The most discussion revolved around a proposed strategy to optimize the police fleet’s efficiency and cost-effectiveness through leasing new vehicles. The leasing company recommended a five-year leasing period, contrasting with the borough’s historical practice of retaining vehicles for eight or nine years. This strategy was suggested to reduce maintenance costs, which increase as vehicles age, particularly after five years. The disparity in resale value was highlighted: vehicles sold after five years could fetch approximately $12,000, compared to $2,000 for those sold after eight or ten years.

The proposed strategy aimed to reduce the number of older, unreliable vehicles that typically require more frequent repairs and maintenance, thus incurring higher insurance and upkeep costs. Despite the potential advantages, concerns were raised about the borough’s ability to commit to the five-year cycle, which would require a disciplined approach to vehicle turnover. The current budget typically allocates funds for two to three vehicles per year, implying an initial investment in five new vehicles would be necessary to adopt this model.

The discussion also addressed the logistics involved in outfitting new vehicles with necessary police equipment. The leasing agreement would allow vehicles to be modified before the start of lease payments. This was contrasted with the current situation where vehicles often remained idle for months awaiting modifications after purchase.

Concerns regarding the hidden costs associated with the leasing arrangement were expressed, particularly regarding the resale value and potential sales charges. Questions were raised about how much of the proceeds from the resale of the vehicles would directly benefit the borough and contribute to reducing future lease payments. Despite this skepticism, the representatives reiterated that the leasing company would handle the resale and that any profits would be directly applied to future lease costs.

In other significant business, the council addressed ongoing maintenance issues, including a tree classified as a noxious weed growing out of the pump house. This issue had been previously addressed a year prior but had re-emerged. The council discussed the tree’s classification and the possibility that birds might have contributed to the issue, leading to a commitment to check on the situation promptly.

Another council member inquired about a lack of reports on restaurant inspections from the Board of Health since May. The member emphasized the importance of these inspections, especially for businesses needing liquor licenses. It was acknowledged that the health inspector had conducted inspections for liquor licenses and that reports from those inspections had been included in previous resolutions.

Updates on local projects were provided by Borough Engineer Joe Burn, including the galvanized water service line replacement nearing completion, recreational field upgrades, and progress on the Downtown Revitalization Phase 3 project. Administrator Eric Mau commended the team for successfully navigating a joint inspection of the water system by the DEP and EPA, noting that the updated 2024 water service line inventory had been submitted and was also posted on the website.

Mayor John V. Lane informed the council that tax bills would be mailed out on August 28, with a grace period extended until September 18 without penalties. The mayor also mentioned the Board of Education’s move out of the municipal building, scheduled for August 15, and congratulated local Olympian Ethan Ramos for his participation in the Paris Olympic Games. The mayor highlighted upcoming events, including Hawthorne Day on September 28 and a fishing chip takeout dinner by the Ambulance Corps on September 4.

Attorney Michael Pasqual reported on legal matters, mentioning an amended complaint filed by Mr. Spoila concerning debris removal from his property and a settlement in the ongoing litigation related to fire foam manufacturers, with an estimated $180,000 to be received from a smaller manufacturer as part of a settlement agreement.

Public concerns were also addressed, particularly regarding pool fees. Resident Bruna Capalo shared her experience at the Hawthorne pool, expressing frustration over a $50 charge for two children who were not residents of Hawthorne. Capalo suggested that the pool committee reevaluate the policy regarding guest fees, particularly for children, and consider a fairer pricing structure. Council members expressed agreement with Capalo’s concerns and discussed the potential for adjusting the fee schedule to reflect a more reasonable charge for young guests.