Every day we witness people taking other people to court. Recently, there was a settlement to the family of a young boy, a Little League pitcher, who was severely injured when he was struck by a line-drive baseball to his chest. Ultimately, he became brain damaged after he went into cardiac arrest as there was a lack of oxygen to his brain. It’s very sad. And yet, his parent’s next step? A lawsuit! They sued Louisville Slugger, the bat manufacturer, Sports Authority, the retailer that sold the bat, and the Little League Baseball Association for damages. I’m not sure why they didn’t sue the baseball manufacturer, or the family of the boy who hit the ball, or the coach who taught the pitcher how to pitch? While the family’s suffering is substantial and will remain forever, this was a freak occurrence that is an inherent risk of the game.
In fact, with the exception of board games, most physical games assume some type of risk and of course, the extreme result may be permanent injury and even death. But everybody settled this suit for $14 million to make this go away. Do you think this is acceptable? Does it really “go away?” It doesn’t seem so. It isn’t the bat’s fault, or the retailers fault for selling the bat, and even Little League’s fault for sponsoring the game, is it? It’s a freak accident. Unfortunately it happened. As we all know, stuff happens! Does it really warrant a lawsuit? Regardless, these three victims felt it would be easier to settle than to possibly lose what, a $50 million settlement down the line?
Whenever a politician wants (needs?) publicity, they will announce a law they have either sponsored or co-sponsored. Usually it is for something inane or so specific, it will never “fly”. Invaribly, we could probably do without it with no negative impact. Case in point, NYS Assemblywoman Amy Paulin’s recent law allowing bicyclists a three foot safety berth when an automobile/truck passes a biker. It’s a terrific feel-good law and that’s it. In another example, NYS Senators David Carlucci and NYS Assemblywoman Sandy Galef announced their support for a bill to ban smoking at playgrounds. While we don't think adults, parents or care-givers should be smoking at playgrounds, its another feel-good law. It can’t be enforced by police, in fact, unless we post cops to monitor playgrounds, why bother? Because it feels good. And, what will the fine be? We all know that smokers smoke and most never stop. We also know that discouraging and disgusting pictures of smoking patients, higher prices, taxes, etc., don’t work to force smokers to quit. So what makes these two legislators believe this law will stop smoking in playgrounds? Just like the three-foot berth Paulin’s law provides bikers, it’ll never be enforced. In the end, they got your publicity.
There are laws on the books for campaign finance money and how often the candidates must file financial reports for a candidate’s campaign. It’s an incredible tedious, time consuming and non-productive tasks for a campaign finance officer or treasurer. Most candidates honestly try to keep up with the demands saddled onto them through legal requirements. These laws were designed to “protect” the public from the abuses that have been perpetrated upon them by previous candidates and politicians. In fact, the way campaign finance money can be spent is also very regulated. The days of old, where the candidates would use up their money by paying themselves and others for “services” rendered are now history. Or so you’d think! Good people donate their hard earned money to try to get their candidate in and the candidate’s abuse of those funds is how they’re thanked. Then there are those who donate for what they can get out of the candidate. And it seems like this type of corruption is happening more frequently. Simply, it all stinks!
Another daily paper’s front page, above the fold story, has the headline, “Judge rejects MTA payroll tax”. To most of you, it doesn’t mean anything. But to the countless businesses located in Westchester, and twelve other counties and municipalities), this tax of 34¢ for every $100 of payroll paid out to employees has illegally garnered over $1.2 billion for them! It’s bad enough that the MTA raises ticket prices every year to those who use their antiquated and poorly performing systems, but to start taxing people outside of the area because their track goes into a town or county is absurd. It’s the embodiment of taxation without representation.
At every turn, it seems our elected officials forget why the ran for office and for whom they work for. Here’s a clue, to represent us, not you! It has to change, but probably won't. As long as the populace remains lazy, uninvolved and cavalier about who they blindly pull the lever for, we will continue to get what we deserve.
Friday, August 24, 2012
Sunday, January 15, 2012
David & Goliath: Astorino Fights Back
If you follow the local lamestream media, and for that matter a select few of the “big guys”, you've seen the anti-Astorino barrage of opininorials and pro-HUD, pro-affordable housing and pro-big government intrusion into our lives regarding any and all affordable housing. Specifically, with the ill-settled federal housing settlement the County agreed to before County Executive Andrew Spano left office.
The misnomer of “affordable” housing is just that. It’s a ploy that was developed by those in the not-for-profit housing game to garner support for their well paid businesses and employees under the guise of a struggling “little guy”. The reality is that it is nothing so noble and just subsidized housing, formerly called welfare housing. Examples of a few of these known companies might be Westhab and Habitat For Humanity (although HFH has a bit of a different angle). What they do is mask their real purpose: developers hiding behind the not-for-profit moniker to pretend to be a caring and helping organization. The reality is they are developers who have found a loophole that would put the brakes on anybody else’s projects and exploited it for their own benefit. Notice I didn’t say exploited for their own profit? That’s the only difference. They will make sure their books show a break-even point and not a profit – all while paying their management and employees very nice salaries. Not for profit indeed!
The federal housing monitor tried to flex his federal muscles to intimidate Westchester into complying with mandates that simply weren’t part of the agreement former County Executive Andrew Spano caved in to. When I ran for County Legislator, I publicly stated I was against this agreement for several reasons, as did others. If you reviewed the 37 pages settlement agreement when it was proposed, the vagueness of the document should have precluded any agreement. We should have gone to court to fight it. However, for those who profess in a belief system that the law is the law and appointments to the bench have no consequence, again because the law is the law, watch out! Electing liberal judges also means no matter how solid your case, if the cause is one of the social agendas of that particular judge you are before, you’ll lose. Could this have been why the County Legislature, cohabiting in lock step with Spano, conceded to his agreement? Probably.
Astorino, has repeatedly stood up to and stared down the mighty federal mediator each time the Goliath tried to force a new change into the settlement equation. I have never agreed that Westchester is racist, biased or discriminatory. That said, I do agree that you can certainly find bigots, mental-midgets, and frankly a few idiots that exhibit parochial and racist thinking when it comes to anyone that is different than themselves. They are not representative of the majority of Westchester residents. In fact, I think the people of Westchester are more tolerant than people I’ve met in other parts of our country.
The feds claim that the County isn’t doing enough to change the law in Westchester regarding proof of income for HUD and/or Section 8 housing. It’s not necessary. The settlement has a provision in it stating the same thing. So if they agreed to it as part of the settlement, they’re just insisting on legal duplicity. Creating and passing a law for this would remove the landlords ability to refuse anyone a rental. Without knowing the proof of income of either, if a Section 8 housing recipient and a Non-Section 8 person applies for an apartment, and if the landlord offers the apartment to the Non-Section 8 person, they can be sued by the Section 8 recipient for proof of income discrimination. If they give it to the Section 8 recipient, he can be sued by the Non-Section 8 person for discrimination, although they can’t easily prove discrimination. It creates a lopsided equation for the small landlords that they simply can’t win.
How should we proceed? I believe CE Astorino is on the right track. By standing up to the federal administrator of this lousy HUD agreement on principle and continuing to meet or exceed the timelines in place, he has set the stage for compliance. By doing so he keeps the feds at bay. How much longer he can do this also depends on the various communities who must participate in this debacle. Good luck Rob!
The misnomer of “affordable” housing is just that. It’s a ploy that was developed by those in the not-for-profit housing game to garner support for their well paid businesses and employees under the guise of a struggling “little guy”. The reality is that it is nothing so noble and just subsidized housing, formerly called welfare housing. Examples of a few of these known companies might be Westhab and Habitat For Humanity (although HFH has a bit of a different angle). What they do is mask their real purpose: developers hiding behind the not-for-profit moniker to pretend to be a caring and helping organization. The reality is they are developers who have found a loophole that would put the brakes on anybody else’s projects and exploited it for their own benefit. Notice I didn’t say exploited for their own profit? That’s the only difference. They will make sure their books show a break-even point and not a profit – all while paying their management and employees very nice salaries. Not for profit indeed!
The federal housing monitor tried to flex his federal muscles to intimidate Westchester into complying with mandates that simply weren’t part of the agreement former County Executive Andrew Spano caved in to. When I ran for County Legislator, I publicly stated I was against this agreement for several reasons, as did others. If you reviewed the 37 pages settlement agreement when it was proposed, the vagueness of the document should have precluded any agreement. We should have gone to court to fight it. However, for those who profess in a belief system that the law is the law and appointments to the bench have no consequence, again because the law is the law, watch out! Electing liberal judges also means no matter how solid your case, if the cause is one of the social agendas of that particular judge you are before, you’ll lose. Could this have been why the County Legislature, cohabiting in lock step with Spano, conceded to his agreement? Probably.
Astorino, has repeatedly stood up to and stared down the mighty federal mediator each time the Goliath tried to force a new change into the settlement equation. I have never agreed that Westchester is racist, biased or discriminatory. That said, I do agree that you can certainly find bigots, mental-midgets, and frankly a few idiots that exhibit parochial and racist thinking when it comes to anyone that is different than themselves. They are not representative of the majority of Westchester residents. In fact, I think the people of Westchester are more tolerant than people I’ve met in other parts of our country.
The feds claim that the County isn’t doing enough to change the law in Westchester regarding proof of income for HUD and/or Section 8 housing. It’s not necessary. The settlement has a provision in it stating the same thing. So if they agreed to it as part of the settlement, they’re just insisting on legal duplicity. Creating and passing a law for this would remove the landlords ability to refuse anyone a rental. Without knowing the proof of income of either, if a Section 8 housing recipient and a Non-Section 8 person applies for an apartment, and if the landlord offers the apartment to the Non-Section 8 person, they can be sued by the Section 8 recipient for proof of income discrimination. If they give it to the Section 8 recipient, he can be sued by the Non-Section 8 person for discrimination, although they can’t easily prove discrimination. It creates a lopsided equation for the small landlords that they simply can’t win.
How should we proceed? I believe CE Astorino is on the right track. By standing up to the federal administrator of this lousy HUD agreement on principle and continuing to meet or exceed the timelines in place, he has set the stage for compliance. By doing so he keeps the feds at bay. How much longer he can do this also depends on the various communities who must participate in this debacle. Good luck Rob!
Sunday, December 25, 2011
Let’s See How Much Better We Can Do!
For the second year in a row, the Westchester County Legislature submitted their version of the County’s budget to County Executive (CE) Astorino. After three heavily attended rounds of public hearings around the county, the representative public clamored “no!” when it came to CE Astorino’s proposed cuts. And with the County Legislature’s 12 Democrats and 5 Republicans on the board, the vote appeared it would once again be a partisan split, as it was during last year’s budget vote. The balance of the Legislature will change on January 1st, when two more Republicans get sworn in. Still, Legislator Jim Maisano’s public wish to not be the minority leader still seems elusive for him.
I agree with CE Astorino’ goal of reductions to the budget. There seems to be an awful lot of excess in certain places. However, it seems like both years he’s gone after the same cuts for the same reasons. And the legislature restores the same cuts he proposes. Is this what our government representatives see as good government? It appears to be their preordained deadlock. I and others are amazed at comments like the one County Legislature Leader Ken Jenkins made when he said, “The budget is done. The problem is not with the legislature. The majority of things we do, we do unanimously.” With about 15,000 budget items, Jenkins said most were supported by both the board and executive branch and that they disagreed on only 27 items, with 40 overrides, including some not directly tied to the budget. Of the 27 budget vetoes, 19 were overridden along party lines. Was it just something they did because they could or are these items of real value to the county? We can’t really know the accuracy of what each side says because each side blames the other, abandoning the public at the sidelines. This type of partisanship has to stop.
There are four legislators not returning this January either because they are simply stepping down or lost in the last election. These are all democratic Legislators, Jose Alvarado, John Nonna, Bill Burton and Marty Rogowsky. I have had dealings with the last three and know them to be concerned, involved and responsive public servants. But they too, have played the partisanship game that I believe the public is so weary of. The last election will increase the Republicans numbers but not enough to put this ship back on an even keel. We need to have better balance, new and different ideas, with better ways of operating our County government. The old ways are failing us. We must have relief from the state induced mandates if Westchester and New York wish to return to any competitive markets again, yet we see no action from them.
Astorino said he expected many of the overrides to his vetoes but it was important to “take principled stands on items” that he thought were detrimental to taxpayers and effective government. Imagine what might happen if the two sides sat down and tried to work together, forging solutions to the budget before it was due? Imagine if, instead of campaigning for their “sides”, they brokered a balanced, effective and realistic solutions that didn’t provide broad-brush sweeping cuts that pit one neighbor against another? Imagine if, instead of playing the partisan games of one-upmanship sound bites in the media, all the representatives actually represented us and created a budget that held or reduced the dollars taken from the County’s beleaguered and abused tax payers? Imagine how much better off everyone might be?
CE Astorino may be on the right track. He wanted to have a one percent tax reduction last year when he proposed his first budget. The County Legislature trumped him and offered a two percent reduction and kept all the positions he sought to eliminate. This year was almost an exact duplication of his efforts with the similar actions taken by his presumed “adversaries”. Imagine if he and his people had worked closely with the legislature before the budget was introduced? That would have caused everyone to take notice of a sharply honed representative government in action! If the CE can only offer cuts of one nature, and the legislature can only offer to override them, how much longer before the public says enough? The CE and the Board of Legislators may respectively have some good ideas. But until we see true collaboration, an honest joining of forces, we are destined for a repeat of the same antics every year. The public is frustrated with these games. I look forward to this new year with local politicians acting and working differently. Let’s see how much better we can do.
CE Astorino rejected $10 million in spending after the county board approved a $1.69 billion budget. This included $1.9 million for neighborhood health centers, $990,000 for Cornell Cooperative Extension, $378,000 for Invest-in-Kids programs, $4.3 million in day-care subsidies, $100,000 for ethnic festivals and restoration of the Route 76 bus line between Rye and White Plains. No doubt we could use scrutiny with some of these dollars. I continue to find it interesting that CE Astorino would cut one bus route while touting another bus route with the Tappan Zee Bridge proposal that I’m convinced comes as an Obama reelection/Cuomo presidential campaign ploy. If we can’t afford a small bus route between Rye and White Plains, how will we be able to afford a much larger one from Rockland to Westchester? The same can be said about last year’s proposed cutting and then saved Bee Line Express Bus Route to NYC.
Republicans and Democrats agreed on a few areas, in particular, money for Cornell Cooperative Extension; $49,000 for Greenburgh Nature Center; $59,790 for business training; $42,500 for the Jewish Council and four positions with the Board of Elections.
I agree with CE Astorino’ goal of reductions to the budget. There seems to be an awful lot of excess in certain places. However, it seems like both years he’s gone after the same cuts for the same reasons. And the legislature restores the same cuts he proposes. Is this what our government representatives see as good government? It appears to be their preordained deadlock. I and others are amazed at comments like the one County Legislature Leader Ken Jenkins made when he said, “The budget is done. The problem is not with the legislature. The majority of things we do, we do unanimously.” With about 15,000 budget items, Jenkins said most were supported by both the board and executive branch and that they disagreed on only 27 items, with 40 overrides, including some not directly tied to the budget. Of the 27 budget vetoes, 19 were overridden along party lines. Was it just something they did because they could or are these items of real value to the county? We can’t really know the accuracy of what each side says because each side blames the other, abandoning the public at the sidelines. This type of partisanship has to stop.
There are four legislators not returning this January either because they are simply stepping down or lost in the last election. These are all democratic Legislators, Jose Alvarado, John Nonna, Bill Burton and Marty Rogowsky. I have had dealings with the last three and know them to be concerned, involved and responsive public servants. But they too, have played the partisanship game that I believe the public is so weary of. The last election will increase the Republicans numbers but not enough to put this ship back on an even keel. We need to have better balance, new and different ideas, with better ways of operating our County government. The old ways are failing us. We must have relief from the state induced mandates if Westchester and New York wish to return to any competitive markets again, yet we see no action from them.
Astorino said he expected many of the overrides to his vetoes but it was important to “take principled stands on items” that he thought were detrimental to taxpayers and effective government. Imagine what might happen if the two sides sat down and tried to work together, forging solutions to the budget before it was due? Imagine if, instead of campaigning for their “sides”, they brokered a balanced, effective and realistic solutions that didn’t provide broad-brush sweeping cuts that pit one neighbor against another? Imagine if, instead of playing the partisan games of one-upmanship sound bites in the media, all the representatives actually represented us and created a budget that held or reduced the dollars taken from the County’s beleaguered and abused tax payers? Imagine how much better off everyone might be?
CE Astorino may be on the right track. He wanted to have a one percent tax reduction last year when he proposed his first budget. The County Legislature trumped him and offered a two percent reduction and kept all the positions he sought to eliminate. This year was almost an exact duplication of his efforts with the similar actions taken by his presumed “adversaries”. Imagine if he and his people had worked closely with the legislature before the budget was introduced? That would have caused everyone to take notice of a sharply honed representative government in action! If the CE can only offer cuts of one nature, and the legislature can only offer to override them, how much longer before the public says enough? The CE and the Board of Legislators may respectively have some good ideas. But until we see true collaboration, an honest joining of forces, we are destined for a repeat of the same antics every year. The public is frustrated with these games. I look forward to this new year with local politicians acting and working differently. Let’s see how much better we can do.
Monday, December 19, 2011
MTA On-Time Performance: It’s A Scam!
Based on “arrivals with 5 minutes, 59 seconds of schedule”, the MTA boasts quarterly of the on-time record for train arrivals. Isn’t 5 minutes, 59 seconds really just six minutes? Of course it is. And, of course this is MTA doublespeak as they try to mask their poor performance. I take the Harlem line into NYC from the White Plains station. I typically take the 8:01AM and arrive at Grand Central Station at about 8:45AM. It should be changed to the 8-ish train. On a good day, the train is on time. On a normal day, whether on time or not, there’s no seats available and most people boarding the train will stand for their ride into NYC. A bad day can be when the train is running fifteen minutes late (or more) or worse, the train is cancelled. No train? No late charge.
This latest iteration of the On-Time Performance chart, buried in the Holiday release of things to do in NYC via MetroNorth, indicated that on-time performance of the Harlem and New Haven lines was down, with the New Haven line edging slightly beyond the Harlem line with the worst on-time performance. Does it matter that hundreds of people are late for work? Does it matter that there are never any seats available for all? Does it matter that many must stand on the wind-swept platform in inclement weather because there isn’t enough room inside the station? Does it matter that once one train is late, many behind it are subsequently late? Does it matter that the MTA slapped a tax on small businesses and individuals to pay for their bloated budget? Does it matter that the MTA routinely raises it’s monthly ticket prices regardless of these issues. Resoundingly, NO, only to those affected riders!
Each year I attend the MTA Board meetings and discuss the above mentioned issues I have with the running of the trains. The meetings had been run by the now-former CEO of the MTA, Jay H. Walder, who has departed his post as of this past October. No great loss to commuters. At these meetings, I usually touch on the fact that I subsidize their poorly run entity as I only take the train three days a week but purchase a monthly ticket. They get to use my money for 7 days, even though I’m not using the train anywhere near that amount. In effect, I’m giving them 4 days of subsidy money with no return of service. And since it’s not enough, they decided to tax us through a payroll tax! I also touch on how we all got indoctrinated into hearing how their delays were due to equipment problems during the colder seasons. Then they started using the same excuse for the warmer seasons. So apparently the trains and related equipment can only run in perfect weather. Yes, of course I’m being sarcastic. The problem is a common one: failed management and a failing infrastructure. Fix the equipment!
Now we are waiting to see who Governor Cuomo will appoint to the CEO position. Do you think accountability should be a mainstay of keeping this position? I do. I also think “tricked-out” numbers to make the story smell better is disingenuous and should be stopped. I also think they should be giving out credits for every late train or cancelled train to those waiting at the station. I realize most of their expenses may be personnel, their pensions and all the other things we all hear about on the news. How about fixing the infrastructure? How about getting everything working well before trying to add trains to the Tappan Zee Bridge and I-287 fiasco? There's much more to do, but everyone seems content to just wave a magic wand and hope for the best. We can do better.
This latest iteration of the On-Time Performance chart, buried in the Holiday release of things to do in NYC via MetroNorth, indicated that on-time performance of the Harlem and New Haven lines was down, with the New Haven line edging slightly beyond the Harlem line with the worst on-time performance. Does it matter that hundreds of people are late for work? Does it matter that there are never any seats available for all? Does it matter that many must stand on the wind-swept platform in inclement weather because there isn’t enough room inside the station? Does it matter that once one train is late, many behind it are subsequently late? Does it matter that the MTA slapped a tax on small businesses and individuals to pay for their bloated budget? Does it matter that the MTA routinely raises it’s monthly ticket prices regardless of these issues. Resoundingly, NO, only to those affected riders!
Each year I attend the MTA Board meetings and discuss the above mentioned issues I have with the running of the trains. The meetings had been run by the now-former CEO of the MTA, Jay H. Walder, who has departed his post as of this past October. No great loss to commuters. At these meetings, I usually touch on the fact that I subsidize their poorly run entity as I only take the train three days a week but purchase a monthly ticket. They get to use my money for 7 days, even though I’m not using the train anywhere near that amount. In effect, I’m giving them 4 days of subsidy money with no return of service. And since it’s not enough, they decided to tax us through a payroll tax! I also touch on how we all got indoctrinated into hearing how their delays were due to equipment problems during the colder seasons. Then they started using the same excuse for the warmer seasons. So apparently the trains and related equipment can only run in perfect weather. Yes, of course I’m being sarcastic. The problem is a common one: failed management and a failing infrastructure. Fix the equipment!
Now we are waiting to see who Governor Cuomo will appoint to the CEO position. Do you think accountability should be a mainstay of keeping this position? I do. I also think “tricked-out” numbers to make the story smell better is disingenuous and should be stopped. I also think they should be giving out credits for every late train or cancelled train to those waiting at the station. I realize most of their expenses may be personnel, their pensions and all the other things we all hear about on the news. How about fixing the infrastructure? How about getting everything working well before trying to add trains to the Tappan Zee Bridge and I-287 fiasco? There's much more to do, but everyone seems content to just wave a magic wand and hope for the best. We can do better.
Thursday, December 15, 2011
Trucks Keep Hitting Bridges
Every so often we hear or read about a truck trying to go under a bridge and hitting it and/or getting jammed under it. If hitting a bridge isn’t bad enough, the ensuing traffic jams danger to the public and fiascos make the situation untenable. The local newspapers write about it, occasionally it’ll appear on TV and radio and the pictures from cell phones wind up appearing on You Tube in short order. I understand that accidents happen. I also understand what it’s like to rely on a GPS instruction - the common reason for the mishap. I do draw the line with GPS units at disobeying one way street signs, going onto railroad tracks and so on.
The answer seems to be elusive to all those experts whom we repeatedly see quoted in articles about the accident. How is this if they are the experts? Perhaps they’re just book smart and lack any common sense intelligence. Maybe they should let us come up with ideas for solving this. And if they adopt our solutions, they return a percentage of their salary for inefficiency.
Last year, 33 trucks drove into bridges on Westchester parkways patrolled by county police; in 2009 it was 54. In 2008 it was 46. There have been 39 he bridge crashes so far this year, 30 of them on the Hutchinson River Parkway, sometimes tying up traffic for hours as cops from several agencies scramble to the scene. A bridge inspector and often a tow truck are called out, costing truckers sometimes more than $100,000 when repairs and lost cargo are added in, officials say. The boxes on tractor-trailer rigs can stand more than 13 feet high, while some of the bridges have clearances barely above 9 feet. This is an issue for emergency vehicles as well. But most of their operators are familiar with the bridges in their communities and have alternate routes they utilize when responding.
Sgt. Ira Promisel, of the New York State Police, one of the good guys, says a task force has been studying the problem for two years and trying out ideas. There’s an obvious waste of time - why fix it when we can talk about it? The task force is comprised of DOT, state police, and Westchester County officials, among others. They’ve tried reflective stickers on bridges in the Bronx, which didn’t work. Stickers. Really? The task force is about to try a device called “The Wizard” near the King Street Bridge. It constantly sends out a message to CB channels that bridges on the Hutch are too low for trucks. Not every solution needs to be a high tech one.
Here’s a simple solution, build an opening on the entrances that a truck might have access to to match the lowest bridge on the roadway. That way, as they try to enter the roadway, they hit the representative structure, set with a notification system to the appropriate police response agency, stop, and get to remove their vehicle without screwing up traffic on the highway/parkways. Most importantly, they haven’t hit and wedged themselves under the bridge, damaged the bridge, other vehicles or hurt anyone. Simple. If you want to argue the cost, we’ve already spent $3.3 million dollars dealing with last years accidents and there’s no reduction in sight.
Being a leader means stepping out of your comfort zone - or, in this case, off the curb. Propose some common-sense solutions to a reoccurring problem and make a difference in a positive way. The truck drivers, insurance companies, responders, motoring public will all appreciate what you do: providing real solutions to real problems.
The answer seems to be elusive to all those experts whom we repeatedly see quoted in articles about the accident. How is this if they are the experts? Perhaps they’re just book smart and lack any common sense intelligence. Maybe they should let us come up with ideas for solving this. And if they adopt our solutions, they return a percentage of their salary for inefficiency.
Last year, 33 trucks drove into bridges on Westchester parkways patrolled by county police; in 2009 it was 54. In 2008 it was 46. There have been 39 he bridge crashes so far this year, 30 of them on the Hutchinson River Parkway, sometimes tying up traffic for hours as cops from several agencies scramble to the scene. A bridge inspector and often a tow truck are called out, costing truckers sometimes more than $100,000 when repairs and lost cargo are added in, officials say. The boxes on tractor-trailer rigs can stand more than 13 feet high, while some of the bridges have clearances barely above 9 feet. This is an issue for emergency vehicles as well. But most of their operators are familiar with the bridges in their communities and have alternate routes they utilize when responding.
Sgt. Ira Promisel, of the New York State Police, one of the good guys, says a task force has been studying the problem for two years and trying out ideas. There’s an obvious waste of time - why fix it when we can talk about it? The task force is comprised of DOT, state police, and Westchester County officials, among others. They’ve tried reflective stickers on bridges in the Bronx, which didn’t work. Stickers. Really? The task force is about to try a device called “The Wizard” near the King Street Bridge. It constantly sends out a message to CB channels that bridges on the Hutch are too low for trucks. Not every solution needs to be a high tech one.
Here’s a simple solution, build an opening on the entrances that a truck might have access to to match the lowest bridge on the roadway. That way, as they try to enter the roadway, they hit the representative structure, set with a notification system to the appropriate police response agency, stop, and get to remove their vehicle without screwing up traffic on the highway/parkways. Most importantly, they haven’t hit and wedged themselves under the bridge, damaged the bridge, other vehicles or hurt anyone. Simple. If you want to argue the cost, we’ve already spent $3.3 million dollars dealing with last years accidents and there’s no reduction in sight.
Being a leader means stepping out of your comfort zone - or, in this case, off the curb. Propose some common-sense solutions to a reoccurring problem and make a difference in a positive way. The truck drivers, insurance companies, responders, motoring public will all appreciate what you do: providing real solutions to real problems.
Monday, December 12, 2011
Tappan Zee Politics As Usual
Many have repeatedly called for a new Tappan Zee Bridge to be built, replacing the existing one. Proponents use the Chicken Little mantra of, “The bridge is falling, the bridge is falling!” And while the bridge certainly needs repairs and maintenance, it getting replaced anytime soon is probably a fantasy on their part. I agree that something needs to be done but am not convinced based on the latest public information session in Tarrytown that we are getting the best solutions.
President Obama made it easier for our cash strapped state by saying the feds would ease federal regulations to expedite the building of the bridge. That’s all well and good if he were paying for it. But guess what? We’re going to pay for it. And pay handsomely I might add. Now that Governor/Presidential candidate Cuomo has entered the fray, saying there will be no mass transit component, it seems that we will be lucky to simply replace what’s already there. I can almost live with that.
While I don’t have that much of an issue trying to incorporate a mass transit element into the project, the lack of coordination with the communities, state and federal governments is disturbing. I’ve always maintained that at the least we should repair the bridge. Given the clamor for mass transit, I feel we’re being shortchanged with the bus system solution. Having a bus system that goes from Suffern to Port Chester may be nice to have but no one has presented a comprehensive plan as to why we need that. Oh sure, the proponents say it will relieve traffic. Prove it - I'm not convinced. Everything they say is based on a supposed increase in traffic. But that also ties in with an increase in residences. What if we stopped developing every bit of green and open space we have? If we don’t build more homes and preserve our green space, maybe our traffic woes won’t be as bad the doomsayers are predicting.
They say more people will take advantage of the mass transit option, keeping cars off the road. If most of those people can still afford to pay the taxes to live here, they’ll have to take the bus because they won’t be able to afford to own a car. With the President’s lack of an energy policy for America seemingly to be “pay more at the pumps”, many won’t be able to afford a car (or two) or afford the gas. What makes you think you’ll be able to afford the toll on the Tappan Zee Bridge? Almost all mass transit/public transportation is a money loser. It’s why the Metropolitan Transportation Agency (MTA) raises its fairs every year. In Rob Astorino’s first budget, he cut the Express Bus service to NYC. If we can’t sustain a known bus route system that is working, is this the model we want to follow? I don’t think so.
The bus system will have a bus running every five minutes. That’s an incredible number of buses. What happens when the powers that be realize that no one is riding the 12:30 AM bus with regularity? They’ll probably have to cancel it because they cannot afford to run an empty bus. It’s exactly the reason the Express Bus to NYC works. There are more during rush hour and fewer during the other times. Every five minutes may be unrealistic even though it sounds necessary. But regardless how many are running, they are cumbersome to turn, slow in traffic (even slowing it), additional pollutants and finally, adding to the already existing heavy traffic which we all suffer from.
The bus pick-up and drop-off points have been mapped out along Rt 119. But parking spaces for your car so you can take the buses do not exist. In Tarrytown and Elmsford, they will be using eminent domain to acquire the property they desire for the bus route lanes. Is this what most people want? I haven’t heard from anyone who liked that idea once they were told about it. The idea of a monorail system, while more environmentally viable would allow cars smaller than train cars & more customizable to ridership. Regardless it doesn’t provide an answer to the question, will it be profitable? ABG doesn’t believe any solution will break-even, let alone be profitable based on the past performance of mass transit.
But until funding for any of this can be offered and the public buys into it, lets draw up plans that will allow a bridge that can handle some growth in the future for automotive traffic and even a public transportation option. The proponents of existing plans haven’ received some resistance or opposition. The dog and pony shows the Tappan Zee Bridge group puts forth is never held at a convenient time for more public participation. Until they change their way of operating, we’ll never have the best ideas or the best plan for the future.
President Obama made it easier for our cash strapped state by saying the feds would ease federal regulations to expedite the building of the bridge. That’s all well and good if he were paying for it. But guess what? We’re going to pay for it. And pay handsomely I might add. Now that Governor/Presidential candidate Cuomo has entered the fray, saying there will be no mass transit component, it seems that we will be lucky to simply replace what’s already there. I can almost live with that.
While I don’t have that much of an issue trying to incorporate a mass transit element into the project, the lack of coordination with the communities, state and federal governments is disturbing. I’ve always maintained that at the least we should repair the bridge. Given the clamor for mass transit, I feel we’re being shortchanged with the bus system solution. Having a bus system that goes from Suffern to Port Chester may be nice to have but no one has presented a comprehensive plan as to why we need that. Oh sure, the proponents say it will relieve traffic. Prove it - I'm not convinced. Everything they say is based on a supposed increase in traffic. But that also ties in with an increase in residences. What if we stopped developing every bit of green and open space we have? If we don’t build more homes and preserve our green space, maybe our traffic woes won’t be as bad the doomsayers are predicting.
They say more people will take advantage of the mass transit option, keeping cars off the road. If most of those people can still afford to pay the taxes to live here, they’ll have to take the bus because they won’t be able to afford to own a car. With the President’s lack of an energy policy for America seemingly to be “pay more at the pumps”, many won’t be able to afford a car (or two) or afford the gas. What makes you think you’ll be able to afford the toll on the Tappan Zee Bridge? Almost all mass transit/public transportation is a money loser. It’s why the Metropolitan Transportation Agency (MTA) raises its fairs every year. In Rob Astorino’s first budget, he cut the Express Bus service to NYC. If we can’t sustain a known bus route system that is working, is this the model we want to follow? I don’t think so.
The bus system will have a bus running every five minutes. That’s an incredible number of buses. What happens when the powers that be realize that no one is riding the 12:30 AM bus with regularity? They’ll probably have to cancel it because they cannot afford to run an empty bus. It’s exactly the reason the Express Bus to NYC works. There are more during rush hour and fewer during the other times. Every five minutes may be unrealistic even though it sounds necessary. But regardless how many are running, they are cumbersome to turn, slow in traffic (even slowing it), additional pollutants and finally, adding to the already existing heavy traffic which we all suffer from.
The bus pick-up and drop-off points have been mapped out along Rt 119. But parking spaces for your car so you can take the buses do not exist. In Tarrytown and Elmsford, they will be using eminent domain to acquire the property they desire for the bus route lanes. Is this what most people want? I haven’t heard from anyone who liked that idea once they were told about it. The idea of a monorail system, while more environmentally viable would allow cars smaller than train cars & more customizable to ridership. Regardless it doesn’t provide an answer to the question, will it be profitable? ABG doesn’t believe any solution will break-even, let alone be profitable based on the past performance of mass transit.
But until funding for any of this can be offered and the public buys into it, lets draw up plans that will allow a bridge that can handle some growth in the future for automotive traffic and even a public transportation option. The proponents of existing plans haven’ received some resistance or opposition. The dog and pony shows the Tappan Zee Bridge group puts forth is never held at a convenient time for more public participation. Until they change their way of operating, we’ll never have the best ideas or the best plan for the future.
Saturday, December 3, 2011
’Tis The Season
The road to Albany is paved with constant tax payer advertising. The art of the press release continues to get refined by the incumbent legislators and the rookie legislators, while not necessarily left in the dust, pale by comparison. There are many local weekly newspapers that exist through advertising as their revenue mainstay as they are otherwise free to the reader. The only daily newspaper in the area is looking for a new office while they’ve jettisoned staff, assets and finally their building. The staff that is left must take one week off before the end of the year with no pay just to hold onto their jobs. It’s ironic how they have always (and continue) to endorse the liberal agenda, report on how great the President is doing for our country and that there’s no recession. They are finally able to experience first hand the affects of their endorsements. Touché.
In the areas best opinion weekly, the Westchester Guardian, they printed the obligatory press release, this time from George Latimer, entitled “On The Road: The I-287 Project”. Their editor places value in these press releases, having previously told me that these are how they inform the constituents of the progress they are making on their behalf in Albany. That remains to be seen. It sometimes seems like self-flatuance to me. I will say from the onset, I like George Latimer. I’ve met with him numerous times and he seems to be a straight-shooter. But, since I don’t reside in his district, he and I each have nothing to lose by being open and honest.
In this release, he states, “The project has long been burdened by inadequate planning, unqualified design teams, lack of oversight, and a ‘rigid regional’ funding system that made financing even more difficult when compounded with the current economic climate. This project was approved during a different economy and there was wiggle room in the state budget. Now, we unfortunately don’t have the same luxuries and that has cost the taxpayers greatly while 287 has been under construction.”*
My issue with this press release is that it purports the information from Latimer is accurate when it needs to be challenged. Had this been a real journalistic interview by an unbiased reporter, they might have challenged him on the first sentence. He has been a legislator in Albany for a good many years. To say this project, which was brought to light in an exposé article by the Journal News, has long been burdened by inadequate planning, unqualified design, lack of oversight, etc., smacks of hypocrisy on his part. We elect legislators to go to Albany to represent us. I can’t think of anyone who wants to get ripped off on any project. I'm sure he’s driven on I-287 and wondered as we all do when will it ever be completed? The difference is as a legislator he can easily find out. But he did nothing. He also, along with many other flabbergasted colleagues, never lifted a finger to help the constituencies along the I-287 corridor.
The release continues, “Governor Andrew Cuomo recently implemented a new series of drastic reforms that will bring the cost of the I-287 project under control and move up the often changed end date. The Governor’s changes will significantly alter the way the Department of Transportation does business, making the Department more efficient on projects throughout New York. Once again, he has shown strong leadership in advancing necessary change in the way state government functions.” While I’m sure this flattery will curry favor for Latimer with the governor, this is exactly what I’d have hope for from my assemblyman, not the governor. This press release should have come from the Governor’s office.
He continues on, “These reforms came as a result of the investigation by Peter Lehrer at the request of the Governor’s Office and will directly address the significant issues that have slowed down the I-287 project and many others across the state. Peter Lehrer is a renowned construction industry expert and also a Mamaroneck resident who most likely has been frustrated by the I-287 project himself.” Nice try George. This may be the case for the state, but if it hadn’t been for the Journal News digging into this story, the state would have blissfully lumbered along without as much as a whimper of a challenge to the practices by those reaping the financial benefits. After the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, it’s a little too little too late. Where’s the wiggle-room now?
Term limits comes up by many every time elections are near - for good reason. Press releases can be a good informational tool if it’s not abused and wasted. Unfortunately, this one is exactly that. It is a publicity/campaign tool that has outlived its usefulness in its current form. I also just received the Tom Abinanti pre-Christmas mailer, stating all that he has been involved in while in Albany since he beat me in the last election. He claims to be green but then mails this oversized cardboard campaign piece. Here’s a guy who knows how to campaign on the taxpayers dime. Nita Lowey has sent hers as well. The waste, I’m sure justified as informative, does nothing but pollute. I’m sure there isn’t much we can do to stop a lot of junk mail coming every holiday. After all ’tis the season.
In the areas best opinion weekly, the Westchester Guardian, they printed the obligatory press release, this time from George Latimer, entitled “On The Road: The I-287 Project”. Their editor places value in these press releases, having previously told me that these are how they inform the constituents of the progress they are making on their behalf in Albany. That remains to be seen. It sometimes seems like self-flatuance to me. I will say from the onset, I like George Latimer. I’ve met with him numerous times and he seems to be a straight-shooter. But, since I don’t reside in his district, he and I each have nothing to lose by being open and honest.
In this release, he states, “The project has long been burdened by inadequate planning, unqualified design teams, lack of oversight, and a ‘rigid regional’ funding system that made financing even more difficult when compounded with the current economic climate. This project was approved during a different economy and there was wiggle room in the state budget. Now, we unfortunately don’t have the same luxuries and that has cost the taxpayers greatly while 287 has been under construction.”*
My issue with this press release is that it purports the information from Latimer is accurate when it needs to be challenged. Had this been a real journalistic interview by an unbiased reporter, they might have challenged him on the first sentence. He has been a legislator in Albany for a good many years. To say this project, which was brought to light in an exposé article by the Journal News, has long been burdened by inadequate planning, unqualified design, lack of oversight, etc., smacks of hypocrisy on his part. We elect legislators to go to Albany to represent us. I can’t think of anyone who wants to get ripped off on any project. I'm sure he’s driven on I-287 and wondered as we all do when will it ever be completed? The difference is as a legislator he can easily find out. But he did nothing. He also, along with many other flabbergasted colleagues, never lifted a finger to help the constituencies along the I-287 corridor.
The release continues, “Governor Andrew Cuomo recently implemented a new series of drastic reforms that will bring the cost of the I-287 project under control and move up the often changed end date. The Governor’s changes will significantly alter the way the Department of Transportation does business, making the Department more efficient on projects throughout New York. Once again, he has shown strong leadership in advancing necessary change in the way state government functions.” While I’m sure this flattery will curry favor for Latimer with the governor, this is exactly what I’d have hope for from my assemblyman, not the governor. This press release should have come from the Governor’s office.
He continues on, “These reforms came as a result of the investigation by Peter Lehrer at the request of the Governor’s Office and will directly address the significant issues that have slowed down the I-287 project and many others across the state. Peter Lehrer is a renowned construction industry expert and also a Mamaroneck resident who most likely has been frustrated by the I-287 project himself.” Nice try George. This may be the case for the state, but if it hadn’t been for the Journal News digging into this story, the state would have blissfully lumbered along without as much as a whimper of a challenge to the practices by those reaping the financial benefits. After the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted, it’s a little too little too late. Where’s the wiggle-room now?
Term limits comes up by many every time elections are near - for good reason. Press releases can be a good informational tool if it’s not abused and wasted. Unfortunately, this one is exactly that. It is a publicity/campaign tool that has outlived its usefulness in its current form. I also just received the Tom Abinanti pre-Christmas mailer, stating all that he has been involved in while in Albany since he beat me in the last election. He claims to be green but then mails this oversized cardboard campaign piece. Here’s a guy who knows how to campaign on the taxpayers dime. Nita Lowey has sent hers as well. The waste, I’m sure justified as informative, does nothing but pollute. I’m sure there isn’t much we can do to stop a lot of junk mail coming every holiday. After all ’tis the season.
Read George Latimer’s entire press release at:
http://yonkerstribune.typepad.com/files/click-to-read-the-westchester-guardian---december-1-2011-edition-2.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)