The proposed ordinance to amend the General Ordinances regarding the Shade Tree Commission was a focal point of the meeting, as several residents expressed their unease with the changes. Concerns were raised over the loss of valuable volunteer expertise, the potential impact on the town’s urban forest, and the cost implications of the proposed changes. Frank Doery, a resident, emphasized the value of the commission’s work and his disagreement with the decision to potentially disband it. Gavin Stewart called for transparency in the decision-making process and voiced concerns about how the handling of the commission’s dissolution could discourage future volunteers. Christine George and Kathleen Murphy raised specific issues regarding volunteers’ response times and the possibility of a referendum to challenge the decision.

In response to the public comments, council members stated that a meeting with the Shade Tree Commission had taken place and that plans were underway to reappoint volunteers eager to continue their involvement. The council assured the public of their commitment to tree preservation, stating that the changes would not lead to indiscriminate tree removal. Expert input was provided on the legal and administrative implications of the decision, the necessity for the changes to comply with stormwater permitting requirements, and the envisioned collaboration between the advisory committee and borough departments.

Beyond the Shade Tree Commission issue, the council delved into a debate on ordinances affecting the municipal budget, particularly one concerning budget appropriation limits. The ordinance in question allows for any unused spending cap to be banked for two years. This serves as a financial planning tool enabling the borough to provide cap relief should there be substantial spikes in appropriations. The council also discussed a grant application for park improvements and proclaimed their support for Arbor Day initiatives.

Additionally, concerns about insurance coverage for potential accidents during the construction of pickleball courts were addressed. The council communicated that insurance matters and potential claims would be scrutinized after hearing from all involved parties. During discussions on the library budget, the council clarified that they had not reduced the library’s funding and expressed support for its programs and services.

A member of the public brought up the absence of a shade tree program and sought clarification on the qualifications of the Department of Public Works (DPW) superintendent and the arborist. The individual also acknowledged the contributions of those who had supported the tree program over the years. Another resident criticized the council for not considering the Passover holiday when scheduling the meeting, highlighting the need for sensitivity to community members’ religious observances.

The meeting further touched on the progress of the cannabis ordinance, with updates provided on the matter. Concerns about the costs associated with the construction of the borough hall were also raised, including questions about the increase in expenses and the potential for misappropriation of funds.

As the meeting concluded, the council addressed the various concerns raised by the public. Upcoming events, such as a fundraising event and a charity run, were announced.