The Jersey City Council debated the first reading of an ordinance eliminating pool fees that were implemented last summer during their caucus meeting yesterday.
By Daniel Ulloa/Hudson County View
“[Ward F] Councilman [Frank] Gilmore and I are introducing this. We wanted to wait a year after the pool fees have been implemented. We don’t believe they’ve been the right decision for the city,” Ward E Councilman James Solomon explained.
” … We did hear complaints. It made the lines longer. The fee was a burden for families paying multiple times.”
He also stated that the amount of lost revenue would be so minuscule that responsible budgeting across the board could make up the difference relatively easily.
Solomon and Gilmore submitted a joint editorial to HCV last week detailing why they felt the fees, approved in May 2023 should be repealed.
“How much does this fee generate?” Council President Joyce Watterman asked.
“It depends on which pool,” Jersey City Recreation Department Acting Director Keith Donath said.
“Overall,” Watterman said.
“We’re looking at Lafayette being around $50,000 for the summer and Pavonia 20 to 30 grand. Pershing is around $50,000,” Donath replied.
“If the revenue item is reduced, we have to find the appropriation to offset that,” Business Administrator John Metro said, arguing the only way to make up the difference would be to cut services or personnel.
Ward D Councilman Yousef Saleh said he had mixed feelings about the proposal.
“In theory, I agree we should have free pools for residents … If you do make it free, the lines are going to get longer. Pershing isn’t included in this. That’s not right. We should do all of them, or we shouldn’t do any of them,” he began.
“I’m also concerned also next year … what if someone comes in and raises frees on the residents of the Heights? We have to keep it fair.”
Gilmore argued that repealing the fees was a net positive across the board.
“It’s going to drastically reduce the process in which people come in. In Lafayette pool … without the fee, they can pass the clipboard around. You only can sign and pay the fee when you’re in the front,” he declared.
Saleh disagreed with that assessment.
“The line is long in Pershing Field as well. The line is around the block. If you’re going to make anything free, you’re going to have longer lines,” he stated.
“If we have to charge out-of-town residents, we have to charge our own residents,” Ward B Councilwoman Mira Prinz-Arey said, also asking to know what percentage of patrons came from outside of Jersey City.
Solomon said $100,000 could be transferred to make the revenue change net neutral since there was extra money in the overall recreation department budget from last year, also indicated he’d be open to adding the Pershing pool to the ordinance.
“We’ll definitely have that discussion then,” Saleh replied. He also wanted to have the breakdown of city residents versus non-residents using the pools.
“We have to figure out Pershing. Is this a big change? Do you have the numbers Keith?” Watterman asked.
Donath said the Pershing pool complex is run differently since it is open for a longer season than the other pools and generated between $60,000 to $70,000 last year.
“We would have holistically take a look. We’ll cut something else. It doesn’t mean we’re not buying soccer balls for the kids. Something we could live with,” Metro noted.
“Is it a big change to add Pershing?” Watterman asked.
City Clerk Sean Gallagher said a change could easily be made to the ordinance before Thursday’s 6 p.m. meeting.
