Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council, legal spar over Jackson proposal to require security and cameras in small multiunit buildings
Summary
Councilman William Jackson urged an ordinance requiring 24/7 security and surveillance for multi-dwelling buildings beginning at small unit thresholds; Corporation Counsel raised legal concerns and assigned staff to work with Jackson to redraft language.
Councilman William Jackson pressed forward on April 8 with an ordinance he said would require 24-hour security and camera surveillance in multi-dwelling buildings after a string of public-safety concerns in parts of Paterson.
Jackson told the council he drafted the ordinance to apply to small multiunit conversions in Paterson — starting at four units in his draft — arguing the city has seen many 4- and 5-unit buildings added to small lots and that the police department is “understaffed, undermanned and ... overworked.” “If these developers want to come to our community and they want to make money in piling up more residents in a small area, they should be held accountable with providing the additional security that these residents need,” Jackson said.
Corporation Counsel thanked Jackson for raising the issue and said the proposal has “real application to serve our residents,” but the legal office flagged potential legal problems and recommended a collaborative rewrite. Corporation Counsel said a law department attorney, Ben David, had been assigned to work with Jackson and recommended sharing the draft with the city’s economic development director for practical and policy input. “I welcome you to my office. We'll accommodate you at your time,” the attorney said.
The exchange revealed disagreement about thresholds used in similar ordinances in other cities. Corporation Counsel suggested following Newark’s ordinance language, which applies to much larger buildings in that city; Jackson argued Newark’s building stock and scale differ from Paterson’s and that mirroring Newark would exempt the smaller new buildings he wants covered.
No formal vote took place. Council members agreed to further work between Jackson, the law department and city staff. The item was removed from the current agenda for additional drafting and is expected to return after legal review and departmental consultation.
Council members also noted gaps in security at some public housing and senior properties during the discussion and said those specific concerns should be addressed in parallel with private-development rules.
Next steps: the law department will work with Councilman Jackson and the economic development office to revise the ordinance language and return it to a future agenda for a formal vote.
