2026. This is a caucus meeting of the Jersey City Municipal Council. We had a scheduled 4 p.m. start and my watch is showing 4:01 p.m. May we have a roll call to begin the commencement of this
meeting. Council person Brooks not here. Council person Zupa >> here. Council person Ephros >> here. >> Council person Little >> here. Council person Gilmore. Council person Singh.
I think she was here. Okay, she is here, but she's not here right now. Council person Griffin, Council Person Lavaro, and Council President Ridley >> here. Wait.
Oh, yes. I see. I Yes. Oh, and here is council person Lavaro. Okay, I wait for him to take a seat. We have six council members present at 4:02 p.m.
On behalf of Council President Ridley and the members of the Municipal Council in accordance 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 was been was provided by posting the b posting
the bulletin board of the first floor of city hall the annual notice which is a schedule of meetings and caucuses of the municipal council for the calendar year 2026. It was also filed in the office of city clerk on Tuesday, November 25th, 2025. In addition, at the time of its
preparation, the agenda of this meeting was similarly disseminated on Friday, March 6th, 2026 at 8:39 p.m. to the mayor, municipal council, business administrator, corporation council, and to the local newspapers, as well as posted on the city's website so I can
certify as to our total compliance with the sunshine law. Madame President, should we just take it from the top? Uh, >> I have a list, John. >> Okay. All right, we'll start with Director Bangghart.
>> Good afternoon, council president, council members. Drew Bangghart on behalf of the department of infrastructure with the uh division of transportation team with me. Uh the first item for today is agenda number
4.1, ordinance 26-010. This is the um change in traffic regulation to make Franklin Street in a oneway westbound between Palisade Avenue and Central Avenue.
Second reading. >> Any questions? Um it was hi Councilman Lavaro here. It suggested to me that um this this proposal may have come before the previous city council
um in in some form. Was that >> I don't believe it was presented as ordinance to make this a oneway be with the previous council. Um the the grant process started with that administration but not this particular ordinance. So >> there might have been a grant approval
previously. Hello everyone. I just wanted to add the previous council in authorizing the design contract, there was discussion about the design uh being a one-way conversion and so there was some discussion among the former council um
that in order to fund the design consultant process um that that would be part of the design. So that was just some background for that. No further questions. >> I thank you all. Um I look forward to to
seeing this proposal through tomorrow. Um I I would love to just get any other research. I think my team reached out about some uh study that's been done around emergency response time mitigation and things and any information um in the last month that infrastructure has about the
coordination between infrastructure and public safety. That's all super helpful so we can communicate that openly to residents in the next couple days before we take a vote. Absolutely. We saw the email. Um we'll compile all that, get it to you, and um you know, we'll probably copy the fire department as well. Some
of that data did come from them. So, just a breast of everything. You know, we did speak about modifications to the current design that that will assist in the response times and, you know, have made an effort to go beyond the scope of this grant project to make improvements
uh elsewhere in the surrounding neighborhood. >> Yeah, thank you so much. I see deputy chief uh deputy director now over there. So, thank you so much. Appreciate the communiciveness. >> Welcome. >> How you doing? Uh, Councilman Griffin here. Um, so at the last council meeting, there was a gentleman, I
believe he's a business owner, uh, and resident and, um, he brought up the fact that a truck was trying to leave the shop and go was is stop and shop. >> Stop and shop and it got stuck for about
45 minutes. So like have we looked into that to see what changes can be made and if so what are the changes for that? >> Uh yes we've um or the the staff has met with the at least one of the store managers in the past um during the pilot
program in 2024. They did express sometimes maneuvering the trucks in and out of that driveway off of Franklin becomes difficult when there's cars that are illegally parked or double parked. the um current design and it's going to be modified a little bit um in that area
as well. We'll remove parking to eliminate hopefully that conflict um you know along with traffic enforcement you know to keep that area clear so clear so those vehicles can back in and make their deliveries more safely and more quickly.
So the other concern in addition to public safety was about the cardiology doc the cardiologist that's on uh I think he's on Franklin uh cardiologist >> it's Michael's cardiologist glad you're going to the doctor. Um and there was a video that was
circulated from the pri the trial run. I know your office had some um uh things you were working on to alleviate congestion around there. If you could speak to that. Yeah, I I don't know the video referenced. Um, if you guys seen video,
um, I'll I guess I'll let Lindsay speak on this a little more, but I don't think there's a uh major change as part of this design. They have their driveway, they'll have their driveway access, and I think currently they're using some of the driveway for their deliveries, which
seem to work. Um, so I I know that one of the things we're going to be doing kind of above and beyond the scope of the grant project will be uh looking at the congested periods of day that usually coincide with school pickup and drop
off. Um, so that's a time that today there's a a lot more congestion. Most of the day Franklin Street is not congested. Um, and we're not anticipating that the bike lane would uh create further congestion at other times of day. Um, so we're actually working
with the deputy mayor uh for education to have a meeting with the school as well as uh Hudson County's transportation management association. We're going to be developing some operational plans to help uh mitigate some of that school pickup and drop off
uh congestion that occurs. Uh and that should help provide access to the cardiologist as well. Um, as part of the implementation, if this is to pass, we do plan to conduct additional outreach with all of the stakeholders on the corridor. Um, total cardiology was one
of those big stakeholders that we would take extra time to meet with to make sure they understand what the changes are. Um, we can talk through if there are uh additional things that we can do to help with congestion management. Um
but that's that's basically the extent of it at this point. >> Um I want to say thank you. That has been the main concern that it gets really congested during the school pickup and drop off. So we can if we can figure out a good situation for that. I
think other than that I don't see any issues in that area. Right. >> Yeah. We agree and like Lindsay said, we're going to continue to have conversations with uh Deputy Mayor Bryant and and frankly that'll open the door to maybe rolling out, you know, to
other schools to help that pickup drop off kind of difficult time of travel, alleviate that. We'll come up with some new ideas and we can, you know, broadcast that citywide and, you know, hopefully be helpful to the entire city, not just this neighborhood.
Um, so just one more question from me. Um, as far as the 87 bus, if if I recall, it travels up and down Franklin. So, has there been any conversations with NJ Transit into how they're going
to reroute and to ensure that there are streets wide enough for them to go down coming from Palisades to Central Avenue, I believe? >> Yeah. Uh, it currently only travels westbound, which is the direction of the oneway before you. So, it goes from
Palisade towards Central. So, there's really no change in that bus route. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? All right. 4.3 >> got ahead of me. Uh,
>> so go ahead. Item agenda item number 4.3 ordinance 26-013. This is establishing a new parking zone known as zone number 20 in the area of uh I'd say Pacific Avenue in the Hudenber and light rail station off of
Johnston. So, just to add a uh a little context, since this is the Ward A area, as a lot of people know, the Hudson Bergen light rail lot has uh suspended overnight
parking and a lot of our residents in that area were using that lot for parking. They are looking to restore some residential parking spots, but I do not have a date on when they will uh be able to do that. I am hoping to have
an answer on that within the next week, but they have things that they're working out on their end uh procedurally to get that done. I think they are working as quick as they can now because they realize that it is um
has cut back on their revenue. So, that is a positive thing because now they're moving. Um but before that happened and now even more so residents in that area are looking for other uh solutions to the parking
issue. The city of Jersey City does not have authorization over New Jersey transit. So we uh have to control what we can. So the traffic and engineering department did receive petitions from residents in the area to implement permit residential permit parking in
this zone. They chose to mirror the current residential permit parking that is present around the Damford station and the Richard Street station. They would apply that same um type of parking zone
here. And uh that's why this is coming about at this point. And this would be streets east of Pacific Avenue for now. Um, and we are open to possibly extending or adjusting some of this, but
this is what we currently have. >> Any questions? >> Uh, yes, madame council president. Um, what would be the feasibility of looking at something similar for the west side a uh light rail station that that area? We
already have I think it's parking zone 8. Um but it doesn't it's kind of block by block. Um so how much time would your department need to put something together or you know maybe we could schedule a meeting after this. Obviously
it's not going to take up the whole meeting but go ahead. >> Completely feasible. Um, you know, we'll definitely work with you offline, you know, and set up a meeting and see if it's an amendment in adding streets or, you know, what what exactly the plan looks like and, you know, get that going
over the next couple council meetings. >> Okay. >> Do you have petitions or can reach out, you know, get that going? That would that would help tremendously as well. We we do have some residents who have started petitioning um including Culver
between uh Mallalerie and 440, Claremont between Kennedy and Westside. Uh but we should I'll have my office reach out and we can schedule a meeting to discuss further. Thank you. >> Thank you. Can I jump in then? Um just a
it's a broader question about this process of uh zone parking. Is it um the petitioning process? Is that is that written in law? Is that uh or is that kind of an internal >> I I believe it's internal and taking over some of this from the former
director. Um this is kind of my first stab at it, so just to be honest, but um you know, it always helps to have those signatures in place and, you know, to present to the whole council that it's something that the the neighborhood is looking to do and that there's buyin
from the community. So, I think it's uh good nonetheless if it's legislated or not. Um, >> would you do you think there's any I'm putting you a little bit on the spot here because you're not prepared for this question, but is that a process that's been working or I know you're
just new to the role. So, >> uh, yeah, I think it's work working anything, you know, regardless of the context if if the petitions are there. I think that's, you know, a great starting point, like I said, to have that community buy in and and to move
something forward regardless of uh, you know, what the the subject matter is. >> Thank you. >> Welcome. >> Now, I did receive right before I I came to this meeting, I did receive a concern from a resident in regards to the timing
because I think right now this is 24 hours. If we were to, I guess, adjust the timing on this, would that be considered a substantial change if we were at to add a time limit into this? >> Defer the corporation council on that
one. >> Probably not. >> Okay. Okay. because I'm, you know, as a resident, and I think most people would agree, we're people really want to have a spot to park when they get off work, uh, and for the evening. Um, so I'll
reach out offline after this to see if maybe we can add a, um, an evening time to this, um, in the meantime. And then I guess the next question which is really not for your department but I'll follow up with buildings and streets because do
we have an idea of how long exactly it would take to implement something like this to actually change the street signs etc. >> I I don't have that information though but I'll gladly help you you know in that conversation. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other questions?
Thank you director. >> Thank you. I just want to note that council members Brooks and Griffin are were here as of 4:04 p.m. and Councilman Gilmore arrived at 4:15.
>> Director GG Gazelle. >> Good afternoon, Council President and Council members. Uh, welcome to the new faces. It's nice to see you. It's my first time here with you today. Uh we are here for agenda item 10.17. Uh it's a resolution authorizing the
renewal of a contract with our vendor Intellectics Inc. uh to continue uh the uh maintenance and development and support for the software and hardware related to the operation of our consolidated affordable housing portal
uh which some of you are already familiar with. It's affordable housingjc.com as it is better known to our constituents and our residents. Uh the total contract amount we're asking for for a one-year renewal is 190 $199,680. Any questions?
>> Questions. >> Sorry. Item is >> 1017. So um just so I have a better understanding um this is a platform where all public housing
you no it's not public housing it's it's affordable use that were constructed for example as part of the ICO >> right yeah so let let me just back up a little bit and give folks a little bit of a primer uh the division of affordable housing is a brand new division to the city in the sense that it's been around we're entering our
sixth year uh we were created by the council and launched in February of 2020. Our prime responsibility right now is municipally mandated affordable housing that is generally part of a redevelopment plan, inclusionary zoning
uh ordinance obligation, affordable housing or some form of tax abatement that has no other state or federal funding. Uh so typically anything that would come out of those mechanisms are the things that we are uh holding for monitoring and compliance and overseeing
their marketing plans uh and their ongoing uh compliance responsibilities. So I don't know. So that's what's on the portal right now. be it possible to also incorporate public housing into that
portal? Because I'm just thinking, you know, if if you're a tenant looking for affordable housing, it doesn't really I mean, maybe it does, maybe it doesn't, but like you probably would be interested in applying to both. >> The Jersey City Housing Authority does have its own portal and you can link to
that portal when you go to our portal. Our division serves as sort of an air traffic control for anybody who's looking uh for other things outside of our jurisdiction. Our responsibility is not even though we don't monitor those for compliance, we do need to know about them. We do know who monitors them. We
know points of contact so that we can direct our residents appropriately if we're unable to help them. And that's on the portal. We have a whole resources page that has all of those links. >> Okay, that's you linked to it already. um what what would it take for it to all be consolidated?
>> I'm not sure about the Jersey City Housing Authority, but I have begun preliminary conversations with my director uh some other folks in the state legislature uh Senator Angela Mcnite uh even uh our U Representative Menendez Jr. about
possibly working on a buildout for other buildings that don't fall under our portfolio to be able to access the portal. But that would probably require a different kind of contract, some other, you know, um, more money. There
will be a lot more users coming through and more applications. And just to give you a little bit more background on the portal, uh, the uniqueness of the portal is it has three end users. Uh, so it's not just the residents being able to apply, it's the developers and the property managers and owners, our administrative agents running
lotteryies, processing, reertifications, and applications on the back end. and then city staff, division of affordable housing going onto the portal checking to make sure that all the tenants are in there that they say in their reporting that are in there. We can look at everything that's being done on the back
end. So you've got multiple users and lots of different things going on on the back end there. So building that out to accept other agencies that we are not the staff for uh would require you know definitely some sort of a little bit of a study probably some analysis and then uh some solutions to figure out how we
could all play in that sandbox nicely. >> Okay. Thank you. I mean I think you know I don't really have concerns with this contract as it is before us here today but I think probably long term it would be beneficial to
>> Yeah. and and there will absolutely be conversations that I would be bringing uh to you members of the council before we do absolutely anything. Uh the portal has um Kaia Singer who's our um data analyst and community engagement coordinator. She basically uh with one other person kind of runs uh point for
this um portal. Uh and we've seen a lot of success. I mean we've literally some of the data that we sent earlier uh in response to uh Councilman Gilmore's um staff. Uh we'll show you some of the numbers there. Um one of the numbers to know is that we've had almost 500,000
just traffic people just viewing the properties looking to see what's on there. Showing you the need that people are looking for a one-stop shop portal such as the one we've created >> 500,000 >> of traffic, not applicants, not uh
users, not profile. Those numbers are in the email as well. But also this to say is that almost 500,000 people alone just from hitting it in a search go on the page, click around to poke around, see what's there. They either move on, some of them create profiles. We also have it. We've drilled down to those numbers
as well if you really need them. Ka can speak more to those. >> That's an annual number. >> Um, so that number is actually for quarter 4 of 2025. I don't have the number. >> I can't hear you. You got >> close to the mic. >> Can you hear me now? >> Yep.
>> Perfect. That number is for quarter 4 of 2025. I don't have the exact number of hits for all of 2025. I can say that we have just over 14,000 total registered users. 99% of those are applicant and users. >> What was that number?
>> Just over 14,000. >> 14,000 registered users. Mhm. >> And and do you have a sense of how many actually acquire units, affordable units through the through the portal? >> Believe there are just under 550 total
units listed on the portal. That doesn't mean that those are necessarily brand new units that were marketed for the first time directly through the portal. It's a combination of brand new units that took applications for the first time through the portal and um units that are legacy units that conducted
their lotteryies, you know, before the portal uh was incepted and and will be poised to continue taking applications if vacancies arise and they need to remarket and refresh their waiting lists. >> I'm sorry. Tell me your name again. >> Ka Sittinger. I'm the data analyst and
community engagement coordinator for the OAH. >> You say Ka. >> Ka. Yes. like Maya with a K. >> Ka, my office will be reaching out. I just want to do a deeper dive with you at some point. >> Yeah, sounds great. Awesome. Thank you. >> Thanks.
>> One more thing, uh we have offered up and have done training for previous council members. Uh your staff are welcome to call. We have a set of slides. We have an entire training uh and a briefing on how the portal works and what's there for you. Uh please reach out to us. We'd be happy to
organize those at any time. Uh, are there any other questions about this contract? >> No, I think we're good, director. >> Okay. Thank you so much and thank you for your support. >> Director Goodman. >> Good afternoon, council president, city
council members. Christine Goodman from the office of cultural affairs. I have two items for you today. The first item is 10.10. It is a resolution authorizing the execution of a hold harmless agreement
for grace church vanor for the use of grace church property for the purpose of community meetings throughout 2026 >> questions next >> and uh the next item is 10.13 this is a resolution authorizing the city of
Jersey city to apply for and accept grant funding from the New Jersey Historical Commission for the project a palace for the people a major exhibition of the Lowe's Jersey theater. That would be for fiscal year 2027. We are
submitting an application questions and >> director that'll be through the Museum of Jersey City History putting on a um exhibit there. Correct. >> Correct. It would be um presented at the Museum of Jersey City History in
partnership with Friends of the Lowe's and two residents taking the lead, Nat Calbach and Chelsea Castro, uh who both hold certificates in historic preservation. So, it will have archival um items and uh oral histories of people
who have watched the theater um over the years. >> I I reviewed the proposal. It's It's fantastic and it's a great project. >> We're excited about it. We'll invite everyone if we get the money. So, >> any other questions? Thank you,
director. >> Thank you, >> John McKenna. >> Good afternoon, council. John McKenna, Law Department. The first item is 10.7 resolution 26-100 which is a resolution authorizing the
ratification of a subordination agreement regarding Lafayette House with a street address of 328 Pacific Avenue. >> Questions? >> Sir, what was the item number again? 10 >> 10.7
>> couple of questions. Um, this project is rentals, condos. >> Uh, rentals, I believe. >> Rentals. Okay. Um, and so there was something like 40 some market rate and
two affordable. There's two affordable units that were given to the city voluntarily. Um the developer is applying for a HUDbacked loan to cover the entire uh development. And one of HUD's requirements is that you sign a subordination agreement whenever there's
a HUDbacked loan. So they don't have to worry about any foreclosure and proceeding that might be initiated by the city taking precedent over their loan and them losing the money. In this scenario, the city didn't loan them any money to build the affordable units. We just have our affordable housing
controls on it through the deed and the affordable housing agreement. So there's no risk to the city with the subordination agreement as is being able to enforce our affordable restrictions. >> So the two affordable units are completely voluntary. They're not not
the requirement of inclusionary zoning or some other >> They were not. They offered it to us at Goodwill. >> Goodwill. Any other questions? >> Oh, how how much are they applying for? >> How much have they applied for in the
loan? >> Yeah. From HUD. >> Um Rebecca, >> we have to back that application. Correct. Is that No. >> Good afternoon, um council. My name is Rebecca Mariello. I'm an associate attorney at Connell Foley. We represent
the developer here. Um, I I have the information for the exact loan amount. If you give me a few minutes to pull up the documents, I can give it to This is huge. >> It's okay. Um I I will say this that um I had a whole host of questions, but it it didn't presume that this was
voluntary. So I don't know that they are any of them matter. I'm just curious more than anything else now that um why is your client a developer? I'm very grateful that they're doing voluntary affordable housing. So just to give you some background, this project was approved before the planning board, I
believe in 2019. Um it was amended again in 2022. Um at that time there was no like a lot of times when these developers go before the planning board um they might get like a bonus and to apply for that bonus they need to do to affordable housing. Like that was not the case here. There was no um mandatory
minimum affordable units. This developer um he has um many properties throughout the city. um you know he wants to it is his initiative just to give goodwill to the city where he can um because he's a stakeholder in the city he has other rental properties here so he did so
voluntarily back in 2019 when he originally got his approvals um I wasn't I wasn't at Kofo in 2019 but I think it was just like overall connecting with the community group hearing their feedback um for this project and to you
know get the support he needed to go before the planning planning board. Um, he gave those two units. >> That was in 2019. He promised that before there was an ICO. >> I'm not sure when the ICO was adopted. >> It was 2021. >> Okay. So then, yes, it was before the ICO.
>> Excellent. >> Thank you, >> Tom. We said thanks. >> Thank you so much. >> Hi. Uh, Michael Griffin here. Um, was this uh property um transferred
through the JC or No. >> Uh, I don't believe this was owned by the JC. This is a just a private development. Um, what we did here was when they elected to have the affordable units, we generally have any property that's doing
that in Jersey City enter into an affordable housing agreement and to the extent that they're willing, put it in a deed restriction as well. So that's how this got flagged for HUD because they saw that the city had a interest in the affordable housing and just wanted to make sure that that wasn't going to
jeopardize their loan. >> Any additional questions? >> All right. Next, John. >> Sure. >> Next is item 10.12. This is a resolution exercising the city's rights with respect to a March 15, 2026 deadline set
forth in the Fair Housing Act as amended. Um, in a nutshell, per the amendments to the Fair Housing Act, we are supposed to have uh a finalized housing element and fair share plan adopted by uh March 15, 2026. We're
currently in discussion with that through a declaratory judgment motion with outside parties and there's still um minor disagreement over what our rehab obligation numbers are going to be. Basically, how much we already have credits for, how much we're going to have to commit to. That's probably going
to be worked out shortly. But in the meantime, by passing this resolution, it immunizes the city from any lawsuits that could potentially happen as a result of not meeting the March 15th deadline. >> Questions? So, this basically extends the deadline
as we hash out the details. >> Correct. >> And what's the extension for? >> Uh, there's no time limit on it referenced. Um, but we will probably have this done in the next couple months would be my guess. >> Okay, got it. So, we should just expect
to be followed up with in the next few months with some and that that's all public information, correct? >> Correct. There'll be a there'll be a final uh either decision from the courts, final order from the court saying that everything's above order, a settlement agreement, one or the other. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> I um correct me if I'm misreading this, but was there an application and then an something the decision came back or not? >> Um a couple decisions have come in just because it's a a multi-step process.
We're basically at the final part here where for our our fair share plan, we had a rehab number sent to us by the state which I believe was about um I'm forgetting the number off the top of my head, but basically our position was
we had enough credits to cover all of the the rehab obligation that we had. Fair Share Housing Center doesn't necessarily agree with that. There's a lot of paperwork that we need to go through between both parties to figure out which is applicable and which isn't. Once we get through that, we'll be at a
number we can agree on and it's done. >> Gotcha. So, um, just just for clarification, are they asking us to build more affordable
units than than we think we need to? >> No, this is separate. So, there's two obligations you get from the state under the Fair H Fair fair housing act. One is your new construction. We're exempt from that as a qualified urban aid municipality. But then for older units
that exist from before, I believe it's either 1980 or 1983, if no work has been done to them, you're supposed to rehabilitate them because they're just assumed to be not necessarily in the greatest state. So, we've got a bunch of different paperwork that we're going
through showing whether new construction has been done that'll count as a credit towards that or um whether or not we need to make some money available towards the rehab of existing units. That's where it comes into the spending plan. Once we know what these numbers are, we can have a finalized spending
plan that everyone can agree with. >> And um for forgive me for not fully understanding um the rehab the units to potentially be rehabbed, are those specifically public housing or are
they um affordable units in mixed income developments? So in this scenario, it's all likely going to be public housing as you would understand it just based off the age. Some of this is going to be housing authority properties potentially. Some of them will be round
one COA properties which were, you know, from the the mid 80s. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All of it's public. >> Yes. Well, depends what we're talking about as public housing here. for how I was understanding it from the council maybe
if we're going to get into a legal definition of public housing versus um HMFA financed >> right now. >> Okay. >> Um so so then for public housing um we we submitted a number right am I
following that? we said was the I don't know some number that uh of units that we said were in compliance I guess or so we were given a number by the state which I want to say was around
3,200 units that might qualify for rehab. You get a certain period of time to say whether that number is correct or it isn't. Part of this process is we're looking at numbers of either future housing to be built towards uh planning
board approvals, housing that has been built, potentially some housing that already has been rehabbed, and just trying to go through a significant amount of paperwork with fair share to make sure that the numbers are above board and correct.
>> I'm following it now more closely better. So, so both numbers on the private uh new construction and then the public housing that has to be rehabbed. Could you provide us? Is it 3200? Is that the number that they said? >> Approximately 3,200. Yeah, if I'm if I
recall correctly. >> How much on new construction are they? >> Zero. We don't have any new construction mand mandate from the state. We're a qualified urban aid municipality. So, statutoily we're exempt at the moment.
And so for 3,200 public, what are we saying? We've Do we agree with that? We're just saying we don't agree with that number. >> No, we did not dispute the number. Um we're just trying to find out how much of it we might already have qualified units that would count towards.
>> I'd like to hear that update at some point. >> And I got it. I'll send it your way. >> Thanks. >> Hey, hey, John. Uh Councilman Griffin here. Question. So the the the number the 3200 right now
couple of questions like how do they identify these numbers? And two like if let's for say they identified I don't know 8,000 and said okay these are the 8,000 but we're going to pick these 3200. Um,
is that the case or they just or it's every single um affordable housing unit that we have that falls under that category or do they choose who gets the uh rehabilitation work?
So basically what happens here is the state identifies the number for us based off of a formula that they use based off of paperwork that they will access largely looking at the age of properties. Um and towards that point the city needs to make money available
out of the affordable housing trust fund towards the rehab of some of those units. So that's why we're having the discussion right now is if we had to potentially rehab approximately 3,200 units, that would be significantly more than if we really only have to rehab
let's say closer to 1,200. Does that make sense? So then um I guess I guess what I'm asking is like with with the with the units, right? Is the state identifying the units or
just giving us a number of units and we identify the units? >> Um the state has identified the number of the units. I don't believe we got a report down to location of property. >> Right. Right. Okay. Right. Right. Now, >> that came from the uh Department of
Community Affairs. >> Okay. So, that will also come from the state. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, John, um I know recently they um guess they did something like this at Montgomery Gateway. Um so, essentially
the state say, "Hey, you guys are eligible or you have or they mandate or say you're eligible, whatever it is, this amount of units." And then subsequently those owners of those establishments, some of them come forward and request the actual um
affordable housing trust fund to do the rehabilitation or some come forward to do the rehabilitation and trying to get um if the property's already abated trying to get a longer a longer a longer
abatement because that's what happened with McGomery Gateway, right? >> Uh to some extent. Yeah, they got the abatement extended I think through a change of ownership and then they applied for additional funding to to rehab the units. Yeah.
>> Okay. So, so and and so the state come back and say, "Hey, we identify 3,200 right now. What if within our inventory more than 30 more than 3,200 affordable units meet the requirement?
What happens then? We're only required to to fund it to the extent that funds are available. It's probably unlikely that we would have more than what the the state has estimated our rehab obligation would be.
We've had an outside consultant do the the math on this to a to a large degree. Um so if it turned out that we might have a higher need, there's nothing preventing us from addressing it, but we're not legally required to do so. I
just I just didn't want an instance to occur where some establishments got it for the rehab and then ones who let's say haven't been rehabbed a longer period didn't necessarily get it because
we've hit that threshold of that number. >> So there's a a good possibility that could this could be part of an application process. I will get you more information on that as this progresses because if we run out of money then that could be the issue. >> Thank you.
>> Any other questions? >> Thank you, John. >> Thank you, >> Dennis Treasury. And ladies and gentlemen of the council, I'm Dennis Macintosh of the Division of Treasury. I have one agenda item 108,
uh, resolution 26 099. It's a resolution to cancel outstanding stale checks. Any questions? >> Questions? 108. >> 106. >> Oh, >> 106.
106. >> 10. Huh? >> 106. >> Yes. 106 >> hostile checks >> 10.6 questions. >> Hi. Uh Michael Griffin here, council um at large. Just a question. Um can can
you give me an example of a stale check? >> Anything that's outstanding more than 180 days on our checks is considered stale. >> So So are these checks that u we've written and they've never been cashed? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you.
The name on it says NJMVC. >> It's um they're um junk titles. >> They're junk titles. >> Yes. >> These checks are made out to the the motor vehicles commission. >> Motor vehicles. >> Yes.
>> Oh, motor vehicles are not cashing our checks. >> No, some of them they they might have been um reissued. Yeah. So the council knows because we've won this last year too. The money doesn't go away. What happens is when they cancel the checks, they put these
all the fun all these funding into a separate account that collects interest and we save it in case one of the guys comes to us and says, "Hey, you know these motor vehicles, we you owe us x amount of money for these sale checks. We can remit payment, but until they do that, we can keep the money, keep on getting interest on it, and you know,
yay us." >> Okay. So, if they approach us, if if they approach us, then we would keep the interest and we would just pay them. Okay. >> Which is $2,000, right? In total, >> it's only $2,000. I believe it's 45
items. >> Not too much interest. >> You have either $60 or $25. It's There's not many. >> It's only 2,000. >> Yes. >> In this one, Councilman want me 2,000. >> We're not saving the budget with this, unfortunately.
>> Hardly any interest. So, any other questions? >> Thank you, Dennis. >> Noble. Good afternoon, council president, council members. My name is Noble Vargas. the director of the information technology
and I'm here today with one item before you. Resolution 26-116, agenda item 10.23. Agenda item 10.23. A resolution authorizing a contract to
Unicorn HRO LLC for payroll and human resources annual license and support services for the Department of Finance and Human Resources. The total cost of this contract is $45,000 and 64 $45,6 $600.
>> Questions? >> I Yes. So a little bit more. Yeah. Yeah. So this has been five years with the software. Um we had a substantial um implementation issues and over the last >> three years the HR team and the payroll
team have worked diligently to try to address as many of the issues as possible. Um over the last 10 months um I've had um regular meetings with the uh the vendor um essentially going through where we at now um understanding
platforms. Um they're very responsive to the issues that we've had. Um we've come on the other side of all of the implementation issues. Um so I that's why we're recommending renewing the contract for another 12 months. Um it was a very painful
process. Um, a lot of it is the complexities of the seven different contracts we have and all of the unique um, processes that we had to put in place. Um, but we've come into a much better uh, position with the payroll software. Um, they have a relatively
good uptime. Um, like like any software, you're never going to get 100% um, uptime, but they are roughly 98% of the time up. Um, always there's going to be issues individually, but I believe all those issues are worked through the human resource department, specifically
payroll. Um, so that's why we're recommending to just renew the annual license for 12 months. Um, and go from there. >> I I have some questions. Council President, >> go ahead. >> Thank you for Oh, you said uptime. What is uptime? >> Uh, how long the system's up, right? So,
anytime like you really can't get in when the systems are down. So they've had a couple of times where they transfer data centers and stuff like that, but other than that, they're very good at notifying us if anything's going to happen. Usually it's on a Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. They try to minimize it. So relatively good up top.
>> Thank you. And then uh I sent an email to administration about this and they already acknowledged, but I just just want to for the record um we got some uh concerns from employees uh about Unicorn. I' I'd love to just get a sense
of a broader report on what kinds of issues have come across over the past years and what has been um with those implementation issues, the the various solutions that have been gotten to because I specifically heard that from employees in the city that despite
saying that we've conquered some of these issues, they're still persisting. So, I just want to get some specific >> absolutely from any like enterprise solution, there's never going to be 100%, right? like there's always going to be an issue or two that arises. Um happy to dive into those issues and try
to put together a report. Um I think >> over the next 12 months we can really assess it before it comes up. But I think at this point renewing it because we're going to run payroll anyway, right? E we're going to have to pay our employees next month and the month after. So I think the prudent thing is to do is let us take all those issues
that you that that that's that that have been reported to you. Let us go back and we'll put together a report over the next quarter and bring it back to you and and and can kind of go from there. >> Okay. And anything obviously understanding that that might take some time in the next quarter and everything but anything that we can get in the next
couple days before we vote. >> We can have a preliminary stuff out but if there's specific issues we would need to research the issues and then make sure we have the right answer rather than >> Got it. So just for you know for the next couple days if it's possible to get some information on um the time stamp um
if an employee clocks in this is what I heard if employee clocks in let's say 6 minutes after a shift started it would get bumped up to the quarter so 15 minutes after the shift started and so they're losing some time. >> So we can look at that rule I I can we
can look at that rule and identify if that exists or does not exist that we can clarify pretty easily. Yeah, that that would be really helpful. >> And council, we have an update on that one. We're giving you a more comprehensive memo and everything. There's a couple other council members have questions, too. But for that one specifically, no points are losing time.
We also checked the W2s last year just to double verify that. But what happens is, uh, Unicorn has a rule where if you clock in at, let's say, 9:06. We'll do a 9 to5, a regular job. So, if you clock in at 9:06, it actually gives you those 6 minutes of grace. If you clock in at
9:07, then it bumps you up to 9:15. However, the same is true on the back end where if you work till 507, it bumps bumps that up to 5:15 as well. So, if you put in your full eight hours, you get credit for your full eight hours. If you work less than your full 8 hours, then it's going to deduce some time
because you didn't work your full 8 hours. You're an hourly employee and the city can't pay you for hours not worked. If you're a management employee and salaried, none of that, you know, matters to you. It's only for the hourly employees that face that. Again, it's just the systems way of making sure we
get the full eight from you or whatever your actual uh work schedule would be. >> I I had heard, and again, this is all really helpful. I had heard it was even the case for salaried employees that they were experiencing this. >> Salar employees, it doesn't matter. They're, you know, you could work 10 hours a day, 5 hours a day. You know,
obviously your manager has to make sure you're getting your correct amount, but you're paid regardless of what it >> it calculates a 40hour work week regardless. >> Yeah, that would be my assumption. >> Yeah. Yeah, it does. just sharing what I heard from. >> Yeah, those specific stuffs are easier to answer. So, we can, you know, like just send us those questions
specifically and we can go because all those rules are defined inside the software. >> Okay, thank you. Yeah, >> I have a different question. Um to Peter um so when I when I was previously on the council, I I thought it was outsourced.
I'm just realizing now is this all an internal insourced and >> it's it's a third-party vendor that provides the software and support for that software but internally we run our own payroll >> running the payroll internally >> correct >> okay how long we've been doing that now
>> uh I think it's been even before unicorn because we had one solution prior to that and I believe it was majority of it was done in-house through one solution and then around 21 I think 22 is when they switched over to unicorn And there is some backend work that was done before the system went live, but I
believe it went live 22 and 23. >> Okay. >> Any other questions? >> Uh yes. Um Noble, so there are other um payroll uh
companies out there, right? For instance, um there's there's uh Ultypro, right? Because I mean, Unicorn seems a little antiquated. Um and then you have like companies like Ultro where there's an app where um employees can see their
hours, they can see their health benefits, they can see whether they have PTO, sick days. Um I mean are is there capabilities like that with Unicorn? >> Yes, there is. Everyone should be able to see their PTO's right now. Um it's
their setup right now. Um for additional modules, it costs money. So, we can pretty much buy as many modules you as we want, but we don't we chose this is this is what we needed and this is what we've implemented. So, if there are other add-ons that we want to do there, there's absolutely a cost to it, but it
can be done. >> Michael, we are in deficit. Don't forget it. No extra expense. >> Any other questions? Thank you. Oh, thank you Amanda. >> Hi. Good evening, council presidents,
countants, council members. I have two resolutions up for agenda this uh this this council meeting. The first one will be resolution 26-107 agenda number 1014. This is the
resolution authorizing the award of Jolt charge to install and operate electric vehicle charging infrastructure in Jersey City. Uh this will include 25 charging stations uh fast charging stations basically evenly distributed
amongst the wards of Jersey City. And I submitted a or I distributed also a memo to you all uh last week and I thank you all for uh or I think the ones that I uh meet and met with today for giving me the time to talk more and answer any of
your questions. Um and if you have any additional questions, >> which uh resolution is this? Joel >> 10:14 Joel charge. >> Oh, this is Joel. >> Yes. Questions? Just a comment. I just want to say thank
you to taking time to meet with me and answer my questions. Appreciate that, Amanda. And um then we talked about that idea of uh possibly and I don't certainly don't expect it to be resolved by Wednesday, but uh meters paying for um non
>> non EVs, >> figuring out some sort of an agreement between um EV cars at the locations and also possibly none cars. Yeah, I think that that's something we can definitely explore um as we move forward in the process of uh selecting locations as well. >> Yep.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Next. Thank you. >> Uh the next resolution that I have is resol resolution 26-101 uh agenda number 10.8. This is a resolution authorizing the
city of Jersey City to apply for and accept grant funding from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection for the Youth Inclusion Initiative Summer Program for 2026. Uh this would provide funding for a 6-week summer program offering youth
ages 10 to 20 hands-on training and exposure to environmental careers, workforce development opportunities, and community-based environmental projects. I'm working on an application right now with me uh uh local organizations where
we're going to uh apply together. Uh the funding is up to $100,000. >> Questions? >> Yes. So when you say job training like is this grant looking to pay some of the
children or >> Yeah, this would offer uh those children stipens for >> Yeah, because they will be attending um educational classes essentially um uh we're in coordination with NJ to actually host some of those classes and
um uh at the end of it we're hoping to also um have a more or less community project where we're going to install some sort of element of green infrastructure and maybe a Jersey City park. Um right now we're thinking about um a pollinator garden uh maybe to some
element a rain garden uh which will give children hands-on experience as well. >> Okay. And um I'm sorry what what are the age ranges again for the grant? >> 16 to 20. >> Thank you.
>> Question for Peter. Uh, Peter, can you send us the breakdown of how many grants the city applies for and how many we get if you don't already have that information? >> We do not, Councilman. We're working on it. We have the larger number, but we're trying to break that down to individual
grants. You can see it. >> So, just for clarification, I think originally you said ages 10 to 20 and then you said 16 to 20. Is it only 16 to 20 that would receive a stipen and the younger teens and tween would just have the learning experience but not get paid? is that Oh, I apologize. I
probably said that wrong. It's about 8 to 10 children that are going to be 16 to 20 in age. >> Thank you. >> No, that's okay. Sorry. >> No, no, sorry if I misheard. Um, this sounds like a great program and thanks for being proactive about looking for
grants. >> Thank you all. Thank you, Amanda. Thank you, Matthew. Good evening, council president, members of city council. Uh the division of Matthew Silver from the division of city planning. City planning has one item for
you tonight. That would be agenda item number 3.1 ordinance 26015 an ordinance of the municipal council the jersey of city of Jersey City adopting amendments to the powerhouse arts district redevelopment plan. So, this amendment um
this amendment incorporates the um what some people have called the Queen Latifah firehouse because Queen Latifah once owned it located at 155 Morgan Street into the Powerhouse Arts District redevelopment plan and assign it to the rehabilitation district. Um the purpose
of this amendment and adding this parcel is to facilitate its redevelopment as a banquet and events facility. Um the parcel which has sat vacant and underutilized for several years now was declared an area in need of
redevelopment last year um as part of an overall survey of vacant and underutilized properties downtown as initiated by Ben Councilman now Mayor Solomon. Um, this that designation brought the parcel
owner to the table to partner with uh, Silverman LLC as a developer of which a representative is here today to speak to the spec specifics of the development. Um, and requested this resoning um, which would um, because the current zoning, the R3 only allows residential
uses. This is specifically about opening opening up commercial uses and the rehabilitation and the maintenance of the historical integrity of the property. Any questions? >> I I have a question. Um, so
you said it's only So, we're looking to um redo this plan for mixeduse building or just commercial. >> Um, my understanding is the developer's intention is just commercial. Um, and
the rehabilitation district allows in a variety of uses. >> Okay. >> There was a previous residential proposal that had gotten zoning board approval at this location, but it was proven structurally infeasible. Um and
so in the lack given the lack of the ability to do um an overbuild or build on top of the structure um it was deemed that some sort of commercial or institutional use was likely the best um the most viable future for the property
and adaptive reuse as some sort of banquet or event space. >> Okay. And and the reason why I asked that is because I don't want us to get in the habit of amending redevelopment plans. Um
so developers can skirt trigger the ICO. >> Um well >> that's why I asked was it mixeduse or just commercial? >> Yeah. So there are no new residential rights created as part of this. All residential rights at the location are pre-existing.
Um if this proposal came with new greater residential density or bulk that was than that was previously allowed that would indeed trigger the ICO. therefore would come with an inclusionary requirement. And we are vigilant when we do receive development
requests that meet those parameters as set out in chapters 188 and 189, we include language in those redevelopment plans. Um, ensuring compliance with the ICO. Um, you know, every
redevelopment plan amendment we've passed since 2021 creates at least 5,000 square ft of new residential floor area or 10 new units of potential residential density
includes those ICO compliance components within. And so there's no ICO element here because we're not creating any new residential development rights. Um thank you. I know developer has agreed
of maintaining the historic facade. Just want to state for regard purposes that we will be maintaining historic facade for this. So the language of the plan for the
rehabilitation district that the um this parcel is being added to um requires um all adaptive reuse and development to adhere to um our state historic preservation
standards as well as the department of the interior federal standards. Um if you have questions about the specific envision development proposal um Mr. Popkin from Silverman can answer those questions. >> Any other questions?
>> Oh, just um the zoning that will apply is R3, correct? >> Yes. So, that's the existing zoning. >> Yeah. And so if you um there's language basically saying that those rights continue to apply, but by adding this parcel into the plan, we allow uses
beyond just residential to be allowed here as well as um provide those strict historic preservation standards to ensure the property's historic character is maintained going forward. >> Okay, Matthew, just my office is going to reach out to you just get a
information about R3 standards. I'm not familiar. So >> yeah, certainly that's like a so that would be like a six around like sixstory residential zone and so that was the pre-existing standards a sixtory building is not >> here on this location while maintaining
the historic which is required. Yes, >> it's more for my identification. >> Yes, certainly please reach out. Planning is always happy to answer questions. >> Thank you Matthew. Laura, >> there are no questions. Mr. Provin, >> good afternoon, council presidents and
municipal council. I'm Laura Takuri from the tax assessor office. I'm here for resolution 26-104, item number 10.11. This resolution authorized the city to use a competitive contract to select the vendor to maintain and update the Jersey
City digital tax map pursuant to the NJSA 40114.3. The tax maps are essential tool for the tax assessor office. They identify other parcels in the city and are used to record changes such as uh subdivisions,
consolidations, and other property mapping updates. Maintaining accurate tax maps is also an statutory requirement under the New Jersey law. While services related to the tax maps are exempt from the traditional public bidding process under
the NJSA 4811-5, the city has chosen to go competitive contracting to solicit and evaluate proposals based on the qualification and experience. This resolution authorized the city to begin the competitive process. Once the
propos the proposals are reviewed and the vendor is selected, another resolution will be uh presented to the council recommending the contract award. Just to give you a backup, um we have been using the digital tax map since
2004, which is 2020 22 years ago. >> Questions? >> Just a a brief question. Um, we we have a vendor now that has been uh doing the current tax map because the the interactive map we have that I've used seems really great is
>> Yes. Actually, it's the same one that we've been using for the past few years. However, um it has >> Yeah, we're just rebidding for it. So, when the contract expires, we have to go back to council, put a new contract out, that kind of this is just, you know, pro form for that. >> But it's different from a contract renewal.
>> Yeah. Eventually, you can't always renew a contract of a period of time. So, we go out, we're going to do a competitive bid where it could be a new vendor, could be this vendor, but we give everyone a fair shot to bid at it. And then we usually do a uh committee that will basically assess the different applications we receive and based on those applications, make a
recommendation which one we should choose. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Thank you, >> Director Burns. Hello, Council President Ridley and members of the municipal council. My
name is Mark Burns and the Division of Animal Care and Control has four items on tonight's agenda for your consideration. The first is item 10.19. It is resolution 26-112. It's a resolution authorizing a shared
service agreement with the town of Guttenberg pursuant to the uniform shared services and consolid and consolidation act for Jersey City to provide the town of Guttenberg with the services of animal control and animal sheltering. >> Questions?
>> This is the the same as the following um for Hoboken, correct? >> Yes, sir. Um, and this is essentially we're getting money from these cities, towns and cities to be able to, you know, give services to them. But the
amount of money that we're getting, does that help us hire and increase our own capacity to deal with animal care and control in Jersey City as well? >> Yes. In the in the two years um that I've been with the city, uh, both of these arrangements have been beneficial
to the city in offsetting costs. Um the the fee that we charge Guttenberg is minimal, but they have their own acco that delivers animals to us. So considering the size of Guttenberg, um their census and the number of animals
that they bring to us, even this minimal a fee has worked out to be to our advantage. >> Okay, great. >> We've been in contract with them before. >> Yes, sir. So with with um I guess this goes for
Hoboken and Guttenberg. Um the money that we're receiving from them, do we keep all of that or are we supplying food and medicine as well? >> We're supplying medicine for the animals that we take in after 7 days they become property of Jersey City.
>> Okay. >> Um we're we're we're using this money to defay costs. >> Okay. Okay. So since we've discussed Hobok and I'll jump to the third item if if that's if
>> I can ask some more questions. Yes. Um >> is there a cap on the number of animals serviced to these municipalities? >> There is not. There there is a fee should they like to participate in TNR which is a big big buzzword that you're
all hearing about. There's an additional fee for that. There is also an additional fee should any of their municipal humane law enforcement officers who replace the the SPCA if they have an animal cruelty case that they bring in that is the responsibility
of the municipality as that's not a stray animal that's a police action on the on the part of the municipality >> when it comes to TNR um preferences is there like a prioritization between their municipalities and ours and so
forth. >> The prior the we do not have a contractual prioritization. Um I do it first come first served and as I'm sure all of you have realized the Jersey City community is very adamant about their appointments. Um so we are not unfair to
the other municipalities but we prioritize Jersey City first. >> Okay. And lastly, I'm not familiar. You could tell me if it's accurate or not. There I understand there might be a $10 TNR program. >> It's a $10 TNR program for the municip
for for the colony cat caretakers is is the term who have registered with the city. That works out for us because we then know where these colonies are and we have a much better gauge on how many feral cat
colonies we'll have within the boundaries of the city. >> Still in effect today. Yes. Okay. Outside, if you are not registered with Jersey City as a colony caretaker, it's $75 an animal, which is still a a very
good rate, but it's not $10. It's only $10 if you registered with us. >> Sorry, just to clarify, that's $10 per animal that comes in and gets the services. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Great. And how does one register to
Yeah. How does a cat colony caretaker register? >> There's a there's a link on the city website. In 2024, we actually granted $90,000 to these cat caretakers. Um, which really helped them take a lot of
the load for surgeries off of them. Um, we were not able to do that last year, nor are we able to do that this year. um when they are not getting surgeries through the city, they're paying at least $100 a surgery to go to a private provider, right?
>> Um why it's beneficial to the city because conservatively every intact federal cat you'll see will make 10 more. >> Even if you make it a number of five and cut that in half, which is as small as anyone who's serious about this
conversation can get. Last year, we fixed 900 feral cats in the city. Um, so that'd be almost 5,000 cats that were roaming in the city right now, not vaccinated, potentially catching and spreading zunotic disease, specifically
rabies, and making five to 10 more each. We'd have a health crisis on our hands, >> at least potentially. >> That's 10 kittens per year for each unfixed cat, right? >> Potentially. >> Yes. And that's that's conservative. A
female feral can make uh 18 cats a season. And and my apologies, >> her females, >> you don't let the cat out the bag. >> And her females are reproductive in at
four months. So it's it's it it grows exponentially. >> Okay. And and so just sorry just to make sure I'm following appropriately. This is um this is 26-114 would be providing
the $10 TNR services for for um colony caretakers that are registered with the city. Well, not specific colony caretakers, but yes, it's it's um 26-114 is a contract with um Adriana Hordinsky
doing business as the traveling vet. and she comes in with a whole contained unit uh staff medicine equipment and and she does both our colony cats, shelter cats. Um and and if we're able to expand it,
we're going to be doing lowcost wellness for Jersey City owned cats. A lot of the a lot of the issue that we're finding in Jersey City is that >> people are just unable to keep their own cats. >> They're releasing them to the street. So, in order to get ahead of that, we've
started the pet food pantry where we are accepting donated food and when you call us and say that you can't keep your animal, if we can, we'll feed your animal for you. Whatever whatever it takes to not make it our responsibility, which cost us more money in the long run, or to just let it out and pretend
you never had it. >> I didn't know that. And >> um there are couple of uh community um uh people they are uh serving cats. Uh
is there any uh grants we have for local community to do the the work? They have been doing it for years but I don't know if we have any grant for them to feed the stray cats. We we have not and and quite
frankly we we should. The the Jersey City Cat Rescue Community is the most organized and selfless group that I've encountered in 15 years of doing this. They they are saving us so much money and so much work on the front lines of this. And all they're asking for is us
to provide the surgeries. >> They're really they're they're doing great work. They deserve more credit than they get. >> Yes. I think those like Oh my goodness. Those those ladies are like the best. >> Yeah, >> they are they're everywhere. I just I hope we can figure out a way to get them
some funding. They're they're really they're really doing it doing a number as it relates to >> Agreed, Councilman. They're they're they're heroic. >> Yeah. >> They have been doing a lot of work and I think eventually we should come up with a plan where we can compensate them or
raise funds for them. At least they don't have to spend money from their pockets. >> Yes. Yes. And I don't know if we can um um the BA and I have spoken at this at length as as as director Ivory Green. Um if we cannot make this whole program any
cheaper, we can make it cheaper to Jersey City and that's by offsetting it with corporate sponsorship and and whatever we could find. I would I would really like to actively pursue that in 2026. I like that corporate uh I think there might be some grants we can look
into where they can offer some even a small dollar amount can be helpful to start with. Right. >> Absolutely. And and um uh Councilman Gilmore's office forwarded us something today about uh shared services grants
that we sent um right to the grant office and and we're seeing if we can get in on whatever whatever would help us defay the cost. >> Yeah. One uh one more point that I we've started to communicate about. I know my office has been in touch with you all um
about having an in-house vet eventually. Yes. Um our understanding was that that needed to be a rules change. Um and that that is underway. >> I it it needed to be added to the organizational chart for me to to pursue it. Um, I've spoken with the BA about
that and he's authorized us to see if we can find Right now we're paying per procedure for a whole vet apparatus to come in and help us and and quite frankly for a municipality of our size with this level of need. >> We we can't pay alakart for procedures.
We need a vet on staff. We need to be able to get ahead of this problem instead of just dealing with it. >> Yeah. >> Great to hear that that's underway. Thank Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. you are doing really a good job. So, thank you. >> Thank you, ma'am. Um my my final before
I before I depart. >> One one second. Uh Markwoman Little, I think has something. >> Oh, I I just wanted to say thank you. And um just I know we spoke just before the meeting um and we had also previously talked about your your searching for a full-time vet, which I
fully support as well. Um, and I just wanted to say for the record that um, this is a uh, a not to exceed >> Yes. contract. >> So, should we be able to find a full-time vet, we can either transfer
all of these funds to offset the cost of that or if we can find some corporate underwriters, do both. Uh, because the the need's actually there. And a a big part of what no one's really addressing, everyone thinks this is a two-front battle. Getting the animals in, getting
the animals out. But the the cheapest way for us to address this is not to be involved at all. And the way to do that is to help people keep their own animals, help them not reproduce animals anymore if they're not trying to help them get vaccinations, help them feed their animals. It's cheaper for us to
just not be involved if we could do that. But we it's not fair to their taxpayers in Jersey City to pay a vet to treat someone's animal. So we need to just have a vet in house. And that way when someone's bred 20 cats in their house, it doesn't cost the taxpayers
$5,000. It cost the taxpayers a day of our of our surgeons work. That's how you get ahead of this in the long run. So that's what we're hoping to accomplish. >> Thank you so much. And my final resolution is resolution 26-115,
a resolution ratifying a professional services agreement between Jersey City Department of Health and Human Services and Dr. Mary Altoare doing business as Alto Veterinary Services. Dr. Altoar is our vet of record currently.
She's been very clear. She she she thinks we need a vet full-time in-house and she'd like to turn the reigns over to that vet if she can. >> Questions. >> Director, uh, thank you for your time this last week, uh, showing my wife and I around the shelter. You're doing a
great job with what was left by Liberty Humane. So, thank you. Um just ask Peter, uh there's some outstanding service requests I understand have been going through um making sure that the animals have shelter when they're outside and also uh when we hire people
for uh the shelter. I think if those requests can go straight to the director to review, I think it'd be helpful and and director, I'm sure you would agree um for him to have the first look because you know they they need help there. And I just, you know, I know there's um we got a lot of emails this
week at Blessue about assignments to the animal shelter. There's a lot of work to be done there. So, I just hope you'll you'll be able to assign the people there uh to get the work done. >> Thank you, Coun. Anyone else? >> Any other questions? >> Thank you, director. >> Thank you for your time, everyone.
>> John Lynch. Good afternoon, Council President and Council. Good to see everybody. I'm here. I have four resolutions. Uh, one is mine. The other three are director KS. I'm here on behalf of him. He had to leave to handle something. The first one is 10.18 resolution
ratifying the award of the contract to AVID to pay street lighting, traffic signals, and associated cameras to provide bill for their bill management system that we get the bills through PSEG. >> Question. So I'm I'm asking for 1.5 million. It's about 125,000 a month.
>> So the um this this is the resolution regarding um tracking the energy, right? >> Yeah. >> They don't Well, we use their bill managing system. They're not tracking energy for us. >> Okay. So yeah, I was when I saw that uh
I guess my only question is um PSEG, they don't track our usage. >> Yeah. I mean everything. So we get bills from PSEG. We get probably about a thousand bills and literally um I can show you them all but anyway here's all the bills that come in right through a
spreadsheet. >> Advid's bill management system breaks it down to two invoices for for us. One is for the uh traffic lighting uh cameras and the other is for the buildings uh which isn't on u this week's agenda. That'll be on next week's. >> Okay.
>> So in in other words, we would have all these bills. In fact, I have I have stacks of them in in my bag now. I can show you. We have all these bills. We'd have to open each one and put a vent a voucher next to it to get it paid. Where adv has a bill management system. Everything gets feeded into that through PSEG.
>> Okay. And this this would be a software. >> No, no, it's Well, yeah, it's it's their software. >> Okay. >> Any other questions, >> John? So, it's 1.5 million temporary incumbrance, but $5 million contract.
What's that? to 1.5 million temporary incumbrance by a $5 million annual contract. >> Yes. That's between both um for for for this for the uh buildings and uh the energy in the buildings and and the lighting in the buildings and the other
one's for the traffic signals. So all total it's a $5 million incumbrance. >> So we're paying them and then they pay the they pay our energy bills. Is that right? >> Yeah. So it's not $5 million to the company. They're basically we're encumbering the funds. They can use that money to pay for us. >> Yep.
Um I I asked this in a previous meeting, Peter. Um do we do they also do or someone else analyze our expenditures with um utilities to see if there's cost savings, over billing, things like that
that are um there. I remember when I was on city council, there was a company that did that for us at one time. >> Yeah. So, we have Kevin Lines, my department, who actually is tracking some of that down. We did have a company that did the energy side of it. Um, I believe that contract is terminated as
of last year. So, we're looking at potential new companies and how that bid process would look. Um, we're also looking at phone phone bills as well because there's a utility side of it, there's a phone side of it. So, we're exploring viable companies that we could potentially utilize to help us save some money going, you know, forward with our
different bills in those areas. But these guys don't do that. I >> I do not believe so, but John L can correct me if I'm wrong. >> No, they don't. They don't. And our main goal is we use them for the build management system. I mean, we could look into other companies that do that.
>> Yeah. >> And I think that would uh Peter, I think that would something more or less fall under like infrastructure really really do it ignored. >> John, this company also does maintenance of our traffic signals and cameras. >> No, they don't do the maintenance of that. That's No. >> No.
CCTVs installation, nothing like that. >> No, this is all straight billing. Okay, thanks. >> Any other questions? >> Next, John. >> Okay, we got 10.9 resolution authorizing
the public sale of 147 motor vehicles and a tire machine through the public uh surplus.com public auction. >> Questions? Now, where will the money go? Are these impounded cars? >> So, these cars were impounded and no one
ever picked them up. What's that? >> These cars were impounded and no one ever picked them up. >> And where where does the money go from from all these sales? If we get sales, >> I believe it goes back to our general revenue. So, these are, you know,
sometimes junk cars abandoned on the streets, that kind of stuff. It's anything that we have to tow off the street into our pound. Um, some could be newer cars, some could be stolen. There's a lot of things we have to do once they hit our impound yard as far as figuring out, you know, the the DMV title on it, the history, etc. We do
contact or try to contact any owners for them. If over a period of time, they do not pick them up. Legally, we're allowed to actually do a public auction, sell those, the proceeds go back to the city, I believe our general revenue um to the council this point, and then we can reallocate it, you know, in the future
budgets. How long we store them? >> Don't know the exact date. I'd have to the law department or public safety confirm that and they can send you or we can send you an email on that. >> I see. And I understand we are also using a lot to save them.
So the the space we must be paying for the space to >> it's city owned property. Yeah. So it's city owned property underneath the turnpike area that was >> kind of dilapidated. So, you know, previously, uh, the city had a contract for someone else to do the services for
us. These are brought in-house, I think sometime last year or the year before. Um, and we've had mixed reviews with it. So, we're going to look to see how we can potentially make it more cost effective going forward. >> Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Peter. Thank you, John. >> Is there any cost to us for this
contract? >> Not Not that I'm aware of. I mean, it's a public bid, so I guess whatever money we make on it, >> there's no cost for the actual bid. I think we use software to post it or do some kind of online advertising for it, but the costs are minimal.
>> It's just a portion of the sale or something like that. Is that how that works? >> No, I believe that's a fixed fee. >> It's a fixed fee. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Um, >> how does the I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Go ahead. Go ahead. >> I say if if a Jersey City resident wants to buy one of the used cars, how do they
get there? They enter the public auction, show up on time, have cash in hand, and make their bid. >> Rolando will be there tomorrow. >> Rolando, you looking for a car? >> So, John, um, have we ever um
taken any cars that were in good condition and used them at DPW for like uh, city vehicles or anything like that for employees? >> Not to my knowledge. I don't I'm not sure we can. >> Is that something we can do? Public safety does a forfeite where they can use some of the vehicles for certain
undercover operations or things like that. Okay. But it's not something that we can >> so public Okay. But but we are getting use out of them if we need >> potentially. Yes. There's a lot of legal hurdles to go through that. But most of these vehicles are either junk or towards the end of their life. Most people are not leaving their brand new
Cadillac Escalade in the city and you know hoping nothing happens to it. >> Yeah. >> Probably cheaper for them to leave it there. >> True. Speaking of, do we have an audit of the city owned vehicles and where they're assigned? >> We do. Every time we do a city audit or we do the annual audit, we have to get
that information for the auditors and uh provide the information to them. So, we can give the latest one if you'd like it. >> Yeah, I request that too. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Next. >> Okay. 10:15 resolution authorizing the award the contract to trius for street
sweeper brushes for the equipment needed for out sweepers >> questions >> next. >> Okay. Can I just >> back up? >> Just take a backup. There are $6,000 Harley-Davidsons on these uh this list.
Nice stuff up there. Just Go ahead, John. Excellent. >> Uh 10 10.16 resolution authorizing the contract to we timan for parts and repair services for the city fleet through education services commission uh formerly Middle Sex Regional Educational
Services for the Department of Public Works Automotive Maintenance. This is uh for a co-op. So this is where we actually get some economies uh based on public entities and purchasing uh good and services. questions. >> Thanks, John.
>> Thank you. >> Thanks, John. >> Acting Deputy Director Lauren Hart. >> Good evening, council president, council members. I just wanted to make myself available for item 4.1. We have any questions from the
Department of Public Safety? Division of fire I believe infrastructure spoke already at length about it. >> Which item are we looking at? >> Question 4.1. That is the street ordinance. >> Any questions for public safety? >> Deputy director. Thank you for being
here and thank you for attending the community meeting that Councilman Efos and I hosted in the Heights. Uh you and I spoke offline after that meeting and there were some concerns that the public raised about response times and you and I spoke that uh you were working with the department of infrastructure to
alleviate those concerns. Could you just give us an update from public safety's perspective? That's correct. So what we did, we took a snapshot uh when we did the pilot uh any responses that we had in that area compared what the response times were during that window of the pilot versus our normal response times
outside that pilot. we noticed about a one minute increase uh for the four or five incidents we had at that time. So we've worked closely with infrastructure. They're going to imple implement at least two processes which should help mitigate that slight increase. Um and we'd love to take a
pilot and do that. Spoke to them and they said that would work with us as they implement the program to make sure that these uh these things are addressed. >> All right. I think you're being humble too. Our our fire department has response times that are best in the country, right? Compared to a relatively sized city. Yes. >> Okay. So, the concerns about elevated
response times could be alarming to the public, but in reality, is it fair to say that the response times are still within better than national average for a similarly sized city? >> You try to assemble a complete first alarm within 7 minutes. So, you know, our first two uh units will get there
within within a reasonable amount of time. there is going to be a slight increase but again I feel like though the infrastructure department is working with us to address these slight increases in the response times >> and those response times could be increased if there's a double parked car as well. Correct. >> Correct. That's why some of the uh
implementations that infrastructure is taking care of uh curb cutouts and things that will help reduce the incidence of double parked cars or illegally parked cars. >> Okay. And are you confident that our fire department can continue to deliver excellent service uh with this the Franklin Street bike lane? I I would say
that we are concerned about the increase in response times, but we always go above and beyond to protect our residents. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Take it from the top, John.
account >> perhaps. Yeah. >> Okay. We have one first freedom first reading ordinance which we already heard about today. Uh we have four second reading ordinances. Item 4.1 we just
heard from the director. Item 4.2 Two, ordinance 26-011, an ordinance authorizing the city of Jersey City as tenant to extend for a 2-year lease with 18 Ash Street Realy as
landlord for a space located at 46 State Street in Jersey City. >> Any questions on that? >> Oh, that's that's >> very well. One second. >> Yes, I I do have a question. Thank you. Um, I think I asked last time like some
information about why we're paying the 40% in property taxes on this lease and if there is any kind of future where we can get out of that at clause of the lease considering the budget deficit that we're in. Um, and yeah, just what's
what's the history there of why we're paying this portion of property taxes? They've always done it that way. I think they did it as a protection against if property taxes go through the roof. you know, it kind of encumbers that. Um, if we did not have that agreement in there, they would demand another form of
compensation and another amount. Um, and we would have to, you know, we'd still pay it. It's not like they're just adding that on top of everything. They would just give us a number and we'd have to agree to that number or, you know, deny it. And that could or could not work in our favor depending on, you know, what happens with the property taxes. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> Any other questions? All right, John. >> Okay. Uh, agenda item 4.3, ordinance 26-013 we heard from earlier today. Agenda item
4.4, ordinance 26-014, 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, nonresidential design standards. There will be a public hearing on the uh Jackson Hill Main Street Special
Improvement District Assessment RO and budget. There are 28 listed speakers here, but I am confident that number will grow between now and Wednesday. John. >> John. >> Yes. >> Hey. Uh, just really quickly, can I ask
uh Jillian a question about the budget? Um, Jackson Hill, a couple of people have been asking me. So, um, so Jillian, there's there's um just one question that people have been asking me um and it's like a breakdown for the
109,000 for beautifification. Um, now I know what it is, but can you just put on record um or say on record what what Jacksonville is looking to do with that that money? >> Good afternoon, council president and
council members. Um so the $16,000 yep that we are looking for beautifification will uh include uh planters and sanitation um uh uh any kind of painting or mural
work that we'll do in the community. We're having conversations with local community groups and with our stakeholders um the property owners to figure out what those projects need to look like. Um, so ultimately that's what the money is going to be used for and
that is UEE funding that's set aside for reimburseables. >> Julian, how much are we spending on cleaning the area? So just some background um so I joined the organization in 2024 but be uh and
at that time we were working with CDS and they were doing our cleaning for the entire district the 2.5 mile um um length of it for half of our budget amount. So, we uh at when we were doing our restructuring of the organization,
we we worked with the city um Kevin Lions at the BA's office and Scott Williams helped us identify um seasonal workers that could help do the work on the ground for us. And we took those folks on for like six weeks, eight weeks or so. Um and we also worked with a
partner. So, we were looking at like maybe about $50,000 at the time. Um that was last year but now we have hired on part-time employees and we're spending around $80,000 with with local hires included. Yeah.
>> So as I and I when we are connecting with people that is the main issue that cleanliness and safety security >> certainly. >> So I think you are taking care of >> cleanliness but how about safety security how are we there? So that's a
work in progress and so there are many um we have a great relationship with the south south district and the west district. So if there are any issues um we reach out to them immediately and we're right in the center of with the hub and the police um um the public
safety building. So we have access um and we do not uh underutilize our relationships with council members etc to make sure that any issues that come up we we address. Um uh but but I think that the safety of walking the district
is good. You know, you want to be able to look into your the shops that are uh open and we have a lot of window coverage. So, we're going to be working on that. U making sure that the the um business owners reduce the amount of um
obstructed window space so that everybody can see in to the 20% that's allowable. So, we're we're we're working on it. So, we're taking our time but working on it and open to any recommendations. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> And and um just to add on that one, we
um you know, it it's difficult um being being a SID, right? Because the the supplemental um the supplemental uh uh programs you have to put in place, you know, get very expensive. When we first started,
cleaning was 190 and and then police off duty was 60,000 a year, >> right? So that's 240. If you look at the budget, the budget is 247, >> right? So, you know, the SIDs if if um
and you know, being being in the neighborhood that we're in with MLK and Monteello, you can't overburden the the the property owners and in assessing, you know, you know, assessing them more, right? Um but, you know, there there are
some creative things I know Jackson Hill is doing. I've been meeting with them. Um and um so you know the budget I understand you know why the budget is the way it is. Um and you know people just need to chip
in. I mean, it's technically by law people should be sweeping in front of their doors, right? Um, you know, safety I get, right? And we have a police we have we have two police stations just off of the the the um main street,
right? We have the West District which is um on MLK but it's right at Monttoello um who they've been a great partner >> um with the with the um SID and then you know we have the South District which is
right next to Snyder High School which is a block away from the district and um you know they they've been a a good partner as well. Um, but you know, when it comes to safety, I I think that, you know, that's something that, um,
uh, public safety, we, you know, that's something that we need to talk talk to them about. Um, and not just for Jackson Hill, but for, you know, all the business districts as well. >> I I have a brief question if I may. um could you help me understand the
difference between the there's the accepting the assessment role and then there's the adopting and ratifying the budget. So I understand that the assessments are separate from the actual budgeting but then I think one or two council meetings ago I thought we had
adopted budget at that point. Jackson said >> oh second Mike let uh let's let uh our BA explain the difference or our corp council explain the difference in the uh >> I I was going to see what the councilman had to say to make sure >> he's taking on a new role. We're not
paying him for that role. anyone who wants to answer. >> Well, Councilman, feel free if I'm wrong with this to correct me because I'm no expert myself. Um, >> you know, he will correct you. >> But I the assessment is basically how we do the taxes. We have to appropriate a certain amount of money for them and the budget we adopt that, you know, so they
can spend that money for the council to kind of vote on both of those. Whereas, you know, for the assessment, you're basically quantifying how much, you know, they're going to bring in from the tax revenue base. And then uh with the budget portion of that, it's based on them showing you and showing publicly what the money will be spent on because
a part of that has UAG funding and things that coordinate with the city as well. So it's a two-part approval based on that. >> A couple meetings ago, did we not hear an item on the budget of the >> I believe we may have. I'd have to double check that. Um I don't usually
they either come together or separately but ultimately >> so initially once it it wasn't adopted so you have to put it on a res you have to create a resolution so it can be public so public notice right so that was last
last month like right like two two yeah two meetings ago. So it's like 28 day you you you it's public notice for 28 days and then that 28 days then it comes back there's another resolution where the adoptions happen.
>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you for clar and for everyone's knowledge if there's more information about SIDS and how they work they actually get run through the clerk's office and you know our clerk is wonderful as everyone knows. He's very knowledgeable about stuff too. So I feel free to everyone reach out to our clerk
or John Hen who's shaking his head at me who's you know taken on a lot of those responsibilities too. >> I'm shaking my head in the affirmative agreeing with you about how wonderful we are and all the superlatives you use. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Jillian.
>> Or you can reach out to my office. >> I'm the for I'm the former president of uh Jackson USA the council man's office hours if you want to stop by. >> Go ahead John. Okay. The next item on the agenda are the petitions and
communications items 6.1 through 6.25. Are there any questions on those? Hearing none. The next >> Yes. May I just request a copy of uh 6.6, please? >> Sure.
>> If you wouldn't mind, would you send me an email? We'll get that for you. >> Sure. Yeah. I'll have my staff sent over. Thank you. The next item is the officer communications. There are none listed. Agenda item eight, which are the reports
of directors. Agenda items 8.1 through 8.3. >> I'd like also like a copy of uh those communication. Well, we have the EO is public, but uh 8.2 would be great. >> I would request the same. >> Okay.
>> Sounds important. We'll make sure to do that. The claims agenda item 9.1 and agenda item 9.2. Any questions on those? Moving on to the resolutions. >> I was I was looking at council
president. Sorry. >> Open my mouth and use words. >> Question on the claims. >> Yes. Go ahead. >> Um on uh I think it's claims addendum. Um there's a $14 million payment to
uh Jersey City. Is that is that um the payroll tax? >> Yes, that's a fourth quarter payroll tax. Congressman, >> fourth quarter of 2025, >> correct? >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> That's it. It's good. 14 million.
>> On to the resolutions. Agenda item 10.1, resolution 26-094, a resolution authorizing the settlement of the action entitled Kinyatta Kelly versus City of Jersey City at all, docket number HUD-L-376-24.
>> Questions? Any um highly sensitive questions? We'll ask that you discuss online with Corp Council. But >> any public questions right now? all the questions. Um, just to let you know that thank you for the memo and um, I haven't
had a chance to read it, but if I do have any questions, I'll ask if you >> Sure. And also for council's benefit, I'll just flag that the memo that I circulated this past weekend pertains to the final three resolutions so we can answer questions when we get there. Um,
this particular item 10.1 is a settlement that was detailed in my correspondence to the council on February 23rd which provided an update about all of the litigation pending in the city including upcoming settlements. So, you'll find a description of this matter in that memo and I'm happy to
answer any questions offline. I will also flag for the record that this was a settlement that was authorized by my predecessor and so there may be some questions that I can't answer. >> Okay. Next agenda item 10.2, resolution 26-095,
a resolution accepting the 2026 assessment role of the Jackson Hill Main Street Improvement District of the City of Jersey City. Next agenda item 10.3, resolution 26-096,
a resolution adopting and ratifying the 2026 budget of the Jackson Hill Main Street Special Improvement District in the city of Jersey City. >> Agenda item 10.4, 4 resolution 26-097, a resolution celebrating March 31st as
transgender day of visibility in Jersey City. >> Um I I have a quick question. Um I don't know who put forward this ordinance, but um would we be open to like inviting community groups and moving this to the top of the meeting?
>> Yeah. Has anyone already reached out to the community groups or >> whose ordinance is it? It's the LGBTQ task force, I believe. >> Okay. Okay. That's the Okay. >> On 10 resolution 104 we're on or 26-097.
>> Correct. That's the the mayor's task force for LGBTQ um established the previous mayor, but obviously inherited in support of the current mayor. >> Is that the same day as the flag raising? >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we should move this to the top of the meeting so they don't have to sit through all the comments. Okay.
>> Yeah. you would just make a uh motion to defer to that agenda item. >> Okay. All right. Any other questions? >> No. Go ahead. >> If not, agenda item 10.5, resolution 26-098, a resolution appointing Tiffany McQuary
as a member of the Jersey City Rent Leveling Board. >> Questions? Okay, we already heard from members of the administration regarding agenda items 10.6 all the way through 10.23.
Agenda item 10.24, 24 resolution 26-17 a resolution ratifying the award of a professional service agreement with the law firm of Bennett Bickland and Salsburg LLC to represent officer Felix de Jesus in the matter of Andrew
Washington versus city of Jersey City >> questions. Yeah. Yes. Um I I realize I don't know what questions will be sensitive and what won't be, but for this and the following resolution, I just want to understand the consequences of a no vote
or an abstension. >> Sure. So this is detailed in the memo that I circulated this weekend, but for the public record, I'll share what I can share publicly, which is that the city has a legal obligation to obtain representation. So either to provide it
internally or obtain it from outside council for city employees and officers who are sued for conduct in the course of their official business where there is a conflict and so the city itself cannot represent an employee or an officer through the law department. That
legal obligation requires that we obtain outside counsel. In this case, there are two separate officers with whom the city has a legal conflict because the city's interests, the city's legal position could diverge from the officers. The officers are separately situated from
each other and also from all of the other city officers that the law department will continue to represent in this litigation. And so, we have a legal obligation to obtain firms to represent these two officers. If we fail to, they could sue the city and they would likely
prevail. the these two cases um relevant to 26-17 and 26-118 or those two resolutions are they pursuant to the same legal case as the one that the city is representing?
>> That's correct. It's all one litigation. These are two individual defendants in that same case. >> Thank you. And just so just to be clear, if if we were to refuse to provide this legal representation,
they would be within their rights to sue us and it would be a slam dunk for them most likely. And so it would essentially be gifting the officers money. Is that your assessment? I I would not state on the record that any case city would be a clear winner,
but they certainly would have a non-frivolous basis to sue the city and seek to recoup the cost, their representation, plus potentially additional interest, penalties, etc. >> I I would say on the record, I think it's part of their contract that we hire lawyers to represent them in all cases.
So, >> it's not only part of their contract, it's actually a state law mandate. And you can find all of the citations in the memo from the law department. >> So, I'm I'm in a unique situation, right? And uh as well as the councilman. We're like we have personal
relationships with the family. So, I'm looking at abstaining. I can't vote on this. So like what >> law department would certainly not counsel you to vote in a matter where you have a conflict of interest and if
this is that case then it is absolutely your prerogative to abstain. >> Okay. Thank you. I guess Sarah, the bigger question, um, as always with me with these cases with officers involved is,
um, if we get to a point where no agreement or settlement can be reached and we go to court and uh, I guess the plaintiffs win, um,
what at what point do we look internally to how can I say this? At what point do we look internally to to see like what so what I and I don't know if you can I'm trying to
without getting myself in trouble or getting anybody else in trouble. Um I'm just trying to figure out like an instance when officers are represented by the city and we go to trial and we lose like
at what point does the onus fall back on them if that makes sense. >> This is a very thorny legal question. Generally, courts have very expansively
interpreted municipal obligations to represent their employees and officers. There may be an argument that there is some conduct that warrants the city either not raising certain defenses or
immunities or discontinuing representation or in extreme cases declining to fulfill what is otherwise a statutory obligation. That is really unclear legal ground. The law department would be happy to provide a memo summarizing the current state of
affairs, but there are no clear lines um on this issue. >> And um a hypothetical question. Um, let's say if a officer is involved in the infraction and the department deems that his behaviors
warrant a removal, are we still on the hook for representation being that they were under Jersey City when the infraction incurred? >> That's correct. The city is obligated to provide representation for anyone um in connection with an incident that
occurred in the course of their official conduct >> even if they were terminated. >> There may be cases where the city mounts the defense that this was outside of the official course of business and so the city should be dismissed from a litigation unless we can establish that
the conducted issue was fully outside of course of official duty which is a pretty big umbrella that that's when our obligation attaches. And to be clear, all of this is about hypothetical future. >> Okay. >> This the city is still defending
actively though, right? >> The city is still defending itself as well as all of the other officers who do not have conflicts with the city's interests. It is just the two officers who are named defendants who do have specific conflicts who were engaging outside counsel for. >> Yes. So, my only concern was, well, not
only, but my concern with the contract I was going to ask about was the hourly rate because in my, again, my experience being outside council, uh, these attorneys are going to piggyback off of everything the city does as lead council for the most part until, you know, if
this case were to go to trial, uh, and kind of double up their work. I I I thought a a lower rate would would have been acceptable to the point that Eric Bennett's office would still accept it because I know they do work for a lot of municipalities at a much lower rate. So, it was just it was just a concern I had.
If you can speak to that please, Sarah. >> Each of these contracts is for representation in this case and in this case alone. So, this is not a backdoor for these firms to provide additional services on litigations. they are explicitly being retained for the purpose of this particular
representation. This is detailed in the memo that we circulated, but it is the law department's position that this hourly rate and this number of hours is what is necessary for this contract. I can assure the council that we have extensively negotiated rates. It was difficult to obtain representation in
this case. This is a case with potentially high exposure for the city. It is a case that has very high national attention, high-profile matter. it is in federal court and so finding a firm with the expertise to take on this matter that's willing to take on this matter is
not necessarily a shoein. So the law department will represent to you that we feel strongly this is the best representation at the best rate that we're going to get for this case. >> Any other questions? >> Next John >> hearing none. Agenda item 10.25 25
resolution 26-118 a resolution ratifying the award of a professional service agreement with the law firm of Oul Screo LLC to represent officer Steven Jagante in the matter of Andrew Washington versus city of Jersey
City. >> Next, I think we kind of covered both. >> And the last item, item 10.26, 26. Resolution 26-119, a resolution ratifying the award of a professional service agreement with the
law firm of Murphy Orlando LLC to provide legal advice and counsel to represent the city of Jersey City and Robert Karns in the matter of Norham Monsour versus City of Jersey City and Robert Karns.
>> Questions? If there are no motion made by Gilmore, >> I can't believe it. There's a second. >> I think I think I think it was council person singing who provided that uh second. All in favor of journeying at
5:59 p.m. By acclamation, please say I. >> Believe it. >> Any nays? Any abstensions? That was approved unanimously. We are off the record at 559. Uh two hours.
Unbelievable. What that I I was looking for last two hours. Simple.