The meeting began with the adoption of the 2025 municipal budget, highlighting an increase in the tax levy and a rise in the municipal tax rate. The council’s decision to add a 16th police officer was met with concerns from residents, who questioned the necessity and cost. A resident pointed out that Delanco’s population of approximately 5,000 might not require more than 10 officers, based on a common guideline of one officer per 500 residents. The anticipated cost of the additional officer raised concerns about long-term financial sustainability.

In response, the police chief defended the need for more staff, citing an increase in service calls and the current strain on the department. With nearly 11,000 calls last year and frequent overtime, the chief argued that the addition would help alleviate burnout and ensure timely emergency responses. The chief also noted that while the department might be budgeted for 15 officers, various factors, such as deployments and injuries, often reduced the number available for duty. A committee member supported the chief’s stance, recalling a past survey that already identified understaffing as an issue. This discussion highlighted the challenges of maintaining adequate public safety while managing financial constraints.

The proposed acquisition of the 401 Creek Road property was another focal point. This property, spanning 11.54 acres and currently zoned industrial, has been embroiled in legal challenges following the township’s rezoning efforts to prevent additional warehouse developments. The council presented a detailed timeline of events leading to the proposed $3.5 million purchase, which aims to prevent the establishment of a truck and trailer repair facility that would alter the area. The acquisition was framed as a strategic move to control future land use and preserve the quality of life for nearby residents.

Despite the perceived benefits, the purchase raised concerns about potential environmental impacts and the financial burden on taxpayers. The township’s plan to finance the acquisition through a bond, requiring voter approval, was debated, with some members questioning the necessity of a referendum for financial decisions. The potential loss of annual tax revenue and a minimal property tax increase were also discussed. A resident criticized the lack of transparency and public engagement in the decision-making process, presenting a petition against the debt for the purchase and arguing that many felt uninformed. The council defended the openness of meetings and public attendance records, illustrating a divide over public involvement and communication.

The meeting also addressed infrastructure initiatives and community events. Reports included updates on water connection projects, gas system improvements, and a community development block grant for handicap curb barrier replacements. Upcoming events such as a town-wide yard sale and community cleanup day were announced.