price on cigarettes to $4.35 in an effort to balance the state's budget, a plan that is expected to generate $300 million. As a result, cigarette sales have taken a nosedive in July." (emphasis added)
The Indians have drawn a line in the sand-and the road to this insurrection is littered with the carcasses of legitimate retailers and wholesalers. When you listen to the Indians' rhetoric, it becomes clear that this is a defining moment for government; either it protects the legitimate rights of the citizens and tax paying businesses, or else it allows criminals to dictate what laws should or shouldn't be enforced.
We'll give the tribal spokesman the last word of warning: "Mark Emery, a spokesman for the Oneida Nation, went further in his skepticism. "None of New York's previous efforts to impose taxes on sovereign Indian nations have ever succeeded, and there is no reason to believe this latest effort will succeed either," Emery said. He added that the tribe is willing to sit down and resolve the issue outside of the court system. "When New York is ready to engage with the Oneida Nation on a government-to-government basis in which the parties respect each other's interests, we'll be ready to negotiate a final resolution that is fair and legal," he said."
NY State is either sovereign, or it isn't. The resolution of this already settled legal question, is in the hands of the governor and the legislature.
Of course, this is just a bit of hyperbole-and the mayor was responding to the possibility that the Indians would reprise their act of vigilantism that took place in the late nineties. But the tribes continue to argue that they have some sort of sovereignty rights-something that the SC decision of 1994 should have disabused them of: "Other events going against the Indian nations have followed: Enactment of a federal mail policy that closed off cigarette shipments, forcing hundreds of layoffs in Seneca territory; a decision by a federal appeals court that denied the Oneidas from seeking damages from New York for wrongful taking of their land; and a state budget that earmarked $150 million this year by enforcing tax collections on tribal cigarette operations."
What a shock! The Indians are citizens of NY State and need to comply with its laws. But now they want to play the race card: "What's wrong with a Jewish man egging on a black man to shoot an Indian?" said Onondaga leader Oren Lyons, a traditional chief the past 44 years. The 80-year-old former college lacrosse teammate of Jim Brown spends most of his time at the reservation just south of Syracuse, except when he travels as a crisis negotiator and human rights activist. He said of Bloomberg: "I had a lot of respect for that man and what he's done in New York City, but now . . . His people went through a holocaust and they have a museum in Washington, D.C., to show the pictures. We don't have a museum to show the holocaust; they wouldn't show the pictures."
Now no one would argue with the fact that the Indians took a drubbing over a hundred years ago-but if you want to consider that those were wars between two soveriegnties, than that issue was resolved when the Indians lost; and since then, in recognition of their mistreatment, various state and federal programs have been put in place to assist the tribal members in being integrated into American society. But when it comes to the sale of cigarettes, the Indians want to have their tobacco and smoke it.
Hence there confused desperation: "People talk about this (as) an uprising," Lyons said. "But what would the state of New York say if Vermont came in and said we're going to have to tax you 80 percent of your income? You think they might stand up and fight? What options are there with the Indians if you can't go to court?"
Well, that's exactly what did happen under the old Articles of Confederation-one state imposing a tariff on the movement of goods from another state-and the resulting US Constitution resolved the issue. But once again, Indians are raising a totally bogus sovereignty question in order to avoid their obligations under the legally binding state law.
As the Journal News points out: "The Seneca Nation on Friday filed an injunction in federal court to delay the collection of cigarette-tax revenue on reservations. Earlier in the week, the tribe filed a lawsuit challenging the validity of the state's plan. "We had hoped to come to an understanding where the parties would have an orderly and agreed upon processing of the merits of our claims," said Barry Snyder, the president of the Seneca Nation in a statement. "Unfortunately, the Nation now finds itself in the position of needing emergency relief from the federal courts to keep the State from implementing this illegal tax scheme."
"Illegal tax scheme?" What this amounts to is a declaration of war against the duly constituted and sovereign authority of NY State-and deserves as forceful a response as the governor and the legislature can muster: "If successful, the state's enforcement would end a decades-long struggle of state officials to collect the revenue. The last attempt, in 1997, resulted in Seneca tribe members in Cattaraugus County occupying Thruway overpasses in protest. Fourteen people were arrested and two state troopers were injured during the protests."
That's what Mayor Bloomberg was referring to-a bold flouting of legal authority that, if not stopped cold, will lead to the subversion of state authority. Put simply, it is a call to insurrection-and no different, given the tax implications, as a direct raid on the state treasury: "The state approved a plan in June to collect the revenue by taxing the wholesalers who sell cigarettes on the reservations, which would lead to higher prices there. Members of the tribe would not be taxed for buying cigarettes on the reservations and could opt into a coupon program. The proposal was coupled with a $1.60 hike in the per-pack price on cigarettes to $4.35 in an effort to balance the state's budget, a plan that is expected to generate $300 million. As a result, cigarette sales have taken a nosedive in July." (emphasis added)
The Indians have drawn a line in the sand-and the road to this insurrection is littered with the carcasses of legitimate retailers and wholesalers. When you listen to the Indians' rhetoric, it becomes clear that this is a defining moment for government; either it protects the legitimate rights of the citizens and tax paying businesses, or else it allows criminals to dictate what laws should or shouldn't be enforced.
We'll give the tribal spokesman the last word of warning: "Mark Emery, a spokesman for the Oneida Nation, went further in his skepticism. "None of New York's previous efforts to impose taxes on sovereign Indian nations have ever succeeded, and there is no reason to believe this latest effort will succeed either," Emery said. He added that the tribe is willing to sit down and resolve the issue outside of the court system. "When New York is ready to engage with the Oneida Nation on a government-to-government basis in which the parties respect each other's interests, we'll be ready to negotiate a final resolution that is fair and legal," he said."
NY State is either sovereign, or it isn't. The resolution of this already settled legal question, is in the hands of the governor and the legislature.
Indians Smoking Dope, Not Peace Pipe
The Seneca have decided to sue the state in order to prevent the enforcement of the tax laws against their criminal enterprises. As Capitol Confidential reported last week: "The Seneca Indian Nation sued the Paterson administration in U.S. District Court in Buffalo Tuesday to block enforcement of a plan to gain tax collections on sales of cigarettes at Native American stores. Papers were filed around 5 p.m. naming the Gov. David Paterson, Acting Tax Commissioner Jamie Woodward and State Police. The Seneca tribal government said in a statement that a complaint was filed in the Western District of New York challenging as substantively infirm (1) the amendments to New York State Tax Law sections 471 and 471-e that were enacted on June 21, 2010; and (2) the emergency regulations promulgated by the Department of Taxation and Finance in an effort to implement those statutory provisions. The tax collection is supposed to commence Sept. 1."
To us, as more legitimate enterprises fold up because of the criminal tax evasion of these tribes, this should be treated as a state of war-and every candidate for governor and attorney general should be grilled on where they stand on this bold questioning of the legitimate authority of the state. But you got to give these tax evaders points for chutzpah.
As CC reports: "In the meantime, the tribal government, which is supported by other tribes, is appealing to Paterson and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to hold off on implementing the collection program while the case is in the court. Court papers say the Seneca have a tribal tax stamp already and that the “well-regulated tobacco economy” supports 18 Seneca-licensed stamping agents and 140 licensed cigarette retailers and about 3,000 Indian and non-Indian employees." (emphasis added)
There's obviously something stronger than tobacco in what these folks are smoking. And it's certainly not a peace pipe. As the Times Union reports: "Following what was billed as a historic gathering of elected and traditional chiefs of the Native American nations of upstate New York, the Iroquois Confederacy issued a unified message opposing the Paterson administration's planned implementation of a tax policy requiring state collections on cigarettes sold by Indian stores." So much for the Indian version of what it means to be well-regulated.
And they're still up to their old tricks of trying to deny the legality of the 1994 Supreme Court decision that empowers the State of New York to enforce its own tax laws: "About 100 chiefs, tribal council representatives and officials from all of the entrepreneurial and traditional -- or "longhouse" -- factions met at a Rochester Institute for Technology conference center much of Wednesday to plan the statement and the next course of opposition. Their message blasts the "foreign nation" of New York from trying to erode sovereignty of the Mohawk, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga, Tuscarora and Seneca people."
The, "foreign nation of New York," you know, the one that provides these Indians with schools, roads, hospitals and welfare benefits-underscoring that, when it suits them, and when they are on the receiving end of state funds, they can be good citizens of this foreign enclave. In our view, the governor and the legislature should start right away in cutting off all "foreign aid" to these insurrectionists. And, by the way, if they really are sovereign, why can't New York charge them for selling goods to its citizens? The rhetorical knife cuts both ways.
And all of the talk of sovereignty is then simply hooey: "The statement that came out of the session said the six-nation confederacy agreed to "reaffirm the ancient unity of the Haudenosaunee" with the common goal of defending treaty-protected sovereign rights to the free use and enjoyment of what they referred to as "our" land. The statement said that, based on treaties dating hundreds of years, foreign governments cannot intrude or interfere in the commerce on the Indian territories. The leaders said the "latest attempt" to damage sovereignty involves the attempts to collect taxes on cigarette products."
But, as always, there is the implicit threat of violence: "Seneca Council Chairman Richard Nephew said the tax policy is misguided and threatens Indian economies. "They're trying to use the Indian nations of New York as scapegoats to get out of their decades of fiscal mismanagement," he said of state politicians. "As leaders our job is to try every means as necessary to keep the peace at home. Our people are angry."
It's about time that someone called the bluff here-and enforced a law that, in the absence of enforcement has cost tax payers billions of dollars; while destroying the small store owners who have always been, while being forced to play the role of patsies, the legitimate retailers and wholesalers of cigarettes.
To us, as more legitimate enterprises fold up because of the criminal tax evasion of these tribes, this should be treated as a state of war-and every candidate for governor and attorney general should be grilled on where they stand on this bold questioning of the legitimate authority of the state. But you got to give these tax evaders points for chutzpah.
As CC reports: "In the meantime, the tribal government, which is supported by other tribes, is appealing to Paterson and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to hold off on implementing the collection program while the case is in the court. Court papers say the Seneca have a tribal tax stamp already and that the “well-regulated tobacco economy” supports 18 Seneca-licensed stamping agents and 140 licensed cigarette retailers and about 3,000 Indian and non-Indian employees." (emphasis added)
There's obviously something stronger than tobacco in what these folks are smoking. And it's certainly not a peace pipe. As the Times Union reports: "Following what was billed as a historic gathering of elected and traditional chiefs of the Native American nations of upstate New York, the Iroquois Confederacy issued a unified message opposing the Paterson administration's planned implementation of a tax policy requiring state collections on cigarettes sold by Indian stores." So much for the Indian version of what it means to be well-regulated.
And they're still up to their old tricks of trying to deny the legality of the 1994 Supreme Court decision that empowers the State of New York to enforce its own tax laws: "About 100 chiefs, tribal council representatives and officials from all of the entrepreneurial and traditional -- or "longhouse" -- factions met at a Rochester Institute for Technology conference center much of Wednesday to plan the statement and the next course of opposition. Their message blasts the "foreign nation" of New York from trying to erode sovereignty of the Mohawk, Onondaga, Oneida, Cayuga, Tuscarora and Seneca people."
The, "foreign nation of New York," you know, the one that provides these Indians with schools, roads, hospitals and welfare benefits-underscoring that, when it suits them, and when they are on the receiving end of state funds, they can be good citizens of this foreign enclave. In our view, the governor and the legislature should start right away in cutting off all "foreign aid" to these insurrectionists. And, by the way, if they really are sovereign, why can't New York charge them for selling goods to its citizens? The rhetorical knife cuts both ways.
And all of the talk of sovereignty is then simply hooey: "The statement that came out of the session said the six-nation confederacy agreed to "reaffirm the ancient unity of the Haudenosaunee" with the common goal of defending treaty-protected sovereign rights to the free use and enjoyment of what they referred to as "our" land. The statement said that, based on treaties dating hundreds of years, foreign governments cannot intrude or interfere in the commerce on the Indian territories. The leaders said the "latest attempt" to damage sovereignty involves the attempts to collect taxes on cigarette products."
But, as always, there is the implicit threat of violence: "Seneca Council Chairman Richard Nephew said the tax policy is misguided and threatens Indian economies. "They're trying to use the Indian nations of New York as scapegoats to get out of their decades of fiscal mismanagement," he said of state politicians. "As leaders our job is to try every means as necessary to keep the peace at home. Our people are angry."
It's about time that someone called the bluff here-and enforced a law that, in the absence of enforcement has cost tax payers billions of dollars; while destroying the small store owners who have always been, while being forced to play the role of patsies, the legitimate retailers and wholesalers of cigarettes.
Supermarket-Or Government-Rip-Off?
While we were away last week, the Department of Consumer Affairs issued its periodic indictment of the supermarket industry-and inadvertently exposed its own complicity in the demise of neighborhood markets in NYC. As Crain's reported-with an explosive, "Supermarkets Ripping off Customers," headline: "City says groceries overcharge for items, charge tax when they shouldn't and neglect to put price tags on many items. The worst offenders are found in the poorest neighborhoods."
Amazing, isn't it? We have a profiteering industry right in the middle of New York City that is, at the same time it is ripping off poor people, it is hemorrhaging stores-at least 200 units have disappeared under the watchful eye of the Bloomberg regulators. What we do need is a study of how the current regime of Bloombergistas-and that would include Commissioner Mintz and his minions of inspectors-has made NYC simply an impossible place to successfully conduct business in.
And if we started to compile the list of taxes, along with the voluminous regulatory mandates in the city's municipal code, we just might conclude that it is the city, through the excessive burdens it imposes, that is actually the entity that is doing the consumer rip-off. Because each additional tax and regulatory levy is passed along to the consumer as an extra cost of doing business.
But so great is the disconnect-and so interested is the DCA in, not only generating sensational headlines, but raising operating funds through the fines it collects-that the city can't grasp how it has been a major culprit in the demise of local supermarkets that it now seeks to remedy in some program that it cheekily calls the, "Fresh Initiative."
Indeed, this Fresh program is a signature component of the mayor's health initiative-designed to bring supermarkets into those very poor neighborhoods that have supermarkets allegedly stealing from the poor. This is draw room comedy disguised as public policy. Take East Harlem. It has lost close to a dozen neighborhood markets-a victim of high taxes, rising rents, and over regulation. Yet the Fresh Program is fixated on drawing new markets in, without any concomitant effort to preserve and protect the food resources that are already there.
As we told Crain's: "Supermarket lobbyist Richard Lipsky said the city has lost 200 supermarkets over the past decade. He added that city government should focus on how to reduce the cost of doing business here." And beneath the sensationalist headline grabbing of the DCA is the fact that the lion's share of the fines were for failure to item price-hardly an egregious sin because this requirement is absent in a majority of other urban environments without any great harm to anyone.
As the NY Post points out: "The most common offenses were failure to properly identify the prices of items on shelves, which occurred with 50 percent of the products checked, and inaccurately charging customers at the cash register, which took place nearly one out of three times." Not mentioned was the fact that the latter issue is a scanner technology problem-and often it is the store that shortchanges itself; something that a consumer will rarely call to the supermarket's attention.
As we told the Post: "Supermarket lobbyist Richard Lipsky slammed the DCA for being too onerous. "It operates its budget based on the amount of fines it collects," Lipsky fumed. "There are mistakes and glitches in the technology. There's no concerted effort to bilk anybody here."
And is it any wonder, then, that our bodegas came out smelling like a rose? Crain's gets at the disparity: "One silver lining is that bodegas scored much higher in the sweep. Citywide, their compliance rate was 82%; bodega compliance was 94% for the five poorest neighborhoods in the city. Mr. Mintz said, “I can't help but wonder whether part of it is the relationship they have with their customers,” said the commissioner. Ms. Brodhagen (of the Food Industry Alliance) offered that bodegas may not use scanners and therefore more items in their store would carry price stickers."
With no scanners, these small stores have to item price so that both the owner and the customer know what the item is selling for. That being said, we do believe that the industry needs to do better at self inspection-particularly of its technology.
But this doesn't take away from all of the useless regulations that the DCA also enforces with the glee of the Sheriff of Nottingham. And while we continue to lose more markets, the DCA will continue with its crackpot vigilance-failing to understand that a less onerous business climate would create a more competitive market; one where the better stores, with the fairer pricing structures, would put any unscrupulous and less efficient operators out of business.
Amazing, isn't it? We have a profiteering industry right in the middle of New York City that is, at the same time it is ripping off poor people, it is hemorrhaging stores-at least 200 units have disappeared under the watchful eye of the Bloomberg regulators. What we do need is a study of how the current regime of Bloombergistas-and that would include Commissioner Mintz and his minions of inspectors-has made NYC simply an impossible place to successfully conduct business in.
And if we started to compile the list of taxes, along with the voluminous regulatory mandates in the city's municipal code, we just might conclude that it is the city, through the excessive burdens it imposes, that is actually the entity that is doing the consumer rip-off. Because each additional tax and regulatory levy is passed along to the consumer as an extra cost of doing business.
But so great is the disconnect-and so interested is the DCA in, not only generating sensational headlines, but raising operating funds through the fines it collects-that the city can't grasp how it has been a major culprit in the demise of local supermarkets that it now seeks to remedy in some program that it cheekily calls the, "Fresh Initiative."
Indeed, this Fresh program is a signature component of the mayor's health initiative-designed to bring supermarkets into those very poor neighborhoods that have supermarkets allegedly stealing from the poor. This is draw room comedy disguised as public policy. Take East Harlem. It has lost close to a dozen neighborhood markets-a victim of high taxes, rising rents, and over regulation. Yet the Fresh Program is fixated on drawing new markets in, without any concomitant effort to preserve and protect the food resources that are already there.
As we told Crain's: "Supermarket lobbyist Richard Lipsky said the city has lost 200 supermarkets over the past decade. He added that city government should focus on how to reduce the cost of doing business here." And beneath the sensationalist headline grabbing of the DCA is the fact that the lion's share of the fines were for failure to item price-hardly an egregious sin because this requirement is absent in a majority of other urban environments without any great harm to anyone.
As the NY Post points out: "The most common offenses were failure to properly identify the prices of items on shelves, which occurred with 50 percent of the products checked, and inaccurately charging customers at the cash register, which took place nearly one out of three times." Not mentioned was the fact that the latter issue is a scanner technology problem-and often it is the store that shortchanges itself; something that a consumer will rarely call to the supermarket's attention.
As we told the Post: "Supermarket lobbyist Richard Lipsky slammed the DCA for being too onerous. "It operates its budget based on the amount of fines it collects," Lipsky fumed. "There are mistakes and glitches in the technology. There's no concerted effort to bilk anybody here."
And is it any wonder, then, that our bodegas came out smelling like a rose? Crain's gets at the disparity: "One silver lining is that bodegas scored much higher in the sweep. Citywide, their compliance rate was 82%; bodega compliance was 94% for the five poorest neighborhoods in the city. Mr. Mintz said, “I can't help but wonder whether part of it is the relationship they have with their customers,” said the commissioner. Ms. Brodhagen (of the Food Industry Alliance) offered that bodegas may not use scanners and therefore more items in their store would carry price stickers."
With no scanners, these small stores have to item price so that both the owner and the customer know what the item is selling for. That being said, we do believe that the industry needs to do better at self inspection-particularly of its technology.
But this doesn't take away from all of the useless regulations that the DCA also enforces with the glee of the Sheriff of Nottingham. And while we continue to lose more markets, the DCA will continue with its crackpot vigilance-failing to understand that a less onerous business climate would create a more competitive market; one where the better stores, with the fairer pricing structures, would put any unscrupulous and less efficient operators out of business.
Courting Disaster at Willets Point
Last Friday. Justice Joan Madden rejected the Article 78 petition brought by Willets Point United against the original ULURP application for the development of the Iron Triangle. City Room reported the decision: "Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg won a victory on Friday for his $3 billion blueprint for apartments, offices and stores in the shadow of Citi Field in Willets Point, Queens, when a judge rejected a challenge from opponents in the area.The judge, Justice Joan A. Madden of State Supreme Court in Manhattan, turned down their request for an injunction to keep the city from going ahead with the project."
But, as WPU's lawyer Mike Gerrard pointed out: "Michael Gerrard, a lawyer for the opponents, called the decision a “two-edged sword for the city.” In a statement posted on the Web site of Willets Point United, a group that is fighting the city, he noted that in dismissing the opponents’ case, Justice Madden concluded that the environmental impact statement had adequately covered the traffic issues. “But in so doing,” he said, the decision “stressed the terrible traffic effects forecast by the environmental impact statement; the need for federal approval for the Van Wyck ramps; and the fact that if the ramps are not approved, the project cannot go forward.” “The city can’t paint one picture to the court and a completely different picture to the federal government,” he said."
So, just what exactly did the judge say-and what is the meaning of the decision for the ongoing dispute over the building of the Willets Point ramps; an acknowledged linchpin for the entire development? In rejecting the WPU petition, Judge Madden said the following: "She rejected their arguments against the environmental review, particularly as it focused on proposed new ramps from the Van Wyck Expressway. She said enough information had been provided to make possible “informed consideration and comment” on how the project would affect traffic in the area."
And we believe that, in this narrow sense, the judge is spot on-and shame on the city council for ignoring the clear and present danger that EDC's consultants underscore throughout all of the traffic sections of the EIS. Could the council members have possibly read any of this environmental review? As Judge Madden says in her decision-rejecting the WPU's argument that the EIS failed, "to state specifically that the traffic impacts cannot be mitigated;" "The traffic analysis identifies significant increases in the volume of traffic and the resulting deterioration of the levels of service (LOS) on specific sections of, and ramps to and from, the Van Wyck and the Whitestone Expressways, and on the Gran Central Parkway." (pp. 10-11)
And she goes on to say-and this should be understood by all of the local area elected officials and civic groups: "The analysis states that "on several highway ramps and sections, the high Build volume would exceed the capacity, especially during game-day peak hours and the highway network would be unable to process the projected volumes within the duration of the peak hour." The Van Wyck would be exceptionally impacted: "As to the mainline Van Wyck Expressway, during peak hours on both game and non-game days, both directions would operate "at unacceptable LOS F." (emphasis added)
How bad would the degradation of service be? Pay attention EDF and NYCLCV: "The average travel speeds would drop from 30 to 35 mph to about 3 mph for the ramp from the North bound Whitestone Expressway and from a range of 25 to 35 mph to about 1 to 3 mph from the Westbound Northern Boulevard." (pg. 12)
We call out the less than independent enviros here because of what the NYC DOH has found out about the city's air quality: "And guess what the DOH found? That's right, outer borough neighborhoods right next to highways are those that are most dangerous to your health: "Lower and midtown Manhattan, The Bronx and outer-borough neighborhoods that flank major highways have higher levels of this form of pollution. Neighborhoods with the largest crowds during the day had, on average, 22 percent higher levels of particulate matter, while areas with the heaviest traffic had an average of 15 percent more than other neighborhoods in the study, which was conducted between June and August 2009."
But we digress from the judge's decision and EDC's crowing for a reason. The Willets Point development stands as a monument to the hypocrisy of Mike Bloomberg-and his carbon footprint reduction posturing while, at the same time, he is elevating unhealthy air quality by promoting-not only Willets Point-but all of the auto dependent mega-developments in the city's outer boroughs. His motto appears to be: Manhattan congestion free-damn everyone else!
But back to the issue at hand. As Crain's points out: "The Willets Point group had focused its argument on the impact two proposed ramps would have on the Van Wyck Expressway. The ramps require state and federal approval, and the group hopes that the project still might stall as the process move forward...“It will be interesting to see how the city will now back away from its recent claims that the project wouldn't be so bad for traffic after all,” he said."
And in this, Judge Madden is WPU's ally-as her decision underscores: "Petitioners are correct that the FGEIS does not identify the impacts on the three highways in either the Mitigation chapter or the Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impact chapter; however, the severity of the traffic impacts is clearly identified and analyzed in the chapter on Traffic and Parking...The Court concludes that this analysis contains a level of detail that reflects the severity of the impacts." (pg 15)
We'll leave aside for a moment whether the EDC consultants' failure to specify in those chapters was a deliberate effort to obfuscate that dire data in the traffic section. Here's the judge's money quote on what the EIS does in fact say: "Moreover, contrary to petitioners' arguments, the analysis does not suggest that the impacts can be mitigated. While a discussion of the impacts in the chapter on Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts would have been consistent with the purposes of the SEQR process and would have assisted local officials in evaluating the Plan, and the public in commenting on it, the absence of such discussion does not necessary infer that impacts could be mitigated." (emphasis added)
Indeed not. But to that admonition let us add the fact that the slicksters over at AKRF actually low-balled the vehicle trips in its original traffic study. As we have pointed out-citing Brian Ketcham's work here-the consultants minimize vehicle trips by dishonestly assigning loads of new trips-almost 50%- to a mass transit system that, frankly, can't accomodate them. Who is going to step up here and call out the irresponsibility of EDC and the rest of the Bloombergistas?
As Gene Russianoff said in his letter to the mayor-focusing on both the Willets Point and Flsuhing Commons project: "Mr. Ketcham studies new development that might be completed by 2017 as reported in the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) for the Willets Point Development Plan and in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Flushing Commons project. He finds:“… [added] subway trips could total more than 92,000 on weekdays and bus trips more than 70,000. …the estimated auto and truck trips, more than 144,000 that might be generated by more than 90 new projects identified in the environmental impact statements referenced above.”
All of which leads to the Van Wyck ramps-and the corrupted review process that the NY Times wrote about a few weeks ago. What Judge Madden is saying, and what Mike Gerrard is referring to when he talks about the "double edged sword," is that EDC is up against it in any honest and open review process. Added to this double edged sword-a sword of Damocles in our view-is the fact that EDC and its Swift Lazar consultants tried to put one over on NYSDOT by altering the severe data points that this original EIS had dramatized-and did so by claiming that the original diverting ramp traffic (estimated at 46% of the Willets Point traffic) would only be 16%. The consultants knew that allowing the original numbers to stand would have aborted this baby in the first tri-mester.
Which gets us to the relationship between the ramps and the overall project: "At oral argument, counsel for respondents {that would be the city} stated that if the ramps are not approved, the respondents cannot 'proceed with the plan as conceived and approved.'" And if they can't? "For the purposes of this review, this court assumes that if the ramps are not approved, additional review under SEQR will be required." (emphasis added)
So, what this decision means is that Judge Madden feels that the original EIS demonstrates the severe traffic impacts of the Willets Point project-and she states that it is not the court's purview to question why the city council chose to ignore the handwriting on the wall. But, now that the cat's out of the bag, anyone who ignores this devastating traffic impact is being malfeasant-and where this puts the EDC three card monte game is any one's guess.
But the judge's ruling doesn't take away from the centrality of the ramp review process-it does in fact add to its significance. And if her highlights of just how severe the Willets Point traffic impact will be is seen as a victory by EDC, it may just turn out to be a Pyrrhic one when the final reviews are in.
But, as WPU's lawyer Mike Gerrard pointed out: "Michael Gerrard, a lawyer for the opponents, called the decision a “two-edged sword for the city.” In a statement posted on the Web site of Willets Point United, a group that is fighting the city, he noted that in dismissing the opponents’ case, Justice Madden concluded that the environmental impact statement had adequately covered the traffic issues. “But in so doing,” he said, the decision “stressed the terrible traffic effects forecast by the environmental impact statement; the need for federal approval for the Van Wyck ramps; and the fact that if the ramps are not approved, the project cannot go forward.” “The city can’t paint one picture to the court and a completely different picture to the federal government,” he said."
So, just what exactly did the judge say-and what is the meaning of the decision for the ongoing dispute over the building of the Willets Point ramps; an acknowledged linchpin for the entire development? In rejecting the WPU petition, Judge Madden said the following: "She rejected their arguments against the environmental review, particularly as it focused on proposed new ramps from the Van Wyck Expressway. She said enough information had been provided to make possible “informed consideration and comment” on how the project would affect traffic in the area."
And we believe that, in this narrow sense, the judge is spot on-and shame on the city council for ignoring the clear and present danger that EDC's consultants underscore throughout all of the traffic sections of the EIS. Could the council members have possibly read any of this environmental review? As Judge Madden says in her decision-rejecting the WPU's argument that the EIS failed, "to state specifically that the traffic impacts cannot be mitigated;" "The traffic analysis identifies significant increases in the volume of traffic and the resulting deterioration of the levels of service (LOS) on specific sections of, and ramps to and from, the Van Wyck and the Whitestone Expressways, and on the Gran Central Parkway." (pp. 10-11)
And she goes on to say-and this should be understood by all of the local area elected officials and civic groups: "The analysis states that "on several highway ramps and sections, the high Build volume would exceed the capacity, especially during game-day peak hours and the highway network would be unable to process the projected volumes within the duration of the peak hour." The Van Wyck would be exceptionally impacted: "As to the mainline Van Wyck Expressway, during peak hours on both game and non-game days, both directions would operate "at unacceptable LOS F." (emphasis added)
How bad would the degradation of service be? Pay attention EDF and NYCLCV: "The average travel speeds would drop from 30 to 35 mph to about 3 mph for the ramp from the North bound Whitestone Expressway and from a range of 25 to 35 mph to about 1 to 3 mph from the Westbound Northern Boulevard." (pg. 12)
We call out the less than independent enviros here because of what the NYC DOH has found out about the city's air quality: "And guess what the DOH found? That's right, outer borough neighborhoods right next to highways are those that are most dangerous to your health: "Lower and midtown Manhattan, The Bronx and outer-borough neighborhoods that flank major highways have higher levels of this form of pollution. Neighborhoods with the largest crowds during the day had, on average, 22 percent higher levels of particulate matter, while areas with the heaviest traffic had an average of 15 percent more than other neighborhoods in the study, which was conducted between June and August 2009."
But we digress from the judge's decision and EDC's crowing for a reason. The Willets Point development stands as a monument to the hypocrisy of Mike Bloomberg-and his carbon footprint reduction posturing while, at the same time, he is elevating unhealthy air quality by promoting-not only Willets Point-but all of the auto dependent mega-developments in the city's outer boroughs. His motto appears to be: Manhattan congestion free-damn everyone else!
But back to the issue at hand. As Crain's points out: "The Willets Point group had focused its argument on the impact two proposed ramps would have on the Van Wyck Expressway. The ramps require state and federal approval, and the group hopes that the project still might stall as the process move forward...“It will be interesting to see how the city will now back away from its recent claims that the project wouldn't be so bad for traffic after all,” he said."
And in this, Judge Madden is WPU's ally-as her decision underscores: "Petitioners are correct that the FGEIS does not identify the impacts on the three highways in either the Mitigation chapter or the Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impact chapter; however, the severity of the traffic impacts is clearly identified and analyzed in the chapter on Traffic and Parking...The Court concludes that this analysis contains a level of detail that reflects the severity of the impacts." (pg 15)
We'll leave aside for a moment whether the EDC consultants' failure to specify in those chapters was a deliberate effort to obfuscate that dire data in the traffic section. Here's the judge's money quote on what the EIS does in fact say: "Moreover, contrary to petitioners' arguments, the analysis does not suggest that the impacts can be mitigated. While a discussion of the impacts in the chapter on Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts would have been consistent with the purposes of the SEQR process and would have assisted local officials in evaluating the Plan, and the public in commenting on it, the absence of such discussion does not necessary infer that impacts could be mitigated." (emphasis added)
Indeed not. But to that admonition let us add the fact that the slicksters over at AKRF actually low-balled the vehicle trips in its original traffic study. As we have pointed out-citing Brian Ketcham's work here-the consultants minimize vehicle trips by dishonestly assigning loads of new trips-almost 50%- to a mass transit system that, frankly, can't accomodate them. Who is going to step up here and call out the irresponsibility of EDC and the rest of the Bloombergistas?
As Gene Russianoff said in his letter to the mayor-focusing on both the Willets Point and Flsuhing Commons project: "Mr. Ketcham studies new development that might be completed by 2017 as reported in the Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement (FGEIS) for the Willets Point Development Plan and in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the Flushing Commons project. He finds:“… [added] subway trips could total more than 92,000 on weekdays and bus trips more than 70,000. …the estimated auto and truck trips, more than 144,000 that might be generated by more than 90 new projects identified in the environmental impact statements referenced above.”
All of which leads to the Van Wyck ramps-and the corrupted review process that the NY Times wrote about a few weeks ago. What Judge Madden is saying, and what Mike Gerrard is referring to when he talks about the "double edged sword," is that EDC is up against it in any honest and open review process. Added to this double edged sword-a sword of Damocles in our view-is the fact that EDC and its Swift Lazar consultants tried to put one over on NYSDOT by altering the severe data points that this original EIS had dramatized-and did so by claiming that the original diverting ramp traffic (estimated at 46% of the Willets Point traffic) would only be 16%. The consultants knew that allowing the original numbers to stand would have aborted this baby in the first tri-mester.
Which gets us to the relationship between the ramps and the overall project: "At oral argument, counsel for respondents {that would be the city} stated that if the ramps are not approved, the respondents cannot 'proceed with the plan as conceived and approved.'" And if they can't? "For the purposes of this review, this court assumes that if the ramps are not approved, additional review under SEQR will be required." (emphasis added)
So, what this decision means is that Judge Madden feels that the original EIS demonstrates the severe traffic impacts of the Willets Point project-and she states that it is not the court's purview to question why the city council chose to ignore the handwriting on the wall. But, now that the cat's out of the bag, anyone who ignores this devastating traffic impact is being malfeasant-and where this puts the EDC three card monte game is any one's guess.
But the judge's ruling doesn't take away from the centrality of the ramp review process-it does in fact add to its significance. And if her highlights of just how severe the Willets Point traffic impact will be is seen as a victory by EDC, it may just turn out to be a Pyrrhic one when the final reviews are in.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Bloomberg Endorses Sestak for Senate
The more we contemplate the recent actions of Mike Bloomberg, the more we question the seriousness of his presidential ambitions-as well as the seychel of his advisers. The latest, right on the heels of his emotional defense of the GZM, is his endorsement of Joe Sestak for senator from Pennsylvania: "New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the man without a political party, endorsed Democrat Joe Sestak for U.S. Senate on Tuesday as an independent thinker who he said would put Pennsylvania ahead of partisanship.Trailing the mayor was the politically charged national debate over the proposed mosque and Islamic cultural center two blocks from the World Trade Center site, and sharp questions about the issue dominated their campaign event at the Sullivan Progress Plaza shopping center in North Philadelphia." (via Liz at YNN)
Who is Sestak? Well he's the congressman that has been accused of being too cozy with CAIR, and less than supportive of Israel. Quite the symmetry here on the heels of the mayor's mosque endorsement:
"In a statement to the Exponent, Joe Sestak said of his speech to CAIR in 2007: “I don’t just speak to groups that I support, I speak to groups that I don’t support and I think that is the job of a congressman in order to have a dialogue,” he said. “And I went to CAIR and I criticized their failure to condemn terrorists by name, Hezbollah and Hamas, and the fact that they had not dissociated themselves” from them.
Well, let’s take a look at the speech. It’s roughly five pages long and over 2,500 words, filled with glowing tributes to Muslims. It’s like Obama’s Cairo speech and his Iran video, and then some. The speech is full of this sort of thing:
Prominently recognized in the U.S. Supreme Court are 18 great lawgivers of history, including the Prophet Muhammad with Moses, Solomon and Confucius. The beauty of Baroque music comes from Islamic influence; as did the ‘Moorish’ style of some of New York’s nineteenth-century synagogues."
And Jennifer Rubin goes on to point out: "So Sestak didn’t go to CAIR to criticize the group at all. If he had intended to do that, he would have called it out for its anti-Israel rhetoric and its efforts to impede legitimate anti-terror measures. Instead, he went to flatter the group and to echo its own propaganda."
All of which makes the timing of the endorsement questionable-and the mayor and the candidate were dogged by mosque questions: "Robert Sklaroff, a physician and Republican activist from Elkins Park, questioned Sestak's judgment for speaking in 2007 to a Council on American-Islamic Relations dinner and said that the imam behind the mosque proposal had made anti-American statements on CBS's 60 Minutes...Wendell Whitlock, chairman of the holding company for Sullivan Progress Plaza, denounced reporters for their mosque questions, calling the issue "contrived political crap" unrelated to the economy or other matters that affect people's lives."
Given the congressman's record-and he recently signed on to a letter asking Israel to ease up on its Gaza blockade-having the Defender of the Mosque come in to endorse, was not good timing, and it smacks of desperation on his part. Recent polls find him trailing his Republican opponent Pat Toomey by 9 points; and with close to 70% of Americans opposing the mosque site, how could the Bloomberg shout out be helpful?
But Bloomberg remains clueless to all of this-no matter how high priced the bad advice he's receiving. And Jonah Goldberg nails the failure of the mayor's leadership on the mosque issue: "Bloomberg isn't only the mayor. He's also a billionaire with vast sway in the city's media, finance and cultural institutions. Moreover, the Big Apple is a Hieronymus Bosch hellscape for landlords and developers. Rent control, historic preservation, zoning, environmental impact, community protests, union delays -- not to mention plain old red tape and corruption -- offer enough tools to stop any project before it starts. (Heck, Ground Zero is still a gaping hole, and everyone has wanted that land to be developed, fast.) The notion that Bloomberg couldn't have quietly stopped this in New York is like saying Satan is powerless to do anything about the heat in Hades. He could have kept the molehill from becoming a mountain with an afternoon's worth of phone calls. The center would be built, just not so close to Ground Zero; no big deal."
But Mike's as clueless as Obama when it comes to the sensibilities of the average citizen: "But instead of quietly extinguishing a controversy, Bloomberg said it was as important a "test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime." He also insists that opponents should be "ashamed" of their bigotry, even though he expects "special sensitivity" from the mosque's backers. Apparently, it's only shameful to think Ground Zero requires "special sensitivity" if you oppose the mosque. Bloomberg apparently needs a tutor to pass his own church-state test."
But, in the end, when we look to examine the mayor's tone deafness. it is revealed to be all about him and his out sized ego. Here's the real reason Bloomberg headed south yesterday: "Sestak has displayed "leadership, independence, and results," Bloomberg said. He cited as an example of Sestak's independence his support for closing a loophole in federal law that allows sales at gun shows without background checks."
Whatever you feel about the mayor's gun crusade, the fact that it motivates him to ignore much more pressing international questions and concerns, tells you all you need to know about the solipsistic mayor of New York.
Who is Sestak? Well he's the congressman that has been accused of being too cozy with CAIR, and less than supportive of Israel. Quite the symmetry here on the heels of the mayor's mosque endorsement:
"In a statement to the Exponent, Joe Sestak said of his speech to CAIR in 2007: “I don’t just speak to groups that I support, I speak to groups that I don’t support and I think that is the job of a congressman in order to have a dialogue,” he said. “And I went to CAIR and I criticized their failure to condemn terrorists by name, Hezbollah and Hamas, and the fact that they had not dissociated themselves” from them.
Well, let’s take a look at the speech. It’s roughly five pages long and over 2,500 words, filled with glowing tributes to Muslims. It’s like Obama’s Cairo speech and his Iran video, and then some. The speech is full of this sort of thing:
Prominently recognized in the U.S. Supreme Court are 18 great lawgivers of history, including the Prophet Muhammad with Moses, Solomon and Confucius. The beauty of Baroque music comes from Islamic influence; as did the ‘Moorish’ style of some of New York’s nineteenth-century synagogues."
And Jennifer Rubin goes on to point out: "So Sestak didn’t go to CAIR to criticize the group at all. If he had intended to do that, he would have called it out for its anti-Israel rhetoric and its efforts to impede legitimate anti-terror measures. Instead, he went to flatter the group and to echo its own propaganda."
All of which makes the timing of the endorsement questionable-and the mayor and the candidate were dogged by mosque questions: "Robert Sklaroff, a physician and Republican activist from Elkins Park, questioned Sestak's judgment for speaking in 2007 to a Council on American-Islamic Relations dinner and said that the imam behind the mosque proposal had made anti-American statements on CBS's 60 Minutes...Wendell Whitlock, chairman of the holding company for Sullivan Progress Plaza, denounced reporters for their mosque questions, calling the issue "contrived political crap" unrelated to the economy or other matters that affect people's lives."
Given the congressman's record-and he recently signed on to a letter asking Israel to ease up on its Gaza blockade-having the Defender of the Mosque come in to endorse, was not good timing, and it smacks of desperation on his part. Recent polls find him trailing his Republican opponent Pat Toomey by 9 points; and with close to 70% of Americans opposing the mosque site, how could the Bloomberg shout out be helpful?
But Bloomberg remains clueless to all of this-no matter how high priced the bad advice he's receiving. And Jonah Goldberg nails the failure of the mayor's leadership on the mosque issue: "Bloomberg isn't only the mayor. He's also a billionaire with vast sway in the city's media, finance and cultural institutions. Moreover, the Big Apple is a Hieronymus Bosch hellscape for landlords and developers. Rent control, historic preservation, zoning, environmental impact, community protests, union delays -- not to mention plain old red tape and corruption -- offer enough tools to stop any project before it starts. (Heck, Ground Zero is still a gaping hole, and everyone has wanted that land to be developed, fast.) The notion that Bloomberg couldn't have quietly stopped this in New York is like saying Satan is powerless to do anything about the heat in Hades. He could have kept the molehill from becoming a mountain with an afternoon's worth of phone calls. The center would be built, just not so close to Ground Zero; no big deal."
But Mike's as clueless as Obama when it comes to the sensibilities of the average citizen: "But instead of quietly extinguishing a controversy, Bloomberg said it was as important a "test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetime." He also insists that opponents should be "ashamed" of their bigotry, even though he expects "special sensitivity" from the mosque's backers. Apparently, it's only shameful to think Ground Zero requires "special sensitivity" if you oppose the mosque. Bloomberg apparently needs a tutor to pass his own church-state test."
But, in the end, when we look to examine the mayor's tone deafness. it is revealed to be all about him and his out sized ego. Here's the real reason Bloomberg headed south yesterday: "Sestak has displayed "leadership, independence, and results," Bloomberg said. He cited as an example of Sestak's independence his support for closing a loophole in federal law that allows sales at gun shows without background checks."
Whatever you feel about the mayor's gun crusade, the fact that it motivates him to ignore much more pressing international questions and concerns, tells you all you need to know about the solipsistic mayor of New York.
BLoomberg's Choke Is On Us
As the NY Post is reporting, the city's air is getting to be downright dangerous: "This is hardly a breath of fresh air. A city Department of Health study on summer air quality released yesterday showed a troubling finding: Even quieter neighborhoods that don't have New York's infamous crowds, traffic and skyscrapers suffer from high levels of smog. The report, which examined various types of air pollution, revealed that a variety of contamination occurs throughout the city, depending on the type of neighborhood. "The take-home message here is that the air quality just isn't great anywhere in New York City. What's surprising is just how variable the air quality is across the city," Deputy Health Commissioner Daniel Kass said."
And guess what the DOH found? That's right, outer borough neighborhoods right next to highways are those that are most dangerous to your health: "Lower and midtown Manhattan, The Bronx and outer-borough neighborhoods that flank major highways have higher levels of this form of pollution. Neighborhoods with the largest crowds during the day had, on average, 22 percent higher levels of particulate matter, while areas with the heaviest traffic had an average of 15 percent more than other neighborhoods in the study, which was conducted between June and August 2009."
And what has Mayor Mike been doing for the past nine years-while at the same time huckstering about something "sustainable," and environmentally friendly, called PlaNYC 2030? He has been directly aggravating this situation by building auto dependent malls and other developments contiguous to these highways-most famously, the Gateway Mall built right along, "asthma alley," in the South Bronx. And if he had his way, another such mall would have been injected right into the middle of the crowded Kingsbridge Heights neighborhood of the Bronx as well.
But the worst of all of these environmental threats is taking place in Queens where not only the Willets Point development (80,000 vehicle trips a day right along the Van Wyck), but 70 or more auto dependent projects are spewing forth carbon dioxide into already gridlocked streets and highways. The latest crackpot example of this environmental assault is the promotion and city council approval of Flushing Commons. Just where are all of the enviros in this challenge to clean air?
Well, we know that the Environmental Defense Fund and the League of Conservation Voters actually endorsed the Willets Point project-raising Sharpton-like questions about potential pecuniary conflicts of interest with the wealthy mayor. And these two groups, when challenged about their quiescence in the face of all of this cumulative development have remained, well, quiet as church mice so as not to disturb their benefactor, Fortunately, the Sierra Club appears ready to join with the NRDC in speaking up about this environmental threat. Calling Jim Gennaro, chair of the council's environmental protection committee.
So, what needs to be done? Health Commissioner Farley, and his deputy Kass, have the right idea-even though they speak at cross purposes with their forked tongued boss: "Any effort the city or everyone else makes to improve air quality in New York City will have benefits across the city. If you reduce traffic in the central Manhattan zone, you will reduce ozone in the outer areas of New York City," Kass said. Health Commissioner Thomas Farley, in a prepared statement, said the study emphasizes the need to switch to more fuel-efficient cars, reduce overall vehicle traffic and rely more on mass transit."
Now if only someone could reach Mike Bloomberg in Bermuda to let him know what's going on-and clue him in to the role that his policies are playing in making the city's air harder to breathe. The news might get the mayor off the golf course a little early. Maybe he could even make a passionate speech about our basic rights to breathe clean air?
That's unlikely, though. In the face of all of this smog, the mayor is driving forward-now last seen promoting the traffic nightmare Wal-Mart at the Gateway Mall off of the Belt Parkway in Brooklyn. As we said a few month ago: "It is now the right time to call out the mayor on his two faced sustainability policy-and the best way of doing that is for the state legislature-along with the city council-to hold joint traffic and environmental impact hearings on PLaNYC 2030; with the Gateway Mall acting as the star witness to the mayor's blatant hypocrisy. The naked emperor needs to be called out, and a moratorium on much new development should be called so that a full analysis of the environmental damage that the Bloomberg development policy is having on the city can be fully understood by all New Yorkers."
And guess what the DOH found? That's right, outer borough neighborhoods right next to highways are those that are most dangerous to your health: "Lower and midtown Manhattan, The Bronx and outer-borough neighborhoods that flank major highways have higher levels of this form of pollution. Neighborhoods with the largest crowds during the day had, on average, 22 percent higher levels of particulate matter, while areas with the heaviest traffic had an average of 15 percent more than other neighborhoods in the study, which was conducted between June and August 2009."
And what has Mayor Mike been doing for the past nine years-while at the same time huckstering about something "sustainable," and environmentally friendly, called PlaNYC 2030? He has been directly aggravating this situation by building auto dependent malls and other developments contiguous to these highways-most famously, the Gateway Mall built right along, "asthma alley," in the South Bronx. And if he had his way, another such mall would have been injected right into the middle of the crowded Kingsbridge Heights neighborhood of the Bronx as well.
But the worst of all of these environmental threats is taking place in Queens where not only the Willets Point development (80,000 vehicle trips a day right along the Van Wyck), but 70 or more auto dependent projects are spewing forth carbon dioxide into already gridlocked streets and highways. The latest crackpot example of this environmental assault is the promotion and city council approval of Flushing Commons. Just where are all of the enviros in this challenge to clean air?
Well, we know that the Environmental Defense Fund and the League of Conservation Voters actually endorsed the Willets Point project-raising Sharpton-like questions about potential pecuniary conflicts of interest with the wealthy mayor. And these two groups, when challenged about their quiescence in the face of all of this cumulative development have remained, well, quiet as church mice so as not to disturb their benefactor, Fortunately, the Sierra Club appears ready to join with the NRDC in speaking up about this environmental threat. Calling Jim Gennaro, chair of the council's environmental protection committee.
So, what needs to be done? Health Commissioner Farley, and his deputy Kass, have the right idea-even though they speak at cross purposes with their forked tongued boss: "Any effort the city or everyone else makes to improve air quality in New York City will have benefits across the city. If you reduce traffic in the central Manhattan zone, you will reduce ozone in the outer areas of New York City," Kass said. Health Commissioner Thomas Farley, in a prepared statement, said the study emphasizes the need to switch to more fuel-efficient cars, reduce overall vehicle traffic and rely more on mass transit."
Now if only someone could reach Mike Bloomberg in Bermuda to let him know what's going on-and clue him in to the role that his policies are playing in making the city's air harder to breathe. The news might get the mayor off the golf course a little early. Maybe he could even make a passionate speech about our basic rights to breathe clean air?
That's unlikely, though. In the face of all of this smog, the mayor is driving forward-now last seen promoting the traffic nightmare Wal-Mart at the Gateway Mall off of the Belt Parkway in Brooklyn. As we said a few month ago: "It is now the right time to call out the mayor on his two faced sustainability policy-and the best way of doing that is for the state legislature-along with the city council-to hold joint traffic and environmental impact hearings on PLaNYC 2030; with the Gateway Mall acting as the star witness to the mayor's blatant hypocrisy. The naked emperor needs to be called out, and a moratorium on much new development should be called so that a full analysis of the environmental damage that the Bloomberg development policy is having on the city can be fully understood by all New Yorkers."
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Desecrating Sacred Ground
There has been much made lately over the fact the critics of the GZM, who have assailed the desecration of hallowed ground, are overlooking the kind of unsavory stores that are also in close proximity to the site. The NY Daily News reports: "Opponents of a proposed lower Manhattan mosque and community center speak in hushed tones about the sanctity of the "shadow of Ground Zero." Tell that to the patrons of the Pussycat Lounge, a strip club where a photo of a nearly naked woman marks its location just two blocks from where the World Trade Center stood. Or the Thunder Lingerie and peep show next door, where the marquee sports an American flag above a window display of sex toys and something called a "power pump."
CBS News picks up on this thread: "Some victims' families say the Islamic center would pervert the mood at Ground Zero, but two blocks from what Mr. Obama called "hallowed ground" are a number of businesses - strip joints, stores selling X-rated DVD's - striking a far different tone than the families want."
And they do have a point-but it's a limited one in our view. As one family member who lost a son tells CBS: "Retired New York Fire Department Deputy Chief Jim Riches, who lost his firefighter son Jimmy on 9/11, said that's different. "I'm not for all those buildings, but, you know, they didn't murder my son," said Riches. "Muslims murdered my son. That's why I'm offended at this being here."
Yes it is the sense that 9/11 families have that this mosque is a direct-and many believe, intentional-provocation. But what of the fact that there are a number of mosques already in the neighborhood? As CBS tells us: "What really complicates the issue is that there already is a vibrant Muslim community near Ground Zero. Two blocks from the proposed site of the Islamic cultural center, there is an operating mosque. Seven hundred thousand Muslims live in New York City's five boroughs, including 10,000 in lower Manhattan, where there are 87 Muslim organizations and businesses."
The difference is that these mosques were already there; and the fact that there presence is unremarkable attests to the way in which NYC Muslims have been treated in the ten years after 9/11. And that the opponents aren't concerned about them, is an indication that there is something else-other than the rank bigotry that the Left sees-animating the opposition.
It is the sense that there is an intentional sticking in the eye going on with the Cordoba Institute-and this sense may be underscored by who Iman Rauf's father was, and the history of his father's mosque on 96th Street. The NY Post has the story: "The elder Rauf, who taught in Cairo and Kuwaiti universities before migrating to New York City in 1965, wasn't satisfied with converted storefronts and assembly halls that Muslims had been using. With $1.3 million in Kuwaiti, Saudi and Libyan cash, he purchased apartment buildings on the corner of Third Avenue and East 96th Street...In October 2001, the mosque's imam, Sheik Muhammad Gemeaha, blamed the 9/11 attacks on Jews. He then immediately resigned and returned to his native Egypt. The next month, his replacement, Imam Omar Saleem Abu-Namous, said he needed proof that Islamic extremists were behind the attack."
Now a modest little mosque in Lower Manhattan is one thing; but a 13 story monument to Islam will unquestionably be a statement that-whatever the scribblers say about upholding American values-will be seen as an altogether different symbol by many of the most unsavory elements in the Muslim world; as the Hamas endorsement dramatizes quite well. And can you imagine if the eventual imams that come to reside in this mosque are of the same variety as those that ended up with Rauf's father? What to do then?
But, back to the porno and lingerie shop issue. Those who point out the tawdry nature of much that goes on in the immediate GZ neighborhood are on to something. Their presence is sacrilegious in a significant way. And then the question rises, what exactly has the Tom Paine wannabe mayor actually done to address these issues? And the sad answer is absolutely nothing-just as he did with the obstruction and dithering of Larry Silverstein, the developer who has stuck his thumb in our eye for a decade.
Remember the cries to clean up Times Square? Those cries led to a massive effort on the part of the city and state to use eminent domain to rid the area of the sex shops and unsavory element. But, faced with an even more compelling need to clean up the area around GZ, not a peep for GZ from the Lilliputian at city hall. And this is the same guy who decries the junkyard status of Willets Point, and is looking to remove these hard working property owners from their land.
Ground Zero cleanup and reconstruction should have been the first and foremost objective of a mayor who, if not for this outrage, wouldn't have gotten close enough to city hall even to sniff it. Instead he did nothing, and the hole in the ground remains to this day. Small businesses can be forced out of their land, but the billionaire developer of GZ gets the mayoral pass. As we said last year: "Now we don't believe that the developer is the only blameworthy participant in this dance of delay-how could Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg, for instance, allow the situation to deteriorate with no action on this iconic property? And, having failed to act, paying off Silverstein to the tune of millions of dollars? Here's a great example of the Bloomberg leadership expertise in action; simply unable to devise a solution to what should have been the biggest development priority for a new mayor."
So, given Mike Bloomberg's nonfeasance about ground zero, he really should shut up about what is, or is not, appropriate for the area. The entire neighborhood should be targeted for renewal-and the land should be treated just like the Gettysburg battlefield; sacred and inviolate. But it will take a bigger man than Bloomberg to get this done.
CBS News picks up on this thread: "Some victims' families say the Islamic center would pervert the mood at Ground Zero, but two blocks from what Mr. Obama called "hallowed ground" are a number of businesses - strip joints, stores selling X-rated DVD's - striking a far different tone than the families want."
And they do have a point-but it's a limited one in our view. As one family member who lost a son tells CBS: "Retired New York Fire Department Deputy Chief Jim Riches, who lost his firefighter son Jimmy on 9/11, said that's different. "I'm not for all those buildings, but, you know, they didn't murder my son," said Riches. "Muslims murdered my son. That's why I'm offended at this being here."
Yes it is the sense that 9/11 families have that this mosque is a direct-and many believe, intentional-provocation. But what of the fact that there are a number of mosques already in the neighborhood? As CBS tells us: "What really complicates the issue is that there already is a vibrant Muslim community near Ground Zero. Two blocks from the proposed site of the Islamic cultural center, there is an operating mosque. Seven hundred thousand Muslims live in New York City's five boroughs, including 10,000 in lower Manhattan, where there are 87 Muslim organizations and businesses."
The difference is that these mosques were already there; and the fact that there presence is unremarkable attests to the way in which NYC Muslims have been treated in the ten years after 9/11. And that the opponents aren't concerned about them, is an indication that there is something else-other than the rank bigotry that the Left sees-animating the opposition.
It is the sense that there is an intentional sticking in the eye going on with the Cordoba Institute-and this sense may be underscored by who Iman Rauf's father was, and the history of his father's mosque on 96th Street. The NY Post has the story: "The elder Rauf, who taught in Cairo and Kuwaiti universities before migrating to New York City in 1965, wasn't satisfied with converted storefronts and assembly halls that Muslims had been using. With $1.3 million in Kuwaiti, Saudi and Libyan cash, he purchased apartment buildings on the corner of Third Avenue and East 96th Street...In October 2001, the mosque's imam, Sheik Muhammad Gemeaha, blamed the 9/11 attacks on Jews. He then immediately resigned and returned to his native Egypt. The next month, his replacement, Imam Omar Saleem Abu-Namous, said he needed proof that Islamic extremists were behind the attack."
Now a modest little mosque in Lower Manhattan is one thing; but a 13 story monument to Islam will unquestionably be a statement that-whatever the scribblers say about upholding American values-will be seen as an altogether different symbol by many of the most unsavory elements in the Muslim world; as the Hamas endorsement dramatizes quite well. And can you imagine if the eventual imams that come to reside in this mosque are of the same variety as those that ended up with Rauf's father? What to do then?
But, back to the porno and lingerie shop issue. Those who point out the tawdry nature of much that goes on in the immediate GZ neighborhood are on to something. Their presence is sacrilegious in a significant way. And then the question rises, what exactly has the Tom Paine wannabe mayor actually done to address these issues? And the sad answer is absolutely nothing-just as he did with the obstruction and dithering of Larry Silverstein, the developer who has stuck his thumb in our eye for a decade.
Remember the cries to clean up Times Square? Those cries led to a massive effort on the part of the city and state to use eminent domain to rid the area of the sex shops and unsavory element. But, faced with an even more compelling need to clean up the area around GZ, not a peep for GZ from the Lilliputian at city hall. And this is the same guy who decries the junkyard status of Willets Point, and is looking to remove these hard working property owners from their land.
Ground Zero cleanup and reconstruction should have been the first and foremost objective of a mayor who, if not for this outrage, wouldn't have gotten close enough to city hall even to sniff it. Instead he did nothing, and the hole in the ground remains to this day. Small businesses can be forced out of their land, but the billionaire developer of GZ gets the mayoral pass. As we said last year: "Now we don't believe that the developer is the only blameworthy participant in this dance of delay-how could Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg, for instance, allow the situation to deteriorate with no action on this iconic property? And, having failed to act, paying off Silverstein to the tune of millions of dollars? Here's a great example of the Bloomberg leadership expertise in action; simply unable to devise a solution to what should have been the biggest development priority for a new mayor."
So, given Mike Bloomberg's nonfeasance about ground zero, he really should shut up about what is, or is not, appropriate for the area. The entire neighborhood should be targeted for renewal-and the land should be treated just like the Gettysburg battlefield; sacred and inviolate. But it will take a bigger man than Bloomberg to get this done.
Benefits Not Common to All
The Flushing Times continues with its excellent reporting on the fall out over the building of Flushing Commons-it seems that the community isn't feeling all of the benefits that the developer believes will accrue from this massive project in the middle of downtown Flushing: "Emotions are mixed on the final plans for the $850 million Flushing Commons mixed-use development project, which many community members say does not provide enough benefit for downtown Flushing. The project will be markedly different from the proposal former Deputy Mayor for Development Dan Doctoroff and former Councilman John Liu agreed on in a letter signed in 2005. Liu said in that agreement that he would not support any project with less than 2,000 parking spaces and with parking rates that are not capped at a reasonable rate into perpetuity. Both stipulations were not included in the final plan."
And, as we have noted before Community Board #7 is unhappy that it got stiffed when all of its seventeen stipulations were ignored when the city council approved the project: "Community Board 7 Chairman Eugene Kelty said he was unhappy with the number of outstanding concerns that were not addressed and its lack of benefit for Flushing residents. “We don’t think there were much concessions given to us. We talked about a movie theater, a school and none of that was ever addressed. There are still traffic concerns and parking concerns,” he said. “These things have to be addressed, and they have to give something back to the Flushing people.”
But the developer of the project surprisingly disagrees with Kelty: "Michael Myer, president of the project’s developer, TDC Development, disagreed, saying he thought the project will be a great benefit to the community. He pointed out that many doubted his company’s Queens Crossing project before it was built and that it has since been a success. “I think the right balance was struck. The city basically ponied up and enhanced the support for the merchants and, you know, we chipped in with making some parking available at Queens Crossing during construction,” he said. “It’s a huge win for the community and it’s going to be a huge catalyst for transformation.”
We agree with Myer-but don't be shocked. FC will transform Flushing; it will transform it into a gridlocked mess with local business taking it right on the chin. And as far as Queens Crossing is concerned, it is a legend in Myer's mind. When we went to visit Assembly member Grace Meng last month, we waited for almost 15 minutes trying to get on one of the two slowest elevators we have ever seen. Imagine a line out the door of an office building to get on an elevator! Now, transpose that vision to Flushing writ large.
The Flushing Times does manage to finally credit the lobbying effort by the local businesses-even though he throws the grandstanding Koo a bone as well for the work he let others do: "In the final run-up to the project’s approval by the Council, Councilman Peter Koo (R-Flushing) and other legislators were able to secure some concessions from the city and the project’s developer, TDC Development.
What was originally proposed as a $2 million assistance program to help area businesses was tripled to $6 million in the face of vociferous lobbying on the part of local merchants, who believed they would not be able to make it through three years of work without help."
But the ball now moves to the borough board's court-and the disposition of this property should not be seen as a fait accompli. But given the limp stand of the local council member, it will be up to Gene Kelty and Board #7 to try to make the hard bargain for the community benefits that should have been Koo's agenda-rather than the shameless shilling that he substituted for real community leadership.
And, as we have noted before Community Board #7 is unhappy that it got stiffed when all of its seventeen stipulations were ignored when the city council approved the project: "Community Board 7 Chairman Eugene Kelty said he was unhappy with the number of outstanding concerns that were not addressed and its lack of benefit for Flushing residents. “We don’t think there were much concessions given to us. We talked about a movie theater, a school and none of that was ever addressed. There are still traffic concerns and parking concerns,” he said. “These things have to be addressed, and they have to give something back to the Flushing people.”
But the developer of the project surprisingly disagrees with Kelty: "Michael Myer, president of the project’s developer, TDC Development, disagreed, saying he thought the project will be a great benefit to the community. He pointed out that many doubted his company’s Queens Crossing project before it was built and that it has since been a success. “I think the right balance was struck. The city basically ponied up and enhanced the support for the merchants and, you know, we chipped in with making some parking available at Queens Crossing during construction,” he said. “It’s a huge win for the community and it’s going to be a huge catalyst for transformation.”
We agree with Myer-but don't be shocked. FC will transform Flushing; it will transform it into a gridlocked mess with local business taking it right on the chin. And as far as Queens Crossing is concerned, it is a legend in Myer's mind. When we went to visit Assembly member Grace Meng last month, we waited for almost 15 minutes trying to get on one of the two slowest elevators we have ever seen. Imagine a line out the door of an office building to get on an elevator! Now, transpose that vision to Flushing writ large.
The Flushing Times does manage to finally credit the lobbying effort by the local businesses-even though he throws the grandstanding Koo a bone as well for the work he let others do: "In the final run-up to the project’s approval by the Council, Councilman Peter Koo (R-Flushing) and other legislators were able to secure some concessions from the city and the project’s developer, TDC Development.
What was originally proposed as a $2 million assistance program to help area businesses was tripled to $6 million in the face of vociferous lobbying on the part of local merchants, who believed they would not be able to make it through three years of work without help."
But the ball now moves to the borough board's court-and the disposition of this property should not be seen as a fait accompli. But given the limp stand of the local council member, it will be up to Gene Kelty and Board #7 to try to make the hard bargain for the community benefits that should have been Koo's agenda-rather than the shameless shilling that he substituted for real community leadership.
Race to the Bottom
The NY Times reported yesterday on the bursting Bloomberg educational miracle bubble-and focused on the false triumphalism of the Kleinbergs over the narrowing of this key vector: "Two years ago, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and his schools chancellor, Joel I. Klein, testified before Congress about the city’s impressive progress in closing the gulf in performance between minority and white children. The gains were historic, all but unheard of in recent decades. “Over the past six years, we’ve done everything possible to narrow the achievement gap — and we have,” Mr. Bloomberg testified. “In some cases, we’ve reduced it by half.”
Call the Better Business Bureau-or better yet the Bunko Squad. This mayoral control odyssey has been nothing more than a magical mystery tour-with all of the factual foundation of a Pulitzer Prize work of fiction: “We are closing the shameful achievement gap faster than ever,” the mayor said again in 2009, as city reading scores — now acknowledged as the height of a test score bubble — showed nearly 70 percent of children had met state standards. When results from the 2010 tests, which state officials said presented a more accurate portrayal of students’ abilities, were released last month, they came as a blow to the legacy of the mayor and the chancellor, as passing rates dropped by more than 25 percentage points on most tests. But the most painful part might well have been the evaporation of one of their signature accomplishments: the closing of the racial achievement gap." (emphasis added)
A blow to the mayor's legacy indeed-and well deserving for this billionaire blowhard. The Soviets didn't create such compelling disinformation when they constructed their Potemkin Villages. Really, is there anything left of the mayor's big bucks boosting of the school dog that didn't bark? Apparently, even the silver ware has been lifted: "Among the students in the city’s third through eighth grades, 40 percent of black students and 46 percent of Hispanic students met state standards in math, compared with 75 percent of white students and 82 percent of Asian students. In English, 33 percent of black students and 34 percent of Hispanic students are now proficient, compared with 64 percent among whites and Asians. “The claims were based on some bad information,” said Michael J. Petrilli, a vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a research group that studies education policy. “On achievement, the story in New York City is of some modest progress, but not the miracle that the mayor and the chancellor would like to claim.”
So, what exactly have we got to show for the past eight years-and $17.9 billion worth of money for nothing? Not much: "But the latest state math and English tests show that the proficiency gap between minority and white students has returned to about the same level as when the mayor arrived. In 2002, 31 percent of black students were considered proficient in math, for example, while 65 percent of white students met that standard."
The folks are certainly wising up-as the NY Daily News reports: "Protesters angry over the sharp drop in student scores on state exams disrupted a meeting of a city Education Department panel last night - leading the schools chancellor and panel members to walk out. The 100 parents and students forced the meeting of the Panel for Educational Policy to disband before it could vote on several budget-related items as well as more than $5 million in contracts. Led by the Coalition for Educational Justice advocacy group, the demonstrators demanded to speak immediately following an agency presentation on the scores."
The DOE response? Decorum everyone: "It's extremely unfortunate that parents who came to voice their opinions before the panel could not be heard tonight because a small, unruly group refused to respect the process and wait for the public comment period to begin," said agency spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz." We think the protestors got it just right.
And cue up another Al Sharpton rendition of the, "Sounds of Silence." Where is Big Al and his patented, "No justice, no peace," chant? Probably cashing his retainer check-as we commented on earlier. But the Times can't resist this: "Mr. Klein began to use test scores to measure schools’ performance, and joined with the Rev. Al Sharpton in forming the Education Equality Project in 2008 to promote good instruction and education reform for minority and poor children. “It is certainly what makes Joel Klein tick,” said Kati Haycock, the president of the Education Trust, which advocates for progress on the issue. “And you can’t say that for everyone.”
Who or what is this Education Trust? And is Haycock on the same pad as Rev. Al? It would seem so, given the inordinate praise she has for Klein's, "really trying hard," performance. She should take a cue from the late John Wooden's play book: "Never mistake activity for achievement."
So, at the end of the day, with all the extra funds expended, what exactly do we have to show for it? In our view, money for nothing.
Call the Better Business Bureau-or better yet the Bunko Squad. This mayoral control odyssey has been nothing more than a magical mystery tour-with all of the factual foundation of a Pulitzer Prize work of fiction: “We are closing the shameful achievement gap faster than ever,” the mayor said again in 2009, as city reading scores — now acknowledged as the height of a test score bubble — showed nearly 70 percent of children had met state standards. When results from the 2010 tests, which state officials said presented a more accurate portrayal of students’ abilities, were released last month, they came as a blow to the legacy of the mayor and the chancellor, as passing rates dropped by more than 25 percentage points on most tests. But the most painful part might well have been the evaporation of one of their signature accomplishments: the closing of the racial achievement gap." (emphasis added)
A blow to the mayor's legacy indeed-and well deserving for this billionaire blowhard. The Soviets didn't create such compelling disinformation when they constructed their Potemkin Villages. Really, is there anything left of the mayor's big bucks boosting of the school dog that didn't bark? Apparently, even the silver ware has been lifted: "Among the students in the city’s third through eighth grades, 40 percent of black students and 46 percent of Hispanic students met state standards in math, compared with 75 percent of white students and 82 percent of Asian students. In English, 33 percent of black students and 34 percent of Hispanic students are now proficient, compared with 64 percent among whites and Asians. “The claims were based on some bad information,” said Michael J. Petrilli, a vice president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a research group that studies education policy. “On achievement, the story in New York City is of some modest progress, but not the miracle that the mayor and the chancellor would like to claim.”
So, what exactly have we got to show for the past eight years-and $17.9 billion worth of money for nothing? Not much: "But the latest state math and English tests show that the proficiency gap between minority and white students has returned to about the same level as when the mayor arrived. In 2002, 31 percent of black students were considered proficient in math, for example, while 65 percent of white students met that standard."
The folks are certainly wising up-as the NY Daily News reports: "Protesters angry over the sharp drop in student scores on state exams disrupted a meeting of a city Education Department panel last night - leading the schools chancellor and panel members to walk out. The 100 parents and students forced the meeting of the Panel for Educational Policy to disband before it could vote on several budget-related items as well as more than $5 million in contracts. Led by the Coalition for Educational Justice advocacy group, the demonstrators demanded to speak immediately following an agency presentation on the scores."
The DOE response? Decorum everyone: "It's extremely unfortunate that parents who came to voice their opinions before the panel could not be heard tonight because a small, unruly group refused to respect the process and wait for the public comment period to begin," said agency spokeswoman Natalie Ravitz." We think the protestors got it just right.
And cue up another Al Sharpton rendition of the, "Sounds of Silence." Where is Big Al and his patented, "No justice, no peace," chant? Probably cashing his retainer check-as we commented on earlier. But the Times can't resist this: "Mr. Klein began to use test scores to measure schools’ performance, and joined with the Rev. Al Sharpton in forming the Education Equality Project in 2008 to promote good instruction and education reform for minority and poor children. “It is certainly what makes Joel Klein tick,” said Kati Haycock, the president of the Education Trust, which advocates for progress on the issue. “And you can’t say that for everyone.”
Who or what is this Education Trust? And is Haycock on the same pad as Rev. Al? It would seem so, given the inordinate praise she has for Klein's, "really trying hard," performance. She should take a cue from the late John Wooden's play book: "Never mistake activity for achievement."
So, at the end of the day, with all the extra funds expended, what exactly do we have to show for it? In our view, money for nothing.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Sharpton Pimps Bloomberg's Ride
Adam Lisberg has thankfully stayed on Mike Bloomberg's tail-following the money and naming names. In yesterday's NY Daily News he gives voice to the dog that didn't bark-the lock jawed Reverend Al Sharpton and his pecuniary relationship to the mayor: "The Rev. Al Sharpton finally disagreed with Mayor Bloomberg a week ago on how to change elections in the city. It was a long time coming.The most prominent African-American voice in New York has a warm and productive relationship with its richest and most powerful white man. They don't always agree, but they always get along. On Aug. 7, Sharpton said he would fight any push to make city elections nonpartisan - which Bloomberg hoped to do this fall. His public stand helped kill the idea. Barely 48 hours later, Bloomberg pulled the plug. Two years earlier, though, Sharpton stayed mum while Bloomberg rammed through a law to extend term limits so he could run again."
And Lisberg rightfully asks, why? And, as in everything else political, the answer lies with Bloomberg's version of the golden rule: you take my gold and let me rule: "Perhaps because, as the city was convulsed over term limits, Sharpton's National Action Network got a $110,000 grant from a brand-new nonprofit funded by Bloomberg. In fact, on the very day Bloomberg announced he wanted to run again, the first $50,000 of the grant was transferred to the National Action Network.The details are buried in filings from the Education Equality Project, a group started two months earlier by Sharpton and Bloomberg's school chancellor, Joel Klein, to close the gap between white and minority students."
All of this comes as no surprise to us-and the smartest thing Mike Bloomberg did in 2001 was to put the morally suspect Sharpton on the pad. It's certainly made his life easier-and has allowed the mayor to staff his administration almost like the Augusta Country Club with nary a peep from the normally loquacious, and bombastic rabble rouser. The fact that Sharpton has parted company on nonpartisan elections is of little note, because his silence over the over turning of term limits gave Bloomberg his undeserved third term-and that's really was the whole enchilada for the solipsistic billionaire.
Sharpton, of course, remains true to his unprinciples to the very end: "The details are buried in filings from the Education Equality Project, a group started two months earlier by Sharpton and Bloomberg's school chancellor, Joel Klein, to close the gap between white and minority students. The project reported only two cash donations in 2008, gifts of $250,000 each from two anonymous donors. Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser would not discuss specifics, but said the mayor gave money to the education project in 2008 - which means Bloomberg was one of those two donors.The National Action Network got $50,000 on Oct. 2, 2008, and the remaining $60,000 on Oct. 17, 2008. The Education Equality Project's tax filing claims there was no conflict of interest in giving money to a group run by one of its own founders: "There is no relationship between the Organization and NAN." Sharpton told the Daily News last week the National Action Network never got any of Bloomberg's money - "not that I know of." He insisted he spoke out against Bloomberg changing term limits, though it doesn't show up in any news clips from the time. "When the mayor changed term limits, I've been on the record against it all along," Sharpton insisted. "The mayor has no financial arrangements, before or after, with us."
A real Chico Marx lyin' eyes moment. We would suggest that Al take a lie detector test, but have no doubt that the sociopath would pass it with flying colors-and this is the man who has become a respected power broker for the Democratic Party; even though Sharpton has been pulling his punches for the past eight years: "Sharpton endorsed the African-American William Thompson against Bloomberg last year but was barely visible. Sharpton denounces the NYPD's stop-and-frisk program at his Saturday rallies, but not on the steps of City Hall."
Lisberg concludes his expose with this amusing comment: "Rejecting nonpartisan elections showed Bloomberg that Sharpton can't be bought. But taking a dive on term limits showed Bloomberg that Sharpton might be able to be rented." We demur. What this has shown is that Sharpton will take a dive for Mike Bloomberg whenever the mayor deems it to be important enough. The Sharpton stand against non partisan elections is simply a misleading epilogue to an eight year intimacy.
And Lisberg rightfully asks, why? And, as in everything else political, the answer lies with Bloomberg's version of the golden rule: you take my gold and let me rule: "Perhaps because, as the city was convulsed over term limits, Sharpton's National Action Network got a $110,000 grant from a brand-new nonprofit funded by Bloomberg. In fact, on the very day Bloomberg announced he wanted to run again, the first $50,000 of the grant was transferred to the National Action Network.The details are buried in filings from the Education Equality Project, a group started two months earlier by Sharpton and Bloomberg's school chancellor, Joel Klein, to close the gap between white and minority students."
All of this comes as no surprise to us-and the smartest thing Mike Bloomberg did in 2001 was to put the morally suspect Sharpton on the pad. It's certainly made his life easier-and has allowed the mayor to staff his administration almost like the Augusta Country Club with nary a peep from the normally loquacious, and bombastic rabble rouser. The fact that Sharpton has parted company on nonpartisan elections is of little note, because his silence over the over turning of term limits gave Bloomberg his undeserved third term-and that's really was the whole enchilada for the solipsistic billionaire.
Sharpton, of course, remains true to his unprinciples to the very end: "The details are buried in filings from the Education Equality Project, a group started two months earlier by Sharpton and Bloomberg's school chancellor, Joel Klein, to close the gap between white and minority students. The project reported only two cash donations in 2008, gifts of $250,000 each from two anonymous donors. Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser would not discuss specifics, but said the mayor gave money to the education project in 2008 - which means Bloomberg was one of those two donors.The National Action Network got $50,000 on Oct. 2, 2008, and the remaining $60,000 on Oct. 17, 2008. The Education Equality Project's tax filing claims there was no conflict of interest in giving money to a group run by one of its own founders: "There is no relationship between the Organization and NAN." Sharpton told the Daily News last week the National Action Network never got any of Bloomberg's money - "not that I know of." He insisted he spoke out against Bloomberg changing term limits, though it doesn't show up in any news clips from the time. "When the mayor changed term limits, I've been on the record against it all along," Sharpton insisted. "The mayor has no financial arrangements, before or after, with us."
A real Chico Marx lyin' eyes moment. We would suggest that Al take a lie detector test, but have no doubt that the sociopath would pass it with flying colors-and this is the man who has become a respected power broker for the Democratic Party; even though Sharpton has been pulling his punches for the past eight years: "Sharpton endorsed the African-American William Thompson against Bloomberg last year but was barely visible. Sharpton denounces the NYPD's stop-and-frisk program at his Saturday rallies, but not on the steps of City Hall."
Lisberg concludes his expose with this amusing comment: "Rejecting nonpartisan elections showed Bloomberg that Sharpton can't be bought. But taking a dive on term limits showed Bloomberg that Sharpton might be able to be rented." We demur. What this has shown is that Sharpton will take a dive for Mike Bloomberg whenever the mayor deems it to be important enough. The Sharpton stand against non partisan elections is simply a misleading epilogue to an eight year intimacy.
Bloomberg Finally Defends Property Rights-But Only for a Mosque
One of the most fascinating aspects of Mike Bloomberg's geshrie for tolerance-a speech that warmed the hearts of everyone over at the far left side of the political spectrum-was the following defense of private property rights: "The simple fact is, this building is private property, and the owners have a right to use the building as a house of worship, and the government has no right whatsoever to deny that right. And if it were tried, the courts would almost certainly strike it down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution."
So, for Mike the Mayor-as well as for all of the country's proto-socialists-the issue of the sanctity of private property only emerges when the ownership rights of a mosque become involved. How instructive is that? But our bone to pick is with the mayor-someone for whom the rights of property have never been as sacrosanct as they have suddenly become now with the mosque building issue.
When it comes to the property owners at Willets Point, or the warehouses owned by Nick Sprayregen in West Harlem, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution be damned! What part of, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized, " doesn't the mayor get?
And where are the pundits here, to point out that in nine years Bloomberg has sat on his tuchis doing squat about the big hole in the ground where the Towers used to stand? Here's a guy that believes fervently in the right of the state to take your property to build a mall-or to expand a private university-but can't see that the use of eminent domain to take away the right of Larry Silverstein to obstruct Ground Zero reconstruction is the quintessential public use. As we said earlier this year: "The fact that we still have a hole in the ground while the mayor has had eight years of lockjaw on the matter is to his everlasting shame. That he hesitates to use eminent domain to kick his fellow billionaire out of the site is certainly, as the socialists say, no accident. It's only the little guys who become the targets of government taking-especially when class acts like Mike Bloomberg are running things."
Bloomberg should be ashamed to say anything about the hole in the ground that he has disrespected by his nonfeasance. In fact the entire area, including the space where the mosque and the girlie clubs are located, should have been condemned for the creation of a truly consecrated redevelopment project. But Mike Bloomberg was too busy trying to force little guys Jerry Antonacci and Jake Bono off of their land-and in the process also looking to spend over a billion of tax payer dollars to accomplish this outrage. Check out this damning video.
So, what the mayor's supposedly great speech reveals about him is that, aside from being a private property hypocrite, he really lacks much intellectual depth-and his preening is redolent with passionately held and wrongful conceptions divorced from the reality of the lives of most New Yorkers. Mike Lupica, with whom we normally disagree with on most things, captures what is important about the mosque controversy.
Writing in the NY Daily News this morning, Lupica speaks of honoring the feelings of the 9/11 families: "Her name is Bonnie McEneaney and she is the widow of Eamon McEneaney, who was a husband and father and son and brother and even one of the great college lacrosse players of all time at Cornell. He worked for Cantor Fitzgerald on the 105th floor and went to work on Sept. 11, 2001, and was another who never came home. So his widow is one you listen to as she speaks in a quiet voice about the proposed plan to build a mosque a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. You listen to her before you listen to the mayor of New York, or even the President, both of whom try to frame this debate around freedom of religion when it's not."
And the widow speaks from the heart-and to the heart of what the mosque issue is really about: "Nobody disputes the principle of freedom of religion," Bonnie McEneaney was saying yesterday. "Of course Muslims should have the same spiritual rights the rest of us have. The question isn't about that. The question is about sensitivity. To me, this is solely about sensitivity, the feelings of the friends and relatives who lost loved ones on 9/11."
And Lupica really lets the hectoring mayor have it: "Michael Bloomberg tells people where to smoke and where to walk in Times Square, how much fat they can have in their food, bullies anybody who gets in his way. Now anybody who disagrees with him on the building of this mosque is against freedom of religion and the First Amendment. Why? Because Bloomberg stamps his foot and says so, that's why."
Both Bloomberg and the president are rationalists cut from the same cerebral cloth-cut off from the emotions of normal people and the empathy needed to truly understand the wounds that the attack created. Lupica deserves the last word: "That Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf can build his mosque, just not at Park Place, that somehow the honor of the city isn't compromised, or the Constitution, if he doesn't build there. Everything Bloomberg and Barack Obama say about this sounds right. But if the only constituency that matters here - the ones left behind by the victims of Sept. 11 - think they're wrong, they are."
So, for Mike the Mayor-as well as for all of the country's proto-socialists-the issue of the sanctity of private property only emerges when the ownership rights of a mosque become involved. How instructive is that? But our bone to pick is with the mayor-someone for whom the rights of property have never been as sacrosanct as they have suddenly become now with the mosque building issue.
When it comes to the property owners at Willets Point, or the warehouses owned by Nick Sprayregen in West Harlem, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution be damned! What part of, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized, " doesn't the mayor get?
And where are the pundits here, to point out that in nine years Bloomberg has sat on his tuchis doing squat about the big hole in the ground where the Towers used to stand? Here's a guy that believes fervently in the right of the state to take your property to build a mall-or to expand a private university-but can't see that the use of eminent domain to take away the right of Larry Silverstein to obstruct Ground Zero reconstruction is the quintessential public use. As we said earlier this year: "The fact that we still have a hole in the ground while the mayor has had eight years of lockjaw on the matter is to his everlasting shame. That he hesitates to use eminent domain to kick his fellow billionaire out of the site is certainly, as the socialists say, no accident. It's only the little guys who become the targets of government taking-especially when class acts like Mike Bloomberg are running things."
Bloomberg should be ashamed to say anything about the hole in the ground that he has disrespected by his nonfeasance. In fact the entire area, including the space where the mosque and the girlie clubs are located, should have been condemned for the creation of a truly consecrated redevelopment project. But Mike Bloomberg was too busy trying to force little guys Jerry Antonacci and Jake Bono off of their land-and in the process also looking to spend over a billion of tax payer dollars to accomplish this outrage. Check out this damning video.
So, what the mayor's supposedly great speech reveals about him is that, aside from being a private property hypocrite, he really lacks much intellectual depth-and his preening is redolent with passionately held and wrongful conceptions divorced from the reality of the lives of most New Yorkers. Mike Lupica, with whom we normally disagree with on most things, captures what is important about the mosque controversy.
Writing in the NY Daily News this morning, Lupica speaks of honoring the feelings of the 9/11 families: "Her name is Bonnie McEneaney and she is the widow of Eamon McEneaney, who was a husband and father and son and brother and even one of the great college lacrosse players of all time at Cornell. He worked for Cantor Fitzgerald on the 105th floor and went to work on Sept. 11, 2001, and was another who never came home. So his widow is one you listen to as she speaks in a quiet voice about the proposed plan to build a mosque a couple of blocks from Ground Zero. You listen to her before you listen to the mayor of New York, or even the President, both of whom try to frame this debate around freedom of religion when it's not."
And the widow speaks from the heart-and to the heart of what the mosque issue is really about: "Nobody disputes the principle of freedom of religion," Bonnie McEneaney was saying yesterday. "Of course Muslims should have the same spiritual rights the rest of us have. The question isn't about that. The question is about sensitivity. To me, this is solely about sensitivity, the feelings of the friends and relatives who lost loved ones on 9/11."
And Lupica really lets the hectoring mayor have it: "Michael Bloomberg tells people where to smoke and where to walk in Times Square, how much fat they can have in their food, bullies anybody who gets in his way. Now anybody who disagrees with him on the building of this mosque is against freedom of religion and the First Amendment. Why? Because Bloomberg stamps his foot and says so, that's why."
Both Bloomberg and the president are rationalists cut from the same cerebral cloth-cut off from the emotions of normal people and the empathy needed to truly understand the wounds that the attack created. Lupica deserves the last word: "That Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf can build his mosque, just not at Park Place, that somehow the honor of the city isn't compromised, or the Constitution, if he doesn't build there. Everything Bloomberg and Barack Obama say about this sounds right. But if the only constituency that matters here - the ones left behind by the victims of Sept. 11 - think they're wrong, they are."
You Dirty Rat!
Errol Louis has a disturbing column in yesterday's NY Daily News about the recrudescence of the rat infestation in NYC: "No, it's not your imagination. Reports trickling in from across the city all point to an explosion of rat infestations. Rodents recently took over a block of W. 87th St. "Residents say they have seen dozens scurrying about in the night (one super says he has seen up to 100!)" reported the Westside Independent in June."
Now Louis, is pointing all this out because he feels that the city needs to bring back its rat patrol force: "Most New Yorkers tend to think about the difficult topic of rats the way psychologists say we handle death: with successive feelings of anger, denial, bargaining and depression - and, finally, acceptance. Those of us stuck in the anger stage won't be happy to learn about a decision by the Health Department to reduce teams of frontline rat-battlers - a bad move that can be fixed at zero cost to the city. "The situation has really deteriorated," says Fitz Reid, President of Local 768 of the Health Service Employees union. A total of 63 out of 84 pest control aides were laid off earlier this year, says Reid - workers paid $27,000 to $30,000 a year and tasked with doing inspections, issuing summonses and clearing vacant lots and buildings infested with rats."
We see these things a bit differently. After all, bringing in the exterminators is an after the fact kind of operation-and does nothing to root out the root causes. And what is one of those major root causes? The veritable Templeton-like smorgasbord of putrescible waste that the city hasn't found a good way to reduce and/or dispose of. As we have pointed out, the city council has launched yet another quixotic attempt to figure out ways to induce New Yorkers to compost organic waste-a silly waste of money when we have a much more effective methodology at our disposal: food waste disposers.
Food waste disposers would greatly reduce the storage of wet garbage at all of the city's restaurants, green grocers and supermarkets-and would, at the same time, reduce the operating expenses of these vital small businesses in our neighborhoods. Disposers, then, would be an excellent public health initiative that would double as an economic development effort during these tough times.
In fact, it is the kind of public health initiative that the city's Department of Health should be championing-in spite of the hidebound stupidity of those oppositionists at DEP. Instead, the DOH is busy with its bureaucratic demiurge; trans-fatting, menu labeling, and grading local eateries that are struggling to simply survive the Great Recession. It's as if the rat invasion of the Taco Bell in the Village never happened.
And then there's the bed bug invasion-that has even reached the Brooklyn DAs office. It's time that the DOH stopped playing nanny and got back to its reason for existence-protecting the health of New Yorkers. It can do that by getting on the disposer bandwagon and resisting the competing busy body urge to tell all of us how we should be living our lives.
Now Louis, is pointing all this out because he feels that the city needs to bring back its rat patrol force: "Most New Yorkers tend to think about the difficult topic of rats the way psychologists say we handle death: with successive feelings of anger, denial, bargaining and depression - and, finally, acceptance. Those of us stuck in the anger stage won't be happy to learn about a decision by the Health Department to reduce teams of frontline rat-battlers - a bad move that can be fixed at zero cost to the city. "The situation has really deteriorated," says Fitz Reid, President of Local 768 of the Health Service Employees union. A total of 63 out of 84 pest control aides were laid off earlier this year, says Reid - workers paid $27,000 to $30,000 a year and tasked with doing inspections, issuing summonses and clearing vacant lots and buildings infested with rats."
We see these things a bit differently. After all, bringing in the exterminators is an after the fact kind of operation-and does nothing to root out the root causes. And what is one of those major root causes? The veritable Templeton-like smorgasbord of putrescible waste that the city hasn't found a good way to reduce and/or dispose of. As we have pointed out, the city council has launched yet another quixotic attempt to figure out ways to induce New Yorkers to compost organic waste-a silly waste of money when we have a much more effective methodology at our disposal: food waste disposers.
Food waste disposers would greatly reduce the storage of wet garbage at all of the city's restaurants, green grocers and supermarkets-and would, at the same time, reduce the operating expenses of these vital small businesses in our neighborhoods. Disposers, then, would be an excellent public health initiative that would double as an economic development effort during these tough times.
In fact, it is the kind of public health initiative that the city's Department of Health should be championing-in spite of the hidebound stupidity of those oppositionists at DEP. Instead, the DOH is busy with its bureaucratic demiurge; trans-fatting, menu labeling, and grading local eateries that are struggling to simply survive the Great Recession. It's as if the rat invasion of the Taco Bell in the Village never happened.
And then there's the bed bug invasion-that has even reached the Brooklyn DAs office. It's time that the DOH stopped playing nanny and got back to its reason for existence-protecting the health of New Yorkers. It can do that by getting on the disposer bandwagon and resisting the competing busy body urge to tell all of us how we should be living our lives.
A&P RIP?
The great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company continues its slide into the abyss-and it, along with our old nemesis Pathmark that had been acquired two years ago, doesn't appear to have many breaths left. It couldn't be happening to a better caste of scoundrels. Four years ago, we were retained by the Pathmark company prior to its acquisition for the purpose of stopping thew building of a Wal-Mart Supercenter in Monsey, NY. We stopped the Walmonster dead in its tracks.
But, recalling the old adage that no good dead goes unpunished, the newly acquired pallbearers of Pathmark decided that they didn't have to pay us-or its workers, for that matter-what they owed for saving a high grossing unit right next to the proposed Wal-Mart. One particular low life, someone named Allen Richards, was the man in charge and we eagerly await news of his deserved sacking-a man of limited talents, and even more limited integrity.
Karma is a bitch, isn't it? But we digress. It now appears that it won't be long before leaner4 and meaner competitors tear off pieces of the carcass that was once that of the great A&P. As Crain's reported last week: "The financial free fall of The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.—owner of A&P, The Food Emporium, Pathmark, Waldbaum's and other chains—has its local rivals salivating. “We are just observing right now,” insists billionaire John Catsimatidis, who owns the Gristedes chain. But industry-watchers say the one-time mayoral candidate is keen to take over some of the ailing supermarket giant's real estate. So, too, are at least a half-dozen others, including Fairway Market's co-owner, Howard Glickberg. “If Food Emporium came up for sale, it would be a real estate opportunity for us,” says Mr. Glickberg, whose company is rapidly expanding in the area."
It won't be long, yeah: "In fact, an implosion of 151-year-old A&P could be a windfall for its competitors. Buildings large enough to accommodate supermarkets are scarce and highly sought-after in the city. A&P's five-borough portfolio of 48 such properties under the Waldbaum's, Food Emporium, Pathmark and A&P banners is one of the largest in the city. The Montvale, N.J.-based grocer has a total of 429 stores across eight states in the Northeast."
Paging Allen Richards, the Titanic needs you: "Once one of the most-admired food retailers in the country, with more than 15,000 stores in its heyday in the 1930s, A&P has been struggling for many years, but it was caught completely flat-footed over the past decade as newer competitors like Whole Foods Market and Trader Joe's redefined the supermarket business. Over the past 12 months, A&P has replaced two chief executives. A third, Sam Martin, was appointed late last month. A former chief operating officer of OfficeMax and Wild Oats Markets, respectively, Mr. Martin has a herculean task ahead of him. The company has lost money for seven straight quarters. In its most recent fiscal quarter ended June 19, the grocer reported a loss of $122.6 million, compared with a loss of $65.2 million in the same quarter of 2009."
Poetic justice, you might say, for the company that kinda invented the anti-trust laws back in the day. In recognition of its market power-and the concomitant ability to destroy other competitors-Congress passed the Robinson Patman Act to curtail A&P' growing influence: "Congress felt that the rise of chain stores1 threatened competition in the retail sector. Through vertical integration and the buying power of multiple locations, large retailers could obtain significant price concessions from their suppliers that were not available to smaller competitors. The Robinson-Patman Act was envisioned to provide protection to small independent retailers and suppliers such that "to the extent reasonably practicable, that businessmen at the same functional level would stand on equal competitive footing so far as price is concerned." In very broad strokes, the Act requires sellers to sell to everyone at the same price, and buyers buy from a particular seller at the same price as everyone else, where they have the knowledge to do so."
And now, the once great retailer is being auctioned off at the equivalent of a yard sale: "In late July, Standard & Poor's lowered the company's credit rating to deep into junk territory, CCC, because it has too little cash on hand. “While many supermarkets have experienced profit pressures over the past year, performance at A&P has generally been worse than industry averages,” wrote S&P analyst Charles Pinson-Rose. Mr. Flickinger predicts that the company could face a cash crisis by next February. An A&P spokeswoman says the company's turnaround plan includes the sale of noncore assets, and that's exactly what has its competitors salivating. Some observers suggest that A&P may sell off Food Emporium. That chain boasts 16 Manhattan stores. Mr. Flickinger notes that they are the most upscale in the company's portfolio and are outperforming its other brands.
And, as analyst Flickinger goes on to point out: “A&P should sell its weakest operating companies, but its history is to sell its crown jewels,” he says. In 2005, it did just that, selling its highly successful A&P Canada subsidiary to help it pay down debt." Where do we get in line for our piece of that debt?
Sill, as much as all of this creates a certain amount of schadenfreude, we must point out that there are good union jobs at stake-a concern at any time, but especially during the current recession: "At this point, the situation is so dire that union officials are worried. “We are concerned about stores closing, layoffs and the lack of customers,” says John Durso, president of Local 338, which represents 7,000 A&P, Waldbaum's and Food Emporium employees."
So while we have a personal reason to gloat about all of this, we do feel that it is important for those looking to pick up the A&P pieces-like John Catsimatidis-to do so; and save the jobs along with the neighborhood supermarkets that are becoming all too rare in NYC
But, recalling the old adage that no good dead goes unpunished, the newly acquired pallbearers of Pathmark decided that they didn't have to pay us-or its workers, for that matter-what they owed for saving a high grossing unit right next to the proposed Wal-Mart. One particular low life, someone named Allen Richards, was the man in charge and we eagerly await news of his deserved sacking-a man of limited talents, and even more limited integrity.
Karma is a bitch, isn't it? But we digress. It now appears that it won't be long before leaner4 and meaner competitors tear off pieces of the carcass that was once that of the great A&P. As Crain's reported last week: "The financial free fall of The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.—owner of A&P, The Food Emporium, Pathmark, Waldbaum's and other chains—has its local rivals salivating. “We are just observing right now,” insists billionaire John Catsimatidis, who owns the Gristedes chain. But industry-watchers say the one-time mayoral candidate is keen to take over some of the ailing supermarket giant's real estate. So, too, are at least a half-dozen others, including Fairway Market's co-owner, Howard Glickberg. “If Food Emporium came up for sale, it would be a real estate opportunity for us,” says Mr. Glickberg, whose company is rapidly expanding in the area."
It won't be long, yeah: "In fact, an implosion of 151-year-old A&P could be a windfall for its competitors. Buildings large enough to accommodate supermarkets are scarce and highly sought-after in the city. A&P's five-borough portfolio of 48 such properties under the Waldbaum's, Food Emporium, Pathmark and A&P banners is one of the largest in the city. The Montvale, N.J.-based grocer has a total of 429 stores across eight states in the Northeast."
Paging Allen Richards, the Titanic needs you: "Once one of the most-admired food retailers in the country, with more than 15,000 stores in its heyday in the 1930s, A&P has been struggling for many years, but it was caught completely flat-footed over the past decade as newer competitors like Whole Foods Market and Trader Joe's redefined the supermarket business. Over the past 12 months, A&P has replaced two chief executives. A third, Sam Martin, was appointed late last month. A former chief operating officer of OfficeMax and Wild Oats Markets, respectively, Mr. Martin has a herculean task ahead of him. The company has lost money for seven straight quarters. In its most recent fiscal quarter ended June 19, the grocer reported a loss of $122.6 million, compared with a loss of $65.2 million in the same quarter of 2009."
Poetic justice, you might say, for the company that kinda invented the anti-trust laws back in the day. In recognition of its market power-and the concomitant ability to destroy other competitors-Congress passed the Robinson Patman Act to curtail A&P' growing influence: "Congress felt that the rise of chain stores1 threatened competition in the retail sector. Through vertical integration and the buying power of multiple locations, large retailers could obtain significant price concessions from their suppliers that were not available to smaller competitors. The Robinson-Patman Act was envisioned to provide protection to small independent retailers and suppliers such that "to the extent reasonably practicable, that businessmen at the same functional level would stand on equal competitive footing so far as price is concerned." In very broad strokes, the Act requires sellers to sell to everyone at the same price, and buyers buy from a particular seller at the same price as everyone else, where they have the knowledge to do so."
And now, the once great retailer is being auctioned off at the equivalent of a yard sale: "In late July, Standard & Poor's lowered the company's credit rating to deep into junk territory, CCC, because it has too little cash on hand. “While many supermarkets have experienced profit pressures over the past year, performance at A&P has generally been worse than industry averages,” wrote S&P analyst Charles Pinson-Rose. Mr. Flickinger predicts that the company could face a cash crisis by next February. An A&P spokeswoman says the company's turnaround plan includes the sale of noncore assets, and that's exactly what has its competitors salivating. Some observers suggest that A&P may sell off Food Emporium. That chain boasts 16 Manhattan stores. Mr. Flickinger notes that they are the most upscale in the company's portfolio and are outperforming its other brands.
And, as analyst Flickinger goes on to point out: “A&P should sell its weakest operating companies, but its history is to sell its crown jewels,” he says. In 2005, it did just that, selling its highly successful A&P Canada subsidiary to help it pay down debt." Where do we get in line for our piece of that debt?
Sill, as much as all of this creates a certain amount of schadenfreude, we must point out that there are good union jobs at stake-a concern at any time, but especially during the current recession: "At this point, the situation is so dire that union officials are worried. “We are concerned about stores closing, layoffs and the lack of customers,” says John Durso, president of Local 338, which represents 7,000 A&P, Waldbaum's and Food Emporium employees."
So while we have a personal reason to gloat about all of this, we do feel that it is important for those looking to pick up the A&P pieces-like John Catsimatidis-to do so; and save the jobs along with the neighborhood supermarkets that are becoming all too rare in NYC
Trooper Bloomberg
Who would have thought that Mayor Mike would take a page out of our book, and call out the governor to get tough with the Indian cigarette buttleggers? Early last year, when the Senecas were making noise about setting up their own toll booths on the thruway. In a post titled, "Paterson's "Make My Day" Moment," we said: "What a great opportunity for Paterson to demonstrate that he has the capacity to lead-and to forcefully insure the rule of law...As far as the Seneca threat, Paterson should be clearing out enough prison cells to accommodate the entire lot of them."
Picking up on this suggestion, Mayor Mike gave the following advice to the current threats being issued by the same Seneca criminals: "Mayor Bloomberg wants to turn the New York State Thruway into the Wild West. On his weekly radio show yesterday, Bloomberg jokingly advised Gov. Paterson to put up his dukes against cigarette retailers on Indian reservations and start collecting the excise taxes that the mayor believes are due the state. "I said to David Paterson, I said, 'You know, get yourself a cowboy hat and a shotgun. If there's ever a great video, it's you standing in the middle of the New York State Thruway saying, you know, 'Read my lips: The law of the land is this and we're going to enforce the law,' " Hizzoner said."
But why is this considered a joke? It's no laughing matter when an organized gang flouts the law with impunity-and the NY Post understates this fact: "Many believe -- and some courts have held -- that the Indians should have the right to sell tax-free cigarettes only to other Indians, and not to the public at large. The Indians reject that claim."
This is just flat out untrue-and Reporter Sally Goldenberg needed to ring us up for the emmis on this matter-as we pointed out earlier this year: "But, on the issue of regulations, we had a fascinating conversation with former attorney general Oliver Koppell. He told us that the successful defense of the state law in the US Supreme Court that legalizes the right of NY to tax these scofflaws, was based precisely on the state's prerogative to promulgate regulations-regs that were ready to go then and have apparently been gathering dust for 16 years!"
This is established law, and to pretend, as the Seneca do, that it is still a debatable issue, is self serving hooey. And, by the way, if you do have an organized group threatening the state with violence if it does decide to actually enforce the law, than why would it be a joke to meet the threat with force?
The Seneca-along with the rest of the Indian tax evaders-need to be stopped in their tracks before harm is done; and before there are no legitimate tax stampers left in the state. And it has gotten so bad, that the Seneca believe that even federal laws don't apply to them: "In the most recent development in the decades-old war between government officials and merchants on Indian reservations, a federal judge in Buffalo ruled on Thursday against allowing the Senecas to continue mailing cigarettes to customers while they appeal an earlier ruling. The decision came after the state seized thousands of cartons of cigarettes from a delivery truck making stops between Seneca Indian Nation reservations in western New York."
And the governor has been posturing on this key tax collection issue-as the NY Post opines this morning. Despite the mayor's encouragement, Paterson is unlikely to act anytime soon: "We'd sure love to see Sheriff Paterson in a 10-gallon Stetson on the Thruway. More likely, though, he'll be riding off into the sunset before New Yorkers see any of that cig-tax dough."
But cowboy hats off to the mayor-a man who knows a scam when he sees one. Blomberg therefore gets, and deserves, the last word: "Radio-show host John Gambling mentioned the famous incident in which the Senecas burned tires along the Thruway in 1997 to protest the state's collection of taxes from wholesalers who supplied Indian retailers. That sparked a feverish reaction from the mayor. "This is an outrage," he said. "You know, if you and I have to pay taxes, everybody should pay taxes -- and this is just a scam to get around the taxes."
Picking up on this suggestion, Mayor Mike gave the following advice to the current threats being issued by the same Seneca criminals: "Mayor Bloomberg wants to turn the New York State Thruway into the Wild West. On his weekly radio show yesterday, Bloomberg jokingly advised Gov. Paterson to put up his dukes against cigarette retailers on Indian reservations and start collecting the excise taxes that the mayor believes are due the state. "I said to David Paterson, I said, 'You know, get yourself a cowboy hat and a shotgun. If there's ever a great video, it's you standing in the middle of the New York State Thruway saying, you know, 'Read my lips: The law of the land is this and we're going to enforce the law,' " Hizzoner said."
But why is this considered a joke? It's no laughing matter when an organized gang flouts the law with impunity-and the NY Post understates this fact: "Many believe -- and some courts have held -- that the Indians should have the right to sell tax-free cigarettes only to other Indians, and not to the public at large. The Indians reject that claim."
This is just flat out untrue-and Reporter Sally Goldenberg needed to ring us up for the emmis on this matter-as we pointed out earlier this year: "But, on the issue of regulations, we had a fascinating conversation with former attorney general Oliver Koppell. He told us that the successful defense of the state law in the US Supreme Court that legalizes the right of NY to tax these scofflaws, was based precisely on the state's prerogative to promulgate regulations-regs that were ready to go then and have apparently been gathering dust for 16 years!"
This is established law, and to pretend, as the Seneca do, that it is still a debatable issue, is self serving hooey. And, by the way, if you do have an organized group threatening the state with violence if it does decide to actually enforce the law, than why would it be a joke to meet the threat with force?
The Seneca-along with the rest of the Indian tax evaders-need to be stopped in their tracks before harm is done; and before there are no legitimate tax stampers left in the state. And it has gotten so bad, that the Seneca believe that even federal laws don't apply to them: "In the most recent development in the decades-old war between government officials and merchants on Indian reservations, a federal judge in Buffalo ruled on Thursday against allowing the Senecas to continue mailing cigarettes to customers while they appeal an earlier ruling. The decision came after the state seized thousands of cartons of cigarettes from a delivery truck making stops between Seneca Indian Nation reservations in western New York."
And the governor has been posturing on this key tax collection issue-as the NY Post opines this morning. Despite the mayor's encouragement, Paterson is unlikely to act anytime soon: "We'd sure love to see Sheriff Paterson in a 10-gallon Stetson on the Thruway. More likely, though, he'll be riding off into the sunset before New Yorkers see any of that cig-tax dough."
But cowboy hats off to the mayor-a man who knows a scam when he sees one. Blomberg therefore gets, and deserves, the last word: "Radio-show host John Gambling mentioned the famous incident in which the Senecas burned tires along the Thruway in 1997 to protest the state's collection of taxes from wholesalers who supplied Indian retailers. That sparked a feverish reaction from the mayor. "This is an outrage," he said. "You know, if you and I have to pay taxes, everybody should pay taxes -- and this is just a scam to get around the taxes."
Friday, August 13, 2010
Tax Evaders Bemoan Loss of Income and Jobs!
The failure to collect the Indian cigarette taxes has devastated NY State's legitimate retailers and wholesalers-as we have incessantly pointed out. Not to mention its impact on an already out of whack state budget. But the folks responsible for all of these losses, instead of being made to pay restitution after serving a long prison sentence, are actually able to go around crying about the loss of their ill-gotten gains.
As the Buffalo News reports: "Mail-order cigarette sellers from the Seneca Nation and elsewhere were handed another setback Thursday in federal court. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Arcara refused to delay the enforcement of a new federal law that prevents businesses from selling cigarettes through the mail. Seneca Nation businesses oppose the law, saying it will decimate the tribe's lucrative mail-order tobacco industry, which has provided jobs to thousands of Senecas while turning a few into millionaires."
Oh the horror-and lucrative it has been, with an emphasis on filthy lucre. And the lachrymose response of the Indians is music to our ears: "News of the ruling distressed Rick Jemison, chairman of the Seneca Free Trade Association, which represents about 140 tobacco companies owned by members of the Seneca tribe. "Thousands of people are going to be out of work ... they already are out of work," Jemison, a former member of the Senecas' Tribal Council, said. "This law is just wrong. It's a law promulgated by big tobacco companies and Congress to prevent competition. They're in bed together."
Where is Jon Stewart and Comedy Central when you need them. Is this guy Jemison kidding? He's helping to run a criminal enterprise whose ability to, "compete," is predicated on the ability of his businesses to avoid paying the state and city taxes-a huge proportion of the price of a carton of cigarettes. Now if the guy wants to really compete, no one is stopping him from doing what anyone else does-competing on a level, tax paying, playing field. If he's unable to do that, he should be gracious enough to simply shut up.
The arrogance of these people-an attitude that has been fostered by years of government forbearance-apparently knows no bounds. When faced with the postal ban, the response is mindboggling: "Businesses have stopped operating, and people have lost jobs," said Lisa A. Coppola, an attorney for a tobacco business owned by Seneca Nation member Aaron Pierce. She said Pierce is trying to develop methods of delivering cigarettes to customers, without using the U.S. Postal Service."
In other words, trying to find new ways to successfully practice tax evasion. All these folks should be shut down and locked up-if only for their arrogant disregard for the laws of the land.
As the Buffalo News reports: "Mail-order cigarette sellers from the Seneca Nation and elsewhere were handed another setback Thursday in federal court. U.S. District Judge Richard J. Arcara refused to delay the enforcement of a new federal law that prevents businesses from selling cigarettes through the mail. Seneca Nation businesses oppose the law, saying it will decimate the tribe's lucrative mail-order tobacco industry, which has provided jobs to thousands of Senecas while turning a few into millionaires."
Oh the horror-and lucrative it has been, with an emphasis on filthy lucre. And the lachrymose response of the Indians is music to our ears: "News of the ruling distressed Rick Jemison, chairman of the Seneca Free Trade Association, which represents about 140 tobacco companies owned by members of the Seneca tribe. "Thousands of people are going to be out of work ... they already are out of work," Jemison, a former member of the Senecas' Tribal Council, said. "This law is just wrong. It's a law promulgated by big tobacco companies and Congress to prevent competition. They're in bed together."
Where is Jon Stewart and Comedy Central when you need them. Is this guy Jemison kidding? He's helping to run a criminal enterprise whose ability to, "compete," is predicated on the ability of his businesses to avoid paying the state and city taxes-a huge proportion of the price of a carton of cigarettes. Now if the guy wants to really compete, no one is stopping him from doing what anyone else does-competing on a level, tax paying, playing field. If he's unable to do that, he should be gracious enough to simply shut up.
The arrogance of these people-an attitude that has been fostered by years of government forbearance-apparently knows no bounds. When faced with the postal ban, the response is mindboggling: "Businesses have stopped operating, and people have lost jobs," said Lisa A. Coppola, an attorney for a tobacco business owned by Seneca Nation member Aaron Pierce. She said Pierce is trying to develop methods of delivering cigarettes to customers, without using the U.S. Postal Service."
In other words, trying to find new ways to successfully practice tax evasion. All these folks should be shut down and locked up-if only for their arrogant disregard for the laws of the land.
EDC You Later?
The NY Times Willets Point ramps report this morning has generated some snarky comments from some folks who wonder whether or not the project will ever even get off the ground. As Curbed speculates: "The state government doesn't have the best track record when it comes to overseeing major projects in New York City (can we get an amen, Brooklyn Bridge Park?), but even those jokesters up in Albany are having a laugh about the redevelopment of Willets Point. The first phase of the massive mixed-use makeover of Queens' chop shop capital is being held up by a lawsuit over highway exit ramps, and some business owners in the Iron Triangle are still vehemently opposed to the city buying or seizing their land."
Well, it's not really any lawsuit that's holding things up, but more so the incompetent technical work of the EDC consultants. And Curbed get a laugh out of NYSDOT's Peter King's wondering exactly when Willets Point will ever get built: "The Times reviewed hundreds of emails between city and state officials regarding the project, and here's a brief excerpt that's representative of the whole lot: "About a month later, after pointing out a mistake in a document that put the development’s completion date as 2107 instead of 2017, Peter King, a project manager for the state, wrote to a colleague, 'Perhaps that reference to 2107 may have been closer to the truth than anyone realizes.'" Not a bad strategy! By then we'll all have hoverboards and spaceships, giving the Willets Point business owners zero leverage in negotiations."
The Real Deal follows along these same lines-and picks up on the Times perspective: "For months, state officials have been privately questioning the safety, design and impact of highway ramps crucial to the $3 billion development of Willets Point in Queens, according to hundreds of e-mails that an opponent of the project fed to the New York Times. The state officials who have expressed concern are some of the same officials whose approval is needed for the project to move forward. "Unless the preparers of this report start accepting the idea that it is seriously flawed, we are going nowhere," wrote Michael Bergman, a structural engineer for the state's Department of Transportation Dec. 28, while reviewing the city's application."
And while Bergmann is our hero in this fiasco, it is interesting to point out that he seems to disappear from all the e-mail exchanges after the first of the year. But there's no mistaking the flawed nature of EDC's submission to the state-something that cries out for further review: "The ramps in question are supposed to connect Willets Point to the Van Wyck Expressway, but officials have repeatedly been frustrated by the city's inaccurate information and on the pressure it was placing on the state to finish its analysis quickly. Peter King, a state project manager, wrote to a colleague in January in response to a typo that stated the development's expected completion date was 2107 instead of 2017: "Perhaps that reference to 2107 may have been closer to the truth than anyone realizes."
King should hone his skepticism here, and foster his emergence as an enemy of shoddy workmanship. The fact remains, however, that this entire issue-and the review process itself-is begging to be removed from the parochial clutches of EDC and its flimflam consultant AKRF. If that happens, the economic development agency and its friends may just die from exposure.
Well, it's not really any lawsuit that's holding things up, but more so the incompetent technical work of the EDC consultants. And Curbed get a laugh out of NYSDOT's Peter King's wondering exactly when Willets Point will ever get built: "The Times reviewed hundreds of emails between city and state officials regarding the project, and here's a brief excerpt that's representative of the whole lot: "About a month later, after pointing out a mistake in a document that put the development’s completion date as 2107 instead of 2017, Peter King, a project manager for the state, wrote to a colleague, 'Perhaps that reference to 2107 may have been closer to the truth than anyone realizes.'" Not a bad strategy! By then we'll all have hoverboards and spaceships, giving the Willets Point business owners zero leverage in negotiations."
The Real Deal follows along these same lines-and picks up on the Times perspective: "For months, state officials have been privately questioning the safety, design and impact of highway ramps crucial to the $3 billion development of Willets Point in Queens, according to hundreds of e-mails that an opponent of the project fed to the New York Times. The state officials who have expressed concern are some of the same officials whose approval is needed for the project to move forward. "Unless the preparers of this report start accepting the idea that it is seriously flawed, we are going nowhere," wrote Michael Bergman, a structural engineer for the state's Department of Transportation Dec. 28, while reviewing the city's application."
And while Bergmann is our hero in this fiasco, it is interesting to point out that he seems to disappear from all the e-mail exchanges after the first of the year. But there's no mistaking the flawed nature of EDC's submission to the state-something that cries out for further review: "The ramps in question are supposed to connect Willets Point to the Van Wyck Expressway, but officials have repeatedly been frustrated by the city's inaccurate information and on the pressure it was placing on the state to finish its analysis quickly. Peter King, a state project manager, wrote to a colleague in January in response to a typo that stated the development's expected completion date was 2107 instead of 2017: "Perhaps that reference to 2107 may have been closer to the truth than anyone realizes."
King should hone his skepticism here, and foster his emergence as an enemy of shoddy workmanship. The fact remains, however, that this entire issue-and the review process itself-is begging to be removed from the parochial clutches of EDC and its flimflam consultant AKRF. If that happens, the economic development agency and its friends may just die from exposure.
EDC's Off Ramps
In today's NY Times Fernanda Santos takes an in-depth look at the behind the scenes effort by EDC to get state approval for the building of crucial ramps on and off of the Van Wyck-crucial because it has argued in court papers that the massive Willets Point project cannot be built sans ramps. What she has discovered is that NYSDOT is profoundly skeptical of the EDC plan: "Even as the Bloomberg administration promotes the $3 billion development of Willets Point in Queens as one of its signature projects, state officials whose approval is needed have privately raised concerns over highway ramps crucial to the proposal and have questioned whether the development will ever get off the ground."
But what is still lurking below the surface here, is how close the state agency was to approving EDC's defective plan before the intervention of Willets Point United-the whole purpose behind the group's push for state senate oversight hearings. But the Times does underscore that State DOT's Michael Bergman was one very honest overseer: "Michael Bergmann, a structural engineer for the State Department of Transportation who was part of the team reviewing the city’s application, wrote to the department’s regional director and other colleagues on Dec. 28: “Unless the preparers of this report start accepting the idea that it is seriously flawed, we are going nowhere.”
This was about the time that the inquiries of WPU's Brian Ketcham began to roil the policy makers at DOT-and the Times goes on to point out that one of these policy makers does seem to support the Bergman position: "About a month later, after pointing out a mistake in a document that put the development’s completion date as 2107 instead of 2017, Peter King, a project manager for the state, wrote to a colleague, “Perhaps that reference to 2107 may have been closer to the truth than anyone realizes.”
But, as other e-mails show, it was King who was trying to push the project forward at the end of lat year-seeking in essence to override the Bergman objections. Ketcham's blistering critique of EDC's defective traffic report, however, became the game changer that led to the King 180-and the Times acknowledges the WPU's role as well: "Several months later, state officials did not seem very optimistic about the project’s future. “If I were a betting man, I’d start dropping the odds regarding success for E.D.C. on this project,” Mr. King said in an e-mail to a state transportation analyst on May 11. “Resistance seems to be building.” He was reacting in part to a group of business and property owners in Willets Point who had organized an effort to try to derail the project. As part of that, the opponents had filed a Freedom of Information Law request with the State Transportation Department seeking copies of all communications on the plan, hoping to pry open a behind-the-scenes bureaucratic process the public often knows very little about."
What does become clear is just how strenuous an effort has been mounted by EDC to get quick approval for its ramps-and haste makes waste if you review just how defective the EDC consultant's reports really were. Which raises serious questions about whether, if this review continues behind closed doors, an honest evaluation of the efficacy of the ramps will be forthcoming. But one thing is certain: EDC has been set back on its heels: "A spokesman for the development corporation, David Lombino, said those concerns were being addressed in a revised plan that the city intended to submit to the state by the end of the year. Mr. Lombino conceded, however, that the ramps’ approval “has been more time-consuming than originally planned.”
No kidding-but the Times highlights just how annoying the tawdry nature of the EDC work product was; and its supercilious attitude towards the regulators:
"The e-mails show state regulators raising various concerns. Do traffic projections account for simultaneous events at Citi Field stadium next to the development site and the nearby Billie Jean King National Tennis Center after Willets Point is fully occupied? Could one of the exit curves be too tight? Might the cluster of exits and merges confuse drivers and lead to accidents?
Such back and forth among different government agencies working together on a specific matter is certainly not uncommon — particularly on large, ambitious projects like Willets Point, which envisions the construction of 5,500 apartments, office buildings, retail stores and a hotel, replacing the auto repair shops, factories and junkyards that have operated there for decades.
What seems unusual is the annoyance state regulators expressed with the work of the consultants hired by the city to work on the ramps’ design. The consultants submitted numerous written responses and clarifications to questions and sat with the regulators in several meetings, but still failed to satisfy them, the messages show." (emphasis added)
But will mere annoyance be enough to insure true oversight and transparency? We're not sure-and why we have been calling for an independent review of the EDC proposals (as the Natural Resources Defense Council has advocated). Still, we are encouraged by the integrity of staffers like Mike Bergmann-and believe at the same time that an open process will embolden the honesty of staffers who can see how flawed this entire ramp project really is: "We have reviewed this whole package several times, and we keep seeing the same things,” Mr. Bergmann wrote to Mr. King and Tracy Sayegh Gabriel, a vice president at the development corporation, on Dec. 30. “Clarification is not our problem — we understand the design concepts. There are several key elements in the draft report that we are not willing to accept.”
But is the upcoming phases of the review process that are fraught with uncertainty-and that must be subject to the most rigorous oversight; particularly since this Willets Point project is so vital to the mayor's legacy (think Lola in Damn Yankees): "As part of the approval process for the project, the city is preparing an assessment of the ramps’ impact on the environment, which will be the subject of a public hearing next month. The assessment has to be reviewed by state transportation officials and the federal highway agency, which can approve it or request a more extensive review, an outcome that would further delay the project."
Which brings to mind the NRDC request: "NRDC is not taking a position on advancing the Willets Point project or on constructing the ramps. But based on our preliminary review, we are concerned over the discrepancies in the study results, and also by the prospect that a project could impair regional mobility..:Thus consistent with our position on other large-scale regional development projects we believe that the stakes are high enough with the building of new access ramps for the Willets Point project to warrant a full environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...By undertaking such independent review, the public can be satisfies that the proposal's impacts have been adequately assessed..."
What EDC and the mayor will be doing-and pulling out all stops to do-is to forestall any further delay; and, even more so, any truly independent oversight of the ramps. For those elected officials concerned with, not only the integrity of the governmental review process, but also the colossal impact of the massive traffic influx that Willets Point's 80,000 vehicle trips a day will generate, the outcome of this fight will be a real test of will.
The roads and highways of Queens County, along with its fragile mass transit infrastructure, are hanging in the balance. Not to mention the basic property rights of small business owners that are being run roughshod over by a billionaire elitist whose only concern is his own legacy.
But what is still lurking below the surface here, is how close the state agency was to approving EDC's defective plan before the intervention of Willets Point United-the whole purpose behind the group's push for state senate oversight hearings. But the Times does underscore that State DOT's Michael Bergman was one very honest overseer: "Michael Bergmann, a structural engineer for the State Department of Transportation who was part of the team reviewing the city’s application, wrote to the department’s regional director and other colleagues on Dec. 28: “Unless the preparers of this report start accepting the idea that it is seriously flawed, we are going nowhere.”
This was about the time that the inquiries of WPU's Brian Ketcham began to roil the policy makers at DOT-and the Times goes on to point out that one of these policy makers does seem to support the Bergman position: "About a month later, after pointing out a mistake in a document that put the development’s completion date as 2107 instead of 2017, Peter King, a project manager for the state, wrote to a colleague, “Perhaps that reference to 2107 may have been closer to the truth than anyone realizes.”
But, as other e-mails show, it was King who was trying to push the project forward at the end of lat year-seeking in essence to override the Bergman objections. Ketcham's blistering critique of EDC's defective traffic report, however, became the game changer that led to the King 180-and the Times acknowledges the WPU's role as well: "Several months later, state officials did not seem very optimistic about the project’s future. “If I were a betting man, I’d start dropping the odds regarding success for E.D.C. on this project,” Mr. King said in an e-mail to a state transportation analyst on May 11. “Resistance seems to be building.” He was reacting in part to a group of business and property owners in Willets Point who had organized an effort to try to derail the project. As part of that, the opponents had filed a Freedom of Information Law request with the State Transportation Department seeking copies of all communications on the plan, hoping to pry open a behind-the-scenes bureaucratic process the public often knows very little about."
What does become clear is just how strenuous an effort has been mounted by EDC to get quick approval for its ramps-and haste makes waste if you review just how defective the EDC consultant's reports really were. Which raises serious questions about whether, if this review continues behind closed doors, an honest evaluation of the efficacy of the ramps will be forthcoming. But one thing is certain: EDC has been set back on its heels: "A spokesman for the development corporation, David Lombino, said those concerns were being addressed in a revised plan that the city intended to submit to the state by the end of the year. Mr. Lombino conceded, however, that the ramps’ approval “has been more time-consuming than originally planned.”
No kidding-but the Times highlights just how annoying the tawdry nature of the EDC work product was; and its supercilious attitude towards the regulators:
"The e-mails show state regulators raising various concerns. Do traffic projections account for simultaneous events at Citi Field stadium next to the development site and the nearby Billie Jean King National Tennis Center after Willets Point is fully occupied? Could one of the exit curves be too tight? Might the cluster of exits and merges confuse drivers and lead to accidents?
Such back and forth among different government agencies working together on a specific matter is certainly not uncommon — particularly on large, ambitious projects like Willets Point, which envisions the construction of 5,500 apartments, office buildings, retail stores and a hotel, replacing the auto repair shops, factories and junkyards that have operated there for decades.
What seems unusual is the annoyance state regulators expressed with the work of the consultants hired by the city to work on the ramps’ design. The consultants submitted numerous written responses and clarifications to questions and sat with the regulators in several meetings, but still failed to satisfy them, the messages show." (emphasis added)
But will mere annoyance be enough to insure true oversight and transparency? We're not sure-and why we have been calling for an independent review of the EDC proposals (as the Natural Resources Defense Council has advocated). Still, we are encouraged by the integrity of staffers like Mike Bergmann-and believe at the same time that an open process will embolden the honesty of staffers who can see how flawed this entire ramp project really is: "We have reviewed this whole package several times, and we keep seeing the same things,” Mr. Bergmann wrote to Mr. King and Tracy Sayegh Gabriel, a vice president at the development corporation, on Dec. 30. “Clarification is not our problem — we understand the design concepts. There are several key elements in the draft report that we are not willing to accept.”
But is the upcoming phases of the review process that are fraught with uncertainty-and that must be subject to the most rigorous oversight; particularly since this Willets Point project is so vital to the mayor's legacy (think Lola in Damn Yankees): "As part of the approval process for the project, the city is preparing an assessment of the ramps’ impact on the environment, which will be the subject of a public hearing next month. The assessment has to be reviewed by state transportation officials and the federal highway agency, which can approve it or request a more extensive review, an outcome that would further delay the project."
Which brings to mind the NRDC request: "NRDC is not taking a position on advancing the Willets Point project or on constructing the ramps. But based on our preliminary review, we are concerned over the discrepancies in the study results, and also by the prospect that a project could impair regional mobility..:Thus consistent with our position on other large-scale regional development projects we believe that the stakes are high enough with the building of new access ramps for the Willets Point project to warrant a full environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)...By undertaking such independent review, the public can be satisfies that the proposal's impacts have been adequately assessed..."
What EDC and the mayor will be doing-and pulling out all stops to do-is to forestall any further delay; and, even more so, any truly independent oversight of the ramps. For those elected officials concerned with, not only the integrity of the governmental review process, but also the colossal impact of the massive traffic influx that Willets Point's 80,000 vehicle trips a day will generate, the outcome of this fight will be a real test of will.
The roads and highways of Queens County, along with its fragile mass transit infrastructure, are hanging in the balance. Not to mention the basic property rights of small business owners that are being run roughshod over by a billionaire elitist whose only concern is his own legacy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
