Tag: City Hall

With the Second Avenue Subway, the Long Island Railroad to Grand Central, and other major rail projects planned, borrowed for, financially diverted from and abandoned, in some cases several times, new politicians on the block face a dilemma.  Come up with even more money to carry out those plans, and they get the blame for the cost and disruption while the irresponsible pols that preceded them get credit for the improvement.  Fail to do so and they might get blamed for the absence of such improvements.  Thus, a few ambitious up and comers have hit upon water transportation as a new mode they can get credit for supporting, and have hit upon calls for public subsidies as a way to get their name in the news.  Unfortunately, such subsidies would divert scarce resources from the existing subway system most New Yorkers rely on, to a new luxury mode that almost exclusively serves the better off — and relatively few of them at that.  On a populist basis, such a proposal is easily and fairly attacked.  There is, however, a potential transformational investment to that very subway system, one not on anybody’s radar screen, that would permanently increase the potential of ferry service as a transport mode.  The opportunity to make that investment is about to close as a result of a development that would be built in its path.  That investment is…

It’s time to admit it:  like just about everyone else in New York City, I’m a criminal, but my life of crime may be coming to an end.  My particular crime:  allowing the kids’ dog off leash in Prospect Park, during the designated hours listed on the park’s website.  How is that a crime?  It is a crime because New York City has an ordinance on the books that says at all times, and in all places, all dogs must be on a leash no less than 6 feet long when in public.  No exceptions.  No exclusions. 

When off leash hours were established, the city didn’t bother to change that ordinance.  It decided instead to not enforce the ordinance during certain hours.  It decided, in effect, to make me a guilty criminal, but to let me get away with it.  Now some folks out in Queens who don’t like off leash hours have filed a lawsuit.  It’s goal?  To force the city to enforce its own laws, and ticket those who allow their dogs to be off leash.  Who could argue with that?  I will argue against the city’s original decision to avoid changing the ordinance, and as part of general principle of law and ethics rather than as a specific canine case.  This is a long post, but if you are interested but that bothers you, you can copy it, paste it, and print it out.

It’s time to admit it:  like just about everyone else in New York City, I’m a criminal, but my life of crime may be coming to an end.  My particular crime:  allowing the kids’ dog off leash in Prospect Park, during the designated hours listed on the park’s website.  How is that a crime?  It is a crime because New York City has an ordinance on the books that says at all times, and in all places, all dogs must be on a leash no less than 6 feet long when in public.  No exceptions.  No exclusions. 

When off leash hours were established, the city didn’t bother to change that ordinance.  It decided instead to not enforce the ordinance during certain hours.  It decided, in effect, to make me a guilty criminal, but to let me get away with it.  Now some folks out in Queens who don’t like off leash hours have filed a lawsuit.  It’s goal?  To force the city to enforce its own laws, and ticket those who allow their dogs to be off leash.  Who could argue with that?  I will argue against the city’s original decision to avoid changing the ordinance, and as part of general principle of law and ethics rather than as a specific canine case.  This is a long post, but if you are interested but that bothers you, you can copy it, paste it, and print it out.

It’s time to admit it:  like just about everyone else in New York City, I’m a criminal, but my life of crime may be coming to an end.  My particular crime:  allowing the kids’ dog off leash in Prospect Park, during the designated hours listed on the park’s website.  How is that a crime?  It is a crime because New York City has an ordinance on the books that says at all times, and in all places, all dogs must be on a leash no less than 6 feet long when in public.  No exceptions.  No exclusions. 

When off leash hours were established, the city didn’t bother to change that ordinance.  It decided instead to not enforce the ordinance during certain hours.  It decided, in effect, to make me a guilty criminal, but to let me get away with it.  Now some folks out in Queens who don’t like off leash hours have filed a lawsuit.  It’s goal?  To force the city to enforce its own laws, and ticket those who allow their dogs to be off leash.  Who could argue with that?  I will argue against the city’s original decision to avoid changing the ordinance, and as part of general principle of law and ethics rather than as a specific canine case.  This is a long post, but if you are interested but that bothers you, you can copy it, paste it, and print it out.

It’s time to admit it:  like just about everyone else in New York City, I’m a criminal, but my life of crime may be coming to an end.  My particular crime:  allowing the kids’ dog off leash in Prospect Park, during the designated hours listed on the park’s website.  How is that a crime?  It is a crime because New York City has an ordinance on the books that says at all times, and in all places, all dogs must be on a leash no less than 6 feet long when in public.  No exceptions.  No exclusions. 

When off leash hours were established, the city didn’t bother to change that ordinance.  It decided instead to not enforce the ordinance during certain hours.  It decided, in effect, to make me a guilty criminal, but to let me get away with it.  Now some folks out in Queens who don’t like off leash hours have filed a lawsuit.  It’s goal?  To force the city to enforce its own laws, and ticket those who allow their dogs to be off leash.  Who could argue with that?  I will argue against the city’s original decision to avoid changing the ordinance, and as part of general principle of law and ethics rather than as a specific canine case.  This is a long post, but if you are interested but that bothers you, you can copy it, paste it, and print it out.

Up in Albany, they are selling out our future to benefit narrow interest groups with one foot out the door.  It is government by the insiders, of the insiders, for the insiders, the rest be damned.  That is mostly what I write about on this blog (lots more to come when I get the time).

I’ve also been upset enough at some things Mayor Bloomberg has done to vote against him, after expecting to vote for him.  And if Speaker Quinn decides the say "screw you" to the people of the city by revoking term limits, we’ll she’ll have black mark in my book forever.  The federal government?  Forget it.

Up in Albany, they are selling out our future to benefit narrow interest groups with one foot out the door.  It is government by the insiders, of the insiders, for the insiders, the rest be damned.  That is mostly what I write about on this blog (lots more to come when I get the time).

I’ve also been upset enough at some things Mayor Bloomberg has done to vote against him, after expecting to vote for him.  And if Speaker Quinn decides the say "screw you" to the people of the city by revoking term limits, we’ll she’ll have black mark in my book forever.  The federal government?  Forget it.

Up in Albany, they are selling out our future to benefit narrow interest groups with one foot out the door.  It is government by the insiders, of the insiders, for the insiders, the rest be damned.  That is mostly what I write about on this blog (lots more to come when I get the time).

I’ve also been upset enough at some things Mayor Bloomberg has done to vote against him, after expecting to vote for him.  And if Speaker Quinn decides the say "screw you" to the people of the city by revoking term limits, we’ll she’ll have black mark in my book forever.  The federal government?  Forget it.

Up in Albany, they are selling out our future to benefit narrow interest groups with one foot out the door.  It is government by the insiders, of the insiders, for the insiders, the rest be damned.  That is mostly what I write about on this blog (lots more to come when I get the time).

I’ve also been upset enough at some things Mayor Bloomberg has done to vote against him, after expecting to vote for him.  And if Speaker Quinn decides the say "screw you" to the people of the city by revoking term limits, we’ll she’ll have black mark in my book forever.  The federal government?  Forget it.

I have finished compiling the census bureau’s state and local finance data for Fiscal 2004, and you can have the spreadsheet if you e-mail me at vampire-state (at) att (dot) net, putting state and local finance in the subject so I know the e-mail is not spam.  Since the Bureau also compiled data for Fiscal 2002, the last budget before 9/11, we can see how that event affected the city’s finances, and thus how that affected us all.  The answer is the city became worse off, in part because when all the dollars are counted, Albany and Washington reacted to the tragedy by directing more money away from New York City.  And the many ways in which New York City and state differ from the national average became more pronounced.