|
Council Public Meeting - July 10, 2007
The Regular Public Meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council
was called to Order at 7:30 pm by Council President Greenbaum with
the Pledge of Allegiance.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE & MOMENT OF REFLECTION for all those
who have and continue to protect our freedoms and our way of life.
OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT ANNOUNCEMENT
According to the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice of this
meeting has been given to the Mount Olive Chronicle. Notice has
been posted at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown
Road, Mount Olive Township, New Jersey and notices were sent
to those requesting the same.
ROLL CALL Present: Mr. Buell, Mr. Rattner, Mrs. Labow, Mr. Tepper,
Mr. Perkins, Mr. Greenbaum
Absent: Mr. Tobey
Also Present: William Sohl, Business Administrator; John Dorsey,
Township Attorney; Michelle Masser, Deputy Clerk; Sherry Jenkins,
CFO
Questions on Bill List?
APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS
May 8, 2007 PM
President Greenbaum: Mrs. Labow, do you want to move the Minutes
of May 8, 2007?
Mrs. Labow: Yes Mr. President. I move the Minutes for approval
of May 8, 2007.
Mr. Buell: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any questions, comments,
deletions, or changes? Seeing none, Roll Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously.
CORRESPONDENCE
LETTERS FROM RESIDENTS / ORGANIZATIONS
1. Letter received June 25, 2007, from Margaret Griscti regarding
the health and safety and welfare of the disabled.
RESOLUTIONS / ORDINANCES / CORRESPONDENCE OTHER TOWNS
2. Resolution received June 27, 2007, from the Borough of Rockaway
regarding the amendment of Abbot- Burke Funding.
3. Executive Order received July 2, 2007, from Governor Corzine
regarding all Flags to be flown at half- staff in recognition and
mourning of Sergeant Trista L. Moretti.
4. Resolution received July 6, 2007, from Atlantic City regarding
the Cost for the State Wide Gypsy Moth Control Program.
MUA / MSA
5. Report received June 27, 2007, from the Hackettstown MUA regarding
the 2006 Annual Water Quality Report.
DOT / DEP / LOI / HIGHLANDS
6. Letter received June 25, 2007, from the State of New Jersey,
Department of Environmental Protection regarding NJEMS Incident
# 237277, Marveland Farms Block 6000, Lot 5 and 6 (70 and 90 Pleasant
Hill Road).
7. Letter received June 28, 2007, from the State of New Jersey,
Department of Environmental Protection regarding the impact of
construction at the Morris Chase Development.
8. Letter received June 29, 2007, from the State of New Jersey,
Department of Environmental Protection regarding Toys R Us – Site
Improvements Block 6600, Lot 1 (Bartley Road).
9. Public Notice received July 2, 2007, from John Boyce regarding
Request for Highlands Applicability Determination for Jersey Central
Power and Light.
10. Application received July 2, 2007, from Malick & Scherer,
P.C. regarding Highlands Applicability Determination for Jersey
Central Power and Light.
11. Letter received July 3, 2007, from D.R. Johnson and Associates,
LLC regarding Letter of Interpretation for Block 4600, Lot 29 (16
North Road).
12. Letter received July 6, 2007, from the State of New Jersey,
Department of Environmental Protection regarding No further Action
Letter and Covenant not to sue for Block 3606, Lot 21 (14 Washington
Avenue).
MISCELLANEOUS
13. Nomination Form received June 29, 2007, from the United States
Department of Agriculture regarding County Farm Service Agency
Committee Election.
14. Publication received June 27, 2007, from the St. Clare’s
Foundation regarding Pediatrics.
15. E-mail received July 5, 2007, from Sherry Jenkins, Mount Olive
Township CFO, regarding Legislation Notice, Chapter 103 (PERS)
.
COAH
16. Memo received June 27, 2007, from Hardyston Township regarding
Elimination of Affordable Housing Regional Contribution Agreements.
LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES
17. E-mail received June 22, 2007, from Congressman Frelinghuysen
regarding Support for Highlands, Great Swamp, House passes State
and Foreign Operations Funding, and Frelinghuysen to Host Town
Meetings.
DCA
18. E-mail received June 28, 2007, from the Department of Community
Affairs regarding Core Principles on Asset Monetization.
MORRIS COUNTY
19. Minutes received June 25, 2007, from the Morris County Planning
Board regarding the May 17, 2007 meeting.
TORT
20. Notice of Tort Claim received July 3, 2007, from Brunnock & Fleming,
P.C. regarding Jonathan Trotter v. Mount Olive Township and Mount
Olive Board of Education.
President Greenbaum: There are twenty pieces of Correspondence
on the amended Agenda this evening. Does anyone wish to discuss
any particular piece of Correspondence? Seeing none, we’ll
move on.
ORDINANCE FOR PUBLIC HEARING
President Greenbaum: We have one Ordinance for Public Hearing
this evening, entitled:
Ord. #29-2007 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive to Repeal
Section 196-73 Entitled “Charges” Subsection B and
Correct a Typo in “Note” in Subsection A.
Mr. Dorsey: This is simply a correction of some typos that were
made in Ord. #37-2003, that improperly
referenced EDU’s in the Flanders system that have never been
used there, and the others to include a word that
was omitted and to make it fully confirmed with the Township’s
longstanding policy.
President Greenbaum: Any Council Comment? Actually, do you want
to move it Mr. Buell, for approval?
Mr. Buell: I move for final passage Ordinance #29-2007.
Mrs. Labow: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any Council discussion?
Seeing none, Roll Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
President Greenbaum: Ordinance #29-2007 has passed on second reading
and I hereby direct the Clerk to forward a copy of same to the
Mayor and publish the notice of adoption as required by law.
ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING – 2nd reading July 24, 2007
President Greenbaum: This evening we have several Ordinances on
for First Reading with the second reading to be in two weeks, July
24th, 2007. The first Ordinance is entitled:
Ord. #30-2007 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing
a Stop Sign at the Exit at Turkey Brook Park on to Flanders Road.
President Greenbaum: Mr. Tepper, do you want to move that please?
Mr. Tepper: Yes Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #30-2007
be introduced by title and
passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th,
2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building,
204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public
hearing, consideration of second reading
and passage of said ordinance and that the Clerk be directed to
publish, post and make available said ordinance
in accordance with the requirements of the law.
Mrs. Labow: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any council discussion?
Roll Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.
President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:
Ord. #31-2007 An Ordinance to Amend and Supplement Chapter 234-8 “Rates” of
the Code of the Township of Mount Olive (Towing).
President Greenbaum: Mr. Perkins can you please move that?
Mr. Perkins: Yes Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #31-2007
be introduced by title and passed on first
reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30
p.m. at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-
Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration
of second reading and passage of
said ordinance and that the Clerk be directed to publish, post
and make available said ordinance in accordance
with the requirements of the law.
Mrs. Labow: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any Council discussion?
Roll Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously, with the exception Mr. Rattner
voted no.
President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:
Ord. #32-2007 Bond Ordinance Providing for the Construction of
a Dog Park in and by the Township of Mount Olive, in the County
of Morris, New Jersey, Appropriating $35,000 Therefore and Authorizing
the Issuance of $17,500 Bonds or Notes of the Township to Finance
Part of the Cost Thereof.
President Greenbaum: Mr. Rattner do you want to move that?
Mr. Rattner: Thank you Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #32-2007
be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a meeting
be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building,
204 Flanders-
Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration
of second reading and passage of said ordinance and that the Clerk
be directed to publish, post and make available said ordinance
in accordance with the requirements of the law.
Mr. Perkins: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any Council discussion?
Roll Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:
Ord. #33-2007 Bond Ordinance Providing for the Acquisition of
Various Equipment of the Township of Mount Olive, in the County
of Morris, New Jersey, Appropriating the Aggregate Amount of $822,000
Therefore and Authorizing the Issuance of $780,900 Bonds or Notes
of the Township to Finance Part of the Cost Thereof.
President Greenbaum: Mr. Tepper?
Mr. Tepper: Yes Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #33-2007
be introduced by title and
passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th,
2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building,
204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public
hearing, consideration of second reading
and passage of said ordinance and that the Clerk be directed to
publish, post and make available said ordinance
in accordance with the requirements of the law.
Mr. Buell: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll
Call.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:
Ord. #34-2007 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Amending
Ordinance #10-2006 Which Established Fees or Rates for Off-Duty
Police Officers.
President Greenbaum: Mr. Buell?
Mr. Buell: I move that Ordinance #34-2007 be introduced by title
and passed on first reading and that a
meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal
Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road,
Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second
reading and passage of said ordinance and
that the Clerk be directed to publish, post and make available
said ordinance in accordance with the
requirements of the law.
Mrs. Labow: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll
Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
President Greenbaum: The last Ordinance this evening for First
Reading is Ord. #35-2007, entitled:
Ord. #35-2007 Ordinance Appropriating $105,000 from the Open Space
Trust Fund and a Donation from the Baseball Association for the
Purchase of Lights at Russ Nagle Field in and by the Township of
Mount Olive, In the County of Morris, New Jersey.
President Greenbaum: Ord. #35-2007 is amended language-wise in
terms of just a description of the project, and where the monies
are coming from. Sherry did you get that information? John did
you get it in terms of amending the agenda, the title? So when
it comes back to us and it’s advertised it’s appropriate.
Also there were a number of blank spaces that needed to be filled
in, is that correct?
Mr. Dorsey: I don’t know about filling in the blank spaces,
but I thought the additions we made were quite good…
President Greenbaum: No, it’s all done?
Mrs. Jenkins: The Bond Ordinance itself is fine. I think the Clerk’s
office also put in all the attachments which are different records
that will be filled in later.
President Greenbaum: Okay, that will have to be done later on.
So then all we’re talking about is a change in the title?
Mrs. Masser: Yes, you don’t have to worry about that.
President Greenbaum: So then Mr. Tepper do you want to move that
please?
Mr. Tepper: I move that Ordinance #35-2007 be introduced by title
and passed on first reading and that a
meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal
Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road,
Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second
reading and passage of said ordinance and
that the Clerk be directed to publish, post and make available
said ordinance in accordance with the
requirements of the law.
Ray Perkins: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll
Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AGENDA:
Resolutions on the Consent Agenda List are considered to be routine
and non-controversial by the Township Council and will be approved
by one motion (one vote). There will be no separate discussion
or debate on each of these resolutions except for the possibility
of brief clarifying statements that may be offered. If one or more
Council member requests, any individual resolution on the Consent
Agenda may be removed from the Consent Agenda List and acted on
separately.
CONSENT RESOLUTIONS
1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount
Olive Authorizing the Renewal of Alcoholic Beverage License for
the 2007-2008 Licensing Period.
2. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount
Olive to Foreclose In Rem a Certificate held by the Township of
Mount Olive
3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Authorizing the Release of Performance Guarantees Posted by Toll
Brothers in Connection with Wyndham Point, Section IV.
4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Directing the Administration to Correct EDU Undercounts and Collect
Arrearages Within the B.L.S.S.S.
5. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Approving and Authorizing an Agreement with the Township of Washington
for the Joint Purchase and Use of an Asphalt Zipper.
6. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Authorizing the Acceptance of the 2006 Audit.
7. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Requesting Approval from the Director of the Division of Local
Government Services for Insertion of a Specific Item of Revenue
into the 2007 Municipal Budget ($1,320.00 for Tobacco Age-of Sale
Enforcement).
8. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Appointing a Liaison to the Warren-Morris Council of Governments.
9. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Supporting the “Over the Limit and Under Arrest 2007 Crackdown.”
10. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Authorizing Change Order No. 2 for the Route 46 Sidewalk Improvements
Project.
11. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive
Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Professional Services Contracts.
President Greenbaum: Okay, we’re up to the Consent Resolutions
Agenda. Does anyone wish to remove any of the eleven on the Consent
Resolutions Agenda? Seeing none, I would ask that Mrs. Labow please
move the Consent Resolutions Agenda.
Mrs. Labow: Thank you Mr. President. I can move Consent Resolutions
#1 through 11.
Mr. Perkins: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Anyone from the public
who wishes to be heard on the Consent Resolutions Agenda? Seeing
none, I close it to the public. Anyone on Council have a brief
clarifying statement
related to the Consent Resolutions Agenda? Roll Call please.
PUBLIC PORTION ON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS - none
COUNCIL COMMENTS ON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS - none
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
RESOLUTIONS NON CONSENT
PUBLIC PORTION ON INDIVIDUAL RESOLUTIONS
COUNCIL COMMENTS ON INDIVIDUAL RESOLUTIONS
ROLL CALL
MOTIONS
1. Bill List
President Greenbaum: Mr. Perkins do you want to move the Bill
List please?
Mr. Perkins: Yes, Mr. President, I move for adoption of the Bill
List pages 1 through 22, I believe, 1 through 22.
President Greenbaum: Is there a second?
Mrs. Labow: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll
Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
President Greenbaum: Mr. Rattner, do you want to move the Raffle
Applications?
Mr. Rattner: Thank you Mr. President. I move for:
2. Approval of Raffle Application #2198 & #2199 for the Order
of Eastern Star #107 Starlight Chapter and Raffle Application #2200
for MOHS Band Booster Association.
Mr. Buell: Second.
President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll
Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
President Greenbaum: Any administrative matters this evening Mr.
Sohl?
Mr. Sohl: None, I’d just like to comment though. We kind
of brushed over Resolution #6 where we accepted the audit. I’d
like to point out that for those who took the time to look at it,
there was in fact not one recommendation or need for change. I
commend the Finance Department and all of their support.
President Greenbaum: We take it as given, based upon Sherry’s
continued quality of work on behalf of the Township. Since I’ve
been sitting up here, I don’t believe that there has ever
been a recommendation and that every single professional that I
speak to only speaks volumes in terms of Sherry’s abilities
and the job she is doing on behalf of the Township. So kudos to
the Finance Department and to Sherry in particular in terms of
our continued bond rating improvement approval, and also on the
audit.
Mrs. Jenkins: Thank you.
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
SWAC vacancies
President Greenbaum: We do have the one resume for Appointment
to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. There are two open Council
positions. I assume, Mrs. Labow, that you’re going to be
making a motion to add Mr. Bowman?
Mrs. Labow: I don’t really know anything about it. I just
received this so I haven’t talked to him or anything…
President Greenbaum: Well does anyone at this point wish to make
a motion with respect to Mr. Bowman, or do you want to hold off
until Mr. Tobey gets back?
Mr. Perkins: I’ll make a motion that we appoint Mr. Bowman.
I think it’s important if he’s interested, he’s
submitted his resume and we do need somebody on the Solid Waste
Advisory Committee.
Mrs. Labow: Well, I would like to just interject. The Solid Waste
Committee is adjourned for the summer. We’re not going to
meet again until September due to vacation schedules.
President Greenbaum: Mr. Perkins, are you making your motion to
appoint?
Mr. Perkins: Yes.
President Greenbaum: Okay, and is there a second?
Mr. Tepper: Second.
President Greenbaum: It’s been moved and seconded. Any discussion?
Colleen, you certainly have placed on the record your notion that
we should hold off on making the appointment at the present time,
based upon your…
Mrs. Labow: I didn’t read his resume, and I didn’t
speak to him so I don’t feel comfortable voting for somebody
at this point.
President Greenbaum: Okay, Roll Call please.
ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously with the exception of Mrs. Labow
who abstained.
President Greenbaum: Congratulation to Mr. Bowman on his appointment
to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee.
Mrs. Labow: Also just on this part, we do have Mr. Mark Kana from
the Board of Health is interested in being on the Solid Waste Advisory
Committee. I will give his resume to everybody for the next meeting,
or prior to. Yes, I know. Mark Kana, he’s on the Board of
Health, and he wanted to be on the SWAC also.
President Greenbaum: Thank you.
LEGAL MATTERS
John Dorsey: Yes, I think there are a couple I should mention.
On Monday as you know, Chairman, since you got off the plane from
Las Vegas to attend, we did have a most interesting meeting with
the representatives of Rock Gold and dealing with the purchase
of the Combe Fill North. I’ve written you a memo on this
which I assume that you all got because I faxed it to you yesterday,
but I think I can say rather briefly that number one, they were
particularly impressed and appreciative of Mr. Rattner’s
efforts to move the MSA into motion and do what I couldn’t
do and that was to get Lee T. Purcell to do the necessary mapping
that needed to be submitted to NJDEP for the service area to be
expanded to include Combe Fill North. They have come up with a
clever way of describing this development. They refer to it in
EPA and DEP circles as an employment center, which I guess speaks
for itself in the modern world. They reported to us that the head
of Smart Growth, and it now seems to me that Smart Growth controls
what a lot of Departments down there do in terms of various policy
issues, just thinks that this is the greatest thing in the world,
i.e. that Mount Olive and Rock Gold is going to take a remediated
site and turn it into a productive area. I think that’s terribly
important because the lower echelons within the DEP must recommend
the extension of the sewer area for the MSA, and must also recommend
a change in the planning area under the state plan, and redevelopment
plan. I can only say that they’ve also met with the EPA and
once again Les seemed to be very confident that the EPA had bought
into the whole concept of the wonders of taking a remediated site
and turning it into a productive piece of property. There is the
issue as to whether EPA will attempt a windfall lien. I must say
that I was terribly pleased to hear that since I chastised them
for not inviting us to go to the EPA, and told them that Mr. Rattner
thought they only invited us when they needed our help, they did
properly articulate the inappropriateness of a windfall lien by
the EPA on that property because nothing EPA did makes the property
valuable. As a matter of fact, everything that the EPA did will
be taken out. The Resolution tonight authorizing the in rem tax
foreclosure is the first step in our solidifying our ownership
of that property. I had withheld that action until I was requested
by Rock Gold to proceed. Everybody agreed that this is now the
time to proceed, and the Council has now done that which I asked
it to do. The Dattolo litigation goes on, Mr. Rattner is going
to have to give up another day. Lisa spent a full day on Friday
under rather close examination. I’ll just read to you a letter
that Dick Cushing the attorney representing her, retained by the
MEL to represent the civil rights part of the case wrote about
the deposition:
“Notwithstanding a rather long and detailed effort to do so, in my opinion,
the plaintiff did not prevail in this regard. Ms. Lashway is a smart, independent
person who takes pride in her independence and the fact that she has tenure to
protect her against the demands of political officials. Ms. Lashway listened
carefully to the questions, thought about her answer, and then presented her
answer in a forthright and honest way. Although the plaintiff, through skillful
questioning, sought to establish that as part of the regular records destruction
of the municipality certain records relevant to this case may have been destroyed,
Ms. Lashway, without prompting and without questioning on our behalf, indicated
that no such destruction had occurred because her staff, which had arranged for
the destruction of documents, was well trained and knew to look for documents
relevant to the litigation prior to the destruction of any documents.”
Mr. Dorsey: Michelle had prepared these forms that you have to
prepare to submit to Community Affairs for the destruction of documents,
and at one point in this ongoing dilemma it appeared that all documents
relating to this matter had been destroyed, but that was not the
case. Lisa did a good job, and Michelle did a good job. Today Councilman
Perkins led us into a meeting with the BPU, specifically the head
of the Water Division, a fellow by the name of Joe Quirolo who
is an attorney that advises them. We had a long discussion advising
them that our paradox was that while we were prepared to grant
to Toll / American Water a franchise, at no point did we want to
do anything that would upset or interfere with the Township’s
right to “call in” this system when the Township thought
to do so. We reversed our position two weeks ago, perhaps it was
a month ago when Mr. Rattner pointed out some of the economics
of taking on that system at a very early point in time. Mr. Perkins
joined in that, and now we are in a process with the BPU of fulfilling
our obligations without in any way giving up any of our rights
under the Developer’s Agreement. As I spoke with Mr. Perkins
tonight, I directed Walter Reinhard who is an attorney that practices
on a regular basis with the BPU, before the BPU, to draw the franchise
ordinance that protects our interest. We will then forward that
on to the other parties and tell them we are now prepared to proceed
once they indicate that they are prepared to live with that form
of ordinance. So, it was a good two days in terms of meetings,
and I appreciate everyone’s cooperation.
President Greenbaum: Thank you. Any questions or comments on the
Legal Matters? Mr. Rattner?
Mr. Rattner: Something that Mr. Dorsey mentioned, that Smart Growth
is running, seems to be the center of operations in the state.
I think one of the things that we were fortunate, the Council President
and I went down to Trenton to try to help with the presentations
about what we want to do in front of Smart Growth about three months
ago. That’s when we found out that Eileen Swann was moving
over to the Highlands and that the Mayor of Chester who knows the
area very, very well, he knows the issues, and I think that this
is the first time that we have somebody in a department that we
need down in Trenton that is from the area, that understands the
problems, and is going to help us in any way that is reasonable.
I think that’s one of the reasons that we’re very fortunate
at this time.
Mr. Dorsey: I should perhaps add that Rock Gold, as they like
to call themselves, advised us that they have now completed all
of the non-invasive studies that they require. Now, on the basis
apparently of doing that, the specs that I drew, and I think that
you will appreciate that I was just flying in blind when I drew
those specs and put in a minimum amount of development for our
standpoint in terms of trying to redevelop our tax base, I put
in number 400,000 square feet. They are now up to 539,000 square
feet, so we are now talking about a ratable if you use the usual
numbers of about $100 million, which we very desperately need as
well as the sale of EDU’s. We also discussed the fact, I
almost can’t believe this because you all know the difficulties
I’ve gone through with the Rockefeller Group and various
aspects there, is that one question about the correctness of the
documents I drew. They reflected on the fact, and he noted the
fact that they acknowledged their COAH obligation and they suspect
that they may and even try and build COAH units, which I think
would be good for the Township on that site but off the actual
landfill itself. There is a certain area that is not over landfill.
Of course the big test is the invasive test, which are the hydraulic
tests, is that the correct word? Hydraulic tests that have to be
made to see whether or not they can indeed put in the necessary…
Mr. Rattner: Pilings.
Mr. Dorsey: That, I think that they probably would do that in
about three months.
Mr. Rattner: You think that’s how long it’s going
to take?
Mr. Dorsey: The most amazing thing is, I’m sorry, am I going
too long? The most amazing thing is that I set up this timeline
and one never knew what one was doing and for months they told
me they were going to want some kind of an addition and I told
them well Vornado keeps on calling wanting to know whether you
guys are in this deal or not in this deal. They suddenly have now
told us that they are on our timeline, which isn’t terribly
important for us, but the most important thing is that invasive
testing they have to do because everything else can be great, but
if the soil can’t hold the building, but that’s where
we stand. I’m sorry.
President Greenbaum: That’s okay.
Mr. Perkins: One quick comment. When you guys met with the office
of Smart Growth, the whatever area they’re going to designate
this as now…
President Greenbaum: Planning area two.
Mr. Perkins: …will the proposed COAH, if they decide to
build on that out parcel, will that be included in the Smart Growth
also?
Mr. Dorsey: Oh yes, area two would permit that whole thing.
Mr. Tepper: We would be required actually to have COAH because
of area two.
President Greenbaum: Do you have something else?
Mr. Dorsey: No, I’m fine thank you.
COUNCIL REPORTS
Recreation Liaison Report
President Greenbaum: I assume no one has a Recreation report this
evening since Mr. Tobey is not here.
Board of Health Report
Mrs. Labow: We had our meeting a couple of weeks ago, standard… I
can’t remember if I reported on that at our last meeting
or not. We talked about phosphorous and the importance of it. Yes,
I did report on it. Okay.
Planning Board Report
Mr. Tepper: Meets Thursday.
Board of Adjustment Liaison Report
Mr. Perkins: No report.
Open Space Committee Report
Mrs. Labow: Basically, we met last night, and as we discussed
we’re moving forward with our applications for the County.
Legislative Committee Report
Mr. Buell: Nothing to report.
Pride Committee Liaison Report
Mr. Perkins: Nothing.
Board of Education Liaison Report
Mr. Buell: Meets next week.
Lake/Environment Issues Committee
Mr. Rattner: Last Tuesday the Lake Committee actually held a meeting
to discuss the issues of the Lake regarding the weeds. It was a
very productive meeting, over forty people attended. Four subcommittees
were set up to discuss different issues from moving forward on
how exactly we’re going to try to improve the Lake to a committee
to look at funding and grants and that type of thing. The subcommittees
first meetings have already been scheduled, and we’re moving
ahead. Phil Tobey was given the responsibility for the Lake Committee
on this specific project as a liaison to the Council and will be
reporting every two weeks to make sure it stays on schedule.
Safety Committee Liaison
Mr. Perkins: No report.
Finance Committee Report
Mr. Rattner: No report.
President Greenbaum: Is there going to be a meeting to discuss
the shared purchasing?
Mr. Rattner: Yes.
Economic Development Committee Report
Mr. Rattner: Nothing to report
Solid Waste Advisory Committee Report
Mrs. Labow: Like I said before we’re adjourned for the summer
due to vacation schedules and apparently one position is filled
tonight, and we have another Council position and a Mayoral appointment.
Library Board Liaison
Mr. Tepper: Meets tomorrow.
PUBLIC PORTION
President Greenbaum: Anyone from the public who wishes to be heard
this evening? Seeing none…oh yes, again, please state your
name and address.
Cheryl Goodwin, 368 Drakestown Road, Flanders: At risk of incurring
Mr. Tepper’s wrath, I still have questions regarding this
Shop Lane development. I really felt that the more questions I
asked the less clear the whole situation becomes, and I’m
not particularly happy about it. We’ve gone through a lot
of documents, I was trying to get a report which I believe Rob
Greenbaum alluded to, as the Engineer having submitted after our
meeting in March, explaining to us how grading was going to take
the water to Shop Lane and wasn’t going to be a problem to
us. What I came up with instead was a memo from him dated June
4th, which was a response, it was to Mr. Sohl, and it was a response
to our e-mail of May 29th. When I came to the Council Meeting on
the 12th, and I came to the Workshop I was under the impression
that there had been absolutely no response to the questions that
I had posed in my e-mail. I now have at a cost of $0.75, a copy
of this memo from Mr. Buczynski, and it as well as some other things
raises some questions. He alludes to these 2005 drawings which
we were definitely not shown in March, and we have seen by coming
to Town Hall and finding them. What we were shown was definitely
showing grading to the top of the foundations and being graded
toward Shop Lane. What we were shown the following day, which did
have a walkout basement, still showed the entire front of the foundation
typically graded up to the beginning of the first floor, which
I guess everyone now knows is illegal, but we certainly didn’t
at the time. It was something to me pretty incomprehensible. He
alluded to a proposed swale adjacent to the property and if you
recall in that Workshop there was a lot of discussion about the
swale. I don’t know why it’s alluded to as being proposed.
Mr. Pfaffenroth’s, I believe it was his engineer I don’t
know, someone from… his employee, as a requirement for his
final approval had staked out a swale. It was dug, it rained, it
came over the top, it was redone and then it has subsequently worked
with the exception of at one point where it has failed. It was
true the entire time that Mr. Pfaffenroth had it in there that
it was maintained, it was mowed, it wasn’t golf club but
it was maintained. I don’t know why now it appears to be
considered proposed. I’d like to get some clarification on
that. The only ditches, and I think Mr. Buczynski said several
times, alluded to ditches on that property, the only ditches on
that property were dug by my husband in pouring rain, trying to
get those rivers of water coming from that property, to get some
of it to go somewhere else. So I would like to get some clarification,
and I don’t know why I had to pay $0.75 for that. I would
have thought that I would be clued into the answers when answers
were given. In the Developer’s Agreement which was approved
in 2005, I was very surprised to read as one of the conditions,
now this is something as I understand that the developer must abide
by and they certainly were during all of the years of Mr. Pfaffenroth’s
ownership of that property, but it says that the developer shall
ensure that no stumps, dead trees, or debris are deposited on or
permitted to remain upon any of the lots or portions of said development,
nor shall they be deposited below the surface. Anyone who has driven
on that road from, I would say pretty much the second it was owned
by the current owner, those boulders are not indigenous to anything
on Drakestown Road. They were trucked in from elsewhere, and you
can bet if you look at those boulders that nobody in the neighborhood
could miss it when those trucks were coming in and they were being
dumped. We had years, they still remain there, they’ve been
there for years, we had years of a mountain of stumps. Not one
of those stumps was from any of those lots. Some of them were trucked
in from properties from who knows where, but they came in off Drakestown
Road. Some were trucked in from the back property. I would guess
some of them were from that other person’s property that
was mistakenly cleared. However, they were allowed to remain there
all that time. The dirt which initially started our questions,
mountains and mountains of dirt with the water problems, and we’re
saying, “What are you doing?” “Oh, they’re
just storing it there.” I’ve been asking and asking, “Who’s
keeping track of which dirt is for backfilling here and who’s
keeping track of which dirt?” The most I’ve gotten,
the closest to an answer has been a shrug of the shoulders, and
I do not understand it. I do not understand why this is not being
maintained at all. That swale which was maintained is now completely
overgrown, and that silt fence is placed on the edge of it where
it can certainly compromise the bank of that swale. I don’t
understand and I don’t think it should be that way. There’s
also the fact and we sat through, from 1989 which was the first
hearing for Mr. Pfaffenroth through 2001, which was the final approval,
many hearings and many long nights. One of the things in the Planning
Board final resolution memorializing this is where it states that
the parcel was originally zoned Rural Residential with a two acre
minimum lot size. Although the lot size is now four acres, the
application continues to be reviewed under the terms and conditions
of the RRA zone. Now everyone who sat though those hearings knows
that those lots were completely gerrymandered. It was a compromise
between Mr. Pfaffenroth’s right to develop his property,
and the conditions, the extreme wetness of a good part of the back
parts of the lot, etc. In the two acre zoning, there is a 200 foot
frontage requirement, and Mr. Pfaffenroth’s last drawings
show the first dwelling facing Drakestown Road because that’s
the only way that it could be without a variance, which he did
not go for. I would like to know how that first house is sitting
facing Shop Lane with 171.7 feet of frontage. As far as anything
that occurred or was discussed in those meetings that would have
required a variance, and certainly if there were a variance we
should have heard about it, and now suddenly we have this three
storey monstrosity. I think if everyone recalls initially when
I came here, and I alluded to a three storey monstrosity everyone
was telling me, “No, well it may look that way from your
side, but it’s really only two stories.” Now we know
since basements have to be above ground that yes it is three stories.
I don’t understand how this has gotten to where now we have
this not only a three storey monstrosity on Drakestown Road, but
it is 171.7 feet. That’s more than 14% below the 1988 requirement,
and that was the requirement when Mr. Pfaffenroth filed his application,
his first paperwork.
President Greenbaum: Mrs. Goodwin, a lot of these issues that
you are raising are really administrative issues, and should have
been dealt with by the Planning Department or the Building Department.
They’re not Council issues. We don’t get involved in
terms of the building which is done pursuant to Planning Board,
or not done pursuant to Planning Board approval. It’s really
something which the zoning office needs to make sure that the plans
that have been filed are the way that the development is getting
built. To the extent that 200 feet was required in terms of frontage,
then the zoning office needs to stay on top of that particular
issue. It’s an administrative issue, and while all of us
up here feel the anguish that you’re going through, I’m
not sure ultimately what the relief which Council can give you
is. It really is a zoning issue to the extent that they haven’t
followed the plans, then the house should not be allowed to be
built, period. But that’s a decision that the zoning office
and/or the applicant needs to go back to the Board of Adjustment,
or the Planning Board and get the appropriate variance, if appropriate,
from the Board of Adjustment if they built a structure which is
not consistent with the approvals that they’ve gotten. But
as you go through these points after points after points, I’m
sitting here going, “Okay, how as a Councilperson, can I
help Mrs. Goodwin?” It really is not a Council issue unless
someone up here can think of something, and I understand that this
is the avenue which you have to vent, to discuss, to educate…
Mrs. Goodwin: Yes, Planning Board meetings you know, and this
is the frustration. I did purchase a CD from the Planning Board
meeting, and on the whole definition of “basement,” I
hear that well it’s just a definition. Well then “building
height” is a definition too, and so “building height” is
lowest point to highest. It just seems like everything is running
around in circles, and I don’t know where the answer is.
I’m seeing things here which, as you say the Planning Board,
you go and it’s the issues that are there on the Agenda,
and that’s what you’re allowed to address. We’re
just getting the run around and stone walled, and there are things
here that seem to be highly irregular, including the fact of character
of the neighborhood because waivers were based on that.
President Greenbaum: My decision-making aspect which doesn’t
have to do with a lot of the issues that you have, it’s based
upon the reports that we get from our professionals. We have to,
as we sit up here, we have to rely upon our professionals irrespective
of what you bring forward. You bring something forward I have to
go back to the professional and say what about this? What about
that? We get a report back from the professional that says everything
was done pursuant to code. We don’t have any opportunity
as we sit here to say, “You know what Mrs. Goodwin? You’re
right, our professional is wrong.” I don’t have a basis
to be able to make that decision. Tonight you’ve raised an
issue with respect to frontage, and that the house was not built
according to the plans that were submitted in terms of the frontage.
It’s not facing Drakestown Road which would have given it
the appropriate footage, but instead it’s built facing Shop
Lane which doesn’t give it the appropriate frontage. If that
in fact is true, you need to bring that to the zoning officer and
say this house is not built pursuant to either the ordinances of
the Township of Mount Olive, and it’s not built pursuant
to the plans which were filed, and approved by your office. In
which case, she then needs to make a decision. She needs to say, “You’re
right Mrs. Goodwin that this house is inappropriately built, and
the applicant is going to be stopped from doing any further work
until they get the appropriate relief from either the Board of
Adjustment or the Planning Board.” I would assume that at
that point it would probably be the Planning Board since they don’t
have all of their approvals and that’s where they got their
original approvals. The Council does not act in an administrative
function. We don’t have zoning people, we don’t review
plans, we don’t make decisions based on plans, we simply
implement decisions which are made by the Planning Board in the
developer’s agreement. The developer’s agreement simply
says you shall comply with all of the ordinances of the Township
and/or the plans which were approved and the conditions that were
required at the Planning Board level. That’s what the Council
does. We’re like the Senate and the Congress rolled into
one. We’re not the President, we’re not the Police
Department, and we don’t have employees. We can’t follow
through on all of the things which you have brought to light. So
those things really need to go through, unless of course there
is some overwhelming scheme to just ignore the Township ordinances,
in which case, and that’s why we sent it back to Mr. Buczynski
at the time and said, what about all of these things that Mrs.
Goodwin is bringing to light. Is the house still at the appropriate
elevation, and the answer is yes it’s still at the same elevation.
Although there may have been some fill that was brought in to bring
the top of the house, but the house itself is still at the same
elevation. Now, you bring to light again and I only use this because
it’s a concrete example that I can grab on to the way that
the house sits on the lot and the frontage. If in fact you’re
right, that needs to be brought to the zoning officer’s perspective,
and a decision needs to be made. I assume that the relief which
the applicant is going to get is a variance ultimately with respect
to the way that the house is built. I can’t imagine that
the Planning Board or the Board of Adjustment is going to say, “You
know what, you can’t build it that way, you’ve got
to knock it down.”
Mrs. Goodwin: Well I can’t understand how it could have…
President Greenbaum: You know what, I don’t disagree with
you, we have sat up here, not with respect to your issues but with
other people’s issues in the past and said what do we do
from a legislative perspective? What law do we pass? What ordinance
do we pass that will ensure from our perspective that ultimately
what is approved is what is built? We’ve struggled with that,
because we meet Tuesday nights and pass these policies and laws
and resolutions which are general in nature, generally, in terms
of this is the problem and this is how we think we can fix the
problem. Then someone like you comes to us and says you haven’t
fixed the problem because here it is again. Someone is actually
building something that’s not pursuant to the ordinances
and is not pursuant to the plans that were approved. We say okay,
let’s check with our administrative branch, and we say Mr.
Sohl, Mayor, Mr. Buczynski, go out and check it out and let us
know if in fact it’s been applied, everything’s been
followed and they come back and they say yes, everything’s
been followed. We sit up here and we say okay, what are we supposed
to do? And then you come back with more things, and I’m telling
Mr. Sohl I’d like you to speak to Catherine Natafalusy. Issues
have been raised in fact that the ordinances of the Township and
the plans that were submitted were not followed at least in terms
of the first house which doesn’t have appropriate frontage,
according to Mrs. Goodwin, and didn’t get the appropriate
variance. I’d like to know whether or not that’s true.
I’d also like to know how that happened. If in fact that
was built in that fashion, then someone in the building department,
because I assume that once it leaves zoning they don’t go
out into the field and check to make sure, I assume that is the
building official who is supposed to sit there with the plans and
say okay, you poured the foundation in a fashion which is not consistent
with the plans. Your house is facing the wrong direction according
to what was approved. If that has happened, that’s a problem,
because then the construction code official is not upholding what
he is required to do on behalf of the Township. So that is what
I need to know. Mr. Sohl?
Mr. Sohl: Yes Rob, to that point what I’d like to request
from the Clerk’s office, since there’s a lot of information
that Mrs. Goodwin has conveyed tonight, if we could get this section
of the Minutes typed up or at least transcribed so that I can use
that to send and share…
President Greenbaum: I think it goes beyond that. I think a meeting
should be set up between Mrs. Goodwin and Catherine because I’ve
cut Mrs. Goodwin off at this point, and she hasn’t gone through
her whole litany of issues that she has. I think that a meeting
has to be established between Catherine and Mrs. Goodwin…
Mrs. Goodwin: I have no problem with setting up a meeting.
Mr. Sohl: Consider it done.
President Greenbaum: …and have Mrs. Goodwin go through all
of the different issues she has with the way that the development
has been built.
Mr. Sohl: Consider it done.
Mrs. Goodwin: I have no problem, she has been very, very helpful
with everything. It appeared to be something before that, the swale,
as to whether or not it’s proposed in the developer’s
agreement and maintenance. Who do I go to for that?
Mr. Dorsey: The Engineer.
Mr. Sohl: What Mr. Greenbaum is suggesting… I will have
a meeting scheduled with Catherine who is zoning, a construction
official, and Mr. Buczynski, so that whenever anything may defer
to one or the other’s expertise they’re right there.
President Greenbaum: Have a meeting with, yes?
Mr. Tepper: I was going to recommend you do it with Catherine
first, and then take the items to Gene to have them addressed all
at once.
President Greenbaum: I think it’s better if everyone sits
down in the room with Mrs. Goodwin, and let her put all of her
questions on the table. Let her get an answer to every one of her
questions at the same time so that there isn’t any question
that she’s not getting the run around. Let her sit with Gene
and with Catherine and with Gary, and list the item and get an
answer right there as to the particular question. Then you can
come back to Council and you can say these are the questions you
didn’t get answers to.
Mrs. Goodwin: With respect to character of the neighborhood, which
is mentioned extensively in the ordinances, it’s not specifically
with respect to residential areas however. This particular approval
also had numerous waivers, everything was based on the rural nature
of the area, including the fact that it is not a standard width.
President Greenbaum: You know I’m not sure that that’s
going anywhere Mrs. Goodwin. I’m not sure that you’re
going to get anyone up here to say that because it’s got
a basement, which is a raised basement, that it’s changing
the character of the general neighborhood. I don’t think
that’s an argument which is going to carry any weight, and
it’s certainly not an issue that we’re going to deal
with as a Council. I think that the issues you need to focus on
are whether or not the ordinances and the approved building plans
have been followed, and if they haven’t been followed, then
not only do we need to know about it, but the administration needs
to take action with respect to any major changes to the building
plans which were approved, or any violations of any of the ordinances
of the Township.
Mrs. Goodwin: I understand what you’re saying, Mr. Greenbaum,
but my only point is that in this particular case as I said, if
character of the neighborhood has no standing then there should
have been a forty foot road, and there should have been curbing,
there should have been sidewalks. None of those things should have
been waived on the basis of the character of the neighborhood and
the rural nature of the area as they were. So, in my opinion, and
I don’t know whether or not this is Council in terms of ordinance
or not, if in fact character of neighborhood or area has no standing
at all then it should not be the basis for waivers as it was in
this case.
President Greenbaum: I don’t agree with you in terms of
it being an issue. Character of neighborhood takes on many different
factors. It doesn’t necessarily mean that a house as built,
whether a ranch or whether its three stories or two stories, if
they tried to put a machine shop in there, I would say that that
goes against the character of the neighborhood, but the fact that
they’re building new construction in the neighborhood, and
in terms of whether or not sidewalks were or were not part of the
development, or whether or not curbing was required or the width
of the roadway, those are all issues which the Planning Board deals
with at the time that the plans are before them. They make the
decision as to what character of the neighborhood means under a
particular circumstance, it’s not Council. They made that
decision that the houses which were going to be allowed, or the
number of houses which were going to be allowed and the width of
the roadway, and whether curbing was to be or not to be, those
are decisions which the Planning Board makes on any particular
given application.
Mrs. Goodwin: I understand that, and I understand that there was
a process and I understand that all of the neighbors were there,
and they all had their input and based on that input it was part
of a process. None of this now is in the process, it’s not
open at all for comment and to me there’s a disconnect that
shouldn’t be. There should be, if there’s input with
respect to whether or not the road has to be the requisite code
width and whether or not there has to be curbing, if all of that
can be waived based on… I think there should be input beyond
that process, and all the neighbors had input on the width of the
road.
President Greenbaum: Well, as we’ve been advised there is
no requirement that there is actually buildings approved, specific
types of buildings approved by the Planning Board at the time that
the site plan approval is done. With respect to the site plan itself,
the roadway, the curbing, all of that, the drainage, all of that
is properly before the Planning Board. So what you’re saying
is that an applicant should be required to establish exactly where
on the lot and what type of house he’s going to put on it.
I don’t think anyone here on Council is prepared to move
forward with that type of ordinance.
Mrs. Goodwin: That may be. That’s fine, but I have to tell
you that’s my opinion if there are certain things that
are completely out of character. There should be a process, just
as there is with most of them where they include the houses.
President Greenbaum: Please let us know. Report back to us after
you’ve had a chance to meet with the professionals. Thank
you. Anyone else from the public? Seeing none, we’ll close
it to the public. Any further comment from Council?
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Mr. Rattner: I just have a question. I see a young gentleman in
the back row sitting here all night, and I don’t think the
Judge sent him…
President Greenbaum: That’s Mr. Tepper’s son.
Mr. Rattner: Oh. You made him sit in the back?
Mr. Tepper: I didn’t think you wanted him sitting up here.
Mr. Rattner: You’re punishing him so he had to come to a
meeting. Well welcome. He grew.
Mrs. Labow: He did.
Mr. Tepper: Significantly.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion was made and seconded, all in favor and none opposed, the
meeting was adjourned at 9:09 pm.
_________________________________
Robert J. Greenbaum, Council President
I, LISA M. LASHWAY, Township Clerk of the Township of Mount Olive
do hereby certify that the foregoing Minutes is a true and correct
copy of the Minutes approved at a legally convened meeting of the
Mount Olive Township Council duly held on August 7, 2007.
______________________________________
Lisa M. Lashway, Township Clerk
|