[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-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",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_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",6280470,"mediaKeyId","2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db","parentId",2615231,"title","Votes at a glance: key ordinances and resolutions adopted by Jersey City council on March 12, 2025","audioSeconds",2817,"startMs",224000,"endMs",3041000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db&start=224&end=3041","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db/thumbnail_224000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6280470/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/Votes-at-a-glance-key-ordinances-and-resolutions-adopted-by-Jersey-City-council-on-March-12-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280470-178fc14bbb5fa98858d806711a2b4a32/orig.mp4?Expires=1770434138&Signature=j72zbl2Py3xzLdeSI~gaJnTMxujMHoHuehNNXBlvtJyrgtgenlX9a6qePYAmXMOsej1WRzBPObWrL3TgFIyanZihNOMlCQQFgLbD~CiSv0xV13VsRKAvMM1KwF73kbGIJm-7sza9Qe5~gTyhiwQUYmX-TZJphIxfhokQiJpr1g73VmrbrXo1YvarwwZ4DBwtDwIcAgxnRh7YNEjDRzKqB08azhkYp1qRqp3BX8dtwiBZV0HL62Gb~bKtOKiJEnqht5-KZZXFbgh1jrWDkutB5OygDiXdc0Dekq4-~NAqTk6Sg3Pp845hCFF6Vuj33dmluc41gnpviXQ5QNJMPfFouA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Jersey City, NJ","date","2025-03-13T18:41:08Z","article","At its March 12 meeting the Jersey City Municipal Council introduced four first‑reading ordinances and adopted a slate of second‑reading ordinances and resolutions. Most measures passed unanimously or by comfortable margins.

Introductions (first reading)
- City Ordinance 25‑025 (3.1) — Amend prior acceptance of condominium units at 155 Bay Street (introduction approved 9‑0).
- City Ordinance 25‑026 (3.2) — Amend chapter 131 (construction codes) to require applicants for construction permits to demonstrate prior approvals from certain city officials and agencies; Councilmember Solomon offered an amendment to add the Tax Collector’s Office to confirm payroll‑tax compliance; introduction approved 9‑0.
- City Ordinance 25‑027 (3.3) — Amend chapter 160 (fees and charges) to include a fee for use of the city’s de‑escalation center (introduction approved 9‑0).
- City Ordinance 25‑028 (3.4) — Amend chapters 160 and 175 to regulate and permit mobile food vendors; council members reported fee reductions and removal of push‑cart language; introduction approved 9‑0 (members noted they will continue stakeholder outreach before second reading).

Second‑reading and final adoptions (highlights)
- City Ordinance 25‑018 (4.1) — Carried to the March 26 meeting by motion (carried 9‑0).
- City Ordinance 25‑020 (Exchange Place SID expansion) — Adopted on final reading (7‑0‑2; Councilpersons Baggiano and Waterman abstained); public hearing was held and proponents described outreach meetings.
- City Ordinance 25‑021 (transfer of city property at 302 Fairmont Avenue to the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency) — Adopted unanimously (9‑0); council discussed redevelopment study and designation options.
- City Ordinance 25‑022 (Land Development Ordinance amendments) — Adopted as amended (9‑0); amendments streamline digital plan signing and remove some previously highlighted sections as described in caucus.
- City Ordinance 25‑023 (technical fee correction) — Adopted unanimously (9‑0); corrected a decimal point (fee intended as $50, not $0.50).
- City Ordinance 25‑024 (temporary construction easement for wells on Johnston Avenue) — Adopted unanimously (9‑0).

Other resolutions and administrative votes
- Multiple resolutions (agenda items 10.15–10.42) were approved, including contract awards and administrative authorizations; one high‑profile resolution advancing the NJDOT bikeways design contract (item 10.40) passed 5‑3‑1 after an amendment requiring Manhattan Avenue remain two‑way (see separate coverage).
- The council adopted a resolution expressing no confidence in the Director of Public Safety (item 10.2); that measure passed 6‑1‑2 and records the council’s formal statement of displeasure.

Procedural notes
- Several items were amended on the floor after caucus discussions and staff updates. Council members repeatedly urged departments to improve interoffice communications and to respond promptly to council inquiries.

The council also opened a long public‑comment period that included 68 listed speakers. Comments ranged from street safety and bike lanes to school funding, payroll‑tax certification, tenant enforcement and calls for department accountability. The meeting closed after votes on the evening’s items; the council set follow‑up and implementation steps for several adopted measures.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Jersey City Municipal Council Meeting March 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Council introduced four ordinances for first reading and adopted multiple second‑reading ordinances and resolutions, including transfers of property, land‑development rule changes and technical fee corrections.","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},6280475,"Council expands Exchange Place Alliance special improvement district after public meeting",437,1705000,2142000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db&start=1705&end=2142","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db/thumbnail_1705000.jpg","/articles/6280475/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/Council-expands-Exchange-Place-Alliance-special-improvement-district-after-public-meeting","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280475-316348d1cec6ed34ddf39d896e1460cc/orig.mp4?Expires=1770434138&Signature=gr3jfUNJy51J1FgKkPbMgsCBqFzKA1JJpmfF3ygwoU9KIh0O-I8oOXwgBYvl1XxW5lUYNavwTuNfmR2xmqEsjdU-9ImRTXzigoM5CNV4RG8NHAOVeNGIJ36-1BCH7NCJSTOc7nU3wptO0Th5bohA6GywRp4IxNO6-iJ6aqoxUwlERV3C2u6A2H1WKcq3wGjH0KUJ220cB1ZquY6~wWPcqPMjPR9CeQO96TnEuD4XVBSBUWnuvvVUj4qGnnAN51XpbFUCCAMdnOi68sDyM9mBzae7bH7A0R-WN~ai17dKH4jx78GLUbd9pcfdvRotjOfU3zYFawoApqZbr3R4sHZeXQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Jersey City Municipal Council adopted an ordinance to expand the Exchange Place Alliance Special Improvement District (SID) to include sections of Marin Boulevard, Christopher Columbus Drive, Morgan Street, Bay Street and several adjacent blocks.

Donald Pepe, attorney for the Exchange Place Alliance, and Diedra Crockett, the alliance’s executive director, told the council a public meeting attended by 44 people had been held to describe the expansion and answer questions; they said no substantial opposition surfaced at the preliminary meeting and asked the council to approve the expansion.

Speakers from the Powerhouse Arts District and residents thanked the alliance for outreach but asked for clearer language about which property classes would be assessed and how fees would apply. A resident asked the ordinance to specify the property class types that would be assessed to help owners and tenants understand obligations.

Council members said the expanded SID would fund supplemental trash collection, cleaning services and capital projects, including streetscape work and improvements near the Ice House Building on Washington Street. The ordinance passed on final reading with seven votes in favor and two abstentions; the clerk recorded Councilpersons Baggiano and Council President Waterman as abstaining, giving a final vote of 7‑0‑2.

The ordinance’s passage allows the SID board to levy assessments and pursue the capital and maintenance projects described in the proposal. The council said it will monitor the alliance’s work and follow up on residents’ requests for clearer billing classifications.","The council approved an ordinance expanding the Exchange Place Alliance Special Improvement District to include additional downtown streets after a public meeting; proponents said expansion funds trash pickup and capital projects.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6280480,"School advocates press council for payroll‑tax certification as board faces budget deadline",4432,4506000,8938000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db&start=4506&end=8938","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db/thumbnail_4506000.jpg","/articles/6280480/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/School-advocates-press-council-for-payrolltax-certification-as-board-faces-budget-deadline","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280480-b7a9969a5d1164d9b713a9779d8b3403/orig.mp4?Expires=1770434138&Signature=m7vz-gXbFSzyRuv0KKg9xN9DcrFfMi1LUy~s0Gao-5NNOaEwXExNgb4k4maoFdlh~6GV~y0CoJb1V7zvTsaq7ARa5G-PF91H6zgxd9cuPkY71~Ur~XBX6nA3X4~HBOuE~oLqSTpE5E-PtxyBuuRW53S46vfUkteQG8zGukK5fMpN1atACK-h9NgCtEGuKMYb~WL-xeypAnmy1B4ojJveouu2c8cGdOXi5KiYwZTtgktmdKjoXGi4QC-9bEA9gMqeapySYe40E1hOh-OP4hgSydndM4AqkdK4q0Up6JmFWbY-fg6XDyfj5AoitoNaKxqSmA8z55bvlz52JcTNHJ3EyQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Education advocates and parents urged the Jersey City Municipal Council to certify an accurate employer payroll‑tax amount and to transfer additional payroll‑tax revenue to the Jersey City Public School district ahead of the district’s budget deadline.

Speakers at the meeting said the payroll tax — a local revenue stream intended to offset reductions in state school aid — had been under‑certified in past years and that the school district was using a smaller certified amount when preparing its budget. Dana Patton of Jersey City Together told the council that the district needed a timely and accurate certification so trustees can finalize the municipal aid picture before the March 19 deadline.

“Every person at this meeting now knows that this is an issue, and has a responsibility to see it get addressed in a timely manner,” Patton said, calling the lack of clear certification a transparency problem affecting students in higher‑need schools.

Members of the school and advocacy community asked the council to ensure the city routinely certifies the full payroll‑tax amount and transfers any 2024 collections in excess of the previously certified figure. The council and board of education operate on different fiscal calendars; school officials said they must use the city’s certification when assembling their budget.

During the council meeting the business administrator’s office responded: corporation counsel told the board of education and the superintendent that a memo had been sent documenting account balances and the timing of payments. Counsel described a balance of roughly $43 million available for remittance after current obligations and said quarterly payments are expected through the fiscal year; the memo showed the next transfers and said staff would provide additional documentation to the district.

Advocates said the timely certification and transfer of payroll‑tax funds is a near‑term action the city could take to help the district avoid program cuts. The school board’s budget timetable and the council’s communication about payroll collections were raised repeatedly in public comment as the district prepared a budget submission for a March 19 deadline.","Parents and education advocates asked the council to certify a higher payroll‑tax figure and transfer unclaimed funds to the school district before its March 19 budget deadline; corporation counsel said a memo documenting balances would be provided to the district.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6280485,"Council passes vote of no confidence in public safety director after weeks of criticism",9361,3620000,12981000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db&start=3620&end=12981","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db/thumbnail_3620000.jpg","/articles/6280485/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/Council-passes-vote-of-no-confidence-in-public-safety-director-after-weeks-of-criticism","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280485-b844142612cbe862b8843825e472adc1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770434138&Signature=F60LvVyD7V6hnEkC21-~2dHZDVPsM0KYsNc8ZQ7~iP2POwlNUujdEM~-0i~fuJ2AHui4WcCHQCr8yFF6BhT8YMSEt0BhppuiWhoxrGlpLBpsVBnSA5tAkHxoj5NKO-RLghMLvWORycHqJs8kI83h4ul-sIV2i2itgsY2NZ9D2SIWrLtoQdOEZp~Rjocoj33k1KTyaTjtr82Snh-ozJRi81aJ-HnIgyPgpZvdZr4QY5gnjh2vuvJ28aWdGeVpq-88bAJIWyg1aCtD0Mvb1ZDKmoF6XG67sPFRJdXBWXwla5Ayi5r5zVH86oocuN1~AbSZ1t7UMu0~-kbze4Q43WGEJw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Jersey City Municipal Council voted to approve a resolution expressing no confidence in the city’s Director of Public Safety. The measure followed extensive public comment criticizing response times, 911 operations, crossing‑guard staffing, enforcement and the department’s handling of recent high‑profile incidents.

The resolution (item 10.2) passed 6–1–2. The clerk’s tally recorded six affirmative votes, one no vote and two abstentions. Council members who publicly endorsed the resolution cited repeated failures of departmental communications with the council and ongoing operational problems raised by constituents.

The motion and the public debate followed weeks of complaints from residents, tenant groups and school advocates who told the council they had received inadequate responses to safety requests and that crossing‑guard shortages and traffic enforcement problems persisted. Several speakers urged removal of the director; others said the resolution was an appropriate public rebuke and a step toward accountability.

Speakers during public comment repeatedly mentioned the department’s handling of specific incidents and systematic problems. Gina Davidson, a Ward F resident, said, “This is the least we can do,” speaking in favor of the no‑confidence vote and citing gaps in traffic safety, crossing‑guard staffing and crisis response. Other community groups, neighborhood advocates and parents testified to a broader loss of trust in the department’s leadership.

Council members discussed procedural follow‑through. Some members said a vote of no confidence is a formal statement that can precede hearings or a request that the mayor consider removal; others said that removal requires a separate legal process with notice and a hearing. Council members who abstained said they were sympathetic to callers’ concerns but raised questions about the legal process required to remove an appointed director.

The council adopted the resolution after members emphasized the need for improved communications and concrete corrective steps. Following the vote, the business administrator’s office distributed a memo to the school district identifying payroll‑tax account balances and timing of forthcoming transfers (see separate coverage). The resolution does not itself remove the director; it records the council’s formal lack of confidence and signals a demand for corrective action and greater responsiveness from the public safety department.","The municipal council adopted a resolution expressing no confidence in the city’s public safety director amid sustained public criticism over 911 response, crossing‑guard staffing and other safety issues; the motion passed 6–1–2.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6280490,"Jersey City council approves design contract for Heights bike lanes with Manhattan Avenue to remain two-way",13347,599000,13946000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db&start=599&end=13946","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2615231-fa4c7d4a539d8ad25dd8ccd5bfbb92db/thumbnail_599000.jpg","/articles/6280490/Jersey-City/Hudson-County/New-Jersey/Jersey-City-council-approves-design-contract-for-Heights-bike-lanes-with-Manhattan-Avenue-to-remain-two-way","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6280490-299949d3a4cea5cfc15eda3ebd3a5c5d/orig.mp4?Expires=1770434138&Signature=UGDClhdUAfpy0dG4h2fsf-zTT3OlMBW94tOqLP7rimcGerpnizKW6B-XuADSD-t2FahS9CPGIMm4O4Q31VlU1YWE8AbkcMOHhR79EeeDQa7IyPTQn9bXx4csyYEg4cFeZ~CjwhNuswyG5gLjSG4cnzxCbdWrEGGDVGHJYX47ykJpdzZAJdwgJz1gCiMvgu6bGI43Da8a5hDZLoVrmLX5yRj~V39EJ28yTeJoaH-DYuJ6c8FBBLn2PFeW3-2ZNFDs6HJi3COMuRTp2ofo4BH7bm4uTdjY-WkgdlkKm1m6FFo8ER0zoN6V1zz3q1j8h0g9iyahb5z-W2fcuKk5AIHo3A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Jersey City Municipal Council voted to approve a resolution advancing a design contract under the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT) Bikeways program for the Manhattan Avenue–Franklin Street corridor in The Heights, with a council amendment that Manhattan Avenue retain its two‑way orientation.

The amendment, read into the resolution during the meeting, conditions the award on the designer providing drawings that “maintain the orientation of Manhattan Avenue as a 2 way street for the entire length of the corridor,” language presented by Transportation Director Mike Mansella.

The resolution responds to an NJDOT grant to design protected bike lanes on the corridor. Mansella told the council the award would authorize the selected firm to prepare preliminary and final design work to satisfy the grant requirements, but that the council had asked the infrastructure department to remove Manhattan Avenue direction changes from the design alternatives.

The decision followed more than two hours of public comment and detailed back-and-forth among council members, department directors, first‑responder representatives and neighborhood residents. Supporters said the protected lanes would slow vehicle speeds and improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians; opponents — including some firefighters, hospital and nursing‑home representatives, and visually impaired residents — warned the changes could complicate emergency access and cited specific operational concerns.

Mansella said the department’s work balances those concerns. “We fully understand that the Department of Public Safety has a responsibility and a directive to save lives when there are emergencies,” he told the council, and added that “it is proven time and again, both in this city and in national and state level research that incorporation of bike lanes increases safety for all road users, and reduces the number of crashes.”

Council members also discussed timelines. Infrastructure staff warned the schedule is tight and that consultants had responded to a request‑for‑proposals based on an aggressive timetable; department staff said they would press the NJDOT for extensions where possible but could not guarantee them.

Public comment at the meeting was extensive and sharply divided. Speakers who live in The Heights said they want safer streets and pointed to recent serious crashes; other residents, business owners and representatives of St. Joseph’s School for the Blind said the corridor as proposed raised safety or operational concerns. A number of speakers urged the council to find a compromise that preserves emergency access and parking where feasible.

On the final vote, the council approved the measure 5–3–1. The clerk’s later tally recorded Councilpersons Ridley, Baggiano and Rivera voting no and Councilperson Gilmore abstaining. The resolution includes the amendment that Manhattan Avenue remain two‑way and advances the design contract process so work can begin if grant and schedule conditions are met.

The design contract advanced by the council must still be executed and designers must produce the required plans for NJDOT review. Next steps described by staff include completing design documents, addressing safety and emergency‑access concerns during the design phase, and returning to the council if further substantial changes are proposed.","Council approved a resolution to advance a NJDOT bikeways design contract for Manhattan and Franklin Avenues with a council-added condition that Manhattan Avenue remain a two‑way street; the decision drew months of debate and divided votes.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: key ordinances and resolutions adopted by Jersey City council on March 12, 2025

Council expands Exchange Place Alliance special improvement district after public meeting

School advocates press council for payroll‑tax certification as board faces budget deadline

Council passes vote of no confidence in public safety director after weeks of criticism

Jersey City council approves design contract for Heights bike lanes with Manhattan Avenue to remain two-way