jerseymom wrote:
Agreed that the officer needs to be educated on the law. However, traffic stops for a cop are nothing "routine."

To wit:

"From 2001 to 2010, approximately 60 of 541 officers who were feloniously murdered in the line of duty were killed during a traffic stop, and 55,000 were injured during a traffic stop or pursuit (Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2010; U.S. Department of Justice, 2011)."

So if I'm pulling someone over, I need to be laser focused on the occupants of that vehicle. That's where my training lies - that's where my task focus lies for that very moment. Now throw in some chucklehead who wants to make glory-points on the Internet and my focus is now diverted into his needs as well (making sure he's not a threat AND potentially protecting him from the threat that COULD BE in the vehicle I just stopped.)

As Mouse and Boodipooh stated well, there has to be some give and take here; an understanding of the right to record AND the understanding that you could just butt in to a situation that puts your life and the life of a trained officer in jeopardy.

bodhipooh wrote:
I am 100% with Mouse on this one. No one is excusing the officer's lack of understanding/knowledge regarding a citizen's right to video tape or film the officer. That doesn't excuse the guy's dickish attitude either.

Collectively, we ask and expect a lot from the police and other law enforcement officers. We should accord them some respect and civility. It shouldn't be a one way street, nor should it be a perpetual "us vs. them" attitude.

bill wrote:
From nj.com

By Steve Strunsky | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com
on April 27, 2015 at 2:02 PM, updated April 27, 2015 at 2:20 PM

NEWARK ? The 19-year-old AirTrain monorail system at Newark
Liberty International Airport is being targeted for replacement.

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey has not publicly
estimated the cost of a new system, or said when it expected the
project to begin or end. But Port Authority commissioners are
scheduled to vote Thursday to authorize spending $40 million on
planning consultants for the project, plus another $30 million
on technical experts.

"Although substantial investment has been made to maintain
current operations, such investment has not extended the 25-year
design life of the system, nor has it expanded capacity," states
the planning resolution proposed for adoption Thursday.

The agency plans to ask the Federal Aviation Administration for
permission to use $40 million in airline ticket surcharges to
offset the planning cost.

The 3-mile system carries about 30,000 passengers a day between
terminals A, B and C, the airport's parking and rental car lots,
and a station linking the airport to NJ Transit trains along the
Northeast Corridor line.

A 2011 report by the Regional Plan Association, a transportation
research organization, recommended replacing the monorail system
as part of a broader plan to expand the region's airport capacity.
The RPA report criticized the AirTrain as slow and unable to
accommodate growth.

The AirTrain, which is free within the airport, has been
characterized by service interruptions due to power failures,
accidents and maintenance. Last summer, the AirTrain was closed
for two months to fill what were essentially 60 potholes in the
steel and epoxy running surface. The weight of the cars is born
by rubber tires that roll on the running surface.

The AirTrain system first opened in 1996 at a cost of $354 million,
built by a company that is now a subsidiary of the Canadian
aircraft and rail car maker Bombardier, which operates the monorail
under a contract with the Port Authority through 2022.

In 2001, the system was linked to a heavy rail station just north
of Newark Liberty, where fliers and airport workers can transfer
between the monorail and NJ Transit trains heading in an out of
Newark Penn Station. The monorail was also expanded from 12 cars
to 18.

Thursday's authorization votes come four months after the Port
Authority issued its first contract for preliminary work to
extend the PATH commuter rail system from Newark Penn Station to
the airport rail station, a project estimated to cost $1.5 billion.

The PATH extension is among 11 major projects, along with hundreds
of less costly ones, included in a 10-year, $27.6 billion Port
Authority capital plan approved by the agency in February 2010.

However, like a new Port Authority Bus Terminal projected to
cost $8-10 billion, a new AirTrain is not included in the capital
plan, suggesting agency officials will have to come up with additional
revenues or spending cuts, to pay for it.

Port Authority officials did not respond to requests for comment
on Monday.

A report issued in December by the Special Panel on the Future of
the Port Authority, convened last year by Gov. Chris Christie and
Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, stresses the need to modernize and
expand capacity at Newark Liberty, John F. Kennedy International
and LaGuardia Airports, gateways to the region that have been
criticized as outdated.


"While some improvements have been made at these airports over the
past decade, many of these faciliites are outdated and ill-equipped
to meet the increased passenger demands of the future," the report
stated.

Steve Strunsky may be reached at sstrunsky@njadvancemedia.com.
Follow hin on Twitter @SteveStrunsky. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

dupondt wrote:
I bought a 10 lb bag of raw chicken for a BBQ that didn't end up getting used. As I'm moving out, is there somewhere I can donate the chicken? It is in good condition.

Best to wrap it well and put it in the trash...

fat-ass-bike wrote:
I'm a huge advocate that ex-service personnel should never be allowed to be a civilian police officer with the exemption of Military Police Officers making that transition.

I believe soldiers of any enlisted rank never make good civilian police officers - Officers on the other hand could have the aptitude to civilian duties and demands.

Marines in particular are trained to be proactive and aggressive by nature

fat-ass-bike wrote:
There will be a rude awakening when SOME of these newly built (in the last 15 - 20 years) residential towers require more financial input from their owners when it comes to maintenance - I'm already hearing stories of soaring maintenance costs that are a direct result of poor initial construction materials being used and even poor standards of workmanship.

I'm aware of one building that has its owners re-sealing and re-tiling all their balconies because of major water damage / leakage - at their own cost. We are taking about over 100 balconies!

I've said it before, but the best investment are your post and pre war walk-up apartments (less then 5 stories) that were built to last and not to a price. It makes sense when you hear overseas consortiums target such properties!

CatDog wrote:
I'm less concerned with the timetable and more concerned with how many billions of dollars this will run over budget, and how much our fares will be hiked to cover it. I'm fully expecting it to run to $2 billion and a $6 one-way fare.

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

Mao wrote:
Here's just one article on how rent control and subsidized housing hurts a city.

http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cr_36.htm

If I didn?t know that story was published by the Manhattan Institute, I would think it?s odd that the word ?tenant? appeared only once, while ?investment? was used 59 times. Whether I agree with the economics on the ownership side, it can?t be sole focus.

07310 wrote:
Quote:

marullos88 wrote:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source ... 35frdXI_czgdrrXLcv5PUq7og

See pdf from the nj hfma in the link.
Apparently the state owns it now and was looking for potential buyers to submit proposals by 3/15/15. It also says it's a low income housing development, with some (about a third) market rate units. Excuse the long url.

Anyone know anything?

If it is designated as a majority low income housing development no developer will touch it without a hefty subsidy from the state or local gov't. There is no money to be made on low income housing. A large development also requires a developer with deep pockets and a long timeline to recoup his investment.

Fomite wrote:
I'm guessing this will be the most over budget, lengthy construction in the history of elevators. And it will break after two weeks so we have to hear the path announcments about the out of service elevator at the grove st. station for years to come. And TVs will constantly remind us it doesn't work. so funny.

JadedJC wrote:
Quote:

Sommerman wrote:
Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
What is the construction on the south side of Columbus at the Grove Street station? Are they putting an elevator in?

The Harsimus Cove Neighborhood Association posted on Facebook that the PA is putting in an elevator.

That will only actually work about one third of the time.

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

loco wrote:
There are three different generations in the home. They would need to find three homes.

So it's acceptable for them to live in one apartment because they're already there, but if they take the buyout they must live separately? Huh?

$200k may not be enough to buy a home, but after taxes it should cover the cost of moving and about 4 years of rent in JC. That really does not sound terribly unjust, considering that they don't own the apartment.

If they were trying to evict them without cause, that's a problem. A reasonable buyout offering is not.


Quote:

The family has lived there for decades. Its their home.

Unfortunately, that doesn't matter. They don't own the apartment, they are renters. They do not have the same property rights as an owner.

Adonis wrote:
Quote:

MattSchapiro wrote:
Quote:

by getz011 on 2015/4/15 0:00:12
...

I stand by my comments. I believe that Dixon should be held to a consistently high level of responsibility and accountability wherever it invests, not just within a couple of blocks of the PATH. I would expect the same of Americans investing in Australia.

I sympathize with the inclination toward higher or lower expectations for a property owner depending on the perception of their wealth. But ownership standards are not determined by the bankroll of the owner.

Standards are the same for homeowners regardless of their economic status and it should be that way. Otherwise they would be impossible to enforce.

If neighbors accepted the conditions of a property prior to the acquisition by new owners, it seems a bit capricious to attack the new ownership for the same previously accepted conditions. Had they created the conditions about which there are now complaints, that would be a different story. But that's not what is being said here.

There is a place for how we as neighbors act based on who owns a property. For example, if a large corporation was not shoveling its sidewalks, I might be inclined to report them. If the senior citizen next door was not shoveling her sidewalks, I would just shovel it for her.

At the same time, if any homeowner is causing a nuisance or is in violation of the law or housing codes, neighbors should feel free to address the owner directly and if unsatisfied, report them to the appropriate authorities.

1000% correct. Apparently a lot of people are haters, they just like to hate on Dixon because they follow the tired mentality of hating on anything that, in their minds, has "a lot of money". In reality the hate stems from the particular individual being discriminatory in applying their personal standards of what's right or wrong.

JCMan8 wrote:
If Fulop truly cared about JC's small businesses, he would take steps to reduce the dramatic obstacles and red tape a small business owner faces when trying to open a business. And he would at least attempt to reform our woefully dysfunctional Buildings Department.

But he doesn't really care so instead we get splashy proposals he can cite to as proof that he is the best Progressive candidate for Governor to lead New Jersey forward.

brewster wrote:
Quote:

hero69 wrote:
they are building something in sohowest/turnpike alley a couple of blocks away from the cast iron lofts, any idea what this will be? any renderings?

Don't know, is that the candy factory site? BTW, it is agreed that the area shall be known as "The Taint".

SRhia wrote:
I agree with @bodhipooh: if you're renting, you do NOT own the place, even if you have lived there for infinity generations.

Heck, even if you own the place, they (the government, whatever) can still kick you out (with eminent domain, other legal BS).

So, just because you have 10 generations living in the place for 1000 years, you are not entitled to the place, even if you have been paying the rent forever.

I know this is harsh, but that's the truth.

loco wrote:
We are residents of a US Masters Residential Property Fund. We hate it. It is clear they want us out. They are hell bent on clearing this building even attempting to evict a 70 year old senior suffering from depression and agoraphobia claiming she didnt live here. She had been living there for decades and Jacob Schulder one of Dixon henchmen saw this senior all the time.

When they saw they were going to lose trying to evict her, they offered the three generations living in their 1200 sq foot apartment $200,000 to get out.

We need to join forces with ALL US Masters Residential Property Fund. I say its time we start the:

US Masters Residential Tenants Union

And join the incredibly successful CHTU- Crown Height Tenant Union in our fight.

ITS TIME TO JOIN HANDS, FORCES AND FIGHT TO GET THIS FOREIGN BANKS OUT OF OUR BACK YARD!

For those interested please read our blog:
BEDSTUYMOVEORDIE.BLOGSPOT.COM

Sommerman wrote:
Is the rendering deceptive in that it doesn't show an hotel between the two buildings or is the hotel not located between them?

Did the building get an abatement?

Is it too late to create the neologism 'masterabater' for these big developers? And yes, I deliberately chose the word neologism.

Nomorebullcrap wrote:
So instead let's build a hundred more skyscrapers!!! SARCASM!!

Stringer wrote:

Fulop unveils Jersey City's AmeriCorps VISTA project

By Rebecca Panico | The Jersey Journal The Jersey Journal
on April 10, 2015 at  2:47 PM

Jersey City is launching a federally-funded volunteer project that will promote economic opportunity and youth development for the city's low-income residents. 

Mayor Steve Fulop was joined by state and local officials Tuesday to announce the new City Hall AmeriCorps VISTA project, as part of a federal investment of over $550,000 for the next three years.

VISTA, or Volunteers in Service to America, is a nationwide program whose corps volunteer full-time for a year at nonprofit organizations or local government agencies to carry out programs that fight poverty.

Read more:  http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... ricorps.html#incart_river

Monroe wrote:
[quote]
hero69 wrote:
why is there a special tax for meadowlands unless it is to restore it to its natural state. if the meadowlands can't sustain itself, maybe it should be scaled back or shut down.[/quote

http://www.northjersey.com/community- ... for-meadowlands-1.1265612