I mean, right now they're probably about Okay, everyone, we're about to get started. If you can find your seats, silence your cell phones, close the back door and side doors. I greatly appreciate it.
Good evening everyone. We are on the record. Today is Wednesday, the 12th day of November in the year 2025. This is a regular meeting of the Jersey City Municipal Council. We had a scheduled 6:00 p.m. start. The clock on my cell phone is showing 6:06
p.m. May we have a roll call for the commencement of this meeting? Council person Ridley here. >> Council person Hulings present. Council person Bajiano, council person >> here, >> council person Solomon, council person
Gilmore, council person Deise >> here, >> council person Rivera >> here, >> and council president Waterman >> here. >> We have all nine council members in attendance at 6:06 p.m. Can we kindly
rise for a moment of silence, please? Terry Tucker the flag to the flag of the republic. nation under Godisible. >> Thank you very much on behalf of Council
President Mortman and the members of the municipal council and the coordinates with New Jersey Public Laws of 1975 chapter 231, the Open Public Meetings Act, also known as the Sunshine Law. Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by the posted on the bulletin
board of the first floor of city hall. The annual notice which is the schedule of meetings and caucuses of the municipal council for the calendar year 2025 and filed in the office of the city clerk on Friday, November 15, 2024. In addition, at its time of its
preparation, the agenda of this meeting was similarly disseminated on Friday, November 7th, 2025 at 8:21 p.m. to the mayor, municipal council, business administrator, corporation council, and the local newspapers and posted on the city's website so I can certify as to
our total compliance with the sunshine law. Council members, before we move on to our regular order of business, there was a resolution placed in front of you to be added to
tonight's meeting. I didn't have the time to add it to the agenda because the agenda was already published, but it will be resolution number 25-727, agenda number 10.59.
It's a resolution recognizing November as Puerto Rican Heritage Month in the city of Jersey City. >> Motion. >> I have a motion to add resolution 25-727 item >> second.59 to the agenda by council person,
seconded by council person Gilmore. On the motion to add resolution 25-727 to the agenda, council person Ridley >> I. Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Yes. >> Council person.
>> Hi. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> Council person Rivera. >> Hi. >> And council president Warnament. >> Motion carries 90. I thought you said that.
>> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. And then after that >> withdrawal three he has to vote. Correct. These three have to be withdraw utilities. Okay. On to our regular order of
business. On the first reading, ordinances, item 3.1, city ordinance 25-119, is a bond ordinance providing for various capital improvements by and in the city of Jersey City in the county of Hudson, state of New Jersey,
reappropriating 58,393,447.96 in excess bond or note proceeds from the various bond ordinances. is not needed for their original purpose to finance the cost thereof. Item 3.2, 2 city ordinance 25-120
is a franchise ordinance granting permission to 2011 Newark Avenue Property LLC its successors and assigns to construct private improvements within the sidewalk area of the Jersey Avenue public right of way adjacent to lot 5
block 12702 on the official tax assessment map of the city of Jersey City. Item 3.3, city ordinance 25-121 is an ordinance amending chapter 3, article 10 of the Jersey City Municipal Code.
Item 3.4, city ordinance 25-122 is an ordinance supplementing chapter 254, property maintenance, article 9, maintenance and responsibility of owners and managers, amending section 3, excuse me, section 245, 254.45,
45 general safety and sanitation to align the facade inspection standards with best practices. Item 3.5, city ordinance 25-123 is an ordinance of the Jersey City Municipal Council amending the Jersey City Land Development Ordinance. Chapter
345, article 1, section 6, definitions. Chapter 345, article 5, section 62, residential design standards. And chapter 345, article 5, section 63, non-residential design
standards. Item 3.6, city ordinance 25-124, an ordinance amending chapter 345, zoning section 52, regarding permitted uses in the medical zone. Uh Sean, >> let me just finish reading the ordinances into the record, Councilman,
and then we can you can make your statement. Item 3.7, city ordinance 25-125, an ordinance amending and supplementing chapter 260, rent control to address institutional ownership of units not currently subject to rent control. And
last but not least, item 3.8, 8 city ordinance 25-126, an ordinance approving the 30-year tax exemption for a mixeduse project at 30 Newport Parkway and 40 Newport Parkway and authorizing financial agreement with
NC Housing Associates number 200 Urban Renewal Company pursuant to the long-term tax exemption law NJSA4A 20-1 exec. Council person Biano, did you address the >> on 3.6 Six. There's been a change in
reference to ordinance 3, ordinance 25-124, first reading agenda item 3.6. Uh, Miss Councilman Solomon and I have made changes to the following to the first reading ordinance. Strike out
assisted living striking out add uh putting it in a maximum height to four to five stories depending on the lot size. This is is in addition to striking out senior housing. This will prevent
luxury senior housing and luxury assisted living. This is what happened to another property along Power Avenue. We need 100% medical services. We have to keep Christ Hospital and we have to uh do everything we can and get the rest
of the certain people in this state to back us and make sure Christ Hospital survives. And maybe we should start talking to Barnabas Hospital and New York Hospital possibly about taking over the hospital. Okay, council members, I'm going to be
taking a vote for introduction on items 3.1 through 3.8. Council person Ridley, >> I have for introduction. >> Council person Huings, >> yes. Council person Bajana. >> No on 3.7 and no on 3.8. Yes on the
rest. >> Council person >> going to abstain on 36 and I for the rest of them. And with regards to the medical zone, I agree that the hospital should remain there, but in order for it
to be financially sustainable, there needs to be senior housing on on or around that parking lot, that site. And well, we will proceed, but um just want you to know as I am the ward council
person for Christ Hospital. Thank you. Yeah, yousef, what they're talking about is luxury senior housing, not senior housing for the >> I understand. I >> Yeah, >> I'm talking about reducing the height, >> right? >> We're just voting on introduction. Council members, >> right, >> council person Solomon?
>> Um, I vote I on 3.1, but have some more questions. Work with the administration on that. No on 3.2, I on 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, and 3.7. And then on 3.8 abstained.
>> So, you're just voting no on 3.2 and abstaining on 3.8 and I and all the rest. >> Correct. >> Thank you, Council Person Gilmore. >> Um, I'll vote I for introduction or all except for 3,
what's this? Eight. 3.8. Yeah, cuz I know I requested um just to see what the affordable rates would be and I have not received any emails as it relates to that. Um and I'm just a little, you
know, uneasy with embaitments in general. Um so I'll vote I for introduction on arrest. >> How are you voting on 3.8? >> Oh, no. Council Person Deise
>> I for introduction. >> Council person Rivera. Hi. >> And council president Waterman. >> I for introduction. >> Okay. If I can just recap, item 3.1 is introduced unanimously. 90. Item 3.2
is introduced 81, but council person Solomon voting no. Item 3 point items 3.3 through 3.5 are introduced unanimously.
90 item 3.6 is introduced 8001 with council person abstaining. Item 3.7 is introduced
81 with council person Bajiano voting no. And item 3.8 is introduced 5 2 1 with council members Bajiano and Gilmore voting no and
council person Solomon abstaining. Before we move on to all of our second reading ordinances, Council Person Rivera does have to leave the meeting and I am going to take his vote on the second reading ordinances with the
exception of 4.2 two, which is going to be defeated since we introduced ordinance 25 dash >> 125 >> 125
and we we are going to amend ordinance 4.6 excuse me item 4.6 6 ordinance number 25-113. So I won't be taking your vote on either of those items, Council Person Rivera.
And then I will be taking your vote on the claims and the resolutions. Before I take the vote on resolutions, I believe there's a couple of resolutions that the council is looking to withdraw. But before we get there, let me take the
council council person Rivera's vote on item 4.1 city ordinance 25-106. >> I 107 is going to be defeated.
Your vote on ordinance 25-108. I And I believe that we are also going to table and council person Gilmore, you can correct me if I'm wrong. I believe we're going to table ordinance 25-110 after the close of the public hearing.
Is that correct? >> Or no, let's just carry it that way. Um, people will still have what they want to say on the record. Um, >> okay. So, I won't be taking your vote on that one either. Council person Rivera,
your vote on ordinance 25-11. >> I >> not taking your vote on 113. We're amending it and your vote on ordinance 25-114. I. >> Your vote on ordinance 25-115.
>> I. >> Your vote on ordinance 25-116. >> I. >> Vote on ordinance 25-117. >> I. >> And your vote on ordinance 25-118?
I >> your >> vote on claims and addendums number one and number two. >> I Right. We're at the resolutions.
So I'm just looking at the resolutions. on resolutions 10.1 through 10.15. I >> your vote on resolutions 10.16 through 10.25. I
Give me one second. I'm sorry. Okay. Your vote on items 10.26 through 10.35. I >> your vote on items 10.36 through 10 44
>> I >> council president you had said that 10.45 45 will be withdrawn. >> So you're making a motion to withdraw >> 10.45
>> 10.45 >> 10.53 >> 10.53 >> 10.54 >> and 10.54 >> second >> from the agenda. Correct.
>> Just give me one second. >> Seconded by council person Sole. On the motion to withdraw items 10.45 53 and 54 from the agenda. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano.
>> Hi. >> Council person Cle. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. Council Person Deise >> I. >> Council Person Rivera. >> Hi. >> And council president Waterman. >> I. >> Motion carries 90 unanimously.
Will we be withdrawing items 10.45 53 and 54 from the agenda. With that being said, council person Rivera, I would require your vote on items 10.46 46
through 10.58 with the exception of 53 and 54 which has oh and and 10.59 which was added 53 and 54 have been withdrawn. >> I
council person re you are free to leave. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much for everyone's cooperation. Okay, members of the public and council members, we're on to our second reading ordinances. First second reading ordinance item 4.1, city ordinance
25-106 is an ordinance of the municipal council of the city of Jersey City referring and adopting amendments to the Bright Street redevelopment plan allowed accessory uses in zone 3 residential infill. This was carried from our September 24th
meeting. This is a public hearing on this ordinance. Any member wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Motion. >> Second. >> Motion to close the public hearing was made by council president Waterman, seconded by council person.
On the motion to close the public hearing on ordinance 25-106, council person Ridley, >> I. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. Council person Bajiano, Council Person Cle. >> Hi, >> Council Person Solomon. >> Hi,
>> Council Person Gilmore. Hi, >> Council Person Deise. >> Hi. >> And council president Waterman. >> I. >> Motion carries 800 to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-106 for final consideration and adoption of
city ordinance 25-106. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Huings. Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Council person Cle. >> Hi. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council person Deise. Council person Ria
voted yes earlier. Council P. Council President Waterman. >> Hi. >> City ordinance 25-106 is unanimously adopted. 90. Before I read the next second reading ordinance, this is just a reminder to everyone watching at home and everyone
in the audience. Please note that today is the last day to register to vote for in the runoff election, our municipal runoff election. My office is open till 9:00 p.m. tonight. It is staffed with someone willing to take a new voter registration. This is your last day to
register to vote for the runoff election that will happen on December 2nd, 2025. That's your public announcement for the for tonight. Next ordinance, item 4.2, city ordinance 25-107. This is an ordinance amending and supplementing
chapter 260 rent control to introduce rental increase limitations carried from the October 8th meeting. As discussed at the caucus and the beginning of this meeting, we introduced an ordinance that is going to replace this ordinance. So, I need a motion to
move to defeat city ordinance 25-107 without a public hearing. >> Motion. >> Motion made by council person, seconded by council president waterman. >> On the motion to move to defeat city ordinance 25-107 without a public
hearing. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Council person Cle. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. Council person Gilmore. >> I, >> Council Person Deise, >> I. >> And Council President Waterman. Motion
carries 8 Z with Council Person Rivera absent to move to defeat city ordinance 25-107 without a public hearing. So, council members, council members are going to be taking a vote on city ordinance 25-107.
Since you made a motion to move to defeat, your vote should be nay. That being said, council person Ridley, >> no. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> No. Does >> she want to vote? Yes. You can't tell
how to vote. >> I want to make sure she understands we're we are voting this ordinance down. So, in order to vote it down, you have to vote no. >> Thank you. No. >> I'm not going to say nothing. Council person Gilmore. Council person Bodiana,
>> no. >> Council person Cle, >> no. >> Council person Solomon, >> no. >> Council person Gilmore, >> no. >> Did you mean yes? Council person Deise, >> no. >> And council president Waterman.
City Ordinance 25-107 is defeated 08 with council person Rivera absent. On to second reading ordinance item 4.3 city ordinance 25-108 is an ordinance of the municipal council
of the city of Jersey City amending chapter 187 inclusionary zoning ordinance. This ordinance was carried from the October 22nd meeting. This is a public hearing on this ordinance. Any member wishing to be heard, please come up and state your name for the record.
Before you do that, just give me one second so I can get the camera on you. And if you can just state your name for the record and spell it for the record. >> Moren Crowley. C R O WL E Y. >> Thank you, Moren.
>> Um, the board of the Embankment Preservation Coalition supports this ordinance, the inclusionary zoning amendment. It's a condition of the embankment settlement that you're going to be voting on later um in this meeting. and we support it because it
adds 30 units of affordable housing to um a redevelopment area that would otherwise not have any. Thank you very much. >> Next speaker. >> Good evening. >> If you can state your name.
>> My name is Sonia Rujo. I am a lifelong resident of Jersey City. I'm retired deputy library director and I'm a proud uh board member of Paco organization in Jersey City. My um thank you for allowing me to speak on
behalf of the residents of Bijabink, a community that has stood proudly in the heart of Jersey City for Are you speaking on this ordinance in particular? >> Uh the embankment. This is but this ordinance it does deal with the embankment but this is for chapter 187
inclusionary zoning. >> No no I I want >> this is not >> so this is not the right ordinance that >> it has to do with the embankment. This is not the one that's has the embankment in the title of the ordinance. >> Okay. So when is the uh the the
embankment ordinance or that already passed? >> That did not pass yet. That's item 4.10. I figured I I knew I didn't I didn't miss it. Okay. Okay. >> She just was making sure >> motion. Okay. >> Second.
>> Wait, hold on. So, this is still a public hearing. I got to be the camera operator, too. Just bear with me. This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-108. Any member of the public still wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium, state your name for the record.
Motion. Motion made by Councilman Cle to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-108. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by council president Waterman. On the motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-108. Council person
Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Hulings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Council person. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. Council person Gilmore I. >> Council person Deise I.
>> And council president Waterman. Motion carries 80 with council person Rivera absent to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-108 for final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-108. Council person Ridley. >> I.
>> Council person Hulings. >> Yes. >> Council person Biano. >> Council person Cle. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. Council Person Gilmore I. >> Council Person Deise and Council President Waterman. >> Hi.
>> Council present person Ria voted in affirmative earlier. City ordinance 25-108 is approved unanimously. 90. On to our next second reading ordinance. Item 4.4 city ordinance 25-110.
It's an ordinance authorizing the city of Jersey City to enter into a lease purchase agreement as a leie with Jackson Square Office LLC as a lesser for a ninestory office building to be constructed on block 22502 lots 36-37
between Orient Avenue and Carney Avenue on Martin Luther King Drive and ancillary improvements throughout Jackson Square. This ordinance was carried from the October 22nd meeting and I believe there is going to be a motion to carry
this ordinance. >> Yes, motion. >> Second. >> Okay, hold on. Let me just to carry ordinance 25-110. What's the um the the second meeting in December, Sean?
>> There's only one meeting in December. >> So, we have to be the 10th. >> Oh, okay. >> So, we're carrying >> one more meeting. >> Yeah. >> One in November, one in December. >> Oh, okay.
>> When you want to carry it, too. >> I didn't know. I thought it was two. Hold on. Let me see. And >> what's the following meeting after that >> January 15th which will be a new council and >> yeah this ordinance will this ordinance
cannot be adopted by the new council. >> It can't >> no sir. >> So all right so we'll carry it to the uh 10th and see what happens >> December 10th. Yes. to the December 10th meeting.
That motion was made by council person Gilmore. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by council person. On the motion to carry city ordinance 25-110 to the December 10th meeting. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Yulings. >> Yes.
>> Council person Bajanna. >> Council person Cle. >> I. Council Person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council Person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council Person Deise. Hi. >> And council president Warman. Motion carries. Aids, excuse me, 8 Z with
council person Ria absent. >> Hey Sean, can you just explain why wouldn't it be um able to be carried to the following meeting? >> Who here? >> Yes. >> Councilman, might be a question for the law department. >> Law department.
>> Yes. just so the public can know because our purpose is to educate to just um so people know exactly why. >> Sure. We can't have one council introduce for first reading an ordinance and then have an entirely new council vote on a second reading. So it wouldn't
be fair to introduce with one council and then have a second brand new council then vote on something they didn't get to opine on on introduction. >> Thank you. That's why our last time to introduce new ordinances is the November hopefully 25th meeting. >> Hopefully
>> hopefully 25th meeting. We will not be introducing any new ordinances on the December 10th meeting. >> Okay. And just to piggy back up on that as well, any ordinances left on the tabled agenda will also expire with the
council's turn unless the council acts on December 10th on any of those ordinances that are tabled. Okay. Excellent. On to our next second reading ordinance. Item 4.5, city ordinance 25-111,
is an ordinance of the Jersey, excuse me, is an ordinance of the city of Jersey City in the county of Hudson, state of New Jersey, providing for a special emergency appropriation in the amount of 14 million to fund contractually required severance liabilities resulting from the
retirement of employees of the city. This is a public hearing on this ordinance. And I see Charlene Burke. Just give me one second, Charlene, to get the camera on you. >> Certainly. >> Appreciate your patience. Want to make sure everybody sees you at
home. All right, Charlene. >> Hi. >> You're good. Good to go. >> Thank you. Good evening, council. I had put in an Oprah on this particular um agenda item and I didn't receive anything back on I recognize it was the
election and probably clerk's office is very busy but I didn't get any of the information I requested but I followed that up with four of the council people asking you including my ward B council person to provide me with the
information that I requested about who this applies to what the interest rate is, how much do we owe, all of these kind of questions, and no one responded except uh Councilman Solomon's office,
but they didn't provide me with the information either. And then when I watched the reading of the first hearing, the when it was introduced, there was apparently an email that went to all of you with details about this. So why would you have not shared it?
That's one thing. Firstly, I'm asking just backup questions. There was nothing to this ordinance in terms of details. Who's getting paid? What's it for? Well, it's public service or public safety. One of the things I would like to know,
who's Danny? He came up here. I wish the directors would identify themselves when they speak at caucus so I know who's speaking. Okay. Then there was an email from directors or whatever his name is. But needless to
say, I want to ask I understand firemen and police officers. I guess this is um their payout for their uh time acrewed like their their days off or sick time or vacation time that they haven't
taken. So I understand when they retire they're not allowed to get a balloon payment anymore. you get it over 5 years. So if it's paid to these people over 5 years, why are we bonding for it? Why are we doing this note for it? Why
can't we pay out of our regular allocations the amount owed? Cuz otherwise all we're doing is paying interest on this money. And $14 million in interest is pretty high, especially even at 2.6% 6% I think
which is the interest rate I heard. So, and plus it's why not just build it into the budget. So, I would have liked all these questions to be answered before I came up here cuz I'm really not sure about all the numbers. I would have
liked to have spoken to you more knowledgeably, but it seems like I don't get that kind of information as a regular resident being interested in a $14 million emergency note that you are
saddling the next administration with. And I really feel that all of you missed an opportunity those that I requested. >> Thank you, Sha. The time is up. Respond. Thank you.
>> This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-11. Any member of the public wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Ivonne Bolson. >> Ivonne. So nice to see you. >> So nice to be here. >> Welcome back. >> Um since the 1990s under Brett Chundler,
we've been bonding terminal leave. Now, the state passed a law a while back. It's capped at $15,000, but we're still paying out big boat pavements, I would call it. According to the budget that I have, the bonds note, we have one right here, pension qualifying obligation
bond, $14 million from the past. The bottom line is from my calculations from 1990s and especially under the full administration, we had paid out close to
$200 million in terminal leave over many administrations. So you talk about affordable housing. Uh this is placed on taxes. It's on the bond debt. Now it's many administrations, but as Charlene said, it should be part of our debt. And
I don't know why we're handing out these major things when all the others municipalities follow state law and cap it at $15,000 leaving. They should use up their time and take the days. and taxpayers should
not be in a hole because our debt. I'm looking at the debt right now. We have I mean it's like $1.5 >> billion dollars in debt. Some of that is debt in terms of uh we pay a fee like the water fees or sewer fees, but some
of it is just playing bonds. So the the point being you make housing unaffordable because of what you vote for. Then you say, "Oh, the landlords, they're horrible people. They raise taxes, but the landlord has to pay these bills.
So, the point of it is you're not doing your job. If other cities uh did what the state did and capped it at $15,000, then why are we paying these boat payments that they call and they are boat payments because some people are leaving with $200,000. Some are leaving
with $300,000. And it's not right. If you're going to do this, we have the reserve. the reserve according to the budget is $27 million. Well, take it from the reserve and stop voting these bonds because at at some point
the bond debt is going to be larger than anything else you're going to pay. Now, when I look at the budget, I think the bond debt was something like $70 million that we had to pay this year, but it can go up and down according to the interest rate and new bonds. So, one reason why
housing is not affordable is because of the debt of the city. And you like to blame it on greedy landlords, but it is the irresponsibility of city government who is not following the state rules of capping the reserve payments at $15,000 per employee. My time. I'm finished.
Thank you. >> Thank you. This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-11. Any member of the public still wish to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Motion. >> Second.
>> Motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-11 was made by council person, seconded by council person budiano. >> Yep. >> On the motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-11.
Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Hulings. >> Yes. Council person Bajiano. >> Yes. >> Council person. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> And council president Mortman. Motion
carries. 80 with council person Rivera absent to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-11 for final consideration and adopt. >> Hang on Sean. Um, Via, if you can speak to the cap at 15,000,
um, the state threshold, um, if you can speak to why why individuals are not capped at that amount or are they capped at that amount? >> Yeah. So, I'll let Britney correct me if I get the dates wrong, but I believe the original state legislation that capped
it was 2011 and maybe amended in 2013. That's what capped it. But any employee that was hired prior to that is grandfathered in. So it's only employees hired after that date where that cap applies to them because it usually takes about 20 to 30 years for an employee to retire. We're at a time now where you've
seen a lot of employees retire under the old rules where they could get paid out in excess of the $15,000 based on their vacation, sick time, and unused leave. >> Yeah, but there was Hold on, Rich. Let me get my thoughts finished. But there was a opportunity to have them exhort
that time without getting paid out. Correct. >> It's up to the employee. >> I know. But what I'm saying is the opportunity had presented itself, right? >> In what sense? I don't know if I understand the question, Councilman. >> What I'm saying when I left the city, right, they said, "Councilman, you have
X amount of days, right? You're only going to get this amount. So you either pretty much use them or lose them or you don't you lose them in a sense you don't get the full value for them. What I'm saying is those employees had that option. Correct. When they retire they
have the option if they haven't used their leave already, their vacation, they're sick, whatever else, then they get the payment for us. That's what this payment represents. So these are employees that over the years, you know, didn't use their full sick time for a year, didn't use their full vacation time for a year, carried it over, and
then when they retire, they have an excess bank of sick time and vacation time that they're getting compensation for based on not using it because the cap doesn't apply to them. They get the full, you know, amount of time that was there, which can be, you know, a lot of
money compared to the $15,000 that the average employee now would be subject to. >> Okay? And some of those some of those individuals get upwards of 200 grand. No, >> it really depends on that employee salary and how much sick time and
vacation time they had. Um it could be that high. Generally the average employee is not in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. But you know for uh certain employees who had higher salaries and they're retired that have had a lot of time they haven't used yes they can have very large payments sometimes which is why the government
officially allowed us in the state to put this in place as far a bond because especially for smaller municipalities you know if someone retires and they have a large amount of payment it could very make it could make a very difficult budget decision for the council. So like this it allows you to basically pay it over a 5-year time period. So we do pay
it all to the employee or the retiree now, but we get to pay to the city over five years versus just one year and one operating budget. >> Okay. So what is the administration position as it relates to instead of
bonding including it um in the budget? Is it more cost effective? Because for me, I'm thinking that if we're bonding, you're you're paying that individual for the obligation and on top of that, you
also getting hit probably not initially, but down the line with the interest of >> there's no interest. It's an interest rate 5-year loan. Basically, it's a bond that we can put out for 5 years with no interest. >> So, there's no difference. >> The difference only to us is instead of putting it in one budget or one
operating budget, we get to spread it out over five years. Because if we put it in the operating budget, it'll increase taxes by 4.7%. Correct. >> Well, it increase the budget by four $14 million, which would equate to whatever, you know, would come out on the tax end of it. >> Got it.
>> Okay. >> Or require cuts elsewhere to pay for it. >> Should I bring that up? >> No. >> Okay, John. >> Okay. for final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-11.
Council person Ridley >> I. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Banna. >> Hi. >> Council person. >> Hi. >> Council person Solomon. >> No. >> Council person Gilmore. >> Um good lord.
Um, I'm going to uh abstain. Um, because I'm just trying to to figure out how do we how do one we get in line with what the state is doing? But bigger than that, how do we get in line with making
sure that we're physically responsible as a municipal government? Um, so I mean I don't feel comfortable voting yes. Um, so I'm going to abstain from this. >> Council person Deise, >> they use the same arguments against
teachers when they go to retire and put in their days. These are union employees that have collectively bargained these terms and deserve their money. I >> that's a persona voted I earlier. Council President Waterman.
So, city ordinance 25-111 is adopted 71 1 with council person Solomon voting no and council person Gilmore abstaining. Before we move on to our next second reading ordinance,
I just want to clarify the vote total on item 3.8. I did incorrectly say the vote total was 521. It was actually 621. So there were six members voting in the
affirmative, two members voting against, which was council person Bajiano and Gilmore and council person Solomon abstaining. So it's 621 for the record. I apologize for that. >> All right, >> you accept the
>> It's my first meeting back in two two weeks. Um, all right. Our next second reading ordinance, item 4.6, Six, city ordinance 25-113, an ordinance amending and supplementing chapter 90 animals to ban the retail sale of dogs, cats, and rabbits, and pet
stores within Jersey City. This is a public hearing on this ordinance. Any member of the public wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Sean, very quickly, we made edits to this. Do you want to do it now or before after? So, who's going first?
This is a public hearing for the animal ordinance. So, the edits are done. Amendments are done after the public hearing, but the edits are online. If you looked at them, they're in red and they're not substantially changed. But I we we
usually do that after the public hearing. So, with that being said, I need your before I got to adjust the camera. I'm sorry. And I'm just going to need you to spell your name for the record before I start the clock.
>> Absolutely. Ariel Leavitz. >> Hold on, Ariel. I'm I'm putting the camera on you. >> Oh, I see. >> One man operation. >> You spell your first name for me. >> A R I E L. >> Thank you.
>> Last name Leavitz. L E F K O V I TS >> K O V I Ts. >> Yes, that's correct. >> Thank you so much, Ariel. >> Thank you. Um and good evening, council. So, I am Ariel Leavitz. I've spoken before you a couple of times now on this
ordinance um which is to prohibit the sale of dogs, cats, and rabbits in pet stores in Jersey City. Um as I've mentioned previously, this is a preventative measure. There are no uh puppy selling pet stores currently in the city. What this would do is prevent
any bad actors from coming in and uh promoting the puppy mill to pet shop pipeline within our community. Um, this is something that is a animal welfare issue but also a uh consumer protection
issue and I just wanted to briefly uh ask again for your support and also mention um so I was part of the discussions that led to the edits. Um those edits are making sure that the animal shelter and animal rescue definitions in the ordinance are in line
with uh state code um and ensures that this only explicitly states rather that this only would affect pet shops in the city. Thank you so much for your time. >> Thank you.
>> Next speaker, I know her. >> Hi, Gina Davidson. G I N A D A V I S O N. >> Thank you, Gina. >> Um I do work for Councilman Gilmore, but I'm speaking on behalf of not only myself tonight, but on behalf of the
rescue organizations, about 10 plus rescue organizations here in Jersey City. Um, we the people on the ground doing this work, we shouldn't have to worry that on top of us doing the work and on top of
us funding our own work that this city council won't try to jam through a legislation without working with us. And this is what happens when we try to legislate on the way out of our
appointment. when we try to legislate as a part of our political campaign. And so I wish Danny were here. I wish I wasn't speaking to an empty chair, but you know, the rescue world was very upset this afternoon and we were all calling each other, emailing each other.
You know, back in October, it was brought to your attention from the shelter director and animal control director that language needed to be changed in this ordinance. and yet you jammed this through this afternoon.
So, I'm frustrated, you know, and and did Fulip create the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee to actually consult with us or was that also just for press? So, I'm going to ask that we
hold on voting on this tonight because I don't appreciate that this council decides that they can make decisions without including the community. Thank you. >> I'm sorry about that, sir. Your name?
>> David Grant. David Grant. >> Um, I represent I'm the New Jersey director for the Humane World for Animals, formerly known as the Humane Society of the United States, our organization along with a coalition of other rescues and animal welfare organizations. Thank you for bringing
this up. And we are very excited about Jersey City taking on this uh ordinance mostly because, as you probably know, New York passed a state bill that recently went into effect. And so what we're seeing are these stores that do not want to switch to a humane business model are moving over the river and
coming over to Jersey. And we don't want to exacerbate the puppy mill to pipeline the puppy mill to pet store pipeline that already exists in New Jersey. As my colleague and good friend Ariel said who's been working so diligently on this, this is not only this is not only protects the animals, but it protects
consumers. We have seen interest rates as high as 150% at some of these pet stores in New Jersey. Not only that, if you get a sick animal that might die early on in life because because of inbreeding and poor conditions growing up, there's little to no recourse for
the consumer to give the pet back and get their money back, which is often in the thousands of dollars. Um, so we want to thank you for taking this up and we are happy to work on any language or any amendments that you guys uh see fit. Thank you. >> Just hold on one second.
Hey, your name for the record. >> Hey guys, it's Carol McNichol. >> Carol Carol >> Nicole >> McNickel. >> Okay, Carol. >> Um, I'm not, you know, really wellversed
on this ordinance. I heard about it fleetingly. Um, and I thought, yes, we don't want puppy meals being dogs being sold in our city. Um, so I'm for this type of ordinance. Um,
but as Gina said, and I don't know her exact point, her issues, if the animal welfare community has not been consulted about this, I think you should table this and move it to next year.
Um, not because it's not a good ordinance. I don't know the language. Um, but you know, the people here doing rescue live and die for these animals that they rescue. We know about the horrors of the
animal world. And I've been in it for 20 years. So, I am speaking on behalf of the rescues, asking you to put this on the table, reconvene I know it could be an issue now because it's year end, but this is a simple
ordinance that can go through next year without any problem with the correct language and coverage. Thank you. This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-113. Any member of the public still wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the
record. >> Motion. Motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-113 was made by council person, seconded by council president. On the motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-113,
council person Ridley >> I. >> Council person Yulings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Yes. >> Council person. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> Stepped away.
>> Council person Deise. I just want to make a comment before my vote. So, >> this is just to close the public hearing. >> Yeah. But before everyone does their second vote, I just want to get the comments out. Um, so yes, after this was introduced, the director of animal control and health and human services brought concerns to us. Some fostering
and rescue organizations also brought those. Um, after talking about the details that needed to be included with this, there were things like um humane uh and e and unethical breeding enforcement on that as well as not
declawing cats that the amendments were too large that this was going to be a broader conversation. We wanted to get this one through because as Ariel said, this is a preventative matter. There are no pet shops right now. This is to stop that. The other stuff, the very
important stuff to keep our animals safe and to make sure that the city can enforce it takes a much larger conversation. Um, we met again with the director of animal control with health and human services and the advisory board um Paul Bell & Boer who has a
meeting this November and we have representatives from the rescue organizations that are going to be a part of this discussion and I will reach out to to anybody else. We had some rescue organizations that reached out to myself and Mr. Rivera personally. You can send us an email if you want notes
or to be a part of that meeting as well because we do agree with you. It's just we don't want to make a huge uh ordinance right now that we're not going to be able to enforce. So, we take this one step at a time. But I do thank you for your concerns. I vote yes to them
end the public comment. Council President Wman, your vote to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-113. Council person Gilmore. >> I motion carries 80 with council person
Rivera absent. Final consideration. Well, excuse me. Before we do that, I believe we have a motion. We're going to need a motion to amend city ordinance 25-113. And the amendment is attached to the ordinance as well as incorporated into
the ordinance >> motion. >> You're going to read >> You want me to read it? Okay. >> You're going to read it into the record. Council person, you can read it. I can read it. I have it highlighted here. So
the amendments um Sean are in um 4A animal rescue organization shall have the meaning as defined in NJSA 419-15.1 that makes sure that you don't have to
be a 501c3. Um the next edit is in um section 7. shelter shall have the meeting as defined in NJSA 419-15.1. And then finally, there is um an additional five that says nothing in
this section shall be construed to prohibit animal rescue organizations or animal shelters from selling or offering for sale dogs, cats or rabbits. >> And the magical question is this a substantial change cooperation council?
>> No. >> Okay. With that being said, >> renew my motion. >> Council person Cle makes a motion to amend city ordinance 25-113 as stated so eloquently into the record
by our corporation council. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by council person Deise. On the motion to amend city ordinance 25-113. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. Council person Bajiano. >> Yes.
>> Council person Cle. >> Hi. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> And council president Waterman. Motion carries 800 with council person Ria
absent to amend city ordinance 25-113. Final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-113 as amended. Council person.
>> Um, I know that people came up with concerns. It sounds like the amendment and council person says hopefully takes care of those concerns if I'm understanding correctly. And if that uh seems to be the case from what I'm
gathering, then um I vote I. >> Council person Helings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. All right, council person. >> With the amendments, I vote I. >> Council person Solomon, >> I and and happy to work with folks in
the future to see if there are any changes to make, but I vote I. >> Council person Gilmore >> I. >> Council person Deise >> I. And thank you very much Ariel for bringing this to our attention. >> And council president Waterman. City Ordinance 25-113
is adopted 80 with council person Rivera absent as amended. Our next second reading ordinance item 4.7 city ordinance 25-114 is an ordinance amending chapter
188 housing accommodations and affordable housing compliance. This is a public hearing on this ordinance. Any member of the public wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Charlene Burke. >> Yep.
>> I do have a question about this because I know affordable housing has been a big issue in this election cycle and uh this ordinance is it a signing or does it create a overseer of the affordable
housing in Jersey City? whether it was created by Jersey City Affordable Housing Trust Fund or other means like HUD or other grants because one of my experiences in Jersey City is that when workforce housing was created on my
block Duncan Avenue, the Mary Norton, they uh were supposedly restricted housing for 5 years at minimum and then two years later they were selling them. There were individuals who were already
selling their units and when I called affordable housing or at the time the person who was in the affordable housing department, they said, "Well, you know, it's not our unit. You'd have to call HUD in Newark."
And I'm really concerned that, you know, even when I heard the Newport um lawyer speaking about all those affordable housing or affordable units down there, do you really know that they're affordable? I mean, has an audit
been done and is it only a self imposed audit by the developer who provides you with that information? Or do we have somebody in the city who's actually a watchdog to make sure these things are in fact
affordable? Because what's the point? Otherwise, it's just words, ladies and gentlemen. and and when you use words, we believe you and it's really unfair to tell the public you're really concerned about affordable
housing. Yeah. Creating it when it gives an a a developer a big tax break, but not year to year when you know what, they moved out and the developer didn't tell you and then next thing you know
it's really not affordable anymore. So I'm asking does this ordinance create that office that is going to be the watchdog for affordable housing? Do you know anyone?
>> Peter. >> So substantially this ordinance about updating some of the statutes to match the state statutes. We do have a department or division that watches affordable by housing which is division of affordable housing. They're the ones who you go to with any complaints or if there's any issues and they keep the records very to ensure everyone's in
compliance with it. >> So there is a compliance officer. >> Yes. So MLK. >> Thank you. >> This is still a public hearing on this ordinance. Any member of the public wishing to be heard, please come up to
the podium and state your name for the record. Uh Lawrence Sneed. Lawrence S ne E D >> S E >> Sneeed >> want to pull a mic up so you don't have
to >> back right now. >> There you go. >> Hello. >> Yeah, Lawrence, you're good. >> Thank you. Uh what is the area median income? Does it include wealthy suburbs?
like are we are we are people getting >> Peter this ordinance because um >> I'm sorry >> he's going to >> oh she was directing the question to our acting business administrator so the area median income is fed set at the
federal level and it applies to the county there's a carve out for city and both sides and county but doesn't include like we don't go extend Peter I'm sorry to interrupt can you use the other mic I don't know what's going on with that So it doesn't extend out to suburbs or >> that's even worse.
>> Mic is terrible. I >> think it's Peter. No, no, no. >> Can you pause the speaker's time? I'm sorry. >> Testing any better? >> Hold on. >> Okay. >> Testing. >> Go ahead.
>> Right. So, the area median income is not set is set by the state and the federal government. It's not set locally by us. It does not extend out to suburbs beyond Hudson County or that area. It's set to be a locality related to specific economic conditions for this area and
for the urban area that we live in. >> Does that mean just Jersey City be >> because it's unaffordable? The rent is too high. >> Britney, explain what this ordinance is. She's going to explain exactly what this
ordinance is. If they're It's a very long ordinance. It's a significant amount of changes. So, if they're just >> Wait, hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. >> Just speak slowly, >> right? >> Cuz when you first turn it on, it's not picking up right away. You got to give
it a minute. Just like a second. >> Go ahead. >> Okay. All right. There's a little there's a significant amount of changes. We're updating. It seems like some of these questions might be more rhetorical, but if there's questions at the end of it, we can try to answer all
those. But there's a significant amount of changes. It's through the division of affordable housing. It's just updating and things like that. >> Okay. Okay. >> Please don't shout out. >> Please don't.
>> Okay. Mr. Sneep. >> Okay. Yeah. No. um get get our you know wages so that you know exactly what needs to happen. Don't include us with anybody else so that it's actually affordable. >> Correct. >> We don't want we don't want to pay their we're not living their wages.
>> Yeah. >> So >> thank you. >> Okay. >> I appreciate it. Thank you. >> All right. I keep telling y'all there's a big difference between lowincome housing and affordable housing and
workforce housing. Low income housing is like housing authority controls. Affordable housing comes with a section 8 voucher. It's a big difference. You don't have no
affordable houses around here that's not without section 8. Unless you go with the low income like the web building I built on Oak Street, it's affordable housing and it goes by a certain income. You can't make over
$40,000 living in housing authority. Don't turn your head. I'm talking to you. You running for mayor so you know what to talk about. The difference between a low income housing is all the Jersey City Housing Authority houses.
It's a total different thing. affordable housing and workforce housing, you get section 8. I used to go to Trenton and then to Washington C DC. I sat on the affordable housing commission
back here in 205 and 210. And that's why I said we need to upgrade stuff. That's like the housing we built, affordable housing we built. They had to make a certain amount of money to buy them houses. couldn't be over maybe 30,
40 or $50,000. And we need to look into that because we losing a lot of houses. People that when we build them houses on the White Street, Stman, Maple Street, them houses we did low-inccome housing.
Now, after 30 years, they paid for a lot of people and sold them and left here and now they in another category. So what we need to do is really really invest in this. Look out cuz you got a lot of people live sleeping on the
street that they don't make enough money. Low income housing you can make 10,000. You can be on welfare section 8 whatever. It's a big difference. A big difference that we not looking into. People come to me lever I need
apartment. How much money you make? Bro I'm on welfare. only get you go you got to go into low income housing affordable housing you got to have at least 20 30 $40,000 income or go to section 8 and get a voucher to go with your money that's a total different
thing I don't know what this one is about but it's not covering this city y'all you really need to look into this and break it down for the people when I got burned out on Maple street 70 years
ago. I went to Maring Gardens. They had apartment to my father house got fixed up on Maple Street. You can't even do that no more. We don't have nowhere for people to go when they even get burnout. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker.
>> Hi. Yes, my name is Tina Nos and yes, I do work for education at Gearmore. Um, affordable houses. We already know right now we had 30 families today calling because they need somewhere to stay. They are they back up in their rent because we don't have jobs. Our mayor
decided to build apartments of jobs. So that's the reason why I really think that we need to take um a meeting in our community because apparently whoever is putting these affordable houses on the list, they have not had their boots on
the ground because we are realized that we have so many families that's living in the streets or living with their f they their families and their friends. And another thing, where is the funds? But I guess I know where them funds at. By me running for politician, I've been
hearing a lot of different stories been calling me. So now I know where the funds is at. So now what we need to do is start looking at the people that been leading and realize these are the ones who've been stealing monies and making different meetings behind our backs to
make sure that they families and that they friends are good. But now we need to learn that we need more housing for not just affordable, but for the ones who's working at McDonald's, for the ones who don't have enough payments to do it. Right now, we got people living
in Airbnb houses because they can't put down a payment. So, y'all let our mayor design this. So, y'all need to find out how to recorrect us since y'all was behind him and find out how we could continue to help our family instead of saying affordable houses.
This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-114. Any member of the public still wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Motion. >> Second. >> Motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-114
was made by council president, seconded by council person. On the motion to close a public hearing on city ordinance 25-114, council person Ridley. >> I. Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Budana. >> Council person Sole. >> Hi.
>> Council person Solomon. >> So just I know this is a public hearing, but before I vote, can I just explain the ordinance? I think might help. Yeah, sure. So just briefly about four years ago, the city council passed this chapter 188 uh to basically create affordable housing rules across the
city. Prior to that, four years ago, we basically had no rules whatsoever. So, you know, one project might have affordable housing and it all might be at um 80% of area median income and then another one might have a project and it might be a mix and nobody was monitoring it. Um there was no system to uh fairly
make sure that people got the uh housing units in a fair and equitable manner. Um there was basically just no system whatsoever. There were units that had been lost. So basically the purpose of passing this four years ago was one to create a a standard system that anytime a project had affordable housing that um
they had to sign an agreement with the city that agreement would cover what the definition of the affordable units were. Um how many bedrooms that were in it um you know how it was going to be marketed in a fair and equitable manner, how there's going to be a fair lottery. Um and what we did is we we uh copied the
rules from the state. Um they're called U-Hack and the state rules are considered the best practice, best in the country, very fair and to the points made about needing genuinely affordable housing. Um it does force every project to have uh affordable housing at 30% very immediate income which basically
means at this stage rents of about a thousand a month um and and then uh other levels of affordability. Um and so I it was a big improvement when we did it four years ago because the system was completely chaotic before then. What this ordinance is doing is it's updating our code because the state updated their
code because we based our rules on the state. This is updating what our city rules because of what the state had done. Um and so it's basically just updating what we did about four years ago. Now all of that is to say this doesn't change the dire need for more affordable housing and it doesn't change
the fact that we have to change other things in the city. But I just want to make sure clear that this is what we're doing. We're updating our existing governance process of affordable housing system to match the state rules because we base our system on the states. And with that, I vote I to close the public hearing. Yes, sir.
>> Council person Gilmore. >> Sean, should I give an explanation too or it's up to you, Sean? >> I say you can vote on closing the public hearing. >> I council person deise. >> I >> and council president Waterman
>> I. Motion carries 80 with council person Ria absent to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-114 for final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-114. Council person Ridley >> I. >> Council person Hulings.
>> Yes. >> Council person Biano. >> Council person. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> Council person Rivera voting in the affirmative earlier. and Council President Waterman.
>> Hi. >> City ordinance 25-114 is adopted unanimously 90. On to our next second reading ordinance item 4.8, city ordinance 25-115
is an ordinance amending chapter 345 of the municipal code and the municipal zoning map to create the Hackinack River Greenway Overlay District. This is a public hearing. On this ordinance, any member of the public wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and
state your name for the record. >> Charlene Burke. Council. Um, I'm the president of the Westside Community Alliance, which is the west side of Jersey City, which this ordinance particularly affects. It
affects all the land along the Hackinack River and we are certainly in support of the Hackinac Riverwalk continuation. There's only small segments. There's the county has some behind the facility, the
the big warehouse facility. And we agree that it should be continuous. But with this was also a change in zoning to a lot of land on the west side and it didn't involve anybody from the
community. When I watched the cau the caucus when this was introduced it was a agreement between the Jersey City Planning Department and the Hudson County Planning Department and no community input whatsoever.
And I would really like to ask you to table this and let them have a meeting with the community because I think it's very important given all that's going on. The the western side of Jersey City is where the developers are all looking
now. And I don't know what kind of zoning overlay they really put into place and what kind of density they're putting in there because let me tell you when you upone a parcel Voronado the
owner of Hudson Mall is going they have a lot of lawyers and if we decide oh you know what that was a little too dense there and start to think about maybe we shouldn't have done that well their lawyers are just going to be here saying if you change that zoning we're just
going to sue you and Voronado has very deep pockets. So before we make zoning changes why not involve the community so that we understand what's going to be built along the hackinac because as we all
know if you're not involved in the beginning it's a big surprise in the end. So, please consider putting this off for 2 weeks so that there can be a community meeting and educating us as to exactly
what planning is intending to do here because honestly, I wasn't focused on this. Otherwise, I certainly would have been a lot more vocal even to the last city council meeting. So, please put this on the table. You
can bring this back the end of November or the last meeting in December, but we need to be involved. Thank you. >> This is still a public hearing on this ordinance. Next speaker.
>> Good evening. Philip Carrington. If you are amending any area zoning then you are varying from the existing plan. The state law requires that if you are
varying from the plan as much as they are doing here, 24% at least 24% of the people that is affected by that in that area should be contacted.
There should be a series of meetings or hearings and that made public. Apparently, this is has not been done. The developers or whoever, they're not here. People from
the area are certainly not here. So, this amount of what we call political scald duggery. I mean, someone's running a game on people. And this happens all the time. Even in areas that has been
had a redevelopment plan, you do this night game of of playing all kind of plays with with it. You set a meeting up and then you table it and hide it from people. I said this is just an example
of that. So the question simply is has there been any hearings on this that you are varying from the plan. That's what it says here. You're changing zone. Zoning is everything. Zoning is key. So you're veering from the existing plan to
do what? Can someone answer? Has there been any meetings for the people in that area? I'm not going to give you the state law cuz it does not affect me that much. If not, I would go on digging and raise much more hell. But this happens all the
time. So no one is answering, which means you didn't do that. This is just a regular sleazy political skull dug. He plays it all the time under Steve administration. That is my viewpoint. Good tonight.
This is still a public hearing. Our next speaker, you can just state your name for the record. >> Sure. Ayah Shurmer. >> Ayler Shurmer. >> Yep. All right. Good evening. Um, I strongly urge the council to pass this ordinance
establishing the Hackinack River Greenway Overlay District. Jersey City is lucky enough to be surrounded by two great rivers on our east and west sides. The Hudson River tends to get most of the attention and for good reason. It has over 18 miles of ai a contiguous
multi-use path enjoyed daily by folks of all ages walking, jogging, biking, or just taking in the views across the city. The Hackinack River has just as much potential, but currently lacks a contiguous riverfront greenway. This
overlay district is the tool that will bring about the linear park envisioned for the shore of the Hackinac River, transforming the formerly industrial waterfront into a recreation and transportation resource for the public. By leveraging public private
partnerships to create, maintain, and operate the Hackinack River Greenway, the city will gain a muchneeded new open space that will help connect neighborhoods and neighboring cities. This will be especially transformative for residents on the west side of the
city who currently have limited access to open space beyond Lincoln Park. Please vote yes on this exciting ordinance to restore public access to Jersey City's other waterfront. Thank you. My question to the council about this
ordinance, I know I go back to when I was a young lady. I can't help myself, but when I used to go down there, we had to get on the boat. We had a boat dock down there. We had the Roseville stadium down there. We had stuff down there that
was taken away from us. And I just want to know, are we going to put a ferry back down here at the boatyard where people got on the yachts and stuff? We tore all that stuff up when we're supposed to redo it when we put society hill and all that stuff down
there, but we didn't put back some of the good stuff that was down there. And I just would love to know what all what all do you plan to do with this waterfront cuz they took a lot away from us when they promised us that they was going to build it up and do this do that
and we didn't get that. So please can somebody let me know what's the real plans for this cuz we need to brighten it back up if that's what we're going to do. Know people used to get on their yachts. I remember my friend Buddy Robertson, my uncle, he had a yacht was
docked down there and we used to go out fishing, got get on a boat and go out in the sea, you know. So, if we're going to bring stuff like that back, it's a good if we're not doing it for rich developers, then table it
public hearing. Our next speaker Uh Lawrence needed ahead. >> Uh I ask that you uh give a binding timeline uh and a dedicated public funding plan
for the city to complete the greenway. So it is not left to the mercy of the development cycle. Uh, the overlay should be a complement to public action, not a replacement for it.
>> Thank you. >> This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-115. Any member of the public still wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Motion. Motion to close the public hearing on
city ordinance 25-115 was made by council person. Seconded by council person Bajiano. On the motion to close a public hearing on city ordinance 25-115. Council person Ridley. >> Hi. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes.
>> Council person Bajiano. >> Council person. Hi. >> Council person Salman. Hi. Council Person Gilmore, Council Person Deise. >> Hi, >> and Council President Woodman. Motion carries 80 to close the public
hearing on city ordinance 25-115 with council person Ria absent for final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-115. Council person Ridley, I. >> Council person Huings, >> yes. >> Council person Biano,
>> no. If they haven't met with the community, Councilman, they have the community. >> This is a multi- agency program that was owned by Hudson County Division of Planning in coordination with our city and cities across Hudson County. The Hudson County Division of Planning has
had multiple meetings about this for the entire breath of the walkway. It doesn't extend just in Jerry City. This goes from Bayon all the way up the entire county. >> Well, and why did the people get up and say they haven't had any meetings? But two things could be true at the same
time, Rich. They probably was unaware or they may have forgot about it. >> Okay. So, council person Bajiano, your vote on ordinance 25- 115. >> I'll abstain.
I I agree with them. They're saying they never met with them. Let them meet the >> I heard that you said you're abstain. Okay. I council person. Hi, >> Council Person Solomon. I >> council person Gilmore >> I >> council person Deise
>> I >> council person Rivera voted I earlier and council president waterman city ordinance 25-115 is adopted 801 with council person Bajiano abstaining
on to our next second reading ordinance item 4.9 city ordinance 25-116 is an ordinance of the Jersey City Municipal Council to amend the Bait Street redevelopment plan. This is a public hearing on this ordinance. Any member of the public wishing to be
heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> What is this about? This what is it consist of? >> This is um specifically for you know where the old path bark was? Mhm.
>> Um at at one point um there was a conversation about a super developer coming in getting all the parcels and doing like 20 30 stories. Um people just thought that that didn't fit that area
that density. Um so we wor with some of the developers in the area to bring some affordable units, some infrastructure improvements. Um, and this redevelopment zone as it relates to this
particular project is going to be I think um 14 stories or something like that. >> And how many or four other units will we get out of it? >> It's um I don't know the exact number, but I believe it's uh 10% and they've
obliged to do uh community a community kitchen or something. I don't remember. Um, >> yes. >> The main thing about that is we have to do these developers like I keep explaining to the council years ago when
we did Newport. You got in Newport, you got five floors or eight floors of affordable housing got to stay there as long as that building stand. We got to make these developers like I told that developer for North Avenue when he came here for
that building you putting affordable there it's for life not 30 years not 10 or 20 they got to keep that been down here 50 years in Newport affordable they can't they can't make it go up this is not what we doing no more you know they said oh I do
for 10 years 20 years we knew we need to do it permanent that's all I'm saying and this where we have more people have somewhere to live in this city. >> Still a public hearing. Our next public speaker, >> uh, Lawrence Sneed.
>> Okay. Uh, I ask for a mandatory community benefits agreement uh for any project built under under this amended plan negotiated with a recognized community coalition uh that
includes a higher percentage than 10% of uh deeply affordable units uh than the current inclusionary zoning requires. uh local hire provisions for construction and permanent jobs. >> Yes.
>> Uh and contributions to a community land trust. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-116. If any member of the public still wish to be heard, please come up to the
podium and state your name for the record. >> Motion. Second. Motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-116 was made by >> what's that? >> Gilmore. >> Council person Gilmore and the second
was made by >> council person. >> On the motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-116. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Hulings. >> Yes. Council person Bajiano.
>> Yes. >> Council person. >> Hi. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> I. >> And council president Waterman.
>> Motion carries 70 with council members Solomon and Rivera absent to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-116. >> Yeah. Um before we vote, John Sean, I just want to say um that you know these
these guys that's developing this property before they even embarked on a journey about developing. You're talking about community Gribacks. This is one of the only developers I know that were hiring people when they were coming home
from jail for the past 20 years without looking for any development property or any development opportunities. Um, and we've had a series of meetings. Um, and at ultimately I feel like it's a fair
medium. Um, at the end of the day, you know, developers are trying to make money. um and they actually wanted more density than what we finally agreed on. So I think given their commitment, what they've been doing and they continue to
do because I continue to see people working at that gas station over there. Um and I continue to see them doing good community deeds. And again, it's a it's a reasonable medium.
I was hopeful that we were able to get 10%, do we need more? You could bet your bottom dollar. But the reality is this. Do you want to see the six or eight stories that's there right now with nothing? No affordable units, no
community givebacks at all, or do you want to see 14 stories with some community give back, some infrastructure improvements, some infrastructure upgrades? You know, at some point we have to have a a reasonable medium,
right? You can't say on one breath that we want affordable units and then you say, well, they we want them we want affordable units and we want them to build as a right. We don't want to give them extra density. You know, economics just don't support that model. Um, and
again, these guys, we've had a series of meeting before I even came in office. We've been having meetings about this area. Um, and initially I think it was like 40 stories over there. Um, and we got it down to a reasonable amount with
a reasonable 40 affordable units. >> That's it. >> Okay. For final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-116. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano.
>> Yes. >> Council person. >> Hi. Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> Council person Ria voted earlier in the affirmative. And council president
Waterman. City ordinance 25-116 is adopted unanimously. 90. Okay. On to our next second reading ordinance, which is item 4.10, 201 Ordinance 25-117
is an ordinance authorizing the settlement agreement to settle the litigation surrounding the Sixth Street embankment. This is a public hearing. On this ordinance, any member of the public wishing to be heard. Please come up to the podium and state your name for the record.
Before you start speaking, if you are listed as a speaker on the agenda, if you would give us your number, it would make us move a lot faster. With that being said, if you can state your name for the record, it's your first time speaking, we're going to need
the spelling of your name before you speak, and I will not start the clock until we have that completed. >> Uh, good evening, Steven Guiardo. Thanks. >> Gucci A R D O. I'm president of the Embankment
Preservation Coalition. >> Good evening, council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. The passage of this settlement agreement by city council and the signing of it by all the parties will truly be a historic
moment for Jersey City. With your approval, we can create acres of public open space in the middle of downtown Jersey City for everyone to enjoy. We can preserve a historic
landmark and an urban forest. We can secure a portion of the east coast greenway and a link to the Bergen Arches. The size of this win and the scale of the public benefit is so big, it may
take some time to fully understand the impact and far-reaching benefits it will have. The settlement provides for the transfer to the city of blocks 2 through six and portions of block seven of the
embankment parcels and a portion of block 8, creating a continuous public open space carter that protects and preserves the landmark embankment structure. It also provides a 30-foot public ride
ofway on block one from Marane to Manila with a 15 foot wide grand staircase, public elevator and public restrooms, a pedestrian bridge from block one to block two over Manila, a public park on
block two, and the refurbishment of the Roberto Clemente Field in exchange for the development of 604 residential units. on block one, including 30 affordable housing units. The Albanese organization will complete
all of the block one improvements, the bridge to block two, the block two park, and the Roberto Clemente field uh improvements at the same time that the building is being ready for occup to be occupied.
We look forward to the successful, productive working relationship with the Albanese organization. Although the settlement isn't perfect, it is a compromise that ends 20 years of litigation and allows us all to move
forward. With your approval, we can finally shift our efforts from conflict to cooperation. It has taken a long time to get here. Thousands of hours of work, dedication, and perseverance.
There are people people here who went to extraordinary lengths to help the coalition and its efforts. Thank you to thousands of coalition supporters over 27 years. Thank you to Mayor Fulip, the city law department,
the current >> Thank you, Stephen. Your time is up. I'm >> sorry. Thank you so much. Our next speaker, >> Moren Crowley. >> Thank you. >> Um, I'm going to build on Steven's comments about the particular, not about
the particulars of the settlement, but about the far-reaching benefits that are important to the future of the city. Um, a national rec recognized historic site will be preserved. Historic districts all along the branch will be protected.
Storm water storage and a flood plane will continue. Horsesmith Cove will get a community park finally of its own comparable to Hamilton Park and Vanor Park. The East Coast Greenway will advance its safe off-road route through
the city. and longer term with other trails that exist or in the works like the Hackinac Greenway will connect all parts of Jersey City, its parks, its schools, its historic sites, its cultural institutions with each other.
And with the new state park running nine miles to Montlair, we will be part of a movement that's been gathering momentum all across the country. Walking and biking trails started locally, but now connecting urban, suburban, and rural
communities regionally and nationally. Similar to the national road system, but one promoting healthy people and communities, not automobiles. It's a movement that was initiated and driven from the grassroots up, fostering civic
pride and community ties at a time when these are so urgently needed. I want to express heartfelt thanks to all who brought us to this moment of opportunity. A special thanks um and I think Steven meant to thank all the
incredible organizations who've helped us for 27 years. Individuals who I can't possibly name, but you know who you are. Um, and I especially want to thank in in recent days uh Brittany Mary, John McKini, and Anio Selon for pulling all
the work together for settlement in the waning days of this administration. Back in 2011, long before she worked for the city, Ania was signing off her personal emails with the embankment coalition slogan at the time, which was make my
park. It's up to you, the council who've supported this vision all along the way to now please turn vision into reality and make our park. Thank you. >> All right. >> Before you speak, if you can just state your name for the record.
>> My name is Bethany Wall. B T H A N Y W. Sorry. B >> B E T H A N Y. >> Thank you. >> W A L L. >> Thank you, Bethany. >> All right. I'm a 20-year Jersey City resident who became intrigued by the
promise of the embankment as an uh adaptive reuse project from my earliest days, stumbling upon it when I moved here in 2005. In addition to my perspective as a longtime resident, I speak tonight in my capacity as embankment preservation
coalition vice president among other responsibilities. I coordinate volunteers, regular folks who encounter the iconic structure along with this project and are energized to lend their talents to help realize the embankment coalition's vision and make
this public space a reality. Since we have functioned as as an allv volunteer community-based organization for the entirety of our 27 plus years, I can't stress enough the value and importance of a robust volunteer base. Our
volunteers range from children to seniors and everyone in between. They participate in cleanups, conduct research, develop programs and exhibitions, and educate neighbors. The breadth of knowledge and skills that the embankment attracts is truly
spectacular. From photographers, graphic designers, marketers, communications experts, and others who help us spread word, to architects and designers, some kicking off their careers and others who bring years of experience. It's pure joy
to see these intergenerational volunteer volunteers collaborating, learning together, and inspiring one another. We have scientists, artists, historians, and educators who undertake research and develop public programs at the intersection of ecology, community, and
culture. And that's just a brief sampling of the richness of our dedicated volunteer base. All this before the space is itself is even publicly accessible. It's breathtaking to imagine what these civic participants and others will accomplish once the
project hits full stride. The fact is our volunteers are de facto community organizers deeply passionate uh uh about this city. We share and eager to leverage the embankment to connect our communities and help them
thrive. By supporting the three ordinances required for embankment settlement in tonight's vote, you'll be be in the company of not only these volunteers but another 2500 subscribers to our newsletter. 2,000 commenters at
the Service Transportation Board. Hundreds who have attended land use and council meetings through the years and another 40 local, citywide, regional, and national organizations that have helped us over decades of preservation and environmental efforts. We're
grateful for the actions you've taken to defend this unique city resource and for what we hope will be your approval tonight. Thank you. your name for the record. >> Uh, I share your name, Sean.
>> Oh, so you are the one Gallagher that everybody was talking about. >> You have the same middle initial as well. >> No, my middle initial is a >> We should always use their middle initial Gallagher. That's it. That sounds great. You got a great name. Go ahead.
>> All right. Thank you everybody. Um, I think it's a pretty important time in the history of citybuilding and a time when we are rethinking the way that we build our cities to replace concrete and asphalt for more um healthy uh environments. So all around the world
that we don't know is that cities are actually spending billions of dollars on green infrastructure to address the extreme heat, the water, the pollution, the air quality issues. It's amazing. In Jersey City, we have something that's incredibly fortunate. We have in just
nine blocks from here from city hall stands what may be the only naturally seated downtown urban forest in the United States or even in the world. And we didn't plant a single tree. We actually didn't spend a single taxpayer dollar on maintaining it. And yet this
forest up on top of the embankment, it's thriving on its own. And it's amazing up there. Um not that I've been up there. Um, it's completely unique and to Jersey City and we should treat it as such. We should treat it, as Theodore Roosevelt said, as our own
national treasure for our future generations. Our vision, the embankment vision, is an ecological one. It's a new urban type of resource that we haven't had before. It's akin to national parks. And today, the first step with you, our city council, is helping to secure this
land for the public good. And we must follow in Roosevelt's footsteps and protect this natural resource from future private interests and even harmful construction techniques and operations. We are filled with a lighter touch within the forest with natural
materials with a respect for living ecosystems that are already existing there. Because the embankment, it's it's not an empty lot. It's a 35-year-old forest. It's the lungs to our community. It captures hundreds of tons of carbon. It absorbs millions of gallons of storm
water. And it cools our streets by nearly 5 degrees. So if we are to remove it, replace it by using standard urban construction processes and means and methods, well then we'll have to spend about 100 or 10,000 million trying to
recreate what already exists there. So let's do the economically sustainable thing. and continue to let the forest thrive and allow our children to experience nature actually in the center of a city
and bike or hike down the East Coast greenway and explore Maine or Florida. So, I just want to thank everybody who's actually made this point happen to get to the place that we are today. Thank you. It was so nice to finally meet the other
Sean Gallagher in Jersey City. With that being said, I see we have William Maxudus. I want to make sure I still spell your name correctly. M A T S I K O U D I S. >> Well done. Well done.
Court, West Jersey City. So the work that gets done in these beautiful chambers is uh always important, but I think every once in a while something truly historic happens. And you know, I I said this is happening
tonight. This is an historic night. I saw some stuff on Instagram and I said, you know what? I'm going to come tonight and and and speak uh to this. Uh there's a tired cliche that, you know, nothing good comes easy, but boy is it is that
true tonight. I uh I can't believe uh that I was the corporation council 12 years I did a little thing on my phone 12 years and 4 months ago and we were close back then. Maddening maddeningly close. Um but uh
and here and here it is. And uh look, I I can't I haven't read the entire thing. I don't know why Conrail is not on there, but I have a lot of trust in uh Britney and John and certainly in in you guys. Um so I I give my fullthroated
support uh for this. Um, I used to say back in the day, uh, when I was, uh, working, and there's so many great civic activists, but I I used to say, uh, you know, these guys thanked a lot of people, but I used to say if you look up the definition of civic
activist, uh, you should see Gucciardis and Crowley's picture in the dictionary. these these are unbel unbelievably uh you know great activists for our city and and uh you
know I uh now that I'm in private citizen I try to emulate them to an extent with our skyway park hopefully you guys get to that you talked about the Hackinac River Greenway before but um I I will say this you the probably the work doesn't end now uh you look at I I
I think about civic activist like Mark Van Wesson who does uh I'm just thinking of people and and Van Bource Park. This is going to take maintenance. It's going to make sure that this settlement agreement looks like it's going to have a lot of uh fulfillment to get done. So, you have to stay on top of this. Uh and
uh but I'm looking forward to bringing my son up there. This is just going to be one of the greatest things. Uh I think it's I think it's going to be one of the greatest parks in America. I think when you combine that with all the other things we got going on, we might have the best park system anywhere. Um,
so to the council people, uh, uh, those of you who are, uh, finishing your your your service, thank you so much. Those of you who ran, uh, thank you for bring your your issues forward. Those in runoffs, good luck and looking forward, uh, to seeing this come to fruition. God
bless. >> Thank you. Our next speaker, >> Danielle D an i l e damo d is and David a d and David a m o.
>> Thank you Danielle. >> Good evening. This is a moment many of us have waited years for a chance to finally move past litigation and toward creating something meaningful for the people of Jersey City. The embankment has sat in limbo for decades. What this
agreement does is simple but powerful. It unlocks a future. It gives us the ability to transform a long abandoned a long abandoned rail structure into a public asset with real community value. There are many there are three key
reasons this settlement deserves your support. First, it secures public land and green space. Large portions of the embankment will come under public ownership, allowing us to build accessible open space in part of the city where it is urgently needed. As
someone involved in our community forestry and environmental commission work, I can tell you opportunities like this are rare and they matter for public health, climate resilience, and neighborhood pride. Second, it creates a path for housing, including
affordability alongside private investment that benefits the city. This is a balanced approach, development where it is appropriate, green infrastructure where it is needed, and a negotiated structure that keeps a public interest at the center. And third, it
finally brings closure to a long and costly legal battle. The sun clears away years of uncertainty so we can plan responsibly and act decisively. Most importantly, this ordinance reflects who
we want to be as a city. Forwardthinking, communitydriven, and committed to protecting public space while addressing real needs. I urge you to support this ordinance and allow Jersey City to move from gridlock to
progress, from litigation to creation, and from abandoned infrastructure to shared community benefit. Thank you. >> Our next public speaker, if you can just state your name for the record. >> Good evening. I'm Margaret Domen, Doom
M. I'm board member and uh co-chair of the communications and outreach uh committee at Journal Square Community Association. Uh we strongly represent uh excuse me, we strongly support the settlement ordinance and the pilot
ordinance which you will vote on after this because implemented they will advance the preservation of the historic embankment and conserve the forest that is naturalized there over the last 35 years. As envisioned by the embankment
preservation coalition, the entire remaining Harris branch should be secured by the city for future transportation options. The hilltop and journal square as well as to the Bergen Arches and the new state park running from Jersey City to Montlair. These
ordinances are a good start to that goal. Thank you. >> Excuse me. Is your first name Donna? >> My name is Margaret. M A R G A R E T Last name Domen D O M A N. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Uh, hi. Good evening, U City Council President Waterman. I am here as my name is Stephanie Daniels. I'm here as the historic Paulus Hook President and we are thrilled to be supporting this uh
ordinance. I I feel like we're here in a truly historic night. This has been 25 years and and for Moren and Steve and all the people who have stuck with this, including the city. I mean, you all stuck with this and made this happen.
Neither of you, nobody gave up. You're creating this greenway for walking and biking and you're connecting neighborhoods. It really does not get better than that. We know that compromise isn't easy. Nonetheless, we support everything that will is every ordinance that needs to happen in order
for this to go through because it'll preserve and protect all these pieces of elevated open space as part of the East Coast Greenway. And by repurposing a piece of history to contribute to our present and our future, we're not forgetting our past
either. So, if you have any doubt, if there's any doubt in anyone's mind whether you're going to vote for this or not, I can't imagine that there is, but I hope that listening to this room has convinced you if if you do have doubts and you will vote for this ordinance.
Not only that, but then we get to uh recycle the 25 years of paperwork that has gone into this. On behalf of Diane Case, who's here, I am telling you that. Thank you so much. Our next speaker, if you can just say your
name for the record. >> My name is Katie Lionus. >> Katie. >> K A T Y. L Y N S. >> I'm I'm sorry. You're backing up the mic and I can't >> better here. Is that closer? >> That's better. >> Okay. K A T Y >> K A T Y
>> L Y N SS. Um, >> go ahead. Uh I'm a board member of the embankment preservation coalition. Um a kind of recent board member but um devoted. Um and over the years I've been
kind of involved in it more officially or less. What struck me most is about how this this wild structure in the middle of the city can inspire people and I mean people of all ages and incomes. For example, a few years ago dozens of artists um got together to
create for the exhibition Embankment on my mind. It was a beautiful exhibition uh up at um New Jersey City University. Um a few years ago it in um over the years it's also inspired children uh who attended many nature walks on the
embankment um of all of young children up into um older children. Um and just this year students from McNair High School environmental club reached out to the embankment coalition to form a partnership. Um in October we jointly
held a workshop that used plants known to be around and on the embankment to create dyes. Um and presently this collaboration with uh McNair um is organizing a citywide student art competition. The students are asked to create work inspired by the embankment.
Um the educational potential is vast. Uh young people are inspired by the strange wild structure in the middle of the city. Um it's like nothing else. um so many things the embankment can help us learn about the natural world, about
the history of the city, about trains, um and ultimately about ourselves. Um we hope that going forward the embankment will continue to inspire inspire us and and to be our teacher. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Our next speaker, your name? >> Dr. Frank Gallagher. >> Frank Gallagher. >> Yeah, I gave that Sean Gallagher his name. >> I guess I'm going to meet some of my relatives today. All right. This is great. >> Yeah, I I would think so.
>> All right, Frank. I direct the environmental planning program at Ruckers, the State University, and I had u a really great experience working with the coalition developing an environmental assessment for the embankment itself. So, I'd like tonight to go over a few of those numbers,
right? The idea that the embankment right now sequesters over 267 tons of carbon that lowers the temperature of the surrounding area. And no, you guys don't want to hear about the numbers, do you? No. I could tell you I could tell
you about the 8.7 million gallons of water, storm water that it intercepts so that it doesn't get into the storm drains of Fifth and Sixth Avenue which flood already and how we got those. You don't want to know how we got those numbers. No, no, that's a little bit too
much. Or I think more directly the idea that the filtering capacity of the seven acres of trees actually relates translates into a health benefit of somewhere around $400 per family that lives along and around
the embankment because of the particulate matter that's filtered out of the air because of those trees. So that's maybe a number that you might might like a little bit better. But to tell you the truth, I really don't want to talk about numbers because
I think the real value in the embankment self is a social value which is very hard to monetize. In 1983, I was the first naturalist at Liberty State Park and I had the pleasure of working with Roy Biller and
the joint activities group in Jersey City School Systems. They were my favorite kids to take around the the park because after their visit to the park, they became sort of invested in the park. We did stewardship activities
as well as nature activities and they planted thousands of trees in the park and and so what I heard from those kids as they grew up is what I think community is all about. And one of my best rewards about 10
years after the program had started was just walking down a path one day and hearing a guy with a young kid, two, three year old kid saying to him, "Yeah, I planted those trees." That's the type of investment that
builds ecological identity, that builds community, and that social value is very hard to monetize, but in a very real way, it makes the community what it is. And so,
I applaud the people who for 25 years have really worked hard to make this happen. And I hope that you sign the deal tonight. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Our next speaker,
>> your name? >> Yes. Good evening. My name's Rob Kushner. That's R O BB. Last name K U S H N E R >> K A U >> K U S H N E R >> N E R. Thank you. >> Okay, >> go ahead, Rob.
>> So, I'm happy to be here. Uh it's it's an quite an quite an evening. uh very important moment in time and um I what's been going through my head is that we are dealing with a priceless resource
here and I just want to underscore those two words. This is a priceless resource. It's unbelievable. It's so hard to imagine what this will mean to the city to to
have a pathway through nature above the city. If you've ever been to the to the Highline in New York City, you would know what a bit of what I'm talking about. But this is going to be even in many ways cooler than the Highline.
Um, I just want to say that uh I became aware of I've lived in Jersey City for 15 years with my wife um and kid with kids and also grandkids. Um this will be I can't wait for our grandkids to be
able to go up there and all the kids in the city as well as the adults to go up in the city and enjoy this what what this will be. I urge you to very seriously vote for this. And I have three I want to leave you with three
words. Let's do this. Thank you. >> Our next speaker. >> Good evening, city council. My name is Elena Little and I am the councilwoman elect for ward E. The ward in which Thank you. Uh the ward in which the
embankment resides. I urge you tonight to please pass ordinances 25-117 and 25-118 to authorize the settlement agreement and make the embmentment preservation coalition's vision a reality. Downtown Jersey City deserves
this quiet, peaceful, natural greenway for eventual eventual connection up to the Bergen Arches and the East Coast Greenway. We know how important urban green space is for our physical and mental health. We need to preserve this
urban oasis that captures storm water and carbon. And Hamus Cove deserves to finally have urban green space. There are people here tonight who have been fighting for this vision since I was a child in grade school. This is truly a generational project. So, I want
to extend my deepest gratitude to everyone who has worked, advocated, and led to make this vision a reality. To the council, please please pass these ordinances and let's make this dream real. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Our next speaker. >> Hey Sam. >> Hey Sam Hessen. I'm speaking on behalf of the friends of Liberty State Park. I I spoke two weeks ago and we'll just speak shorter tonight on this truly
historic night. This urban reuse of former railroad tracks as a public park to serve the public good is enlightened and necessary to benefit future generations. You have a golden opportunity to take action to end this
28-year fight to save the embankment is a priceless urban nature forested space for positive and peaceful passive recreation with all its quality of life and ecological benefits. I urge you to
honor and bless Jersey City's future by doing what is clearly in the best interest of the public good by passing the ordinances. This is actually the best, greatest, most beneficial give back for any abatements in Jersey City's
history by creating this special public resource for people's mental, emotional, and physical health and spiritual well-being. It is a spiritual resource. The park will be accessible to and
benefit people from all over Jersey City by walking, by bicycle, and by the nearby Newport buses and the light rail and path train. And who are linked to trails east and west and north and
south. Just as Liberty Park is a blessing to all who visit, the embankment will also be a great and spectacular priceless treasure, a gift to future generations. So I I want to end by thanking all the council people
who have supported the embankment park in these many last years. And again, I want, as I did last time, thank Moren Crowley, Steven Guchiardo, and all the past and present board members of the Embangment Preservation Coalition who
are truly unsung heroes of Jersey City. Our next speaker, >> good evening, uh, Laura Skolar, and I'm speaking this evening on behalf of the Jersey City Parks Coalition representing
our 29 member park advocacy groups and soon to be our 30th member, the Mcinley Square Community Board. For the past 20 years, the Jersey City Parks Coalition has proudly championed the creation, improvement, and stewardship of parks
throughout our city. We believe that our parks are more than just green spaces. They are the heart of our neighborhoods, places of play, reflection, and connection where both nature and community thrive together. From our earliest days, we have supported the
important work of the embankment coalition and their embankment and east coast greenway vision. They have been a valued member of our organization since 2014. We would also like to highlight an
especially important aspect of this project, the Haramus branch and its associated corridors that connect Jersey City neighborhoods, historic sites and open spaces from the Hudson to the Hackinack River, the Hudson River
waterfront walkway, the Horsamus branch, and the Bergen Arches are county segments of the off road east coast greenway, a walking and biking trail being stitched together from Maine to Florida. This connection is more than
symbolic. It is part of a national commitment to public health, environmental sustainability, economic development, and civic engagement. The greenway not only links our communities regionally, but also ties them to a
shared vision of accessible open space and active transportation that benefits residents, businesses, and visitors alike. For these reasons, the Jersey City Parks Coalition is proud to
strongly and enthusiastically support the settlement agreement before you this evening. Seeing such a comprehensive and forwardthinking plan move forward towards the realization is a winwin for
all involved and above all a lasting victory for the people of Jersey City. And speaking of victory, how about Steve and Moren giving them a victory lap around the embankment? Our
next speaker, if you can just state your name. >> Joanne Brennan McKe. You need me to spell that? >> Brennan. The last the other name >> McKe. Mck K E. >> Thank you, Joanne.
>> I'm here on behalf of the Hamilton Park Neighborhood Association. I'm on their board. The Hamilton Park Neighborhood Association has supported the embankment project since the beginning. Its environmental, recreational, and
community benefits are enormous. We'd like to thank the coalition for never giving up, never losing heart, and never backing down from the challenge. And tonight, prospectively, we'd like to
thank the council for making this project a reality for the people of Jersey City. Thank you. >> Our next speaker, you can just state your name. >> Colin Egan. I'm um here speaking on behalf of myself
and >> Colin, I'm sorry, it's Colin Egan. E Gan. Yes. E G- an >> Thank you, Tom. >> I'm sorry it wasn't Gallagher. It would have been gone with a theme, but another Irish name. Um, I'm here to
speak on behalf of myself and friends of the Lowe's to support the ordinances in front of you. You know, 25 years ago, the embankment was a good idea. We needed the open space then. We needed
then to preserve the physical link with Jersey City's rapidly disappearing industrial and railroad history. And we needed it as a kind of character definfing space, unique amenity that
just makes life better in Jersey City, that makes people happier to be here and to visit here. But for some reason, such an obvious idea, it's taken quite a while to come together. And the thing is now a quarter century
later, we need it for all those reasons and all the ones you've heard spoken about even more. So now finally the council has the chance to make it happen and I'm sure you will.
So let me thank you in advance and thank the administration and finish out by just adding this note that in my knowledge many of the best ideas that made life better in Jersey City have started on the grassroots
level and have been pursued by the grassroots. And all I can say is that Moren and the Embankment Coalition have upheld that tradition extraordinarily and I want to thank them for doing this
for us and for Jersey City. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next speaker. >> Uh my name is Jenny Furlong. F U R L O N G. And I'm sorry, fur
l o n g like 1/8 of a mile if you bet on horse if you bet on horse racing. Um I'm here on behalf of the Jersey City Landmarks Conservancy to second everything that everything everyone in front of me in line said not just to
second it but to multiply it and amplify it by a thousand. Uh the embankment coalition has done extraordinary work over these past 27 years and fought and really fought with moneyed developers
and moneyed interest to preserve the embankment as green space for Jersey City. for the landmarks conservancy. It's an obvious fit to preserve the embankment itself as a historic structure, but it's
also a significant part of our mission to uh preserve Jersey City's environmental integrity as well. So, we also want to speak out in support for the thoughtful and careful development of the floating forest that is the
landmark or that is the embankment as it currently stands. And I also want to say this is a wonderful gift to downtown, but there are many spaces in Jersey City and many other neighborhoods that needs the city's help in prioritizing the
preservation of their green space, too. So, I'm hopeful that he was as we move forward into a new administration that that can become a priority for the council as well. Thank you. >> And your name? >> Good evening. Uh Pam Robbins. Are
>> I can't hear you. I'm sorry. >> Pam Robins. >> Robins. >> Robbins. R O BB I Ns. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, I'm here representing I'm the president of the Haramus Cove Association and on behalf of our board
and our neighbors, we're very thankful to everything the embankment coalition has done to finally bring a park to Haramus Cove. We've been that one since I have been a resident here for 15 years. Um, we are strongly encouraging the council to vote for all three of
these ordinances. It brings it's going to bring an amazing opportunity to put a wild park in the middle of the city and provide all the value that everyone has spoken about tonight. So, thank you. >> Great. >> And your name? >> My name is Arthur. >> You can you can bring that up to you,
Arthur. >> My name is Arthur Cook. >> Arthur Cook. >> And um I'm on the board of the Harsmouth Cope Association. And of course, I want to thank Marine and Steve for everything they've done, as well as the embankment coalition to make this happen. Um,
they've been fighting developers for 25 years to make this, uh, make this possible, this moment. And, uh, it's been a hard fight. Um, especially as we see the hard fight that we all have with developers in this city. Um, just to step back from that a little bit, I
would like to remind everybody of the the ancient ancientness of this wall. I mean, when I first um arrived in Jersey City, not knowing anybody, and just walking around, I would see this towering thing over me, and it would remind me of walls I've seen in other
cities, uh like the wall around the Emperor's Palace in Tokyo, for example, and just feel some kind of touching of my ancestors here and everywhere else. But um I will say that with this I've been very cynical about
politics in the past few years and this is the first couple of weeks and with this I hope you'll cap it a feeling of maybe um maybe democracy can u win out over big money. So thank you. >> Yep.
>> Okay. I got >> this is the one Sonia. >> Okay. All right. I'm here. Um, my name is Sonia Rjo and I'm here on behalf of the residents and the tenants of Byinking, which is part of Paco. Um, we have been
here uh in the heart of Jersey City for decades. We are I'm here tonight um in not in opposition of the development of the park but in support of responsible progress. We understand that Harrisman
Bankman project brings growth. A new park, a new baseball field, and we look forward to seeing our children enjoy those the spaces. But for those of us who live in the shadow of that construction, our seniors, our families,
and our working people, the progress also brings serious concerns. This project means years of heavy construction right at the doorstep. Noise, dust, road infestation, vibration, hazard, traffic hazard,
possible flooding, and the loss of peace that many elders depend on. Many residents are seniors and fixed income and people with limited mobility and families with young children. For them, the impact will be immediate and deeply
personal. We're not asking for the project to stop. We ask that it move forward with compassion and accountability and respect for those who have called this neighborhood long before the first crane arrives. We urge
the developers in the city to work handinand with our tenant leaders and the housing organization like Paco which has served this community for over 50 years to ensure one the clear communication with residents before each
major construction phase. Noise, dust, and safety control especially during early morning hours and evening hours. safe pedestrian routes for children going and returning from school and seniors, emergency contacts and rapid
response when problems arise and most importantly ongoing engagement throughout every phase of the development. My concern here is with block one is not just a cluster building. It is a living community built with workingclass
families who believe in Jersey City when few others didn't. We stayed. We raised our children and we helped build this city. The least we ask is that the progress honors our contribution.
We all want a better Jersey city, one with growth and justice should go hand in hand. Responsible development isn't only about what we build. It is about who we protect when we build it. So tonight, I urge you and our council
members to hold the developers accountable and ensure that >> Thank you. Sia >> never come. >> Time is up. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> You can bring the mic up to you. You can stretch it up all the way up. There you
go. And your name? >> My name is Lea. L E D A >> L E D A. >> Last name D U I F. >> D U I F. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Uh good evening council members, the ones that are left here
right now. Um I'm asking you to vote yes on uh these two ordinances. Uh for decades, the Sixth Street embankment has stood as such a symbol of possibility, an opportunity to create something lasting and green in the heart of our city. Transforming the embankment into a
park will provide valuable green space in our city. And green space means cleaner air, help with storm water, cooler temperatures in summer, and better mental and physical health for residents. This isn't just about beauty. It's about connecting neighborhoods,
public health, equity, and quality of life. The work of getting us here hasn't gone unnoticed. I want to take a moment to si sincerely thank the city council especially our wardy councilman James Solomon mayor Fulip the city's planning
and legal teams particularly Ania Chaloney and above all everyone at the embankment preservation coalition including Moren Cwley Steven Gerardo Jenny Sha and all the spouses including you Peter um and all of you for your
tireless work and the commitment for these many is a really sincere thank you. It's your efforts that have brought us to this historic opportunity, one that future generations will look back with gratitude.
Thank you. >> Our next speaker, your name? >> Donna Rtosteri. R I S T O R U CCI. I I wasn't going to say anything. Donna, I'm sorry. Yes. R I S T O U.
>> R I S T as in Tom. O R U C I. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, I wasn't going to say anything. Everyone has spoken so beautifully and eloquently and two of the members of my horseimus Cove Association board spoke. But you know
the but this is such a wonderful achievement and you can see the the support that that's been from every every area of our city every organization and people have spoken about how historic it is which it
is but you know I was just thinking though that the reason it's so historic is because it took 25 years of struggle to get it and the you know develop Philip has fought us every step of the way and I think it is such a tribute to
the coalition to Moren and Steve and the board and everyone that they stuck it out and I it's just so amazing that they didn't give up and I'm just so proud to be part of this, you know. I mean, it makes you think about what kind of a system we have that
it takes 25 years of struggle to get something that the city council supported from the beginning. Everyone supported from the beginning. And you know, like we have the people from Port Side coming here every week for two years even though the laws on their side. Now we have the people from Christ
Hospital um fighting to save the hospital and their jobs where it should be so clear that that's that's what we should have. So, what I just want to say is that I guess when we fight, we win.
And congratulations to our city. >> You can state your name for the record, please. >> Rebecca Missile. M I Sel. >> Thank you, Rebecca. >> I'm really here tonight on behalf of the Vanvor Neighborhood Association. I'm a vice president with the association and
we are just here to also voice our support for the work of the embankment coalition. Our partners there, we've been supportive of this work from the start. We're quite blessed to have a beautiful park in our neighborhood and we know how important and vital that is as a community resource. So, just thank
you to the council and to the incredible work of Moren and everybody who's been a part of the embankment coalition. Thank you. Our next speaker. >> Hi. Uh, Robert Napiorski. N A P I O R S
K I. >> I'm sorry. >> Robert Naporski. Nap. >> Nap. >> I O R >> I O R >> S KI. >> Thank you. >> Uh, I'm going to be very brief, but uh, just want to echo what everyone else has
said. I spoke in support of this project back when I was a high school student and when I was a college student. So when I saw this on the docket tonight after a long day of work, I said, "You know what? I live close by enough. I'll just come over and just want to commend everyone that's worked on it. Previous
administrations, the current administration, obviously Moren and the embankment coalition. It's been a been a long time coming. I'll be 40 next year. I never thought I'd still still be talking about this after all that time." But um yeah uh besides standing obviously is a city
landmark. Uh one thing no one's mentioned uh it was actually designed and engineered by James J. Ferris who one of our high schools is named after. He was a city commissioner and civil engineer who also I believe laid the concrete foundation for uh the Hudson of
Manhattan Powerhouse as well. So aside from just being a physical historic landmark, this is something that's tied to our city's culture and history. And I just want to again commend everyone that's worked on this. Thank you. >> And your name?
>> Yes. Speaker 5.60 Gabby Felu. >> That's good. I'm glad you listened. Thank you. >> I just wanted to go quickly on the record and agree with all of the impassioned and eloquent speakers before me in full support of the embankment and the and all the ordinances needed to
accomplish it. Jersey City is finally turning a corner and really listening to our residents. Responsible development with reasonable community givebacks that serve those who live here is something we should we we would all like to see more of. This represents a crowning achievement to our
city that will inspire our future generations. A heartfelt thank you to Meen and to Steve and to all of those who had any part, large or small, long or short, over the past 25 years in turning this vision into a reality. Thank you.
>> Next speaker. >> Hi, I'm Robert Fu. I am speaking on behalf of McInley Square Community Board and myself um in support of passage of ordinances 25 117 and 118.
This is our chance after decades literally of work by the embankment preservation society and um overcoming setback after setback to finally preserve the embankment together with its wild forest permanently. Uh, please pass these
ordinances. >> Uh, good evening. My name is Julio Garcia. G A R CIA. Uh, >> first name is G >> Julio Ju L IO. >> Thank you. >> I come here as the executive director of Paco agency and speaking on behalf of
the many families and residents of Vya Borink. I come also here to highlight the legacy that was left by individuals like Primitivay and Elio Rivera who fought so hard for the community that exists there today. Um we are excited at
what's to come and the park and the development that will be there for our community to have and enjoy. Uh but we also echoing the comments of Sonia Aruo uh we throw caution and also ask that the council and along with the Albanese
group ensure that it the development that's being built on block one does not infringe on our community uh that was has been there for over 55 years. Thank you. >> Your name? >> Vincent Marchettto. >> Vincent raise that up to you.
>> Yep. Spell your last name. >> M A R C H E T O. >> Thank Council members. I'm a New Jersey licensed architect. I'm a partner at MHS architecture and I'm a partner in charge of this this project. Um what I wanted
to talk about and I echo a lot of the comments of the past speakers, but one angle I wanted to share with you was that these projects also create a lot of jobs. um in our firm in the last five years have we seen a lot of the scale of development grow. We've been able to
triple the number of jobs in our firm from 20 to 63. Um, and one thing and and these type of jobs, these projects, not only they allow us to add staff because they have longer timelines, the additional revenue, but the longer
timelines of these bigger jobs allow you to forecast out two, three years, and that allows you makes it more comfortable to add more local jobs as a lo local firm. So, that's a big benefit. And it's not just architectural jobs obviously that these are created. Every week we meet as a team to discuss the development. We're talking with
consultants, civil, MEP, structural, landscape, geotechnical, elevator consultants, interior design, acoustic, traffic, planning, and exterior envelope. All these, uh, consultants are ask adding a lot more local jobs. And
so, um, I just wanted to say that, um, we take our work extremely seriously. We know this is a very, very important project. And um I just push my staff every day to make sure that this project will be something that Steve uh Moren and the rest of the community will be
very proud of. >> Thank you. >> And your name, sir? >> Yes. My name is Dean Marchettto and I'm speaker 5.75. >> Thank you. Well, I am uh I'm a licensed architect and a
planner and um I've been involved in this project for 23 years representing uh both the uh the land owners and the developer. Um over the years we've had many many meetings with the embankment
coalition and I the the work that they've done is is amazing. But I know you're going to hear about uh the benefits of parks of um parks and um
let me just see you know affordable housing the Roberto Clemente Park improvements jobs but as a planner I just wanted to say a few words about the big picture. I've had the opportunity uh during the course of the
project to visit the prominade plante in Paris and of course the highline here in New York. Two precedent projects that this project has taken some cues from. Those projects are transformational projects in their cities. I I can't tell
you how many people come to Highline from all over the world to walk that. Um and in the Proomenade plante in Paris it's the same thing. you're walking above all the streets looking at all those beautiful buildings. Um the difference here is that this is a a
highline for Jersey City. It's not for tourists. There will be many many students when this is done to come here and look at Jersey City as a model for planning urban infrastructure in cities all around the country. There's no doubt
that this will be something special. Um, you know, when the turnpike extension was put in Jersey City, it separated the town from uptown on on uh on Journal Square above the Palisades to downtown uh you know in the financial section
down there. And so when you have an infrastructure, pedestrian or public infrastructure that crosses that turnpike, every time you cross underneath it, it connects the city again. Those are really important planning virtues that come uh in a
project like this. Imagine if you live in one of the new buildings or any building up in Journal Square. You get up in the morning, look out your window, see this beautiful, beautiful skyline in Manhattan, come down to the elevator, ground floor, you walk to Pavonia Avenue, you start walking down, you get on a little sidewalk that's elevated,
get onto the embankment, and you could cross downtown with never having to cross a street. Imagine if you have a bike, a child, or even a baby stroller. To be able to walk across town without ever having to cross the street is a very very safe thing. And imagine there
would be a um a possible uh a possible ferry at the end of that. I see my time is running out. I just want to take the time to thank Mory and Steve for their work. It is incredible. But I also want to thank my clients, uh the land owners, Victoria,
Albanesey's group. Thank you. Next speaker. >> Hi, I'm Natalie Leone. That's Natalie. Lemon. L I M as in monkey. O N as in Nancy. Good. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Hi. I'm really nervous about
sharing these remarks tonight because it's not easy being the only person in a room this big to have a different opinion. I know people are in love with this project idea and the embankment organization has designed something really thoughtful, beautiful, and ecologically responsible as well as fought tremendously hard. I don't want
people to hate me for I too love the forest up there and appreciate and would endorse the design proposed. But I am opposed to this project as it stands on three grounds and would like to share my concerns for the historical record. I fully acknowledge there are details of this I'm likely very ignorant to, but I still want to share my feelings. Since
this ordinance of the two tonight is about settling the litigation, and that's one of my first three reasons for opposing, I'll get right to that. I know there have been endless appeals over the right to this land between the litigants, the city and developers for two decades. It's my understanding though that a federal court ruled that Jersey City and not the developers
should have been sold this land, that the developer that the sale by Conrail in 1999 was illegal. It's my understanding that the developers have continued to appeal this over the years. And so now to end the legal fighting and access the land, we are tonight voting on accepting a settlement deal that would give us one six of the embankment
which is only just based on the aforementioned. But in exchange, we must promise to never bring up the illegal land sale again, i.e. relinquish our legal leverage. And also we must give the developers in question a 30-year tax abatement on a 40f high-rise with only
5% affordable housing. 5% 30 out of 604 units. And those details make this settlement unacceptable to me. 5% affordable housing with a generation long tax abatement is insulting to the people who are struggling to keep a roof over their heads and don't even have the capacity to be concerned about when when
the city will build a high-rise park downtown who might be very concerned about making sure developers are paying every single tax dollar possible so there's money to be spent on homeless shelters, affordable housing built by the city and not developers and other matters. Someone just said downtown deserves a greenway. And that rubs me
the wrong way a little bit when doing that takes money, tax money that could go to kids in poor areas in the southernmost part of town. Speaking of the city, one of my other reasons for opposing this is my fear that the city will botch the embankment organization's vision like they did with reservoir number three, where they kicked the
citizen group to the curb and ignored everything they had meticulously planned and designed. That recent experience makes me feel like the embankment organization shouldn't be in such a rush to end this litigation and take a settlement that not only furthers terrible development precedents, but may well bring about a project that's not what they envisioned and disturbs the
vibrant ecological community that's already thriving there despite all their careful planning. I suggest we wait for a settlement that doesn't force us to abandon our legal leverage and force us to fall in line with and further normalize bad development practices. We could instead wait for a city government that we can trust to execute the vision
correctly for the litigants to capitulate for a better deal. The embankment isn't going anywhere. I don't understand why people speak about it like it is. Thanks to this wonderful organization, it has legal it has historic protections. Thanks to the law, its status as developer property is contested. It has stood the test of time
and whether folks are actively using it or not, it's providing us with a numerous ecological benefits. Thank you. Our next speaker, Aya Shurmer, A Y L A S C H E R M E R.
>> Yep. >> All right. Good evening again. Um, I'm speaking on behalf of myself as well as Bike JC, which I am on the board of. I wholeheartedly support the settlement designed to preserve the historic Armus branch embankment and turn it into a public good that meets our city's modern
needs. The community's decadesl long vision of turning the embankment into an open space trail and act active transportation corridor is finally on the brink of reality. Let's bring it over the finish line. Jersey City is a dense urban area with a dire lack of
green and open spaces. The embankment can now finally be transformed into just that, a one-of-a-kind peaceful, car-free urban oasis for both recreation and transportation. It serves as a critical link in many local, regional, and even national
greenway plans. For example, there are proposals to connect the embankment to the future Bergen Arches Greenway, the future Essex Hudson Greenway, and even the East Coast greenway running from Maine to Florida. The embankment is also an essential
element of many local master plans that were developed based on robust public outreach. The Jersey City Greenway connectivity plan and bike master plan are two of many such examples. I look forward to seeing this public asset turned into the public good that
our community deeply desires, and I can't wait for the countless memories that will be created there for generations to come. Lastly, as a local advocate myself, I'd just like to shout out Moren Crowley and the entire Embankment Preservation Coalition for fighting this fight on
behalf of all of us for decades. I know just how demoralizing it can be to keep fighting a battle that seems like a losing one at times or like it's not going anywhere until it does. Thanks for chipping away at this bit by bit without
backing down to make tonight's milestone moment possible. Please vote yes on these landmark ordinances. Thank you. >> Next speaker. >> Uh hi Tony Belli also with bike JC.
>> Okay. >> Uh well I just want to express my and our support for this uh project this settlement uh for all the reasons mentioned. I I want to focus on one aspect of it. Uh maybe unsurprisingly transportation
um someone said it might be cooler than the Highline. I think the provision of true transportation for people on on foot and on bikes is one way in which it probably could be and may be better than
the Highline. And I just want to ask the city government to keep that in mind at all times as we go forward. Uh there are many uh benefits provided by the proposal and that means many different uses and transportation
is a dynamic use if you will that it can sometimes be hard to integrate into uh an area into a plan. So I would just uh ask that everybody pay attention to the details of that. Uh the city has uh many uh talented professionals who are very
good at planning for uh engineering designing bike and walk facilities. I would ask that they always be involved in that and we stand ready if anybody needs advice as to how that works. So that um that particular benefit going through the area as you've heard is part
of many greenways. The same thing by the way would apply to the Hackinac River project. let let's always make sure that it's something that can be used for uh in this case its original purpose uh to move people through the corridor just to do it now in a way that's clean and green. Uh with that uh I again reiterate
our support for the project and I look uh look forward to enjoying it someday soon. Our next speaker, >> Sophia David Dova, S O F Y A D A V Y D O
VA. I'm a member of the Journal Square Community Association and the Bergen Arches Preservation Coalition, but I'm here on behalf of a younger version of myself who grew up in downtown and was very mystified and intrigued by the
embankment um walls. And I always thought that there there there was something special up there. And then I would see sort of woodland creatures scurrying around the perimeter and I knew there was something special up there. And it might have taken a few
extra decades, but I'm glad that such a great group of people have finally come around to the same conclusion that it is special up there and it it's going to be a public good and there's nothing to be afraid of. So, I'm
I'm very hopeful that this project will be a catalyst for future adaptive reuse endeavors um and and will they might happen in a more timely fashion. Uh I commend the Embankment Preservation Coalition for
their decades of hard work. Bravo. And thank you most of all the city council. >> Thank you. Good evening. Sorry. My name is Karen Vonopen. You can find me at 5.7 in the list. Um,
I moved here 25 years ago and the embankment was one of the first thing I heard about like as in uh a way of an activism point of view. I remember going somewhere after being invited and there
was some big vase that was standing there and people were asked to throw money in it cuz they were going to hire a lawyer and I was like let me do this. You never know something comes out of it. Here we are 25 years later. That was
a good $20 investment it seems. Um I do agree though with the young lady that spoke earlier. There are some minuses to this whole thing. And uh I can understand that not everybody is thinking it's great, but I've lived here
long enough to know that, you know, compromises sometimes are better than getting nothing at all. So I would say congress to congratulations to everybody that worked hard on this.
Good evening. Irene Barnaby. >> Your last name. >> B A R N A B Y. >> Thank you. >> So, I know it's getting really late, so I'm going to keep it nice and sweet and short and sweet. Um I'm here on the um behalf of the Village Neighbor
Association. I'm a board member there. we are here to support um new ordinances and couldn't be more excited that this is moving forward and I've just been honored to work along the embankment coalition and thank you guys. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. >> Sorry, one second. >> Okay, >> good evening. >> Your name? >> Diane. Last name is Kase. K A E S E >> K A >> E S E >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Uh if this ordinance
passes, uh this will be a historic night. It will be for a historic structure, for a historic grassroots effort, and because I get the opportunity, which is very rare, to stand up here and support something, not
fight it. So, as someone who has been working on this project through three kids and numerous needlepoint projects, I ask that the council pass these ordinances and make the embankment a reality as an open space to all. Thank you.
You know, Charlene, >> Charlene Burke, president of the West Westside Community Alliance, and we're here in support of the embankment. Um, finally coming to a close as far as
litigation goes. Hallelujah. I can't say that. Hallelujah. I've been sitting in these here when it was remanded back to the city to have all those hearings. I tell you, I have been involved in many of the meetings
that have taken place, but really to to get to this point where litigation is stopping and creation of something stellar for this city is just amazing. And I cannot thank the tenacity
of other residents of this city who have a vision of what this city is that can transcend different administrations and different city councils and actually have the
power, the will, even the ability to stay up late at night, night after night to get things done and inform people. They are the ones I really applaud this evening. All of them. All of the embankment
preservation coalition members and supporters. Because let me tell you, I know as a community leader of a community group, it's tough. Sometimes you don't feel like doing anything. You'd like to close your eyes and just
buzz out like not think of anything. But people do it day in and day out and for 27 years to do it. That's an enormous commitment that these people have made. So when you're thinking about putting a
plaque on that wall, I wanted to speak to the embankment coalition and the people of this city that made this happen. And I don't want to see politicians names, but I want to see the
people who made this happen. Thank you. Hello. Uh, my name is Jake Lefaber. >> Jake? >> Yep. >> Um, I'm sorry, your last name >> Lefaber. L E B R. It's hard for me to
hear. You can bring that mic up to you, Jake. I know you're tall. >> L E F E B er. >> Thank you, Jake. >> Um, so I've been volunteering with the uh Jersey City Embankment Preservation Coalition since 2023. So, I just want to
give a big thank you to Marine Crowley, uh, Steven Gucciardo, Sean Gallagher, and Bethany Wall for this incredible and monumental effort. Um, I've only been working on it for two years, and I can't wait to see this happen. So, um,
but, uh, I'm not from Jersey City. I'm actually from Hoboken, but perhaps that speaks to the potential of the embankment. Um, the embankment is a critical piece in a vision that extends far beyond the city. So, yes, it will provide access uh to critical green
space here, but it will also be part of a network that connects surrounding cities, habitats, and the and the northeast region. So, just bear in mind that you have the opportunity to realize something that will benefit not only Jersey City residents um but also people
and places far beyond the city limits. So, Jersey City, lead the way and be an example for the future of cities. Thank you. >> My name is Jack McKe, M K E. I'll keep it short. There's nothing I've thought that hasn't already been said a couple
times tonight, but uh I'll emphasize a couple points. Uh what the Embankment Coalition did is inspiring. As someone that had a lot of hopes for politics as a young man, studied it, I got burnt out because there's a lot of sadness and heartbreak when you see the little guy lose. And this story is a case of the
little guy coming together, fighting together, and with your help winning. Um, one note I would say as we go forward with this project, assuming we do to take the time to listen to the notes of the designers and the community groups that have been involved. I know
that like in the history of New York City, there was a period where New York uh, Central Park was this beautiful thing and then it kind of fell into disrepair as the the quote unquote experts were just clear cotton trees because they didn't want to take the time or they didn't have the expertise to do it. Uh there are people that have the time and are willing to give it
their expertise. Take advantage of it. Do not create do not create a suburban soccer field floating in the sky. Let the beauty that exists there remain and uh with a scalpel, not a hatchet. Thank you. >> We are named. >> Thank you very much, council. My name is
Ann Studholm. I'm on your list. An N. >> What number are you on the list? My god, I can't remember. >> It's all right. I'll look you up. Go ahead. >> S T U D H O L M E. Um, I was actually here to speak on something else. Are you going to have general public comment
separate from comment on extraordinary? >> Yes. >> Okay, I'll save my remarks for then, but I love the embankment. It's wonderful. This seems great. >> Good evening, Shireen McCormack. I just wanted to speak very quickly uh to reiterate support for the embankment
and this milestone event tonight. Where we are is huge. It's so inspiring. Green spaces need to be preserved. Our city's history needs to be preserved. And um I just I commend uh Moren Crowley and um Steve Gujiara and everyone who has
worked so hard so persistently on this. Congratulations. Please pass this. Thank you so much. Hold on one sec. Can I have your last name again? Your first name and your last name. Shireen, if you could just spell it for the our court recorder.
>> Sure thing. S H I R I N. M A C O R M A C K. >> Thank you. >> Hello, Isaac Smith. I I think the clerk knows how to spell my name. I do. >> I don't think I've ever spoken on an ordinance item. This is different. Uh
but I figured this one's worth doing it. Um so this is uh something I hope that's going to be really amazing for the city going forward and something we can all say is uh you know look back in 20 years and say, "Wow, we were a part of that. It's really amazing." Um I just want to
say I, you know, like everyone else that uh really appreciate the coalition. They've been working on this since I was about 5 years old. So, uh, uh, it's been wonderful working with them on this. I got to say I will be missing the what they really want to say is I'm going to miss the daily Steven Gucci call. It's
basically become a scheduled item on my day. I know it's come, but it's been a pleasure to work with you guys. It's been a pleasure to work on this and with the law department, everyone. And uh, don't vote no. Hello. Uh, Lawrence Sneed, L A W N CE, S
Need D. Um, forgive me everybody. Thank you. Uh, I am here to speak specifically against uh 117. Uh, but hear me out. Uh, this ordinance contains a provision that
is fundamentally undemocratic. It states that any future law, ordinance or regulation passed by this body that has a material adverse impact or effect on the financial economics of the project
shall not apply to this developer. Um, this means, you know, if a future council responding to the will of the people passes a law to require more affordable housing, I think it's at what it 30-year tax abatement for 30 affordable units, which is less than 5%.
Um, better wages for workers, uh, or stronger environmental standards. This one developer would be exempt. Um, you're being asked to sign away the city's future legislative power for one specific corporation. Uh, you are creating a zone where our local laws do
not apply. Uh, this is not about being for or against the park. Of course, I want that. I'mma be there. Uh, this is about whether any developer can be above the law. So, the the ask is uh can you vote no on
the ordinance or remove that clause? Uh, >> thank you. >> Motion. >> Oh, were you coming? Is anybody else coming? >> Is there anybody else you want to line up now? >> Just left.
>> You spoke already or no? >> No, he didn't. Okay, he didn't. >> Your name? >> Michael Darling. >> Michael, hold on one second. I just want you to bring that mic straight up so because you're a tall gentleman. And if you could just spell your last name again.
>> Darling. D A R L I N G. Thank you. I just want to s I want to end on uh I don't more people want to talk, but I wasn't planning on speaking tonight even though I was on the board because I've been on the board for about three years
now and it's humbling to see the outpouring support from the community. It's been humbling for somebody that's come to um the meetings as a volunteer as first of all just as a Jersey City resident and to see that there were people that
cared so much 27 years ago to start protecting this for future generations. Um, it's been humbling for me to see what it means to really commit to a project and put your life and and heart
and soul into a project. And that is what the members of the embankment preservation coalition have done. And I've been honored to to have been able to help them in a very small way for the last few years. And so I got involved because I was fortunate growing up to be
introduced to our national parks. It's some of my favorite experiences that I had and I was fortunate enough that I had a family was we were able to go to the parks and the fact when I came to Jersey City, my family was like, "Why are you going to a concrete jungle? Why
are you going somewhere that is so far away from the parks that we loved going to growing up?" And I said, "Well, listen. There is an opportunity in our cities to create green spaces. There is an opportunity to create natural environments for people that can't otherwise go and experience it." And one
of my favorite books is by a gentleman, Cigarette Olsen. He talked a lot about the uh um the Boundary Waters um in northern Minnesota. And it's his book's titled The Singing Wilderness. And in his first chapter, he describes as a young boy being able to go and find
peace and serenity in what he called the singing wilderness. The embankment is an opportunity for us, in my opinion, to create just that for our community and to create all the other benefits that we've heard talked about today. So, for everyone uh on the council, thank you so
much for taking the time to listen to the community support. Uh, I encourage you to please pass this and I encourage, um, I just want to thank everyone that came out here today and sat through all these comments. Uh, I'm really humbled to be here. Uh, and thank you so much
for taking time to hear my comments. >> Okay, I'm scared to ask this question. Oh >> Oh Oh This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25-117. Any member of the public still wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the
record. I heard a bunch of motions, but give me a motion. >> Motion. >> Motion made by council person to close a public hearing on city ordinance 25-117. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by council person Deise.
On the motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-117. Council person Ridley. >> Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Yes. >> Council person. >> Hi. >> Council person Solomon.
>> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> Yes. >> And council president Waterman. Motion carries 70 to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-117.
Council members Ridley and Ria absent for final consideration. >> Can we um motion to carry so everybody can come back? Um I've never seen this many happy people with a council meeting
in my life. It is a good thing. So, we can carry this to the uh December 10th meeting >> so we can all have a good holiday after that. >> So, Councilman, even though I don't get a vote, I'm going to wholeheartedly disagree with that motion. And we already held the public hearing
and closed it. So, even if they did come back, >> we wouldn't be able to. Okay. >> All right. >> No, we could just see their smiley faces. >> Watch the YouTube stream. >> Watch. Okay. Yeah, it's like a watch. In any event, for final consideration and adoption of
city ordinance 25-117, council person Ridley stepped out still. Yes. Council person Huings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Yes. And I have pictures of trains up on those tracks in the 1970s. I'd like to
see some of them published. >> I vote yes. Council Person, >> I'm gonna wholeheartedly vote I. And you know, like many people said, today, tonight is a night of history. And it
deeply heartens me to see so many people from the community uh that care. They came out to speak and want to engage and to stand together for the future of this city. And I know this is the result of decades and decades of persistence,
vision, love for the community. And I want to take a moment to thank Mayor Fulip, uh, director Aniac Alone, uh, Corporation Council Brittney Murray, John McKini, and especially the residents, uh, Moren Crowley, Steven
Goodardo, Sean A. Gallagher and the entire embankment coalition and both past and present. I know many embankment coalition members gave the full measure of their lives um so that
we can be here tonight to vote on this and we stand tonight on their shoulders. And this is more than a development. It's a legacy and let's make sure it's one that honors the people who built it, fought for it, and believed in it before it was just a dream. Thank you.
>> Just remember my predecessor, Robert Burn, and your current city clerk had to sit through all those hearings for all those years. >> Anyway, Council Person Solomon, >> yes, I I want to just echo the words that have been uh said so many times, but uh first just extraordinary thank
you to uh those who fought for 25 years to get us to this place. Um, so obviously incredible. Thank you to the Embankment Preservation Coalition, Stephen and Moren, uh, Sean, Jenny, um, Robert, all the new board members. Uh, it's really been an extraordinary
community effort, uh, against long odds to get here. Thank you to the incredible city team. Uh, you know, the mayor, the corporation, council, John, Britney, Ania, uh, lots of work was put into to get us here. Um, and thank you to partners, Albanese organization, um, who
worked very, very hard with us. And like anything, we're at a compromise here. It's not perfect, but it ultimately uh moves the city in a significantly uh better direction. And um I also just want to personally thank Isaac Smith who worked extraordinarily hard on this uh for my team and and really uh helped
move the project along at a number of uh key key moments and key points. Um and then uh you know, I think for me the the biggest thing just to emphasize is you know, we we got more work to do. So, while it's an exciting day, uh we have to see the vision fulfilled and that's going to take a lot of extraordinary
work uh planning this uh working with the community, coming up with a holistic vision, finding the resources for us to uh turn this into a unique, vibrant public space, uh that I think everyone craves. So, I'm committed to that effort and uh proudly vote yes tonight. Thank
you. Before I ask Council Person Gilmore's vote, I wanted just to go back to Council Person Ridley because you were out of the room when we were discussing the final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-117.
Um, thank you to everyone that spoke and um, you know, there are some projects that take a while and you might discuss them uh, for the last eight years and there are others that have been discussed across administrations and
this is one um, and so happy to see that uh, we're getting to that light at the end of the tunnel and I vote I. >> Thank you. And now, Council Person Gilmore. >> Yeah, I just want to um thank everyone
who was a part of this, the embankment coalition, all of the administrations, legal, and everybody else who was involved. I don't know about y'all, but I love when I read or hear a story about the underdog winning and the people who
deserve to win, it just does something to my body. Um, so I'm extremely elated that we're at this juncture right now. 25 years is so long. Just to put it in context, it's longer than I've been born. Um, so that is a very long time. I
probably vote I council person the G. >> Ditto on all of the comments and the thank yous. This was an incredible effort. did take a long time, but we're we're in the right place right now. Thank you to all the advocate advocates that came out. A few weeks ago or maybe
months ago, when the developers came to sit with each council person to go over the project and how excited they were, they left almost every council office or every council person I going, "Do you think we have the votes? Can we do something? Do you want to put a
community thing on?" I know that they must be in this room, but they were slightly nervous that they weren't going to have the votes. and we all said like think you got it. Uh so I hope they are here and they do see that they do have it. Thank you so much for the work. I'm really excited for the embankment. I'm even probably more excited for Bberto
Clemente Field um to be redone um and rejuvenated. And I'll say that for Councilman Rivera, too, because that was his top priority. So I proudly vote I. >> My dogs and I will be there as soon as it's done. >> Council person Rivera voted yes earlier.
and Council President Mortman, >> I want to thank everybody for that comment. Um, and I want to address Natie, the young lady that came and she had her concerns about the tax abatement that is attached to this, which is 30 years and 5% affordable housing. Um, so
often, uh, a lot of you come out and you you're against the tax abatement and said don't give it, but in a situation like this, you you afford it and it's only yielding 5% affordable housing. Next time we come back, we have another tax abatement that's on the table for 30
years and for people to stay in affordable housing and add to it. So I I'm hear her concern and I know in order to get certain projects done, you do have to give some type of tax incentives and this project it needed the tax incentives. And not only that, you're
going to need more than that to really get this project done. So I see all the the public is here and this is what you want. You said you want it and you good with the 30-year tax abatement. That's what you're saying. And so with that, I vote I. But come out next time, next
council meeting, and tell me how you feel about this next one that's coming up for 30-year tax abatement because it yields affordable housing downtown also. That's a fair or axe. And I would like to know that, too. With that, I vote I.
>> City ordinance 25-117 is adopted unanimously 90. Still got one more ordinance. And the last one, item 4.11, city ordinance 25-118,
is an ordinance of the municipal council of the city of Jersey City authorizing a tax abatement with Jersey City and Bankman Associates LLC, regarding property located at block 11602,
lot 1, on the tax map of the city of Jersey City, more commonly known as 437 Marin Boulevard, pursuant to the long-term tax exemption law NJSA4820-1X. This is a public hearing on this ordinance and I see Ivonne. Just give me
one second, Ivon, before I start your time. I want to make sure we get the camera on you. >> All right, Ivonne. >> Okay. All tax debatements are wrong. Tax abatements are contracts. They're not ratables. It is ratables that stabilize
the taxes. Uh in 2018 after reval the city was worth $34 billion. Today it is worth $59 million. So even though uh Phillip and you city council uh spent spent and
spent stabilized the taxes not going up was eratable. This is not eratable. So when they start paying back money to the city, they'll be paying back in cheap dollars. 10 years from now, that $1, that dollar they pay will be, you know,
it'll be a discount. We don't know from any tax evadement how much we lose in terms of the schools. We don't know how much we lose in terms of the county because we, you know, only 5% goes to the county. We don't know what services they're going to. We don't know how many
children will be there. What you're doing is basically transferring that tax abatement to the small homeowner who has nothing at all. And the problem I have with tax abatements, including this one, regardless of what it is, is that you
don't have that in the information. We don't know the loss of the ratable that would stabilize the taxes. So, someone does not go into tax lean. We don't know the loss of the dollar amount that the schools do not have. We don't know the
loss to the county because they need their dollars, too. They pay for all our welfare and social programs, not Jersey City. So, you know, you can dress this up how great tax abatements are. Tax abatement robs the people who have to
pay their fair share of government. And I think it is wrong. I think it's absolutely it's it's immoral because you're transferring that tax abatement to another group. And that other group will be in the newspaper when the city
actually be this month. Last year it was 5,200 people who wanted a tax lean and they're paying for all the people who got free stuff and cheap housing because somebody else had to pay it up. It's not as though you're gonna cut your budget and
say, "Well, gee, we're going to go down." You know, when Philip first started as mayor, the budget was $485 million. The budget now is $750 million. Well, the tax abatement is is it's just
it's a contract. That's all it is. It's cheap money. It is not eratable. And what you all tax abatement harm and I want to see in all future tax abatement what is being lost you don't do that and that's wrong
what ratable is being lost because it is the ratable base that count the county strikes the budget really what it is all the money your >> time is up Ivon >> okay thank you very much but it's absolutely wrong >> our next speaker.
>> My name is Edward Perkins. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, um with this abatement, although it's in war e uh Councilman Solomon, uh with only 5% of affordable housing or
less than 5% of affordable housing, personally, I think this is a bad deal. um if it took two weeks or two years or 25 years or 50 years. I'm not unfamiliar with coming down here uh trying to
encourage the council to care more about those of us who can't afford to live here and helping with affordable housing or lowincome housing. Providing it for us is the answer that we need and this is not it.
I love green spaces. We all deserve green, safe spaces to live in, right? But not at the How can you afford a developer? How can you let them come into our community and do this?
We're inviting thousands and thousands of more people and families in, right? Our infrastructure, we can't even hold people. And this is just sorry. I mean, this this this is just a I I I disagree with this. is particular for WARE E, but it's not a private embankment. So, it's
open to all of Jersey City. That includes me. But the affordable h housing is what we need most in our city. And this isn't really helping at all to provide housing for most of us in the city that need it.
It's not. I want if if you support this and you're running as mayor, so if you happen to win, of course, I want this to be um brought to the wider community. We should have a wider conversation because people from the public from W E are here
and maybe a few other people are here and they say yes, yes, yes, but what about the rest of Jersey City? We may not all agree on any one project in any one ward, but this is wrong for all of Jersey City. Thank you. Yeah.
Next speaker. >> Good evening, Danielle the Demo. Now, with this pilot embankment tax abatement, I want to first start by saying there's actually a lot to like in this deal that we have heard so beautifully before. But here's where I
pause. Why does a developer need a long-term tax abatement to deliver benefits that should already be baseline for doing business in Jersey City? We're talking about a 40 a 40story luxury tower, over 600 units, and a tax break
that could cost us tens of millions in future revenue. The ordinance says it will generate more than current taxes. Well, that's an empty lot. Of course, it's more. That's not a justification.
That's creative accounting. If this project is is as strong as it sounds, it should stand without a subsidy. Developers don't need handouts. Our schools, parks, and infrastructure do. And bigger picture, not every vacant
piece of land has to become housing. Open space, storm water control, green infrastructure, those are forms of development, too. Let's stop equating construction cranes with progress. So,
yes, support the transfer, support the preservation, support the end of litigation, but please take a hard look at the abatement. Make sure this is a partnership, not a giveaway. Let's grow smarter, not just taller. and make sure
this project sets the standard for transparency, accountability, and long-term public good. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker, >> good evening once again, Phil Carrington. For years, we've been fighting over the
issue of tax abatement. I'm going to support this at this time only on one condition that seniors such as myself or black seniors particularly who purchased the house before the turn of the last
century. See we've been paying taxes for on let let me use myself as an example $99,000 on the building that I had. That's back then. Today I'm paying taxes $650,000
on the same building. So we need a tax abatement. The reason for that is that the taxes went up or assessed more and the more it is assessed the more you pay. But but my income remained the same. Matter of
fact, I'm in the seniors group. our income then become stable or steady income, but our taxes continue to go up. It is good if you're going to sell the property for $600,000, but I have no intention to sell it. So,
I'm paying on the assessment. Let me be clear. If I'm going to sell it for $600,000, that's good. Then I'm I don't mind paying you taxes. But if I intend to keep it for 20 years, why am I paying you taxes when I'm just going to keep
the property? So, as it is said, then I ain't paying taxes for those who ain't paying taxes. So, seniors such as myself are requesting a tax abatement or tax exempt primarily because we are on fixed income
and every year or every two years, our taxes go up. See, it's debt to income. If my income is $2,000 a month and I'm paying $3,000, come on. Something ain't right. So we
look, we we need a tax abatement for seniors, for black seniors, my black man speak only for black people. But that need to be considered. Continue with your tax abatement for this project. But it must be considered because 3 to 4,000 black people lose
their houses for tax. I mean, people who own the house outright lost their houses cuz they can't pay taxes. The income is steady. The taxes is much more than the income. You either sell the house, refinance it,
and you're going to lose it anyway. So if you're going to continue to give everybody a tax abatement, it is time to give seniors a tax abatement or tax shelter or tax cut or reverse it to the tax we were paying back in 1989 and
1990. Let's play the game by one set of rules. >> Thank you, Phil. >> Our next speaker, >> hi Natalie Leone again. L I M as in monkey, O N is in Nancy. Um I feel like I I already explained in my first
remarks um exactly why um both the tax abatement is is incorrect and how it affects all of us. But I will just echo a couple of the things that other folks said. the the first woman who spoke tonight talked about essentially she was talking about passing the buck. Um that
when the most l when the new highrises that stand to be the most lucrative um give us the most tax revenue are held exempt, then it's all of the regular people and homeowners that are paying taxes instead. And then they end up raising rents on people like me who live
in a 100-year-old house that my landlord doesn't live in. you know, just a twobedroom house that's not eligible for rent control or anything else. Um, it's a terrible, terrible precedent. It's a part of this development boom um that is not being addressed. Um, it's immoral,
as someone else said, and I hate that such a beautiful project has to start with like these dirty beginnings. Um, I think that that's a problem. Um, Danielle mentioned that affordable housing should already be a baseline. That's true as well. Um, Miss Waterman
said that in this in that in this instance it was a necessary incentive to get us over the line, but and I haven't read all of the legal papers. Um, so maybe I'm missing something, but it really does seem like we had some sort of legal leverage throughout this entire
debacle. That's why it went on for so long that the initial sale was deemed to be illegal. So, if we had leverage, then why was it necessary for us to bend over and give them the double whammy of not having of a 30-year tax abatement and
only 5% affordable housing? I mean, come on. Make it make sense more. I'm sure it's all in the litigation paperwork, but um I just can't believe also that there's so much going on about this and there's all these posts about it, but no one's talking about these costs. Why are
we being so hush about that? Again, this is a beautiful, beautiful project that has some very ugly things that are going into it. Let's at least be transparent about it and have a conversation about it. But this portion is wrong. And if it is possible to pass one ordinance but
not the other, um, I think you should really look into that. Let's hold these developers accountable. It's it shouldn't have been their land in the first place. So why are we giving them extra things that take away from ordinary citizens to get this through? I also like the idea can the embankment
needs to be preserved. That's 100% true. But a lot of what people are talking about are like recreational opportunities and I think that that's important too, but we need tax dollars to go to really really really important things um before recreation as well. So
I don't know this tax abatement I don't think we can afford it and there should be a way for these things to not be mutually exclusive. We should be able to get the embankment without this. We have legal leverage. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker
>> Steven Gardo. >> Gotcha. Stephen, >> I'm always very humbled uh coming to council meetings and hearing the needs of the people in Jersey City. Um uh we
have tremendous respect for other neighborhoods. We believe that this project will be good for everyone. Uh when we speak about there's two things I wanted to clear up. Uh just quickly on the affordable housing issue. The the uh
zoning that governs block one would have allowed a 400 unit building with 200 hotel units to be built without any affordable housing being required. it it was uh zoned that way prior to the new
affordable housing housing ordinance and the developers would not have had to supply any affordable housing. Um so when you say it's 5% of 604 units that's not actually accurate. Um so with a little bit more information maybe uh the
people who spoke might have some more understanding. What happened is the developer is converting 200 hotel units to residential units and 30 of those 200 hotel units will be affordable housing
units. So that's actually 15% of the 200 units. Those are the only ones that were available for the affordable housing ordinance to be applied to. Just to make just to clarify, I'm not saying it's a great deal and everyone's completely
happy with the settlement. This is was a compromise. The other point I want to make about the abatement is as Sam Pess said earlier, the givebacks, the community benefits, the improvements
that are going to be available to the public amount to somewhere in the neighborhood of $40 million. Never have I ever seen a development project come before this city council that would have those types of givebacks and community benefits. So,
as as a citizen, as a as the president of the embankment coalition, are we in the habit of supporting abatements? We're not, but in a case like this where there's so much to be gained. Um, we we we do believe it's justified and we hope
that you vote yes. Thank you. Our next speaker, >> Lawrence Sneed, L A W N CE S ne. Uh, thank you. I'm here to speak
specifically against 118, the 30-year tax abatement for the embankment luxury tower. Uh, this ordinance grants a massive public subsidy, three decades of reduced property taxes for a 604 unit
building that provides only 30 30 affordable units, that is an affordability rate of less than 5%. Our own city's inclusionary zoning policy expects a 15% set aside for projects receiving a tax abatement. This deal
delivers only a third of that. Uh the city's documents admit this is a significant inducement. Uh fancy word for bribe. Uh because the project is not feasible without it. Uh feasible for whom? Feasible for the developer to
achieve you know an expected profit margin while the schools and city services lose out on full tax revenue for a generation. Uh please vote no on 118. This is a bad deal for Jersey City. The scale of the public subsidy is not
justified by the minimal public benefit. We cannot afford to set this precedent. Um, and I'm not done. Hold on. And on the feasibility thing, um, is it can you can you actually answer me
on on whether or not this when you say feasible, are you saying the building physically can't be built or are you saying uh the developer can secure profit uh for their investors? That was a question.
>> Yeah. >> No, >> he'll speak to you on his side. >> Don, could you just >> Yeah. Talk to him, please. >> You don't know. Okay. Okay. He doesn't have the financials in front of him, so >> Okay.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker, >> Moren Crowley. >> Bring it down to you, Moren. There you go. >> Thank you. Um, I just wanted to say that I feel the pain of the speakers that are
speaking against this ordinance, but I ask you to approve it because it's part of a package of ordinances that are absolutely necessary in order to settle the embankment litigation. Um I actually um am very you know feel
the the concerns of the woman who just expressed um about the un increasing unaffordability of houses that we live in. My husband and I bought our house almost 50 years ago and a few years ago the taxes um are now more than what we
paid for the house. And you know, um, that's painful, uh, because it it it obviously can drive people out of the city who really feel rooted here and want to be here. Um,
but I do think that pilots maybe they there ought to be more education sessions about the benefits of pilots in some cases. As Stephen pointed out, we're getting $40 million worth of benefits for it. And I want to say to
the people who think that we should continue fighting, we've been fighting for all these years, and we're not sure the outcome. Um there there's litigation on the local level,
on the federal level, and we aren't as trusting in our institutions anymore, especially on the federal level as we are in our own city government. So, I'm urging you to vote for this
ordinance as well as the other two that make our settlement possible. Thank you. This is still a public hearing on city ordinance 25118. Any member of the public wishing to be heard, please come up to the podium and state your name for the record. >> Motion.
>> Second. >> Motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-118 was made by council person Gilmore, seconded by council person. On the motion to close the public hearing on city ordinance 25-118. Council person Ridley
>> I. >> Council person Hulings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Council person. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> I. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> And council president Mortman. Motion
carries 80 with council person Rivera absent for the close of the public hearing on city ordinance 25-118. But final cons >> hold on hold on Sean. I just want legal to clear um or the DA to clear some
things up. Um as it relates to 4.11 um all of these while they're separate ordinance they're pretty much grouped together right. One can one one so the settlement is is
so if if we don't vote on 411 what if anything happened with 4.7 >> the settlement would not be um the settlement would go away it's a condition that the >> so there okay all right now my biggest concern which I've always
asked is for us to show the real dollar amount we're for going versus what will be taxed if the actual establishment was there. For the life of me, I just don't know why as a city we can't have those
numbers or something close to those numbers because with those numbers, the public can see whether we made an educated decision or from a financial standpoint, is it worth getting whatever the public benefits are versus what
we're paying. So, I just don't understand how we can't get that in order. Um, so my next question as it relates to what can be built as of right there. Um, is it true? Um, the gentleman
spoke of it can be 600 units or something like that. Uh, as a right. >> Yeah. Um, >> see an update on the actual financial stuff for you. In appendix B, we list the 30-year pilot projection versus
conventional taxes. It's included in NW Financials report. >> Okay. What's that number? So the public can hear so the public can hear that number >> sideways. >> And if Peter, if you can tell me like what is the dwelling that can be erected
as of right? Um um I mean cuz these are the numbers, you know, that paints the story in totality. Um so the general public can know, hey, you know, everything considered that may have been a good decision.
>> Sure. Councilman, if you want to talk about Appendix B, uh, and this is all projected. The gross pilot over the 30-year period would wind up being approximately, um, $122 million. County
share at 5% would be a little over $6.1 million. Um, we have we have it the right way. >> Okay. So, that's pretty much the number I was looking for, the 122. >> That's the gross pilot, right? And the conventional taxes projected would have
been um a little under 213 million. >> A little under 213. >> So an admin fee and obviously the city keeps uh 95% of the pilot. >> So Peter, what um what can what uh what
type of dwelling can be what what is that area zoned for? like as it relates to the different units that they can do as a right without any opening the zone or anything like that. >> So I don't know off the top of my head I have to get you that information counselor.
>> Okay. I mean I do share the concern as it relates to like where's the relief for one and two family homeowners,
right? people are right to say that hey there has been x amount of houses foreclosed on for taxes that's paid off right so what do we say to someone whose
taxes I know my taxes have increased almost double right but what do we tell someone who taxes was one 4,000 a year and now is 14,000 a year and their their cost of living is going
up but their income subsequently is if they're lucky is going up 5%. So, this might be a larger conversation, Councilman, but there is a mechanism called five-year abatements where if you were to build a brand new home on an existing lot that's zone for, you know, one or two family homes or if you were
to uh make substantial improvements to your home, there is a mechanism where any individual, regardless of size of the property or what they're building on it, could apply for a 5-year abatement, which would help with some of those improvements based on the new assessment they receive on the improvements they built on the property. So, there is a
mechanism in place. I'm happy to meet with your office if you >> No, no, that that's for new dwellings. >> No, it's for existing as well. >> It's for existing. >> So, if you were to, you know, I don't want to go too far into it, but you built new bathrooms, you built an addition on your house, things like that, all those things would potentially qualify for a 5-year abatement that any
homeowner could, you know, receive. It's based on essentially the areas that are needed of improvement, you know, which is a large part of city. doesn't mean a house specifically or an area specifically. It's more geography, but anyone potentially available
themselves on, you know, for that. >> Okay. All right. Peter, I mean, um Sean Sean, I just I have had those questions. >> Okay. For final consideration and adoption of city ordinance 25-118,
Council Person Ridley. >> Um thank you to everyone who spoke. I think that um you know when we get into these talks about abatements and especially since we haven't done many uh over the last eight
years that I've been here there's a lot of pros and cons. I think council president pointed out something very good um in saying that we have to be careful with picking and choosing, right? Because we just had another abatement before us a couple
weeks ago that had more affordable housing that had to get back for uh St. Peters that also uh included a school um that was making sure we had minority contractors on the job and a lot of people were not for it. Now, this
project has less affordable housing um you know in both in downtown and now people are um you know more rallying around it. And I get it cuz it's been 25 years and this is a big project. Um the last project I said when I was making my
vote that I did uh sit down with uh those attorneys for the project and the developer and I told them that we were in need of jobs just like we're in need of affordable housing. our community is in need of jobs. Um they did make good on that and connecting with people in
the community. I asked the same of this um project um and they did reach out. I asked them to reach out to Jerry Walker school also. They did do that. We discussed it during the caucus meeting. Um so there are a few other benefits
here. I think that um this deal could be better but I understand the need to move forward um and how the two are connected. So because of that and because we are also working with getting people employment I will vote I
>> council person heings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajana. >> This project has been going on for maybe over 14 years. Of course, the taxpayers over almost $15 million and uh I think it has to get approved.
We have to get it over with. Uh I usually don't vote for tax abatements because I'm against them, but here they given back almost $40 million in benefits. So for this one, I will say yes. >> Council person Sole.
Um this is definitely a hefty abatement that um you know a lot of people alluded to uh Natalie Edward Lawrence um regarding what the city is giving up and in terms
of finally getting closure for the community. And I uh I'm going to vote I um just so that we can turn the chapter um here in Jersey City regarding this uh embankment.
But I also tell everyone here today that you know what we want for downtown we need to want for the south side of the city. We need to west side north you know in the Heights because um you know we want these benefits elsewhere in the
city as well. So, we need to be able to speak to those benefits and want to improve those communities just as much as downtown. With that, I bode eye. >> Council person Solomon.
>> Yeah, just to echo what Steven said before, which was the existing as of right development there was 400 units of market rate housing and then 200 hotel units, which would have been zero affordable. And what we did is applied the uh 15% ICO to the 200 units that we
converted from the hotel uh to to the uh residential. And obviously um you know uh like all all things, it's a compromise. Um but to end the 25-y year uh fight and uh move this forward, I think is worth it. So I vote I.
>> Council Person Gilmore. Um, this one's a little it's a little challenge. Um, challenging because I typically um I hate pilots in general. Um, because
it's somebody has to pay it at the end of the day. Um, but I mean I'm kind of stuck between the rock and the hard place because 4.10 I already voted it on. 4.10 in is looped in with the rest
of the um with the rest of I guess the the ordinance and the um legislation. So, I mean, I I vote I, but I I don't want anybody to think that this is an invitation to just say um we can we can
go and get uh pilots. Um so, I considering all of that. Thank you. Council person Deise >> I. >> Council person Ria voted affirmative
earlier and council president Waterman. >> First I would like to thank everyone for coming out and sharing their concerns. When it come to tax abatements is always a strong disagreement. Like uh Councilwoman Ritley said, we had passed a uh tax abatement uh about two weeks
ago and it had to do with more affordable housing. It had to do with union labor. had to do with um connecting with local contractors to make sure they get jobs and people came out and protest against it. Sometime it feels like and you have to understand it
feels like when it we on the south side of the city we get protest against tax abatements but the tax abatements on this side we don't get that much push back. That's why we having this conversation. I know it takes certain things to get certain projects done.
this situation here. It is a long time coming. But you have to hear the concerns of the people on the south side. They are saying this. I heard what Phil said about seniors. I hear that all the time. How, you know, how hard it is for them to pay their taxes. Now, here
we are with a project that was 25 years and we given a 30-year tax abatement. The next time we have a council meeting, there is another tax abatement that's on the table to sustain affordability that is there now. and just to increase um
affordability for 18 more units. Will you come out and protest that? I don't know. That's what I'm saying. When we on one side of town, it seem like we want it. We on the other side of town, it seem like we don't want it. You know, and you saying it depends on the project or whatever the case may be. But the
truth is though, either you for affordability or you really not for affordability. That is really the issue. And that the tax abatement we voted on two weeks ago was 15% affordability. This one is only five. So I know how
long they waited for it. I know it's not five, but it's like 5% to us. That's why I got you, Steve. All right. I got you. All right. But but but you have to see what we're what we're saying here when it comes to tax abatements. Now I'mma see what happened the next time we have a meeting because that'll be another
30-year tax abatement up. Will you come out and tell us you don't want it or you do want it? So with that in mind, I'm just going to abstain from this one because at this point I'm like, what? You want it? You don't want it. Southside, we can get it. North side, we
can't get it. And at this point, we really need to sit down and just come up with something across the board. Are we going to start issuing them back and forth because the south side of the city do need to be developed, too. So that's why. Right.
>> So you're abstaining? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. City ordinance 25-118 is approved. 8 01 with Council President Waterman abstaining. That will conclude our second reading
ordinances. We're going to move on to our public request for a hearing. Just remember, I'm going to be calling the number and the first name of the individual. If everybody is going to start to exit, I suggest we take a fivem minute recess. >> Motion for a fivem minute recess.
>> Second. >> On a motion, all in favor by acclamation, please say I. Uh, we have a five five minute recess. >> Ma'am, you cannot come trying to get Denise Denise.
It is. This is a big We all said no. All dead. Right. >> Yeah. >> Just to double check, Jessica, can you check the live stream to see if you can
hear us and that we're live? Is she here? Thank you very much. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are back on the record. We are now going to our public request for a hearing. I'm going to be calling the number.
>> Right. That's right. Got it. You're right, >> Wait. This is just a public hearing. I'm not going to have a debate with you, Ivonne. Um, again, this is a public hearing for everyone who signed up. I'm
going to be calling the speaker number and the first name of the individual. With that being said, 5.1 Leverne, I believe she left. 5.2, Tom Miller. Hold on one second. Thank you.
Next speaker, 5.3, Sean. I like that. Next speaker, 5.4, Edward. I know he's here. >> Good evening. >> Hold on. Hold on, Edward. I'm sorry. I just got to get the camera on you, buddy.
>> You're good to go, Edward. >> I was so pleased to cast my vote. Um, I was going to say I did it on November 4th, but I didn't. I did it on uh Sunday before the 4th. I early voted. I was excited. Um, and darn it, it's not over.
Dang. >> Oh. Um, I'll be >> feel pain. >> I'll be having to cast the vote again. And um, well, there is so much at stake. And I guess we can start on the south
side. President Wman, we can stop start on the south side with affordable housing. So I'm pretty sure that most of the black and brown people on the south side are going to have something to say when any new development comes in and the affordable housing rate for like a
one-bedroom is like $1,100. Like people are very poor or have very little income and um that's just it. So, um, you know, I don't know what I'm really willing to accept for us to build
affordable housing on the south side. Like, if we have to sell our souls just to get affordable housing on the south side, that won't do. I'm just really hopeful or I'm hoping that um we just get an administration that really
cares and um that will attempt to um listen to all of the city and uh try to deliver for all of us. Uh, as far as public safety goes,
you know, it's going to be up to the mayor to appoint a police director and um make sure that that vision for public safety is um a one that's it turns the page on where we were.
Maybe the next council won't have to uh vote on a no confidence vote. That's embarrassing. It's shameful. And it was a step far too late for accountability in my view. Uh public safety with a new director
that will prioritize an administration that will prioritize not just homelessness and joblessness in our community but also support for mental health services. A 247 response. There's just so much equity
and our departments for funding and a council that will listen. So, it's not over yet. We'll be back. Thank you. Our next speaker, 5.5, Gina Good evening. Gina Davidson working for Mr. Gilmore, but speaking on my own
behalf tonight as a resident and representing cat rescue organizations across Jersey City. Justice for Drew and justice for Tesan Rogers. at the top here. I just want to be your friendly ma reminder that anytime a
human being is shot and killed by our police force here in Jersey City, it is a massive failure. Moving back to ordinance 25-113, which we spoke about earlier, on its face, yes, this seemed like a great idea outlawing pet stores from selling puppy mill puppies. Right,
that's the highle summary. And it is. It's a It's a great idea, but again, and Amy, I'm not sure who you did speak with, but you did not speak with the animal welfare advisory committee and you did not speak with members of our groups. And so, we're glad to have had
people like Britney. Thank you so much, Britney, for reading out the corrections. Uh, thank you to Ariel L for her help with the changes. And thank you to Paul Bell & Buer who has been tireless, tireless in his advocacy of animals and of the people performing the
rescue operations around this city. And I want to thank our shelter director, Mark Burns, for bringing to our attention back on October 20th, there were some problems with this ordinance. And thankfully, we've changed it because as it stood, you would have
single-handedly defunded 8 to nine out of 10 rescues in this city. And so, thank you for making the changes as late as they were made. Thank you for making those changes because our organizations can't all afford to be 501c3s. We don't
have uh the the the money and the and can't handle the administrative burden, right? So people like me, I'm regularly spending $300 to $500 a month to do this rescue work. So I'm putting both my time and my money in. And so
what this ordinance was going to do was not only disallow us from buying pets from pet stores, but it was going to disallow non-501c3s from getting reimbursed when they adopt out an animal. Right? And when we adopt out animals, again, it's coming out of
our own pockets. I've spent $1,000 on a single animal to make sure that they're taken care of. And sometimes we get maybe $75 back as an adoption fee, right? And that's what this language that y'all scramble to put in there protects. So again, thank you Britney, thank you
Ariel, thank you Paul Bellen Boyer, and thank you to folks who continue to support the work that we do to keep our people and animals safe in this city. Thank you so much. Our
next speaker, 5.6, Tina. Hey guys. Yes, my name is Tina Noles and yes, I do work for Education of Gearmore, but I'm speaking upon myself. Justice for Drew. Justice for Drew. Justice for Tashan.
Tan. Thank you. Um today I just wanted to speak um about myself about um everything that had been going over going on over with the community over the time I starting to see the people
are starting to see the truth of what really have been going on through this election. to my community. I just thank God we are so blessed. We should have to do so much to make up of the lack of the service. But we are going to keep
serving up to each other. People are ready to see something new and that we are that the that the voters really showed up and showed me that we are ready and to do something different for our community. For a long time, I have
been coming here begging for help for a nonprofit that I was helping the community. By me running for this campaign, it really showed me that people are on each other's side. It don't have nothing to do with helping the community. It really actually has
something to do to help their families and their friends. I realized by me helping out the community when I was doing the campaign, I seen a lot of people outside doing other stuff, but people was definitely giving them a clap on their back. But while I was
continuing to help out the community for the families and stuff, I really think that was unfair of the situation of seeing that I was the ones who was helping out the community from housing, from TRA, from food, from shelters, from
resource. All my friends come to my spot for a safe spot to help out the community, but we have the other ones who go out and enjoy theirel, but we continue to help out the community. I really think that is wrong. I am so glad that people really show the truth about
voting for me and they are waiting for the ones who have the heart to continue to do the community. I realize here in Jersey City, it's not about the heart. It's not about the people that care. It's actually about the money here. And it's a shame that this is the way that
we are living. I believe Jersey City will change if they get the right people in there and not the greedy ones in there and get the ones who care from their heart and not the ones who just keep taking the money. So, thank you guys. And I see y'all in January when I be sitting up there, guys, cuz we going
to have some new rulers up in here, y'all. New positives, low income. And this ain't going to be no lie. It ain't about the money because y'all already know I won without the money. We didn't have no money and I thank God for everyone in here who voted and took out
the time. Thank you guys. Our next speaker 5.7 Karen. It's a tough act to follow. Um I'm here because last time I couldn't say what I wanted to say. I I wrote it down. I was trying to read it. I noticed I was
reading too slowly. So I was trying to improvise. It's very hard when English is not your first language or even your second. And so I came today to ask like can you maybe for people who is who cuz you took
away two two minutes you know not that long ago and making it even harder. 3 minutes is not a lot to to make a point. uh and especially not when sometimes you have to look for a word and I know today
is not a good day to come here and advocate for that but on the other hand I am number three talking here and it's past 10 so that means the issue is not with us the people that want to do public speaking there's some issues with
the agenda that's too big and maybe the other thing about the abatement should have been on a separate day. And I mean, I don't know who goes over this and maybe I'm talking to the wrong people cuz most of you won't be here no more in January. But I hope that that's somehow
it's going to change because I feel we shouldn't be sitting here hungry uh like many of the people from the port side there uh because you want to you know have you have something on your mind. Uh that said, I hope you do anything you
can to keep the hospital open and to give everybody um you know that needs it uh housing. Thank you. >> Our next speaker 5.8 Ben ready. >> We're ready. Good evening. Uh, my name
is Ben Silva. BN S I L V A. I reside in vote on 3186 Street in Jersey City, New Jersey. and I'm the business representative for HPAE Local 5186 representing over 200 nurses um at Christ Hospital.
Um I've been coming to this council for a couple of meetings now reporting on the situation ever since Hudson Regional uh the new owners uh decided that they were going to engage in unlawful mass layoffs, laying off over a hundred of our dedicated nurses. And now they have
told us they want to shut down the hospital completely. Just this morning, they told us they want to lay off even more people and have just a freestanding emergency room with an ambulance waiting in the parking lot in case someone has a heart attack. This is unacceptable and
we are truly grateful to the council for taking this first step in protecting that land to make sure nothing other than a hospital can be built on that land. But this is just a first step, right? This this zoning needs to be made permanent in the in the next meeting. Um
and the council has to take every step every single day for as long as Hudson Regional operates to make sure they're held accountable that a future administration or uh some legal trickery doesn't destroy this hospital and take away health care that this neighborhood
needs. Um, so please continue to hold Hudson Regional accountable. Finish the job on your second read and we thank you again for all your support. Our next speaker 5.9 Daniel >> I can't even speak now anymore. Done.
Yeah. When you're ready. >> Good evening. I'm here tonight to talk about something that hasn't made your agenda yet, but will. That's the proposed Route 139 gateway reszoning, also known as ordinance 2512
in draft form. Now, I know the phrase gateway to the city sounds nice, but when I see the map, it looks more like a gateway to overdevelopment. This proposal would upzone chunks of
land R1 and government use to R3, RC-3, and NC1. And the staff memo cheerfully notes that no one from the public chose to speak. Well, that's one way to spin it, especially when there have been no community meetings that I or anyone in
the lower heights have been told about. But that's par for the course. If you don't live in the Hilltop, you're probably not on the invite list. The ordinance is being pitched as consistent with the 2022 master plan, but that plan
calls for contextsensitive incremental change, not blanket density that drops midrises next to 100-year-old homes, overwhelms local streets, and adds more strain to already weak infrastructure.
And that affordability trigger everyone loves to mention, it only applies at 15 units or more. So developers will just build 14 units and skip affordability altogether. We've seen that movie before. And spoiler alert, it ends with
working families priced out. And up the hill, Christ Hospital is still under threat. demolition plans, developer money, campaign donations, all why residents are literally fighting to
save healthc care access. So before this resoning quietly lands on your agenda, slow it down. Hold real community meetings in the lower heights. lower the threshold to affordability so
affordability isn't optional and match any zoning change with an actual infrastructure plan because no public comment doesn't mean people don't care. It means nobody bothered to tell them
what was coming. Thank you. >> Our next speaker 5.10 Chris Chris C. No. 5.11 Debbie B. No. 5.12 Phillip. Let me be quick. Uh, members of City C,
I want to thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. And this is an open letter to James Solomon who have a 74% chance of becoming the next mayor. And everything that I'm saying here, Mr. Solomon is in my in the transcripts. You don't have to ask any questions. And
this is of course an ongoing issue that has been going on for the last three years. I had a license and a permit to do business and I got shut down. According to the law and the law of George Madam back in 2020, it says
ordinance to uh city code 296-2.5B says that I had 40 I had two days to make an appeal which I did and the law department or no the business administrator had 48 48 hours to respond. He refused to respond and I keep coming back here on and on and on
and no one respond. We went to court and and of course this is the transcript. Um William O'Donnell and Christian Goodman made willfully false statements on the oath. Donald um William O'Donnell
lied on the oath he should be arrested or suspended for lying. Um the I got a letter that covered up. I'm going to put a hold on that letter for for for a while. But I have a an a follow-up letter that you can take a read. I need you to have a a read of this letter. But
the law department is ridiculous as you as they possibly can. The two lawyers, Philip Adelman and Meliss Marx, they are they operate in bad faith made willfully false statements that they know is not true. And Meliss Mars, I'm putting on the record, lied on the oath Jan um June
July the 19th, 2024. She lied on the oath. She know what she's saying was not the truth. On a side note, um while you're while you're at it, um I have also have another transcript somewhere that that that I need you to take a look
at that as well. Um Alvin Pitt uh was running an illegal art gallery and again I got a transcript. I don't I'm not saying anything that I I feel an illegal art gallery in the Batoon Center
in 2015 that needs to be examined. He needs to be fired as well. Your color has nothing what whatsoever to do with when you're wrong, you're wrong. I don't care what color you are. Now, let's go a little further. The case got even so ridiculous that the lawyer, the judge,
Judge Anthony Delia, told me to lie on the old sort of prejudy case in their favor. Now, I'm a black man. I always let people know how black I am. You can see how black I am, right? But so, I I always say that, but I would never tell a lie. He told me to say that uh William
O'Donnell that discriminated against me based on the color of my skin. Look, I'm telling you it's in the transcript and that was but you I I can I call the judge lie but he was lying. He's not telling the truth. So you need to take a look at this cuz it's going to follow up to you. They refuse to even sit down and
discuss the issue at all hearing. They continue to lie. >> Thank you. >> A pack of lying liars. Tell them I say so. Our next speaker 5.13 Jay Barkdale
5.14 Charlene. Thank you. Firstly, I would like to ask a question and you can answer at the end of my three minutes please. Resolution 25724, is that linked to the ordinance that was
already passed regarding the $14 million in salaries and or retirement severance? It's ordinance 25111. So answer that for me at the end because it seems to be the same number. But what I'm here to talk about is this bond
ordinance or uh it's ordinance 25119. It's a first reading tonight. Uh, clawing back $58 million in excess bond or note proceeds from various bond
ordinances. When I looked at the list of that, the reservoir number three up in the heights happens to be one of those that $4 million is being clawed back from. And I spoke to the New Jersey Historic Trust where they got a grant of
several grants and they are going to their expectation is Jersey City is going to go out to bid later this year or the beginning of next year for the work on that reservoir, the historic preservation work. And if
you're clawing back the money, there's no way those grants can that grant can go forward. You can't do the bid. So I'm asking whoever developed that list and many of them are parks and I know because I'm the vice president of the
parks coalition that many of our parks are in need of refurbishment and small projects. And yet much of this money on this $ 58 million is our park money. So why is it being clawed back instead of
us having to do open space grants to Jersey City to do projects when money's uh already allocated because nobody tells us this money is there. So we can't advocate for that. But now I see
this list. I really want all of you to ask the question, is this an open grant that maybe we have green acres or is that an open space grant that we didn't move forward on? What is that money for?
Is it matching funds to something else? Because if you pull those matching funds back, you can't do the grant if it's given to you by Green Acres or Hudson County Open Space. So, please due diligence here. Ask the questions. I
appreciate you, Councilman Gilmore. You ask questions, but they're not going they're not going deep enough. Honestly, I wish I could whisper in your ear sometimes. Ask this. >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker 5.15 Esther
Uh, good evening. My name is Esther Whitner and I'm here to urge you to vote no on ordinance 25-126, the proposed 30-year abatement for 30-40 Newport Parkway. The purpose of an abatement is to spur development to encourage projects that wouldn't
otherwise happen. It is not meant to be a developer subsidy underwritten by the taxpayers of Jersey City. The developer of this property, LER, has already enjoyed the benefit of a state tax exemption through the New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency for
nearly 40 years. That exemption is set to expire in three years. Instead of returning to the city's regular tax roles like every other property owner, the developer is asking for another 30 years of special treatment. That's not economic development. That's
entitlement. If you read the ordinance, the justification for the new abatement includes a long list of capital improvements. Replacing window windows with Florida ceiling glass, replacing the facade, renovating the lobby, new boilers, a new
roof, and more. Well, I need new windows in my house. Do I get a tax break of 30 years? Of course not. And neither should a luxury developer on the waterfront. To get these benefits, the developer dangles
the carrot of affordable housing. But as Mr. McCann stated during the caucus meeting, those affordable units will remain in place even if no new abatement is granted, at least until the current tenants vacate. Those tenants are protected.
So, the promise of affordability is an illusion. It's not contingent on this deal. We also need to see a third-party audit of the existing affordable housing units to make certain that there are no units that are being rented out at market rates. The incoming mayor,
whomever that may be, has pledged to build more affordable housing across the city and likely at a lower cost and in neighborhoods that actually need a pilot to attract investment. taxpayers and this council should not be held hostage by a developer who already benefits from
one of the most valuable pieces of land in Jersey City. This property should be added back to the raidable base and contribute its fair share toward the schools, the library, the county, and open space taxes, easing the burden on residents who are already paying high
taxes. It's time for Jersey City to wean itself off long-term abatements, and it starts with this vote. I want to note a clear conflict of interest. The developers attorney Connell Foley is the same firm that employs Councilwoman Huings. Even an indirect financial
relationship requires recu recusal to maintain public trust. Councilman Solomon, you have tried to build a reputation on fighting corporate influence, invoking names like Trump and Kushner, while Richard Lefer, this developer served on Donald Trump's
transition team in 2016. >> Thank you. Time is up. >> Do it consistently. >> Your time is up. Next speaker 5.16 Eve. Tonight I am supporting James Solomon for mayor because I trust him to manage Jersey City's finances. Thank you also
to council persons Gilmore and Bajano for your responsiveness. Now to the remaining team full of members of council. Jersey City is in continual violation of rent control and municipal accounting laws. I live in a Wy rent control building governed by rent control ordinance chapter 260 mandates.
Philip administration and your obstructive city law department have all refused to enforce the rent control statutes for longer than five years, including failure to maintain any audited rent control price ledger or even identify all the rent control buildings. Failure to audit and reconcile the rent price ledgers every
30 days as required by NJSA485-4 state law. Ignored illegal rent and decrease of service petitions for years in violation of due process deadlines and failed to certify and release audited 2024 and 2025 financial reports
required by NJSA485-26 GAP municipal accounting as confirmed in Portsight Towers versus Equity Residential case 224CV07508. The city's own rent leveling board found Jersey City landlords are not compliant with chapter 260. Yet team Phillip and
their lawyers continue to obstruct enforcement perpetuating the same statutory violations. These actions violate tenants 14th amendment timely due process civil rights aided and emedded unlawful rent overcharges under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act
NJSA568-2 breach duties under NJSA485-4 NJSA 468-2A and chapter 260. Philip administration furthermore acts capriciously in violation of 42 USC 1983 federal civil rights law. Government law
enforcement is not optional. Failure to enforce the above stated laws constitutes government obstruction and dereliction of duty. Team Phillip also routinely walks out of your council seats, hides behind objects, and otherwise engages in public hostile behaviors towards tenant constituents.
Notice defendants. Steven Fulip administration. Today in New York, I filed a lawsuit against you in the Federal United States District Court, District of New Jersey, for violations of federal civil rights statutes, NJSA485-4,4468-27, and Jersey City chapter 260. City
lawyers have no authority to cause a lawless shutdown of housing related laws in this city. There will be justice. Stay tuned. Next speaker, 5.17, Amy Amy's not here.
Next. 5.18. Candace Lawrence not here. 5.19 Jim. Jiml. 5.20. Yvon. Oh, sir. I did the math on this $122
million you're getting from that abatement. That's they're paying about $4 million a year. Considering what they're getting, that's chump change. But this is not why I'm here. This is last year from the Jersey Journal. 60 pages, two columns each. All the people
that was in tax lean, 5,200 people, more or less like that. Under Jersey City rent control laws, tenants cannot have a tax increase. The landlord goes to tax court and appeals.
They appeal and they did. This year they got rebonded $34 million which I have to pay on my tax bill. Last year it was $49 million. Affordable housing does not pay. So what you're doing with rent control and
affordable housing, you're passing, you're robbing from Peter to pay Paul. These people are the ones who pays the bills for all your affordable housing. There is no such thing as affordable housing at all. When I first when I came
to my first budget hearing, the budget was $90 million sometime in the mid70s. Mich was mayor his last term it went up to 300 uh million dollars fuller $485 million I just thought $750 million now
you can't tell people that you're going to provide them cheap housing when you continue raise water raise sewer double the school cost insurance went up you're just you're
just making these people poor You're not providing affordable housing. Where is their affordable housing? You people are hypocrites. There's no such thing as affordable housing when the city's currency is their tax bill. You get your money from
taxes. And all tax abatement and and people under rent control do not pay their fair share of government. Your rent control. If I was a tenant under rent control and I had to renew my lease, the law says for November, it is
3.2%. That's it. It ignores the increase in the insurance cost. It ignores the increase of all the things. For myself personally, I remember my house insurance went up an additional 800 bucks.
There's no such thing as cheap housing. You're just making another group of people poor. what you're doing is really immoral and you really violate one of the commandments about stealing because you're stealing their equity. You're stealing their homes. You can say here,
"Oh, proudly we gave out affordable housing doesn't exist." And your idea, Solomon, of housing for $1,000 or less. Are you curious? I This is ridiculous. It doesn't exist except if you rob somebody and that's what you're doing.
Our next speaker, 5.21, Renee. >> Good evening. Uh, my name is Renee Steinhigan. I'm speaking on behalf of New Jersey Apples Seed and I want to just say something. I'm going to be speaking on the land ordinance, but I
walked in here um and want was welcome to hear that there was a resolution of the litigation on the embankment coalition, but the name that was not mentioned was Charles Montaigne, who I represented several years ago when the developer sued the city and Mr.
Montaine. And with the permission of Moren, she said I should acknowledge that without Charles, even though there's some hes uh that the litigation went on forever, but without Charles Montagne, there would be no Enbackment Coalition. With that said, um I'm here again my
past. Before I came here, I looked at a letter that I wrote June 2012 to the Department of Health or no, it was to the court in a case uh when Christ Hospital was converting to a for-profit
entity. At the time, the there was a community organization called Save Our Christ Hospital. We're there again. The reality is we knew we would be there because you now have to do what the department of health has never done. At
the point in 2012, we knew that Hudson Hulk was going to sell the land. They had done that in Bayon Hospital. They had done that in Hoboken. We, the community, was outraged and pointed it out and asked for the department of
health to put restrictions that would not allow them to sell the land. We knew that once the land was sold versus the operation of the hospital that the hospital would close and that this would be used just to develop. With that said,
we are now left in Jersey City to fill in the gap. what the Department of Health did not do and will not do now, which is they will let this hospital close. The point is we in Jersey City have to support the health care services and
facilities that we need in this city to service what is a growing city, a growing city that needs more than one acute care facility. Therefore, we support the attempt to restrict and make clear that this zone
has to be used for health care facilities only. Healthc care facilities, any use that does not provide medical services that the community has access to should not be allowed. And with that said, I thank you
for moving forward that uh the ordinance on first reading and look forward to speedy um dealing of it at the planning board where it has to be referred to and then back to you for second reading. Thank you.
>> Our next speaker 5.22 Isaac Geminis. Okay. 5.23 Michelle is not here. >> 5.24 24 Kevin >> 30 listen speak.
Good evening, council. I'm Kevin Weller from the rent control portside towers east in Ward F. Before I address the harder truths tonight, I want to begin with gratitude. Council President Waterman, thank you for sponsoring
ordinance 25125. This ordinance addresses a real problem affecting some of the most vulnerable renters in Jersey City. Bad actor landlords have found workarounds to displaced tenants and your bill closes that gap. Mark Boles and I were honored
to provide input and we did so knowing we were consolidating feedback for many of the people standing with us tonight. Your willingness to listen, to refine, and to act on something that genuinely protects tenants is exactly the kind of leadership this city needs. We hope you
implement our suggestions so we can support ordinance 25125 without reservation. and to this council as a whole. Thank you for voting down ordinance 25107. That measure would have guaranteed landlords a 40% net operating income for
rent control properties and allowed them to pass violation fines onto tenants. Now, Jersey City will not be the first municipality in this country to reward landlords for breaking the law. You stopped that and we are grateful. But now for the harder truth. Today is
November 12th, 2025. Michelle and I gave our first speeches before this council on November 9th, 2022. This is our 66th consecutive meeting as a group, three full years. And every single violation that was
present on that first night remains in violation to this very day. Illegal rents, illegal rent increases, no resident superintendent, no 24/7 uniform security. The 1991 variance requiring two units for on-site supers, all ignored. The Korean War Memorial still
unsecured by portside security, which is a legal requirement for them. Landlord identity laws still not followed. Mandatory mandatory notices about code violations still never sent to tenants. We proposed solutions. We handed you a
standardized form. You voted to create a special committee with subpoena powers to investigate. That committee has produced nothing. Three years, over 1,000 personal testimonies, zero violations corrected. That is the legacy
each of you now owns, including those of you running for city council seats or for mayor of this city. You have each been given a whistle tonight. It's meant to be symbolic, a reminder to blow the whistle before it's too late, to finally answer the question of why this council
and this administration have allowed such consistent lawlessness to continue uninterrupted for 3 years. You can join those who have already emailed blow the whistle jcgmail.com or you can roll the dice. You can hope we forget. You can hope that when you are no longer in this office, all of
this just goes away. >> Thank you. Our next speaker, 5.25, Daniel, it's been three long years. You've seen us every other week. We've had more time together than anyone else who will vote
on December 2nd. And in all that time, as Equity Residentials violations continue uninterrupted in this city, we figured something out that creates an uncomfortable reality leading up to the December 2nd runoff election. It's a concept that I hope the press will cover. It's called strategic regulatory
capture through performative opposition. So, here's the question. What if a politician doesn't need landlord money because they're already delivering exactly what landlords want, a complete nonforcement zone while maintaining perfect political cover as a tenant
champion? Why would Equity Residential or any landlord oppose a candidate who lets 204 consecutive days of violations continue? Who allows over $1 million daily in violations to accumulate to well over $1 billion with zero
collection because a penny saved is a penny contributed just without the paper trail. In August, this council voted to create a special investigations committee with subpoena power. Three months later, zero subpoenas, zero hearings, zero findings, and it's
already been placed on pause. Now, here's what I've observed. Passing strong sounding ordinances, getting credit as a tenant champion, refusing developer money, and campaigning on that refusal, then ensuring enforcement mechanisms stay completely broken by not
taking action you've always had the power to take, such as investigation and oversight. Result: landlords get something better than campaign contributions ever could buy. Complete operational immunity under a government that pretends to be their enemy. No
paper trail, no political liability, and the people delivering it get to campaign as tenant champions while all major landlords get exactly what they want. December 2nd is coming. Do a few searches. Search Portside Towers on GoFundMe and watch back the 65 council
meetings posted there and read the over 100 times our struggle has been covered by the press. Then pick a candidate who's running on tenant advocacy and search for whether big landlords, big corporate landlords like Equity Residential, Varys Residential, Avalon Bay, or the Jersey City Property Owners
Association actually oppose that candidate. Don't look for campaign funds or contributions. That's too obvious. Look for the absence of opposition from big landlords. Then look for the absence of action from the candidate. Look for over 200 days in a row of reported
violations with not one cure. Because the dog that doesn't bark tells you everything. Don't be afraid to vote based on what's really happening, not just what we all wish was happening. We've spent three years documenting this system. The question is whether Jersey
City voters will figure it out before December 2nd. Our next speaker, 5.26, Drew. Good evening, council. My name is Drew Coachnowski and I live at Port Side Towers. Last month, over 60 of us watched the municipal court hearing on
Zoom. We watched our landlord plead guilty 71 times. Not once, not twice, 71 times. 71 separate violations, 71 admissions that they broke the law. We expected justice. We got something else
entirely. The penalty, $2,000 per violation. That's $142,000 total. But then came the real surprise, or lack thereof, at this rate. After 3 years of reporting violations, our landlord was given several more months
to comply with the promise that if they do comply by early next year, those fines drop to less than 10%. That's roughly $14,000 for 71 guilty p. Let me be clear about what the law actually
requires. Jersey City Code section 260-17 states that violations affecting more than one tenant shall be considered a separate violation as to each tenant. Section 1-25 states each day a violation
continues as a separate offense. This wasn't 71 isolated incidents. These were failures affecting 232 families in just one of our buildings persisting for years. Under the law, as written, the penalty should be calculated per tenant
or at the very least per unit per day. That's not $14,000. That's not even $142,000. That's many millions of dollars. Instead, someone negotiated a deal that treats systemic fraud affecting hundreds
of families as if it were a mere 71 parking tickets. And that's only for one building. The identical violations at the other tower, 155 Washington Street, those weren't even prosecuted. Who negotiated this? On whose authority? For
whose benefit? This is what broken justice looks like. Our landlord admitted guilt 71 times and walked away with a discount and a payment planned. If I could ignore my bills, my student loans completely unscathed, then garner a discount, I'd be thrilled. Meanwhile, our families are
still living without required resident superintendent. were still being charged illegal rents, were still being displaced. Council President, this body created a special investigative committee with subpoena power. Use it. Investigate who authorized this deal. Investigate why
the law why the law's mandatory penalty structure was ignored. Investigate why one building was prosecuted while the other was made invisible. See us. We are right here. Help us. Subpoena the records. Get answers. Our
next speaker, 5.27, Jessica. >> Good evening, city council. I think you know I'm Jess Bran. I live in Portide Towers East. Um, and I think you know that I'm a scientist. I'm trained to observe, collect data, and draw conclusions. And three years ago when we
began documenting what happens when tenants follow every rule, file a report, and present evidence to elected officials. Tonight marks our 66th consecutive meeting. That's 66 data points, over a thousand testimonies, as you've heard,
more than a thousand documented observations. And our hypothesis was rather simple and straightforward that evidence plus engagement equals protection. The results are that zero violations have been corrected,
zero illegal rents have been rolled back, zero families have been protected from this displacement. Earlier this week, Kevin and Michelle testified testified before the New Jersey Senate in support of Senate Bill 4347, the Slumlord Act. Michelle
testified that she and Kevin have reported violations for 202 consecutive days. She told the senators, quote, "That's 2,828 violations that we've reported, and not one of them has been cured. How can this be?"
Because our landlord hides and our city and even the state DCA, who are copied on every one of those 2,828 violation reports, have taken no action. We are abandoned. The New Jersey legislature asked for
their testimony because of what this council has allowed to continue uninterrupted. And as a scientist, I don't like the conclusion the data forces me to draw and rather be an optimist and believe that people
intend to do well and it will do well. But empirical evidence doesn't care about what we want. It tells us what is. Three years of data. Thousands. Three years of data. H. Sometimes it just feels crazy. Three
years. Thousands of undocumented I'm sorry, thousands of documented observations. And the pattern is clear and replicable. And December 2nd is a data point. An election is a measurement. And measurements reveal what's working and what isn't. And if three years of evidence means anything,
voters, hopefully people that are watching online, too, should examine these results, not the rhetoric. Look at what's been corrected. Look at what's been enforced. Look at who's been protected. The data doesn't lie. I think we know what's going on. You've each
been given a whistle tonight. And as a scientist, I can tell you exactly what happens when warning signals are ignored in any system. They don't stop, they escalate. The email is blowthe-wistlejcgmail.com. The choice is yours. Use it. Our next speaker 5.28 Barbara.
Good evening, city council. And this third anniversary of ports tenants coming to you begging for you to do your job. Let's have some fun with numbers. There'll be a quiz at the end of my speech. For the past 3 years, portsiders have
shook this city with a simple four-word phrase, no filing, no exemption. To date, portsiders have given more than 1,000 speeches in over 70 appearances in
front of you. In the past 204 consecutive days, they filed more than 2,800 complaints of illegal violations committed by Equity Residential.
And the municipal court prosecuted oddly only some of Equity's violations. Our landlord was fined for two non-functioning bay fence and one uncovered ma mattress for whopping total
of $1,432. Wow, that's less than the $750 amenity fee being paid by just two of Portides 527 units. Remember, each and every one of our 527
units is charged a $750 amenity fee. It's nearing the end of many of your terms. Let's take a moment to reflect on the great work that you've done for us tenants. We can do this by reviewing the
numbers. I expect that I'm going to get a huge number to reflect how much you've all achieved to protect portside down to the laws of our city. Let's see. Three years
was four words was 1,000 speeches was 70 appearances plus 204 days of 2,800 violations plus two vents
plus one mattress plus a fine of $1,432 plus an annual $750 amenity fee across 527 units. Now multiply this huge number by the
number that of times that fullup has shown up for us, which is zero, and the number of times that you've successfully investigated why the city's laws aren't being enforced, which is also zero.
that unfortunately zero is this council's legacy. Thank you. Our next speaker 5.29 Fernando. Good late evening council. My name is
Fernando and I also live in Porsai Towers. This is my second time speaking before this council. Earlier this week, Kevin testified before the New Year's Senate, he was under oath. He told him about our landlord's emergency contact
that one filed with city as required by law. He said, and this is a quote, "When we have an emergency, our emergency contact is literally a call center in the Philippines. This is not an allegation or a rumor
that is documented. Recorded testimony about a documented file with the city. He play a recording of his emergency call in this very room. And the law is clear. Both state and JerseyCT ordinance require landlords to file the name,
address, including the apartment or unit number and telephone number of our representative who can be reached at any timing in an emergency and who has authority to make emergency decisions and authorize expenditures. And in Jersey City for building as as large as
ours, that person is a resident super our landlord file that information they certify it. It's on a record with city agency by the emergency number actually goes to a call center in the Philippines with no authority to approve
expenditures with no ability to make emergency decisions and with no local presence whatsoever. That's not neligence. That's pro because as you may know emergencies happen fires, floods, structural failures, heat
failures in the winter and when they do the law requires someone local with authority who can act immediately. We do not have that. Michelle also testify in Trenton on October 22nd, 2024, a ST
inspection that found 515 code violations at our buildings, including more than 20 life safety violations. Our landlord concealed that report from all 527 families that conceal me
concealment is against the law and this is all documented. So council your investigative committee can subina all of this the phone records proving the call center the registration documents filed with a bureau or rent
leveling the communications about the consil inspection report. This is a documented deception that put families at risk. So please investigate use your subpoena power get the records and hold someone accountable. Thank you
very much. Our next speaker, 530, Mark. >> Good evening, council members. I'll start by saying that I can't compete with the original speeches, Kevin and Michelle, who've been addressing you in
this forum for 3 years. I've only been coming here since January 2023, a short 34 months ago. But in that time, the rent leveling board ruled that Portside Towers has always been rent controlled. They ordered rents recalculate and
refunds issued. EQR appealed, but there's no stay on that appeal on the aid grant. So, I ask what every tenants's thinking. Where is my refund? It's been more than 2 years since that decision. Two years of waiting while justice waits in purgatory. Or perhaps
that's limbo since purgatory actually has an exit. Last summer, you voted you now to create an investigative committee with subpoena power. That was a bold move. But how many subpoenas have actually been issued? You've got the same authority Congress used to investigate Watergate,
but you've treated the power like a library card you've forgotten to activate. Council members Cle Gilmore and Dece will you. The question is why didn't you act? Is there any time left? If so,
subpoena the rent rolls, every landlord's rent record. See who's overcharging and by how much. Subpoena the mortgage documents. The state exemption law ties everything to the initial mortgage. Get the facts, not excuses. Subpoena the superintendent
records. Let's find out if these employees actually exist or they're just fiction. And if the your department heads aren't submitting the violations we've sent you, subpoena them too and have them testify under oath because the public deserves to know whether this
incompetence or corruption. You have the power in the little time left. Use it please. On a more positive note, the first reading ordinance 25125 supports rent control and I wish to thank council
president Waterman and the rest of you for sponsoring it. Thank you. Our next speaker 5.31 Sundep thank you 5.32 David thank you 5.33
here okay which is so good evening council my name is Vasilik Langanger I go by that uh it's not the first time I'm appearing in front of this council. Sadly, not the first time. Uh when I spoke last time,
my best guess would be a year and a half ago. I still had hope that you would save me from what happened to me in the meantime. Between 2020 and 2024, I rented two different units at Portide
Towers. First by myself, then with my daughter, who moved in with me after she graduated from college. As we know, Equity Residential has used algorithmic software to increase rent
rates for Port Site Towers despite the building's rent control status. Not only was my rent in both units artificially um I'm sorry, inflated from the beginning on, it kept going up. I was
even charged an on-site transfer fee of roughly $4,500, which management threatened to increase further by over another 3,000 if I didn't sign the lease for my new apartment by a certain date. for equity.
It was as if I was breaking my lease because the twobedroom I could afford was available one month before my lease ended November instead of December. I had to take a loan to cover the expenses of my move. I'm not sure if you
understand the amount of pressure that that that puts on a person. Many of my neighbors and myself were told by management when we moved into Portite Towers that if we wanted to move from one unit to another at any equity
building in Jersey City and even in New York City, it would be free of charge as long as the rate for the new place was higher. In November of last year, I had to move out because I no longer needed a two-bedroom. My daughter who had found a
job decided to move to Manhattan. I could not afford a 3,600 rent. It increased to more than that by myself any longer. I inquired for a one-bedroom, but there was nothing that fit my budget. Equity asked me whether I
was moving because of the cost, which I confirmed. I moved to 112 Sussex Street into a one-bedroom, one bath for 2565 a month. And this November, I asked to
renew for an additional six months because of health issues. My rent increased to $2,641. I worked as an associate professor at Ramapo College of New Jersey for 27 years and I retired this past July.
Unfortunately, as a retiree, I can no longer afford to live in my colleg's home state. >> Thank you. Your time is up. >> Okay. Thank you for listening. >> Next speaker. 5.34 Shannon. 5.35 Sonia.
Tonight I want to tell you the story of a neighbor back in Germany who owns a couple of apartments in a city called Manheim. And let me be clear, this story is not about mom and pop landlords. We are not after them. They are not the bad players. We all know that. Jersey City
and Manheim are very similar. About 315,000 people live in Manheim, 303,000 in Jersey City. 44% with immigration background in Manheim, 41% in Jersey City. But back to my neighbor, his name
is France. He and his wife Pria are the classic mom and pop landlords. France and Pria rented one of their apartments to a big Turkish family in Manheim. The family was laid on their rent. After a few reminders and warnings, France drove
over there to collect the rent in person. He was determined to get his money, ready to threaten them that he would kick them out if they don't pay immediately. When he arrived, he was greeted by the entire family um who
invited them to sit with them on their table, have a meal together, and um have some sweet tea together. Um the family um showed then France the dad then showed
him the toilet which had just broken and pointed to his five children and his old mom. Instead of collecting any rent that day, France asked the Turkish father for some tools, got on his knees and fixed the toilet. The day he went home without
to that day he went home without his rent. But it came a few days later as a check in the mail together with a letter full of gratitude. And now a little insight in what went through my head when I wrote my 47th speech today. I was
about to write I'm not telling you this story to compare France to equity. And then I paused and thought to myself, actually, why am I not comparing them? Because equity is so far off in their indecent and inhumane behavior. Because
it has become absolutely normal that we wait months until a toilet get fixed. Because we can't remember the names of our neighbors anymore who got priced out. Here we are. Here are the standards you set. City council, I'm not willing
to live by those standards. They are below human dignity. Tonight I'm here to tell you that I see the Annas, the lifts, the terrors, the Vasilicis, the Judiths of this city. Those being harassed by landlords hiding behind
LLC's. Those being forced out because the rent and the city have become unaffordable for them. one on our three-year anniversary. I'm asking you and those bad acting landlords, isn't it time to get on your knees and serve your
constituents and customers? >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker, 5.36, Dan. >> Good evening. Three weeks ago, I stood here once again and asked why ordinance
260 is not being enforced. Tonight, for the 42nd time, I have to ask the same question again because nothing has changed. Tens of thousands of violations continue to go unpunished.
Landlords ignore inspection results, file incomplete rent roles, submit doctor forms, and the city still issues no fines. Ordinance 260 was supposed to hold property owners accountable, but without enforcement, it's just the ink
on paper. You passed a new ordinance introducing minimum fines. That was a good step, but did it actually change anything? Has anyone been fined under the new rule? Or are we once again watching laws being
passed just to look good on paper while landlords carry on as usual? The city is losing billions of dollars every year in uncollected fines. Billions. Money that could be used to fix our roads, improve public transport,
schools, child care, and fund mental health programs. Instead, we are letting it slip away. All while residents shoulder the burden. We pay illegal rents. We live as unresolved maintenance issues that lower
our quality of life and often our health risks. And on top of that, we are the ones paying for city improvements while billionaire landlords who profit from our infrastructure get the tax breaks. So, I have to ask, why are all these
costs on us? the residents and none on on them. Who is responsible for the imbalance? Who allows incomplete paperwork to be accepted? Who signs off on false inspection reports? And who benefits from lock looking the
other way? All these questions can be answered if there's a will to investigate. And on August 20th, a decision was made right here. a decision to form a committee to investigate. It was a clear
deliberate step and an acknowledgment that something is wrong and the city council has the duty to find out. That was almost 3 months ago. What has happened since then with the committee besides sitting on its hands?
You the council have not only the power but the obligation to investigate. We don't need more promises. We need reinfor we need enforcement. We need transparency. We need accountability. Not next year, not after the election
now. And the data don't lie. And one of our mayor candidates is sitting right here for 3 years listening to us and doing nothing. Just as a reminder for December 2nd. Our next speaker 5.37 Gracie
Not here. Okay. 5.38 Brendan. Good evening, council. 71 guilty, please. Yet nothing changes. I want you to understand what that means. For three years, we've watched the pattern. Small admissions of guilt, negotiate reductions, promises of future compliance, and then everything
continues exactly as it was. Our landlord admitted guilt 71 times last month and in return they received months to go into compliance and a 90% discount on an already reduced penalties due to a
terrible plea bargain. Maybe a promise to fix things, but nothing ever changes. The guilty pleas didn't stop anything. They were just the price of continuing service. And this is the pattern we've lived it with for 3 years. We file complaints. The city issues violations,
there's a hearing and possibly a small fine and a promise to fix things. A promise that's never fulfilled. Nothing changes because the system isn't designed to stop wealthy landlords. It's designed to give them an affordable way to break the law. Look at the numbers.
Over 2,800 violations reported in the last 22 days alone, 71 guilty pleas, millions in mandatory penalties under law reduced to thousands. And only one of the buildings was charged out of two. There are two buildings. I can promise
you if you look at the skyline, you'll count two buildings. Where the heck was I? This isn't justice. This is permission. Permission purchased at a discount Costco price. And it connects directly to this council's three years of
inaction. We've asked you to investigate to use your subpoena power to hold someone accountable. You've created a committee exactly for this purpose and yet you're yet the committee is acting like a gym membership. You signed up and haven't done jacks yet. Pardon my language.
And nothing happened. The same pattern. Acknowledgement without action. Expressions of concern without consequences. Promises without follow through. Meanwhile, more than 200 families from just our two buildings have been displaced. You can search Portide Towers GoFundMe and see the
desperation. Everyone in this room that's still awake can right now before you vote on December 2nd. Search Portside Towers GoFundMe watch the 66 consecutive council meetings where we begged for help over a thousand times for three long years and see the 100
times it was covered in the press. That's your public record, too. 71 guilty please prove our landlord is breaking the law. Three years of documentation prove to the city the council is letting them or is utterly incompetent. Come on,
let's actually fix this Next speaker. 5.39. Mel 5.40. John, 3 years. Blime me. Maybe one day we'll have a mayor who actually uh enforces the city's rent control laws.
Anyway, thank you for doing what's right tonight and voting to defeat Ordinance 25-107. I'd like to briefly touch on the exchange I had last time with Councilman Salai. Um, you insisted that the hardship clause contained in the ordinance ordinance didn't guarantee
landlords a 40% net operating income and it's simply been badly read. And given it was looked over over by legal professionals and housing industry experts all with plenty of experience of such ordinances and they all interpreted as presenting landlords with this windfall. I'd say with respect that the
ordinance wasn't badly read, it was badly written. I'm not bringing this up as a personal proper you. I'm bring it up because I stand by what I said at the last meeting. It's alarming that the ordinance got even this far. I also bring it up because as long as Pulip is still mayor, we'll be skeptical of every
ordinance that comes up for consideration since, as we know, his priorities do not lie with Jersey City residents. And sadly, this council does have a track record of going along with whatever Fullet wants, not least the ongoing slew of tax abatements that continue to line the the pockets of his
already super rich developer mates. That said, thank you again for doing the right thing where that ordinance was concerned. And thank you, President Waterman, for bringing forward its replacement 25-125. This one looks far more palatable. Councilman Solomon, congratulations on
your strong performance in the recent mayor elections. Should you become the next mayor of Jersey City, I hope you won't be led down the same path as your predecessor and sell out your constituents. You've introduced some important laws to protect tenants in recent months. Can we count on you to
follow through on your commitment to standing up for tenants rights and actually enforce those ordinances? That case, good luck in the runoff. Cheers. Next speaker. 5.41. Michelle Shell Hirs, president of the Portide
Towers West Tenant Association. 3 years ago on November 9th, 2022, Kevin and I stood before you for the first time, President Waterman, you responded to us and said we were right. You said this city needed to step up and
do the right thing. We believed you. And while it's been the longest eight weeks ever known to mankind for Kevin's rent controlled standardized form to resurface and be approved, I must acknowledge some progress. A few good
ordinances have recently been approved and we're grateful for that. But it's hard to celebrate when they've resulted in zero enforcement. At several meetings, it's been obvious that some of you were not familiar with ordinances you voted to advance. as if the voting
result was predetermined and the content of the ordinance didn't matter and the will of the people didn't matter. And so for some of you, voting against the people resulted in the people opting not to vote for you. It's been devastating
to witness this council surrender its power. 3 years and you never exercised your your Faulner Act powers. Yet, you created a special investigative committee, and then you allowed the committee to be driven by the city's
legal team instead of by its appointed members. You're grown adults with free choice, yet you knowingly allow yourselves to be rendered impotent over and over again. Some of you have asked
for our support in election campaigns. But if you haven't used the power you already have, why should the people trust you with more? I mean, after 3 years of interacting with us, haven't you already figured out that we know how
deep things run? We've told you before that we know things. Everything is by design in this city, isn't it? So, where's your moral compass? You all know that casual corruption is still
corruption. You've each been given a whistle, a reminder that you still have time to finally investigate why every violation we've brought to your attention in 2022 remains unresolved in 2025.
I'm calling on you to email blowthe whistlejcgmail.com and join us. Don't believe that the truth of your past won't haunt your future. Your fate is most certainly forever
linked to ours. Take that whistle home with you tonight and let it guide your conscience. Thank you. Our next speaker 5.42 Joe Harkkins. I don't think he's here.
Next 5.43 Moren. Moren's not here. Thank you. 5.44 Erica. I didn't see Erica. 5.45. Paula no 5.46 Donna
okay 5.47 I think Moren left too 5.48 48 Norris. >> Yeah. The Sergeant Anthony Park Neighborhood Association urges the council to act to
save Christ Hospital by reszoning the medical district to eliminate senior housing and assisted living and limit the height to four or five stories. At a rally on October 8th, hospital owners Yan Moshi and Dr. Nazar Cafay begged
state representatives for $60 million. 5 days later, they submitted a letter to the planning department to demolish the hospital and redevelop 10 10story buildings. Our association has noticed that the various owners of Christ
Hospital's intentions seem to be to drive the hospital into bankruptcy by stripping away the real estate value, charging the hospital $400,000 a month rent, and collecting management fees. Indeed, a state commission of
investigations report concluded that between 2013 and 2016, Carepoint owners Vivic Gapali, James Lawler, and Jeffrey Mandler created Shell Companies owned by them
and charged the hospitals $157 million. They had no employees and little in operating expenses. The report also states that Care Point was notorious for operating outside the networks of the state's largest insurance carriers,
which resulted in the three Hudson County hospitals billing some of the highest rates in the country. Yan Moshi, an owner of Hudson Regional Health, the current owner, has been sued civily at least nine times in federal court for violations of the Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations RICO Act. According to a Jersey City Times article published on February 5th, 2025, all the cases relate to his ownership of health care businesses in New York and New Jersey and alleged kickbacks,
fraudulent billing, and illegal fee splitting between lay people and physicians. Dr. Nazar Cathier, who is president and chief executive officer of Hudson Regional Hospital and CEO of Hudson Health System, was named a defendant in
two of the New York Rico cases. In December, the Jersey City Times reported that Kafay was embroiled in litigations involving two women, one claiming sexual harassment and the other sexual assault. We also want to bring to your attention the owner's history of buying a property
and vacating it. The employee daycare center at 110 Palisade has been closed for 20 years. The hospital has eight floors. Only three are used. The garage has been partially closed. We are unsure why we were told about a land dispute or that the garage is unstable. However,
one week later, Netflix crew members were there directed were directed to park there while they were shooting a movie in the hospital. Please support ordinance 24 25124 to save our hospital and medical district
from luxury redevelopment. Thank you. >> Our next speaker 5.49 Lauren. >> Hi. Good evening. >> Um good evening council members. Thank you for your stamina on this long night. We have lots of people that care deeply about Jersey City. Myself, I'm here to speak in favor of the bird friendly
design standards. I'm speaking as one of over 750 people who signed a petition in support of these standards and on behalf of the 501c3 nonprofit Jersey City Birds, whose mission is to make Jersey City better for birds and birders.
Studies prove that people, especially youth, benefit from interaction with nature. That connection to each other, to our environment, to bird song, to the creatures that coexist with us in this dense city makes us physically healthier. It increases our happiness
and well-being. We want birds to thrive here. So, it's urgent to protect them from window strikes. An estimated 1 billion birds die annually in the US from window strikes. Birds collide with windows because the reflections in the solid glass look like
open sky or tree. Many die immediately on impact. But the number of carcasses found, while shocking and upsetting, is only a fraction of the victims. Most are never found. They're swept into the trash or fallen inaccessible spots. Birds that survive the initial strike
often have life-threatening injuries like hemorrhages or concussions. Adrenaline can cause them to fly away, but then they die later. Sadly, many perish here in Jersey City. Collision victims we found this year include a redtailed hawk, scarlet tanagers,
thrushes, warblers, and hummingbirds. So many birds overcome overwhelming odds to survive to adulthood only to die needlessly on our streets. Bird-friendly design is the solution. It's simple, effective, and elimmits over 90% of
strikes. When implemented during design, the cost is incredibly minor. It's less than half of 1% of a building's total cost. So, for example, on a mid-rise building for $8 million, built for $8 million, bird friendly windows add
0.38%, a mere 30,000 to the total cost. and they can actually save and lower long-term energy costs. There are many costneutral or cost-saving solutions such as using less glass overall, using external insect screens or sun shades,
and implementing better lighting design. Costs will keep dropping as other cities adopt these standards, which dozens, including Newark and New York City have already done. Bird-friendly design is a clear common sense solution. In committing to making our buildings more
sustainable, we are not just advocating for the birds. We are advocating for a better city for us, our children, and generations to come. We see things like the embankment coming. We see the city trying to be sustainable and a place that we want to live and love. And we need to do these bird friendly standards
as part of building that better future for all of us. Thank you. our next speaker 550 Moren Rios. Okay. I live in my building for 26 years, rent control building. And as you could see the package that
I'm giving out, these landlords need to be held accountable. My landlord owning in my apartment I had 21 violations. This building is made out of 14 families and out of all the families only me
fighting because they refuse to fix. The rest of the tenants in the building they don't want to fight because they scared of what's happening with me which I'm being retaliated on, harassed, intimidated. They bring a contractor to
my house with a gun and come to find out he's a sheriff. I can't believe the sheriff of New Jersey is using themselves to come to my home as a contractor with a gun on them. I've been to court.
My rent is in an export account for the ne um since January because she hasn't fixed. So they refused to give her the money. And still I'm waiting for them to finish all the fixing in that apartment. Inspector's been in my house seven times
and they got violation. Landlord goes to doesn't show up for court for the um summons. He has a warrant out for his arrest. The daughter is the property manager and I believe this young lady There's a loose connection. Sorry.
Continue. >> I believe this young lady, which is the property manager, she works for the state as a state inspector. She comes to my home asking me that she going to bring a new contractor. I only had three contract in
my house. One with a gun, one without a gun, and another one. And now she's telling me she's coming back again to do another inspection. How many inspection does it take for her to fix? If you're looking at the same things, it's nothing different. My lawyer from Waterfront
came to my house while she was present. She got hostile. She has um she gets aggressive. I have a case against her for um trying to trespass into my apartment without my permission. I have um for intimidation and harassment
against her. I don't know how can we live like this. Whatever laws are in Jersey City, I think we need to enforce them and they need to be locked up. Those landlord and that property manager, they need to be locked up. And there's some corrupt going on because
she works for the state. She's a state inspector and she interferes and something needs to be done in Jersey City. Too much in corruption. And another thing um fire prevention came to the building in January of 2025. They
refused to let give them access to the building because the fire skates they are dangerous. Those fire escape if there's a fire in that building that those we cannot escape through those fire escape. Those fire skates going to fall. 5.51 Naima Terry.
5.52 David, he left. Okay. How about 5.53? Richard? >> Yes, >> he left. 5.54. Susan,
she left. Okay. 5.55. Joel. Good evening. My name is Joel Rothus and I live at Courtzside Towers West. I'm speaking last tonight, which means I've heard everything my neighbors have said. Everything is true. Every number is accurate. Every disappointment is
earned. When we started three years ago, we believed in a simple proposition. If we followed the process, presented evidence, and worked with this council in good faith, we would get justice. That was reasonable. That's how systems are supposed to work. Three years later,
we followed every process. Petitions, emails, 66 consecutive meetings, daily violations, reports. You formed a committee with Sabina powers. And not one violation has been corrected. Not one illegal rent rolled back, not one
family protected. Earlier this week, Kevin and Michelle testified in Trenton, as mentioned earlier, Kevin testified that, quote, "At portside, we are forced to play a shell game just to find out who is in charge of our
safety. This is a deliberate blueprint to avoid accountability for housing violations." He further explained how a million bill multi-billion dollar corporation gets away with this by quote filing fraudulent, deliberately strategic,
incomplete documents that are then accepted by the receiving uh authorities. They testified about what happens when a municipal government chooses not to enforce its own laws. While this council debated deliberated,
more than 200 families in just our two buildings were displaced. You can search Portzside Towers GoFundMe and see the desperation evidence there. You can watch 65 consecutive meetings, 66 with today, and see us beg for help in more
than a thousand ways. That is your public record. That is your legacy. We came here wanting to support you. Some of you are running for reelection, some for higher office. We wanted to stand with you and these leaders fought
with us. But if our free three years mean anything, the people of Jersey City should know the solution of our future may not be found among those currently elected. That's painful to say. We spent three years hoping and working with you to try
and have us pro try to have you prove us wrong. still have a choice. You have the power that you have not used. You can investigate subpoena you can enforce. We will continue to build this record. Every meeting, every violation, every family displaced, whether accountable
ability comes through your action or through other means, it will come. Whistles have been placed before you. The question is whether anyone will blow them. We came here three years ago in good faith. We stand here in good faith. The question is,
does this council will this council finally meet us there? >> Thank you. >> Our next speaker, 5.56, Becky. >> Good evening. Uh, Becky Hoffman. I'm a member of the Riverview Neighborhood Association on their development committee. I'm here to speak about
ordinance 25124. I will tell you I'm much more articulate earlier in the day. Um I thank you all for being here. Um the need for the hospital is critical to the heights and this zoning change um although being
rushed is really needed. As Renee talked about earlier, we knew uh the separation of the land from 2012 from the hospital operations was going to be disastrous for the community. And unfortunately, our planning department and other
activities didn't happen to put this change in place through the master plan process. It was only with uh Councilman Bojano's help and other members of the council that we got uh this ordinance uh put together. Um and you know it's
unfortunate that it came to that that we have to you know make these changes at this uh time. The thing I wanted to actually um talk about and I think it's been so obvious tonight is the power of community and you know what community
can do and that we have good ideas and we can make a difference and unfortunately um the community is locked out has been locked out and has not been part of these conversations. We've learned about the activities at the hospital through
the press through rumor but not through direct conversation with the community. My understanding is that director uh Marion had instructed them to reach out to the community before they, you know, even put out any type of plan. And unfortunately, as far as I know, that
hasn't happened. Um, in addition to what you're looking at tonight with um 25-124, there's additional work that needs to be do be done to revise the Palisade Protection Overlay District, also known as the Peep POD, because the property
along Palisades Avenue on the cliff is the largest piece along the cliffs and that needs to be protected. So I ask you to help us make sure that backroom deals don't happen and that we make changes so that we can have the
health care support that we need in the heights and not uh luxury housing in the guise of an attempt at senior housing or affordable housing. While those are very something that's also needed, it's not needed in the way that this particular entity is trying to do it. So I thank
you for your time. Our next speaker 5.57 Beatus. >> Thank you so much for your time. Uh I'm speaking on behalf of neighbors, families, and community members who rely on Franklin Street up in the Heights
every day. We're asking the council to introduce an ordinance at the November 25 meeting for a first reading to make Franklin Street one way from Central Avenue to Palisade Avenue so that the long plan protected bike lane can finally move forward. The state is
currently reviewing the amended bikeway plans and final approval is pending. However, advancing this ordinance now would show that the council is listening to residents and is committed to creating safer, calmer, more livable streets for people walking, biking,
driving, seniors, parents with strollers, and kids traveling to school. Passing the ordinance at first reading on November 25th with a second reading and adoption on December 10 would keep this project on track and prevent unnecessary delays once the state
completes its review. This is an opportunity for the council to demonstrate leadership, responsiveness, and a shared dedication to building a safer community. We respectfully urge the council to take this step and to help make Franklin Street safer for all of us. Councilman
Salet, I'm counting on you to make sure this one is on the next meeting's agenda. Might as well go out with a roar. I'd also like to express my support for the future of the embankment project and to express my appreciation in the adoption of the Hackinack Greenway
overlay ordinance. There is hope of things to come. Thank you. >> Our next speaker 5.58 Christian. >> Hi, good evening Kirsten Meister. Um, I just want to say this is a tough time in America right now and you all sitting up
there are very inspiring for being here, for putting up with this and everybody in this room has inspired me. Um, my issue is petty and small and I just you guys all have a lot to say and I'm really proud of our city. Um, I'm here
as a PS37 parent. I'm a PTA president for our school and I'm speaking to resolution 25681 on the agenda tonight. Um I'm a parent of a child at PS37, a school that currently lacks any
dedicated outdoor space for our students to play. Um, we do have a current street closure um, time and place and it's really convenient to have it, but it's also a vital necessity for the health, safety, and well-being of our students.
The current limited hours only allow for two of our lunch school lunch hours groups to play outdoors. We're here um, seeking in the extension of the closure hours, which would be essential to accommodate all the kids throughout the school, all ages, and all lunch periods. This would guarantee that all of our
students have a safe, necessary, and limited time during a limited time for physical activity um during their busy day. We have been working diligently with um Solomon's office, the the PS uh 37 PTA. Um we started this initiative
since last June. We started with the trial run. We've been actively engaging the community and the neighborhood stakeholders to address concerns. Our outreach has included the um attending Hamilton Park Association meetings and polling neighbors. We have successfully addressed the majority of feedback and
implemented solutions which included ensuring me um access for emergency vehicles, maintaining adult supervision presence during all closure times, relocating business loading zones to prevent interruptions of deliveries, erecting visible signage detailing the
street closure times, and coordinating with traffic engineering to ensure that street cloing schedules are maintained. Our children deserve a time and a space to play during their day. I urge you to consider their fundamental need for safe outdoor activity as you make your decision. Thank you for your
consideration and thank you everybody for being here late this evening. >> Our next speaker 5.59 Miranda. >> Hi. Hello council. Um I'm also a parent at um PS37 and uh I'm you know committed
to our children's health and safety cuz I'm here at a/4 to 12 and so are you. Thank you. Um yeah, so we're just um seeking um the um extension of a current um ordinance so that um all of the
children at PS37 can enjoy um more space to play on Pavonia Avenue. Um we have the barricades, we have the staff, um we've pulled the neighbors. So, um, we just want to give the kids a chance to
play. Thanks very much. Our next speaker, 5.60, Gabby. >> Hello. I'm here to speak about ordinance uh 25-120. My name is Gabby Felu and I serve on the board of both the Hartsmas Cove Neighborhood Association and the Saffron
Homeowners Association which is currently litigating against the proposed Albian high-rise hotel development at 2011 Newark and we're litigating at the uh with the zoning board's u misdirected approval of it.
I'm here tonight to urge the council to table ordinance 25-120 which was the second reading tonight. Uh the first reading was the second on the agenda tonight and defer any action on the proposed franchise agreement until the pending litigation is resolved. This
franchise agreement is directly tied to a project whose legal valid validity and indeed its very ability to be built is still before the courts due to its extreme variances whose approval by the zoning board is in direct conflict with
existing Jersey City zoning laws and the master plan. Approving this ordinance now puts the cart before the horse with no justifiable reason. It assumes an outcome that may never come to pass. The city will have ample time to review and
act on this agreement if the project is actually cleared to proceed. Until then, there is no justification for advancing a franchise for project mired in litigation. The developer through his lawyer spoke to you briefly this past Monday at
Caucus. He downplayed the size and scale of this project. Over half the floor area is event space. The tower is equivalent to 12 regular stories where only five stories are zoned. The plans you were
given do not show that the ebike station will need to be moved and the proposed dining plinth is 3 ft above the sidewalk. Even more troubling, the ordinance as written appears to grant this franchise essentially for free.
This is a giveaway, plain and simple. Local small independent restaurants pay annual licenses for outdoor dining parklets to offer permanent dining space on the public right of way for a dollar in perpetuity is patently patently wrong
and reeks of developer influence. The objection to the entire high-rise hotel project has been heard loudly and clearly by hundreds of residents and supported by other downtown associations including Paul's Hook Neighborhood
Association, Harsmus Cove Neighborhood Association, Hamilton Park Neighborhood Association, Vanvor Neighborhood Association, the Saffron Homeowner Association, and the Village Neighborhood Association. This council's duty is to protect the public interest, not advance a private developer's agenda
and a total giveaway of very high monetary value while the courts are still deciding whether the project is even lawful. >> Thank you. Our next speaker 5.61 an >> yes. Hi, thanks. I'm an studholm from
the law firm of Post Pollock. I'm here also to comment on the proposed franchise for 2011 Newark. Um, thank you for the opportunity to speak. It is very late. I'm just going to add a little bit more information to what my client just said. He's the head of the Saffron
Homeowners and they're my client. Um, they're the building next door to the proposed hotel event center which would enjoy this franchise. Um, at the five hearing dates on the hotel, um, which is the subject of this, the saffron
presented six expert witnesses, multiple lay witnesses, including from neighborhood associations. Um, I know Mr. Pess was here tonight. Um, he was there. It It was It was a big deal. It was like a year of hearings. The board approved the application on grounds that
are only legally applicable. I'm a zoning lawyer, to what is called an inherently beneficial use. They said, "Oh, this will be great for the city, and it's really hard, you know, it's not great for the neighborhood. It's hard to make the decision, but it's good for the city." That's not the test. That's the test for a hospital or school, not for a
private commercial use. Um, so we've appealed the approval. The approval was granted in March of this year. We recently had the initial case management conference. A briefing schedule's been set. The litigation's destined to go on for at least two years. Um, maybe a year
and a half from now. I mean, we've been going, you know, the approval was in March. So, the litigation at this point involves only the zoning board and not the municipality or the mayor and council because you guys haven't acted
yet in to do anything with with this application. I wanted to make sure you were informed and I'm going to be in touch with corporation council's office and I think Mr. Felio and um the other saffron people will be in touch with you guys personally. I wanted to make sure you were informed of the pending
litigation. It's docket HUD L322625 before you vote on this ordinance giving away this very valuable franchise. It's far better to ask the appropriate questions in the two weeks that you have
as to how much this franchise is worth to the developer. I'm a developer's lawyer usually and by my calculations it's easily worth $150,000 a year. $150,000 a year profit. Not not not gross profit. They've got seven two
tops. They've got probably two or three lunch seedings and two or three dinner seedings. Let's call it if it's even 300 days a year. That's, you know, less than six days a week. They're it's a very very very profitable thing and it's being given away to them essentially for
free for a dollar a year for 99 years. You can renegotiate with him. You can wait until the courts have spoken which will take a while. If the use is approved as currently laid out, which of course we doubt a lot of money, then
then there's a lot of time. The time is up, man. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. >> Our next speaker 5.62, 62. Kate, >> hey, good evening. Thank you for sticking it out. Uh, my name is Kate
Donnelly, lifelong Jersey City resident. I am now on the board of RNA and I also serve on the development committee with Becky. Um we are very happy and pleased
with um ordinance 25-124 that was put forward by uh Councilman Boiano and uh Solomon uh at kind of last
minute we were pushing for a fivestory cap and limit and we're very happy to see that added to it. Um the fear is that what needs to be
medical use might um kind of end up with uh too much dense de development um on that plot. Um the other reason why uh it's so
important to have the hospital medical district there is uh many of us all lived through hurricane Sandy and we while I realized that they have made a number of improvements
in uh at the downtown medical center um it's quite important to have a medical resource up the hill and out of the flood zone. Uh, and it just really makes this action super important. Um, as my
friend Becky Hoffman had also mentioned, since um, the eastern edge of the property is on the Palisade cliff, um, there have been some difficult issues that have come up recently with the
interpretation of the peepod ordinance and those of us at RNA would prefer to see uh something happen on a parallel track where the references to a cliff
face would be uh struck from the ordinance. Uh and any setbacks would have to be from the top of cliff. Um, we also think that it's very important that
when this potential change to the the master plan is put through that the administrative record is crystal clear that it is and will remain a med a medical district.
Thank you so much for your time and attention. Our next speaker 5.63 Elena I think she left 5.64 David
he left too 5.65 Jack 5.66 Gillian 5.67 67 Rebecca. >> Good evening, council president Waterman and members of the Jersey City
Council. My name is Rebecca Low. I'm president at HPA local 5186 at Christ Hospital here in Jersey or as his owners is now calling it Heist University. I have been providing care to critical
patients at our hospital for 12 years. Thank you Councilman Beam and Solomon for sponsoring this ordinance to strengthen the zoning for Christ Hospital. First, I would like to share with you a list of nearly 800 people who over the last few days have signed a
petition urging you to protect Christ Hospital and stop the land grab. This is a testament to the importance of our hospital in the Heights neighborhood. There's a need for healthc care service to be maintained on this site. Unfortunately, what the
current operations have brought to the hospital in their first six months is a rain of chaos that's threatened care for patients and disrupt the lives of those who dedicated our lives to caring for those patients. We live with daily uncertainty about our job. We survived
bankruptcy proceeding last year that gave us a glimmer of hope and we thought we just might have an owner who will invest in our hospital. Christ could thrive. That was just less than 6 months ago. It turns out that there was just empty promises to the court and the New
Jersey Department of Health. For the past two months, patients at the hospital and workers like me have been comps in HR monopoly gaming as they have threatened these layoffs and attempt to exact millions of dollars from the state. Our jobs as healthcare workers
are stressful enough. We're trying to save lives while the owners have little regard for our well-being. They have tricked the staff by giving us hope for six months ago, but now they are violating our union rights by refusing to bargain with our union over these layoffs. The track record so far leads
us to the moment where we need to protect our hospital. If the owners of our hospital are being honest, they intend to keep the healthc care services on the property, then they should have not have an issue with this change in the ordinance. But we know they do not they do have an alternative plans. They
that is why we need Jersey City Council to protect the interest of the community. The public must know that they will continue to be able to have access to healthcare services in the neighborhood that they live in. I urge you to vote yes and I thank you for your support to protect Christ Hospital.
Our next speaker 5.68 Nick 5.69 69 Debbie. Thank you. 5.70 is a dupe of 5.8. 5.71 Sonia left
5.72. Melissa 5.73 Lionel. Yeah. 5.74 Vincent. I believe he left and so did Dean. 5.75 5.76 Alyssa
is Alyssa here 5.77 Beverly here. Thank you. Um and good morning to everyone. Uh my name is Beverly Brown Roua. I'm the financial dro pro financial justice program director for
New Jersey Citizen Action. And I want to thank council members Bjano and Solomon for introducing uh this ordinance which amends chapter 345 zoning section 52 uh regarding the permitted uses in uh the
medical zone uh ordinance number 25-124. I am here uh first to stand with the workers at the hospital at Christ Hospital, the members of HPAE who have had to endure years of mismanagement, mistreatment, layoffs um and just
general stress and and undue um I would say harassment uh by various owners or the last few owners of the of the hospital. I'm here as a 30-year resident of the Heights. I have witnessed and heard much of the history that was described by uh Becky Hoffman, uh Kate
Donnelly, and Norice Rain Maker. Uh Norice left out a lot of the gory details, but she did cover a lot of the troubling history at the hospital. Um and I'm here to urge you uh to move this ordinance forward as quickly as possible. New Jersey Citizen Action
convenes the New Jersey for Healthc Care Coalition, which fights alongside communities across the state for access uh uh to and to improve health care services uh including emergency reproductive health and especially youth mental health services. Uh we all know
you all know uh that what Hudson Regional Health proposes is nothing more uh than a new phase of the decadesl long land grab schemes that have uh been robbing our community of critical health care services for the sake of making
massive profits for company shareholders. I urge you to move this ordinance forward. Do the right thing. Make it happen. Save the services for the community in the Heights and indeed all of Jersey City. closing this hospital is going to put a stress on all of the hospital systems in the area. Uh,
and the people of Jersey City deserve to have a medical uh, facility that is run properly um, and safely and that treats its its employees and all of its uh, patients uh, with dignity and with good
care. Thank you. and our last speaker 5.78 Natalie I believe she left the FBI. >> All right, on to our petitions and communications. Any questions or comments on items 6.1
through 6.42? Hearing none. Any questions or comments on officer officer communication 7.1 through 7.3? Any questions or comments on reported directors 8.1 through 8.7? Now I'll be taking a vote on claims and
addendums number one and number two. Again, that's a vote on claims and addendums number one and number two. Council person Ridley. >> I. >> Council person Huluings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> I. >> Council person. >> Hi. Council
>> person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council person Deise. >> Hi. >> And council president Morton. >> Hi. >> Council person Rivera voted earlier in the affirmative. Claims and addendums number one and number two are approved
unanimously. 90. On to our resolutions. Items 10.1 through 10.15. Council person Ridley. >> I. Council person Huings. >> Yes.
>> Council person Bajiano. >> Hi. >> Council person Sole. >> I person Solomon. >> Um, no. On 10.2. No. On 10.10. And then, uh, I and the rest.
>> Council person Gilmore. >> Hi. >> Council person Deise. >> I. Council person Rivera voted yes earlier. Council President Waterman >> I. >> Okay. Item 10.1 is approved unanimously 90.
Item 10.2 is approved 81 with Council Person Solomon voting no. Items 10.3 through 10.9 are approved unanimously 90. Item 10.10 is approved
81. Council person Solomon voting no. And items 10.11 through 10.15 are approved unanimously. 90. On to our next set of resolutions. Items 10.16 through 10.25.
Council person Ridley. >> Uh on 1022, I just want to thank the uh newly formed park association for Dr. Lina Edwards Park for all their uh work with helping
us move this forward. Uh and with that I vote I for all. >> Council person heings. >> Yes. >> Council person Biano >> I. >> Council person Sole. >> Council person Solomon. >> Just want to thank Councilman Ridley and
the Lena Edwards Park Group for advancing 10.22 and I vote I for all. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. Council person Deise >> I. >> Council person Ribera voted I earlier and council president Waterman >> I.
>> Items 10.16 through 10.25 are approved unanimously 90. On to our next set of resolutions. Items 10.26 through 10.35. Council person Ridley. >> I
personal. Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> Hi. >> Council person Sole. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Hi. >> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> I. >> Council person Rivera voted I earlier
and council president Woodman. Items 10.26 through 10.35 are approved unanimously. 90. On to our next set of resolutions. Items 10.36 through 10.44. Council person Ridley.
>> Uh abstain on 42. I on all arrests. >> Council person Helings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano. >> I. >> Council person Cle. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Abstain on 1042. I all the rest.
>> Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> I. Council person Rivera voted I earlier and council president Waterman. >> Okay. Items 10.36 through 10.41
are approved unanimously. Zero. >> Hopefully that stops. >> It did. >> Item 10.42 42 is approved. 702 with council members Ridley and Solomon
abstaining. Items 10.43 and 44 are approved unanimously 90 for the for the balance of our resolutions with the exception of 10.45 53 and 54 which have drawn.
So we're taking a vote on items 10.46 46 through 10.52 10.56 through 10.59. Council person Ridley >> I. >> Council person Hulings. >> Yes. >> Council person Bajiano.
>> I. >> Council person. >> I. >> Council person Solomon. >> Sorry. I >> got it. Council person Gilmore. >> I. >> Council person Deise. >> I. Council person Rivera voted I earlier
and council president Waterman resolutions 10.46 46 through 10.52 are approved unanimously 90 10.55 through 10.59 are approved unanimously 90 and may I
have a motion to adjourn at 1210 a.m. Motion made by council person Gilmore. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Second by council person. All council members present by acclamation please say I. >> I. We are out of here at 12:10 a.m. Good
morning everyone and good night and thank you so much everyone in attendance, everyone watching at home. Remember teamwork makes the dream work. Have a great rest of the day and stay safe.