Monday, March 22, 2010

Parks in wealthier nabes get more cops

From AM-NY:

When the first section of Brooklyn Bridge Park opens next month, it will have nine full-time Parks Enforcement Police patrol officers for 13 acres, about as many as the entire borough of the Bronx.

Advocates say that’s a glaring example of a two-tiered system in which wealthier areas get more protection.

The officers – city workers paid with funds raised from nearby property owners - will work in three shifts to provide 24-hour coverage, a level of security other parks don’t get.

A handful of parks – all of which are in Manhattan except for Brooklyn Bridge – have dedicated, full-time patrol officers, paid for by donors or property owners. All other parks share roaming patrols, paid for by the city

Geoffrey Croft, head of New York City Park Advocates, said there is an “enormous disparity between the publicly funded parks and the ones which receive private funding.”

Brooklyn has 15 dedicated city-funded patrol officers covering the rest of its 4,300 acres of parks. In Queens, 14 patrol officers handle more than 7,000 acres and in the Bronx, there are 10 for about 7,000 acres, according to the Park Advocates.

“This is a civil rights issue,” Croft said. “All communities deserve safe, well maintained parks, not just those in wealthy neighborhoods.”

A spokeswoman for the Empire State Development Corp., which until recently shared responsibility for building the park with the city, said the security arrangement reflects the park’s “special need with respect to its isolated location on the waterfront.”

Highland Park is isolated, too, numbnuts. Where are the park cops for there?


Anonymous said...

Geez what a Moron....This the new America you get minimal services and if you want more you pay extra.

How about getting people to stop smoking or doing drugs in the area and donate that money to the parks for more guts?
This is a civil rights issue

Free Refills said...

People should be happy that residents around Brooklyn Bridge Park are paying extra for police protection, because it diverts money the city would have otherwise spent there to parks elsewhere in the city.

Anonymous said...

No it doesn't. They just wouldn't have had police either.

Deke DaSilva said...

Why does the new Goldman Sachs building in Battery Park have police officers constantly patrolling their building?

They make butt loads of money, they can't afford their own private police force?

They need $45,000/year guys from "the boroughs" to protect these thieves?

Anonymous said...

This is stupid. You protect the things that you value most. Why spend $$ on some shitty rat infested park in the Bronx. It's already crap.

Queens Crapper said...

The "shitty rat infested park in the Bronx" is like that because of neglect by the Parks Department because they pour all their resources into yuppie parks. Is there a reason why Flushing Meadows is being neglected when thousands of people use it each day and it rakes in plenty of cash through events and tax revenue?

Anonymous said...

Yeah thousands of people use it each day. Only most of them are illegal immigrants who use the park to make animal sacrifices, shoot up drugs or find an unsuspecting victim to rob and rape after they have foolishly wandered in after sundown.

First rule of triage - don't waste time treating patients who will certainly die. Try to make them comfortable, but after that better to focus your efforts on someone who has a chance of living.

Queens Crapper said...

There are thousands of residents of Flushing, Kew Gardens and Forest Hills that use the park that are not illegals. And this isn't a fucking hospital, moron. The Parks Dept is mandated by the City Charter to fund all the parks. It should be done so equitably. The people of Queens deserve a world class park just like the people of Brooklyn do.

Anonymous said...

Look, not looking to get into a debate w/ you. The nicest parks in the city have one thing in commom - an actively engaged local community who support the park with volunteer efforts, and financial contributions. The parks that are the shittiest are those surrounded by neighborhoods sitting around waiting for the parks dept. to come clean things up. Get invovled. Plant a tree, pick up trash, paint a fence, hold a fundraiser, establish a community group. Quit sitting around waiting for the gubment to come take care of you.

Queens Crapper said...

If the people surrounding those parks had money to give, they would. So they should be punished because they don't?

There are volunteers in just about every park in the city.

Conservancies PAY SALARIES to keep their parks clean. The fact that less than 2% of the annual city budget is put toward parks is the problem.

Anonymous said...

Dude, you are not reading, no one said you had to give cash, I said plant a tree, pick up trash, paint a fence, hold a fundraiser, establish a community group. these things take very little money and proabaly have a bigger impact than cash.

Why begrudge those who are willing to pay extra for up the upkeep of their park? I think the building makes a contribution to the the upkeep of the park in question. There was an article you posted recently which discussed how a lot of these new buildings do that. If someone want to buy an extra service with their money why are you so pissed off? Because you can't buy it, or because no one will buy it for you? I don't get it. It's like flying a plane. You can go coach and still get there, or you can pay extra and fly business class and have it a little nicer.

Beside we all benefit from it. Anyone can go to central park and enjoy the work that has been done there. Same is true for the so-called yuppie parks. They don't check your id at the gate so enjoy.

Anonymous said...

All citizens are supposed to enjoy equal services under the city charter. You aren't supposed to be able to buy government services that other communities can't afford or that they won't get because of their race or economic status. Privatization of park land also comes into play when the parks are run by conservancies.