Three tries, and O'port finally adopts budget
Divisions on council stalled approval of 2007 spending plan
BY CHRISTINE VARNO
Staff Writer

After two failed attempts and much dispute over hiring a borough administrator, the majority of the Oceanport Borough Council were able to reach an agreement last week on a municipal spending plan.

At the May 24 meeting, council voted 5-1 to approve a $6,209,742 budget, only after two other motions that evening to adopt the same spending plan were rejected by the council members.

Council rejected the introduced budget twice at the meeting after two motions to adopt the spending plan resulted in three council members supporting the plan and three members voting it down.

In a vote on the municipal spending plan, the mayor does not have the option to break a tie vote, Mayor Lucille Chaump explained at the meeting.

"This is the council's budget," said Chaump at the meeting. "I do not break the tie."

Council was able to agree on a budget only after Borough Attorney Scott C. Arnette and borough Chief Financial Officer Greg Meyers devised a compromise after a brief recess at the meeting regarding the $40,000 salary slated for a borough administrator in the budget.

"It was good that we had a recess," said Councilman John Ibex at the meeting.

"It would have been unconscionable if we walked out of here tonight without a budget. I am willing for the good of the town to get a budget approved."

Ibex along with Councilman Gerald Briscione voted no on both motions to adopt the budget, citing the position of borough administrator as the main reason for their decision not to support the plan.

Councilman Hugh Sharkey also voted against the spending plan.

Councilwoman Ellynn Kahle and Councilmen William Johnson and Richard Gallo, all of whom support the reinstatement of the position of borough administrator in Oceanport, voted in favor of the budget.

Ibex explained that at the suggestion of Arnette and Meyers, he would support a budget that included the salary for a borough administrator, if a portion of the funds were set in a reserve until it was determined that the position should be filled.

A volunteer blue ribbon panel appointed by Chaump has agreed to conduct a 10-week study of the borough administrative offices to determine whether there is a need for a borough administrator.

Ibex explained that $16,600 of the $40,000 borough administrator salary would be placed into escrow to not be touched until the panel determines that there is a need for an administrator in the borough.

If the panel determines that the post of borough administrator should be filled, after being vacated for over 20 years, then council can vote to move the funds from escrow to support the salary.

Additionally, $6,300 would be removed from "other expenses" in the budget, according to Ibex.

After the explanation, Ibex made a motion to adopt the amendments to the budget, which was quickly seconded simultaneously by Briscione and Johnson.

The motion passed 5-1 with Sharkey casting the lone no vote.

A motion to then adopt the amended budget was approved 5-1, again with Sharkey voting no.

The original municipal budget of $6,232,940 was trimmed by more than $23,000 after it was rejected by council April 19.

The reduced spending plan was again rejected by council on May 3.

Although there was not much public comment during the public hearing on the budget at the meeting, several members of the public spoke during the public participation portion of the meeting.

"Start to work together," Gary LaBruno of Oceanport said at the meeting. "Stop driving a wedge. … The majority of the people in the room that come to these meetings are against hiring a borough administrator.

"You are here to represent the public interest, not your interest," he said.

And, Morris Place resident Ron Sickler blamed Kahle, Johnson and Gallo for the weeks-long process necessary to adopt a budget.

"The three of you sitting there have an agenda," Sickler said. "We don't know the agenda.

"We are not going to know it until it hits us in the face" he said, continuing, "There is no need at this time for a temporary borough administrator. In order to give someone power, you have to have a job description."

At the meeting, another motion to restore salary increases to certain borough employees was adopted after Chaump voted yes, breaking a 3-3 tie.

Kahle, Gallo and Sharkey voted against the measure, with Johnson, Ibex and Briscione voting to restore $5,300 to support four borough employee salary increases.

The increases include $1,500 to the municipal court administrator, $2,000 to the tax collector, $1,500 to accounts payable and $300 to the borough clerk.

"To just give a 4.25 percent [salary] increase and then to put $2,000, $3,000 on top of that with no justification," Kahle said. "I am disappointed with that aspect."