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