May 26, 2012 · www.gothamgazette.com

Gotham Gazette
Loading
Archive for October, 2005
Recent Posts
NYC Blogs
Click here for a list of NYC blogs
Newsfeeds
Search This Blog

More Scores, More Controversy
October 21st, 2005

New Yorkers got another set of student test scores this week — and more debate about what they mean. The results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress found that, while the performance of fourth and eight graders in New York State had improved over the past decade, there has been little progress in the past two years. And critics pointed to the gap between the results on the national test — which showed little recent improvement — and the scores on statewide tests, which indicated sharp gains by New York students.

Education expert Diane Ravitch told the Sun that the national results provided evidence that “New York State practices grade inflation.” “The state has been dumbing down its test,” said Sol Stern of the Manhattan Institute.

Not so, said a Daily News editorial, branding such accusations politically motivated. In fact, the paper said, the national “scores show that huge numbers of New York children are doing terrifically.”

Using the results to try to assess Mayor Mike Bloomberg’s school reforms — pro or con — is a bit of a stretch, since the city results won’t even be available until December. Looking beyond the city — and beyond Wonkster’s turf — the scores provided the first report card on the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind education law — and the news was not good for the White House. “No one can be satisfied with these results,” Ross Wiener, of the Education Trust, which backed No Child, told the Washington Post. “There’s been a discernible slowdown in progress since ‘03, at a time when we desperately need to accelerate gains.” In response, the Post reported, “The administration scrambled to put the best face on the numbers and to defend the law.” Guess it took their minds off Harriet Miers and a possible indictment of Karl Rove.

By Gail Robinson on October 21, 2005, 6:51 pm
In category: Education | 1 Comment »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Subway Discount: Why the Skepticism?
October 21st, 2005

Yesterday, Wonkster summed up the debate over whether the holiday discount for the subway was a good idea. This debate was framed in terms of whether the discount makes sense financially. Today, Craig Haberman of the New York Times examines it as a question of psychology. New Yorkers, he says, will always suspect someone is trying to put something over on them. We objected to the Metrocard when it first came around, and we suspected foul play when the city made the Staten Island Ferry free, he writes, so it only makes sense that we see this discount as suspect.

He sees the potential to have some fun with this:

“The holiday discounts create interesting possibilities. Other public officials might want to follow the authority’s lead. The city, for example, could celebrate the holidays by lowering December rents in public housing,” he writes. “That ought to really tick people off.”

By Joshua Brustein on October 21, 2005, 3:58 pm
In category: Transportation | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Subway Discount: Pro and Con
October 20th, 2005

A day after the MTA announced it would give a holiday discount to riders, opinions diverge over whether this is a good idea. The Daily News writes that “the MTA hasn’t a clue as to how much those breaks will cost – or even if they will have a cost.” In an editorial, it predicts that the discount may cost less than the $50 million annual cost projected by the MTA by increasing ridership.

But the New York Times quotes several fiscal analysts from across the spectrum saying that the move is irresponsible — especially when the MTA is asking the voters to allow it to borrow more money.

A New York Post editorial questions whether the MTA has its priorities straight: “Certainly, no one can complain about a fare cut … But what about those cries of poverty from MTA Chairman Peter Kalikow? And all those threats of fare hikes?”

And the subway riders at the Gothamist seem to have changed their initial support for the measure:

“We don’t want to look a gift horse in the mouth (too much), but Gothamist would really prefer the MTA to give us subway service for Christmas. We’ll pay the extra $1 not to be sent on wild weekend subway service goose chases!” The blog says it will use the subway savings to take a ride in a taxi.

By Joshua Brustein on October 20, 2005, 1:43 pm
In category: Public Finance, Transportation | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Rival Housing Plans
October 20th, 2005

In August, Fernando Ferrer made housing a significant issue in the 2005 campaign when he announced that he planned to build 167,000 new homes over the next ten years. Yesterday, Mayor Bloomberg responded, promising to create an additional 100,000 new apartments on top of the 68,000 he has already committed.

The Village Voice blog Power Plays explains the primary difference between the two plans: how to pay for it. Bloomberg favors “collaborations with private sector partners,” while Ferrer wants to rely on “public revenue generated by reworking tax breaks to developers and reclassifying the tax status of vacant lots in residential areas.”

It also points out that the mayor’s plan to set aside 7,500 apartments for New Yorkers with “special needs” is half of what Mayor Ed Koch committed under his housing plan.

By Mark Berkey-Gerard on October 20, 2005, 9:26 am
In category: Housing | 3 Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Subsidizing the Times
October 19th, 2005

The editorial side of the paper may be reeling from the barrage of criticism over its handling of the Judith Miller case, but the real estate side of the Times seems to be faring quite well. According to today’s Observer, 10 of the 11 property owners whose holdings were condemned to make way for the new Times headquarters are suing, claiming they deserve far more compensation than the total $86 million they have received. But the Times has little reason for concern, writes Matthew Schuerman since, “according to the development agreement … , the Times Company and Forest City Ratner get to divert every dollar beyond that initial $86 million from the substitute tax payments that they’re making. In essence, city and state taxpayers — who are already chipping in several millions dollars’ worth of subsidies” will have to fork out even more if the disgruntled property owners win in court. Or, as Gawker puts it, “should these small-business Davids prove victorious against the development Goliaths, they’ll take their winnings from the city and state treasuries.”

By Gail Robinson on October 19, 2005, 11:44 am
In category: Land Use, Public Finance | 2 Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Spitzer Urges 'No' Vote
October 19th, 2005

New Yorkers should vote against Proposition 1, the measure on the November ballot that would change the state budget process, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer writes in today’s Post. The changes, he says, “would worsen the already dysfunctional state budget process by eliminating important controls on spending and ensuring that the budget will be late every year.” Spitzer goes on to condemn aspects of the proposal that would shift power away from the governor and to the legislature. He says “The Citizens Budget Commission and virtually every other independent fiscal watchdog recognizes that this is a recipe for disaster.” Perhaps, but cynics might note that, as a leading contender for governor next year, Spitzer would be unlikely to want to give up power before he even takes office.

By Gail Robinson on October 19, 2005, 8:25 am
In category: Electoral Politics, Public Finance | 1 Comment »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Atlantic Yards Debate Heats Up
October 18th, 2005

Juan Gonzalez from the Daily News sums up all of the controversial financing by Forest City Ratner of a community group, named BUILD, that many say proved essential to building local support around the project. The funding includes the initial $5 million donation, a $10,000 contract, $100,000 for the group’s salaries, an office building free of rent and office furniture, and an additional $28,000 contract to distribute the company’s promotional paper The Brooklyn Standard (the first edition only, in pdf). He also covers a connection between the community group and a pro-development political campaign.

No Land Grab digs up more campaign connections – by using Google of all things.

Days earlier, Gonzalez’s colleague at the Daily News, Mike Lupica, called Ratner’s plan a con.

Norman Oder, author of a report (in pdf) criticizing the NY Time’s coverage of the Atlantic Yards, picks up a copy of the newest edition of Ratner’s promotional paper that’s been littered all over the surrounding neighborhoods. He also questions whether the funding BUILD is using to pay the street team that distributes it falls under the Community Benefits Agreement signed by BUILD.

On NY Turf provides information on the Oct 18 Public Scoping Hearing for the Atlantic Yards Draft Environmental Impact Statement – which is meant to obtain public comments – and gives Dan Goldstein, spokesman for Develop Don’t Destroy Brooklyn, lots of space.

Council Member Letitia James, whose district encompasses the development, offers a preview of her argument, which will be laid out in full at the hearing, in which she:
- Raises concerns about transparency, process, and misuse of eminent domain
-Derides the possible 10 year period before construction on the affordable units begins and the fact that the total number of affordable units is no longer 50%, but 30%
-Sees a lack of infrastructure and complains that the Empire State Development Corporation has not provided the funding to hire an engineer to guide the public the the EIS process.
-Cites an IBO report (in pdf), which estimated that the development would bring less than $1 million dollars a year in revenue to the city, to argue the public subsidies currently on the table are not merited.

A few days ago, Brian Lehrer aired an interview with Tom Wright, VP of the Regional Plan Association, where they discuss the pros and cons of the numerous stadium developments (MP3) in NYC and NJ. Wright sees lots of good in the plan, like the affordable housing component and says the infrastructure exists to handle the project. The segment is part of Lehrer’s 30 issues in 30 days project which concerns itself with the elections in the NYC and New Jersey.

By Mike Muller on October 18, 2005, 6:12 pm
In category: Community Development, Land Use | 2 Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Problems At the Polls?
October 18th, 2005

The Politicker poses an interesting theory for why Christopher X. Brodeur – the self-described filmmaker, cartoonist, writer, composer, political activist and investigative reporter – earned 3.5 percent of the vote in Democratic primary for mayor and posted particularly strong returns in the Bronx, a borough he says he never visited.

The issue may not have been that the candidate’s name sounds Haitian or Muslim, as some have suggested, but the result of New York City’s notoriously bad voting machines. Votes meant for Fernando Ferrer may have gone to Brodeur.

“The evidence suggests that thousands of Hispanic New Yorkers lost their votes, and that what should have been Freddy’s convincing primary victory turned into a squeaker, and was cast under an unnecessary shadow as a result,” the Politicker writes.

By Mark Berkey-Gerard on October 18, 2005, 4:14 pm
In category: Electoral Politics, Governing | 1 Comment »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Attacking On Taxes
October 18th, 2005

“Finally. Freddy Ferrer has attacked Mayor Bloomberg on an issue on which he truly deserves it: taxes.” So begins an editorial today in The New York Post. But since this is the New York Post, it goes on to say: “Unfortunately, Ferrer, the Democratic mayoral nominee, can’t say how his plan would be any better. In fact, he readily admits that he has his own tax-hike plans..” The editorial then attacks both candidates for raising (or planning to raise) taxes, because higher taxes “throttle the economy — chasing away investors and prompting job-providing businesses to scale down, move out or refrain from coming to New York in the first place” Since the mayor ” socked it to taxpayers” after September 11th, “New York City today has 100,000 fewer jobs”

By Jonathan Mandell on October 18, 2005, 10:39 am
In category: Electoral Politics, Public Finance | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Don't Force Employers to Give Insurance
October 17th, 2005

Joining the New York Sun, the New York Times runs an editorial this morning opposing the Health Care Security Act, a City Council bill that would force large grocery stores to provide their employees with health insurance. Last week the Sun dubbed the bill the “Higher Priced Groceries and Minority Unemployment Act“, describing it as a “radical attack on the capitalist economy” driven by unions trying to maintain their political clout.

The Times is kinder, saying it would be hard to find a piece of more well-meaning legislation. Still, it doesn’t think the bill — which has been vetoed by Bloomberg and may well become the subject of a lawsuit — is a reasonable way to approach the problem of the uninsured.

“The nation’s health care problems are too complicated to be addressed by a chock-a-block system of overzealous, homespun laws that fail to address the overarching problem of the uninsured and may not hold up in court, anyway,” writes the Times. “The problem cries out for a federal solution.”

By Joshua Brustein on October 17, 2005, 4:35 pm
In category: Health | 2 Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Bloomberg's Bargain
October 17th, 2005

Being a Republican has been good to Michael Bloomberg — by all accounts it enabled the one-time Democrat to become mayor. But Chris Smith writes in New York magazine, his alliance with the Bush administration — and with what Smith sees as the White House’s proclivity to play politics with terror threats — costs the mayor as well.

“Bush and the party are willing to cash Bloomberg’s millions in checks, use the city as a soundstage, and point to the mayor as an example of the party’s big tent. Yet whether it’s in Congress or in a crisis, Bush and his minions abandon the city, ” Smith writes. This troubles many Democrats planning to vote for Bloomberg but appalled at “the idea that they’re supporting the party of Bush and Rove, even tangentially or symbolically.”

By Gail Robinson on October 17, 2005, 12:32 pm
In category: Electoral Politics | 1 Comment »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Monstrosity or Landmark?
October 17th, 2005

The destruction of the old Penn Station to make way for Madison Square so appalled many New Yorkers that it paved the way for our current landmarks preservation law. But now the New York Times finds that three leading preservation groups have put the arena on a list of significant modern buildings. Could landmark status be next?

While the Times did not quote anyone who flat-out called for preservation of the garden, Kate Wood, of Landmark West!, which is spearheading the movement to landmark 2 Columbus Circle said, “I’m all for a public hearing for Madison Square Garden. It would tell us a lot about where we are in our ability to evaluate the architectural and historical significance of the recent past.” But many New Yorkers still cringe at the thought of honoring something they view as an architectural atrocity. “This building remains unforgivable by any standard,” Paul Goldberger, dean of the Parsons School of Design, said in an e-mail to the Times, while Diana Goldstein, who was among those who sparked the original protests to save Penn Station, e-mailed, “Who on earth thinks that building is worth preserving?”

By Gail Robinson on October 17, 2005, 11:43 am
In category: Arts, Land Use | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Arguing Against Proposal One
October 17th, 2005

Opponents continue to form their case against Proposal One, an amendment to the state constitution that would change the way the budget is formed. (The Daily News is going through its
top ten reasons to vote down the measure
).

In today’s New York Post, Diana Fortuna of the Citizens Budget Commission explains why she thinks Proposal One is a bad idea, calling it a power move by the state legislature that ignores serious problems like the state’s failure to balance its budgets and its “enormous appetite for debt.”

She also finds it ironic that this measure is on the ballot following the first on time budget in two decades:

“The budget was on time because voters in last year’s legislative elections expressed clear outrage at the state’s miserable record of missed deadlines,” writes Fortuna. “In other words, all it took to get a budget brought in on time was political will — not a constitutional amendment.”

She worries that this amendment will fool voters into thinking they’ve gotten reform — and temper the outrage that could lead to real change.

By Joshua Brustein on October 17, 2005, 8:11 am
In category: Public Finance | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


What The Lame Duck City Council Should NOT Do
October 16th, 2005

The New York City Council has overridden 34 vetoes by Mayor Michael Bloomberg since he took office in 2002, which, The Times writes in one of their New York region editorials, “has provided good theater and sometimes even good policy, although often in a small-bore way.”

But now with some members of the City Council (most prominently Speaker Gifford Miller) term-limited out, there are two proposals the council is considering, the Times argues, that should wait until the new council members take their seats in January — the extension of term limits from two terms to three, and new legislation addressing campaign donations from labor unions. Voters “notice when their elected representatives focus in these waning days of the term on things that make a difference in everyday lives” – - such as the recent override of the mayor’s veto to institute free parking on Sunday — “not the political lives of the council members.”

By Jonathan Mandell on October 16, 2005, 8:21 am
In category: Governing | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


"Greatest Thing Since Sliced Gourmet Bread" Or "Minority Unemployment Act"?
October 15th, 2005

When the City Council overrode Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto last Tuesday to enact the Health Care Security Act — which requires grocery store owners to provide their workers with health care insurance — Amy Traub of the newly-revamped DMIBlog hailed it as “the best thing since sliced gourmet bread” while the editorial writers of the New York Sun dubbed it “the Higher Priced Groceries and Minority Unemployment Act.”

There is little on which the two commentaries agreed. The Sun’s said the law was clearly aimed at a specific company, Wal-Mart. Traub’s said it also would affect “high-end groceries like Whole Foods and The Garden of Eden thatalso cut corners on the health care needs of their employees.”

Traub: “When these corporations fail to provide affordable health benefits, many of their employees are forced to go on Medicaid or use other state-sponsored programs to get health care for themselves and their families. The public is thus subsidizing the cost-cutting measures of these employers even as it becomes harder for companies that do provide benefits to compete.”

Sun: “….The additional cost might cause some barely profitable supermarkets serving poor or minority communities to close their doors.”

By Jonathan Mandell on October 15, 2005, 9:44 pm
In category: Community Development, Health | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


NYC, Job Blackmail Capital of the U.S.
October 15th, 2005

In the name of job creation, corporations play cities against one another — threatening to leave one for the other, so that cities and states give the corporations tax breaks to stay, at a cost to taxpayers nationwide of some $50 billion a year. But, though these taxpayer subsidies “routinely exceed $100,000 per job,” the corporations rarely deliver on their promises, with few good jobs created or even retained: “The system is rigged,” argues George LeRoy, founder of Good Jobs First and the author of The Great American Jobs Scam: Corporate Tax Dodging and the Myth Of Job Creation.

Though both his book and an essay adapted from it published in The Nation this week ( “Scamming The States”) look nationwide, LeRoy makes clear that New York City is a particular victim:

“New York City is in a class by itself as the ‘job blackmail’ capital of the United States,” he writes in Chapter 1 of the book, (in pdf format), and then lists some four dozen such deals between 1988 and 2001, including 11 worth about $350 million that Mayor Rudolph Giuliani agreed to within the first 18 months of his administration.

A surprising number of tax breaks were given to companies supposedly threatening to leave New York that actually have “New York” in the title, such as the New York Times (two packages worth more than $45 million) and the New York Post (two packages for News America also worth about $45 million), as well as the New York Mercantile Exchange ($183.9 million), Mutual of New York ($5.7 million), the New York Board of Trade ($31 million), and the biggest of them all, the New York Stock Exchange, which was promised $940 million. That deal “eventually collapsed, buttaxpayers have still been stuck with bills totaling at least $145 million” Despite the hefty pay-outs, “the contracts typically do not require a company to repay the subsidies even if they have large-scale layoffs,” which several have had — nor even (in a couple of cases) if they wind up relocating.

“Mayor Bloomberg has been less profligate than Giuliani was,” LeRoy writes, ” in part, no doubt, because of the financial crisis he inherited, including so much tax revenue lost to ‘job retention’ deals.”

By Jonathan Mandell on October 15, 2005, 8:04 pm
In category: Land Use, Public Finance | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Give Bloomberg Power Over Charter Schools
October 14th, 2005

The New York Sun has an editorial today supporting Mayor Bloomberg’s bid to lift the cap on the number of charter schools that are currently allowed in the state. (The Daily News has also supported the idea recently). Further, the Sun writes that not only the Board of Regents should be allowed to grant charters. The mayor, it says, should also be given this power — something that only one other mayor in the United States currently has the power to do. (That’s mayor Bart Peterson of Indianapolis).

“While the Board of Regents might not be completely uninterested in charter schools, the Bloomberg-Klein team has exhibited something very much needed – genuine excitement about charters and a willingness to make charters a cornerstone of its efforts to reform the city’s schools,” the Sun writes. If Bloomberg is given this power, the Sun thinks that charter schools will be his legacy.

By Joshua Brustein on October 14, 2005, 4:29 pm
In category: Education | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Lessons from Ground Zero
October 14th, 2005

People on the Gulf Coast seeking to rebuild their communities can learn from what has happened in New York City since 9/11, writes David Dyssegaard Kallick of the Fiscal Policy Institute in The Nation. “In New York we saw program after program that heightened inequality rather than reducing it,” he writes. While New Orleans residents are correct to be wary of corruption, he cautions, “In New York the worst abuses happened right out in the open, with billions of dollars in public funds subsidizing huge companies and gentrifying neighborhoods. It would be a further tragedy if this were the result on the Gulf Coast.”

By Gail Robinson on October 14, 2005, 12:38 pm
In category: Land Use, Public Finance | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Taxes
October 14th, 2005

The New York Post writes today that Mayor Bloomberg’s recent plan for citywide economic development ignores one serious issue: taxes. The Post singles out the 18.5 percent raise in property taxes that the mayor installed in his first year in office, and says that when you “toss in high income taxes and various other city and state taxes, fees and regulations piled on in recent years … the city is arguably less business-friendly today than four years ago.” The editorial calls for tax and regulatory relief to be a part of any plan to attract business.

Newsday also has an editorial about taxes today, though it focuses on the federal level. It says New York’s taxpayers will become “collateral damage” if the recommendations of the president’s Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform become policy. Specifically, the panel called for lowering the cap on tax deductions for mortgages, bringing it to $300,000 from $1 million. This would be a hit to property owners in New York City, where million dollar apartments are the norm.

The panel’s recommendations are just a starting point for the debate, the Newsday observes. Its message for the congress about to pick up this debate: “Don’t dump on us.”

By Joshua Brustein on October 14, 2005, 9:56 am
In category: Public Finance | No Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed


Times Square Too Bland Even for Howard Johnson's
October 13th, 2005

For New York Times columnist Joyce Purnick the boarded up windows of Howard Johnson’s in Times Square are a sign that the area’s revival is now complete.

For decades, the restaurant – known for its mediocre food and orange and turquoise decor – was a safe haven for tourists and New Yorkers who were overwhelmed by the crime and sleaze of Broadway. Now, with the area now as safe as Disneyland, it is no longer needed.

“This, with due respect to Howard Johnson’s, is great news,” writes Purnick. “It says so much about New York City. To say goodbye to this coffee shop is not merely to say goodbye to a relic. It is to bid a final farewell to aspects of a city that exist no longer, and yay to that.”

By Mark Berkey-Gerard on October 13, 2005, 12:15 pm
In category: Gotham City | 3 Comments »

| More

RSS Feed RSS Feed



RSS Feed