During a recent government meeting, community member Lawrence Goldberg raised significant concerns regarding the handling of a local park project, specifically addressing the removal of a major park from the borough's master parks plan. Goldberg, representing the organization 200 Save I, highlighted discrepancies between community survey results and the borough's current plans, questioning the decision-making process.

Goldberg pointed out that a survey conducted four years ago indicated a strong community preference for parks and recreation options, which were notably dismissed in favor of less popular alternatives. He emphasized that the survey, commissioned at a cost of $15,000 to $20,000, clearly showed that the community prioritized park development, yet the borough seemed to overlook these findings.

Financial accountability was another focal point of Goldberg's comments. He noted that the borough has collected substantial rental income—approximately $350,000 in the past year alone—yet claimed insufficient funds to maintain or repurpose the property in question. Goldberg argued that the borough's financial management appeared contradictory, as it continued to allocate rental income to the general budget while asserting a lack of resources for park development.

Goldberg urged the borough to reconsider its approach, suggesting that the collected funds could be earmarked for park improvements and that collaboration with community organizations could help realize the community's desires. He called for a more transparent and responsible management of public resources, advocating for a shift towards fulfilling the community's expressed needs rather than pursuing less favored options.