By The TimesLedger
Could it be possible in a country where children wear $150 Nike Air Jordans and pay $50 a piece to collect a library of the latest video games that there are children in Queens who will go to bed hungry tonight? Advocates for the borough's 175 soup kitchens and food pantries warn that Queens is on the brink of a disaster.
The Hunger Action of New York, a network of food providers and advocates for the poor, claims that there are 100,000 children living in Queens who would go hungry were it not for the food offered by neighborhood food pantries and soup kitchens. And they say that if the mayor's contingency budget is put into effect, city funding that now adds up to about $7.7 million in the Emergency Food Assistance program, will be cut. The cupboard will be bare, they say, and children and the elderly will go hungry.
Whether one is Republican or Democrat, rock-rib conservative or die-hard liberal, the thought of children going hungry has to be unconscionable. It is sad to think of closing the Queens zoo. It is frustrating that the public libraries may be forced to cut back on their hours when they are not open enough now. But it is unthinkable that children and their families may soon be going hungry.
To be sure, the advocates for the poor are not beyond using exaggeration to make their case. But whether there are 100,000 or 10,000 standing on the brink of hunger, it is a circumstance that cannot be tolerated.
Before the contingency budget goes into effect, either City Hall or Borough Hall should commission a study of the borough's food assistance programs to determine exactly how many people in Queens rely on the generosity of pantries and soup kitchens to feed their families. How many families have exhausted food stamp and other benefits? How many children would not have even one decent meal were it not for the food offered at school breakfast, lunch and after-school programs? What kind of reserves do the city's food pantries have?
The alarm has been sounded. There may be a million reasons why 100,000 children depend on the government and nonprofit organizations for free food. These reasons need to be addressed. But for now, the most important thing is to make certain that their safety net is secure, that no child suffers the pain of hunger and malnutrition.
The one certain formula for combating graffiti is to remove it or paint over it as soon as it appears. Graffiti vandals suffer from undernourished egos. They leave their tags so that others in the vandal netherworld will admire them. No matter how infantile and ugly, they are proud of their tags.
One owner of a chain of McDonald's restaurants in Queens established a policy requiring his managers to paint over graffiti within one hour of opening. It worked. The vandals soon grew frustrated.
The East Flushing Civic Association and City Councilman John Liu (D-Flushing) have called on storeowners in Flushing to take action in the war against graffiti. The city, he said, will supply the paint and occasionally cover up the graffiti, but it is up to the businesses to use the paint themselves.
The problem here, as elsewhere, is that that many of the storeowners are not residents of the communities where they work. They may feel that the graffiti on the storefront gate and walls is not their problem.
They are wrong. The business owners must lead the fight against graffiti. They cannot allow their buildings to become a canvas for twisted minds. And they should not feel this is a battle that cannot be won. Ridgewood has already shown that the vandals can be defeated by a united community.
