Common Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everyone. The meeting will come to order. And it has been quite a week. We've celebrated wins from both the boys and girls high school lacrosse teams. We've got the World Cup going. And of course, the Knicks won the NBA championship. So let's bring all that teamwork and sportsmanship into this evening. Madam Clerk, would you please read the adequate notice of compliance statement?

Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by the City Clerk's Office in the preparation of the Council Annual Meeting Notice, dated December 17, 2025, which was properly distributed and posted per statutory requirements. Please be advised that fire exits are to my right, your left, and at the back of the room. The City has a listening system to assist the hearing impaired. If anyone needs hearing assistance, assistance please obtain the system at the days and return it thereafter thank you and may we have the roll call please mr boyer president mr chris foley here ms kalmanson here ms landman here mrs saracena here president tote here um and next i'm going to call on the city's summer interns to lead us in the pledge of allegiance

with liberty and justice for all.

madam clerk would you please read the notices regarding closed session and hearings and comments a closed session meeting is authorized by state statute was announced and held prior to the start of this meeting and the known items for discussion were listed on the published closed session agenda please be advised that council meetings are broadcast live on comcast channels 34 and 36 and verizon channel 30 and rebroadcasts on thursdays and saturdays on hgtv on comcast 36 and verizon 33. When invited to speak, please come to the lectern, clearly state your name and address, spell your last name, and speak into the podium microphone so that your comments can be understood by all and properly recorded. Whenever an audience or council member reads from a prepared statement, please give or email a copy to the city clerk's office at cityclerk at cityofsummit.org. To help facilitate an orderly meeting and to permit all to be heard, please limit your comments to no more than three minutes. Unless you are using an electronic device to follow the meeting agenda or need it for professional emergency contact purposes, please turn it off. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to expand a bit on the city clerk's note about hearings and comments. This will facilitate a smoother process, particularly for those watching remotely. If you're seated in one of the first two rows, please remain silent while you're sitting down. Anything you say can be picked up by the recording microphones and make it difficult to hear the official proceedings. The three-minute limit on public comments corresponds to a bit less than a single printed page. If you're leaving written remarks, please put your name on them and place them in the box near the lectern when you're done. With that, let's move on to the city's business. We are going to hold off on approval of the June 3rd minutes until our July 7th meeting. So we'll go directly to our mayor for her report.

Thank you. Good evening, everyone. Thank you for being here tonight. So last week, I had the honor of speaking at the DARE graduation ceremony. It was really fun to see the fifth grade students and so many of their families in attendance to celebrate this wonderful achievement. Our police officers do a tremendous job leading this program every year and teaching students important life lessons that they will be able to carry with them into middle school and beyond. We also celebrated at the annual DARE pool party earlier this month at the Summit Family Aquatic Center with our students and several members of our police department and some hot dogs from the PAL. I want to wish all of our DARE students a heartfelt congratulations and best wishes for their next chapter in middle school. I'm sorry that I was unable to attend the Pride celebration on Sunday due to a family wedding. I heard it was great and I wanted to thank DCP for putting together yet another fabulous community event. Speaking of fabulous community events, a reminder that our two-part Juneteenth celebration is this weekend with a flag raising on the Village Green this Friday, June 19th at 3 p.m., and a pool party celebration at the Summit Family Aquatic Center on Saturday, June 20th from 12 p.m. to 5 p.m., which will feature food trucks, children's activities, music and entertainment, and another flag raising ceremony. You do not need a pool membership to attend or swim at this event, and I hope to see you there. I also wanted to provide a quick reminder that our middle school and high school graduations will be held this Wednesday and Thursday at Investors Bank Field at Tatlock Park, weather permitting. There will be increased traffic in the area on those nights, and I want to remind everyone to follow all parking signs around the field and be considerate of the neighbors that live in the area. Please do not block driveways. Police will be out and ticketing in the area. I would like for everybody to enjoy the graduation and not come home with a parking ticket. A huge congratulations to all of our class of 2026 graduates. I wish you the best of luck in your next chapters. And lastly, I just heard, I know council president mentioned both the girls and boys lacrosse teams won the county. Sorry, there's their state titles, but their curse cup was the semifinal game was tonight. It just ended shortly ago and the boys won pretty handily. So that was a semifinal. So they will play against Del Barton on Thursday. So good luck to them.

And that's all I have. Thank you. Okay, thank you. And now on to Tammy Baldwin for the City Administrator's Report. Administrator Baldwin.

Thank you, Council President. Please be advised, everyone, that city offices will be closed this Friday, June 19th. It's also a parking holiday and summit, so there's no fees required for on-street parking or parking in the municipal lots and garages. Trash and recycling collections are not affected, so everything will remain the same there. The next Summit free market will be held next Friday, June 26, from 12 p.m. to 2 p.m. at the transfer station. Summit residents with a parking and disposal permit can attend and browse donated items, and they can take what they want for free. You can review the donation guidelines on the City website at cityofsummit.org backslash freemarket before bringing any items to donate. Just check that out. And lastly and most importantly, I'm happy to report that our summer internship program is underway. We're very excited to have our interns here with us tonight to share what they're working on this month. They'll be coming up to speak in just a little bit, so you'll hear from them. This is the 17th year of our internship program. I'm really pleased that we can continue to offer this program every year. I also want to thank, it is a paid internship, which is meaningful to our students, and I'd like to thank our human resource manager, Megan Champney-Quisalot, and her assistant, Debbie Prezantella, who lead the program every year. They do a great job, and our interns are able to get useful, professional work experience, as well as a behind-the-scenes look at what we do in local government. So, to our interns, thank you for being here tonight. We're looking forward to hearing from you in just a little bit, and I hope you enjoy the meeting. Thank you.

Okay, thank you. And now for the President's Report. First, the next council listening session will take place Monday, the 22nd, from 7.30 to 9 at the Community Center. I'm going to be traveling for a bit the next couple of weeks, so my next office hours won't take place until July. Mondays, the 13th, the 20th, and the 27th. Next, we are going to arrange tonight's agenda a bit. Directly after our presentations, Council will vote to appoint a new member to represent Ward 1 for the remainder of the year, followed by swearing in our new colleague if that person is present. We'll kick off our ordinances for hearing with the proposed ordinance banning AI data centers. We know many of you are here for that ordinance, and we don't want you to have to wait for hearings on eight other ordinances before you get a chance to share your thoughts. If you're watching from home and planning to come down to make a comment, this is your cue. I'd like next to turn to an update on the old firehouse site property. As residents know, the sale of the firehouse did not close as expected. It's disappointing, but it gives the city an opportunity to step back, apply what we learned, and make sure we're managing this important public asset the right way that protects Summit's long-term interests. We're taking some steps right now. First, we're finalizing negotiations with St. Teresa's to commit to a new and valid parking agreement. This needs to be resolved so there's no question about the parking rights for the future purchaser. Second, we're going to conduct an environmental analysis of the property. Before the site can be developed for residential use, we'll need a clear understanding of any remediation that may be required. And this information will help us make decisions and protect the property's value. Third, at the recommendation of our city administrator, we're considering whether a broker with more direct experience in this type of transaction would better serve the city. To specialized property, we want to make sure we have the right support and advice as we move forward. The good news is we have a little bit of time because our city budget was balanced without the sale of the property, of the firehouse property. We know we do want to sell it as expeditiously as possible, but we're not under the gun. Finally, in prior meetings, we've had council members spend upwards of 20 minutes speaking during council remarks and it emptied out the chamber. At the last meeting, I asked that we limit ourselves to the same three minutes that we give the public. That decision was mine. I'm not afraid to try something and say it didn't work. So I won't limit the time at this meeting for council remarks. I appreciate that all of us up here approach our jobs with thoroughness and passion, but out of respect for each other, the staff, and the people patiently waiting in the audience, let's model the behavior we ask of our residents. And for everyone who speaks tonight, please let's show respect for each other. Before we move on to our historic minute, I believe our clerk has something she would like to say.

I would just like to give a special shout out to my husband, Frank. We are celebrating our 47th wedding anniversary today.

Happy anniversary.

And we never had a fight.

Happy anniversary, honey. Thank you. Let's move on to our historic minute. Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Tonight, I would like to welcome Enrique Guzardi to present the historical minute. Come on up. Enrique is a recent Summit High School grad, an ally to the LGBTQ plus community. and someone who impressed many of us when he spoke at council last year. We're happy to have him back tonight to talk about the history of pride. Over to you, Enrique.

All right. Good evening, everyone. My name is Enrique Guzardi, a recent Summit High School graduate. I was president and founder of the Political Discussion Club at the high school. I was also one of five captains of the high school football team, and now I am a student athlete at Franklin and Marshall College studying government and international affairs. So this past weekend, Summit held its annual Pride event on Village Green in honor of Pride Month. And as an ally of the LGBTQ plus community, I would like to share a brief history of Pride in New Jersey and reflect on why these celebrations are important here in Summit. New Jersey's first Pride parade took place in Asbury Park in 1992. It was inspired by change to the state's law against discrimination, which had been amended to include protections based on sexual orientation. Asbury Park was chosen because of its long-standing reputation as a very welcoming and safe space for LGBTQ plus community members. Approximately 1,500 people attended that first Jersey Pride celebration. And in the years that followed, Pride events began to spread throughout New Jersey, though not without challenges. In 2001, residents of Jersey City organized an LGBTQ Plus Pride Festival after being denied a city grant. Despite the lack of official support, they moved forward and celebrated their community. In 2005, the Newark Pride Festival was founded in the wake of the tragic murder of Sakia Gunn, a young lesbian who was targeted because of her sexual orientation. Her death became a catalyst for organizing, advocacy, and greater visibility within the LGBTQ Plus community. Throughout the 2010s, Pride celebrations served not only as opportunities to gather and celebrate, but also as platforms for advocacy. Communities across New Jersey rallied across historic milestones, including the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell in 2010, and the achievement of marriage equality in 2013. Pride came to our area in 2018 when the Summit YMCA hosted a Pride event at Columbia Park in Berkeley Heights. The following year, on June 7, 2019, Summit held its first city-sponsored LGBTQ plus Pride celebration on the village green. So why do we celebrate Bride Hearing Summit? First, Bride promotes visibility and representation. By bringing LGBTQ plus people, allies, and issues into the public sphere, Bride helps challenge stereotypes and encourages greater understanding and acceptance into our community. Second, Bride strengthens community support. These events create space, safe space, and inclusive spaces where people, especially Summit's young people, can connect with others, find support, and express themselves authentically. Third, Pride remains a powerful form of activism and advocacy. It highlights ongoing challenges, raises awareness of discrimination, and builds support for equal rights and legal protections. And finally, Pride serves as an important act of historical remembrance. It honors those who came before us, and it recognizes the struggles that have shaped the movement. And it celebrates the resilience of the Summit community that has fought for dignity, equality, and recognition. As Pride in New Jersey continues to grow with dozens of celebrations taking place throughout the state this month, It is also important to recognize that challenges still remain. Legislative efforts targeting LGBTQ plus individuals continue to emerge across the country, reminding us that progress should never be taken for granted. From its activist roots to today's celebrations, BRIDE has played a vital role in not only advancing visibility, acceptance, and equal rights throughout our state, but serving to be a beacon of hope, solidarity, and inclusion for all marginalized peoples of the world. Thank you to the summit community and others for working together to build a more welcoming, equitable, and compassionate summit for all. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, we have two presentations this evening, and let's kick it off with Megan Champney, I'm going to mangle this, Quisalete, as someone whose last name is always mispronounced, would you please introduce the interns to the community?

Thank you, everybody. Thank you for having us here and taking the time. My name is Megan Champney-Queselate, and I have the privilege of serving the City of Summit as the Human Resources Manager, as well as coordinating the summer internship program. Before introducing this year's interns, I would like to thank the department heads who have welcomed our interns into their departments, and they have provided meaningful learning opportunities and opportunities for these young people to grow and learn more about government. I would also like to extend a special thank you to our confidential administrative assistant, Debbie Perez-Dantalla, who is here this evening. Deb, can you stand up, please? This is Debbie. Debbie's dedication, hard work, and unwavering support are instrumental in ensuring that everything within administration and human resources, including this internship program, run as smoothly and as successfully as possible. This year, we received a record number of applications, approximately 40, which speaks to the growing interest in our program and the value students place on public service. While we had fewer internship opportunities available this year, we remain grateful to everyone who applied and who are hopeful, and we are looking to expand opportunities again in the future, specifically within the communications field. Over the past two weeks, our interns have immersed themselves in the workings of local government through meaningful projects, meetings with department heads, tours of our municipal facilities, attendance at tonight's Common Council meeting, and an upcoming ride along with the Summit Police Department. I think that's what they're most excited about, actually. Our goal is to provide them with a broad understanding of the many people and departments that work together to make Summit the exceptional place that it is. It is my pleasure to introduce the City of Summit's 2026 summer interns. Matthew Crunfuss and Ava Shannon are applying their talents to projects within the Department of Community Programs. Kayla Pang, our first rising college freshman out of Kent Place School, is working within the Department of Community Services, specifically in the Land Use Division. and Samuel Story is contributing to several important projects within the Human Resources Department. Please join me in extending a warm welcome as they come forward to introduce themselves and provide a brief overview of the good work they are doing this summer.

There it is. Good evening. My name is Matthew Kronfos. I'm a rising sophomore at Purdue University majoring in marketing and economics. And this summer I'm working with the Department of Community Programs to sort of see how marketing can improve turnout for community programs and events. So one of the main things I've been doing is kind of analyzing registration data and social media data and email campaign data to try and see how marketing efforts impact attendance for community events and what can be done in marketing to increase turnout for these events. So that includes stuff like redesigning email campaigns and creating more short form content for the social media accounts and a lot of other fun stuff like that. I'd also like to say thank you to David Guida for being such a great mentor for this role. I've learned a lot and I'm very grateful for this experience.

Hello, my name is Ava Shannon. I'm a rising sophomore at Boston College, and I'm majoring in political science. I'm working in the Department of Community Programs this summer with David Guida, and my main job these past two weeks has been to get sponsorships for the community events that run each summer, like the Fourth of July celebration and the concert series and movie series and National Night Out. So that mainly involves reaching out to local businesses via email and going to them in person to kind of inform them of the opportunities available and seeing what their interests would be with that. And I've also been working on reaching out to nonprofits that serve the Summit community to have them participate in our National Night Out because they have an opportunity to table at that event. I'm also super grateful for David and Megan and Debbie for this opportunity and I've learned a lot through this experience. Thank you.

Good evening, council. My name is Kayla Pang, and I'm a rising freshman at Duke University hoping to major in public policy. I'm very grateful to be interning for the city's land use division and working under the awesome mentorship of Augusto. And recently I've been working on a report on the city's next city tree replanting cycles, focusing specifically on how to mitigate the urban heat island effect in Summit. I've drafted some recommendations for the city's potential setback planting program and the city triggered landmark program. And recently I've just been going around street to street to Summit to check for removals and plantings of new trees, just to keep our city tree database completely up to date. um yeah i'm really grateful for this experience and thank you all for all that you do for summit

Hello, my name is Sam Story. I am going to be a senior at the University of South Carolina. I'm majoring in psychology and film. And this summer I've been working with Human Resources on developing a new standard operating procedure for new hires. And this is with the goal of making onboarding more efficient and to have something written down that anyone can use in the future to onboard a new employee. Along with that, I have been doing a benchmarking project, communicating with other municipalities to see and compare their communication and social media policies. Lastly, I'd like to thank Megan and Debbie. I am so grateful for this opportunity, so thank you.

I'm so sorry, I did forget to mention that there is one other person in this room, Emily Griffith, who is behind the camera back there, but she was our intern last year, and we are so happy to have her here tonight, so thank them.

Thank you all. You're doing meaningful work for Summit, and the residents will definitely benefit from it. So now you get to see how the sausage is made. Next, we have Lisa Hibb from Concord Energy Services with an update on Summit's energy aggregation program. Welcome back, Ms. Hibb.

Thank you very much. It is my pleasure to be here and to report some very good news on the status of the program and to also ask Council to consider possibly filling out a participation form for continued participation in the Garden State Community Energy Cooperative. So my name is Lisa Hibbs. I am the director of sales and project management for the government sector for Concord Energy Services. We are the energy consultant for the Garden State Community Energy Cooperative, of which the city of Summit is a registered member. The borough of Lincoln Park is your lead agent. Also joining with the City of Summit as a registered member is Jefferson Township, also Mount Olive Township, and most recently we have added Mount Arlington, the borough of Mount Arlington over in Morris County. just on June 3rd passed their resolution to join your co-op, so it is growing. The good news is clearly making its way to other municipalities. So just as a bit of a recap, the Garden State Energy Cooperative went out to auction on October 3rd, 2025, and the pricing that was received at the auction was lower than JCP&L's price to compare, and an award was made to Direct Energy Services, LLC. This is for a 19 month contract term, which began with residents meter reads in March of 2026. The standard program rate, which does not include any additional renewable other than the state's renewable portfolio standard at 37.5%. That price is 14.46 cents per kilowatt hour. And that is compared to JCP&L's basic generation service rate. In other words, if you're not with a third party supplier of your own, that is the default price. That price was 15.6 cents at the time of the auction. So we also have a 100% green program option. This is an optional. um program option that residents can call or go online and opt into that price is also below the jcp l price to compare that price is 14.61 cents per kilowatt hour and the current bgs price for jcp now because it does fluctuate It reset in June, June 1st, 2026. It is currently, we are split right now. We have a summer one and a summer two rate. This is customary for the utilities. The program rate does not have a summer one, summer two. It's a flat price throughout the seasons. But I just wanted to make everyone aware that we are in the season where we do have two different rates for JCP&L's basic generation service rate. The first is 14.8 cents for the first 600 kilowatt hours used by a customer. And then the second summer rate is for anything in excess of 600 kilowatt hours. That price is 15.7256 cents per kilowatt hour. If we blend them together, the average resident here in Summit uses 747 kilowatt hours. Now clearly that is an average over 12 months. That you're going to see summer usage go up because we're using our air conditioners. But if you blend that summer one, summer two, just based on that 747, you get a rate of 14.87 cents. So that's considerably lower than the 15.6 at the time of the auction. But again, we're on the conservative side there. We're just taking the historic average over the 12 months to get that 747 kilowatt hours. The good news, participating residents in the city of Summit have saved a collective total of over $48,000 in the first two months of the program. The average savings for a household here in Summit is $9 a month. So of the 7,647 eligible households within the City of Summit that we started with, 1,608 of the account holders requested their account be opted out, and 38 account holders requested that it be a permanent opt-out. So not only not participating this round, but if the City of Summit and the Garden State Cooperative do move forward with another auction, those 38 folks would not be included. They're kind of on a do not disturb. They can certainly rescind that, come back in, but we will consider them permanently opted out until they do so. We did receive 194 pieces of return mail for which we opted those residents out. That is a requirement of the regulation. And we also had 321 utility rejections. That could be for any reason ranging from a move, changing to another third-party supplier, or just getting a little bit behind on the bill, and we require that. Any account holder participating in the program must receive one bill, just like they do now from JCP&L. The suppliers cannot send them a separate bill. So if folks do get behind on a bill, they are dropped from the program just to make sure that they stay on that consolidated billing. So the opt-out rate for the City of Summit is about 23%, which is completely normal. This is your first time through the GEA program. So there's lots of questions, of course, at the beginning. And some warranted skepticism. It's unknown. No experience with the program. So hopefully, with hearing that the program is doing what it's designed to do, saving residents money people can that people that have opted out can opt back in there's no cost to do so throughout the term of the contract similarly anyone that didn't know that they were enrolled in this program and once out they can certainly do that at any time during the contract term no fees or penalties So at this time, Concord Energy Services is just making the City of Summit aware that we have asked for a participation form to be completed for 2026-2027. This would include any extensions on the current contract and participation in any auctions in 2026 or 2027. So I know Rosemary has that. I also provided an updated resolution should Common Council want to consider that. That resolution is on file with the clerk's office as well. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Do we have any questions from members of the public for Ms. Hibbs? Do we have any questions from members of council?

You are a leaning forward council member for you. Go right ahead. So the 1,600 folks that opted out, 38 opted out permanently. But the 1,600, do they have to opt out again next year? They would.

It's each time there is a new program offering. So each time there is a new contract, there's that new information packet, yes. And we are able to flip that to a permanent opt out. All they need to do is give us a call at 866-688-5197. That's Concord's customer service number. And we'd be happy to convert that over to a permanent opt out. That way they do get the do not disturb benefit without having to opt out each time.

If I can just ask a question, follow-up question with that. So if they opted out, and there's 1,600 people, so we're requiring them to do it again next year? I mean, do they know that they have to do it permanently?

Yes, it's actually on the response card, and it's also in the information packet itself. And it's in the program video that's posted on the program's webpage.

Okay. I'm just concerned with people having to do a task over and over again. Absolutely. If they opt out, then perhaps we hit the switch and they need to opt back in instead of just them.

The regulation is not written that way.

Okay. Okay. And the other question I had, you said if you're not up to date on your bill, you're automatically opted out.

If you're, it takes about 60 to 90 days for you to be behind on your bill before you'll be dropped, yes.

Okay, so you'll lose power before then.

No, no, no. Right now, just so that everyone knows, we are in the moratorium for shutoffs with the BPU.

Okay.

That happens in June. So that way you don't lose air conditioning and quality of life. So yeah, that I believe runs through September 15th. I could be wrong though. But yeah, right now, no shutoffs.

Thank you and I'm happy to hear about the savings.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Hibbs. Oh, thank you. Okay. So, as promised, we're going to move our resolution up to appoint a new colleague. Madam Clerk, are you going to read the title of this? I believe I can defer to our chair of the law committee. Go straight to Council Member LaSarasina. Thank you.

Thank you, Council President. Resolution under Law and Labor ID 12613 relates to the appointment of a new Ward 1 Councilmember. By way of brief background, former Councilmember Bob Pawlowski stepped back from his role in May of this year, just a few weeks ago, under applicable New Jersey state law because former Councilmember Pawlowski is a member of the Summit Republican Party. The Summit Republican Party then recommends three candidates who have raised their hand and are willing to serve. We thank each of the three of them for raising their hands to do that. And then it is the responsibility of the remaining council members to choose amongst those three. So we have evaluated the qualifications, the interests. We've had an opportunity to speak with the various candidates who were set forward. And so I'm very pleased to move on the resolution that we appoint Andrew Smith as our replacement council member for Ward 1.

And I'll second that, absent having a second member of the Law and Labor Committee. Do we have any comments from members of the public on this resolution?

Good evening. Nick Curiel, chair of the Republican City Committee. I'd like to thank council with their decision. I provided three excellent candidates, and I'm sure it was a tough decision to make to pick, you know, the candidate. Each candidate was well qualified, but I appreciate this, and let's move forward and get a new council member on the dais. I'm sure you guys are all aware with Andrew's situation this evening. He couldn't make it. He had a health issue, but he'll be back next council meeting. So thank you.

And thank you, Mr. Curiel, for your making this such a smooth process for all of us. Okay. Any other comments from members of the public? Comments from members of council? Yes, Council Member Lucera-Sena.

Thank you, Council President. I just again wanted to extend gratitude to each of the three candidates who raised their hand, and to Andrew in particular. I have had the chance to speak with him. He has a long history of service to Summit, both through sports community and in general. He's coming with a very sincere desire to just serve the community, and so I look forward to getting to work with him if we move forward and adopt this resolution.

Yes, Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. I just want to say I know Andy from sitting next to each other at many, many basketball games over the past few years. And I also know his mother-in-law and his wife and others. And I'm excited to have him join us in this capacity. I think he'll be a great addition to the team.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay. And let me just add, sort of building on what Mr. Curiel said, yes. Andy is not able to join us tonight. The plan is that as soon as practicable, he will sign his oath of office privately so that he can begin serving on committees in advance of the next council meeting when he'll be up on the dais and will be able to participate fully. And at the next council meeting, which is July 7th, we will swear him in publicly so that everybody can join in welcoming him. With that, this is just A's and A's? Voice vote. Voice vote. Okay. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? No. Yay. We now have seven council members. Thank you so much. Let us go back to ordinances for hearing. And as promised, we are going to begin hearing. with the ordinance dealing, banning AI data centers. So Madam Clerk, would you please read the caption for ordinance number 26-3390? Yes.

Ordinance of the City of Summit, County of Union, New Jersey, amending and supplementing Chapter 35 of the City Code entitled Development Regulations, Subsection 35-9.2, Prohibited Uses.

Okay, thank you. Council Member Lucera. Chris Fooley.

not all italians have the same last name thank you council president ordinance 26-3390 would add a prohibited use to the city code defining and prohibiting ai data centers the ordinance is based on the model ordinance recommended by the association of new jersey environmental commissions anjec as customized for summit circumstances by our dedicated city land use manager and our city solicitor It was reviewed by the planning board, which unanimously agreed that it was consistent with Summit's master plan. When I originally proposed this ordinance at the May 19th council meeting, I mentioned that the Bristol Myers Squibb property on Upper Morris Avenue is in the process of being sold, and that although I'm not aware of any current proposals to build a data center, I wanted to protect Summit from this undesirable development. AI data centers can use enormous amounts of energy and water in a time of drought, among other negative effects. While the state of New Jersey is tightening rules on data centers, the federal government is relaxing their rules right now. I believe we should move quickly in this fast evolving space. We should remember that the proposed ordinance is designed to work in tandem with the city's existing development regulations ordinance, the DRO, which provides additional interlocking protections. I learned in my training as planning board member that whatever is not explicitly permitted by the DRO is prohibited. On June 8th, I participated in a council listening session where several residents mentioned the data center ordinance and suggested ways to improve it. We have also heard from residents by email. I greatly appreciate this input from concerned citizens. In this divisive time, I have been glad to see that Summit has come together in our desire to keep out AI data centers. Our city staff has been gathering the feedback, and we will incorporate any changes to the ordinance to ensure it provides the protection we need. Please be aware that any changes to tonight's ordinance, beyond minor typographical changes, will need to be reviewed and cleared by the planning board once again. The planning board's next meeting is June 29th. Any revisions to the ordinance would then be considered by Council in July. We have a binary choice tonight. Approve the ordinance as is and potentially amend as needed in July or leave Summit unprotected. I move to open the hearing.

Second. Okay. And thank you. Members of the public, before we... receive your input. We do have a couple of city professionals we'd like to have explain things. Perhaps this will answer some of the questions you have and make this whole process move a little more smoothly. And so we'll begin with Augusto Delmaso, our land use manager, who's got a presentation on land use and how this fits into it. There we are.

All right. Hello, everyone. On that same note, I will say that many, many members of the community have been incredibly responsive, incisive, have reviewed every portion, provided tremendous feedback, and I hope that I can help settle some questions and avert fears and bring some light onto the ordinance, what it means and how it would be interpreted and how it impacts land uses now and in the future. So we're talking about prohibited uses, data centers. The structure of the ordinance itself is very simple. Section 35-9.2 prohibited uses, we're adding the new section E, AI data center facilities as defined herein are expressly prohibited in all zones. Now that in itself is simple language, but the context of applicability is complex. and to fit some of its needs with its existing land uses and prevent future developments that would negatively impact the community, we created the two definitions for AI data center and computer center. So why are the definitions important? These definitions serve to inform the zoning official and the Zoning Board of Adjustment on how they would consider the circumstances of a land use application, let's say a zoning permit, site plan application or a D1 use variance or variance applications in general within the city. Now, that interpretation primarily lies within the zoning officer's ability. and exercising his role. So keep in mind that while there are many complex caveats of the ordinance, the zoning office is keeping a keen eye on all sorts of land use developments. And now this definition, these definitions are effectively split into three parts of every statement that comprise them, which identify the structure and the principle use, the technology as we identify it today and its various forms, and the impact on utilities that it can have. Here's the breakdown of the definition on its identification. We're calling it an AI data center. That wording is to comprise everything that could fit into the definition. As it's written, AI data center is commonly known and is sometimes referred to as artificial intelligence data centers, internet data centers, or cloud data centers, importantly, and any and all functionally equivalent but differently named uses, structures, and facilities. Now, if they choose, so let's play out the example. If a developer were to try to name their development something else, this would give the zoning official the point to ask the question, well, is it really what they're saying what it is, or does it meet our definition? And that is incredibly important for interpretation of land uses and applications. So we're identifying, the first part, the structure and the use. And the language states, any building, structure, facility, or connected facilities where the principal use is the training, developing, storing, deploying, and other such uses for AI models at scale for offsite users. Such as, but not limited to. So what is this statement doing? This statement is applying a broad range of uses for AI workload, saying that it must be the principal use of the structure. It's identifying the principal use of the structure. And it's furthering that by saying included but not limited to. When we're identifying the technology, AI, and its models as they are presently understood, it's going to help the public, future zoning officials, and future zoning board members be able to look back at this point in time and compare, because we don't know what the technology will be in the future. So we are at this current point for comparison, and we are capturing the technology and its principal use. large language models to extend, neural networks, machine learning, and any other forms or categories of types of information systems which transmit process data from and to a variety of purposes. And these purposes capture or try to capture some examples of what an AI workload would involve. And that workload, the technology, the circumstances of the use of that structure fit together. And so by identifying the tech, we can set parameters for how that interpretation in the future will protect against these kinds of developments. Okay. Then we're identifying also impacts. So keep in mind, we've done structure and principle use. We've identified the technology to the best of our ability. And now the impacts. And this is something that a lot of people are concerned about. But I hope to demystify a little bit. when we have the identification of the impacts, a use that meets the criteria stated herein and generates a total peak power load in excess of 20 megawatts or greater, or has a measurable and distinct impact on water utility consumption compared to other aggregate land uses, shall be considered an AI data center. Now, this statement is establishing the baseline for 20 megawatts or a measurable and distinct impact on water utility consumption because there's a relationship on how those things affect or are affected by present day data centers. So if a data center were to generate 20 megawatts or more or have a measurable impact on water utility, they would be automatically considered an AI data center per this ordinance. So you're probably asking, wait, what about everything else below 20 megawatts? This is where the sum of the three factors I mentioned, the structure in use, the technology, and the impacts come together. So fundamentally, if any proposed land use were to fit these three points in summary, It is prohibited, according to the ordinance, because that land use could be categorized as an AI data center. So if its principal use is training, developing, deploying, storing, or various categories of artificial intelligence systems that send or receive data, that's point one. If it meets at least one of the criteria I just mentioned and others in the definition and produces greater than 20 megawatts of peak power load, it's an AI data center. If it meets at least one criterion and has water consumption that exceeds other land uses, it's worded more complexly. It says in comparison to aggregated land uses. for water consumption. If it meets any one of these points, if a zoning official or a zoning board were to look at the application and compare the contents and say well it does meet these criteria stated herein, it would be a prohibited use. And that would be easy to identify. And so a great example came up. Someone mentioned that there is new technology out there for these kind of micro data centers. where you take about a generator-sized unit and people would hypothetically hook it up to their home's electrical and they would be subsidized for that electrical connection by the AI company. If we were to take that, and we're not envisioning a hyperscale facility, if we looked at point number one, the principal use of that structure, that structure we would treat in the same fashion such as an air conditioning unit or a generator, those being the most fitting, That would be the principal use of that structure, and it would be prohibited. So the scale in this context doesn't matter. These three catches consider all of the possible circumstances for what the city would call an AI data center. Here we go. And why is that important? Because there is a direct causal relationship of the technology today to energy and water utility consumption. Data centers right now are massive. They consume a lot of power. They need a lot of power. They consume a lot of water. And you must meet those things. If we're looking at the current circumstances, if anyone tried to put an AI data center in Summit, which I do not believe they would, they would need to meet that. They need a significant usable land area, superfluous electrical energy generation, and access to water infrastructure to meet that AI data center. However, if I were to tell you the things Summit does not have is significant usable land area, superfluous electrical energy generation, or access to water and infrastructure to meet AI data center demands. And I'm making this argument on the part where If we took anecdotal looks at other data center facilities across the United States, and as many people are referring to the one in Kenilworth and the many fears around that, To put it simply, it would not make sense to place it in a community like Summit. The data centers that we're seeing in New Jersey, for example, they're trying to locate them in towns that have a very large agricultural zone district because they have that open land. And there's such little home density and power generation density located there that that they're justifying adding the power load to those regions as opposed to more densely populated cities. Or at least that's what we've seen. But understanding that causal relationship, power, water, land area, is it probable in Summit? I do not believe so. We know what an AI data center isn't, and this statement is tossed into the definition, but it's an important one. In land use, especially dealing with board applications, permits, and the various types of code enforcement, applicants love to try to claim they're doing one thing and then do another. This is included here to say If we're playing out the hypothetical example, a developer comes in and says, oh, I'm going to build a warehouse in this permitted zone, but it were to be identified in any area of that warehouse that they meet one of the criteria of the ordinance, the city would just, the zoning officer would just recategorize that within the AI data center definition, therefore banning it, right? So we know it is not a warehouse. Continuing, now this raises the question for the second definition, what about computer centers? Why did we create the definition? It currently exists in the PROD and PROD2 sections of the DRO as an undefined term. Now, having an undefined term creates a lot of complexity for a zoning ordinance, and it is important that we do define it with a land use that is consistent to what presently exists within the City of Summit and in those zones. And so as it's written, as it was written back then, there likely wasn't a vision, an understanding or acknowledgement that AI data centers or data centers would become what they are today. So reasonably, as you know, as a... as a member of the zoning division, I would imagine that that understanding simply didn't exist. So they wouldn't have thought to think about it. I don't think any of us would have imagined that AI tools and the circumstances of creating it would have reached this point today. So, the proposed definition for computer center is made to fit what exists and maintain the status quo of those two zones currently in the city. And this definition helps protect from the loophole, like the warehouse example I just mentioned. If we had left computer center an undefined term and didn't capture what currently existed, a savvy developer could have tried to put a data center there, call it a computer center, and say they're entitled to it. But we are avoiding that by including this in the ordinance. So further protected from that egregious use. As I just mentioned, computer center, we're identifying the structure and the use, a facility or a portion of a facility that's used primarily for office, research, administrative, educational, or institutional, or business support computing activities. So then you're thinking about the character. Okay, so it's used primarily as an office. It's used primarily as a medical institution. It's used primarily as an educational institution. There is a financial industry there. And it just so happens to be that in that primary use, principal use, there are computer rooms, information technology support rooms, network rooms, software development spaces, et cetera. And those spaces serve the principal use in an accessory function, and they are subordinate to the principal use. So if I had to give an example, and I think it's easiest to use the present one, if we have medical research going on in the PROD and PROD2 zone, If there is a server room type facility there that is used for on-site purposes that helps this primary use accomplish its function and it's not transmitted out into the internet and the ether, that would fit the description of computer center. So it would remain permitted and that is the status quo as of now. So, let's talk about the character. The computer center must be accessory or subordinate to the permitted principal use, like I mentioned. It has to be office, administrative, institutional, research-oriented, permitted principal use. Now, Here's part of the character. It must be occupied and staffed consistently with that same use. So when we're talking about it, you imagine a data center at scale. These are massive rows of high density computing technology that are not staffed, that serve purely transmission purposes, AI workload processing purposes, and do not have a direct relationship with the people who work there on that principally permitted use. The computer center must have that. And this is where the tie-in to the AI data center comes in. A computer center shall not be primarily designed or operated for the large scale housing of servers, cryptocurrency mining equipment, AI computing equipment, cloud computing infrastructure, collocation equipment, or other high density computing systems for offsite users. This is where there's a connection to the AI data center definition in terms of the technology and its use. If someone were to claim that a computer center is meeting this category of the shall not be interpretation, It could be recategorized. It could be a violation. And it would be prohibited under the ordinance and called an AI data center. So we're protected on multiple fronts via both definitions, from closing loopholes on computer center and instituting those three points from the AI data center definition. Is the city currently protected from all AI data centers in terms of the code? I would argue that yes. Actually, as it stands before the institution of this proposed ordinance, the development regulations ordinance section 35-9.2 prohibited uses A, where a use is not specifically permitted in a zone district, it is prohibited. What that means is if a development application came in for some kind of AI data center and so on and so forth, it is already a prohibited use. They would have to file for de-variance relief and go to the zoning board and successfully complete the onslaught of public comment at the zoning board. But that would be a part of the process. And I also want to demystify one thing. There's a misconception that In passing ordinances like this across the state, this would prohibit someone from applying for a D1 use variance. These ordinances, regardless of where we are, they don't prohibit a developer from applying for a variance. They just state specifically that the ordinance recognizes we do not want this use permitted. So that's an important distinction. And from that, the city's protected. So, if it's already prohibited, why are we doing this? Precisely for this exercise now, this ordinance was crafted with our present-day understanding of how the technology applies. our present understanding of the existing land use structures and facilities and application in Summit and creating this definition today, regardless of whether it is amended or made more, let's say, strenuous in the future, it's important because it's going to inform the generations, the future generations of zoning officials, if they're not replaced by AI, and zoning board members of the same. So I hope you have enjoyed listening to my presentation. I put a lot of effort into it, and there's always a line of communication with the land use division. Feel free to call if you have questions, concerns. A lot of these things came up from the comments that were provided by members of the public and members of council. So thank you, everyone. I hope that was helpful. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Delmaso. Thank you. And I'm going to ask our city solicitor to provide her advice on the question of recusal.

Yes, there was a question about whether one of the council members should recuse themselves from participation in the public hearing on this ordinance. And under the New Jersey local government ethics law, determinations regarding conflicts of interest are inherently personal to the individual and very fact sensitive. Any potential conflict depends entirely on that specific individual's circumstances and the matter before the exact matter before the governing body. Each situation is evaluated on a strict case by case basis to ensure legal compliance and maintain your trust. Based on the facts presented regarding a potential conflict here, my office has determined that there is no conflict of interest under the local government ethics law that would require recusal in this instance. The proposed ordinance is a general piece of legislation that applies to all properties in the city. There's no direct or indirect financial interest being impacted, and there's no direct or indirect personal relationship involved, so we don't have any issue here.

Thank you very much. You've all been waiting so patiently. It's finally your turn. Because we have so many new faces, I just want to remind you of a couple of things. We do ask that you limit your comments to three minutes. And this is a comment part of the process. It's not a conversation. If you have questions, we typically gather them throughout the hearing and answer them at the end. If there is something that can be answered in a word or two, we may do that. But for the most part, if you have questions, we will address them at the end of the hearing. So with that, please kick us off. Thank you.

Hi, my name is Kelly Elko. I live on Waldron Avenue, 19-year Summit resident, and thank you for that information from Council, but I do have some comments about this specifically. I am speaking tonight regarding the proposed AI data center ordinance and the future of the former Bristol-Myers Squibb campus. I would like to respectfully request that Councilwoman La Saracena consider recusing herself from matters involving AI data center policy and any future deliberations specifically concerning the redevelopment of the SQUIB property. Let me be clear, I am not alleging any wrongdoing, ethical violation or improper conduct by Councilwoman La Saracena. However, public trust in government depends not only on the absence of actual conflicts of interest, but also on avoiding circumstances that may create the appearance of a conflict or raise questions in the minds of residents. Residents are aware that CoreWeave has become one of the nation's largest AI infrastructure companies and a major participant in the rapidly growing AI data center industry. Residents are also aware that Ms. La Saracena's husband serves in senior leadership at CoreWeave and is responsible for helping shape the company's strategy, growth, and position within the AI infrastructure market. At the same time, Summit is considering an ordinance specifically directed at AI data centers, while the future of one of the largest redevelopment opportunities in the city's history, the former SWIB campus, remains uncertain. Also, CoreWeave previously partnered with developers at the former Merck campus in Kenilworth to create a major AI infrastructure project. That project has become a prominent example of how former pharmaceutical campuses can be transformed into AI data centers. I have no idea if CoreWeave is pursuing the Bristol-Myers Squibb property, and I'm not suggesting that Ms. La Saracena has acted improperly, but my concern is one of public confidence, which has eroded over the years, as we all know. When decisions involve an industry in which a close family member holds a senior executive role, reasonable people may question whether those decisions are entirely free from outside influence, even when no such influence exists. For that reason, I believe recusal would both protect Councilwoman La Saracena and the City of Summit from unnecessary controversy. Recusal would allow the public to have complete confidence that decisions regarding AI data center policy and the future of the SWIB property are being made without even the appearance of a potential conflict. I respectfully ask Councilwoman La Saracena to consider whether recusal would be appropriate in order to preserve that trust. Thank you. And I also just want to say that I emailed all of you with my opposition to the data center and with my suggestions on how we could rewrite it, and only Ms. Toth replied to me. So I thank you for that. But if the others could have given me the same consideration, I would have really appreciated that.

Thank you for your comments.

Hello, Andrew Miniger, Edgar Street and Summit. One second. Sorry, is this counting against my time? I'm cleaning glasses really quickly.

No, not at all.

Five bucks Home Depot, by the way, Chief. Okay, so thank you for banning data centers, counsel. You will likely hear, and you have heard already, multiple requests about this ordinance. You're probably going to hear many to amend this ordinance tonight, make it more clear that AI data centers are being banned in Summit. Since January, when control of this council changed hands, I have seen this council listen to residents through many different channels, weekly office hours, emails, phone calls, social media, impromptu sidewalk conversations while you were tending to your gardens, Michelle. And you have taken resident concerns very seriously, like champions. In fact, I know, I happen to know that this ordinance being on the agenda today is the result of you listening very carefully. You heard the urgency from residents on this topic, and you fast-tracked the ordinance so that there was a hearing on it tonight. So thank you. You are balancing the needs of many different people from many different viewpoints, and that is commendable. On the topic of balancing, you're probably going to hear the request to table this ordinance tonight, to not vote on it tonight. Dan, excuse me, Councilmember Christopher Foley, I was glad to hear what you said about that when you started it. In my opinion, it is better to first pass this ban on AI data centers before making any changes for many reasons, including that the planning board already voted, like you mentioned, that it is consistent with the master plan. But also because of the good work I have seen from this council so far this year, you will listen to this community And if needed, you will make this AI data center ban even better in the weeks to come. We trust you to do that. Thank you. Thank you.

Hi, good evening. Good evening. Can I start? Yeah, go right ahead. So my name is John Hung. I live at a 223 Kent Place Boulevard. I work in AI infrastructure for one of the tech companies that build and train today's largest AI models. So because these data centers are highly restricted and tightly secured, very few people ever see the inside of them. I'm one of them, and because through my work, I have been granted access to visit these sites multiple times. I know firsthand how this infrastructure operates, and I also happen to live right behind BMS. I'm here to speak tonight because this ordinance, I'm telling you that it is not robust enough and we need to reconsider this. So while I support the goal of keeping data centers out of summit, this ordinance relies on overly simplistic criteria that creates dangerous loopholes. We shouldn't be trying to regulate this with arbitrary numbers or engineering triggers. We need a complete, more robust ban on this. So I know the ordinance tries to be smart by using some oral logic to say we ban the facility if it hits either a 20 megawatt cap, a high water consumption trigger, or the need for some custom electrical substation. But as an AI infrastructure expert, I can tell you that modern tech easily bypasses all of these safeguards. First, the industry has shifted rapidly to closed-loop liquid cooling. Because the fluid is sealed inside a closed loop, the facility consumes zero municipal water. This completely bypasses your water trigger. But the reality is that in anyone's backyard close to these data centers, the intense heat still needs to go somewhere and get rejected into the environment, and they can only rely on high-powered external radiator fans to do that. So a developer can technically build a 19-megawatt zero-water facility that is perfectly legal under your ordinance, but the 24-7 low-frequency humming and noise of these fans will be in our backyards. Second, developers, this is a common practice in the industry, routinely use what we call a warehouse pivot. Because data centers are just concrete shells, a developer can apply for permitted use, like a fulfillment warehouse. Once they're built, they can quietly fill the interior with ultra-dense next generation server racks and still satisfy your criteria. The gamble they're making here is that our city does not have the technical resources to audit and understand the interior layout of whether this is really training AI or serving it. And I will tell you, that regards to the computer center comment, I've been to these places. They have business support functions. We even have cooking staff serving free food to engineers there. These are fully staffed facilities that act as offices as well. And so the last thing I want to say is that we are building this ordinance based on current understanding, but the industry is highly unpredictable. Within just a span of two years, the tech sector had gone from traditional structures to having makeshift tents to power data centers on land. And now we're talking about building data centers in space. So because of the intense flexibility and creativity, we need to really assess this and not rush through this.

Yeah, it appears that you've prepared this in writing. If you could share it in writing with us, we'd much appreciate that.

Is that legal? There is a recording device added. Was that legal?

It's a public meeting. I don't believe there's any prohibition.

Okay. Yes. Thank you.

Hello, council members, mayor. So my name is Lori Wade. I'm actually a resident of Union at 560 Malcolm Road. But as a resident of Union County, I wanted to be here to support this ban on AI data centers. So I'm actually here representing the nonprofit, the Union County Residents Alliance Coalition. So we're very passionate about preserving the future of Union County and not having these AI data centers here. We can talk ad nauseum about what they do, why they're harmful, what they could do to the environment, our health. The gentleman before me kind of said half the stuff I was going to say. But I wanted to first... Focus on your transparency. So thank you so much for your FAQ that was online For making it so publicized look at all these people here who your residents knew that this was happening we were here we were able people of Union County were here to voice our concerns and ask questions and You know that transparency as leaders of the community. It's really something that we appreciate and You guys bear responsibility to the residents to notify us of this before it happens, the ordinances, and not to have things happen that don't seem like it's an AI data center. As the gentleman just said, building something that then gets converted into one. So CoreWeave, for example, they're building an AI data center in Kenilworth. It's right across the street, literally right across the street from Union. But Union didn't, you know, there was no talking there. Also, they have plans for two more AI data centers. So the one that's got the approval is being built right now. But they're now trying to approve two more. And we don't feel there's the transparency with the Kenilworth Town Council. So I really want to thank you and Summit. You guys really did a service to the community here in Union County. And I also appreciate the delineation between a data set AI data center and a computer center and We also at the coalition could use your help in getting the information out to the summit residents as residents of Union County That this is happening all over the county. There's lots of talk Union just passed an ordinance to ban AI data centers at their last council meeting and we We also recognize that big tech wants New Jersey to be top five in AI infrastructure. There's tens of pressure on townships and counties. There's a lot of pressure to acquiesce to this construction of these data centers within your borders. And the pressure from big tech, they have tons of money, tons of power, tons of influence. So we appreciate putting the residents first. And we want to show gratitude to the council for hearing us out, prioritizing the health of the people and the environment in Union County and all across our beautiful Garden State. We're the Garden State for a reason, so we want to preserve the environment. And this may feel like a small thing, but it has a ripple effect. So, Ms. Mayor, at the coalition, we'd love if you shared this rationale for the event with the New Jersey mayor's meeting. Hopefully you can encourage other towns to follow suit. in putting affordability and health above big tech and profits. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, Delia Hamlet. Thank you, Irene Loeschert, for letting me borrow your readers tonight. Good evening. I want to speak directly. I'm going to speak quickly. I know we only have three minutes, which I understand. I want to speak directly to the misconception that this ordinance is safe because it only applies above a 90 megawatt threshold. Everyone is being guided by the size of the megawatts, but that is not the only issue residents experience on the ground. For the last three years, I've been boots on the ground with the residents down near the BMS facility multiple times over the years. I was there again last night with the neighbors. This is not theoretical to them. The data center component there is roughly 11,000 square feet. You can ask the residents up and down the street. There is a constant mechanical hum. It's simply a fact. There are backup alarms, which we recently got solved over the last year. There is noise that residents are living with every day. And that is the white elephant in this room. The ordinance as written largely ignores the very reason many neighbors are here tonight that know nothing about megawatts. Residents are not here because they are studying megawatt thresholds. They are here because they are living with constant humming, alarms, mechanical equipment, and industrial noise that impacts a residential area. I also want to clarify the role of the planning board. The planning board's role that I sit on as the vice chair was not to rewrite the ordinance. The question before the planning board was whether or not the ordinance was consistent or not inconsistent with the master plan. That is a very different question from whether or not the ordinance is strong enough, clear enough, or protective enough for the residents. Councilmember Chris LaFollie sits on me with that board and he would be able to clarify that for you as well. And respectfully, this is the job of local government, not just to look at a definition on a slide, but to go out, visit with the residents, stand on the street, and hear what they are experiencing from an approximately 11,000 square foot facility. If neighbors are already dealing with this level of noise from that facility, then why should we not pretend that a megawatt threshold alone protects them from a larger or repurposed data center use? That is exactly why the 20 megawatt threshold concerns me. I got a minute left. Noise does not magically become acceptable at 19 megawatts just because an ordinance starts at 20. The noise comes from the equipment, the cooling systems, the chillers, the fans, the generators, the transformers, truck activity, just as our friend John here just said. Sounds like we should put him on a committee. The question is simple. Do we really believe 19 megawatt data would be quiet, but a 20 megawatt data center would be not? Of course not. And to the slide that said, wait, what? What about everything below 20 megawatts? Exactly. That's the question. The city's position is that an AI data center below 20 megawatts are already prohibited because the principal use language, the 20 megawatt threshold is not necessary. It should come out. Leaving that number in the ordinance creates confusion, tells the residents one thing, but gives a developer another thing to argue. It gives future applicants, attorneys, and boards a number of things to fight over. If the intent is a true ban then say that. Ban the use. Thank you.

Hello, Elliot Fishman, 34 Webster Avenue. I'm one of the residents in the neighborhood behind BMS, and I'm one of the 200 residents who signed the petition, and one of the 40 residents who teamed up with former Mayor Nora Radist and Delia Hamlet to fight the noise at BMS. So I'm standing at this lectern to underscore how grave and how serious noise from BMS presently is. And to amplify what Telya just said, that is the white elephant in the room here. Now, BMS may consume 3 or 4 megawatts. They're talking about 19 or 20. Already the noise is unbearably bad in that neighborhood. Just as a matter of history, well, you may be aware that Summit has a noise ordinance on the books where 65 decibels after 7 p.m. is prohibited. That has never been enforced except one time. That was against BMS when former Mayor Radist contracted the county district attorney to sue BMS. Now, that lawsuit was disposed, but we actually had the Board of Health out with noise meters and a county attorney writing complaints against BMS. Now you're proposing something which is potentially five times that. That would be very disappointing to the whole neighborhood. Thank you.

Thank you.

My name is Eric Moberg. Thank you, Mayor, Council President, Council. I am strongly in support of the most stringent language written into the AI data center ban. Councilman Boyer has been especially focused on protecting the residents of Summit and everyone who visits Summit and does business in Summit. Now, for the people who are at home watching on TV or on YouTube, The traditional AI data center, it has nothing to do with a computer room or speeding your orders from Chewy or getting your Amazon orders there any faster. It can also be noted as a surveillance center. It is tying together all of the flock cameras. That is the reason for the massive amount of computing power that is needed. That is why it needs to use so much water. Now, for sake of comparison, let's say our current ability to generate power is a postage stamp. A traditional A computer room is insignificant, but an AI data center would be equivalent to a large ballroom table or a massive dining room table. Where is that power coming from? What are you doing with all the heat? And as far as the hum, it never, ever stops. You will hear it 24-7, 365, including Thanksgiving and Christmas and New Year's and Easter, and it won't stop. I urge the council to strike all the megawatt language, make it very clear, very plain, and ban them all.

Good evening. My name is Sheila Kaushik, and I live on 255 Camp Place Boulevard. I will share my time with my son, Rohan. We'll also have a few comments. I just have a few very quick comments. It's my first time coming before this council and first time speaking on any matters regarding the City of Summit. But this felt like a very important one. And I certainly echo, I think, every single comment made by the other residents. I'm not an expert in the field. I appreciate John, Mr. Hung and his comments about the weaknesses in the language that's written. And I also appreciate the, you know, what appears to be kind of the same intention to ban AI data centers, but I don't think it takes an expert to see a lot of the gaps and the misses in the language and how it can be more robust. And turn it over to my son.

Could you adjust the microphone?

My name is Rohan Kaushik. I think we should stop the data centers because...

Speak into the microphone, honey.

I think we should stop the data centers because it uses a lot of water, and maybe we could use the water for something else. There's also the environmental concerns. It might destroy a lot of the environment, and the noise will be very annoying, like a lot.

Thank you very much.

Good evening. My name is Lucille Callahan. I live at 131 Passaic Avenue for 37 years, backed up to the property that we're discussing. And it is noisy. And every new purchaser of that land has been worse and worse and worse over the decades. And some of the things that I noticed tonight, we were hearing that it's really unlikely the probability of a data center coming to Summit anyway isn't going to happen. Why rely on that? Just say no to all of them, period, regardless of size. I don't know the difference between over 20 and under 20 in terms of what those fans are going to sound like, but it's not going to be good. I also want to know, do we have studies that tell us what's happened in other markets where these have gone in to property values? right within the ring, around the data centers, and the mile out, and the two miles out, and the three miles out. What about businesses? If property values are going down, the viability of the town goes down, how many businesses close? What about the income for the business owners? How many businesses closed? And what about hearing, auditory? If we're going to be immersed with this god awful sound, are there studies on what happens to people's health? And they're hearing in the areas that this has happened. And I'm talking about like-to-like areas of Summit, New Jersey. How many are these across the country? Do we have any information? Has anyone looked into it? Have we had National Association of Realtors look at property values? What has dropped? What hasn't? Has it gone up maybe? Maybe it's a good thing. I don't know. But we need that information. So until we have that information, we need to restrict these data centers coming in and do it quickly and it needs to prohibit all regardless of the megawatts. Thank you.

Susan Bowen, 45 Waldron Avenue. I am a lifetime Summit resident, and one thing I know about all of us, there's a reason we live here. And the reason we live here is because we're really good at what we do. And so we get to have nice houses, and that's a great thing. And I've known very, very brilliant people here in Summit. My dad is one of them, went to Princeton. You know what really, really bright people do? They realize they're not experts. They find the right expert. Why haven't we found Mr. Hung? You guys are very good at what you do, but you don't know about this. You just don't, because it's not what you do for a living, right? And let me tell you two other things I saw. One of them is my other house is at Lake Hopatcong, and Lake Hopatcong has very fulsome rules about the noise ordinance, right? And yet, there are huge boats on Lake Hopatcong every day, that are way above the noise ordinance. You know why? It wasn't well drafted. And so what happens is you say, well, there's a problem with this boat. And they say, well, we don't have a way to test it. And the way we test it is when the boat is idling at the dock. That's not when the boat is loud. That's why you need experts to say, in five years this isn't about water, but it is about something else. I don't know, but you guys don't either. Trust the real experts. Remember why you're here. Remember what you do when you have a complicated problem. You go to an expert. You go to not necessarily a smart person, although you really want a smart person, but you want an expert. Why isn't there anything in this about noise? Is that our problem? Is that going to be our problem in five years? Probably. So why aren't we thinking about it? The other thing I think, and I see you have 41 seconds. Remember my thing about the boats that they go back on. The only way you're going to find out about water usage is after this is built. And you know what? You're not a water utility, right? You don't have the ability to audit how many gallons of water are going to be used. So why does it matter? Why aren't you waiting until you understand? You talk to somebody like Mr. Hung. You ask Mr. Hung, who's the best guy who knows about that? And you talk to that guy. That guy may not know how to cook a turkey. He might be very smart, right? You wouldn't trust him to cook a turkey, but you would trust him to talk about data centers. And that's what you're not doing. So that's what I think. Thank you.

Good evening. Don Nelson, 20 Plain Street, lifelong resident of Summit. I know you guys are trying your best. I know you really are. But I looked at a flyer this afternoon that talks about the sale of 88 Morris Avenue. On the flyer, it says data center as one of the uses. So though we may believe it's not going to happen here, if it's being advertised, there's a possibility it's going to happen. I know you're trying your best. And just to reinforce the noise coming off of Bristol-Myers Squibb, I was in someone's backyard on Kent Place the other day, I believe it was 2-11, and I was shocked by the noise. I was just back there for some other business I was conducting, and I was really shocked by the noise. So, while we're trying to do our best, we really do need to recruit experts. I'm not an expert. Believe me, I own megawatts, kilowatts, whatever. Change the number. Make it so that a five-year-old you can explain it to a five-year-old. That they know, no means no, we all have kids, most of us have kids, we say no, they push the boundaries, we say no, they push the boundaries, we give in. You have to say no. It's pretty simple. Your number one job, forget budgets, all your budgets do dictate how you protect Summit. Your number one job is to protect the Citizens Summit. whether red, blue, purple, yellow, green, whatever the case may be, that's your number one job. You all ran about how much you love Summit. I love Summit. Show that you do it. Show that you really love Summit. Ban data centers with experts so that 20 years from now, when that little postage stamp that the guy was talking about doesn't become a problem for us. I guarantee you most of you won't even be in town in 20 years. I hope to be. I've been here all my life. Don't screw it up. We're going to live with your decisions for a really long time. Your number one job is to protect us. who you said you would do when you ran for council. Please do so. Make it so it's easy to understand when a developer comes in and says, I want to do this, whether it's a data center or a high-rise. I know affordable housing is a whole different animal, but we have to protect what Summit's about, and we're slowly, slowly losing what Summit's about. And this is your opportunity. Clean slate. Put the future in your hands. Write it so it can't be screwed with. Does that make sense? Thank you very much.

Hi, my name is Irene Loschert, 14 Lenox Road. My son, who recently graduated from college, is back and living in town and was asking where I was going tonight. So I gave him a brief overview of why I was going, who's on council, who believes what, where they stand. And he did a quick search about AI data centers, and he said, oh, 19 megawatts, I mean, says that could be as big as a Walmart super center, which is not really small. And he said, and I said, well, you know, there are these people who are okay with the ordinance, the way it's written. And then there are two people on the council who are completely are, you know, are for a complete ban of AI data centers. And he said, shouldn't everyone on the council be against that? And I said, yeah, you would think that everyone on the council would want to ban any sort of AI data center. The other thing I wanted to ask was that Council President Toth had said, made it seem that we should pass this ordinance, or you should pass this ordinance, and that we can amend it down the line pretty easily and finesse it. My question is, why not go for the outright ban to begin with? and then finesse it. That way there's no question, right? There's no loopholes to get through. If you ban it outright and then you feel like you need to work it a little bit and rewrite it and see maybe it's a little too restrictive because, I don't know, a school needs a computer center or something like that, you know, you can work backwards. That's all I wanted to say. I am strongly against the ordinance as it stands right now.

Christine Ertle, 12 Harvey Drive. Last name is E-R-T-L-E. I want to thank the prior residents for the excellent points that they've raised and I ask you to seriously consider the points that they've raised. I want to supplement their remarks by saying that one of the things that I've heard on the news on TV is that New Jersey is already one of the leading states in AI centers. So when I heard that fact or that comment on the TV, I was concerned about that. The other thing is that the federal EPA is now promoting that the AI center builders go to closed water loop systems for cooling so that they can avoid the issues with the water supply. So that's another example of how the wording that's in the ordinance needs to be factor in the fact that the water supply isn't necessarily going to be an issue if they go to this new method. The other thing that they're promoting is that they're promoting building their own energy center on the site, which I'm sure you've heard about because that's kind of gotten a lot of publicity, so that they don't have to use energy off the grid. So that's another thing that talking about the heavy use of the energy isn't necessarily going to be an issue if they have their own energy source. The other thing that I had a concern about was the comment that was made. The presentation was excellent, by the way, but I had a concern about the comment that there's no large property available. I'm sure that Kenilworth thought the same thing because they didn't expect Merck to sell their property to someone who was going to build an AI center. And we have two large Bristol Myers Squibb properties in town. I happen to live near one of them. So I don't think they have any thought of selling it at the moment. You just never know, because everyone knew Merck was a really big, good place to work in Kenilworth, and now it's not. The other thing is that... I wanted to raise was that the I am very concerned about the noise pollution and I'm concerned because it's not really being mentioned in the presentation or in the ordinance from what I can tell and air pollution you don't hear people talking about air pollution too much but it's my understanding that that's a factor as well in addition to the noise pollution from the decibel level and the fact that there's also this other kind of noise pollution called tonal noise, which we don't even know it's out there because we can't process it ourselves. So that's another type of... Thank you for your comments.

Good evening, Council. Thank you very much for having me. My name is Tom Sokol, 227 Kent Place Boulevard. I've been in Summit for about six years. I just want to say thank you very much for raising this ordinance, making sure that we are banning AI data centers. This is an incredibly important thing to get done and get done right. I have a background in construction. I've built the air conditioning systems for data centers. I know firsthand how loud they are. Even for smaller centers, when I was working with them years ago, they are incredibly loud, incredibly hot. No one works in them, it doesn't provide employment opportunities, it doesn't contribute to the community, offers very little except for lots of noise, lots of heat, lots of pollution, rising electricity costs, tons of negative consequences, very few benefits for the community. Being right behind the BMS property right now, I could see their loading docks when the leaves fall in the fall. It's incredibly loud already. There's plenty of comments already about the noise pollution and how that's not really addressed by the current ordinance. That is already a big problem, and you're talking about a 20 megawatt facility as per the wording. Imagine your air conditioning unit in your house is about one kilowatt. Think 20,000 times bigger than that. freight trains size condensing units outside pouring sound and pouring heat out into the atmosphere so i do want to make sure that we have the right people looking at the ordinance making sure that we have the right wording These companies are big. They have a lot of lawyers. They are very creative in finding loopholes through. We need to make sure that this ordinance is bulletproof now and into the future because no one wants to see this in their property and see the noise and the heat get even worse. So thank you very much.

Thank you for your time, man.

I'll be brief, as I did not prepare anything, but at your listening session last week, I asked the members that were present... I'm sorry, ma'am, if you could just... I'm sorry. Mary Jo DiFonzo, 12 Washington Avenue. At your listening session last week, I requested that any research that you guys needed to do was done thoroughly and extensively. And when I hear all these people coming up and rattling all this stuff off, I didn't even know... You haven't done your job. Did you know that the Nashville Zoo is fighting this very same thing? They're supposed to put data centers right next to it. And so if it's going to affect the animals, how is it going to affect us? Can anybody answer that? No. So, Dan's right. I've lived here for 50 years of my 62 years. You gotta get this right. I don't wanna leave. My husband wants to go to Florida. I don't wanna go. This is where I grew up. This is where my family owns property. But if you guys can't get this right, I'm outta here. So, do your job and get it right. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Aaron Cohen. I live at 225 Kent Place Boulevard with my six-month-old daughter and my wife, Ashley, directly bordering the Bristol-Myers Squibb campus on Upper Morse Avenue. I'm one of the residents who will be most directly impacted by whatever happens to that property, and that's why I'm here tonight. I support the intent of Ordinance 26-3390, but this council is right to act, and I'm grateful it's moving. But I'm asking you to not pass this ordinance as written because the 20 megawatt threshold creates a loophole large enough to drive a data center through. 20 megawatts is not a small server room. It's a mid-sized commercial data center, potentially 50 to 150,000 square feet, running 24 hours a day, 365 days a year with industrial cooling systems and backup generators. My neighbors and I already know what it sounds like to live next to a heavy industrial equipment on that campus. a data center would be significantly worse. More importantly, that threshold doesn't account for what we've watched happen 10 miles away in Kenilworth. CoreWeave entered that community describing a 40 megawatt facility. It is now a 250 megawatt, $1.8 billion project under active construction. And most residents did not know it was happening until it was too late to stop it. The BMS campus is 88 acres. Nothing in this ordinance prevents a developer from subdividing that property and filing multiple sub-20 megawatt applications, each technically compliant, collectively catastrophic. I'm suggesting for three specific changes to this ordinance. First, remove the megawatt threshold entirely and define the prohibited use by purpose. Any facility whose primary function is housing servers for AI compute, cloud infrastructure, or data storage regardless of power draw. Second, add campus-wide aggregate language so the limit cannot be gained parcel by parcel. Third, explicitly state that this prohibition survives any future redevelopment designated for the PMS campus, because under New Jersey law, a redevelopment plan can override a zoning ordinance, and that is exactly the mechanism a developer will use. This ordinance is a good start, but a weak ordinance passed now is harder to fix tomorrow. Please send it back for tighter language. The residents of Kent Place Boulevard are counting on you to get this right.

Hi. My name is Tim Smith. I live at 247A Kent Place Boulevard. And I want to applaud you for taking up this issue. It's a very important one. So thank you for taking it forward. I am affected also by the noise coming from BMS. I've been to this chamber before to talk about reverse alarms. We made some progress with the white noise reverse alarms. They were going off at 3 in the morning and keeping me and all my kids awake. So I applaud you for making sure that the contractors at that campus are actually using noise alarms that are below the level. But what I will say is the noise ordinance in Summit and broader New Jersey of 50 decibels overnight is too loud and it doesn't take into account the low wave frequency. So if you go outside on my back porch, you will hear the hum like a freeway from the BMS condenser units. That's just what's pre-existing there. I would encourage the council to take up stricter noise ordinances as part of this plan. It's the noise that's the core issue for us where we live at our house and there's no mention of any sort of noise pollution that is affecting the property today or what it could be in the future. There are noted health benefits for a low hum on children, on sleep. There's a lot of, I encourage you to look up the, some of the issues with a low drone hum coming from a campus like this. For me, that's the core issue with the data center and with the current condenser units on the site. So thank you for your attention to this. I appreciate all the work that you've done in the past, and I hope you'll continue it into the future. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Marisol Rodriguez and I live on 27 Harvey Drive and I thank you for your service. I echo our fellow residents and I've noted that no one is for data centers. We are all against them. And I also felt that the three points about prohibiting data centers, I was sad to see that it didn't mention anything about noise, which has been a great concern. And now I'm learning about the great heat that these data centers produce, and that would be a terrible impact on the environment. So I respectfully ask you to please do What you've been voted into office for and that is to protect Summit and its residents. Thank you

On Milton Avenue. The last time I spoke at a meeting in Summit, I've lived here for 30 years, worked in the town, was when BSW Broad Street West was going on and we almost went down the wrong road and it was stopped after it went through. And if you learn from history, that's something that really got me involved in politics. I'm a registered democratic, democrat, but this is not political. Trust is errant. Perceptions are perceptions. I think somebody should recuse themselves. And last point, because I don't want to go over three minutes, is noise. The only noise we should have in Summit is the ambulances going up and down Broad Street, saving people's lives, and the 4th of July fireworks. Thank you.

Do we have any more comments from members of the public?

My name is Laura Soden, 48 Madison Avenue, Summit. I don't have any planned speech, but in listening to everybody, I echo everything that they've said. Also, not to brag or complain, but I'm 84. I hope to die in my house. My mother died in my house. And if this gets passed, and if these little... I know BMS is going to stay here for a while. I have contact with one of the people over there because my property borderlines the road. Excuse me, the road. right next to BMS. I could reach over and shake their hand. And I'm told that they are, it's up for sale, they're keeping five buildings, and they're going to lease out some of the other buildings. And do you know, and I'm not asking you really, hypothetically, do you know what they're going to put in those buildings? Will your ordinance cover what's going to go into those buildings? So that's one of my fears. And I also say that if it's like what they've talked about here, I have to move. I could not. I lived through the demolition of when Celgene took all those buildings down. It was horrible. And I'm just really concerned about what will happen in this next trip. So thank you.

Good evening. Robert Osborne, 55 Madison Avenue, 30-year resident there. I've seen this property change hands three or four times. And up until recently, the last three or four years, the noise has become unbearable. The only thing I ask that you please consider the residents, when you go home tonight, put your head on your pillow, enjoy the silence because we don't have it. And it's really, it's not a good thing. I appreciate your consideration for all the neighbors. I speak on behalf of them. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello. My name is Zachary Lakin. I live at 69 Madison Ave. So I am Bob's neighbor. And first of all, I'd just like to reiterate what everyone here has said. It doesn't seem like there is any community approval or support for these data centers. We've heard a lot of reasons why they shouldn't be built from all different generations, all different sides of the spectrum. However, we have not heard very many benefits, what they will bring our community. And I'd like to talk from the perspective of a new parent. I have a three year old and we're expecting another son in November. I moved to Summit from Short Hills for the community. And I know plenty of others from my son's daycare as well as our neighbors. who all have the same sentiment that we're here for ourselves to raise our kids, to be the community that we want to be. And it doesn't seem like these types of data centers will be conducive to that quality of life. And I think we can all agree quality of life is a big part of the reason we're here. Also, I appreciate the council on both sides of remember and I also think that avoiding the appearance of impropriety on in any case is important. And that's to gain and to continue and contain the trust of the members of town. So I would just like to reiterate what everyone here seems to think is that we really should be having some stronger language on how to really put down a firm ban for data centers. Thank you.

Anybody else?

Hi, Stacy Allen, Plymouth Road. I want to address the issue of the general development plans because we really need to be precise about that. The general development plans are like master plans for each of these two pharmaceutical properties. Both the Summit East Campus and the Old Cell Gene BMS Campus operate under approved general development plans, but neither GDP approved a data center. They approve research, office, and campus uses. Nobody holds a specific vested approval to build an AI data center on either site. At the same time, both zones include older language allowing computer centers, data processing, and communications as a principal use. That language was written before AI data centers were the kind of thing going on today. So the risk is not that somebody has already approved an AI data center, that these are not already approved. The risk is that a future applicant could try to argue that a modern AI data center fits inside older zoning language that was never written for this technology or these impacts. This is exactly why the ordinance needs to be clear. It needs to remove the megawatt threshold, prohibit conversations, and prevent a developer from splitting a project into pieces. A GDP should not be used as a backdoor to convert an approved research or office campus into a large-scale AI data center. If somebody wants to make that argument, they should have to come back through the public land use process with full review of noise, cooling, generators, traffic, water, power, and neighborhood impacts. The honest bottom line is that a GDP may protect what is actually approved, but it should not be treated as a blank check for new industrial use that was never reviewed, never debated, and never approved as an AI data center. So my concern here is it seems like everybody in Summit does want to not have data centers. That seems pretty obvious. It seems like Council does not want them. However, I think a lot of us, everybody here speaking tonight, we're concerned that the language is not clear enough and that there's loopholes galore and we need to make sure that we're covering this. So even if you approve anything, I don't know what you guys are going to do tonight, but even if you approve something, it seems like we need serious experts to make sure that Summit is very much protected. Thank you.

All right. Good evening. Anonymous. I have a feeling someone's going to wind up with a data center. Definitely have a feeling about that. To the one resident who said if that winds up happening, she'll move, you're not going to be able to sell your home when there's a data center here. That's not going to happen. I thought that was a little disrespectful that you're asking about the microphone as well. I'm a member of the Free Press. I want to document this meeting. I want to bring it to the public and, you know, we show everybody's opinions and what their thoughts are and then how you guys vote. That's the whole purpose of it. I find it funny that you're questioning the legality of that. It's a little ridiculous. Also, congratulations on your anniversary, Rosie. Thank you. That's wonderful. I think Councilwoman Saracena needs to recuse herself. I think that has to happen. If that doesn't happen, I think that's very troublesome. As many of you know, I've come to these meetings, was coming to these meetings for a long time, challenging the former council who was Republican majority. And I can honestly say that this council this year is horrific and horrendous to watch. It's the abominable standard has completely dropped. I do believe the Democrats are completely ruining this state and they are ruining Summit. They are completely destroying the fabric of what Summit is and what Summit represents. So we'll see how this goes. But I got a feeling that a data center is coming to Summit. So we'll see how this goes.

Anybody else?

Hi.

I'm Nika Rieppe. I live at 126 Mountain Avenue. I was not planning to speak tonight. My husband and I, we wrote to a couple council members and we were very appreciative to get responses. I just wanted to bring up one point. I am completely against all data centers and reiterate everything that everyone said. The only point that I want to make in addition to what reiterating is that thank you for the presentation, but in listening to that, as someone who I know nothing about data centers, I came here just to inform myself. I know that I don't want them, but I don't know anything specific. And hearing this presentation, everything that went through my head is all the things he's not saying. So if we're going to say we have these three criteria, so something at 19 megawatts, which I know at least 19 megawatts is not good. Well, we're talking about one data center. What's to say if something passes the three criteria that we're not going to have three or five that could come into here? it passes the criteria and we could have them. And then we're talking about, well, technology changes or they don't want, right now they don't want places with big land. Well, what if data centers soon don't need that big land under 19 megawatts? And then you have an infiltration of multiple data centers here. I think that that's not, we've heard what one everyone's complaining about. Imagine more than one. So please, really think about the language. Please really think about bringing in experts. I'm just so upset hearing, listening this to my fellow residents. I don't live near Kent Place, but I feel for them. I feel for everyone in my community. So please, I urge you to please think about the language. Take your time and bring in experts. Thank you.

Do we have other comments from members of the public? okay then we'll call the public portion of this hearing closed and move to comments from council members Okay. Well, Council Member Boyer, you look like you are locked and loaded.

I guess no one else wanted to make comments or waiting for me to go. Just a point of order real quick, Council President. I want to clear this up that there is no three-minute rule for Council in terms of our comments. I just didn't hear you say that, and I just want the public to know that. I did say that in my Council President report. Okay. I just, I didn't hear. I'm sorry. So let me begin first by thanking Augusto for all his hard work. I know there was a lot to go into this. You know, our professionals built a definition with real care, and I want to be fair about the work that you did. I'm gonna ask two things tonight first that we closed the gap we've heard from numerous residents about the gap and this is something that I mentioned at the introduction that I didn't need to reread I think you all saw the same and read the same thing that I had said and second that we direct a city commission an independent study of what a facility like this would mean in Summit. Its impact on our grid, on our water, the noise, the vibration, the air quality, and the round-the-clock operation that, and that we publish those findings for the public so you can see it. Right now, no one knows. Right. No one knows. And here's why the study together with a complete all out ban. And I'm not here to rule out the impossibility forever because we don't know. And that's why I would want to see a study. But right now, a permanent ban is needed. Now, I want to talk about what bothers me with the whole language, and it is the 20 megawatt number, and I've talked to folks on council about this. The argument is that it's not really essential, and that the other language captures that use regardless. I take that seriously, but follow it to its conclusion, right? If the principal use criteria is what actually define a data center within a facility that meets those criteria is already captured at any size. which means the number adds nothing to the catch. It only adds a line. And, you know, this is not a theoretical thing, right? When we talk about the small data centers and, you know, I think the presentation in people's minds is this large capacity facilities. But according to industry analysts, the fastest growing segment of AI data center development right now is not the giants, it's the smaller facilities. It's the five to 20 megawatt range. And they do it in clusters, modules, edge centers built by the dozens, right? So the threshold is set at exactly the top of the category that is growing the fastest. And we would be banning the rare giant and leaving the door open for the common kind. I also have been told the number protects current uses like hospitals. It does not. The hospital is protected by the computer center definition. Computing that serves a building's main purpose. That definition contains no megawatt figure. so the carve out protects the hospital not the number so we can address the threshold without putting one legitimate use in this city at risk and here's the gap that none of the defenses has answered and i read pretty much all of them the ordinance measures one use Its own final sentence says, transformers, substations, utility, infrastructure shall be considered separate uses. The text itself splits a facility into separate pieces. And there is no aggregate limit anywhere in it. So even granting every other point. Nothing here stops the load from being divided, or two or three sub-threshold facilities from opening, each under that line of 20 megawatts, together drawing several times the power of our entire town. we would be measuring one building while the city pays for all of them. I have not heard an answer to that. And until there is one, the concern stands. And finally, the noise, I've said this before, I live right across the street from the hospital, that low vibration, At times that high vibration and the generator at the hospital is only on for four hours and it drives me nuts. I could imagine something being on 24-7. it just it just it's not it's just not right the last thing is this is probably one of the most important decisions this young council has to make and they didn't do anything wrong right this is the process and we're going through the process the public came in and We're listening to you. We're hearing you. This is not a Democrat versus Republican thing. This is us needing to listen to the residents and now to make changes to the ordinance. I've been here before with a lot more people here. And as a senior councilman now, I've made mistakes. I've been a little stubborn. but the reality is I'm telling the council right now you know don't be like me two years ago right it all works out but you know I can be honest I'm not you know it is what it is but that's what a senior you know council member should do right what we should do tonight is table this ordinance. We should go back. We should make it stronger. There's no reason for the 20 megawatts to be in there unless we have plans one day to actually do this. Other than that, I don't see the reason for it. I just, I don't. And no one can explain to me why. Because it has nothing to do with hospitals, libraries, even Bristol Myers Squibb or any other pharmaceutical company. You know, you're talking about two, three, four megawatts, right? Why do we have 20 in this? You know what 20 megawatts is? I had asked this question before, you know, if we can get like an illustration, this would be my last thought. 20 megawatts powers 15,000 homes. 15,000 homes. You know how many homes are in Summit? About 8,400. So that is double. That is double. We can't have that happen. So, Council President, I will let other members speak through you, but I just want to let you know that I do want to make a motion to table this ordinance. I don't have to do it now. I guess I want to let others speak first, or if Irina... Or through you, Council President, if our city solicitor thinks the chain of events, if we do the motion now, I think I'd rather have the other council members talk, and then I could do the motion. But that's your decision, Council President. I just wanted to ask the city solicitor.

I don't believe you've technically made the motion.

No. Yeah. I just didn't want to have a vote and miss it. So just let me know.

council member landman oh sorry go ahead oh i'm sorry i didn't i didn't go the other direction i apologize council council member calminson thank you council president um thank you augusto for outlining the ordinance and really showing us why this is such a difficult issue to tackle and all the different nuances and i also want to thank all of the residents that have reached out to us via email and i've met some in person and everybody and at the listening session too and we are so lucky to have so many engaged residents that are really sharp and really want to help us make this as strong as possible because we're all in agreement that none of us want data centers and summit of any size none of us want that so um We have two choices tonight, right? We can do two things at the same time, right? So this ordinance, it needed to go to the planning board for consistency review. So we cannot make any major change to this ordinance about megawatts or anything like that. Tonight and pass it right we would have to start all over so what we can do at the same time which is what I'm in support of is passing this ordinance and then we have something and then immediately getting to work with all of the all of the experts we have and Getting this ordinance as strong as possible because if we wait if we wait and send this back When would it be back in front of when could we have it back in front of Council July 7 July 7? We're not nobody has applied There's nothing in front of a zoning board or anything like like that that we're got like no this is something to do proactively and

Please, no comments from the public. This is a council member conversation.

For context, there are no applications to the zoning board for this kind of use. There's not an expectation that we'd receive them anytime soon. And that's at the land use division. So I'm letting everyone know.

Okay. Okay. Thank you, Augusto. I think that's all. Okay.

Yes. Well, council member Len. Okay, council member Chris.

I would also really like to thank all the members of the public who came to the council listening session, who sent the emails. This is really, for me, democracy in action. And I ask that each of you, some of you who've spoken here tonight for the very first time, think about the work that council's doing and all, it's about 70 different committees, commissions, boards, subcommittees that you can volunteer to get involved with. I encourage you all to do that. There's a lot of brain power in this room. None of us on council has the kind of experience in AI data center construction or engineering. We're relying on a very talented city land use manager, our city solicitor, and the experts that they were able to tap into, as well as the state level model ordinances that they relied on. This is government we're talking about here. Government almost by definition lags what private companies are doing, especially in an emerging and evolving technology area. So I think there are a lot of great situations and a lot of great suggestions on the floor tonight. I'm not the person to figure out which ones make sense and which ones don't, which ones we should add, which ones we should not. I also think it's important to have some protection. We have heard and I heard tonight and I saw on the internet today that there are companies that are advertising or real estate firms advertising their properties for this very purpose. And so I think out of an abundance of caution, we should have something on the books to send a signal. We communicate to the real estate firms that we are banning this. And I think we have significant protection. If not watertight, we have better protection than the DRO currently provides us from everything that I've heard. So for those reasons, oh, and I really wanted to thank Councilman Boyer. I appreciate him diving deep into the details. And also his comment that this is not a partisan issue. We are united on this. We've been united on almost everything we voted on this year. And this is yet another example where Council is trying to work together to get something good done. And I think Councilman Boyer's questions are strengthening what we're going to ultimately result in on this ordinance as we amend it. So That's where I am on this. I really appreciate everybody coming out and staying here and listening and getting involved.

Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Grisifulli. Yes, Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Honestly, I'm still digesting a lot of what I heard tonight. It's a lot to take in. First, thank you, Mr. Delmasso and your team for that excellent presentation. And thank you to all of the residents who have shared your feedback with us over the past few weeks, particularly those who have come with these very concrete suggestions and ideas of how we can make it better. Let me just start by restating the headline. No one up here wants an AI data center and summit. None of us. And banning AI data centers has bipartisan support. This is not a partisan issue, as Councilman Boyer said. As I said at the introduction of this ordinance at the last meeting, this space is rapidly evolving, and we need to be nimble. And I've learned a lot, as I said, over the past two weeks from all of you. This is the type of ordinance we may need to revise multiple times, if that's what it takes. And where I disagree is with Councilman Boyer on tabling this. We cannot allow perfection to be the enemy of the good. We may be showing up to a gunfight with a knife in this case, but I'd rather do that than show up empty-handed. We can and we will improve upon this ordinance. I think we should pass this tonight, continue to strengthen the protections for Summit, and get to work on this tomorrow morning. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Landman.

I'll only add as somebody who spent, oh, I'm sorry.

I'm happy to go on.

No, go right ahead, Council Member. I was making assumptions and they were incorrect. Please, Council Member Lucero-Cena.

Thank you, Council President. I want to echo the gratitude that we all feel for everyone coming out with very deep engagement on this issue and very thoughtful review of the issue at hand. Again, I think we're hearing throughout the room, right? We all want a best in class ordinance. And we are mindful of the fact that even since the introduction of this proposed ordinance, we've had peer communities in Sparta and Madison introduce their own ordinances, right? We're watching Monroe, Millville, Red Bank, Warren. And I'm forgetting one. Berkeley Heights. Thank you, Council President. So we want to both learn from the very excellent feedback of our residents and our in-house experts, as well as what peer municipalities are doing. So I am in agreement with several of my colleagues that I believe we should adopt the proposed ordinance to give us an additional layer of protection. And then as we learn over the next few days and weeks, if we do feel that there are opportunities for improvement, we will absolutely make them. It does not slow down the process. Again, it is additive of protective layers. Certainly creates no additional risk. It's no harder to amend an ordinance than it is to adopt a fully new ordinance. It would slow down the process if we went back I think we've got a really solid foundation here and gratitude very much to Mr. Delmasso and his team. I will say of the questions about whether I am conflicted, I will note in brief, so my husband works for a company called CoreWeave. They are involved in the project that's going on in Kenilworth. He is one of over 2,000 employees. He is not an executive officer, not a major shareholder. I won't bring in some of the I'll leave out any colorful language or some of the verbiage that's been used, but I will say he's certainly not, quote, the force behind what's going on in Kenilworth. He works on a totally separate team. As a brief side note, the force is an awesome nickname that we have adopted as a family and kind of reclaimed it, so we now refer to him as the force. But he works on a totally separate team. He's not involved individually. in the data center team. We have no direct or indirect benefit. We're no differently situated than anyone who owns stock in a publicly traded technology company, which is what CoreWeave is. With any matter that comes before council, I take a pause, right? We all do. And we consider whether we are conflicted. In this matter, I took that pause, I referred back to the applicable state law, and I determined that there was no conflict of interest in this case because of my husband's employment. As an additional layer, I conferred with our city administrator and ultimately went to our city solicitor and conferred with her and appreciate the analysis that was done there. Again, I... As I've said, I don't want to do the easy thing or the expedient thing. I want to do the right thing because a conflict of interest and recusal means something, right? It means something under state law. And so I want to honor that. and do what I feel and what our city solicitor has confirmed is the right thing. And I also don't want to make it more difficult for any of my colleagues or future council members to feel that they must recuse themselves in certain situations when it's not actually called for under the law or guidance. So if you have additional questions or concerns, I'm certainly happy to sit with you and consider them and talk through them, but I did want to share that. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Lucera-Cena. If we have learned one thing this evening, it's that definitions matter. And I'm very grateful particularly to Mr. Delmasso for defining computer center for the first time in our development regulations ordinance. That in itself closed a big gap. As he said, AI Data Center has a three-prong definition. You can get caught on any of the three prongs. Certainly, if I can drag this analogy out, we could add prongs or make them sharper, and I'm sure we shall. But in the meantime, if I'm taking a fork to the gunfight, that's better. That's also better than going empty handed. It sounds from what we've heard that we need to go back and determine how to enforce our noise ordinances and who is truly responsible for them and make that happen um and we'll get that track going as well and with that i believe you know we we are

Can I ask a question about process?

You may ask a question about process, always.

Thank you. So, Augusto, if this ordinance passes tonight, but there's an intention to either amend or, you know, remove and just replace with a new ordinance at some point, does that have to go back to the planning board for a consistency review?

Yes. So the planning board has already deemed that this ordinance is consistent. If we were to make any amendments to the substantive language, it would be referred back to the planning board again, and they would just be applying the same test of whether it is not inconsistent or consistent with the master plan, which is...

Fairly simple. And then I would just ask that, I mean, I kind of feel as though, you know, not that I get to vote, but I kind of feel as though something on the books is better than nothing, particularly if there's a commitment by the council to really go back and close the loopholes, because I believe that there are several. So I just wanted to be on record as saying it.

Thank you. And I believe you have a motion, council member Boyer.

Yes. Just one quick question for our land use manager. Augusto, you said currently, based on the land use law, currently AI data centers are prohibited, right?

Based on our current DRO, a proposed AI data center wouldn't be prohibited. They are prohibited? Yes.

Okay. And the debate and the question would be if we pass this ordinance tonight with the 20 megawatt definition, that changes the current prohibition, right?

No, it actually wouldn't change the current prohibition. What the definition does is, as I explained, it just sets up the confines where a zoning official or zoning board would interpret that prohibition. So it would still remain prohibited. The AI data center, whether it is 20 megawatts or greater or less than or has or does not have a measurable impact on water, if it has any of that criteria, it would still be banned. So it doesn't change. The prohibition is there just as a statement. Because it's not included in the zone districts, it is prohibited. Now, this would just be a restatement, an assertion of the fact that clearly now AI data centers are prohibited.

Council President, I'd like to be on record to table this motion, to table this ordinance for the fact that right now, currently, AI data centers are prohibited. And with the passing of this ordinance, it would actually make it easier for AI data company to come in and argue the 19 or so below megawatt threshold. So with that, I make a motion to table.

Is there a second? Okay. We are not going to vote on that.

I think... Could I ask for a clarification from our land use manager of this assertion? Council President, there's a motion on the floor.

Right. And there is not a second of that motion. There's no discussion. So there isn't a...

If there's no second, the motion just dies.

Yeah. Okay. Okay. But prior to our vote on the ordinance, I would like to ask a question of the land use manager. Yes. It seems we have an additional issue that has been introduced. It's been insinuated by people on the floor, but now it's been stated by a council member. Will this ordinance actually increase the risk of Summit to construction of a data center? Sorry, could you repeat that? Would passing tonight's ordinance, the one that's on the agenda, increase the risk of a data center in Summit?

No.

No. Plainly, no, it would not.

Point of order. Yeah, it's actually point of order.

Okay.

Council President, I'm asking for a point of order. Yes. Thank you. Our city clerk, the motion to table, I didn't hear that it was officially denied.

The Council President did ask for a second and received none.

Okay, thank you. I just wanted to make sure it was on record. Yes. Thank you.

Yes, I'm sorry. The city solicitor said it, and I thought that you're right. It should have come from me. Okay, with all of that, I think we are closing this hearing. Given the time, I'm going to call a five-minute recess so we can stand up and stretch our legs. Can we please return to our seats?

Yes, yes, that's fine. I'll do that.

I normally take them home and send them the correct email.

As soon as you sit down. Okay. okay we have eight more ordinances to hold hearings about aren't we excited so let let us get going um we are all back um so let's continue this session so um madam clerk would you please read ordinance for hearing number 26-3382

ordinance of the city of summit county of union new jersey amending and supplementing chapter 35 of the city code entitled development regulations ordinance 35-9.2 prohibited uses um thank you council member chris if uli thank you council president ordinance 26-3382 would add a prohibited use to the city code to ban detention facilities

Other towns in New Jersey are facing the adverse consequences of detention facilities. They are simply not keeping with the character of our town, and I want to add an important layer of protection against them. To be clear, this is not an ordinance designed to attract detention facilities. I move to open the hearing.

Thank you. Second. Okay. So let's begin with comments from the public. Is there any person here who would like to speak about detention facilities?

Oh, it's late. Will von Klemperer on 56 Colonial Road. I urge council to pass an absolute ban. Make the language as tight as you can. And I look at this in terms of what's temporary and what's permanent. Temporary, we're in a period of anti-immigrantism. But that will pass. We will have a different president. We'll have different governing. What is permanent is if Summit does anything that looks like collaboration with ICE. I just want to mention for information something. Those of us who have visited in detention centers, those of us who volunteer in the immigrant community, you should know that some detention center guards address detainees as money. Money, you get over there. Money, you hurry up. The private companies who own these centers, they charge for every night that a bed is full, every meal that is served, every detainee who goes to sick call. You know, it's like your hotel bill. You do this, you buy the snacks in the lobby, it all shows up on the bill. At the state level, then Governor Murphy, and the majority of the legislature, they ended the practice that New Jersey County jails would rent rooms to ICE for immigration detention. They stopped that. So at the state level, our state is refusing to collaborate. I hope that at the municipal level, we will do the same. The ordinance would be the basis for our defense, but I remind us that President Trump's ICE is lawless. Summit cannot count on ICE to submit an ICE proposal to our city clerk. They're not going to ask, well, when does the planning board meet so we can get an approval? They roared into Delaney Hall in Newark with no real interest in permits for the plumbing or the ventilation system in a facility that had been idle for over five years. They refused Newark Mayor Baraka's entrance. And when he left, they came out through the gates, laid hands on him, took him away. So please pass this. And just I'm asking that the community should know that passing it is the first step. Everyone in the community will then have to watch ICE carefully and be ready to resist promptly. Thank you.

Thank you. Do we have other comments from members of the public?

Hi, Irene, I was just wondering, can you explain, is this part of the same ordinance for the data AI center? Is there not a vote after all of everything that we talked about? Do you vote always all at the end? For all the ordinances? I thought like each ordinance gets We do all the hearings first.

And then we go back, and then we do final consideration for a vote. I see. On each of the ordinances. This happens to have the same title, but it's a different purpose. I see. This is just for the attention of the Senate. Okay.

We have other comments from members of the public. Yes.

Denison Hariel, 140 Broad Street, Summit, New Jersey. I must say that I'm very pleased that Common Council has taken this step with this ordinance to address something that is not needed in Summit. For over 37 years that I've been a resident, prior Common Council's mayors and residents and now this Common Council and mayor have stated that you are in favor of affordable housing. You've also stated that there is no vacant land in Summit. You are concerned about overdevelopment and you are concerned about not building anything that changes the character of Summit and goes against Summit's master plan. If these positions have been taken on affordable housing, then they apply even more for being against having a detention facility in Summit. I must say this evening that unless Summit has changed, this is not who we are. Or should I say, this is not how I see Summit. First of all, Summit does not have an illegal immigration problem or a problem with violent criminals living here. There may be some persons who may have overstayed their visa, missed the deadline for renewing or getting a green card, or did not understand a process that they needed to follow. These are not criminal violations and they do not rise to the level of needing a detention facility in Summit. Secondly, many of these detention facilities are operated by private for-profit companies that are not concerned about overdevelopment neighborhood character, human rights abuses, arrests of innocent, hardworking persons, and sometimes students, often without a warrant, and other abuses that are ethically and morally wrong. And thirdly, Members of Common Council, you have the authority with the passing of this ordinance to state that Summit does not want a detention facility here and you don't have to accept one. You are covered in New Jersey under the Municipal Land Use Law. The passing of this ordinance will encourage all residents, no matter where they are from, their race or ethnicity, to know that they are welcomed here, will address the same concerns of no vacant land, overdevelopment, and changing the character of the city that is used for affordable housing, and will send a message that a detention facility of any kind is not needed in Summit. Summit does not need this attention. Use the tools you have, pass the ordinance, and let Summit and others know that this is who we are.

Thank you.

Do we have other comments from members of the public? Okay, then let's close the public portion of the hearing, move on. Do we have comments from members of council? Yes, Council Member Landau.

I just want to say I am so proud to be part of a council that is going to prohibit detention facilities in our city. Detention centers like the one just 15 minutes down the road can find people without due process in dehumanizing conditions and violation of their human rights. Residents of Summit do not want that here. And I'm thrilled to be able to vote on this ordinance tonight. Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Council Member Lucera-Cena.

Thank you, Council President. I'm grateful that we are considering this ordinance tonight. This is an initiative that I have been pushing behind the scenes. In nearby Roxbury, just around 25 miles away from here, we have a suburban, family-friendly community known for its excellent public schools, about 22,000 residents. It sounds a lot like Summit. And there they are fighting against a detention center facility where the Department of Homeland Security would like to confine an estimated 1,500 people as part of their mass deportation program. That is not consistent with Summit's values, and that is what we want to prevent. Some have regrettably dismissed this ordinance as political theater or virtue signaling. Rather than being curious and asking questions, they quickly judged. But it is important that we take this step. Federal law tells us that it's important that we take this step. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1970, for example, and the guides that implement it are meant to restrict and to guide the construction of federal projects. And there they make reference to the, quote, compatibility of federal projects with applicable state and local planning and zoning standards. So it matters that we have this on the books. And this has been discussed Delaney just down the down the road here, very close to us in New York. is operated by a private detention center operator. So though we may have to deal with consideration of federal preemption if it's an agent of the federal government, if it's a private operator, those protections for the federal government are significantly less. And there too, it makes it ever more important that we have this protection on the books. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you.

We have other comments.

I'll merely add, actually, thanks to our city solicitor, I have never been so impressed with the whereas clauses in an ordinance. I think you did. The explanation of why we are introducing and hopefully passing this ordinance lays out beautifully why it does not belong in Summit. Okay.

Council Member Chris Ifouli. Yes. Thank you, Council President. I introduced this ordinance because I view detention centers as simply an undesirable land use that's not keeping with Summit's values or Summit's character. I also support strong border enforcement as well as humane treatment of immigrants that we have in this country. And I think we can do both. We can walk and chew gum at the same time in Summit.

Thank you. Okay. Okay, then let us close this hearing and move on to the next. Madam Clerk, would you please read the ordinance for hearing number 26-3383?

Bond ordinance appropriating $5,604,000 and authorizing the issuance of $5,337,000 in bonds or notes of the city for various improvements or purposes authorized to be undertaken by the City of Summit in the County of Union, New Jersey.

Thank you. Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. If I may, the next three ordinances are our annual ordinances authorizing the city to issue bonds to cover the capital plans for the municipality, parking, and sewer utilities. This is an administrative step following the approval of the annual budget last month. I just wanted to give that introduction for all three at the top. Ordinance number one, excuse me, 263383. This bond ordinance stems from the 2026 municipal budget authorizing issuing bonds or notes sufficient to cover the municipal capital plan. I move to open the hearing on this ordinance. Second.

Okay. Do we have any comments from members of the public on this ordinance? Do we have any comments from members of council on this ordinance? Okay, I'm going to call this hearing closed. Madam Clerk, can we move on to ordinance number 26-3384?

Bond ordinance appropriating $2,250,000 and authorizing the issuance of $2,142,000 in bonds or notes of the city for various sewer utility improvements or purposes authorized to be undertaken by the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey.

Thank you, Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 263384. This bond ordinance stems from the sewer utilities 2026 budget and authorizes issuing bonds and notes sufficient to cover the sewer utilities 2026 capital plan. I move to open the hearing on this ordinance. Second.

Do we have any comments from members of the public on this ordinance? Okay. Do we have any comments from members of council on this ordinance?

Council Member Christopher Lee. Thank you, Council President. I guess a question for our city administrator. For these bond-related ordinances in total, how would they affect the bond rating of Summit, which is very top quality at this time? Will this have any negative impact on the bond rating of our city and therefore the cost of our borrowing in the future?

Through you, Council President. They will not have negative impacts. We're actually going through rating calls this week to go out for permanent bonds for 23, 24, and 25 capital projects. It's looking good. We don't have the ratings yet, so I don't want to get overzealous. But the calls are going well. Our financials are looking good. These... ordinances are setting us up for our capital projects for 2026 so they're not part of the permanent financing yet but we are authorized to go out when we decide to do that in the future and if i may council president we we also in finance committee met with the attorney who works with us on this the financial planner and had a robust discussion about exactly that issue before proceeding so okay thank you do we have any other comments from members of council

No, I will only note that we are way, way below the authorized amount of total debt the city can issue. It's a good thing. I mean, you want some low level, but not a whole lot, and that's exactly where we are. Okay, let's close that hearing and move on to... Ordinance number 26-3385, Madam Clerk.

Bond ordinance providing for the improvement of parking facilities in and by the City of Summit in the County of Union, New Jersey, appropriating $2,593,000, therefore, and authorizing the issuance of $2,469,000 bonds or notes of the City for financing such appropriation.

Okay, thank you. Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 263385. This bond ordinance stems from the parking utilities 2026 budget, authorizes issuing bonds or notes sufficient to cover the parking utilities 2026 capital plan. I move to open the hearing on this ordinance. Second.

Do we have any comments from members of the public on this ordinance? Do we have any comments from members of council on this ordinance? No, just this should help us. This will finance rehabbing the tiered garage on Springfield Avenue. So let's close this hearing and, oh, keep going. Finance ordinances. Madam Clerk, would you please read Ordinance 26-3386 for hearing?

An ordinance to amend the Code Appendix A, Schedule of Fees Contained in the Revised General Ordinances of the City of Summit.

Thank you, Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 263386. This is an ordinance to amend some of the fees in the city code related to construction, community programs, and the police department. As discussed in previous council meetings this year, we are reviewing fees across all departments and making adjustments to bring them closer in line with both the cost to the city and keeping with common practice in neighboring municipalities. I move to open the hearing on this ordinance. Second.

Do we have any comments from members of the public on this ordinance? Okay. Do we have any comments from members of council on this ordinance? Okay. Let's close this hearing.

and move on to finance excuse me ordinance number 26-3387 for hearing back to you madam clerk an ordinance to establish the 2026 salaries wages or compensations of and for the officers and employees of the city of summit county of union state of new jersey Thank you. Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance 263387. This establishes the 2026 salaries for union and non-union employees. These annual adjustments to salaries and wages reflect the increases passed in the 2026 municipal budget. I move to open the hearing on this ordinance. Second.

Do we have any comments from members of the public on this ordinance? Do we have any comments from members of council on this ordinance? Yes, Council Member Calamansi.

Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Council Member Landman, Council Member Saracena. I'm really happy to see salary increases for our hardworking city staff. We're in a really difficult economic climate right now, and affordability and fiscal responsibilities are always top-of-mind things for us and all of our committees, but well-deserved salary increases, so thank you.

I'm just looking for my, I'm looking for my raise. I'm doubling your salary. I didn't see it in here.

I'm doubling your salary, Madam Mayor. Do we have any other comments from members of Council?

Council, through you, Council President. Yes, Council Member Boyer. As we're talking about salaries, I just want to bring up again are crossing guards. I know Councilmember Landman had told me before that some of them receive, you know, Social Security or... Unemployment benefits. Unemployment benefits, yes. And I did a little digging and a lot of them don't, right? So I think when we start looking at increasing in salaries, I'll say again on the record that the people who cross our children across the street who are working when it is cold outside, when it is hot outside, they can also use a little adjustment in their salaries as well. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you. Do we have any other comments? Okay, let's close this hearing. Madam Clerk, would you please read hearing, ordinance for hearing number 26-3388.

An ordinance amending Chapter 3 police regulations of the Code of the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey, adding a Section 3-20 entitled Drones and Other Unmanned Aircraft.

Thank you. Council Member Kalmanson.

Thank you, Council President. This is Ordinance ID 26-3388, and this ordinance regulates drones and unmanned aircraft in the City of Summit. I move to open the hearing on this ordinance. Second.

Okay. Do we have any comments from members of the public?

Patterley 192, Ashland Road. Rosie, happy anniversary. Thank you. And thanks to everyone here. I don't know how I did this for six years, honestly. But I did, I think it was like over 200 plus meetings. You do the math. Anyway, but that's not why I'm here tonight. I'm asking counsel, and this is late, so I'm just going to read this without any emotion. I'm asking counsel to pause or revise this drone ordinance because as written... It appears to regulate an area largely reserved for the FAA, the operation of aircraft in the national airspace. And drones does unnecessarily damage an industry I don't think the council members fully understand. The city of Summit cannot regulate aviation safety or operations in the national airspace system, which this ordinance attempts to do. The federal government does that, and the FAA already has existing regulations covering the operations of small UAS and UAS drones. For example, the ordinance bans drone flights over public gatherings unless approved in writing by the chief of police. Yes, I still love Ryan. Sorry. And... But FAA guidance makes it very clear that an FAA Part 107 certified operator who follows FAA regulations, including rules for operations over people, cannot be subject to local approval for that flight. The FAA already regulates when and how drones may be operated over people. This is the domain of the FAA, not the city of Summit. The ordinance also claims drones pose substantial risk of injury. This is alarmist and unsubstantiated as FAA regulations already regulate such risk. This language suggests Summit seeks to override federal safety laws and wants to become basically an aviation authority. Summit can regulate drone conduct on city property, including launches, landings, harassments, voyeurism, nuisance, reckless endangerment, interference with emergency operations, which is actually already regulated by the federal government, and misuse of public property. That I fully support. But Summit should not and cannot prohibit FAA-compliant overflight or require local police permission for a flight the FAA already allows. I believe public access or space, I believe public spaces should remain accessible to responsible FAA Part 107 certified drone operators who are trained, tested, and certified for legitimate activities such as photography, inspections, mapping, journalism, construction, real estate, and security. Lawful drones use shouldn't be seen as suspicious activity and certainly it's not a threat to the public. That's it. Thank you. And I'm tired.

Do we have any other comments from members of the public?

Dennis and Harry, 140 Broad Street, Summit, New Jersey. In reference to the previous speaker, is there a possibility tonight for the chief of police to speak to this in terms of clarifying exactly why this was needed or just to clarify the whole situation?

Well, I was going to say chief, but let's see if there are any other members of the public who want to say something so that you can address everything. So do we have any other comments from members of the public? Okay. Then police, yes, Police Chief Peters, I would ask you to address some of the comments raised by Mr. Hurley and just explain why we're doing this.

Through you, Council President, I'm going to read an email that I had previously drafted in response to some of the similar concerns. I've been here for 16 hours. I think just reading this might make me sound a little bit more intelligent instead of speaking for a minute. So I do concede that the FAA does have restrictions in place for both drone operators under both 49 U.S. Code 44809, parentheses, A, as well as the Part 107 referenced by Mr. Hurley. However, municipal police officers do not have the authority to enforce federal law. The process generally would be for a police officer to identify any potential violations, locate and identify the operator, stop any unsafe conduct, gather information on the operator and the drone, and ultimately refer the matter to the FAA. Having the ability to enforce certain violations via ordinance will undoubtedly reduce the time it takes for the FAA to receive, review, and address any reported incidents from the Summit Police Department. It will also likely serve as a deterrent for those operating outside the guidelines of their restrictions. Additionally, under 14 CFR U.S. Code 107.39, the FAA restricts the flying of drones over any open-air assembly of people, as Mr. Hurley had stated, which means a gathering of people, this is how they define it, a gathering of people who are sufficiently concentrated and cannot readily move away if the drone were to fall. However, it does not address the following. Flying over events that generate high attendance, but less concentrated crowds. restrict the launching of drones from city property which may expose the city to liability at the request of councilwoman camlinson i reached out to the city solicitor who did say that the city may be exposing them to some level to of liability by not restricting um drones from takeoff and landing on city property uh for example if a you know a juvenile gets a drone for christmas goes down to memorial field and flies it right into the face of somebody walking in their morning walk the city could potentially be on the liability for not restricting that flight. Similar to if we didn't have a leash law with dogs in Memorial Field and we just let dogs run rampant and a dog attacked another human or another dog, we would, I think, bear some responsibility for that. Considering Summit is a variation of airspaces, we're not just Class G. We are mostly Class G, which is unrestricted. There is no blanket requirement for pre-authorization to fly. We also set forth clear penalties for violations, which the ordinance does. The FAA regulations do not. In summary, with the passing of this ordinance, some police officers have the authority to address persons who violate the following provisions without referring the matter to the FAA. Launching and landing on city property. interfering with emergency operations such as police, fire, EMS, or search and rescue, creating a nuisance, which could be defined as repeated low-altitude hovering, disrupting public events, operating in a manner that causes fear of injury, and in addition, there's always privacy concerns, which may run concurrent to New Jersey state criminal statutes for invasion of privacy. So in conclusion, I told Mr. Hurley prior to his public comment, this came to my attention through the Chiefs Association with the FIFA events happening around. One of the major considerations for law enforcement for public safety was drone operations over large crowds. We consulted with Elizabeth. Elizabeth was a very robust drone ordinance because they do have ports. They have major infrastructure and they ported up the Hudson. um in addition to some other municipalities of our size and came up with what we felt was a tailored ordinance for us that being said if there's any suggested revisions or if there's anything a part of this ordinance that council doesn't like i promise you i will not go home and lose any sleep over it um it's just something that was brought to my attention uh we are not experts i'm not an expert um but it is something that we did a little bit of homework on and felt strongly about it um but again it's it's kind of up to you guys whether or not you want to move forward with it i'm perfectly content either way So I appreciate it. I'm open to any questions if anybody else has any. Through you, Council President.

yes council member boyer i do have a question um chief first of all thank you for being here and protecting all of us you know um but i i have a question about public property because we say city property but that's public the public's property right so does this prohibit a kid from getting a journal from toys r us i don't think they're still around but um and being in a safe area whatever we define that is on public property and flying a drone, are they not going to be able to do that? Is there a difference?

My understanding is the ordinance states city property. I don't know if that conflicts with public property.

City-owned property.

Yeah, which is the public's property, right? Yeah, pretty much.

Yeah, I would assume so. So if a kid's on, if they're out on Sunday and... nobody's around and they're out in the parking deck. I mean, I know it's close to the police station, but if they fly their little drone or whatever, they're not allowed to do that.

Under this ordinance, they would not be allowed to do that.

The second question I have is, What if we may require people to have a 107 license, right?

So our officers that are part of our UAS unmanned aerial systems unit, which is the drone unit for the police department, we do require them to have a part 107. It is not a requirement for the state for police officers to have it. But we did want that extra layer of protection for the city for liability purposes. I can tell you each officer who had zero experience in aviation took about four to six weeks to study for that test and pass it. And they had to pay $185 out of their own pocket to be reimbursed from the city when and if they passed. I'd like to say they all passed the first time, but... To have a 12-year-old study and take that test, if he gets the 107, he can fly it wherever he wants.

It's not an easy test. I think that's just my first read of this. It's like, well, if the ordinance requires people to actually have this license, that means that they're complying with the rules, they know where to fly it, they know where not to fly it, they know this, they know that. So if we had an ordinance that said, hey, summer residents, if you want to fly a drone, you need to get that license, right? And then that would take care of all the other pieces of, you know, you can't fly it during, you know, events and everything, because I think all of that is in there. I'm just throwing that out there. I think that would take care of a lot of the stuff. What I am... just concerned about is just on public property and kids flying drones and things of that nature.

I just don't want it to be too prohibitive in public spaces where I understand your concern, which is why we reached out to the city solicitor just to find out if we were exposing ourselves to liability by not limiting or prohibiting the use on city property. And while much of the liability would fall on the pilot, if there was an accident and somebody got injured, the city would bear some sense of liability because we're permitting that act to happen on city property. What level of liability that is, I don't know. And again, I don't disagree with you that having a Part 107 would allow anybody flying a drone to be better prepared and understand the airspace and where they can and cannot go. I don't think it necessarily changes the level of liability that the city faces. Whether you have a driver's license or not, you're still subject to Title 39. But again, whatever the council wants to do, I'm okay with it. I promise you I won't be upset. Thank you for answering my questions. I appreciate it.

Yes, Councilman. Oh, do you want to go first? Okay. Okay, Councilmember Lucera-Cena.

Thank you, Council President. I just wanted to note that there's, of course, always discretion in the enforcement of laws and ordinances, right? And so I think in the example that Councilman Boyer has presented, it could be an education moment, right? It wouldn't necessarily be an enforcement, but it could be to educate the child on safe operation and where such activities are permitted or not permitted.

Correct. Thank you. We do use discretion for municipal ordinance quite a bit. Just because a lot of people aren't aware of ordinances, right?

Mm-hmm. Council Member Kalemanson. Thank you, Council President. Yes, this situation that Council Member Boyer is describing is exactly what we discussed and exactly why we were going back and forth with, I think it was Ron Kavanaugh. He drafted the ordinance. And the piece that I was concerned about was the piece that said parks. Right. Because, you know, I have kids and my dad got little like drone and they went outside and they played with it. And we don't want to take that away from anybody. So that's why, you know, we were going back and forth about this and talking. because we certainly want everybody to enjoy being in the park safely, right? So all of that being said, you know, with this ordinance, we do have the ability to remove parks from this ordinance if we want to. Yeah, right. Do whatever you want. So if this council chooses to, I would be supportive of removing parks from this ordinance. Is... Can I make a motion?

How would I do that? Did you want to amend the ordinance then?

Can I make a motion to amend the ordinance?

If it's a substantive change, it will kill the ordinance.

Okay.

So being that reduce, I see.

So being that timing is of the essence, and we would like to get this past before July 4, and before FIFA, I'm going to support this ordinance. And then we will amend in the future, so that we can make sure that you know that parents and grandparents and all can still enjoy little drones with their kids.

And then similar to the previous topic, I'd be certainly open to guidance from an expert. I'm not an expert on this. I learned all about drones when we initiated the program. As, you know, the supervising officer, I didn't get a Part 107, but I, you know, met with the vendors, learned a lot about drones, learned about the operation of them, but I'm by no means an expert. I didn't take the 107. I don't have a 107. I'm assuming Hurley has a 107. So there you go. I got an expert. So now we serve against two committees, experts, one for the surveillance cameras and one for this. So every time I put an ordinance on the agenda, he shows up.

You have a fan club. Okay.

Any other questions?

really quickly I have to be honest I don't love it but what's definitely important to me is that we communicate with the public about it before we do any sort of enforcement or even education so can we just I trust that you will but can we I just wanted to make that point with the public about what the rules are because my kids to fly drones flew drones at the park and even my husband but So I think, again, it feels a little overreachy to me. Let's revisit the parks piece. I like that idea.

I don't love going on record and saying that we use discretion quite frequently. However, having an ordinance in place and being able to use discretion, but also being able to refer to the ordinance if something did go bad to say that there was something in place to mitigate this risk. Yeah.

I understand.

Thank you.

Good way to go about business.

Yeah. Yeah. Parks. If we eliminate parks from the conversation.

Well, city on property, it states in the ordinance, so it would include something like the top of the college garage, which I think should still be included. Parks may be a little bit different because there's more space and you're not launching from an elevated position because that ceiling that 400 foot ceiling doesn't change whether you're. Depending on where you are in the town and the topography, it can change. But if you're on top of a structure, typically from what I'm understanding, and again, I don't have a part 107, Mr. Hurley might clarify me, that structure, the topography comes from the ground, not necessarily from the top of the structure. So if you go 400 feet from the top of the Cullis Garage, you might be north of the 400-foot ceiling. Then it goes from the top of the structure. There you go. So you can actually go higher than 400 feet in regards to the topography if you're launching from 80 feet or 100 feet up already. Now you're 500 feet in the airspace.

But if we're concerned about large gatherings, most of those in town happen at our parks. Yes. So aren't we sort of defeating the purpose if we take parks out of it?

Well, there's other components to this that I think would cover that. And again, we're not trying to restrict flying. The FAA oversees airspace, right? That's not what we're looking to do. We're just looking to give ourselves something to grab onto if we do have anything that falls within this ordinance that we don't have to necessarily refer it to Washington, D.C. and wait for a response. We can address it in real time. And if that means, you know, a $35 ordinance violation for someone who's not being cooperative or using our discretion for someone who didn't know, then that's kind of those avenues that we would take. Thank you.

Yes, Council Member Christofoli.

Chief Peters, two questions for you. One, have we had any incidents in Summit that would raise concern that we need to address through this ordinance? Or is this a general issue that we're seeing in other jurisdictions? And the second part of the question is, is there pressure from some other entity related to FIFA that we should take action now in relationship to the World Cup being played here?

So the first part, we did have one incident where a drone crashed and it was our drone. So yeah, it got damaged and it could have hurt somebody and our guys are part 107. So it's just as simple as how fast things can go wrong with wind gusts and with weather. These things are very sophisticated and they tend to operate pretty good, but accidents can happen. On the back end of that, the FAA did come out to the New Jersey State Chiefs of Police Association meeting and they talked about modern technology with drones and the ongoing threat there is. If anybody saw any of the videos from the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, a lot of what they utilize was drones for attack mechanisms. And it's been a main concern for the FIFA security, which is one of the reasons we tried to kind of get this on the books as soon as possible, especially with the watch parties. And again, we're not looking to restrict whatever the FAA has in place. We're just giving ourselves the ability to kind of enforce without having to refer out and hope that we get a response. But it is something that I'm not the only chief in Union County that's pursuing this. Like I had said, I think Springfield's had one on for a while. I know Elizabeth, we took pretty much, a lot of their language with the exception of some of their critical infrastructure. So it has been a topic of conversation, I think, across the board as this technology advances and there are nefarious actors that can utilize these things and arm them with small explosives and other things, chemical agents that can just fly over and cause havoc. And I'm not saying that the summit's ordinance is going to stop anyone from doing that, right? There's not going to be a terrorist that looks up our ordinance code and says, I'm not going to go to summit because I might be subject to a $35 fine. But again, it's just, like I said, it's really up to you guys whether or not you want to move forward with it. It was just something that's been a discussion amongst chiefs of police. Did my best to do my research. Is there room for some revisions? Most likely, right? We're not experts. Pat seems to know a lot more about it than I do. But there's always work to be done, and I kind of share the same sentiment as before. Maybe we pass it now, see how it goes, have some meetings with some people who know a little bit more about this stuff, and then we can always revise it. That's a part of this process, right? The public comment, have people coming out and giving their feedback. Definitely open to that. I'm not like a closed book.

So I think on that basis, I would support the ordinance with the opportunity to amend. Thank you. Good.

Okay. Any other comments, questions? Okay. Let's move on then. Madam Clerk, would you read Ordinance for Hearing No. 26-3389?

An ordinance amending the Code of the City of Summit, Section 7-25, Regulations for the Movement and the Parking of Traffic on Municipal Property and Board of Education Property, Subsection 7-25.2, Municipal Parking Lot Areas. Thank you.

Back to you, Councilmember Kalman.

Thank you, Council President. This is Ordinance ID 26-3389 and this ordinance, should it pass later in the meeting, will reopen the Chestnut parking lot effective tomorrow, June 17th. This lot will return to a commuter lot for the time being. Pre-payments and park mobile payments are the only forms of payment that will be accepted as the payment kiosks were removed earlier this year in preparation for the property sale. we will need to close this lot again when the property is sold but until then we would like for our residents to have access to this lot while it is still uh city property i moved to open hearing on this ordinance second thank you um do we have comments on this ordinance from members of the public

Okay, do we have comments on this ordinance from members of council? Through you, Council President. Yes, Council Member Boyer.

I just wanted to give a shout out to Councilwoman Comminson because she made this happen with speed. I mean, she saw the issue, she brought it up, and she was like, listen, we need to do this. So thank you, Councilwoman. Good job on this. Hopefully it'll... go relieve some parking issues for the time game thank you council member boyer anybody else

I'll just note that we are scheduled. I haven't been to the tiered garage lately, but we are scheduled, or maybe it's happening that there will be repair work there this summer that will close the top couple of tiers. So having the Chestnut Street lot open is going to relieve some of the pressure there on parking. And with that, I'll close that hearing, and we can move on to votes. okay ordinances for final consideration okay um madam clerk would you please read the title of sorry ordinance number 26-3390

Ordinance of the City of Summit, County of Union, New Jersey, amending and supplementing Chapter 35 of the City Code entitled Development Regulations, Subsections 35-9.2, Prohibited Uses. Thank you.

Council Member Christopher Lee. Thank you, Council President. Having closed the hearing on Ordinance 26-3390 a relatively short time ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption.

Second. Okay. Madam Clerk, would you call the roll? Mr. Boyer.

This is the, I'm sorry, this is the, there's two developments. The data center. Okay. Just a quick note that I made a motion to table this. The motion was denied. I do feel as though that the 20 megawatts should be taken out of this, and I know it's going to pass anyway, but for that reason, nay. Mr. Christofoli? Aye.

Ms. Kalmanson? Aye. Ms. Landman? Aye. Ms. Saracena?

Aye. President Toth? Aye. Okay, let's go to Ordinance Number 26-3382. Would you please read the title, Madam Clerk?

Ordinance of the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey, amending and supplementing Chapter 35 of the City Code entitled Development Regulations Subsection 35-9.2, Prohibited Uses.

Thank you, Council Member Chris Zafouli. Thank you, Council President. Having closed the hearing on Ordinance 26-3382 a short time ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption.

Second. Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll?

Mr. Boyer? Aye. Mr. Chris Zafouli?

Aye.

Ms. Kelminson? Aye. Ms. Landman? Aye. Mrs. Saracena? Aye. President Toth?

Aye. Moving on, Madam Clerk, would you please read the... Read the title of ordinance number 26-3383.

Bond ordinance appropriating $5,604,000 and authorizing issuance of $5,337,000 bonds or notes of the city for various improvements or purposes authorized to be undertaken by the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey. Thank you.

Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 26-3383. Having closed the hearing on this ordinance just moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption. Second.

Madam Clerk, would you please call the roll? Mr. Boyer?

Aye.

Mr. Crisofoli? Aye. Ms. Kalmanson? Aye. Ms. Landman? Aye. Ms. LaSarasina?

Aye. President Hoth? Aye. Madam Clerk, would you please read the title of ordinance number 26-3384? Aye.

Bond ordinance appropriating $2,250,000 and authorizing the issuance of 2,142,000 bonds or notes of the city for various sewer utility improvements or purposes authorized to be undertaken by the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey.

Thank you. Council Member Landman. Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 26-3384. Having closed the hearing on this ordinance just moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption. Second.

Thank you. Would you call the roll, please? Mr. Boyer?

Aye. Mr. Chris Foley? Aye. Ms. Kalmanson? Aye. Ms. Landman? Aye. Ms. Lucera-Cina? Aye. President Toth?

Aye. Madam Clerk, would you please read the title of Ordinance No. 26-3385?

ordinance providing for the improvement of parking facilities in and by the city of Summit County in New Jersey appropriating $2,593,000 therefore and authorizing issuance of $2,469,000 bonds or notes of the city for financing such appropriation. Thank you. Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 26-3385. Having closed the hearing on this ordinance just moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption. Second.

Roll call, please. Mr. Boyer. Aye. Mr. Chris Foley. Aye. Ms. Kalmanson. Aye. Ms. Landman. Aye. Mrs. Saracena. Aye. President Tov.

Aye. Madam Clerk, would you please read the title of Ordinance Number 26-3386?

An ordinance to amend the Code Appendix A, Schedule of Fees Contained in the Revised General Ordinances of the City of Summit.

Thank you. Council Member Landman.

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 26-3386. Having just closed the hearing on this ordinance moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption.

Thank you. Roll call, please.

Did I have a second?

Oh, I'm sorry. A second. Okay.

Now roll call, please. Mr. Boyer? Aye. Mr. Grisifulli?

Aye.

Ms. Kalmanson? Aye. Ms. Landman? Aye. Mrs. Saracena? Aye. President Toth?

Aye. Madam Clerk, would you please read the title of ordinance number 26-3387?

An ordinance to establish the 2026 salaries, wages, or compensations and for the officers of and for the officers and employees of the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey. Thank you. Council Member Landman?

Thank you, Council President. Ordinance number 26-3387. Having closed the hearing on this ordinance just moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption. Second.

Roll call, please.

Mr. Boyer.

Aye.

Mr. Crisofoli. Aye. Ms. Kalmanson. Aye. Ms. Landman. Aye. Ms. Lucera-Cena. Aye. President Toth.

Aye. Madam Clerk, would you please read the title of ordinance number 26-3388? Aye.

An ordinance amending Chapter 3, Police Regulations of the Code of the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey, adding a new Section 3-20 entitled Drones and Other Unmanned Aircraft.

Thank you. Council Member Kalvinson.

Thank you, Council President. Having closed the hearing for Ordinance ID 26-3388 moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption. Second.

Roll call, please. Mr. Boyer.

Just a quick note, just explain my vote. Councilwoman Lammon and Comminson said that there were look at revisions to this, especially on the public property and things of that nature. So I would like to vote for say nay now in the condition that we do take a look at this. So yes.

You voted nay, correct?

Uh, aye. Sorry.

He's like, aye? Aye. Okay, you're confusing me. Sorry.

It's late. Sorry.

That's okay. Mr. Crisofoli.

What he said.

I need an aye or a nay, please. Aye. Oh, thank you. Ms. Kalmanson. Aye. Ms. Landman. Aye. Ms. Saracena. Aye. President Took. Aye.

Almost there. Madam Clerk, would you please read the title of Ordinance Number 26-3389?

An ordinance amending the Code of the City of Summit, Section 7-25, Regulations for the Movement and the Parking of Traffic on Municipal Property and Board of Education Property, Subsection 7-25.2, Municipal Parking Lot Areas.

Thank you. Council Member Kalmanson.

Thank you, Council President. Having closed the hearing for Ordinance ID 26-3389 moments ago, I move this ordinance for final adoption. Second.

Roll call, please. Mr. Boyer?

Aye.

Mr. Crisofoli?

Aye.

Ms. Kalmanson? Aye. Ms. Landman? Aye. Ms. Lucera-Sena? Aye. President Soot? Aye.

Now we have an ordinance for introduction. Okay. So, Madam Clerk, would you please read the ordinance for introduction ID number 12614?

Repeal and replace Chapter 5 filming controls and amend Chapter A schedule of fees appendix Section A-27, filming permits and Section A-28 filming parking fees of the General Code of the City of Summit County of Union, New Jersey. Thank you.

Council Member Boyer.

Thank you, Council President. For introduction of this ordinance, I would like to defer to Councilman Christofoli, who did a tremendous, wonderful job on this. Thank you for saying that.

Yes.

So I'd like you to introduce it, sir.

Thank you, Councilman. I'm speechless, so I appreciate that. Ordinance ID 12614 The Film Ready Ordinance would modify Summit's existing ordinance covering film and video productions as part of a partnership with the New Jersey Economic Development Authority. The Wall Street Journal article from May 28th has the unlikely headline, Big Studios Are Ditching Hollywood for New Jersey Due to State-Level Tax Incentives. uh the problem is that each of new jersey's 564 municipalities has its own rules that make it difficult for these productions to come to our towns the proposed ordinance is a model recommended by new jersey eda to make the rules and process more uniform 65 municipalities across the state already have adopted this ordinance since summit is such a special place One question is whether we might attract too many productions. This was a concern raised by our city clerk. But I am assured by our attorney that the ordinance includes provisions for us to take a pause or just say no if the volume becomes too high. Thomas Edison built the world's very first movie studio a few miles from here in West Orange. It's worth a visit. So in one sense, the movie industry is just coming home. I move to introduce the ordinance. Second, and I'm sorry, Dan killed this one.

Yeah, second. That's very gracious of you, Council Member Boyer. I know you would have done as well. Okay, so this is just... Just roll call. Roll call? It is roll call. Yes. Thank you. Hadn't gotten to that page. Madam Clerk.

Mr. Boyer.

Aye.

Mr. Crisofulli. Aye. Ms. Kalmanson. Aye. Ms. Landman. Aye. Ms. LaSarasina. Aye. President Toot.

Aye. Now we get to move on to resolutions. Let's see. We've already done Ms. Lucera-Cenas, so we're going to go back to Council Member Landman.

Council President, if I may suggest, Council Member Landman can bundle if she wishes.

Great, thank you. I will do that. I appreciate that. Thank you, Council President. Resolutions number 12509 and 12513, I'll bundle those together. They provide cost of living adjustments to salaries or move city staff to the next step in their salaries. This increase applies only to non-union employees that have, 3% only applies to non-union employees who have maxed out their steps. City staff, like all city residents and the municipal budget, are feeling the impact of historically high utility prices and fuel due to the war in Iran, as well as other goods and services. And this modest increase will help offset but not fully cover the current inflation rate. I move to adopt this resolution. Second.

Okay, thank you. Are there any members of the public who would like to comment on one or both of these resolutions? Any members of council? Yes, council member Boyd.

I know it's late, right? I just want to ask the council, when salary increases, can you please look at the crossing guards, right? I mean, I know, right? But, I mean, we're talking about, you know, increases in food and this and that. I mean, some of these folks are retired, you know. When you look at increasing salaries and stuff, take care of those folks too. That's all I'm saying. So if you can go back to, not with this, but if you have other conversations in finance, it would be nice to do that as well. Thank you. Thank you.

Council President, excuse me, through you. Yes, City Administrator. I just want Councilman Boyer to know, and I'm going to find it, and I will email it to you tomorrow along with the Finance Committee. We did do some research on surrounding towns and their crossing guard rates, and we are one of the two highest. So I just want to put that out there.

Okay.

Thank you.

Do we have other comments from members of Council? No. So I think this is just an up or a down. Okay. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Any opposed? Okay. A motion carries. Let's move on to Councilmember Chris Ifouli.

Thank you, Council President. Resolution ID-12579 authorizes the award of a bid in the amount of approximately $220,000 for the Ashland Road sidewalk plan, providing a safe way for kids to walk to school or Memorial Field, a route for dog walkers, runners, and everyone else on that side of town. I move to adopt the resolution.

Second. Thank you. Do we have any comments from members of the public on this resolution? Do we have any comments from members of council?

Through you, council president.

Yes, council member.

This one is really close to my heart because I saw it from the beginning and now to this point. This is the essence of residency advocacy. It didn't start here. This one started with the residents, the neighbors. They got everybody together. They got a petition. They had over like 100 people sign it. They organized and they they brought it forth and the council did what they should do which is you know push it and Make sure that the city Implemented because the people want it so tonight this whole process really becomes real We're gonna build new ad a compliance sidewalks from Ashland Road from Stacy Court Tanglewood Drive and I'm really excited about how this played out. And a portion of it is going to be funded by the DOT. So didn't really spend that much money on it either. So it all worked out. So thank you, Council President.

Thank you. Yes, Council Member Calamanson.

Thank you, Council President. I'm equally excited about the sidewalks coming to Ashland because, you know, the sidewalks have just gone into Canoe Brook and I've had so many people stop me and thank me and say they're really enjoying them. They enjoy walking, you know, their dogs on the sidewalks. And, you know, when we have sidewalks, parents feel safer letting their children walk and giving them more freedom. which then builds the confidence in children, and that's what we all want. So I'm really excited that new sidewalks are going into. It's a huge deal. Thank you.

Anybody else? Oh, I'll just say, yeah. That's a neighborhood in town where there has been no safe way to leave other than by car. And it's very exciting to see this. I'm sure those of us along this side of the dais who have walked Ashland Avenue and knocked doors on Ashland Road, can appreciate how dangerous it has been. I love telling the story of the postal carrier who stopped his truck when I was walking on Ashland to tell me that there needed to be a sidewalk. Wow. Glad this is finally happening. And thank you, Ali, if you're watching this, because we know you started it. With that, let's take a vote. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Yay. Back to you, Council Member Crisafulli. I think we're pulling this one.

Oh.

Yes, I am sorry. As much as we want to appoint affordable housing round four task force members, please, people, apply for this. This really affects you. You are correct. So let us go back to Council Member Kalmanson for Resolution ID 12602. No. Yes. 12602.

Thank you, Council President. This is Resolution ID 12602, and this resolution declares a vacancy in the Parking Services Agency for a parking collections technician slash enforcement officer, pending closed discussion. I move to adopt this resolution.

Second. Okay. Do we have comments from members of the public on this resolution? Do we have any comments from members of council? Okay. Then let's close the hearing. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Consent agenda. Do I have a motion to pass the consent agenda? So moved. Second. Okay. Do members of the public have anything to say about the consent agenda? Members of Council? Oh, for a second there, I thought you were raising your hand, Councilmember Cowlinson. No? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay. Thank you to our city staff for sticking it out. You are free to leave us. We'll see you way too early tomorrow morning. Gonna move on to the public comment portion of the meeting. And as we begin public comments, we ask that the residents of Summit step forward to speak first. We value input from everyone, and any member of the public is welcome to speak. We simply ask for your courtesy in allowing our local neighbors to lead the public discussion if they're prepared to speak first. Hello, Mr. Bassman.

Council President, just really quickly, I know Gus was on his way out, but I just really wanted to thank him. The last two meetings, he really did a fantastic job, so maybe he'll watch this at some point. We'll tell him you said so. Yeah, he did good.

Yes. My name is Henry Bassman. I live at 18 Hartley Road. I was sad to see at the end of the last Common Council meeting, Mayor Fagan gave a long passionate and concerned talk about the political climate and summit. She accused the current Common Council majority of playing politics with important decisions that affect the entire community. I would suggest there's enough blame for both sides that should have been acknowledged because by not doing so, her speech became partisan political propaganda. More importantly, complaining does not solve problems. It only makes them worse. Leaders don't complain about problems. Leaders solve problems. As Chief Executive Officer of Summit, here are a few leadership initiatives I believe Summit's Mayor could have proposed to solve the problem. One, form a partnership with the Mayor and Council President dedicated to improving the political climate summit. Two, recruit two highly respected leaders to consult, advise, and negotiate best political practices. Frank Masiosi and Jordan Glatt would be a good team for such an effort. Three, hire a team building firm to identify and implement some much needed changes. Four, bring leaders of the Democrat and Republican committees together to sign an agreement or joint letter describing their commitment to best political practices, as I did with Mary Ogden, to stop people from stealing campaign signs many years ago when we were both chairs of our respective parties. Five, hold meetings with people who have grievances, float conspiracy theories, and firmly assault people on social media, and work with them to rectify their concerns. Reach agreement with council members to eliminate ambushes and gotchas. There's an old saying in business, lead, follow, or get out of the way. If healing the increasingly divisive political climate in Summit is a priority for our mayor, it is time to take one of those three courses of action. Stop complaining and lead, follow, or get out of the way. The consequences of not fixing this problem will be dire. People pay a real estate premium to live in Summit. because it's a great community. If Summit becomes a toxic community our premium property values will evaporate. Every homeowner will lose value of their home. Downtown will wither. Our tax base will shrink. Our school budget will be reduced. Our beautiful community will deteriorate. I don't want that to happen. I feel certain Other summit people don't want it to happen either. So as we used to say in the Army, do something, even if it's right. Our mayor was elected to lead, follow, or get out of the way. Now, if... Our mayor has already taken action to rectify some of the problems that she identified. Then I express a great thank you for taking that action. We need to have peace. We need to get along with each other.

Thank you, Mr. Bass. Anyone else?

Denison Harry on 140 Broad Street, Summit, New Jersey. Council President, I'm not sure whether this is appropriate, but maybe I should have asked it earlier, but regarding the Affordable Housing Round 4 Task Force members, you said about appointing, and then you made a comment about apply, so I'm a little confused. You said appoint, then apply, so how does that work? Mm-hmm.

Reverend, if you would like to apply, go back into your account. Have you applied online?

No, I'm already on the Affordable Housing Committee.

So you're on the Affordable Housing Committee. Just select the new task force in addition to what you have. As long as you don't go over four, because the system will only accept four.

So this is an addition, another committee?

Yeah. If you'd like, I can do that for you if you're okay with that.

Oh, I like that.

Thank you.

Okay.

So, but the process is a two-step, Reverend, that residents apply and then from the applicant pool, council appoints.

Okay. That's why I was confused. Yeah. Thank you so much.

Okay.

Alan Dickey, 80 Canoe Brook Parkway. I just want to thank all involved in the Canoe Brook Parkway improvement. The sidewalks are complete. The construction has been going very smoothly. The police department has protected the workmen. I've had the opportunity to walk on the new sidewalk several times and everyone in the neighborhood who has been using the sidewalks is very, very happy with the sidewalks. It's been a great improvement to the neighborhood and the livability of our neighborhood so thank you all and it's this has been a long project that's been going on since perhaps even 2019 and there have been several different iterations of council and other people involved in this and it's been a great success and again thank you all very much thank you any other comments

OK.

Anonymous, I really wish you wouldn't do that, Council President, with the saying residents first. There's no need for it. There is just no need for it. I believe I'm the only non-resident in the room. um this was started in the beginning of the year and it just sends a bad message i mean we didn't do it throughout the meeting uh but now we're doing it again you know that makes me want to get up to the lectern and speak before a resident you know as a courtesy i always let the residents speak first there's no need for it i i i truly don't understand it um how are you doing tonight council president Council President, how are you doing tonight? Excuse me? How are you doing? What a weird barrier to create. You can't even say good? Shut down communication? May I ask what the point of the last meeting was to limit council comments to three minutes? Because that's an abominable disgrace to the process. It's disgusting. These elected officials, they represent the people. I don't know what makes you think you can just arbitrarily decide to do that. And through the chair of Councilman Boer, I'm glad that you pushed back a little bit, but I wish you would have pushed back harder. You're a better man than I am because I would be losing my shit. Absolutely. For something like that. These people have been elected to represent the public. I don't know what makes you think you can arbitrarily just decide to make up a rule like that. I had a 12-hour workday. This is my busy time of the year. I would have loved to have just stayed home. But it was important enough for me to come out here. And you can't even look at me in the eye. You have not looked at me in the eye this entire time. You wouldn't even say how you're doing. So I just don't understand it. And I know you won't be giving any apology, but I think you owe the mayor an apology for saying that she should be limited to three minutes too. Absolutely disgusting disgrace.

I'm sorry, through you, Council President. Please stop the clock. Councilman, the typing, I'm sorry, I can't.

I'm sorry, I was just taking notes.

Okay.

Sorry, it's a little loud. Okay, thank you.

yeah so uh that's disrespectful to the process it's disrespectful to the proceedings uh it's just a disgrace it's abominable disgrace for for the whole process you cannot limit council comments to three minutes and to do it under the framework of uh discipline that's disgusting i spoke about the three minutes being not enough for residents so to do that to the council members and to do that to the mayor thank you absolute disgrace. Thank you for your answer how your day. Thank you for your comments.

Thank you for your comments. Do we have any other comments from members of the public? Okay, how about members of council? Council Member Boyer.

Sorry, Council Member Christofoli. My son does that, and I'm like, why are you hitting the keys so damn hard, man? It drives me crazy with that.

I hear that at home, too.

I do hear it. He's going to say he's practicing his drumming.

So, as we know, this weekend, we'll be celebrating Juneteenth. On June 19, 1865, federal troops reached Galveston, Texas and told the people there that they were free. The Emancipation Proclamation had been signed two and a half years earlier. So the freedom was real the whole time, but the news simply had not arrived. So for two and a half years, men and women lived as slaves, but they were already free. I think that gap is not a grievance, but a lesson. Freedom on paper is not the same as freedom in your mind. It's an interesting book that I read years and years and years ago. It's Breaking the Chains of Psychological Slavery. And this promise and our founding documents of our Constitution is for all of us that we were all created equal and that has always been true and when I look at my kids I Relate to them all the time No one is better than you Walk with your chest high Be firm in your ideas and Don't take second place, be first. Compete, damn it, compete. That to me is what Juneteenth is all about. Compete. And I hope that the public on that day just doesn't take it as a holiday, but embrace the history of this country. Because without these things, America might not be the America that we have now, with all the freedoms and rights and 14th Amendment and this amendment and that amendment. as a young country this was a growing stage so um i hope everybody takes juneteenth then and uh thank you council president thank you council council member boyer yeah council member lineman uh thank you council president um

So I want to speak briefly about Summit's affordable housing plan and the concerns residents continue to raise as recently as last week at the council listening session. The current affordable housing plan moved Summit forward towards compliance, but it was not the product of a strong enough strategy. It was developed under intense legal pressure and approved without the level of planning, public understanding, and relationship building that the issue required. And we're feeling the consequences of that now. Wilson Park might be subdivided because the plan put in place last year did not have a suitable location for the our house development. It's clear our houses needs were not properly considered. And now we're carving up and developing space script best excuse me scarce green space. The Veterans Housing Project at Chum Pike is also not a suitable location for this type of development. Veterans deserve access to transit, support services, a community connection, and a setting that supports long-term stability. St. Teresa's was included in the plan before the Archdiocese approved it. They still haven't. We are working in good faith to meet our affordable housing obligation. We don't just need to, we want to. The question residents and many of us keep asking though is whether the current plan can be improved so the city can meet some portion of that obligation in a more reasonable and responsible way. I don't know yet. I don't have the answers. But residents, we hear you. And I wanted to acknowledge that tonight. We are incredibly grateful for the constructive, helpful response from the public as we work through this plan for summit's future. Please keep those ideas coming. On to the budget, we passed a bunch of ordinances and resolutions tonight to spend money on important assets for the city. And I am very excited to make these investments in safety and sports fields and playgrounds and roads. But I just also want to flag that we are closely monitoring goodness, monitoring operating expenses. In a surprise to probably no one in this room, the cost of utilities and fuel for the city are hitting the city budget pretty hard city utilities and fuel expenses up about 45% versus this time last year. So we are we are watching closely. This is what we planned for when we worked on this year's budget, keeping a laser focus on the burden on taxpayers, reducing that as much as possible. And we thank in advance the city staff who are working very hard to meet the operating the constraints of the operating budget. And then last but not least, I know she left, but I want to just close by thanking Nicole Sawicki and Councilmember Kalmanson and others for opening the Chestnut lot in time for those going to the parade for the Knicks on Thursday. I hear there's a big group of high school students going now that school's out, I think, really effectively today. So I just want to thank everybody who made that happen and remind our kids to stay safe. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Calmenton.

Thank you, Council President. I wanted to give some updates from DCP. Playground update. The Tatlock slash Washington playground phase one is complete and the playground is open. The second phase will take place later this year, and that's when we will have an official ribbon cutting. Maybe playground is scheduled to open the week of June 29th. Community Programs is hosting several World Cup watch parties. The first one is Thursday, June 25th at 4 p.m. The World Cup will be shown before the screen on the green, and that movie that night will be Air Bud World Cup. July 4th, we will be showing the 1 p.m. and 5 p.m. World Cup games at Memorial. This is in addition to all of the band and entertainment that we always have in the bouncy houses that that will all be there. And we will also have the World Cup game. So that's going to be really exciting. Also, Saturday, July 11th on the Village Green, we'll be showing two World Cup games and working with Summit Soccer Club and other local soccer clubs to run games and activities for the kids. And there will be food trucks. So that'll be from 4 to 10 p.m. Lastly, recently it came to our attention that not all residents are aware that Summit Department of Community Programs offers financial assistance for recreation programs, facilities, and summer camps based on qualifications for the federal free and reduced lunch program. Subsidized rates and payment plans are available for qualifying Summit residents. So if you have any questions, please call or email David Guida and he can help point you in the right direction. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Council Member Crisofulli?

Thank you, Council President. It's been a big two weeks since our last meeting. The DARE graduation that the Mayor spoke at, our Council Listening Session, Pride Celebration, Affordable Housing Implementation Committee, aka the Mount Laurel Committee, Capital Projects and Admin Committees, Tap Water Tuesday's session that I attended to learn how we can protect our drinking water, Recycling Advisory Committee, the Environmental Commission last night. There's something just about every day. I'm really impressed by the summer interns. They really show amazing talent, and for them to serve our city this summer is really, I think, a sign of the success of city staff. Quickly on the capital projects committee that I chair, we have three grant applications that were part of the consent agenda. One is for additional sidewalks or rehabilitated sidewalks around the Village Green and the YMCA lot. with accessibility, the ADA ramps and so on. They're part of the 70 areas that the Department of Public Works is chipping away at around the Village Green. Bryan Parkway, we are seeking additional funds there as well as for repaving curbs and drainage on New England Avenue on both sides of Springfield. Sewer repair will be extended to the southwest, I guess, part of town closer to Ashland, Druid Hill, and Greenbar where I live. Really looking at the integrity of our sewer system and repairing it as needed so that that money is really well spent. A quick update, the tier garage will be part of a July 7th contract award. The top floor, top two floors will be closed. Um, and that will be sorted out on the affordable housing fund very quickly. I continue to work closely with Mayor Fagan and former Councilwoman Delia Hamlet on the Mount Laurel committee, which is charged with execution of last year's affordable housing agreement. We spent most of our last meeting, which is prior to the last council meeting, really strategizing how to protect Summit from undesirable and unsustainable development. We've made some very difficult decisions to carry out the plan. Residents should know that we're working together to protect Summit from the loss of protection from even further unsustainable and undesirable development. If the judge determines that Summit is not moving forward with the execution of the agreed plan, we run a very serious risk of losing our protection from developers. One current proposal is to build a high tower, six-story tower has been announced previously on Summit Avenue at Broad Street with more density than any project that's ever been approved in Summit. The project would overshadow the Village Green. And if that project proceeds, The product that could be just the start of further development as the new taller and bigger building establishes a precedent that could be difficult to reverse. So we're fighting that possibility. We're working together to ensure and I'm told by the attorney that our chances are very strong that we will succeed in that. So I'm going to not talk further here. It's been a long night. Really appreciate everybody's attention, all of you out there online still watching. Hopefully, you've had some popcorn to keep you going. But thanks for everybody's attention and your participation.

Thank you.

Council Member Lucera-Cena. Thank you, Council President. I'm sorry, I'll try to keep it very brief. First, again, I want to express gratitude to everyone who came out this evening and especially to those who have remained with us through the many hours. And for those residents who expressed their concerns and frustration around the noise pollution that's going on around Bristol-Myers Squibb, thank you very much for sharing your experience with us. This is something that we can now take and do earnest work on. So again, we very much appreciate you all coming out and letting us know what's going on in your neighborhood. On affordable housing, to echo comments that have been made, we appreciate the continued feedback, the concerns that we're hearing about the proposed mechanisms from the Round 4 plan. We understand the pain points. It's not a plan that some of us would have chosen, but it is the plan that we have. We want the Round 4 plan to work better, both for affordable housing and for sub-it. One area in particular that I've been focused on is the kind of worst case scenario cost analysis to the city and of what that financial picture looks like, what the potential burden would be for the taxpayer. Unfortunately, under the prior council, that work was not done. So we are working toward that analysis now. My very quick, this is a rough estimate admittedly, my quick back of the envelope math is that a worst case cost analysis would be about $20 million, which is obviously a very significant investment that the city taxpayers would be bearing. But we will certainly keep you all posted as that work progresses. And then finally, I just wanted to share. So we had the opportunity to take our family to Philadelphia this weekend as we're preparing to celebrate the 250th anniversary of America's founding. And we went to the site of one of Ben Franklin's homes where my daughter interestingly selected this compass as the take home that that she wanted to take. have a spy on her behalf. And when I told her before I left this evening that I was having some big feelings about coming to the meeting, she scurried away and gave me the compass. And she said, take this in case you're feeling lost. And so as I was driving over, I was thinking about that. And what kind of the north point could be for Summit. And for me, I think for many of us, it's our shared values, right? We have so many shared values in this community. We want our excellent public schools. We want our green spaces. We want our beautiful downtown. We're grateful that we can shuttle off to New York and Philadelphia We want, you know, community that comes together toward a common purpose. And we saw some of that tonight, right? That high level of engagement. We may disagree on the way that we get there, but we do have so many common goals. And it's essential to have that participation, that respectful dissent and the productive dialogue, right? That is the beating heart of this American experiment. So again, we express our gratitude and when we ground in those shared community values, that's when we get to a great result together. Thank you.

Thank you. Then I'm going to finish with just a few highlights in the second quarter, and I know I'm repeating what some of my fellow council members have said, but there will be a more complete sort of wrap-up. Despite having the most challenging budget environment in recent memory, council unanimously passed a balanced budget that maintains city services. And compared to many of our neighboring communities, we kept our property tax increase relatively low. Council's also just passed the ordinances necessary to begin implementing our 2026 capital budget. We're going to buy a new fire truck. We'll buy four new police cars. We're going to revamp the water slide at the aquatic center and improve the baseball softball fields in town. We'll complete the sidewalk projects on Ashland Road and elsewhere, and we'll rehab the tiered garage on Springfield Avenue. And we've moved forward with several playgrounds, as Councilmember Kalmanson noted. Washington Phase 1 is open, maybe is about to. We've announced a new neighborhood playground downhill from the community center that's scheduled to open in the fall. We've brought back pop-up dog parks. We've staffed our city boards and commissions with highly qualified volunteers, making appointments without regard to political affiliation. Summit, as we've all acknowledged, Summit is blessed to have knowledgeable, dedicated residents who step up and volunteer. And if you haven't joined their ranks, I urge you to do so. And with, yes. I'm really sorry.

You jogged my memory, and I apologize. I meant to mention that Megan Trindell, our communications person, and I are working with Mark Osoroski and David Guido with DCP to do a Facebook Live. Look for more information, but it should be June 25th.

Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Thank you. That's perfectly all right, Mayor. And with that, I will entertain a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Stay quiet. Meeting is adjourned. We won't see you until after Juneteenth and the 4th, so enjoy the holidays. That's right.