by fat-ass-bike on 2014/11/1 23:56:53
...
There has NOT been one 'group' or individual that has gone beyond making standard value statements or stating the obvious. Not one has a solid business action plan - if they were to seek funds from a Bank, they would all be turned down because of poor planning.

by fat-ass-bike on 2014/11/1 18:03:57

Unfortunately JC is littered with trash in our political landscape - every aspect and positions of public service is littered with such individuals or groups that are politically motivated or influenced

by La_Verdad on 2014/10/1 10:11:56

Is it true that Greco - the head of the Teacher's union makes six figures and he has no other job other than running the JCEA? No classroom responsibilities?

by dtjcview on 2014/3/24 9:29:15

Hardly surprising. Parents are represented by the BOE, and teachers by their unions. Student's education needs come a poor third. Additional funding is simply swallowed up by the other 2 groups.

by dtjcview on 2014/3/22 1:06:12
The Abbott funding was originally earmarked for impoverished families. Not many of those live in Hamilton Park these days.

by Br6dR on 2014/3/17 8:04:47

Give me one scenario where someone needs confidentiality when speaking to a mayor.

by LoKo498 on 2014/3/2 22:29:48

Pre-k is just an excuse to dump your kids off.
I went to kindergarden when I was at that age & now they starting school 2 years sooner for what...to get your kids ready to be on their own.
Its the governments way to get the kids prepared to be away from the parents at a early age.
And also to get the unecessary shots, they are full of poison to get the body prepared for the worst to happen & contain that RDIF chip that they implant without us knowing or our concent.

dtjcview wrote:
The prospect of affluent downtown helicopter parents taking advantage of free pre-k, clogging local back streets to drop off and pick up their kids, is much less appealing than say, building affordable housing at 9th and Brunswick.

I'm with Fulop on this one.

Yvonne said:
I brought my camera and videotape the public comments.

[!IFRAME FILTERED! ]
Jersey City School Board Meeting from Speak NJ on Vimeo.

by Yvonne on 2014/1/21 19:37:05

Matt, you cannot have it both ways. Mr. Byrne, the city clerk asks, does anyone want to speak? That question means if you have a question on the ordinance, feel free to speak up. The reason, Lavarro screamed at Jayson, the CarePoint employees were leaving. I am quite sure, the city told them to come. Lavarro, not Jayson controls what is on the agenda. Lavarro decided to spend one hour honoring different groups before the meeting begin. Matt, Democracy is messy, it is similar to childbirth. The process is hard but the baby is worth the price. I want to protect "Freedom of Speech," because I want to know where my tax dollars are going. Tell Lavarro and the city council to use the meetings for the city's business. It should not be used to honor every Tom, Dick, and Harry. They are looking for favors with different groups without spending their campaign dollars. It is also very common the year before an election. Almost everyone gets an award. Example - someone is retiring from city government, give that person an award; someone is turning 85, let's give that person an award. They, the city council, keep the meetings longer than it should be, they control everyone ordinance on the agenda.

Yvonne:
This thread is about First Amendment, you remember - Freedom of speech.

Matt Schapiro wrote:
When a few people choose to monopolize the public comment time, there is a cost. Sometimes that cost is the council members' and staffers' and reporters' and audience members' time.

And sometimes that cost is the right of their fellow citizens to express their opinion, as evidenced by the below anecdote.

In this case, where a fellow citizen is denied their right to speak, those who choose to monopolize council time in service of their own "1st Amendment rights", are actually trampling on the rights of others.

And they damage the function of our representative democracy in the process.

There will be about 20 council meetings this year. Let's conservatively assume that there are 5 opportunities for a single individual to speak at each meeting:

5 minutes x 5 opportunities x 20 meetings = over 8 hours of each of our elected representatives' time over the course of a year

Not all of that time is wasted as occasionally this person may have a salient point to make. But any way you shake it, if a person chooses to speak at EVERY SINGLE OPPORTUNITY they can, simply because it is their right to do so, they are wasting too much of a lot of people's time, in my opinion.

And likely denying at least a few people their own right to speak in the process.

Quote:
Earlier this year, I attended a council meeting because there was an ordinance on the agenda for 2nd Reading on which I had an opinion. I have 3 children under 5yrs old and a finite amount of time to put toward this stuff.

As it turned out, there were six or seven other items on the 2nd Reading agenda before mine and certain persons got up to speak on each and every one of them: sometimes offering reasoned opinions, sometimes soliciting the Council members for information that was easily available by other means, sometimes repeating the same opinion during each of their 5min speaking periods.

Two hours after the start of the meeting, my time ran out and I had to go home, right before the ordinance in which I was interested came up to bat.

If folks spoke only when issues rose to a certain level of their interest - rather than every single ordinance no matter their level of interest - I would have had my chance to speak. My comments might have added value to the discussion and they might have affected the outcome of the legislation.

Yvonne said:
With all of this abated money coming in from tax abated buildings, all taxpayers should have lower bills. But in reality the opposite is true. Tax abatements benefit the people in the building but are a burden on the rest of JC. It is the reason towns like Secaucus do not give abatements and yet they have a lot of development. Even Hoboken do not give abatements on the luxury waterfronts, such as the Tea Building.