fat-ass-bike wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

fat-ass-bike wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Many municipal employees do not live in JC or even in Hudson County, they use cars. If we do not provide parking, then they will be taking parking from residents who actually live in JC. It is in their contract for the city to provide parking. The mayor and city council have parking provided for them in the rear of city hall. It if hypocritical to say employees should not have parking when it is provided for elected officials.

Hogwash, they can pay for parking like all the other employees in Hudson County / JC that work here. Comparing the Mayor and a city employee is ridiculous. Parking should only be provided to city owned vehicles and more specifically, those that are not used for commuter use by staff and stored overnight.

Any other city parking should be made available to public for a fee which in turn benefits every small business or residents and their guests.

So you a making a determination that an elected official, has more value than a regular employee of municipal government. This special privilege is also given to certain non-elected employees, such as the Business Administrator, a non-JC resident plus others. They are provided parking in the rear of city hall. You cannot say someone has more value than someone else. It is in their contracts at the moment, any judge would validate that agreement.

So you think the janitor or a pen pusher should have a special car park spot and is no different to the Mayor ?

Obviously you have no idea about the safety of public elected officials.

Yvonne wrote:
Quote:

fat-ass-bike wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Many municipal employees do not live in JC or even in Hudson County, they use cars. If we do not provide parking, then they will be taking parking from residents who actually live in JC. It is in their contract for the city to provide parking. The mayor and city council have parking provided for them in the rear of city hall. It if hypocritical to say employees should not have parking when it is provided for elected officials.

Hogwash, they can pay for parking like all the other employees in Hudson County / JC that work here. Comparing the Mayor and a city employee is ridiculous. Parking should only be provided to city owned vehicles and more specifically, those that are not used for commuter use by staff and stored overnight.

Any other city parking should be made available to public for a fee which in turn benefits every small business or residents and their guests.

So you a making a determination that an elected official, has more value than a regular employee of municipal government. This special privilege is also given to certain non-elected employees, such as the Business Administrator, a non-JC resident plus others. They are provided parking in the rear of city hall. You cannot say someone has more value than someone else. It is in their contracts at the moment, any judge would validate that agreement.

fat-ass-bike wrote:
Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Many municipal employees do not live in JC or even in Hudson County, they use cars. If we do not provide parking, then they will be taking parking from residents who actually live in JC. It is in their contract for the city to provide parking. The mayor and city council have parking provided for them in the rear of city hall. It if hypocritical to say employees should not have parking when it is provided for elected officials.

Hogwash, they can pay for parking like all the other employees in Hudson County / JC that work here. Comparing the Mayor and a city employee is ridiculous. Parking should only be provided to city owned vehicles and more specifically, those that are not used for commuter use by staff and stored overnight.

Any other city parking should be made available to public for a fee which in turn benefits every small business or residents and their guests.

Yvonne wrote:
Many municipal employees do not live in JC or even in Hudson County, they use cars. If we do not provide parking, then they will be taking parking from residents who actually live in JC. It is in their contract for the city to provide parking. The mayor and city council have parking provided for them in the rear of city hall. It if hypocritical to say employees should not have parking when it is provided for elected officials.

Yvonne wrote:
Many municipal employees do not live in JC or even in Hudson County, they use cars. If we do not provide parking, then they will be taking parking from residents who actually live in JC. It is in their contract for the city to provide parking. The mayor and city council have parking provided for them in the rear of city hall. It if hypocritical to say employees should not have parking when it is provided for elected officials.

user1111 wrote:
Quote:

user1111 wrote:
Michaelangelo Conte | The Jersey Journal

At tonight's regular meeting of the Jersey City City Council, an ordinance will be introduced that would start the process of eliminating a parking lot used by city employees at the city justice complex and open the way for its development.

The parking lot is at 362 Summit Ave. and the Jersey City Justice Complex is located at 365 Summit Ave. There was heated debate on the ordinance at last night's council caucus meeting, with Councilman Michael Yun saying the parking lot should remain and it should available to residents for overnight parking.

Council Richard Boggiano said the city has closed several parking lots recently, resulting in the city having to pay for parking for employees. He said he does not want those costs to continue increasing.

Councilman Frank Gajewski said the city is not obliged to provide parking for city employees.

More

Hey Frank! get rid of the parking @ 280 Grove Street, and you can take the lightrail to work like most of us here in Ward A.

tommyc_37 wrote:
An example of how backwards Jersey City can be sometimes:

"Council Richard Boggiano said the city has closed several parking lots recently, resulting in the city having to pay for parking for employees. He said he does not want those costs to continue increasing."

1. Jersey City should be encouraging its city employees to use public transit.

2. Jersey City, which is broke, should NOT be PAYING for city employees car parking! WTF.

user1111 wrote:
Michaelangelo Conte | The Jersey Journal

At tonight's regular meeting of the Jersey City City Council, an ordinance will be introduced that would start the process of eliminating a parking lot used by city employees at the city justice complex and open the way for its development.

The parking lot is at 362 Summit Ave. and the Jersey City Justice Complex is located at 365 Summit Ave. There was heated debate on the ordinance at last night's council caucus meeting, with Councilman Michael Yun saying the parking lot should remain and it should available to residents for overnight parking.

Council Richard Boggiano said the city has closed several parking lots recently, resulting in the city having to pay for parking for employees. He said he does not want those costs to continue increasing.

Councilman Frank Gajewski said the city is not obliged to provide parking for city employees.

More