Heat. Heat. I would like to advise all those present that notice of this regular meeting of November 12th, 2025 has been provided to the public In accordance with the provisions of the open public meeting act of the state of New Jersey, notice of time and place of this meeting has
been included in the annual notice of meetings which was posted and filed with the city clerk and with the Jersey Journal in the Star Ledger. An additional notice of time and place was posted and filed with the city clerk and was forwarded to the Bergen record and star ledger on November 7th, 2025.
The regular meeting of the municipal council of the city of Bayon is now in session. Miss Medina, please call the role. >> Mr. Booker, >> here. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> here. >> Miss Leur, >> here. >> Mr. Lapaloosa >> here. Please rise for the pledge of >> allegiance.
I alian to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Our first item is an ordinance of the city
of Bal County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a redevelopment plan for the property located at 626-628 Avenue, which is designated as block 405 lots 31 as shown on the official tax map of the city, which was introduced and passed. The first me read reading at the
meeting held October 15th was published in the Bergen record and posted on the bulletin boards required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by the council
president giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> I >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of
Hudson, New Jersey, approving a redevelopment plan for the property located 66- 628 Avenue E, which is designated as block 405, lot 31, as shown on the official tax map of the city. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance
an opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. >> Yes. Can you come to the front and state your name and address, please? My name is Janice Mattis and I live at
624 Avenue, William Bayon. Um, I don't understand exactly how this building is going up. Um, how many floors is it? How how big
is it going to be? >> Uh, I know it's five stories. >> Okay. >> It is 60 ft tall. Um, and we'll have approximately 20 units. >> 20 units. >> Um, there was a letter that went out advising people to come to the planning board.
>> I've received no such letter. >> Okay. Um, >> when was it sent out? I I don't know the answer to that but I will tell you that um that is our normal process. So it'll go through that board and get sent back to us.
>> No, I did not receive any such letter and I don't know that anyone else did either. >> Well, I brought this up back in 2019 regarding this building.
I took him to court and I won. So I'm asking my question is why is this coming up again? >> Why is it coming up again? The the >> the developer wants to develop the property.
>> He bought the property. He wants uh they want to develop this property into a building. >> What is the difference between what he wanted before and what he wanted what he wants now. >> Again, I really don't know what he
wanted before. >> What was the nature of your appearance in court in 2019? >> The actual court appearance I did not go to. Um, it was during CO, but I did take him to court and I have
all the documents on that and I won the case. So my question is why is this occurring again? Now if he wants to develop it, his building can be historic
and it is not. >> It's as far as I know it's not designated historic. >> No, it isn't. It could be though. >> But he owns the building and and >> Right. Why don't we do we have anybody that can assist with these questions?
Anybody that has a bit of the history? >> Sure. >> So on this project, this project uh initially back in 2019 was in front of the zoning board for a variance uh for a Dvariance which kicked it there which
again didn't conform with the underlining zoning. Um, while the zoning board did pass that, the court uh in their ruling did strike that down as a you know, I don't have the the ruling, you know, I haven't seen the ruling in a
while. Um but they they did revert saying that the court uh or that the zoning board used its uh authority to change the underlying zoning which quite frankly though that's the purpose of the board
uh as that's a variance of a D a D variance. Um as this property has been studied as an area need of redevelopment uh along now with the you know hearing now for the redevelopment plan. The current zoning here would you know
permit something similar in nature as it's a you know if it being proposed in the redevelopment plan a five-story building but in the transit district um or sorry transit development district uh the TDD um seven stories would be permitted uh if you can meet the other uh bulk
standards. >> So does the plan that's in front of us today it's safe to say that it is within the guidelines of permitted there is no need for a variance. Well, from again the from the height of what's being proposed, uh the the one of the purposes
of doing it this way is uh for there to uh a finance the project uh for uh in the future for the council to consider a tax abatement um on the property. Uh but in again on the height it's we're
lowering to uh from seven stories to uh a maximum of seven to five here. Uh but on on this again the bulk standards being proposed for this ordinance um as council president uh L Palooa said it's uh five stories approximately 20 units
uh here. >> Did you did you just say you were lowering from seven stories to possibly five to seven stories? No, five. It's going from it. >> The underlying zone would permit seven stories.
>> Um, as the the maximum height in this redevelopment plan, the maximum height is five stories. >> This plan as it is in front of us. >> Yes. >> Max >> and they were shot down for a variance seeking over five in 2019.
>> No, they were shot down by the court. The zoning board approved this at five. The court uh found, again, I don't have the the ruling in front of me. Um I'm going off a recollection on that. Um but the the court did uh strike the zoning
board's uh approval down. >> Yes. >> And isn't Mr. Melli, is this your project? >> Yes. >> Can you offer us some additional insight? >> Certainly. >> Why don't you? >> Okay. So this was approved by the zoning board as as Mr. Skillander said. Um and
it was for the actual physical height of the building. Uh we were more than 10 feet in 2019. >> Yes. And then it went to court and instead of sending it back to the zoning board, which is almost always the result, I think, and I wasn't the attorney on that. I think the court got it dreadfully wrong when it just
overturned. That is a draconian thing to do. But the thing that she basically said in her decision is this is a relegulation. This is a rezoning of the property as opposed to giving a deviation of variance. Well, okay, that's not the body that's supposed to
do that. This body can do that. And this body has found that this is an area in need of redevelopment. And the building right now, as it stands, I think it's 60 ft, which is which is a normal size building for Bon. Uh especially with the the redevelopment that we have been approving. Some of them have been a
little bit more than that. Um it's 20 units. It's it's appropriately sized for this project for this property and it puts the property to better use. It's a commercial use now. This is more consonant in a residential neighborhood. Just to step back to the zoning, the zoning that was implemented back when
there was prior planner here. The zoning that was implemented along Avenue A gave with one hand and took away with another. And what do I mean by that? It said you can have seven stories, but you have to have lots of certain sizes and depths, right? And if you look down
Avenue E, I I haven't done a study, but I think others have, not if they find a lot that meets all of those requirements without getting a variance, there isn't one. It's almost impossible to meet those regulations. So it looks good on
paper, the TDD, TDO, we're very transit oriented de transit oriented development friendly, but it isn't. It makes it virtually impossible to comply. And that was on purpose. It was to require you to have to beg for permission to build. That was a different time and it put
Bang on behind the eight-ball for years. So now fast forward to now we've realized that and we have reszoned a bunch of properties that are underutilized and are old commercial buildings and we're looking to it's you know true transit oriented development
which this is and this isn't overly intense. This isn't overly tall. It's it it respects setback boundaries. It's a nice project and it's it's right size for this this property. So, yes, you're really you're you're changing the zoning, but that's what the
court said. The zoning board shouldn't have done what it did, but this body is empowered to do that, and that's what we're asking you to do. I wonder just as an aside and I I don't mean to interrupt you ma'am but as an aside I wonder if there has been prior litigation on a project if that might be
something that is pointed out to us in the future. We can certainly take that up um >> in another conversation. >> Not a great not a great omission. >> Exactly. Not not something I welcome um hearing and I do think you are well within your right to come and offer that
information to us. Um, just as my own comment, and this is not the ward that I oversee. Um, but nevertheless, I'm I'm certainly concerned with our community as a whole. Um, I I I do my my prior opinion was
that I was in favor of this project because it is a very good use of of that area which is otherwise um not being utilized and is very industrial and not necessarily helping um residents.
I I wonder if this is something we need to consider more carefully or if we should look at more carefully. >> Yeah, I think we should pull this off and discuss it a little more and come back to this. >> Okay. >> Okay. One more comment I will make. >> Yes. >> Or two
people I spoke with do not want this period. And in the second place, it wasn't just one variance for the height. There were multiple variances that they were asking for that
the court overturned because they were asking for all variances. Uh not only the height but uh frontage and you know I I do have the papers but they were asking for um too many
variances and that's why it was overturned. >> Okay. No, I think what we should do is um get the decision from the court and look at those papers and we're going to put this off for for this month. We're not going to do any action. >> All right. >> Okay.
>> I just wonder if before we let the young lady leave if if Director Skiller, are we certain that we have all of that same documentation that was previously >> Yes. from the uh the court? Because again the the zoning board was a >> petition itself and
>> the the zoning board uh again was sued um in that capacity of it. So we have the decision from that uh from the zoning board. >> We have the decision. Do we have >> right the complaint itself? >> We I will talk with our uh lawyer uh for the zoning board lawyer on that to make
sure what he has on the file in that matter. Um but he should have all the documents as the zoning board had to be named as a uh party in that matter. >> Okay. Uh director, just uh just as a side note, uh can we all get a copy of that because we're here talking about
we're withdrawing this and we're going to make a decision on it and I'd like to read uh her complaint and so forth and so >> absolutely. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Madison. >> You're welcome. You have a motion to postpone to the December meeting. Can I have a second?
>> Second. >> And on the motion to postpone, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lalooa. I >> O2 is an ordinance authorizing and approving title 39 rights in accordance
with NJSA 3951-1 to enforce traffic and parking violations on public access access roads and parking areas for the property located at 266-280 Broadway which is identified as block 268 lot one as shown on the official tax
map of the city. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held October 15th. Was published in the Bergen record and posted on the bulletin board as required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council for consideration and
a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Carol giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Booker, will you second? >> Second. >> On a resolution, Mr. Booker >> I. >> Mr. Carol, >> I >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss. >> Mr. Laloo. I >> second reading is by title an ordinance
of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, authorizing and approve approving 39 title 39 rights in accordance with NJSA 39:51-1 to enforce traffic and parking violations on the public access road and parking areas for the property located
at 266-280 Broadway, which is identified as block 268, lot one, as shown on the official tax map of the city. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who
wishes to speak. >> No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or passage has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? >> Second. >> Motion to close. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur.
>> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> I. and a resolution ordering final passes >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I
>> three is authorizing and approving the title 39 rights in accordance with NJSA3951-1 to enforce traffic and parking violations on the public access road and parking areas for the property located located at Avenue J East 22nd Street and
Hook Road which is identified as block 466.01 1 lots 1 2 3 and four and block 478 lots 1 and 1.01 block 465 lot 9 and block 506 lot 2 as shown on the official tax map of the city pursuant to the
planning board application P2308 and amending and supplementing section 7-38.4 four of the city of bale municipal code was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held October 15th was published in the Bergen record and record and posted on the
bulletin board as required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following the public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by the council president giving the ordinance second reading Miss Weamer will you second >> second
>> on the resolution Mr. Booker >> I >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Pson, New Jersey, authorizing approving title 39 rights in accordance with NJSA 39 colon
51 to enforce traffic and parking violations of the public access road parking area and parking area for the property located J East 22nd Street and Hook Road, which is identified as block 46.01,
lots 2,3 and 4. 478 lot one and 1.01 block 465 lot 9 and block 506 lot 1 as shown on the official tax map of the city pursuant to the planning board application P2308
and amending and supplementing section 7-38.4 of the city of Balance Municipal Code. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to
speak. Any questions on 03? >> No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. May we have a motion to close. >> Move it. >> Second. >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Hi,
>> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final pass. It >> second. And on that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carroll, hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi.
>> 04 is an ordinance authorizing the sale of city- owned property identified as block 830 lot 2.02, O2 which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held October 15th was published in the Bergen record and posted on the
bulletin boards required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council for its consideration and the public hearing and resolution giving the ordinance second reading is moved by council member Perez Missur will you
second >> on a resolution Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance authorizing the city the sale of city owned property identified as block 830
lots 2.02. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. >> Yes. Sharon Nrosski, 126 Avenue.
This is not This is an item that's up a second time for me. When I was sitting up there in 2021, this same exact property was going on. We were selling it. I was saying we should pull back because the the developer, who by the way, I love the
developer. I picked him. I voted for him in 2016 when we granted this redevelopment plan in 2016. The base had nothing. No infrastructure down there. The Alexa was the only thing. There was no walkways. There was no Costco. There
was no LA Fitness, no Starbucks, you know, none of those things were down there. It was really just the Alexa. And we we agreed to sell the land and he had a great plan and I've seen his work in other towns and I'm sure his
development is going to be fabulous. I have no objection to that. But my concern is that and my concern that was up there in 2021 when I was sitting there was that he never draw down on this land. He never took
ownership after we gave him this redevelopment plan in 2016 almost 10 years ago. 10 years ago. So when we did that negotiation it was a very different time. The market was very different and what was down there was
very different. So the value of the land was very different than it is today. So I I do have a copy of of the U financial agreement and it doesn't really say what the price per unit is or what the overall because you're just doing one. But at that time I believe it was um
like 19,000 a door and then to 20 and to 30. But I did my calculations based on $35 a door because I know in 2021 when I was advocating for it to go up, it didn't. So I know at that time it was about that. So,
so at the time there's 1,200 most recently there was barring the changes that are coming up in the next one and that was at the planning board meeting that I was at last week. There is now there was 1,200 and um and 50 units. That's 1,250 doors
and normally redevelopment values are calculated by doors. And this was 30 we charge the the original thing was about $35,000 per door. So if you do the math, 35,000, you know, times$,750 comes out to $61,255,000.
That's what the price basically was, right? We have never received one penny in tax dollars because he never draw down. So he land tax was never even paid. That was my argument back then. We were told it was going to be and I was no longer on the council and it never
happened. Okay. So still hasn't paid anything 10 years later. So now today, next thing on this agenda is that we added another 500 units to this building. So 500 doors. So according to
the redevelop the uh financial agreement, the sale agreement that I'm looking at, I don't see a change in the price. So that's still now giving him 500 extra units today in 2025.
the price that was a valid price, a very fair price in 2016. But all that infrastructure we have down here, the going rate for a door down there now is more like $75,000 per door. So if we did the whole thing, because you have the
right, you have the right as the council to renegotiate the whole agreement now. You do. So if you did it $75,000 a door times the new increase you did of$,750 units that would be $131,250,000
that is a difference of $70 million loss to the taxpayers. Okay. But even if we say we'll honor what we did back in 2016 and then it was redeveloped in 2020. uh u an amendment was made in uh
2017 and then in 2022 and 2023 and just last week in 2025 23 and 24 and now 25. Okay, that's the fourth amendment that was passed um this last Wednesday, last Tuesday. Okay, even if we honor that and we said we were just going to charge him
today's rate for the new 500 units, we decided to give him last week or you guys did it at last month's meeting. So, I'm not really sure what the plan is because you guys did introduce something and then the planning board did something different this week, but this is a second reading. So, it can't be what they did two days ago because that
would be a first reading. But, um, so even if you did it that way, right, the 500 units, what we're going to get now at the $35,000 per door is 17.5 million. Okay. But if they paid us today's value, it's about 75K a door times 500, that
would be 37.5 million. If we're keeping it, that's a $20 million loss in tax revenue to the city. Well, not instead of tax revenue. It's for the sale of the land. But that could help this city instead of raising our
taxes, right? That's $20 million we're you're you're leaving on the table that these taxpayers are debt. That's the value of our land. So, you know what this is to me? This is a fire sale. This is payback for an election that just happened. This is what this is. This is payback for an election because this is
when this happened last time when the last was the mayor election. It became a payback for election. You know what? That's nice. He's elected. His election's over. You guys are all up for re-election. Just saying. And and that being said,
um you know, not um and and and additionally, the man who's who introduced this plan, he don't care anymore. The man in the corner office sold his property. He's not a homeowner in Bayon anymore. His deed for sale was filed
July 1st. So, he's not a taxpayer. So, this is not affecting him like it's affecting me. And most of the people are sitting out here. And probably the rumor has once he's completely resigned from here, he'll probably be living in another city in Hudson County. So, this is not affecting him. So, he sold his
house and on the way out he's selling out the Bayon people. That's what's happening. We're leaving all this money on the table. That's what you're leaving on the table. I'm just saying that's that's, you know, really
not not acceptable. Um, so I am for this plan 100%. It's a huge plan. It's a great I do have issues with the plan and I'll talk about that on the next thing. There are some issues because there are some things that are not proper down there to accommodate this right now.
But, you know, it's a great project and you know, Neil, I'm sure when we talk in a minute, you're going to talk about why we'll talk about why affordability isn't mandated in our redevelopment plan. And Gary, I'm going to ask you about union labor because this definitely is a job that requires union labor, but I don't
see it in anything in writing. But like I said, that's my take on this property sale. So, I think you all need to take a breath and maybe do what you did on the last one and reook at and understand why you did not negotiate renegotiate the financial terms for the best interest of
your constituents. Thank you. >> I'm going to let one of the professionals speak on this because there's a number of things that were left out in the storyline of this and so one of our professionals will explain that. So, >> can I just not Sharon? >> I don't want a story line. I'm going by
what the documents say. I got you. I got you. Let Let them explain because that's what we pay our professionals for. >> Hi, good evening everyone. My name is John Wescala. I'm a redevelopment council for the city. Pleasure to be here uh this evening. Uh I was actually
in this room speaking about this very project probably three three and a half years ago. Uh, and just just to put it into context, what we're talking about right now, we're not talking about the redevelopment plan. We're not talking
about prior redevelopment agreements. What we're here is on uh ordinance 04, which is an or ordinance to authorize the sale of block 830, lot 2.02. What is that? That is phase one of the Bayon
Partners project. And as indicated and and it is absolutely correct, this is the first phase of the redevelopment project that was approved by this city uh in 2016. There have been a number of amendments
over time. Whatever happened a week or two ago that that is not the uh most recent amendment. Uh it was originally approved at 1,250 units. Uh it was amended approximately three years ago to
the uh to the current number which is 1,750 units. But we are here on ordinance 04 to talk about the closing of phase one. And there's discussions about why the developer didn't take down properties.
And when I was here three and a half years ago in this same room talking about this issue, I reluctantly said that the redeveloper had not done anything to default or breach the agreement. The agreement as as with all
of our redevelopment agreements has multiple has obligations on both sides. Redeveloper has certain obligations, things they need to perform and so does the city too. is city- owned property. Uh when I was here three and a half years
ago, I it said in public the city had not yet performed all of its obligations. We had an obligation among other things to amend the highway access permit, clear title. There were a number of of items. Uh we have paired down those
items over the course of the past three years. Uh we got the uh redeveloper agreed to wave the uh requirement for highway access permit modification for this first phase of development.
This first phase of development incidentally is 240 units. the issue that we have had and believe me when I tell you I have been charged with seeing this phase come to a closing for the
first 240 units. Our issue has been an environmental issue. There was a pile of dirt that was stock st stock stockpiled on city-owned property along one of the roadways. And
about six years ago, a decision was made to move that dirt from that particular location and to put it on what is phase one of this site. Approximately 30,000
cubic yard pile of dirt. When we took a look at this pile of dirt, it was realized that it was it contained contaminants. It was not a clean pile of dirt any longer. It was city-owned dirt on city-owned property.
So, the city has had to deal with that issue. We have been in multiple public meetings here. We've had RFPs that have gone out and it was the city's responsibility. The city went out to RFP, hired its consultants. The dirt
pile has been removed. We had our LSRP matrix, do all the analysis, etc. It was not a cheap process. It turned out that decision to move the dirt from one location onto this site uh resulted in
in an environmental cost to the city of approximately $400,000. But the work has been done. I would say it's reflected in the ordinance that the redeveloper uh actually funded that work. When I say it funded it, it put the
monies into escrow. And that's actually going to be a credit uh off of the uh purchase price that's reflected in there. You'll see a net purchase price. Uh but that dirt work has finally been done. That was actually the final item. That was a city obligation
for us to close on phase one. Work was completed. Letters have been issued. So why are we here tonight on ordinance 04 is it's technically a requirement that we have an ordinance that formally authorizes the sale of that phase one
portion of the property. It is in the original redevelopment agreement. It's in the amended redevelopment agreements. The original redevelopment agreement, incidentally, was in was a redevelopment purchase and sale agreement. So that's why we are here. Um
we could not close sooner on phase one uh without providing that necessary clearance. Uh we are ready to go. Closing documents have all been prepared uh and uh you know with the passage of this ordinance we will be able to uh
close title on phase one and proceed accordingly. >> Mr. Skinder, can you um enlighten us a little bit about the price and >> Right. But I I wonder if I might ask John a question first. Um Okay. Council President John, go ahead. Sure. >> Um I let Let me just ask you a couple of
questions. One, why is it that we would make a decision to move contaminated dirt from one location to another? >> I do I don't know how I don't know how that decision was made to be honest with you. Uh I just along the line learned that uh there was a dirt pile that was
on this site and somebody else you know may have a >> and then an opinion on it. I don't know. All I know is the dirt was is there and we have to deal with it. >> Right. Right. No. And I I I appreciate that. But if then if neither party then make the terms met the terms of that agreement, why wouldn't that agreement
just become null and void and and one would think that the city would then revalue this property and and put it up for sale once again at a time when I believe our finances are going to be strained.
>> Well, we have a contract. We entered into an agreement. There was no breach of the agreement by the redeveloper. So, they they signed an agreement. Uh and again, it had obligations on them, obligations on the
city. When we come down to it over the course again of the last several years, the obligation has been on our part to address these issues. We need to be able to give listen contract you buy a
house uh you have terms. >> That's exactly what and yes and >> didn't breach and that would have been an actionable issue for him. He could have then >> if I can jump in you're right an anticipatory breach would be one thing
but in order to come to equity you have to come to equity in with clean hands means you can't say well I want out of this contract because I want out of this contract and the developer hasn't performed if you've got some pre-existing conditions that you have to take care of and in this case we had an
obligation to provide certain things that we're just now able to provide given that we didn't have the right and we went through this very hard over the course of several meetings several years ago about whether or not there was a breach on the part of
the city on the part of the developer. Mr. W which is Scala has a to be charitable contentious relationship with the with council for uh the redeveloper. Uh notwithstanding that, you know, facts are facts and they
have a funny way of getting in the way of things. And this dirty dirt pile that wasn't decision on admissible council to move it there was it was the dirt was moved from one site to another uh is the last of the pre-existing conditions that we are obligated to take care of prior
to closing. and the developer to his credit once we said, "Okay, we've and we had to you're well aware that we had to facilitate an accommodation on his part to the tune of $400,000 temporarily. He'll get a credit back at closing." Uh we can now effectuate phase one. This is
a long and tortured process. No doubt about it. We've had attorneys involved in this things up to their uh necks and we're at the precipice of being able to close on phase one which allow us to move forward on the other phase. >> Does so does phase one at the price of
is is first of all is the price of 4.9 million is that inclusive of all phases or will there be additional payments up? >> No, this is only first phase and that is actually a net price. They initially made a uh deposit of 300 I believe 325 I
think it's reflected in the ordinance. Uh those monies were actually released to the city in terms of its you know general budget years ago. So they're getting that credit they're getting a credit for actually I believe they put up two $450,000.
I think at the end of the day the work is going to be about $400,000. So, they're going to get a credit for that and then they'll be just whatever your typical adjustments are at closing. But that net purchase price, which is just under $5 million,
uh is for phase one. Uh and it's on the basis of 240 units. >> And so, as the phases progress, there will be additional payments. >> That is correct. As the project continues, as with other projects that involve city property, uh phases two,
three, it's actually I believe it's phased out as six phases in in its entirety. Uh we we would be back just like any other project with ordinances that are authorizing it and and that's provided in in the original redevelopment agreement and the amended
agreements. come in. Title companies want to and and lenders want to see that there's a formal ordinance from the uh municipal council uh in this regard. >> That's okay. So, council president, I think some of the things that have to
be, you know, explained out to the public and to the council on this um again for the full history on this project. So, some of the numbers that were just priorly quoted, uh, they were 40, you know, 35,000 to 40,000 a door. Uh, again, would make
sense if this was a stick frame construction. When I say stick frame on six stories or more, um, this project is not. This is uh, you know, light gauge steel to uh, steel and concrete. And the
purchase price on the door on per door actually decreases as the higher that you you get up. If you were getting that kind of rates on that, we would be downtown Jersey City also getting, you know, close to $60 a square foot for rent. We're nowhere near that. We're
closer to 35 to between $ 35 to $40 a square foot. So at the time the amended redevelopment agreement was done uh for these additional 500 units uh it was negotiated at a fair market price of uh
you know 25,000 door and that is stated in the amended redevelopment agreement not the financial agreement because the financial agreement shouldn't have those terms those would be in the redevelopment agreement. So when overall those additional 500 units would net the
city approximately $12.5 million of sale that um it didn't have at the time. So those are again for the additional phases. But I think that's important for the record and for the public to know on uh you know the project for this. So for
the you know for the council to say that we didn't renegotiate on it. I think we did. we got additional monies out of it and those numbers were based off of the sale of other projects at the time of similar height uh of 12 stories or more of other projects and broken down on a
per door basis. So that was something that the city agreed with along with the the redeveloper and you know in a fair you know price 25,000 a door for you know 12 stories you know for for like gate steel and uh for concrete I think
is more than fair you know price on the city end of this you know look if if this was stick construction I'd agree 40,000 45,000 a door would be appropriate but it's not I think it you have to look at the construction of the building being built
there and you know equate apples to apples and oranges to oranges here. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Yes. >> Pat Desmond 131 West 4 Street Bon I believe that Borai pays more per door
than any other developer you have down there. Gupta paid what, 10,000 per door. KPE is paying what? 15,000 per door. And you're saying Borai is paying 35,000. Right. >> 20 25,000. Yeah.
>> That's more than everybody else. So if you want to see Boris work, just drive through New Brunswick. They do a great job. They use union labor. They use They're going to use Bayon contractors because I'll hold their feet to the fire to do that as
subcontractors. I brought them in on the Dora. He was going to use all Bayon contractors to do the work. So, if he's using Bayon contractors, he's keeping the money in Bon, right? And if he's using using union labor, it's going to
be built better. and he's paying more per door than everybody else. And I understand what Sharon's saying. I'm not like trying to go against her, but we need to start building. It's been laying vacant for how long? We're getting nothing right now, right? Need
to start building it out. >> $5 million is a lot of money. >> Need to start building that out. So, it's been 20 years at least since something was built down there. >> That's all I'm saying. Every time that something's done on property, >> Borai is a man of his word. He'll come
in here, do the right thing, >> give him a chance, get to get it going. >> Thank you. >> Y >> Tom Curry, 8 West Grand Street. I've been in the construction field for 20 something years. When you build something with concrete
and steel, I don't give a damn what price you got. $25 a door. Prices go up when you use concrete and steel. I worked on three buildings down there and they built with wood.
What my bosses, what my owners got down there, I don't know. But I guarantee you they they got a song in the dance. one of the biggest developers that Balon had and the biggest developers in Jersey City. They they got the whole general
square and their buildings are built with concrete, glass, and steel. Okay? I think we should renegotiate the price because you're going back to 2016 and going with $25,000 worth the door
and you're gonna take the taxpayers money out of our pockets to fund their mistake. 90% of the is contaminated. Nobody up there cannot say they didn't know.
You could go back to the freaking first mayor that we had that base has been contaminated since since the bases have been built. on a summer day, you go sit down on 440 between Costco and uh Wendy's and smell the the stench
that comes out of that out of that water. Vinnie Lar had a perfect word for it. It smells like crap. And you can smell that all the way to Broadway on a on a nice windy day. So for everybody to say they didn't know this place was contaminated, they're
full of you know what. But as you're standing there for the developer, I don't believe that we have to pay $25 worth the door and you are going to use concrete and steel. I think the price should be negotiated
and look at the and look at the taxpayers that are going to be coming here in May to put you back in office. Thank you. I just I I just want to clarify I am not here on behalf of the developer. I I represent the city. I have been believe me I have been trying
to press this sale of phase one of this project for years. The point the point that I am making is we do need to deliver clean title
and a property that does not have known contaminated substances on it. And that is and that is what we have had to deal with. Nobody wants it closed quicker than I do. This thing has been on my plate. I'm
here for the city. the work has been done from a contractual perspective. Uh they're obligated to buy and we're obligated to sell and we're ready to go with phase one. >> Raise the price. Think of the taxpayers, not your pocket.
Think of the taxpayers. >> Okay. Please, please don't yell from the chair. Thank you. >> Anyone else? I figured, you know, I just found out about this project a few hours ago, so I really have Rich Matelski, 87 West
Third. >> You did? >> Yeah, I did. >> Uh, I just I was sitting home. I was I seen it on social media and I said, I come up with a novel idea. How about we How about we pause development like we did
the last election? It worked so great then, may work again. let the let a new administration, a new mayor come in and he may have different ideas. Uh because it seems like we every time we we sell property down the base, we're getting uh we're getting taken
and and even I I see a projects going on there right now. It looks like three new buildings going up in that what used to be a grassy lot and we can't even figure out how to get cars on and off the base and we're thinking about putting another thousand units. I mean, I've lost
confidence really in the in the planning and the strategy of this. You know, that's I got nothing else to say except take Northern Illinois plus 14. >> Stephanie Gleson, 1050 Avenue C. um
didn't know all this was going on. But I guess the question would be is I understand you said that you're here for the city, but you don't live in the city, do you? >> No, I'm I'm I'm redevelopment council. Yes. >> Okay. So, your taxpaying money is not being um brought out your pockets extra.
My whole thing is why can't we negotiate the price? If we did something in 2016 and this is 2025, don't things go up? I mean, I'm not a developer. I I can't build nothing. Don't even know how to hold a hammer.
But isn't that just common sense? If I charge you something in 2016 and now in 20 2025, it shouldn't be the same price because milk yesterday was $3 and then next week it's going to be $4. So why we
can't just go back to the table and negotiate a price? >> I I don't I don't know. said, "It doesn't sound like it's that easy, especially since I think some of the things were on us on the city and that was the reason why this deal didn't
get done faster." So, I don't know if there's a legality to that, but we could be sued, I think. >> Well, listen, we we entered into a contract. Uh we agreed these are the deliverables we're going to provide you. We're going to provide you with a clean piece of property. We're going to give you a uh we're going to give you good
and clean title. and uh and and over the course of this time we have not been able to but we have a binding contract a redeveloper takes on uh the responsibility it's under the redevelopment law this property was declared as an area in
need of redevelopment it was blighted again I I represent the city I am representing the administration but they s we signed a contract we had our obligations the developer has their own obligations And we are now
9 years later >> I can count >> delivering delivering on that. So we we have contracts you have offer acceptance consideration and that's where we are right now. The developer is not in breach or default of
the agreement. So we're not in breach or default either. We we've delivered and this is about closing on the first phase of the project. And now I'm just curious about one other question that um she asked. Why do we move contaminated dirt
from one site to another site? Is >> that I do I cannot answer that question. It was it was it was on it was on one parcel of city property that was uh was not on this within this redevelopment area, an area that this city decided uh
needed to be redeveloped. Uh but a decision was made. I cannot tell you why that was made, but what I can tell you is it created a problem and it's created a many-year delay in the ability of of
the city to convey the property to finally realize, you know, the the consideration and it's also led to a delay in the ability of the redeveloper to proceed with the development. And my last question. So we moved the bad dirt
to another property. Still bad dirt. So now we got to pay another money to get the bad dirt or for that property to go out. >> It's been removed. >> So it's all gone. We done with it. >> Okay. Okay. I still think we need to.
>> Thank you. >> Good evening, council. Jean Perry, 77A Hobart Avenue, Bayon, New Jersey. Just a quick question. When was the uh remediation completed for that dirt? >> Like within the last month. >> Do we have a report available if it's opened?
>> Uh we do have a report. >> And what about the location where the dirt was moved from initially? Was that remediated yet? >> I'm sorry. What's the question? >> Well, the dirt was moved from one location to another. So it was dirty over here. So I'm sure it's dirty where
it came from. Was the other location also tested? >> I don't know. over the other location was uh was tested. I think the pile the pile's removed. I don't know all the uh I don't know all the particulars in that regard. I know it was moved on to this site. Looks like um Director Skillander
is here to speak to that. >> So, Jean, just for clarity sake, are you asking where the pile of dirt ended up? >> No. Was the new area tested by the state that is no longer contaminated? Similar to Collins Park, we had old chromium. The state had to come in and test it.
Was testing done there and was it done where it was moved from? >> So the testing that was done on the property that was being sold? >> Yes, >> that had that is what was being tested
on there. Uh and that has come back uh with uh you know negative findings of contamination there. Uh, as for where the dirt came from, we can't speak to uh, again, I don't know, uh, where that came from, that dirt pile,
uh, and how it ended up on the city's property on there. But, um, I can tell you for the property where, you know, I can speak to from if, let's just say 0.1 is where the dirt originated from, don't know where that happened and why that happened to move to onto the current
property. So, for let's just say two on that one. So, but from two to its removal, I can say that we know that we've removed that property. We've tested that uh soil. Um our licensed site uh remediation professional uh at
Matrix uh conducted the testing the uh the removal with the company Ambient on that to to certify that uh it was done proper in accordance with the the uh D rules and regulations there. And again move that to uh
>> that report is available to the general public. >> I believe it is. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or passage has been filed with me. May I
have a motion to close? >> On a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, Mr. Perez, >> Miss Weame, Hi. Mr. Lapa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second.
>> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> My concerns largely emanate from '05. The nature of 04 as explained by our attorneys and even as the public discussed. Um, I'm inclined to vote I
given that this is essentially a contractual procedure and a clearing of title, but I I vote I. >> Mr. Perez, >> at this uh phase, I'm looking at uh the way Mr. Desmond said, union labor. I think that when we sit down with these
people, they should explain that we need union labor. Uh, and I vote eye on that. >> Mr. I'm I'm I too am conflicted by this. Um but I do recognize that we entered into
a contract and did not deliver on the deliverables that were our responsibility. This developer has every right to take legal action against us. Um, I think also that because this is a multi-phase
project, knowing that additional funds will come into the city as these phases progress is somewhat comforting to me. And I too am familiar with the developer um, in and of himself. I do know him to
typically use labor. Um, I don't, it is not spelled out. I don't have a clear confirmation that that is the case on this one, but I do know him to typically do quality work using union labor. Um, and because I cannot I cannot shield
away fault on on on the city, I do think we we certainly bear some of of the fault in this. Um, it should have happened quicker. Um, the the the relocating of this dirt disturbs me. I don't know why or who would have made
that decision or who its location bothered um so much so that they had it moved. But nevertheless um for those reasons I will vote by >> Mr. Appalooa. >> This has been a long time coming. I know
um the for this developer that he normally uses uh union labor. I've heard it mentioned many times that he's going to be using union labor which we're definitely in favor of. Um the city uh explained
why there was delays in this. It was to no fault of the developer. Um they're paying what we considered at the time a fair price. And because it was no fault of their own, we have to basically honor that price. And so with that, I'll vote
I. >> Five is an ordinance of the city of Bayon in the county of Hudson, New Jersey, approving an amended redevelopment plan for the peninsula at Bayon Harbor Bay East for the entirety of block 830 which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting
held October 15th was published in the Bergen record and posted on the bulletin board as required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council court's consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Perez given the
ordinance second reading Mr. Booker will second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon in the county of Hudson, New Jersey, approving an amended
redevelopment plan for the peninsula at Bayon Harbor, Bayon Bay East for the entirety of block 830. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to speak.
>> Mr. Drosski, 126 Avenue, I'm not going to give up on you. I'm going to think that sometimes something's going to sink through cuz that was, you know, glad you're all comfortable with giving away money. Um
because I didn't hear our lawyer talk about that it wasn't negotiable. Just saying that. Um okay. So about the there this project itself. Again, no problem. I was all for this project when it was going to be one of the first projects
down there and there was nothing there and there was you know would be the only thing with a lot of these units and everything and we all know what a great developer. We heard a lot of testament to him. No problem. But I do have a problem. This is a redevelopment plan. a redevelopment plan which
should say in it. I understand that Wasim's a great guy and he generally uses union labor and I believe that. But you guys have the power. Yes, you do. Because this isn't a plan that we're looking at today isn't one that came back from the planning board last week
because this is one you guys changed. And when I was at the planning board meeting, I'll have you know the other engineer for the city or of CME who represents the city um said I'm up here on the be behest he said of the city
council because they asked me to add five stories and I literally got up there and say are you kidding me? Did they really ask you? They asked you. I went and that was my professional question to him and he said, "Well, through the developer, yeah, it was them that requested these five stories be added." Just letting you know it's on
YouTube, the the meeting. Um, so but with that being said, we I just don't understand what we're doing with adding the 500 stories, 1750 units. That's 1750
plus cars at a minimum. At a minimum. And they told me at the planning board, "No, Sharon, there's going to be a ferry. The good old ferry. Loved the ferry. Took it for years from Brady's dock, then took it from Port Liberte. Best transportation in the world. I advocated
for the furry. I wish we had a furry, but and I know again we're playing in politics with our agenda here and articles that went out because back before the primary election for the man in the corner, there was an article about the ferry in
the contract with New York Waterway, right before that primary, right? Do you know what's posted now out there? New York waterways 2025 map. And you know what's not on it? I mean 2026 map. Bon.
So I know that's what we want to say when we want to get people thinking we're getting things done and we want their votes, but it's not reality. We cannot build development saying a furry's oh we're getting a furry because it's not there. And then we can say it's
in a transit area because the light rail is only if you go by, you know, why would I say, you know, fly straight maybe 3/4 actually from this one is probably over a mile because I know from I I I run down there so I can tell you what that is to the probably a little
over a mile to get to the light rail station. But the problem with that is you can't get there by foot because we're still waiting for the pedestrian pass walkway bridge that we've been promised for 10 years too. We're going to blame that on DOT and it very I know how DOT works. But you know what? Who's
following up? Because whoever job it is should be calling them every single day before we have more debts on that road. Remember we were all gungho when those poor people lost their lives there, right? Hit by the car all over and then Oh yeah. Yeah. We're all pounding our
chest and then where's the follow through? So you're putting 15750 units. That's a minimum because there's no other way to get around. We have no cross bus transportation in this town. None. There's no cross town
transportation. And right now um the bus service, Amal's bus service on Broadway bus is going away. And he did. He went to seniors and took them. I don't know if you're getting that. I don't even know if you negotiated with New Jersey Transit because I don't see that on their website either for taking over the bus route. Bayon has a terrible public
transportation system, but yet we're going to keep putting people down there that the only way they can get out is through cars because there is no other way. They're not walking. They're not walking a mile and a half and they're not crossing that highway unless they want to take their life in their hand. And we shouldn't be encouraging that
anyway. and the fact that we have bad infrastructure down there that we're paying police officers who should be out patrolling for the three driveby shootings that happened recently two in my neighborhood on Fourth and Fifth Street. Okay. But instead of our cops maybe being out patrolling and doing
other things, they're doing traffic down there. We had three cop cars down there doing traffic because it's such a nightmare because of all the accidents and the cars. And when the cruise ship comes in, there you go. How many passengers? I don't I have no idea. A guard on a cruise, but I I'm assuming
it's a couple thousand passengers on most of these boats and they're all coming by car, whether it's Uber. I mean, they're not walking down there. There's no there's no other trend. So, they're going in and out and it's no one can get around there. It's just dangerous. So, you don't have the infrastructure in place and we're tired
of hearing but it'll be there by the time it's developed because it hasn't happened. It hasn't happened. That furry has been being promised before the Davis administration. Mark Smith mentioned the ferry. Okay. So, we're talking 15 15
years or so we've been talking about the furry coming there and it just not happened. So, alls I'm asking is for you guys to take question. Maybe you put a pause on this. I think Richie Richie talked about that. Why don't we put a pause on it and wait till the infrastructure catches up? Because another thing that's going to happen is
I was at the planning board meeting. And we talked about the number of two-bedroom units and there going to be kids there and we don't even have a way to get kids safely. And Jackie, I know people have called her about how we're getting kids to school because they can't walk over the highway. >> And it's dangerous and we shouldn't be
advocating and you're creating that danger by building these units. You know the saying, build it, they will come. Well, you're asking them to come and then you're asking them to put their lives on the line to get to school, to get an education. That's on you because you're putting
them you're setting up that danger. You're setting that up. So, I'm just saying maybe we need to take a pause on this. Maybe it don't need to. I'm not saying it's not a good project. And I'm also asking you right now to go to update this to update this. You can do
it right here on the fly. And you know, you can you can make union mandatory. You can add that to this redevelopment plan. And you can also add affordable h units to a redevelopment plan. And I know people who sat up there, Mr. Coffee is not out here will tell you, "Oh,
that's not part of a red." Every other town puts affordability into their redevelopment plans. They all do. So, Mr. Mr. Mr. U. Carol, I'm going to ask you, you should make that motion.
See if your colleagues have it to come up >> on several occasions >> right now. But right now on this plan, you can make a contingent. You guys know you can make changes on a plan when when you're doing it. And Gary, I would like Why don't you make the amendment to um mandate union labor? Mandate it. I'm
sure M. I'm sure Wasim is going to do the right thing. But he may turn around and sell this tomorrow because tomorrow after you pass that last one where he bought the land, he'll turn around and sell it for more than $25,000 a door. Guaranteed. And it'll be it'll be the
money out of us taxpayers that we could have got that 20 million. it's going to go into the developers because he's definitely selling it. The value of that land by the nature of the that this is going through the roof. Okay? So, he can sell it tomorrow without doing anything. And the redevelopment plan will bind in
case he sells it to someone else. That union labor and that affordability that maybe Mr. Wasim's going to do out of the goodness of his heart will bind the next person that he sells this development to. If he sells the redevelopment plan, the property, it goes with it. you'd be
binding the next person to actually have to abide by what we all believe you know while seen would do but I don't believe in taking things people at their words you know I think it should be binding it's not just you taking their words you're you're representing all the
residents here you have an obligation and the obligation is to deliver not to say well I'm sure he usually does well he probably will that's not acceptable your job is to make sure it happens thank Thank you, >> Mr.
>> I have a question for you. >> Can you explain how the city's making more money on the number of units? >> Sure. So under the purchase and sale agreement, it was initially structured where based on the number of doors uh that were sold, the city would get a
sliding scale and um the original purchase and sale and redevelopment agreement limited to 1,250 units. So the next amended agreement which was in front of this council, it was negotiated for the additional 500 doors there to be
at uh 25,000 a door. So the basically in short of it the more units that uh the city approves there the more money that the city gets on the development site for the sale of it. So that's how the contract was structured and continues to
work and operate. So as the developer takes down each of the you know unit counts for his uh you know different phases the city will get that. So again, you're going to see another ordinance, you know, for the second, third, fourth phase, you know, you know, so forth. Uh
but again, if the developer so chooses, you know, wants to buy more units from the city, the city has that option to again renegotiate the price of it and sell more units there and get more money out of the developer for the purchase of the land. >> Did I understand that you said we did
have the ability to renegotiate? Well, as the number of units that came in uh from that, we did, you know, renegotiate the part of the contract that wasn't in, you know, dispute or agreed upon prior. So, we >> had the ability to renegotiate the
additional >> additional units. Yes. Because that was at the request of the developer uh at the time along again with the city's need for getting more future revenue coming in. So the amended agreement was put in front of the council to sell more
units, you know, there and get more money, you know, into the city's coffer. >> And did we just just to clarify a couple of points? >> Sure. >> Did we ever have the ability to renegotiate the original contract for the purchase price? As I understand it,
we were in default. >> Um, which in my mind, >> I answer the question. No, >> thank you. We didn't uh we agreed. So this is a >> we're not talking about a brand new 1750 unit project. This started out as a 1250
unit project in 2016. Uh and with you know and there have been one or two amendments over the last couple years which have come before this council ultimately resulting in the additional 500 units at that purchase price. And we did discuss the purchase
price uh uh in this room, you know, in the context of those ordinances. Uh that was it. The ordinance that's here tonight, again, please read everything in it, but its purpose is uh essentially for the city.
We we are following up. We agreed under the RDA that they're entitled to 1750 units and this is a redevelopment plan that recognizes 1750 versus the 1250. You look at
height, look at everything else. Believe me, I'm not I'm not saying not to. Uh but it is it is about the additional 500 units. And I do not believe incidentally legally uh that uh the city council can
impose a mandatory union labor agreement in the context of a redevelopment plan. I have not seen that. We have certainly never done it and uh you know it's my legal opinion in that regard. >> Thank you. That was my next question. John, >> is it legally permissible in a financial
agreement? >> In the financial agreement that >> I think it's even worse in the financial agreement than the redevelopment agreement. financial agreement is supposed to deal only with the financial terms of this. The redevelopment agreement deals with the redevelopment of the property. >> Okay. So, it really is not within our
ability to mandate the use of union labor, which which is quite honestly something I would be in favor of. Um, >> are you in favor of it? And and and I've talked to Wasim Bor who told me that he's going to use I agree you can't
always take their word for it, but I mean, going in past practice, like you said, you say he does great buildings. I've seen a little bit of his work and I like it as well. >> So, John, you know, part of I guess with the PLA too on this is in order for the
municipality to uh and I think we've had this discussion in public to mandate a PLA. You know, the court has found that uh the city has to have some skin in the game outside of just selling and doing redevelopment. that city has to put a bond. So like for the film studio, us
putting a a redevelopment area bond, there's a financial stake that the city took in the project to you know mandate some terms again the power of the purse on that. So that's how again we could mandate uh you know uh PLA uh for that uh but also again even for how our
ordinance is written there has to be you know a two-part test of to the you know uh city involvement of a project being more than 15 you know million dollars there. So, on this one, um, you know, we're we're happy that again, the
developer is taking that initiative on his own, but for the city council to do so, I don't think it's, uh, in the spirit of the the PLA law and again would potentially violate, uh, you know, what powers that the municipal council has.
>> Thank you. >> Yes, ma'am. Hi, my name is Lena Drillman, 189 West 27th Street. Um, uh, I had a question about that. Um, I'm sorry, I just, uh, forgot what it
was right now. Um, she something about affordability. Can you mandate affordability? Some affordable units. >> Yes, you can. That's the >> That could be added, right? I have one more thing. I know when you buy a house, uh you can't just like have that
contract open-ended for nine years. Uh you know, there's usually like a a limit like you have 60 days to finalize this or something. How come we don't have that with the city? You know, even with the film studio, like uh you know, uh if this doesn't go through within a certain
period of time, then it should be opened up to something else or renegotiation or something. That's what I don't understand. like why has his drag gone so long? You know, uh in other in other situations, not only this one, I something about some dirt, but besides
that, why isn't there like an expiration date? >> Yeah. Why isn't that? Yeah. Why isn't that that that would be to the city's advantage, >> right? And and sometimes in the course of this there's several extensions that they can get as well. >> Okay. But that would be up to the city
to grant the extension, wouldn't it be? >> Yes. >> Okay. So they would have to show like a good cause why they >> right. So but I that should be part of anything standard you know uh it shouldn't be just open-ended >> till whenever you know. >> Um Lena I think that one of the one
important factor here is that um and and and clearly it was in the developer's best interest to do so but but we the city did not meet the terms of that contract which meant that the developer then had the ability to sue us. So the
the legalities and the cost of a litigation. >> Yeah. Unfortunately, it makes Son look like a bunch of screw balls nonstop. >> And so and and please keep in mind that the while we are certainly tasked with what is doing best for our citizens, that encompasses a great many number of
things. And one of which is bringing in the right type of developer and development so that it ultimately does benefit the city. And so in in reneggging on our contracts, um that would not put us in a very favorable light with any >> Why is that allowed to happen?
>> I I wouldn't um quite honestly I'm not sure this property was negotiated quite some time ago >> and the terms of that contract negotiated then as well. And so it it seems to me that in this case it um this is sort of the um the lesser of two
evils and we are better served in meeting the terms of the contract at this point in time um than going through a full-fledged litigation. >> Is conly shooting in the foot. That's what it looks like to me. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Yes. >> I'm sorry. Stephanie Glover Wilson 1050 Avenue C. Okay. I understand the less of the two evils. I understand Bayon dropped the ball, but now I'm asking Neil Carol question. She said something about she meaning
Sharon. Sorry. Um that you could put an amendment in that there'll be so many affordable apartments in these new development. Is that true that y'all can do that tonight and put it in this the person has to have so many apartments?
so many affordable apartments. So, it is true that we can pass legislation. What is also true, and what I was going to comment on when it was my turn to talk, but I'll do it now, is that over the past several years, I have put forward essentially three measures.
Measure one was a return to rent control across the board of uh buildings with units of a certain number. Okay? It there's a stigma attached to it wrongfully. What it does is it stabilizes rents throughout the city. It lets the renter know what they can
expect as an increase, which gives them peace of mind and some dignity. Next was a affordable housing measure, >> which is exactly what you're talking about. So, I put forward an idea that we include across the board in every uh
redevelopment plan affordable housing. If you're going to build and and for the sake of this conversation, we'll we'll use numbers and I'll try to go back and get my details, but if you're going to build a unit uh a building of a 100 units, you should have 20% 20 units affordable housing. If you're going to
build a building of 40 units, you should have another percentage based on the number of units that go into each building. The third was a workforce housing measure which is actually a program that exists currently in the county and it's based on a um
formulation of your income. >> They were DOA uh couldn't get them moving. Uh >> who's that? >> No, I'm >> I mean I I mean no disrespect. It's they need to be moved. They need to be
seconded. They need to be fleshed out. The bill needs to then, you know, goes to the law department. We formulate it. We bring it back. There's at least a 60-day process of you introduce something, you vote on it, you work it out, you v, you know, bring it back to the public, let the public speak on it, and so forth.
I'd love to see it happen. And quite frankly, and I think we should be generous, I'd like to see it happen January 1. I'd like to think we should have this in place for the new year. I've tried for three years. It hasn't happened. >> Here's my thing.
>> I think we should do it January. >> So, so before I want to interject before I think I'm the only one who really spoke to Neil at length about >> 100% I'll give you credit for that. >> And I'm not I'm not against affordable
housing. I think we and I say we because I think it was myself and my colleagues differed on the number and the percentages. So then I spoke to the law department and right now There could be something that could be done. I don't know if it could be done for January 1,
but um I >> It can if y'all want it to be. And no, honestly, it can if y'all want it to be. >> Right. >> Well, I'm saying, but it's it's a negotiation that we have to do as a council and make sure it's all legal. >> Here's my other thing.
Elections are going to be elections and I get that. I don't know who you guys think are voting for y'all. Anyone that's voting for y'all are making under $70,000 a year and they have to pay
rent. I'm in the process now of trying to move. And honestly, I might be moving out of BAM because I can't afford BAM. I work for the county. All y'all know that. I run a nonprofit. All y'all know that. I don't make no
money at the county. So, if I'm paying rent now, $2,500, and I won't go into one of these new buildings with three bedrooms and two bathrooms, when I looked yesterday, it was $5,000. That means I can't stay here no more.
So, I don't understand why the council, the previous council, and this council or the next council start making affordable housing for people that live here. The average person that lives here has 2.3 kids
making under $70,000 a year and y'all want their vote, but then y'all letting these other people come in and we can't afford to live here. So, make it make sense. I don't know why y'all can't go back there, fight it out, argue it out,
whatever you got to do, put it on so this new developer can have some affordable housing in Bayon going forward for any developer that comes into this town. There should be at least
30 to 40% apartments that are affordable. That's common sense. Y'all raised all this money to run these elections, but we can't vote for y'all because we can't live here no more.
And I don't think they going to vote for y'all behind me. So, I'm I'm Jersey City does it. Union City does it. Bob Bayon can't do it. Make it mandatory. It's not a hard decision. So Stephanie,
we don't none of us here, I believe, um, disagree with your reasoning and and your heartfelt comments. In fact, I have a report on my desk that I'd be happy to share with you. the the the issue at hand here is one there's there was an
extensive investigation by the state that reported that Bayon has a sufficient number of affordable housing units that they're not required and I I do mean required in in quotes to add any
additional right and I think and and I'm going to have Director Skylinder come up in a moment but I I I want you to know that we all looked into this very very close. I I looked into it very closely. Um the report also says that the median
income and the monthly rental allowance is also within the general population here in Bayon. And therefore now I don't I don't know I'm telling you what the report says and we looked into it. So therefore, in order for us to
to mandate that would affect one's ability to get financing in in the financial world and then our then I'm telling you the ability here within the city to continue to grow and meet our needs and meet our financial
responsibilities which are growing each and every day um is going to come to a stop because then there will be no ability to obtain financing to continue the growth here in Bayon. And I can assure you right now we do not have the means in
this city to meet our financial obligations without some form of smart continued growth. So that is the way that I understand it. With with that, I'm I'm going to ask Director Skylinder if he might comment
more or expand upon that because I don't I certainly don't have all the answers, but I at least wanted you to to know my thought process um and what was done to to look into it. >> I'm sorry, director. >> That's okay. So, back to again um this
council uh had its uh fourth round obligation for um Mount Laurel. Uh with that again um the state said that the city of Bayon had a present need obligation to rehabilitate
749 units and not build any new units because we did qualify as an urban aid municipality. Um again oversimplifying the affordable housing process is you know those were requirements that the state looked at when it come when it
came to the income line. Uh the state sorry the federal government publishes by region where we fall into the Jersey City metropolitan region on what is the affordable housing. So those are uh
nationally publicized uh guidelines that discuss incomebased rent base on you know quote unquote what is affordable and now there's different levels of affordable. You have
you know very low moderate uh and then you also have and that's on the federal level. What the state does, it adds an extra layer in there of workforce housing on there and they're all tied to
the uh area median income. So the area median income being in Jersey City is approximately about $100,000. Um for workforce housing, it's between 80% to 120% of AMI. So you're making
between that range um you know roughly you know 80 to you know $110,000 a year. Now that's a state um guideline. uh for the federal uh purposes for uh HUD uh affordable
housing is your moderate which is 60 to 80% AMI and then below 60% is your uh you know low to very low uh that's important to understand on those because
that allows on these agreements on understanding what the capital stack is. So, there are state and federal programs out there where if the developer so chooses to build, um there's home funds,
other programs out there that they can apply to the state and build. Generally though, the developers look at what the requirements of the municipality are in order to meet that. and Bayon is in a
very unique situation on we're ahead of the, you know, affordable curve because we meet our obligation year and year over again unlike other municipalities within Hudson County or the region here.
We make sure that we have, you know, an abundance of affordable housing units that we rehab. We make sure that it's also done through the Bound Housing Authority. We don't want to, you know, and this is a policy decision that if the council so chooses to change, you
know, the administration will agree with uh that change, but we prefer that the housing authority uh build, run, and operate these affordable units only because again, I
think there's a more a better control in place than on rehabbing units, on upkeeping with the rent, upkeep Keeping with the maintenance that goes on with that, our housing authority has a robust rehabilitation program in place.
Mandating doing the inclusionary zoning takes that away from the city and pushes that onto the developer. Uh and again, you know, the developer, you know, doesn't have to build those standards to uh you know, luxury or, you
know, market rate. um there's a certain guideline that has to that they have to meet and generally depending upon the developer that's what they they build in accordance with uh the law. So,
you know, there's there's a a misnomer on, you know, what affordable is. Jersey City, quite frankly, Hoboken, the more very affluent, you know, regions that are getting the six, seven,000 a month
units. We're lumped in with them on on the Jersey City metropolitan area affordable option. When we did the study, our market rate is workforce housing. Uh it you know it's a tough thing on >> if our market rate is workforce housing.
What would be the danger of mandating it? >> Exactly. >> The danger of mandating is is that at that point you allow the developer uh potential opportunities from a financial standpoint to cut out um tax incentives at uh if it's just market rate otherwise
do. So for for argument sake under the affordable uh under the pilot law the city cannot collect section 8 vouchers. The that is taxexempt. So on the pilot that money is exempt. So if it's a for argument sake for simple math it's $2,000 a month there. The tenant is
paying $500 and there's a subsidy of $1,500. That $1,500 the city does not collect any pilot payment on it. So only >> if the apartment is section 8 if the apartment is workforce which is not under the section 8 guideline and I don't want to muddy the waters and suggest that it is.
>> It is fully collectible >> but of how the law is written. I'm just using section 8 as a example. There's other uh government programs uh for subsidies on that that the municipality cannot collect a pilot on. So it's it's
just more expansive than just section 8. Uh >> okay, Mr. Thank you, ML Wilson. You know, it was a good show with all
the numbers because kind of put me to sleep. But, uh, affordable housing, I remember I remember when I was building some buildings in this town. Contractors and builders had to give so much money from their project to go to
to build affordable housing in this town. >> I haven't I right it still probably still does. Haven't seen any buildings going up for affordable housing. Unless you make $5,000, you could four or $5,000 a month. Kushner Realy, their
highest their fourth floor is $5,000 a month. Their studio $2,100 a month. That's the That's the developer I worked for. All right. Nice guys. I won't talk bad about them. But Trump Crow, his
buildings, the Alexa, he's up there $6,000 a month and he has almost every building going down the river up to the George Washington Bridge. You got to stop with this building. This contractor, does he have a tax
abatement? Yes or no? And how long? And how long was this tax abatement going for? Since 2016. >> Pilot you talking about? >> Yeah, whatever. Whatever you call tax abatement. Well, they do have a financial agreement. It doesn't kick in until the uh project is built and they start to become occupied.
>> So, has he been paying taxes on that property whatsoever? >> He doesn't own the property. We've with uh with tonight's uh action, at least as it relates to phase one, >> property will be sold. He has built the he shovel in the ground.
>> Did he put a shovel in the ground? Yes or no? >> No, because he does not own the property. >> Who Who removed the Who removed the soil? the city. >> Okay. So, this contractor is coming in. He has the property since 2016. We've been holding the property for him since
2016 and we couldn't sell it to somebody else. >> No, we had a contract with him. He's a designated redeveloper. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh he took on the risk of the development. We had an obligation to deliver him good, clean title, clean
piece of property. >> We haven't done that yet. We are going to be closing on this property phase one and he will have a continued obligation for all the subsequent phases. >> So since 2016 to now we we got no tax money whatsoever for that property.
>> Correct. Because we cannot out of my pocket, his pocket, her pocket, everybody else's pocket. >> We couldn't convey it to this developer or any other developer for that matter. >> Another question. >> Hundreds hundreds thousand units he's
going to build. seven. Well, whatever. Where are the cars going? Before that, before he even starts, you better be putting a traffic light there first because I tell you right
now, Tommy, you did a wonderful job. I commend you on that. I'm doing that the work down there. >> Yes, you the police department. But I tell you one thing, you don't get a traffic light there.
I commend the police department because they're almost getting hit over there. >> It's true. >> Look on Richie Met's uh uh Facebook pages. He laughs. >> I think we've all >> we Well, I laugh when I see it. >> I only asked for Delenius to go straight
up the middle. I didn't ask for to change the traffic pattern. But now you're forced to put a traffic light there before anybody builds. >> The plan is for a traffic light. It's still waiting for DOT approval. And
>> the actions that they did, yes, there's some backup still. It's not It's a It's a band-aid. >> Some, >> but the truth of the matter is is less. >> It goes to Wendy's. >> So >> at five o'clock it goes to Wendy's. >> I get it. I understand. >> I understand. >> And if we And since we have the
developers down there, There's a number of different things that are going to happen along the way in different phases. >> Now, the last meeting I was here, the developer down on Fort Street is paying for the traffic light. How many developers we have down the MOT
in the past 10 years? We couldn't get we couldn't get 30 40,000 50,000 for each one of them. That traffic light should have been G, you know for a fact that traffic light should have been back in there 19 and 2010 >> even uptown. And I pushed for that, by
the way. I had the police do the study before Costco was there. They said it didn't warrant a traffic light. And I knew, >> but you had a survey saying that you were 90% 95% full before Costco went in. Before KRE put them three buildings up, the traffic light should have been in place. >> Again, I don't want to go back and forth
and argue >> because you know I'm right. >> That's the problem. You know I'm right, >> Tom. I'm just going to explain to you what you asked me first. >> You asked me about developers paying for lights, right? I have money going towards a light uptown where the crossing guard was hit on 56th Street
paying into that. So yes, we do. >> Oh, so we have to wait for Oh, okay. The citizens are bound. Just remember Gary Labu said you got to hit buy a car first so you get a traffic light down there Costco. >> Thank Thank you, Tom. That's really not right. That's really not right for you to say that. You know,
>> Tom, I I just want to mention to you that this is a problem that that we are currently working on, but it is a problem that existed before this administration took office. We inherited that issue. We We do not >> Well, and and and that may very well be, but I I don't know the severity. I'm
going to tell you right now, I don't know the severity of the issue back then. I know only what has been in place right now. But I I do recognize that it is a problem. I think we all do. And I I don't disagree with your comment that yes, that we should perhaps be able to
get all of the developers together. And I actually mentioned that to a couple of our developers just last week, oddly enough, at Gary's event. um that perhaps we might get together and one personal favor that I would ask for is for contributions towards a traffic light
there. But I do know we are also mandating that the developers in that area are reworking the traffic pattern are adding additional roads are paying for the cost of those roads as well as our our water and sewer issues associated with that. So there there's a
lot of negotiations and a lot of moving parts and believe it or not before we have the ability to put up a traffic light. The Department of Transportation has to approve that for us. >> So just saying there is a need certainly is enough for me but it is not enough
for everyone. >> So and we're not I don't want to have a I'm welcome a conversation with you any time but but not across the >> Mr. Desmond. >> I'm sorry. >> Mr. Desmond. Pat Desmond 131 West 4 Street. I just want to ask is all the developers down
there have >> what you're asking for? >> Affordable housing. It hasn't been mandated. >> So, nobody has it. But you're trying to make this guy do it. Is that fair? I mean, what are you doing here? >> Just >> You should have done that from the very
first developer. You can't start it at the end and then what about the rest of them? And I, you know, you know that I'm not against rent control or any of that. I'm the one that did the petition for it. So, >> which let's door >> to door for that.
>> And um in lie of a new building, we're rehabbing 750 and that's coming out of that affordable trust fund. >> I understand that. But for years, they were able to sell >> spent on but there's a >> to sell the affordable housing. Right. You were able to take your affordable housing and sell it.
>> Correct. Oak Street is a new project. >> All the towns were doing that >> and it all ended up in Camden or something, right? That's where all the affordable housing ended up. So, you can't start with one developer. I mean, you got to start somewhere. I get it. But you should have done it with all of
them. You can't start with with Borai and say, "Hey, you got to be the guy that takes all the the affordable housing." >> You know what I mean? >> I I get it. >> He's already negotiated a contract with him. You can't tell. But from from >> well and and Neil, we've publicly said
that that we don't agree with him, but we can agree to >> Listen, I mean, I'm not against affordable housing, but >> I said the same thing. It's percentages that maybe we have to negotiate. We have to talk about >> Yeah. You just go to bring all the developers in and say, "Hey, >> can't just go to one and say you're
taking it all." >> You bring up a strong point to briefly address it. That's why I called for a January 1 this time. But over the past years where I've been introducing different bills that have died at various reasons or apathy or lack of
coming up with a different plan, I would say I've got the bonafites to to say, you know, I'm going back years. I'm not just saying do it today. And since there was no >> I know we talked about it, >> but but also as opposed to just saying, well, why this guy and not that guy?
Since there is obviously or there was obviously no will where there's a will there's a way and there was no will to accomplish it holistically I have put it forward individually. So that's the explanation of why I >> No, no. I I get it. But I mean to put it
all on one guy like you got to take all the affordable housing >> at this point, you know, if I if I can. >> Yeah, council president. >> Two things. Number one on the affordable housing. Any of the ex existing RDAs have a prescription against affordable
housing in them. So it's got to be anything and everything going forward where an RDA hasn't been approved. I understand Neil and I have hour-long conversations on just this topic all the time. Uh and as frustrated as he is, I I
have walked him through the the solve for all this. And it's not today, it's not tomorrow. It's a long-term solution. And it involves multiple uh agencies, and it involves being able to count to three up here uh so that you have three
votes on something. And I I think in the long run this can be effectuated given the fact that um we've seen an a tremend like in the past 10 years let's face it more stuff has gone through the slle and bayon than anywhere else in the state of
New Jersey and and and we're way better off because of it from a from a development and financial standpoint than if we just did nothing as we were doing from 2000 to 2015 or 14. I don't know what ban would look like. Now uh
the second part with respect to the uh traffic concern the traffic light especially we had about a 90inute Mary Jane conversation a zoom call with uh too many people to keep track of on on the screen on um Monday I believe it was
uh to talk about uh how we're going to ease the traffic patterns and the problems that are being exacerbated by the fact that we have more people in one area and you know eventually say 30 years years ago, if you thought we'd have a traffic problem on 169 uh w with
people going down there, we would have laughed. I mean, it it this is a not pleasant but good problem to have that these places are being frequented and people are are eager to come to Balon and live in Balon because it was a long period of time where business certainly
wasn't coming here and people didn't want to live here. So, we've turned that corner. Now, we have to address the the real issues that that are attended to this type of growth and that's traffic patterns. And I can tell you that there was nobody at the end of the meeting on Monday that was happy. Uh which is probably the right thing. Everybody's
going to have to give a little bit. We have to figure out what the best solution is. And sometimes you implement the solution and then the theory of unintended consequences kicked in and you find out there are other problems. So I mean we could put a light there as as Tommy I think is rightly suggesting. But if we put a light there, we don't
know if that's going to cause other problems. But we'll find out and then you deal with it. How about put shuttle buses with each development down there? >> Let them use shuttle buses, move people back and forth to the light rails, stuff like that. >> I can tell you that's something that over the years there's a special
improvement district established, although not affectuated down there already. And as the buildings filled up, the discussions about, okay, how can we move people from one end to the other? How can we move people from uh the light rail to their
units? How can we move people from light rail to the ferry and furry and back? Uh th those are all real conversations. The problem is you can't do it ahead of time. It's it's it's almost like the the card has to go before the horse sometimes. Uh and and you know, we've
shown if if you build it, they will come. Uh and now we have to figure out how to get them in and out. And out they've come. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Good luck. >> And Mr. President, uh may I say something? Uh Mr. Mr. Desmond, listen. I
agree with what you're saying and I just wanted the record, I sit here and I listen to all the uh the conversations and the concerns about the city and I agree with you. However, I want to understand one thing that I want it to be known that this council and many many times in conversation. We're not sitting
here and some of us silently are are disagreeing with affordable housing. So, I want that to be understood. The fact of the matter is there's a lot of moving parts and everything that's being done with these developments. I'm not even going to sit here and conversate and blame past administrations. We all knew what we did when we got out there and
ran and voted for these seats. What we did is we inherited those situations. We're trying to work with them diligently and respectfully and being informative. And I don't want to sit here quietly and think that I do not want people uh having affordable housing in this town simply because I come from
affordable housing. So, I know what it's like. and I sat down with the developer, um, I'm sorry, not the developer, Mr. Director, uh, Skylinder, and we talked about affordable housing. He's went over the stats and we meet all the requirements. So, we're not sitting down just just blatantly saying, "No, we
don't want affordable housing." So, I want my colleagues and and the public to understand that we're looking forward to it, >> right? And and it's a big deal to rehab 750 affordable housing units already that are already out there. >> So, it takes a lot of money for that.
Council President, one, you know, one thing if if I may just add in here, and if anybody's looked at the agenda, uh, we actually do have an agenda item at CR18. >> Yes. >> Uh, it is actually listed as a shared service agreement between the city of Bayon, the Bayon Housing Authority. It
actually is going to to the exact points that have been discussed here. Uh, it's actually an agreement that's in place. It's part of our fourth round plan, our fair share plan. It authorizes us to work with Bayon Housing Authority to use
those monies that we collect on our commercial projects that are in our affordable housing trust fund to to fund projects, rehabilitation projects, special needs housing projects uh with with various groups uh that the city's been working on as well.
>> Council President. >> Yes, MBA. >> I pushed for CR18. I've been pushing It is the mechanism by which we are able to utilize the credits which are dollars
from the rehabbing of units. So we built a bank of credits of dollars which are now at a point where we can start utilizing them. We are doing two things at once. We are rehabbing existing
affordable housing and looking to build new. What the town is missing is new units. This interlocal allows us to work with John Mahan and the Bayon Housing
Authority, their expertise in developing housing. And he's also very good at maintaining and monitoring housing. He's got the um skill set. He's our agent in
this matter. But that's CR18. >> Thank you, Mr. Desmond. >> Anyone else on 05? >> Mr. Ryan, >> you'll be next. You'll be next. >> Just wanted to respond to a couple
points that were made. Um, I uh certainly recognize the importance of a need for transportation on the former military ocean terminal. I would point out that when Joe Dory was mayor, he actually intervened to have a train saved exactly for that purpose and it
sat in the light railard in Jersey City for many years. Unfortunately, the development hadn't uh arrived in a very rapid manner. So, eventually the train was given away. Um it's only several years later that we now have enough development that might actually justify
the use of that train. Unfortunately, it's gone. But I just wanted to point out this was an issue that mayor Dorya foresaw many years ago and tried to do something about it. Unfortunately, the development at that time was not enough to justify, you know, building a train
line, but the concept was thought of. Um >> trolley as well. >> Yeah. Um and another issue speaker earlier um said that 90% of the former military ocean terminals contaminated. My recollection is that in 2006 the New
Jersey DP said there was no further action needed. The majority of the acreage was not contaminated, but a significant minority of it was. Um theote was built in phases. It wasn't all built the same way from the same substance. So, um there's no
one-sizefits-all about it. As I recall, there was a lot of gunk that seeped into the ground when the military had the property. uh and that needed to be cleaned up, but not all of the property there was contaminated. Not 90%, but certainly a significant minority of the
property was contaminated. >> Thank you, Mr. Perry. >> Jean Perry, 77A Hobart Avenue. Uh just to piggyback on Miss Glover said earlier and Mr. Skilinder, Mary Jane, you just addressed one of the questions I had.
There are only 800 housing apartments available in the city. I have a friend that I went to grammar school with. She's on a list. The waiting list is seven years to get housing and she's ready to move into the street right now. So, we need to do something here.
>> What is the estimated income or the rental for these new properties going up down? Because like you said, >> there's more than 800 units. >> I closed my windows. I wore a mask outside. Now, I want to sell my house because I'm tired of the scrap metal, y'all, which
I'll come back to later. I can't afford $4,500 live on 12 Street and Broadway for a single family apartment. This is ridiculous. What these buildings are getting away with is this pure it's theft. I'm sorry. There's nothing in Bayon worth $4,800 anymore for a
one-bedroom apartment. >> Yes. Mike Bigno, 42 West 23rd Street. Uh the development of the Mbe and everybody now it's it's it's gone almost well it's down to uh Boulevard, Lincoln Boulevard, uh right there at the turn where the UPS
is and it started out, you know, small, it's gotten big. The walkways have been uh fabulous. Uh, and they just finished the one by the LA Fitness. Now it continues all the way down. It's almost complete all the way up to the uh
Lincoln Boulevard or Lincoln Terminal right there by the UPS. Uh, I'm here to mention with the developers and everything and I know there's a lot they do. They've taken that area and it it's turned into it's
magnificent. the wildlife there has been actually they they're going to come, you know, and it it hasn't been destroyed. It's uh we still get the horseshoe crabs there. the bird uh population has increased and I'm looking for the maybe
the developers and I know there's a lot of issues with the developers then they pay for a lot of it but we do need for the public to have water access to the Bayon inlet and if developers I know I've talking to a few of them everybody's the big boys and they're
willing to do it and again if everybody like I said they're trying to get them to sit down because it helps their property, too. And it does help the public and they own residents and the public must really enjoy this new opening. I mean, and you can go there
from early early morning to late late at night. You see the pictures, everybody's out taking the sunsets. So, it's been good things with this development area. And I I want to I'm I'm bringing up the water access point for kayaking, which people can also kayak to New York then
if we have access to the water if the ferry is taking so long. But truly because there people are fishing there already. People are putting kayaks in it already. And if we do get a water access point and the developers I'm sure will want to do that, it will be safety. Safety safety is important because we
don't want anything bad to happen in that sense that they will not be allowed to it. and the ferry's coming in and it's bringing up on his uh agenda. So, and they also could be part of having public access to that water because they're going to be having access to it
that the public needs to put their uh kayaking vessels in there and to fish and bird watch and enjoy what the development has brought. It's brought in uh great great uh wildlife to the Bayon area that was once totally contaminated.
>> Thank you, Michael. Anyone else? No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? >> On the motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, >> Mr. Perez.
>> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi. >> She's here. >> She's back. Miss Reamer, there's a motion on the table to close the hearing for 05. How do you vote? Disclosing the hearing
>> and a resolution ordering final passage >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol. >> All right, I'll be as brief as possible. There's a lot to unpack. Um there was talk many people spoke at some point somebody mentioned the pause in
development. I it was I was the individual who called for the pause. I was happy to get support from the council to do it. There was also a study involved. I don't think or I rather I think that a pause now um especially with respect to what I read
in the documents here that this is based off a 2000 master plan study. I'd like to see it based off one from 2025 or 2026. And I think we should consider reopening the plan, accomplishing a plan, setting it to law, and then that way it would significantly reduce the
amount of these items that actually come before us because either you conform or you don't conform. Uh next, I am voting against this represents a change. I think someone else from the audience mentioned that times have changed and
with the times come new things. There's new development down there. It's the same reason I voted against the 50s story building uh at that at a location near to there. It's another same reason why I voted against the 10-story building on 25th Street at what at which time I had to convince people that there
was significant human uh interaction and traffic in that four square corner. We also had to have and I'm thankful that the police were able to be there especially at the let out of school to police the area and make sure that it is safe for the amount of people that are
going through there just today let alone when we make improvements or when improvements are made there. Uh traffic on the base and it it was unfair the characterization of the council president and I do want to defend you there. You have been a diehard uh
advocate for that traffic light. It is necessary. It is needed. Improvements have been made there today. But more is needed. And before we go forward with massive substantive change, we need to have a better plan. And and the the word plan's been used many times
now. >> Down to affordable housing. Miss Glover, you were given um the same very polite, long- winded and educated brush off that I've been given uh for some time.
>> Fair enough. And the the answer is yes, it can be done. To be for it, but not to put forward a plan for it is akin to being against it. You either show your work on the test or
you fail the test. And so I it's a failure at this stage in the game in 2025 December. What month are we in? November. I would all I would say and I'm glad Jay's here before we lose you Jay because I think you were the only guy who got it when I said it and
I'll repeat it and everyone can make fun of me again. I likened the situation to Herbert Hoover because everybody at that time said, "There's not going to be a problem. Don't worry. Business will bail us out. Business will take care of it.
The government doesn't have to make laws. Doesn't have to set restrictions. Doesn't have to step in." And the world collapsed. Now, I'm not I'm not Chicken Little. I'm not saying the sky's is falling, but I I'm I'm glad I got a second chance to
bring that example up because everyone keeps saying, "Well, they'll do it. Of course, they'll work with union labor. Of course, they'll put in affordable housing because they might get tax credits to do so." Well, here we are and it's not happening. So, we need an FDR, not a
Herbert Hoover. The government I if if you try something and it doesn't work, admit it and try something else. but try. We haven't tried. Uh CR18 was mentioned. There's going to be affordable housing. This represents potentially new affordable housing. And
it is fantastic to get a new building or project. But again, I would love to see my neighbors living in new buildings, living in beautiful buildings, living in all parts of town as opposed to being
relegated to one area simply because that's the one building in town that'll accommodate it. And that's that's how I feel about those measures. I vote on >> Mr. Perez. Well, Herbert Hoover was the one that
says two chickens in every pot and two cars in every garage and nobody saw it. I mean, you can go out there and campaign and you can say your slogans, but I'm going to tell you right now that Mr. Booker and Mrs. Wemer pointed out
exactly how we us we feel here. We are for affordable housing, but there's situations that we have to deal with before we get those affordable housing. And it's not that easy, but we are trying. uh we're not here quietly. We're trying we're trying very hard and uh
also our my um president of city council is there also advocating for this. So no chicken in every pot, no two chickens every pot and no two cars in every garage. Thank you. I miss Lemur. Stephanie, I I certainly hope you didn't
feel as if you were brushed off by any means. Um that was that's not the intent. That's never the intent, but there are um circumstances around and and again this is not I want to point out to everyone this is not a new problem. Okay. Why was this not
considered when that development was first initiated? I know that Pat said and and he said it perhaps in in the most Pat Desmond in the most simplistic of ways. How could you single out or discriminate against one builder when that wasn't taken into consideration in
prior years? So, did our prior administrations not have the foresight that there would be a need or a requirement for affordable housing or for an allocation to affordable housing or that the influx of traffic in that area would not require a greater amount
of planning um and and transportation services outside of Mayor Doria who was um who was a wonderful man in in my eyes or what I remember of him. So, nevertheless, there are a tremendous amount of things to consider um and and
various circumstances that all have implications that we have to take into consideration. And I suspect that's perhaps why prior administrations didn't address the need or or meet it. Um but nevertheless, I I I would hope that no citizen ever felt as if they were pushed
off and I would have thought that no council member would have initiated that thought. But nevertheless, I do think that we are at a point where we need to make a decision with regards to this ordinance. I think it all is related to
the prior one. Um I would love to see um an allocation for some sort of of affordable housing, but but this is not the point in time to do that. And it is disingenuous to go back to that planning
now when we are at the point where they are ready to move forward. Um and again this was a contract that was entered into I I want to say it was about 10 years ago. So I think all of that should
have been taken into consideration then with the administration that was in place then. Nevertheless, M And with that, I vote I. >> Mr. Lapaloosa, >> I I think we've all stressed that we want affordable housing. Uh even
workforce housing, we're not afraid of that. Um I think we differed on the amounts and um Mr. Carol, you may have been the one who spoke the most about it, but I'm definitely second between you and Jay and and even my colleagues.
So, there is some common ground. We aren't there yet. We're still working at it. Nobody's silent about it. Everybody wants this to happen and I truly believe it's going to happen. But I think we need to all sit down and negotiate something that's fair to the town, fair
to developers, and uh mostly fair to the people who need that housing. And so with that, I'll vote I. >> 06 is an ordinance approving the financial agreement buying between the city and Chanty 5 Urban Renewal LLC for
the property located at 562-568 Broadway, which is designated block 184 lots one, two, and three as shown on the official tax map. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held October 15th. Was published in the Bergen record posted on the bulletin board as required by law with notice
that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council court's consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by the council president giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi.
>> Mr. Carol, hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. No problem. Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon approving the financial agreement buying between the city and Champion 5 urban renewal LLC
Florida property located at 562-568 Broadway which is designated block 184 lots 2 and 3 as shown on the official tax map of the city. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity heard concerning it. The council president
will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. I don't know. Is is this is this the one that was just approved at the planning? No. >> Oh, okay. I'm just asking how many units is it? That's quite simple. I just I don't have the whole ordinance.
>> Okay. And how many years? >> 25. I didn't ask. That's all I have. I need nothing else. I don't need an a song. >> So, just for the public's uh you know information and to the council's
benefit, we have Dan Banker from NW Financial who can go through the memo that was prepared for uh the uh for the council and to the public to kind of go through and walk through the project on how we came up with the assumptions for the 25-year pilot on 110 unit uh
building here on uh Broadway. Thank you, Joe. Dan Banker, NW Financial. Um, so the memo dated October 7th, 2025. I don't know if you have it in front of you, but I will walk through the memo and if you have any questions as I go through, please feel free to ask
them. Um, so as asked, this project will be a ninestory, 110 unit residential project. Uh it will also include 2,896 square feet of retail space and a total of 115 parking spaces. Uh the unit mix
of the residential component will consist of 11 studios, 66 onebedrooms, and 33 twobedrooms. Um, as we do in all of our analyses, we take a look at the developers projections to determine if their uh, rent assumptions, expense assumptions
are appropriate for today's market. And in in this case, we looked at uh, comparables within five buildings in the surrounding area. Uh, and we increased their rents by approximately 2 and a.5%. Um, so we're projecting studios at 2250,
one bedrooms at 20 2750, and two bedrooms at 34.90. Uh, the developer is expecting operating expenses of about $550,000 a year. That's the equivalent of 5,000 per unit. What I will say is that is a very low
number uh for a project of of this size. Typically, we see proformas and audited financials that suggest a much higher per unit expense number. Um, however, we're using the developer's assumption there. Um, the total project cost is
estimated to be about 53 a little over $53 million. That's including a land purchase price of 4.3 million, which comes out to about 39,000 per unit, which is in line with other comparable properties and buildings of this size. Um that also
includes a community benefit payment that was negotiated of $110,000 uh in addition to a pocket park that they will be building that's estimated to cost uh $316,000.
Um as for most projects, a portion of the total project cost will come from debt. Uh it's estimated that 70% of the project cost will come from debt. The other 30% will be developer equity. So that's about 16 million in developer
equity and 37 million in uh private loan. Before we consider a pilot of any kind, we look at the project under a conventional tax scenario. Um if the project is considered feasible, we would not recommend a pilot. Um in this case,
we looked at the project under conventional taxes. uh conventional taxes are estimated to be about $825,000 uh for this completed project and the various metrics that we use to determine feasibility suggest that a subsidy of some kind is necessary. Just to go
quickly through it, the project would be worth $3 million, roughly less when it was built under conventional taxes than it costs to build. Um the other metrics like internal rate of return, yield on cost are well below uh the standard
market returns that um provide for an efficient and or sufficient return to get a project built. And lastly, the debt service coverage ratio is at a level that would suggest that it would not be able to obtain the uh appropriate and enough funding to build the project.
So for all those reasons, we conclude that the project is unlikely to move forward under conventional taxes. Then we go to the pilot scenario. Uh the developer originally requested a 30-year pilot, which would be at 10% of gross revenue for the first 25 years and would
increase to 11% for the final five years. Uh after negotiations, that pilot term was reduced from 30 to 25 years. and the 10% pilot lasts for the first 15 years and the 11% lasts for the final
10. In addition, we have negotiated a more aggressive phase in of conventional taxes. We've talked about this in the past, but the pilot calculation is based on the greater of a percentage of gross revenue and a percentage of otherwise applicable taxes. Otherwise applicable
taxes meaning what the project would pay under conventional taxes. Um and that aggressive phase in consists of the final five years at 80% of conventional taxes. So in years 21 through 25 it will be the greater of 11% of gross revenue
or 80% of conventional taxes. Um, right now, just to to show the uh benefit to the city, right now the three lots uh generate about $34,000 in tax revenue um of which the city shares
about 15,000 as a city uh keeps about 45%, school gets 37%, county gets 18% under uh this proposed pilot at stabilization once it's 95% leased up. Uh the pilot is estimated to be
approximately $425,000 of which the city share will be about $44,000. Um looking at it over a 25-year period, this project under the proposed pilot,
uh assuming a a 2% annual rent increase over the 25-year term is projected to generate $16 million in pilot revenue, of which 15.6 6 million will be the city share. The rest uh will go to the county for their 5%.
Um and we also did a fiscal impact analysis to determine the number of residents and school children that may be generated by this project to determine if there's a net benefit. Will the pilot revenues outweigh the costs associated with the new residents and school children? And that analysis
suggests that uh when accounting for the new resident and school children cost, the annual net benefit from the pilot will be about $350,000 a year. And that number increases as rents increase and as the percentage of annual gross revenue increases and as the phasing of
conventional taxes comes into play. So our analysis suggests that the net benefit of this project over the 25-year period will be just under $14 million for the city. And with that, I'll answer any questions anyone has.
>> Does anybody have any questions? >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? Lena Drillman, 189 West 27th Street. Um, just uh it's not a direct question to
all of that numbers there, but uh I'm just concerned about the changing demographics in Bayon. Just a general concern. Uh I own my own home free and clear, so I'm I'm okay. But listen to some of these numbers of rentals. It's
just astonishing. So, uh, uh, who I don't know who's going to be able to pay that rent. I I'm assuming mostly younger people. And, uh, also the fact that, uh, with rentals, you're talking about a transient population. People have no real roots in Bayon. They just come and
go one year to the next. There's no real community in that or there's no guarantee of community. It's not like a condo or co-op where you feel like you own some piece of anything. So it uh it encourages also just uh maybe not the kind of uh people we want to see
necessarily and of course the parking problem. You walk down any street in Bayon uh you're struck by the amount of uh pollution that uh the smell of the car the vehicles. I also have issue with um parking lots underneath uh buildings
because the fumes from the cars will go up. Nobody really addresses that. uh just a quality of life thing. Um but um I'm concerned as I'm getting older that uh I certainly wouldn't be able to afford these kind of rents. I don't know where people like me would expected to
go once you retire. So just a general comment. >> Thank you. >> Yes, Matt. Okay, Janice Mattis, 624 Avenue. I have a question for Miss Whmer. You mentioned
something about that you cannot meet the responsibility. You made a statement some some time back. >> Okay. But generally you ask the question when that comes up agenda. This is a totally different thing.
>> No. Um this in general the question in general >> in general not just for council people. >> Okay. Um, if you're talking about financial responsibility, then what are all of these apartments?
Are they that are down at Mi and all over the place? Are they all rented or are all are a lot of them vacant? >> So, they did an absorption study >> and the absorption study came above the state average. The state average was a little over 92%.
>> Okay. and they're I think around 96% rented, >> okay, >> for the newer buildings. >> Okay. So, if you have that and you're not meeting financial responsibilities for the city of Bayon, what makes anyone think that building
more apartment buildings is going to solve the problem? >> I I don't understand what you mean. We're not meeting financial responsibilities. We are. >> Okay. >> And and the whole reason that we do these financial agreements is because gets more money than traditional taxes.
And that's why we we do these pilots to get more money so we can try and balance our budget. >> Trying to balance your budget. But you're >> we do balance our budget. Every year we balance our budget. We had a $26 million
deficit at one point, which I'm very proud to say that this council helped wipe that out. >> Okay. Okay. Okay, that was my question. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else?
>> No protest against objections to or statement in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. May I have a motion to move? Second. >> Motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss We >> Mr. Laalooa. >> I
>> and a resolution order in final pass. on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> miss We >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi. >> 07 is an ordinance amending and
supplementing the revised general ordinances of the city of Bayon chapter 13 recreational and other public facilities. Was introduced and passed the first meeting at the meeting held October 15th. Was published in the Bergen record posted on the bullet. required by law with notice that it
would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Perez given the ordinance second reading Mr. Booker will you second >> on the resolution Mr. Booker
>> Mr. Carol >> Hi >> Mr. Perez >> hi >> Miss Lalooa >> hi >> second reading is by title ordinance amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances of the city of bound chapter 13 recreation and other public facilities. The council is now ready to
give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recog recognize anyone who wishes to speak. >> Mr. 126 Avenue, I think I seen part of this, but I don't have the ordinance in full. Can you just explain? And I think we're
requiring insurance to use any of our fields or anything. I I think >> so this was really written um so that it gives the police a little more uh a little more withstanding to to deal with mental health issues with people who are
possibly sleeping in the parks or um what's that? >> No, I didn't say anything. >> Sorry, but I heard something. >> Um >> I think they opened the door. So, um it gives the police a little more um
jurisdiction to do things with people who are uh basically homeless or sleeping in a park >> and it allows them to let the people seek uh help mental health. >> Oh, okay. Thank you. Just didn't really know what it was about.
>> You're welcome. >> Anyone else? No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? >> Second. >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Ber.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> I >> and a resolution ordering final pass. >> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez,
>> hi. >> Miss Reamer, >> hi. Mr. Laooa. >> Hi. >> 08 is amending chapter 7 traffic which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held October 15th was published in the Bergen record and posted on the bulletin boards required
by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of November 12th is now before the council for consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by the council president giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Booker, will you second >> on the resolution? Mr. Booker.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lalooa. >> Hi. >> Second reading is by title, an ordinance amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances of the city of Bay on chapter 7 traffic. The council is now
ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. I have a motion to close.
>> Move. >> A motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapos. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passes. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapalos. Hi, the first speaker is Miss Nadski. So, since I spoke first, there were a lot of comments made on my things and um
I didn't get to readress them because you don't get a second bite at the apple. So, this is my second bite. Um so, I just want to talk quickly about a few things. I know just want to address um Miss Weep mentioned the prior administration, which she's definitely referring to me who questioned that. Um
but I wasn't sitting there alone. Gary Gary's been the longest serving council person for um 15 years. You're finishing up. Juan's been there 12 years. Neil, you're seven and a half. >> Yeah. Okay. Gary, um Jackie and uh Lloyd
are just about almost 40 years. Um that agreement I'm 100% own that I approved that uh war and why there wasn't affordability because like we said it was in 2016. It was there was nothing else down there. We hadn't built
anything. We had the $24 million deficit at that time. We were trying to dig out of that which like Mr. Lapalooa just said, you have zero deficit right now. That was the answer to the question that was when when asked about I have that written on my paper to financial
responsibilities because I did hear that term exactly as that being used when voting yes on the the development the uh where I development which I I honestly have no problem. I just don't think we have the infrastructure to support it.
So we're saying no no no finan we did say financials responsibilities and that was the reason and I hear you say that we meet our budget every year because we keep increasing taxes every year we can't keep selling off one things and I know I vote on them but there comes a
time right where you have to stop like you know just simple thing you know I used to run marathons now I'm you know 30 years later I'm not running a marathon anymore because the circumstances change right my joints say they don't want to do Well, our roads and our parking says we
don't need we can't sustain this, right? So, you have to adjust and and go with what's what what you're on your plate now. So, yeah, I did do a lot of those developments, but that was when we had a $24 million deficit and that's what got us out of that. But, let
me tell you, there were a lot done in the last three and a quarter years and there wasn't a deficit that was trying to be fixed. So there were very different circumstances. So I'm I'm going to justify what I what I did and I own it. I I never say I don't. And
that's one of the reasons why I didn't rerun with the administration because as thing changed the administration didn't want to. They forgot the terms that we what we ran on, right? We forgot. We forgot residents before developers. You guys should try to remember that. And I
heard someone mention Journal Square. Unfortunately, people say, "Oh, we're not Jersey City. We can't charge that much per door." But it looks like you're trying to be Jersey City. Not in a good way because it's looking like Journal Square down there. Journal Square is nothing but a bunch of big buildings that no one had a plan for. They're all
around there. There's no long-term plan. And that's what our base is starting to look like. That was a gift to us. And it just really doesn't look like there's any cohesiveness down there. Um so that and one other thing. Um
we Oh, and Mr. coffee. I'm glad Oh, he he walked away. Mr. Coffee, who don't live in in Bayome, but lives in Oceanport, doesn't have the same problems, but I'm glad he found it laughable about the traffic problems because that was his exact word. It's laughable that
we have that problem because it's a good problem because those of us who commute every day and have to go that way, it's really not laughable are the people that live down there. So, I I don't find it laughable. Thank you. Mr. Perry, Jean Perry, 77A Homeward Avenue. Uh, two
things. The delineators, home, right? Director Cotti did a great job. I'd like the city council to see possibly get with director Kubert. 11th Street was made a no left turn street onto Avenue E. Unfortunately, people in this town
don't understand what no left turn means and they continue to go through it. Could delineators be put there to stop it? I mean, we made that a no left for one reason. We had three motorcycle accidents, I believe, on 12th Street where the bikers were killed. So, if you put the delineators up, I'm hoping they
don't try to do they do down Costco and make that left-hand turn. Uh secondly, I'd like to thank the Bayon Fire Department for the response and Junior Ferrari especially for his phone call on 1028 for the fire at my son's house uh next to my son's house which probably saved their lives getting out that
night. Uh another issue on downtown still scrap trucks. We need to have if we're going to deal with this Mr. Scrap guy rest of our lives down there, we might as well have the signs up. The trucks do not know where to go. They're stopping. They're going up to Mary J. down here making a
left on Lord, making a left on Lexington. Something needs to get done. Uh, also I called in about the scrapyard. Trucks are not using their covers the way they're supposed to use. I don't want to speak too much on that, but from what I understand, the ordinance has changed. So, if we could
please look into that matter. And then secondly, and this is for Chief Weaver, and this is a valid question. Last week, the scrapyard was in full force with no water. Four residents were there. We called Hudson County Regional. No one showed up. I called the Bayon Fire Department and I just want to know is
that an issue for the fire to want to be called before the fire starts because it's going to happen again if they don't use water. Who enforces the water? Is it the council? I mean, the city or the state because the time the state shows up, you have a fire that's been burned for 12 more hours again. It's not fair to the fire department.
And that's all I have this evening. >> We'll take a look into that. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Perry. Question. When you say is it the tarp that they're not putting on the truck? >> From what I understand, the tarps are no longer they now have to put them on
state. >> As long as it's not blowing out of the back of the truck, they're not in violation. >> So into because they're not coming in and the stuff's blowing all over downtown >> plus as they're coming downtown. >> Well, that's a state violation that they do they should saving summones.
>> Thank you, Mr. Perry. >> Thank you. and and can >> Mr. Tomary West Street. >> I'd like to uh my honor is to uh the Marine at the end
>> army. Well, same thing. You had a gun. It's a you had a gun. But I'd like to uh commend uh Pete Amado. Anytime you give him something to do, he gets an idea, he runs with it. If it wasn't for Pete, BA would never be on
the map in the state of New Jersey. He did a great job. Police department, fire department, public works coming out doing what they have to do. Uh talking about all this stuff that's going on in this town, it's not getting better. You might think it's getting
better. It's not. Traffic's outrageous. The Balon Police Department's working harder and harder than ever down near Costco. Pretty soon these cops are going to get hit. And I don't want to see any of these guys getting hit by a car.
Drivers don't care. You got out of state drivers down there. I brought this up last week. Parking authority is not down there. I've been down there today for four hours. Did not once see parking
authority car come down and look at the Texas plates, New York plates, Virginia plates, Maryland. No tickets down there. What? They forgot about the uh the unforbidden city. The unforgotten city over there.
They could go up and down them streets, all them blocks down there. They could make a ton of money down there on tickets during ship days. Just have the cops can even sit there, watch the people park alongside them town houses that are down
there and walking out of there with their luggage, walking down to the ship, parking up into the parking lots, doing the same thing, taking a shuttle bus down there. Somebody brought up about uh I think Pat brought up about shuttle buses. Every one of them buildings down
there have their own shuttle buses. to take their people to Jersey City, Grove Street, Pavonia, Pad Station, anywhere they want to go. But, you know, that's still not enough. You're building. There's too many buildings, too many cars. Somebody's
definitely going to get hurt down there. And I said this once before, somebody's going to get killed. That family's going to come after the city, and it's going to cost us millions of dollars. And I don't think you just want to spend millions of dollars.
Probably cost 130,000 200,000 for a traffic light. Shaper to put a traffic light up than paying millions of dollars to some family, you know. And low income housing. Neil, I agree with you 100%.
We need it. It's just getting one, two, three, four, and the guy up in the front to say yes. So on that note, good night.
>> Mr. Signal, >> good evening. Mike Signno, 42 West 23rd Street. I'm announcing there will be a shoreline cleanup this Saturday, November 15th, at the area we are all talking about what we love so much at
the Harbor View Marketplace, which is right across from Little or Lidle, I guess it's pronounced LLE, and the old gate house, which was the entrance to the military terminal. And we're trying to keep that waterfront area clean. And
we need some volunteers. And it's interesting because when you do a cleanup, you get to actually see what's getting in the water and why it's getting how. And you will notice that when you go shopping at Lidle in that
area, if you leave that little grocery flyer in the basket and your little fruit b your fruit plastic bag that you're supposed to fill with all these goodies and then you go in your car and leave that in that shopping cart, it winds up in Bon Inlet. And that is what
we pull out most of the time. So I'm asking everybody if they can come out and volunteer Saturday. Rain or snow will cancel it. The cleanup starts at 9:00 a.m. and it's till 11:00 a.m. You can come for 15 minutes. Come to say hello or come to do an hour and you just
to observe a new area bayon that's opening up. Thank you. Miss Bario, Sarah Barro, live on West 33rd Street. Uh, last year there's a there's a empty lot on 33rd Street in Broadway next to
Dominican restaurant and I had permission to use it from the owner. I went through B went through city hall for to get the paperwork and I was declined and it got me thinking there's a lot of empty lots in Bon just doing nothing. There's now a huge one on 33rd
and Broadway on the opposite side of the restaurant and I had the idea I talked to someone in city hall about this and it turns out other people had the same idea. Why don't you build a vendor lot a space that's completely flattened with a barn roof over it and host events there. A
lot of times Bayon does little events and you close off streets which causes traffic like the farmers market or small fair. You can have a lots in Bayon big ones and use that for events. You can use you can turn it into a mar a store market event every week kind of like
melands or how the dream wall runs their space to major corporations to do pop-up stores and you can bring in more people to kind of make your own like market valley right there in Bayon and you can and US people can pay a cheaper price to rent it out. You can host huge events
there. try and bring in tourists into Bayon because Bayon there's not much to do and we have so much space empty lots like the one on 33rd Street just completely empty is so so if it's city property that's
something we could probably you know consider but if it's private property it's up to the people who own that there's a plan to do something in that you know there's a developer who's buying that land may have a plan and you may not want to do the vendor market.
But I'm not saying that it's not a good idea. It's just a matter of finding the right land to do it on. >> That's the thing though. There's a lot of empty spots. I find it weird that they're all privately owned and nothing's being done with them because there's a lot of them >> in each empty lot. Um there's legality
issues about letting people on the property. There's insurance and different things like that. And that's why somebody may not want the public to be on their Also, you know, again, if if it's a vendor lot, then you have to realize that you're making sales there
and stuff, too. So, I'm not against it. I'm just saying it would have to find the right niche really to make it happen. >> So, I had to find how I would have to figure out who owns that portion and talk to them >> and make the pitch to them. I guess that
would be one way to do it. >> All right. Thank you. >> You're welcome. Okay, moving on. >> Before we um move on, I I did get um I saw Stephanie raise her hand. Stephanie Wilson. Stephanie, did you want did you
mean to want to speak? >> All right, come up. We'll allow you. >> Stephanie Glover Wilson, Avenue C. Um two things, one bad thing. Uh Hunger-Free lost funding due to everything that's going on. So, the
office at 170 Broadway will be closing January 1st. So, I'm coming to the council. I need office space, free office space cuz I paid for the last two years and I cannot afford to pay rent anymore for office
space that I'm doing stuff for the town and for the all of Hudson County. So, one of y'all own something that I can just go into, I would appreciate it. Number two, um we get a lot of bad fruit
and my volunteers asked me, "What can we do to start a composting um system here in Bon? I know we have to take it all the way to Jersey City. Um, and then we take some to Carney, but what can we do to start something right
here in town so we can have if anyone has any suggestions, ideas, my volunteers are maybe one of the public works yards if there was a space and we'd have to look into that. Mr. Carter, I don't know if there's a composting area where we can look into that.
>> Okay. >> All right. And then Miss Desmond, do you have an idea? Talk to me. Can't hear. >> I can't hear you. >> So, this is office space, not the Okay. >> What if if I can
>> give her your microphone if you don't mind? 597 Broadway is owned by the city of Bayon >> and we had a contract with a mental health provider for the past I don't know 20 years and they notified us that they're not going to renew their lease
uh come January 1st. It's a it's a large space. you wouldn't need all of the space, but I I think a discussion could be had between now and the December meeting as to whether or not uh it wouldn't be till till January because they're there till December 31st. But
certainly we can have a discussion and talk about what it would take to facilitate whatever it is you need, how much how much space and and what it would entail. And Mary Jane would be the contact person for that. um as we're moving forward. >> Um I don't know if everyone's been into
the I know Lloyd and Neil has been into the 170 office. You see how big of a space I need um to do everything that we do. We that has like three sections and one's a private section so we can counsel families when they're going
through all their tragic stuff. And then what one side is for Hudson County cuz they come down to do the food stamp applications and the Medicaid. And then the other is to store store the non-p perishable food to give out for emergency cases. >> Do you have any idea of the square
footage by Cornell? I mean that could be but we can measure >> I mean Neil you've been >> is is the same size as Bayon Commerce. >> Okay. >> So you know you've been inside that office. >> We we need Yeah. We'll we'll Yeah.
>> Don't worry. Even if we have to come down and measure we'll take >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> That was it. Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you, Stephanie. And then I um want to take a few minutes to um address uh Miss Mattis, Miss Nadraski. I forgive me. I didn't want to
interrupt you earlier and then I I didn't have an opportunity. Um I did elude to the fact that I have been made aware that there is a possibility that we do not currently have the means to meet our financial obligations um in the upcoming budget. Uh that is something
that was we were just made aware of. Uh like you I do not know why. Um it is one of the questions I have asked and would would hope to have an answer to. Um I do agree uh with you Sharon that the pilots
are a necessary part of a municipal budget because they do allow for the greatest allocation of that income to benefit the city. And I have often said I I don't understand why at a time when this city
is generating more revenue than ever before we are having issues meeting our budget. Now again that is something because in our budget last year we met our budget and we had a bit of a surplus.
I am led to believe that in the future budget that is not the case. Now, with that being said, in full disclosure, I've also been made aware that there have been a tremendous amount of retirements and um our our police, our firemen, uh our workforce, there are um
a tremendous amount of retirements that have taken place. That that does come at a cost to the city. I don't know what that dollar amount is just yet. Um I do also know that the rising costs of health care expenses um so much so that played a role in
that. So much so that the city took it upon themselves to cancel the short-term disability insurance for all of our colleagues. Something that I do not agree with. I think was unfair, unnecessary, and should have been discussed with colleagues in advance so
they were prepared. That did not happen. Now again happen by the council either. >> I no it didn't nor were we aware. Now nevertheless I I do believe that the city um at this point in time is doing what they can to assist in that endeavor
um spearheaded by by several people. But I don't know what has caused that. And again that is just something that we have recently been made aware of. Um so I I did elude to that. Uh I I absolutely take ownership of that statement because
that is what I have been led to believe. I don't know why or what has led to that. I do hope to it has been my request in the past that all of these pilots have a this council has the ability to have a line item allocation
in pilots to our school board budgeting and our our requirement to meet the school board budget. that would I could not promise you that it would not necessitate the increase in property taxes, but it should lessen any
potential increase in property taxes if if at all. Um, now again, I don't have the answers to that. Um, it it is just something that we've been made aware of and that I'm hoping to uh look into greater. And I have a um I will
hopefully have an upcoming meeting that will help us. I think I think all of the council in general will sit to review all of those facts and and see what it is that has led us to once again be in the position of a potential deficit.
So that that was where my comments came from. Um that was the foundation for it. I I don't have a better answer for you and I I apologize for that. I would like to um and I I intend to. >> Okay. Wait, the public speaking.
>> This is not going to be questions back and forth. No, >> everybody had a chance to speak and we want >> I just want to know is there going to be a mayor election? I mean, I don't understand what's going on with that. >> Yeah, we're not going to discuss that right now. Okay. But thank you anyway. I appreciate that,
>> Miss Medina. >> Okay. 09 is an ordinance for introduction. It is an ordinance amending and supplementing the revised thermal ordinances of the city of Bay on chapter 7 traffic and a resolution fixing Wednesday December 17th at 6 p.m. the Darthy E Harrington council chambers
as a time and place for a public hearing and a final passes. The resolution is moved by the council president Miss Weamer. Will you second? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missuri. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. 010 is also an ordinance amending
chapter 7 traffic and a resolution moved by council member Perez fixing Wednesday December 17th at 6 p.m. in the Dorothy Harrington Council Chambers is a time and place for a public hearing and final passage. Mr. Booker, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution of Mr. Booker, >> I >> Mr. Carol,
>> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> I >> Mr. Lapalooa. I >> 01 also amends chapter 7 traffic and has a resolution fixing Wednesday December 17th at 6 p.m. in the D Harrington
Council Chambers time and place for a public hearing and final passage. Who would like to move it? >> Second >> and on that resolution Mr. Booker >> I >> Mr. Carol I >> Mr. Pre >> Missur >> I >> Mr. I
>> 012 is a ordinance approving the redevelopment plan for the property located at 62 1.5-72 Prospect Avenue which is identified as block 449 lots 2122 and 23 as shown on the official tax map of the city pursuant to the local
redevelopment housing law and a resolution fixing Wednesday December 17 as a time and place for a public hearing and final passage. Would you like to move it? >> Move it. Second >> and on that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol,
>> in the intervening 30 days, I would ask that the plan be amended to include work um an affordable housing measure. I would also ask that the director meet with me to go over various add-ons from the caucus meeting, which I asked for
last week, seven days ago, and did not get. For the sake of getting these answers in 30 days, I'll vote I. >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I
13. >> They don't normally answer questions on introduction. >> I have no idea. It's up to the council president. >> Jean, I'm gonna allow you to come up and ask the question. >> I could not hear what you said.
>> No, I was asking when this is going before the planning board because I didn't see in the last few agendas and I just open requested every document on this property because this is a property that was torched 10 days ago that my daughter-in-law broke her arm, dislocated her shoulder, has nerve damage trying to get my granddaughter
out of the house. So I find it a little coincidental that there was four years now this is in the making this property. Now all of a sudden there was a fire and now it's a for planning and zoning. >> Yeah. I I mean I can't speak for the coincidence of all that. I I really don't know anything about that. What I
do know is 012 and 013 is coming before the council. >> Okay. >> And has not been to the planning board yet. >> Right. >> And there's a number of projects that were >> So next step is you guys planning. >> Yes. Thank you sir. the there's a number of projects that have been in the queue for a long time
and we're trying to get things done and progress and that's the reason why we're doing this in that order. >> I'll make sure I'm at the planning board meeting. Thank you, Gary. >> Thank you, Jean. Just on one of the comments made about the the fire on this property, uh the fire is being
investigated uh you know by our uh fire department on there. Um however as of right now there's no indication that uh this is uh arson at this point in the preliminary one. Uh so uh to indicate that uh again this is being
moved for um nefarious reasons that's just not uh true um on that again the fire department if it you know when the report is finalized if it comes to different conclusion we'll we'll get there but the initial investigation and the initial comments on that uh that this was not a
>> okay >> suspicious arson fire. All right. Thank you. >> 013 is an ordinance approving the redevelopment plan for the property located at 1037-1041 Broadway which is identified as block 45
lot 20 as shown on the official text map of the city pursuant to the local redevelopment and housing law and a resolution fixing Wednesday December 17 as a time and place for a public hearing and final passage. Who would like to move? >> Move it. >> Second. And on 03, Mr. Booker, >> hi.
>> Mr. Carol, >> I with the same stipulations. >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I 14 is an ordinance amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 35 zoning and
resolution fixing Wednesday, December 17th at 6 p.m. the Darthy Harrington council chambers as a time and place and public hearing. Would like to move it? Move. >> Second. And on 014, Mr. Booker, >> hi
>> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> 015 also amends chapter 35 zoning and a resolution fixing December 15th as a time and place for a public hearing.
Would like to move it? >> Move it. >> Second. >> Second. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol. I know we have 30 days. This one in particular, Joe, I need you to remember where my office is and try to
meet with me because this changes the industrial zone and sets buffers between the public and what the potential operation that's going to be there. And I know these zones exist across the city. And I'd like to have more
clarification on this, >> especially in light of the scrapyard downtown. I I think we probably all would, Joe. Um, so I guess >> it's for introduction. I wouldn't mind
holding it, but I can't count to three up here. >> Again, I'm willing to meet with any of the council members, you know, as I have standing appointments with most of you up there to discuss items. So happy to feel free to discuss this with you.
>> Where is this exact property director? I'm sorry. for again for for this one as discussed last week we're uh on 015. >> Yeah. >> Uh so um on this one is just creating as a conditional use standard um an import
and uh export uh for automo uh bill uh facilities. Uh basically for indoor uh warehouses. uh some of the ones that have been built uh there's been um an ask to uh by the uh you know of the
administration to permit this as a expressly you know permitted use there. Uh right now it's ambiguous into the ordinance whether or not this would qualify under uh the warehouse uh and uh distribution and trucking standard there. Uh so this is also again we're
asking to amend the zoning that would uh permit this as a conditional use. So this would still go in front of the planning board with the enumerated standards. Um and again the ones that are being proposed on this is that
um you know this uh facility be uh an import export facility. Um but it be a warehouse. Uh the warehouse will be limited to the storage of passenger cars and delivery vans and shall not store tra uh tractor uh cabins or trailers not
related to the movement of the cars and vans. Um maximum number of units uh of trips per day uh would be 25 trucks that would have the car on them and should only operate between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. Um there should be a maximum stored uh
200 cars on the premise. uh and the area um shall be fully fenced in with the minimum uh height of 8 feet. Uh and then if the area where the vehicles are stored shall be screened otherwise prevented from view from public streets, rideways and adjacent properties of a
fence, wall, landscaping, uh burm or any combination of um if there's accessory structures or buildings associated with the apher uh use uh that location be located in the rear or sideyard. And then where the usage joins a residential
zoning 25 foot buffer shall be provided. >> Again, this is just for introduction and this still has to go in front of the planning board for discussion as to the consistency plan for the uh review. Um on another note, back to the prior comment to in speaking with um Chief
Weaver, uh the reports uh said that the fire was caused by a uh a cigarette that was uh improperly disposed of in a garbage can. I direct a quick uh question at this location. This is on a Hook Road if I'm not mistaken. Like is that >> this would be in the entirety of the uh
>> the entire area? >> Uh yes. So >> and do I also does it also note tank farms and bulk storage of flammable and combustible liquids? >> Well, again that is is currently permitted in the ordinance uh as of right now
>> that we're that we're being asked to >> no. It's only that's currently in there. What's being proposed is in the uh bold on the bottom >> that's currently in there, but what we're asking to do is to zone that area as heavy industrial which would allow
for that. Correct. >> It currently allows the It currently allows >> already zoned that way. >> It currently allows the tank farms. Yes, >> it allow Okay. >> Yeah. The ordinance allows for that. Is that area already >> zoned for that? >> Yes, >> it is. >> So, what's being proposed is the change
in the bold and underline. Yeah, >> I see. >> And where would the entrance be at this moment before it goes before the planning board? >> Again, that would be at the site plan hearing for uh to decide on that. But this would change again the standard u
within the zone. Uh and again, as a conditional use standard, it has to go in front of the planning board for a site plan hearing. And I might just add just from a general land use perspective what a conditional use is. It does have to satisfy all
those conditions. If they don't touch on every one of those uh then basically it becomes a non-permitted use. If they wanted if they would want to get relief from that they'd actually have to come in with devariance relief before your zoning board. So they do need in order
for it to be permitted they have to hit all those conditional use standards and still come in and present their applications. But this is not specific to this one site. This would change the this would change it for all sites under this designation. >> Anything within the indust the heavy
industrial zone. Yes. >> And that's that's my that's my concern. So that's what I want to meet with you about especially with respect to buffer zones and so forth. Again, as stated with the buffer zones there, if it's within 20 um there has to be a 25 uh um
foot um yeah 25 ft buffer uh zone if it if it join a residential zone. Okay. So on introduction, Mr. Carol >> for introduction pending further review. I'll vote I
>> Mr. Perez Miss Wemer are the same as >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I >> 06 is approving an amendment to the redevelopment plan 469-71
New Hook Road which is identified as block 416 lots one and two as shown on the official tax map of the city pursuing to the local redevelopment and housing law and a resolution fixing Wednesday December 17th at 6 p.m. in the Darthy Heat Harrington council chambers as a time place for public hearing and
final passage. Who would like to move it? And on that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi, >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I'm going to recuse myself as I do work for the
tenant there. Okay. 17 is a ordinance vacating the rightway easement reserved to the city of Bayon and for Dorport realy for LLC over block 476.01
lots 10.01 and 10.02 and a resolution fixing Wednesday December 17th at 6 p.m. in the Darth Harrington Council chambers as a time and place for public hearing and final pass. So who would like to move it? Second
>> on that resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi. >> 08 has been removed. Withdrawn. Communications is a resolution moved by
the council as a whole ordering the following communications to be received and file. It covers C1 through C8. Any questions on the communications? and on communications. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi.
>> Missur, >> Mr. Lapaloo, >> I officers report is a resolution moved by the council as a whole. It orders the following officers reports to be received and filed and any resolutions incorporated within to be adopted.
covers O1 through O6. Any questions on the officer's reports >> and on the officer's reports? Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I
>> consent resolutions is moved by the council as a whole and it orders the following resolutions to be adopted but uh CR4, CR 21, CR16 and CR17 have been removed.
>> Okay, just repeat that again please. >> CR4, CR16, 17 and CR21. Any questions on the remaining consent resolutions? And on that resol on the resolutions, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. I >> R1 >> is affirming that the council members have read at a minimum the comments and recommendation section of the calendar
year 2024 audit and I will be asking you to sign an affidavit certifying that you have done so. Who'd like to move it? >> So second one quick >> I think. So, could we just have a quick summary of any action items that were
noted, if any, and if we've rectified any recommendations in that audit? Were there any? >> There were three comments, >> right? I read >> already >> that were already rectified. What were the three comments?
had documents. >> And that so I think the that comment was that wasn't wasn't properly documented. So was it just that the proper documentation was missing a signature or was there no indicances
>> and so I spoke to both department and I also spoke to payroll proper substantiation. >> Okay. >> Excuse me. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you.
You need a bell. So on our one, Mr. Booker, >> hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> R2 has been withdrawn.
Part three is awarding the sale of the city of Bayon in the county of Hudson, New Jersey of its property tax levy for the fiscal year ending December 31st, 2025 and ratifying and confirming and authorizing certain actions in connection therewith. Would like to move
it. >> Move and a second. on R3. Mr. Booker, >> hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Beamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi.
>> Can I just jump in here? Uh, I was advised that CR17 was pulled. >> Yes. No. Yes. >> Yeah. Meline said CR 4, 16, 17, and 21 were all removed.
>> They were for the CDBG. that I never received any >> CR7 is the temporary water pipeline construction. >> I apologize. It's 15 and 16 that were removed. >> Okay. So, Abco Construction, which is CR15, we didn't get that information
right. And CR16, >> correct? >> So, we've got to go back and amend the resolution for the consent to to >> to reflect that it's >> reflect that it's CR1 17 is included. CR 1516
um >> 21 >> 21 >> NCR4 >> and four yeah >> okay so on the amendment of the consent resolutions Mr. Booker >> hi >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez
>> hi >> Missur >> I >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi. >> Okay, back to R4. It's designating the property located at 485-493 Avenue C and 64-66
West 22nd Street, which is identified as 209 lot 22 23.01 01 and 27 as a non-condation area in need of redevelopment and authorizing the planning board to prepare a redevelopment plan pursuing to the local redevelopment and housing law.
>> Would like to move it? >> Move it. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Pres, >> Miss We >> Mr. Laalooa. I
>> R five is designating 102-116 Avenue Bayon Urban Renewal LLC as redeveloper of the property located at 102 and a half-116 Avenue E which is identified as block
467 lots 10 11 12 13 and 14 as shown on the official tax map and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement for the Move it. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker,
>> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalo. >> Hi. >> Our six is designating ML Realy Corp. of New Jersey as the redeveloper of the property located at 626-628
Avenue which is identified as block 405 lots 31 as shown on the official tax map of the city and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment for the same >> you still want to do that >> yeah Maline can we can we carry this uh since the redevelopment plan didn't pass so there's no statuto authority to grant
this agreement >> on to R Seven, designating MW Urban Renewal LLC as the redeveloper of the property located at 361-373 Kennedy Boulevard, which is identified as block 262, lots 7, 8, and 9 as shown
in official tax map and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement for the same. >> Move it. >> Second. >> And on that one, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> M. Reamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa.
>> I >> R eight is designating John and Maryanne LLC as the redeveloper of the property located at 1012-1022 Avenue CN53-57 West 48 which is identified as block 64
lots 2 and 3 as shown on official tax map of the city and authorizing execution of a redevelopment agreement. So move on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Loose.
>> Hi. >> Hi. is designating Golden Apple Capital Capital LLC as the redeveloper of the property located 935-939 Broadway which is identified as block 85
lot 23 as shown in an official tax map of the city and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement. I'd like to move it. >> Move it. >> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapel. >> Hi. R 10 is designating NES LLC as the redeveloper of the property located at 11-13 West 19th
431-437 Broadway and 10-12 West 20th which is identified as block 220 lots 18 23 24 25 and 26 as shown on official tax map and authorizing the execution of a
redevelopment agreement. >> Move it second. on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laapalooa. >> Hi. R1 11 is designating 653-657
Avenue LLC as the redeveloper of the property located at 653-657 Avenue which is identified as block 139 lots 19 and 20 as shown on official tax map of the city and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement.
>> Maline, if I if I may just interject here. Uh actually we just have a typo in terms of blocking lots here. It's actually block 98, lots 13, 14, and 15. It is correctly referenced in the resolution itself. >> So, it's identified as block 98, 13, 14,
blocks 14, and 15. Would like to move it. >> I'm going to have one correction on the next one as well, just so you know. >> I'll move it. >> And on the resolutions, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalosa.
>> Hi. >> Or 12 is authorizing the planning board to conduct a preliminary investigation to determine if the property located at 1201-203 Kennedy Boulevard and 1205 Kennedy Boulevard. And I guess I should have to
look into it, which is identified as block 32, lots. 1 and 15 constitutes a non-condation area need of redevelopment and authorizing the preparation of a redevelopment plan. >> Would like to move it?
>> Move it. I see you put the correct block in there >> and second. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weamer.
>> I >> Mr. Lopalos. >> I 13 is authorizing the execution of a second amendment to the redevelopment agreement with KOZ, Prospect Property Urban Renewal LLC for the redevelopment of the
property identified as block 455, block 1.01, as shown on the official tax map. I'd like to move it. >> R13. >> I'll move it. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I >> R4 is authorizing the execution of a license agreement between the city of
Bayon and 746 Avenue Bon urban renewal LLC move >> second >> second >> Mr. Booker >> hi >> Mr. Carol >> Hi >> Mr. Perez >> Hi >> Miss Hi
>> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi. >> R 15 is designating Port Terminal Ferry Corp. doing business as New York Waterway as the redeveloper of the property located at the Peninsula Bay on Harbor and identified as portions of
block 930 lot one, block 970 lot one as shown on the official tax map of the city and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement, ferry operators agreement, license agreement, and parking management agreement for the redevelopment of said property and operating the ferry services in
according with the redevelopment plan. So move. >> Yes, >> Sharoni. 12678. I'm just going to say kudos if you can get it done. I'm glad it's here. I've been advocating it for a long time. I just hope it's not like the
other plan we did tonight where it takes 10 years or our movie studio which is about 10 years in the making, you know, um just because we give redevelopment plans. I hope we have some followup um the people that are supposed to follow up. But the real reason for my coming up because I don't think I'm going to speak
on anything else is I would like to thank Miss Weamer for um being fully transparent about the financial comment um situation. I I do appreciate transparency um with the residents. So, thank you.
>> So, on R15, Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I'm very happy to see this and I vote I. >> R 16 is authorizing the execution of a
water wheeling agreement between the city of Bon and the town of Carney. >> Move it. second >> and on that resolution Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez
>> hi >> Miss Weame >> hi >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> Now the others are spaceholders. Are we awarding the contract for the alterations to the stepping stone academy? >> Second.
>> Well, I was told that they were still space holders. >> Okay. >> I thought you needed >> this. This is an award. We we took in two uh this is for Holy Family Academy. Took in two bids. one for 8 million uh
$194,000 from HNS Construction and the second from Billy Contracting in the amount of 5.894 million. Uh so the award would be as you can imagine the one for 5.8494 million. Uh and it's subject to
uh the grant funds that that uh the BEF uh got from the federal government. And of course the federal government actually having the funds uh when they reopen. >> Jay, I wonder, you know, we learned with the 25th Street pedestrian bridge that
sometimes the lowest bidder is not always the best choice. >> Well, in this case, we had a very successful experience with Billy Contracting. They did all the air conditioning and I I echo your sentiments about >> uh the lowest not always being the best. Uh but in this case, we had a very good
experience with Billy contracting in phase one. I see. Okay. Thank you. That was my my question as to what due diligence or what experience we've had with the >> Okay. >> Okay. M has a question. Um yeah, I I didn't read this. So, this
is Holy Family again. Want to talk about projects that are dragging on. I don't know how long has this rehab been going. We purchased this property with the idea of selling it and and for them and we were going to sell the other properties which we started selling and
we still don't have enough seats for head start. We still have a waiting list. Can I get there's been um at I like to get a number from whoever up here can give it to me on exactly how much money
we have allocated through BF and the city to this project because I feel like we could have built a big beautiful building maybe 30 stories for what we're um to for you
know head start for what we've spent over the last I'm going to say it has to be about nine years that this has been going on. The rehab there >> purchases in 20. >> Okay. So, so six years five years. It's
been longer than that. >> 21 no we closed in 18 and then we got into the transaction with them where they actually moved in in 21. The >> Yeah, but they were rehabbed before they moved in. >> Understand? >> Yeah. So I'm saying how much money from the say we we purchased the land minus the purchase price. I mean you could put
in the minus the purchase price. How much rehab and when is the end in sight? I mean this is holding up some serious services that are needed. >> We we we didn't >> your contractor now I I know but no but we authorized it. It's through our our economic
>> 5.8 here. I know we had 1.2 in connection with the first phase and that was more than we had expected. I I we can get a number that finalizes it, but it's all through federal historic grants. >> I under I I'm not under I I'm not saying I understand where the money comes from.
I'm just understanding the mismanagement of getting the the the site up and working. I I can also tell you the federal government. If you want to talk mismanagement or you want to talk a troubling place to work with, it's the federal government because we
had we spent about two years trying to ascertain the final approval. Suzanne, is that about right? Two two and a half years. Uh and we were directed by the federal government to apply for even more money. We weren't. The BEOF was.
They put in for I think a million7. They were told, "No, no, go in for five and change." and and they went in for five and change. And maybe that extra $4 million cost us >> two more years. So, uh to to throw it on the BF when you're dealing with the
behemoth that is the federal government, it's a bit unfair. Uh that that piece of property uh is is a troubled piece of property. We knew that going in. BEF knew that there were going to be environmental concerns. They had to remove all the asbestos. They had uh old
style um furnaces in there. Everything had to be removed. You're in tight quarters because you've got uh residences on both sides and the people on Howard Place are not uh at all thrilled about all the construction work that's gone on there. Uh and we've got
to start the PUFF has to start drawing down on this money pretty quickly. But it wasn't until probably September of last year that they came and visited because Samantha Howard was still working here and they the federal government actually came a contingent
came to Bayon and we had a we had a meeting with them down at the uh museum on Broadway and and 9inth and that's where they finally confirmed that we would be getting the $5.7 million or whatever it is that they that they uh told us to apply for. But it sat
mysteriously for a good two years where we couldn't get an answer out of Washington for anything. >> Okay. I just I just want to know in the end game when we can actually get kids into the Head Start program that are desperately needing it because when we started this to add to get through the wait list, those kids are pro are
obviously too old now to need it. So people left were left unserved for for for you know something that shouldn't really be left. And I'm glad you're worried about the people on Howard Police because you weren't worried about the people in my neighborhood when you decide to move the um
whatever you want to call impound yard down by any. Thank you. >> So who'd like to move R17 move? >> Second. >> And on R1 17, Mr. Booker. >> I >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur.
>> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. Are we awarding the contract for improvements to Russell Golden Park? >> No. >> Oh, okay. >> We need to hold off on that. >> Yes.
>> What wouldast >> we got four bids disposal um at a total of 12,937 613. Century Waste Services at 10,287,
Suburban Disposal 15,958 and Affordable Cartage at 15,991 and those are for all five years. Uh the award is going to be for the it's it's a three-year bid with two options at the city's option sole sole option um as we
did the last time. And so Century Waste Services for the first three years is at $5,994,000. ENL disposal is at 7,718,227.80. Suburban uh disposal was at 9,168,000. Affordable cartridge at 9,455,83.36.
Uh the recommendation uh by the uh department director, the purchasing agent and the engineer is that we award to Century Waste Services um in the amount of 5,994 for the first um three years with with
two one-year options exercisable at our discretion. Um the previous uh the previous work that Century Way services did uh was for the housing authority of the city of New York. Um
and we did receive a objection from uh ENL disposal as to some documentation that was either submitted incorrectly or um uh not included within within the bid. I don't think think that any of them we're
going to look into it further are fatal to the bid. Um so the the recommendation is to award to Century Way services which yes Jackie is the lowest by about $2 million. >> So Jay the 5.9 was essentially 6 million
is for the first three years is it 2 million for each of the option >> $2,97,000 and $2,196,000. So it boils I think we did the math it was it's like 1.998
uh for the first three years and then it goes up to 2,97 and 21 196 the last two years. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And so then my my of course my next comment is are is that does that come with any change in the level of service
we're currently getting? It's it's everything and more and it's actually better defined as to what's required. Uh director uh Carter and I spent days and and we actually sat with with our business administrator, Mayor Jane
Desmond, to go over the particulars of this bit uh to make sure that we had it right down to to the to the brass tax as to what is and what isn't included. >> Right. Okay. Thank you. We are awarding to Century Waste
Services for solid waste collection. Who'd like to move? >> Would you like to do it as a whole everybody? >> Okay. Move it as a whole, please. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Leur. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> And I know this went up from our previous contracts. everything went through the roof obviously, but um $2 million difference on number two is a big a very very large difference. So, um
I'm happy to say I for this contract. Okay. Next item I have is reserve space for authorization to enter into an amended and updated community benefits agreement and redevelopment agreement in connection with the 1880 studios and
Togis urban renewal LLC. As you're all aware, um, Togis 1888 Studios was able to, uh, get the legislation was finally passed a month ago and, uh, or maybe two months ago, and, uh, within the past two weeks,
they were able to enter into lease with Paramount Global, uh, which puts them as in a 10-year lease position. There's also uh the hopes that they can get uh one or two more three-year lease holders. Uh but based upon the fact that they were able
to secure a 10-year lease uh and they were approved by the Economic Development Authority, I think two Thursdays ago uh to move forward. Uh it's now time to again this takes a long time to go through. This was several
years ago. uh we ne negotiated the basic terms of a uh um community benefit agreement and now it's time to implement it. Uh so there there's a an EDA form that that you have to fill in the blanks in connection with uh uh Aspire funding
um financing from the state and this will allow us to enter into a community benefits agreement where that was previously discussed a couple years ago about uh what individual benefits the people of BON will receive above and beyond a pilot payment, above and beyond
the the the exchange of um the the number of people will be working on this property and and then another people will be working on constructing this property. >> Jay, is there a dollar amount um attached to this? even some of those um of the community
benefits because there are a great deal of of benefits including interactive programs with our schools and um so some of the agreements or even if we could release to the public a list of those of the community benefits that we will get to see touch and feel and and that will
come out of >> we're still we're still fine-tuning them but I can tell you that right off the bat uh they have to implement and develop a plan to mitigate flooding issues in the area of Avenue A and West First Street uh at a cost to reduce the flooding at a cost up to not to exceed
$2 million. Uh they're going to construct the walkway improvements uh public parks and open space as depicted in the redevelopment agreement. Uh there's a whole host of community there's a community advisory committee
that has to be established to to to implement and maybe flesh out more benefits. So this just >> and Jay, is this is there a term or is it in perpetuity as long as they're in business? >> Well, I I think the there the initial um
benefits are going to flow in over a fixed period of time, but as they become part of our community, what I can't say that they're not going to uh want to continue and have >> I just wanted to know if there was something in writing that said this will continue every year. You know, whether
it's um uh a tutoring or teaching of some of their technical skills, things like that. >> Tax credit, the Aspire tax credit program. So, if they violate this or they stop adhering to whatever we agree to, um they lose their Aspire funding
then. So, and there are tragic uh financial consequences for them if they do that. So I guess I guess >> I would like to see the agreement is what I'm saying. So okay >> draft the draft agreement but it it still has to be fine to the fine tooth
comb has to go through it. Remember the New Jersey economic development part authority is part of this agreement. Okay. >> But if you could get the council a copy we'd appreciate that. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> I would like to move it. >> I guess my question before we move it is so are we approving the agreement in and of itself or we approving moving forward with the >> I see that was my question. Okay. >> It's a draft. >> Thank you for the red line.
>> It's just a draft for now. Mr. Booker moved it. Who would like to second? >> Second >> on that one which will be R20. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi.
>> I have nothing more. >> We had one ordinance that was sent to you earlier today by um Mr. Richard Scholar's office. >> Okay. And the conversation was held with the council president. Yes, it was. I believe um >> you said no. So, you may want to revisit
that conversation. >> Motion to close. >> Next month. >> Next month. >> Next month. >> Okay. >> Take a motion to close from Mr. Carol >> and second >> and on motion to actually Mr. Booker.
>> Mr. Wait, no, no. We we had two on the the resolution that you had there for the um >> for the uh first street for tous. It was actually two parts. I had to break it into two separate resolutions. There was one for the uh >> okay
>> for the community benefits agreement >> at 10:30. You didn't respond to me and >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Not that one. This one. Uh uh I'm talking about for for TOGUS for 1888 student. >> That's what I'm talking about. I emailed you this morning. I sent you two resolutions for that.
>> No, you did not. >> Rather than have this um disagreement, is there is it something that we >> It's very simple. >> It It's a It's a resolution that allows for a first amendment to the redevelopment agreement and all it does is change the schedule of the
construction because it's been two years since we entered into >> to what what is the new He gave it to me but he's given it to them now. >> Okay. So I'm going to read this. Subject to site preparation environmental remediation obtaining all government
approvals and to tolling extension and modification as provided in the agreement. Commence construction by June 30, 2026. Complete construction by 40 months following the commencement of affirmative construction. Outside date for completion of construction of the
entire project is five years from commencement of construction or June 30th, 2026, whichever is later. And there's what we were talking about dates for completion. So like you had mentioned before >> they don't
>> um again a lot of these they can uh ask for an extension if there's a good reason but it doesn't have to be granted but obviously different things during COVID there were several companies that had problems getting supplies or and um they asked for extensions and some of
them were granted. >> Did they get like a penalty or something? I yeah it's case by case there could be penalties. Yes. >> Okay. >> On add one would like to move it
>> and on that one Mr. Booker. >> Hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi >> Miss Hi >> Mr. Laalooa. >> Hi. >> Anything else? Mr. C. >> I think that's it. >> Okay.
So on a motion to >> adjourn and and Mr. Booker >> to adjourn >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez >> hi >> Miss Weer >> Mr. Lapalooa
>> uh I want to wish everybody happy Diwali and a happy Thanksgiving and I vote I