- NJ
- Hudson County
- 9/24/24
- 09/24/2024
- 67 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The Jersey City Council convened on September 23, 2024, to address a broad array of issues, including security upgrades, affordable housing preferences, and a significant cultural project involving state tax credits.
- NJ
- Hudson County
- 9/23/24
- 10/10/2024
- 28 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The recent Jersey City Cannabis Control Board meeting highlighted significant operational challenges, including leadership dissatisfaction and procedural delays affecting local cannabis businesses.
- NJ
- Hudson County
- 9/16/24
- 09/27/2024
- 154 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The Jersey City Historic Preservation Commission held a discussion on various agenda items, including the denial of a demolition application for a historically significant building on Palisade Avenue. The meeting also covered applications for certificates of appropriateness for several renovation projects within the city’s historic districts.
- NJ
- Hudson County
- 9/11/24
- 09/13/2024
- 110 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: The Jersey City Cannabis Control Board meeting on September 11, 2024, was marked by discussions, particularly surrounding the renewal application for Garden Greens LLC, amid allegations of employee misconduct and community dissatisfaction. The board also deliberated on other applications, including those from JC Element, Earth, and Locomotive, while addressing community impact and regulatory compliance concerns.
- NJ
- Hudson County
- 9/11/24
- 09/12/2024
- 248 Minutes
- Noteworthy
- Highly Noteworthy
- Routine
Overview: During the recent Jersey City Council meeting, debate emerged over the proposed ordinance related to the Pomo Center project. Council members expressed frustration over the administration’s lack of detailed budget information, with concerns about the financial implications and the absence of a clear funding mechanism for the project’s buildout. The ordinance’s introduction was contentious, with calls for more community engagement and skepticism about the administration’s diligence in financial assessments.