‘Drive to Ban Cars in Park’

Regarding “Drive Is Building to Ban Automobiles From Oasis of Central Park,” Bradley Hope, Page 1, March 27, 2006]

Closing the loop drives in Central Park 24/7 is long overdue. Cars on the loop drive frequently speed and make it dangerous for all park users, as well as produce noise and air pollution within inches of actual park users: joggers, skaters, cyclists, walkers, etc.

There are plenty of other ways for cars to get around without driving on the loop drives. Once the city goes ahead with a three-month trial this summer, we will all wonder how we went so long without it.

BRIAN HOBERMAN
Manhattan

Regarding “Drive Is Building to Ban Automobiles From Oasis of Central Park,” Bradley Hope, Page 1, March 27, 2006]

Wow, don’t let me rain on your car-free apple pie, but the recurrent proposal to “Ban Automobiles From Oasis of Central Park” — as your headline puts it — may sound great to you in the press release, but is bogus when it hits the pavement.

In 2003, the “oasis” had five pedestrians injured by cars, but over three dozen pedestrians injured by bikes.

Try crossing any of the park drives under various circumstances. Cars observe the staggered lights at a very, very high rate. But bikes — hey, they don’t stop under any circumstances. At any time.

The crosswalks are safe as they cross the car lanes, but they are kill zones as they pass the bike lanes. Indeed, it is far more dangerous to cross the park drives when the supposedly death-dealing automobiles are banned — because their place is taken by bicycles.

I bicycle in the city and I’m a member of Transportation Alternatives. But if the “car-free” supporters do stage a sit-in on the loop drive, they better not sit in front of the bikes.

CHRISTOPHER GRAY
Manhattan

‘Bollinger on the Spot’

In the controversy over Columbia Law School’s awarding of a faculty position to Olati Johnson, Dean David M. Schizer wrote: “The ethics charge [against Johnson] … arose in a highly partisan atmosphere and involved many disputed issues of fact that were never adjudicated …” [“Bollinger on the Spot,” Letters, March 28, 2006].

The Center for Individual Freedom researched, wrote, and published the original news article regarding Olati Johnson’s ethical lapse and subsequently filed the ethics complaint against her.

In two years since first publication, no one, including Ms. Johnson, has disputed any fact we disclosed, unless such assertions were made in private discussions of which we have no knowledge. Ms. Johnson was specifically offered the opportunity to respond to the article, which she ignored. We stand by every word written, every fact disclosed.

Dean Schizer’s point about “highly partisan atmosphere” eludes us. The U.S. Senate is highly partisan by its nature, which excuses no deviation from ethics by anyone employed there.

We would remind Dean Schizer that the first person to recognize the ethical issue raised by Ms. Johnson’s actions was Ms. Johnson herself in her original memo to Senator Kennedy.

JEFFREY MAZZELLA
President
Center for Individual Freedom
Alexandria, Va.
www.cfif.org

---

Please address letters intended for publication to the Editor of The New York Sun. Letters may be sent by e-mail to editor@nysun.com, by facsimile to 212-608-7348, or post to 105 Chambers Street, New York City 10007. Please include a return address and daytime telephone number. Letters may be edited.