And so, we organized. We found that the state had allocated some funds for water remediation, and we urged JCPS and JCMUA to apply. But it was not enough money, and we wanted every child in every school in Jersey City to have access to clean drinking water. So we pressured the JCMUA and the City, and they came up with funds for the first two phases of water remediation. We held actions, we went to meetings, and we made sure that all of the affected parties were communicating with each other. (You can see more details and the history of the water project on the Jersey City Together web page here.)
We spoke with the Mayor and asked for his commitment and asked how much the project would cost, and which schools would be included. The estimated “city contribution” climbed from $12M to $14M, but not a dime came from the city budget. Most of it came from JCMUA funds.
All of these commitments were the result of our organizing. We showed up. We attended the JCMUA Board of Commissioners Meetings, and reinforced the imperative that safe drinking water be provided to every child at every public school. We used the language of humanitarian action and clean water as a child’s human right. The JCMUA Executive Director was personally on-board, and even used his prerogative to answer us through his Executive Director’s report.
We know that our organizing work was crucial to completing the water remediation project.. The reimbursement grant from the NJ Dept. of Education covered about five percent of the project costs, yet served to propel commitment to the collaboration. The JCBOE Superintendent committed to using District capital funds to remediate the last dozen schools and early childhood learning centers, which were outside the scope of the SOCFBA water grant.
Finally, in March of 2025, the work was done, and after seven years of hard work, we celebrated with the district. And this is an example of where, at long last, the world as it should be meets up with the world as it is. The key ingredient was not another politician.
The key ingredient was persistent, disciplined organizing by community.
This is not the end of the story. The water action offers a final lesson that connects to this chapter:
“Avoid pats on the head” (Page 45)
When we knew the water issue was “won” (when we were assured all schools would have installed fountains), we began planning the final water project celebration. We had more than a year to contemplate a celebration because in part because the JC BOE took longer than expected to finally complete the project.
On page 36 of Going Public, Gecan talks about the intersectionality of power and recognition. Gecan describes (in very memorable terms) a dinner meeting with Mayor Ed Koch. The mayor uses the opportunity of this dinner to describe the New York IAF organizations in very negative terms (page 40). Gecan makes the point to Koch (and to the reader) that when an organizer and an organization are described in these negative terms, it is not the individual who is being disrespected. Rather, the incident shows disrespect for everyone who is part of the organization, for the public relationships and work of every leader in the organization as well as the organization itself.
The action to celebrate the water win on March 20, 2025 had some of those same elements.
And, a note on celebrating the wins. When you organize, and you are disciplined, and it works such that you can celebrate, it is crucial to take credit. Why? Because it's not about a simple photo op. Something deeper is at stake: when you win, you have demonstrated that you have the power needed to compel the justice you wanted to see. It took raw power to get water fountains in every school; power to compel politicians from the City, the MUA, the Board of Education to finally act and do so in an orchestrated fashion. Community organizing was the power dynamic that forced elected and administrations from inertia to action.
It is important to recognize the efforts and name it in public.
When we first started the planning to celebrate the water win the central administration staff of JCPS said to us “this is your event”--which was how they had treated the previous public actions on school drinking water that we had held. We met with district staff to plan the event. We were excited that the district wanted to have students participate in the event, with speeches and singing.
But then, things shifted.
With two weeks to go ahead of the event, we suddenly stopped hearing back from district officials. In retrospect, we know they intended to take over the event, and take all of the credit.
The district administration sidelined our speakers. They created their own narrative, grossly overstating their own role in the efforts and minimizing the city’s, MUA’s, and community’s respective roles. Then, they gave us the “pat on the head” that Gecan refers to in Chapter 2: one of our key leaders who continuously pushed the work forward–visiting schools where water remediation was happening, talking to district staff as well as the contractors and plumbers who were actually doing the work–was given a “trophy of appreciation” for being a water advocate.
Why was this not recognition? Because what the district did was individualize the work from a multi-year, organizational-wide effort, by diminishing it to to be focused on one “activist”, while in the same stroke, taking credit as though it was their idea to remediate the water (as though they had not had to be pressured - by us, the community - every step of the way to complete the work).
Our team was skilled and experienced enough to navigate the action and claim credit as we could. But it was a great illustration of “pats on the head.”
