David Weprin: Against Congestion Charging Because It Hurts The Outer Boroughs; Most Pols Afraid To Take Opinion On Matter

From NY Times ("Bigger Push for Charging Drivers Who Use the Busiest Streets" by William Neuman, November 24, 2006):

One of the most outspoken opponents of congestion pricing in New York has been David I. Weprin, a City Council member who represents some neighborhoods in eastern Queens that are far from subway lines and where residents with jobs in Manhattan are more likely to drive to work.

He said congestion pricing amounted to an unfair tax on residents in those areas, many of whom can ill afford it.

“The potential for causing hardship to people who rely on their cars in boroughs other than Manhattan is too great to try to implement congestion pricing at this point,” Mr. Weprin said.

In response, advocates said revenue from a congestion pricing program should be reserved for public transportation improvements that would help the outer boroughs. For instance, if new or faster bus routes could bring residents into Manhattan or to subway stations more efficiently, they may be more willing to forgo driving. That would also help answer critics who have said congestion pricing is nothing more than a new tax that would go straight into the city’s general budget.

Most of all, the advocates of congestion pricing have their eyes on the long-term strategic plan for the city being prepared by Deputy Mayor Daniel L. Doctoroff. The plan is a response to predictions that the city will add one million residents by 2025, and figuring out how to keep people and vehicles moving around an ever more crowded city will be an important part of it. The activists hope that it will include a recommendation for some form of congestion pricing.

Mr. Doctoroff refused to talk about what the plan would include, but he said he was aware that traffic is a concern.

“It’s clear the level of congestion is an inhibitor to growth,” Mr. Doctoroff said. “We believe that smart growth is good, and therefore we need to provide additional capacity on every mode of transportation.” That, he said, includes city streets, and he added, “How we do that, that’s what we’re thinking through now.”

I can't say I know what the scope should be, or how high the charges, but it seems to me that congestion charging makes sense. If billions of dollars per year is being lost in traffic jams due to unncessarily burned fuel and wasted labor time, why not?

But it's hard not to be sensitive to Weprin's objection. Considering the vast majority of the city doesn't live in Manhattan, it really is high time to consider that the outer boroughs of New York City could really use improved subway service. If you live in Brooklyn and work in The Bronx, you probbaly have to drive. If you live in Queens, you probably have to drive unless you're lucky enough to live near a subway line. And if you live or work in Staten Island, you have to often drive no matter what.

Wasteful Underage Drinking Summit

With all the talk in recent months of alcohol causing so many problems in New York City (see my post "Attacking the Nightlife Industry"), a (snicker) sobering trend has begun Upstate.

Apparently, Central New York, an ill-defined region of what is probably the state with the loosest cultural identify in the entire United States, is having major problems with underage drinking. News 10 has the grim details ("Underage Drinking Summit," October 27, 2006, Cait McVey):

Underage drinking is a reality for most teenagers today, and the consequences can be serious. Recently, there have been several teen fatalities due to drunk driving in the Central New York area. In an effort to curb the problem, the group Prevention Network is holding an Underage Drinking Summit. Thursday's presentation was for teens and their parents.

So what the solution to this quagmire? Talk to your kids? Well, sort of. Teach your kids how to drink responsibly? No!

Actually, there was an ever-so-small snippet of wisdom at the bottom of this article:

Although the teenage years are known as a time when kids tune their parents out, teens we spoke with said they are listening, and they appreciate mom and dad's involvement.

"You act like you're ignoring them, but you're subconsciously listening," Chittenago High School student Rachael Gerow said.

Wait, that wasn't it. But that did lead into it:

"They always say if there's a need or a ride that's needed or I need a ride home somehow to give them a call. They're always supportive," said Chittenago High School student Scott Rutledge.

(I find it very amusing that the article was covering up the implication that this high schooler's parents told him if he had a drink he should call them so they could pick him up.)

That's right. If you have kids who are old enough to drink (and by old enough, I don't mean legally old enough—I mean they're probably old enough to be curious enough to sneak a bottle out of your liquor cabinet when you're not looking), it is your responsibility to see to it that they do it safely. So, if they entertain their curiosity, they shouldn't have to be afraid to call you if they need help. Calling somebody when you've had too much to drink is a sign of responsibility.

As a side note, it's very interesting that journalistic impartiality flies out the window when alcohol is being discussed:

During his presentation, Creagh also told parents that driving isn't the only danger teens face when drinking. He said alcohol can be a factor in many acts of sexual assault and violence...yet another reason to tell your teen to stay sober.

Yet another reason? How many reasons are there? The general rationale seems to be that we intoxication is immoral, and that drinking leads to intoxication. Meanwhile, young people should be protected from immorality. Therefore, young people should be protected from drinking. Of course, this ignores the reality that many young people are surrounded by images, and even witness first-hand, people drinking and enjoying themselves—with no ill consequences. I know I've had plenty of drinks in my time—probably too many sometimes—and have never once even considered committing a sexual assault or any other violent act. And I've met many other drinkers for whom I could safely say the same.

Many authority figures in this state and country seem to overlook the absurdity of saying to somebody who is by most measures legally recognized as an adult—and many high school seniors fit into this category—that you should do as I say, not as I do. If you're 18 and in high school, you likely have an older brother or sister who is 21 and legally allowed to drink in public. As a matter of fact, you very likely spend a lot of time with that person.

The good news for residents of New York State is that parents actually at least have some say in how their children consume alcohol. There's still enough liberty in the matter to let a parent allow a child to drink at home. I hope they take advantage of the opportunity to teach them to drink responsibly, so they don't learn in their dorm rooms or leaning over a frat house toilet.

Long Island: Crime in the Suburbs

Newsday has an interesting history of crime on Long Island posted on their web site ("Crime in the Suburbs: A deadly parade of violence brings pain to peaceful neighborhoods" by Tom Demoretcky):

For the postwar generation of baby boomers and their parents, Long Island was seen largely as a refuge, away from the big city and, of course, away from crime. "I never thought anything like that would happen here," reporters covering crimes would often hear. "That's why we left the city."

But in the past 25 years, the quiet suburbs have spawned enough murder and mayhem to keep both prosecutors and movie-of-the-week producers busy. From Colin Ferguson's horrific slaughter of commuters on the Long Island Rail Road to the antics of Joey Buttafuoco and Amy Fisher, local crime has often become national news -- and network entertainment.

More here.

Buffalo News Report on the Spitzer-Faso Debate

John Faso (R) made some fair points in his debate with Elliot Spitzer (D), but he seems to be a little desperate at this point (Matthew Spina; "Faso, Spitzer talk taxes, economy," The Buffalo News; October, 13, 2006). On one hand he pointed out:

"We are losing thousands of young people, leaving Long Island, leaving upstate," Faso said in a debate televised statewide from the Buffalo studios of public station WNED-TV. "Seniors leaving because they can't afford the school taxes. Others leaving because they are going to flee the estate tax. And unless we recognize that that's the fundamental competitive challenge we face, we are not going to keep people and jobs in New York."

On the other, he had to resort to attacking Spitzer's character in some rather unfair ways:

"Higher taxes under him," Faso continued. "Lower taxes under me."

For his part, Spitzer often corrected Faso but never showed the anger Faso said he possesses. At one point, Faso said Spitzer would resort to "bluster and intimidation" to get his way as attorney general when his office prosecuted corporate fraud.

"Well, once again Mr. Faso wants to run against a mythology," Spitzer responded. "Perhaps he believes if he repeats something often enough, he can persuade himself it's true.

"I have said clear as day to the public, "We will not raise taxes. We will cut them.' I believe in smaller government, smarter government. Mr. Faso is the one described by his own party leadership as an Albany insider."

Stewart Airport

Bob Baird of The Journal News talks about the possibility of making Stewart Airport a "fourth major airport" for the New York metropolitan region ("A fourth major airport?," October 5, 2006). He also talks about ancillary mass transit potential:

Even back in the Quonset hut days, there was talk of a direct rail connection to help attract some of the Rockland, Bergen and even Westchester travelers away from the other jetports and make Stewart a more attractive departure point for them.

For a long time, those who support restoration of passenger service on the old West Shore rail line argued that it could eventually make a connection to Stewart — perhaps even a high-speed connection.

But now, with mass transit virtually assured to be a component of a new Tappan Zee Bridge project, it may be commuter rail across the Hudson that provides that connection.

Just this week, Al Samuels, president of the Rockland Business Association and Nyack architect Jan Degenshein visited the newspaper to make a case for two-way commuter rail as the favored mass transit option. Both say that the ability of New York City residents to reach employment in Rockland is just as important — maybe more so — than providing a one-seat ride to Manhattan for Rockland residents.

Having that reverse commute option, they argue, would bring in the work force that's needed to fuel the next round of economic development here. It would fill a staffing need expressed by companies that would like to relocate to Rockland and for those that consider leaving because they can't find the help they need.

But both business leaders also see commuter rail across the Tappan Zee possibly providing a more direct rail link to Stewart than is available now.

At the AirTran announcement Tuesday, Vanderhoef called Stewart the "linchpin" for the future of the Hudson Valley. If that's true, from this vantage point, that would make frequent, quick and dependable rail service essential. Such a "train to the plane" could make Stewart the airport of choice for Rockland, Bergen, Westchester and even parts of New York City.

The old chicken-and-egg question remains. Will it be Stewart's need that generates support for the rail line or will it be rail access that prompts the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to designate Stewart as New York's fourth major airport?

No one can crystal-ball that one as yet. But with Orange and Sullivan counties growing rapidly and the three other airports projected to max out their capacity in about 15 years, the future of Stewart will have to come into focus soon.

Perhaps as much as the decision on a Tappan Zee Bridge mass transit option, Rockland's future — in terms of transportation options, economic development and land use — may hinge on decisions related to Stewart that have been a quarter-century in coming.

New Traffic Plan for Times Square: Does It Go Far Enough or Too Far?

A new traffic plan, emphasizing pedestrian space, is coming to Times Square. The plan includes wider sidewalks and diversion of traffic from Seventh Avenue to Broadway. "Urban visionary" Enrique Penalosa doesn't think the plan goes far enough ("New Traffic Plan In Times Square Favors Pedestrians," NY1, October 12, 2006):

some are calling for more radical solutions to traffic, among them, Enrique Penalosa, widely considered an urban visionary, who as mayor of Bogota, Colombia, revolutionized transportation there.

He says the key is getting people out of their cars, by creating quality pedestrian space.

"We have to choose between a city that is friendlier to cars, or friendlier to people," said Penalosa.

Penalosa advocates restricting car use, and cutting down on curbside parking, although he did not discuss the ramifications, like say, the impact on businesses or city revenues. Some changes, he says, could even be put to public referendum.

"In Manhattan, they close many streets for markets," said Penalosa. “But I dream of Manhattan, making Broadway pedestrian, permanently."

Among his other ideas, is recreating 42nd Street as a pedestrian corridor, with a tramway.

"We are beyond just patchwork solutions,” said Stringer. “What we really have to talk about is the overall transportation network that is on the brink of collapse."

For now, advocates of more radical change will have to settle for smaller steps, like the changes here in Times Square, which take effect November 4th, and will be evaluated by the city after six months.

Attacking the Nightlife Industry

One of the city's most robust industries is entertainment, specifically nightlife. According to The New York Times, this should be stunted along with many of our other economic activities under the guise of "Improving the Quality of Nightlife" (editorial, October 8, 2006). Here are some of the details of the Times' proposals:

• "The police would surely get better cooperation from the clubs if the city had greater say over whether the owners could keep their licenses."
• "It needs to take a close look at the licensing process and the density problem not just in New York City but in Syracuse, Buffalo and other places as well. And it must make the licensing process perfectly transparent, so that everyone can see where all the licenses, actual and proposed, are located on the map. (In some places, that will mean bypassing local political cliques who keep this to themselves.)"
• "[T]he authority should devise a strategy for cutting back the number of licenses in areas that are deemed to be overly saturated. When owners close down or give up a license in an area troubled by club noise and violence, the liquor authority should be able to retire the license rather than giving it to a new applicant."

First of all, I'm not so bothered by a democratic process that ends up restricting nightlife. I think it's a bad idea, because nightlife is a healthy sector of the economy, and certainly plays a huge role in making New York a livable 24-hour city.

However, there is no reason a state bureaucracy should have any say in the matter under and circumstances. They shouldn't even have the power to grant licenses to an establishment; this power should be local, and a locality should have the right to simply not even require a license if it pleases. There is no reason, under any circumstances, by any stretch of the imagine, for the state to be involved in granting liquor licenses to establishments in New York City, Buffalo, Syracuse, or anywhere else. These matters should be left to village, city, and county governments.

The state liquor control board, if it isn't abolished outright, should have a single goal: making sure that liquor is safe to drink, and not bathtub moonshine. There is no reason for the state to be wasting its money on any other project.

As for violent bouncers, that shouldn't be a problem unique to the alcohol business. Bouncers who commit violent acts should be treated the same way as mall security guards who commit violent acts.

And as far as underage drinking goes, it's time to work with the state to repeal that policy of preventing young adults from drinking. Young adults are going to drink anyway, and there should be safe places for them to drink, so they don't binge drink with a powerful substance that they have little to no control over.

City Population Estimate Revised Upwards

According to recent news reports, the city's population estimate has been upwardly revised by the U.S. Census Bureau to 8,213,839. This is after a successful challenge by the city government. The reasoning and methodology is reported by Newsday ("Big Apple grows: 8.2 million people, revised after census dispute," October 3, 2006):

The planning department contends thousands of New Yorkers are not counted by the Census Bureau in its annual population estimates, which are created by monitoring births, deaths and migration information. The estimates are separate from the official census population count conducted every 10 years.

The annual estimates draw migration information from tax returns, a method city planners say doesn't work for New York because it misses thousands of immigrants, students and other new residents who don't immediately file those documents.

"It falls far short," said Joe Salvo, director of the planning department's population division.

With that in mind, Salvo and his staff compile their own figure, which uses housing data such as construction permits, certificates of occupancy and utility records. In their three successful challenges since the 2000 census, they have discovered more than 205,000 additional residents.

The procedure is widely accepted by demographers and other experts, including the Census Bureau, which sent a letter to Mayor Michael Bloomberg saying the city's help was appreciated.
...
[Mayor Michael] Bloomberg said in a statement that a more precise count is crucial because it affects state and federal funding for programs including affordable housing and low-income housing tax credits. He said it paints a more accurate picture of the city, which is estimated to reach a population of 9 million by 2025 or 2030.

"The increase is also a resounding statement of confidence from the thousands of people who continue to come to New York City from other states and countries for the opportunity and diversity we offer," he said.

From the Village Voice Power Plays Blog ("Size Matters: Feds Admit NYC's Enormity," Murphy, Jarrett; October 3, 2006), with links from that blog included:

The Census Bureau updates its decennial census every year by looking at birth and death rates in a city, as well as figures on the migration of people in or out of that jurisdiction. City Planning argued that the figures on migration aren’t reliable. It suggested an alternative way of counting, using occupancy rates and a count of housing units of different sizes. The Census Bureau bowed to City Planning's wisdom (as it has for three straight years now, for a cumulative increase of 163,712 bodies.)

It's cause to celebrate when the entire city of Los Angeles would have to clone itself and merge with Oklahoma City to steal the No. 1 spot, especially when you think about the years when New York was bleeding people. But while Mayor Bloomberg is quick to tout the city's gain of 200,000 people since April 2000, getting big has its problems. One is how city services keep up with increased demand. Right now, New York has fewer cops and firefighters than it did five years ago, and while the administration says the headcount is doing more with less, the bitch from the front lines is that it doesn't add up.

Additional resources:

• Bloomberg: "New York Population Revised To Record 8.2 Million," Oct. 3, 2006

FBI Stats Show New York Safest City In 2005; Statewide Violent Crime Up A Little

From KWTX ("New York Safest; Dallas Most Dangerous," September 19, 2006):

FBI statistics show Dallas had the highest crime rate of any of the nation's top largest cities last year.

The FBI Uniform Crime Report found about one crime was reported in Dallas last year for every 12 people.

New York remained the safest of the nation's ten largest cities in 2005, with about one crime reported for every 37 people.

San Jose was the second safest, followed by Los Angeles, San Diego, Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston, San Antonio, Phoenix and Dallas.

The national figures showed that violent crime rose 2.3 percent last year, the first increase since 2001.

And the ten largest cities in order of safety from the above link:

1. New York: one crime per 37.38 residents.
2. San Jose, Calif.: one crime per 34.46 residents.
3. Los Angeles: one crime per 25.97 residents.
4. San Diego: one crime per 24.09 residents.
5. Chicago: one crime per 21.9 residents.
6. Philadelphia: one crime per 17.96 residents.
7. Houston: one crime per 14.17 residents.
8. San Antonio: one crime per 14.12 residents.
9. Phoenix: one crime per 14.10 residents.
10. Dallas: one crime per 11.79 residents.

On a bad note, violent crime around the state increased a little this past year. However, overall, the state crime rate is down a bit too ("New York State crime rate down," September 18, 2006):

The state's overall crime rate has dropped once again, although there was a slight increase in violent crimes. According to the 2005 FBI report, violent crime was up a little more than one percent last year.

That reflects similar numbers for the rest of the country. Officials from Governor Pataki's office say an increase in gun crimes led to the bump in the overall violent-crime rate.

But the governor says he's already boosted money for gun violence prevention by $16 million for this year.

The crime ratea for 2005 was up a little nationally. Information from the FBI:

• Crime in the United States 2005

FOX23 in Albany: "Canal Businesses Took Hit from June Flooding"

Flooding damaged Erie Canal boating business this summer. From the AP via Fox News ("Canal Businesses Took Hit from June Flooding," loaded Sept. 19, 2006):

(Utica, N.Y.) AP -- Too much water wasn't a good thing this year for the New York state canal system.

The severe flooding that hit parts of upstate New York in late June closed sections of the Erie Canal for two weeks at the height of the summer boating season. That put a dent in the bottom line for many of the canalside businesses that rely on boaters for much of their summertime trade.

According to state officials, the canal locks handled 80,000 boat passages from late April through early August last year. During the same period this year, that number was about 57,000.

Waterway commuting

An old saying goes that every great city has its river. This may be true, but many aren't using them very much anymore, as cities concentrate more on tertiery services and less on shipping and industry. Jennifer Saranow of The Wall Street Journal wrote an article ("Cities encourage commuters to take to the water," September 5, 2006) about the expansion of commuting services by waterways, which has gotten some attention from the federal government.

According to the article, "At the federal level, the latest transportation bill authorized more funding for ferries than the previous bill - $335 million over five years, up from $220 million in the previous bill."

The New York metropolitan area has seen the following:

Besides the new water-transportation options, existing services in cities from New York to Seattle are expanding and trying to spur ridership. Earlier this year, the privately owned New York Water Taxi, which serves commuters crossing the East River with yellow taxilike boats, started forming partnerships with new apartment developments and giving new tenants discounts and free passes. Another private ferry operator NY Waterway, with 18 local routes, painted two of its ferries last month to resemble yachts and plans to put the finish on all 34 ships it operates. In August, Washington State Ferries started testing letting riders buy tickets online and is working on enabling monthly pass holders to get fees automatically downloaded to pass cards each month.

...

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey estimates that there are about 37,000 daily weekday trips across 22 routes in the area, up from about 33,000 trips daily on 14 routes before the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks. The agency, which has started working on a study that could lead to a regional ferry plan, predicts growth of 3 percent to 5 percent over the next few years, with ferry service set to be launched between Yonkers, N.Y., and Manhattan in the spring and from Edgewater, N.J., to lower Manhattan later this year.

...

NJ Transit in New Jersey has also over the past year adjusted some of its commuter-bus routes so they link up better to ferries going to New York.

...

Ferries also can serve as an important form of backup transportation, for instance, during blackouts or after terrorist attacks. After Sept. 11, 2001, large numbers of people were evacuated from lower Manhattan in boats and extra ferry service in the area until late 2003 helped to make up for shuttered commuter-train service.

The drawbacks? Ferries generally depend on gasoline, which is getting expensive. "[O]n June 1, NY Waterway raised some prices 25 cents to $1 per ride depending on the route," Saranow wrote. "A one-way ticket from Weehawken, N.J., to midtown Manhattan, for instance, went up 25 cents to $6 and a monthly pass went up to $211 from $200. In contrast, to get from Weehawken to Manhattan by rail would cost about $3.25 per ride and about $93 a month, but would include a train transfer in Hoboken, according to NJ Transit. The monthly NY Waterway fare from Belford, N.J., rose to $572 from $550. To get a train from the area to Manhattan costs $297 per month.

AMD Coming to Albany

Advanced Micro Devices is opening a plant in New York's Capital Region. According to Times-Union interviews with locals in Austin, Texas, where the bulk of AMD's operations are, it's been a good corporate citizen ("A city without limits for AMD," Rulison, Larry; Albany Times-Union, September 17, 2006):

Although some in Austin have been upset by the construction of AMD's new campus -- the 59-acre site is located atop a sensitive aquifer -- others are happy the company is investing money in the city and solidifying its operations here. They praise AMD for its economic impact and support of the city's cultural and social welfare institutions.

Locals say New York's Capital Region should expect similar corporate involvement when AMD ultimately decides to build a chip fab here.

"You are very fortunate that AMD is coming to Albany," said Brewster McCracken, an Austin City Council member who says AMD is the city's largest user of renewable energy and one of the largest supporters of local nonprofits. "They're going to be a major contributor to your community."

New York Sun: "Realign Amtrak"

The New York Sun, a conservative city-based paper, published an op-ed making the case for privatizing Amtrak ("Realign, Amtrak," Joseph Vranich, September 15, 2006):

Today the Senate will vote on whether to give Amtrak a record $1.6 billion in subsidies for next year and still more for a loan bailout. This is wrong. It's past time for someone in Congress to apply the brakes to the run-away Amtrak train

The bill at issue, promoted by Senators Lott, Clinton, and Schumer, aims to reform Amtrak. But it is only a pretend reform. One problem is that it prohibits competition against Amtrak's monopoly by private contractors who have taken over and improved trains in Europe, Australia and South America and won contests against Amtrak to run commuter trains in Boston, Los Angeles and San Diego. The bill allows domestic freight railroads to bid on any one Amtrak route in 2008, but freight lines like Union Pacific and CSX have made it clear they have no interest in doing so. Hence, the Senate bill thumbs its nose at innovative solutions that 56 nations have applied to their Amtrak-like problems.

A transportation expert at the Heritage Foundation, Ron Utt, hits the nail on the head when he notes that the proposals taken as a whole fall short of real reforms: "It is replete with directives, alterations, restructurings, subsidies, studies, reports, metrics, five-year plans, transitions, and other forms of top-down micromanagement designed to create the impression that spinning wheels represent forward movement."

Part of the case Vranich makes is that cutting under-used routes would free up resources for Amtrak to concentrate on useful routes, most notably the Northeast Corridor between Washington, D.C., and Boston.

He largely models a proposed privatization scheme on the British privatization of railroads in the 1980s.

The Traffic Problem (Again)

Carolyn Curiel wrote an interesting op-ed—"Hey! Hey! I’m Walking Here! — How New York (and Other Big Cities) Should Solve the Traffic Problem"—in The New York Times about the crippling effects of traffic in New York City and the metropolitan area.

Key problems mentioned in the article are:

• trucks in Queens
• gridlock in Manhattan, The Bronx, and Staten Island
• low-income people frequently have the longest commutes, often by car

Curiel mentions tolling bridges and congestion charges as ways out of the mess.

Sadly, many of the problems won't be solved this way. Much of the traffic comes from the suburbs. While much of the region is served by local bus service and commuter rail service, an interesting oversight in planning is how to best expand and utilize mass transit.

There are two separate solutions, and ideally both need to be implemented.

PATH Extensions
The first solution requires cooperation with suburban counties. While expensive, this solution might really be the expansion of the PATH trains to other points in the region. Among densely-populated places lacking heavy rail mass transit:

• The borough of Staten Island
  
• Bergen County, New Jersey
• Paterson, New Jersey
• Yonkers, New York (so immediately north of The Bronx that it's often confused as part of the city)
• New Rochelle, New York
  
• Long Island

These are all densely populated centers nearly or completely devoid of regular, speedy mass transit service. Southern Westchester has suburban commuter lines, as does much of New Jersey and Long Island.

Nobody wants to build mass transit anymore, but it's clearly the best solution. The region along the Hudson River in New Jersey has become densely populated enough that it would be ideal for an underground PATH four-track line mirroring the subway trunk lines in Manhattan. With two new cross-river tunnels built, one to Midtown and one to The Bronx, that region of New Jersey could potentially see immense growth.

A four-track tunnel under the Hudson River to The Bronx from somewhere north of Fort Lee, New Jersey, where population density decreases, could allow the trunk line to continue to Stewart Airport, which admittedly requires yet another crossing in the Hudson Valley. This has the benefit, however, of adding new mass transit options to Yonkers and other parts of the the Hudson Valley where none exist. Such options could be a boon to towns like Beacon and Newburgh. Keeping the service as a four-track trunk line allows for complementary local and express service between Manhattan and the distant airport, while benefitting many communities inbetween. The trunk line could be fed by the following interstate feeder services:

1. a two-track spur from Fort Lee to Paterson via local communities in New Jersey. This would provide direct access to Midtown Manhattan from these communties.
2. a two-track spur south from Jersey City to Staten Island via Bayonne. This would complement present PATH service and the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail service, as well as any planned Staten Island light rail projects.
3. a two-track across The Bronx or Yonkers to places like Rye and New Rochelle. This would provide feeder service to the main trunk line and to the New York City Subway's present spurs in The Bronx that feed Manhattan trunk lines.
   

Another major component of PATH expansion would be to the three airpirts already in the region. A small expansion is all it takes to bring PATH to Newark Airport. A longer expansion to Kennedy Airport has the benefit of giving downtown Brooklyn access to the suburbs, yet is already somewhat on the table politically as a Long Island Rail Road expansion. Thirdly, there is no mass transit service except by bus to LaGuardia Airport.

Beltway Service On The Subways
The other way to improve transit in the city is entirely local, and should be the city's responsibility. The outer boroughs, except a part of Brooklyn and Queens, lack any sort of cross-town mass transit service. Most of the subways feed into Manhattan. The A Train could be expanded across The Bronx, and perhaps even under the East River to LaGuardia. Beltway service further out in Brooklyn and Queens is sorely missing.

New York Colleges to Link Through Web Port

From The Business Council of New York State:

New York’s public and private colleges have joined together to create a Web site that will foster partnerships between business and approximately 175 of New York's higher education institutions.

The Web site will help businesses contact institutions and researchers working on specific topics.

The Web site, which is expected to go live in early 2007, will be “a fast, relevant online resource to support efforts to connect, and grow industry clusters, emerging businesses, and non-profit organizations,” according to a press release from the State University of New York (SUNY) and the Commission on Independent Colleges and Universities (CICU).

For more information, see "New York's colleges connect through 'Web portal'."

New World Trade Center Complex Plans Unveiled

See "New Ground Zero designs unveiled" from the BBC.

Albany Times Union Goes After Bruno

The Albany Times-Union ("Upstate reality," September 7, 2006) had some harsh words for New York State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno:

Last Friday, on the day Mr. Faso was again in the news for challenging Mr. Spitzer's air travel, this time for using a luxury jet owned by a gambling lobbyist, Sen. Bruno was getting most of the attention as he scolded Mr. Faso for suggesting that upstate cities are "withering on the vine" and in a "death spiral." Upstate has its problems, Mr. Bruno said during an interview on a local radio station, but "I want to hear positives; I don't want to hear negatives."

Talk about being in denial. Things are bad upstate, even if Mr. Bruno doesn't want to hear about it. How bad? Bad enough for Eliot Spitzer to have compared upstate to Appalachia earlier in the campaign, only to stand corrected -- Appalachia is doing better than upstate. And bad enough that any candidate who cares about his or her credibility will acknowledge these grim facts.

Mr. Faso has his own problems, to be sure. More recently, he was attacked for using a contributor's aircraft, even as he deplored Mr. Spitzer's air travel. But that aside, Mr. Faso clearly wants to take the gloves off and go after his opponent. If only Sen. Bruno would take off his rose-colored glasses -- and leave them off.

It's hard to disagree with assessment. It's hard to find an Upstate city that has done even modestly well over the past half century. Utica has lost more than 40% of its population since 1940 (see the population chart on WikiPedia, or confirm the figures for yourself on this site from the Census Bureau). Similar stories can be told of the other formerly large cities of the region: Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, and even humble Albany (which once had a population well in excess of 100,000). Even more indicative of decline, the suburbs of those cities are hardly booming, even if some modest growth has at times occurred.

This was once the region with arguably the most successful, advanced economy the world had even known. The Times-Union is right: something is seriously wrong, and Bruno probably doesn't even understand what.

The Links:

• Joseph Bruno
• WikiPedia Entry
• Personal homepage
  
• Elliot Spitzer
• WikiPedia entry
  
• Campaign homepage
• John Faso
• WikiPedia entry
  
• Campaign homepage
  

NY Times: Liquor-License Freeze Enacted in N.Y.

According to The New York Times ("Liquor-License Freeze Enacted in N.Y.," September 7, 2006):

The state liquor board yesterday imposed an immediate four-month freeze on approving liquor licenses for areas of New York City that already have three or more license holders within 500 feet of each other.

The unanimous action by the New York State Liquor Authority, which was immediately denounced by a trade group of city nightclubs, follows the deaths this year of two young women. They were killed after drinking heavily at nightspots in SoHo and Chelsea.

This, of course, serves no useful public purpose whatsoever, and in the end hurts what may actually be one of the city's fastest growing economic sectors.

Nevermind that it hurts entrepreneurial individuals as well:

Robert Bookman, a lawyer for the New York Nightlife Association, a trade group of 125 bars and nightclubs, mainly in Manhattan, said the action was unfair. It has “thrown the industry into chaos within the last few hours,” he said.

Mr. Bookman added, “If I have my lifetime savings wrapped up in a place that I’m prepared to open Oct. 1 and now I can’t get a license until January, how am I going to pay $30,000 in monthly rent and not be able to open?”

The New York Times points out that there have been a few shocking murders in Manhattan in the past few months after young women left bars or clubs and got attacked by bouncers. The city, of course, enacted legislation to deal with that problem:

Last month, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg signed legislation that made it easier for the city to shut down establishments that fail to conduct background checks of security workers.

Come to think about it, that sounds like the solution: legislation that attacks the problem.

Imette St. Guillen, killed in February, and Jennifer Moore, who was 18 when she was killed in July, were not killed because liquor licenses were being issued to clubs within 500 feet of each other.

More information: "Liquor Licenses"

Previous Posts

I launched this blog to deal with my musings concerning New York State and New York City politics and problems.

These are previous posts from my personal blog concerning New York State:

• More On How F**ked Up Upstate NY Is - And Why It Hurts Downstate
• Concerning a NY Times Article on Buffalo
• Oppression Tower
• Gas Tax
• Cameras, Cameras, Everywhere
• Drivers
• Feds screw NYC and Washington, D.C.
• Pataki lowers gas prices
• Picking On Young Adults
  
• Another Reason Republicans Love Prisons: Gerrymandering
• Liquor licenses