Even In The Era Of Obama, People Still Unclear About “The Tempering Qualities Of Humility And Restraint”

The first rule of graft is never being improbably flashy with your loot:

An NYC Transit supervisor allegedly “living large” with luxury cars and five flat-screen televisions in her house is suspected of looting the cash-strapped agency with a bogus billing and kickback scheme, the Daily News has learned.

The MTA inspector general and the Brooklyn district attorney’s office are investigating whether Jacqueline Jackson, 50, inflated bills submitted by a Brooklyn company and then shared in the ill-gotten gains, law enforcement sources said.

The scope of the suspected fraud isn’t yet known but the early signs are alarming, sources said.

NYC Transit is believed to have used the company, AJI Records Retrieval, to do pre-trial tasks for at least a decade, paying the firm about $1.5 million, sources said.

. . .

Jackson earned $83,000 a year as director of legal support for the tort division in NYC Transit’s legal department.

Yet, Jackson had a flat-screen television in just about every room — including the bathroom — of her two-story brick house on E. 46th St. in the Flatlands section of Brooklyn, a source said.

She also had five or so fur coats in her closets, according to the source.

Outside, a Mercedes-Benz S430 luxury sedan was in the driveway. Jackson also drives a Lincoln Navigator.

. . .

“She’s living large,” one of Jackson’s neighbors said. “Inside the house is so beautiful.”

The Sweet Smell Of Another $100 Million Campaign

More than three years ago the mayor was running for reelection. Now it’s starting again. Maybe that’s the link:

The mysterious sweet smell that swept over parts of the city more than three years ago returned on Monday night.

The city’s 311 information line was flooded with callers reporting the smell of maple syrup, or something like it, wafting across several neighborhoods, a spokesman for the Office of Emergency Management said.

Nearly all of the calls — 35 in just a few hours — came from areas in Manhattan, the spokesman said, although one caller reported smelling the sweet scent across the East River in Queens.

Department of Environmental Protection agency investigators were searching for the source of the smell late Monday night and early Tuesday morning, the agency’s spokesman said.

For more on the mysterious, still unexplained Smell of 2005: The Sweet Smell Of Maple Doughnuts, Or Perhaps Eggos, Smell Returns? Mysterious Smell Comes, Goes And Leaves No Clues In Its Wake, Sweet Syrupy Smell, I Wish I Knew How To Quit You!.

Wait Around Long Enough And Everything Becomes A Landmark

Wow, the much maligned “Superblock” of the 1960s gets landmark designation in Greenwich Village:

Three towers that have dominated the Greenwich Village skyline for 40 years were given historic landmark status yesterday — a move that will make it harder for the property owner, New York University, to expand on the site.

Enthusiastically Euthanasic

More democracy, not less:

Setting up a showdown over one of the most divisive issues in recent political memory, Speaker Christine C. Quinn announced Tuesday that the City Council would vote Thursday on Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s plan to revise the term limits law so he can pursue four more years in office.

Supporters of the change said the move reflected Mr. Bloomberg’s and Ms. Quinn’s confidence that they have gathered the 26 Council votes needed to pass the legislation.

There are also signs that public opinion is tilting against the change, and privately some allies of Ms. Quinn say she is anxious, if not desperate, to hold the vote before an advertising campaign opposing the change takes hold.

“If it’s not on Thursday, they’re in trouble,” said one council member who supports the bill, speaking on condition of anonymity so as not to upset the mayor or the speaker.

The “Why Lie? I Need A Beer” Method Of Campaigning

30 Democratic City Councilmembers revealed some of what they are thinking regarding the mayor’s plan to permanently raise the number of terms via a Council vote. Time for a roll call:

At the meeting, many council members expressed support for changing term limits, which would force dozens of them from office next year, but said they were deeply uncomfortable doing so themselves because New Yorkers had voted for it twice.

Several lashed out at Mr. Bloomberg, saying that the mayor and his wealthy friends had orchestrated a campaign to rewrite the law without consulting with council members, according to those in attendance, who described the meeting on condition on anonymity for fear of offending colleagues.

“This one billionaire is now controlling our government, like a dictator,” Councilwoman Darlene Mealy, who represents Brooklyn, said during the meeting, colleagues said. Ms. Mealy did not return phone calls after the meeting.

Normally, “like a dictator” is an offensive rhetorical overreach. Not in this context!

Roll call — Lewis Fidler comes out in favor of self-serving legislation to extend his Council career:

But several members argued that even if the method of changing the law was unsavory, they remained philosophically opposed to a two-term limit and would act to change it.

Lewis A. Fidler, a councilman from Brooklyn, said he told the group that “this is about whether term limits are good government or bad government. I think it’s bad government.”

Roll call — John Liu, finally understanding the difference between good grandstanding and bad:

According to those in the room, roughly eight members spoke in favor of the legislation revising the law to three terms; eight spoke against it; and four asked questions that did not reveal their position.

Queens Councilman John C. Liu, who has emerged as a leader in the effort to stop the mayor’s plan, gave what many considered the most moving speech. As he recounted after the meeting, he told his colleagues, “I came into government with a pretty cynical attitude, but over the last six years I came to believe in the system. But in one fell swoop, what has happened here has decimated my belief in that system.”

Roll call — Robert Jackson, expanding on his personal philosophy of representative government and principles:

Robert Jackson, a Manhattan councilman, offered a rousing defense of the legislation under consideration, saying he has always opposed term limits and would not let public opinion sway him. “Even if 80 percent of my constituents are in favor of the death penalty, I wouldn’t vote for it,” he said. “The same is true for term limits. It’s a matter of principle.”

The issue of the back-door referendum:

A few members, like David I. Weprin, of Queens, questioned why Mr. Bloomberg did not attempt to change term limits through a public referendum.

But Peter F. Vallone Jr., of Queens, said that a referendum would cost millions of dollars to organize, a cost the city should not bear while the economy is faltering.

Solution — have the mayor bankroll a special election. It would be “altruistic” . . .

Roll call — Domenic Recchia, on the subject of “ample opportunity” to voice opinions:

After the meeting, Councilman Domenic M. Recchia Jr. of Brooklyn, who said he favors the extension, explained: “A lot of us council members feel that passing it through legislation is giving ample opportunity to the voters of the city to voice their opinions.”

He added: “If the voters don’t like their council member, they can vote him out of office. And if they don’t like the mayor, they can get rid of him too.”

And, finally, contra Joyce Purnick, evidence that billionaire term limit-hater Ronald S. Lauder may not be in on the plan after all:

As the Council debated, Mr. Bloomberg’s aides scrambled to shore up the support of Mr. Lauder, the term limits advocate and cosmetics heir.

After agreeing last week to support a third term for Mr. Bloomberg, Mr. Lauder vowed on Sunday night to fight the mayor’s plan to permanently change the limits to three terms from two, calling it a “terrible mistake.”

Last week, Mr. Lauder privately agreed to support a one-time change of the law to three terms, to allow Mr. Bloomberg to seek re-election in the middle of an economic crisis. But he was angry to learn that the mayor was pushing for a permanent change of the law.

Mr. Bloomberg’s staff argued that there were two reasons a permanent change was preferable: It was less likely to face legal challenge and would appeal to more City Council members. When Mr. Bloomberg learned of Mr. Lauder’s frustration, he and his aides suggested a deal in which Mr. Lauder would sit on a 2010 charter commission committee, which would have the authority to change the law back to a two-term limit. In return, Mr. Lauder would agree to not fight the mayor’s plans to alter the law.

But Mr. Lauder, after appearing to back such a deal, balked on Sunday night, people familiar with the matter said. His reversal left City Hall staff members confused, as one said, and flustered.