The council reviewed surplus balances and proposed utilization for the current year. A significant portion of the meeting was devoted to the allocation of surplus funds from the parking budget and the general fund. The potential amount available for use in various capital projects, including sidewalk repairs and lighting, was scrutinized. The council sought to clarify the impact of surplus allocation on the overall budget, with a detailed exploration of the sources of this surplus, including Recreation fees, permits, state aid, shared service agreements, and One-Shot Capital items.

A notable point of debate concerned the budgeting of anticipated revenues, particularly in relation to Cellular Tower revenue. The council members questioned the limitations and necessary documentation for the anticipation of revenue.

The meeting also delved into the review of the multi-page budget document, which outlined the cuts made since the initial budget meeting. There was a examination of the specific reductions across various departments, including Village Management, Tax Assessment, Village Attorney services, Engineering, Planning Board, Police and Fire Departments, Public Works, and Health Services, among others. The council and department directors engaged in a collaborative effort to prioritize needs and make reductions, with the aim of ensuring accurate billing moving forward, particularly in the allocation of health insurance costs to water and village employees.

One of the more debated topics was the school resource officer program’s potential impact on the village’s budget and the ongoing negotiations with the Board of Education regarding the allocation of costs for special police officers in schools.

Further adjustments to the budget included reducing utility expenses by $154,000 and modifying overtime to align with the previous year’s levels. The council reviewed the impact of contractual increases on the budget and stressed the importance of quantifying these increases to communicate them effectively to the public. Additionally, there was a detailed breakdown of proposed tax rates and the efforts made to reduce the tax increase burden on residents.

The council also discussed proposed staff count changes, most notably the replacement of an assistant to the Village Manager with a Director of Communications. The need for additional positions in certain departments, such as Public Works, and the challenges of filling vacant police positions were also considered. Concerns were raised about the reduction in capacity for an additional electrical subcode official and a part-time clerical person for the master library, which could affect the building department’s ability to conduct timely inspections.

The council members expressed satisfaction with the overall budget proposal while acknowledging the challenges of balancing various departmental needs with long-term planning priorities. There was agreement on the importance of public safety initiatives, such as communication system upgrades, and recognition of the efforts of department directors in making sacrifices to maintain functionality amidst budget constraints.

In addition to budgetary matters, the council addressed concerns from residents regarding local projects. This included responding to public comments about the footbridge on Kingsbridge Lane and addressing questions about the registration of dogs.

The meeting also featured a public comment from a resident who commended the council’s decision to remove the barn at Hackle and expressed support for the installation of lights at Veterans Field and other locations for softball and baseball. The council members reciprocated the resident’s enthusiasm for investing in the village’s parks and facilities.