What do you mean? I'd never respond and say machine. I never respond and say machine. I never respond and say
hello. I never respond and say hello because I never responded. Hello. I never respond because Testing testing I am. >> You want me to just do it?
Good morning everyone. We're here for the Saturday, March 241st, 2026 meeting of the Maplewood Township Committee as a part to discuss the 2026 budget. I'll do the reading. Pursuant to section 5,
chapter 231, public laws 1975. This is to state for the record that adequate notice of this meeting has been provided to the public by posting and maintaining the annual notice of regular meetings on the bulletin board of the municipal building by mailing the annual notice of regular meeting 2026 to the news record
in Star Ledger in December 2025 and by filing said notice in the office of the township clerk. Whereas chapter 231 public laws 1975 common public communities act requires that all meetings of public bodies be
open to the public and whereas section 7A provides that the governing body has a discretion to permit prohibit or regulate the act of participation of the p public at any meeting and where a desire of the governing body to comply with this act same time to conduct its
business in an orderly and expeditious manner now therefore be resolved to the township committee township Mayboard does hereby prohibit except the set forth in formal agenda. Active participation in deliberations of the governing body by the public and except
as otherwise prescribed by law does limit the public to the observations of the actions and discussions of the governing body at all of its regular and special meetings. >> We can't move because we >> we're just >> we will do the salute to the flag.
Pledge allegiance to the flag of United States of America to the republic for which it standy justice for You know that was for the mayor. You didn't do it though. Made it through though.
>> We made it through. >> I guess that one It doesn't seem to me. >> I think it was with his phone. Look at you. >> Okay, let's So, we've done the statement. So, do the roll. Let's do the
roll call. >> Mayor M. Adams. Here. M. Collins. Colding. Yes, >> Mr. Daffis >> present. >> Mr. Herman >> here. >> Mayor Duca >> here. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh township administrator overview. >> Thank you, mayor. Um, I am joined uh this morning by our assistant administrator Miriam Perez, our CFO Nile Clemens, and our assistant CFO April
Miller. We've all been working on the budget for for months and months, but certainly uh after the last budget workshop that we had to um incorporate changes that the township committee had requested into the operating budget to make recommendations on the capital budget um and to at least line up and
explain how any discussed changes would impact the budget. And we've prepared for you uh worksheets for each of these. Um the one thing that the finance office is still working on is the annual financial statement and that has taken a lot of their attention over the last few
uh weeks and and months and we expect to have that done in the next few weeks. um by the time we introduce or we plan to introduce on April 7th and if not by then shortly thereafter we can introduce a budget without the annual financial
statement completed but the state won't approve the budget for final adoption until we submit to them our annual financial statement. The big piece for us in the AFS is and what we you know we're with any budget we're always waiting to see is how much surplus we
regenerated at the as a result of the prior year budget operations. The township's in a fortunate position in that at the end of 2024 we had $10.6 million in surplus which is a good amount. We realize as revenue each year
a certain amount from surplus last year from that 10.6 six, we used 2.7 million as uh as surplus as a revenue and we hope to regenerate that amount or more in the budget that we presented to you
today. Um that has a 2.95% increase. We are proposing to use $3 million of surplus. For the last few years, we've been generating more surplus as a result of operations than we had the prior year and then we had anticipated in the budget. And you know
there's a there's a hope that that trend continues and we'd be able to use more in this year's budget. So that's >> You meant 2.7. >> Th this year would be a little over $3 million. Last year was $2.7 million. >> Okay. Sorry, I'm looking on the the sheet where you've got 2025 is 2.7.
>> Yep. And then 26 recommended I think it says is 3.03. >> Zero3. Okay, got it. We'll go through that as we go through the operating budget, but I'm just giving you kind of a big picture of where we are um with our budget. Um there there there will be
changes, but we have we still have flexibility both on the revenue side and the expense side uh we think to incorporate any changes that that township committee may request both that are already shown on the the sheet as proposed or any any new items that come
up today. Um, and we have presented the budget at least with everything that's been adopted so far to the auditors. They've run a review and we are we're well below our tax cap and our appropriations cap. So, we won't run in we don't expect to run into any issues
for either of those. We have u you know hundreds of thousands of dollars of cap space for both of those. So, that leaves us with a good amount of flexibility. >> Okay. Is that it? >> That's it. >> Well, thank you very much. Um so today
we're going to start off with capital. Uh in the past capital has had an impact on the operating budget because we've had to include 5% of our capital in the operating budget. But we do not have to
do that this year. And could could you explain why? >> Because we have a reserve in the capital fund balance is well over $2 million. uh the authorization for capital ordinances this year if it was $10 million that would be $500,000. Instead of budgeting
$500,000 in the operating budget, we'd be able to utilize capital fund balance for the 5% needed for those new ordinances. >> Okay. So, because we have such a healthy fund balance, we don't have to impact our operating, which is very good because that always was a a drag on how
much we could capitalize because it impacted the budget. So that's a that's a good one. Uh Mr. Weary, you have sent us uh last night you sent us additional uh spreadsheets on if we can go to the capital summary 2026.
Um there are five tabs. The first is MUN municipal. >> Yes. >> Um you have made some changes here according to your notes. So, we're looking at administrative recommendation three. And could you explain
um just on the ones that you've changed? >> Yeah. >> And the ones you're not recommending >> and why? >> Sure. So, starting at the top, you have 26-01 for IT servers. We I had originally not recommended any
additional money because it was unclear to us what the total cost of that project was going to be. We were still working with it. They were still evaluating our system. Just yesterday, we had a meeting with our IT vendor. They gave us a refined proposal and they also gave us a
timeline which was quicker than we thought. We expected we would do some work this year and some work next year, but they feel that we can get all the work done this year and so we'd ask that the the total amount be uh approved for borrowing this year. There are still some questions out there because the uh
part of this is a server upgrade and purchasing especially RAM and some of the components is very volatile right now um because of the amount of data centers that are coming online and the demand for those types of parts and so our IT vendors going once approved
they're just going to watch the market could be for a couple months waiting for us to make a purchase at a price that we think is appropriate. So they're that may delay it a bit, but they're confident that you know they'll be able to get the work done this year at prices that that with this 250,000 we'd be able
to get all the work done. The township committee had appropriated or had approved for borrowing half a million dollars last year, some of which we've already used for upgrades and this would be the balance of that. >> Okay. >> So that that number was added. the next uh large one if
>> you just want to clarify the admin admin and admin three the admin one like can you just please >> yes >> clarify what those each are >> absolutely so the first just the cost um column is what the department heads had
submitted for a request so if you go like we'll pick kind of like an easy one if you go down to municipal parking lot repairs Mr. Mr. Kitner in the engineering office had submitted $250,000 to mill and pave the mun the town hall parking lot here
>> that all those are shown in costs when we realize you know what we have capacity for um and and what the total requests are. The total requests were $6.6 million. The township is not in a position to approve that amount for borrowing each year because we're we're
not in a position to pay debt service on that high amount of cost. The range we would like to see us in is the four to7 million range of approved borrowing each year because we can support debt service on that without any, you know, greater than two two and a half% increases on
taxes each year. So that's why we that's why the range I try to look at is just around $7 million in new borrowing per year. So >> that's you're talking now about the total at the bottom. >> Yeah. So for cost they department heads had submitted requests of 16.6 6
million. So, we have to start looking at cuts. So, I meet with the department heads and we decide areas where we think that they can uh they can cut out requests. Parking lot was one of them. So, that gets kind of cut immediately. And then between ad admin wary
stages of cuts that go from the 16.6 originally requested down to 12 million to 9.9 and to 7.6 in the final column. And the goal is to try and get it less than seven. I >> mean, ideally, we'd like to see it as
close to seven as we can. Yeah. And there are other, you know, there is some other things that go into that. Um the the SEFD line would also be supported by, you know, that same kind of bucket of money. So, we want to Yeah, we want to get it as low as we can.
>> So, we will basically be looking at the admin 3 line. >> That's what I would recommend for this year. Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, let's go to um DPW abatement uh 2603.
>> And I do want mayor if I could just for one moment speak about 2601 the municipal road repairs. That was a $1 million request. New Jersey American Water will be repaving with us a lot of roads in the town this year. There will
certainly be roads that they don't get to and will need to be repaved, but we do know they'll be doing a lot of work in town. We want to wait and they're about 70% done with their total project. So, they're still going to start digging up some more roads in town. >> I'm sorry, what percent? >> 75%
>> of their project. So, they'll be here in maybe through the summer. And then we know PSEG is going to come in and do work on a on a number of roads in town. So my recommendation is to allow New Jersey American Water PS&G to repave the
roads that they're required to repave and then we'll come back next year with a full uh request. And that's one I think it's an opportunity to save money, but also there we have a capacity for how many road repaving projects we can manage, I think. and and so I want to make sure we we realize that as we
discuss this budget when you go down a DPW abatement 263 under engineering that's $1.3 million not recommended in the final one the the township is um not able to fund this in
some prior years as well but we do know that this is a project that will have to be done in the next few years and this is for um remediation required to be done at the DPW that you site. >> Your note next to that indicates that
the relevant agency may issue fines if the area is not remediated. >> They may and we we've been in discussions with the D. They're aware that this is on our radar. We have done some work investigating what's required to be done. Um so it's not, you know,
we're not keeping them in the dark. Also, you know, as a state agency, we don't exactly know when they're going to come back and forth our hand, but the the township committee has an opportunity at any point through year as borrowing. So, it's not while, you know,
this is what we hope will be this year. Let's say we were in a we were forced into a position later in the year where we had to undertake some work. We could come back to the township committee and talk to you at that point. >> Is this the work we need to do for the affordable housing area? >> Unrelated. >> It's completely unrelated. property at
DPW is a former Tenico site and from that prior use there was contamination which the township is responsible for. >> Okay. >> So 2606 safe routes to schools. You didn't include that in any of your recommendations and that's because we're not there yet. Right. >> That's right. We have design money
already for this which we'll use and we expect construction to commence in the fall of 2027. So this will be a request in 20. >> Okay. and the 2608 traffic calming the initial request for 600,000. You've been consistent at 300,000. >> Yeah. Across the board. And this is
still an increase from the 200,000 that was approved in 2025. And our engineer thinks even at this $300,000 number that we will get done the priority projects that we had discussed for this year. >> Okay. And then uh Deartfield, we're
going to talk about that after we go through all this. Okay. So then um 2613 you mentioned before municipal parking lot 2614 municipal building architectural assessments those were included but you
have not recommended anything at any point. >> Yeah I think that those are projects that can wait for future years. >> Okay. Nelson wall the two 15 >> same. Yeah that can wait for future. >> All right. So then the next one is 2616 bike lanes Dell road. It made it to your
previous recommendation, but you dropped it in your final. >> Yeah. And looking for areas where we can um reduce the amount of total approved borrowing. I thought this was one that could be moved to a future year mostly
because of capacity. This year we we plan to engage with the public on the prospect street design. There is an opportunity there for bike lanes to be included like we had done with Parker. I expect that to be a very robust public conversation um through through public
meetings, engineering um committee meetings, township committee meetings and so thinking about bike lanes on Denell and also what undertaking that would be I thought maybe that would be an opportunity to move that to next year and also give opportunity next year for those conversations to take. Is that 250
based on is that for striping or there was some conversation about materials for the sidewalk >> that would be under greenway construction >> kind of. >> So it's just striping for the >> bike. Well, I feel like the Dell project is a little bit we've talked about that a
little bit more and a little bit farther in in um the planning of that than Prospect. And I feel like Denell is very connected to Parker. >> Yeah. Can we hold off on that? Let's go through it and then we're going to see if anybody wants to bring up any recommended changes. >> Okay. >> Okay. And I'm sure you will.
>> I'll highlight. >> I will too. >> Um Okay. Greenway Construction 2618. >> Yeah. >> Just trying to move us along because we got Okay. >> The same. So, this is the walking path between Jefferson and Oak View. This is on the side of two, but you dropped it. Same reason.
>> That's right. Same same reason. Yep. >> And your your your other ones are pretty consistent from two to three. for DPW. You just cut down on their requests. I I do want to ask about um in buildings and grounds there. You gave us something
that said some uh costs for maple and fields were taken out of capital. Could you talk about that? >> Nothing has been taken out of capital yet, but I had I had brought that up because I want the township committee to to have the option. So, in the buildings and grounds capital request, it's
$32,000 for improvements at Mapler Crest Field, and we've discussed that. >> I'm sorry, where are we? >> 2602. >> Thank you. >> 2602. I'm there >> under DPW. And the this is for at Maplerest for the three fields to do um
some leveling, cutting outside in field repair. And if if approved through this borrowing, you'd have second reading when we likely second reading when we approved the budget in May. >> 20-day esto stopple period for the bond ordinance, which means we're awarding
contracts in June. And then >> too late, it's too late. >> That's fine. So if that's the opinion of the township committee, then you have an opportunity to put this in operating budget and become available early. >> So the option here is to reduce this 380 by some number or just leave it at 380.
Yeah. But but when we talk about the operating to include in the operating whatever number is so we can get this thing done sooner rather than later >> sooner and and actually we could even put it in the temporary budget and get it done before final. Right. >> Okay. Uh community center flooring that's
2601. You dropped that. Yep. >> That's under community services. 2601 you dropped that. >> Yes. I I >> Okay. >> It's in good shape. I think the the look of it there's an interest in maybe >> improve. I think it's fine. >> Okay, >> it's fine.
>> Uh, community center signage. Okay, no change there. The memorial park lighting. I think we all agree that we're not ready to we haven't had any conversation with the community about this. >> We haven't had any >> to say the least.
>> Okay. Uh, any is there anything special about the police vehicles or equipment? I think we went through this the last time. Just to note that some of the police items that were dropped upon further investigation, they wouldn't qualify for borrowing. So because they
useful life and total cost and so some of those items have been moved into the operating budget, the the specifically the uh tracker property evidence maintenance moved into the operating budget. Um SDX traffic data, it is a software. It's used for um you you can
get phone data and find out how fast people are driving and kind of where they're to and from and some other data around there. Very useful. Not a capital item and also not something I think we can absorb into the operating budget this year, but something we'll probably keep an eye on because if there is an opportunity, we might want to uh use
that. >> Okay. Anybody have any questions? Generally, >> what are in the uh vehicles and equipment? That's just a very >> Say that again. >> Vehicles and equipment. What is that? >> Police vehicles. Yeah, just because of their >> That's all that's all police. It's under
>> No, DPW. We went through that. >> I'm sorry. So, >> yeah, we can >> 601. We talked about buildings and grounds. We didn't talk about vehicles and >> we went through that in the uh Go ahead. >> But we can I can speak to that now if you'd like. Um in 20 and let me just pull up the general capital
in DPW. Okay. So, vehicles and equipment specifically, um, on high priority, they're looking for a bucket truck. They currently have a a 26-y old bucket truck, um, which is at the end of its useful life. They're
looking to replace that for $25,000. A freight liner, the current um, one is 31 years old at the end of beyond the end of its useful life. Um, and a rolloff truck. They have one that's uh 20 years um at the end of its useful
life. And so those are the those are the high priority items that they would like funded in this year and it's is rolled into that number. >> Okay, that's helpful. I do understand that there is equipment that they would need for field maintenance that they do not currently own. So if that's not in here, then that would impact our
discussions on who would be handling field maintenance if they don't have that equipment currently. So thank you for that explanation. >> Okay. Um, looking at administrative recommendation three, are there any, and
this to the township committee, is there is there any line that you'd like to see either change downward or upward? >> Deputy mayor. >> Yeah, I'd like to see the Dell bike lanes included for this year. I feel like if we're going to go through the
effort of having community conversations, I don't see why we can't talk about Prospect and Dell. I feel like Dell connects to Parker and it goes to the train. We have our we see the bike racks full of bikes every single
day. So clearly people are going to the bike and I mean going to the train and from the train and so it is absolutely being used and including making the bike lanes there just makes it safer. So, that one seems farther along than Prospect, but we are also doing Prospect
this this year and I think that'll be a little bit more of a heavier lift, but I don't see why we wouldn't do both of them and why we would hold off one for the next year. Um, that's what I think. >> Is there anyone who has a difference of opinion to that? >> I have a question. Um, when are we doing
prospect repaving and and all that? >> This year. Uh, we talked about this fall. >> Yeah. I don't remember >> this fall if we can hit our >> deadlines. I think the reality is it's
not going to happen this year. >> Agreed. >> Agreed. >> Yeah. >> Although there is some there is some there is some urgency there because of uh >> the the state grant. We have to spend it by a certain day. >> I think there's a you can get an
extension. It's just a lot of we have to we have a lot of work to do and talking to the community. Yeah, >> I think that's a much heavier lift. >> I think it's uh I don't know how pragmatic it is to move both of these forward at the same time. Uh I would
propose that we move um forward with Denell and not Prospect this year. I just think that that's an easier project if I may as opposed to Prospect. Uh but we do have that state grant and I don't know the particulars of the timing of that.
Yeah, I I think I don't I don't know the dates, but you know, so this is we don't as opposed to the operating we can put money in here and if we don't spend it this year, we can spend it next year. This gives us bond authorization. So it
allows us to do the projects. Mhm. >> There's I think there's a good reason to put all these in here, both of these in here because if not, we're going to be talking about this next year at this time >> and then we're going to have to wait till June or July to actually start the
project. If we put it in now, then the money will be there and if we can wrap these things up and do the paving now or do the striping now when the weather breaks, we would get it done now. >> Yep. So, I'd be interested in I don't think you have to take one out to put the other in. Um, we can do both, I
think. So, I would be in favor of putting in uh Dell 250 Dell. >> I'm good with that, too. >> Okay. >> What is the timing? I just want to know what the timing is for the greenway so that we can be in coordination with the
rest of it in South Orange cuz like I feel like they still have a ways to go. So, is that why we're thinking that this would be next year? >> Yes, that's I think that's that's what it is. I don't I don't think we're clear about South Orange's plans. >> Yeah. >> Yes.
>> Okay. Cuz Yeah, that's still a I just want to make it clear that's still a priority, but um yeah, we don't they they have Chisawick to get through, which is a lot. >> Correct. And um >> yeah the other thing is I think that we have not seen we've seen conception you
know conceptual is it is it concrete versus brick >> right >> all that that has a lot to do with how much >> absolutely and we don't >> a lot less than 500,000 if it's brick it's 500,000 >> and >> I I think we've we've got Yes.
>> Yeah. All right. I just want to make it clear that that's still a priority but I I think the timing makes sense. Yeah. So, I just I I know we've been talking about traffic coming. The 300,000 is a h 100,000 more than last year. Um, is everybody okay with that 300 number?
>> Yeah. Yeah. You know, I mean, if money grew on trees, I would spend more, but 300 is 100 more than we did last year. Um, this is a very important thing that we focus on. So, um, I'm happy that it's higher than last year.
>> Yeah. But and keeping in mind that some of the other things that we're doing are traffic calming as well with bike lanes and stuff. Sorry, Miss Adams. >> The um enforcement though, I think is going to make a big difference with pedestrian safety because we're coming
up raising our percentage of tickets and moving violations and all that. And once once a town gets a reputation that their police department are enforcing, people slow down and get more careful. So I
think that's improve important improvement. >> What about 2601? I'm a little uncomfortable not having anything in there. Um I understand the utility has a lot of work to do. They're going to be opening up a
lot of roads. Um, but I thought we had some sort of agreement, maybe not an official one, after the last workshop to put a little bit of money in there. We didn't know how much that was going to be because we wanted to find out from you um which roads maybe will not be
included and so on and so forth. >> Engineering is still working with New Jersey America finalize those roads and finalize may even be further along in the process. Right. I so we couldn't confidently say what the
number was for this year. Beyond a need though, I'm my thought was more about capacity, right? I think we're going to be paving a lot of roads this year. We being New Jersey American Water and potentially PSEG with some work that they're going to start later. >> But this doesn't include New Jersey
Americans work won't include reconstruction of any roads. >> We do have a separate line right under this. So 2602 under engineering is municipal road reconstruction. So on roads that New Jersey water is repaving, we may still be doing um fully
accessible curbs or general curb repair, um manhole inlet resets. Uh >> but that's still not road reconstruction. >> So that's all in that line for work that we would do in parallel to New Jersey American waters work. Yeah, I I share I
I'm I'm think that this first of all, I'm not sure why we have to split 2601 and 2602 that we should just have a municipal road reconstruction repair and if it gets spent on an NJ A, you know, New Jersey American Water Street, that's
fine. If it gets spent on on someone else's street, that's fine, too. I I think roads need to be addressed every year. I understand capacity questions and all that, but I would be interested in taking that out of number two and putting into number one just for general
road reconstruction. And I would be interested in bumping it up another 250,000 and leave the 500 in there for the same reason I mentioned about the Prospect Street is that if we put that money in this year, then we can start earlier next year to focus on the road
program. I think we start way too late with the road program. We get crowded out for good contractors because we don't start until August and we also run into all kinds of other problems with schools starting and all that because you know we're always and then we're
running into always the cold weather around Thanksgiving. So I'd be interested in putting that money and bumping it up to 500. I don't know that is it in an accounting thing uh just a bookkeeping thing like you wanted the lines separate because this is sort of a
one-off that New Jersey American is doing it. I have no problem with them being separated. Um as far as you know unless unless it precludes us from using some of that money to do the first line. You know what I'm saying? I feel like it should be a good
>> question conversation to have them separated but when we go to use them it would be helpful to have them together. So that's fine. That's fine as long as you know there's an agreement on the number of 500. I will say that adding 250 to this will likely exhaust this money this year. I appreciate the idea
of having money. >> Yeah. Well, >> next year, but that's just realistically I don't I don't want the content committee to the if there is some left over maybe we have I don't know 125,000 but we're likely not going to roll out a bid package for $125,000 of work next year. What we could do though is maybe
in the fall or earlier in the year next year, we could approve borrowing for >> Yeah, >> we could talk about that in finance because I think I think we ought to borrow this year for the road program next year so we can just start earlier. We're always too late. But I listen, if
this could spend 500,000 on roads, I'd be happy because I think there's at least 500,000 on road repairs. >> Yeah. Little expensive. >> We hear it. We hear it all the time about roads. >> Okay. >> Very expensive. And we drive on them, too. >> Yeah. >> Anybody object to adding another 250 there?
>> No, I don't object to it. I just want to I think um I feel like next year it's probably going to have to be bigger than the normal million, a little bit more than a million that we traditionally go for road program. And a lot of that's
there are some roads, and I mean reconstruction, not just repaving. That's what New Jersey American is just going to repave. They're not going to be ripping it down to the to the cobble and reconstructing the road. Those are two very different things. And there are several roads that just from my lame,
you know, non-engineer eye, um, look to be something that needs more of reconstruction than just repaving. >> So, >> okay. Um, so what we've done is we've increased the road reconstruction from
250 to 500 and we've included bike lanes 250. So we've added 500,000 here. Any other additions, subtractions anyone wants to >> I have a couple of questions under building improvements. So 2604A there's building improvements various locations
and then building improvements woodland. So what are the various locations? because that stayed in all the way till the end at at a slater amount. >> Yeah. So 2604. >> It might be because you have a grant.
You have grant 50. >> That's for the That's for the >> No, that's what I'm saying. That's why they're No, that they're separate lines. >> So under that one and let's see that total line is how much? Uh >> you have it down to 420. >> $425,000. Okay. So, this includes u
$150,000 miscellaneous improvements, $200,000 for the police department heat pump, $75,000 for the Woodland PIV valve that's part of the fire suppression system, and it's in need of replacement. Um, and so that is what rolls up into
the let's say 200 350. Yeah, 425. >> Okay. So, so miscellaneous police department heat pump 200 and woodland um valve >> and then for the Woodland 300 you've got in your note that it's a so it's like a
14 it's a 1.4 million project 5050 cost share and 525 has previously been appropriated. Um and so you're suggesting another 300. What does that entire total project encompass? Because that's >> it's a big number. That's the previous
number that dates back a bit, I think. >> Say that last piece again. >> Um, >> previous number that >> Yeah. I'm just like I'm just asking for a little background on that last piece of the woodland. >> Sure. So, there's some that the township com there's some parts of the project that the township committee has already
authorized borrowing for and and started some amount of work on. That's the doors, the and with the side lights, the windows above the doors, removing the aluminum siding, exposing the windows above the doors, and there's some staircase repair there as well that
needs to be done. Then, as a result of the woodland preservation plan where an architect went through and evaluated the the structural components of the woodland, they identified a need to make improvements in the ceiling above the great hall. And that's a that's an
expensive piece of this project. Unfortunately, that the public won't generally see, but it has to be done that has been added into the project. We received that grant from the >> So, if we've already appropriated 525, have they started any of that work? Because why are we appropriating more if
we haven't even spent are we trying to get it all together? So, we could do one package together with one bid package. The work that we've done so far is architecture work and we've repaired one door on the great hall and and that was more exploratory
>> like we already approved the um the um the curtain but that never got changed. Is that going to be part of this? >> Not going to be >> I'm not sure why we approved that last year and that never even got um >> that's a different >> Oh, okay. That's part of the woodland. Sorry. Okay.
>> No, it's fine. Yeah. So the curtain was appropriated for separately and unable to be installed so far because of separate issues I think and and the you've added some money to that because there we realized it needed more work than was originally visioned. Um I don't
know and I know we were going back out to get uh proposals for that work. I don't know where it is today. >> So I just want to be cuz like the Okay, so that's separate. So the wood so this is so the big thing is the the the ceiling which was part of the recommendation it needs to be done. the
stairwork. Um, and then we're all aware of the the windows that are um been blocked out and that's related to the siding outside. And then the door did we ever end up having a finalized um
agreement on moving forward with the doors at a certain price point. I think that was doors are pretty expensive. >> The doors are we're removing the doors and rebuilding them and and reinstalling them. And we have done one door
so that we understood the nature of the work and the cost of the work and that will be included. Then all the doors following that same pattern will be included in this bid. >> And remind me how much the doors are. >> That one specifically was more expens. I'd have to go back and look, but it was
in maybe around $20,000 >> and we have a lot of doors. So, but I just want to make sure like we're all because I think when the the woodland presentation was made, we were looking at it as, okay, we can't do everything at the woodland, but we're going to
prioritize it. >> And these are the priority pieces. Yeah. And I I think most people have seen the conditions of the doors. So, everyone's in agreement that the doors need to be replaced. And just the nature of the work, they're going to be more expensive. And we hope that packaging
them all together in a larger bid will give us the best pricing. >> I still don't like how expensive the doors are. >> Me neither. You mean they're expensive? >> Like they still are very expensive. >> They got to take all the framing out is very expensive and re
>> well labor. >> We're fortunate and I think part of that's part of the reason we get this type of grant from the state. this we everyone understands the expense it is to maintain a historic building and that's part of the reason why we're getting $700,000 from the state to do
this work. We're making another application this year for another $700,000. We we'll continue to make those applications. >> So if we got more grant funding, would that that would then free up some of this? >> No, it's matched. >> It's matched. >> Matched all matched. >> Yeah. I mean, technically, if we're
matched, then, you know, we're we're we're appropriating a little bit more than what we need for the match, but I get it. Cushion. >> Yeah, there's a little bit of cushion in here. >> Was that So, back to the door. And we're belaboring the doors. And as committee member Adams noted, it was actually in
the $440,000 range originally. So, it's like half now, believe it or not, to to do our our historic door. I remember the last time I uh attended an engineering uh and planning meeting, we were still awaiting
to hear from state preservation commission um whether or not the door that we did build was acceptable to them. Do we have that now? The one door? >> I don't know. I don't expect that we're
>> meaning acceptable to them as terms of >> yeah that wasn't my they had reviewed the bid document before it went out and I know that they had approved it. I don't I wasn't aware that they were coming back to inspect the work. I do know that there was a discussion about going to the state regarding doing a
rebuild of the door and using a prefab door. >> Right. But we >> you know the way we're moving forward because of this whole bid package and because we think by the work we've done on the first that we can responsibly put out for a rebuild of all the doors
instead of requesting the state to consider a prefab door. Do you know so that's where that was my recollection of where that conversation was left off. Well, and all this came the grant money is only available because we went through the process of of the historic
the architect and the getting it uh to a point where we could apply I can't I forget what it's called where we could apply for these historic grants which we couldn't do a few years ago when we talk about the door. >> We are because of the historic preservation commission and the work
that they do. We are certified local government uh for the state when it comes to our historic properties and we completed a historic preservation plan for the woodland and those two things make us eligible for these grants and and very competitive because of the the amount of use. It's not a historic home.
It's we are continually programming in there. So we are competitive for these grants. >> Yeah. Which will really help with the costs for that's why we went for that. Yeah. >> Okay. So, so if you take the total project cost, divide it in half,
>> and then subtract the 525 >> in order to make our 50/50 cost share, it would be um like 200,000, not 300,000. So, if we're I'm I'm just saying it's $100,000 extra
if we're looking to >> fit other things into the budget. That's all >> part of that is, you know, is it the interest of the town committee? I I maybe there's 10 or 12 doors there. So, if you want to cut out costs, is there the an interest to do six doors as
opposed to eight or do some of the siding and not all of it? Like, you'd have to start cutting things out of the project at points where there's not a clean break. >> Well, I'm just going by the total cost you have listed here, >> right? But you're looking at the total costs are 1.4 million. There's $700,000
grant and we have 525 previously appropriated. Right. We need to appropriate some amount to come up to the 700,000. >> Right. So if you take the 700 minus the 525. That's all I'm saying. >> Right. Right. But >> because we have an extra 100,000 in there that we don't need for the match.
>> Right. We do. And that's to cover portions of the project that we are all combined. Doors, windows, siding. So if you were to lower the And you're right, we only need 700 plus 700. the township only needs to put in 700. So we could reduce it to that amount but then we are
taking things out of the project. There's not a clear >> um >> but but then the total project number should be higher then right? I'm just going with the total project number. >> The total project >> so if you take the total project number >> divide it >> okay
>> I mean >> and there's a there's a little >> Oh see you're saying you're saying the grant is 700. So if you do 700 plus 700 >> is for so >> Okay. But still you're appropriating more than is >> but the grant been covering >> there was a little bit extra built into
here. >> Right. That's all I'm saying about it. >> That's all I'm saying. If we're looking to try and project, >> do you want to do you want to make a recommendation or not? >> Um I want to talk about this whole thing so that we can see where we might agree to move things around. I'm not sure that
this is the place, but I'm just asking. >> No, it is the place. I'm not sure what you mean that you move things around. What are you talking about? Moving the capital budget. We're Yeah, we're added in more for the roads, which I agree with. We added in Dunell, which I agree with, but then that bumps us up at the bottom line. Right. >> Right.
>> And so so we're looking for other areas that we might want to reduce. Is that correct? >> I'm I'm not No, >> I don't think we have to. Well, I think I think this is this is this is a capital. So this is not a one for one. So this is this is money that will stay
in the capital accounts and as we have woodland activity next year, this money will be applied to that. So we wouldn't have to maybe put that in next year. So we don't have to do a one for one because these these these accounts live past 2026.
>> So if you could explain again if so the for the for the total number if we're above 7 million. So it looks like we're around like 8 million >> at least. What how does that affect our >> So I think that to to meet the grant there's a and even the project cost
there's a a need for $175,000. We've submitted a request for 300,000 extra basically right in in this. So we don't need the full amount. It's a $1.4 million project on historic building with prequalified contractors. We think it's we'd submit that it's reasonable to
put a little extra in that budget. >> Yeah. I don't want to take any out of it. Just >> I would I would >> one to one Matt >> I would say that you know this this seven well now it's going to be $8 million. This includes $3 million for Deart.
>> This is a one-time project >> that we cannot let crowd out the other things that we have to do. >> So this is a and I had this discussion with Patrick yesterday about it that I I am just I am I don't think we should have included this three million. Obviously, it's part of the the thing,
but we always talked that the $3 million for Deart was going to be a standalone project. >> We talked about that being separate. Yeah. >> Just like the library was a standalone project cuz if you include it in here and say want to keep seven million out, >> you can't you're spending $4 million on
opposed to seven. >> Yeah. Right. >> Right. >> So, that's a good point. >> I don't think we need to cut anything. In fact, uh, and I, we don't need to add anything because it's, you know, the 3 million is a bar, you know, we're borrowing it, but I would not be so
concerned about going over $8 million here because $3 million of that is dehart. >> And can you just go over the what that means >> for tax impact? >> Tax impact. >> So, you would not have to budget the 5% in the 2026 calendar year budget. Uh
right now your capital request for column admin 3 is about $8.2 million using round numbers. So the appropriation for the 5% the down payment would be $410,000. That will come from your capital fund balance. The only effect would be the
annual debt service that will come later once we go out to the market and have an official statement and we sell notes. We'll let you know what we come back what the impact will be. As far as what the mayor said too, the debt service pledge from Deart Park, your renovation will come from the open space fund.
>> Right. >> May >> May >> May >> they haven't agreed? >> Haven't agreed to yet. May, excuse me, come from the open space trash. >> Any other question? >> Okay. I think for the larger budget impact, we had asked our financial adviser to look at the amount of
borrowing we >> approved each year and on a 10-year capital program, which is, you know, generally a a blended useful life, uh, for $7 million, the increase each year
is, uh, for the most part between two uh, and 3%. And so that's what they were saying that responsibly you could approve that amount each year without negatively impacting like budget's natural growth. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. That really helps. And and mayor, um you're right.
We talked last year about keeping to heart out of the budget thing, but I think honestly by putting it in, if you take the eight minus the three, we're at five when usually we'd be at seven. So it's it's forced us to tighten our belt by 2 million. >> Yeah. >> Which I think is a good thing. So
>> and the only reason I So yeah, >> the only reason I left it in is from on the finance side, not not how you guys think about it, but on the finance side, we get the debt service bill and it's one bill, right? So that's just why we we but I do appreciate that there's a difference in in approach here. >> Yeah. All right, I'm good with this. I
>> Anybody else on the municipal capital? We'll go to pool capital. >> There are two items here. >> Yes. >> One is an awning of 11,000, one lobby flooring. Were you recommending both? >> Yes. Wait, where >> should be a tab? >> There's a tab on the bottom. It says
>> very on the top here, >> which is the awning. >> This would be the awning on the broine house. It's a new addition to the pool. So, you know, the bromine house if you're if you walk into the pool on the left hand side kind of halfway back is the new building that the municipality
built four years ago. >> The pump house. >> The pump house. >> Thank you. >> So, >> you're calling it the Brome. >> Yes. So it would it would come off and right against that house is a lot of deck space. So it would come off of that >> because we had to take so many trees out to build that building.
>> Okay. Any other questions on the pool? >> Now we need to buy >> storm water utility. >> So this is you know general storm water projects that engineering has teed up for this year. Um and we you know it's it's a little more than we bring in in the or right around what we bring in in
the storm water utility. Um, and we, you know, we expect going forward it's just going to this the utility will pay for more and more debt service. So, this is a mostly of a balance request against what we receive in revenue. >> We bring in over 800,000. I think we're budgeting 875 this year or something
like that, right? >> Any questions on this stormwater utility? >> I don't know what that rain garden at the pool parking lot, but we're not doing it this year anyway. >> So, I'll have a to learn about it. >> Open space trust fund. Yeah, there is a
a column here that is changed from the last time we had this discussion and that's admin recommended. So all these projects have gone to the open space committee. They've made their recommendation. So then I've made my recommendation here because the township
committee doesn't have to follow the OSTF recommendation. The I think from the last time we talked there was a $10,000 request for the inoculation of ash trees. We do have money from prior year OSTF uh approvals. We can pay for that. So, we took that out of this
year's budget. And I've changed from for debt service for the uh the HART field. I had originally requested 250,000. They had recommended 100,000. I'm recommending 365,000.
The reason is we looked at how much debt service would cost on that improvement and I shared that with the township committee prior, but generally on a $3 million improvement um the debt service will be about $260,000
a year if it was a 10-year um was a 10-year improvement and or I'm sorry, a 15 if it was a a 15-year bond. at a 10-year bond, it would be $360,000. So each year we're gonna do that as a or
it's already started as just a general um bond. It's not pledged to get money from open space. Each year we can make a request to open space and see if they're able to fund debt service for the heartfield. This year, I recommend going
above what the OSTF had recommended because we we generate each each year about $621,000 in revenue into open space and we have from last year $165,000. So that leaves us $787,000
this year that could be allocated to projects. Openspace has recommended the the um committee has recommended $525,000. So that leaves a lot of money in the bank that sits in a bank earning interest. At the same time we're talking about paying interest on money we borrow
at a higher rate. So financially that just at least to me on the finance side doesn't make sense. So I'd recommend if we have the capacity this year pledge as much to deart as we can. It lowers the amount that we're going to end up borrowing when we end up borrowing and
each subsequent year we can make requests to OSTF for debt. >> Hang on. Hang on. Hang on. Hang on. So I thought that what you said just now is very interesting because it is not it does
not align with the presentation to OSTF about this particular item or at least it was not understood by OSTF in the manner that you presented it. namely the issue of whether or not the recommended contribution to the
Deart Park field improvement is not going to be locked in for 15 years, year after year. We can change it year after year. Is that what you're saying today? >> Yes. >> But that is not what was said before. >> Well, because open space chose to fund at a lower amount and we can't support
the bond with the amount that was that they would be comfortable with. So instead, when we when the township committee considered the bond for this, it's just a general bond. So the township is obligated to pay it whether we pay it out of our general debt service or we pay it with a contribution
from open space. It could have been the other way. We could have said this is going to be the debt service. This debt service is going to be supported by open space. But we don't we we don't have funding in that in in a high enough amount to support that. >> Right? Because the reason why OSTF
recommended the way that they did is because at 365 they were like they understood that that would be a locked in amount for 15 years year after year. And so if you look at what we generally bring in that's more
than 50% of their annual um of the annual generated funds in in the trust fund. And then they thought about other projects that we know we have to do that we're kicking down the road like the duck bond pond um what's the term of art
uh dredging and whatever that's called um which is going to be a very expensive project and some other projects. So they didn't they were concerned rightfully so reasonably concerned about locking themselves in for 15 years for
more than 50% of their annual revenue. >> And that's that's battle scars. That's what that's battle scars. Um OSTF has lost u battle scars. Yes. Yes. for years for the for you know purchases by the
township that you know came out of OSTF and then kind of left very little to do open space. >> So I think battle scars were the words that were used in that meeting. >> I can appreciate that from the prior conversation. So the OSTF to be clear is
not obligated in any year and certainly not even in this year to spend any money to support debt service for the Hartfield improvements. They don't have to spend a dollar this year. There's capacity there that would otherwise go unused and I recommend we support as
much as that capacity allows but no obligation for future use. >> So I think we should just so the OSF is an advisory committee and based on the information they had they made certain advice. Now we have additional advice. So we can we have different additional
information from our administrator. We can either go with the OSTF or we can change it and we don't have to go with what the administrator we can anywhere between 100 anywhere between zero and 375 we can decide. >> Oh yeah. No, I understand that. So that's where we are right now. So I I
think and I think you're absolutely right. This is an annual decision that gets made by the T township committee and I think I share some of the concerns about um sort of anticipating that 50% of our open of our open space money is going to go to Dehart debt re I don't
think that was ever contemplated by I think we want to you know our goal should be to try to increase our open space. >> So >> I I have a question about the park trees. We've had a lot of park trees
thankfully, gratefully, and needed planted um the last I don't know five years. >> We've we've committed a lot of money and that's these cannot be open space cannot be used for street trees. So, this is just park trees, but we've planted a lot
of them. I'm wondering if there's some wiggle room for this year on the park trees. I know it's only 25,000 to Huh. >> reduce the amount. Yeah. To reduce the amount or like because I'm not sure that what the plan is. Is it for because we've planted
I can't even count how many at Mapler, right? And and also at um Memorial since we got the um the tree planting plan done. So I'm just wondering if that I don't know the answer. So I don't know
where else we're planning. Are there are these for other these are probably for other parks I would expect like Bordon and different parks that haven't gotten the tree replacement done. So I'm fine with leaving it in there. I just thought of it when I was reading this.
>> And again, you know, if it's not used this year, it's going to be held for a future year. >> So I just wanted to be clear on the OSTF. We're uh we're recommending or you're recommending to spend all of the things that they requested.
>> Yes. >> So the >> they didn't request them. >> Well, they all the things that they all the requests that they considered and approved >> requests that were made of them. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Well, what I'm trying what I'm trying to say is that if you're if you're suggesting bumping up the um
deart debt service, then that's not at the expense of something else that they requested that they're not going to be able to fund. I just want to make clear because >> not this year. >> Not this year, right? It's it's >> Can I can I just I'm sorry. Can I just
Can I frame this that it's not them and us? >> Correct. >> They're an advisory. >> Yes, I understand that pounds. This is the >> but as we're talking this is our decision. >> Yes. Well, >> yes, absolutely. But as we're talking about battle scars, I want to make sure that you know that we do this in a
collaborative way with our advisory committee. So, um I'm I am fine with what is proposed right here. I think it makes sense to use the money that is available this year if there isn't anything else in the on the horizon that we're saving it for, you know, uh that
I'm just not aware of. Um that's all I was trying to say. Well, you see there's Okay, I agree with the mayor's approach and we should move forward. But again, there's a pro there's something staring at you right there. $750,000
for the duck pond reconstruction and dredging. >> Why didn't they recommend spending a >> We're not recommending it. We We It's not we and them. That is a project that we don't practically think we can even get to this year all things considered in terms of actually doing it. Um, but
that is something that's getting kicked down the road and we know that that's a that's a that it's a priority. >> Well, the OSF didn't recommend any money for that. Why didn't they? >> Because administration said we're unlikely to get to that project this
year. And and I have to say that for for engineering or DPW or administration to ask for 750,000 for for this and we
don't ask I I assume this is the whole cost or is this >> the whole cost? >> Yeah, we don't ask I mean we don't have $3 million for Deart Park in here. So I don't understand why they would put this in here because it's going to be bonded and the only thing that we would
potentially ask him for is some payment towards that bond similar. Sure that. So >> yeah, I think the duck pond needs to be discussed and we need to schedule it up for future capital notf. >> Yeah.
>> Doesn't make any sense to put 750 more than we even get a year. Okay. >> What do you want to do here? >> And so the so the big thing here is the difference between what was recommended by OSTF and administration is an
additional 365 >> 265. Yeah. >> Or uh Deart debt service and no money for the ashtree. What's that about? >> We have money from prior years. >> So we're good with that. We don't need any more money in there.
>> But you're using the money for prior years. So you're saying you're using different money for you're not using open space money for the asht tree in >> it was it was a previous year allocation from open space that's still in an open it's still in the open space trust fund earmarked for inoculation of ash trees.
>> Okay. I know it's bianual. It's like twi every other year >> inoculate. Are you saying they put it in and then get inoculated like what? >> Or maybe it got put in two years. >> I don't know. >> Oh maybe we didn't skip the year. status is there >> and I look in the trust fund there's 10
there's 10,000 plus in that account >> okay >> this year and >> what is what is the pleasure of the township committee with this 365 >> this would mean that we would have um a balance in the an unappropriated b unallocated balance of about 8 million
$8,000 8 million >> yeah we're cutting it all the way to almost zero >> yeah I'm I'm a little uncomfortable about that. >> Yeah, me too. >> What about >> 250? >> Give me any number. I mean, you don't have >> 250. 265. How about cutting a 100,000
off that 365? >> That's fair. >> We don't like to You know what? Your head gets too big if we just agree with everything you recommend. >> Yeah. >> What do we do What do we do with money that's sitting in the open space that is
just not spent? Like what is that? How does that do we use it throughout the year for other things or it just >> rolls into next year? Like what's the benefit of it? Just >> you could choose later this year to make an appropriation from Open Space Trust. Otherwise, it sits in an account. It earns interest and it's available for
next year just like the 5 was available from last year that hadn't >> and we could do that at a separate time separate from the budget. >> Correct. >> You could like if something came up. >> Yeah, like that then. And I just have one other comment to make because we haven't discussed it anywhere else in
capital. The uh Duran Hedenhouse had requested $25,000 for the roof replacement of the main building there, which was um is included in this final recommendation. That's a bigger project,
maybe around $425,000. It also asked the township for money, but didn't have an exact number on it. and they want they have some money already approved in a roof fund. They expect to do fundraising on it. So, we're not exactly sure the final we
don't have a good estimate for the project cost. We don't know how much they're going to contribute and so it's hard to figure how much we're going to contribute. The engineer and I spoke with the architect that's done 90% of the plans for the the roof replacement there and he is confident that we can
wait until 27 to do the work. I haven't spoken to uh Duran Heden about that yet because I want to have the conversation here first, but I would speak to them about doing the fundraising that they intend to do, having knowing how much that fundraising is going to contribute to the project. At the same time,
there's $25,000 here that we can use to get final architecture plans, a really tight budget estimate, and then we'll bring this back to the township committee next year. >> Okay. So, um I'm hearing we're going to drop the 780604
to 68604. >> I have a a question, Patrick. Uh what's the rate on that? Um >> interest the interest rate, what's the bank rate, and just giving the three rates across the board and how we're saving in doing what you recommend
compared to what we want to do. And what's that number if we leave 30% in the trust fund? I haven't done the analysis on that. >> I think we need to look at that. >> We know offhand what the rates are. I know that generally the rates we borrow at are higher than the interest we'd get
>> for this particular uh recommendation you're making. What was that rate? >> So we don't know the rate yet. We wouldn't know until we go out to the market after you authorize the and then when we go to issue the debt, we would know at that time. It all depends on >> Do you have any idea?
>> Yeah. Because you were making a recommendation park. >> Yeah. to see what the >> under 4% definitely under 4% with you guys rating under 4%. So, will we be leaving based on the recommendation at least 30% in the trust fund or a certain is that 30% of what we have left if we
take some of that money out? >> I'm sorry, I don't understand your question. I can't hear you that well. >> We had we had said we're going to leave some money in. Right. So, what's that percentage look like? >> What is that earning? >> What are we earning? >> 3.3% 3.3% on your interest on
investments right now. 3.3%. So there's a gap between So let's say we we borrow at four and we're earning 3.3. >> So you'd be paying.7%. And >> so it's not a huge gap. >> Yeah. Well, that >> and it gives us a little flexibility. >> Yeah. And that's the whole reason he wanted to put the 365.
>> Correct. Right. >> All right. >> Right. >> Right. We're we're I think >> the 265 >> 65. >> I like that approach, too. >> Are we all good with that? >> I'm in agreement with that. >> Okay. Uh SCFD, I think this can be quick and then we can go over to the eggs.
Patrick. >> Yes. Sorry, I'm just making notes so I can changes incorporated. Okay. OSTF. The top part of it, this remains exactly the same as the last time you saw it. $180,000 for costs that we would share
with South Orange. The bottom did change. There is a $350,000 request for a new ambulance at uh for SEFD. Since it's an ambulance, the the township bears all of the cost for this. I met
with the um the mechanic and the our our mechanic and our fire chief. The we have two ambulances right now, one from 2016, one from 2017. They frequently, not frequently, but more than we'd like, break down. There have been times over
the last year when both ambulances are in for repair, which we don't like to have that occurrence. And so there's a request here for a new ambulance, $350,000. >> What's the life of an ambulance? 10 years, >> about 10 years. You know, the some of the problem is both of the ambulances we
have now are diesels. Ambulances do a lot of idling while they're at calls, and idling is not good for diesels. We we would get a gas ambulance. Maybe that extends useful for life a little bit. But it it just depends on the amount of runs they do. Um but there, you know, it's an emergency vehicle. It takes a good amount of impact. But
>> are there electric ambulances? >> And what's that? >> Are there electric ambulances yet? >> If there are, we'll find them and we'll make >> I haven't seen any, but we haven't seen any. >> Yeah. The other thing to note here is right now the lead time on an ambulance is three years.
>> So you're approving borrowing. There's a need now, but even with that, you know, we >> we'll be waiting a bit for an ambulance. >> How many do we have? And do we sell our used ambulances? >> We have two and we sell them when we're done with them. So, we'll make some
money back on it. Yeah. You know, and there is some market for them. You know, like a plumber will use them for >> Why is this our cost? Because South Orange does not use EMS only provides Maplewood. >> Well, they do runs in South Orange. >> No,
>> no, not at all. >> No, not the ambulance. >> Oh, >> only Maplewood, >> right? >> Only Maplewood has an has an agreement with >> I thought they did like um >> No. >> Okay. >> Not the ambulance. Yeah. >> Okay. Um
any questions about this? So, this would be $510,000 total. When When this ambulance, if we if we bond this now and put the order in this year, when do we get it? >> Maybe three years. It could be sooner. I mean, these things fluctuate. Yeah. >> But right now, it's years.
>> Yeah. Well, we're going to need it in three years. >> Well, it's not like it's the end of this year. We're making investment now so that >> so that we'll have everything. >> We'll do everything we can to find one earlier. And that happens sometimes. Let's say a big department like New York puts in an order for a lot of
ambulances, but then there's one that they don't need and maybe we can pick it up off the floor. Like there are times when things like that happen, generally speaking, >> we should try and get the order in with a big uh order. >> Yes. Anyway, >> we're eager. All right. >> So, going back to uh
>> got to get over there. Are you kidding? >> So, we're adding >> 510 to this bottom line for O for SCFD, right? You're adding. Yes. Yes. The
>> And the was not in here either, right? >> No. No. That's right. Uh, can we make a motion to adjurnn and then we'll come back. >> Recess. >> Recess. >> I make a motion that we recess. >> A second. >> Adams.
>> Yes. >> M. Collins. Colding. >> Yes. >> Mr. Davis. >> Yes. >> Sherman. >> Yes. Mayor Duca. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Call it at the 11th. 12:20. >> 12:20, please. >> 12:20. The Easter egg hunt.
>> Well, Friday, not the Easter egg hunt. >> Call Russell. Let's see if he left with the kids. >> Sure. He's sitting at home not taking the kids. >> You got to get the egg. >> Yes. Gary Nelson said battle scars.
Those were his words. >> Oh, I believe it. >> Hey, you taking the quiz? >> Okay, I'm heading over there. So, I'll see you guys if you're there. Yeah, Just Oh, great. You see us eating.
Okay, welcome back to our budget meeting. Excuse us for eating. We took a recess to go to the egg hunt that was over in two minutes. So, so just so we're clear and we can wrap
up the capital, we added 500 to the municipal piece. We have the pool 27,000 that has to be added. Nothing on the storm water utility, right?
That's separate. Yeah, supported by >> Yeah, I understand. I'm just thinking that and then SCFD we have 510 and um just the OSTF we agreed to the
administrative recommendations except for um the Deart field improvement. We're going to have it at 265. >> All right, we're on the same page. >> Yes, I have all those notes. there >> right now >> does the um so the bottom line on here
on the capital does not include those other tabs so that >> so we're bonding for more than just that >> correct >> whatever 8 million >> correct >> uh mayor did you want to take a roll call that you're back in session and >> we certainly do now that we're all here
>> all right Adams >> here >> yes >> Dis >> present >> sermon here. >> Mayor Duka >> present and accounted for. >> I had to buy Girl Scout cookies.
>> Well, only to share, I hope. >> I'll put it up. >> Share. >> For all those tabs. >> Say that again. >> We have the grand total for those tabs outside of the OSTF and stormwater utility. >> Grand total 9,491,984. >> Does that include
>> Yes, it does. >> Oh, that includes storm water. including storm water. >> Right. But you take storm water out. Can you do that? >> Is that 8 million million >> 755,819 without storm water? So that's 8.1 million, excuse me,
$8,198,819 from the general capital tab, 27,000 from the pool tab, $180,000 for SEFD, and 350,000 for the ambulance. That comes to 8,755,819.
>> Okay. And of that 8 million, 3,150 is for Deart Park. So that leaves us for other general capital costs somewhere around 5.4. >> Correct. About 5.6. Yes, sir. >> 5.6. Okay.
>> Okay. >> Great. >> All right. Your uh the next thing on the agenda is revenue and um we did receive something last night and and if we go to notes on change, is that the best way to look at it? >> Yeah, I think so.
I think it's the easiest. So, we'll go to uh >> got let's make sure everyone's at that. Budget Prep 31826. >> Yes, >> it's the spreadsheet. >> Right. >> Okay. >> So, at the top we have changes
incorporated into the 31826 budget document. Um, as a result of the prior workshops and and potentially some conversations since, we have reduced the amount to be raised by taxation from 3% down to 2.95%.
We have increased surplus from 2.7 which was in the original draft budget and is the amount we used last year. We've increased that to $3,3,314. We increased the joint meeting of Essex and Union County. That's our sewer uh payment to reflect the increase in the
annual assessment from them. So their increase we pass on to rate payers through a rate increase. So we'll we'll see some additional revenue in that this year. and 7 West Parker. This is the first year that the billing, the pilot uh billing will rely on an an audited
statement. And so we revised that amount to show an additional $44,900 that we expect to receive this year as a result of those pilot payments. On the expense side, >> I just hold on. I want to make sure if anyone has any questions. Um so I I have
a question on 123101. It's the joint meeting increase. >> Yes. >> Do we have to increase the fee the sew fee >> to realize this increase in revenue? Yes. >> What is that increase >> like per household?
>> Yeah. Per per account. >> I don't have that with me. And we we had done this in prior years. We generally have a fee increase too. And this is just to absorb the increased in billing that we get from the joint meeting. I can calculate that for you. It's about
three $3.50 >> more. >> Correct. >> Total. >> So, uh I mean because usually we talk about this separately, right? We usually like say we have to like we're going from 275 to 300 or whatever per
household as opposed to >> but it's it's included in the revenue to bring our >> number down to 295. So, >> okay. So ju just so for so we get we get a bill from the joint meeting for our sewer, >> right?
>> And we pass that on to the homeowners and property owners, anybody who has a toilet. Um so uh >> right >> that's what we're talking about. It's I don't even Do you know what the 2025
rate was? >> Who's dinging? You put your turn off your >> 2025 approximately $449. 2026 approximately $45253. >> Okay. And that include does that include the
capital for joint meeting? >> Yes. >> You know, and >> and the capital isn't increasing. So just just the piece that's >> Yeah. I was actually looking for what is the assessment cost. Yeah. With the capital. >> You could give you because I think that
the bill is broken up into three pieces. I think there's a right regular fee and then >> you don't have that. >> I don't have that with us and I can provide that to the township committee after the meeting. >> Okay. >> Monday. >> All right. Any other questions on revenue? >> Um, does this
does this anticipate the increases in some of the fees that were been talking about or like um Mr. Palma brought up those increases. Does this budget in revenue anticipate the increases that
we're talking about in fees >> merit and new employees? >> No. No. No. For changing fees? No. Okay. >> Haven't been passed. >> No, I know, but that's why I'm asking if it's anticipating it or not. >> No, unless we have a an ordinance that's
passed, we can't do it. So, the $351,000 in additional fees and then helps to get us down to that 2.95. Is that correct? >> Yes.
And that means using the additional surplus of 300,000. Okay. And how does that change us um in terms of having a healthy fund balance? I know we talked about uh percentages um
changing from 2.7 to three. How does that affect us overall? We won't know just yet because we don't know how much surplus we regenerated as a result of 2025 operations. So that'll come with the AF >> because we don't have that. >> Yeah. That >> in in in
prior years, maybe the last four or five years. Each year, we've been generating more than was anticipated the year prior, we've been well. So there's, you know, some expectation that'll continue. We don't we don't have any reason to think that won't continue, but we won't know until we see the AFS. The other
part of that conversation though is that in our fund balance um at least in in at the end of 24 we had 10.6 million. So we use 2.7 as revenue in the budget last year and we'll regenerate certainly a
large portion of that. We just we're going to reate all of that. So we have a large amount of fund balance that gives us flexibility year-over-year in and set our tax rate and and you know absorbing >> and what and we'll have the AFS before
we introduce this. >> That's our goal. If the township committee chooses to you can introduce without the AFS. The AFS has to be done by the in order for the state to approve our budget before final adoption. Right? >> So typically we'll introduce send the budget down to the state. budget gives
us clearance to adopt. So you can get it after the budget's introduced but before it goes down in the state for approval. >> No AFS annual fund >> financial statement. >> Financial statement for anyone who might be watching. >> Yes. And that's an unuded account of the
town's financial position as of 123125. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Let's go to expenses. >> Uh I have a quick question. It's not a question but uh so the percentage percentage that you want us is three for the admin recommended would be about 3%.
And anticipated last was 3.6%. Right? How do you get to your number without knowing um what your actual numbers are and then um it's just a three-part question. How much tax revenue have we collected and what do we estimate the percentage of
the taxes collector represents in the deloquences in order to formulate that number? How do you come how do you do Patrick? >> So the tax collection rate is about 99%. Uh last year the levy was 40 40 million.
So you collected 99% of that. Your initial question was how do >> is that number in the budget because it it looked blank when I looked at it. It was blank. Did you have all those numbers imported? >> Oh, yes. Yes. >> On the sheet. >> I'm sorry. Do we have those numbers
>> on the sheet? Included on the sheet. >> So, they'll be finalized with the AFS and then we'll put the exact number in. That number is sheet 22 of the AFS. So, once it's finalized, we'll drop it in. But the tax collection rate is 99% last year. >> Okay. >> From the tax collector.
>> Okay. And the first part in terms of how do you set the rate? You know, these are aspirational budgets and so we we'd like to have we're looking to find a a budget that is balanced at under 3%.
>> So, you know, that's our goal and that leads into a lot of the cuts that we're recommending, a lot of the expenses that we're we're recommending and so but it's that's our goal. >> Yeah. Your your percentages have been pretty accurate across the board. you know 3% 2.9%. So I was just wondering
how you came, you know, without having your actual numbers. >> Yeah. And if the the 3% or the 2.95% >> that is the rate that we will strike, okay, >> that residents will receive as as an increase on their tax bill. So that is definite. The thing piece we don't know
about is how much of that do we collect as we about 99. There's no there's no question of what we will assess to when you've when you finalize the budget as to what the the uh tax rate impact will be. >> Okay. Curious. Thank you. >> There's an expense item for uncollected
taxes. Right. >> There is. >> Yeah. >> Okay. You saw that. >> And the the reason for that and it's it can be a very large number because it's calculated off of all of the taxes that the the township collects. So we'll collect for the school district and for the county as well. That can be a very
large number. So, if we were to look at the document that says notes on changes and then hit back to revenue, we would be able to see those new numbers that you plugged into revenue. Correct. Under administrative recommendation. >> That's right. And in the section that
says changes incorporated into budget document. That's correct. >> Okay. All right. So, let's go back to notes on changes. And you've done some changing with um expenses. Yes, the South Essex
Fire Department after that we presented this last time had adopted their budget. One, it was lower than they had originally proposed which gave us some relief and two, they had some uh leftover allocations from prior year
budgets that we will see returned to us. So those two things combined reduced the amount that we had expected to fund SEFD. The reduction was 242,000. Okay, >> there is a uh removal of the rehab
contribution. This is for this would fund our affordable housing trust fund and we would use it for rehab obligations that we have in the fourth round. We had funded this amount with $50,000 last year and because we're we haven't received our approval yet, we haven't started spending that money and
so we we still have that $50,000 that we can use towards home improvement programs. So, we have money already there this year and it's a we have a 10-year compliance period. So, this will be an item that we'll fund in future years as well, but we don't need it this
year. So, that's been removed. Um, we reduced the liability line we have for a uh joint insurance fund bill that we have received. We have money available in our self- insurance trust that we propose to spend that from. And there
was a reduction in crossing guards. Um the if you look on the on the budget side of it for for 2025 actuals, we spent well less than the 2025 budgeted and we we made some correction there to show
give a more accurate reflection of what our pay will be this year. >> Well, we didn't actually reduce the number of crossing guard. >> No, >> no, I think we actually added. >> No, this is this is only about and if you go >> it's only the budget line. Yeah, >> I just want to make clear that we did not reduce this and it's not reducing
it. It's just a financial >> we anticipate it's been less than what we initially notified you of. >> Yeah. Yes, that's right. So, and >> want to make that clear. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> I can pull So, just to give you color on that, um on crossing guards, the 2025
appropriation was $420,000. We spent $372,000 this year. When we originally presented the budget to you, we gave you that$420 with a with an increase, but being as we we spent well less than last year, we recalculated that. So, this is only a
budget impact. Does not impact C. >> That makes sense. >> Yep. >> Good move. >> And to note that on the sheet that we gave you, it includes a column for 2025 appropriated. So, that's what the town committee approved in the budget. Then it has a 2025 actual. So that's after
transfers and uh 2025 actuals. >> Yeah. So it's column T on the budget tab. That's the adopted numbers that you guys asked for. >> Column U is 2025 appropriated that factors in any transfers. So if you see
a difference in T and U, there was either a transfer in if it's increased or a transfer out. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So back to the notes on changes. Um, that was all of the expenses. Are there any questions on
>> So, just so we're we're clear, the the 351686 in new revenues and the 405 089 in decreases are built into the budget that you provided so far. Correct. >> That's correct.
>> Okay. So, the capital we've already done, so we don't need to do that. >> Yes. So the remaining and then the next group is the remaining to be incorporated into budget documents. There's some revenue there and expenses.
>> So anything we do here will impact what you've provided us. Right. >> Okay. >> That's right. >> So let's go down. >> The 92 brunette. We agreed to a new pilot agreement with them last year and we're waiting. This
will be the first year that we have a um calculations off of their prior year audit. So, we'll get that audit by the end of this month, but we expect that the 229 is based off what we received last year. We expect that number is going to increase to $35,000.
We'll know that um by the end of this month, and we we're we're working a little bit now to try to get a finer point on that, but we expect that that's going to increase and that'll help uh revenue collections. We have uh pool surplus anticipated. Our auditor has finished. They're working on the EFS.
Part of that is the pool and they have um the the number for what's in the pool surplus. >> Yes. So, our pool uh schedule and our annual financial statement has been completed. So, they were able to determine that there was $60,000 in cash
surplus from the pool. That can be anticipated in the pool. Thus, it'll reduce how much needs to be budgeted in the current fund because your pool expenses are higher than the revenue in the pool. So, you have to balance the pool budget in the current fund. So, this 60,000 reduces how much needs to be
taxed in the current fund. >> And in the 2025 budget, we had anticipated $50,000 from pool surplus. So, this is a continuation of that. This will exhaust all of the pool surplus amounts. And
yeah, it will exhaust all the pool surplus amounts. There is conversation discussion about you know pool having separate surplus because it's set up as a utility. So it would have a separate surplus. What happens if we dissolve that? But that'll that conversation I think will take place later this year. But so this keeps it generally consistent with prior year allocations.
>> So as as long as it's a utility we have to show surplus, right? And it stays. Yeah. If we were to eliminate the sur the utility, there would not be no such thing as a surplus. >> That's right. Correct. >> That's right. It would just be general. >> Um,
we have there's also an ability to realize money from pool capital, $23,000 we have in the pool capital surplus and we could if you know depending on all the changes that are discussed today, we could realize another $23,000 from
there. Um the next few national opioid settlement we will receive approximately $28,000 this year. This wasn't included in last year's budget as revenue when the budget was adopted. It was done as a chapter 159 after the budget was adopted. These amounts are generally
known to us. These are as a result of um court judgments and so they lay out schedules for us of what we're to receive. So when it's a known amount, I suggest that you that we include that in our budget. Um the you know this would mean like in last year not having
budgeted and doing it later in the year, we likely kind of add to surplus. This year we could we could include it in our general revenue. The next three lines, these are um they're they're noted as private grants and this is what we
receive from the agreements we have with the cannabis dispensaries here in Maplewood. Last year, these were included in the budget when we adopted it. We just hadn't put them in this year, and we should to keep our budget kind of consistent and also reflect our
spending this year. So, we proposed to add the three of those. The the combined total is $45,000. Then, we received a health department grant. So, this is new. We I think you are aware of it by an email, but as been discussed in previous budget
conversations and we haven't done we haven't included in any temporary budgets yet, but we have an opportunity to add that $181,000 that the health department has received for with that grant. And then this number,
so we we have received $1.6 million from our insurance company for the IDA claim for damages to the library. So the the responsible my recommendation and what I think is the responsible thing to do here is since this is a
reimbursement directly related to cost for the library that we receive this $1.6 million and we add an expense into the budget to pay down the li the debt related to the library in that same amount. And that way it's not like a oneshot um revenue that you're not going to
realize in future years. There will be some re revenue in future years. still owed a balance on here over $400,000 that we're waiting to get from some of the insurers. Hopefully receive that later this we would do that. We would recommend the same thing. Take
that in as revenue, put in an expense line, pay down the debt for the library. >> So that's in an expense line somewhere else. >> It is not yet, but it would be. Yeah, >> it would be. >> Yeah. And I think we ended up having to do more bonding for the library than we
wanted to. So this and I think the FEMA money should be used to pay that down >> and there's another 400k we're expecting >> coming. I'd have to look at the exact I mean I have it in in my notes but yeah there is there's a balance of money because we're into reinsurance now and
it was a very very large claim and on the reinsurance side it's paid from I think it's five carriers and so those carriers each of them are paying at different timelines >> all of them late for for us like we wanted the money like but that's why
we're still waiting on some amount of that but it it's been approved and we expect money >> so we're accepting this as revenue but are we and then we're also paying down at at the same time you would >> that'll be in the budget as well. >> That would be added to the budget. So you'll show a revenue of 1.6. Yeah. >> Show an expense. >> Okay. >> So it'll be it would be budget neutral
is is the recommendation. >> You could Yeah. >> So the bottom line here is that a little over 400,000 is some new revenue that you've identified. >> Yes. Yeah. >> You're saying no. >> It's not included in the budget document. going >> the grants would be budget neutral as
well because you would budget the revenue on the revenue side for each grant you would budget the appropriation as well. So there's about $158,000 of new revenue 159 rounding up. >> The difference there is on for that
grant in the proposed budget or in the pre in the budget that it's actually still that you're seeing here it includes expenses that that grant will now cover. So there will be Um there could be an adjustment in the budget for that.
>> Then we have some any any questions on these additional revenue. >> And just the uh to be clear about these private grants, we have not struck an agreement with anyone for 2026. >> That's right. Yeah. >> So these may change.
>> Yes. >> Is this sort of in line with what we got last year in those private grants? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Did the IDA claim cover all our expenses put in or >> I mean I I know that without looking at
it. I mean generally in insurance it's not going to claim everything. It's not going to cover everything. Now >> what percentage of that number is >> I I could I'd have to go back to the claim find out but I can find out. Yeah. >> We're also expecting some FEMA money but
that's um 90% of our expenses. Okay. On the expenses, you've made some adjustments to some of these categories. >> I I proposed some ex um because these remain to be incorporated.
So, I proposed some some changes here. First, on historic preservation, this is for a line we used to fund HPC operations. They had originally requested $31,200. that included and and they had made that
presentation uh to you at the last meeting. I had I proposed to remove 60 or excuse me $6,000 that they had earmarked for a consultant to do individual designations and they had also included $3,000 for uh transcripts
during demo demolition hearings. Um I proposed to reduce that from 3,000 to 2,000. So that would reduce it another uh $1,000. at 6,000 for the consultant plus 1,000 reduction for the transcripts uh reduces this line by $7,000 just
over. That's number one. The second one, I mentioned this in during the capital side and this the first number here should be a 6-01 because it's this year's budget line. Um but this is they had originally proposed this as a capital expense. I don't believe it
qualifies for that and had recommended they put it into their operating budget. The total expense here is uh just over $20,000. They have lines that can absorb 10,000 of it. So I would uh recommend that we increase this line by 10,000 so they can pay that amount. >> What is this exactly?
>> Yeah. So it's it's for their evidence track. >> This is the police, right? >> This is the police. >> Police department evidence tracking system. Right now they use an antiquated system that previous staff had a really good understanding of and I think we're comfortable. >> No, no, that makes more sense. I didn't know it was police. It didn't say that. So that makes more sense. >> You know what? Bring your mic a little
closer to >> Sorry. Yeah, >> I think it's the bending >> the >> uh the next line is for UC food distribution. We had discussed um the an opportunity with the move from
the health department to reconfigure how we approach food distribution and we had solicited a proposal, a few proposals, but we like the one provided by UCC. They currently stock our community
fridge and we have an interest in moving forward with them on this um resetting of how we provide that few distribution. The there is an opportunity for part of this cost to be paid for with the grant noted above for the health department.
That health department grant um that could be $11,000 that you use in there to to offset that cost. The total cost is um it they gave us a proposal just for the balance of this year would go from May through uh the end of this year. So the total am I had shown you
the total amount for this year $23,000 as an expense and 11,000 would could be offset by the grant uh noted above. The next line is what we had discussed earlier moving Maplerest from capital into the operating budget at $32,000.
So, that will be added to this Department of Public Works uh field maintenance line. >> Just to be clear about this, because we've talked about it a couple of times, this is to go out to bid for a firm that
comes in and levels all the fields with some kind of special equipment and stuff, right? >> This would just be at >> Mapler Crest. >> Maple Crest. >> No, I understand. But the three fields at Maple >> Then there's another amount that was already >> Yeah, but I just want to deal with this first. So this would be we'd go out we
get a we'd do out go out to a bid or something or quotes we know. >> Yeah. >> Or quotes cuz it's only 30. Okay. >> So we would find a company that that comes in and levels everything. That's what we talked to the field committee about. >> Maple Crest. >> These are the every like five years or
so um amounts where we had the we had the estimates for per field and we decided to do three and then >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Okay. Then the next line is >> Mayor, may I ask a question? Pardon interruption. Just to be clear, for the
32,000 for Mapler Crest, you guys don't want to do a fully funded ordinance. You want to include it in the budget so that you don't have to do an ordinance. >> Correct. >> Because we want to get it done now, >> okay? >> We can't wait for the whole in the
estoppel period and all that. Probably >> and I'd recommend we put that in our next temporary budget so that we have the the money available. The next line, this is um another DPW line for parks maintenance. This is field startup at
Memorial and a so which is not included in the prior one, right? In what we just discussed. So startup at Memorial and then an evaluation and recommendation for all the fields. So the for all the fields isn't physical improvements at all the fields, but an evaluation and
recommendation. Some of it may be for maintenance items that we can handle and some of it may be for let's say like capital improvements that would be handled um you know potentially in our budget or maybe in future years. >> And we know that South Orange uses an outside firm to do this. Correct.
>> Yes. >> So um they would do they would get the fields in Memorial set up to play and then give us an evaluation as to how to go forward. >> That's right. >> Those two things, right? >> Yes. Okay,
>> you good? >> So, yeah. Yeah. So, is this just getting it set up for this year or is this >> this would become an annual thing I think? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. But it would be getting set up now. That's why we want to do it now and not wait for >> Absolutely. >> And we want to ident and put extra money in
>> so we can identify go. >> Absolutely. This is what we need. >> Okay. Um the next line is the heart field maintenance as we're talking about DPW expenses increasing in some of the lines above. We were looking for opportunities to decrease some of the spending in
Deart. We had $20,000 for field maintenance there in prior years. We reduced it to 10 for this year. We think we can reduce it another five just because we're going to do a small amount of startup before this spring season and then we'll we'll go into construction likely for uh after that. So, we won't
need a full amount of money here. So, just to help balance these changes, proposed to reduce the toartfield maintenance by $5,000. The next line is, this is a new u it would be a new line in the budget, a contribution to the South Orange Rescue
Squad of $10,000 to recognize expenses related to their mutual aid that they provide, Maplewood. And we met with uh South Orange Rescue. We discussed their their needs and you know with anybody they're a volunteer organization. They rely heavily on fundraising. They also
provide us a tremendous service and so we thought it appropriate to provide some contribution for their operations and so we could create a new line to provide that to them. >> This would also recognize their um attendance at a number of our special
events. they do set up um an ambulance at um like at the 4th of July and a couple of the other things. So, but this is new. We used to do this years ago when the Maplewood First Aid Squad went out of business and South Orange came in
to pick up the excess runs and they do a pretty significant amount of them. Um, we used to give them a contribution and that kind of died down when we ran into some budget numbers, budget problems, but they have, you know, they did meet with us and explain
um how much they're doing here and they did uh ask for a contribution. >> I like that. I mean, they've met with us and asked us to do this a couple years ago and we said no. So, >> it's good. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Because I was at that meeting. >> This is on this is on I'm just being
clear. This is on top of the money that we fund our South Orange the um >> Yes. >> the fire department to provide this. >> Yes. >> Right. >> So, >> so this is Yes. This is So, when our fire department is out on a call,
whether it be a fire call or an ambulance call and there's another call that comes in, then the typically South Orange Rescue Squad covers that call. So, they don't get reimbursed for that. Um, and this just allows us to recognize
their their work here. And >> what was the I don't remember, but we did meet with them and they had a number of um like they do they do calls in Maplewood. >> Yeah. >> Um, you know, they definitely do um
provide that service. Um, so are you recommending this as an annual or at least starting this year? >> I think this year and I think every year >> evaluate. Yes. Yeah. Any other speaking of >> Yeah, there's a fire in South Orange.
>> Oh, is that right? Okay, >> finish. >> I'm sorry. >> There's more, right? >> Yeah. July 4th. A pension in July 4th. >> Yeah. So, the next line is for prior year pension bills. We just received this, so we're sorting through it, but we want to make you aware of it in case it does have a budget impact. We we got
pension a pension bill for prior year contributions of $141,886. We knew some of these were coming. When we do retro payments for any contracts that we settle, we we owe money to pension. Some of it, all of it we should
have budgeted for. But we just got the bills and finances going through our lines to make to to see where we have this. And so I'm putting it on here just as a, you know, a heads up that this could be something we come back, let's say next week and and tell you we need to fund a line to cover this cost. So
this is just notification. And then the next line, July 4th, fireworks, because this is the 250th anniversary of our country, we have gone out to our usual vendors to get quotes. and what prior
years would cost us $26,000 is $40,000 this year. >> Are you serious? >> Don't worry, they're going to give us a bigger and better show. And we said, well, could you scale down the show to what we spent last year? And the answer is no. And I think that the reason for that is they have demand because of this. And so there's an opportunity for
them to do bigger. So if if they could get a let's say, you know, if we don't um contract with them, they could get someone else to do a $40,000 show. So that's the cost to us. Yeah. >> No drones, just firework. We thought about that and talking to other municipalities that have done it. It's
It can be more expensive than >> Oh, drones are definitely more expensive. >> Yeah, I hear they're pretty cool. >> Very cool. >> But more could be more expensive than >> Would this go back down? I Because I don't think seen go back down. Once they go up, they don't go back down.
>> No, that's the concern. You hope that in years when you're not celebrating the 250th anniversary that there's less demand and that could drive the cost down, >> but Right. And >> it's not going to go back to 26, right? >> We're doing fireworks twice this year though, right? Because we've junth also.
And is that price that's going to be at the 25 amount >> on Junth? There's not as much demand, but it's a good question and it's one we've asked and it's one we're getting input on right now, >> which we would >> we also we also I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> We would only pay half for that one for Junth.
>> We pay all we pay all we pay all of theirs. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> It's alternated. Oh, I thought we we get reimbursed. >> We pay, they pay, we pay, they pay. >> Okay. >> Right. We just pay for Fourth of July every year. >> Yeah. >> So, one thing I asked is is it I know
you know this is Fourth of July is done in community services and Junth is done in arts. >> Yeah. >> But if we could get one vendor to give two shows, maybe we get some cheaper price. >> Great. And we're exploring that. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> So, how much of the Junth we don't know yet. That's for the 4th of July. >> Getting quotes now. Yeah. >> Oh, >> that's in their budget. >> That's in >> Okay. So, um >> Sorry. >> Go ahead. >> No, I was just going to say like what
what is our critical point policy makers up here to where we don't do Fourth of July fireworks? after we're all no longer up here. >> I mean, >> I would like to provide some
earancelling headphones if we're going to provide fireworks. I think there's been some talk in the public about that, but that's a very small small cost. >> Okay. >> Just saying. >> So, um the >> expenses the net expenses are up two
236. Is that >> Yes, sir. >> Yes. I was hoping you were going to correct me because you corrected me on the revenue side. >> So So those that's $236,000 that we haven't calculated into the
budget yet. Right. So that's right. >> And that's So how do you propose we're going to be able to address this? Well, the there also above that is about $414,000 that >> No, we just heard it's about 180
>> 158 >> Oh, sorry. >> $158,98 in additional revenues. $236,46 in additional appropriations. So, the difference is you need to come up with
$77,268 of an additional revenue. And part of that is we just received this health grant and we're working with the health department to identify the co the costs that will be allocated to the grant and if they are new costs or you know how
how they are going to work it into their budget. So that there is some um we do have some questions to answer. So what Patrick's saying is we're going to look to reduce the salary and wage lines in the health department for this grant where there, you know, salaries would be charged to offset the budget expense for
the health department. >> And there's some other stuff out there too that we're talking about with salaries too. >> Yep, there are. >> Okay. Um, any questions on this >> on the changes that have been proposed?
>> Looks good. So, do we need to talk any more about budget and revenue or we've done that, right? >> I'm all set. >> You're all set. I bet you are. All right. Um, let's see. Now, we're going to go to
new employee positions. There are three that we're going to be able to talk about in public. One is the administrative operations specialist for community development. Second is a program supervisor in
community service. Third is violations in in the court. >> Wait, is this in your other Sorry, I'm >> This is on the right here. >> Yeah, on the agenda >> right here. >> And and sheet.
>> So this is in the in the sheet new employee request sheet. >> Yeah. >> Yes. But I just want to be clear what we're talking about in open and what we're talking about in closed. >> Merit closed. >> So in closed, we have a number of requests to increase salaries that will
be talked about in closed for individuals. And there's also a request to change the uh public information officer from part-time to full-time, which we will be talking about in close because it it could in our conversation
it could bleed into the individual and we don't want to do that publicly. >> Right. >> So these are these are new positions that we're talking about only and they need to be talked about and open and not enclosed. >> Yep. >> We do everything right, Madame Clerk.
Okay. Um, so we've heard a request from the community development uh administrative uh sorry administrative operations specialist um Mr. Weary in his recommendations.
Um you do not recommend that. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Is there anyone who would like to speak on that to propose a different opinion about that?
>> Could we get a little context from you as to your recommendation? >> Yes. So, first on the on the request and you were provided with the new employee request which has background from the uh department head here on this request, but generally speaking looking for an additional person to handle um a lot of
the data operations for some of the divisions in that office as well as a potential increase in need for administrative tasks related to historic preservation and and potentially if there was a historic district and additional work, it could be absorbed in
that department. Um so that was uh one part of the the need for this position. The other part was related to operational projects related to data management and kind of how data is collected, compiled and presented from the department. Um, I I do think that
there's a, you know, there's always a benefit in having a new employee, but I don't think that there's a the a long-term need and I I think, you know, looking at our budget in total, this is a position uh that we could we don't have to fund
>> if we do not, how do you suggest that we meet the need? >> Some of this piece is is data and some of that looking at data. I think some of that can be done in, let's say, other departments. We've discussed a need for more housing data and I've already, you know, started working with the tax
assessor with the director of community development to pull some of those numbers together. You know, I think that it wouldn't be maybe as um any presentation wouldn't be as polished and maybe not um updated as frequently, but I think we can provide enough information to the township committee
where you can use it to make decisions. And that that's where I think, you know, certainly the position could be used. So, doing without it, you're not going to get as much or it's not going to be as polished, but I think you'll have you'll be able to get what you need in that area from administration and a lot of departments helping to pull those
numbers together to where you can make uh responsible decisions. On the the piece about historic preservation commission, you know, there as we talked about Ridgewood Road and the potential there, there there may be potential expenses related to that, but we're not
at a point in that process where we have a current need. and I wouldn't want to fund a position when there's not a current need. So that's why I recommend not funding this position. >> Has there been any uh research and further assessment done with
community development to better understand how they uh will move forward with if we decide not to fund this position? Uh I I've discussed my recommendation with the director of that department and
we have an agreement that we can we can accomplish what we need to accomplish this year without the position. >> Okay. Because beyond data that's project specific or request specific I do think that the department is looking at building their data capacity long term
so that they can evaluate some things like code enforcement. They can evaluate uh the effect of new fees for zoning and construction for instance. So they can basically be more data informed in general which is a long-term permanent
thing as opposed to a specific project. So what how is that going to be handled if we do not fund this position? >> It'll to the extent we can it'll be handled with current staff. And I say to the extent we can because I I don't want to give the impression that everything
that could be expected out of this position will still be accomplished in the same way. But again, I I go back to confident we can provide the township committee with the data they need to make good decisions and and even the public, you know, to explain our provisions. I think we can do that. It's going to be administration. It's going
to be community development. It could be the clerk's office. It's going to be a few offices pitching in to get the data out that we need to. And we the more and more we rely on some of these um like systems like Gov Pilot the I think the
we keep we gain knowledge of how they function I think are even even this year but before any of these discussions we get some better data out that we've seen in prior years. I certainly think that's helpful. >> Thank you. >> And this is the first year that this uh
staff ad has been requested for this department. >> Yes. >> So I think what Mr. office is saying is that some of these needs um um may only be filled with additional staff, but you're you're saying that um we'll be
able to still get this data. And I think what I'm interested in is this is the first year they've asked for this. I'd like to see what kind of data um we're able to get throughout this year. And I'd like to get a little more information, you know, a little more background and understanding about what a new person would be able to add to
that department and sort of, you know, um, down the line, you know, this would be a possibility. Um, you know, but I think that there is a need and if we're able to fulfill it without adding a staff, that's obviously a better thing
to do. Um, you know, but so I'm glad it's on our radar at least. And if we're not able to do it this year, um it may be a need um in coming years. >> Okay. >> We move the pool manager to community development or is that in the wrong place? >> No,
>> no, we didn't identify that. We need to talk about that. >> No, I know, but it's under community development. >> Yeah. Okay. So, um anything else on this administrative operations specialist? >> When somebody resigns, >> you got to use your mic. >> I'm sorry. When someone leaves and
resign, do we absorb that money that the total amount we're paying them into the department or we take it and put it back in the general? What do we do with that money? >> So, let's say you have a position funded
at $100,000 in a department's salary and wage line. That person leaves halfway through the year. So, you have $50,000 remaining. that amount would stay in that in that siling wage line. If you didn't fill it through the end of the year, then that amount becomes is
unspent at the end of the year. It could either be canceled off or it could run through the following year and then lapse into surplus the fund balance. >> Would that be reflected in your spreadsheet when you give it to us actual as an actual or would you update it later? When we look when we look at
salary and wage lines, we fund it for the full amount for the full year. Does that answer your question? >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. Um we we'll come back and we're going to go through each one and we're going to add the pool manager because that was a new position we didn't get on the agenda and then we'll come back and
make a decision on the whole package. uh community services program supervisor, you are not recommending that. That's a request of 49,000 in salary. >> That's right. So to discuss the position, I'll just
give you some of the highlights because the the for each of these the department heads have provided a a greater detail um for all of them that that I couldn't get into but um they you know generally the community services has experienced growth in their programming and and
revenue and they have a greater need for um staff. The reason I don't recommend this position, one, we've had uh difficulty retaining. Well, right now we don't have a fully staffed office and I I am interested to see the operation of
the office when it's fully staffed and we've taken some measures to ensure that we not just attract good candidates but retain good candidates. So, I want to see how that operates with with a fully staffed office. The second piece is my understanding from the township committee is we want to take a look at
recreation programming and make a decision on do we want you know are there opportunities to um to pull back a little bit of what we offer like in in specific areas. Um so you know I think we should get through that process
before we decide to add additional resources to the department. >> Anybody have any >> I have one question. I just was wondering if you could give us an update on because that that department is not fully staffed right now. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> There are two openings. >> Yes.
>> For the recreation director and the arts and culture or I don't know that's not arts and culture director. Sorry. And those are those are not not um filled yet. >> Right. So there's an art director position that is not filled. There is a
program supervisor, a program manager position that we've made an appointment but they haven't started yet. And there is a program supervisor position that we have advertised and interviewed for and have not yet made an appointment on. >> Yeah, I think we need to see this
department fully staffed before we add anything else. >> Okay. Um, anything else on this one? violations clerk >> in the the court. We've had high turnover in that uh office and even fortunately we've been able to keep it
mostly fully staffed but the the turnover has set them back in terms of the amount that they're able to process and there's kind of two pieces. One, we want to there's enough work in the office. We already have a backlog and we want to make sure that when people have
a need to appear before the court that it's done in a timely manner. So we we have a an immediate need to fill uh fill the position so that we can address that backlog. This position also supports the South Orange Municipal Court as well.
They have a similar backlog and so the benefit is that the costs are shared as well. Uh we've discussed with South Orange and they are also in favor of filling this position >> and they pay half. >> They pay half. Okay. >> Any comment on this?
I support this if we're going to increase our enforcement. >> Uh and then we have the pool manager $10,000. Yeah. And this is uh Go ahead. >> I apologize for this not being added earlier. The reason it's not on the salary sheet like what I gave you a
sheet with all the salaries for employees. Um it's not on there because it's kind of boiled down with a lot of those seasonal workers who are part-time seasonal and there's a you'll see a whole number in there. The request from the department is a right now we have three managers for the pool and the pool
as you know runs seven days a week and and has long hours so we need three of those managers. Um we have a need right now we don't staff a manager before um 12 noon and so the the the operations
prior to 12 noon are are generally like run by the the most senior person there. But as we add we've been adding more programming in the morning around lessons and things and there's also just as we have more pool patrons uh we have a need to to be ready when all of them
show up and and to do some more like planning in advance and so and and everyone I think here has seen over the last few years the increase in uh demand at the pool which has been great and so I do recommend that we uh that we fund this position. >> I agree with that. Um, I also think just
like with WCK programming, we need to um think about being careful about how much we're providing in programming and lessons or whatever it is. Um, because that also takes away from members ability to enjoy
the pool entirely and to have a little less going on sometimes. But anyway, my point is we keep asking for more. So we now we have to fund somebody to help. >> Just to clarify, there is no increase in pool lessons for the summer.
>> Not this summer, last couple years. >> They've sold out because the >> I know I'm not saying it's not wanted. Only I'm saying I think we need to be careful. >> So um >> Why is it under community development though? >> It's just a mistake. >> Oh, okay. >> Just a mistake. >> Did I put it under community development? >> Yeah, it's under community de on your
sheet. >> Don't you? That's what I said before. >> Redevelopment doesn't run the pool. >> No. Okay. It's just a mistake. So, we've had we've we've heard um we've dealt with four new position requests. We've heard recommendations of the
administrator. Um the the four total about $160,000. Um some of them are full-time, so they would be also getting benefits. I don't have that >> um that number. So, but so um let's just
go down. Is there anyone who would like to uh create the position of administrative operations specialist this year? >> Not this year, but >> okay, >> maybe in the future we'll >> not this year, but maybe in the future.
>> Okay. Well, we're focused. Let's focus on this year because we don't know about the future. Community services program supervisor. Anyone want to >> the new one? No. >> Okay. >> Not right. >> Um, violations clerk.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Jan, you >> said yes. >> Yes. Okay. Uh, pool. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> No. >> Okay. So, you're right. >> Did you say yes? >> Oh, okay. All right. So, you got them.
Okay. Um, next up is public comment. Is there anyone There's no one in the room. Is there anyone online who would like to address the township committee? >> No, they're outside >> on this beautiful day. >> Okay, >> they may watch it later.
>> Um, so we need a motion. You're going to read motion read this statement. >> Section 8 of the open public meetings act chapter 231 public law 1975 >> permits exclusion of the public from a meeting in certain circumstances.
Whereas this public body is the opinion that such circumstances presently exist now therefore be resolved by township committee township of Mapwood State of New Jersey as follows. The public shall exclude upon discussion upon any action upon the hearing specified subject
matter the general nature to be discussed as follows. Personnel it's anticipated at this time that the above stated subject matter were made public. >> Is there a motion? >> So moved. Second, >> Miss Adams, >> yes.
>> Miss Collins Cing, >> yes. >> Mr. Davis, >> yes. >> Miss Herman, >> yes. >> Mayor Duca, >> yes. I have a I have a question. Will we be coming out of there to come here to adjurnn or we'll be able to adjourn in there? >> We just stay out here. >> We have to come back out here to
>> We can stay out. Yeah, we could just stay right here. We don't have to go in there. We could just stay here. Just close. >> Yeah, that makes sense. >> Oh, but then >> So, what would we do? just put it on uh like >> I would ask if the township committee is comfortable that we we stop the zoom
which would generally be you know in depth and we would stop the YouTube and I expect if the township committee doesn't expect to take official action >> after we'll we'll make that statement. So we are going to go into closed um rather than move to the other room.
We're here we got our stuff here. So we are going to end the zoom and the YouTube. Um at the end of the close we will come back into public for only the purposes of adjourning the meeting. We will not take any action at that time. >> On the YouTube it's going to show in
close session. Not that it's over. >> Recommend it to be closed. >> Yeah. >> But then how are we going to come back? >> We're just going to end it. I just made that statement so that we're not coming back publicly and we won't be >> come back publicly. But if they want to see us, they have to come here.
>> Okay, fine. Yeah, go ahead. Yeah, we already close. Mayor