DouglasReynholm wrote:
Ate at Shadman last night for the first time. Very good. Convenient for downtowners. Okra was excellent. Okra, Chicken, Mango Lassi, Meat Kabab, Naan, small side salad for 19.50. Only complaint is they use plastic and styrofoam plates. The food is served in dishes, but if you share, someone ends up using the styrofoam. Shadman should take the next step and use silverware and dishes. The place is clean and looks like it was recently redesigned. Will eat there again!

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

OneSkirt wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
......

And the people in the existing department had the skillset to fulfill that mission? Sometimes it's easier to create a new department, than give an impossible task to an old one.

The proposal was to "move" the Cultural Affairs Dept. out of Health & Human Services and into the RRC (which still makes zero sense). It wasn't to create a new dept. The RRC is a complaint center, so it seems, meant to address concerns residents bring to them. The very natures of its name is "Response" as in "responding/reacting". Cultural Affairs and Senior Services (in most cases) are not matters something that are merely "responded" to. These are entities unto themselves that require plans, and people who know how to carry them out with a vision. Moving them there is going backwards, and definitely counter to the transition plan.

Was anyone at the council meeting? Was moving these 2 depts. and the reasoning behind this proposal discussed at all?

"Kelleher reminded the council that the division does not create the demand for cultural events, it is the demand for cultural events that created the need for a department to organize them."
Source: http://www.jerseycityindependent.com/ ... oration-soundly-defeated/

"The Division of Senior Affairs provides information and assistance to seniors, helping them to obtain services they need."
Source:
http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/hhs.aspx?id=1438

So you think that people with the skills to organize events and deliver food to seniors are the same people we need to drive "promoting JC and spuring economic growth"? I don't.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

OneSkirt wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

OneSkirt wrote:
Has anyone heard why on earth they would propose to put Cultural Affairs & Senior Services under the Resident Response Center?? I don't get that at all!

What functions did they provide? If all they did was handle street festival permits, and senior transport requests, it would make perfect sense.

The mission outlined in the transition plan was to expand Cultural affairs into a dept. handling Arts, Culture and Tourism and making it more of a true driver for promoting JC and spuring economic growth. Moving it to the RRC is big step away from this mission, it would seem.

And the people in the existing department had the skillset to fulfill that mission? Sometimes it's easier to create a new department, than give an impossible task to an old one.

dtjcview wrote:
Quote:

OneSkirt wrote:
Has anyone heard why on earth they would propose to put Cultural Affairs & Senior Services under the Resident Response Center?? I don't get that at all!

What functions did they provide? If all they did was handle street festival permits, and senior transport requests, it would make perfect sense.

trambone wrote:
[quote]
People assume a green light for cars means walk. The intersection at the shoprite actually gives a walk signal and has all traffic halted. It causes delays for people trying to leave that parking lot.

nyrgravey9 wrote:
I don't get why anyone is arguing with these NYers, JC doesn't need douchebag investment bankers and other asswads messing up what we have here.

To the NYers reading this, this article is fiction. JC is a wasteland, don't come here. All of JC is begging you to stay where you are.

You're better off where you are.

CatDog wrote:
yeah I've noticed there seems to be an increase in the number of motorcycles zooming around recently.

chilltownboy wrote:
I also think he was motivated by the fact that he could buy a brownstone in Lafayette after selling his 5th floor walkup in PH. There is some awesome housing stock in Lafayette thanks to our old friends Keeney & Halladay.


Quote:

nemobeatz wrote:
My guess is it's mostly a symbolic gesture. Goes against the narrative that he's just a "downtown" mayor, but also it's a beautiful neighborhood and right next to the lightrail. =)

Quote:

tommyc_37 wrote:
Just curious, did Fulop state why he planned to move to B-L? You'd think he'd want to be closer to City Hall and stay downtown.

Quote:

nemobeatz wrote:
I'm hearing it's near Communipaw and Pacific. Btw, have you joined the new Lafayette community forum on nextdoor.com? Trying to rally our neighbors to join. https://nextdoor.com/invite/dfsvrptuttjtfvumjafn

Quote:

Monroe wrote:
Does anyone know where Fulop is moving to in BeLa?

CatDog wrote:
Quote:

nafco wrote:
Is it just me or does the Times release a carbon copy of this article every year or two saying New Yorkers have finally 'discovered' JC?

every 6 months, more like. I'd rather they stop discovering it, to be honest. I like my rents where they are right now.

jc344 wrote:
OneSkirt, I don't understand how you can state what PROBABLE CAUSE is since you keep referring to it as probably cause, which makes no Grammatical sense whatsoever . Speeding and leaving the scene (if in fact that happened) again in and of itself are not probable cause for an alcotest. I would tell you and the rest of the people what the probable cause for an alcotest is ,but unless you research it yourself ,you won't learn anything. I suggest you make a trip to the library and research PROBABLE CAUSE for the administration of an alcotest. Just don't look for it under probably cause because you'll never find it.

JCMan8 wrote:
Quote:

Christine wrote:
I think that some people here think that having a car accident is a crime. It is not. What factors contributed to the accident are another story. There are people here wondering why this guy wasn't being treated as a criminal for speeding or careless driving. Nobody ever is. 95% of the population would be behind bars. I want justice like everyone else, but c'mon now...learn the difference between moving violations and crime.

No one thinks a car accident alone is a crime. But it is a crime to kill someone and leave the scene of the accident.

Literally nobody here is wondering why the cop wasn't treated as a criminal for "speeding" or "careless driving." The shocking thing is how a guy who killed someone and leaves the scene of an accident wasn't even breathalyzed. And 95% of the population don't kill people when they drive.

Of course, any regular person would be breathalyzed if they killed someone in an accident. And they'd certainly at least be given a ticket or arrested for leaving the scene. But cops look out for themselves, so this guy was never given a breathalyzer, and basically got off scott free when the police came. The only reason anything even happened is because there was outrage and there's almost certainly videotape of the incident. Cops will cover for cops by not giving them breathalyzers, but they won't destroy a videotape.

Do you really not understand that or are you just a cop yourself (or closely connected to one)?

elsquid wrote:

Quote:

Where are the criminal charges for speeding and reckless driving, along with the standing Manslaughter charge? He got sumonses for them, but they are not part of the criminal charges.

As I recall from my days as a newsman in NJ courts, I don't think speeding and reckless driving would normally be included in an indictment because they are traffic offenses, not criminal offenses. Prosecutors can go directly to trial without an indictment for those, normally in a municipal court.

When related criminal ("indictable") charges are also involved, as they are here, the traffic offenses get dragged up to the Superior Court criminal trial and are usually considered "lesser included offenses" to the more serious charges. They don't tend to have much consequence there unless a verdict or a plea wipes out the more serious charges, in which case there is often a conviction for just the lesser offenses as kind of a fallback.

Vigilante wrote:
Cop should use his head when navigating our streets but definitely support him rounding up the bad drivers.

CatDog wrote:
So how is it that a single person has been writing entire essays on every single mailbox, lightpost, and bench in this city over the last month or two, and has not yet been caught? Half of the gazebo on the pier at Exchange Place is covered with this insane person's ranting about Osama bin Laden, the NSA, Obama, Fulop, Satan, and god knows what else.

Who the hell is doing this, and why hasn't this person been caught yet? if you see someone walking around with markers, or writing on a wall or mailbox or anything, please PLEASE call the police as soon as possible, because this is getting out of hand. Pretty soon every surface in this city will have to be repaired because of ONE jerkoff with a sharpie.

bjay wrote:
Quote:

OneSkirt wrote:
Questions:

Why is he NOT indicted for Speeding, Reckless Driving AND Manslaughter?

There's a distinction between the summonses that were issued right away for the traffic violations, and the criminal charges brought in the indictment by the grand jury.

In the first category, the newspaper story says: "Following the April 19 accident, Spolizino ... was issued summonses for speeding, careless driving, no vehicle inspection sticker and failure to wear a seat belt."

In the second category (the criminal charges), the story says that Spolizino "has been indicted by a grand jury on three charges including aggravated manslaughter..... a death by auto charge and one of leaving the scene of a motor vehicle accident resulting in death...."