Vineland council defeats zoning changes on harm-reduction centers, sends revised proposals to planning board

Vineland City Council on March 11 defeated two proposed zoning amendments after a lengthy public hearing and debate focused on how the city should classify and locate harm reduction centers and sterile syringe programs.

The council considered Ordinance 2025-9 and Ordinance 2025-10, both of which arose from a draft the Planning Board had reviewed. Chris Dockney, a professional planner with CME Associates, summarized a report and recommended that the city add a definition for "harm reduction center" (drawing from the state Harm Reduction Act) and explicitly permit such centers in the IN-1 institutional zone, allow them conditionally in the B-3 business zone, and permit a sterile syringe program only as an accessory use to a harm reduction center in IN-1. "We recommend ... you include a definition for a harm reduction center, taking that straight from the state of New Jersey's definition in the Harm Reduction Act," Dockney said.

Speakers for and against the zoning language addressed access to services, neighborhood safety, and placement of providers. Elizabeth Meanan, speaking as a mental-health and substance-use provider, urged the council not to constrain counseling and treatment services to industrial zones because "moving services to industrial zoning limits access to care," and said it would "increase your incidence of crisis events." Teresa Booth, senior director of child development at the YMCA in Millville, said she was not opposed to counseling services but opposed a needle exchange near child-care facilities, citing safety concerns if needles were mishandled. Emails read into the record from local residents and from Andrew Davis, a security officer at Newfield National Bank, expressed opposition to fixed-site needle exchange near vulnerable populations or bank branches.

After public comment and discussion, council members recorded their votes and the body announced both Ordinance 2025-9 and Ordinance 2025-10 were defeated by a 5-to-0 vote. President Spinelli summarized council members' stated reason for no votes as the need for clearer definitions and more time to resolve changes raised during the review period.

Separately, the council took first-reading action on a revised ordinance (2025-27) that also addresses definitions and harm reduction centers and referred that draft to the planning board to determine whether it is substantially consistent with the city's redevelopment plan. The council voted to pass Ordinance 2025-27 for first reading and to send it to the planning board; the motion passed and the ordinance will return to the council after the planning board provides findings and recommendations. A companion measure (Ordinance 2025-28) was also passed for first reading and referred to the planning board.

Why it matters: the zoning language determines where mental-health, substance-use treatment and harm-reduction services can operate in Vineland. Providers warned that limiting services to industrial zones could reduce access for residents who rely on nearby care; opponents raised concerns about public safety and placement near schools, parks and sensitive sites.

What happens next: Ordinances 2025-9 and 2025-10 were defeated and will not take effect. Ordinances 2025-27 and 2025-28 were passed for first reading and referred to the planning board; further revision and a subsequent council vote are expected after the planning board's review.

Ending: Council members said they want clearer language and more community input before final adoption; the planning board review will provide recommended changes and the ordinances will return to the council for next steps.