Newark residents press council on housing conditions, alleged corruption and a proposed 'Public Trust Act' for police oversight

Dozens of Newark residents used the hearing‑of‑citizens period at the March 18 council meeting to press officials on housing conditions, alleged corruption at local housing projects, and police transparency following a highly publicized officer‑involved death.

Felicia Austin Singleton opened the evening’s public comments with a forceful charge that the housing authority and city officials had favored developers over residents and allowed unsafe living conditions, saying at the podium that contracts and deals were made “at the expense of the residents' lives.” She accused officials of selling property for $23,000 and suggested money was missing, framing her remarks as a call for legal accountability.

Other speakers echoed housing complaints. Lisa Parker and several residents described poor maintenance, pest infestations and slow follow‑up on complaints at sites including Villa Victoria. Nadira Brown urged the council to stop sending residents back to the same offices and staff who, she said, had not solved their problems; she named a housing navigator, Joy Black, as someone residents rely on for help.

Police accountability was a separate, sustained thread. Sha'Carrie McDougald, who identified herself as an Essex County resident, presented a written proposal she called the “Public Trust Act.” McDougald said the measure would require the city to publish a preliminary statement within 48 hours identifying the investigative authority, to preserve body‑worn camera and other evidence, to maintain an ongoing public dashboard and reporting, and to include early‑intervention and officer‑wellness measures. “When serious incidents occur … the public deserves the ability to verify,” she said, urging council sponsorship or formal review of the proposal.

Several speakers tied calls for oversight to a recent officer‑involved death and to the broader end of federal consent‑decree oversight of the North Police Division. Residents asked the council to put permanent local standards in place so progress does not “fade over time.”

The meeting also featured multiple allegations of fraud and improper deals. Alif (Aleif) Mohammed told the council he had provided a videotape he said implicated the mayor’s brother and others and said the tape had been shared with federal agents and news organizations; he invited candidates to obtain copies. Jamar Youngblood accused the city council of aligning too closely with the mayor’s slate and urged voters to consider independent candidates.

Administration officials responded publicly to several of those claims. Business Administrator Eric Pennington told the meeting the state does not permit an unbalanced municipal budget and said the city has consistently submitted budgets that the state approved. On the question of Community Development Block Grant funds for a prior affordable‑housing parcel, Pennington said the CDBG funds had not been spent because the earlier project did not proceed and that there was a pending sale expected to deliver 100% affordable units. “There is now a pending sale for that property in the amount of about a half $1,000,000, which we expect the developer to move forward within the near term,” he said.

Corporation Counsel Kenyatta Stewart addressed residents’ questions about law‑enforcement pursuits, saying New Jersey law allows vehicle chases only when the officer reasonably believes the driver poses an imminent threat to someone. She said the ICE agents’ chase referenced by commenters did not meet that legal standard and therefore was unlawful under state rules.

What this means going forward: several residents asked the council to move from expressions of concern to specific policy steps — whether legislative protections for tenants and workers, or formalizing McDougald’s transparency proposals into a city policy or ordinance. Council members acknowledged the complaints and, in several cases, asked the administration for follow‑up: one council member said code enforcement would be asked to inspect an address named in public comments, and the business administrator offered to deliver more detailed budgetary and grant accounting to the council on request.

The council then proceeded through a lengthy agenda that included temporary appropriations, grant acceptances, contract awards and redevelopment approvals (several of which passed by roll call). One multi‑parcel new‑construction redevelopment package was deferred so council members could review developer materials and ask more questions.

The council adjourned after motions, ceremonial recognitions and community announcements.

Reporting note: this article attributes direct quotes and assertions to the speakers who introduced them at the public‑comment podium. Allegations of criminality, missing funds or statutory violations were made by residents at the microphone and were not substantiated in the meeting record; the administration asked for specifics and said some funds cited were not missing but unspent because the project did not proceed.