Albany Hurries to Spend Stimulus Cash; Bloomberg Wants Fair Share

With New York getting a hefty chunk of the federal stimulus package (or, as the Obama administration would like to call it, the American Recovery & Reinvestment Plan), it turns out that state officials are trying to figure out how to spend it quickly enough! According to the NY Times, "Nearly every day, officials from 20 agencies meet there to sift through hundreds of proposals, from waste-treatment plants to courthouses to emergency wireless systems."

They are racing against the clock because a lot of the money is "reserved for large-scale capital projects, money that must be spent quickly — in some cases in a few months — to help jump-start the economy." Timothy Gilchrist, Governor Paterson's senior adviser for infrastructure and transportation, was philosophical and told the Times, "It’s better than being on the other side. I’m Captain Asphalt." While doling out stimulus money could helpful to Paterson's image, some local officials are worried that while capital projects are getting greenlit, there isn't money for basic operating expenses of their towns.

In another facet of stimulus money, Mayor Bloomberg isn't very happy with how Albany is allocating the stimulus funds. The city believes it should receive $2.1 billion from the Medicaid stimulus money, but Albany is only giving $1.9 billion (they have differing opinions on how that's calculated). Mayoral spokesman Stu Loeser said, "The mayor has repeatedly said he was concerned that federal stimulus money meant for the city would get lost in Albany, and we are already seeing a clear example."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Chung in News on March 5, 2009 10:00 AM

Comments [rss]

ma bell

i take it that since all anybody can talk about is bloomberg...you must agree that your savior has done nothing but fuck up since taking office. this complete joke of a stimulus package is costing us billions of dollars on projects that don't fucking need to be done! they don't even know how to spend the money! half of this shit is going to go down the tubes on pet projects, wasting craploads of money and setting us back years!

steal from the rich...give to the poor. don't worry how hard anybody is working. i bust my ass at work and am a good person...but you take my money and give it to some slacker who has no desire to work hard. this is disgusting.

freaking guys are too busy bashing rush limbaugh and jim cramer. spend more time fixing the economy and less time bashing talking heads!

http://www.mainstreet.com/article/moneyinvesting/news/cramer-my-response-white-house?page=1

NannyState

Save us, Captain Asphalt!

pal

"There's no blurring of editorial and advertising."

of course there is a blurring. there is always some blurring somewhere.

i'm sure there are certain politcal organizations or groups you wouldn't offer an adverstising package too.

or certain groups that many people find offensive that if they apporached you you would decline.

tien

Yeah, and that's a decision that Jake and I make. Not something that we leave up to the editors. It's how businesses work, pal. Do you expect a TV or radio station not to run ads for any of the mayoral candidates? Or other issues?

pal

so i guess if david duke was running for public office here in nyc and had lots of cash to spend on ads, gothamist would have david duke ads all over it's site.

i understand tien mao. it's business in the end. true. though sometimes ads are pulled for certain issues or not shown to begin with because "so and so" or some other group of people were or could be offended - they might me too controversial and there would be a backlash. but i guess bloomberg doesn't offend enough people the way he offends me so who cares if his ads are all over gothamist (or if it bothers me).

anyway, thanks for your feedback.

tien

Speaking as someone selling ads on Gothamist, this goes without saying, but I'll say it anyway: There's no blurring of editorial and advertising.

The fact is, Gothamist is a business and Bloomberg 2009 helps support that business as much as all our other advertisers do. And when Weiner, Thompson, Avella, Catsimatidis, and anyone else running approaches us to advertise their candidacies, we'll offer them the exact same advertising package that we offered Bloomberg.

pal

i suppose there are ways to block the ads but...

i read gothamist because...

i think that most of the media is a heap of garbage. i read bbc news and the times and cnn but i like gothamist as sort of a grass roots do-it-youself news blog that sorts through all of the trash and picks out edible bits and it seemed to be fairly objective with the comments and all as well. but we have a man running for mayor who took our vote away (forcing his way to running for a third term). he's also worth billions of dollars. the other candidates don't have anywhere near this kind of money to plaster the city with ads and brainwash the less informed into making a balanced decision on who to elect mayor. it's grotesque!!! it disappoints me that gothamist has these bloomberg ads popping up all over the place. it's disappointing actually. it's being subservient. we value the wrong things in our society.

Steven

Use firefox and adblock plus and you don't see any ads.

pal

they don't work for free but they still pick and choose their ads okay? a power hungry billionaire who is running for public office is now going to plaster his ads all over every blog that's out there. while other candidates who don't have the same money don't get to do this. it sucks and gothamist is going along with it.

it's tacky and creepy in a way. it makes gothamist look a little less objective too. it just feels "toolish".

pal

these constant bloomberg ads on gothamist are making sick.

PTG in nyc

Gothamist gotta get paid yo. Even though this is only a blog, there's plenty of Bloomberg rips on Gothamist for me to believe that they have not blurred the line between editorial and advertising, so it is what is is, but Jen and company don't work for free! That said, I'm sure they could use more volunteers (wink wink).