This Website use Cookies OK

Read more Opinion News

Readers sound off on municipal parking fees, the Central Park Five and Facebook censorship


Too steep for Brighton Beach. (Egan-Chin,Debbie,,New York Daily News)
$500 to park in Brighton Beach lot?

Brooklyn: I am writing on behalf of myself and my neighbors to make everyone aware of the unbelievable and outrageous increase in the municipal parking permit fee near my home in Brighton Beach. Brighton Beach is a highly congested neighborhood providing little or no parking. It is a lower to middle income working class residential area on the South Shore of Brooklyn. The locals who park in the municipal lot do so out of necessity, not by choice. Parking in the area is very difficult all year round, but especially in the summer months when New York City beach traffic is in full bloom.

Up until this quarter, the quarterly rate for a municipal parking permit in Brighton was $330. It had been raised about 10 years ago from $300 to $330, (an increase of 10%) which I and most neighbors viewed as reasonable at the time. But now the quarterly fee has been raised to $500! From $330. That’s one hell of an increase!

There were many problems with this lot: no snow removal for nearly a week this past winter; garbage regularly overflows; cars are illegally in the lot and are rarely ticketed and/or towed.

This increase is absurd and difficult for many of the resident on Social Security, of which I am one! Michael Gunderson

Champion fan

Staten Island: Hate Sam Champion, Voicer Rosie Stine? No way. Love Sam Champion. So happy he’s back. Sheila Picciarelli

In the right

Tarrytown, N.Y.: Police Commissioner Jimmy O’Neill and Mayor de Blasio stand by and do nothing (“Standoffish Finest,” June 10). The police policy during the Inwood brawl was the right call by the police supervisor because if one of the police officers got one of the brawlers in a head lock, he would be the one going to jail. Jack Culkin

Five counts of injustice

Manhattan: Why won’t the press or government answer the number one question most of humanity has regarding the Central Park Five being framed and put in jail with garbage evidence? Why aren’t crooked prosecutor Linda Fairstein, the crooked detectives and every other crook involved under arrest and being prosecuted for a wide variety of crimes? We are getting angrier every day, FYI. The longer it takes to start jailing dirty cops, prosecutors and judges, the faster you turn all of society against police and so-called “law enforcement.” Young people don’t trust this corrupt system one bit. Kalan Wood-Vincent

Playing hard to get

Eagle, Wisc.: I subscribe online. So many popup ads. I enjoy reading about your big city, but you are making it so difficult! Steve Atkinson

No entitlement

Freeport, L.I.: In response to Maria Vullo’s op-ed (“One horribly entitled industry,” June 7): I have been in the title industry for over 40 years and never thought I would have to continually fight for this industry that she considers so horribly entitled. During her reign at the Department of Financial Services, the industry was viciously attacked and regulations were implemented. The department made these rules without adequate research in our state, which should not be compared to Iowa. When fought back against, a judge totally annulled the entire regulation. After an appeal, a portion of the regulation was put back in. Vullo continued to try to exploit the entire industry, saying it was the norm to take clients to strip clubs to compensate for their business, which was totally inaccurate. While she may have found one or two companies guilty of this, DFS never went after them but instead punished the entire industry. She left DFS some ago time now. The unthinkable nerve of her to write this piece while we are trying to get the state Senate to pass laws to save our industry from losing more jobs. Linda Hall

28th Amendment?

San Francisco: Barbara Radnofsky’s op-ed imploring the House to impeach President Trump is another example of the desperate ends to which liberals will go to undo an election they still can’t come to grips with losing (“The impeachment imperative,” June 7). The list of offenses she lays at the president’s feet — essentially the talking points of the DNC — fail to acknowledge the single most salient fact: The Mueller report establishes that there is not one scintilla of evidence personally linking this president to any coordination or collusion with Russia regarding the 2016 election. And the alleged evidence of “obstruction” involves actions well within his Article II authority, or public pronouncements he was entitled to make. But remarkably, Radnofsky would have the country put through the divisive process of impeachment, where it will reach a certain end in the Senate, because it’s necessary for “public education.” The Constitution provides for impeachment only for treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. I must have missed the amendment that added “or for public education.” Douglas G. Vetter

Precedent is set

Forest Hills: Barbara Radnofsky wrote that “the Watergate impeachment process greatly informed and educated the country." That was true then, when the public was behind impeachment and there were Republicans who actually believed in “country over party.” When the Republicans impeached Clinton, there were no “high crimes and misdemeanors”; it was a political hatchet job. The public recognized this, which is why the effort failed and ultimately backfired politically. But it did change the perception of impeachment from a constitutional remedy for criminal conduct by a president to a political tool to be used by one party to go after a president of the other party. The process was trivialized, and thus cannot be taken seriously, no matter what the evidence shows. By going after Clinton, the Republicans effectively immunized Trump. Alan Hirschberg

This post has been removed

Manhattan: To Voicer Stan Rosenson, who continues to repeat his script, repeat his script, and deflects rather than even try to rebut any of my simple points about what defines “hate speech”: Is George Washington’s call to “hang the King!” “hate speech”? Yes, according to you. No, according to us liberty-loving liberals. When Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto called for violence against the Nazis, you say those Jews should’ve been silenced for such “violent” hate speech. You still don’t see the problem with your argument? Your argument that your boss or Mark Zuckerberg can ban people for calling Adolf Hitler a “murderer” (pretty hateful speech!) is absurd on many levels. But, when a monopolistic social media site (Facebook) bans whistleblowers and “agitators” from public view, that crosses a line into Nazism 101. My point is that we need a vaccine for hypocrisy. Negative speech is more important than positive speech is. When we focus on the negative things, we can fix them. When we focus on the positive things, no one fixes all the negative things. Your negative speech is A-OK, while your enemies is not? Hypocrites are the worst, because they don’t believe their own spiel. Evil people use censorship. Good people don’t. Keach Adams