Search
Secret Development Deals and Why I Oppose Bloomberg
Many of the Bloomberg apologists on Daily Gotham try to claim that either he has nothing to do with the horrible development plans that are sweeping NYC, or that the process is all open to the public and hence people MUST be happy with these development plans. But the truth is very different. The process is NOT an open one. Instead, community-developed plans are ignored and secret deals are made behind closed doors between representatives of Pataki and Bloomberg and Bruce Ratner.
Let’s start with an August 20, 2005 article in the
http://dailygotham.com/blog/mole333/secret_development_deals_and_why_i_oppose_bloomberg
Mouse over the text to select it, then press Ctrl-C to copy it.
Bi-partisan sellouts
While I agree with 90% of what you have to say, I think you are picking on the wrong people. Yes, Bloomberg and Pataki support the Ratner plan, but so does almost every prominent Dem in the city, including Marty 'ra ra Brooklyn' Markowitz, who sold Ratner on the Arena idea initially, every democratic candidate for Mayor, and pretty much all but a handful of councilcritters and reps, with the excpetion of Leticia James, Major Owens, Velmanette Montgomery and Charles Barron.
Let's not mince words, both of the corporate parties sell out to the developers, and are rewarded handsomely (take a look at Markowitz' donors, for starters).
We need really progressives in power who will stand up to the devlopers, and we're not finding them in the democratic party right now.
Gloria Mattera just made the ballot with more than 7000 signatures as the Green Party candidate for Brooklyn Borough President. She's up against Marty, Ratner and hundreds of thousands of dollars in real estate and developer money - slide over to www.electgloria.org to give her a much needed donation (eligible for a 4-1 match, probably 5-1 when Marty oges over the limit, as he's banking a war chest to run for Mayor in 2009)
Say no to Bruce Ratner and Marty Markowitz - Gloria Mattera for Brooklyn Boro President: www.electgloria.org
I guess I have a skewed view
I have more contact with Chris Owens than any other politician (see my previous diary on this) and I have some contact (indirectly) with Letitia James (who I think is a friend of the Owens') and Norman Titus. My Councilman is Yasskey and I think his stand on Atlantic Yards means when he goes up against Chris Owens for Congress in 2006, I will be strongly supporting Chris. I like Yasskey, but he seems to fall into your catagory.
I want to start by making something very clear. I do not like and do not agree with the Green Party claim that the Dems and Repubs are the same. I think it is a lie to get noticed and I will never forgive Nader for using to the nation's detrement in 2000. Even Bloomberg is more corporate, pro-Development than any Dem. And the Repub pro-Development stand is really pro-Developer while the Dems are more leaning towards the labor stand (which is partly wrong) of more jobs...the net result is almost the same, though the Dems push for more affordable housing and such. The Dems are a good party, but they have been exceesively influenced by big money these days. Why? I say it is because the left hasn't worked hard enough. Participation from the grassroots is what balances big money interests. The politicians need either money or strong grassroots to win. If the grassroots don't come out, the big money is the main influence. If you are following Brooklyn, you know that in the Brooklyn DA's race the vastly superior, most progressive candidate, Paul Wooten, had to drop out. Not enough money and support. So we are left with inferior, less progressive candidates. Why? Because he was largely ignored by the left. Where were all the leftists who complain about how bad the Dem candidates are when Paul Wooten, a person whose progressive credentials are impeccable, needed help? The main person I know pushing for him was the person who ran the Kerry campaign in Brooklyn. Few Greens, Deans or Kucinichers seemed to be helping him. That is a failure on our part as much as it is a failure on Paul's part. If we want to turn the Dems more progressive, we gotta do better!
Having said all that, I am torn on the Green challenge to Marty. On the one hand, I like Marty! I can't help it! I have liked him since he marched with the pro-Choice march before the RNC last year. He is a GOOD BP, if you ignore development issues. Hell, he may be the PERFECT BP if you ignore that one issue. But I can't ignore development issues. So I am happy to see a Green challenge to him. It also is a race that is perfect for a Green challenge (unlike the recent Pres elections!). So, for the first time since 2000, I will consider voting Green. In 2000 I swore I never would again, but maybe...just maybe I will. Question: Where is WFP on this race? I like WFP better than Green overall (especially since Letitia James' election!).