Assemblyman Richard Brodsky is beginning to get on my nerves. Not only has he demanded that NYC's share of state education funding be cut more than I suspect it already has been (still waiting for ALL the data, and where did you think his extra share would come from)? But he is also objecting to an attempt to use a congestion charge as a means of limiting overuse of our public streets. In fact, people from elsewhere in the state would be welcome to use our public streets — on foot — just as they are now welcome to use our public parks. Is that true for NYC residents in all the parks out in the suburbs?
Brodsky would probably say that having suburbanites in NYC makes the city better, and we are luckly to have them. Meanwhile, city residents, he might say, would be a burden elsewhere, and are unwanted. Unless they were there to work in lower-paid jobs.
I was once tangentially involved in a project on outcommuting, for which the Long Island Planning Council had asked for assistance from NYC Planning's number crunchers. The crux of LIPC's view? They wanted NYC residents working in Nassau and Suffolk, because they needed the workers, and the locals didn't want the burden of the less well off sending their children to the local school and using other services. But the problem is traffic. Couldn't NYC do something to get people in buses?
It is a heck of a lot easier to commute to Manhattan by transit than it is to most suburban shopping malls.
NYC shares its parks despite having fewer resources for them than elsewhere, as a result of carrying the bulk of the cost of the region's poor and troubled, and the pensions and debts prior generations awarded themselves before moving to the suburbs.
I't not about what in Albany, it's about who, it seems. Knock Mr. Brodsky down a few notches on the leader vs. panderer to privilege continium, as I described here http://www.r8ny.com/blog/larry_littlefield/earth_day_and_judgment_day.html.
Addendum:
Speaking of Long Island, there is a reason I prefer to think about what I write rather than fire something off. I should have mentioned that according to what I read online, there is one suburban politician capable of thinking about what is fair and best for everyone in the long run, rather than pandering to those with a greater sense of entitlement in the short run. That would be Tom Suozzi. Why am I not surprised?
It is also worth mentioning that based on what I read, the proposed congestion charge would apply to EVERYONE not just those from outside the city, unlike the Brodsky-like proposal to just charge suburanites Bloomberg put out in his first year. Of course, NYC parks are generally free to everyone. Suburban park charges are often just for non-residents, or higher for non-residents. Glad Mayor Bloomberg has come around to our way of thinking.