Dyster Owes More to the People
It is really sad that Mayor Dyster has never once accepted the notion that he serves at the pleasure of the people. He seems to think that he was crowned to do whatever he sees fit for the length of his term and the people be damned. His unwarranted wasting of our valuable casino funds and Jayne Park projects has put him at odds with the vast majority of the city taxpayers, and he is treating it as if that majority doesn't exist. He should be impeached and removed from office so that the public will can be implemented.
Can’t Wait for Reporter
Thanks, Frank. You're doing an amazing job every week. I'm on countdown day to when I can find this week's on line and get my "fix." then I pick up the hard copy on Wednesday and read it again.....
Founder of Major Fact-Gathering Website Says We Erred
I am the founder and CEO of NeighborhoodScout, one of the sources of the study cited in your story.
In your story, Mr. DalPorto is quoted as saying the data are two years old, and that the FBI warns against using the data to rank the safety of cities.
I wish to respond to both statements. First, the data used by the NeighborhoodScout study when published in December, 2013, were the most recent Final, Non-Preliminary crime data from the FBI with complete national coverage. These are the 2012 FBI UCR annual data, which were released in Final, Non-Preliminary form in November, 2013. In fact, as of today, those 2012 FBI data are still the most recent Final data with complete national coverage from the FBI UCR. Soon, the 2013 data will be released. When they are, NeighborhoodScout will re-run its analysis and provide a full update. But until then, the data used in our study are the most recent Final, Non-Preliminary data with complete national coverage. Mr. DalPorto's statement was misleading, as any research organization needs full national coverage for any comparative study to be conducted.
Second, Mr. DalPorto is quoted as saying that the FBI warns against using the data to rank the safety of cities.
Our response is as follows:
Q. Why rank cities on safety even though the FBI cautions against it?
A. The FBI’s message is focused on how different circumstances, such as economy, transience, demographics and other things beyond the control of a law enforcement agency can cause higher rates of crime, and therefore, the main focus of the message is that it is not fair to judge or rank the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies by the rates of crime in the communities they serve. We agree.
But our ranking is not about agencies. It is not ranking or rating the effectiveness of law enforcement agencies. It is about places. It ranks the relative safety of places using rates of violent crime per 1,000 residents. This is like rating the safety of automobiles. As such, the public has a right to know how safe a car is, just like they have the right to know how the safety of any city compares to others. It is not a judgment of law enforcement as circumstances are different in each locality and law enforcement does the best they can. Rather, it is an assessment of safety of the city that should be publicly available.
Dr. Andrew Schiller
Founder and CEO
Poverty Industry Has Double Meaning: It makes working people poorer too!
Regarding your article about the Executive Director of the Niagara Falls Housing Authority earning big bucks: May I point out that those in the poverty industry, who reap high salaries, perks and profits, are also oftentimes those who help enable poor people to become more dependent.
They also help make working people poorer by adding to workers' tax burdens.
When new welfare and Medicaid recipients relocate to Niagara Falls, to enjoy subsidized apartments, it is the Niagara County taxpayers who pick up most of the welfare and Medicaid costs for these new transplants.
Therefore the poverty industry has a double meaning: it enables the poor to stay poor while making the middle class poorer as they must pay for the poor.
All across Niagara Falls, private landlords, who do not get taxpayer subsidies, are struggling to find tenants.
Whoever moves into the Housing Authority either moves from houses and apartments owned by private landlords or come from other cities adding to burdens of taxpayers here.
If someone moves out of privately-owned property to the tax-free subsidized Housing Authority they hurt the taxpaying landlord, who oftentimes gives up and abandons his property (he can't compete with tax free subsidized housing) and then the city winds up demolishing the property, costing taxpayers even more.
And that lowers the tax base.
Subsidized housing is supposed to be built where low income people cannot afford market rate apartments.
This is not the case in Niagara Falls where rents are low.
A would-be Niagara Falls Landlord