Issue 183: Call to artists

Changes in the JCMAP program afoot! Plus: campaign fundraising, a new Watterman letter, and ICYMI!

Hello! I feel like this week is the calm before the storm, aka the calm before we find out what Trump is gonna do, but in the meantime here is some local news/info/programming for you. As always, I hope you have a wonderful weekend and thank you for reading! — Amy

---

New JCMAP Director and changes to the program

This week I was thrilled to hear from Mari Gardner, the new-ish (since the fall) Director of the Jersey City Mural Arts Program (JCMAP). Gardner is an artist and curator with an extensive resume of working with public art, and she seems incredibly well-qualified for the position. And it sounds like she is making some very much-needed changes to the program, which I am very happy to share with you. (If you’ve followed me for a long time, you’ll know I’ve been very critical of this program in the past for the very reasons that Gardner now seems to be changing and shifting. So rather than focusing on my criticisms of the program of the past, I’m happy to report the positive changes she seems to be bringing in, all of which I hope will be a breath of fresh air to the city.)

For one, there is now an Artist Roster which is open to applications. Artists can apply to it and have their work considered for new mural projects that the city will be sponsoring for 2025-6. This is a huge leap forward, and it is open to all artists to apply, as long as you get your info in by January 31. Here’s their website, an FAQ on their call for applications, and the application itself. It all looks very straightforward and reasonable. If you’re chosen to be included in the roster, you’ll be notified in late February; from there, you become eligible for future projects (you’re not guaranteed a future project if you get on the roster, but artists for future projects will be chosen from this list).

I talked to Gardner about other changes in the program that I’ve wanted to see for some time, including making the budgets for each mural transparent and involving the community in the selection of works. The lack of community involvement has always especially irked me — the streets of Jersey City are public space, and if we expect people to care about their communities and genuinely feel a part of them, it’s important that we allow them to have input into what happens there. She wrote to me:

[…]we are […] emphasizing inclusivity in the planning and approval process. At least one community member from the immediate area where the mural will be painted is required to be involved in selecting the artist and contributing to the mural concept.

Once that phase is complete, the final design will be presented to the Public Art Advisory Board—a diverse group that also includes community voices—for review and approval. This meeting will be publicly advertised, and all Jersey City community members are welcome to attend, providing an opportunity for everyone to share their input.

This is fantastic!! Yes, this being Jersey City, we have to see how all this plays out, but it is a huge step in the right direction. Look, we went from “Hey I’m just gonna splash this huge mural of David Bowie on a skyscraper and there’s nothing you can do about it” to this, and I will take this and celebrate it a hundred times.

Her answer to the question about the budget for the individual murals was less satisfying to me, but I’m also ok with it for now. I should point out that I have never heard any complaints from artists over the budgets they were allotted, or from community members over this issue; while I’ve heard plenty of complaints over the content or execution of various murals, the budgets themselves have never been a problem as far as I can tell. Basically, her answer was that the budget needs to be worked out over a variety of stakeholders and tailored to each specific project, which is understandable and I have no doubt is true. Pricing art is always tricky, I get it. It would be really great to see some sort of transparency around this particular issue, but I also get that these things can take some time. So watch this space, and hopefully all will go well moving forward.

Mostly, I’m just so happy Jersey City hired a really qualified person with a lot of relevant experience to this position. I think this is going to lead to some really positive changes in this program overall.

---

Mayoral campaign donations + Joyce Watterman wrote another letter to the editor

Ok, it’s that time of year — the time all candidates running for office have to make their fundraising and expenditures transparent and report them to the state (and we get to see them too). This is always a great opportunity to check in and see where everyone is, where they’re headed, and what issues they might run into as the campaign goes on.

First off, James Solomon has an impressive haul of over $335k in the last quarter; Bill O’Dea comes in at $118k; Joyce Watterman at $44K; and Mussab Ali at $19k. To read more about the specific expenditures vs income for each candidate, you can go to the individual articles there. It looks like Jim McGreevey perhaps forgot to file (?) — there isn’t anything on record for him that I could find and Hudson County View didn’t report anything for him, and I doubt he didn’t raise any money this past quarter given he’s been a strong fundraiser overall. It’s not totally unheard of for candidates to file late, so I’d expect we’ll hear from him soonish. But with McGreevey’s info missing, it’s a little hard to say what is happening with the top three candidates, although I think it’s fair to say that the top three are still the Top Three, with the other two candidates still unable to really break into that top tier. Notably, both Ali and Watterman spent more than they brought in.

Because I am a huge nerd about these things, I couldn’t help but notice that frequent Jersey City campaign donor Ziggy Rozalski, the owner of Ziggy’s Autobody, donated to both Solomon and O’Dea. Rozalski is absolutely one of the old school neighborhood characters of Jersey City, who is somehow both an auto mechanic and also a notable boxing manager (he also looks like he could easily clean my plate and still have the energy to go out and service 8-10 cars after, so I would like to point out that this entire paragraph is being written in the spirit of pure love and fandom to the entire Ziggy lore so please don’t kill me Ziggy I mean no harm). He was a longtime donor to Fulop and Fulop’s slate, and now seems to be choosing between Solomon and O’Dea to support. Notable (perhaps?) that he donated more to Solomon than O’Dea this quarter.

And in what I can only imagine is going to start being a weekly occurrence now, Watterman wrote yet another letter to the editor of the Hudson County View, this time (sort of?) attacking Hudson County View itself (I guess?). Criticizing “how the media portrays this political contest” — and I can only assume that by “the media” here she’s referring directly to HCV editor/reporter John Heinis, who is one of the very few reporters left in this city in the wake of the Jersey Journal preparing to shut down and the only reporter I know of who writes exactly one article every quarter breaking down what each candidate raised, and had barely finished his article on the latest campaign hauls when this letter appeared — Watterman, who is the literal city council president and until recently had the financial backing of some of the largest real estate developers in the region, says that she’s running a “grassroots” campaign that cannot be measured in donations:

The fixation on campaign contributions lacks context; it fails to acknowledge that many candidates, particularly those like myself who are dedicated to grassroots efforts, may not have the financial resources to compete in fundraising with those political figures with fat cat friends.

Sure, nothing says people-powered and up-from-the-grassroots like filming an ad with LeFrak (and I honestly don’t know how many times I have to link to that article but man, I guess I’m going to just keep linking because Watterman keeps trying to redefine herself and no, I’m not going to let her do that. Also here’s some writing I did on the topic here because why not). Or, say, voting lockstep with the entire Fulop agenda every time anything came up for a vote in front of the council. No, but — she’s grassroots! Or so she insists.

Watterman writes:

As a female candidate, I face unique challenges that complicate this narrative. Historically, campaign contributors have been predominantly men, creating an environment where female candidates struggle for equal footing.

While I embrace my identity as a woman in politics, this novelty can overshadow my qualifications and commitment to service. The media’s tendency to highlight gender rather than policy positions detracts from substantive discussions that voters deserve.

Like, come on. Yeah, I’m a feminist too, but I can’t help but think that any of the problems Watterman might encounter as a female candidate might also very easily be overcome by her connections to the current power structure (ahem, city council president! also a regular at this turbo-charged “invest in JC” real estate forum which is just teaming full of people looking to invest in some candidate who will hand wave their project through completion). The whole point of feminism is that I want female candidates to be treated fairly and equally to their male counterparts — which is exactly what HCV has done consistently in their coverage of the race. Also, I have not seen any local media highlight her being the only woman in the race except, very occasionally, in a positive light that might give her an advantage and a distinction over her opponents. So this seems like a very unfair complaint to me.

She also writes:

Yet, when media narratives focus primarily on financial metrics or sensationalized aspects of the campaign, they risk alienating those very constituents who need advocacy the most.

I mean, in the far abstract when you’re talking about all campaigns nationwide throughout time, maybe — and I’m making a lot of space for that maybe — this is true, but in a local race, again come on. Watterman was largely silent all of 2024, only suddenly churning out a bunch of letters to the editor since January. In that absence of information, what metrics are people supposed to use to judge the seriousness of her candidacy? Ok she’s not putting out policy statements or press releases, she has almost zero social media presence or public events, but also she doesn’t want to be judged by the one thing she does post which is her campaign fundraising? How is that fair to the public trying to figure out who she is as a candidate? If she was bringing in massive numbers of people to events and setting records on volunteer sign-ups, I could believe there was this silent groundswell of support for her that can’t be measured in financial donations. But it’s hard for me to read this letter to the editor as anything other than a desperate candidate saying Listen, the vibes over here are immaculate, everything is fine and simultaneously picking a fight with one of the few reporters still left standing who regularly covers the area. Again — as I keep returning to with her campaign — why would anyone do this???

After last week’s newsletter where I ripped into her, I kind of expected to leave Watterman alone for a while. But in this letter, she’s essentially attacking one of the last avenues we have for local news, John Heinis, by accusing him of sexism unfairly and I just can’t let that go. She clearly didn’t raise very much money this quarter and wants to redirect the conversation. Meanwhile, John has, as far as I can tell, always treated all the candidates fairly and evenly. His outlet has covered her input at various council meetings and he’s dutifully posted her letters to the editor when she’s sent them. What more could she possibly want?

---

ICYMI

• There have been lots and lots of fires recently, with the Jersey Journal reporting five blazes in just a day and a half last week.

• Hey, I said last week that anyone willing to take the trek to Trenton to testify to get our schools more money would get a special shout-out and… someone took me up on that!! I am thrilled to report that candidate for Assembly Katie Brennan went and gave testimony asking for more state funding for our schools. Sounds like she was the only person on the day she attended who was in the room to ask for more funding for JC, so I am grateful that she was willing to make the trip and do the work.

• Is NJ turning red? A really good new article in NJ Monthly considers the results of our last presidential election. I recommend this article, even though they misspelled Kearny in it (lol).

• On Monday, January 20th, the Knitty Gritty Social Club is hosting a “Not Our Inauguration” event at Riverview-Fisk Park from noon to 1pm. From their site: Join the Knitty Gritty JC Social Club and your neighbors in protesting the inauguration and honoring the memory of Martin Luther King Jr. We will share inspirational readings and register our discontent (bring noisemakers!) Also bring canned food to donate to neighbors in need. For more info, please go here.

• A “Palestinian Cultural Fair” is happening next Sunday, January 26th at Grace Van Vorst Church (39 Erie), with proceeds going to help people in the region. For more information, go here. It’s free to attend but organizers would love it if you RSVPed so they can get a head count, and you can do that by going here.

---