Please notify the municipal clerk for any disability requirements necessary for attendance at township council meetings. The fire exits are located through the double doors to your right and through the door on your left. Please silence all cell phones. If you are unable to attend the council meeting in person and would like a topic to be addressed at a council meeting, please
visit www.twpofw washington. us contact us tab. Click on mayor and council. Send email to contact all council members at once. Can everyone please stand for a salute to the flag? >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio >> here. >> Councilman Sears >> here.
>> Councilman Omen >> here. >> Councilwoman VZ >> here. >> Council President Denno >> here. Let the record reflect also in attendance, Mayor Peter Calamari, administrator Mark D. Carlo, CMFO John Corkran via Zoom, and Township Clerk Susan Wakowski. Motion to open the
public comment period of the meeting. >> So move. Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> would anybody like to come up and address the council at this time? >> Seeing no one, motion to close the public comment period. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I.
>> 2026 budget. I guess we'll go through we'll do all the items that we missed that are not salary and then we'll just do the salary ones next and we'll be complete. >> Thank you, sir. I uh I do have a list to bring you through. I'm sure everybody's expecting me for an April Fools this
evening. However, I'm not. Um, I do want to let the council know um right off the bat, unfortunately, uh, the main condenser for the police department air conditioning um, totally um, stopped working. Yesterday, we
called out Whailing and Ives. They did some diagnostics and today I met with the individual right outside our windows here and uh they're stating that there is a leak somewhere in the line of Freon. They stated that the uh the units are
very old. They don't recommend pressure testing it to try and find out where the leak is. I guess it's an out unused freon anymore. So uh they don't use that type of freon anymore. It's $350 a pound to fill the system would be close to $2,000
and they recommend um purchasing a new unit because it sounds like it's unfixable. Unfortunately, that also involves the condenser, the air handlers, and new duct work. It was explained to me that the freon they use uh has the potential to be flammable, so
the duct work has to have sensors in it. So, I was able to receive the um estimate this afternoon and it's just shy of $30,000. So, um it's the main air conditioning um for basically the entire police
department other than the basement and the um the dispatch center. Um the question hopefully is it will be funded but whether we fund it in the operating budget or the capital budget
um that would be my first request of the council you know I mean it does have a life expectancy of more than 10 years um you know my thought would be be put it in capital of course I did get the bond ordinance today but we it's not you know Sue didn't put it out yet so I can
send it back to >> um Mr. buying failed to, you know, tight, you know, revise it, it would add another $1,500 for the 5% to the capital improvement fund uh that we took down about $20,000 from moving those things.
So, I guess the first thing is will you fund it? And second, would you like to fund it in the operating budget or in the capital budget? And of course, I'm going to get quotes, but I, you know, I have to tell you it's going to be at least $30,000, but I will try and find it less expensive.
>> Mr. Corporin, where would a an expense like this where would a CMFO put this type of expense under typical budgeting? >> I I would probably lean toward the current fund. I mean, based on the life expectancy,
you probably could do it in capital. Um, but I personally probably rather see it current, but obviously that's the council. >> Thank you. How old is the current system that tested? >> Do you know? I was told it was over 10 years old.
>> I don't I don't know. >> What What's our warranty? >> There is no >> not on that one, but moving forward. >> I don't know what the warranty would be on the new one. I didn't get that that far. >> Okay. >> What was the um
this proceed you missed the call? I believe well I don't know what those but what was the work effort that Mr. C did >> he replaced all the units correct Mr. Okay. >> I I don't know. I know he replaced all the town hall ones. I don't recall if he
did police. Yeah, >> he didn't do that one. He did the one for here. >> Okay. I know town hall he did everyone. Seriously outside. >> So, he did not do the one outside. Okay. All right. There's your answer. >> What's that you council? We uh put it
into general or capital. I would I would to tend to put it in the capital even though it's a not a huge expense. It's more than you know like we're talking about trucks there what five 10 so I I would put in the capital >> Mr. Sears
>> only it's 1 1500 >> I would use expense >> general expense >> ML I I would say general expense as well >> Mr. I would, excuse me, I would go capital. I think
it's, you know, it has a I don't know what the amortization timeline is for it, but you know, say major piece of infrastructure on town hall. Um, >> do we know how old the other one is? I'm sorry, Mr. Do we know how old the other
one is? Could both of them, since they're both the same age, crap out? The technician told me that he it was over 10 years old. That's that's >> But what about the other one that's out there that wasn't replaced? That's what I'm worried about. >> I don't know. I mean, you know, just for observation, the condenser looks newer. >> Okay.
>> So, there's two out. Well, there's >> there's three and then the dispatch one is up to the front of the building. Right. >> So, I think one is the court that's right outside our window. One was the police basement and one was the police main, which is everything but the
dispatch. the one that's busted. >> So, Mr. Alman, you were gearing on capital. >> Yeah, I tend to think capital. Uh, but the question I have is, uh, you may not have the answer tonight,
but the next stage in the municipal complex was to, uh, evaluate the police department. So, if they put in a new unit, is that a
unit that can be reused or is it a throwaway? >> Do you do you know where the Sorry to talk to him from the from the audience, but uh the whole audience. Um do you know where the air handler part is at is?
>> It's in your attic. >> It's in your attic. So I do not believe I mean there's a couple of options that are out there for the police department. The main focus was putting the addition southbound. So from this side over and that was for the
this sally port and the two cells. It did not involve ripping off the roof. I'm sure there's some type of you know you know part of it that's going to have to been together. I mean I don't know. I I would tell you that I think we should definitely find that out before we do
it. But I don't know. >> I don't think it's gonna matter what we have now. You can't go air conditioning, right? >> Yeah. I don't see why we couldn't use it, but I'm sure it would have meant either involve finagling around it and moving the system, but I wouldn't be out to just destroy it because we're, you
know, taking a wall down or something like that. Well, I guess the question is and I don't know if it's a viable option, but you know the I don't know what they refer to as the the room >> called the room the um >> like the Mitsubishi
>> splits. >> Yeah, they they just pretty much stay in the room. >> Yeah, it's not >> it's from back here all the way to the front of the building. So there's a lot of little rooms and then the entire hallway. The only thing air conditioned right now on this first floor is the
dispatch center. That's it. Everything else is on reason. >> I believe if if you did if you don't if you don't mind speaking um if we ever did the addition that would probably have its own separate system and that
would be zoned separately >> for your capital. >> Yeah. I you know unlike the cars which have a much the vehicles which have a much shorter life they have a shorter life and I think we'll be the plan would
be to purchase them on a regular basis a regular cadence so that's why I would view them as being >> different >> expense versus capital >> okay >> I will follow uh Mr. installments lead and go capital also. So capital
>> So I'll just I'll just revise it. I'll probably send you a new plan just so you have it for your books and then um it'll be no problem tomorrow morning. >> All right. So on page one we we only have salaries, right? >> Uh yeah, if we if we could I just have a list for you if you don't mind. If you go to page two, everybody, and we're
going to go to uh >> the bottom you're going to go to admin mileage at the bottom of page two. >> Yep. We need to reduce that from 600 to 550 to be >> Yep. >> So I'll make a motion to reduce uh admin
travel and mileage expense from 600 to 550. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Cio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Olman. >> Yes.
>> Counciloman Bles. >> Yes. >> Council President Denna. >> Yes. Perfect. Page two. Uh, let's see. No, page three, we're going to admin IT >> all the way down at the bottom. >> Yep. Admin IT services.
>> Increase that by 12,000 up to 43,500. And that's >> So, the new ask and recommended request is 43500. >> Yes. >> And why is that? >> Because you guys move the computers from capital to current. >> That was a $12,000 computer expense that
we moved last night. >> All right. What's next, Mark? >> Oh, roll call. Roll call. I'm sorry. So, uh, new recommend is, uh, 43500 for 60120103200 admin IT services. I'll make a motion to
amend it. Um, >> second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Uh, yes. >> Councilman Sears, >> yes. >> Councilman, >> yes. >> Counciloman BZ, >> yes. Council, Council President, the Senate, >> yes. All right. Page eight. Page eight,
>> we are going to elections miscellaneous. >> Elections miscellaneous. Yeah, >> we are reducing that $600 to a total of $2,900 and that's because we signed the agreement with Bethany. We thought it was going to be 1,500 uh an election
date. It is 1,200. So, we recommend reducing it to 2,900. So, the new recommend request for 60120121500 is $2,900. I'll make a motion. Do I have a second? >> Roll call.
>> Councilman Casio, >> yes. >> Councilman Sears, >> no. >> Councilman, >> yes. >> Counciloman BZ, >> yes. >> Council President, >> yes. >> We'll go to page 17. Can we just all
make sure we have the mics on? Uh there's some issues going on on WCTV >> page 17. >> 17. Thank you. >> Okay. So, it's actually it starts in the bottom of 17. It goes to the top of page
18. um administration respectfully requests the reconsideration from council to uh fund an additional 500 to bring it back to our recommendation of 7500. This was for our website designers extra projects. I had provided council
with the previous purchase order and invoice um for the extra work that that individual did. Um so I'm asking for your reconsideration please. I'll >> motion for the 7500. I'll second. >> Roll call.
>> Councilman Casio, >> no. >> Councilman Sears, >> yes. >> Councilman Alman, >> no. >> Council BZ, >> yes. >> Council President Denna, >> no. >> Next.
>> Okay. Um, we'll go to page 24. >> Okay. >> We tabled uniform construction code software for $5,000. We'd like to >> um reduce that down to zero.
>> Um I will make a separate pitch uh when we get to salaries, but we'd like to bring this down to um zero. Aren't we getting this the AI software? >> We talk about later. >> Well, you Yeah, you tabled it because you guys wanted to read the document I
had given you. Um, we had since um want to pitch another idea as far as staffing and we were willing to remove the $5,000 for AI software uh to >> So, we're not buying the AI software.
>> That's our recommendation for this year. Yes. So for so this we're making 612219582000 minus 5,000. >> Yes. >> So um can you give us the pitch now before we decide what we're doing? >> So we would like to increase the
staffing in the building department slashplanning and zoning. If you remember we did consolidate everyone into the same office. Um there is a lot of work being conducted within the building department. We'd like to um essentially hire what we would call a
second assistant TA. Just so everyone knows, you know, um one individual in there is a technical assistant. One individual is a part-time um assistant technical assistant. We would like a second part-time technical uh assistant
technical assistant. And the the main motivation would be to expand the hours of operation for the public. So, right now, um, depending on any given day, the latest someone's in there is till 5. So, I'll, you know, I want to just interject
say we're not bringing you a halfbake idea, but I don't essentially have everything solidified. Um, we just know that we definitely want an additional person on a Friday. Right now, there's only one employee that staffs that office um from 8:00 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
The individual that's there sometimes has to go out for either a tree inspection or when uh you know a zoning is needs to be done, they generally try to do it earlier in the week. Um but then when that off then that individual uses entitled you know uh a crew time
off, it uh forces us to close down the office. We'd kind of like someone to have additional staffing hours on that Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday. So, it would be an additional person in that office for Friday from 8 to 1:30
and then we're thinking like a 12 um to 6:30, 12:30 to 700 p.m. Um we are open late on Mondays till 7 p.m. And the feedback we're getting is it's very much appreciated. There's a lot of customers that come in Monday night between that
time frame after work and then on Tuesday, I'm sorry, on Wednesday and Thursday, the planning and zoning assistant is there till 5. So, they've worked very well together. I don't want to say necessarily totally crossrained,
but they work they work very well. So, even if the planning and zoning assistance there and someone comes in to drop off or has some questions about construction, they tend to take it. So, um, in addition to that, it would also assist us with having extra, uh,
manpower, so to speak, to purge old files over after the 10 um, 10-year period. They can be purged. And my exhibit down on the table in front of you, those piles of paper, those are all
the still the existing escrow module um, accounts that have not gone been gone through. Most of them are from Azelina. So there's road opening permits down there. The big pile you see is the Aelina close out purchase orders. Um so
we want to hit that a little bit at a time. You know, technically it's could be essentially deemed unclaimed money because a lot of these projects are going to take research time going into the computer, seeing if it's done, if it's not done, contacting the owner,
does the owner still live here? So, it's still a big project, but the motivating factor would to have um more manpower in that office for an extended period of time and on Fridays. So, right now, the assistant technical
assistant works um 20 hours, 25 hours, and has a salary of 32,000. What we'd like to do is maybe I'll I I'm going to essentially ask for half of that 16,000 to initiate this at the
halfyear mark with the intention of if it works coming back to the council for the full you know 32 or whatever the salary is at that point. Um the motivation to take away the 5,000 in IIA is to help support the money needed
for that. So, you know, technically it would be an $11,000 addition from what we initially asked, but we're taking away the five. >> Are we are we are we committing to having pile on the table complete by 2027? >> No way. There there's no way. And again, the motivation isn't because I I did
tell council that I didn't need to fund the special building project line um to take care of that project, but I'm I'm just wanted the council to know that there's there's definitely things that this individual would do and we want to crossrain them so they can assist maybe
an escrow billing in there, assist the assistant to planning and zoning, assisted the construction office. There'll be plenty of stuff to do and it will be way less expensive than trying to make a part-time employee full. >> Do we really based on based on
inspection revenue and fee revenue? Do we really need to fund this person or do we just hire the person based on the all the building construction going on in township right now? Shouldn't this salary be because the building department is supposed to be selfunded as per the DCA guidelines, right? It is.
So, we shouldn't be putting money from the taxpayers into it. It should be all coming out of out of inspection of fee revenue, right? So, if there's money there, like we should >> essentially, but I don't want, you know, I don't want to give a false impression to the council that that it can always be done. So, in your miscellaneous
documents, I gave you the UCCC report for 25. We we did awesome. We blew it out of the water. >> That's what I'm saying. So, why do we need to add money? >> Well, because I can't promise the council that's going to be every year. So, the expenses for the depart for the building department were like 2.84 84
last year and we brought in 455. But I want the council to know honestly that the year before we only brought in I'd have to look at the revenue but say the revenue was only like 240. So we do have um you know the fair share housing
you know that will come in. But I can't promise the council that looking forward every year we're going to um be in the green so much. But but the but the but the building department director should be have that
analyzed so he or she knows if they have to cut staff at any point in time based on what their projected revenue is for the year because you know I've been in departments where you know we've we've had to let go of inspectors in August because the revenue fell
and you know that's what happened. So, you know, we're going back to the old adage of like when I first got put on council that we're we're funding the building department whether they're making money or not making money, which is not how it's supposed to operate. But we don't have an abundance of spec.
>> No, no, I'm not saying we have an abundance. >> One electric, one plumber, one building, one fire. So, if we got rid of one, I don't know who would do it. So, I understand what you're saying. I don't I certainly don't think we're in the position to cut staff. No, I'm not I'm not I'm not saying we have to, but
somebody should be watching it. Like I know last year we didn't have to because we had such a an abundance of permits come in that it was it was a banner year, but there are lean years where, you know, we have to do more with less. >> Yeah. I mean, you know, >> the department has to do more with less
based on the guidelines set forth by the state. >> I understand. I just I don't think there's more to take away to make less. You know what I mean? Well, there's always way, >> you know. So, >> I I I just don't understand. So, we want
to add a head that potentially will come in once they're on on boarded uh at >> this new person. I'm sorry, Mr. >> This would be a new person >> at 32
16 for the half year, but 32 basically. Um, and you know, I I can't think of one industry. I can think of one or two, but I can't
think of many industries or many companies that are expanding payroll in this environment. And we have, you know, we were presented with a solution for the AI software that would basically
be a uh sort of resource multiplier to the existing staff. So, we're going to throw out software that, you know, uh is a resource multiplier to bring on a resource. I I
>> did I ever use those words a resource multiplier? >> I am. >> Well, what what is the software going to do? I mean, you not you the administration made a pitch to fund $5,000 of AI software.
What was that going to do? >> Well, I provided a whole write up on >> That's what I'm saying. It was an important write up. I thought it was a very valuable asset. >> You know, it was a very valuable tool to the to the department. >> I know you're not throwing money around. So, I was trying to make a concession to get some extra work. So, if you're
willing to, you know, I wasn't making an ultimatum. So, if you're willing to fund the 5,000 for the AI program, I'll take it. If you're willing to give me the additional staff, then I would love to have it. I was trying not to >> based on based on well based on the the
the the initial approval of this item for the software. I thought it was an important piece of software for the building department because it would help them get their reviews done on a more expeditious manner because it would do a lot of the calculations that they're doing manually now. So it get permits off their desk.
>> That would be great. Like I said both >> but >> we can't have both. Yeah. But I think I think getting rid of this based on the original approval and the the the data that was provided for for the approval I think is is a mistake because I I again
I I thought it was a it was a good value for the employees to help them >> that's great things off their desk. >> The the building department is the greatest revenue grabber for us. That's where we wanted to throw. >> Well, I think one of the biggest problems we have in town, Mark, is that
permits take forever to get in this town, and we all know that. That's >> So, we want to reduce staff because >> No, no, we want to use the AI software to get permits out of the department quicker. We're not reducing staff because they don't have the staff yet. You're asking? >> No, I'm going back. >> What I'm saying is I looked at this is like, hey, one of the biggest complaints
I get from people in town is it took me a a long time to get my permits. So, I thought, you know, with the presentation that was made with the AI software that it would get permits off the department uh officials desks and and process them quicker, so therefore people wouldn't be complaining to us saying, "Hey, I waited
8 months to get my pool and now the season's over and I don't have it." >> I'll be very happy to take that back, but I would also ask you to take those complaints with a grain of salt because people don't understand that there's 10 days to do this or 20 days to do this. You know, that's often when I get in the
middle of a complaint, it's because the resident didn't understand the building department or zoning officer has by law a certain amount of dates. So, I would just just want but I I'd love to take it back. I I would hope you'd give me the additional staff, too. >> Um it's a pitch. Thank you, Mr. Sears. I
appreciate it. Appreciate it. >> I think the software was the key to moving those permits. That's how we were told and how we were presented. >> I did not tell you that, sir. No, we were presented. We were presented that the software would help expedite
those permits. Whether you told us or not, that's really irrelevant. >> You guys turn everything critical criticism. I didn't criticism as this is >> about this. No one tentatively approved it. No one read the information I gave
to them. They said we would table it. So, please don't anyone on it today say that I said this. I never said it was a resource multiplier. I never said it would get permits out. That doesn't happen. I don't want to be called out about it next year. That's all I'm asking.
>> No, no, but it's a resource tool. >> Okay. >> I'm glad to have it. >> And I would just like to add quickly um that, you know, software is good. I came from a background of software, but software cannot help with the building staffing problem that was uh mentioned
for the residents and it also can't help with that stack of paperwork that's on the table. >> Mark, but they'll be extremely critical when it get doesn't get done. So, >> but Mark, we gave you a budget last year to get that done, did we not? We're we're more than
>> But we're more than willing to fund that person to keep that going. >> Nobody's taken that away. Okay. >> Right. That money is still there. >> No, it's not. It's not there. And I I told you it was going to be a very extremely humongous project that was not going to get done.
>> So, I I it's okay. I made my pitch. It is what it is. >> Yeah. I think that money was to get it off the ground just to see where we stood, not to get it done. You can tell there's a lot of work there. Mark, was that position that you're talking about, was that a full-time position or >> No, it was a part-time position so we
could avoid, you know, health benefits, all the fringe benefit. >> Can you uh rephrase how many hours that would be? >> So, what I would what I would hope for is that you would fund me enough to make it 25 hours. like you know if you funded me to 16,000 and I get it initiated by
the July 1st position uh time frame um that I could you know work up you know it's going to it's going to >> do we have somebody in mind because last time we had a hard time getting a person >> I don't and you're right I think >> didn't we have a hard time last time getting the the TA and the assistant TA
>> I I don't know they were both here before I was here I mean it's you know it's going to be a special person because we want them to work like 12:30 to 6:30 12:00 to 6:30 and a Friday. But, you know, I think there's someone out there um for it. Um,
you know, I I really do think it would be a benefit. I I can't make the promise, but >> I'll make a motion to approve the 5,000 as is for 601221 95820 for the AI software. >> I'll second that.
>> All right. That's the one they zeroed out. That's when they you we we never voted on it. >> Table. >> It was tabled. So, I made a motion to leave it as requested at $5,000. >> Okay. >> Mike Alman uh seconded it.
>> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Uh yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Omen. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President Denna. >> Yes.
>> Sorry, going back up top. So if we go to the top to building department um >> are are you going to I'm sorry >> tell me what page >> 23 >> 23
>> yes >> where's the part-time TA go Mr. I I mean I would ask you guys to put it into the the second TA position which is on page 22. >> There's only one T Oh, second. >> Yeah. So I would just ask you to put
16,000 in there and then I would just manage it, you know, from there. So it would be the line 60122 1951 150. >> I'll make a motion to increase make that $50,000. >> How much? >> 50,000.
I appreciate that, Council President. >> Okay. So, this is this is a part-time position, right? >> Part-time position. So, it'll be two part-time T be a second and a third part-time TA. Correct? >> Yes. >> Assistant TA. >> Yes. An assistant assistant. >> So, you're motioning for 50,000.
>> Yep. >> I'll second that. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Cassium. >> No. Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Omen. >> No. >> Councilwoman BZ.
>> Yes. >> Council President Denn. >> Yes. >> Is that pass or >> I don't think it's goes up. You >> need four. >> You need four. You only got three. >> What if I What if it's if it's our recommendation? does that
>> you can't change your reputation. >> Yeah, get that point. Good try. Thank you. I appreciate you. >> All right, where are we going next? >> Stacy's. >> So, we are going to go to um page 26. >> 26.
>> We're going to go to p uh police salaries. >> Police salaries. >> Yeah. So, I I know it's a um a salary line, but I just wanted to remind council with with the agreement that we have tentatively approved, we could
reduce this uh by 10,000 essentially. It is contractual the number there. So, we would I would imagine everyone knows the agreement I'm speaking of. I'm just trying to be a little koi with it. >> So, 2,900's the new request and add recommend. >> Correct.
>> Yes, sir. So for 6012524110 29 2,900 is the new request and recommend >> question. >> Yes m >> all the >> hold on we got to do a motion and uh and then we can question it right
>> s recommend on the on the administration >> okay no go ahead Mr. Seriously. >> Okay. So, all of the savings we got from the early retirements, shouldn't we reduce that from the police salary? >> We did, sir. It was It would have We
saved $200,000 from last year's retirement. >> It went down 200 >> retirements, I should say. >> And what about >> Do you agree? >> Oh, we can't do that yet. Can't do it this year. Next year. >> Yeah. Next year you'll realize the
savings, Mr. Sears. >> And we're approximating that at 120,000. Remember, just give or take. Please don't keep me at the way. >> I know. I know. >> Is there >> Mr. Roman has a great memory. >> Is there a reason or can you explain?
So, I see the 200 obviously in the appropriated and requested. You know, it's it's right there in front of you. um why the actual didn't come up to that.
So >> So if I may >> 3 million 1110. >> Hold on. Mr. Corpin has an answer for you. >> If I may, that's because we we we did a transfer for 63,000 coming out. When you transfer money out, it it reduces what
it appears that was spent. So you would have to add that 63,000 to that. So, we're bringing it basically up to 3 million one. >> And what did we do with that 63? >> I I can tell you the resolution number and the date. I don't have the resolution in front of me.
>> You guys have it in your miscellaneous. >> Yeah, we stated 12225. Uh, and we took 63,000. What I don't know is I'm assuming it wasn't just one account that needed that money. It was probably a few. If I had, you know, maybe >> the first transfer was like mostly
energy stuff. So again the 3,110 was appropriated based on contract. Uh just as the 29 is going to be
appropriated based on the contract. And we see that $200,000 that was discussed as part of the early retirement actions. >> Yes. >> So if we didn't spend we only spent
3,33,000 though. >> So the savings going across 3033 to 2910 is like 70,000 less.
Well, we you still appropriated the two the $3,110,000. So, we raised that as part of the budget. >> Correct. >> Right. So, we may have only spent that amount, but we still raise that amount. So, the appropriation
is $200,000 cheaper, but you got to remember all those um all the employees received 2.75% this year. they received their step increases and everything. So even with that, there's still a $200,000 savings
from what we asked for last year to this year, >> right? Like I know what you're saying. You're saying, "Why wasn't it $200,000 cheaper than >> 3 million 33,000? >> Shouldn't it be 28?" >> Right? So, but you got to remember from
last year to this year, there was a 2% 2.75% increase across the board, plus there was step increases. So, you know, employee that was making 50 might be making 60 and then that 60 got a 2.75%. >> So, we saved 200,000 off of what we
asked from last year. >> Chief, we're not hiring new officers, right? year >> hiring. >> Yeah. Not >> we're not well replace or hire, whatever you want to call it. Are we replacing officers this year?
>> If we have a retirement, >> right? So, the new ask is 2 million. The new request is 2,900. Um, do I have a motion? So moved. >> I'll second it. Roll call. >> Councilman Casio,
>> no. >> Councilman Sears, >> no. >> Councilman Omen, >> yes. >> Counciloman BZ, >> yes. >> Council President, the Senate, >> yes. >> What's next, Mr. Uh,
>> okay. Thank you. We're going to go to uh page 29. No, no, no. We're going to go to page 27. >> 27. Okay. Yep. Uh police officers too. >> Special officers too. >> Y >> uh again with that agreement, we can
reduce that line by $19,000. >> 70,000 is the new request. >> The new ask would be 70,000. >> So minus 19,000. Uh, I'll make a motion to make uh 601252401947,000.
Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Counc. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman, >> yes. >> Council Veles, >> yes. >> Council President, >> yes.
>> Okay. >> Um, on the top of that page, we have a director. The first one we'll do just to get rid of this page. Um there's a there's two there's a director of public safety 1850 requested 1850 recommended. Do I have a motion? >> Where are you?
>> Right at the top of page 27. Everybody okay with the directors at 1850? >> Yes. >> Everybody okay? >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> I'll I'll just make a motion that we just do all directors 1850. So you don't have to go through each number. >> So every director is okay. 1850.
>> That's my That's my >> I'll second this. >> Okay. We don't have to take a roll call on that because they're all the recommended. >> They're all the same. Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. They're all the same, right, Mark? They're all the same. >> Yes, sir. Except Yeah, except for the public affairs director, but I know you'll we'll go through that.
>> We'll go through that. Okay. What's next on your list? >> All right. Let's go to page 29. It's going to start uh the discussion on the >> radio. Yeah. >> So, that would be the first one in the police budget that's associated with the dispatch center. Uh so >> so this we're going to add we're going
to add the money from the ESB temporary uh the new >> No that that'll be in the ESB. >> Okay. >> That's couple couple line couple more pages down. >> So what's this radio expense we're going to change? >> So well we tabled it because that line is associated with the dispatch service
agreement. So um after having all the presentations and discussion on outsourcing the dispatch now we have to uh I guess make those decisions. >> I think um this is a discussion that I'd
like to put into the fall of this year that I'd like to start a discussion before the budget's finalized so we can have meetings on it. um in discussion on it. I think it's too late right now to do anything with it and I you know we
hopefully get different numbers back in the end of you know at that point in time but I'm okay with leaving the way it is right now. >> I agree. >> So it's staying in capital I mean in operating. >> Yeah. Oh no we're talking about dispatch itself.
>> Oh no I thought you talk about radio. >> No no not radio. Mr. Paul's question was are we are we are we going to proceed with identifying a outside source for dispatch or are we leaving it in town? I think it's we're behind the eightball already of moving it now because we're
you know four months into a year. So I think this is an October November discussion of of getting the numbers in October November. So I think we'll put it on the agenda for then to start discussions amongst the council. We'll move that up to August.
>> You'd like to move it up to August? We'll move. >> It's going to take a while before we >> You've been here before. >> Yeah, we've been through this uh multiple times more times than the car. >> No, I think I think we're we're it's April already, so I don't think we can do anything this year. >> So, we start discussions in August like
you said. >> Um and we'll go from there. Is everybody okay with that? >> Yes. >> Yes. Mr. Sears. Yes. Mr. >> Mhm. >> Okay. So, go ahead, Mr. There's the Carlo. >> Okay. So, the the request is 23,000. >> Everybody okay with the request here for
radios? >> I'm I'm fine with it. >> Everybody fine with it? >> 23,000. >> The next one is police miscellaneous, right? >> You got it, sir. We're going to If you want to put the speedboard in, we would ask that the increase of the line be
increased to 18,250. >> So, the new request to recommend is 18250. Yes, sir. >> That's the speedboard on Vanber. >> That's the Vanberg speedboard, right? Yes. >> By >> and then do we Yes. By one. And then did
we look at possibly moving the one on Washington? Cuz today it was telling me I was doing 188 miles an hour again. >> And I know it's because the solar doesn't hit it. The Tacoma does not do 188 miles an hour. It's not turbo, so it doesn't do it. Um >> that wasn't
>> Can we maybe move it? >> Can we figure out a different place for it? We we will look into that. >> Everybody uh do I have a motion what's the number for? Everybody okay with the 18250 to buy the van speed sign I'm
>> we got funds for that right from the insurance company >> 2023. Yeah. >> All right. What's next, Mr. Carl? >> So 18250 is good. >> Yeah. >> We're going to go right below. >> It's the new request I recommend. >> We're going to go right below to guns and ammo. >> Oh, guns and ammo. Yep. And that new ask
is going to be 37,000. So just to put the math right in everybody's head. >> Are we going to war? >> I hope not. Hope >> probably just a month here. >> Holy moly. >> I'm joking. >> We're good.
>> So the chief said he could reduce if he got all the rifles, he could reduce the 24 to 22, but then you add in the 15 for the price of the rifles. That brings us to 37,000. We moved it out of capital. >> Okay. Everybody okay with that? >> Bottom of page 29.
>> So this includes a 15 from top. Correct. Top is approved. This one's approved on the top of page. >> Right. And then you have 45. >> Yep. So 18250 for this one and >> 37,000 for this one. Everybody okay with that? >> Give me the final number on that line. >> 37,000
22,000 for ammunition and 15,000 for new rifles. >> Correct. Mr. D? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> Mr. Alman, you okay with that? Yes. >> All right. What's next? >> All right. We're going to go to page 30 down at the bottom. We're going to go to
dispatch desk software licenses. >> Yep. >> And uh Mr. >> the I know we're specifying specific rifles based on what we need.
Does the 1033 >> Nope. >> Can't use them. doesn't doesn't allow it doesn't allow armorament or um lethal lethal weapons. Correct. >> But maybe a tank. >> Yeah. Actually, usually
>> you can get a tank. >> Armor armor car. >> Armor car. You can armor cars and stuff like that. They sell you pistols, firearms basically. >> No firearms or >> firearms. >> I wouldn't want to use one. >> No, it's been used in the years. >> All right. So, what are we doing here?
Mr. the call at the bottom. >> Uh, just we're asking for 235. >> Oh, 23500. >> Marines never abuse their firearms. >> All right. Everybody okay with the 23500 request for police dispatch licenses? >> Everybody okay with the bottom of page 30?
>> Yeah, that's legacy stuff, right? We need >> Okay. >> And then we're going to go to uh computer software leasing on page 31. >> Yep. >> 275. >> What is it? >> 275. 7500 software computer police
computer software leasing. Anybody okay with that? >> This is everything we tabled because of the dispatch. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yes. >> Okay. What's next? All right. So, let me just get my notes. Okay. Just go up a line, sir. We're going to go to police vehicle acquisitions.
Um we we we understand what council did. just respectfully uh asked that it 298,000 be funded and that's for the two frontline cars and the three side job cars. We do totally respectfully understand what council did but we uh we
asked for 298 in that line and that's because whatever you will approve we took out of capital we put it in the current that would be the appropriate line to the new >> I'd make a motion to reduce the 298 to 90,000 for one vehicle. Second
>> roll call. >> Casio. >> Uh, yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Omen. >> Yes. Yes. >> Councilwoman Bles. >> No. >> Council President Dennett.
>> Yes. >> All right. Let me just scratch that off. Okay. We're going to go to page 32 >> and it's going to be OEM. So the OEM other >> Well, what about police salaries and wages on the first line because that
that starts on the bottom of page 31, Mr. Darl? >> Yeah. I mean, did you want >> Oh, no. No. Go go go in your order, please. I'm sorry. >> Okay. So, we're going to go to OEM miscellaneous expense. >> Yep. and we have to increase that to
17,000. The reason is we took 10,000 from capital for the upgrade to the intersection by Picari Bicari and uh council also wished to purchase two of those portable Wi-Fi hotspots. So it went from 4,500 to 7,000 for the
additional >> and then 10,000 for the >> and then 10,000. Yes. >> Everybody okay with the new recommended request? 17,000 >> 17 even. Yeah. >> Okay. Yeah. I'll make a motion. >> We don't have >> Oh, yeah. It's good. >> What's next? Mr. Carl, everybody's good with it. >> Okay. Wow. All right. Uh, let's go to
page 35. Oh, do you want to do that director while you're there? You said that's good. >> The director All directors are good. So, >> perfect. Okay. So, we're going to go to 35 and we're going to talk about the dis
the what are we calling that? like the the backup dispatch center uh for emergency operations at the um were >> we putting that in building maintenance or were we >> No, I thought the one right below it equipment. Okay. >> Yeah. So, we would make we would request
that it go up $30,000 to $35,000. >> Everybody okay with that? Since we moved it out of capital, we voted last night to move it. So, >> was that for >> the new ESD the secondary dis at the building? We all agreed last
night to move it to put it in capital >> uh >> 39 >> 490. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm trying to get right. >> Yeah. 490. Page 35. >> Sorry. And the 30,000 making it 35,000. Right. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Where are you next, Mr. D? >> Uh we're going to go to page 39. So DPW vacation buyback. I uh you know I I kindly ask for the support of keeping it the $1,000 there for any employee that
may wish to sell back the vacation. >> I haven't checked off that we approved it. >> Yeah, I think >> we approved it. >> We approved it. >> I haven't checked off that it was approved. >> I must have been. >> Okay, that's fine. >> Are you sure, Mr. Cassio? I'm serious. >> You were doodling. No, I'm telling you there's no doodles on. >> Are you sure you proved that? I'm being
here. >> I'm positive. I have a check mark by >> I had a question on it, but I didn't say >> Oh my god. That's a major win. Okay. >> You take it while I can get it. >> DPW director. We're good. I will take that. Okay. Um, page 40.
So, this is the DPW radios. I do not have a good answer for you that why we didn't buy them last year. I spoke to the foreman and the uh superintendent and Tai who's also, you know, uh, well involved in this. The one ordered in 24
did come in. We're now waiting for it to get installed because the price is to purchase the radio. Remember, it's not a portable. It's like the the radio in the car to install it. If you fund the 3000, we have vehicles that don't have it. I
will assure that the money is spent for the radios this this year. We do need it. >> I'm not funding it again next year if we don't spend it. >> All right. So, >> no. Did they buy a radio already? So we in 23 we tried to buy one
>> and then we canceled it because it was never coming. So in 24 we tried again but we had tried again in 24 before we canceled the 23. >> So in 25, you know, I can't I don't really have a good answer whether it was an oversight or we said well hell the
the one that we bought in 24 hasn't come in but it's finally come in now early 26. We're going to get it installed and you have my word that there are vehicles that need the radios. They want them. Um and we will spend the 3,000 this year on the
>> Yeah. I just don't understand. You know, we >> we budgeted. >> We budgeted it and they didn't buy it. Is it a managtorial pooa or uh what why is it lie in the budget again? I mean, I I
understand that you're going to make sure they get in there, but it just >> I'll take the blame for last year that, you know, we didn't order it. >> Write that down. >> It's on recording. >> Everybody okay with the 30,000? >> I just ask. >> Go ahead, Mr.
You know, I I realize that we would want to add it to the vehicle, but they're in and out of different vehicles so much. Uh, are portables
more flexible? You know, >> not for them. >> No, they'll lose them. I've had to park or break them. >> Or break them. Yeah. >> Buster way more money, right, Chief? like >> and they'll break and they'll >> impede their ability to work there.
>> I've had Yeah. For DPW workers, it doesn't work. >> You assign it to someone and when they break it. >> Oh, come on. We're setting them up for failure. It's >> They're never going to wear it because it would just impede their their work.
>> Mark, quick question. The radio. Um, so we bought one in 24, right? >> Yeah. >> Is that installed already? >> No. No, that's that's >> So, are we using part of the the 3000 to get that one installed or >> No, that's in the price. So, the 1426 is the radio. >> That's going to come out the remainder
of the 27, >> correct? To install it. >> No, it's it's all within the price for the 1426. >> Oh, they installed But they just didn't do it yet. >> They just didn't No, because the radio just came in. >> Oh, okay. >> And I I Well, I think it came in a couple months ago, but I think it got
lost in the mix to be honest with you because of the retirements. I think it was an assignment of one of the >> Okay. >> the retirees. >> Gotcha. >> Blame on the last time. >> I'll take the blame. >> Are they going to be on the county? I guess it network or channel.
>> Yeah, they're going to be on fire. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, those radios would be a lot more expensive frequency. >> It's our old frequency that the fire department used. That's what they use currently. Yeah, >> that's not the police legacy one, is it?
>> Yeah, >> it is. >> That's who fire that's who DPW uses. >> So, can they there's interoperability between the police? >> Yes. >> And the fire department >> the capability on our desk to listen to
those old frequencies. >> Everybody okay with the 3000? >> I'm okay with it. Thank you. >> Page 44, police vehicle repair. >> Police vehicle repair. >> Oh, you know what we got to do? We have
to do Did we do fire vehicles tires? >> Yes, we >> Yes, we did. We took 2,000. >> We did. You said that. Okay. >> I listened to it this morning. >> Thank you. >> We did do it. >> Yeah. police deep uh fire vehicle tires is done. >> Okay. We just got to do police vehicle
>> equipment repairs. We we do respectfully ask you to to leave it at 30 considering um we do have we we we did have cars in the queue waiting um for kind of some expensive repairs to see how we did with
the um acquiring the new vehicle. So we would kindly ask that we do not reduce that and we keep that at 30. Well, we getting rid of the four vehicles like was stated last night or we not getting rid of the four vehicles that were stated last night. >> If you gave us four vehicles,
>> we could swap out one. >> There's 22 There's 22 vehicles right now. >> Do you I mean, >> chief, there's 22 vehicles. Do >> you give me two vehicles? I >> We gave you one. We gave you one. >> Yeah. >> But do we need 20? >> Get rid of one, but that's it. >> But do we need the other 22?
>> Yes. Come here during the day and see how many vehicles in the parking lot. not 22 years. >> And chief, I also mentioned last night, I think you had four vehicles out of service last week, right? >> Currently, I probably spent about half that budget, right? That ask.
>> Okay. >> It's only going to get worse. >> All right. >> Make a motion to keep the 30. >> You're okay with it? Well, everybody's okay with the recommend. >> Everybody okay with the recommend? >> Yes. >> Thank you. What's next? Mr. >> We are We did police vehicle
acquisition. We're almost We're getting close. Uh, jump to page 61. >> 61. >> Yeah. >> 61. >> Yep. Where are you? >> We're going to go to capital improvement
fund. So, >> the new number for the air conditioning was 75,574. So, we just have to add 1,500 to that. >> So, 47 106 7. So $77,074
774. >> Yes. 77074. >> Everybody okay with the new recommended request >> for capital improvement fund? >> Seven 7707. >> You're not adding the air conditioning to the >> Please. Yeah.
>> Everybody okay with that? >> Yeah. Okay. >> All right. We're done with all the items then. >> Yeah. I think it's just except for the salaries. >> Yeah. We're going to go back and start on page one with salaries. All right. So, go to page one. Administrator um market value compared to Kaskak
Valley municipalities. Lowest paid administrator compared to surrounding towns. Additional information is in the binder. 149250 is the requested and recommended. >> So, I make a motion to accept it. >> I'll second it.
>> Well, if you're not going to change it, you don't have to move it. You don't have to make >> We got to figure out who's going to >> well for discussion here. Whatever you want to do. >> Well, I was going to make a recommendation. Take everything across the board salary wise and give everyone
a 2% raise across the board from the 2025 uh appropriated Right now, everybody's got a 2.75 except for certain people, Mr. Darl. >> Yes, there's there's a handful. >> Yeah, correct.
>> Are they tagged outside? Are they tagged on the spreadsheet as well as the book? U spreadsheets probably more informative. So if you go to the small finder and you open up the big you open up the big
sheets, the first set gives you um a comparison of 2025 salary and then how much the increase would be at 2% 2 and a quarter I'm sorry 2% 2 and
a half 2.75 and three. So essentially to give everybody a 2% raise on the sheet would be 27,462. Every quarter% above that is an
additional $3,66. So every quarter percent raise above 2% is is has a value of $3,66. But that does not take into account, you know, um the specific handful of employees that we asked for specific
raises for. >> So aside from uh the one officer in the administration, >> what one officer? What do you mean? I'm sorry. >> Aside from that, I'm just trying to
highlight those that >> Yeah. So I can I can bring you through. So if you go to the last column. >> Yeah. >> And you see increase. So uh that is a specific number for administrator.
>> Yes. >> Um you know the the uh the assistance in purchasing and in tax office we ask for 50 cent raise like we do every year.
Um, we asked for a specific uh raise for the clerk. Uh, council already approved like the, you know, like the the increase in $25 for like the meetings from 125 to 50.
Um, the deputy treasur benefits coordinator is a specific increase of $16773. You guys already approved the recycling coordinator. The directors you already approved for
$50 increase. >> Mhm. Uh the chief police has a specific salary for agreement. The And then if you go like to the bottom of the second page like the police the police um per DM we asked for
$29 per hour, right? Is that No. Yes. The part-time it's $29 an hour. It went up like I think from like what was it cheap like 2819 or something. Oh, I should have the >> Yeah, 2816.
And then we asked for a 50 50 cent raise for the special officer 2, but the range instead of 20 to 26, we asked it to go from $20.50 to $26.50. the crossing guards a new range of $20
to $22 an hour. And then the um then of course what we did with public affairs is we combined because it's it's the same individual that's the public affairs director and the public affairs
coordinator. So we just took the salary um for coordinator added 2.75% took the salary for director and just added the two together. So it's one one salary position rather than two and then
um I believe that's it. You know, I do I do have in case I miss someone, the next set of >> Yeah, but we can't we can't do the director and the salaries together because the directors are the directors. >> Did you want to >> Well, this came from a concern council
had last year about the assistant be being the same as director. Uh that, you know, there was some disagreement about should that be combined or not. So, we were just going based off of our recollection of what council. >> Yeah. But if we're calling it, we're still considering that the the person
the public affairs director. So what's to say the other directors say, "Hey, how come I'm not getting 10,000, you know, uh uh $234?" >> Pretty much for the reason I just stated is none of them are their own assistants. They for the most part they
all have employees who do the bulk of the work. >> If I have a question for Mark. >> Yes, sir. >> Or maybe the chief can answer this. Are we in line with crossing guard salary? Because I know we've lost a couple. They
went to other towns and we're paying much less than the other towns around us. >> I think the answer to that was you last people going to Oregon. I think you were saying they're paid. It all depend >> how much.
So for us to maintain the keep crossing guards and this is just we should increase it more than a dollar. I mean I I can tell that when there's no crossing guards there's usually a police
officer standing there and it's a lot expensive to have a police officer >> crossing the kids than the crossing guards. I know we're losing them, but maybe we should be more competitive with our crossing guards. And I'm just putting this out there. I mean, I can
see what's going on during the day. You guys basically are not around during the day, but I do see a lot of police officers are standing crossing and talking to a couple other people. >> You said when this happens, chief goes
to high school. What's happen >> because we don't have a crossing right here. >> Oh. >> So, should we consider making this more competitive for keeping our crossing guns? >> If we went to $30, would that be a
competitive rate? increase. >> Can you >> I mean, if I'm going to if we're going to invest money, I would invest the money in those caution guards during during the day, get them more competitive and keep them here without other towns drawing them from us or
spending top dollar for a police officer to stand there. Do >> we have any current openings now? >> We do. We've been getting applications in, but they come in drips and They also been throughout investigation.
>> I would I would agree with you, Mike, to make it $30. >> I I don't I that would be my if they're getting that much in Ultra Pan and and other surrounding towns are paying that. >> And if we're behind the Aball, I mean, it is it is >> more cost effective than putting an
officer there >> with a little bit of increase. >> A lot more than calling an officer in on overtime to stand at crossing guards. Do we do we do that chief? Do we have to call off Susan to to do crossing guard on overtime or not? >> If the shift is short, yes, then we would have to. Right now, the shift has
been covering it. So, we pull somebody off the shift. >> Okay. >> So, it's not costing us money, but we're pulling somebody off the road. >> It doesn't, but there's a police officer standing there for an hour. >> I mean, that would that'd be a perfect investment for the community. At least
that's the way I see it. Yeah. >> Chief, would you be able to figure out what the new the new request would be? I mean, if it essentially that's a third of an increase, right? >> Right now. >> Okay. >> I can't even What page is it?
>> I mean, I see it a lot during the day cuz I'm around most of the time during the day. >> Crossing guards is 60125240150. >> What page, sir? >> I I got to find it now. What number is it? It's 6015. >> Page 26. >> Page 26. >> I think page 26.
>> I must have looked that up. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Echo. >> Oh, you guys already approved it. That's why I'm >> think you need it. >> I have no idea. >> This pain. >> Well, would you
the council would you consider an intermediate step? Yeah, maybe 20. >> Old pan is $34. That's what I marked down here. >> I think $30 would be >> Well, it's a big It's a big increase. >> Yankees pay. >> What's that?
>> Yankees pay 50 million for a center fielder. Not every center fielder gets 50 million. >> You want to go to 25? >> 25. >> I mean, >> I just threw 30 out there in concept of a spread. >> You want the r the range, chief. Correct. error.
>> Yeah, I would want I would want to range it this way. I can top out >> 25 to 27. >> 25 to 27. I'm okay with 25 to 27 as an intermediate step. >> Everybody okay with that? >> See if it resolves. >> I agree. >> 25 to 27. >> Yeah. Okay.
>> Well, let's see what the new number is. >> That's a minimum 50 million. >> Let's see what benefits it brings. So can we have any is that correct? >> Correct.
>> So we can't talk about anyone. >> Only if they're negative, right? Only if it's that if they're you know I mean you want to mention a specific name only if it would be a detriment. Like if you want to talk about how great I am, you can feel free.
in the eyes of >> Well, first I I don't know if we can I hear what you're saying. I don't know if we can't talk about the negative. I don't know if we can talk about the positive. Quite honestly, I I I mean, again, I would give you my word. It's, you know, it's only when there's an
expectation of a negative outcome when we rice notice because remember we did it two years ago and we went we went through the the exercise but I mean can you do it do you feel you could do it without mentioning actual names or you want to know the names that are associated? >> No in front of you.
>> So public affairs you know I guess >> have we done public affairs? >> Hold on. >> Do we want to finish crossing guards or chief take you a little longer? >> Yeah. All right. So, probably going to be closer to 100 >> 95
>> right now. So, that's easy. That's without the um >> Right. >> So, do we want to make $100,000 >> the summer camp? >> I generally pay for the crossing guards out of the trust for summer camp because it's associated.
>> Yeah. So, do we want to move it to 100,000 and I would get you a 25 to 27 range? >> Yeah, definitely. Yeah. This is just doing a real quick. I can give you a more concrete number, but I think that would be pretty close. >> Everybody okay with changing on on page
26 to 95,000 request to 100,000? >> I'm I'm good with it. I mean >> motion to make it 100,000. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Roll. Yes, we can all get >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Omen. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President Des. >> Yes. Okay. >> You want to do overtime while you're right there? >> Overtime. That's a good investment. Uh >> police overtime. >> Police overtime. Uh 601250240120
110 requested 110 recommended. >> Same page. >> Yeah. The line right above crossing guards. Everybody okay with it? >> Hold on. This winter >> we had a little spike there last year. Any reason for that, Chief? >> It's the comp.
>> Yeah. Yeah. We tried to buy down our the cop that guy's accumulated. >> Well, do you need that much this year considering you just put two police officers on? >> If we want to continue to do that, it
definitely helps. I don't know what the rest of the year is going to bring as far as, you know, call outs and stuff like that. Again, it's trying to hit moving target. We got people coming. I don't know what it means for us. Hopefully nothing. But,
you know, one person has a lot of town. So, these are all things that we have to consider. mask is is the I don't know if it can be referred to it as but is the baseline overtime is that
constant or possibly decreasing? No, it's based on each officer's individual over time. So, you know, it depends on who gets what if if a sergeant calls out you try to replace the sergeant. This is where we keep the supervision. If a junior officer, we try
to keep him in the junior officer. So we kind of keep it in par with their >> Can a can a corporal take the place of a sad and get a differential pay for that? Correct. >> So they don't up until 300 hours they
get compensated. >> They get the compensation. >> Everybody okay with the 110? >> I'm I'm okay with it. >> I'm good because it's consistent. So >> everybody okay with it? >> Yes. >> All right. Done. Mr. Daro. >> Uh, thank you. Um, >> an administrative police administrative
assistant at the bottom of the page. Uh, that's a 2.75% raise there. >> Yes. >> So, we have a motion still on the table to reduce everybody's to 2%. Anybody want to second that?
>> Would you consider 2.5, Dr. Casio? >> No. I'll second Dr. Casio's two >> so to make everybody's uh 2026 increase 2% right Mr. Yeah. 2% from 25 opposed would be 2%.
>> Okay. >> I'm discussion. >> Uh I was waiting for you to motion and second before. Um, I, you know, personally, I think it's insulting and demoralizing to our employees that out
of a $16 million budget to give them all an increase to 2.75 would be just shy of $34,000. Um, you know, I'm sure many people on here uh who work for the government got more than 2% this year. Um, so, you
know, wh why are we doing this? You know, all it takes is one or two people to leave who will do better in another town. Then we have to go through the exercise of hiring training. You know, it's it's demoralizing.
Yeah, that would be about a $15 increase per year on the average house in town. >> I think we need to do better by our employees. I would support two and a half%. >> I mean, so I agree, you know, we need to
do better for the employees. We need to do better for the town's people, the taxpayers. You know, it's a balancing act because honestly, every time we've discussed a line, almost without exception,
you know, the administration has asked us to reconsider uh because they feel, you know, it's justified based on the uh dollar amount that has been re recommended. um
it it cannot be a everinccreasing budget. I mean I just feel that you know at some point we all have to um
accept that it's not an endless uh we we can't just tax upon tax upon tax for this. uh in my opinion the you know the 2% based on
my personal experience and what I've saw in my at least in my company you know that is not uh that's not an unusual increase and that's in the private sector uh >> but the private sector also benefits
from bonuses large bonuses >> I don't know the private sector >> so I know I'm a government employee two I'm not getting 2% I'm getting 3% rates >> um we also have >> I I I agree with you but if our cost of
living continues to rise then we're looking at a bigger picture so I I completely agree that we can't keep taxing and taxing but we're also as as residents experiencing expenses
so I So it's just an endless circle >> unfortunately. Yeah. I mean you go you can't you can't get a slice of pizza for less than $3 these days. So it's the reality. So while we have to I I agree completely that we have to balance it.
But it also has to they have to be able to do the same and balance their homes and these are the people that are servicing the residents and they're doing a very good job. C. Council President, if I may, I mean,
again, I'm sure everyone shares the same sentiment, I hope, but you know, the civilian group of employees are excellent. They do a great job for the residents, for the town. They're the worker bees. They are the ones that get this done for
the residents. I think job performance is incredible. We're not firing people. We're not disciplining people. We don't have grievances or lawsuits. We have great retention and I believe they they're deserving of the 2.75 especially
to point out the inequity between the unionized employees. Why? Why? Because the civilians are ununized. Do they get the 2% rates? The the police and the DPW have been getting 2.75s for
the last four years. And I believe the surrounding towns are seeing it's between 3 and 4% for civilians. And we're not even asking that. We we just think it's reasonable, especially every quarter percent is $3,000. It's, you know, I understand taxation, but these
are the people that are going to get stuff done. Thank you. >> You know, I won't speak for the other council, but I'm here often and I have a full-time job. I'm here often during the day when they're working or right after
I get out of work and I see them. I see them dealing with the public. I see them answering the phone calls. I see them walking up and down the hallways getting the job done. So, you know, Mr. D. Carlo makes a good point. They're the turnover rate. I
don't think we have them, right? Unless it's been a retirement. That's that says that, you know, they're happy. We want to keep them happy because they are the the soldiers doing the work every single day to get this
town moving. It's easy for us to sit up here and just, you know, Yes. No. >> No, it's not easy to sit up here and make decision. >> No, in comparison, we're just here making decisions, but they're doing the grunt of the work is what I'm saying. >> And nobody's taking that away from them.
It's just that. >> So then, you know, I agree. Let's balance. We have to balance. But like I said, each quarter percent is $3,000. You know, that that's, you know, out of a $16 million budget, it's an immeasurable
increase. Um, to keep, you know, I I'll go out on a limb, say there's maybe 40 employees on these two sheets. >> No, not a year. >> Okay. Um, you know, for the difference of another $3,000, you know, come on. Let's treat them like they deserve to be treated and keep the the, you know, good
morale, all like that. Do you think we're we we're mistreating them? I I I I find that insulting. We would never mistreat anyone. Just because they don't get a uh the raise that the administration wants doesn't mean we're we're insulting them at all.
Okay? There are people that work in private industry that don't get raises for years. There are people that in private industry don't have their health insurance paid like they get paid the the the civilian employees that we have our full-time ones anyway. Okay. So you
know we talk about this wheel that keeps going around. Okay. So government increases their taxes. Now the worker has to work even more who gets taxed even more. All right. So it's just a constant wheel. So if if somewhere where the where the government has a steady
flow, then you know the worker can enjoy a little bit of the fruits of their labor. And I don't think giving 2% is a kick in the can at all. I think that's pretty generous, especially with some of these higher salaried employees that we have. Okay? I mean, 2% doesn't sound
like much, but if you're, you know, making 200,000, well, do the math. That's a $4,000 bump. That's a lot of money. Okay. Okay. And I don't agree with the police and I'll be throw it out there that they should get the 2.75
increase every year. I think that's high. I really do. You know, you know, I hear, well, it's a dangerous job, which it is, but they chose the job. Okay, that's what they chose. And I don't want
to insult anyone, but you know, it comes with a price. Everything comes with a price. We're playing paying a crapload of money for insurance, health insurance, but that's got to come through somewhere and it's coming from the taxpayer. Okay? And I think even
though we're paying it for the employees, okay, part of it anyway, they're contributing, right? The employees are contributing. What about the individual worker who is not employed by a company? He pays a ton of money. A ton, you know, 30, $40,000 is
coming out of his pocket. So, where is the justification for that person? Okay. To say, man, he's getting really he's getting hammered. That person's getting hammered. He's got to work numerous jobs to get something that our employees are enjoying. So, for
me, rolling up the 2% plus health benefits and all the other benefits that they acrew, I think that's very generous. I think that is super generous. And I will leave it at that. Any other discussion?
>> I don't I don't think we're insulting either. I agree with that. But we can do better. So maybe you want to do the 275. Okay. But we got to go higher than the two 2%. I mean, you and I are both
enjoying 3% raises. It's not right. And I agree. It's coming from the top, right? This is why elections matter. It's coming from the top. We wouldn't be in this situation if we did not live in New Jersey. >> I mean, we're getting that our residents
are getting hammered from >> we're all getting state government more state than anyone else, right? That we're we have to fund crap that we shouldn't have to fund. >> Okay. >> Agreed. >> It's a sid. Okay. And then we're hammering them at the local level and
the county level. And I know the municipal level is the probably the smallest part that we have, right, Peter? Of all the of all the taxation that we have, correct? You know, the schools are under pressure. You saw what happened to that. Okay. Westwood's got to cut people. >> And who's the most important people?
>> Kids, right? >> So, there's got to be some break for the parents to help the the younger generation and everyone. You know, the seniors, they're on a fixed income and we have to do we have to do our part. It's not easy sitting up here making
decisions. You know, we'd like to have this, we need to have that. There's needs, wants, and desires. We have to cover our needs. We have to get some of our wants cuz we need it. And our desires sometimes have to be put on the back burner. So, again, I I digress. I'm
just going to more I talk, the more I get in trouble. So, I'm looking at the overall group here and basically they're around 45,000 to 52,000. That is super hard to try and live on.
Um, I feel comfortable with a 2.5%. We'll split the difference. Um, um, I I just think that >> we gave them two and a half last year, Mr. Defin. >> You wanted to give them 1.5. gave them
two. Initial vote was 1.5 and then uh thankfully you reconsidered and you voted for two. >> I will they they >> I can sit here and and honestly say >> 2.5y old
>> they deserve it, >> you know, because I'm here almost every day. >> Yeah, I would. >> I tried to avoid the administrator, but I'm here every day. >> I would. >> Mr. Strongman, would you reconsider 2.5? >> No, I'd prefer to stay at two. >> State two.
>> All right. So, the motion right now is to bring it down to two. >> Roll call. >> We're on We're on salary. >> I know. I >> All right. So, Councilman Casio motion to present
and Councilman second the motion. Roll call is Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears, >> no. >> Councilman, >> yes. >> Counciloman BZ, >> no.
>> Council President Desetta, >> no. Would you guys do 2.25? >> I'll motion for Oh, no. I'll motion for 2.5. >> I'm sorry. 2.5. >> 2.25. Second. >> No, no, no. I'm going to motion for 2.5.
>> 2 and a half. >> I just said that. >> You said 2.25. >> No, I >> Oh, okay. I misheard you. I'm sorry. I will motion for 2.5%. >> Second it. >> Sorry. Which which was that >> now? We're 2.5. >> Okay. Thanks. Glad to hear that. Mr.
Lass and Mr. Sears, >> somebody's not speaking correctly on my left here. >> Councilman Casio, >> no. >> Councilman Sears, >> yes. >> Councilman Omen, >> no.
>> Councilwoman Veles, >> yes. >> Council President Denna, >> yes. >> Does it pass or >> We have three S's and >> two nos. >> Two nos. >> Does it pass? Well, it's a decrease from what really what they're they're recommending. >> So, it passes.
>> So, it passes. >> Can uh before you finish up, can I just uh bring one more pitch to you if I can just Is that okay? It's for uh recreation uh superintendent. >> So, wait a minute. So, so the motion is
to make everybody's 2025 salary up 22. >> No, no, no, no, no. take the 2025 salary and multiply it by 2.5 to get to 2026 >> except a few exceptions that are noted. >> I'll change all the numbers with with uh and you know we'll do it with Sue
tomorrow. >> Yes. >> You say that recreation. >> Can I um we go back to uh the >> public affairs? public affairs. >> Yes. >> On the loan sheet >> on the big sheets or in the budget itself.
>> We'll paid you on the >> probably like 17 or 19 probably or something. >> What is this? >> Who is this? >> This is something Mr. Dala wants to discuss with us. So that's after we go. Mr. Alman had a question first.
>> Page 17. Wow. >> 18. Public >> public affairs salary and wage. Um, so I would uh I don't disagree with the number or whatever the the new number
calculates out to, but I would um I would suggest that we put it into the coordinator line, not the director line. >> Wait, I'm sorry. Where are we? >> 17. >> 17. Okay. 17. >> Page 17. Okay. Just one second, please.
>> Yeah. I don't I don't I don't agree with combining the director and the coordinator because I know the director is going to ask you. >> No, I So, >> leave it separate. >> No, I think we should combine them because it's >> Oh, you want to combine them? >> I want to combine them. I would just
like to move it from line uh- 100 to -10. >> So, there would be no director in public affairs. >> You have to have a director. >> Yeah. Statutoily. Yeah. You have to have a director because you have to have nine directors. >> But is that a is that department
in the table of organization? >> Um in ours I believe it is you can >> it's in the ordinance today. >> You can change that if you want. The only two directors you have to keep is the administrator as a as a director and the uh director of law. Those have to be
in place. The other ones you can make director of uh street sweeping whatever you want. You want that? >> I'll take it. >> Okay, there you go. >> Steve, I think we also may need public safety for police. >> Uh, it might be I know there's two or
three that mandatory, but the rest are at the administrations. I think the council's >> I just don't think we should combine. I think they should stay separate. >> But wasn't that the request last year to combine them? No, that was >> I mean that was that was it came from at
least one person on the council. >> Yeah, >> that's so we we carried it through to >> Is this is is this a quarterly stipen just like everybody else's director come or >> No, it it's salary. No, but I'm saying how's it paid out like one?
>> Oh, Scott. >> I think directors are quarterly. >> Yes, that's what I thought. That's right. So, and then the coordinator, it's most likely, you know, twice a month. So, we would, you know, I think it's
appropriate if you combine them to make it salary. However you do it, I mean, you know, I think the mayor's looking to maintain the director position. Well, they have he has to maintain. >> So I guess you know either fund that or
just separate them. It's the same dollar amount. I based on every other director getting the 1850, I think we should keep them separate. That would be my motion to move them back to two lines.
>> Everybody okay with that? Do I have a second to that? Oh, I'll I'll second that. Yeah. >> So, we're going to make line 11850, Sue. >> Yep. >> And the other line 8384. Is that correct? >> Well, I'll figure out the 2.5%. >> Yeah. >> Doesn't that include the 8384?
>> No, that's the um the 2.75%. >> Okay. If council agree, I'll change my recommendation to match what was just said. >> Next. Thank you. It's uh I'd have to add it. I don't feel like adding
to them all. >> I'll do it more 8364 >> for 2.5% >> 8364 Mr. U. >> Yeah, it's 8364. player on this.
>> So line 100 becomes 1850 and line 110 becomes 8364. >> You got to add 204 to 8160. >> Yep. 8364. >> It's 8364. >> It's freezing down. >> Anything else? Uh >> uh yes. Can you can you just entertain
me for a few more minutes, please? And uh we do want to make a pitch to increase the hours for the uh recreation superintendent currently. And you have >> where what line are we on this turn? >> Uh well, it's pretty much all the way at the B back of the the um
>> No, no, but we're in the budget so we can look at it. >> Oh, it's on page 47. I just got to that one very quickly. >> 47. 47. >> So everybody should have that. It's a front and back. And uh >> without
>> I'm sorry, sir. >> Page 47, recreation superintendent. >> All right. So 47 >> have a front and back piece of paper. >> I can't say his name. >> No, don't say his name. Just recreation superintendent. >> You know who it is. You just said his name.
>> Right. So um the requested amount when we turned it in was 2.75. It's down to 2.5. Um, we would like So that that salary is a $26.90 an hour salary. you know, based on the
the research we I did with the help of that individual and looking at other towns, it's it's not easy to compare apple to apple. Like the the wreck activities that one town has isn't identical to us, but we feel that it is a reasonable
um increase to bring his hourly rate from 26.90 to $30 an hour. And then we're asking to go from 20 hours a week to 25 hours a week. And the the reason would be the justification would be the
sheet I gave you. So this superintendent um came up with ideas for additional activities to do within the township. Now, he wouldn't be able to do all of these activities on the 25 hours, but the hope would to be maybe next year or
some some point have a full-time uh recreation superintendent so we can provide more activities um for our residents. So, if you go to the bottom of the back page where it says asking, so we're asking for salary to be
increased from 26.92 an hour to $30 per hour. asking to increase hours per week from 20 to 25. Increases the yearly salary from 27462 to 39, a difference of 11,538.
However, if approved, we think we could get it up and running and initiated by June 1st, plus the estoppel period for the budget and everything. So, I really would only have to ask for an additional 7,000 um this year. But again, just understand if you approved it next year, I would
come asking for the full 39 or if we were very successful in those next seven months and feel that we could pitch a full-time position uh to the council, we of course would like to do that. So again, I just want to >> So 35217 is the new recommended request. >> Uh is that what I write? Do I write
that? No. So it would be well whatever last year's salary is plus 2 and a half% plus 7,000. So because I you know it wouldn't be retro for him like it will be for the rest of us because his position is just
starting you know it'll just start June 1st. So I feel the 7,000 will get us those additional hours and the additional pay um per hour. So if Mr. Mr. Roman can help me figure out what 2.5% of what uh
just got to find them on the sheet. >> 687 + 27 >> 27462 + 687 is Mark >> 11 >> 28 Mark >> Yeah. 35148.
>> 35149. >> Oh, 35 >> 35148. I'm I'm rounding down, Mr. Conrad. >> Okay. >> 35149. I'll bust it, Mr. Corp. It was 35148 625. >> How about I have rounding up? It's okay.
>> About 35200 just you know whatever just to round up. >> That's fine. >> So that's what we request. And again, please I don't want anyone to think like I'm promising all these. It's going to take this individual time to put these together. >> Now, we are we going to make these uh
revenue neutral. So, if you know like I know the other like are we going to include what the cost of these programs are and then add a fee for his increase in hours and all. >> Yeah. I mean, yes. >> The intent of doing this like we do with
with summer camp, it basically is a is a zero it's a self-funded revenue neutral thing. So the intent would be all these programs would generate some of his funding. So therefore, we're not taxing everybody for a full-time director if we do go that route. Because knowing this individual, not mentioning his name,
he's probably going to be successful in doing this. I will pat him on the back for it. Um cuz he spends a lot of time doing it without having the hours. >> What is that supposed to be? >> Right. So,
>> what's the nearest >> 35200? >> 200. >> And that's at the 2.5. >> That's the 2.5 plus 7,000. >> Was that the last to ask, Mr. >> Yeah. Um, you know, other than if I could get you just to take if you're
willing to take a look at the health benefits uh treasurer coordinator. Um, it's I know you guys said two and a half% but there is a there's a lot of work with that position. >> Excuse me. Are we voting on this one?
>> Oh, sorry. So 30 so uh 60128371110 new ask is 35200. We recommend is 35200. Do I have a motion? >> So move. >> I'll make the second. Roll call. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Omen.
>> Did you get him? >> I get him. Don't worry. Councilman Omen, >> no. >> Councilman Casio, sorry about that. >> No. >> Councilwoman BZ, >> yes. >> And Council President Senna,
>> yes. >> I only have three yeses on that one. >> All right. >> But I raised my recommend. >> So with three passes, right? >> Yes. >> I say yes. Yeah,
>> we'll have to review that. All right. What's next? >> So, is that okay? The 35. >> What's We have to check. Is if he changes his changing recommend to the 30 35 200, right? >> What's the next line in the final line? >> All right. So, the only if I can ask you
to please look at the health benefits um deputy treasurer, if you go to my big sheets, it's >> What about the Is it on a sheet? Is it on a >> paper? It is, but I it might be easier to show you >> on the long sheet. >> On the long sheet.
>> So, what are we looking at? >> You look for go to the second column all the way close to the end like one, two, three, like six up. Deputy treasur benefits coordinator that it's a stipen right now. It's at 5827. I really do request respectfully to bring it up to
uh an even 7500 which would be an increase of$,673 there with the change in the difference card we are saving over to $300,000 but it does add a lot more administrative and clerical work to that position. There's you know there's daily reviewing
of reports the claims um monthly reviewing of reports and the claims. there's invoicing and purchasing and there's a lot of work dealing with uh the members because the members have more clerical work on them. So, uh I
feel like it's definitely deserving of more than the 2 and a half%. Um and again, that position was very imperative um for saving that money. And it's I don't want you to think that I'm asking you to give the person money because they saved us money, but because of that
savings, it wasn't like a free savings. There was a trade-off. there was more work put on this individual. So I'd respectfully ask instead of a 2.5% could we please increase it $1673 to bring it to 7500 from 5827.
>> I motion to keep it at the 2.5%. We have a I'll second roll call. I'm sorry. >> It's It's not on a page. We're doing it off the big sheets. >> Um I can get a page for you. >> Well, it doesn't matter cuz we're
leaving it 2.5. >> Here it is. No. Well, here we go. >> On page nine. >> No, no, we have to vote. No, Sue is looking for it. >> Yeah, page nine. Just to make sure I keep it up there. All right. Um so, Councilman is motioning to keep
>> and did I hear a second? Nice session. >> Uh, page nine. Yeah. >> Yeah, >> it's on page nine. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Uh, no. >> Councilman, >> yes.
>> Counciloman BZ, >> no. Council President Denn, >> yes. >> So, what was that vote for? To keep it at 2 and a half%. >> Yes. Anything else, ladies and gentlemen? >> Yes. Um, I know we voted on this twice,
but on page 18, >> 18. >> Yes, >> it actually ends at the bottom of page 17 of website, public affairs website. >> 17 to >> 18. It's the extra 500.
>> Oh, okay. Yeah, we voted on this at the beginning of the meeting. Yes. >> Yes. So, this individual does a lot of extra work beyond these $500. So, to be clear, in case some of you
aren't, this is the same person that will do the programs for has done the programs for a lot of our events. um did so much during the snowstorms to make the postings and make the community aware exactly where the DPW was going,
what it was cleaning. This person does way more than the $500. And I don't know how much you're aware of the projects. On March 3rd, we did receive an email from I believe Mr. Carlos stating all the different
um ways that this person contributes. I think it was March 3rd. We all got that. So I would ask if the council would reconsider, you know, because we will lose, you know, valuable information sent to our
residents. In fact, just recently this individual put me in contact with somebody that was having an issue of because of the 5K and she monitored that, you know, outside work hours. You know, they do a lot beyond the these
extra $500. So, I just ask council to reconsider and I'd like to motion for the 7500. >> If I may add to that, council president, she also handles the green team's web page. and she also handles the uh veterans uh
um web page on the township's uh web. >> Okay. >> And she she was pivotal in the banners for veterans. Pivotal. >> Thank you. >> We have a motion for Miss and Mr. Se. You seconded this.
>> Yes, I'm seconding it. >> All right. So, let me do this one. Motion by council to 75 and second is going to be by Councilman Sears. Councilman Casio, >> no. >> Councilman Sears,
>> yeah. Yes. >> Councilman Omen, >> no. >> Counciloman BZ, >> yes. >> Council President Denna, >> yes. >> Thank you. We done now. >> Well, Mike, if I may, um I'm sorry. uh
benefits coordinator. I don't understand not giving the increase. Um we added work to her every day as Mark said. Um and yeah, we're just adding that on without any monetary, you know, what what what's her incentive? You know, she
went through a lot of work uh with the administration to get this going. We didn't ask for a one-time bump for her for all that work. We were hoping the council would have seen the value in it. Um, you know, I, you know, I I don't know what would stop her from saying,
you know, this was not part of my job description for the pay I signed up for. Um, and you know, as you know, Mark didn't want us to go there. You know, >> I don't understand. And saving the town 300,000 a year. >> I don't understand that statement. We we we created a position for benefits
coordinator, >> but we had work to it with the difference card. What's that? We work on the whole difference card concept adds at least a half hour of work to her a day where you know she does have to check the claims make sure that there's enough in the bank to cover it. Um you
know and the town did save and you know I'm going to say you know our employees should should share and that one it adds extra work to them especially. Thank you. >> So I I would just ask if you'd reconsider that also. I'll motion for the 7500. >> Um, I'll second that one too. One, what
page you want with the >> the long, right? >> Yeah, I think it connects. >> Mark, we're done after this one. >> Yeah. Okay. So, no other after this. >> I'm sorry. Motion by Councilwoman
>> up to 7 um >> 75 >> 7500. >> Seconded by Councilman Sears. >> Councilman Casio. >> No. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Alman.
>> No. >> Council BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President. >> No. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Second. So >> all in favor? >> Thank you everyone. >> I'm sorry. Who motioned?
>> Second. >> So when a new initiative in town to save money, >> we can't we can't bring it to fruition because I'm not going to add work to our people and tell them there's no extra pay for it. >> Yeah. Right. This is