[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.