New York Views - a Sporadical

AVELLA: LEADING MAN IN EDUCATION

2009-07-26T19:49:00.008-04:00

The Grassroots Education Movement to Defend Public Education or GEM indicates on their blog that they are a newly formed coalition of NYC Group that "seek to educate, mobilize and organize educators, parents, students and our communities against the corporate and government policies which serve to underfund, undermine and privatize our public school system. GEM advocates, both within and outside the UFT, around issues dealing with the equality & quality of public educational services as well as the rights of school workers."

A recent entry on the site discusses Tony Avella as the “leading man” in the education movement.

Posted by JW, it reads:

"After Tony Avella's statements at the Working Families Party forum a couple of weeks ago, progressive educators seem to be backing his run for mayor.

"I AM ABSOLUTELY NOT A FAN OF CHARTER SCHOOLS."

You can't get much clearer than that.

Avella will first have to topple Bill Thompson in the Democratic primary, and that will take some doing. In the meantime, Thompson's been putting on some new coats. He certainly wasn't asking to fire Joel Klein before Avella said it at the WFP forum.

The Avella campaign is letting people know that their man was on NY1 bashing the rubber rooms, no-bid contracts, and the atmosphere of intimidation at the DoE. Video will be available online tomorrow.

They've also put a new page on Facebook: Educators for Avella.

Tony Avella is forging the correct agenda on education.

Bill Thompson is real "Old School" when it comes to teaching kids, and he's now just playing catch up."

— JW

SPIN, BABY, SPIN

2009-07-12T17:26:00.009-04:00

from New Yorkers for Avella - blog by Milan - 7/12/09

Or maybe that should be, "spend, baby, spend!" Michael Bloomberg's desperate attempt to become mayor-for-life has his staff on the defensive, defending his record-breaking campaign spending. He's burned through nearly $37 million to date this year, breaking all records for a city campaign and unprecedented even for Bloomberg. This is the guy who told us recently that an election can't be bought. He would do well to remember this in the race against Tony Avella and William Thompson.

Aides to Bloomberg are said to be worried that the sour economy could turn voters against him. A New York Times story on Bloomberg's campaign spending quotes Bloomberg aide Jill Hazelbaker as saying polls consistently have shown that voters are not concerned about his campaign spending, which already is four times more than he had spent at this point in 2001. Another Times story characterized as "a chink in the armor" Bloomberg's failure to win a recent sought-after endorsement. (We hear the mayor is stressed-out about this, but doesn't he know that money can't buy you love?) Ms. Hazelbaker also noted that Thompson had taken more than $100,000 in what she called “special interest money.”

Good news is that candidate Tony Avella is beholden to no special interest groups. This is a tenet of his campaign, and it is the way he has always served in his role as a City Councilman. He's a fighter for the people, our schools, our neighborhoods, and small businesses. It's about people, not money.

The AP's Sara Kugler reminds us of Bloomberg's own recent remark that "you can't buy an election" because the public is "much too smart for that." And word is that behind the scenes in the Bloomberg campaign, there is some hand-wringing about the way things are going (although the damage control experts spin things a little differently.) Not only is Bloomberg's spending obscene, but his advertising is exposed by blogger JD2718 as shameful--don't miss this one!

WFP MAYORAL FORUM - "I made every dime I have."

2009-07-03T17:28:00.003-04:00

The WFP Mayoral forum was held Thursday night, July 3rd. I don't know how it was perceived on the webcast - whether you could hear the audience or not -- but there is no doubt that Tony Avella won.

However, I have unanswered questions about the Working Families Party. They injected themselves big time into the term limits debate last fall and were very opposed to the overturn of term limits, including getting involved in a lawsuit.

But then they endorsed Christine Quinn for another term. Quinn led the fight with Bloomberg to overturn the will of the people. Some people even think that the term limits question was not raised at the event because they made a deal with Bloomberg. Remember when Bloomberg said to a reporter "you are a disgrace" for bringing up the issue?

The WFP will make an endorsement vote on July 9th.

Bill Thompson had the nerve to call himself the "presumptive" nominee. And he will be if every registered Democrat goes to the polls in September for the primary and does the "politics as usual" thing and votes the way the Democratic political establishment is telling you to do.

These are some of the Twitter comments on the WFP site.

"So I think that Avela won the debate/forum - the reason being that any time you quote #the wire you win! "

" Cool forum WFP. Thanks for the opportunity. But if you endorse Bloomberg, then this city has gone to the dark age"

"Bloomberg is out of touch. Thompson seems a bit rehearsed. Avella rocked."

"Thompson was SO boring - he should run for senate."

"No Thompson, NYers aren't energized by you. Nice try though..."

"Did Thompson just call himself the presumptive nominee? That is some questionable messaging. "

"Thompson gives the same stump speech every time. "nuanced" is a bit of a stretch"

"thompson is going off the cuff, up is down"

Some articles: read comments after the article:

NY Daily News: Mayor Bloomberg defends massive campaign spending: "i made every dime I have."

NY Times: At Working Families Party Forum, Bloomberg Declines to Toe the Liberal Line

Live Blogging at Mayoral Forum in NYC

NYC Mayoral Forum live blog (start at the bottom)

TONY & JULIA: The Lips Story

2009-06-22T18:42:00.001-04:00

So typical of the press. Give them a serious issue like child obesity and instead of reporting on it, they focus on what kookie fitness guru Richard Simmons said at a recent press conference sponsored by Council Member Tony Avella ... that Avella has lips like Julia Roberts. Oi vey! What was he thinking!

Avella is introducing a resolution asking Congress to pass the FIT Kids Act, which would require state and community educational agencies to produce annual reports on health and physical education programs. The most serious report was from the NY Times.

But back to the lips comment ... Funny? Maybe…. But at least Tony has lips. Did you ever notice King Bloomberg’s? – his top lip looks like it is glued to his front teeth. I’ve always wondered if he just finished eating a peanut butter sandwich or maybe it is a permanent application of rubber cement or crazy glue and he just cannot help it.

Yes - this lip story has legs – but not the obesity story. Azi Paybarah, of the “you are a disgrace" fame reported the Lips in his recent column.

So maybe this will bring Tony Avella the attention he very much deserves. And being compared to Julia Roberts ain’t all weird.

Roberts apparently does not like to talk politics but she is a big environmentalist – as is Tony Avella.

OMG - DID HE REALLY SAY THAT?

2009-06-21T09:36:00.001-04:00

Emperor Bloomberg is sounding more and more like W every day:

from the New York Daily News:

Mayor Bloomberg was asked today to comment on the criticism President Obama is receiving for killing a fly during a recent interview, and his resulting response was such a quintessential example of Bloombergese that it simply cried out for posting.

And so, here it is, compliments of the DN's Erin Einhorn:

“I don’t know why he did it. I had pickets outside my house for geese last night. We are sending some of these geese for well-deserved rest up in the sky, wherever geese go.

"But the bottom line is, we can make fun of the geese but they’re a danger to human beings flying. And we’re doing what's appropriate, and I’m sure what the president thought about was that particular fly might be spreading something like the H1N1 flu and he was going to risk his own life with hands - bare hands, without Purell - and he protected the public by hitting that fly, and we owe him a great debt of gratitude. I'm sure he’s laughing about it right now."

This is our mayor? How embarrasing!

I am sorry President Obama killed a fly on national TV - it became a press diversion. But "risk his own life?" What was Bloomberg thinking?

And as for making fun of the geese. This is just a stupid and insensitive comment. The plane that landed in the Hudson River was hit by Canada geese - i.e. migratory geese. Killing the geese who live around the airports will not make a difference to the safety of air travel. Finding ways to protect the planes and an understanding of the bird's migratory patterns will.

Do we really want this dope as mayor again. I don't.

Vote for Tony Avella for mayor.

image from Emperor Bloomberg.

PETULANT RICH KID AGAINST ETHICAL REFORMER (Tony Avella)

2009-06-20T07:08:00.001-04:00

The media is mostly not our ideal of what they should be -- investigative reporters searching for the truth -- idealistic muckrakers. For many, it is a job - they go with the flow; reprinting press releases with a tweak here and there. The media, after all, is owned by corporate America - (or is it China) In truth, if any of them did have the courage to speak out against His Emporership Mayor Bloomberg, they would forever be banned from City Hall. And they would have no story - albeit a slanted one. This is democracy, kids. Face it.

When an underdog like Queens Council Member Tony Avella - a progressive with great ideas and courage - tries to make a difference, he is mostly ignored. He is called an "outlier." Instead, Bill Thompson, the pick of the Democratic machine – is the favored Democratic candidate. …. But by the machine and politicians, that is ... not the people ... and certainly not on the blogs that I have read.

So it came as a breath of fresh air when Bernie Mooney from the Examiner writes a blog titled "Bloomberg is a Petulant Rich Kid” criticizing the mayor for being out of touch with New Yorkers. If this petulant rich kid was such a financial genius – then why did Wall Street have such a serious meltdown? Why is unemployment so high in New York City. The man has been mayor for eight years after all. Why didn’t he see it coming and do his “magic.” And why are the schools in such bad shape. Ask any teacher!!! Why – because Bloomberg had no answers – that’s why. And because he controls the media, you hear what he wants you to hear.

Mooney on Tony Avella: “There is a dark horse. That dark horse is Tony Avella, a city councilman from Queens who is no fan of mayor Mike. He has even taken his council colleagues to task for kowtowing to Bloomberg’s whims. He is most definitely against the out of control development under Bloomberg’s terms. Frankly, I never heard of him until I picked up a copy of WG, Williamsburg Greenpoint News +Arts.”

While I am impressed that Mr. Mooney gets it right in his piece, my problem with him is that as a political writer he has never heard of Tony Avella. Tony has been in the council for eight years and has been a leader against the abuse of eminent domain and over development. He knows how the real estate industry has run this city into the ground -- and he wants you to know also. I knew who Tony was and I do not make a living writing about politics. Tony is undoubtedly the most progressive, courageous and independent thinker in the Council - never afraid of speaking out against corrupt Christine Quinn. One of the few with real ethics, he refused to accept a large raise, which the council voted for themselves. But don’t take my word for it – check out Tony’s web site – please get informed. Learn about the issues that affect the average New Yorker.

But unfortunately, the average New Yorker – even those who actually vote – do not have a clue who their Council Member is – or who hold all of the citywide offices. This is how scoundrels get into office because at election time –some of these same New Yorkers get “religion” and feel obliged to do their “civic duty” to vote. They will go to the booth and pick the first candidate – or just vote the party in which they are registered. And they think they did a good thing. Ask them who they voted for - or if they know anything bout these candidates and they cannot tell you. This is very frightening. This is why Bloomberg and the City Council were able to overturn term limits.... it is because YOU voted for the very council members who made deals with Quinn - you rub my back and we will rub yours.

If you want a better New York with a mayor who actually listens to you … it is within your power to make that change. Bloomberg is a tyrant. He does not deserve another term in office.

Council Member Tony Avella would be much needed progressive change for New York City. Let's give him (and us) a chance at real democracy!

NY TIMES: ANIMAL RIGHTS MAINSTREAM ETHICS

2009-04-09T20:23:00.001-04:00

In today’s New York Times, Nicholas Kristoff proclaimed that “animal rights are now firmly on the mainstream ethical agenda.” The piece, entitled Humanity Even For Nonhumans is reprinted below. For those of us who have lived this lifestyle for years and have suffered the slings and arrows of detractors - this is wonderful news coming from such a conservative paper … and yes it is .. when it comes to animal issues.

Some of the blog entries after this article referred to old religions like Buddhism and Jainism, which certainly revered animals. But they are not mainstream and Mr. Kristoff is recognizing this “profound difference from past centuries.”

In a testimony I gave at the January 30th hearing of the City Council Committee on Consumer Affairs regarding two pieces of legislation concerning the NYC carriage horse issue, I referred to an article published in the Harvard Crimson last year entitled Compassionate Campaigners how animal voters were shaping the 2008 presidential election. Written by Lewis Bollard, this opinion piece talked about the new electorate who care about animals, and how they see a politician’s attitude to animals as a broader reflection of his compassion and character. Bollard calls them news-savvy, socially integrated, and politically active. They are the people who sent over 300,000 e-mails to NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell successfully urging him to drop convicted dog fighter Michael Vick from the league. They’re politically active, and willing to use their votes to protect the defenseless.

So it comes as no surprise that there was such wide spread interest in the puppy for the Obama family – and and not just any puppy - but it must be one from a shelter.

Yes the times are changing and the paradigm is shifting.

Why is it that these kinds of progressive and ethical ideas grab hold in the grass roots first and take so long to move through the government, corporations and those with the power and money.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

April 9, 2009

OP-ED COLUMNIST

Humanity Even for Nonhumans

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF

One of the historical election landmarks last year had nothing to do with race or the presidency. Rather, it had to do with pigs and chickens — and with overarching ideas about the limits of human dominion over other species.

I’m referring to the stunning passage in California, by nearly a 2-to-1 majority, of an animal rights ballot initiative that will ban factory farms from keeping calves, pregnant hogs or egg-laying hens in tiny pens or cages in which they can’t stretch out or turn around. It was an element of a broad push in Europe and America alike to grant increasing legal protections to animals.

Spain is moving to grant basic legal rights to apes. In the United States, law schools are offering courses on animal rights, fast-food restaurants including Burger King are working with animal rights groups to ease the plight of hogs and chickens in factory farms and the Humane Society of the United States is preparing to push new legislation to extend the California protections to other states.

At one level, this movement on behalf of oppressed farm animals is emotional, driven by sympathy at photos of forlorn pigs or veal calves kept in tiny pens. Yet the movement is also the product of a deep intellectual ferment pioneered by the Princeton scholar Peter Singer.

Professor Singer wrote a landmark article in 1973 for The New York Review of Books and later expanded it into a 1975 book, “Animal Liberation.” That book helped yank academic philosophy back from a dreary foray into linguistics and pushed it to confront such fascinating questions of applied ethics as: What are our moral obligations to pigs?

John Maynard Keynes wrote that ideas, “both when they are right and when they are wrong, are more powerful than is commonly understood. Indeed the world is ruled by little else.” This idea popularized by Professor Singer — that we have ethical obligations that transcend our species — is one whose time appears to have come.

“There’s some growth in numbers of vegetarians, but the bigger thing is a broad acceptance of the idea that animals count,” Mr. Singer reflected the other day.

What we’re seeing now is an interesting moral moment: a grass-roots effort by members of one species to promote the welfare of others. Legislation is playing a role, with Europe scheduled to phase out bare wire cages for egg production by 2012, but consumer consciences are paramount. It’s because of consumers that companies like Burger King and Hardee’s are beginning to buy pork and eggs from producers that give space to their animals.

For most of history, all of this would have been unimaginable even to people of the most refined ethical sensibility (granted, for many centuries those refined ethicists were also untroubled by slavery). A distinguished philosopher, Thomas Taylor, reacted to Mary Wollstonecraft’s 1792 call for “the rights of woman” by writing a mocking call for “the rights of brutes.” To him, it seemed as absurd that women should have rights as that animals should have rights.

One of the few exceptions was Jeremy Bentham, the philosopher who 200 years ago also advocated for women’s rights, gay rights and prison reform. He responded to Kant’s lack of interest in animals by saying: “The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?”

In recent years, the issue has entered the mainstream, but even for those who accept that we should try to reduce the suffering of animals, the question remains where to draw lines. I eagerly pushed Mr. Singer to find his boundaries. “Do you have any compunctions about swatting a cockroach?” I asked him.

“Not much,” he replied, citing reasons to doubt that insects are capable of much suffering. Mr. Singer is somewhat unsure about shellfish, although he mostly gives them the benefit of the doubt and tends to avoid eating them.

Free-range eggs don’t seem offensive to him, but there is the awkwardness that even wholesome egg-laying operations depend on the slaughtering of males, since a male chick is executed for every female allowed to survive and lay eggs.

I asked Mr. Singer how he would weigh human lives against animal lives, and he said that he wouldn’t favor executing a human to save any number of animals. But he added that he would be troubled by the idea of keeping one human alive by torturing 10,000 hogs to death.

These are vexing questions, and different people will answer them differently. For my part, I eat meat, but I would prefer that this practice not inflict gratuitous suffering.

Yet however we may answer these questions, there is one profound difference from past centuries: animal rights are now firmly on the mainstream ethical agenda.

This beautiful photo above is from Sharing our Earth with all Species a blog by Carmen Mandel-Cesareo, a professional photographer, author and conservation advocate

"I THINK THE MAN IS TOTALLY DEVOID OF ETHICS."

2009-04-01T06:42:00.001-04:00

... said Council Member and Mayoral candidate, Tony Avella in commenting about Mayor Bloomberg running on the Independence party line - an agreement that is in the works. Eduardo Castell, campaign manager for Comptroller Bill Thompson's mayoral campaign chimed in with "I see it as Bloomberg's pay-to-play politics. They pay to get someone's support." NY 1 reports that Bloomberg may once again run on Indepence Party Line.

Yes, Mr. Bloomberg needs a party line to be on the ballot and the Dems and Repubs will not have him so he is in negotiations ($) with the Independence Party.

As most of you know, Bloomie used to be a Democrat, until he turned Republican in order to stand out on the ballot when he ran in 2001. As an unknown, he knew he would lose a Democratic primary, so as a dark horse, he spent lots of money and flooded our mail boxes with Bloomberg propaganda in order to win that election. Talk about recycling. I wonder how many trees gave their lives for the Bloomberg campaigns.

As a new Republican with lots of moolah, he was a perfect partner to the ethically challenged rudi guiliani. And unfortunately, while it was Mark Green's election to lose in this strongly Democratic city, Green managed to alienate the Hispanic population, which turned on him voting for Bloomberg. What were they thinking?

You may also recall that giuliani tried to stay in office after the 9/11 tragedy, but it did not work for him. Too late, not enough time. We were so happy to see him go. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

Bloomie would try the same tactic several years later and be successful.

The "Republican" Bloomie is credited with bringing the Republican Convention to NYC - a Democratic City!!! in 2004. Protest upon protests upon arrests occurred. An insult to NYC. But people have short memories. Yes, people unfortunately get the government they deserve. If you give a free pass to someone who ignored the two previous ballot initiatives that solidified term limits -- or so we thought -- then you are in effect abdicating your freedom and a dictator is what you will get.

then in June 2007, Bloomie left the Republican line and became a man without a party.

So now, Bloomie - a candidate in search of a party - is sucking up to the Independence party - you remember that controversial and questionable group of people - oh OK - so read about it here from the Village Voice.

Over the years, party founder Fred Newman and his supporters have faced repeated accusations of anti-Semitism and cult-like behavior. In a NY1 investigation in 2005, people involved with Newman's psychotherapy practice said they were brainwashed into joining a cult, allegations Newman has denied.

Everyone knows that Bloomberg has more money than god. He is already spending on ads all over the Internet - everywhere you turn there is another Bloomberg ad – brainwashing people.

While someone like Council Member Tony Avella, the most ethical, charismatic and smart of all the mayoral candidates hurts for money. One source of donations for most of the other candidates comes from the powerful real estate industry (you remember them - they own NYC) with their families, colleagues and friends donating to the max, they can nicely fund any candidate they want and make sure they get their development deals and make more money.

No one should be allowed to buy elections and there should be a spending limit on what candidates are allowed to spend on elections.

But this is America ... and this is NYC. We buy and sell elections here. And we worship money and raw power.

WHAT WAS JOHN LIU THINKING????? SAME AS DAVID WEPRIN that's what.

2009-03-09T06:12:00.001-04:00

So now John Liu wants to run for Comptroller. Whoop di do! I guess he saw that the office of Public Advocate was filling up fast and his ratings were in the toilet. As they should also be for the office of Comptroller.

NYC voters should expect that candidates running for the office of Comptroller be on the up and up and have a brain. They should have a pristine record of dealing with finances. That is - they should not be involved with any questionable goings on involving hiding things from the public, supporting fraudulent legislation and supporting legislation that would cost the tax payers money at the expense of a private questionable industry that only politicians and lobbyists support. What industry is that do you say ... well the carriage horse industry ... what else?!

GET THIS:

Council Member Liu recently signed on as a sponsor of Intro 653-A, the industry bill that would (among other things) provide the drivers with a rate increase, joining his cohort, David Weprin. Presently the drivers (officially and according to the law) make $34 for 1/2 hour and $10 for each additional 1/4 of an hour. They have not had a raise in 20 years (or so they would want you to think.)

Boo hoo.

The truth is that the industry took this matter into their own hands years ago and charge EXORBITANT rates through their web sites. Did you really think they wanted to wait for the City Council. There is no difference between booking a ride on the web sites and catching one at the hack line. The law applies to both. If you do not believe me, take a look at this web site for NY Tours. $173.95 for 40 minutes!!! Jumping Jehassafeffers .... when according to law, 40 minutes should be $34 for the first 1/2 hour and another $10 for each additional 1/4 hour. So it should be $44 tops. This is outrageous.

What is wrong with you, Mr. Liu and Mr. Weprin? Why are you supporting fraud? Please explain yourselves.

How will you handle the city's money? If it is anything like this, you should both get a job in the private sector -- try Wall Street. Neither of you deserve to be our Comptroller.

You think this is an anomaly you say? Well take a peek at these two other web sites: Gotham Carriages -- $98 for 40 minutes ... or Manhattan Carriage - they charge $40 for 17 minutes and ask you to call for the price for other rides. Hello! it is $34 for 1/2 hour. Doesn't anyone pay attention. Mr. Liu - Mr. Weprin - what gives with you two? Are you getting some hefty campaign contributions?

OK - now with the rest of this highly questionable legislation.

Take a look at #17-330-j. A bit hard to comprehend? This is what it really means: The ASPCA has been overseeing the carriage industry for like forever. They have peace officer status and can issue violations and tickets. They volunteer their services for free to the city. This bill would get rid of the ASPCA oversight along with any city agency and the police department -- notice the text in brackets that gets removed. Why -- well the ASPCA, one of the more conservative animal welfare organizations is in favor of a ban of the horse-drawn carriage industry in New York City. Although they are not opposed in principle to horse-drawn carriages, they are for NYC because they say that there is NO WAY the industry can operate humanely. Why people like Liu and Weprin are not listening to an organization founded by Henry Bergh, horse advocate, is beyond my comprehension.

I happen to love the ASPCA. They are conservative and do not rush into things. They are solid and not extreme. When they take a position, I generally agree with it. They know about animals, animal issues and the NYC carriage industry. This responsibility should not be taken away from them and given to shady representatives of the carriage industry. Gee, maybe the Teamsters will get the contract.

The gist of this is that the industry would self regulate -- but who would pay for it? Well not them, that's for sure. The RFP would most likely be prepared by the Department of Consumer Affairs or Department of Health and Mental Hygiene ... a contract would be awarded .... and the cost would be picked up by NYC's tax payers. At the expense of what - closing a health clinic for people or a senior citizen center? Yes - that is exactly what will happen!

Is this who you really want for Comptroller? Liu or Weprin. Either they are stupid; they think we are stupid; or they don't care about this.

Can either David Yassky or Melissa Katz do a better job? Only the shadow knows ... but I think anyone who is outraged about what has happened on Wall Street should be just as outraged at this development and think twice before voting for these losers.

Oh BTW - did I mention that Speaker Christine Quinn, Queen of the Slush Fund scandal, is in closed door talks with the industry lobbyists? No? How could I forget? She supports the industry. Of course, no surprise there since her godfather was the late Tom Manton, Emperor of the Queens Democratic Party who "appointed" her speaker.

And you thought this was a democracy? Silly you.

"If it's hot, don't sit on it" department

2009-03-08T00:01:00.001-05:00

"Consumers and voters are hungering for authenticity like never before."
--pollster John Zogby

It’s not that Mayor Michael Bloomberg doesn’t like people, it’s just that he prefers rich ones. How do we know this? He said so, last week! “If you make more money, you deserve more money," he explained during his weekly radio show. Similarly, his recent refusal to extend food stamp benefits to non-working, able-bodied adults reflects his position that work is the best way to escape poverty. (Fair enough. Still, remember, this is the mayor who in 2001 described asthma as a public health problem that comes from "not knowing how to clean." And the same mayor who explained last summer, "if it's hot, don't sit on it," in regard to scorching hot mats at city playgrounds. A real "people person.") He reserves his affection for investment bankers, traders and others who have lost jobs on Wall Street; they'll be the beneficiaries of his $45 million retraining program.

A recent New York Times editorial described Bloomberg's "tough love" stance on food stamps as "cramped." More like morally constipated, and his undemocratic power play over term limits demonstrates that he is bankrupt of integrity.

Is Bloomberg qualified to get the city out of its financial mess, or did he cause it? And how dearly will his term limits debacle cost him in the polls? We shall see.
Will people finally wake up and get real about electing a mayor? What about William C. Thompson and Anthony Weiner (who were described, along with Christine Quinn, in a Wall Street Journal editorial as "the political equivalent of "The Three Stooges")? What do we know about Tony Avella?
Photo credit: Smith/Daily News

NOT MY MAYOR

2009-02-25T20:48:00.001-05:00

or BLOOMBERG TO NEW YORKERS (EXCEPT THE WEALTHY): DROP DEAD

There were two interesting pieces about Mayor Bloomberg in the papers today. Metro ran an excellent op ed piece by Richard Kim, an associate editor of the Nation, which is reproduced below. And the NY Times ran an editorial "Food Stamps in Hard Times", which was critical of Bloomberg blocking an extension of food stamps for able-bodied adults without dependents.

Kim talks about how NYC has not been spared the ravages of the recession – unemployment at 7.4 percent and growing; record homeless rates and the already beleaguered middle class is in full flight from NYC, being driven away by the highest rent, food, child care and utilities bills in the country.

Kim goes on to criticize Mayor Bloomberg’s new $45 million program that would use taxpayer money to retrain “investment bankers, traders and others who have lost jobs on Wall Street.” He intends to set them up with “seed capital and office space.” This from the same man who has refused to accept extra food stamp money from Obama’s stimulus plan.

Bloomberg has never had an ounce of empathy for any living thing – human or animal - and in these dire times, New Yorkers should think twice before giving him a third term. Bloomberg is on a power trip, defying two previous ballot initiatives in which the public had overwhelmingly voted for term limits.

NYC used to be a welcoming city for the middle class – now it is just a bastion for the wealthy.

As Kim says below, New York City "needs a mayor for all of us — for the boroughs, for the poor, for the working class and the laborers and artists, musicians and writers who have made this the best place on earth."

We believe Council Member Tony Avella is the man for the job. He is smart, honest, ethical, cares about people and animals and has some great ideas. He was outstanding at the mayoral forum at Three Parks Independent Democratic club on February 11th. This man needs to have his voice heard!

WRONG MAYOR, WRONG CITY

By Richard Kim

Any erstwhile liberal New Yorkers thinking of supporting Mike Bloomberg’s bid for a third term should do so with their eyes wide open. The city hasn’t been spared the ravages of the recession. As of December, unemployment stood at 7.4 percent, and experts predict almost 300,000 more jobs will be gone by the summer of 2010. Homeless rates are at record highs; the city’s overstretched shelters now take in an average of 36,000 people each night.

The city’s already-beleaguered middle class is in full flight. A recent study by the Center for an Urban Future shows more than 150,000 middle income residents left New York City in 2006, driven away by the highest rent, food, child care and utilities bills in the country. Meanwhile, Manhattan has been rezoned as the almost exclusive playground of the rich.

If Mayor Mike gets re-elected, it will stay this way — or get worse. As the New York Times reported last week, Bloomberg is refusing to accept extra food stamp money from Obama’s stimulus.

In this climate, Bloomberg’s decision is an act of cruel sadism, withholding food (food!) from thousands of hungry mouths to make an ideological point about work. It’s also straight from the playbook of the most reactionary Republican governors, who are threatening to return stimulus money to prove just how much better free markets are than government.

But here’s the really unbelievable part: The next day, Mayor Mike announced a $45 million program that would use taxpayer money to retrain “investment bankers, traders and others who have lost jobs on Wall Street.” Bloomberg intends to set them up with “seed capital and office space” so that they can “promote innovation” and “capture growth.”

There you have a succinct encapsulation of Mike Bloomberg’s priorities. Poor, hungry New Yorkers will be stripped of food stamps that the federal government says is both necessary and good stimulus, while the bollocks-for-brains bankers who got us into this mess will get office space and taxpayer moolah to restart the cycle of speculation.

I love NYC. Right now, NYC needs a mayor for all of us — for the boroughs, for the poor, for the working class and the laborers and artists, musicians and writers who have made this the best place on earth.

AVELLA RANKED BEST IN QUEENS ON HUMAN RIGHTS

2008-12-30T09:18:00.001-05:00

On December 10, 2008, the Urban Justice Center released its report card for the Human Rights Project, which rated NYC Council Members on their human rights record based on key legislation before the City Council in the past year. The Human Rights Project works to hold city government accountable to human rights laws and standards. Click here to see the New York City Council Watch report card.

Council Member Tony Avella, candidate for mayor of NYC in 2009, ranked third on the list. Leticia James ranked first, followed by Charles Barron who ranked second. The issues covered included term limits, voter registration, elder abuse, immigration services, tenant protection, paid family leave and child-health plus - just to name a few.

Read the article in the Queens Ledger by Nathan Duke.

This should answer all those animal haters who think that compassion is a finite quality - that to give any to animals - as Council Member Avella has consistently done - means that you have less for people. Those of us who disagree with this miserly approach know that compassion for animals or humans only generates more compassion. It is an infinite quality and only grows with use.

We are proud of Council Member Tony Avella's achievements and wish him the best in his race for Mayor of NYC. Wouldn't it be great to have a mayor who cares about people and animals?

See his web site - www.tonyavellaformayor.com

Term Limits in New York City

2008-10-26T19:24:00.001-04:00

Re the term limits bill passed by the New York City Council, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge Councilmember Tony Avella's most courageous stand against this anti-democratic power grab by Mayor Bloomberg and Speaker Quinn.

It must further be pointed out that, to those of us who have followed Tony Avella's political career, this sort of laudable behavior is hardly new or unique.

For a long while now, while other hack councilmembers have scraped their knees, cravenly genuflecting at the throne of the Speaker, Tony Avella has been a steadfast profile in courage, prioritizing the best interests of the people of New York City, ahead of political expediency - a priority that has not come without a price tag for Avella, exacted by a vindictive council leadership.

Also, mention must be made of those councilmembers such as Bill DeBlasio, Letitia James, Charles Barron, et al, who with no motivation other than a clear vision of good government, cast a firm "NO" against this naked power grab of Mayor Bloomberg's. They stand in stark contrast to those in the council who, as has been reported, only cast a "NO" vote after passage of the term limits extension bill was considered a fait accompli and their votes against it, meaningless - and only after being given permission by the leadership to vote against the bill.

With Tony Avella's decision to run for Mayor of New York City, the choice is clear. Does New York City want a perpetuation of the cynical, hypocritical, self-interest that defines our current leadership and has perhaps never been so boldly displayed as in this self-serving, term limits extension? Or is it time for honesty and integrity to inform the future of our city.

Note well, this man Tony Avella, for in him you will see a quality in all too short supply in the political world today - that quality, defined by moral excellence, that is INTEGRITY!

TERM LIMITS - THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY SPOKEN -- TWICE!

2008-09-01T15:58:00.001-04:00

In 1993 the people of New York City overwhelmingly voted for term limits. In 1996, the issue came up again and once more it was voted in - this time extending the term from 8 years to 12 because it seemed to make sense at the time.

What about this does the City Council not understand?

Don't they get that New Yorkers, who are quite savvy when it comes to political issues, wanted to restrict those who had a lock on Council seats and other city wide offices - all due to the heavy influence of political clubs.

Who are these council members who blithely ignore the fact that New Yorkers have twice now voted for term limits? Are we gradually moving toward a dictatorship where our opinion or vote does not matter?

According to a recent article in the New York Times on August 28th, a majority of Council Members surveyed supported extending term limits -- even though city residents have twice voted for them. 27 out of 38 interviewed favored extending term limits - only 8 opposed altering the rules.

Each member of the City Council who want the rules changed, while in the middle of the game, knew what they were getting into when they were elected. They include Miguel Martinez and Domenic Recchia, Jr. to name two. Thomas White has an interesting spin n keeping his job - "From the civil rights point of view, term limits have denied people the right to vote because they can't vote for who they want to. If I like the way you represent me in your district, and you enjoy the things I am doing for the district, why would I want to change you?"

You're kidding - right, Mr. White? I mean - that was the whole point of the public voting for term limits because the Council had gotten so stagnant under Peter Vallone. The political clubs with their influence controlled politics even more than they do now. People demanded a chanage. The ballot initiative was true democracy.

And sorry, Kendall Stewart if it has taken you six years to "learn the ropes." Tough learning curve. But you knew that going into this. Don't change rules in the middle of the game!

Ah - but there is still some honor left in politics. John Liu: "The issue at hand is not term limits, it's who decides. Is it 52 people - 51 council members and the mayor - or is it 8 million people?

And our man, Tony Avella is quoted as saying - "The day we change the term limits is the day we take a step toward dictatorship. We seem to have someone in the mayor's office and speaker's office who think they can change the law to stay in office."

Tony Avella is running for the office of Mayor. Visit his site at www.tonyavellaformayor.com to sign his "I support term limits petition."

PROHIBITING TEXT MESSAGING WHILE DRIVING? LET'S BE FAIR ABOUT IT!!

2008-08-17T11:51:00.001-04:00

The New York Times recently reported that Council Member David Weprin is planning to introduce a bill into the NYC Council that would prohibit AUTOMOBILE drivers from text messaging when they are driving. It sounds very responsible ... after all, it is against the law for automobile drivers to talk on their cell phones while driving ... why not text messaging too? ALL drivers should be focused on the road. The operable words here are “ALL” and “AUTOMOBILE.”

I would support this bill with enthusiasm if it covered all drivers on the road. And by that, I mean it needs to include horse-drawn carriage drivers - the ones who drive all over mid-town Manhattan; the ones whose "engines" leave calling cards for people to step in.

Believe it or not, carriage drivers are not required to have a NYS Drivers License to operate their 19^th century contraptions better known as a carriage or buggy. This means they can drive while using their cell phone. They can also read magazines, stand up while driving and my favorite - make u-turns with impunity.

“ What!” You say. “But they drive right in the thick of traffic! How can that be.? I have seen them on many occasions get into messy situations with cars and taxis. I have seen them squeeze in between cars on 9^th Avenue. What gives? Is the City nuts? I’m moving to Canada! Where's my suitcase!"

There, there, now. If you go to Canada, try Toronto. They got rid of horse-buggies in the 1970s. Unfortunately, I do not have too much hope to give you in your quest for sanity and fairness since Mr. Weprin has already taken sides in the horse-drawn carriage debate by supporting a bill that would increase rates for carriage drivers. For those of you who do not know, this is a cash only business. And as with businesses of this type, drivers do not have to report exactly what they earn. Who would know?

Considering that this small industry is the subject of a lot of controversy now, it would behoove Mr. Weprin to stay out of the fray rather than to award the industry a carte blanche rate increase with no give-backs. Particularly since he is running for Comptroller and as such would be handling the City’s money, he should be beyond perceived conflicts of interest.

“My goodness” you say. “Doesn’t the Mayor and Council members – particularly Mr. Weprin care about the safety of pedestrians?” And I say - “Get real." Mr. Weprin only cares about being elected Comptroller so he can control the City’s money and support the carriage industry.

It is the voters – YOU – who have to see the irony in this – Weprin running for comptroller and supporting a cash only business. There are other more qualified candidates for Comptroller such as Council Member David Yassky who has announced his candidacy.

Mr. Weprin’s quote about text messaging is from the New York Times:

“It’s a risk to drivers, obviously, and also to passengers and pedestrians,” Mr. Weprin said in an interview. “You’re not looking at the road and you don’t have both hands on the wheel” when engaged in text-messaging. “The probability for accidents is too high to ignore.” Mr. Weprin said the bill would be modeled on New York State’s ban on the use of cell phones while driving, which imposes a $100 fine for the first infraction.”

Well, Mr. Weprin, you should be fined $100 for introducing such an incomplete, shallow bill.

Of course, drivers should not be on the phone - texting or otherwise when they drive. That is just plain common sense. But this must include ALL DRIVERS.

Trash talk with Jessica Lappin

2008-08-16T00:57:00.001-04:00

From the "Not in My Back Yard" department
The Chapin School "mom-tourage" isn't alone in its opposition to the prospect of a Marine Transfer Station on E. 91st Street. Why, it's right in my back yard, too! Dammit! Mayor Bloomberg says, "Why should the Bronx have a monopoly on trash?" Yorkville residents see things differently, of course. Not to worry about health concerns, though. An administrative law judge has already advised complainers that they can call 311 to air any grievances about unsafe or unsanitary conditions or permit violations that may be observed if the proposed beastly waste center becomes a reality. Not a hotline, but 311. Yep. Don't hold your breath on resolution of your problem.

City Council member Jessica Lappin has emailed constituents to announce that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will hold another public hearing on the issue. It's fun to attend a public hearing with Ms. Lappin in attendance--why, anything can happen! She's a former figure skater, and graceful under pressure!

Save the date: Tuesday, September 16
Time: 1 pm-4:30 pm, and 6 pm-10 pm
Location: New York Blood Center, 310 E. 67th Street
Comments are limited to 5 minutes
Written testimony may be submitted until 5 pm on Monday, Sept. 29
Written comments should be submitted to the New York District Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, 26 Federal Plaza, Rm 1937, and New York, NY 10278-0098.

She kicks ass with bed bugs

2008-08-14T20:44:00.001-04:00

Gale Brewer's tireless efforts to bring about meaningful bed bug legislation haven't helped her in the City Hall newspaper August poll, which asks: Which City Council member would make the best Batman? Read the results
There's still time to vote -- click here and scroll down the page
Note: I attempted to contact Gale Brewer about this situation and others, including her embarrassing flip-flop on the groundbreaking bill to ban horse-drawn carriages. No response. Hope springs eternal.

Is Gale Brewer bugging out?

2008-07-29T23:22:00.001-04:00

Is anyone else worried about City Council member Gale Brewer? She has a lot on her mind, to be sure. Bedbugs, for one thing. But why would she tell a bald-faced lie at a well-attended public meeting? That’s right, she pledged her support for Tony Avella’s legislation that would ban horse-drawn carriages. She still has not signed on as a co-sponsor—six months later! What’s worse, she is stonewalling her constituents who support this landmark measure.

She made this declaration in February at a packed meeting at the New York City Bar Association, where a panel on animal advocacy was gathered to discuss humane legislation and the workings of the City Council. Oh yes, she did! Lawyers, advocates, friends, and Upper West Side constituents—we all listened as she boldly promised her support of Intro. 658.

New Yorkers understand, of course, that Gale Brewer is toiling over a number of important issues. Like bedbugs. In January, she told NY1: “The bottom line is bedbugs must be dealt with.” First things first, Gale.

She must love the bedbug issue with all her heart. Maybe she’ll run for president on the bedbug platform.
Say, did anyone else attend the bedbugger’s recent open house? Always great food. I didn’t see any bedbugs, but I was had an itchy red welt afterward. Thinking about Gale gets me scratching.

TAMMANY HALL REVISITED

2008-07-04T18:59:00.001-04:00

I don't even have to write this piece because Sally Goldenberg from the NY Post says it all. After you read this, please think about whether or not you want someone like Christine Quinn for mayor. She is expected to announce her candidacy at some point. It will mean more corruption, more pork barrel favoritism; more TAMMANY HALL and more politics as usual! It is unfortunate that Tony Avella's district has suffered from this favoritism because he has "defied her." His ethics stand out in a field of political hacks.

NEW YORK POST - July 4, 2008

QUINN PORKS A WALLOP

$$ FOR PALS; FOES STIFFED

By SALLY GOLDENBERG

Speaker Christine Quinn's friends on the City Council brought pounds of pork home to their districts - while neighborhoods represented by members on her enemies list often get beans, a review of this year's budget shows.

Her biggest victim was Tony Avella (D-Queens), whose "sins" were harshly criticizing her over the budget slush-fund scandal, voting against congestion pricing, which she pushed for, and running for mayor, a job she is expected to seek.

He got a mere $340,464 - the lowest of anyone on the council, which he said is "morally and ethically challenged."

Quinn insisted she's not doling out rewards and punishments. "There are many different factors that go into that decision making," she said.

Underscoring her point, Lew Fidler (D-Brooklyn), an opponent of congestion pricing but an overall ally of hers, topped the list with nearly $1.25 million.

Queens Democrat Eric Gioia, who has had several disputes with the speaker's office - though he voted for congestion pricing - got only $360,464.

The same amount went to Charles Barron (D-Brooklyn), who opposed congestion pricing and blamed Quinn for the budget scandal and was angry she refused to name a Brooklyn street after radical Sonny Carson.

Two members - Michael McMahon (D-SI) and Domenic Recchia (D-Brooklyn), who decided at the 11th hour to vote for congestion pricing - each received whopping sums.

McMahon, who also defended Quinn after the scandal, got more than $1.2 million. He noted that he does well each year because he is Staten Island's sole Democrat on the council.

"The speaker never said to me, 'Look, if you vote for congestion pricing you'll get more money, or if you don't, you'll get less money,' " he said, but he acknowledged those who "continuously work with the leadership on issues . . . do well."

Recchia, who received more than $1.1 million, also voted at the last minute for congestion pricing, but said "there was no quid pro quo."

NYC COUNCIL SLUSH FUND LAW SUIT

2008-06-28T15:45:00.001-04:00

Finally something interesting is being done about the NYC Council slush fund scandal that reared its ugly head this past April. At that time, it was revealed that during 2007 and 2008, Speaker Christine Quinn’s office had set aside $4.7 million for thirty different phantom groups. Quinn claimed that she only found out the groups were fake a few months prior and told her staff to stop funneling the money to them. They apparently did not and she claimed she was unaware of this. Hmmmmm. Seems to me in her position that she should have known one way or another.

Quinn became Council Speaker in 2006 when a deal was made with Queens Democratic boss - the late Tom Manton who hand picked her. Gifford Miller, Speaker prior to Quinn, has not addressed this issue. It is interesting to note that Council Member Jessica Lappin was his chief of staff but has not yet been implicated.

On Thursday, June 26th, eight taxpayers asked a judge for a special inquiry into this scandal. Attorney Norman Siegel argued that this highly questionable practice has had a corrosive effect on the public trust. No kidding!

Who better to lead this charge than Norman Seigel, the “People’s Advocate” – and the candidate who should have won the Public Advocate position in 2005. (He lost to Betsy Gottbaum who has been so unsuited for this job.)

If successful, the lawsuit will require that Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Mayor Boomberg to testify under oath about this questionable budget practice.

The people deserve better than Christine Quinn for Speaker -- or for Mayor.