Brought a smile to my face


On Monday, New York State Supreme Court Justice Alexander Tisch ruled that city officials may build a homeless shelter in the affluent neighborhood known as “Billionaire’s Row.”

As you might expect, the locals are unhappy with the decision. The West 58th Street Coalition, a group made up of residents and local officials, have claimed that the shelter will increase crime in their area — and that the building chosen is a dangerous fire hazard.

“The City has embarked on a reckless plan and hedging their bets hoping that there won’t be a fire at the Park Savoy,” the one-percenters wrote on Facebook. “Are you willing as decision makers and stakeholders to take that chance with even one life?”

Despite the moralizing tone, another pesky concern keeps coming up: that the presence of homeless people will cause residents to “face un-quantifiable economic harm to the value of their property.”

In a December 12th ruling, Tisch dismissed the complaints. “While safety issues constitute an important concern, the shelter has been issued a temporary certificate of occupancy and is presumably safe to open,” he wrote. “Aside from the safety issues, petitioners’ alleged harm regarding loitering and property values is speculative and does not form a sufficient basis for granting a preliminary injunction.”

Soon after, however, First Department Appellate Judge Jeffrey Oing introduced a temporary delay in proceedings to investigate any potential concerns. Others, however, remained skeptical. “We believe the lower court was correct in denying the injunction and once the appeals panel gets a full briefing that decision will stand,” a spokesman for the city’s Law Department said in a statement.

That is precisely what happened. After investigating the matter, Tisch confirmed that the safety issues raised “are all aspects for which the City and its agencies are supposed to be given deference.”

And since the city has granted the potential shelter a temporary certificate of occupancy, Tisch said it “demonstrates to the Court that the building is presumably safe and in compliance with applicable laws.” The fact that the coalition’s claim that the neighborhood already had its “fair share” of homeless shelters was “without merit.”

Still, the fight continues. Randy Mastro, The West 58th Street Coalition’s lawyer, said it was “disappointed in today’s decision and plans to pursue an immediate appeal.”

“This unsafe building should not be permitted to operate as a homeless shelter,” Mastro said. “Placing the homeless in this building puts their lives at risk, as well as the lives of staff, neighbors and firefighters responding there.”

Meanwhile, Social Services Commissioner Steven Banks asserted that “we will begin serving our neighbors in need at this location as soon as possible,” calling the ruling “a win for hard-working New Yorkers experiencing homelessness who will have the opportunity to get back on their feet at a high-quality, employment shelter.”

The homeless shelter is a situation directly against the elite One57 building, which hosts a condo owned by Dell founder Michael Dell, worth $100 million — the city’s most expensive property when it was purchased in 2014.


https://www.breitbart.com/poli...ny-billionaires-row/

How very progressive of them...

Hah fricking hah. But, really wealthy people can stonewall and throw so much money and litigation at a "backyard problem" that the problems often go away because they made it too expensive.

Some wealthy "horse people" in rural VA fought tooth and nail to keep power transmission lines going through their "sight lines" and delayed it for years and years with appeal and calls for impact analyses. I think they lost and it happened because there was no viable alternatives.

So there will soon be lots of shit on the streets in that part of NYC like in San Fran?

I'd find it more amusing if the homeless shelter were to be built in the neighborhoods of the city council members rather than people who simply have a lot of money. One day I'd like to be one of those people, and I don't want to live next to a homeless shelter and am not ashamed to say so.

"Not in my backyard."

The problem is some of the wealthy have no problem allowing shelters to be made somewhere else other than where they are. It sounds familiar as Trump dumping the criminals in sanctuary cities.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
I'd find it more amusing if the homeless shelter were to be built in the neighborhoods of the city council members rather than people who simply have a lot of money. One day I'd like to be one of those people, and I don't want to live next to a homeless shelter and am not ashamed to say so.

I have to agree. The rich folk did not create the homelessness problem and should not be punished by it.

quote:

Originally posted by az4783054:
"Not in my backyard."

TOTSOFA


Then
On
The
Sidewalk
Out
Front
Asshole

So where does DeBlasio live?

quote:

Originally posted by patw:
The problem is some of the wealthy have no problem allowing shelters to be made somewhere else other than where they are. It sounds familiar as Trump dumping the criminals in sanctuary cities.

quote:

Originally posted by Balzé Halzé:
So where does DeBlasio live?

He was living in Park Slope Brooklyn, but moved to the traditional home of the mayor. Gracie mansion is on the upper east side of Manhattan.

Here is a quote from someone named lostwallet on another site that I found interesting.

quote:

FYI, for those who don't live here, the City has to provide shelter for anyone who asks. (Lost a lawsuit about a decade ago.) Ever since, every single-room-occupancy (single room, hotplate "kitchen" only, shared bathroom) building—which used to cater to students, the elderly, and those who needed a short-term place to live—has been kicking tenants out, tripling the rent, and opening shelters—with the taxpayers paying three times the market rate (or about $2,000-3,000 per unit per month). Many of these facilities are not properly staffed, do not have security, and do not provide any mental or rehab services. They are basically VERY expensive dumping grounds for people and it's not unusual for the buildings to house between 200-500 people per building. They are spread out throughout the City* but just the size of these buildings changes neighborhoods. Midtown, where this "Billionaire Row**" is, has many of these SROs and faded, old hotels and there are already a number of shelters there, too.

Additionally, the free place to stay actually is drawing people to the City—with consequences. (The family that lost their two children, horrifically, when their steam radiator exploded were addicts from Maine who moved to NYC, and worked the system specifically to place themselves into free housing. Another article, which was behind a paywall, quoted a woman who was complaining about being looked down upon by neighbors in other buildings, who then said she had come to NYC from Maryland and went right to a shelter intake.)

This is not about NIMBYs, it's about an out of control drug abuse and mental health crisis, with the slum-lords profiting because they know the City needs to legally supply places to live—an no one in the City has a clue how to control it. People are being warehoused in hotels (at full rate), slum-lord buildings converted into pricy units—and those who were paying tenants are being evicted to make way. All of this has exasperated the affordable housing stock further.

Addendum: Many of the street homeless in my neighborhood will not go to shelters because they are either too unstable to know better and/or will not submit to curfews or cull their belongings—as shopping carts full of trash are not allowed in shelters. These are the most seriously in need of mental health services, and many are so out of it that they will not accept help.

quote:

Originally posted by punch out:
...on another site...

I'll allow it this time, but in general, that's not allowed here.

Billionaires huh,,, well, just form a syndicate, sell shares for 100 mill each, then buy the building and any other possible problem building and have an accidental fire, or just tear it down to rebuild...

When they go sit out back and say "I wonder what the poor people are doing?" .... they can just look over their fence and know.

quote:

Originally posted by punch out:
Here is a quote from someone named lostwallet on another site that I found interesting.

quote:

FYI, for those who don't live here, the City has to provide shelter for anyone who asks. (Lost a lawsuit about a decade ago.) Ever since, every single-room-occupancy (single room, hotplate "kitchen" only, shared bathroom) building—which used to cater to students, the elderly, and those who needed a short-term place to live—has been kicking tenants out, tripling the rent, and opening shelters—with the taxpayers paying three times the market rate (or about $2,000-3,000 per unit per month). Many of these facilities are not properly staffed, do not have security, and do not provide any mental or rehab services. They are basically VERY expensive dumping grounds for people and it's not unusual for the buildings to house between 200-500 people per building. They are spread out throughout the City* but just the size of these buildings changes neighborhoods. Midtown, where this "Billionaire Row**" is, has many of these SROs and faded, old hotels and there are already a number of shelters there, too.

Additionally, the free place to stay actually is drawing people to the City—with consequences. (The family that lost their two children, horrifically, when their steam radiator exploded were addicts from Maine who moved to NYC, and worked the system specifically to place themselves into free housing. Another article, which was behind a paywall, quoted a woman who was complaining about being looked down upon by neighbors in other buildings, who then said she had come to NYC from Maryland and went right to a shelter intake.)

This is not about NIMBYs, it's about an out of control drug abuse and mental health crisis, with the slum-lords profiting because they know the City needs to legally supply places to live—an no one in the City has a clue how to control it. People are being warehoused in hotels (at full rate), slum-lord buildings converted into pricy units—and those who were paying tenants are being evicted to make way. All of this has exasperated the affordable housing stock further.

Addendum: Many of the street homeless in my neighborhood will not go to shelters because they are either too unstable to know better and/or will not submit to curfews or cull their belongings—as shopping carts full of trash are not allowed in shelters. These are the most seriously in need of mental health services, and many are so out of it that they will not accept help.

Fun to watch the Leftists burn their own city down.

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by patw:
The problem is some of the wealthy have no problem allowing shelters to be made somewhere else other than where they are. It sounds familiar as Trump dumping the criminals in sanctuary cities.

I meant that as a good thing. Let the liberals who fund these things take it like they give it.

^ ^ ^ Sorry. Harmonica approves.

quote:

Originally posted by PASig:
So there will soon be lots of shit on the streets in that part of NYC like in San Fran?

Hopefully, they can build a similar shelter near Marc Benioff's house, reap what he sows.