No way:

If the state fails to work out a financial rescue of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, the base subway and bus fare could rise to $2.50 and the cost of a 30-day MetroCard could rise to $104 next June, according to a study by the city’s Independent Budget Office.

Much better:

To head off those possibilities, a state commission has floated a rescue plan that would use the proceeds from a new regional payroll tax to help plug the deficit, along with a smaller fare increase.

Either way, service cuts are almost inevitable.  Yes, a 23% fare increase AND service cuts.

Along with MTA mismanagment, we can all thank upstate dufus George Pataki for this mess.  As governor, he led the repeal of the commuter tax in 1999 in a (successful) attempt to gain favor with suburban swine.  If you work here, you’re using the services here.  States with an income tax charge non-residents income tax, and NYC has the right to do the same.  We’ve lost over $5 billion since the tax’s repeal.  Bringing it back would generate an estimated $500 million annually.  That’s almost half of the MTA’s $1.2 billion deficit.

Not only are CBGB’s remains scattered around the country like ashes, but now Hilly Kristal’s ex-wife is suing their daughter.  That’s not a very punk thing to do, is it?  Well, it turns out the Kristal Estate was worth more than $3 million when he died (that’s not very punk either).  Funny thing is, the money is almost entirely from the sale of CBGB’s tee shirts.

…that inspire a sense of foreboding immediately upon stepping into them:

1.  The Manhattan Mall

2.  Radio Shack

3.  The Park Slope Food Co-op

After CBGB’s died in 2006, its remains were scattered like ashes around the country.

The bar stashed in a trailer in Connecticut, the awning pawned off on the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Museum and much of the rest of it left to molder here, in a dingy 3,000-square-foot Moishe’s moving company storage space in Williamsburg, a stage dive from the Navy Yard.

I guess that’s sad or something.  You can see the storage space in this typically lame New York Times “multimedia” feature.

Even more sad, however, is this…

There is grim commentary to be found in the fact that Ms. Parnassa-Staley - who once booked acts like Hatebreed and Cattle Decapitation - now makes business calls for CBGB Fashions Inc., a clothing operation run from the storage unit that sells T-shirts, belt buckles, onesies for kids, even a CBGB dog vest for your poodle. That ghastliness is matched only by the news that the club’s former barman, Ger Burgman, son-in-law of the deceased owner, Hilly Kristal himself, is now the customer service representative for online accounts.

Well, at least they have jobs.

Um, what?

After 72 years, the Triborough Bridge - Robert Moses’s three spans connecting Manhattan, Queens and the Bronx - was formally renamed on Wednesday for Robert F. Kennedy. [snip]  The move to rename the bridge had the support of the Kennedy family and was championed by Mr. Paterson’s predecessor, Gov. Eliot Spitzer, who resigned in March. But doubts remain about whether drivers will use the new name, and some have questioned the use of $4 million in state funds to make new signs at a time when New York faces steep deficits. (emphasis added)

Well, since some have already questioned the wisdom blowing $4 million on this kinda crap, I suppose I’ll jump on the bandwagon:  WTF?!?!  I guess the Kennedys don’t have enough signs with their names on them?

Even more ridiculous is the idea of renaming a 72 year-old bridge.  It’s kind of like adopting a 17 year-old Indian boy named Dhananjay and renaming him Tommy.  It’s too late.  He has a name.  All you’re going to do is mess him up.

You’ll always be the Triborough to me…

I’m glad that Bloomberg and Department of Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan are trying to make New York City more bike-friendly, but what the hell is with this newly selected bike rack?  This is the design that won the CityRacks Design Competition.  They plan to install almost 5,000 of these in the coming years.

Obviously it’s too small to be practical.  Even worse, I can easily see myself walking into and/or tripping over this thing.  Coming straight at its narrow edge at an NYC pace while thinking, talking or texting, it would be easy not to notice it.  This is the kind of pedestrian hazard I’d expect to see in some European city, but not here.  It’s almost un-American!  And I sure as hell hope they don’t plan on installing them next to the curb as in the photo, or else there are going to be a lot car door-bicycle make-out sessions going on.

Judging by the comments at the bottom of the Times story, most others aren’t too pleased with this design either, though the primary concerns seem to be the impractically small size and the suspicion that this thing could easily be pried out of the ground.

Cue Beyoncé.

Because Mayor Michael Bloomberg believes only he can guide the city through a period of economic crisis, and because two-thirds of the New York City Council would be out of a job otherwise, the Council has overturned the term limits law that was previously approved twice by the New York City voters.

Bullshit.

Questions:

If Bloomberg is the only viable political candidate in the City of New York who has the skills and knowledge to get us through tough economic times, might he have at least attempted to explain what this special knowledge entails?

Instead of changing the law to suit his own personal desires, couldn’t he simply have shared his super-duper economic survival secrets with the next mayor, whoever he or she happened to be?

Do the sniveling self-serving sycophants of the City Council who voted for this measure (no conflict of interest there, right?) have any sense of shame whatsoever?

Okay, I can do this…*deep breath*…eh-hem!…A-A-Anth-Anthony Weiner for Mayor!

Update: Vote in my poll at my DailyKos Diary!

Sing it, girlfriend!

From 1:00 Thursday afternoon until 11:00 in the evening, the New York City Council held public hearings on the question of whether or not they should give themselves and Mayor Chutzpah another term.  Yes, I know, each of them would still have to win the actual election, but the powers of incumbency are such that it would be extraordinarily difficult for an outsider to defeat either the Mayor or one of the two-thirds of the current Council members who will be prevented from running again as a result of the existing term limits law.  That’s exactly why the two-term limit was supported by the people of the City of New York in the first place.

But are these hearings a sham?  Some claim that Council Speaker Christine Quinn already has the votes lined up to overturn the term limits law.  I don’t know if that’s true, but this well-meaning struggle against the power grab does feel a bit hopeless.

Watching this NY1 video, it’s clear that somebody actually paid people to go to the hearings and hold up signs in support of the Mayor.  Ridiculous and ineffective.  Certainly the brainchild of some outer borough political aid with a greasy comb-over and poly-blend suit.

I’d be fine with repealing the term limits law, as long as the voters–and not the Council and Mayor–were the ones repealing it.  I might even be fine with giving the steady if lackluster Bloomberg one more term.  But the way they’re going about this, plotting in a backroom deal to overturn something the people have voted for twice, is reason enough to dump them all right now.  You can see it on Bloomberg’s face when he’s speaking in the video above:  I know this is bullshit but I’m doing it anyway because, what the hell, this city needs me!

If they were honest and consistent, those supporting the Council’s rewriting the term limits law should come out and say that they also oppose public referendums.  What’s the point of having them if the voters’ decision can be overturned at the whim of those in power?  The mayor has apparently said that it would be too “distracting and time consuming” to hold a referendum on his plan.  Oh, okay, well just do what you want then.

The stupid thing is, if they actually did have a public referendum and spun it as an up or down vote for Bloomberg, I’d bet the people would vote to extend the limit to three terms.  Although a NY1/Baruch College poll found that three-quarters of New Yorkers want a chance to decide on the issue in a referendum, 44 percent say they are in favor of the mayor’s quest to allow elected officials to run for a third consecutive term.  I’m sure a few glossy mailers funded by Bloomberg’s billions could get that up over 50%.

If you feel like preaching to the choir, there’s a gathering in Brooklyn sponsored by Public Advocate Besty Gotbaum this Sunday, October 19, 2:30-4:30 P.M., at the Lafayette Avenue Presbyterian Church (85 South Oxford St between Lafayette and Fulton).

I wish were feeling it.

Anthony Weiner has begun his campaign of outrage against the Bloomberg power grab.

Mr. Weiner is transforming his candidacy into a full-throated populist crusade against the billionaire Mr. Bloomberg’s proposal for a third term, hurling his thin frame in front a political locomotive roaring down the tracks.

Go, Weinerdog, go!  I would really love to come to the conclusion that Weiner would be a better mayor than Bloomberg and get behind this.  Gotta love the underdog (underWeinerdog?).  But then there’s this.

Mr. Bloomberg is expected to spend about $80 million in his re-election campaign - $20 million of it dedicated to attacking Mr. Weiner, according to people familiar with the plan. By contrast, Mr. Weiner has raised $5 million for his campaign.

Hmm.  Well, if he really can turn this into a movement, he could raise enough money to make it a race.  Bloomberg’s campaign spending would be subject to the law of diminishing returns if this became a real fight, with all the free press and publicity.  I don’t see Bloomberg not getting his way, but this will hopefully get interesting.

Weiner actually opposes term limits, but that fact doesn’t undercut his argument here.   The law is the law, and something that the people have voted for twice should not be overturned with a back-room deal.

Here’s Weiner’s new (gritty, low-budget) site, LetNYCVote.com.

Who cares whether cosmetics heir Ronald Lauder approves of Bloomberg’s power grab?  When I read things like this, my instinct is to oppose the term limit extension as a matter of principle, regardless of my initial reaction.

Come on, Weiner, convince me.

So The Times is inconsistent in its tacit approval of his power grab.  No surprise there.

But will the rumblings of outrage build into a movement, or will most be ambivalent for the same reason that I am?

I might be outraged over this power grab if there were a competent successor waiting in the wings.  Mayor Weiner?  Please.  He’ll forever be Clinton’s sycophant in my mind, even if he was seemingly omnipresent at my subway stop during the 2005 mayoral primary.  Christine Quinn?  Don’t be fooled.

Bloomberg’s highly competent though uninspired two-term run has been marred by two great crimes:

1.  The time and energy (though fortunately not money) spent during his first term trying to, in combination, get the West Side Stadium built and bring the not-so-special Olympics to New York.

2.  The suspension of civil liberties and habeas corpus during the 2004 Republican National Convention.

His accomplishments?  Ummm…not letting everything go to shit (and those waterfall things)?  Is that it?  Is that good enough?

I think the problem is that I simply don’t know what a good New York City Mayor looks like.  There’s just no positive role model, you might say (LaGuardia was too long ago).