“...The other major disgrace was his suspension of mayoral term limits...
“...Bloomberg — who had called a previous bid to undo term limits “an outrage” — strong-armed the City Council to allow him a third term...
“...One critic who thundered against the power grab was an obscure Brooklyn city councilor named Bill de Blasio, who... rode the issue to the mayoralty himself. Now, of course, de Blasio is roundly disliked...
Folks of at least two minds on this...
Not re your rabidly biased journalism, which all agree has jumped the shark - rather:
1. Those who, even without the gift of hindsight, thought electing de Blasio to a 1st term a far bigger disgrace than electing Bloomberg to a 3rd ...
And – when push came to shove – rather have a mayor who had the police’s back, than one who had a knife in their back...
Keep in mind – certain times of night, in certain parts of the Bronx – one’d be safer in the tiger’s cage at the Zoo than out on the streets...
(BTW, grew up in one of those parts – moved to the ‘burbs about the same age as did AOC)
Those who wanted Bloomberg as the Dem candidate – but realized the Teacher’s Union(s) looks at him the way the NRA looks at Warren...
2. Those who think de Blasio – by some bizarre metric – was somehow effective as NYC mayor...
One more grade of paid teachers – but dumbing down the NYC schools as fast as gun orgs (including gangs) shooting them up...
Safer needles – unsafer subways...
And would vote for him, for a 3rd term...
4
Does the headline writer of this review know nothing of NYC history from before 1990? What about LaGuardia? Even Koch had more accomplishments (depoliticizing judicial appointments, building massive amounts of low and middle income housing) than Bloomberg.
3
It's a great pity how quickly deBlasio has screwed up Bloomberg's accomplishments.
4
No. Exhibit A: Hudson Yards. Exhibit B: Long Island City. Exhibit C: New York, a over crowded mess with a subway that doesnt work and people who's only concern is money.
2
And the crazy dude drives his own helicopter that explains his ability to multitask, and think spacially. Frankly, agnostic government makes some sense especially when running the trains on time makes sense. Bloomberg made money in a relatively narrow perspective (business data and news) and stayed under the radar as money piled up when the world was infatuated with business moment to moment. Business personalities are now "not interesting" in favor of idiotic personalities on TV. Bloomberg is even bored with his money and irreverent power.
The Rudy-Bloomberg era will be looked at as the golden era of New York City.
2
Crime plummeted waaaay before Bloomberg, and he tried to sell the city to the highest bidder more times than can be counted. He was devoted to real estate development no matter the cost to the city -- remember him trying to get the Olympics? Giving the west side yards away? Fighting against getting the Gowanus declared a superfund site so it could be built up? And Barclay's was an outrage out the time, filled with give-aways, broken promises to the city and imminent domain seizures, lest the NYT writers forget!-- And he rode on Giuliani's coattails with policing; reaping the benefits while taking none of the blame.
And do you remember when he decided he wanted to be president so got the Republican national convention here, both closing the city for a week and getting the police perform mass arrests to stifle protest?
And then, of course, suspended term limits so he could keep going. (At least one person paid the price for going along with this. Anyone remember Christine Quinn, Bloomie's heir apparent?)
And the subways utterly atrophied all the while!
Best
Mayor
Ever!
6
"...data-driven, pragmatic style of governance"? Perhaps, except in the case of stop and frisk. What was it, 87% of the stops were of black and brown people, 10% were white. But the whites stopped had a 30% higher rate of carrying drugs or guns. And... rather than increasing the percentage of whites stopped (say those hard partying young finance guys leaving their offices in the evening to go clubbing) Bloomberg doubled down on the keeping the disproportionately high percentages of blacks and browns stopped. Pragmatic? I'd say racism overriding data.
https://www.nyclu.org/en/press-releases/analysis-finds-racial-disparities-ineffectiveness-nypd-stop-and-frisk-program-links
1
Giuliani and Bloomberg were the best. They really cleaned up NYC (along with William Britton). de Blasio is a disaster
1
This is a Classic Case of being called the Greatest due to the fact all the others were ____________ !
Not perfect, but the best Mayor NYC has ever had. We need him back because DeBlasio is the worst.
1
I guess if you're a real estate magnate the answer is yes. He destroyed the landmark status of Greenwich Village by giving variances to build behemoths that even the evil Giuliani had refused.
1
Did he get bailed out like the rest of the Bankster 1%?
(YUP)
2
I am looking forward to reading this book.
Yes, Bloomberg was flawed but was able to accomplish a great deal despite not always hitting the right notes. DeBlasio, on the other hand, says all of the right things and does virtually nothing. DeBlasio's first inauguration speech, in which he insulted Bloomberg who was sitting right there, made it clear to me that he was a sore winner and foreshadowed what a wind bag he would become as mayor.
I find it very surprising that this column, and perhaps also the book itself, makes no mention whatsoever of Bloomberg's overwhelming obsequiousness to the wealthy and the powerful. "We love the rich people," Bloomberg famously said, and boy, did he prove it. Look at the city we live in now. Small and medium sized businesses have died out by the hundreds, either replaced by chain store behemoths, or their spaces remaining vacant for years. When it comes to housing, Bloomberg's policies were a bonanza for the developers of luxury housing, who have stuck spire after spire of ivory-tower priced apartments across the city, while working New Yorkers are further squeezed, and pushed farther and farther away from the city center. As for the culture of the city, the income and wealth inequality stunted the vibrant soul of America's largest city. We once had exciting and innovative arts, music, and theater with room for the young and less-affluent to make their mark. Now, we're turning into a mall, a bland playground for the oligarchy.
4
I moved to NYC because of Bloomberg. He’s not as progressive as I would have liked, but he did many great things (parks, smoking ban, PlaNYC, etc). The city has definitely deteriorated since he left office, despite the economic boom we are experiencing.
5
I would vote for Bloomberg hands down - for mayor again, for governor, for president... He's not perfect and I disagree with him on a few things (namely stop and frisk, real estate zoning), but he's smart, pragmatic, and solution-oriented. I only wish more people with his intellect and talent ran for government leadership roles.
7
Yea, Bloomberg took credit for the drop in crime just like Giuliani did. Which was total baloney. Crime dropped NATIONWIDE during these periods. Maybe he should take credit for Milwaukee's drop in crime too. The better explanation for the drop in crime was the legalization of abortion in 1972 which resulted in less crime 20 plus years later due to unwanted pregnancies by people whose offspring would gravitate to crime economics.
The "broken windows" police policy for the slightest transaction resulted in a man being killed by the police for selling a single cigarette.
The exodus of the middle class and the rise of the oligarchs and the "pencil" super condos during this period speaks for itself.
Greatest Mayor? Meh.
2
After 33 years in NYC, I relocated this year to the west coast. While I still love New York and will always probably consider myself a New Yorker, the truth is that the romance of New York has long departed and Michael Bloomberg is a big reason. Today, New York exists primarily for the 1% and as a Disney-like plaything for tourists. In unintended ways, this review makes my point. "The arts flourished" under Bloomberg? Maybe the big blockbuster shows at the Met or MOMA, but no young, aspiring artists today can afford to live in New York! The High Line was a nice idea, but it triggered a gaudy, uncontrolled frenzy of high-end development that has turned this urban oasis into essentially a sunless canyon. And the Hudson Yards debacle is an appropriately lurid exclamation point on the legacy of Bloomberg. Yes, Bloomberg's people came up with some nifty innovations, like Citibike, nanny-state public health policies, and pedestrian-only zones. But cities succeed only when they are home to a vibrant, economically and ethnically diverse population where people of all walks of life can thrive. Bloomberg's 12 years effectively killed that notion of New York City, and there is no sign that it's going to return anytime soon.
3
Not even close. Fiorello Laguardia was the man. He was mayor.of all New Yorkers - not just the rich ones.
3
I say thing as someone who voted FOR Mr. Bloomberg three times:
The United States would be one really lucky country to have him in the Oval Office. The lefties and the right wingers would HATE it (which is why he could never get nominated by either major political party), but the vast majority of Americans would be thrilled with and prosper under such a competent and practical presidency.
Sigh.
4
Regardless of his positive or negative effects, only a dictator changes the laws regarding their length of stay in office while they're still in that office. It was as awful a move as I've seen in New York or American politics in my long life. What if Trump were to try the same thing?
2
Bloomberg, the ultimate plutocrat. The mayor who illegally secured a third term (with the help of his lackey, Christine Quinn,) tried his best to make NYC into his own personal "nanny-state," made infinitely worse our school system by closing schools, breaking up comprehensive high schools into smaller fiefdoms for his "Leadership Principals," and demonized teachers, created a city where the gap between the poor and the wealthy grew dramatically while the middle class gained nothing, endorsed and implemented "stop and frisk" while ignoring civil liberties, and let Wall Street and the real estate industry dictate their own policies. I could go on. His arrogance and hubris were breathtaking. He was no progressive. Like Cuomo, he uses social causes (tobacco, gun control) to mask his neo-liberal political/economic policies. Let's not fall into the trap of comparing him to De Blasio, a major disappointment. So, the answer to your question, from my perspective is NO, not even close.
2
For the well-heeled, he may have been a great mayor. But for the other than well-heeled, he was a nightmare. His rezoning destroyed neighborhoods.
2
If being Mister Gentrification and making a great deal of the city unaffordable is the criteria for best mayor award Bloomberg is the hands-down winner. His neglect of the outer boroughs was over the top.
2
He was no friend to democracy; he bought a third term. Full Stop. He supported Stop and Frisk, which means he was no friend to the Black and Latino citizens who suffered unfairly under this practice. He sold the City to this highest bidder, resulting in the wholesale elimination of affordable neighborhoods and a deeper weakening of the middle class. New York certainly looks better; it looks cleaner...but I have to wonder at what costs: the proliferation of vacant store fronts, the ridiculously high rents, the unaffordable cultural offerings, and the further marginalization of the working poor and middle class who carried that city on its backs for generations. The city has now been transformed into a symbol of corporate greed and a hyper-capitalist playground. Yeah, he was a good mayor, but for whom?
4
The best mayor in NYC history, John V Lindsay. He was the mayor of all the people, not just the rich.
He walked the streets, not hidden in a limo, surrounded by P.D. bodyguards.
Lindsay did not vacation in Bermuda every weekend. Bloomberg got very angry with the press when they asked where he was on weekends, he stated that he had a right to his private life. The mayor has no private life, he choose to be mayor of America's largest city, no one asked him to be one. If there was a major problem in NYC on the weekend, you heard from him on Monday.
Mayor Lindsay spoke for everyone and to everyone.
6
YES, or among the top three. This man manage the unmanageable.
2
No, Trump was, or is, or would have been.
Bloomberg probably was our greatest mayor but it was Rudy who preceeded him and went to war on crime and incivility who set the stage for what Bloomberg was able to accomplish.
2
Mr Bloomberg was nothing more than a billionaire who bought a mayorship of the country’s largest city. Akin to a so-called benign dictator, he pressed his view of society on millions of people. No smoking laws, sugary drink laws, restaurant rating laws...the list goes on. Mr Bloomberg tried to create a ‘nanny state’ in his image of what he thought a city should be. Thank goodness he is gone. But he was most certainly not the greatest mayor ever of NYC. That’s ridiculous.
7
He didn't buy my vote.
I didn't vote for him the first time because I thought, A businessman for mayor? No political experience? But I voted for him twice after that.
And clearly, a very different sort of businessman that our physically and morally dilapidated, bankrupt president.
2
3 x a winner is hardly a fluke.
6
@Bette
In his illegal third term bid, Bloomberg spent $100 million of his own money to eke out a 4% lead over an uninspiring, underfunded, but capable Thompson, coming out to about $180 per vote. Some triumph! His own internal polling told him he was in trouble but his campaign, with the aid of stooges like the Times, projected an aura in invincibility. It was his third term that was the most destructive, because he basically put the city up for auction to his cronies in real estate and finance, while he waited for a bid at the presidency. Governing from the clouds, the man is no less a rich snob than Trump and no less an egomaniac.
No! Ask the people in the outer boroughs what they think of Bloomberg. Ask the people who were forced out of Harlem and The South Bronx about their former Mayor.
4
Too bad he wasn't allowed to run for a fourth term. NYC will never see the likes of him again.
8
To Bloomberg, I would say; "twelve more years, please!".
8
This review is so much better than the usual, "wealthy politician bad, poor politician good" bleatings. A competent, hard working, and generous person like Bloomberg is better than an incompetent, lazy and greedy politician, be they rich (Trump) or relatively poor (de Blasio). Ironically, if you go through old newspapers stories, you will see that de Blasio, like Trump, has gouged his own tenants and has been extremely stingy with his own charitable deductions (he and his wife donated $350 in 2017) https://nypost.com/2018/04/17/tax-returns-show-de-blasio-wife-donated-very-little-to-charities-in-2017/ Bloomberg, on the other hand, has donated a huge percentage of his wealth for public health, gun control, arts, etc... And as for lack of work ethic, de Blasio is Trump's mirror image. (anti-disclaimer - I have never met or supported Bloomberg)
4
He might be short in stature, but Bloomberg’s no LaGuardia. Bloomberg helped accelerate the hegemonizing of New York to the detriment of its culture, and placing corporate interests above those of its citizens. In the end, Bloomberg was just OK. Only, I hope he eats a lot of salt.
8
Bloomberg was not a great mayor. He was not a politician who listened to the people and guided them, but a technocrat who forced his views on them. Technocracy and plutocracy do not amount to democracy. This was starkly demonstrated in his purchase of a third term.
New York has had some good mayors--LaGuardia, O'Dwyer (who led New York during its greatest era (1945--1949) when the New York Times cost 3 cents, Wagner,and Lindsay (New York's most liberal mayor).
It worst mayors were Walker, Beame, Koch, and Giuliani.
7
@Diogenes And de Blasio.
I have seen my share of NYC Mayors, and I say that Bloomberg is unequivocally the best.
Even the thing you say is a negative " West side stadium project," was a great idea shot down by greed and political corruption, now all we have in its place is a bunch of ugly apartment buildings for the rich.
If you don't like Bloomberg than you will never like any NYC mayor, if that is so , the fault is all on you.
He made NYC better in so many ways.
18
Bloomberg is about 1000 times better than our current mayor.
39
No, it was Rudy, as he helped clean up NYC.
1
Is this an editorial or a book review? I think the former.
2
I think by most New Yorkers he's known as an evil technocrat who drove people out of their homes to build more Starbucks's.
9
Neglected to mention stop and frisk and the psyops against Muslims.
@Chris Stop and frisk was clearly addressed in this piece as a black eye on Bloomberg's terms.
Yes
2
This reviewer inserts his personal opinions about the subject of the review (as opposed to the book itself), not in a clear and direct way, but by inserting a comment here or there without development or explanation. Very disappointing, especially for an academic. The NYT can do better.
2
I'm not impressed by "both political parties, to varying degrees, embrace a rigidly moralized politics". This is a settled matter for the Republicans but not very true at all for the Democrats, who still merit Will Rogers' observation that "I belong to no organized political party. I'm a Democrat."
2
Bloomberg had many successes that both benefited the City and solidify his credentials. But he cannot be considered a great mayor as he did not address the most powerful threat to the City's well being -- the real estate industry. It gets what it wants, often contrary to public interest, at a price of promises of public space, affordable housing, or improving the subways. Those promises are seldom fulfilled, and are not used to prohibit more development. This does not include audacious tax breaks, taking much needed funds from our schools and other municipal needs.
13
Early in his tenure Bloomberg gave pensions to new employees of his with only 5 years on the job. We'll be paying for that for many years to come. Later in his tenure he withheld raises from management employees for 9 long years while union workers kept getting salary hikes, completely demoralizing managers whose salaries were dwarfed by the those of the workers they managed. Not the greatest mayor I ever worked for.
2
As NYC's wealthiest citizen, I never got the sense he was beholden to private interests -- and that's saying a lot for today's political arena.
16
I worked in NYC in the early 1970's through the late 1990's. I watched the city go through some very rough times, especially with Mayor Dinkins. Bloomberg was a wonderful mayor and a great asset for New York. People don't give him enough credit. I WISH he were running for President.
22
One Borough Mike
Allowed any building no matter how tall in Manhattan and almost no building at all in most of Queens. Sure,he fixed up a few schools and police stations.
My neighborhood in Richmond Hill footprint remains unchanged.
I blame One Borough Mike for encouraging and allowing unrestricted growth in certain areas and forgetting about the working class areas in NYC.
Is NYC too crowded now ? Smaller,smarter and a more diversified city wide growth was a better way to slow grow NYC
I think about One Borough Mike every time I am stuck in 45 minute trafficking Woodhaven Blvd.
( However, I would have loved to see that stadium over the railroad yard)
3
@Danny Seaman Queens has had opportunities to develop, including the Amazon HQ2 project, but you rejected them. Instead of a large employer you've decided to retain derelict warehouses. At some point the borough needs to accept responsibility for sabotaging the opportunities it's had over the years.
2
Mayor Bloomberg was hardly a great mayor -- except, of course, in his own estimation. He was a "great" technocrat, as well as a "great" autocrat. While he may have claimed "I'm a liberal, I'm a liberal, I"M A LIBERAL!" The truth is that is that Mayor Bloomberg was a symptom of the rise of neo-liberalism. In the glowing reviews of his "successes" (The Barclay Center, The High-line, The Cornell Tech Campus, the rise of Tourism), one would do well to ask how NY has really benefitted. to quote Richard Barbrook, from his Essay" The Californian Ideology": "American neo-liberalism seems to have successfully achieved the contradictory aims of reactionary modernism: economic progress and social immobility. Because the long-term goal of liberating everyone will never be reached, the short-term rule of the digerati can last forever."
5
I experienced NYC when people like Wagner, John Lindsay and Abe Beam ran it but I have only really admired Bloomberg. He may not be a Gates or a Winfrey or a Carter or a Steyer but Bloomberg appears to care at least a little bit more about the majority than he does about himself.
5
I agree with many of the points and accolades made in this review...but I would add the following:
1) The debacle of Mayor Bloomberg's appointment of Ms. Black to run the NY City schools. She came to the position without education credentials but with previous experience working for Rupert Murdoch. In return the former school's commissioner under Bloomberg (Joel Klein) went to work for Murdoch.
2) Just as Robert Moses was successful in "getting things done" because he controlled so many levers of power and was able to stifle opposition to his policies by the myriad of interest groups in NYC, Mayor Bloomberg had a long history of philanthropy which made it difficult for many interest groups to oppose him rather than align with him.
But one must give him credit for his many successes, innovation and mostly rational policies. Finally, one wonders whether NYC is governable without the extras (the spending of personal wealth (Bloomberg) or the control of money without oversight (Moses).
3
Ms. Black's problem was only partly because she did not come up through the education ranks.
It was also because she said that having fewer children (and by intimation that doing so would lead to income equality and better behaved children) would be good for our public schools.
Tone deaf, perhaps. But right. Gone are the days when most poorer parents could bring up 5-6 kids and turn them into responsible citizens. Oh, it can be done even in our inner cities, but it's rarer nowadays.
1
"His hallmark was a largely nonideological, pragmatic approach to problem-solving." Let's not forget that under Bloomberg homelessness rose more than 12%. I would hardly call hyper gentrification, the massive displacement of women, children and people of color, pragmatic. No, David Greenberg, this is the platform of the Republican party. Much of this article reads as a naive apology for an administration that helped usher in a pernicious condo culture and little else.
7
What about the ambiguous (at best) results of Bloomberg's wholesale re-zoning of NYC? This is his real Robert Moses-like legacy - a city whose uses of space and, subsequently, whose character, have been wholly transformed.
9
"...both political parties, to varying degrees, embrace a rigidly moralized politics."
This is the problem.
"Bloomberg’s data-driven, pragmatic style of governance"
This is the solution.
It's a shame he's not running for president.
19
Wish we had more ‘flukes’ like Mr Bloomberg!
Someone in politics who gets things done, is apolitical and let’s a city flourish!
No one is perfect and government is a series of compromises with factious parties
He made the city secure right after 9/11, when it faced a whole new world of unimaginable threats
Too bad he didn’t choose to run for President in 2020
He would have had my vote
9
The reviewer states that he never voted for Bloomberg, and its impossible to determine his political affiliation, still, I find this paean maddening. Michael Bloomberg was the worst thing to ever happen to NYC; he destroyed this city to "save" it.
Bloomberg, and his Albert Speer, Daniel Doctoroff, neither of whom were native New Yorkers, tried to remake the city in their own, grossly distorted self-images. Bloomberg saw himself as a modern day Medici, and envisioned New York as a new Florence, but instead of a vibrant, creative city, we got a sterile, wind-swept Hudson Yards, basically, what Bloomberg would look like if he was reborn as a real estate development. The argument for Bloomberg was that he's so wealthy, he could not be bought, and no, he couldn't be bought with money, but he could be bought with the adulation and gratitude of his cronies in finance and real estate.
When Goldman Sachs announced it was considering relocating to Jersey City, Michael Bloomberg was apparently the only man on Earth who actually believed them, and enticed Lloyd Blankfein to "stay" with a billion dollar package. He rezoned the entire East River waterfront, and doled out parcels like party favors to his buddies. Now, the entire stretch, from the Brooklyn Bridge, to LIC is an unbroken wall of luxury condos. And let's not forget Bloomberg's Betsy DeVos, Cathie Black, whom he appointed Schools Chancellor because the they both attended the same cocktail parties.
15
Data-driven, pragmatic, non-partisan. That sounds great to me. I only wish Mike Bloomberg could be elected president. Sure, he would make mistakes, but he could also do worlds of good in this hyper-partisan, know-nothing era of politics.
10
And the city became a playground for the rich.
14
'A self-made multibillionaire, the Boston-born technocrat transformed the city in his 12 years as mayor. Crime plummeted, schools improved, racial tensions eased, the arts flourished, tourism boomed and city coffers swelled', this New Yorker found Gotham more secure and fortified under Mayor Bloomberg's leadership.
When he took a stand more recently, and addressed the Nation of the perils of a Trump presidency, he was right to the point, blunt, concise and ruthlessly honest.
Mr. Bloomberg may be disliked, but he commands respect and brings to mind, 'The Duke of Wellington'. A conservative liberal here, an acquaintance of mine tells me that he is courteous to women, and on occasion, enjoys a celebratory event.
He is known for taking no prisoners, and shows signs of being a true believer that accomplishment carries the day over verbiage.
Certain human traits are timeless, and while Governor Pataki may be forgotten, Mr. Bloomberg is remembered as a power-to-be-reckoned with, without a trace of the bully in his constitution.
When 'New England Eyes are Smiling'.
4
It is a shame and a blot on our republic that a pragmatist who ascribes to no rigid ideology is deemed unelectable.
Mike Bloomberg was raised poor, studied engineering, worked hard, and made money. He believes in brainpower. While mayor, he had scientists and engineers studying ways to deal with our coastline in order to mitigate the flooding Sandy caused, and they were drawing up plans.
He personally gives money to charities, cultural institutions, greening efforts and work-training programs in his name and his daughters' names, and through his company, and anonymously.
He is Mr. Trump's opposite.
9
Bloomberg was a great mayor for the elite, not ordinary New Yorkers. His idea to put non educators is charge of schools and building up charter programs at the expense of community based schools still has its repercussions; he hated unions. He turned his back on the needs of the working and middle class in the area of housing, he put friends in high places where they didn’t belong. I have lived in New York City for close to 40 years. He was mediocre at best, not a friend of the “little” people. Glad he’s gone.
10
I'm one of those people that helped design and build the "contraption", as you call it. Mike is on the correct side of every issue. If he ran as an independent he would lose and Trump would win. So he didn't run. If he ran as a democrat he wouldn't get past the primaries because, you know, Wall St. As if we didn't need an economy anymore. If he ran as a Republican he wouldn't get past the primary because, you know, guns and abortion. As if guns are really making us safer. So there's no place in our political system for the most qualified person who could make the biggest difference of all to everyone. An actual non-grifter job creator.
10
Absolutely right. And why a new kind of civil war has been brewing and might boil over after next year's election.
It takes worse than a tin ear and a perpetual state of monied aggrievement to explain Bloomberg's solicitude for his fellow billionaires, notably in NY's real estate industry. The tax breaks are costing us how much? And what did it take to defeat yet another publicly subsidized stadium?
And Bloomberg can hardly be credited with drops in crime which were seen in many other large cities, notwithstanding the police harassment of poor communities common to the broken windows approach. Stop and frisk probably wouldn't have gone over very well on East 86th Street or at clubs frequented by Wall Street types downtown.
That the miracle claimed for the public schools was later revealed to be a fraud doesn't seem to trouble his supporters, though credit where is due: it was a remarkable PR achievement which has persisted long after the game was exposed.
What perhaps best typifies the Bloomberg era is the man standing in front of investment and explaining that the financial crisis wasn't really there fault. They were duped by wily poor people.
9
I'm glad I was here living in NYC during this fluke in time. I think Bloomberg really made a difference in how this city is managed. He showed that integrity and competence can be brought to city government. It's such a shame these concepts have been completely reversed by the current administration.
3
One disgrace was Bloomberg's abominable treatment of protesters of the Republican National Convention. Housing affordability is one of the biggest arguments against him, but during his term, on my block and the next, new construction for senior housing and four for low income -- not the euphemism, affordable -- were built. Considering all, I think he was the best mayor in my over forty years as a New Yorker.
1
The article writer left out his handling of the catastrophic hurricane Sandy in November , 2012. Bloomberg refused FEMA's offer for help before the storm due to cockiness that his Office Emergency Management could handle it, they couldn't. The water came rushing up SI's sandy shore and sewers and down from the hills ALONG WITH THE STORM SURGE and low lying residents had water rising above their cars. 1/2 of the NY state fatalities were on Staten Island where there was no government assets on the ground during the storm because of debris in the water and flooded refineries created a shortage of fuel. In addition Mayor Bloomberg insisted on holding the Marathon which starts at the Verazzano Bridge in SI only days following Sandy despite the fact that residents were running low on food and water there, because runners had flown in from around the world. He backed out only after pressure. That proved he didn't provide equal assistance to the outer boroughs. One low lying town in Staten Island zone 1 totally sold all their homes and moved out. There was no mandatory evacuation unlike Nassau County which forced residents of Fire Island to leave. The hurricane washed over Fire Island and split it in two.
5
You never know how lucky you are to have something, until you don’t have it anymore.
I didn’t agree with everything Mayor Bloomberg proposed, but one thing I did know was that Bloomberg was a COMPETENT, can do Mayor who, throughout his adult life, showed how to get things done! And, in my view, his enormous wealth “immunized” him from the standard “being bought” influences the usual politicians run for office to take advantage of.
I’d vote for Bloomberg in a heartbeat for Mayor or for President. He’s not infallible, and since he’s made his mark in life he can just do the best job he can as his only driving force!
8
Bloomberg really thinks he knows better than anyone else what is good for all of us. This made him one of the worst mayors in my opinion. And he basically gave New York away to his rich friends.
Regarding his so-called accomplishments, the DOE came under mayoral control before he got into office after over 100 years of Board of Education nonsense. Crime was already on the way down. Sadik-Khan was the worst DOT Commissioner ever.
I am glad someone wrote a book about him, the first of what I am sure will be many. He will be remembered, much like Robert Moses, unkindly in the decades to come. He did, however, modernize the interface between citizens and bureaucracy, but that is his only accomplishment worth noting.
2
In moralistic political terms, there is only a policy of sharing the wealth versus evil. Aggrandizing wealth is, in itself, morally reprehensible, as the underlying property or resources can not be owned in reality - the Earth is the Lord's, as it is said, and property rights are a concession to humankind to prevent neighbors from killing each other for a more arable patch of land or a better watering hole. But it is a vivid illusion: A social contract developed in ancient times that still compels people to respect each other's property as if it were truly theirs to do with as he or she sees fit, but no one can take their so-called belongings with them; we do not own even our bodies, much less anything external to them; we only manage the flow of things from one to another. When law has been perverted to the degree that vast sums are accumulated to the detriment of the less fortunate in society, law itself has been nullified, its foundation proven false, and a society that adheres to continued legal acquisition is evil and must be changed or abolished. The people that act as if they were the possessors of the elements of nature will destroy themselves in the final analysis. Universal re-distribution of wealth, coupled with self-regulated birth control, is the just and holy way to a sustainable future, even to a great society. This is a job for a pragmatic problem-solver to tackle.
Best mayor this city has ever had.
3
Well he never would’ve let Amazon get away. That’s for sure.
4
@Mat
It will eventually come to light just how large a role Bloomberg played in trying to lure fellow billionaire Bezos to NYC. Bloomberg's tech campus on Roosevelt Island, right across from LIC and the development of LIC by his real estate cabal were meant as a landing pad for the Amazon mothership. Cuomo and de Blasio were merely spectators on the sidelines but were allowed to pretend they had input; their fecklessness says it all. Why else would Bezos have been so mystified and taken aback by the reaction? It's because he had been dealing solely with another, completely out of touch plutocrat who assured him everything was set.
I haven't read the book but in noting major disgraces, the reviewer doesn't mention two additional ones:
1. When he was a Republican, while giving money to support gun control measures he also was making financial contributions to state and national Republicans who were strongly in opposition to them.
2. When he ran for his third term when his opponent was an African-American, he gave $2 million to the Independent Party that didn't need to specifically identified in order to hire poll watchers at black and Latino precincts. Part of the money was stolen by an Independent Party employee and although both the party officials and Bloomberg knew about it, neither reported it to law enforcement. It was only after a Daily News columnist found out about it that the employee indicted and subsequently convicted of the crime and that the purpose for Bloomberg's contribution came out.
I always laugh when Corey Booker, who supported Bloomberg in that election hoping for big campaign contributions, complains about voter suppression. Apparently it's all right to suppress voting if it's going to go against your candidate.
I once asked Joyce Purnick, a former Times reporter and editor who published an earlier bio of Bloomberg, whether he was aware of his apparent hypocrisy. She said that he was but that in Bloomberg's mind, what was best for him was always utmost.
2
After having lived in NYC since 1980 my answer is an unqualified yes!
Bloomberg was an excellent Chief Executive and brought real value and change to the city.
If only he would run for President!
3
Certainly the greatest Mayor in our lifetime. The city was run as a progressive business, not as a piggy bank for extorting contributions and never-ending excuses for failing the public.
5
Regardless of Mr. Bloomberg's many accomplishments, I will never forgive his indiscriminate support of "stop and frisk," during which millions (yes, millions!) of black and Latino New Yorkers had their civil and constitutional rights abrogated by mayoral fiat.
Regardless of whatever good Mr. Bloomberg may have achieved in other realms, his administration will forever be tarnished by his willingness to overlook the degradation and brutality suffered by so many of our fellow citizens at the hands of antagonistic NYPD officers, who instead of seeking to deescalate conflict, often eagerly resort to violence as a means of asserting their authority.
When Frank Serpico dropped a dime on the corruption and malfeasance of the NYPD decades ago, it should have been a wake-up call that management, supervision, and training needed a complete overhaul. But instead, the culture of police officers serving as an occupying force has only intensified, and every subsequent mayor (de Blasio included) hasn't bothered to address the systemic and embedded dereliction at NYPD.
So the inhumanity, corruption, incompetence, and sheer ignorance at NYPD continues, mostly unabated. City officials are scared of union mouthpieces like Patrick Lynch who reflexively condemn anyone who dares to question police brutality. Unarmed Amadou Diallo being shot over at over 40 times and Eric Garner begging not to be choked to death have yet to convince our mayors we have a problem.
Good riddance, Mr. Bloomberg...
13