The proposal to construct a six-story multifamily residential building at 102-116 Avenue E, formerly known as the Bean property, captured the attention of the council. The proposal outlined plans for 105 residential units, 110 parking spaces, and various amenities designed to accommodate future residents. While the council generally expressed no objections to this development, they noted the absence of detailed architectural elements that had been part of the original structure. There was interest in potentially restoring such features, particularly the statuary that once adorned the building. The council discussed the possibility of placing the statuary in a museum, should it become available, to preserve Bayonne’s architectural heritage.

Another development proposal involved replacing the Clayton Block company site on Route 440 with a parking lot. This plan also received no significant objections from the council members, who appeared to be open to the change, recognizing the potential for improved land use and enhanced community infrastructure.

The council dedicated time to discussing the city’s historical preservation plans, emphasizing the importance of utilizing historical information and archaeological finds in community projects. One proposal included displaying historical information at light rail stations and a bus facility near Mercer Park, creating an engaging historical welcome to Bayonne. This initiative is particularly timely, given an upcoming anniversary that the city intends to commemorate. The council explored the idea of coordinating with the New Jersey State Museum to ensure the appropriate presentation of historical finds and sought community input on how best to celebrate the anniversary.

Members also addressed the condition of existing historical plaques, particularly one at Mercer Park, which had not been cleaned since 1994. The council expressed a desire to enhance the plaque’s appearance through thorough cleaning. The discussion concluded with plans to compile a list of tasks to address after the winter break.

The meeting also involved procedural matters regarding the scheduling and organization of future council meetings. The council adopted the meeting calendar for 2026, selecting specific dates that avoid conflicts with major holidays and early voting. These meetings are scheduled for January 27, February 24, March 24, April 28, May 26, September 22, October 20, and November 30, with the council maintaining a tradition of not holding meetings in June, July, and August.

A debate emerged regarding the meeting time, with some members advocating for maintaining the 7:00 p.m. start time, while others considered the potential benefits of moving it to 6:00 or 6:30 p.m. Ultimately, the council unanimously agreed to keep the meetings at 7:00 p.m., acknowledging the challenges earlier times could pose for those commuting or with personal commitments.

The council addressed the election of a chair, vice chair, and secretary, with a suggestion to vote on these positions as a slate rather than individually. However, due to the absence of a member expected to be nominated for a position, the election was postponed until January 2026. The decision to defer the election was supported by a majority, allowing the council to reconvene and address the matter at the next meeting.

The meeting concluded with inquiries about the budget for signage and whether funds would carry over into the new calendar year. The council planned to consult the finance department to ensure that available resources for signage were not overlooked.