Jahooodie

Jahooodie t1_ivgu6gx wrote

They have an invested interest to keep the status quo of the Union & Board. You realize only one of their slate up to vote is a current educator? The others according to their material a doctoral candidate & Democratic Committee member. They are putting forth arguments for the most part that they are also for change, and it's up to the voter to decide.

I fundamentally don't believe that the only folks who can have expertise in BOE control are necessarily teachers or teacher's union folks. Their voice carries weight of first hand experience, but so do those who've graduated from JC public schools & their parents. Or people who've studied sound budget administration at the scale of the school system here... their budget is more than some municipalities altogether.

I am concerned that CFC has strong ties to developers, but then again anyone involved with the Democratic party trying to get stuff done in town sorta is (ala Fullop). I'm not fully convinced on their ideas for change, but I think perhaps at least they would be a conflicting voice at the table to push reform. I think the main thing I've been concerned with our BOE for years has been the status quo has to change & modernize to the sunlight.

For the record I'm not voting a straight slate I don't think, but I've not read a compelling to me argument that CFC is the devil & Education Matters are saints

1

Jahooodie t1_ivekrbs wrote

Would love to go carless again, did it for a few years with a different job. But I work is a 40-60 drive to a major NJ office park, that does have a bus stop but would become a 3 hour multi seat commute each way. Also family and friends are a 45-60 minute drive, where best public transit could do is a multi-seat 2.5 hour trip that lines up only a couple times a day that would oils drop me off 25+ minutes drive away from them with essentially no taxi infrastructure

Just to point out I would also love to vote for better intra NJ public transit infrastructure.

7

Jahooodie t1_ivegtbi wrote

Yes the sides are saying similar things, but one is in bed with the Union and status quo more heavily than the other.

Also it’s not astroturfing to make a case for a candidate. And both sides have vague plans (in my opinion). I’m just seeing normal political speech going on, not a concentrated artificial effort to influence (but it is the internet, anyone could be a troll or a dog for all I know). You yourself set up a case against the OP and basically weave a argument to vote anyone but CFC, which is also fine speech by me

1

Jahooodie t1_ivdf8bf wrote

They do seem partnered with the developers (who want taxes low), but do also seem to have expertise and bona fides to be legit outside of that. With the very recent tax increase and last few years of ‘not so good’ budgets, it does seem logical for there to be a ‘throw the bums out’ push for change.

What makes it seem like Astro turfing to you? Doesn’t seem like it to me, there seem to be legit concerns about the incumbents & the rival party seems to have legit popularity because of it.

7

Jahooodie t1_iuwx8ex wrote

Do they have an estimated opening date? Usually in JC add 13 months to that for the real date; I've heard some business owners blame the slow, understaffed, and sometimes dodgey inspectors for a reason why new JC businesses often blow by projected opening dates

1

Jahooodie t1_iuww3xg wrote

>High earners aren't going to come and pay Manhattan rents in JC because of taxes and people aren't as likely to buy a place with such high taxes.

The value proposition of JC has been torpedoed awhile ago, yet we still have rubes defending "twice the space for half the price" memes from circa 2006

3

Jahooodie t1_itgafmw wrote

It’s the best event series in town, a charity fundraiser, Tony is swell.

Also for the record if you read this Pat Byrne Little Steven Van Zandt, the Lilyhammer to Lilith Fair joke ruled

2