Did Giuliani Really Clean Up Times Square?

AP via CBS News ^ | Dec. 28, 2007 | Staff

[jdm]

Times Square is crammed with tourists, and not just for New Year's Eve. These days, they're eager to gawk at the glittering lights of Broadway and visit attractions like Madame Tussauds Wax Museum and the MTV studios.

But 15 years ago, the place was considered a cesspool, overrun with crime and home to sex shops and peep shows. Drug addicts shot up on the street. Locals avoided the neighborhood.

The man who has taken the credit for revitalizing Times Square is GOP presidential hopeful and former Mayor Rudy Giuliani. He has made Times Square a symbol for how he tamed the evils of an out-of-control city and turned it into a tourist-friendly destination.

"It's called getting things done," he said at a fundraiser this year.

It's not that clear-cut, a closer examination of the Times Square renaissance shows.

While even his critics will say Giuliani deserves praise for his part in redevelopment of the area, the finished product was the culmination of decades of work that came before he was elected, according to lawmakers and urban planners.

"State agencies had plans in place to develop 42nd Street well before Giuliani," said Ethel Sheffer, an urban planning expert who led a quality-of-life study on Times Square during the redevelopment. Any large-scale redevelopment "takes a long time to unfold," she said.

The Times Square plan was in the works during the 1980s, when state officials and then-Mayor Ed Koch used eminent domain to condemn and take control of decrepit buildings.

But there was no legal way to control businesses until the City Council initiated a study during the administration of David Dinkins, who preceded Giuliani as mayor, that would allow them to pass rezoning laws if they could prove sex businesses were harming residential areas.

Walter McCaffrey, a former City Council member, said the idea to rezone wasn't even related to Times Square at first. It started with a neighborhood in Queens near the Queensboro Bridge that had suffered when topless bars and porn shops moved in. After the study, the City Council drew up stricter zoning laws that prohibited sex-oriented theaters, bookstores, massage parlors and dance clubs from operating within 500 feet of homes, houses of worship, schools or one another.

The law passed in 1995 - about two years after Giuliani took office.

By this time, the area was already changing, urban planning experts say. The paced quickened after the legal challenges to the zoning laws were defeated and Giuliani bore down.

Says Charles Millard, a former City Councilman and head of the city's Economic Development Corp: "I drafted the law that allowed us to do this constitutionally when David Dinkins was mayor, but until Rudy became mayor and pushed it through his planning commission, and pushed it through the city, not a thing had happened."

Others say Giuliani was in the right place at the right time, as the economy boomed in the 1990s and shifted toward tourism, real estate and Wall Street. The proliferation of Internet porn also made many sex shops obsolete.

"It was kind of like a perfect storm for him," said Arturo Ignacio Sanchez, a City and Regional Planning professor at Cornell University. The process started with Koch, picked up speed under Dinkins and really accelerated under Giuliani, he said, adding: "It fast forwards with warp speed under Bloomberg, and you have the city today."

Times Square has always lived a double life - even a century ago the 10-block stretch of busy Midtown streets was home to upscale splendor as well as hidden brothels and fetid hotels. With the invention of neon and the rise of Broadway shows, the area slowly became the entertainment center of the city.

But by the time Giuliani took office, the area had fallen into decline. In 1993, nearly 4,000 incidents of crime were reported in the area, according to the Times Square Alliance, a business group.

Part of the revival was the arrival of upscale hotels, theme stores and restaurants - businesses that Giuliani helped lure with a private-public team of developers.

Disney received a low-interest loan from the city to give a facelift to the New Amsterdam Theater on 42nd Street, considered by some to be the crown jewel of the new Times Square. The renovated theater soon drew in other businesses, such as MTV, ESPN and other media companies.

Giuliani talks on the campaign trail about the eradication of porn shops from Times Square and about declining crime rates during his tenure.

"It didn't happen by accident, it didn't happen by wishing they went away," Giuliani said in a speech in October. "It happened based on a very well-organized campaign, a study demonstrating the impact of pornography on neighborhoods, an intense battle in court that nobody thought we would win, and we won. And most importantly, the pornographers lost and they were chased out of Times Square."

There are still some sex shops in Times Square, but the majority of them disappeared long ago. Some simply relocated.

Former City Councilman Thomas Duane was among the few who voted against the rezoning laws in the 1990s, in part because he was not eager to see the sex shops simply switch neighborhoods.

"He didn't get rid of them from New York City, he dispersed them from Times Square, mostly to the industrial waterfront areas of the city," Duane said of Giuliani.

"And as Manhattan became a more attractive place to live, people started moving into those communities and now the same problem exists," he said. "It just doesn't exist much where the tourists go."

[Dr. Frank fan]

If he didn't want to run, fine. Just don't blame it on a physical impairment that didn't exist.

Well, at this point it's worth pointing out that cancer is a physical impairment.

But you're also attacking something of a strawman. Giuliani, to my knowledge, never said "I am physically literally incapable of running for this office". I've quoted you what he said in post #172:

"I've decided that what I should do is to put my health first and that I should devote the focus and attention that I should to be able to figure out the best treatment".

Which part there do you think you've 'disproved'?

So: he had decided not to campaign because he felt he should focus on his treatment. And here's what you've just said: "If he didn't want to run, fine".

Well, he didn't want to run, he wanted to focus on his cancer treatment. And you have no good reason whatsoever for doubting that. So we're fine then, right?

I have a problem with lies and mistruths, particularly from people who want to become public officials.

Where's the lie or mistruth in Rudy stating that he wanted to focus on his cancer treatment? Do you think Rudy "didn't really want" to focus on his cancer treatment? Does that make sense?

And why the heck do you have a problem with that?

Because again, you presume to know that which you do not, and you bizarrely second-guess a fricking cancer patient based on nothing but fluff and your own hatred of the guy. I guess I have a problem with that on many grounds: intellectual, moral, aesthetic....

It's just low and I think you know it.

[NobleEagle2004]

Total Smear,Law was passed 1995 2yrs AFTER Gulliani took office.That Means Permits could not have been issued and approoved prior 1995. Duh.....they must think we would miss that.

[KeithCu]

> It didn’t stop him from marching in the Gay Pride Parade or
> launching his campaign against gun manufacturers.

Would you please compare how much energy is expended in running for Senate versus walking 3 miles down the street? Is it 10x? 100x?

[FocusNexus]

“Many attributed the drop in crime to the improved national economy and declining national crime rates, but crime in New York continued to decline during an economic downturn, even while it rose in the rest of the country. While a few cases of police misconduct or excessive force received intense publicity, actual police shootings declined by 40 percent during Giuliani’s administration, and long overdue reforms reduced violence in the city jails by 95 percent. Over Giuliani’s eight years in office, New York’s crime rate fell by 57 percent, and the FBI rated New York as America’s safest large city. “

From: Academy of Achievement

http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/giu0bio-1

[Dr. Frank fan]

Oh, give up. Admit they are right. Cancer schmancer, Rudy wore a dress.

A DRESS!

Therefore he is evil personified. Let's just admit it ;-)

[calcowgirl]

Read what I first wrote again (”the doctors said they thought campaigning was perfectly within his physical capabilities and, if he started treatment right way, he would have recovered and been “full speed” by the time the campaign normally kicked in.”)

In other words, he had no physical limitations that would not allow him to campaign (or do anything else, for that matter). And, remember—I only entered this conversation to correct someone that erroneously posted that “Rudy didn’t run against Hillary because he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and had started chemotherapy treatments.”

I guess you would have preferred that myth be perpetuated—sorry to ruin your day.

[thefactor]

wow. where did you find that site?

crime went down nationwide in the early 90's.

and i guess rudy was out there catching all those criminals himself on the streets of new york? i make all my points in my previous posts. just read those.

[Dr. Frank fan]

Read what I first wrote again (”the doctors said they thought campaigning was perfectly within his physical capabilities and, if he started treatment right way, he would have recovered and been “full speed” by the time the campaign normally kicked in.”)

Still would like a reference for this thing "the doctors" said. Anyway, I'll take your word for it that that's what "the doctors" said.

Meanwhile, here's what Rudy said at the time:

"I've decided that what I should do is to put my health first and that I should devote the focus and attention that I should to be able to figure out the best treatment".

Do you have a problem with someone with cancer deciding that what they should do is to put their health first and devote their focus and attention to treatment? If so, why?

In other words, he had no physical limitations that would not allow him to campaign (or do anything else, for that matter).

Who said he did?

He wanted to focus on treating his cancer. Get it?

And, remember—I only entered this conversation to correct someone that erroneously posted that “Rudy didn’t run against Hillary because he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and had started chemotherapy treatments.”

And as you've established, they weren't chemotherapy treatments, they were a hormone treatment plus external-beam plus brachytherapy (seed implantation). Good point. He didn't have chemotherapy, instead he had a different mixture of nasty things done to his body. So, not sure what you think that proves. The fact remains that he dropped out because of the cancer, like the person said. Not because it physically prevented him from being able to run in some sort of absolute it's-not-physically-possible way (which no one ever claimed!), but because he HAD FRICKING CANCER and wanted to devote his energies to TREATING THE DAMN CANCER, perhaps (one speculates) some political campaign seeming relatively unimportant to him by comparison to HAVING CANCER.

How on earth can you not be getting this?

I guess you would have preferred that myth be perpetuated—sorry to ruin your day.

What "myth"? The straw man you cooked up? Sigh. Let's all stipulate for the record that Rudy Giuliani would have been, strictly speaking, physically capable of running for Senate NY 2000. It was not physically impossible for him to have done so. If that's all you're trying to prove here, then fine.

Nevertheless, you seem not to get that the guy was diagnosed with cancer and thus had other things on his mind. So that is what he wanted to focus on, which is EXACTLY what he said at the time. You have no good reason whatsoever to doubt that statement he made regarding his reason, and yet here you are, continuing to argue, argue, argue....

[calcowgirl]

Ahhh... now we start with the “you must be a Rudy hater” whine.

That usually gets followed with homophobe, xenophobe, racist, or other such baseless rhetoric.

Conversation over.

[GregH]

Rudy has a solid record in running NYC city.

I dont like his anti-constitution positions on some issues, but he is not a bad figure as some here paint him to be.

He is vastly more experienced and capable than any of the Dems running for the Presidency.

[calcowgirl]

The gay pride parade? I’d guess he could have flown to Albany and made a speech or two with about the same effort.

And Giuliani put quite a lot of effort into his campaign against gun manufacturers and his plans for gun licensing. He went to rallies, met with Bill Clinton, and even met with Janet Reno so she could incorporate all of his great new ideas into Clinton’s crime bill. Not to mention all those meetings with attorneys and the Brady camp.

Priorities, ya know? I mean—the Senate would have just been too much work. But gun control? Gotta have it!

[Dr. Frank fan]

Ahhh... now we start with the “you must be a Rudy hater” whine. That usually gets followed with homophobe, xenophobe, racist, or other such baseless rhetoric.

What the heck are you talking about?

[durasell]

The existing zoning at the time — tax breaks — were very inviting. That’s how Trump made his first big deal — buying the old Biltmore next to Grand Central.

All this stuff was in place long before Rudy.

[Calpernia]

It was Harold’s influence that created COMPSTATs.

/back joke from another thread

[durasell]

Yeah, it was years of urban planning.

[Liz]

Because of what Rudy and Bratton did in NYC, it then caused crime to decline nationwide.......

Snort---I guess that's why Giuliani up and threw Bratton out of NYC---it got so clean (/sarc).

As Rooty's hand-picked appointee, Bratton's only "crime" in NYC was standing in egomaniacal Rooty's spotlight. Bratton got the credit for reducing crime, got lionized by the media and was on the beautiful people's party A-list. Rooty was incensed and unceremoniously dumped Bratton.

BEST OF ENEMIES: Mayor Giuliani and William Bratton at a press conference
in 1996 as Rudy announced Bratton's "resignation" as police commissioner.

RUDY: "Get outta here Bratton---nobody but nobody steals Giuliani's limelight."

BRATTON: "If I ever stop smiling, I'm gonna kill this SOB."

[MarkL]

Sorry, I must have misunderstood your meaning.

Mark

[Caramelgal]

No. I was being sarcastic, in an attempt to illustrate the stupidity inherent in the takedown of Giuliani contained in the above article.

Sorry. Thanks for the clarification. When I first read your post I didn’t get the sarcasm as it’s sometime hard to tell around here when people are being serious or not. :)

I think you and I agree. Big city mayors are more like corporate CEO’s. They don’t face the same sorts of issues, constitutional issues, as a governor or the President. A strong mayor can keep a city council under tighter reigns than a governor can with state legislators or a president can with congress.

And a good mayor can bring in, support and empower appointments, like police commissioners, public works officials and school superintendents who can get the job done. And that’s what Rudy did and it worked. I don’t like the man on a personal level but I will give him credit for turning NYC around.

And he did demonstrate strong leadership immediately after 9/11. Compare and contrast Guiliani to the Mayor of New Orleans during Katrina.

I don’t like Guiliani’s views on the 2nd Amendment, on privacy and abortion and I won’t be voting for him in the primaries, but if I could convince him to give up the presidential race and come to Baltimore and clean up this city and get crime under control like he did in NYC, he’d get my support.

As far as wearing a “dress”, people need to lighten up. He did it for laughs on an appearance on SNL. Milton Berle used to dress in drag for yucks. So do some Redskins fans – the Hogettes?

And minimizing the effects of cancer and cancer treatments have on a person is a real low and cheap blow and something I would more expect to find among DU’er’s.

[NYC Republican]

You clearly are CLUELESS

[Elyse]

This is nothing more than a hit piece on Rudy, and no doubt, his detractors will jump all over this... FR has become pathetic....

I don't understand why you think posting this article was pathetic. This was not a hit piece. It was a fairly balanced view of what Giuliani was actually responsible for doing. It states that his efforts wouldn't have been possible without prior city planning, but it clearly states what he did to make the project a success.