Macungie Borough Council adopted its preliminary budget Dec. 3 and with it a proposed new tax ordinance and an increase in the police department's budget allowing for a new 32-hour officer.

Under the new tax structure, as explained by council member Chris Becker who was most involved in the budget's design, the real estate tax millage dropped to 2.5 from 8.4 mills. Becker stressed the new budget did not include a tax increase but in order to meet the same revenue as last year real estate tax was adjusted to reflect rising property value in the borough. Becker proposed rounding the guide for the tax rate to 0.0025, bringing a change in revenue amounting to $2,712.63 just under $2 more per household.

Additionally, the new budget requests a 32-hour per week police officer to cover time left vacant by scheduled medical leaves in 2013. These amount collectively to 32 weeks in the year. The increase in cost is around $13,000. The problem arises in the mayor's directive earlier this year, stating explicitly the police department would arrange for 25 shifts per week.

The controversial points will almost certainly meet with a veto from Mayor Rick Hoffman. The mayor was not present for council's meeting but had made his point clear to council previously he would veto a budget that included the tax ordinance.

According to his rights, the mayor can veto the tax ordinance and then it passes back to council, who can override his veto by a majority vote plus one.

Becker had approached the chief of police for his input on covering for the absent officers and Chief Harry recommended an additional 32-hour officer to compensate. The borough's solicitor, Attorney Patrick M. Armstrong, confirmed it is within the council's rights to hire and terminate police officers, but not to set their shifts that remains exclusive to the mayor. However under the collective bargaining agreement of the police department, anyone hired for a specified number of hours per week must be scheduled those hours. At this, the problem arose of running against the mayor's explicit directive for 25 shifts.

Joe Sikorski insisted the mayor's statement had forced them into this position, trying to flex scheduled shifts to cover for these planned absences and now proposing a new officer position council is well aware the mayor will reject. Becker and Cope both attested to feeling council threatened by the mayor's statement.

"He's going to circumvent what we have worked so hard to do," Cope said. "If that 32 hour officer is on there [the budget] he's going to veto it."

Nagle claimed not to feel threatened but cautioned Cope against the possibility of yet another lawsuit and more costly litigation. Cope rallied, calling it "an excuse." The solicitor, however, said council would not be doing anything improper by going forward with the preliminary budget as proposed that evening, being perfectly within their rights.

Hoffman to date had offered no other solution to the problem of the police shifts, Cope reminded everyone, and had simply said "No."

Residents of Macungie continued to point blame at the mayor. "Everything he wants he has gotten," Pat Stasko said, before council took its final vote. "You're afraid of the mayor. You're going to vote for whatever the mayor wants."

Armstrong told council that voting to pass the preliminary budget as written with the new officer in the police budget would "probably make the mayor's directive of 2012 moot."

The final adoption for the budget is Dec. 17. Council passed the preliminary budget with nays from Nagle and Lynn Walker.

The proposed budget also includes $150,000 in costs for street repairs, including the reconstruction of Lumber Street and repaving of Village Walk and Brookfield Drive where the roads have begun to deteriorate. In 2012, the borough spent $26,000 on street work.

The borough will acquire a new police car to replace car 702 and also a generator for Borough Hall, a precaution lately thought of due to the wrack of superstorm Sandy in October.

Expenditures on the borough's budget are heavily weighed down by pensions for borough employees, for which the usual state funding did not come through this year.