[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6306553,"mediaKeyId","2437337-c64ae39c37ed8dade2e1e3e29899129e","parentId",2437337,"title","Council splits over adding Manhattan/Franklin bike-lane design contract to agenda; debate centers on safety and grant conditions","audioSeconds",278,"startMs",212000,"endMs",490000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2437337-c64ae39c37ed8dade2e1e3e29899129e&start=212&end=490","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2437337-c64ae39c37ed8dade2e1e3e29899129e/thumbnail_212000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6306553/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/Council-splits-over-adding-ManhattanFranklin-bike-lane-design-contract-to-agenda-debate-centers-on-safety-and-grant-conditions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6306553-042215cca800aa15e318c84b917968e2/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437962&Signature=HBwhaCCWinCPh5oQdRB8HTrkGgxWaavEur5V9-zlDseXTUYu5EA4USomtsXh-tmA7lYmY1UWIOjd5sByRIfl3oidRbeWZ0gba5t54AG4ATtulWqwvPkTG09dt4-9YB3PPy5x1cIMD-zWVIQhpvFXmPk7BXmYcDQEZDn5E~cI5QZTt5qlgSQg2oBZJs-Js0s4ayBrvqmfbxAu19xAGniqNaLlHta9C0rVPOWtEDfZuA1IAB5QQ7aIBsX3YDA3VHt~B~-StyB-0UQSRpId9AWriEQ-uVxr2vO~U1q6F764ihHuW0E7UQcI2td5S-1knAf5W5Euu~0usXpt0LIPsTJqVA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Jersey City, NJ","date","2025-02-28T04:00:12.57Z","article","The Jersey City Municipal Council on Wednesday debated whether to add a resolution to the agenda to authorize a professional-services contract for engineering design of a protected-bike-lane project on Manhattan Avenue and Franklin Street.

The proposal, introduced as a resolution to award a contract to French & Pirella Associates, P.A., would authorize up to $162,000 for design and construction-management services tied to a New Jersey Department of Transportation grant the administration said is worth about $670,000 for construction. Council members split over adding the item to the agenda after extensive questions about public-safety objections and whether the administration could redirect design funds to another street if the council later chose a different location.

Councilperson Parker Patel (identified in the record as Director Patel) told the council the $162,000 figure reflected the vendor’s quote assuming a full build-out, and that the vendor would bill only for work performed. “If we say that we are not covering that full length and they're only covering part of it, we would not then pay them for services that they haven't performed,” Patel said.

Several council members said they had been told public-safety divisions — including Police, Fire and OEM — opposed the project for the full length as originally proposed, citing concerns about fire-route circulation and response times. Councilperson John Saleh said the public-safety directors “said no to this project” at an earlier meeting and said he would not vote to add the resolution without further study and another meeting with public-safety leaders. Councilperson Rivera also said he would not support adding the item while public-safety remained opposed, saying, “This is not about numbers . . . It's about lives.”

Councilperson James Solomon and others argued the council needed to act quickly to avoid losing the DOT grant. “We have nearly $700,000 to make people's streets safer,” Solomon said, arguing a two-week delay could imperil the funding. Councilperson Ridley and several council members urged caution and requested a meeting that included public-safety staff, the Department of Transportation grant manager and community stakeholders.

Councilperson Soleil moved to add the item to the agenda; Councilperson DeGise seconded. The transcript records a roll-call vote on adding the item. Multiple council members stated their positions on the record during the vote: several voted aye, Councilperson Baggiano said no, Councilperson Rivera said no, and Council President Waterman stated she would abstain because she said the information arrived too late for her to decide. The transcript records back-and-forth and some confusion about the required threshold for adding an item, but council roll-call statements indicate at least six members said yes during the vote, while two said no and one abstained.

Council members also discussed whether DOT funding would follow the city if the council later decided to move the bike-lane design to a different street. Director Patel said the DOT grant is specific to the two streets named and would not cover construction on a different street; the contract under discussion would be for design work tied to the grant area. She said that, while the city could award a general engineering contract for other locations, the DOT funding prerequisite requires this planning work for the specified streets.

Speakers from the bike-advocacy group Bike JC and other advocates addressed the council during public comment and said the proposed protected lanes would provide proven safety benefits. \"Protected bike lanes don't get stuck in traffic, and neither will they impede emergency vehicles,\" one advocate said. Supporters asked the council to keep the grant available and to coordinate public-safety input with traffic-safety goals.

The record shows a divided council and requests for further coordination; the administration was asked to convene more meetings with Public Safety, OEM and the project team to resolve circulation concerns and to confirm grant conditions. The resolution would authorize French & Pirella Associates, P.A., to provide engineering design and construction-management services up to the quoted amount for the Manhattan Avenue and Franklin Street improvements, as written in the resolution title read into the record.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Jersey City Municipal Council Meeting February 26, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Councilors debated whether to add resolution 25-145 to hire French & Pirella Associates for engineering design of Manhattan Avenue and Franklin Street bike-lane improvements, with public-safety officials opposing the plan and questions about a $162,000 contract and a $670,000 DOT grant.","taxTitle","Jersey City, Hudson County, New Jersey","taxId",2747,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6306558,"Jersey City council votes to end most municipal pool fees, citing equity and access",3436,2332000,5768000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2437337-c64ae39c37ed8dade2e1e3e29899129e&start=2332&end=5768","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2437337-c64ae39c37ed8dade2e1e3e29899129e/thumbnail_2332000.jpg","/articles/6306558/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/Jersey-City-council-votes-to-end-most-municipal-pool-fees-citing-equity-and-access","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6306558-0d69515135b90d1ea3f535471f0201a8/orig.mp4?Expires=1770437962&Signature=XQVd1vIx9FSg2XCHV63vRh2re3tbLC~z2LeQJn8n0yczP6J~BsOUZ5YvcSmw5~Re0PBQuTVKcpxflGuTp4UZ3WdC1nLuz5c~12npEIcI~GaUJPxNPuSiB3biGb9JawX4FH-iqnQi-1rwqlF8c3-clgEqREatHv38x1cZKVd~gmiNRvf53hG2uYBjWvivuB9pHVpzj43h5gm5mlljwDP83UtcQKbHieHeSFcVg5EK7N534DECM~yirgYdTkr-gQtTnBb-hsuO-5TEyisvB~4kMp75P7UhQ~2d2Hsb540eTNOXmujD03mWdet4C7U93fXfV8FjbXhhubTBBmXlGqzVFw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Jersey City Municipal Council on Wednesday adopted ordinance 25-011 to remove municipal pool fees, making resident access free during the summer and ending most adult daily charges, council members said.

Supporters said the change reverses a brief experiment in user fees that caused lines and discouraged low-income residents from using public pools. Councilperson Frank Gilmore and Councilperson James Solomon cosponsored the measure and led a push to restore more open access.

The ordinance drew a long public-comment period. Lanisha Trent, a Ward F constituent service liaison, told the council the fees were “a financial burden on some” and said the city had collected about $50,000 in pool fees, which she described as “a drop in the bucket” compared with the city’s overall budget. “Adding yet another fee . . . widens the gap between who can afford access to recreation and who cannot,” she said. Several speakers framed the issue as one of life safety and equity, arguing that free pools are important cooling centers during heat waves and a place for children to learn swimming skills.

Council members who supported the ordinance described trialing fees and finding they did not produce the intended revenue and instead limited access. Councilperson Ridley said the fees “didn’t generate the money that we thought it would” and that if the city can offer pools free, it should. Councilperson Saleh clarified the measure’s scope on the floor, stating that the council had already removed children’s fees previously and that “this ordinance is to make the pools free for the adults.” Gilmore described witnessing a young visitor turned away at a pool because she did not have money and said he offered to pay the fee rather than let the child go without; he argued the pilot had failed and needed reversal.

The measure also includes six-month membership pass language on the ordinance’s fee schedule; some commenters asked the council to reconsider the level and structure of those pass fees for frequent adult users and seniors. Members of the AquaNuts, a water-aerobics group at Pershing Field Pool, and other senior speakers urged lower or zero costs for older adults who rely on low-impact exercise.

Council debate was short and largely supportive. Multiple council members thanked the dozens of residents who turned out to speak. Councilperson Solomon and Councilperson Gilmore said the change restores public access to widely used facilities and helps families and seniors with limited financial means.

City ordinance 25-011 was adopted by the Municipal Council. The ordinance text and the council’s motion show its purpose is to revise chapter 660 (fees and charges) to eliminate the daily summer fees and remove the broad adult fee structure in favor of free resident access during the defined summer period. The record shows broad council support during the final vote and no recorded roll-call opposition to final adoption during the public meeting.

The ordinance takes effect under the city’s standard timetable for adopted municipal ordinances; the administration will publish details about operational changes, summer hours and pass procedures before Memorial Day.","After months of debate and nearly 30 public speakers, the Jersey City Municipal Council adopted ordinance 25-011 to eliminate summer pool fees for residents and to remove most adult fees collected year-round, with supporters citing equity and safety.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council splits over adding Manhattan/Franklin bike-lane design contract to agenda; debate centers on safety and grant conditions

Jersey City council votes to end most municipal pool fees, citing equity and access