Mary Foster's Eminent Domain Threat Meter

Immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attack, the Bush Administration trotted out the handy Threat Meter. This system of mind control can be used in many ingenious ways. I have customized it for my friend, Mary Foster.

There is no better way to control people than to make them feel threatened. You can threaten them with words, you can threaten to physically harm them, or you can threaten to take away or damage their property. Do you remember how scared we all were when they would raise it and lower it every day. Do you remember watching too much TV? But then the Bush administration and the media stopped issuing daily threat levels after people stopped paying attention.

While properties have not been taken away from a private entity in Peekskill for years, Mary Foster's attempt to make Eminent Domain an election year issue is her way to threaten and 'activate' business owners in Peekskill.

Earlier this year, someone else used the Threat Meter to scare residents of Bohlman Towers into believing their apartments would be sold to a private developer and converted into condos. We all remember how well that threat worked, we were there for the City Council Meeting and the subsequent uproar until they all figured out that the threat wasn't real.

The Threat Meter: another thing that Mary Foster can learn from George Bush.

M.F. (that's short for Mary Foster) in the North County News on Eminent Domain

First of all the North County News, especially in this article, reads like a High School newspaper and who reads it really. But its worth commenting on for the simple reason that even when you try to explain Mary Foster's position it just sounds wrong. While eminent domain has not been used in current projects in Peekskill; Mary feels like using the issue to distract people.

George Bush is well-acquainted with this technique. Get the people's interest directed towards one item, and distract them from how you are dealing with the real issues.

The following is a quote from an email which was sent to me by the Democrats, concerning an opinion piece from the North County News. The topic: M.F.'s eminent domain 'proposal':

When an economic development activity is designed or intended to increase tax base, tax revenues, employment or general economic health but does not result in the transfer of land to public possession, occupation and enjoyment, that economic development activity is not a public use. The public benefits of increased tax base, tax revenues, employment, or general economic health do not constitute a public use.

Superficial - not!

I kept the superficial - not! quote in because it reminds me of what the cool kids use to say 20+ years ago.

Firstly, it forces the City to be its own developer and what city does that?

Secondly, and more importantly, it ask that we stretch our imagination to a point where we can believe that '...the public benefits of increased tax base, tax revenues, employment, or general economic health do not constitute a public use."

Which means that YOUR children getting a better education, PEOPLE having jobs, and the GENERAL ECONOMIC HEALTH of Peekskill do not constitute a public use.

Mary, wouldn't the public be using these benefits? Its not a play on words but the type of reasoning that goes into these types of projects.

Mary Foster is putting the owners of the Crossroads Shopping Center ahead of the people of Peekskill. It is plain and its simple. Because who benefits from having an ugly mall in our Downtown -- no one -- except the owners of the Crossroads Shopping Center.

Is Mary Foster our friend?

I recently received a 'Friends of Mary Foster' letter. I'm sending it back no donations, no explanations. I'm just done with Mary Foster.

highlights from her letter:

"I stood up against overdeveloping the riverfront and the downtown."
This she did. To our detriment she studied it to the ground and asked for density limits and set asides for low income housing that make no financial sense for a developer. While I don't lose sleep over whether Martin Ginsberg makes money or not, I understand that money has to be made and that makes the wheels turn. Ginsberg will lower the density but he won't sit by while Mary Foster bloviates about developing the riverfront responsibly. She's simply asking for too much.

"I have sought to bring business to town."
Target vs. DHL? Perhaps Mary Foster doesn't realize that alot of our tax dollars leave Peekskill and go straight to the Courtlandt Town Center (that's the mall where Walmart is). I would have loved to have Target here and I would've gladly spent my money there. They may still come but they won't sit around listening to Mary Foster as she tries to convince us that light industrial is better for Peekskill than Target. We know better Mary and you're asking too much.

"Let's bring the downtown to the next level" or the Sandra Dolman Plan.
While not in the "Friends of Mary Foster" letter it has to be discussed because Mary won't bring it up herself. While in the guise of studying the artist district Mary will try to change the artist district opening it up to market rate prices. Sandra Dolman suggested this in a meeting years ago (except that she overtly said the artist distric should be opened it up to section 8). It didn't sound like a good idea then or now that Mary stole it.

Redistricting the downtown without bringing up the waterfront and Central Avenue is irresponsible. We need something that will attract middle and upper income wage earners to Peekskill and a revitalized riverfront would do that. It would attract these people to the riverfront and the downtown.

Redistricting the downtown before that would be an open invitation to slumlords and predatory landlords that have turned our beautiful housing stock into boarding houses and placed people into inhumane living conditions for profits.

Mary tries and tries to convince us that Peekskill needs diversity in housing but we have plenty. We have housing for everyone in Peekskill. Housing for poor people, rich people, middle income people, for people who want to pave over their backyards and make volleyball stadiums and betting parlors, for people that want to sell liquor from their basements, for people who want to live in extended families that have a very casual relationship to each other, ie. families composed of eight brothers of approximately the same age.

We don't need to study the downtown to see that allowing non-artists to live there is a bad idea. Its the only place where code enforcement problems don't seem to exist to magnitude that it exist in our residential nieghborhoods in Peekskill. We should study how it brings diversity to Peekskill and how we could attract more artist to Peekskill. The Artist District is one of the few things that is still good in Peekskill - Let's keep it that way Mary don't ask for too much.

Once I would've never voted Republican but now I will. Thanks to my friend Mary Foster.

You are respectfully asking for my vote...?

Mary you're asking for too much.