asdfdf23 - Trust me I completely agree. I wouldn't trust our current administration to water my plants while I was out of town, let alone execute a fundamental reform of the way this city does business. For now there is no way an energy service contract or consolidated purchasing could happen because of the entrenched interests in this city having their own interests in mind over that of Jersey City residents.

As for Jersey City's history, I think the situation is actually starting to change - and not because of the city or county governments. There are groups of volunteers around the city that are slowly unearthing bits and pieces of Jersey City's history. At this point, the last thing the city should do is appoint someone to a paid position to oversee any of that work. Instead, simple measures like recognition of the work being done by ordinary citizens can go a very long way. That kind of stuff doesn't cost the city anything and is worth its weight in gold, but it all goes back to the matter that competent people have to be elected. To do that we have to have enough people show up to vote on November 8th.

As a direct example of the revenue implications from our city's history. NY and NJ have gone to court a couple of times over the last 25 years over the legal status of Liberty and Ellis Islands and which state owns them. In the mid-1980s there was an agreement between the two states to share the sales tax revenue from concessions sold on both Islands. Problem is NY never actually shared the revenue.

History

ESCO

Consolidated Purchasing

Hi everyone. Here are three other ideas that I have that I think will benefit the city. None of these things have been considered in Jersey City in the past but all have the opportunity to produce revenue and improve the city's image.

1. Consolidated purchasing. Of the many disadvantages of having so many autonomous agencies in this city, another is that we don't get the benefit of purchasing common supplies in bulk. Instead of 10 or 20 or 100 people making separate decisions about purchasing on everything from printer paper to health insurance the city government will have more power if it used it's buying power to its advantage. This isn't going to close the hole in our budget, but it could easily save hundreds of thousands of dollars per year, if not more. Also, this is yet another reason to get rid of all of our autonomous agencies.

2. Energy Services Companies are private organizations that will come in and retrofit existing buildings and guarantee a certain percentage savings from improved energy efficiency. They make their money by taking a cut of the savings for a certain amount of time after they do their work. This type of project is low risk (savings from energy efficiency are predictable), does not require up front spending, and immediately improves cash flow. Corporations and municipalities around the country enter into these types of agreements all of the time. With the average age of Jersey City's buildings we could save millions of dollars in energy costs, improve comfort in our buildings, and reduce wear and tear on the heating and cooling systems in those buildings.

3. History. Jersey City has a historical legacy that rivals any city in the United States. Unfortunately, we live in the shadow of NYC and our politicians have never been willing to promote the city's rich historical past to attract tourists. Instead, they let the rest of the world form their opinion of Jersey City and New Jersey from TV shows like The Sopranos and The Jersey Shore. Two quick examples:

In 1974 I was on the JCPD motorcycle squad. Rain had washed out part of the cliff on the back side of Harsimus Cemetery off Newark Ave and exposed a catacomb from the 1600s that the Dutch had dug into the Palisades when they originally settled Jersey City. A group of teenagers found the catacomb and went in and found bodies that the Dutch had placed there hundreds of years ago. The bodies had been encased in lead to prevent disease but were otherwise exposed to air. Teens being teens, they broke open one of the lead encasements and found a very well preserved body of a blond haired girl that was more than 300 years old. Not long after, the city and JCPD were notified. I actually drove my police motorcycle into the entrance of the catacomb when I first arrived. What did our city do? Did anyone try to save this amazing piece of history? Well, the city promptly dug a hole by the railroad tracks (below the turnpike) and dumped the body there. They then called a cement truck and sealed off the entrance to the catacomb. It's so tragic it's nearly unbelievable. The catacombs are still there though, sealed behind concrete waiting for a time when we have an administration that realizes their true value.

Around 1990 PSE&G was digging downtown and found a fully intact ship from the 1700s buried about 20 feet below street level at the intersection of Bay and Warren Streets. When Jersey City was first settled, Hoboken was an island and most of downtown was marshland. The ship may have sank accidentally or may have been used as infill by the residents at the time. Even though Jersey City is normally ignored because it lives in the shadow of NYC, this event was big enough that news stations came over and did a report on the amazing discovery. Jersey City being Jersey City though, we couldn't let a priceless piece of history stand in the way of burying a new gas line. About 24 hours later, a backhoe ripped the entire ship out of the ground and PSE&G went on about its business. A couple of years ago there was a similar find in NYC. Needless to say archeologists and historians were called in to conduct a proper excavation of the site.

Some people may say that worrying about history when we have a bad economy and crime and corruption is a fools errand. Any city that cares so little about its own past is doomed to irrelevance. Look at Hoboken. They have two dubious claims to fame: Frank Sinatra and Baseball. They let everyone know about both incessantly. Twenty years ago no one outside of Hudson County would recognize the name Hoboken. Today someone halfway across the US is more likely to have heard of Hoboken than Jersey City. The bottom line is that we're missing out on millions of dollars in tourism revenue each year because of this shortsightedness. The good news is that much of our history is still intact and waiting for the right administration to come along and take advantage of it.

Rich

Thank you ogden1 and tern. I'm glad this forum exists if for no other reason than it gives me an opportunity to interact with people who tend to care more about Jersey City than the average resident. Please remember to vote on Nov 8th. Tell your friends and family to vote as well. I guarantee the entrenched interests in this town are praying (or paying?) for low voter turnout.

For Jcresident0001 and everyone else commenting on the JCPA. First let me take a step back and say that it's not my intent to villainize anyone. I know a number of city employees who are good hardworking people stuck in a dysfunctional system they have no control over. The JCPA is one of a number of problems Jersey City has, and a relatively small one, but it's still a problem worth addressing - along with all of our other autonomous agencies. Anyway, here are my latest comments:

1. For those who misunderstood my comment about the JCPA HQ purchase on Central Ave, the cost of the new building was not $10 million, but rather $4.6 million. I used that number as an example of what we'll really pay when interest is included. Not knowing the interest rate or the term of the bond that number could be off by quite a bit, but it was a rough guess.

2. Regardless of my point above, the transaction for the purchase of that piece of real estate was tainted because of the seller's ties to Healy. There's also some big questions about the value of the property being lower than what we paid (wouldn't be the first time). Also, since the JCPA is an autonomous agency, Jersey City is not directly responsible for the debt, but that doesn't really matter as both Jersey City and the JCPA are government agencies who (theoretically) answer to Jersey City residents. In other words, the people of Jersey City have incurred a debt of $4.6 million on questionable terms even if the Jersey City government has really only co-signed the loan.

3. Since Jersey City guaranteed the bond for the JCPA, there is no difference to the average Jersey City resident about the liability they've incurred. While default is certainly unlikely, that does not mean it can't happen - just look at all of the hoopla about the federal government's bond guarantee for Solyndra. Note that as of 2010 direct Jersey City debt was $500 million but the city has guaranteed another $300 million in bonds on top of that for a total liability of $800 million. So, our total liability is about 160% of our city's annual revenue. Go figure that our credit rating is BBB, which means we're hovering just above junk bond territory.

4. Jcresident0001 pointed out that the JCPA enforcement division only worked 10 months of the year because of the snow on the streets in the winter. If that's the case I have to ask what were those folks doing those other two months if they weren't writing tickets? Maybe they were put to some other use, but unlike cops, a parking enforcement agent is a fairly one dimensional role so it's not likely they can be easily repurposed to perform other duties when the streets are covered in snow in the winter.

5. I want to circle back to my earlier criticism of the various autonomous Jersey City agencies. This entire discussion would be a lot easier to have if all of the money that sloshes around Jersey City wasn't moved around between different accounts where the average resident has no visibility. Instead, we have a system that operates in a manner tantamount to a money laundering operation.

JCResident0001,

1. I'm sorry I wasn't clear so let me explain my math...

If the city pays the JCPA $8 per PAID ticket and the city paid $1.2 million to the JCPA then $1,200,000 divided by $8 = 150,000 tickets. That's how many tickets are paid each year. That number in and of itself isn't particularly meaningful because it's impossible for me to know how many are collected from Jersey City residents versus out of towners.

More importantly, the state has published 98 salaries for the JCPA as of 2009. Even if it's down to 85 and less than half (let's say 40?) are in traffic enforcement, then we have 40 people responsible for 150,000 paid traffic tickets each year. That works out to 3,750 tickets per year per traffic enforcement agent. That may sound like a lot, but if the average enforcement agent works 225 days per year that comes out to 17 tickets per workday. If they work 8 hours we're talking 2 paid tickets per hour per enforcement agent. I'd like to think that reasonable people would take that number to be on the low side. So, could we accomplish the same enforcement with fewer agents? How about better enforcement from the agents that are currently working not very productively? My point in these numbers is to demonstrate that our system is broken.

2. You're not going to get a disagreement from me on the Scofflow unit. I've never said the JCPD doesn't have areas it can improve as well. Considering JCPD's manpower shortages, I think that a license plate recognition technology is worth exploring for fixing the problem. Of course, I'm assuming the technology is procured effectively... look at the heck of a job the JCPA has done spending $400,000 upgrading meters on central ave that have caused a revolt from local residents and businesses. Pretty sure they'll be selling those on ebay for a "profit" of 25 cents on the dollar any day now.

3. I don't have a problem with a city or government agency buying and selling buildings. I do have a problem the way our city goes about doing it because of the amount of corruption in this town. All too often, we pay more than we should for the buildings we buy and sell them for less than their worth. Making a "profit" off of a city owned property is possibly a great thing... it could also be a terrible thing if we're not getting as much profit as we could for the building's the city sells.

For example, here's what will probably happen with the JCPA building... we bought it for $4.6 million using a bond to raise the money for the purchase. With interest that probably works out to some number closer to $10 million over the life of the bond. A few years from now we'll sell the building for $5 million to fill yet another hole in our budget and claim a "profit" of $400,000. But we (JC taxpayers) will still owe that $10 million in bond money plus interest. What I'm saying is that our elected officials use property transactions as a form of money laundering so they can squeeze ever more money out of JC taxpayers and feed it to their friends in a series of convoluted and opaque transactions.

4. Two other reasons the city wastes money with property transactions. First, it doesn't take care of the buildings it owns. We're paying $43,000 this year in fines for OSHA violations for the West District. Also, every time the city buys a building that is property tax revenue that goes away. So, we buy a building to save $225,000 in rent but how much of that money would have come back to the city anyway in property tax?

I happy to lose an argument as long as the outcome is better for the city. How many of Healy's or HCDO's hand picked candidates are willing to open themselves up to questions like these? More importantly, why should they bother if they're counting on low voter turnout to win the election?

JCresident0001,

1. I'd love to say that $1.2 million is from $8 per ticket, but as Brewster pointed out our budget is not transparent enough for anyone to see things with that level of granularity. If I assume you are correct though, that works out to 150,000 tickets per year at $8 per ticket. My two takeaways from that: First, a number equal to half the population of the city gets a ticket each year. I'm not sure if that is high or low compared to national standards, but it seems high - even if you include out of towners. Second, if we have a staff of 100 on the JCPA that works out to 6 tickets per JCPA employee per workday. That number sounds quite low to me, but if it is accurate I would say we're not getting very much out of them.

2. I don't think the city should be in the business of buying and selling buildings as any type of real estate investment. The fact of the matter is that the purchase was tainted because the seller was a donor to the Healy campaign. So, I'm willing to bet we overpaid when they used an outdated appraisal. Second, our city sells buildings all of the time at a fraction of their actual value, typically to a tainted investor who turns around and flips it for a hefty profit. Also, just because the city backed the bond doesn't mean that we, the taxpayers of Jersey City, didn't incur a debt through the JCPA. Last, what is the interest we're going to pay on that bond? With our city's credit rating and the size of the bond that easily works out to more than $250,000/year in interest alone. The bottom line is that you'll have to forgive me for being skeptical that city government agencies should be playing the role of real estate investor when they don't have the money to fill the potholes in our streets, the intelligence to make sound investment decisions, or the integrity to do what's best for the people of Jersey City.

3. The Jersey City Police Academy, where I worked for my last years before retiring, is right off Chapel Ave. Needless to say I've been there at 5am and I completely agree with you. I have no problem saying those types of issues are the ones the JCPA should be dealing with, but leaders should be held accountable - something that hasn't been done across the board in Jersey City for decades. So yes, cut off the head.

Last, I thank you for your insight - if our council put half the thought into running this city that you've put into your last couple of posts we'd have a better city. I know that I don't know all of the answers, and I have no problem accepting someone else's better idea. The standard for success has been set so low in Jersey City that residents are happy when a public employee just shows up to do their job, regardless of whether or not they do it well. It's a sad state to be in, and things don't have to be that way. I don't underestimate the size of the challenge ahead of us, but accepting dysfunction is just something I can't do.

Rich

Citywide issues such as crime and infrastructure are complex and require thoughtful solutions. Aside from the fact that we lack a transparent government with the best interests of Jersey City residents in mind, we also lack competent leaders capable of making intelligent decisions if they were honest in the first place.

The main purpose of the city council is to pass a budget (on time & before the money is spent) and to prioritize the utilization of city resources. Instead, our council perpetually mismanages funds, fixes very little, and spends a disproportionate amount of our resources fixing problems. Just look at our sewer system: It's aging, but if it was maintained we wouldn't have to spend huge sums of money on emergency repairs and EPA fines. We also wouldn't have lost business from people who don't want to do business in Jersey City because of the perception that nothing works here.

And yes, I always hear stories about how these types of problems are the fault of previous administrations, but that excuse is the only thing in this city that is actually older than our sewer system. It is not a free pass for the current administration and city council to continue ignoring problems by kicking the can down the road rather than investing time in thoughtful and transparent long term planning.

Our elected officials are used to treating taxpayers in Jersey City like a cash cow because they're never held accountable for their actions. About 7% of the city's population actually cast a vote for Healy - that was during a normal election year where turnout is highest. I'm running for city council on November 8th to help change these problems. If you want to hear my specific stances on a number of issues please visit my thread (link posted below). More importantly, turn out to vote in the special election on November 8th. Too many people in this city complain about our politicians but then don't come out to hold them accountable when they have the opportunity.

Rich Boggiano

Link to my thread: http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewt ... p?topic_id=25422&forum=11

Thanks for your reply JCResident0001, but I have to take issue with some of your numbers. I've got a list of sources of my information below. I've explained earlier in this forum my opinions about the role of JCPA's enforcement division versus that of the JCPD so I won't rehash that in this post.

1. The JCPA generates $8 million per year in revenue. This information comes from Mary Paretti, CEO of the JCPA that she posted on this forum about a year ago. Keep in mind that money is paid by residents for parking violations, so it is a form of a tax. If we treated the JCPA as a "business" why not charge $1000 for illegally parking? $5000? The reason we don't do that is because the JCPA's mission is to manage our parking, not generate money. I have no problem with fining people for parking illegally, but we shouldn't ever use tickets as a means to generate revenue or justify the existence of a useless bureaucracy. Here is the link: http://jclist.com/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?post_id=259496

2. The city of Jersey City has incurred debt on behalf of the JCPA. The JCPA needed a $4.2 million bond to buy it's building on Central Ave. Note that it narrowly passed because folks like Steve Fulop argued that the building wasn't worth that much money and that the seller was a friend and donor to the Healy Campaign. Here is the link: http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/20 ... cil_backs_the_jersey.html

3. Take a look at the $1.2 million the city gives annually to the JCPA: http://www.cityofjerseycity.com/uploa ... 11%20Adopted%20Budget.PDF

4. The top salaries in the JCPA are quite a bit higher than $30,000/year. I never said the top 10 were $4 million (see my earlier posts), but they represent a disproportionate percentage of the JCPA's overall revenue. To put it simply, the entire organization is too top heavy. You can look up 2009 salary data (the most recent available) here: http://www.mycentraljersey.com/sectio ... RSE18/NJ-Public-Employees

I always prefer to look up the facts as best I can before coming to a conclusion on an issue. I'm also open minded about ways to reform the JCPA. It's far from the largest issue our city faces, but there is no way around the fact that it is a dysfunctional agency that is in need of fixing. Keep in mind that I'm a retired cop who has also advocated reforming how our police department is structured, so I have no sacred cows when it comes to issues like these.

Thanks as always,
Rich

From Augustine Torres in the Jersey Journal:

THE ELECTION WHINING CORNER
I've been getting a number of calls from candidates complaining about the other guys who are running in the nonpartisan election. My answers are usually a variety of "yes, it isn't fair," "who would have thought?" or "unbelievable."

I'm being polite. The truth is that the strategies being employed, the campaign dirty tricks on the street, and the secret support given by political personalities are old hat, pre-historic.

For example, the issue of strategy can be addressed by pointing out that after the first debate on King Drive, Council members Kalimah Ahmad and Ray Velazquez have not appeared at another public Q and A. Their opponents are fuming that they have stayed in the shadow.

Ahmad and Velazquez want to retain their at-large seats in the Nov. 8 special election. They have been advised by their handlers in City Hall to not open their mouths. The public will never see them again -- except at fund-raisers and koffee klatches.

It's the classic strategy of trying to keep the special election quiet. A low voter turnout will always help the incumbent. With 17 candidates, it will not take many votes for a victory -- around 4,000 would do it. I don't have to tell you that if there is no president or governor running, people are too busy working and watching reality TV.

Dirty street tactics is a favorite complaint. City and Hilltop activist Richard Boggiano entered the council race at the last moment and as fast as his campaign posters go up, he's finding them "replaced" by posters of bracketed candidates Omar Perez and Sue Mack. Boggiano must have learned quickly because his posters are back.

The Jersey City political machine also like to prevent candidates -- except their office seekers -- from campaigning in housing complexes (Did anyone say Unico Towers?) by blocking access. It's good to have operatives in the field who want to protect their public employment checks.

No blood, no foul is the rule with most New Jersey elections. I routinely covered North Hudson elections years ago in North Bergen, West New York and Union City, where people complained only if it involved more than a loss of a pint.

As for not so secret support -- are you surprised that Freeholder O'Dea quietly backs Mack? The same could be said of Jersey City Downtown Councilman and mayoral aspirant Steven Fulop. Opponents are wondering where Sue is getting all her money.

Oh yeah, Freeholder Jeff Dublin is talking up Healy's choices, Ahmad and Velazquez.

Hello Everyone. I wanted to share a letter that I wrote that was published in the Independent today.

Elect Rich Boggiano to At-Large City Council Seat

Dear Editor:

The problem with many public servants in Hudson County is that several of them have forgotten the most important part of their job description ? actually serving the public. I?ve spent my lifetime serving my country and this City, as a marine and as a Jersey City Police Officer. If you elect me on November 8th, I fully intend to continue my service to our great City as a member of the City Council.

As a City Council member I will accept a salary of only $1.00 a year. I will also refuse the other perk that our politicians have become all too accustomed to abusing ? a Jersey City taxpayer sponsored car. In a time when our City is borrowing money against our children?s future to pay for today?s inflated operating expenses, I see it as my duty to set the example for the rest of our elected officials who have gone the other way ? those that happily collect two or three city or county paychecks or pensions while claiming we don?t have the money to fix the potholes in our own streets.

If elected, my commitment and service to the people of Jersey City will be defined by transparency and accountability. We need to shine the bright light of integrity on all of the seedy practices that our current elected officials simply accept as a fact of life in Hudson County. For 30 years I?ve fought corruption at every turn. I?ve never once accepted a favor or abused my position for personal gain. My campaign isn?t underwritten by the contributions of a few powerful, politically interested backers, so I won?t have to answer to anyone but the people of Jersey City after November 8th.

We also need to hold people accountable for their actions, whether as a City employee, political appointee, or elected politician. Those who can do their jobs well should be rewarded for their competence. Those who are not contributing must be fired or voted out of office.

Too many people think that this type of change in Hudson County is impossible. Change is possible, but only if you come out to vote on November 8th. When you do, I humbly ask you to vote for me, Rich Boggiano, column 13F.

Rich Boggiano for City Council
President, Hilltop Neighborhood Association

asdfdf23 and brewster - As a retired member of the JCPD, I know that I'm biased, but please accept that the vast majority of police officers are good people who want nothing but the best for this city. At the same time, it's only reasonable to accept that they want the best for their families as well. That often means moving out of the city so they can send their kids to better public schools. Why do they care so much about their paychecks? Because it's so expensive to live in NJ is a big part of the answer. Is the police union reasonable and open to change? Yes, but they have to know that they can trust the party on the other side.

Imagine things from their perspective - cops get told they have to cut their benefits while city employees sitting across the table from them collect two or three paychecks from the city and county. It's almost so absurd you would think it couldn't be true, but then again this is Hudson County.

Also, a large percentage of our cops (and teachers and firefighters and EMTs?) are burnt out. They see ridiculous problems and have little power to solve them. Cops lock up the same criminals night after night, only to have them released back on the streets time and again. Teachers have unruly students in their classrooms but have zero authority to discipline them. Firefighters and EMTs answer 911 calls and have to take people to the hospital on a daily basis because someone has a headache and thinks an ambulance is just a free taxi ride.

Are cops perfect? Absolutely not. Could they be more flexible? Definitely. But it's not fair to vilify them.

Either way, to my original point, I believe that exploring incentives to keep more cops (and firefighters and teachers?) living in the city would be both economical and pay huge dividends by more fully vesting them in the success of the city.

It's these kinds of ideas I'd like to put on the table, but again, you have to turn out to vote. Healy was elected in 2009 with 7% of the city's population casting votes in his favor. This election will undoubtedly see even lower voter turnout. With such low turnout I can't emphasize how much every single vote counts.

jsqfunk - All great questions. Here are some answers for you.

1. Jersey City's financial situation is that we're in a mess in both the short and long term. Over the past 20-30 years, our politicians have used every one-time accounting gimmick in the book when creating our Jersey City's budget. We're now in a position of essentially borrowing from the future to pay today's operating expenses. Jersey City has an upcoming pension balloon payment of about $50 million from unpaid police, fire, and public employees pension contributions since 2009. Obviously some of that has to do with the recession of the last few years, but the city was in trouble long before the financial crisis made it impossible to hide the problems any longer.

There is no single magic fix for our budget problems. I've already listed many of my ideas in earlier posts, but here are some more:

a. Revisit contracts allowing for accumulation of sick time. The city is borrowing $9.5 million to pay for this liability this year alone when we have an $80 million budget gap.
b. Eliminate redundant city and county agencies. Merge agencies - DPW and JCIA should produce about $10 million/year in savings.
c. Ban city employees from holding multiple government positions. We have people who are employees of both the city and county. Where does their loyalty lie if they're collecting 2, 3, or 4 separate paychecks? Are they really working 2, 3, or 4 times as hard as the rest of us? Probably not.
d. I said this earlier and I said it again in tonight's debate: I will only accept a $1/year salary as a city councilman. I also wouldn't accept a city car for my position, which is another complete waste of money. Why are we paying for city employees to commute down the shore everyday?

2a. Business experience: Over the years as a police officer I bought and maintained a number of apartment buildings in Jersey City with the help of several partners. I sold off the properties that I had in the early 2000s and haven't bought any again because the economics haven't made sense (go figure since we had a housing bubble).

2b. We have an insane number of regulations that serve little or no purpose, restrict business, and aren't evenly enforced anyway. It's safe to say that it's likely impossible to actually start a business in Jersey City without breaking the law first. We have useless fees justifying useless jobs all in the name of protecting the public, but the real reason is so that your elected politicians can have a form of control over business owners in the city. I'm not anti-government, but I do think that government should exist to provide basic services and protect people. Jersey City hasn't had a government like that since Frank Hague was elected 90 years ago.

3. The short answer is yes, I support using tax incentives to lure business to Jersey City on the condition that they actually benefit the city. For example, Goya is being offered $80 million in state incentives to relocate a facility in Jersey City. In theory it will create several hundred jobs, but if they are closing down a facility in NYC to place it in Jersey City how many of the NY employees are simply going to commute to Jersey City to keep their jobs? If that happens, NJ will have given away $80 million without "creating" as many jobs as advertised. Instead, the incentive should stipulate that Goya has to create a certain number of jobs in Jersey City or in NJ (depending on who is paying for the incentive) in order to earn their tax break.

4. JC Police "on the beat." I was actually a beat cop in the South District back in the 1980's. In times past we had hundreds more cops than we do today. The police force has been 20-50% larger than it's current size at various times in the past. Police work is inherently labor intensive. With fewer cops covering the same area the JCPD is forced to put every warm body into patrol cars to maximize the flexibility of their resources.

Knowing that adding 400 more cops is not realistic when the city faces an $80 million budget deficit I'd propose an alternative. Right now, Jersey City cops have to be Jersey City residents when they are hired. After they graduate from the Police Academy they can move out of the city after their first year on the job. About two-thirds move out of the city because they want to send their children to better schools. If we have 800 cops on the JCPD I'd say about 250 currently live in the city. Imagine if you had 650 more cops simply living in the city? Over the past 40 years I've done countless things off-duty that make Jersey City a better place - rushing into a burning building a few houses down from me, breaking up fights, and simply being a 24-7 crime deterrent in my neighborhood. Rather than hire 400 new cops why not explore ways to encourage more of our current police force to continue living in the city? Extend the mandatory requirement to live in the city for new hires? Offer a bonus to existing cops? I'd rather have 800 cops living in the city 24-7 than 1000 cops who are only in the city during their shift.

5 & 6. I think that both of these answers are the same. On the whole, I think that the Journal Square redevelopment plan is sound. We need mixed use development interwoven with a livable/walkable/bikeable community. Journal Square used to be the center of the city until the PATH complex was built that destroyed the area, but we know what is possible and there's no reason we shouldn't be moving in that direction.

7. The biggest problem Jersey City faces is low participation from registered voters in elections. Too many people have given up hope that anything will ever change in Jersey City. This is a special election in an off-year, so we're likely to see well less than 10,000 people come out to vote. It could be as low as 3,000-4,000. That's 1-3% of the city's population and 2-5% of the registered voters in the city. The good news is that a small group of motivated people can upset the apple cart. So please, tell your friends and family to vote on November 8th.

Paulushooker -

I loved much about the JSQ redevelopment plan, except that some of the planning seemed to stop at the borders of Journal Square, especially when it came to the sewer system. I'm no civil engineer, but it seems pretty simple to me that if you add thousands of housing units and massive buildings on the top of a hill all of that sewage is going to flow downhill.

I've lived about 4 blocks downhill from Journal Square across from St Joseph's Church for over 30 years now. In the first 25 years I never once had a problem with flooding. In the past five years my basement has flooded three times. While part of that may be bad luck on my part, much of it has to do with the fact that large portions of our 100+ year old sewer system are failing. Many of the people in my neighborhood had similar concerns, especially given our city's history of making lopsided bargains with developers. So, I did what I've always done and raised my voice to shine some light on the matter and will continue to do so until my neighborhood's concerns are addressed. Stay tuned.

asdfdf23 - I've been fighting this fight for 30 years and haven't compromised my principles yet. Ask any member of the Hilltop Neighborhood or any of the hundreds or thousands of people I've helped over the years.

As a show of my intentions, I will only accept a salary of $1/year for my work as a city council member. I will also refuse all of the other perks that our elected officials tend to lavish on themselves. I'm running for office because I want to fix Jersey City, not for personal gain. I wish I could say the same for everyone else in this race.

Last, nothing will change in Jersey City without good people going to the polls and voting. The reason our current mayor and council have so little credibility is because they were elected with the votes of a few percent (low single digits) of the city's total population. I think North Korea gets a higher voter turnout than Jersey City. So please, tell your family and friends to go to the polls on November 8th. If they can't get out of work that day have them fill out an absentee ballot before the October 18th deadline. If someone doesn't vote they lose their right to complain about all of the things wrong with this city.

Thanks Brewster. Every vote counts, so please tell your friends and let them know I'm happy to answer their questions as well.

As for merging county services, I agree that it would be an uphill battle, but it's been done before albeit on a smaller scale with the North Hudson Regional Fire and Rescue.

These kinds of changes could take years, but this is the first time in a very long time I've felt that the tide is shifting against the cabal currently running Jersey City & Hudson County. If Jersey City tips in favor of transparency in the next election or two, we could all be surprised how quickly the intractable problems of today simply go away.

The real question is if we're going to get enough voter turnout to counter the dead bodies the HCDO will probably roll into polling stations on Nov 8th. It's very hard to enact change unless people leave their houses and vote for it.

Rich

Thank you Althea. I can't say how much I appreciate your support and enthusiasm.

Brewster - To answer your question on the JCPA. The agency has about 100 employees. The top 10 salaries are responsible for about 25% of the ~$4+ million budget. Below are my comments on the JCPA vs JCPD:

1. The leadership structure of the JCPA is top heavy and bloated in comparison to it's size and budget.

2. The above numbers do not include the annual sexual harassment settlements ($300,000 this year and counting).

3. The average non-executive salary in the JCPA is about $35,000. Cheaper than a cop? Yes. To your comment about the JCPD being overburdened and unresponsive, I can guarantee you that if you were being robbed the traffic agent down the block wouldn't do anything about it. When I was first hired there were 1276 active cops in Jersey City. Today we're down to a little over 800. With so few police for a city this large it's no surprise response times for all but the most serious crimes are so slow. It's also why so many residents don't even bother reporting crimes, which only makes matters worse because politicians can claim that crime is going down.

Right now we're spending $4 million to collect about $8 million each year from tickets issued. That's a horribly inefficient form of taxation. The purpose of the JCPA shouldn't be to provide revenue for the city. it should be to make sure that parking is fairly enforced. Otherwise, we should hire 500 traffic agents at their $35,000/year salary and make sure they all wrote tickets for an amount $35,001 or greater. Bottom line is that you have an agency that is both bloated and ineffective. To think of it another way, the residents of Jersey City are paying $8 million a year to get minimally effective traffic enforcement. I'd far rather see cops doing that job and doing it effectively while also providing greater coverage to respond to emergencies in the city.

4. Even if you wanted to keep the traffic agents at their current salaries (instead of cops), I see no reason why they shouldn't be rolled up under the leadership of any other city agency simply to eliminate the useless and bloated overhead at the top. I think that the JCPD would be the most logical place to put those folks.

5. You may say that my time as a cop means that I'm biased in favor of the JCPD, but I guarantee that my argument for county-wide consolidation of police services would not be popular in any of the 12 different departments in Hudson County, especially not in the JCPD. Fortunately, I've been around long enough that even when I say something unpopular most people know that I'm saying it because I believe it's right and not because I stand to benefit.

Last, thanks to the sold out crowd of supporters who came to my fundraiser last night at the Powerhouse Lounge.

MDM - You raise a good point.

Whether controlled by the city or contracted out, the point of government is to protect its people and provide basic services. Instead, Jersey City residents have gotten the worst of both worlds where they no longer control an essential portion of the city's infrastructure, but it's still run as inefficiently as when the city ran the show.

Brewster - Thanks for your feedback and questions. I speak with Steve Fulop all of the time - We share a number of the same ideas about how to fix the city government. With respect to my ability to enact change, I've been doing that for 30 years as the President of the Hilltop Neighborhood Organization. It's always been an uphill battle exposing corruption & patronage and doing what's right, but I'm certainly not new to that fight.

To give you some concrete examples, here are measures that I support for eliminating redundant services in Jersey City/Hudson County:

1. Move the Jersey City Incinerator Authority into the Department of Public Works. This will save more than $10 million per year in waste.

2. Eliminate the Jersey City Parking Authority. I don't disagree that a traffic agent is cheaper than a cop, but the issue is that agency is way too top heavy with zero accountability. The top salary for the JCPA is $115,000/year. Add to that all of the benefits, take-home cars, etc., and you have an autonomous agency that runs a deficit while also having no effective parking plan for the city.

3. We need to stop the county government from expanding its footprint within Jersey City. I fought the county from buying the Block Drug property. Now we have a large piece of property the city no longer collects property taxes on. Currently the county wants to buy the Provident Building on Bergen Ave which I am also fighting. If they move through with the purchase, you're not only paying for the county to buy private private property and renovate a building, but you're also losing out on property taxes because they're not giving up any of their other real estate. Nothing has changed to necessitate such an expansion of county government.

4. I think Jersey City should merge its police and fire departments with other municipalities in Hudson County. Right now we have 12 fire chiefs, 12 police chiefs, and 12 departments with massive redundancies between them. I was a cop for 37 years, so I'm confident saying that we could streamline those top heavy leadership structures, put more cops on the street, and end up with more effective services for our residents than what they currently get. Our police and fire departments combined consume more than one third of the city's budget. This proposal would face a lot of resistance from entrenched interests, but these county-wide inefficiencies are a big reason why county-wide property taxes are also so high.

5. Take the water department from United Water. Water bills have skyrocketed since turning that agency over. Long story short, residents are paying much more for the same service they were getting before.

These are all great questions. Some people may not agree with my answers, but if nothing else please trust that I understand the complexity of these issues and I approach all of our city's problems with integrity and an open mind. My answers are below. Please keep your questions coming.

- Raising local property tax to fund municipal government?
I am against raising property taxes. Period. There is far too much waste and corruption in our city and county governments that needs to be wrung out to free up funding for our city government. Jersey City has among the highest property taxes in the nation and less to show for it than municipalities that collect a fraction of our revenue on a per capita basis. Fix the duplication of services, eliminate useless jobs, require competitive bidding for 100% of city projects and publish the results of every bid received by the city. These are the kinds of things that Jersey City needs to focus on ? not raising property taxes on an already burdened population.

Extending existing and new PILOTS/tax abatements to promote inward JC investment?
Tax abatements aren't inherently good or bad. What is far more important is how they are used. In the case of Jersey City, I do think that some tax abatements are necessary to stimulate development and bring business to the city. At the same time, the abatements have to make sense for the people of Jersey City. Everywhere else in the country such abatements are tied to a company's performance (how many local jobs they create, etc). If the company upholds its promise it gets a break on taxes for doing good things for the city. At the same time, if the company fails to perform, their abatement should be withheld or rescinded.

JC policies to limit pensions and healthcare benefits to those that have served the City for a pre-defined period (say 20-25 years)?
I don't think anyone should be eligible for a pension until they have served the city for at least 25 years. I became a Jersey City Police Officer in 1973 with a salary of $11,000 and a promise that I would be able to collect a pension and health benefits after 25 years of service. I continued to serve Jersey City until I hit the mandatory retirement age and was forced to retire (I was fortunate to have a job that I loved so much). Thousands of police, firefighters, and teachers have signed up for different versions of the same bargain. Do I think I earned my pension benefits? Absolutely. Do I think we need to look at reworking the structure of our system so that it's sustainable into the future? Also true. The fact of the matter is that the world has changed a lot since 1973. Health care costs continue to climb at an unsustainable rate, making good faith promises from years past look like short sighted gimmicks in retrospect.

Limits on unused sick days for public workers such as use them or lose them?
The private sector has had a use or lose policy for sick leave for as long as I can remember. Rather than have public workers stockpile sick days for a doomsday scenario I would rather purchase long and short term disability insurance for them. So, if someone needs to go out sick for an extended period because of cancer or a heart attack they won't have to worry about losing their income. At the same time, the city would be relieved a very large liability. It's important to keep in mind that this kind of change will take time as there are various contracts that have been signed in the past and those would need to be honored until they can modified when those contracts come up for renegotiation. Still, there is no time like the present to start making such changes.

- Stance on public employee pensions in general. Can the City still afford them the way they stand?
The biggest threat to public employee pensions is health care. The reason why the average person in either the public or private sector hasn't seen much of a wage increase in the last 10 years is because rising health care costs have consumed most or all of the money that would normally be used for that purpose. I think that public employee pensions are sustainable if we are smart about how we handle the health care issue. There are smart ways to keep health care costs in line, but there is so much distrust between our public employees and city government that the situation has been treated as a zero-sum-gain until now.

- Stance on JC balancing the budget. What measures would you support?
There is a massive duplication of services in Jersey City and Hudson County. For example, when I first moved to the city there was no Parking Authority ? cops were responsible for writing parking tickets. We've basically added an entire department to the city with an entire leadership team and all of the fat salaries, office space, and equipment that come along with those positions. Also, why isn't there more collaboration between police and fire departments in the county? Years ago Hoboken didn't have a police force and was patrolled by Jersey City PD. Now they have their own department with a chief, etc. I could go on and on with examples like these. I know that there are entrenched interests that resist change, but I think that we need to rethink the way that we do business in this city and county and with that will come a balanced budget, reduced property taxes, and improved quality of service.

Will you try to put an end to pay to play?
I've worked to shine a light on corruption in Hudson County for the last 30 years. As President of the Hilltop Neighborhood Association, I fought the Waldo Rail Yards back in the 1980s (if you've never heard of the Waldo Yards it's because we won that fight). More recently, I've rallied my neighbors from Journal Square and the Heights to make sure their voices are heard as the redevelopment of Journal Square begins.

Unlike many of our elected officials, I've never tried to benefit financially from any of my relationships in the city. Since retiring from the police department, I continue to volunteer my time as the liaison between the State Department, US Military Academy at West Point, the Jersey City Police Department, and a number of ethnic communities throughout Jersey City for the Winning the Peace Program. Over the last decades that program has exposed hundreds of West Point cadets to ethnic groups they'll likely face again as officers serving overseas. I do it because I'm happy to serve my city and country, not for money.

Hi everyone, this is Rich Boggiano. I just wanted to thank all of you for your support and I hope to earn your vote on November 8th.

I wanted to offer myself to answer any questions that you might have about my candidacy or where I stand on any of the challenges facing our city today. So, if you have anything you'd like to know please post your questions here and I will respond for everyone's benefit.

Last, I invite you to visit my website at http://jcboggiano.com/

Thanks again everyone!

Rich