ianmac47 wrote:
The problem with blind labor force reductions under Christie is that this includes occupations where cutting the workforce is dangerous, such as police officers in Newark and Camden, or likely to impact longterm investments, such as reducing teachers or university positions. What Christie has failed to do is reduce the bureaucracy of local government; true savings comes when we eliminate the unnecessary municipalities, local school boards, and the town by town services that drive up the cost of doing business. Christie hasn't done this at all. Instead, crime is up in Newark and Camden and other cities with police layoffs, class size is up in public schools all while he is claiming a victory.

murican wrote:
All the usual buzz words.

Same old same old. School reform begins and ends with teachers- make tenure more difficult, merit pay aka reward good teachers, Teach for America model, etc., etc..

Obviously very well funded.

List of Executives
http://b4njkids.org/go.cfm?do=Page.Show&pid=2

Some well known locally.

Would have more respect for them if they recognized that education especially urban education is a complex issue and does not begin and end with teachers.

Comprehensive education reform includes comprehensive urban reform: support for parents and students (psychologically, economically, educationally), community access to good nutrition, providing adequate housing and safety within communities, providing support for related community organizations : libraries, after-school centers, day-care, community recreational centers, training centers and scholarships for youth and adults, stimulation of businesses and economy within communities etc.

I would feel better about these types of organizations if they fought for our politicians's accountability, and our financial system's accountability (Wall Street, banks) all of which seem to conspire to eradicate the middle class and make the working poor poorer.

But it is so much easier to attack a straw man (all those [bad] teachers and the evil unions.

My 2cents

PS.
And they have ads on jclist!

DanL wrote:
@ShelleySkinner

congrats and good luck in your new position

my question is now answered, B4K is coming to JC. My skepticism is about and use of PACs (Political Action Committees) and their undue influence on campaign finance and elections.

however, I'd be happy to to look over the mailer and send you (email) some "skeptic's" questions, maybe on "how to's?" relating to the group's objectives and goals that you could be anticipating anyway.

also, feel free to reach out and call or email me.

pferm201 wrote:
So, coming from the Hudson Reporter, eminent domains "notices" are being sent to home owners in the McGinley Sq area. If you have not seen the article here it is:
http://hudsonreporter.com/view/full_s ... te_lead_story_left_column

So has anyone who lives in the area gotten the notice? I'm hoping this is the start of the plans that are going forth for the area to improve. Granted, eminent domain is not the way to go in my opinion and is a cruel way to get people out of the area, but nonetheless that area can possibly become a great location and finally change.

Edit: "Home Owners"

borisp wrote:
Quote:

Ms_Taggart wrote:

But since that is like 45 million light years away from happening, I have to look at outcome versus theory - until marriage comes off the books all together I 100% support gay marriage.

This is what puzzles me immensely. If you already decided to fight for a change in the current laws, - why not fight for the RIGHT change?

And, as someone who immigrated here from Soviet Russia, - boy, am I puzzled by the attitude "oh, it is light years away from happening". Look, if all people thought this way, - what would we be celebrating tomorrow?

borisp wrote:
Quote:

Ms_Taggart wrote:
Quote:

borisp wrote:
.

Borrowed quote... "
The 14th Amendment says no state shall 'deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.' Which makes the gay marriage issue all the more perplexing. Why should gay people be the only ones to be protected against marriage? That is why I'm announcing that I will be filing a lawsuit against the state of New York to extend this protection to straight people and have all marriage banned."

Since you quoted me, it must mean that you are responding to what I said. However, I can't make a connection.

I am not sure what statement of mine you are responding to, and I am not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing.

Sorry.

borisp wrote:
Quote:

PHResident wrote:
If it was as simple as "Tax Breaks", I'm not sure we'd be quite as interested in getting married in the first place. This goes way beyond taxes.

From the HRC website:

Rights and Protections Denied Same-Sex Partners
Because same-sex couples are denied the right to marry, same-sex couples and their families are denied access to the more than 1,138 federal rights, protections and responsibilities automatically granted to married heterosexual couples. Among those are:...

Oh, COME ON!

"The right to make decisions on a partner's behalf in a medical emergency"? You can take a piece of paper, write "I trust so-and-so to make a decision on my behalf in a medical emergency", notarize your signature for $3 and DONE.

The state merely recognizes marriage as a form of a contract that automatically includes medical trust, financial trust, will, and so on.

But it does not means that you can't make a contract with a partner without marriage that will include ALL those things.

You can't claim that married couple had more rights than un-married people just because the contracts they made have different names.



The ONLY, - ONLY - benefit that Government offers to a married couple that nobody else can get, - is difference in taxes, - and tax-related things, - like disability benefits and so on.

However, when the Government creates a privileged group endowed by special benefits, - one should fight against this very idea, - not for an inclusion in that privileged group.

The government should not be giving special benefits to married people over un-married one. There is no justification in that, period.

jzfan wrote:
I hate to interrupt a nice sycophantic rant about "streamlining" and "saving millions", but not only are these claims speculative at best as it pertains to the JCEDC, worse, they speak to the incompetence of legislator(s) proposing it.

They have proposed an action without even checking with the entity that is supposed to subsume the Jersey City Div. of Cultural Affairs and the JCEDC....namely Hudson County's governing body. That is ridiculous and smacks of headline creation without any actual thought or due dilligence done to assess the feasibility of such an action. Clearly, that makes you wonder of those proposing it gave a second of thought about the impact of such a proposal?

It sure smells like a preemptive strike to: a) appear to be trying to save the City money using buzz words like "streamlining" and "consolidating" without any credible assessment or likelihood of approval by the County; b) attack Steve Lipski and, by association, Mayor Healy and his cohorts.

No meaningful governmental solutions; just politics.

No_More_Socialism wrote:
So i need to vote for one of these bums tomorrow. Are there any of them that are not union thugs, not part of the militant union complex? some are endorsed by AFSCME, others JCEA. I don't know if i can see a single candidate in here that doesn't look beholden to the unions and their demands for ever bigger budgets and spending.

on a sidebar--did anyone review the top goals of the candidates? hardly anyone mentioned increasing education outcomes. just amazing. there were goals for "differentiated curriculum," "more administrative presence in the hallways," "better race relations," "applying green concepts to the schools" but scant attention paid to what schools are supposed to do. do these people think schools are some day care center or some place to experiment with their new pet social experiments. what a joke. the schools are in such disrepair that the leadership must be uprooted to change the trajectory. all of them are more concerned with what's good for the unions instead of what's good for the kids. i doubt that will ever happen so what i'll do is move out to the suburbs once i have kids that are anywhere near school-age so their educational outcomes aren't restrained by teacher union centered education model of jersey city.

ianmac47 wrote:
Quote:

Ms_Taggart wrote:
Quote:

ianmac47 wrote:
Yeah, its pretty pathetic that the highest executive position in the Jersey City schools only earns $200,000. But it makes a lot of sense since any qualified applicant could make twice that in the private sector.

Meanwhile, Epps was probably speaking to some statistical data. Its totally possible that the girls in the school system are statistically in trouble more often or cause greater damage. Its also possible that a select number of specific girls are responsible for the vast majority of the problems and thus are the "bad girls." It is hard to assess without the available data.

Correction: $268,000 + pension + car and driver.

Yes people in the private sector can make more, but those are for profit companies that are not funded with tax dollars. The president only makes $400,000 a year and he manages billions and billions in budget.

Also, CEOs never manage failing companies for 10 years - board of directors (and shareholders) don't let them get away with blaming everyone else for their problems. It's not my fault, I just have bad employees. It's not my fault, I just have bad customers. Give me a break.

His comments were sexist and in my opinion, enough to get him removed from office.

As long as you have a disparity in pay, you have a disparity in the quality of people managing your schools, and for that matter, teaching in your schools.

If you are going to complain about his performance, you need to recognize that you get what you pay for.

ianmac47 wrote:
Yeah, its pretty pathetic that the highest executive position in the Jersey City schools only earns $200,000. But it makes a lot of sense since any qualified applicant could make twice that in the private sector.

Meanwhile, Epps was probably speaking to some statistical data. Its totally possible that the girls in the school system are statistically in trouble more often or cause greater damage. Its also possible that a select number of specific girls are responsible for the vast majority of the problems and thus are the "bad girls." It is hard to assess without the available data.

Vigilante wrote:
I know the Parking Director of a small to medium sized resort city. His department has an operating budget of about $350,000 yearly and they generate $20,000,000 in revenue by ticketing and towing. Every time you see an illegally parked car or a person running a Stop-sign or speeding you're seeing city revenue slip through our fingers.
Such a shame.

JPhurst wrote:
One other thing I will note to bring this home to Jersey City. We can see this taking place in the debate over the merger of the City's Department of Public Works (governed by the civil service system), and the Jersey City Incinerator Authority (no such regulations and widely seen as a patronage pit).

I'll let people decide which model they think is better.

snowflake20 wrote:
So if Torico's doesn't open soon, does that mean crime in JC stops?

JCbiscuit wrote:
but here's the thing: the money budgeted to HUD this year has to be spent on HUD projects. it's not like that grant could've gone to pothole repair.

kudos to Jersey City for getting a piece of the pie. any damn pie.

the bigger argument is with the federal government, which allotted this cash in the first place.

MDM wrote:

Healy and company are going to turn this city into Detroit on the Hudson via their fiscal mismanagement.

J_Downtown wrote:

Seems much more like a political move as opposed to trying to have a discussion with the Mayor or getting some clarification for the residents.

JSleeze wrote:
Quote:

DanL wrote:
Vidya Gangadin has also filed her candidacy for the board and I hope that she will receive serious consideration by voters. Vidya is a parent leader at Academy I, a parent of four current public school children and employed as a financial analyst in the private sector.

We have the opportunity to elect (relect) great board members.

Vote!

This woman registered to vote nine days ago. How long has she lived in Jersey City? I should vote for her when she can't even be bothered to vote herself?