Scotch Plains Council Adopts 2009 Budget

The Scotch Plains council adopted the township’s 2009 municipal budget Tuesday night in a 4-1 vote.

The $25 million spending plan actually decreases municipal taxes this year by 5.3 percent, but given the implementation of the new sewer bill, residents will see a 8.3 percent net increase in their costs. Even still, members, who voted in support of the budget, insisted it was the cheapest way for the town to stay below the state's 4 percent tax levy cap.

Mayor Nancy Malool re-presented her PowerPoint explanation of the budget. In it, she stated that the town’s options were slim, and that the decision to create a sewer utility that charges residents a separate bill for their water usage was the best way for the town to avoid further layoffs. A possible cap waiver or pension deferral, she said, would have been irresponsible and cost the town more in the long run.  

The public hearing was surprisingly less vocal than in previous sessions. Most of those who rose to speak, including Former Mayor and District 22 Assembly Candidate Martin Marks, along with his running mate, Bo Vastine, were there to praise the council’s work.    

The main complaint raised came from resident Philip Wiener, who questioned the council’s choice not to take the state’s pension deferral plan. Wiener argued that he thought the costs to the town to pay it back over the next 15 years would ultimately be less than what residents will have to pay to the sewer utility during that period.

Scotch Plains Democratic Chair Dick Samuels echoed that sentiment.

“The $600,000 pension payments could have been deferred; this is like turning down stimulus money,” he said.

But the township’s budget consultant, Greg Fehrenbach, refuted those statements, saying that the pension deferral would only be for one year, causing the township to be faced with the same costs next year, plus interest.

“You’re not focusing on the problem, that if you did pension deferrals, it gets you out of the tax levy cap for part of 2009, but in 2010 you’re back in it,” he said. “The issue is that if you do postpone the problem this year, you make it a worse problem next year.”

Councilman Jeffrey Strauss went further to explain that the pension deferral requirements weren’t well established when the decision had to be made.

“When we were given this info, the rules were as fluid as the ocean,” Strauss said. “So when we were told that we had to make a decision on pension deferral by the end of March, and didn’t know the impact going forward, and no other town was going near it, then it didn’t make sense.”

Joan Papon, the town’s representative from the Rahway Valley Sewer Authority, also spoke up in favor of the town’s decision to establish the sewer utility, which is intended to pay off the $521,000 increase in the sewer fee this year.

“You right now are paying for millions of gallons more than what you use,” Papon said. “I am really convinced that once you do one year of this, your rates are going to drop.”

Other concerns raised were about just how tight the budget is, and what will happen if the township is hit with a surprise cost later in the year.

“This was a big concern with the budget this year,” Malool said in response. “Unfortunately, this budget is very tight, and tight to the point that it’s a little disconcerting. But the point is we were faced with such constraints that we had to cut to the bone. I hope there are no surprises.”

Councilman Kevin Glover was the sole councilperson to vote against the budget. Just before its adoption, Glover stated that he suggested a variety of alternative options for saving money, including deferring or lowering the council members’ salaries for a year and freezing all administrative and supplemental salaries for the year.

“It’s decisions that were made earlier this year on the budget that have backed us into where we are today,” Glover said. “I can’t support this budget.”

Other council members, though, said that they were pleased with their decision to adopt the sewer utility and address the fees now rather than putting them off for the unforeseen future.

“I can’t say I’m happy with the budget this year, but under these circumstances it’s the best we can do,” Mary DePaola said. “It is not something that defers our problem or causes a snowball effect. We’re dealing with and confronting our problem head on.”

“When we think about these decisions, we’re not thinking about the five people up here, we’re thinking about the 23,000 people out there,” Mayor Malool said in conclusion. “You’ve heard the various suggestions, and I can tell you those suggestions are gimmicks that either put things off or come up with other numbers that don’t benefit the town at all.”