O'port council fails to agree on budget
Stalled by dissent over position of boro administrator
BY CHRISTINE VARNO
Staff Writer

The Oceanport Borough Council failed for a second time to approve the 2007 municipal spending plan at a special meeting held last week.

At the May 3 meeting a motion was made by Councilwoman Ellynn Kahle to adopt an amended budget resolution that reflected reductions from the original failed budget. The motion was rejected after the four remaining council members failed to second the motion.

A special meeting to adopt another resolution to amend the 2007 budget is scheduled to be held tonight at 7 o'clock at borough hall.

A public hearing and final adoption of the budget is planned for the regular council meeting on May 24.

"The budget was amended," said Mayor Lucille Chaump in an interview Monday. "If these were the changes that the majority of council had made, I cannot understand why it was not adopted.

"Where was everyone for the 11 budget meetings?" she asked, adding, "Then you come to a public meeting to vote it down."

Council failed to adopt a $6,232,940 budget on April 19 and held a budget workshop meeting April 23 to amend the spending plan.

The budget was trimmed by more than $23,000 for a total spending plan of $6,209,742, according to Chaump.

The amendments included cutting $17,000 from municipal employee salaries, Chaump said.

An additional cut reduced the amount of salary for the controversial new position of borough administrator by $35,000.

Plans also included using $25,000 of the surplus in the budget, according to Chaump.

The post of borough administrator in Oceanport has been vacated for more than 20 years, and in March council approved the 2007 salary ordinance that set the salary for a full-time administrator at $75,000.

After amendments were made by council, the position was changed to part time in order to reflect the reduced salary approved by council.

Councilman Gerald Briscione contends that he did not second the motion to approve the budget because it included the salary of a borough administrator.

"I think I am the only one who has consistently said I was against the budget for the borough administrator," Briscione said after the council failed to approve introduction of the budget.

Councilman Ted Ibex noted that he was not comfortable with the cut the council agreed on at the budget workshop meeting, which he was absent from.

"I am just curious what the wisdom was behind that," Ibex said at the meeting. "The changes in the salaries is the most disturbing to me.

"We had a budget almost at the end of February. Here we are approaching the middle of May and we are still discussing it," he continued. "We are dragging our feet here and it doesn't make any sense. I would rather have happy employees out there."

Ibex added, "My recommendation for this council is to put the budget back to where it was and eliminate the borough administrator all together."

But Councilman Richard Gallo disagreed with Ibex and Briscione, saying that he felt the council was headed in the right direction on the budget.

Gallo said the council was able to make cuts and also keep the position of a borough administrator in the spending plan.

"We did not cut [municipal employees] salaries," Gallo said. "We cut increases in salaries."

Kahle defended the decision to reinstate the position of borough administrator.

"With the town growing," she said, "we need someone to manage just the day-to-day [business]. This person would be able to be our liaison at a state level and write our grants. We are losing out because we do not have one. No one is looking out for us."

After council failed to approve introduction of the budget, Briscione made a motion to rescind a recent approval by council to hire a consulting firm to study the administrative offices in the borough and ultimately determine whether there is a need for a borough administrator in Oceanport.

Briscione said he felt there was no need to pay $15,000 for the firm's services because Chaump has appointed a committee of borough volunteers to look into whether a borough administrator is needed.

Ibex seconded the motion but it was voted down after council voted 3-2 to rescind the contract.

Council had voted 4-1 on April 19 to hire Jersey Professional Management for an amount not to exceed $15,000.

Ibex was absent from the meeting and Briscione's was the only vote against the hiring of the firm.