Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety Fees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents urge Monroe Township to waive or refund municipal portion of concealed‑carry permit fees

Monroe Township Council · April 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Several residents asked the council to refund or waive the municipal portion of concealed‑carry permit fees, citing similar actions by other towns and calling the fee a barrier for residents on fixed incomes; council members noted legal and administrative constraints and did not take immediate action.

During the public‑comment portion of the April 6 meeting, multiple residents asked Monroe Township to consider waiving or refunding the municipal portion of concealed‑carry permit fees.

Greg Pisarvski, who identified himself as a Monroe resident of 14 years, asked the council to consider refunding municipal permit fees and cited other New Jersey towns that have waived or refunded local charges. "I would just ask you to consider on your next agenda... that you consider at least refunding or waving future fees," Pisarvski said.

Other speakers, including Mark Steele and a resident who said the fee is a burden on people on fixed incomes, urged the council to place the issue on a future meeting agenda and vote. Several speakers said some neighboring towns have refunded local portions of the fee.

Council members and staff explained the limits of local authority and the current process: concealed‑carry applications are processed through a state police portal that collects state fees; municipal charges have varied historically and the legal framework is affected by state law and court decisions. Mayor Delina and staff noted that the township has been writing to state legislators to press for changes but did not propose an immediate local refund.

Outcome: The council did not take a vote on refunds at the April 6 meeting and members asked staff to return with information if needed. The public requested the item be scheduled for a future agenda.

Sources and attribution: All direct quotations and descriptions are drawn from speakers during the council’s public‑comment period; attributions are to Mr. Pisarvski and other residents as recorded in the transcript.