The Jersey City Independent "

Share/Save

Continuing columnist Earl Morgan’s cynicism from yesterday about the most recent City Council meeting, the Journal today editorializes that “there is a very small window of opportunity to get the city administration to act on your cause,” whatever it may be, since “the May 12 municipal election is fast approaching.”

Zing!

Forgive us for not wanting to participate in the time-honored Jersey City media tradition of grumbling about “election time” and ignoring the issues, but let’s take a look at the Journal‘s jaundiced view, shall we?

First off, let’s deal with the faulty premise of both Morgan’s column and the subsequent editorial.

All of the applications approved for funding from the Hudson County Open Space Trust Fund aren’t yet “projects,” as was made quite clear at the meeting. In some cases, the city has no specific plan for the site. Instead it is simply trying to wrangle as much outside cash for city improvements as it can. Why this is a bad thing, we’re not sure. Should the city have done it earlier? Perhaps. But why must the paper cast doubt on a government that is trying to do something good for a change?

Next, does the paper really believe that eight open space grant applications and five letters of support really include “almost everything of importance for a good many city residents?” The paper makes it sound as if the entire council meeting was a political sideshow, with council members pledging to fill every pothole and tackle that tough roofing project of Jane and Joe Citizen as well. I’ve seen some political posturing as of late (the council’s remarks during the JSQ Redevelopment Plan hearing come to mind), and trust me, there really wasn’t much at the last council meeting.

One can only wonder how the Journal would have treated the meeting had it sent its usual reporter to actually cover the council, instead of a cynical “seen-it-all” columnist.