[0:03] You ready, Steve?

[0:05] >> I am

[0:07] » I am

[0:07] ready.

[0:08] >> Okay. I will call the August 18th, 2026

[0:11] » Okay. I will call the August 18th, 2026

[0:11] meeting of the Newtown Township Board of

[0:13] Supervisors to order. I will note that

[0:16] we did not meet in executive session, so

[0:18] I'll ask Mr. Nace to please call the

[0:19] roll.

[0:21] >> Yes. Mr. Altieri.

[0:23] » Yes. Mr. Altieri.

[0:23] >> Here.

[0:24] » Here.

[0:24] >> Mr. Sanfilippo.

[0:26] » Mr. Sanfilippo.

[0:26] >> Here.

[0:27] » Here.

[0:27] >> Ms. Chandless.

[0:29] » Ms. Chandless.

[0:29] >> Here.

[0:30] » Here.

[0:30] >> Ms. Grasso.

[0:31] » Ms. Grasso.

[0:31] >> Here.

[0:32] » Here.

[0:32] >> Mr. Mr. Russo.

[0:34] » Mr. Mr. Russo.

[0:34] >> Here.

[0:35] » Here.

[0:35] >> Your solicitor and manager here.

[0:37] » Your solicitor and manager here.

[0:37] >> Thank you very much. We will now move on

[0:38] » Thank you very much. We will now move on

[0:38] to section five, which is the moment of

[0:40] silence.

[0:45] And we'll stand for the pledge.

[0:48] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the

[0:50] United States of America.

[0:52] >> States of America, to the republic for

[0:54] » States of America, to the republic for

[0:54] which it stands, one nation under God,

[0:57] indivisible, with liberty and justice

[0:59] for

[1:03] » We'll move down to section five, 5.1.

[1:05] Can I get a motion to approve the agenda

[1:06] as presented?

[1:08] >> So moved.

[1:09] » So moved.

[1:09] >> Second.

[1:10] » Second.

[1:10] >> Motion's made by Supervisor Russo,

[1:12] » Motion's made by Supervisor Russo,

[1:12] seconded by Supervisor Sanfilippo. Is

[1:14] there any board discussion?

[1:16] Seeing none, all those in favor signify

[1:18] by saying I.

[1:19] >> I.

[1:20] » I.

[1:20] >> I.

[1:21] » I.

[1:21] >> All those opposed. Motion carries.

[1:23] » All those opposed. Motion carries.

[1:23] Section six, public comment for agenda

[1:25] items only. If there's any members of

[1:27] the public that are residents or

[1:28] taxpayers, please come to the podium,

[1:30] state your name and address for the

[1:31] record, and please note that you have

[1:32] three minutes per speaker.

[1:39] » No one's coming forward.

[1:40] >> All right, perfect. We'll now move down

[1:41] » All right, perfect. We'll now move down

[1:42] to section seven, new business, 7.1.

[1:45] Uh, I guess we'll we'll put this on the

[1:47] table first. Um, 7.1 is Can I get a

[1:49] motion adopting the ordinance

[1:51] authorizing the incurrence of lease

[1:52] rental debt to secure repayment of the

[1:55] guaranteed sewer revenue notes, 2026

[1:58] series to be issued to the Newtown

[1:59] Township Municipal Authority and award

[2:01] and execute related agreements and

[2:03] documents.

[2:06] Let's get the motion made and then we

[2:07] can turn it to discussion and they can

[2:09] do their presentation, I guess.

[2:11] >> So moved.

[2:12] » So moved.

[2:12] >> Okay. Is there a second?

[2:17] » Second.

[2:18] >> Motion is made by supervisor Grosso,

[2:20] » Motion is made by supervisor Grosso,

[2:20] seconded by supervisor Chandler.

[2:22] I don't know who's there from the

[2:23] Municipal Authority, but if they want to

[2:25] do they want to explain what's going on

[2:26] here?

[2:28] >> Uh yeah, Steve uh

[2:30] » Uh yeah, Steve uh

[2:30] Mackel is Steve, I think you're going to

[2:33] need

[2:34] to come and speak over here even though

[2:37] uh and be at the No, I think you're

[2:39] going to have to be actually over here

[2:42] uh because uh the they're not picking up

[2:46] Well, they were hearing me on the

[2:47] system, but I don't know all of a sudden

[2:48] they're not. So, if you could do that,

[2:50] please.

[2:51] >> Okay. Uh thank you. Steve Mackel, vice

[2:53] » Okay. Uh thank you. Steve Mackel, vice

[2:53] chair of the Newtown Township Municipal

[2:55] Authority. Um

[2:57] we've uh

[2:58] done a lot of work to um look at

[3:01] proposals for refinancing the bonds uh

[3:04] that are uh from 2018.

[3:07] And um we have uh

[3:12] selected Delaware Valley Refinance

[3:15] Authority to uh move forward with the

[3:17] bond uh

[3:20] refinancing.

[3:22] Um if there's any questions, I know you

[3:24] have the materials.

[3:25] Um

[3:27] we can And Lucian Calhoun is here from

[3:29] DVRFA as well and can answer any

[3:31] specifics.

[3:36] » Well, I mean, I don't really know how

[3:37] much details we've kind of been left out

[3:39] in the dark on a lot of this. Um so,

[3:41] we've had to do our own independent

[3:42] analysis uh even though we requested one

[3:45] to be conducted. So, I don't know if

[3:46] Lucian wants to give an overview. I

[3:48] understand that we're already securing

[3:49] this debt and it's your debt. Um but I I

[3:53] think that there are at least I have

[3:54] some questions, so I don't know who's

[3:56] the proper person to kind of explain

[3:58] this from uh, a high-level so that at

[4:01] least I can have some comfort, uh,

[4:03] especially given the situation that we

[4:05] find ourselves in with the economy, uh,

[4:07] whether this is the proper time to move

[4:09] forward, even understanding that we have

[4:11] that lock-in uh, that is being discussed

[4:14] or being offered by Del Val. So,

[4:16] whoever wants to start explaining to why

[4:18] we should be backing this $30 million

[4:20] debt, uh, I think it's probably a good

[4:22] start.

[4:29] » I'll go.

[4:30] >> Can you all hear me?

[4:34] » Yes.

[4:35] >> Yes. Oh, okay.

[4:42] All right. Well,

[4:44] those

[4:45] that aren't familiar with Del Val, you

[4:47] know, we were finance authority created

[4:49] by four counties in 1985,

[4:52] and since then we've originated more

[4:55] than 460

[4:57] loans to more than 215

[4:59] different local government units

[5:02] in 16 counties of the Commonwealth.

[5:05] Um, you know,

[5:07] for the life of the authority, we've

[5:10] uh,

[5:11] been a very economic,

[5:13] uh,

[5:14] means of doing financings, and and

[5:16] that's the case, uh, you know, for the

[5:18] municipal authority.

[5:20] Uh,

[5:21] the

[5:23] loans that we provide, you know, with a

[5:25] 22-year maturity, such as it would be

[5:28] required for the municipal authority,

[5:31] uh, typically average about 50 basis

[5:33] points lower in all-in true interest

[5:36] cost

[5:37] than, uh, a comparable bond issue.

[5:40] And I know that, uh, you know, this is a

[5:42] big financing, and then we're certainly

[5:45] uh, pleased that the supervisors and the

[5:47] directors of the municipal authority of

[5:50] elected to proceed with this and

[5:53] once you'd be comfortable that it's a

[5:55] good decision. Our competition just

[5:58] closed a transaction

[6:00] for a school district

[6:02] in the Poconos a $35 million transaction

[6:06] that's comparable

[6:08] pardon me to the municipal authority

[6:10] financing if the district had used

[6:13] DelVal they would have saved

[6:15] $2.65 million

[6:18] in debt service cost over the life of

[6:20] the financing.

[6:22] The cost of issuance of that financing

[6:25] were

[6:27] about two and a half times you know the

[6:29] cost of issuance that this DelVal loan

[6:31] would require.

[6:34] A bond issue would require

[6:36] the funding of a debt service reserve

[6:38] fund which DelVal loan does not require.

[6:42] That reduces the amount that needs to be

[6:44] financed by almost $3 million.

[6:47] So the

[6:49] confident and comfortable that you know

[6:52] the decision that's been made will

[6:55] result in the greatest possible savings

[6:58] to the authority under the current

[6:59] market conditions.

[7:01] The guarantee

[7:03] that the township would execute

[7:06] constitutes lease rental debt

[7:09] under the local government unit debt act

[7:12] and

[7:13] the enactment of this ordinance

[7:15] authorizes the execution of that

[7:18] guarantee agreement and the incurrence

[7:20] of the lease rental debt.

[7:23] It

[7:24] the ordinance approves

[7:27] the refunding of the 2018 bonds

[7:31] approves

[7:32] the municipal authority's selection of

[7:35] DelVal

[7:36] and approves the

[7:39] cost of issuance that DelVal would

[7:41] assess on this

[7:43] transaction, the the cost of issuance

[7:45] would be $146,500.

[7:48] And which again is

[7:50] um about 40% or less of the comparable

[7:55] cost of issuance for a bond issue.

[7:58] Uh it pledges

[8:00] the full faith, credit, and taxing power

[8:03] of the township in the event of the

[8:05] deficiency

[8:06] of uh

[8:08] the sewer revenues generated by the

[8:10] municipal authority to make the debt

[8:12] service payments.

[8:14] Um but you know, that guarantee again

[8:16] only kicks in if there is a deficiency.

[8:19] And there's no expectation that there

[8:21] will be a deficiency.

[8:23] The maximum possible payment um

[8:27] um the lease rental

[8:29] uh debt that's being incurred

[8:31] is uh I don't exactly have the number

[8:34] memorized, but it's $5,175,000

[8:39] uh

[8:40] range, but that that's the theoretical

[8:44] maximum

[8:46] payment at a 15% interest rate.

[8:50] And obviously, that interest rate will

[8:52] be fixed at substantially lower rate. We

[8:55] expect it to be

[8:56] fixed in the 4.3 to 4.35%

[9:01] range.

[9:02] Um you know, depending on what

[9:04] the market volatility is tomorrow.

[9:08] >> [clears throat]

[9:09] » [clears throat]

[9:09] >> But the

[9:10] » But the

[9:10] um you know, again, the guarantee is

[9:12] only becomes an issue for the township

[9:15] in the event that there is a deficiency.

[9:17] Uh the loan to the municipal authority

[9:19] is exactly like the three loans that the

[9:22] township currently has with the Delaware

[9:25] Valley Regional Finance Authority.

[9:27] Uh the provisions are exactly the same

[9:31] as as is the case with the three

[9:33] existing loans.

[9:34] Uh Uh, the township has

[9:37] three loans with DelVal aggregating a

[9:39] little around $9 million.

[9:42] So,

[9:43] and I believe the interest rates range

[9:45] from 1. 2%

[9:48] to Yeah, I think that I think the higher

[9:51] higher rate is is some

[9:54] confidence. I think one of the loans may

[9:56] be around 3%, but the others are

[9:59] you know, in the 1 and 2% range.

[10:01] So, the the same benefits that the

[10:04] township has enjoyed uh, will be enjoyed

[10:07] by the municipal authority.

[10:14] » Perfect. And those three loans, I mean,

[10:16] those are substantially less than what

[10:19] this is

[10:20] uh,

[10:20] potentially incurring, correct? Aren't

[10:22] those three loans kind of like an apples

[10:24] to oranges comparison, you'd say, with

[10:25] regards to the total amount we're

[10:27] talking about?

[10:29] >> Um, well, the provisions are the same

[10:31] » Um, well, the provisions are the same

[10:31] and with DelVal, that you know, the loan

[10:33] rate's the same for small loans, big

[10:35] loans.

[10:36] Um, you know, we've done large

[10:38] transactions for the Bucks County Water

[10:40] and Sewer Authority, $50 million.

[10:42] And we've done

[10:44] $50 million and up transactions for

[10:46] Chester County,

[10:47] uh,

[10:48] Delaware County, Bucks County.

[10:51] Um,

[10:52] but

[10:53] you know, the the size of the loan is

[10:56] yeah, doesn't affect the loan rate or

[10:58] the provisions of the loan.

[11:00] >> and my concern necessarily is whether

[11:02] » and my concern necessarily is whether

[11:02] you guys are a qualified shop. I don't

[11:03] think that was ever called into the

[11:04] question, at least by me. Um, I just

[11:07] have questions on one, I thought the

[11:08] process was handled in in a very um,

[11:11] interesting way where we were kind of

[11:12] boxed out the entire time. There was no

[11:14] discussion until

[11:16] we were kind of forced to make moves and

[11:17] then

[11:18] we're being told that by us slowing

[11:20] down, we were incurring additional

[11:22] costs, which I think is just a

[11:24] ridiculous sort of proposition to put us

[11:26] in, which doesn't necessarily, I guess,

[11:27] involve you.

[11:28] Um, let me ask this question. With

[11:30] regards to and this is

[11:33] you know, to just just the I guess the

[11:34] last question I have is,

[11:36] you know, understanding that we're going

[11:38] to be locking this in and the interest

[11:39] rate will be lower than that of a bond.

[11:41] I understand that. Uh and let's say the

[11:44] the interest rates go lower after we

[11:46] lock in, we're getting an option to I

[11:48] guess lock that in

[11:50] one more time over the the span of of

[11:53] this bond lifetime, or at least for the

[11:55] next 10 years, excuse me.

[11:57] I guess the question that I would ask

[11:59] is, what's the rush of doing it now?

[12:01] Right? It's not like

[12:03] interest rates are obviously high. We

[12:05] know what it is. Like is this truly, you

[12:07] know, and I guess this isn't really a

[12:09] question for us to answer,

[12:11] but I'm I'm curious.

[12:13] Why would we be rushing into this now,

[12:15] or the municipal authority be rushing

[12:16] into this now as opposed to waiting to

[12:18] see where the economy is

[12:20] in a year or 2 years? Is it just because

[12:22] we started this process and we don't

[12:24] want to

[12:25] backtrack a little bit?

[12:27] And that might be a question for Steve.

[12:29] I don't want to be unfair to either of

[12:30] you, but I'm I'm just curious if, you

[12:32] know, why we're we're going to be moving

[12:34] forward if we have so much uncertainty

[12:36] with the economy right now.

[12:38] >> So I'll I'll I'll answer it.

[12:40] » So I'll I'll I'll answer it.

[12:40] >> Can you slide up just a

[12:41] » Can you slide up just a

[12:41] >> Okay. In December of '25, we began the

[12:46] » Okay. In December of '25, we began the

[12:46] process of this. Uh a engagement letter

[12:50] was supposed to be executed and

[12:54] was approved to be executed and sent to

[12:57] Stifel, I believe. And

[13:00] on July 1st, we were told that they have

[13:03] not received that. It was never sent by

[13:04] the township, which we didn't know until

[13:07] that point. On June 9th, uh we had a

[13:10] meeting with uh

[13:12] DVRFA to discuss this and come up with a

[13:15] proposal. Uh

[13:18] Stifel was not able to move forward

[13:20] until they had that letter of engagement

[13:22] in hands. Uh unbeknownst to us, they

[13:25] didn't have it. And uh we were on the

[13:28] track to do that while the audits were

[13:30] getting done, which were needed as part

[13:32] of this. And

[13:34] um

[13:35] so June 9th, we began a conversation

[13:38] with DVRFA. Um and June uh I can get my

[13:42] notes, but uh there amongst in June up

[13:45] July 1st was when we were told that uh

[13:48] Stifel did receive the letter and could

[13:51] come up with a proposal. In evaluating

[13:53] those two proposals, the uh

[13:55] restructuring of the debt was um

[13:58] first available to be uh refinanced in

[14:02] dece- in September of this year, and we

[14:04] were tracking towards that since our

[14:07] December meeting. And

[14:09] uh when in getting proposals from DVRFA

[14:12] and a competing proposal from Stifel, it

[14:14] was um

[14:16] decided upon the Municipal Authority

[14:18] Board that we were comfortable with that

[14:20] savings, uh with the origination savings

[14:23] as well as the overall savings

[14:25] in uh the the debt refinancing.

[14:30] » Oh. No, see if I understand the

[14:32] timeline, I appreciate that. And I think

[14:34] it's helpful. I I guess and maybe I

[14:35] phrase it uh incorrectly, is given that

[14:39] we've moved forward and the Municipal

[14:41] Authority's moved forward um with this

[14:43] and then seeing the uncertainty in the

[14:45] bond market and the volatility of the

[14:47] economy right now as it relates to

[14:49] interest rates, I guess my question is

[14:51] is the Municipal Authority clearly is

[14:53] still comfortable moving forward as

[14:55] opposed to maybe waiting a year or two

[14:57] years to see where we are. Is that I

[14:59] mean, clearly that's the answer, I

[15:01] guess. And I guess I just want to make

[15:02] sure that we're comfortable with that as

[15:04] well because if there's a potential that

[15:05] we're saving more money next year

[15:07] because the interest rates go down, and

[15:09] I get it, it's a potential. We don't

[15:11] know whether they're going to go down,

[15:11] we don't know whether they go up, but I

[15:13] don't want to see us lock in and then

[15:15] only have one more bite of the apple

[15:16] over the next x amount of time over that

[15:18] term.

[15:20] >> Uh that's correct. We decided to move

[15:22] » Uh that's correct. We decided to move

[15:22] forward with September as our date to

[15:24] refinance, knowing that we could save

[15:26] $1.2 million plus the origination cost

[15:29] savings.

[15:32] » But that basis could also that savings

[15:34] could go up if the interest rates go

[15:36] down even more.

[15:36] >> It could, but we don't have a, you know,

[15:37] » It could, but we don't have a, you know,

[15:37] a crystal ball to say what those rates

[15:40] will be a year from now, 3 months from

[15:42] now, but it does cost substantial money

[15:45] monthly that we're losing right now if

[15:47] we decide in July, August, September to

[15:50] do that.

[15:51] >> No, that's fair. Crystal ball, that's

[15:53] » No, that's fair. Crystal ball, that's

[15:53] definitely a fair analogy, but we also

[15:54] aren't necessarily up against time

[15:56] clock, I guess is the question I was

[15:57] getting the answer to, and I think I I

[15:58] got it. So, that was helpful, though.

[16:01] Um, Lucian, I appreciate it. That was

[16:03] helpful. Steve, I appreciate it. As I

[16:04] said before, I appreciate the time that

[16:06] the municipal authority spent on this

[16:07] personally. Um, I know that we had our

[16:10] own independent analysis done as well

[16:12] once the two providers were kind of

[16:14] narrowed down. Um, so I don't know if

[16:16] there's any other questions from the

[16:17] board.

[16:20] » I do. Um,

[16:23] we still don't have that question

[16:25] answered on what is the

[16:29] scenario if we wait?

[16:35] » I

[16:36] My answer is the same. It would be we

[16:38] saw the opportunity to refinance in

[16:40] September. Um, waiting because of the

[16:43] unknowns,

[16:45] uh, it was a chance for the

[16:46] rate payers to get a savings.

[16:49] So, we decided to move forward with the

[16:51] timeline that was proposed back in

[16:53] December.

[16:56] » Okay.

[17:03] » Any other questions from the board?

[17:08] » I would just like to say that I did have

[17:10] a chance to talk to

[17:11] >> Can Can you all hear Cheryl?

[17:13] » Can Can you all hear Cheryl?

[17:13] >> I can. I Yeah.

[17:14] » I can. I Yeah.

[17:14] >> Great.

[17:15] » Great.

[17:15] >> Okay. To To DelVal, and I did

[17:17] » Okay. To To DelVal, and I did

[17:17] communicate with Steve

[17:19] via email

[17:21] with the side-by-side comparison. I know

[17:22] Steve, you did yours, but

[17:24] this right now is when you can refinance

[17:27] based on the bond from Steve. And I

[17:29] think based on the analysis that you did

[17:31] with Del Val and a little bit of what I

[17:34] looked at from our folks, it does seem

[17:37] to make sense. And even though we don't

[17:39] have a crystal ball to predict what will

[17:40] happen, the benefit of Del Val is you

[17:42] don't incur any additional expenses

[17:45] to refinance if I'm understanding

[17:47] correctly. And you can also reset. So,

[17:51] if the interest rate We're not If the

[17:53] interest rates go up, we're locked in.

[17:55] If they come down, we can watch them

[17:57] come down, and then we can reset at the

[17:58] lowest possible rate, and then we're

[18:00] guaranteed that rate

[18:03] at the end of this period. I think it's

[18:05] part of the deal.

[18:06] >> Yeah. Okay.

[18:07] » Yeah. Okay.

[18:07] >> Thank you for saying. I should have

[18:08] » Thank you for saying. I should have

[18:08] mentioned that, too. That was an

[18:09] attractive feature of the DVRFA

[18:11] refinancing as opposed to doing a bond

[18:14] bond issuance.

[18:19] » Any other comments from the board?

[18:20] >> So, so yeah, I just I wanted to make

[18:22] » So, so yeah, I just I wanted to make

[18:22] sure I understood that right. So, if the

[18:26] we lock in now, but rates, you know,

[18:28] actually do fall in the future next year

[18:31] or at another point, do we have the

[18:32] ability to lock in a subsequent lower

[18:35] rate?

[18:39] » Well, what's contemplated is a 10-year

[18:41] option.

[18:43] It's similar to what you would have with

[18:44] the bond issue.

[18:46] The The difference between a Del Val

[18:48] loan and a bond issue is with a bond

[18:51] issue, when you exercise an option,

[18:54] as is the case with the 2018 bonds, you

[18:56] have to refund them. You have to incur

[18:59] all the cost and go through all the

[19:01] drill of issuing a new series of bonds

[19:03] to pay off the old bonds.

[19:05] With a Del Val loan, when you exercise

[19:08] an option, there's no reissuance.

[19:10] There's no additional cost. It's just a

[19:12] rate reset.

[19:14] And with a DelVal with a bond issue, you

[19:17] can't do exercise an option more than 90

[19:20] days prior to the option day. So, if you

[19:24] have a 10-year option, you have to wait

[19:26] until 90 days prior to that option day

[19:29] to take advantage of what interest lower

[19:31] interest rates were hopefully in the

[19:33] market at that time. With a DelVal loan,

[19:36] we can make a forward commitment

[19:39] years in advance

[19:41] to be effective on the option day

[19:44] if you hit a a low interest rate

[19:46] environment. And that's exactly what we

[19:48] did to one of the township notes. Uh the

[19:52] we

[19:53] executed uh we we made a commitment to

[19:58] uh refund the bond issue of the

[20:01] townships about 15 months in advance of

[20:04] the option day.

[20:06] Uh and we locked the rate at that time

[20:09] to be effective on the option day.

[20:12] And and that's something And again,

[20:14] there's no cost. DelVal charges no fees.

[20:17] There's no filing to DCED requirement.

[20:20] There are no cost of issuance incurred.

[20:22] If the authority had used DelVal in

[20:24] 2018, we wouldn't be doing this refund.

[20:28] And the authority would have saved about

[20:30] 7 and 1/2 million dollars in debt

[20:32] service cost.

[20:39] » Uh

[20:41] Wouldn't we have to wait another 2

[20:43] years?

[20:45] Uh

[20:46] Wouldn't we have had to wait another 2

[20:47] years cuz it would have been a

[20:49] a 10-year term?

[20:50] >> Uh we could have locked the rate in 2020

[20:52] » Uh we could have locked the rate in 2020

[20:52] to be effective in 2025.

[20:55] >> But well, this this loan would be 10

[20:57] » But well, this this loan would be 10

[20:57] years though, right?

[20:58] >> Yeah.

[20:58] » Yeah.

[20:58] >> Okay, so you're saying we're going to

[20:59] » Okay, so you're saying we're going to

[20:59] have an 8-year term

[21:01] on the last thing 2018?

[21:03] >> No, I'm saying if if they had done the

[21:05] » No, I'm saying if if they had done the

[21:05] deal with DelVal in

[21:07] First of all, our interest rates were

[21:09] lower then than they are now.

[21:12] This refunding only works because there

[21:14] were 5% coupons

[21:16] on the 2018 bond issue.

[21:18] That's the only reason that refunding is

[21:21] economic.

[21:21] >> Well, I'm just saying if it in 20 I was

[21:23] » Well, I'm just saying if it in 20 I was

[21:23] just talking about the turn. I thought

[21:24] you said we'd be refunding.

[21:25] >> No.

[21:26] » No.

[21:26] >> We'd be resetting now, I thought you

[21:27] » We'd be resetting now, I thought you

[21:27] said.

[21:28] >> Well,

[21:28] » Well,

[21:28] >> We'd be refinancing now. I thought

[21:30] » We'd be refinancing now. I thought

[21:30] we would have to wait

[21:30] >> If you'd done the deal with Delval in

[21:32] » If you'd done the deal with Delval in

[21:32] 2018, in 2020 we would have locked 1%

[21:35] interest

[21:36] rates. That's what we did.

[21:38] It would be effective on the option

[21:39] date.

[21:41] >> 2020 would have locked in, but the

[21:42] » 2020 would have locked in, but the

[21:42] option date would have been 2 years from

[21:43] >> Yeah.

[21:43] » Yeah.

[21:43] >> Yeah.

[21:44] » Yeah.

[21:44] >> Okay.

[21:44] » Okay.

[21:44] >> Right.

[21:48] » Any other questions from the board?

[21:53] All right.

[21:53] All those in favor signify by saying I.

[21:56] >> I.

[21:58] » I.

[21:58] >> I.

[22:04] » Mike, are you a yes?

[22:06] >> I.

[22:08] » I.

[22:08] Yes.

[22:10] >> All those in favor

[22:11] » All those in favor

[22:11] >> hear me?

[22:12] » hear me?

[22:12] >> Yeah, we can hear you. Let's actually,

[22:13] » Yeah, we can hear you. Let's actually,

[22:13] Stephen, you should probably just do a

[22:14] roll call vote because it sounds like

[22:16] everything's blocked up.

[22:18] >> Okay.

[22:21] Mr. San Francesco.

[22:23] >> I'm a no.

[22:25] » I'm a no.

[22:25] >> Ms. Chaneles.

[22:29] » Yes.

[22:31] >> Ms. Grosso.

[22:32] » Ms. Grosso.

[22:32] >> Yes.

[22:34] » Yes.

[22:34] >> Mr. Russo.

[22:35] » Mr. Russo.

[22:35] >> Yes.

[22:37] » Yes.

[22:37] >> Mr. Altieri.

[22:38] » Mr. Altieri.

[22:38] >> No.

[22:41] » All right, motion carries three to two.

[22:44] Move down to section 8, public comment.

[22:47] If there's any public comment, please

[22:49] come to the podium, state your name and

[22:50] address for the record, and please note

[22:51] that public comment again is 3 minutes

[22:53] per resident and taxpayer.

[22:57] » We have no public comment.

[22:59] >> All right, any Any comment?

[23:03] Uh I just want to reiterate again, I do

[23:05] appreciate the work that the municipal

[23:06] authority did on this. Um I think it was

[23:09] a good conversation and and a good

[23:11] exercise.

[23:13] Um so it doesn't, you know, that vote

[23:14] does not discount the work that they put

[23:15] into that.

[23:18] >> I also like to comment that

[23:20] » I also like to comment that

[23:20] as much as we got our independent

[23:23] contractor to do an evaluation and

[23:25] things like that, I I do hope in the

[23:27] future that the process

[23:29] is more open and the lines of

[23:32] communication between the least the

[23:34] supervisors and the municipal authority

[23:36] and going forward is more presentation

[23:39] based and conversation based because

[23:42] you know, as much as we got to where we

[23:44] are right now, I do think uh

[23:47] we could have done a better job

[23:48] collaborating

[23:50] and getting this out in a timely fashion

[23:53] with direction.

[23:56] » Any other board comment?

[23:59] >> I just made a motion. Thank you,

[24:00] » I just made a motion. Thank you,

[24:00] everyone.

[24:04] » Good evening, everyone.

[24:05] >> You too.

[24:10] » Is this your phone?

[24:11] >> Yes.

[24:11] » Yes.

[24:11] >> Okay. Thank you.

Board of Supervisors - 18 Aug 2026

Transcript