Work Session 20160224
A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR. COURT ROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY ON WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2016 7:30 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER – OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT – ROLL CALL – FLAG SALUTE
Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M. and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney. Mayor Aronsohn led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and asked for a moment of silence in honor of the American men and women serving in our Armed Forces, as well as those serving as first responders.
2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn asked if there were any comments or questions from the public.
Ellen McNamara, 120 West Ridgewood Avenue, said that she was one of the majority of Ridgewood residents, who voted in favor of the parking garage. She is now embarrassed to admit that she believed Village Council members, Financial Advisory Committee members and the architect, when they all assured her that the drawing presented at the public forum was a work in progress. She had concerns about the scale of the concept plan, particularly the effect it would have on the existing buildings in Ridgewood, but she was told not to worry. Ms. McNamara said that she has now spent endless amount of time canvassing in order to get signatures for the No to BCIA petition. Over one thousand signatures have been gathered during the past week, which is amazing, considering the lack of awareness relative to this issue. Many who have signed the petition agree that Ridgewood needs a parking remedy, but they want to keep the Bergen County Improvement Authority (BCIA) out of the matter. Over the past few months, several Village Councilmembers have asked for research analysis and design changes to address these concerns, and three Councilmembers are pushing ahead for reasons she doesn’t understand. Ms. McNamara said that she only wants outstanding questions and concerns about the funding of the garage addressed before it is handed over to the County. When these questions have been answered, everyone will feel confident about the vote in favor of the garage.
Jim McCarthy, 153 Hope Street, spoke about the BCIA, and said that there are fees that the Village will have to pay to the County, which are in excess of the fees the Village would pay if the bond for the Hudson Street parking deck was executed by the Village. There may be an offset in the percentage of interest; however, the Village will still have to pay $92,000 more to fund the project on its own. Mr. McCarthy said that the opportunity to take advantage of the pricing differential will be lost by handing control to the County, and this could add up to a substantial amount of revenue amortized over a number of years. The evidence clearly demonstrates that the market could bear a higher pricing differential.
Mr. McCarthy said that there are indications contained in a letter from Village Councilmembers that the petition for “Say No to BCIA Funding” contains lies and misinformation. He asked the Village Council to address the specific lies that are being put forth. He is offended by the insinuation that the people promoting the petition are using dirty tactics in order to put the petition forward.
Steve Beloise, said he represents Archbishop Meyers, 171 Clifton Avenue, Newark, on behalf of Mt. Carmel Parish. He stated that a fair compromise for the proposed parking garage on Hudson Street would be to omit one level. He welcomed a dialogue between the Village’s traffic expert and Mt. Carmel’s traffic expert.
Lorraine Reynolds, 550 Wyndemere Avenue, thanked everyone who signed the petition. She observed that people agree that a parking garage is needed. She related a story of someone she met when she was canvassing an area of the Village, trying to gather signatures on the petition. At one time this individual had appeared before the Zoning Board of Adjustment with a plan for a family room addition. It took several appearances before the Board could arrive at an acceptable compromise, and he now says he is happy that the Board would not allow him to build such a large family room. The Board told him to stay within the streetscape among other things, and this resident commented that this should be one of the conditions the Village should have to adhere to as well, when building the Hudson Street parking garage.
Dana Glazer, 61 Clinton Avenue, thanked everyone for their involvement and support of the petition to “Say No to BCIA Funding” of the parking garage.
Doug Goodell, 234 Mulberry Place, thanked the Village for their attention to stream clearance and the de-snagging on the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook. In January, he noticed the build-up of debris where the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook intersects Maple Avenue, and a few weeks later he was surprised to see equipment in the area de-snagging the sand bar. This was done at just the right time, when the ground was frozen and the soil could not be disturbed. Mr. Goodell was glad to see the continuing activity, and he was told that the cost might have been covered by a grant obtained by the Engineering Department. He again thanked the Village for the attention to this area of the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook.
Linda Kotch, 60 North Hillside Place, said she is happy that the bond ordinance to fund the Hudson Street parking deck within Ridgewood is being re-introduced, which is a move in a positive direction. She asked when the new streetscape design for the parking deck would be complete, and asked when there would be a discussion relative to a pay back of the financial obligation. Ms. Kotch recalled a public meeting on January 19th, when there was a discussion relative to the amount of money for design fees. At that time, a design cap was also discussed. It was noted that the balance was used to cover other studies, and she asked if this includes the parking studies that have not yet been received. She commented that it appeared the Village spent a lot of money on the construction documents before selecting the design.
Referring to the multi-family impact studies, Ms. Kotch noted that RBA is doing the traffic study and BFJ is doing the fiscal study, in addition to work on infrastructure and design coordination. She found it odd that BFA was awarded the same amount of money to do infrastructure and coordinate all of the studies, as the parking experts were paid. She wondered if the Village was being foolish to assume that what is being allocated for expenses are actual expenses or will the Village have to spend a lot more because budgeting was done correctly.
Tom Guinan, 146 Phelps Road, said he supports the parking garage and he thanked Councilwoman Knudsen for her response to his email.
Ms. Sonenfeld referred to the multi-family housing impact studies, and stated that the four contractors are on schedule to have all of their reports submitted to the Village by next week. She stated that BFJ is coordinating and doing infrastructure, in addition to preparing financial information and the revenue piece of the economics.
Regarding the Hudson Street deck, she thinks that the construction bid took up 80% or more of the budget. Based on indications by the Village Council, the design team decided to move ahead. Ms. Sonenfeld spoke about BCIA funding and said that upfront fees are $92,000, but that amount must be considered when looking at the amount to be saved in interest which works out to be approximately $22,000. They will wait for Walker Parking Consultants to determine the number of spaces to be allocated in the garage for parking permits, Central Business District (CBD) employees, and visitors. Until this information is available, it is difficult to determine the cost of the parking deck, and she reminded everyone that only approximately 15 parking permits were issued this year.
Councilman Pucciarelli addressed a speaker, who indicated that at the time of the referendum the design of the parking garage had been determined, and there was no room for compromise. He stated that since the referendum, three designs have been offered, which were discussed at length. Several Councilmembers met on various occasions with Ms. Sonenfeld, other Village staff, and the design team so it cannot be said that the Village became fixated on one plan before the referendum took place. Plan A was selected initially and then rejected, followed by a compromise. A vote to approve a bond ordinance to finance the garage within Ridgewood was rejected, by a majority of the Council, and that is why the project ended up at BCIA for funding since everyone agrees that a garage is necessary. Councilman Pucciarelli said he doesn’t understand why there is a suspicion about the process, because the process has been thorough, and it is time to move this project forward.
Mayor Aronsohn said that the petition was handled well for the most part; however, there have been some emails circulating containing misleading information regarding the BCIA. This information concerns the exorbitant cost, the fact that the Village would lose control of the process and that the garage would be taken over by commuters from out of town. Mayor Aronsohn said that the intention is to re-introduce an ordinance next week to bond within Ridgewood for a smaller garage with fewer parking spaces, and he hopes to have a second reading of the ordinance on March 23rd. He said that a partnership with BCIA would be beneficial, but it will also be good if the project can be kept within Ridgewood.
Councilwoman Knudsen spoke about a letter from Ed Mayo, which came as a surprise to her. She was not aware of any discussion among the Village Council that this ordinance would be re-introduced on March 2nd. Councilwoman Knudsen said that the most unfortunate part of the email was the suggestion that members of the public are liars. The Village Manager said that no one is aware of whether the $22,000 would be a wash or whether the calculation of the non-resident parking passes could possibly equate to a significant amount of money. In the absence of this information, it would appear unfair to indicate that there is any lying or inaccurate information circulating. Councilwoman Knudsen said that the use of BCIA funds would eliminate control by the Village of non-resident parking, resulting in a decrease of spaces available to residents. She again stated that she was upset by the fact that some residents were accusing others of being liars.
Councilwoman Knudsen recalled that after the first option to fund the garage within Ridgewood did not receive a super majority vote, the Village approached the BCIA to fund the parking garage. The BCIA was told that the garage would be redesigned. She feels that the process has now come full circle, and she is confident that the garage will become a reality, but she must feel comfortable with this vote moving forward.
Mayor Aronsohn stated that there was nothing in the January vote for $12.3 million that referred to size. Councilwoman Knudsen said that she understood that many of the construction documents had already been prepared and she was concerned that the footprint of the building was in the middle of Hudson Street.
Councilman Pucciarelli said that he is proud of the process and the fact that this Village Council has been able to reach a compromise, reflecting different viewpoints. The compromise has produced a smaller garage and considering the BCIA funding for the project has been a learning experience. At some point; however, they must proceed with the majority view and there is not an extreme difference between the two funding alternatives.
Mayor Aronsohn said that he feels that the Village Council is reaching a consensus point in terms of size and funding source. There will be more discussion of the ordinance later in the meeting, followed by an introduction of a bond ordinance next week.
Councilman Sedon said he continues to have questions on the financials and the drawings for the Hudson Street parking deck. Mayor Aronsohn said that there are some options for consideration, which have been forwarded to Walker Associates for review. Councilwoman Knudsen said that she has heard from one of the designers that there was a delay with the renderings because they had to go back to square one. Ms. Sonenfeld said she is hopeful that they will have a rendering looking down Hudson Street, going west, by the end of the week.
Councilman Pucciarelli referred to Mr. Goodell’s statements about the de-snagging of the Ho-Ho-Kus Brook. He said that the staff in the Engineering Office must be congratulated on this work, which was covered under a successful grant application.
3. MOTION TO SUSPEND REGULAR PUBLIC MEETING AND CONVENE SPECIAL WORK SESSION
At 8:10 P.M., upon motion by Councilman Sedon, seconded by Councilwoman Hauck and carried by a unanimous voice vote, the Village Council suspended the Work Session.
At 8:15 P.M., upon motion by Councilwoman Knudsen, seconded by Councilman Sedon and carried by a unanimous voice vote, the Work Session was reconvened.
4. DISCUSSION OF LIGHTING AT MEMORIAL PARK AT VAN NESTE SQUARE
Bill Gilsenan, 65 North Van Dien Avenue, introduced himself and stated that he is one of the founding members of the Conservancy for Ridgewood Public Lands. Members of the Conservancy have noticed that whenever there are events taking place in the park the town comes alive; however, the park is under-utilized in the evenings. This could be because it is dark or that the lighting that exists is street lights and not very inviting. The Conservancy met with a designer to come up with a more welcoming design. The intention is to fundraise privately and donate it back to the Village to cover the cost of new lighting. They have met with the Engineering Department, the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), and the Parks and Recreation Committee, who have all endorsed the plan. Underground utilities will be provided to various portions of the park and additional conduits will be installed for electrical lighting and speaker wires in order to facilitate musical events, movies or food events. The Conservancy hopes that the entire Village will benefit from this upgrade to the park.
Brooke Silver, of Jannenberg Luminei, introduced herself and described her background in the field of lighting. She has eight years of experience in interior design and fifteen years of experience doing solely lighting design. She has worked with the MTA, Long Island Railroad, and the Parks Conservancy in New York City, in addition to working outside the country. Ms. Silver stated that street poles are designed to offer lighting at an outward and downward direction, and most engineering requirements call for a foot candle level on the ground. Ms. Silver said that exterior areas should be lit similar to a living room, which means the surfaces such as pathways, are being lit to allow us to meander. Ms. Silver offered examples of several projects she has worked on where the use of LED lights has cut energy costs in half.
Ms. Silver said that she looked at both an overall plan of Memorial Park at Van Neste Square and also broke the park into three sections. The first section is along East Ridgewood Avenue; the second section is along Van Neste Square where people enter from the commuter bus; and the third section is along Dayton Street. Ms. Silver stated that the goal is to light the paths and bring people into the park. She suggested lighting the statue of Abraham Godwin from above in a natural setting, and she pointed out that the lighting at the Veteran’s Memorial is in need of repair. She suggested down lighting, which can be used in a multitude of ways to light pathways, special features and sculptures. Ms. Silver recommended the placement of lighting in trees, which is done by means of two or three screws and will not impede tree growth. Information would be provided on specific installation in order to protect the tree.
Ms. Silver referred to the glare effect of lighting, and stated that if lighting is brought down and properly shielded, the source of the lighting is not noticed. Up lighting is a wonderful technique that can be used to celebrate the grandeur of the trees. When up lighting and down lighting is combined, the entire tree and the ground will be lit, which is very inviting. Ms. Silver pointed out that path lighting can be achieved by using the trees to address the stairs.
Mr. Gilsenan stated that he is asking for permission from the Village Council to begin the work. Fundraising will be done privately and then donated to the Village when complete. Ms. Silver explained that the sap has to be running in the trees when lighting is installed, for healing purposes. Installation could begin in March and end in December. They like to work from March until May and again in September through December.
Councilman Pucciarelli commented that this is a wonderful example of volunteerism in the community. He asked if on-going maintenance would be the responsibility of the Village. Mr. Gilsenan said that currently there are eight street lights in the park at 175 watts, and the plan is to install 147 LED lights with 1175 watts. The LED lights are expected to last ten to fifteen years and the amount of electrical usage will decrease. Mr. Gilsenen concluded that maintenance appears to be minimal and the fixtures will be corrosion proof.
Councilwoman Hauck said that this lighting system will enhance the park and the Village. The CBD is in very good hands with Ms. Silver, based on her vast experience. Councilman Sedon agreed and said it will be a wonderful addition to the downtown area. Councilwoman Hauck indicated that the project will make the park more usable and more welcoming. There will be less expense involved in the maintenance and electrical costs.
Mayor Aronsohn noted that the project has the unanimous support of the Village Council. The Village Council will have to approve a resolution, and Mr. Gilsenan will then work with the Engineering Department, the Building Department and Mr. Rogers. Ms. Sonenfeld said that this should be handled as a gift resolution. There was a question relative to making donations and Mr. Gilsenen stated that donations will be tax deductible and should be made to the Conservancy for Ridgewood Public Lands specifically for Memorial Park at Van Neste Square. He will finalize the donation process and look for assistance from the Ridgewood Guild and the Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce for collecting the donations.
5. DISCUSSION
a. Budget
1.) 2016 Capital Budget
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that at last week’s Budget Meetings, the Village Council spent three evenings reviewing expense and capital. At the conclusion of these meetings, the Village Council asked everyone to consider the capital requests which they had presented. The capital requests were higher than the previous year at $11 million, which was later reduced to $8.3 million. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that Councilmembers have information concerning last week’s meeting and Mr. Rooney, the Village CFO, has now provided them with recommendations on capital from the Village professionals. These recommendations reduce the capital requests to $6.3 million, and approximately $1.7 million has been eliminated relative to projects that have been completed.
Mr. Rooney stated that the page entitled Proposed Capital Budget provides a comparison of the $6.3 million request for this year and last year’s capital budget. He noted the significant increase with the proposed funding estimated at $200,000 for 2016. There is $1.8 million available, which is the result of reviewing current ordinances that have unused funded proceeds. By cancelling these ordinances, $1.7 million becomes available to fund projects that have been requested. There will be a request made to the Bergen County Open Space Trust fund to fund another request. The debt that will be issued and authorized would be $4.2 million.
Mr. Rooney spoke about the Annual Gross Debt and noted the composition of the current debt of the Village. The cancellation of the ordinances will lower the debt by $112,500 and the new debt would be $4.2 million. The net effect is slightly over $9,000,000 in net debt which is much better than authorizing $6.3 million in debt.
Ms. Sonenfeld said that at the end of 2014 there was $46 million in total gross debt, which included debt authorized and not issued. At the end of 2015 there was $45.3 million which was a decrease and the Village is now looking at $46.258 million. The projected capital for the end of 2015 was $47.341 million so this new number is below that. Ms. Sonenfeld said that with the appropriate staffing this year, they were able to find $1.8 million of funds in ordinances to offset and allow for more investment. They feel comfortable with $46.258 as the total amount of debt, which is far below the allowable debt.
Councilman Sedon commented that he is pleased to see that the number of SUVs for the Police Department has decreased from seven to four. Ms. Sonenfeld said that over the past two years, the cars in the police fleet have become much better; however, they didn’t have much choice but to reduce the request if they wanted to work within a reasonable budget.
Councilman Pucciarelli spoke about the prominent budget items including replacement of the 1989 Pierce pumper at $427,000; the sweeper at $210,000; and $600,000 for digestive cover system for the Water Pollution Control Facility; $370,000 for continuing meters and pumps in the SCADA system; and changes and additions to the computer system of $220,000.
Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out the three major changes contained in the budget. The replacement of the fronting of the stable at Habernickel has been removed; a new vehicle for Emergency Services at $150,000 was added; and $1,500,000 for Kings Pond improvements was removed. They took out the urgent building issues from each individual department and added them to the $1 million footprint category.
Councilwoman Knudsen said she would like several days to review the amendments because she is concerned about the fact that all of the funding for Kings Pond has been removed. She said that this is an issue that needs attention.
Councilman Sedon stated that the open space grant money owed for Habernickel Park and Schedler Park has been held up due to the diversion issue where the Village must purchase open space due to the fact that open space land in the Broad Street area was inappropriately used for housing in the 1970s, instead of a playground. He asked for additional information. Janet Fricke, Assistant to the Village Manager, stated that the open space money is being held in abeyance until the issue is resolved. The resolutions will be done in the next several weeks and the amount of funding is in the range of $800,000 for the two grants, which would be an appropriate amount, given the purchase. Indications have been made that a purchase of land may not be necessary in order to resolve the situation.
Mayor Aronsohn stated that Councilmembers would like a few days to review the information, and any comments should be forwarded to Ms. Sonenfeld.
2.) Additional Award of Contract – Maintenance of the Water Distribution System
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is an additional award for supplies from Water Works Supply Co. and HD Waterworks Supply for the purchase of pipes, appurtenances and materials for Ridgewood Water.
3.) Bid Rejection – Heavy Duty Municipal Dump Body for Water Department
Ms. Sonenfeld said that after careful review, it has been determined that the bids received for the heavy duty municipal dump body exceeded the cost estimates for the project; therefore, the bids will be rejected.
b. Policy
1.) Discussion to Establish Guidelines of Audio/Video Recordings of Public Meetings
Councilman Pucciarelli said that he is proposing an ordinance which states that if a meeting is not otherwise being recorded, any individual intending to record the meeting must let everyone know. This method will work within the guidelines established by the Supreme Court of the State of New Jersey, which allows ordinances regarding the recording of meetings, which are not disruptive. The ordinance will serve as a notice to people attending meetings that they are being recorded. Mayor Aronsohn suggested that the notice be given to the person organizing the meeting as well as the participants in the meeting.
Councilman Pucciarelli explained that there are many ad hoc committees that hold meetings such as REAC or the Ridgewood Arts Council. These are meetings of smaller groups and as a member of one of the committees, he thinks it would be disruptive to learn that a meeting is being recorded without notice being given. He looks at this issue as a form of spying because at times, personal conversations take place which should not be recorded.
Councilman Pucciarelli said he has amended the original ordinance. It now states that if someone attends a public meeting other than a Village Council meeting and intends to record the meeting, that person must notify the person presiding over the meeting and all those in attendance, at the beginning of the meeting. There will also be restrictions on recording devices that are noisy or a distraction.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that this seems to be an extended courtesy that may not be enforceable. Mr. Rogers agreed with Councilman Pucciarelli that the points in the ordinance are regulations and are consistent with regard to the Supreme Court case. He did not think that there was anything unenforceable contained in the ordinance. The Village Council has to decide whether they want to provide enforcement for any violation of the ordinance. Councilman Pucciarelli commented that a warning should be enough to prohibit someone from trying to make a recording again. He added that the idea of someone recording a committee meeting would change the nature of these proceedings because many times people join these committees because of the social aspect.
Councilman Sedon referred to the section of the ordinance relative to the recognition of people’s privacy during their attendance at public meetings. He pointed out that these committee meetings are all open to the public. Councilman Pucciarelli agreed, but said that there is some expectation of privacy at a volunteer meeting where people may be chatting in a familiar manner.
Councilwoman Knudsen questioned the section of the ordinance stating that these recordings could not be used on a private website. Mr. Rogers said he thinks this refers to something other than a Village of Ridgewood website, but this should be clarified. Councilman Pucciarelli said that this means the recording could not be deemed to be an official recording or record of the meeting.
Councilwoman Knudsen asked if this ordinance overrides the right of someone to record the meeting if they have a legal right to do so. Mr. Rogers explained that this ordinance doesn’t prohibit the recording of a meeting; it only requires that the person recording notify the person running the meeting and all those who are attending the meeting.
Councilwoman Hauck stated that this ordinance establishes decorum, and she pointed out that they have taken something that has been established on the State level and clarified it to make it a local level ordinance. She referred to the Citizens Campaign, which is a group of civic leaders, teachers and students dedicated to improving and empowering government. They have a model ordinance which establishes reasonable rules that includes everything that is the foundation of democracy where sharing with the public is fully enforced, and where meetings are open to the public and decisions are transparent. Reasonable restrictions can be imposed by the governing body to accommodate citizens and members of the media wishing to video tape and record all public meetings. Any member of the public is entitled to make a video recording of a meeting open to the public as long as the recording is not disruptive to other people in attendance. Councilwoman Hauck said that these are recommendations offered by a think tank. Guidelines are offered by other municipalities including restrictions on the number of cameras allowed, with priority on a first come, first served basis; placement of the camera to be approved by the governing body; municipality must be provided with a copy of the video tape; and if the videotaping becomes disruptive, the Mayor or person presiding over the meeting can ask that the videotaping stop.
Councilman Pucciarelli said that while those are useful points, he only wants an ordinance put in place that requires that those attending a meeting be notified that the meeting is being recorded. Mayor Aronsohn thanked Councilman Pucciarelli and Mr. Rogers for drafting the ordinance, which he supports. The consequences of violating the ordinance can be taken up at a later date as necessary, because establishing normal behavior is the important first step. The ideas offered by Councilwoman Hauck are also worth considering at a later date, because disruptive behavior must be prevented at any official meeting.
Councilwoman Knudsen referred to the disruptive incident that occurred two weeks ago at the Village Council meeting where it was alleged that a resident who was videotaping the meeting was hit by another resident. Ms. Sonenfeld said that no active investigation is presently taking place, and no charges have been filed. The Police indicated that no crime took place after a review of the tapes of the meeting. It could be considered a disorderly person offense if pursued, but no crime was committed.
Mr. Rogers recommended that everyone review the section of the proposed ordinance that deals with decorum. Councilman Pucciarelli said that he understands the concerns of people who feel that their civil liberties are being compromised, but the ordinance only requires that everyone at a meeting be notified that a recording is taking place. He pointed out that the civil liberties of the people who make up these boards and governmental bodies have to be taken into consideration as well.
Mr. Rogers said he didn’t feel that there was anything unreasonable about what is contained in the ordinance. Many municipalities have already passed similar ordinances that are much more detailed.
3.) Discussion of Waiver of Fees on OPRA Requests from Elected Officials
Councilwoman Knudsen referred to previous discussion of OPRA requests that required a lot of staff time. She would like to OPRA a large amount of information on a number of issues. Ms. Mailander said that technically Village Councilmembers do not have to file OPRA requests. Ms. Mailander indicated that Village Councilmembers should be charged when their requests are very time consuming, due to the volume of information requested. The Village Clerk’s Office can receive up to fifteen OPRA requests per week, which can become burdensome and many must be sent to other departments. Ms. Mailander felt that Councilmembers should be held to the same standards as the public.
Ms. Sonenfeld said that another option would be for a Councilmember to send an email or memo. She didn’t think this kind of formality from Councilmembers was necessary.
Councilman Sedon asked for an explanation of information that would be particularly time consuming to assemble. Ms. Mailander said that a 200-page document can be put together quite easily and quickly; however, a request for 200 pages of emails about a particular subject between a Councilmember and Village officials or staff members is much more involved. This would also require the involvement of the Village IT person who would have to search the server. This type of request is time intensive and requires a lot of effort.
Councilman Pucciarelli said that if a Councilmember wishes to conduct his/her own internal investigation through an OPRA request; it should be done at the Councilmember’s personal expense. He added that he has never felt the need to file an OPRA request.
Councilwoman Hauck said that she has never filed an OPRA request. If she needs information she goes to the appropriate office, is given the file and other pertinent information, which she reviews on-site. She stated that what is happening more frequently are OPRA requests of a personal nature, creating an atmosphere of distrust. Everyone should act in a spirit of good faith with each other. Councilwoman Hauck concluded that this is not the sort of thing that should be occupying the time of Village staff.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that she filed an OPRA request relative to the Mazer traffic study, dated October 15, 2015. She had to read about the study on-line from a resident, who indicated that this study had fallen through the cracks, and Councilmembers should find out what happened to it. She felt that it was part of her job to find out what had happened to the study, and she learned that there was a request to post it on-line in early December. Councilwoman Knudsen noted that these are public records and there is no prying or investigating going on.
Ms. Sonenfeld gave an example of an OPRA request that resulted in a review of 6,700 emails by Dylan Hansen, the Village Systems Analyst, which took an extensive amount of time.
Mayor Aronsohn returned to the question of whether or not Councilmembers should be subject to fees when making OPRA requests. He reiterated his opinion is that Councilmembers should be subject to the same fees as members of the public. Councilmembers indicated agreement.
c. Operations
1.) Amend Chapter 3 – Administration of Government at Section 3-41 – Department of Water Supply – Establish Division of Public Works
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is a follow up to a matter during a previous budget meeting where Richard Calbi, Director of Operations, presented a staffing reorganization that included the addition of a Superintendent who would oversee the operations of Streets, Fleet/Central Garage, Solid Waste and Recycling. This should help the efficiency of operations and comes with no increase in headcount or cost. The ordinance would add this position to the code.
Mr. Calbi stated several positions have been separated from the Division of Public Works and this should bring a new higher level position, which in the future will succeed the current Superintendent of Operations. This person will be in charge of the daily work in terms of the departments of Streets, Parks, Shade Tree and will also be involved with Garbage and Recycling, along with other facets of the operations. Cost savings will be realized when the employee in that position moves into a more senior position.
Councilman Pucciarelli asked how this would happen without an addition employee. Mr. Calbi explained that a high level position in the Streets Department was lost, along with a Fleet Manager. Three mechanics in Fleet have been replaced by one mechanic. Ms. Sonenfeld said that one of the goals of last year’s and this year’s budget is to have jobs that are transferable from one staff member to the other. This is also an example of leadership succession planning, which is a more effective way of managing staff on a day to day basis with performance measurement. Councilman Sedon questioned whether or not this was a permanent position, and Mr. Calbi said that it is permanent.
c. Parking
1.) Bond Ordinance for Hudson Street Parking Deck
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that a copy of a sample bond ordinance for the Hudson Street parking deck was received from Matthew Jessup, the Village Bond Attorney, which is similar to the previous bond ordinance which was defeated. The only difference appears to be the amount, which has decreased from $12.2 million to $11.5 million.
Mayor Aronsohn explained that there would be a bond ordinance for introduction on March 2nd with the second reading scheduled for March 23rd. Renderings will be available next week, along with a further discussion on parking fees.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that the earlier ordinance on funding the parking deck through the Bergen County Improvement Authority (BCIA) needs to be removed or cancelled simultaneously. Ms. Mailander said that an ordinance can only be rescinded by means of another ordinance. Mayor Aronsohn said that his understanding is that the BCIA funding ordinance would be rescinded after the new bond ordinance for funding the parking deck in Ridgewood had been adopted.
Councilman Pucciarelli commented that there seems to be a consensus among those who opposed BCIA funding to proceed with a parking garage. The question is whether the compromise is satisfactory to everyone. He suggested that both alternatives for funding be kept open on parallel tracks until there are four votes in favor of self-funding for the parking garage. Councilman Pucciarelli said that there has been a thoughtful and thorough debate on this process, and this is the time to act.
After some debate on the appropriate time to rescind the ordinance, Mayor Aronsohn stated that on March 23rd a vote to adopt the self-funding bond ordinance would be taken first. If it passes, it would be followed by the introduction of the ordinance that would rescind funding by the BCIA. Councilwoman Knudsen disagreed, stating that there is an opportunity for a unanimous vote to adopt the self-funding bond ordinance. Therefore, the ordinance to rescind the BCIA funding ordinance should be introduced at the exact same time as the self-funding bond ordinance is introduced. If the procedure takes place as suggested by Mayor Aronsohn there would be two options open for funding on the table. She indicated that it is a much better idea to move forward in the spirit of working together in commonality. Councilman Sedon agreed with Councilwoman Knudsen and commented that if everything goes as planned, the funding issue will be resolved on March 23rd and they won’t have to worry about another vote.
Councilman Pucciarelli said that the only justification he hears is an element of distrust of each other, which is not the case. He doesn’t want to go to the BCIA for funding, but he thinks this option should be kept open because there is a chance the self-funding bond ordinance may not result in a 5-0 vote for adoption. The Village can’t tell the BCIA that they will not be using their funding one week and change their minds and go back to the BCIA the following week. Councilwoman Hauck stated that in the spirit of cooperation, both options should be left open. Closing off the option to go to the BCIA implies that there is an element of fear, and BCIA funding is simply another option for funding.
Councilwoman Knudsen formally requested that the ordinance to rescind the BCIA funding option be prepared for introduction on March 2nd. She asked Ms. Mailander and Mr. Rogers to prepare an ordinance to rescind the BCIA ordinance.
Mayor Aronsohn recalled that following the second reading of the original self-funding bond ordinance in January, they did not go forward with that bond ordinance. The BCIA ordinance was then introduced on first reading and he would support following this model on March 23rd. He added that until the time the Village Council votes 4 to 1 or 5 to 0 in support of a self-funding bond ordinance, he will continue working with the BCIA because this parking deck will become a reality. Mayor Aronsohn stated that he hopes the self-funding bond ordinance can be supported by all five Councilmembers.
2.) Parking Fees
Ms. Sonenfeld recalled that the firm of Walker Parking Consultants was asked to offer their best recommendation as to how sufficient money would be raised from the parking utility including debts, meters, and other items. Walker has updated the study twice and has most recently looked at 325 parking spaces. Another meeting followed consisting of Ms. Sonenfeld, Mayor Aronsohn, Councilman Sedon and Mr. Rooney to formulate some creative ideas. They had to keep in mind that they had to be conservative and ensure that the deck is funded by parking meter revenue and not by taxpayer money. It was agreed to extend the hours of the parking meters. Walker suggested that the time be extended to 9:00 P.M., but the group felt more comfortable with 8:00 P.M. This extra hour of parking revenue, amounting to approximately $50,000 for the year, meant that this revenue must be made up elsewhere. There was a discussion of raising the street rates to 75 cents an hour, and keeping the garage and lot rates cheaper than the street rates to attract people. The Cottage Place lot, which offers eight-hour parking, would be exempt. Mayor Aronsohn suggested considering the option of having free parking at the deck on either Saturday night or Friday and Saturday night from 6:00 P.M to 8:00 P.M. The consensus was to try this option out on Saturday nights and if it was working well and not impacting revenues, they would consider extending it to Friday nights.
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the group considered raising the number of commuter passes for residents from 750 to 800, which would help to offset the one hour mentioned previously. Passes for non- residents would change from the current 1,500 to 1,000. There was a recommendation to raise fees for parking tickets, which is open for debate. There was a discussion relative to different rates for meters and lots in different locations, and it was determined that all parking meters would be 75 cents and lots 50 cents. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the Walker Study recommended raising meter rates to $1 during the second year, but she suggested they watch the revenue coming in before automatically raising the rates. The Walker Study is forecasting a decrease in demand for parking, but if that is incorrect there would be no need to raise the rate to $1 in year two.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that she cannot support free parking in the parking garage on Friday nights because this gives an advantage to businesses and restaurants in a specific area. Everyone should have to pay for parking on Friday night. Councilman Sedon indicated that the pilot idea was for free parking on Saturday only to see how that works. Councilman Hauck agreed with the free parking incentive on Saturday nights since it could increase overall parking revenue in the future.
Mayor Aronsohn said that free parking in the garage was considered for Saturday initially due to church services. This is not necessarily the busiest time and would not impact revenues and offers an opportunity to gauge whether or not people are gravitating toward the parking garage.
Ms. Sonenfeld reminded everyone that the CBD employee parking at the Ken Smith property is being eliminated, and Mayor Aronsohn said that they need to think about the configuration of parking in the garage. Walker will help them determine the allocation of parking spaces for CBD employees and people with parking passes. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that there were a record number of CBD employee passes issued in February at 99, and 71 were used at the Ken Smith lot. These spaces at the Ken Smith lot will become unavailable when something is built on that lot. This means that there are 71 potential users for the parking garage, combined with Ridgewood residents with parking passes, resulting in the occupation of 200 parking spaces.
Councilwoman Hauck said that the CBD employees are taking up spaces that business people hope will be occupied by shoppers. The streetscape should be available to the residents and visitors for shopping.
Mayor Aronsohn recommended that this item continue to be listed on the agenda for discussion in the hopes that an ordinance can be introduced shortly. Ms. Sonenfeld said that she is quite sure that sufficient revenue can be generated so that the hour between 8:00 P.M. and 9:00 P.M. can be covered, along with free parking in the garage on Saturday evenings. Councilwoman Knudsen suggested introducing an ordinance for the next meeting; however, Councilman Sedon recommended waiting for the report from Walker. Mayor Aronsohn agreed to wait to review the report and keep the conversation moving forward.
6. MANAGER’S REPORT
Ms. Sonenfeld stated there was a hardware issue, which prevented anyone from contacting Village Hall by phone earlier this week. The internet was also unavailable, but the issue was corrected within a few hours. Ms. Sonenfeld reported on three evenings of budget discussions last week and the final information is being assembled. They didn’t feel comfortable with the numbers on pensions, insurance and other classified expenses at that time, but the information has now been revised. There is a recommendation on budget surplus and an additional meeting will be scheduled where Ms. Sonenfeld expects to present three budget alternatives. She encouraged residents to watch videos of these budget meetings, especially if they are interested in municipal government and the complexities involved.
Regarding leaves, Ms. Sonenfeld reported that 414 summonses were issued and 404 fines have been paid. The remaining summonses were dismissed. She said that proper protocol was followed; however, it took some time for the summonses to be issued. This is a customer service issue and not a legal issue. She indicated that this was not a pleasant exercise, and she hopes that this experience will be a deterrent for future leaf collection problems. Ms. Sonenfeld said she was surprised at the number of violations. She is working with a team of residents who indicate that enforcement should be continued. Mr. Calbi will research whether there is a better way to encourage people to comply with the seven-day requirement in order to keep the streets clean and safe.
Councilwoman Knudsen stated that this seems to be a high number of summonses, and she wondered if there was a break down in communications. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that most residents paid the fine with no questions asked because they knew they were in the wrong. She added that the team of residents is considering ways to improve communication, and they have worked with the Village Prosecutor to ensure that all forms of communication have been covered. She said that there could be improvements in communication and customer service, and they are considering a more interactive and detailed website for next year, which will clearly indicate a start date and end date for leaf removal.
Ms. Sonenfeld spoke about the sink hole at Linwood Avenue and Northern Parkway that occurred the day before July 4th of last year. The County completed the necessary repair work last week. She reported that New Jersey Transit (NJT) will be replacing the two kiosks by the pedestrian walkways with the appropriate tile at the train station. She isn’t sure when this work will begin, but noted that this repair work will result in the temporary loss of four parking spaces.
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that there were continued discussions on the outsourcing of crossing guards at a recent budget meeting. Several Village staff members attended a meeting with a potential outsourcer, who would be responsible for the hiring, monitoring, training and supervision. This would free up Police Officers who have to cover posts when crossing guards do not report to work, and reduce overtime. More information on this proposal will follow. Ms. Sonenfeld said that two towns in Bergen County have presented budgets, including Ramsey with a 1.9% increase and Mahwah with a 1.8% increase.
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that a resident reported leaking on the east end of the train underpass on rainy days. The area was inspected and it appears that water is seeping through some 100-year-old areas, which are difficult to fix because workers must be specially trained to work around railroad tracks. NJT has been contacted and asked to help with the repairs.
Ms. Sonenfeld reported on the weekly meeting with the four consultants regarding multi-family housing. A preliminary draft report is expected next Monday evening, and this topic will be listed on the Village Council agenda of March 9th. The presentation by the consultants will take place at Ridgewood High School, and the ordinances will be carried to the March 23rd agenda when a vote is expected. Ms. Sonenfeld announced that the March 23rd meeting will also be held at the Ridgewood High School Campus Center.
Upcoming Events – Ms. Sonenfeld noted several new programs from the Parks and Recreation Department. Back to Basics focuses on a healthy lifestyle. There was a recent presentation of Backyard Bee Keeping on February 13th. There will be a program on March 21st to discuss reforestation, to be held in the Senior Lounge from 7:00 P.M. to 8:30 P.M. Paddle tennis for adults is scheduled for March 6th, March 13th, March 20th, and April 3rd. This is a joint program between Ridgewood and the Upper Ridgewood Tennis Club. Meet the Manager will take place on March 5th. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the Recreation Department has a few seats left on the bus for the trip to the Philadelphia Flower Show. March 14th is the kick off date for the combined Ridgewood and Fair Lawn Weight Loss Challenge. Participants last year lost a total of 337.9 lbs.
7. COUNCIL REPORTS
Planning Board – Councilwoman Knudsen reported that the Planning Board formally adopted the Re-Examination of the Master Plan last week. This topic has consumed the Board for a number of meetings. An application for a variance was also heard from Tito’s Burritos. Variance relief was granted, which resolves the long standing issue relative to this business.
Ridgewood Arts Council (RAC) – Councilman Pucciarelli reported that work is being done to staff the Foundation of the Arts Council. The second Trustees Meeting last evening was cancelled and has not been rescheduled. He welcomed Jane Shinozuka who is the newest member of the RAC.
8. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn stated they would again have comments from the public, and asked anyone wishing to address the Village Council to come forward.
Jeff Voigt, 99 Glenwood Road, asked if the Re-Examination of the Master Plan was complete. Councilwoman Knudsen replied that it is finished, and it is a public document that should be available online soon. Mr. Voigt asked that Mt. Carmel Church be advised of the plan being contemplated for the meters and the garage on Saturday nights. Councilwoman Knudsen reported that she will have a conversation with Father Ron to review the details.
Linda Kotch, 16 North Hillside Place, asked if the Village would have total control over the garage, including fees charged for parking, if it is funded by the BCIA. Mayor Aronsohn indicated that the Village would have control. He said he would comment further at the end of the meeting.
Saurabh Dani, 390 Bedford Road, stated that he hopes the Village Council will work together to address the design of the garage and the traffic concerns. Unfortunately, today he didn’t see anything different from what he saw on January 6th relative to working together. There has been no compromise on the design, which is not favored by a majority of the residents of Ridgewood. There are a significant number of signatures on a petition, which could be taken to the courts. It is time for the Village Council to respect the residents of Ridgewood and work as a team.
Mr. Dani stated that several Councilmembers indicated that the BCIA process should be respected; however, one of the Councilmembers spoke today with the Freeholder Chairman and other Board members to inform them that next week, the Village Council would be voting on a local bond ordinance and the BCIA ordinance would become irrelevant. Mr. Dani explained that he spoke to the Freeholders today and was given this information.
Mr. Dani recalled that Councilman Sedon had indicated in the past, that he wanted to share the new parking rates with businesses in the CBD so that they are not surprised. He said that he hopes Councilman Sedon will keep his promise so that the businesses are not blindsided, because it sounded like the ordinance will be introduced next week.
John Saraceno, 17 Coventry Court, said that the Village Council seems to be slowly moving forward with a parking garage on Hudson Street. He hopes that there will be a positive vote on the self-funding bond ordinance between March 2nd and March 23rd and if the BCIA is the only option, there will be a binding referendum as to the outcome of the petition. He hopes that the Village does not have to resort to a binding referendum, but it could be the only option as a result of the certifications and the petitions that were filed. Mr. Saraceno said that the right thing to do would be to keep everything moving forward.
Siobhan Winograd, 274 Ivy Place, said she voted yes for the garage, but was disappointed when she saw the first design. The best outcome of this conflict is that the design has been vastly improved. She said that the opinion of the Chamber of Commerce and the Ridgewood Guild must be considered and the Village Council needs to listen to the business community in the Village. They need to focus on the facts, but at the same time “have each other’s backs”. A positive vote on the garage will restore some faith and she encouraged a 5-0 vote on the self-funding bond ordinance by the Village Council.
Rurik Halaby, 374 Evergreen Place, said that he doubted he would ever see the day when all five Councilmembers vote in favor of the parking garage because there has been a pattern since day one with certain members of the Village Council pandering to their base. This goes against any progress in the Village. Mr. Halaby commented that at some point, this must end, and the idea of losing control is nonsense. He said that the petitions that have been circulated are full of half-truths and he hopes the Village Council will vote 5-0 on the self-funding bond ordinance which will benefit the entire community. Mr. Halaby stated that it is impossible to tie down every detail in this type of project and they should keep their options open. If the petition succeeds, the people should be given the opportunity to speak even though he thinks the petition will fail.
Kathryn Schmidt, 123 South Irving Street, said she is hopeful that the garage is moving forward. She was with someone recently, who said that although he supported the original garage design, he felt that the new design is an improvement, thanks to all of the debate. Ms. Schmidt pointed out that sometimes dissent isn’t a negative thing and it is good when an engaged discussion takes place highlighting different points of view. She hopes for a 5-0 vote on the funding for a proposal that seems to be much better than initially proposed.
Lorraine Reynolds, 550 Wyndemere Avenue, recalled that the initial Walker study recommended parking passes for 135 out of town commuters who should be charged an addition $125 per year. This would amount to over $300,000 over a 25-year period. She said that the Village could not charge a different fee for out of town commuters if the project is financed through the BCIA. Ms. Reynolds said that this is something to consider.
Tom Hillman, 133 East Ridgewood Avenue, said that he has been in business in Ridgewood for 42 years, and every few years the idea of a parking garage comes up. He stated that the compromise in this situation has resulted in a proposal for a better garage than any in the past, and due to the low interest rates this is the best possible time to move forward. The other garages all had issues and the funding has been the consistent problem. Mr. Hillman reminded everyone that the merchants in the Village pay taxes through their landlords and are an asset to the Village. He predicted that it will take no time for the garage to be full and parking will continue to be a problem due to the loss of existing parking spaces. Mr. Hillman stated that this parking garage will go a long way to alleviate some of the problem. This whole discussion has gone on far too long and it is now time to act.
Anne Loving, 342 South Irving Street, referred to the proposed ordinance relative to cameras at meetings. Ms. Loving stated that the ordinance would prohibit unattended cameras which she agrees with; however, she pointed out that the cameras at tonight’s meeting have been unattended for some time. One of the reasons for the ordinance is to prevent disruptions. She pointed out that disruptions at the previous meeting were not a result of recording devices, but as a result of a person who chose to hit another resident. The camera operator was not involved or doing anything remotely disruptive.
Councilman Pucciarelli referred to the comment allegedly made that three Councilmembers said that the garage design was their design and if you don’t like it they would take it to the BCIA. He said that this is an example of history being rewritten and there has been a lot of compromise, which is demonstrated by the four garage designs that have been considered. He and Councilwoman Knudsen have worked together on the latest design, which is a result of compromise. The community should be proud of this design, which is the result of a lot of input from residents over a long period of time.
Councilwoman Knudsen said that she and Councilman Pucciarelli have worked long and hard, and have been on the same page during the process. She reminded everyone that she asked for the renderings in January but they were not available, and she hopes they will be available at the end of the week. This is a public building which means that public opinion must be respected, especially those who will be most impacted by the design, visual impact, scale and size of the building. She concluded by stating that it is very important to include the public as part of the conversation.
Mayor Aronsohn said that he has been in regular contact with the Freeholders and the BCIA Director. He attended their meeting earlier today. The BCIA is well aware of the Village Council’s plan to reintroduce the bond ordinance, for self-funding the Hudson Street parking deck, next week and hopefully the unanimous adoption on March 23rd. They have been told that if this is not the outcome, the Village intends to move forward with the assistance of the BCIA. Mayor Aronsohn declared that the Village needs a parking deck and either option will work, because the time is now
Ms. Sonenfeld addressed the question of how much control the BCIA would have over items such as parking rates. She read from a portion of a statement from the Ridgewood Bond Attorney and noted that the BCIA cannot add conditions or covenants once the lease agreement and other bond documents are executed and the bond issue has closed. The BICA and the Village have agreed and the final lease agreement will reflect that the Village covenants to impose the same fee to County residents as it does to Village residents. Prior to last year, the Village has always charged Village residents and non-Village residents the same fee for parking, and the covenant requested by the BCIA is consistent with this long standing Village practice. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that Article III of the draft lease agreement provides in detail how much control of the build phase each party shall have, and she noted that the Village would be responsible for the following:
(a) Prepare plans and specifications.
(b) Cause the project to be constructed and installed.
(c) Let all contracts, for the construction and installation of the project.
(d) Supervise construction.
(e) Sign off on final completion acceptance of the projects.
(f) Sign and requisition all payments from the bond trustee to pay all contractors.
(g) Exercise all remedies in the event of a default of the contract.
(h) Direct investment of bond funds, until spent, of the contract.
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the only covenant that applies is the covenant on charging the same for residents and non-residents in the parking deck, which is based on the amount of parking that is made available for commuters. This will not be a 325 spot commuter parking deck, because there will also be parking for shoppers, diners, and CBD employees.
After a brief discussion of whether or not deceptive information had been circulated concerning the cost of the parking garage, Councilwoman Knudsen stated that it was unnecessary and unfortunate to suggest that residents who were engaging in a legal petition were liars. Councilman Pucciarelli commented that the number of spaces allocated for commuters could fluctuate from year to year and cannot be projected over the lifetime of the lease. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the goal is to have users of the parking deck pay for the facility and not to have the deck financed by Ridgewood taxpayers. Councilman Pucciarelli stated that the Village is free to determine the allocation of spaces for commuters in the parking deck, and they could charge commuters at the Cottage Place lot more than would be charged at the parking garage.
9. RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION
Ms. Mailander read Resolution #16-70 to go into Closed Session as follows:
10. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilman Sedon, seconded by Mayor Aronsohn, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 11:04 P.M.
_________________________________ Paul S. Aronsohn Mayor
_________________________________ Heather A. Mailander Village Clerk
- Hits: 3357