March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes Minutes of the meeting of the Charter Study Commission of the Township of Millburn, in the County of Essex, New Jersey, held in the Bauer Center starting at 8:15 PM on the above date. Mr. Drucker welcomed those present and read the following notice: In accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act, be advised that notice of this meeting was posted on the township website. All those in attendance joined in the Pledge of Allegiance. Upon call of the roll, the following Charter Study Commission members were recorded present: Corey Biller, Jerry Kung, Shaunak Tanna, Joanna Parker-Lentz, and Chris Drucker. Also in attendance: Michael L. Collins, Esq. of King, Moench & Collins LLP via Zoom. Mr. Biller made a motion to approve the agenda. Seconded by Ms. Parker-Lentz. All voted in favor. Reports There were no reports since the previous meeting. Public Comment Mr. Drucker opened the public comment period. Jeffrey Feld, Millburn resident, commended the Commission on its work and praised the transparency of the process. He specifically recognized commissioners for publicly acknowledging how their positions evolved over the course of the study. Mr. Feld expressed concern about misinformation circulating on social media following the March 26 meeting and recommended that the Commission’s report include appendices documenting the number of meetings held and the availability of recordings, in order to address inaccuracies and demonstrate the rigor of the process. He drew on his own experience running in partisan primaries, where he was denied a party nomination for refusing to sign a loyalty pledge. Mr. Drucker closed the public comment period. Commissioners responded to Mr. Feld's comments and addressed criticism that had been raised through social media and direct communications alleging insufficient public outreach. Commissioners noted that the Commission had held meetings on different days of the week, including evening sessions and a Sunday public session, and that all meetings had been recorded and posted publicly. Commissioners expressed that the recorded record would address any claims to the contrary. Commissioners also noted that they had conducted outreach specifically to include the candidates who had not been elected, to introduce themselves and solicit input — reflecting an intent from the outset to conduct the process transparently. Commissioners agreed that having approached the study with open minds, sought a wide range of opinions, and changed positions where the evidence warranted, they had no reservations about the process. They noted that the ultimate judgment on the Commission's recommendations rests with the voters at referendum. New Business� March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes Dr. Kung asked Mr. Collins about the status of the draft report. Mr. Collins indicated that good progress had been made on Phase I and Phase II, and that drafting for Phase III of the study was continuing. Discussion on Next Steps and Referendum Timing. Commissioners opened discussion on next steps, identifying two interrelated timing questions: when the referendum on the Commission's recommendations would be placed before voters, and, in the event the referendum passes, when elections for the new governing body would take place. Commissioners noted that the decisions were linked — the "if this, then that" sequencing — and that each path forward carried different implications for the township and for public engagement. One commissioner observed that change is difficult for many residents, particularly long-term community members, and that the Commission would need to sustain public attention and outreach through whatever process followed the adoption of the report. Mr. Tanna asked whether the draft report could be released publicly before adoption. Mr. Collins advised against it, recommending the report remain under attorney-client privilege until the Commission was ready to vote on a final version; he noted that releasing drafts would create confusion and that in both prior commissions he had represented, the report and ballot question had been presented together, drawing an analogy to the Supreme Court's practice of not releasing draft opinions. Mr. Tanna then asked whether the Commission could adopt the report separately from the ballot question. Mr. Collins explained that separating the two steps would create legal ambiguity. He acknowledged the statutory provision permitting amendment of the report within one year of submitting the ballot question but noted that the ballot question is the operative legal instrument and that submitting it dissolves the Commission; minor corrections to the report would not raise legal concerns. The Commission considered two paths for placing the referendum before voters. The first, modeled on Red Bank’s charter study process, would place the ballot question on the November 2026 general election ballot, with municipal elections held in May 2027 if the referendum passed. The second path would schedule a standalone referendum within 60 to 120 days of filing the report. As long as that date is at least 75 days prior to the November 2026 general election, the new council would be elected in November 2026 if the referendum passed. Relative costs of the two paths were discussed; it was noted that the Commission had spent approximately $6,000 of its $60,000 budget to date. A third scenario – holding the referendum in November with the transition election deferred to the following November – was acknowledged as permissible, with a prior example noted in Asbury Park. Commissioners expressed reservations about arrangements in which newly seated officials would serve a brief lame duck term before having to seek re-election the following year. A commissioner asked Mr. Collins whether, after the Commission submits its report and ballot question and is thereby dissolved, members could continue to meet publicly or advocate for the recommendation. Mr. Collins advised that once the Commission is dissolved, the Open Public Meetings Act no longer applies. Former members may exercise their First Amendment rights as private citizens, including appearing together in public forums or holding office hours. Any use of personal funds for campaign materials would be subject to New Jersey campaign finance law enforced by ELEC. Commission funds may not be used for advocacy purposes. Commissioners deliberated on the choice between a June standalone referendum and the November general election. Factors favoring June included: the Commission's current public momentum, which commissioners felt was an asset that should be used rather than risked � March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes dissipating over the summer and fall; the risk that placement on the November ballot alongside Senate and local races would dilute attention to the referendum, particularly given the charged national political environment anticipated in November; and the concern that some voters might reject the referendum on cost grounds rather than its merits if a May election were the visible downstream consequence. Commissioners also noted that a November referendum would be unfair to candidates currently running for local office, who would face a brief term and immediate re-election if the referendum passed, and that the November-to-January transition period is already typically disruptive to municipal operations. Having council elections in May 2027 would lead to further disruption, while having the transition to the new council-manager elections occur in November 2026 would allow a clean handoff. A standalone June referendum was also seen as providing greater clarity to voters. Placing the referendum on the November 2026 general election ballot would mean it appeared alongside Township Committee seats carrying terms of either six months or three years depending on the outcome — a source of potential confusion. A June referendum would disentangle these two decisions entirely. Commissioners further raised a budgetary concern: if the referendum passed in November 2026 and a May 2027 municipal election followed, the newly constituted government would take office in July bound by a budget set under the prior form of government, with no input from the incoming body. It was also noted that while Red Bank's newly elected governing body voted to move municipal elections from May to November, that step is discretionary and not guaranteed to occur. Finally, commissioners observed that recent public criticism directed at the Commission could itself be turned to advantage: a standalone June election would directly answer any charge of lack of transparency, shine a focused light on the question, and capitalize on existing public awareness. The Chair proposed Tuesday, June 16, 2026 as the referendum date. Commissioners discussed the school calendar context of that week: June 16 falls on a Tuesday, the traditional election day; and senior students would remain in Millburn through graduation later that week. The consensus was that any voter motivated to participate would find a means to do so, particularly with mail-voting available, and that the pre-summer timing would maximize turnout among engaged residents. It was emphasized that the June election date would provide more transparency and higher turnout than July, August, or September. Motion to Recommend Referendum Timing Mr. Drucker made a motion to recommend to counsel that a special referendum on the charter recommendation be held on Tuesday, June 16, 2026. The motion was seconded by Mr. Tanna. Roll call vote: Mr. Biller: Yes Dr. Kung: Yes Ms. Parker-Lentz: Yes Mr. Tanna: Yes Mr. Drucker: Yes The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Collins acknowledged the June 16th special referendum date. Public Comment Mr. Drucker opened the public comment period. � March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes Beth Zall, Millburn resident speaking via Zoom, noted that she had filed petitions and paperwork to be a candidate in the November 2026 Township Committee election and that she was “confused about some of the things that were decided.” She observed that 2026 already has many elections. She asked for clarification on how the June referendum would impact her candidacy, including whether she would need to re-petition to appear on the November ballot under the new structure and whether seven council seats would appear on the ballot if the referendum passed. Mr. Collins clarified that if the June 16 referendum passed, the November 2026 general election ballot would include seven council seats, and any candidate – including current Township Committee candidates – could file a petition 75 days prior to the November election. Mr. Biller noted that while re-petitioning would require additional effort, the June path was actually less burdensome for current candidates than the alternative: a November referendum passage would require candidates to run a full campaign and then immediately re-petition and campaign again. Mr. Tanna agreed, characterizing the June referendum as the least disruptive available option for current candidates. Charles Bambara, Millburn resident, stated that he had prepared a written statement but chose to withhold it during the first public comment period in order to hear the Commission’s deliberations without bias. He expressed that the Commission had addressed every point he had intended to raise, and praised the quality and thoroughness of the discussion. He noted in particular that the Commission’s decision to hold a standalone June referendum directly resolved the voter confusion he had anticipated with a November placement – observing that voters faced with both candidates and a referendum on the same ballot would reasonably question the purpose of their candidate votes if the referendum passed. Mr. Bambara commended the Commission for its work and endorsed the June timeline as capitalizing on existing momentum. He expressed his full support and offered to personally contribute to any public outreach effort if needed. Jeffrey Feld, Millburn resident, asked the Commission to confirm that all statutory deadlines to hold a June 16 special referendum could be met, including the deadlines for finalizing the report and approving the referendum question. He asked about the filing deadline and signature requirements for candidates seeking to appear on the November ballot in the event of a yes vote. Mr. Collins indicated that his office would work with the Commission to meet the required deadlines. Frank Saccomandi, Millburn resident, speaking in his personal capacity, noted that collecting signatures on a petition is a routine part of running for local office and not an undue burden, observing that candidates for the Commission itself had collected significantly more signatures than Township Committee candidates are required to gather. He commended the Commission on the thoroughness of its work and expressed support for the decision to hold a standalone June referendum, stating that voters who turn out for a single-question election will be those who are informed and engaged. He also noted that the proximity of the referendum to the primary season would allow all potential November candidates a full campaign cycle. Lea Cruz, Millburn resident, commended the Commission, comparing the quality of its deliberations favorably to the current Township Committee, which she noted is “smart and thoughtful.” She encouraged the Commission not to be discouraged by late-arriving criticism, noting that engaged residents who followed the process closely would recognize the thoroughness and care with which the Commission had approached its work.� March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes Cheryl Desmarais, Millburn resident speaking via Zoom, felt that the public thought the referendum would be in November. She echoed Ms. Zall’s point about the many elections in 2026. Regina Truitt, Millburn resident speaking via Zoom, stated that she agreed with Ms. Zall and Ms. Desmarais, and cautioned against dismissing critics, noting that residents who disagree with the Commission’s recommendations are equally deserving of outreach and engagement. Ms. Parker-Lentz responded that the Commission had actively sought out dissenting opinions throughout the process, including visiting residents who opposed the recommendation, and expressed regret that more residents had not engaged during the sixteen meetings the Commission had held. Mr. Biller echoed those remarks, noting that he had personally reached out to residents he knew were opposed to the recommendation and had specifically encouraged them to attend and participate. He stated that he had no regrets about the process and that the Commission had made every effort to hear from all sides. Ms. Cruz clarified her earlier remark about not listening to critics was intended to apply now that the Commission’s decision was final – not during the process – and acknowledged that commissioners had clearly been guided by input from all perspectives, as evidenced by the fact that several had changed their positions during deliberations. Alex McConnell, Millburn resident, noted that the June referendum represents a recommendation to voters, who will have two and a half months to consider it, debate it, and reach an informed decision. He expressed confidence that the process had not been rushed and that the standalone election would bring appropriate public focus to the question. Mr. Biller offered a broader observation about civic participation, noting that the pattern of residents engaging only after decisions are made — rather than during the deliberative process — undermines the quality of outcomes for everyone. He stated that the Commission had made soliciting broad participation a central commitment throughout its work. Mr. Tanna noted that the Commission had maintained a public input form throughout its work to allow residents to submit views without attending meetings in person, and that the form had received no submissions. Mr. Drucker noted the Commission had developed a set of recommendations for the incoming governing body in the event the referendum passes. Dr. Kung asked Mr. Collins whether the report could include non-binding best practices drawn from the Commission's interviews — advisory observations for the newly elected governing body rather than formal legal recommendations. Mr. Collins confirmed that the Commission could annotate the report as it saw fit. Mr. Drucker cited as one example the practice observed in Verona, where the council holds a monthly open public forum outside of Town Hall to invite community dialogue on any topic. Jean Pasternak, Millburn resident speaking via Zoom, thanked the Commission and offered two observations. First, she stated that based on her involvement in township elections since 2023, public support for a new form of government and nonpartisan elections has been consistent and strong — reflected in the 67 percent of voters who supported the candidates who ran on that platform, and in the similar margin by which the Commission slate was elected. She expressed confidence that the Commission's recommendation aligns with what residents have been asking for and that the public is more informed on the question than some may assume. Second, she offered a general observation that petition collection is standard practice for local candidates and not a significant obstacle given the benefits the Commission's recommendation offers the community.� March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes Michael Becker, Millburn resident speaking via Zoom, thanked the Commission and noted that he had reviewed the meeting videos as well as materials from other municipalities that the Commission posted. He expressed support for the June 16 date, observing that referendum questions placed on November general election ballots tend to get lost among other races and lose their significance – drawing on the example of the open space trust fund referendum that passed but received little public attention. He stated that keeping the charter question separate from partisan November politics would elevate its importance and allow voters to focus on it directly. He expressed hope for strong turnout and stated that he would be voting yes. Mr. Drucker closed the public comment period. Commissioner Closing Remarks Commissioners acknowledged that their work as a formal body would conclude upon filing the report and ballot question, but expressed commitment to continuing public engagement in their personal capacities – including holding office hours, scheduling meetings, and making themselves available to explain the process and answer questions from residents for or against the recommendation. Dr. Kung noted that the Commission had gone well beyond its minimum legal obligations in terms of transparency, including posting meeting videos and holding second rounds of public comment, including via Zoom, at every meeting, neither of which is required by statute. In response to characterizations that the process felt rushed, Mr. Tanna observed that the Commission’s recommendation had been publicly known since the prior Thursday and that June 16 allows close to three months for public deliberation on the question. Ms. Parker-Lentz addressed the suggestion that the outcome had been predetermined, noting that she had changed her own position on various questions throughout the process and expressed willingness to discuss her reasoning with any resident who wished to engage. Dr. Kung noted that some members of the community had themselves approached the process with fixed opposition to whatever the Commission would recommend, regardless of its content. Mr. Tanna offered a closing observation he described as foundational: the Commission's core recommendation is adoption of the Faulkner Act form of government, and that is the question before voters on June 16. Individual elements of the recommendation — the number of council seats, partisan versus nonpartisan elections, the method of selecting the mayor — can be adjusted after adoption without convening another charter study commission. The opportunity to change the fundamental form of government, however, requires a charter commission and may not arise again. Commissioners urged residents not to lose sight of the primary question by focusing on elements that remain amendable after adoption. Ms. Parker￾Lentz committed publicly to advocating for change herself if the new form of government proved unsatisfactory after four years. Mr. Biller echoed the point, emphasizing that a no vote forecloses the ability to move to a Faulkner Act government entirely, while a yes vote preserves the ability to refine it. Adjournment Mr. Tanna made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Biller. The meeting was adjourned.� March 31, 2026 Millburn Township Charter Study Commission Meeting Minutes ____________________________ Dr. Jerry Kung, Commissioner Charter Study Commission Secretary Approved: April 15, 2026�