Oh, SmAlbany!

Today's lead editorial in the TU deals with the prospect of the capital region becoming the model in New York State for technology high schools. I actually know a little about this because both SJC and her father are somewhat involved in this. I couldn't agree more with the editorial: Everything I know about these high schools - mostly from a friend who works at a high tech high in San Diego - indicates that they are simply excellent: the faculties are enthusiastic, the community spirit of the schools are wonderful, and the education is top-notch. SJC is very interested in technology education, and is currently thinking about taking a summer internship (she's a teacher, summers off!) with the tech group that wants to bring the high school here. I completely agree. SJC's father works for NERIC, which is a regional coordination unit for the state's BOCES grouping. He's very much in favor of the high school, and not the biggest fan of the TU editorial board. So when they agree, I take note. I think the tech high is a great idea. Let's hope Shelly can be convinced.

...to Last Vestige records on Quail Street in Albany, you should really go there. I hadn't been in a while, and when i stopped in recently, i was reminded how great it is, and how great used record shops are in general. They have a good selection of CD's and a nice amount of old records. You can also do some great dollar record shopping in the bargain bins.

The increased tolls on the Thruway are already being blamed for an apparent decrease in Memorial Day weekend traffic: If we sort out two of these three varialbes - gas prices and tolls - some interesting results occur. It's simple economics. Consider:

As discussed earlier here, the tolls went up about 25% (12.5% of you use EZ-pass, which now has a discout.) That means that the tolls went up about 1-2 cents per mile - from about 3 cents/mile to about 4.5 cents/mile. In a typical car getting 30 miles to the gallon on the highway, with gas prices about $2.20/gallon, a mile worth of gas is about 7.5 cents. So per mile driven, the tolls are about 35% of the cost on average. So it seems reasonable than either an increase in gas prices or an increase in tolls could affect people's economic mindset. It doesn't seem that way because the tolls are such a low, fixed cost (who worries about $3), but when you break it down by mile, it does make some sense.

However, both variables miss the real cost: driving your car for 1 mile is estimated to cost about 45 cents, if you include the purchase price of the car, wear and tear, insurance, gas, tolls, and everything else. So in some ways it's a psychological error to worry so much about the gas and tolls - the vast majority of money is already sunk into the car. When you drive, the price of gas is a small fraction of the cost you are paying - the real costs are repairs, insurance, and having to buy a new car.

One other note from the article mentioned above: I don't know why, but I take his word even over the toll plaza managers. What a great use of data!

A few days ago I discussed the economics of erie canal redevelopment. Low and behold, the TU is running a six-part series on the matter. Note the picture on the front page and caption about Oswego's "Harborfest": That strikes me as funny because all the SUNY-OSWEGO grads I know consider Harborfest a huge drunken party weekend for college kids and trashy townies. And shouldn't it be a sign that, despite the wonders of "Harborfest," the town is still decribed as "struggling."

Here's the TU description of the canal series of articles: I continue to find all of this very humorous. I'm fine with a six-part series on the canal. It's an interesting piece of New York and SmAlbany history. But I can answer the question those pose right now: the Erie canal's revitalization might be a nice niche tourist piece of a revitalized upstate econmoy. But let's not pretend it's going to be the centerpiece of upstate redevelopment. That's embarressing. It's like we can't think of anything else. Can't you see the conversations:

How should we improve the economy upstate?

I don't know, but we do have this 170 year old canal sitting here, that's got to be a sign!

I wonder how much revenue they pull in up at Lock 7 off of elementary school field trips. I remember those fondly.

A slow news day today, but maybe that's a good thing. Enjoy the barbecues, picnics, and weather. And try to, at least for a few moments, ponder the history or meaning of memorial day.

Yesterday, at the church SJC and I go to, the pastor (an older man of about 75) gave a sermon that started off by lamenting the way that memorial day is treated by people too young to remember World War II or beforehand. He made the ponit that when he was a child, he would spend memorial day going to various cemetaries with his parents and a VFW post contingent to place flowers at the graves and salute the fallen soldiers - the day was called "decoration day" once upon a time.

I actually felt pretty bad. I can honestly say that I have never been to a memorial day parade or decorated a gravesite. And i consider myself somewhat patriotic.

Their latest lead story on WNYT.com has just an aggregious gramatical error in the headline. Ugh.

UPDATE: They corrected it shortly after this post went up. Are they reading SmAlbany?

As hard to enforce as the new mall-ing age at Crossgates is going to be, I actually think it's a pretty good idea. Or at least one that can be reasoanbly debated. A letter to the editor in today's TU, however, decided to debate it without any reason. Let's break this one down piece by piece: What a way to start a letter that is ultimately about the shopping age at the local mall. It may or may not be true that the "concept of accountability" is "vanishing" in society and that "the punishment of all has superseded the need to correct the actions a few." But whatever she is referring to here - the Bush administration, overregulation of life, the fall of the American republic - it just can't be "last straw" when Crossgates puts in a shopping age restriction. And if it can, your priorities are really out of whack. Well, the new policy specifically allows him to go to the movies, and there are a bunch of eateries by the theaters, so that's a moot point. On the other hand, if he buys insanely priced sneakers as often as he goes to the movies, he will have a problem. But doesn't that belie the opening sentence - that the son has good manners and common sense? Actually, i think they've made a common strategic calculation: the money lost from teens buying insanely-priced sneakers on friday night will be more than recouped by the new expenditures of adults who stopped going to the mall because it had turned into a zoo on weekend nights. The idea that they are punishing some people probably never crossed their mind - they're interested in revenue for their stores, not making particular people happy. Well, sure. They'll have to go to either another mall or to another business. Unless they want to go to a movie, then they can still go to Crossgates. But it's true - Crossgates has turned it's back on the teen shopping-date. Those days are over. This misses the whole point. 80% of the store owners at the mall are in favor of the ban. That must mean that they think they can make more money with the ban in place - businesses run on a pure profit motive. Furthermore, people don't go to Crossgates because it has unique stores. They go there because it is convenient to go to lots of stores at the same time. I'm pretty sure that you could get better prices and better customer service if you went to stores around the capital region instead of crossgates. What they are pushing there is convenience and efficiency of your shopping time. That's the whole collective point of the mall.

And that's the key point of the ban - if adults who are going to spend money don't think it's convenient to go to Crossgates, then Crossgates loses all of its appeal. Banning teenagers on the weekend nights helps to do maintain that appeal. Case closed from the business point of view.

But she's also got the wrong idea with her boycott. If she takes all her business away from Crossgates, it looks like a recession. She needs to continue to shop there on the non-ban hours, so that her boycott of the ban hours produces a local dip in the sales figures. That way it becomes evident that the ban is going bad, not just the general economy of the mall.

And seriously, though. Has this parent ever been to Crossgates on Friday night?

A reader sends in a scanned copy of the TU cover from "Ron Guidry Night." Note the people standing on the warning track. That's not the end of the game - that's during the game! Simply amazing. Click on the picture to see it at full size.

I just realized that i'm blogging at the SUNY-Albany library right now while I should be working on my dissertation outside enjoying the sunny 70's on a gorgeous Memorial Day weekend. I promised myself I'd do some work today, but that's not going to happen. I'm outta here.

SJC and I were thinking about playing golf this afternoon, that's a certainty now. Maybe we'll go to Frank's for a cone. Then it's on to a barbecue at the in-laws.

How about all those SmAlbany traitors who ran off to NYC because of the predicted rain, they got their just desserts. Enjoy the smog, folks. I hope the subway doesn't break down.

Signing off till Sunday. Enjoy the weekend.
Matt.

The governor announced today a plan to help bring the upstate economy into the new century. Unfortunately, he seems to think it's the 19th century: Good gosh. Maybe David Rusk was right last week, when he declared that our economy was so backward upstate that we were living in a different century.

But seriously. I'm all for spending public money to help revitalize the upstate economy. But who thinks that that the best way to do it is to start with the canal? Come on. Now, I know they don't want to use the canal for transport. That would be rediculous, but at least it would show that they understand the basic factors that produce a good economy.

No, their plan is to build an extended "greenway," which apparently is the main driving force behind the humming economy of the hudson valley and the niagara region. What? Just read the last two sentences again. I'm no economist, but all you need is a degree in common sense to see through this nonsense. This has "special interests" written all over it.

Although I suppose this beats a lot of other ways to waste 50 million dollars (see post directly below.)

Wasted money, unkept promises, and nothing to show for it. What a train wreck.

And it was all in an effort save 25 minutes on a 2 hour plus ride to New York City. Maybe it'll teach them a lesson.

Schenectady leaders have annouced plans to build a new downtown movie theater complex, complete with beer and wine sales:I'm happy about the theaters. Sounds good. But three points on the beer:

1) Who wants a glass of wine or a beer at the movie theater? Not me. This isn't central Europe. I can't ever think of a time I was at a movie and said to myself, "you know, i could really go for a beer right now. Actually, a glass of white zin would hit the spot. I really just need a drink." I suppose you'll get the drunks, the college kids, and the yuppies looking for a novelty, but most likely it will be like those deli shops that have beer out for sale but no one ever buys it.

2) Who in the world makes the association between "sales of beer" and "style and elegence?" I mean, seriously - sophmores at Union? Sure, the wine could be classy - but remember that it'll probably be served in paper cups, not wine glasses. And forget corkscrews. This is a straight twist-off scene. Paging Mad Dog 20/20!

3) How much do you think a bottle of budweiser is going to cost? Again, seriously. If they stuck with typical restuarant economics, a beer should be about 2 or 3 times the cost of a soda, which at Crossgates now starts at $4.50 and goes up by size. And you better break the piggy bank for a glass of red wine. Good lord!

I could probably write 10,000 words on how ridiculous this is. Sometimes I worry about finding great SmAlbany grist in the paper every day. But then they go do things like this.

Ahhh, Schenectady, you've done it again.

Normally, I don't touch on the lower level elections in the city. But as Democracy in Albany points out today, the 5-way, 2-party race in Ward 7 for the council is an unusually crowded affair and the Metroland interview with the candidates has a lot to say about issues that are of interest to this blog: the proposed convention center, the redevelopment of Delaware Avenue, and the building of charter schools.

Read the whole thing.

BONUS: One of the candidates is a Log Cabin Republican. My all-time favorite blogger is Andrew Sullivan...

The TU lead editorial takes up an issue we discussed a few days ago: regional governments. If you recall, an economic analyst told us we were living in the 18th century and a local mayor responded by calling him a socialist. Luckily, the TU brings a bit - just a bit, mind you - of reason to the issue today. Echoing the words of the analyst, the TU says: What the TU is describing here is two related problems often referred to in political science as a "race to the bottom" and a "collective action" problem.

A collective action problem or race to the bottom occurs when each locality, looking out for its own interest, takes steps to improve its own situation. As all localities do this, it ends up hurting everyone. The catch is that if they had worked together, the cooperation would have produced a better result for everyone. A classic example is business tax breaks. Since every town wants to have the new businesses move there, they each offer tax incentives, hoping the business will choose their town. However, once everyone offers tax breaks, the businesses have little incentive to choose any town over any other town, and all of a sudden the corporate tax in every town has sunk. If towns continue to lower their taxes to entice business, it eventually becomes a game of who can get to the bottom - literally and figuratively - fastest.

The TU identifies this as a problem, but that's nothing new. Economists have known about these problems for a long time. So what's the solution? Well, again, not much new here. One common solution is the one the analyst, David Rusk, and the TU seem to support: This is an example of the classic solution to collective action - unite the individual localities and make them one larger locality. Think back to the tax example. If all of the local towns were centralized under one government, the tax rate could be uniformly set, and the businesses could not get lower taxes by piting the towns against each other. Makes sense, and in many situation it is a good solution.

But not our situation. The whole editoral is idealist daydreaming for two reasons:

1)It is political almost impossible. The TU basically recognizes this in the article. How in the world are you going to get the Democratic-run cities to cede their local autonomy to the suburban Republicans in Albany or Schenectady county? How in the world are you going to get the suburban Republicans to agree to take on the cities as governmental partners, knowing that it is just going to drain public resources from them?

2) It wouldn't stop any collective action problem. This is where I find the TU to be completely disingenuous. Shifting the center of gravity from the town to the county is not going to stop any collective action problem. Instead of pitting town against town, the counties will be pitted against each other. In fact, it's not clear that you can control this kind of problem until you get to at least the state level, and even then we see "races to the bottom" between states on such isses as pollution and tax breaks, which often requires the federal government to step in. But wait, we see this problem between nations as they try to attract corportations to their country - think of the complaints from American workers about countries that don't have minimum wages or national corporate taxes. The bottom line is that you are not going to stop the parochial problem by getting rid of town government and replacing it with county government.

But that's not the TU's agenda here, or Rusk's. They are interseted in improviong the quality of the cities - and that conveniently can be done by expanding the city limits to encompass the suburbs, which conveniently can be wrapped into a neat package of "regionalism" and sold as a way to counter the parochial problem. But the problems of the cities is not that they are being pitted against the towns - it's that people tend to want to work in the cities but not live there. Thus the tax base stinks, and all the economic production (i.e. paychecks) is driven out of the city at night. Again, you can try to solve this by expanding the city limits, but it's not clear that people won't just move to Saratoga county. Oh wait, they already have. But we could just expand the city to there, right?

See the problem?

Now, I'm a big fan of Albany. Anyone who reads this blog knows that. So don't take this as an attack on the city. I just don't see the political expansion of the city as either a politically plausibility or a sucessful solution to this problem. I would gently suggest that the only solution is to do things that make people want to live in the city - so that they spend their money there, so that business needs to return to support them, and so that both people and businesses pay taxes there. The only way to do that is to invest in the city and make it a better place to live. Obviously, resources are strapped and only so much can be done on limited budgets. But trust me, you can't fix Albany by simply expanding its boundaries. It won't work.

If anyone is interested in learning more about this topic, I can recommend two excellent books on the subject, which is just fascinating once you get into the details of tax policy and capital flight out of cities. Trust me. Start with Doug Rae's City, which is a riveting account of the long term processes that produced this problem in one city, New Haven, Connecticut. Then, if you want to get into the policy prescription details, try Metropolitics by Myron Orfield, which is the defining book on the subject, and a great read.

Memorial Day weekend is upon us, the traditional start of summer and the traditional start of great weather in upstate, NY. Unfortunately, it has felt more like late October this week, and the 'cast for the weekend is warmer but soggy.

Nevertheless, I can't endorse this response: Ugh. The weather turned so were cancelling our outdoor plans and going to New York City for Memorial Day weekend. And they have a summer house in Lake George! [I'll be glad to make use of it. -ed. No, it's not worth it unless you can use the pool...]

Well, at least all the traffic will be going the other way on the Thruway...

Full memorial-day-weather-stinks TU article here.

It looks like there's a chance we'll get JetBlue at Albany airport. Chuck Schumer is on the case, and he's definitely a master at delivering the goods to his constituents, for better or worse. And in this case, better: Everyone likes lower airfares. But I must say that the second half of the article was a bit disturbing: Now, don't get me wrong, lower airfares trump almost all other considerations. Nevertheless, I'm worried about what expansion is going to do to the hassle-factor at an ever-growing regional airport. I'm already nostaligc for the days when you could park your car 15 seconds from the door, get your tickets in under 3 minutes, and be at your gate 2 minutes later at Albany airport. Fifteen years ago, it was the most accesible airport of its size in the country, bar none. Now, it still is incredible accesible, and the hassles are still minimal compared to major airports, but things are changing - lines are longer, the parking is getting worse, etc. Don't get me wrong, a lot has been massively upgraded as well - the services available now are much better, there are more flights and, lest we forget, 15 years ago only Gate 1a and 1b even had tubes to walk to the plane in.

But we're starting to creep toward the point where the "big-airport"-style hassles are coming in without anyt sign of the great direct flights that make big airport hassles worthwhile. The last thing I want Albany to turn into is Hartford BDL, which has the same cruddy selection of regional flights, but has all the hassles of a big city airport: parking, prices, crowds, etc. Another massive expansion of the airport needs to be coupled with better services, such as direct flights to more destinations outside of the northeast and mid-atlantic.

But yes, JetBlue of course will be a welcome option. But more direct flights would be even better, in my opinion.

I know that arson is nothing to joke about, and obviously I'm glad that the Grand Street arsonist has bee caught, but there's no way you cannot laugh at the way that they caught him: So, to recap:

1) Watson sets fire to an apartment building.
2) He then realizes that there are security cameras of the scene.
3) So he decides he needs to get the tapes, presumably to destroy them.
4) And his plan of action is to pretend he's the fire chief and just ask for them.

Good lord! I don't know if this is a record for criminal stupidity or general audacity.

Although the headlines today in all the local papers seem like good news for SPAC, the money troubles continue. While the lead story was the $2 million in large gifts they got yesterday, the real story is buried deeper in the articles: I love SPAC. I love the park. But I must confess that I can't relate to the idea of it not being crowded - I guess I've only ever gone to the rock shows there.

One of my favorite TU "life" stories of all time was a 2-page spread done in about 1997 about the SPAC parking lot, which was entitled "Teenage Wasteland," and described the mayhem that took place in supposed-to-be-alcohol-free parking area prior to major rock concernts. It included interviews with completely bombed 17-year olds and photos of teenages chugging beer and urinating on trees. I think there was also a sidebar story about people hopping the fence to sneak into concerts.

The article alone was priceless (I wish TU online could retrieve it), but the real joy for me was that my younger sister just happened to going up there the next day (i think the story was run to coincide with a Dave Matthews concert or something) and my mom caught wind of the article, only to discover that my sister's plan was to leave for the concert about 5 hours before it started. Few moments in a sibling rivalry can top something like that.

Ahhh, SPAC. Maybe they should just start selling their own beer in the parking lot to raise revenue.

All sorts of free concerts just released their schedules recently. Even if you don't love the bands that are coming , you should go, since a continuation of these concert series will undoubtedly bring in bands that you do like:

The harness track is going to have free concerts all summer, with some good local talent included: Burners U.K. the McCrells, Ernine Williams, Refrigerators, Hair of the Dog, etc. The schedule is quite packed.

Just don't put any money in those slot machines, or your ticket might not quite be free.

Here's the Alive at Five schedule for this summer. Looks pretty good, but not as good as some past years.

Here's the free Plaza concernt series schedule for the summer. Looks decent - Black 47 headlines one day, the Lovin' Spoonful another.

In a move that quite surprises me, the Working Familes Party - which endorsed and greatly helped David Soares last fall, has declined to endorse any candidate in the Democratic primary for mayor this year: Instead, they are going to continue there work against the machine by taking trying to build their base on the common council: It's looking more and more like wrong candidates, wrong year for those trying to unseat Jennings. This thing may be over before it starts this summer.

I posted this comment over at Democracy in Albany in response to people who were complaining that "we shouldn't be so concerned about race," and were starting to use my statistical fisking of the TU against the claims of people upset with the mayor: Comments welcome.

UPDATE: I'm discouraged that this has turned into an affirmative action debate. To those espousing that view - Why does this debate have anything to do with affirmative action?

I can assure you that I am an opponent of affirmative action, but i can also assure you that i think what is going on in the mayor's office is a bit shady.

If the underlying presumption being made by the naysayers is true - that the hirings at city hall are all on the up and up - then I tend to agree with you if you see this as a ploy to get the mayor to promote/hire people on a race basis in an affirmative action manner. But that's just the point. I don't think the hirings are all on the up and up. (Note that i think the TU did an awful job and overstated the case, though).

You say why should we care about skin color? Because it might be the case that people are losing out on jobs in a merit system BECAUSE of their skin color!

If they are not, that would be a different story. But if they are, then 2 things are clear:

1) we're not getting the best workforce for our tax dollars, since better candidates are being passed over for race reasons (same problem affirmative action is described as having).

2) we're singling out a particular sub-population of the community and adversly affecting them - doesn't matter if it's blacks, whites, poor people, left-handed people, or whatever. It's wrong.

To put it in the language of those talking affirmative action right now - if affirmative action is wrong and worth ending, then racial discrimination HAS to be wrong and worth vigorously investigating.

If it's (discrimiation) is not there, and your point is that it's not really there (we're being hoodwinked by some TU/liberal coalition), fine. But otherwise, i don't think you have much of an argument.

No news is bad news on a murder case. So I was hopeful when I saw this. But apparently they're just selling their house. Depressingly: I'm beginning to think we're never going to even see a trial in this case. If they can't indict Christopher Porco, it's a serious dead end.

So, the ice cream man came through our neighborhood recently, and SJC and I started wondering why they don't have ice cream trucks that sell soft ice cream. Seems like they would make a killing. After a lifetime's worth of wacky wafers and Italian Ice, it would be refreshing to be able to get a soft vanilla with raindbow sprinkles, no?

So we got on the internet, and low and behold, they do exist: Mr. Softee has been serving soft ice cream from a truck since 1956. Unfortunately, they only have franchisee trucks in about 4 states, and none in upstate NY. I wonder why no one has tapped this market? - I would easily pay 3 dollars for the occasional soft ice cream cone right on the street in front of my house.

So then I email my friend Tom and he lets me know that, growing up in south central Pennsylvania, he has never seen an ice-cream truck except a soft-serve ice cream truck. Go figure.

I still think it's a cash cow if someone starts one up in Albany.

Just for fun, my top 10 most purchased ice cream man treats when i was a kid:

10. Ice Cream "Crunch Bar" - along with #5, the only treat on the list my mom approved of
9. Candy assortment - "Nerds," "Now and Laters," etc. - all pure flavored suguar
8. Frozen "Charleston Chew" - easily still stuck in my teeth 5 hours later.
7. "Choco Taco" - about 700 calories worth of sugar, ice cream, and chocolate in taco shape.
6. "Bubble Tape" - who doesn't need 6 feet of gum in their mouth at one time?
5. "Creamsicle" - my most conservative pick, but always delicious.
4. "Wacky Wafers" - compacted flavored sugar about the size of a quarter - 5 in a pack.
3. "Fun Dip" - a stick of hardened sugar that you licked and dipped into more sugar.
2. "Rain-blo" gum - taste lasted about 3 seconds, but it was only 10 cents for 6 pieces
1. Italian Ice - either lemon or watermelon flavor. Flip it over to get the juice early!

Got any other classics?

The lead local story in the TU today describes the rather large diescrepency between the proportion of African American citizens in Albany and the proportion of African Americans who have jobs in the Jennings administration. As a social scientist, I must say that I am aghast at the statistical analysis the paper uses. But first the facts: As one might expect, the political ramifications of this report were felt instantly: The response from city hall was less than pleasant: We're going to mostly talk statistics in this post because the TU does a shoddy job with their data today, but we should first note the mayor's response to this was completely out of line. As I'm going to show below, I think there is a case to be made that the observed discrepancy in racial job holdings is not evidence of racism or even intentional practices. However, to brush aside a report is ludicrous. As Democracy In Albany has pointed out, the mayor's response is simply an accusation that people are trying to play politics for less than honest motives. But the crux is this: the mayor's offce can agree with the report or it can dispute the report, but the mayor can not simply brush it aside as if it was done with less than honest motives. This wasn't some fly-by-night interest group, it was the local newspaper of record!

But, as I said, we need to get the whole picture of what is going on with the statistics. As a social scientist by trade, I spend my days trying to make sense out of such data. Articles like this one are notorious for two types of problems:

1) Taking some data and drawing a logical, but completely incorrect, conclusion: The implicit conlcusion in the story is that this is a purposeful result of hiring practices in the Jennings administration. Maybe. Maybe not. But the mere statistics do not get us there. We need to do a little more work to get to that.

2) Incorrect use of statistical analysis: Journalists routinely employ shoddy statistical methods in many cases, and then don't use some very helpful statistical methods in other cases.

For those interested, I'm now going to walk through some of the statistics (in layman's terms) that we can use to further analyze the data provided by the Times Union.

What we have here is data. By itself, data tells you nothing. In order to properly interpret data, you need to develop a hypothesis and then make sure you're data is suitable for testing that hypothesis. If it is, you can then do some proper statistical testing and draw some valid conclusision.

Obviously, newspapers don't have time to go through stats lessons in every article. So a lot of this becomes implicit in the article. Let's look at the implicit stuff in the TU article from today:

Data: the data they use is a breakdown of job holdings in the Jennings administration by race, as well as census data on the racial profile of the city of Albany.

Hypothesis: A number of hypotheses seem to be swirling through the article. The most gentle claim is that there is a racial imbalance in Jennings administration jobs. Some stronger hypotheses - for instance that this is intentional racism - might be implied but are never stated.

Suitability: The TU never seems to question the suitability of their data. This is an error.

Do some testing: The only testing the TU does is a straight correlation. This is also an error.

Conclusions: The TU doesn't really draw a conclusion - it simply lays out the imbalance in the correlation. This, from a newspaper perspective, is ok. But from a social science perspective is an error.

To illustrate how you might go about a semi-serious analysis of this data, I'll walk through the data the way I would approach this as a social scientist.

Step 1: Notice the potential problem and describe it. The TU does a nice job here. Blacks make up 22% of the city population. They make up 11% of the city employees. They are most underrepresented at the top-level jobs, and most well-represented at the bottom-level jobs. The TU gives some nice breakdowns of the proportion of workers by race in each of these categories, as well as some sectors of city jobs.

Step 2: Confirm that this is statistically significant. We need to make sure that such a result couldn't happen by random chance. For this, we use a complicated statistical technique that tests proportions. In this case, it is definitely statistically significant - there would be less than a 1 in 1000 chance of observing an imbalance this great if city hall workers were selected at random from the population of the city of albany. (The z-stat was over 100). However...

Step 3: Confirm your underlying assumptions about your variables. That statistical significance assumes that the two samples we are working with - city workers and the city residents - are "nested populations," (i.e. all the workers are drawn from the city residents). As it turns out, they are not! According to the mayor's office: This throws a serious wrench in the TU analysis, because we don't know the racial composition of the surrounding area from where the workers are drawn. For the statistical comparison to be correct, we need the racial data from sample #1 (city workers) to be compared to the racial data from the true population pool (i.e. the general population of all the areas that city workers come from). Right now this is not the case. City residents is being used as the true population pool, but city workers is drawn from a larger pool (city residents and non-city residents). And 44% of the city workers are coming from this non-city portion of the true population pool.

The racial statistics of the true population pool is crucial missing information. What we know is the racial statistics of the city portion of the true population pool. So, for instance, if the non-city portion of the true population pool is 93% white and has a population of 100,000 residents, then the imbalance in city hall jobs all of a sudden goes away! If it is 100% white and a population of 200,000 residents, then all of a suden there is an imbalance in favor of African Americans! Note that i have no idea what the population size or racial composition is of the non-city portion of the true population pool. If it's a very low population, or if it's not overwhelmingly white, the imbalance in jobs remains statistically significant. Also note that this says nothing about the types of jobs people get at city hall, only the number of workers.

UPDATE: A comment over at Democracy in America points to the Albany County racial statistics: apparently 11% of Albany County residents are African American. So if the true population pool for city jobs is the whole county, there is no numerical imbalance.

(Of course, it only raises the political question of why albany city workers are being mostly brought in from outside albany - to the detriment of the african american populaton in the city. But that would be a political question, not a statistical one. )

Step 4: Come up with some hypotheses. Although the recognition of the racial statistics of the true population pool makes the problem look a lot less serious, there is the disturbing realization that most of the African-Americans who work for the city work in the lowest jobs, and almost none work in the highest jobs. (We could again go back and make sure this observation (1 African American in 86 jobs) is statistical significant, but i already have - it is. There is less than a .01% chance you would observe this result if the jobs were pulled randomly from the true population pool(the corrected one that accounts for the whole county).

One hypothesis we could make is that there is some sort of racial discrimination, either explicit ("we don't hire blacks as policy"), implicit ("we don't have a policy, be we all know that we don't hire blacks"), or subconcious ("we have no problem hiring blacks, but when we interview them we unintentionally discount them as candidates") that is causing the low number of African Americans in the top positions. This seems to be the quick conclusion some people have come to, and also the implicit TU conclusion.

A second hypothesis would be that there is a lurking variable here. A lurking variable is a third variable that explains away a correlation or an imbalance. For instanace, you might look at statistics about car crashes and see that tons more accidents happen in NYC than in Saratoga. It would be wrong to draw the conclusion that the roads in Saratoga are safer than NYC? Why - can you see the lurking variable? Tons more cars drive on the roads in NYC, so there are lots more potential accidents. In fact, per mile driven per car, the roads in NYC are almost certainly safer than in Saratoga. The vast difference in miles driven on the two roads in an average day is the lurking variable that explains the incorrect conclusion.

What might be a lurking variable that could reject a racism conclusion here? Well, the mayor's office suggests one: Of course, people tend to gristle when they hear stuff like this. A response from council woman Carolyn McLaughlin: Of course, both sides are partial right here. The mayor's office is correct in saying that the African American population in the city is disproportionately less educated than the population as a whole. McLaughlin is correct however, because the imbalance at the top-jobs in the mayor's office is just far too great for this imbalance in education to be making a difference. We are not talking about filling 10,000 jobs that require a Ph.D. here. We're talking about only having 1 African American in the top 80 jobs.

So while I sympathize with the possibility that lurking variables - such as education - can throw a wrench into these statistical problems, in this case it's somewhat ludicrous, because the numbers are so small and the population of jobs is tiny compared to the population of the city.

Step 5: Draw some tentative conclusions and look for more data: My conlcusion (from the pitiful amount of data we have) is that the imbalance in jobs by race in the city as reported by the TU is due to a combination of three things:

1) Bad statistical work. Not correctly counting the population the jobs are drawn from is a huge mistake. If workers are coming from the suburbs, then the racial composition of the suburbs is a fact we need to know. Shame on the TU for not even considering this. Of course, the politics of why city jobs are being given to people who don't live there is a question I would like answered.

2) Lurking variable of education. The mayor's office is probably right, at least partially. The percentage of qualified candidates for the top jobs in the mayor's office who are African American is probably small than 22%. It might be 10%. So that explains the imblance partially. However, it doesn't explain a 1 for 80 result. Not even close.

3) Some sort of discrimination, or at least non-aggresiveness at minority job hiring. Note that I didn't say racism here. I doubt it is a simple story like that. The most serious problem in my view is the outside-the-city hiring. I'm sure that the city could find plenty of qualified candidates - and plenty of qualified African Americans - if city jobs were restricted (at least partially ) to city residents. The mayor's office could certainly do more to aggressively seek out qualified minority candidates. Again, a good start would be to aggresively seek out candidates who live in the city - that might clear the problem up to a large degree by itself. I'm confident that this strand of the problem is built on laziness and entrenched networks, not racism really. However, i'm open to the possibility there is at least some of the subconcious racial discrimination in the hiring process, if not more implicit things. This, of course, can be very difficult to root out, especially if it at the level of the individual.

I'd like to see more data on all of this. Most crucially would be a description of the population pool (not just the city). I'd also like to see statistics on educational background, as well as some data on who the city interviewed for the top-posts. More data is always more helpful.

UPDATE: I want to make it clear - it apparently wasn't in my original post - that i'm not advocating any sort of affirmative action or diversty investment on the part of the city. If the city is acting on good faith and being truly colorblind, and the job results are simply coming out as they are because the best candidates are getting the jobs, then i'm fine with that. Really. I don't think the imbalance itself is reason to for alarm unless its connected to racism or some other policy that is systematically denying African Americans who are qualified the jobs. In fact, the point of my statistical analysis was largely to tear apart the TU article. But i can't ignore a situation where only 1 of the top 80 jobs goes to an African American, can I? You don't need high powered statistics to see a problem with that, right?

They seem confident.

A Saratoga company is looking to gain market share locally for it's popular western New York soda, Sarasoda loganberry: This event gives us a nice chance to review the best local sodas around. Now, I'm a soda junkie, and I don't just mean the old Coke/Pepsi/Sprite routine. I like local sodas. It's not worth reviewing plain cola or diet cola - they all taste like Coke, anyway. The real treats are the flavored sodas, and SmAlbany doesn't disappoint. Here we go:

Orange Soda

I've always thought that the best orange soda is the cheap Price Chopper stuff in can form. Cans are almost a requirement for orange soda, for two reasons. First, flat orange soda is about the worst stuff in the world. You might as well go get some McDonalds Orange drink. Second, none of the bottled stuff tastes that good - Minute Maid Orange is way too syrupy, and Orange Crush has a nasty aftertaste. Given price and quality, nothing, and I mean nothing, beats Price Chopper Orange. (Stay away from PC Diet Orange, however, it's awful.)

Grape Soda

Grape sodas are a lot like Orange sodas. The bottled stuff from the big manufacturers - be it Crush, Nehi, or Minute Maid - just aren't that good. Again, you need a can. The Price Chopper stuff is ok, but the best is Adirondack Grape in a can. While Adirondack Orange has less flavor than Price Chopper Orange, the grape is easily superior. Very sharp. Stay away from the Sam's club soda for both grape and orange. Although it's dirt cheap, it's not worth it.

Black Cherry

Adirondack also has by far the best black cherry soda, although an argument can be made for IBC black cherry in the bottle. Black Cherry doesn't require a can the way Orange or Grape does, and the IBC stuff is darn good. One ridiculous problem with IBC, however, is that they don't sell the Black Cherry in our area! (It also is quite pricey compared to Adirondack.) It makes zero sense - they sell the root beer and cream soda everywhere! I've had to stealthily import it from New Haven, CT and Rochester, NY on several occasions. If someone knows where to get IBC Black Cherry locally, let me know.

Specialty Sodas

My absolute favorite specialty soda is Stewart's oranges-n-cream soda. It's like drinking a creamsicle. And it comes in a nifty glass bottle. Although it's not exactly local, per se (it's from White Plains), it counts here because it's tough to find outside of the northeast (I've had it in New Haven, CT and once in Washington, D.C.)

Let's hope that Sarasoda Loganberry isn't as bad as Funny Cide Ale - which, by all accounts, tastes like the horse urinated in the bottle.

Laney's ($$$, 2, 90, in Kimberly Square, Loudonville): This is an excellent restuarant for two reasons. The first is selection - they do a wide variety of food really well. They have serious entrees in the $13-15 range, and they have excellent sandwiches in the $7-9 range. The menu is simply huge. I recommend the portobello mushroom sandwich for lunch, and the chicken parm is excellent for dinner. The second great thing about Laney's is the outdoor seating area in the summer. Very remeniscient of being up in Saratoga on Caroline street. Great for getting a drink with some friends. Just beware of the rather large bar crowd on weekend nights and Friday happy hour. Most recently ate here: late May, 2005.

..in the fall on a constitutional amendment regarding state budget reform. The legislature overroad Pataki's veto yesterday. While we'll have plenty of chances to get into the details of this in the coming months, I can say right now that I will be advocating a yes vote. The budget process was already far too tied up in the hands of three men prior to last year's Court ruling, which effectively made the governor the sole budget-writer. This is from the New York Times last December 18th:Correct or not as a technical legal matter, we need to remedy this as public policy. It is unreasonable to put so much discretionary power in the hands of the governor, especially in an age where the state budget is the bulk of the state's business as a governing entity. Thus the constitutional amendment. Our system is a republican one partially because we give priority to the legislature in matters of the purse. That true no matter what party or ideology you subscribe to or believe in. The current situation in New York is not reflective of this. Here's the full court decision if you are interested.

at the strategic choices the Albany County Republicans have apparently made for fall races. Republicans are doing worse than ever in county races, and it has begun to be a struggle for them in many of the formerely solid suburban towns. A move like this is perhaps the only allocation of resources that makes sense for the party - if they can't win the towns, they'll never win the county. So any sense that they need to spend money in the towns in order to win them basically rules out chasing the two main county races up this year - county clerk and county sheriff.

Police have made an arrest in the Grand Street arson case. However, according to the TU: That's good news and bad news. Hopefully they will catch the others soon.

...game was yesterday in Cooperstown. It's a worthy reminder that all of baseball history is not more than an hour down the road from SmAlbany. Most readers probably either don't care or take that for granted, but you shouldn't. I can't tell you how many people I've met from the west coast who ask if I've ever been there and then are amazed at how close by it is.

The Hall of Fame game - a mid-season exhibition between two big league clubs - is a real treat if you ever get a chance to attend. They play at Doubleday field in downtown Cooperstown, which only seats about 8,000 people and is tucked in between neighborhood houses. During the home run derby, the announcer will make calls like, "And that one is headed straight for the Smith's porch out in left." Just a really good time. The major leaguers only play an inning or two (before being replaced by minor leaguers from their respective teams) but the home run derby, the parade, and the atmosphere make it an excellent day trip.

I was wasting time getting in some good thinking at Starbucks this morning when I realized I needed a few office supplies. For whatever reasons, I chose CVS at Latham Mall. Once there, I was tempted into taking a quick walk through the mall, just to see how bad it has become. I hadn't been in there, except upstairs to see a movie, in probably a year.

Wow. Wasn't ready for what i saw. Klein's is closed. Half the lease spaces are empty. Two eateries left in the food court. No more McDonald's. Even the cruddy "sports posters / knives / pot paraphernalia" stores seem to be having trouble, although those kinds of stores tend to dominate a mall in decline. There must be 8 of them there now.

When I first walked in, I was expecting something like Northway Mall in the early 90's. But it's worse. Way worse. Unless the movies are making a serious profit (which i doubt), I suspect that we'll see the dormant-sale-redevelopment pattern completed at good 'ol Latham Corners within 5 years.

I can't say i have much affinity for any mall, especially not Latham. By the time I was old enough to have a mall of choice, Crossgates was already all the rage. But it certainly is the end of an era. And i did have a bit of nastalgia for the days of Papa Gino's near the main entrance and the original arcade down by CVS.

UPDATE: Now I know it's really bad. LCM has it's own feature on deadmalls.com. Money quote: Yup. That sums it up.

A letter to the editor in today's TU takes issue with the recent report by the Department of Taxation that showed the smoking ban has not hurt business. The letter, sent by the Restuarant and Tavern Association, said this: Well then. It's probably true that overall bar business has decreased since the ban went into place. But let's think this through a little more:

1) a decrease in business, by itself, is no reason for the public to reverse its thinking on a policy. Lot's of things can decrease a bar's business - raising the drinking age, for instance. But that's the point - we're weighing greater concerns (health, stopping DWI) against the business impact. You can debate whether a smoking ban is worth the economic costs, but we shouldn't pretend the economics are the sole variable of interest.

2) Nevertheless, if the state is lying about the economic effects, we need to know that. If they really didn't consider businesses that were forced to close, that's wrong. They should also detail how many businesses asked for "hardship exemptions" to the bans. Again, we need to weigh the economic costs vs. the public benefits of the ban.

3) Personally, the ban has increased the amount of times per month that I go to a bar. It's so refreshing to not have to sit in all that smoke. Plus, your clothes dont reek the next day. And in reality, these have always been the issues for me, not the second-hand smoke stuff. Anyway, the ban has increased my economic contribution to the tavern and restaurant industry, and my contribution to new york in the form of liquor taxes. Or has it? Aren't we just talkin about...

4) A transfer of economic expenditure here? I doubt it's the case that the smoking ban has decreased overall alcohol consumption in the state. People who care that much about smoking most likely just purchase more liquor at package stores and consume it in their home. I bet the tax revenue is overall neutral. It would be interesting to see if there has been a spike in store liquor sales since the ban. This, of course, does not mean the restaurant business should be happy - they have reason to gripe when business is transferred away from them. But it does mean that the public isn't losing any revenue because of the ban, assuming consumption is just being shifted, not reduced. I've certainly shifted (as noted above) my consumption toward the bars. But I don't think my aggregate monthly spending on beer has changed. I'm just more likely to drink at a bar than in the past.

As I said before, I like the ban and I think it's worth the economic impact. Others can disagree. And look, I'm generally a libertarian about these things - my first instinct when the ban went into place was that it was a little bit big government repressive. I thought that people who don't like smoke could go to other bars that are less smokey. The market could solve the problem.

But as much as I'm a libertarian about this, I more so a (small-d) democrat. The ban is incredibly popular. People who smoke are only so burdened as they are at work - they smoke outside. And the bars really are better for the 75%+ of New Yorker's who don't smoke. I think reasonable people can disagree about the merits of the ban vis a vis the economic cost. But don't sit here and tell me that we can't do something the public wants simply because some businesses will lose revenue. We'd never be able to do anything in the public interest if that were the case.

Rustey's Pizzeria and More ($, 1, 85, Albany-Shaker Road, Loudonville): Above-average take-out pizza, subs, and wings. The prices are cheap, the pizza is good, and you can get $2 off by mentioning their website. Certainly not worth driving to from far away, but a good option if you are local to it and want a quick pie. The wings were decent. Have not tried the subs yet. Most recently ate here: late May, 2005.

A teenager is behind bars after crashing his car while drunk and killing his friend. It will be interesting to see what the final conviction and sentence are just. These are tough cases to handle - i think the penalties for DWI and vehicular manslaughter should be much stiffer, but i hate to completely ruin a teenagers life.

At any rate, since he's not an Albany cop, he definitely won't be driving anytime soon.

The famous theater on Madison avenue is back open for business. It's worth supporting this place (along with the spectrum) as they have always had lower prices, better food, and a better variety of movies than the mall mega-chain theaters.

You're telling me they don't have a contingency plan for this problem?: This is an issue at almost any college graduation that is going to be outdoors, but usually it is dealt with ahead of time - each graduate is notified that if the event must be moved inside, they only get a certain amount of tickets for family members to get it.

If Siena did not plan for that possibility, I feel very badly for anyone who's college graduation was hampered by the school's overlooking such a detail.

...that mayor Lenz will have to beat this fall in saratoga. He announced he will seek a second term yesterday.

I am sick of this nonsense: That is utter garbage. While it is quite true that we won't get the Olympics without the stadium, it is far from the case (as implied) that we will get the Olympics if we do build the stadium. In fact, most analyst don't even give us a 1-in-5 chance of getting the Olympics, and that's with the stadium.

I don't know what kind of pressure Pataki and Bloomberg are putting on Uberoth, but I hope Silver and Bruno can hold out until the Olympic vote onJuly 6. When we lose the Olympics, the stadium discussion will become much more reasonable, and opposition will grow from a majority to a preponderance.

It's interesting to compare the graduation speakers that local universities have attracted this year:

Both Skidmore (Tim Russert) and RPI (Hillary Clinton) did well yesterday in attracting big names. Union, on the other hand, will have to settle for its outgoing president, Roger Hull, when they graduate in June. Next week, Albany Law (after alledgedly going after Clinton) also seems to be settling, bringing in local judge Joseph Teresi.

Siean, which graduated today, apparently has only a student speaker at graduation. Whoa.

Traditionally, graduation speakers are best if they are short, funny, and not too famous. I was at Yale in 2001 when President Bush spoke, and although he was up to the task on the first two items, the security prescence and general circus-ness of the event made it hard to bear.

My college graduation speaker at Hamilton in 2000 was so unmemorable that I can't even remember his name. All I know is that Colgate had John McCain that day. As such, I can sympathize with those at Albany Law and Siena this year.

Both Fred Lebrun and George Will devote their Sunday column to the recent Supreme Court decision overturning New York State's ban on the purchasing of out-of-state wine via mail order or internet. Will's column is mostly devoted to questions of jurisprudence. Lebrun's column, however, makes some interesting points about the practical ramifications of the decisions: Lebrun then goes on to wonder whether New York will go ahead and remove the ban, or apply the shipping ban to in-state wineries. He thinks it could go either way. I doubt it. The New York winery industry is small but growing. Whatever damage will be done to it by out of state competition pales in comparison to the harm that will be done by a ban on direct shipment in state. Lebrun tries to make the case that some powerful interests have imposed such bans in New Jersey and elsewhere, but that is a totally different situation - the wine industry is not nearly as prevalent.

A year from now, we'll all be drinking direct shipment wine from California, mark my words.

...is this evening. The more I learn about the triple crown races, the more I appreciate saratoga.

First off, my sister goes down there every year to meet up with old college friends and spend a day at the races. That should be the first clue that something is wrong. My sister hates horse racing and she hates crowds. But the Preakness is not a horse race, it's a "spring break"-type party destination. Hmmm. A few more facts I have learned:

1) It costs $40 to get into the Preakness. Good lord. I almost fell out of my chair when i heard this. I know people around here who were mad when Saratoga tickets went from $2 to $3.

2) Pimlico is located in a crappy neighborhood...and it is not a particularly asthetically beautiful track. Of course, Saratoga is the exception (along with Churchill Downs) on both of the counts as opposed to the rule.

3) They open up the infield to spectators/partiers - which results in a crowd full of drunken college kids and a horrible visual background for anyone actually interested in watching the race live. My sister reported last year that they didn't even watch the Preakness.

Granted, Saratoga doesn't have a triple crown race. But it's dirt cheap to hang out there (even to go to the Travers), it's in an absolutely beautiful setting, and they've struck an excellent balacne between allowing people to do as they please with alcohol and not letting the picnic area turn into mardi gras.

Whenever someone starts moaning that the track has lost alot of its classiness or charm, all I have to do is explain the Preakness to set them straight.

Saw the new star wars last night, and I loved it. I was a huge star wars fan as a child, and was quite disappointed with The Phantom Menace and Attack of the Clones. Revenge of the Sith, however, was amazing. The first 45 minutes were a bit slow, but interesting nonetheless. After that the movie was as riveting and enjoyable as the older ones. And gosh, I'm still a sucker for the opening music and the adrenaline rush of seeing the yellow "Star Wars" logo blast onto the spacey background when the movie starts. Overall, the movie deserves to be grouped with the first three, not the more recent two.

More importantly, Revenge brought me around to the belief that it was worth making the prequels. Before last night, I had mostly wished Lucas never started them up again. Now I think it was worth it. So much of the full story is now brought into better relief - I can say without reservation that Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back, and Return of the Jedi will be more enjoyable to watch now that I've seen Revenge of the Sith. It really does bring it full circle. We all left the theater itching to watch the original Star Wars, which we will this week.

As usual, the dialoge wasn't great, but the transformation of Anakin, the destruction of the Jedi, and the fall of the republic make for such a riveting plot that it doesn't matter. The last hour of the movie taps into the emotional stream of the original star wars in a way that is quite spectacular. The crowd was really into it as well, cheering certain scence on and applauding loudly when it was over. It's odd to see a movie in which you know the otucome - it's really of question of how instead of what. This, I think, played to Lucas' strengths. The movie was forced to have a solid connection to the original Star Wars - and all the good will people have toward it.

Go see it, you won't be disappointed. Finally, finally, Lucas delivers the goods.

The area outside the movie theaters at Crossgates last night felt alive for the first time in ages. Long lines to get into the movie, tons of people in line for popcorn, and a general buzz in the air. Just fantastic fun. It's not often that you can get a mega-plex like Regal 18 crowded. It reminded me of the old Fox theater on Wolf Road in the 80's.

We saw a brother and sister, about age 5, dressed up as Padme and Anakin, complete with lightsaber. I was worried that little Anakin wouldn't take it well when he observed the on-screen Anakin go bad, but he was all smiles walking out of the theater.

As I've reported earlier, politics in Saratoga is nasty. The denoument of the Dreyer saga illustrates this so well.

But first, let's get everybody up to speed. Dreyer was Deputy Public Safety Commissioner, in charge of overseeing the administrative aspects of fire and police in the city. Yesterday, the city council decided to discontinue her position, effectively firing her. The state reason was because the city's insurer considered her a severe risk and wouldn't cover the city from lawsuits. As the council saw it, Dreyer had been intensly corrupt: a grand jury had written a report stating: Dreyer, of course, deines all of this, claiming she is the target of a police union smear due to her cutting of overtime for the force and because she is a woman.

I have no real way to judge this on the merits of the case. It seems that Dreyer was at least as corrupt as your average deputy commissioner, and it's hard to see this as a conspiracy -22 people testified against her at the grand jury. From a probabalistic analysis of the merits, it's tough the believe her and not her detractors. And if the insurance issue is legitimate -which it seems to be - it doesn't much matter. The city can't justify that kind of alteration to their risk management financing.

But i do see how the decision conveniently fits the politics of the city right now. If you approach this from the angle of political manuvering, it was an absolute no-brainer for the city council to get rid of her:

1) It's an election year in Saratoga, and the politicians in office are already nervous about the fallout from the property assessment last year. It's an issue that could topple the mayor and others on the city council. Given that...

2) The last thing the council needs is accusations of a "dirty deputy commission" being put into the mix in the fall. So...

3) Throwing Dreyer overboard is almost the only option. From a purely strategic re-election standpoint, it could come down to a "her or me" logic on the city council. Reprimanding her but leaving her in office wouldn't change anything in the fall. It would only give the challengers more grist for the mill.

Just for good measure, the town republicans also refused to back her main staunch defender - Public Safety Commission Tom Curley - in an announcement that they would nominate Lawrence Britt instead of him for his current position in the election. This also happened two years ago, but Curley prevailed anyway. It's not clear how this is going to affect him this time.

Now, I doubt the council was simply being this machiavelian - as Accounts commissioner Stephen Towne said, 'It's not personal; it's a matter of assessing what's best for the city.' But it's certainly is better for all involved than having to deal with it in the fall.

Anyone live in Saratoga who has a better feel for the electoral politics of the Dreyer decision?