|
|
Letters to the editor Confined in Chelsea I was glad to see Chris Lombardi’s in-depth coverage of the Bayview Correctional Facility. I visited Bayview, perhaps 25 years ago, hoping to start an on-premises library or reading room and maybe hook up services from the New York Public Library (NYPL). I didn’t get very far. Later I drove up to Bedford Hills [Correctional Facility], having read about a specific Puerto Rican mother who was separated from her young children for 16 years after being convicted of possession of a minor amount of marijuana. I wasn’t allowed to visit her. When I worked at NYPL, I went to Riker’s a couple of times in 1989 with one of the librarians who periodically supplied some of the prisoners with books. A colleague revealed that my assignment was “punishment”—for refusing to write a supervisor’s Christmas cards? I hope that, as more Chelsea residents realize that Bayview is part of the neighborhood, there will be opportunities for some of us who are not in the Junior League to volunteer there, or to facilitate the residents’ “outside” work experiences. I agree with your editorial but would go even further. Both regular and auxiliary police officers need our support. Consider that the recent salary increase passed by New York City Council Speaker Quinn and her colleagues of $22,000 per year is almost equal to the $25,000 starting salary of a new police officer or the cost of several bulletproof vests. Salary increases for civil servants and private-sector employees are based on the principles of merit, performance and quality of service, along with an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work. Most New Yorkers would agree that any police officer is worth more than any or all 51 NYC Councilmembers combined. The same is true for citizens who volunteer to serve as auxiliary police officers. Between the new New York City Councilmember base salary of $112,500—supplemented by lulus ranging from $4,000 to $28,000—their average salary for a part time job is now $125,000, or five times that of a rookie police officer! Why not use some of the several hundred million dollars worth of yearly member item pork barrel projects or the paper billion dollar budget surplus to pay police officers what they really deserve? These same funds could support bulletproof vests for all auxiliary police officers as well. Consider the case of lame-duck New York City Council Finance Committee Chairperson David Weprin, who is running for New York City Comptroller in 2009. Weprin currently earns a base pay of $112,000 per year and an $18,000 bonus for chairing the Council Finance Committee, totaling $130,000 salary for a part-time job. Weprin also has an outside income averaging $200,000 per year. Perhaps he, along with his colleagues, should leave some of their many useless New York City Council hearings or Pay for Play campaign fund-raisers. Let them walk in the shoes of others and put some time in on the beat and serve as auxiliary police officers. It might give them a real appreciation for what police officers and auxiliary officers do in protecting all New Yorkers. Based upon the 2000 census, average income for a New York City resident is only $41,000. Why not ask each Councilmember to donate part or all of their salary increases to police officers? Better yet, trade in all 51 Councilmembers for more and better-paid police and vests for auxiliary police. The Council does a great job mugging taxpayers. Next time you need a cop and none are available, call your local City Councilmember and see what they can do to help take a bite out of crime instead of your wallet! As a member of the community extremely disturbed by the proposed Washington Square Park “renovation,” I would like to thank Jonathan Greenberg for his passionate championing of our community interests and his coherent expose of the Appellate Division’s blunderous decision It is truly unsettling that the city would, once again, advance the interests of NYU above those of the residents (flattening the fountain equals more chairs at overcrowded NYU graduation). What a waste to spend tens of thousands of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars to move the fountain a couple of feet just to align it with the Arch. The Bloomberg administration’s decision-making abilities appear more and more disappointing. The ordeal I went through to move my car on that icy day when alternate side parking should have been suspended—but wasn’t—is still fresh in my mind. The closing of the newsstand at the corner of Thompson Street and West Third by the Department of Consumer Affairs for no rational reason is deeply troubling. The two lovely brothers who ran the newsstand have suddenly lost their livelihood and their ability to support their families (each with a wife and two small children), and they may be forced, due to the city’s arbitrary and capricious muscle-flex, to apply for welfare. No one can understand why. The brothers did no one harm and, in fact, provided valuable service to the community, the least of which was additional security for the neighborhood: Since the newsstand was forced to close after 80 years of continous operation, there have been two separate instances of criminal activity in the adjoining building. The city would be such a better place if only someone like Jonathan was mayor. I pray the Court of Appeals will see the merit of reviewing the First Department’s flawed and seemingly political decision. Unfortunately, justice sometimes takes an inordinate amount of energy, so keep popping those vitamins, Jonathan, and thank you again for all your hard work. Despite your reference to the Appellate Division’s “nearly fatal blow” overturning Justice Emily Jane Goodman’s Supreme Court ruling, the “renovation” of Washington Square Park is by no means a foregone conclusion. The city’s “renovation” is actually a full-scale radical redesign of the entire park that will alter its historical role as a gathering place for free speech and spontaneous performance. If this were a “renovation” there would not be continued widespread community opposition in the form of multiple petitions and surveys, large-scale attendance at community and city agency meetings and multiple lawsuits that remain pending against the Parks Department for failing to conduct the proper environmental review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and City Environmental Quality Review before approving the plan. Commissioners Benepe and Castro have repeatedly said that installing a high fence around the park, reducing the size of the fountain plaza, removing approximately 32 healthy trees in the first phase of the three-phase plan alone and aligning the fountain with the arch will not alter the nature of the park or impact our constitutional rights. They also repeatedly deny plans for a conservancy, even though documents acquired from their own department discuss plans for a conservancy. Moreover on Sun., March 11, a police officer was in Washington Square Park interrupting spontaneous performers, with a copy of park regulations in hand. It is extremely telling that, in front of these writers, he was speaking with individuals who were doing exactly what they have done in the park on and off for more than 30 years. In fact, the present Washington Square Park design works. And while the city’s refusal to grant permits in Sheeps Meadow is being challenged in court, Washington Square Park’s role is crucial as a gathering place. Parks has also insisted that the changes will have no environmental impact. However, bulldozing and leveling the entire park will endanger wildlife and its habitat, and destroy the mature trees that provide the natural canopy that protects park users from heat and the sun’s rays. Finally, due to our lawsuit (ECO v. City of New York, Index No. 07-102194), no construction will occur in Washington Square Park without at least a 50-day notice.
|
View our previous issues >our latest family addition:
|
|
Chelsea Now is published by |
Written permission of the publisher must be obtainedbefore any of the contents |
