Tuesday, May 5, 2009

A million more trees will be pruned less

From the NY Post:

The doomsday budget Mayor Bloomberg unveiled Friday calls for pruning trees less frequently -- one of many belt-tightening measures planned for the 2010 fiscal year.

While the trimmed-down trimmings will save $1 million, the city has also scheduled a massive greening of streets and parks. According to its capital plan, more than $250 million is earmarked to plant new trees over the next 10 years.

So we're planting a million new trees but are not going to spend the money necessary to adequately maintain them. Well alrighty then.


Anonymous said...

Funny how all of the street trees in a certain northeast
sector of Queens were just freshly pruned.

I guess that "Bloomie" needs their votes to steal his 3rd term and a little bribery goes a long way.

Meanwhile the less fortunate red-lined neighborhoods painfully watch as their hospitals, firehouses are closed and their vital services response time is cut.

I guess that "Bloomie" doesn't expect to get their votes and they're being punished for their past criticism of "the little emperor"!

A tale of two different nabes!

Once again there is a TWO TIER system that exists, side by side, in NYC!


Now you know why you're NOT GETTING YOURS!


VOTE MAYOR BUM-TURD OUT or get more of the same (or worse)!!!

Anonymous said...

A large number of trees planted over the last 3 years have died or are in poor condition. Sure you can ram a fresh sapling into the sidewalk but who will maintain them??? Dog urine, salt, and motor oil will kill them eventually. Bad planning (planting) Mr Bloomberg. Millions of dollars wasted.

Anonymous said...

Once again there is a TWO TIER system that exists, side by side, in NYC!


Well, everytime we show that it cuts across everything about this city, including preservation, you go apeshit.

How WAS Paris?

Anonymous said...

I thought Blumturd knew how to run things.

Missing Foundation said...

The appearance always trumps reality.

This is the green mayor - but that doesn't mean parks (waterfront and toxic sites goes to developers) or trees (their interest is to only be planted to beautify - and help sell - new co-op units,) but only to find ways to cut corners on energy needs so we can pack more people in (bike lines).

Anonymous said...

Take Jerome Paige, a supervisor in the authority's Brooklyn office. Last month, The News found Paige and his city-owned Ford Windstar minivan at an exclusive Poconos resort known as The Hideout.

Records show the $90,000-a-year bureaucrat puts in for the 240-mile round trip to his chalet every weekend. In two years, that's 20,000 miles, courtesy of the taxpayers.

How may trees can 90k annually plus vehicule expenses save if Jerome Paige was fired for stealing city property without reimbursement? Maybe they can hire 4-5 Nursery men to work 5 days a week pruning trees - that's lots of tree, right?

Anonymous said...

"I thought Blumturd knew how to run things."

That third term wannabe egomaniac put the "i" in run and we got ruin!!!

Anonymous said...

You shouldn't build it unless you plan (budget) to maintain it. I haven't heard any plans to cut back on plans to plant 1 million trees but they can't maintain what they have?

Trees are planted by people's homes and they have no choice in the matter. The least you can do when you force a tree on to someone is properly maintain it.

Don't get me started on City trees damaging someone's sidewalk and trying to get the City to pay or do the repair itself (though they will issue a notice of violation)...

Anonymous said...

I WANT ONE OF THOSE NEW TREES! 4 years ago the city cut down the "sick" tree in front of my house, leaving a nasty stump the neighborhood dogs love to crap on. I have been waiting and calling every year, at least once a month for stump removal (thanks community board #5 for not taking care of that) and then a new tree. Freeking ridiculous!

Anonymous said...

I love trees but maintaining the existing large trees is more important than just planting new ones because of the possibility of injury or death when unpruned limbs fly off in hurricanes.

Furthermore, mature trees are very valuable and it is a shame to lose them when they uproot because they have too much canopy, not enough roots.

CntrySigns said...

So the City won't prune them and if the public does it we get a fine. Wonderful. Add to that, the type of trees they are planting include the Honey Locust Tree which if you read the wiki are prone to loosing large branches in wind. Oh fun!


Anonymous said...

Paris was just fine "micro man"!

M. D. Vaden of Oregon said...

Similar illogic reigns in Portland sometimes pertaining to trees.

There is at least one good reason why I did not like working for the city park bureau decades ago, choosing tree care business instead.

A good landscape foundation means enough funds to maintain what already exists.

If the New York crews would work twice as hard, maybe the cut-back would make sense. I have yet to see a tree division double it's pace.


M. D. Vaden of Oregon