Council Meeting Wrap-Up: March 20, 2024
Note to reader: If you are enjoying this summary series please share it with friends, family, and colleagues. If you are not enjoying it, share with your enemies. Thanks!
Good morning, Hoboken and welcome to spring (though it has been cold and rainy lately)! Our meeting on Wednesday was primarily about the e-delivery ordinance up for second reading, so I’ll stick to that today, but we did do other things like accept a donation from the NJ Devils to rehab the roller rink at the Multi Service Center and approve the acquisition of some new hybrid and electric vehicles (for police, property, and HHS). There was a lot of passion, a lot of hyperbole, and some convoluted reasoning. Enjoy!
E-Delivery Registration Ordinance
Let’s start with the end. This ordinance passed 5-3 with me, Councilwoman Jabbour, and Councilman Cohen voting No. Does that mean this will become law? Not necessarily. Now it goes to the Mayor for signing or vetoing, and I’m hopeful he will veto. While I agree that this ordinance contains some good things, its main purpose – registration – renders the whole thing toxic and does NOTHING to further the goal of having e-delivery personnel comply with EXISTING laws requiring them to stay off our sidewalks. In fact, this ordinance it at present unenforceable… but don’t ask me, ask our Chief of Police who publicly came out in opposition quite strongly during the Council meeting. So, what’s included in the final version? And more importantly, what ISN’T included?
First, the ordinance requires e-delivery personnel to register with the City. The registration process would include filling out an application, paying a fee, signing a Vision Zero pledge, taking a test, and getting a highly visible yellow vest. Thus, the sponsors’ (and their supporters) “take a test, wear a vest” slogan. You gotta give it to them, that’s clever.
Second… well there really isn’t a second besides requiring the Hoboken Parking Utility and/or the Police Department to enforce this regulation. Who will enforce it? Who knows?!?!?
What this ordinance DOES NOT include is any reference to sidewalks and does nothing to advance our goals of making our sidewalks safer. In my view, it is merely an attempt by its sponsors to make it LOOK like the City is doing something.
Why do I say that? Well mostly because the proponents of this ordinance focused almost exclusively on keeping e-delivery personnel off sidewalks during their comments, yet the ordinance itself adds NOTHING specific to sidewalk enforcement. As the Chief of Police pointed out, it is already illegal to ride on sidewalks and the police have issued nearly 200 tickets to e-delivery personnel doing so – contra to what Councilwoman Fisher said when she stated the current law is not enforced. This ordinance is solely about registration – so it matters not whether an e-delivery driver is on a sidewalk here. If an e-delivery driver is driving in a bike lane and is otherwise being safe, a lack of registration makes the driver illegal. On the other hand, if a driver is on a sidewalk, but is registered it is illegal still, but not because of this ordinance.
A few weeks ago, at the Mayor’s request, a working group including four city council members, police officers, Transportation and Parking personnel, and community advocates began meeting to discuss safer sidewalks. To date, our discussions have been focused on identifying what will actually work in promoting safer sidewalks. We have not limited our discussion to what the City Council should be doing, but rather expanded the conversation to include what the entire City government can do. We agreed that there is no silver bullet, to achieve compliance with our existing ordinance (i.e., the one currently on the books prohibiting e-bikes on sidewalks) and we needed to focus on visibility, education, accountability, and infrastructure. More specifically, we agreed that the visibility and education components of the solution can be done quickly and we should move on it now. Unfortunately, under the ordinance which passed on Wednesday, the only way to get drivers to actually take the test and wear a vest is to have them register first! So, where do we go from here?
As I stated in my comments, my preference is to see the Mayor veto this ordinance so we can focus on moving forward with holistic solutions. If he does veto, I’d like to see an ordinance requiring drivers to wear vests and take tests (but the latter facilitated by apps and not the City – similar to what is about to become active in New York City). The task force can then work on other educational components, establishing infrastructure improvements (such as creating places for drivers to congregate safely), and an accountability regime administered by apps (e.g., GrubHub). Since its inception, the working group – which has expanded to include delivery personnel representatives, has had some great discussions on who this can work. There is a path forward here. Let’s keep working on it.
Other Fun Things
Best Analogy: This one goes to me in stating why I opposed the ordinance despite agreeing with two-thirds of it. I said that if you’re thirsty and someone offers you a glass of water, but they tell you two-thirds are safe, but one-third is poison… you don’t drink the water.
Worst Analogy: Councilman Presinzano takes this one for his defense of not putting the burden on the delivery apps to drive compliance with our existing laws. He stated that in a car accident you ticket the driver, you don’t ticket the car maker (i.e., Ford). But that is nonsense and doesn’t apply. We put plenty of rules on car makers to ensure their cars are operated safely, such as seat belt requirements, environmental standards, braking standards, etc. Just as with car makers, for some things delivery apps are in the best position to help promote safer sidewalks in Hoboken.
Best Line: Chief Aguiar wins this one. After some long winded, convoluted, and loud bloviating by Councilman Russo, Chief Aguiar retorted, “speaking louder does not make your points any more valid.”
