Will You be Affected by the Change of Address Ordinance?

[Sonia]

An ordinance, proposed by the Lefrak Organization, is scheduled to be introduced by Councilman Fulop at the next City Council meeting. The new ordinance will change the name of River Drive South to River Drive. Consequently, people residing in the following buildings will experience a change of address:


Pacific
John Adams
James Monroe
George Washington

The association has requested an extension of the statutory time limitation to allow residents, and small businesses, in the affected area, ample time to change the address on their documents and stationary. We are requesting an additional six month to the alloted statutory one year, from the City Council.

In addition, we will be asking for an ordinance that will "legalize" parking on both sides of Washington Boulevard, between Newport Parkway and 16th Street. Although residents have routinely parked in that location, it has been brought to our attention that residents' cars may be towed away, and we need an ordinance to legalize parking in this area.

As always, your comments and suggestions will be much appreciated.

[Golfie]

Does this mean that we have to start changing our address on our bills etc. now ?

[Jake2]

I think you only need to change your address if you live in one of the four listed buildings. TOA tenants won't have to make a change.

Parking worries me the most. As it is, we don't have a place to park free overnight. When and if I find a space, I sometimes park on Washngton Boulevard. I don't want to fear the city will tow my car, or give me a ticket.

[Golfie]

Yes, I live in John Adams

[Sonia]

I've just been informed by Councilman Fulop that there is no statutory time frame, which would allow residents a reasonable period of time in which to change their address on their documents. Apparently, the law would go into effect 20 days after the second reading. :Tara.sad6

Steve also indicated that the change is not considered "meaningful" by the post office, and residents will still receive their mail after the 20 days elapse. However, it occurs to us that many residents, and especially small business owners, would prefer to have the correct address reflected on their stationery and mail.

Furthermore, we believe a second ordinance should be drafted that would legalize parking on Washington Boulevard, at least overnight, and as mentioned in my previous post -- in the area between Newport Parkway (near Staples) and 16th Street, in order to eliminate resident parking summons, and tow-aways.

Steve has agreed to hold-off introducing the change of address ordinance for now. I will be contacting the Traffic Engineer to learn how long it will take to draft the parking ordinance, and will keep you guys posted.

In the meantime, how long do you think is an appropriate time frame for Steve to delay introducing the change of address ordinance? :Tara.feed

[Lisa]

The Councilman must be mistaken, twenty days is completely unreasonable. :mad: I live at the James Monroe, and want as much time as possible to make the necessary changes. It occurs to me that the post office would give us at least a year before becoming reckless with our mail, but two years would be better.

[Cleo]

Sonia,

Just wondering, who told you about the annual "statutory time limitation?" and when?

[Steven M. Fulop]

I think we all agree the 20 days that is given is not very reasonable at all. This information came to light as I spoke with traffic and engineering to confirm the info that Sonia had conveyed.

Nevertheless, it will be a non issue for us. I will just wait on introducing the ordinance till the appropriate time has lapsed that we all agree upon here. It would be most helpful if you let me know what time frame you feel is best and I will work from there.

Steven Fulop

[fazzies]

Why is Lefrak proposing the change? Was there an earlier post regarding this topic?

[Stinky]

I'm not affected by this but I'm curious.

- Why does Lefrak want to do this?
- Why put existing tenants/owners/business users through the pain?
- Who is gonna benefit (apart from check/stationary printers)?

- Don't you have to change your driving license and registration info within 30 days by law?
- Would a change of street name mean you have to update DL/Reg within 30 days as well?
- 30 days from when?

Seems like a small to moderate hassle for little gain.

[Jeremyk]

Stinky,

Those of us who park our cars along Washington Boulevard are also affected by this. I think Sonia is looking for an ordinance that would make overnight parking legal in the area around Staples. It sounds like it's a good idea, as some of us have been ticketed for parking on that street. Does Councilman Fulop have a problem with this?

Sonia wrote:
Furthermore, we believe a second ordinance should be drafted that would legalize parking on Washington Boulevard, at least overnight, and as mentioned in my previous post -- in the area between Newport Parkway (near Staples) and 16th Street, in order to eliminate resident parking summons, and tow-aways.

[Steven M. Fulop]

Jeremy-

I think the parking is a good idea. Per your request, I already sent an e-mail to Traffic and Engineering this morning. I have put it in the line of current requests of traffic/engineering changes that have been requested for Ward E. As I do with all these requests, I will stay on top of it but it is difficult to guage the time frame that it gets tackled in government.

Steve

[Steven M. Fulop]

Jeremy-
Per discussion with Traffic/Engineering. Overnight parking (6PM -7Am) and weekend parking is currently legal on both sides of Washington (from Gangemi to Marin). So, the area you mentioned is already covered to accomodate parking for residents during off-peak traffic hours on Washington.

Hope that is helpful
Steve

[Sonia]

Actually, this is a perfect example of the difficulties I'm experiencing in working with Steven. As Steve knows, I left him a phone message this morning, complaining about his failure to provide the Newport community with adequate service. According to Steve, his plate is full, and maybe that's why he is often unresponsive, fails to return phone calls, schedules appointments and doesn't call to cancel, can only conduct business walking from his office to the train station (at which point your time is up), and time after time doesn't follow thru.

Once again Steve, you got it wrong! You have the wrong location. As repeated on this thread several times, and as I told you yesterday (as you were walking to catch the train, and amid the very loud noise in the background) the location is between Newport Parkway (near Staples) and 16th Street (near the A & P). Let me remind you of your response, which was to tell me to go stand on line or "queue", and that you don't have time to visit this bulletin board, although it looks like you made some time this morning.

As I stated in my phone message this morning, your performance with regard to this matter is lacking. The Newport community deserves better!

I have a call into the traffic Engineer's office, and will advise them of the correct location. In fact, at this point, it may be best for NWA to contact the Traffic Engineer, as we're not interested in standing on your line.

More on this topic, later.

[Stinky]

Those of us who park our cars along Washington Boulevard are also affected by this.I understand that and I think it's a good idea to free up "unused" overnight space for parking.

My point was that I don't understand the need to rename River Drive South and it'd be nice to know the reason for putting people though the hassle.

[Stinky]

Sonia, Steven said Washinton from Gangemi to Marin. That's 6th to 18th if I'm not mistaken and thus would include Staples to A+P.

[Sonia]

Here's a brief history. The change of address ordinance is one of four ordinances proposed by the Lefrak Organization back around October of 2005. However, because of a dispute between the City Council and the Lefrak Organization at that time, the four ordinances were removed from the council's agenda. The dispute revolved around a charitable contribution to the JC museum. The city claimed Lefrak had pledged to contribute a million dollars to the museum, but Lefrak disagreed. In any event, the matter was settled, we understand for $250,000, and a $100,000. check was delivered to the city council caucus last Monday, concurrently, freeing the four ordinances for introduction at a subsequent city council meeting.

The four ordinances accomplish two things:

1. Two of the ordinances will result in permitting meter parking on Washington Boulevard, but only from the area of the boulevard where Chase Manhattan is located to around the area where Azucar is situated. The Lefrak organization proposed these ordinances in order to help the businesses who are their tenants. However, there is an advantage to Newport residents as well in the expectation of creating approximately 50 parking spaces, available for free overnight parking. Stinky, currently there is no parking allowed on this stretch, or there would be no need for the ordinance, which does away with no parking, anytime signs.

NWA would like to see the area extended up Washington Boulevard to include the area starting at Newport Parkway through 16th Street, or around where the A&P is located, but Lefrak management has informed us that there is no incentive for them to include this additional space. Residents have reported receiving tickets for parking in this area. It's our belief that preventing the issuance of parking tickets, and tow-aways for residents should be enough incentive. For this reason, I contacted Councilman Fulop, to see if we could get an additional ordinance. Also, since speaking with Steve, it has occurred to us that it may be possible to add the additional proposed area to Lefrak's ordinance, which Steve is planning to introduce at the next council meeting.

2. The second set of ordinances are designed to change the street name from River Drive South to River Drive. The name change starts at the ring road surrounding Town Square, and goes straight up by Presidential Plaza, joining the road that will stretch in front of the Shore Club, and into the NE Quadrant. Since October, we've been in discussion about this ordinance. I was under the impression that there exists a statute allowing at least a year for the address change, and repeatedly asked Steve to confirm this. Yesterday, he informed me that no such statute exists, and residents would have 20 days before the ordinance would go into effect. Although he has offered to refrain from introducing the ordinance, supposedly to give residents time to put their affairs in order. The problem is, generally, you can't put in for a change of address until after the legal change of address has taken effect. In other words, the ordinance would probably have to be approved first.

The issues are further complicated by having to deal with a councilman, who apparently doesn't have the time or inclination to fully consider the different aspects of a problem. At the end of the day, the proposed solution, if there is one, does not suffice.

[Jake2]

Steve's address doesn't make sense. Marin Boulevard is on the west side of the mall, and does not intersect with Washington Boulevard, which is on the east side. I'm not sure where gangemi drive is located, but I thought it was on 6th street, near Pep boys, located between Marin and Washington.

[fazzies]

Sonia,

I still dont see the purpose for the second set of ordinance. Why not just extend the River Drive South street name to Shore Club? This is because the almighty Lefrak proposed it. Does this make any sense to anybody?

[Jake2]

Here we go! Thomas Gangemi Drive is on 6th Street. Fulop has the wrong location. For best view, click the Newport Center Mall area on the map twice.

Thomas Gangemi Drive (http://www.mapquest.com/maps/map.adp?formtype=address&addtohistory=&address=&city=Jersey%20City&state=NJ&zipcode=07310&country=US&geodiff=1)

[Stinky]

Go north on Washington from 6th (Gangemi). Washington turns west after Target and hits Marin. Does Washington become 18th before intersecting Marin or does Washington go as far as Marin and 18th starts after the intersection?

Mapquest and Streets+Trips 2006 call the west-bound section 18th but my 2002 Delorme Street Atlas software says it's Washington all the way to Marin and that 18th Street starts on the west side of Marin.

So, does Washington go from Gangemi to Marin or Gangemi to 18th? More importantly, what do the parking enforcement people think?

[Stinky]

Sonia, thanks for the reply. I certainly understand and agree with opening Washington to evening/night parking from Newport Parkway north.

The idea of putting meters on Washington between 6th/Gangemi and Pavonia does not sound good for the following reason:

In the summer through the fall the company that maintains the greenery (Roseland or somesuch name) parks their truck in the northbound, left hand lane of Washington (approximately opposite Azucar) while maintaining the central divide and verge. This is necessary because the truck carries the water supply for hydrating the verges and plants in the central divide. The forces Washington northbound down to two lanes, a tolerable situation apart from rush hours.

Add in meters and another travel lane is no longer available so Washington northbound would become a single travel lane for a couple of days every week. I doubt that a single lane will prove adequate and the mainenance company needs to have their truck by the divide so that they can water the plants.

Maybe meters would work on the southbound side of Washington but it'll be a pain on the northbound side unless the mainenance company can find another way of watering the plants or do it out of hours.

If meters are to be installed, this should be on an experimental basis for, say, six months after which the ordinance should be made permanent (or abandoned) by the City Council.

On the renaming of the street:
- Why can't it stay River Drive South?
- Why put people through the pain?
- How long would people have to change State and Federal documents like Drivers licenses and Pilot Certificates? 20 days is inadequate.

[Jeremyk]

Stinky,

It's obvious, Steve Fulop reported the wrong address to Traffic/Engineering. Sonia listed the correct address on this site several times, and she told him the information when they spoke. There's a problem with either insufficient communication, or the Councilman is just not on the ball, and making mistakes.

[stellartois]

:mad: :eek: :(

seriously.. is this really going to happen? i would like to keep river drive south! i guess we should be expecting a letter/flyer of some sort letting all the residents aware of this?? bc i don't think that many people know about this website...

[Cleo]

Actually, this is a perfect example of the difficulties I'm experiencing in working with Steven. As Steve knows, I left him a phone message this morning, complaining about his failure to provide the Newport community with adequate service. According to Steve, his plate is full, and maybe that's why he is often unresponsive, fails to return phone calls, schedules appointments and doesn't call to cancel, can only conduct business walking from his office to the train station (at which point your time is up), and time after time doesn't follow thru.

Once again Steve, you got it wrong! You have the wrong location. As repeated on this thread several times, and as I told you yesterday (as you were walking to catch the train, and amid the very loud noise in the background) the location is between Newport Parkway (near Staples) and 16th Street (near the A & P). Let me remind you of your response, which was to tell me to go stand on line or "queue", and that you don't have time to visit this bulletin board, although it looks like you made some time this morning.

As I stated in my phone message this morning, your performance with regard to this matter is lacking. The Newport community deserves better!

I have a call into the traffic Engineer's office, and will advise them of the correct location. In fact, at this point, it may be best for NWA to contact the Traffic Engineer, as we're not interested in standing on your line.

More on this topic, later.

Sonia,
Your experience is no surprise! Of course, Fulop screwed up, most of his energy is focused on pursuing publicity, and promoting his political agenda to get elected Mayor. Glad to see we don't need statistics to confirm his lousy performance. He likes to demand other people's resignation, I think we should demand his.

[Lenin]

The name change is *****ic...why cause trouble when none needs to be caused?

Mr. Fulop...FOCUS! Your job is more important than this!

[fazzies]

We should station 4 volunteers at each building to sign a petition for the street name to stay River Drive South.

[Pacific Blues]

Please leave the name alone. This is as useful as freedom fries. :mad:

[Sonia]

Just to keep you posted, I spoke with Traffic/Engineering, and they will need a day or two to check the parking status for the area north of Newport Parkway. We should definitely have an answer no later than Friday, or possibly tomorrow. I'll get back to you as soon as I have news.

The association is prepared to oppose, and/or appeal, any ordinance that is detrimental to the interests of the Newport community.

[Linkin]

I agree with earlier posts about keeping the name the same. Since the numbers are already ordered ascending (starting from the ring area), why not just continue it toward Shore club and beyond?

The petition idea sounds good. :Tara.hail

[Lisa]

Does anyone know how much money Lefrak has contributed to Fulop's campaign fund? It's possible that Fulop was only concerned with pushing through these ordinances for the Lefrak organization, and does not give a damn about their effect on us. The entire transaction stinks of corruption:


...a $100,000. check was delivered to the city council caucus last Monday, concurrently, freeing the four ordinances for introduction at a subsequent city council meeting.

[NOmoreLIES]

Why doesn't someone just ask the postmaster of jersey ciy whether this matters? I suspect the postman will not differentiate between mail sent to "River Drive South" or mail sent to "River Drive."

[Stinky]

Why doesn't someone just ask the postmaster of jersey ciy whether this matters? I suspect the postman will not differentiate between mail sent to "River Drive South" or mail sent to "River Drive."But will the State and Federal agencies care?
- If they do then Drivers Licence and Registration will have to change.
- If those change then car insurance will.
- If the car insurance does then perhaps the house insurance does.
- If the house insurance does then the mortgage does.
- If the mortgage does then associated bank account does.
- If the bank account does the credit card does..........

[things]

I have lived here for 6+ years and some of my mail (due to my own error) has a "River Dr" address, and others a "River Drive S" address

Never had problems receiving mail with either names.

Just an fyi...

[msion1]

Seems like much ado about nothing to me. Clearly, the reason why this is an issue has totally escaped me. Just extend the road to the Shore Club, keep the name and zip code the same, and there's no drama.

[Sonia]

I just heard back from Traffic/Engineering regarding the parking issue, as follows:

1. Legally, overnight parking is already permitted from 6th Street (Thomas Gangemi Drive) to 18th Street, but people have received tickets because of a lack of signs. Although there are signs for "No Stopping, No Standing", some of you may have noticed there are no parking signs, which is probably the reason for the confusion with the police, and the handing out of tickets. The head of Traffic/Engineering, Joe DeSouza, has assured me they will have appropriate signs put in place, promptly.

2. In light of the above, the only remaining purpose of the Lefrak's parking ordinance, has to do with creating "metered" parking in the designated area for the restaurants' customers. Our concern is that the metered parking not infringe on resident parking; and in this regard, we have asked Mr. DeSouza several questions, which he has agreed to respond to by Monday. Stinky has also raised some relevant questions on this thread, and we will follow-up with him to address those as well.

Finally, for your information, Mr. DeSouza has clarified that Marin Boulevard and Washington are joined at the intersection following 18th Street, going north.

[PHXguy]

Finally, for your information, Mr. DeSouza has clarified that Marin Boulevard and Washington are joined at the intersection following 18th Street, going north.

Does it mean that Mr. Fulop was correct? :confused:

[Sonia]

PHXGuy:

Interesting question, since it appears Mr. Fulop has made several mistakes here. Just on the parking issue, I think I was misled into believing the community would benefit from the ordinance by the creation of more parking spaces. It now appears the community had these spaces all along, and at this time, the ordinance fails to provide residents with any additional advantage. We are still waiting to learn if there will be a disadvantage.

There is also the problem with the parking signs. Steve should have instantly picked up on this situation, and insisted the signs be added immediately. If we hadn't noticed, undoubtedly, more residents would be suffering the aggravation of being ticketed, and having to fight the ticket in court, or pay.
I think these things are much more important than the logistics of where the intersection is located (16th Street or 18th Street). What would you be thinking when you're standing in line waiting for a traffic court judge to dismiss your ticket?

[Jeremyk]

Sonia,

I would be very angry! It looks to me like he lied to you about the ordinance. If the community has nothing to gain here, then he's doing all this for Lefrak, who else?

I guess this means we're not getting the extra 50 parking spaces.

[Jake2]

Hello Jeremy,

There are no, "extra 50 parking spaces". Very tricky of Fulop, he just told Sonia that to get her to accept the "Lefrak" ordinance. I can see why she's pissed. He was DISHONEST! :mad:

The good news is we will now have signs on Washington Boulevard so our cars won't be ticket'd. :) The bad news is we still need more parking. :(

[Lisa]

Steve Fulop should come on this bulletin board and explain to all of us how these ordinances will benefit the Newport community. We are entitled to know if Mr. Fulop is doing this for the residents of Newport or the developers.

At this point, it looks like the neighborhood association was not provided with enough information regarding the benefits of the ordinances. Mr. Fulop must come forward, and explain how the ordinances will benefit us, in order for our community to make an informed determination on whether we want them introduced.

[Floridian]

You know, I pointed out Mr. Fulop's bad decisions during the forced garage parking for people living in highrises. Almost everyone took his side. It's amazing to see how the opinions change when it effects them.

I told you so.

[renuka]

What're you talkin' about? Everyone opposed it and this is why Sonia got Fulop to NOT include Newport in THAT legislation!
You know, I pointed out Mr. Fulop's bad decisions during the forced garage parking for people living in highrises. Almost everyone took his side. It's amazing to see how the opinions change when it effects them.

I told you so.

[Sonia]

Steve Fulop should come on this bulletin board and explain to all of us how these ordinances will benefit the Newport community. We are entitled to know if Mr. Fulop is doing this for the residents of Newport or the developers.

At this point, it looks like the neighborhood association was not provided with enough information regarding the benefits of the ordinances. Mr. Fulop must come forward, and explain how the ordinances will benefit us, in order for our community to make an informed determination on whether we want them introduced.

I agree with you Lisa, Steve has an obligation to give us this information. We are the people he is suppose to be serving.

When speaking with him, I often felt I wasn't heard, or what I said was unimportant, and yes, he does make bad decisions, but what's worse, if you question his decision, then in his mind, you're a Fulop basher, not worthy of his attention, and one of those people on NWA's Bulletin Board that don't like him (or as the JC Listers put it -- likes to *****). Who needs to deal with this? :mad:

[Floridian]

I went to the member list and looked up Steve and he logged in today, but still no response. When he comes up with this stuff, he must think we aren't very bright and this stuff will get right past us. It almost makes me want to register to vote!!!!

[Sonia]

Spoke to the Supervisor of Traffic Investigation today, she is the person who drafted the four ordinances.

On the plus side, she adviced me, the two ordinances, relating to "metered" parking, would do away with currently existing "no stopping or standing signs" during the days, from Monday thru Fridays, from 7 AM to 6 PM. Instead, metered parking would be permissable to everyone on these dates until 9 PM, by feeding a meter every two hours.

The disadvantage to residents is that we would relinguish currently available free parking on these days (Monday thru Friday), from 6 PM to 9 PM. In addition, we would give up free parking on Saturdays, from 7 AM to 6 PM, in exchange for metered parking, which has to be fed every two hours.

The current scenario will continue for Saturday evening hours, Sundays and holidays.

That's the deal folks, let me know what you think. :Tara.feed

I'll be picking up copies of the ordinances to confirm details on days and time, tomorrow.

[Sonia]

I understand from speaking with the city clerk's office this morning that the address change ordinance has been withdrawn, and will not be introduced tomorrow at the City Council meeting, so it's obvious our objections were noted. The metered parking ordinance is still on the agenda. We will probably make an appearance at tomorrow's meeting to see what actually happens.

[Sonia]

I just got back from City Hall after obtaining my second set of the ordinances (Steve has the first set). There appears to be some changes, so I am re-posting my previous message with regard to the metered parking, as follows:

The meter ordinance will effect both sides of Washington Boulevard between Thomas Gangemi Drive and 14th Street. Metered parking is, "lawful for two hours upon the deposit of twenty-five ($0.25) per twenty (20) minutes in the meter..." for the hours specified. In other words, meter parking for two hours will cost $1.50. It is non-permit parking, which means it is available to people from outside Jersey City.

On the plus side, the two ordinances, relating to "metered" parking, would do away with currently existing "no stopping or standing signs" during the days, from Monday thru Fridays, from 10 AM to 4 PM, and 6PM to 10PM. Instead, metered parking would be permissable to everyone on these dates between the hours of 10 AM and 4 PM, and 6 PM and 10 PM, by feeding a meter every two hours.

The disadvantage to residents is that we would relinguish currently available free parking on these days (Monday thru Friday), from 6 PM to 10 PM. In addition, we would give up free parking on Saturdays, from 10 AM to 10 PM, in exchange for metered parking, which has to be fed every two hours.There will still be NO STANDING from 7AM to 10AM and 4PM to 6PM.

The current scenario will continue for Saturday night-time hours, Sundays and holidays.

From the face of the document, it appears the Councilman is arguing that the benefit to the community is increased parking spaces during the day, and parking meters on both sides of Washington Boulevard between Thomas Gangemi Drive and 14th Street.

[Lenin]

Why not just allow parking on both sides of Washington at all times except twice a week for towable 2 hour periods for street cleaning (and getting rid of abandoned vehicles?)
Think of all the money saved by not installing hundreds of meters.

I guess that would cut into Kinney's (and by extension, Lefrak's) bottom lines.

[privatepilot]

Speaking as a condo owner, I personally would like it to be changed to "River Drive" - many famous waterfront streets are named "River Drive" or "River Street" and even if its a matter of preception, its more of a positive than a negative. Also, I dont think any mail will get lost if you don't put that "S" in "River Dr". I get mails which just say "River Dr." and to the best of my knowledge, I haven't lost anything.

[Sonia]

A brief comment on the incident at city hall. The NWA has ordered the transcript of the city council meeting, which according to the city clerk takes about two weeks to transcribe. We will decide our course of action after we've had a chance to review the transcript with our attorneys.

Until then, we can achieve the greatest efficiency by focusing on resolving issues surrounding the ordinances. Specifically, how to best revise them to improve the circumstances in our neighborhood, while at the same time maximizing benefit to Newport residents. The intent, behind the ordinances, at least from the city's perspective, is to generate income for the city. The parking schedule is structured to maximize the creation of revenues (thru the meters) by, among other things, taking free parking spaces from residents. Any perceived advantages, as discussed on this board, essentially would be just as possible to achieve with less restrictions on us. What is needed here is compromise and revision, that is if it turns out that the city has complied with all the required governmental regulations and legalities that would allow them to place meters on the boulevard.

Letters are going out to the state of New Jersey, the governor's office and NJDOT, the Mayor's office, and the president of the city council to ascertain whether the city has met all its legal requirements, before passing this legislation. In addition, We are also forming a group of residents, from those of us who will be affected by this legislation, to help with the revision process. We Need Your Help. Please let us know your availability by PM or emailing me. If we do nothing, the ordinances will pass in approximately two weeks.

We understand Mr. Fulop may attempt to create sympathy for his ordinances on this board by having his supporters register, and post messages in favor of the ordinances. Effective immediately, and starting as of March 23, 2006, with regard to any new registrant, or anyone posting a message regarding these ordinances, you must identify the Newport building in which you reside. We reserve the right to delete any post where we believe the poster is not a Newport resident. Your post, however, will be saved, and you may appeal our decision by contacting us and demonstrating that you are indeed a Newport resident, at which time we will return your post to the thread.

[Linkin]

>The parking schedule is structured to maximize the creation of revenues
>(thru the meters) by, among other things, taking free parking spaces from
>residents. Any perceived advantages, as discussed on this board, essentially
> would be just as possible to achieve with less restrictions on us. What is
>needed here is compromise and revision, that is if it turns out that the city
>has complied with all the required governmental regulations and legalities
>that would allow them to place meters on the boulevard.

How about placing metered parking on a portion of the area in question? So instead of either extremes, arrive at some compromise where there are parking meters and there are free spots. E.g. metered parking on one side of washington, and un-metered on the other side?

>We understand Mr. Fulop may attempt to create sympathy for his ordinances
>on this board by having his supporters register, and post messages in favor
>of the ordinances. Effective immediately, and starting as of March 23, 2006,
>with regard to any new registrant, or anyone posting a message regarding
>these ordinances, you must identify the Newport building in which you reside.
>We reserve the right to delete any post where we believe the poster is not a
>Newport resident. Your post, however, will be saved, and
>you may appeal our decision by contacting us and demonstrating that you
>are indeed a Newport resident, at which time we will return your post to the
>thread.[/QUOTE]


Whoa, not sure where this is coming from? I just reviewed some of the earlier posts, and don't see why you are trying to draw a correlation between people's views on the ordinance versus there affiliation with either NWA or Fulop. When the NWA says it takes a certain position, is that just based on majority posts on this forum? I own/live in James Monroe (two years), and I see advantages to the ordinance, but am also willing to compromise...I don't see how my stance should suddenly make me a Fulop-supporter or against the NWA. I support the NWA, but now I'm also curious as to whether I actually have any representation.

[Floridian]

Sonia,

Do you find it hypocritical that under the politics page, you start a tread about free speech online and on this thread, you want to delete posting because they don't list a building? Come on. Anyone can say they live in a building and post. I think we can figure out what posts are legit.

Also, is there a way to start a petition for a recall election for Fulop? Let's kick him out.

[Sonia]

Linkin,

In response to your post:


How about placing metered parking on a portion of the area in question? So instead of either extremes, arrive at some compromise where there are parking meters and there are free spots. E.g. metered parking on one side of washington, and un-metered on the other side?

We understand Mr. Fulop may attempt to create sympathy for his ordinances
>on this board by having his supporters register, and post messages in favor
>of the ordinances. Effective immediately, and starting as of March 23, 2006,
>with regard to any new registrant, or anyone posting a message regarding
>these ordinances, you must identify the Newport building in which you reside.
>We reserve the right to delete any post where we believe the poster is not a
>Newport resident. Your post, however, will be saved, and
>you may appeal our decision by contacting us and demonstrating that you
>are indeed a Newport resident, at which time we will return your post to the
>thread.

Whoa, not sure where this is coming from? I just reviewed some of the earlier posts, and don't see why you are trying to draw a correlation between people's views on the ordinance versus there affiliation with either NWA or Fulop. When the NWA says it takes a certain position, is that just based on majority posts on this forum? I own/live in James Monroe (two years), and I see advantages to the ordinance, but am also willing to compromise...I don't see how my stance should suddenly make me a Fulop-supporter or against the NWA. I support the NWA, but now I'm also curious as to whether I actually have any representation.

In the past, opposition to Fulop has resulted in a barrage of posts from new registrants claiming to be newport residents, spaming and trolling this board. They were very annoying, and had to be banned from the board.

In this current situation, we have a set of ordinances that affect specific groups of people. First, the change of address ordinance affects the people whose addresses are on River Drive South, and second, the meter ordinances affect the parking rights of the residents of Newport. Our main objective is to gather feedback from Newport residents who are affected by the ordinances, not from people who live say in Paulus Hook, Hamilton Park, Perth Amboy or North Bergen. I'm sure you get the drift. In order to collect as clean a sample as possible, we have to remove and disallow irrelevant posts from the pertinent threads. It would be great if we could trust in the integrity of the Fulop backers, but historically, it's been shown that we can't.

As a community organization with over 1,000 members, we have a sizeable "pool' of resident members to demonstrate where a majority of people stand on an issue. The board helps augment our services by giving people a platform from which they may be heard. We are looking at all possible compromises/revisions, and appreciate your suggestions.

I see Steve is also reading your posts, and, hopefully, taking your suggestions seriously.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Floridian,

In response to your questions:


Do you find it hypocritical that under the politics page, you start a tread about free speech online and on this thread, you want to delete posting because they don't list a building? Come on. Anyone can say they live in a building and post. I think we can figure out what posts are legit.

Not hypocritical, just paradoxical. Clearly, in this special situation, we need to keep the sample (the thread) only for the comments of those of us who will be affected by the ordinances. It's not unusual for this board to get 25,000 to 40,000 hits per day. Sometimes it seems like everyone in Jersey City is stopping by. We can't second guess, for example, if members of the city council can figure out which posts are legit.


Also, is there a way to start a petition for a recall election for Fulop? Let's kick him out.

NWA would never initiate a petition to recall any politician. Our philosophy is basically non-political, although we do work with politicians to accomplish our good works. The best way to register your disapproval of a particular politician is by exercising your right to vote, which is why we urge everyone to register and vote.

[Jake2]

To an extent, I agree with Floridian, we should recall Fulop. He's acting like a despot, making decisions, without including us in the process. Maybe he should take a 101 on principles of democracy. How much money has Lefrak given Fulop. I'm sure it's in the thousands, and Fulop is doing him a favor with these ordinances.

I will suggest that parking on Washington Boulevard be limited to residents who have a parking permit. In this way, commuters would be unable to park in the spaces, or risk being towed away. We would be rid of the commuters, and the annoyance of the meters (doubt they would collect as much money as Mr. Fulop imagines anyway). If we want to limit the amount of time, we can have signs, limiting the hours.

Don't believe Fulop will listen, but made the suggestion anyway!

[Stinky]

...doubt they would collect as much money as Mr. Fulop imagines anyway)...How much do you think meters would bring in? Here's a S.W.A.G. at it:

Each parking meter could generate a theoretical maximum gross of $2,106/year.
$0.75/hour * 9 hrs/day * 6 days/wk * 52 wks/yr = $2,106 pa

Rounding down for holidays leaves less than $2,000 a year but lets call it two grand.

I'll be generous and assume that the meters would be about 40% paid (people don't always put in coins, meters are sometimes out of order, empty meter bays, meter bays occupied by construction vehicles or displaced by construction, etc.). At 40% the typical gross would be $800 per year.

Plucking numbers out of thin air:
- Let's assume that the cost of a meter and its installation is $1,000.
- Let's also assume that it costs $200/year to empty the meter, maintain it when it malfuntions, repair/replace when it's damaged by traffic, depreciation, etc.

Return in year one would be negative ($800-$1,000-$200)=$-400 and in subsequent years would be positive ($800-$200)=$600.

How many meters are proposed, fifty? It's an awful lot of hassle for $30,000pa (from year three onwards) which will hardly make a dent in the budget.

Was a cost/revenue analysis presented to the City Council because we need to see one before supporting or fighting this plan? How much do existing meters on Pavonia Avenue and Newport Parkway generate and what do they cost to buy, install and maintain?

Are meters being proposed for other areas of the City or is Newport being singled out for this?

[Sonia]

Stinky,

Although I would prefer to wait for the transcript for his exact words, the gist of a statement made by Fulop was that his intent was to generate income for the city. At the time, he was responding to an issue I raised regarding his failure to explain the ordinances to us. Despite my recognizing the various perceptions emerging here, I think people need to take a realistic look at what's on the table, and not base a decision on perceptions only.

Don't know if meters are planned for any other part of Ward E, or the city, no mention was made.

There may have been a cost/revenue presented to the city at the caucus on Monday night, but none was mentioned at Wednesday's meeting. I requested a copy of the traffic analysis, as it may not have taken into consideration the one lane scenario we had previously discussed. However, I believe we need to make a formal written request for documents from the city, as part of our letter, in order ensure we get them.

I would also suggest, we look at the hours for the metered parking. For example, consider the possibility of making it earlier than 10PM or different hours for Saturdays. We may be able to come up with a better deal for ourselves. I know some of us think the best deal would be no meters at all, but it's prudent to consider different scenarios.

[Sonia]

Change of Address form was withdrawn by Councilman Fulop at the last council meeting.