Dec. 21, 2001

Roger E. Benson
PEF President
PO Box 12414
Albany NY 212

Dear Mr.Benson

I have your four-page letter of October 10 regarding the parking controversy in our capital city. I'm afraid your letter adds more heat and a great deal of confusion to a very complicated issue. Justice for workers and quality of life for residents, many of whom are our public employees, should be our principle concern.

Candidly, I don't know who advised you on A.6144-A, but the description of the bill in your letter is totally inaccurate and grossly misleading. A.6144-A and its anticedents over the years have always provided all-day parking for everyone in commercial zones coupled with a minimum of 20% of unrestricted parking spaces in neighborhoods with resident permit parking. The bill described in your letter is certainly nothing like that. I don't know of any bill, even in draft form, such as you describe.

Although I support the current bill, which passes the Assembly with my prime sponsorship each year, it differs to some extent from the version I drafted some years ago. The mayor prefers this version because he feels it is in the best interests of the city. If you have had any recent negotiations with the city on the bill, it's news to me. Since I am asked to carry the bill, I would expect to be involved. If you have any suggestions or, how to improve the hill to make it- acceptable to PEF, I would be glad to consider them.

As far as the Cathedral lot is concerned, your letter reflects no concern for the victimization of that parish by the state. Not only was the parish depopulated by state eminent domain in the 1960s, but what little parking it had for worshippers was taken, causing the 150-year-old catheral parish extreme economic and social hardships which continue to this day.

My bill to restore some parking in consideration for a subsequent donation of 15 acres to be given to the Pine Bush Preserve did not surface until after we created 2,300 parking spaces one block away in a new garage. Hasn't the state done enough damage to the cathedral parish already? Isn't it time we made amends when it is our power to do so?
I was especially distressed to read your comments about neighbors who allegedly moved in to these adversely affected areas after the Empire State Plaza was built. Many of the residents were there before the ESP, many of them are now elderly and are the ones most hurt by their inability to leave their homes and find a parking space when they go back home. Albany is a city, not an office park. When the ESP was conceived, most workers had one car and took the bus. It is the habits of workers which have changed, not the neighborhood.

Your letter mis-states the order of events when you say I
"rushed to legislative action." I acted on this quarter-century
old issue based on the city's home rule request, something timed
by the mayor, the city council and the legislative calendar.

The assertion that subdividing homes into apartments has added to the problem is totally wrong. Subdividing buildings has been all but illegal since 1968. If an owner wants an additional apartment, he needs both a zoning variance (which is hard to get) and a parking variance (which is all but impossible to get). Your mis-statement really has it backwards. Subdividing is not adding to the parking problem. In fact, parking problems prevent subdividing, even where it would make sense.

Albany was a city before the state was a state and I the United States came into being. These Albany neighborhoods have been occupied by families, churches and small businesses generations. It is the state which is the newcomer, not the neighborhoods. Ironically, it is our own state workers who live disproportionately in these neighborhoods and who are being driven out by an assault on their quality of life caused by the transformation of residential streets into gasoline alleys for all- day uptown and suburban parkers.

When I first came to the Assembly, one of my first bills was to have the UDC do a feasibility study to put layers of parking on top of the Sheridan/Elk parking area. That study has been completed. Now that the Smith Building is being emptied, it would seem to be more appropriate than ever to increase the parking capacity in that area -- before the Smith Building is reoccupied. I would hope we could work together to make this plan a reality and add hundreds of new parking spots for workers and residents alike.

I remind you that I have always been first, loudest and most consistant in supporting the rights of public workers. (Remember Kingston, the firings of the provisionals at SED and DEC?) Parking is the only thing we have disagreed on in my nine years in the Assembly.

Meanwhile, this capital city, which has provided many of us with livelihoods for many years, is suffering from an outmigration of its middle class, which threatens the future of the city. I would hope the unions, whom I have constantly defended, would share the sense of alarm that I feel and work with the city and state to help find solutions to these problems which will be fair to workers and residents alike.

When you wish to discuss this matter, hopefully at meetings with the city's representatitves, I will be happy to accommodate you. We have an obligation to try to solve this problem.

Please do not hesitate to write again.

Sincerely,