The Jersey City Council has agreed to put a referendum on next fall’s Nov. 3 ballot asking voters if they want to move municipal elections from May to November. Acting on a recommendation by Mayor Steven Fulop, a divided City Council voted Jan. 13 to allow voters to choose.
The measure passed with seven votes. Councilmen Richard Boggiano, Ward C, and Michael Yun, Ward D, were opposed.
In 2010, New Jersey enacted legislation allowing Faulkner Act municipalities like Jersey City to move their elections from May to November. The Fulop Administration wants feedback from the public. If results of the referendum show the public favors the move, the administration would present an ordinance to combine the next municipal election in 2017 with the November general election.
Fulop proposed the change when he ran for mayor in 2013. He predicted it would increase efficiency, save approximately $400,000, and alleviate voter fatigue.
In a policy paper released during his campaign, he also cited increased voter turnout typical of the general election, and greater access to the democratic process as the main objectives for the move.
“Increasing voter participation benefits everyone,” said Fulop. “By moving the municipal elections to November, voters are offered the chance to cast ballots for all government offices at once – school board, city, county, state and federal – enhancing the pathway to the democratic process for all of our residents.”
“Increasing voter participation benefits everyone,” – Mayor Steve Fulop.
____________
Some are opposed to the move
Residents who opposed the referendum at the Jan. 13 meeting feared that it would be the first step towards making drastic changes to municipal elections, including eliminating runoffs when no candidate receives 50 percent plus one vote, as was done when Hoboken moved its elections from May to November. Candidates in Jersey City do not run as Republican or Democrat.
Boggiano predicted the change would increase confusion over ballots combining local, statewide, and sometimes federal elections, and over which candidates were running partisan or non-partisan.
In 2012, the City Council adopted an ordinance that moved Board of Education elections from April to November following a similar referendum process championed by then-Councilman Fulop. That referendum passed with 73 percent in favor.
The pros and cons of moving the election
A 2010 report done for The League of Women Voters analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of moving the election from May to November.
The report said May elections tend to be about local issues. While fewer voters come out for May elections, they tend to be better informed on local issues, the report said, however smaller special interest groups in the city tend to have more influence over the outcome.
The report said May elections tend to bring out more candidates and thus give voters more choices. Fewer independent candidates run in November elections. The analysis also found that voters during November elections tend not to pay attention to the local issues which often decide local races.
Often those voters, the report said, will skip local candidates entirely, and so fewer voters actually vote on the local races.
The cost of elections are lower when combining local elections with county, state and federal elections, the report said, but the ballots tend to be longer, more complex, and local candidates and local issues tend to get lost on the ballot. This means that while more voters turn out for the election, many of these voters ignore local candidates and vote only for the most prominent.
The ballots would be even more crowded in Jersey City now that school board elections are also held in November.
While the city would save money by moving the elections from May to November, the report said that there is also a greater possibility that funds from political parties would filter into local races.
May elections were part of a reform
May elections resulted from a reform effort in the 1880s to make sure that local elections focused on local issues and did not get swept up by the impact of some popular candidate for governor or higher office. The change to November would also sometimes be impacted by gubernatorial or federal elections.
Speaking at the public portion of the meeting, resident Yvonne Balcer said she was not in favor of the change.
Although informed that the election would remain non-partisan, she feared that the change would do away with a runoff and allow candidates to win seats without a majority of the vote.
“This change will also favor people with money,” she said.
She said increasing the number of candidates on the ballot made them more difficult to read, especially on the newer machines that have a smaller area for potential candidates.
She said the November ballot would have to accommodate candidates for the general election, the school board election and the municipal elections.
Boggiano was also concerned about the confusion of the ballot as well as the possible loss of the runoff elections. Under the current system, a runoff takes place four weeks after the election, between the two leading candidates for a local office if no candidate has received more than 50 percent of the vote during the original election.
“Even if we have a runoff it will spill over into the holidays,” he said.
Jeremy Farrell, corporation counsel for the city, said the current referendum only asks voters if they want to make the change.
“It will be up to the City Council to choose if there is a run off or not,” he said.
Al Sullivan may be reached at asullivan@hudsonreporter.com.
****SIDEBAR
100 steps renaming put on hold
Although most of the members on the City Council seemed to favor a recommendation by Mayor Fulop to rename the 100 Steps after former Ward D Councilman William Gaughan, they agreed to put off a vote until February. The steps, Fulop said, provide quick access from Jersey City Heights to Hoboken and the 2nd Street station of the Hudson Bergen Light Rail line.
Councilmen Yun and Boggiano, whose wards encompass the steps, said they were not notified in advance.
“I have nothing against Bill Gaughan, but as councilman for [Ward C], I should have been told in advance,” Boggiano said.
He also said the Riverview Neighborhood Association, which worked hard to get the developers of the nearby Cliffs apartment complex obligated to built the steps, should also have been consulted.
The $1 million restoration project was designed to rebuild steps that were built early in the 20th century but torn down in the early 1990s after being closed for years while in disrepair. The steps are an alternative to walking Mountain Road, a steep thoroughfare with a concealed sharp curve that had once been the scene of street crime.
Maria Tuzzo is local favorite
The project languished for years because the Cliffs developers claimed the cost of the project was beyond their means. Gaughan secured the grant money that made the project viable.
Some residents from the area want the steps named after Maria Tuzzo, a long time leader of the association, who along with Gaughan had pushed to get the project completed.
Speaking before the council at the Jan. 13 meeting, Kern Weismann, head of the Riverview Neighborhood Association, suggested the steps be named after Tuzzo.
“She passed away before the steps were completed,” Weismann said. “The steps were something she was very passionate about. She was a tireless fighter for rebuilding those steps. These steps would not be there if not for the efforts of the Riverview Association.”