recording. >> Good evening everyone. Welcome. >> Uh we were in close session uh for the last hour discussing um the mediation with Kenian uh last Friday or whatever
that was. Um just and we are now back in open session. Uh we uh will stand for the pledge of allegiance and remain standing for a moment of silence in honor of 18th commemorating the delayed arrival of freedom to the enslaved black Americans in Galveston, Texas in 1865.
A moment to honor and reflect the history and ongoing struggles for equity and justice. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic stands one nation
indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Please be seated. Uh next on uh the agenda is the approval of minutes. Um I would ask for a motion to approve the following sets of minutes as submitted and amended. And I'll note
that uh I have I uh abstained from voting on the May 2026 voting session minutes because I was not present. So we're going to consider the May 7th work session minutes. the May 7th close session minutes, the May 20th voting session minutes, the June 4th
work session minutes, and June 4th close session minutes. Is that is there a motion? >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Is there any discussion about the minutes? Everybody had a chance to look at them. >> Yes. >> Thank you so much.
Uh, in that case, may I have a motion to adopt the minutes as uh as noted my >> We have the motion there. We just need a >> Oh, right. I'm sorry. That's right. So, uh, >> yeah. All in favor? >> I >> I
>> Thank you. Everybody take a look at the administrative reports. >> Yeah. Good. >> Yes. >> The DVW is doing a lot of work these days, which I'm happy to see. They're always doing a lot of work, but a lot of noticeable work. They're finishing the porch at city hall. Doing a lot of a lot of striping downtown. Uh lots of lots of
good projects. So, uh thanks to them in particular this month. Um any questions about that? >> Okay. I'll make a motion to accept the administrative reports. Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. Okay. Motion carries. Uh next is
public participation. Um, I'm going to open up the meeting for public participation unless you have mobility issues, uh, and you'd like to, um, in which case we can bring a mic to you. We ask you to step up to the podium here, state your name and address for the record. You have three minutes of uninterrupted time for, uh, your
questions or comments. Uh, the council and mayor may or may not respond. >> Good evening, everyone. Um, Beth O'Brien to Hancock Street. I am curious if there's any information
that you can share with the public about your negotiations with the developer or is everything still happening in private? >> Yeah, we're still negotiating. Uh, and you know, the two main issues I think we've talked about before, storm water and environmental. That's basically all
I can say at this time. >> And you have a second meeting coming up. >> Yes, that's right. Yeah, I I sent you an email. I think it's on July July 7th. So we'll have another mediation meeting on July 7th with Council President, myself and Mr. Opel. >> Thank you.
>> Sure. >> Sean Ellis 21 Belier Avenue. Um with regard to that meeting, um did you ask Khavnanian um to uh tell their client to let the D on the
site so that they can finish the environmental investigation because that that is one of the concerns, right? The environmental thing. So did you ask Kanian to let their to tell their client to let the D finish their own investigation? Uh well, Mr. Did you indicate that I
>> Yeah. Yes, we did. and their response. >> You have it right there. >> Silence. >> We have another mediation scheduled. So, there's going to be follow up on >> Thank you. Um my my other question is um I sent an email to the council today
about uh what I saw um online on video of from the uh June 4th meeting and I want to know who is responsible for losing $660,000 of taxpayer money.
You have any other comments or questions or is that the last of it? possibly depending on what >> well the response is >> if you just ask all of your questions up front uh that >> I think it'll depend on the response >> uh the the city has conducted uh Mr.
conducted an investigation. The results of that investigation have been distributed to the council. We have a meeting on next Wednesday, a close session meeting to discuss personnel matters related to this issue. Okay. So, I'm going to suggest that we do not pass this budget until we have an
accountable, responsible party for this because I don't think the taxpayers should be paying for this because this is not their mistake. It's someone in the city's mistake in in the government.
Okay. Um please vote no on this because that on on the on the amended budget because that will allow us to hopefully do an independent investigation. This is off the charts. Unbelievable to
lose 660,000 over $660,000 with financial consultants with I mean I don't know where the incompetence lies, but I'm flabbergasted
and I want to I want to know who is going to hold be accountable for this. Unbelievable. Huge, huge disregard for the public interest. And I don't want an internal
investigation. I want someone to look from outside because with all due respect to Mr. Opel, the mayor hires him. He works for the mayor. And uh that's the fox guard in the hen house
if if I've ever seen it. So that's all I have to say. >> Hi Michelle Harris, 26 Church Street. Um I read Lamborgh matters this morning with great interest. I was very happy to see
the storm water management ordinance highlighted. Um I have two comments questions. One is um it seems to me that there's a little bit of a disconnect. It's great that it's highlighted now, but for many months um
storm water management ordinance um has been brought to the attention of council um via multiple means um via email to the mayor and council to the city construction office by um multiple people addressing council here during
meetings. Um many of those comments uh in meetings were met with complete silence by everyone on the dis until there was a lot of emphasis last meeting and finally solicited some comments which was great. I was very happy to see it in Labor Bill Matters today highlighted. Thank you for that. But I'm
wondering it feels a little disconnected the discourse up until now and now the highlight on it. And I'm wondering if something has changed or what has kind of brought that to a head now and um we
are in hurricane season. I recognize that and I'm glad it's come up. Um so I'd appreciate an answer to that question. Um and the example uh that has been brought to the council's attention has been in the past the playground um
at the Fisherman's Mark Glamble Academy site. Um, and to date, um, I have attended the hearings. I have met with the court clerk. I have reviewed the transcripts. I followed it very closely. I'm the only direct adjacent neighbor. So, I have an interest in the
proceedings. As well, I'm very interested in the stormwater management ordinance itself. And, um, they are not in compliance and they have not yet been receiving received a permit from the city as I understand it. and the July se uh 2nd hearing is coming up and there's
physically no way for them to do the amount of remediation they'll need to do. So they are not in compliance and won't be. So there just seems to be a disconnect to me between those two things. That's one. And two, um there was a comment in the uh in the lamal
matter specifically about runoff uh you know it being of personal interest. Why should this matter to me? And it was um I think the comments were along the lines of well if your patio drains onto mine, you know, I'm a neighbor that's impacted by that. There are zoning ordinances that address setbacks and
that address prohibition of drainage from one property to another. That is not the stormwater management ordinance. The stormwater management ordinance is for the greater good. Um on September 1st, 2021, I had it. We all know that. I
have photographs if I may put this to you. >> Dis please. >> So, so this photograph is of and for the greater good of everyone here, I'll pass that around. This is a photograph of the um corner that is nearest to the playground. This is 70 ft from the
playground. This is the corner of North Union and York Street. Um this is the extent of flooding there was during Ida. This will happen again. that concrete pad um that was installed is approximately 1,600 square f feet just a
shade shy of that which is almost four times the limit required by the storm water management ordinance. So to me there was a missed opportunity to highlight what this ordinance is really for which is the protection of all.
Within 200 ft of the playground there are about 20 residences, five businesses and one nonprofit. Um so the storm water management ordinance is really uh not about neighborto neighbor. It is about the greater impact that the ordinances
can have. And I just think that that's what needs to be highlighted so that when the water comes again um it doesn't come to us and if it does come to us we've done everything we could to remediate um damages on our Thank you.
>> Thank you for those observations. um the the uh you know I frequently talk about resilience and ordinances in Lambertville matters there that wasn't the first reference to that specific uh ordinance and it seemed appropriate given uh kind of the work that I've been
doing this week um with respect to a regional approach and it was just on my mind um obviously from past meetings as well. So, uh, you know, I think that in my experience as the mayor, I have run across a lot of episodes or a lot of
instances where neighbors have suffered direct result of storm water running off of property. Obviously, it there's a a greater uh you know, there are greater impacts uh across neighborhoods and across the city, but was just something to that that was just an example to kind
of um I don't know, just was something that popped into my mind and I know it's something I've had to address between neighbors before. Um and I think that I thought that was relevant. Um and with respect to the the the permit, um it did ask uh for an update, received one
today. um you know the civil engineers have completed their engineering for the zoning permit um and this is as I said in the last meeting work it working working its way through the court so it has a court hearing on uh July 2nd and we'll see what the results of that are
um so uh but that's that's I think all I can say at the moment on on the subject um they are they do know uh they do know the issue the construction office zoning officer knows this issue the court knows the issue so uh it's all being dealt with in process Um, so, um, that's
>> what is does the prosecutor know about the speed issue? Because I know that's something that recently came up. So, we might want to make sure that he's aware of that. >> Well, the the construction code zoning officer will talk to the prosecutor >> just because I know at the last court hearing the storm water wasn't an issue because we uh he hadn't gone on the
property yet to measure the pads. So, I just want to make sure that everyone knows including the court that is. >> Right. I I'm just when when you say the for the zoning permit, does that mean that then they're going to the they have
to go to the zoning board or is it all before the prosecutor? >> They got to get those summons for the court. >> I know, but but >> to comply with the requirements of the storm water control ordinance. Uh uh and I would imagine they would be directed to do so by the court with other
>> actually to go back go to the zone board. I'm just >> if it's a permanent can be done administratively as long as they're in compliance with the requirements of the ordinance. I don't I'm not I'm not sure whether or not they're talking about that doesn't implicate a action zone
necessarily. >> I'm not clear if um work is continuing or not. That's what I'm not sure. >> I haven't seen any work on the site. I've seen material stacked on >> I should ask the neighbor. >> Well, I don't know that the neighbor inform whether work has continued.
>> I don't think it has. Yeah, I I can I can actually. So, um materials have been staged. The only thing that has been done on the site is five or six trees have been planted. Um which doesn't require a permit. Um and the commitment
that was made at the last court hearing was that the work would be done, permitted and done. To this point, they haven't submitted sufficient information to get a permit, let alone to do the work. So this was I this was first
brought to the attention of city of the city construction office in April of 2025. The city construction office summoned them for the first time in September of 2025. There have been court hearings in
December 2025, February 2026, March 2026. The next court hearing is July. They will still not be compliant. is physic I mean it's physically impossible for them to get the permit and execute the work between now and July. So once again the can is going to be kicked down
the road. And that's my point about bringing up how important is the storm water management ordinance if it's over a year later and none of this is done. That's my point. So to clarify what what happened. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, I just want to add
that we are potentially facing an interim storm water management issue, >> right? Because you got this unfinished work. Okay. Sorry. Thanks. Next,
Judy Gleon, 86 North Union Street. Thank you for taking care of a lot of the specifics that I might not have remembered in detail the way you did. Thank you very much. I too read labor matters this morning and my reaction was a little different.
It wasn't sort of a oh good this is being highlighted when I got to the storm water management part. And you all may remember when I stood here and said you guys did a great job with the storm water management ordinance. You did a wonderful thing and
now you're not enforcing it. So why why why why why aren't you following up the thing that you were proud of? So when I saw this today, what I actually thought was seriously, seriously, this is how we're dealing with this now to say, "Hey, look at this
great thing that we're still not enforcing that we're still not doing anything about." and having watched the weather before I came here tonight and seeing what's happening with storms and having seen the street that you have the
picture of in front of you and most of you saw it as well. I'm also a retired attorney and courts do a lot of good things when they're given the kind of information and the kind of teeing up of an issue both sides
and the judge makes a decision. When both sides say, "Oh yeah, it's all taken care of. Oh yeah, we've already done that. Oh yeah, we're working on it. Oh yeah, we'll get back to you." They the court doesn't do that. In my firm, you had to meet the deadlines because we didn't go in
assuming the court would let us get away with it. I'm not saying that's good or bad or anybody else does it any differently. I'm just saying we are continuing to take advantage of the fact that the court is waiting for the attorneys to tee up a problem and each time the listed dates that uh Michelle
just said, the attorneys sort of say, "No, we're yeah, we're we're good. We're working on it." I don't know. I know every time you say there's nothing you can do, I know that. I also know that the people who bring
the who file the the construction office or the zoning office, whichever way they go, they have the ability to do things. I have heard discussion of they can't go on the property without permission or trespassing. That is crazy. When you're enforcing something, yes, you can. It's
sort of one of the rules when you are that officer. So, no, it's not a question. Can I go on the property? But all I can say is everything I just said 200 more times since I come up here all the time and say it. It's been over a year.
We aren't doing anything. Nobody's doing anything. When it rains, it's going to rain one day soon. And this happens. What What will we say? Geez, I wish we'd known about that. Gosh,
I don't think so. Thank you. Judy, your point about the attorney's Tina for the judge, that's why I think it's important that we make sure the prosecutor knows about the issue about the storm water management because if that wasn't on his plate before, he's not going to be able to raise that to the court's attention. So,
I do think it's important, we don't want to rely on the construction official that we can let the prosecutor know that. >> I totally agree and thank you for that. >> Anyone else in the room? >> How many people? or people online but no hands raised. >> Okay. Thank you. Then will someone
kindly make a motion to close the public participation? >> So moved. >> Second. >> All those in favor, please say I. I. >> I. Thank you. >> We're going to move on to the amendment of the 2026 budget. Um just a couple of
notes about process here. So uh the last meeting we had public hearing on the budget. Um so that took place at the last meeting. Uh this particular amendment requires a couple of things. It requires two readings. The second reading uh includes a public hearing. So we will have a public hearing on the
amendment of the 2026 budget. Um the public hearing is just on the amendment itself. So um if anybody wishes to speak to that when the time comes, they may do so. Um before then I'm going to just uh uh Christy Erit who is our CFO uh and
Michael Doulis who's our budget consultant. Welcome both of you here. Um so we have the whole finance team here tonight. Hello Sue. Um before we do that I'm just going to Christie sent through to the council and me just a brief explanation of the budget amendment. I'm
going to read that and then um we will um the city clerk has to read the entire resolution to amend the budget uh into the record a second time which takes probably about 10 minutes. Um so she will do that >> unless we have the city attorney read
it. That'll probably do a much better job. >> Um after which we will open it up to uh the public for the hearing. So the 2026 budget amendment explanation. In 2026,
the city of Lambertville budget was reviewed by the state division of local government services which is required once every third year. Any changes required by the division of local government services must be made through a budget amendment in order for the municipality to adopt its annual budget.
And I'll just note as well that we have in fact amended the budget at least once since I've been the mayor. I don't remember what year that was, but this is not all that uh unusual in and of itself. The following requirements, recommendations were made by the state uh division of local government
services. One, interest on the notes was omitted from the introduced budget and needed to be added to in the amount of $103,500. two, storm water maintenance salaries and wages in the amount of $7,500 were moved from inside the cap to
outside the cap per the direction of the state DLGS. There was no monetary change. This was simply a reclassification from one section of the budget to another. Next, storm water maintenance. Other expenses in the amount of $27,250
were moved from inside the cap to outside the cap per the direction of the state TLGs. There was no monetary change. This was simply a reclassification from one section of the budget to another. Dog regulation. Other expenses were increased from $11,000
$11,500 to $26,500. The original intent was to pay a portion of these expenses from the dedicated dog trust fund. However, the state DLGS recommended that the full contractual amount be included in the 2026 budget. Public defender other expenses were
increased from $2,800 to $4,800. The original intent was to pay a portion of expenses from the dedicated public defender trust fund. However, the state DLGS recommended that the full contractual amount be included in the 2026 budget. All remaining changes included in the
budget amendment are subtotal category adjustments that are required to be reflected in the budget amendment resolution. And just lastly, this amendment does not result in any change to the tax rate as originally presented in the introduced budget.
Now on Cindy >> resolution number 110 2026 for the record will note that this is the second reading. a resolution to amend the 2026 budget of the city of Lambertville County Understate of New Jersey. Whereas
the local municipal budget for the year 2026 was approved on the 23rd day of April 2026. And whereas the public hearing on said budget has been held as advertised. And whereas it is desired to amend set approved budget will be
advertised on June 8th and a public hearing on the amendment will be held on June 18th, 2026. Now therefore, be it resolved by mayor and council of the city of Lamberfell County and Punan that the following amendments to the approved budget of
2026 be made. General revenues. one surplus anticipated sheet 4 from $523,000 to $643,500. Summary of revenues sheet 11
surplus in anticipated sheet 11 from $523,000 to $643,500. Five. Total general revenue items 1 2 3 and four on sheet 11 from 3,232,95.19
to3,443,595.19. 7. Total general revenues sheet 118,452,188.98 to8,572,688.98 general appropriations a operations within cap storm water maintenance salaries and wages sheet 15
from $7,500 to $0 stormwater maintenance other expenses. expenses. Sheet 15 from $27,250 to $0. Dog regulation other expenses.
Sheet 15B from $11,500 to $26,500. Public defender salaries and wages sheet 15D from $2,800 to $4,800.
Total operations items 8A within caps sheet 17A from 4,594,65849 to4,576,81849. Total operating cap op total operations including contingent within caps sheet
17A from $4,594,65847 to4,576,81849 detail salaries and wages sheet 17A from 2,351,600 to $2,346,100. Detail other expenses including
contingent sheet 17A from 2 2,242,96849 to2,2,230,71849. H1 total general appropriations for municipal purposes within caps sheet 19 from 5 million $384,130.94
to 5,366,380.94 a operations excluded from caps uh storm water maintenance salaries and wages sheet 20 from 0 to $7,500. $ storm water maintenance other expenses sheet
20 from $0 to $27,250. Total operations excluded from caps sheet 20A from $792,516.85 to $827,266.85 85 halfway total other operations excluded
from caps sheet 25 from $869,8734 to94,6234 detail salary and wages sheet 25 from $50,500 to 58,000 detail other expenses is sheet 25 from
$819,3934 to $843,6234. D municipal debt service excluded from caps interest on notes sheet 27 from $0 to $13,500. Total municipal debt service excluded
from caps sheet 27A from 1,547,700 to1,651,200. HG total general appropriations for municipal purposes excluded from CAPS sheet 28 from 2,743,5584 to2,881,384
O. Total general appropriations excluded from caps sheet 29 from 2,743,584 to 2,2,881,384 L. Total general appropriations items H1
and O on sheet 29 from 8,127,188.98 to 8,247,688.98 9 total general appropriation sheet 29 from 8,452,188.98 to8,500 72,688.98.
Summary of appropriations H1 total general appropriations for municipal purposes within caps sheet 20 from $5,384,130.94 to 5,366380. Let me say that again. 5,366,380.94.
A operations excluded from caps other operations sheet 30 from $792,516.85 to $827,266.85. Total appropriations excluded from caps on sheet 30 $869,8734
to94,6234. D municipal debt service sheet 30 from 1,547,700 to1,651,200. Total of general appropriations on sheet 30 from 8,452,188.98 to 8,572,688.98.
Be it f be it further resolved that certified copies of this resolution be filed within the office of the director of local government services for certification of the local municipal bud budget so amended. It is hereby certified that this is a true copy of
the resolution amending the budget adopted by city council on the fourth day of June 2026 second reading on June 18 2026. >> Thank you. Uh before I open up to public uh comment
uh public hearing on this, I'll just uh say that um this uh not putting in you know interest on the notes being omitted uh was an oversight and um I accept responsibility for it. I did not catch it in my final review of
the budget and uh I'm in good company because neither did the auditors. Um so it was only uh the CFO who caught it later on in the budget process when it was under review at the state. So, I just want to be clear about um responsibility there. Um but, you know, in the end, it doesn't change the tax
rate. It was an oversight. It was an error and uh I I accept responsibility for it. So, at this point, I'll open this up for the public hearing. If anybody wishes to speak to just the amendment on the budget, this is the time. Paul Stevens, 390 Street. might think
I'm talking on about the amended budget, but we'll find out, I guess. Um, since a hard copy of the proposed budget changes were not available at last week's budget discussion, it was a little hard for me to follow all the changes that were being incorporated into the introduced
budget. My main takeaway was listening through though. My main takeaway from listening though was a number of adjustments were needed to what was in the cap's budget. After the um and after the discussion, I was under the
impression that that resulted in an increase in the amount of surplus used to 120,500 on account of subtleties about making such moves. However, after reviewing the hard copy challenges that was that was
published in tonight's agenda, I think I was mistaken. Um, yes, the surplus increased by 120,500,000, but it appears to me that the main driver for that surplus in increase was the mistake in the introduced budget
related to the payment required for interest on the notes in the amended budget. the uh increase uh on the notes went from zero dollars to $103 and 103500
let me try this again just over $103,000 okay my question then is is my interpretation that the majority of the need to increase the use of surplus required because the introduced budget
omitted the interest on notes Another thing that has come to my attention when looking at this now in a new light um is that um there's something called general admin other
expenses uh in the budget. It has a uh proposed value of 8 84,500 in the 2026 budget. However, the same expenditure was 189532 in 2025
and that was up from 142300 in 2024. So my questions are a what is the general uh admin other expenditures? What are they? and why do you think you're going to be able to save so
significantly compared to what's gone on in previous years? Finally, I have a little bit of a reality reality check for everyone related to the municipal tax revenue increases that have taken place over the last few years. In the
mayor's budget messages, the small amount of annual increases in the average municipal tax has been highlighted over the years. It's been calculated by applying the proposed budget tax rate to the city's previous
year's assessment resulting in a rosy picture, such as the $33 increase for 2026. However, the actual increase that the taxpayer will see is a product of the proposed rate and the new assessment,
which gives $157 in 2026, not 33. This is just for that year. As I pointed out last week, this is a 7.3% increase over the previous year. Now, we could discuss the relative impact on
average taxpayers of a 7.3% increase. However, if you look at the compounded effect of all the increases since may the mayor has taken office, the municipal revenue required from property tax is up nearly 60% when both the rate
and the assessment are taken into account. The municipal tax rate itself has increased 23% as the city's assessment has increased 28%. I'm not saying everybody's total
property tax has gone up 60% since 2021. It's the municipal portion that has. The total has only gone up by about 18% as of 2025, which makes the evaluation it which is below the evaluation increase
over that same period. It appears that the increase in the value of the city's properties has been more than enough to cover the increases needed to the other entities covered in the total property tax bills. The main ones being the school district and the county. At the
same time, Lambertville's share of the total property tax has risen from 16.5% to 20.5%, which is about a 25% increase. All right. Think of what I've just said as a wakeup call about future municipal
budgets because the city's property assessments are unlikely to increase in perpetuity at the rates that they have over the last few years. I'll close with that and wait for your answers to my questions and any comments you may have. Thank you for your attention.
>> Uh thank you. Um to your first question, uh the answer is yes. Uh so that $13,500 will come from surplus. Um so that's uh that's that uh general administration and I'm going to try to answer this and I think I've got the answer but I'm
going to ask you guys to verify. So in the last three years general administration which includes uh such things as the attorneys uh uh and some some professional services account. So last year for example in 20 or in 20 let's see 2025
$189,000 and a lot of that was due to litigation. So um we had a significant drop in what we think is our proposed litigation amount for 2026 versus 2025. Uh and that's also I think believe that that's probably true from 2024 as well.
So those numbers fluctuate based on our need here in the city. Uh and administration includes things like the attorneys uh and litigation legal expenses, additional uh um uh expenses that may be required through engineers and that kind of thing. Right.
>> Yeah. And the other the other part of it was we created a new line called data processing. So in prior years we had all of our computer IT software in the general admin. The state has asked they now that everything is computerized they
have a flexible chart of accounts which is everybody every category is in its own account number on the state budget document. So they like to compare uh different towns and municipalities throughout the state of New Jersey to
get a realistic what other municipalities are spending on. So, um, we created a new line item in the budget called data processing. And we moved all the IT software and everything from the city out of the general admin and into a data processing just to have a clearer
um of what we're actually spending our money on. So, that was another reason for the decrease. >> Uh, I didn't see that as a line item in there that >> in the original budget. >> So, in the in the original introduced budget, there's a new line item called
data processing. Okay, thanks. Maybe we could keep track for future of the uh what we are spending in terms of litigation. So we know what that is. >> Yeah, we certainly know what it was for last year. And uh if you like to have a seat, I can address uh to the best of my
ability your third um which was a big one. Uh and Michael and Christie may speak a little bit to this. You know, trends over the years with the budget. You know, it's important uh certainly to look at um I think when you when you
look at the budget, let's just say over the last four years there there every year is a different budget. Um and different things have happened. So, you know, for example, from 22 when I started to 23, we finally were able to fully staff the DPW, which increased the salary and wages, right? So, there are a
lot of things that we've done over the last several years. We've added a new position for storm water, you know, coordinator man. So, A lot of things that we do from year to year are um are the result of you know certainly we've talked about the the cost the rising cost of health insurance
which has gone up double digits 20 30% uh every year or those those are all drivers of our budgets and I think that if you look at the budget messages over the last four years you'll see you'll see some patterns right you'll see definitely you'll see uh increases in um
uh in statutory um items in um things. Uh there's not, you know, at the end of the day, I would argue that there's not a lot of discretionary choices in the budget. So, beyond the kind of the contractual and and um uh the contractual and and things that we need
to pay um you know, at the end of the day, we you know, we put in the 2% every year for for salary increases. Uh the first, you know, there was one year when we included $30,000 for tree work because we were having so many issues with dead trees. So really from year to year I could address particulars in in
each budget. And then in terms of the tax rate, you know, we set this tax rate by property value. And Paul, we're not going to have a conversation about this. Um I you know, you're more than welcome to make a you're more than welcome. I'm talking now. This this public comment
was just about the the budget amendment, not about four years worth of budget practices. So I'm I'm going to ask you to uh to thank you very much. Um, and I'm trying my best to answer your question in a public way, but you know, this is a very broad question that you've asked in a public meeting. So, I
can only kind of address sort of trends as I see them. And, and I'll I'll turn this over to Michael or Christie for any kind of further thoughts I have in a second. You know, we we list the tax rate by property value because we know that assessments that assess assessments fluctuate,
right? So, so your the tax rate isn't necessarily, you know, what what what the tax rate is from year to year may only go up a little bit, but if your assessment goes up, you you obviously end up paying more even though the tax rate is the same or or or or about the same. So, I'm going
to leave it there because I feel like that was a big question. I'm happy to have a conversation if you have specific questions about it, but this is not we're just talking about the budget amendment. Do you have any other thoughts you want to share just about trends? And you don't have to I don't have any
comments. I would >> So, Mr. Stevens, your math is always pretty impressive and uh I I tried to follow the percentages. Um and I'd be glad to to look at your calculus. We have a moment, but from looking at the
budget perspective, we we look at what the levy was previous year. Look at the levy is this year. And the increase in that cash is is really the driver of the budget, right? That's what we're talking about and how we get there. Whether it's a multiplier on the rate or the assessed
value, etc. that it's going to cost this year another maybe $200,000 more than did last year in the levy. Um and and I say that because that's just the the top down simplest approach. So that's only I
could add I heard it. Thank you. >> Next uh remember please. This is just about the amendment. >> Yes. So, I wanted to ask um if you pass this amendment tonight, does that mean
that you are sticking the taxpayers with funding the $28 million assessment mistake? And that is that true that what Paul Paul's calculus said that people
will owe an additional $157. How much additional will they owe? And if you pass this bill, if you pass this amendment, are you kicking that to the taxpayers to cover whatever mistake was made?
>> Is that your only question? That is one of my questions. >> Okay. So the assessment error was does not impact this year's budget. It impacted the 2025 budget. Has nothing to do with this year's budget or the amendment. Um so this was a this we started talking about this back in
February. Um this has no impact on the 2026 budget. >> Well, that was not my question. Well, okay. So what so say your question again, please? My question was that if you pass this amendment,
does that mean that the taxpayers are going to have to cover for that mistake or have they already covered for that mistake? >> It's it's figured into the budget, so there's no additional costs. There's >> I I want it in plain terms like I'm a
5-year-old. Please explain when and where the taxpayers are going to pay for this mistake. >> They're not going to pay for this mistake. a part of the job. >> Who's paying for the mistake, the $660,000? Who's paying for that? >> So, I guess the easiest way to explain
it is that you have your fund balance, which if you want to think of it >> like a savings account. I don't know how I'm trying to explain it as, you know, as well as I can. So, um, nobody paid more money. There was no residents that
paid any money. I know there was the amount of 600,000 that was just to get in and out, but the schools, the county, they have a budget. They strike their budget and they were paid exactly what their budget was. Our taxpayers paid
exactly what our budget was. The 600,000 came out of the savings account that the township basically has. So, no residents are paying more money. It really was a direct hit to the city of Lambertville's budget. So the bottom line, if you look at a balance sheet and you have, you
know, a surplus, you know, a profit or loss statement, basically there was a loss. So there was really no extra money that anybody paid. the taxing districts received exactly what they were supposed to.
>> So if I if I if I understand correctly, no one paid any more, but we could have used that $600,000 for a community pool. um like all sorts of other services that >> I'm I'm just trying to understand is
this a public hearing and I'm asking questions >> public hearing but it's >> about this amendment which is related to the budget which is related to things that came up during last city council meeting related to this amendment. Okay, this is a new discovery by the
taxpayers. We're missing over $600,000 that we could have been putting into services in this town for residents that we could have been putting into shade trees that we could putting into all sorts of things. And I'm just trying to understand
like that's just basically is what what you're saying. It's gone. We don't have that money that we could have used for our services. Is that correct? >> No. >> Is that correct? It's not correct. >> Okay. People are not saying it's correct up here. And how how would you explain
it? >> It's not it's not correct because if if we had known about the error when we began the budgeting process in 2025, it would have been a completely different budget. We would not have factored in the $29 million worth of assessment into the budget. So it would have been a
completely different budget. So yes, we did pay out this money last year. we paid it to the school and to the these but but that the idea that uh and Michael you can or Christie you can kind of elaborate on this that if the mistake had been caught by when the when the tax
book was certified in January of 2025 there would not that 29 almost $29 million would not have been would not have factored into any of the any of the tax levying budgets and it would have ended up being a completely different budget. Am I correct Michael? Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Wait a
minute. Wait a minute. We need to take a timeout here. Process check. You can't talk about a budget that was crafted under a set of facts or with knowledge you didn't have. That's done.
Okay, that is done. Look at it this way. You have a checking account. You have a savings account. You have bills that get paid. You write checks from your checking account. But you have like $25,000 in your savings account and you
overdraw your checking account by $5,000. You take money from your savings account and you put it in your checking account when you find the problem. And that's basically what Christy said we've done.
We have a saving account fund balance >> and we we closed the hole which would be like an it's not really it not the same as an overdirect but the concepts there and we close that gap by drawing from
the this the surplus which is you know not the best reason to have it but that's fortunate that we did have it. So, you know, um I I think it's I think I understand the public's
um response to this. I do. And I think it's well founded. Okay. Um but it's done. Okay. It's done. >> It it it is done. And I just want to I I think that was a great metaphor and I I
thank you for that because I have a checking account and I have a savings account and my son just graduated high school yesterday and he wants to go to college and luckily our savings account we and his scholarship you know efforts and everything that your checking
account you wouldn't have all that money >> exactly and he might not be able to go to college then. And so I'm saying there are repercussions for dipping into the savings. And I am I am just really frustrated that it seems as if
this is being treated as oh you know oops and swept under the the the rug. It's not an oops. $660,000 is a lot of [ __ ] money. >> We're not going to have that language. I think one thing.
No, I know. But I would like Mr. Ellis to sort of have >> I I can't say I agree with the practice of asking people to step aside. >> He can stay there when I say what I'm going to say. So stay if you want. It's a you know, it's only a few of us here.
Um I I find oursel really I think a lot of the confusion is is that we're turning ourselves inside out to try to not say that there were some problems with the budget this year. So, let's let's be clear. There were problems with the budget this year. Errors were made. You know, we were lucky. We we could
cover it, right? Cover it two different ways, right? We covered it two different ways. We took it from surplus and we had the savings account in terms of the assessed value and the six seven as they say, right? There were Okay. Yes, there were. And and so going forward, we could
like beat oursel like pop over it. And but I do want to say that I I think our languaging we can we should just own it a little bit more up here and I'm willing to own it. It happened. I'm not really into the budget
process. Like last time I said when we were here I've seen this for about 5 minutes or just now it's been two weeks and five minutes. So, one of the things I think in terms of process, which I hear people say process going forward, is that, you know, I I just think it's
the call to us to be more organized. We aren't in a like a township committee system where you have a a a council member or a committee member as you know they call it in township committee overseeing like one you know sector of
of government like somebody do public works somebody do long public safety somebody do that I just think it's time that we do that we have a staff we have ready willing and able people up here as council members I don't want to be on a
need to know basis about everything that happens every day because then I have to vote on it and I kind of feel bad that like I'm huming a hum sometimes people ask me questions and I'm not sure the answers and I'm always scrambling
looking it up but like we are dying to be a little bit more hands-on. We aren't trying to get involved and help and and if that oversight can't help. So you have some um collaboration, you have some I don't know what's they saying now
redundancy in the system. That's really not right. But that we can't ch and do that because part of our problem is in checks and balances or you know or or you know signing off on things. It's kind of a mishmash.
when I worked in say government for years and still do and I am a government consult so you know um other people call me up and ask me these questions um is like we had like five people sign off on one permit you know top guy doesn't sign
off on it everybody reviewed it why to make sure that this stuff the best effort you can that this stuff didn't happen so I'd like to propose that we start doing that because I don't know how else to be able to look at everybody face and say, "I did the best job I
can." Going to vote yes on I have to vote yes on this budget. The city's got to continue to operate. We have to continue to function. We had some issues this year. We got to make sure that garbage gets picked up every day. Everything works. But can I make the process better? That's what I'm
suggesting. >> That's a great idea. I completely agree. Um and you know, I think accountability and transparency is very important. uh you know there was a mistake made. It was an unacceptable mistake. Uh it's not you know we we discussed it. We you know
it was our money our savings account. So it's not like you know $600,000 doesn't exist. It's a substantial amount of money and I think the only thing we can do is make sure it does not happen again. Work on these processes as Karen indicated. And uh you know we have to be
accountable to the public and we did not do a good job here. I uh I don't disagree with what Karen and and Evan have said about it. It it's money from somewhere. We don't print it,
we collect it. And you know, we had a savings account that we had to dip into, which is regretful and it could have been used for other purposes and it is taxpayer dollars.
>> Thank you. >> And thank you. Thank you for for admitting that and saying it clearly to the residents, the pe the voters and the you know people who um you are representing because even
that goes a long way. um based on what seemed to me like obfuscation and non accountability. And accountability isn't just saying I'm
sorry. It's it's taking measures to make sure I I'm I'm beside myself that Karen that you had didn't see that until 5 minutes before >> the first or or or I mean I don't know
how how but but very shortly before I mean these are things that are just everybody needs to be involved. I don't know. I mean the the tax assessor is the tax assessor
the only person who can put the $28 million error in or do other people have access to that system? >> We're gonna we're gonna move on, please, Sean. Okay, we're gonna move on. So, uh, the next person who wishes to make public comment on the amendment, please step up to the microphone.
>> And Sean, I would just say before we end that we're going to try to be as transparent as we can, but we also deal with personnel issues and you have to understand that the city has certain legal obligations about that. So, >> you can't just like Michelle Harris, >> I have a related question. If the answer
has to come later because it's out of scope, just let me know. But I'm going to put it out there. um as a business owner I made that magnitude of my my books get audited independently audited every year um if there that would result in a material finding for me and it
would impact my ability to get loans to get grants how potential clients look at me. So beyond we've discussed like what is the implication for the depleted savings that we have for future resource
my question is um does that kind of error and the documentation around it impact our ability to function to get funds later to do other things beyond that. So again, that's out of scope for this conversation. I'm fine, but I'd
like to table that and have it answered at some point by the experts that are beyond what I can. >> I can give I can give you a brief answer and and just to recap because a lot of people I think some of the people who are in the room have may may have not been at other public meetings where this
has been discussed. So I'm I'm just going to give a a a one minute tour, not tour, one minute explanation uh of this so that there's a little bit more clarity on the depth of the issue. Um so in November of 2025, a data entry error
was made in the tax assessment system uh in the amount of $28,775,000. That assessment error was not caught when the book was certified. was not was not caught by the tax assessor or by the county. Then it uh was factored into our
budget uh here. It was not caught by the tax uh tax collector, anybody on the finance committee, myself, the CFO, budget consultant, council president, um the the deputy treasurer, none of us caught it. Um and uh it wasn't until a
year more than a year later that the auditor caught it. So in February of 2026, the auditor let us know that there was an error dating back to 2024. So that's a lot of people involved in an error. That's a lot of people who didn't catch it who, you know, this mistake is
a very significant mistake. I've already spoken to this um and uh I I you know we we we did uh conduct an investigation which will remain confidential. It's a lot of sensitive information about uh personnel matters. So we are working
through it. Um, and uh, that's all that's that that just give you a little bit more information about what happened. Um, and you know, I can't fully address your question at the moment, Michelle, but yes, it's likely to have some impact possibly on our ratings. Um, like our S&P rating, right?
The last four or five years, we've added to the surplus every single year, and that's an accomplishment. Uh, with the exception of this because of last year, we've done well. We've we've brought in more revenue every year than we've spent. Uh last year was the first year we had uh we had an issue with not just
the tax assessment but an overexpenditure in healthcare something that we've been talking about rising costs of for many years. So whether to what extent it may impact us uh in terms of ratings that has yet to be seen. uh our ratings were uh you know were
increased uh from they they they were uh they were elevated after a couple of years of of this this program that we've got where we're bringing in more than we're spending and we're trying to keep our spending down. So I I I can't answer anything more broadly than I mean that's about the best answer I can give you at
the moment. >> Mayor, I I do want to add something to the record on that if I may. >> Please. >> And um you know I it it's a problem Mr. Alice, you're right. Um I think uh to the question about the impact.
So in 2025 the city's revenues performed at record levels. That's not the taxes, that's all the other services. And that those record levels is the money that went to cover the 660.
Now that money comes back into our surplus as our CFO mentioned and our surplus balances continue to remain the highest they've been. So to our rating agencies,
they won't it's not a number that's going to pop. However, this may be a discussion when they look at the audit that we're going to have to explain. Good evening everyone. Uh my name is Mike Redmond. I live at 23 Perry Street
and uh I'm disappointed and I urge you to vote no on this amendment until you get your house somewhere. You know, there's the idea of old business and new business. We have a problem with the old business and you need to restore the confidence of the
taxpayer. Mr. Span was really the only one that kind of owned that is the taxpayers's money. It's not money that's in a cloud someplace. Uh I would like to see, you know, a written policy as to how we can avoid this. Uh everybody
knows mistakes happen. Everybody knows it's easy to Monday uh Monday morning quarterback. U but you're asking for big things. You know, you're asking for, you know, 7% bomb. People aren't getting that in their wages, right? You have a duty.
And the idea that people aren't ashamed of what happened is disturbing. It should have 28 million should have jumped out of the page. So I urge you to vote no until you get your house. Back
to you. >> Mayor, I have a question for either Michael or Bo. If we do vote no to this, aren't there serious controversies that come with the city in terms of uh you know, one, how are we going to pay for uh people to get their trash collected?
Um, you know, I believe they can find council members and mayors for not passing the budget. So, I don't know if you can, Councilman, you you have as the representative of Lambertville an obligation to adopt a budget within a time within a timely manner. We've we
are past that point. Um we are not late because we're moving procedurally. However, the state has approved a balanced budget. That is statutoily correct. Um and just to add a little bit to it, you know, the term that they say
is each budget year stands on its own. So adopting this budget only impacts the services the city is providing in 2026. >> Right? And and look, we also have to own that we're late because we have all
these problems and and yeah, and it is the taxpayers money, but that's why, you know, up until this point, you know, we have to adopt a budget. It's end of June. The fiscal year is going to change. It's not like a welcome thing. I mean,
I'm not ending it. It It's not a fun vote to take. Um, and that's why we got to get we have to change our act. We got to change our our processes and and like I want to do that next because I can't keep doing this year after year, you
know. We can't keep, you know, oops, it doesn't cover it. It It's not our money, you know, and it's not our thing. It's everybody's thing out there, you know, and and we own that. And this should be our last year. Well, I gotta do it, you
know. I don't really know what it is. Or oops, sorry. It doesn't cut it. We really do have to clean up our act and and just and and go back and to fix it and and say that none
of this word salad about, you know, special this and special that. We had an error and we pay had to pay for it out of you know taxpayers like savings money that we are building up the surplus to get it to you know for the budget to be
better. We are lucky we had it but we just have to say it. I can't word salad it. And >> I would just want to address you because I completely understand what you're saying and I just want you to make sure you understand that if we do vote for this it's not because we're approving
the mistake. The mistake is unacceptable. >> It's unacceptable. >> Understood. I would just like >> No. No. And I I I understand. I was And if I was in your position, I'd be saying the same exact thing. But, you know, from my position, if I don't vote on it, I'm putting the city in an even worse
position. And I don't want to do that. That that's not going to help this problem. And I But voting yes is not just sugarcoating this. Oh, you know, it's not real money. It's up in the cloud. This is a problem, >> right? you have to sweep her to come tomorrow, the garbage had to come
tomorrow and you know, city wall to be open on Monday or Tuesday, you know, but that's why >> you know sometimes holiday, >> right? >> All right. The budget 33 Wilson Street. Um, I understand the
predicament you're in, but it's a self-inflicted one. And it's a self-inflicted one for multiple reasons because every year we have a rush to the budget and every year there seems to be some kind of problems and every year we come in late and this year it's later
and the problems were bigger and I and I think the whole system is totally broke and quite frankly you're going to need to restore confidence within the system to go forward to make the fixes that are need because you have to have an open
and independent audit and investigation to how it happened, why it happened, what was missed. I mean, I think the local government local government of the DCA would be a place to look for that kind of help. Uh, I don't think doing it with in-house or with our professionals and and I'm not hitting on them or
saying anything bad, but I think you have to build that trust back. The second part is that in all my years of going to local government meetings, and it's over 50 years, probably close to 55, and all the towns I've been involved with, and doing a search on Google, I've
never seen anything like that. It's the first. I mean, I want Lambert be the first in many things. You know, the happiest town, the most beautiful scenery, the most wonderful downtown, but that's not a first we should be proud of. I mean, maybe somebody finds somewhere else in another another state.
But the other part of it is that this whole budget process, we're using revenue that could have been better used for something else. New garbage cans for downtown, fixing more potholes, um helping to beautify the central business
district, giving people an extra break at a time when gas is high and everything else by not having to, you know, have taxes actually go up. uh or storm water or so many of the other things. And so it's not just a mistake, it's a missed opportunity and it's
something that can never happen again. But it has to be there has to be accountability, transparency, and then a real fix with B dying from the community, buying from the community. My other kind of final point is that, you know, it seems like this process happens all behind closed doors. We get
to look at numbers, but we don't understand why those numbers are there. There doesn't seem to be an open process for the public with the budget and I know for some of the council people there's a complaint about it but you know I know you're going to have to go forward with it because you know
because it's the deadline but it can never happen again and there really need to be accountability and I'll just throw in one other thing the you know one way you could have gotten money is the the other disaster which is the cost and farm the $3.3 million
bonding for property that we're getting about 800,000. >> That's Judy Gleason, 86 North Union Street. I'm pretty sure I'm outside the scope of just the budget amendment, but I'm trying not to be outside that scope. I'm
trying to do two things. One is my understanding was this was a budget hearing meaning it's not just a Q&A. We don't just come up and ask questions. People are doing like sort of bringing out issues sort of testifying to issues before you so that you can make a
decision. I know that you can't make any decision except voting for this budget. I gather from the recent conversation. But I I am concerned when I see a member of the public who's way more knowledgeable than I'll ever be about budgeting be told he's had his time and he has to sit down because of whatever
way it's outside the scope. I'm asking as you're considering your process which I'm hearing is what you want to do. I'm asking that that be a part of your consideration. Second thing is everybody will go home from this including me and say thank god we don't have to deal with budget anymore but we
can't we can't do that and the building the trust thing that you all are talking about and people from the audience or people here have said start doing stuff now because you'll have our attention we'll have our willingness to engage so
issues and this was brought up actually I think mayor by you snow removal well that's going to cost money though you know well Hey, how did people feel about the snow removal this winter? I think you had a really big black mark about snow removal this winter. So maybe we
need to start looking at elements of the budget right away so that we know what you're trying excuse me trying to deal with. Number two, I know that health care stuff, health costs have gone up, but every year and I've worked in government. I love public service a lot
of my life and I never had an automatic no matter what 2% raise. Hey, don't worry about it. you're going to get it because you didn't because the state didn't always have it and the feds didn't always have it and so you didn't always get it. I think it's great if we have it but we don't always have it. We the town doesn't always have it. And I'm
just asking when you relook at your process and you talk about the steps you're talking about, which I I think are great and I commend and I'm totally in favor of, but look at the hard stuff and start looking at it now because some of it might be a little different than
what we've been doing based on actual numbers and actual experience and actual dollars and stuff like that. because right now we have a lot of rich people moving into this town, but we still have people who live here who aren't and they're getting hurt
by these increases. So, I'm just asking you do what you're going to now say you're doing because I think you all can do it. I think you're all very bright and capable to do it, but as has been made, we can't do it. We're not even allowed to know. So, we're looking
forward to you doing it and helping, including us, and getting it done. Thank you. Anyone else line? >> Yeah. >> All right. Uh would someone make a motion to close the public comment or
the public hearing on this resolution number 110 2026? >> All those in favor please say I. >> I um I will just remind people that we do hold bud budget hearings in November when we uh two days and uh those are
reported. Um so we do have the CFO and the budget consultant. The bulk of the budget has gone through on those days. Uh and uh everyone is welcome to attend those and everyone is welcome to view them uh on uh online and uh I think if you go online and see how many people
actually uh do do come or do them, we'll find that it's minimal. So I would encourage everyone who's interested in the budget to to come and and be a part of that process because that is an implicit process. Um and now I would ask for a motion to adopt the budget uh the amended 2026
budget budget as amended. So move >> second. >> All those in favor please say I >> I motion carries. Uh we'll move on to resolutions. Okay. agenda this evening is um uh to consider
resolutions number 112-2026 through 123-2026. Is there anyone in the council who has a question or would like to pull any of these resolutions out of the consent agenda? Uh no no requests. I would ask for a
motion um to uh adopt uh consent agendas numbers 112 20226 through 123-2026 move. >> Second. >> All those in favor please say I. >> I have a motion to pay the bills please.
>> So move second. >> All those in favor please say I. >> I. >> I ordinances first reading ordinance number 12-2026. This is an an ordinance of the city of Lambertville and the county of Hun in New Jersey providing for various capital
improvements of and for the city appropriating $863,000 therefore and authorizing the issuance of $819,850 in general improvement bonds or notes of the city to finance the same. So, I'll
just run through um this ordinance just to so everybody knows what uh what we are bonding for. Um, included in this ordinance is $32,000 for improvements and repairs to city- owned buildings, including but not limited to the restoration of wood and metal elements at city hall facade, and miscellaneous
repairs to city- owned buildings, including but not limited to heating and cooling systems, roofs, structural repairs, sidewalk repair or replacement, replacement furniture and shelving, and including all work and materials necessary.
$95,000 for remediation of Kavala Park uh including engineering, soil sampling and testing, repair of grounds in accordance with the proposal of integral consulting incorporated dated May 13, 2026, including all work and related materials necessary um and incidental
there too. $91,000 for acquisition of police vehicles, uh, including but not limited to the acquisition of a Ford interceptor or equivalent, including the customization and related equipment to allow for the vehicle to be used for its intended use, including all work and
related materials. Therefore, $35,000 for acquisition of technology equipment for general city use, including but not limited to acquisition of replacement server, office computers, laptops, and peripherals, including uh related software and security measures,
including all work and related materials necessary there of and incidental there, too. and $340,000 for repairs to city streets, including but not limited to reconstruction and repairs to South Indian Street and Swan Street, and including related repairs within the
city right away to inlets, curbs, driveways, signage, and related work and all, including all work and related materials necessary there for or incidental there, too. Um, also just note that there was a typo in section three. Item three of the draft ordinance that incorrectly listed the estimated
maximum amount of bonds or notes for the police department is $986,450 and that has been corrected to $86,450. Um, are there any questions from the council about this fund ordinance? Hearing none, I would ask for a motion
to introduce the ordinance for first reading of the public hearing scheduled for July 16, 2026. So moved. Second. >> All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Oh, you know, Michael and Kristen, you guys. No. >> Sorry. We're going to stop for just a
minute so that um so you can have >> Thank you, Michael. >> Uh so the motion carried on that and the public hearing will be in July 16th. Um, next is ordinance 13-2026. It's an ordinance to amend the Lambertville city code 2014 chapter
11-1.8 smoke alarm, carbon monoxide alarm, fire extinguisher compliance inspection, marine occupancy to include secondary power source identification label compliance. This will change uh this change will addresses uh new requirements from the
DCA which mandate clear warning labels marking the presence of supplementary power sources like solar panels, battery backups, and generators. Anything from the council on misintroduction? >> No, I think it's a good idea. Yeah, >> especially for
um our fire department, police department because of the weather, people are getting generators and there's no uh there's no requirement to have any information on your electric service
before they come in the house. So, it's a great safety concern for our first responders that this will require that information. >> Well, actually, they had a requirement to put something on the box, the the
generator box, but it didn't meet the label that I had is just like some >> Yeah. >> You know, uh Avery label, so they've upgraded requirement. >> Good.
>> Unless there are any further questions, I would ask for a motion to introduce on first reading the public hearing scheduled for July 16th of Ordinance number 13-2026. >> All those in favor, please say I. >> I. Ordinance number 14-206.
This ordinance will amend the Lambertville City Code 2014 chapter 7 traffic section 7-4.7 handicap parking to include a handicap parking space in front of 21 South Main Street for David M. Delveio. Um so we do
these pretty routinely. This particular one is um on South Main Street which is uh which means has to go to through the Department of Transportation and uh as the Department of Transportation allows on their roads. It will be reserved specifically for the resident.
>> Any questions? >> Oh, that Oh, I didn't realize that. It's dedicated to >> Yes, it'll be it'll have the placard number, the handicap placard number, and it'll be reserved just for that one person. >> That's for the state. >> Yeah, for the state. sustain code, not a
municipal code. The municipal code does not allow for designated um parking spaces. >> Right. I'll recuse myself. >> Well, that's how you >> um All righty. So, >> it should be an extra long.
Um, I'll make the motion to introduce the ordinance on first reading with the public hearing for July 16th, 2026. May I have a second, please? >> All those in favor of introducing an ordinance from public hearing in July, please say I. >> I.
>> I did a note. >> Moving on to a second reading of ordinances. Uh, we have ordinance number 11-2026. An ordinance to amend the Landfill City Code 2014 chapter 2 administrative code section 8.4 Environmental Commission
letter B members to add two alternates. So we talked about this a couple of meetings ago um and we decided to move forward with introducing this at uh the last meeting. This will add two alternates um to the environmental commission. We've got a lot of enthusiastic, knowledgeable people here
in town and uh this was a request of the environmental commission. So, I will open this up for a public hearing. Um, if anyone would like to speak to this ordinance, uh, this is the time. >> Thanks. Uh, anyone online? >> No. >> All right. I have a motion to close the
public comment on second. >> All in favor of closing public hearing, please say I. >> I. Any further discussion from the council? >> Okay. Will someone please make a motion to adopt N-2026? >> Second. Oh, go ahead.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. Um, so we've adopted ordinance 11-226 on the second reading granting final approval. Um, correspondence. No correspondence. Um, a couple of brief a couple of
conversations to have this evening. Um, fairly brief. Uh, I did send out something in Lmberville Matters. uh the prolifer proliferation of sandwich boards in the central base is has kind of tipped tipped to I don't know tipped over um and I think it's time we finally
address the question of uh sandwich boards and uh and shops they are currently not allowed under our zoning code um for the record and um you know we've had some conversations about this at uh this this governing body um including one in which we authorized the
chamber to add a few um around town and I think It's time for a conversation. So, I've got a couple people from the from the Historic Preservation Commission who are going to work with me on this and um the vice president of the chamber um and we're going to have some
conversation about um you know, kind of where what good design guidelines. But before we do all that, just wanted to, you know, take the temperature of the council to make sure that uh I don't get out there and start doing a lot of work to have come back and have the council say, "Yeah, we're not really want them."
So, I just want to get a sense from from the council members if you're open to the idea of sandwich boards. Um, and you know, without going too much into a detailed an in-depth conversation, if you have any thoughts that you'd like to share just initially,
>> Steve, I I think Councilman Stegman can speak most. >> He's the sandwich board because you're a you're a former business operator in the city, so I think you have some some
the uh >> years ago there >> 30 seconds remaining >> and that brings us to today. >> That brings us to today. >> An envelope. >> Uh sandwich boards have been uh
dealt with many different ways. The last time we dealt with them was we banned them all and gave the chamber permission to put directional holes up with and businesses could put their names on them and direct people down the streets. But
now people are putting signs up >> for miles from their business. um >> Eli pork >> and and then we have a lot of we have a lot of uh people who are using pork pork signs like
>> open house signs and advertising businesses from >> Doyless Town for whatever and people do work at your house so they put a sign. Um so we've tried to make it uh uniform
and um you know, it's up it's up to the council how they really want this and want the city to seem to visitors. I mean, I think at this point it's really has gotten to a point where I think we have
to address it again whether we're going to um legally have it have it done. Uh but if if that's the case then I think that we all have this and that's why I think the mayors included historic preservation
commission because uh they have they approve all the hanging signs in town. You can't put up a sign without it being approved. Material that's made, the size is based on the uh the square footage of the frontage. And there's a whole
formula and then to just throw our hands up say, "Oh, we can't regulate the sidewalk ones, so we ban them." So, if it's if it's the council wants to wants to proceed with coming up with with some
design standards for them and size and how far you can place them from your business and and just wrestle it that way. Um, then we'll see, you know, something we we think we have to regulate. I mean, we wait, let me take
it a step back. We already regulated. They're not a period. So whether we just whether we just >> enforce our ordinance and just say they're they're regulated, you can't put them out or come to some middle ground
with the business community and the visitors who were coming to the city uh to you know have a brand that we are now supporting and the way we support that
is through regulation of the type, size, quality wording uh and two sidewalk signs. And keep in mind they have to be ADA compliant because you can't block the sidewalk from from
uh from the ADA requirement. So, there's a lot of information that we have to gather on this one. And I think it's time that we get the business community back involved with it and ordinances and
uh and our input from the police department as well and uh see what we can come up with. >> What about you consider fees? >> I'm sorry. Will you consider like a permitting process?
>> I think I don't know. >> No, I think that because that's it costs so much to do that like >> it does it by. >> Yeah. I mean to me like look it's >> I think the the ones that are particularly egregious are the one where you know it's half a mile away and you know there's no connection. It's right
in front of Eli Field there. Like that's ridiculous. >> Um and I there's some businesses that have you know six of them which is too many. Um so I think it's great that you know you're reaching out to the chamber. I'd love to hear what they think about this. I think the historical uh preservation committee, it's great, too,
because they're the ones that have spent a lot of time thinking about what do we want our central business district to look like. Uh so I think that's great, but I am concerned right now there are way too many and unfortunately we may come to this where it might just be easier to enforce the ban. Um so
>> yeah I mean >> because otherwise we have to say oh what sign is good what sign is bad you know the positioning and you know truthfully the ADA requirements might make this impossible for us to improve it because there are some sidewalks that are very narrow that you just simply can't put a sandwich there for a location where like
a perimeter where you can have them. I just like, you know, don't want to say, "Oh, yeah, let's do it." And have a permit pro, you know, like that. It's like, >> no, that's like I'll make enough. And I would add to this whatever requirements is that vacant buildings, like the
building that live in Charlie's, everyone has decided now they post paper on it. And I really think we should just take it down, put something that says post no bills. It's kind of getting out of hand because everybody posts, you know, different organizations think it's
a bulletin board and they're they're posting stuff and it kind of looks I mean I feel bad. I mean absentee property owner or whatever, but like there shouldn't be posting on uh on you know windows of >> Yeah. >> properties. I also think um these these
uh sandwich boards have become and the little portable signs that they've become permanent fixtures. >> Yeah. They don't come in at night. >> They don't come in at night. So what are we going to do? Have our police force driving around, you know, like confiscate like
>> well, you know, >> we can add that to the conversation about there should be >> when businesses are closer than that. >> Right. Right. And they should be limited as to how many >> how far >> you know but then we kind of get back to
the whole issue of enforcement >> which if there is no if there's no no teeth there are no teeth in it people are going to ignore it and continue to do what they're doing. Well, he'd have to deal we would have to address the
enforcement forces it >> you know or or >> well >> or or just that you know if if we enforce what I think what we're trying to avoid
or what I'm trying to avoid is a blanket saying all right everyone off the street now well you got to pull all your sign boards off we can do that tomorrow because we have an ordinance. >> Yeah. >> The thing is to try to come to see if we
can come to some agreement about what's permissible, what adds to the city's historic nature, what subtracts this, you know, it's >> what's the perceived need for the Syrport period. Like I would
>> it's because they stopped doing the the street signs which actually look very nice. They just stopped updating. Robos is still there. You know, there's a couple other ones I think. >> Um And you know, >> right, some are updated, some aren't. >> I don't know if it's a money issue where their business has to pay for it and they don't want to pay for it and it's cheaper to put the sign out, but that's
not a really good reason for us to allow the sandwich boards. So, I would like I think it's important though to hear from the businesses because if they all say this is really important, we need to bring in foot traffic, well then I'd like to listen to that. But >> yeah, let me let me do this. Um, let me come back to the council in July. I will
have met with the chamber and at least one or both of the HPC members and also have a conversation with Bill which I want to have right >> also I'll have a conversation with Bill um uh which we're not going to have right now um in fact with how we outline
and >> yeah I I also think that in that in that mix is is uh I think there's also an ordinance that prohibits people putting stuff on the sidewalk to sell. I mean, it's all in that.
>> Oh, like tables of stuff like >> like Rolex watches, those kinds of things. >> What's in the conversation? >> I will imagine there's something about that. Not sure, but I would imagine. Um, all right, gentlemen. I I got my
marching orders to speak on that. This is an update about the environmental resource inventory. So, we have a an ad hoc committee that's working on it. They've been meeting every couple weeks. They're doing a great job. Um, and I met with at the planning board meeting last night. We talked about the master plan.
And what I'd like to do is to convene a group of four people from the planning board and four three people from the zoning board um sometime in the next month or so to talk about process um and make some recommendations to the planning board about what's the best way
to do this. would also like to um consider either at the July meeting or at the August meeting at the latest kind of what that funding is going to look like. We'll need to do a special emergency um to cover the cost of the master plan um process and the ERRI. So,
um it's all kind of seriously underway now and I'll continue to offer updates about that. Um if you're interested in looking at ERRI, the Readington ERRI is the one to beat. Uh it's fantastic um our GIS um eri and I would encourage
everybody to take a look at that and just go on the Readington Town website. It is so much fun and it's such a great it's so well done. >> Could you could you explain to the public what those initials mean? You >> just the ERRI is a um environmental resource inventory that you mentioned.
>> Um right. And then just announcements tomorrow is Junth. All our city offices will be closed. uh sweeper will not run and trash will be picked up on Monday. Um uh for the summer we go to just two meetings over the course of the summer. We will uh meet or we will not have a
work session in July or August. Um so our next meeting will be July what? >> 16th. >> 16th. Thank you. Um all city offices will be closed on Friday, July 3rd in observance of Independence Day. And um I have just two other quick things I
wanted to just throw out there. Um LSRPS at Kala Park, they've scheduled the wetland survey and soil sampling along Canal Bank for Thursday, June 25th. So that's getting back underway. And there's a pre-construction meeting for the South Franklin repaving job uh
that's being held this coming Wednesday 8:30. I don't have the construction date yet, but uh I'm hoping to get that at the uh at the meeting on on Wednesday. Um and now I will open this up to public comment. question about Kapalo Park, especially as it relates to the budget.
Um, obviously we spent a lot of money on this. Uh, are we going to be able to update the public as to what we're going to try to do to recoup some of that? >> Um, I've talked to Bill about that. I'm not ready to have that conversation just yet publicly. I think we need to talk about it a little bit more. Um, uh, it's
it's a well, I'll just say this. It's so complex and it goes back so far with so many parts and and and agencies. It's going to be very it's going to be I think a challenge but Bill and I will have another conversation about it and we'll uh draft a memo or something about it.
>> There there is funding that we we are owed though from the state that is that still viable? >> Yeah. So the last uh last email I had on the subject from the the Green Acres is that they're currently still planning on um
uh settling with the you know sending the city the $300,000. So, that was something that uh an email that came through a couple months ago. So, to the best of my knowledge, Green Acres is going to stick with us on this until we're done, which will be great because we've already spent well over $300,000 on the project.
Yes, Mr. Stevens. Uh Paul Stevens, 39 Corey Street. Um I'd like to follow up on uh some of the things that were said after I was no longer allowed to talk. um it would seem to imply that I don't understand what's controlling the budget
and I do understand that there the budget is very rigid. There's not a lot of room in it. Okay. What I was taking more exception to in my message was the fact that it sounds like every time we read something in the budget me uh
message it is that there's really only a minuscule increase when in reality it's not. And over a period of time, those things compound one another to ratchet up rather quickly. Okay, so I do understand the budget. I've looked I've
got spreadsheets that show how it's changed. Each individual item's changed from year to year. Okay, same thing with the revenues. Okay, so I do know the budget. Um the other another thing is um as far as attending the budget hearings
uh I have attended them in the past and we're not allowed to ask questions. Okay? We're only allowed to sit there and listen. So I don't go anymore and I if anybody cares about the budget, it's me, but I don't learn anything from it.
Um, and then finally, oh well, on this topic anyway, back to the money that was lost. I don't care knowing details about the personnel or anything else. I want to know what
we're going to do to keep it from happening again. That's the same thing I said last week. That's the most important thing is to make our systems better. That's what councilwoman Kaminski is talking about. You know,
let's let's figure out ways to make it better. That's what's important. Not, you know, taking care of some finding out who did what. Well, you need to find out what happened. So, yes, where in the process things broke down, but it's a
system problem. It's a systemic problem apparently, and we need to make sure we understand these things. And then finally, the bit about the the sandwich boards. Hey, maybe uh you know those signs that the uh chamber put up originally, you know, that would hang
there that the historical uh commission uh talks about, maybe instead now what we do is we put up a great, you know, in a couple of places in town, a map of the city that's as nice as those looked. And it's kind of like going to the mall. you
know, you are here, here are these businesses, and then you let each business have one thing outside of its uh business so people know when they got there. I don't know, but I mean, yeah, there are things that can be done. >> If I could respond, uh they're called
directory boards. >> Yeah, >> they have been up for 15 years. The maintenance of them lack the chamber. I don't know if the chamber's responsible at this point. We had what >> to make way for another
>> sign on the bridge. They took down the directory board that lists the businesses who are chamber members. That is the difference. Not wasn't a city board. It was a chamber of commerce. You had to join to be on them. There's one left that's next to the Marshall House
waiting to fall over. So I think directory boards are are certainly uh a good idea to as a uh thing that we should talk about. But if there are directory boards it would
have to be done by if we want to be fair we have to be fair. for one business is on it, they should hold it. >> Anyway, I >> do something to alleviate things and this still help businesses people find them because you know I mean I'm
constantly guess do you know where such and such is? It says it's here on my GPS. >> I know we all have this now. So, >> but QR code would go a long way. >> All right. But yes, I just wanted to clear that up from earlier since I
couldn't talk anymore. >> Thanks. And I did not mean to imply that you didn't know the budget. You know it as well as anybody up here and probably better than most. So um I appreciate your input on the budget. >> Um and uh we did get a number of
recommendations about uh approaches to solving you know this these process issues. So um quite quite a number of recommendations to to begin our work with. Um wait Judy >> question real quick. I'm sorry. How many
people actually from the public come to the budget meetings >> last year? I don't know that anybody did. Yeah. >> So, somebody came and asked questions. I don't know why that would be a problem. I think that that would be >> We're not allowed to. That's that's the Yeah, the hearings are they're just uh
>> like people presenting their budgets really discussion budget or teaching or anything else like oh I want more paper clips. And you know, one point I have to make and this is part of the the difficulty um at the council level is,
you know, and Christie and I can both attest to this, you know, all after the hearings, all the numbers get plugged into the budget. So by the time January rolls around, we have a good right and then numbers continue to come in. They come from the state, they
come in from, you know, our contracts, we got to plug in this and that. So the budget is very fluid in terms of its movement um right up until the time it's not and and you know this year I will say that the council members didn't have access to the budget until very late
uh you know went through the the proposed the proposed budget meeting >> but and then the fix to that really are some more monthly reports and part of the organization perhaps of looking at reorganizing is some monthly accountability and and you know staff
meetings and things of that nature. So, it's not just flowing out there and and you know it gets nailed down so you understand it's like um it's like the state like they report in on um tax collections high, low or indifferent. always changes in the state budget like
all miraculously in the spring the budget colle the budget numbers you know collection numbers are up but there's a there's a reconciling and a reporting on it that happens you know during the hear you know during their process so you know there's there's certainly stuff
that you know could get into like our correspondence folders and information folders that are are you know kind of empty a lot you know I don't see what comes you know what comes in I It might be dull stuff, but then you get an idea of what the flow is only if you
experience it. >> Judy, sorry. >> Judy Gleason, 86 Union Street. Um, actually Paul and I were at a budget hearing together because we thought we would learn a lot of stuff by going there. And you can't ask questions and you also can't do anything except watch the person who wants the money say,
"This is what we need it for." And the budget person saying, "Okay, next." So it's really not helpful in many ways even if you just sit there and listen because all you hear is this is what we want, this is what we get. Okay. So what for whatever that's worth, we did try
that. Um, I wanted to remind us that the handicapped parking issue, which I am not opposed to or think about really that much, but you all said a few months ago, you know, we really should see how many handicap spots we actually have in
this town because I'm not saying don't approve every single one. I'm just saying we've got a lot. We don't know where they are. I mean, you guys said you didn't know where they are, and we really probably should know how many parking places in a town like this where
we have handicap parking spaces. I understand the state road versus city road issue. I But y'all said you were going to look into that. Maybe you are looking into it, but we don't know that if you if you are. And um lastly, the
businesses thing. I used to be involved with a business group, a group of business people in this town trying to cause things to happen and have free parking days or do something. And one of the things that I learned was if whatever you're doing to find out
things, don't just talk to the chamber. Many pe businesses don't belong to the chamber because the chamber charges a lot and they don't they haven't in the past six or seven years done much. So for businesses to have $300,500, $800
and not really get anything has been problematic. So I would just urge you to talk to the businesses, not just the chamber. And secondly, I would urge you to consider doing some of the things
that other towns do like in the midweek having a free parking day because it's a hook for advertising for the business to say come to Lynwardville on Wednesday because it's free parking or whatever. I know the town doesn't want to give up weekend traffic, weekend parking. I'm
not saying that. But all those ideas and we kicked around a lot of them when Judy Fall was mayor trying to move the ball and stuff and co came and then this and that. But there's there's excuse me there's people interested in having a movement with the city behind them to
try to get a better outcome in business for our businesses. So, as you're thinking about things like you can have a sandwich or you can't, bear in mind that there's lots of possibilities that you know we seem to think we have lost
track of and maybe we can do them. So, thank you Jeff for Wilson Street. I I my question really I heard you you mentioned you did a bond It's $95,000 for Cablla Park. >> And are we also at the same time going
to be going after the people responsible for failing to do the cleanup in the first place or who brought in the contaminated soil that they should know? >> Councilman just asked that question a few minutes. >> I'm sorry. >> Councilman asked that question a few minutes ago. It was a conversation that Bill and I have had and that we need to revisit.
>> Okay. And what I said when uh the councilman asked it is it's uh it's incredibly complicated because we're going back many years. We have uh you know engineers we you know there are different firms doing different just unpacking the tangle of the extent of
the problem over over a period of a decade is very complicated and will require a lot of resources for us to do that. So you know it's just a question that we need to you know decide you know is this is this something that we have the resources to to to effectively do
and it has to be effective right just be you know there's definitely culpability here um and but how that gets a fixed I don't know how that gets it's it's complicated right >> and I was just going to say as someone who sues insurance companies for a living I'm more than happy to help out
with this and assist in any way I possibly can because I would hope that there's insurance coverage. But I I understand it's complicated. You got to figure out, you know, what caused what. Um but we don't know that yet as the council and so and I know we haven't finished that. So >> I' I've done many bile reviews on
contaminated sites so I know that there's boxes waiting for somebody. Um but I just wanted to double check on it. Sorry. I' I've had a bigger disaster than the um budget's been having twin six-year-old grandsons and a seven-year-old cousin together in my
playroom. So, >> good luck with that. >> Anyone else in the room? Anyone online? >> Okay. I have a motion to close the publication session. Say move. >> Okay. >> All those in favor, please say I.
>> I. And I would ask for a motion to adjurnn. Please. >> So move. Second. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. I. >> Thank you. We thought