Thursday, February 20, 2014

NYPD Arrests 3 Persons For Criminal Possession Of A Gun At Roosevelt Island's 580 Main Street (Roosevelt Landings) Last Friday - Criminal Justice/Public Safety Town Hall Meeting Sponsored By District Attorney Vance And State Senator Serrano February 24

According to this Roosevelt Island Operating Corp (RIOC) Public Safety Department (PSD) Incident Report:

2/14/14 - 1958 - 580 Main St. - Crim. Possession of Weapon - NYPD conducts arrest
A NYPD Press Spokesperson reported that officers from the 114th Precinct responded to a 911 call of a gun spotted at 580 Main Street (Roosevelt Landings). Upon reaching the 4th floor of the building, the NYPD officers observed a gun on a ledge and arrested 3 persons in close proximity to the gun.

RIOC PSD Director Jack McManus adds that PSD received an anonymous call about a gun being spotted at the location. PSD then called 911 and NYPD responded.

Roosevelt Island criminal justice and public safety issues will be the subject of a Town Hall Meeting on Monday, February 24.


As previously reported:
Senator José M. Serrano and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr. are sponsoring a very important Town Hall Meeting for the Roosevelt Island community. Attendees will have the opportunity to interact directly with DA Vance and our local elected officials, while learning more about the services provided by the District Attorney's office.

Do you have concerns about public safety and the role of the DA's office? Suggestions or questions? The panel, which will include DA Vance and Senator Serrano, will lead a discussion enabling Roosevelt Island residents to have their voices heard. Please join us!

This Town Hall Meeting will take place on Monday, February 24th, from 6:00pm-7:00pm at the Good Shepherd Community Center Auditorium, located at 543 Main Street, Roosevelt Island, NY 10044.

Light refreshments will be served.
This is an important meeting. Hope to see you there.

UPDATE 2/26 - According to a Manhattan District Attorney's Office representative, the weapons charge was dismissed. The weapon was a BB gun. A charge of marijuana possession remains.

32 comments:

Bill Blass said...

Always giving eastwood a bad name

Bill Blass said...

Eastwood may be a dump but its our high price rentals dump we love it

Bill Blass said...

They need to do better background checks on the new people moving in

Bill Blass said...

This sounds like a case of hipsters with guns

OldRossie said...

SOMETHING tells me this is not the hipsters you know and hate...

Bill Blass said...

This cannot be true. As Eastwood has the most outstanding citizens living there

Bill Blass said...

I Am as shocked about this as much as the police were shocked when they found out that there was gambling going on at ricks in the movie Casablanca

Joyce said...

As the Head of the Roosevelt Landings Residents Association, I'd like to voice my opinion on this issue.....


Roosevelt Landings is the only building on Roosevelt Island that does not have doormen or someone specifically on-site to deal with security issues in the building. When the Island was fashioned, the Public Safety Department was assigned that task, and our building's management pays a high price tag for that ongoing support.


We have 49 doors leading to our building. And because of our very quirky layout, nefarious access through any one puts residents at risk. Unfortunately, we have residents who live in our midst, who consistently disable the locks so they can come and go as they please, infringing on the safety of their neighbors. No one should tamper with locks for their amusement of selfish access.


People who live in other buildings are guarded from erroneous entry, where Roosevelt Landing's folks are not. Therefore, it is imperative that Roosevelt Landings have the protection of the District Attorney's Trespass program to deter offenders. And I believe Director McManus has instilled a proper approach to dealing with those issues in the men and women on his force.


Children loitering in hallways should be asked to "go home," not get arrested. People who are waiting at the doorway for their buddy to arrive should be escorted out of the building, not handcuffed and thrown into a cell.


People who demonstrate harmful intent should be dealt with in a manner befitting the danger they present.


A public safety officer should never have to put their life at risk by confronting a person with a weapon. That is the job for the police force, which, I believe is grossly under served in this community. When a problem involving a gun, knife, or other weapon comes up, resolution is urgent, and Public Safety Officers put themselves on the line to handle the situation. They should not have to do so.


Instead, we should have at least two permanent booths for police officers on Roosevelt Island. Our volume of population warrants at least that amount. It is unconscionable, and the failing of the City of New York, that this protection is not available to us.

ribob said...

Even though I am paying thru the nose market rates to live in "eastwood" my kids get a kick from telling their friends they live in a ghetto

Bill Blass said...

You are the one of the very few families to move into eastwood.As the rents on the 3 bedroom and 4 bedroom are going for 3500 for 3 bedrooms and 3900 for 4 bedroom.these apartments are being rented to people with for 4 and 5 people so they can split the rent between them. Very few families like youself cannot afford this rent I am guessing you are in a 2bedroom that goes for 2700. If you were living here during Halloween notice how few kids came to your door. Thats because there are no more people moving into eastwood with kids.

westviewgirl said...

again, I am on here asking, WHEN WILL WE RESIDENTS ON "RI" HAVE NYPD? Most of us pay city and state taxes, yet are treated like we are non residents of the state of NY!~ RIOC has proven it is lacking in " watching over us " and has also proven that it lacks in the ability to hire the RIGHT watch dogs over our homes. Tis a shame that we are treat like a " red headed step child " if you will. We seem to have a crime problem that is growing here, yet have not NYPD protection without waiting for them to come from Queens? What will it take to have NYPD on this island? Will it take deaths? Will it take a certain crime perdentage for almost 14,000 people that will be growing to maybe 20,000 in the coming years and fast? Who can make this happened? Will it take an act from God?

Joyce said...

RICC included securing NYPD protection on the term sheet it submitted to NYC and RIOC. Keith Guerra, former head of PSD, suggested getting booths for 24 X 7 presence of 2 police officers here.


We get push back because relative to other areas of the precinct, we are considered "low crime." But the statistics of officers to population on Roosevelt Island is approximately 15% of the coverage that the rest of the City of NY receives.


I defined this particular need at the hearings with the Community Board, City Council, the City Planning Commission,and at Scott Stinger's office, who, at the time, was the Borough President. He is now NYC's Controller.


The City's lack of response to this growing problem needs to be addressed by residents in a meaningful way. Cyrus Vance, Manhattan's District Attorney, and Senator Jose Serano are coming to town on February 24th. It is imperative that the community comes out and is very vocal about this concern.

OldRossie said...

You said there is push back because the island is relatively low crime. Doesn't that make the officer/resident ratio irrelevant, if not higher than necessary?
There's PSD, there's NYPD patrols, and there's relatively low crime. Though there appears to be more incidents lately, I'd say the island is in good shape.


Note that a year ago I was singing a much different tune. My focus was very much on young people on the island and their brazen disregard for authority (smoking pot in public areas, grouping together and being offensive, and selling drugs - I suspected - at the bottom of the bridge ramp). I'd bet these are the same kids and their off-island friends causing trouble. Nonetheless, the island, in my opinion, is better off than the majority of the city, and has little to complain about.

OldRossie said...

Isn't that what you always wanted Bill? No more "rich yuppies"?

Joyce said...

Keep in mind that it's winter time. Everyone goes indoors. I'm not saying there's no improvement, just that the jury's still out on that score.

Frank Farance said...

Ms. Short, historically the October-December months are the quieter period for PSD, incident activity starts again in January (as per several years of reports).

Bill Blass said...

Well actually it would be nice to live with rich hipsters. But I do not see a person with money moving into eastwood . As I said eastwood has become a flop house.no families move in .3 and 4 adults move into a apartment they share the rent.they do not make the apartment into a home its just a place to sleep and go to work

CheshireKitty said...

This is the case elsewhere in the City too - sometimes families double up, as well. The only solution is more rent regulation.

OldRossie said...

Always an argument for lower rent, never a word about job creation. Funny.

CheshireKitty said...

It might be funny if "middle-class" or "low-income" jobs paid enough to afford what currently passes for "middle-income" or "low-income" housing. Rent subsidies are needed since the r/e market is skewed toward the "high-income" population.

Bill Blass said...

Hey kitty.what do you think was the biggest real estate con job in ny city.was it the sale of Manhattan .by the indains or was it belson convinceing hud to pay for the outrageous rents in eastwood

CheshireKitty said...

LOL, Bill! Good one!

YetAnotherRIer said...

I kind of have to agree with Kitty. IMHO, shelter is a human right and should not be exposed to the free market as it is currently.

OldRossie said...

This isn't about shelter. Shelter is defined temporary protection from harm. This is about getting something you don't want to pay for. Kitty and Bill want to live on Roosevelt Island. Lets say rent for the size apartment they want is $3,000. Rent for the same apartment in Forrest Hills (strictly as an example) is $2,000. Lets say Kitty and Bill could afford $2,000, but don't want to live in Forrest Hills, so instead they'll lobby to reduce the rent on the island - or increase subsidies - so they can get what they want, without having to pay for it.
The subsidies exist because, you're correct, everyone should have shelter. Subsidies are a drain on the taxpayer because they're abused by people like Bill and Kitty.


First, Kitty is going to rant and rave, saying things like "if it were up to you". Bill and Kitty are going to jump on the whole ML system and the purpose of island housing to begin with... however it progresses, YetAnother, just remember that that both of these people can afford "shelter", they complain because that shelter is not as big as they want in the location they want.

CheshireKitty said...

Yet is right. There should be even more regulation of the r/e market - just as utilities are heavily regulated, for example, and even the agricultural sector receives subsidies and so forth so that the small number of farmers do not take advantage of the >90% of the population that are not farmers (consumers).


In a concentrated market such as r/e, where only a few large landlords or consortia of investors control and deliberately combine to keep prices high of a large proportion of product (cartelization) there is clearly not a lot of competition, which would tend to keep prices down (if there were many developers competed for leasees) also there is always an artificial scarcity of supply as landlords deliberately warehouse units (an illegal practice) thus driving up the price of the available units.


The r/e industry manipulates the market to their advantage - which is always the case when there is either a monopoly or market centralization/concentration. The situation with r/e is exactly like that of the oil-producing states combining to double the price of oil in the OPEC organization. Obviously, since then, there have been numerous wars fought, coups d'etat etc., in the oil-producing regions, as the West attempts to regain control of supply.


Really, there can't be enough regulation of the r/e market, considering the position of the large developers, such as Sheldrake and the Related Companies: A few large developers control thousands of units - this represents a cartel, which is anti-free market. The developers and building owners conspire among themselves to keep rents/prices of housing high - the trademark of a cabal or cartel. There are numerous developer/landlord organizations that facilitate the exchange of information on pricing and so forth.


The only reason there isn't more regulation of the r/e market is because these companies are very politically savvy, are major contributors to politicians (they buy the pols) which ensures that meaningful/hard-hitting regulations aren't enacted.

KTG said...

Your argument does not make much sense. You cite agricultural and energy markets as examples of regulatory controls.

So are you looking for developers to take subsidies tied to restrictions? What's the point , since developers would never take a subsidy that would cut into profits, and it just pushes costs back to other tax payers. Also farming is horrible example because commodity prices are at all time highs but we are still paying subsidies, proving that its an inefficient model. You can address supply/demand equation without addressing availability

The fact is there are pockets of significant inflation (like most of Manhattan, W'Burg, GreenPoint, LIC), places that have seen up tick in prices (like RI, Jackson Height, Forest Hills), and places that are deem less desirable. The city is better served improving transport and related facilities in third criteria to drive development. This way expanding market more naturally controlling prices and also creating a greater tax base to fund services.

Lets be clear shelter is a basic necessity.

But to Old Rossie point shelter that comes with a short commute, good parks, in right school system or access to entertainment is not a basic human necessity those are things that factor into how much of a premium you pay on top of that necessity.

OldRossie said...

1,000% agreed. Additionally, you're point regarding the improvement of less desirable areas would yield cost that are better received by all (I'm happy to pay an extra 20 bucks or whatever per month for a metro card for the MTA to develop as such. less open to higher taxes for the subsidies Bill would prefer). Unfortunately, Kitty will likely shoot that down as the "evil gentrification".

rilander said...

For years there was a booth on the bridge before the helix, and there is a booth outside Duane Reade. Never see any PSD there....day or night. Out tax $$$ and maintenance $$$ at work! Thanks RIOC...(Roosevelt Island Office of Cronyism)!

NotMyKid said...

Typical bungling representative.

Wouldn't it be more cost effective and easier to arm psd and send them through more training than to beg and plead for a nypd officer, at a rate of well over $100k/yr salary to be posted on RI.

Of course said officer is not going to do vertical patrols alone or any other fantasy you envision.

Reality check lady.

NotMyKid said...

Bungling representative.

Reality check, indoors as in stairwells having sex, smoking dope and performing drug exchanges.

In your own staircases.

Yet, let's have psd run around like inadequate security guards with handcuffs and a flashlight.

Good call.

NotMyKid said...

With only a 30 man department with possibly at most 6-7 officers per shift, where is the man power?

There is none.

Your money is put to better use by actual roving patrols, not sitting in a booth.

So unless RIOC authorizes at least an extra 10-15 officers, it's not practical or efficient to man these booths at a regular basis.

Bill Blass said...

Us hipster haters. Have a friend in spike lee.