Lacey Town Council Addresses Community Concerns and Approves Key Resolutions

In a recent session of the Lacey Town Council, community concerns took center stage as residents and council members engaged in discussions regarding the town’s development projects, public safety, and historical preservation. The meeting was marked by debates on financial transparency, infrastructure improvements, and management of public resources, as well as commendations for local achievements.

The council unanimously passed two ordinances: one to amend the reporting system for dealers in precious metals and other secondhand goods, and another to establish a new chapter on taxation in the township code. Additionally, the council approved Resolution 2024-74, appointing Alan Baker as a regular member of the Lacey Municipal Utilities Authority, rectifying an oversight from the January 1 agenda.

The meeting opened with the council bestowing recognition on local sports teams for their national achievements, with Mayor Peggy Sue Juliano and Deputy Mayor Steven Kennis praising the young athletes’ hard work and dedication. The Lacy American Youth Football Cheer and Jersey Shore Division 10 Small Level 1 team received accolades for their fourth-place finish at the national competition in Florida, while the Lacy Food Bank and its director, Joanne Curts, were honored for their commitment to combating hunger in the community, serving over 120 families monthly.

Public comments revealed residents’ concerns over town management, particularly regarding the new municipal complex’s spending, transparency, and the fate of the historic Warden House. A document presented by a resident from Scope Engineering argued the Warden House is structurally sound and could be relocated, contrary to the council’s position on its removal. The council responded by addressing these concerns, noting they had considered the possibility of moving the building but were advised against it due to potential risks.

Discussions about the town’s infrastructure highlighted residents’ safety worries due to a lack of sidewalks near a busy intersection and the prioritization of certain areas for improvements. The council clarified jurisdictional limitations and encouraged residents to address relevant authorities with their concerns.

The debate intensified over the proposed construction projects, with residents questioning the council’s decision-making process and financial implications. A resident suggested involving the Catholic Church in constructing a recreation center, while another debated the cost-benefit analysis of adding a second story to the police station. The council defended their actions, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of issues.

The possibility of adding a third story to a town building was discussed, with council members divided on feasibility. Talks of a potential partnership with a third party for a recreation building were mentioned, albeit with details withheld due to confidentiality during negotiations. Budget meetings and managing town spending also featured prominently in the dialogue, with calls for greater public participation and transparent decision-making.

The financial aspect of town development remained a contentious topic. The projected cost of $34 million to expand the existing town building sparked a debate about the wisdom of such an investment. Furthermore, big developers’ interest in purchasing the property was noted, with the mayor clarifying their disinterest in housing projects and addressing concerns over transparency.

A decision to discontinue a project with Johnson Controls led to frustration among some council members and residents alike. Transparency issues surfaced again, centered around the $243,000 spent on an investigation and the council’s responsibility for divisions within the town. The necessity and responsibility of a $34,000 engineer’s report were also contested.

Additional matters raised included questions regarding the use of an outside engineering firm, the financial implications of a public-private partnership (P3) project, and the potential impact of abolishing the Council on Affordable Housing on the township’s obligations. A proposal to promote the town as a location for film productions was presented as a potential economic boon.

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.

Peggy Sue Juliano
City Council Officials:
Peter Curatolo, Mark Dykoff, Steven Kennis, Timothy McDonald

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

Trending in
New Jersey:

Meeting Date
Filter by bodytypes
Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
Board of Elections
Board of Health
Borough Council
City Council
County Council
Environmental Commission
Historic Preservation Commission
Housing Authority
Human Relations Committee
Insurance Fund
Land Use Board
Library Board
Municipal Alliance
Parking Authority
Parks and Gardens Commission
Parks Commission
Planning Board
Recreation Commission
Redevelopment Agency
Rent Leveling Board
School Board
Sewerage Authority
Shade Tree Commission
Trails Committee
Zoning Board
Filter by County
Atlantic County
Bergen County
Burlington County
Camden County
Cape May County
Cumberland County
Essex County
Gloucester County
Hudson County
Hunterdon County
Mercer County
Middlesex County
Monmouth County
Morris County
Ocean County
Passaic County
Somerset County
Sussex County
Union County
Warren County
Filter by sourcetypes