It seems like Al Vann has been around Brooklyn’s politics since George Washington was president of the USA; no joke. In politics, his name has been discussed more times than the daily weather report on any television station. I have been told that over the years he has been a teacher, unionist, political activist and elected official. He was an assembly member in the Albany legislature for 27 years (1974-2001). He won election to the New York city council in 2001. Some of his detractors have suggested that he came here on pre-retirement leave.

I know that there are some good things that Al Vann has done -in terms of public service- and I believe that one of these days a street in Bed-Stuy will be named after him. After all, he has held public office for about 35 years. Fine.

Lew Fidler is a fixture in NYC politics, has been so for years and years. It seems that he has spent a lifetime of heavy involvement in Brooklyn’s politics, especially in the areas of Midwood, Carnarsie and East Flatbush. For a pragmatic politician -as compared to a political idealist- he has done relatively well for himself. His mother was heavily involved in the politics of East Flatbush for eons, and many of his relatives are also stuck deep in the trenches of Brooklyn’s politics. There is nothing wrong with that. There seems to be some family friction but that’s personal stuff and I won’t touch it; not my political business.

Leroy Comrie has been around the city council for the last quarter century or so. Comrie was Archie Spingner’s chief of staff. For many years Spigner was the deputy speaker of that body. Spigner used to represent St. Albans in Queens until he was term-limited in 2001. He was the council member for about two decades. Then Leroy won the seat; so between the two of them, this district has been on Spigner-Comrie lock-down for a very long time.

Look; before I go forward here, let emphatically state that I have total respect for Al Vann, and his fights for black-empowerment, inclusion and respect. I admire and respect his contributions to the politics of this city; but you have got to know when to quit. You have got to know when you have gone past your prime and your usefulness.

As for Lew Fidler, I want to believe that we have an amiable relationship. Sure he is a very strong advocate for his people (Jews/Caucasians); but that’s his obligation. Despite this, he has always found ways to work with blacks, to accomplish meaningful things on the other side of the tracks -so to speak. And I can prove this.

In political races -and on some political issues- Lew and I have been on opposite sides many a time, and in general, it was adversarial but with mutual respect. So this column is not about some hatchet job by me. On the contrary: I am trying to make a point about the term-limits extension issue. And I know that some of you out there will doubt my disclaimer, given that Lew and I spar a lot on these blogs. Contrary to the attacks from my detractors, I do try to write it and call it as truthfully as possible -given my limitations. Truth be told, Lew and I have many many mutual friends; so I do respect him from many angles. But it’s possible that Lew and I will probably always find ourselves in adversarial situations. It’s obvious that Lou and I are different, in terms of our political-philosophy, values, aims, approaches, ideals, objectives and motivations.

I don’t know Leroy Comrie too well. We have met quite a few times but only in casual ways. On 7-29-2006, I wrote a column entitled: “Naming names, and taking no prisoners…etc.” In this article I exposed the fact that Leroy Comrie had raised $211,624 from 683 people. This money was for his re-election to the council in 2005. I also exposed the fact that he had spent $193,629 of this money, and still had some other outstanding liabilities at that point. What was striking to me was the fact that Leroy Comrie had no primary opponent. He also had no challenger for the general election. As far as my recollection goes, his name appeared on the Democratic, Republican and Working Families Party lines. He may have even been placed on the Independent Party line for all you know. I found this disgraceful. He spent all this money for what purpose? He never had a friggin race. He had no opponent.

To me, this type of behavior coming from elected officials, necessitate some kind of investigation from the authorities. There was none. In my article, I also exposed others who had similarly abused the Campaign Finance system; it was all to no avail. Most of the others were white, but that’s just incidental. Blacks, whites, Hispanics, et al., they all abuse the Campaign Finance system. I don’t think mainstream media (MSM) pays enough attention to things like these. I don’t think the district attorneys of all five boroughs -nor the state attorney general- really understand what’s going on here, and how all this looks to John and Jane Q. Public.

If you go to my archives on Room Eight New York politics (www.r8ny.com), you will find this and other articles where I took Comrie to task. There have always been defenders of his, coming up on the website to hit back at me: fine. Lew Fidler is one of Comrie’s staunchest defenders. And that’s okay too; it is his prerogative to defend Leroy whenever he deems it necessary, like recently, when I took Comrie to task for his performance during the public hearings on the term-limits extension bill.

So now, I have a few questions for Al, Lew and Leroy -since all three voted for the vomitable extension bill- and I need to ask them before it’s too late. Why do you all think that you need four more years in the council? I could also ask this of few others too, and I probably will do that soon enough.

I am sure that Leroy had been involved in politics long before he got to Archie Spigner’s staff, and I am concluding (based on observation and resident-reports) that the quality of life in St. Albans has deteriorated -over the time Leroy has been either elected/or influential, in the decision making of the district. This is not to say that it is strictly Leroy’s fault, but it happened on his watch: no matter what the deeper causes and reasons.

It’s a fact that in this area crime has grown steadily over that time. The housing stock has been dilapidating to some extent and foreclosures of private homes have now become a major issue. Difficult issues in education still naggingly persist. There are many youth problems in the district: gangs and gang warfare persist. There are many issues around senior-care, female-safety, sexual crimes, jobs, community direction and future economic development; especially since Rev. Floyd Flake resigned from Congress. There are quality of life issues that concern many homeowners here too. And I could go on enumerating problems and issues at hand. It’s really a microcosm of the city relative to areas where blacks and Hispanics predominate.

In the areas where Lew Fidler holds court there are issues/problems similar to those in Comrie’s district. What’s worse for Lew is the fact that he wears many other hats. Lew has been the democrat’s District Leader for almost two decades or so. And I am not suggesting that he is derelict in his duties or responsibilities, but I am saying that there are many problems in the area that need addressing: like yesterday. As an educator, I can say that problems of overcrowded schools and large class sizes are ones that stands out here.

My point is this: if elected officials are given significant times in office, but still fail to solve or resolve problems/issues; then why should their terms be extended? After all this time in positions of influence (or as elected officials), what more can they do that they haven’t done or tried? Isn’t it time for new blood? Isn’t it time for new ideas or contributions? Isn’t it time for different approaches? Isn’t it time for different leaders?

If someone has been in office for eons, and the problems of the area he/she represents perpetuate; don’t they have enough decency to introspect and then do the right thing: leave. No matter how good the intentions of Leroy Comrie and Lew Fidler, they -like many others in the council- need to do some serious retrospection. You see, they don’t own the council; they are guests of the voters, and the voters have demanded term limits. In fact: the voters have twice spoken on term limits. Like any refined guest, members like Comrie, Fidler, Vann and others, should know when it is time to leave.
Fellas: don’t let the door hit your backs on the way out; please.

Stay tuned-in folks.