OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Jersey City Council Meeting - October 21, 2025

Council and Caucus Meetings — Tuesday, October 21, 2025
BodyJersey City, New Jersey
SessionCouncil and Caucus Meetings
DateTuesday, October 21, 2025
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 54:08

Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Um resolution number 25-646.

0:04

It's a resolution providing local support for Vox Farms Incorporated to operate a class one cultivator cannabis business at 80 Harrison Avenue.

0:17

I was gonna ask about Ron, you know, I like Ron.

0:21

He's done a fantastic job, but is the cannabis control board meeting anymore?

0:26

Or and if they aren't, can we get them meeting?

0:31

We're actually gonna start meeting in November.

0:34

Okay.

0:35

All right, so this is uh timely, it's ripe.

0:37

Yes.

0:38

Thank you.

0:42

Next will be item number 10.25, resolution 25-650.

0:49

It's an amended resolution providing local support for cream of the pot LLC to operate a class five retail cannabis business.

0:59

It's it's a change of address moving from 397 community avenue to 41 Marin Boulevard.

1:08

So with the change of address, did it did they have to go back through the process?

1:13

Did they go back through planning and go back through the board?

1:16

Or is this simply an amendment?

1:19

It's an it's an amendment because the address they're moving to was previously approved.

1:24

It's just that applicant abandoned the location.

1:29

So if in the instance where they're moving to uh an area that haven't already been approved, they would have to go through the whole process over, right?

1:38

Yes.

1:39

Okay.

1:40

Now this cannabis stuff is really nerve wrecking for me.

1:46

So I know people are going to say that they were waiting to go in that area.

1:55

Right.

1:56

So do individuals who have prior approvals in other locations become prioritized from people who's waiting in the pipeline.

2:07

No.

2:08

Because you're saying that at one point someone else was here.

2:12

Well, someone was supposed to occupy that space, right?

2:15

And they never did.

2:16

They didn't, they had the lease.

2:19

They didn't, they're not pulling their cannabis application, they're just pulling the location.

2:23

No, no, no.

2:24

Once they find a new location, they'll have to go back in front of the CCP.

2:28

The downtown address is was what's going on with those folks that was originally down there?

2:36

I'm not sure why they pulled the application or decided not to move forward, but they're just looking for a different location.

2:41

Maybe it was the rent that they're paying to hold the space.

2:46

Okay, so so that's what I'm saying.

2:48

So being that these people that's already approved was at another location, then they get wind that hey, these people may not be using this, so let's apply to remove our application from point A to point B, right?

3:04

What I'm asking is are those individuals who already have approval, are they prioritized in front of the people that were waiting?

3:15

Because people were waiting because the issue of location is it too close.

3:20

Is the issue of capping in certain areas?

3:23

We've went through all that.

3:25

So now we're allowing the applicant to move from one spot to another.

3:30

So I just want to get clarity.

3:31

If I don't think that would apply for this application because it's on communal avenue where there's an existing pending application that's has all the CCB approvals only a few hundred feet away.

3:44

So I think this is actually helping with the distance.

3:50

Just sorry, just this I guess my concern is so the company that's abandoning their space is still keeping their license.

3:59

Correct.

4:00

So what they're saying is we know at some point in the future we're gonna find a new space and then we'll come back to the C C B.

4:05

Correct.

4:11

Is that the issue?

4:12

That's why they abandon it because they can't afford to meet the rent.

4:16

You really don't know.

4:17

They haven't clearly stated that no.

4:26

We shouldn't have to come back here.

4:28

I I think it's just like, you know, to have it like this after they've already gone through the process, and let's say they need to move.

4:35

I do think that it should be more administrative because they've already cleared the hurdles.

4:40

And if they their community impact plan was approved by the council, if their initial location was approved by the council, I think it should be up to the discretion of the director, you know, whether the next area is appropriate.

4:54

I think there was a concern that we needed to change their resolution of support that goes to the state.

4:58

Oh is the state that they need.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Arts And Culture███████████████████19%
Community Development██████████████████18%
Cannabis Regulation███████████11%
Housing█████████9%
Mental Health Awareness██████6%
Public Engagement█████5%
Transportation Planning█████5%
Environmental Protection████4%
Rent Control████4%
Summary of Proceedings

Jersey City Council Meeting - October 21, 2025

The Jersey City Council met on October 21, 2025, to discuss and act on a range of agenda items including cannabis business resolutions, infrastructure grants, health program updates, the final phase of the Jackson Square development, and the Arts and Culture Trust Fund cycle 2 report. The meeting included detailed discussions on the financial and logistical aspects of the Jackson Square project and concluded with a motion to adjourn passed unanimously.

Cannabis Business Resolutions

  • Resolution 25-646: Providing local support for Vox Farms Incorporated to operate a Class 1 cultivator cannabis business at 80 Harrison Avenue. A council member asked about the Cannabis Control Board meeting schedule, noting meetings will start in November. The resolution was deemed timely.
  • Resolution 25-650 (amended): Providing local support for Cream of the Pot LLC to operate a Class 5 retail cannabis business, changing address from 397 Community Avenue to 41 Marin Boulevard. Discussion clarified that the amendment was allowed because the new address had been previously approved for another applicant who abandoned it. A council member raised concerns about prioritization of approved applicants over those in the pipeline. The resolution was accepted.
  • Resolution 25-648: Providing local support for Harbor City Outreach LLC to operate a Class 5 retail cannabis business at 135 Monticello Avenue. No questions were asked.
  • Resolution 25-647: Providing local support for Art 44 Company LLC to operate a Class 5 retail cannabis business at 669 Bergen Avenue. A confidential memo was provided to council members.

Infrastructure and Transportation Items (Presented by Drew Banghart)

  • Ordinance 25-109: Adding multi-way stop intersections to the city code. Questioned, then moved.
  • Resolution 25-637: Accepting a grant from NJTPA for transportation planning positions and master planning work.
  • Resolution 25-638: Requesting a six-month extension of a NJ DOT grant for Christopher Columbus Drive to coordinate with JCMUA water and sewer work. Discussion on timing with MUA schedule.
  • Resolution 25-639: Accepting FY2024 funding for the same Christopher Columbus Drive corridor.
  • Resolution 25-643: Accepting a grant from NJ Transit for the VA on-demand service. Discussion included questions about service to Bayonne and possibly capping mileage.
  • Resolution 25-644 (likely): Regarding Hudson County Chromate site (Honeywell) at Duffield Avenue – a deed notice to protect existing engineering controls.
  • Additional discussion on Columbus Drive improvements: curb bumpouts, wider sidewalks, and mixed bike lane design similar to Cole Street.

Health and Human Services

  • Resolution 25-631: Authorizing an MOU with Hackensack Meridian Medical School to bring in interns for clinical support. Approved.
  • SAMHSA Grant Presentation (resolution not numbered clearly): Acceptance of final year of a $125,000 grant for mental health awareness training. Reported 5,000 people trained over six years (1,368 in the current grant year). The program includes training for police, Rec and Youth Development staff, and residents. Council asked about program length (8-hour training, certification valid for 3 years) and certifying body (National Council for Mental Wellbeing).

Jackson Square Final Phase – Item 3.4 (Presented by Eric Moore, Brandywine)

  • Proposal to build a nine-story building with municipal offices (EDC and others), a food plaza, park, and signage to delineate Jackson Square. The city owns the land, will sell it to Brandywine; the company will develop, the city will pay monthly rent (first year $5.2 million, 30-year schedule with inflation escalator), and after payments, ownership reverts to the city.
  • Council members raised concerns about lack of clarity on occupancy beyond EDC, rent costs vs. savings, and missed opportunities for a senior center or youth site. They suggested putting the project on hold to further discuss uses with the Business Administrator. The council president recommended the BA arrange meetings to incorporate council feedback.

Arts and Culture Trust Fund Cycle 2 Report (Presented by Committee Members)

  • Grant Totals: $1,063,484 awarded in cycle 2 (up $200,000 from cycle 1), distributed as 88 grants across three categories: General Operating ($414,996 to 19 organizations, average $21,841), Program Grants ($548,488 to 49 grantees, average $11,193), and Individual Artist Fellowships ($100,000 administered by Jersey City Arts Council).
  • Outreach: Trainings, office hours, multilingual applications, and computer access at libraries.
  • Impact: General operating grantees impacted 244,000 people in person; program grants reached 30,000 in person and 11,000 online.
  • Council thanked the committee and asked about tracking established vs. new artists. Committee committed to gathering and supplying that data.

Second Reading Ordinances (Scheduled for Public Consideration on Wednesday, October 22)

  • Ordinance 25-101: Tax exemption for Sussex Street Associates project at 177 and 193-195 Grand Street.
  • Ordinance 25-103: Parking restrictions for street sweeping inside Lincoln Park – Jersey City Parking Authority will enforce and keep revenue. Council questioned why the county does not handle it.
  • Ordinance 25-104: Reserved parking spaces for the disabled at various locations.
  • Ordinance 25-105: Amending multiple housing codes to establish mandatory minimums for housing-related violations.
  • A council member summarized the rent control amendment as limiting rent to 30% of income.

Other Resolutions (Approved without significant debate)

  • Resolution 25-626: Honoring Dolores La Curtis on her 88th birthday and 53 years of service.
  • Resolution 25-627: Authorizing liens for litter removal costs.
  • Resolution 25-629: Appointing Brian Ranz as per diem assistant municipal prosecutor.
  • Resolution 25-635 and 25-636: Accepting and ratifying assessment roll and budget for Binley Square and McGinley Square Special Improvement Districts.
  • Resolution 25-642: Ratifying a professional services agreement for union negotiation proceedings.
  • Resolution 25-???: Reimbursing $26,294.25 to Dan Millen for erroneously auctioned vehicle.

Key Outcomes

  • The cannabis resolutions were prepared for approval, but no explicit vote was recorded in the transcript.
  • The Jackson Square development was put on hold for further council input and meetings with the Business Administrator.
  • The Arts and Culture Trust Fund report was received and discussed.
  • The meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m. after a motion by Councilperson Soleil, seconded by Councilperson Rivera, with all present council members voting aye. (Roll call: Ridley, Hewlings, Boggiano, Soleil, Solomon, Gilmore, DeGeez, Rivera, and Council President Waterman.)

Meeting Transcript

Um resolution number 25-646. It's a resolution providing local support for Vox Farms Incorporated to operate a class one cultivator cannabis business at 80 Harrison Avenue. I was gonna ask about Ron, you know, I like Ron. He's done a fantastic job, but is the cannabis control board meeting anymore? Or and if they aren't, can we get them meeting? We're actually gonna start meeting in November. Okay. All right, so this is uh timely, it's ripe. Yes. Thank you. Next will be item number 10.25, resolution 25-650. It's an amended resolution providing local support for cream of the pot LLC to operate a class five retail cannabis business. It's it's a change of address moving from 397 community avenue to 41 Marin Boulevard. So with the change of address, did it did they have to go back through the process? Did they go back through planning and go back through the board? Or is this simply an amendment? It's an it's an amendment because the address they're moving to was previously approved. It's just that applicant abandoned the location. So if in the instance where they're moving to uh an area that haven't already been approved, they would have to go through the whole process over, right? Yes. Okay. Now this cannabis stuff is really nerve wrecking for me. So I know people are going to say that they were waiting to go in that area. Right. So do individuals who have prior approvals in other locations become prioritized from people who's waiting in the pipeline. No. Because you're saying that at one point someone else was here. Well, someone was supposed to occupy that space, right? And they never did. They didn't, they had the lease. They didn't, they're not pulling their cannabis application, they're just pulling the location. No, no, no. Once they find a new location, they'll have to go back in front of the CCP. The downtown address is was what's going on with those folks that was originally down there? I'm not sure why they pulled the application or decided not to move forward, but they're just looking for a different location. Maybe it was the rent that they're paying to hold the space. Okay, so so that's what I'm saying. So being that these people that's already approved was at another location, then they get wind that hey, these people may not be using this, so let's apply to remove our application from point A to point B, right? What I'm asking is are those individuals who already have approval, are they prioritized in front of the people that were waiting? Because people were waiting because the issue of location is it too close. Is the issue of capping in certain areas? We've went through all that. So now we're allowing the applicant to move from one spot to another. So I just want to get clarity. If I don't think that would apply for this application because it's on communal avenue where there's an existing pending application that's has all the CCB approvals only a few hundred feet away. So I think this is actually helping with the distance. Just sorry, just this I guess my concern is so the company that's abandoning their space is still keeping their license. Correct. So what they're saying is we know at some point in the future we're gonna find a new space and then we'll come back to the C C B. Correct.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com