A Response to "Idealist Becomes the Demagogue"

Dear Constituents,

Below is an Op/Ed of mine that was published on Thursday in the TriCity News. It is a response to Mr. Jacobsen’s recent piece about me titled, “Idealist Becomes the Demagogue.”

Peace,

James W. Keady
Councilman, City of Asbury Park, NJ

GET THE FACTS BEFORE YOU WRITE
By Councilman James W. Keady

In the November 16th issue of the TriCity News, TCN Publisher, Dan Jacobson authored a story titled, “Idealist Becomes the Demagogue,” commenting on an event that took place at the November 13th Asbury Park City Council Meeting. He called me a slew of nasty names and leveled some serious charges against me. What he failed to tell his readers is that he was not in attendance at the Council meeting in question.

In fact, all of Mr. Jacobson’s information from that evening came from secondhand sources. Unfortunately, I am not surprised by this because Mr. Jacobson rarely attends City Council meetings and he usually reports the majority of his “news” from secondhand sources.

Ok, so Dan could not make it to the meeting. He heard about what happened and thought it worthy to write about. Given this, did he do what any fair-minded journalist would do and reach out to me to confirm his “facts” or to seek comment or clarification from me on what he was “reporting”?

No.

What Mr. Jacobson did was print false information and extrapolate his lengthy opinion from it, misinforming and misleading his readership in the process.

When I read the article, I called Dan and asked him why he did not reach out to me to confirm that he had the facts correct given that he was not at the meeting. And he said:

“My deadline was too tight for me to call you.”

His deadline was too tight for him to call me.

Let me give TCN readers a little background here. Dan Jacobson and I have a fairly good rapport with each other and we have an ongoing dialogue on a range of local and national political issues. He has my home phone number, my cell phone number, and my work phone number, all of which he has used in the past to call me about stories he is working on. Dan’s office is about 50 feet from mine – same building, same floor - and he stops by our office regularly. And if I do not see Dan in the office, one of his favorite hang out spots is directly across the street from my home.

Despite all this access and the fact that Dan was writing a story that was focused on me and my statements at a City Council meeting, he never said a word to me.

Now, do I expect Dan Jacobson or anyone for that matter to agree with everything I say or do in my role as a Councilman in Asbury Park? Certainly not, but what I do hope for is simple fairness and accuracy in reporting.

What would have been fair in this situation would have been for Dan to call me and ask me direct questions about what transpired at the November 13, 2006 City Council meeting.

Here are my thoughts on how such a phone call might have gone.

BEGIN INTERVIEW

DJ: JIM, WHAT EXACTLY DID YOU PROPOSE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING REGARDING THE WEST SIDE COMMUNITY CENTER?

During the public portion of the meeting, a significant number of residents and community leaders shared their frustrations about the violence in our streets and its impact on our young people. To combat this problem, they asked for the City Council to offer greater support to the West Side Community Center.

In light of the issues they raised, I put a motion on the floor requesting that the governing body earmark $100,000 in funding from our Community Development and Affordable Housing Fund that could be made available for infrastructure upgrades and programming at the West Side Community Center. I also stated that in order for this money to be released, the West Side Community Center would submit proposals to the City Council on how the money would be used. The governing body would subsequently vote on which proposals they would like to support.

Again, to be clear, I was not saying the money should go to the West Side Community Center that night. I requested a firm and measurable commitment of resources on the part of the City and a process by which those resources could be allocated.

I was unable to garner a second for this motion.

DJ: DID YOU TALK ABOUT THIS ISSUE WITH ANY OF YOUR FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS PRIOR TO THE MEETING?

There has been the charge that I “blindsided” my colleagues with my request, that I had never discussed this issue before. On October 18, 2006, the day that Tylik Pugh was shot, I discussed earmarking $250,000 in funds from the Community Development and Affordable Housing Fund for community programs with both the City Manager and the Mayor. My proposal was similar to the one I made on Monday night, that the funds would be set aside and that community organizations like the West Side Community Center, the Boys and Girls Club, the Salvation Army, etc. could apply for money for programs specifically focused on getting our young people off the streets and involved in positive activities. At the request of the Mayor, I did not put forth this proposal publicly that night and I deferred to his desire to have some time to speak with the folks at the West Side Community Center.

DJ: SOME PEOPLE HAVE SAID THAT YOU “SET THIS WHOLE THING UP” AND ORCHESTRATED HAVING THESE PEOPLE COME TO THE COUNCIL MEETING.

There have been some detractors of mine that have suggested that I met with these citizens at a Sunday night meeting prior to the Council meeting and “set the whole thing up.” Not only does such a charge show complete disrespect for the initiative of these West Side residents, it also is false. On Sunday evening, when the community members were holding their meeting, I was at home with my wife, Leslie.

There are others who say that I set this up on Saturday afternoon because my wife and I participated in a “Stop the Violence” vigil and march organized by Mrs. Laura Henry, a Bangs Avenue Resident. This is false as well. To say that I orchestrated what these people said at the meeting is to disregard them as living, breathing, thinking human beings with their own minds. Clearly, those who want to redirect the focus back to me are missing the content of these residents’ statements – which was exactly their point – they feel that no one seems to be listening to their needs.

DJ: SOME PEOPLE IN ASBURY PARK HAVE ACCUSED YOU OF GRANDSTANDING LATELY, HOW WOULD YOU RESPOND TO THIS CHARGE?

My actions have not changed. What has changed is the reaction from certain Asbury Park citizens. I stand up for what I believe is right. I stood up for protecting the Baronet from the specter of eminent domain. I stood up and demanded a greater level of performance by Asbury Partners on our Waterfront. I stood up for more attention and resources to be focused on the Downtown. I stood up to appropriate funds for a summer youth jobs program. I stood up for the gay community when they were unjustly attacked by the Concerned Christian Coalition.

At the November 13th meeting, I stood up and requested that we take official action to earmark resources for the needs of the West Side Community Center and all of a sudden, I’m demonized. I wonder why it is that when I stand up for private property owners or for historical preservation, I am appreciated, but when I stand up for residents on the West Side who deal with violence day in and day out, I’m grandstanding, I’m a demagogue, and I’m “playing the race card”.

DJ: IF YOU ARE REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT HELPING THE WEST SIDE RESIDENTS, WHY DON’T YOU ADVOCATE FOR THINGS LIKE RENT CONTROL?

I have. I wrote back in May of 2006 about my actions on this issue. The complete blog entry can be found at www.keadyreport.blogspot.com. Click on May 2006 under “Archives”.

DJ: FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD, THE MEMBERS OF THE BLACK COMMUNITY THAT SPOKE AT THE COUNCIL MEETING WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF YOU AND VERY CRITICAL OF YOUR FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS, WHY DO YOU THINK THAT WAS THE CASE?

Since my election to office, I have made the West Side a priority in my life. I spend time every week walking through the neighborhood listening to concerns of West Side residents and business owners. I also attend a lot of events on the West Side, from community vigils to football games to social events. I have tried, by my actions, to let the people on the West Side know that I am as concerned about their lives and future as I am about folks on the East Side. As for the attitude of those who spoke at the Council meeting towards my colleagues, I would encourage you to do what you did not do in your November 17th issue - get your own first-hand information.

DJ: SOME PEOPLE OUT THERE ARE SAYING THAT YOU ARE TOO FOCUSED ON THE WEST SIDE, TO THE DETRIMENT OF OTHERS IN YOUR CONSTITUENCY. BASICALLY, THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT SUPPORTED YOU WHEN YOU RAN, BUT NOW THEY ARE UNSURE IF YOU STILL SUPPORT THEM AND THEIR CONCERNS. HOW DO YOU RESPOND TO THIS?

I think at the moment, my supporters among the homeowners and business owners are generally frustrated about the pace of redevelopment in Asbury Park. This frustration has been bubbling below the surface for some time now.

Here is a short list of what I believe are the root causes of their frustrations.

1. Despite all the hype about the redevelopment of Asbury Park’s waterfront, Asbury Partners has not created one new residential ratable in four years. This lack of progress occurred despite the fact that we just experienced one of the largest real estate booms in American history. The lack of new ratables means two things - no new customers for business owners and no new tax revenue to lighten the burden on homeowners.

2. Despite all the hype about the redevelopment of Asbury Park’s waterfront, Asbury Partners has not rehabilitated one pavilion, nor have they rehabilitated Convention Hall or the Casino. Because of the way the redevelopment deal was written, there are almost no penalties against Asbury Partners for their slow movement on the waterfront and no “carrot” that the Council majority has agreed on to make the process move faster. Further, the Council has not been public enough about its disapproval of Asbury Partners’ lack of progress.

3. We have had multiple murders in Asbury Park this past year; 102 reported shootings; 50 guns taken off the streets by our Police Department; thousands of arrests; and a growing gang problem in our city.

4. The downtown streetscape has not even started. The rehabilitation of the Steinbach’s building, while underway, has dragged on for years.

5. It does not seem that we have a clear plan for marketing our most tangible assets – Asbury Park as a brand name, Asbury Park’s music and cultural history, and Asbury Park as a summer (and beyond) tourist destination.

6. A concentration of poverty and unstable family situations that lead to crime and a drug trade continue to undermine any efforts made by our school system, our Police Department and our City Government to create a safe and secure city.

DJ: YOU ARE ONLY ONE PERSON ON THE COUNCIL AND YOU ARE IN THE MINORITY. SO WHY ARE PEOPLE SO UPSET WITH YOU?

With people generally frustrated about the progress of redevelopment, you have both new business owners and new homeowners questioning whether or not Asbury Park was a good investment. People are not seeing the progress that they were promised by the re-elected majority of Mayor Sanders, Deputy Mayor Bruno and Councilman Loffredo. Some people are starting to panic that their investment is going to tank and that they are going to lose everything they have risked. This is a tangible fear for people and something the Council needs to take very seriously.

Having said this, I do think there are two issues that people are concerned about specific to me and that may have offered them a channel for their greater frustrations.

First was my nuanced position on the Market Street Mission. A lot of homeowners are upset about this organization setting up shop in Asbury Park and I have heard people placing the blame on me that they have come to our city.

I have been very clear about the facts and my position on this. I did not seek out the Market Street Mission or vote to have them come to Asbury Park. But given the fact that they bought the building and received the appropriate permits to come, I am not going to bury my head in the sand. I am going to engage them and the County on both the Market Street Mission’s policies and the County’s greater responsibility to dealing with problems of homelessness.

I strongly agree that Asbury Park should not be the only town to provide social services for Monmouth County’s homeless. And so I am in the process of engaging the County and State Offices of Human Services and Social Services to designate a clear plan of regionalizing the responsibility for homeless people. If you would like more information on my position, please visit www.keadyreport.blogspot.com. Click on July 2006 under “Archives.” This work is currently underway via the newly created City Subcommittee on Homelessness, which I co-Chair with Councilman Loffredo.

Second, after two non-fatal shootings on the West Side, I truthfully answered questions from a reporter from ABC News about the gang presence in Asbury Park.

The statement I made was on October 17th, the day before Tylik Pugh was fatally shot at 11:30am in broad daylight within 100 yards of our middle school. This was the day before our school board made the decision to close our schools for two days. This was a day before the media descended en masse to cover these events. You had four days worth of regional and national negative media coverage that ensued and I think it just pushed people over the edge.

Some people felt that I could have “spun” or “massaged” my comments to not make the City look bad. My response is that I was elected to proactively attempt to find solutions to the problems our city is facing. We can only solve our problems by facing them honestly.

DJ: OK. SO NOW WHAT?

I believe that a number of things must be done to keep Asbury Park moving forward in a positive direction. I have outlined above a short list of issues that the homeowners and business owners are concerned about. We must couple these with the top three issues from folks on the West Side – job creation, affordable housing and increased recreation opportunities – and get to work solving problems. I have done the analysis and have a number of changes I would like to see made, but I need three votes in order to get anything done. It has been difficult for me to get the support of two other votes since I have been on the Council, and a number of initiatives that I have put forth have not made it because of this.

What we need most is for more Asbury Park residents to get involved by coming to City Council meetings and by joining Boards and Commissions to do the work which needs to be done. The TriCity News could help us in moving the city along by doing real reporting on these issues so that citizens are fully aware, rather than subjective, fact-less rants.

Here are a few questions you could start digging into, to create the dialogue necessary for forward movement:

1. How do we attract light manufacturing into the Memorial Drive corridor to create good paying entry-level manufacturing jobs for West Side residents?

2. Given that Asbury Partners has not delivered any new ratables on the Waterfront and as such, we have a short-term budget gap and a mid-term financial planning problem, how can we fund the programs we need to deal with the roots of crime and gangs in our city with a goal of preventing further violence?

3. How hard of a line should we draw with Asbury Partners at this point in the process? Given their lack of performance on delivering promises made to the community, should we consider more drastic actions for the long-term good of the city?

4. How is the lack of new residents on the waterfront affecting downtown business and overall investment?

5. What is the best way of marketing Asbury Park in a way that maximizes our key historical, musical, cultural and tourist assets?

6. How much affordable housing do we need and what exactly does “affordable” mean in Asbury Park?

7. What vision for Asbury Park will best serve the economic and social needs of its current residents?

Now Dan, I do not want you to tell me what you usually do - “people don’t want to read about all that stuff – it’s too boring for them. They don’t care.” People do want to read about this, they do care, and you need to report on it. Even those people in the suburbs that you consistently harp on know that finding answers to questions like these is critical if Asbury Park is going to redevelop in a way that is sustainable both economically and socially. I am doing my part by trying to find policy answers to these questions. It is where my energy has been and will continue to be focused during my term in office.

We know that you want Asbury Park to be just like Berkeley, Madison or Asheville. Something that those towns have is an independent, alternative newspaper that reports in detail on the issues that the mainstream news agencies miss. We need you to do your part – research issues first-hand and report.

Why? Because you are the TriCity News and you’re here to help.

END INTERVIEW