Thank you. We're live. >> Okay. Hello everyone. >> Recording in progress. >> Hello everyone. Uh welcome to the Township of Chadam committee meeting the
workshop agenda for today March 10th. Uh the meeting is being called to order at 7:31. Mr. Lanti, has adequate notice been given? >> Yes. Adequate notice of this meeting of the township committee was given as required by the open public meetings act as follows. Notice was given to the Chad Mccurer in the Morris County Deli Record
on January 7th, 2026. Notice was posted on the bulletin board in the main hallway of the municipal building on January 7th, 2026. and notice was filed with the township clerk on January 7th, 2026. >> Thank you, Mr. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Mr. Al Perowitz,
>> Mr. Troy >> here. >> Mrs. Ewald >> here. >> Deputy Mayor McHugh >> here. >> And >> here >> and second call. Mr. Aleritz >> we have the whole committee. >> Okay.
Now I would like to open uh the first hearing of citizens. Mr. Please provide guidance. >> Members of the public are now welcome to come to the microphone to address the township committee. This is an opportunity for any member of the public to be heard about issues which are not
topics scheduled for public hearings tonight. Those present may step up to the microphone to be heard. If you're watching via Zoom, you may speak during any of the public comment sessions by following the Zoom instructions to raise your hand. Whether in person or online, when you're recognized to speak, please
mind the following procedures. Please say your name, spell your last name, and give the name of your street. You are not required to give your street number. All public comments will be limited to three minutes. Rather than use any of your time answering questions, the
township committee will wait until you finish speaking before responding. There are two public comment sessions on tonight's agenda. Each member of the public will be limited to one comment of up to three minutes during each public comment period. Written comments submitted to the township clerk before
3M today will be read during the public comment sessions. Written comments are subject to the same guidelines as oral comments. Duplicative written comments uh may be summarized rather than read in full according to the guidelines issued by the New Jersey Division of Local
Government Services. Um, these rules will also apply to the public hearing on the uh the ordinances this evening. And if anyone's here about the ordinances, we will have separate public hearings uh for those matters. And uh we did not have any written comments for this evening. >> Okay. Uh are there any hands raised
online? >> Uh no hands raised online. >> Any member of the audience would like to come forward to ask any questions? questions or comments. >> And this is for anything other than the ordinances.
>> The ordinances are uh the affordable housing matters. Then we can close the first hearing of citizens and we can move on to the public hearing for the adoption of the ordinances number 2026-05
the affordable housing ordinance ordinance 2026-06 adding the H AH1 zone and ordinance 2026-07 affordable housing overlay district open it to comment now Yes. Uh we do not
have any hands raised online. >> Okay. >> So if anyone is here to speak about ordinance 202605. >> Um so the zoning ordinances come next. This is the one that um is we'll let Jessica describe what it's about, but um
if you're here about either of the zoning ordinances, those are the next two. >> For the benefit of the residents, you want to just do all three of them public hearing together? >> Uh we should have separate ones, one for each. >> Okay. Okay. So, are we gonna let Jessica make comments first and then
>> Well, that's that's up to to you. >> Yes, let's have Jessica make comments first. >> Yeah. >> And give an overview. >> Good evening, everybody. The first ordinance on for tonight is uh what's referred to as the affordable housing ordinance which set forth the rules and
regulations for the administration of Cadam's affordable housing program and how the units that will be produced um and the units that are currently available will be administered. This includes income distribution limits, um,
bedroom distributions, um, as well as how they're going to be marketed to residents and re and those who live in the affordable housing region. It also includes what's called a um, development fee ordinance, which is
actually very similar. Actually, it is the same ordinance that we had adopted previously. It was just um brought up to date with the new new act regulations. >> So just to make clear, this is what we already have on the books but updated
based on the new the new round. >> Yeah, it is pretty much exactly what we had. Um this is for the most part the or the model ordinance that most municipality will be adopting. I did make some specific changes that I felt
were important for the township and it was signed off by um by the um fair share housing even though it didn't need to be. They uh they did sign off on it so we shouldn't have any issues. Um everything has been um you
know reviewed by everyone it needs to be reviewed by. So, >> okay. Any other discussion >> or we can open to the public if there are any comments on ordinance 2026-05 the affordable housing ordinance.
>> Ed making type in the chat. Um reading through this stuff uh can you tell me how many units you guys are committing to build or whatever. I know there's a Southern Boulevard. >> I can't hear you. >> Oh, you can't hear me at all? Uh,
>> speak into the middle. >> Okay. Sorry, Ed. Sorry about that. Uh, I'm trying to find out how many uh affordable housing housing units you guys are committing to build through this settlement.
>> So, we did not settle with fair share housing. So, there is no settlement. This is the affordable housing ordinance which does administer the affordable housing units which will be created. Our realistic development potential was four units. So the township has committed to
building four units over the next 10-year period >> at Southern Boulevard. >> That will be in the I'm not I don't know it is Southern Boulevard, but I may >> Yes. >> Okay. I know what it's block. I know the
blocks and lots. Um later there are two ordinances on regarding overlay zones and those are zones um which will help to meet our unmet need. Our unmet need is what we're not committing to build, but
we're zoning to build. So it doesn't have to be built. We're not planning to build it, but we are providing the potential for it to be built. >> Thank you. I will also say the uh realistic development potential was four units, but we are building a um triplex and we
will receive one bonus credit. So technically it's three units plus one bonus credit. >> When you say four units, >> oh sorry, Jim BL O B I E L L O Popler Lane. When you say units, how many actual
apartments or whatever they are being built in those four units? >> Three. >> Three. >> There will be three units. Three apartments with varying bedrooms, but only three. >> Okay. How many How many units are we required by state law to build?
>> Three. >> And how many? >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. We're required to build four. We're building three and we get one bonus credit. Um, if I can just uh cut in for procedure, let the resident ask all your questions and then we'll respond at the end. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Okay. Sorry. >> So, the unit on where Charlie Browns used to be, is that one unit or is that 80 or 60 units? >> 62 units. >> 62 units. >> Sorry, I'm not supposed to wait for >> That's all right. That's all right.
>> So, you're saying all Chattam's going to do is build four more units. >> Three. three more units. >> So, this is the fourth round of affordable housing. We have been found compliant and done everything we needed to do for our third round housing
with the building of the um group homes. >> That's the last remaining units that need to be built for our third round compliance. The three units that we're discussing this evening are for our fourth round compliance. >> How big a building is that going to be
for three units? It's a triplex, so they'll It's going to be similar to a townhouse with three. >> Okay. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Okay, just as a reminder before you
start, um, ask all your questions and once you're done, then we'll respond. Once we start responding, that's you're done with questions. So, >> that's an unusual request. So, no, that's another question based on a response. I get >> Yeah, that's that's part of our procedures.
>> Okay. Go ahead. >> Okay. Well, let me see if I could ask this question so I don't have to try to get another question in. My name is Don Banano in Three Magnolia Place. So, in the deliberations of this council, uh,
what went into the decision to change the business districts, and that's what I understand you're doing. You're now including low moderate income housing. What went into the decision of concentrating that in the areas you've chosen? and was there consideration for
any of the residents around there? And the last question I'll ask you, um, and I'm going to ask a different this way. Uh, how many members of the board live within an eighth of a mile of where this new business district is going to be?
Any hands? Quarter of a mile. You're not going to answer it. 3/4 of a mile. Two miles. Two miles. >> Two miles. So effectively these the the members here are concentrating these low
moderate income housing units at least the plan and I understand you're not going to do anything now but you're concentrating in an area where none of you live within a mile a mile and a half of it whereas there are many residents who may be within
500 to a,000 ft of all of these areas that are being identified. So, was there any consideration to say, "Gee, maybe we ought to spread this out to with this very, very large township that we live in." Now, I'm going to make this comment. I was here four years ago.
Maybe it was a little less, maybe a little more when uh you guys weren't here, but the port had decided to put in some low and moderate income housing right around here. You couldn't get a seat in the room. You couldn't get a seat outside. You couldn't get a street
on the seat out in a parking lot. It was packed and there was a good reason for it because people were being affected by it. This decision not that many people are being affected by it but there is a development that is going to be affected by it and no consideration has been
given to those people who pay a lot of taxes and get very very little in return. Our choice I understand that nobody's forcing us to live there. But it seems to be an odd concentration of where these affordable housing units are going to be placed. This is a very large
township. Uh there are a lot of things that are going on adjacent to this township that are going to require these shopping centers to stay as shopping centers. There is a big development in Gerald. They're going in by Madison. Not your responsibility, but those people are going to want to shop somewhere. We
start putting affordable housing within those shopping areas. It's going to take away shopping opportunities. Um, so I'd like to understand the thought process is why we're jamming it all into one area. Why not spread it out throughout the township? Thank you.
>> Provide some clarification first. >> Yeah, there's definitely some legal clarification. >> Yeah, I I sorry. Let's answer the person who >> can't But you if you wanted to come back up if you have a follow-up question, you're more than welcome to come back to the
mic if you if you want to. >> No, we're going to answer his question. We're going to have our Do you want me to >> provide I can provide wanted to provide some clarification just to make sure residents understand. >> Um so the third round affordable housing
which was the last round that we completed, we built 62 units which the Charlie Brown site and 24 units went in at the Arbor Green site. Those are 100% affordable units. We are obligated under this fourth round to build three which
gives us four credits affordable housing units. The overlay zone in our third round, we did an overlay zone over the property that's next to the Chattam Club. The overlay zone provides the option for a developer to come in and to
do uh residential housing, but mixed in terms of being affordable and market rate. So, we already have an overlay zone on a property. That was that's been in place during the third round. But whether or not a developer comes in, it's it's up to, you know, the market
dynamics. It's up to the development. That was never opted. But it would in that property, it's 36 units and it would be mixed use and it's 5:1 ratio market rate housing to affordable housing. The the overlay zone, the reason was put over that area is we have
to provide a realistic development potential for those units we still have an obligation to build but we don't have space to build. So you have to provide you have to meet that it's basically an unmet need. You have to provide some way to to accommodate for that unmet need.
And it is the same way as that property Fairmont Commons that's over by the Chattam Club in that it allows for market and affordable. So, I think it's a 20% set aside affordable and the way it was structured is so that it's two stories. I don't even think it allows
for three stories of residential development similar to what you already have at the Charlie Brown site and other structures in the area. And again, market dynamics, the people who own those properties, that may not happen, but it was our obligation to provide a
realistic development potential for for that ability to put in the multi-unit housing. So, I hope that I just wanted to clear the I still respect everybody's input and I just want to make sure we understood what the dynamics are. And now now I'll turn it over to whatever
whoever else wanted to provide input. >> Well, I think also based on the landscape of Cham Township and swamp and wetlands and those kind of things, we are very limited in our options of where we are able to identify these areas. So,
we were very thoughtful about all of this and um it's a legal obligation. Chattam Township has been one of the only townships and municipalities that has successfully, you know, implemented our our affordable housing. There are some some
municipalities that haven't done anything yet. And um Fair Share Housing brought lawsuits against every municipality, over 400 municipalities in New Jersey. China Township was one of maybe two that were successful in winning
>> if if unless you know your fellow >> unless Jessica you had anything else you wanted to add. >> I I I do. So um we if we understand the overlay zones they retain the zoning that is already there. The overlay zoning gives an option. It doesn't mean
that that option has to be taken, but it provides the the zoning required by the Mount Laurel doctrine. >> I understand. >> Now, now we were legally required under this new the new amended housing act to
identify portions of Chattam which were this is a term that is in the fair housing act likely to redevelop. So, we couldn't just pick anywhere. We had to go through and look at the areas that
were likely to redevelop. The statute identified some types that you know some types of um properties u nurseries uh like plant nurseries um and not baby nurseries but um that for example that's
one of them. Um any vacant land that that could be developed that that would obviously be another one. um fair share was very much pushing Chadam to have higher densities in our areas where they currently our overlay zones are 10
dwelling units per acre. What that means is for every acre of land, 10 units are available. Two of those units would be affordable housing units. Eight of those if the zoning is if you take if someone takes advantage of the zoning um the
overlay zoning, eight of those would be market rate units. Two of them would be affordable units. And when you go through the entirety of the um overlay zones, it equals what our unmet need is.
>> I understand what you just said. However, it seems to me when you thought about where are we now going to put these these areas, you concentrated extremely extreme concentration in one area. Now, Chattam Township is a from
from acreage, square miles or whatever you want to call it is very very large. And I know there's some big properties, there's some big houses, there are a lot of things, but it's strange that you concentrated in an area. There are two shopping malls that are critical to this to not only our area in Chattam
Township, they're critical to Madison. I know we don't give a damn about Madison. We don't ever did. Um Mars, Madison's going to build on Geralda. Uh where are those people going to be shopping? What you've done is taken the in my opinion, you've taken the easy way out. you said,
'You know what? We're not going to get Look how many people have shown up here tonight. Almost none. Because you know what? Because they're not affected. When we had the when we had the um recommendation to put low and moderate income housing on this property here, and I just talked about it before, you
couldn't get a parking spot. You couldn't squeeze yourself in here. So, it's a matter of, you know what, I think you made a decision on who's who are we going to annoy? Who are we going to get mad at us? We don't give a damn. those people in that development behind there, we don't give a damn about them. We pay
2 and a half% of the taxes. We get nothing. We That's our choice. That's not a complaint. It's our choice. But I think you've taken an easy way out. Said, you know what? Let's make it a a business to change the business zone to a business affordable housing zone and
it's given you an easy way out. You didn't do enough work on this. There's got to be other areas you could have identified instead of concentrating it. And that's why I asked the question, how many of you on the board live within an eighth of a mile, a quarter of a mile, a half a mile? You could be three miles away and still be in this township.
I don't know. I'm not asking where you live, but that's the issue. And I don't think you've given enough thought to what you do to other people who are big contributors to the tax base in this town without really saying, you know what, maybe we should have diversified this a little bit more. So that's my
complaint. And I know you've already voted on this, so it's probably a dead issue for us, me living in this where I do, but you're you're concentrating this zone in one area of this enormous township. And I know what you said. We got swamps. We
got a lot of things. There are other areas. And I would love to see the other areas you looked at and turned down. Thank you. >> Well, so I would say the other side of that is not only I've lived here for 25 years. I grew up in Madison, actually. So I >> I did too. I lived there for 35 years.
>> So um there's also consideration for our new residents and the people that will move into town if there is affordable housing. People that qualify for affordable housing, there's a reason they qualify for affordable housing. >> I understand. >> They may or may not have an automobile.
They may or may not have transportation. We're required at Charlie Browns to provide transportation to the train station as part of affordable housing because they may not have transportation. So I think as a human being to put them out on Myersville Road is yeah I didn't think that was the best
>> the prior board the prior board decided here was a pretty good place. So boards have different opinions. So you that's this board's decision and I'm sure it's an easy one for you guys to make and say you know what people have affordable housing they don't have two or three cars put them where they're shopping.
Well guess what if you if you put affordable housing in there where are they going to shop? They're not going to shop there if you take the if you take away the the shopping malls not malls but the shopping areas the two the to the butt chike road. So it just seems to me you guys made a pretty easy decision.
Let's make this decision. We're not going to have a lot of people screaming about it. It may never happen, but you know what? You're being very unfair to the people who have bought those properties. Very, very unfair. We should go back and rethink what you've decided to do.
>> Mayor, if I may just make a couple comments. Um, first, first, if I may just clarify, um, if I'm if I'm hearing uh the gentleman uh correctly, this has been structured in such a way that we have what's called an overlay zoning. So the underlying pre-existing
zoning still exists and is applicable. So I think the notion and to the extent that um something does materialize there per this plan uh would be um not to uh eliminate the commercial component that is to say the retail shopping there. It
would uh desiraably be a mixeduse um structure where you've got residential with the existing some semblance of the existing retail uh along with parking. So that's a hope and desire and again this is a a you know a uh a straw man
plan that may or may not happen over the next 10 years. That's sort of the horizon. Uh a couple things I understand and I certainly respect your your your opinion. Um there's a lot of work that happens uh at at the subcommittee committee level that is to say the affordable housing subcommittee. So
there's been u extensive hours uh consulting with professionals uh looking at maps so on so forth and looking at uh the the drafting of the the affordable housing language. So one of the first things we did was certainly not accept the preliminary figures that were
provided to us. We took uh a proactive and aggressive step to challenge those numbers, reduce it. We effectively did. We were sued twice by the New Jersey Builders Association and then second time by Fair Share. We effectively reduced the the commitment by I think
about 10%. Um most municipalities just excuse me just accepted the numbers. Um there were probably a number of them that uh challenged it and we are now I think it's I guess one of two that successfully defended uh the plan that we put forth. So it's been accepted by
the state. So all that is good news. Um what I can also share with you is that one of the things that's become abundant abundantly clear to me and I think other members of the committee is that um we cherish our green space, our open space. Um we love our parks, we love our
trails, we love the aesthetics u of of the township. Uh so one of the factors that we took into it was not to set aside and make vulnerable unpar undeveloped parcels of land that have environmental sensitivity that have
trees mature trees on it. An attractive comp component this is one of multiple components that we looked into is that uh the the sites that we selected are already developed. They're already impervious coverage. This asphalt covering that land it wouldn't affect any environmentally s sensitive areas.
we would not be cutting down trees. We would not be reducing our open space. So, that was a factor that went into it. Another factor, and I think Mayor Roman had um alluded to it, was we already have existing transportation there. That that tends to be a variable that comes into the mix. It's not a pre
prerequisite in every application, but we have another bonus element, which is that the transportation already exists there. So we can piggyback that without any potential accretive cost in the event we have affordable housing plans that come to fruition in other
locations. It it's sort of ideal because it's a short cops given away at the Madison train station. Um Chadam's a little further down the road, but again there's pre-existing transportation logistics already in place uh in that general vicinity. So those are two other
components that certainly went into analogy of variables that we looked at uh in order to make what we believe to be um uh a reasonable plan. Uh a third I'll share is pre-existing utilities. So for example um the things that carved
out get carved out or are lands that don't have any sewer system. For example, uh this already had uh existing sewer system connections. So that uh that lends itself to be a plausible plan and in our in our ability to put forth a plausible plan. Um those were that was
another consideration that we took into account in order to make as far as finalizing it to these select lots. So I hope that explains a little bit about our thinking. Um I think at the end of the day the hope and desire is uh the some level of
retail dynamics will c certainly be there in the event again a plan comes before the planning board. Uh it would ideally be a mixeduse uh uh development. Um and it would also benefit the residents there would benefit from uh
existing uh logistics uh and the development also be more reasonable in terms of ultimate cost and any potential burden to the township because existing uh utilities already are in place over there. So I think that um hopefully sheds a little bit more light on uh some
of the parameters that we're looking at as we were looking considering a multitude of different sites. Another thing I just like to add is that this also goes in front of the planning board. So it was not just only our committee. There's a series of checks and balances. So it goes in front of the
planning board as well. And it wouldn't be here if it wasn't passed through the planning board as well. >> And to those points, any development plan for that area would have to go back to the planning board. So just so everybody's aware, any planer comes in and wants to do something over the shop
site or over the ACE hardware site, they would have to go to planning board. And speaking of the planning board, the planning board did consider all three of these ordinances to be consistent with the master plan. >> We're by the city.
>> Hello. >> Hi. My name is Tom Anselme. An sel. Uh live on Shunpike and directly adjacent to one of the properties in question. So, a couple questions. I understand what's going on with the overall picture
here. Um my questions are multiple a couple questions. Um one is the overlay onto the existing zoning. Um if the business owners are not willing
to do anything and you don't get these affordable housing numbers up, what is plan B or is there is there a plan B? Um cuz I've seen them go imminent domain and try to take over places. I'm hoping it would never go that route being that
we live in Chattam Township and not you know somewhere else for a lack of a better term. Um my other question is being adjacent to my property and and and having gone through hoops to get variances because of the twoacre minimum
or whatever it is in Green Village. I had to go nine months trying to get variances and permits just to put a single family house on a 1acre lot. And so the idea of having 37 units right next to my house that could be three stories tall and that's what it says, not two and a half but three in that
area. Um I I have some cons questions and concerns because it it just it doesn't fit with where we're at right now and it doesn't fit the neighborhood. And you know, Green Village, as they said, is a little different than John Township. you know, I'm know I'm on the border. Madison's across the street, but
you know, we rely on these shopping centers and and the last part of that question or part or last part of what I had to say was I spoke to a couple of the property owners that didn't even know this was happening. Um, I know it's public notice, but I got a certified
letter in the mail while I was on vacation last week, and I really found out about it yesterday. So, I mean, I was talking with a couple of the business owners there and they had no idea that this was even happening. So, that concerns me because I just what concerns me is where's the next level of
this? If the business owners decide they don't sell, where where are you going to put these units? And again, I'm concerned about having a three-story unit next to my house. Plain and simple. >> I can answer off the bat two of those very easily. Pursuant to the municipal
land use law, we we were required and I personally oversaw the notice of every person within 200 ft of the affected areas. So, it was and it was also
noticed um in all of the normal public notice ways. The letter was above and beyond everybody who was affected by this matter. So that's why you did get and it was sent via certified and regular mail. So that's the first um
that's the first answer. The second answer is I I want to make sure you understand the difference between a the property that is going to be built the threestory triplex and an overlay zone.
So when the Fair Housing Act was amended and everything was codified and put into law, everybody understands that there are places such as Chadam that have challenges and not a lot of vacant land. Two specific challenges we had in Chadam
was not only the vacant land, but the source service area. There's large portions of Chadam which are not in the sore service area and those areas cannot be used for affordable housing because there's no sore service there. What
these overlay zones are encompassing are an option. We are not required to build the units that are in the over that are contemplated in the overlay zoning. All we have to do is provide a realistic
opportunity for affordable housing in those areas. This doesn't mean we are being forced to build anything in those areas. What it means is that that is an option to someone who owns it, an option
to somebody who may want to purchase it. That doesn't mean it's getting built. It doesn't mean that if it doesn't get built there, we have to build it somewhere else. The only project we are required to build is that three-unit triplex that we discussed right at the beginning of the meeting. Everything
else is is called unmet need. Because of our RDP, our realistic development potential and the vacant land adjustment that we received by law, we are only required th to build those three units. The rest we had to provide zoning for
which we did through the overlay zone. So, I just want to make sure you understand the difference between an overlay zone and realistic development and and what we actually have to build. We have to build our RDP unmet need. We just have to zone for. It doesn't mean it's getting built. It doesn't mean that
we have developers lined up. It means that we as a township have provided the realistic opportunity by zoning for those units. >> Oh, may I? No, I understand. I understand that. I understand that
completely. But my question is at what point does this next stage of the affordable housing kick in where you have to meet another number >> there? There isn't >> there. So this this level four that you're doing this preliminary then why are we bothering doing it if we don't
need to do it? >> Because we are doing what we need to do. We are >> we required by law to do it. But it also says we're required by law in the next stage at some point to add more affordable housing. So that's my point. some point this is going to have to be pushed to become more affordable
housing. I I'm okay with that, but I just want to know like what that time frame is. You're saying that then we're doing this overlay and it's just they're not going to do anything. Then >> if I may, >> I'm just I'm I'm curious >> just to clarify. So the state of New Jersey there's been a series of lawsuits.
>> Yeah. No, I'm aware over history decades in New Jersey starting with what's known as Mount Laurel decision. Yeah. And that's what's really set the stage for this affordable housing in New Jersey in what's known as rounds. >> Understood. >> Each round is composes of a number of
years. This round is a 10ear period. >> Right. >> Right. We finish the third round. Each round depending on how the state legislature and governor decide they want to handle that round. >> We'll come up with a set of rules and parameters and a new process for it.
>> Right now we are in the fourth round. We've what we need to do for the prior rounds, right? >> No one knows what the next round entails. >> So then >> there could be another governor, there could be another legislature, there could be so many different things that could change in New Jersey and in the
country that we don't know what's going to happen in the four fifth round. >> There may not even be a fifth round, right? >> But likely there will be. All that we're required to deal with right now is the fourth round and the requirements under the fourth round. And those requirements of the fourth round are as our attorney
explained has been discussed realistic development potential an RDP which is just a mechanism to allow through zoning opportunities ways that developers property owners buyers sellers can potentially do things because the current zoning does not allow for the
argument has been in New Jersey that towns don't allow for zoning because of twoacre requirements oneacre requirements all these different things says you can't build affordable housing New Jersey because the restrictions are such that they preclude it and don't
want it. So in this round it says you have to provide for an RDP and that's what towns are doing through these overlay zones or other mechanisms. That's all we have to do in that regard. Then there's the regard of actually units that you do have to develop those
obligations and that's what we are obligated to do. So the two aren't really related. It's not that we're going to then be forced to do the things that are in the RDP. In this round, they were totally different. You're looking at your vacant land analysis. You're looking at what, as you know,
Committeeman Choy had explained, what circumstances may lend themselves to actual development. Uh, so they're they're two different things just so we're not confusing those. The overlay zone that we're dealing with tonight is just to ensure that the zoning does not preclude affordable housing. And so the
zoning that we're creating that allows affordable housing is being done so in a way that the density >> understood >> right can allow for a developer to meet based on the size of the land based on all these different factors the height the the size of the land all these different options to allow for a
developer to build >> is known as realistic and what goes into realistic the market conditions the utilities um you know from good planning right sound planning we we retain the services of a professional planner, not just the township committee here, but
also the planning board. And they have to review that according to the master plan to see are the locations and the plan that you're putting forward together uh sound planning planning that makes sense in the state of New Jersey and makes sense because what ends up happening is we get sued and we did get
sued all these other towns because entities actually are saying you're not doing enough. What you're saying is not good enough. it's not realistic enough and we want you to do more. Right? >> And that's what we fought and we said, you know what, we have a solid foundation. We did our due diligence.
This has been going on since 2024. We've been actually doing a lot of work through planners, through meetings, public meetings just like this, planning board meetings, public hearings uh and and and presentations for the committee to show why and how we got to this point and to then be able to defend it and we
were able to defend it successfully. So the where we are at today is probably not ideal. Nobody likes it, but it's just the reality of where we are in New Jersey and the obligations that this governing body and the residents and communities have to face and they have to deal with and they have to forcely
accept it. And so that's what the plan is today is this overlay zone, okay, is not a mandate to build. It's just a mandate to allow developers now or over the next 10 years. And as uh Comm In the
third round, we had created another overlay zone. And in that period, nobody's built over there. Either the economics weren't suitable, they didn't have a desire, they were happy with the way it was. Um, and that's exactly what could happen with this. But this
governing body is proposing under this ordinance to create that plan for the next 10 years. >> And I understand it. I understand that completely. And and I'm a general contractor by trade. I do heavy highway bridges and um have done development types of places. So I understand the
infrastructure very well. I understand why you picked the place. My concern was not so much of you know how it was picked or why it was picked. My concern again is like what is the next step in stage four >> but that's why you keep saying that's why I've explained there is this is the next stage. >> So this but I'm just I just wanted to
clarify that nothing there's not going to be a push in five years. If I if I can nobody there's no action item for us to go to the shop development fair say >> look I get I get my food every day I get my haircut at these I get the like
nobody is putting them out of business if the property owner of that development decides to call it quits and shop goes out of business and Dunkin Donuts up shop >> I understand >> then and they want to put a development there >> they have the opportunity to do that I
get that former mayor uh Mike Choy's point. We hope that it's a mixeduse development because we all >> of course we do and okay that was a clarification that I was looking for because again I'm a planner and so I wanted to nip this in the bud so I knew
what was going on and again it it does directly affect my house because I'm literally sharing a border with these five commercial properties on the corner of Green Village Road and Shpike. So having a three-story building staring in my backyard is not something I'm happy about. So I'm just that's that's
>> it may not be a threetory building. >> It may not be and and I could fight in zoning at that point if it ever goes to that point. So I that's why I just want to make sure that we weren't going further than I thought we were. So thank you for your time. >> And just for perspective, the the
allotment is for 10 units per acre. The Arbor Green property is 24 units an acre and the Charlie Brown site is 20 units acre. So just so you have perspective in terms of what it would potentially look like relative to what's there >> the property next
>> just a quick question >> if somebody offers Oh Jim Bello Popular Lane if someone offers the shopping center where ACE is now $20 million a
developer and they accept it. Does that mean they already have approval to put up a three-story building? >> No, they would still have to go through all the municipal land use approvals that are required by law, right? >> They don't get >> but but the but once it's done, they
have the ability to go through the process, the normal process, and then if it's accepted, they can build whatever they want or whatever they are allowed. >> But no, they cannot build whatever they want. They have to follow the zoning that >> understand that. But the zoning now is
basically saying you can put up buildings that are a couple stories high for affordable housing, right? >> Well, it's not and no, it's not for affordable housing. Somebody could come in and put a and and put affordable housing there, but it's mixed use with
um and inclusionary, which means it would be both market rate and affordable. >> So, they could do what's across the street from the train station in Madison. They could have some buildings underneath that or you know >> stores >> and put three or four stories of
apartments on top. >> They cannot put three or four stories of apartments on top. It can only be 36 ft high. So if there are commercial on the bottom there >> two two stories on top. >> Yeah. They'd be constrained by and they're also constrained by the amount
of the density. So they would have to look and see how big the lot is. You still no matter no matter what it is, you still cannot go above 10 units per acre. >> Okay. Thank you. >> My name is Paul Wayne. WHN 689 Pike
Road. I live just a little past the 200 foot boundary. I have a few comments. Um I guess uh that might be summed up with the fact that uh I think Hickory Tree has already done its duty as far as
affordable housing has gone. We've put up with an enormous development across the street unit. I think we've done our duty. Anyway, why does the new uh the new zone include
a wellestablished bank building and a church? I doubt that the bank will give up its land, and the church may not be subject to eminent domain. There's really isn't enough land here for a serious housing development, much
less a mixeduse development that will require parking in addition to what the residents need. It seems to smack of spot zoning. Uh I'm also puzzled that the ordinance includes a front yard setback of 30 ft,
but no uh no sideyard setback. There is a setback mentioned in the other ordinance, but it's only five feet. So any house or building that's going to be put in there is going to be shoehorned into the the site.
There are the obvious considerations. U there are other sites. I don't know you you've probably investigated all of them, but um the golf course might give up some of its land. There is a space between the Cadam Club and Juniper
which has two houses on it which is quite large. I don't know whether there are wetlands on it or not. Um you should also consider the loss of the professional offices. U a lot of people in the town use those
offices. There are medical people, there are psychiatrists, educational specialists. Uh my optometrist is there. Uh and there's a dentist. Uh I don't know where they'll go. Um and
then of course there's the problem of traffic. Uh, it's not really desirable to concentrate more traffic in that area. I have trouble getting out of my driveway in the morning or getting into my driveway in the evening or getting out of my driveway in the evening. I
often have to drive right when I want to go left and make a U-turn someplace else. In a word, I don't think this is a desirable uh option or a serious realistic option.
There really isn't enough space there for for anything really. That's all. >> I just want to clarify a few things for you. There is the sideyard setback. If you read under D, all standards and
requirements in the underlying B1 and PI2 zones shall be met unless they are superseded. So there are sideyard setbacks that will be retained from the zoning that is the underlying zoning already. So it won't be shoehorned into
anything. They still have to um follow the sideyard setbacks that are in the underlying zoning. The only >> 5 foot 10. >> So the sideyard setback would be a little shorter than me. Um >> that's a ridiculous setback.
>> Okay. But they they would that is the setback that is the current setback that is in the zoning right now. >> So whatever the setback is currently remains the same for the sideyard. >> Oh this is a crowded area. >> Okay. Uh the second the second thing you
you discussed was eminent domain. The township is not under eminent domain is undertaken by a municipality and the township has stated that we are not the only project we are required to build is the three units
not anything here. If we were we there is no mention of eminent domain because the township is not building anything in this area. The township is not required to build anything in this area. All the township has to do is zone for the
opportunity for affordable housing in that area. So, it's the second or third time I've heard eminent domain mentioned. And I just want to make sure everybody understands the township is is not going to be the one who builds anything in this area. They're not looking to build anything in this area.
Therefore, eminent domain is something that is not on the table anywhere. That would be if the township was going to build something, if they were the ones that if it was municipally sponsored project, which this zone is not. Um I I
also heard you mention that we were going to lose all of those professional offices that were there. Again, just because it is zoned for this meaning this for it does not mean that those offices will leave. It is not a foregone
conclusion that any of these businesses will be displaced if somebody was to buy these projects or the these parcels. My understanding is they're all in use currently and in order which means they're more than likely making revenue.
Um in order for somebody to go in and buy these projects, it would have to be financially feasible. And there are a lot of things that would go into penciling out a project. But you have to remember when a when a developer buys when a developer is required to put in
affordable housing, they take a haircut. They are they know going in that two of those units for every eight market units they have to build, two of those affordable units, they're not going to make money. In fact, they're going to probably lose money on those affordable
units. So that is something that developers when they are going to build in any area they take that into consideration. So there are financial considerations that have to be taken into account. Would they make more money with it being a shopright or would it make more money as you know there are
many considerations. So I I don't think um it is a foregone conclusion that business and medical offices are going to close or that shopping centers are going to close. It is an again it is an option that is now um being proposed for those areas.
>> Well, it is true that if the bank and the church do not cooperate or do not are not interested in selling their land, there's only one owner who is. Is that spot zoning?
>> Again, we're not we're not requesting that anybody goes out of business or stops churches might >> I'm not requesting that either. >> Banks might close and and on top of that if they decide to leave and sell their property and they want to develop these
are multiple steps here then there are certain obligations but there's no action item for any of us to see any of those businesses in any for churches or sports clubs or anything else close. Uh these are things that we all use as
residents of like we wish them ongoing success. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. My name is Gary Young. I live on Popular Lane and um I'm not going to say the same things that
everybody else has said. I'm sure you've heard enough to feel very satisfied as to how you feel about this. However, um I would just say to you, there are a couple points I think that Mr. Banano raised that are very valid. One of them being and the other people here. Um, one
of them is I think there's an overconentration of this type of use uh pursuant to this act that burdens us in that one corner of the town which is very unfair and discriminatory and because we don't have
equal opportunity here under the law. It's not equal application. It's it's burdening us much more than anybody else. And I appreciate that it's a pre-existing condition. You didn't have these laws to contend with in 1789 when they were first developing Chattam. But
you know the you have to live with what exists today. Okay. And living where we do having those commercial properties adjacent to us is a quality of life benefit. Okay. So I I
don't we feel threatened by the potential loss of that use and it makes our lives better. I can walk to those stores, okay? Which is a nice thing to be able to do, especially if you go in that ShopRike parking lot and see how dangerous it is. You don't want to drive
around in that parking lot. So, um I I object to this on the basis that I think it was an easy way and I I believe there may not be an easy way out, but I think it was about the easy easiest way for you that you could conjure up, which is still I appreciate that, but
nevertheless, it's unfair to us. And we have valuable properties. We pay taxes. We pay a lot of tax. And I think this would take away and potentially prejudice the value of our properties. So I would ask that you keep that in mind in your consideration because
there's a consequence to that. So hopefully that won't be realized. The other thing I would just say to you is by passing this ordinance, you put a crack in the door. In the absence of this ordinance, someone would have to make an application. I don't know if it would require a change of zone, but it
would be something more burdensome by virtue of having this statute in place. If a developer comes along and says to the owner of that property, um, we're going to give you $20 million because we want to build all this affordable housing, we'll make out like bandits.
I'm concerned about that. Um, because I think there is a possibility of that. So, I would just ask that you reconsider this because I consider at least some of the impacts that it has on us. Thank you. >> Any more comments?
>> Mayor, if I just uh if I can add just a point of clarification for the members of the public as part of you know the the information I was offering before, right? There is a consequence to not doing this or to doing And I think it's important to understand what the
consequence is of not doing this. Um I can speak to it Jessica. If we do not do this, right, we are at risk of what's known as builder's remedy lawsuits, right? We lose our immunity from this from developers being able to sue us and
essentially say I want to build affordable housing anywhere I want at pretty much whatever density I want. Is that correct? >> Yeah. So what would happen is if we do not pass these ordinances this evening, the we lose our immunity. A developer can
come in and say great, I want to I'm going to build say they want to buy two single family lots next to each other. Um they would then be able to put whatever they want with whatever setbacks they want. Um build as many units as they want in order to um meet
our affordable housing. and it'd be under the guise of saying, "Well, I'm going to build a 100 units. Um, I'm going to build a 100 unit project in this two family lot." And it happened in other municipalities. And you would have a 100 units in a two family lot and you
would get your 20 units of affordable housing, but you'd also get 80 units of market rate units. So, you remember for every two affordable units, you have eight market rate. >> So, I think it's important to keep that in mind. This governing body did not the
easy way out. This governing body looked at also, you know, I I I hear some concerns and there are legitimate concerns that there's fear that this may take away the shopping plazas or somebody's going to come in here and think this is really lucrative. But the reality of it is it is not lucrative to
build affordable housing. Affordable housing projects that are all affordable housing tend to require pilots such as tax abatements. They require subsidies. They require grants. They require a uh really uh you know lowinccome housing
credits a lot of effort to build. So it is not a lucrative thing to just come in there and say we want to build affordable housing. In fact, what does make sense for a lot of developers and why this is considered and why the court agreed and the special masters and the planners agreed that this is a realistic
good realistic opportunity because you look around the state wherever there are mixed uh developments where there's inclusionary zoning there does tend to be a commercial element associated with that because that is also where the money is. So the fear that you're going to lose your professional offices that you're going to lose your businesses
that you're going to lose some of the shopping districts is actually actually uh the exact opposite. Those are the things. So when when banks are looking to close, when office buildings are looking to close, when grocery stores or cafes are looking to close and the owner
of that property says, "Well, this is no longer sustainable for me." This is a lifeline to ensure that those kinds of businesses stay in your community. That's what makes them survive in a lot of places in New Jersey and why this is a not the easy way but again the
wellthoughtout realistic opportunity because otherwise you end up with uh two three four multif family homes scattered throughout the town in areas that probably will not fit in with those characters of the neighborhood and where potentially we lose our builder re our
immunity from builders uh uh our builder's immunity I'm sorry and open the door to builder lawsuits where then we can have devel of greater magnitude uh all throughout the town. I >> also just want to mention the financial
aspect. So, another fun topic tonight is our budget and I'm a chief financial officer. So, this is what I live in Maria and do seven days a week. It's not easy to build the budget. And when you think about putting affordable housing
in an area like on the cliff of Snake Hill where we have to sewers and transportation that like the costs were were inordinate. And to um former mayor Choy's point, this is an existing overlay. We're not required to
do anything. But I think something we also always consider, something that's always at the top of my mind is the financial aspect. You talk about your taxes. I don't want to raise your taxes either and you're paying enough taxes. But it's a reality that when these are imposed, this is a law that we have to
comply. We have paid. We have the most fantastic planners and lawyers that have honestly really saved us because every municipality was sued every single one. New Jersey, over 400, and we were successful. >> The last time you'll see me, my face
again up here. I I promise you. Very eloquent description. Dominic Manano, very Magnolia Place. very eloquent description of what you had needed to do and what you were trying to do to save the township from being sued for things and so forth. The
issue is the concentration the concentration of these the these areas you've identified as a new business zone businesses plus affordable housing. It's not the fact we appreciate the fact that we need to have affordable housing, but
you've concentrated it and I I would really like to know what other areas you might have looked at. Now, you probably are not required to share that with citizens. >> Every other place in Chattam Township, no other place. You talked about transportation. That's an interesting
point. More people, more transportation. That whole area coming through Shunpike, I'm sure you guys do it. If you live in the township, you go shopping at Chai. It's it's very concentrated. The roads are not are not Shunpike is a narrow road and all of the concentration, more
people, more transportation. You need to go back and think about where else can you do this? Because here's the issue. Once this is passed and somebody decides to sell Shop Bryant or the or the Ace Hardware development there, they begin they decide they're going to sell because somebody's going to put a lot of
money in front of them. And I appreciate the idea that nobody makes a lot of money on affordable housing. And I have one other issue. Is there anything here that is there anything in this ordinance that prohibits the township of Chadam from either donating borrowing money to
help pay for the affordable housing? If a developer comes in and says, you know what, we could do this. We need another $5 million. Is there anything in this ordinance that would prohibit Chattam Township from providing the money, providing a loan or borrowing itself to
be able to fund that? >> But if you're talking about >> this is a zoning ordinance. This is not that isn't something that would be in a zoning ordinance. >> No, it wouldn't be in a zoning ordinance. I'm not suggesting it is, but is is the current the current board,
current council. >> I would go so far as to say that you really can't do that. There's no real again >> was there obligated to develop in this overlay zone. >> A developer could come here and ask but there's no obligation to do that.
>> No, there isn't an obligation >> by the same way that this let's say this governing body were to pass any law. There's no nothing set in stone, right? And if the state down the road in the fifth round says, "Hey, you have to do this or a different set of individuals are sitting up here in 10 years," they
can easily undo that. So there's and as I said, I I think I would go so far, not legally, but you really can't do that because you're kind of negating a hypothetical that really doesn't even exist. >> Okay. Okay. Understood. All right. I've
said my piece. Thank you. >> I I just want to say one more thing. Um, I work with multiple municipalities. I have worked with multi mun multiple municipalities. Chattam is one of two that successfully challenged the
obligation. Two municipalities that successfully challenged their obligation, had it downwardly adjusted, and then refused because fair share was not being um realistic. We refused to settle with fair share. I only know two
places in the entire state of New Jersey that did not settle with fair share. We have a very compliant plan. We have a defendable plan. The court has approved our plan already. And uh your council,
your committee has gone above and beyond has stood up for the residents with not only this plan and the obligations. And there have I I I cannot there's not much I can say other than that to let you know that
your council defended everything that they could and they went up above and beyond. You know, where everybody else was settling um everybody else was, you know, maybe oh, it's only a few more units. The committee refused to do that. They
believed in their numbers. They believed in the professionals and they believed in the law. and you should be grateful that they stood up to fair share and the builders association. >> Jim Biello popular lady. Um the president you were talking about is it
my understanding that we paid $6 million for the Charlie Brown property gave it to a developer and then gave him a two $2 million 20-year loan interest free because that came right out of our taxpayer dollars pockets.
So if that happened then there is a president for >> those are some roundabout numbers you're correct but that is different from the overlay zone that was to meet the actual development obligation that the town had in the third round which was those number of units that uh former mayor and
current committee woman just spoke about the the obligation for this round is just those four those four units that we're building the three four and we're getting that extra credit for. That's all our obligation is to de this round. So since we own that land and we're
going to be working with the developer to develop that, that's all our obligation is for you. >> Well, I think what Mr. Banana might have been asking is that in the future, would we ever do the same thing? >> You this governing body, future governing, we don't know what could
happen in a situation where there is an obligation to develop >> with this with respect to that overlay zone. There is no obligation for us to develop to do something like the Charlie Brown or something like these three units. That's the current obligation for
for what we're dealing with now and over the next 10 years. In the fifth round, should that come when that comes in 10 years or so, right? That's a whole different set of numbers that we'll have to work with. They may say you have one unit you have to build. They could say
you have 20 units. We don't know yet, right? And at that point, we'll have to deal with the reality of Okay, what land could we do? What, you know, the town had to buy that land in order to then turn it over. We don't have much land to develop. We don't have land that we own
that we could develop uh much else other than what we're looking at for these three units. >> Okay. Thank you, Mayor. Um >> and we looked at those dreams because that did make sense from a financial perspective rather than having to also go out and then buy some land from a
property owner at really ridiculous expense. This most sense to to be in the best interest of the taxpayers at the lowest cost. >> Mayor, we do have a hand raised online that hasn't spoken yet. Can we uh let them speak? >> Absolutely. Yes. Thank you.
>> Okay. Phone number beginning with area code 973. Uh you are clear to speak if you unmute. Name and street, please. Uh >> Tom Evans, Burville Drive. Am
I in line to speak here? >> Yes, it's your turn. >> I I'd like to ask you you referred to a triplex tonight. Uh everything I've heard prior to this, you've talked about one-story group homes and it wasn't
clear at all how many units are in those threestory triplexes. You just gave away two lots of land over on River Road. How many triplexes are going into each lot?
How many bedrooms are in each building >> is my first question. >> So, just to clarify, um I think there's a little confusion. What we're looking at on the property that would be adjacent to the police department, uh is
one building, three units. Each of those units would have to, and correct me, Jessica, if I'm mistaken, one bedroom, one two bedroomedroom, and one threebedroom. Correct. >> I believe that's the um distribution. Yes. >> And so it would just be like a town home
or, you know, one one building, one structure that would include uh those three units. >> I'm I'm sorry. I thought I'm confusing it with the River Road. >> What is going in on River Road? >> River Road three. Yeah, that's that's separate. I apologize. Um, is that
>> River Road is three group homes with four bedrooms each? >> Okay. How many story? >> One story. >> Each one's one. >> Is that what he asked? How many stories? >> Many stories. >> Each one's one story for the group home.
>> Oh, very good. Thank you very much. One last question. I I'm amazed that regarding the Hickory Tree Overlay zone, no one is speaking about the fact that within five years, and you keep diminishing this as a 10-year window, if
nobody comes forward, within 10 years to destroy the area there within five years, they can come back and completely redefine the density. Isn't that the fact? That's what I've heard from the Chattam Burough discussions as well as
Kendra's presentations here in the township. It's a five-year look back. So, you keep talking about 10 years. If they don't come forward to develop it, you're free and clear. But within five years, they can re redefine to increase
the density to attract the development within a five-year window. Would you please clarify if I'm correct or wrong on that? >> Yeah, there is a midpoint review in five years to make sure that we have done
everything we're supposed to do, which includes building that three-unit triplex, make sure that um we've deed restricted it appropriately. That's part of that. Um they'll also look and you are correct they'll also look to see if something has been built here um at this
location and if the overlay zone has been adopted. Um but the standard is the realistic development potential. It is that we have provided for the zoning and that it keeps with the character of the
area. So, one of the things that we took offense to when we refused to settle with fair share is they wanted to make the density in this area 25 dwelling units per acre. Where we have it at 10,
they wanted 25. They kept trying to um get us to go higher and higher. And we were able to successfully defend to the special adjudicator, the program judge, and the superior court that 10 units per acre is what's appropriate for this
area. And we have a court order which says so, >> right? I just I just think you should refer to that five-year time frame rather than the 10-year because you're being disingenuous and and deluding the
residents of the town. Thank you. To clarify though, it is a 10-year round. The fourth round by legislation under the afford housing act and all I say all the previous round
there's reviews there's checkpoints say the court wants to whether it was the court at one point it was ka at one point it was the courts through fair share they always want to make sure that you're submitting reports you're updating your spending plan you're showing that you're doing what you need
to do so um yeah said about that >> and one thing that we gained by not settling with fair share is in every other municipality that did shuttle settle with fair share, they have to answer to fair share. We do not. >> Two, we are one of two municipalities
out of over 400 >> that I know of. Yeah. >> That we know of >> that didn't settle and did not enter into a mediation agreement instead. I just want by by you know not settling too. I mean the the demand that was on the table by fair share was a far more
burdensome and odorous um proposal than even what the law required and everything from uh the numbers to the mechanisms to the reporting um all of which would have resulted in greater
density more burdens to the resident and greater expense for the taxpayers. So the fact we were uh we were able to prevail and have the agreement of the the program judge and the special master for the state. Uh I think speaks a lot
about our plan and what we put forward. >> We did not take it lightly. We did not just rely on our lawyers and our planners to tell us what to do. We educated ourselves. We had a lot of conversations. We're grateful to have the experience of people that went
through the third round to be able to do this in the fourth round, which was a little bit different. So, I I I don't want I I just I guess I take it personally that people think that we just snapped our fingers and and made an easy decision. It's not an easy decision. It takes a lot of time and
effort and money, quite honestly, to do the right thing. This was the right thing to do. We fought for it and we I wouldn't just go to court and fight tight. We had to make sure that we were buttoned up and tight. We were all felt very confident that we were buttoned up
tight. We had the right plan that was right for Chattam and we won. So, I'm proud of that. If I just may uh say something um for the benefit of of the public, I think I think the overarching concept for for us
um as it pertains to affordable housing was for the township um to be able to manage process uh along our desires and requirements as best we could. Again, under the umbrella of the state law, uh metaphorically we wanted to drive the
bus. Um the third round was complicated. Um there were uh there were decisions planned that were done under duress. Um it was our hope and desire that for fourth round we drive the bus. We dictate within the confines of the law.
Um we don't have all the answers because this is a five-year checkpoint 10ear horizon. Things certainly may change at some point at some point or multiple points along that time horizon. But but I think what this plan allows us to do is meet the present need of effectively
net three units. We'll be in good shape there. I see foreseeably um over the next several years that being completed, we'll we'll finish the group home which will comply will fully satisfy our third round. Uh and I think we can present to um the jurisdictional bodies uh a township that is complying. we're making
best efforts to to manifest uh the the the ultimately the spirit of of the affordable housing um uh laws. Um what is that to say that uh if if nothing happens in this overlay then we failed?
I I don't think so. And if something has happened there, have we failed or succeeded? Not necessarily the right. I don't think that's a fair way to look at. I think at the end of the day, we looked at what we had within our control and we wanted to drive the bus. We wanted to maintain options as opposed to
being forced to do do something under the perils of uh builder's remedy or having no options and no andor close to no time and having to make bad decisions. So right now this is a plan that complies. We have our commitment
today is three. The plan complies. Uh we have time, we have flexibility. We are driving the parameters on density. It is a modest and achievable number of 10 units per acre. Most larger size developments are 20 plus units per acre.
It is a massive density um that I think would not be in keeping with the characteristics of the township. So we are driving and managing uh you know controlling the variables. Um we're in a good place. We're in the driver's seat. We don't have all the answers. Uh but we comply. We have a plan. We're not going
to get pushed up against um a a short fuse or a time clock that's going to run out on us. We I think we're in, you know, I think we're in a very good spot here. Uh we have a three-unit commitment. Um
and we've got a plan that that satisfies that that was just approved by court and and we're we're we're in a great place is is how I look at it. Um, I can respect the concerns about concentration and and congestion um uh about possible
changes of character of that particular area. It it's an it's an overlay zone um and it complies with the plan and we've fulfilled our obligation today. Um and uh I I think for the residents who
I when when you look at these ordinance a tendency to catastrophize and Imagine the 600 unit building there that that um you know forodingly overlooks the sidewalks and shadows up the entire Shanpike road. Um that's certainly not the case. Um we've put together
something that complies. Uh whether or not it comes to fruition, that's not within our purview. Um it complies and our current demand, our current requirement is three units. We are in a fantastic position as we look across the state. Uh I think you about 560 569
municipalities. We're in an excellent position. Um and I and I want you to kind of walk away with a little bit appreciation of where this township is with regard to fourth round housing, affordable housing. Um we've driven the bus, we've controlled
the parameters. Uh we've successfully uh litigated and won. Um and I think business as usual, the businesses out there will continue. uh the property owners um have uh you know added benefit whether or not uh u but
their property rights are still intact. You can still be patrons of the businesses there. Uh it will be business as usual but you know uh I appreciate all the questions and comments. Uh I do understand your concerns. Um at at the end of the day
certainly putting uh the worst thing would be for this committee to say well gee we're going to punt this. We're going to put our heads in the sand. we're not doing anything. That I think is the uh defcon one scenario where now the state now the state believes we are
acting in bad faith. We are in a very favorable position. We're we're looked favorably upon because we we actively took this on. We intelligently uh debated it. We we uh we put forth revised numbers um and they agreed with
us. So I think they they see the township as acting in good faith as it pertains to this overarching endeavor here that every town must comply with. Um I think it would be a big mistake uh to say well gee do nothing just ignore
it you know and decide you know hope you know for a hail Mary that something changes down the road. We don't believe it will in any material way as far as uh the general obligation the details of it certainly will change but um uh you know
I think we're in a good position um to be able to negotiate whatever changes whatever unknowns may come down the pike um and and uh I I personally am uh you know proud you know committee woman Eald was on that subcommittee I we did you
know uh we did um there were a lot of lessons learned from prior experience experiences, collective experiences on affordable housing matter in the township. And we we said, you know, enough is enough. We're going to be smart about it. We're going to be aggressive and and we're going to challenge and we're going to uh put
something that um uh makes sense for the township. It's not something that's perfect, but it's it's reasonable. It's it's acceptable. Um and I think we're by and large happy with the outcome.
Can we move on to the next person waiting to speak? >> Yes, >> Jessica. >> Yeah. Hi, it's Jessica Romeo on Pine Street. I just want to say, you know, you guys have put in the the elected officials, the township committee, and the professionals have obviously put in
tons of work and thought, and I think you should be applauded for your efforts. Um, I think we should all be grateful for the work you put in, the care, and the thought you put towards this. So, thank you. That's all. >> Thank you, Jessica. >> Any other questions?
>> Yes. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Hi, Jen McN on um Noi Avenue. Uh just to speak uh how Jessica, thank you to everyone for the hard work. I have been listening to the comments. I've been following this and I think if you've closely followed the past history of the affordable housing obligations in
the township um we've been backed into some difficult corners in the past and I think that people here like Jessica said have put some really serious thought and consideration um from the township elected officials from the township uh management uh our lawyers everyone else some incredibly thoughtful um work into
this. So, we do have what Mike said, we are driving the bus. In the past, we were not driving the bus and we have been backed into some other situations and this is smart and uh we're the obligation for three, which it probably could have been if you look at other towns, a whole heck of a lot more. Um, and I appreciate everyone's time and
thank you so much for for all your hard work. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> That's all at the moment. >> Any other comments? Um, again, Tommy, I'm selling Shike
Road. Um, just out of curiosity, and this is just a legitimate question. I'm not being facitious at all. I'm If I were to sell my pro want to sell my property on Shike Road, which is an acre, would I be able to get my property reszoned to build 10 units on it? That's
my That's a legitimate question. >> No, that would be spot zoning. That would be so one a so but >> singling out one specific property without merit without foundation. So for example there's things under you know state law
like redevelopment law correct you know there's properties in need of rehabilitation properties in need of redevelopment there's a lot of criteria that has to be met >> even if it's touching onto a property that already has that zoning. >> What do you I'm sorry. So my border would be a property that has the zoning
once it goes into place. So it would be spot >> want to be included in >> I'm just saying could I be included in it down the road if I chose to be >> in the overlay zone? Yeah, >> you could >> Jessica >> I'm just curious. It's a question. >> You could apply >> um No, not automatically. You could
apply for a variance. >> Okay. >> Through Wanted to know if the option was there when I saw >> down the road. >> Yeah. Are you in the business district? >> You could apply for a varian. No, I'm in residential that touches. >> That's what I just want to clarify, right? Because this is an overlay zone for that business.
>> But what I'm saying is once that overlay zone is created, if I'm touching that then zone applies to the what I'm trying to explain. Just one second. Sure. The overlay zone applies to this business district. >> Correct. >> You are not in the business zone. You are have you have residential zoning.
>> Correct. I was asking the question if I could do that though. >> That would have that's that's a residential zone. He'd have to have to go through the motions to successfully prove the case included. >> But you're you're part of the
residential zone. We're trying to overlay zone to the business zone, not the residential zone. >> I understand that. But my question is five years from now, if the building starts happening or if something happens and I want to decide, hey, maybe I don't want to live next to this area or maybe
I'm just tired of the congestion. Can I take my property and apply for this reszoning because I can get a lot more selling my one acre with 10 units on it even >> I'm I'm just saying I didn't know because >> anybody can apply for anybody can apply
for zoning anywhere doesn't mean you you have to show positive and negative criteria order to get that. Now I want to be very clear something that Mr. Shahadi said earlier, if we were to not pass these ordinances this evening and
lose our immunity, anybody could do what you just said. Anybody in any area of the township could sell their single family 1acre lot and jam as many units as possible into their 1acre lot. By passing these ordinances and by having a
compliant plan, we stop that process. we, you know, currently if you if that is, you know, the roads you want to go on and you want to apply for a variance um for the bulk standards of your of your property, you're welcome to do that. And in that case, the zoning or
the planning board, depending on what your um what you're seeking, what variance is would adjudicate the merits of your application. But if we are not if we do not do what we're statutoily required to do this evening, we don't get to make those decisions.
the court and a special judge comes in and makes those decisions for us. We lose our zoning power. >> Thank you, Jessica. >> Are there any other questions? Mr. >> No hands raised. >> Okay. Anyone else questions, comments?
>> Rick Carlin, Shunpike Road. Wife and I have lived here for 34 years. Um, very quick questions. One, it sounds like because I haven't done a ton of homework, I have too much other homework
that the township is subject to these requirements separately from Chattam Burough. Correct. >> Okay. >> All right. And um the only other thing I was gonna say is you can tell by the
questions I'm I'm in basically 100% agreement with what's being said. But so two years from now I decide to sell my home. It's zone single family residential. I don't think I'm going to attract
anywhere near the market value that I would get prior to this happening. especially if there's any perceived uh idea by the market that it's indeed going to be developed, you know, and
it's almost like what Tom said, we need flexibility. Um, hey, it could turn all the way around. You you lose the shopping center, one of them or whatever. And I've noticed from the beginning, affordable housing is always located
near a commercial area. As you mentioned before, some of these people don't have cars, whatever. That's where they're putting them, not just here all over. Right. Well, uh if we're we're only like four lots uh
those those of us that are being affected by this uh right nearby. There's others in different directions, but we're we're we're all neighbors. and you know to have the ability to do other than just single family cuz somebody
will come and yeah I'll buy your property for half the price you know I mean that's that's what I could hear so I worked a long time to uh and bought in Chadam for that reason so that you know
it would be a lot more valuable than what might happen that's it thank Okay. Any other questions, comments? Okay. Do I close the public hearing there? Motion to close the public hearing related to the final adoption of
ordinances. >> I can do that. I'm closing it. >> Okay. So then we're going to do each one of these individually. Motion to adopt these. >> Yes. Uh and then we'll have to open the public hearing for the next ordinance.
>> I'll make a motion to adopt 2026-05. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Alperitz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy, >> yes. >> Mrs. Ew, >> yes. >> Deputy Mayor McHugh, >> yes. >> And Mayor Roland, >> yes.
>> Motion passes. Okay. >> Now, I'd like to open up the public hearing for ordinance 2026-06 adding the AH1 zone. There was some overlap. >> There was overlap. >> There was a little overlap. Is there any Are there any questions online? >> No.
>> No questions. Okay. I'll close the public hearing related to ordinance 2026-06. Uh is there a motion to adopt? >> I'll I'll move to adopt ordinance 2026 adding the over affordable housing one
zone. I'll second. >> Mr. Auroritz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy, >> yes. >> Mrs. Ewa, >> yes. >> Deputy Mayor McHugh, >> yes. >> And Mayor Roland, >> yes. >> Motion passes. >> I'd like to open the public hearing for
ordinance 2026-07 adding affordable housing overlay district. >> Any questions online? >> Oh, absolutely. Uh, we appreciate it. We do. It gets boring when nobody's here and we appreciate having a conversation.
>> Have a good evening. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we'll close the uh the hearing for ordinance 2026-07. Is there a motion to adopt? >> So move. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Eluroitz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy,
>> yes. >> Mrs. Ew, >> yes. >> Deputy Mayor McHugh, >> yes. and mayor. >> Yes. >> Motion passes. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh we will now move on to the resolutions. I want one through five, correct me if
I'm wrong, are basically updating the regulations related to affordable housing. Um just with the with the latest standards those are that's correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> If I may just number one uh 2026
That's actually related to the uh grant application for Mammoth County home for the group homes. >> So that's the developer li program and that is a resolution that's required by the governing body in order
to make that application. Uh two, three, four, and five are implementing resolutions as you mentioned there as part of the fourth round. >> Got it. That's right. Thank you very much. And number six is the library grid. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Is there a motion >> to approve? Do we do each one individually? >> Okay, we can do a consent. Is there a motion to approve resolutions 2026-075 767787980?
>> Is there a move? >> I'll second. >> Mr. Mr. Al Perowitz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy, >> yes. >> Mrs. Eel, >> yes. >> Deputy Mayor McHugh, >> yes. >> And Mayor Roland, >> yes. >> Motion passes. >> Thank you.
>> Now we can move on to reports and we want to hear from Rich first. >> You read my mind. I was >> So, we've got uh Rich, come on up to uh one of these chairs. So, Rich Young, our EW superintendent Also, I believe we're joined I hope
we're joined by uh Zoom also with John Rushki as he >> John is there he is. >> Oh, there he is. So, both uh the engineer and the superintendent are here. Uh under public works um we don't have any legislation but we do have under discussion action uh separate from
this report discussion on the compost facility and that's why John is here. He's also been assisting uh Rich and myself with the D regulations uh associated with permits for such facilities. So Rich has provided two
memos and a spreadsheet. Um and Rich, unless you have anything to open up with, we could just start with questions. Let's go to questions. Okay. >> So you've been sitting here for an hour and a half, so I'm going to question you now. I'm not let
>> Yeah, make it worth a while. Um, okay. So, for for the the benefit of the residents, the question is we want to get rid of the mulch service. Uh, you would still we would still take in lease for composting from residents,
but we would eliminate the land uh landscapers ability to buy a permit which allow them to correct. >> Um, and I guess my big thing, and I'm sure many residents experience this, is is there any way to recast this to monet
to better monetize? Because I know I had asked my because we had a conversation about this not too long ago. Um, because I was like, I how can I pay my landscaper to dispose of leaves when we have a place to dispose of leaves? And um, when I went to my landscaper and and the answer was that they can dispose of
the leaves, but have to because you need to know what's >> that's part of the problem. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, uh the landscaper said that, you know, first of all, they're collecting these all week and we're not we're only open Tuesdays in the morning and so it's not doesn't make sense. And
then of course, if they're collecting an entire truck full of these, how do you know that the six yards that are in there or the 10 yards are mine? So there was some complexity, but I really felt like there was a value because there's a lot of people, a lot of residents paying to have their leaves
disposed of and you guys have to grind up leaves for the residents who dump their leaves anyway. So there's feels like there's an opportunity for revenue generation in there. So I'd much rather money go to the township than else. >> Yeah. With the with the leaf aspect, we
don't run. >> Okay. >> In the in the spreadsheet, I proposed was we have wind rows of leaves that through our D permit we have to flip once a month regardless time of year it's once
a month once that is done and it breaks down we contract with a local vendor who takes it for free but it takes on the average two to three trucks minimum and a front end loader
two days. So, we're providing a service, but it's just for the mulch for the brush aspect of it. Restoring mulch.
to do that. >> Not mulch. Hey Rich, I I think it'd be important to note that, you know, some past operations and why where we're here because there was a point where we had a lower price and we were getting a lot of
developers coming in and it was just overwhelming for the DPW to keep up with it and that's kind of why we raised some of the rates to try to discourage some of the commercial because if we if we want to try to expand this operation, it it's more than just our our existing
resources. You know, we scale back it. We scale back these operations once before. >> And I asked the question as well and I think it was there are only two customers, two landscapers that >> currently >> currently >> there was two last year, two two in 24
and two in 25. When these guys come in, they come in >> under the proposal that Rich put forward though where we would contract with MUA to handle the hulling away of the leaves, the grass and the brush. Uh we
would not be doing any mulch obviously not providing mulch. Therefore, we don't need the t grinder anymore. >> Okay. >> So that would be saving correct. So that would be uh saving about 15,000 plus the manpower to load that which
takes about a week. So it's one guy and a front end for a week. >> So we contract how do we pay the flat fee container >> flat fee container? It's $200 for the pole of it and it's um
It's roughly 485 a 30 yard container which can consist of them pulling and taking it and then bringing back another. >> So the new setup would just be le container brush container.
It's it's the same service to the residents except for >> so no multiple >> and then and then no use of your bodies um to do the drum grinding. >> Correct. And the cost of the drum
grinder itself which is 3,000 a day. Yes. 3,000 a day. And then it would also be that if you look at the alternate option to get more use or expansion then you know that's entrance for neighbors
of vehicles and trucks and those kinds of things. And this would not necessarily shrink it greatly because you still want to dump the mulch or the brush and okay 64 And what's happening, we're realizing
that the numbers are going down >> and we're being left with excess that we have to find home find. >> John, corre correct me if I'm wrong. The the new uh permit doesn't allow us to leave anything on the ground. >> Yeah. We can't have storage. We can't,
you know, have we can't maintain long-term storage. And that that's what we have is over the years we've accumulated quite a bit of material. >> The material really isn't the quality of material is poor. We we put it through a tub grinder, but it's it's really not a commercially grade um you know mulch
that that a homeowner would typically use. This this is you know really is not a you know the quality the material is very poor. we have that material that's sitting there a while that people have not necessarily taken advantage of coming with their own buckets and taking it or
whether it be delivered. Um then indeed it sits there and with the new regulation you can't let it sit there necessarily in the same way if you will or different. Uh, so does it is there a cost to does somebody come take it for
free because of its quality or would we have to pay to get rid of it? So you're looking roughly between 15 and $20 a yard. Okay. >> And we were charging $25 a yard.
>> We're charging $25 for three yards. So, but this way they can't come and pick it up either because we would >> we can't store there's the part of the new requirements are that if we're storing it um John feel free to jump in
and if I'm missing something correct we have to do testing uh as well. So there's requirements and how we have to store it and what we need to do in order to store it and then we also have to make sure that we're doing testing over there. Uh and then the concern is not
the testing we can handle in house. WPC but it's what happens if certain chemicals uh because the reason for the testing is it's you know people use pesticides they use there's chemicals there's all these different things what happens when it reaches into the
groundwater or into that area so then if there's problems levels are elevated we now have to deal with those consequences >> okay I mean the mulch I'm not terribly attached to although it's nice people mostly because it's and I and you
know same thing it's expensive to purchase mulch but it is treated and everything so um but but it is only 60 I guess I'm not and if we really wanted to do it I guess we could charge more but I'm not sure but um I guess I'm just wondering John
yeah you've worked with a lot of towns have you seen >> you know leaf collection facility that is able to make fin go with it. I'm just I'm just kind of dumbfounded that there's not a better way that there's not a way to monetize this. You know,
we're looking at kind of a really crappy budget and revenue that's dropping off and I'm like I feel like there's an opportunity here that we're missing. >> No, there's there's a lot of um you know, municipalities are not necessarily
um you know, set up to be you know, for large bulk processes to make a lot of money with wood processing. There's a lot of companies out there already and in fact what I'm seeing now is a lot of municipalities are getting you know looking at these regulations now that
the D is rolling out and all the processes now we have to follow and and and permitting limitations um you know and and like Z said the the testing the testing we we actually have to pay for a lab so we are it is going to add additional costs associated with you
know doing all this testing we just don't going we're going to have to we have labor in house to collect the samples, but the analysis is still there. So, you know, a lot of a lot of municipalities are looking at that testing requirements and the over and the burden of of all these regulations that it's almost D is is pushing a lot
of the smaller municipalities that have these systems, you know, out of business to to look at alternatives. >> Yeah, >> it would be largely an economies of scale. I know county runs a compost facility and a lot of towns right over
a lot of towns bring their compost facility for a town to do it because you're so small that it's just starts to get too expensive to meet with the little potential for the revenue that you have. >> Okay. Because I mean we're talking about just so we're clear, we're talking about
like eight month eight weeks of the year. It's really the fall season. And just to give you perspective, you said the MUA I think you said it's like I can't find it. 430 was it 435 for 30 yard container. >> Total cost. 485 for a 30 yard container.
My contractor charged me 480 bucks to pull away 12 yards. So I get what you're saying. I just feel like there's an opportunity. But I I trust you guys your judgment. >> The thing is we could we could up the rates. You know, we did talk, okay, if we wanted to get contractors in, right? We'd have to up the rates for them to
make that revenue to make it profitable right now. >> Well, we don't have to have the facility open. >> Correct. I was aside from that, right? So, you know, look at in order to do that, um, let's say it's with the MUA, right? Let's say we're keeping the NBA, but then you're how much money do you
have to charge two contractors, two landscapers that are coming, they're going to just say it's cheaper to go elsewhere. And so, we're going to go through all that work in order for us to, you know, be able to generate the revenue or break even or to make it
cheaper. Uh, we're going to have to charge them a lot more and it be cheaper for them to go elsewhere than it would be to stay with us. And then if we lose them because we've put ourselves out of business, then we've gone through all that work and now have no customers.
>> I thought there were more much more customers. I said, "Well, how many landscapers are coming?" And I said, "Two." >> And and also again, I can't emphasize enough regarding >> dropping off leans Tuesday morning. Was that commercial contractor? But we don't have the >> plus if there if there's containers
there for restor as opposed to >> Rich is there is there and this is a completely separate concern or angle at this uh and that is um having the grinder having the mulch facility and
creating mulch with this um containerized version going forward. Um would that um go to a mulch facility or would it go to a landfill? Do we even know that? >> A recycling facility.
>> It would go to recycling facility. Okay. So So you don't lose that >> environmental benefit. >> No, it goes to the Morris County facility. >> Terrific. If if we do um Stacy's much more to the the details um
on on the looking at it differently. If we if we have additional cost, additional liability, which is happening period, >> correct? Um, and if we if we go the route of growing it to drive revenue,
um, is is that clearly going to be a um a cost benefit um rather than just doing what we're looking at and maybe um, in other words, if we look at it on a gross base, we're not making money now. It's
costing your guys a lot of um, time >> money. So we're losing money now. Um is it would it be simple or very difficult particularly under new regulation and other things? Uh how difficult would it
be to turn it into a profitable or I don't know you have an exact answer on that but I think it'd be substantial. It would >> I guess I just I just I would just emphasize again the quality of the material that we're generating. Um you
people call and buy our material because it's convenient because they can just call the town. But you can get the same quality material by just walking down anyone cutting down a tree. Any of the commercial tree companies will give you a whole truckload of their material for free. Okay. >> So it's it's that's the quality of
material. So if we're going to go in the business of selling mulch like like it's you you have to process it more. You know, it's not just a matter of running it through a tub grow tub grinder. you're you're grinding it multiple times, screening it, you know, in some cases they're dying it. It's it's not,
you know, it's we're we're not not talking about just a simple composting. Now, we're getting into a manufacturing process >> to to to generate a a quality mulch that we can we can compete with a company that's doing it properly. >> And just this year, rather last year,
we're talking about revenue of about 7,000 expenses of about 42,000. >> Okay. >> To maintain is But >> I with this whole new procedure, we're trying to keep, you know, the same service to the
>> res. So, you know, instead of dumping in the ground, Yes. putting in the dumpster. >> Yes. That's really the big the big does does that if we go the dumpster route fewer
commercial guys obviously two trucks anyway and 60 truck loads going out. Uh would the would the traffic residential area there um would that be greater, lesser or similar because now you just move in the
containers? It all depends on, you know, like spring's going to be heavy. >> Sure. Of course. >> And the fall. >> Yes. >> You know, that's primary. Those are the busy seasons. Yes. >> But it's busy anyway. >> Okay. >> You know, and MUA doesn't pull containers on the weekends. >> Okay.
>> Strictly Monday through Friday. >> Y Okay. >> So, the weekend traffic. >> Great. >> Any other questions, comments? I mean, you're I read all of the stuff. You made a very compelling argument. I've been racking my brain to try to
figure out how to challenge it, but um I I respect your opinion and the work that you put in and you know unfortunately with this new permit driven by the new >> just so you know too before Rich comes
here I challenge him quite a bit. So I challenge you. Yeah, >> I I make sure you know the spreadsheet alone was was frustrating enough for him. So because I want to make sure that we all have the right information and
and you have the the dollars, the figures, the quantities that you need to know in order to make that decision. Unfortunately, it seems like, you know, you're just looking at this short of saying, "Yeah, we want to eat that cost. We understand we want to keep the cost and subsidize it. There's really no
other alternative that we we could come up with to to maintain this and I think the numbers of make the decision for themselves. >> Well, the service is still there because you drop service >> like obviously like it's a new procedure
so you know we're going to figure it out along the way >> you know but I think once people get used to putting their stuff in dump it shouldn't And we're not talking we're not talking for this year. It would be for next year. That's why we wanted to get this
out of the way early, have this conversation so that way we can give enough notice to, you know, the folks that use the mulch, but also the landscapers. Who knows? Maybe we tell the landscapers like, you know what, I'm only give you 20,000 to keep this going.
>> I don't I don't think they will, but we'll get some feedback. >> Then you got to really check what they're dumping. It ain't dirt and branches and brush. >> Just my last two cents, just to give you perspective. It could you I if I paid
the township $20 a cubic yard. >> It would cost me $24 would be half the price and I would more than contribute to an like I would contribute half of an MUA container with oneird of the with one third of the leaf. So that's that's what I'm getting at in terms of you know
the e But I guess how would you like how would I get it from my house to there? >> No, you still have a landscaper, but the the res >> the res. So I would buy a permit to dump 10 yards. Now unfortunately Rich is not going to want to measure when the truck
comes with 30 yards >> that they're only dumping 10 yards. So it's not it's not a clean process, but I like got to be a way. All right, I said my >> I mean if there we have some if there's a way we could figure it out. I said we'll let the contractors let the
landscapers know, hey, heads up and maybe we'll meet with them and see if they can. I mean, >> I'm not opposed to coming up with an alternative. Rich Rich is a little more hesitant. I just, you know, would love to see if we can make it work. I just don't practically, you know, as you
said, how do you make sure that the people who are paying are the ones bringing it in? And >> I think you're going to lose contractors automatically just from having to shut them off into the dumpster. because that's too much time. >> They're gonna pay their guys.
>> Your price is going to go up. >> And actually, you can you can buy m residents can buy material from the MUA and they do have different products because they process a different way if you want to buy wood mulch versus unscreened compost. Um and and so they
they you can buy from there's other sources too if you want to buy the material back. >> Thanks, John. purchase from the NBA. >> Yeah, we'll put in our DPW notify because we do put in there right
now. So, just say, "Hey, here's how you can buy it now." >> Okay. Anything else? >> Put your thinking cap on. >> I'm looking to you for another question. >> All right. Thank you so much
>> to you and the crew on the snow plowing. >> Just anecdote, I got one resident came and they said they knew exactly where where Chadam stops and starts. >> You got to come. I know. I'm Chad. The roads are clear. >> Great crew.
>> You actually car this time. So next time maybe slow it down. >> No, because you kept everybody safe. I mean, I'm a big hill. We got lots of big hills. So we appreciate
>> We had a neighbor at a medical emergency at 2 a.m. on Sunday and the roads were clear. You guys got that. My walk and his walk were not clear, but the roads were clear because they accidentally knocked on my door, but it was uh the roads were clear and they had no
problem. So it was report All right. Well, thank you guys. >> Have a great rest of your evening. >> You too. Thanks for hanging in. >> I believe you need to hang around. >> Yep. Yep. I was just going to ask you. I'm making sure you still want to cover it tonight.
>> Okay. So, whatever next on the >> Yes. Thank you. So, uh since we do have John here, uh next is under engineering. Uh briefly, uh we will have a resolution likely for the next meeting uh if not for April. Uh That would be toward the
contract to add it to a contractor low bidder to do the work at a for improvements. Um any questions on that one? >> Is he just quickly what is um your your best guess time frame? >> Um John, we haven't scheduled a precon
yet. So >> no, we haven't scheduled a precon, but it will be done during during the day and and during the construction, you know, we'll we'll emphasize that it needs to be safe. you know, he can't as he's working, you know, you'll still be able to walk up the gravel road um and
walk in the area, but you know, it should pro I would I would guesstimate it's about two weeks worth of work, maybe a little bit longer just to to complete the signage and things to come back, but um but it's really about two weeks worth of work that he's going to do. >> And and John, best guess on roughly when
you when you believe this work will start. Um, I would think that if we um we award the contract at the next meeting, it usually takes about two, three weeks to get contracts in place. So, I would think that he would probably start late
April, early May would be the soonest. >> Yeah. So, we'd have construction in the middle of lacrosse season. >> Well, is it going to is, you know, it's going to be during school hours. So, they'll be working during the day and
they will, you know, have them any equipment that they have they'll pull to the side and so, you know, they they have to make the work site uh, you know, safe every time they leave the day, every time they leave. So, I don't it's it's you know, with the the paving the paving may be a day at two at the most.
So, it's not going to be a very um you know, long process and it should be during the day and he should be able to keep the work site uh relatively safe when uh you know because it's not we don't have any major excavations or or you know large trenches he's digging.
It's really just all paving work. So, it's it's it's relatively neat. will be off. Don, did you get the question? >> Uh, no. No. >> I guess like the safety issue about accessing
how many spaces are going to be lost. that small window of time while the field might be used and everything else too. >> I I I I would think that in the beginning he's going to have a small bulldozer that he'll do the get the
grades and things. So there's probably one piece of equipment um we can make sure that he doesn't leave any of his dump truck or anything on any of vehicles he doesn't need to park there. And then during the paving he's going to have probably have a paver and a roller. So have those pieces of equipment, but I
don't envision him taking up more than two or three spots. >> There will be a period then though when you can't drive on it. You you'll always be able to walk on it, right, John? That is to say, you'll be able >> Yeah. Even even driving on it, you know, a lot of, you know, a lot of small
pavers will say that um you know, you you should keep off your driveway for a week and and I always laugh about that because, you know, asphalt doesn't consolidate or or or take time like a concrete where it cures over time. You know, as soon as you roll that asphalt and it cools, you can walk on it right
away. So, you it's really hours that it's going to take that uh you know, will be open versus, you know, days. Yeah, we could talk to him about having his equip parking his equipment up on at the on the top of the hill versus the lower area just to keep the lower area
open. Yeah, just in the event that we lose access to up yesterday, you know, um we get communication as early as possible so whoever if someone's got scheduled events up there. >> Yeah, we we'll we'll definitely look at
the scheduling and and when he submits his his schedule, you know, we'll we'll hash out all those things during the pre-construction meeting. >> Thanks, John. Um so the reason John's here is uh for the discussion action items on the
agenda titled Southern Boulevard open space LOI that is the property formerly owned by Pensky family. Um I did email a while ago um her
request that the mapping be made available. Um as soon as that was done you know I wanted to make that Um, and I said that to you and I had asked if there's any questions or reason for discussion. Actually, nobody really
mentioned that there was, but the reason I brought it up is because John followed up with the next step, which was to, uh, submit an application to the D for the actual delineation. Um, and before we went ahead with that,
um, because that was almost just shy of $3,000, I was like, you know what, based on the mapping, not much really changed from what we thought. And there's a lot of limitations already, and very little that we can do with the property. Um,
and whatever it is that we probably would consider doing, uh, can probably be done without the permit from the DP, which would, uh, so just seems that We may not need to go to the next level. But before that determination is made
and before I decide uh whether I should write the requisite to check or not, I want confer with all of you and give you guys an opportunity talk to John and maybe see what possibilities you have in mind for this in light of the restrictions um and for John to give us
a little bit more clarity on what is or is not possible there. Did we get we got I don't remember receiving anything. >> Yeah, it was emailed about a month ago and then uh resent I believe with the agenda packet. >> Was it a packet?
>> Yeah. So, so the resent >> we can send it out again. Um but basically the hatched area is actually the wetlands and the clear areas are the uplands. And if um if we impose the 150
foot buffer onto the wetlands, which we suspect because, you know, because of the the proximity of the swamp, it's going to be exceptional value. And that's about 150 foot buffer. And and just scaling this is about 100 feet. So when you when you add that 100 foot
buffer onto this, there's going to be very limited to almost no property that that's that's not going to be within wetlands or within the wetlands buffer. Um I I and if we go for the LOI basically the D is going to go out and
they may move a line here or there shift it you know slightly that that's common for them but it's it's not going to drastically change you know what what you see here it it's it very very typically very minor changes that that they make and then and then basically
the line is set for five years. So, a lot of developers will get an LOI because, you know, they buy a piece of property, they know that the the line is set. It's it's it's not going to change. And so, that's very common to get the LOI. But if we were going to go for a a
a path or um you know, some type of a permit that's either either a general permit or an individual permit, um you don't have to get the LI the L as part of that permit process. Um they they review the the wetlands delineations. Um so so $3,000 it's it's a hefty
application fee to get the LOI. Um in comparison if we were just to look at a path through and you can the D regulations are are are very lenient on recreational paths. You know that we can put paths throughout this and and uh you
know we should have no problem getting a permit. And in fact that permit has no cost to it. It's probably the only application fee that I'm aware of that that D does not charge actually to to permit paths, uh, recreational paths. Um, you know, I did show a driveway here
and and and a parking area. This this is going to get um this is actually going to be a difficult permit to get. We' have probably have to go for an individual permit, get a whole bunch of waiverss um to get that. you know, D may in fact take this area and and push the
parking lot over here and try to limit the amount of area that we have to come in. So, we really and and if you look at if we want to get a parking lot over here, we still have the 100 foot bed and maybe there's a little pocket in here, but you know, all this is transition area. So, DP is not going to want to
have a driveway going through this entire area to put a parking lot here. That that's we we we would have a challenge. I don't want to discourage it entirely, but it it would be a challenge with the D. So, you know, if we're going to do something like a parking lot, we would have a pre-application with them and discuss, you know, possibilities
because it's likely going to be an individual permit. >> John, if I heard you correctly, uh something like a path, uh we we don't need to get the LOI, correct? >> Correct. Yeah, you don't need an LI for the effort. >> This this was something that was up for
discussion for public solicitation of public input. Um but now there's limitations known and we don't have things back uh from the open space.
So perhaps we can run it in front of them and see if there's anything other than a path that is uh interesting. >> Correct. and and and we don't have to jump to submit the LOI if we want to just you know vent this a little bit and and we can submit the the LOI in six
months and or a year. All the work is start is prepped up to to submit it. We just you know it's just a matter of do we want to go that next step and uh you know spend the money to get us over to goal just for an LOI and it's it's not g you know we're going to be over the goal but we're going to have the same map you know we're not going to be able to do
anything with that LOI other than say yes the the D has confirmed these limits. >> Yeah. So, um, mayor, I would request that, uh, I get some input from open space and Craig gets some input from environmental commission and then we
either go get an LOI and do whatever we want to do that way if you're agreeable to that. Yeah, >> great. I think the biggest consideration is the parking >> because we can do a beautiful space and trails, but if someone doesn't have a place to park, >> right, that's part of the discussion. I
think Right. I don't know where else it's like the Green Village post office where everybody walk. >> So effort started. So let's uh let's do them the courtesy of having their input. >> Absolutely.
>> If we had a connectivity to Nash, where would that be? Um, we would we would connect it. Um, if I can see my cursor in here, you know, Nash is over here. So, we we we can uh you know, you do have the parking lot. I guess I I could try to go up a different
map, but we we can have, you know, connected to the Nashville Nash property. Well, the way that's laid out, the uh if if you talk about even the Green Village Trail, Nash Green Village, uh that would end down by the old skating rink.
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's it's up over, you know, this this is a this is a low >> there all the way to the sidewalk. It's kind of same idea. >> There's another pocket of wet there's additional wetlands to delineate on the N. We didn't delineate all of Nashville. They're just in the area where we're going to put the um the boardwalk in the in the path. But the this is all
wetlands out here probably extends out. But you know it's it's over here and we can connect you know we we we wanted to talk about a connection and extension to come around and and and bring a path around into you know just have it just as another branch coming around so
people can walk a circle around you know that's certainly something we can look at. >> Yeah that's that's Thank you. >> John I have a question. So the the northern section up against
southern where the path jogs around. >> Can we not utilize that through buffer averaging and arguing the value is degraded because of its proximity to the street and noise pollution and and
light. See the with with wetlands averaging you have to have property you have to have pro a portion of the property that's not within a buffer. So there's not there's not a lot of area that we can give with
averaging because if you have a 150 foot buffer the buffer is extending all the way over here. So usually with a buffer you you have property that you can you know horse trade away and increase buffer. >> You trade away though the the western pieces right? No. Well, we we this is
all wetlands all in here. So, you know, we there's no average. You can't average these these pockets because the they're >> the uh the space all that space to the left of the parking lot. >> Oh, in here. >> Yeah.
>> Well, this this is I can just um throw a scale on this. Let me just this from here to here. What does that feage? >> That's it's a that's 180 ft. So, you know, if you have a 150 foot buffer on
either side, this is all buffer. >> Yeah. Because my hope and desire was um to buffer average out that area and just flatten it and make it parking, you know, informal parking for Nash, which
currently is mostly under park. >> Yeah, this will be a challenge because Nash the other parking lot is over here. >> Yeah, that's what I wanted. >> And this this wetlands probably continues all the way around here. So, it it you have a wetlands pocket here. And you know that that supplemental
parking would be a challenge to get it permitted today. >> And all this would be just packed dirt and and rock. We would have a gravel, you know, we would have a gravel path coming in. So, it's it's um you know, just just to
you could see what they've done at the Great Swamp parking lot that they have. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> So, John, you are going to get us an updated map with Nash on there, right? So, we >> Yes. Yeah, I can do that. Yep. Absolutely. >> Also, just so we could see it together. I I can show an updated map with Nash
and I can actually um I can do is just combine the two plans so we know exactly where our path is and all the fields and and how we're going. Um so we we can combine this so it's something that so we can look at it holistically as a as as as one property versus two.
>> Yeah. Because I guess I wonder, you know, parking is difficult, but if we were able to connect to the 80 ft that we have to potentially build and put like the basketball court there and use that or I don't know. Not that I want to dismantle stuff, I'm just trying to creatively think how we
can maximize the overall space. >> Yeah, because we can we can compare the delineation that we did on Nash and and just kind of you know we dash these as interpretive of what we would would be just based on the topography and uh we won't go out and delineate more unless we need to but you know just for
planning purposes we can do that. Okay, great. Thank you. >> And John, because it jocks, it uh you would have obstructed sight lines from the street, right? >> Well, there's a there there's already a um a driveway apron here and there is
somewhat of a gravel path here already because they the landscaper was coming back here and there's a shed here and it's a debris pile. So, I guess this is where they were dumping some of some wood chips. And so, there is a a somewhat of a of a it's not very defined gravel, but there is a path that's
that's in this area already. And uh when you come out it the site distance was was fine. >> Yeah. I'm just wondering about security because it could be like, you know, it's obstructed views from the street. Uh you know, um >> yeah, we could look at a light. We could
probably add a light >> chief on a DPW because that be chained at night. Um, >> yeah. >> Yeah. I I I would expect something like this. We would say that it's, you know, dust of dawn, you know, it's closed at
night. Discourage people from driving in. >> Well, I thought we couldn't do the parking lot. >> Why are we putting a path to nowhere? >> Yeah, that's why I'm confused. Wait, I thought that that is
>> Well, no. This is just I was just illustrating a possible parking lot. If this parking lot is from here, we would we would do some type of a trail in this area. >> So, that parking lot would need a permit or no, John. >> Oh, yeah. Absolutely. >> And then this this would probably need an individual permit because we're we're
we're because this is this is all >> buffer. That would be a difficult permit. >> Yeah. this this would need a permit and this would you know it wouldn't be a general permit like it' be an individual permit and I would suspect you know we would have a pre-lication with the D but
the D tend to um you know show some leniency on their with it comes to recreational uses you know the fact that we're putting this in for you know for people for recreational path a passive path you know they they they usually are
very cooperative in that sense but again they they may come back And now they'll they'll hammer us on, you know, is there other options? Can you minimize the disturbance? Can you move the parking lot over here and stick it in like this way so when you drive in and then pull in on this sides? They
they I would see that they would probably push for that so that we don't go far into it. >> But that that would all come out in a pre pre-application meeting to talk about, you know, options and approaches. Would would county consider extending
the Nash trail to to this location? And I don't know what I don't know if they'd be a bluff at the end or what, but um would they on the table? >> Well, we we could we could certainly approach Morris County for another grant if we want to extend from the existing
um boardwalk and do another path in this location. Yeah, there's definitely when we had when we permitted for this sidewalk on Southern Boulevard, this was a, you know, difficult permit because there was um they were there was uh spotted
salamander habitat in this area. And uh actually we had had to hire a special uh environmentalist to go out there at night to look for salamanders. And it was a big deal just to get this sidewalk in. So it sounds like uh
cost value would suggest trails probably the best way. >> Yeah, the trails and but I could Yeah, I could see the D allowing some small parking lot to allow in here. I I would think that they wouldn't push back too much. you know, they they they will ultimately do that and then deed
restrict the rest of the property. So that we're that's the tradeoff is that we we're putting the parking lane that we're going to deed restrict from further developing from a parking lots or any other uses. Um that that restriction would preclude um it wouldn't restrict paths and other
passive recreation in the wetlands. >> Three kicks. How many spots do you think you can get if it's closer and you can't touch the land that's ab spotting southern because I think you referenced spotted salamanders there. >> Yeah, that right here. This this this
wetlands pocket is is um you know >> that's I I for us to start impacting these wetlands that that's going to be then we're going to start getting into wetlands mitigation and and um you know that that can get costly. Um, you know, we could look at, you know, negotiating
moving in some wetlands and then, you know, creating this all, you know, creating this entire area as wetlands, but then, you know, that those mitigations there's there's ratios that you have to meet and and it's it's it's a process to go through that. That's that's a costly process.
>> Thanks, John. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Good night, everyone. >> Have a good night. reports. >> Well, there really are not too much too many more things uh besides the budget.
Do you want to take a break for the restroom break or >> Okay. Yeah, maybe we'll take a five minute break or few minute break. >> Yeah. Recording stopped. And this letter came for you.
>> Oh boy. >> Yeah. One of those Residents don't get that that overlay big piece. >> Never get >> I keep want to >> I mean the side pieces >> don't open the umbrella until it starts
rainy. That's kind of the point. You want to put something together passes mustard. >> Low probability. It's complicated. >> I think they're still on.
>> Are the mics muted? Yes, they are. >> That's separate. That's Zoom. Zoom. Audio back up audio as soon We're waiting on you. >> Yeah. So, bring the cameras up and record. It >> shows we'll be back shortly.
>> Recording in progress. Ready, Mayor? >> Yes. Ready. >> Okay. Um so this evening uh under administr administration uh no action um proposed
under clerk report was received. Any questions there? Construction building. Uh just a report any questions anything discussed there? Finance. Um I'll get back to financing police. works. We covered those.
Anything there? Tax collector. Uh we will have a resolution on the next agenda for outside lean redemption. Any questions concerns on the report tax assessor? I will note under his report he didn't provide a very likely update
this month question. No, but I have been getting questions from residents about whether or not they've started, you know, going door to door, which he said or the report said that they have, which we knew that from other meetings. Uh that but they started
in, you know, some of the sections just get a lot of coverage with storms and everything else. So, uh it's more so to make sure residents are aware that that's begun. It also said, you know, in terms of access, it said something like you can see what area they're in now by going on.
>> Yeah, we did put out an update on the So, it's on our website. We have an update. >> We did put an update, I believe. Um, just double check. >> They also have a spreadsheet on their website, asj.com. There's a spreadsheet of um what
who the inspector will be and what date they have currently slotted to arrive at the property. >> Oh, good. >> So, you can look it up by your home address and you can see what their projected day is when they might arrive. >> Okay. We did post something on I believe on social media with a link as well and
updated on on our website tax page with that information to go to and see where they are and all that. >> Okay. Hasn't popped up for me in social media. I follow but I'll see if I can find it and then try and repost.
>> But no, good. That's what I want to make sure. >> I'll double check on that. Right. Um then on to finance. There are a number of legislative items. For the next meeting it would be to a
resolution to introduce the budget resolution. We are in the self-exam we are in the self- exam year of that cycle. So resolution to do that resolution to uh do some budget transfers under the reserve budget and
then to set the open space tax rate based off of the proposal that will be in the budget presentation shortly. Uh so with that um I'll turn your attention to the slides uh for the
budget presentation. Uh this year the um screen um there's a session running. Okay, thanks. Um so this year the municipal budget
finance committee uh was comprised of mayor general deputy mayor Marty McQuitt second uh myself our CFO and our assistant treasurer at Davenport mayor she's a finance and accounting
professional over two decades uh and our deputy mayor operates an independent national business development firm that he's also owned for over two decades. So, we've got two very very fiscally minded uh business professionals. Uh as I mentioned, this is their second year on the finance
committee. >> Oh, third for the mayor, second for the deputy mayor. So, a lot of experience there working on this and uh appreciate their their input and their challenges that they put forward to us to craft this budget. Uh the timeline uh for this budget
largely mirrors previous and for the governing body. You've heard this now several times, but I I say this as though uh members of the public are hearing this for the first time in case anybody's dialed in uh or is new to this. The budget process starts uh in
the previous year in the fall uh around September October where we are having department heads and the finance department administration working on the individual department budgets the requests um really reviewing expenditures from the that year and
starting to look at needs and priorities for the following year as well. some of the challenges coming ahead. Uh November uh we have department head meetings uh and review their budget requests. Uh and then that information gets fed to finance department to uh put together
the first draft of the budget as well as close the books from the previous year. Uh February March is when we start having the finance committee meetings to propose and put forward that first draft to them. And then uh by this time March uh we've finalized the the draft of the
budget to be proposed and we're doing quality control things uh that would involve our auditor and really looking at financial statements, fund balances, reserves uh you know any expenses, anything that might have come up uh
since last year that we weren't aware of. It also require sometimes by the time the school or the county finalize their budget or requests for the library or other entities. Uh that is stuff that that gets fed in by March the latest. We
usually have that. Uh today, March 10th, we do the initial budget presentation. Uh we look to have budget introduction March 24th uh with another presentation, same presentation unless anything's changed. Uh and the goal is to adopt
April 28th, 2026 uh in time to meet the state deadlines for the budget adoption municipal for municipalities. The municipal finance and budgeting uh really varies quite differently from uh
the private sector. You know what people might be used to. Uh it's a very heavily regulated process. We look for guidance from the state uh through the department of community affairs, local finance board. Uh sometimes that guidance comes right in the middle of the process. Uh
we wait on the governor to really make clear to municipalities what their state aid is going to look like. Uh and that's something that comes also uh when they're finished introducing their budget. U at least two dozen meetings and calls uh occur in order to get this
budget to where it is. It's not I think it's definitely a long drawn out very thorough process in addition to the finance committee includes our auditors as well to make sure that we're doing the right thing. Um the budget has to do with really our
appropriations and our revenues. uh you know our salaries and wages, other expenses which are everything from supplies, materials, fuel, uh any contractual obligations we may have with third parties, uh utilities and the debt service. All these are just a sample but
what really make up the biggest part of our appropriations and then our revenues uh everything that includes fees and fines, licenses, any interest from our bank accounts, the state aid I mentioned, any grants and what's known as ma miscellaneous revenue.
that we charge copies or smaller things. Those make up our revenues. That is our main revenue, our main source of revenue outside of taxes. Taxes is really our main source of revenue. We don't we're not a business. We're not selling widgets. We're not uh providing uh
consulting services. Uh besides mulch, maybe we we're not selling a product. Uh the biggest uh portion of uh our revenue is the taxes. So, we try our hardest to increase revenues uh in any other way
other than taxes to minimize that tax burden. But the difference between the appropriations and those revenues is has to be made up with taxes. That's the the levy. Um and we really try to strike a balance between doing the cost of business and
those limited opportunities for revenue. Uh we are also not municipality that has hotels that might collect hotel occupancy taxes. We're not that has a downtown with parking revenue. We're not a town uh with hospitals that might
generate more fees for birth certificates, for example. Uh so we want to provide top rate government service and ensure the public safety so the community still remains attractive. Uh that then leads to the increase in home values that people come to appreciate
and yields taxpayers the best return on their investment which is their property. So, we're constantly looking to do more with less. Uh, finding savings, mitigating those increases, and trying to increase ways where we can generate revenue. The challenges, uh, the goals that we
have in light of those challenges are to avoid some quick fixes, uh, the short-term remedies of just dipping into your surplus, uh, to to always say, "Oh, well, we don't want to raise taxes." Uh, raising taxes, well, that's nobody's goal. Uh, it ensures that the is stable
and resilient for the future. To make sure that those fund balances are healthy, uh, and that we can budget as lean as possible, but do so responsibly where we're not cutting services that don't need to be, and we're not jeopardizing or risking safety or
compromising even on the quality of our roads during storms. For example, this year we were confronted with a number of very very significant challenges. Uh, the of those challenges was the rising cost of health healthare
uh headlines uh in New Jersey papers but also around the country are all uh saying the same thing health care costs are rising and they're rising very very drastically but in New Jersey especially for municipalities who provide health
benefits to their employees as most municipalities do your options are really limited uh you're either on the state health benefits plan for example or you're out to to private market. 2025 the cost of health care for employees uh
and retirees was about 2,474,000. We saw an increase uh of 32% this year. That's an extra $85,000 to our health care cost. And that's not and just to clarify, our employees are also contributing as well to their
health benefits. So, uh we follow the model was an old state law that dictates how much employees contribute based on their status, the health coverage status and also their salary. So it's a graduated scale. So our employees do
share in this burden and they are seeing that same increase. So they're seeing uh their contributions going up about the same amount of money. Um, but that $85,000 is a very difficult uh increase
to overcome. What I've tried to do, and I've done that every year since I've been here, almost every year since I've been here, is uh request our claims experience from our health insurance plan and try to market that to other providers to see if we can get better costs. Unfortunately, uh, no one is
willing to quote us at a better cost or at all. Um, largely because One of the reasons that you look at your claims experience, how many employees you have, and uh you know what what are those claims like? Uh the good thing about the
stay benefits plan is it pools us with a larger entity as opposed to just going off on our own for the few employees that we have. So this was a very big uh challenge for us. In addition to the payments for the county order tax
revaluation, uh we started that process. We awarded that contract and we did a what's known as a fiveyear special emergency last year. Essentially what that does is uh splits up that cost over five years. So the cost over each of those five years starting with this year
is $130,000. uh we kind of borrow we borrow that from ourselves, but we repay ourselves uh over time rather than borrowing it from the bank at a higher rate. But that's $130,000 expense this year that we did
not have last year. >> You want questions as we go along? You want to >> uh if you don't mind uh waiting till the end, but >> you might want to take a breath. That's okay. >> You're gonna have to answer the question. >> No problem. Uh the I just to emphasize
also that this tax reval was ordered by the county. So, we did have a little bit of a heads up on this one uh to plan for it, but uh you know there's little that you can do. It's a cost that you have to pay for at some point. Uh this year also
weather uh as we know, we all know was a big challenge. Uh worse than last year, worse than a few years, record setting uh storms that we've dealt with in 26 year to date $94,000 in costs just for
salt brine and our contractor. Uh that is already more than we spent all of last year and that does not include an increased amount that we budgeted for overtime for DPW. Uh we can't time storms. So if they come in over
weekends, they come in evenings, uh that is a cost that we acrew uh in the form of overtime. So because what we had originally planned when the department requests came in in the fall. Uh we were thinking great, you know, we could manage with similar levels as to
as far as last year for overtime budget. The the good thing about getting the storm out of the way so soon was we knew what those costs were and budget for it rather than have an emergency later on in the year and and scramble. So, we did increase the budget line for overtime by
about $50,000 uh because there's also still the potential for storm at the end of the year and we have to plan for that. And that overtime is not just winter weather too. Uh you know, from time to time we get hurricanes or other storms that could impact the community
and we have to be prepared to handle those. Um so uh a quick snapshot of the budget this year as compared to last year. Uh I put two charts uh that really show your
appropriations and the revenue. And the reason I do that, I'll explain in a moment. Our total appropriations this year uh 19,741 uh 153. That's a change of $312,000 over last year. Uh not a terrible
increase. uh but our revenue uh went down as well um by about a million dollars. Now I'll explain that in a second. So our revenue for 2026 was about 6.5 whereas last year was about 7.5. So the difference between those two as I
was talking about before that tells you what the amount to be raised by taxes is and all of these figures I'm talking about one obviously this is what's proposed and this is just for municipal purposes only within your control. So that excludes the library. The library tax is set by state law. And there are
county schools and open space. Uh you know a number of other things I'll show in the chart later. So this is just what's in in the control of the township township committee and and over here. So that difference is the what's known as the levy, the amount to be raised by taxes. That's an increase of $1.3
million approximately $1.3 million. And when you look at I'm sorry uh our net valuation taxable uh we had a very modest increase in the net valuation taxable that's our ratable base uh that is a very low increase but a very low increase historically one of the lowest
in the last five years uh and so that is what we spread the amount to be raised by taxes across that net valuation taxable that's I'll show that later but the numbers uh above are a a little deceiving, but they aren't
truly representing the full picture because grants uh have to be booked as both a an appropriation and a revenue. So, why did the revenue go down by so much? That's because we took out the grants. If you take out the grants from the
revenue line item, you do see that our revenue actually did go up $212,000 this year, but the appropriations went up $1.5 billion and largely due to the health care
costs. Um 60% of that increase is due to the stale benefits plan increases this year, that 800 plus that I told you about. Um, and we don't want to dip into our surplus too much. The the amount we use from the surplus is also accounted for in the revenue. So, we left the
surplus at the same usage as in previous years. Um, but as I mentioned, limited opportunities for revenue otherwise. Uh, last year our tax rate went up.9%. I'm sorry, the net valuation, our vable
base went up 0.9%. the year before that 2.33%. So that's to illustrate uh the magnitude of that rate of base change. This is the top seven the top seven
expenses that make up 77% of those appropriations. You'll see those emergency response and public safety. That is uh the biggest expense. That's everything from the police department, the fire department, uh hydrants to uh
uh dispatch. Uh that is the biggest portion of it. Uh that went up just about 4%. Um not too bad. Insurancees though, that's where you'll see that big increase. And so not only health insurance, but workers compensation and
general liability insurance. Everything from liability employment practices liability. as well for all of our facilities and all the employees. That went up uh 833,000. Public works expenses uh in addition to
the new uh team contract coming into effect, the increases for uh salt, brine, contractor, and the overtime costs. That was one of the larger increases this year. Second to insurance, uh pensions and social
security that went up. a tremendous amount. Debt payments also went up, not a tremendous amount. Uh capital improvement fund, we did reduce that by about $75,000 this year to just try to offset a little bit of the uh damage to
all those increases this year. Uh but we did keep it at about $500,000 whereas last year was 575. Uh capital requests this year, all departments were told limit it to strictly essential, mission critical, absolutely function without
it. Uh that way we don't uh add to our debt and that way we try to minimize the impact for the tax rate this year. And then utilities did go up this year about $42,000. Uh we do go out to auction just to give
residents and and township committee an idea of what we do to try and find savings everywhere or reduce those increases. Uh we go out to auction to try and get competitive rates rather than just going to the JCPNL we bundle our utility costs to
aggregate those whether it's for the buildings whether it's for the uh street lights or the facilities uh we do go out to auction and try to get the best rate and it also gives us a level of predictability for the next couple of years so we're not at the whim of BPU
and JCPNL increases. So the subtotal of those seven items uh for this year was 14,991,249. That's an increase of 9.67. The remainder everything else uh which is administration, technology, finance,
construction, recreation, legal, engineering, our boards and commissions, affordable housing, everything else besides those things up there is just4 million472,000. Uh that is a uh increase of 234 over the
last year. And down below again, you'll see the total appropriations excluding grants because again, grants have to be both as an appropriation and a revenue. So, want to make sure that you look at that without weighing both sides of the equation.
Uh I was talking about our net valuation taxable. Just a quick snapshot over the last uh couple years, what our tax base looks like. 2022 went up 23 24 went up a large amount and that's largely due to developments that were coming online.
Enclave was the biggest one. Uh so whenever there's development in town uh larger developments especially uh that helps our tax base which minimizes the individual burden burden to individual property owners because you're spreading
more of that levy uh across more. Here's a snapshot of our surplus for the last couple of years. So, you'll see uh keeping it at 3.5. It's been at 3.5 for the last four years. How much we're using from the surplus. Uh last time uh
it was at 3 million was in 2022. Uh we will have a fund balance after this budget adoption based off of what's proposed estimated about 1,762,000. Not ideal, but not bad. Uh it's still
healthier than it's been uh in in some of our worst years. Uh it is still very healthy. I don't see it affecting our bond rating. Uh ideally we'd be at 2.1 uh million, but that would mean that we would have to reduce what we use from our fund balance by about $317,000.
Uh that would mean approximately an extra $90 a year per household to do that. uh that's to make sure that's at least 10% of our total expenditures from the prior year, which is generally a best practice, but I do think we'll be
able to recover in future years. Um moving on. So tax bill review, what would it look like? All everything that I've talked about here. So the amount to be raised by taxes, again, proposed for municipal purposes only within your control, excluding the library, that's
13,28 400 million. Take the net valuation taxable, divide those, that gives you a tax rate of uh 376. Uh with an average residential assessment this year of $878,600,
that means that the average annual residential tax bill for municipal purposes only would be 3 mill sorry, $3,32. That's on that's $275 a month to pay for a top of service uh that residents are
getting. So that $275 a month makes sure that the police are doing their job. We've got storm cleanup, snow removal, road maintenance. We're running the recycling center, compost facility, a whole slew of things in addition to uh contractual services. We've got a number of shared services agreements to again
keep costs low. um leverage some uh economies of scale and also provide subsidies to the fire departments, all volunteer fire departments, our volunteer EMS and to a senior citizen center uh all that do a great job and provide outstanding service to operate
service to the residents. I think that's a very fair price to pay for uh all that residents get in this town. And when I mentioned within municipal control that is that 17% of the pie. So
for every dollar that we collect, so we collect the taxes for all of these entities. So uh people do get mad that their taxes are whatever they are. Uh they think that you're to blame, that we're to blame, but we're really only responsible for 17% of that. Uh the
library gets 2%, county about 16%, and the school about 64% of the tax bill. Um Now, in light of these challenges, uh we we wanted to make sure that because we
also do set the open space tax that we consider uh our outlook, our commitment to open space, parks and recreation, all the projects on the horizon, but also find a way to offer some relief to taxpayers. And I just want to highlight
some things that we've done uh recently and have in the works. Playgrounds, three uh sorry, uh two playgrounds already completed with two more at Colony Pool uh coming up for upgrade. We've preserved fence property as open space. Uh we are rehabbing the Colony
Pool walls. Uh that's a cost of $600,000. That's in progress and will be coming up uh to completion very soon. And as we talked about earlier today, uh ADA improvements over at Astra Field.
So proposing a rate reduction to 1.5% as opposed to the default of 2%. So that will uh generally provide a decrease in the levy of about $175,000 which is some relief to taxpayers uh
that that is within your control. And then finally outside of the budget but part of the budget process is the sewer utility. And uh they say it's out of the budget but process. That's because it is a utility. So, it's selfquidating, which means that
the revenue from this sewer utility have to support the operations and it's got its own fee structure, which is what we call rents. That's what uh covers it. The budget this year is 3.36 uh versus last year 3,315,000.
That's just an increase of uh $45,000. We do a thorough analysis of the costs there while m maintaining all the infrastructure improvements that are necessary to keep the sewer utility operating. Nobody wants a backup in their sewer utility. Uh that is a
missionritical operation over there. Very very uh sensitive piece of uh piece of puzzle. Uh all the equipment there is is uh tended to 247. We've got six dedicated full-time employees. Uh we share the administrative staff and so we
aortion those costs from the township. uh our uh foreman over there who's uh operating the plant has really done a great job as they do over there holding the line on any discretionary spending but they're also subject to those health insurance increases that we are on the
township side and we uh have utility debt service there this year it's 535,000 and we are also budgeting for a capital improvement fund of 250,000 uh on the horizon we are expecting that we'll need to do a rate study uh especially the
major impact of the headworks project that our engineering team is working on and looking to apply for that funding through the state's I bank to keep costs low for residents. So that is uh municipal budget proposed
for 2026. Questions? >> I think you I think you have some questions. >> Um okay. Um let's So healthcare
um that's a lot of money. That's a huge increase. Um, do you either can you either speak to like how many people that covers or why our experience is so bad? I mean, does this have to do with because the percentage of retirees that we cover versus current employees? Like
I don't understand. >> Um, so I do get the claims experience reports. Um, it it would be some of that information is covered under HIPPA, but it's everything from somebody may have cancer treatments, leukemia treatments. The largest thing that I hear that's
driving healthare cost is the cost of GLPs. A lot of the weight loss drugs. A lot more people are using those uh which is driving up prescription costs. Uh so that's one aspect of it. But it's it could be anything from uh you know major
major illnesses for retirees um to families younger younger folks with families that have children and uh that the family So, you know, somebody younger starts off here in the township, they're
single, and then as the longer they are with the township, then uh, you know, they get married, have kids. Um, but there's no one answer as to why. It's largely because the state as a whole has been experiencing uh a lot of mismanagement. I mean, the headlines are
right there. There's been mismanagement on the state health benefits plan. I think that's the biggest thing. And also over the last couple of years, the towns that have had better experience or have been able to leave have left which leaves more of the uh towns that aren't
able to leave left holding the bag and have to make up for those costs >> and and that's what I'm getting at. So, because I know over the years you've been looking at moving us outside of the state, anticipating that we were going to hit this cliff >> because everybody with good experience
went outside and got better rates than everybody with worse. And I'm like, we we seem like a pretty typical town with I can't imagine the demographic. So I'm trying to figure out how our experience without you know anybody's individual you know being so much worse than comparable like I mean the burrow was
talking like oh yeah we jump shipped a while ago and I'm like how is our experience that much different from the burrow that we can't seem to get >> sometimes just two or three offs it's it can especially for the size of our township our our workforce I don't know
the exact size of workforce but I think ours is smaller Um, so that has something to do with it. Um, also, you know, and in my experience, I've left the state health benefits plan and other plans and other municipalities elsewhere, you sometimes will get a
better rate, a teaser rate in the beginning, and then you start seeing those increases later on. Uh, so that kind of initial jump, people are just being very reactionary and they may, you know, may be good for them in the
moment, but there's no um There's no guarantee that the future years won't see very similar or even worse increases. >> That did happen here about 15 years ago. We went with Denver and then I think it was just a
year later we went back to the state health program. >> Um do you know how many recovery total? It's not just >> I do have we have 51 active and 60 retirees. >> Our CFO is watching and she's sending me
those the spreadsheets. >> Thank you. >> But yeah, 51 active and 60 retirees. >> Okay. Um Okay. So, we know there's a lot of like things that we'll use to manage the
budget. So, we might adjust how much surplus we use to to contribute to the budget. We might adjust the R. There's different things that we use. But, of course, you always have to worry about the implications for the Um, so the fact that we're not doing any of that, is that because you have
concerns about our ability to replenish the surplus? The surplus doesn't account for three and a half million of this $19 million budget, 18 million, whatever that >> So, it's a big chunk of the budget. So, we count on being able to finish that.
But, but you have concerns. >> I do, and I don't want to speak for our CFO. Um, she can send me a message if she thinks so. And from both of us talking about this, yeah, we are concerned. So you'll look here at the trend. Um the line that says increase
surplus of operations, you'll see has been dropping since 2022. So 2022 increased surplus of operations was 4 million82,000. 23 3.7 24 3.4 25 3.0. Um that you know
there's a lot of reason why uh that could be one of those. You know, every tal about lean budgeting, lean budgeting, don't leave any flaw. People some some politicians or candidates for office will talk about, oh, you know, there's a slush fund. Nobody's putting
in a slush fund. But you you when you really budget to the dollar and cent, you're not leaving yourself any wiggle room. And anything that you save or don't spend comes back to surplus. So, it's not like, you know, disappearing into thin air. The taxpayers still
benefit from it. Um, you know, so that's one thing. Revenues not meeting expectations uh is another thing that affects it. Uh, and it's not that we have been uh not meeting expectations in revenue. It's just that in some areas
that roll over is less. I know you're still meeting it, but it's not as great as it was maybe in the previous year. Uh, and then, you know, there's been past politicians who have talked about the rut and the well the rut affects your surplus as well. Uh and then
lastly, you know, um making sure that you know, you're not always just appealing to, oh, we need a 0% tax rate, 0% increase on the tax rate every year. And there were years uh in the past that that had happened. And then if you're
not bringing in revenue and expenses keep going up, the only way you can do it is through the tax levy. And I think uh we were to use more of this fund balance. Uh not only would we bring that 1.7 million lower than it is, uh it
could jeopardize us for the future. >> Okay. Um I think that's pretty much >> I have a question on open space tax. So, so right now the thought process is to um take it from two to one and a half.
Uh and if I heard you correctly, the thinking was to uh soften the um impact on the budget. Um I can appreciate that thinking, but I'm wondering if there's more that you
considered. For example, like if you project out, do you do you forecast a a diminished need for funds to do open space activities or um
I don't know I mean is there anything beyond what you articulate is as basis for reducing it by half point >> so we look at what's the plan for this year and what our plans for coming years and we look at our debt service and we look at our reserve over there we have a
healthy balance in the open space fund um this would not um this would not impact operations uh for open space. We look at large if well let me back up. We've got debt service that
unfortunately uh a number of years ago prior to my arrival I don't know you know what the thinking was but they bonded for uh a lot lot of those expenses and they did so in a way that now we can't prepay that. So we have this debt service that we have to pay.
It would be nice if we pay all of it, but we can't. So, there's no sense in just collecting more revenue to just sit there, collect interest when the homeowners, property taxpayers could benefit from that relief rather than it just sitting in account uh with us not
really doing much. Uh if there are projects, and we've talked about a number of projects, if there are projects, there's a planning process involved in those. There's an engineering process. There's typically bidding that's going to be involved in going process uh to award a contract
then mobilize. So the feeling was for any projects within let's say a million dollars uh that are coming up. We have enough in our fund balance in our open space fund uh that we could and you don't make a payment all of that once, right? Typically you phase in the
payment. So you might have an initial portion a midway payment or they're paying you as invoices approved. you're not going to have a million dollars coming out of that fund all at once. So, we have enough to make any payment that would be uh necessary for any project
that's forecast uh and then be able to account for the balance of that in the 2027 budget for the open space tax >> and it's not permanent. The default is two two cents every year. So it will automatically go back next year
>> and if there was anything very large we have enough to make a down payment on that as well if we wanted to borrow uh issue notes to to borrow uh we have enough in our open space fund for that. So it wouldn't preclude us there really would not be any harm that I can see in
reducing this. >> Do you have the numbers on hand? So um what's the balance now? And roughly my recollection it charges like about 800,000 a year, right? >> Yeah. So, the 2% add a full 2% you're
bringing in about 700,000. >> So, uh or you just take that 175 multiply it by four, that's it. So, it's about 700. I do have the uh open space here. So, um with with what
we're talking about, you know, at a um 1.5, the available balance at the end of the year would be about $494,000. How have miscellaneous fees been doing? I know that I know we can't factor that into the revenue, but um I'm just
curious because I know um construction fees were uh surprisingly, but we're not going to budget for that because that's not traditional, but and but then you do get that kind of follow up that the ratables
will increase based on the construction. And and again, we're not going to roll the dice and bet that we're going to be able to replenish. want to be comfortable. But um I'm just curious to know the same as well. >> Um so uniform construction code fees we
left that at uh 425 which is the same as what we anticipated last year. So that was um slightly lower than what was anticipated in 2024. We did bring in more revenue this year um but um you
know we felt 425 was a comfortable safe number. interest. Obviously, interest is going down. That's an example, right? Rates are going down. So, while we did benefit from renegotiating our bank and getting better rates, they've now gone down. So,
we are expecting that revenue go, >> but overall the revenue outside of the grants as I mentioned is up 200 change $212,000. And again, sort of the equation is if we
were to up that right um that's less for future years uh potentially future years or if we don't make those numbers then again uh would have an impact on future years too.
This is not this is a very very difficult budget. >> Any other questions? >> I want to thank you all. I want to thank the finance committee. I really want to thank our CFO Deb King and assistant treasure at Davenport. They are fantastic. So really appreciate all the
hard work. >> Okay, if no further questions, uh we can go to the second hearing of citizens. Same rules apply as previously. Is anyone online? >> Okay. Okay. Uh then I will close the second
hearing of citizens and I will seek a motion to adjourn the meeting. >> So move. >> I'll second. >> Okay. >> I thank you. >> Thank you everybody. >> Thank you everyone.
>> Way to end on a sour note, right?