Gothamist: Mayoral Hopefuls Debate the Parks

Tony

Tue, 27 Sep 2005 19:37:36 -0500

This could be the last fall season for two treasured parks. Macombs Dam and Mullaly Parks across the street from Yankee Stadium may be destroyed until we rise up and voice our concerns. If these parks are seized by business, is any park really safe? Find out more at www.yankeesstayhome.com and www.saveourparks.blogspot.com

freaky

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 19:03:51 -0500

Wacky, you're totally right. Benepe should have been canned. What he says reflects upon the Mayor. If he thinks that THIS is "Nature taking it's course", he should first understand that, no, crack smoking prostitutes and homeless shanty towns aren't nature taking it's course. And secondly it's the job of the Parks Department to take care of parks. It's his job. He gets paid to do the opposite of his job! How much does he get paid?! Outrageous.

Borges

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:54:51 -0500

Private funds from 5th ave donors did save Central Park from being a shanty town and helped turn it into the manicured garden it is now - that's okay in the short run BUT it sets a dangerous precedent. which is that one way to keep from having to maintain our vital shared infrastructure, our commons, is to privitize them. Privatize the parks, the water lines, the highways, seaports, the internet, the electronic frequencies (for TV and radio)... it not only lets government off the hook as the defined steward of these things as outlined in Rousseau's "Social Contract" but it also opens the door for a neo-landowning class which has well-funded representation from several elected officials and judges who rule in favor of corporate freedom and against individual rights. Full civic engagement, which is what we should strive for in a democracy, means that we should operate as if we live in a commonwealth. Note I'm not talking about socialism or communism. Of course not. But this trend of privatizing anything of any worth does not a healthy democracy make. It might make for a nice new aristocracy or it might make a nice healthy feudalism - but it was not intended by the framers of our Constitution who were themselves students of Rousseau and Grotius.

James

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:48:00 -0500

Scott, you're right. I'm a community gardening guy in South Bronx. What most Parks advocates fight for is the small neighborhood park or green space. THey don't fight to make Bryant Park even more pristine. Parks Commissioner Benepe was right when he said that the plots of green in a grey urban landscape are one of the things that make city life livable. What he wasn't right in saying was that some neighborhood parks aren't worth taking care of. Scott, throwing (capital) money at parks to have ribbon cuttings is exactly what the Mayor has been doing. What sensible people want is to spend that money instead on MAINTENANCE. Parks staff has been cut beyond the point where parks stay in good shape, the result is that they devolve into anarchic savagery and need monsterous infusions of capital money to completely rebuild the place. And there is a real sense of ownership of the land, we own parkland. We own it. It's ours. Generations of our tax dollars have paid for it and now it's our duty to MAINTAIN it. I don't have a chainsaw to clear fallen limbs so we also own the Parks Department. If the park is maintained well it will attract users, the crack smoking prostitutes will have a hard time setting up shantys, then there will be no need to send cops to 'enforce the park' like it's some sort of DMZ. It will be instead like Walt Whitman said of Fort Greene Park, "the lungs of the community." The barometer for the health of the neighborhood.

wacky

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:41:05 -0500

Benepe's explicit unwillingness to fulfill his mandate is shocking. He ought to be fired.

Aiko Texiera

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:16:51 -0500

I was there. Your coverage is killer. Though I do wish Weiner had been able to go. When Miller is on fire it's because he's a ham and gets laughs, but when Weiner is on fire it's because he goes on these detail-laden rhetorical rants that get the policy wonk in me giggling with joy. I don't know if Anthony's my guy, but he is impressive. I want Ferrer to 1) sign the pledge 2)talk about all issues with the zeal he used to bash the mayor's comissioner. Check that story out. How this guy still has his job is beyond me. Apparently the chair of the Parks Committee wrote a furious letter to the mayor about it. The mayor blinked a few times in response.

Scott Sala

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:05:41 -0500

I can't believe how much people get worked up over Central Park. Gimme a break. It is a wonder of the country, and to bitch about certain points when the forum's intent is to focus on parks that actually need help is a grave misunderstanding. The answer lies in not 1% of my taxpayer money, but in private endeavors like Bryant Park. When we just assume throwing my hard-earned dollars at a park will magically make thigns great, we all lose. Oh, sure, it'll look great once the ribbon is cut, but without business interests tied to these projects, and a real sense of ownership of the land, many of these restored places will fade as soon as the gov't takes away the maintenance money and depends on police to keep things in order.

J

Wed, 27 Jul 2005 15:44:53 -0500

The big issue as far as park rules should be banning cars! Olmstead and Vaux never planned on letting cars in Central or Prospect Parks. In fact, Central Park was designed with transverses to hide crossing cars from view. Let's get cars out of the parks so that money spent on repairing park drives can go to better causes. The parks should be a refuge in a city where very few have their own backyards. It's amazing how worked up the Conservancy gets over potential damage to the grass, but willingly allows cars to sully the peaceful oasis that could be Central Park.