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. Lacanti, has adequate notice been given, please? >> 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 Courier in the Mars 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. Landi. Can we have a roll call, please? >> Mr. Al Perowitz. >> Mr. Troy, >> here. >> Mrs. Ewald, >> here. Deputy Mayor McHugh >> here and mayoritz. >> Yes, here
>> and second call. Mr. Alaritz >> here. We have the whole committee. >> Okay. Now I would like to open uh the first hearing of citizens. Mr. Lante, will you 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 3 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 3 p.m. 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?
>> Any question? Let's see. >> Questions or comments? Anything? >> And this is for anything other than the ordinances. >> Okay. >> The ordinances are 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. We open it to 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. Now, 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 going to 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 UAC 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 municipalities 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 >> that or can type in the chat. Um, I'm reading through this stuff. Uh, can you tell me how many units you guys are
meaning to build or whatever? I know there's a Southern Boulevard. >> I can't hear you. Can we >> Oh, you can't hear me at all. Uh, >> speak into the mic. >> Okay. Sorry. Head for me. 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 I'm not I don't
know it is Southern Boulevard, but I may Yes, that >> okay. >> I know it is 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 Blo 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. >> 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 all these questions. >> That's all right. That's all right. >> Question. >> So, you're saying all Chadam'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, >> it's an unusual request. So, that's another question based on response. I >> Yeah, that's that's part of board 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 and
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 it 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 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 move within a mile 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, and 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 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. >> Do you want to make some clarification first? >> Yeah, definitely some legal
clarification. Yeah, I I >> answer the person who >> Yes. >> Yes. >> But you if you want 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.
>> Should I? >> No, we're going to answer his question. We're going to have our >> Do you want me You want to >> provide cl 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 is 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 it's 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 de the overlay zone. The
reason that it 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, Fairmount 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. >> I think also based on the landscape of Chhattam 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 uh 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 if your fellow
>> I'd like to ask >> unless Jessica you had anything else you wanted to add. >> 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, we were legally required under this new the new amended housing act to
identify portions of Chadam 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. >> Okay. 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. >> 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've 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, and there's a reason they
qualify for affordable housing, >> 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 >> prior board 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, the not malls, but the shopping areas are two to
two that the abut Chunk Pike 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 bought those properties. Very, very
unfair. We should go back and rethink what you 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 and 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 uh 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 and we effectively did. We were sued twice by the New Jersey Builders Association and then a
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 uh 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 and 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. There's
asphalt covering that land there. 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 Roland 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 pops given away to Madison train station. Um Chadam is 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 penalty 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 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 probably 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 plan if the
developer comes in and wants to do something over the ShopRite site or over the Ace Hardware site, they would have to go to planning board with those sites. >> And speaking of the planning board, the planning board did consider all three of these ordinances to be consistent with the master plan
>> or by the same. Hello. >> Hi. My name is Tommy Anelme an SL Mi. Uh live on Shunvike 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 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
2acre minimum or whatever it is in Green Village, I had to go 9 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
downtown Township. We 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 have spoke to a couple of the property owners that didn't even
know this was happening. Um, I know that'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 is 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 that 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 Chattam 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 zoning. 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. No man, you know, 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. >> 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 curious. >> Just to clarify. So the state of New Jersey there's been a series of lawsuits.
>> Yeah. over history, decades in New Jersey, starting with what's known as the Mount Mount Laurel decision origates in Mount Laurel. 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 10-year 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. Um 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 done what we need to do for the prior rounds. >> 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 or there may not even be a fifth round, 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 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 it.
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 in 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 uh 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 >> what's known as realistic. And what goes into realistic? the market conditions, the utilities, um you know, from good planning, right? Good sound planning. We we retained 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. 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 the communities have to face and they have
to deal with it and they have to forally accept it. And so that's what the plan is today. 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 committee
meld said 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 it 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 you understand that's why I've explained there is this is the next stage this >> so this 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 ShopRite development and say, >> "Look, I get I get my food every day shop right. I get my haircut at these. I get the stuff." Like, nobody is putting
them out of business. If the property owner of that development decides to call it quits and Shopright goes out of business and Dunkin Donuts full of shop, >> I understand. >> Then, and they want to put a development there, they're >> they have the opportunity to do that. I
get that. to former mayor uh my choice point uh we hope that it's a mixeduse development because we all unit >> of course we don't 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 in Shike 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 three story 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. >> Thank you. >> 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 an acre. So just so you have perspective in terms of what it would potentially look like relative to what's there >> the property next to me 37 acres that's
why I came up very >> just a quick question if somebody offers Oh Jim Viello 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. They don't get a >> 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 >> they cannot build. No, they cannot build whatever they want. They have to follow the zoning that I >> 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 are, 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, they're constrained >> 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. >> Come on.
My name is Paul Wayne. WHN 689 Shunpike 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. 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 u the golf course might give up some
of its land. There is a space between the Chattam 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. Um, 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 thing that foot 10. So the sideyard setback would be a little shorter than me.
Um >> that's a ridiculous setback. >> Hey, 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.
>> This is a crowded area. >> Okay. U 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 a 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, but 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 all 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 or churches or sports clubs or anything else close. Uh these are things that we
all use as residents of Chattam Township and we like we'd like we 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 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 channel. 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 shop, right 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. It 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. All right. 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 something else. And I think it's important to understand what the consequence is of not doing
this. Um I can really 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 uh 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. Uh 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
take 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 really uh you know
lowincome housing credits. Uh 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 is 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 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 rem our immunity from builders uh uh our builder's immunity I'm sorry and open the door to builder lawsuits where then you can have development 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 and breathe 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'd have to put in 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 that 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 in 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 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 and there's no other place in Chadam 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. If you live in the township, you go shopping at Chai. It's it's very concentrated. The roads are not are not Shanpike 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 or the or 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? >> Turn back. >> 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. Uh yeah, but there's no real again obligated to develop in this overlay zone. >> A developer could come here and ask, but there's no obligation to do that.
>> 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 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. Said
my piece. Thank you. >> I I just want to say one more thing. Um I work with multiple municipalities. I have worked with multiple munic 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 Paper, um the precedent 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 precedence for
it. >> Those are some roundabout numbers. You are 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 committeewoman Ewald
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 develop under 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 here. >> 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 nine 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, U, mayor. um >> and 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 made the most sense to to be in the best interest of the taxpayers at the lowest cost we felt. >> Thank you, >> 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. You are clear to speak if you unmute. Name and street, please. >> Uh Tom Evans, Birchville 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 just 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, it's one one-bedroom, one twobedroom, 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 round 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 stories? >> One story. >> Each one's one. Did somebody ask how many stories? >> How many stories? Each one's one story for the group calls.
>> 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 5-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 Shares, 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 is by legislation under the afford the the fair housing act a 10-year uh and then with all I say all the previous rounds there's reviews there's checkpoints the court wants to whether
it's 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 I think that's that 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 immediate agreement incent. >> I just want by by you know not settling too. I mean the the the demand that was on the table by fair share was a far more burdensome and ownorous um proposal
than even what the law required and uh everything from uh the the numbers to the mechanisms to the reporting um all of which would have resulted in greater density more burdens to the residents
and greater expense to the taxpayers. So, um, the fact that we were, uh, we were able to prevail and have the agreement of the the program judge and the special master the the for the state, uh, I think speaks a lot about of
our plan and what we've 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. I'm grateful to have the experience of people that went through the third round to be able to do this
with the fourth round which was a little bit different. So I I I don't want I I just I don't know. I guess I take it personally that people think that we just snapped our fingers and and made an easy decision. It was 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 to fight. 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 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 much more complicated. Um there were uh there were decisions plans 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 5-year checkpoint 10 year 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 a good shape there. I see foreseeably um over the next several years with that being completed, we'll we'll finish the group homes 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 something under the perils of 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, 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 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 u I I think for the residents who I think when when you look at these ordinance it's a tendency to catastrophize and and imagine a 600 unit building there that that um you know forbodingly overlooks the sidewalks and shadows off the entire Sh Pike 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 perview. 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 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 over there will continue. Uh, the property owners, um, have uh, you
know, added benefit whether or not uh, uh, but the 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. I do understand
your concerns. Um at the end of the day, certainly putting uh the worst thing would be for this community 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 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 Ewald was on that subcommittee. I we did
you know we did um there were a lot of lessons learned from prior 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 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.
>> We move on to the next person waiting to speak. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Jessica. >> Yeah. Hi, it's Jessica Romeo and 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, and 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 had been backed into some other situations. And this is smart, and uh we're the obligation is 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? Mr. >> That's all at the moment. >> Okay. Any other comments? Yeah, >> one just
um again, Tommy, I saw me show my growth. Um, just out of curiosity, and this is just a legitimate question. I'm not being facitious at all. If I were to sell my pro, want to sell my property on Shan Pike Road, which is an acre, would I be able to get my property resed to
build 10 units on it? That's my That's a legitimate question. >> No, that would be spot zoning. >> That would be so 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 a 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, >> So, you're saying you 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.
>> You could apply. >> Um, no, not automatically. You could apply for a variance through >> I just wanted to know if the option was there when I sold down the are you are you in the business? >> You could apply for a variance. >> No, I'm in residential that touch.
>> Well, that's why I just want to clarify, right? Because this is an overlay zone for that business. One thing once that overlay zone is created if I'm touching that >> overlay zone applies to the what I'm trying to explain it just one second 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 >> like I mean he can he'd have to he'd have to go through the motions to
successfully improve the case in order to becluded in that is what >> 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 5 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 10 units on it.
>> I'm just saying I didn't know >> anybody can apply for zoning anywhere doesn't mean you you have to show the positive and negative criteria in 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 road 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. Lanti? >> 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. And um the only other thing I was going to 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 it 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, 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 uh 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 Chattam for that reason so that you know
it would be a lot more valuable than what might happen that's it thank any other questions, comments. >> Okay. So, do I close the public hearing? Is there a motion to close the public hearing related to the final adoption of ordinances?
>> You control. >> 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. Short, >> 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, but >> there was overlap. >> There was a little overlap. Is there any are there any questions online?
>> No. >> No questions. Okay. I will 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 uh affordable housing
one zone. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Auroritz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy, >> yes. >> Mrs. U. >> Yes. >> Deputy Mayor McHugh. >> Yes. >> And Mayor Roland. >> Yes. >> Motion passes. You >> I'd like to open the public hearing for
ordinance 2026-07 adding affordable housing overlay district. Yeah, there's some overlap. Any questions online, Mr. Manti? Oh, >> I just like to thank him for letting us speak. >> Oh, absolutely. >> We 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. Al Farrowitz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy, >> yes. >> Mrs. Ewolf, >> yes. >> Deputy Mayor McHug, >> yes. >> And Mayor Roland, >> yes. >> Motion passes. >> Okay. You uh we will not move on to the
resolutions. I don't know if you want uh 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, mayor, just number one, uh 2026-075, that's actually related to the uh grant application for Mammoth County Home for the group homes. >> So there that's um uh the developer
Lucha wanted to apply for some additional funding through the county home 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, mayor, as
part of the fourth round. >> Got it. That's right. Thank you very much. >> And number six is the library print. >> Yes. >> Okay. Is there a motion to approve? Do we do each one individually? Could we do a little
>> by consent? >> Okay, we can do a consent. Is there a motion to approve resolutions 2026-075767787980? >> So move. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Al Perowitz, >> yes. >> Mr. Troy, >> yes. >> Mrs. Eel,
>> yes. >> Deputy Mayor Leu, >> yes. >> And Mayor Roland, >> yes. >> Motion passes. >> Thank you. >> Now we can move on to the reports. And do we want to hear from Rich first? Rich. Rich, >> you read my mind. I was gonna So, we've
got uh Rich, come on up to uh to one of these chairs. So, Rich Young, our the PW superintendent. Um he's here also. I believe we're joined I hope we're joined by uh Zoom also with John Rushki as he dial >> John. There he is.
>> Yes. 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 uh John is here because he's also been
assisting uh Rich and myself with the D regulations uh associated with permits for such facilities. So, um, 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. >> Return the favor just like you drill him. >> Yeah. Make it worth his 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 would allow them to 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 it have to be coordinated because
you need to know what's rented. >> That's part of the problem. Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, uh the landscaper said that you know first of all they're collecting leaves 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, the 10 yards are mine. Uh 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 though and you guys have to grind up leaves for their residents who
dump their leaves anyway. So there's it feels like there's an opportunity for revenue generation in there somehow. So I'd much rather my money go to the township than there or else there's leaves. >> Yeah. With the with the leaf aspect, we don't grind the leaves. >> Okay.
>> In the re in the spreadsheet I 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 to three days to do it. So we're providing
a service, but it's eating up a lot of manpower. That's just for the less for the mulch for the the brush aspect of it. Residents are allowed to dump mulch and then we turn into we we work with the contractor to tub grind it to make double ground mulch and then we sell it
back to the residents. >> Well, that's from the residents dumping mulch. >> I didn't even know you could do that. Okay. >> Not mulch to make. >> Yes. 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 scaled 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. But when these guys come in, they come in half not happy. >> Under the proposal uh that Rich put
forward though where we would contract with the MUA to handle the hauling away of the leaves, the grass and the brush. Uh we would not be doing any mulch. Obviously, we've not been providing mulch. Therefore, we don't need the tub grinder anymore. >> Okay.
>> So, that would be saving correct. So that would be uh saving uh about 15,000 uh a year, >> right? Plus the man power to load that duck grinder which takes about a week. So it's one guy and a front end loader for
a week. >> So we contract how do we pay the MUA? Is it by the by the uh cubic MUA would be believe a flat fee uh container? Correct. >> Flat fee container. It's $200 for the pole just to show the grab it. Then it's
um right here. It's roughly 485 a 30 yard container which can consist of them pulling it, taking it, and then bringing back another one. So the new setup would just be uh leaf
container, brush container. Is that >> it's it's the same service to the residents except for the mulch. >> So no mulch deliverance 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 perhaps get more use or more expansion then you know that that's one
entrance for neighbors of vehicles and trucks and those kinds of things and this would um not necessarily shrink it greatly because you still want to dump the mulch or the brush and the leaves. >> Um okay. How many residents take advantage of the
mulch delivery? >> It's roughly including myself. >> It's in the spreadsheet had 64 or 2025 to 64 res. >> Yeah. And what's happening? We're realizing that the numbers are going down. >> Mhm.
>> And we're being left with the excess that either we have to find home have find a home for basically because >> John 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, 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 because 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 uh coming with their own buckets and taking it or
whether it be delivered um then indeed um it sits there and with the new regulation you can't let it sit there necessarily in the same way if you will or 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? >> We have to pay the year in. >> So you're looking roughly between 15 and $20 a yard. >> Okay. >> And we were charging $25 a yard.
>> We were charging $25 for three yards most of it. >> Okay. >> So but this way they can't come and pick it up either because we would >> can't store it. We can't store it. There's the part of the new requirements are that if we're storing it, um John,
feel free to jump in and uh if I'm missing something, right? Correct. We have to do testing uh as well there. 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 actually through the WPC. Um 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
leeches 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
mostly because it's and I and you know same thing it's expensive to purchase mulch but it is treated and everything else. So, um, but but it is only 60 people. So, I guess I'm not and if we really wanted to do it, I guess we could charge more, but I'm not sure if it is. Um,
but, um, I guess I'm just wondering if John, are you there? Yeah. >> Yes. >> Work with a lot of towns. Have you seen, you know, leaf collection facility that is able to make financial go? 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 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 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 like I Union County runs a compost facility and a lot of towns
whole, right, Rich? I think uh the one over in Springfield off Shumpike they've got a lot of towns bring their stuff to the county compost facility for a town to do it especially so small 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 well 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 4 I can't find it 434 what was it 435 for 30 yard container container. >> He's got all the total costs for you. So
>> 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 we could up the rates. You know, we did talk about, okay, if we wanted to get the
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 opening up. >> Correct. I'm saying aside that, right? like 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 MUA but then you're you got to 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 would just 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. And I said, "Well, how many landscapers are coming?" They said, >> "And al and also again, I can't emphasize enough regarding the quality >> dropping off leaves Tuesday morning or
commercial contractors." But we don't have the heat. >> Plus, if there's if there's containers there for residents to dump in, these contractors are going to have to manually load like back up to the dumpster as opposed to Yeah. as opposed to dumping on the ground. So if we went
with them >> Rich is there is there um 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 would 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. Yeah. >> Recycling facility. Okay. So, so you don't lose that
>> environmental benefit. >> No, it goes to the Morris County facility. >> Terrific. Perfect. If if we do um uh Stacy's much more down to the the details um on the looking at it
differently. If we if we have additional cost, additional liability, which is happening period, >> right? >> 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 growth base, we're not making money now. It's costing your guys a lot of um, time >> where they losing money on it now. Yeah.
>> So, we're losing money, is it? 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 uh I don't know you have
an exact answer on that, but I think it'd be substantial. >> Yeah, I guess I just I just I would just emphasize again the quality of the material that we're generating. Um you people will 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. 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 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 with expenses of about 42,000.
>> Okay. have to maintain >> is crazy even >> that's when I save $200 plus the guys >> with this whole new procedure we're trying to keep you know the same service to the residents >> because that's our main so minus you know instead of dumping on the ground
putting in the dumpster. >> Yes. >> That's really the big >> the big sell here. Does does that if we go the dumpster route, fewer commercial guys obviously, six two trucks anyway and 60 truck loads and
going out. Uh would the would the traffic uh the residential area there? Um would that be greater, lesser or similar because now you just move into containers? >> It all depends on you know like spring's going to be heavy. >> Sure. Of course. >> And in the fall.
>> Yes. You know, that's prim that those are the busy seasons. Yes. But it's busy anyway. Okay. >> You know, and MUA doesn't doesn't pull containers on the weekends. >> Okay. >> They're strictly Monday through Friday. >> Yep. Okay. >> So, the weekend traffic people wouldn't even notice. >> Great.
>> Great. Thank you. >> Any other questions, comments? >> No, I just, you know, >> I mean, you you make I mean you're make I 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 uh you know I wouldn't really fight your professional opinion of this. So >> unfortunately with this new permit our answer kind of died. >> It's the new driven by the new permit.
>> Yeah. >> Just so you know too before Rich comes here I challenge him quite a bit. >> So Then I challenge you. Yeah. >> I I I make sure uh 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. And unfortunately it seems like, you know, when you're just looking at this short of saying, "Yeah,
we want to eat that cost. We understand. We want to eat 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 just sort of make the decision for themselves. Well, the service is still there because you drop you up deep and
you branches and such. Service remains >> like obviously like it's a new procedure. So, there's going to be bumps and bruises here, 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 dumpsters that shouldn't shouldn't be done because
>> everybody just wants to get rid of their stuff. >> Okay. 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 the folks that use the mulch, but also the
landscapers. And who knows, maybe we tell the landscapers, they're like, you know what, I'll 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. >> Jimmy Hoffman's partner branches in
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 MU like I would contribute half of
an MUA container with oneird of the with oneird of the leaf collection. So that's that's what I'm getting at in terms of the you know the economics of it. But >> I guess how would you like how would I get it from my house to theirs? No, you still have the landscaper, but the the resident would buy the permit.
>> The res. So, I would buy a permit to dump 10 yards. Now, unfortunately, Rich is not how 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 was like, there got to be a way to All right. I said my
>> I mean, if there we have some if there's a way we can figure it out. I said, we'll let the contractors know. We're going to 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. Uh 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 them having to
shovel it off into a dumpster. >> Oh yeah, >> that because that's too much time. Yeah, >> they're going to pay their guys to do that and then your price is going to go up. >> I mean, yeah. >> And actually, you can you can buy m residents can buy material from the MUA and they do have different products
because they process it different way. If you want to buy wood mulch versus unscreened compost um and and so they they you can buy it from there's other sources too if you want to buy the material back. >> Yeah. >> Thanks, John. purchase from the NUA.
>> Yeah, we'll put in our DPW bullets and it'll it'll notify because we do put in there right now that you can buy from DPW. So, we'll just say, "Hey, here's how you can buy it now." >> That's great. >> Okay. Anything else? A wrench.
>> I'm looking to you for another question. >> All right. Thank you so much. to you and the crew on the snow plowing. >> Just anote 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. >> Yeah, great crew. You actually did too good of a job. I say >> as far as we're out a lot faster this time than have been >> so next time maybe slow it down a little
bit. >> Oh, because you kept everybody safe. I mean, big hill. We got lots of big hills, so we appreciate it. >> We had a neighbor at a medical emergency at 2 am on Sunday and the roads were clear. You guys got that? My the 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 parking on the road, so it was really important. >> All right. Well, thank you guys. >> Great. You too. Thanks for hanging in
>> I believe you need to hang around, right? >> Yep. Yep. I was just going to ask you. I'm making sure you still want to cover it tonight. >> Okay. So, whatever is next on the agenda 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 but that would be to award the contract to to uh a contractor lowest bidder to do the work at the estate for the ADA improvements. Um I don't think there's any questions on
that one. >> Ze 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 pre-con, but it 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 probably 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 3 weeks to get
contracts in place. So, I would think that he would probably start late April, early May would be the soonest. Once we have the pre-op meeting though soccer season now. >> 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.
Yeah. >> Okay. >> Is it going to affect parking at all? Like for people that are coming during those two weeks? I mean, the charts will be off on the side and everything, but there isn't going to be another place where they're
going to go, right? >> John, did you hear the question? >> Uh, no. No. Um, I get like the safety issue and everything, but what about access and parking? Um, are how many spaces are going to be lost during 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 to get the grades and things. So, it'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.
>> Okay. 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 >> 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 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 upper yesterday, you know, um we get communication as early as possible. So, whoever if someone's got scheduled events up there. Yeah, we 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. >> Great. Thanks, John. >> Okay. >> Um so, the reason John's here is uh for the discussion action item was on the agenda uh titled Southern Boulevard open
space LOI. Uh that is the u property property formerly owned by the Fensky family. Um I did email a while ago um her request that the the mapping would be made available. Um as soon as that was
done, you know, I wanted to make sure I reviewed that with John. 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 then uh 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, 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 D 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 to 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. >> Do we have anything? I don't remember
receiving anything. Yeah, it was uh emailed about a month ago and then uh resent I believe with the agenda packet. >> Was it resent agenda packet? Okay. >> Yeah. So the the not I believe I resent it though. >> Okay.
>> And 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 they 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 the 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 DP regulations are are are very lenient on recreational paths, you know, that they 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 gonna to get um this is actually going to be a
difficult permit to get. You would 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 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 bit and maybe there's a little pocket in here, but you know, all this is transition area. So D 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
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 LOI for the forational. >> This was something that was up for discussion um for public solicitation of
public input. Um but now there's limitations known and we don't have things back or I don't have things back uh from the open space here. So yeah perhaps we can run 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 the gold just for an LOI and it's it's not going to, 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 uh go get an LOI or the path, do whatever we want to do that way. Um, if you're agreeable to that, are you agreeable to that, sir? >> Yeah. >> Great. I think the biggest consideration
is the parking. >> Okay. >> 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 that's part of the push back from the environmental commission is that they don't want it, but we also want give people access to it. So, >> I don't know where else you're Yeah.
like the Green Village post office where it parks there to walk on the lawn. But >> so efforts were started. So let's uh let's uh >> do them the 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 like I could try to go down a different map, but we we can have, you
know, con connected to the Nashville Nash property. >> Well, the way that's laid out the uh if if you talk about even the Green Village trout, Nash to Green Village, uh that would end down by the old skating rink, which
>> Yeah. Yeah. It's it's up over, you know, this this is a this is a long >> there all the way the sidewalk gets >> there's another pocket of wet there's additional wetlands to delineate on the net. We didn't delineate all of Nashville. They're just in the area where we're going to put the um the boardwalk and the and 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 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. Hey John, I have a question. So the the northern section up against
southern where the path jogs around. >> Mhm. >> 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 thing 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 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 and increase buffers. But we >> trade away the the western pieces right now. 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 totally >> 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 uh just
throw a scale on this. Let me just This from here to here. >> What does that mean? >> That's that's a That's 180 ft. So, you know, if you have a 150 foot buffer on either side, this is all buffer.
>> Not even the football field. >> Yeah. My hope and desire was um to buffer average out that area and just blacken it and make it parking, you know, informal parking for Nash, which
currently is wfully under park. >> Yeah, this will be a challenge because Nash the other parking lot is over here. >> Yeah, that's and this this wetlands probably continues all the way around here. So it it you have a wetlands pocket here and 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 >> 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 so it's >> you could see what they've done at the
great swamp parking lot that they have and >> like that. Okay. >> Yes. So John, you are going to get us an updated map with Nash on there, right? >> Yes. Yeah, I can do that. Yep. Absolutely. >> Also, just so we can see I >> I can show an updated map with Nash and
I can actually um what 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. >> Um, 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 can 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. >> Yeah. >> And John, because it jos it uh you would have obstructed sightelines 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 some debris pile. So, because 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 sight distance was was fine. >> Yeah. I'm just wondering about security because it could be like not you know it's obstructed views from the street. Uh you know um >> yeah we could look at a light we could
probably add if there's not a light DPW because that may have to be chained at night >> um >> yeah 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 use the parking lot. >> Why are we putting in a path for nowhere? >> Yeah, that's why I'm confused. >> Wait, I thought that that is >> Well, now 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 um going in permit. >> Yeah. This this would need a permit and this would you know it wouldn't be a general permit likely be an individual permit and I would suspect you know we would have a pre-application with the D
but the D tend to um you know show some leniency on their when 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 they 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 in 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 call come out in a pre pre-application meeting to talk about, you know, options and approaches. >> Would county consider extending the Nash
Trail to to this location? And I don't know what I don't know if there'd be a bluff at the end or what, but um would they is is that on the tables? 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, a 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 valuing would suggest
>> trails probably. >> Yeah, trails and but I could see 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 you wouldn't restrict paths and other passive recreation in the wetlands.
Okay. >> For kicks, how many spots you think you can get if it's closer and you can't touch the land that's abuing southern because I think you referenced spotted salamanders. >> Yeah, that right here. This this this wetlands pocket is is um you know that's
>> 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. >> I appreciate it. Thanks, John.
>> Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Good night, everyone. Okay. Hi. You want to continue with the reports? >> Yes, mayor. Um, well, there really are not too much too many more things uh besides the budget.
I don't know. Do you want to take a break for the bud to the restroom break? Does anybody need a bio break or >> I need I need >> Okay. Yeah, maybe we'll take a five minute break or a few minute break for people. >> Up to you. Just because once we get to that one. Yeah. Okay. Ready, Mayor?
>> Yes. Ready. Thank you. >> Okay. Um so this evening uh under administration uh no action um proposed under clerk report was received. Any questions
there? Okay. Construction, building, uh, just the report. We didn't receive any questions. Anything to discuss there? >> Okay. Finance. Um, I'll get back to financing, police, public works. Uh, we covered those. Anything there?
>> Tax collector. Uh, we will have a resolution on for the next agenda for an outside lean redemption. Any questions or concerns about the report? Okay. Tax assessor. I will note under his report, he did provide a very lengthy update. uh this month on
progress related to the reval. Any questions or concerns there? >> Uh 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 didn't act for other meetings. Uh that but they started
in, you know, some of the dentist sections just to get a lot of coverage with an animal. 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 the website.
>> Yeah, we did put out an update on the website about that. >> So, it's on our website. We have an update. >> We did put an update uh I believe um you 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 update it on on our website, uh the tax assessors page with that information to go to and see the uh like where they are and all of that information. Okay. Hasn't popped up for me in social media, but I I follow Township, 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 is to this meeting and push it out as well. >> I'll I'll double check that. I know we did work on that. So, >> um 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 cycle of uh 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 an ordinance to set the open space tax rate u based off of the proposal that would 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 budget committee >> screen there. >> I'm sorry. >> Um there's a Zoom session running on that computer. If you want to share the screen >> so I didn't realize there was a Zoom session there.
>> Thanks Greg. Uh, I'm can't see where am I. Here we go. Okay. Good. Perfect. Thanks, Greg. Um, so this year the municipal budget finance committee uh was comprised of
mayor General Olen, deputy mayor Marty McHugh. Uh this is your second year or third year on the finance committee. Second, uh myself, our CFO and our assistant treasurer uh at Davenport. Um the mayor, she's a finance and accounting professional of 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 astute and fiscally minded uh business professionals. Uh and as I mentioned, this is their second
year on the finance committee. >> Yeah. No, I'm sorry. >> You're second. Oh, third for the mayor, second for the deputy mayor. So, a lot of experience there working on this and uh we appreciated their their input and their challenges uh that they put forward to us to craft this budget.
Uh the timeline uh for this budget largely mirrors previous years 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. 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 for for that year
um 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 reviewed 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 and 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 that also require sometimes by the time the school or the county finalized their budget or we're getting requests for from the library or other entities uh
that is stuff that then gets fed in by March the latest we 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 goal is to adopt April 28th, 2026 uh in time to meet the state deadlines for the budget adoption uh for 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, the 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. Um at least two dozen meetings
and calls uh occur in order to get this budget to where it is. It's not a uh overnight thing. It's definitely a long drawn out very thorough process in 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 of these are just a sample but of what really make up the biggest part of our appropriations. And then our revenues, uh, everything that includes fees and fines, licenses, any interests from our bank accounts, the state aid, I mentioned, any grants, what's known as MNA, miscellaneous revenue, um, you
know, things that we charge copies or smaller things. Uh, 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 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 h 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 a town that has a downtown with parking revenue. We're not a town uh with um
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. Uh 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 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 it ensures that the town 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 uh our roads during storms. For example, this year we were confronted with a number of very very significant challenges. Uh the biggest of those challenges was the rising cost of health
health care 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. Um, 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 in 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 costs. And that's not and just to clarify, our employees are also contributing as well to their
health benefits. So, uh we follow the chapter 75 model. It was an old state law that dictates how much employees contribute based on their status, the health coverage status, and also their salary. Uh so it's a graduated scale. Uh
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 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 health 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 5-year 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 a 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 us to wait till the >> uh if you don't mind uh waiting till the end, but uh >> you might want to take a breath, but that's okay. I have to answer the question. >> No problem. Uh the other one 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 in a few years. uh record setting uh storms that we've dealt with in 2026 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've 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 in the form of overtime. So because the 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 could budget for it rather than have an emergency later on in the year and and scramble. So, we did increase the budget uh 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 and 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 did that, I'll explain in a moment, but 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 a chart later. So this is just what's in in the control of the township the 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 how I I'll show that later. But the numbers uh above are I say a little deceiving, but
they aren't truly representative of 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 million and largely due to the health care
costs. Um 60% of that increase is due to the stay 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. Uh, but as I mentioned, limited opportunities for revenue otherwise. Uh, last year our tax rate went up uh.9%.
I'm sorry, the net valuation, our ratable base went up.9%. The year before that 2.33%. And so that's to illustrate uh the magnitude of that rate of the 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 departments, uh hydrants to uh
uh dispatch. Uh that is the biggest portion of it. Uh that went up uh just about 4%. Um not too bad. Insuranceances 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 the liability and and uh employment practices liability as well uh 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 Teamsters contract coming
into effect, the increases for uh salt brine contractor and the overtime costs that was uh one of the larger increases this year second to insurance. Uh pensions and social security that went
up not 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 and 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 missionritical absolutely can't function without it. uh
that way we don't uh add to our debt and that way we uh try to minimize the impact to the tax rate this year. Uh and then utilities did go up this year about $42,000. Uh we do go out to auction just to give the residents and and the 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. So rather than just going with the market rates through JCPNL, we bundle our utility costs, 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. So 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 just 4 million or $172,000. Uh that is a uh increase of 234 over last year. And down below again, you'll see the total appropriations excluding grants. Uh because again, grants have to
be booked as an appropriation and a revenue. So want to make sure that you can 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. Uh 2022 went up 23 24 went up a large amount. 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 bur the 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 the 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 at 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. 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 $370,000. 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, and 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 13,28,490. 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 I'm sorry, $3,32.
That's on uh that's $275 a month to pay for a lot 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 and 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, top rate service to the residents. So I think that's a 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 I'm sorry uh two playgrounds already completed with two
more at Colony Pool uh coming up for upgrade. We've preserved Fensky 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 part of the process. That's because it is a utility. So it's self-liquidating 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 the puzzle. Uh all the equipment there is is uh tend 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 of 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 with the major impact of the headworks project that our engineering team is working on um and looking to
apply for that funding through the state's I bank to keep costs low for residents. So that is uh the municipal budget proposed for 2026. Any questions? Command of evil. I think you I think you
have some questions. >> Um okay. Um let's uh 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 it have to do with because the percentage of retirees that we cover versus covering employees like I'm trying to understand >> um so I do get the claims experience reports um it it would be because some
of that information is covered under HIPPA but it's everything from somebody may have cancer treatments leukemia treatments a large thing that I hear that's driving healthcare 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 or retirees um to families, younger younger folks
with families that have children and uh that c the family plan costs more. 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, may get married, have kids. Um, but there's no
one answer as to why it is. It's largely because the state as a whole has been experiencing, uh, a lot of mismanagement. I mean, the headlines right there. There's been mismanagement at 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 claims 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 plan, anticipating that we were going to hit this cliff. >> Yep. because everybody with good experience went outside and got better rates and everybody with worse and I'm like we we seem like a pretty typical town with a 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 t like I mean the burrow I was talking to a friend they're 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 a two or three offs it's it it can can skew especially for the size of our township our our workforce I don't know the exact size of the burough's 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 an outside vendor and then I think it was just a year later we went back to the state of health health benefits program. Um, do you know how many we're covering in total? Because it's not staff.
>> I do have We have 51 active and 60 retirees. Our CFO is watching and she's sending me those stats so I don't have to pull up 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 contribute to the budget. We might adjust the route. There's different things that we use. But of course you always have to worry about the implications for the follow.
>> Correct. 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 because surplus does account for three and a half million of this $19 million budget, $18 million, whatever that was.
>> Y >> So, it's a big chunk of the budget. So, we count on being able to replenish 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. But 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 4,82,000.
23 3.7 24 3.4 25 3.0 know um that you know there's a lot of reasons why uh that could be one of those you know everybody talks about lean budgeting lean budgeting don't leave any fluff 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 and comes back to the surplus. So
it's not like you know it's just 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 rollover is less. So 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 playing with
the rut. 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 if we were to try to use more of this fund balance, uh not only
would be bringing that 1.7 million lower than it is, uh it could jeopardize us for the future. >> Okay. Um I think that's pretty much everything I had. I have a question on open space tax. So,
so right now the thought process is to u take it from two to one and a half. >> And if I heard you correctly, the thinking was to uh 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 uh I don't know. I mean, is there anything beyond what you articulated as as basis for reducing it by half a point? So we look at what's the plan for this year and what are 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 could prepay 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, the 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 and going through that whole 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 up at once, right? Typically you would phase in the payment. So you might have a an initial portion, a midway payment or they're paying you as invoices acrew. 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 uh reducing it to 1.5 this year. Do you have the numbers on hand? So um what's the balance now? And roughly my recollection it it recharges like about
800,000 a year, right? >> Yeah. So the 2% at a full 2% you're bringing in about 700,000. Okay. >> So uh or you just take that 175 multiply it by four. That's it. So it's about 700. And I do have the uh
>> do have the 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?
because 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 for uh uh surprisingly. Yeah. But we're not going to budget for that because that's not traditional year. But we and then
but then you do get that kind of followup that the ratables will increase based on the construction that was done. 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 if they're able to replenish. But um I'm just curious to
know has have you seen a decline in that as well or >> 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 was a comfortable safe number. Interest obviously interest is going down. That's an example right
down. So while we did benefit from uh renegotiating our agreement with the bank and getting better rates they've now gone down. So we are expecting that sort of revenue to go down as well. >> Okay. But overall, um, the revenue outside of
the grants, as I mentioned, is up, uh, about 200 and change, $212,000. >> Okay. And again, sort of the the equation is if we were to up that, right, um that's less for future years. Uh that
potentially for future years or if we don't make those numbers, then again uh would have an impact on future years too. >> Okie dokie. This is not this is a very very difficult budget year.
Any other questions? Okay. >> I want to thank you all. I want to thank the finance committee. I really want to thank our CFO Debbie King and uh our assistant treasur at Davenport. They are fantastic. So, uh, really appreciate all
the hardware work they're doing on this. >> Okay, if no further questions, uh, we can go to the second hearing of citizens. Same rules apply as previously. I'm still anyone online with their hand raised. >> Just to receive a vote. >> Oh, okay.
>> Okay. Uh then I will close the second hearing of citizens and I will seek a motion to adjourn the meeting. So moved. >> Well second. >> Okay. >> I >> I
thank you. >> Thank you everybody. Thank you everyone.