Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Of Interest

Sam Pratt has published his list of "some of the biggest ups and downs" in the year almost past: "2013 in review."


  1. Excellent Sam, the "GANG of FOUR" who twisted themselves into pretzels to deny the obvious history of Standard Oil in the South Bay!

    A worthy Maoist moniker for such incorrigible propagandists.

    And recall that their campaign implicated the questionable practices of the Crawford engineers and Monahan title searchers too. There was plenty of egg there.

    In the same story, there was the burying of Riverkeeper's letter to the Common Council, a letter personally authorized by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and hidden in a drawer at City Hall.

    But hey, the public won. And we won against a very complex subterfuge and abuse of power.

    With so many different people chipping in, both new and old, let's hope that it marked the beginning of the next chapter for our waterfront planning.

  2. Bravo Sam Pratt! Interesting to read a statement from an attorney that land under water does not exist. At low tide, one can walk all the way out to the moorings placed there by Sloops and no one can (legally) block Nick's path.

    1. Gossips 4/18/13: "Roberts went on to assert that before 1850, when the railroad was established, no one could have owned the land in question because it didn't exist."

      As funny as that pronouncement was, there was also the disagreement over the definition of a "title search."

      Curiously, the Monahan [et al] title agency owned all of the pertinent information already, in its private archive. That was information the public had to go to Albany to discover, which it then used to embarrass the council into seeking Monahan's admission.

      But whatever Ms. Roberts believes a title search should cover in the circumstances, no FOIL inquiry was able to learn exactly what the Common Council ordered from Monahan [et al], since Ms. Roberts used her personal assistant in the private sector to place the order. (The assistant's private actions are beyond the public's reach.)

      Soon afterwards, the same law firm which still employs the assistant dissolved its relationship with Ms Roberts.

      And then there was the part played by the Crawford engineers ...

  3. It's easy to understand that HDC/Bruce Finn didn't understand the laws of land under water when he proposed moving the HPBA north 30 years ago.

    These ancient laws were based on voluntary citizen maintenance, prohibiting the king from re-possessing the wharfs needed for future immigrants.

    Call me Diogenes, but it's hard to believe that these highly paid attorneys did not willfully disregard the customary, prescribed laws on the use of foreshore before they began "amending" them.

    1 Riparian

    1. It's worth mentioning that "moving the HPBA [Hudson Power Boat Association] north" is still the plan in the waterfront program.

      In a related development, in 2013 the state renewed its commitment to keeping the state boat launch where it is. This was after safety complaints made by Furgary members inspired the state to address the problems.

      The word from NY state: in 2014 expect more infrastructure repairs and enhancement at the state boat launch.

    2. Correction, research on Navigational law started in 85 when city mayor Allen suggested removing the tin boat navigators.
      It was closer to 95 when NDTBA incorporated after HDC proposed (re-)moving the stewards of foreshore.