HOPE FOR PROSPECT PARK The proposed car-free Prospect Park trial might not be dead after all. Though the last official word from the city was that nothing will happen before the council allocates $250,000 for another traffic study, we hear that a trial ban will be announced soon. However, it won't be the 100-percent car-free ban that park advocates have called for. Rather, it will be some sort of limited ban. That might not satisfy car-ban advocates, who believe any trial would have to replicate the conditions of a total ban in order to demonstrate the minimal effect on traffic such a ban would have.

A trial that calls for continual opening and closing of the park drive would only confuse motorists, causing them to drive to the park to see if it's open, which adds traffic to the streets around the park. If motorists knew the park were permanently closed to traffic, fewer would venture in the park's direction. This is a pattern of motorist behavior that has been observed in numerous cases where major roadways have been closed for extended periods without adjacent streets being adversely affected.

TISH, TISH Too bad for Tish James. We heard a rumor that she has been told by Assemblyman Roger Green to forget about running for City Council again this year because he will be supporting the incumbent, James Davis. We could not track down Green or James for a comment, but Davis told us he'd heard the same rumor.

If it's true, one has to wonder what's behind it. Green was a strong backer of James in her 2001 race against Davis, and Davis retaliated by endorsing Hakeem Jeffries over Green last fall. The answer may simply be that Green and Davis both saw little to be gained from supporting candidates who lose. Or it may be more complicated than that. We'll try to find out.

LEW TARGETS LOUDMOUTHS City Councilman Lew Fidler has attended enough of his two kids' Little League baseball games to become fed up with parents who berate players, coaches, and umpires from the stands. Too often he's seen polite efforts at diplomacy fail. The nice thing about being an elected official is that you can do something about these bozos, or at least try. Fidler introduced a bill that would allow youth organizations to bar unruly spectators from events. "The idea is to set up kid zones," Fidler said. "(Adults) can come, but this facility, this event, this enjoyment, belongs to the kids."

Fidler is aiming at behavior that is not criminal but is nonetheless intolerable. "I've seen some of this conduct for myself. Ninety-nine percent of the parents and participants want to crawl underneath the bleachers when this one spectator gets out of control," said Fidler. For stepping up to the plate against Little League loudmouths, Fidler gets our Cheer of the Week. Unfortunately, Fidler failed to run his idea past Mayor Mike Bloomberg before holding a hearing at the Youth Services Committee he chairs. The mayor's representative took the microphone and announced that Fidler's bill would lead to mayhem.

"The mayor's people completely misunderstood it and testified against it… I suggested they send over the words (for the bill) that would make them comfortable," said Fidler, who assured them "that we weren't empowering vigilante mobs to pulverize people." Wait a second. Mobs to pulverize idiots who ruin youth sports-that might actually work. Someone call Tony Soprano.

CASEY AT BAT AGAIN Former School District 15 Superintendent Bill Casey didn't stay retired for long. A couple of weeks after leaving his job at the school's chancellor's office, Casey resurfaced as director of education for The After-School Corporation. TASC is a city-based not-for-profit dedicated to after-school programs in New York that eventually hopes to go national. One of the board members Casey will be answering to is Brooklyn-bred Jay Kriegel, leading the effort to bring the Summer Olympics here in 2012.

CANARSIE MADHOUSE HIT A lawsuit charges that Seaport Manor in Canarsie routinely neglected psychiatric patients in crisis, haphazardly distributed psychotropic medication, misappropriated money, and was infested with vermin. The lawsuit, filed by Attorney General Eliot Spitzer in response to a New York Times exposé, could finally bring justice to the sleazy operators of the home, alleged to have garbage strewn about, layers of mouse droppings, roaches, flies, fleas, and broken furniture, and where some residents began to decompose before staff members even knew they were dead.

Other than that, it was a fine place to live.

STROKE OF BRILLIANCE Bensonhurst Assemblyman Bill Colton came up with a brilliant way for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to mitigate the impact on city residents of a fare hike. His idea: don't do it. Now, why didn't we think of that?

Colton actually scheduled a press conference to discuss his proposal, which calls for city residents to pay less than others for MetroCards. We are more likely to see Colton's corpulent aide Carmine Santa Maria slip down our chimney in his famous Santa suit. We shouldn't be mean, given that Colton's token gesture at least calls attention to the negative impact a fare hike would have on folks who already pay much more of the true cost of their rides than transit users in other cities.

We'd even agree with the notion that commuters from Long Island, Westchester, New Jersey, and Connecticut should pay more to take the subway that we do, since they no longer even pay a commuter tax, let alone city income taxes to help fund the transit system. But the political environment simply won't allow a two-tiered fare system-even though LIRR commuters get a per-ride government subsidy four times greater than that of subway riders. (Government rewards people for moving out of the city, then wonders why it can't stem suburban sprawl. Baffling.)

But back to Colton's idea. Since the vast majority of subway and bus riders live in the five boroughs, a fare hike that spares them wouldn't raise nearly enough money to close the MTA's purported deficit. It would also create an immediate black market for reduced-fare MetroCards. Colton's plan won't reach the MTA's boardroom without hitting the third rail.

GOIN' BACK TO BROOKLYN Councilman Jim Oddo's bid for three exclusively Staten Island council districts has ended. It now appears he will retain about a third of his 42,000 Brooklyn constituents when new district lines are adopted later this year.

The first draft of the new lines dropped the Brooklyn portion of Oddo's 50th district, resulting in three Staten Island districts with about 148,000 residents each-the smallest in the city. Theoretically, that would give each resident more political power than, say, the 159,000 in the Sunset Park-based 38th district.

Latino groups complained vociferously to the mayor, who controls seven of the 15 districting commission members. Oddo has just three appointees, so he wasn't in a position to pick up his soccer ball and go home-despite the senselessness of throwing Bensonhurst and Dyker Heights into a Staten Island district. Instead, sources tell us, Oddo agreed to take back some Brooklyn blocks if he could hand-pick them, as well as draw exactly the lines he wanted in Staten Island (the goal being to ensure he and fellow Republican Andrew Lanza win reelection, not to mention help a Republican win the Bay Ridge council race in November 2003).

So Oddo will keep about 14,500 Republican-leaning constituents in the southern and western border of his current Brooklyn territory. How was he able to achieve that with just three appointees on a 15-member commission? Because they are the swing voters. Without them, neither the mayor's nor the council speaker's appointees can get anything done.

None of this should have been necessary, given the silliness of the notion that Latinos would be robbed of political power if a couple of their districts were 9 percent more populated than some other districts. The average New Yorker derives precious little power from his councilmember, who casts a single vote in a 51-member body overshadowed by the mayor and state government.

PERRY PEEVED, NOT PLOTTING East Flatbush Assemblyman Nick Perry is still upset with Councilman Kendall Stewart, who's also the male Democratic district leader in Perry's 58th Assembly District. But Perry told us he's not scheming to oust Stewart in the council primary next September, though it was inevitable such a rumor would crop up given the recent icy relationship between the two.

The source of the rift was Stewart's endorsement of Republican Governor George Pataki last fall. It was a highly unusual endorsement, given that Stewart's constituency is largely black and Democratic, and overwhelmingly supported Carl McCall in the gubernatorial election. Such endorsements generally are made in exchange for goodies, namely discretionary money from Pataki's allies in the state government, but Stewart isn't eligible for any of that because he's a city official, not a state assemblyman or senator. Also, as Perry noted, Stewart's endorsement was of no apparent benefit to Pataki-no surprise since the 58th A.D. has 46,004 registered Democrats and just 2,468 Republicans. "He really didn't do anything to help the governor, so the governor is not indebted to him at all," Perry said.

As for the rumors that Perry is combing the district for a candidate to run for Stewart's council seat, Perry said, "I just want to deny that, categorically. I am not recruiting anybody." But the assemblyman said he'd consider supporting someone else when the time comes. "There are candidates strong enough to provide Kendall with a serious challenge, especially with this bogeyman he's going to carry around with him for the rest of his political life," Perry said, referring to the Pataki endorsement. "Before that, there was no question as to whom we would support for City Council next year."

Perry said as a councilman, Stewart is entitled to support any candidate he chooses. But as a Democratic district leader, "Kendall has a second obligation that he has to remain mindful of at all times. He's responsible for bringing home the Democratic candidate in each election." Perry added, "This is not just Kendall. Quite a few Democratic district leaders in Brooklyn are guilty of that. And we wonder why the Republicans have made headway…" The district leader who attracted the most attention for endorsing Pataki and other Republicans was Sheepshead Bay's Mike Geller, who probably didn't get invited to any Nick Perry holiday parties this year. "His claim to fame is as a Democratic district leader, but he keeps endorsing Republicans. He should run for Republican district leader," Perry said. "What use is he to the Democratic Party if he's going to steal the platform…and then seek fame and fortune, (and say) 'Now that I have the platform, I'm going to help elect a Republican.'"

Geller's position has always been that he's simply looking for the best candidate. But certainly the leanings of his district toward Rudy Giuliani and Pataki influenced Geller's endorsements of the two Republicans. Stewart's situation was entirely different and could threaten his reelection in September, Perry said. "I think he made a very bad move and he has alienated a lot of support I think he will need next year," said the assemblyman, noting, "He won with a mere 20 percent of the vote" in 2001.

But Perry and Stewart have been allies in the past, and did collaborate in their support of Kevin Parker's successful run for state Senate this fall. "I would deny that Kendall is not an ally," said Perry. "Kendall is an ally. Since his election we have worked together pretty well." He concluded, "I will see the way the dice rolls, and maybe next year I'll support Kendall. Maybe I'll support somebody else."

Borough Politics Archive

2002
December 30 column.
December 23 column.
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
Novemer 25 column.
Novemer 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.
October 28 column.
October 21 column.
October 14 column.
October 7 column.
September 30 column.
September 23 column.
September 16 column.
September 9 column.
September 2 column.
August 26 column.
August 19 column.
August 12 column.
August 5 column.
July 29 column.
July 22 column.
July 8 column.
July 1 column.
June 17 column.
June 10 column.
June 3 column.
May 27 column.
May 20 column.
May 13 column.
May 6 column.
April 29 column.
April 22 column.
April 15 column.
April 8 column.
April 1 column.
March 25 column.
March 18 column.
March 11 column.
March 4 column.
February 25 column.
February 18 column.
February 11 column.
February 4 column.
January 28 column.
January 21 column.
January 7 column.

2001
December 10 column.
December 3 column.
November 19 column.
November 12 column.
November 5 column.
October 22 column.
October 1 column.
September 6 column.
September 4 column.
August 30 column.
July 23 column.
July 2 column.
June 25 column.
June 11 column.
May 28 column.
May 21 column.
May 14 column.
May 7 column.
April 30 column.
April 23 column.
April 9 column.
April 2 column.
March 26 column.
March 19 column.
March 12 column.
March 5 column.
February 26 column.
February 19 column.
February 12 column.
February 5 column.
January 29 column.
January 22 column.
January 15 column.
January 8 column.
January 1 column.

2000
December 25 column.
December 18 column.
December 11 column.
December 4 column.
November 27 column.
November 20 column.
November 13 column.
November 6 column.
October 30 column.
October 23 column.
October 16 column.
October 9 column.
October 2 column.
September 25 column.
September 18 column.
September 11 column.
September 4 column.
August 28 column.
August 21 column.
August 7 column.
July 31 column.
July 24 column.
July 17 column.
July 10 column.
June 26 column.
June 19 column.
June 12 column.
May 15 column.
May 8 column.
April 24 column.
April 10 column.
March 13 column.
March 7 column.
February 21 column.
February 14 column.
February 7 column.
January 31 column.
January 24 column.
January 17 column.

1999
December 16 column.
December 9 column.
December 2 column.
November 25 column.
November 18 column.
November 11 column.
November 4 column.