has the agenda in front of us. Bill, put it on mute if you would. Um, is it B754, Jerry? That's the only thing we're hearing uh for this evening. That's correct. Yep. Okay. And we're waiting for one more. Uh, council
person, I got 9045749. If you could rename yourself. I don't know who that is. We got a couple people that are um Japanese. I don't even know what's
going on right now with um 9045749. If you could rename yourself. I don't know who that is. We got a couple people that are um chip Japanese. I don't know what's
going on. Uh Jerry, the uh 2011 904 is a phone in so uh we can just make sure they're muted. Rename yourself. I don't think they can. We got it. Sorry. Thanks.
All right. We can start. I'm gonna admit people real quick. Okay. Councilwoman Jabbor here. She'll be joining momentarily. It's Japan. I'm not sure. Oh, I see Emily.
Okay. I think she's maybe with Phil. She's coming. She's joining us right now. Okay. So, we can start. Council President. And good. Do we want to uh is Emily Emily here? Yes.
Jimmy, you want to read? Yes. Please be dear city clerk for can you take that echo out? You guys want to All right. Dear city clerk Fina, please be advised as the mayor of the city of Hoboken, I hereby
call a special meeting for the governing body called for Thursday, April 24, 2025 to begin promptly at 7 p.m. for the following purpose. Special meeting, April 24th, 2025. Starting at 7 p.m.
Ordinance for hearing and final reading. An ordinance affirming reinforcement of the reinvestment plan for the Western Edge redevelopment area B754. Introduction and first reading of an ordinance to exceed the municipal
budget appropriation limits and to establish a cap bank. Introduction of the CY 2024 budget. Resolution F1, resolution authorizing emergency temporary appropriations in accordance with
NJSA 4020 public portion action will be taken and no other matters will be discussed and acted upon this meeting. Please ensure that the city council members are notified for the special meeting in
accordance with applicable law rules and also please publicly notice the special meeting as required by the open public meeting act NJSA 10 col4-6. I would like to advise all those
present that notice of this meeting has been provided to the public in accordance with the provision of the open public meeting act and that notice was published in the city website copies provided the bergen record Ellis special northstar ledger jersey journal also
placed on a bullet board in the lobby of city hall. Written objections if any shall be made to the city clerk. Salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Uh, roll call. Mr. Con here. Here. Miss Fischer. Mrs. Jabore
here. President Xano present Mr. Canero present Mr. Ramos Mr. Russo present Doyle thank you Mr. Karina. Correct. Yeah. Okay. So, so as uh as you
you read through the uh agenda, I just want to inform members of the public um that we're the only item that we are acting upon this evening is going to be uh ordinance B 754. Uh the other three items that were
uh noticed for tonight have all been carried to the regular May 7th council meeting which will be uh held in chamber city hall chambers on May May 7th if I at 7 p.m. Um and uh I don't know whether
uh I I think just for the record I should indicate that the planning board did meet and uh conduct a consistency review of this ordinance and the planning board unanimously uh passed and f and found that this
ordinance was consistent with the master plan and the land use element. Um, and so with that, uh, I would open it up to the public for, uh, public comment on this ordinance. And Jerry, are you are you going to,
uh, Manuel Rivera, do do you want me or are you going to let him in? Yeah, we can let them in. We so far have one. I see Mr. Ross. Ross. Matthew Ross.
Um, well, why don't we start with Manuel Rivera since it's the first one I saw? Sure. Manny, good evening, Council President. Am I Am I up? I didn't hear. Yes. Yes. I'm
sorry if you didn't hear. Yes, you you you've got your your five minutes. And the only item in case you couldn't hear me that we are acting on this evening is uh B754, which is the Western Edge uh ordinance.
Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. I'm pardon me. I'm think I see you see and I think I'm at the planning board. Sorry for that. Uh, council president and council and members of the public. Good evening. Uh, uh, council president, I do want to just take the few minutes um,
just to say that um, in the planning board when they uh, met in discussing uh, uh, B754. Um they were as you were present they were very uh clear and uh for the public that was present in regards to
what the essence of the the reason for reaffirming and for checking um this ordinance. Um I believe that that it was done in a proper manner and I hope that members of the public as I as I exorted them or or asked them to
please if they had any confusion because other members were inferring other members of the public that um that we members of the public and residents of Hoboken did not have all the details although it's a lot to read and it is um sometimes over um I want to
say over my head sometimes because there's some words and some stuff but um asking the question is where we get the answers and I appreciate this evening. Um when you what you just said that you clarified that uh the planning board did find this um compatible and agreeable.
So with that I just want to say um you know if you can if that you feel that it's necessary for other council members to just um reaffirm to the members of the public that are present in this meeting not and were in touch at the planning board that they maybe get a little bit of a gist as to why um you
are affirming and why nothing was changed. pardon me. Why nothing was technically changed from your original 2017 uh ordinance B715. And again, council president, thank you for the meeting. Again, thank you for the planning board for uh doing
their job and their due diligence. And again, I'm just going to leave it at that. And I hope that other members of the public when they ask their questions, um they're able to get any clarification tonight. So, thank you again, Council President, council members, and uh uh I'll talk to you a little bit later. Thank you. Are yield
back? Thank you, Mr. Rivera. Um, Jerry, Mr. Ross, you indicated was That's correct. Good evening, council. My name is Matthew Ross. I'm a partner at PD
Padavano and we represent Insera Supermarkets as well as its landlord Northwest Redevelopment Supermarkets and separately Pacific Cliff Protection Alliance. Um, as a preliminary matter earlier today, Palades Cliff Protection Alliance LLC requested an adjournment in
a letter that we circulated to the council around uh 3 or 4 p.m. today. It's my understanding same was not granted. So, I'm going to proceed with that understanding. uh with respect to supermarkets and its landlord by way of letter dated April
24th 2024 we provided the council with a report from Michael Maris Associates the traffic and parking consultants for Sarah that was dated April 23rd 2024 like to submit same as is one as an exhibit for consideration by the council
my client wants to have a careful review of parking requirements traffic and construction staging under the current day conditions to protect the existing property owners and businesses in the redevelopment zone. It's unclear whether the new ordinance considers the findings
of any additional or updated traffic and parking studies or whether any analyses have been performed in 2025 for review by the planning board or the council that would identify any conditions changing over the last decade to be addressed if necessary. Marrison
Associates in their letter recommended that the plan requirements for any proposed projects be based on the current conditions for parking, traffic, and density as of 2025. Now, with respect to my other client, Palisades Lift Protection
Alliance, I respect the council to the letter dated April 24th, 2024 in the exhibit 2025 and the exhibits there too, which my office submitted to the council on behalf of Pal Cliff Protection Alliance. and I'll mark that if the council will so entertain same as PCPA1
as an exhibit. Now, for the record, I and my client have no objections to the affordable housing components of the plan. Additionally, to provide some explanation as to the request for the adjournment that is part of that
letter, we wish to have the adjournment so that there's sufficient time for our planner to fully review this plan in its current form. Further, we submit that given the gravity of this plan, it should not be considered by the council via Zoom. And additionally, the timing
of the hearing is not conducive to public participation given the spring vacations that are currently going on. Subject to those points, I'd also submit that the council should provide a disclosure of the
conflicts for those who won't be voting from the council. And I have to inquire whether any of the council persons who are voting have had any actions with developers or conflicted council persons specifically regarding this plan that is
before the council tonight. Now, previously my client made numerous objections and submitted comments and I refer to those comments and objections in the prior actions several of which were attached to the letter submitted today. And to be clear, neither I nor my
client waves the prior comments and objections and we incorporate same therein. We still think there are inconsistencies with the master plan and the relevant planning documents. We want to know further as to this procedure
whether or not the city attorneys have given any opinion on whether the procedure involving this second new ordinance is legal. And that raises valid questions as to whether the proper procedure has been followed. Moreover, we submit respectfully that
there should be a concept plan. To date, we're unaware of any and that is a consideration that the council should have before voting on this. Finally, moreover, I want to raise the issue of the city's obligations under
settlement agreements. To date, there's been no disclosure whether developers requested payments for fees and costs in connection with the new ordinance yet, and if so, if the city paid same. Subject to these points and the fact that we're cap five minutes, I
reserved my right to make additional comments and incorporate the comments of other members of the public and interested parties to the extent that they that we don't make them, but they're not materially in conflict with the points I've raised. With that, I yield back the floor. Thank you.
Ross. Council President, I don't see any other hands being raised at this moment. If you would like to speak, if you could please raise your hand. U Lisa Lamelo. Um on behalf of the
Doric, uh for whatever reason, I'm having a little trouble with the raise hand function. uh on the Zoom format. Um so I would like to speak if uh if appropriate at this time. Thank you, Lisa. Just go right ahead. Thank you
very much. Uh um I have a few questions uh actually on on the uh what is taking place tonight. Uh I understand that the ordinance is to confirm um I'll get the the appropriate language here to affirming and re endorsing the
uh redevelopment plan. Um what is the purpose of affirming and reindors egg redevelopment plan? You a question I have to the board. I and this is not typically a back and
forth. Um if you want to conclude then the the board as it see fits can respond to you. Well, I have I have a few questions then I will I will um request uh that the board address uh
I can list those if that's what's required um under this procedure and under this format certainly there was no statement of that uh initially uh the other questions I have is whether there's been any update to this plan uh
most of the or much of the plan um documents date back to um you know 2010 uh and 2015. So it's, you know, somewhat stale in terms of uh planning
perspective, the the information that that's in it. Has that been reviewed and updated in any way? Uh and has there been any attention by the city or any any uh entity within the city as to
the soils or um the the ground conditions in the redevelopment plan area uh and the ability of those u soils uh and the ground conditions to support
these suggested buildings. Uh those are those are the three questions that uh like to have addressed by the board. Thank you. Okay. And I mean we we I think it'll be more efficient to do it in real time. Just so you understand, this comment
period is we're having a a hearing and the public has an opportunity to speak to to con to convey their concerns, issues, preferences, but it is not it is never a
back and forth where we are obligated to respond to questions that which doesn't mean when people raise questions we can't. And so I I I wasn't sure if you were indicating that you felt that we
were treating this this meeting differently by not allow intending to answer all your questions. So to to the extent that uh we we don't have to do it and we often don't engage in whatever
the the number of questions that somebody may may may pose. It's not unusual. Um, you asked why we're affirming, endorsing. I I do think uh Mr. Rivera Soler also asked the question of, you know, clarifying for the public
what's going on here. So, it's kind of along those lines. Um, to be very clear, we on October 24th, I believe, if I'm off by a day or two, don't hold me to it, but we passed this ordinance
amendment. And since then, for for legal reasons, council has requested that we uh affirm and reindor the very same ordinance. Uh and so this is not a new
ordinance. It is we that's why it's a reaffirming and reinforcing an ordinance that was passed in October of last year. Um and it pertains to certain
allegations uh with regard to prior votes and uh allegations of uh you know the president if I may. Yeah. Thank you. I think you've done a perfect job that this is just a reaffirmation to clear up
some um things that weren't clear. I think that's the best way to put it because there's litigation going on trying to not down that that that rabbit hole. So, thank you. Um I can tell you
uh Miss Lamelo that the initial plan was adopted in 2015 and so I don't know what you you alluded to documents that are as old as 2010. I I don't I don't know what that would be. Um our plan was adopted in
2015 and there have been eight amendments to it uh prior to tonight. So that means you know and which is that may be a large number but it is certainly not unusual that there are a
number of amendments to redevelopment plans as the various portions of the redevelopment area are developed. Um and and I I can't answer your question about the environmental conditions at the site
other than I'm sure in the preceding decade uh you know there there was exhaustive research. I don't think that the con, you know, unlike the the point about traffic, I don't think the
environmental conditions at the property have changed and I think they were, you know, really looked at in the past, but I I do not recall from, you know, 7 to 10 years ago, uh, the answer to that question. So, I'm sorry.
and let's um thank you. I I think um if I may know this not supposed to be a back and forth call um you know we certainly can uh you know as part of the uh planning board uh site plan review uh
for neither Monroe which is in this area um will present more information on uh the the the soils the the type of soil that is located on this site and the ability to builds on um the site uh
without uh damage to surrounding uh properties. And certainly if the uh city council uh wants to review any of those uh reports or information uh on the uh soil conditions uh we can certainly provide
those. Um and as um council and Sarah had indicated um they had asked for an an adjournment request which was denied. Um you know from from the dors
perspective uh we can also provide that information uh to the board although the board uh did forward uh in so thank you. Well, okay. Yeah, there will be planning board hearings again with regard to this in the future if this passes. Uh, so
you'll have whatever rights you have. Thank you. Um, Mr. Lore, is there are there others? There are no other hands being raised that I see out of Oh, wait. Close public portion. Um, Jerry, there is no there's a hand. Ashley Morgan has a hand up.
Yeah, Ashley Morgan. Yeah, good evening. Uh, I'm Ashley Morgan from Jason Lampello Malin and Capuzo and we represent the city of Union City. Uh, to start off, I just want to say that our
client uh, we second the arguments made by Mr. Ross regarding the ordinance. Uh specifically, we believe that this is rushed as in it is not allowing the public an adequate opportunity to fully
review the amendments. Furthermore, we agree that the passing this amendment uh to the ordinance will not necessarily resolve the ongoing litigation or the
allegations of conflicts of interest. Because of this, we would agree that it would have been in everyone's best interest to adjourn this until a time which would allow for more public participation and would give an
opportunity to look more closely into the various topics that were listed by Mr. Ross. Thank you, Miss Morgan. Uh Pat Waiters. Miss Waiters. Yes. Thank you for
recognizing me, Council President. I must respectfully disagree with the last speaker, Miss Morgan. There you had so many meetings on this project here. I go way back from 2007 uh 17. Also, the one that was even in Jersey City, downtown
Jersey City. This is very personal to me. I don't think you guys should keep dragging this out. All of those attorneys came at these meetings and spoke. Members of the public was invited to these hearings. I was also there and I can name a few others. It's just is
the way they holding up this project for years and years. It's embarrassing. I think you city council members need to get together and take action and do what you have to do and leave everybody else that's on the outside out of it. This seem personal. How many more meetings do you have to have and then to have this
one virtual and inconvenient everybody? We thinking we joining in to hear about the budget and now we here we is still with the southwestern edge is crazy. I mean you got they won the lawsuit in court. I don't understand why you keep taking taxpayer money dragging this out
going back to court. They had so many public hearings on this. So what is the problem? We got an election slowly approaching. Everything is being rushed. But shame on y'all that this thing is still dragging in limbo like this for years and it's not fair to the developers that want to start their
project. It's personal to me. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Waiters. Saying any Any other members of the public? Motion to close. Second. All in favor? I I
Good tonight. On the ordinance. Mr. Con. I Mrs. Jabore. Yes. Mr. Presidento. Hi. Mr. Pantero.
Hi. President Doyle. Thank you. Thank you all. Yes. President Doyle. You vote. Jen, you have to All right. I voted. I I said All right. Thank you.
I'm sorry. All right. The ordinance is adopted. Okay. A motion to close. Anyone? Motion. Second. All in favor? I I meeting
adjourned. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you.