In announcing his…
By The timesLedger
The neighbors living near PS 144 in Forest Hills have had it with the young punks who are vandalizing their neighborhood. They say that on a nightly basis, the vandals gather in the schoolyard where they spray paint graffiti, smoke pot.
In announcing his war on graffiti earlier this month, Mayor Bloomberg noted that more than just being ugly, graffiti tells people that a neighborhood is not safe, that criminals can do what they please without fear of the law.
This community has tried to fight back by painting over the graffiti and that is commendable. But they say they are fighting a losing battle. Where are the police while this is going on? How hard can it be to catch these vandals if they keep returning to the scene of the crime?
For their part, the police said they were not aware of serious distrurbances at PS 1444. To start with, these kids should be warned that they have no right to hang out in the schoolyard after dark and if they return they should be arrested. If they are carrying spray paint or markers, they should be charged with doing graffiti.
The police should work with the Anti-Graffiti Task Force to photograph and keep records of the graffiti “tags,” so they can prosecute the worst of the vandals.
When these kids do get caught, it is not enough to make their parents pay a fine. The vandals have to feel the pain. Trespassers and graffiti vandals should be required to perform long hours cleaning up the city's graffiti mess as a condition for having the charges against them dismissed.
But none of this will happen until local police begin taking the vandalism seriously. The community has made it clear that this is a real problem and that should be enough to get some action from local law enforcement.
Editorial: ‘A full term’
The City Council is considering legislation that would amend the term limits law allowing council members to serve a third consecutive term if their first term was less than the complete four years. The new law would limit council members to two “full terms.” The change could be voted on this fall as part of a charter revision package.
The “full term” wording would also keep incumbents from running again after their replacement finished a partial term. The voters clearly did not want this to happen.
Some have suggested that this is an end run by a handful of elected officials seeking to circumvent the will of the people. Former Councilwoman Julia Harrison has called the proposed change “self serving.” She claims it is intended to keep people forced out by term limits from returning to office.
That is simply not the case. When New Yorkers voted overwhelmingly in favor of term limits, they believed they were limiting council members to two four-year terms. They did not consider the unusual circumstances in which a member might be limited to six years.
The jury is still out on the first council born of term limits. They could hardly have taken office at a more difficult time. Like their predecessors, they are capable of silliness and self-indulgence, such as the trash cans in Flushing that bear the name of the local councilman.
To its credit, the council has shown a willingness to work with the mayor to get the city through the current fiscal crisis. Most members are still figuring out how city government works. They deserve the chance run for two complete terms.
