As such, I will call to order our regular meeting. This is a regular meeting of the mayor and burough council, the burough of seaside park and the county bos state of New Jersey advertised for Monday, March 30, 2026 to begin at the conclusion of the work
session meeting which has now just ended. This meeting has been noticed pursuant to the provisions of New Jerseys open public meetings act. Adequate notice of the meeting was properly provided by transmitting the notice of the meeting for publication in the Asbury Park Press and the Ocean Star
on January 2nd, 2026. Notice of the hybrid meeting was also properly provided by posting the notice in the Seaside Park Burl website on March 26, 2026. Notice of the meeting of the governing body has been posted in the corridor of the municipal building and
in the office of the municipal clerk. Roll call. >> Council member Condos here. Council member Connor >> here. >> Council member Craft >> here. >> Council member Otunda >> here. >> Council member T >> here. >> Council President Wolf >> here. >> Mayor Peterson >> here. >> Thank you.
>> Let us begin our meeting by standing for a moment of silence to be followed by the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The first item on the agenda is a request for approval of the minutes. Those are the March 19th, 2026 work session, the March 19th, 2026
regular meeting. Any comments or if not a motion? >> Make the motion to approve. >> Motion by council member Condos. I'll >> second it. >> Second by council president Wilke. Roll call. >> Council member Condos. Yes. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes.
>> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Otenda. >> Yes. >> Council member Tote. >> Yes. >> The next item on the agenda is request for approval of the special meeting minutes. The meeting is that of March
17th, 2026. Any comments from council. If not, a motion. >> I'll make the motion. Mayor. >> Motion by council member Connor. A second. >> Second by council member Condos. Roll call. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos.
>> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> I abstain. I was not present for that meeting. >> Council member Rotunda. >> Yes. >> Council member Tob. >> Yes. >> Council President Wilk. >> Yes. >> Musher approved. >> Next on the agenda are ordinances. The
first is final reading and adoption. Ordinance 22618, an ordinance to exceed the municipal budget appropriation limits to establish a cap bank as per NJSA4A 4-4514. Any questions, comments from council?
This being practiced by this municipality as well as most municipalities for many years in order just as it indicates to cap availability potentially of funds up to the cap itself as per the statute.
Anything else from council? If not, we'll go into the audience if there Yes. If there are any comments, final reading adoption ordinance 22618. If anyone has any, they could give their name and address into the record.
Hearing none in the audience, this as indicated was a uh exercise in airing on the side of caution just in the event that there were more people who wish to attend tonight's meeting than the seating which were met. Uh that is not the case. As I look out, there are a
number of available seats, but nevertheless, as this has been advertised as a hybrid meeting, we also have >> 154 >> 154 individuals that are participating or watching rather via Zoom platform. If
anyone has a comment as final reading adoption ordinance 22618, if you could give your name and address for the record uh and make a comment. Seeing seeing no hands, uh I would uh
entertain a motion to close the public comment period for the final reading adoption ordinance 22618. Uh and also for passage of the same. Do we have such a motion? >> I'll make the motion, ma'am. >> Motion by council member Craft.
>> I'll second it. >> Second by council member Connors. Roll call. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. Council member Condos, >> yes. >> Council member Otanda, >> yes. >> Council member Till, >> yes. >> Council President Wil, >> yes. >> Motion approved.
>> Next on the agenda is final reading adoption ordinance 22619 accepting annexation of the 168 acres known as South Seaside Park in the township of Berkeley. uh as per the
various pastformational sessions and discussions of council over the last uh several year time period when this issue had arisen. But uh more recently uh with the council and the municipality having hired
its planner to conduct a planning review report and also uh also having entailed a government strategy group study submitting a report as well. on with the
council's uh on time on independent research ongoing and uh the lengthy period of time. Uh the factual and procedural history involving the issue is uh lengthy
probably uh that factual history might even date back to the 70s and a determination decision rendered by Judge Addison. Uh that being said, that decision was then appealed to the appellet division of the superior court
which affirmed the decision and uh ultimately uh there was a determination whereby the governing body of uh Seaside Park voted uh four to three to deny the request for annexation. Uh that whole
factual background and history uh arose under a prior statute. that statute uh has been amended uh right after that period of time. It occurred in 1982 and it's been amended
several times thereafter. As such, the more recent history uh has arisen with a similar petition uh filed originally in the most recent time period under the
new newly amended statute by the plaintiffs residents of South Seaside Park who petitioned Berkeley Township to allow dean deanexation so that the South Seaside Park residents could become part of Seaside Park. uh that process again
uh very lengthy in terms of summarizing even the legal history and the factual history. Uh more recently after a unanimous appellet division decision, the matter was deliberated upon by the
New Jersey Supreme Court and Justice Patterson authored the July 10th, 2025 decision which affirmed the petition affirmed rather the health division decision and as a result the
petition arose from the South Seaside park residents who petitioned the burough of Seaside Park uh to become a next and more recently of course as we're well aware the ongoing due diligence conducted by the
council in conjunction with consultation that's various professionals uh who are here this evening uh took place. So I turn we have special counsel here. Jean, anything further from your
perspective at this juncture? >> No, mayor. Thank you. That was a good summary of the process here procedurally as many of the people in the audience have heard me review the process many times at this point and I don't want to be repetitive but uh clearly the uh
action tonight on second reading is what's required by the statute in terms of the governing body's decision of whether or not to accept annexation of the south seaside park portion um And
just to review um also on your agenda there are n number of items that would uh only go forward if the vote of governing body is the a in the affirmative on the basic question of annexation. If that uh the governing
body rejects rejects annexation, then those items would not be voted on. And but if it does accept it, then you see the zoning ordinances. We discussed that previously under the statute. As soon as
the ordinance is effective under the law, then South Seaside Park sort of instantly legal cup of soup way becomes part of Seaside Park. Um, and at that point, the zoning ordinances, which simply mirror
Berkeley Township's ordinances would be in effect. So, there would be a continuing basis. you've received and read um and had a presentation by the planner uh Kendra Ley um as to the process beyond that which would require
uh extensive study and expansion of the master plan and development of ordinances for that area that are reflective of Seaside Parks planning objectives. But this way at least there will be uh zoning ordinances in place
which echo those currently in place. um fought by Berkeley Township for that area. And at the end of the resolutions, there are three items which would only go forward it in the event of a positive vote on annexation. One is the uh
appointing according to statute of a threeperson committee to uh enter into negotiations with Berkeley Township. Um obviously there are a lot of issues and as we've said many times I'm sure there are issues that we have not contemplated
despite the efforts of this governing body um through the report to professionals to look at all uh the issues um that would commence almost immediately on Monday following the effective date of the ordinance um and
in that idea of having to take over things immediately there's an advertisement for bids for solid waste collection We've also had the opportunity to reach out and we do have a uh proviso uh or provisional emergency
uh contract that could be put in place pending the receipt of those bids and solid weight bids have to be uh on the street for 60 days. And then there's a third resolution establishing a council committee to review uh these issues as
well with the uh annexation committee that's established. Um and you know once if it goes through and there's an affirmative vote, there would be opportunities to discuss uh these issues on an ongoing basis with Berkeley
Township with members of the public. the effective date um or the effective time period for the two committees, the Seaside Park Committee and the Berkeley Township Committee to come to an agreement is 60 days. If that does not happen within that 60-day period, then
um Seaside Park would have to apply the superior court. The assignment judge would then choose three people of his selection who would then review all of the information and make that determination. though I remain hopeful
that um you know since it's always better to have local control than to put your future in the hands of the courts that the two municipalities will be able to work something out but the law does have a provision if we are not able to do so. >> Thank you Jane.
anything uh from council at this juncture? >> Mayor, if I may, I um similar to the last time, I guess repeating myself in the same manner that we've repeated other things before, just you know, want to go on record that this was something
that was brought to this council. And I can tell you speaking for myself that I've had many sleepless nights. I've had many conversations with neighbors. I've read every single thing, positive and negative, that's been on social media and in the various news channels. Um, I
think the biggest of which was people asking for a postponement or, you know, motion to delay or table this and probably if you had asked me last week, I might have been inclined to do that. I'm no longer feeling that way. Um, mostly because I don't think there's
going to be any new information available in another weeks or two. One of the questions that kept getting asked is, "Well, you're making decisions based on a report that was flawed. There was a major mistake." And while Ken's here, and they acknowledged it at the last
meeting, that there was a significant and almost egregious error that I think falsely set expectations for the public. The mathematics were corrected. Um, I think had we not seen that the first time, anybody who heard they might potentially, you know, save 8% would be
ecstatic. but it sounded then like a negative. Um I was asked, can you go back and validate all of the other numbers that are in there? And so I personally went through and looked at things. I'm like, there's really nothing that can be validated in the true sense of the word because quite frankly,
they're all assumptions. And when you make any business decision, you're going to have to make assumptions based on what we know today. And if the you know this I'm calling it a merger um because I would do it in a merger and acquisition scenario you do sensitivity
analysis how far off can we be and I had requested that we get a spreadsheet so we could do some of that we haven't met as a council to do that collectively um but myself individually we can be off by
quite a bit before it turns into a negative scenario and so I I think what myself personally from tonight's position of not tableabling it, which I think there was a lot of people asking us to do, is that we're just going to have to build out a very strong
implementation strategy and rely on our department heads who are the experts, our planning board who are experts. Um, and I I think that's the best that we can do at this juncture. >> Thank you, Jim. Any other council
comments? I think in following up on some of the comments just made by council member Condas, it's it bears repeating that the prior history involving a similar if not
identical petition and the history arose under a prior statute. The more recently adopted statute in certain ways has many specific provisions that give some
time frames, give some direction. Uh however, many spokesmen and lawyers indeed and it's been spread upon the record in this forum as the process has been ongoing for many months. Uh many such commentators point to omissions in
the statute as presently worded and those omissions and the area of for interpretation uh were addressed in part by the New Jersey Supreme Court which engaged then in an exercise of legislative or
interpretation rather of the legislative intent uh which is a process part that uh we have considered and are engaging in where indicated the statute is clear
but uh one of the areas that uh I agree with council member Condos questions arose in theformational sessions uh asked us to ask a court for an advisory opinion to ask a court okay
how will it all work what will be uh an aortion measurement of indebtedness and what percentage of assets might be attributed to that. Is there any procedure process to calculate those numbers and if so uh if there's any
monies that are to be transferred what would be the time frame similar to a bonding ordinance for example would it be immediate? Uh there are a number of areas where uh questions were very legitimate and they have been fully
digested and considered by this governing body in conjunction with the legal advice and under the direction of the New Jersey Supreme Court and the statutes that the court has cited. Uh unfortunately there is nowhere uh that
the court uh indicates that leads to a conclusion that the New Jersey courts would render an advisory opinion or that the New Jersey courts would give what is called prospective relief. Relief as to
something that has not yet happened. uh as such we've digested and reviewed that fact and that in fact goes to many of the questions that we received as well that we can't simply ask that of a court
uh without making the decision and acting uh what I know has been the course of conduct and that's negotiating any and all issues with all entities and that includes certainly Berkeley Township with reasonable ness and good
faith and whereby we will be acting in the best interest of Seaside Park. Anyone else on council anything at this juncture? If not, as this is advertised for a public hearing, this is different
for those who may not uh often attend meetings. that is different under the open public meetings act than aformational section whereby we allowed and in fact encouraged questions, comments, items uh online and otherwise
and in person. Uh this is an opportunity under the act to give any comments. Uh it is therefore something and again we've advertised it uh contrary to what many municipalities found to be a reasonable course of
conduct in the co era. We have in fact uh advertised this as a hybrid meeting whereby we would entertain comments. If anyone has a comment, if they could therefore under the open public meetings act give their name and address into the record. So I will now open the floor up
for any comments. >> Excuse me, mayor. Before we do that, I just because many people here don't normally attend our council meetings. So for the benefit of those who don't normally come, I just want to let everyone know we do have a a five minute or less time limit on public comment.
And thank you, Karen. That being said, if do we have any comments on second reading of the ordinance? >> Yes, if you >> Thank you. Kathy Lo Faroh, 189th Avenue. I have
We've all read a whole bunch of stuff online. I just want a couple questions answered possibly. Um, I read somewhere that the Berkeley mayor said Seaside Park would have to pay Berkeley for assets such as beaches,
roads, sewer lines. Is that true? >> Can I can turn it over to councel? So that's exactly what the the determination on what needs to be paid and how these things are going to work
is exactly what that 60-day period where the two teams will go. The language of the statute is requires uh cases park to pay its proper portion of any indebtedness. So that generally and
there are different ways to figure it out. in the reports that were put up. There were, I think, three different scenarios that were put there. I'm sure that Berkeley Township has its own. Um, one, you know, sort of sensible way to think of it is any portion of that indebted indebtedness that is ascribable
to, uh, South Seaside Park, if there were work done, if there was bonding done there, there it also are ways to look at it in terms of a percentage of the land area population, other configurations. So that's going to be part of the negotiation. Um as far as
access and when you talk about the sewer um and the sewer capacity, there are a number of ways that could be done. Um you know townships and I you know they're very capable of speaking for themselves. Um but certainly could have a position that you know we have to pay for that access. Is that done through
shared service which as as it you know often is? Um is there some idea of taking it over? We won't know what the scale of that is. And that goes to the mayor's comments about not being able to get a predetermination on those issues
because of the need for the governing body to make the decision um in its own in terms of beach access. And again, I don't want to get involved in some sort of pre-litigation stance. Um the Supreme Court has made some determinations
already regarding uh some if not all the beaches. So those are things that will be discussed and and there's there are a lot of things that will be considered as I said and I'm not a polyiana it may end up that it does go to the courts um but
there are a lot of reasons why it may be more beneficial for the municipalities to work it out between themselves when you we have the opportunity the first thing that will happen at that first meeting is Brookley Township will lay out its analysis and then we'll have a
starting point. So, I'm not I I can't answer you yes or no as far as what the ending determination is, but I can tell you that the process is either one through a negotiation or through a determination made by the people appointed by the court.
>> Thank you. Just uh as a response to everybody here, it it just seems to me that there's a lot of moving parts to this thing. We have no numbers really. Uh, as as you mentioned earlier, there's
issues that have not yet been contemplated. I just throw this out there. Would any of you go into a car dealership and sign to buy a car without knowing how much it's going to cost? No. Okay. Last point.
The same way that you mailed out the recycling and garbage schedules, this whole annexation thing should have been mailed out to every single taxpayer. Not everybody's on Facebook. Not everybody's on YouTube. This is the
first winter I'm here in Seaside Park since 1976. If I wasn't here, I wouldn't know about this. This should have been noticed just the way we notice garbage. This is a huge undertaking.
This is a communal a seasonal community. People are not here to know about this. I really think it needs to be taken. Just my opinion. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Any other comments? Yes, sir.
How many? >> Bill McGrath, 339 Bay View Avenue, Berkeley. Uh, I just I just want to question the bounds. I know you describe the
Southeast Side Park as 168 acres and you describe it as physically known as Southeast Side Park, but in nowhere does it give a fixed bounce. And the reason I question that is because when you copied
our zoning ordinance, uh, which you're going, I assume you're going to pass later, uh, you defined, uh, a zone here. That's the, uh, beachfront conservation zone.
And, and I'll read the definition of what where that zone is. It says the beachfront conservation zone shall include the following areas south of Shore Road and 24th Avenue and
concluding at Sedge Island, west to Barnett Bay and west to the Atlantic Ocean. This includes Island Beach State Park and New Jersey Governor's Summer Mansion, but does not include Sedge
Island or Sedge Island's Wildlife Management Area. So now I'm confused, as I'm sure you probably are. Maybe this was I'm I'm sure this is an oversight, but I think this should be cleaned up on the final reading because uh from what I
understand from our attorney that this area was not included in the original petition. Uh so that's why I would suggest in the ordinance when you describe the bounds of South
Seaside Park that you do it either in a normal what's called a meets and bounds description or list the blocks and streets. So we have a uh know exactly what the boundary of Southeast Side Park
is. And I'm sure that it not did not include our Berkeley Township's sovereignty which is different than Beach ownership sovereignty of Island Beach State Park. That's that's my only question. >> Thank you sir.
>> I don't and I you know in terms of the definition of 168 acres that in fact was the definition that was used by the court to take them through the position petition. I had had a similar thought that there should be meats and bounds. I
have not been able to find that um in the record and certainly as to the effect of any ordinance if there is a portion of the ordinancing indeed copied from Berkeley Townships including the descriptions of the area. If there is an area that is not included by our zoning
ordinance that is not part of any annex portion then obviously we our you know sees parks zoning ordinances have no impact in Berkeley Township if that if the section that remains Berkeley Township anymore than Berkeley Townships
and the reason for those ordinances being put in place is because if the annexation is uh granted by the governing body then on it on its effective date upon publication, then Berkeley Township's ordinances would
have no effect in that section, which would then be part of Seaside Park. So, I agree that, you know, if if it is if there's a part described in the ordinance, which is not part of the South Seaside Park and remains part of Brookley Township, that Seaside Parks
ordinances have no effect there. And we'll we'll make sure to clean that up going forward. >> Any other public comment? Yes, Jimmy. >> Good evening. Um, Jim Burns, 219 Darford Drive, Bayville. I've been the uh Ward
One Councilman here for uh probably the last 10 years or so. Been a lifelong uh resident, believe it or not, when there was a wooden bridge coming over. But uh and I've had many friends on the council here through the years, and we've had a good time. So, uh, you know, I wish you
a lot of luck on what you're doing here, but being involved with this for the last few weeks, you know, intensely, it seems like we're putting a puzzle together without a lot of the pieces. And some of the pieces are big pieces. You know, there it's that piece you look
for when you put the puzzle together, and we're missing them. So, you know, I wish you luck, and um, you know, I hope to be on a committee that helps you uh, put the pieces in there and fund them also. But uh and then uh as far as the
uh as being a disabled vet uh Berkeley Township, we'll always support the uh Sergeant Lions all their events like we've done in the past and uh feel free to uh use our park for those events. Thank you. God bless. >> Thank you, Jim.
>> Thank you. And certainly, Councilman Burns has always been and I hope always will be along with the other members of the Berkeley Township Governing body. great friends of Seaside Park along with their elected representatives at all levels of government who will who have
been and will remain friends. And I it bears repeating that that park of course uh in memory of a Seaside Park resident who was here in this room. We used to give out awards for their graduations
and we all cherish his memory and his mom and I share those thoughts with you. >> Maybe I'll move over here so I can be with you guys. >> Any other comments? >> Yes. Yes, sir.
Good evening. I'm Bobby Ring. Excuse me. 119 Surf Drive, South Seaside Park. The allegation that those seeking annexation are engaged in tax shopping as raised by Jay Delaney at the last meeting is not supported by the record.
Over the course of 38 hearings before the Burke retention plan board spanning five years, no direct testimony was presented by the petitioners sub to substantiate such a claim. The issue only arose during cross-examination and in those instances the petitioner's
financial expert gave no testimony supporting the claim of tax shopping. Furthermore, the trial court, the appellet court, and the Supreme Court of New Jersey all ruled unanimously that the petitioner satisfied statutory requirements for deanexation of Brookley
Township, despite the township's strong opposition. Berkeley Township also cited tax shopping as a reason to decline the annexation in its appeals for appeals filings to the courts, but that conclusion was re was rejected by the courts.
Mr. Dr. Delaney also questioned burough planner Kendel's reliance on census data contained in a report prepared by professional planner Scott Bman. However, Miss clearly stated that she did not rely on Mr. Bowman's conclusions but solely on the underlying census data including in the report as it was
accurate. It's also important to note that while Mr. Delaney is a resident of Seaside Park. He also serves as the Berkeley Township administrator and therefore his elitess is divided between Berkeley Township and Seaside Park and consequently his opinion should not be relied upon.
During the same planning board hearings, the Berkeley Township Police Chief and several other officers testified that annexation will result in a loss of resources and funding for their department, but indicated that that funding would instead go to the Seaside Park Police Department. In her decision, Superior Court Judge
Marlene Lynch Ford, who is also a resident of Seaside Park, concluded that annexation was logical and consistent with the state of New Jerseys policy encouraging the consolidation of smaller municipalities. An online petition has recently circulated purportedly to demonstrate
opposition to annexation. However, its validity is questionable. The originator explicitly allowed and even encouraged individuals who are neither Sees Park voters nor taxpayers to sign it. For example, when asked on social media by a resident of Tom's River, "Hey, I'm a
resident of Tom's River. Can I sign it?" The response was, "Absolutely." Unquote. As such, this position should not be considered a reliable representation of constituent opinion. This matter has now been under consideration for 10 years and 8 months. The expert reports issued in February
demonstrate that annexation of South Seaside Park is in the best interest of the community. Seaside Park can annex South Seasside Park, provides services effectively and reduce taxes for current Seaside Park property owners. South Seasside Park encompasses approximately 1 half square mile
consists largely of seasonal residences with full-time occupancy concentrated in 3 to four months during the busy busy summer season. From a service delivery perspective, this represents a manageable transition. Moreover, annexation is most efficiently implemented during the off season than
during the height of summer. It is widely understood that tax revenue generated from South Seaside Park exceeds the cost of services provided by Berkeley Township. This financial reality helps explain why the township reportedly spent over $1 million contesting the deanexation along the
planning board proceedings over several years. They spent over $700,000 in engineering fees alone. In the absence of any contrary expert opinions, and there are none that I'm aware of, annexation should be approved. Delaying action will only increase the
eventual cost of implementation. And finally, there's a particular uh benefit worth noting that under annexation, residents and visitors will enjoy unified access to both Seaside Park beaches and the White Sands Beach with a single beach. An outcome that reflects the broader efficiencies uh that this
effort seeks to achieve. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments? >> Seeing none, amen. There's one more. They selected. >> Okay, we do have one more. Two more.
>> Um, I'm Don Whiteman, 2000 Banget Avenue, South Seaside Park. I look at your seal up there where it says 1898. Um, my grandmother came to Seaside in 1918.
So, I'm up here as telling you I've been here a long time. Uh, my families are four generations of people who are Seaside Park as well as South Seaside Park. I want to thank the council for the opportunity to address you and the
community. I appreciate all the work you've done as you make this very important decision. I'd like to mention something that has gotten lost in all of this discussion.
We have fought over 14 years. My father did this 50 years ago. Why did they do it? And why did we do it? because like him, we want to leave
something far better for our children and generations to come in both towns. I want to leave them a community that is like-minded and understands what it is like to live in a beach community
because we are a beach community. Also, I want them to live in a community that represents their concerns and acts in the best interest of that community. My mother uh was born in Seaside Park.
My father was born in Seaside Heights. They met, they fell in love in Seaside Park and they raised their family in Seaside Park. I have aunts and uncles uh that were Seaside Park residents also and their uh offspring still live in
Seaside Park. I lived in Seaside Park for about four years when I was young. Lived right on 9inth Avenue. Um they moved out of Seaside Park in about 19 54 and moved down to South Seaside
Park. Uh and at that point my father started realizing what was Berkeley doing for us down here. We want to become part of Seaside Park. So that is when he finally in 1972 said we've had enough. we're not sending our kids over
to the mainland 16 miles away. We're not going to do everything on the mainland. We want to be part of a community like Seaside Park. So, he took 10 years of his life uh to do that. Uh he did it for me, my
sisters, he did it for the people at South Seaside Park as well as Seaside Park. The gravity of this boat that you know you're going to take is not lost on me. My father when he did this
was pressured all those years ago to stop the deanexation movement. People pressured him to stop it. It got so bad that the pressure in all forms his standing in the community with people he
even his livelihood was threatened. Now do you believe that? how people back then threatened his livelihood. Now, why did he continue? He continued because he knew what the right thing was to do.
Berkeley's Township, as Bobby said, spent over a million dollars to fight this. Why do you think they continue to fight this effort? Because we are the valuable and we are that valuable. That's why. Well, what did my father do
when he was faced with intimidation and pressure? He continued fighting and trying to get into seaside party. He continued on because that was the right thing to do. He wouldn't allow himself to be influenced by those that
only had their own best interests at hand. He did what was right, and so are we. Let's leave this community even better than it is now. Let's be on the right side of history for Seaside Park and its neighbor Cha Seaside Park and become one
community. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Comments. Yes, sir. >> Hey, good evening. Tom Bars, uh 27 Brighton Avenue. Um the the budget that
was handed out earlier today um is obviously going to change based on the decision that's made tonight. Have we prepared or have available any type of pro-forma that would filter in um the
assumptions that were uh identified in the analysis as to what the implication to the budget would be? I'll turn it over to council, but uh obviously this is an introduction of Seaside Park's budget this evening, and
if an affirmative vote was rendered on the ordinance, uh that would entail an application from Seaside Park to the state uh to consider authorizing the introduction of an amended budget. But
>> if I may, mayor, also as I think you've heard, um, you know, immediately there's an engagement in negotiation. So, some of those that information will be acquired hopefully within that 60-day period. That would certainly be helpful in a variety of ways um probably for
both municipalities, but if not, um, then at least there'll be more clarity on the numbers. So that application to the to the state if there does need to be an amended budget um would be based on that information. >> Okay. And then my other comment would be
the analysis uh and there's been a lot of discussion about its credibility based on the errors I've identified and things along those lines. But it it is fairly it's a very short-term view relative to transition impacts um and what happens in the near term.
Personally my concern is the long-term view. When you look at all the things that have to be rationalized and solidified relative to zoning, relative to the master plan, relative to infrastructure, relative to curbs,
sidewalks, streets, parking, all of that it is a big unknown. And I am hopeful that you all have given some thought to what the long-term implications are from
a taxpayers's burden that may be anticipated for those things that you all know need to be addressed and need to be reconciled, aligned, whatever term you want to use. All right. So, I'm I'm making that statement. And then my last
comment is I want to thank uh council person condos for her offering her perspective and point of view on this. As a resident of Seaside Park, I would have expected and the mayor had asked the council if anyone had any comments
and other than council person condos, not one of you offered your perspective and point of view on what this entails and the magnitude of this. The magnitude of this to everybody in this room, regardless of whether you're South
Seaside Park or Seaside Park, right, is no minuscule issue. And I would have expected our governing body, each one of you individually, to offer a point of view and perspective as you sit up there as council person
did. Thank you very much. >> Any other comments? Yes, sir. Tom >> Tom Joseph, 704 South Bay View Avenue, Seaside Park. I I think that people have touched on a lot of points here tonight and a lot of
very good issues have been raised. The whole question of let's move slow and there are all these unknowns. Um, honestly, I've tried to figure out short of commissioning another study, two more studies. I was very
disappointed in the one we did. But when you read it and you ask yourself, does this make any sense, once you get the numbers fairly right, you come away with there don't appear to be any major gotchas. It is shortterm,
but over the long term, what we're talking about is creating an opportunity for the people in South Seaside Park to join us, our neighbors, which aren't very far south of us, have an opportunity to become part of a town
where they can have local government, truly local government. And I think that's worthwhile and something we should support. at the same time how the problems that will have to be resolved are not going to go away.
They're not going to get better because we wait. They're not going to get solved because we wait. They're going to get solved because people have to work on them and solve them. I mean, I learned something in my career that was very clear. If something needs to happen,
somebody needs to be working on it to make it happen. nothing happens by chance or just well we'll let it simmer and eventually it'll solve itself. So I'm basically here to say yes there are some unknowns
we need to factor that in but if we wait nothing changes and I think it's the right thing to do for Seaside Park. It's the right thing to do for South Seaside Park and I just want to say go forward and do it and then solve the problems
and try to keep the budget from going up. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Any other comments? Seeing none in the audience. Oh, >> Mike Julian. Mike. >> Oh, Mike. I'm sorry. Yes, sir. No, I'm
not >> hurting my face. >> I've heard that. I've heard that. >> Okay. Vote. No. >> So, we'll do something I'm really not comfortable with. >> I'm sorry. We need your name and address.
>> Mike Juliano, 24 Street microphone near >> the mic. Mike. Okay. The mic is near the mic. >> Hopefully that this mic will drop. Definitely drop. So I'm going to do
something I'm really not comfortable with. Give you give the people I know most of the people on the council know everybody a little bit of benefit of my background. So I've been an engineering consultant recently retired for over 50 years consulting environmental
consulting partner firm own my own firm stockholder. So I understand the whole process, written master plans, so on and so forth. Part of our engineering background and education and career is to weigh the
parameters. Always look at the given information you're going to go off on the wrong anybody can solve the problem get the wrong answer. So initially I said okay this makes sense absolutely makes sense because geographical
cultural from an engineering planning point of view it's perfect then I went and I did what I always told my younger managers to do make your come weigh everything come to almost a decision and don't make
it back up look at all the parameters again dig deeper so that's what I did I looked at the issues I got kind of got in the weeds and I started to pull back from that from that positive attitude I had in the beginning. But look, this is going to be so hard from the point of
view of on on Eric with uh public work. This is going to be much harder on the police team. Not that anything ever bad goes on. That's just how hard this was going to be tough on the administration, on carrot, on Jedha. And we have a dream team as far as I'm concerned. I've been around I've been here now 20 something
years. This is the dream team from the attorney's point of view. So I looked at all of them like is it really worth it in the short term? And I'm like, well, this is not a short-term thing. This is long-term thing. You know, in respect to the gentleman who spoke before me, I
don't see any issues hiding. We know how to run a beach. We know how to run a bayfront. >> We know how to run lifeguards. We know how to run a recreation. We already know how to do everything that's occurring in South Seaside Park. And I'm so heart sick of hearing South Seaside Park. I
just want to hear two words. So I went back and and I re-evaluated myself and I'm also for people who don't know I've been on the board of adjustment the planning board for 20 years. In 2013 we define a board. So we have one board been chairman that board what 10 years
eight years whatever >> 10 >> 10 thanks and we've done now one of the big pieces that's going to happen here is the master plan. Is everybody in South Seas Side Park going to be happy at how that master plan in Northeast
come out? I don't know. Maybe not. But we have an opportunity to control the land use on our entire southern border from the ocean to the bay as they say. There's a townhouse zone there. We don't even allow that in Ces Park.
There's there's a four family zone. We don't even allow that. So, we have an opportunity now. So, I've come full circle and came around like what are the negatives here? I'm not I'm not seeing any at this point. We can control the type of development on our
southern border and eliminate that border. So, it's just one large community and the people at Southeast Side Park will have an opportunity during the plan the master plan process to to weigh in on that. Also, we get to
consolidate 168 acres of barrier property with effectively no cost. There's a tax break in there which is to me it's just a bonus. We get the business district that on the planning board level in the council. We always wanted the business district. We can't
get anybody to to to start a business in town. We messed around with the zoning. We try to do this. We try to do that. people say they're going to do it and there's just no reason for it. So, I think that at this point I don't see any negatives and I've gone through the
whole process for and against and I just would support the council and I hope that we move forward and put this behind us to become one community. >> Thank you. >> Any other public comments in the room?
Yes, we have Pat. >> Hi, I am def Pat Ersa 13710th Avenue. I'm definitely not an expert on any of the things that have been discussed. I'm just a citizen. But I do really think that this is a
good thing for our community in the long run. And therefore, I'm very positive about um this vote and I'm sure you're going to vote positively. I'm hoping. Um I do want to address what the gentleman
back there said whose name I lost, but um he said he wished that he had heard from every council person. And I was on a public board that did some very difficult things. not a town council, so
I don't know any of the ramifications, but it was closing schools and opening schools and spending money and all of those other things. And it was extremely important for the community to hear the opinions of the
council people. And I'm hoping as the process moves forward and you vote as quickly as possible, as soon as you can, but that as we have to make decisions, we do hear more publicly. I know when
it's legal, you have to be enclosed, but you have public hearings and you have public meetings and we don't really always hear from the council people. I respect you all and you all work hard, but I think the community would like to
hear your opinions. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Yes. >> Do you want me to do it first? >> Yes, certainly. Please. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. And I won't uh take a long time and certainly the governing
body may this evening either as part of this process as part of their vote they may choose to to share their thoughts but I think that it's important for the public to understand so that they understand why the governing body has taken this position to this point in
this particular case of annexation or deanexation the courts have made it extremely clear that the thing that the governing body cannot do is pre-judge, preddecide. I really want to thank the
governing body for their silence to this point. It's something I've discussed with them many times in light of the case on this particular deanexation issue that the courts have been very clear that what the governing body in order to not be arbitrary and
capriccious, that's a phrase you may have heard, that's the thing the governing body may never do. And that's one of the problems what um in the test for annexation deanexation and in that case in order to be
determined to have not acted arbitrarily it's important that the governing body not have made a decision before getting the information. So in this case, they have not been disclosive really on legal advice and I don't want them to have to
take the hit for that because it was my legal advice in in having reviewed the case law that anything any statements that they made that showed that they had made a decision. they made up their minds one way or another prior to getting the information could invalidate
it or be used to undermine their decision if this matter should proceed uh to court in the future. So I uh I don't want them to to have to bear that. That was my decision. Obviously tonight is the night for that decision and and
um and in a different position, but it's it's been a leadup to this point. >> Thank you. Thank you so much for clarifying that. So moving forward after the vote is taken then as we deal
with issues that you will still have to be then >> correct. No, I I mean certainly never be arbitrary capriccious, but this uh sense of not expressing views during the process was really um to that degree is
specific to this annexation deanexation issue based on uh the language of the court including the Supreme Court. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments here in the room? Seeing none, I'll go on soon. I'm sorry.
>> Yes, Gale. >> Can I just make a comment? >> Thank you, Mayor. >> Gail Coleman, Southwest Central Avenue, Seaside Park. Mr. Wait,
I was for the annexation. He says I say 45 years ago, he says 50. I remember it being at it when I was 18, but maybe I was a little younger. Whatever. Um, I am for this. I was for
it back then, but I'm still for it. Okay, with that being said, they're our neighbors. They contribute to our local economy. what's left of our local economy, the businesses that >> uh we also just purchased this burrow just
purchased a fire truck, am I correct? >> And we're going to have to buy another one. Okay. We're paying on whatever the percentage the interest rate is. What is it the for the bond? Is it three, four? I don't know what it is. I haven't been on the
council in six years, so I don't know what the bond interest rate is. But in my humble opinion, if South Seaside Park joins with us, they share in the burden of the fire trucks, the first aid squad
that we all need here. If you could see what the audience demographic looks like, we're not 25. Um >> uh well yeah I am speaking for myself but uh
I think it's very important that the we recognize that the burrow of Seaside Park over the years over the years Jerry you know Gina you know Seaside Park has always picked up the tab a lot for the
tribal state squad and the fire department and the water rescue. I live on Central Avenue. I hear I know when those trucks go out. I hear the sirens in the middle of the night. And I want to thank everybody that we have volunteers
and eventually >> and this is coming. We're going to have to go to a paid system. It's coming. Okay. When I was on council, we briefly discussed it, but it's coming. Not now, but it's coming. So, the more that we
have help with everything, we're gonna have to buy another fire truck. Is that correct, Councilman Ratundo? Soon. >> It's It's ordered. >> Oh, okay. So, now that's good. >> How much did Berkeley contribute to that? Do you know? >> Zero.
>> Okay. So, >> does anybody else have the answer? The administrator Karen, do you know how much they have contributed? >> Zero >> to the zero. >> Zero to the pumper, zero to the ladder truck. >> Perfect. So there we go. So and then we
still So it's we're covering it. It's our liability for South Seaside Park. Correct. B. Am I wrong, Steve? No. >> Huh? Well, we we have a shared services
agreement whereby Berkeley Township contributes 35,000 a month. >> 35 grand on the shar. Okay. How much was the pumper truck? How much was the pumper truck? >> A million. Just throw a number out. Million2. >> Okay. What's the next truck? How much is
that? >> Million7. >> Million. Okay. Plus the interest. >> We we we can't engage in a Q&A session. >> Okay. All right. I'm sorry. >> No, you made a point. >> I'll make my point here. >> I think so. Anyway, of sharing what's
going on. >> One more thing before I go. >> Um, John Black, the late John Black, he was an engineer. He lived on L Street. Most of you know him. Some of you in the audience know him. He was very
interested in all this stuff. And I just had lunch with his wife the other day and she had was asking me questions about this and she had told me John was an engineer that specialized in water
and water infrastructure. Okay. He didn't live he worked up in Pompton I think Pompton Lakes but wherever. and he looked into the water and sewer infrastructure down there cuz that's he had a concern about that and he told me or she he told his wife that's not going
to be a problem for us as a town as a whole. So just he's not with us anymore. He's in heaven. But I'm just saying that um I respect his opinion. um he's had a lot of good ideas for our
bayfront, but unfortunately he's no longer with us. And I want to thank you all for taking your time and doing your due diligence, what you had to do. And I hope you all vote for uh the annexation of South Seaside Park to Seaside Park.
So it becomes one happy community. And in the meantime, Seaside Park residents, welcome to Seaside Park if it does happen. But remember, we like to keep Seaside Park the way it is. >> Thank you, Governor.
>> I have my hand. >> Alex Condos, 44 7th Avenue. I have a lot of uh concerns about this vote. Uh so I'm just going to kind of make just one concern. I just want to talk about one thing because I don't
want to keep everybody here all night. Um the master plan, it was mentioned about the uh commercial district, the business district and businesses in Seaside Park and South Seaside Park.
As far as I know right now that the ordinance is that um mixed use is not permitted in Seaside Park.
So, what I'm asking after that after the votes in that this be part of the uh planning board's reviewing the master plan because for a short
while mixed use was um it that it was approved for a while. It was prohibited for years and going way way back it was permitted. That's how a lot of
businesses um were able to exist and thrive. Um some of which people in this room have owned or still own. So I just want to say this. I want the
master plan to be changed to mixed use along the Central Avenue corridor in Seaside Park. If it is not changed, then you are not for business in this burrow. Period. End
of the story. >> Yep. >> I don't want to keep hearing that everyone's pro business. If it doesn't get changed, you're not going to enable people to build either something new or take something that is uh presently
stands and convert it into mixed use and have businesses. I believe and I think a lot of people believe that businesses is the heart of a town. Okay? including a lot of the
businesses in South Seas Side. All right. But from 14th Avenue to Porter, it needs to be reinstated if you truly want businesses to exist here and to thrive.
>> The school was taken away. You ripped the heart out of the town. >> Mhm. Years back. Okay. 15 years ago, >> you you ripped you ripped they ripped the heart out of the town. Okay. And I'm
and I had a big problem with that. Let's take this into consideration. What's left of this this beautiful place and have it thrive with mixed use >> for the for the for our future, for our
families, for our children's future. Okay. in South Seaside and in Seaside Park. It's critical. I could go on for another half an hour, okay, with the businesses that don't exist that can't exist anymore. >> So, I'm just saying that that's
important. >> Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Same guy that was here before. Um, let's set the record straight. The negotiated shared service for fire and first aid, right? You had a negotiated shared
service with Berkeley. >> I in certain regards right now the Berkeley Township pays I believe 35,000 a year and >> and to first aid >> and you negotiated that shared service. Am I correct?
>> Not not for 35,000 for fire. All right. About tribar has a arrangement >> 70 >> 702. >> I think you get my point 228. It's a
>> that it was a negotiated shared service that we're not here for the free ride. We've owned up what you requested and that's it. Not for Jeffrey to sit there with a goose egg. We do contribute and we didn't take a free ride. I bring the checks over myself every year. So, let's
set the record straight and keep the goose. >> Thank you. >> I'm not going to debate about who paid for the fire truck. I think the record speaks for itself. >> We did. >> I'm I'm not engaging. So, but yeah, I
did. We do have a separate shared services on the table. I believe it's never been signed by any party, but it is a roughly 70% 22% uh Seaside Park, 70% Seaside
Heights, 8% Berkeley Township. >> That's tribal of a,000. >> That's 800,000 total. >> So that's a separate agreement. We have a shared services agreement with
Berkeley with animal control. that shared service is not going on anymore. We just we just had that. So we don't have a shared service animal control. >> It's been acted upon detrimentally relied upon by both municipalities and
>> I believe even with a voucher sign, but we're not here. It's in the big scheme of things. >> It shows cooperation between >> the two that annexation does go forward and the negotiations enter. I'm sure all um the issues will be brought to the
table >> and then the fire is a third area. >> We just don't want to be >> contribution. >> Any other comments? >> Seeing none in the room, I believe we had some hands raised and the those
participating online if anyone has a comment online if you could give your name and address into the record. Yes, Dave Arbach, 2014. He said, "Pardon me." Um, I want to thank the mayor and council for entertaining on my email.
>> Be quiet. We can't hear him. >> Sorry, Dave. >> Sorry. >> I can hear you. Yes. >> I just wanted to reach out and thank um the mayor and the council for putting up with my emails over the past couple of weeks on this. Um really appreciate some
of the dialogue I've had with U Councilman Tooth Condos and Craft at Jerry Ratundo on this as well. Um I don't want to misquote Gina and what she said earlier to start this. I'm neither um for or against this. I
would like what I think Gina suggested, which was why isn't there some kind of like a sensitivity analysis behind a one-year views? And I know I've heard a lot of push back on this. I just don't understand
why the council won't share a five-year view basease worst case you know kind of analysis a high level sensitivity we just want to
understand you know how you're looking at the data um we certainly don't rely on the consulting firm which by the way also provided a lot of inputs to a 5year your view to this? You know, I know they modeled out beach bag sales for five
years. Um, but you know, I I just would have thought there would have been a broader sensitivity round. Um, otherwise, I I do feel confident that the council and the mayor will take the right decision tonight. Um, and I think Gina said uh very appropriately, this
isn't about a vote yes or no today. If it's yes, it's on you guys to make this happen, right? This is going to be a very very difficult path forward and I I as a a taxpayer want you know I still have your support in this. I will still question
things that are done but I think you guys know that you have a monumental task. Um I appreciate the feedback I've gotten from council members that they take this vote very seriously. So um again thank you all and uh best of luck.
>> Thank you sir. Any other comments from those participating via the Zoom platform? >> Yeah, this is uh Mitch Coppelman, 20410th Avenue. I personally apologize for not being there in person as I very often am. Uh a couple of comments.
Number one, I am absolutely in favor of this moving forward. Uh the first time I heard about it, it made such logical sense. two proud bordering communities wanting to do things together in an intelligent hopefully lower costefficient way. It just made a lot of
freaking sense. Uh however, in a council meeting you all may recall I brought up uh doing the due diligence in this is critical to getting it done right and to understanding the facts as Dave just pointed out. Um and I wasn't thrilled
with what I read, what I heard regarding the quality of the work done. Uh certainly the error that was made reduced the entire community's comfort with some of the data but Gina correctly pointed out Dave just rearticulated I was vice president of strategic planning
mergers and acquisitions for a fortune 1000 company a pretty big company and retired now but uh sensitivity analysis to understand what range of possibilities could occur is always critical in making decisions and junior
alluded to the fact that there is some sensitivity data available. It may not have been reviewed by all the council, but she reviewed it. So, I'm going to echo Dave's point. Sensitivity analysis of what could be what it arranges uh is important to get that information out to
the public to restore faith in the rationale, the base number rationale behind this. So, I I implore you if it's available, get it out in a readable form. Uh last two comments. Dave also mentioned he's right on the money. Uh
implementation is the next big challenge and it's going to be a big one. Uh you've all got your hands uh out to do it, but it's going to be a challenge. I implore you that when you feel you reach something you can't do, don't be afraid to call on the community. Don't be
afraid to call on qualified consultants so it's done right. So we know where we stand. And B and to Mrs. comment regarding the process for the six-man team to get together next week or shortly. Uh she highlighted the fact
that Berkeley will be putting their cards on the table first. I just want whoever the team turns out to be from Seaside Park to remember our cards are already out on the table. Everything we did, everything the consultant did is public information available on the website. So they already know the range
of possibilities we considered. So they've got it up on us. So we just need to be prepared to deal with whatever comes. I wish you all luck and I wish to I'm glad that our friends in Seaside South Seaside Park will become part of Seaside Park. Thank you.
>> Thank you, sir. Any other comments from those participating via Zoom? >> Hang on. I'm a techie. I know what I'm doing. >> Maybe you should walk outside with it. >> Excuse me one moment, Mr. Mo.
>> A phone was going off. Now we can hear you. Yes, sir. >> Okay. Good evening, council mayor. Um, I'm on 5715 and there's a number of challenges that you guys have and some of it can take a little bit of time and some of it you only have about a month to address it. In particular, we have a
tax payment coming up on May 1st. Right now, it's set to go to Berkeley in a few minutes. Berkeley may not be in the picture. So, something has to be done to notify us what to do, assuming we do vote the name of this of this
annexation. Uh also uh somehow we have to be notified that a change in town has taken place. Ideally um perhaps a joint letter by the mayor and the mayor from Berkeley to us uh would be appreciated.
Keep in mind that not everybody down here uses the address for their taxes for for communication. A lot of it goes to other places. So you have to somehow find those mailing addresses. Now Berkeley has a mailing tax bills.
Whether you can incorporate that into your system, I don't know. I took a look at the uh Berkeley and yours um uh tax uh sites and the input input lines look kind of similar. So perhaps you're using
a similar system and one could be adopted by changing a of the of the township code. I don't know. But those are some of the things that you have. We, like I said, we only have a month to figure out who to send the check to regardless of how much of a check it is. You know, when we send it to Berkeley,
they give it to you and send it to you. That's things you're going to have to work out. And like I said, we have a limited time. I want to thank you for your time and and all the efforts you put into this. Have a good day. >> Thank you, sir.
Yeah, it was a substance more of a question than comment about sending tax payments in >> obviously but M. Chipani addressed it previously. I don't know. >> Yeah. And if and if I may, so I I
believe for the May 1st um in we've been in touch um with the Ocean County Tax Board and and also the state I think for the May 1st tax bill that those funds and and just sort of for the convenience of people to know that you would still
pay that bill as you have. That question of the um funds that are collected and how they are distributed is one of those issues that will be discussed uh in that 60-day negotiation session.
>> Thank you. Any other participants for comments online with the Zoom platform? >> Yes, sir. >> Yes, sir. >> My name is Bob Beni, financial consultant for the township of Berkeley. like to
um have my testimony into the record for the mayor and counsel as well as for legal counsel. We did not enter into the same sphere as the hire professionals for the
township. We did not review their record cases. First off, with respect to the prior speaker, this year's tax tables have been set. You will not receive any relief in 2026.
2027's tax um bills, and you can shake your head all you want, but it's true. 2027's tax bills will be established based upon the 2027 assessments. We've come up with
the most likely experience or most likely scenario where Seaside Park will experience up to a $4,760,000 increase in their annual municipal budget. It'll take three, four, five
years to get there. That will happen. It will happen because of two essential reasons just so that the public can can understand what's going going to happen. Currently, Seaside Park spends
approximately $12,250 per person on in their municipal budget. The Township of Berkeley spends approximately $2,300. There is going to be a shift in police
services and other services to the Seaside Park taxpayer. There's also going to be, as we mentioned previously, you can shake your head. No, but there will be there's going to be a shift. >> The shift is going to be most likely in
the area of 1/3. Why? Because your population is going to increase permanently year round population will increase approximately by 1/3. The reason being is that you currently have in Seaside Park approximately 2,115
properties. South Seaside Park has approximately 1,200 properties. Population year round in Seaside Park is approximately 1446 and in South Seaside Park is approximately 500
year round. >> Okay. Therefore, you have a shift from those participants, people, households, permanent residents over to seaside park from Berkeley down. Now, that's fine. If that's what the vote is, that's what the
vote is. But the facts are going to bear out. That means when you amend your budget this year, you will not be able to include the revenues, any revenue from you, you will then have to be faced with
a tax limit cap, a budget appropriation cap issue, and an issue of your tax. Here's the facts. Pure and simple facts, and that's going to be your prerogative. In addition, come 2027, you're going to
have a swing In your county taxes, your county taxes will increase. Why? Because the proportion of an equalized tax rate, the equalized tax value will be going up. And any school age children that are
currently paid through Seaside, South Seaside Park through Berkeley Township will now be paid in the other tax levy, meaning Seaside Park. We're getting this into the record because we don't want anyone to un to misunderstand that we haven't been
looking at this for the last month or two. It's been recent. Again, we have not gone through all of the prejuditial issues. It's a new and in addition, you're going to have a issue with the
infrastructure and the absent base of the town. Whether it's bonded or not doesn't matter. is going to be cash on the barrel head to the township. That's in the record. Legal counsel knows that we we are going to be
tracking this. And by the way, you can't overexpend a budget in New Jersey. It's a felony. Chapter 131, public clause of 1989 make it a felony. even though you overexpend your budget outside park last year and
the year before by the way and that is against the law. So we're going to be tracking all of this and just for the record we want to make sure that you know that we have looked at all of this and we are understanding of what your
decision is going to be on. But we're here. >> I'm a boy game. I'm sorry if you could wrap up here. We have a 5 minute limit and the bell has gone off, but you can certainly finish that thought.
>> Are you there? >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Any other comments from individuals on the Zoom platform? Two more. >> Two more. >> Hi. Hi. Good evening. Can you hear me?
>> Yes, sir. >> Hi. Uh my name is John Bod. I'm at 26 First Lane in Midway Beach. How are you? Uh good evening uh Mayor Wil and ladies and gentlemen of the town council. >> Good to meet you. >> Thank Thank you for uh for the diligence
that you put into this uh study and uh you know for all the work you do on a daily basis. Um, I am currently the president of the Midway Beach Condo Association. Um, I represent approximately 386
homeowners in Midway Beach. Several other board members are also on the phone call as well as u a lot of members of our community. I think we've all been watching this with um, you know, a degree of uh, apprehension and
excitement, you know, depending on who you ask. But, you know, I think we all ultimately understand that this is going to happen uh one way or another. So, uh there's a couple things that are important to us as a community. I think those of you that know Midway know that
we're a a very unique community on the island. Um we're one of the last World War II bungalow style communities left down here. And uh we live on top of each other, but we wouldn't have it any other way. We love the way that uh our
community functions and uh you know we've been neighbors with you for so long and we consider you a member of our community as much as you consider us part of yours. Couple things that I think are important when you consider uh
the study that you did and uh zoning in particular. you know, we fought for years and years for Berkeley to accept us as a conforming uh community based on, you know, the distances and whatnot that we are to one another. Um, I know you're probably familiar with Camp
Osborne host Sandy. You know, it was a community up in Brick for those of you that don't know that. um you know they were built similarly to us and uh after Sandy you know whatever it didn't wash away burned down in a fire and they fought a very long drawn out legal battle to be able to rebuild their
community and ultimately they were not able to do so. So, I've read your um your study and your draft zoning ordinance in detail and I'm very happy to see that you know in at least in the draft format that you're accepting us as
a conforming community. I urge and hope that all of you will uh adopt that ordinance as it's written uh because that'll offer all of us a lot of protection and uh allow our children, grandchildren to be able to enjoy this
place just as just as we love it. Um you know, again, I'm not going to take up too much of your time. I'm speaking as a homeowner u down here and I really just uh you know, wish you luck in making the right decision. is in your hands. Um,
I've been a lifeguard for 25 years on the ocean. We have a the uh nationally accredited lifeguarding crew up here on our beach and uh you know, we'll do our part continuing to manage our community and uh as well as integrating into yours and we hope to see you at our tournament
this year and we always look forward to being at yours. So, thank you guys for uh taking the time to listen to us and uh best of luck in your decision. >> Thank you, sir. And there was another Zoom comments on
individual. >> Hello. >> Yes. Uh, your name and address, sir? >> Yeah. Uh, yeah. My name is Jeff Bever on 53D Street at Seaside Park. So, apologies for not being able to make tonight's text within one of the public
sessions in the fall. Um, I appreciate the investment in the report that was done by the third party company. I think there was a lot of valuable information overall in that and I've been staying up with this as it progresses um, you know, over the last several months. Uh in in
my opinion, not has really much has changed actually from the fall though. Even though there was a lot of valuable information in that report because as the gentleman said earlier, there's a lot of unknown pieces to the puzzle. There's a a significant amount of
information that is completely unknown and basically the residents of Kingside Park are being led into this blindly. I feel a lot of pressure that we need to annex park because of the proximity similarity in name could be friends
neighbors but there's a very significant amount of information uh as the third party company pointed out and as I believe uh might have been the mayor mentioned before the council did a good job trying to reach out to schools to get additional guidance in terms of how
this may go and you know was not able to secure that information and as the third party company told us in the fall, a lot is going to determine how the negotiations go with Berkeley County and they informed us they are not going to
come into these negotiations and it's extremely likely they almost guaranteed us that this was going to go to the courts after that and then we're at the hands of a court judge to appoint essentially strangers I guess to
determine our fate in financial to run with the patrons of the situation. So in my opinion, you know, there's so many unknowns. It's it's really and common sense. I believe that it's very irresponsible. It's irresponsible for
the residents of Creekide Park now to take on this risk without having the complete picture and all the information. And as the woman said before, she supported annexation. She wants to keep Sside Park the same. This
is just the first step. You know, the communities, the proximity is there. We're similar in name, but I think we're very, very different. The culture of Seaside Park is very unique. The feel of it there, the community that we all
love, and I'm feeling extreme pressure amongst my neighbors, myself to annex Southside Park because of the proximity and the name, but the information is just not there. there's a high amount of risk and as the report also pointed out
there's an extreme amount of complexity and that the report kind of built this picture also around there's a lot of unknowns and that thing evolved and that could change a lot of the numbers and the way it was laid out could change as well so you know kind of guaranteed
tax break and that could change and I think this whole discussion would be going really differently if seesaw park residents were told that their taxes were going to go And I'll see like what I said in the fall is that there's I don't think anyone should believe that the taxes are actually going to go down. There's going
to be some need for it because of this annexation for that tax money to go into some investment. It's not going down and I can pretty much guarantee everyone. So, thank you very much for >> Thank you, sir.
Any other participants via Zoom? Seeing none, uh any other comments from those in the audience? Seeing none, I would entertain. >> We do have J.
>> Good evening, Jay Delaney, 1710 North Baby New Seaside Park. I want to thank Bob for the uh >> introduction >> introduction earlier. Uh but let me assure you that my participation in presence this evening as in the past few
uh weeks uh has nothing to do with my current present employment as the administrator in Berkeley County. I'm a lifelong resident of Seaside Park. And uh I won't uh uh indicate that my lineage extends as far back as Mr. Whiteman says, but uh in any event, I'm
a 64 65 year resident and in addition to presently serving as the administrator in Berkeley Township, uh I had the honor of serving as both an elected official and uh appointed official bur of Seaside Park for some 20 years.
Having said that, that first of all, I appreciate the opportunity to speak. I recognize this is a public hearing specifically on the ordinance presented this evening or present the last meeting. First of all, I understand that this governing body and Seaside Park as a
burrow did not seek this opportunity or question. Uh this is the result of uh two different cycles, one 50 years ago and one most recently going back at least 10 12 years uh by the residents of Sou Eastside Park to deanics from
Berkeley Township for obvious reasons. As I said in previous testimony before this governing body, uh first of all, I am neither against or in favor of annexation. What I am in favor of is making sure that this governing body has the correct
factual and complete information on which to make a decision. And I'm not sure that that's completed or has been completed. I think there are still a number of outstanding questions. refers to some of the other issues that have been raised. And again, as I stated previously, I believe that Seaside Park
and South Seaside Park all are already and have been for many years one community. That's not really the issue that's present and before the council tonight. Uh I should recognize and uh say that uh uh my wife grew up in
Southeast Park. I grew up in Seaside Park and I think that's a pretty darn good indication that it is one community and has been for many years. Specifically, uh Mr. Rake referenced earlier my questions that I had raised previously regarding the planning and
zoning analysis. Uh first of all uh the planning impact study reference a diverse housing stock and I think we heard that from one of the previous speakers tonight, the president of the uh Midway Beach Condominium Association.
Uh diverse housing is a polite way of saying bungalows and trailer park. Not that that is good or bad. It is just a fact. The report that uh was commissioned by Burrow references currently there are four zoning
districts in Seaside Park. There are nine zoning districts in South Seaside Park. And specifically table 5.8 of the report references the various uh types of um permitted uses. I should note that
the table has six columns or six rows and uh three of those reference three family, four family and townhouse uses none of which are permitted in Seaside Park. The end result is that uh this
report identifies a distinct and significant increase in density and for those that are in familiar with municipal operations density translates into higher cost in providing services. I believe that is a fact not an opinion.
Secondly, uh the report and there has been many comments uh specifically at two meetings ago last meeting and then this meeting the report commissioned regarding the financial impact the report provides. Some have
referenced them as estimates some have referenced them as assumptions. They are significant and they are numerous. Every one of those assess assessments estimates uh also has an indication and I think that uh council member Condos
referenced it an indication of uh severity or importance or variation. I urge this governing body to consider all of those. I reemphasize my points earlier that there are still unanswered questions. two of the most significant.
Uh, does the impact study recognize or include funds either as part of their one-time estimate or ongoing estimate increased operating cost? What it will take to increase the the burrow of
seaside parks surplus and reserves in order to elevate them to the existing level to maintain the bur's financial stability as well as well as its bond rate. I haven't heard any mention of that in a p public session or do I see
it referenced specifically in the report. >> Excuse me, Jake. Five minutes. Can I give a m >> I didn't hear that? I'll take your word that it's been five minutes. Again, I appreciate the opportunity to speak and
let me emphasize that if you do wish to be transparent, which I believe was the indicated goal at the first public listening session, I encourage this governing body before their vote to identify their interests and potential
um conflicts of interest related to this vote. for those of you that have either employment, property ownership or business ownerships uh in the property that is considered to be annexed. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Jeff. >> Any other public comments? >> What happened? >> Uh Chuck Applebee had his hand raised. Um so he just >> Yes. Sorry. >> Mr. Applebee
are on the Zoom platform. Yes. Can you hear me? >> Yes, there you are. Yep. >> All right. Sorry about that. I'm uh in an airport, but I just wanted to state that I'm in favor of this. I've been following this for a long time. Chuck
Apple will be 215 10th Avenue. And I I really want to just stress to the council that they'll be fully supported by the town and everyone in the community by voting yes and approving this. And that's what I wanted to say. All right. Thank you very much. Good
luck everybody. God bless you. Goodbye. >> Thank you. >> Any other comments on Secretary? >> Mayor, can I just say one thing only because and I'm forgetting I thought I wrote down who said it. It might have been Mitch Coppelman when he asked about
like the sensitivity analysis that I said because I don't want Jenna to be on the spot to be posting something on the website that was not created by anybody by either the firm that we hired or done by the um finance committee or our CFO.
It was merely my own that I did based on the information that was given and the financial template that I had requested. So that would not be placed out on the website. it was mine and I think the due diligence would be that depending on the vote tonight that the finance committee
and our CFO go through and do it as people have said also looking at the five-year and whatever else might be necessary but there's only so much you can do before you know where you're headed. Oh, >> sorry. >> Thank you, Gina. >> Another
>> There's another individual on the Zoom platform. >> Looks like a hand raised. >> How are you? >> You hear me? >> No, you're having an echo. try.
>> Okay. My name is >> Yeah, it's still not uh communicating. Uh >> try again. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I can't hear you.
>> She might be watching it and talking. She has to turn off her her own sound. >> Are you watching and talking at the same time? Perhaps if you turned off your sound at your end. >> No, it still has a reverberation. >> Did you turn off the sound in your uh
own device? Let me lower the volume all the way down. How about now? >> Much better. >> Much better. >> Is that better? >> Yep. Now we can hear you. If your name and address, >> my name is Tom Thompson. I'm 11
Midway Beach. I just want to give a couple of optimizations. see that ever increasing revenue to South Seaside Park as South Seaside Park assessments increase due to new construction, home expansion and
renovations, total control of all development from Seaside Heights to Island Beach State Park. Additional revenue of business in realer licenses. Updated police suit, fire, EMS,
sanitation equipment with sharing of costs over more residents, limited limited municipal liability of southeast side roadways from majority primary own. A fully updated flood infrastructure
performed by the state after Sandy. All those things considered, this is likely a once in a lifetime opportunity to reduce costs by increasing efficiencies in both communities while making both communities better.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Are there any other comments? >> Seeing no hands on the Zoom platform, any comments in person? Seeing none, I would entertain a motion
from the council to close the public hearing on the ordinance. >> I'll make the motion. >> Motion by council member Craft. >> I'll second it. >> Second by council member Connor. Roll call. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos.
>> Yes. >> Council member Otanda. >> Yes. >> Council member to >> Yes. >> Council President Wils. >> Yes. >> Motion approved. And that being said, are there uh any comments or a motion from council or have our attorney any anything?
>> Thank you. Uh certainly don't want to say anything. I just there was a reference made to conflict and there had been a question that was raised. Um I just want the public to be aware that the analysis was done in accordance with the common law and the local um
government ethics law and all governing body members are able to participate. There is no level of community of uh interest that prohibits participation. >> Thank you, J. That being said, are there any uh
comments from councel or a motion on second reading of the ordinance? >> I'll make the motion, ma'am. >> Adopt the ordinance. >> Oh, motion the >> motion by council member Connor
>> to adopt the ordinance. What? Will you >> to adopt the ordinance? >> Yes, I'm sorry. Yeah. >> Okay. I want to be clear. That's the motion. >> Ask me these questions. >> Well, I'm asking motion to adopt the ordinance. >> Yes. Okay. Thank you. >> Second.
>> Second by council member Craft. >> Pardon me. >> Roll call. >> Yeah. No. Roll call. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. Council member Condos. >> Yes.
>> Council member Otanda. >> Yes. >> Council member Tote. >> Before I go, I just want to say that despite what you know the way the council just said and we did consult, I don't have a legal conflict. Um and I do also believe there are uh potential benefits for this to our community. Uh
but due to my professional role at the Central Regional School District, which services students from both Seaside Park and Berkeley Township, I personally feel deeply conflicted. I am going to uh uh abstain from the vote. >> Council President Wilk. >> Yes. >> Motion approved.
>> Thank you. >> The next motions entail the series of ordinances all of which have been introduced previously. uh they entail the Oakley Township's
current ordinances and I can turn to >> council final reading and adoption ordinance 22619 accepting annexation has just >> we could quietly leave it's kind of hard
to hear The first of the ordinances number 22611's final reading and adoption amending chapter 200 article 7 zoning provisions to include beachfront residential zone.
And again, by way of uh comment, these ordinances uh and there was some comments that were directly on point as to the ordinances are word for word what the Berkeley Township zoning ordinances
are as applicable to South Seaside Park. Uh I understood there was a question earlier that went to the verbiage of at least one of the ordinances and certainly uh if that's the case that unfortunately may reflect a either a
typo or something more substantive in the Berkeley ordinance. Is that fair to say or we don't? >> It it reflects the the the language of both the ordinances is stated previously. If there's a portion and it was the reference was made specifically to the ordinance that covered um Island
Beach State Park. If there's a reference to some land that is determined to still be part of Berkeley Township, then our ordinance would have no effect >> in that section would remain in effect on the part that is now part of Seaside Park. And uh I
>> ordinance effective. >> I can't help also but note because zoning was a issue that many of the comments were raised about and it's extremely important to Seaside Park and I suspect extremely important to
Berkeley Township and the residents of South Seaside Park. Um and we in Seaside Park have taken a firm stand on a very uh relevant related issue as to the impact of the state of New Jersey and
that entails the adoption uh through the D of the rule rules and certainly he he's not here looking for any acclaim but we've mentioned it previously on the record this governing body unanimously uh worked together and uh the credit is
not ours but it's uh those that took the lead on this including but not limited to Assemblyman Kenichra in this district this legislative district but it goes beyond that those real rules have a direct impact on South Seaside Park and
Seaside Park and what has been put in action uh it was passed in the lane buck session just hours before the last administration left Trenton and uh will have a devastating impact on all of us
and we are all one community and we all stand together and and as I indicated the at the when we adopted the resolution at Seaside Park u we thank the uh president of the senate and also
the co-sponsors of the bill one of whom we welcome here he's here this evening is uh uh senator, former senator perhaps future, but certainly this district and he has stood up for the shore and nets. Senator Amato, he was Senator Singer and
Senator Holes Apple all co-sponsored a bill and that bill has been uh put forth by the Senate President uh Senate Senator. And I'm sure many of us who follow things in Trenton will realize that
perhaps some of those individuals may on occasion pull a different level, a lever when they go into a ballot box. But that didn't stop them from real realizing the deficiencies and an what's been called an overstep by the D. They took into
account and took authority away from the people, away from the elected representatives. And there's a growing bipartisan movement in the state that recognizes that fact. And hopefully some very drastic changes to those D uh real
rules will come about because we talked here this evening and these ordinances all are talking about zoning in South Seaside Park. Those real rules trump everything and they go right to the heart of that zoning issue. So, uh, I
thank Senator Amada for that. I thank, uh, county senators. They all stood together with the Senate President and and, uh, I think some movement is occurring. We can hope. Uh, but thank you.
So, that being said, the these are all zoning ordinances that we're adopting. We've talked about them in the past, and the first is 22611. anything uh from the council on this ordinance? If not, we'll go into the
audience. Any public comments on final reading ordinance 226 uh 11? Is there any online? I see no comment. I would entertain a motion to close the
public hearing and uh to vote uh for adopting of the zoning ordinance. And as we discussed earlier, uh we were faced in a very tough position, difficult, whatever the word is in Sees Park. We didn't want to
invest a lot more money, time, and effort in uh looking at something that hypothetically would never have come to pass, may never have come to pass. So we took a conservative approach with the recommendation of our planning and the
legal team to uh put in place those ordinances which exist in South Seaside Park and recognize that zoning uh with the provision in this too. All these ordinances have gone before the B of Seaside Park's planning board for
review. uh there was no position taken and obviously uh in certain instances the zoning at South Seaside Park is in conformity with the zoning in Seaside Park but in certain other instances there are differences and they contrast
with one another and as such that would be uh part of the process to be undertaken with the planning board in the future in conjunction with the planner and the look at the master plan. But uh that being said, this is second
reading of uh 22611. Any do we have a motion? >> I'll make that motion. >> Motion by Council President Wilk. >> Second. >> Second by Council Member Craft. Roll call. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos.
>> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Rotunda. >> Yes. >> Council member Toad. >> Yes. >> Mher. >> And I don't know. We we have two of our uh finest of Ocean County, if not the
state lawyers who are here. I could ask them a couple which I've never asked either. Is there any uh can a hearing take place as to ordinances all of the next one if they're done in summary, but no question.
>> I knew the answer already asked me. All right, that being said, >> that's how you do it. >> So, we we we've then completed the review of the first one, 211. >> D,
>> you good too? >> No, we have to look. >> We got to go. >> Number D is final reading adoption ordinance 22612 that is amending chapter 200 article 7 zoning provisions to include resort commercial zone. Any comments, questions
from councel? If not, we'll go into the audience. Any comments on second reading 22612? Any online? No. >> I see none. I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing on 22612.
And uh >> I'll make that motion. >> Motion by council president Will. Second. >> Second by council member Rotunda. Roll call. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes. >> Council member Rotunda. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. Council member Connor, >> yes. >> Council member Craft,
>> yes. >> Council member Tote, >> yes. >> Motion approved. >> And do we have a motion for 212 or 22612 rather? >> Make motion by council member Craft. >> I'll second. >> Second by Council President Wil. Roll call. >> Council member Craft.
>> Yes. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Rotunda. >> Yes. >> Council member Toe. >> Yes. Motion approved. >> Next is final reading adoption or
ordinance 22613 amending chapter 200 article 7 zoning provisions to include residential 50 and residential 31.5 zones. Any questions, comments from council
hearing? None. I'll go into the audience. Any comments? Second reading 22613. Seeing none in person. Anyone on Zoom? No one on Zoom. >> I do see none. I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing and vote in favor of the ordinance. >> I'll make the motion.
>> Motion by council member Connor. >> Second. >> Second by council member Condos. Roll. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Otanda. >> Yes. >> Council member T. >> Yes. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes.
>> Motion approved. Next is final reading adoption ordinance 22614 amending chapter 200 article 7 zoning provisions to include beachfront conservation zone. Any questions, comments from council. >> That's the one that talked about
sensibly right now. >> We did weird some comments that obviously now would become adopted as part of that record. >> Anything else from council? If not, I'll go into the audience. Any public comments? Final reading adoption
ordinance 22614. Seeing none in person, anyone on Zoom. >> Oh yes, sir. I'm sorry. >> Uh yes, your honor. This is the one that I spoke about. This this particular area is entirely >> with your name and address. I'm sorry. I
>> Bill McGrath 339 Baby Avenue. And this is the one I spoke about earlier. Mr. Cypriani explained >> this. I'm I'm just asking that it be either tabled or or postponed because
this particular area is all completely within Island Beach State Park. >> Okay. And just on the other one, the 2026-11 which included Midway Beach. uh just
this experience. I'm on the zoning board in in Berkeley and we've been having a lot of pressure lately on increasing the size of the homes in uh in that in Midway Beach and uh we tried to that's a
historic area and there's several historic areas like that. I mean someone before mentioned Osborne Osborne Beach that's up by Dormundy Beach that completely burnt down during Sandy. There's other areas that are very
historic like that. I mean, you call them bungalows, trailers, or whatever, but not not I don't mean that to degrade it, but they're they're very unique areas. Uh Ocean Grove is another one. Ocean Grove, very historic. They've been
there for >> decades, decades. And so I I would hope, of course it's none of our business anymore, but I would hope you would try to maintain the character of uh the
present Midway Beach rather than try there there's many many people there that they want to put third, second, third stories up and um it it will completely change the the neighborhood in my view. But uh again I'm I'm just
here to speak about this uh 20264. It's completely within Island Beach. So I would ask that would be be uh either tabled. >> Yeah. I I and I and I take the point. I will say to the governing body that I think that the wisest course um for this
evening is to go ahead and do it as I said if it is part if if it only affects lands that are remain as part of Berkeley Township then it will have no effect and then eventually will be uh withdrawn. But that you know
determination those legal determinations I think it's the wisest course just to put it in place. It's if if it's all within silvery township, then it will have no impact. >> Thank you, Jean. >> Any other comments on Seeing none, I
would entertain a motion from council to close the public hearing and for adoption. Ordinance 22614. >> I'll make that motion, Mayor. >> Motion by council president. >> Second by council member Craft. Roll call. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes.
>> Council member Condos. Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Otanda. >> Yes. >> Council member Toe. >> Yes. >> Motion approved. >> And I I belatedly I would address the gentleman's comments because I think that came before our planning board and
everyone universally recognized and supported the historic nature of the Midway Midway Beach area. And you can go up the coast and look at some some label unfortunate development which has taken place which is contrary to what
previously existed. And so I don't disagree with that. I don't think the pine board did either when they talked about this whole situation. But again there's a caveat and there's a major problem with the state of New Jersey that is looking at all of us and
that's Midway Beach. at Seaside Park, the entire bar island of New Jersey and the overreach goes further up the river communities, bay communities, all that's what's being addressed. That's what we spoke of earlier.
The next is final reading adoption ordinance 22615 amending chapter 200 article 7 zoning provisions to include residential four family south zone. Any questions, comments from council? I'll go into the audience. Any public
comments as to second reading ordinance 22615? Seeing none in person. >> Uh, no one on Zoom. >> And on Zoom, I would entertain a motion to close the public portion and adopt second reading 22615. >> I'll make that motion, Mayor.
>> Motion by Council President Wilk. >> Second. >> Second by Council Member Rotunda. Roll call. >> Council President Wilk. >> Yes. >> Council member Rotunda. Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Toe. >> Yes.
>> Musher approved. >> Next. Final reading adoption ordinance 22616 amending chapter 200 article 7 zoning provisions to include neighborhood business zone. Again, as per the current zoning allowed in
Berkeley and all the uses also permitted. Any questions, comments from councel? Hearing none, I'd go into the audience if there are any public comments. Second reading 22616. Seeing none in person. Anyone on Zoom?
>> Uh, no one on Zoom. >> No one on Zoom. I would entertain a motion to close the public portion and for adoption of ordinance 226. >> I'll make that motion. Mayor, >> motion by Council President Wilk for adoption. >> Second. >> Second by Council Member Condos. Roll call.
>> Council President Wil. >> Yes. Council member Condos, >> yes. >> Council member Connor, >> yes. >> Council member Craft, >> yes. >> Council member Otanda, >> yes. >> Council member Toe, >> yes. >> Motion approved. >> Next is final reading adoption ordinance
22617, amendment chapter 200, article 7, zoning provisions to improve residential townhouse zone. Any questions, comments from council? Seeing none, I'll go into the audience if there are any public comments. Second reading 22617.
Seeing none in person on the Zoom platform does not have any hands raised. I as such I would entertain a motion from council to close the public hearing and to take a position on second reading 22617.
>> I'll make that motion. Mayor >> motion for adoption by council president Wilk. >> I'll second it. >> Second by council member Connell. Roll call. >> Council president Wil. >> Yes. Council member Connor, >> yes. >> Council member Condos, >> yes. >> Council member Craft, >> yes.
>> Council member Attendees, >> yes. >> Council member Toad, >> yes. >> Motion approved. >> Next on the agenda is payment of claims. It's 226161. Approving payments of itemized claims as set forth in the check registered DO
list for the time period March 20, 2026 to March 30th, 2026. Any comments from council? If not, a motion. >> I'll make that motion there. >> Motion by council president Wil. I'll second. >> Second by council member to roll call.
>> Council President Wil. >> Yes. >> Council member to >> Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Rotunda. >> Yes. >> Mot. >> Next
is the budget and this includes 226162. First, the resolution authorizing self-examination of the budget for 2026. Do we >> I'll make motion. >> Motion by council member Craft. >> Second
>> and second by council member Connor. And do we need have any explanation this process maybe from council just why how this occurs and uh what is self-examination? do it. >> The state allows us to do this every
>> Yeah, >> I think that's true. >> It's with within the statute where we do not have to go through the more formal process. So, >> it's every few years that you have the opportunity to do that. In this case, it's it's our turn. >> We're on the cycle. So, we have a motion
on the floor and a second. Roll call. >> Council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor, >> yes. >> Council member Condos, >> yes. >> Council member Otanda, >> yes. Council member Toad, >> yes. >> Council President Will, >> yes. >> Motion approved.
>> And as such, we have 226163 resolution to introduce the 2026 municipal budget. And related there too, we actually have the forum as referred to earlier for the information session whereby residents can review the
PowerPoint and ask questions. uh and that's a a difference from prior years where uh we had the officials here. So I thank all involved in the process and certainly
Councilman Craft and his committee for his expertise as well on the budget issues along with our CFO, our administrator, clerk and deputy clerk all did a lot of work to put this together. >> Video was outstanding. We have it and I
guess we'll post that. >> Yeah, be great. >> I thought the voice was great. The voice was perfect. >> Do we need anything else? If not, we have a motion for introduction. >> I'll make motion to introduce. >> Motion by council member Craft, second
by council member Connor. Roll call. >> Uh, council member Craft. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. Council member Otanda. >> Yes. >> Council member to >> Yes. >> Council President Will. >> Yes.
>> Uh May 7th. >> Yeah. hearing as per the introduction is scheduled for May 7th, but there are variables related there too, including in the past years the state of New
Jersey has uh not given authorization in a timely manner. The second variable uh would entail what was referenced moments ago at the uh con conversation concerning the annexation issue, the impacts and the uh
need for introduction of an amended budget. We have our council to guide us in that process. The next on the agenda are resolutions and I'll read them in summary fashion. as previously alluded to. Some of the
resolutions uh conceivably would have been a nully and uh were only on the agenda uh with the provision if there was a a favorable vote on the adoption of ordinance 22619
as to the annexation. Uh and they would only be looked at deliberated upon. That being said, 164 authorizes 226 rifle license applications. 165 authorizing the bow of Seaside Park
through the Seaside Park Police Department to participate in the Defense Logistics Agency law enforcement support office 133 program to enable the Seaside Park Police Department to request and acquire access Department of Defense
equipment. 166 authorizing the execution of an agreement for the conveyance of real property. 167 appointing a seasonal employee of the Department of Public Works. 168 awarding a contract for Earl Asphalt
Company for the K Street Roadway improvement project. 169 appointing pumpout boat operators for the 2026 summer season. 170 amending resolution 225 230 to correct compensation of the
deputy municipal clerk 171 authorizing the transfer of the year 2025 municipal budget appropriations as per NJSA 4A4-59 172 authorizing a salary increase for the deputy municipal clerk 173
appointing an annexation committee to negotiate the aortionment of property and indebtedness this with the township of Berkeley pursuant to NJSA4A-7-18 in the event about adoption of 22619 and that uh committee to consist of um
our bond council William Mayor Esquire our council Steven Zabarski Esquire and myself as leaison to the governing body mayor Peterson those are the three members 74 authorizing advertisement and
solicitation of bids for solid waste collection and that too uh may or may not uh be appropriate. I know that I can address special or council uh Jean had
done some work on this. Is that necessary at this juncture or >> Yes, it's necessary at this structure. We had to discussed um and I have uh just put Karen in touch with a company that would be able to do something on an
emerent basis but um public uh I'm sorry solid waste bids have to be out for 60 days. So, anything that we do on an urgent basis, um it's still going to be necessary to put this out because we will not be able to receive bids back
for at least 60 days. >> Very good. And the 175 is establishing a council committee and that too was on the agenda in the event there was a affirmative vote on adoption of ordinance 22619.
And uh those are council members who not only had volunteered with their services but also have special expertise in certain areas that they bring to the table uh to assist that process which uh
I think was referred to but several of those commented as a a very uh involved task, a difficult task and uh that entails uh council member Craft with expertise especially attributed to
budgetary issues. Uh Council Member Condos who has specialization in management and personnel issues and the overall uh knowledge and experience uh of Seaside Park. uh all of these council
members and certainly uh council president woke with a very lengthy lifelong knowledge and history of not just public works issues but zoning issues, construction issues, public works in general. So, uh, we appreciate
all the hard work and it was alluded to previously about, uh, whether comments, uh, had been made by council members as to a a very, uh, complex issue and a very meaningful issue to Seaside Park's
current status and future. And I think it's fair to say each and every council member uh has given this uh many many months of deliberation, hard work and thought and whether that's translates
itself into comments uh and certainly did with sleepless nights for a lot of people and uh entertaining emails and comments and calls and one-on-one meetings with residents and taxpayers and a great deal of effort
for which everyone uh deserves our thanks. uh but that is a committee of the council itself to work with uh all concerned and as I said earlier in good faith in uh due diligence if that's the proper
word as that's appeared in some of the uh cases earlier and uh I think that that reasonleness the rule of reason always should prevail and negotiations and I'm sure in the past We just touched
the tip of the iceberg of the level of respect and cooperation that has existed and will continue to exist between the communities. Berkeley Township, those officials who have served there over the years and will continue to serve there.
uh and we only mentioned one and uh he shared his thoughts here at the podium and I can certainly thank him personally as Jay Delaney was a excellent diligent hardworking individual of integrity for
the bow of Seaside Park and I have no doubt that he brings to the table the same expertise and skill uh and thoughtfulness to the township of Berkeley now. So uh there are a lot of very very good people
out there, elected people, officials of both of those communities that I am confident uh will be able to sit down with one another and resolve issues. Uh whether that uh process occurs
immediately, which I hope uh or uh over that uh 60-day time frame remains to be seen. But uh that is our goal. I know and someone mentioned that at the commentary previously that uh whether
strangers are inevitably the good choice, whether the court system is that uh is certainly not preferable when you have known quantities and you're able to negotiate and mediate in good faith. It's always better to have. It's less
costly, less time consuming, and it's something that both sides would have the ability to have direct input into the final resolution. So, that's certainly one of our goals that had been discussed in the event that this uh was passed.
Anyone on council have comments further at this juncture on any of the resolutions? >> I do. >> Yes. Um 166 authorizing the execution and agreement of conveyance of real property. Just for clarity, that is our elementary school building which we have
been negotiating um I think since fourth quarter of last year with the local board of education that no longer felt the need to maintain responsibility for that building given it's a non-operating school district. um
worked very closely with their um their superintendent board June Corsinesi explicitly has been very active in that as well as Dr. Lisa Gleason and Marty brought his expertise also in uh buildings management to ensure that we
got the use of their surplus funds which the state had no way of giving back to anybody if they were not used. Um, and so the roof is going to be repaired and once that is completed to the satisfaction of the parties based on I think the uh agreement we authorized
previously at another meeting that's what this one is for. So I'm very excited about that. We get to maintain that building in our municipality for future uses including some of the ones that are there now including our code office. Um that was on that one. And then on 172 I just like to congratulate
Owen who's our deputy municipal clerk who got certified as a municipal registar which is um why he's getting the salary increase um which has been precedent in the past and he's doing an outstanding job.
>> Thank you J. Anyone else on councel? That being said, it's not required by law as resolutions tend to be voted on without public comment, but it's our practice to allow comments on resolutions. So, as such, if anyone has a comment on any specific uh resolution,
if you could give your name and address into the record. >> Yes, Don Whiteman, 2000 Barnett Avenue C. Does this include the annexation? Uh I
haven't heard publication yet. >> All right. Uh I want to first of all uh give thanks uh to uh my Lord and Savior. >> That's right. >> Um going through all that we did
uh with um meetings, we always had a word of prayer every meeting, every time we went before a judge. And as I say, and I have always said, uh, when we prayed for guidance and wisdom,
sure enough, God heard our prayers. And as I say, I want to, um, give all thanks and glory to him. Secondly, I want to thank the council. I want to thank you for your time and effort, uh, your vote to accept this. And I know
you had people call you. I know you have people talk to you. we saw things online also which I was amazed some of the um emotions that were online. Uh third I want to thank uh Joe Molini our
attorney. Uh he was the right guy at the right time. He really was when you before we started this we went to a couple attorneys. He'll never win. I don't want to take it. We went to Alan Porter from Princeton who did with my dad. He says no I can't do it. He says
I'm too old. us chance of you winning is going to be slim and uh other people in in uh came up to us and said what are you doing it for? So we decided no it's it's worth doing. Also I'd like to thank
my executive board who was with me for 14 years. That's a long time with an executive board group. 6 and a half years traveling back and forth to Berkeley Township for planning board meetings. It's not a short distance. That's why I like being able to come up
here and ride my bike. Um, and again, I'd like to thank uh all thanks go to my South Seaside Park homeowners for their continual financial support and encouragement over the past 14 years. We couldn't have done it without
the enthusiasm and without the encouragement and the financial support of the people in Sou Eastside Park. So again, I'd like to reiterate, I thank you council for uh your vote and um I'm
looking forward to working with Seaside Park and getting this town of South Seaside Park um as I say to what you expect. Again, I thank you very much. >> Thank you, Don. And that's uh naturally
related to certainly 175 as well as the uh 173 on the but any any other comments on resolutions if we have any seeing none in the audience. Do we have any online? No one. No one online. And I
would uh entertain a motion motion close the any public hearing on resolution and entertain the resolutions as a consent agenda. >> Have a motion by Councilman Craft. Second by Council President Wilco. >> Council member Craft.
>> Yes. >> Council President Wil. >> Yes. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. >> Council member Connor. >> Yes. >> Council member Rotunda. >> Yes. >> Council member Till. >> Yes. >> Motion approved. That concludes the resolution agenda.
Does anyone else on council have anything further at this juncture? >> Well, John, I I do that the gentleman who wanted a comment from from everybody on council before and I guess we were kind of restricted in what we could say, but when this first became a
possibility, I tell you, I was kind of conflicted because Mayor Amato, Mayor Bakion, u Mr. Burnhams, John Cameron, Jay Delaney have been very positive in in helping us establish our business district down there. And for whatever reason, Seaside Park has just not been
that business friendly. But when I gave it a lot of thought, I was elected by the people of Seaside Park to do the best job that I can for them. And I think that's what we did tonight. >> Thank you, J. Any other comments from council members
or any anything further? Hearing none, I'll go into the audience if there's any public comments. If anyone has them, if they could give their name and address into the record. Seeing none in person, anyone online on the Zoom platform. >> Uh, no one on Zoom.
>> No, none on Zoom. Uh, as such, I would entertain a motion to close the public portion and to adjourn the meeting. >> So, make that motion. >> Motion by council member Condos. >> I'll second it. >> Second by Council Member Connor. Roll call. >> Council member Condos. >> Yes. Council member Connor,
>> yes. >> Council member Craft, >> yes. >> Council member Otenda, >> yes. >> Council member Till, >> yes. >> Council President Wil, >> yes. >> And we stand and thank everyone for coming out. Let's go.