Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Good evening and welcome to this special meeting of the Middletown Township Board of Supervisors. Would everybody please stand and join us in the pledge of allegiance [clears throat] to the flag of the stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Miss Corpal, would you please call roll? Mr. Kzak here. Miss Kane here. Um Miss Hannah Miss Hannah here. Also in attendance is township manager Mr. Ratliff, uh, township solicitor Mr. Espazito, and township engineer, Mr. Kesler.

Um, all right. Before we kick things off, I just want to give Mr. Ratliff an opportunity just to explain to the members of the public what's going on in the building this evening.

Absolutely. Thank you very much, Mr. Keyzac. So, tonight the township staff has affectionately referred to this as a double header. So, uh, before we realized that there would be a continuation of the board of supervisors meeting from Monday, which I think many of the public were at, uh, to tonight at 7:00 p.m., there was a developer meeting scheduled with our township staff, uh, regarding BET investments. They're proposing a text amendment and eventually a land development plan um, just down the street from here, across from the Giant uh, the Flowers um, Mil Shopping Center. So, uh, that's happening right above us. Um, if you come on to this and look up, you'll see some people up there. Uh we have a number of residents up there who are engaging um in a process with the developer to sort of talk about the proposal, give their feedback about the proposal. Um and that's a new initiative of the board of supervisors to ensure that the land development planning process is sort of citizen informed from beginning to end. So that's a really good process that's happening. Had we realized that there would be a second meeting happening, we would have chosen a different night. That meeting started at 6:30. There are probably people in this room who were at that meeting. If you're interested in that, you can filter up there if you'd like. I imagine as that meeting continues, folks from there will continue down here. Uh we have township staff out in the hallway that can uh facilitate you to get to whichever meeting you want to go to. Um so that's what's happening. Um two meetings at once and we'll sort [snorts] of continue on.

Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Rish. So, uh first uh few upcoming uh meetings. We talked about these at the last meeting, but just to reiterate, we have our reorganization meeting which will be Monday, January 5th, 2026 at 7 p.m. Uh at that meeting, our new supervisors uh will be sworn in and we will reorganize ourselves and do uh various appointments. And then our first regular meeting will be Monday, January 12th, 2026, also at 7 p.m. And those meetings are all in this room. Um okay, so this is a special meeting. Um and it is in essence a continuation of the last meeting uh that we held on Monday night. And so the first thing on the agenda is old business which uh all involve the 2026 uh budget. So the first item is consideration of adopting the 2026 budget. So I will uh and just uh for the sake of the public that motion was made and seconded at the last meeting uh but it uh did not pass. So I will once again move to adopt the 2026 budget. Is there a second?

A second. All right. There's been a motion and a second. Are there any board questions or comments? Um, can I make can I read? Sure. Mr. Keyzak, um, to the board. I'm going to move to the podium for this part of the discussion. Sure. Sure. Sure. Yeah. I'm good. Okay.

So, um, I just wanted to read something that I quickly wrote before I got here tonight. Um, I know there's a lot of social media post, a lot of misinformation, a lot of upset residents. So, I just wanted to say I understand people are frustrated with the cost of living. We're all feeling the squeezed right now. I certainly don't want to pay more in taxes. I understand nobody wants to pay more in taxes. And the last thing that I want to do is raise taxes on other people. But just like the cost of living for individuals is rising. The same is happening for our township. The cost to run this township effectively goes up every single year. Projects cost money. The cost of material and labor have been rising exponentially. I'm sure you guys are aware if you get ever got anything done with your house. We have non-negotiable obligations every year that rise. We have pensions that we must pay. We have cost of living raises for our union member staff members that we are obligated to pay. The board of supervisors cannot change that. We have managed to not implement a tax increase over the years because we have held off on projects, projects that would have really benefited the township, but we knew people were hurting and we did not want to raise taxes. So, we did whatever we could. We moved finances around. We had the ARPA money from COVID that we were able to utilize to keep us. You see that bump in 22? We can no longer afford to do that. We're at a point where we must raise taxes. As much as we don't want to do it, that's the reality that we are facing. Think of your household. If you needed a new roof, you didn't have money in your savings, so you keep pushing it off, pushing it off, right? you're you're not getting it done. But you're going to get to a point that that roof is so bad and in such bad condition that if you don't get that roof fixed, it's going to fall in and collapse. It's going to make more damage and it's going

to cost more money. We're literally in that position right now. So that's where we're at. We're at the point that if we don't put money into this township, then we are going to be worse off in the future and it's going to hurt the taxpayers in our community. We don't want that to happen. Um, sorry, lost my price. Just wanted to talk. So, down the road, we don't want it to cost more. So, imagine that you're running your household and the cost of living has gone up every single year, but you haven't had a raise in 10 years. Are you going to be able to afford to keep that? No. You You need to sustain it. That's what's happening. That's what we're up against. I hear a lot of people saying it's our job to balance the budget budget and that's what we're trying to do. That is our job. You are absolutely correct. That's what we're doing. That's what we've been doing since August. We've been looking at this. so bad.

The township staff and the department heads and the budget team and the board of supervisors have been working on this budget since August. We have asked why things are needed and we have also cut things whenever possible. From the department heads to us, we've all asked for cuts. We've all asked for them and they have cut and I'm sure Eden you you will go over some of that as well. None of us want to raise your taxes. I can guarantee that. Not one of us on this board want to do that. We understand the times are really hard and the last thing we want is to put a bigger burden on the people in our neighborhood. But we are here to do what's best for the residents of this township. And sometimes we need to make very very difficult decisions. And not investing in our township now is going to cost us more later. We all want police and firemen to show up. If your house is burning, you have an emergency, you expect them to show up to help. You want roads that are paved. You want snow removed. You want grass cut. You want your parks to be clean and safe, your neighborhoods to be safe. That only happens from tax dollars that are happening throughout the township that we collect. If we don't have money to do that, if we have to cut staff, cut police officers, cut these resources, it's going to hurt the entire community, not just now, but for the future. So, as I'm sorry, it's unfortunate that the township and the counties aren't funded better from the federal government. Many townships, not just ours, are facing this financial crisis right now. and they need to raise taxes or look at what they're doing. And it's sad that once again the burden is put on the middle class. I don't want that to happen. I wish it didn't have to happen. But that's the reality that we're facing.

And right now we have to do the responsible thing and the responsible thing is to pass this budget. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Corpal.

Uh Miss Hannah, do you want to say something? Yeah, I have I wanted to just talk about some things that happened the other night. Um and kind of like what I'm seeing posted on social media. Um I know we're here to talk about the budget, but I also wanted to talk about um the fact that um I'm really proud to work with the people here. Um the board of supervisors, we put partisan politics usually aside. Um the focus is on the community. The focus is on you. The focus is on serving. Um the people that sit here, ran on campaigns, worked hard to get elected, um and give up their time to be here to serve you. Um we um are committed to this community. We're committed parents. We're com committed employees. Um and nobody is a coward. Nobody deserves to be disrespected. the harsh rhetoric, um the aggressive language, the potential political violence that's being suggested. There is no place for that here. Our goal is to keep you as the center. All of that is a distraction. We don't talk that way to each other. Um and I'm asking you, please do not disrespect people in that way here. On that note, um I want to say thank you to the staff. This has been a lot. But I do have a question um for Eden. How much can we reduce what this budget without having to readvertise? Can you go through that step by step?

Absolutely. Um thank you. So there are provisions within the Secondass Township Code and we are joined here by our township solicitor who can help us um through that process if it gets there tonight. Um currently the proposed budget um contemplates an increase of a half a percent of earned income tax which is a majority of additional funding um into the proposed budget which uh includes covering a projected deficit of about $3.8 million in 2026 um and a 6.08 uh real estate mill um increase. You can decrease that real estate millage by 2.5 mills um uncomfortably. There would have to be significant cuts that go into that. um because that's worth about $1.5 million. And that um 2.5 mills is in a bunch of other funds, not the general fund. So, we'd really have to look at parks, fire apparatus, all that stuff. Uh fire services to to reduce those. But you could reduce it by 2.5 mills and not have to revertise. You would not trigger that. In addition, you can make 20% adjustments within individual line items if we get into a line item review um of the budget without having to readvertise. so long as there's not a total percentage of change um at a certain amount in the total budget. So, if we get to workshopping at that level, we can get there. Um if the board of supervisors find it appropriate to do adjustments greater than that, uh we'll need to do that either in this meeting or a separate meeting. It will need to be readvertised. Um there'll have to be another public meeting for for that adoption. Uh, in addition, depending on what changes you're making, if any, to real estate millage, to earned income tax, all of that, those ordinances need to get readvertised. Um, and that takes us well into 2026, which would mean we would go into the new year without a budget because I note that today is

December the 17th. So, we're getting there. Does that answer your question, Miss Hannah? Uh, I think so. Um, so I know at our and then and now I'm going to ask this question of um, Supervisor Kaine. Um, knowing um, that we can take it down 2.5 mills and we can look at 20%, what's it going to take for you to vote yes on this budget?

I'm not sure. There's some I have some ideas, but I'm not sure. I again I I I think I made myself very clear on Monday night and I think everyone has seen it so far. So I'm not going to sit here and readress it and reans answer why my vote is a no. But if we wanted to work together, I will work together and find the things that I've talked to the township management about potential reductions that could help get there. Um but I think I I've said stated my answer and I'm going to stand stand firm. Okay. So, at this point, um, can we take a recess and take a look at that?

That's up to the chair. Mr. Espazito, is that appropriate to take a recess at this point? Yeah, you can absolutely take a Okay. Um, do I need a motion? I think the chair could take them in. You can just take it. Yeah. All right. We're going to we're going to Can we give the public a time that we expect to return? I mean, why don't we say do can we say 15 minutes? Is that reasonable for now? Okay. We'll we'll take a 15-minute recess.

All right. Uh, thank you everybody for your patience. I'm going to call the meeting back to order. Um, so we do have pending a motion to adopt the 2026 budget. There has been a motion and a second. Uh, we are in the, uh, board comment section of the motion. So, Miss Hannah, um it was your comment when we took a recess, so I'll hand it back over to you. Is there anything else? Yeah, thanks for waiting, guys. Um I had an opportunity to caucus with Mr. Eden Ratcliffe, um our township manager, um and we discussed um some items that uh we'd look like to look at. Could you share, Eden?

Yes. Thank you, Miss Hannah. So, Miss Hannah, in attempting to walk through the budget um and get more comfortable with the proposal that's here, has requested uh a couple changes. So, just as an overview, um there's two proposed tax increases uh within this budget. So, there's the earned income tax going from half a percent to 1% and then there is a 6.08 real estate tax millage that's proposed. Um that real estate tax mill is impacting four funds, none of which are the general fund. The general fund uh is actually proposing a.3 mil decrease. Um the proposed tax increase on real estate is 3.08 mills in fire protection. It is 1.42 42 mills uh in fire apparatus. Um the township board of supervisors has a policy position of funding all apparatus not only for the career engine uh but all four fire companies that serve Middletown in accordance with the previously adopted apparatus plan. Uh a 1.58 mil increase in parks and recreation which is to achieve structural balance within that fund um is currently supplemented by the general fund and then a.3 mil increase for the ambulance and rescue fund. that money is go directly to um the um rescue squad uh the EMS squad that uh supports the township. Uh so Miss Hannah has proposed a reduction of a half a mill uh that would take it from 6.08 to 5.58 uh a quarter mil uh decrease in fire protection and a quarter mil decrease in parks and wreck. Um and so that would take the proposal from 6.08 to 5.58 that is allowable uh which I think the solicitor will confirm. um in the proposal here uh both in the budget and uh within the tax ordinances that have been proposed uh without the the need for readvertising. So uh if a majority of the board is approving of that proposal from Miss Hannah then the budget and accompanying resolutions and ordinances could be duly adopted tonight.

Can I also make just a clarifying uh question? So doing that um that lowers our taxes a bit but yet we still will be able to pay for the essential services and we'll be able to uh going into the new year being able to fund our budget. Right. Abs.

Absolutely. I think the uh fire services uh both the four volunteer companies uh as well as the career company will still be well served by this budget and enable to uh provide the current services they're providing as well as enhance some of those services in 2026 uh and into the future and uh parson wreck will require a little bit of subsidy from the general fund but I think that that can be uh managed within the limitations of the existing proposed budget. Um I think that this is an unharmful uh proposal um that is worthy of deep consideration by the board. So, just to procedurally, if I can, Mr. Keyzac.

Yeah. So, I'm just um there's been a motion in a second that's pending. So, procedurally, what would be the next step with these changes?

Yes. Good question. So the motion in second is specifically so for those of you who have the agenda in front of you uh there's a few what we call budgetary items that are in uh in consideration tonight. Um so in terms of the budget there's the budget which is the spending plan. It's a policy document. It's a statement of the board's policy priorities. Um it accounts for the revenues that are there. Uh let's say that the board uh votes momentarily to adopt that budget. it will not be in total effect until the accompanying real estate tax um ordinance is adopted which could be amended to reflect that 5.58 real estate mills we just discussed as well as item 5A which is the earned income tax. Uh there's two other items which we'll talk about here secondly which is actually just a waiver and the implementation of a new law dealing with the future. So if you vote on the budget it's it's not you're not done yet. You have to uh you know approve sort of the uh revenue plan which would be the real estate tax ordinance and the earned income tax ordinance. Um, if the board can certainly have discussion now and say that you are approving or disapproving of Miss Hannah's recommendation of that real estate tax uh decrease, if you're approving and you adopt the budget, uh, we would just sort of note for the record the change in the proposed real estate tax of 6.08 increase to 5.58.

Got it. Does that make sense?

Yeah, it does. So, no new motion. Uh, there's been a motion in a second. So, we're still in the board comment period. Um, I'll just state publicly that um, so first of all, I thank Miss Hannah for your efforts to try to continue um, to fine-tune this to get to a point where there's something that um, and I know you haven't voted yet, but something that ideally you'd be able to support. Um, I know a big part of this budget, a big part of every budget, but a big part of this budget, one of my biggest concerns is always public safety and making sure that we're protecting the residents and the property and our community um, at the level that we've become accustomed to. And certainly that's one of the reasons uh that Middletown is such a great community. So I just want to reemphasize um park and wreck um with all due respect to our park and wreck department and all the amenities. I just want to make sure that from a public safety standpoint that reducing

I can't hear him. Yeah. Reducing um reducing the millillage that is going to the fire protection fund is not going to impact our ability to provide fire protection services in the township. I know I know it's not ideal. I I appreciate that, but I just want to make sure that we can still we have we have we we have an obligation um for better or for worse to provide fire protection to the township and we need to make sure we can still do that with the

Yeah, I certainly would not um I I certainly would not be bashful about uh representing to the board of supervisors if I thought it was going to be harmful to our ability to provide emergency services. I think the proposal by Miss Hannah is responsible. Um I think it's a discussion that we'll have when we're developing the 2027 budget. Um, fire services is super important and an area of um, great need within the township. Um, and it's an obligation that the board has to provide fire rescue ALS and BLS services. Um, so I think while the reduction relatively minor, that quarter of a mill, will certainly force a conversation going into 2027, I think that we'll perfectly fine in 2026.

Yeah, and you bring up an important point. I mean, we've talked about this a lot. Um, I've talked about it a lot. We have not raised taxes in Middletown in a decade. And even though our expenses continue to rise year after year after year, we had always taken the approach that rather than raise taxes, we were going to make every effort to cut expenses. And I think Miss Corpal stated it um I don't think I could state it any more eloquently than she stated it. We have reached the breaking point where there's nothing else that we could cut um without fundamentally changing the character of this community. I mean, the cuts is not um we're not talking about, you know, modest things. We're talking about laying off, you know, police officers and public works staff and that's just not something that um is palatable. One of the things we talked about though is we made a a conscious decision not to raise taxes every year. We could have we could have for the last 10 years been raising taxes a little bit every year and we would be in the exact same position we are right now. your tax burden um or the tax burden that you will have if this budget is passed would be exactly the same um if we did what we are proposing to do tonight or if we had been doing it in small increments over the last 10 years and maybe that would have hurt less because it would have been happening little by little. Um again we made a policy decision not to raise taxes but one of the things we have talked about and one of the things um I want to be conscious of is we are trying to make this a level setting budget meaning we are trying to get to a point where our our budget is balanced and this is sustainable into the future long term. We don't want to be here doing this again next year. And so the only my only concern about reducing the proposed tax increase is are we going to be in a situation in 2027 where we're facing another structural deficit and we have the same difficult decisions that we're currently facing. And I may not know that may not be easy to predict, but just from what you're anticipating, do you have any thoughts on that?

I think that it's I agree with the comment that we the township's in a strong financial position and it has been for a long time. uh which has allowed us to sort of get to the situation where we are. Um for those who don't know, the township is AAA bond rated. Um and part of that is having a fund balance policy which the board of supervisors has had for a long time. Uh it says that the general fund can't um have less than 25% in its general fund reserves of its total annual spending. Policies like that are how the taxpayers can sort of have confidence in the board of supervisors fiduciary responsibility and the exercising of that responsibility um to ensure the sort of their good stewards of taxpayer funds. Um the challenge that we have here is that that fund balance used to be higher because of uh previous um tax policy [snorts] uh which has allowed allowed for expenses to increase without revenues to um catch up with that. I I call that smart financial planning. It made a lot of sense when that happened 10 years ago. Um, and now we're sort of here at that minimum fund balance policy. Uh, we have a $2.8 million uh, structural deficit. Uh, there's been some discussion about how well that's that's really terrible and that's challenging. Well, yeah, it is challenging, but we could support that because of existing tax policy and smart financial planning. And now we're sort of in that level setting. Um, expenses go up every year. We have four collective bargaining contracts. We have um, construction projects that need to happen. We have a lot of infrastructure that we're responsible for, storm water, roads, ADA ramps, curbs. um you know the equipment that that takes care of that. We've gone over that in a robust way um in many public meetings throughout this process. Those things need to be maintained. They need to be taken care of. Frankly, if we weren't taking care of those things, if we weren't kind of maintaining that infrastructure and delivering those services, we would have a similar room sort of questioning why that's not happening. So, as expenses sort of rise, you know, then the revenue needs to keep up with that. Um and so I think the budget that's proposed here tonight and the tax policy associated with that is responsible. it sort of achieves that, but it's an ongoing conversation that needs to happen every year.

Yeah, that's fair. Okay. Um, so, um, anything else that you want to say, Miss Hannah? No. Is, um, is there anything you'd like to add, Miss Kane?

Yeah, Miss Kane. Is there anything We're uh, still board comments. Is there anything you want to say? No, I think um you know I think Miss Hannah I think the things that you suggested were the same things that were on my solution list um for additional places that that we could we could essentially cut the budget. I think it like to your point it's going to um mean that we may need to be back here next year. Um but we can again it'll be a little bit off the residence um from where it was. All right. So, um there's been a motion in a second. We've had board comments. I'm going to open it up to uh public questions. So, are there any questions u from the public? And if you want to talk, just come up to the microphone, state your name and address. Go ahead, Mr. Fitch.

Joe Fitch, 346 Wyoming Avenue. Um I I think it's kind of an insult that we the young lady made that we don't realize that the cost of goods have gone up. I mean as anybody as a homeowner just going to the gas station and buying gas, we realize the cost of goods, milk, eggs, all that stuff has gone up. So um we see that my problem is [clears throat] wasteful spending on stuff that we don't need. Did we really need to spend hundreds of thousand dollars for electrical chargers out behind the building? did we need to spend, from what I heard, $4 million for a salt shed at the public works department and gas pumps. Um, we're getting hit with the storm water fee and and that's something that, you know, I'm not going to blame it on you guys, but your forefathers that sat here have not done anything for 30 plus years. You keep allowing the building to go on, the building to go on, and now all of a sudden, you know, it's only $60 a year, but still, you know, we're getting slammed with that $60, and now we're getting slammed with another half a percent for our earned income tax and the taxes. You know, the biggest thing is the wasteful, stupid spending. You know, that's where you guys need to stop and and and need to think about this. You know, like I said at one of the original meetings when they, you know, the ADA ramps, $12,000 or whatever it is, Isaac, to put in a an ADA ramp. I mean, okay, let's let's, we talked about hiring public work guys. Let's hire public work guys that are, you know, specialize in concrete, a couple guys, and and let's get some interns or something from the tech school and and teach these young kids and and use them for some of the labor is, you know, to let them learn.

Yeah. I mean, I'll I'll just I'll respond to a couple of your points. So, the your point is well taken about the ADA ramps. I mean, obviously, we are required by the ADA, which is federal law to replace to to install and replace these ramps. And if we're going to pave roads, we have to do the ramps. So, I get that. And and one of the things you're talking about, which is doing some of that work in house, the concrete work in house, that's absolutely something that is on the table and we are considering. So, it's a it's a good point. Um the charging stations, they were paid for by grants. Your tax dollars did not pay for the charging stations and they actually make money for the township. We we get money when people charge their vehicles there. So, that's actually a money-making enterprise. Um, you know, you could debate the merits of the salt shed for public works. I mean, that that salt shed was ancient and it was unsafe and it needed to be replaced. It's an expensive thing. Um, so yeah, we have to make difficult decisions every day about what to spend money on. Um, we're going to continue to make difficult decisions about what to spend money on. I mean, we that that's what we do.

But, but the problem is is, you know, you build that salt shed and then you're charging us a storm water management fee. How much imperous surface is on that piece of property there? Yeah, but I don't think that changed the Well, you know what? It it does. I mean, in the long run, especially now that you're saying stones are impervious. I I mean, that's the new engineering thing that, you know, stones don't absorb water. It it Isaac, you can tell them. I think you're referring to the just the township ordinance. It does say compacted gravel is considered impervious for storm water purposes. That's been the ordinance for as long as I've seen it.

But but again, you take a gallon of water and you pour it in the the center of a packed down set of rocks and you pour it on asphalt and and what's going to happen? It's going to it's going to get absorbed in the rocks, not in the apps. You know, it's just it's just the stupid spending is what the problem is. You know, just the wasteful stuff. Okay. Any other public comment? Yep. Mr. Every morning, [clears throat]

Andy Warren, Shady Brook Drive. Um, just a a clarification. Am I speaking just to the fire tax issue or to the whole issue? The motion is to approve the 2026 budget.

All right, then. Let's and I'll try to keep it brief and understandable. Um roughly roughly what percentage of the total budget is fixed? In other words, you really don't have as a board discretion over the entire budget. The there are federal laws, state laws, grant regulations, etc. And it may be a whatever was at 50 million whatever the budget is. Yeah, the budget's 52 53 million. 5 53 and but you really can

can you give it a percentage as to how much we don't have any discretion and I don't need it right. No, no, it's a good question. Yeah, approximately 80% of the general fund which is where most of our kind of general operations happen is related to personnel which is mostly related to you know collective bargain agreements and things like that. So usually refer to that as kind of a fixed. All right. So I I think then the answer is I think that you really only have about 20% and these are all general statements I would have said that you can adjust is that yeah I would have said probably 10 because while certain things you know

all right I'll buy that and and we're I don't need to be exact tonight just generalif 10 to 20% is really all that you all can really impact so from what I understand Now, um, and I [clears throat] will refer a couple points to this, but, uh, hopefully in the future we can, um, number pages. It would make it much easier if I could number these, but roughly [snorts] uh, page 26 as I count, and it's this one. um that talks about um what an earned income tax is and all of that. Um but the point that I make with this is that it states in recent years the general fund has carried a structural deficit due to expenditures rising faster than revenues resulting in an operating loss in excess of $1 million each year since 2023. There's no surprise that we're here tonight. This is a majority Democrat board and it has been for the last six to eight years. And for three years, we've been going down a million dollars and you knew it. And here we are. Nobody does anything. An increase to the earned income tax rate is expected and that increase is what percent?

A half half a percent. Okay. So it's really goes from five to one. It's doubling. Yeah. It goes to a full percent. It's double. Yeah. Okay. Correct. All right. All right. Well, that's there. Again, I I was really perplexed by why we had to have a um a a break for 20 minutes to try and convince a member of the board at this point to vote with you all. I mean, there wasn't any convincing. We weren't we weren't together.

All right. whatever it was you for for 6 or 8 years you didn't care whether you had a majority or a unanimous you could have passed that thing without that it's nonsense the other point with this if we can go to what I will refer to page 16 roughly [snorts] um sorry 16 which is the one [clears throat] that lists various our neighboring townships and burrows

and has them all listed as to how we are. If I read this 32 for the board, [laughter] what they have a

it if I read this correctly, it lists starts with Middletown proposed Middletown current and then it lists neighboring townships and burrows in Bucks and Montgomery County. Currently, of these 13 based on taxes, of the 13 neighboring townships and burrows, we're nine. If I read this correctly, by the time this proposal, if it's passed, Middletown is going from the ninth lowest total budget, the third in one fell swoop.

Well, we don't know what those other municipalities increases are going to be this year. That's it says total real estate and EIT paid. It lists how much they all pay as of 2025. So this is that's our so currently we are ninth, right? And that those are the current tax burdens of those municipalities the 13, right? So we don't know. So we don't know what they're going to do after this year. So we it may be completely different. Point the I don't but my point is you're comparing our My point is you're comparing our future budget to their old budget. So, no, I'm preparing what y'all put on this page that I read and reading it back to you.

Yeah, we're nice. The the um Okay. [clears throat]

Okay. [snorts] What I'm suggesting, Mr. chairman is that this majority Democrat board for six, eight or more years. You said we'd be we'd be the same place tonight no matter what. Except tonight we're getting it in the throat. If we would have been thinking incrementally, yeah, we'd have been in the same place. But someone suggested my roof's leaking. Am I going to let it leak for 10 years before I fix it?

You would have been paying would have been paying taxes, more taxes over those 10 years though. So over the 10 years, you would have been paying more. I got it.

But I wouldn't have got it in once. My point with all of this is we are here because of [snorts] in my opinion fast and free numbers that as you all are I'm I'm like a kindergarter trying to discuss with you what you've been hopefully studying at least since September with all of this. Um the the [clears throat] point of tonight is we could have done a lot better by the people of this township than knock them with one fell swoop. And the last point that I will make um tonight [clears throat] would be that three years ago or four years ago when I was here, we were spending a lot of money on a fire study for this township. [music] And we had a study by a national organization that looked at our fire coverage. Now we're suggesting and everybody the board as a group including me thought that was great. We should have some clarity. Now tonight because we're cornered We seem to be saying, not seem to, you did say we will not necess a reduction of the fire

fee will not necessarily impact fire protection. If that's the case, how in the name of goodness have we been not using the funding to keep this fire protection that that study said we needed with five or six fire companies. We're in a terrible mess. No doubt about it. And you all have to do something about it. And it's very easy to get up and rail against the elected officials, which I'm doing. But it's also not the other part of that is if we don't like being hit with a 30 or 40% tax increase. and my roof is leaking over 10 years then it's responsible for the naysayers to say what am I willing to give up and that's a question that you all never led and that is irresponsible

other public comment oh wait hold on sorry Miss Hannah yeah go ahead I I just wanted to Mr. Warren is it I when you said we took a break for no reason. Um I needed to caucus with our manager um to look at where we could save some money for the taxpayers. I thought it was with you. Okay.

Sorry. So, and the reason why I asked for that is um being um a local elected service person, you are you are living with your neighbors and the residents who are going to be affected and I just want to communicate to everybody. Um people have reached out to me, they have called me, they have text me, they have emailed me. um those calls, those um connections are very important and I want to remind you that that is the same on every level in government. Um you think that nobody listens but we do listen and we do reflect on it and it's important that you feel like you have a say and you have you can be involved and and that's why we're here and we're we're changing a couple of things. Thank you.

All right. other public um

good evening Mary Katherine Snider 36 Barley Court Langghorn PA uh I think you all got an email from me today in regards to Monday evening's meeting and I did in that email request that you make a public apology to the one person on the board and there were two people who voted no one person on the board uh seemed to take the brunt of it and then there were other comments throughout the audience that evening so But I just want to say something. We are first and foremost residents of Middletown Township. It doesn't matter what party we're in. Our houses and our taxes doesn't say Democrat Republican. It says taxpayer. So I think we all need to step back, especially before a new board comes in in January and start to respect each other and grow some more ethics in our attitudes and in our willingness to work with others. And I commend the new township manager. He came in with some wonderful ideas as it often happens in any organization. However, we cannot afford any new hires this year. Secondly, I would say

can I just can I just if you don't mind, I just want to I'm going to address that comment because um we did get your email. Thank you. I always appreciate residents reaching out. Um, I first of all, I wanted to tell you that I have the utmost respect and admiration for the three other people up here with me on this board. And I can tell you that we've all worked together for a very long time. Um, if anybody watches our meetings uh or sees how we interact with one with one another. Politics is the farthest thing from any of our minds. We work together as a team. Um, we work very well together. We work respectfully and collaboratively. And virtually every vote that we have made as a board, not all, but the significant majority have been 40. Uh meaning we are all rowing in the same direction. Um but um government um is not always pretty. Um we're talking about very important serious issues, issues that are important to all of us. We've been working together on this budget for over four months. It's been a long road with a lot of meetings, a lot of dialogue with residents, um a lot of working together, um a lot of, you know, calculating and adjusting and trying to figure out what the right thing is to do. Um I can tell you that while the tone of the meeting on Monday night may have gotten a little heated, at no point did any of the four of us ever lose respect for one another. uh we've actually all been talking to each other over the last two days trying to you know coordinate and see what we can do. So um I appreciate the sentiment but I want to assure you that um we are all good partners, good colleagues, we respect each other um and we work together and we are going to continue to do that regardless of what happens with this particular issue tonight because there's a lot of work left to do and when tonight ends we move on to the next issue. So, um, so I appreciate you saying that and I, um, I can tell you that I mean to the extent you want me to

apologize to the community, I am happy to apologize to the community to the extent that any of the things that I said um, um, were inappropriate or um, were, you know, disrespectful to any of my colleagues. Thank you. And it's not what I want, but it's what we should all do. Not just you, Michael, but everybody. Sure. Okay. So, three things. Um, if I can get them in the right order. Uh, I found it very interesting tonight that you mentioned that you could reduce the millage, I think it was by 2.5. Was that right? Yeah, they could legally reduce 2.5 and not have to revertise.

Okay. But I also read today that the Bucks County Commissioners are about to raise their millage by 2%. So, we can take down our 2.5 and add in their two. And where are we going to be, guys? So, I'm not asking you. Excuse me. It's my turn to talk and I'll give you plenty time to answer. It's not I I know you have no control. We all know that you have no control over them. I'm just pointing it out. The EIT, earned income tax, I would greatly appreciate it if whoever is involved in that would be uh willing to go out and look and see how many people work in Middletown Township and do not pay the EIT. We probably we probably know the answer to that question. I don't know if we have it at our fingertips, but we probably could.

It's It's We don't have a clear answer.

No, you wouldn't because it's the it's the lawn service companies that have five guys that don't even have an I9 or maybe they do have an I9, but they're not paying it. And it's the tree service people, and it's the Merrymaids, and it's all the people who come and go in and out of our township on a weekly basis. And there's a substantial amount of money that could be taken from those people. And should they not be following the law, then it should fall back on the employer, the tree service company owner, the landscaping company owners, charge them for however many people they have and penalize them the way Keystone likes to try and penalize anybody that doesn't have to pay their um tax on time. So, let's get that on the agenda for some to-do things. And, uh, if you have to raise it up to 1%, um, I'm not thrilled with that, but it is what that it is what it is. Now, in terms of new hires, really, you cannot afford it right now. You probably have great ideas for the people that you want to bring in. We can't do it this year. Anybody in this fiscal year who leaves because they retire, because they quit, because they're fired, because for any other reason in the administrative side of this township should not be replaced for fiscal year 2026. Figure it out. Go departmentally, spread out their their um responsibilities. And I've done it where I worked for 32 years, and it's not that hard. And you would be surprised at the end of that year how really vital might that position have been. Maybe we can do away with it. But do a little bit more than just the 2.5 here and what can we do there. You got to start looking internally as well. [snorts] So I'm not asking you Michael to give an apology. I just want our ethics and our integrity to come up a whole new level by January

and take the politics out of all this. Thank you. [applause] I think I just want to can I um address something? One of the things we are looking at is the um the private engineer. Um it doesn't seem like that's going to work right now. So we are looking at that. So we are looking at the hires and things like that. Um so just know that that is one.

Yes, M. Sorry. I was just going to say we had spoken about that and I spoke with you um about putting that on the back burner. However, some of the positions if somebody leaves it would be irresponsible to not fill. I mean you have to have certain positions filled. However, I they're just saying keep the cap on. Miss Laro. Hi, my name is Lauren Laro. I live at 18 pair road in Levittown. Um, forgive my ignorance, but do seniors living on social security or retirement, do they pay the EIT? Did everybody hear that? No, they don't.

Okay. So, people complaining about seniors can't afford this because they're on fixed incomes. This this tax raise doesn't affect them, right? Yeah. Not not only do seniors not pay the earned income tax, but 40% of Middletown residents are already paying a 1% earned income tax. It's That was my next question. How many people are already paying this tax and aren't going to see anything increase in their income because or any decreases in their income because of this tax because they're already paying it just to another township?

Yeah, I'm uh we brought that up on Monday, but it's it's always worth repeating. So, the earned income tax, number one, you you only pay it if you are working. Um so, seniors, retired uh residents do not pay the earned income tax and would not pay the earned income tax. So, that increase will not affect them. For residents who are living in Middletown but working in a municipality that has a 1% earned income tax already, which by the way is most of our neighboring municipalities, you're already paying 1%. It's just that half of your tax is going to the town where you work, not the town where you live. So for that 40% of our residents, all that's going to change for you is that your tax is going to stay exactly the same, except that money is going to come to the town where you live instead of the town where you're working. So again, that's 40% of residents. That's significant. And if you raise this tax one to 1%, you can't legally raise it anymore without putting it on the ballot for us to vote on. Is that correct?

Believe that's true. We need a referendum, Mr. RPO. Yeah, that's correct. So, if we bite the bullet this year, it's up to us if it ever happens again. That's right. Correct. Okay. And how seriously did we look at and were people concerned about cutting the police budget? So, like did people were people interested in that? like are people concerned about that or

so so let me say this um I believe that over the last four months we looked at everything because I think it's fair to say that the four the four of us came in um not wanting to raise taxes at all. Um that's been our approach every budget cycle. Um however once we realized the structural deficit that we were facing we went fund by fund department by department and took a very very critical eye. There is simply no way to reduce the size of our police department. In fact I think if you look at most objective studies that are done about how many police officers a township of our size with the number of residents and square miles that we have, we actually are probably undersized. we probably have less police officers than most objective studies would say. So there's just there's just no way we could cut the size of our police force. And frankly, if we did that, residents would feel that immediately. Um you know, when you call and you want police to come, you want police to come. Um and I I have talked about this many times. There's a ton of community policing that goes on in this township where our police don't simply respond to violent crime. They respond to quality of life type calls. um the things that impact your life but maybe are not necessarily on the level of criminal behavior. Well, you call the police department for something like that and they respond and they deal with it. If we had to start reducing the size of the force, I mean that would that would go away. So, um to answer your question, yes, of course that is something we looked at. Um but I think I won't speak for my colleagues, but that is just not something that is feasible. But to your point about how the the community aspect of it, how it's like not criminal stuff, but it's things that we call the police for, was there any consideration made for exchanging those police officers for social workers who are actually trained and educated to do work like that in the community because they would be more economical for us to

employ and I believe they would be more effective in serving our community and providing those types of resources. I know from a personal experience if I've ever needed to call crisis for a family member, they never have anyone available, but they can call the police. So we I would rather call a social worker that a police officer when someone's having a mental health crisis. Yeah. So our police department already does that. We implemented that uh a few years ago. Um and actually um it's been a tremendous program which has been very successful. You've hired social workers for the police department. So we don't we don't hire them. Exactly. Do you want to Yeah.

Yeah. So it's a partnership program in terms of what we talk about. Um, and I think kind of zooming out a little bit. Um, I'm super supportive of that. I think Middletown and the board of supervisors are super supportive of that. It's a long-term strategy, right? Like we're not really in a situation with the flip. Yeah. We're not going to like we can't like lay off a bunch of cops and hire a bunch of social workers. That's an unfair labor practice. There's a lot of problems with that. It's not legal. Like there's all sorts of issues with that. But long term, I think um the existing uh co-responder program that we have now is something that we would expand. Um, but I think when we're in a level setting um, you know, budget year, which is frankly where we are when we have an operating deficit, you know, those are sort of the nice to haves that we get to explore in future years. Thank you guys so much. I appreciate everything you're doing.

Thank you. Other comments? Yes, sir.

Hi, my name is Tom Pedrick. I live on Briggs Road in, excuse [clears throat] me, Highland Gate. I come from 42 years of private industry. I was a district manager for AT&T and the private world is so much different than what I see in this organization. We went to uh removing pensions a long long time ago and went to 401ks. Has there been any consideration given that as a negotiating negotiating item come the next police contract?

Yes. So, um, you are correct that a a large number of our employees, including the police department, um, are collectively bargained and so we are contractually obligated to provide pension contributions. As far as our non-UN employees, they have what is essentially a 401k for them. Is [clears throat] that correct? Uh, yeah. So, every um the the short answer is yes. Yeah. Okay. Um, if you're asking specific questions about collective bargaining with the police, well, one point I'd like to make is collective bargaining eventually uh terminates, right? You start a new one. There's a contract that has a termination date and then you negotiate the next contract and if why has there been any consideration to replacing the pension with a 401?

Yeah. So, our the current police contract is not up yet. So, we have not begun collective bargaining on the next contract. So, that's not we haven't gotten there. We haven't talked about any of that. But, you're not against it. I'm I I I can't weigh in one way or the other on collective art please contract. I'm not going to comment because I can tell you from all those years I worked there the 401k actually turns out to be very very beneficial you know than the standard pension. Okay.

Okay. Another thing I'd like to bring up is having [clears throat] been in private industry all those years when uh you know every year without fail I could tell you what day the budget cut was coming how many people I had to lay off you know that kind of thing and um where we were going to go from there. All right. So to somebody's point about the roof falling in, if if our roof was going to fall in, all right, and I had assets that I could draw on to take care of that roof, and I'm really referring to Styers and the Country Club, which which I doubt, I could be wrong, I doubt very seriously, they're profitable entities. So why if we're trying to correct the budget problem now, all right, and I guess optimistically not have it in 27,28 and forward, why not unload those what I believe are unprofitable. We're just seem to hold on to them when you know we could generate money now and take this bare uh burden of tax increase off most of the township. understand t the country club is owned in part by the burough but still you got tons of real estate there and stars I live across the street from stars there's a million acres

yeah so there's two things I would say in response to that first is both of those um properties are uh they have long-term lease agreements so there are tenants on those properties that they can be sold though

the other thing I would say to you is that it has been the opinion and policy of this board to this point that both Styers and the Country Club are community assets. They both preserve open space, which seems to be a very important um priority for a lot of the residents in this township. So, if we were to sell them and they would get developed, I think that's something that there'd be a lot of public backlash to, but they also provide general public benefit for recreation. Um, and so I you you make a good point. Does there ever come a point in time um where that's something that could be considered? I I don't know. I can tell you that to this point that's not something that this board has ever entertained. I will tell you that um as we move forward um we have to look at everything, right? I think it's fair to say that we have to be um open-minded to every possibility as we move forward because obviously this is a difficult conversation we're having tonight. Um, and while we've certainly I think as a board tried uh in earnest over the last several years to control spending, I mean, we we did manage to cut a million dollars off of off of last year's expenditures. We we denied another million dollars worth of spending and projects and initiatives that probably were needed. So, it's not that we have not cut. Um but as we get to the point where it becomes harder and harder to cut and you start to find a lot less areas where you are actually able to cut, you have to look for different alternatives and different strategies. So um your points are well taken. I don't have answers for you tonight other than to say um you know we're we're always here to listen and consider new ideas.

Just one more to to your point about open space. I hear you on that and understand that and I like Well, Woodburn Road is a mess as it is, let alone put more houses up, but every day it seems like I read the papers or read the internet and we're approving some building of uh additional houses everywhere, you know. So, to say open space, well, are are we holding on the stars because we're building elsewhere?

I don't I don't think there it's you're trading one for the other. I mean, every every land devel you can't talk about land development as sort of a broad macro topic because every one of these projects is an individual project. Um, if a if a piece of property is zoned a certain way and something can be built on it, there's very limited things that the board of supervisors can do to control that or stop it. Um, but so I I don't think you can say, you know, you're building here, so you're preserving styers there. I just I don't think we think about it that way. I think that everybody on this board understands the value of open space and that open space is important to the residents of the township. And so, um, I just put that out there as something that I have to think about very critically before I were to take a leap, um, into something like selling off, you know, a large property like Styres,

but just bear with me. Are either one of those profitable as they stand today? Um, I um, I don't think so. I think if we probably break even I mean we don't we don't I don't think we lose money but we probably more or less what would you say?

Sure. So I would say uh under the new lease arrangements within the last few years at Styers they're certainly more profitable than they used to be. The township is not actively pouring a large investment into those properties. Similar to the country club the township is not actively investing in that property. That lease is expiring in a few years and that'll be one of the things that's proposed is using the assets of the country club fund in this budget is doing a long-term evaluation of that property. We certainly expect uh the next generation of that property regardless of its use, especially if it remains as a country club, will need significant capital improvement, but on a year-to-year basis, the township is not uh currently investing significant funds into either property. And then just a sidebar on Styers, there are conservation easements associated with that property. So, it's not just as simple as selling a real estate like you know any other property would be.

And I would just observe um that selling assets or liquidating assets to fund our operations is a short-term solution, right? It's like taking out a loan. It's your own money. We sold something and now we have cash in hand, which is great. But when that cash gets spent, you know, on our operations, well, then what do we do? That's exactly where we are now, right? Like we have a $2.8 million structural deficit which is operating the township. no dedicated funding source to capital, which is what funds the things that everyone sees and experiences in this township, and that operating deficit grows by a million dollars a year. Um, so if there isn't enough revenue to come in to to fund that, and we're just using one-time sources, we're what we call structurally out of balance, which puts us into the exact situation we're in now.

Yeah, but I hear you. But, you know, the my point is that in the private world, we would sell off an asset, all right, close down a location, lay a lot of people off. All right. And it was like, "Sorry, too bad." But the the asset itself was sold and thrown into the fund and that, you know, that helped eliminate or reduce further pain to the company. Sure. That makes a lot of sense in private industry.

But I think I think from a policy standpoint, we're trying to stop doing that. We're trying to stop this band-aid approach where yeartoyear we figure out band-aid solutions to just keep surviving. And I understand what you're saying, but the private sector is different than the public sector. We number one provide essential services to the community that we are legally obligated to provide. We have to provide police. We have to provide fire. I mean, we cannot do these things. And so, it's not a business where you're just focusing on profits and losses. We have we have obligations. Um, and I think again I'm not going to speak for my colleagues, but for me personally, what I think that we need to do and why I consider this a level setting year is doing these type of band-aid approaches where you find short-term funding sources to just survive that year only puts you back in this situation the next year. So, what we're proposing tonight gives us the opportunity, we hope, to have some more long-term permanent solutions,

right? And I'll shut up after this, but the it would depend entirely on how much you were revenue you were able to obtain from selling off that asset, right? Sure. That's always the question, right? Yeah. All right. Thank you. No, thank you very much. I appreciate it. Other public comment. Yep.

Uh good evening, Jonathan Kirby, 136 Eggertton Road here in Langghorn. Um happy to see a number of folks came out uh including some folks that I think I'm neighbors with and haven't met yet. Um so most of my experience with public comment is generally you comment and then you go sit down. I appreciate that you're engaging here. Uh one of the things that was addressed kind of earlier in the meeting was the idea that the proposed budget we kind of removed a little bit from it right to reduce the the size of the increase. And what I'm wondering here is is that all we can do or is this the kind of thing as you said it's kind of a level setting. We're trying to stop the bleeding so to speak. Is this something that can be fixed over maybe two or three years instead of trying to do it in one year and then we don't really know what the next year is going to bring? Is that an option here? I think that that's one of those things I I see is that, you know, small increases yeartoear are annoying to everybody, right? We're all paying taxes here, but it helps us to budget appropriately in our own lives. This is obviously a much larger increase to fix the problems that you've you've shared with us, but is there the ability to do that where we can break it up a little bit over a longer time? [clears throat]

Yeah. So, I it's interesting. Um, we we looked at so many different scenarios for what, you know, this might look like. I mean, we've again, we've been at this for four months. So, the amount of times we looked at, you know, spreadsheets and different scenarios, we looked at, you know, lower tax increases, we looked at higher tax increases, we looked at higher real estate taxes, we looked at no earned income tax. I mean, we we looked at a number of different scenarios. Um, I I personally think that the tax increase that this budget contemplates is necessary this year in order for us to balance the budget. Um, now Miss Hannah, um, I appreciate, you know, had an opportunity to meet with the township manager and to consider some reductions that the township manager is feels that while not ideal, would allow us to still move forward with a balanced budget. Um, and if that is what, you know, it takes for Miss Hannah to support this budget, then I'm willing to to consider that. I don't think that personally that it we be able to reduce it any more than that though. I mean, I would struggle to to adopt a budget that is calling for a a tax increase that reduces it any further than what Miss Hannah just proposed because I think all that's going to do is kick the can down the road. That it will not resolve the problem. It will continue the cycle of just short-term band-aid type fixes. Um, and we'll be back here again next year. So, um I I appreciate that a large tax increase is is not palatable. Um you know, we try to emphasize over and over again like we we this is not our full-time job. We we live here. We're residents here. We all have families. We all own homes. Um we're going to pay this tax increase, too. And so, none of us want to raise taxes on ourselves. Um and no politician ever wants to raise taxes because, you know, we get it. It's it's not popular. So, if you're worried about your political future, it's not something anybody would ever do lightly if they could avoid it. I believe that this is the responsible thing to do. I

think this is responsible government. I think this is responsible budgeting. I won't speak for my colleagues if they feel differently, but that's my personal opinion. I appreciate that. Do you think that this is a time now where moving forward, right, assuming that this budget goes through in whatever form that takes and whenever that happens in following years, we're going to look at things and say, "Oh, you know, we do need to increase a little bit as things move forward." I feel like that it's real nice to say we held taxes low or at a whatever it was for 10 years, but I feel like we've kind of learned this lesson now. Yeah. Listen, how do we keep that momentum so we don't come back here to this type of situation again?

So, I I know you weren't here Monday night, but one of the first things I did when we started this conversation was to take accountability for why we are where we are. Um, I am so I'm proud of the fact that we haven't raised taxes in 10 years. I think that's a commendable thing. I think we were focused on the residents when we did that. We were we were trying to not um burden the residents with higher taxes, you know. Um but it is absolutely the case that the reason why we are talking about such a significant increase this year is because we chose not to raise taxes incrementally over the last few years. This this conversation that we're having right now about a structural deficit and about the general fund not having a dedicated funding source, that's not a new conversation. We've had this conversation every budget season for the last I don't even know 3, four, five years. It's been a while. Um, and we made a policy decision not to raise taxes, but to find other ways to close the gaps. It was borrowing money from the investment fund. It was cutting things here and cutting things there. It was deferring projects. I mean, I I said the other night when I started on this board, we were paving a million dollars of roads in the township every year. Now, we're only paving half that because that was one of our cost cutting measures that we made to avoid tax increases in the past. So to answer your question, I mean I absolutely I mean I think that one of the things we are committed to or and I certainly am going forward is what can we do to be responsible as we go through the year uh from a budgeting standpoint, from a fiscal fiscal planning standpoint um so that we don't find ourselves in this situation again. And might that include smaller incremental tax increases? Um yeah, I mean there are there are lots of municipalities in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania that raise taxes every single year and have going back I don't even know how many years. There's lots of towns that do that. Um there are very very few municipalities or any governmental authorities, school districts, county government that can say they didn't raise taxes for 10 years. I mean that's that's unusual. Um but we did it and we did it with eyes wide open because we thought it was the right thing to do for the community and so here we are. Um, so yes, I think it

is probably going to influence our policy decisions as we move forward in subsequent years. Thanks. Uh, one other thing that I thought about, maybe I should have disclosed this originally. I'm from New Jersey. Um, hopefully I don't have to move back there, but the um, one of the things they're really looking at, a lot of the smaller towns where I'm from is shared services. This is a larger township, so I know that there's probably more efficiencies in some of the things that we're dealing with. Is that something that's looked at whether it's shared services in terms of, you know, I know we kind of the mutual aid with the fire departments. I'm sure the police departments and EMS do that already, but you know, you're going to pave a road, right? And so is Falls Township. Can we get together on that kind of thing? Is that the kind of stuff that we're doing? Is that pursued? Is it not? Can you

I don't And uh and if you're talking about paving and things like that, I don't think that's something that we've ever done. Is that true?

Really anything like anything that you could put on the table for a shared service, right? Yeah, I love shared services. I've done it a lot in previous governments that I've worked in and had the privilege to manage. Um I think that's something that's on the table for us to explore. Um I think it's a great area of opportunity. You're absolutely right that in the emergency service realm, uh it happens a lot. We have a lot of mutual aid, a lot of automatic aid with our police department, fire department. Um that happens a lot. I think we can sort of carry that momentum into other services. We have good relationships with our neighbors, which I'm really happy about. Um we're building stronger relationships with the four burrows that we oversee, um which I'm really happy about. So I think there's opportunity there. is sort of a long-term solution, not a short-term one, but um definitely something that we're looking into.

And one of the problems I think fundamentally with that is like we're we're the big brother, right? Like we're bigger than all our neighbors. We're one of the biggest townships in the state. You know, we have over 40,000 residents. So when you compare us to those surrounding us, we have to make sure that it's, you know, at least mutually beneficial to Middletown Township and Middletown residents. And there is some cooperative purchasing that also happens too. uh you know road materials, salt and things like that that are done in fuel on an annual basis that we as all municipalities in the county together put in for a bid and then we each take you know whatever piece of that we need and so there are things that kind of at economy of scale we do try to cooperate with our neighbors to accomplish. That's great. Thank you. Appreciate you.

I listen these are great ideas. Uh and the gentleman before you had some some really nice ideas. I mean I think what I would like to convey to folks is like everything's on the table right we are open-minded. We love the give and take with residents. We welcome ideas. We welcome interaction. I mean, we have a great team here who I think are committed to being, you know, creative and forward thinking as we move forward. So, I mean, I I appreciate the suggestions and, you know, there are no bad ideas at this point given our circumstances. Thank you. Thanks for your time. Thank you.

Yes, sir. Have you looked in your own areas as far as vehicle maintenance, township owned vehicles, your lawnmowers, your fire trucks, your police cars? What have name and address? Oh, Bruce White Twin Oaks.

I see your equipment all over the township for repairs. You're at Scrappies, you're at beans, you're everywhere just just putting it out. You got a beautiful six bay garage up there, [clears throat] who by the way does call me a lot and ask me things about what's going on under hoods. So evidently, you're not using your garage. You're just throwing money out the window when you have that garage. Back in the day, we would repair our own equipment. The fire trucks for one. Every two, three days, I'm out on the road all day. Every day I see various equipment maintenance companies in the firehouse driveway, whether they're cleaning pumps, cleaning filters, changing the oil, whatever they're doing could be done at the township garage. And you're not paying somebody $13,540 an hour labor to do this work when you can do it in house. Same with the police cars. They probably haven't put a light bar on a new car up there in [snorts] five or eight years. They send them down. and they farm them out either to the guy in Warminster or to the guy in Bristol. That's all stuff could be done inhouse. That's a lot of money. I do it. So, I know what these things cost and I know how much you know you're going to put out when you're paying a guy already that sits around all day waiting for something to come in a door. Lawn mower with a broken belt, a truck that needs a water pump, something. But most of it goes out. There's nothing done in house anymore. That's a lot of money, man. I mean, that's a lot of money. So, I was just curious is whether you looked at that or whether you're you're okay with sending something to beans or sending something to uh some other fire protection company or even the lawn mower or leasing equipment from Giles and Ransom.

So, we actually had a You used to own all your own equipment. Yep. So, these are good questions. So, we I mean, how much do we do in-house versus Yeah, we do a lot of um of our vehicle maintenance in-house. a lot of our police cars, a lot of our public works cars to mowers. Um, you know, sometimes it does get a little complicated uh and sort of beyond. So, I mean, Eric's not capable of a lot of stuff. I know Eric real good.

Yeah, Eric's very good. Um, and the mechanics that we have in the public works um team are very, very good. One of the requests that we denied um actually before it even got to a public meeting was another mechanic because of the sheer amount of volume of work that we do. Um, we have a very large fleet. Um, so if I could just continue answering the question, uh, one of the things about the fire departments, they're independent nonprofits and they own their apparatus. So I think you're referencing that, you know, they're bringing in Glick or people to who specialize work on fire trucks, they're not our vehicles. We're not paying for that. Um, that's not coming out of our budget unless we own that firetruck or have a maintenance agreement there. Um, so that that's one thing to sort of point out, but the general maintenance um, you know, of these police vehicles, of our public works vehicles, of the fleet, for building and zoning, I mean, most of that is being done uh, in-house, and you know, our mechanics do a really good job.

Small stuff. Yeah. So, we do a lot of that in order to keep our costs low because we know the the cost of outsourcing. That's what I mean. He does little stuff. He does he doesn't do any major stuff. I know for a fact because he calls me all the time asking me questions. Sure. things like body work. We do not have the capacity. No, no, no, no. Serious engine work, electronics work, transmission work. All that stuff used to be done in house.

Yeah, I'm super interested in doing a lot of that in-house. It would require a budget request for equipment for people who specialize in that. We have a tight budget. We're raising taxes. Some of these things can't happen. Um, you know, maybe in future years, uh, you know, the board may see fit for additional investment into that in order to receive, um, you know, those services in house. And what that means is that there would be additional sort of need for taxation in order to invest in that because we would be looking for savings over the long term. I'm very interested in that. But I think when you're in a level setting budget year like we are now, you know, to ask for those things is sort of not reasonable. And importantly too, just one additional detail is depending on what type of vehicle it is and if it's still under warranty, you sometimes might see it at a dealership. Well, that's another issue. If it's under warranty, Yeah. it's got to go back.

Sure. So that but just to your point about you see the vehicles all over the community or at other dealerships and that's usually why it's because it's warranty related work that you know we would be we're already paying for a warranty and so it would

that's right that's covered that's paid for right but I mean a lot of the stuff like I say a lot of the stuff that I get phone calls about is stuff that could be done in the garage rather than pay somebody hundreds of dollars an hour for an idiot that come from tech school it's only going to go on Google or in a book anyway and you're not going to get it fixed the first time it's going back three times which puts a vehicle out of service three more times when it could have been done correctly the first time in house for this much money rather than this much money that's where I'm going money's money no matter what tree you pull it off of

yeah listen you make good points I mean I think one thing I will say that we have talked about is not just in this context but just sort of generally are there more things we can do in house to save money so I think it's It's a good question. It's a fair point. So, I mean, it's something we can look into for sure. I appreciate it. Thank you. Anybody else? Yes. Sorry, it's cold in here. I got to keep my coat on. I know it is cold. It's cold in here. It's either too cold or too hot. I don't It made a note for the next meeting. The thermostat.

Hi, Sally Jones. It's 23 Hartwood Road. You said we haven't had any increases in 10 years for the taxes. So, you're trying to say our tax level just remained constant for the last 10 years for Well, maybe not. Maybe your school district or county or other taxes, but Middletown Township hasn't raised taxes. Okay. But real estate taxes, whenever somebody sells a home, the gets reassessed and the taxes are going to go up. That's not true. When someone gets a new mortgage, the taxes go up. That's not true. You are getting That actually doesn't happen. What do you mean? I I see it happening to me. No,

I wish that happened because we would have see additional revenue into the budget which would make municipal budgeting in Pennsylvania a lot simpler. There's actually a law that's proposed piece of legislation proposed in Harrisburg to allow for that to happen. I think the county is relatively supportive of that. Um but that's not true. When we when new houses are built, um you know, if it's a million dollars, they actually have to figure out the reassessment. We talked about this at length on Monday. um back to 1972, which is a countywide assessment. When a house sells, there's no reassessment that happens that adjusts your tax rate. Okay. Well, someone's taking money from me, and I want to know where this money's going to. It's coming to my taxes. So, the government's taking it. I just don't go and give money away for free.

No, I believe you. Um I think we need to look at your county tax bill and your school district tax bill because every time they raise, that would hit your mortgage, but Middletown hasn't had a substantial increase in over 10 years. What about all the new developments we've had? We have too many homes that have gone up. you're getting taxes from them. We have businesses that have gone up. You're getting taxes for them or you're giving them abatements, not collecting from them and putting the bill on us.

So, so we're not giving them abatements. That's not permitted at the Secondass Township Code. Um, number one, and number two, we talked at length again on Monday and in previous budget meetings, but I can give an overview here. Um, the total tax base for Middletown Township over the last 10 15 years has gone down.5%. And so the reason for that even with all the new development is because there are commercial properties and residential properties that are appealing their assessment which they're welcome to do to the county to reduce their total assess value. And so while yes there's new development that's happening that's adding to the tax base there's people who are reducing either for whatever reason they're reducing their assessment of their house and the balance out of that is a net negative to the township. So our actual real estate tax base has gone down. If we weren't doing development, we wouldn't be getting that money into the budget, which would mean our total SSI would go down even further, which would make the taxable liability to fund the government services we have now even higher than it currently is.

Okay. I'm going to have to disagree with that. You have I'm I've worked in finance for 20 years. So, I know how things work and as a citizen, as all of us as citizen, we're paying it. You're basically employed by us and we want to see how these financials are working. This to me is something that you give to someone at a yearly report for a company which doesn't tell you anything and we need to know a lot more. And as far as it earn income tax, I have to tell you this seniors do pay an earn income tax. I just recently became a senior and I'm still paying it. [snorts] Well, you said that if [clears throat] Yes, I'm working. But someone who said seniors don't pay it, but seniors do pay it. Yeah. Well, I think the retirees,

I understand that, but the what was said with seniors. Sure.

When I I lived in this township all my life and Middletown Township used to take pride in the fact they didn't have that earn income tax. They had a head tax which used to be 20 or $25 per person. You went up to the one the half percent in earn tax. Now you're going to go up to 1%. And then you have mentioned that 40% of the people aren't going to see a difference because they're working in other areas. What about the other 60% of us who work in this township? We're still going to continue to to pay that. I haven't had a chance to read this all because I just received it. I wasn't here last week. I was out of town really. So there's nothing else I want to say. Oh, and as far about the police, this doesn't have anything to do with budget. I don't think you should cut them because the police, you want the best and if they don't get paid well here, they're going to go someplace else, but I wish they would answer calls. When someone was throwing firecrackers on my roof, they did absolutely nothing. I was very upset about it. That's it.

Thank you, ma'am. Hi, Jennifer Tedman, Highland Park. I just wanted to make sure that we are being fair as far as our commerce is concerned to our residents and I'm hearing that and I might be it just might be internet stuff but 32% we're going to see an increase while like places like Lowe's sees like a 30% decrease. So I think the 32% increase I think the first thing that and maybe folks already know this so if I'm telling you things you already know or repeating myself I apologize but so if you look at your tax bill only a small percentage of that is your township tax okay

80% of it is your school tax. So when people see there's going to be a 32% tax increase it's not take your tax bill and add 32%. It's just the township portion. I don't know I we don't have the graphic to show that do we? Uh we can pull up the presentation. It might be worth if there's going to be substantial I just think substantially more public comment. We might as well run through. So you're saying it's 32% of the 20%. So you're going to take your 20% and you're going to times it by.32 and and so and that will be your increase for a resident. I mean we could actually we have a calculator that can help you figure out exactly what um in the back is our finance director. If you go meet with her and give her your address, she can pull up your exact proposed tax bill under the current budget.

Okay. And then with that increase for that what it you said 80% is the school 20% is for you guys. So out of that 20% and we're going to see that increase. How much are we seeing for like places like Lowe's or different commerce that are around how much are they getting increased and is it proportional to what we're seeing? Yeah. You want to take

So just to kind of clarify a little bit. So the percentage change of on the township bill applies to every single property in the entire township that pays taxes, right? So the Lowe's example that goes back to Mr. Ratliff's point about an appeal. So that means that they have gone through the legal process at the county level to petition or and uh seek approval for and receive approval to reduce the taxable value of their property. And so what in that specific example over the last about 10 or so years that they have gone through that process which has resulted in about a 30% reduction in the value taxable value of their property. The actual increase applies to every single property.

Okay. Can we separate the two? If we're seeing that commerce itself is getting, you know, is able to hire people so that they get these reductions. Can we separate the residential from the commerce and say, "Listen, we're going to increase. We're seeing so much more, you know, from our residents than we are from our commerce should be separated and we should increase the commerce." I would love to, but unfortunately legally cannot differentiate certain types of properties. You can't do it by zoning. No, it's not permitted by law.

Okay. Okay, every every property whether it's residential, commercial, is going to face the same tax increase. And the thing that people have seen about Lowe's is again it would be the same as let's say your house is valued at $50,000 and that's what you calculate your real estate tax on. If you wanted to, you could appeal to the county to say I want you to reassess the value of my house and if they determined that the assessed value of your house was lower than that, then your tax bill would go down. Well, that's what these big companies, like you said, they can afford to do that. Yeah.

And I agree with you. It's not fair and it's it's frustrating to us. It's the residents that are really suffering. You know, a 32% increase, whether it's on 20% of our overall tax bill. It's still something in a time where we're seeing everything skyrocket. And listen, I understand as far as like your police department, they have to have health insurance. Health insurance is going skyrocket. And um you know, I'm an independent. I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but I know at the federal level that's happening across the board and we are seeing all these things increase.

I completely agree with you when it comes to your sort of assessment of local tax enabling law. It's all controlled by the state. There have been a lot of initiatives um the Pennsylvania Municipal League, which Middletown is a member of, um petitions the state legislature every year to give us more taxing options um to sort of address some of the equity concerns within the way taxes are addressed. These laws haven't been updated in a very long time. Um, and it gets very little traction in the state legislature, both in the House and the Senate. So, these are great conversations that I think we need to be having with our elected officials to see those laws change, but it's a very heavy lift. Okay. Thank you very much for your time. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other public comment? Yes, ma'am.

Interesting. The second and third highest on there.

Hi, Deborah Harker. 140 level. Um, [clears throat] it's 32% of the township portion of the taxes. I had Miss Hendershot run my taxes while I was here at the town hall meeting. She ran my taxes for 2025 and then she showed me my increase. And when you do the math, it's 32% increase to my real estate portion of my taxes. In addition to that, you talked about how this is going to have limited impact to senior citizens who are on non-earned income and also to the people who are already paying a 1% EIT tax. And like this other woman said, then there's the rest of us. So, I'm having a 100% increase to my EIT portion of the taxes that I pay. And when I take a look at the total numbers of how much tax I pay to this township between EIT and property tax and then I look at the numbers from 2025 and I look at the numbers for 2026, this represents an 82% increase to the taxes that my household is paying to this township. How can you look at us and say that I should have to pay 82% more than I paid last year in order to fund this township's bills? It doesn't make sense. And if you had taken small portions, maybe 3%, 5%, whatever it might have been over the past 10 years, I don't think we would have gotten to 82% by now. It's just absolutely ridiculous that you can look at us and think that it's right for working families to have to pay this much extra money in order to fund the the things that you guys have not done over the years. It's absolutely ridiculous. The only other thing I wanted to say is I wanted to thank Miss Hannah for your response to my email because you provided a very

individualized and empathetic response. Many other people would have just provided a canned response. Um, but I know that you took a lot of um, you took my comments to heart and you really responded very um, personally and I really really appreciate the time and thought that you put into it when I know that you're getting so many emails and you're getting bombarded. I appreciate it very much. Thank you. Of course. Yeah. I mean, uh, um,

we don't expect anybody to be happy about a tax increase. We're not happy about a tax increase. We I mean we we pay taxes, too. We're increasing taxes on ourselves. [clears throat] Um I I understand how everybody feels. We're not we don't expect people to um to be happy about it. So I I mean you're all your feelings are absolutely valid and justified. I don't And I apologize. I have one more thing. Part of my absolute disgust with it is the fact that in this budget you're also adding seven and a half new employees. You're telling us about how your costs are going up and everything is costing a little bit more. and then you've added five new employees over the past 5 years and this year you want to add 7 and a half new employees. How can you not just say we just don't have the money?

So there's there's two things there. Number one, I think uh my understanding is that some of Miss Hannah's uh proposed changes include a reduction in that. And so I think that's something that's Yeah. Um so now you're adding six and a half employees. So the other thing is that that's not a one-year expense that compounds year-over-year salary benefits and pension contributions all of our future obligations. So part of the rationale behind um hiring more staff and this is something we've talked about extensively is exactly what this gentleman and some other people have mentioned. We're bringing things in house that we're currently outsourcing. And so the the the the hope the belief is that it will actually be a cost savings in the long term.

We're going on hopes and beliefs. No, we're going on a professional business proposal that was vetted in the board process. We didn't It's not a hope it's not a plan, though I appreciate the comments of the board chair. Um, we looked at our cost to do a lot of storm water drainage work. There's a lot of drainage work that has to happen in this township. There's a lot of deferred maintenance and there's a lot of projects both on the storm water quality side, which we're responsible for, as well as the storm water quantity side that we're responsible for. We're outsourcing those projects and we're paying a lot of money to do those projects. So the idea is to bring as much of that inhouse so we can expedite the amount of drainage work we're doing, which is probably the chief complaint other than trash that the township gets number one. And then number two, reduce the cost to do those projects, much like we talked about with the mechanic earlier. And so we did the math to figure out what that looks like.

Great. 82% is my math. That is the township portion of the taxes that I will be paying more next year than this year. It is not my total tax bill. I know how to read it and I know how to do the math. Excellent. Any other questions or comments? Yes, sir. [clears throat]

Name is Bill Steber. U 23 Black Eyed Susan Road in that big column there, Village of Flowers Mill is where I live right here in Langghorn. Um I just wanted to share some reflections tonight. Uh um I'm by the way, I'm semi-retired, so I do play by earned income tax. Uh but I wanted to uh just share a couple things about the operating deficit over three years. Uh I know a lot of what you said was contractual in nature and I understand that it makes a lot of sense. Uh but the other part that 10 or 20% uh as a process improvement consultant I kind of think about well are they doing anything in terms of looking at the processes of how the work is done? Yes. uh men some of the individuals of work talked about uh equipment and people and those kinds of things but uh trying to get a hold of that operating deficit is a difficult ch chance and I think uh either looking at your process steps how you get work done the first gentleman tonight talked about waste I've worked with organizations they just have a campaign on waste uh but something has to be done to kind of minimize some of that uh so that us older taxpayers can get some relief. Appreciate that. That's just share my view.

I think the short answer is that's certainly something we're we're trying to do. Yeah. [clears throat] Yes, sir.

Good evening, guys. Lance Seagers, Quincy Holler. Um I think we spoke the other night. Um I appreciate the 1% decrease in millillage, but I don't think that is enough. I believe there's enough room for 2.5%. um understand why the taxes are necessary. I don't think it all has to be done in one year as I stated on Monday. Um I think we do need a lot of um structural things fixed, but we are literally taxing and spending it right away. I don't know if that's necessarily um a great plan. When you look at the EIT this year estimated to bring in 16 million, next year it's over 19 million. If we cut two and a half mills instead of one, we're reducing uh what we bring in this year by two and a half million. So next year we can get someone in projects we didn't get to. Um grant funding, we're not allowed to put that in the budget, right?

Yeah. So in the budget development process, we reviewed grant funding as sort of separately. Um but we tried to make sure that we were accurately representing the sort of taxable spending within the budget. So we sort of account for that separately. So, how much how much uh grant funding that is not in the budget that looks like we're we need to spend that money, but we have grants that are going to pay for that. How much is that of that is in the budget? I'm not sure I understand the question. So, we have a grant that's already approved. Let's just say it's for $500,000, but it looks like we have to spend $500,000 on that stormwater project, right? Yes. But $500,000 in grant funding. Now, we've allocated $500,000 in taxpayer money to uh to pay for that grant comes in. Yeah. We accounted for that separately. so that we're not artificially inflating the bottom line.

And just in capital spending, there is approximately 1.4 million in earned grants. So grants that we have already been committed to or have signed contracts for. And there is an additional about $2.5 million of potential additional grants and including uh the redevelopment authority which funds a lot of our emergency service vehicles. We expect to hear uh any week about those answers and that represents uh about a million dollars of that 2.4 million. Okay. So, we could probably get down to to taking off 2.5 mills. And we could probably take some of these projects that aren't, you know, necessities and our luxuries. Maybe we take a look at Simmons Park. That's a $300,000 bill. Maybe we do a patch job and wait till next year.

So, the guidance that we've gotten from the board is that these projects, if they don't get the grant funding, we're not going to do them. Right. So, we've represented sort of the desire to do them next year and the board has essentially said if we get grant funding, it's got to come back for their approval. you know, full speed ahead. If not, then it's going to be a wait. Okay. So, if we don't do 60 inlets this year, is our township going to crumble if we do 40? Yeah. And these are the subjective policy discussions that the board has. If we don't do ADA curb ramps that we've ramped up from $300,000 to about $750,000,

but remember the reason that the ADA curve ramps is going up is because we're proposing to do more paving. So instead of what is it a mile of paving, we're doing six and a half miles of paving because we have roads that have been are beyond their shelf life and are deteriorating and need to be maintained. The more paving we do, the more ramps we have to do, which is of course required by federal law. If you touch if you touch the road, you got to do the curbact. Haven't we already been doing curb ramps because we've been doing less paving. So more paving means more ramps. This doesn't move. We've already been doing curb ramps, right? I'm assuming that the neighborhoods and streets that are on the docket to be paved have already had those curve ramps done. Correct. Not all of them.

Okay. So, that would be the $300,000 instead of raising it to the 750. I think Mr. Ratless's point is that when you increase paving in order to comply with the ADA, you have to also increase your curb ramps because whenever you go in to repave a road by what the law says. Sure. But if you touch it, you got to change the curve ramp, right?

Okay. So, all of these answers say no, there's no fat to cut. Okay? And they point to then this township has just been run horribly, okay? If we didn't have a plan for the future, okay, if we have been putting 300,000 a year into curb ramps, okay, and now we're increasing paving, but we're not even going to be touching the neighborhoods that we've already changed to curb ramps, then what we've been doing is playing whack-a-ole with no plan,

okay? And now we're being hit with millage rates, which I I'm not even complaining about their earned income tax because it doesn't affect our retirees. But as soon as you guys continue to raise the millage, then our retirees start getting hit and they don't have an option to increase their income. Okay. Which is why I'm the millage increase isn't what's funding the infrastructure that you're talking about. No fluid. That's not it's not as fluid as we would like it to be. Trust me. Um you know, if it was fluid, we would sort of move money between all of these funds. If you if you take a mill if you reduce a millillage to not pay for a parks and wreck project and you needed to cover parks and wreck funding from the general fund, could you do it? You can transfer from the general fund to all the other special. So then it's fluid.

It doesn't matter. I don't entirely agree, but I understand your perspective. So that's the frustration is that you're getting taxed both ways and I understand we need to do it, but how do we stop the bleeding but also get what we need to get done? And it can't all be an emergency. Otherwise, you guys haven't been doing your job very good. And I don't believe that either. I believe what we're doing is we're increasing taxes a lot so we can spend it a lot. And we don't want to at least have a little bit of compromise. So that's where I say I think we can get rid of 2 and a half mills. I think we can. I wish we could get rid of more without having to revertise, but that's where we're at. Thank you.

Appreciate it. Thank you. [snorts] Yes, sir. [clears throat] Bob Diggle, Quail Road, Letown. Uh, you said you're cutting the fire emergency service a quarter%. What What are you cutting? Well, we haven't service. Yeah, we haven't voted on that yet. That was just a proposal. So, it wouldn't be cutting any service. Do you want to explain how that Yeah, it's not any increase by

Yeah, it's not cutting any uh additional service. I can't speak to exactly what in that fund, we're not going to be able to fund with that quarter mill. Um, without sort of sort of reviewing that fund specifically, um, but the necessary funding that's needed in order to continue providing emergency services, both the contracts that we have with the existing four companies as well as the career engine supporting their paid staff will be well covered by the existing rate um, and the other threequarters of a mill proposed increase. Okay. And on the uh another uh the $50 or $50,000 study, we've done two of them [clears throat] already for like $85,000. Yeah. And we went nowhere with it. They had workshops and everything and it just died. You spend another 50,000.

I mean, I I I respectfully I would disagree that it went nowhere because I think Miss Kane and I have been part of a multi-year process working with the volunteer fire companies and I think there actually has been a lot of progress um that's taken place. Certainly, we still have a long way to go and it's an ongoing process. Um, but I [clears throat] think, you know, in order to continue to move fire services forward and and to keep the fire volunteer fire companies viable, I think we're trying to continue to be forward thinking. So, I mean, sometimes you need expert help in order to tackle these tough problems. When was the last time you spent? Couple weeks ago. Ago, probably. Yeah. With the the supervisors and all?

No, it was myself. Um, I met with the chiefs and presidents. We have an ongoing meeting about once a month. Okay. Uh, another question. The RDA grants, how do they come in? Not yet. Soon. When when they come in, does that money go back in the pot that that they cover or how's that work? So, we You want to explain the Yeah.

Yeah, sure. We apply for uh specific We have specific asks uh mainly police vehicles and public works vehicles, street sweeper. Um they will tell us exactly what they funded and at at what level they funded. the board will have to vote to accept that and tell us um you know if we're going to move forward with that. So for example, if they fund 50% of a street sweeper, the board will have to decide are they willing to fund the balance of that or if they fund 100% of three police cars, are we willing to accept that? Um it's not it's not a given, but essentially they'll tell us what they're funding and we get to choose whether we accept it or not.

So if the RDA covers three police cars and you get the RDA, do you buy three more? No, we just buy the this budget only contemplates to fund what we applied for for RDA. So, if we don't get the RDA funding, we won't purchase that vehicle. If we do get it, then we will purchase that vehicle. Does that answer your question? Yeah. Okay. Uh, another three, it's not three more, it's those three. I've been in township 42 years now, and I was there when they sold the water sewer, and to me, that was a rainy day fund. Well, Dawn says the roof's leaking. I think we should take money out of there to do some of these projects instead of hitting the seniors and everybody, you know, let's do what we need to do so we don't get further behind. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other uh public comment? All right. So then at this point, we're going to move forward. Um so there has been a uh motion and a second to approve the 2026 budget. I will do a roll call vote. So I vote yes, Miss Corpal. So are we voting on as the first time or with the No, we don't have to deal with that yet. That comes in the next thing when we talk. Yeah. So Miss Hannah's proposal um impacts item 4C which will establish the real estate tax levies. And I think what she represented was that she is potentially prepared to consider approving the budget so long as the real estate tax um would be down to 5.58 down from 6.08 real estate mills. So this is just a vote on the budget which is the spending plan.

Just the budget. Okay. The spending plan. Uh, so I'm a yes. Okay. Uh, Miss Kane, no. Miss Hannah, yes.

Okay. The, uh, 2026 budget is adopted. That moves us to item B, which is consideration of enacting ordinance number 25-08, increasing minimum real estate tax levies for fire protection and ambulance and rescue uh, purposes. Um, Mr. Explain real quick. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. So, in 2024, uh, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, uh, introduced Act 54, which allows secondass township codes to enact an ordinance allowing for a tax levy limitations, um, for fire protection and for ambulance rescue. Currently, the, um, maximum is 3 mills and 1 mill. So, we are permitted by law to go to 10 mills and 5 mills. All the board of supervisors is considering here is allowing the township in the future to tax at 10 mills or 5 mills. Obviously, we are nowhere near those amounts. We are not proposing that. It is essentially allowing for the implementation of a law which is a separate vote. Um so this is not impacting your tax. This is not a tax vote. This is essentially an implementation of a law so that future versions of the board of supervisors can consider it.

Does that make sense? Yep. All right. So I will move to enact uh ordinance number 25-08 increasing the maximum real estate tax levies to 10 mills for fire protection services and 5 mills for ambulance and rescue services. Is there a second? Second. It's been a motion and a second. Any board questions? Any questions from the public? Yes, ma'am. Well, when you're speaking, could you please explain to us what a mill is? I have no idea what you're talking about and there are probably other people who don't either.

Yeah. So, that's your real estate mill. So, your tax bill is contemplated based on a millage rate, which is the a certain level of taxation um against the total assessed value of your home. So, when you look at your tax bill, it's based on a certain amount of millage from the township, from the county, and from the school district. um that's essentially a number that's produced depending on what the tax levy is that is multiplied against your um total assessed value. And just for simple math, the 1 mil is equivalent to.1% of your assessed value. So it's essentially a tenth of a percent of a real estate tax. Uh%

sure. All right. There has been a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. I. I. I. Opposed. Carries. 40 zero. Uh item B, consideration of authorizing resolution number 25-28R, establishing real estate tax levies for the 2026 fiscal year. So this is the item that uh Miss Hannah's um change would pertain to. Correct, Mr.

That's correct. So if you are looking at the policy briefing summary in front of you, uh it proposes fire protection at 3.08 08 mills based on Miss Hannah's recommendation that would be reduced by a quarter of a mill. Uh fire apparatus would stay the same at 1.42. Parks and wreck would go from 1.58 to Mr. If you were you need to look at the column next to it, the 2026 rate. Sorry. Yes, I'm sorry. I was looking at the rate of change.

Yeah, thank you. So, um fire protection would go down from 5 ms down a quarter uh of a mill. So, that would be 475. Fire apparatus would stay the same at 2.5 ms. Parks and wreck would go from 3.5 to 3.25, a reduction of a quarter of a mill. Ambulance and rescue would stay the same at 74 and general would be 7.025, which is a reduction of.3 ms from the current year. So that's a total additional tax levy uh on real estate as 5.58 mills. [snorts] That's and again that's based on Miss Hannah's recommendation earlier this evening. All right. So with uh Miss Hannah's uh amendment, I will move to adopt resolution the number 25-28R adopting the 2026 real estate tax levies. Is there a second?

Second. Thanks, Miss Hannah. A motion in a second. Any board questions? Questions from the public? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. Opposed? Nay. Carries 31. Uh, next on the agenda, item D is consideration of authorizing resolution number 25-29R, which is waving the limitations of the secondass township code for the purpose of paying salaries and benefits for fire suppression and ambulance and rescue personnel. Mr. Ratliff,

the secondass township code regulates the amount of um fire tax that you can spend on your career firefighters or um your career fire department. Uh, act 140 of 2024 allows the board of supervisors to amend um that provision of the secondass township code which is required uh by all of our previous budgets as well as our proposed 2026 budget to use that fire fund to pay for um the expenses related to our career firefighters. So this is a resolution authorizing that change.

Thank you Mr. Ratliff. Um, so I will move to adopt resolution number 25-29R allocating a portion of the fire protection uh real estate tax proceeds for the purpose of paying salaries and benefits for suppression uh for fire suppression employees. Did I make that motion correctly? That's right. Thank you. Um, is there a second? Second. It's been a motion and a second. Any board questions? Questions from the public? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. I. I opposed n

carries 3-1. Uh so that moves us to our um actually our only real new business item uh because all of the uh foregoing items were carryovers from the last meeting and that is um consideration of adopting resolution number 25-31 are um increasing the earned income tax rate to 1% that would be effective January 1, 2026. Um self-explanatory, but Mr. Riff. Yeah, this is implementing the um proposed rate of an earned income tax from 0.5% to 1%. All right. I move to adopt resolution number 25-31R increasing the earned income tax rate to 1% effective January 1, 2026. Is there a second? I'll second.

It's been a motion and a second. Any board questions? Questions from the public? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

Just for a uh note of clarification. Um again, as of tonight, not what'll happen when everybody adopts our budget, but according to this chart, um the earned income tax in the 13 listed municipalities, uh I I thought earlier a comment might have been made that [clears throat] most of our neighbors have 1%. Um, according to this chart, of the 13 municipalities listed, only two presently have 1%. Um, Ben, Salem, and Falls. Everybody else is 5% with uh Mont Plymouth Township 6% and Upper Marian 0%. So, it's only two.

Yeah. I mean, so number one, that chart wasn't necessarily intended to compare us to our neighbors. It was to compare us to similarly sized municipalities. So it's not just Bucks County, Texas. I'm just suggesting Yeah. The other the other thing, again, I and I don't want to get in a fight with you, Mr. Warren. I like you. I'm not trying to battle with you on this topic, but you're comparing our 2026 tax rate to these other towns 2025 tax rate. So, you're correct. Next year, our tax rate is going to be different if this passes. However, 2026, those other municipalities may have a different taxing rate as well. Um, yeah, Miss Huckleberry.

Hi. I just wanted to clarify the earned income tax chart. There's two columns, one for the township and one for the school district. So, the ones that have a half percent township EIT, you have to add the school school district half percent to get to the 1% in total. There's no uh EIT for the school district in a shaman. You can give him my book that shows that um the overwhelming majority of municipalities are at 1% but the school district as Miss Hucklebridge explains takes the other half a percent. So we're the only municipality in the Nisham school district that's not at 1%. Correct. Am I wrong about that? Uh Langorn Manor does not Langore Manipalities. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Clarify this is online in the full version. The ones that we handed out here are a shorter version that may not have this chart. I yield. You're both right. I love it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Rich. Here. [laughter] Um, all right. There's been a motion in a second. Um, all those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Nay. Carries 3-1. Um, so that, um, concludes our business for tonight. So, I will um I guess just quickly uh go around to my colleagues to see if anybody has anything they want to say for other business. I'll start with Mr. Valor.

Sure. Uh I just wanted to uh congratulate Miss Corpal on her uh final meeting. I wanted to appreciate uh all of your years of service to the township. It's been a pleasure working with you. Uh and similarly want to congratulate the board uh for recognizing Supervisor Payne who you know we wish would have been here tonight. Really appreciative of you honoring her legacy and happy holidays. Thank you Mr. Valor. Mr. Kesler nothing to add for this evening. Thank you. Mr. Espazito just wanted to tell Miss Corporal it's been a pleasure working with you for the last six years. I wish you the wish you the best and happy holidays to everybody. Mr. Ratliff,

I echo the comments. Miss Corporal will certainly miss having you on the board. I've appreciated working with you for the time I've been here. Um I do want to say municipal budgeting is really difficult. Um it is so much better when the public is involved. Um so I appreciate you guys being here. Um I would be remiss if I didn't thank the budget team. We've thanked them a lot throughout this process. Um this was an incredibly heavy lift. It was a very very difficult budget year. Um on our budget team, our our dedicated public servants who took their jobs incredibly seriously and were relentlessly passionate about making sure we were delivering a robust product that was comprehensively reviewed that we were really sussing out things that we didn't need to fund and looking for areas of improvement and also making sure we were representing the policy interests and priorities of the full board of supervisors. Um I couldn't be more proud of them. Um it's difficult. I think all of us are sort of feeling the the squeeze, the pinch, the challenge of where we are tonight. Um they made it in incredibly um you know, it was rewarding to work with them. You know, their the work that they did and putting it in there. A lot of late nights, a lot of daytime meetings, a lot of challenges, a lot of constantly refining what we were doing. Um I'm proud of them. I appreciate them. I'm thankful for them. Um and once we sort of take the holiday break, we'll start on next year and I hope to see everyone here a part of our process. We do start very early. Um but to the budget team, thank you and congratulations on getting a budget adopted.

Thank you, Mr. Riff. Uh Miss Keane, um I just wanted to take a moment to thank um Mr. Kizak and Miss Hannah for um the words that you said. Monday was really tough. Um it was, you know, a lot of there was a couple things said that were directed at me that was really hard. Um but again, we're I I did not come into this lightly. um public public office. So, you have to have a backbone. So, again, I look forward to working with you guys, continuing to work with you guys. We've had a good relationship. We will keep that. Um so, thank you, Miss Hannah.

Um I just wanted to say thank you to everybody who came out and uh budget season next year again starts in August, so put that on your calendar. Um and that way you can have input and contact your local representatives because they need to hear from you. Um, thank you everybody. Um, it it was tough. Thanks to the staff. I don't want to keep talking. Happy holidays. Miss Corbal.

Um, again, I just wanted to thank everybody on this board and thank Nick and thank you Eden and um, Mr. Kizak and um, Mr. Episto for all your guidance and um, everybody that helped me get here and for your patience in teaching me what I need to learn here. This was a very difficult year. Um but certainly a different difficult budget. Um I know people aren't going to be happy. We're not happy. Um nobody wanted to do this. As that show says, nobody wants this. Um but it's what needed to be done. And um hopefully this means going further. Um the budget it'll be easier next year. So, um, for you guys sitting in the audience that are coming up here, good luck. Congratulations, and hopefully this will be an easier process going forward, um, you know, I know the board puts a lot of thought into their decisions and, um, my alarm for bed is going off, so I'm going to stop talking. [laughter] I just wanted to say, uh, happy holidays to everybody and a happy healthy new year. Thank you.

Yeah. Uh, so this, Don, Monday was supposed to be your last meeting. uh you got to come back for an extra round. So, congratulations. Lucky you. Um we we really are going to miss you. You've just been a tremendous asset to this community and this board and you just brought so much compassion to this job and so it's been an honor and a privilege to work with you and we're going to miss you. Um so, thank you for everything. Um I also want to thank the township staff. Um we asked so much of you this budget cycle. The last four months have been absolutely brutal. Um you know, they've been hard on the four of us. I mean, a lot of sleepless nights, um, a lot of work, but the township staff has really worked around the clock. Um, it's really, um, it's a bit inhumane what we asked them to do in terms of the time commitment in the effort. And one of the biggest things we really challenged them on this year was to, um, do more public engagement and public feedback really than than this township or maybe even any township for that matter has ever done in a budget process. I mean, just the amount of initiatives um that were geared towards interacting with members of the public and hopefully making sure people, you know, knew what was going on. Um we knew this was going to be a hard year, so we wanted people to be aware of it. One of the most difficult things for us, um is, you know, people get information from a lot of different sources. They get information from social media, they get information from the press, they get information from friends, neighbors, and so, you know, we wanted to try as much as we could to just put information out there. Um, and tonight was a, you know, Monday was a good night. Um, tonight was a great night. This this process, local government, it works best when people come to these meetings and interact with us. Um, this this isn't this isn't fun. This isn't rewarding when it's just the four of us up here talking to nobody. Um, so it's great to see people come here. It's great to have people ask questions. You challenge us. You push us. Um, you help us direct policy in your community. We were elected by you to make decisions, but ultimately we want these to be decisions that you are involved in. So to the folks that maybe haven't come to meetings before and haven't participated in your government before, please don't be strangers.

Please come back. We saw a lot of new faces um over the last few months, people we never met before. They came out and got involved. And I I mean that genuinely. I I mean, even though some of these questions and and conversations are difficult, I love it. And it um it helps us do a better job. And it really makes this process what it is supposed to be. I mean, this is this is why local government is such an incredible thing. It's really it's grassroots, right? It's neighbors working together to improve their community because at the end of the day, that's what we are. We're just we're neighbors. We're members of the community. This is not our full-time jobs. Um we just do it because we love it here and we're raising our families here and we want to make it, you know, as good as it can possibly be. And we know you guys all feel that way, too. So, um everyone have a great holiday. Everybody have a happy new year. We hope to see some of you back in the new year because, um we got a couple weeks off and then we're right back at it. So, thank you again, everybody. Have a great night.