Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

HobokenJ t1_jckahau wrote

Narrator: "It's going to be privatized,"

−19

mikevago OP t1_jckas04 wrote

What are you basing that on? The DEP controls the park. I'm not sure even Murphy can overrule them.

20

HobokenJ t1_jckrkus wrote

Hey, I hope I'm wrong. But when it comes to NJ standing strong against developers, well... I have little faith.

12

mikevago OP t1_jckti5p wrote

Headline: After a long struggle, we finally get some good news!

JC Reddit: I bet this is bad news.

15

theiLLmip t1_jclv0p1 wrote

FWIW that dude is “HobokenJ”. Us here in JC DO appreciate the good news.

2

objectimpermanence t1_jckz2rb wrote

Yeah but this is New Jersey, not Texas. We actually do have a pretty decent track record when it comes to parks, even though we could probably do better in urban areas.

NJ ranks second in the nation for the proportion of land dedicated to public parks and wildlife. Thats pretty impressive for a state that’s also the most densely populated in the country. Source

8

Anonymous1985388 t1_jclbghl wrote

I don’t even know what Downtown JC used to look like pre-WW2. Now it’s all luxury housing towers but maybe there were some historic buildings that used to stand in downtown JC. I guess the history/architecture was torn down by developers so that they could build luxury housing. Hopefully Journal Square can preserve some more of the old architecture during their growth phase.

0

nuncio_populi t1_jclp0fr wrote

What are you going on about? Downtown has a ton of old buildings in Paulus Hook, Van Vorst, Harsimus Cove, and Hamilton Park.

4

nuncio_populi t1_jckfh5e wrote

The head of the DEP is a political appointee who reports to the governor. He can definitely overrule the commissioner.

3

sutisuc t1_jclfvxj wrote

Yeah but when we elect another Republican as governor then what? That’s why we need to enshrine this stuff into the state constitution.

3

Knobbies4Ever t1_jclfhv1 wrote

Tru dat. But I don't think this is a case where Murphy has to approve this specific DEP plan - the way he'd sign a bill. Control over DEP comes through initially appointing a leader who (presumably) aligns with his agenda, and then having the ability to fire (or threaten to fire) that person.

Maybe I'm splitting hairs with that distinction, but I understand now why LaTourette kept his head down when Fireman's proposal came through the legislature last year.

1