In a breathtaking show of bureaucratic arrogance, possible corruption, and Albany incompetence, New York’s so-called civic leaders dealt a probable deathblow to the city’s more than five-year effort to bring the Olympics to the Empire State. Their (in)action calls into question New York’s ability to get big projects done at a crucial time in our history.

Now the NYC 2012 Olympic bid is scram bling to undo this self-inflicted damage in a 72 hour race to submit a document answering the International Olympic Committee’s critiques of each city’s plan. Their initial review released last Monday was favorable, but it singled out the absence of a stadium as a key weakness Later that same day, an obscure state board representing Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno stabbed the city’s bid in the back by denying the Olympic Stadium support at the 11th hour

Our self-sabotage must look strange to other cities: Hosting the Olympics is a prestigious international honor. It opens the door to a decade of ambitious economic developments that benefit future generations. So why would a man entrusted with representing his city’s interests do more than all the other competing cities combined to derail his own city’s Olympic dreams?

The answer lies in the murky world of New York politics, where dysfunction is so commonplace that it is an accepted way of life. In Albany, bureaucratic stonewalling is a respected negotiation technique. The horse trading that is the only alternative to permanent stalemate requires all downstate appropriations for big projects be matched by appropriations for upstate developments. This has the effect of doubling the taxpayer cost of major public works.

Public debate, backroom deals, and courtroom hustling are all done to the drumbeat of special-interest money. The over-hyped public outrage about the stadium was stoked by millions of dollars of ads spent by Cablevision to stop a development that would end its Madison Square Garden monopoly on hosting major sporting events, concerts, and conventions. Unions who weighed in on the stadium’s side were likewise backed by the prospect of profitable construction contracts.

Compromised dollars from debate also flowed into the extended households of the ultimate decision-makers themselves. Mr. Bruno’s son Ken is a paid lobbiest for Cablevision. State law allows Mr. Silver to receive undisclosed amounts of cash funneled into his law firm without releasing full records, so it is impossible to tell whether he was directly influenced by the Dolan family’s desperate largesse, but Mr. Silver’s influential former chief of staff, Patricia Lynch, is on the Cablevision payroll. And while Speaker Silver drew accolades for his call for a lower Manhattan Marshall Plan, his literal lack of response to a package by Mayor Bloomberg offering generous tax and rent incentives protecting the primacy of ground zero redevelopment pulled the curtain back on Mr. Silver’s preordained purpose. His claims to represent the democratic will of the people were likewise undercut by the fact that a majority of his Assembly members and the City Council backed the Olympic stadium plan.

Killing by committee is a time-honored last ditch defense in Albany, but in the past, a strong governor has been able to navigate the system to get the job done. Not so our current governor, George Elmer Pataki. For too long he has acted almost uninterested in New York’s Olympic opportunity as he focused on raising money toward his fantasy of running for president. He should not be allowed to limp away from this national and international embarrassment unscathed. If a governor cannot get his state’s Olympic bid through procedurally rough waters, how can he be trusted to deal effectively with a divisive Congress or international dictators, who are sure to be more difficult opponents than Mr. Silver?

Average New Yorkers must also accept a bit of responsibility for accepting or encouraging this dysfunctional environment. Many self-described civic activists cheered when it became apparent that the controversial stadium was stopped. But in the larger sense, what does it mean to cheer inaction?

In the old glory days of New York City and state, ambitious public-private works were the key to our rise, from the Erie Canal to the Empire State Building (which, it should be remembered, was built in one year). But we seem to have lost the will or ability to take on great tasks efficiently. Progress on ground zero and Governors Island are stalled after almost four years. Now the central development effort of the Bloomberg administration appears derailed as well.

It is no small irony that the tarnished crown jewel that Cablevision is seeking to defend stands on the site of the old Penn Station whose destruction spurred the modern preservation movement. The West Side stadium debate reflexively took on shades of Robert Moses versus Jane Jacobs in the public’s mind despite the crucial difference that there is nothing much worth preserving on the proposed site – and preservation for its own sake is stupidity. It is an example of how too many liberal activists are running on the fumes of past successes rather than the purposeful solutions to pressing new problems. Their good intentions have been exploited to the political and personal benefit of permanent government parasites.

The city built by ambition is in danger of showing it cannot compete against the great cities of Europe. This is a national as well as local embarrassment, and blame should fall at the feet of Sheldon Silver and Joseph Bruno. There may still be time for a Hail Mary pass to save our city’s Olympic bid, but the lessons of this very public fumble should not be forgot ten. “Let’s not get things done!” is a rallying cry only in a city that is in decline.