The New York City Charter

The whole hubbub about whether or not Governor Paterson can appoint a Lieutenant Governor made me wonder: what if the Mayor's office fell vacate? Who takes over then? What's the deal?

From what I understand, the first in line is the Public Advocate. If the Mayor dies, resigns, is removed, or becomes incapacitated at any point during the first three years of a term, the PA takes over for 60 days until a special election can be held. Whoever wins then finishes that term. However, if the Mayor's job is vacated in the fourth year of a term, the PA serves as acting Mayor until the end of that year and term (there's no special election since in that year there's already a regularly scheduled Mayoral election). Also, an acting Mayor does not have the full powers of an elected Mayor (can't appoint or fire people, can't sign bills, etc.). Got it?

However, I took a quick look at the City Charter today and found a confusing clause: apparently, it doesn't have to be the PA who necessarily takes over. It can also be the Comptroller or some other unspecified official. There's all kind of clauses and rules and confusing jargon in here that makes it unclear precisely who becomes acting Mayor and for how long. There's paragraphs of stuff about succession upon a vacancy and a lot of it is contradictory. It's very odd.

To me this seems ridiculous and dangerous since it can create a vacuum and battle for power. Also, holding a special election 60 days after a vacancy creates unneeded political turmoil and makes a proper and smooth transition problematic.

I think this is dumb.

We should revise the City Charter and make it clear: one person, one elected city official (either the PA or Comptroller) should become Mayor upon a vacancy. That person should then complete the end of that term with full mayoral authority.

Either that or a Deputy Mayor should be elected with the Mayor like a VP is with the President or an LG is with the Governor. That way there doesn't have to be an uncomfortable or confusing political situation - for example, if a Democratic PA succeeds a Republican Mayor, the new Dem Mayor might have different policies than the old GOP Mayor. Seems smart to be.

WNYC Buys WQXR

Big news today in the world of New York radio: two of the oldest stations in town are merging.

Well, sort of: public radio station WNYC and the media company Univision have bought classical music radio station WQXR from The New York Times Company. They have actually bought two radio band signals: 96.3 FM and 105.9 FM. WQXR will be moved from 96.3 FM to 105.9 FM and, presumably, 96.3 FM will become a Spanish language station.

The good news is that classical music radio in NYC will be saved. In the last couple of decades this has been an endangered species. The bad news: the 105.9 FM band isn't as strong as the 96.3 FM band and it will probably not be as easy to find or get as many listeners.

Still, we should be glad that there'll be some classical music on New York radio as opposed to none. And by having it become a public radio station, this relieves it of commercial pressures.

So now an 84 year old station (WNYC) owns a 73 year old station (WQXR). Both stations are legends. And this tribute to a former WQXR broadcaster from 1983 gives you a flavor of what an important and amazing legacy this station has.

Canadian Donuts Invade NYC

If you like They Might Be Giants or the girl who played Juno in Juno, then you might like the newest Canadian import that's hitting NYC this week -- Tim Hortons. Little known in the USA (they have some stores in the Midwest), they're now taking the biggest city in the country by storm.

Tim Hortons has shrewdly managed to take over more than a dozen Dunkin' Donuts franchises including ones in Penn Station and Times Square. They are even going to be a couple of stores in Brooklyn (in fact, I think there already are). These new stores virtually materialized overnight and it's been catching some of our fellow New Yorkers off guard. One day it's a Dunkin's and the next it's a ... Tim Who?

This is quite an audacious business move. Whoever said Canadians weren't good capitalists?

So is Tim Hortons as good as Dunkin' Donuts (which I love)? Sorta. I actually go to Canada a lot and have eaten there several times but never had the donuts. Tim Hortons also sells sandwiches and soups and full meals (at least in Canada) and the food was pretty good when I had it. As for the donuts (including maple donuts), I can't say but I'm willing to give them a shot.

Still, for my money, nothing in the world can beat Dunkin' Donuts coffee.

So welcome to NYC Tim Hortons. If you can make it here, etc.

Now if only we could get In'N'Out Burger in NYC then Mr NYC would be really, really happy.

Why are NYC addresses so crazy?

In the cell-phone/e-mail/digital age, people don't send letters much anymore. But people still have to live someplace and therefore still have physical addresses. If you live in New York City then, you know that our addresses make absolutely no sense.

The typical address is "number, street name, apartment or unit (if any), city, state, zip code." In NYC, however, it's the "city" part that gets a little confusing.

Too whit: there are five boroughs that are all part of the City of New York. Therefore, logically, every address here should be "New York, NY" or "City of New York" or "New York City." But no! Only if you live in Manhattan do you get a "New York, NY" address. And that's not because you live in New York City -- it's because Manhattan is co-extensive with New York County. So the "New York" part actually has nothing to do with the city.

And there are no correct addresses that are "Manhattan, NY" or "New York City" or "City of New York." Why? I don't know!

And it gets odder. In the Bronx, Brooklyn and Staten Island, almost all city addresses are "Bronx, Brooklyn, and Staten Island." I say almost because, in the Bronx, if you live Riverdale, then the city name is "Riverdale." But the rest of the Bronx is "Bronx, NY" or "The Bronx, NY" and Staten Island and Brooklyn are always "Staten Island" and "Brooklyn." And this has nothing to do with these boroughs' county names (like with Manhattan/New York County) because only The Bronx is Bronx County -- Staten Island is Richmond County and Brooklyn is Kings County.

But where it gets REALLY confusing is in Queens (i.e. Queens county). There are no Queens' addresses that are "Queens, NY." Instead, the city part of any address in Queens is by neighborhood i.e. "Flushing, NY", "Forest Hills, NY", "Long Island City, NY", "Astoria, NY", "Woodside, NY", Fresh Meadows, NY" and on and on. So if you live in Queens, you better know what your specific neighborhood name is or else you'll have problems.

I know that NYC is a huge city and, since it extends over five boroughs, it's impossible to have a uniform city address. But why can't it be easy? You know "Manhattan, NY", "Bronx, NY", "Queens, NY", and "Staten Island, NY"? Why does it have to be so inconsistent and confusing?

I've done my best to answer this question, asked everyone I know who might know the answer, even scoured the web but have found no clear explanation. If you know the reason, please let Mr NYC know.

Sonia's Turn

Next week, Judge Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation hearings to the US Supreme Court begin down in our nation's capital. These hearings certainly having the makings for good political theater: the Democrats will call on some of the most expert and respected legal minds in the country who support her nomination to testify on her behalf; meanwhile the Republicans will trot out blowhards and Neanderthals who oppose her to explain why the most qualified jurist in over a century shouldn't ascend to our nation's highest court.

Oh, and Mayor Bloomberg will be there too in order to testify in support of Judge Sotomayor.

This should be interesting.

Yet with her confirmation all but assured, it looks like Sonia will be leaving NYC in a few months time and heading to DC in order to become our nation's newest Associate Justice. Since most Justices remain on the court until right before they die, she'll probably never live in our fair city again.

But while she may be leaving New York in her rear view mirror, as this great in-depth article explains, Sonia is and always will be a quintessential New Yorker. This city is imbued in her values and experiences. She grew up in a housing project in the Bronx, excelled in our public schools, won scholarships to Princeton and Yale, worked in the Manhattan DAs office, loves the Yankees, theater, and the opera, resides in Greenwich Village, and is a 24-hour a day workaholic.

This is one very tough lady and her path to the Supreme Court has not only been well earned but also has a distinct NYC edge. And I'm sure she'll be a great Justice and do our city proud -- hopefully for decades to come.

It's Over (For Now)

If we still lived in the days of pimply-faced newsboys with funny caps standing on street corners, holding a stack of papers and waving another one in the air, this is what we'd probably hear tonight:

"Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Espada returns to Democrats! State Senate deadlock over! Extra! Extra!"

And so it goes.

That of model of selfless public service, Pedro Espada, has returned to the Democratic fold, giving them the party 32 votes. Along with the new LG Richard Ravitch, it looks like the final nail has been wedged into the coffin of this power grab by the Republicans. For the time being (nothing is ever permanent in politics), the New York State Senate can go ahead and be its regular dysfunctional self instead of its irregular dysfunctional self.

Espada actually apologized for putting this state through hell for the last 31 days. Oh, what a gent. I guess he realized that this new arrangement wasn't going to give him any actual power so he made the best possible deal he could to end it. So now the Democratic party once again gets to be home to this criminal opportunist. Aren't they lucky?

The unanswerable question, of course, is are we?

When Harry Met Sally ... Twenty Years Later

The classic, iconic movie about love and relationships in NYC was released two decades ago this month and became an instant classic. It stirred up the ages old debate about whether or not men and women really can be friends, about how sex confuses love, about how old relationships affect new relationships, about how love in NYC is a crazy adventure.

Everyone who loves this movie has favorite scenes, favorite lines. Some agree with the movie's philosophy, some don't but still enjoy it anyway. My personal favorite parts of the movie are the short scenes of older couples sitting on the couch talking about how they met and fell in love.

Also, this movie is an unrequited love letter to New York. Remember, this flick came out in 1989 when NYC was still viewed by many as a crime-filled cesspool. But this movie had faith in the city when a lot of people didn't, and had faith in the power of love and marriage when at times it can be very, very difficult.

Of course the most famous scene in this movie is when Meg Ryan fakes an orgasm in the middle of Katz's Deli. It never fails to be funny, no matter how many times you see it.

Breaking News!

New York State has a new Lieutenant Governor -- maybe.

Governor Paterson just appointed former MTA Chairman Richard Ravitch to fill the empty post.

Normally the job of Lieutenant Governor is a do-nothing position who only casts tie-breaking votes in the State Senate -- but with a deadlocked State Senate, this means the job currently has a great deal of power.

It is not clear if this appointment is constitutionally permissible but it's also not clear if its forbidden. Legal minds differ. The courts will decide. But if it is, our month-long political misery will be over.

Let's hope this succeeds.