Heat. Heat. I would like to advise all those present that notice of this regular meeting of February 18th, 2026 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 Bergen record in Asbury Press. 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 February 13, 2026. 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 Weamer >> here. >> Mr. Lapaloosa >> here. Please rise for the pledge of
allegiance 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. Okay. Our first item is an ordinance
amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances of the city of Bayon chapter 35 zoning. I have a motion on the table to withdraw this resolution by council member Carol. Mr. Laloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker.
>> Mr. Carol, >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, Miss Weamer. >> I apologize. Did we >> We're withdrawing this. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I
>> 02 is an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 2834 East 22nd 22 Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 28 28-34 East 22nd Street
which is identified as block 212 lots 30 31 and 32. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held December 18th. 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 the meeting of 20 January 21st and was postponed to this meeting of February 18th is now before the council for its consideration and the public hearing and the resolution moved by the council president given the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker.
>> Mr. Carol. >> Mr. Perez. I >> Miss Beamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial agreement buying between the city and 2834 East 22nd urban renewal LLC for the
property located at 28-34 East 22nd Street. 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 Nudroski 126 Avenue. All right.
So, um maybe for this one then in the next three you could just tell us how many years they are and how many >> terms. Okay. >> Yeah. Can you So that's so what are the terms for this one? >> Oh, we're going to refer to our professionals. >> I just want the number of years and the
number of units. We're we're on O2. Incidentally, uh Dan Banker, our uh financial consultant, is running a couple minutes late. >> Yeah. >> I just number of years and the number of units.
>> So, the number of units for uh this one for 28-34 East 22nd Street is a 116 units. And the terms of that agreement are they are it's a 25-year
pilot with um starting at uh 10% for five 11% uh for 10 uh 12% uh then for the next uh 10. And then the tax phase and starts um at the uh the last four years are two
years at 60 and then two years at 80 with the community benefit payment uh for the overall project uh for $290,000 with uh the current property paying $54,596 in taxes with a current city share of
200 sorry of $24,530. Uh once when this project is stabilized, uh it is estimated that the stabilized pilot payment will be $418,000. Uh and the city share will be $45,917.
>> How many parking spots does this unit have? Does this for the number of units? >> I don't have that uh on the top of my head, but that's in the uh project description when uh Dan Banker has with the memo. Oh, and just because it's a very um you know the parking uh over
there is >> already uh troublesome. >> Again, the parking on that would have already been done in the redevelopment uh plan and the you know the redevelopment agreement, but generally we're trying to keep to the 1.2 uh for two bed and one for one point uh and one
for our uh one. So, but generally those are the standards that we're trying to use for this. >> Yeah, but it was just I I know that's not here, but we're giving a benefit. So I was just understanding the other the burdens on the the neighborhood as parking delivery is their delivery spot. I know that's all done at the site plan.
I know that >> again the the redevelopment plan those concerns are addressed in there uh on the parking requirement and also on the loading and uh the loading zones. I mean, Councilwoman Weamer's been very adamant on making sure that the uh there
is a internal loading zone within the building to handle that along with the uh garbage pickup uh to make sure that those uh burdens are not addressed. >> The question was how many two-bedroom units are here? >> I don't have the breakdown on that right now. I just have that overall unit count, you know. >> Okay. Because usually that affects
school children. So, okay. Thank you. >> Anyone else on O2? 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. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I resolution ordering final passage. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker,
>> Mr. Carol, >> did you have your vote? Mr. Carol, >> your vote. >> I said no. >> Oh, I didn't hear you. Sorry, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. I >> 03 is an ordinance approving the
financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and Bayon Partners Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at Memorial Boulevard which is identified as block A30 lots 2.01 2.02 3.01 3.02 4.01 and 4.02 O2
which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held December 18th 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 the meeting of January 21st and was postponed to this meeting of February
18th is now before the council for its consideration and the public hearing and the 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, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa.
>> Hi. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and the Bon Partners urban renewal LLC for the property located at Memorial Boulevard, which is identified as block
830, lots 2.01, 2.02, 3.01, 3.02, 4.01, and 4.02. 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. >> And can we hear the terms again on this
as well? >> And we're going to want it for for the fourth one as well. >> Sure. So for uh this one uh this one again is amending a uh agreement uh getting the benefit of the uh extension of the pilot on the buildout phase of
this because this is a multi-phase uh five uh building five-phase project. So the terms of what were originally approved by the council are remaining the same at uh 25 years. Uh the difference is on the length of time um that uh they have to build out for that.
Um the o other change to this agreement uh is that uh because this is city land that we are selling uh that once when the pilot does go on into effect uh we'll be exempting the land tax so that the city will get the full benefit of the 95% of taxes otherwise due and
doesn't have the administrative burden of the land tax credit there. Uh and again doesn't affect our ratio because right now um it goes to zero uh since it's city land and exempt. So, um, again, those are the the changes of the
terms on this one. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> The number of units in this phase. >> Yeah. >> Sorry. >> You want to just stay up for a couple minutes at least? >> So, the next one you can just say that I won't have to come up.
>> So, again on this one, this was the uh this is the borai site. So that was uh 1,750 units over the uh uh five phases. So with the first phase, you know, with us closing um at the end of uh December
uh was roughly 250 units or so. >> Okay. Um and I just want to say I'm absolutely happy because I know they're going to use um union labor. So that's a good thing. >> Anyone else? Hi, good evening. Melissa Gdeski
Rodriguez, 148 Avenue F. Um, in I want to be considerate of everybody's time. I just have a few questions about these buildings that maybe we can answer in bulk or at a later time. Um, but how many of these units um are designated as affordable housing, disabled residents,
veterans, seniors, or special needs, and how much is being dedicated to workforce housing? That is a very hot topic across multiple municipalities and we have great first responders. We have great municipal workers. I think it's time we give them a fair share, too. So, do any
of these units on tonight's agenda cover any of those topics? >> Not not as it relates to this particular project. We're just talking about this ordinance right now. >> Okay. In the sake of saving time, can that be part of the terms that are covered when when presenting? it would
just help us all and again I want to be considerate of everybody's time so none on this unit. Thank you. So, director Skylinder, while um and that's a that's a wonderful question for which obviously, as you know, is near and dear to my heart as well. But so
while there are no units specifically designated um to meet that requirement, can we just review the overall affordable housing guidelines and state how the current environment that the
city is in is already within those affordable housing and workforce guidelines um according to the state analysis that was recently done. >> Sure. So, Councilwoman, um, also during part of this speech, we have Derek Orth, who is our affordable housing attorney
here. Uh, so he's able to also answer any other questions on on this matter, uh, as as you may see fit on this. But generally for workforce housing, um, let's understand overall the guidelines on this from a monetary perspective.
This is all based on the jur, you know, federal guidelines from that are done by HUD. They set those standards for the Jersey City metropolitan area which Bayon falls into. For the most part, it's all of Hudson County. Uh it takes a look at what the overall units are, the
overall population in each of those zip codes for there. uh with then you know looking at the ranges of what is considered to be market rate uh from there at a 100% of the AMI or the area median and income from there and then
going from the different ranges on low income to moderate to workforce uh on the federal guidelines the federal guidelines only deal with low and moderate uh while the state adds that second category third category of workforce housing
So for the guidelines on that affordable housing for low is between 40 to 60% of AMI. Uh and then moderate is 60 to 80% with then workforce being 80 to 120% of AMI. >> And and director Skiller what exactly is
the AMI for the area that we are designated in? >> So overall for the salary for uh the Jersey City metropolitan area uh we are it's $107,000 uh for the salary. So uh while we understand the the plight of it, these
are you know the rules and the rubrics that are set up um that we have to live and abide by. Um also again on the the salary uh on the rent on a monthly rental basis uh roughly the rent is about 2100 a month uh for what they
consider market rate or someone that at 100% of AMI can afford. So that's also again the basis for workforce housing which roughly when you look at our data is our market rate. Uh so from um from there for our you know
into the affordable you know guide guidelines and what we're doing for our fourth round obligations uh while we've adopted in the the past the uh fourth round uh housing and spending plan. Basically the goal of
that is to how we are achieving the 750 units of rehab component um for our existing you know current housing stock that we have. um mo mostly through you know our housing authority on their rehab component and then also
supplementing that with some of the uh development or some of the rehabs uh on some of the other private uh you know privately owned affordable housing buildings to meet that uh in addition to certain other items that we're doing on
you know new build for Oak Street uh you know working with the uh the YMCA as uh the only single room occupancy uh building in the county to make sure that that remains as as an SRO. Uh so um you
know those are just some of the guidelines you know on broadstrokes >> and that facility specifically speaking about the YMCA that that benefits >> that that vast majority our our veterans our I know that there's a great number
of veterans that are there. So they are um very patriotic, wonderful gentlemen. Um but that is the primarily the benefit that comes out of that building. Am I correct? Again, it it allows for I I don't know the breakdown of specifically
what type of uh units there are, but um for this round, single room occupancies are allowed, you know, such as a Hawaii. And given the fact that it's the only uh one within the county, there's a a need for that. Again, helps on the affordability for keeping people within
the county, a single room to, you know, afford, you know, very, you know, highly subsidized rent to remain within the area that they they grew up in. Uh so again, part of that spending plan also addresses some of the needs that that building needs, such as a new roof, which we're working with them uh on
using the affordable housing trust fund to spend. >> Yeah. And they rehabbed over 700 units of affordable housing. >> Yes. >> Was it 750? Excuse me. Yeah. Um just I think they finalized it last year. >> Yeah. And also again, we're still having
to meet because this is also has to go in front of the court uh just for uh sake of uh transparency to the public. uh the court has to approve the the plans and along with um you know the obligations that we have and we have different reporting
requirements that we have to meet meet. So I mean Derek if you want to jump in and talk about some of other things that >> Thank you director. >> Yeah. Thank you Mr. Skiller and and council members of the public. My name is Derek Worth. It's a pleasure to be here tonight. I last appeared before you
uh last year in August where we uh or perhaps it was July where we presented our fourth round affordable housing plan and that plan consisted of a robust plan for rehabilitation of existing units within the city of Bayon. We also have approximately $13 million which we are
leveraging to both rehab existing units and also to provide funding stacks for perhaps 100% affordable housing projects throughout the city of Bayon. We have produced that plan. we have submitted to the court as part of our fourth round affordable housing obligation. We are working in a partnership with the
housing authority of the city of Bayon. We are still waiting for the court approval of that plan. The courts are uh are backlogged as every municipality in the state of New Jersey or essentially nearly every municipality in the state of New Jersey has submitted a plan. So we are waiting for that approval but we have proposed a plan and we are moving
forward with that. Thank you. >> Thank you Zumac. I just want to update the council just on tiny little piece of that. So once a year the city of Bon is required to file
a report with DCA. I filed it at 11:00 last night and we have 14.7 million in it and we have definitely have 4.2 two already allocated through these good projects that Joe Skillander and Derek have mentioned and John John Wasala and
I believe in uh this next month um Clark Hint is coming in with some revisions that are required under the law of to the whole thing and then I will all we all be talking to you about how to spend the remaining about nine and a half to$10 million which we have to spend
within four years. So, there's just a little piece there, but I wanted you to know it's not something that you're only thinking about. It's something we're actively working on with everybody in >> Thank you, Sue. >> Thank you, Council President. I'm sorry.
>> Excellent. >> 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? >> A move. on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> hi.
>> Mr. Carroll, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi. >> Mr. Lalooa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi,
>> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laloo. I >> 04 is an ordinance approving the redevelopment plan for the property located at 1191-205 Kennedy Boulevard which is identified as block 32 lots 10 112 13.01 101 and 15
which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held December 18th was published in the Bergen record and posted on the bulletin board was required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at the meeting of January 21st and was postponed to this meeting of February 18th 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. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi.
>> Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bale, New Jersey, County of Hudson approving the redevelopment plan for the property located at 1191-205 Kennedy Boulevard, which is identified as block 32, lots 10, 112, 13.01, and
15, 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 >> and we're going to pull this. So,
>> well, no, no. >> Sorry. >> Sorry. No, 05 is the one. Yeah. So, uh, Council President, uh, again, for this redevelopment plan. This is the Luke Oil site on Kennedy Boulevard. Uh, >> okay. >> This is the one uh that we discussed a
couple months ago uh that had that phased approach. they hit six stories if they had eight and nine that was uh tiered with um different benefits coming in. Uh the overall plan itself has a maximum of 130 units. Uh overall that again could be has to fit in with the
within those three phases. Uh but again it's taken into consideration the uh construction costs over there. uh that again with the also the financial agreement being introduced um on this one they are going to pursue the sixstory option but just for again
because this is a redevelopment plan talking about the bulk standards on that it would you know potentially permit um either the eight or nine but they'd have to come back and uh you know renegotiate a uh redevelopment uh sorry a financial agreement on that um but for the bulk
standards on that um like I said it's uh if it's nine stories ries uh they have to uh you know provide a shuttle service to and from uh the nearest light rail. Um if eight stories uh they have to have the higher parking uh requirements of
1.5 um and then at six it meets our you know normal standards of 1.2 uh you know for two bed and uh one for uh one. Uh there's no breakdown of the unit counts, but it overall says on the studio size, 700 foot for a studio, uh 700 feet for a
one bed, and 1,000 ft for uh uh two bed. Uh does not permit uh any three bed at all there. >> Thank you, director. >> Anyone else on 04?
No protest against objection to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? I >> move on. The motion to close. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur. Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I.
>> And resolution ordering final passage. >> Move it. >> Second. >> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carol. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Hi. >> Miss. We hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. Hi. 05. I have a motion to postpone to March
18th and it's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Carol, will you second? Second. >> On the resolution for postponement, >> Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. I >> six is an ordinance of the city of Bano County of Hudson, New Jersey, adopting an amended amendment to the redevelopment plan for 1012-1022 Avenue C and 53-57 West 48th, which was
identified as block 64, lots two and three, as shown on the official tax map of the city, which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st, 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 February 18th if now before the council for consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by the council president given the ordinance second reading Mr. Booker second >> on the resolution Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez
>> Missur >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance adopting an amendment to the redevelopment plan for 1012-1022 Avenue C and 53-57 West 48 which is identified
as block 64 lots 2 and three. 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. May I have a motion to close? >> Second. >> On the motion to close. Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second.
>> On the resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Hi. >> Missur. Hi. >> Mr. Lapalooa. Hi. Well, seven is an ordinance authorizing and approving the traffic control plan for applicant Bayon Housing Authority,
Oak Street Development, owner of certain property located at 7 Oak Street West, and also known as block 471, lots 1 through 7. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st was published in the Bergen record and posted on a 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 February 18th is now before the council's consideration and a public hearing and the resolution moved by council member Perez giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Carol,
will you second >> on the resolution? Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. Miss Reamer. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance authorizing and approving the traffic control plan for Applicant Bayon Housing
Authority Oak Street Development owner of certain property located at 7 Oak Street West, which is known as block 471, lots 1 through 7. 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. Nadski Sharon >> Nadski 126 Avenue. Um since this area is kind of important to me, my dad lives right there. Uh what was the outcome of the study? What I mean because we we've
seen the lack of studies down um at the base. So is there traffic lights coming and I'm assuming this is in relationship to the upcoming >> Oak Street. >> Yeah, Oak Street. Yeah. So, is it about the the new um potential housing development that's going there?
>> Yes, it is about >> So, I'm saying what's the outcome? Is it is it requiring a traffic light and how many units was that going to be? >> And when was the the date and time of the traffic study that was done? So, 10th, but go ahead.
>> Again, the council, sorry to interrupt on this, but the um for for this one on this property, uh the overall um for this is for Oak Street for the affordable housing for Bayon Housing Authority and United Way. On this, there
is a unveated road um that exists as a a court circle um on this property that was not vacated properly. So part of the traffic um control plan here is one to address the fact that um the the
sidewalk is going to you know reexist uh here along with um also the temporary construction closures um and roadway signages that are needed for uh the emergency you know vehicles to go by while they're constructing. So there's really two requests uh for this uh
traffic control plan that our engineers uh did review um at CMA. >> So it wasn't just general like if there's a traffic light that's going to be required later on when all the uh units come online. >> This was just strictly for development reasons.
>> Can we get uh Miss Mac? >> I'm just trying to understand what it was. >> Thank you, Mr. Skeleton. I I don't want I don't want to interfere with Mr. Spillinger's presentation. He's talking about we have a resolution on
tonight which was proposed by Lieutenant Ki from our police department. As you know, he handles all of the um construction uh permits for traffic and um he makes the recommendation. He recommended this. This is really about what is going to be the pedestrian
access on the road while the construction is taking place. And Mr. Scalinder has been um very diligent about making sure every project that comes up has that control plan. But I think the question you were asking um Miss Nrosski was more to was a traffic
signal uh required. This is 40 units and when it went to site plan there was a rigorous review by the housing authority and their consultants about what the traffic impact would be and there was a very lengthy presentation about the fact that these are 20 units of special needs
housing and 20 units of senior housing. And as part of the site plan application, there was a report that said that basically this has a very low traffic impact because the type of person that lives in these buildings has a very low use of u vehicles and I just
wanted to add that to you because I think that was something you were >> that was what I was asking you about pedestrian crossing too. >> Yeah. So the pedestrian crossings were handled during the site plan by CME and at the time and now Mr. Scolinder is making sure that during the interim time
until while it's under construction that there is a safe passageway. >> So it's construction phase >> and approved by um Lieutenant Concy and the police department upstairs. >> Okay. That's all I was asking. Thanks. >> Thanks. I thought that was 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? >> Move it. >> Second. And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final pass. >> It second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. I
>> 08 is an ordinance approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 21-37 West 25th Street Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 21-2935 and 37 West 25th Street which is
identified as block 183 lots 56 and 8.01. It was introduced at the and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 February 18th 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. Laaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carol, hi. >> Miss Perez.
>> Hi. >> Missur. Hi. Mr. Lapaloosa. I >> second reading is by title approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 21-37 West 25th Street Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 21-29
35 and 37 West 25th Street. 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. We'll give you terms on each one, right? Okay. All right. Can we just give the
terms on each? It's >> We have >> We have Mr. Banker here that can go through the lists of these. >> Yeah. So, Mr. Banker, if you could just stay up there. >> Yeah, no problem. >> In succession. >> Uh, good evening everyone. So the terms for this project
um okay so it's 10 floors 182 market rate units. The term is for 30 years. The first 20 years are at 10% of annual gross revenue. The final 10 years are at 11% of annual gross revenue. And you have a uh somewhat aggressive phase in
of conventional taxes. 0% for the first 10 years, uh then 20% for six years, then 40% for five years, then 60% for four years, and 80% for four years. Uh current taxes on the site are
approximately $93,000, of which the city share is about $42,000. And under the proposed pilot, the um at stabilization, the annual the annual pilot will be about $630,000, of which the city share will be about
$610,000. >> Just one other thing to add to this project. Uh um this is the uh uh forum site. So there is a uh community uh center or community space that's supposed to be in there. So on this one,
while we didn't negotiate a community benefit payment as part of the redevelopment plan, they have to provide uh the city with that space that uh we can determine to use at a different time. Um but uh again, you know, that's one of the things uh that we just wanted to, you know, that was part of the terms
of the negotiations for this financial agreement there. So just for everyone's consideration >> and so director Skillander the community benefit is the allocation of a >> 1000th floor on the uh main lobby floor and then an entire floor two or three
>> overall it's 10,000 square feet >> 10,000 square feet available to our recreation department or open to the public whatever that specific use may be and then ongoing care maintenance cleanliness hy all things of that nature on the developer. Yes, that is correct.
So, and again, you know, we still have to negotiate the the use of it there. Uh, which again would go back in front of the city council uh for uh your approval on that, but uh the terms of it, yes, would be, you know, the substance of that would be that. >> Director, is there also an attachment to
that in regards to the lifetime of uh the use of that for the city give back? >> Uh again, of uh that's all based on the the redevelopment plan on there. So it's uh you know it would be you know almost in perpetuity for the life of the building. >> It is lifetime in perpetuity. And then
director Skylinder am I correct in understanding that the current tax rate is at $98,000 per year and that will increase with the pilot to uh 630,000 per year. >> Yes, that's what Mr. Banker said.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. No protest against >> you want to make a comment. >> Um, did I hear that correctly? The first 10 years we were collecting zero. >> No, that's the phasing of conventional
taxes. So, it's the greater of 10% of gross revenue or 0% of conventional taxes. >> Oh, okay. And u and just for clarification, because I did go to the planning board meeting on this, there was it wasn't really determined how public the space was going to be. Um, I
think Mr. Munz was here when we talked about it. It was really going to be scheduled through the city wreck department, not for kids to come in off the street and use it. I know that's not determined yet, but I'm just want to clarify that was definitely the impression from the developer attorney
at the time. So, um, >> the city's negotiating how to figure that out. >> Yeah. So, it's Yeah, but I I think the public is led to believe that it's some public thing that anyone can walk in like the parks. Um, and my understanding is you'll have to be an organization, you'll have to have insurance, you'll
have to have a lot of things. So, uh, that's what was stated at the planning board when I went there. >> Uh, there'll be some control about who comes in and comes out and what times it's open, I'm sure, but the rest of it is still to be determined. >> Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you.
>> Okay. No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage. It has been filed with me. I have a motion to close. >> Move it. on the motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> no. >> You don't want to close the hearing?
>> I apologize. >> Close the hearing. >> Mr. Perez >> got ahead of myself. Spoiler alert. >> Miss Weame. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second.
>> On resolution for passage. Mr. Booker. >> I. >> Mr. Carol. So I would say this about all the developments especially as this is development heavy um and it's not worth repeating myself however many times. My
position on the affordable issue which was raised earlier is now a matter of record uh maybe even a broken and scratchy record but I've been in favor of it and I believe all of these should contain it. There are instances where you don't want to win a battle and lose the war. For example, when someone
agrees to use 100% union labor and actually help working people, you want to make sure that that's something that can happen. Uh in a situation, an instance like this and many others tonight where the housing limit was put at 107,000
and a average school teacher beginning work tomorrow would take 15 years in order to reach 105 I believe. um that just doesn't make sense to me. But with respect to this property, I understand
the benefit and the potential that this would be used as a recreation facility. I'm just very scared of the area and the height and the danger that it might put the recreation children in. And so that's
why I vote no. >> Mr. Perez, >> I I vote I. And the reason being we're going to have a youth center there for our youth which we don't have here in Bayon. Um every other municipality like
Caucus, a small town like that has a youth center and we don't have one. And if you go to North Bergen they have one. We don't have one. Continue going around in these municipalities. But here we have nothing for the kids. So this is a great opportunity to have a youth center
and a building that we're not going to pay any rents for. They're going to take care of everything and it's a safe area because high school kids go back and forth there and grammar kids and they cross the street there in that area. So that's that's a very well-generated you
youth area by the kids and and it's in the middle of the town where the kids can come from from from the north from the south from the east from the west and be in one specific area in the middle of town. So, I vote I again, >> Miss Leur,
>> I too vote I for uh many of the same reasons that Councilman Perez does, I do believe that the community benefit um in addition to the potential contribution
from the pilot going from the 98,000 to even within the first years to 10% of the overall ederal income and then increasing thereof uh reaching a maximum of about $630,000. To me, that math still works. And so
with the benefit of both the influx of revenue as well as the community benefit for that recreation uh facility for our children, whether it is managed through our recreation department or whether it is a community center open to children,
which is yet to be determined, I still um can't find the negativity in that. And while I realize that it may be a potential um increase of responsibilities on our police department and perhaps our chief
uh may have to allocate some additional uh forces to that area to make certain that uh all is is moving along smoothly. I do think that if given the opportunity, I I don't want to speak for the chief, but I do think if given the opportunity, the
chief might say that he'd rather our young adults of of our community to have somewhere to go and something to do rather than roaming the streets. So, with that being said, I vote I. >> Mr. Lumpalooa, >> again, not to be redundant, but I agree
with both my colleagues what they just said. the $630,000 in taxes is is a home run. Um obviously much needed tax revenue. Uh the fact that we're getting two floors is something very unique and
something beneficial to the city. Um regardless of how that's controlled and opened, um the recreation department, even if they control it, they do such a great job now that they're going to do a great job with those two floors. And um
a lot of uh our space is usually steered towards uh athletics. This doesn't have to be steered towards athletics. This could be steered more towards maybe some of the arts or some drama uh clubs or things like that. So there's a lot of different uses for an indoor space and
it's a very unique thing and these are the great things that we like to do as a council. the fact that it's in perpetuity really is the the grand slam of all that there's no lease that's going to run out in a few years. And so with that, I think it's a great project,
a great benefit. And I'll vote I. >> I'd like to jump in and uh I voted I already. I just want to say one in defense of the young people. I know there's a lot of gravity that comes to that McDonald's right across the street. And I am not against what my colleague is saying. But I think if you give the
children somewhere to go, they will not gravitate towards that McDonald's. Past experience I've had, that's if you're talking about a troubled spot, that's where the kids gravitate after school. That's where they walk to because they have nowhere to go. If you give them somewhere to go, they will follow. So uh
in defense of the young people, give them a chance to uh utilize that space. And I think uh that'll clear up some of the the traffic that happens after school and for our police department uh taking care of the children after school. >> Thank you, Mr. Booker.
>> 09 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and ML Realy Corp. of New Jersey urban renewal LLC for the property located at 626-628 Avenue E which is identified as block 405 lot 31. It was introduced and passed
the first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 February 18th is now before the council for consideration and the public hearing and a resolution
moved by the council president giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Mr. Perez >> second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and ML Realy Corp of New Jersey urban renewal LLC for the property located at 626-628 Avenue E. 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. >> Mr. Banker. Uh so this project is five floors, 20 market rate residential units. Uh just
to give you some more detail, 12 onebedrooms, eight twobedrooms. It will also have 22 structured parking spaces. The pilot term is for 20 years, 10 years at 11, sorry, 10 years at 10%, 10 years at 11%. Uh a slightly aggressive phase
in uh towards the back end, we'll go with two years of 80% and two years of 60%. Uh the community benefit payment is $2,500 per unit for a total of $50,000. Current taxes are approximately $17,000
of which the city share is about 7600. At stabilization, the projected pilot will be 63,000 of which the city share is about 61,000. >> Any questions? >> Yes. Janice Mattis 624 Avenue
5 years ago I bought a court brought a court case against ML realy I won it's been set aside it's been pushed aside so I don't know why it is why you're going
against a judge's order but you have I bring up ordinance number 39. I I know it's getting ahead, but it's the to reopen and amend the city's master plan to establish clearly defined zoning
districts that reflect the character of the city and protect residential neighborhoods from inappropriate development. I think that this project is an inappropriate development. I know because I've spoken to a lot of
neighbors. I did it five years ago and it hasn't changed. So that's basically what I have to say. Thank you. Anyone else on 09? 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? >> Move it. >> Second. >> Second. >> I think Maline before, please forgive me, but I think before we proceed, >> you want to let Mr. I do I would just
like an explanation or the reasoning behind moving forward with this project when um Miss Mattis clearly had a a discrepancy and and had taken it so far as to go to court. So I I appreciate that, Mr. >> Understood. I just wanted to put it on
the record so everyone's clear. So Miss Mattis is correct. There was a zoning board application uh that was approved by the zoning board. She went to court. They overturned it. Um and so the judicial branch spoke and we brought it
back to the legislative branch and said we think this is something this is an area that needs to be designated as an area need of redevelopment and allow this isn't an an overbuild here. I mean it's for what it is now to what it will be. It's more constant with the neighborhood actually uh being
residential. Um but we brought it back in front of the legis the legislative branch. The legislative branch has spoken. it has adopted a redevelopment plan that permits the development that is the subject of this pilot. Um so that is how we wind wound up here. So it's it's just the different branches
interacting with each other. Uh the judicial order was with respect to a zoning board decision and it doesn't restrain you from forever from changing the zoning. So that that's why we're here. I just wanted to clarify that. All right. Thank you. >> Was it the same project too that >> it's essentially the same project? Yeah,
it's essentially the same project. Um it's it's the definitions that were involved last time. Uh I think the city's clarified those now where I think it might have been at the planning board this time. It might have been a little bit easier, but the zoning regulations along Avenue E are really tough on on uh
development right along Avenue E near the light rail. It's hard to develop without having so many variances that it just doesn't it doesn't work. You can't get an approval that can survive judicial scrutiny. So that's why you've seen so many redevelopment plans along avenue E along the light rails because
the zoning isn't really it says TDD but if you look if you drill down one layer it's almost impossible for any of the for for a lot of the the the lots in the area to comply. >> Right. And Mr. Mselli the the park will not be used as a staging area.
>> No it will not No, we would have to get D approval to do that and no one wants to go through that. Uh we just want to make sure. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. No, we we won't be doing that. We will be making a community benefit payment which we hope will be used to refurbish that park as a matter of fact. >> Yeah. And park needs it. >> It's on the list >> and that that's the intent as well. And
let me just ask you, Mr. Miselli, is the is the project materially different from the original project. And what year was that action brought forth? >> I believe that was 2019. I I can't remember off the top of my head. I think it was 2019 2020. Um don't quote me on that though. I'm just going off memory.
>> In that general vicinity. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's essentially the same. And really, it's the rooftop amenities that I think triggered the variance last time, the height variance that really set it over. Um, which is something >> has that been modified? >> We we're doing it now and I think the
code as written today would probably not have counted that as a zoning story and and so this is consistent with the way we've treated rooftop amenities and we really want to do rooftop amenities particularly on the east side of town where you have a view of of uh New York City, Statue of Liberty, things like
that. So, it really is to allow a and again it it's right-sized. It's not it's not a 10-story building. It's not a huge, you know, community give back like uh like the forum, but it is rightsized and it is a step in the direction of residential as opposed to what it is now, which is really used as an electrician.
>> How many units in total? >> It's 20. >> 20. Right. Okay. That's my thought. 22 22 parking spaces. 20 units. >> Um >> Okay. >> I I appreciate that. Thank you.
>> So there's a motion on the table to close the hearing. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Reamer. >> Hi. >> Mr. Laalooa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Move it.
>> Second. >> On that resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. 010 is a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 958-968
Broadway urban renewal LLC for the property property located at 958-968 Broadway which is identified as block 78 lot 44. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st. 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 February 18th is now before the council for a public hearing and final uh consider final consideration 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 Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial
agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 958-968 Broadway urban renewal LLC for the property located at 958-968 Broadway. 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. Mr. Banker, give us the terms, please. >> So, this project is 10 floors, 117 market rate residential units. The mix is 18 studios, 54 onebedrooms, and 45
twobedrooms. Uh there's also a commercial component of approximately 10,000 square ft, and a total of 163 parking spaces. Uh the pilot terms are for 25 years with the first 15 years at 10% and the final
10 years at 11%. There's also a slightly aggressive phase in of conventional taxes, two years of 60 and three years of 80. Uh the community benefit payment is 2500 per unit at $292,500.
The site currently generates approximately $40,000 in taxes, of which the city share is about $17,000. At stabilization, the projected pilot is $418,000, of which the city share is $45,000.
>> Any questions on 010? >> What was that? 117. >> 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. Carroll. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> On the resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi.
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss. We >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> No. I do not think the neighborhood needs two 10story buildings across the street from each other. So, I'll vote no. >> Ordinance passes 3 to two.
0. 11 is an ordinance approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 485 Avenue C Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 485 Avenue C 487-493 Avenue C and 64-6
West 22nd Street which is identified as block 209 lots 22 23.01 and 27. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 February 18th 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. Laaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution second reading, Miss
Booker. Hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial agreement buying between the city of
Bayon and 485 Avenue C urban renewal LLC for the property located 485 Avenue C, 487-493 Avenue C, and 64-66 West 22nd Street. 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. >> Uh, this project will be 10 floors, excuse me, 135 market rate residential units. The split is 91 bedrooms and 45bedrooms.
There will also be a 180 ft retail component and a total of 146 structured parking spaces. Pilot terms are for 25 years, 10% for the first 15 years, and 11% for the final 10 years. A slightly
aggressive phasing of conventional taxes of two years of 60% and three years of 80% at the back end. Uh the community benefit payment is $2,500 per unit, which is uh the equivalent of $337,500.
Existing taxes on the site are approximately 58,000. uh of which the city share is about 26,000. At stabilization, the pilot is estimated to be 481,000 of which the city share will be about 466,000.
Anyone on 01? 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. on the motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi.
>> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passes. >> Some move. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol,
>> Mr. Perez, I >> Miss Weaposa. Hi, 12 is approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 745-747 Broadway Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 745-747
Broadway which is identified as block 139 lots 18 and 19 as shown on the official tax map of the city. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st. Was publish 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. The following public hearing at this meeting of February 18th is now before is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution giving the order second reading is moved by the council president. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol,
>> hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weame. I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 745-747
Broadway Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 745-741 Broadway. 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.
This is a six-story project with 27 residential uh market rate residential units. The unit mixes 21 studios and six two-bedroom units. There's also a roughly 1,500 square foot retail component and 29 parking spaces that
will be located offsite. Uh the pilot is for a term of 20 years, uh 10 years at 10% and 10 years at 11%. a slightly aggressive phase in of conventional taxes with two years of 80% in the final two years. The community
benefit payment is uh 2500 per unit uh which represents $67,500. Current taxes on the site are approximately $15,000 of which the city share is approximately $7,000. And at stabilization, the pilot is
estimated to be $78,000 of which the city share is about 76,000. >> Anyone else on old 12? >> Mr. Just on the retail on the on the retail parking there, what is the percentage um for square footage of retail parking
that's required? >> Because there's a percentage, right? So many square feet, >> the number of parking spaces per square foot. >> Um I don't know exactly >> because you had um you only had extra nine. >> So again on this this is solely a
residential uh project. Oh, I thought he said retail on the bottom. >> Is there I don't I didn't think there was. >> That's why I asked that question. >> He said retail. >> According to the numbers, I have 1500 square feet of retail. >> Okay. Um, so the 1500 ft of retail was still full beneath our ordinance um and
our standards of requiring that for 2,000 square feet. So I don't believe there is parking for the retail and that. Um, but again on this one because it is on Broadway and a difficult site, we're not allowing the curb cut on Broadway. Uh so that's why the all the
parking is offsite um to handle this. >> I I didn't hear did it meet the requirement for res for the number you just talked a lot about but I don't know that you answered the question >> again because of the financial agreement up um that was already in the
redevelopment plan. So the again they they have to require and meet the requirements for the uh redevelopment plan. Um, Miss Mack, you want to shut up? >> I understand the redevelopment plan, but I'm just asking, do you guys know? >> I'm just getting some clarification. That's all >> because the redevelopment plan is not
agreed if it's if it's not a community benefit. And I think making difficult parking is not a community benefit. That's my point. >> I'm not trying to I'm just trying to add information to the information. I don't handle financial agreements. Mr.
Scalinder does. So, he has all >> No, but you know the rules about the development. anything under 2,000 square feet would be considered neighborhood commercial standards which would not require parking and as Mr. Skillland said because of the location um on
Broadway we could not have a a curb cut. So the question you're asking is about what's the square footage of the actual parking spaces but in this instance it would not be required. You and I dealt with this on Denoi. Uh most specifically um
>> but don't the requirement per retail space require so many offsite >> not for 1500 square feet. No. >> So that's at 200 you're saying is >> no for that 1500 square feet is considered neighborhood commercial. So it's not required.
>> So there's no retail states for the retail area require. >> Yes. And that's it has nothing to do there may be some requirement you want in a financial agreement. I'm I'm not >> Yeah, I know. I can't answer that question. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> I I was just trying to remind you and I worked very closely on this this
question before when we both were trying to figure it out on Avenue on Avenue C >> and I think they wind up with no residential I mean no commercial anyway >> you know but we I just trying to remind you that you and I worked on this once before. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> So do we do we want to provide some
clarification here? So, while the retail space may not require um an allocation for parking, the residential space does. And if I understand correctly, that residential requirement is being allocated and accounted for with
off-site parking. Is that am I correct? >> Yes, that's correct on that. >> And that is meeting the standard as required for the residential units. >> Yes. And that that that off-site parking is in what proximity to the actual building?
>> It has to be within a quarter of a mile of the building uh within a a a radius uh from the site there. Uh while the ultimate plan is to have this across the street uh in uh the holiday tree and trim parking lot when if it if that does
get uh approved for redevelopment. um you know that's the ultimate goal but the there's flexibility in the plan in the event that that project doesn't come to fruition uh there but again that's on the redevelopment plan already you know adopted
>> so my only question with that is um and so I I hear everything that you said director >> sure >> so I guess my question is how is it that I approve a plan that is contingent upon
a secondary plan being approved >> if if that plan is not yet approved. >> So is there a recourse built in? >> Mr. Miselli, you want to answer? >> Do you want to? Thank you. >> Sorry, Mike Miselli. I'm the applicant's attorney. So, yes, you're right. There there this is a contingent plan. If we
can't get parking, we can't move forward. >> Okay. I think that's what comes and that's built into the >> that's built in and like director Skillander said if we can find another spot within a quarter of a mile which I think is about 1300 >> square feet 1300 linear feet the radius just to put context because I know
sometimes you lose >> sure >> but it's if we can't find it within that area we're going to have to figure something else out >> then the okay >> then the pilot I mean we have a certain amount of time and if the redevelopment plan across the street does go which I hope it does I don't want to leave a big hole on Broadway I don't think anybody does um we will that that that
redevelopment plan requires that they allocate those spaces to us. So, >> it does >> it's it's in everyone's interest to move that redevelopment plan forward at some point. We're hoping it's within the time that we have under the pilot. >> If not, it's a risk that that that we're taking, but but we're fairly confident that the the council will do that at some point.
>> Okay. and and again >> explanation >> just for the the council and the public's benefit of this the overall you know under the the law for the financial agreements and looking at the the but for test it's you know we're looking
at the financial terms of that not the actual you know project itself while there is a project description provided in there overall that's handled at the at the redevelopment plan level this is dealing with the financial terms and as to what is, you know, whether or not they can
build without a pilot. That's for for the butt for test. Um if they, you know, because of construction costs, uh market rate, other conditions there. Um you know, that that's what's being, you know, proposed uh with this one. So like that's where Mr. Banker uh and NW
Financial is looking at the terms as to what ultimately is financially best for the city on the approved redevelopment plans um that were, you know, in front of council. So, >> and Mr. Mselli, is it safe and you don't you need not walk up? I is it safe to
assume that that agreement for the allocation of the parking spots and whatever that purchase or sale or rental agreement whatever that may be is already agreed upon between the two developers and that is not something that is hinging. >> I cannot get involved in the discussions
about that. I represent both parties. Um, so I know they were talking about it, but I don't know. I can't give you an answer because they can't really involve me in the negotiations. But there will be an agreement. Um, if the they h like I said, the project across the street where Holiday used to be,
they have an obligation to provide it. We have an obligation to get it. So, if the parties don't reach an accord, then they're both going to be in a spot. So, it's in both their interest. They will. I think they will, but again, I cannot I don't know where they are because I'm not allowed to get in between two
clients. >> Okay. >> Okay. Understood. >> Appreciate that. >> Thank you. >> Yes. Question. >> Miso Demco 42 West 27th Street. Uh I just have four follow-up questions about off-site parking. How does it work?
Should I ask them at once or one by one? But it's um basically the first one is is the off-site parking um sort of requirement is that a bayon specific or is that um state or different guidelines? I I'll just answer that. That is uh part of the redevelopment
plan. This uh on this particular project it was adopted in September. Um and they have to comply with the plan. That's how it's been established. Essentially the redevelopment plan is the zoning ordinance and in this regard with respect to this particular property. So,
the the Bayon redevelopment plan has a section for off-site parking as a sort of one type of option for parking. >> Uh, yes. As it relates to this specific redevelopment area, this specific project >> and it was within a quarter mile, I believe, right? It was >> Yes, that's that's what I heard. I
forget the specifics, but it's got to be within a quarter mile. And again, as Mr. Misselli said it is contingent that proviso is within the redevelopment plan within the redevelopment agreement which is a contract between the municipality and the redeveloper. If they cannot
secure that parking whether it's across the street or within that suitable area if it's a quarter mile or what have you uh they cannot proceed with the project. >> Okay. So that was actually my second question as well. That's 0.25 miles you said for the maximum distance uh from
the location. That is correct. That's what director Skillander said. I think that's the number. >> Okay. And that applies for all of Broadway or all sites or that would be >> this that this is specific to this redevelopment area, this redevelopment project that we're talking about
presently, which is uh matter 012. >> Okay. For this and thank you. And then the other two questions relate more to these contingencies that were mentioned. So the first one is would the parking if it's found would it have to be exclusive for this owner or can it be shared among other multiple buildings?
>> This would be specific uh to this particular developer. Now that said if there's a larger parking facility whether it's across the street it could it may very well be a shared situation uh if it's a larger lot than the I forget what the number of parking spaces
is that's required but uh it could be. But this developer has to have allocated parking whether it's across the street or the other location for the required amount of parking for this project. >> Okay. So there's flexibility whether it's in an exclusive facility or in a
shared facility basically. >> Uh I think so. Yes. >> Okay. And then the last one is in the contingencies. Um let's say they find like one number a different number. Is there a minimum for what it has to be or is there flexibility on they find something but it's a bit lower than they were hoping they can go forward. So
what's the regulation? >> The the or the the redevelopment plan is specific to uh to the number of spaces required. Uh if they came if if they were in a situation and I forget, let me just see 29 parking spaces. If they if
they came in uh and and met with the city and said, "Well, we can only get 25." uh they would have to come back in before this council in the first instance to seek an amendment uh or relief from that parking requirement. Uh
so they cannot do it uh without securing a u an amendment to the redevelopment plan that would allow for a reduction in that required amount of parking. >> Okay. So it's 29 and then they can negotiate back at the council here >> if again the the requirement the
redevelopment plan as adopted requires 29 spaces. >> Okay. >> Assuming that's the number. If they want to do anything less than that, they're going to have to seek an amendment to the redevelopment plan. What does that mean? They're going to have to petition the council
to have uh Miss Mack and the planning board reopen the plan. Call it reopening. was basically seeking an amendment. They would have to justify that. What's their basis uh to reduce the amount of parking? Uh and then it would have to be brought back before the
council with an ordinance that gets introduced, a public hearing just like we're having now and an amendment to that redevelopment plan. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Melissa Gdeski Rodriguez, 148 Avenue F. I think the only question or answer I
may not have heard was when does that happen? So when does the parking have to be ready for the building or does the building have to be ready before like what what goes first and how does that timing work because I would assume it has to work almost directly at the same time which allows for these two
construction projects happening almost in the same radius kind of creating more of what we see today. So can you explain the timing on that? >> Well the the timing is uh and Mr. Miselli's client uh is the uh is the designated redeveloper for this site. Uh
they're going to have to come in uh for site plan approval that among other things is going to have the building details and so forth. And it's also going to have to demonstrate where the parking is. So they cannot proceed without having either that agreement in place or coming back or or coming in at
site plan and saying well you know we we're going two blocks uh down to another vacant parcel or another area um where it's suitable to accommodate their 29 parking spaces. So just to read the specific language on
this to clarify this for you know the public in the adopted redevelopment plan the parking for residential uses shall be pro uh provided at a rate of one space per studio and/or one bed room unit and 1.25 spaces for twobedroom units. Uh and then this is where the
conditions come in. So the parking shall be provided offsite within uh quarter mile of walk of a straight uh of the subject property. The location of off-site parking shall be identified at the time of the site plan application.
Off-site parking shall be secured via a perpetual easement or shall be deed to the same owner entity as the redevelopment area. Parking spaces shall be uh demonstrated to uh or sorry shall be demised at 9 ft by 8 ft uh 18 ft and
accessible uh spaces shall be uh demonstrated pursuant to ADA requirements. The redeveloper shall be responsible for obtaining city and all land use approvals required for off-site parking. Certificate of occupancy shall not be issued until such approvals are
obtained in outside of any and all appeals periods. So basically look they the building they have to identify this at site plan. The building cannot open if they don't have this secure. So, there's measures in there outside of the the future council
amending this plan as to the off-site parking requirements on an already approved plan. >> Thank you. >> So, director, in short, they cannot obtain a co without the parking being available to the potential residents. >> No. And they therefore then can't collect any rent.
>> Exactly. Okay. Thank you. 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? Some move. >> Second. >> On a motion to close. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez.
>> Hi. >> Miss. We >> Mr. Laaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> On that resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. In a situation like this, I would rather
see them contribute to the construction of a parking lot all on its own that would be remanded to the city, used for the city uh residents as well as whoever is going to live in this building. And I'm just
it seems like a quagmire of what must happen in order for it all to come together. So, I vote no. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. Mr. Lapalosa, >> uh, the only way I would agree to this is if to have those safe fails in there,
um, the ones that were just mentioned about not being able to rent it out and without having all that parking taken care of. And so with that, I'll vote I. 13 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of
Bayon and 66 653 657 Avenue E Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 653-657 AvenueE 659 Avenue E and 47 East 41st Street. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held
January 21st. 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 February 18th is now before the council force consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Perez giving the
ordinance second reading. Mr. Lapaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I. >> Second reading is by title. An ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial
agreement buying between the city of Bon and 653 657 Avenue E Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 653-657 Avenue, 659 Avenue E, and 47 East 41st Street. 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. So this project uh will consist of six floors, 52 market rate residential units. The mix is four studios, 35
onebedrooms, and 13 twobedrooms. There will also be 57 structured parking spaces. Uh pilot is for 25 years, 10 years at 10%, 10 years at 11%, and 5 years at 12%. Uh there's a slightly aggressive
phasing of conventional taxes of two years of 60 and two years of 80. Uh the community benefit payment is equal to $2500 per unit which is the equivalent of $130,000. Current taxes are approximately $34,000
of which the city share is approximately 15,000. At stabilization, the pilot is projected to be 153,000 of which the city share will be approximately 149,000. Any questions on 13?
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. on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carroll, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laloosa. >> I
>> and a resolution ordering final passage. >> Some move. >> Second >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We >> So, um, before casting my final vote, I
guess my only other question and and, uh, director Kavanaaugh, please don't don't get up. No need to leave your seat. Quick question. In addition to our community benefit payment um as well as the benefits that come from the pilot, I just want to make certain that all of
the developments that are on the agenda today are also in line with our overall uh wants, needs, desires, and projects regarding one or long-term control plan, our water and sewer separation and and
all of the efforts that our municipal services are currently working on. So is is am I safe in assuming that that is correct? >> Absolutely. That is one of the the main things that we have accomplished over the last three and a half years. Scander
and I have have spent a lot of time trying to pull that together to make that infrastructure part of it's it works right. So it makes that infrastructure a part of the overall plan as well as any kind of risk mitigation and analysis that goes on as
well to hold the developer accountable to have materials on site or see whatever risks any of these developments may pose as in the past it really wasn't considered. Now it is wholeheartedly considered and what we have to navigate
on a more global plane. >> Okay. I appreciate that tremendously. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you, Maline. I vote I. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I. 14 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of
Bayon and 1945 555th 55th Street Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 19-45 West 55th Street which is identified as block 28 lots 2 and three as shown on the official tax map which was introduced and passed the
first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 February 18th is now before the council for its consideration and the public hearing and a resolution
moved by council member Booker given the ordinance second reading Mr. Perez will you second >> second >> on the resolution Mr. Booker >> I >> Mr. Carol >> I >> Mr. Perez >> I >> miss >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance
of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 1945 555th Street Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 19-45 West 55th Street. 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. Uh this project will be eight floors, 207 market rate residential units. The unit mix will be 26 studios, 148
onebedrooms, and 33 twobedrooms. There will also be 218 structured parking spaces. Uh the pilot is for a term of 25 years, 10 years at 10%, 10 years at 11% and 5 years at 12%.
uh a standard phase in of one year of 60 and one year of 80. The community benefit payment is 2500 per unit which is the equivalent of $517,500. Current taxes are approximately $93,000 of which the city share is approximately
42,000. At stabilization, the pilot is estimated to be 652,000 of which the city share will be approximately 633,000. Any questions on 014? >> I'm sorry, Mr. Banker. Please forgive
me. I missed. How many units is this? >> 207. >> Okay. Thank you. >> 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.
>> On a motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Miss Weamer. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Some move. Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Carol. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laaloosa. Hi. >> 15 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 508 Avenue urban renewal LLC
for the property located at 508 Avenue, 510-514 Avenue and 134-136 West 22nd Street which is identified as block 208 lots 1.014 and 35. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st was published in the
Bergen record and posted on the bullets and boards required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of February 18th is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and the resolution moved by the council president given the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second?
>> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial
agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 508 MUA urban renewal LLC for the property located at 508 MUA 510-514 MUA and 134-136 West 22nd Street. 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. This project will consist of six floors, 61 market rate residential units. Uh the unit mix will be 29 one-bedrooms and 32
twobedrooms. Uh there will also be 69 structured parking spaces. The pilot term is for 25 years. 10 years at 11%, 10 years at 12% and five years at 13%. There's also a slightly
aggressive phase in of conventional taxes. three years of 60% and three years of 80%. The community benefit payment is 2500 per unit uh which is $152,500. Current taxes on the site are $27,000
of which the city share is approximately $12,000. At stabilization, the pilot will be approximately $225,000. Uh of which the city share will be approximately 218,000. Any
questions on 015? >> 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? >> I move second on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, hi. >> Mr. Perez,
>> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. Move it. Second. on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> I >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa.
>> Hi. 16 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 173-179 Avenue F Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 173-179 Avenue F which is identified as block
442 lot 67 8 and 9 which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 meetings February 18th 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. Lapalooa will you second >> second >> on the resolution Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez I >> Missur >> I >> Mr. Laapaloosa.
>> I >> second reading is like title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bon and 173-179 Avenue Furban Munal LLC for the property located at 173-179
Avenue F. The council is now ready to give all persons in this interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. Uh the project will be six floors with a total of 36 market rate residential
units. The unit mix is eight one-bedrooms, 16 one-bedroom plus dens, uh four twobedrooms, and eight two-bedroom plus dens. Uh there will also be a 1,600 square foot retail component and 39 structured parking
spaces. The pilot term is for 25 years. the first five years at 10%, the next 10 years at 11% and the final 10 years at 12%. Um, three years of 60% of otherwise
applicable taxes followed by three years of 80%. The community benefit payment is 2500 per unit uh or $90,000. Current taxes are approximately 29,000 of which the city share is approximately
13,000. Uh at stabilization the pilot is estimated to be 132,000 of which the city share will be approximately 128,000. >> Any questions on 06?
>> Um I I have a question. I um I apologize Melissa. I'm sorry. Um, Mr. Miss Elliott, is this your project? So, um, so that area, very densely populated, also a very busy road, uh, in
close proximity to a couple of schools, a church on Sunday, all of the above. So, my questions are one, did we allocate for delivery, move in, move out inside the building? I think that was one of my requests. And then um entry in
out of parking garage is where? >> Um I'd have to check the site plan. We haven't >> um I have to check the site plan on on that on both of those issues, but I can get back to you >> on that. I know that we reduced the scope of this building. This was initially supposed to be a sevenstory building with a few more units.
>> We did reduce the scope and I don't know the ripple effect on that. I I'd have to check the site plan, honestly. I just I just I can't remember. I I cannot remember. Um we can check if you want. >> Do you mind? I'm sorry. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. I'd appreciate it.
>> And then perhaps we could come back to my question. We could allow Miss Gdeski to speak. >> Oh, Melissa Rodriguez, 148 Avenue F. um not only this ordinance, what is the anticipation
or approx you know approximate anticipation of new students that will arrive from almost these 2,000 units? Do we have any study on that that was conducted by the city? >> Yeah. Um usually u
>> I can speak to that. >> Okay. Um so NW Financial uh prepared memos for each of these projects which goes through the financial analysis to determine if a pilot's necessary and if
so what the negotiated terms are. So that's what's being presented today. As part of that memo, we include a fiscal impact analysis which projects the number of residents and public school children coming out of each project. Um
there is a study that was done by Ruters um that was originally done in the late 2000s. It was updated in 2018 and then updated again uh more recently in 2025 that re uh researched tens if not hundreds of thousands of residential
units across the state in rental, condo, old, new, um and looked at each bedroom count and pulled actual resident and school children data in order to project out and uh define multipliers that you
can assign to each bedroom count within each type of development. So using those multipliers, we've applied those to each of these developments to project both the number of residents and school children. So for example, on this
particular project, um it's estimated that there will be six new public school children. I'm happy to include that projection going forward. I unfortunately don't have a total across all projects, however, but I can get that. Um, >> and so is that projection based what is
that projection based on? So six we we're we're talking about um 33 units. >> So out of that >> Yeah. 36 units. >> 36 I'm sorry. So 36 units and we're we're projecting six school children.
And is that is that based on are the factors that that allow us to reach that determination based on uh how many studios, how many onebedroom, how many twob is that or the square footage what's the factor that leads us to that assumption?
>> Yes, absolutely. So uh first is the breakout of the building itself. So 50 plus unit buildings are a different category and have different multipliers than uh 5 to 49 unit buildings. So this falls into the 5 to 49 unit category.
Then within those categories, you have different multipliers based on the bedroom count. A studio and onebedroom for example has a public school children multiplier of.143. So you apply that number to the total number of studios in onebedrooms and it
results in a projected number of public school children. um as the bedroom sizes or the bedroom count get increases the multipliers get higher because presumably a two-bedroom will be likely to produce more public school children than a onebedroom. Um so based on that
breakout uh when you add up the one 1 plus two and two plus the projected number of public school children is six. >> And what is that? So it's 0.143 for a studio in onebedroom. What is that allocation for a twobedroom?
>> Uh.196. >> Okay. And so out of out of a project of this magnitude with that mix of of apartments, we're coming up to six school children. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you, Miss I I don't want to
assume that answers your question. >> It does. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> No problem. >> Um I I think it'd be interesting to do that math across all 21 financial agreements. Poor teachers um where we got you. But um and then concerns around the lighting. I clearly live on the area
and um on a daily basis. A kid almost gets hit almost all the time. There's a lot of bike riders, a lot of ebikes. It's a whole different topic. Um what are we doing for light control, traffic control? Um the the area is getting more and more densely populated as you know Councilwoman Wemer you live right there.
Um it is getting tough over there. So like what um infrastructure um or improvements will this development be contributing to? >> Sure. So I think that's what we're going to let um attorney miss. So that you know exits or enter the enter the garage
entrance is on 24th Street. We kept it off the main avenue on Avenue uh on Avenue F. >> I'm sorry. So that would be 22nd Street. I'm sorry. Probably not 24th, 22nd. >> 20. Okay. So, it's off the side street and there there is a size there is a loading space in >> a loading space internal. Okay. Those
are very narrow roads. >> Uh it is a Well, those are one way. So, it's a right it's >> Yeah, it's a right in and right out. >> Left in and left out. Okay, that's fine. >> It's one one movement. >> Um Okay. And then um >> please forgive me because I've already
forgotten her question. Um, Miss Gdet Melissa. >> Oh, lighting traffic. >> Exactly. So, so Melissa, the inflow and outflow of traffic is going to be on that side road. So, it's not along Avenue F. So, the patrons won't have the ability to go on that main avenue to the
uh east of them. They have to go, they have no choice but to go out towards Avenue. Uh, and then I guess make either make the left on uh I'm sorry, towards Avenue. Uh yeah, Avenue 8. So make the left to go around to the back highway or
make the right to go uptown um in that direction. So um Director Skylinder, if you have some great words of wisdom to add to that, we're happy to hear that. >> So just in the redevelopment plan on the the lighting standards there, uh we did take this into consideration as we do
with all plans. So the lighting standards verbatim quite uh you know it's uh section four um a through on page 16 se and 17 of the redevelopment plan. So it says building mounted light fixtures shall have a maximum mounting
height of 15 ft. B lighting shall be sufficiently illuminate all areas to prevent dark corners and quotations. All lighting sources must be shielded to prevent and eliminate any glare. C. Lighting attached to the building are permitted provided that they shall be
shielded downward and directed towards the site. D. A maximum illumination of 0.5 uh uh foot candles is permitted along the side and rear yards and 3.0 foot candles along street frontage. E
light fixture shall be LED or other white light sources. >> Sorry to clarify traffic lighting. >> Right. So I I think what her question so Melissa because the entry and exit is on the side road um clearly there won't be any addition of am I safe and assume
there won't be an additional traffic light that's out of there because there is a traffic light on that corner >> again as requirement um with all studies and all site plans um that is always a engineering concern on that um dealing also again with the loading zone which
is section 2.5 of the redevelopment plan. uh one of the questions uh there that it does require an internal uh loading zone if feasible. Um and the like all traffic uh requirements here for the traffic
lights um there is a uh traffic preeemption uh requirement um that in all redevelopment plans. >> But again, so the entry is so you physically have to wait for the light at the corner before you can enter onto that side to even enter the garage. It's likely to be very slowm moving uh
vehicles. We will have a traffic study as part of the site plan approval so we can uh I know Councilman Booker is on the planning board. We can look at that uh when we go in front of the the planning board. Um we do have other pedestrian protections. We change the
the pavement to signal to people that this is a place where cars are coming in and out. Um, in some instances we put uh a light or some sort of indicator to let people know that that's where cars are coming out just to make it a little safer. Um, but it is going to be slow in and out. Um, you know, you never know if
there's going to be an idiot, but for the most part when you're going in and going out, you're not going at a very high rate of speed. >> And then Mr. Miselli, let's just make certain it is the facade is very tasteful. >> I think you've seen this one. I think it's very nice. I like it. It's a matter of, but I'll we'll absolutely show it to
all of you. Um I think you've all seen this one actually. I think we we did sit and go through this one. Um so and just to to jump back to the to the Ruter study which is what Mr. Mr. Banker was was looking at. The Ruter study is a little bit more aggressive in its
projections because it does include a suburban study area. I think I don't think it focuses on the urban core quite as much as I think our surveys in Bayon when we had done them the rates were much lower for the number of students being generated uh in new buildings. So,
uh, it's a Ruter study. It's it's it's the standard. It's the gold standard, but it just take into account that it does it does look at the whole state and and doesn't just focus on the urban core where it's a little bit different. There are fewer uh school kids generated from
developments here than there are out in the suburbs. So, that that just take that with a grain of salt when you when you consider the Ruter study. >> Sure. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Does that satisfy your question, Melissa? >> Yes and no.
>> Okay. No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage which has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? >> I move on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, I >> Mr. Perez. Hi. >> Miss Weame. Hi.
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passes. on that resolution. Mr. Booker, Mr. Carol, >> I don't remember if it was for this particular uh development, but this idea of the Rucker study was brought up before and thank god she's not watching
tonight because I got in trouble last time. I'm trying to convince my fiance to have at least five and we're just one couple in one house. So, I I think those numbers are ridiculous and being in the classroom, I can see the influx. So, I vote no. >> Mr. Perez. Hi,
>> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Decide that after you have the first one. Okay. So, you know, so >> it's a battle I'm losing, but I'm trying. >> As a father of four, just you could decide that later on. Hey, I vote I >> one at a time. >> Yeah.
>> I have a 5-year-old. You can borrow. >> You fund their college. >> Yeah. Right. Exactly. >> I would hope they are all as ambitious as you, Dr. Carol and that you are assisting with that PhD tuition. >> 17 is an ordinance approving the
financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 111-12 John F. Kennedy Boulevard Urban Renewal John F. Kennedy Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 1191-1199 Kennedy Boulevard, 1201-203
Kennedy Boulevard, and 1205 Kennedy Boulevard. There is a motion on the table to withdraw this resolution. It's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Carol, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez.
>> Hi. >> Missur. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi. 08 is an ordinance approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and and 81-87 East 22nd Street Urban Renewal LLC for the
property located at 81-87 East 22nd Street which is identified as block 49 lot 6 and 7.01. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st was published in the Bergen record and posted on the Boltons and Bo required by law with notice that it would be further
considered for final passage following the public hearing at this meeting of February 18th is now before the council board'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. >> I
>> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapos. I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 81-87 East 22nd Street Urban
Renewal LLC for the property located 81-87 East 22nd Street. 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. Sorry, I'm a little uh
>> Okay, got it. Uh, this is 81 to 87 East 22nd Street, correct? >> Correct. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Um, so this project is six floors, 45 residential units. Give you the unit mix real quick.
8 12 Sorry about that. Uh 45 Margarate residential units. The unit mixes 10 studios, 25 onebedrooms, and 10 twobedrooms. Uh there will also be 50 structured parking spaces.
The pilot term is for 25 years, 5 years at 10%, 10 years at 11%, 10 years at 12%. Uh there will be a slightly aggressive phase in at the back end of the term. Three years at 60, three years at 80%.
The community benefit payment will be $2,500 per unit which is the equivalent of $112,500. Current taxes are approximately 28,000 of which the city share is approximately 12,500. At stabilization, the pilot is estimated
to be about 150,000 of which the city share will be about 145,000. Any questions on 08? 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? >> So move
on. >> Motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol.
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa. Hi. >> 19 is a financial agreement approving a financial agreement between the city of Bayon and 120 West 33rd Street Urban
Renewal LLC for the property located at 120-122 West 33rd Street. And I have a resolution to withdraw this ordinance moved by the council president. Mr. Carol, will you second >> on the resolution? Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol,
>> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. Miss Reamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I 20 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 74 Hopkins Avenue Urban Renewal LLC for the property located
18-22 East 15th Street, which is identified as block 253, lots 39 and 40. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st. 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 February 18th. It is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Perez giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Lapaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker.
>> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. I >> Mr. Laloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bon and 74 Hopkins Avenue Urban Renewal LLC
for the property located at 18-22 East 15th Street. 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. Um so 18 to 22 East 15th Street will
have five floors, 32 residential units. The unit mix uh will consist of one studio, 11 one-bedrooms, and 22 bedrooms uh and will also consist of 42 structured parking spaces.
The pilot term is for 25 years, 11% for 10 years, 12% for 10 years, and 13% for 5 years. Uh a slightly aggressive phasing of conventional taxes, three years of 60% and three years of 80%. A
community benefit payment of 20 2,750, sorry, 2,750 per unit, uh which is the equivalent of $88,000. Current taxes are approximately $24,000 of which the city share is about 11,000.
Uh at stabilization the pilot is estimated to be approximately 119,000 of which the city share will be 116,000. >> Any questions on old 20? >> Sharoni 126 Avenue. It's just really um a statement. I don't This is the type of
development that I just don't see as making sense. If any of you looked at the block, it's a very residential block, all small houses. Granted, when you get to Avenue E, you got the new building that's down there, which makes sense on what do we call it?
Lo Carter. Um that I think we're calling it something like that. I I think that kind of makes sense in some places. I just think this is the kind of development that just undermines the communities, the neighborhood, the look and feel, and isn't really what um fits
in our master plan. 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? >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> I voted against the uh redevelopment
plan for the same reason. Uh if you walk down that block and stand in the middle of the street and stretch out your arms, you can touch the cars on both sides. Um this just doesn't make sense to me. I would implore my colleagues to uh vote no as well and protect that area,
especially because I've gotten numerous complaints over the years about that corner. And you know, I think the next light or next traffic improvements we do might have to be right there. So, I vote no. >> You're voting no on closing the hearing. >> Closing again.
>> You know, I got so excited. I got so I should be used to it by now how many nos I give. I vote yes to close the meeting. >> Okay, >> Mr. Perez. I >> Miss We >> So, I'm gonna I I am going to vote in favor of closing the meeting. Meline,
please bear with me. >> We're not closing the movie yet >> for just a moment because uh the the question does not go without merit. Um and I too questioned the uh for lack of a better word common sense of allowing
for something of this nature in that area. And unfortunately what I found was that that block is is what we call a uh a splitzoned block. And and if director Skylinder is anywhere here, just please correct me if I'm wrong because I don't
I don't profess to be right, but it it's my understanding. So I believe it was a a splitzoned block for which would allow for this type of development in the middle of that block. And that that zoning I believe was passed uh years prior to to to me joining uh the
council. I don't I don't know how long ago, but it was something that's already in existence and one would have thought that would have been contemplated at that point in time. So half this property uh was in the 8th street rehabilitation plan uh and part of the
issues uh with that plan again you know good plan at the time it was adopted but uh we've you know been amending it periodically because it doesn't allow zoning board relief and the relief is appropriate at the council given the fact that this warehouse that exists in
a residential zone um also again fold it fell in between an R2 zone and the Broadway corridor um uh the OS of the 8th Street rehabilitation plan uh and you know Broadway um zoning. So that's
why on this one uh which was I believe adopted in 2018 if I'm not mistaken. So >> but uh but again it's you know a plan that was been in the works at this by that point in 2017. you know, the state
helped come in. Uh, Miss Mack did a good job working with the the state and the city, you know, on that plan. Um, but one of the issues again for at least this specific property uh was again it was split zoned between an R2 zone and
the 8 street rehabilitation plan. So, created an ambiguity in the law as to what the underlying zoning would be. On the Broadway side of this, um, this building would be permitted. So that this is just really more of an >> I guess I I I do still struggle with
>> I >> that it's a split. So I I I question the the motive or the reasoning at the time that that was passed, but nevertheless, that is what is in effect currently. So um all right. Thank you, Director Scander. I appreciate that. Maline, I apologize for uh
um rerouting your direction, but I do vote I to close that. >> Okay. Mapaloosa >> I. and a resolution ordering final passage. >> And a second >> on a resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, I
>> refer you to my earlier comments and and I would add that just because something is allowed legally does not mean it is something that we must do. You know, we have the authority to make that final decision. So when when the argument is given that well, it is allowed, it's it's not a sufficient
argument. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> I >> Mr. Lapalooa, >> I too voted no on a redevelopment plan for this project. Um, again, I think you have to take each project for its face
value. I drove down there. I took a look at the area. There's a cut street very close to that as well. And, uh, I just don't think that it fits in the neighborhood right in that middle of that block. Um, regardless of the split zoning, I just didn't think it was a good fit. And I'll vote no.
Okay. Again 3 to2 the ordinance passes. >> 021 is approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bon and 6 657 Broadway Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 657-63
Broadway which is identified as block 158 lots 22 23 and 24. and it was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 the meet this meeting of February 18th is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council the council president giving the ordinance second reading Mr. Perez will you second
>> second on the resolution Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol, >> he stepped out. >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson,
New Jersey, approving a financial agreeing buying between the city of Bayon and 657 Broadway Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 657-63 Broadway. The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard
concerning it. Council President will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. >> This project will consist of six floors, 60 market rate residential units. Uh the unit mix will consist of 35 studios, 15 one-bedrooms, and 10 twobedrooms. There
will also be a 1,690 ft retail component uh along with 67 structured parking spaces. Uh the pilot term is for 25 years. uh five years at 10%, 10 years at 11% and 10 years at
12%. Uh slightly aggressive phasing of conventional taxes, two years of 60, and three years of 80. Uh community benefit payment of 2500 per unit, uh which is $150,000. Current taxes on the site are $48,000
of which the city share is approximately $22,000. At stabilization, the pilot will be 172,000 of which the city share will be approximately 167,000. >> Anyone else on 021?
>> And so I just have a couple of questions. I believe this um whose whose project is this? M I apologize. Um Mr. Kavanagh, do you mind? So please, so this project is located on Broadway. There is an existing curb cut. We're
going to allow for the curb cut to stand being that it is existing. Correct. >> And then is it safe to assume move in, move out, delivery, all of that will be allowed for in the building? >> It's still on site. >> Um, and there is sufficient parking. And
the curb cut, just so to give clarification on the curb cut, the reason we asked for the existing curb cut to remain was because it would it enabled us to accommodate the in the interior parking in the building to get
all the cars off the street because parking on a street is an issue. So we >> sure >> we did this that that was contemplated in in that design. No, that that was my only question because I'm I'm always concerned about blocking the traffic on Broadway. >> Is the curb cut going to be the same? Uh
>> same width. >> Say yeah, I believe it's the same with I >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance. So it's has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? So >> move second.
>> Second. >> On a motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Has Mr. Carol returned? Miss Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage.
>> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Not here. Mr. Perez. >> I >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi. 22 is approving an amendment to the free financial agreement buying between the
city of bound and the Peninsula View Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 75-87 East 31st Street which is identified as block 411 lot 2.01. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January
21st. 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 February 18th. Is now before the council for its cons consideration and a public hearing and a
resolution moved by the council president giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Booker, will you second? >> Second. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Reamer, >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson,
New Jersey, approving an amendment to the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and Peninsula View Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 75-87 East 31st Street. >> So, Director Skylinder, I I apologize
for interrupting you again, but just explain to me what this amendment is. So on on this one, to kind of conform with all uh new uh residential projects, uh we're exempting the land tax there. So again, the city gets the full benefit uh
of it. Um it also does reset the um the the terms uh on that. So we did uh have NW uh review that as well just to make sure that it does conform um kind of with some of our standards. Uh so um uh you know it's similar to other uh
redevelopment plans that we've uh or other financial agreements we've uh put in front to amend. >> Okay. And what are the terms of that financial agreement as well? I I'm sorry. So >> yeah, Dan, if you want to mind. >> Uh sure. So um this one is the year it's
25-year term. Years 1 through six 12% of AGR. Years 7 through 11 13% of AGR. and years 12 through 25 14% of AGR. Um, another amendment in this is that uh so
the original financial agreement uh is dated March 13, 2018. At that point, they were hoping to be able to purchase other properties that would allow for a total of 232 residential units. because they weren't able to purchase those
properties, the total unit count has been reduced to 165 residential units. Um, so those are the pilot terms. The reduction of the unit count, uh, we also made sure that it would conform with the
statute as it relates to the phasing of conventional taxes as we talked about 0 20 40 60 80. Uh, the original agreement wasn't necessarily uh, didn't spell out the early stages. So that is made more clear and uh as Mr. Skillander mentioned
the confirming that the land will be treated as exempt >> and that original agreement was contemplated and passed when >> uh it was dated March 13, 2018. >> 2018. Okay. Uh okay, understood. Thank you so much.
>> No problem. >> Any other questions? No protest against objections to our or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with May. May I have a motion to close? >> Move. >> Second on a motion to close. Mr. Booker.
>> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi.
>> Mr. Carol. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I 23 is an ordinance approving the financial agreement buying between the city of
Bayon and Duke Realy Bayon Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at East 22nd Street, which is identified as block 466.01, lots 1.01 and two, and block 478 lots 1 and 1.01. 01. It was introduced and
passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st. 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 February 18th. Is now before the council for its consideration
and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Perez giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Booker will second >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. Miss Reamer. >> Hi, >> Miss Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance
of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and Duke Realy Bayon Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at East 22nd Street. 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. So this is an industrial warehouse project. Um it will be built in five phases. Uh building one will be approximately 1.1 million square ft. Uh
building two will be approximately 150,000 square ft. Building 3 will be approximately 125,000 square ft. Building four will be approximately 110,000 square ft. And building 5 will be approximately 220,000 square ft.
uh the term is for a period of 20 years. Uh there is a uh so this is broken down by a percentage of gross revenue and a minimum amount per square foot. So as it relates to the percentage of gross
revenue, it starts at um 15% of annual gross revenue for years 1 through 10. uh bumps up to 15 and a half% of annual gross revenue. In years 11 through 15 and then finally in years 16 through 20
it's at 16% of gross revenue. But in addition to that calculation there is a minimum per square foot amount and that amount is $3 per square foot increasing by 2% per year. So just to give you an example, in year one, we'll look at the
revenue of the project and compare that. So that'll be 15% times whatever the revenue is and compare that to $3 times the square footage of the project. So it's the greater of those two calculations every year. And each of those are escalating.
So um in terms of current taxes, uh current taxes are $2.4 4 million of which the city shares approximately $1.1 million. Um at stabilization the projected pilot will be approximately $5 million of
which the city share will be $3.5 million. >> And um where's director skull? I >> I got a question for Mr. Banker. So the the $3 square foot and all like is that something that is normal for
warehousing like to when you uh figure out financial agreements? >> Yeah, absolutely. So I've probably worked on I'd say 10 warehouse projects over the last year and a half and uh that's actually one of the most
aggressive starting points. $3 a foot. I've seen 275. I've seen 250. So, um I have not seen much higher than $3 per square foot as a minimum. So, that is a quite aggressive pilot to start off. Um
am am I correct in recalling that this is the old Exxon property? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Okay. So, was there and also was there a I I believe if I recall correctly there was a tremendous amount of remediation that had to be performed. There was um
and significant contributions. I I mean >> if I recall because I I I was quite >> concerned. Look, this is a an original standard oil site. This let's right >> let's not you know kid anyone that Constable Hook as other parts of Bayon
are highly environmentally contaminated and still are. And this helps you know the the remediation that has been done there is helping cure you know as Jay used to call it the Fostian bargain of all right we had lower taxes because we had jobs but we polluted the land. Um,
so we're now trying to clean it up, make it more resilient, raise it to uh, you know, current D flood standards, uh, similar to how the Texico site where the film studio is going. Uh, so a lot of efforts in that regard, you know, quite frankly, also there is no infrastructure
there because this, you know, if you didn't work there, you have no >> and they're also going to institute all of that infrastructure and then work out a sort of agreement amongst other land owners in that area. Part of what they did actually was acquire, you know, another 45 acres to
avoid that. So they didn't have to agree to easements. They just bought it outright. So >> So they're solely responsible for it. >> Yes. So they look they they they connect to Avenue J and East 22nd Street. So a lot of the infrastructure that it it will have to go there, you know, is
going right into the, you know, the systems that we do have currently in place. Um but again, you know, this has been a a a redevelopment site that's been in the works for uh you know, many years at this point. Um so, you know, this is one of the last, you know, hurdles to find
>> who whose project is I apologize, Gary. I'm sorry. Whose project is this though? Who who's the attorney working on? >> You have Mike uh Cavelli and Mike Miselli. So, you got Mike Squared back there. >> Sorry. >> And do we have a dollar amount that was spent on the remediation? >> Right. That's what I'm That That was So
that was part >> I can Yeah, I can tell Sorry to interrupt. Uh I can tell you that the site work line item is $85 million. >> Oh my Oh wow. >> So that was that was a contribution that was made prior by the developer. >> Well, no, that's on their that's on
that's not a contribution. That's on them to spend out their expense. Okay. >> Yeah. >> I got to say one thing that this is a great project and I tell you why. We're going to have 2,700 jobs available for our people here from Bayon
>> and it's going to be union jobs. And not only that, uh we're going to have 70% of that construction is going to be built by union labor at this time. And eventually it's going to be 100% but they said 70% for this time now, which is great for us. Great for us. And
spending that over 85 or hundred million dollars to clean up a site that's totally contaminated. It reminds me of the 1888 studio. It's going to be a good uh project for us, for the city of Bayon, >> and a half times the taxes, >> right? And we're going to be getting a
lot of tax money from it. Correct. >> And Mr. Melli, is it safe to assume that those as as Councilman Press said, um the use of of a portion up to that 70% or no less or or whatever of the union labor. Is it safe to assume that that's
all written into >> it? It is not prologus is a company that does union labor as a matter of course for the most part. >> Okay. >> Um I think we have looked at this project at approximately it's more than half. It's about 70% that I think we've penciled in. It could wind up being
100%. It could wind up being 71%. But Prolodologist likes to use union. They've used union on the site work. They've used union on the remediation work. >> So they they prefer union labor >> in this particular project. >> Yeah. and and that that's true, I think, of all of their projects that that their
default is to go union. Um it's just it still has to make sense on paper, right? Sure. Um but but I think that's the default. And like I said, it could it could wind up being, as Council Member Bre said, 100%. It could be 80. >> Clearly, the the concern with a project of this magnitude and over several
freezes, uh phases, excuse me, is that obviously timeliness and and you know, construction, reliability, um quality, things of that nature. So obviously one tends to want that yes that professionalism that comes with
utilizing our union labor. >> It is a publicly traded company, one of the largest um >> industrial land owners in the world. >> They do things by the book the right way and they they want to get it done in a timely way and with professionals. So it's in their interest to use union
labor. Again, they can't commit to doing 100% because if a number comes in a little wonky, they want to reserve the right to say, "Okay, not this guy and this guy or this woman and this woman." >> Sure. So, um, just to put a little bit more context, and I know that we talked about affordable housing, but this site at the Koa fee, the affordable housing
fee that will go into the affordable housing trust fund that has, I think, 14 million or or change. >> It's Yeah, >> this is a $10 million contribution just from this site >> from this site. >> From this site, >> over all phases. >> Overall phases. But it's a $10 million allin to the affordable housing trust
fund. So, it's what we have plus I mean, it's a lot. It's going to help a lot. You can build, you have so many options with just one project, with one one swing in the back. >> We've been looking at several different options. We can't really talk about it, but >> right, >> it's going to give us a lot more options with this money in the affordable trust
housing. >> Yes. And as you said before, and this is for me the most important part. I know there's $10 million in CO fee. You heard the tax the taxes that we're going to get out of this. We're going to get jobs. Great. It's it's great to have that number of jobs. We made other contributions. We made waterfront
walkway contribution of $2.3 million. We made an open spa or we're going to make an open space contribution over $600,000. We're going to do some repairarian construction that's going to be a quarter of a million dollars. So, we've spent about $13 million or committed to $13 million worth of contributions to the city on top of the
tax benefits on top of the jobs. For me, it's about the remediation. And I think Councilwoman, you and I have talked about this. The the environmental legacy of Exxon and Standard Oil is something that has touched every single one of our families. I don't think there's a family
that's exempt here. And what you have here is a private actor that's it says 85 million. We we I think it's going to be more like a hundred million in the end. The remediation a private actor that has taken its capital and cleaned up the
dirtiest site in our city. Maybe one in one of the dirtiest sites in the state uh and and done that on its own dime. And and I got to say that makes me feel better about living in Bayon. And that alone would be enough for me to grant
this type of relief. And it's and it's >> some might call that the cost of doing business. Yes. With that being said, >> I I Yes, >> I I appreciate that they did. >> It's hundred million, right? It's a hund00 million uh investment in this in this investment to clean something up
that has caused a lot of us to get sick. >> And uh and it's time it's time to eliminate that. And they're doing that. Uh and you know for that reason and all the other benefits that you heard tonight I would ask that the council approve this pilot. >> So so uh council woman I just want to
want to address the union issue here for a second. So uh again repeatedly our ordinance you know to mandate you know the let's just differentiate the film studio site with this one. The film studio site per our well per our ordinance project has to have a $15
million plus more project cost. And then also uh there has to be that stake within the the project itself or like a redevelopment area bond. So the city has to have some skin in the game absent of the you know outside of the pilot >> in order to mandate
>> in order to mandate. So we you know we've done best efforts again to assure that there's you know union on this site but uh again for any of the agreements to to mandate it um legally you know we can't do that or make that a requirement of these agreements
>> but >> again given the fact of you know what Mr. Miss Elli said as you know it's a you know largest you know one of the largest publicly traded uh REITs in the country on that with trillion dollars under you know management and assets. Um
I mean it's you know they have every best you know they have every interest you know in getting this done getting this done right and doing this by the books like cutting no corners and you know I have you know faith that it will get done. >> I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Thank you. No protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance. So it's passed the chest has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We
>> Mr. Laughalooa. >> I >> and a resolution ordering final passes. >> It >> and on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laaloosa. I
>> 24 is an ordinance approving a financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 12-22 47th Street Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 1719 and 21 West 46
and 124 16 2022 and 24 West 47 which is identified as blocks 77 lots 13 14 15 27 28 29 30 31 and 32. It was introduced to pass the first reading at the meeting held January 21st
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 February 18th 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 second >> and on the resolution Mr. Booker >> I >> Mr. Carol >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laapalooa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving a financial
agreement buying between the city of Bayon and 12-2747th Street Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 1719 and 21 West 46 and 1214162022 and 24 West 47th.
The council is now ready to give all persons interested in this ordinance an opportunity to be heard concerning it. Council President will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. >> Uh, this project will consist of six floors, 75 market rate residential units. The unit mix will be 10 studios,
43 onebedrooms, and 22 twobedrooms. And it will also contain 98 structured parking spaces. Pilot term is for 25 years, 10 years at 10%, 10 years at 11%, 5 years at 12%.
uh a slightly aggressive phase in of conventional taxes with two years of 60% and two years of 80% at the back end. A 2500 per unit community benefit payment equal to $187,500. Current taxes on the site are approximately 78,000 of which the city
share is about 35,000. Uh the projected stabilized pilot will be approximately 251,000 uh of which the city share will be approximately 243,000. Um, Mr. Velli, correct me if I'm wrong, but this used to be eight stories.
>> It was >> at one point because I remember voting no on the redevelopment plan. >> It the redevelopment plan does allow eight stories. Um, it we we talked to you about this. We've talked to to the council people about this. Uh, makes makes sense for us to scale it back. Uh,
it's more consistent with >> in the middle of the block. It's it's consistent with what the city right it when we we did the redevelopment plan that hadn't been a policy yet that up the side streets really were looking to keep it at six. Now that that's the policy we we did scale it back uh and and um it's it's a six-story woodframe
structure now. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> 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. on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> hi.
>> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol,
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Again, very, very happy to see the change. I think it fits in the neighborhood better at six rather than eight. and um with some setbacks and things in it and I'll vote I
>> 25 is an ordinance amending approving an amendment to the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and Bay View urban renewal 1 through5 LLC for the property located at 159-161 Avenue which is identified as block 300.01 lots
1.01 3.01 3.02 3.03 3 0405 06 and 3.99 and block 3.01 301.03 lots 2.01 and 2 3 3.01. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st was published in the Bergen
record and posted on the bulletin boards cried by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of February 18th is now before the council for consideration and a public hearing. And who'd like to move the ordinance for a second reading?
>> I'll move it. >> Second. >> Second. >> And on second reading is by t on that ordinance on the resolution for second reading. Mr. Booker, >> I >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi >> Miss Weer. >> I >> Mr. Lapalooa. I
>> second reading is by title. An ordinance of the city of Bayon County of Hudson, New Jersey, approving the amendment to the financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and Bay View urban renewal 1 through5 LLC for the property located at 159-161 Avenue. The council
is now ready for persons interested in this ordinance to be given um beard given the opportunity to be heard concerning it. The council president will recognize anyone who wishes to speak. So, Director Skylinder, as you can imagine, I have questions about a tax
exemption about um >> the land tax. >> The is that just the land? >> Just this is just the land tax. So, this pilot again was approved by the council right before um you know, we started implementing that and just you know going back and amending the agreement to include that language in there.
>> I see. So, that the only amendment >> that's the only amendment so on that. So it's dealing with again once when the pilot gets on they the land tax you know is exempt from it and so the city would get the full benefit um for it. So that's the the amendment um being
proposed uh for 025 >> and are these these that all of these types of agreements that were passed that was all passed prior to around that same 2018. >> No this one was done by this council. This was done >> okay >> maybe six seven months ago. So what was
this reason? Oh, this is AM. I'm sorry. Okay, thank you. What would the reasoning be behind that just >> part part of it is again on the administratively uh we have to now collect uh you know and calculate the the land tax uh and
give a credit at the end of the year whether onto the taxes that they paid. So, of how the how a pilot works, uh, it's you have your adjusted gross, well, let's put it this way. You have your gross revenue. So, building makes $10 million, 10% pilot off of that a million
dollar uh, payment. Now, land taxes 250,000. The deduct 250,000 and it's a one for one credit off the pilot payment. So that million-doll payment is really 750,000 of pilot payment, 250,000 of land and broken down between the
percentages. So to the for the administrative ease of you know and also more for the city's benefit uh on that uh you know the city gets the 95%. Under conventional taxes were roughly you know 30%.
uh there. So, it's really trying to double our money um you know to you know make sure that there's more revenue coming into the city. Uh and we could only do these on residential projects not um commercial or industrial. So that's for where we can get that
benefit. We want to you know use that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Melissa Gesi Rodriguez 148 Avenue F. Um I think I just have an overarching statement to make that does apply to this and everything else but um maybe
going forward just as solution right I don't always like to come with a problem but can the administration publicly list specific community give backs tied to each development potentially going forward that does create a high level of transparency for the community um centralized publicly accessible document that outlines project commitment so this
gentleman I'm sorry I didn't get your name but you're fantastic thank you um including financial contributions, infrastructure upgrades, and community benefits. Like, just outline it. Like, we could just save so much time and create better questions and better dialogue. And then the agreements that are written with measurable benchmarks
and timelines that the public can track because my concern is with all of these 21 financial agreements, there's going to be tons of traffic, tons of constructions. I know um Dr. Carol, you've received a call, I know, council, where I'm like, I can't get off the block. Nobody can get off the block. We
have school buses, we have school vans, um we have a whole bunch of different types of transport happening at any given time. And my biggest concern is we're all going to get caught in that and there was just like a lack of communication. So that's just my recommendation. Just make it live for the rest of the community to follow. So
I appreciate that. Thank you. >> No protest against objection two or statements in favor of this ordinance or its passage has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close? Move. and second and on the motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> hi
>> Mr. Carol, >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laapaloosa. >> Hi. 26 is an ordinance approving the second amendment to the Harbor Station North redevelopment plan for the property
known as block 660.01 lot one and there is a motion on the table to withdraw this ordinance and it's moved by the council president Mr. Carol will you second >> and on that one Mr. Booker >> hi >> Mr. Carol
>> hi >> Mr. Perez >> hi >> Missur >> hi >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I 27 is an ordinance amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 4 licensing registration and business regulation
which was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st was published in the Bergen record and posted on the Bolton board as required by law with notice that it would be further considered for final passage following a public hearing at this meeting of February 18th is now before the council
for's consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Booker given the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carroll, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa.
>> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 4 licensing registration and business regulations. 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. >> So, so I guess my question I apologize ch my question is just what what are we rescending? What is being rescended for? >> So, there's differences in the application for permits, the number of days, some of the insurance
requirements, who's responsible, whether it's uh the director of public safety, some of them are going back to the event coordinator. That's no different than I was just going to ask what is the what is the nature of the what are the changes and
because it says small businesses like >> right >> are we increasing fees are we decreasing fees are we creating more I'm just trying to understand the nature of the changes are we making difficult more business more difficult for our small businesses the backbone of our community or are we making are we easing it
>> it's not it's not for the businesses it's for events block parties, carnivals, community cleanup, farmers market, festival fairs. >> Um, >> yeah, we made that very expensive recently. >> Bank or food pantry. >> And
>> so the application deadlines were were changed for the block party for 30 to 60 days. Community cleanup 30 to 60 days. Flea market was taken out. >> So you don't require a permit anymore for a flea market. So I think that was
put into >> Is there still a fee for a block party of a was a lot? I think $1,000 or something. >> Let me just check the >> I just was wondering are we so what the changes were. >> $100 for a block party. >> $100. Yeah.
>> Okay. Just in general, is it making it easier or more or more difficult to do events? Not sure. >> The fees some of the fees went up uh and then some of them >> Well, this is this is the same rules as
some of them. >> I'm sorry. I just want to answer that question. So, I work in that department. And so it just makes it easier and it tracks everything to make sure that people have the insurance they need to do the events. So it's easier we and on the website it actually displays step by step how to execute it.
>> So no so you're just saying it's just a way for tracking. So fees fees didn't change or requirements didn't change. >> Certain fees were added and certain fees were >> new fees. >> So new fees were added. >> So yeah, they're all on display on the website. >> Okay. >> Okay. But I just I'm so we're increasing
fees on the public to do public to do community events. >> Some of the fees. Yes. >> Yes. >> So and and and creating fees >> as we give. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome.
>> Anyone else on >> Stephanie Glover Wilson 1050 Avenue C. Just clarification. So if I set up to give out food in Bayon, I have to pay for a permit and I'm giving food to your residents in your town. >> Just clarify for me.
>> Excuse me, >> director. >> Right. So, let's just So, that that was part of of what my question was because I'm I'm not really certain of what the amendments are and what we're So, director Skiller, is this something that you you you are not um miss far?
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, food bank a 501c3 >> is is not required to to exactly is exempt from those fees. Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah, >> please by all means >> have them. Okay, but what they said is
correct. Um for community cleanups, food banks, and food pantries, there remains no fee. The uh fees that were increased were for things like festivals uh that had very small fees and still none of them exceed $500.
And that is not meant to make it harder for the organizations. I'm a part of a couple that have festivals. It's to uh reduce the burden on the city because just because we want to have a festival doesn't mean the city has to pay for it. >> Does that make sense?
>> Okay. So, I'm I'm just going to just very quickly. So, what is outlined here in our ordinance is um obviously the requirement for general liability insurance, which certainly I'm I'm not opposed to. Um
>> that wasn't a change that already, >> right? That was not that was in existence, Jeff. I'm Trust me, I'm had those writers written many times. Um, there is an application fee that is not inclusive of garbage removal, police
coverage, health inspections, traffic control, blah blah blah. But again, one might assume typically it's a block party or food donation, something of that nature. Okay. $500 per day for a carnival, a festival, a fair, or an outdoor market.
a parade or promotional event is going from $200 to $500. >> And is the reasoning behind that because one might assume that that would require let's say police presence
um even perhaps uh emergency personnel such as an ambulance or something of that nature on site for that type of an event. Obviously drawing a larger magnitude of individuals. Okay, I apologize. What were you >> and and trash so much? >> And that so that was my next question is
so is trash removal police is that inclusive of that of those costs? >> So at this time there are no additional fees for that. It's something that will be monitored going forward especially as we have more and more festivals come to
the city. 47. >> We had 47 last year >> festivals. >> We had 47 that were run by private citizens or organizations here in town. So a church carnival, >> hometown fair. >> So we understand the need for
>> Right. Okay. So 47. Really? >> Yeah. A lot. >> Okay. Not it's not hard. you know, >> but the good news is it won't cost you anything if you'd like to go out every day and help clean up our neighborhood because that is a zero >> dollar per day cost to the community
especially for the not for that's banks because that's going >> I can't hear you baby there's no fee for the giving out for food I apologize you are >> helping the community and we didn't feel that that's something that you should be penalized in any way >> okay thank you
>> and then um m Um, of course I'm going to call you Jackie, right? Director Farber. Um, one, so it it does also say $0 per day for uh community cleanup, food banks, food pantry, and city sponsored events. So then it does go on further to
say $100 per day for other uh and is that defined as farmers markets? >> No. So that would be other is um like a charity softball game or a basketball game or things that don't necessarily fall into um like a festival or a
carnival. >> I see. So something similar to So the just just so the ordinance does list other than farmers market. So it does it does include the farmers market which I'm assuming because that is a city sponsored UE event that's not subject
to. Okay. Um, is is this schedule uh posted somewhere on our events page or something of that nature just so that it is available to the public so they can >> every bit of it? >> Yeah, there's a shorthand guide that lists, you know, each event type, the
number of days you need to get your application in byite and the applicable fee. >> Okay. >> We've made it very public friendly and we're available to guide any the public does he need any help? >> Okay, I appreciate that. Thank you so much. >> Thank you for the expert.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody 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? >> Move. Second
on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> I have to tell you, I have mixed emotions on this. So, and I'm and I'm sort of stuck on the 500 the increase from $200 per day to a $500 per day uh
cost for things such as a carnival, a festival, an outdoor market, and a parade. Those types of events are the events that sort of bring our community together. And typically, they are free
events. Um and and and for those that those in our community that don't have the, you know, the ability to sort of go and take their children to events that that do have a cost. Um that's something that they might look forward to. And then I
feel like people would have to charge an entry fee or something of that nature or increase cost um just to go ahead and effectuate that. And I So of course what comes to mind obviously is our St. Patrick's Day parade and and to the best of my knowledge I I do think there's a
fundraiser. In fact, I I think I'm going to that on Sunday, but I do think there's a fundraiser, but I do feel like that is the one event and and the mayor, our prior mayor, and I'm I'm I apologize, director Kavanaaugh, but you know, the one event where especially
Mayor Davis said time and time again that that is everybody comes home for St. Patrick's Day. And I just feel like um an increase from $200 to $500 is so significant that I'm I'm just not I just
don't know that I could vote in favor of this. And before I cast my vote, I'm going to ask Director Kavanaaugh to give me her opinion, which I value tremendously. >> I would just like to clarify and yes, we agree with you. All of these events, we try our hardest to make them work and we're happy that everybody comes home
for those kind of events. We do. We love our town, but we have to make it a safe event. So, in order to do that, we need police, we need fire, we need DPW, we need the health department, we need the inspectors to be able to go out and inspect every single food vendor that is
out there and make sure that they're getting their food from proper places, that they're licensed, that they're they're providing safe fun for our community. So, these things cost us a great deal of money. You can only imagine what 47 events costs in the
police department or for my inspector to go out there and inspect 30 40 trucks in a matter of two hours by the time from the you know when they get in in the morning and then be there all day. This is a great expense to the city. So for someone publicly to put on an event,
you've got to navigate that. >> And and correct me if I'm wrong, but some of them not all of them but are moneymaking entities as well. Correct. >> So, for them to pay a fee, >> uh, that wouldn't be wrong. >> Correct. They're making money off of of the event that's actually happening. So,
we have to provide a safe and effective event, but it really can't cost the taxpayer because you want to throw a giant party. >> Right. >> Right. We have to we have to cover our costs. We're not looking to hurt anybody out there, but we're not covering our
costs. And in effect, I can't hire more inspectors to go out and do the job that we need to do under chapter 52 in the public health department because we're we're expended. Like all of this cash
that goes out to navigate these events, it costs us money. >> So that is why >> I appreciate that. Thank you, Director. >> Yeah. Thank you, Miss Kavanagh, for making it crystal clear to the public.
>> So, Miss Weamemer, your vote. >> While I certainly value the time and the efforts put forth by our professionals that work here in this city, um I personally have a black party every year uh and and have attended many
community events and hold many community events uh myself. Now, not that they are uh for profit because obviously they never are, but I I I think that if we looked at the overall budget that perhaps these funds could come from elsewhere. So, I I vote no.
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. I vote I 28 is an ordinance of the city of Bayon amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 3 police regulations. It was introduced and passed the read first reading at the meeting held January 21st was published
in the Bergen record and posted on the bulletin boards required by law with notice that it would further be considered for final passage at this meeting of nove February 18th is now before the council force consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Booker giving the ordinance second reading Mr. Perez
will you second >> second >> on that resolution Mr. Booker >> hi >> Mr. Carol >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance of the city of Bayon amending and supplementing the revised general
ordinances chapter 3 police regulations. 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. So I guess my question is so 28 29 and 30
am I correct in assuming they're all >> they're getting reputation >> related. So, do we have someone that can come up and explain to us the revisions, the amendments where it looks as if we're so 20 and 29 are rescending the terms of that ordinance in their
entirety, >> right? >> And then one might state that ordinance 30 is uh restating >> that. But you made 030 more comprehensive and included what was in uh 28 and 29.
Does that make sense? >> No. >> No. >> So, so who is So, we're rescending bicycle registration, registration required, the application and application fee, as well as registration, transfer of registration,
and insurance requirements. So, what are the terms of the amended and restated ordinance that covers what was rescended? Could you talk into the mic please so everybody can hear
the >> Okay. So, um 28 um was the bicycle registration and um that had not really been an ordinance that had been active. There have not been any registrations
for bicycles. Um so, it was really null and void. Additionally, uh since the passing of the state um bicycle ordinance, which we partially mirrored, there wouldn't be a need for it. So, it
was eliminated to sort of all supplemented into 30 and the helmet requirement is now in 30 as well. And so there are you telling me there was not so just because there hadn't been any registrations prior
doesn't necessarily mean there wasn't a need for them. So is there now a requirement that all electric scooters be registered or there's no requirement? >> Okay, I want to jump in. Uh listen, I actually uh uh championed for this uh ebike uh ordinance and what we're doing
right now is we're mirroring the state guidelines and what we had to do is we had to revamp our ordinances in town and like she's stating that the bik bicycle ordinance uh registration was in existence and we haven't used it in a while. Now what we're doing is we're
mirroring everything that the state has put down in terms of enforcement for the ebikes. They've been a problem for a while throughout the state, throughout the country. So what we're trying to do here is we're trying to advance the fact that police have the ability now to
enforce okay enforce the ordinances and keeping the ebikes uh in in accordance uh with the new state law. >> Right. And what they did was they took the two 28 and 29 out of chapter 3 police regulations and added into 030
which is traffic chapter 7 of our ordinances. You want to comment on the Yeah. >> So, um this is just basically the ebike ordinance here in Bayon is
just the state ordinance. We have no other restrictions or anything. We're just going to enforce the existing state ordinance. Is that what I'm hearing? >> Well, well, what we're doing here is we're trying to mirror the state. So, >> the state is our ordinance anyway, right? We have to enforce the state law
is our law, >> right? >> So, our ordinance, sorry to cut you off. I didn't mean to. No. Um, came before the state had passed. >> The state always had a registration policy for DMV for them. We just never enforced them. It was always on the state, but if you go to DMV, they
classify the different things and do different types of licenses and so we're not doing anything other than what the state is. So they don't have any stricter policies or anything. That's all I'm asking. So basically state law is what's in effect here. Nothing more and you can't make it less
than state law because it's not allowed. >> You want the city ordinance does go a little further in prohibiting the operation of the ebikes in parks on city streets sidewalks. So it does go a little
further than the state law does. >> Okay. But not as far as registration and that or age limit and license and insurance. >> State level. They put age on it. 14 and younger. No ebikes. 15 and older. Yes. Ebikes. They have to be registered
insured and the driver has to be licensed. >> Okay. And we have a mechanism for enforcement. Just that. There are fines that are on the ordinance violations. Um >> yeah, that's the in that's the fine the
mechanism for enforcement. >> The enforcement would be run through PD. >> The police >> police department. >> The police department. >> Oh, chief. Is that specific to motorized bicycles of a certain power level or And
I'm not well verssed in motorized >> refer to the uh state. >> Yeah. Yeah. Nor do I. But so in addition to the age requirement, it also only pertains to electric bikes of a certain level. >> Speed. >> Speed.
>> Speed. What is that speed? Does anybody know? >> 750 watts. I mean, it's my understanding that 28 and 29 are rescending or wiping off the books uh older restrictions and then
further putting them back in place in 30. >> They're putting them back in chapter seven. They're taking them out of >> in the 30 seconds. >> It's rescending and and restating >> the an entire Yep. So the
on top of the definitions put herein 750 watts the fine structure as well as uh the specifics about the parks and where they can and can't be within the city outlined and defined in 030. So it is
more stringent or more directly applicable to >> in in layman's terms. My question is, is this going to pertain to the many ebikes that we see on the street for which I probably get no less than a half a dozen calls a month from little old ladies
trying to make their way on the sidewalk being swept by by someone on a an ebike. So that so that's my question. Is this lessening those rules? Is it making it more stringent? Is it requiring a
greater amount of sort of accountability in effect? What does this do? >> It should. There are a number of ebikes on the roadway somewhere else >> under 15. >> Chief, can you can you come to the mic? Would you mind?
>> As the uh chief approaches, what we're trying to do here basically is we're looking to enforce safety in terms of the ebikes. There's certain areas we want to use identic identifying features in terms of there's a lot of food industries that are using ebikes. All right. So, there's some rules and
regulations so we can identify and enforce the law. And basically what we're doing here is mirroring and even increasing what the state has put down. We waited we had an ordinance before and we waited to pass this because the state
did not come out with theirs. So we're trying to to try to mirror that and enforce hours in the parks. >> Okay. So that >> from book. Yes. >> So it it applying a greater amount of control. >> Yes. To the food delivery uh Door Dash
uh GrubHub whatever food delivery services there are. and then providing additional rules, restrictions, uh, registration, insurance requirements, >> requirements, >> uh, not only on those people, but anyone 15 years or older where there's no
requirement right now. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, Chief. I'm sorry. >> Anyone else? >> So, Miso Demco 42 West 27th Street. Um I have a mix of comment and question. So
and it kind of relates to 28 29 30 and 32. So I've been following some of the ebike developments at the state level as well. So just first from my understanding the rescending sections 3.29 29 and 317.
Is that because um or at least for 329 specifically, is that because the state law already covers that? So that would be conflicting with the state law just for the rescending move. Is that is that correct? >> Just that is yes. >> So that that's the reason why. Okay. And then for the point on going further since I don't actually see the language
for like what the proposed amendment might be, is there a way to find out what exactly that? Because I heard Watts mentioned, I heard Speed mentioned um from the state. Uh we're also hearing different categorizations for throttle for class one 123 which is now not used. Uh the question of ebike in general is
sort of being you know it's one category. So now anything from a five mile per hour is the there's an electric component or 25. Um from the state's perspective it might be considered the same vehicle. Um the conversation in this room also reflects a bit of confusion. U just you know as someone
who rides a bike in the street and wanting to make sure that I'm you know in compliance with the law. It's concerning that there's details that are in conflict that I'm not aware of. Uh but first on that question of just going further. So where could I find out what
those um you know like requirements are? >> You want a copy of the ordinance? >> Yeah, if it's possible if you have the language on that >> give you a copy of the ordinance. >> And just to understand I guess where this goes further from here. So is this a vote on this to enact the ordinance?
Is this the vote to continue with this? So now this is going to be the final sort of language that's used. >> That's correct. >> Okay. I mean I can't comment on it until I see it. So I I guess that's where I yield. Um but some questions, you know, for example, if I have friends visiting from New York, um New York doesn't have the same requirements and then they come
from New Jersey for 30 minutes and back. You know, what would be the process? You know, how do they get their bikes registered in New Jersey? I know that's not a bayon law, but if bayon police encounters, you know, has an interaction with them stops them, for example, what's the process then, you know, just to walk through that scenario.
>> Well, first and foremost, if you can get from New York to New Jersey in 30 minutes, you let me know how you're doing that because I do it every day and I've never quite accomplished that. >> From exchange place, from exchange place, the train can be a little bit of a, you know, >> so that that's one. And then we'll defer to the chief. >> To answer your questions, motor vehicles
are registered in both states. I'm unaware if New York has registration requirements for ebikes. If they do, then there would be reciprocity was as far as registrations are concerned. >> If they don't, then if they came over to Jersey with an ebike that's not
registered, they would be in violation of state law. >> And then BO police just enforces the state law. >> Correct. >> Correct. And and uh if there's a uh violation of mun municipal ordinance. >> Okay. Uh, and can I ask a follow-up question perhaps um to you chief? Um,
just in terms of um are there any strategies for enforcement in terms of like checkpoints in terms of um I don't know like um targeted campaigns uh like what's the idea for the enforcement process? >> A three-step approach. >> Okay. >> Awareness, education, and enforcement.
We're going to do uh social media, a website, um handouts to make people aware of the uh changes in the laws, uh educate them as far as what the requirements are in
hopes of voluntary compliance and in the absence of that, we then enforce the laws if we see violations on the street. >> Okay. And in terms of like ebikes and bicycles, um what's the strategy for identifying like types of models of bikes? >> Yeah, that's difficult. Uh if the
there's markings on the bike that tells us the wattage or the power or whatever, we can read that. In the absence of that, it's going to be up to the officer on the street that encounters this uh ebike. >> But so a bike could be stopped and then it could be discovered that it's not an
ebike, for example. I'd have to refer you to the state law which defines all classes of ebikes. Uh that's online. Okay. >> On the state. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Have to revise the rest of the language, but thanks for the clarification. >> Thank you.
>> So on 028 uh 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? >> Move it. >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. Mr. Carol,
>> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lopaloo. >> I >> and a resolution ordering final passage. >> Move it. >> Second. >> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi,
>> Miss Weame. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I >> 29 is amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 3 police regulations and it was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held January 21st 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 February 18th is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by the council president given the ordinance second reading. Mr. Booker, will you
second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss We >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> second reading is by title in ordinance of the city of Bayon amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 3 uh police
regulations. 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? >> Move. >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> I >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I >> and a resolution ordering final passage.
>> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker, >> hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, >> Mr. Perez. I >> Miss We >> Mr. Lalosa. >> I 30 is amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 7 traffic. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting held
January 21st 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 public hearing at this meeting of February 18th. is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing
and the resolution is moved by the council as a whole given the ordinance second reading and on that resolution Mr. Booker. >> Hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi >> Miss Weame. >> Hi >> Mr. Lalooa. >> Hi. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance
of the city of Bay on amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances 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.
>> Any questions? >> 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? >> So move >> and second. >> And on the motion to close, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll.
>> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss. >> Hi. >> Mr. I >> and resolution ordering final passage. >> Second. >> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi,
>> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I 31 also is amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 7 traffic. was introduced and passed the first reading held January 21st 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 passes following a public hearing at this meeting of February 18th is now before the council for its consideration and a public hearing and a resolution moved by council member Carol fixing the
ordinance giving the ordinance second reading Mr. Booker will second on >> the resolution Mr. Booker >> Mr. Carol >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> She stepped out of the building. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I >> second reading is by title an ordinance
of the city of bail on amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 7 traffic. The council is now ready to give all persons in this 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. May I have a motion to close? >> Motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez,
>> is absent. Mr. Laalooa >> I >> and a resolution ordering final passage. >> Move it. Second. >> And on that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Pres. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Green. Still not present. Mr. Lapaloo. >> I 32 is an ordinance amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 19 fire prevention and protection. It was introduced and passed the first reading at the meeting
held January 21st, 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 the public hearing at this meeting of February 18th. is now before the council for its consideration and a final uh public hearing and a
resolution moved by council member Booker giving the ordinance second reading. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> I miss not back yet. Mr. Laalooa. >> I. >> Second reading is by title an ordinance
of the city of Balon amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 19 fire prevention and protection. 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.
Miso 42 West 27th Street. Uh I just have a question here with the definitions of vehicle. Does the does the language here also pertain to um electric bikes? Um and also just a general question, where might I find more about the language for um lithium ion batteries in developments
u buildings, parking, uh street and private parking? Um just to understand the fire safety aspect of >> the fire chief is going to come up. >> Should I stay up here or >> Yes, you could stay there. >> Good evening, council. Keith Weaver on behalf of the fire department. Um so
your question this particular uh ordinance does not apply to electric bicycles. We had previously passed one about the storage of bicycles I believe uh last April in residential buildings. This is specific to electric vehicles in parking garages and attached structures
and keeping them close to the entrance to make these fires uh easier for our fire department to fight. They pres present unique challenges to us. we are prepared but this the the uh proximity to any entrance to a parking garage etc where that's where we would like these
vehicles to be placed helps us fight the fire and protect our first responders and of course our community. Could I just ask what are some specific challenges to be like aware of or like >> Well, the these uh these vehicle fires are proven to um well, for example, a compression a regular compression uh
gasoline engine car fire in my experience generally uh is out in about 5 to 10 minutes, 500 gallons of water roughly. Um these vehicles are proven to be burned hotter and longer. Uh probably up to 8,000 gallons of water and possibly 45 minutes and the minutes to
fight. and they're also prone to reignition. So they we are prepared. We do have a plan and we do have the equipment. Uh but they they definitely differ from your regular vehicle or or a older vehicle on the road. >> Okay. Thank you. And just um maybe it doesn't pertain so much to this point
right now, but um in general does it seem like um more and more electric vehicles presents a challenge over time for fire department? >> I would say over time they're going to present the challenge. That's why we are certainly prepared. You know, as these vehicle age, I would imagine there'll be mechanical malfunctions. We haven't really seen that yet. Um you you'll see
them here and there, but I it's my opinion as these vehicle age, there could be potentially more fires of them. >> Thank you. >> Okay. You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> And then chief, I guess I have a follow-up question. >> Sure. >> How does that apply to private homeowners who may have an electric
vehicle and and a charging station at >> Well, this is only applied in two parking garages and any structures that permits were going to get pulled moving forward, >> right? So, okay. Thank you because I I I appreciate that. But nevertheless, if the if the um
if the concern is there for parking structure, is the concern there? I mean, grant typically I guess a a private homeowner would have one or let's say two yes >> electric vehic my my concern is does that are we are there any restrictions, requirements, concerns about a private
home who may install an electric charging? Well, certainly it's going to be it's going to be um generic to to the type of equipment and I believe that they have to pull building permits to install those chargers. So, they would be inspected, I believe, by the building department as well. >> The zoning.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you, Chief. I'm sorry. Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Zoning will tell you exactly where you can place it. >> Place it and protest against objections to or statements in favor of this ordinance or it's passed which has been filed with me. May I have a motion to close?
Move it on a motion to close. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laaloosa. >> Hi. >> And a resolution ordering final passage. >> So move. >> Second.
>> Second. >> And on the motion, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi, Okay, our first speaker is Mr. Truth. Just remind everybody this is a
statement period, not a question and answer about city matters and a period of five minutes. This >> right. Hello everyone. I am Leroy Truth of Leroy Truth Investigations. Please follow me on Facebook and please subscribe to me on YouTube. Now I've
been brought here because numerous people have asked me to come here and to specifically investigate you, Mr. P La Palooa. And I'm not going to get into details yet what the investigations are about, but myself and my hope team will be investigating you. And I do have one
question, which is, were you ever involved in phone calls in order to jam up an individual named Tony Chapon? Okay. So, you're not going to answer that. Now, the other part I'm bringing here is
extremely concerning. And by a show of hands, how many of you, if you found someone in Bon, New Jersey, who worked for Bayon City government here, and they were found to have engaged in sexual harassment and sexual assault of a worker, how many of you by show of
hands, would make sure that person was fired and also charged and arrested. So, show of hands. This is pathetic. Oh my god. You support the sexual harassment and assault of
women. So I am here because the Bayon head of Bayon Democratic Committee Lieutenant Fedro of the Hudson County Sheriff's Department also that was found not that these are allegations of sexual harassment or sexual assault. They were
found sustained. So I'm asking you to immediately remove from as the head of the Democratic committee tonight. Now, this comes from a third party agency because internal affairs at the Hudson County Sheriff's Office found it sustained the allegations of sexual
harassment and sexual assault. Hudson County Law Department found it sustained. And this I'm going to read from a third-party law office in New Jersey, highly respected, said he did it. I'm not saying he did any of this. So, he must be removed, investigated, charged, and arrested. Protect women.
Why don't you want to protect women? AND NOT A SINGLE ONE of you would raise your hands. So you have just said to the public, and I'm going to focus on each of you over the coming month, that it is okay to sexually harass and sexually assault a woman in Bayon or Hudson County, and you
will support and cover up and protect them. Every single one of you. Disgusting. Now, findings. This is from the third party law office. I find that Fedro did subject Maria name change the
victim to sexual harassment in the workplace and violation of the county's policy against harassment as well as engaged in conduct unbecoming. I specifically find that Federal sent Maria unwanted and unsolicited pictures of his penis and genitalia attempted to
unhook her bra. That's sexual assault and attempted to intimidate her. That's your Hudson County Democratic leader here in Bome. When Federal asserted that he and Maria both sent each other sexually explicit pictures, thereby
stating or implying the exchange of pictures was wanted and or solicited. He was unable to present any proof of pictures sent to him by Maria. Why? Because he lied. The only pictures that were presented as part of the investigation are those that Fedro sent
to Maria. Furthermore, Federal falsely alleged lied that the pictures he sent were prior were sent prior to 2018. The picture he sent to Maria via Instagram was clearly sent around 2022 or 2023 as first reported. Not only do I find that
the pictures sent to Maria were unwelcome, but I also further find Maria reported to her union representative Mendoza that Federal was harassing her with repeated unwanted flirtation. And it does not appear Mendoza documented any of that. I future I I further find
that Fedro did attempt to unhook Maria's bra when he gave her a hug in her office. Sexual assault. Is that okay if that happened to your wife, La Palooa, or anyone else's wife's or daughter here? You say, "Yeah, Federal is protected by Jimmy Davis, another alleged sexual predator." It's okay. He
could sexually assault anyone, right? I do find that Fedro also did attempt to intimidate Maria by way of bringing being redacted into her office following their March 8th, 2024 argument. That argument followed years of sexual
harassment and con and occurred only after Maria filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against the county. I find that Fedro's behavior in this regard is is unbecoming and New Jersey law against discrimination, criminal sexual contact, harassment, cyber harassment, official
misconduct, witness tampering, retaliation. Those are crimes that Federal committed. So with that, how many of you think Federal needs to be fired and indicted, charged, and arrested? Raise your hands for the for these. They don't say they're
allegations. They say they're true. Anyone take a look at this. Let's do let's do close-ups here. Everybody look at this. Not a single hand is up. So if sexual predators want to come and be protected, come to Beo, New Jersey.
>> Okay, Mr. Truth, your five minutes is up. >> Miss Matt, you have to call the next one, please. >> Miss Rodriguez. Good evening. Melissa Gdeski Rodriguez, 148 Avenue F. Um, so some of these start off with kind of questions. I know you
can't answer me now, but it's just always food for thought. Um, the first thing is I haven't had a chance to connect with Lieutenant Rhodess who's always been a phenomenal partner, but once again, we had an incident over on Avenue F, where a disabled child's school vehicle was repeatedly honked at
um, for the right reason. It was double parked. Um, but there was also no snow removal, so the child can't really get to a corner or anything, but it's also a school vehicle. Um, and I think there is some opportunity, and I'd be willing to volunteer my time to just help support and educate our first responders. Um, it
created a big deal for that child. I watched a child have a complete meltdown as they exited the van that day and it broke my heart. It was none of my business. Um, but again, it just goes back to just spreading awareness is what that is. Um, and our team, like our EMS, our fire department, our police, they're
fantastic. This is an easy fix. Um, so I just want to bring it to everybody's attention. Um, but yet I routinely see cars, vans, construction vehicles, and delivery trucks double parked illegally with no response. I've personally called it in multiple times. I don't see
tickets. I don't hear honking. And it's kind of upsetting, right? I think is what's good for one is good for all. We shouldn't double park, but this is a school vehicle, right? With limited um ability from that child, and this is a child. Um the next thing is um just an
enforcement is inconsistent. Um this is about fairness, clarity, and protecting some of our most vulnerable residents. I would gladly volunteer my time to help educate around school vehicle identification and the importance of uh safe drop offs for childrens with disabilities. Um the next thing I'm not going to get
too much into it. I know you've all heard it and seen it. Snow removal is a really big pain point. I mean my son fell multiple times on the snow. Um and I'm sure a lot of people did. But maybe going forward there could just be a better plan considered for the residents. Um,
and I I kind of thought about this like would it have been reasonable to ask our large developers or private partners to assist in snow removal? I think that might be something super simple to think about in the future, how they contribute to the community. Yes, monetarily is super important, but those actions and
those small things go a long way for everybody in our community. Um, the last topic is 25th Street Bridge accessibility. I watched multiple seniors, elderly people try to get over that bridge during the bad weather.
Personally, I watched it and it is not okay. I don't know what happened and it's not my job to know what happened, but there needs to be some accountability on why that's not ADA accessible. we see it and during the snowstorm and the ice, it got really bad
and and I just think that maybe there can be an update provided to the public reasonably about when we're going to do something about that bridge. It's literally our the only way from the east side over otherwise you drive a car, you got to go down to 30th and then 21st and hopefully it's not flooding because
you're not going to go down 21st if it is. But it's just I want to share the things that I've observed in the community and as somebody who lives here, born here, raised here, I want to help. I want to be part of the solution, but I just want to make sure you know what you don't know, and I just want to give you that opportunity to correct.
So, thank you for your time, >> Mr. Medina. >> Mr. Palito, Nola, >> good evening. I I was here last year for the very first time. Tonight is my second time at
this kind of meeting. I was present a problem and thankful has been taken care today. I'm out of the same problems. I will explain better. Can I introduce your pictures?
So that joyway has been a very disturbing problem. All of you guys helping me out satisfied me completely with the collaboration of top policy department public work
a bolard it was a place in place and the problem has been solved thankfully during last month with the snow season I was explained that because of the No removal
with the help of the bulldoger heavy duty you're going to pull it out that's fair I understand that I went personal to the public office public work office to explain to the
problem and I was explained kindly that because there's no there's no season we have a lot of snow removal and I was told it will take some time maybe weeks I said okay it's understandable that's the first time I exposed to the
problem said I understand I don't expect it miracle right away I'm patient you guys do your job but I want to just reminded that I have this problem so we know we are aware and then we left the
mid term time passed by two weeks three weeks I start to show up my face again and asking some clarification, some collaboration
to explain also that original last year the job it was down where it was required a little bit more time with the drilling things. So the main job has been down during this period of time many time numerous time
one maybe two once in a while this ballard has been knocked down from distracted drivers you know with the great surprise in less than you know couple hours boom
the bullet is up again so somebody does good job and there was no need for to call up for excuse me I'm the guy blah blah so the bullet was up right away so always great job so now come back again
at this problem I bring to the problems this situation and I was told to wait and I be wait now a month to pass by but during one of my visit I didn't like
the answer I received in that office. I don't want to mention a name. The person is not present in this room tonight. It could be one of the assistants. And then in front of the lady in that
office, the secretary, Miss Jackie, whatever, nice lady. This gentleman open up his mouth and I don't like the answer. the solution he proposed to me. He said, "Well, he says probably that we're going to take care of by the end of the snow season." I
said, "Uh-uh, other than take that. I'm not going to wait the end of the snow season for a problem like that. This is a serious problem has been evaluated the first time when I was here and with the collaboration with the police department
has been taken care now for five minutes to eight minutes to be generous 10 minutes okay I don't accept it after a month then you guys taking care of the city problem with the snow I understand
you tell me you you know the gravity end of this driveway. So I challenge anybody to be in my apartment upstairs above the bakery okay and hear a constant that beep the horn
then the people you drop off just for pick up a pastry whatever so we don't think it's fair we got to listen this noise okay people is very disrespectful so I've been raising my voice nicely until I was misunderstood to my explanation I was accusing you for
threatening people okay >> your time is up if you want to leave your information with the clerk. We can follow up at a later time. >> Huh? >> Yeah. Well, I mean I'm asking for if that bullet going to be put in place. >> Microphone. >> I come back. I can come back to >> No, you have to vacate the microphone.
It's five minutes. >> I'm sorry. >> Explain again to him, please. >> You're only allowed to speak for five minutes. But if you leave your name and number, we can go over this. I will personally make sure that I call you tomorrow to
find out. >> Well, I would like to I would like to know when you're going to be put up. You should take a fight. >> You have to vacate the microphone. Leave your information and someone will get back to you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> My name is Carla Garcia. I will call them. I think I have
>> Okay, >> Miss Nadski. Um, I know I know it's not question answer, but I came here tonight expecting to see the city budget introduced since it supposed to be introduced and approved by the March 31st. It requires two readings.
Um, it, you know, >> I know it's not question and answer, but um, >> no, not now. >> Um, but then so and also um, just quickly about the parades. I could speak from the St. Patrick's Day parade
committee doesn't make money. They lose money every year. Um just that we had made money in the past because all the all the money they do make covers the bands. And I do notice that there's some and I would never call that another organization, but it is on the agenda tonight where we're waving fees for such
events that's happening for an organization because it says waving the fee because they're nonprofit. So is that part of the new um the new ordinance? It's in your consent agenda for tonight. Um, and then lastly, I I think they're still here. I heard we
talked about um affordability and we quoted Dan quoted the um calculation used for that which incorporates Jersey City and I think that's part of uh Mr. Carol's problem in that because we don't make that salary here, but affordability
gets defined by the income because of the way we're regionally grafted, which is fine. We're regionally grafted in there. So we want to quote that for the developers when given them because that's what affordability is defined regionally including Jersey City. But then I hear the same representative for
the developers say that we shouldn't count the Ruckers um study on the number of kids going to school because that includes suburban areas which is different. Well, we can't have it both ways. They can say we want to use this calculation because it
favors what the developers want when it comes to affordability calculation, but we're not going to use the Rucker study when it comes to the number of kids going into school because that includes a region not like ours. Well, salary rise, we're not like Jersey City. I'm
just saying we should just apply the studies the same and not pick and choose which ones when they fit the audience that they're looking for a favorable vote on. That's it. Thank you. >> Mr. Rivera,
>> David Rivera, 103 West 42nd Street. Um, just want to make a statement. Currently, the properties on the on this list are basically they pay about $1.4 million in taxes now. And uh looking at the numbers, they're going to pay after
the pilot 7.2 million, which is a a big number, which is great. We'll be able to use that money towards uh different different things, debt or uh different programs for the city. And the community give backs are 2.4 million. That's that's that's tremendous. and
just just this month. >> Wow. That that that's that's tremendous. And is it safe to say let's say uh uh uh that difference between the the 1.45 and the 7.2 is about 6 million, I want to say. Right. >> Yeah. >> Awesome. That's that's tremendous. All
right. Thank you very much. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you. >> Did you want to speak? come up to the microphone. >> Can I sign up? >> Just state your name and address.
>> Joe Villa Rosa, 34 East 52nd Street. For what it's worth, I heard somebody's opinion and it smells pretty lousy. I know when I lie when I see one. I don't know what Rocky came from. He
should go back under. I know the gentleman he's referring to for quite some time. He's a standup guy. They don't come any better. You call, he answers, you get an answer. Sometimes you might not like it. Might not be what
you want to hear, but you get an answer. Third ward, there's nobody better than Gary. I know there's some people in the room. You might have differences of opinion with him and nobody agrees with anybody all the time.
But I'll go to war with that guy anytime at all. My father used to have an expression. There's men and then there's a man's man. That was my dad.
I'm called that by people and I wear that as a badge. And I'll call Mr. La Palooa the same thing. A man's man. Old school. That's all I got to say. >> Good night all. >> Moving on. Ordinance for introduction. It is a bond ordinance providing for the
replacement of the sanitary sewer located on Avenue F in and by the city of Bayon in the county of Hudson, New Jersey, appropriating $3 million therefore and authorizing the issuance of $3 million bonds or notes of the city to finance the cost thereof and a
resolution fixing Wednesday, March 18th in the Dorothy Harrington council chambers as a time and place for a public hearing. The resolution is moved by the council. Council member Perez, Mr. Lapaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi.
>> Miss We Director Kavanagh, is that 22nd Street and Avenue F? >> 24th. >> 24th. Councilwoman, that's 24th and Avenue F. A portion of that line is totally
collapsed and the and another portion is blocked. So that entire area which affects many households has to be replaced. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I have I have a question unrelated. Mhm. >> Um so 20 um 2nd Street and and Avenue F.
Uh in consultation with my private water and sewer consultant. >> Yes, I know him. >> I am I am told that there is not a cap on the internal sewer line because there
is a horrendous smell. Um and and it often is mass. Sometimes you think there is it's a gas leak. Um, and then you somebody will take a walk over and I've received a couple of phone calls, residents telling me, I think there's a gas leak on 22nd Street. Can you come
here? Nevertheless, we walk over and so there's no cap, I guess, on the internal piping or something of that nature. Um, so is there is there a remedy that can be had and it and of course it's right outside of a food establishment. So is there some sort of a remedy that can be
had for a location such as that or an issue such as that? me like you usually do and we'll respond right away. We'll send Violia out to do an investigation. Um I feel like there we have covered this before and and perhaps they did they're
they're and there's such there is construction in that area. So I think they're doing it's a multi-step process. I just Okay. And I will I I'll absolutely I'll >> send me the specific location. We we'll look into it. >> Okay. I appreciate that. All right. Thank you, director.
>> I vote I Maline. >> Okay. Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I 34 is approving a financial agreement buying between the city and 1191-205 John F. Kennedy Urban Renewal LLC for
the property located at 1191-1199 Kennedy Boulevard, 1201-203 Kennedy Boulevard and 1205 Kennedy Boulevard and a resolution moved by council member Booker fixing Wednesday March 18th and the Darty Harrington Council Chambers at the time place for
public hearing and final passage. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> 35.
It is an ordinance of the city of Bayon approving the final financial agreement buying between the city of Bayon and Chanty 5 Urban Renewal LLC for the property located at 562-568 Broadway and a resolution fixing Wednesday, March 18th is a time and
place for a public hearing and final passage. It's moved by council member Perez. Mr. Lapaloosa, will you second? Second >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss. We >> Mr. Lalooa.
>> I 36 is an ordinance amending and supplementing the revised general ordinances chapter 7 traffic and a resolution moved by council member Booker fixing Wednesday, March 18th as a time and place for a public hearing and final passage. Mr. Mr. Lapalooa, will
you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi. >> Bill 37 also amends uh chapter 7 traffic and it's a resolution fixed March 18th.
This is a time and place for a public hearing and final passage. It's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. You're >> on a resolution. Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carol. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laloo. Hi. All 38 is amending chapter 7 traffic and
a resolution moved by council member Carol fixing Wednesday March 18th as a time and place for a public hearing and final passage. Mr. Lapaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi >> Miss We Laaloosa. >> I
39 is an ordinance moved by the council as a whole. uh reopening and amending the city's master plan to establish clear defined zoning districts that reflect character of the city and projects residential
and protect residential neighborhoods from inappropriate development and the res fixing the resolution for March 18th as a time and place for a public hearing and final passage and on the introduction of that Mr. Booker. >> Hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi
>> Mr. Perez. I >> miss Weame. >> I >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I 40. It is also moved by the council as a whole and it is establishing a construction con commencement deadline for developers receiving a payment in
lie of taxes agreement and a resolution fixed on Wednesday, March 18th is a time and place for public hearing and final passes. >> We have to pull that. >> You're pulling. >> Yeah. Communications is a resolution moved by the council as a whole ordering the
following communications to be received and filed. It covers C1 through C9. Any questions on communications? And on the communications, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> officers report is a resolution by the move by the council as a whole ordering the following officers reports to be received and filed and any resolution incorporated within to be adopted. Any
questions on the officer's reports and on the officer reports Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Reamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laaloosa. I >> consent resolutions is an agenda uh
resolution moved by the council as a whole ordering the following resolutions to be adopted. It covers CR1 through CR52 and on the consent resolutions. Mr. Booker, I have a question on uh CR23.
So on I pulled it out on the remaining consent resolutions. Mr. Booker, >> hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi >> and Mr. Lapaloo. >> Hi
Okay. CR23 is approving the Bayon urban enterprise zone and submitting an application for the Bayon UE Broadway security camera phase 2 in the amount not to exceed that
should read $453,354 to cover the cost of the installation of four new cameras and upgrading eight existing cameras on Broadway. >> Jaclyn Barber, UE coordinator. Okay. Uh,
thank you. Uh, quick question. I just I noticed that we passed the first phase of this cameras being on Broadway and obviously is a safety issue for uh, businesses and residents. Now, we got phase two. Uh, can you fill me in on exactly what that's uh, going to encompass?
>> Absolutely, Councilman and Council. Um, so this is the second and last phase of uh the project for installing cameras all through Broadway. Um you know the main focus for urban enterprise zone is the safety of our businesses and also the employees that leave these
businesses and attend to the businesses early in the morning. Um when I came on the as a coordinator I noticed that there was a uh not as much as security on Broadway and working with uh the previous chief and now the present chief. Um we're continuing the efforts
to protect our businesses. Um this will actually have a total of let me see from the urban enterprise zone, 20 cameras with an existing other eight that are already there. So that will be covering 50 55th
Street all the way down to Fifth Street on Broadway. Um the city also at one point uh went out for a grant and got the grant for almost close to a million dollars and they're covering the rest of the city. So Urban Enterprise Zone worked with the city to relieve that cost so they're able to cover other
parts of the city and we will cover all of Enterprise Zone. Um, like I said, this is close to $883,000 invested for the city and the well-being of our businesses and the community and as well as the employees. >> Excellent. Thank you.
>> You're welcome. My pleasure. >> On CR23, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laapaloosa. >> Hi. >> Down the home stretch. R1 is moved by
the council president authorizing and approving the issuance and the sale of not to exceed $9,515,000 bond anticipation notes and $6 million in taxable bond anticipation notes of the city in the county of Hudson, New Jersey to the Hudson County Improvement
Authority and determining various matters in connection therewith. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Pres. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> I
>> R two is moved by the council president. It's authorizing an agreement with Arthur R. Theobbolt, Junior, Esquire of Apples, McDermott, Mastro, and Murphy, PC, for professional legal services to act as special labor attorney for an
amount not to exceed $75,000 for a period of one year commencing January 1st. Mr. Perez, will you second? Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lopaloo. >> Hi.
>> R3 is entering into an agreement with John T. Deduces MD for professional medical services for uniform employees for an amount not to exceed $52,000 for a period of one year commencing January 1st, 2026.
Mr. Booker, we second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, I >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laapalooa. >> Hi. >> R four is an agreement with Hudson
Health Employees Assistant LLC for professional mental health services to provide employee assistant mental mental health for a period of one year commencing January 1st, 2026 for an amount not to exceed $39,000. It's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Perez, will you second?
>> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo. >> I >> R five is an agreement with John T. Deduces MD for professional medical
services for non-union employees for period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $15,000. It's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> R six is an agreement with Richard N. Campus Esquire for professional legal services as the planning board attorney in connection with developers for a
period of one year commencing January 1st at a rate payable at $225 an hour not to exceed $50,000. It's moved by the council president, Mr. Booker. Will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez.
>> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laapaloosa. >> Hi. >> R seven is an agreement with Lou Environmental Services for professional services as a certified leadbased paint inspector for a period of one year commencing January 1st at no cost to the
city. It's moved by council member Perez. Mr. Booker, will you second? Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. Hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, >> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. Hi. >> R8
is authoriz an agreement with Donahghue, Deronda, Doria, and Tomkins LLC for accounting and auditing services for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $113,500. It's moved by the council president, Mr. Perez. Will you second? >> Second.
>> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carol. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Hi. Miss Weamer, Mr. Lapelos. >> I >> R nine is authorizing the entering into an agreement with John El Chaseo LLC for
professional legal services to represent the rent control board for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $40,000. It's moved by Councilman Booker. Mr. Carol, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. Hi,
>> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I 10 is authorize an agreement with McManaman Scotland and Bowman LLC for professional legal services in connection with the city's water and sewer system for a period of one year commencing January 1st for a total
amount not to exceed $150,000. It's moved by the council president. Mr. Booker, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi.
>> R 11 is an agreement with McManaman Scotland and Bowman LLC for professional legal services as bond council in connection with the city's water and sewer utility for a period of one year commencing January 1st for a total amount not to exceed $60,000. It's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Perez,
will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi. >> Mr. I >> R1 12 is an agreement with Dworth Paxton
LLP for professional services as bond council for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $100,000. It's moved by the council president Mr. Perez we second >> second >> on the resolution Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Missur.
>> Hi. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi. R 13 is authorizing the agreement with Clark Kaitton and Hints PC to act as the city's council on affordable housing consultant for a period of one year
commencing January 1st in the amount not to exceed $75,000 is moved by council member Perez. Mr. Booker, will you second? >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi.
>> 14. is an agreement with McMan Scotland and Bowman LLC to serve as panel counsel for general and litigation matters for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $125,000. It's moved by the council president, Mr. Perez, will you second?
>> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Reamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa. >> Hi. R1 15 is authorizing the agreement with Chason, Lampereell, Malone, and Capuzo
to serve as panel council for general and litigation matters for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $25,000. It's moved by council member Booker, Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On that resolution, Mr. Booker, hi.
>> Mr. Carol, hi. >> Mr. Perez, hi. >> Missur, hi, >> Mr. Laalooa. Hi. R 16 is authorizing agreement with Roman and Roth for professional legal services to act as labor attorney in connection with arbitration, hearings, litigation
before the courts, negotiation, and perk hearings involving various unions and the city of Bayon in connection with labor related matters for a period of one year commencing January 1st form not to exceed $75,000. It's moved by council member Perez. Mr.
Booker, will we second? He left the building. Who'd like to second? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker. Oh, it's not. >> That's okay. I messed up a couple. >> I'm getting tired now. Look out. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi,
>> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> We have reached my bedtime. I'm telling you. >> R 17 is authorizing an agreement with Timothy J. Moriati Esquire, Steven R. Hmel, Esquire, and Belier Lur PC to act
as chief municipal court prosecutor and alternate municipal prosecutors for a one-year period commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $155,000. It's moved by the council president, Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second.
>> And on the resolution, Mr. Booker is not present. Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We >> Mr. Lapaloosa. I >> R 18 is authorizing an agreement with Yaklot
LLC, MMF Kil Killilis LLC for professional legal services as municipal court public defenders and alternate public defender for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $85,000. It is moved by the
council president, Mr. Perez Williams. Second >> second. And on the resolution, Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> I >> Miss We >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> R 19 is authorizing the execution of a
second one term one-term year option to renew the competitive contracting with integrated Microsoft for calendar year 2026 with an amount not to exceed $240,000. It's moved by council member Booker. Mr. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second.
>> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Who else left? Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. R 20 is authorizing the execution of any
and all documents necessary to enable the city to exercise its second year option to renew agreement number CY24046 to as amended with Stack Coulahan and Stack for Expert Real Estate Appraisal Services for a period of one year
commencing January 1st for an an amount of $12,000. It's moved by council member Perez. Mr. Lapaloosa, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa.
>> Hi. >> 21 is awarding the contract to Personno Deano Construction LLC for the improvements to G. Thomas D. Dominical Park for contract amount of $500,950. It is moved by the council president, Mr. Perez. Will you second?
>> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. >> 22 is designating 1191-205
John F. Kennedy Urban Renewal LLC as the redeveloper for the property located at 1191-1199 Kennedy Boulevard, 121 123 Kennedy Boulevard, and 1205 Kennedy Boulevard and authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement. It's moved by
council member Perez, Mr. Laalooa. Will you second? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, I Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. Hi, R23 resolution moved by Council Member
Booker designating 12-22 47th Street Urban Renewal LLC as the redeveloper of the property located at 1719 and 21 West 46th Street 124 1620 22 and 24 West 47th Street and authorizing the execution of
a redevelopment agreement. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I R 24 is moved by the council president.
It's authorizing the planning board authorizing and directing the planning board to reopen and consider an amendment to the H Street Rehabilitation Plan Broadway business district regarding daycare regulations. Mr. Booker, would you second?
on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss Weamer, >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I. >> R25 is moved by Councilman Booker authorizing the mayor and city clerk to execute a traffic cost sharing agreement
regarding the traffic light to be installed at the Bay View project. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. uh on that resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carroll, >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloo.
>> Hi. >> R 26 is authorizing the correction to prior resolutions to authorize the execution of various redevelopment agreements. It's moved by council member Perez. Mr. Booker, will you second? >> Not on the resolution. Mr. Booker,
>> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> R 27 is moved by the council president. It's authorizing a resolution to expand the construction
extension of the construction hours for the designated developer at 197 Avenue Erban Renewal LLC for the project located at 197 Avenue E. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. >> Second on the resolution, Mr. Booker.
>> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> Hi, >> R 28 is moved by the council president authorizing
authorizing the negotiation and preparation of redevelopment agreement between the city of Bayon and AM Realy LLC. uh for the property located at 657-63 Broadway. Miss Perez, will you second? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker,
>> Mr. Carol >> 31 31. >> Uh no, 28. >> 28. Sorry, >> my eyes are deceiving. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. Hi,
R 29 is a resolution moved by council member Perez authorizing the mayor city clerk to enter into an agreement with NW Financial Group LLC for financial advisory services for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $125,000.
Mr. Booker, will you second? >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Missur, >> hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> R 30 is authorizing agreement with
McManaman in Scotland and Bowman LLC for professional legal services special redevelopment and land use attorney attorney for a period of one year commenceed January 1st for a total amount not to exceed $50,000. It's moved by the council president Mr. Booker. Will you second? Second.
>> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. Hi. >> Mr. Carroll. Hi. >> Mr. Perez. Hi. >> Missur. Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. Hi. R31 is moved by council member Perez authorizes authorizing the agreement with English Taylor for professional
legal services as redevelopment and land use attorneys for one-year period commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $75,000. Mr. Lapaloosa will second. >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi.
>> Missur. >> Hi. >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> Hi. R32 is authorizing an agreement with Montrose Environmental Solutions for Professional Environmental Services on behalf of the city of Bayon for a period of one year commencing January 1st for
an amount not to exceed $25,000. It's moved by Council Member Booker. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second on that resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, hi. >> Mr. Perez, hi. >> Miss We Mr. Laalooa. Hi.
The others have been withdrawn. So R37 on your agenda is authorizing an agreement with Matrix New World Environmental Engineering for professional engineering services with regard to the licensed site remediation professional for period of one year
commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $50,000. It's moved by Councilman Booker. Mr. Perez, will you second? >> Second. on the resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa.
>> Hi. >> R38 is authorizing agreement with Richard N. Campus SO for professional legal services to act as a zoning board attorney on behalf of the city for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $30,500.
It's moved by the council president. Mr. Booker, will we second? that one. Mr. Booker, >> hi >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I
39 is an agreement with spatial data logic for municipal departmental data management, software, enterprising, licensing, and cloud hosting for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $84,420.
It's moved by the council president, Mr. Perez. Will you second? >> Second. >> Resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Miss Lapaloosa. >> Hi.
R4 is is authorizing the conditional designation of BEC Quincy LLC and execution a executing a escrow agreement. It's moved by the council president Mr. Booker. Will you second
>> on the resolution? Mr. Booker. Hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa. Hi. R41 I did not receive a resolution on so I'm going to assume it's been withdrawn.
>> Uh no >> I don't I don't have a resolution. >> All right. >> Okay. It was just to go out for the design but I thought we did have a resolution. Yeah, we went we would definitely went over this. >> Yeah. No, there there should have been
um on this, but uh I can update the council that uh Andy Riel and his team uh have uh prepared the uh bid specs uh yesterday to get the engineering uh um to go out to get the engineering um bid specs uh for the uh the traffic light
signal which would have satisfi satisfy this ordinance uh or resolution on that. So, but um yeah, we can you know Um, and Sue, >> Sue, did you want to update us on just what's going on with the the traffic
light? >> Lights plural. Excuse me. >> Also, Mr. Nrosski has a question. >> Good. Um, yes, council president and council. Um, as you know, you started a
a wave of activity. Um, you actually this evening, you didn't probably see it, but because things get buried, but you adopted the uh the traffic re resolution amending the traffic code for all of the improvements that have been made by our police department and our
public works department uh at MPI, which is very important uh in this overall effort. Uh we've also met with Costco. Costco is making progress with uh with with New Jersey DOT and uh they also met with Lieutenant Ki who is now satisfied
and Mary Jane Desmond uh satisfied I believe I won't speak for her but I know that um Lieutenant Ki is now satisfied with the improvements within the traffic within the parking lot um and really wonderfully we were able to identify in
a old bond from 2019 that for bridges and traffic calming. Uh Donna Mau was able to um identify funding that can allow this this traffic signal to go to design and construction >> without bonding. Well, without she will
need to bond in the future probably for other things, but the bonding process itself is a lengthy process and she does have funding in it and that funding is also for the South Cove Bridge uh that you did this evening for the um it's
it's exactly what it was written for. It was written for these type of improvements. So, um thank you. >> It's really all speed ahead and um Joe did have Andy Andy did the RFP. it's ready to give to u to Amy Deabella to
proceed. So hopefully and I have very good news for you next month on MAP in terms of things. So >> and this is going to be going out to bid for the engineering right of >> Yes. Yes. That that's a piece that has to be has to be done. So >> could could we do a like a a verbal um
uh like read the resolution into the record >> uh on it? So, um, uh, Andy Riel, uh, and his team, uh, has prepared a document, uh, it's titled, uh, um, RFP Goldsboro traffic, uh,
just bear with me one moment. My signal is not too good. Or or Maline, can we let me go print this out? And uh, can we move on to the others? Sorry, >> we'll come back to this. >> Yeah. Mr. Drastic has a question.
>> Joe, one second. >> Or or actually maybe Sue. >> It's just a I had left last month's meeting a little early and I know this came up about the study and my real concern is why was the city paying for the study and not the developers down
there? And why are we using our why are we paying for that traffic light? Um, and I know you just said you found some bond money or grant money that that could there's a lot of other areas that need traffic um improvements in town that that could be used for. Um, I just
don't understand why down there those improvements weren't being made by all those um new developments down there that got very very nice financial agreements, but the city the taxpayers are paying for that. >> You want to explain how the city was
going to pay this? So again the the bonding on how this is all going to work structurally for on this is that we are looking to create a special improvement district SID 2 was not created properly. So we're
in the works uh on making sure that is created but the council has expressed that they want to move this forward. Uh it is going to take a couple months on the engineering and the design of uh the traffic light based on some of the infrastructure concerns there. You I mean you have the Spectre pipeline
underneath there uh along with the some of the intersections not meeting up um you know in you know four corners you have cross lane uh and into Goldsboro. So part of that the um you know with those considerations on moving forward
with this this is something that again can come out of a bond where there is money for and that the city will get then reimbursed by the special improvement district there. >> So you're saying that this will still be >> this will be the bond will be paid down by the special improvement district
>> the project cost the city will get reimbursed by the SID in order to pay for the bonds that we already have issued. Oh, then and that and that's that's agre agreed upon already or is this something you hope to accomplish? >> It's in the works right now as the SID has not been approved yet in front of
the council as the ordinance >> I thought you named people to the SID. I was thought I was at a meeting where you named people to a SID a couple years ago. Maybe >> the SID that you created uh was done inappropriately. There was no notice provided. >> There was no people that I'm just saying I I'm not the lawyer. >> Well, there was Well, I was not
>> Mr. Laalooa was there and Neil was there and Juan was there. I mean, I was also there for 1888, but you keep forgetting to mention that one. >> And again, back to to the SID, when we looked at trying to make sure that it was created properly, we could not find that the notice was there. So, out of
abundance of caution, we're redoing that. So, but again, >> who paid for the initial study for Andy Reichel's work? It's the city on that again his you know regular contract with this you know the
city for special you know redevelopment. >> Yeah. But normally it gets paid out of generally most of the work he does gets paid out of escrow from the projects he's working on right >> depends on the the project for it. So >> so the taxpayers are paying it. I it's still my point is I I feel that all
those improvements down there should be paid for by the developers there and not the taxpayers. They all got plenty. There's not one that didn't get a financial which I gave, but it was also with the ability like they should be they were supposed to be making the improvements. So, we give them the
benefits and then we're now paying for the improvements. I I just don't I think it's asking a lot. >> There is a vehicle to get paid back on it and it's a safety issue that needs to be taken care of immediately. >> Needed to be taken care of in the past. Yeah, I agree. I'm just saying though I
I think that that we shouldn't be paying for it. So, for the the title of the um the RFP, um we would ask that a a resolution um you know, directing this uh the city to uh
put out this uh request for proposal uh uh seeking for professional uh proposals for professional services providers uh here referred to in this notice uh and the various uh submission documents as consultants. respondents providers, contractors, submitting parties,
applicants, vendors, service providers, and/or professional service providers for the following professional services in according with the fair and open contracting process as defined in uh the New Jersey local unit paytoplay law NJSA
1944-20.4 at SAC. Uh the city of Bayon is soliciting response slashproposals to the city to request for proposals for the provisions of the following
professional services. uh one uh that a scope of service detailed in section 3 uh related to the traffic signal design of Goldsboro Drive which may include but
not limited to site civil engineering, electrical engineering, land surveying services, regulatory compliance and conditions at the site and federal levels, traffic engineering, cost estimates, geotechnical engineering, sight and safety uh and quality
asurances, traffic control and safety professional opinions andor testimony if required. >> Would like to move it? >> Move it second. >> And on R 41, Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, hi
>> Mr. Perez. Hi, >> Miss Weame. Hi, >> Mr. Laalooa. Hi. R42 is authorizing the execution of a field fill easement agreement with PR Bayon Industrial Urban Renewal LLC.
I'd like to move it. >> Second >> on that resolution. Mr. Booker, >> Mr. Carol, >> hi. >> Mr. Perez, >> hi. >> Miss We >> Mr. Lalooa. >> Hi. >> I have a couple additional add-ons.
First one is authorizing the mayor, city clerk, and andor other appropriate appropriate city official to take any and all actions and execute any and all documents necessary to enable the city to exercise its second one-year option to renew agreement number CY24058
with NJ Humane Society Services for Animal Control and Animal Shelter Services for a period of one year commencing January 1st for an amount not to exceed $114,000. Who would like to move it? >> Second >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker,
>> Mr. Carol, >> Miss Perez, Mr. Perez, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laaloosa. I >> two is amending resolution 253-19066
approving the submission of the grant application with the New Jersey of Department of Transportation to change the title project to read LFT 2025 for the improvements to Second Street, Fourth Street, and West 9th Street.
I'd like to move it >> on the resolution. Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Reamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Laaloosa. >> Hi. >> And three is award contract to Jersey Elevator for one-year period commencing
January 1st for elevator services and maintenance at city hall and the fourth street senior center for an amount not to exceed $35,000. Who'd like to move it? >> Second. >> On the resolution, Mr. Booker. >> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss H.
>> Mr. I >> R four was pulled was not returned to me. R five I mean add five is authorizing the director of public works to sell
escrap or at auction five vehicles that are no longer serviceable. Who'd like to move it? >> Second. >> And on the resolution Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. Miss Weame. >> Hi.
>> Mr. Lavaloosa. >> Hi. >> I have one more that is not on your agenda. >> I never got the pink slick slip back. I don't know whether we're going forward with that. >> Took it from me. >> Is that Is that replacing the ones you
took out? Okay. So, >> it's a tow truck. Yes. Which at four is authorizing the purchase purchasing game to purchase 12026 Ford F600 roll back.
>> Okay. I'll take a look on my desk, but we could we could read it. >> Okay. From all American fleet uh for a total amount of $113,26048. would like to move it. >> So move >> second >> and on add four. Mr. Booker,
>> Mr. Carol, >> Mr. Perez, >> hi, >> Miss Weamer. >> Hi, >> Mr. Lapaloosa. >> I >> Now the one that's not on your agenda is designating consulting Municipal Engineers LLC doing business as CME
Associates, Waterman LLC, Arcadius US Inc. Center State Engineering Associates, NH2M Associates, Inc. for the qualified General Engineering Services pool for a period of one year
commencing January 1st pursued to the local contracting law in the pool amount not to exceed $750,000 for future contracts will be awarded from would like to move it. I'll
>> move second. And on that one, Mr. Booker. >> Hi, >> Mr. Carol. Hi, >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi, >> Miss Weame. >> So, I guess I I apologize, Joe, but I guess I have a quick question with that. So, threequarters of a million dollars, we're creating an engineering pool.
>> So, what we're doing with the pool, unlike some of the other contracts, we're qualifying and preserving the bid. So, we're putting off to the side that type amount of money for, you know, the budget. So for finance to allocate that in the budget, but because there's no contract yet awarded on city work, all
those contracts will have to now go back in front of you also helps us track the uh the work that is being done. Um you know, so instead of having one blanket contract that covered all the work, they'll have all right a road improvement contract, a park improvement contract. uh but it preserves for those
uh engineers the uh the qualified bid so they don't we don't have to republic re uh request the you know proposals uh every year >> so those are the ones that were withdrawn >> it's yes the ones that were withdrawn were regrouped into a pool
>> the point being we will get to see them before they do anything and the CFO will know in advance what is likely to come because right now she's getting bills after whoever engaged >> and this could be an as per project.
>> This is more prospective per this qualifies it and then going forward there'll be future contracts in front of the council for this year as to each of those projects. So helps us track it >> and we estimate that amount at 750,000
for for per year per anom overall throughout the city >> because of the park improvements and other things. It's roughly um I mean it's a little bit less than what was approved uh last year, but generally that's what we spend on engineering services. >> Really? >> Yes. >> I'm in the wrong.
>> Well, part of it is again on some of the requirements from D. It's Yeah. >> park improvements. >> The reason for the pool is to be able to tell what is being spent just before anybody engages somebody. So you have a running tally of what's going on and
it's not hitting the books after people have engaged them and you didn't realize you went over. >> Right. So I guess my question with that is is there is there a standard operating procedure that's been put in place that says you have to request approval to utilize this engineering
firm and here's the estimate as to what it would cost and somebody is tracking the draw down on that $750,000 so that we're not >> Yes. >> Yes. That's the point. >> And who who is that person responsible for?
>> Not a BI. >> Ah, I see. >> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you. >> And your vote. >> I have a question on the explanation there. So, these all um these were all
public uh fair and open, right? bid because normally when you bid right you award a contract up to a certain amount but now you just put it in a pool so usually it's like each vendor has a certain limit right you award something based on up not to exceed
>> all the now it's a pool so CMA can do $750,000 worth of work so you know like sometimes you guys give a little bit so then you don't have to go to fair and open then you just keep increasing it you know what I mean then it increases so um Then you keep then you come back
here and you're amending the contract. So this isn't going to be like that like so right. So it's just anyone could spend any amount of that money. >> No. >> Okay. So then how that's not how you explained it. You said it's a pool. >> Yeah. It's per project as we find out. >> So it always be in a public meeting.
>> I didn't hear it. I'm sorry. >> Will that always be in a public meeting? The approval. You said you're going back to the council. That would be the only Okay. >> Yes. It has to come back here for approval for the project at that amount not to exceed. It will be per project.
The pool enables us within the pool to get bids on projects and keep everybody on their toes and efficient. Can I >> But we know before we do something the cost because right
now people have this past year everybody had contracts and nobody realized that public works was it's like the Amazon account public works everybody uses it but nobody knows what everybody's doing. Now you have to stop in one place,
express what the project is and get approvals from multiple people before it comes here. >> Maline, could I get a copy that we'll have that up on the site tomorrow? This um of the wording of this resolution. >> Thank you. >> Not bright and early, but
>> Miss your vote. >> Mr. Lapalooa. >> I. >> With nothing else, I will take a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. And on the motion to adjurnn. Mr. Booker. >> Hi. >> Mr. Carol. >> Hi. >> Mr. Perez. >> Hi. >> Miss Weame. >> Hi.
>> Mr. Laloosa. >> I have a good night everybody.