New Jersey has made significant strides in reducing carbon emissions in recent years. The state has set ambitious goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to clean energy sources, and has taken a number of steps to achieve these goals.
One of the key initiatives in New Jersey’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions is the state’s Energy Master Plan. This plan, which was updated in 2020, outlines a roadmap for achieving the state’s clean energy goals. The plan sets a target of reaching 100% clean energy by 2050, with an interim goal of achieving 50% clean energy by 2030. To achieve these goals, the plan calls for a number of actions, including expanding renewable energy sources, improving energy efficiency, and electrifying transportation.
New Jersey is making significant investments in renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind power, to reduce carbon emissions. The state has set a goal of producing 7,500 megawatts of offshore wind energy by 2035, which would power more than 3 million homes. Additionally, the state is investing in community solar projects, which allow residents to subscribe to a share of a solar installation and receive credits on their electricity bill.
Another important step that New Jersey is taking to reduce carbon emissions is improving energy efficiency in buildings. Buildings account for a significant portion of the state’s energy consumption, and improving energy efficiency can help reduce carbon emissions while also saving money on energy bills. New Jersey has set a goal of reducing energy consumption in buildings by 20% by 2020, and is offering incentives and financing options to help businesses and homeowners make energy-efficient upgrades.
Finally, New Jersey is working to electrify transportation in the state. Transportation is one of the largest sources of carbon emissions in New Jersey, and transitioning to electric vehicles can help reduce these emissions. The state has set a goal of having 330,000 electric vehicles on the road by 2025, and is offering incentives for residents and businesses to purchase electric vehicles.
In conclusion, New Jersey is taking a number of steps to reduce carbon emissions and transition to clean energy sources. The state’s Energy Master Plan sets ambitious goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and the state is making significant investments in renewable energy, improving energy efficiency in buildings, and electrifying transportation. By taking these steps, New Jersey is demonstrating a strong commitment to addressing climate change and ensuring a more sustainable future for its residents.
Hoboken, New Jersey is a single square mile. The former shipping and industrial community is located across the Hudson River from lower Manhattan, making for a beautiful riverwalk with iconic views. In terms of placement, Hoboken has the Hudson River on the East, Jersey City to the West and South, and Weehawken to the North. The little city is smack dab in the center of it all. Along with a great location, the city has a rich history and a vibrant future to come! As of late, there are plans to redevelop Hoboken to make it a city of the future, but first, we must discuss how the city of one square mile got to where it is today.
Hoboken’s Past
The Hoboken Historical Museum explains the history of the city in a few paragraphs, originating with its Native American roots. Held by the Lenni Lanape tribe, the land now known as Hoboken, New Jersey was called “Hopoghan Hackingh” or “Land of the Tobacco Pipe”.
The land was purchased by the Dutch Governor of Manhattan, Peter Stuyvesant in 1658, only to land in the hands of British loyalist, William Bayard. New Jersey confiscated the land as a result of the Revolutionary War, leaving it to be bought by Colonel John Stevens and named “Hoboken”. The Stevens family started to create the foundations of the modern Hoboken waterfront. As early as the 1820s, Colonel Stevens and family built up the water front to be a recreation area with a “spring water grotto” known as Sibil’s Cave (shown below), a large park, and a ferry service. (Hoboken, New Jersey, The Mile Square City: A Brief History)
Officially, The City of Hoboken was incorporated on March 28, 1855 (Hoboken, New Jersey, The Mile Square City: A Brief History). As time went on, the water and rail transporation hub of Hoboken grew to be a city of immigrants and the factories that employed them. These blue-collar workers established themselves in tenements throughout the small city.
Unfortunatley, in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, Hoboken was ravaged by fire. In an article published by the Hudson Reporter, a staff writer says,
The city of Hoboken as we know it today arose (like a phenoix, some may say) from these ashes. Hoboken has become a more affluent and expensive community since its forced rebirth. In the years following the fire, Hoboken has tried to maintain the preservation of its history in shipping and industrialization, while modernizing and diversifying its use of zoning in neighborhoods.
As the 21st century has carried on, Hoboken has become a center for what I like to refer to as “puppies and babies”, meaning you can not walk more than one block without seeing one or the other. The city is perfect for young professionals who commute into New York City, including my sibling.
Hoboken has a special place in my heart. Partially because of the Cake Boss and Carlo’s Bakery (who doesn’t love a good cannoli), but also because of its beautiful views and walkability. As a Planning and Public Policy undergraduate student who grew up in a New Jersey suburb, I dream of one day living in or near Hoboken. To have access to a walkable city, accessible transit, and views of New York City, I might never need a car again!
Hoboken’s Future
An integral part of Hoboken’s development has been to reimagine its waterfront. The Fund for a Better Waterfront (FBW) has been the nonprofit behind creating a public park on the Eastern side of Hoboken, between Sinatra Drive and the Hudson.
As discussed in chapter 6, Planning and Poltics of John M. Levy’s Contempory Urban Planning, there are a variety of planning styles one may pursue. Criag Whitaker, the urban planner behind FBW, designed the plans for a very clear public park between Sinatra Drive and the Hudson.
Craig Whitaker makes it clear in his plan that he wishes for the waterfront park to feel public. He also critiques a plan proposed for the North End of Hoboken’s redevelopment in a video for FBW.
Mr. Whitaker’s advocacy of public parks is reflective of the role of the planner as an advocate. Hired by a nonprofit to draft these plans, Whitaker represents the interests of the Fund for a Better Waterfront. The organization wishes to give the waterfront to the people. They believe that the waterfront is a public good and should be accessible for all who wish to access it.
While this is not the only plan to redesign Hoboken, I believe the land between Sinatra drive and the Hudson River is best used as a park. I have enjoyed walking the length of the waterfront with my family time and time again. That land is vital to the beauty that is Hoboken, New Jersey. I hope it continues to be adopted and maintained for generations to come.
Sources:
Levy, John M (2017). Contemporary Urban Planning, 11th edition. Prentice Hall
Though New Brunswick’s George Street closure was intended as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent limitations on indoor dining, the street remains as a pedestrian-only walkway nearly a year and a half after the initial decision. As a senior returning to campus, the decision to continue keeping George St. only open for pedestrians and closed for automobile traffic has been a genuine delight, making the street safer and less busy, and therefore more walkable, particularly at night.
As a college student, walking down to George St. no longer feels like a task where I must set out a specific location, travel only to the predetermined shop, and then leave immediately afterwards. Instead, walking through George St. has become an activity of its own, stopping at shops as we pass by and making plans for all the restaurants we haven’t been to yet.
I am not an urban planner, and have, previous to taking this class, not considered the impacts of pedestrian-only roads on either the community or the businesses. I understand now why creating larger spaces for pedestrians and limiting vehicular traffic might be good for the community– spatially, the emphasis is taken away from the single-minded, independent focus of moving cars from point A to point B (where pedestrians are an afterthought), and instead put on the street itself, where the businesses themselves can flourish and pedestrians can take their time engaging with the street.
Obviously, there are consequences to closing down automobile access to a street of shops. Many of the previous businesses that used to rely on customers that dropped by while driving or have no use for an outdoor space have not benefitted from the street closure. Those that relied on business from customers that weren’t college students are also suffering, and some of these businesses have fully closed down. Though this is unfortunate in the short term, the point was made in class that reversing the decision to close the street for pedestrians would not bring back those businesses, as the damage is done and it would take time for those shops to recoup their lost profits. Instead, businesses that do rely on foot traffic and outdoor dining spaces would suffer as well, having to convert back to a business model replacing vehicular traffic with foot traffic. Because the street closure has been in effect for so long (a year and a half!), making this decision permanent would be the best way forward. New businesses that take the places of the older ones (and survive) will be more suitable to a pedestrian walkway, and George St. will continue to thrive.
With a bus stop fairly close to George St, the benefits of the pedestrian walkway are also more widely accessible, both to students and the wider New Brunswick community. Though it would be unrealistic to expect this single street closure to expand to a larger, more unified community space (such as Ithaca’s downtown area– the Commons– which runs for two blocks and offers a wider pedestrian space, more variety in businesses, and built-in features such as benches, fountains, and stage space), a permanent pedestrian-only street is a great start to what could become a more flourishing downtown.
How much involvement should the United States government have in a citizen’s private property? This question will vary heavily from person to person, as political identity and socioeconomic backdrops play a key factor in one’s answer. Those less trusting of the government may advocate for minimal regulation, while those in the opposing view might call for more involvement. Regardless of viewpoint, the differing levels of the government have had a say in regulating private property through the use of tools like eminent domain and zoning ordinances.
Within the book Contemporary Urban Planning the author, John M. Levy makes a clear distinction between the two major ways the government can influence private property. While eminent domain allows the government to buy private property for public use, zoning restricts property owners from some regional regulations without compensation. Eminent domain allows cities, states, and so forth to acquire private land, with just compensation, from citizens for public use. Zoning allows cities to regulate private land ownership without having to pay property owners, even if it causes a reduction in potential profit. Many towns, cities, and municipalities have used zoning to create the areas they envision. For reference, the Supreme Court case Mugler v. Kanas (1887) affirmed the right of the government to close a local bar. The government’s ability to enforce the closure of the bar, in the name of public health and safety, has come to be known as the police power.
The practice of zoning itself was nationally legitimized during the landmark Supreme Court case Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co (1926). Amber Co. argued that by unconstitutionally limiting how their land could be used their property was devalued. However, the village did not take any land, it merely regulated the use in which it had, for the benefit of public health and well-being. Therefore, the Supreme Court ruled that the local government had a legal right to enforce police power on land owned by the realty company.
Zoning has also been used to perpetuate an aesthetic or to maintain a healthy environment, and such is the case in the Garden State. Around 2015 New Jersey’s appeals court overruled a trials court decision to allow a zoning variance in Englewood Cliffs. The zoning variance would allow LG Electronics USA to build a corporate office building four times the city’s limit. Many including The New Jersey Federation of Women’s Clubs were upset because building such a large structure would greatly impact the view along Palisades Cliffs.
“[The 35-foot limit] is designed to preserve views of the skyline and trees, avoid the appearance of overcrowding that could result from tall buildings, and maintain the existing character of the Palisades Cliffs,” the appeals court wrote in the decision. “Such a large-scale deviation will undoubtedly have a visual effect on the area.”
The city of Englewood was able to legally uphold aesthetic zoning ordinances, through the New Jersey appeals court. All the while, Bergen County did not have to provide LG Electronics USA with any form of compensation. Therefore the government is within its constitutional right to both regulate and take land private property, for the benefit of public health, safety, and well-being.
The economic impact of the Great Recession was severe for many economies in the United States. In an attempt at revival after this economic hit, states implemented different strategies for economic development. Some states were able to bounce back more than others, and in the case of New Jersey, the journey towards successful economic development has been bumpy.
In 2013, New Jersey passed the The New Jersey Economic Opportunity Act (EOA). This act is a consolidation of five state economic tax credit programs into two, the Grow New Jersey Assistance Program and the Economic Redevelopment and Growth Grant Program. It allowed New Jersey to offer competitive financial incentive packages in order to attract development in smart growth areas in the state. The attraction of companies through the New Jersey Economic Opportunity Act was meant to result in the mutually beneficial redevelopment of public spaces, and increase in job availability and the employment of their residents, the introduction of healthier options for those residents by healthier food companies in food deserts, and the boost of the tourism sector from this redevelopment of infrastructure. The companies would benefit from the assistance given and the business gained, and the areas redeveloped would reap the benefits of those redevelopments.
Unfortunately, this exchange has not gone the way it was intended, and New Jersey has found itself with the short end of the stick. New Jersey’s plan was to offer overly generous corporate tax subsidies in order to encourage companies to relocate and develop infrastructure in New Jersey. The offering of generous corporate tax subsidies and the lax implementation of oversight safeguards, as well as the lack of caps on monetary awards, resulted in companies taking advantage of what seemed to be New Jersey’s fountain of subsidies, and then reneging on their deal, or only fulfilling a portion of the agreement between the state and their company.
This bait and switch between companies and New Jersey has resulted in ineffective results in New Jersey’s economic development. After being given the subsidies to build new infrastructure or relocate to a new location, rather than doing so, and creating new jobs and development opportunities for residents, companies simply move workers to different locations in New Jersey, or after receiving subsidies from New Jersey, they move to another state, taking the subsidies, and the employment with them, while leaving New Jersey to shoulder the added economic impact of them leaving and the wasting of subsidies.
Currently, companies such as PSE&G are pushing for even more nuclear subsidies than they need, and they have taken drastic measures such as threatening to close nuclear plants in the state if they are not obliged. In my opinion, their actions can be compared to blatant robbery and bullying on a grander scale. Many suggestions have been made by experts that New Jersey cut out the middle man, which would be the companies and implement the necessary redevelopment strategies themselves, that they place hard caps on award amounts with shorter award timeframes, demand stricter evaluations, require reporting from companies, and more.
The planned development of a BJs Wholesale store is threatening a 28-acre patch of swamp and forest centered in a Staten Island community. The parcel of wetlands under siege is only a piece of the wide network of wetlands that surrounds the New York-New Jersey area. The existing wetlands are critical for providing environmental protection to surrounding communities and enabling biodiversity for local wildlife.
Environmentalists and local residents of Staten Island are feeling defeated after a two-year battle to prevent the development of a BJs wholesale store, which is now going ahead with development. City and state planning authorities gave the go-ahead for the construction of the massive warehouse-like store with an over 800-space parking lot capacity, despite the fact that it will expose local residents to a higher risk of flooding and degrade the local biodiversity. This allowance was done with the condition that the development must take on environmental initiatives in order to mitigate some of the resulting ecological damage.
Proponents of the development, such as James Oddo, Staten Island borough president, and City Council representative see the deal as a good resolve for the land which he feels would inevitably be developed and tout the benefit to the local economy as the store is expected to employ at least 200 workers. Opponents such as the Staten Island Coalition for Wetlands and Forests, reject Mr. Oddo’s assertions, as it is now pursuing litigation effort, “arguing that the right to build on the land was never guaranteed and that regulators should have compared the project’s impact with unbuilt land — not a hypothetical, less environmentally sensitive development.” Nevertheless, the development of the site will go ahead, representing another marginal loss in the wider destruction of an important local ecosystem.
Wetlands are any habitat characterized by land in which the floor is covered by water. Wetlands are an important component of the local ecosystem because they are able to cultivate a dense population, comprised of hundreds of local and migratory wildlife species. These special ecosystems also play an important role in the battle against climate change as they are a natural buffer to capture excess stormwater runoff and moderate floods in the area. In the wake of experiencing increasingly frequent hurricanes and tropical storms, the greater NYC area desperately needs all the natural mitigation of flooding it can retain. Additionally, wetlands are ecologically useful for dispersing concentrations of pollutants other runoff that comes from the city, acting as a natural water filter. The dense vegetation arising from the nutrient-rich soil works to sequester carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. A disproportionate burden is placed on the remaining wetlands for natural carbon dioxide absorption spewing from the surrounding urban landscape, as there are a limited number of other natural or integrated green spaces in the greater NYC area. This presents a related use of the local wetlands, which is the opportunity for local residents to experience green spaces with wildlife for mental health and recreational uses.
The failure to preserve this patch of land is not important because of the actual acreage it gives up, but because of what it represents in the scope of a wider lens. Over the past century, over 85% and 90% of coastal and freshwater wetlands, respectively, in the New York-New Jersey Harbor estuary have been destroyed. Negligent development upon these critical ecosystems has degraded the harbor’s natural flood mitigation mechanisms at a time when weather patterns are becoming increasingly unpredictable and unstable. In this case, the local residents are pushing back, calling for updated environmental regulations and conservation of the wetlands, due to these very concerns. Yet in the face of this sensible pushback, local officials forced through the special building permit, directly elevating the risks to local residents’ safety and security of their homes. A solution to improve the preservation of the wetlands may be to improve the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) coordination and influence with local municipalities to produce a more centralized strategy to preserve the local wetlands. A problem with municipal control over land use can be a limited scope of resource or land use, such it may be beneficial for a state environmental authority to understand the larger habitat at hand, and effectively preserve the wetlands.
That’s right 2045 is the magic number. This is the year that scientist have predicted that the population of New Jersey will increase by 17% from the current number of people in the North Jerseys region; reaching a number of about 7.7 million. 2045 is also the year that the numbered of employed people is suspected to increase by 13% from the current number growing to about 3.4 million people. Those numbers show that Northern Jersey is expected to grow and that is a lot of people that need to somehow find transportation to their destinations. Luckily 2045 is also the number used in the title of the Northern Jersey Transit Planning Authority or NJTPA’s plan to improve the transit methods in New Jersey to develop a sustainable transit system in the Northern Jersey region. The plan itself is so modestly titled “Plan 2045”.
Plan 2045 is a comprehensive plan has one simple goal in mind; connecting northern Jersey. How the people at NJTPA will go about it can be found in the detailed document here. Included in the master plan are 7 key goals that aim to create a sustainable and longterm multimodal transit system. These goals are:
Protect and improve natural ecosystems, the built environment, and quality of life.
Provide affordable, accessible, and dynamic transportation systems responsive to all current and future travelers.
Retain and increase economic activity and competitiveness.
Enhance System Coordination, efficiency, overall safety and connectivity for people and goods across all modes of travel.
Maintain a safe, secure, and reliable transportation system in a state of good repair.
Create create places through select transportation investments that support the coordination of land use with transportation systems.
Improve overall system safety, reducing serious injuries or fatalities for all travelers on all modes.
“We have to be able to give our today for the next generation’s tomorrow….
Mitchell Silver, Commissioner of NYC Department of Parks and Recreation. Words spoken on the Plan 2045 symposium that can be viewed here.
Plan 2045 does not only plan for the issues that we see within the transit systems today, but it plans for the issues that may come later on in the future. It takes into consideration trends that are occurring today that can continue to grow such as the growing population and the effects of climate change with superstorms like Sandy. Plan 2045 also takes into consideration the innovations that may occur in the future that shifts methods of transportation based on the innovative trends of today. These changes include: ride-share increases, a shift in fuel sources, the increased population in cities, the increased deliveries from online shopping, etc. Plan 2045 has a plan for issues that may occur and is constantly being updated to reflect the trends. Plan 2045 has a plan for the roads, bridges, tunnels, bus systems, trains, bicycles, pedestrians, airports, and freight. This plan will leave no aspect of transportation out. The plan will abide by 4 themes. These themes are to create a transit system in north Jersey that is:
Competitive
Efficient
Livable
Resilient
With all these elements added into the mix of this well thought out plan I can’t hope but be excited for all the change that is to come to New Jersey. My only concern is how much funding is the public going to add and where will it be delegated to. Increases in fares, tolls, and taxes are expected in order to achieve this goal of connecting North Jersey but if the outcome is as good as they plan for, then I’ll be alright paying a little extra to indulge in the benefits of a better transit system.
Stormwater management is a problem that spans municipalities of all shapes and sizes throughout the country. Urban areas rapidly increase the amount of impervious surfaces (roads, buildings, and other paved areas) that cover the ground. Rural areas have even less stormwater management and hold greater concerns regarding erosion and runoff. In both cases, contaminated stormwater runs over these hard surfaces and bypasses storm/sewer drains, running directly into local waterways.
This situation presents an important discussion on stormwater infrastructure and public health. It is in the public interest to protect residents from expensive flooding property damage and pollutants from entering our waterways. This aging infrastructure is seldom the topic of discussion in municipalities as it is mostly underground and doesn’t come up unless something something fails or overflows. Natural disasters like 2012 super storm Sandy and periods of heavy rain bring the topic back into discussion however.
The infrastructure that handles wastewater and drinking water is paid for through dedicated funds from water rates. Stormwater on the other hand, lacks this source of funding for maintenance and upgrades. In response to this problem, 40 states have adopted “stormwater utilities” that use various means to reduce stormwater runoff and collect revenue for the improvement of the infrastructure. New Jersey has failed multiple attempts to establish such utilities, but this tried and practiced solution keeps coming back. More than 1600 stormwater utilities exist nationwide and NJ has paved the way for their existence in the garden state. A bill has been approved by the Senate and will likely pass this year that enables municipalities, counties, and certain authorities to establish stormwater utilities.
Like many other utilities around the country, it would allow municipalities and regional authorities to collect a fee from property owners to improve stormwater systems. This fee is assessed on the amount of impervious surface owned at the property and helps towns meet Municipal Separate Storm Sewer (MS4) permit requirements. This is a sort of permissive legislation however, which permits but does not require the establishment of such utilities. The need to prioritize action then comes along with a discussion on the implications of stormwater and poor management. To gain traction, the college town at the University of Delaware heard stormwater/ flooding as being associated with water quality. Tim Filasky, the director of Newark (DE’s) Department of Public Works and Water Resources noted that most of the town’s drinking water came from the poorly managed and flooded groundwater. The language used in the messaging of the issue was crucial in gaining support for Newark’s functioning stormwater utility.
Every day almost 400,000 people commute from New Jersey to New York City for work. The routes to the city via the various modes of transportation—car, bus, train, ferry, even helicopter—are crucial to ensuring the continuation of this activity. Currently, however, problems are arising with the existing modes of transportation, particularly from cars and rail. Heavy traffic congests bridges and tunnels, and the rail lines are operating through a 100-year-old tunnel on two tracks shared with Amtrak. Given this old infrastructure and the strategic importance of transportation between New Jersey and New York City, transportation planners should implement measures that would sustainably revitalize these connections. The debacle of the ARC Tunnel shows, however, that planning is often tied up in politics, disrupting the implementation of new visions.
The existing rail tunnel from New Jersey into Manhattan
The Access to the Region’s Core, or ARC Tunnel, was intended to build two additional tracks in a new tunnel into Manhattan to alleviate the pressures on the old one. The project was expected to cost $8.7 billion, with $3 billion each coming from the federal government and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The tunnel was approved and construction had started when Governor Christie abruptly halted the proceedings, explaining that he had seen new estimates that increased the price of the project to over $10 billion. Though this study was disputed, construction was discontinued. The money from the Port Authority was instead used to improve highways in the state, a project that could have been funded by increasing the gasoline tax.
The plan for the ARC Tunnel
Though in the post-WWII period of increasing suburbanization cars were promoted (and needed for that sprawling form of land use planning), there is now an increase in people moving back to urban areas, and studies suggest that young people, the millennials, are less interested in owning cars than older cohorts. By choosing to protect the car instead of investing in public transportation, Governor Christie ignores the changing preferences of society. Further, the governor’s actions lacked economic logic. The state had to pay money back to the federal government for the ARC Tunnel, and the 6,000 workers that had been hired were laid off. The senselessness of the actions suggests it was a political move, meant to make Governor Christie more appealing to the fiscally frugal Republicans and continue the attractiveness of the car. Transportation, then, has become a political tool instead of a public service, detrimental for the people who use public transportation to go about their daily lives.
Construction on the project had already begun
Instead of using politics to reinforce the position of the car, the state government should be investing in sustainable planning. In Contemporary Urban Planning John Levy notes that public transportation often faces criticism for its speed and difficulty to implement in newer cities, but as smart growth plans emphasizing compact development begin to dominate urban planning, public transportation will receive more investment. For the cars that already exist, the gasoline tax should be raised to pay for upgrades to roads. Outside of paying for necessary expenses, the gasoline tax would begin to neutralize the costs of the environmental externality of carbon emissions from cars, and the money could go to enhancing sustainability in other sectors. Transportation has always been important as a facilitator of connections. In this age of environmental problems, its planning is has more global implications than ever before.
RUTGERS STUDENTS ARE IN DIRE NEED OF FREE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION!
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, consists of three campuses (Newark, New Brunswick, and Camden) that provide education for more than 65,000 students from all 50 states and over 115 countries. 86% of all students are New Jersey residents and 14% are from out of state.1 When a student looks for a job after receiving a degree, he or she is essentially required to have already gained work experience. Since most internship and job opportunities are located outside of Newark, New Brunswick, and Camden, the majority of students who do not own a car are being deprived of efficient preparation for entering the workforce. With the increasing cost of tuition, books, supplies, and overall cost of living, the average college student cannot afford to pay $271 for a monthly NJ Transit rail pass (price for students traveling between New Brunswick, NJ and New York Penn Station).2
The current system provides a 25% discount for students, but limits each student to use the pass only between one origin and one destination, which strictly limits transportation accessibility.2 For prospective students and professionals, the lack of affordable/free transit options outside of Rutgers’ campuses is unattractive. By providing free transit passes to current Rutgers faculty, staff, and students, the University would become more competitive among other universities, and the state would have another incentive for people to come to New Jersey to live, work, study, and play.
In Rhode Island, Brown University worked with the state’s statewide public transit system, RIPTA (Rhode Island Public Transit Authority), to create the UPass program which sought to reduce car congestion in Providence and provide more transit options. “Current faculty, staff, and students are able to ride any RIPTA bus or trolley anytime, anywhere in the state at no charge. Brown’s investment in the UPass program is the latest effort in one of many transportation initiatives benefiting employees, students, and the broader community. How it works: swipe your Brown ID through RIPTA’s new fareboxes and take a seat – it’s that easy! Rides will be electronically counted and RIPTA will bill the University monthly. The University will review monthy statistics to ensure that only current, valid IDs are in use. IDs that are cancelled, lost, stolen, or obsolete will be reported to RIPTA and will not work with the new fareboxes.”3 The program, which costs Brown University approximately $150,000-200,000 annually, has been largely successful -increasing student use by 227% and faculty use by 2%. Since UPass was launched, the program has been expanded and now has more participating universities, including RISD, Providence College, and Johnson & Wales.4
Although the UPass program has been successful for Brown University, it is important to note that Rutgers is roughly 7.5 times larger than Brown, which only has a total of 8,619 students.5 Therefore, the total cost of the program for Rutgers would be significantly more expensive. However, that is not to say that such a program for Rutgers would not be a successful investment for the University and state as a whole.
IF YOU AGREE WITH THIS PROPOSAL, CLICK THIS LINK TO SIGN MY PETITION.