No, there's one down. But you know what, Jim? Oh, you can have mine. I just wanted to make sure we're on the same testing. haircut. I try. Well, actually, you know what
happens is I just like set up How are you? Amen. It's going to be worth Congratulations. Simple simple guys I think we had that last week.
I don't even like chocolate. Rebecca loves I have I don't have a sweetance. So like I don't I don't sitting here and he's like one and then you're like okay maybe I'll have a set
ordinance. We'll take care of that. Good. Yeah. Okay. What do you want? I would like to vi I would like to advise all those present a notice of this meeting has been provided to the public in accordance with the provisions
of the open public meeting act that notice was published in the city website copies provided bergen record Ellis I shall the northstar ledger ters journal also placed on a bulletin board in the lobby of city hall. Written objections if any shall be made to the city clerk.
Thank you Mr. P. Rise for the pledge. Allegiance flag United States of America and to the stands one nationy. Roll call. Mr. Con here. Mr. Fischer here. Mr. Jabore here. President
present. Mr. Canero present. Mr. Ramos preso present. So we're going to start with a presentation by the New Jersey uh D. But be before we do that we just have a
little housekeeping to clear up. Um number uh B783 which is for second readings. It is number uh it is number seven this evening is is
going to be amended. So we're going to we're going to vote on the amendment which will in essence and then the the hearing on it will be at the next meeting. So on August 20th. So we will be voting on seventh but it will not be a final vote. There will not be a final
hearing on it. So uh members of the public uh will we're treating it like a first reading. So that it we will not hear uh any testimony or uh comments on number seven. Uh the uh
CD10 um is does does not have this the required two sponsors. So it is not going to be heard this evening. Um so if you're here for CD10 um then you you we will not be
discussing or voting on it this evening. And then in the uh first readings uh number two is indicated on the agendas as stricken. It's not going to be it's being pulled and number 14 is
also being pulled and number CD11 at the very end referring 14 is also not going to be heard tonight. So if you look at the agenda, you can determine if there's anything wouldn't want you to spend the evening here waiting and when we're not
going to be addressing it. Uh so with that, um who Jennifer Gonzalez or I guess you want to do the introduction or Caleb? I think she's just pointing to somebody else.
I'm just going to do a quick introduction. Uh Dennis, would you like to come up and do the presentation with Kim? And if you guys don't mind just um name and title and Hello everyone. I'm Dennis Reinick. I'm the director of
resilience engineering and construction. I think I know most of you well. Uh it's been an 11 12 year journey together and I love coming here. Um Councilman Fischer, good to see everyone. Um I'm glad I came tonight. Uh this this is a nice little check-in with the council
and I'm glad I was invited to come tonight along with this community, the state and the federal government. Quite down if we can in the room. Okay. Thank you, Dennis. Sorry. Oh, so sorry. Um along with the state, the federal government, we're committed
to completing this project and completing it on schedule and in budget. Um that means we need to do certain things. We need to aggressively move toward a completion of the project. I think Hoboken wants it done more than anyone in a timely fashion. So, you're ready to be protected from the next
storm. Sooner is better than later. And um I think as you see us working in multiple locations around your town, that's our goal. But it also has some funding implications. We're trying to hit funding targets as well. So, some of this urgency is also hitting funding targets by December, making sure we've expended funds that can't be returned.
Uh hitting targets for next December, and we're on schedule to hit that target as well if we keep going and keep moving. Um, but what comes with that comes with disruption, comes with closures of streets. Um, and not for nothing, something I feel very strongly
about is the community does feel the impact of this construction around the town. Um, but I also think it'll be worth it when we look back when we look back for multiple generations of reducing flood risk to this area. And I think it's going to do a spectacular job once it's
installed and we install it correctly and we install it with with with um with good inspection, seeing it when we need to see it during the daylight. Um and inspect these systems so they'll last for a lifetime and more. Um that's my
speech. I want to let I'm going to let um uh Kim, my project manager, she's been with us since the 2014 NEPA document that we did together. Um, and I'm gonna let Jen take over because I could talk all night and I want to thank you again for having us and the invite.
So, Kim, can you give us your last name? Great. Um, I'm Kim Makavoy with New Jersey D. I am the bureau chief um seeing overseeing the Rebuilt by Design projects on behalf of D. Uh I'm glad to
be here tonight to give you a little overview of the northern and southern um construction specifically on Marin and 15th and Garden. Um but for first I kind I want to go over just the coordination
communication to date. Um things that we strive to do with you as a community. Um we have bi-weekly touch-based calls with Hoboken representatives um to communicate um and and them to
communicate to us on input on the project where we are on schedule. Uh we do have outreach that most recently we've engaged the city council traffic subcommittee uh for each of these closures um presenting to them and
getting their input. uh hope and stakeholder meetings. We've engaged with um entities that are directly impacted by these closures to try to communicate traffic and access along with Jersey City stakeholders. So, those are things
that we currently do. We we have those on our websites too, posted so we can dis uh distribute information um uh readily to the community. Some things we're committed to do better is communicate better. we can do better.
Um, we have signage we can we are looking to implement at work zones to say why we're here. Why is the your community? Why are you sitting in traffic for so long? What is the purpose of this? And what's going to come after this? What is it going to look like? Um,
so we're finalizing concepts for that. Uh, Harborside Park, we're um implementing fence banners to show the community this is not this is going to look better. This is there is a reason um and I think we can do better. We actually identified communication money
to initiate this init this um kind of communication and it's not out of your construction budget. So this is a separate initiative. We have opened work zones and we're committed to doing that to clean them up so there's better access for your community um and the
people that walk by this and see these um structures. uh traffic specifically um you know we have engaged MBI Michael Baker International to performs traffic studies um we're funding the effort we're working with them on lessons
learned from other closures and um we have weekly traffic meetings every Thursday we meet with contractors we meet with Jersey City and Hobok and PD we meet meet with uh representatives to talk about lessons and to talk about future so we're committed to doing all of these
Um, and we're also scheduling an amenities meeting in which we can update the community on the design. What is it going to look like? And that's going to be inerson meeting looking for August. Next slide, please. So, why are we really here? This is a
major street closures going on in your community. It is an inconvenience and we're trying to lessen that. So, we put this as a tenative schedule on major closures. So, this is northern and southern. They're linear. We're never
going to close more than one a full closure of one street in the north um or and the south. So, right now, we started 15th and Garden this week. Um that's estimated 4 months. After that, in the north, we're going to go to Bloomfield.
After that, we're looking to go to um 14th Street. That is yet to be scheduled. We're looking, we know what's scheduled into the fall of this year. Um, southern closures, we are looking next week to go to Marin Boulevard July,
the week of July 21st. That's estimated also 4 months, then go to Grove Street and then expected back to Jersey Avenue. Again, that hasn't been scheduled. That's um in 2026. we will come back to you on that
schedule to ensure that everybody's communicating. Um, this does not account for smaller duration closures around the community like a bike lane, like a corner, like a one lane um that that we don't think are are big traffic um
impacts. Um, but there will be addition and also it doesn't account for additional closures that might be needed for a final gate installation or final restoration. And that looks like weeks, not months for that those types of um final amenities.
Next slide. So the 15th Street plan closure, we actually have a full presentation on our website. Um we are in the second phase of this which is closure 2 which started this week. This is a major construction. This
is a installing foundation and the rail system for the gate. This is one of the biggest gates in this community. It's being manufactured in North Dakota at this time and planned to be delivered in, you know, in this area by September,
October of this year. So, that's a huge um accomplishment. We will be coming back for a third closure. Um that will be more, like I said, more like weeks for final restoration and amenities. Um, I just want to say also with this 15th
and garden schedule, we worked with our contractor to try to limit we we our contractor does not want to be there to have a full closure. It's not cost-effective. It's not um manpower-wise. It's not efficient. So they looked at um extending work hours
in some of the construction that they can extend work hours um excavation gate installation um restoration of roadways. So um to do that we would need a approval for a hobok and um a waiver for
the current noise ordinance. So we would need that from hobok and to extend those work hours on Marin. Um, we are looking tentatively to start the week of 20 July 21st. That is also a 4-month closure. Again, it's a
massive construction project. It is the same as 15th and Garden. It's in it's it's actually a little bit more intense. You have subsurface utilities. Um, we have um micro piles. We need to pour the
monolithic concrete structure gate install. So, those are all massive, very complex um types of construction and coordination. This will only be a two-phase closure. Um after this first, we'll um looking to come back in um
summer 2026 for final for just final gate install and testing on this Marin closure. We did um look at uh synchronizing and coordinating with other entities because we knew Marin had
to be closed for other projects. So what we did is we we wanted to start this now because New Jersey Transit has their long slip project that they would close Marin and Hoboken is looking to do a water system pressure mitigation project
that would also require a closure of Marin. So those projects we're looking at to work concurrently so we minimize future impacts for your commun for the community. Um and and that's actually a great savings.
Uh just to wrap it up because I I know I'm going a little long. Um we continue to coordinate that's our initiative with with the city with Jersey City um Hoboken and our partners. We will have
public virtual meetings. We found it very valuable to go to this traffic subcommittee at each of these major closures to kind of to brief on what we're doing and then go to the community. Um, and we'll continue to do that for these major closures. We're going to refine the schedule as a
project move forwards and coordinate with with with Hoboken on traffic with MBI. What did we learn? How can we mitigate better? Um, what can we do better? um moving forward. Um and that
and also work zones educate the public. We we have what are you going to see at the end of this? Um why are you sitting in traffic? It is inconvenient. Um and then as I mentioned the amenities
uh in person meeting to update the community because not everybody has been here as long as we have. Thank you. Thank you very much, Kim. Council members, do we um so first what? Councilwoman Fischer,
thank you. Uh first, uh thank you for doing that. I have been here since the beginning, since 2015. Um the uh even before I was on the council, I was on the keg. Um, what I would say is it's so helpful to
just see that like just being able to I mean it's frustrating all the closures, but just being able to kind of sit and have a little bit of a view for the next 2 years on what to expect, even if it's not the exact dates, but just broadly so
people can just put their head around it. Um, you know, it's what we asked and and I really uh we really appreciate it. Um the uh the the one thing I I guess I both want to highlight as well as ask
Jimmy, he'll get there. Um you know, one one of the things I think we learned in this process was, you know, we are racing to get this done because if the storm happens tomorrow, you know, it would be terrible. um if
her or if uh supertorm Sandy happens again. So the goal is to get it done so we're prepared as as soon as possible. But I think one of the things that we kind of have learned in this process is it has felt like the project plan was really driven around efficiencies for
the contractor and not the kind of interests of the city. And and we've learned kind of that I think together and I and I think we're correcting we've corrected some of that. Um, you know, the early conversations with the last 15th Street closure just weren't as thoughtful about the
residents. The early conversations on Jersey Avenue weren't as thoughtful about the residents. I think they're better. You know, I think we've learned we have a business in Southwest Hoboken that Reuben can talk about um that's being impacted. We have, you know,
businesses on the north end that are being impacted. The parking garage lost 30% of its revenue the last time it closed, right? that that's not and and my neighbors don't like the management of the parking garage. But still, no one wants to see, you know, a business close. But I just think we need to
continue to be thoughtful on what we can do to support the businesses along the way, to support um the neighbors along the way and um and solve for the quality of life issues for the residents and that should be first. So the ask I would say we know that we know these two big
projects right now are these monolithic pores. Totally sold me on it. There's a zero possibility while that's happening for you to go down to one lane. But as we talked about on the phone the other day, like the second that's done and you start doing like the surface level just
ground work, you know, uh repaving the street and doing the curbs, like that's when we want you to quickly go to one lane as quickly as possible. That may not be what the contractor wants, but that's what we see everywhere. everywhere. Whenever a road, even when
the city does it, when we mill and pave, we mill and pave one half of the street, then we move to the other half of the street. We don't shut our streets down just because a contractor it's more efficient for them. So, we just I'll implore you to as we get closer to really just force the contractor to do
those, you know, closing one side when we know it definitely is possible. But when it's not possible, we we won't ask you to do it when it's not possible, but we'll kind of demand that you do it when it is possible. So, but thank you. I hopefully the public got, you know, some
good information out of this. I want to thank you for that input. I want to thank you for the input and we're going to keep we're going to keep that under adisement every day. Yep. Thanks, Dennis. Great. Council members, appreciate the presentation.
Yeah. Thank you. Councilman Cohen, did you just very briefly, I want to also thank you for the presentation. I also want to emphasize the importance of of using the funding that we have and hitting the milestones. And Dennis, you you referenced it. I think it's critical. Uh we see what's happening out of
Washington. Uh we don't want to be in a situation where we have money available for this to forever protect our community. For those of us who lived through supertorm standing in 2012, we never want to experience that again. And when this is complete, we won't. So, for all our businesses, for all for all the
inconvenience that we're dealing with, thank you for the heads up. Thank you for the timeline, for showing us what we can expect. Uh, but ultimately, thank you for the work because this community is going to be prepared and and your leadership and efforts on this is hugely important. So, thank you.
Um, council president, can I just ask a related question? We have a resolution for a noise waiver on here relating to rebuild by design. It's both 15th Street and Marin. Is it possible to vote on that and have that discussion
just while they're here or No, you can say no. But well, you want to suspend the agenda for It is the resolution. CA there are there are three noise ordinance.
Yeah, it's just the one for uh CA3. The other two are the other two are for Elor. Can I just make a comment while she's gone? Yeah. Yeah. I think uh one thing that we're in
the box, right? We live it every day. You guys are involved at every day. Although we had meetings over the last 12 years leading up to this process, we can't assume that everyone that lives in Hoboku was in that box with us. So, the one thing that I really
appreciate uh what you said there is the signage that's going up why we're doing this because people moved into Hobok in the last two years. I had no clue uh that this has been going on for the past 13 year process that we've been going through since 2013, 2014 and and onwards with this. So, I think that's the most
important thing that we want to put out. That's why we asked you to come here tonight. This presentation wasn't for us so much because we you hear our frustrations when we have those uh those meetings. just for the public so they can understand the where, the why, and the how we're doing it. But definitely the sensitivity towards uh we're living
in that box and we're paying attention every single day, but they're not. And they're just thinking waking up for the first time when they saw Jersey Avenue close. No matter how many nixels we send out, how many emails we send out, they're not they're going to work. They're taking care of their kids. They're relying on us to worry about those thing. When they see it closed, oh
like, whoa, what's going on here? So, we have to get out and include everyone. get them all in that box as much as we can. So, that one slide that I appreciate is the more outreach as to the why, the where, the how we're doing this. So, let's like emphasize that as we go through this a little bit more. Councilman, I I learned that from you,
though. We heard this community feeding this back to us and we heard it from Mayor Bala and we heard it from uh the administration. This reaction was not, you know, I like to dig. Um, I think what we heard was that we need to tell a better story while we're digging. And
um, and I think we can do both. And I think we can do it better. And um, I I I think Kim and I both agree that um, the feedback you gave us is given us the impetus for some of the signs you're starting to see and what you'll be seeing this fall. And my assistant commissioner, Morardi, is uh, fully endorsing it. And uh, she's asked me to
give her an update on how we're telling that story. So I want to thank you very much for bringing that up. And I wanted to thank the administration and this council for uh pushing us to do better. Do you do you have those like big signs that have a pretty picture on it with a gate that say, you know, bring it down.
What' you say? Like a flooding project, you know, D. Do you have those where people can see them where they're sitting in traffic? You know what I mean? So, yeah, we're develop we have um actually we're getting signs delivered this Friday. Oh, great. For um the area around 15th
and Harborside. Mhm. So, that's kind of our first and then we're um developing the other ones for the other like Marin and such and the other work zones. So, and also we're looking at signage like A-frames that businesses are open. Yeah. Please
um during construction so hearing that input from from you know talking to both of you and and um you know understanding there is a need to to communicate of that aspect also. Great. Councilman Woman Fischer, uh, rather than closing
this down, bringing opening public comment on resolutions, closing it, coming back to this, are you do you have a question for them about and I'm happy just so just because they're here, I I talked briefly with Dennis and uh, Director Gonzalez. So
there the D is asking for a noise waiver and we've had multiple conversations uh you know it's it's a little different when it's Southwest Hoboken versus 15th and Garden just because 15th and Garden has a lot of residents that live right on top of it. Southwest Hoboken where
the work is. It's a little bit removed from Hoboken residents, but what they're asking for is, and the reason they're asking for a noise waiver is to be able to work longer hours to get the project done quicker. So, we're trading off the
disruption to the broader community for more disruption for the neighbors in that neighborhood. Um, and most of my neighbors asked for that. Um, but that being said, there's sensitivity. So, there uh the request is for 7:00 a.m. to
11:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. I'm just going to say it first. 7 a.m. to 11 uh p.m. Monday through Friday just during the 15th Street closure on both Saturday and Sunday from 7:00 a.m. to
4:00 p.m. And that is their regular construction uh between um Bloomfield on 15th between Bloomfield and Park. Then they also are asking for a waiver for Park Avenue and 15th to do overnight
work and potentially select weekend work. That actually is in the intersection and it's a main intersection. Um it's not going to be that extensive of work. It's just when they need to do it. Um what I So that's what the noise ordinance is. What I've
requested is that no um jackhammering, no pile driving, no noise like a jackhammering, and no rear reverse alarms occur before 8:00 a.m. or after 1000 p.m. in there because my neighbors
will lose their mind if they're woken up and kids, etc., woken up at 7:00 in the morning with jackhammering. That just isn't acceptable. So, and you guys said you said you thought it was okay, Dennis, putting you on the spot, and Jen said,
"So, it's not in it's not in there." So, I just want to get them to be okay with it, and then we'll vote later. Okay. All right. So, uh, in response to your request, you know, we've, uh, proposed amended language to the resolution that would say significant noise producing activities such as jackhammering, pile
driving, and federally mandated reverse vehicle beeps are not permitted on 15th Street between Park Avenue and Bloomfield Street between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. Um, that's good. Is that acceptable? Yeah, that's good. Fantastic. Awesome.
Can I ask a question? Dennis, if you're asenting to that, you could speak into the microphone or are you thinking about it or could you speak into the mic? I need the extra hours. It's up to you to keep me on, you know, give me the opportunity to keep working and reduce that work zone.
Um, I don't think it's going to happen. I don't think it's going to be a problem. Um, and I I think it's fine. And also the overnight and weekend work requires BA approval notice and approval 48 hours in
advance and stakeholders. So um that okay Councilman President I question for you guys I from an insurance perspective I've been I've worked with construction sites you have to have the beeping on those trucks going. I think it's a
liability issue. So I I I agree with Councilwoman Fischer. However, I don't know if you can do that legally. I don't think we can turn them off. And I'm I'm struggling with that one myself. Like moving trucks in back up. Just don't back up. You can only go forward and left turns.
You have it you have it before nine right now. I want I was thinking back. You know what? But you but but the different I hear I totally hear you. However, this is literally two
residential buildings directly on top of this site and it's just not okay. Well, you can't trump state law. We're not No, no, that's not what I'm saying. I'm just saying they can't back up their trucks before they won't be able to disable the feature. Um,
not asking you to. Just don't back up your trucks. Four, right? All right. Good luck. What what it comes down to is the D people have to comply with the noise ordinance which means not operating those vehicles or circles not activities during that time
period. You can do other things but not things right and that that has implications maybe on timing. So that that's fine. I think that we understand. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. Great. So are we good to go? Very much.
I want to thank you again for the invite and I'm happy to come anytime. Thank you. Okay, so moving on to the ordinances. Second readings on ordinances. As I mentioned a moment ago,
uh we B 783 is we're not going to have a hearing on that tonight because it's not up for a second reading. So, a Ad Adrien Orasco and Cheryl Fall, you both signed up for B783.
So, we're we're not we're not going to be having a hearing on it. So, August 20th um for for each of you. And Cheryl, you signed up for other matters, but Adrian and he did too. Adrian did too. Oh, you signed up for Okay.
All right, that's fine. Um so, we'll start at the top. Um we are We're going to start with uh amendments to Hoboken code city code chapter 154 rental housing warehouse warehousing to
clarify the city's ability to conduct inspections and uh this is B777 and uh the first Cheryl you signed up for Before the end of tonight, I'm going to feel
like Manny. I rise to speak in support of this ordinance, an ordinance that marks an important step forward in enforcing Hoboken's long-standing but long ignored anti-warehousing laws. First and foremost, I want to thank the residents
of Marine View for their tireless efforts. It was your organizing, your presence, and your refusal to be dismissed that forced the city to finally pay attention to the warehousing that's been happening in plain sight. You made this ordinance possible and the
entire city owes you a debt of gratitude. This is not new law. This is an update of existing legislation that has quite frankly been ignored for years. Sadly, the city has failed to enforce what was already on the books, allowing landlords
to keep rent controlled units vacant or unrened sometimes for years. What makes this amendment especially meaningful is that it adds teeth to the original law. Specifically, it adds a crucial enforcement mechanism by requiring
property owners to provide city inspections with access to units. This may sound like a small change, but it's foundational to ensuring the anti-warehousing positions are not just symbolic. This legislation rightly
affirms that landlords cannot simply sit on vacant units indefinitely, especially in a city where housing is scarce, rents are sky-high, and tenants are increasingly vulnerable. But while I applaud the overall intent and direction of this ordinance, I do have some minor concerns that I hope the council will
address tonight and moving forward. A key change in this ordinance is the transfer of oversight responsibilities from the rent leveling board that historically held public hearings to one city employee with no public oversight or input. This may have been done with
the sincere goal of streamlining the process, and I recognize the value of reducing bureaucratic delays, but removing public oversight is problematic. Transparency is not just a procedural luxury. It's a it's a guardrail, and heaven knows
administration of our rent stabilization laws need transparency. So, I asked the council, with the rent leveling board no longer reviewing waiver requests, how will the public be able to hold landlords and city agencies accountable? What mechanisms are in place to ensure
that this does not become a black hole? I also want to raise a broader concern about implementation. There is a legitimate worry that this ordinance may be aimed at placating voters where organizing has been strong while leaving tenants elsewhere in Hoboken behind. Warehousing is not limited to one
building or one ward. All across the city, we are told that landlords letting units sit vacant when when tenants leaves. This leaves remaining tenants in those buildings increasingly isolated and exposed. We need assurances and I mean clear public on the record
assurances that this ordinance will be enforced citywide that all landlords will be subject to the same scrutiny that this isn't performative gesture limited to one constituency. And finally, I ask whether the city or the sponsors of this ordinance gave any consideration to the thoughtful
suggestions submitted by Mike Evers. His proposals strike a reasonable balance between administration administrative efficiency and transparency. One, require landlords to make vacancy extension requests online, creating a a flaggable record. Two,
automatically forward information to the rent leveling board and include that information as part of the hearing documents. and three, empower the board to hold hearings when irregular irregularities arise. Such processes would preserve public oversight without adding delay. I encourage the council to
review those recommendations and I'd welcome any indication tonight that they will be expeditiously considered for incorporation. In closing, I support this ordinance fully, presuming it will be comprehensive, transparent, and importantly a citywide effort to end warehousing in Hoboken. I look forward
to hearing answers to the questions I've prop I've posed in advance of tonight's vote. Let's get it right and let's get it right for everyone. Thank you very much. Thank you. Michael Levers, Mike Evers, do I have good legs or what? You like
that? Okay. Um, I I emailed Paul about this a while ago and I'm basically echoing Cheryl's concern. Uh, as somebody who deals with city regulations here and in other municipalities, I think that just letting the landlord
apply to the housing department, assuming they can ever get their website to work properly, um, is great because that's so much more efficient than having to, you know, for a simple fairly routine procedure, which is you want your apartment vacant, so you can fix it
up or whatever, uh, that that's perfectly good, But the problem is, and as I mentioned to you, Paul, and I'm a little bit disappointed there weren't any safeguards put in. Who's watching the Watchers? I mean, I know Vanessa who would be in charge of this immediately,
but Vanessa is not a mortal. Okay? It is not beyond the realm of imagination that someday, as remote as that possibility might be, there might be a corrupt municipal employee. We agree that's possible. however small
the probability and there is no safeguard for for for stopping uh warehousing of apartments and quite honestly let's face it there's warehousing going on this is not like a an unusual thing there's warehousing going on right now uh the other problem
with it is uh and again speaking of the human factor um some of these people who warehouse apartments are tough customers okay and you have now inadvertently put one individual on the receiving end
of tough customers. Now, we should say, well, too bad. I mean, you take the job, you should, you know, do the heavy lifting. But I think we all know that doesn't happen a lot. So, in addition to the fact that I think you need to watch the watchers have some oversight, the
suggestion in this case was that all applications be um put into the minutes of the rent control board. Okay? They don't have to act on it. It just needs to be reported. So, it becomes a matter of the public record that the public can pay attention to. If you put that in
there, that would do two things. One, it gives us somebody who's watching the watchers. And two, it takes the pressure off the municipal official. It removes the the the fear of retribution because they're in a position to say, "Look, this is a matter of the public record. I
have to do what I have to do." So I would suggest that you give some thought to to um modifying this resolution either after it's passed or now. Okay? To to provide those safeguards because all you're going to do otherwise is
create another s opportunity for abuse and you're not going to address the problem of stopping warehousing. But thank you. Thanks m Thank you Mr. Evers. Uh, Patricia Waiters, B777.
Patricia Waiters, 15 Church Towers. I want to know who's going to be watching the watcher. And I'm just going to give a small scenario with the rent. When you say this is I'm talking about the HHA. Every time I come up here and you say it's not you with section 8. I brought
the real legislation. I'm fumbling through papers there, but I went to Trenton myself in housing authority. Who authorized them to charge those people? Wait, let me finish to charge those rents because you said that they can this legistration here that you're
trying to put forward. This will manage and show you for the warehouse and apartments and all of this other stuff. I want to say this. My mother lived in housing authority since 1962, right? You keep saying, well, if the person deceased or die or
leave, the new person that come there, well, can have their rent increased or whatever. Now, I've been talking to a few tenants, some of them paying 2,900. I bought my rent receipts from the tenants. I don't want to give names to protect the innocent. 2,900
and something for a housing authority apartment. Don't take it wrong because I'm saying housing authority. What I'm saying, I brought the legislation from the housing and urban development federal legislation from HUD and I have it here if anybody want copies. Where is
all of that money going? Now, the lady said to me, well, they said, I'm playing flat rent. What the hell is flat rent at Hoboken nowadays? Okay. So, could you imagine all of those units where they telling people to flat rent? Like when my mother was there, the flat rent was
you can't charge more than 850 for a threebedroom, 750 for a twobedroom, and so on. But my thing is, you are charging these people all of this money. Okay, they millions of dollars in a hole for PPPs, that rent protection, cuz I'm in
court with all of them. They almost paying $3,000. I can't find legislation nowhere pertaining to that. And don't blame Camello Garcia, please. I went from back when the other managers was there before Camello. Will that be controlled?
Because they warehouse apartments there too and been selling them to the Yepies that don't know no better. I want to know when you keep saying you're going to watch the list and houses being I live in church towers. Yeah, I'm coming at you next. I've been doing it intentionally telling people to
apply because I know there's units there. Okay. So, when you put this on the agenda and say you're going to be monitoring a list or asking for a increase in this and that and seeing who warehousing apartment, if it's election time and is one of your buddies and
money being passed under the table, lies, lies, and more lies. But this is serious. I want you to look into the housing authority, all the units. I have everything here for you tonight. And see why they charging those people that kind of money for those apartments. And they
said according to the young ladies and two gentlemen, they told them that's flat rent. You could either pay flat rent or the 30%. And they chose flat rent, which was good back in the 70s and 80s. Who changed it and when was it changed? And it wasn't Vanessa. And I
don't blame Camello. Thank you. I want answers. Thank you, Miss Waiters. Manuel Rivera Solair B777 the warehousing ordinance. Good evening. Good evening, council president, members of the council,
members of the public. Uh I guess my reputation precedes me, but uh I will try to be uh a little bit uh more concise this evening. Council President, um the question would be that members of the public would be uh concerned or at
least more interested in is as was mentioned before by the prior speakers which were very concise and with a lot of detail what they had um discussed with you. I wouldn't I want to know and I guess many members of the
public is what are the consequences? What are the teeth that this new amendment is going to have? um what triggers the inspection? Is it an inspection that's going to be done uh anonymously, meaning a spur of the
moment without the um property owners um being aware that they're going to be inspected at a certain time determined by you or by the person who is going to uh be conducting the inspections? And again, who does the inspections? who has
the authority to go into uh private property and do this? Um these are just questions. They might some be legal. They might some um be for the benefit of the city not seeing itself in in legal jeopardy, but um those would be the
questions. Again, uh I limited to that because uh again, prior um members of the public were more concise in their description. So again, what are the consequences? What are the teeths to this new
amendment or to change the change in this amendment? Council President, if you can help members of the public understand that and again, who is the one who is going to do the inspections and to whom do they answer to?
I have one more. and is the the person in charge of the inspections. Do they have to go through the building property agent? Uh those would be the questions, Council President. And uh again, if you
could answer any of mine or any of the concerns of the fellow members of the public, I'm sure we would all appreciate it. Thank you once again. Thank you, Mr. Me River. Um that's it for members of the public on this ordinance.
Motion to close public portion. Second. All those in favor? I President Doyle. Councilman President. This is um since the Marine View Plaza
um issue in the beginning of the year. Um, while the mayor and I don't always see eye to eye, I think it should be very important to say this to everyone here that the mayor has worked together with me and everyone in the council and we've done this together. There has been
things brought to his attention. They've taken a little longer due to some snafoos. However, we were dotting our eyes and crossing our tees. Um, as far as oversight, it can happen, but this is a positive step forward. So I think we have to
first start here and then we could build upon it. Uh we can add things. Uh but right now it is on here. You can individuals can put complaints in and then that sometimes will trigger some of the inspections. Uh that'll be done by
the office of housing or their designate and fines um Manny will be anywhere from $100 to $500 up to $500 per day. So there is some things in there. But I do want to say that this whole council worked on this together. This should
have been passed or it may pass out. It should pass. Uh I'm voting yes for it at the last meeting, but due to a newspaper glitch uh that has come about. But I do want to say that the newly formed Marine View Plaza uh tenant association, I'll nickname it. I don't know if that's the
exact name of it, but they had reached out uh to all of us with some things for us to address and we did just that. So, with the work of the mayor and with everybody on this council, we got to a positive thing and all politics were put
aside on this. So, I I want to make that clear to everybody here that this was everyone up here in front of you working together to get this done. And anybody that has any tweaks or additions to this, we are always open to listen. This is a very
unique property that maybe in the state that a lot of things haven't happened with this. So, this was a little bit of we had a feel around in the dark a little bit and there was some uh a lot of questions that went back and forth with some people more knowledgeable on the topic. But again, I'm I'm happy with
the outcome and you know, I'd like to thank Mayor Bala uh for his support and his open ear to anytime I called him to offer suggestions. Council President. Councilman Cohen. Thank you, Council President. Uh I just want to kind of put a point on what it
is. This amendment uh is a the problem that it's that is hopefully going to solve warehousing units where you don't where an owner for whatever the reason. Maybe they think they're going to go condo one day. Maybe they think that the law is
going to change in a way that maybe they don't have to be subject to rent control rather than rent out those units at affordable or below market rates. They're going to take their chance and leave it vacant and hope that one day they're going to be able to get market
rates out of these units, depriving our community of affordable or below market rentals. Uh there was a loophole that came out and Councilman President Zano talked about Marine View, but I think that this is something obviously it applies citywide to all buildings. I
want to make that clear. This is not targeting any single building, but the experience in this building put a point on the issue. And the issue is is that it's one thing we have we have a relatively small division of housing, not that many people working in it. And they're working really hard and
responsible for a lot of units. And when they make an appointment to inspect a building to determine whether there are apartments that are warehoused or not, that's an important inspection for them to determine whether that that property owner is illegally and wrongfully taking
units that could be rented and keeping them off the housing market. So when time comes for the inspection, the build the property owner said, you know, I got a cold today. Uh it's raining. Uh there's mud on the street. you know,
let's reschedu. And there was no way that the city had the ability to address the failure of the property owner to make these apartments available for inspection. This changes that. This uh
requires that uh a fail I'm just going to read from this. Failure to accommodate or allow the inspection shall constitute a separate violation of this chapter for each unit, not each building, for each unit where an inspection has been requested and the property owner shall be subject to
penalties described as Councilman President described them. So, uh, this loophole is closing and I think this is an important thing. You know, we'll see how it operates. We'll see how it works. Could it be done better? We don't know. But this is new. But this is a tool that
the city requested. Uh you know, Mayor Bala, division of housing saw this as a problem. Uh clearly the the tenants of Marine View Plaza believe that there are many warehouse units in that building that should be available to rent. Uh and this is going to give the city a much
needed tool uh to enforce the law on warehousing. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Councilman Cohen. Um, Councilman Yeah. Cano. Uh, thank you, Council President, for remembering my name. Um,
I pronounced it correctly, too. Uh, just to add on to the comments already. Um, this has really been a a collaborative effort for citywide, you know, starting with the Marine View residents, uh, moving over to the, uh, various housing advocate, uh, groups within the city, and it's really a
collaborative effort. So, I agree with with with all those comments. Just to add a little bit more on on what this also does and you know we've said I've said throughout my term here that um one we all acknowledge that we're in a housing crisis. Housing affordability is
an issue throughout the United States especially in the northeast especially in New Jersey especially in Hoboken. Uh and there's a couple ways to solve for that. Uh one material way is um what we've done significantly here in town is is some pricing controls where where we
can right rent control uh the controls associated with our public housing agencies. Um but the other one is volume. Um it's a supply and demand issue. Uh we often think of development uh and building affordable housing is one of those solutions and it certainly
is and and and I'm supportive of that in the right circumstances. The other is making sure that all our available supply that exists is on the market. If these things are on the market, then it adds to our our volume. It adds to our supply and it and it can have a a
downward effect on on the prices, which is good. Uh as Councilman Cohen uh had noted, often uh landlords when they're looking at their investment, they they deal with the mental calculation that if they hold on to a place vacant uh just for one or two months or 3 months extra
uh they can reap uh you know enhanced rewards by way of higher rents. Uh but that keeps stock lower than it needs to be than it should be. These are not regular investments. This is not a stock certificate. This is somebody's home or somebody's potential home. So, what
we're doing today is is giving our administration a little bit more teeth to be able to make sure that our existing supply is as what it should be. Uh, I'll be supporting this and I expect all my colleagues will as well. Council President, thank you very much. Councilman Cano and
Councilman Russo, you're next. Quickly, um, if I remember correctly, in the talking about watching the watchers in the rent control law itself, all decisions by the rent leveling officer are subject to appeal by the
board. To the board to the board, excuse me. Yeah. Um, this not necessarily being a rent control issue, there probably has to be that that would probably have to be included somewhere. corporation council. Can you
and of course I don't expect you to do it right now, but could you just look into that to see that we could extend that same provision to the warehousing provision because I think that solves the issue and I think it does it pretty quickly
and and easily. Just noting that any decisions made in the housing office have the ability to be appealed to the board. It says, council meo, it says on filing complaints, it says any civic
organization or uh sorry units uh any individual affected by action or inaction of an owner of a dwelling unit subject to the provision of this chapter. Any civic organization or any appropriate municipal agency may file a complaint of violation of this chapter with the Hoboka Municipal Court. I don't
know if that supersedes and they go right to court on it. Yeah. But that I mean I'll just it may and I and I think the concern I don't want to put words into anyone's mouth, but I think the concern was if we're going to if we're going to kind of shift that to a department,
what's kind of that first level of appeal rather than going right to court because there's a there's a lot more money involved going, hiring attorney, so on and so forth. So, and again, I don't have the the the immediate answer, but I think it's something worth looking into so that we could see if we could just pro just have that same provision.
Well, actually, and I I should point out that one of the reasons why it was moved to the division of housing from the rent board is because section 154 in the code is not it does not have anything to do with the rent. So that was that was the
reason it was profered as but it's something it's it's right for discussion. Yep. Is all I'm saying. I appreciate it. Okay. All right. Uh Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Excuse me. Mr. Con. I. Mr. Fischer.
Yes. Mr. Jabor. Yes. President Xano. Hi. Mr. Canero. Hi. Mr. Ramos. Hi. Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I the next is uh amendment to Hoboken city code section
155-2.1 transition from rent regulation by preempting governmental agency to regulation of this chapter to clarify the calculation of base rent. Uh no
members of the subject have signed up. I take it back. I sorry. It's right on there. You actually didn't, but you're welcome to speak. Okay. So, who gets the calculation? Where do you get your calculations? That's what I asked earlier.
Where do the calculations come from? You just said in this ordinance, there's a the code sets out how the the initial rent. Mhm. It be back in time is the first and acceptable rent.
1978, right? Yes. 1973. But yep. And and then over time there are allowable increases, tax search charges, utility search charges. Uh what I'm concerned about now, and I know it's not a lot of money,
it's you just keep adding over All right. Every year, I got an example for the people that just moved in 770 two or three years ago. Every year they was getting a $100 increase. That's what you mean by language? If the the division of housing looks at those
increases and verifies that done properly. So if they were done properly and the division of housing approved them, then they were appropriate. If Mike is a commissioner, he sits on the board. We reached out to Kelly Peterson, which is overheard for your area. Okay.
So who control those rents? We don't. Our rent does not apply to the housing authority because that's under a federal program. So Okay. So, church towers, clock towers, marine view, yacht board applies to them, right? Those are all under HUD.
Okay. Thank you. Okay. Um, Manuel Rivera, I missed you on the list as well, Manny. I think I think Ernest is coming instead. Sorry, I missed I missed the sign up before. My name is Ernest Boy, Marine
View Plaza. Sorry. Yes. Uh Ernest wrote on the I think he wrote on the No, I didn't. I missed it earlier. Sorry. Well, you'll All right. Is it okay if he He let He did let me go. This this again this again is Marine View Plaza. And I
just want to explain to everyone here. This is not just for Marine View. This is this is for anyone in the city who's coming off of a pilot program. So, I live in Marine View Plaza. I don't pay the search charge. So, this doesn't affect me personally, but it does affect
many many families who have to pay an extra three, four, $500 a month. And we believe that it didn't adhere to the letter of the law to include the search charge in the base rent when we do one day move into rent regulation. So,
that's why we are we brought this to to to like you all because there seemed to be something that just didn't add up. and we have a base rent and then again it didn't it did not affect me but when folks did have to pay a search charge it
was an extra line item so we believe that it does it should not be part of the base or moving forward yeah I'm just I just wanted to explain that to folks I'm I'm being real I'm being real quick about it I just wanted to make sure that folks that like folks in Hoboken don't
think it's just from Marine View Plaza it's for everybody who's coming off of this program. Thank you. Thank you, Ernest. Now, I've got to get your your name. Uh, Manuel Rivera, you gave up your time, Manny. That's it.
Yeah, you want me to yield back? I'll yel back in two seconds. Council President, all I need all I would like to ask on behalf of members of the public um and I appreciate the clarifications of the previous member of
the public um but what are the significant changes? Can you clarify them for members of the public? Is it redundancies that are being changed? Is it loopholes as was mentioned in an earlier um
in an earlier um amendment? But can members of the public just have a better clarification because it seems like some some of us are a little bit confused and we are not clar clear on what the amendment B77
um is going to clarify and amend. So that would be a great B778. I'm pardon me. 778. I believe Mr. Boyd explained it pretty well, but I I council president, if I may, I thank the member of the public, but I would
appreciate uh council members if they could help members of the public understand. Thank you. Yep. I yield back. So B778 as an example, there have been at some buildings that are not currently or that
were not subject to rent control had other types of charges such as for example an income sir charge at Marine View. And when Marine View transitions to the rent control code, there is no
allowed income searchcharge at Marine View under our rent code. So that payment that currently under the program that was in place at Marine View, payments were being made. those payments no longer have to be made to the
landlord because our rent control law does not allow those to be charged to the tenants. So that's what this does. It's right and I and I would add that the ordinance is retroactive to the beginning of the year January 1, 2025.
Okay. But it says all right. Um, so no other members of the public have signed up to speak on B778. Motion to close public portion. Second. All those in favor? I. Mr. Fina, please call the vote.
Mr. Con, I. Miss Fiser, yes. Mr. Jabor, yes. Mr. Presidento, I. Mr. Cano, I. Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo, I. President Doyle, I. An ordinance an ordinance amending
chapter 192 section 192-4A to add restricted parking spaces for persons with disabilities. This is B779. No members of the public have signed up to speak on this ordinance. Motion to close public portion. Second. All those in favor.
Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con. Hi. Fisher. Yes. Mrs. Jabore. Yes. President. Hi. Mr. Canero. Hi. Mr. Ramos. Hi, Mr. Russo. Hi, President Oil. I
an ordinance amending chapter 179A, article 1, section 179A-20 of the Hoboken City Code to adjust taxi cab fairs. This is B780. Uh, one member of the public has signed
up, Mr. Rivera Solair. Thank you, Council President. Maner, six W. Just want to let you know, Council President, I have a brief question. Um, would just like to know if members of the public could understand when you say adjustment of taxi or tax
fairs. Now, obviously, you're making an adjustment that is going up, I believe. Uh, or is it a procedural um clerical thing for the actual owners and drivers of these cabs? Can members of the public just have that information? And what
will be those new adjustments rates? And I will yield back. I can. Thank you, Councilwoman Jabore. Um, so to answer your question, this adjusts the taxi fair rate from $8 if
it's a shared ride, excuse me, from $7 to $8 if it's a shared ride and from $8 to $10 for an individual fair. It also then creates an adjustment so that over time there's actually a 3% or CPI
increase each year. You may recall there was a meeting when the taxi drivers, several came to basically petition us and ask that they be able to adjust their fairs in order to stay um competitive with some of the other rates that are being charged by other rid share providers. Um there this increase
hasn't taken place in a number of years. I'd have to look back exactly to when when you said joint shares were eight and it's individual or 10. Do you mean the other way around? Uh it's going from Nope. It's going from an increase from $7 to $8 as long as
it's a shared ride from the terminal because oftent times correct because oftent times they'll put multiple. Correct. Yes. So, if you do a shared ride from the terminal into the city, often you get you get that sort of cheaper rate, but if you get picked up anywhere else,
it's adjusting from the flat $8 up to $10. Thank you for that clarification. Sure. Uh, no other members of the public have signed up to motion close public. Second. Second. All those in favor? I. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con?
I. President, Miss Fischer, yes. Mr. Jabore, yes. President Jano. Hi, Mr. Cano. Hi, Mr. Ramos. Hi, Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle, I ordinance amending and supplementing
chapter 158 parn rent control increases closed for end of the Hoboken city code by adding a new section 158-2 entitled prohibition against algorithmic rent fixing in the rental housing market. This is B781.
Uh, Adrien Oasco, I mean, uh, he's taller than that. Uh, Council President Doyle, members of the council, uh, thanks for the opportunity to speak tonight and, uh, strong support of this ordinance. Uh, thank you to the entire council for
voting to place it on tonight's agenda. I'd also like to thank uh Councilman Cohen and Kintterero for raising the issue and Assemblywoman Lopez and Senator Gopal for championing this at the state level. Uh this is a straightforward and urgent measure. It
simply affirms that landlords and developers who benefit from our city's booming housing market cannot collude fixed prices and push rents higher through the use of so-called rent setting algorithms. Uh here's what we know. Companies like Real Page and Yardi
Systems have sold a software service to landlords and property managers under the promise that they can outperform the market by coordinating rent increases. These aren't just recommendations. Um they're a roadmap for collective
price hikes and they're enforced through real time data sharing among comp companies and competitors. Um, it's no accident that Real Page advertises the ability to raise rents. In fact, one executive claimed the software could drive double-digit rent hikes, something
that, in his own words, quote, very few managers would be willing to do manually. This is not innovation, it's exploitation, and it's exactly what antirust law was designed to prevent. As we speak, Real Page and many of the landlords using this software are being
sued in class actions in federal court by the DOJ and most recently uh right here by New Jersey Attorney General Matt Plattkin. That lawsuit named several major Hudson County landlords including Kushner Real Estate, Greyar, Bazudo, and
others. These are not fringe actors. They're major players in our city's housing market. Attorney General Platkin put it bluntly. The defendants in this case unlawfully line their pockets at the expense of New Jersey renters. And he's right. Renters in this area have
seen a 50% increase in rents since 2015. That's not a coincidence. It's the result of unchecked profitering and workers, including the ones that we represent at 32BJ, are among those being squeezed hardest. SEIU 32BJ represents
the doormen, concierge, cleaners, and security officers who keep these buildings running. They don't get to use algorithms to negotiate higher wages. Many of them already struggle to afford to live in the city they work in, and artificially inflated rents make that
even harder. This ordinance would clarify what should already be obvious. Landlords cannot coordinate through software to fix prices and undermine fair competition in the housing market. It's a common sense protenant proworker reform. It's so common sense that
several cities across the country have already passed similar ordinances. We urge the council to send a clear message that rent gouging has no place in Hoboken. Stand with renters, stand with workingclass families, stand with communities. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Juan Bautista. Are you gonna say I'm shorter than that? U everyone, my name is Ron Bautista. I'm a tenant in Hoboken. I've done a lot of advocacy work. I am a member of Hoboken United attendants. Although just full
disclosure, I'm not speaking on behalf of them. Um and I'm here to speak in favor of this ordinance. I think it's it's important to uh prohibit this algorithm algorithmic uh rent price uh
gouging, rent price fixing, uh grand price collusion. Uh you know, during the referendum that we went through last year, uh the corporate landlord lobbyist, uh he was saying, you know, tenants should really be able to like
negotiate the rent prices with their landlords. And we laughed because we're like, "When was the last time you saw a tenant saying, "No, I'm not gonna pay $3,000. I'm gonna pay $2,000 for the rent." Um, and then there was a landlord that during that referendum, we had a
long conversation. Long story short, he said, "I want to charge as much as possible for my rent." That means that they want to go as high as possible and they also say whatever the market bears, you know, it we should be able to do
that. Um and then we also think of how uh many families struggle in Hoboken to do just that. Uh just uh during the weekend I bump into some neighbors uh from the Jordan and they're struggling.
they're afraid that they're going to get displaced and and and the referendum although it was to protect uh tenants around rent control, protect tenants about displacement, it was really about protecting neighbors and that meant that
there was and with the 72% of the vote that uh went and said we are going to protect neighbors and voted no in that referendum. Uh basically we show we showed that there was neighbor solidarity no matter whether you're in rent control or not. Uh and this is what we're trying to do with this uh
ordinance. We're trying to say that um that that there shouldn't be that kind of collusion because then that market uh piece it's it's it's not real. There is not that competition. You can talk about supply, but when there is an algorithmic
uh rent fixing app that is doing these kind of things, when there's class action uh lawsuits that are happening, and I know many of the advocates that are on board on that end, when you know, you have the attorney general in New Jersey do the same thing, there is that buildup and um I think that there's this
opportunity at the local level to get ahead because those lawsuits take time. the state takes time to act on this, but you have the opportunity to act tonight and we hope that you feel the support from tenants and that you're able to move forward with this. Thank you so
much. Thank you very much. Uh Kevin Weller. Good evening. Glad to be back. My name is Kevin Weller and I am a renter from Jersey City. I live at the now nationally famous
Portside Towers. My landlord, Equity Residential, also has rental units here in Hoboken. In 2022, they raised my rent by over $1,500 per month. That single increase may turn out to be
the most expensive in history for my landlord and the entire real estate industry. This wasn't just happening to me. My neighbors were hit with increases of over 30 40%. The excuse we were told things like the software took empathy
out of the equation and that the local office no longer had the power to do anything about the rental rates. The message was essentially the software made us do it. Pay up or we will simply replace you.
That isn't a free market. That's more like a shakedown. The New Jersey Attorney General lawsuit states that a key part of the scheme is to deliberately keep units vacant to create artificial scarcity while all while sharing non-public data.
In 2023, I was the first and I believe still the only New Jersey renter to file a national lawsuit against what my legal team described as a price fixing cartel. That case has since been consolidated in what has become the largest real estate
antitrust class action case in American history. While the federal courts handle that case, you this council can act tonight. You can decide that this scheme has no place in Hoboken. This is not a fringe issue. This fight has triggered
an FBI raid in Georgia, drawn a formal statement of interest from the Department of Justice, and has the support of state attorneys general across the country. But let me shift the focus for a moment to something that's uh less controversial. Trump's big beautiful bill.
When the landlord lobby recently tried to get a lifeline in that bill that would have banned cities like Hoboken from regulating these algorithms on July 1st, just last week, the United States Senate voted it down, not the bill, but
this provision 99 to one. Let that sink in. The one thing the United States or Washington DC um that unites Washington DC is the belief that your right, your power to protect the residents from this
scheme must be preserved. I commend you for introducing this ban. It is a vital first step. I urge you to pass it tonight. But don't stop there. An enforcable law is an uninforcable law is an empty promise. You must immediately follow up by introducing companion
ordinances to give this law the power it needs to actually work. And now with the United States Senate vote on your side, it's time to take bold action that will make this ban actually accomplish what you mean it to. First,
mandate a tenantfacing certification. require every landlord to provide a written certification with every lease and renewal, attesting under penalty of law that their rent was set in compliance with this ban. A false certification is fraud, a clear violation that empowers every single
renter in Hoboken to be an enforcer. Second, create real penalties with personal accountability. Amend the ordinance to include minimum fines, which New Jersey already permits all of its municipalities to do. and add
language that holds not just the corporate LLC, but landlords, agents, and employees personally liable subject to imprisonment. Put that part back in for knowingly violating this law. This pierces the corporate LLC shell game.
Third, ban um coercive class action waiverss. Landlords are increasingly using leases to strip tenants of their rights to join together in court, specifically related to real page litigation and other class actions. This council has the clear authority to
regulate unconscionable and retaliatory lease terms. Pass a companion ordinance that voids these waiverss in all residential leases. Tonight, you can pass this ban and declare a victory. Or you can pass this ban and then
immediately commit to finishing the job by creating a law with real power, real consequences, and real protection for the people of this city. Don't give your residents an empty promise. Give them a law with teeth. Thank you very much. Thank you,
Sylvia. Hello. Good night. Uh, thank you. Was it Hello. Hello is correct. Y yeah. Good evening. My name is Sylvia Louu and I live in Porsai Towers too. Tonight you
will likely hear a careful Polish story from the real estate lobby. They will talk about efficiency, market dynamic and sophisticated tools. I am here to translate it what that words means. When
they say efficiency, they mean eliminated competition. The New Jersey attorney general lawsuit states and these landlords have an agreement to forgo competition. An executive for one of the defendants
AI ACI group admitted in case a study that the software helps competitor works together not to works separately. This is a definition on my humble opinion of cartel. No efficiency. This is a lobby
cartel or whatever you want to call but non efficiency. When they say the software is just suggestions, they are being dishonest. The consolidated national law described how real patient force disciplines require landlords to
accept the software price 80 to 90%. the time. Another defendant, SEO, admit they would they wouldn't have had the courage to push rents so aggressively without algorithm given them cover.
And when they talk about supply and demand, they leave out the most important part, the law alike, they are manipulating both. Then share not public data to artificial inflated demand. And
as one co bragged their strategy result in pushing people out to keep vacancy at the level that maximize renew for the entire cartel. This isn't a business. This is an scam.
And please pass the ban today tonight and then pass the enforcement ordinance that hold them accountable for the reality of their action not the fiction of their talking point. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Patricia Waiters. Is she left here? Okay. Um and then I apologize. Ms. Mooney. I I can't make out your first name.
Could you tell me what it is for our record? Sersa. Oh, okay. Good evening. My name is Sersa and I live on Fourth in Bloom and I'm a renter and I'm also a part of HUT. I wanted to
speak in support of the prohibition against algorithmic rent fixing and I want to affirm everything that the speakers before me have said. They've said a lot of amazing things. I'm a software engineer and I have some experience in actually training some of these models. So, I've had a bit of a
glimpse at how amazing, terrifying, and very, very nebulous these systems can be. I'm always happy to give a 10-hour lecture on AI 101, but I will spare you for now and keep it brief. What companies like Real Page have created is
a black box that aggressively maximizes landlord and corporate profit at the expense of tenants and community here. So when I use that term blackbox, blackbox, it means that this algorithm um is very unclear in how it works. And
the result is that we can have real page has created a system that very likely has encoded a lot of discrimination and um gentrification into it and we won't know the effects of that until it's too late. And I also want to read a
snippet from Real Pages website um to give you a glimpse of what they want in their own words for their AI screening um tool. It's more than just a credit score on the ability to pay. It's a revolutionary way of understanding an applicant's willingness to pay. What
they literally want to do is look at every single person, every potential tenant, and figure out exactly what their capacity to pay is and charge that. So these companies have designed a way to extort every dollar that they can out
of us, the community of Hoboken. Of course, this affects local businesses as well who also have to pay rent. So it also creates a cartel among landlords and it severely incentivizes landlords joining this cartel because the more
people that join and subscribe to Real Pages services, the better their algorithm will get. Um, so please let Hoboken be an example of justice tonight. And as these conflicts with tech and AI are becoming
ever sharper, I would like Hoboken to stay ahead of the curve. So please vote yes. Thank you. Thank you very much. Yeah, Miss Waiters, you were I called your name a moment ago. No, please sit down. You you have to sign up if you
want to speak and it we haven't gotten to you yet. Okay. Please you know why? Please I know why you're here. Come here all the time. Just please sit down. I sit down. Patricia, would you like to speak?
You're all set. Okay. No other no further members of the public to close public portion. Second. Second. All those in favor? I council president. Yes. So, um I'm proud to be the sponsor of of
this ordinance. Uh we had there were references to the fight over the rent control referendum that took place last year and we fought hard to keep that in place. But this ordinance affects all properties in
Hoboken, not just those that are subject to rent control. Every single property in Hoboken. uh when it was originally drafted, representatives of the uh and presented on first reading, representatives of the
uh real estate industry reached out to me and to Councilman Canara who co-sponsored with me and we listened to them and one of the critiques they had was that there was a similar ordinance that was pending in Berkeley, California, which was subject to
litigation uh because it did not have a limitation with respect to what could be included in the illegal algorithm for price fixing purposes. And they made the point that it has to be nonpublic information
or information that could be that would not be readily available to the public at no cost. Uh otherwise you have a potential first amendment issue. So, we we actually listened to them and we talked to our friends at 32BJ and and we looked at the ordinance in Jersey City,
uh, which had similar restrictions that we did not originally have. So we made those modifications and we defined non-public competitor information as information that uh not limited to prices, supply level, security deposits,
ideal occupancy levels, lease contract termination information, renewal dates of residential dwelling units or any other material terms that is less than 365 days old and not widely and readily available to the public at no cost. That
is the non-public price fixing information that cannot be shared amongst building owners. And if they do it, they're subject to a fine of not uh as prescribed under New Jersey law and a fine not exceeding $2,000 and community
service, not prison as Mr. Weller requested, uh but uh community service. Uh, and I think in in essence we do see this as a civil case and so does the New Jersey Attorney General Matt Plen who filed a complaint that was uh referenced
by Mr. Weller in addition to his class action. Uh, and and I and I wanted to just mention that and and I suspect that my council colleagues have had similar conversations. Mr. Weller referred to his experience in Jersey City where it was basically it's not me, it's it's the
algorithm that's making me do it. I can't negotiate with you. I've heard similar things from tenants that I represent in the fifth ward who live in buildings who said to me there was a time when we could go to the office and say, "Hey, you know, the the the unit that's the same size that's down the
hall is being charged $400 less than what you just hit me with." They're like, "There's nothing we can do. There's nothing we can do." So, it's not just what I've heard and what I've seen. And it's been we've been told that is this this algorithm real page is the one
that's most commonly referred to but at I'm just going to read from paragraph 218 of Matt Plen's uh price fixing antitrust lawsuit that was filed in April. Uh I'm just going to read it in in 2023. Bazudo, that's one of the major real estate management companies here in
Hoboken and nationwide and and in Jersey City as well, imposed a rent increase of 30% on two residents of the park and garden property in Hoboken. When the residents attempted to negotiate, Bazudo informed them that this was the market rate. Uh there's a little bit redacted.
After the renters went public and other Bazudo residents reported similar experiences, the mayor of Hoboken wrote a letter to Bazudo's president and CEO assailing the quote egregiously high increases unquote that would lead to people being quote forced out of their
homes unquote. As Mirbala observed, the company's website committed itself to quote integral business practices that allow us to affect change and make a positive impact on people's lives unquote. But Bazudo's actual practices were not consistent with that statement.
And they in a few paragraphs later, they for they sue for Sherman Act violations and price fixing out and violations of New Ze uh New Jersey consumer fraud practices. It's important to note that this council
unanimously passed a law recently uh where we said that if a while we while we were uncomfortable defining what a unconscionable rent increase is under New Jersey law, we did say that if any
landlord increased the rent by more than 10% they had to notify year-over-year, they had to notify the existing tenant whether they used an algorithm or and that has to be disclosed to the tenant. Okay. So, not only are we today passing
a law that says that if you use these algorithms with non-competitive information to fix prices across the market when you set your rents for Hobok and tenants, and not only are we going to be, if we uh pass this tonight, as I hope we will, the second community in
the state of New Jersey to do it, Jersey City being the first, but with the other tool that we've provided by letting tenants affirmatively be told by their landlords that indeed they're using an algorithm when they set that very high price year-over-year that we're giving a
good set of tools to our tenants to protect them in this housing market. So, I I want to thank uh uh 32BJ. Uh I want to thank uh my co-sponsor uh uh Councilman Cana uh for his leadership on this and uh I think this is a great
thing that we're going to be leaders in an area that we can really make a difference in the lives of tenants in our community. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Councilman Councilman Cano. Uh, and I'd like to thank Councilman Cohen for his sponsorship of this and for also stealing threequarters of my
comments. Um, uh, but, uh, you know, look, um, I mentioned before, uh, housing prices, uh, there's kind of two sides to how we deal with it. One is is supply and and dealing with market
forces that way. And the other one is is through, you know, uh pressures that we could put on the prices themselves. Um there's been a constant, you know, referral to the market and what the market will bear. Well, that's taking into consideration that, you know, housing is a commodity and and it is um
but it is again, as I said before, it's not like a stock certificate. It's not like a bar of gold. Uh these are people's homes and so this is a commodity that's very sacred to to to folks. And so we have to make sure that we put in the right protections. If you are going to make this investment, there are significant conditions because if
you are going to take advantage of the market, you may be putting somebody out of a home. Uh and and that creates uh lots of problems for our community and for um you know, the country the country as a whole. Uh in addition you know for
my lifetime and well before uh the power dynamics between the two parties involved the landlord and the tenant are never equal. You know pure market you have equal power on both sides. I think uh Mr. Bautista had had mentioned that who negotiates their rent you just you
just take it right. uh and in a in a in a in a good healthy market where there's equal power dynamics, you can do that negotiation. In our current environment where when when a landlord goes too high, there's really not a lot the the
tenant can do besides come to the city or or go to courts and that is an incredibly difficult uh burden on them. had a conversation with somebody earlier this week who said uh she had received a 15% increase which was for her was was a
lot and she had mentioned that Councilman Cohen actually helped her out in that capacity. I know a lot of people on this council have had similar stories where they've helped people out. Wouldn't it be better if we could restore the balance of power between landlords and tenants so they don't have to go to the government every time uh
there's a dispute? Uh and so you know what we're looking to do here today in addition with the uh the controls that we did earlier in the uh in in the in the uh the year and uh per Mr. Weller those that will come in the future because we are not at the end here. We
this is but the beginning uh is is to put in the things that we can do uh to help restore uh that balance of power between the two. I'm happy to be a part of it. I'm excited for what we're doing on this council and and I thank everybody for their support. Thank you, Councilman.
Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, hi. Miss Fischer, yes. Mr. Jabor, yes. President, I can I Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo, I President Doyle, I.
An ordinance amending and supplementing chapter 155 rent control article 3 rent leveling and stabilization board and office section 155-23 determination appealable of the city
code to update appeal procedures for rent determinations. Uh Cheryl, this is B782. just off the cuff, um, sort of a new practice that I've noticed in the last couple of years of people coming up to
the microphone and like letting you all know that they're speaking on behalf of themselves and not somebody else. Um, it never occurred to me that any of you might think I was speaking on behalf of anybody other than myself or in any other capacity other than as me.
However, at this particular moment, I would like to speak in my capacity as the rent leveling board chair, not on behalf of the board because I haven't spoken to any of them, but the chair itself to ask you to please carry this. Um, I'm totally speaking off the cuff.
The thing that you're amending currently has to do with appeals to the rent board and it has it's a pretty simple provision currently has three parts. One, every decision the rent leveling officer makes is appealable to the board. Two, the person who's making the appeal must prove that there was
something capriccious and arbitrary. And and then there's a third thing that I'm blanking on right now. Um but anyway, um it's pretty simple stuff. I spoke I I didn't look at this until
after four o'clock, so I couldn't get a hold of the rent leveling officer, but I did briefly get a hold of the direct uh head of housing, and she had shared that the office wanted to have something included that said that the party who
was making the appeal had to um contact other interested parties, tenant or landlord. that it would be their burden and their responsibility to do, not the office. And that's in there and I think that's great and they've
asked for it. There's a whole bunch of other stuff in there that to me is kind of a word salad. Um, it kind of looks like something that came from a regulation that was submitted to corporation council during the time when
I wasn't on the board that was denied and it never went to the public for public discourse. But what I want to say is um oh the the the change says that anybody making an appeal must provide
the documentation that the rent leveling officer made her decision based on. I will tell you and if I had more than 5 minutes I could give you specific examples to say that there's not always documentation. So that needs to be clarified. Actually,
I think it should be taken out, but you know, your case is better if you provide the documentation. It's up to you. Um, the other thing, um, now I'm blanking again on this. The other thing is, oh, there's a lot of controlling stuff in
here. It must be a PDF. You must have a table of contents. I don't ever want to see the city having to go to court because somebody got their hackles up and said, "No, it's not a PDF. It's a word document."
There's no reason for that. So, I mean, I guess what I would ask is if we can just table it and maybe make sure that the rent leveling office or the housing division is weighing in on everything that's been added and also let the board
weigh in. I mean, I'm the chair. Nobody spoke to me and I would have said PDF. So, um, respectful request. You're going to do what you're going to do. Um, but I would say this is a little much. Thank you very much. Um, Patricia Waiters.
Nope. This is I think Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Patricia. I misspoke. You did not sign up for this. Thank you. Okay. Uh Manny Manuel Rivera Soler.
Actually, she did. But anyway, so much we didn't want. Thank you, Council President. Um I appreciate you um calling me on this uh ordinance. I was not going to uh
continue to speak because even though I have over 20 minutes of air time if I choose to speak on every single ordinance, but I just want to be succinct here this evening. I just would like to echo the sentiments that were shared by um fellow member of the public
um Cheryl. If you hear the chairperson of the rent leveling board asking you directly to please table or carry this ordinance. I believe that it holds weight and you should consider um her
request heavily because as she said there are things in this um ordinance when you go and read it. They are very complicated to understand unless you would like to take the time this evening maybe 5 10 25 minutes to explain to
members of the public the little details that Miss mentioned that are jumbled. So with that council president uh I would say I will yield back and thank you for considering mine and Miss Phall's requests for tableabling even though we
are not council members. We thank you. Thank you. No, no more uh members of the public motion to close public portion. Second. All those in favor? I Okay. So, um
you want to carry it at least? Pardon? Well, I mean it was it was provided to us from the housing division. So, the question of whether they've seen it, it was this is their request. This is their work. um it's it's it's the process for them
to tee up an appeal to the board. So um you know does that so I is there is there a time constraint here? I mean does our next meeting pose an issue or
we could I we don't have a problem either way. I'm just trying to clarify I mean I I mean this was put up on first reading on June 4th and because of our schedule I mean this has been well over well over a month that this has been out in the public uh available for public
comment. I mean I I went through it. It's pretty straightforward. I I have to believe if someone didn't properly PDF a document or collate a document that they would be uh given grace. You can't just change it on the Well, you can't you can't change it on the but I I mean I I don't think this is
going to be done in a dogmatic way that's designed to to make it hard for people to appeal. I think it's just giving people basic guidance on how to do it. It seems it seems pretty straightforward. And obviously if it's not working in a way that's that's tenant friendly, we can always amend it. But yeah,
but it it strikes me as being a fairly, you know, straightforward thing. And again, it's been out in the public for over a month at this point. And we're not having our next meeting until August. Councilman Ramos said we we vote on it and we can always amend it if Yeah. bring those back to first reading next meeting.
Okay. Y Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, hi. Mr. Fischer, yes. Mr. Jabore, yes. Mr. President, IO, hi. Mr. Ramos, hi. Russo, hi. President Doyle,
I. So for the next one, this we're just voting in essence on first reading. So there's no public comment on seven 83. Oh, sorry about that. Seven's carried. Yeah.
Pardon? Seven's carried, right? No. Back to first reading. Oh. Oh. Oh. Okay. Right. So, we're just voting on this. Okay. Um, are we all right? So, Mr. Fina, please call. Do you have a question? What are we voting on?
This is an ordinance. I'm sorry. It's number seven on the agenda. Ordinance amending and readopting and reinforcing the redevelopment plan for the western edge redevelopment area, Jefferson and Madison Street sub areas B783.
It's we are there was a amendment to include additional information in the resolution but that's so we're going we're voting in essence as first reading and it'll come back is saying no. Pardon? This is saying don't vote on it. Just carry it all together.
What? Carry it all together. Just carry it all together. Okay, Brian, that's not what we So, we can't we won't be able to pass it on the 20th of August. I think Director Brown should maybe come up to the microphone. Yep, he's coming.
He's using Don't use the verb carry. Okay, tell us without saying that. Uh, all right. So with there weren't any amendments made to the ordinance that's here now. So you if you're voting on amendments, there's nothing to vote for.
So you're essentially just moving it moving it to the next meeting without nothing will be so nothing needs to be voted on tonight. Correct. They're not adding in text with regard to what happened at the
planning board. Yes, that text didn't change. That text was not provided and added through the on for tonight. So there's nothing to But we're not. So it'll be on first. You said it. I didn't. We're carrying it. Yes. But we'll be in September.
We're just pull We're just pulling it, right? We're just pulling it. Yes. If we don't if not been provided to us at this point in time, council, I believe you're just carrying it until the next meeting. don't believe although I haven't seen them yet that this the changes will be substantial. So you
might be in the second reading or have you decided already where they were substantial? The whereas clauses the clauses clauses it's whereas clauses that acknowledge the planning board's comments and that's on that's that's the that's the strategy that
we've determined that it's not substantive. I believe it's not going to be substantive. So it will be on for second reading corporation council nor any of us. I think that's I think that's a conversation we can have between now and August 20th. But for now I think you can carry it. All right.
All right. You if someone tell Ruben to come back in. Yep. Thank you. And while he's while we're retrieving our errant member, the ordinance amending chapter 155 sections 155-16,
155-17, and 155-20 of the Hoboken city code to clarify certain determinations, considerations of the rent leveling board and application fees. This is B784.
Cheryl, you good? I got it. Nice warmed up there. I rise in support of this ordinance which corrects a decades old mistake. A mistake that has cost Hoboken tenants dearly. Although the phrase one-time
exemption never legally existed, what did exist in the early 1980s was a subsection in Hoboken's rent control ordinance, section 1853-C9, that allowed for the legal base rent for buildings that were both vacant and deteriorated.
This subsection was formally repealed by this very body in August of 1985. I was here. And yet, despite that repeal, a major failure of governance occurred. Related language elsewhere in
the ordinance was never removed. The core provisions were struck down by vote, but the surrounding references were left to linger like a time bomb in the ordinance. For 40 years now, that leftover text has been weaponized, used to push through unlawful exemptions from
the legal basement, empty buildings, displaced tenants, and erase affordable rent control units that this from the city's housing stock. It was a loophole that never should have existed, and it's a loophole that needs to be closed right now. Let me be very clear on two
critical points. First, it would be entirely inappropriate legally and logically for anyone to suggest that this ordinance should be applied prospectively only to cases not Sorry, somebody just called me. Um,
prospectively only to cases not yet filled, not yet filed with the rent board. Why? Because the exemption was repealed in August of 1985. Nothing can be considered pre-existing and entitled to a hearing at this point unless an exemption application was
submitted on or before August 7th, 1985. Anything filed after that did not have any legitimate legal ground and currently has no legal grounding whatsoever. Second, anyone pointing to the September 23rd, 2023 Superior Court
ruling as evidence that this exemption is legally valid is either misreading the decision or misrepresenting it. Judge Christine Vanic clearly stated in her decision, quote, "The court does not address the validity of section three of the resolution, which denied the
application based on an alleged absence of a provision allowing for an exemption." Close quote. In other words, the court took no position on whether the exemption was actually allowed under Hoboken's rent control law. That core legal issue was not decided in that case. And frankly, if it had been, the
fact that no such provision existed in the ordinance makes a likely outcome obvious. There is simply no legal basis for the so-called onetime exemption. This error in the ordinance has caused real harm. Countless affordable rent control units have been lost. Working
families, seniors, artists, and low-income tenants were displaced. All because Hoboken didn't finish finish the job back in 1985. Tonight's vote is not just procedural. It's about which side you are on. A yes vote says, "I stand with Hobok and renters. I believe in the
rule of law. I want to preserve affordability in this city." A no vote, a failure to act. Not only lets confusion and exploitation persist, it aligns you with landlords benefiting from loopholes that never should have been acted upon. That's not neutrality.
That's a choice against the Hobok and renter community. You cannot claim to support affordability or equity and ignore the misuse of a repealed law. And just to close the historical loop, I have spoken directly with former Councilman Joe Delave, who confirmed the 1985 repeal that he himself voted for.
I've also provided extensive documentation on this issue and would gladly do so again for anyone who needs it. The facts are clear. The repeal happened. The law no longer allows the for these exemptions. Period. and it hasn't since 1985. Let's end this legal fiction. Let's clean up the ordinance.
Something that should have happened 40 years ago. It's not radical. It's not controversial. It's basic legislative hygiene. It's the least this council can do. So again, I urge each of you vote yes for clarity, accountability, transparency, and most of all for
Hoboken's renters. The time to fix this is not someday. The time is now, tonight. There is no excuse not to. None whatsoever. Thank you. And I just want to let everybody know I've been trying to get this I've been trying to get this done since the first time I set foot on the rent
leveling board in 2009. Please vote yes. Thank you. Amanda Boardman. Good evening council. My name is Amanda Borman and I am an attorney representing Morehouse Hobok and LP who has a current pending one-time exemption application
that has been filed with the rent leveling board. This application has been filed pursuant to ordinance 155 sections 16 and 17 in addition to regulation 1868 which codified the procedure to be
followed by the rent and leveling stabilization office in connection with the request from property owners for a one-time exemption under chapters uh 15516 and 15517. We have submitted our documentation
outlining case law that has been referred to for this matter um and our opposition to the changes to the ordinance. First and most importantly, what I want to make sure that this board knows is is that our stance on this is that first the provisions should not be
accepted as they stand today. But most importantly, if this board if this uh uh if the committee goes through and decides to change the ordinance revisions that they do not retroactively retroactively um impact any of the
pending applications that are out there. We want to make sure that city council is aware that since at least 2022, the board, the rent leveling board, has removed the application forms for the one-time exemption from all public forums, not only their office, but also
online and have made it extremely difficult for any landlords who are applying for the relief that is provided to them by the ordinances. In addition, the board has also unilaterally and in strict violation of the ordinance has stopped any hearings
regarding any one-time exemptions, which is a blatant disregard of 155 section 17 under subsection A. On at least two court cases, the rent leveling board and their attorneys have recognized the
existence and the validity of the one-time exemption as codified by 15516 and 17. Also outlined in here are that there are proponents against the one-time exemption who have granted one-time exemptions as well. These
actions that are currently being taken by the board clearly violate the ordinance and the regulations that have been presented here too. Most importantly, as discussed, if the if council decides to go through and uh
apply these revisions, we do ask that any of the revisions should not be retroactive. There are property owners who have relied on this ordinance. They have done their reviews. The ordinance is posted online for everybody to review and it is listed there clearly. In
addition, there is also regulation 1868 which outlines specifically how property owners can go through and apply for these exemptions and the determinations that need to be met. Property owners have relied upon the board's words and their actions. They've followed the
ordinances in the regulations to ensure compliance for this one-time exemption and their petitions should be heard. The board is acting improperly and in violation of the court ordinance by denying hearing the property owner's filed applications which have been
properly filed and have been followed. To make this ordinance retroactive would would make um the board's bad actions valid. Council should act on behalf of those who have properly followed the rules for the safety of their tenants
and to ensure that this revised ordinance, if it passes, does not impact those who have followed the rules and have followed the guidelines and have followed the words of the board. The revisions themselves, in our opinion, should also be denied. Though
there may have been a repeal back in 1985 for a specific term of the ordinance, there's been no documentation that has been provided that these subsequent provisions now codified as 16 and 17 were meant to be released. In addition, the board themselves are the
ones who passed regulation 1868 in 2017. So, it would have been the board's intention to actually continue to review these one-time exemptions because they're the ones who passed the the regulation again in 2017. They have been hearing these onetime exemptions since
1985 and they have been granting them. They are stepping in now to attempt to change it. Yet, it is impacting those who have properly gone through and filed their applications timely. Again, we request that the board or that the committee the council here does not pass
what's out. But if they do pass that it's not made retroactive and please request that the board actually hear any of the pending applications that were filed before these revisions. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. There are no other members of the public signed up to speak.
Motion to close public motion. Second. All those in favor. Yeah. Well, I I just would have to say there's nothing in this ordinance that says it is or is not retroactive. That's up to a judge in a court, not us.
Uh even if we opined one way or the other. So, and it sounded like there's certainly nothing bribing us to make a change to our ordinances. So if if there's an issue with the board that
certainly you have your rights that can address this. Um but there's you know there's there's no reason why we cannot take this action today. So whether there is retroactive time of application rule
we know about that time of decision rule that's for a judge not us. Um and so unless corporation council you disagree. So I think I think uh Mr. Fina call the vote.
Mr. Con? I miss Fischer. Yes. Mrs. Jabore. Yes. President. Uh abstain. Mr. Cero. Yes. Mr. Ramos
I Russo yes twice I'll I'll give Paul his back president P president I thank you so an ordinance
opting into the garden state CPAC program to facilitate the financing of CPAC projects this is B78 85 CPACE CPACE I'm sorry CPAC I'm not sure what that is but I'm sure
it's not good it's a conference you're not we are not opting into CPA we are not doing that PACE I spend much time there um anyway uh the no members of the public signed up to speak on this close public portion second all those in favor
Mr. Pina please call a vote Mr. Con I fer yes Mr. Jabore. Yes. President Zano. Hi, Mr. Cano. Hi, Mr. Ramos. Hi, Mr. Russo. Hi, President Doyle. I uh ordinance amending chapter 192
parking for persons with disabilities. This is B786. There are no members of the public signed up close public portion. Second. All those in favor? I. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con.
Hi. Hi. Fisher. Yes. Mrs. Jabore. Yes. President. Hi. Mr. Canero. Hi. Mr. Ramos. Hi. Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I. An ordinance to amend chapter 190
entitled vehicles and traffic to relocate a loading zone on Hudson Place and extend bus stop hours on Hudson Street. B787. Mr. Furry. Uh, I'm sorry. Motion. No members of the public. Motion to close public portion. Second.
All those in favor? I. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con. I. Mr. Fischer. Yes. Mr. Jabore. Yes. Mr. Presidento. Hi. Mr. Caterero. Hi. Mr. Ramos. Hi. Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I.
Um, Ruben. Can he? An ordinance authorizing a financial agreement. Uh, Councilman Ramos, you have to step up. No. I apologize. Um,
number 12, an ordinance authorizing a financial agreement between the city of Hoboken and JB112 Urban Renewal LLC B788. Uh, no members of the public have signed up. Motion to close public portion.
Second. All those in favor? Hi. Hi. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, hi. Miss Fischer, present. Mr. Jabore. Yes. President Jano. Hi. Cano. Hi. Mr. Ramos.
He's Mr. Hi. President Doyle. Hi. Jimmy. Hi. Yes. So maybe director Ferrante, if you could allow uh inform Mr. Ramos that we would like his company. Loves getting to the mic. He was ready.
I don't think Always ready. For Reuben. For Reuben. Tiffany voted present. All right. So, uh, an ordinance to amend the city code of the city of Hoboken, chapter 59A, entitled Department of
Public Safety, article 2, section 59A8, establishment of division to increase the police department table of organization B789. Uh, there's one member of the public, uh, Dei Amani.
Thank you, Council President. Um, this ordinance is about adding 14 more to our police force. I think there is no better, no more potent deterrent for crime than having more police presence um in our streets, in our parks.
However, it was in this room not too long ago, maybe a month ago, when we heard that the city has some money issues that even to support the stuff that this council has approved, the taxes must be increased in large amounts. So, what I say to you is let's
think a little bit more creatively. Hson County Sheriff's Office has 300 professionals. They're deployed in Bayon, V Hawen, Jersey City, Union City. We don't see much of their presence here in Hoboken. We pay $70 million to to
Hudson County in taxes. I think we can use some of that money coming back to us by having more sheriff presence in Hoboken for patrolling our streets and parks and that would be a very potent way to bring back what we give to Hudson
County. That's all I wanted to say. Thank you very much. Um, no other members of the public are signed up to speak. Motion to close public portion. Go first. Second. All those in favor? I Yeah. Uh, Councilwoman Fischer.
Yeah. Um, so I I'll start by saying uh I agree with uh what Deie just said. Um, you know,
f first of all, we've seen a lot of progress in the staffing of our police. We've seen more community policing out there. We've backfilled over uh 20 police officers. We've approved 10 um additional police officers. I think
there's always been support for, not always, but generally support for investing in our police. It's something the city would like to see more of. Um, we've also seen our police department kind of reallocate um and put resources in places where
we've had greater concern as opposed to just kind of spreading it out more generally and and really meeting the needs of our community. Um, you know, we do uh to the point that Deie just made um we don't have sheriff
resources in uh in Hoboken almost none. It's been almost a policy of the county just not to really allocate sheriff's resources here. Uh we have a new sheriff um that we expect to win in November um
who's already made a commitment to deliver more resources uh to Hoboken because we have more county roads than uh any other town in Hudson County. So there's definitely an argument that says a way for us to economically support um
public safety in Hoboken is really to leverage the county, which I think is a great idea. Second, this um I I know there's an urgency because, you know, we want to be able to say that we're, you know, delivering more police resources and making the community safer. I think
um I I do think that there isn't a rush for these um approvals right now. We do have a very we have kind of a financial crisis in the town. Um and you know, we
need to work through that. Um this year is a difficult year. We're going to see a tax increase. This year we're actually being saved by the county because our taxes went down um in the county. um that that reduction is offsetting what will probably be some level of sizable
increase in uh in Hoboken. Um but really next year is the big hit, right? We we approved a extraordinary contract um back in March. This council did. Paul and I uh did not support that um because
of the longer term financial implications of that. And it really, you know, when we're in a point right now where we're struggling to pay, you know, make choices on um providing services to the community, pay for all of the, you know, wonderful investments we've made in the community. Um by committing more
to uh this increased staffing as well as the the contracts we've already approved, we're actually taking money away from many other employees within the city. So, I just I would just say um I would like to ask that we ideally I I
don't want to vote against our police, but I'll vote no tonight. But I would love to see this just delayed until we get through the budget, get a sense of, you know, what this year looks like, what next year looks like, and then make um those decisions at a later date and continue to work with our police um
who've made just a lot of improvements in terms of, you know, really just aligning their their resources, I think, more specifically to some of the needs in the community. So, thank you, Councilwoman. Councilman
President Zado, I think the ultimate thing what we should be doing here is that we haven't been able to discuss a budget here and agree on a budget and that should be the first and foremost thing before we go increasing our employees. Now, right now we're under a hiring freeze. I had
requested from director Franty and he employed the services of the chief and some other officers inside the firm. But I think it to tell the story, I think we should look a little bit here. From 2021 to 2024, the table of organization was 145 uh across everything. Um
in 2025, it's we moved it up to 156 based upon the numbers I got back. And that's cuz we added the 10 officers from last year. Um, but I'd like to I think it's important to note that what of the 145 what was actually filled over those
years? In 2021, it was 133. In 2022 was 135. In 20 sorry, in 2023 is 128. In 2024, 132 in 2025. Currently, we're at 142.
Now currently right now we have uh it looks like in as of July we are we have the ability to uh to hire one more lieutenant and we have a total of 110 officers that have been allotted
the the day-to-day police officer. Right now we're at 97 with the hiring freeze. So, there's 13 more officers to come once that hiring freeze is um lifted, which could happen after the budget. Um, again, 13 more officers,
that's not a small number that helps the community. So, I I'm always a believer right now with the the picture that was painted by the outgoing uh business administrator uh and some concerns on the contract
that was passed um that we're going to add to some of the problems. And I think 15 20 years ago, we went into a problem where we had to demote people. We had to let people go inside the inside the city hall in different departments. And I think right now if there's 13 officers that we still
can hire based upon what we've already approved, I think we should look at that. Um I'm not in favor of this. Not because I'm uh uh uh not wanting less police. However, we
have 13 that still need to be hired. So, I I don't know how we go from 13 that we have the ability to hire or once we lift it to adding another 14 before those 13 even get through the process or we begin the process. So,
I just don't understand that we're even having a discussion that we haven't even taken the time to look at our budget, to look at our finances. And you know there is implications and I know we're going to hear listen I somebody's going to say it tonight that just because we increase the to doesn't
mean we have to hire them. Well stranger things have happened in government that people have been hired and once you giveth in government you can't taketh. So there's just one thing here is that there's 13 more to hire. We still have there's a lot of people there
that are going to help it's going to help public. I see more people on the street and the numbers I just read back to you show that um and that we did hear the needs that they want it and we have increased. It's just that now there's a hiring freeze. We have five in the academy right now that will be joining
us uh that I think missed the hiring freeze. So that that's a positive. But again, I asked a bunch of questions. And if we're in a hiring freeze, what could happen is um we're going to we're being asked to add six superiors and
eight more officers is that the six superiors essentially they're they're just promotions. So I don't know if that falls under a hiring freeze or not, but the new officers we couldn't hire anyway. So that would leave us with 8 + 13 21 officers that would be in the tape
the police officers dayto day on the street that we see that there would be the ability to hire if there was a hiring freeze lifted. Uh, so I think we until we pass a budget, until we see the financial condition of the
city. I honestly wish we could just hold this vote off and then move upon we can agree on a budget because we don't know right now we can't agree on a budget. The state could come in if we don't agree on a budget and that's going to put us into more dire straits. So I
think as a as a council we have a responsibility to first look at the financial aspects of our budget before we make any other decisions. Uh thank you council president. Um yeah just because we increase the table of organization doesn't mean we have to
hire. So there you go. Um and it but it's true. Um, look, uh, this is increasing it by 14. Council President Zano is right. We've increased it, uh, a while a few times. Uh, we're still not back to the levels that I think we were
at in 2000 or something when our when our population was, uh, about half what it is now. Um, you know, we're const everyone in every sector of every business in the United States is always asked to do more with less. I firmly believe nobody's asked to do more with
less than our police officers and our law enforcement agencies. Um, yes, you what you see on the street, them patrolling, uh, pulling people over, walking the beat, that's a part of their job that takes, uh, a lot of time. That's the work we want them to do. Uh,
what you don't see is all the administrative work that they have to do as well because of a lot of the reforms. And I think they're good reforms, right? You have to review body cameras. You have to write up reports. There's a lot of extra time that's needed. So, what one particular police officer has to do
by way of uh on the beat versus administrative work has dramatically changed and it's taken up a significant amount of bandwidth. Uh and so why do we need more cops on the street? And I agree with uh Miss Waiters on this is because what it means to be in the level
of work that it takes to to do the job of a police officer has fundamentally changed uh and in in many respects for the better, in some respects for the worse, but it has changed. It's far more timeconuming. And so we need more police officers to provide the level of service
that we expect in Hope. Uh we've said time and time again, uh I've said there's three kinds of crimes that they attract. Crimes against property. So, you know, I vandalize uh uh President Doyle's house. Uh crimes
uh that'll be I did it. Don't give me any ideas. Yeah. Um uh uh crimes against persons. You know, I I punch uh uh uh Council President Doyle in the nose. Uh and then uh what's the third one? I'm I'm just
quality of life crimes. quality of life crimes, we call it, which is uh you know, a drunk driver who who who doesn't actually hit anybody. Some that doesn't hit Jim crossing the street. Uh a um an ebike delivery person who's riding on the sidewalk but doesn't actually hit
somebody. Uh a a disorderly person's who is making people feel uncomfortable but not actually, you know, hurting anyone. uh those crimes are are on the rise in Hoboken and it's because the most effective way of policing that is with community policing, the cop on the
street, the person getting to know their neighbors. Uh and it's incredibly difficult for our current force at the current staffing levels to be able to do that as much as they want to, as much as we want them to. This room was filled
with uh 100 people after the unfortunate incident uh at at the Church Square Park because one of these quality of life crimes turned into uh a crime against persons. Uh and and you know, our
community has been crying uh pleading for us to do something about this. Folks on this day have have have been uh doing the same thing and I think rightfully so. Now is the time to give our professionals, and I call them professionals, right? We have the best
chief uh I'd say in the United States, uh on on our force, let's give him the tools he needs to be able to to devise a plan, a strategy for how to get this done. You can't just This takes time to do that. We need to be able to say you will be able to hire x amount of people
over x amount of time uh and and develop your police force in the way to meet the needs of our community. So, I see this today as a commitment to giving our officers and our our police leadership uh the tools they need to solve for the things that
we want and the things that we need uh and in keeping Hoboken safe. Thank you, Councilman. Council President Russo. Thank you, Council President. I think the member of the public is on the right track, but I think it's it's
still a little limited, right? We have relationships with not only the county, but we also have relationships with the state uh police department. We have those relationships with transit and port authority. And I think we should utilize all of those relationships as best as we
can to ask for help to police our city. But what no one wants to really admit is that we have no control over that decision. We could request it. We could beg for it. But we have no
control over that decision. Two issues are being conflated in this conversation. One is about our police department and how we're going to staff that. And the other one is about our budget. And they're both really really prominent here on this agenda tonight. And they're both really, really, really
important. I don't want to confuse the two, but both need to be addressed in the conversation. So, let's address them. I think it's about priorities. When this room was filled with over a hundred people talking about an incident
in our park, every council member, every elected official stood up and said, "We need to make sure we protect our city." How do we do that? We don't do that by asking an outside agency and hoping that
they come to do it. We do it. We do it ourselves. And I disagree with my colleague who said, "We want to say that we're delivering more police on the streets." No, we don't want to say it. We want to do it. It's
not about saying it. It's about protecting our citizens in the city of Hoboken. It's about prioritizing how we're spending our money. Day in and day out, I will prioritize
our public safety in the city of Hoboken before I vote on a 3.5 million increase for the Hoboken Business Alliance or a bonding action or spending $125 million on a park. It's
about priorities and the public safety is the priority in this city for me and should be for all of you every time. When we pass laws like our test and vest
that I was proud to be a sponsor on with two of my colleagues, we expect our police department to enforce that law. How could they enforce that law if we don't give them the opportunity to staff properly or give them the tools to make
sure they do that? That's what this is about tonight. This isn't about the budget. Cuz if it was about the budget, we would have voted no on a lot of other things rather than voting no on police
officers. So, I'm 100% in favor of this tonight. As a matter of fact, I was hoping that we did 20 more so that we were staffed properly, like when the chief came before that microphone and told us what we really needed to create
those po those police in the parks and to create that new division. That's what we need to do. So, I am 100% supportive. I hope all my colleagues vote for her tonight. Thank you, Council President.
Anybody want to go be before this? Okay. All right. Yeah. So, Councilman Russo, I appreciate what you just said, but I'm just going to remind you of something that you sent to us on your budget cuts for everybody. So, the two are assimilated. You put a
cut in for the police salaries and wages of $698,000 and other expenses of $326,000. So, you're speaking out of both sides of your mouth. I'm not speaking out of both sides of my mouth. You put that up. So if you're saying you want to spend that the two are together. Well, we'll talk about the budget.
You just said you were going to cut that from their salaries. With all due respect, with all due respect, you're not you're talking out of both sides of your mouth. Yeah, I'll let him finish both sides of your mouth. Council President, if I may, with all due respect, Councilman, we'll talk about the budget. We'll get into that and I'll spend hours
here and and by all means I could talk to the business administrator about every single one of those line item cuts that I introduced rather than these general statements. That's number one. Number two, I increased spending from
from last year by 2.5% in in salary and wages in that line item. I'll say it again so you hear it. I increased spending 2.5% in that line item from last year's spending.
Yeah, I think you should reread what you what you sent us because you didn't I know exactly what I sent. You didn't do that. So you pontificating getting your soap box is not what you're saying here. So let's just get this straight. You were going to cut the police salary. So how can you say you want to hire more? That's garbage. I
mean I'm looking at the sheet that was sent to us by Jerry. It says cut salaries. So, you can't sit here and say, "I want to hire 20 more when you're cutting $700,000." Councilman, you were clearly told that we're not hiring police officers by the
end of this year. You were clearly told that by not only the chief of police, but by the director of the department. You know, you know that that has nothing to do with this year's budget. You know that. And you're smiling about it
because you know you tell me $700,000 you're going to cut. We're not What? How are they going to pay people? How they will? Tell me how. All right. I will when we get to the budget. Councilman Ramos. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, gentlemen. Appreciate it. Uh at first uh
this number was uh 28 and uh had a conversation with the the police chief uh at the time and my two colleagues are discussing the budget. that there were some budgetary constraints to try and fund at that
number. So I made the request of finding a number uh where we could patrol what we need to patrol but yet be uh financially responsible while we do that. And I
think uh also looking at uh the challenges that we've had in finding uh qualified candidates uh to fill the role where our last day we had nine uh applicants and we're hoping that we
could why I voted for the contract was trying to make the that job more attractive to people so we could attract more applicants and ultimately I want to see uh an increased foot presence that we had in the mid 2000s
uh that we needed that that we definitely need. Our population is growing. The ground coverage in which they need to cover uh is also expanding and I know that they're not going to get to this number tomorrow either. Just looking at where we're getting we're not
getting uh applicants and we want to see these more applicants, not just any applicant, qualified applicants. So, I'll repeat that again. I don't think we're going to get to that number that we're looking at within the next two to three years potentially. Uh
and I want us to get there. That's our goal is to get to that number. And I work uh I'm a teacher. I work in a profession where we have 30 kids in a room. You know, I think our eighth grade
class, we just graduated, 240 kids in our eighth grade class. We're asked to do much more with much less. And that has to be more difficult for us. And I think they're in
the same boat uh at this time. We have we have students with no teachers, right? Those kids are not going to be able to learn if we don't have our streets fully staffed, especially when and and
teaching again. We have new things that take me away from doing my job of teaching with paperwork. When one officer makes an arrest, that basically takes them off the entire shift, right? And and that's not and
that's not the fault of their priorities or what they want to see. That's that's that's state operations now that have been thrusted upon them that they need to make adjustments for and we need to make adjustments for. So I'm pleased that they went from that 28 number into
a number I find more manageable with the 14 number. Uh and so hey if you're going to listen to me I got to support it. Right. So so I appreciate uh those taking my comments seriously and coming down on that number that I felt comfortable with. And so I'm going to support this tonight.
Councilwoman Jabore. Thank you, Council President. Um, my number one priority is absolutely public safety. I think that is true for all of us up here. Um, and I want to underscore what Councilman Ramos just pointed out, which was this was an adjustment and a negotiation versus
where this was initially introduced. And the vision of this was to affectuate a community policing bureau. Uh and that came at the recommendation of both director Franti as well as our chief um in order to in hopes of preventing another incident like what happened at
Church Square Park. And that conversation feels like it was yesterday. It has not left me and the comments from other parents about their feelings about whether they walk around and feel safe, whether they feel that their children can be safe. Um, so I'm
supportive of this tonight because one, I do think it was um, somewhat negotiated for the sake of concerns around the budget and the landscape that we are in right now because this is a reduction from the initial proposal. Um, and so we're landing in a place of more consensus building in order to have the
support of this this governing body. Um, and two, I believe very much in that community policing approach. I think we have the best police department in the state of New Jersey. Uh, and I think that they do a phenomenal job, but we have to have their back by following the recommendations that are made to us. And
so I plan to support this tonight. I hope that the majority of this council will support this tonight. Um, because we need to continue to make sure we're taking care of our public safety officials and professionals. Um, I worry about their ability to do that job every day. The burnout conditions are very
real when we are overworking the current staff that we have. And if we don't create a pathway to continue to expand to keep up with our population, we're doing a disservice to those professionals. And so I will be supporting this tonight. Um, thank you to Director Franti, to Chief Aguar for
continuing to make recommendations to us about how we can do better. Um, and we will continue to support you in that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Councilman Cohen. Thank you, Council President. Just a few just a few comments on budget uh before
I say a few things about this ordinance. Uh if you look at a budget, it says it it reflects the values of our community. Uh that's what they say about the federal budget and that's what they say about ours. And I think that's true. And when it comes to public safety, I just
want the public to understand that about 35% of the entire city budget is dedicated to public safety, which reflects the importance the importance with respect to salaries in the budget. Just salaries. There's
been a distinction between budget and salaries. 70 to 75% of the salaries in Hoboken's budget goes to public safety. So, however we vote tonight on this, and I respect all my colleagues for their positions on this, and I think they all
come at it in good faith, there is no question that this council and this city prioritizes public safety and does it with dollars and does it with their support. Now, with respect to this proposal, I've heard from a number of community
members, separate and apart from the incident that happened in Church Square Park in the meeting, that they wish for the days when they knew their officer on the beat. that they look at that time where they had a relationship with the officers who walked the streets of their
neighborhood as a fond memory as that the you know like you know I guess on Sesame Street you know you knew the mailman you knew your officer they were there they were there regularly just had the privilege of
attending the swearing in of the newest class of officers and the chief told them that you better have comfortable walking shoes And I thought that was awesome because that's exactly what they've asked for. That's what this my constituents have asked for and
that's what this council has agreed to do which is to enhance community policing. And the questions that I've asked the heads of the union that that I've asked Chief Aggie are director Fanti is there have been questions asked about
the number of table of authority increasing and whether this is wise and whether this is prudent and whether this makes sense. Is this truly necessary? and I chair the finance committee and I take that seriously. And the answers I got consistently
were that if we really are serious about having community police presence in this community, this is what we need. This is what we need. So from my perspective, I'm supportive of this. Uh I'm supportive of this. I think I I I think the budget issue is frankly a red herring. I I I really do. I think I
respect again I respect everybody's opinions on this, but this is something that we're already prioritizing in terms of the the the large percentage of salaries. You know, you you won't hear in a political campaign about that. You'll hear about, you know, what city
hall is spending and but but when you look at the reality, the reality is 70 75% of the salaries are going to public safety. And that's appropriate because if we don't have a safe community, if we don't feel safe in this community, this is not a a community where people are going to want to live and raise their
families or go to work or or have a business or invest in the future of our community. So again, I'm supportive uh and I believe that it makes sense to do it because I believe in community policing and I'd like to see those police on the streets. Thank you, Council President.
Thank you, Councilwoman. Council President. Yes. Can I speak? Thank you. The uh I was waiting. Um I ju I just want to I want to say uh a couple things. First, um public safety
is definitely a priority of all of us. Um, and but I think it's a I think we all have a different interpretation of how we deliver that and where we are
potentially today. Um, when we had the terrible tragedy on October 31st, you know, it was a it was a shock to all of our system. It was just absolutely tragic. We were all sat in this room
with a couple hundred people and we all had different interpretations at that moment. I mean I Councilwoman Jabbor sat next to me and said, "Do we do these people think that our community is not safe?" Right? And she and we all evolved
because we felt very unsafe at that moment, but we also didn't feel unsafe the the minute before. So, you know, it's a it it was a moment in time that brought our community to its knees and then we responded to it, right? We put
in an area that felt the most unsafe where we we um uh heard the most complaints. Resources just got allocated into that area, right? We put cameras in. We put um you know, almost
immediately uh Chief Aguar put a police presence in there. and I'm part of a community group in that area that is just so grateful for all of the um additions that have been made um made there. The other thing that's happened
since November is we've we've added over 20 officers on the street because for the last several years, as Paul pointed out, you know, we've been we've heard at every meeting, every CAPS meeting, every public safety meeting I've had with neighbors that we didn't have enough
officers. And then we changed our law. We were allowed, we changed residency requirements and suddenly we were be we were able to uh we were able to hire people and we've added 20 officers give or take and we still have 14 open seats,
right? So if we fill those 14 open seats, we have 35 more police officers since November, right? we we we you know we don't even know what an additional 14 officers is going to look like when
already we're seeing community policing happen. And the and the one thing I do want to say and this is you know I'm someone's going to quote me on this. I'm not a uh I'm not a um a police expert, but but we've seen in the last few years
community policing when we when uh Chief Leu came in as an interim police chief after uh Chief Franny left the very first thing he or Chief Randy uh retired and this isn't negative on Fanti who I
adore but the uh The very first thing Chief Lee said to me was, "I want to sit down. I want to understand what your issues are in the second ward." And I said to him, it was the middle of the summer. We have like safety concerns late at night around Pier 13. And within
a couple days, he had community police, like community policing. We had a police officer present uptown when at the around the closing of Pier 13. we saw more police officers on the sidewalk because we had a police chief that made those choices to allocate um resources.
And this was when we were we had low resources. This is when we were down probably at some of our lowest levels. So, I'm not at all opposed or I I I personally want to prioritize safety. I just think there's a lot of ways we can
get there and we've seen it before and we need to pursue all of those and we have addressed a big safety concern that happened back in October with a lot of resources. We actually as a community, as a council, as our public safety, as
you know, members of the public, we addressed and rallied around safety concerns in in an area. And I'm not saying that we solved it, not by any stretch, but we have the ability to do that just because we have a request from our police
department to add an entire new division, right? They wanted 28, they negotiated 14. Why is that the only solution? And in a at a time when we are faced with real financial concerns and we have people in this room that are
union employees in city hall that are off that are off contract for 3 years. They've been without a contract and we're and we are investing only in public safety. Like we need to look at everything on a combined basis. So to me we should take the opportunity to do all
of that. see if we can get more community policing from our existing um police staffing and how it's going to grow and think about the financial implications. So, thank you for letting me speak again. But for for clarity, if anyone walks out of here and says public
safety is not my priority, they are dead wrong. Thank you, Councilwoman. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con? I miss Fischer. No. Mrs. Jabore, yes. President Zano.
No. Mr. Cano, hi. Mr. Ramos, hi Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I So, we're done with ordinances. Second readings. Second reading.
Second reading. Yes. We have a ways to go. Yes. This is public portion. Where's the one for uh Oh, yes, you did. Um, thank you, Mr. Fina. Um,
okay. Pardon? Yeah. Do we want to take a fivem minute break? What's being requested? Yes. I'd like to talk to Director Brown anyway. Yep. Me, too. How about 50?
Do we have to make a motion or do we have anything? Motion to make a fiveminute German. Yeah, I think we Well, the problem is that we bathroom day 4:00 in the morning. Are you going to get up? No members of the public.
Which one did you ask? No, I did not. So now I think I know how Hallelujah. I get to see Not me. Not me. Got a radio. Jim, I love that you're in shorts, by the way.
And Michael Evers. in the wheelchair with the no leg. She died. Happy very Well, let I ain't saying it. What? He went back up to the mountain. He was vacationing.
All I have is a landline up there. The way to get away. You better get that stall later. That's like 12:30. special meeting.
What do we think? There she is. Staten Island Fairy. You vote for a boat. Going to need a bigger boat. Yeah. 50 year anniversary, John. Yeah. Okay. Is that one of those like natural sewers
or whatever? Any good? I don't know. I'm going to find out. Well, you're going to try for the first time. So, were we supposed to have a motion to No, I get that. Um, look, no, just the council's back in session. Okay, that's what I thought. Thank you.
The council is now back in session. Okay, everyone, Paul's here. We're ready to roll. Okay, so uh we're on to public portion on resolutions. Cheryl phallic,
you've signed up for four different resolutions. Okay. Yes, you are correct. So, A1, CA3, and CD1. And um I actually didn't write down the numbers, but mostly I have questions that I hope can get answered. Um, the
first one has to do with the contract for Millennium Strategies and I currently I actually have a job where I'm always looking for grants and I I don't recall ever we've had Millennium Strategies with the city for a long time
and I don't remember them ever getting us any affordable housing grants and there there actually are a lot of them out there and now if we're gonna buy the Y there's affordable housing there. Um, my question is, have they ever applied?
Do we tell them to apply? If we told them to apply for housing grant money and they haven't, can we get somebody else? Um, secondarily, again, more questions. This has to do with poor little Church Square Park
that's getting pummeled again. Um, $86,000. Um the first question is did we change the open space trust to allow for
Did we Okay. So why is this not coming out of that? Did we did we shoot our whole thing? I know that's a little crass. Stop. That's fine. Be Yeah. Is there nothing left in the
affordable housing trust fund? And if so, that suggests that maybe we're doing a little too much park stuff. Is the open space trust is different from the affordable housing trust? The what trust? The open space trust. Open space. That's what I meant. Yeah.
Yes. So, we were not affordable housing. I mean, affordable housing on the brain. Open space trust. Okay. And then the last thing, and I'm not really sure how this works, and this is probably a little going to be a little strange to the council because we it's pretty standard
stuff once a building is built that we release the monies that we've been holding uh the bond that we've been holding just as soon as they've accomplished everything um that they were supposed to. There's one that's being released for Arthur's. I mean,
it's not Arthur's anymore, but uh the building that used to be Arthur's and I've seen it advertised online. New building, new construction, $6,500 rents already. And I don't know who
releases that bond or what letter goes with it, but I think a letter should go with that one that tells the owner that actually it's a rent controlled building. And the floors that existed before, I
think they went up a couple of stories. So there's no base rent on the fifth floor, but it's still rank and told. But the lower floors have a legal base rent. And if the units
have been reconfigured, there is a way to still glean the legal base rent. So, um, I'm actually putting that on the table. I know it's unusual because most of the time these are brand new buildings. This one isn't. The rent
control ordinance defines what a new building is and this one ain't that. So, if somebody could just explain how that goes and how they can be put on notice. Thank you very much. Thank you, Miss Felic. Uh, Director um
Stratton, could you I I gather that you're not going to have at your fingertips right now the question about Millennium Strategies, but if you could provide that with Of course. Thank you. So, I'm um
Michael Evers is is gone. Uh Patricia Waiters still present. Pass. Pass. Okay. Um Manny Rivera Solair
much. Gracias is Manuel Ria Soler. Good evening, council president. Once again, thank you all. I see that my voice has gone up higher or something because uh I've never heard it uh so resounding. But I just want to say, council president, a couple of things. Usually I
uh come here and I uh I don't want to say play because this is not a game, but um I do the agenda bingo, giving you the different uh uh numbers that I I believe that you should be discussing. But
tonight, I'm going to change it up a little bit. I'm going to go and specify the ones that we're going to speak on. So, first off, I would like to say a congratulations. And this is because I I respect and love um anyone who decides
to give themselves um of service to a board or commission even to this council. So to the member who has joined the Hoboken planning board um I might not be able to say his last name or pronounce it correctly but so I'll just say Mr. Christopher uh if anybody knows
how to pronounce his last name. Mloi Zent Mccloi. Thank you uh council member. Uh so to him a congratulations and um I I will see you I guess at those meetings. Again also before I continue um you also have
um a resolution this evening for the budget F1. Uh members of the public are interested in knowing what was your decision and where do you land on the tax levy that was mentioned this evening by a council member that you were saved by the uh county. What exactly does that
mean? What does that imply for members of the public and residents who pay taxes in Hoboken? Can you please explain before you make any decisions and make a vote so that members of the public can understand why you made said decision? And again, council president, I would
just like to speak on C5 briefly and CD4 and CD9. So on C A5 which again a fellow member of the public um was uh speaking on it. This is concerning to me because it belongs or it is part of the six ward
church park is a park that is used by many many many members of the public and of Hoboken. It is a destination. It is a place that needs to be respected for his historic value. Um I don't understand
why we are doing uh this uh increase but if you could explain it to members of the public again as uh was mentioned the uh open space fund but also I believe that there were grants that were going to be uh awarded to this project. Again
I have issues with the project. It sounds like the things that were promised were were a little bit uh uh changed without giving members of the public uh further information. And I would like to specify directly, which
would be the um bathroom locations, which I thought were going to be more in the center of the park, not at the peripheral of the park, which by the way, they are small. And if you don't believe that there going to be lines for the bathroom, uh, you are mistaken. So
that is an issue and I will bring it up further in further details. Which number? Say again. Which number? It's CA5. DA5. Thank you. Sorry. Sorry, council member. I didn't uh didn't hear you. Uh so I want to continue with uh CD4
which is um again members of the public are interested because we're not clear. At least I think I am. It's it's the C DB BG grants. Is it you're voting this evening to
accept all of the money that's coming in in that grant? um or is it in the ordinance or rather in the resolution? Are you going to um then divide this
money or allocate it to the different uh uh entities that uh will be benefiting from said grants. And to conclude over here in C D 9 again members of the public would be
interested to know um you're taking recommendations from the study that was made for the or is this the location let me first start with that of the current uh Hoboken uh hospital I'm not going to say the the correct name I'm just going
to say Hoboken hospital and if it is can you please let members of the public understand what is the reasoning for the resolution. Are you trying to move a resolution that
is going to make it easier for the hospital to disappear or are you going to protect as I said the first time a couple of meetings ago that I will work hard and diligently to try to keep this hospital where it is. It is necessary.
It is of of paramount importance to the residents of Hobokin, especially the senior community. Council President, with that, I will yield back. Okay. I believe I I went over a few minutes, but thank you, sir. For uh I don't see Director Brown, but I
CD4, we have an obligation every 5 years to prepare a five-year report for HUD relating to the community development block grant program. So, this is a report has been created and we are
blessing it as an approved five-year plan for that. That's correct. Um, with regard to CD9, we're going to talk about that. We're going to have to talk about it. So, you'll you'll hear Pardon. Yes, it is the hospital.
Excuse me. But we're going to talk about it at some length. But, uh, Yeah. Well, she's Well, she didn't she's not on the list, but is there a general
Would you like Are you Would you like to speak on CD9 or would you like to speak in general about the hospital? No, that's not what I'm asking you. She's going to speak on the resolution. Do you want to speak on the resolution
itself or you want to talk about generally the hospital because you're welcome to do either or but next speaker uh Mary Andrea is up next. There you go. And you could think about I don't know what
no way. Okay. Okay. Are are you ready? We are ready. All right. Mary Andrea 159 Street. I want to talk about CA1, CA2, CA3.
Each of those are resolutions um amending the Hoboken noise control ordinance waiver for Lor on two and NJ DP rebuild by design. Now,
it's quite alarming to hear 7 to 11, I believe, is the hours that they're asking for. Is that going to be also for all of these 7 to 11 that they will be allowed to work and create
noise? Now I'm also very concerned about that horrible piercing back beeping. It is painful for me with um as a
migraine earer but sounds are painful because my s ears are very sensitive in my head because of that condition. Now, I know everybody doesn't suffer from that, but there's times that you're just
listening to sounds that are piercing of beeping in buildings. Now, is this People don't pay much attention, but are they going to make any kinds of sounds
from 7:00 in the morning until 11 o'clock at night? I cannot believe anybody in their right mind, maybe down at Hudson Place, there are people that live down there that will have problems with that, but they sure as hell will
have problems on Bloomfield and Garden. Now I'm over here trying to figure out being on Ninth Street. Will I be spared at 11 o'clock at night the sounds that will echo from 15th between Bloomfield
and Garden? And I I think people aren't paying attention to this. This is really serious because that people live and work. I work now at
home. We we work there and every noise is amplified because there's building and pounding every single place in this town everywhere. It just never stops. It's
just excessive. And if you think that people are going to just take it with a stride, I disagree. Your buildings up there in the second ward,
it's going to drive them insane. I don't I You can't mince this as nothing. How what are the hours for this? And not only that, how long
is this waved? Who will enfor who who enforces quiet in this town? Of course, there's no such thing. But you're the that those bill by design. Two, no, three months. What am I talking about?
Three months. And they're pretty anxious. Is that guy? Oh, no. We got to be working maybe around the clock. You're talking to a policeman. We don't have a bit of a policeman. Who Who's going to enfor this is not a problem for anybody? Am I
the only person that's going to have a problem with this? If you'd like, I will ask Director Gonzalez to come up. These are three different locations, three different circumstances, but I understand they're all waivers though. Two are for Elcore, and I understand
that's down by the train station. I don't care about that. That's down by the train station. Why should I? Nobody lives at the train station usually. But there are people on Hudson Place. I understand that. But I am concerned about Bloomfield and Garden because
already there's so much stupid noise where I live on 9inth Street all over that compounding it with waiverss for the noise from 7:00 in the morning to 11:00 at night. They just do whatever they want.
There's no there's no balance. Okay. I I I mean I need to know that they don't do whatever they want because they're here asking for a waiver which if we don't give them they won't do it. Number but Tiffany was having issues with it
but but that doesn't mean anything. He seemed to have sort of like I don't care. Would you like to have Director Gonzalez come up and answer your questions? Yes. Okay. If you would permit please. I I can answer those questions. I mean you can Yeah.
Go ahead. She what? So I heard a lot of opinions about the noise and the hours. Do you have a question of the merits of the hours? Can you be more specific in what your concern is related to the hours extension for the Rebuild by Design
project? Are we going to hear beeping until 11:00? No, it was modified so that that would end at 10 p.m. B. What about 7:00 in the morning? No, it was modified to start at 8:00 a.m. in the morning.
Oh, come on. They always say that and it's always waking me at, you know, this is I mean, this is I mean 7:00. I apologize. Usually when they start and you know it is D asked for 7:00.
Okay, you're you're we're at 6:15. Mary, I we're I understand that, but at night noise travels. Microphone. It we've had the conversations with
neighbors as well. We're trying to minimize the number of days, right? So, we're trying to shorten it by working longer hours and neighbors are sensitive first thing in the morning. They cannot do any jackhammering,
any loud construction work or the back the backup until 8:00 a.m. They can assemble. They can get the site ready, but they can't do it until 8 and it'll stop at 10:00. And and from a practical standpoint, it'll end up stopping sooner once the days get shorter, right? Like
it'll just it won't be light enough out to do a lot of the work. And in terms of them doing it on time, I I assure you when they're 5 minutes early, my phone explodes. Everyone's like, "Why are they out there 5 minutes early?" And they will very quickly get to adhering to
what the schedule is. They just have And is there a time frame of days? Yes. You're asking for waiverss. So, how much does that encompass in the time? I agree. I I'm sorry. This is not a back and forth.
Okay. Can you Okay. Do I I just had that question. Can you answer that one question? Is there It's in the It's in the resolution, but I I'm sorry. I didn't read it. It's in the resolution. It was also part of the public presentation at the beginning of this meeting. With those amendments, it would save up
to 14 days in the construction schedule over those duration of construction activities. But are you asking how long is it? No. No. You're I'm saying daywise. You're saying it's only 14 days. You're saying it saves 14 days to work longer hours. So you have more pain but
for a shorter duration. It is that's the idea here to work extra time to make the full duration shorter. So then it's not lasting three months. I It's not less than three months. I said it's not lasting three months.
It is lasting. It is and months. Okay. Well, that's a pretty chunk of as opposed to four months, which is 14 days longer than three and a half months. Okay. So, it is the the three three months that he asked that he stated in
his presentation. Thank you. Uh Miss Capiello, did you Linda? Thank you. Hi everybody. It's uh uh I signed up but I I and I would like equal
time if possible um to go over this. So equal to the last speaker. Is that possible? No. Just at least you were honest. Exactly. So with that I'll move forward. We play favorites apparently. In regards to the resolution um
I have concerns. It's uh I was really here. I didn't even realize it. I think the agenda packet was about a thousand pages. It's a lot. 1400. Yep. Okay. Very hard for somebody to go through. I I have to say so I'm glad I caught it. Thank you to the choir. What's that it? Anyway, with that said,
I don't want to use up my time. This is important to me. Um I am not clear on why we need redevelopment. Um and I I'm just concerned with the third ward in general and the changes. Um, we have a viable hospital that needs work. We need a
great hospital, but I was really coming here to ask for transparency on what might happen with the garage because we need the garage for the businesses, for the people, for the safety of the neighborhood. Even if you have a spot in church towers, you have visitors, it
will change the quality of the neighborhood. Secondly, um I've been to planning board meetings and just the few I've gone to, there have been me many many promises with developers, with owners that the only reason they got
approvals of their project within that three blocks is that they were going to provide parking for their tenants and people at the Midtown garage. You could go back and look at the transcripts and that's as of now. There's even a
development which even came back here a a year ago. Um, and they opposed it. They lost, but the tenants that were being evicted on 327 Grand, but they were given two spots on the street. Not even yet happening. We need the garage.
I don't understand. No plan to get rid of the garage. Okay, we'll talk. I don't understand. I'm not an attorney. I don't understand why we need redevelopment. I also want to mention having gone to the planning board is that sometimes I had questions and I tried to do some due
diligence and I know annually you need a zoning board report to be done I believe by law and I wanted to read it so I could be prepared and I the last one I could find was in 2022 codified and sent
to the governing body which you should have that information to 2023 and by the way at that I I think that report even recommended looking at the lighting in Hoboken. I only mentioned that as an aside because I think that's interesting information as we develop Hoboken. Um anyway, with that said, I just don't
understand can we really move into redevelopment when we don't even have that particular document that hasn't come come to the governing body. How can we be informed as residents? How could we be sure our community is fine um and we're protected? because right now with
all these changes, it the quality of life really is deteriorating if you can't find parking. And we need a good hospital, but I don't really understand why we need all this. And I do know you're doing an appraisal. I'd like an update. I think the neighbors deserve that. Um I know you're doing I believe
you're doing an appraisal. I believe there was a bond to fix the garage. I don't think there are many spots in there if anybody goes to get in there now. Um, but all these projects, including the pantry down near the senior service, I believe this the
planning board gave them 12 spots on the street. So, the neighborhood really is being affected and I'm just really concerned with this. Um, and um, I just wanted to say that which document just at the risk of well, the document that you're I'm not
that I'm referring to. Yeah. Um, well, annual report of the zoning board. I believe the state of New Jersey requires by law that every year there is a zoning report done. Okay. And I believe that is for the purpose that all of the changes in the city
could be reviewed and it would be available. So you would use that information to further develop. I don't it's and it needs to go to the planning board and to this governing body. Comes to us only here. So it's available
to anyone who asks for it but it by law it comes to us so that we could look at trends and say you know what we need to change the law because a hundred people every year are asking for these changes and we could well we would consider whether we want to make changes to make
it better for everyone and I only raise that because I just wonder if you haven't seen reports or if we're not having the benefit of that information how can you make informed decisions that are going to be so impactful on the neighborhood and you
know and and even challenge what people that live in the neighborhood uh are observing already and all of these projects haven't even been put forth. So I would just ask the the the count the governing board here to assure they've
had those reports to and they all exist before we go forth and start changing multi-development laws here that just change neighborhoods. And you look in New Jersey there are we want a great hospital but they don't have to take
parking garages down. We could just go in and research. We're going to talk about that in detail shortly. How will we get lo how will we be informed when well if you listen tonight you will be partially informed if I don't know what
you're you want to be informed about a future you can go to the planning board which you apparently have gone to in the past and there will be site plan approvals in the future for what project for that's what I'm saying I'm stammering because you want you want to
know how what how you will be informed about every project that's going on. Explain what this ordinance is. We will do that. Our time is up, but we have to talk about that as a group because we have to vote on that tonight and we will discuss it in detail. And then after the meeting, I will be happy
to come over and chat with you if you're still here. I it's very hard this long of a meeting and a thousandpage agenda. But I but I do do not understand why we do not have those reports and documents available. You have them. The fact that you They don't is doesn't mean they're not they
don't exist. Well, I requested them and they're not on the website and and I don't believe they exist. Okay. And I'm just asking you if you could verify they exist and everyone has an opportunity to review them carefully before decisions are made. Thank you.
Yeah. No, I'd be happy to to give you a call if you would leave with the clerk your contact information and we're going to talk about C9 very soon. So, uh, very soon.
Okay. No more members of the public have signed up to speak. Second. All those in favor? I. Okay. So, um, CD9, Jerry. Uh, council members,
council president, uh, F1, F2, CD9, CD10. CD10 has at before you arrived we announced that it does not have sponsors. I'm a sponsor. It does not have sponsors plural. So we
are not going to be acting upon it tonight. So and members of the public were informed of that and some people left. So, so just so I so I understand, um, so everybody who's been touting that
they're so supportive of building a 100% workforce and affordable housing project or deciding that we don't have sponsors for that. That's correct, Councilman. So, is there anyone on the council that would like to second that?
No, that I'm I'm making sure. Council, that's all I'm doing. We had a meeting. I'm just asking about it. We had a meeting last night. I wasn't here. That's right. And I'm telling you the reason that we concluded that was because the answer was people wanted more information. We had a meeting last night. Put some
questions. And I'm just And I'm just confirming. I'm I'm just asking all my colleagues here tonight. No one would like to second that tonight. We already had discuss. All right. So F1, F2, CD9. Anyone else? Um
and F1 we're not going to be acting on. And there is no budget to vote F4. So you F1 you said F1 F2. Can you just repeat what they C F1 F2 and CD9 Councilman Russo has asked be pulled F1
for discussion F F4 fin I don't is that the same? Yeah. F4. Where's F4? Is and T1. That's good for me. Just two. T1. P T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T1
T1. You said F4 and T1 was the one in between there. F4 T1. I'll let P2 go. I I'm sorry. Yeah. F4 T1. F4 T1. Yeah. Okay. That That's what I heard. Okay. I thought there was extras. Okay.
And CA just CA3 for a separate vote. CA3. Yeah. On to the right of me.
Uh C in CA5. Sorry. CA5. Okay. So, um, Mr. Fina, um, Mike did. Mike did.
Yeah. So, Mr. Fina, could you call the vote for I guess everything except I'm going to try to put in alphabetical order. CA3, CA5, uh, CD9, F1, F2, F4, and T1.
on the rest. Mr. Conn, I Miss Fischer, yes. Jabore, yes. President Zano, hi. Mr. Cano, hi. Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo, hi. President Doyle, I
F1. F1. Yeah, that's why we started. So F1, we I probably should have announced I hope people haven't been waiting all night for the vote on the budget, but there is no budget that has been agreed upon that has five votes. So uh we need
a temporary appropriation to continue to uh fund the city. Otherwise, we need six votes for the temporary approp appropriation or there's a shutdown as of tomorrow. So, and this is through uh August.
Are we not talking about We can talk We about the budget. Yeah. I'm not council president. I I don't want to get yelled at again. I wasn't here in the beginning of the meeting. I don't I don't know what you want to do here. That's what happens when you're tardy. Only kidding. No. Um if we're Are we not talking about
the budget? Uh we are I mean we have we have your budget proposal. We have Councilman President and Ramos proposal. We have Councilwoman Fischer's
proposal. We have the administration's introduced proposed budget and we have to reconcile to get to five. Well, and that and that's part of what I wanted to talk about in the sense of we've
well number one, let's talk about the the process that the business administrator kind of laid out for us. The budget is now in the hands of the city council, right? So, appropriately, the amendments by council members should
be coming through the chairman of the finance committee, which is Councilman Cohen, right? Uh, I believe Councilman President Zano and myself presented Fischer to um Counciloman Fischer. Well, I Councilwoman Fischer did not send it to the subcommittee
unless I missed an an email. I sent it to the business administrator administration. Right. So So again, I'm just trying to I'm trying to adhere to what was laid out for us. Business administrator also asked that we do a line by line budget amendment
indicating with specificity. Correct. And I think that was very different. I think Councilman President Zano pointed out was very different from our previous business administrator's approach to that. I believe I was the only council person who submitted a line by line budget
amendment. I think there were some generalities and some questions from anyone else who submitted those amendments, but I want to make sure we're doing this in the right way. I then followed up with the business administrator after an original meeting
that I asked Councilman Cohen to call so that we could discuss how we're going to do this. I followed up and the business administrator said to me over email that he would not entertain all of these cuts unless they were presented in a way that
we understood that they had support. And please correct me if I'm putting words into your mouth or if I'm misrepresenting that. No, that's accurate. We have to send it for first to an auditor and then get state approval for the amendment. Okay. I just want to make sure I'm I'm clear on that.
I I think we need to have another finance committee meeting so that we could discuss those because there was a lot of those lineby-line items that I specifically asked the business administrator to give me feedback for. I don't ever pretend to be the city CFO or
or this uh fiscal expert, right? Some may come now. But I know I'm well qualified to act in my capacity as a councilman and I understand my role to do that. So I want to understand what the next
steps are going to be so that we could go over any of those potential amendments because I think that's really important. Right. Uh could I coun president? So, one of the things that came up in our committee and we talked about the
process and I think this administrator Stratton mentioned it is that we're looking to find amendments that have support of five council members before we submit them to the state for conforming them and to get our final budget.
So, at this point, I'm not aware of anyone other than yourself that is in support of your amendments, which is one. So, we I'm more than happy to have another committee meeting, but it strikes me that if we're going to move
on your amendment that you need to have the support of your of your council colleagues to do that. So, that's Councilman, I don't disagree with you. Yeah. But what I'm saying is it's not my job to talk about
what those changes would look like. It's my job as a councilman to set a spending limit. That's it. Right. So, I presented those spending limits and then asked the administration to look at those to see if we had to
further amend that so that it made sense. So that we're not asking to cut $100,000 out of a line item that we already spent 200 over that limit. Right? Again, it's very simple. If we want to
cut a specific person, if we want to cut a specific department, we zero out that budget. That's it. It's not our duty to say, "Well, this person's going to move from that department to the NE." That's the administration's job. Well, I think
you've heard from Director Stratton that a specific line item recommendations is what he wants, and I understand that. Instead of saying find 2.2% 2% cut or and I'm not suggesting that you were
that vague, but when you say, you know, he's in a in a position where we have to be able to if we know in order to get the state to look at it, we need to know that there are five votes to to Well, that that's also not accurate,
Council President. That is the preferred way to Well, yeah. Do we want to send We could We could vote on any amendment even without the state's approval. we could we could pay our auditor to put it all together, send it down there, it gets reject, they approve it, it comes back, we vote it down, we do another one, and then, you know, by November,
we'll, you know, be kind of late in the year on that. So, I think it's reasonable to us to to to presume that if we want to have a budget that will pass, we you your budget, I believe, was cutting $6.8 million. And I don't know
that there is an appetite considering what's our big picture and what's happening next year. So I don't know. The proposal was a 2.5% increase in spending across the board from what was spent last year. It's not budget to to
it's not budget to budget. It's actual to budget. All right. So we we had a we had a significant dollar amount from last year's budget. what was budgeted to what was spent. I didn't go back to what was budgeted in
2024. I went back to what was spent and I increased that dollar amount. Okay. Do you And to pretend that that's not a reasonable way to approach a budget to me is ludicrous.
No one's saying it's not reasonable. I'm just, you know, I I understand it doesn't have consensus. That's the only point I'm making. Council President Um, just just to respond, I I went through uh Councilman Russo's
uh budget recommendations in detail, and there's there's definitely some of the things that he's recommending um that I agree with. I think what we've done in the past just to kind of bridge the gap here is, you know,
we we all review the budget to the level that we're comfortable with and and then we talk amongst ourselves and um and try and make sure there are issues that are important to people that they want to be incorporated. I go back a couple years
when, you know, we wanted social workers, right? Like I remember talking with Ruben and a couple of you like we wanted social workers. So you know we look through the budget and try to identify areas where we think we think the city is not spending wisely where we
want to you know we've all talked about putting money in in the housing department. Um and you know we put money in there they didn't spend it. Like it's it's a little bit of a back and back and forth. Um the you know
I think what Councilman Russo is asking is not something that we've done in the past, right? It's uh we haven't we haven't seen it from Councilman Russo specifically who hasn't participated most of the budget conversations in in
the last several years. Um but just kind of drilling down and taking an actual number that is not a complete number at the end of the year and increasing it 2 and a half% theoretically sounds great but an example right um one of the line
items was our sanitation and he looked at a an artificially low year-end number because the the number at the end of the year wasn't fully funded for the year as we know funding happens at the end of the year took in And it was a huge
number, right? It was like five plus million. So he took that and he increased it 2 and a.5%. Um came to a number that is almost $2 million lower than what our actual contract for sanitation is for the year. Right? So is
it doing what he's suggesting is is great in theory but it's having at least some element of command of that you know how a budget is built and um and and just the knowledge I mean we we when I look at when I let me finish please when
we look at I think when all of us look at the budget we've seen patterns right we've seen patterns over the years we've all been on the city council except for Paul long enough to know generally what the mayor's office looks like, generally
what the health department looks like, generally what our debt service, and we can go back and look and see how it trends. We're not here to solve for pennies. That's not our job. That's the administration's. What we're here is to identify places that we believe are
there's potential waste and there or you know just areas that we don't think spending should occur or areas where we want to see more spending occur. That's like what our job is. Our job we are not you know we're not the executive branch.
Um we're not solving for every tiny little penny. So, I just going back to what I think both um council president and vice president were just saying, you know, it's taking a starting point and talking to colleagues and saying, do you think that we can get behind it? That's
what we've done in the past and and those conversations are happening. I've we've spoken I've spoken to Paul. I've spoken with council president and we're trying to get to a point where we can get those five votes, you know, around a budget and not say to the
administration, you have to audit every single number in in the budget. So So, council president, I will come to you in just one second. I mean, I know that um I do not know that this this colloqui, as a former council
member used to say all the time, uh is is you know, is this is the best forum for us to be doing this, but obviously you can respond. Listen, and and I appreciate that, Council President. However, it's gotten to and and most of the time
I I respond to nonsense with the Brandolini law. But however, it's important to note that when someone continues to try to opine on what
council person X or Y is thinking is just absolute It's nonsense. Okay. I followed the rules. I asked exactly how to do that. Councilwoman Fischer never submitted that to the
subcommittee. I have no idea what her cuts are. I have zero idea what they are. So to allow somebody to opine on all these things and then to try to get into someone else's head is absolutely ridiculous. Okay,
we want to talk about getting indepth into the budget. I'm asking for dump slips every day about our sanitation. I'm talking about what that contract looks like. As a matter of fact, if I remember correctly, I was the only council person who voted against an over
$7 million contract for a hauling. So to pretend that all these things are going on pertaining to the budget is just absolutely insane. You can't say that you're concerned
about the budget when you vote on contracts of that size. It's about priorities. Wait a second. I'm going to jump in. It's about prior I'm sorry. Excuse me. No, I'm going to jump in. Talk about contracts. You voted for a contract.
That's super super crazy. So, don't start with the sanitation contract. Don't start with the contract. That is garbage. Again, both sides of your mouth. Both sides of your mouth. Council member Russo, I'll have your turn. All right. Please, you could take as long as you need to. Could
shutting you up. I'm shut. I'd like to shut everyone up. Can council Can Council Cohen schedule a meeting? Yes, he can. But it's important to point it out. I'm not going to let somebody sit here and then tell me what I was thinking. I I understand. Would you allow it?
And I think you've made it clear that you're not going to do that, please. Through your conduct. So, it is 20 of 11. May we F2 move on to F troop F2. So it's this is
the uh temporary appropriation through August 21st I believe. Uh and it's to keep the lights on. Uh you had Councilman Russo. Is it okay if I call for vote? Yep. Call for vote.
Mr. Pina, please call a vote on F2. Mr. Con? I. Mr. Fischer. Yes. Mrs. Jabore, yes. President, no. Mr. Cano, hi. Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo, no. President Doyle,
I Okay. Uh, D3. DA3 for a vote. Councilman Fischer, is that me? Just uh All I want to just clarify this is the as amended. Um, the one that you
have the one that I have here doesn't have the amendment on it. Okay. I'm I'm sorry. This is this is the the noise. Yeah, this is it's actually both. It's actually for Uptown and Marin. It is a noise waiver for both. So, what do you that the the changes
that we discussed earlier are not are included? Yeah, Director Gonzalez has made the changes somewhere electronically. We kind of talked about them. Um, so we've agreed what they are and I'm assuming Director Gonzalez, you you've made the changes, right?
The the resolution has been amended and it reflects amended. As amended, the change in time in the morning, change in time in the evening and what are restrictions for construction. So I just want to say as amended. So Mr. Fina, call the vote on CA3 as amended. Yeah. Mr. Con? Hi. Fisher.
Yes. Mr. Jabore. Yes. President. Hi. Mr. Cano. Hi, Mr. Ramos. Hi, Mr. Russo. Hi, President Doyle. I CA5, this is Councilman President Zano, I
believe. I believe this would be director Gonzalez or is this director? Okay. Sorry, I get you guys mixed up with I don't know who's who won the park or this or that. I can tell them apart. Well, no, no, not no. On which who's in
charge of which part? Their responsibility. Yes. Responsibilities, Mr. President Doyle. Um, so I know what this is for, but it pertains to a question that we're going to be voting on later for first reading. You want to change a bond from Southwest
Park from 21 to 19 and move 2 million into parks, Church Square Park, not excluding or however the language works. So, it looks like it's all going to Church Court Park. Correct me if I'm wrong. Uh, yes. So, a year ago, I think we spoke or you
told me that um there was a bond for a million dollars for Church Court and somebody I was under the impression that we needed to pass that bond to show to the higher ups that we were applying for grants that we had money set up. Y
and I was under the impression that most of the construction in the park would be covered by grants. Yes. Is that correct? Yes. So now leading to this, we're asking to move 2 million of a bond for that park. I'm no well then it says for Church Square
Park. So well let me explain. I'm sorry. May I explain? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, please. So um this current project uh for which um CA5 as we were discussing is on the agenda is for a phase one implementation of the vision plan.
Yes. Yes. That project is fully funded. Yes. Um that project received $1.4 $4 million in grants. So, it is more than 50% of the project cost in grants. I'd have to do that math in the exact percentage. Um the uh reallocation for the Church Square
Park from within the um B551 allocation, existing funding allocation um between Southwest Park expansion and Church Square Park um would enable funding of future phases of that vision plan implementation. So, say phase two.
So my well maybe I heard it wrong but I was like most of this is going to be covered by grants. So I was last year you said every phase would be covered by I we will continue to apply for grants for every phase as we do with every capital
but we have a we have a million already we've bonded for four church square park. Correct. Correct. All right. So this is going to make three for the park potentially to use potentially. Um, I'd like to, and again, this is a question. I I think that 2
million should be put towards roads or sewer pipes or water manes. Well, maybe the one across over here on Second and Washington, we should actually probably look at replacing that geyser today. But I'm just saying we're going to put it towards Church Work Park. I was under the impression I voted for that because
I was under the impression that all of that was going to be taken care of with grants. If we're moving $2 million over in that bond that we're going to vote on for first reading, it's a concern for me because I I either I didn't hear it correctly or it wasn't explained to me correctly. I don't understand how Church
Square Park is going to cost us money when it was told to me grant money was going to take care of it. I I'm making a statement. And I don't expect you to say anything back, but I just wanted to make sure I didn't hear it wrong last year. But I just it it I I want to make my
case. I don't think the money should be moved from Southwest Park to Church Park because we were told that this was not going to cost us much to do it. Statement. And thank you for explaining to me. I'm It's not. Thanks. What's What's the additional funding for? The additional funding is for a
change order for a variety of uh different unforeseen conditions in the field. Um we actually ended up moving the fence. We ended up resetting some blue stone. We also ended up adding uh three uh chest tables to the project. Um so there are a variety of different unforeseen conditions as well as the the
addition. Um for example, we had to pave a larger uh you know portion of the street due to utility trenching, things like that. I can give you a line item breakdown, but it's also included in the res resolution. Yep. Thank you, director.
Mr. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, I. Fisher, yes. Mr. Jabor, yes. Mr. President, no. No. Mr. Cano, hi.
Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo. Hi, President Doyle. Hi. Uh, F4. No, I'm sorry. CD9. So, this I think Councilman Russo.
Yeah. I mean, do you mind if I I mean, I'm going to explain what happened at the planning board and then Yep. You're on to you. By all means. Um on Monday night there was the planning board as as you know we've and um Linda left but I'll be
happy to talk to her. Um the the redevelopment in May we asked the we this by the the the city council and the administration asked that a an area in need of
rehabilitation or redevelopment analysis be performed. We hired topology. They went and looked at four different properties associated with the hospital. And this is a step that just is to determine whether the four properties
are can be designated or appropriately designated as an area in need of redevelopment. The the four properties were the entire city block where the hospital currently is. That's one. the the portion of the city block to the
west of that where the municipal garage is, which is about 2/3 of that city block, that's number two. There is a a uh single building. It's it's roughly 20 by 100 at 307
Willow directly across the street to the east of the hospital and a building at 122 Clinton which is at the a block south of the southwest corner of the hospital which is currently used as a
medical professional building. So, um, three of the buildings are owned by the same owner. The the hospital square block, the 307 Willow, and this 122 Clinton are all owned by one owner.
And the owner is not the operator of the hospital. It is somebody who owns the land for all three of those. The fourth uh parcel is the municipal garage which is owned by the city of Hoboki. So the I
the idea is as as whether you like them or not redevelopment zones that such a designation would give us the ability to make a plan whatever plan we want to work towards saving, preserving,
improving the hospital and garage whether and the municipal garage which as you some of you who are here a lot know that We had on some time ago a $30 million bond resolution that we or
ordinance that we never voted on because we we got we stopped and thought if we're going to do this redevelopment something different might happen so let's not rush into that. Um so the planning board there was a
150page report that was prepared very comprehensive and the recommendation was that all four lots should be included as in the designation of an area in need of
redevelopment. It was one unique aspect though was that the 307 Willow the the one it's a I think it's a fourstory building that probably was residential many years in the past but the hospital owns it and they've used it in the past
for offices for you know for the doctors and administration of the hospital and the hospital itself and the municipal garage all three were met the criteria area of an area in need of
rehabilitation, a re redevelopment. I keep saying it incorrectly. So, but the the fourth property which is a block away did not in by itself qualify as an area under the criteria in the law as an
area in need of redevelopment. But in that law, it says if there are additional parcels that make the the area that is uh designatable uh you know sort of integral properties
that that will make the redevelopment more viable then they can be included even if they themselves are not blighted they're not deteriorated they're not etc. So because that medical building is
an outpatient medical facility and it uh it it certainly is a common use with the hospital and so the report recommended that the planning board identify all four of them as an area in need of redevelopment. The planning board
debated it for two and a half hours and and determined that they were that it recommends that three of the four without the 122 Clinton building that property
um included saying we don't think the planning board by a vote of 6 to2 said we don't think that property needs to should be included in the area in need of redevelopment. moment. So we have before us we have asked them for a
report that we got back we we have a report and we a detailed report and we also have the planning board's recommendation. Tonight our job is to either we could reject it all altogether and say we don't think it should be a
redevelopment zone. Um we can we can agree with the planning board and say we think that three of the four properties should be designated but the fourth shouldn't or we can say we think thank you very much planning board but we think that all four properties are
necessary to make this a financially viable you know property to you know because in order to go through the redevelopment process we have to find someone who will be willing to come in and fix the hospital. Whe whether they tear
half of it down and build something new and do the other half, whether they do it on a different property, there's many different ways that we can skin that cat. But this process and this vote tonight, there's no plan in front of us to say this is how it's going to happen.
It's just this this is a step in allowing the redevelopment process to move forward. And as many of you know, you know, uh pilot payments can be ways to incentivize creative financing. Um
and this is a non- condemnation uh redevelopment zone if we were to select it. So we cannot use eminent domain but we would uh you know so we this is just can is it
going to be designated and if so we go on to our next chapter to see whether and how we would develop this seek to develop it. Nice job council president. Thank you. one.
So, so somebody has to make a motion. But excuse me, council president would took the planning board to do two and a half hours. You did it in five minutes. But on time, if only they had listened to it. Is so uh what we we well we have to
Okay. The last piece is when we call it, are we voting on nothing, three, all four? And if we're voting to reject the planning board's recommendation, we need to explain why we're doing that. We have to put that into the record.
Well, I explained that the options. I didn't say the reason that we should disregard the planning board is fill in the blank. So, you know, because it makes the project viable. That's council president potentially.
Is are you gonna are you are you going to speak? I thought you said you wanted to speak. So, I I'll I can't say I'll be brief, but um I'm going to try. I'm going to try. I'll try. Well, at least you're self-aware. I am very self I so are clear. I'm very
self-aware on this point in particular. Um I listened for probably an hour and 45 minutes or almost two hours of the two and a half hour planning board meeting and I just um I think what what Jim said is accurate. I just want to
give a little bit of color. Um, you know, the debate was around uh whether or not these properties met the criteria for redevelopment or was it neglect that contributed to the
state of disrepair. And so the initial vote, they actually did a vote on all four properties and it failed. It was 44 and it failed. Then there was a discussion um on how you know do they can they get to two, can they get to
three? Everyone kind of had a different view on which ones would would actually um qualify and ultimately they got to this list of three that they felt they'd have enough votes for. And I think the
vote was 62 or 53, one of those. 62. Um, so I just it's uh I just I just want to give that color because we're we're definitely solving for the interests of the operator of the hospital, right? All
of this is so that the operator of the hospital and I I sit on the board of the Hoboken Hospital and I want to see a new hospital built, but we're solving for the a deal to be struck with the operator of the hospital that importantly, and this
was one of the questions last night that the planning board struggled with, doesn't actually own the land. And all of the color that we've heard so far is they've not come to an agreement with the actual property owner. Um the
property owner is Avery Eisenrike. Um we were in a lawsuit with them when we uh modified our zoning to make sure that this would be a hospital in perpetuity. Um and you know he's just sitting there
and seems to not be willing to strike a deal. So, I just I want to put it out there that as we progress through this process, I will I will vote on it tonight because I'm hopeful that we will get a new hospital out of this, but I am concerned that as we progress, we're
creating a disincentive structure. We're actually incentivizing the property owner to just sit with a property and not actually build a hospital. So, I just want to say that, but um and give that color, but I'll support it. Thank you. And I do want to emphasize
that your you know your opinion we had there has been no designated developer. So the fact that the whether the current operator may be in the future you know we're not doing this tonight and voting
on this tonight to make that entity be the future developer. But anyway, it may very well be, but it that's I um Okay, so is Oh, council president, I was going to make a motion. Okay. I'd like to make a motion that we
move forward. Um, we acknowledge the planning board's decision and we as a council disregard their decision in order to consider all four properties based on I think you said it in your opening remarks. Basically, there's proximate
interest in being able to conclude that fourth property. though it doesn't meet all of the criteria, it is related to the larger spirit of this project potentially and should be included for consideration. So, we would put on the record, we acknowledge the planning
board's discussion and their findings, but reach a different conclusion for purposes of moving forward. And much like Councilwoman Fischer's amendment about the hours of operation, Director Brown and I have been discussing, you know, not knowing what the outcome would
be, but but the resolution that was in Asella was written last week and said it it presumed the zoning the planning board would agree with all four. So we have to tweak it just factually but that would be amend the resolution but we can I think vote on it and we
will get that taken care of just to make it reflect the reality. Yep. Is there a second? Second. Okay. All Mr. Fina. All those in favor I Yes.
Hi. Hi. Ramos. Hi. Russo. Hi. President. I uh I think just corporation council, did you want to uh weigh in on CC1 that
we've already voted on? I think yes. Um as I was signing because we signed all the resolutions after they were voted on. I realized that the title was incorrect and there was a beat for the resolve that was not correct. I want to make sure there wasn't confusion. The title originally in your packet was a resolution qualifying special counsel.
This is actually meant to be a resolution appointing special counsel. So, the point of this resolution was to appoint Milbank um as the special counsel to handle the litigation. So, I want to make sure there was no confusion and the council's fine with me changing the appointing and uh removing the last
four resolved. There's confusion. We can okay with correcting the typo in CC1. It's it's not qualifying, but it's you didn't catch that. I did. Yeah.
Okay. So we are back to F4. Mr. President's on. Yes. Thank you. Um, Director Stratton. Thank you, Council President. Director Stratton. Um, I read
over the audit for 2024 and I have a couple points that I wanted to bring up and I'm going to guess you're going to fix them. I know you're new to, you know, you're Okay, I brought it with me. So, I want to bring up the one, two, three, the four points that I thought were extremely
important on things that the city failed. Well, the report never says you fail on it. They they're very generous in how they say that there's a problem. They don't they they dance around it. So, there was one there was significant weaknesses in internal controls over
financial reporting. Uh, and I'll let you reply to these at the end. There were certain contract violations of procurement regulations. There's inner fund balances and cash management concerns with liquidity management and a clear reconciliation
process. Uh we adopted some cash management plan but it suggests that we need more monitoring. And this one's a little concerning. The acred absences tracking acred compensated uh absences. It had to me it has an impact on benefit payments and a
strain on finances. So that one's actually concerning to me. It stated that certain departments did this, but there was no centralized collection of this information. And looking at this, the biggest one I see out of this is that the significant weakness in internal controls over
financial reporting. That is a red flag that I've ever seen in my entire life. Uh I know you can't comment on the details of it and I'm just reading a piece of paper that the auditors gave us. Are we
fix I'm guessing we're fixing all this but some of these are repeats or year after year after year after year and nobody ever talks about it but I I mean uh what are we doing for some of these because these are some big ones I think.
Sure part of the importance of conducting an audit is to find areas that are deficient in need of improvement. So the areas that you highlight is something that we do work on every year. You covered a number of different topics, but I would be happy to respond more specifically on the
internal controls we have in place, whether it's through the admin system, uh, time accured through our prime point system. We do have centralized measures and controls, but I would I would have to know specifically what the audit findings are related to, whether it's a purchase
order or internal controls, and then go through and give you a report. if you want to send me an email pointing out the specific things. Um I brought I brought the auto with me because on page 186 for recommendations there it was silent to that but there were general
comments and recommendations which is the purpose of doing an audit. They're very nice in how they say it without getting themselves caught with saying, you know, the red flag. But I think the biggest one for me that I I don't have to send you an email. The that the two are the acred absences.
Mhm. Because that has a financial impact at the end of the day on our budgets uh and what we pay out. And the big concern is they didn't just say weaknesses and internal controls. They said significant weaknesses. That's a major and that one I really want to know because that's a
that's a scary one. Understood. Yeah. Um I'm President Doyle. I'm good now. Okay. Thank you. I'm sorry. Um Mr. Fina, uh F4, please call the vote. Mr. Con,
I. Miss Fischer, yes. Mrs. Jabore, yes. President, I. Mr. Cano, I Mr. Mr. Ramos. Hi, Mr. Russo. Hi, President D. I So, we'll be asked to sign that uh by
before we leave tonight. Uh T1 and Councilman Preszano, I believe that's yours. Uh yes. Uh Director Weber, I guess I
This one I've never seen. I've never really understood and I I talked with uh Councilman Ramos today about this. Evidently, this was caused by a con uh an accident. There was a traffic accident at the intersection. They took out the pole or it took out the light. Right. Correct.
So, I have we filed a claim. We expecting to be reimbursed. We have to put up front. That was my question because I've never again I've never seen something like this. I figured are we suing somebody or we getting insurance money to pay for we're we're we're we're expecting an
insurance claim. It was a DUI. I don't I don't think there's going to be any. Okay. All right. That's all I wanted to know. I was just make sure we were getting assurance. Okay. Thank you. Very good. Mr. Con. Hi.
Fisher. Yes. Mrs. Jabore. Yes. President. Hi. Mr. Cano. Hi. Mr. Ramos. Hi. Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I. So, uh, okay. On to public portion.
No. No. First reading. Yeah. Is for introduction. I You want to do the other first? Which other? Which one? Introduction. No, I'm okay. Go ahead, Mr. Fina. I'm sorry. I want to hear for introduction. One of the city of
Hobok and the county of Hutchin, New Jersey approving. Wait, Ruben's got to go. He's got to get out of here. Hold on. Hold on, Jimmy. He's got to leave. Excuse himself. You're off the pole, Jimmy. Sorry. You must be getting tired. Introduction of an ordinance of the city
of Hoboken in the county of Hudson, New Jersey. Get out of the room. the contribution of portion of the annual service charge provided to the city of Hoboken pursuant to the financial agreement by and between the city of Hoboken and
JB 112 urban renewal LLC into the city city pilot education trust account Mr. Fina please call a vote Mr. Con I miss Fischer yes Mrs. Jabore. Yes. President Jano. Hi,
Mr. Cano. Hi, Mr. Ramos. Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I introduction of an ordinance amending chapter 141 parking garage and lots public
Mr. Ribbon. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt you, Mr. Fina. An ordinance amending chapter 141 parking garage and lots public of the Hoboken city code to amend transate
transient parking rates in municipal parking facilities. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, I. Fisher, yes. Mrs. Jabore, yes. President Jano, I. Mr. Cano, hi. Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo,
I'm sorry. Which one was What are we on? Three. Three. No, we're on two. No, we're two is two is strict. No. All right, President Doyle, that's the increase in parking, right?
Yeah. Parking. So, we're number four ordinance. An ordinance amending chapter 192 parking for persons with disabilities. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, I Miss Fischer. Mrs. Jabore. I'm a yes. Sorry, you're going so fast.
I'm a yes. Mero, I Mr. Ramos. Hi, Mr. Russo. Hi, President Doyle. I Ordinance for introduction amending chapter 146 pedallers transient merchants of the city of Hob Oakland to
include non-motorized mo mobilebile rental vendors. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, I. Mr. Fischer, yes. Mrs. Jabore, yes. President, hi. Mr. Cano, hi. Mr. Ramos, hi.
Mr. Russo. Hi, President Doyle. I an ordinance introduction amending chapter 110-17 requiring waste container rise for large municipal family buildings. Mr. Fraer, please call the vote.
Mr. Cole, I Miss Fischer, yes. Mr. Jabore, yes. President, hi. Mr. Gero, I Mr. Ramos, hi. Mr. Russo, hi. President Doyle, hi. Ordinance for introduction amending
chapter 110 adding section 28 for sidewalk trash sheds. Mr. Fina, please call a vote. Mr. Con I. Fiser. Yes. Mr. Jabor. Yes. Mr. Presidento. Mr. Hi. Mr. Ramos.
Hi. Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. Hi. in introduction amending chapter 58-27.1 recreation fees please call the vote
Mr. Con I Mr. Fischer yes yes Mrs. Jabore yes president Mr. Cano hi Mr. Ramos hi Mr. Russo no president Doyle I
launch for introduction amending chapter 58-23 permit enabling reservations for resilient resiliency park community room Mr. Fina please call the vote Mr. Con I Miss Biser
yes Mrs. Jabore yes Mr. President hi Mr. Canero Mr. Ramos hi Mr. Russo. Hi, President Doyle. Hi. Excuse me. An ordinance for introduction amending
chapter 193 water. Oh boy. Mr. Fer, please call a vote. Mr. Con, hi. Fisher, no. Mr. Jabbor, yes. President Zano, no. Mr. Cano, hi.
Mr. Ramos, no. You said Mr. Russo. No. President Oil. I All right. Yes. Number 11. Yeah. Ordinance further amending bond
ordinance B51 of the city of Hobok and county of Hudson, New Jersey, reloc reallocating funds for non-additional cost, no additional cost to the city. Mr. Pina, please call the vote. Mr. Con. I. Mr. Fisher. Yes,
Mr. Jabore. Yes, President. No, Mr. Cano. Hi, M. Uh, Mr. Ramos. Ramos, no. Mr. Russo, no. President Doyle.
Hi. What was Ruben? What was your vote? No. Okay. Thank you. Uh, an ordinance for introduction amending bond ordinance B493 of the city of Hobok and County of Fton, New Jersey,
revisiting the so uh the the soft course of borrowing limited borrowing limited at a non no additional cost to city of Hokan. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con. Fisher, yes. Mr. Jabore,
yes. President Jano, no. Mr. Cano. Hi. Mr. Ramos, no. No. Is what he said. Mr. Russo. No. President Doyle. Hi.
Do you want me to read this one for you, Jimmy? Give a break. Wait. Is this the one? Fisher. We're talking about the last one. What did How would you vote on? Yes. That was a Yes. Okay. Yes. Ordinance for introduction bond
ordinance authorizing the completion of various capital improvements for maritime park block 259 lots one and two and 800 Monroe Resiliency Park block 87 lot 1.01 01 including public art
acquisition, installation and capital facility improvements allocations related there too in and for the city of Hoboken County of Hudson, New Jersey appropriating the sum of three 36,342,000
therefore authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds or bond anticipation notes of the city of Hoboking County of Hudson, New Jersey in the aggregate principal amount of up to 34 million million530
24,900 making certain determinations and covenants and authorizing certain related actions in connection with the foregoing. Mr. Fina, please call the vote. Mr. Con, I miss Fischer. Yes.
Mrs. Jabore, yes. President, no budget, no vote. No Mr. Cano. I Mr. Ramos and Mr. Russo. Hi. President Doyle. I
So now can we try public portion? Yes. Uh and and Enrique Herrera. Thank you, Council President. Uh, I just wanted to touch up on a couple subjects. First, um, to address
the whole AI algorithm issue, uh, one of the things that I've already elaborated on, and the one young lady that was in here earlier was talking about, some of these algorithms have Starlink and other advanced technologies. If we could just open up a public inquiry into how far
this algorithmic situation is with rents control or whether or not appointments are settled is one thing, but can these algorithms geoloccate humans, whether or not they're going into buildings, stuff like that. I always take the necessary step forward when it comes down to just the technology question. I'm not really
a fan of AI. Um, I also did that whole thing where I destroyed the prediction scale model that orchestrates illegal acts onto a person using a real-time concept using Marvel comics which is involved with uh AI 128 uh where our
technical term in this universe of Marvel if that were the case would be 128. That's that's just the technicality there of that being that. The second thing about for the for the cops to to actually add on to that type of information u the compulsive detox
presented by Katherine Hol in New York could be something that could be implemented here. It's not on all awards but uh when it comes down to some people just being a nuisance to people. We were just speaking about that as well where it involved some people just
being blatantly disregarding of people's, you know, public space where they per, you know, you live here, you work here, you you have co-workers and schoolmates, and then there's that one homeless guy that just shows up on Second Street. Um, I don't know where they come from. Uh, it is a problem for
some uh people who like to enjoy their privacy. Like let's say if I go to a certain part of um the waterfront for example, there always be that one guy walking by. Uh is there a reason for that? Is he making a nuisance out of himself? Yes or no? But
that just becomes a hassle for citizens when they try to report that behavior cuz they just fix themselves up as they see the police coming in. So um I I think compulsive detox should be looked at. Again, inquiry into that. um it wasn't necessarily presented and the problem isn't as big in um in Hoboken as
it is in New York where you walk into a train tracks. You'll see a homeless person sleeping there or they're just start you know walking dead zombie situation where they just compulsive disorder out but there is compulsive detox where they just get put into intake which would lead to an impatient stay where that would be an appropriate
measure. Um and I think that that'd be my inclusion in that conversation. Uh lastly, if how much time do I have by any chance? Well, you were a little late in starting it, but you probably have about 3 minutes. Okay. Uh the lastly, I had already
talked to Katie Brennan about this and uh it involved the Edipus Electra curriculum in our schools. I know u ruin you're a very big fan of my curriculum, especially when it comes down to Edipus Electra. Uh it involves how my inclusion into that board of education meeting
which will inevitably come one day would include exploration into K through 12 and associates into doctoral and PhD of this curriculum involving um education discipline exploitation and subjugation where we stop irregular behavior in kids
from pointing the finger at adults and teachers when it comes down to their own conscious thoughts and um appropriate measures. is toward one or two classes, not necessarily a lot, but that would be an ISS state if you keep pointing a finger at the teacher because you feel
some type of way or you you know or or your parents where they're not afforded the same education. A lot of grandparents and parents didn't necessarily have those words. It was always you're going in and you're going out. And some people are, you know,
raised on a Hispanic mindset, toxic masculinity everywhere. When we bring up this specific subject matter, it just involves human consciousness and how we discipline our children or young adults as they grow up away from behaviors like irregular behaviors, pointing a finger
at people, making unnecessary claims and advances toward people and then projecting that type of ideology amongst the stat, you know, you know, people, whatever. But, uh, I have a in-depth view of it on my social media. Just my phone, frankly, uh, stopped
working. So, I'm kind of back in the stone age now. So, uh if anything else, that that'd be my conclusion for that. Thank you so much. Thank you, Cheryl Fall. Sure. Um, I just wanted to I actually
literally stayed because I wanted to thank the Well, I wanted to thank seven people up there for voting on that removing that one time exemption. Um, I also wanted to speak in support of my
rent board colleagues. They really haven't done anything wrong. The rent board has been in a bad space for a long time because there was this empty space in the ordinance with all the ancillary language and they didn't have the
capacity. It it had to come here eventually and council councilwoman Jabbor, thank you. Finally, somebody was brave enough to bring it here because rent control, as we know, is the third rail and you're not supposed to touch it because
everybody's scared that we're going to have a referendum. But we had one and we saw what happened. Um, the other thing I wanted to mention tonight is, um, I'm seeing a pattern tonight, and I do acknowledge that it's maybe a little
annoying when people work hard on ordinances to have people come up here and make suggestions who, you know, seemingly haven't done the work, but they may have the lived experience. And the one thing I want to caution the city council about, I'm just going to say
March 11th, 2011 That night the city I don't know who was on the I think maybe you were on the council then but I don't think anybody else was. That night the city council passed Z88 which is this awful sort of thing uh change to the rent control
ordinance. And the night that the city council passed it March 11th 2011 they said we're going to fix this at the next meeting. That's my point. So to hear, oh, we're going to fix these laterers. I hope you
do or I hope you consider changes some of the things that the community said. Um, but I don't really have any faith that you will. So, a couple of things did get passed tonight that did have some things that really did need to be worked on. So, maybe some of you will.
Um, but with that said, again, thank thank those of you who did vote for that thing that really had to come out or that ancillary language. I very much appreciate it. Good night. This failed, right? Thank you.
Patricia Waiters, thanks for coming back. We got the microphone going up or no, I guess it's all right. All right. Thanks. Could you guys, Patricia, wait this, could you guys please consider having a caucus? I'mma say this to the next mayor and be
upstairs in front of your door every day, whoever the mayor, have a caucus because y'all could attend your business on the caucus and give the meeting back to us to sit out here. Now, I can't even go do all my papers that I was going to go do tonight. And I promise people stayed up to watch this.
This is me, Patricia Waiters. New Jersey Democratic State Conference. This from 2018. Okay, that's me when I checked in. This is when I was a proud Democrat back in 2018.
And I went to all the classes and I had a good time. Drank a little wine. No. And way I want to be serious. And I really liked the idea of even being a committee person back then. But I wrote myself in
with one vote and my uncle Dave, God bless his soul. But I ran for committee in your word, Michael Russo. 33. And I got 95 votes. You know how that felt? Felt like I won mayor. I'mma
put this on cuz I promised them. And I'm here to educate what I've learned what a Democrat committee person should do. I'm going to educate the people. We not here to fight the Republicans and the conservative and the progressive and no,
we here to work together as a team. I'm going to work in 33 to the best of my ability. And I brought this tonight to show y'all we all live in Hoboka, no matter what board district you're in or running for. But the main thing is working together. All of y'all and
Manny, you've been in my apartment. I got crates very organized of people which is your constituents that still come to me. This is from Phil Cohen's ward. I want to share this. July 10th, 2024, a young lady that voted for you and they loved you, but she wound up
giving it to me. Could you pat you help me? Do you get whether I got along with Phil Coh or not, I jumped on it right away. And this was serious. Okay. But having you been the friend or whatever of that person, and I'mma protect names to protect the innocent, it could have
been your friend or whoever, but she was confused cuz y'all just appointed her to the board. Okay, so she wrote in detail what the issues was with one of the commissioners and Mr. Reco. But this is why I'm saying this. When you a
committee person and y'all run for uh government or official positions like this, you supposed to be loyal and work with the people. Whether is your best buddy, whether it's Ravi Bala when y'all ordering on his ticket, you still got to do what's right for the people. You
acting under the authority of the people. She confining you and you promised her, but you never took care of it evidently cuz it wound up in my house. Okay, another one. This was for Michael Russo
and you was on the board then already, Mike. This is to Kelly A. Patterson plus 25 more. You see the 25 more that was CCed on this email? These are tenants. I sent pictures of rats, Russ feces coming
out of the toilet. They cars are being told the same stuff that I've been saying for year. And this is marked April 27th, 2022. Okay, look at the pictures. So, and look at that. That's that's me.
All of that work is Pat Waiters. This is how people come to me. And I'm going to be a proud Democratic committee person. And for everybody that's watching this that I ask to support me, I'm going to make you proud cuz I'm a woman of my word. Even though you guys feel like you
can undermine me and don't recognize what I do, I do it for the people. I'm not trying to impress no politician cuz this would usually happen. It wind up in a milk crate somewhere being untouched if it's not an election time. So again,
I got 95 votes. Go me. And I will be working with you guys. Okay? Everything, all my information still the same. Y'all don't have to say it, but I'mma say it. Welcome aboard. Pat Wade is ready to fight. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Waiters. Uh Manuel
Rivera Solair. Thank you, Council President. I will be brief in lie of the time uh constraints. Uh I did have a lot of just want to show for proof. There was a lot of uh issues and grievances that I've been uh
accumulating uh throughout the weeks and months that I've been uh in the Hoboken six ward uh speaking to my neighbors. So all I want to do is just then I'll save that for another time
and I just want to abbreviate it again. Council President, I just want to say that I hope that we can again as uh the consoler of the council uh we could join in prayers for our fellow citizens of Kirk County, Texas with this horrible
incident of the floodings where they were missing. Uh there are missing 60 souls that are not found. 110 deaths, many children, young children. I wish we could join in prayers for them and keep
in solidarity. I hope that we could also join in prayer for the people of South Car North Carolina. Pardon me. And pardon me, I lost my train. and also the people of Rodaso,
New Mexico or Rodeos, New Mexico, I'm not sure, but they also suffered uh floodings in their uh municipalities in their state. So, as Americans, I hope you can join them. I know that I'm losing you, but then also in our shores
of New Jersey and Planefield, New Jersey, we also lost certain residents of the set town. With that, Council President, I will then say, as I always do, we pray for the release
of the hostages of Israel. We pray for the innocence of the Palestinian people. And with that, I say Slava Ukrainy. Glory to Ukraine. Slava, glory to the heroes. And council president, to you and to the council and
to the members of the public. God bless you and God bless Hoboken. Thank you for for this meeting and again thank you for the great explanation you gave earlier on CD9. Thank you and good evening job. Thank you Mr. God bless you Jim
Rivera Eric Hanahan he left and Eric Vulpi I think is in the same category. No he is right there. Oh no Mary and Dra I'm here. Did Yeah. Sorry.
Mary, I already called you Cheryl tonight. I Which is not an insult as you. No, that's all right. Mary Andrea 1599 Street. Actually, I I had not planned to speak. Uh I did sign up though. Yes, you did. Because um I came here for the rent
issues because I I've been in this town a long time and I actually forgot about build by design. Um, I don't think I'm the only one that has forgotten about it. And I say that
very seriously because listening to that little presentation, I remember very well going to all those meetings back in the day. And I remember thinking about the people
that lived up there on 14th and 15th now on garden in Bloomfield and I thought, "Wow, thank God I don't live there." And the people that at the time I'm sure some of them have sold um
because a lot has happened. a pandemic has been in the world and a lot of people left this town and a whole group of new people that have come to live here. My point being
I forgot and this Kim used the word massive twice. She put an emphasis on that word because it is massive. She also used the
word monolithic. They don't know what's coming. Uh it it's major. And I believe you as the council, they don't have the local paper anymore.
And I don't know how many people tune in, but perhaps some of them do to this meeting. their lives are going to change. And a lot of people are not going to want to stay.
And I can understand why. blocking even a street like Bloomfield, which I was on to go to the laundromat uptown, I mean up in Union City, uh, for three months,
and then having their whole landscape change is going to be dramatic. And this town needs to alert. This is a reality
that's coming. I forgot until tonight. And last year in July when the fireworks were on the Hudson, the cars to get out of this town in
front of my street on 9inth making a left to go on Bloomfield ran until 4 in the morning. And the one bad thing is sure I live on the street right in front was the honking.
Now, I believe this council should make a deliberate effort to say your lives are going to be hell if you remain in this town. You are not to honk because you won't be able to go anywhere for
hours maybe because they've got to know this is going to happen. I remember those diagrams. I remember those gates. what they were going to try to do to make them presentable,
how it would change the values of their property. Do these people remember? You know, Russo, you know it was
catastrophic. I I monolithic those gates and they were going to affect Washington near Madison and the old Kelly's. It was going to affect all the people that live there.
And I don't know what it's going to do because I always thought it was an overreaction to the 100year flood. And yes, I suppose it could happen in 50 years, but
I don't believe they know this is coming. Just to bring the gates into the city, the into the city, you've got to put humongous signs
and say with photographs that this is going to happen. I really mean it. I I'm not trying to stop it. I can't. Nobody can. But the world is innocent to this in many respects unless
you were there because you reminded me tonight. At least I live on Ninth, but God only knows what the vibrations will be for five blocks from there or seven. Who knows? But you need to you need to
really let people know. Please. Thank you. Thank you. Motion to close public. That's it for uh second. All those in favor? I. Motion to close. Second. Second. I
sw you were asking about schedule. I didn't read it. Good night, Joe. Always good night. Hi, Michael. Michael, we actually did have a committee meeting last night. I was
going I was on it. I dialed in. I guess I was in the waiting room. Not Texas.