YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Vernon Township Council 2 9 2026

Vernon Township Council 2 9 2026 — Transcript

by Vernon Township · 31,911 words · 5,192 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:07for February 9th. Will the township
0:10clerk please read the statement?
0:14>> Notice of this regular meeting was
0:15provided to the public in the press on
0:17January 22nd, 2020.
0:19>> Can't hear you. Can't hear you.
0:21is posted at the municipal building in
0:24accordance with the open public meetings
0:26act NJSA 10 col4-7
0:30>> salute the flag
0:34pledge allegiance to the flag
0:37of the
0:40standyice
0:45for all
0:50>> we have a roll Call please.
0:59>> Council member Canino
1:00>> here.
1:01>> Council member Ols
1:03>> here.
1:03>> Council member Rudo
1:05>> here.
1:05>> Council member Sparta
1:07>> present.
1:07>> Council President Higgins
1:09>> here.
1:11>> Next on the agenda, mayor comments.
1:15>> Thank you, Council President. Uh January
1:1922nd, Vernon Township
1:22um sustained a loss. Adrien Kovat, a
1:26freshman of Vernon High School, died on
1:28Thursday, January 22nd. She's 14 years
1:31old. She's a freshman high school and
1:34was diagnosed with DIPG, which of brain
1:38cancer
1:39um in early May of 2025 is when it was
1:44um diagnosed. Um, we have learned from
1:48members that uh that Adrien was an
1:50integral part of the SCY, which is the
1:54Swordfish Swim Team family, and she was
1:57described as one of the hardest workers
1:59and fiercest competitors we've ever
2:01seen. Uh, throughout her illness, she
2:04has shown incredible strength,
2:06resilience, and determination,
2:08never never giving up hope. So, my
2:12condolences to the Kovac family. Um
2:15there is a gofundme if you just search
2:19help for Kovac's family you'll find it.
2:22So if you could donate um uh to help the
2:26family. Another loss uh Harvey
2:31Rosf he was a Byron councilman. He was
2:35Sussex County GOP committeeman and was
2:38also one of the candidates for
2:40commissioner. Um, I would ask for a
2:43moment of silence.
2:53Thank
2:55>> I have a couple members that just need
2:57to add to the
2:59record the environmental
3:02um, excuse me, economic development
3:04advisory committee. um all one-year
3:07terms expiring January 14th, 2027. That
3:11is Bruce Campbell and David Keller.
3:17Last week, I met with Mayor Eric Wilson
3:21and West Milford Mayor Michelle Dell to
3:24discuss the Highlands Act. There are 88
3:28municipalities of the Highlands that
3:29have been required by the Highlands Act
3:31to severely limit future development and
3:34to take measures at the local level to
3:37support the Highlands Act and the
3:39Highlands regional mass.
3:42This has resulted in a sign significant
3:45financial stress for Highlands towns,
3:47particularly those that are 100% within
3:51the preservation area where restrictions
3:54are the greatest. There is currently a
3:56one-way flow of benefits that is
3:59outbound from the highlands with no
4:02effort to underwrite the cost uh and
4:04consequences of responsibilities placed
4:06on the highlands municipalities.
4:08Highlands communities need some measure
4:10of financial support to account for the
4:12loss of development potential and
4:15mandates to take resource resource
4:18protection actions at the local level.
4:21Consider that New York City pays 165
4:24million annually in local taxes across
4:27the Catskill Mandela wershed in addition
4:30to funding the Cat Catskill Development
4:33Corporation and and the watershed
4:37uh agricultural
4:38council's respective activities. There
4:41is a Facebook group um so Vernon
4:44Township we joined again with them and
4:46having a good meeting with them. Um
4:48Senator uh Anthony who is going to be
4:52heading that up uh down the trend. Um
4:55there is a Facebook group called
4:56Highlands Impact Aid Now. Uh just follow
4:59that for more information on where we're
5:02at with that stuff. So I think it's um
5:04we seem to have a good coalition of of
5:07mayors and uh assembly men um and
5:11senators that uh I seem to to kind of
5:14join the fight and hopefully we could
5:17get some funding.
5:19So um that's that's one of my comments.
5:22Thank you.
5:24>> Okay. Thank you. You'll notice that
5:26there were two two different agendas.
5:28One included the latest one, the
5:30presentation uh part number six. There's
5:34two distinguished guests here because
5:36one of the main subjects being discussed
5:38in town are pilot programs, the master
5:41plan, uh any changes in uh funding and
5:46we thought it would be definitely
5:48worthwhile to invite both Corey Soner
5:50and Matt Jessup. Matt you've met before
5:53when he explained the pilot program and
5:55Corey's our town engineer from PLO. So,
5:58uh, Corey, if you would please, uh,
6:01just, uh, if you just want to say
6:04publicly what's going on with the, uh,
6:07plans when they were last developed. I
6:10guess that was like 2021. And, uh, just
6:13go forth to educate a lot of people.
6:21>> That's just all. Okay. This one. Okay.
6:24They're probably not aware of what's
6:26driving some of the changes and a lot of
6:28the resolutions that reach us come
6:30through you first and the land use
6:32board. A lot of your rulings
6:33>> tonight. Tonight I'm here for there's a
6:35developers agreement on the agenda.
6:36>> Right.
6:37>> That as well. Right.
6:38>> And then that's what I was here to
6:39speak.
6:40>> Okay.
6:40>> Okay. The developers agreement is
6:41related to the Red Hand LLC development
6:43project that was approved by the news
6:45board. Right.
6:46>> Had nothing to do with the pilot
6:47program. It's just
6:48>> now the pilot's us, right?
6:49>> Yeah. What's it?
6:50>> The pilot is on us. That's that's us.
6:52land use board had an approval for uh
6:55Redhead LLC and one of the the
6:57conditions of that resolution was to
7:00enter into a developers agreement with
7:02the town um related to that approval
7:04only and that developers agreement
7:07basically outlines um uh requirements
7:11for um it's basically a document that
7:14outlines what they have to do according
7:16to the resolution approval is
7:20>> he explaining to you or to That's
7:23>> Yeah, I was going to say if you want to
7:24turn and face the audience that would
7:28>> address the council.
7:29>> Okay. I was addressing to you.
7:31>> Yeah, you were. But there it's really
7:32here for them.
7:33>> Okay.
7:35>> Corner there. I was turning around and
7:38I'm sorry.
7:40>> All right.
7:41That's got me all confused.
7:43>> Sure. You're near a microphone so that
7:44people online can hear. Tap
7:46>> it and see.
7:47>> It's not I can turn it on for you.
8:03Okay.
8:11So, basically what the developers
8:12agreement that was added to the agenda
8:14is related to Redand LLC application
8:17that went to the LE board. They're
8:19required a court. One of the conditions
8:21of the latest court approval was for the
8:23applicant to enter into a developer
8:25agreement with the town. Developers
8:27agreement outlines the the requirements
8:30of that they have to address according
8:32to the resolution from the board. Also
8:35establishes a performance guarantee for
8:38items that are going to be related to u
8:40the public improvements. There's some
8:42items are inside the uh the rightway of
8:46a mega drive and they also are going to
8:48be relocating a portion of the town
8:49sewer main which was approved by the
8:51hill sorry not Hillsboro um Vernon
8:54Township municipal utility authority the
8:57MUA approved a relocation of the sewer
9:00main so this agreement basically because
9:03they were touching parts of the
9:04municipal infrastructure development
9:08brought the need of having a developers
9:10agreement it's more than just a standard
9:12uh application because they're touching
9:14our infrastructure. So that was the main
9:16item inside the um developers agreement.
9:20It also outlines the the dollar mouth
9:22related to performance guarantee related
9:24to the sewer line movement and also uh
9:29establishes inspection fees, you know,
9:32and other legal, you know, durations of
9:34of how long the project's going to take
9:37and uh things of that nature. But
9:38they're all back to what was approved by
9:40the land exporter. And that was the
9:42reason for a developer agreement.
9:46>> And you just explain Red Hand because
9:48some people know Red Hand, some people
9:50know it by different names. There's
9:52three or four names.
9:54>> Okay. I believe the the application from
9:56the board was called Red Hand LLC. Okay.
9:58Which the O'Neal Group is the owner's
10:00owner's applicant.
10:04>> Are you referring to a specific?
10:05>> It's not. It's not question or answers,
10:07ma'am.
10:07>> Okay. I just wondered if he's talking to
10:09us. I wonder if he's
10:10>> This is just specific resolution in the
10:13agenda.
10:14>> It's not. It's not. You'll have chance.
10:15>> Yeah. You'll have your opportunity. Cory
10:17was here. He was here as a favorite to
10:19everyone here to explain what the
10:22development and the agreements are so
10:25that whenever we speak on those
10:26subjects, we all have a good
10:28understanding because there's been some
10:30miscommunication and misinformation on a
10:32lot of subjects have been discussed. And
10:34it's it starts with the engineering and
10:37it starts with Cory's company. It's one
10:40of our contractors. He's been a long
10:41time. He knows every piece of property
10:43in town, I think. And uh and all the
10:46engineering that goes with it. So there
10:48were there were questions and there were
10:50confusion, Cory, even on water run off
10:53of the land over on Omega Drive as
10:56opposed to being sewage runoff. So those
11:00types of things go through you as well.
11:02Correct.
11:02>> Yes, they do.
11:06only related to the resolution for that
11:08was adopted by the land use board and
11:11there's a resolution on tonight okay in
11:13the town to enter that agreement
11:16developers agreement right
11:17>> which outlines a very specific criteria
11:20that they have to address and handle and
11:25so they can be in in compliance with the
11:27resolution that was approved by the
11:29landing board not this council you have
11:31a different resolution that's on your
11:32agenda tonight.
11:33>> Correct.
11:34>> To allow the execution of that
11:35agreement.
11:36>> Right.
11:38>> Okay. Um I do have some questions. It's
11:42not so much directed at you. It's more
11:44directed at the mayor as we're
11:46discussing this development. It's
11:48reminding me of the request that I put
11:50in this morning. Um did you receive the
11:52email that I sent?
11:54>> Refresh my memory. So, I was asking you,
11:57this has more to do with the schuma fee
12:01for uh Theta Grove.
12:04Um, so I was going to ask, I know Theta
12:08Grove um did not submit their schuma fee
12:12for the hookup and um there's currently
12:15about $270,000 that they owe towards the
12:19town and towards the VTMUA. Is there any
12:22internal investigation going on about
12:24how they got a CO without submitting
12:28that payment? Because I know this is a
12:30different topic, but it's I can't help
12:32but think of this as talk about this.
12:35>> Yeah, there's there's an investigation.
12:37Yes.
12:37>> Will that report be sent to all the
12:39council members
12:40>> as it's done?
12:41>> Um,
12:42>> are we taking corrective action to make
12:44sure something like that doesn't happen
12:45again?
12:46>> Yes.
12:48And I also saw that Schuma set a
12:50deadline for this late payment to be
12:53received by the 4th of February and that
12:55date has obviously passed. Have they
12:58submitted that payment?
13:00>> I can't I can't answer that
13:02>> because they have this time. Far then
13:04this these questions are a different
13:05subject. I'm sure they'll be brought up
13:07later. You've introduced a subject that
13:10okay
13:10>> the audience will probably be interested
13:12in has nothing to do with Mr. Doner.
13:15>> I just couldn't help but think of it.
13:16Thank you.
13:16>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you.
13:19>> No other question from the
13:20>> Any other questions from the council?
13:25>> I'll be here if there's anything later.
13:28>> Yes, I do have one. What happens if the
13:32council doesn't approve?
13:36>> Well, that that's a legal question.
13:38>> Okay.
13:38>> Because it is a board this, you know,
13:40they the Bernard Township of Landers
13:42board has made their approval,
13:43>> right? And the the only reason the the
13:46uh um developers agreement was in place
13:49is just to outline um the conditions of
13:52the resolution and also so we can
13:54establish a performance guarantee to
13:56make sure that they complete the items
13:58that they said that the board required
14:00them to do. The board required them to
14:02do some of these items, not all of them,
14:03but some of the items to make sure they
14:05satisfactory complete those items. And
14:08um and they posted the necessary
14:10performance bonds. They've proposed
14:12postmaintenance guarantees after they're
14:14done construction. So just basically um
14:18in my opinion it's a document to make
14:19sure they uph hold all the items that
14:22they promised they would do in front of
14:23the land use board.
14:25>> Thank you.
14:27>> And for you no question at this time
14:30till later on but for the public the
14:32land use board meets what twice a month
14:34>> when there was when there's a full
14:35agenda. If there's if there's a subject
14:38to be discussed they have the meeting.
14:39If there's nothing on the agenda is
14:41canceled and for the particulars of
14:44development, what a building looks like,
14:47sewage, that's the place to go. It once
14:49it gets to us, it's already through the
14:52professionals and it comes here for
14:54approval and monetary considerations,
14:58but the real design of the building and
15:00all the rest of it starts with the land
15:02use board.
15:06Thank you,
15:08>> Council President. Can I just remind
15:10everyone to please talk into their
15:12microphones because um the public can't
15:16hear. I can't make them any louder.
15:19>> Okay.
15:20>> Okay. Thank you.
15:21>> On
15:24Matt Gess,
15:27you were here to uh educate us as well.
15:33So,
15:34>> if you just describe to everybody who
15:36you are, you you've presented before.
15:37Maybe you could sit over where Corey
15:39was, speak to the uh
15:40>> I certainly will. I just wanted to add
15:42before I sat, council president, that I
15:44think I was here for the same um
15:46red-hand developers agreement that's on
15:48your agenda for tonight. So,
15:49>> I I'm happy to sit and answer any
15:51questions that maybe Cory didn't. Um and
15:54then see where we go from there.
15:55>> Right. You were the main speaker on red
15:57hand whenever uh the pilot program was
16:00presented and you you were the main
16:02speaker on the pilot program. Correct.
16:04>> Correct. C president. So again Matt
16:05Jessup McMahon in Scotland and Bowman.
16:07We are at the townships for
16:08redevelopment council and we did
16:10represent the township in connection
16:12with the financial agreement which is
16:15the document that memorializes the tax
16:17exemption for the Omega property or the
16:21red property. Um, we also are
16:25represented the township in connection
16:26with the negotiation of the developers
16:28agreement, which is the agreement on
16:30your agenda for tonight, which
16:33memorializes the terms of the planning
16:35board's 2025 approval of this project.
16:41You also have on your agenda for tonight
16:43a resolution that approves um a vacation
16:47of two easements, a sewer easement and a
16:49drainage easement and then granting of
16:52new sewer easements and drainage
16:54easements. In short, as court mentioned
16:58earlier, the location of those easements
17:00which are for the benefit of the
17:02township are simply moving within the
17:04property. We're not losing a drainage
17:06easement. We are not losing um a sewer
17:09easement. they're simply being
17:10relocated. That's not uncommon. So, the
17:13other resolution you have on your agenda
17:15for tonight um approves the relocation
17:19of those two easements. Obviously, Corey
17:21can speak better than I can on the exact
17:23science behind those things, but our
17:25firm did represent the township in
17:27connection with those matters that are
17:29on your agenda as well.
17:31>> Okay. Do any council members have any
17:34questions?
17:38No.
17:41Okay. I'm sure the public may have
17:43questions later. You've touched on uh
17:45the the pilot program. I'm sure that
17:47will come up later. And uh there's some
17:52documentation saying that we granted a
17:5430-year pilot, but only a 20 year is
17:57allowed. Would you comment on that?
18:00>> Oh, uh sure. Um,
18:03so the ordinance that approves the
18:07long-term tax exemption for this project
18:09does approve a 30-year u pilot. The
18:13township had sent over an ordinance
18:16previously adopted, I think maybe in
18:182014 or I forget exactly when, um, that
18:23attempts to put a 20-year restriction on
18:27commercial and industrial pilots. Um, so
18:31two things. One, I would differentiate
18:32that ordinance from the project that
18:34we're talking about right now because
18:35the project we're talking about right
18:36now is a residential project that is not
18:38a commercial or industrial project which
18:42um the ordinance that you're talking
18:43about uh specifically covers. However,
18:47the other interesting thing about that
18:48ordinance is
18:50it is drafted as if it is addressing
18:55long-term tax exemptions under the
18:57long-term tax exemption law, which is
19:00its own statute in New Jersey, 4820-1.
19:05However, when you read that ordinance
19:07and you look at the provisions of that
19:09ordinance, it mimics all of the language
19:13and the requirements of the 5-year
19:16exemption and abatement law, which is in
19:184A21.
19:20That is a different law that governs a
19:23different set of tax exemption for
19:25different types of projects. So, as to
19:29the immediate point of a 30-year pilot
19:31for this Omega project versus the
19:33ordinance that the townships are
19:35previously adopted, they don't relate
19:37because the ordinance only applies to
19:39industrial and commercial and our
19:41project is 100% residential. I would
19:44also again just add I think maybe the
19:46township needs to take a look at that
19:48ordinance because by its terms almost
19:51every provision of that ordinance
19:53violates the provisions of or is
19:55inconsistent with the provisions of the
19:57law that it purports to summarize.
20:00>> Okay. A pilot program is payment in le
20:04of taxes.
20:05Whenever a homeowner or business owner
20:09owes their taxes it's charted. How do
20:11you follow whether a pilot has been
20:13paid?
20:13>> It's the exact It's the exact same
20:15process. So, the tax assessor, they
20:18still assess the property even though it
20:20has an exemption. It's just listed as
20:22exempt. You create a tax bill based on
20:25the formula in the financial agreement,
20:27the agreement that's signed between the
20:28township and the property owner
20:30governing the terms of the pilot. tax uh
20:32collector will compute that bill, will
20:35mail that bill, and then the property
20:38owner um who's paying a pilot has to pay
20:41their pilot at the same time and subject
20:44to the same interest penalties and
20:46delays as a conventional taxpayer. So,
20:49your pilot is due four times a year,
20:51February 1, May one, August one, and uh
20:55November one. Just like all of the rest
20:57of us conventional taxpayers, um, we all
21:00have a 10-day grace period. The pilot
21:02taxpayer has a 10-day grace period. If
21:05any of us fail to pay, we start getting
21:07charged interest. If the pilot owner
21:09fails to pay, they start being charged
21:10interest. And if we ultimately don't
21:12pay, our real estate um, delinquency
21:17becomes a lean that the township sells
21:19at the end of the year. Similarly, if a
21:21pilot property owner fails to pay their
21:24uh pilot on time, then at the end of the
21:27year, they have a real estate tax lean
21:28against their property just like the
21:30rest of us. That lean goes into the sale
21:32and it gets sold. So, they are treated
21:35in every way from a payment perspective,
21:38billing, collection, enforcement,
21:40delinquency like any other taxpayer.
21:43>> Okay. And could you update us on any
21:45changes in Trenton concerning new laws
21:48that do away with pilots or change the
21:51rules of a pilot program or the money's
21:53flowing to or not flowing to the school
21:55district?
21:56>> Yeah, there have been no laws adopted
21:59that have changed any of the
22:00distribution mechanisms or uh
22:03requirements with respect to a pilot.
22:05There are every year, I would say every
22:08legislative session, there are somewhere
22:10between three and six pieces of
22:13legislation that are introduced that
22:16attempt to um either modify pilots or
22:22change the distribution method of p for
22:24pilots. Recall that unlike a
22:27conventional tax dollar that gets split
22:29up amongst the township, the board of
22:31ed, the library, the fire district, you
22:33name it, any other taxing districts,
22:36pilot dollar, 95 cents comes to the
22:38township, 5 cents goes to the county,
22:40and those two taxing districts that get
22:42a pilot dollar. Um there are bills
22:44introduced from time to time. There was
22:46one introduced by um Senator Singleton
22:50four months ago, five months ago now,
22:51something like that. um that would
22:53attempt to try and statutoily
22:55redistribute a pilot dollar in other
22:57ways, but none of those bills have been
22:59fully adopted or signed by the governor.
23:01>> Okay. Yeah. Any other questions?
23:04Council,
23:06>> if you could stay around, you're it's on
23:08your subject is on the agenda, so I'm
23:10sure the audience will have some
23:11questions and if you could stay for
23:14>> certainly. Yes. Again, you have two
23:15resolutions. one to approve the
23:16developers agreement and one to approve
23:19the vacation of the two easements and
23:21then the um creation of the two
23:23replacement ements.
23:25>> Thank you.
23:25>> All right. Thank you.
23:33>> Next next subject is public comment. Uh,
23:36council member or council president, I
23:38believe Miss Caldwell is here to talk
23:40about where
23:43>> the affordable household resolutions and
23:45ordinances.
23:56>> Introduce yourself, please.
23:57>> I'm Jessica Calwell, Jay Calban
24:00Associates. I'm the township planner.
24:02I'm here tonight for the affordable
24:05housing ordinances and two resolutions
24:08adopting a spending plan and a
24:10rehabilitation plan for the township. Uh
24:14back in July 2010, the uh land use board
24:18adopted and the council endorsed a
24:21housing element fair share plan in
24:24compliance with the fourth round of
24:26affordable housing regulations.
24:28Uh that was a deadline by June 30th. we
24:32did get a brief extension to July 14th.
24:36So, we submitted the housing element
24:37fair share plan and then by the end of
24:40the summer there was a deadline for any
24:42interested parties to object uh to that
24:46plan. A fair share housing center filed
24:50a letter of interest. It wasn't a full
24:52objection, but it was uh requesting
24:54additional information
24:56which we provided as the township. And
24:59then we entered into a consent order
25:01with fair share housing center which
25:03essentially they agreed to our housing
25:06element fair share plan. They didn't
25:07object to it uh with additional
25:10information that we provided. They were
25:12satisfied uh that we were meeting the
25:14affordable housing regulations and then
25:17they just asked us essentially to do
25:19what we would need to do uh as required
25:22by the Fair Housing Act anyways which is
25:24to adopt an updated affordable housing
25:28ordinance which regulates how uh units
25:32are restricted rented um various other
25:35items with respect to the uniform
25:37housing affordability controls and the
25:40fair housing act. So, that's one of the
25:42ordinances on the agenda. The other
25:44ordinance updates the development fees
25:47for new residential development and um
25:51non-residential development,
25:53essentially residential development
25:55that's not inclusionary and new
25:57non-residential development pay a
25:59residential development fee which then
26:02the municipality can use to do various
26:05types of affordable housing projects. Uh
26:09we also have a spending plan on the
26:11agenda for adoption under resolutions
26:14and this just identifies how that
26:16development fee um account will be spent
26:20over the next 10 years which is the
26:21fourth round period. And then we have a
26:24rehabilitation plan which outlines a
26:27program that the municipality has to
26:30rehabilitate existing units that um
26:32might not be up to code. And that's one
26:34thing that we can use our development
26:36fees to um
26:39housing for people who meet certain
26:42incomes if they have something like a
26:43furnace go out or need a repair or
26:46something like that. So uh that's what's
26:49on your agenda tonight and I'm here to
26:51serve those items.
26:53>> Very good. Thank you. But so all the
26:56things that are on our agenda typically
26:58this is an explanation like an education
27:01program for everybody including us. It
27:04starts with the land use board once
27:06again and Jessica is one of the main
27:07players on the land use board as a town
27:10planner. She's a professional provides
27:12that information to land use board. They
27:14vote on it and then it comes to us as a
27:17resolution or an ordinance and uh so
27:21that's that's why they're all here.
27:22That's the information flow. They're the
27:25professional and they're here to answer
27:26any questions as well and and make
27:29everybody aware on an education basis
27:32what the facts are. Correct.
27:34>> Correct.
27:35>> Yep.
27:37>> Thank you. So I guess you can take some
27:39questions too whenever the
27:41>> Sure. questions now or if you don't have
27:42anything now later on fine as us.
27:45>> I do have one question.
27:46>> Sure. Um, so when someone applies to um
27:49be a part of the say they their furnace
27:51goes out and they're applying to be a
27:53part of that housing opportunity.
27:55>> Let make sure I have the terminology.
27:56>> The rehabilitation
27:57>> rehabilitation that is paid for from
28:00that fund that 2.5% 1.5% that it's an
28:06equal housing opportunity fund.
28:07>> Yes.
28:08>> And that grant would come from there.
28:10>> Yes.
28:11>> Okay. I just wanted to make sure you
28:12understood that. Thanks.
28:13>> Yeah. So, it's a one and a half percent,
28:14you're absolutely right, for new
28:16residential, two and a half% for new
28:18commercial. Those fees go into the fund.
28:21The the fund has been there for I think
28:23since 2005, but uh this is just re
28:27re-uping it essentially and continuing
28:29it.
28:29>> It said at the beginning of the packet,
28:32I want to make sure I have the right
28:34packet that you follow.
28:37It says here that it was bumped up from
28:410.5% when it was established to 1.5 and
28:44then 2.5. Those were increased by the
28:46state in about a few months ago, right?
28:50>> Um these were actually increased during
28:52the third round, but as part of the new
28:54fair housing act of essentially end of
28:57last year, these were all increased. So
29:00yeah, it's it's always been set based on
29:02state law.
29:03>> Okay.
29:04>> Those those fees. Thank you.
29:06>> Excuse me, Mrs. Cowwell. Perhaps you
29:09might be able to enlighten the council
29:12and also the members of the public. What
29:16What do you mean by rounds and how
29:19frequently these rounds are?
29:21>> Oh, sure.
29:22>> You know, are called or passed or
29:24whatever.
29:24>> Yeah. So,
29:25>> how it's done? New Jersey has uh a
29:28constitutional obligation that
29:30municipalities need to provide for
29:32affordable housing, what's called their
29:34fair share of affordable housing. And
29:37the way that's come across is it's come
29:39in what's called rounds that are
29:41supposed to be essentially 10-year
29:43periods where a municipality is given an
29:46obligation and you prepare the plan, the
29:49housing development and fair share plan,
29:50then execute the plan whereby those
29:53units are supposed to be provided. So
29:55we're now in the fourth round uh which
29:58is 2025 to 2035
30:01uh which is why we're submitting now for
30:03approval so that we get covered for
30:05these next 10 years
30:10>> and
30:10>> covered.
30:11>> Yes. And these are subject to what
30:15happens um
30:17>> if you don't comply.
30:18>> Yeah. Then you can the municipality
30:21could be subject to what's called a
30:23builder's remedy lawsuit which
30:25essentially renders your zoning null and
30:28void and the builder gets to decide what
30:31they want to build and how high and how
30:34dense and all those things and um
30:37definitely not what um we recommend for
30:40municipalities. So that's one of the
30:43reasons why you go through the
30:45compliance. It's to protect your zoning
30:47so that your decisions are made locally
30:49and not in a a judicial setting. So in
30:53effect,
30:55what the township does by following the
30:58law on this is it protects itself and
31:02the community from being or having a
31:06decision thrust upon the community that
31:09may not necessarily be what the
31:11community wants. rather than working
31:14through the planner as we have done
31:17whereby um we can kind of negotiate what
31:22goes on during that period in terms of
31:25the length uh uh and also the type of
31:29housing that is required of us.
31:32>> Yes, absolutely correct.
31:33>> Thank you.
31:37>> Any other council members? No. Okay. So,
31:40let's uh have a motion to open the uh
31:45comments, public comments for items on
31:47the agenda only. Large crowd. We are
31:50going to limit it to three minutes per
31:51person. And uh please just state your
31:55name uh when uh when you come up. Can I
31:57have a motion to open the floor to the
32:00public?
32:00>> Second.
32:04Moved.
32:04>> All in favor? I.
32:07>> Any opposed?
32:08Floor
32:11is open to the public. Thank you very
32:12much.
32:19>> I'm going to take advantage of the seat
32:20and the microphone. Thank you. Good
32:23evening. I know we're supposed to state
32:26our name and where we come from. I just
32:29want to say I appreciate these folks
32:31being here. I'm sure Bill and the others
32:33had something to do it do with it.
32:35However,
32:36you ask who I am. I say I am still a
32:40disenfranchised Vernon registered voter.
32:43One out of the 2,433
32:46signators on the petition to have the
32:49pilot question put on the ballot for
32:51vote
32:51>> on the agenda.
32:52>> So, I'm just going to
32:55do
32:57>> you're asking my name.
32:57>> Is this is this subject on the agenda?
32:59>> Yes. 26-83.
33:02Um please explain why this has to be
33:06done on emergency basis. Um 95,000
33:10um for it says SCUMA utilities. Um what
33:14specifically is it for?
33:362683 is the emergency temporary
33:39appropriations that you're talking
33:40about.
33:42>> Yes, sir.
33:44Why does it have to be done on emergency
33:46basis and what specifically is it for?
33:49It says SCUA, but what specifically
33:52schema fees does it cover?
34:06Maybe
34:08the administrator knows
34:13it looks like it's to pay a bill.
34:18don't um think that I'm haven't had the
34:21opportunity to look in the drill down of
34:24the comments and the letters and emails.
34:27I want an honest answer,
34:33but I'm asking a specific question.
34:36>> There's an invoice that I gave
34:37everybody.
34:38>> Well, this is the public comment so that
34:41they can get they can get back to you.
34:43>> This is the bill
34:43>> the administration can get. This is not
34:45an an This is not a back and forth an
34:47answer.
34:47>> I'm here because we're all concerned
34:49about what's going in our township.
34:51>> Okay.
34:52>> And you and you've expressed that
34:53concern.
34:55>> No, I don't. I pay taxes in state of New
34:58Jersey.
34:58>> So then there's also a request, I
35:00understand, from the county for their
35:02monies. How much are they asking for and
35:04what is that going to do? And do we have
35:06those funds as well?
35:08And in regards to Jessica Caldwell, I
35:12think she said um about the rounds.
35:15We're in the fourth round. How many
35:16years do we have before we have to build
35:19the fourth round? 10 years. Is it maybe
35:2310 years we have to build? So why the
35:26rush?
35:28Um
35:30the developer the answer
35:34there's an invoice from Skuma
35:37>> to the town. So that
35:39>> and it has to be paid.
35:41>> What's it for?
35:42>> What's it for? It's
35:44>> which is it a connection fee? Is it what
35:47property does it belong to is what I'm
35:49saying. I mean
35:50>> most please find certificate of annual
35:52charge executed by chairman of Sussex
35:54County Municipalities. These
35:56certificates are in accordance with the
35:582005 Vernon Township contracts. We're
36:01under contract to pay schumma on a
36:03yearly basis. And this is this is the
36:06the invoice that came in and it was
36:09received in the finance department
36:10January 23rd.
36:12>> Does it have anything to do with the um
36:15other property getting a CEO and not
36:19paying?
36:20>> This is her time to this is her again
36:22her time to trust you. You know
36:25>> please
36:27>> ma'am please.
36:28>> No I've seen you in action and I'm sorry
36:31I'm not
36:32>> okay you can I've seen you in action.
36:34I'm not impressed with you either.
36:36>> Thank you very much. I appreciate
36:37>> You're welcome.
36:40>> Yeah. I don't know. Um I just think
36:43there's a lot of issues that are being
36:46addressed in a quiet manner which should
36:48really be addressed full throttle in
36:51front of the public and it's unfortunate
36:54but we're asked to trust the process and
36:58so far I don't think the process has
36:59been so good. Um, it's very sad
37:04and um,
37:06>> I guess I'll leave it at that. But I'm
37:08just saying going forward there has to
37:10be more checks and balances. I don't
37:13want to see if if I could be so bold to
37:15say just the mayor negotiating any more
37:17agreements without somebody on the
37:19council being involved. I think that's
37:21very important. More eyes, more ears,
37:23better results.
37:27>> Okay. Thank you, Council President.
37:30I think it's
37:38to answer Miss Edward's questions. The
37:42210,000
37:44I believe that's the amount that is I'm
37:48sorry
37:50250 whatever that amount was I don't
37:52have the bill in front of me. Each year
37:56there are quarterly payments made to
37:58schuma which is the amount of money
38:00that's necessary to pay for the
38:03treatment of wastewater and that was a
38:09portion of wastewater that was not
38:12included in the original budget. Okay,
38:16because apparently we used more
38:18wastewater.
38:20So that had to be pace paid for.
38:24>> You talking about the 70,000
38:26>> 70,000
38:26>> 70,000
38:28put these on the county that they'll be
38:30looking
38:31>> the county uh is the amount of money
38:34that had to be paid for the quarterly
38:39amount.
38:41Yes, sir.
38:44>> So, so basically you have two
38:47contractual situations that needed to be
38:50resolved. There was no duplicity about
38:52this. It's something that we have to do
38:54on a on an annual basis. and we have
38:57another member of our uh of our MUA
39:01sitting in the audience and if he
39:04chooses to uh speak with you after the
39:07meeting, I'm sure he'd be glad to
39:09reinforce or clarify the position, but I
39:13I wouldn't think that any member of the
39:15township, the council would try and so
39:18to speak bamboozle you or anything on
39:20this. It's very very clear. Thank you.
39:25Anyone else?
39:30>> Hello. Hi, my name is Ashley Sinnelli
39:33and I'm gonna address ordinance 2602.
39:36>> All right.
39:36>> Uh 2602, the ordinance for Burger Road.
39:40Um I just wanted to speak on this
39:42because I know many of you are not
39:43familiar with the situation. Um this has
39:46gone beyond a typical neighbor
39:48disagreement. Um, why are we requesting
39:52this? Um, our neighbors have
39:55wasted municipal resources calling code
39:57enforcement on us no less than 10 times.
39:59They have threatened to kill our dog and
40:02me. Could you speak up?
40:03>> Yeah, I'm having difficult
40:05>> different microphone.
40:06>> Relax a little bit. You
40:07>> I don't public speak.
40:10>> Okay. So, our neighbors um since we have
40:12moved in in 2024 have consistently
40:14harassed us to the point where we now
40:17really want to go home because they are
40:20going to be a problem and we don't want
40:21to leave because we're scared of what
40:22they're doing. They have threatened to
40:24kill our dog. I have it in writing on
40:26multiple occasions because they don't
40:28like that I have electric fence. They
40:30have filed false complaints with animal
40:32control. They have filed false
40:34complaints with the police department.
40:36They have called the town clerk. They
40:39have called probably every office in
40:41this building wasting municipal
40:42resources for meaningful things like
40:45where I park my car. They take pictures
40:48of us when we leave the house when we
40:50come home. They take pictures of us when
40:52we have guests over. They take pictures
40:54of my underage child who was sitting in
40:56the audience.
40:58The strip of road that we were
41:00requesting is unpaved and leads to a
41:02gully that was filled with trash. Was an
41:05ivy. There was nothing there. There's no
41:07public lake access. My neighbors have
41:09lake access on both sides of their
41:10property. We are asking for this for
41:13peace of mind, for safety.
41:18In fact, they have been sending people
41:20down my street who I see in the audience
41:22tonight to take photographs of our
41:23children. I had to follow someone out to
41:25ask why they were photographing my home
41:27this past weekend. This has become such
41:30an issue. We are so uncomfortable.
41:33Every time I go outside, they are
41:35photographing us.
41:41This is our first home. We're raising
41:43our family here and our dog is part of
41:46family. I shouldn't have to keep Vitamin
41:49K by my front door because I'm afraid my
41:51neighbors are going to kill my dog. I
41:53shouldn't have to be concerned that they
41:54are taking pictures of my 5-year-old
41:56daughter. She can't even walk to the
41:58garage with my husband because this
42:00little strip of unpaved road connects
42:02our house and our garage without them
42:04out there. They walked to me the end of
42:06the street to putly harass us. The
42:09police have been to my house more times
42:11than I've ever called the police having
42:14and by full of police reports.
42:19This behavior exhibited by these people
42:21has been nothing short of psychotic and
42:23traumatizing to us. And I ask you to
42:25please approve this ordinance so that we
42:27may feel safe at our home. Thank you.
42:40Oh,
42:43name is Angelina. I'm a resident at 20
42:45Burger Road. Uh, I am the neighbor that
42:48she just spoke about, which is
42:50completely untrue. I've been a resident
42:53there since 2018. I've never had any
42:55issues with any of the neighbors. Um,
42:58they have moved in in 2014. and they
43:01purchased the house and from the
43:03beginning of the time that they bought
43:05the house, they systematically attempted
43:06to restrict public use of the roadway,
43:08which is the Burger Road. They initially
43:10put the signs on my property without
43:12knowing it's my property. And they were
43:14actually the first ones to call the
43:15township and question that it's my
43:18property. Um, and actually that's
43:20recorded. I've never called the township
43:22on them first.
43:23um they misrepresented the legal status
43:25of the road, created ongoing conflicts,
43:27which I feel like this was a perfect
43:30framing to take over the land because
43:33they have the garage on the left, they
43:35have the house on the right and they
43:37just want to connect it to have the
43:38culde-sac for themselves and essentially
43:41blocking the public roadway, the
43:43turnaround and the access to the lake
43:45that the other neighbors historically
43:47did use. And um so I was the police
43:52actually they called the police on us
43:54the first time when I was in the
43:55stroller walking on Burger Road that's
43:58still as of today is a public roadway
44:01and they've been systematically blocking
44:03it physically blocking it with the car.
44:06They've been calling the police on us.
44:07One time he called 911 when I walked on
44:11the road. Um so that's completely
44:13inaccurate and I didn't never called 10
44:16times to the police and that could be
44:18checked. I mean that's completely
44:20untrue. Um so let me go back to the
44:25facts because
44:27uh proposed vacation. So I'm here for
44:30the ordinance 2602 concerning the
44:32proposed vacation of Porsche Municipal
44:34Road. The initiative originated from the
44:36residents of 24 Burger um a directly
44:39interested party and the plan was
44:40prepared by their funds. They paid the
44:42township to create the plan and um to
44:46create the ordinance. Under these
44:48circumstances, my hope is that council's
44:50decisions will be based exclusively on
44:51public interest and the priority of
44:53safety. Burger Road is a dead and
44:55municipal road. The red residents,
44:57delivery trucks, visitors, and emergency
44:58have used since 2018. I've never had any
45:01issues. It's a public asset that serves
45:03our community has been maintained by
45:05public funds. Vacating would provide no
45:07meaningful public benefit. Instead, it
45:09would primarily serve a single property
45:11owner and eliminate access for others.
45:14My main concern, if the road is vacated,
45:16there will be no proper turnaround at
45:17the end of the road.
45:19Um, this creates safety and
45:21accessibility concerns for residents,
45:23visitors, emergency vehicles. Township
45:26roads must remain safe, functional, and
45:28logically designed. If the if you vacate
45:30that piece of road, it's it's literally
45:32just a narrow road you have to back up.
45:35This ordinance presents ongoing safety
45:37risks including mandatory vehicle
45:39backing approximately 400 ft. Um limited
45:43access for any any trucks, cars,
45:46emergency services, and also right now
45:48we have um everybody backing up because
45:51they've been forcing everybody to back
45:53up along the the road. So if there's a
45:56FedEx truck or if there's a UPS Amazon,
45:59they're just backing up all the way down
46:01the road. Um,
46:04notably the ordinance also provides no
46:05factual basis demonstrating any
46:07financial benefit or cost savings to the
46:09municipality resulted from this proposed
46:11vacation. Claims that warranted
46:13maintenance or lack of improvement are
46:15also a little bit misleading because
46:17that's included in the ordinance. The
46:18township already maintains the road and
46:20paving was completed up to the point of
46:22proposed vacation. Um, the official maps
46:25municipal plans confirm that the road
46:27maintains municipal status along its
46:30entire length extends to the lake. So
46:32it's not just a dead end street. It
46:34actually leads right into the lake
46:36>> and blocking it would
46:37>> wrap it up a little bit.
46:38>> Yeah.
46:39>> So it would just block any access to
46:42>> uh to the lake that historically have
46:44been used. So I actually have neighbors
46:46who did sign a petition. I think
46:48somebody sent couple emails to the
46:50township clerk because they couldn't be
46:51here um in person. But I have never
46:54called the police 10 times. You could
46:56verify that with the police. I'm just
46:58trying to preserve the road because this
47:01has been systematically done since the
47:03day they moved in and um here we are. I
47:06just want to preserve the road and that
47:08way the public could have access to it.
47:10If anything happens 20, 30 years from
47:13now and the lake gets restored, everyone
47:15can still use it and that's it. I mean
47:18as simple as that.
47:19>> Thank you.
47:20I hope that um you make the decision
47:22based on everybody's interest, not just
47:24one person who wants to take over the
47:26culdeac.
47:35>> Hi, how are you? My name is Kevin Riley.
47:38Uh this also has to do with the matter
47:40at 25 road. um
47:44bad at this, but this has been an
47:47ongoing
47:49torture. Realistically,
47:53I don't know what the dilemma is. So, we
47:55put up different avenues to make this
47:59right. We are going to pave an area at
48:01the end of our road or at the end of our
48:03property. Sally cars
48:06um deliveries, everyone could turn
48:08around. The plow trucks could turn
48:09around. We are trying to make it right.
48:12The reason everyone's backing up the
48:14road, yes, we have been trying to make
48:16it a thing to where that isn't a
48:18turnaround where my 5-year-old is
48:20playing and my dog is playing, but my
48:22neighbors have also chain linked their
48:24driveways to where there is no access on
48:27the road at all. They had two cactus
48:30plants hanging to deter people from
48:32touching their chains. So,
48:36I'm a man of very little words. Just
48:39that's all I got. just
48:41see it for what it is and I hope you
48:44make a great decision. Thank you.
48:52>> Anyone else?
48:57See, no one else. We'll close the uh
49:00wait.
49:01>> Okay.
49:07>> Good evening.
49:08from the Glenwood section of town. Um,
49:10I'm speaking to resolution 2696. I can
49:14talk about that now, right?
49:20>> Agreement with Red Hand.
49:24>> I just want to point out a few things.
49:26Um, I feel like the people who signed
49:28the petition have been underestimated
49:31in as far as how much research we've
49:33done as this has gone along. Um, how
49:36many people in the audience are aware
49:38that the developer gets the first 10 to
49:4015% of the profit off that building,
49:42that $10 million project? They get that.
49:45And we're going to be asking single
49:46parents, single mothers, retired people
49:49to chip in for the profits for a
49:51for-profit company. It's it's it goes
49:53against everything that we elected you
49:55to represent us for. We put you in these
49:57seats. We did not give up our rights to
50:00common sense, to critical thinking, to
50:03you know, we didn't sign allegiance to
50:04death to agree with everything they've
50:06done. There are many things wrong with
50:08this whole situation, starting with the
50:10the situation with the MUA for startups.
50:13Secondly, we had three professionals
50:15speak and respectfully each of them, I
50:17respect them, but they weren't sworn in.
50:20Okay? And when Mr. Chesset was here the
50:21last time, we had the meeting in
50:23December, nobody even knew he worked for
50:25us. Nobody knew because he didn't sound
50:28like it. He sounded like he's working
50:29for the developers. When when um when
50:32Mrs. Cole got up, she said, "Era money."
50:35Okay, if you hear these if you hear
50:37these nuances, these are this is a click
50:40working against the taxpayers. They're
50:42working against us. And honestly,
50:44collectively, we put you in that seat to
50:47represent our opinions, not to not to
50:50save us from ourselves. Okay? We don't
50:53need saving. 2,300 people signed this
50:55ordinance. We don't need to be saved. We
50:58want we want you to do the right thing
50:59for us. Not for red hand. Not for one
51:02key, not for
51:05a riot or whatever the hell the names
51:06are. It's enough. It's enough. This the
51:09statute all these limited companies and
51:12these different aspects. It's a it's a
51:14Ponzi scheme and it was created and
51:16trended by the Soprano state and and
51:20honestly it's it's probably organized
51:22crime. This is insane. and we're letting
51:24this happen here. This is a beautiful
51:25place to live. I hate to see it
51:27destroyed. Like for example, Jefferson
51:29is being faced with right now. They're
51:31eating up all the board of ed money,
51:33destroying the townships, and we just
51:35can't proceed full speed ahead because
51:38someone made an agreement before they
51:40even presented these properties. We
51:41found that out in our due diligence that
51:44they make an agreement with town that
51:45they will get this agreement before it
51:48goes to planning board, before they do
51:50permits, before anything else. This
51:51isn't how you do things. This is really
51:54not and it's upside down, inside out,
51:56any way you want to call it. It is not
51:58working right for the taxpayers. I thank
52:00you and I really encourage you to not
52:02approve this process. Thank you.
52:17>> Sty from Glenwood. Uh I'm going to talk
52:20about 26 97 and 98.
52:24Um
52:26we have 10 years to satisfy the
52:30requirement. I think we were lowered to
52:33197
52:34units over the 10-year period. So my
52:38question is why a rush? Why are we being
52:41jammed with all these apartment
52:43buildings in this town when it doesn't
52:47fit in our environment? It's not what
52:50our town is. Our town is a country
52:54lifestyle. What do fourstory apartment
52:57buildings have to do here?
53:02Mr. Rudo, you said
53:07we may end up with what we don't want.
53:10We're there. We don't want these
53:12apartment buildings. We don't want these
53:14pilots. the town's people have spoken.
53:19They don't want to be cified. I'll use
53:23that terminology. We don't want to bring
53:26in
53:28about, if I'm not mistaken, it's close
53:30to 200 apartments between all of these
53:33buildings. That's not what we are.
53:39My question on the rehabilitation
53:42program is
53:44what other options have been looked at?
53:47There's many that are available. We can
53:50allow uh mother daughters again which we
53:57refute when we put a resolution through
53:59a few years ago outlawing them. They are
54:01qual they qualify for rehabilitation.
54:05So why can't we go back to allowing that
54:08again? I would have been a perfect
54:10candidate to have that when I had my dad
54:13living with me for five years. It would
54:15have been great to have him have his own
54:20quarters instead of having to live in my
54:22living room. But anyway, that that's
54:24another story.
54:26We need to look at other options, not
54:29just put up lowincome apartment
54:32buildings and senior apartments.
54:35Who's going to pay $2,800 a month to
54:39move to Vernon where there is nothing
54:41here except
54:44recreation? If you own a home and you're
54:47getting tax deductions, that's
54:50different. Well, when why would you pay
54:52$2,800 rent every month out and get no
54:56return back? It makes no sense. I don't
54:59think these apartment buildings are
55:00going to fill. I don't see it happening.
55:03We got apartments up on the mountains
55:06that are h empty. So, how
55:10what makes anybody think we're going to
55:12fill 150 part apartments in the next 10
55:15years? I don't see it. Thank you.
55:36is Christa Gary. I have lived in Vernon
55:39for about 52 years and I've seen many
55:42mistakes made by former community
55:44leaders and I don't want to see that
55:47happen again. I believe that the
55:49majority of earned citizens believe that
55:51adopting the proposed pilot program
55:53could prove to be a serious mistake for
55:56our town. Often pilot programs have been
55:59extremely lucrative for the developer
56:01where they have often taken advantage of
56:03municipalities with creative contracts
56:06and operations to make sure the
56:08developer pays the lowest amount under
56:10the agreement. While payment in lie of
56:13taxes programs are designed to
56:15incentivize development or gain of
56:17contributions from taxexempt entities,
56:20they come with significant financial and
56:23social drawbacks for local communities.
56:26Some of the downsides are reduced school
56:29and county funding. Pilot payments go
56:32directly to the municipal budget,
56:33leaving school districts with little to
56:35no revenue from the new development.
56:38Higher tax burdens for residents. New
56:41residential developments increase the
56:43number of students and the demand for
56:45public services like police and fire
56:47protection. Without a corresponding
56:50increase in school and county tax
56:52revenue, these costs are often shifted
56:54to the homeowner through higher property
56:57taxes.
56:59Another reason is long-term revenue
57:01loss. Municipalities generally receive
57:04less money through a pilot than they
57:06would under conventional taxation, even
57:08if the agreement provides a steady
57:10short-term stream.
57:12Unlike property taxes, many pilots are
57:15voluntary or not legally binding,
57:18leaving municipalities with limited
57:20enforcement options if an organization
57:23decides to stop paying. Developers and
57:26entities may fail to file required
57:28financial audits or violate the terms of
57:31their agreements. I hope that all of the
57:34above reasons that I just presented will
57:36have an impact on the present council
57:39and cause you to reconsider your stance
57:41on this very important, very risky
57:44enterprise that would be binding for 30
57:47years. I urge you to listen to the
57:49sensible voices of the people whom are
57:53overwhelmingly
57:54against this project. Thank you.
58:07Good evening. May I approach and give a
58:09hand out to everyone?
58:11Sure. Thank you.
58:25>> This could be for the
58:27>> the record as well.
58:31Thank you. Thank you, sir.
58:50>> Good evening. My name is Kurt Stevens.
58:53Uh, I am your local farmer. I'm also one
58:56of the petitioners that helped the
58:59petition against the pilot. Um
59:02I'm not a very good public speaker so
59:04this is good practice so bear with me
59:06here. Um it is said that the foundation
59:09of all good relationships starts with
59:11good communication. Uh given my feedback
59:14to you all at the last meeting about not
59:17feeling heard and given the failure of
59:19the council and the clerk to reply to
59:22written communication from the
59:23petitioners. I'm here again to try and
59:26get some clarity and to progress the
59:28dialogue here. As a reminder, there were
59:30over 2400 Vernon residents who signed
59:33the petition regarding ordinance 2517.
59:36Uh despite this, on January 23rd, the
59:39petition was rejected.
59:41Uh the clerk under guidance from the
59:43attorney cited the Millennium Towers uh
59:47legal case. Uh I didn't really know what
59:49that meant. Uh, I spoke with some
59:51attorneys myself, did a bunch of
59:53research, spoke with others in the
59:54community, and essentially what I
59:56understand that to mean is that it's a
59:58it's a legal shield uh that protects
1:00:02administrative acts from petitions. Um
1:00:06and then this goes into a bit of sort of
1:00:09very dense language is is going to be
1:00:11hard to you know speak about here but
1:00:14you know my understanding is that
1:00:16petitions can't work against
1:00:18administrative acts but they can work
1:00:20against legislative acts. So this sort
1:00:23of boils down to an argument about uh
1:00:26what does this pilot ordinance
1:00:29represent? Um, so my understanding, and
1:00:32please, we have a bunch of experts in
1:00:33the room and a bunch of people on the
1:00:35line that are interested in these
1:00:36answers. Um, but my understanding is
1:00:39that an administrative act is when a
1:00:41council merely fills in the blanks of a
1:00:44law that already exists. It is the
1:00:47simple execution of a preset policy. Uh,
1:00:51however, the clerk's rejection letter to
1:00:53us fails to identify exactly which
1:00:55pre-existing ordinance or plan mandates
1:00:57a 30-year tax break for this project.
1:01:00Uh, if there is no written rule being
1:01:02followed, then this council is not
1:01:03executing a policy. You are creating
1:01:05one. Um, a legislative back, as I
1:01:08understand it, is when a council
1:01:09exercises its own discretion to set new
1:01:12standards or enter into new permanent
1:01:14contracts. Our research suggests that
1:01:16ordinance 2517 is a legislative act for
1:01:19several reasons. Uh first is the absence
1:01:22of a mandate. The township's own records
1:01:25are silent on the requirements for this
1:01:27pilot. There is no ordinance that
1:01:29specifies a 30-year term and no preset
1:01:31financial formula for this redevelopment
1:01:33area because no rule existed. The
1:01:36council's decision to grant a 30-year
1:01:38term in December was a discretionary
1:01:40policy choice. In New Jersey, such a
1:01:42choice is a legislative act subject to
1:01:44referendum.
1:01:46Second, this ordinance deviates from
1:01:48established township policy. Uh Burnon's
1:01:51general policy on tax exemptions.
1:01:53Ordinance607 establishes a clear 20-year
1:01:56cap. By granting 30 years for the Omega
1:01:59Drive project, this council did not
1:02:00administer an existing rule. It created
1:02:03a new 10-year extension over our only
1:02:05written precedent, which feels like a
1:02:08major shift in the duration of tax
1:02:10exemptions, which is a primary matter of
1:02:12public policy. I know the gentleman
1:02:14earlier said that perhaps because it's
1:02:18industrial commercial that it wouldn't
1:02:19apply to this, but you know,
1:02:23this does seem like a commercial
1:02:24development. It's it's it's a
1:02:26multi-million dollar investor investing
1:02:27in a commercial enterprise. Um, and then
1:02:31I know I got to wrap this up. We got a
1:02:32lot of people here. Um, lastly, you
1:02:35know, fiscal impacts. You know, we've
1:02:37debated these costs at length.
1:02:41I know there's a debate whether the
1:02:42school has capacity to absorb this or
1:02:44not with existing meetings. Uh, but the
1:02:46fact remains that the Omega Drive
1:02:49financial agreement itself
1:02:52in section 4.4 admits that the project's
1:02:55financial benefits are speculative and
1:02:57not guaranteed. Again, that's in writing
1:03:00in the financial agreement that the town
1:03:01entered into. It's speculative and not
1:03:03guaranteed. So, despite this admission
1:03:06of uncertainty, the agreement commits
1:03:08Vernon to a 30-year term that provides
1:03:10no direct funding for our schools.
1:03:12Deciding to shift that long-term fiscal
1:03:14weight onto the public based on
1:03:16speculative revenue is a legislative
1:03:18decision that demands public oversight.
1:03:21And then lastly, as as many of the
1:03:23audience have already alluded to, you
1:03:24know, there's a clear public mandate
1:03:27here. there is over 2400 signatures
1:03:29representing approximately
1:03:3125%
1:03:33uh turnout as compared to our most
1:03:35recent general election and that's
1:03:37almost double the legal requirement for
1:03:39a referendum. So in closing, we ask the
1:03:43council tonight to resend the clerk's
1:03:46rejection and allow this ordinance to go
1:03:49before the voters as the law intended.
1:03:53We have done our part by bringing you
1:03:54the names of over 2400 neighbors who
1:03:57want a say. If this rejection stands, we
1:04:01will be left no choice but to take the
1:04:03next necessary steps to protect the
1:04:05public's right to oversight.
1:04:08This includes seeking a judicial review
1:04:10of the clerk's determination in superior
1:04:12court as well as launching a general
1:04:14initiative to establish permanent
1:04:17uniform standards for all future pilot
1:04:20agreements which are likely to be quite
1:04:22restrictive. Uh we would much rather
1:04:24resolve this here tonight through the
1:04:27dem democratic process you were elected
1:04:29to uphold rather than through a
1:04:32protracted legal process.
1:04:34The choice to avoid that path lies with
1:04:36you and I would ask that you address
1:04:40myself the audience if not now in your
1:04:43uh comments at the end. Thank you.
1:04:54Let's
1:05:03see. This is nice. Um, Jackie, pardon
1:05:07me. I wanted to ask a question to Mr.
1:05:10Jessup before I say what I have to say
1:05:11to make sure I have some element of
1:05:13accuracy here. Um, Mr. Jessa for the law
1:05:18for the state. Do we have to
1:05:22>> our legal requirement is to submit the
1:05:24four phases to the state? Is that
1:05:26correct?
1:05:26>> Because I asked him if
1:05:30>> you would take the question if you're up
1:05:31to it because you were here for his
1:05:33education. If you care to answer her
1:05:35directly, it's up to you.
1:05:37>> So can you describe what do you mean by
1:05:39the four
1:05:39>> legal requirement is to just submit the
1:05:42plan to the state. Correct. for the four
1:05:44phases. We have to submit each phase our
1:05:46fair share to the fourth round housing
1:05:49element fair
1:05:53requirement is to submit the plan the
1:05:55zoning the all of that to the state. Is
1:05:57that correct?
1:05:59>> Jessica will answer your question about
1:06:00your round four housing next year.
1:06:06So for round four, we had to submit our
1:06:08plan to what's called the dispute
1:06:10resolution program, which is in the
1:06:12superior court.
1:06:13>> So legally, all the phases have to be
1:06:16completed by us. That's our legal
1:06:18requirement for the sound. Correct.
1:06:21>> Uh it's a little different. I can give a
1:06:24a longer explanation later, but I think
1:06:26I' I'd like to address where the units
1:06:29fall in the various phases because this
1:06:31isn't all under round four. So, the
1:06:33reason I'm asking is the, you know, we
1:06:35hear the 10 years a lot and I'm
1:06:37wondering what happens if we don't have
1:06:40all of the units built within that 10
1:06:42years. That's not our legal requirement.
1:06:44Correct. It's just required that we have
1:06:47all of our plans in place, the zoning,
1:06:48this that and the other because we can't
1:06:51developer to build.
1:06:52>> Yeah, that that's correct to a certain
1:06:54extent. And a lot of these units go back
1:06:56to round three, which is why it's not
1:06:59really like a lot of people and saying,
1:07:01"What's the rush in round four?" These
1:07:03are actually round three units because
1:07:05really nothing was built during round
1:07:07three. But it's not to a certain extent.
1:07:09We What I'm saying is in 10 years if all
1:07:12of these 194 units, 197 whatever it is
1:07:15are not built, there's no legal
1:07:18ramification. That is correct. Because
1:07:19Vernon can't force a developer to be
1:07:21built here. 96 units from round three
1:07:25plus 194 for round four.
1:07:27>> Are we required to have these buildings
1:07:29erected within 10 years by law
1:07:32>> if they're approved by the board? If you
1:07:34do something to not have them
1:07:36>> if a developer doesn't approach us at
1:07:38all in the next 10 years, let's say for
1:07:41all of those units
1:07:43responsible.
1:07:44>> What we have to do over time is show
1:07:47that the zones are still viable if
1:07:49they're not being
1:07:50>> correct. We have to provide the building
1:07:52opportunity, all of that.
1:07:54>> Yeah.
1:07:55>> But legally, if the buildings aren't
1:07:56built, if a developer didn't come to us
1:07:58within 10 years and we didn't build
1:07:59this, there's no legal ramification.
1:08:01We've done our part. We made the zoning.
1:08:03We made it available. We made the
1:08:05opportunity.
1:08:07>> I think you're making a lot of sweeping
1:08:09statements that I would want to,
1:08:13you know, we'll leave it just now. She
1:08:17answers your questions.
1:08:19>> Yeah. So, I was at a job site a few
1:08:23weeks back in Greenwich, Connecticut,
1:08:24and I was sitting in a room with Greyar
1:08:26Developers and Acriman attorney. Greyar
1:08:29is one of the leading developers in in
1:08:32the country. They're well known. Acriman
1:08:34top attorney, Ford real estate
1:08:36development pilots uh in the nation,
1:08:40nationwide recognized. They're not
1:08:42little small potatoes local. And we were
1:08:45I've been to quite a few jobs with them.
1:08:48and we have the kind of relationship
1:08:50where we can have casual conversation
1:08:52and we were talking about what's going
1:08:53on in Vernon and I showed them the
1:08:56December 29th meeting um specifically
1:08:59when Mr. Jessup was speaking with his
1:09:02presentation. And you know, I bring this
1:09:03up because someone before said it acted
1:09:06like he wasn't a representative of us.
1:09:09And what's funny about that is that the
1:09:11attorney that I showed for one of the
1:09:13top real estate firms in the country
1:09:16said, "Where's your representative?" I
1:09:18said, "He's right there." And I said,
1:09:20"Why?" And he goes, "He sounds like he's
1:09:21for the developer. I've never seen
1:09:23someone represent a town and not give
1:09:25any cons, negatives, talk about any
1:09:28negotiation." And he said, "I find that
1:09:29really odd." He said, "What I also find
1:09:31really odd is that O'Neal, they know of
1:09:34O'Neal."
1:09:35They said, "We also find it really odd
1:09:37that O'Neal is coming to you back to
1:09:39back to back with all these developments
1:09:4255 plus 27 unit and 99 unit." And I I
1:09:45don't know if there's any more on the
1:09:47schedule
1:09:47>> running over and you're
1:09:49>> So I'm wondering how he got in touch
1:09:52with O'Neal. Did O'Neal come to us or
1:09:54are we probing them? Because they're of
1:09:57the mindset and they are powerhouses in
1:10:00this industry that O'Neal wouldn't have
1:10:02come to us for all of this one after the
1:10:06other after the other. And the timing is
1:10:08too coincidental with all of this state
1:10:10mandate. So, I'm wondering if we can get
1:10:12some backstory as to how O'Neal found us
1:10:15and why they're hitting us back to back
1:10:17because they seem to think that we're
1:10:19kind of pushing them to do it. So, I'm
1:10:22wondering why because legally we have
1:10:24all our phases complete or if we have
1:10:26all our phases complete, we don't have
1:10:28to have these buildings erected in 10
1:10:30years,
1:10:34>> you know, and that's been said at the
1:10:35meetings. We have to have these built in
1:10:3710 years. No, we don't.
1:10:39>> No, we don't.
1:10:41>> Okay. Thank you very much.
1:10:50Anyone else?
1:10:58Seeing no more members of the public
1:11:00wishing to go forward. May I have a
1:11:01motion to close the meeting to the
1:11:03public?
1:11:03>> Motion.
1:11:04>> Second.
1:11:05>> Second. All in favor?
1:11:07>> I.
1:11:09Next up, review of the bills list. Any
1:11:12comments from the council members on the
1:11:14bills list?
1:11:15>> Yes, I have comments or questions. And
1:11:19this is probably would be for the CFO.
1:11:22So, I'm disappointed that the new CFO is
1:11:24not attending the meetings.
1:11:27Um, but I'm just curious, how does the
1:11:30QPA paid?
1:11:33>> Monthly.
1:11:34>> It pays monthly. So, I would think
1:11:39every month it should be the same amount
1:11:40of money.
1:11:41>> Yes.
1:11:42>> I see varying different
1:11:45um charges. So was just curious is we
1:11:49voted at the last meeting for his
1:11:52salary. Does he charge us extra extra or
1:11:56>> I'd have to look at his contract.
1:11:58>> Okay. Yeah. I'd like you could send that
1:12:00to me. I appreciate that. I'm just
1:12:02curious how he's paid because I would
1:12:04think it would be the same amount every
1:12:07month. And then the next question I see
1:12:11tree service. So, I remember sitting in
1:12:14the audience before I um came up here on
1:12:17the deis as a council member talking
1:12:19about that bucket truck and there was a
1:12:22lot of it was a big price tag and a lot
1:12:25of people were for it against it. But I
1:12:27remember you guys saying we're going to
1:12:30cut down trees and we won't have to use
1:12:32tree service. And then I had noticed
1:12:34that somebody went to Ruckers and signed
1:12:38up for a tree class. But now I see
1:12:40almost $8,000 of tree service. So I
1:12:43thought that bucket truck was supposed
1:12:45to be in lie of us ever hiring anybody
1:12:47else. That's how you made it sound like
1:12:50this is good investment. So if we're not
1:12:52using that bucket truck for trees, what
1:12:54are we using it for?
1:12:57>> We we are using it for trees. What what
1:12:59you're seeing is trees uh and limbs that
1:13:02are around power lines. That's something
1:13:05that our guys are not going to be doing
1:13:06is working around power lines. They're I
1:13:09don't think they're even allowed to. Um
1:13:11that is for the power for the electric
1:13:13companies to do.
1:13:14>> Okay. So, have you used it at all the
1:13:16bucket truck?
1:13:17>> Of course. Yeah. They've used it already
1:13:19for uh cutting down, you know, trees and
1:13:23uh it's been used various times.
1:13:26Absolutely.
1:13:26>> But doesn't the electrical people do the
1:13:29tree service.
1:13:30>> They do tree service around
1:13:32>> they charge the towns.
1:13:35>> No
1:13:35>> and they charge the towns.
1:13:37>> So what what happens is um if there are
1:13:41trees um that are not they do their own
1:13:46tree cutting as well. Uh but then there
1:13:48are trees that uh it could be a down
1:13:51power line or uh there are sometimes
1:13:54that we have to call guys out for uh
1:13:56trees that are near a power line that
1:13:58could be could be an issue. Um so that's
1:14:01you're seeing uh some of that. But we
1:14:04went through uh
1:14:07we went through the uh I guess five
1:14:10years that the truck has almost like a
1:14:1120 year lifespan on it. and we went
1:14:15through the um the cost of what that
1:14:18would be and we we estimated that within
1:14:215 years that truck will pay for itself.
1:14:25But there are certain situations where
1:14:27uh we do have to call a tree service. Uh
1:14:30there are also at times when you could
1:14:32have multiple down um that we do need
1:14:34assistance because only have you know
1:14:37like I said one truck. Um, so there are
1:14:41numerous times that uh that extra hands
1:14:45are are used. That's why you're seeing
1:14:47that bill that could be reduced uh
1:14:51probably greatly.
1:14:53>> Oh, I'm sorry. Can you repeat that?
1:14:55>> It's going to be reduced that bill
1:14:57>> I would assume. Yeah. Through um
1:15:00uh I would assume that eventually it
1:15:02would be reduced more. Absolutely. Like
1:15:05I said, our guys not working on power
1:15:07lines.
1:15:09Yeah, KMM Tree and Lawn Service is
1:15:11working on power lines.
1:15:14>> They they have um
1:15:18I I don't know exactly what what they've
1:15:21done. Um I don't I don't have
1:15:23>> Sounds like it's the lawn service. All
1:15:24right.
1:15:25>> Well, they're they're they're a tree.
1:15:26They're they're a tree. I don't know
1:15:28which one you're looking.
1:15:28>> And they're cutting near the power
1:15:30lines.
1:15:31>> That could be the reason.
1:15:33>> Good. All right.
1:15:34>> Yeah. We don't um if it's something that
1:15:36we can do, we do it ourselves. But but
1:15:38if it's something that um and around
1:15:41power lines, like I said, I don't know
1:15:42what that that can
1:15:46>> and then there was a $400 charge for a
1:15:49dangerous tree.
1:15:52Okay. All right. Just checking.
1:15:58>> Any others?
1:15:59>> Um I do have one
1:16:00>> call.
1:16:01>> I just was curious as to what this is.
1:16:02It's um $1,250.
1:16:06Um Amy Hackett Mac Grant Q2 Consult.
1:16:09Could you just elaborate on what that
1:16:11is? I just didn't know what it was.
1:16:14>> I don't know where you're talking. What
1:16:16What check?
1:16:17>> Can you give a check number, Carl?
1:16:18Sometimes that helps.
1:16:19>> 65279
1:16:22>> page one.
1:16:30>> I don't know what that is. I'll have to
1:16:31get back to you. All right.
1:16:32>> Thank you.
1:16:38Is it a grant?
1:16:40>> A consultant for a grant.
1:16:42>> That's what it said.
1:16:43>> They give a very small
1:16:44>> Oh, the M grant. Yeah.
1:16:55>> And if you could look into 65304,
1:16:59please.
1:17:02repaired with floor for $28,000.
1:17:06>> If I have an answer for that one.
1:17:08>> Perfect.
1:17:09>> Um it's the DPW had to replace the floor
1:17:13and that was in uh bond ordinance and
1:17:15improvement properties and a resolution
1:17:18was passed last year.
1:17:21Um there was two quotes on it and that
1:17:23was the better of the price and it was
1:17:25finally
1:17:26done. So that's why you're seeing the
1:17:28bill now. Was the floor uh bottom
1:17:32pitted?
1:17:32>> It's the
1:17:33>> It's like a coating that goes on
1:17:35>> epoxy.
1:17:36>> Yeah, similar to that. It's uh it's a
1:17:39lot cheaper than having to rip up the
1:17:42concrete water. So, plus it also has u
1:17:46some ripping stuff in there. So, so
1:17:48non-slip and and and it's easy to clean
1:17:51up as well. So,
1:17:52>> thank you. And it's lighter in color
1:17:55which um helps with working in that in
1:17:59that uh in the shop.
1:18:03>> Any other
1:18:07vote on the bill's list or just
1:18:10make a motion to
1:18:11>> motion to accept the bills list.
1:18:15>> Moved second.
1:18:21All
1:18:21>> in favor? I
1:18:24>> need a motion to accept.
1:18:26>> Um,
1:18:29>> we have a second.
1:18:32>> I'll second.
1:18:38>> We'll hold the minutes.
1:18:43>> Have a motion to approve the minutes
1:18:45from January 15th executive session
1:18:48minutes.
1:18:50>> I'll make that motion.
1:18:51>> Thank you.
1:18:52Second. All in favor?
1:18:55>> I
1:18:57said there's a roll call.
1:19:02>> Yes.
1:19:03>> Yes.
1:19:04>> Runo.
1:19:05>> Yes.
1:19:06>> Sparta.
1:19:07>> Yes.
1:19:08>> Yes.
1:19:09>> Motion carries.
1:19:10>> Have a motion to approve January 15th
1:19:13reorganization meeting minutes.
1:19:16Move.
1:19:17>> Second.
1:19:21Council member Cantino,
1:19:23>> yes.
1:19:23>> Council member,
1:19:24>> yes.
1:19:25>> Council member Mugo,
1:19:26>> yes.
1:19:27>> Council member Sparta,
1:19:28>> yes.
1:19:29>> Council President Higgins,
1:19:30>> yes.
1:19:31>> Motion.
1:19:33>> Have a motion to approve January 21 26
1:19:37special emergency meeting minutes.
1:19:39>> Moved.
1:19:41>> Second. Have a second.
1:19:44>> Second.
1:19:46>> Roll call.
1:19:47>> Council member Canino.
1:19:48>> Yes. Council member Ols
1:19:50>> abstain.
1:19:51>> Council member member Zudo.
1:19:53>> Yes.
1:19:55>> Council member Florida.
1:19:56>> Yes.
1:19:57>> Council President Higgins.
1:19:58>> Yes.
1:20:00>> Finally, regular meeting minutes on
1:20:02January 29th. May I have a motion to
1:20:04approve regular meeting minutes?
1:20:07>> Second.
1:20:09>> Welcome.
1:20:11>> Council member Canino.
1:20:12>> Yes.
1:20:13>> Council member Holmes.
1:20:14>> Yes.
1:20:15>> Council member Rudo.
1:20:16>> Yes.
1:20:17>> Council member Sparta. Yes.
1:20:19>> Council President H.
1:20:20>> Yes.
1:20:21>> Motion carries.
1:20:24>> Next up, we broke up the uh consent
1:20:27agenda resolution.
1:20:30The uh
1:20:33non-convent or introduction
1:20:36for the motion for the consent agenda
1:20:39discussion. If anyone cares to
1:20:45have a discussion on any individual
1:20:47ones, let me know now.
1:20:49>> Okay. So, um, yes, if you could pull out
1:20:522691
1:20:54>> 91.
1:21:06Okay. And let me see what else.
1:21:112696
1:21:14>> 96 on it.
1:21:17>> That That's not on consent.
1:21:18>> That's not on the consent.
1:21:19>> Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. All right.
1:21:21Wait. I think I might have something
1:21:23else.
1:21:25>> So, where what where does the consent
1:21:27Oh,
1:21:29>> 81 to 95.
1:21:31>> All right. From 2691 91. Um,
1:21:34>> I'd like to fill out 2683.
1:21:36>> 83.
1:21:43add that. You okay?
1:21:45>> I'm fine.
1:21:48>> And I'll uh that's 2685.
1:21:55>> Getting confused here.
1:22:01>> Then you'd be looking for you'd be
1:22:03looking for a motion for resolution
1:22:05268182.
1:22:0884 86 to 90 92 to 95
1:22:14that motion.
1:22:17>> Second
1:22:21roll call.
1:22:22>> Roll call vote.
1:22:23>> Council member Can.
1:22:24>> Yes.
1:22:24>> Council member.
1:22:26>> Yes.
1:22:26>> Member Rudo.
1:22:28>> Yes.
1:22:29>> Yes.
1:22:30>> For President Higgins.
1:22:31>> Yes. Motion.
1:22:33>> Okay. We'll go in order then. Emergency
1:22:36temporary appropriation discussion
1:22:39>> 26
1:22:40>> 2683
1:22:42>> was that
1:22:43>> that was me. Um so I'll make a motion.
1:22:46>> Oh yes, second.
1:22:48>> All in favor
1:22:53>> I have quite a few questions about this.
1:22:55From what I see
1:22:56>> to be put on the agenda I mean seems to
1:22:58be put on the table.
1:22:59>> It was it was it was
1:23:01>> okay. Thank you.
1:23:04So, from my understanding, this is
1:23:07because we're being charged an overage.
1:23:09Um, and what I'm really concerned about
1:23:12is when I look at the letter from SCUMA,
1:23:18um, it says that it was received by the
1:23:20mayor's office on December 18th, 2025.
1:23:25But then the letter itself is dated for
1:23:27December 20th, 2025 from Skuma. And then
1:23:31it wasn't received by finance until
1:23:34January 23rd of 2026. So over a month
1:23:38from when it arrived in the mayor's
1:23:39office to when it was received by
1:23:41finance. And Danell
1:23:44wrote an email that was in our packet
1:23:46that says the mayor handed me the final
1:23:48billing from Skuma on Thursday MUA
1:23:51meeting. It was dated received by his
1:23:54office on 1218, but he says he just got
1:23:56it. So, I was unaware that we were being
1:23:59charged an overage, which has resulted
1:24:01in me not putting enough in the
1:24:02temporary budget for the township. So,
1:24:04that's why we're voting on this. I'm
1:24:07just wondering what is with the dating
1:24:09on this because it says received by the
1:24:11mayor's office on the 18th of December,
1:24:15but then it's dated December 20th. And
1:24:17why wasn't it received by finance until
1:24:20January 23rd?
1:24:22>> Your guess as good as mine. I have no
1:24:24>> It says it was received by your office.
1:24:27>> I was It was in my inbox and I
1:24:31questioned whether or not that should
1:24:32even like why did it even come to my my
1:24:35box where or at least I got a copy of
1:24:38it. But that should be really you know
1:24:40again and I handed that off to Spoon to
1:24:44to excuse me to to Denell since she's
1:24:46the director. So yes, I did hand it when
1:24:50I when I received it I handed it to her.
1:24:53where where I got lost in the shuffle or
1:24:57um I can't tell you. I don't know.
1:25:00>> I'm glad that we could solve the problem
1:25:02by voting on this. But my other
1:25:03follow-up question is um will the
1:25:05finance department in the future be sent
1:25:08these communications to prevent this
1:25:10from happening again? Is there a way
1:25:11that we can make sure that notices from
1:25:13schuma are not just sent, they're also
1:25:15sent to the new CFO so that this doesn't
1:25:19happen again?
1:25:21They said I don't know where where that
1:25:23that letter originally I mean if you're
1:25:25tell it came in directly to the finance
1:25:28office that it came I I don't know like
1:25:29I said I don't know I don't have the the
1:25:31tracking of where that where that came
1:25:34in. Um but it just it it I I get what
1:25:38you're saying. It just it confuses me
1:25:40because it says received by your office
1:25:42September 18th. It says that you gave it
1:25:44to her at the MUA meeting and it says
1:25:47received by finance a month later. So to
1:25:50me,
1:25:52I've asked my question
1:25:53>> 18th finance a month later after
1:25:56>> it says on the document December 18th,
1:25:58that's the mayor's office
1:26:01finance January 23rd. And then there's
1:26:03an email that sent us from Denell saying
1:26:08the mayor handed me the final billing
1:26:09statement from Skuma on Thursday at the
1:26:11MUA. It was stated received by office
1:26:131218, but he says he just got it. So I
1:26:16just want
1:26:16>> So scoop that schoon is uh uh that's
1:26:20their comments right about when it was
1:26:22sent in.
1:26:23>> No it's your office
1:26:26>> that's marked by your secretary.
1:26:29>> That's the date that's there
1:26:33might not have changed this stamp. I
1:26:35have no idea.
1:26:37Like I said, I don't know
1:26:40my box and and I honestly I wasn't even
1:26:43gonna because normally it's that gets
1:26:45dispersed, you know, to to the
1:26:47appropriate departments. Um
1:26:49>> cuz I was
1:26:50>> I was shocked. I just brought it over to
1:26:52to her and that was the first time she
1:26:54saw it too
1:26:55>> cuz I was thinking at first maybe it was
1:26:57that her stamp is incorrect, but it says
1:26:59December 18th, 2025. So, unless the
1:27:03secretary has not changed her stamp to a
1:27:05different year in over a month, which I
1:27:06highly doubt, but anyway, but that's my
1:27:09questions.
1:27:10>> Yeah, you know what? That's
1:27:14>> because like I said, I I noticed it in
1:27:16my my mailbox and then I think it was
1:27:19like the day after I brought it to
1:27:21>> Well, the the other issue is is that it
1:27:23was received on the December 18th by the
1:27:25mayor's office, but it was written by
1:27:27Skuma on December 20th.
1:27:28>> That confuses me, too.
1:27:30>> That's crazy, too. It makes no sense. I
1:27:32I cannot
1:27:34>> It's a really weird letter. And then the
1:27:36email from Denell is just very
1:27:38concerning as a council member. I'm
1:27:40reading that and I'm like, I better ask
1:27:41about this. So,
1:27:42>> well, also it's there seems to be a lot
1:27:45of frustration on Denell's part as well
1:27:47because she even says that Skuma refuses
1:27:50to notify the MUA of a number of items
1:27:52and others have no issue sending
1:27:53correspondence to me directly. Yeah.
1:27:55>> The game with that. So,
1:27:57>> they should be sending all
1:27:58communications to her.
1:28:00They should for CC her at least her. It
1:28:03shouldn't just go to the mayor.
1:28:04>> As I said, I was I just said, "Hey, you
1:28:07know what? I'm going to school to to the
1:28:08NUA meeting." I just bring this to her
1:28:11anyway. I wasn't even going to bring it
1:28:12to her. I fig she had it.
1:28:19>> On the email chain.
1:28:21>> Yeah. Another question is if we approve
1:28:24the $95,000, have we been paid from the
1:28:29uh group?
1:28:32>> This has nothing to do with group.
1:28:33>> Okay. So, we got where if if we approved
1:28:36the $95,000,
1:28:39is it added to next year's budget? Does
1:28:40it come out of last year's budget?
1:28:42What's the consequences to paying this
1:28:44$95,000?
1:28:46>> Yeah, that that's that's a question for
1:28:48uh for the MUA. It's
1:28:51>> that will have to that would have to
1:28:52come out of this this year's budget.
1:28:54>> Oh, yeah. If it was given to Yeah,
1:28:56right. So,
1:28:57>> 2026 budget.
1:28:58>> Well, she's adjusting the 2026 budget.
1:29:01>> It's 2026 budget.
1:29:03>> Yes.
1:29:05>> It's a temporary budget for 2026. So,
1:29:08it's going to be in the
1:29:10>> We're adding 20 $95,000 or Yeah. 95
1:29:14already.
1:29:17Like I said, schuma uh the MUA pays
1:29:20their own bills. So, um
1:29:23that that should not
1:29:24>> Yeah. When she refers to the budget,
1:29:25it's the MUA budget.
1:29:26>> Yeah.
1:29:27>> Not our budget.
1:29:27>> Oh, the MUA budget. Yeah. Pat,
1:29:30>> what's that?
1:29:32>> No, I thought it was on our It's on the
1:29:35MUA budget because you sit on the MUA
1:29:37board.
1:29:40>> Okay. Any other comments on uh
1:29:46on that resolution?
1:29:48>> My questions are answered.
1:29:49>> Okay.
1:29:51>> Visual vote on that one.
1:29:53>> Yes.
1:29:54>> Roll
1:29:56motion to uh
1:29:57>> it's already been moved on.
1:30:00It's a roll call.
1:30:03>> Council member Casino.
1:30:04>> Yes.
1:30:07>> Yes.
1:30:07>> Council member.
1:30:08>> Yes.
1:30:09>> Council member Sparta.
1:30:10>> Yes.
1:30:11Higgin.
1:30:12>> Yes.
1:30:16>> Next resolution up for discussion is the
1:30:19one that uh I had a question on. This is
1:30:22for for Mr. Stoner.
1:30:25>> So a motion resolution 2685.
1:30:28>> 2685 is is a resolution.
1:30:30>> I'll make a motion.
1:30:32>> Second.
1:30:33>> All in favor?
1:30:34>> Discussion.
1:30:36>> Discuss.
1:30:36>> Yeah. So, there's a uh
1:30:40construction of an on-site septic field
1:30:42located at Woodland Trails Campground.
1:30:44So, Woodland Trails Campground off of
1:30:46Route 565, right? And it's a summer only
1:30:50type or it's not a year round uh
1:30:52location.
1:30:54Are there are there plans to build uh
1:30:56year- round facilities there? Is that
1:30:58why we're approving a septic or what's
1:31:01the details on this?
1:31:04>> This is for Freema Works approval. We're
1:31:06um building a new septic system to
1:31:09replace existing system on the it's a
1:31:12treatment works approval because it's um
1:31:14they're not expanding. It's it's
1:31:16actually for campsites that exist today
1:31:19because there's several um septic
1:31:21systems on that property. You can't have
1:31:24multiple septic systems on one property
1:31:25because there's a campground. Every time
1:31:27they do something with their septic
1:31:28system, they need a treatment works
1:31:30approval which is approved at the state
1:31:32level, the D level.
1:31:34>> Okay. So, anytime you do a treatment
1:31:37works approval that he asked the town to
1:31:39consent to the submission of that
1:31:41treatment works approval and basically I
1:31:44believe they do just kind of what you
1:31:45just stated there. You asked a question,
1:31:46are they expanding? They doing something
1:31:48new, you know, they want the town to,
1:31:50you know, give the consent if they're
1:31:52okay with the septic system, you know,
1:31:55being constructed for whatever may be on
1:31:58that property today. Okay. So it's not a
1:32:00new they're not expanding. They're not
1:32:02changing the operation
1:32:04just replace an existing system.
1:32:06>> Okay. Right.
1:32:08>> I could So who who inspects the the
1:32:11construction of that? Is that still the
1:32:12board of health or is then the D?
1:32:14>> The D the county the county
1:32:17>> county board of health
1:32:18>> county health department will but they
1:32:19the county acts as the agent for the D.
1:32:22Okay. So the treatment works approval
1:32:24and the in and this the approval of the
1:32:26septic system gets done at the state
1:32:28level
1:32:28>> but then the county will do the
1:32:29inspection.
1:32:30>> Okay.
1:32:31>> Be involved with the approval. Their
1:32:32engineer will sign off on it. The county
1:32:34be involved with it as well. Not not so
1:32:37much from Trend.
1:32:38>> And this is strictly just a a blessing
1:32:41for them to send it in. We have no
1:32:42financial obligation. No oversight on
1:32:45this.
1:32:45>> Yeah. There's actually one form in the
1:32:46treatment works approval. It says um it
1:32:49specifically states consent from the
1:32:52municipality. They cannot submit the
1:32:54application unless the town consents to
1:32:56it. And basically this resolution gives
1:32:58the mayor the authorization to sign the
1:33:00consent, you know, for the submission of
1:33:02that treatment works approval
1:33:03application.
1:33:05>> Thank you.
1:33:09>> Okay. No further questions on 2685.
1:33:13>> Roll call vote.
1:33:15>> Council member Canino.
1:33:16>> Yes.
1:33:18Yes.
1:33:18>> Council member Rudo.
1:33:20>> Yes.
1:33:21>> Yes.
1:33:22>> President Higgins.
1:33:23>> Yes.
1:33:24>> Motion carries.
1:33:26>> Next resolution is question is 2691
1:33:30authorizing signatures on township
1:33:32checks pursuant to NJSA
1:33:36motion and a motion to the table.
1:33:40>> I'll make a motion.
1:33:42>> Second.
1:33:42>> Second.
1:33:43>> Favor.
1:33:44>> Discussion. Just discussion. open for
1:33:46discussion on signatures.
1:33:49>> Okay. The point I want to bring forward
1:33:51is I believe the CFO should be on each
1:33:54signature. So if you're picking two
1:33:56people, the CFO would be the third. I
1:33:59think she needs to sign just about
1:34:01everything.
1:34:02>> This is um why we're adding her.
1:34:05>> Say again.
1:34:06>> This is I believe this is for adding
1:34:07her.
1:34:08>> We still
1:34:09>> Yeah, but I want her with every
1:34:10signature.
1:34:13So from here you can use two correct. So
1:34:17it could be the CFO and the mayor or the
1:34:20BA and the tax collector. I think she
1:34:22needs to be on everything that needs to
1:34:25be signed.
1:34:30And if I'm interpreting that
1:34:32differently,
1:34:35who out of the four below listed should
1:34:37be the principal signatures? So you
1:34:40could put pick the clerk and the tax
1:34:42collector. Well, then it should be, in
1:34:45my opinion, the clerk, the tax
1:34:47collector, and the CFO.
1:34:50Or maybe it should be just the CFO and
1:34:53maybe another person, either three or
1:34:55two. But the CFO needs to be on every
1:34:58signature in my opinion because she's
1:35:02responsible
1:35:04for all the money in this town.
1:35:10Some the only if if she was on vacation
1:35:12for two weeks
1:35:14>> something had to be done. Yeah.
1:35:15>> So she couldn't I get what you're
1:35:17saying.
1:35:18>> Mhm. Then we would have to when she goes
1:35:20on vacation we'll have to have it.
1:35:22>> One of the others one of the others
1:35:24would have
1:35:25>> Yeah. But I believe she should be on
1:35:27everything. She needs to know where all
1:35:29our money is going all the time.
1:35:35Is that going to be a problem for that
1:35:36to occur?
1:35:38>> Well, motion to add that.
1:35:41>> You already have the chief financial
1:35:43officer here. I think what this is is
1:35:45just all you always want it. And and I
1:35:48logistically sometimes you can't have
1:35:50that. So there may be some times where
1:35:52she's not in the building. God forbid
1:35:54something happens to her.
1:35:56>> So you always have to have that. And
1:35:57that and that's why you have multiple
1:35:59you have five um different people if you
1:36:03always will have three but you know if
1:36:05people aren't here
1:36:06>> so I don't disagree with you. I mean,
1:36:08and she's ultimately responsible. Um,
1:36:11it's her license on the line,
1:36:13>> right?
1:36:13>> So, she should I'm sure she probably
1:36:15would
1:36:16want to be signing.
1:36:18>> Agreed.
1:36:18>> I can't speak.
1:36:19>> Agreed. I mean,
1:36:21>> but I but you just can't if you do do
1:36:24that, then you tie up the the
1:36:26potentially you tie up the town. So, you
1:36:28have to have the ability to to go
1:36:31outside of that.
1:36:32>> That would only be if there was an
1:36:34extreme emergency.
1:36:36>> I understand.
1:36:38I understand and you're right.
1:36:39>> You know, um I just think she should
1:36:41sign off on everything.
1:36:45Um
1:36:45>> resolution um is so that the bank
1:36:50accepts our signature cards. This that's
1:36:52basically what this resolution is for.
1:36:55We have to submit signature signature
1:36:57cards to the bank and we're letting them
1:36:59know who the sign signature cards are
1:37:03going to be. That's what this resolution
1:37:05is. I think this was done because the
1:37:08CFO just took No,
1:37:10>> say it again.
1:37:11>> I believe this this was done because
1:37:13again the um the CFO she she has to sign
1:37:17uh the signature card. She's new to the
1:37:20she's new to to the township. So
1:37:22therefore her signature has to be
1:37:27>> okay. when I when I got on right you put
1:37:29your signature too because you therefore
1:37:32it just it just reinstates every uh
1:37:35every person that has
1:37:36>> on a card.
1:37:37>> Yeah.
1:37:38>> So this is only about putting a name on
1:37:40a card
1:37:40>> to have the authority to sign.
1:37:43>> Okay.
1:37:44>> And you can't just have two people. So
1:37:46any one of these members uh Tina or tax
1:37:49collector, municipal clerk, myself can
1:37:52sign checks. All it is just gives the
1:37:55authority to sign checks. That's all it
1:37:57is.
1:37:58>> Is it possible to amend this resolution
1:38:00to require the CFO to sign every check?
1:38:03>> Is that something that's possible with
1:38:05this?
1:38:05>> Well, the CFO sees sees every check,
1:38:07right?
1:38:08>> But to sign,
1:38:10>> you can't force one per, you know,
1:38:13someone to make it mandatory that their
1:38:15their signature always has to be on
1:38:17there. Um,
1:38:19>> well, it's saying two out of You're
1:38:21saying it's you can sign individually.
1:38:24It sounded like you just said, but the
1:38:26resolution says two two out of the four.
1:38:30>> So, you usually the checks have two two
1:38:32require two people plus plus these
1:38:34checks have to go through a voucher
1:38:36process as well and people have to sign
1:38:38off on that. But you always have to have
1:38:39two people because you don't want
1:38:42>> you don't want the business
1:38:43administrator just taking a check and
1:38:44and signing it and cashing it,
1:38:46>> right? So, it's a safeguard,
1:38:49>> but it's more than a signature on a card
1:38:51being presented to the bank.
1:38:52>> Yeah. Yes.
1:38:53>> Our CFO is the last person when we do
1:38:57our Rex and we do our POS and
1:38:58everything, our CFO is the last one to
1:39:02approve anything. So, if her signature
1:39:06isn't on the check itself, we wouldn't
1:39:10even get to that part of printing out a
1:39:12check if she didn't sign off on the
1:39:15wreck
1:39:16>> on the PO,
1:39:17>> right?
1:39:17>> On the purchase officer. Oh,
1:39:19>> she is the last. There is a process.
1:39:21There's four of us that have to sign off
1:39:23on that before a check is even printed.
1:39:26And the CFO is the last person to sign
1:39:29off on it. If she wasn't to sign off on
1:39:31it, we wouldn't be printing out a check.
1:39:33>> Excuse me. By law,
1:39:37>> by law, the CFO must approve the uh any
1:39:43amount of money dispersed attesting to
1:39:46the fact that the money is available.
1:39:50If she doesn't attest that there is
1:39:52money to cover the check, she can't sign
1:39:54it. Right? So in effect that becomes her
1:39:57authorized signature.
1:40:00>> Well, but this is not what it's saying
1:40:02here. It's authorized checks, withdrawal
1:40:04slips, other bank items with two out of
1:40:07the four below listed principal
1:40:09signatures being required. So again, I
1:40:13still say
1:40:14>> she's doing it if she doesn't.
1:40:16>> But but saying two out of two people
1:40:19have to sign it
1:40:20>> and that's just for the check, the
1:40:22physical check itself. So, one person
1:40:24can't take your checkbook and and write
1:40:27checks. My business, my account, there's
1:40:30myself and my and two other partners can
1:40:33sign because sometimes I'm not there. If
1:40:35I'm on vacation or something comes up,
1:40:37I'm sick and vice versa. So, we we
1:40:40always put have more people just in
1:40:41case. And sometimes in government in in
1:40:44in the summer, you could have three of
1:40:46these people gone.
1:40:48>> So, they can s they can sign as a single
1:40:52signature. a check. No, no, you always
1:40:54have to have two people.
1:40:55>> All right.
1:40:56>> So, you have to have two be the CFO.
1:40:58>> You have to have two of these five
1:40:59people. But before you even get to the
1:41:01check, there's a whole process where
1:41:03there Yes. There's a PO, there's a
1:41:05voucher is done, the vendor signs it,
1:41:08the department head signs it, the CFO
1:41:10has to certify that there's funds. Also,
1:41:12in resolutions, we put in there that
1:41:14there has to be certified funds.
1:41:16>> Um,
1:41:17>> okay.
1:41:18But I do understand what you you're
1:41:20saying and I am I would venture to guess
1:41:23that the CFO because her license is on
1:41:26the line that she is making sure that
1:41:29all of these checks she probably reviews
1:41:31the check through admins spits them out
1:41:33every month. She probably checks make
1:41:35sure all the the paperwork is done
1:41:37because if she doesn't she has a
1:41:39fiduciary she has a fid fiduciary
1:41:41application.
1:41:42>> She's got a license to maintain.
1:41:43>> Yep.
1:41:44>> Okay.
1:41:46>> Okay. You're okay with the way it's
1:41:47worded then?
1:41:48>> I guess I am.
1:41:49>> Yes, I have to be.
1:41:51>> Okay. So, we'll have a motion to accept
1:41:52resolution 2691.
1:41:54>> Roll call.
1:41:55>> Roll call.
1:41:57>> Council member Canino?
1:41:58>> Yes.
1:41:58>> Council member Holmes.
1:42:00>> Yes.
1:42:00>> Council member Rudo.
1:42:02>> Yes.
1:42:02>> Member Sparta.
1:42:03>> Yes.
1:42:04>> Council president.
1:42:06>> Yes.
1:42:06>> Marries.
1:42:09>> Being that there were the listings of
1:42:11all the questions, we'll now move to uh
1:42:13approve the consent agenda. Do I have a
1:42:15motion?
1:42:17>> We already we already did that and then
1:42:18we just did the individual ones. So now
1:42:20we're on number 10 just resolutions that
1:42:23were pulled off to discuss individually.
1:42:26So next resolution would be resolution
1:42:282696. Well, unless people don't have any
1:42:31problems with them, then you can maybe
1:42:33move it for a consent.
1:42:35>> Well, I asked
1:42:36>> Yeah, that Yeah, you you asked um you
1:42:39asked for 96 2696.
1:42:48And also 2696.
1:42:53>> Yeah. Well,
1:42:54>> 2689
1:42:56and you can just go to vote discussion.
1:43:00>> So, we might as well do each the last
1:43:02three um individually.
1:43:05>> Sandy, did you just say 269?
1:43:07>> We already voted on
1:43:08>> 26 89.
1:43:10>> We already voted on that.
1:43:11>> Oh, I'm sorry. 26 96.
1:43:16>> There's the um the agreement.
1:43:19>> Yeah, that's 96.
1:43:20>> Yeah, 96.
1:43:22>> I'm sorry.
1:43:23>> Right.
1:43:24>> Got the wrong one.
1:43:25>> So So of those three, is it just 96 that
1:43:28you guys want to discuss?
1:43:30>> Uh single vote.
1:43:32>> Yes. On that one. The other two, you're
1:43:33okay to vote. So you could do a consent
1:43:35for 2697 and 2698.
1:43:40>> One one motion on consent for those two.
1:43:42Then we'll
1:43:43>> come back to this 96.
1:43:44>> Exactly.
1:43:45>> Okay. Have a motion to approve uh 2697
1:43:49and 2698.
1:43:51>> Moved.
1:43:53Second.
1:43:54>> Second.
1:43:55>> Second.
1:43:56>> Second.
1:43:57>> A second.
1:43:58>> Roll call.
1:44:00>> This is for the two resolutions.
1:44:02>> Yes. 97 and 98.
1:44:04>> 98. Yes.
1:44:05>> Council member Canino.
1:44:06>> Yes.
1:44:07>> Council member.
1:44:08>> Yes.
1:44:08>> Council member Rudo.
1:44:10>> Yes.
1:44:10>> Council member Sparta. Yes,
1:44:12>> council president.
1:44:14>> Yes.
1:44:14>> Carries.
1:44:19>> I need a resolution to open up
1:44:20discussion on
1:44:22>> motion on open up resolution 2696.
1:44:27>> Discussion moved.
1:44:28>> Second.
1:44:30>> All in favor?
1:44:30>> No.
1:44:31>> No consent.
1:44:32>> No, it's it's just discussion.
1:44:35>> Okay. 2696.
1:44:38>> I don't have a discussion. I ready to go
1:44:40to vote.
1:44:45Okay. Because you're the one that had
1:44:47>> I pulled it out. No, I want to vote
1:44:49separately. I don't want to discuss. I'm
1:44:51just going to vote separately.
1:44:53>> Okay.
1:44:54>> Is it Does anyone have any questions on
1:44:56it?
1:44:57>> Any other questions? 2696. Pat, anybody
1:45:00good?
1:45:02>> Roll call vote.
1:45:05>> Council member Canino,
1:45:06>> abstain.
1:45:08>> Council member,
1:45:09>> abstain. Council member Rudo,
1:45:11>> yes.
1:45:12>> Council member Florida,
1:45:13>> yes.
1:45:15>> Higgins,
1:45:15>> yes.
1:45:16>> Motion carries.
1:45:26Introduction of ordinances.
1:45:31Motion to introduce ordinance 2605
1:45:35>> for first reading.
1:45:36>> For first reading. This is the ordinance
1:45:38to repeal and replace existing chapter
1:45:41133 affordable housing and municipal
1:45:43code township of Vernon.
1:45:46>> Moved.
1:45:46>> Second.
1:45:48Roll call.
1:45:51>> Council member Canino?
1:45:53>> Yes.
1:45:53>> Council member Holmes.
1:45:54>> Yes.
1:45:55>> Council member Rudo.
1:45:57>> Yes.
1:45:57>> Council member Sparta.
1:45:58>> Yes.
1:45:59>> Present in hand.
1:46:00>> Yes.
1:46:01>> Motion carries.
1:46:06That's a non-discussion item, right?
1:46:09>> That's the way it's been done in the
1:46:10past. Yes.
1:46:10>> Yeah.
1:46:13>> Ordinance 2606
1:46:16to repeal and replace existing article
1:46:1914 affordable housing of the municipal
1:46:21code of the township of Vernon.
1:46:23>> On first reading.
1:46:25>> On first reading.
1:46:26>> On first reading. Have a motion to
1:46:28introduce ordinance 266.
1:46:31>> Second.
1:46:34>> And a uh roll call. Roll call.
1:46:36>> Council member Canino?
1:46:38>> Yes.
1:46:39>> Holmes?
1:46:40>> Yes.
1:46:40>> Council member Rzudos?
1:46:41>> Yes.
1:46:42>> Council member Sparta?
1:46:43>> Yes.
1:46:44>> Council President Higgins.
1:46:45>> Yes.
1:46:45>> Motion carries.
1:46:48>> 13. Public adoption. Public hearing
1:46:51adoption of ordinances.
1:46:54Ordinance 2601.
1:46:56Calendar year 2026. model ordinance to
1:46:59exceed the municipal budget
1:47:01appropriation limits and establish a cap
1:47:04bank.
1:47:07May I have a motion to open a public
1:47:08hearing on ordinance 2601?
1:47:11>> Moved.
1:47:12>> Second.
1:47:14>> All in favor?
1:47:15>> I
1:47:16>> I
1:47:20member the
1:47:22public didn't come up on that public.
1:47:24>> Any members of the public wish to
1:47:26comment on
1:47:282601.
1:47:30>> That's Dorian. Please can you explain
1:47:32that a little bit more would like
1:47:34further explanation on that
1:47:40>> on on this ordinance
1:47:44>> going from two to%.
1:47:45>> So the part part of the um budget
1:47:48process the U state has allowed the
1:47:52municipalities do a cap bank and that
1:47:54cap bank is for two years. So if you
1:47:57don't exceed your 2%
1:47:59uh you can put it to the future and
1:48:03borrow that some of that money if
1:48:05there's an emergency.
1:48:07So uh some towns have done it uh when
1:48:10they when they when their budget for an
1:48:13emergency purpose would have exceeded
1:48:15their 2% that that they can annually
1:48:18increase a budget on. Um, but they can't
1:48:22go over I think it's 3%. And every year,
1:48:25every year
1:48:27a 2% goes off. So it doesn't accumulate
1:48:292% 2% 2% 2%. It's only good for two
1:48:32years. And it's only used again in in an
1:48:35emergency if the budget if there's an
1:48:37issue with the budget.
1:48:39>> So they could have used it for the
1:48:40$70,000 that um they neglected to get
1:48:44payment from from uh O'Neal
1:48:48>> 55. they could use that money
1:48:49>> if if there if there is no money if
1:48:51there if there was no other way that
1:48:53they could pay for it theoretically.
1:48:55Yes.
1:48:56>> Okay. Thank you.
1:49:03>> Any other comments on 2601?
1:49:07Seeing no more members wishing to come
1:49:09forward, may I have a motion to close
1:49:10the public hearing on ordinance 2601?
1:49:13Moved. Second. Second.
1:49:16>> All in favor? I
1:49:21>> have a motion to adopt ordinance 2601.
1:49:24>> Motion.
1:49:26>> Second.
1:49:28>> Roll call.
1:49:30>> Council member Canina.
1:49:31>> Yes.
1:49:32>> Council member Ols.
1:49:33>> Yes.
1:49:34>> Council member Rudo.
1:49:35>> Yes.
1:49:36>> Sparta.
1:49:37>> Yes.
1:49:37>> Council President Higgins.
1:49:39>> Yes.
1:49:39>> Motion carries.
1:49:41>> Here's ordinance 2602. Ordinance to the
1:49:44township of Vernon County associate, New
1:49:47Jersey, releasing, extinguishing, and
1:49:49vacating the rights of the public in a
1:49:51portion of block 436,
1:49:54lot 22, Burglar Road.
1:49:57May I have a motion to open the public
1:49:59hearing for ordinance 2602?
1:50:02>> Moved.
1:50:04>> Second.
1:50:05>> Second.
1:50:06>> Second. All in favor? I.
1:50:09>> Any members of the public wish to come
1:50:11forward make any statements?
1:50:16had a couple of people already. No
1:50:18further.
1:50:26>> Hey Dassi, I would just like
1:50:28clarification on this, please. It's my
1:50:31understanding that B Road was used as a
1:50:35right away for the fire department if
1:50:38they needed to access Lake Wanda for
1:50:41water.
1:50:43So,
1:50:44does that does the town own
1:50:47the road?
1:50:50>> My understanding is the town owns the
1:50:52road. It's paved and it is a dead end
1:50:55road,
1:50:56>> right? It's a dead end for the
1:50:58>> practitioners lives at the end of that
1:50:59road. The other one lives at the next to
1:51:01the last house and their their
1:51:03neighbors. They're next door to one
1:51:05another. Well, isn't there a jeopardy of
1:51:09our emergency services in Holland Lake
1:51:12Center if they can't? This road was
1:51:15created as an emergency
1:51:19access to the lake where they get water
1:51:22from. So, isn't it an e doesn't
1:51:25interrupt?
1:51:27>> No.
1:51:27>> That how can you was this before the
1:51:31land use news board? has something.
1:51:34>> Did the planning board did review this?
1:51:38>> And is that the planning board reviewing
1:51:40or what did they say?
1:51:44>> You have you have the engineer.
1:51:46>> Yeah.
1:51:47>> Yes. Can I speak about this?
1:51:50>> That would be good. I appreciate that.
1:51:52>> You say
1:51:55I just want to understand this one.
1:51:58>> You can share.
1:52:01Good.
1:52:04Okay. Um,
1:52:07this this part of this ordinance is for
1:52:09the vacation of a a the last piece of
1:52:11Burgger Burger Burgger Road. Um, which
1:52:14is between the two two property owners
1:52:17uh two properties that are owned by the
1:52:19same property owner. Um, Mr. Riley had
1:52:22spoken, but property owners spoke
1:52:25earlier. They own a house that's on
1:52:27block 436, lot 22, directly across the
1:52:30street. They have their their garage
1:52:32with block 438, lot one there. The
1:52:35rightaway is a 20 foot rightway. There
1:52:38is no culde-sac, no turnaround. There's
1:52:41a it's a a deadend street which did tie
1:52:44into the border into the property owned
1:52:46by Lake Wanda. There's no draw down
1:52:48location, no stand pipe. There's no
1:52:51docks. There's no boat. There's um there
1:52:54is no direct, you know, access into Lake
1:52:56Juan, which everybody knows Lake Wanda
1:52:58is not fully full right now, but still
1:53:00it's not um a direct access where you
1:53:03can have a drill.
1:53:04>> Fire department's got to pull out of the
1:53:06lake at this point. And there's other
1:53:08locations like Wanda, they can get to
1:53:09much easier than this location.
1:53:11>> Okay.
1:53:11>> We did re review with the land use
1:53:13board. It was brought to them last uh
1:53:16last week, week before last and uh they
1:53:19did uh we reviewed that by went through
1:53:22the description of the vacation and
1:53:23explained that there is a 20 foot
1:53:25rightway. There is no room for a
1:53:28culde-sac or bolt or turn around.
1:53:30Anybody goes out to the end of that
1:53:32roadway, the only way they can turn
1:53:33around is going onto the either the
1:53:35house property or the garage property.
1:53:36They cannot turn around inside the 20
1:53:38foot ride right away. technically
1:53:41without going on somebody's private
1:53:42property. They had to back out just like
1:53:44what's happening today. I did visited
1:53:47the uh property. I've been to the
1:53:49property a couple times, but I went down
1:53:50today just to refresh my memory because
1:53:53it's been a while since I've been over
1:53:54there. I did notice that, you know, a
1:53:56couple of the driveways are chained
1:53:57across. People cannot turn around. They
1:54:00have to back out the roadway
1:54:03the without going onto the the property
1:54:06at the end of the street. they still
1:54:08would have to go on somebody's property
1:54:10to turn around. So, they still would
1:54:12have to back out. This is this rightway
1:54:15is actually vacated 77 feet
1:54:18right away. What we do is basically the
1:54:21town is vacating their rights to it.
1:54:24We're not selling the property. We're
1:54:25not deeding it to anybody. We're
1:54:27vacating our rights to it. At that
1:54:29point, then the property owners can do
1:54:31their own um
1:54:34claim to that property and and add it to
1:54:36their properties on both sides, east
1:54:37side and west side of Burgger Road if
1:54:40that's what they desire to do so. But
1:54:42it's right now we're giving or vacating
1:54:45our right to it. I spoke to the DPW
1:54:47supervisor. He's fine with plowing the
1:54:49road without having that access to that
1:54:51area. And it feels they maintain Burgger
1:54:54Road exactly as they had today. Uh this
1:54:57past summer they did pave. They paved
1:54:59right up to the part where it's going to
1:55:00be vacated. They didn't go past that.
1:55:02That is new newly paved. And um so
1:55:06that's where we're at today. We're you
1:55:09know this was requested by the property
1:55:10owners at the end of the street and I
1:55:13believe u the request was valid and and
1:55:16they put up the compensation for the
1:55:18preparation of the deed uh vacation
1:55:20documents and we prepared the documents.
1:55:21It's ready to be uh uh vacated. Then
1:55:25that the only other question I would
1:55:27have then is why are we vacating or why
1:55:29are we selling it? It's a township piece
1:55:32of property. Why are we just giving it
1:55:34away freely?
1:55:36>> May I answer?
1:55:38>> It's no.
1:55:40>> You can come back if we
1:55:43>> um
1:55:45>> it's a valid it's a valid question valid
1:55:47comment. Um the vacation of roadways
1:55:50rightways is a common common situation
1:55:52they do in a lot of towns. Um, I've had
1:55:54situations in other towns where they've
1:55:56had the uh lake communities, septic
1:55:58systems or, you know, parts of a of a a
1:56:00dwelling area even inside a rightway
1:56:02because it's not constructed properly
1:56:04and then they'll vacate that understand
1:56:06right aways. I have one across my
1:56:08property. But my question still lies is
1:56:11why are we just giving it away freely?
1:56:16Can you answer why this thing gets put
1:56:20up for sale and let the people buy it?
1:56:25>> Okay, I'm going to get stared at instead
1:56:27of an honest answer.
1:56:29>> Oh, valid question.
1:56:32>> We have it might affect it might affect
1:56:35the vote. Who knows?
1:56:38>> Okay, I guess we got our answer. Thank
1:56:41you for your explanation. It's not your
1:56:43issue.
1:56:45And uh I feel it should be
1:56:52>> anyone else.
1:56:54>> Maybe we should table it.
1:56:56>> I have ahead.
1:56:59>> When I approached the township about
1:57:01this, it is my understanding that in the
1:57:02state of New Jersey paper roads when are
1:57:05not they are not maintained which this
1:57:07road has not been maintained. We have
1:57:08cleaned up countless piles of garbage.
1:57:10The road is not paved when we purchased
1:57:12the property. The adjacent homeowners
1:57:14are the ones who maintain the property
1:57:16and therefore are the ones able to
1:57:17obtain.
1:57:18>> But that does not give you a
1:57:20Sorry.
1:57:22>> You're don't
1:57:22>> That's not what I'm saying. I'm sorry.
1:57:24>> No, she she's not allowed to be speaking
1:57:26with you. You're saying that you're
1:57:28>> I would just like to say I can't show
1:57:31you a visual. This small patch of road
1:57:34is between my house and my garage. I
1:57:36cannot cross to my garage without having
1:57:38to go across.
1:57:41It puts, like I said, my daughter at
1:57:43risk. Puts the dog at risk. That's why
1:57:44they keep calling animal control makes
1:57:45and the dog goes to the garage. They're
1:57:47taking pictures of my five kid because
1:57:49she's crossing the road. That's why
1:57:51we're for safety.
1:57:54There is no access to the lake. As Mr.
1:57:56Stoner had stated, he had been down
1:57:57there. Other people have come down to
1:57:59see it. They understand that there is no
1:58:01access. There is nothing there except a
1:58:04dead gully on a lake that is dying. the
1:58:09dying lake. Um, and I'm just asking for
1:58:12this because I don't feel safe in my
1:58:14home because of these people.
1:58:16Thank you.
1:58:18>> I might take a look at it.
1:58:20>> I would have brought pictures.
1:58:23>> Oh, yeah.
1:58:27But just just uh you know both have
1:58:31visited um Pat you actually yes that
1:58:34site um there there is no like lake
1:58:38access to it. It's it's completely
1:58:40blocked by shrubs and weeds and uh which
1:58:44are more than six feet high. Um like I
1:58:47said our police department went there as
1:58:49well just to just to confirm that there
1:58:52is no safety issues. Um, and they didn't
1:58:55find any as well.
1:58:58>> Sorry.
1:59:00>> Um, Steve, just to clarify, what is the
1:59:02size of this piece of land that we're
1:59:04talking about? And is it a built
1:59:07>> 77t long by 20 ft wide?
1:59:12>> Excuse me.
1:59:13>> Excuse me.
1:59:14>> What you say? The area.
1:59:16>> Yeah. He wanted to know the area.
1:59:18>> 1,500
1:59:22ft. So, it's not a buildable lot. It's
1:59:24not like the town could sell it for
1:59:26somebody to put a house on,
1:59:28>> right?
1:59:28>> So, it seems kind of
1:59:30>> And it's not being absorbed into a lot
1:59:32block. Correct.
1:59:33>> No, it's not. Um, if I was a property
1:59:34owners, I would likely file a, you know,
1:59:37a a claim to that property and then it
1:59:39could be absorbed equally into each
1:59:41property next to it. When a town vacates
1:59:43a land, a piece of property like this,
1:59:45when it's part of the original
1:59:47subdivision, it typically goes back to
1:59:49both properties on half to the one
1:59:51property on the east side and half to
1:59:53the west side. They just happen to own
1:59:55both sides
1:59:56>> and then the tax assessor would
1:59:59>> join the lots and assess it.
2:00:02Yes.
2:00:04Because they own the tax.
2:00:05>> Yeah. So, we're doing tax roles as a
2:00:06different additional area to the
2:00:08property. not going to be any taxes
2:00:10going to get absorbed into either side.
2:00:16>> Sure. Come on up.
2:00:20>> So, I know I requested to pave that
2:00:22road. Um,
2:00:23>> can you So, I requested that road to be
2:00:26paved back in 2024. Um, this was prior
2:00:30that prior to knowing that the neighbors
2:00:32wanted to vacate the culde-sac
2:00:34um per se, right? It's not enough to
2:00:37create a turnaround. Yes. Um but I asked
2:00:39to pave the road because it's been a
2:00:41dirt road for for since 2018 and
2:00:43probably for decades before that.
2:00:45>> Um so they they decid the plan was to
2:00:49pave the whole road until um the current
2:00:52neighbors said that they want to take
2:00:54over the culdeac to create the safety
2:00:57and peace. But like everybody else, all
2:00:59the res residents, we have backyard, we
2:01:02have the front yard that the kids could
2:01:04play, the dogs could play. I'm not sure
2:01:06why um there's a need for the road to be
2:01:09used to play and like you said I
2:01:11remember um back in the day they did
2:01:14they put access they weren't they used
2:01:15to put accessories on the other side of
2:01:17the road but now they're not it's not
2:01:19allowed right so that's that's what
2:01:21created this whole accessory one side
2:01:23and a property on the other side
2:01:24>> it is there is an an existing
2:01:27non-conforming condition when on when
2:01:29that property where the garage is today
2:01:31current zoning will not let accessory
2:01:33structure be on its own property
2:01:35And actually that does kind of lean
2:01:37better for zoning now if they do combine
2:01:38the lots and they have the principal
2:01:40structure and the accessory structure on
2:01:41the same lot.
2:01:42>> Okay.
2:01:43>> You know the um you cannot get put
2:01:46accessory structure by itself on a
2:01:47property today unless you got a use
2:01:48variance from the landport.
2:01:50>> Okay. And I've also asked this question.
2:01:53There's also the shoreline that belongs
2:01:54to Lake Wanda that I believe the
2:01:56township took over and that would
2:01:59actually give some space for the like a
2:02:02K turn to turn around but I wasn't
2:02:05nobody had answered that question and
2:02:07I'm not sure there's like so there's a
2:02:09shoreline right according to the survey
2:02:11it doesn't belong to um myself or the
2:02:15residents it just belongs to the
2:02:16township or like Wanda that no longer
2:02:19has a HOA so my question is um because
2:02:23you are vacating this road then they get
2:02:25to privatize the whole all the
2:02:27shorelines too. So, I understand there's
2:02:30no access right now, but this is a
2:02:32long-term consequence for if the lake
2:02:35gets fixed if um the township maintains
2:02:38the lake. Then, historically, I spoke to
2:02:41the neighbors who've been there for 30
2:02:42years, they did use it. So, as of today,
2:02:45it's not being used, but vacated today,
2:02:47then in the future, nobody could use it.
2:02:51>> That's correct. And at least in the
2:02:54public, you know, we're vacating our
2:02:57public rights to that. 77 ft of the at
2:03:00the end of the roadway.
2:03:01>> Yes.
2:03:01>> When you're saying about sewer, but
2:03:03there's no sewer net.
2:03:04>> Just sewer. Okay.
2:03:05>> Just access like you said right now
2:03:07there's no, you know, it's it's not
2:03:09maintained. There's no um access even
2:03:12though historically there has been
2:03:14access because Lake Wanda is is not in
2:03:16the greatest shape right now. But my
2:03:18point is in the future, I'm thinking
2:03:20future, what happens if they rebuild the
2:03:22lake? if they maintain the um all the
2:03:26the the shrubs and whatever is going on
2:03:28in the lake. Once you vacate it, that's
2:03:30it. There's no going back. And they get
2:03:32to use not only the road, but they
2:03:34privatize all the shorelines as well
2:03:36that my neighbor wants to actually
2:03:38>> shorine. Yeah. Yeah. Um yes, technically
2:03:43that shoreline becomes, you know, right
2:03:44up against their property.
2:03:46>> Yeah.
2:03:46Um I don't see in the in the future then
2:03:49you know getting getting access and
2:03:52putting a a boat ramp or doing think you
2:03:55know the the some other type of uh
2:03:57straight access into that lake without
2:03:59considerable D permitting to do so. Um
2:04:03I'm just dealing with what's there
2:04:04today.
2:04:05>> Yeah. I'm just saying like future wise
2:04:07and um just thinking of that.
2:04:12>> Yeah. And um I guess that's it. The the
2:04:17lake access and the future consequence
2:04:20of it.
2:04:20>> I think one of the big issues was always
2:04:22with that like a turn vehicle can turn
2:04:24around.
2:04:25>> Um being that it's there's no culde-sac
2:04:27there's no it's only 20 ft in width. No
2:04:29vehicle can turn around that 20 ft
2:04:31either at this location or in front of
2:04:32your house even. It's it's too narrow
2:04:36without going. If they turn around in
2:04:38front of your house, they go into your
2:04:39property to turn around. Same thing what
2:04:41happened here. It's not big enough for
2:04:42somebody to actually turn around
2:04:44physically without going on one of those
2:04:46two lots.
2:04:48>> And actually, somebody brought up a good
2:04:50point. Why is it being given away for
2:04:52free? Because the ordinance says it's um
2:04:54it's a cost of the township. It's it's
2:04:56it's um it's something else. It doesn't
2:05:00specifically say it's just because one
2:05:02person wanted to request it because they
2:05:05just want to own it. That's simply is
2:05:07that they just want to own that whole um
2:05:10section. It's not because of anything.
2:05:11It's the cost of the township and we
2:05:13don't get anything out of it. And me as
2:05:16a taxpayer, I've been paying there
2:05:17since. I've requested to pave the road
2:05:21so everyone could use it. And now people
2:05:24coming with the strollers, people coming
2:05:25with the bicycles and they get stopped
2:05:28right at the time, right at the point
2:05:29where it was supposed to be vacated by
2:05:31the residents of 24 Bergen telling them
2:05:32it's a private property. But it's not a
2:05:34private property until you decide if it
2:05:36is. And it's been ongoing since they
2:05:39moved in. So, this is just formalize and
2:05:41legitimize um what they've been lying
2:05:44about. That's it.
2:05:49>> Thank you.
2:05:52>> I'm happy to answer any other questions.
2:06:00>> She has already
2:06:01>> Does anybody have any other questions
2:06:02about the property? No,
2:06:03>> you've already come up.
2:06:05>> It's just one.
2:06:07I do have a question for
2:06:11Yeah. If we're vacating the property,
2:06:15how come it wasn't put up for auction?
2:06:19Like it just the the part that I'm
2:06:21grappling with is it's a road that the
2:06:24town currently owns. And yes, the
2:06:27homeowner owns property on both sides,
2:06:30but then there's a whole area behind it
2:06:32that would then be closed off from the
2:06:33public that includes lakefront access.
2:06:37And it just seems I'm just curious why
2:06:40didn't we go out put it up for auction
2:06:42or if they're offering to buy it, how
2:06:45come that wasn't considered? Because it
2:06:47just seems strange to just give up road
2:06:50that we own as a town.
2:06:52>> It's up to the town's decision. Um it's
2:06:54very common to vacate a situation, you
2:06:56know, like this where they're this is a
2:06:59it looks like a driveway. If you go to
2:07:00the site, it looks like
2:07:01>> Yeah. I mean, I I looked at it on Google
2:07:03Earth. I looked at the map and I know
2:07:04other members have gone up and seen it.
2:07:06So, and we were sent photos of it and
2:07:08arguments from both sides. And that's
2:07:10just the part that I'm really grappling
2:07:12with is how come if we're if it's road
2:07:15that the town owns and someone wants it,
2:07:18we're just going to give it to them. I
2:07:20mean, I can't that's what I'm grappling
2:07:23with.
2:07:23>> I think
2:07:25those
2:07:27>> I don't know if auctioning off what the
2:07:31what the uh you know how how that would
2:07:34work. Let's put it that way. Okay. If
2:07:36you you did try to auction up, you have
2:07:38a property between, you know, this
2:07:40property at the end of the end of the
2:07:42roadway
2:07:43and then you'd have maybe the lake
2:07:45association. They might be interested. I
2:07:47think that's the only two people I think
2:07:48would have a valid
2:07:49>> Yeah.
2:07:50>> thing to it.
2:07:52>> It just seems
2:07:54I'm just repeating myself.
2:07:55>> There is there is no lot block for that.
2:07:57>> There is no lot block. It's
2:08:00be able to sell it.
2:08:02>> Why not? But you're restricting it. So
2:08:05any kid that wants to go fishing on the
2:08:07side of the property there at the edge
2:08:09will never be able to use that anymore.
2:08:12>> Can't use it now.
2:08:14>> Maybe access to it now.
2:08:16>> No, it goes right to the lake.
2:08:18>> According to this map, then Corey Stoner
2:08:21wrote a wrong map. Then am I right,
2:08:23Corey? you know, say historic line, but
2:08:25physically great today that you
2:08:28without going through woods, you know,
2:08:32you know, growing up overgrown areas,
2:08:34you know, to the lakes, you guess, you
2:08:36know, you that's the only way you can
2:08:37get to it. I
2:08:40>> like it goes right to the edge.
2:08:42>> The land use board has reviewed it.
2:08:44>> They did not have any maps. They had no
2:08:47supporting information.
2:08:49>> They did. I had to ask for each document
2:08:53and I was still getting documents today.
2:08:55>> That was from the land use board.
2:08:57>> That was from everything that was done
2:08:59in this town.
2:09:00>> Okay.
2:09:01>> I had to ask for each individ
2:09:06>> the land use board was provided.
2:09:07>> They didn't have it either.
2:09:09>> I explained it was explained to the land
2:09:12board.
2:09:12>> Yeah.
2:09:13>> They didn't have all the supporting
2:09:14documents.
2:09:16>> They Well, they didn't question anything
2:09:18either. So I guess if they didn't ask
2:09:21those questions, right?
2:09:22>> Well, we are
2:09:26>> okay. Let's uh close the uh motion to
2:09:29close the discussion and the public
2:09:31comments on 2602.
2:09:34>> Moved. Second.
2:09:40>> All in favor?
2:09:41>> I
2:09:43roll call on the order.
2:09:44>> Roll call vote. Motion for a roll call
2:09:46vote.
2:09:49Just a roll call.
2:09:50>> You just call for roll call.
2:09:51>> Roll call vote motion.
2:09:52>> I'm sorry. Made the motion. And who
2:09:54seconded the motion to adopt?
2:09:57>> I I made the motion. I think Carl
2:09:58seconded
2:09:59>> if they're closed. It's a closed public
2:10:01comment.
2:10:01>> Have a a motion or a second to
2:10:04>> I think I
2:10:07make a motion to adopt 262.
2:10:13>> Have a second. Second.
2:10:17Roll call vote.
2:10:18>> Council member Cantino,
2:10:19>> no.
2:10:20>> Council member Ols,
2:10:22>> no.
2:10:23>> Council member Zudo,
2:10:24>> yes.
2:10:25>> Council member Sparta,
2:10:26>> yes.
2:10:27>> Council member Council President
2:10:28Higgins,
2:10:29>> no.
2:10:31>> Motion does not cover
2:10:39263.
2:10:42That's
2:10:46>> Have a motion to open a public hearing
2:10:47on 2603.
2:10:50>> Move.
2:10:51>> Second.
2:10:54>> All in favor?
2:10:55>> I
2:10:56>> I
2:10:57>> members of the public wish come forward.
2:11:00Any any comment on 2603 which is orders
2:11:03the extending lease agreement between
2:11:05the Vernon Township Board of Education
2:11:07Township of Vernon subleas lease
2:11:09agreement between the township and dog
2:11:12owners gathering society of Vernon
2:11:14Township for certain approved real
2:11:15estate identified on the official tax
2:11:18map at the township block 308 lot 2.
2:11:24No one coming forward.
2:11:27Close it to public. Motion to close to
2:11:29the public.
2:11:30>> Moved.
2:11:31>> Second.
2:11:32>> Second.
2:11:36>> All in favor?
2:11:38>> I I call vote on 260.
2:11:44>> A second.
2:11:45>> Motion to go.
2:11:48>> Motion for adoption ordinance 2603 and a
2:11:51second.
2:11:53Have a second. Vote. Second.
2:11:56>> Okay.
2:11:59Roll call.
2:12:00>> Council member Canino?
2:12:01>> Yes.
2:12:02>> Council member Holmes.
2:12:03>> Yes.
2:12:04>> Council member Rudo.
2:12:05>> Yes.
2:12:05>> Council member Sparta.
2:12:07>> Yes.
2:12:07>> Council President Higgins.
2:12:08>> Yes.
2:12:12>> Ordinance 2604, an ordinance to amend
2:12:15chapter 250 entitled fees and escros to
2:12:17the code of the township of Vernon
2:12:19Sussex County, New Jersey. I have a
2:12:22motion to open the public hearing on
2:12:24ordinance 2604.
2:12:27Moved.
2:12:28>> Second.
2:12:30>> Second.
2:12:31>> All in favor?
2:12:32>> I.
2:12:34>> Members of the public wishing to come
2:12:36forward make a statement on 2604.
2:12:42>> Have a motion to open to the public.
2:12:45>> We're open.
2:12:46>> We're open to being mean. Closed.
2:12:48>> Close.
2:12:51>> Make a motion to close it to the floor.
2:12:53>> Do I have a second? Second.
2:12:56>> All in favor?
2:12:58>> I
2:12:59>> have a motion to adopt 2604.
2:13:02>> Moved.
2:13:03>> Second.
2:13:05>> Roll call vote.
2:13:07>> Council member Canino?
2:13:08>> Yes.
2:13:09>> Council member Holmes?
2:13:10>> Yes.
2:13:11>> Council member Rudo?
2:13:13>> Yes.
2:13:14>> Council member Sparta?
2:13:15>> Yes.
2:13:16>> Council President Higgins?
2:13:17>> Yes.
2:13:18>> Motion carries.
2:13:21>> Have a motion to open the floor to
2:13:23public comment. limited to 5 minutes on
2:13:26any topic.
2:13:28>> Moved second.
2:13:31>> All in favor?
2:13:32>> I
2:13:34open to the public.
2:13:37Um any members wishing to come forward
2:13:39through five minutes to subject
2:13:55Edwards. Thank you. Um, this might be
2:13:58after the fact and I apologize because I
2:14:01didn't look at all my notes and it's a
2:14:02little frightening to get up here all
2:14:04the time and address everybody and and
2:14:06the public, but I had a question and
2:14:09maybe Mr. Jessup can answer this for me.
2:14:12Um, in regards to the pilot programs and
2:14:15they talked about um, if we don't
2:14:17fulfill our obligation, we could have a
2:14:20builder's remedy where they can come in
2:14:22and do whatever they like more or less.
2:14:24That's how it sounded to me. Mr. Jessup,
2:14:27if you don't mind, um,
2:14:31if we allow the builders to come in,
2:14:34purchase the property, they go through
2:14:36the approval section, that doesn't mean
2:14:39they can't build, and that doesn't mean
2:14:41that we have to give them a pilot
2:14:43program. Am I correct to stay in that?
2:14:46They can still build if they want, but
2:14:47they just don't have to have a pilot tax
2:14:50exemption program in place.
2:14:54Bill that's correct.
2:14:56>> That's correct. Well, it seems quite
2:15:00that that part is always left out. The
2:15:02public doesn't is not aware of that. Um
2:15:04I think that's a very important fact. Um
2:15:08let's see number the other one which
2:15:10which I wanted to ask um in the 2689
2:15:15says when Red Han LLC the owner the
2:15:18predecessor of Omega Drive Redevelopment
2:15:21urban renewal LLC entity was the owner
2:15:24of the redevelopment area I had seen a
2:15:27letter by um one of the O'Neals um I
2:15:30don't know if it was the DCA I believe
2:15:33saying that they were changing their
2:15:35entity name to become um new development
2:15:38entity.
2:15:40Is Red Hand a redevelopment entity? Do
2:15:44they have their own stipulation? Is that
2:15:47what I'm getting at?
2:15:48>> Well, I asked that question at the land
2:15:50use board. Uh Lauren O'Neal, who is an
2:15:52O'Neal, she's their attorney,
2:15:54>> right? She's the one who wrote the the
2:15:56letter, I think. And our answer was that
2:15:58it had something to do with family
2:15:59history and they it's an LLC tied to the
2:16:04O'Neal Group as a functioning LLC for
2:16:08this uh oper for this development. I'll
2:16:11allow Matt to uh clarify that a little
2:16:13bit further.
2:16:18>> Uh thank you, Council President. So, I'm
2:16:20I haven't I don't know that I've seen
2:16:22the letter you're referring to, but I'm
2:16:24going to presume for the moment that it
2:16:25is the letter to DCA that is applying to
2:16:29have the name changed to say urban
2:16:31renewal.
2:16:32>> Correct.
2:16:33>> Okay. Perfect.
2:16:33>> Not redevelopment entity, urban renewal.
2:16:35And the reason
2:16:36>> to do the affordable housing.
2:16:37>> Yes. And the reason that they did that
2:16:39is because under the long-term tax
2:16:41exemption law, a pilot can only be
2:16:44granted by law to an urban renewal
2:16:47entity. And under the statute, an urban
2:16:49renewal entity must have the words urban
2:16:52renewal in the title.
2:16:54>> So you often see redevelopment entities
2:16:57as a company start out as the address of
2:17:00the property LLC and then when they go
2:17:03to get the pilot, they amend the name
2:17:05and the certificate of formation to be
2:17:07an urban renewal entity under New Jersey
2:17:09law and change the name to say address
2:17:12urban renewal, LLC, comply with the
2:17:15statute.
2:17:15>> That's what I figured. But is Red Hand
2:17:18is it under Red Hand LLC? Are they the
2:17:20ones that that doesn't say Urban Renewal
2:17:24Developer? Uh like
2:17:27>> it's Omega Drive Redevelopment, Urban
2:17:29Renewal LLC.
2:17:31>> Red Hand LLC, the owner, the predecessor
2:17:35of Omega Drive. So they were before
2:17:38Redand and then they changed the name to
2:17:42Omega Drive Redevelopment. Is that how
2:17:44I'm reading that? started as Red Hand
2:17:46and ultimately made its way to the Omega
2:17:48Drive entity that they created for the
2:17:49project which they then converted into
2:17:51an urban rural entity via the letter
2:17:53that you had seen uh written down to the
2:17:55division and the division would have
2:17:56written a letter back approving that uh
2:17:58transfer.
2:17:59>> Thank you. That's what I was curious
2:18:01about.
2:18:03I was hoping that um the council and the
2:18:06mayor would tonight um if that's the
2:18:10case or the attorney for the council
2:18:13give the consent that they're going to
2:18:15reply to the petitioners about our
2:18:19request for an answer as specifically in
2:18:22regards to can the clerk just site the
2:18:26clerk was supposed to just validate the
2:18:28petition right the names and whatnot and
2:18:30then it was supposed to go on to I
2:18:32thought the town council in conjunction
2:18:34with um the attorney advising them. I
2:18:38just think that the response was a
2:18:41little light and um some here think that
2:18:45we didn't really get a good response at
2:18:46all. I mean millennium as the farmer
2:18:51affectionately known as the farmer said
2:18:54u there's a dispute which category falls
2:18:56under administrative or legislative
2:18:59and I think that should be addressed. I
2:19:02don't think that should go to the
2:19:03wayside. I think that needs to be
2:19:05addressed
2:19:06and I hope the council feels the same
2:19:08way if not for this time but the next
2:19:11time because the 99
2:19:14you think the town was up in a for the
2:19:1627. You have no idea what's going to
2:19:19happen if the 99 comes in.
2:19:21>> You want to address it?
2:19:22>> Yeah.
2:19:23>> Okay. I'll let you finish your time. I
2:19:25mean you have I think you have a minute.
2:19:26Um, one of the other things, um, it was
2:19:29mentioned, it kind of seems to me that
2:19:33the town council,
2:19:35you know, they're always paying the
2:19:38schools. You said if they if there's an
2:19:40assessment and then the owners win, the
2:19:43schools, usually they get they keep
2:19:45their money, they'll get a refund back
2:19:47to the town. I understand that. But
2:19:49we're only one taxpayer. We have two
2:19:52pockets. one pocket for the municipal,
2:19:55one pocket for the schools, but we're
2:19:57only one taxpayer. And I want you to
2:20:00keep that in mind because it seems like
2:20:01you're always separating the fact, well,
2:20:03we're the municipal, we get the money.
2:20:06Yeah, taxpayer. So, I just wanted to say
2:20:10that. Um, and I guess I'll end on that
2:20:13if Mr. King has something to say. That's
2:20:17>> uh Yes. With regard to Millennium, uh in
2:20:19Millennium, they discussed how a um
2:20:22pilot project on a redevelopment under
2:20:25the redevelopment law is exempt. The
2:20:27legislature has exempted specifically
2:20:30under the redevelopment law and the
2:20:33pilot portion of the redevelopment law
2:20:36is included in that um any referendum.
2:20:39Uh in addition there there's other
2:20:42there's other sections of like the
2:20:44budget law with the cap uh bank that
2:20:47we've done here. That's not something
2:20:48that could be um put on referendum
2:20:51either because within
2:20:53within the budget you can't do a
2:20:55referendum on a budget. The cap bank
2:20:58ordinance that we did today is part of
2:21:00that and there's case law a separate
2:21:03line of case law on that as well with
2:21:05regard to millennium with regard to the
2:21:07distinction of administrative um that
2:21:10was discussed and that was used. It was
2:21:13a judicial creation.
2:21:16It Millennium was appealed. went up to
2:21:18the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court
2:21:21abregated probably about eight or nine
2:21:23cases that qualified a decision on that
2:21:28administrative
2:21:30you know distinction that was created by
2:21:32courts. So that administrative thing
2:21:36that administrative
2:21:38description has been ripped out. You
2:21:40can't use that. What the courts said,
2:21:43the Supreme Court said is the legisl
2:21:46legis legislature can give and take
2:21:48away. With regard to Millennium, it was
2:21:51clear that under a redevelopment, a
2:21:54pilot is part of redevelopment, you
2:21:56cannot do a referendum on redevelopment.
2:22:00>> All right.
2:22:01>> That's just that's just what the law is.
2:22:03>> Okay. But I guess incentive attorneys
2:22:05who feel differently, I don't know.
2:22:07Well, that that by the way that
2:22:09Millennium was also followed up by a
2:22:11more recent case in uh Orange, West
2:22:14Orange. I forget the name of it, but the
2:22:17court also um referred to Millennium in
2:22:20that as well.
2:22:22>> I just wanted to this one thing out to
2:22:25the um town council. Please keep in mind
2:22:30that we're not going to be here in 30
2:22:33years. This is our children, our
2:22:35grandchildren. This is their future. 30
2:22:38years is a long time. Remember when they
2:22:40come to you and say, "Oh, we got to do
2:22:42it. We got to do it or we're going to
2:22:44get sued." Fear your mongering type
2:22:46scenario. You have 10 years to to show
2:22:51that we have a plan in place if a
2:22:53developer wants to come in. And number
2:22:55two, we don't have to offer a pilot to
2:22:58make it happen. It should be the other
2:23:00way around. What are they going to give
2:23:02us to come into the area?
2:23:06So, thank you very much.
2:23:07>> You're welcome.
2:23:21>> I'm going to read because I want to be
2:23:24sure I say it correctly.
2:23:27My name is Peg Dassi and I've lived here
2:23:30for over 40 years. But I'm here tonight
2:23:33to formally contest Ordinance 2517.
2:23:38This agreement is not merely a
2:23:40difference of opinion on development. It
2:23:43is a violation of our municipal
2:23:46standards and mathematical failure that
2:23:50shifts multi-million dollar burden onto
2:23:53the backs of the burden taxpayers.
2:23:56I am asking this council to resend
2:23:59formula tonight based on three specifics
2:24:04of failure.
2:24:07The first one is NJSA4A
2:24:1120-8
2:24:13requires a developer to prove that the
2:24:16project is the only feasible
2:24:21with a tax break. However, Mr. Jessup in
2:24:25the last uh time he discussed this
2:24:29testified that this project would yield
2:24:32an intern to rate of return of 5% under
2:24:36traditional taxes.
2:24:38In the current real estate market, a 5%
2:24:42IRRa is a typical baseline that is not a
2:24:46financial failure. The pilot is a tool
2:24:50designed for blighted areas where no one
2:24:54will build. It is not a gift to a
2:24:57developer who simply wants to turn a 5%
2:25:02profit into a 15% profit at our expense.
2:25:08The developer's own financials
2:25:11indicate in the financial agreement a
2:25:14profit every single year. Therefore, I
2:25:18am asking for an independent audit of
2:25:21the financial proform
2:25:24that is if that audit shows the project
2:25:27is viable without this subsidy of the
2:25:31pilot,
2:25:32it constitutes an illegal gift of public
2:25:36funds under New Jersey law.
2:25:40Second, I would address the gross versus
2:25:43net deception being fed to the
2:25:45community. The mayor's office claims
2:25:48this project brings in 3.7 million
2:25:52compared to 3,800
2:25:54permanently generated. That sounds like
2:25:57a win-win until you look at the real
2:26:00figures. Under traditional taxes, this
2:26:04project would have generated $3.2
2:26:08million for our school district. Under
2:26:12this pilot, the school defense zero. We
2:26:16are projected to be adding new students
2:26:20at a per capital cost that is adds up to
2:26:24a multi-million dollar liability over 30
2:26:28years.
2:26:29When you actually subtract the cost of
2:26:32those students,
2:26:34the net benefit to the town is less than
2:26:37$500,000
2:26:39over 30 years. This isn't good new
2:26:43revenue. It's a cost shifting.
2:26:46We are forcing every other family in
2:26:49Vernon to pay the developer share of
2:26:52school taxes. That is fundamentally
2:26:55wrong.
2:26:58Finally, we must address the
2:27:00ordinance607
2:27:04which is permanent standardization of
2:27:07law on pilots
2:27:11where Mr. Jetson has spoken saying that
2:27:15it doesn't apply. The attorney we
2:27:20went to sees it differently. He says
2:27:23it's the baseline
2:27:25and that the fact that it's just
2:27:28commercial and income producing
2:27:34does not limit
2:27:37uh residential.
2:27:40In fact, it
2:27:42is in essence saying residential is not
2:27:46allowed for pilots because the laws in
2:27:49New Jersey are exclusionary. They're not
2:27:52inclusionary.
2:27:55>> Oh, sorry. My screen went blank.
2:27:57>> Didn't hear the impact. Got to move
2:27:58fast.
2:27:59>> Pardon me.
2:27:59>> Got 20 seconds.
2:28:01>> In conclusion, we're asking the the you
2:28:06to resend the ordinance tonight. If
2:28:09you're not making a bad deal, you're
2:28:11creating a li liability. We, the tax
2:28:14swingers of Berlin, as witnessed by our
2:28:17petition, demand you follow the
2:28:20framework of607,
2:28:22audit the developers necessity and
2:28:26protect our schools. Will any member of
2:28:30this council move to consider this
2:28:32ordinance tonight based on any of these
2:28:35financial discrepancies? We sure hope
2:28:38so. Thank you.
2:29:03here. Just want to thank everyone for
2:29:06for your service tonight. I know these
2:29:08meetings are difficult. There's a long
2:29:10agenda to get through and I honestly,
2:29:12you know, trying to focus on you. So
2:29:16irrespective of what our differences may
2:29:17be, thank you for sort of helping
2:29:19conduct the affairs in the the town
2:29:21here. Um, and I'd also like to say,
2:29:24Council President Higgins, you know, I
2:29:26appreciated how you started off this
2:29:28meeting almost like an educator sort of
2:29:32prompting the professionals to engage
2:29:34with the public and trying to sort of
2:29:37pull answers out of them and trying to
2:29:39facilitate that communication. So, I
2:29:41appreciate that and I'm hoping we can
2:29:43have a little bit of that here right now
2:29:45uh with with me professionals here. Um,
2:29:49you know, attorney Kang just provided
2:29:51some comments to our formal council
2:29:54woman here and I know we have another
2:29:56attorney present that also sort of
2:29:58specializes in as well. So, I'm hoping
2:30:00we can perhaps hear from him as well.
2:30:02So, um, again, I'm no attorney, so I'm
2:30:05sort of not necessarily telling you, but
2:30:07also trying to, uh, get your
2:30:10recollection here, but, you know, in
2:30:13your rebuttal, you sort of stated that
2:30:14the Millennium case was clear, went up
2:30:16to the Supreme Court, and there was also
2:30:18more recent case law uh, in Orange, New
2:30:21Jersey. And I believe that's uh,
2:30:25uh, I just look at my notes here.
2:30:28Um,
2:30:35uh, this is administrative, but in
2:30:36orange, the council was following a plan
2:30:38that had already set the rules. Um, they
2:30:42had a redevelopment plan that set out a
2:30:44lot of detail around pilots and terms,
2:30:46etc. And Vernon, you know, there are no
2:30:49rules. Our 2021 redevelopment plan is
2:30:51silent on tax terms. Oregon 16-07 says
2:30:55it's fun. So by choosing 30 years with
2:30:58no existing mandate, we aren't really
2:31:00administering. We're legislating
2:31:02something. So can you sort of address
2:31:05that distinction?
2:31:08>> I I would wait until you're done with
2:31:11your five minutes.
2:31:12>> I was I was hoping we could modify the
2:31:14format of this a little bit and just
2:31:15have a little bit more of a because
2:31:18your your response may necessitate more.
2:31:22What people don't understand this is not
2:31:23a debate. We don't go back and forth.
2:31:26You know, you usually what happens,
2:31:28you'll ask, people would ask their
2:31:30questions the way that the open session
2:31:32is. You can comment on anything you
2:31:34want. You have questions, then the
2:31:36council would take it back to the mayor,
2:31:38the administration would come up with
2:31:40the answers and then provide them maybe
2:31:42at another meeting or email them to you.
2:31:44you know, with all due respect, you
2:31:45know,
2:31:47you're essentially
2:31:49violating the constitution by denying
2:31:51this petition and this is going to
2:31:54result in legal expenses being incurred
2:31:56by the town. You know, it seems like the
2:31:58stakes are rather high and the community
2:31:59is quite upset about this. So, I
2:32:01understand that in normal course of
2:32:03business, it's not a debate. And I'm not
2:32:04trying to have a debate. I'm honestly
2:32:05just trying to have more of a dialogue.
2:32:07I'm trying to speak to you in a very
2:32:08respectful way. But there's thousands of
2:32:10people that are upset by this. And
2:32:12again, you've cited some case law, but
2:32:15you've only really touched the surface
2:32:17of it. And I'm just really trying to
2:32:18understand your perspective because
2:32:20maybe you can talk me off the ledge here
2:32:21and you know, we can just end this right
2:32:22here and you can.
2:32:23>> So, so you you've talked about
2:32:25litigation. I would advise this council
2:32:28not to discuss it any further. I cannot
2:32:31discuss it with you because I don't want
2:32:33to give up any attorney client privilege
2:32:35information with regard to pending and
2:32:37possible litigation you've just
2:32:39threatened.
2:32:50clear statement. It's a good legal
2:32:52statement and uh it does abide by the
2:32:54rules of the council and and the
2:32:57discussion. It's I have total support
2:32:59for that statement. You really can't
2:33:04answer your concerns.
2:33:08>> I would say
2:33:08>> I'm sorry. You can't answer the response
2:33:10that you gave us in an email and clarify
2:33:14it.
2:33:15>> That's a for sure.
2:33:18>> Yeah. I mean, it is a little frustrating
2:33:20that we are we are formally
2:33:22communicating you as a petitioning body
2:33:24to the council and we're not getting any
2:33:26responses. We're communicating with the
2:33:27clerk and we're not getting any sort of
2:33:29formal responses. You know,
2:33:32perhaps this is not the right forum to
2:33:34have this discussion. perhaps I'm naive
2:33:36to the implications of the process and
2:33:39you know etc etc but please respond in
2:33:43some fashion in a timely manner and just
2:33:45don't ignore because it sort of just
2:33:47makes it worse if if folks are just
2:33:49being ignored. So, um, again, we're
2:33:51trying to decide
2:33:53where to take it and just honestly
2:33:55trying to understand position of the
2:33:57town more clearly and draw these
2:33:59distinctions. And, you know, your
2:34:01attorney is advising you, but perhaps
2:34:04you might want to consult with other
2:34:05attorneys because
2:34:08there's a lot of folks out there that
2:34:10are very well informed, educated, you
2:34:12know, and the case law is not clear from
2:34:16what we can tell. So,
2:34:19I hope this isn't just sort of dismissed
2:34:21outright and you just you just carry on.
2:34:23I mean, I hope you really look at this
2:34:25more closely and consider the different
2:34:27paths that this can take.
2:34:30>> Appreciate it. Thank you. We'll take
2:34:31advisement.
2:34:37>> Sir,
2:34:44>> good evening. Back in the hot seat.
2:34:47>> I'm sorry.
2:34:48>> You said I'm back in the hot seat.
2:34:50>> And you would be, sir?
2:34:52>> Harry Shortway, Vernon, New Jersey. Just
2:34:54for the record, former mayor, former
2:34:55deputy mayor, former council president,
2:34:57former councilman, former MUA
2:34:59commissioner, former board of ed member
2:35:01about 30 years on volunteer committees
2:35:03throughout the township.
2:35:05I would like to briefly address the
2:35:07issue of sore connection fees for the
2:35:09Theta Group development and how the
2:35:12newly obtained recordsffect
2:35:14the questions of culpability.
2:35:17On January 27th, 2026,
2:35:21the Sussex County Municipal Utilities
2:35:23Authority notified the township and MUA
2:35:26officials that the final certificate of
2:35:29occupy had been issued without notice to
2:35:31Schuma and without payment of the
2:35:33required connection fee, which they
2:35:36calculated as $213,000
2:35:39plus. This is important because the
2:35:41connection fees
2:35:43also go to help earn rateayers.
2:35:47under Vernon's agreement with Schuma and
2:35:49I believe this is in the 2005 agreement
2:35:52and then they re um addressed it in 2013
2:35:56of certain connection fees go into a
2:35:58rate stabilization fund for burning
2:36:00customers. This helps keep sore rates
2:36:03lower for local users. If connection
2:36:06fees are not collected, the benefit is
2:36:08lost or it's delayed.
2:36:11The VT MUA is owed over $70,000.
2:36:15Burn's MUA regulation says the
2:36:17connection fee must be paid when a
2:36:20building permit is issued to connect to
2:36:22the source system. The word shall makes
2:36:25it mandatory. The documentary record
2:36:28shows that the developer had actual
2:36:30knowledge of connection fee obligations
2:36:32as early as July 2022.
2:36:35At a preliminary source service
2:36:36allocation, meeting the developer's
2:36:38representative acknowledged
2:36:40understanding of the fees, the charges,
2:36:43and the billing procedures.
2:36:45We also know the property owner at the
2:36:47time was a former BTU MUA chairman.
2:36:50Therefore, he had prior experience with
2:36:53municipal utility authority operations,
2:36:56further indicating familiarity with
2:36:58connection fee requirements.
2:37:01The SOUR inspection approval occurred on
2:37:03June 25th, 2025. In November of 2025,
2:37:07internal emails show the develop
2:37:09developer actively was seeking a
2:37:11hardship and also a waiver of connection
2:37:14fees and requesting the proper
2:37:17application.
2:37:19This confirms that the developer knew
2:37:21the fees were required and were due
2:37:23before connection and occupancy.
2:37:26Certificates of occupancies were issued
2:37:28on or about December 29th, 2025. Under
2:37:32New Jerseys Uniform Construction Code, a
2:37:35certificate of occupancy can only be
2:37:37issued when all laws and ordinance
2:37:39ordinances are met. The code clearly
2:37:42states that all required fees must be
2:37:44paid in full before a CO is issued.
2:37:47Despite that knowledge, the project was
2:37:50connected to our source system.
2:37:52Certificates of occupancy was issued
2:37:54were issued. Apartments were rented and
2:37:57assumed revenue was generated. At the
2:38:00same time, no confection fees was paid
2:38:02to either Vernon MUA or the Suis County
2:38:06MUA and Skuma received no application
2:38:11as ever been filed with them. Based on
2:38:14these facts, the issue is no longer a
2:38:16simple administrative oversight. The
2:38:19record establishely establishes clear
2:38:21non-compliance with regulations and
2:38:24raises credible questions as to whether
2:38:26source services were knowingly obtained
2:38:28without payment of the required fees.
2:38:31That is precisely why an independent
2:38:33third-party investigation as we did with
2:38:3720 resolution 22-100 when we
2:38:40investigated the actions of a BA here.
2:38:43A third party investigation would be
2:38:46appropriate. It would determine who had
2:38:48authority, what decisions were made, and
2:38:50whether Vernon's ordinances, MUA
2:38:52regulations, state UCCC code
2:38:55requirements were properly properly
2:38:57filed. This is not about personalities
2:39:00or politics. It's about equal
2:39:02enforcement of law and protection of
2:39:04public funds. For those reasons, I
2:39:06respectfully request that the council
2:39:09place the matter on the public agenda,
2:39:11preserve all related records, and
2:39:13authorize an independent investigation.
2:39:16Thank you.
2:39:29very difficult to follow.
2:39:32>> I'm going to stand right here just old
2:39:34school.
2:39:34>> You sure? Sure. You may come up.
2:39:40Um,
2:39:41I've mentioned this before, but there's
2:39:43constant banter on social media.
2:39:48Some of it real, some of it not real. It
2:39:51was just recently somebody posted that
2:39:54the mayor did a special favor and a
2:39:57special underhanded deal with Vernon in
2:39:59to give them a dedicated sewer line. I'm
2:40:02no fan of the mayor. I've been critical
2:40:04of the mayor. That's just not true. I
2:40:07can remember when Mr. Shortway was
2:40:09sitting where you are talking about the
2:40:11line going to the Vernon end. Do we go
2:40:13under? Do we go over the creek? It's
2:40:16been going a long time.
2:40:18Resolution 2237
2:40:22by the MUA.
2:40:25Let me just preface it. It was recently
2:40:27posted that the plus 55 was supposed to
2:40:30pay one .edu DU per unit. But once
2:40:33again, the mayor um did an underhanded
2:40:36deal, backhanded deal, and reduced it to
2:40:3933. However, in 2022,
2:40:44there was a resolution
2:40:47by the MUA saying that um it was
2:40:49resolved that um the property located at
2:40:54Theta Drive would pay a total of 33
2:40:57edus, which is 6 per unit, which is
2:41:01exactly what normal one-bedroom
2:41:03apartments cost. One edu is normally
2:41:06reserved for a three-bedroom house.
2:41:10So, I just say that to say that some
2:41:13things you see are real, some things
2:41:14aren't real, but I've seen enough lately
2:41:17to really make me have concern, just
2:41:18like council councilman Cantino
2:41:21mentioned, about the dates
2:41:24and the explanations
2:41:26and did we get it in December?
2:41:28Did I give it to her when soon as I got
2:41:30it? It seemed maybe that's not the case
2:41:33since it was timestamped 4 days before
2:41:35it was even dated,
2:41:37but he didn't give it to her until the
2:41:39meeting of the night. I want to come
2:41:41back to that. But
2:41:46there was discussion about
2:41:50there was discussion about this um
2:41:54resolution.
2:41:56I'm sorry. Um ordinance or was it a
2:41:59resolution? I'm sorry. It it was a
2:42:01resolution resolution um that was
2:42:04mentioned earlier by a couple of
2:42:05people6007
2:42:07and it talked about the eligibility of
2:42:10commercial and industrial property. I
2:42:13asked you for clarification on that at
2:42:15the last meeting. You said you looked
2:42:16into it. You came back, the attorney
2:42:18said it wasn't considered commercial.
2:42:20I've looked at legal reviews. I've also
2:42:22looked at um a well-known real estate
2:42:26publication
2:42:28um
2:42:32finance lobby and they say that anything
2:42:34greater than a forplex with the owner
2:42:37living in one of the four apartments
2:42:39it's considered commercial property.
2:42:42It's not residential. It's there to turn
2:42:45a profit.
2:42:48Once again, I don't know that we've been
2:42:50given the right answers. Maybe the
2:42:52attorney that's here tonight have some
2:42:54of those answers and how they come to
2:42:56the decision that it's not commercial
2:42:57property.
2:42:59But I think the clarification is
2:43:01important. I don't know if we just
2:43:02didn't know about602
2:43:04or if there's so many ordinances it just
2:43:07got overlooked. I don't see that it was
2:43:09ever overturned.
2:43:11So, I am concerned about that. And then
2:43:13finally, and I sure don't want to go too
2:43:16far over my time, but finally in that um
2:43:21MUA resolution,
2:43:23it clearly stated
2:43:26the amount of the edus,
2:43:28but then it went on to say that the
2:43:30board of commissioners of the MUA
2:43:33instructs the administrator to collect
2:43:36the connection fee from the property
2:43:38owner and notify the township building
2:43:41department of the future future
2:43:43connection. The edu calculation of 33
2:43:46will become effective upon closure of
2:43:49all permits.
2:43:51Now, I know Miss Bright, our former CFO,
2:43:55was also the chief financial officer for
2:43:57the MUA, and I know there was
2:44:01information back and forth, and she was
2:44:04questioned previously about bills that
2:44:06were MUA bills that were on township
2:44:08bills, and she told a former council
2:44:11member and myself when we were sitting
2:44:12on the back row, "Well, it all just goes
2:44:15into one big bucket and then I put it
2:44:17where it needs to go." And we we
2:44:20complained about that and we said that's
2:44:21not the way it's supposed to be done.
2:44:24I don't understand why
2:44:27the town is paying the schuma bills. I
2:44:31don't understand why the MUA they have
2:44:32their own accounts. They collected or or
2:44:35maybe I'm wrong. I would like some
2:44:37clarification on how that's done and
2:44:39what our involvement is and why we're in
2:44:41the middle of this and why it's not the
2:44:43MUA VTMUA dealing directly with schuma.
2:44:47And if I could get an answer that
2:44:48tonight for that tonight, that would be
2:44:50wonderful. And I thank you very much.
2:44:54>> Just a comment, the the uh edu uh
2:44:58calculations. I have nothing to do with
2:45:00that.
2:45:01>> I just read that it was in 2022. I
2:45:03haven't even known,
2:45:04>> right? But you made a you made a
2:45:05statement that basically said that I
2:45:07backhanded some
2:45:09>> No, I said
2:45:11he was actually
2:45:12>> said he was on social media that were
2:45:16completely erroneous.
2:45:18>> Okay.
2:45:18>> So I'm just kind of cautioning people.
2:45:21But on the other hand, when you start
2:45:23seeing things like this pop up on social
2:45:26media, like the correspondence from the
2:45:29CFO of the MUA to the town clerk and the
2:45:32dates and the times, it it's very
2:45:35concerning and I don't understand how it
2:45:38could have been dated timestamped by
2:45:40your assistant 4 days before it was
2:45:43dated,
2:45:45but how it didn't get stamped into
2:45:47finance in 23rd, but Miss Bright by her
2:45:50correspondence to the clerk said that
2:45:52you gave it to her at the MUA meeting on
2:45:53the 22nd.
2:45:55It still goes on to why is the township
2:45:58responsible for this? We keep tell keep
2:46:00being told they're two separate
2:46:02entities. Keep being told that they
2:46:04collect their own money and that they're
2:46:06solvent and they don't need the town's
2:46:08input. Give some clarification. I would
2:46:12challenge the president or council
2:46:14president at the next meeting to have
2:46:17representatives from the MUA here, both
2:46:19the the chairman and the CFO and the
2:46:22building department because it's been
2:46:24rumored that the CFO of the MUA
2:46:27instructed the building department to
2:46:29give them a CO even though they hadn't
2:46:32paid their connection fees.
2:46:34I don't know how that's even possible.
2:46:36She's not been an employee since
2:46:37September.
2:46:39But there needs to be some kind of
2:46:40internal you guys need to ask the
2:46:42question and these are the only ones
2:46:44that can answer them plus the plus the
2:46:47building department have they paid their
2:46:49connection
2:46:53and I guess that's the most and were
2:46:55they given a CO or were they given a TCO
2:46:59and why would they be going before the
2:47:01MUA looking for hardship relief if they
2:47:04already paid which they were instructed
2:47:07to do by the by the board of the MUA to
2:47:11the chief financial officer to connect
2:47:13those fees before they were permitted. I
2:47:16know we have our own CUFO now. I know
2:47:18they're supposed to be separate, but
2:47:20there's going to have to be some
2:47:21communication between the two of them.
2:47:24You guys need to know what's going on
2:47:26because I ask questions and nobody ever
2:47:27seems to have
2:47:31Thanks.
2:47:39to support the condon
2:47:50uh really I'm wondering what we're all
2:47:52doing here. I'm wondering what Mr.
2:47:54Jessup is doing here. I'm wondering what
2:47:56any of us are doing here because you
2:47:58guys have sat at this table for several
2:48:00meetings saying, you know, I don't think
2:48:02the people understand. you know, you
2:48:04guys are misinformed. You don't know
2:48:07what's going on. You should you have to
2:48:09show up. You have to ask questions.
2:48:10Well, we've done that and we don't get
2:48:12answers. We get answers to nothing.
2:48:14>> You brought him here who is a
2:48:16specialist, an expert in this field. We
2:48:18can't even direct questions to him. He
2:48:20has to look at you to see if he can
2:48:21answer us. Why is he here? He should be
2:48:23here to answer us. All of us have
2:48:26questions that just never seem to get
2:48:27answered. And I don't understand how you
2:48:29can ignore it. I I think you're
2:48:30forgetting that our tax dollars are
2:48:32paying the salaries of the people we're
2:48:34asking answers for.
2:48:35>> May I ask you a question?
2:48:37>> No.
2:48:38>> No, I can't ask you a question.
2:48:43>> Have you listened?
2:48:49>> Listen to anything that was stated by
2:48:51you staying. You haven't learned
2:48:53anything. And these gentlemen came here
2:48:56and uh the town planner came here. They
2:48:59they gave you facts.
2:49:00>> Yeah.
2:49:01>> And you're sitting here as if you didn't
2:49:02hear one word that they were saying. But
2:49:04we had
2:49:05>> Don't you Did you absorb it? Did you
2:49:08absorb what they said?
2:49:09>> I did.
2:49:10>> Okay. Good. I'm glad because we're
2:49:12absorbing what's taking place as well.
2:49:15We're trying to put this in place
2:49:18>> to bring the professionals here to uh
2:49:20answer your questions and have you
2:49:22listen to them rather than listen to us
2:49:24because they're professional. But
2:49:26>> what he said he did his parting for
2:49:28answers from you on things everything he
2:49:31said he should be able to not even be in
2:49:33this room and you should know everything
2:49:36because these are you're voting on these
2:49:38things. You're playing with our money
2:49:40and you should know every single thing
2:49:41without him even being in the room. he
2:49:43would speak. This is his job. He
2:49:46shouldn't have to be here. You should be
2:49:47able to answer every single thing that
2:49:49we ask of him.
2:49:51>> That's not the way it is. And you know,
2:49:53that's not the way. I'm not an attorney.
2:49:55I'm not a town planner. I'm not a
2:49:57professional engineer.
2:49:59That's not my background.
2:50:01So, how can I answer those questions?
2:50:04>> Questions ask you simple questions.
2:50:06>> Simple question. Let me ask you a
2:50:09question that I've given you the answer
2:50:11to three times.
2:50:13Financially, the questions that come up
2:50:16financially is a prime reason why we
2:50:19voted for the pilot. It's a hands down
2:50:22no choice. Best for the town, best for
2:50:25you, best for the kids.
2:50:28>> And you have one of those. And at the
2:50:31end of this meeting, I like conclusions.
2:50:34My comment at the end, I'll I'll go
2:50:36through that again for you to let you
2:50:38know how it's best. And maybe you'll
2:50:40listen this time. Maybe because you
2:50:43think you know a lot more than you do
2:50:45and
2:50:45>> I think I know more than you.
2:50:47>> Well, I I think you can still have two
2:50:49minutes to say what you want and then
2:50:51then we're done with that.
2:50:52>> I think
2:50:54you're making a decision for all of us.
2:50:57You're obviously not.
2:50:59I mean, how we put you in there to
2:51:02represent us.
2:51:05Represent us.
2:51:06>> Excuse me. Not represent you.
2:51:09>> Yes. You gave us the authority by the
2:51:12vote in a constitutional in a democratic
2:51:16republic to make a decision based upon
2:51:21information that we know that we believe
2:51:25to be of greater import. This is not
2:51:28something where you go by the uh who
2:51:32yells loudest. I've been very clear and
2:51:36I'm sorry. I'm not going to sit here and
2:51:38be be belabored by somebody who's
2:51:42unhappy with the council president and
2:51:44what he's saying, but I've told people I
2:51:48don't put my wet finger in the air to
2:51:51see where the witch is blowing, the wind
2:51:54is blowing. Okay? I take what I hear and
2:51:58I listen to it and if necessary, I
2:52:01adjust my thoughts. I adjust my outlook.
2:52:05Okay? But I do not go with the group
2:52:09that yells the loudest.
2:52:12That's not the way this government
2:52:13works. If you don't like it, vote
2:52:17somebody out. That's the way it works.
2:52:20>> We would have if there were enough
2:52:22people willing to run and be a part of
2:52:23the charade.
2:52:25>> Uh I don't call it a charade.
2:52:28>> Secondly, I don't think, you know, I
2:52:30find No, it's my speaking time.
2:52:33You sat on that parking lot and told us
2:52:34that the mayor was violating the rules
2:52:37because he hasn't involved you guys in
2:52:38any developer discussion. He threw you
2:52:41under the bus in the parking lot.
2:52:42>> Mayor, no, the mayor.
2:52:44>> I was there.
2:52:45>> Excuse me. You were there. What you took
2:52:48out of context was what I said that the
2:52:51mayor and I had a disagreement because I
2:52:55wasn't called when there was supposed to
2:52:58be a meeting. Okay. You said the mayor
2:53:00hasn't involved you when he has met with
2:53:02the
2:53:03>> on the contrary. There was there were
2:53:05meetings that I've had with the mayor.
2:53:08>> Okay.
2:53:11>> Final comment before your time's up.
2:53:13Have
2:53:14>> I This is ridiculous. Ridiculous.
2:53:17A waste of our time.
2:53:21>> Excuse me. I've got an answer.
2:53:24>> Answer me.
2:53:25>> Not talking to you. Hi, my name is
2:53:27Raymond from a moment.
2:53:32There's a
2:53:35what's the communication between the
2:53:37council I'm sorry between the uh the uh
2:53:43Marcy uh town clerk and the uh chief
2:53:48financial officer questioning on how the
2:53:51issue of the
2:53:54the the mayor's issu comments were being
2:53:57overlooked and why it was not paid.
2:54:01um essentially
2:54:05the member of the administration. I'm
2:54:09not going to use names simply because it
2:54:11doesn't resolve anything. I cannot
2:54:13collect and this is from the uh this is
2:54:18from the director of the MUA. I cannot
2:54:21collect a connection fee until
2:54:24everything is actually connected. it. I
2:54:28didn't notify you
2:54:30that it was and no one contacted us to
2:54:34see if they paid their fees.
2:54:38Zuma needs to be paid as well. And that
2:54:42doesn't come from me. It comes from
2:54:45county MUA.
2:54:47Uh and that was from, as I said, the
2:54:49director of the
2:54:52uh of the municipal utility authority.
2:54:56What we
2:54:58obviously to me what happened is there
2:55:00seemed to have been somebody overlooking
2:55:02something but all bills are paid by
2:55:07the municipal utility authority. Hey, we
2:55:10have a shared service agreement which
2:55:13allows which requires that the bills be
2:55:17sent to the uh the uh member who was
2:55:24judged to be in responsible for that. I
2:55:27would imagine accounts payable or
2:55:29accounts receivable and those those
2:55:33payments are made
2:55:36out of the uh of the accounts the
2:55:39ledgers of the MUA. So but for what Mr.
2:55:45uh Dunlop was asking it's all done it's
2:55:48just done in this building.
2:55:51It's done in this building to save money
2:55:53and that's the reason why if maybe
2:55:57people would like to spend more money by
2:55:59putting it in a separate building and
2:56:00hiring a separate staff but I don't know
2:56:03why you would do that and spend money
2:56:05that you don't necessarily have to.
2:56:12>> Thank you.
2:56:15>> My name is Raven Slack from Vernon. Um,
2:56:19I'm not a very good public speaker. Um,
2:56:22I'm much better in writing. So, that's
2:56:24why I didn't get up earlier. But I just
2:56:26want to say real quickly, if you're
2:56:29going to tell them not to answer
2:56:31questions from the gentleman farmer
2:56:33because of a legal threat
2:56:35and uh someone else said, oh, it might
2:56:37have been you said it was a it's not a
2:56:39debate, right? We don't debate here. So,
2:56:41if we can't come here to, you know, to
2:56:45petition our government for a redress of
2:56:47grievances and you're not going to have
2:56:49a debate and there's questions that you
2:56:51won't answer, where do we go for that
2:56:54debate? Because then it should be a
2:56:56debate,
2:56:58where does that take place? Because
2:57:00that's where we should go. If it isn't
2:57:02here, where is it?
2:57:06That's what you're here for, isn't it? I
2:57:09mean, if it's not, then where do we go?
2:57:17>> Nothing.
2:57:18>> I'm waiting for your five minutes to be
2:57:20up, ma'am.
2:57:21>> I'm sorry. You're waiting for my five
2:57:22>> five minutes to be up.
2:57:23>> No, because I'm done. I just want an
2:57:25answer to that. I'm not going to spend
2:57:26five minutes starting.
2:57:28>> So, I explained the legal reasoning why
2:57:31the petition cannot go on the ballot. I
2:57:33cited the case law. Unfortunately, you
2:57:36don't believe it or don't want to
2:57:38believe it. So, you I don't I don't know
2:57:42what else I could say to um
2:57:46to make you happy.
2:57:47>> So, the township needs another lawyer.
2:57:49Okay. Thank you.
2:58:00>> Hi, it's Larson. I'm from I have a few a
2:58:03few questions actually.
2:58:05um regarding that I wanted to first
2:58:08isn't a question or it's a comment. Are
2:58:11you aware that the town of Chadam out of
2:58:14their 11 pilot programs there are two in
2:58:16non-compliance that have not paid their
2:58:18their tax their taxes? Okay, that is a
2:58:21big issue. Who's going to follow up on
2:58:23it? And I the information we received
2:58:25from Mr. Jessup is in conflict with what
2:58:28I got here in the actual uh agreement.
2:58:30Okay, just bear with me a moment. Again,
2:58:33it's 8.3 article D. In the absence of
2:58:37default by the entity blah blah blah,
2:58:39the township agrees to consent to
2:58:40collateral assignment by the entity to
2:58:42any secured party or secured parties of
2:58:44its interest in this agreement and to
2:58:46permit each secured party to enforce its
2:58:48rights here and under the applicable
2:58:50security agreement and shall upon
2:58:52request of the secured party execute
2:58:54such documents as are typically
2:58:56requested by the secured parties to
2:58:57acknowledge such consent. This provision
2:59:00shall not be construed to limit the
2:59:02township's right to payment from the
2:59:04entity. Nor shall or shall the priority
2:59:07of such payments be affected by the
2:59:09secured party exercising its rights
2:59:11under any applicable applicable security
2:59:14arrangement. So that's what we're
2:59:16touching on upon defaults and
2:59:19delinquencies. Where does it say what
2:59:21we're getting as far as a tax lean?
2:59:22Where does it say we're getting 18% 20%
2:59:25whatever for delinquencies? What does it
2:59:27say the remedy is for a for a default?
2:59:30It it it's clearly not on here, but
2:59:32you're telling us that it's just like
2:59:34any other tax and every other attorney
2:59:36we've spoken to says it's not tax. So,
2:59:38it's not like a regular tax lean or you
2:59:40can just, you know, sell the property at
2:59:41a tax lean sale at the end of the year.
2:59:43Please tell me in this in this document
2:59:45where it says we can sell it as a tax
2:59:46lean.
2:59:53>> So, first the section that you just
2:59:55quoted. Yeah.
2:59:56>> Is for purposes of when the developer
3:00:00gets construction financing, the lender
3:00:03who's going to lend millions of dollars
3:00:04to make sure that the project gets
3:00:06built. Yes.
3:00:07>> They want the right to pay the pilot in
3:00:09the event that the developer does not.
3:00:11The provision you just cited is to
3:00:14ensure that the construction lender can
3:00:16pay our pilot when their developer
3:00:18doesn't
3:00:19>> not forced to.
3:00:21>> Correct.
3:00:22>> 100%.
3:00:24>> We get our money. yours.
3:00:26>> Watch
3:00:55annual service charge or minimum service
3:00:57charge payments as the case fast. Why
3:00:59don't you go a little slower so
3:01:00everybody can hear you and we can all
3:01:01say understand it. All annual service
3:01:04charge or minimum annual service charge
3:01:06payments as the case may be made
3:01:09pursuant to this agreement shall be in
3:01:11lie of taxes and the township shall have
3:01:14the rights and remedies of tax
3:01:16enforcement granted to a municipality by
3:01:19applicable law including those of inrem
3:01:22tax foreclosure pursuant to NJSA 545-1
3:01:28just as if said payments constituted
3:01:30regular property tax obl obligations on
3:01:33other real properties within the
3:01:35township.
3:01:35>> What page page and paragraph?
3:01:38>> What page and paragraph is that?
3:01:41>> It's section 4.6A.
3:01:43Rights and obligations
3:01:46paragraph
3:01:47>> section 4.6A.
3:01:50Section 4.6 is rights and obligations
3:01:53related to tax exemption. 4.6A is the
3:01:57paragraph that I just read
3:01:58>> and that's in the agreement
3:01:59>> above it. Immediately above it, it says
3:02:03in 4.5,
3:02:06the entity's failure to make the
3:02:08requisite payment of annual service
3:02:09charge or minimum annual service charge
3:02:12or if applicable van taxes in a timely
3:02:15manner shall constitute a default
3:02:18capital D defined term under this
3:02:20agreement and the township may among its
3:02:23other remedies as provided in this
3:02:25agreement proceed against the project
3:02:28pursuant to the INREM Tax Foreclosure
3:02:30Act.
3:02:31NJSA545-1
3:02:33at SEC. In addition, the township may
3:02:36terminate this agreement with respect to
3:02:38the project in accordance with section
3:02:395.3 and it goes on.
3:02:42>> Is that the agreement that was part of
3:02:44the ordinance that was passed and that's
3:02:45an executed agreement?
3:02:47>> Well, I can't see whether this is
3:02:48executed because this isn't my copy
3:02:50obviously, but
3:02:51>> but is your copy have that same language
3:02:53in it? Is your copy executed?
3:02:54>> Yes, it is.
3:02:55>> And that's executed by the developer
3:02:57>> and the town.
3:02:58>> Yes.
3:02:59>> Thank you. Mhm.
3:03:06>> MUA, are they are the lenders going to
3:03:08be paying the MUA?
3:03:11>> That that agreement is not between the
3:03:12MUA.
3:03:13>> Interesting. All these all these
3:03:15disjointed parts. You notice how this
3:03:16section you repeated is 4.6, but it goes
3:03:19on here 8.3. It's all convoluted. Why
3:03:22would they? They're two different
3:03:24sections. One thing is you're what
3:03:27you're doing is you're trying to make a
3:03:28great big philosophy so people can't
3:03:31understand it. This is done to deceive.
3:03:33Okay? That's why it's done. Do you know
3:03:35the meaning of of the red hand? Do you
3:03:38have any idea what the definition of red
3:03:39hand is? It's an anti-semitism. Why
3:03:42don't you read up on just Google red and
3:03:44then while you're at it, Google blackand
3:03:47blackand is about terrorism. We made a
3:03:49pack with the devil. Okay? And this
3:03:51document is doing nothing to help our
3:03:53township. nothing to help us. Okay. And
3:03:56the fact that you went and found this
3:03:57cute little way of going and calling
3:03:59this a residential property versus the
3:04:02commercial properties is very
3:04:03interesting. You didn't find a way to
3:04:05help the town. You found a way to help
3:04:07the developer beat us, didn't you?
3:04:11You're really working for us, aren't
3:04:12you?
3:04:15I encourage everyone to look up Red
3:04:16Hand, the anti-semitism definition of
3:04:19red hand and black hand.
3:04:22>> Thank you. Anybody else?
3:04:30>> This
3:04:31>> I'll be quick. Scott Pastel from
3:04:33Glenwood. Um, I just see and I I'm
3:04:36hoping everybody on a council sees
3:04:40that over the last few meetings since
3:04:42the the whole pilot project um has been
3:04:47being discussed that there's a really
3:04:50big erosion of trust from the town's
3:04:54people against the council and I see it
3:04:57getting worse and worse and worse. Um, I
3:05:01don't think this is setting a, you know,
3:05:03a good base for things moving forward. I
3:05:06I just see it pretty horrible. I feel
3:05:08bad for the two new towns council people
3:05:11that came on. Now, um I find it really
3:05:15hard to fathom that we the previous
3:05:20count uh town council would really
3:05:23scrutinize things like the you know
3:05:25garbage drop off down to the penny
3:05:28looking at every possible bill and then
3:05:30very easily other than Jessica D.
3:05:33Benadetto very easily rubber stamp a yes
3:05:37on a what I see as a really losing
3:05:41uh pilot program that that we're looking
3:05:44at for 30 years. It's it's insane to me
3:05:47how easily that went through. I could
3:05:49see maybe it goes through and
3:05:50everybody's arguing and you know we
3:05:52finally came to it and people aren't
3:05:55happy but it it it was an argument. It
3:05:57was a pretty easy yes that that happened
3:05:59with that. So I guess my real issue that
3:06:02I have is that you know I previously and
3:06:05maybe naively I had faith in the town
3:06:07council to be kind of a guardrail that's
3:06:11in place to provide some financial
3:06:14financial and other common sense to to
3:06:17things like this. You know I think the
3:06:19mayor should bring up projects. He
3:06:21should throw them out there. But the the
3:06:23town council for me is what is supposed
3:06:25to be, you know, looking at does this
3:06:28really make sense for the town. Um, and
3:06:33I just don't think that's happening now.
3:06:34I I think you know my I might again I
3:06:37might be naive but for me my thought on
3:06:40the council is you know the people that
3:06:42you elect are there
3:06:46to basically
3:06:48portray what you
3:06:50are electing them for. So they're not to
3:06:52get elected and then think that they
3:06:54know more. I totally disagree with with
3:06:57what Mr. Rudo was saying. You know I'm
3:06:59I'm smarter than you. You elected me. So
3:07:01now, you know, you guys hang out and and
3:07:04I'll make all the decisions.
3:07:05>> I didn't
3:07:06>> I think just let me finish. I think if
3:07:09it's a 50/50 uh topic or it's a really
3:07:12contested subject, then yes, you're
3:07:15entrusted to provide the the deciding
3:07:18vote. I elected you, you do that. But in
3:07:21this case, there's an overwhelming
3:07:22majority of people that are not in favor
3:07:25of this. And you know, there were posts
3:07:27about, you know, uh, we defeated the
3:07:29Democrats or we beat the liberals on
3:07:32this or whatever. I'm the most
3:07:33conservative guy around and I was at the
3:07:36recycle center and there's people there
3:07:38that I've seen them speak here. I see
3:07:41him post online. I disagree with them
3:07:4298% of the time. We were on the same
3:07:44page with that because this is a a
3:07:46unifying
3:07:48uh subject that I think most people are
3:07:51not for. There are some people for it,
3:07:53which is fine. Um, but I think that, you
3:07:57know, it's a good cross-section of the
3:08:00town that we were able to throw a
3:08:02petition together, get more than twice
3:08:05the number that's needed, thousands of
3:08:06people, and if that if they had had more
3:08:09time, we would have gotten a lot more
3:08:10from from what I saw. Um, and that's
3:08:13totally being disregarded. And acting
3:08:15like it's some kind of victory uh to me
3:08:18is is kind of crazy. So again, I can be
3:08:21wrong, but I think that the the town
3:08:24council for the most part, unless it's
3:08:27some egregious error that's happening,
3:08:30should represent what the large majority
3:08:32of the residents that elected them want
3:08:34to happen.
3:08:36>> Um, so I'm hoping at least that the two
3:08:39new members, and from the questions that
3:08:41I've heard, I think that is going to be
3:08:43the case. I'm I'm really hoping. I wish
3:08:45Jessica was still on on here. Um, but
3:08:49I'm hoping that moving forward we really
3:08:52look at what the town's people want and
3:08:55not think that we're smarter than them.
3:08:57I know there was a there was a comment
3:08:59uh two meetings ago or one meeting ago
3:09:02that you know you people have to do your
3:09:04homework and do your research. The
3:09:06people I saw here know way more than I
3:09:08do about this. I looked into this. I
3:09:10tried to look at some pilot programs
3:09:12around the state just to see the terms
3:09:14are all over the place which to me means
3:09:16you can negotiate those terms and you
3:09:19can either get terms that work for you
3:09:22and work for the developer. I understand
3:09:24he has to make money too or you walk
3:09:26away. It seems like we were kind of
3:09:29negotiating from a panic state like
3:09:33we'll take whatever or something else
3:09:35was going on. I don't know what but I
3:09:36don't know why we have these horrible
3:09:38terms for our town for this 30 30 years
3:09:42and the you know throwing out the 3.7
3:09:44million that's great if if it was a lump
3:09:46sum that would be great. This is spread
3:09:48over 30 years. You know we're not
3:09:49building any Taj Mahals with that money
3:09:51that's that's coming in and and money
3:09:54now as anybody with any financial sense
3:09:57knows is worth a lot less in the future.
3:09:59So 30 years down the road, this is not
3:10:01going to be great and we're going to
3:10:03have town council saying we have to
3:10:05raise your taxes. We're stuck in this,
3:10:07you know, this agreement that we can't
3:10:08get get rid of. So I went on longer than
3:10:11I should. I'm sorry, but thanks for your
3:10:12time.
3:10:13>> Thank you.
3:10:22>> Excuse me.
3:10:23>> My name is Kathy
3:10:25working.
3:10:26Two questions. How many pilot programs
3:10:29are be discussed at this time in
3:10:32preparation for further projects?
3:10:34Because I'm under the impression that
3:10:36you need to have the pilot before you
3:10:38can get the U building permits.
3:10:43>> Are there any more pilot programs under
3:10:47consideration?
3:10:49>> There have been none submitted to the
3:10:52council from the land use board where it
3:10:55would originate. that I'm aware of. No,
3:10:58I'm on the language board.
3:11:01>> Yeah,
3:11:13>> I recognize that I spoke already. I'm
3:11:15not I'm not really allowed more time,
3:11:17but if you'll just allow a a small
3:11:19measure of civil disobedience here. Um,
3:11:23the woman that just asked the question,
3:11:24I was under the impression that pilots
3:11:27aren't coming from the land use board.
3:11:28They're coming from
3:11:31you guys.
3:11:32>> Comes here. The project is approved at
3:11:34the land use board and then a request
3:11:36for a pilot will come here. There's been
3:11:38no more projects that have been out of
3:11:41the land use board over to here to even
3:11:44be considered. So, the answer is none.
3:11:46>> Thank you. Maybe I just misunderstood,
3:11:48but I thought it. Anyway, so just in
3:11:51sort of digesting what everyone has said
3:11:53this evening, it seems like
3:11:57this issue of administrative versus
3:11:59legislative and case law, which which is
3:12:02not cut and dry. It's subject to
3:12:03interpretation. Um, but to me it seems
3:12:06like the real conversation that the
3:12:08petitioners should have with the council
3:12:10is not over case law, but it's really
3:12:13over the financial benefits of the pilot
3:12:15because it still feels like uh you and
3:12:18Mr. Rudo feel strongly that this does
3:12:20offer really strong financial benefits
3:12:22to the town and perhaps you know we just
3:12:25need to hash it out more because again
3:12:27the agreement says that these revenues
3:12:30are sort of speculative and it's it's
3:12:32all forecasting and I'd really love to
3:12:35see um degrees of forecasting. So, you
3:12:39know, what is the bear case? What is the
3:12:41base case? What is the bull case? You
3:12:43know, there's there's a whole range of
3:12:44outcomes that can come from this pilot.
3:12:46And I'd really just love to stress test
3:12:49this a bit more and and just see see
3:12:51where that riskreward balance truly lies
3:12:54because I think what was provided to the
3:12:56public felt optimistic. um you know
3:13:02not just a farmer but I also you know in
3:13:04an earlier life had a significant
3:13:06background in financial analysis and
3:13:10you know compounding is a very powerful
3:13:12thing and this what was published to the
3:13:14community assumes a lot of compounding
3:13:15over 30 years. So will we really get the
3:13:18three semi- million or is it going to be
3:13:19something different and I I really just
3:13:21implore that we have an honest
3:13:22conversation about that and perhaps
3:13:24there can be some sort of working
3:13:25session between the council and and uh
3:13:29petitioning body to kind of hash this
3:13:31out more. Again, I don't know what the
3:13:32correct form is and I'm cognizant that
3:13:35I've over I've sort of already overaided
3:13:37my time here. It's quite late, so I
3:13:38don't want to belabor it, but again, I
3:13:40would just implore you to keep the lines
3:13:42of communication open. Let's just try
3:13:43and avoid a big snafu that's just going
3:13:45to leave a black eye in the town. Let's
3:13:47somehow talk about this and work this
3:13:50out, please. So,
3:13:51>> we'll do our best.
3:13:52>> Thank you. Thank you.
3:13:53>> Thank you.
3:13:57as long as we're being civilally
3:13:58disobedient.
3:14:00That's the two questions that I thought
3:14:02maybe the attorney while he was here
3:14:04could answer. One was that um607
3:14:08considered in their deliberation and
3:14:11what was it that led him to think that
3:14:12it was residential.
3:14:16>> He's here. He's the one I think that
3:14:18made the decision.
3:14:19answer that.
3:14:26>> So again, that that ordinance in each
3:14:29section quotes statutory language from
3:14:33the 5-year exemption and abatement law,
3:14:35not the long-term tax exemption law. The
3:14:385-year exemption abatement law does
3:14:40define commercial and industrial. It is
3:14:43not residential. On the contrary, even
3:14:46if we were to imputee the long-term tax
3:14:49exemption law into this ordinance
3:14:52and ignore that every provision of the
3:14:54ordinance disagrees with the long-term
3:14:56tax exemption law, the long-term tax
3:14:58exemption law also makes a distinction
3:15:01between industrial, commercial, and
3:15:03residential. and residential projects,
3:15:05whether they're single family, multif
3:15:08family, 500 unit or plus towers in, you
3:15:12know, an urban environment or a 20 unit
3:15:15project in a suburban environment. Um,
3:15:18they are residential under the long-term
3:15:19tax exemption law. It is why the land
3:15:21tax gets exempted. It is a distinction
3:15:23made in the uh long-term tax exemption
3:15:25law.
3:15:27>> Thank you. Thank you,
3:15:32>> Mr.
3:15:33If the
3:15:35group
3:15:37did not pay the se the sewer connection
3:15:40fee of $7,000, are they can we negate
3:15:44the financial agreement based on that
3:15:46because they didn't hold up to the
3:15:48financial agreement that we had just
3:15:51like you were arguing back and forth
3:15:52with the lady sitting up in front and
3:15:54Larson.
3:15:59>> I don't think you you
3:16:00>> really can't answer that. No, that one I
3:16:02I I did want to come up here, but that
3:16:04one I can't answer. I don't know about
3:16:06the dispute amongst a a fee of the MUA.
3:16:10I don't know which project it relates
3:16:11to. I don't know what agreement is in
3:16:13place that would or wouldn't provide the
3:16:15township with rights and remedies
3:16:16against the developer. I'm happy to look
3:16:18into it if you want. Maybe Mr. King is,
3:16:20but I I just don't know about the MUA
3:16:24outside of your
3:16:25>> Yeah, I can't answer that.
3:16:26>> Right.
3:16:27>> Thank you for your honesty. No, I
3:16:28appreciate the honesty. It' be nice if
3:16:30Mr. King
3:16:32>> any anyone else?
3:16:36Okay. Have a motion to close the
3:16:39comments to the public.
3:16:41>> Second.
3:16:42>> All in favor?
3:16:44>> I
3:16:48do to council comment.
3:16:52Um
3:16:53may I begin? Where are we?
3:16:58Where are we at here?
3:17:05Next is council comments. Need a motion?
3:17:10>> No motion.
3:17:11>> Start with uh Carl if you have any
3:17:13comments.
3:17:14>> So I just want to go back to I I noticed
3:17:16a lot of people in the public tonight
3:17:18were asking questions about the same
3:17:19thing. Um just know you do not your
3:17:22voices do not fall on deaf ears. Um, so
3:17:26I'm very concerned about what I have
3:17:29learned in relation to um, Theta Grove
3:17:33not paying their schuma hookup fees on
3:17:37application and the fact that they were
3:17:39given not one but multiple cos full cos
3:17:45hadn't their hookup fees and that's over
3:17:48$200,000 correct in SCMA hookup fees and
3:17:53fees for the VTMUA that they had not
3:17:56paid yet. And I read through the emails
3:17:58that I received in my request and I
3:18:01can't really figure out exactly what
3:18:03happened or why that went down. There
3:18:06seems to be a general understanding that
3:18:09this is not the way it's supposed to be
3:18:11done when I read through those emails,
3:18:13but I really this is something that
3:18:15should be into. So I know you said that
3:18:18you're doing an internal investigation.
3:18:21Can you just reassure members of the
3:18:22council that we will receive
3:18:24documentation and a report of that
3:18:27internal investigation?
3:18:31>> Yes. And just just just to be clear,
3:18:33nobody's getting out of paying fees.
3:18:36>> No, I that's not what I'm insinuating.
3:18:38>> Sometimes people, you know, think that I
3:18:42deal cuts or slack with the
3:18:46I will look into it.
3:18:50What I'm concerned about also is that
3:18:53Skuma sent us sorry Skuma sent us a
3:18:58deadline for this late payment to be
3:19:01received by noon on the 4th and to my
3:19:05knowledge they have not received that
3:19:06payment. Correct.
3:19:08>> Can't answer that. I don't I don't know.
3:19:11>> No, because that payment comes from
3:19:13>> from the MUA.
3:19:14>> From the MUA,
3:19:15>> but we would still That's public
3:19:16information though.
3:19:17>> Well, you'd have to get it.
3:19:19>> Okay.
3:19:20Um, also, and this is something I wanted
3:19:22to ask you directly about, mayor,
3:19:24because I did see in one of the emails
3:19:27that was sent to me, um, communication
3:19:30between you and Mark Serantino of the
3:19:32Unneil Group that a hardship application
3:19:35was being discussed as early as November
3:19:378th in one of those emails. Is that
3:19:40hardship because you said we need to get
3:19:42them, there's no hardship application on
3:19:45the MUA website. Where can we get them a
3:19:47hardship application? That was on
3:19:49November 8th and there was no notice
3:19:54from the MUA administrator that the fees
3:19:56had not been paid been paid until
3:19:58January 2nd. So is that potential
3:20:00hardship being discussed in relation to
3:20:04that hookup fee in November? Because
3:20:07that makes me concerned. I have to say
3:20:09when I'm looking through what I asked
3:20:11for and I'm looking through those emails
3:20:13that stuck out to me that you're
3:20:15discussing a hardship with these people
3:20:17from the O'Neal group in November,
3:20:20two months before the administrator of
3:20:23the MUA noticed that that fee hadn't
3:20:25been paid.
3:20:27>> So I just there was some confusion on
3:20:31because again I I can't speak for the
3:20:33MUA. Um so I tried to handle as best as
3:20:38I could about how that hardship process
3:20:41um takes place. So that's the
3:20:44discussions that that you heard well
3:20:47read um about how they go about doing it
3:20:50and then then you have to wait from what
3:20:53I understand things have to start with a
3:20:55discussion at at the MUA meeting. So
3:20:59there's there's some
3:21:00>> you went through that in those emails
3:21:02afterwards. Yeah. I saw that you
3:21:04directed them to the MUA.
3:21:06>> First, you're discussing it with them, a
3:21:08hardship in November, and then two
3:21:11months later, we find out that they
3:21:12haven't paid their connection fee. And
3:21:15I'm concerned by that because if you I'm
3:21:18not implicating you in anything. I just
3:21:20want context. What was were they just
3:21:22>> if they were if they were given a
3:21:24hardship, right, which is 20% over five
3:21:27years.
3:21:27>> Yeah. That that's for
3:21:29>> So that's that's what we're getting at,
3:21:30right? um what is that dollar amount?
3:21:33Right? And then if they get a hardship,
3:21:35then that's that's when they they make
3:21:37make those payments based on hardship.
3:21:39>> But mayor, I I know what the hardship
3:21:41process does. What I'm asking is that
3:21:43potential hardship that they were
3:21:45discussing with you in November, was
3:21:48that over their connection fee?
3:21:51>> That's correct. Yes. Yeah. So, they were
3:21:53discussing the connection fee with you
3:21:55and the fact that they hadn't paid it in
3:21:57November, but then finance
3:22:00>> because they had to get in front of SC
3:22:02uh the MUA to make their case and then
3:22:05there was
3:22:05>> they haven't even done that as of now.
3:22:07Correct.
3:22:08>> They did.
3:22:08>> Yeah. So,
3:22:10>> January 27th.
3:22:11>> Okay. January 27th. But still, that's
3:22:14three, four months later. I'm It just
3:22:16makes me concerned because
3:22:18>> that's not right. It was delayed for two
3:22:19months.
3:22:22>> It's on the agenda. They delayed it for
3:22:23two months.
3:22:24>> Not the not the uh the hardship for the
3:22:27MUA.
3:22:28>> So that's already been voted on
3:22:29>> the hardship there on January 22nd and
3:22:32it was
3:22:34>> they didn't come.
3:22:35>> He's talking he's talking
3:22:37>> told the lie about what happened.
3:22:38>> He's talking about the hardship to the
3:22:40MUA.
3:22:42>> No, you're you're
3:22:44you're talking about the 99 unit
3:22:46building. No.
3:22:47>> Oh, I'm my apologies. My apologies.
3:22:51>> No, they came but they didn't show up.
3:22:53It was on the agenda. They didn't show
3:22:55up and it said it was being delayed
3:22:57either March or April.
3:22:58>> My apologies.
3:22:59>> So, the question still is
3:23:01>> appointment
3:23:02>> if they didn't pay.
3:23:04>> That's what I'm concerned about is that
3:23:06they got a CO when they hadn't paid
3:23:09their connection fee, which they would
3:23:11pay really at the beginning of the
3:23:13process. And I mean that's from what I
3:23:16could find in MUA code. I I could be mis
3:23:20Nobody's disputing that this should have
3:23:23been done much earlier.
3:23:26>> Yes. agree.
3:23:27>> Why is it that like when I look through
3:23:29these emails, I see the administrator of
3:23:33the MUA asking in on January 2nd,
3:23:38January 2nd, she's asking, "Did anyone
3:23:41ever collect the fee for their
3:23:44connection?" But then I look back into
3:23:46November on November 8th and you're
3:23:48discussing a hardship with them.
3:23:52That disconnect there just makes me
3:23:55really uncomfortable. I have to bring it
3:23:57up and I sent you an email about it this
3:23:59morning. So, it's not like I'm but I I I
3:24:03have to make that public. But that that
3:24:04makes me very uncomfortable when I look
3:24:06through those emails and see that.
3:24:15>> Mr.
3:24:16>> I have no comment.
3:24:19>> I'll save it for the next meeting.
3:24:21>> Okay.
3:24:22>> I have like 15 minutes written down
3:24:24here. I'll pass.
3:24:27>> I I have some comments I just want to
3:24:29make. A lot of people have that come up
3:24:31to spoke tonight, they're friend of
3:24:33mine, or at least I think they are. And
3:24:36uh whenever friends have a conversation,
3:24:38whenever two people have a conversation
3:24:40on a subject and you prove your point
3:24:43and you you give your opinion, the other
3:24:46person's supposed to listen to what
3:24:48you're saying and say, "He has a point.
3:24:51I might not agree with it, but then the
3:24:53next meeting you don't come up and and
3:24:55say the same thing you heard as if I
3:24:57never said it. So, I'm going to say
3:24:59again exactly what took place with the
3:25:01pilot. Everybody is confusing two
3:25:04buildings. A 99 unit building, which is
3:25:07an emotional
3:25:08uh drawing that's been presented. It's
3:25:11in the land use board. It's not through
3:25:13the land use board. It's the project
3:25:15across the street from Acme and it's not
3:25:18even approved and it's still in
3:25:20discussion purposes. Has nothing to do
3:25:22with this. But most of the people I've
3:25:24spoken to, I have mixed that up with the
3:25:2727 unit building on a 3/4 acre piece of
3:25:30property sitting behind this building
3:25:33that's generating for the town $900 a
3:25:36year taxes. So for those people, even
3:25:40Scott, is it going to generate money?
3:25:42Yeah. 900 bucks a year as paying the
3:25:45town for for the taxes on that vacant
3:25:48piece of property. 900 times 30 years.
3:25:51How much is that?
3:25:54900. If you take $900 a year and
3:25:57multiply it times 30 years, how much do
3:26:00you have?
3:26:01>> $27,000.
3:26:03Compare that compare that to $3.7
3:26:07million that the town will get from the
3:26:10from the pilot program on that building.
3:26:13>> It doesn't go right here.
3:26:14>> And for people that are sitting here
3:26:16complaining about I'm speaking I'm
3:26:19speaking people that are sitting
3:26:21complaining about their taxes. This is a
3:26:23way to generate tax revenue. We're
3:26:26facing a budget that's that's that's
3:26:29unbelievable.
3:26:30And here is money. This is income. This
3:26:33is revenue. And we're not giving
3:26:35anything up. There's a building going up
3:26:38that's going to have four apartments in
3:26:40it that are lower income type of
3:26:42housing, but there it's in the same
3:26:44building. They'll pay less and it may
3:26:47generate even if you go by tripling the
3:26:50number of students that the uh the
3:26:53planner said up to 14. There's no cost
3:26:56to the school district to add 14 kids,
3:27:00but we in the town are getting over that
3:27:03course of time $3.7 million.
3:27:06>> That's not true. That's not true.
3:27:09>> How can that not be true? It is true.
3:27:11The financial I'm That's my turn to
3:27:13speak. I sat here and listened to all
3:27:15the stories and I heard, you know, that
3:27:17we're we're we're shaking hands with the
3:27:20devil and we're we're in the with the
3:27:23mafia and all the rest of the stuff.
3:27:25red hand and all the rest of the things.
3:27:28This is a building that's going to
3:27:30benefit the town. It's going to tie into
3:27:33the sewers. It's going to uh improve the
3:27:37area behind the building and there's
3:27:39going to be four apartments in there
3:27:42that that may have some lower income
3:27:44people in it. That's the bottom line.
3:27:46And the rest would I have built the
3:27:49building? No. because I don't believe
3:27:52that they're gonna get the rent that
3:27:54that they're gonna get.
3:27:55>> Which means I could get $3 million.
3:27:58But guess what? You're not a developer.
3:28:00You're not a developer and I'm not a
3:28:02developer. They took they took the
3:28:04chance to do it. It's it's their chance
3:28:07to take. They claim it was an 11 million
3:28:10project. They could fund 10 million of
3:28:12it. They need to pilot to get that other
3:28:14million dollars. They took the risk. Let
3:28:17them take the risk. They're taking.
3:28:19>> We just got the answer that if they
3:28:21fail, we're still protected.
3:28:23>> We're not going to lose.
3:28:25>> And how can you how can you compare
3:28:27getting $900 a year to the the amount
3:28:31that I just said, it's it's it's a
3:28:33closed closed case with with no
3:28:36downside. All this thing about going to
3:28:38blow up the schools, there's going to be
3:28:40all the students. That's all hearsay.
3:28:43Even if I I said multiply it times
3:28:46three, you know, say that to 14 or 15
3:28:49students. So what what's that going to
3:28:51do? This is a great opportunity.
3:28:55And then the other thing that's
3:28:56happening at the same time with the
3:28:57budget and and with all the people here,
3:29:00you got a lot of answers for a lot of
3:29:02questions. So I'm going to give you a
3:29:04project to do. We have 119 veterans that
3:29:10are not paying taxes now. And that's the
3:29:12law and we vote it every time and and
3:29:15that's okay. They deserve something,
3:29:18right? So they don't pay taxes and that
3:29:21is a hole in our budget one. It's up to
3:29:23$1,79,000.
3:29:26Now we collect for our taxes for our
3:29:29town from our residents for our use in
3:29:32the town $19 million. You've we've just
3:29:35created a 4.5% hole in the budget. So,
3:29:39how about somebody next meeting come
3:29:42along and give us some ideas how to
3:29:44generate a closure for that to hold.
3:29:47>> I can I can give you one pilot
3:29:50>> that's going to help. Maybe you can give
3:29:52me two now. That's something
3:29:54constructive. That's We're trying to do
3:29:56something constructive. You're trying to
3:29:58beat it down, but there's no uh no
3:30:00options here. Where are the options? We
3:30:02have we have requirements to provide
3:30:05lower income housing. You just heard the
3:30:08uh the law on it. You you heard the
3:30:11accountants. You heard you heard our
3:30:12attorneys. You heard this attorney. But
3:30:14you're not listening. So work with us.
3:30:17Where are the ideas
3:30:20>> businesses?
3:30:26>> So that's all I have to say. That's it's
3:30:29an opportunity. I always look at things
3:30:31as opportunities rather than problems.
3:30:34and uh to be so emotional about it and
3:30:36bring in the devil and all the rest of
3:30:38the stuff here is uh
3:30:41>> too far.
3:30:42>> I think people need to also realize
3:30:44we're all taxpayers here. We're all
3:30:46living. We're all taxpayers. Um
3:30:49>> and like I said, the this program was
3:30:52was negotiated um through our financial
3:30:56advisors
3:30:57at Jessup as well, CFO, everyone has
3:31:00looked had eyes on the stars. just had a
3:31:02wing in a prayer. Um, like I said, and
3:31:05people know Council President, he he
3:31:07rises over many, many things. Um, so
3:31:12it's
3:31:14to say that we just
3:31:17not caring or uh reckless. It's it's not
3:31:21it's not true. And and anyway, but just
3:31:24keep in mind we are taxpayers here, too.
3:31:27So, we're all in this together.
3:31:31I
3:31:31>> like a motion to adjurnn, please.
3:31:34>> Second.
3:31:35>> All in favor?
3:31:35>> I I

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Vernon Township Council 2 9 2026 by Vernon Township, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 31,911 words across 5,192 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.