Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop was grilled by a group of Downtown residents last night over his administration's handling of a controversial 87-unit residential development proposed for a lot near Schools 3 and 4.

The residents, about 80 of them assembled inside the council chambers at City Hall, accused administration officials and Fulop's allies on the City Council of being unresponsive to their complaints about the development.

Some even uttered a word Fulop often hurled at the previous administration: corrupt.

"It really stinks of the old corruption and graft and greed that had always traditionally driven Jersey City," said Harry Young, 64, of Bright Street. "Because the developer's the only one that seems to like this deal."

The mayor - who was elected in May after spending years on the council railing against political corruption and pledging to run an efficient, transparent government - seemed rattled by the crowd's complaints.

At one point, he smiled and said to the crowd, "So, are we still friends?"

Fulop represented Ward E on the council for two terms, and he is loved, even revered, by a large swath of the Downtown. He said last night he is "exceptionally hurt personally" by the crowd's accusations.

"When you have friends that you've known for nine years saying, corrupt this, that, things that you wouldn't say to anybody ..." Fulop said before being interrupted by a man in the crowd.

"Don't stand there and grandstand," the man said. "This is not about our feelings."

The proposed development would feature 87 "microunits" that developer Rushman-Dillon hope will attract college graduates. There are no parking spaces planned for the property, which the city sold to the Jersey City Redevelopment Agency in 2012 for $1.8 million. It is located at the corner of Varick and Bright streets.

Critics of the proposal say it will increase congestion in the area, make parking difficult if not impossible for residents who already live there and create a "Hoboken-like atmosphere."

Rushman-Dillon could not be reached to comment.

The rub, city officials say, is that while the proposal for the building has yet to receive a vote from the Planning Board or council, the redevelopment area created for that lot was approved before Fulop took office, with no objections from the community at the time.

City attorneys have said the city cannot simply halt construction on the project or else developers could sue and likely win. Fulop said he hopes to convince the developer to lower the number of units.

Marlene Sandkamp, president of the Van Vorst Park Association, whose members seem uniformly against the plan, said she's not sure any opinions were changed after the meeting.

"We believe we have a legal fight just to slow this down," Sandkamp said. "We all hope it works out. we want to work with Steve."