the city is doomed under these failed leaders.
There is an ad on TV that says if you do the same old, same old, you're going to get the same old, same old. We have been getting the same old, same old for too long. It is time for change, for new ideas. Overthrow the dominant Paradigm! We need change to improve our City! City Newspaper has failed in that they limit their openness to change. Choosing a person who has stated that has said they are not running for as the ideal candidate is absurd.
Experience is not a magical quality that makes one candidate great. Lack of experience does not mean a candidate is unworthy of a vote. Ideas and fresh thinking are important too.
Many thought Bill Johnson was an experinced leader but he is the one who brought the disasterous fast ferry to Rochester. Experience didn't seem to help in that situation.
OK, the casino proposition has gotten some play in the media (especially the gov and lej's shenanigans), the prop on the Adirondack land swap has been mentioned in the D&C, and I've recieved a flyer in the mail about the one that eliminates the mandatory retirement age for judges, but what are the other three?
Counting on City to enlighten me....
I am disappointed in this article. Endorsing somebody who has dropped out of the race is counterproductive. Warren is the only candidate with definitive policies available to the public. (lovelyformayor.com/issues has links to PDFs I believe.) And this article references her countering RCSD's efforts. Clearly this newspaper failed to review the stats on our beloved district. Lol
City Newspapers does not endorse Green Party Candidates after they write good things about us. They say City Council has more experience but they don't listen to the residents of the city and they vote 9-0 on mostly every proposal made by the Mayor. At City Council meetings they have already made their decisions before the concerned citizens get their opportunity to express their concerns. Twenty minutes after they listen to the citizens they make their vote without any discussion or any concern for the taxpayers.
rebeccarafferty - All that you say about Emily Good may be true. But that begs the question. Do you believe that she's qualified to be Monroe County sheriff?
Third parties in ths country traditionally fail to achieve traction until the public realizes that some national calamity is in the offing which the major parties can not or will not address.. We have the requisite calamities. And neither the Dems nor the Repubs are willing to addtess them. But the American public as a whole has yet to realize what's going on.
What the heck....I will step out on a limb with an early endorsement for President I. 2016....FDR!
The Greens have been activists fighting for a wide variety of environmental issues including devastating climate change , fracking and corporate contributions including to gas and oil companies. The Green Party has a long history of activism prior to directing efforts towards obtaining political party status. To imply that they are somehow not against climate change is absurd. One thing for sure is that they rejected was the move by the Sierra Club to contribute $26m supporting shale based gas fracking. Greens have a fundamental principle NO CORPORATE MONIES. That is where the rubber hits the road ,as they say. Bonnie Cannan
I had a bit of a debate about downtown development economics with Alex on Facebook (we don't know each other) and I was shocked at his ignorance regarding development and taxation issues. He has a simplistic and naive viewpoint based on extremely shallow evidence of supposed 'gifts' to developers by the city. This totally ignores the tax and socio-economic implications of rebuilding the center city. For small investments like selling gutted buildings for a few dollars, the city gets a totally revitalized center city: Midtown, Sibley's, the new Main St Hilton, the Morgan project on the river, the Inner Loop fill...all of these projects are funded and underway. So why critique what are a series of huge wins for Rochester based on strategic investments by the City?
Frank your right climate change is a real problem for the future and that is why, as you know, I have included the following items in my platform:
· Include renewable energy systems in the building modernization plan for Schools – This will help save the City School District money through reduced energy costs. It will also decrease the carbon footprint of the city and help keep our air healthy and clean.
· Switch the city’s fleet of vehicle to renewable energy – The increase in both popularity and effectiveness of alternative energy vehicles has made it practical to save the city money and keep our environment clean through the use of electric vehicles. In conjunction with a public utility and renewable energy at the schools, this will greatly reduce the operation costs of our fleet.
· Provide a property tax credit for installation of clean renewable energy systems.
· Push for home pick up of electronics at least monthly.
· Explore energy generation through wind turbines at Durand Eastman Park, low flow turbines on the Genesee River, energy transference walk ways, and solar panels on city buildings.
· Make tree lined streets a priority – Whenever the city removes a tree they need to replace it and make trees a mandatory part of all street redevelopments projects.
As well as have had a press conference about bicycling and talked about light rail.
Ideas like this will greatly reduce our carbon footprint, prepare our city for a changing future, and reduce costs for everyone.
Thanks for bringing this up again.
How come no one here is stating the obvious? Tom Richards has proven himself to be our area's finest political leader since Tom Ryan (who was under-appreciated then, we might recall). He has also been, by far, the most unifying leader we have seen in a long, long time (another under-appreciated quality Mayor Richards has). He was been so low key about this that it escapes immediate observation.
Lovely Warren will be our next mayor. I pray she governs with maturity and grace, and consults with Mr. Richards. I doubt if he'll ever steer her wrong.
There are many worthy points on the comments here, but upon re-reading, Ms. Towler makes an awful lot of essential points. And at the very least Mayor Richards' deserves the tribute she has paid him.
I think it's interesting that you say, "conventional wisdom casts third parties such as the Greens as agitators who exist on the political fringe..." By "conventional wisdom" I assume you mean to take the Republican-Democratic Party (singular) stance of "you get to _choose_ between Kang and Kodos" and give it some kind of aw-shucks homespun spin. It is not "conventional wisdom" at all, but a deception that has been parlayed iteratively for the past 60 years of politics.
And when you speak of "the media" and how it "hasn't paid a lot of attention to their campaigns" or how it has excluded Green Party candidates from debates, it sounds like you're referring to an outside third-party. I don't know if you were aware, but The City is part of said "media" and just as culpable.
The "Weekly Alternative" years ago became part of the loathsome Rochester Establishment. This comes as no surprise and demonstrates once again that City Newspaper no longer represents those principles it espoused when it came into existence.
He dropped out of the race. And that is true whatever ones political position. This is bizarre and in my opinion counterproductive. I think that this suspension of belief and acceptance about the results of a fair election has the potential to be very divisive - setting the entire community back. It is as if you are saying some citizens, the ones that bothered to vote, don't matter.
Thank you, City News, for very clearly defining the issues as they are. What matters here, what has always mattered, is who can best lead the city? Politics aside, that answer is painfully clear.
I have read and appreciated the work of City Newspaper for over three decades. And while I have not always agreed with the opinions I have always found them to be fair and well considered. I find your decision to endorse a person that is not running an utter and complete shock that contradicts everything I have respected about City News in the past. Are we to believe that this city has only one person capable of serving as mayor? I will find it extremely difficult to pick up or go to your website from this point on.
Long time reader
What is the point? What is the point of endorsing a candidate who is no longer running? Your endorsement (or is it an anti-endorsement?) shows a sad lack of courage to make a decision based on reality. While you are clear to point out candidates you believe are unworthy of the position of Mayor and, therefore, the votes to get there, you totally missed your own point by telling people to vote for a candidate who does not want the job. Your endorsement of Tom Richards belongs in the realm of pure fantasy.
Endorsing Richards may also be extremely disrespectful of the reason he stopped campaigning. He left to focus on family issues. Your endorsement might seem like an intrusion into his family time.
Most important, your endorsement of Tom Richards does nothing to help the people of Rochester decide between the two candidates who are still running and who truly want to be mayor.
Maybe voters can boil it down to one simple personality trait: courage. Alex White wants to debate the issues with Lovely Warren, but Lovely is afraid to debate. Lovely will not honor the voters of Rochester with a much-needed discussion of the issues. She is afraid she cannot shine compared to White and she is also afraid to validate White as a candidate. The next Mayor of Rochester has to have courage. Alex White has courage…Lovely Warren does not.
Emily Good is the only challenger to the Republican incumbent for County Sheriff. When given the opportunity to reach readers, she makes a strong case for restorative justice, and points out ways that we could be participating in local governments and communities, but do not -- and the reasons why we shirk these duties. She is also very well versed in the corruptions that take place under the current status-quo-maintaining administrator.
Having gotten to know Good over the past few years, I've begun to understand the vast difference between how she is portrayed and who she really is. Whatever your feelings are about Good, the driving force behind her decision to run for sheriff deserves a closer look.
Website powered by Foundation