Mt. Olive Township Council Minutes
June 17, 2003

7 pm Open Space Reception


The Regular Public Meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council was called to Order at 7:30 pm by Council Vice President Ray Perkins with the Pledge of Allegiance.

MOMENT OF REFLECTION in recognition of the men and women fighting terrorism and those who have lost their lives defending the freedom we all enjoy

According to the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate Notice of this Meeting has been given to the Morristown Daily Record. Notice has been posted at in the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mt. Olive, New Jersey, and notices were sent to those requesting the same.

ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Scapicchio Mr. Spino, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Greenbaum, Mrs. Miller
Mr. Guenther, Mr. Rattner
Absent: President Guenther

Vice President Perkins: Mr. Guenther had to step away, he is down with Kathy Murphy, our grants coordinator working on securing more money for the Seward Mansion, he intends to hopefully be back towards the end of the meeting.

ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Licitra; Cynthia Spencer, Business Administrator; Lisa Lashway, Township Clerk; Peter King, Township Attorney.


Cheryl Goodwin, Drakestown Road: We have had problems since we have lived here with our next store neighbors. The fence that was between our properties was the least of it but we have felt that it seriously devalued our property and when we moved we would do something about it. I brought some pictures. They are old pictures, but I would like the Council to take a look at these photos because they are photos of what is under current Mount Olive Code a perfectly legal fence. We don’t know if this is the intention of the Council, but we don’t think it should be. The question has always risen, when people look at these, or look at the fence, what part of it is yours, what part of it is your neighbors? It is all the neighbors. When we heard the neighbors were moving away we contacted the Zoning Office and Property Maintenance and he indicated that under law there was really nothing wrong with the fence and that he could perhaps make them repair some of the weaker portions. There is broken, rusty wire. Perhaps have them paint some of the rusty parts, but really nothing. Years ago when Desiree Dunn was the Zoning Officer, she told me that she would have required that they put the wood portions in permanently as opposed to being wired to wire fence, but that they could literally cast that in concrete because there was nothing saying they could just throw up odd portions of fence, odd heights, and that they couldn’t have wire fence on our side. So we have known for a long long time that for whatever reason, this is not addressed and I don’t know what the Zoning Officer has done. The front portion which is why it was just wire fencing did come down this afternoon, there are still some rusty posts in the ground, they didn’t come out really easily I guess. But as I said, I don’t know if this is intentional on the part of the Council, that they truly want this to be an acceptable fence and we citizens should be able to do this to the neighbors or not, but we would certainly hope that they would not be and it would have been something that you’ve simply not had reason to address.

Mr. Perkins: What response did you get from the Zoning Officer?

Mrs. Goodwin: This is not addressed in the Code of Mount Olive, and that maybe he could make them paint some of the rusty portions; but that is truly not addressed and as I said, I have been told that through the years. In fact years ago Desiree Dunn said it’s wired. The wood is wired to the wire fence. If I make them put posts in, they could leave the wire side on your side and literally cast that nest in concrete, so that’s what it is. Part of the fence did come down this afternoon for whatever reason. So we don’t know what the Zoning Officer might have done.

Mr. Rattner: The Goodwin’s showed me those pictures last week and I did try making a call to the zoning officer, but I have been really busy and we didn’t hook up. I was here. Earl was here, when we actually put the property maintenance ordinance in, and I feel that what I saw, even from some of the pictures, some of the fence is in disrepair. Some of the stuff is not properly anchored and some of those things are covered by our property maintenance. The idea was to keep everything in good repair, have nothing that could be a safety factor and if the fence is loose, especially when you have animals, I can understand about not having anything to say which way you Mr. Rattner (cont’d): put the framing and which way you put the fencing. Some of that stuff, sections of fence leaning against an iron tube and some bailing wire put around it. I believe that our property maintenance would cover that because it covers a lot of things. It covers broken branches, it can cover a gutter that may be loose; you know people that don’t cut their grass and let it go up waste high, and it causes a nuisance.

Mr. Spino: Maybe we should have the Zoning Officer in and a workshop to discuss with him, maybe what should be in the ordinance that involved that fencing is that the fences should be of the similar type all the way down. I’ve seen different heights, different kinds of wood fencing, different kinds of metal fencing. It really doesn’t make any sense the way it is done. The way it is done there, it just seems like it’s done like that to aggravate the neighbors.

Mr. Rattner: Well that’s different, some people have different types. You do it at different times.

Mr. Spino: If you are going to run one fence line, by the time you get to the end, four different styles, kinds and materials.

Mr. Rattner: Well that’s something we could put in the code, but I think part of it is, if it’s in disrepair, if it’s not properly affixed.

Mr. Perkins: Would you be kind enough to coordinate something with the Zoning Office to address this and bring that back before the Council for a future workshop.

Mrs. Goodwin: As I said, my concern is as Desiree Dunn having told me that, that fence, as it stood, they could sufficiently anchor, when you talk about anchoring, that fence could be legal, if they had the wood portions perfectly anchored. That is casting and concrete, something that is a total eye sore, esthetically.

Mr. Rattner: Those are two different issues, but right now part of it is not, I take that right now, it is not allowed because it is not properly affixed. That is the immediate. Then we look at what Mr. Spino is saying, we should look at the ordinance because we have to consider the esthetics and how it relates to the neighborhood. I am sure there are certain neighborhoods in town that they would not put up with it, somebody would have put that up and it would have been gone the next day, not by the town but by somebody else just going in and taking it on themselves. I am not telling you to do that, but we have to address it and it should be done and we could plan that, but right now, just to at least take down the stuff that is in disrepair.

Mrs. Miller: You can always amend an ordinance to make sure that fences have to be consistent throughout their length.

Mr. Rattner: One of the things now which was around is that you don’t need a permit to get a fence, so nobody even knows what you are doing.

Mrs. Goodwin: In theory you do. Now there was not permit for this one but it has been up for twenty years. In theory you are supposed to have a permit, but apparently it is just a question of paying a fee.

Mr. Rattner: Anything up to what; four feet, and there’s no special stuff. You can just come in and get the permit and say fine.

Mr. Goodwin: The Zoning Officer is involved at six feet or below. The building department becomes involved and then there are building inspections done at six feet and above. So in other words, if you are six feet below, zoning can issue a permit, and there is as far as we know, no inspection, nothing else done by the Town, and this does inspect and regulate an awful lot of things and this seems to us to be a very big hole in what could be a very uncomfortable living situation.

Vice President Perkins: What is your address again?

Mr. Goodwin: 368 Drakestown Road.

Vice President Perkins: We’ll take a look into that through the Zoning Office.

Mrs. Goodwin: As I said, the whole front section, except for a few pipes that wouldn’t come out did come out this afternoon, for whatever reason. I don’t know.

Mr. Rattner: So maybe they were talked to.
Mrs. Goodwin: Most of it you couldn’t tell was there.

Vice President Perkins: Anyone else? Seeing none.


Recognition of: Mount Olive High School Debate Team

Mayor Licitra: First what I am going to do is read the article. The Mount Olive High School Debate Team recently won its third straight annual Northwest Jersey Debate League Championship. The team, which has a dozen members is coached my Mount Olive high school English teacher, Linda Niper. “Niper said the team debates throughout the year and is part of a local league to which nine area schools belong. High schools in Sparta, Roxbury and Jefferson are in the league.” The top performing schools go on to the championship which was held at our school in Mount Olive High School. The members of the winning team are senior Philip Laparey, Juniors Michael Curren and Dan Beckman and Sophomore Brian Cantor. This year’s debate team captain placed third individually for speaker of the year. He tied with the spot with a Sparta High School Student. Also individually, Beckman placed first for speaker during the championship. Cantor won second place, and Cantor and Beckman won first place for the day. Everyone was excited that the team placed first overall for the third year in a row and they have really been a power house in the last few years. Mrs. Niper said, I think they are really dedicated and we have some really extremely talented debaters. There are things that go unnoticed in Mount Olive because they don’t take the highlight of other championships or other teams. We try to keep it in focus, that all teams are equal not matter what, if they play sports or debate, and we try to recognize them. To win three years in a row is something that really makes Mount Olive proud, and it makes Mount Olive look good and it makes these young people realize that this is quite an accomplishment. So, we in the Township, Mayor and Council would like to bring these people forward and honor them for this honor that they bestowed upon Mount Olive of bringing this championship again to Mount Olive and I’d like to bring up first of all Philip Laparey.

Mayor Licitra: Philip Laparey, in honor of outstanding and significant achievement and winning the 2003 Northwest Jersey debate team championship and this certificate of achievement is presented by myself and Council President Bernie Guenther. Thank you.

Mayor Licitra: Michael Curren, in honor of outstanding and significant achievement and winning the 2003 Northwest Jersey debate team championship and this certificate of achievement is presented by myself and Council President Bernie Guenther. Thank you.

Mayor Licitra: Dan Beckman, in honor of outstanding and significant achievement and winning the 2003 Northwest Jersey debate team championship and this certificate of achievement is presented by myself and Council President Bernie Guenther. Thank you.

Mayor Licitra: Brian Cantor, in honor of outstanding and significant achievement and winning the 2003 Northwest Jersey debate team championship and this certificate of achievement is presented by myself and Council President Bernie Guenther. Thank you.

Linda Niper: First of all Mayor Licitra, we really appreciate the recognition that you and the Town Council are giving us this evening. As you said, it is so important we think that everyone recognize the academic accomplishments of the school along with the Football Team, and the other sports teams. For you to take the time to do this, this evening really means a lot to the debate team and personally, to me, but also to the high school and we really appreciate it. I would like to take a minute to also recognize two other team members who are with us this evening. The four that were mentioned represented us in the Championship but all during the year the other debaters are debating and helping us accrue points for the year too. So I would like to recognize Gregg Signivitch and also Alan Helenski.

Recognition of: Memorial Day Essay Contist Winners
Kelsey Oesmann, MOMS
Libby Werner, MOHS

Mayor Licitra: Few the last few years we have been having a Memorial Day Contist, an essay Contist and we were rained out this year as far as the ceremony was concerned but that does not mean we don’t have some winners who the Pride Committee had picked as our winners for our recognition of our Memorial Day Essay Contist. I am going to give my time over here to our Chairman of our Pride Committee, Liz Quimet who will come up and make the awards for me and tell you a little bit about the Contist and the winners. Thank you Liz.

Liz Quimet: Well, as Mayor Licitra says, we have this every year and I think this is our fourth year that we have had this. What we look for in the essay’s is heart. Not just parades and barbeques and that’s what Memorial Day means to each of the students, but we look to see what it is in their heart of what it means. The one thing I think is really important that we have seen is that a lot of the kids start off their essays not ever knowing what Memorial Day was. So first of all, it is nice because it is a history lesson, so that get that at least in there. Then the other part is that they don’t believe it is just sales at Macy’s and the barbeques, but they also believe that there is really a meaning to it. One of our winners was at the Middle School, and one was at the High School, and our Middle School winner was Kelsy Oesmann. Our High School Winner was Libby Werner. They also received a $100.00 savings bond.

Mrs. Quimet: I would also like to read their essays. This is Kelsey’s. What does Memorial Day mean to me? Freedom, Peace, Justice and Liberty are a few things that categorize the United States to me. I can’t imagine the United States without these traits. Memorial Day is the day when America remembers and honors the brave individuals who fought wars for our country, for us and our freedom. To some people, Memorial Day is just a day when pools open and there is a parade and barbeque. But to me it is the day when we should realize that these soldiers fight for us and for our freedom, yet they don’t even know our names. Memorial Day is the day when we should realize how much freedom means to us and that we sometimes take our freedom for granted. It is a day when we should see that we owe a lot to the soldiers who served in the armed forces and to thank them for all they have done. These soldiers really had to be brave and strong to deal with all of the pain, suffering and sorrow they experienced. They deserve to be honored and remembered. Even if it is only for one day out of the whole year. It is hard to imagine what goes on during war and how hard it was for the people who were involved in them because we are so far away from it all. If you talk to someone who is a war veteran, you can get a sense of the death and destruction involved in war. You can see how hard it was for the soldiers and you come to realize that these people really deserve to be honored. These soldiers fought for us. Some of them died fighting for us. How does it feel to know that some people gave their lives for us, for this country, and for everything the United States stands for. Yet we fail to recognize these people and thank them. We don’t give them the credit they deserve. Without these people the United States would be a totally different country. A country I am sure I would not want to live in. I love the United States and can’t imagine living anywhere else. I can say what I want, do what I want, and believe what I want. I owe this sense of freedom to the brave soldiers who fought for our country; they are the people who made the Untied States what it is today, and I think it is time we thank them.

Libby Werner: Every year at the end of May, we as Americans take time out of our busy lives to remember. Remember our Country’s past, and the people that have helped to shape our great nation. We also reflect. We reflect on our own lives and how we have made a difference in the world. Be become thankful. We become thankful to those to have risked their lives to save ours and our freedom. Memorial Day is the day said to honor the people that have died for our Country. I believe that in honoring, we are remembering the great sacrifices in what selfless people they were. By remembering that there are many people who lost their lives so that we can live freely can really humble a person. We have to take the time and remember that the land we walk upon was won for us through battle. We need to honor the memory of our fallen soldiers. In remembering others, we must also learn to reflect on our own lives. Memorial Day is not only a time to think and remember others, but also a time for us to look at what we have done in our lives. It is a time to evaluate what we have done for our community and our world. People have died to save our Country; but what are people doing to keep saving our Country today? Memorial Day is when we must reflect and look at our Country present day. How can we continue to keep our freedoms? How, as individuals have we worked to better our world. Memorial Day to me is a time set aside to be able to reflect and look within ourselves. That is the only way our nation will stay great. Above all, we must be thankful to those who have served our country. Not many countries in the world have the luxuries and freedoms that we as Americans do. We are able to live the way we do because of the soldiers of our past. People fought and died for us and we must be filled with gratitude. Memorial Day is when we give our thanks. I see it as a Thanksgiving Day for the late soldiers of our Nation. It is a time when we must look outside ourselves and instead be thankful towards others. That is the only way we will be able to work towards a more harmonious future. I truly believe that Memorial Day is a very important holiday to our nation. It is a day when we remember our fallen solders, reflect on our own contributions to society and are thankful for all that everyone has done for our Country. Memorial Day is one of many Holidays said to honor our great nation and increase patriotism and nationalism. I know this Memorial Day, I will stand up, raise my flag and be proud to be an American.

Proclamations read by Mayor Licitra
July 13th – 19th National Aquatic Week

WHEREAS, July is Recreation and Parks Month; and

WHEREAS, individuals and organized forms of recreation and the creative use of free time are vital to the happy lives of all our citizens; and education, athletic and recreation programs throughout the Township of Mount Olive encompass a multitude of activities that can result in personal accomplishment, self-satisfaction and family unity for all citizens, regardless of their background, ability level or age; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Mount Olive is extremely proud of the swimming facilities and aquatic programs of this community and their contributions to providing to all ages a healthy place to recreate, a place to learn and grow, to swim, build self-esteem, confidence and a sense of self worth which contributes to the quality of life in our community.

NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed that I, Paul R. Licitra, Mayor of Mount Olive Township do hereby proclaim, July 13th – July 19th NATIONAL AQUATIC WEEK in Mount Olive Township.
Recreation & Parks Month

WHEREAS, the U.S. Surgeon General’s report “Physical Activity and Health” concluded that a sedentary lifestyle is a primary factor in more than 200,000 deaths per year; and

WHEREAS, Public Health professionals and park advocates suggest that when communities invest in parks and other recreational facilities, they invest in the health of their citizens; and the availability of parks, trails and greenways have a positive impact on community health; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Mt. Olive Divisions of Recreation, Parks, Buildings & Grounds as members of the National Recreation and Parks Association, are committed to providing the best possible recreational programs, facilities, services and opportunities to the residents of Mt. Olive; and

WHEREAS, The National Recreation and Parks Association brings visibility to parks and recreation, and quality sports programs; and

WHEREAS, parks, recreation activities and leisure experiences provide opportunities for young people to live, grow, and develop into contributing members of society.

NOW THEREFORE, be it proclaimed that I, Paul R. Licitra, Mayor of Mount Olive Township do hereby proclaim, July as Recreation & Parks Month in Mount Olive Township.


Turkey Brook Park Project Status

Mrs. Spencer: Consolidated Building Corp - the soccer restroom building is having the siding or façade installed today and should be finished by week’s end, weather permitting. The trim is also to be finished this week. The cupola is installed, the roofing complete with the exception of the tin roof for the cupola, which is expected by month’s end. The rough plumbing has been stalled and bathroom fixtures are on order. The water system work will commence tomorrow. The water meters will now be installed inside the buildings, thus protecting them from the elements. There is sufficient room in each building to wall mount them in the designated storage areas for easy access. It has been recommended that we consider hopper type opening windows to be inserted in the buildings which will provide a weather seal and keep in the heat and protect against the pipes freezing in the winter and the windows can be opened in season to provide for better air flow and ventilation. Joe will be examining that as a possible change order. The Baseball Tower 2nd floor has been started and is 85% framed. Weather permitting this will be completed this week. The rough plumbing is 65% complete and HVAC contractor will begin his work next week, while the roofing will be within the next couple of days. The ruts created by the heavy equipment and the extremely wet conditions, are being regarded and the area cleaned and re-seeded today by CBC contractors. Kyle Conti Construction - final punch-list has been created and is being discussed with Kyle this week. There are a couple of trees that still need replacement and some issues with sod and drainage to be corrected. Conti will be asked to return to the site in July to finish up the paving around the baseball tower as soon as the exterior work is completed by CBC. The Maintenance Barn; Jim has been soliciting quotations for roofing. It has been recommended that he use a dimensional shingle in the same color as used on the two new buildings. As soon as he receives all three quotes, he will go before Council to make his award recommendation. It is planned that the barn roofing be completed prior to July 19th. Jim’s guys have worked miracles in-house and have installed new doors and windows in the structure and replaced all stone walls through use of their masonry skills. As time/weather allows, the cracks in the side of the structure will be addressed as well. Joe has been working with the Town to create plans that can be submitted to Building and Construction for the bracing of a second floor within the barn structure. Development of boulevard activities - Parks, Buildings and Grounds working with a couple of the Road Division personnel rented a bulldozer last week and have created the bed for the loop road parking lot and also dug out the area needed as a base for the Saturn Playground installation. This week they will have the rock base delivered and level it.

Mr. Greenbaum: I have a question for Jim. Jim, several people have come up to me concerned about the playing fields themselves and the leveling of the fields. What is your impression of how the fields are currently situated? What is going to be done to correct any problems? Are those punchlist items? Are you on top of it? I am more interested in an update as to what your impressions of what the conditions of the fields are currently.

Mr. Lynch: I have been in conference with the soccer club and with football regarding the conditions, those were the primary concern fields. When the sod was installed, the vehicles that were used did leave some angulations in the final grading. That is been noted, it has been noted ever since that sod was laid last fall. It is included on the punch list, it is expected the contractor will make minor repairs to those areas as we have assembled lists deemed necessary. We will not let Conti close this job out until it is repaired to my satisfaction. There are some areas now that we have had a very wet spring, where we could see some of the grading by the bulldozer, the final grading. There is some work that needs to be done. It has been noted, it is on the punchlist and Conti will have to finish that before we lose sight. We will get those fields to where they should be. I would say in just my opinion professionally, those fields are 97% complete. there is 3% though that needs to be addressed. It has been noted and Cindy and I will be working along with Schoor DePalma to make sure that is closed out in a proper fashion.

Mr. Greenbaum: I had several comments from various members of the soccer club who were very concerned about the condition of the fields and I am glad to hear that you have been in touch and working with them towards getting the fields in appropriate condition. They were so concerned that they wanted me to actually go up and walk the site with them because obviously I haven’t walked the site other than the day the park was open and all of us walked the site. Their concerns obviously are our concerns, because Conti can’t leave the site until those issues have been corrected. I have great confidence in you and I just wanted to raise the issue here tonight to let you know that others had been in touch with me, I don’t know whether or not it was prior to your getting in touch with them, but it is an issue that needs to be addressed.

Mr. Lynch: We will be addressing it on an ongoing basis. I am sure they have come to you as well as their discussions with me. We have been talking with various members of the clubs and I have tried through the league soccer and football residents to try and get the word out, that it is on the punchlist and these items will be corrected.

Mr. Greenbaum: Okay.


Questions on Bill List?

Mr. Rattner: I went through the Bill List and I came up with six or seven items that I wanted to look at. I only found about half of them in there. The three I didn’t find were relatively small, they were expense reports and things like that. Should they be in there, or would there be cases with small items that wouldn’t be in the basket, that that’s really not a complete list.

Mrs. Spencer: It is my understanding that everything should be in there although there are some exceptions where small checks may have been issued, the back up and purchase orders certainly should have been in there.

Mr. Rattner: Okay, well after the meeting I will give you the list. They were smaller ones and they were under the limit that we would normally look at anyway.

Mrs. Spencer: It is my understanding that his is a compilation of the Bill List.

Mr. Scapicchio: Cindy, there is a check for $93,000 and some change for Kyle Conti on Page 3. Have all of the appropriate people signed off on that payment?

Mrs. Spencer: Yes, they have. This represents 99.71% of the project being complete. There is $15,000.59 that remains to be completed and we are still holding $23,673 and as we have reported on the punch list items we believe that to be well over what it would cost for the completion of those items. It has been signed off by everyone.

Mrs. Lashway: There was a purchase order that Kyle Conti was supposed to come in and sign.The vendor never came in today. I don’t know if it is that one, but it was a payment to Kyle Conti and he did not come in today. The note says not to issue the check until he come in and signs the purchase order.

Mrs. Spencer: Right. We have a policy that we never issue a check until such time as that P.O. has been signed off on. In the cases with these contractors, because we get a certificate of payment that they have in fact not only signed off on it, but that they have had it notarized and then we have the architect and engineers sign off. We often time let them come in because it is out of their way during our business hours to make it in, so they do not receive those checks until it is approved here, they sign the P.O. and only then is the check issued to them, because we already have their signature for that amount.

Mr. Rattner: On the Conti Voucher, aren’t we also holding out over $100,000 in retainage, the 2%?

Mrs. Spencer: We were, and it was recommended by Schoor Depalma that a major part of that be released which is why this payment is so large, because so much of the job has been completed at this point. To hold them because the remainder of the job that needs to be done is basically paving around the baseball tower.

Mr. Rattner: I am not questioning it; I just thought that I read it the other way around. I thought that we were still holding it. Could you pull out the voucher and I will look at it during the meeting.

Vice President Perkins: Any other questions on the Bill List?

Mr. Scapicchio: What is the procedure that we normally use to release that retainage? Is it when the project is 100% complete? Isn’t that the purpose of that retainage to hold it until that job is 100% complete?

Vice President Perkins: It normally is under contract.

Mr. Scapicchio: If that is normally the way we practice business here, then I would like to figure out what that is and deduct it from this amount. Is it normal for the Administration or Gene Buczynski to arbitrarily make that kind of a decision if it is not normal practice on our part?

Mr. Dorsey: Well Gene Buczynski should not be certifying vouchers if indeed the payments are not in accordance with the terms of the contract. I don’t know how anybody could answer that tonight because Mrs. Spencer advises that this retainage has been released on Gene’s authorization.

Mr. Scapicchio: It hasn’t been released yet, it is part of this payment. I don’t know on what basis he made that decision. In your experience though John, with the municipal contracts, when is the retainage released?

Mr. Dorsey: The term retainage usually denotes that it is retained until the very end of the job.

Mr. Scapicchio: Isn’t it usually 30, 60, or 90 days after completion?

Mr. Dorsey: I don’t know about 30, 60, or 90, it is usually after all the affidavits are submitted and all bills and subcontractors has been paid and that sort of thing and if there is any maintenance bond to be put up, that the maintenance bond is put up. There is no point in trying to answer the question because the Administrator says it is Buczynski who made that decision and he is not here.

Vice President Perkins: Would your recommendation be, Dave, then to just remove that item from the Bill List?

Mr. Scapicchio: That would be my advice; I don’t know what everybody else has to say.

Vice President Perkins: Let’s just remove it.

Mrs. Spencer: That does place the contractor in some what of a position of hardship because you don’t have another meeting for three weeks.

Mr. Scapicchio: Wait a second Cindy; you talk about the hardship of the contractor, how about the hardship and the difficulty that we and the taxpayers go through? I mean that in all sincerity. You continue to talk about the hardship that others go through and I think that you need to focus your efforts on the hardship that we go through.

Vice President Perkins: Cindy do we know what the retainage is?
Mrs. Spencer: I would have to look at it and go back to the last payment that was done and I could calculate that certainly.

Mr. Rattner: If we had the retainage, the total adjusted contract is $5.1 million, so if it was a 2% retainage, we should be holding $100,200.

Mr. Scapicchio: And we only have about $30,000

Mr. Dorsey: I’ll make a suggestion. Why don’t you approve the payment to Conti less $100,000 retainage, what ever the arithmetic is tells you what the amount is. Why don’t you make subject to the Council’s satisfaction, the release of the retainage when Buczynski comes in and justifies the release to you.

Mr. Spino: I would move that you do exactly what Mr. Dorsey said, remove the portion of that which is retainage and hold that until we get a confirmation of what is going on.

Mr. Greenbaum: Which as I understand is virtually the whole payment, less maybe a $1,000.00 or $2,000.00 but if that is what our contract requires us to do, that is what we should do. There is only $15,000 left and we are making a $93,000 payment, we are supposed to have $102,000, he is getting about $13,000. I’ll second Mr. Spino’s position.

Mr. Scapicchio: Steve, are you going to come up with the number?

Vice President Perkins: Let’s move along until we get to the Bill List at the end we could give that final determination.



March 25, 2003 Present: Mr. Rattner, Mrs. Miller, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Greenbaum, Mr. Scapicchio, President Guenther
Absent: Mr. Spino

May 27, 2003 Present: Mr. Spino, Mrs. Miller, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Scapicchio, President Guenther
Absent: Mr. Rattner, Mr. Greenbaum

June 10, 2003 CS Present: President Guenther, Mr. Scapicchio, Mr. Rattner, Mr. Spino, Mr. Perkins
Absent: Mr. Greenbaum, Mrs. Miller

Mr. Scapicchio made a motion to approve the minutes listed above and Mrs. Miller seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously with the following exceptions. Mr. Spino abstained on March 25, 2003, Mr. Rattner abstained on May 27, 2003. Mr. Greenbaum abstained on May 27, 2003, and June 10, 2003. Mrs. Miller abstained on June 10, 2003.


League of Municipalities

1. E-mail received June 2, 2003, from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding Flag Ordinance, Long Term Tax Exemption Law.

2. Letter received June 5, 2003, from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding Smart Growth / State Planning Acceptance Process.

3. E-mail received June 5, 2003, from the New Jersey State league of Municipalities regarding Senate Community and Urban Affairs Committee Meeting, Monday – June 9, 2003.

4. Invitation received June 9, 2003, from the Morris County League of Municipalities regarding Morris County Mosquito Commission.

5. Letter received June 12, 2003, from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding Sixth Annual Elected Officials Hall of Fame.


6. Letter received June 21, 2003, from McManimon & Scotland, L.L.C. regarding Fairways at Flanders Associates, LLC, a/k/a Fairways at Flanders, LLC; and Severud v. Fairways at Flanders, Docket No. MRS-L-708-03.

7. Freshwater Wetlands Application Checklist received June 5, 2003, from Associated Consultants regarding Property at Drakestown Road Block 12, Lot 4 Washington Township, Morris County.

8. Letter received June 6, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding Musconetcong Sewerage Authority (MSA) Amendment Proposal.

9. Letter received June 9, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding the Governor’s 12th Annual Surf Fishing Tournament.

10. Letter received June 10, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding a One year Extension of Time Request – Dara Estates.

11. Letter received June 12, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding Permit Application No. W-08-92-4681 Dyrham Wood (aka / Golden Hills)

Resolutions, Ordinances, Correspondence from other Towns

12. Resolution received May 28, 2003, from the Morris County Board of Freeholders regarding Temporary
Prohibiting Parking on Certain Sections of County Roads (Flanders Road).

Correspondence from Organizations / Committees / Boards

13. Annual Report received May 27, 2003, from the Morris County Planning Board regarding Development
Activity for the year 2002.

14. Letter received May 28, 2003, from Morris County Mosquito Extermination Commission regarding products used for Mosquito adulticiding.

15. Letter received June 10, 2003, from St. Elizabeth Ann Seton regarding “Parking” for Annual Carnival.


16. Letter received May 28, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control regarding request for Special Ruling to Permit Renewal of Inactive License Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 33:1-12.39 Held By: Burger and Brew.

17. Letter received May 29, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety, Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control regarding Division’s Actions against Clover May Inc.
18. Letter received June 4, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety, Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control regarding Special Ruling Permit Renewal of Inactive License Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 33:1-12.39 Held by Burger and Brew.

19. Letter received June 4, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety, Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control regarding Special Ruling Permit Renewal of Inactive License Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 33:1-12.39 Held by Rare Hospitality International, Inc.

20. Letter received June 9, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Law and Public Safety regarding Notice of Proposal.


21. Letter received June 11, 2003, from Comcast regarding effective Name Change.


22. Notice of Re-scheduled Hearing received May 27, 2003, from the State of NJ Board of Public Utilities,
Regarding the New Jersey Propane Gas Industry.

Vice President Perkins: Council comments on any items of correspondence? Seeing none



Ord.#25-2003 An Ordinance to Amend and Supplement an Ordinance Entitled An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Establishing the Mount Olive Township Ethical Standards Board and Related Matters (Ordinance No. 1-2001)

Mr. Rattner moved that ordinance Ord.#25-2003 be introduced by title and past on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 8, 2003 at 7:30 pm at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mount Olive, New Jersey for a 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. Miller seconded the motion.

Vice President Perkins: Council Discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously with the exception of Mr. Greenbaum and Mrs. Miller, voted no. Earl Spino was not present for the vote.

Ord.#26-2003 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Revision to the Code of the Township of Mount Olive, Part II, Chapter 400 Lane Use, Article V Design Guidelines and Technical Standards, Section 400-74 Surface Water Management Subsection E Design Standards.

Mr. Greenbaum moved that ordinance Ord.#26-2003 be introduced by title and past on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 8, 2003 at 7:30 pm at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mount Olive, New Jersey for a 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. Miller seconded the motion.

Vice President Perkins: Council Discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously. Mr. Spino was not present for the vote.

Ord. #27-2003 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Establishing Fees or Rates for Off Duty Police Officers.

Mrs. Miller moved that ordinance Ord.#27-2003 be introduced by title and past on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 8, 2003 at 7:30 pm at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mount Olive, New Jersey for a 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. Greenbaum seconded the motion.

Vice President Perkins: Council Discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously. Mr. Spino was not present for the vote.

Ord.#28-2003 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Providing for the Defense and Indemnification of Police Officials and Public Employees.

Mr. Rattner moved that Ordinance #28-2003 be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 8, 2003 at 7:30pm at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mount Olive New Jersey for a Public Hearing and 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. Greenbaum seconded the motion.
Vice President Perkins: Council discussion?

Mr. Scapicchio: Mr. Perkins, this ordinance or version of this ordinance first came before Council on October 9, 2001. At that time the title was Indemnification of Members of Volunteer Boards for Punitive Damages. At that time, based on the comments of Mr. Dorsey, Mr. Licitra and the rest of the Council members, I think that this type of an ordinance as proposed really exposes the township taxpayers to a tremendous liability that I don’t think we should accept. Now if we could purchase insurance or the JIF was to cover this, I would look at it a different way. I am not sure how this got back on the calendar but I would like to see this Council reject this proposed ordinance.

Vice President Perkins: Any other comments from the Council?

Mr. Spino: I asked for this to be placed back on the agenda, and we did have in a straw poll at our workshop and approval to do that in our closed session because it was having to do with litigation. I am recommending it be done because we put out people on our boards and officials. What you are saying is we are putting you at great risk, volunteer, but if something happens, we are not going to support you. I don’t think it is fair.

Mr. Scapicchio: Give me an example because that is not true.

Mr. Spino: I don’t think it is fair.

Mr. Scapicchio: When you say we are putting them at risk, what do you mean by that?

Mr. Spino: We are putting them at risk for every person to come along and make a unjustified suit. You could sue anybody you want for anything you want at anytime you want. I am not going to debate the issue, if you don’t want to do it, don’t do it.

Mr. Scapicchio: We do support them because the legal fees that are incurred in defending that type of a law suit are covered. The only thing that is not covered is if punitive damages are awarded.

Mr. Dorsey: You have correctly stated it. You cannot buy insurance for punitive damages, you do buy insurance for what is referred to as the laws of compensatory damages and you do buy insurance that provides the defense, generally even for punitive damages, but it is the punitive damage award that is not covered by any insurance that I am familiar with. The punitive damage award is an extraordinarily unusual award but it does occur. This ordinance excludes from it any punitive damage award that arises because the employee or public official committed a crime such as and this is only by way of an example; if a police officer was to steal while in the course of conducting an investigation, that could give rise to punitive damages and there would be no coverage for that, it would be a punitive damage award and it would be indemnified under this ordinance. But there are other instances in which punitive damages rise and this ordinance is in attempt to indemnify the public officials for those kinds of judgments.

Mr. Rattner: You weren’t here at last week’s meeting when this was discussed, and when the straw poll was taken and what was represented directly. I did check my memory with the person who said it and it was represented to us the JIF had changed and that they would cover this type of an award if we were asked to be covered by that.

Mr. Dorsey: Steve, I know what you are referring to because Peter asked me about that this evening.
That fact of the matter is, unfortunately he was mistaken. He believed that you were discussing things dealing with employment practices, under the current system of JIF, the Township receives a $50,000 deductible if it does not have an approved employment practices booklet and follow certain other procedures, but even if you have an employment practices, manual it does not cover punitive damages. It does not grant you insurance for punitive damages.

Mr. Rattner: I understand what happened, but when we talk about the straw poll we took last week it was based on that and I think we came to the conclusion, if we can have insurance, it is not going to hurt other than maybe a little bit more in premiums, the taxpayer because of the acts that would rise, the punitive damages that we would okay having the insurance for it. But if we can’t get insurance for it, I wouldn’t leave it open ended either toward the taxpayer.

Mr. Dorsey: That is fine by me. This is a policy decision, I was asked to redraft the ordinance and put it on so you have to do with what you see fit.

Mr. Rattner: I am just saying, why if some of the votes are different from the straw poll it is because of what we understood last week and if the facts are slightly different, that’s why it is going to have a different result.

Mr. Greenbaum: I have a question for Mr. Dorsey. Assuming that this ordinance is going to be defeated, can individual punitive damage awards be indemnified by this Council on a case by case basis if that is the decision.

Mr. Dorsey: Every punitive damage award would be an individual award. It would be against a named person, and yes, the Township Council could adopt an ordinance to indemnify as to a specific award.

Mr. Greenbaum: I understand what and how punitive damages are generally awarded and for the types of conduct which punitive damages are considered, in most instances, it is my opinion, that we would be remiss if we were to indemnify for punitive damages for those types of conduct. However, I could foresee a particular type of situation where a punitive damage award was made where the conduct of the individual was not the type that I am opposed to indemnify. I think it is better policy to look at it on a case by case basis if that event arises rather than to have a general ordinance.

Mr. Scapicchio: Ray, I would just like to read an excerpt from that October 9th meeting that Mr. Dorsey made because I think it puts in perspective the types. He gives an example of what a punitive damage award would be given for. He goes on to say that in a case of board members, theoretically it is possible given a certain set of facts, that if they violate a person’s constitutional rights, if they make a decision which is clearly based not on the facts in the case, but upon racial discrimination, or ethnic discrimination, it is possible that a Jury could award punitive damages because it is something more than simply making a mistake or doing something wrong. It is a situation in which they have been actively motivated by people’s motive. That is the kind of situation in which punitive damages are made and I would suggest that if that is the example that one uses, those are the types of people that we don’t want sitting on our boards. That is not to suggest that we do, but if one acts in the manner that Mr. Dorsey describes here, that is not the type of act that we want to hold an employee or a board member harmless and indemnify them for.

Vice President Perkins: David, when I looked under the defense Section two, the exceptions are obviously criminal acts or remissions, actions arising out of fraud, misconduct. I am not convinced in myself that doesn’t pertain to someone acting outside their scope of their responsibility in a good prudent manner and ethical while sitting on a board or another public employee. I am kind of torn between looking at that.

Mr. Scapicchio: If you look a little further up the top of that page, you will also see that it says indemnification by township should include any of the following. Any bonafide settlement agreement entered into by the public official or the employee, and it goes on to say that as long as the settlement is approved by Township. So what that suggests is one may enter into a settlement prior to something going to court. So you are then again faced with, do you go to court, or do you provide a settlement. That is my position and I am not going to support it in its present form.

ROLL CALL: Defeated Unanimously with the exception of Mr. Spino and Mr. Perkins, both voted yes.

Ord. #29-2003 Bond Ordinance Providing for the Acquisition of Water Meters in and by the Township of Mount Olive, in the County of Morris, New Jersey, Appropriating $11,125 therefore and authorizing the issuance of $11,125 Bond or Notes of the Township for financing the Cost Thereof.

Mr. Spino moved that Ord. #29-2003 be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 8, 2003 at 7:30pm at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mount Olive New Jersey for a Public Hearing and 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. Rattner seconded the motion.

Vice President Perkins: Council discussion?

Mr. Rattner: I support this. This is long overdue; trying to get these water meters in and it appears we have somebody who may actually get them in. However, I have a question with the ordinance itself. We know this is being paid out of the sewer utility; it describes itself liquidating and the obligations as such. However when you look in Section 9, it appears that it is saying that it is the full faith and credit of the Township and it is the unlimited obligations of the Township. Is that a mistake?

Mr. Dorsey: That is not a mistake; it is the typical language that is included in every one of the Township’s ordinances. I understand that through various mechanisms which are in place, the water users alone will pay back this bond ordinance. But in order to float a bond, it must have behind it the full faith and credit of the Township.

Mr. Rattner: Okay, because then I guess my question is more directed to Sherry. If we have the full faith and credit of the Township as pledged, then how come it would be deducted from our debt load. If we are pledging it then it would be part of our debt.

Mr. Dorsey: Well, they may segregate that on the basis that you have self liquidating utilities.

Mrs. Spencer: That is exactly the answer that I was given. Sherry did check with Bond Counsel and it’s required by law that the wording be in here.

Mr. Dorsey: You know, even if you had an MUA, when the MUA floats a bond issue, the full credit and good faith of the Township stands behind it and that is arranged by way of agreements entered into at the establishment of an MUA. So there is nothing unusual about this and you will see through the various mechanisms that are in place, that only the water users actually pay for this bond.

Mr. Rattner: I know we have enough people that are going to be looking at that.

Mr. Dorsey: You know what I mean.

Mr. Rattner: You know what I mean.

Vice President Perkins: I think we went through this even when we started the separate utilities, the bond ordinances that were in place had the same question.

Mr. Rattner: I don’t have a problem with it as long as it meets the Statute.

Vice President Perkins: Any other Council Discussions? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously


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.


1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Awarding a Contract to Waterworks-The Lee Company for Furnishing of 18@ Meter Pits and Accessories for the Mount Olive Township.

2. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive to Cancel Taxes of Block 2100 Lot 33 and Return Tax Sale Certificate Proceeds for this Property Acquired by the Township Through Donation.

3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Renewal of Alcoholic Beverage Licenses for the 2003-2004 Licensing Period.

4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Place-to-Place Transfer of Alcoholic Beverage License No. 1427-44-013-003 from One Unit in Sutton Plaza to the Adjacent Newly Constructed Unit for Sutton Park Bar & Liquors, Inc. Trading as the Wine Rack.

5. New Jersey Department of Transportation Resolution, Application and Agreement for State Aid to Counties And Municipalities – Cory Road/Flanders-Netcong Road Sidewalks Improvements.

6. New Jersey Department of Transportation Resolution, Application and Agreement for State Aid to Counties And Municipalities – Resurfacing of Sandshore Road.

7. New Jersey Department of Transportation Resolution, Application and Agreement for State Aid to Counties And Municipalities – Reconstruction of Sunset Drive.

8. Resolution of the Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Granting of a Waiver for the Fee for the Temporary Food License for Local Food Establishments that are Currently Licensed and Operating a Permanent Food Establishment Within Mount Olive Township.

9. Resolution of the Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Bid Award to Princeton-Nassau Conover, FLM for a 17.500 GVW Dump Truck for $50,054.

10. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Bid Award to Condit Truck Center, Newton, NJ for a New Cab, Chassis, Body, Hydraulics, Plow Hitch for $90,641.

11. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Change Order for Turkey Brook Park in the Amount of $25,000.00 for the Running of Water, Sewer and Electric Utilities to Future Concession Stands.

12. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Temporarily Closing Fairfield Way for the Installation of a Water Main.

13. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Professional Services Contract with Schoor DePalma for a GIS Strategic Plan and Data/Document Conversion of Building and Construction Documents.

14. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Execution of a Contract with Enforcy’s NJ, Inc.

Vice President Perkins: Does anyone from the Council wish to have any items of the Consent Resolutions Agenda removed or discussed separately?

Mr. Rattner: I just have some comments and corrections. On the first resolution, if you look at it, it doesn’t add. It’s because the decimal place is in the wrong spot. It said that the grand total is $91,000. If you add it down your around $5,000. What it should be adjusted is, where it says $610.50, it should be $61,050.00. Number 2, where it is $256.00 to the bid award, it should be $25,675 and the rest are okay and then it will add down to $91, 125.00. The next item I have is number 7, which was a reversal in the priority on the roads. I know we discussed it; the Public Works Director was going to look at Sunset vs. Sandshore at the Council President’s request because we felt that sunset seemed to be a higher priority and that was reversal. I just want to make sure that it was not because of a decision up here, but because Public Works agreed that was the right way to go. I am assuming they did that.

Mrs. Spencer: I do know that Gene and the Director of Public Works met and went through this before it was submitted.

Mr. Rattner: The last item is No. 14, and this one may be a little more problematic. This is the resolution of the contract with Enforcy’s. We talked about this four weeks ago; the first time the Chief came in and he came up with a price of about $120,000. I said I read the contract, came up with something different. He was here last week and gave us a handout saying it is $91, 280 and the resolution now says it’s $108,000. What is the cost of this program and related stuff? The initial amount.

Mrs. Spencer: I believe that same handout showed what the cost for the kind of licensing and maintenance over the year started with the first year being $17,000, growing by $2,000 and ending at $25,000 at the end of the term. I don’t have that documented in front of me. I could go get it.

Mr. Rattner: I have this, is this what you are talking about? I can’t find numbers that are anywhere close to the $108,000. I remember when I first added it up, I thought it was over $200,000.

Mrs. Spencer: He didn’t write it out, but I had done an analysis.

Mr. Rattner: If we’re buying this stuff, it is $191,000. There is a certain amount each year. How did you come up with the $108,000. What does it include? I am not sure really what we are dong here. I know we have been talking a lot of different numbers, and I want to move ahead with it, but I can’t figure it out from here, where the$108,000 came from. We need the software, we need the hardware after you install it, they are doing the data conversion and the software, hardware and the data conversion right here is $191,280.

Mr.Scapicchio: I think we need to hire Rattner as our accountant. Do we have to move on that Steve?

Mr. Rattner: I think we should just pull it off until we make sure because I don’t think that is enough money to go ahead with it anyway even if we voted on it

Mr. Dorsey: Okay, so let’s just have a motion to approve all of the Consent Resolutions 1 through 13

Mr. Scapicchio made a motion to approve the Consent Resolution Agenda 1 through 13. Mr. Spino seconded the motion.

Vice President Rattner: Public portion on Consent Resolutions. Seeing none, I’ll close it to the public.

Mr. Dorsey: David’s motion is to move resolution 1 through 13 with the amendments and corrections mentioned by Mr. Rattner.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

Vice President Perkins: There was one item under non-consent resolutions that has been removed for this evening, so that will be off the agenda. So that means we’ll pass the public portion on individual resolutions.


15. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Endorsing a Constitutional Convention RE: Tax Reform – OFF


1. Bill List.

Mr. Greenbaum: Before we get to the Bill List, Ray, do we need to find out if Mr. Rattner has figured out the numbers on the Conti Bill?

Mr. Rattner: Taking what is on the application for payment, it says completed work to date is $5, 089, 927.50. From that you would take 2% retainage, which totals $101,790.00 which has earned less retainage of $4,988,136.95. According to this sheet, less previous certificates for payment, they have already been paid, is $4,973,145.88 which says that there is only an available amount left in the contract of $14, 991.08. What that is saying, is that is about 3.3%. I think before we heard that the contract is 99%. Right now what we have paid him is $99.7 of the contract amount. So I think Mr. Scapicchio said before that maybe we should just pull that off entirely and decide if we are going to keep the 2% retainage we had before or make some new procedure. With that, because with $14,991 you would still have to take out the 2% plus you could only pay him for work that has been done. From the percentage, we know it is not 100% done at this point, so there is really no money to give the contractor.

Mr. Greenbaum moved the Bill List absent the Conti Payment. Mr. Spino seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

2. Approval of Raffle Application #1082, #1084, #1085, #1086 for the Budd Lake Volunteer Fire Dept; Raffle Application #1083 for the Mt. Olive Junior Baseball/Softball Association; and *Raffle Application #1084 & #1085 for the Budd Lake Volunteer Fire Dept.

Mrs. Miller moved for the approval of the raffle applications as listed above. Mr. Greenbaum seconded the motion.

Vice President Perkins: Council discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously


Library Board Liaison Report

Mr. Scapicchio: Several things, we had a meeting on Thursday, June 5, 2003 with representatives of the Library and as the Council knows there some outstanding issues that need to be worked out in terms of how the paper work flew between the two agencies in terms of this new library building and how the money was handled. All of those issues have been addressed to everybody’s satisfaction, so that issue has been taken care of. Progress to date for the new library is as follows: there is the finalization of some outstanding contract documents and I believe the only thing outstanding is Mr. Dorsey’s requiring the contractor to have the Township named as an additional insured on their liability certificate, submittals for all the materials and products used to date have continued to move forward, they have installed the soil erosion controls and some safety fencing in the disturbed areas, delivered the temporary field offices, and they have the temporary power hook up either in place or in progress. They started to clear the site and remove the tree and brush and they have installed some crush stone in the entrance way for that site. They have surveyed and staked the location of the building and major site improvements and preparation for primary excavation work which should begin shortly. Also at the last Library Board meeting they raised two issues with their existing building, one was the cooling system which they say needs to be replaced, but they are hesitant to do that since they are going to be moving out of there. I think they said the replacement costs was about $8,000, so they had it repaired and it is sort of just held together with some bandaids and tape. The other issue is the parking lot is in disrepair and they wanted to know if we could have DPW look at it and possibly do something at a reduced cost to sort of fill in some of the pot holes that are there. Cindy, could you have someone in DPW look at that. If we could help them out, that’s fine, if we can’t I guess that is fine also.

Mr. Rattner: What is your initial opinion on the General Contractor since he is relatively unknown in these parts?

Mr. Scapicchio: I could tell you that everybody seems to be happy. The construction manager that the library hired is pleased with the progress to date and there is another issue Steve, and that is that the Library Board of Trustees understands that there is some money left over because the bid came in lower than one expected. They have looked at four additional change orders that they are considering, the architect has put together some pricing for change orders that they are discussing. They will probably want to come and make a presentation to the Council at the next workshop. I have an idea of which one of the four they prefer, but I think they are still gathering some information. Lisa, if we could put them on the agenda for a workshop and I had a discussion with Jane Israel tonight. Maybe you could just let her know that we did and they could come prepared to make a presentation and try to convince Council to accept one or all of, or none of their recommended changes.

Vice President Perkins: Each one of those will have a cost benefit associated with them right?

Mr. Scapicchio: Yes. They certainly do.

Mrs. Lashway: Do you want that on for the next Workshop?

Board of Health Report

Mr. Perkins: One major item that came up at the Board of Health meeting was the well at the liquor store across from the lake. They wanted to have it underground in a pit and have a vent that came off it, not unlike what was done at the Perkins restaurant. The Board decided to reject that proposal since it was not prepared by a professional engineer as the other two applicants had been required to do. It was only done by Andover Pump. So we gave them a 30 day turn around. They need to get an engineer and come up with a better design than that. What I would like to do also is schedule for the next workshop or the one after to have our Health Director come and make a presentation on the status of the shared county type service and all that have taken place. I will ask Lisa if on the 24th or the following workshop if you could set aside the Board of Health for that. On a positive note, I ran into Art Meyers at the Buildings New York show. He had a display booth there also. He sends his hellos to everyone.
Planning Board Report

Mr. Greenbaum: Basically June 12th was our last meeting. There were two development matters on. One was the continuation of AOR holdings, which is a planned expansion down at the Mall at 206. I think it is19,000 square feet approximately. The Planning Board was able to get the applicant to redo the entire parking lot as well as redoing the entire sloped area behind the building as part of the approval process. The other development matter which was discussed was Wachovia Bank which is a bank which is going to be up in the Trade Center and that was approved and that takes care of my report.

Open Space Committee Report

Mrs. Miller: They were doing mostly the planning for their little reception that they had tonight. I think they pulled it off very well. There’s really nothing else.
Legislative Committee Report

Mr. Spino: No report.

Pride Committee Report

Mr. Perkins: We have all seen the Pride Committee here. I finally got a chance to get those certificates out to those young adults. All the stuff that had been purchased for the Memorial Day parade, the balloons and all the handouts will be part of the Turkey Brook celebration, so those items will just be moved over. The group continues to work with the NJDOT on some beautification sections along the highways. As you know, the triangle that was done across from the Ace, that was fixed, actually more work is planned for the area and they are also looking at the State doing some work by Mount Olive Road for the stream that runs through since that also dumps down back into Budd Lake. The State has a jurisdiction over that one particular area where it gets kind of filled in with shopping carts, so they are going to try and work with the DOT on that.

Board of Education Report

Mr. Scapicchio: They meet next Monday so there is nothing to report tonight.

Master Plan Committee Report

Mr. Scapicchio: Rob can sort of help me out on this one, I had to leave early for the Library Board Meeting, I didn’t stay for the full discussion. The committee discussed the rescinding of the cluster ordinance and the basic consensus was that they wanted to keep in place the cluster ordinance but they wanted to add some additional language, and some strength to that. I had also made the suggestion that the cluster ordinance really never worked the way I thought it was intended. In that I would like to see some clustering, but I would also like to see some homes on some larger lots. When I asked the engineer and the Town Planner whether or not we could do that, and to sort of create zones that didn’t allow the cluster or created zones that specifically allowed clusters, they said that it could be done, but that it was very time consuming in putting that kind of a document together; based on Mr. Spino’s suggestion, they were going to move forward with adding some teeth to the existing cluster ordinance so that we could get that adopted and then proceed with trying to strengthen it in the way that I thought it would be appropriate. Is that accurate Rob?

Mr. Greenbaum: It’s accurate.

Mr. Scapicchio: That’s when I left the meeting.

Mr. Greenbaum: The other part of the meeting related to the proposed amendment to the Master Plan to allow the adult active community on the one track behind the old Budd Lake school. There was significant discussion as to the different types of uses that property could be used for - commercial, office, adult active community. It is currently zoned commercial. There are only two negative votes. Mine and Bruce Bott voted against changing it to an adult active community, and it will be part of the Master Plan. It is not that I am against senior housing in town; I am in favor of senior housing in town, as I am sure all of us are; but affordable.

Vice President Perkins: What I would like to propose to my fellow Council members here is our Zoning Board is obviously a Board that is appointed by the Council, we have absolutely no liaison, and Mrs. Goodwin who came in and made her presentation this evening, again brings to light that the grass roots people are effected just as bad by some decisions that are made in our ordinances, in our land use ordinances, and enforcements, and I would like to propose that we create a council liaison position to at least come back and report to the Council on a monthly basis at least, or once every two weeks, what is taking place and how it is effecting the average citizen, not just the developments without the Town. I would offer to hold that position for the balance of this year.

Mr. Rattner: Would it make more sense to periodically have the Board of Adjustment president in here so he can just answer questions?

Mr. Perkins: No. I rather make it part of the Council Reports.

Mr. Scapicchio: I think if a Council liaison gives a good report, it is probably a good thing to do.

Mr. Perkins: I would offer my services for the balance of this year and then we could look at looking for someone when we reorganize.
Mr. Scapicchio: I would support that Ray.


Dave Jones, Budd Lake: Just out of curiosity, what are we doing considering paying Conti anything when they are named in a lawsuit for $800,000?

Mr. Dorsey: Because there is an understanding that his vouchers would be processed in accordance with his contract and it would not appear at this basis, based upon some very significant study, that Conti was not the party primarily at fault in connection with the $800,000 extra. I am not going to discuss that extra because it is a matter of litigation.

Mr. Greenbaum: John, wouldn’t it also be true that if we were to withhold payment for work done that we would have additional issues?

Mr. Dorsey: We would have many additional issues.

Mr. Jones: If he is not at fault, why would he be named in a lawsuit?

Mr. Dorsey: We are just not going to discuss it any further Dave because it is in litigation.

Mr. Greenbaum: I don’t believe that is what Mr. Dorsey said anyway.

Mr. Jones: Well what did he say?

Mr. Greenbaum: In matter of the record you can get the minutes.

Mr. Jones: I don’t think you know either, thank you.

Mr. Greenbaum: I know exactly what he said on that issue.

Ned McDonald, Budd Lake: This is a question I guess to the Administration. I see in this month’s Bill List, there are 13 separate checks to Verizon. Is there any reason we have to have that many separate checks? Couldn’t this be consolidated?

Mrs. Spencer: Well the actual payment is consolidated I believe into one payment, but we receive numerous bills. I believe also this will be the last month that happens, because we have now signed the accounts over to ACC Business, but we were receiving, Jim would you help me out, I feel like saying about 45 separate bills on different lines and they come in one at a time.

Mr. McDonald: You say that will be stopped with the new system?

Mrs. Spencer: As a result of the agreements, we have awarded to consolidate our phone system; yes. We will be getting one bill.

Mr. McDonald: Thank you.

Colleen LaBow, Budd Lake: I just want to ask two questions. Back when Turkey Brook, when the detention basin was spilling out and the plugs were removed or whatever; intentionally, unintentionally. What was the end result of that? What were the findings? Why was he at the meeting? A suggestion was made by a couple of people that Conti was responsible for that. Did he pull the plugs?

Mr. Lynch: The incident in question, Conti did remove the plugs to draw down the pond. DPW responded to the situation. There was through the proper chain of command an investigation initiated through the lake committee. We plugged it. Soil conservation was out, Joe Dunn from soil conservation investigated and their findings were that there was no reason to fine Conti or anything. The situation was controlled. There was a spill in to the lake, however it was rectified on the Township’s behalf and we move forward from there.

Mrs. Labow: I just wanted to know what the end result was for that. The other thing I have to ask a question about is the Master Plan changing for that track of land over there on route 46 to senior housing. First I was in a meeting and they said it was going to be 330 units, then I read in the paper it said 367 units, that hasn’t been deemed yet?
Mr. Greenbaum: Separate issues. The two plans which have come before the Planning Board are conceptual in nature, both of them, there is no application currently pending. The Master Plan has dealt with whether or not the zone is going to be changed irrespective of who ultimately is going to come in and develop that property. Now, most likely it is going to be Hovnanian. It’s going to be at about 360 units when they ultimately come in with a plan. The decision in the Master Plan to change the zoning is not necessarily dependent upon Hovnanian.
Mrs. LaBow: To accommodate the builder.

Mr. Greenbaum: Correct.

Mrs. LaBow: How do we know that?

Mr. Greenbaum: How do we know what?

Mrs. LaBow: How do we know that we are not chining the Master Plan to accommodate the builder?

Mr. Greenbaum: All I can tell you is that through my own deliberations on the issue, it has been done that way and the Master Plan from my own perspective is not being changed to benefit anybody, it is simply to provide a different type of zoning, a different type of development. I can’t tell you what each member of the Master Plan Committees’ justification for doing that is, I could only assume that it is only for the same reasons that I am doing it. Otherwise, I can’t say.

Mrs. LaBow: The other question I have, I live right around the corner from there. It used to be where you could leave your house there, all those cute little bungalows, go to the traffic light, make a left and be on Route 80 in a matter of three or four minutes if you happen to hit all the traffic lights. Now you turn on to that roadway there and because of all the houses that had come further west, and with the ITC, so on and so forth. It took me 15 minutes for me to get from my house to Route 80 the other day. I understand that no one has put in an application before the planning board to develop that attractive land for senior or any other housing at this point. It seems to me that we just keep putting in developments, we keep adding to the town and we don’t do anything for the infrastructure.

Mr. Greenbaum: You have to understand that the piece of property in question is currently zoned commercial. It can be developed commercially. Everyone is very concerned about the traffic on Route 46, in fact the traffic is likely to get worse based upon developments which were approved during the1980’s and 1990’s. Those developments are going to add significant traffic; Route 46 is a State road. We have tried to do different types of things regarding the traffic control on Route 46 for the benefit of the residents of Mount Olive Township. In addition to that we are concerned about the traffic because there is further development west of us which is going to be bringing additional traffic and there is nothing we can do about that except try to raise the concerns which the township has done. Everyone is very concerned. I think if we could limit development on that piece of property, that is something that we would look at. As you know, a property owner has a right to develop his property, we can’t stop him from developing it. So, we looked at the different types of uses which that particular piece of property could yield, and if you think about it, in an adult active community of 52 or 55 and older, is not likely to put as much traffic in to the rush hour peek periods as an office building might or a commercial use might.

Mrs. LaBow: Right now, Rob, living over there I could tell you that the rush hour peek periods are horrendous, however the “slow” times of the day are horrendous. Furthermore, if there is a possibility that a development is going to go in there with 360 seniors, any kind of housing, you are looking at a possible 720 more cars onto the roadway during that time.

Mr. Greenbaum: It was all discussed. Again, that piece of property is going to be developed and we looked at the different types of usage and how it would affect the traffic. Just because you live on the Budd Lake side of town, don’t think that the traffic problems aren’t bad on the Flanders side of town. If you have ever been on 206, on a Saturday trying to go south, or coming north on 206 during rush hour, we have traffic problems on the Flanders side of town as well. We are very concerned about the traffic. It is unfortunate that a lot of these developments which were approved a long long time ago before any of us except probably Mr. Rattner and Mr. Spino were here and had nothing to do with those approvals. We looked at different options with the traffic issues trying to see if there were ways that the entrance to that particular piece of property could be somewhere different; going out the back end. That was looked at, it was raised by Mr. Weiss in fact and we were told because of constraints of the property itself, that was not an option. I don’t know whether or not it is a wetlands issue or it’s just not an option. In addition to that it would create other traffic problems on other roadways. Believe me, I am not a fan of putting in this senior housing, but I am in the minority.

Mrs. Labow: I am not saying that it is a Budd Lake issue, that there is all this traffic. I could only speak for where I live. If I lived in Flanders and in the same situation, I would be saying the same thing. The other thing is, a little further west of there, they have the development Country Oaks. Two years ago, when I was walking through that neighborhood and if Bernie was here he would tell you the same thing, people had gone to the State and they had counted the cars and so and so. They were told that there weren’t enough fatalities to warrant putting a traffic light in. I also understand that we are one of the States that don’t require builders to put back into the infrastructure when they kind of like, deplete things and make things harder. I know that is not our fault and we can’t do anything about that because that is our State issue and we have to get that passed through. But on the other hand, something has to be done, whether it is additional traffic lights. My house is only three streets in from the highway and almost every other hour you hear sirens because there is one accident after another. So, is there anything we could possibly do about this except to say we are trying. What could we do that is really proactive other than talk about trying?

Mr. Spino: If you talk to the Police Department, most of the accidents are due to driver inattentiveness. If you put more lights there, I am not saying we shouldn’t, we are still trying to get a light on Connelly Ave. I don’t think we will ever give up that fight. Also, due to driver inattentiveness, you are still going to have accidents. Getting back to the senior housing, it was discussed and it has come to the conclusion that this is the least intensive use of that property.

Mrs. Labow: I would think a warehouse would be the least intensive use, but you can’t dictate what somebody could put in there.

Mr. Spino: You might not have as much automobile traffic, but then you have tractor trailers. Which would you rather have?

Mrs. Labow: Actually I would rather have a couple of tractor trailers during the day than a couple of hundred cars.

Mr. Spino: Most of the people over there would not because 300 units is not going to give you the traffic that even a warehouse might with the employees and the vehicles going in and out, or that a commercial site would give you; open all day. Would you rather have a Sams Club there with traffic all day long, seven days a week, or would you rather have an office building that has a lot of traffic in the morning and in the afternoon. It is the least intensive use of the property. I would like to see it not developed; I would like to see nothing else developed in this town, but that is not up to me.

Mrs. Labow: The other question I have to ask is again, at several times on the changing of the zoning, I keep hearing the word affordable housing for seniors. Now, are we talking about affordable housing for our seniors that are in our Town that can no longer afford to live in their houses and pay the high taxes, or are we talking about affordable housing for people who are coming from the east, west, say people who can afford a $300,000 unit?

Mr. Greenbaum: I think you should take the “affordable” out of it. It is senior housing, which is what it is. That is what the intent was, but what this is, is it is going to be market driven and there is very little we could do about it once we change the zone and it is just going to be senior housing.

Mrs. Labow: So basically the idea isn’t to provide housing for our seniors within our community, a place where they could go, and purchase and be able to stay in town. It’s whoever can afford to live there.

Mr. Greenbaum: You can’t dictate who is going to purchase anyway. Even if you could set aside a certain number of units which you can’t do, no one could dictate that those units would be for Mount Olive residents. There will be hopefully a lot of Mount Olive Residents who would take advantage of this active senior community and will move from their current house into this community and hopefully live here happily ever after. So to say that this is not to the benefit of Mt. Olive residents, is not accurate.

Mrs. Labow: We don’t know because we are not asking for people’s tax returns to see if they can actually afford or not afford because that is not the issue.

Mr. Greenbaum: It is not apart of the approval process.

Mrs. Labow: Where is it that there is truly affordable housing?

Mr. Spino: COAH, Mt. Laural, but then you have what we might have up on the hill. The units that we had that were affordable, we had to take for every one unit, we had to take seven or eight building units. So does that make Mr. Spino (cont’d): any sense anymore? It doesn’t, this original thought was to make it affordable for the people in town as Rob said so that they can sell their house, still live in town where their children might be living, or where they raise their kids over a 30 year period or whatever. Even I realize that they are market driven. What you can do and what the Planning Board could do is if they so feel that they should is that they could build in to the recommendation, maybe the developer gets more units. But some of them have to be affordable. What would be the HUD price? I don’t know if that is possible. We are not even at that presentation stage yet.

Mrs. Labow: There hasn’t even been an application yet before the planning board, so we don’t know what is really going in there or if anything will go in there.

Mr. Greenbaum: I don’t think that is necessarily true, I think we know that if we change the zone, Hovnanian is going in there.

Mrs. Labow: But still, you don’t know. We could only suspect. Thank you very much.

Howie Weiss, Flanders, NJ: A couple of things I could add to the conversation, as co-chairman of the Master Plan Committee, they might want to clean up a little bit of that last conversation. First of all, the planned adult community was put on the Master Plan Workshop about two years ago, it was at that time that we identified a need and at the time I guess ideally we wanted to do affordable senior housing for everything that we all talked about. I think we realized last week that affordability is a relative term. Even if we were able to make the home affordable, whatever that means, say under $300,000. If it is priced under $300,000, if it is priced under market value, it is going to be resold at true market value by the first person that buys it. It is a relative number that we cannot control. To clean up what I wanted to do, Colleen you had made a comment about who is dictating the process and I can assure everybody that we set aside some basic parameters of how we would like to set up a planned adult community zone. In that we listed things like density, minimum acreage requirements, so on and so forth. It was once we set up some of the initial parameters, mainly a density of six homes per acre. A minimum acreage of 70 acres I think, I don’t have it in front of me. Then that got out into the first draft and it was at the first draft that I am sure some representative from Hovnanian saw the Master Plan and realized that there is an opportunity. Hovnanian came to us with a plan that worked with our first draft. Six units on an acre, a 70 acre minimum; as Earl touched upon in his closing comment, one of the things we tried to do to insure affordable housing is we were considering increasing the density from six units an acre to maybe 8, 10, or 12. When we realized that wouldn’t have accomplished anything, we pulled that off the table, went back to six units an acre and pretty much gave up on our hope of making affordable adult housing. I guess relative to other new home housing starts in Mount Olive, it will be affordable but I think we are being realistic to think that we can tell the developer what price he could sell the homes for, short of sacrificing the density. That is where we are at with the Master Plan. That was my addition to what Mr. Greenbaum reported. I have a couple other items I wanted to talk about. When I looked at consent agenda Item 11, I wanted to thank the Council for approving that $25,000 and I wanted to give just a little bit of background to that. I know Cindy has been working very strongly with myself who represents the football program as well as baseball. The rest of the story that is not on here is that I just wanted to make it public that both the football program and the baseball program and I think soccer as well is doing their own thing, have worked on a joint effort to build a concession stand with private funds. I know that the concession stand was pulled off of Phase I of Turkey Brook for financial reasons. It was a need that the groups wanted, working with the Council and tonight’s appropriation of the $25,000 makes it all possible, so just for the record, the baseball program and the football program are going to privately build concession stands, and the two programs are going to work together to make it a fundraiser and a money maker so that the programs can exist, so thank you to the Council for giving the programs the start that we need. Again, the money simply ties in the utilities to a point where we have agreed upon to make this concession stand. I have another issue that I noticed tonight. I was hoping that we would never have to talk about this, but with the build out of Flanders Park, many of you know I live in Flanders Crossing, every night the park is used. It is packed with walkers, volleyball players, basketball, etc. But we are getting to the point where parking is a problem. I know the township made great efforts to build that auxiliary lot off of that road down there, and what is happening is that people are a little bit lazy. I have been here with the high school parking problem and watching Council have to determine what to do with parking but we have another problem. It is going to need to be addressed.

Mr. Spino: You mean to tell me that the people that go down to the walk, won’t park in that lot and walk to where they are going to walk?

Mr. Weiss: Unfortunately Mr. Spino, I am going to tell you that. It is a problem because what is happening now is the people who use the park, are parking on front of the Flanders Crossing area. That is private property that is open space and as a resident of Flanders Crossing I pay a lot of money to maintain that for landscaping and know people are parking essentially on my front lawn. I guess they wouldn’t know that is private property. I think I am going to ask the Council, to maybe consider posing an ordinance that will prohibit parking on Bartley-Flanders Road, we could define the area, but it is a problem. Tonight I saw six cars. Mayor, you were down there I don’t know if you Mr. Weiss (cont’d): saw the same problem. But when there are three cars parked and the next time there are four.

Mr. Scapicchio: Howie, are they jumping the curb?

Mr. Weiss: There is no curb and I can tell you that is private property. We have talked about it in our association meetings, putting boulders and stones and ways to do it, and I don’t know if that is a solution, but I could assure the Council that if there is no resolution or there is no ordinance drafted to protect our private property, then they are going to do it themselves and that might cause other problems that I would hate to get into, namely boulders on the side of the road is certainly a hazard, so I am asking the Council to consider it, making their next workshop to draw up some kind of ordinance that would prohibit parking on Barely-Flanders Road. Maybe we could avoid possible problems down the line. The final issue I had tonight is annoying me. This is something I have been reading in the newspapers, it is always nice to see Mount Olive in the paper, but when the headlines are starting to read that Mount Olive is involved in more lawsuits and more litigation, it annoys me. I’m talking specifically about the Ethics Board and the law suit that is currently on hand. I understand Mr. Dorsey that we are not going to talk about the specifics, but I remember a couple of years ago when this was an issue and the Ethics Board was put together, and I suppose the concept was that the people that were involved were trying to do something good, perhaps come up with a Board that was non-political, something that was not to be used by a political candidate to maybe attack another candidate or maybe even to just get their name in the newspaper. It is funny, because as a member of the Planning Board, I sit there monthly and I listen to our developers who come up here and I know that they don’t care about Mount Olive, they don’t care about the citizens one bit, they are concerned about their wallet. I suppose their is nothing wrong with that but people who come up in front of us from the Planning Board, they tell us how they are concerned, they want to make Mount Olive better, but ultimately if they don’t get what they want, they go right to the court system. I suppose they are entitled to it, but as a citizen, as a taxpayer of Mount Olive, I get very annoyed when I see somebody who does not live in this town, not get their way, and they run to the courts. Now, I am seeing a resident of our town who is doing the same thing. It is annoying. Mrs. LaBow has sued the Township and it frustrates me. Ultimately I will have a question for you Mr. Dorsey: It seems just like our developer’s who come in front of the Planning Board and don’t get their way, they don’t like the answers, so they sue us. I have to wonder sometimes if there is a better way to handle this. Mr. Dorsey, I hope you could answer it; you always seem like a reasonable person, you always seem to have a solution. Regarding this issue, did Mrs. LaBow or her atttorney, ever approach you regarding her concerns to any alternative?

Mr. Dorsey: No. The first we heard of the alternative which frankly was very easy to accomplish, and we’ve started the process tonight was when we appeared after two years of case management conference.

Mr. Weiss: Because I guess what I have in front of me is Ordinance #25-2003 which is ultimately a very expensive document to the citizens of Mount Olive. It seems like a very simple solution that should have been worked out a long time ago. I didn’t know if there was ever another solution besides the courts and again, I sit up there unlike many other people, I sit up there week after week hearing the developers attack us, and it’s frustrating when I have other people doing that, with that said, I don’t have any other questions. I hope you put a little thought into my comments about the parking on Bartley-Flanders Road so that we could avoid a problem before it becomes a reality.

Mrs. Labow: I think it is time to clear this up once and for all. Steve Rattner, I am sure you will back me up on this since we have discussed this at length. First of all, when I put in an application for the ethics committee, I was not intending to run for Council. Then I decided to run for Council, I called up Lisa Lashway and I said to her at that time, should I withdraw my application for the Ethics Committee because I am planning on running for Council, I don’t know if that disqualifies me. She told me that according to the ordinance that was adopted by the township, the selection criteria, did not make any mention of anyone who was a candidate, or running for office or even on Council and who knows if I would be elected or not elected, the election was November; they were selecting them in March. So I said, I probably won’t get picked, I’ll just leave it the way it is. Well as it turned out, I was chosen. Then after the meeting was adjourned, Rob Greenbaum brought it to our attention that they had just appointed somebody who is running for Council. I had not even submitted by petition at that time. Mr. Scapicchio told me at that meeting that was held that the discussion was in violation of the Sunshine Act. Mr. Scapicchio flat out said to me, well, if you decide not to run for Council you can be on the ethics committee. I said, well according to the ordinance I could do both. He said no, because we didn’t want to have anybody that was politically motivated on the ethics panel. I said well, you didn’t say that in the selection criteria. So low and behold they took me off, they put Dick Kamin in my place, which if that’s what they wanted to do that’s fine. Then they combated the problem by changing, in a resolution the selection criteria in the resolution, stating that if you are a candidate for office you cannot be on the ethics committee and you can’t change an ordinance with a resolution, what they did was try to change the selection criteria of an ordinance with a resolution. You had 15 days to start a suit of you plan to start a suit. I talked to Bernie Guenther, he told me he didn’t have a problem with it, I talked to Bill Sohl, he said he was standing by his guns, I spoke to Steve Rattner, Steve said, you’re right. We should change it, I’ll tell Dorsey that there should be a change made. I said please get back to be because I only have a couple more days. Nobody got Mrs. Labow (cont’d): back to me. I had to make a decision. I was basically told by Mr. Dorsey after that, that if I wanted it changed, take us to court. My hands were tied. Did I want to pay Mr. Dorsey to first of all properly adopt the ordinance and make the appointments and then turn around and pay the same man for litigation. No. Those are my tax dollars too, Howie, not just yours or anybody else, they are mine as well. So, two years later we go to court, and I said to my attorney, I said look, I don’t want to be appointed to the Board, it is said and done, I understand the ideas. You can’t have somebody on the ethics panel if that is supposed to be the governing body to take care of people, if there is a problem you can’t investigate yourself kind of a deal. I really just want them to properly adopt the resolution and not change selection criteria, do it properly. He said, okay I’ll tell the judge and we’ll see what happens, Mr. Dorsey agreed and they made the changes. That’s what happened that is the whole ball of wax. Now finally two years later you are changing the selection criteria in the ordinance with an ordinance, the proper way, not with a resolution. I shouldn’t have had to go to court. I should not have had to pay filing fees, get an attorney; I shouldn’t have had to spend two years waiting for this. The Township Attorney should have known better, should have understood, should have made the changes.

Mr. Dorsey: That’s ridiculous, you are being absolutely ridiculous.

Mrs. Labow: You’re being absolutely ridiculous; you know darn well you cannot change the selection criteria of an ordinance with a resolution. That’s all.

Mr. Spino: Why didn’t you just come to the Council and ask us to change the ordinance.

Mrs. Labow: I couldn’t, there was a time frame.

Mr. Spino: You still could have come to us and asked us to change it.

Mrs. Labow: I went to three Council Members.

Mr. Spino: You are talking about ethics, those are the exact same reasons we had to put an Ethics Committee in Town because I think what you did was unethical.

Mrs. Labow: I went to three Council members and asked for their help.

Mr. Spino: Going to three Council members is not coming to the Council and suggesting what we can do to ameliorate the situation.

Mrs. Labow: You are wrong, Richard Bonte came up here that day when you guys voted on that resolution. Rich Bonte came up here and told you, you couldn’t do it that way. I stood up here, we were told we were wrong. Read the minutes.

Mr. Spino: I am not saying you weren’t wrong or weren’t right. I am saying you didn’t…

Mrs. Labow: I did. I brought it up at the Council meeting that night when you tried to adopt the resolution.

Vice President Perkins: Colleen, Can I make a recommendation because this appears to be going back and forth and it’s going to be non-productive.

Mrs. LaBow: Thank you.

Vice President Perkins: Thank you very much.

Mr. McDonald: I sympathize to some extent with Howie’s situation, with cars parking on the street in front of his property. However, he was asking for no parking on the road. We are going down that long path again that anybody who finds it annoying, distasteful, etc. with cars parked in front of their property are going to be up here saying, I want a no parking sign in front of my house. I want one in front of my house too. These people park across the street from me and it makes it difficult for me to get out of my driveway. But I am not coming up here and saying, no parking signs. It is a public road. If somebody wants to park there, they have the right to park there. They don’t have the right to park on your property. Also, you can’t put boulders right out on the road because actually the right of way covers more than the road. I really think you should not consider any more of these no parking ordinances around town, unless they are for a matter of public safety and it can be demonstrated as a bonafide public safety issue, but not just the fact that somebody doesn’t like a car parked in front of their drive. It is just a fact of life that if you have a road in front of your house, there may be cars parked on it. The other question is, since it was Ray’s I Mr. McDonald (cont’d): wasn’t going to talk about it for first reading; the ordinance about the ethics committee. I agree that anyone holding political office should not be on the ethics committee. However people who are seeking to be a candidate for political office I think they have the right to seek political office without any penalties on anything they do. Otherwise it is going to be a chilling effect on people who may be on the ethics committee, who might want to be on the Ethics Committee who might want to run for public office. If they have to weigh the possibilities of what may happen if they decide to run for office. If they are elected to office that is one thing, then they may be in a position of power or political action where they could comprise being on the ethics committee. But a citizen should have the right to run for office with no strings attached at all. Thank you.

Mr. Rattner: I actually disagree with that statement because you have to worry about the perception of a conflict of interest. It is just like if you’re a federal employee, you can’t even run for an election in a local election. One of the things when we had the ethics board and we actually discussed and we didn’t put it in the original ordinance because at the time, Mr. Greenbaum came up as one of the names for the ethics board and we told him on certain terms that we were not going to consider him because there is no way that I know of that anybody can campaign hard trying to get the issues, trying to go after the other person to come up with issues that you want to be discussed, and then say that I want to be on an ethics board where you can get a pulping. I think there are certain times where you have to look at what the perception is. Not where there is an ethical lapse because most people up in and in the audience are very ethical people, but it is the perception and in public life, perception is reality. That is why we are very concerned. I think even with that, Mrs. LaBow has not said that she disagrees with having that in there. She was just saying she didn’t like the wording of the Ordinance and she is satisfied because we are changing some words. Not the intent. But she is saying about the procedure that got us there, so she is not even complaining about that part. If you can’t see where you are running for election, and you see what goes out during elections. You see what some of the paper work that goes out and some of the accusations and some of the things that come up going back and forth. How could somebody be on an ethics board and say I’m not going to campaign like that, or I can’t campaign with the rest of the group. I just don’t think it is possible.

Mr. McDonald: I would like to disagree. I believe a little more in human nature, maybe not in a politician’s nature but in human nature that people can separate issues. This has nothing to do with Mrs. LaBow. I am here on my own feet.

Mr. Rattner: I only brought her up because she didn’t complain about the fact that the limitation.

Mr. McDonald: If you are going to carry it to your level Steve, then somebody who is in the real estate business should not have anything to do with issues that come up with housing. Somebody that is in the insurance business should have nothing to do with something that comes up with insurance. You could carry your arguments to the extreme. Somebody who is a lawyer should never be involved with anything that has to do with a legal issue unless they are part of the litigation.

Mr. Rattner: You have to look at it, because you want the experience, and the background of different people which I think is very very important. I sat up here with Mr. Sohl. He worked for AT&T, I worked for AT&T. Any issue that came up regarding bid or consideration of any communications company, we would not vote on; just because it can be said that our employments depended on that. Was it a conflict? No. We’ve gotten rulings that’s not a conflict when one person out of 400,000 in a job that really doesn’t depend on whether a cellular tower goes in. However, we stepped down from voting just because we didn’t want the perception. We didn’t want somebody in the audience at sometime coming up and saying if you worked for AT&T, how could you evaluate what you are doing with the cable TW or anything like that. Most of us here and it has happened on the Planning Board, it happens with our professionals, there are times, if it gets to close they have anything to do, or they think there’s a perception, they step down. Our Mayor does.

Mr. McDonald: I applaud you for those higher ideals; however you should also realize that people who wish to be on the ethics board or are on the ethics board could aspire and achieve those same high ideals that you say you and your associates have accomplished. Why are you singling out a certain number of people who can act in that manner and then say everybody else, the general public can’t?

Mr. Rattner: We can disagree with that, but you don’t use an ethics board as a stepping stone in Politics.

Mr. McDonald: This could go on forever; I just wanted to give my opinion on it, that’s all.

Mr. Rattner: We’ll agree to disagree.


Mr. Rattner: I just want to say that the beach is looking good. The sliding board, I don’ think I would be on it, but some of the things out there is definitely making it look good.

Mr. Greenbaum: I have something which has really troubled me and it involves an issue which was raised during the most recent republican campaign and it particularly related to Flanders Crossing and a piece of literature which was circulated discussing why Mayor Licitra would talk about reassessing the houses in the Flanders Crossing development for more tax revenue and it was a piece of literature which was circulated to elect David Jones and I am sure knowing how things go, it was Dave Jones who circulated this.

Mr. Jones: Do I get to respond to this?

Mr. Greenbaum: No you don’t. Although you can tell me privately because as far as I know; first of all it shows a blatant lack of knowledge as to how the process of how reassessment goes and what reassessing actually does, because it doesn’t raise tax revenue. What reassessment does is it just reapportions the tax revenue, it doesn’t raise the tax revenue. It is not done by the town, it is called for by the County. It is done every certain number of years, and I am particularly troubled that something like this blatant lie would be circulated to a particular community, a community that I live in and I am sorry that Mr. Jones was not here to listen to the discussion, as many of the other people who don’t want to hear this, but they will certainly have an opportunity to comment about this at the next meeting. I am very troubled by this, and I would like to know where he got this information and if he didn’t get it from anywhere, what gave him the right to circulate something which was so blatantly not true.

Vice President Perkins made a motion to adjourn the Public meeting all in favor, none opposed. The meeting adjourned at 9:43 pm.

Mr. Perkins moved to go into Executive Session and Mr. Spino seconded the motion. All in favor, none opposed. The Public meeting adjourned at 9:43 pm. The Executive session immediately followed at same.

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 September 30, 2003

Mount Olive Township Clerk





2012 Mount Olive Township. All rights reserved.