LETTER: Trying ‘to force a runoff’ for Jersey City mayor is not democratic

5

In a letter to the editor, Jersey City resident Michael P. Hussar gives his take on why trying “to force a runoff” election for mayor next year is not democratic.

Photo via FourSquare.

Dear Editor,

I am writing to bring to light a concerning tactic that has recently emerged in our nonpartisan Jersey City mayoral elections, set for November 2025.

It has come to my attention that certain candidates, specifically Bill O’Dea and James Solomon, along with Jersey City Mayor Fulop, have been engaging in a behind-the-scenes strategy to manipulate the election process.

Their aim is to force a runoff election, leveraging this tactic to undermine the democratic process and dilute the impact of voters’ choices.

In nonpartisan municipal elections, we expect a fair and transparent process where candidates are chosen based on their individual merits and their ability to serve our community.

However, O’Dea, Solomon, and Fulop appear to be working together covertly to ensure that no single candidate can secure a clear majority in the first round.

By strategically positioning O’Dea and Solomon as alternatives, they hope to create a scenario where a runoff is inevitable. Their goal is to gain an advantage in a second round of voting, despite their initial lack of broad support.

This tactic is profoundly undemocratic. It undermines the principle of direct representation by manipulating the election process for personal gain rather than letting the best candidate win based on demonstrated qualifications and public support.

It creates confusion and disillusionment among voters, who may feel their votes are being invalidated or undermined by such maneuvers.

Moreover, elections are a significant cost to taxpayers. Forcing a runoff election represents a waste of taxpayer funds that could be better utilized in other community services or initiatives.

Every unnecessary election incurs additional expenses, including the costs of organizing and administering the runoff, which ultimately come out of our municipal budget.

It is also worth noting the hypocrisy of these politicians. O’Dea, Solomon, and Fulop all campaign as champions of grassroots movements and opponents of political bosses.

Yet, their actions contradict their rhetoric by attempting to handpick candidates and manipulate the election process rather than allowing the constituents of Jersey City to make an informed decision.

I urge all residents to be vigilant and not fall prey to these undemocratic strategies. Your vote is a powerful tool in shaping our community’s future.

By supporting candidates who genuinely represent our values and have a demonstrated ability to lead effectively, you help uphold the integrity of our electoral process.

Let us choose leaders based on their merits, not on manipulative tactics that waste taxpayer resources.

Michael P. Hussar
Jersey City resident


Warning: A non-numeric value encountered in /home/hcvcp/public_html/wp-content/themes/Hudson County View/includes/wp_booster/td_block.php on line 353

5 COMMENTS

  1. Let’s not forget to mention Jim McGreevy. Trying to enter Jersey city politics with the likes of Justine Mercado and Brian stack in the background.

    We all deserve better. We all know the history.

  2. I try to assume people have the best intentions. I am trying to apply that rule to the writer of this letter

    But when he objects to people who don’t have ” initial broad support.’ using the runoff law to advance their case for mayor it’s hard to take him seriously.

    The only purpose of a runoff law is to make sure that someone with initial broad support of a minority of the city does not sneak into office against the will of the majority.

    Yet to hear this writer describe it ,it sounds like he thinks using a law the way it was intended is the equivalent of being a convicted felon or something.

    Nonpartisan elections in general and run off laws in particular dilute the power of the parties and if people who have had great notoriety in their past.

    It gives other voices a chance to have the time to let people hear their messages and ensures that whoever wins has the support of a majority of those who went to the polls.

    Run offs are not tricks. And in our two influenced by money political world they are one of the few tools that generally work for the little guy.

  3. “It has come to my attention…”

    1. Do you have proof of what they’re doing?
    2. If so, is what they’re doing illegal?
    3. If so, have you provided the proof to the appropriate officials?
    4. If not, why not?

    Seems to me if you want to protect democracy and have the evidence to do so, helping to ensure election integrity would be a priority.

    It has come to my attention that you might be a McGreevey operative.

    See how that works?

  4. Sorry if this is a stupid question but I admittedly don’t follow local politics closely and I feel like I missed something in your letter to the editor: What exactly is the “profoundly undemocratic tactic?”

    You said they “appear to be working together covertly to ensure that no single candidate can secure a clear majority in the first round” in order to “gain an advantage in a second round of voting.” How are they working together to ensure this? And why is having a second round of voting undemocratic?

  5. This article is completely wrong.
    First of all, Fulop has nothing to do with them. He abandoned the mayor job a year ago. He has campaign funding problems ie money laundering $1m from Carepoint into his Super PAC which CREW sued for and had to be returned….then he took large donations from Hudson Regional and owner Yan Moshe, and the landowner the hospitals are on…now Carepoint is teetering on bankruptcy and Fulop is involved in Hudson Regional trying to take Carepoint over…then Fulop just appointed himself to the board.
    Corrupt much? Then Fulop hasnt hired anyone to answer the 24/7 no heat hotline….or enough people to enforce rent control…we are losing average $5million a year from rampant ticket fixing of building code summons at municipal court….
    So if anything O’Dea and Solomon are the ones cleaning up that corrupt mess. For real.
    O’Dea is hands down the next mayor and Solomon will likely wind up as deputy mayor or possibly take O’Dea’s county commissioner seat. A runoff election would make no sense and neither of them would waste the money when we need rent control and the building code enforced. The tenant groups are working on policies with O’Dea.
    Also this article has no basis and is very defamatory towards two stellar candidates.
    The last thing any sane person would ever accuse Solomon is corruption! Omg. Ridiculous.

LEAVE A REPLY