In an act of tremendous arrogance, Mayor Bloomberg has announced that he would not send out this years annual $400 propety tax rebate to homeowners, even if the City Council LEGALLY compells him to.
According to the NY Post, Bloomberg said "We have no money. I think that's what you have to understand. This is not a legal issue; this is a fiscal issue."
A lawsuit was filed by City Councilman Vincent Ignizio (R-SI), which has supposedly infuriated Bloomberg.
When asked how he could just ignore the City Council and not comply with legally enacted legislation Bloomber responded "Well, we issue the checks. I don't sign them personally, but we issue the checks."
Bloomberg may actually have a legal point. The way NYC government works is that the City Council authorizes spending, but it is the administration that actually makes the expenditures. Just because spending is authorized does not mean that the mayors people are compelled to actually make the disbursements.
However, they can not spend a dime not authorized by the Council. That always leaves the possibility of spending less money than approved, depending on circumstances, such as changes in economic conditions.
So the real question is, can the City Council legally compel the Mayor to make the payments. The courts will decide.
The larger question is, how does this affect Bloomberg's chances for reelection?
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email This
Hits: 602
Trackback(0)
TrackBack URI for this entryComments (17)
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by alice Lemos , November 20, 2008
but knowing the mentality of the average NYC voter, who is "impressed" by Bloomberg's background, he will probably win in a landslide. Those who will vote against him will be those who saw through him years ago and maybe a few angry home owners. Yes, there will be an election - let's hope he loses.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Paladin , November 20, 2008
I think Bloomberg is more vulnerable than people think. He has not been a very good mayor, in spite of the positive press he gets.
Ferrer was totally inept at exposing Bloomberg, nor had Bloomberg revealed his true self yet. Ferrer also couldn't raise any money after the primary.
With Weiner that will not be the case. And if Republicans grow a set and put up an actual republican candidate they could undermine Bloomberg.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by alice Lemos , November 20, 2008
grow a set? I hope we live that long! Actually, I wish they would very actively run somebody against him. Bloomberg is the definition of arrogance.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , November 20, 2008
someone will run against Bloomberg. there's no way the GOP, even if it's just the grassroots folk, don't run someone on the Republican line...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Paladin , November 20, 2008
Jay Golub for Mayor!!
Seriously, we had better run someone and not let Bloomberg abuse the republican party again. It's getting dangerously close to battered wife syndrome.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Scipio , November 21, 2008
you have no choice but to vote for Bloomberg even though the man is damn aggravating. The choices other then Bloomberg are far, far worse. I am not into the purity of losing and I want the best candidate to win. Bloomberg is a decent mayor but an arrogant elitist. Face it, a rock-ribbed conservative has zero chance. It reminds me of people who actually claimed there was not difference between Dinknins and Giuliani.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by alice Lemos , November 21, 2008
is NOT a good mayor. I don't know why you say that. He is running a sanctuary city; violent crime is on the increase; he is incapable of budget cuts; his own staff has grown tremendously. He is from the school of bad ideas. His answer to everything is "raise taxes".
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Paladin , November 21, 2008
I agree. Bloomberg does not have much to crow about. Crime is on the rise again, especially in south Queens.
While I would have hated to see Green as mayor in 2001, Ferrer could not have have done worse and probably would have been better than Bloomberg.
As has been discussed on this blog before, Bloomberg could not possibly have raised spending any higher these last few years. It has been out of control and is the reason we are in such dire straights now. He is to blame.
I know there was a huge difference between Rudy and Dinkins and am not often into the "purity of losing." There is no such thing with Bloomberg, however. He is not with us or for us or helps us in any way so I do not see the disadvantage of dumping him for another liberal nanny-state democrat.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , November 21, 2008
"The choices other then Bloomberg are far, far worse. I am not into the purity of losing and I want the best candidate to win. "
Scipio, I must disagree with your claim.
As you know if you've read UE recently, I think the Mayor not only has done a bad job, but he's acted no differently than the other "choices." Freddy Ferrer would have raised taxes and spending in a manner not much different than Mayor Mike.
this isn't about purity. It's not about running a hard-core conservative with the idea that that candidate would win a plurality of the vote.
My point is that as long as we'll have a tax-and-spend liberal in the Mayor's office, why not have a Democrat who the GOP can point to like Rudy was able to do with Dinkins?
If the GOP wants to start winning again and changing the direction of the city, it's critical that Bloomberg is not the next Mayor. This is why the Republicans MUST put a candidate on the ballot in November who will get solid support from the Republican base here in NYC - this will ensure a Bloomberg loss from an "independant" line...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by alice Lemos , November 21, 2008
who are Democrats talking about how much they dislike Bloomberg because of the probably cuts in the MTA service and transit fare. I think he is vulnerable. But again, knowing the herd liike mentality of so many New Yorkers, . . .
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Dorothy Loughran , November 22, 2008
Jay,
I'd love to see a republican run for mayor.
Do you have any names to throw out for consideration?
I can't even think of a republican leader in the city.
N.Y. has been taken over by liberals.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , November 22, 2008
John Catsimatidis is our best bet for a good republican candidate. Aside from his personal wealth, he has a strong connection to the republican party, a good set of values and beliefs and would have a cast of republicans helping him run the city.
He is also very interested in building up the republican party in nyc and having a strong two-party system.
I know the social conservatives won't like him but he is the perfect republican to run for citywide office.
Some may criticize his recent conversion to the party, but he has supported many republicans throughout his career, including Reagan. Plus he comes from a family with strong republican roots, inluding his wife and children. His daughter is a very active republican and more conservative than most.
He will make a great candidate for our party and a great mayor.
Beyond that I am at a loss to name one seriously viable potential candidate.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Daniel Peterson , November 22, 2008
His daughter is very republican, in fact she listed her idealogical positions on facebook and she'd make conservatives proud.. She was very active campaigning for John McCain and also became of a member of the NY Young Republican Club, of which I am president. She attended our last meeting, but unfortunately, I was in London and didn't get to introduce myself
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Jay Golub , November 22, 2008
There are really no, so-called, Republicans out there to run for Mayor. Of all the elected officials from the GOP in NYC right now, none are qualified in running for the office, especially if Bloomberg is in the race as an independant.
Catsimatidis, a relatively recent convert to the GOP, has espoused positions that many Republicans will feel comfortable with. He obviously must overcome the concerns of some in the GOP that we'll have another Bloomberg on our hands, but if he's able to do that well, he would be a very good candidate for the type of run it will take to win in 2009.
With Bloomberg's recent poll numbers dropping significantly, we may not even have to deal with a three way race in 2009. Bloomy may have over-reached this time - even for him - with the overturning of term limits. Even egomanic-a-holics can be too full of themselves.
As Bloomy's record in office starts to fall apart, I'm not convinced he will be able to realistically run for a third term...
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by alice Lemos , November 22, 2008
rating are dropping - but watch: at the last minute he will come through with rebates for property tax owners, will restore transit service and "all will be forgiven" by a public that reelected Charles Rangel, knowing how corrupt he is. In NYC people have collective memory loss.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by Robert Hornak , November 23, 2008
Jay, I agree. I think Bloomberg has overreached this time. The public does not approve of his changing the term limits law and now with the economy in distress, he is the guy who gets to take responsibility for everything.
Clearly, if we had rolled back the property tax increases and eased up on the ridiculous levels of enforcement for business and homeowners on things like garbage disposal, instead of aggresively pursuing the ever increasing levels of income and the higher and higher levels of spending that go hand in hand with high taxes, then we would be in a far more stable financial position right now.
Instead the mayor and council went to town on the taxpayers dime and now we all are going to pay the price.
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
written by alice Lemos , November 24, 2008
op ed in the Sunday New York Post which has Bloomberg with a crown on his head. The idea that Bloomberg is "above politics" or "post poltical" (whatever that means) is nonsense. Bloomberg is for Bloomberg and he is for his reelection by hook or by crook. His overturning the referencum on term limits is just one sign of his ambition. Question: If Bloomberg is such a terrific administrator and businessman with great acumen, why didn't he see the financial crisis coming?
report abuse
vote down
vote up
Votes: +0
Write comment
You must be logged in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
