Dear Editor:
Aggressive booting of cars violates the rights of the citizens of Jersey City (re: “Unfair boot,” March 9). It is patently ridiculous to boot cars in this manner, for a first time offense on a non-moving violation. If a person is speeding, which is inherently very dangerous to pedestrians and drivers alike, that person may get a ticket and then that person may discuss the issue with a Judge.
I brought my car into the shop and got a loaner. Maybe I should have missed an hour of work to go up to Central Avenue to get a temporary pass for my one-day loaner car. Instead I chose to leave a note on the dash explaining that I am a resident, and my permitted car was briefly in the shop on this particular day. At 10:39 a.m. a boot was slapped on my car. I have to pay an insane $110 for the boot, plus a $42 parking fine. No judge is going to be able to evaluate this $110 fee either.
Why is this different from other violations? Jersey City, including the Parking Authority, gives tickets for a variety of things. I am not aware of any problem that Jersey City has collecting on tickets, so why is it necessary to introduce this new non-judicial boot? Why not just give me a $152 parking ticket, if that is what they want to do? What is the point of the boot, for a first time offense? How about booting only cars with at least one outstanding ticket? I would bet that 80 percent of these boots go on the cars of Jersey City taxpayers, so it is not like they are beating up on out-of-towners here either.
I understand that only Mark Russ, the CEO of the Parking Authority can overturn part of a booting fee if the JCPA Board of Commissioners agrees and even they don’t have the Authority to refund the $35 balance that is forever trapped in the scoundrel jaws of the PayLocks in Sayreville.
Apparently the Board of Commissioners meets once a month, and they have nothing better to put on their agendas than the facts of individual boot cases that were previously evaluated and assessed by the JCPA CEO Mark Russ, who has nothing better to do than fairly contemplate the merits of the evidence I present him. This Soviet Russia style process is designed to be uncontestable, which is contrary to the spirit of speedy adjudication. As a taxpayer, this nauseates me.
None of this is right. Mayor Healy, Councilman Fulop and other fine representatives of the Jersey City citizenry, I ask you to please straighten this mess out.
Defending all the common taxpayers of all wards by running these lecherous Sayreville bums out of town would be a great feather in the cap of any Jersey City Mayor.
Best Regards,
Daniel Weiss