|
Dulce et Decorum Est…
City Council Overrules CB1 on Naming Tribeca Intersection for NYPD Officer Killed in Iraq
The City Council on Tuesday overturned a preliminary determination made by Community Board 1 (CB1) last October, by deciding to approve a proposal to co-name the Tribeca intersection of West Broadway and Lispenard Street in honor of James D. McNaughton, who, on August 2, 2005, at age 27, became the first New York City Police officer to be killed in action while serving in “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” Co-naming is an honorary geographic designation in New York, under which a street or intersection retains its original label, but a second sign is also attached to a nearby lamp post, denoting the additional, commemoratory name. In this case, the Tribeca location was chose because it is outside the Transit Police station at which Officer McNaughton worked. CB1 decided to reject that proposal in October, for multiple reasons having to do with fairness and the lack of consistently applied standards for such requests. In a vigorous debate, CB1 members voiced competing priorities. Susan Cole began by saying, “I having nothing but pride for this young man, but we’ve been very clear about co-naming. We have refused to do this for abolitionists,” she added, in a reference to proposals in 2006 and 2009 to rename the same intersection for David Ruggles, an African-American opponent of slavery who led more than 600 former slaves to freedom, and who once lived in Lispenard Street. (CB1 also rejected that proposal.) “I’m not against a plaque or dedicating a tree, but co-naming would set a terrible precedent,” Ms. Cole said. “We should do something, but not a co-naming.” Marc Ameruso countered that, “in other cases, plaques have been more appropriate, but we shouldn’t be against co-naming in all cases. As a veteran of Afghanistan, I’m in favor of this.” Pat Moore, who chairs CB1’s Quality of Life Committee, noted that, “we did decide as a board that we’re against co-naming, and we turned down the Ruggles proposal, even though he lived on Lispendard. If we didn’t do that, why are we co-naming for someone who didn’t live there?”
Bob Townley said, “we need to view things in the context of local community. In this case, the local community is our precinct and that should be our framework. It is important that we act as a community, and support the community that this man was a part of. Let’s give them what they’re asking for, which is nothing compared to what happens every day to police.” Mr. Townley continued, “this is not setting a precedent, and if the abolitionist was turned down, we should bring that up again. McNaughton was fighting for the same thing the abolitionist was fighting for. We need to honor both. We should not get technical now, but instead support this proposal and then look at these things in the future in a different way.”
Tammy Meltzer, chair of CB1’s Battery Park City, said, “co-naming is not the best way to honor someone who has lived a life of service, but every single subway entrance now has an electronic component. In this age of technology, it would be great if every entrance to that subway station had a digital banner across it honoring him in greater depth. That would be a way to convey information.” Alice Blank, who chairs CB1’s Environmental Protection Committee, said, “I live on Lispenard Street and remember the proposals for David Ruggles. But I would feel uncomfortable naming this for any individual, whether David Ruggles or James McNaughton.”
She added, “this officer was an unbelievably important hero. But there are not enough streets, or room on these street signs. And there’s no end in sight, especially with all of the people who died on September 11. So I support finding another way.” “Trees are one example,” she observed. “There are hundreds of trees in Tribeca, and they could have plaques in front of them. But co-naming is troubling, because when do you say no?” Laura Starr said, “I didn’t know we had a policy about co-naming streets, and would like to know what it is.” This led to a months-long effort to update and clarify CB1’s criteria for street co-naming proposals, led by Reggie Thomas, chair of the Transportation & Street Activity Committee. Mr. Thomas outlined those guidelines at the May 23 meeting of CB1, saying, “we have had a very rich, interesting, unique and somewhat horrifying experience with street co-namings. This is an emotional issue, but an operational issue as well.” He explained that CB1 was increasing the minimum time of community involvement from 15 to 20 years. The new guidelines also explain that, “Manhattan Community Board 1 is unique, given its narrow street grid, historical street names, and a history of human loss — and as a result, requires us as a Board to review applications for street co-namings with an additional level of stringency and great care.” The criteria also require that, “a prospective honoree must be deceased, and be a New York City resident or native, and/or an individual of great significance to New York City,” while further reserving the distinction for, “an individual whose death occurred under extraordinary circumstances of crime, accident, disease, social circumstance or the death itself leads to a greater awareness within society of the cause of death and a concerted effort to solve the problem.”
Officer McNaughton’s case meets some (but not all) of these criteria. He was born on Long Island, but lived in Queens at the time of his death. He entered the Police Academy in 2001, and served until his death in 2005. The loss of his life in combat in Iraq qualifies as, “extraordinary circumstances.” But he would seem to be disallowed by a provision that says, “an individual already named on a public memorial within Community Board #1 will also be discouraged.” (Officer McNaughton’s name already appears on the NYPD Memorial in Battery Park City, as well as a bronze plaque within the Tribeca subway station where his police unit was headquartered.) Decisions about co-naming streets are ultimately made by the City Council. But, as a procedural matter, they come first before the local Community Board within which the street is located, so that the panel can issue an advisory opinion. When CB1 rejected the co-naming proposal honoring Officer McNaughton in October, City Council member Margaret Chin, who represents Lower Manhattan, said, “we honor those who have served in our Armed Forces, as well as the brave men and women who made the ultimate sacrifice for our freedom. One of those heroes is Police Officer James D. McNaughton — who not only served our City, but our country as well. To honor his memory, and the wishes of his family and colleagues at NYPD Transit District Two, it is my hope that the Community Board will reconsider this co-naming application and give Officer McNaughton the public designation his sacrifice and service to our City deserves.” CB1 did not revisit the proposal to co-name West Broadway and Lispenard Street after Officer McNaughton, but the City Council moved ahead nonetheless. On Tuesday, that body’s Parks & Recreation Committee (which oversees street co-namings) considered a bill that will designate dozens of streets and intersections throughout the five boroughs with honorary names.
Ms. Blank appeared at this sessions, and rose to speak when public comment was invited. She began by noting that she was speaking only for herself, and observed that, “we are very much aware that state street co-naming happens all over the City. CB1 has bylaws that they are not very much in favor of co-naming, because of the number of streets, the difficulty of getting to those streets, the history, density, and the extraordinary number of people who merit honors for all the tremendous amount of tragedy that CB1 has seen.” “We all appreciate the vitally important role of the police in our community,” she continued, “and that of the fallen officer whose life was tragically lost during valorous service in Iraq. But when a Community Board votes against co-naming a street, it has an important reason for doing so. And its members do not expect that their views will be disregarded without directly engaging them, without sharing any reason, and without confronting the community’s reasoning. This small act raises large questions about the integrity of our Community Board process. The Council should consider allowing the community and the Community Board to have an opportunity to further discuss and consider these street co-namings.” “CB1 has had immense loss and many heroes who merit recognition, from September 11, to the more recent terror attack in Hudson River Park, and the many heroes fallen in the line of duty,” she concluded. “The community must rightly be very careful to be fair to all those worthy of honor.” After she spoke, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the street co-naming bill that will authorize the designation of West Broadway and Lispenard Street in honor of Officer McNaughton, along with nearly 100 other, similar designations. Shortly afterward, the Council as whole approved the same bill. Afterward, Ms. Chin said, “Officer McNaughton embodied the very best of the NYPD — selflessness, duty and honor. In addition to serving in Transit District Two, Jimmy was an Army reservist. In the weeks after September 11, 2001, he patrolled the subways to reassure his fellow New Yorkers during a time of extreme fear and anxiety. When the Iraq War began, Jimmy was redeployed and joined his fellow officers at Camp Victory, in Baghdad, to train Iraqi police officers. While guarding the camp in 2005, a sniper’s bullet ended Staff Sergeant McNaughton’s life. He was only 27 years old. He became the first NYPD officer killed in Iraq, and his legacy lives on in the memories held by his family, friends and his fellow NYPD officers. I am proud that my colleagues on the New York City Council approved the co-naming to ensure Jimmy’s legacy is never forgotten. Now, people walking by — especially young people — will see Officer McNaughton’s name and look into his story and the sacrifice he made for our country.”
Matthew Fenton
|
|
