Garwood Borough Eyes Police Department Expansion Amid Rising Community Demands

The recent Garwood Borough Council meeting was marked by discussions on expanding the police department with an 18th officer, a decision driven by increasing community demands and operational needs. The council also debated a flat sewer fee ordinance, election procedure changes, and heard public comments on various community issues.

27:35The potential addition of an 18th officer to the Garwood Borough Police Department emerged as a primary topic of discussion. The police chief emphasized the necessity of this expansion due to rising service calls and operational pressures. Currently authorized for 17 officers, the department operates with only 15 active officers due to long-term absences. The chief highlighted a surge in service calls, from 15,000 in 2022 to an anticipated 22,500 by 2025.

The council acknowledged the importance of maintaining adequate staffing levels to ensure effective police operations and community safety. The proposed officer would alleviate the burden on existing staff, allowing for better coverage during patrol shifts and more flexibility in responding to community needs, such as school events and traffic enforcement. The financial implications were also discussed, with the finance committee noting potential cost savings in overtime and the risk of revenue loss if staffing needs are not met.

A council member, reflecting on their experience in the police committee for fiscal years 2023 and 2024, expressed strong support for the addition, stating, “I have no reservations recommending the 18th officer.” This sentiment was echoed by others, who recognized the chief’s recommendations and the potential risks of not proceeding with the officer’s addition. There was a consensus within the finance committee to recommend hiring the officer, subject to community feedback and further budget discussions.

1:05:14Simultaneously, the council examined the proposal for a flat residential sewer fee, which sparked debate among council members and residents. The ordinance suggested a $100 flat fee for all residential units, with an annual $5 increase over five years. Concerns were raised about the flat fee’s fairness and its potential impact on water conservation efforts. Residents questioned why industrial sewer fees were usage-based while residential fees were not. The council acknowledged these concerns, emphasizing that the revenue from the fees would be dedicated to sewer maintenance, though future councils could potentially change budget allocations. They noted that a usage-based system was administratively burdensome for a small borough.

46:54Discussions on election procedure changes also featured prominently. A council member expressed concerns about new state legislation affecting primary ballot design and signature requirements for candidates. They argued that these changes could limit voter choice and disadvantage grassroots candidates. The council agreed to review a proposed resolution regarding the new laws, seeking feedback and potential revisions.

1:46:25Public comments further enriched the meeting, with residents voicing opinions on various topics. A representative from the Garwood First Aid Squad requested increased funding, framing it as a vital investment in community safety. Another resident supported the addition of the 18th police officer, highlighting the lack of sufficient discussion in previous budget meetings. Concerns about traffic safety and the proposed installation of a pedestrian-controlled light on West South Avenue were also raised, with suggestions to modify it for emergency vehicle access.

0:28The meeting also celebrated community engagement initiatives, including preparations for the Garwood Poetry Festival and upcoming programs for adults and youth. A notable event discussed was the Garwood Easter egg hunt, with plans for a rain date to ensure community participation. The police department reported significant activity, with over 2,000 service calls in February alone.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

is discussed during:
in these locations: