Summit’s Agenda offers yet another example of a good government approach to it’s Agendas that Berkeley Heights can emulate in its approach to Council Meetings. There are actual memos and supporting documents attached to resolutions and ordinances that provide residents with meaningful context. It may not be the entire paper-trail and one can argue it’s selective, but it provides a great starting point for residents to dig deeper. The entire bill list is present and there is actually language explaining the differences between a resolution and ordinance. Lastly, and this might just be a one time deal but there was only ONE no bid contract (although its a bit of a doozy).
Before getting to the 02/03 meeting its important to note that the 01/20/2026 meeting was dominated by Affordable Housing as residents raised concerns about the city’s plan, development impacts, public safety and zoning changes. The 02/03/2026 packet includes a bunch of affordable housing related contract amendments, mediation and litigation topics in closed session, and a housing update for the council to consider.
Closed session will cover collective bargaining, litigation, contract negotiations and personnel. Part of the agenda connects to affordable housing mediation and litigation connected to redevelopment – strongly hinting that housing and related legal exposure remain might lead to additional costs
In the regular (public) session, the Finance Committee is scheduled to approve an $18,500 transfer from salary accounts to legal services. Under state rules, the transfers are time-limited and can be an indicator of where year-end pressure is coming from.
At the same time, an amendment to the Solicitor’s professional services contract tacks on another $18,500. The original agreement was $250,000 and was already increased to $350,000 earlier in the year. One section of the resolution references a different amount but the supporting documentation points to $18,500 being the number at play.
Burgis Associates – Affordable housing shows up yet again in professional services spending through a separate amendment to the agreement from $75,000 to $82,000. The additional cost is attributed to dispute resolution and expanded planning and will be paid from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
PSE&G Foundation- Authorization to apply for a Sustainable Jersey grant to install an electric vehicle charging station at City Hall – small amounts at play here but consistent with Summit’s goal of moving the municipal fleet toward electric.
ParkMobile- More significant is a revised agreement for parking payment services that sets transaction pricing at $0.35 for 2026 with a possible increase to $0.40 starting 2027. The is a no-bid contract (proprietary software exception), includes exclusivity provisions, includes a three-year initial term with automatic renewals and specifies Georgia law as the governing standard. As a whole, the terms will impact annual costs as wells as flexibility in changing vendors or renegotiating pricing.
Quikteks– Technology services for Police Department that one followed a competitive process – the staff memo compares multiple proposals, which indicates that several vendors underestimated the number of users, which would have increased real costs after implementation.
Consent Agenda- includes payroll adjustments, tax refunds resulting from assessment appeals and scheduled payments to Union County for taxes and open space funding.
Questions Residents Can Ask During the 02/03/2026 Common Council Meeting
Can the City clarify the solicitor contract increase before adoption?
Resolution references $100k increase, while supporting documents show an $18,500 increase. Which one is right and will the resolution be corrected on the record before the vote?
What’s the actual term of the ParkMobile contract being approved?
Resolution summary describes a one-year term with renewals but agreement states three-year initial term with auto renewals.
Why does the ParkMobile agreement designate Georgia law as governing law for a New Jersey municipality?
Was this negotiated and what does it mean for dispute resolution or enforcement involving the City?
How does the City justify a no-bid, exclusive parking services contract in light of long-term cost and flexibility?
What alternatives were considered, how often is pricing reviewed and what exit options exist?
What’s driving the continued increase in affordable housing related professional fees?
Costs are rising across vendors- is there a projected total and timeline for stabilization?
Are current professional services contracts appropriately scoped based on actual workload?
Amendments suggest that original contract caps underestimated complexity of work -how will future contracts be structured to avoid repeated increases?
What should residents expect from the affordable housing issues discussed in closed session?
Without disclosing privileged details, can anticipated policy or financial impacts be explained?
Read More on Town Council Meetings and Agendas
|
Related Articles
First Chickens, Now This: Is the Council Playing the Scutari Stall?
Nokia Redevelopment Investigation, $16.7M Emergency Spending, and Key Questions
