Fine. Leather. Goods.
1 Like
A certain type of old person doesn’t always understand what seems to us to be an obvious concept. See also Cliven Bundy.
7 Likes
Perhaps they mean they will push back by purchasing the land from the NY Parks Department at the going rate of $1000/ sq ft (actually a bargain in that neighborhood) and then they will also reimburse all the other local taxpayers for the loss of amenity over the past 10 years.
Or more likely, they’ll donate to local politicians who they know from the golf / yacht / country club who will in turn pressure the city government to roll over and give them the land.
11 Likes
And now they’re gonna let in all the ruffraff.
Edit: Like my personal favorite, Fenton
24 Likes
Sounds like every mountain community around Silicon Valley. Every time I go up to hike, I find more trails where someone has posted phony-ass signs claiming private property. Some of the people in these little communities even claimed to my face that it wasn’t legal for me to walk down their streets, despite the fact that the county had paid for them.
11 Likes
It doesn’t seem objectively reasonable for public funds to be expended providing and maintaining an area for dogs in the middle of a concrete metropolis totally unsuited for the physical and mental health of dogs.
It’s probably pragmatically necessary, though, because dog people can’t be argued with or stopped from having dogs regardless of what harm comes of it. Like most people in love, they are not reasonable.
I still have a few small nicks from a pit bull attack two weeks ago so my dislike of irresponsible and incompetent dog owners is probably higher than usual.
7 Likes
They need to paws and think about what they’re doing.
10 Likes
That’s a whole different conversation though. I don’t disagree that dogs are better off out doors with lots of room to run. But, the reality is that people do keep dogs in the city (and probably have for as long as we’ve had cities), and therefore, we have dog parks. The problem here is about some people taking control of a publicly funded resource, and excluding other tax paying citizens.
But again, we’ve had dogs as pets for quite a long time in human history. That’s unlikely to just stop anytime soon, no matter how we change how we live. On top of that, dogs (and other animals) are markedly adaptable to urban environments (another can of worms as to whether or not that’s good, but it IS a thing, no matter how we may feel about it).
That’s not a bad thing to be against - people need to realize that having an animal as a pet is a responsibility, not a novelty. But the key issue here is the hijacking of publicly funded resources for private use.
20 Likes
Came here for the Night Vale reference, was not disappointed.
7 Likes
That kind of shit infuriates me!
Same thing happened down in Maryland where my parents keep their little skiff boat. Someone tried to claim the beach, but Maryland law says the beach is public to the high tide line. Also the buoys they used to try and fence off the area mysteriously came untethered and floated away…
6 Likes
you mean
?
2 Likes
I’m wondering how they managed to go 10 years supposedly without a complaint to Parks until now. Either they managed to keep all people in the neighborhood happy long enough for most people to forget that it was a public park, or the complaints were being lost by someone.
3 Likes
I’ll bet that’s made them barking mad…
4 Likes
They were just doing the City Council’s work by ensuring that the Dog Part is and remains forbidden. In fact, we should all just stop talking about it altog
1 Like
Oh, everybody hates that. Nobody wants to be told that.
(I could not help myself. Sorry.)
3 Likes
yeah “lost”, that’s the ticket.
2 Likes
It’s likely that few if any people knew they had grounds to lodge a complaint since they thought the park was private property.
10 Likes
