Page 4 THE VILLADOM TIMES IV • March 20, 2013 Mahwah Township council, seniors compromise on budget by Frank J. McMahon The Mahwah Council and the coordinator of the township’s senior activities center have reached a compromise on the reduction of the senior center’s 2013 budget. At a recent budget work session, Council President Harry Williams advised the council that Susanne Small, the township paid coordinator of the senior center, offered a proposal to reduce the center’s 2013 budget by $2,950 instead of the $6,000 previously recommended by the council. He explained that Small proposed that $1,100 be taken from the professional services line item, $850 from travel expenses, and $1,000 from the food and beverage line item. Councilmen Charles Jandris, John Roth, Steven Sbarra, John Spiech, and Harry Williams voted for Small’s proposal. Councilwoman Lisa DiGiulio cast the lone vote against the budget reduction. Councilman Roy Larson was absent from the work session, but previously voted to reduce the senior center’s budget. Prior to this latest vote, Spiech explained that he originally voted to keep the senior budget intact because he has been impressed by the number of seniors who have said they moved to Mahwah because of the senior center. He also noted recent reports about the aging population in Bergen County, which he described as a blessing because older residents bring fewer children into the school system. “I think the council is missing the boat,” Spiech said. “We have to start marketing Mahwah as a place for seniors. We have good access transportation and a housing stock that ranges from $60,000 to $2 million and there is a growing senior population in Mahwah, Bergen County and the state. They come here and they don’t bring any school kids, and they don’t put any stress on our infrastructure. I think we’re missing the boat cutting this budget. If we would have accepted the budget as it was, I think it would have been a good thing.” Jandris agreed with Spiech, and explained that he has three kids in the school system for which he pays taxes, but he said, “So do they.” He thanked the seniors who wrote to him about the budget reduction for putting his kids through school “because they don’t owe us anything.” DiGiulio said the only reduction she would agree to is the $1,100 reduction Small said she could give back from professional services. Sbarra said he is willing to compromise, but he felt the $6,000 reduction was “do-able.” He emphasized, however, that Small’s proposed budget reduction would still provide more than what was spent by the senior center last year. Sbarra pointed out that, with Small’s amended proposal, the council would still be giving the seniors $9,271 more than the center spent last year. He said, “I’m OK with that and I’m willing to compromise.” He added that he is concerned that the reduction being recommended by the council was being described as a “cut” when it is really a reduction in the original budget increase request by the senior center. Roth added his comments about Small’s amended budget proposal, saying, “Bottom line, the senior center budget is being increased over last year. In the spirit of compromise, I think the coordinator made a good proposal here and one that I am certainly willing to support. I think she did a good job trying to address our concerns about reducing spending while giving seniors more, which we have done.” Before the council’s vote, Williams pointed out that, if Small’s proposal were not approved, or if other motions ended in a tie vote of the six council members present, Small’s proposal would fail and the original $6,000 budget reduction would effectively be approved. The council then voted 5-1 to approve Small’s budget reduction proposal. The council previously voted to reduce the senior center’s proposed $163,000 budget for 2013 by $6,000. But many seniors wrote letters to the council, and several spoke at a February senior advisory board meeting. The seniors spoke out against what they described as a budget “cut” and urged the council to reinstate it. At the advisory board meeting, Small advised in a written statement that the reduction would have “an enormous (continued on page 12)