Also, just a note, the Green Party and Occupy are not the same group. There are many devoted and intelligent people active in the Green Party who never set foot at Occupy. The Four Pillars of the Green Party are 1) ecological wisdom , 2) social justice, 3) grassroots democracy , and 4) nonviolence, which to me is not a bad framework to approach public policy. Rochester needs a government that is inclusive, invigorating, focused on the entire fabric of our community. We have too much potential as a community to keep limping along like this. We need to give people a real stake in their neighborhoods, a real voice at the table, and empower them to help drive this city forward, which is what the Green Party puts on the table.
Our current budget situation is pretty dire, we are at the point of closing down libraries and recreation centers, delaying critical infrastructure projects, and cutting community and youth services. I would say that asking whether the amazingly low property values these deals grant and the low taxes they allow businesses to pay is good for Rochester is a perfectly fair question. I don't disagree that we should encourage businesses to grow in Rochester, but at what cost? How many jobs is a recreation center for at risk inner city youth worth? 10? 50? 200? We're talking two issues, the taxes these deals set and the assessments granted, and I don't think it is unreasonable to ask that Rochester businesses deal with a higher level on both of those scores so that we don't pass all of the pain of our budget crisis to the residents who live here. Having a serious conversation about the budget and not talking about the tax breaks and property assessments for major development deals is unproductive and shortsighted. Tom Richards and Lovely Warren won't even talk about this issue, and Alex White is making a valid argument. Maybe Rochester simply cannot afford these deals at the levels we have been granting them, we are simply passing on too much pain to the people who live here, we're at risk of slashing the social fabric of Rochester in this budget season, and I think we need to change our priorities to benefit everyone in Rochester and not just the businesses that operate here. I think everyone would agree that Rochester needs a new economic vision, and 40 years of one party Democratic rule hasn't brought it.
I like the idea of state guidelines, but I like the idea of more community oversight and veto over these tax-break packages. The list of COMIDA board members is mostly business executives of varying fields, with a union member and a few lawyers. I'm not saying these people aren't qualified or are evil or malicious, but it means that these tax breaks are being given out by a very narrow slice of the Rochester community. I would advocate for more community members, perhaps a rotating member from a neighborhood council, maybe a college professor, community advocates on issues like housing or poverty. We need to stop letting these tax breaks be given out by the business community, and deal with them holistically with the whole Rochester community in mind.
MJN - I know it's been a month. I didn't see your response.
First, I recommend spending an hour or two perusing thenewspaper.com, you'll come away as pissed off at the way government treats its citizen drivers as I am.
Second - Admittedly, until the City of Rochester decides to start enforcing the tickets with more than just strongly worded letters, they aren't "unconstitutional" in the strictest sense. However, it is still creepy as hell.
Third - Court decisions: Sixth Amendment violation decision: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/37/3714.a…
Due process violations: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/38/3802.a…
Certainly there are cases on the site wherein courts have accepted some red light systems as well, but the execution of these systems, in the main, is a tale of corruption, graft, or otherwise poor judgement due to using private industry to do public safety jobs. From all I've heard and read, the city is learning from past mistakes, and the current lack of effective enforcement (requiring people to be fearful enough of a letter with the photo and the police shield to send money is not as effective as a personal stop by a cop) only leads me to believe that it is nothing but a money-grab.
While going through the articles on that website, be sure to pay particular attention to the articles about how cameras actually compromise traffic safety and that there are a whole bunch of other, more cost-effective and less intrusive/less constitutionally questionable methods to increase safety.
Full disclosure: I do not own a gun, and I think my wife still has a .22 rifle that hasn't been out of the closet in years.
How about a website that tracks auto deaths, or smoking-related deaths, or any number of other causes of death? The numbers do NOT warrant a response. How many millions of guns and gun owners versus how many deaths? Such a tiny percentage. And don't give me any crap about one death being too many. If that were the case airplanes, swimming pools, ginsu knives and water balloons would all be outlawed.
It is about rights.
Why do we insist on continuing to give away our rights?
Our rights are being eroded a little at a time, all in the name of "safety" or "protecting the children". With the exception of cannabis in Colorado and Washington, when was the last time anybody in this country earned MORE freedom? The fact that both of those were referendums voted in by the people is quite telling. The government has us under pretty much daily surveillance. I can't go to work without being seen by at least 10 light-pole cameras and risking tickets at 2 red-light intersections. The NSA hoovers up any and all electronic communications. They don't do much with it now... but they can. The TSA ignores the 4th amendment, as does stop-and-frisk. My students go to school only after going through metal detectors and then spend the day under unblinking gaze of something like 50+ cameras. We've ceased to be citizens and have become cogs in the machine and revenue sources for the government.
The current hue and cry for more regulation of this or that "danger" just shows that most people are sheep who care more about security than liberty. They deserve neither.
(Anyone who wants to know how Hitler or Mussolini came to power needs to simply look around at our nation in the last few decades. We've slowly gone from being a vibrant, growing, powerful people to a nation of simpering cowards in a fascist-lite environment. Only the continued existence of the First Amendment has kept us anything like free... certainly can't give credit to the 4th or 9th.)
Once more for emphasis:
It. Is. About. Rights.
This article is not only terribly biased, which is no surprise, but shows just how much hatred the liberal establishment has for conservatives. What happened to tolerance preached by liberals? Tolerance does not mean that one should listen to the other sides views, liberals want tolerance to mean that we must not only listen to it, but accept it. Also, your comment that waiting for Scalia to die off is full of hatred. The limited quote you put in here that 'we cannot have a moral feeling against homosexuality' is a shameful way to confuse your readers. The point was why are conservatives not allowed to have a moral objection to homosexuality? Liberals can have their view of homosexuality but if our view is different than yours, you want to shut us down. Where is the openess that liberals claim to have. You know, there is a saying 'there's nobody more conservative than a liberal'. Your article pretty much proves it.
I hit the wrong key when writing ...term of office of senate is 6 years! Should not write in the dark..LOL
Interesting response! So, lets go back to the assumption of the framers. The members of the House were supposed to to Washington for two years and represent their district's interests. They, it was feared, would be subject to populism so, a more deliberative body, the Senate was to go there for 8 years to temper their populism. Representative Slaughter, to be sure, has been elected over and over...therein lies the problem! She killed Ren Square because of a dispute with RGRTA and, because she wanted an intermodel facility.
My point is this, that the County, City, and transit authority wanted Ren Sq. The REPRESENTATIVE was charged with the responsibility of enabling the project at the instruction of the local government, not, killing it because of her ideas!
The Representative has voted time and again with her party and against the interests of the district. Trade policy helped kill Kodak, and she voted for it. But, back to the issue at hand...the corner of Main and Clinton. Bill Johnson has said that that was the problem that was essential to the redevelopment of downtown...Maggie Brooks agreed! Louise killed it and the 243 million that went with it.
So, Senator Schumer, a member of the Senate, the body charged with balance and legislating, got the money, and she sent it away. It is hard to celebrate the 10 cents on the dollar that instead will be used to build a train station that no local official asked for except the Member! I hope this answers your question!
I have a question: what are chem-trails, and how do they relate to global warming and/or climate change?
Chemtrails have been seen over the Rochester area lately.
Has City seen them?
The majority already speaks in the fact that 80% of us do NOT own guns. And yes, we need gun control. The idea that these laws only inconvenience law abiding citizens just isn't true. There are plenty of non-criminals who are stupid and careless and in need of control. The mother of the Sandy Hook shooter was not a criminal, but she sure was stupid and careless to continue to have guns in a home with a mentally ill son.
Te majority already speaks in the fact that 80% of us do NOT own guns. And yes, we need gun control. The idea that these laws only inconvenience law abiding citizens just isn't true. There are plenty of non-criminals who are stupid and careless and in need of control. The mother of the Sandy Hook shooter was not a criminal, but she sure was stupid and careless to continue to have guns in a home with a mentally ill son.
Cuomo allows O'Brien to make this an upstate/downstate issue for show, but O'Brien is his rubber stamp and toady like all NY democrats. Where was O'Brien's support of upstate on the gun law? He wouldn't even let his 'constituents ' comment on it before he voted on it.
Clint, you may disagree with what Slaughter has done in Congress, but anyone who has been elected to the House FOURTEEN times can hardly be accused of not representing the majority of voters in her district.
As to her dictating whatever it is that she’s dictated, you’d better elaborate. Last time I looked there were multiple levels of government and she represents just one of them in a small corner of the state.
Of course we have to. We live in the state. We're all New Yorkers, not just arrogant loud mouths from Queens and the Bronx.
Disapprove of gun ownership? Then by all means don't own one. Otherwise mind your own business.
Control nuts, not guns.
Marriage in its very nature and meaning is the union of the two naturally distinct and complementary sexes as husband and wife. That universal truth is rooted in natural law, the most basic facts of life, the very existence of the humankind and every human person. It transcends societies, faiths, ideologies, traditions, creeds, languages, cultures, races, colors, nationalities, and legal codes. The overwhelming preponderance of the earth's seven billion inhabitants understand that no amount of mumbo-jumbo or hocus-pocus by nine black-robed wizards can do a damn thing about it, any more than it can repeal the law of gravity. The idea that anybody's being "persecuted" or deprived of rights is ludicrous.
What next — a big fat taxpayer boondoggle to maintain all those horses and buggies? Or subsidizing a new pony express?
Lovely was right the first time, but what the dickens does this have to do with running a municipal gummint?
I work for Amtrak in Philadelphia but am not writing as a representative of Amtrak. I love reading about Amtrak in various communities around the country and appreciate the comments of my fellow readers. My request to this news publication is that folks make some effort to tell me, the casual Internet reader, WHERE YOU ARE! Yes, I did run across it eventually. Hello Rochester! Glad you're getting a new station. Public works projects are woefully overdue almost everywhere.
Natural gas is the future of energy. It is replacing dirty old coal plants, and dangerous expensive nuclear plants. It will fuel cars, trucks, vans, buses, locomotives, aircraft, ships, tractors, engines of all kinds. It costs far less. It will help keep us out of more useless wars, where we shed our Natural gas is the future of energy. It is replacing dirty old coal plants, and dangerous expensive nuclear plants. It will fuel cars, trucks, vans, buses, locomotives, aircraft, ships, tractors, engines of all kinds. It costs far less. It will help keep us out of more useless wars, where we shed our blood and money. It is used to make many products, and will bring jobs that boost our economy. It lowers CO2 emissions, and pollution.
Over 6,000 select natural gas story links on my free blog. An annotated and illustrated bibliography of live links, updated daily. The worldwide picture of natural gas. Read in 79 nations. ronwagnersrants . blogspot . com
Website powered by Foundation