Paterson council rejects introduction of 2025 municipal budget after heated debate

Paterson Municipal Council on Friday, May 30, 2025, voted down a resolution to introduce the calendar-year 2025 municipal budget, after an extended staff presentation and several council members raised concerns about missing detail and assumed revenue.

Business Administrator (acting) told the council the draft shows a projected 5.6% tax levy increase “if we do not get the full allocation of transitional aid that we have requested.” He said the figure reflects current assumed transitional-aid levels and that the administration is still assembling department-by-department cuts to reduce the levy if the state award is lower than requested.

The budget resolution in front of the council was captioned as “resolution authorizing reading of the calendar year 2025 municipal budget by title only and the introduction of calendar year 2025 municipal budget” (Resolution No. 25:297). Councilwoman Maricca Davila moved the introduction and a council member seconded; the resolution failed on roll call, with the clerk reporting 3 in favor, 4 opposed and 2 absent.

Why it mattered: the Business Administrator said the city’s introduction number depends on the state’s transitional-aid award; he provided council members a copy of the Memorandum of Agreement between the city and the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (DCA) that governs transitional aid requirements. The administration said it expects adoption to occur in late summer if numbers are finalized — “August or September,” the Business Administrator said, quoting the CFO’s timeline.

Council members repeatedly pressed staff for more detailed backup figures during the public dais discussion. Councilman Jackson said councilors lacked the supporting spreadsheets and line-item detail the administration had cited, telling the Business Administrator, “we don't have any sheets or any forms in front of us that have the details of what you just spoke about.” Several council members, including Councilwoman Ruby Cotton and Councilwoman Maricca Davila, emphasized they would not support a final tax increase of the size represented by the introduction.

The administration outlined several specific areas it is examining to reduce the levy and improve self-sufficiency: raising building-related UCC fees that have not increased since February 2011, a proposed 2% sewer-rate increase to shore up sewer utility liquidity, and shared-service talks with the county and the DCA on fire and other services. The Business Administrator also said he is forming a transitional-aid working group to model scenarios — from one-year cuts to 10-year plans — to get the city off transitional aid.

During council remarks, members also sought written detail on one-time federal funds the city has used. Council members asked for a clear accounting of American Rescue Plan (ARP)/CARES funds and how prior federal awards are being applied to current capital projects. One councilor repeatedly requested a line-by-line breakdown of revenue variances tied to departmental fees and “contra” state revenues such as energy receipts tax.

Public comment during the meeting amplified council concerns: residents asked for a public accounting of ARP and CARES Act spending, questioned the projected benefits of recent capital projects and asked how long-term returns on those investments would reduce tax burdens.

What happens next: the administration said it will assemble department-level cuts and present more detailed documentation to council members. The Business Administrator committed to meeting with department heads through June and to provide more formal backup when the state’s transitional-aid award is final. The council may reconvene to consider an amended introduction or an adoption after additional staff presentations and analyses.

Votes at a glance: The council voted on Resolution No. 25:297 (introduction of the 2025 municipal budget) — outcome: failed (3 yes, 4 no, 2 absent).