The meeting opened with a detailed report from the CFO regarding the borough’s best practice inventory, a requirement for state submission. The CFO explained that the borough had achieved 39 affirmative responses, surpassing the minimum requirement, though some questions received negative responses. The borough’s audit, currently under review by the prior borough attorney and auditor, was also discussed, with ongoing litigation delaying its completion. The CFO highlighted the importance of ensuring vendors are in good standing and mentioned that a new website would help verify vendor statuses. Additionally, the borough had not uploaded contract details to the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) database, a compliance issue to be addressed for the next year.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to the hiring process for a new business administrator. A council member inquired about the criteria for selecting candidates, questioning whether the council would review resumes or if a recruitment firm would be utilized. It was suggested that the governance committee, alongside the business administrator, would play a role in the hiring process. This topic spurred further dialogue about the qualifications and transparency required in selecting a suitable candidate.

Another point of discussion was the establishment of a storm recovery reserve fund. The council deliberated on a recent legislative change that now allows the borough to open a checking account specifically for storm recovery. The CFO detailed that funds appropriated for this account would be reserved for addressing storm-related issues such as flooding and snow removal, with unused funds remaining in the account for future emergencies. A council member sought clarification on the fund’s usage, questioning whether it would cover homeowners’ losses or be exclusive to the Department of Public Works for major storm-related repairs. The CFO clarified that the fund was intended for large-scale emergency responses, not individual homeowner relief. The council emphasized the importance of a systematic approach to estimating required amounts based on budget capabilities and previous experiences with flooding.

The meeting also addressed several ordinances, including the introduction of ordinance 2024-5, which pertains to the creation of regulations for lead paint inspection. Questions arose regarding the inspection process and the enforcement of these regulations. Additionally, the council discussed ordinance 2024-13, which amends residency requirements for the municipal administrator, allowing for public participation in the deliberations. During discussions of ordinance 2024-14, which amends salary requirements, a council member sought clarification on how the salary for a new hire would be determined, emphasizing the importance of understanding the parameters of the salary range established in January of each year.

Public participation was encouraged throughout the meeting, with individuals raising questions about the salary range for the municipal administrator and other topics. The council members appeared uncertain about the specifics of the salary range at that moment, leading to a motion to close the public session and return to the council’s discussion.

In addition to these discussions, the council considered various resolutions, including an ordinance concerning the office and employee structure for the borough’s administration. It was noted that a copy of the ordinance would be available to the public soon. The consent agenda was reviewed, with no items off consent.

The meeting also included an update from Roy on challenges faced with the server used by the tax collector and assistant CFO, which had caused a delay in the claims process. Roy assured that any missing claims would be addressed in the next month’s ratification.

As the meeting neared its conclusion, a council member motioned for a closed session to discuss a recent lawsuit. This prompted debate among council members about the appropriateness of discussing the lawsuit in a closed session and the right of council members to be informed of legal matters affecting the borough. Ultimately, the motion passed, and the meeting transitioned to a closed session for further discussion of legal issues, ending the public segment of the meeting.