In an editorial, Jersey City resident Elvin Dominici Encarnación expresses his disappointment with the City Council members supporting a 20 percent rate hike for the third quarter tax bill.
Jersey City homeowners are once again facing a major challenge: a proposed 20 percent tax rate in their Q3 tax bills publicly supported by Councilman Jake Ephros (Ward D), Councilman Joel Brooks (Ward B), and Councilwoman Eleana Little (Ward E).
These elected officials campaigned on affordability, housing justice, preventing displacement, and protecting working families. They spoke about standing up to powerful interests and giving residents a stronger voice in government.
Yet before holding public meetings in their districts or seeking meaningful input from the people they represent, they released a joint statement signaling support for a reflected tax increase that many residents fear will make Jersey City even less affordable.
The common denominator among these council members is that they were endorsed, supported, and politically organized by the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), a national political organization that promotes policies such as affordable housing, tenant protections, rent control, labor rights, and expanded social programs.
The question many residents are now asking is simple: How does supporting a 20 percent tax increase help the very families they promised to protect?
As a community activist who has served Jersey City residents for more than 15 years, I have seen seniors struggle to afford groceries and medications.
I have worked with small business owners, many of them minorities, who were on the verge of closing because they could no longer afford rent and operating expenses.
Affordability is not a political slogan. It is a daily reality for thousands of families.
That is why this decision is so disappointing.
Many of these same elected officials criticized previous City Councils for acting as rubber stamps for the mayor’s agenda.
Today, residents are left wondering how announcing support for a major tax increase before holding public meetings with constituents is any different.
I also find it troubling that one of the first major initiatives associated with Councilman Ephros involved expanding council staff and increasing salaries while many basic quality-of-life concerns in Jersey City Heights remain unresolved.
Residents continue to raise concerns about sanitation, litter, street maintenance, public safety, and neighborhood cleanliness.
To be fair, Mayor James Solomon deserves credit for the way he approached the city’s fiscal crisis. He spent months meeting with community leaders, churches, nonprofit organizations, political stakeholders, and residents throughout Jersey City.
He explained the city’s estimated $255 million budget deficit, listened to concerns, answered questions, and sought public input before presenting solutions.
Whether people agree with him or not, he made the effort to engage the community, and that deserves respect.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for the council members who have already publicly committed themselves to supporting this tax increase without first conducting similar outreach in their own districts.
As the son of an immigrant mother who left the Dominican Republic when I was nine years old and was only able to bring me to the United States when I was 21, I understand what family separation feels like. Immigration is personal to me.
That is why I become concerned when elected officials spend more time turning immigration into a political spotlight than delivering meaningful results for the families living through those struggles. Jersey City residents deserve action, not symbolism.
Most importantly, if these council members truly believe in the DSA’s promises of affordability, housing justice, rent protections, and preventing displacement, then supporting policies that could increase financial pressure on homeowners and renters raises serious questions.
It risks betraying not only the trust of the voters who elected them, but also the very principles they campaigned on.
Politics should be about serving people, especially those who do not have a voice.
Releasing a joint statement before holding meaningful conversations with constituents sends the opposite message. It suggests that political agendas matter more than public service.
The people of Jersey City deserve more than statements. They deserve transparency, accountability, and elected officials who remember that their first responsibility is to the residents who sent them to City Hall.