A major focal point was the $3.6 million bond for acquiring land surrounding the historic Zurbrook mansion. The council emphasized a strategic vision for Delanco’s future, highlighting the potential for affordable housing and park enhancement. This vision faced scrutiny from residents, primarily concerned about tax increases and transparency. One resident, Austin Dasher, voiced apprehension over potential tax hikes. Dasher also criticized the lack of contingency plans, arguing that the council had focused solely on optimistic outcomes without addressing potential pitfalls. The absence of effective communication and limited use of social media for public information dissemination were additional points of contention.

The financial implications of the property purchase were dissected in detail, with discussions on how the debt would be structured. A council member clarified that the township would employ a long-term amortization plan, with favorable current bond anticipation note conditions. Principal payments would not begin until the fourth year, and existing funds from canceled bonds could cover interest payments, potentially avoiding a tax increase. However, questions about why the township would purchase the property below its appraisal value of $5.3 million remained unanswered.

Environmental concerns were also prominent, particularly regarding a proposed truck repair facility on the acquired site. Residents, including Carl Terasi, a member of the Joint Land Use Board and Shade Tree Commission, expressed concern over the removal of approximately 700 trees, potential pollution, and increased traffic. Scott Duke highlighted current problematic truck traffic patterns, fearing exacerbation with the facility’s introduction. He provided anecdotal evidence of large trucks struggling to navigate town roads, emphasizing safety risks for nearby parks. Meanwhile, Eileen Carlos, a property owner, questioned whether removed trees would be replaced and sought clarity on environmental commitments.

The zoning of the property, currently I3 and excluding warehouse use, was another critical discussion point. The council’s intention to acquire property for general municipal purposes was seen as a move to maintain flexibility in future development. Residents expressed frustration over the lack of clarity on the township’s plans, with some advocating for preserving the site as open space.

In response to these concerns, council members assured that environmental testing had revealed no contamination on the property and emphasized plans to retain part of the land for public use. However, the potential increase in truck traffic and associated noise remained contentious. Zire Carter thanked the council and underscored the importance of public engagement in democratic processes, emphasizing that community participation and access are vital.

Further dialogue revolved around the township’s financial obligations, with the council highlighting efforts to manage finances effectively. The council noted that old debts had been canceled to accommodate new expenditures, maintaining a relatively low annual tax increase despite rising expenses. Nonetheless, residents like Joe Galvano questioned the township’s debt levels and financing approach.

As discussions continued, tensions rose over accusations of transparency issues and personal attacks on council members. Council members defended their dedication and transparency efforts, urging residents to respect differing opinions and the outcomes of upcoming votes. Correspondence from a resident named Sam James raised further questions about the financial implications of a proposed truck repair facility, questioning whether expected tax revenue from it would be less beneficial than potential residential developments.