Good evening. On behalf of the governing body of the city of Pay, we welcome you to the May 5th, 2026 city council meeting. In accordance with chapter 231, public laws of 1975, adequate notice of this meeting was provided by resolution of the municipal council adopted on June
17, 2025, setting forth the schedule of meetings for the year 2025-2026. Said notice was published and posted on the city hall bulletin board by the office of the city clerk. Please be further advised this meeting will be conducted in person. The Zoom stream
provided is for viewing only and is offered to the public as a convenience on April 24th, 2026. Public notice and Zoom instructions for this meeting were posted on the city of Pake website at www.c cityofpsake.com. Council agendas instructions are also
available on the last page of this agenda. Please be guided accordingly. Roll call, please. >> Councilman Monk, >> yes. Present. >> Councilman Love, >> present. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> present. >> Councilman Mayor, >> present. >> Councilman Garcia,
>> Councilwoman Colo Montinez, >> present. >> And Council President Sher >> here. Shall we stand for the occasion, please? >> Heavenly Father, we want to thank you, Lord, for allowing us to meet this evening. Father, we ask you to please guide us in the decisions that will take
place this evening in the beloved name of. Amen. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all
for a moment of silence. >> Silence, please. Yeah, I just want to ask for a moment of silence for um the ground man um who was killed tragically over the weekend here in the city of Bose. I want to pray for both the men's and the Hill family.
>> Thank you, Councilman. >> Thank you. Good evening and welcome to tonight's meeting. If you do not have a copy of our agenda and you would like a copy, they're located directly outside council chambers. Um you can also uh access all
the information regarding this meeting, resolutions, ordinances, correspondence, etc. that the council has received by the administration. Those are also available to you online. Our first order of business is Roman numeral 4 in our agenda. Mayor's presentation 2026
preliminary budget presentation. I believe this is considered receipt tonight by the council of the budget. As we all know, the budget is the mayor's budget until he hands it to the council at which time it becomes the council's budget. when budget it is
certainly with all that confusion it is the people's budget and with the people we will share with them why we are contemplating what we are mayor may I turn the floor to you sir >> yeah so what we'll do as we have done in
the past. We're going to go through the PowerPoint um that will explain kind of the process and where the numbers came from. You should have a copy of the budget workbook which gets into greater detail on, you know, the numbers that are
presented in the PowerPoint. So, at this point, I'll just turn it over to Mr. Mr. Omar Garcia, our chief financial officer, to kind of walk us through the PowerPoint and how that correlates to the workar. >> Yes.
>> Good evening, council members, um, members of the public. Here to present the 2026 proposed budget. And if you bear with me a second just to pull up the PowerPoint as we go. As the business
administrator stated, everyone has a copy of the budget workbook that goes into the detail of the various line items. This PowerPoint will pretty much summarize the major changes within the 2026 budget as compared to the 2025 and
where we got um the numbers. So just by okay just by uh introduction a quick explanation on what is a budget. The budget is the outline of how the city intends to spend its funds during the calendar year in order to provide
the necessary services for its residents. Appropriations or expenses are broken down by departmental salaries and other expenses, deferred charges and statutory expenses. capital improvements and debt
service. And I will go through some of those examples later. Revenues or income is broken down into four areas of fund balance or surplus, miscellaneous revenues, receipt from delinquent taxes,
and amount to be raised by taxes, which are the current year's taxes. There we go. Okay. Uh so now just to explain a little bit about how the budget is prepared, where the requests come from, how it's put together to become what you have in front of you at
this moment. So the budget process begins with the department or the division, the city department or city division submitting the request u department to request for the following year's budget to see what they within
their budget parameters are within their needs. Then once all requests are received, the administrator and the CFO review the request may the administrator and CFO later meets with the department head with the department heads to convey
the mayor's approval or denial of set request or changes or modifications. Once those requests are finalized, it is compiled into one entire document which is for example work as I'm going to now.
And that budget work is then presented to the council. That's where we're at today. Today we have the budget presentation and we also have the introduction of the once once the budget is presented and
introduced it's the council has it the council will review it and then we have a public hearing and then we have a public hearing which now is set for the meeting of June 4th. the members of the public will come up
and will they be able to uh speak on the budget or questions they have on the budget and then subsequent to the hearing there is the adoption process where the council can vote to adopt the budget. So getting into the 2026 proposed
budget, again starting on the appropriation or the spending side, appropriation or what the city anticipates spending for its day-to-day operations. The total proposed appropriations for 2026 is 123,391,52.
And of course you would ask what are the significant changes in appropriations from last year to this year. So the biggest part of the budget one is really just one line item is health benefits. And I
will explain more health benefits as I go along. health benefits increased $6,534,800 due to an increase in health premiums. >> That was approximately a 31% increase set statewide and we're part of the
state health benefits and that rate increase is set by the state. We also had liability insurance which increased 960,000 due to an increase in premium set by the joint insurance fund.
Again, that's a 32 32.52% increase from 2025. We also have our garbage and recycling collection and disposal cost which increased 334,000 or roughly 9.57%
from 2025. Those are contracts that the city has and they have a set term. Once they expire, you the city has to go out rebid them and those and those are then the responses or prices that come back from
the companies willing or submitting bids. Then you also have the library appropriation which is set by the state of New Jersey which increased $216,341. And I' just to note all those increases
that I just mentioned were either set by contracts or other governmental agencies. >> So just so the council gets a feeling for this budget and what we had to do to get to the number. um when we walked into the mayor's office telling him that
health benefits alone was $6.5 million which equates just that number to an 8% tax increase. Obviously, you know, he was adamant that there's absolutely no way that that is
something he could present um for the residents of the city of Pake. So then we really had to roll up our sleeves and get to work. But I just want you to get a feeling that just that health benefits alone was over 8% tax increase.
Well, it is it's it's 8% of our our budget that we then had to cut to reduce it down to an acceptable level uh for the mayor. And sticking on health benefit, >> I know we say it every year, but the acceptable level is the commitment I
made when I first ran to never go beyond 5% under any circumstances. So just >> I didn't want to give the punch line. >> I didn't want to. >> It just begs the question, what's the acceptable level? >> I wanted to open it up with with the punch line at the end.
Well, and staying on health benefits and we have our own slide on just health benefits alone because it is a driving factor on cost increase for this budget. We wanted to point out that over the last four calendar years, the state health benefit premiums increased
96.68%. Meaning that four years ago, what we were paying for one employee is half of what we're paying today. Or it doubled pretty close to doubled now than what it was four years ago. The state health
benefit commission approved again a 31% rate increase for 20 thou uh 2026 2026 health benefit program plan year for us. Again, that represented $6.5 million in increased cost for employee health
premiums. Now again following this closely as the mayor and the uh business administrator we always follow closely per the New Jersey League of Municipalities the state health benefit plans actuary
those are the people who um look at or the consultants that actually look at the plan and determine the next year's rate increase or future rate increase. They're actually reporting that is likely there will be another doubledigit premium increase for plan year 2027.
>> So unfortunately this looks like it's going to occur again. Hopefully not at the level of 31% but we don't know. >> So that being said and also mentioning how over the past four years health benefits has doubled.
The city has aggressively explored options, alternatives that address this increase of costs. I mean, we've looked at coming out of the state health benefit plan for a private fully insured plan or for a self-insured plan. We've
worked with um our professionals to to review what it would look like if we came out. Um, we got the same result actually last year as we did two years before where it would actually cost the city more money to come out in one of these plans than
staying in the state health benefits. So again, neither option is feasible as it would be more costly than the current cost. The city, I just want to make a note. The city is currently working on an option that offers a high deductible
plan along paired with a health savings account and a health reimbursement account. And if this option can come to fruition, the city would be able to reduce its health benefit cost by approximately $2 million
um if all active employees were to switch to this style of a plan. So, so that is actually item 30 on the agenda this evening. um just for the council's edification. We can go into the factual
um logistic of the the plan, but any further discussions because we are in active negotiations literally with every single union that the city has. I would ask that at that point if you need further clarification that may enter
into the realm of the negotiation that we go into close session if if uh the council needed so. Okay. So now just again a summary of the total budget which again $123 million
total budget. We have salary and wages at 50 50,277,350 or 41%. We have other expenses which include health benefits, the insuranceances, the
garbage and disposal costs and recycling that we spoke about at 53,216,000 or 43%. We have deferred charges making up 15,350,000 or 12% in that number is the pension the
annual pension contribution that the city makes to the state. We also have debt service of $2 million or 2%. Capital improvements of $700,000 or 1% and then the statutory appropriation
which is called reserve for uncollected taxes at $1.8 million or 1%. Now, since I touched on debt service, just to show the council where our debt service payments look like going
forward, currently for 2026, we have an annual debt service payment of roughly $2.1 million. And as you can see over the next uh roughly 12 years, what those debt service payments entail. I do want
to bring up that although not reflected in the schedule, we do have a to pro properly uh call it a pending debt service, we have about $3 million of authorized bonds that haven't been issued. So when those eventually get
issued, they'll be added to the schedule. >> Oh, for and it was for the parking deck. So, and the as the council knows, the arrangement is that the parking authority would be
reimbursing the city for that um bond payment once the bond the bond comes issued. So, even though it'll show as debt, it's going to be offset by the revenue that the uh parking authority is going to give the city to pay off that debt service.
>> Correct. >> All right. So that was the appropriation, the spending side of the budget. Now, how do we raise the funds to pay for those appropriations? Well, revenue are how the city funds its appropriations. So revenue or income is
broken down by fund balance or surplus, miscellaneous revenue, grants, receipts of delinquent taxes, those are prior year taxes, um, and amount to be raised, which represent the current year taxes. So again, what are the significant
changes in revenue from last year to this year? So we saw an increase in municipal court revenue of 400,000 a positive from 25 to 26. We also saw an increase in various
new pilots or payment in lie of taxes that came on the books um to the tune of 475,000. We saw a decrease in deferred state aid of 275,000. The deferred state aid actually stemmed from money resulting in
the city back in 2016 changing from a fiscal year to a calendar year municipality. And now we're at the tail end of this deferred state aid uh aotment. And then the bottom number, we have an increase of of raised by an
increase in the amount to be raised by taxes of 3,995,000 or 5% of the prior year tax. I'd just like to add to that because I do not want to skip the deferred state
aid, right? the utilization and the good stewards of that money that it's 11 years later and we still have money that we can use for the budget. I know that when we did that there was
concerns about how much of that money was going to be used in the budget. I want to let you know that in collaboration, this administration has been able to keep it since 2016 and still spend it sparingly to the fact that we
we ran it even with the increases in health benefits of 96% over the last four years, we still had money left that we could use to offset this budget. So I I want the public to understand that that def the first state aid could have been wiped out and used within the first
three budgets and we carried that for the last you know since we got it we carried now we're already in 2026 and we still have money there in the account so I don't want that to be lost in the in the presentation now just a summary again of same so
obviously in the state of New Jersey you have a balanced budget so if I We have uh 123 million in appropriations. We have 123 million in revenue. And pretty much the revenue breaks down as $26 million or 21% in miscellaneous revenue.
That includes the court revenues and the uh state aid revenue. We have uh surplus anticipated of 13.4 million or 11% receipt from delinquent taxes of 47,000. And then the amount to be raised by
taxes or current year taxes of 83,895,000 or 68% of the total revenue. And speaking of taxes, what is an estimated impact of a proposed tax levy
of 5%. So on the tax assessor's assessed value or the assessment book, the average home is assessed at 275,000. And that's taken from taking the total valuation or the
total assessed valuation of all residential homes and dividing it by the number of residential homes listed in the tax assessor's duplicate. So, with the average home assessed at 275,000,
the 200 the 2026 average municipal tax bill would be $7,737. The average municipal tax bill in 2025 was $7,415.
The increase per year would be $322 or per month $26.83. One thing that I would like to note as well, um the tax levy increase is 5%. However, we had increased valuations,
added valuations, added ratables is usually the term that we refer to. Those are new constructions being added to the tax assessor's roles. And what that allows us to do is even though the tax
levy increase is 5% for the existing um taxpayers they'll actually feel a 4.34 increase to their tax rate to their taxes. So that is pretty much the summary of
the budget workbook. If any of the council members have any questions or on the presentation or the workbook, >> Councilman Love, please. >> Yeah. Thank you, Council President. Just real fast. Um,
other expenditures on um this page right here. >> I know uh benefits are in there, but what else is included? So again, and and I'll just read some of the things off. So for example, you have
health benefits. You have >> Sorry. And also, is it correlated with >> So and that's what I was going to get to. So if you actually in your budget workbook, you flip to page six, starting on page six through page,
bear with me, seven. Page six and seven actually gives you a full detail of that other expenses and just some of the bigger items to to highlight. You have health benefits. You have liability insurance. You have the
departmental other expenses. You have uh collection of solid waste and recycling. The disposal of solid waste. The amount uh needed to raise for the library that's set by the state. So, pretty much
uh again, pages six and seven give you a detailed list of those other expenses. Yeah. And if I may, if you're wondering, well, how did the city go from an 8% on medical benefits down to the 5%.
If you start on page five and flip through the pages, everything in parentheses is what we had to cut to get that eight down to a five. Page five. >> Councilman. >> Yes, I'm done. >> I'm sorry.
>> Councilman Monk, please. I just want to uh comment that appreciate the very thorough and clear presentation. >> Uh very informative um gives clarity exactly
where we are and why we're facing a increase as well as just a nice overview of of the budget. Really appreciate it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Absolutely. I concur.
>> Councilman mayo, please. >> Thank you. I second that. Uh very very clear, very thorough. Um couple of questions. What do we what's our bond rate right now? What do we pay? What do we pay on bonds? >> So the last time we issued bonds were
was back in 21, we were a doublea bond rate. >> And what's our interest rate on the bonds? So again, back then when we issued bonds, it was a coupon rate of 5% but an
actual interest effective rate and I get back to you on the exact number two it was like around 25 2.5 interest was very low back in 2021. >> Um and the surplus is the surplus
interestbearing or it's strictly within the budget. So, no, it's not interesting. It's it's just a a flat number at the end of the year that then you can use to offset the uh budget. >> The
trash seem like a pretty big portion of the budget. Is there on these pilots and the some of these larger projects, are they having to provide their own trash? Yeah, on the larger buildings they they
provide their own trash collection. Um, usually >> what's a large building to find us, Mr. >> So, it's it's really the new construction um you know, they're over 10 units plus. What happens is the older the older buildings that are are pre-existed are curbside buildings and
then all the new buildings uh we have a different setup for their pickups because they're much larger and they they're usually on site with a private hauler. >> Thank you. >> Um well and the commercial that's true mayor the commercial users as well um have their own pickups at multiple times
beyond what we have for the residents. >> Thank you. That's good. On page number five and number, page number five, page number seven, the difference or what savings the administration
cut. So at a difficulty and well with difficulty the comparisons between this the current year 2026 are compared to the adopted 2025 budget not the actual 2025 expendited for the for those for those sums whether it be
net increases or decreases. So the total decrease was $2.4 million. Um, and what happens is when you look at the difference, you're like, well, what happened to the money? So, it goes into the general fund and then we popped it
into surplus. So, the budget balance. So, the the the 2.5 million almost that the administration saved. You're comparing between the the third column which be the current year of 2026 versus the first year first column which is the
adopted budget of 2025. >> Correct. >> That is correct. My question there's no comparison of the current year to the actual expendited in 2025. So what happens is that's fluid. So some of the changes like with uh retirees and who
comes and who goes and positions that are not filled, right? So that's why you what was adopted was what we compare to because that's the difference in the budget. But in act in actuality you may have a larger you may end up with a
larger amount in the bank. You have the difference about 50 50.2 versus 46.3 you end up with a another 1.5 >> right? But what I want to caution on is that we always want to try to regenerate
surplus because in this budget how much are we using on surplus? 13 million which is another which is another accolade by the way. We were able to keep it flat from last year to this year with an increase of $6.5 million. We didn't use any more surplus, but what
happens is those differences is what rolls over into surplus that then allows us to plug it into the budget to keep it flat. So, I just want you to keep that in mind. So, it may look like there's more money, but what happens in in reality, it goes into surplus and then
we can't regenerate that same amount. So that one whatever that 1.5 would go back to regenerate the surplus. How much of that surplus do you have in of that 13 million do would you have going back into 20 in the 2026 budget going back into surplus
>> for you know how much the total was that we brought in for surplus. So they just did the AFS right now. >> So so for example uh in 2025 where we anticipated utilization of $13.4 $4 million in surplus to balance
the 2025 budget. We were only able to bring down one uh bring back 10.1, meaning that our surplus from the start of 25 to end of 25 actually went down $3.3 million.
>> Got it. Hopefully this 1.5 will bring it back to uh 12 and a half. >> Any any penny helps. Any penny helps. Yeah, thank you. I just >> I'm I'm sorry. Councilman had thought I wanted to make sure the councilman mayor
had finished and now is councilwoman member. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Council President. So, I know with um we're facing tough times um with these reductions, what would the impact
be um the proposed budget reduction to the level of services that we will be providing to the residents? >> I know that's per >> perhaps Mr. Fernandez, as a followup, ma'am, could you give us some idea of
what what is the impact? What will people feel on the ground here in the city? Um, so some of the things that are currently happening, um, the the fire department, depending on
who shows up, like who's at work, we may run with five companies instead of six companies, but they really shouldn't see any major change in service other than we know we're running that day with five companies versus six companies. It's I
mean, these are bodies that we're talking about. Mayor, I don't know if you want to like >> just briefly, some of the impacts would be administrative where there was a hard line on any overtime. We may need to be a little bit more um I don't want to use the word creative, but um consider some
of our budgetary restraints in terms of investigations. We may have them done in the daytime. We may ensure the scheduling would appropriately address any concerns of manpower. We may hold back on replacing positions immediately
and try to align them more with additional retirements in the future. We may not replace vehicles right away and see what we can get by in terms of services that directly impact the uh residents. We can go one by one. We'll
sit there and say, can we get away with three mechanics at DPW instead of four? and then someone will see an open position and call us and say, "Hey, you know, city bake, you have an open position for an additional mechanics." And we'll call HR and say, "No, we don't. At least not right now." So,
those are some of the uh direct impacts in terms of administrative decisions. In terms of the constituents, the residents of the city and those who visit and work here, the goal is that they would not feel the difference, that we would make up the difference in other areas. How do we do this? Because of course, it would beg the question, if we could have done
it before, why not? because additional relationships may help where we may not have all the police. You may reach out to the sheriff's department and say, "Hey, we know that the jail is no longer there. Can we utilize some of your manpower to help us in specific areas of
concern for an operation rather than double up on our police officers? Mutual aid becomes extremely important with our fire department and the relationships that we enjoy with Bergen and throughout the state county as well as sometimes
even Hudson County and Essex County. So these are some of the realistic concerns that we may have here. Here's the I hate to frame it this way, the scary in years past where the state or the federal
government may have and I don't want to say be found lacking in willingness to send us more money perhaps there are extenduating circumstances we can make up the difference. I'm being very candid, not so much. If there's a cut in rental
assistance, if there's a cut for wick women and children, if there's funding that we're not necessarily getting to expand our health department, then we make do or we reach out to another municipality and say, can we partner up? We look for shared service. Shared
service seems to be the mantra, at least the direction that the state would like to go in in terms of affordability. If there are areas we can save, we explore. Had a recent conversation this week with our council president and the VA of potentially saving some funding by uh by
working with the county or other agencies to identify services within the city that we provide that are necessary, but perhaps we could save if we work with them. These are some of the practical or I guess impact. This is
some of the impact that would have on this. But in terms of day-to-day permits that you need to get recreation for our children, we may get a few more volunteer coaches than the ones that we have to pay. We may hold up on some job opportunities
for teenagers unless we get a partnership. I would like to highlight goodwill this year that for the very first time said that they will partner with us to hire individuals not only uh individuals within the city but um adults with autism our program that we push forward. We try to find funding
from other sources rather than try to pay for it because these are very difficult years and as the uh chief financial officer had already stated. Um we're looking at another increase >> next year and the years to come for the
health benefits and this is the municipal tax levy. It doesn't even include the county school. So we're cognizant of the impact that it could have on our residents. Some those are some of the impacts of council. I hope that gives you some perspective. I
didn't answer it in complete detail, but gives you a general perspective of what we have to do to stay at this 5%. >> No, thank you. And listen, I mean, I hear it. Just had a meeting um last week and everyone was complaining about the health increase, you know, and I mean
those that were that opted early on to go into now being selfinsured can do it, but th those that can that have not been able to is having a hard time just like us. So, >> well, it's throughout the state, right? >> It is throughout the state. Yeah. I I
say this purposely to uh to both bring a little bit of a humor to this situation, very serious situation, but I recall and I don't know if he'll remember the assemblyman when I was sharing with him um what was it a few months ago of all the complaints we were getting in sake about the rising healthcare costs and he
just gave me a look with no words like you're you're not the only city reaching out to me from the state as there are many cities that he represented in uh in his other role. But it is it is a challenge throughout the entire state of New Jersey. >> Thank you.
>> If if I may, the tax increase is 5% but it's offset uh to come down to a 4.2. Is that right? >> Yes sir. Um, >> do we do we anticipate next year at the same time, same
station, do we anticipate similarly that kind of increase >> as far as the tax levy? >> Right. >> So, that's really dependent on the development of the development world.
Um, the council has seen several of these projects that um have received designations and redevelopment plans. there at least one of them is going to the the board tomorrow. Um we have one larger one of the larger ones on this
evening for the the council to consider. We have been historically primarily the last four or five years we've been historically over the $10 million mark. Um but again the scenario is is it offsetting the amount of appeals right?
So, if we get $10 million, but the appeals end up being $15 million. Yeah, we don't feel the $50 million, we're only going to feel five, right? But in this case, we were actually able to overcome that number. Um, and we
anticipate that the the the growing interest in in investing in the city of PA will continue and we hope to see uh large numbers. I don't know if if this uh we can replicate 18 million next year, but we hope that in the next
couple years we should see in the 20s, but that's wishful thinking looking at what's coming down the pike. But also to your point, it was around September that I gave a directive that we would have a higher increase where we would not move forward on filling positions and we
would look how we can uh make up the difference with existing employees. We would take an approach of hiring within. If there was a real need in a department, then we would identify perhaps potential candidates that were in another department that could perhaps take up those roles, whether dual roles
or leave the department and they would be fine. The reason why I bring that up is because you make a very important point that we don't see an expected. We're not expecting a windfall next year. That's the truth. We're not expecting that. We're not expecting the state or the federal government to turn
around and say, "Hey, sake. Here's $40 million. We just found it and figured you should have it." So, these are the years where we have to make tough decisions. I think the reality and our residents understand it and they they connected to the services, of course, they understand storms and the need to
hire contractors to remove snow when things get out of hand. They understand emergency road uh repairs or other services that we have to provide. get we're going to have to increase taxes, but we also have to make tough decisions to try to keep that at a
reasonable number and give an expectation to our residents that we're doing everything that we can to to reduce that number where we can. >> If I may, Mr. Fernandez, in terms of on on page three,
uh you have variance between uh of 25 26. You've got a number of categories that generate income. St. Mary's, uh, police, etc. Why are they being zeroed
out? >> I'm sorry. Where are you exactly? >> On page three. >> Am I looking at this room? So, council president, if you're referring to the handful of ones that have uh zeros in
the first and second column. >> Well, actually, I'm talking about the last column. >> Oh, the last column represents that we're anticipating the same amount in 26 as we were in 25, meaning there's no
increase or decrease in the amount anticipated. >> Right? So, as you go through that last column, right, um, the reductions are in parentheses, the added, the ones that we're anticipating. So, if you look at the the one, two, three, fourth one down, that's the 400,000 that we're
adding in court, and then as you go up and down, up and down, then you'll see that ultimately the number is an additional 4.7 million. >> Thank Thank you for the clarity. Um, I look forward as do all my colleagues and going over this with a fine tooth comb.
That's what they pay us for. Um, but let me join with everyone who spoken already and complimenting you and uh, if I may to Mr. Fernandez and most of all to the mayor for uh, the amount of time and effort is evidenced by uh, by this budget. Um, it is not it's not a happy
document, but I'm not aware of what many other municipalities are facing. Um and for one reason or another, it seems that greater greater um interest was taken uh by this city in terms of looking to the
future versus other municipalities which felt more comfortable to uh to dive in. Um I have two lights on Councilman Mayor and Councilman Monk. Councilman Monk, please. Thank you. um
a comments and and a few questions. The annual debt service you show on the graph where it drops in 2029 to 2030 like in half, right? In terms of what that service will be, right?
>> Yeah. About Yes. There's about a little over a million dollar drop off from 29 into 30. >> Right. So, is that a drop off? Was that a balloon payment? >> So, it's not a balloon payment. No, it's actually the end of one of our bonds
that are actually coming down. So, in 2029, we will make the last payment I believe on a 2016 refunding bond. So, pretty much we that 2029 that payment will pay
it off. So, 2030 there will be no longer a debt service payment for that bond. So, so in other words, there's not going to be any large like balloon payment, any large amount that's due to pay off that pay off that bond. >> No, just the it's actually the regular
annual payments. >> Annual payments. This falls off. >> Yes, >> this falls off. Okay. The debt service here it says including sewer utility debt does not say anything about the parking authorities debt. How much debt
does the park you know you know off hand? Obviously it's not this budget. How much debt does the parking authority have? >> So actually the parking authority does not have any debt. They've only had one bond payment back in 2009 which they paid off. I think it was like a 10 or
11year bond. So they have since paid off that debt. So and actually just to reiterate what Mr. Fernandez was saying if if the council remember when we built the parking deck, the council approved a bond ordinance that allowed I want to
say 3.7 million worth of debt to be issued by the city. But when that gets issued, the that will also trigger the parking authority to make a payment for those bonds to the city. So it'll actually offset itself. So
not really a debt but whenever the city actually does bond for that that will become its debt service payment to the parking authority pretty much reimbursing the city >> right so the parking authority in essence will be paying the debt that
we're carrying. So, so to say that we can't bond like if we were to bond the parking authority were to bond let's say another $3 million then that's where the difficulty would be to pay off the current debt service. So I don't want I
know that Omar said has no debt but it has a debt commitment >> to the city to pay that debt. >> Okay. Thanks for the clarification. So that debt service that the parking authority has an obligation to pay which means the city actually took out the
bond that's in the city's name. Is that included in this debt service that's on this graph? >> No, it's not. The city will take out a bond. >> Okay. So fine, but we have >> in the city's name or under the authorities's name. >> It's the city's name. If you recall,
council president, the all the funding sources came to the city's name and it created some difficulty if the parking authority wasn't the owner. If you remember, there was the shared service with the parking authority to manage and maintain. So, the ownership of the deck
is the cities and the agreement was between the parking authority and the city to maintain and operate the parking deck. In return, we would be issuing the debt. we would be paying off the debt service from the parking authority end, right? And then um there's already a
shared revenue uh agreement in which whatever excess revenue is split between the city and the parking authority. So it kind of was a very nice easy way to pay off the debt uh and the city keep
ownership of the parking. But >> so Mike, where I'm going with this question is so in the past >> the city had debt that was being paid off by the parking authority. >> Is that >> No, previously the parking authority had
the debt and paid the city. So the the reason the parking authority had debt is because it purchased the parking lots that the city owned. So they took out a debt and paid that purchase price to the
city. Now, the parking authority literally just came off of their last payment, which made it perfect timing to be able to say, "All right, we will then so the city doesn't have to pay that extra $3.7
million in debt. Now that that opened up in the parking authority, we made the agreement so that the parking authority pays off the debt that the city is uh so the the revenue that the parking authority used to pay back the city Mhm. >> Right. That all came from the parking
authorities revenue from >> Yes. >> from you know meters and so on and so forth. >> Yes. >> Okay. So this new debt, new bond of 3 million. >> Does the parking authority have enough
revenue on their own to cover that debt service? >> Yes. That's my question. >> That's a great question. So all we did without calculating the additional income from the deck because the parking
authority just came off of their debt service. All we did is just use what the the income we've already have from paying that debt service into turning it around and paying now whenever the city issues the bond. So the beauty of the
the the timing was that we're paying it off with existing income. All the extra income from the parking deck is literally split between the city and the uh parking authority while the parking authority maintains it on. It was it was perfect timing um when we were able to
do those agreements. >> Okay. Fine. Thank you. Um the next point I have and also a question regarding these new developments of redevelopment that's coming down the pipeline right um talking about I know council president
asked about next year what next year look like um are any of these developments um any are they going to come before the the city for any type of pilot programs >> that we know of today? So, as of right
now, no one's requested a pilot permit payment for the ones that um are on. We've been very successful where the smaller redevelopment projects through affordable housing funding and things like that. After the the mandatory set
aside that we put in um at the mayor's request and the council approved, um we've been able to contain them really not coming in. I could tell you that the much larger ones are probably going to come in and request some sort of pilot. Um there is a pilot this evening that is
before you and that is for Spear Village which is rehabilitating uh the four four of the six buildings. Um and I could tell you just to give you the punchline it would it would literally pay us more than we get for
the entire site just on that pilot paper. Right. So, so you kind of get a feeling for how we're So, as of right now, there's been no request, but I can tell you just by the sheer size of some of them that you may get one or two, but I
have to tell you, and we did this I think we did this scenario, we ran this scenario maybe a year or two ago, and I think you were the one that asked the question. Um, out of all the number of redevelopments that we've had in the city of Pake, the actual number of
pilots that we've issued, whether it be five-year or the 30-year variety, which is a lot less common than the five-year here in the city of Pake was almost within a hand and a half. And we've done I mean, I lost count how many
redevelopment plans we've done in the city. So just so you get an idea that yeah there may be one or two but in comparison to the number of projects that we put out there it's not a very large number >> and that's at 5% versus the is that five
years versus the 30 >> uh either one. So either one, we we're very very low in comparison to municipalities that use it use redevelopment at the pace that we're using redevelopment that our numbers are significantly lower
than the amount of plans that we've put out there. Um, also as you know, depending on the project, and I think council president and I had that conversation not too long ago, 95% of that pilot payment comes to the city depending on the structure of that. Um,
which also changes the amount. So in many many cases we actually our taxes are reduced the amount of the payment is actually reduced at the end of the pilot and that than at the the last couple of
years of the pilot. Um okay thank you. Another question I have in common if you look at the worksheet uh you analyze you know the difference
the variance between the budgets. So the the comparison and the variances were used looking at the current year budget versus the prior
year budget as opposed to using the current year budget versus the actual of expendited from last year. And where I'm going with this question
is I think we all can say very comfortably that everyone's very happy how the city's being run, right? We all commend the mayor and every sing every single department, you know, from parks and city hall and so on
and so forth of it's just great. So let's say you look at expenditures of other expenses. Let's take that one line line item. You have the adopted budget of 2025 is 46
million. I'm just using round. >> What page are you on? Uh page seven. >> Seven. Okay. >> The adopted I'm leaving out insurance. I I don't want to go anything near insurance. Okay. Obviously. >> Okay. So,
um, other expenses, we had a $46 million budget for 2025. Actual spent in 2025 was 42 million, 4 million less. And the budget for 2026 is 53. So when we compare the budget for 26
or 53 million to the budget of 25 or 46, right, there's only a call it a $7 million increase. But if you were to compare this year's budget to actual what's expended in 2025
and actually is 11 million increase. So, if we were able to run the city last year for $42 million with all these line items here and let's put on a 5% increase, whatever number you want to put on there, why can't we do it for 46,
why do we got to go to 53? >> So, if I can just to add to because I think your question is right around along the line where Councilman Mayor's question was leading to and to pick it back on something that the mayor's uh also mentioned. So two things with the
actual expendited. The actual expendited represents expenditures through that were recorded through December. There are bills that come in after December but still related to 25 that have to come out of this budget. So that's why for example the state of New Jersey
who's a very conservative who treats the budget very conservatively um allows you to keep this year's budget open for a secondary year for that exact purpose. So when expenses come in for example uh
PSEG which is about a $100,000 bill their December bill comes in in January that's not reflected here yet because but it will get paid out of the 2025 budget. So that's for example one of the reasons that's in there. Also going back
to the comment that uh piggybacking off the mayor, we learned about this health benefit increase very early on in the year. It was I think they voted on it in July, but they were talking about it as early as April. And once we we knew what
it meant coming to this budget more than a year ago. So decisions were made to reduce spending and also uh try to try to for example someone who may have retired try to not replace them last
year and wait till this year to be able to you know save some money that we know we're going to have to need in this year's budget. So, I agree with what you're saying, Councilman, but I would say that um some of these actual expenditures don't represent what
we actually need in a calendar year, especially the 2025. >> No, understood. In terms of their additional expenses, you know, I mean, I would imagine we're I mean, we're coming up to May. I would imagine by now you have all your expenses for 2025 in the
system, right? you're not getting any more utility bills in in in you know May for 2025. So, I do imagine you probably have some updated number of what the actual expenses were, >> right, >> for 2025. But going back to the second
comment, but the city did run with those vacancies, right? So, and the mayor did a great job. Everyone's happy in the city. So there any reason we can't go forward with whatever vacancy that is to go forward
with the same vacancy >> depends what vacancy and what we're facing. So if we have I'm going to try to be very general. If we have a certain number at DPW that we've been able to get away with and we only deal with two major storms and we're fine. We get hit
with 10. We dealt with a bunch of apparatuses that break down and we fix them in-house. It would cost us more to have to send them out to fix and then we may need a mechanic. We get a few people out sick and we don't have the replacements. I don't want to say
because I never want to present to the community that we take a gamble. We try to take a pragmatic approach at staffing and at what services we provide, but we cannot predict the future. We can plan for it and we can run through scenarios, but we don't know. Look at just 2025.
That storm hit most of the cities around us with a complete surprise. We were among the first to ran out and contracted individuals to help us take office. We would hope we're not running into that every single year. So with the pen, I think we're going to take a very close look. I mean, right now it's
called the mayor's budget. After tonight, it becomes the council's budget. You go through it and we're going to take suggestions. >> We're going to find someone else to take it down the road, >> but we'll go through it. We'll see what we can go through without having to fill vacancies. Look, there are some
conversations when it comes to public safety that we can have, very serious ones. And uh by God's grace, things have gone well strategically under the chief's leadership and under the chief of the fire department, we've been able to be responsive to emergencies and to mutual
aid. We would hope we don't have years where we have greater challenges, incidents where we have more police officers. When it comes to internal, again, we have been looking at every department and seeing where we don't have to fill um seats or where we can
shift someone over to another department. So, we are looking at it. As to your question, why can't we? It's not that we can't, is that it's much harder to fill them once we're in the situation than it is to plan for it ahead of time. And right now, we're trying to plan as
much as we can and not fill all those vacancies, but we also understand the government needs to run and we can't predict what's going to happen. Does that make sense? >> Yeah, it it does. It does. >> So, there's a specific area. >> I think there's just um you know, if I look at these numbers, string these numbers. >> Sure. If we would take last year we
actually spent okay minus I mean add in some whatever some bills that are missing >> and add a couple percent you know obviously there's increasing there >> we probably just use last year's expenses how how the city was run we probably could swallow the increase of $6 million health insurance costs just
look at these numbers they're hard right >> perhaps but obviously I'm looking I'm looking at a very I'm looking 30,000 ft high >> sure too general >> okay too general again >> no but it's a good point it's bad point. The only thing I would ask consider maybe if we looked at it over the last four years. If we consider what grants
we received, we consider what additional revenue we had through COVID money that is not going to be available anymore. Um that that does leave us in potentially precarious situations if we don't. >> So that's even more of a reason to run
as I'm not going to use the I don't mean skeleton crew, right? the more of a reason that if we're able to run the city with x amount of >> yes >> services, employees, whatever it is that we need to continue because of we're running out of co funds early on
>> out of that big check we got from the state by changing from fiscal to calendar and so on and so forth. >> We actually need to even tighten up even more. >> Yes. And to our our CFO's point, that's why we made some of those decisions early on um last year and then we're looking at this year to see what can we
do without what can we practically do without. >> Yeah. So So I'm going to >> I want to respectfully caution everyone u forgive me. >> Yeah. >> Um and that is that we wanted to be very general tonight Mr. Fernandez's words that some of what we're saying whether
we know it or not could impact negotiations. So unless the question is pressing, I would ask that it be made privately rather than for the uh >> I just then I just want to end with a comment if I may
say this 30 years ago. So not that I'm a prophet. Okay. But um looking at >> we thought you were >> um where government was where was again my the little one that I understood 30 years ago as where government was going
in terms of costs right and is that the government is probably 20 years behind the private sector or more right over the last look over the last 20 years the private sector they had to consolidate right look in State of New Jersey, you have over 500
municipalities. Okay. Police, nothing personal to anyone any just it means you have 500 mayors. You have 500 police chiefs, 500 fire chiefs and it keeps it keeps going on and on, right? And all the councils, everything, right? Every single department, right? Obviously, you
can't just have one big city for a whole state, right? You have to >> every area has their needs and so on and so forth. But it also comes to a point where the private sector couldn't handle it. And that's why we had all those consolidations >> in the private sector, right? And it's the same thing with the government,
right? You see the mayor yourself mentioned about how we we do other municipalities, right? Or maybe joining with the county, right? That's that's where the private sector was 20 years ago because it's just not affordable, right? Um I remember looking at these
budgets back 20 25 years ago. our expenditures were $80 million or 77 somewhere between78$80 million we're talking about $123 million today right okay many years people make more money now I get it right but as this keeps
increasing more and more I think what's going it's going to force government whether it's health it's either even I'll say even fire department the departments right privatize fire departments right there municipalities that have done in the past right or any any department because it's just
becoming to a point where it's just not affordable. It's just it's going to crash. Anyway, I'm just leaving with that thought. >> And that again is a fair point. I I would only um ask for all of us to consider that certain services
haven't decreased over the years. Like I'll give you a minor example. We have found that the need for crossing guards have increased over the years. We have found that with the blessing of getting uh funding for schools and school developments in that small area where we
would go have we strategically looked at the areas and and where we can use crossing. We've had our police go unless you put us there we get volunteers to cross people we're going to need more crossing guards. Now those are minor salaries but it gives you a glimpse as to how things happen in the city that
there are some services that we can say hey maybe we don't need to do this as much or see how we can partner with the municip there's no municipality looking to consolidate crossing guards with us right it's one example DPW we would look at the county and say hey maybe for
roads you're doing most of the county roads what would it cost us to have you do all the roads and we don't have to pay it or others have pointed out to garbage or maybe requiring more individuals to look at that besides as the business administrator mentioned
newer developments are commercial areas they have constantly taking up the garbage collection themselves and that saves us on some money so we continue to explore I just wanted to give you small examples recreation you know we were we were benefiting from having a county
park they still haven't taken up the recreation part of the park So, we still run the recreation there. We run the coaches. We run the programs there, mining cost. But I think to your point, it the task is on us. And you're right, the private sector was far ahead. I
think that the the difference, and I think we all know it, is that the private sector gets to look at their budget. And it's as simple as are we in the black or the red. We're in it for a profit. And we have to consider what services may be eliminated or where are we hurting individuals if we worry too
much about the numbers. That's that's a challenge that we live with. But you are right. We do need to explore that. So we will and we always look forward to having the council join us in any meetings or uh any groups so we can look over the budget in more detail and have these discussions.
>> Thank you mayor. Councilman mayor please. >> Thank you. Um just a bunch of other questions but the crossing guards is interesting. Um interesting you mentioned the crossing yards because like >> the the development of a lot of areas
like bringing more families here. That's what we want for say >> are we increasing our expenditures more than our revenue >> by bringing in these these >> developments and things like that? >> No. you know, not overall when you look at
the budget in a whole, but I mean there are services like an example like that one where we would need to have a >> Okay, so it dep Okay, so it depends on the intersection. So it's really more related to where the schools are. >> This is a general question specific to
crossing crossing like crossing for many many years, right? No, no, but I'll give you a very clear understanding because maybe it's for those who aren't following on privy, our high school closed. >> Everyone went downtown. >> The volume of individuals
crossing the street immediately increased from one year to another. So there were streets where we didn't have an expectation that you needed crossing guards where now you needed one and in certain cases two. Where Monroe Street wasn't always the place that large numbers of kids were going to cross. Now
we have so many children crossing there. So those are things that occur. It's good. We we got over $350 million to build a new high school, but for the next five to six years, that big volume of students and cars all went downtown,
then we needed more. if there are other areas to get identified and say, "Hey, we didn't have um crossing guards here. But this year, because of an increase of of motorcycles or other vehicles on the road, there's been an increase of accidents, we need a
crossing guard." And we go, we didn't have those reports two years ago of increased accidents. not so this is where I say sometimes the services are what directly impact whether or not we're going to do an increase or decrease not so much the development
itself but the changing circumstances or conditions that are affected in municipality >> thank you now the questions I actually wrote down on page three of 10 um there's um
a realization again of two Back to what I was discussing before council discuss is the realization of these on these pilots of an additional $2 million that was adopted for the 2025 budget an additional more than two about 2 million
was actually realized. Why is the projection for the the current year 2026 budget not at least considering that these pilots would increase year to year but at their benchmarks? Why are we not using the 2025 realized numbers for the
proposed 2026 budget? And if it's going to go to surplus three, but just curious why those numbers aren't aren't using the 2025 realized there. So, so if you're looking at specific pilots um for and again assuming you're
looking at specific pilots, some pilots have more than one year worth of collections, especially because of how the pilot program works where at the initial phase, you b you basically bill on an estimate until they actually start
renting it out and it gets fully rented and then they provide you the next year a financial statement, an audited financial statement that then you can say based on your re your actual revenues I should have build you this much for last year and and I only build
you just arbitrary figures I should have built you 150 I build you 80 as an estimate now you owe me 70 for this year and now I can realize that 70 plus another 150 but now so like and I'm just using an example for example uh uh uh
Concord Estate where I can't then say well now I'm going to collect every year 220 because that's not an actual one year's worth. So, some of them are a little skewed because they have what's called the uh the catchup or the Yeah,
pretty much the catchup from the previous year, but I don't think there's uh $2 million worth of uh pilots from last year either. >> Councilman Close to it. >> What's that? I mean, >> I guess clo close to it, including the
uh housing authority and and the likes. Yep. >> Yeah. Total. >> Yeah. I'm looking like almost 2 million, I think. So, between the first total and the second total, >> right? >> So, like if hopefully we get close to that number before that number would go back to surplus as well.
>> It it will absolutely. But again, just again and it's just so happens that taxes under my department so I'm a little familiar with the billing of them like some of these and again I guess not to name well they're line items so I guess I can name them like the one called Jack Parker where we anticipated
350 and collected 450 I can tell you that was the exact same example that I gave you where it was also oh the true up that's the word that we call it the true up from the previous year but his actual bill every year is more closer to 350 >> but uh my assumption is that overall
we're doing pretty well in these pilots as far as them >> being profitable and they're going to some of these are going to come they're going to we're going to have increases overall then >> just based on these you want to see what you want to see what Omar said right you want to see that at the end of the true
up it's over the number that we budgeted right so you know the Jack Parker we budgeted 350 we realized 455 and that number will continue to go up once we can establish that that 350 is now 450, then you'll see 450 there on that
number. Um the issue is because of the way the tax um the the tax abatement law is written, you don't bring your financials in December, right? you may end up getting your financials, your audited financials
in like January or February and then we send like a corrected bill for that number once we know what the actual collection was. Um, and again, not I hope we have a very very knock on wood a
very strong rental market. Uh, but vacancies matter, right? When you're looking at percentage of income, right? So depending on if there was more vacancies this year than last year, you know, and that kind of rigomear roll. Um but as they grow, you are correct. As
they grow, so do the percentages and these numbers will eventually change to the higher number. >> On the pilots, the the audits on the pilots, who takes care of these audits? It's the city or a third party? >> So they bring in their audited financials from a licensed um
I guess >> certified public account. certified public accountant that then are verified um through the finance office and the tax collector's office. >> Is there any legislation that
prohibits income from these properties to go to a another entity held by the property holder? So, the way it works, and it depends on the type of pilot. So, on a five-year abatement, it goes directly to
whoever owns the building. In a 30-year, a long-term tax abatement, the law actually requires that you build you open up an urban renewal LLC, which is the like nonprofit arm of the the abatement, and that's who gets the
abatement. that then is kind of back and forth with the uh the for-profit entity which may be 123 Main Street LLC and then you'll get that's who owns the building and then you'll get 123 Main Street urban renewal
which is the one that gets the pilot and that's all structured by the state of New Jersey and the Department of Treasury and we can't deviate from that and neither can the property owner. Uh, in fact, one property owner deviated from that and lost pilot. So, my my
question is really, can I own 123 Main Street? >> I'm going to interrupt I'm going to interrupt you, Councilman, for just a moment. We're focusing on the budget right now. Is this budget related or >> Nope. Could we impose on raising at another time?
>> Yes. Thank you. >> Um, tax appeals. Have we seen an increase in tax appeals this year? So, I think what's helped us and the reason we were able to get the $18 million is that we've stabilized the number of tax appeals. Um, and well, there's a large
one you see here before you, but that's an anomaly. Uh, and that's why we've been able to obtain whenever he brings up $18 million and that you're going to realize a less less of an increase than the actual increase, it's because we
brought in more than what the appeals were. um just generically so you can understand that. So we've been doing really well stabilizing the appeals which is interesting at a 50 what are we at now? 50%
50% ratio which we know brings a bigger gap. We've been successful in defending >> in defending them. The the taxers office has been um you know tough to make sure that they can battle these requests. So,
they've been doing a good job at maintaining these appeals down. >> Council President, curb me if I'm going off topic. >> I will curb you, Councilman, and remind you of the late hour >> and the availability of both our business administrator and our mayor on
specific items which might be answered directly. Council, >> I'll reserve it for later. >> Thank you, sir. Are there any other questions on the introduction of the budget? Mr. Mr. Hernandez, what happens next with the budget? >> So, um, if the budget's introduced this
evening, the council has until the June 4th, right? June 4th, is that the right thing? The June 4th meeting to adopt it or make any changes and amendments they want. It'll be a public hearing and then if everything goes well, it'll be sent
over uh it'll be adopted and then sent over to the state. So what what'll happen now is if it's introduced, we send it over to the state just for them to give it their lookie. Um then they may make changes as well as the council. So we need to make sure that we bring
those changes back to the council on the June 4th meeting. And then at that point the council can decide to adopt it, change it or um discuss the items that the state might have. We've we've been pretty good. The state really doesn't they're minor comments typically but
that's the process. >> Yes. >> Thank you sir. With the council's permission moving on to the number five on our agenda hearing of citizens. In accordance with the open public meetings act NJSA104-1 sec. The council opens every public
meeting for comments by the public. However, in accordance with NJSA104-12, nothing in this act shall be construed to limit the discretion of a public body to permit, prohibit, or regulate the active participation at any meeting.
Therefore, please be advised that the council will not entertain any comments from persons who communicate obscene material. Make statements which are considered bias intimidation in which a person intends to intimidate any individual or group because of race,
color, religion, gender, handicap, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, or makes comments intending to speak any offensive language. The person who makes these statements will linger allowed 5 minutes for public discussion. Is there anyone who would like to address the council, please?
>> Yes, sir. >> Thank you, Council President. Joshua Goldman, 185 High Street. Approximately two months ago, the council passed a res pass passed a resolution uh declaring my neighbor's property an area of rehabilitation. Uh I'm here today uh
recently I filed a lawsuit uh seeking to anal resolution. Uh, I'm here not obviously to discuss the merits or discuss the lawsuit, but more I'll say to apologize. Um, the council and the mayor, the everyone here has been gracious with their time and and I
really respect that everyone here is fighting for the residents and what's best for the community. Uh, I didn't file a lawsuit to be oppositional, to win, to whatever. But really, the reason I'm here tonight is just to explain myself is that there is a strict time bar in bringing lawsuits. And therefore,
while I received great advice from a council member that I should wait and see what the applicant might or the property owner may ultimately present, unfortunately by that time, I would have lost my opportunity to file a suit. And so therefore, uh the suit was uh filed I don't want to say preemptively, but
obviously with without full knowledge of what may be coming and it is obviously my hope and my interest that I can withdraw the suit, that it's not relevant and that obviously everything works out uh in everyone's best interest. Um but um but unfortunately I have to do it. So hopefully uh you know
the I'm happy to extend any time to the city. I'm not looking to have the city spend or waste any money on on filing on various filings. Um but uh you know I do I'm appreciative of the council's time and and how how much they're fighting for us and I don't want the presence of
the lawsuit to be perceived as oppositional or as antagonistic or as not appreciative of all that the council is doing. Um, so thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else like to address the council at this time?
>> Seeing no, I move to close the public hearing. >> There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Motion and second to close. Roll call, please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia.
>> Councilwoman Colom. Yes. >> And council president shar. >> Yes. It was councilman love read and he said he must make to try to get on zoom. >> He has not tried to join. >> Very good. Thank you. We're up to revenue numeral six in our agenda ordinance for second and final reading. Hearing is required. Number one proposed
warrants number 2526 amending the designation of restricted parking for disabled persons by plate number introduced at the April 1426 council meeting. Is there a motion please to
here for a second and finally there motion and second. >> Councilman Monk, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Councilman Gol Montinez. >> Yes. And council president Sher.
>> Yes. Ladies and gentlemen, the council has opened public hearing at this time. Is there anyone who would like to address the council on this item and this item only? Seeing none, move to close. >> Second. >> Motion a second to close. Roll call to close, please. >> Councilman Monk, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo,
>> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Councilman Colinez. Yes. And council president Sher. >> Yes. Thank you. On the ordinance, please. Is there a maker? >> Second. >> Motion second. Roll call, please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes.
>> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. Yes. >> Councilman Garcia, >> Councilman Komz, >> yes. >> And Council President Shear. >> Yes. Thank you. proposed an ordinance number 2523-26
an ordinance amending the east side redevelopment plan for property identified on the official tax map of the city is block 1036 lots 1 and 8 corresponding to one market street in the city of Pay introduced the April 14
2026 council meeting motion public hearing motion >> motion >> second question >> Councilman Monk >> yes >> councilman Melo >> yes >> councilman Mayor. >> Yep. >> Councilman Garcia, >> Councilman Colz, and Council President
Sher. >> Yes. Thank you. At this time, ladies and gentlemen, >> this is I'm sorry. >> Your microphone. >> My microphone. >> Thank you. >> Is it working now? >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh on 2023, we just opened public hearing. Correct. >> Correct.
>> Uh at this time, ladies and gentlemen, is there anyone who' like to address the council on proposed orders 25-26? >> Seeing none, move to close. Second motion of second to close. Roll call, please, to close. >> Councilman Monk, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes.
>> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Councilwoman Colunt, >> yes. >> And council president Sher. >> Yes. Thank you. On the ordinance, is there a maker, please? Second. >> I'm sorry. Motion and second, Councilman Monk.
>> Yeah. Just a few questions if I may. So, the parking standards on this proposal And number one, item one on the parking stands, it's it says that um that a studio one bedroom needs 75 space per
unit. But item two says at minimum one parking space must be assigned to each unit. So how do you balance again? >> That's good. That's a good question. So when you average it all out right
what we're saying is you have to provide for every single unit that exists irrespective of what your total requirement is. >> Does that make sense? >> Maybe I just don't understand.
>> So the studios the okay so we limit the number of studios you can have in a building. So if you keep reading there's a percentage can't exceed the whole >> um but then if you look you'll have like a one and a half for two bedrooms you
have two for two and three bedrooms right so when you do the math what'll happen is they no matter what the number comes up to so let's say it's 100 units and they need 150 parking spaces right
so let's say there's 100 units, they need 150 parking spaces. The first 100 units is one for every single one of those residents so that everybody has a parking space on the provided parking. It may okay, it makes
sense. However, okay, if we're saying that a twobedroom needs 1.5 spaces per unit, >> because we're on the on the assumption that if someone has two bedrooms, they good chance they have one and a half cars on average,
>> right? And if we force the owner to give someone who has a studio one spot, that means we're taking away >> we're taking away spots that we required for the twobedroom
because I don't have really one spot for every studio. At the end of the day, if I have to give a studio a spot at no additional cost, >> that means I'm taking away from the two bedrooms the one and a half, right?
Which means I'm g I'm pushing cars onto the street. I don't really have enough parking. >> Well, no, because you're washing one with the other. So, either it's the car from the studio or it's the car from the the two bedroom. And it's funny you bring up and the reason I'm smiling is because one of the catalysts for putting
this was you in the ordinance a couple OF MEETINGS AGO. SO THAT'S WHY I'M LAUGHING BECAUSE YOU'RE the one that brought it up. >> So listen I I I don't have public >> Hold on one second. I think Councilman Garcia keeps like off mute and he may I don't know if he can hear us but um
>> I'm glad I I have no problem saying I made a mistake. Um, so the idea was that every every member, every unit should have a space to them at no cost on the premises. So that's why it's written the
way it's written so that every unit that needs a space gets a space. I understand. But if if if this this ratio of 75 space per unit for one bedroom is based on that people in one bedrooms a lot of
them don't have cars. That's where it comes from. >> Yes. Right. But then if the ratio for two bedroom is 1.5, that means we're taking the assumption that people have two bedrooms have more than one car. >> Well, no. No, no, no. We're doing the one and a half because some two bedrooms
have a have more than one car. Some two bedrooms do not. Okay, that's fine. But the average we're saying we're assuming they have more than one on average >> and you have to round up by the way. So if it's if it's a space and a half, you got to give me two spaces. >> Okay. Okay. But it's one and a half. So
then that means if I'm forced to give a parking spot to a studio, that means I am I do not have enough parking for the two bedrooms. >> So we have a financial guy say he's shaking his head. you want to strike that it's the that's a dimminimous
change. I just I'm just afraid that the next time I present it, you're going to TELL ME WHERE'S THE ONE SPOT FOR THE uh I don't know if you recall that conversation we HAD ABOUT THE SPOTS and the making sure they all have a spot and that they're parked in the in >> So I I mean >> I'm okay.
>> I'm not disagreeing with your concept. I get it. But I'm just trying to tell you where it came from. >> Okay, that's what that's point number one. >> Okay, whatever we want to do with it. Fine. Number two is that you see the whole theme here throughout this whole plan is that we need parking, we need
parking, right? Ratio at a minimum one parking space must be assigned, right? On-site parking and so on and so forth, right? But then we do also allow again all part of it. Okay. This payment in le right. >> Yes.
So does the as a council we put into place these parking requirements because we sit here and the mayor hears it more than we do of all the issues that we have in the city of lack of parking where we have to start doing permit parking in different neighborhoods right
and issues we have we have to now allow cars parking closer to the corner because there's not enough parking >> if the planning board is not in the same same understanding what's going on in the city the same way we do, okay? Because we hear things on a different level than they do. They come in for
their meetings, but we we get more of a broader picture what's going on in the city. Then they might easily allow payment to L or as it says in item eight, the plan acknowledges that the parking requirements set forth here and may require a waiver, right, exemption.
So, do how do we know that the planning board right is in sync with what all the things that we're passing to increase parking because of all the different things, permitting, park to the corner, so on and so forth. What I would like to see is that for the last 10, 15, 20
redevelopment plans that we've done that went before the planning board, how many of them received this payment to L or received a waiver? >> Okay. that that to what this what the council put in place in terms of what requirements we wanted to see per
twobedroom per threeb. This will give us a sense that maybe we're doing the wrong thing by every plan that comes before us by allowing this payment by allowing them to to diminish the requirements on the planning board because they're just not they're not in sync with what's going on in the city city. So this so I
understand your perspective but if I could just give you a little bit maybe a different perspective and and we'll start with the law itself right so the municipal land use law of the state of New Jersey requires some flexibility for the planning boards and the zoning
boards for that matter because not every application is the same not every application is in the same vicinity not every application has the same access to public transportation So they're allowed to evaluate all of that before they make their decision. Secondly, to go to your
point about parking, they're all required by law to be Pay residents, right? So your class four members, whether it's um planning, board, or zoning board are all residents of the city of Pake who are living in essence
what it is that you're talking about. Right. Um and >> gentlemen, I'm going to interject for just a moment. I'm concerned that we are going beyond the ordinance before us. These are related discussions and related arguments, but I would ask you to be mindful, please.
>> I will be brief because perhaps if if we can, Mr. Administrator, through the council president, the councilman's request is at least the last 20 applications if the council could receive a report of how many received payment in L and then we can go from
there. So let's let's uh ascertain that number >> or bring that copy to um the next council meeting and then perhaps we'll have time to have more conversation on that. >> Absolutely. I just want to be clear though we'll get that report but not every location is the same. Not every location is the same.
>> You can qualify for but I just big picture >> as to the request of the we'll make that happen council. In in light of uh that that comment, mayor, for which we do thank you, um would it be more appropriate to hold this ordinance until
our next meeting um to get that clarity? Is there any rush on this? >> So, so we're trying to get through redevelopment designations and things of that nature. Um I would say I would say that that in and of itself and again uh
we'll defer to the council decision, but >> I don't believe that was the intent of the council. asked the councilman to clarify. I think he wanted more of the information, >> right? Because it's really not you're not comparing apples to apples is is I guess what I'm going to say. You're going to you're going to see what the
planning board's actions are, but it's really not apples to apples. This is a plan before you with specific requirements, right? And irrespective of that, the planning board's going to do their action irrespective. >> Nonetheless, Mr. Fernandez, if this ordinance is not passed this evening,
but is put for second and final reading um at our meeting on April 14th, April 14th, that would be a trick. Um when appropriate in May, will that significantly and sufficiently hurt this ordinance if that delay is taken? I I
can't answer that question with certainty because, you know, there's discussions with developers and and I don't know, you know, I'm I I I don't I I can't answer that with certainty. >> For my part, I would just simply ask is that is that the desire of the council
or is that an option that would explore enough? I don't >> right now it's it's a concern that the argument and discussion has been such that it would directly affect this ordinance. If I if I may, um I I
typically would say, okay, you know what, let us go. Let's vote on it. Let's move on and so on and so forth. The reason why I just I I read them all. I say, okay, it's a project of 15 units, 12 units, and so on so forth. But if I'm not mistaken, this is a project of 400
>> units. So, you know, and in terms of the parking, like >> I think it was 640. >> Oh, 640 actually >> parking spaces. 640 parking spaces that are being 640. >> So, you know, if if the planning board again, and I I appreciate that they're
all residents of the city, >> but they're just they're not tuning in. >> And a council representative. >> Well, we have a council representative. >> Yes. >> We have the mayor's representative and we have an ex-conselman whose biggest biggest pet peeve is barking. Like, he brings it up at EVERY SINGLE MEETING. HE
HE'LL shut down. >> No, just to clarify. Yes. and and you can be very clear that's councilman former council Daniel Schwarz. So we have councilwoman Maria has former councilman Daniel Schwarz >> residents but I do want to stress that they have 640 parking spaces that they
have proposed. Right. >> And just so you know one of the ones you're going to see on the list is one that he literally right councilwoman said come back to us when you got more parking and he dismissed it and they came back two weeks later with three more parking spaces. So the proposal
>> again will this proposal >> I can't answer that with I want to answer >> I think you have to clarify he doesn't know how the developer will react to >> yeah like I don't know if it's going to delay the project for a long period of time we still have to go through the designation process >> this is an extraordinarily important
item unless I hear otherwise I'm going to ask that this be postponed for till our next meeting >> can I just ask a question if his proposal is 640 units 640 park Does that mean that's his proposal now? But he's still coming before the
planning board change it. >> He has to come before >> Can he change the plan now? >> No, I would. >> Can he change it for the time we approve this? Can you come before the planning board and say, you know what, at 640, I'd rather do 550. Give me 100 you.
>> So remember this. If I may just refresh some of the council members recollection and for council mayor when we passed the pil pile up which is the payment in L of parking ordinance it was made very clear
to every single member of every single board this is not you pay for parking. It was if a board in their review not
even thinking about a pilot issues a parking variance then at that point the payment l of parking comes in. This is not a oh I'm missing 10 spaces I'm just going to give you some money for 10 spaces. The way we have our pilot is you have to
go before the board irrespective of the pilot and present your case and why you should not need the total number of parking spaces because of XYZ. If in their wisdom the zoning board or planning board decides that you are
presented it in a way that you uh are eligible for the waiver, whatever that number is will then be charged a number. So, I I wanted to make that clear because I know sometimes they put it so you pay for parking, you have to get a variance. No, no, no. Here you only pay
for parking if you get a variance. If you don't get a variance, you don't you you don't well, first you're denied and right because before there were parking variances and the city wasn't um receiving any money and because of these pileups and these variances, things like
worsening of the parking deck, we used it for the parking deck or retrofitting certain lots that the mayor had um eyeballed for making it public parking. And that's kind of how we use it. But you can't come in as a developer today and say, "I'm short 20 spaces. I'm just
going to hit you off with $30,000." Like, that's not how that works. >> I'm just just fant I appreciate that. >> Councilman, if I could ask that that we sum up a conversation. >> Yeah. Okay, fine. I'm Yeah, I'm just um >> Where are Where are you holding Councilman?
>> I I It's a very It's a very big project. It's 400 units, and I would love to I would love to have a little more clarity of what or maybe tighten this up in terms of what the board could do. Um, or at least look at the history of not only
what the planning board has done in terms of payment in L, but as well as what the board has done of regarding the parking standards, residential site improvement standards of minimum 75 space for a onebedroom, one and a half.
Have they diminished those requirements besides paying was what's the history here? Do we need to tighten this up before we approve it for 100 unit? >> So, the reason the reason that language is in there the way it's in there,
>> it's because the planning boards and zoning boards have that ability today. All we did was because this is a redevelopment plan is grab what the law has them do today separate apart and I put it in here so that it maintains the
same the boards maintain the same power that's why it's written the way it is um and that's what's the state of New Jersey has in the RSIS which is the residential site improvement standards and the municipal land use law so if anything by bringing that in we're tightening it more because we're
following what the state is requiring us to do. So I I don't want to confuse the two. So the plan is is built around a specific site, but it mimics what your zoning ordinance and your what the planning board and zoning board's rights are as a board. So that's why it's
written in the way it's written. So just so you understand, if you let's say this doesn't exist, the planning board still can have the right to do those things, right? >> Councilman mayor, please. This is still a redevelopment site. If they were to
diminish or decrease the required spots that was given to them by the council and at this site, that would have to come for reapproval by the council. Correct. So, if they went to from a 1.14 to 1.11, they would have they would not have to come back. >> Not for that. They would have to come
back for any use changes >> that exceed the numbers that are in here. So, so if they if in that thing if in the report it says 490 and they come in with 600 units or 500 units, the board cannot vote on it, it has to come back to the council. So,
>> it would seem, if I may forgive me, councilman, it would seem that this is a matter of of extreme importance. I'm informed that next Tuesday the planning board will be meeting. Am I correct, ma'am? >> To May 6th and then June 3rd is the fin. >> May 6th and then June 30th. What I'd
like to do with the council's permission is to ask that we put this item on hold >> and exchange it for a meeting a week from tonight where we will revisit the item for for a vote. Is that to everyone's pleasure?
>> Um, what are we going to ask the planning board if they already >> that will be taken care of with the administration with our city clerk? >> What? >> I'm not I'm sorry. What are we asking the plan? I'm I'm going to get a report on the last redevelopment plans, right?
And and what the outcome was for parking variances. That was my understanding. So the last, you know, bunch of redevelopments, what what I'm looking for, trying to figure out if it will work, and I'm not making more things even more bollocked up than they are already, is by calling for a week from
tonight for the council to meet again to discuss uh this 2523-26. and that before that time the planning board meet and discuss the issue and have whatever clarity needs to be had that might address Councilman Monk and
other questions. >> Well, it can't go before the planning board till we vote on it. >> Then what we'll do in in that order in the correct order? Does that satisfy you council? >> Yeah. Again, if I think it's a very large project and probably a few weeks
is not, you know, obviously everyone has their timeline, but this is big. This is very big and I'd like to just get a better handle of what's coming down here. >> I'm trying to uh respect everyone's uh beliefs here and concerns here. And forgive me if I'm not doing quite the job that you would like, but I'd like to
ask at this time that the council vote down. Will we didn't have a we have a vote? >> No. carry it to the to carry it to the next to the next meeting >> to carry it to carry the second >> table to the next >> take it to the next meeting of the
council right motion >> there's a motion to second >> you have to you have to take a motion to remove take it back your motion >> do I need to take back the motion yes I do need to take back who voted I voted positively on the motion to vote for
was already saying what the motion is for. >> Who was it? I don't remember. >> So, it was um >> Yeah, but I still have a question. I still don't understand. We're just taking it back to the planning board so they can go about the
>> parking. >> We're carrying to the next council meeting. >> Okay. Okay. I guess >> I would like >> whoever whoever moved it. You like to carry whoever it was. Okay. >> I move >> to carry. I move to carry. May I have a
second? >> Second to carry. >> Roll call, please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. Councilman Garcia, >> yes.
>> Councilman Colomz, >> yes. >> And Council President Sher, >> yes. Is without prejudice. We're up to number three. Please propose an ordinance 2524, an ordinance chapter 128, employer regulations to add articles and worker payment protection
and an coercion introduced at the April 14 council meeting. Is there a motion please to open public hearing? >> Motion and seconded. So we have Councilman Monk. >> Yes. Move to
>> Council President. >> I believe that the administration wanted to uh amend the agenda to remove this ordinance because there is a new version of it scheduled for first reading. >> All right. I'm sure the administration
sent in the necessary paperwork and unsurprisingly I don't have it. So how do we correct? >> It's in there. So, so what happened president is there it went from second reading. So from first reading to second reading there was a non-deminist change
>> and that's why it's put back on for first reading. So cleaning up a language that the attorney said was not the minimist and we cannot change the language and vote on it. So we want to withdraw it at that language to fix it and then start again. >> So you have it as first reading. So it's on there as first reading.
>> So it's simply a motion to amend the agenda to remove this from the agenda. That's what we're doing. Is everyone in favor? >> I move to I move to remove this item of an agenda. >> Second. >> Roll call to >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Love. >> Councilman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilman Colonz. Yes. >> And Council President Sher. >> Yes. Thank you. Now what? We just removed item number three from
the agenda and we to number four. Yes, sir. Okay. Number 14, proposed an ordinance 25-25-26, an ordinance amending the city code of the city of Pacific, chapter 259, streets and sidewalks, article 2, street excavations, te telephone booths,
subchapter 249-12, definitions and 259-7, rules and regulations governing excavations to establish a 5-year roadway moratorum and enhanced restoration requirements for recently improved city roadways.
Is there a motion please to open public hearing? >> Motion to open public hearing. >> Second. >> Motion and second. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilman Colonz. >> Yes. >> And Council President Sheer. >> Telephone rules. At this time, ladies and gentlemen, the council is deliberating proposed $2525. Is there anyone who would like to address the council?
>> Seeing no ads, move to close the public hearing. >> Motion second >> and second on telephone bills. Roll call. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilman Colz. >> Yes. >> And Council President Shear.
>> Yes. Thank you. >> Yes. So if I may, the reason it says telephone is that was the existing problem. I'd be more comfortable if we had telephone booths right now. >> Rick, I think you were all okay with it.
>> Oh, okay then. I'll be quiet. >> Yes. >> Is anyone not okay with it? >> Okay. Did we Did we see no hands? already. >> Um, we need on the second to >> the ordinance.
>> Second. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Counciloman Colonz. Yes. >> And Council President Shear. >> Yes. Thank you.
>> Item number five, sir. Number five, proposed an ordinance 2012-26, an ordinance appropriating 6.6 million on behalf of the city of Payic, including $1.6 million available in the city's reserve for road, sewer, and park
improvements and $5 million grant expected to be received from the state of New Jersey department affairs to provide for drainage improvements throughout the >> Is there public hearing? Second
>> moved and second. Any comments, ladies and gentlemen, who would like to address the council on 25-26? >> We're good. Councilman Monk, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Garcia, >> yes.
>> Councilwoman Colonz, yes. >> And Council President Shear, >> yes. Thank you. >> On the hands, >> any hands, ladies and gentlemen, the council's deliberating 2526 kind of. Does anyone like to adjust the council at this time? >> Second motion and second to
>> close. >> Thank you. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Counciloman Colz. >> Yes. >> And council president. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Motion on. >> Motion on.
>> Motion on the motion to accept. >> So move. >> I think that was a first and second. >> Okay. Councilman Monk, >> yes. >> Councilman Love, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Garcia,
>> yes. >> Councilwoman Colz, yes. And council president Shar. >> Yes. Thank you. Up to communications for numeral seven item 629. Are there any questions on the six tonight? Seeing none like this time is a motion, please.
Second. Roll call, please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Yes. Yes. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Counciloman Gomez. >> Yes. >> And council president. >> Yes. Thank you. All matters. This is to
be routine in nature. Items 10 through 19 please. Are there any questions please on 10 through 19? >> Move. Second. Please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Yes.
>> Councilwoman Melo. Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilman Coline. Yes. >> And Council President Sher. Who do you work for? Who do you work for? >> Yeah.
>> Motion to on 20 alone. Please. Ro >> motion on 20 alone. >> Move. >> Second. >> Motion and second. Roll call, please. On 20 alone. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Yes.
>> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Counciloman Coline. >> And Council President Shear. >> Yes. Thank you. Roman numeral eight on our agenda. budget introduction current
year 202521 an ordinance to establish the municipal budget appropriation limits and to establish a cap bank and just say 48- col4-45.14 first reading on to consider budget
introduction second reading to be said at introduction >> the meeting of June 4th >> meeting of June 4th is Is there a motion to accept 21? >> Second. >> Second. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Love. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Coline. Yes. >> And Council President Sher. >> Yes. Thank you. Resolution authorizing the current year 2026 municipal budget
to be read by title. Am I reading the whole thing? No. >> Yep. to be read by title. >> That's on 22. >> Yes, sir. I'm reading August 22. Resolution authorizing the current year
2026 municipal budget to be read by title only. Whereas the local budget law NJ4A-4-5 allows the municipal budget to be read by title only at public meeting of the municipal council. Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the city of Payic with no less than a majority of
the full membership concurring that current year 2026 municipal budget of the city of Payic shall be ready by total by title only and be it further reser resolved that three certified copies of the budget once approved shall
be transmitted to the director the division of local government services three days after the approval and be further resolved that the budget shall be advertised in accordance with NJSA 48 col4-6 and the public hearing shall be
held prior to approval in accordance with NJSA title 48 col4-8 signed by council president and the city clerk. Is there a motion to accept this resolution? >> Move it. >> Motion second.
>> And second. Roll call, please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. Councilman Love. >> Yes. >> Councilman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Colon. Yes. >> And Council President Sher. >> Yes. Thank you very much. We're up to resolutions. >> Uh item number 23, the introduction. >> 23. We need a >> motion in a second to introduce to accept 23.
>> Move. Motion >> second >> and second 23 >> budget. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor.
>> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilman Colonz. >> Yes. >> And Council President Shear. >> Yes. Thank you. Resolutions from the numeral nine on our agenda. 24 is a resolution
authorized executive session. Mr. Ma'am, do we need it? >> No. Council President, >> Mr. Fernandez, >> it would depend on the conversation on 30 >> because that's the health benefits. >> Well, let's see if there's any questions. >> Yes, absolutely.
>> I was uh any anyone else had any issues? >> I was going to ask. So, is there objections to taking 30 for reconsideration in a later date without prejudice? Why don't we take 30 off and if we could
be talking about resolutions 25 through 32 less 30 25 through 32 less 30. Are there any questions please? See license motion please to accept 25 to 30 to 32 left 30.
There's a motion. >> Second. >> And a second roll call please. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. >> Councilman Love. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Garcia. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Colunt. >> Yes.
>> And Council President Sheer. >> Yes. Thank you. We are up to ordinances for introduction and first reading. >> Yes. We have not. Do we need to do 30? >> Yeah, you have to pass 30. >> Okay. Uh and we have to do it
separately. Okay. Is there a motion please to accept resolution number 30? >> Council. >> Yes. Like can we get we need full session? >> No. No. I can tell you what it is
like details. that we need to go into. >> So, what this does is um we're moving to lower expenses for employees as well as the city that are going into your content, Mr. F.
>> Yeah. Yeah. A high deductible plan. That was part of his interception like it's almost written on the back of my head. Um so to to do that as part of the negotiations there's a a high deductible plan has a deductible and the idea was
that um in this plan the city would put in the deductible amount that is set uh by the state and the IRS. It differs depending if you're single or family.
And um that would go into an account where whoever has the high deductible plan could use a card with that funding in it to pay their medical bills. Then there is a second component which
are called maximum out of pockets for after you've exceeded your deductible. There's the in network maximum out of pocket and then there's an out of network maximum out of pocket. What this would do would create an HRA which is a
post and there's a way that IRS requires it a postdeductible HRA to then offset the maximum out of pocket in an in network which is $2,000 more. So it's whatever
the deductible is and a maximum up to the $2,000 that would be in this HR H which is a health reimbursement account. So in a normal world, you have your HSA. If you don't reach your deductible, you
can >> um you never have to use the HA. So you never need the HA card. You use your HSA. You pay whatever you got to pay. Perfect. um the selling point to this process and and why we've entered into negotiations
that an HSA can be carried over into the next year. So, let's say your deductible, we'll do easy math, right? Let's say the deductible is $5,000. You only spent $4,000 of that deductible. next year you get that $1,000 carried
over and then the new HSA number, let's say it's 5,000, would then go there. The selling point to individuals who are on this plan is that that is an interestbearing account as well. So, it's a financial advantage to keep as
much in the HSA as possible. Um, if you were to um once you hit 65, you can pull that money out uh and just pay whatever your current rate of taxes
are in New Jersey. New Jersey taxes you if you touch the money that's New Jersey, right? Um, >> don't change that one. >> You're not going to change that one. Uh, and then the HR is just there if you need it. Uh, if you pass the post up. So
that's it in a nutshell. So what would happen is if you pass this, it would allow for um individuals that go into the H the high deductible plan for us to set up that HSA and that HRA uh for
them. When we did the math and and I can't go way beyond that because then that's part of why we did what we did. Um, like Omar said, right now, just if everybody used up everything,
we'd still be saving $2,000. I mean, two million in savings. Um there's other additional things that if you want to get into greater detail I can close session but in the most basic it's a high deductible plan in which we're creating an HSA to
fund the deductible and an HR for the in network maximum out of pocket. Um if it gets to that point C please a question about a specific demographic within the other >> if it's specific about a plan I could
talk about it. like what's the question and then I'll I'll let you know after the retirees that are still in those plans. What's their So that's a negotiable item and I could tell you what the negotiations were that we're in right now >> in close session on
>> in close session. Yeah. Not right now. >> Are there any other questions? >> Yeah. President. Yes. So So it so the HSA So if someone goes out of network >> Yes. And what happens? So there's the the HSA. So you have a deductible,
right? So let's say your deductible is $5,000. Okay. I'm going to hold you for a moment, Mr. Fernandez. I've received a request by a member that we go into close session, which supersedes this discussion. May we have a motion to go into close session only? Roll call,
please. >> Yes. >> Who gave the motion? >> I make the motion. >> Second. >> Councilman Monk. >> Yes. Councilman Love, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes.
>> Councilman Garcia, >> yes. >> Council Montinez, >> yes. >> And Council President Sheer, >> yes. Thank you. Everyone who is not vital to these conversations, I need you respectfully to vacate. >> Ladies and gentlemen, we appreciate your kind patience. Is there a motion to
reconvene? Motion. Motion and second by the council to reconvene our meeting. Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Marine, >> yes.
>> Councilman Garcia, >> and Councilman Love, Council President Sher, >> we are on resolution number 30. I'm sorry. >> Your vote? Yes. >> My vote is a yes. >> Thank you. >> That's to go into public session. >> Correct. That's uh to reconvene.
>> Well, now on we're voting on resolution number 30, a resolution authorizing the creation, implementation, and funding of health savings accounts and health reimbursement accounts in connection with health plans coverage. Is there a motion to accept, please?
>> Motion to accept. >> Second. >> Motion and second. Roll call on number 30 only. >> Councilman Love. Councilman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman Garcia, >> yes.
>> Councilman Coline, >> yes. >> And council president. >> Yes. Thank you. To remember more clos on our agenda ordinances for introduction and first reading number 33, proposed ordinance amending the designation of restricted parking for disabled persons by license, plate, and number. Is there a motion to accept for
sit down for second and final reading at our meeting of May 19 >> 19th? >> May 19th. >> Motion. >> Second. Motion and a second. Roll call, please. >> Councilman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes. >> Counciloman Coline,
>> yes. >> And Council President Sher, >> yes. Thank you. Please. Number 34, proposed ordinance authorizing the execution of an agreement for payment in L of taxes with Spear Village Preservation Owner LLC. Is there a motion to accept for second final
>> reading at our meeting of May 19th? have a question on that one. >> I will take a brief question given the hour council. >> Um, who's the who's the owners of that property currently? The spear village. Yeah.
>> And the pilot >> and the pilots's going to >> is there taxes currently on the property? So what's going to happen is there is a an agreement between the housing authority and the developer. The developer u needs the resolution to then
go to the HMFA the housing >> finance >> finance more mortgage finance agency so that they can get their mortgage based on that they're entitled to the pilot. >> Is there current taxes on the property from that? There there are the current
taxes on the property for the entire property which is uh six buildings including uh plus a building for the housing authority offices is um what is it 157
something like that. This would be uh just for four the four buildings in the back. So it's a separate block and lot from the other buildings in the front. This is the rehab portion of the project where the rehab portion is going to be completely 100% affordable. So that you
know people from the units once it's repaired they can go there. There'll be a different range of incomes but it'll still be affordable like it's all affordable. >> Um and under that negotiations may respectfully remind that this is for first reading.
>> Okay. >> Council may your questions answer? >> Yep. Very good. Do we have a motion and second? >> No, sir. >> Second. >> Roll call, please. On 34. >> Counciloman Melo 34.
>> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes. >> Councilman Coltz. >> Yes. >> And council president. >> Yes. Thank you. Number 35. Please post Orange chapter amending chapter 128. Employer regulations to add article two worker payment protection and
anti-coercion. Is there a motion to set down for a second and final reading in our meeting of May 19th? >> Move it. >> Second. >> Motion and second. Roll call, please. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes.
>> Councilman Colz, >> yes. >> And council president. >> Yes. Thank you. We're up to payment of bills and a minimum of 11 on our agenda. There any questions on the bills as presented by the queer? Seeing no lights at this time, is the motion, please, to accept the minutes.
Hills. >> Second. >> Councilman Love. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Councilwoman Melo. >> Yes. >> Councilman Mayor. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Gol. >> Yes. >> And Council President Shear. >> Yes. Thank you. Administrator's report. Mr. Fernandez. >> Not at this time. >> Mr. Mayor, sir. >> Briefly, today was Cinco de Mayo. We had the council general whose office is in New Brunswick come down here. Mariana
Diaz um representing the city was Abid Borales, commissioner on the board of education and we had a ceremony at General Sarah goes the statue. That's it. >> Very lovely. Thank you. Um are there any uh other points for members?
See none at this time. Motion. I'm sorry. Please. >> There is a motion. Is there a second please to close? >> Second. Motion second to adjurnn. Roll call to adjurnn, please. >> Councilman Love, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Melo, >> yes. >> Councilman Mayor, >> yes.
>> Councilwoman Golo Montinez, yes. And Council President Sher, >> yes. Thank you. This meeting is adjourned. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your kind patience.