Metered Parking on Washington Boulevard

[Sonia]

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

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. There will still be NO STANDING from 7AM to 10AM and 4PM to 6PM.

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.

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

[Jake2]

Sonia,

These ordinances are nuts! Why would any of us want to give up free parking for metered parking, and run up and down the elevator feeding the meters, when we can park overnight for free, and not bother with the meters. Who came up with this brainless idea? :Tara.badi

[msion1]

I don't have a car, but this sounds like a really bad idea to me. Metered parking is a pain in the neck.


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.

[Cleo]

Stinky, Jake2, Golfie, PHXguy, Lisa, mission1, things, Renuka, Floridian, Jeremy, Stellartois, Lenin, Pacific Blue, Linkin, Fazzies, No More Lies & Sonia,

If you expect an explanation from Fulop, you may be waiting forever. True to his character, you will not get him to face up. It's obvious, Fulop is working in favor of Lefrak, not us. This ordinance will get the approval of the City Council.

[Sonia]

Cleo,

Thank you for sharing your opinion with us. From my perspective, I think it's premature to guess how the Councilman will handle this matter. Yes, all four ordinances were proposed by the Lefrak organization, but Steve has been visiting this board every day, and has undoubtedly read our posts.

I understand from speaking with the city clerk's office 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.

[Lisa]

Sonia,

To some extent, this is good news. You also need to find a way to keep us up to date on any ordinances or other legislation that may impact Newport. It's obvious we should not be relying solely upon Councilman Fulop.

[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. There will still be NO STANDING from 7AM to 10AM and 4PM to 6PM.

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.

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

According to 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.

[renuka]

So in essence this is the implication?

1. No benefit to the community of residents. In fact there's a greater degree of inconvenience since we'd have to replenish the meters every 2 hours with quarters :eek:. Certainly no sleeping in on Sat AM! :D

2. No more parking for commuters since they're not around to replenish the meter every 2 hours too.

3. Potentially unhappy clientele of the South City Grill, Komegashi etc when they're over for a corporate event. Or attendees of any private parties. Also those establishments that do not validate parking.

4. Also residents' friends and relatives who visit for more than 2 hours face the same problem.

What next ? :confused:

[Linkin]

Well,

One thing I like about the proposed ordinances is that now visitors have a higher chance of finding parking when they come over to visit me. There's virtually no parking to be found on the weekends b/c people have camped their cars there for the whole weekend.

I for one actually like this ordinance. I can see from a resident's perspective why they might not, but I'm already paying for garage, so I don't need the street parking (call this a selfish decision).

[DogLover]

Well,

One thing I like about the proposed ordinances is that now visitors have a higher chance of finding parking when they come over to visit me. There's virtually no parking to be found on the weekends b/c people have camped their cars there for the whole weekend.

I for one actually like this ordinance. I can see from a resident's perspective why they might not, but I'm already paying for garage, so I don't need the street parking (call this a selfish decision).

I have to say that I do agree with you. When family/friends come over, they have to pay a ridiculous price to park in the garages.

[Jake2]

No guarantee family and friends will get free parking, but guarantee I won't have free parking on Saturdays, and total aggravation with the meters. I don't like this ordinance.

[Lisa]

Sonia,

Do you know the intent behind this legislation? I'm not sure why we need meters.

[Sonia]

Good question for the city council. The city may be looking to make some money off of this.

[Lisa]

Or it could be to discourage resident parking on the boulevard?

Why is Councilman Fulop silent on our questions? He doesn't seem to know anything. We must remember his attitude next time he runs for election.

[07310]

Well,

One thing I like about the proposed ordinances is that now visitors have a higher chance of finding parking when they come over to visit me. There's virtually no parking to be found on the weekends b/c people have camped their cars there for the whole weekend.

There's no guarantee that that there will be more parking available to visiting friends and famiy, but I will guarantee that it will annoy you and your visitors having to run down to feed the meters every 2 hours.

[Linkin]

There's no guarantee that that there will be more parking available to visiting friends and famiy, but I will guarantee that it will annoy you and your visitors having to run down to feed the meters every 2 hours.

Nothing's guaranteed, but I'd rather make the run every 2 hours than have to ask my visitors to pay parking to visit me. The fact is...many people *are* parking there cars there during the weekend, which makes less available spots for visitors.

So if there's a greater chance to see available spots, I'd support that. I understand the point of view of people who are are residents and want to park there, but I'd like to add that not everyone thinks this ordinance is a bad idea.

[Sonia]

Why is Councilman Fulop silent on our questions? He doesn't seem to know anything. We must remember his attitude next time he runs for election.

Hi Lisa,
Indeed we should! Councilman Fulop does not like criticism. In the past, he has told me that he finds it hurtful, and would like us to delete any posts that criticize him. Apparently, the JC Listers ban all posts criticizing him, and we have heard rumors that he pays another board to erase any posts, which are judgemental of him. It is particularly egregious that the board in question claims to be a political forum. This is clearly a case of an elected official manipulating private enterprise to his own end.

As we explained to Steve in the past, our policy is to allow people free expression, as long as their posts are in compliance with our rules. Criticism of politicians, especially, goes to the very reason for the first amendment right of free speech. If the day comes when Americans are banned from discussing the actions of our elected officials, then we, as a society, will cease being a democracy. Mr. Fulop must be called to answer for his failure to explain the proposed legislation to Newport residents. In this situation, he has failed to do his job.

[Sonia]

On this issue, we have received several emails, and private messages, which are pretty much summed up in the following email that we received from one of our members:

"...Then it's just cheap parking for people who work here and provides no benefit at all for residents.

The NWA should oppose this."

[renuka]

But even people who work here are HERE TO WORK and not run around worrying about the meter running out! :eek:


On this issue, we have received several emails, and private messages, which are pretty much summed up in the following email that we received from one of our members:

"...Then it's just cheap parking for people who work here and provides no benefit at all for residents.

The NWA should oppose this."

[Jeremyk]

Sonia,
Did you go to the council meeting tonight? Any news on the meter ordinances?

[Sonia]

Yes Jeremy, I was at the city council meeting this evening, and it was horrible. Steve Fulop attacked me as I was speaking to the council. I am too upset right now to discuss this any further, and will get back to you with more information in the next day or so.

[JPhurst]

Hi Lisa,
Indeed we should! Councilman Fulop does not like criticism. In the past, he has told me that he finds it hurtful, and would like us to delete any posts that criticize him. Apparently, the JC Listers ban all posts criticizing him, and we have heard rumors that he pays another board to erase any posts, which are judgemental of him. It is particularly egregious that the board in question claims to be a political forum. This is clearly a case of an elected official manipulating private enterprise to his own end.


I'm not going to get into all the intracacies of the conflict between Steve and Sonia/NWA. But the above statement is clearly a falsehood insofar as it says that JC List bans all posts criticizing Steve. There is plenty of criticism of Steve on JC List.

Other than that, I'll just say "Don't go there."

[Cleo]

Fulop clearly has some serious psychological issues. First, he attacks the Chief of Police, now it's the President of the neighborhood association. I also read in one of the newspapers that he publicly disparaged the Guardian Angels. It's obvious, he's out of control. Fulop needs a therapist. He does not belong in public office.

Incidentally, JPhurst, there's only one person on JC List that does criticize Fulop, that's Dan Levine, but I don't see any recent posts from him, maybe he's been banned. Levine was the one voice of reason in a sea of Fulop panderers, everyone else on that board kisses his ass.

BTW, did he explode in front of the entire city council?

[NSK]

If we do end up getting metered parking, this technology would be nice (I think that the key technology is provided by a company called PepperCoin):
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reino Parking Systems, a global leader in on-street parking solutions, announced deployment of joint solution in February 2005; completed rollout August 2005

No searching for coins, no worry that meter will expire

Enables consumers to pay for parking meters with credit cards or mobile phones

Consumers will receive SMS text message on cell phone before parking expires – avoiding parking tickets – and can extend time on meter with cell call

Results: credit card installations show average transaction double value of cash transaction
---------------------------------------------------------------

[Stinky]

...Consumers will receive SMS text message on cell phone before parking expires – avoiding parking tickets – and can extend time on meter with cell callThat's a terrible idea! Metered parking should be for short term use only and even then only when a suitable parking garage cannot be found. A two-hour limit makes sense especially if a provision were added prohibiting return within the following two hours.

Why allow people to feed meters via phone? Why not just make them eight or twelve or twenty-four hour meters?

[NSK]

I posted the idea not to bicker on specific details of the implementation (how many hours continuous parking) but to say that it would be nice to have a system where I don't have come to the meter to extend the time

For e.g. I might have put in the money for 30 minutes, but have been delayed by another 15 minutes due to long line in the check-out counter; Wouldn't it be nice to be able to increase the time remotely? This has nothing to do with enforcing 2 hr max. limits (they can be enforced, if they make sense, by simply writing a business rule that only permits extensions upto 2 hrs).

[DogLover]

Yes Jeremy, I was at the city council meeting this evening, and it was horrible. Steve Fulop attacked me as I was speaking to the council. I am too upset right now to discuss this any further, and will get back to you with more information in the next day or so.


In previous posts, we have all read that Steve Fulop does not like to be criticized, yet it's ok for him to critcize someone and to do it in an open forum? Seems a bit too hypocritical for me.
Sorry you had to go through that Sonia.....he seems like he can dish it, but doesn't want to take it. Too bad the world doesn't work like that and since he chose a career in politics, he should be able to withstand people disagreeing with him. If he doesnt like to be criticized, perhaps he picked the wrong profession!

[renuka]

Well reading this thread it appears that the date the ordinance will go into effect is 20 days from next Wed. the 5th of April? Assuming that it gets approved on the 5th, does this mean we'll find our cars towed away or ticketed on Tues. Apr 25th? How do you guys feel about this ? Correct me if I'm wrong on the dates ..

[Lisa]

Has it occurred to you that Fulop is pushing this ordinance for Lefrak at the expense of the residents? It's a major inconvenience for us. We have a Councilman making decisions for us without showing a willingness to discuss alternatives.

[Lenin]

Lefrak originally fought the City to forstall parking on Washington Blvd. at ANY time. It was illegal to park there, PERIOD. Lefrak obviously thought it was undue competition with the Lefrak/Kinney expensive garages.

Lefrak, of couse, is very eager to have meters installed along the length of the boulevard because it will have the same effect of discouraging tenants from parking and force more of them into the $$$garage$$$ system.

I think tenants are best served by a system of free parking along both sides of the boulevard at ALL times. If it works Saturday and Sunday it can work Mon-Fri. Twice a week sweeping with alternate No-Parking for 2 hours will suit us well.
If it slows down traffic to the legal 25 mph, the better for us all...a 6 and even 8 lane speedway through Newport is a terrible idea for residents.

[renuka]

I agree with Lenin ... I think because we opposed the previous legislation forcing us to park in the garages, Fulop and Lefrak got together and came up with this great brainwave!

I'd like to invite Fulop to take up residence for a couple of years at the Pres. Plaza or ToA. Maybe he needs to go through the experience first hand before lording it over the residents! How does one man make so many people in Jersey city as well as residents in Newport mad at him?? Must be some HUGE personality flaw. He seems to be out there wagging his tongue and criticising just about anyone who is unfortunate enough to cross paths with him. Seems to lack basic manners, social graces and civic sense.

The gall of the man to go out, be all 'uncivilized' and claim NWA is funded by Lefrak ... now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black!! :rolleyes:


Lefrak originally fought the City to forstall parking on Washington Blvd. at ANY time. It was illegal to park there, PERIOD. Lefrak obviously thought it was undue competition with the Lefrak/Kinney expensive garages.

Lefrak, of couse, is very eager to have meters installed along the length of the boulevard because it will have the same effect of discouraging tenants from parking and force more of them into the $$$garage$$$ system.

I think tenants are best served by a system of free parking along both sides of the boulevard at ALL times. If it works Saturday and Sunday it can work Mon-Fri. Twice a week sweeping with alternate No-Parking for 2 hours will suit us well.
If it slows down traffic to the legal 25 mph, the better for us all...a 6 and even 8 lane speedway through Newport is a terrible idea for residents.

[Sonia]

I understand, some time back, the Lefrak organization offered the exact same ordinances to our former Councilman, Junior Maldonado. Apparently, forgetting about validated parking, at that time, Lefrak argued that metered parking would generate more business for the restaurants located on the boulevard. However, Mr. Maldonado refused to introduce the ordinance at the city council because he believed it unfair to Newport residents, who would end up with the inconvenience, and burdened with the expense.

It now appears the Lefrak organization persuaded Councilman Fulop to introduce the ordinance for them. Moreover, Fulop's failure to explain these ordinances to us has left me with the sense that his silence is intentional.

As you can see from the following Jersey Journal article, historically metered parking has not worked well for Jersey City. Apparently, the city council may be considering placing meters in another section of town, but it seems that community is opposing the plan even before an ordinance is introduced. I agree with Ms. Parkinson, "It don't make sense". Unless, of course, the city wants to demonstrate that Newport is not the only neighborhood slated for the metered parking.

MLK Drive meters would put them in a spot

Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Jersey City resident Annette Parkinson owns a busy salon on Martin Luther King Drive, which means a 12-hour day is common.

She drives to work and is usually lucky enough to nab a parking spot in front of her shop. Soon, Parkinson may be looking for spots on the busy side streets, otherwise she can bring a pocket full of quarters and feed a meter up to $6 a day.

"It don't make sense," said Parkinson, when told the Jersey City Parking Authority is considering placing meters in front of her store and elsewhere on King Drive. "I can't afford to keep running out to the meters, with customers here, and pay all that money. It adds up."

News that parking meters may be returning to King Drive after a 10-year hiatus was met with bewilderment and anger by many business owners and local residents. They say they are unnecessary and unwanted.

The executive director of the JCPA, Robert Dalton, said his office is conducting a study of whether - and where - to put meters on King Drive and Monticello Avenue.

There are currently 1,637 meters in the city, which generate roughly $1.2 million a year, and Dalton would not say how many he hopes to put add.

The JCPA has lost money during the past three years, and the new meters would certainly be a revenue boost, but Dalton says that's not the reason for study.

"The business community wants this," he said. "They need more turnover of vehicles at these locations."

Louise Bell, owner of LaBelle Beauty Salon, said Dalton is wrong about that.

"It's a bad idea," she said. "People like to come down here and shop, get their hair done, and not feel rushed. I don't know anybody that has asked for meters."

The meters along King Drive were removed about 10 years ago because they were not generating enough revenue, said Dalton. Whether a second go-round will change things remains an open question.

"People are not going to feed the meter, so tickets are just going to pile up," said an employee at clothing store on King Drive. "So it doesn't make sense."

JARRETT RENSHAW

[Sonia]

P.S.
We understand the Lefrak organization has around 5,000 empty parking spaces available in the private garages, and will accommodate any resident who would like to rent one.

[Sonia]

Earlier, I placed calls to all three At-large Council representatives, and heard back, so far, from one, who informs me that the second reading on the "meter" ordinances will not take place until April 12th, as there is no council meeting scheduled for next Wednesday. So, it seems we may have extra time, prior to the meeting, to try an resolve this issue.

[Sonia]

This morning, I spoke with Marianno Vega, President of the City Council, and an At-large council person. The council met last night, and Marianno informs me that he and Councilman Peter Brennan will now be handling Newport's meter parking issue. According to Councilman Vega, a committee to study parking issues and advise the council on which position they should take has been convened. I requested the names of the committee persons, which Marianno agreed to provide later on today. He also informed me that there are no resident representatives on the committee.

Marianno has requested a letter from us, stating any suggestions we may have for compromise. I made it clear that we would prefer no meters at all, but are also open to negotiation, if necessary. Your comments and suggestions will be included as part of our letter, so please post any other suggestions you may have ASAP. :Tara.feed

[Jake2]

Sonia,

Does this mean Councilman Fulop will no longer be working on this ordinance? I think he totally screwed up, and had to beg the grown-ups at the city council to take it off his hands. Did he claim he had too much work, and couldn't handle Newport? Or, did he admit his failure to get the job done right? What explanation were you given?

[renuka]

Maybe the "grown-ups" (I like your term!) realised for themselves what was going on ... would like to believe there are atleast some wiser folk up there.
Sonia,

Does this mean Councilman Fulop will no longer be working on this ordinance? I think he totally screwed up, and had to beg the grown-ups at the city council to take it off his hands. Did he claim he had too much work, and couldn't handle Newport? Or, did he admit his failure to get the job done right? What explanation were you given?

[Sonia]

The Newport Waterfront Association will be holding a special mini-meeting this Sunday to discuss the metered parking ordinances, affecting Newport residents.

Where: Cosi's
555 Washington Boulevard
(Across the Street from the PATH Station)


Date: Sunday, April 2, 2006

Time: 10:30 AM

Topic: Metered Parking on Washington Boulevard, as described in the ordinances introduced by Councilman Steven Fulop.

[Stinky]

I'd like to lay out some ideas, possibly as a talking point for the mini-meeting. This is very much a work in progress so please do chime in.

I have broken this (long) post into three sections:
- Current Situation
- Councilor Fulop's Proposal
- New Proposal

Current Situation

Washington Blvd - Gangemi/6th to Newport Pkwy
· No parking at any time

Washington Blvd – Newport Pkwy to 18th St
· Mon-Fri 7am-6pm No Parking
· Other than Mon-Fri 7am-6pm Free parking

Newport Pkwy – River Drive South to Washington Blvd
Resident Parking Zone 7
· Mon-Fri 7am-6pm Free two hour parking
· Other than Mon-Fri 7am-6pm Free parking without restriction
· Parking allowed for any vehicle with a resident sticker at any time
· There are three parking meters near the Shore Club sales office

River Drive South
Resident Parking Zone 7
· Mon-Fri 7am-6pm Free two hour parking
· Other than Mon-Fri 7am-6pm Free parking without restriction
· Parking allowed for any vehicle with a resident sticker at any time

Pros and cons of the current scheme
· Residents and guests can park on Washington between Newport Pkwy and 18th St overnight and at weekends
· Resident Parking Zone 7 is severely limited.
· To get a Resident Parking Permit you need to live here or produce a letter from your employer that you work here. This reduces available spots for "real" residents.
· Resident Parking Zone 7 allows any vehicle to park for up to two hours. This is difficult/impossible to enforce and thus reduces available spots for "real" residents.


Councilor Fulop's Proposal

Washington Blvd - Gangemi/6th to 18th Street
· Mon-Sat 7am-10am No Parking
· Mon-Sat 10am-4pm Parking Meters at $0.25 for 20 minutes limit 2 hours
· Mon-Sat 4pm-6pm No Parking
· Mon-Sat 6pm-10pm Parking Meters at $0.25 for 20 minutes limit 2 hours
· Mon-Sat 10pm-7am Free parking
· Sun Free parking

Resident Parking Zone 7
· No change

Pros and cons of new scheme
· Short term parking available for business patrons (though all restaurants validate)
· May bring in revenue for the JCPA
· Will reduce/eliminate Saturday and evening parking along Washington Blvd for residents and their guests.
· Will force residents and their guests to feed meters every two hours on Saturday and on weekday evenings.


New Proposal

Washington Blvd - Gangemi/6th to Newport Pkwy
As in Council Proposal
· Mon-Sat 7am-10am No Parking
· Mon-Sat 10am-4pm Parking Meters at $0.25 for 20 minutes limit 2 hours
· Mon-Sat 4pm-6pm No Parking
· Mon-Sat 6pm-10pm Parking Meters at $0.25 for 20 minutes limit 2 hours
· Mon-Sat 10pm-7am Free parking
· Sun Free parking

Washington Blvd – Newport Pkwy to 18th St
· Resident Parking Zone 7

Resident Parking Zone 7
· Eliminate the free 2-hour parking in Resident Parking Zone 7
· Eliminate hours of operation and days of the week so these become real resident spots 24 by 7 by 52.
· Every vehicle parked in Resident Parking Zone 7 must have the relevant permit displayed or would be liable to ticketing no matter what time of the day or night, day of the week or holiday.
· Phase out the Resident Parking Zone 7 Permits for people who work here and keep the Residents spots for residents.

Pros and cons of the new proposal
· Increases the number of resident parking spots in zone 7
· Parking meters introduced on Washington outside the businesses that might benefit from them
· Parking meter revenue for the JCPA
· Workers and shoppers who park along Washington on Saturday and Sunday would have to use garages or public transport

So, what say you?

[Jeremyk]

The restaurants are the businesses on Washington Boulevard, and they all validate. Why would patrons want to feed a meter when they can have free validation. I don't get it? Fulop wants to take away free parking from residents that live here 24/7 to give metered parking for non-residents, who can validate for free? Does not make sense to me!!

Stinky,

I like your proposal, except I don't understand the part about eliminating 2 hour parking in zone 7, would this mean we can't park there at all? Please explain.

[Stinky]

I like your proposal, except I don't understand the part about eliminating 2 hour parking in zone 7, would this mean we can't park there at all? Please explain.Yes and no. If you had a resident parking sticker then you could park there. Without a sticker you'd (hopefully) get a ticket.

The problem with the free 2-hours for anyone is that it's difficult to enforce. I've never seen the JCPA put chalk marks on tires or any of the usual tricks to make sure that cars don't exceed the 2-hour limit. If you walk along Newport Pkwy you'll see that 40%-60% of the cars don't have resident stickers.

I walked along there last summer playing with a new digital camera and took a picture of the plate of every car. Then I walked it again just over four hours later and did the same. When I got home I looked at the pictures and:


57% of the cars did not have a resident sticker
Of those, 78% were the same vehicles I'd photographed 4-hours earlier


Eliminating the free 2-hour period would mean more spots for residents 'cos the JCPA could enfore it (any car without a sticker would be in violation).

[Lenin]

Stinky,


The "new proposal" would be a wonderful boon for tenants.
Thus it is DOOMED from the getgo. Lefrak will never stand for it because it allows too much real competition with this lucrative garages, and if Lefrak won't have it, neither will the City Council...that's REALPOLITIK!

It has ZERO chance of passage. But oh, all that free parking for tenants up and down Washington Boulevard is something to have wonderful dreams about...sigh and alas!

[Stinky]

Lenin,

If we're not prepared to fight for what is right then we don't deserve to get it.

The way I read the Constitution, individuals get to vote and choose their politicians not corporations (I know that's a bit naive but I'm feeling idealistic right now). We _should_ have more say in this than Lefrak.

[Sonia]

I'm in full agreement with you Stinky, the Newport Waterfront Association has yet to receive an explanation from Mr. Fulop concerning his reasons for introducing the meter parking ordinances, although today I was informed he has sent out an email to a select few claiming he wants to make short term parking available for business patrons. This explanation is incredible, and/or demonstrates a total lack of knowledge of how the businesses along Washington Blvd. operate. As most Newport residents know, the fact is most of the businesses on the boulevard are restaurants, and all of them offer (as Jeremy stated) Free validated parking.To even think in terms of taking free parking from residents, and inconveniencing them with hours upon hours of running back and forth to feed a meter, in order to give 10 or 15 minutes metered parking to non-residents, who can easily park for free in the garages, is indicative of a mind that doesn't care what-so-ever about Newport residents. Fulop's bias in favor of the Lefrak organization should be apparent to everyone. The only question remaining is WHY?

[renuka]

When was such an email sent out? Before or after Marianno Vega and Councilman Peter Brennan stepped in to handle the issue?


I'm in full agreement with you Stinky, the Newport Waterfront Association has yet to receive an explanation from Mr. Fulop concerning his reasons for introducing the meter parking ordinances, although today I was informed he has sent out an email to a select few claiming he wants to make short term parking available for business patrons. This explanation is incredible, and/or demonstrates a total lack of knowledge of how the businesses along Washington Blvd. operate. As most Newport residents know, the fact is most of the businesses on the boulevard are restaurants, and all of them offer (as Jeremy stated) Free validated parking.To even think in terms of taking free parking from residents, and inconveniencing them with hours upon hours of running back and forth to feed a meter, in order to give 10 or 15 minutes metered parking to non-residents, who can easily park for free in the garages, is indicative of a mind that doesn't care what-so-ever about Newport residents. Fulop's bias in favor of the Lefrak organization should be apparent to everyone. The only question remaining is WHY?

[Sonia]

Renuka,

I'm waiting to hear back, but it must have been before because the two At-Large Councilmen just stepped in, in the last week.

Also, spoke with Councilman Vega earlier today, and he informs me that, as he recalls, the only reason for the meter ordinances, given by Steve was to create parking for the business patrons on Washington Boulevard, but Marianno had to agree, in light of the free validations, that this is not a good enough reason.

It's conceivable that Steve just took the ordinances from Lefrak without questioning them, and handed them in "as is" to the city council. Dumb, but conceivable.

[Sonia]

Mark Your Calendars

The Newport Waterfront Association will be holding a special mini-meeting this Sunday to discuss the metered parking ordinances, affecting Newport residents.

Where: Cosi's
555 Washington Boulevard
(Across the Street from the PATH Station)

Date: Sunday, April 2, 2006

Time: 10:30 AM

Topic: Metered Parking on Washington Boulevard, as described in the ordinances introduced by Councilman Steven Fulop.

[Cleo]

It looks like Steve is giving everyone a hard time. NWA gets to do his work because he doesn't even check the obvious details, and the city council has to assign the ordinance to someone else because it's obvious something's very wrong, while Steve is off in La La land, dreaming of his political aspirations (and how he will defeat Mayor Healey). For Steve, it's all about him, and getting his name, "out there". We've go three more years of this jack ***, how do we get him out of Newport before we are plagued with more ordinances? And how much does an ordinance go for these days? :rolleyes:

[Sonia]

Cleo,

I can't help thinking that much of this could have been avoided if Steve had explained the ordinances to us before introducing them at the city council. We could have pointed out the obvious fallacies in his proposal beforehand. Also, obviously, NWA would prefer not to have to take on additional work, which is why frank, open, communication is necessary.

I personally do not believe Steve is a jack ***, just misguided.

[Jeremyk]

Sonia,

How was the meeting?

[Sonia]

Productive. More info at a later date!

[Sonia]

Attached is a copy of the letter to Councilman at-Large Peter Brennan, with copies to Mayor Healy and Council President Vega, which is a result of Sunday's meeting. Even if you park in one of the garages, we urge everyone to support the rights of all Newport residents to free parking in our neighborhood. The residents' parking permit costs $10.00 per year, and allows you to park your car on the streets of Newport. You may not need this now, but there may come a time when you will. Join our efforts to preserve your right!

[TravelinThru]

I got quite worried after reading the proposed changes in the letter as I do not own a car but rent practically every weekend. So I called JC's Parking Authority to ask if I would be able to get a resident's parking permit. Turns out you need to own a car to get one, but they do not enforce the permit requirement on weekends.

[taym1]

Sonia,

Since we are making a new proposal, is it possible that we can ask the street cleaning times to be moved to (at least a little) later in the day? The current 6-8am is making it close to impossible for many of us who leaves for work around 8am, unless we get up at 6am just to move the car, at which time we don't even have a place to move it to. I think this should benefit the residents trying to find overnight parking on the street.

[Sonia]

taym1,

I'm sure we'll have time to tweak the proposal.

[Sonia]

Last night, I was at the City Council caucus meeting, as an observer. My purpose was to get an idea how the council would approach the legislation regarding meter parking on Washington Boulevard. Although I wasn't surprised to hear Ward E Councilman Steven Fulop advance the Lefrak organization's arguments in favor of the meters, he clearly said he supports metered parking, and non-residential parking, in Newport, I was taken aback by his total disregard for the Newport tenants' position. Even the Council President, Mariano Vega, appeared surprised, and admonished Fulop, reminding him that tenants vote.

Fulop argued three points:

1. Metered parking will eliminate commuter parking.

2. Metered parking will provide parking for non-resident guests (family and friends).

3. Metered parking will generate income for the city.

According to Steve, he visited the Monroe Condo last week, and their board agreed points 1 & 2 would benefit the owners of the condo units. Although we have not seen any documentation, supporting their vote, we have decided to address the first two points.

The first point, eliminating commuter parking is certainly of interest to all of us living in the Newport community. However, installing meters on Washington Boulevard is clearly not the best way to resolve this problem, which could just as easily, and less restrictively, be resolved by say, the city issuing different colored parking permits, distinguishing resident owned cars from non-residents. A simple "print" job by the city is less costly, and just as effective as installing the less attractive parking meters.

Moreover, the condo owners, and the city, should realize that parking meters will not enhance the value of the real estate, and may do just the opposite, as potential renters prefer units where free parking is an option. It is more important to make the area desireable for residents, attracting tenants by offering free street parking as an alternative.

Also present at last night's meeting were the attorneys for the Lefrak organization. They are applying for a tax abatement on SC North, which is up for a first reading this Wednesday. According to their presentation, Lefrak is building over 800 parking spaces into the Shore club complex, but residents in those buildings will need less than 500.

Surely, some of those additional parking spaces could/should be assigned as complimentary or reduced fee parking, to accommodate Newport guests. This kind of accommodation would guarantee some guest parking, as opposed to the carrot Fulop is holding out, suggesting that meter parking would avail spaces for residents' guests, which,in most cases, is merely an illusion. The reality of the situation, we all know meter parking is random parking, makes it highly unlikely that your friends or family members will get a parking space, especially if there are less than forty meters in the entire area.

Many of us have come to realize that parking in Newport is at a premium. Some of our residents cannot afford to pay for parking in the private garages, in particular some of the tenants who live in the subsidized housing in Presidential Plaza. Resident parking must come first. How dare Mr. Fulop suggests that metered parking for non-residents be made available at the expense of residents.

As for Steve Fulop, we have a special message. If it turns out metered parking is approved for Newport, every time a tenant feeds a quarter into one of the meters, we urge them to let it serve as a reminder that Steve Fulop is responsible for their tremendous inconvenience. We're certain all those quarters will remind tenants, over ,and over, and endlessly over again.

[Butchcjg]

I live in the Roosevelt...we moved in a couple of months ago and got a temporary parking permit (until our change-of-address for our vehicle registration went through) and have kind of been lazy about going back to get the permanent one (b/c they never ticket on our block and we are mostly gone by 8am.

WIll this ordinance affect me? Should I rush to get one?? When would it go into effect? (Meaning, can I mail it off and wait for it by mail?)

[sdietric]

I see people saying that the can "run down" and put money in the meter after two hours.

"feeding the meter" is illegal, at least in New York, I recently got a ticket. The cop was standing next to the meter, 2 minutes left. I said I wanted to put in another quarter, and he said that the car has been there already for two hours and I'll need to move the car, and I can not put in money because he would consider this "feeding the meter". I did anyhow, and promptly got a ticket.

Is feeding the meter legal in Jersey City?

[Sonia]

Butchcjg,

I would suggest you apply immediately for your permit, you can pick-up an application at the management office. If you mail in the application in the next few days, you should be able to receive your permit by mail without any hassels.

sdietric,

You've raised an excellent point. The issue was included in a letter written to Councilman at Large Peter Brennan. However, despite my letter to the Councilman at Large, with copies to the Council President, and the Mayor; and despite the fact that our unresponsive Ward E Councilman Steven Fulop reads this BB routinely, and has undoubtedly read the letter (several times), as it was posted on this thread, no one has indicated that it's illegal to feed the meter in Jersey City. Nevertheless, the question clearly merits research, and I will have to get back to you with an answer in the near future.

Thank you for raising the issue.

[Lisa]

Sonia,

Are you saying Fulop is claiming the Monroe Condo board voted in favor of the parking ordinances? As far as I know, that's not the case.

[Jake2]

Sonia,

What time does the council meeting start tonight? What's the latest we can get there?

[Jake2]

Got the following PM from Sonia: Meeting is scheduled for 6:00 PM, but people arriving at 6:15 -- 6:30 will most likely get a chance to be heard.

[Sonia]

As an update to last night's council meeting, we are posting three items, which were made part of the city council's public record, they are:

1. NWA's April 4, 2006 letter to Councilman-at Large Peter Brennan, submitted on record by Councilman Brennan.

2. NWA's argument on behalf of Newport residents, read into the record by Sonia Maldonado,

3. NWA's outline and request for a feasibility study, and written explanation (memo) on the legality of feeding parking meters over the initial two hour limit, with copies furnished by Sonia Maldonado to each Councilperson, and to the city's attorney.

A committee formed by the council, and chaired by Councilman Brennan, will study the matter, and recommend what action should be taken on the ordinances. I was informed last night that the committee will meet first with me, and subsequently with our Newport community to discuss changes to the ordinances.

In addition to the above, NWA has requested a map of the area, and zone 7, in order to clarify for all of us what areas will be affected.

We'd like to thank the tenants who attended last night's meeting, and a special thanks to Robert Vivien, for offering his help in pulling the group together.

With the exception of Steven Fulop, who left before the voting took place, in order to celebrate the Holy Day of Passover, all the council members who were present voted to table the ordinances.

[Sonia]

Please refrain from posting messages that are not relevant to the topic on this thread. You can always start a new thread for any remarks, comments or critiques that you may want to make.

Thank you for your cooperation.

[Lisa]

The following piece regarding Wednesday's city council meeting was reported in Saturday's Jersey City reporter, but the write-up misses the point that NWA is trying to secure more parking spaces for residents. Sonia's argument is that these no parking spaces should be made available for resident parking, and should be extended through 18th Street. NWA should contact the reporter, and ask for a more complete story. Also, to point out that not most, but ALL the restaurants within the perimeters outlined in the ordinances have free validated parking.


A quarter for their thoughts

Also at the meeting, Sonia Maldonado, president of the Newport Waterfront Association, was upset over two ordinances that would allow metered parking spaces on both sides of Washington Boulevard between Thomas Gangemi Drive and 14th Street.

Ward E City Councilman Steven Fulop proposed the ordinances.

Maldonado argued that the spaces would be a financial and physical inconvenience for Newport residents and called for both ordinances to be rejected. She backed up her points by reading a letter she sent to City Councilman at-Large Peter Brennan.

"Our resident members would like to see both ordinances denied in their, entirety as the interest of the residents should outweigh any slight benefit that may be perceived by Councilman Steven Fulop, who introduced the legislation on behalf of the LeFrak Organization," said Maldonado.

The LeFrak Organization is the developer of Newport.

Maldonado said she learned from City Council President Mariano Vega that Fulop proposed the ordinances to create metered parking spaces to accommodate patrons visiting restaurants located in Newport. She pointed out that most of the restaurants already offer free validated parking.

Fulop defended the ordinances, saying there is no parking in the area where the meters would be placed and that the city could make a "couple of extra shekels."

He also said a committee would study the issue further.

The council tabled the ordinances. Fulop was not there for the vote because he left early to observe Passover.

[Cleo]

Fulop's "shekels" from metered parking will be at our (residents) expense!!

And, take a look at how many "shekels" Fulop has already gotten from developers, a total of $42,000.00. Now how many favors is that worth?

Here’s a listing of some of them….

George Filopolous _ Metrovest 2000.00
Joe Panepinto 2000.00
Charles Kimmel- Extended Mgt. 2000.00
Jon Kushner 2000.00
Drew Flectere -100 Wahington Assoc. 2000.00
Tara Lucarelli aka The View projects at Liberty State Park 2000.00 & 2000.00
Vince Wilt 2000.00
Robert Caufield – Fields development group 2000.00
Harry Cantor Greene Urban Renewal 2000.00
Francis Schiller 1000.00
Harrison Lefrak 1000.00
Euegene Squeo 1000.00
Bob Leher 2000.00
Jamie Lefrak 1000.00
Eric Silverman (St Francis project) 2000.00
Chris Dagget 2000.00
David Barry (son of Joe Barry serving time in federal prison) Applied Housing 2000.00
Jim Caulfied 2000.00
Bob Schwartz 2000.00
Bernard (Bernie) Hartnett 1000.00
Gerald Taufield 2000.00
Michael Barry 2000.00

A TOTAL OF $42,000.00 into the ELEC account of Steven Fulop who said he would never take money from outside interests or developers…..??????????????????

[Sonia]

Sdietric and everyone else,

The answer to sdietric's question is No, feeding the meters in Jersey City is not legal.

I have before me a memorandum of law, prepared by Jersey City's Corporation Counsel, William Matsikoudis, in response to Sdietric's question, it reads as follows:

Parking meter violations are governed by the Jersey City Municipal Code 26-36 (a copy of which is attached to this memorandum.) Subsection (a)(1) of the ordinance makes it unlawful and a violation of the Parking Code for any person to "cause, allow, permit or suffer any vehicle registered in the name of, or operated by such person... to deposit in any parking meter any coin for the purpose of parking beyond the maximum legal parking time for the particular parking meter zone."

Therefore, in the city of Jersey City, it is illegal for a person to "feed the meter" so as to keep their vehicle parked in a parking zone designated for two-hour parking beyond a two-hour time limit.

[renuka]

So this means we would not be able to park in the street for more than 2 hours. And hence we're forced to pay for garage parking.