Written on 29 March 2018.

Village Council Public Work Session Minutes 20140709

A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGEOF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 2014 AT 7:30 P.M.

1. CALL TO ORDER – OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT – ROLL CALL – FLAG SALUTE – MOMENT OF SILENCE

Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 7:33 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney. Councilwoman Hauck was absent.

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. Mayor Aronsohn also asked everyone to take an extra moment to remember one of Ridgewood’s own, Firefighter Steve Missel, who passed away this past weekend.

2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Mayor Aronsohn asked if anyone from the public wished to speak regarding any of the agenda items.

Marcia Ringel, 250 Ferris Place, asked some questions on legal points, following up questions she raised at the July 1^{st Reorganization Meeting. The remote electronic participation by a Councilmember at that meeting was the first time that had occurred in Ridgewood. Ms. Ringel asked what the legal justification was for allowing that to happen, with no precedent or previous public discussion, and no explanation given at the meeting. She noted that Councilwoman Hauck’s absence was a shock to many people. In fact, Ms. Ringel thought it could be inferred that in permitting the now infamous remote vote, the Village Attorney’s interpretation of the law was result-driven, to ensure that the Mayor and Deputy Mayor were re-elected, rather than representing equal and impartial legal support to all Councilmembers. This is because without Councilwoman Hauck’s vote, the results would almost surely have gone a different way if the Village ordinance had been followed. She asked how it was established that the remote electronic connection was uninterrupted, a typical requirement where it is allowed. From the audience’s point of view, the transmission was often interrupted and garbled, with repeats, corrections, and very slow speaking in a failed attempt to be heard clearly. In short, Ms. Ringel noted that these "almost comical" efforts overwhelmed what should have been a solemn and joyous occasion. She asked if that mattered to anyone.}

Next, Ms. Ringel asked if audible voting was the only criterion to be considered when the Councilmembers vote on anything, as Mr. Rogers indicated last week. In discussing the word "audible" and other points, Mr. Rogers cited Ordinance 3-14, which covers voting on ordinances, and is distinct from Ordinance 3-6, describing stipulated Reorganization Meeting procedures, which seems to be a big legal stretch, in Ms. Ringel’s opinion. She noted that last spring, Councilman Riche was away, and tried to vote by letter, but he was refused because he was not in the room. Ms. Ringel asked if a Councilmember shouted a vote through the window from the parking lot, would that vote count; or if an audible vote would suffice if the Councilmember was standing in the hall and shouted the vote through the door; telephoning the vote in via speakerphone; or recording the vote on a tape recorder and having that recording played at a meeting. She inquired if Councilmembers could now routinely vote while on vacation, and if it could be anticipated that soon, residents would be able to view five cell phones at the dais where the Councilmembers formerly sat. In addition, Ms. Ringel wanted to know if the public could also participate remotely.

On July 1st, Ms. Ringel commented that Mr. Rogers said he was unaware of any prior Closed Session meetings to pre-determine the Mayor or Deputy Mayor selection. If a majority of the Village Council had held any such meeting, such as to create a script to be read aloud at the July 1st Reorganization Meeting, and therefore tantamount to a vote, would that have been legal under New Jersey Statute? Ms. Mailander said that on July 1st, those meetings had been properly noticed, and Ms. Ringel wondered if those were the meetings that did not happen. The June 4, 2014, agenda on the Village website listed a Closed Session for "legal, NJDEP fine, Ridgewood Water". The June 11, 2014, agenda for the Closed Session cited "personnel, Fire Department, and legal tax appeal for 1200 East Ridgewood Avenue". The June 18, 2014, meeting was canceled. Ms. Ringel asked where an announcement was made for the meeting that supposedly never took place, and where can the public resolution leading to that meeting be found. Section 4-12(b) of the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) lists nine exceptions for which Closed Session meetings are allowed, and none of them pertain to choosing a Mayor. If Mr. Rogers should learn that any such meeting had occurred, Ms. Ringel wondered how he would advise the Councilmembers. If being Deputy Mayor is not a big deal, as Councilman Pucciarelli said, why was there such a big deal made of the situation.

Councilman Pucciarelli responded that it would be difficult for Mr. Rogers to refute any of the statements made, or to answer some of the questions asked by Ms. Ringel. He stated that he has known Mr. Rogers for many years, both professionally and through interactions at local sporting events. Councilman Pucciarelli continued by saying that it is one thing to question the law, and he believes it is wonderful to be able to do that, although he also believes that some of the arguments made by Ms. Ringel are losing arguments. However, he thinks that to suggest that Mr. Rogers’s opinions were driven by anything other than professional ethics is disgraceful, and crosses a line into slander and personal attack. In particular, Councilman Pucciarelli took exception to Ms. Ringel’s comment that Mr. Rogers’s opinion was result-driven, because it implies that he was not driven by his knowledge of the law, or by ethics, but was simply doing a favor for some of the other Councilmembers. Councilman Pucciarelli said that is slander. He stated that to intimate that Mr. Rogers is anything less than professional is outrageous, and Ms. Ringel ought to be ashamed.

Mr. Rogers responded that the law is not what was set forth by Ms. Ringel’s attorney. In fact, there was no question posed in his letter regarding the subject of taking a vote electronically, because Mr. Rogers believes that the other attorney understood the law enough to know that the OPMA permits electronic meetings. The definition of a "public meeting" in the OPMA discusses electronic participation, so Mr. Rogers said there was no issue with regard to whether a Councilmember could participate remotely, as long as the public can hear that person, and as long as the person can hear the public comments. One of the reasons why the OPMA includes that language is so that no official actions can be conducted via telephone. It is understood that there may be times when Councilmembers, who volunteer their time, cannot attend a meeting, which is why they permit remote participation. However, certain parameters are set for that participation, as previously explained by Mr. Rogers.

Secondly, Mr. Rogers said there were a number of other issues brought up by Ms. Ringel. He noted that he never said that he was not aware of any Closed Sessions, but Ms. Ringel’s attorney made a representation that illegal meetings were held. Mr. Rogers was not aware of any illegal meetings that were held. He explained that there were several Closed Session meetings, for which notices were given pursuant to the OPMA, and Councilmembers are able to participate in and discuss at those sessions such things as voting for Mayor and what they would do when they came out into the public portion of the meeting concerning voting for people who will be appointed to various committees and boards. All of that is allowed during Closed Session, and that is what occurred. Mr. Rogers pointed out that there is a municipality in New Jersey in which a Mayor was elected, and was soon after deployed to Iraq. For one year, he participated in Council meetings via Skype. The Councilmembers in that municipality were able to take action and vote on certain items, and the Mayor was able to participate as if it were a normal Council meeting. That type of participation is allowed by the OPMA, as well as by case law. Therefore, to suggest that Mr. Rogers’s opinion in that regard is result-driven is a sham, and a veiled effort of some people to try to disrupt the process that occurred on July 1st.

Mayor Aronsohn commented that there was an editorial in The Ridgewood News a few weeks ago that spoke to the divisiveness existing in Ridgewood on certain issues. While it is not pervasive, Mayor Aronsohn said it is sometimes evident at Village Council meetings, as well as at Planning Board meetings. He does not believe it has any place in the political discourse, and he believes it is incumbent upon the Councilmembers to put an end to such divisiveness. Mayor Aronsohn has reached out to some of the members of the clergy in Ridgewood, as well as the head of the Community Relations Advisory Board, because he thinks it is important, as community leaders and as residents of the community, to end the divisiveness. He said he was speaking specifically to accusations such as those just made that seem to find their way into discussions. Such accusations do not move the issues forward, nor do they help Ridgewood to be a better community. Mayor Aronsohn asked his colleagues and the members of the public who were present to establish a new standard of political public discourse. That does not mean that people cannot disagree, but Mayor Aronsohn thinks that baseless accusations only destroy what everyone is trying to achieve. He also believes it means that it will mean stricter adherence to the rules governing decorum at Village Council meetings. For example according to the Ridgewood Code, as well as Robert Rules of Order, personal attacks are not allowed during public meetings. In addition, the Ridgewood Code specifically states that members of the public are not allowed to come to the podium and ask questions of or make remarks to individual Councilmembers. The idea is to discuss the issues, votes, and actions. That is why Mayor Aronsohn said he will, as the Chairperson of these meetings, adhere more strictly to the rules of decorum in the future.

Councilman Pucciarelli stated that the quote attributed to him about being Deputy Mayor was inaccurate. What he said was that there is no ostensible authority given to the Deputy Mayor, other than to chair meetings in place of the Mayor. In fact, he pointed out that Mayor Aronsohn had only been absent once, at which time Councilman Pucciarelli performed his duties as Deputy Mayor. However, two very important roles of the Deputy Mayor are: working very closely with the Mayor; and performing weddings, which makes it a very significant position.

Gary Cirillo, 260 South Pleasant Avenue, welcomed the two new Councilmembers. He agreed that Ridgewood had been very divided over the past several years, both geographically and politically. However, on a positive note, Mr. Cirillo complemented the Councilmembers on the signs that have been placed in the CBD to allow people to more easily navigate the streets. On the other hand, Mr. Cirillo said he is not sure if the flags used to allow pedestrians to cross streets in the CBD are a good idea, and he hopes that safety is the ultimate goal. He also thanked everyone on the Fourth of July Committee. Mr. Cirillo noted that this year, the celebrations were threatened by severe weather, including a hurricane, and the parade was phenomenal. The fireworks were also spectacular.

Regarding Project Pride, Mr. Cirillo commented that the watering cart was finally returned today after several weeks. He thanked Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, for his assistance. In addition, Mr. Cirillo thanked Carmine, one of the Village mechanics, who was very instrumental in putting everything together. Mr. Cirillo then commented on the amazing number of volunteers who are available to beautify the CBD, including the Women Gardeners; Ridgewood Guild; Project Pride; Eagle Scouts; as well as those who volunteer on an individual basis. All of these people put a lot of time and effort in working in the CBD. They get a lot of satisfaction from all their hard work; however, Mr. Cirillo believes that the volunteers are not being met halfway by Ridgewood. For example, one volunteer cleared a tree well in front of The Gap in the CBD, and asked one of the store employees to clean up the mess. However, three days later, the mess was still on the sidewalk. Mr. Cirillo thinks that the tree wells, in particular, are in bad shape. When people asked him why his volunteers are not taking care of the tree wells, he responds that it is not up to them to do that. Employees from his company have attempted to do some light trimming and spraying, but they cannot do all the necessary work. Some of the store owners have taken it upon themselves to try to beautify the tree wells, and in the process, they have made the situation worse. Mr. Cirillo suggests that, going forward, there needs to be some kind of policy regarding the tree wells, because they are the "face" of Ridgewood in the CBD. Weeds are permeating every sidewalk in the CBD, and there is no uniformity in how the trees look. Ms. Sonenfeld agreed with Mr. Cirillo, and noted that Ms. Loving had raised the issue of the tree wells in public comments a few months ago. Ms. Sonenfeld said she put together a team, to which people from the community will be added, because she believes there is a lot of inconsistency in how these situations are handled. There is clearly a need for some kind of an integrated, consistent approach to the situation. Ms. Sonenfeld asked Janet Fricke, Assistant to the Village Manager; Timothy Cronin, Director of the Department of Parks and Recreation; Councilwoman Hauck; and Councilman Sedon to lead efforts to address this. Mr. Cirillo commented that the situation has become so overwhelming that he believes it would be best to attack it in quadrants, or find some other way to break it up into smaller areas of concentration. Ms. Sonenfeld said she would love to have Mr. Cirillo participate in the group.

Tom Kossoff, 46 Heermance Place, noted that the parking meter case was decided today, and he found it surprising that, first of all, the amount of money that Mr. Rica was ordered to pay was less than what was originally agreed, and that when all of the payments are added together, Mr. Rica will only pay less than half of what was taken. Mr. Kossoff asked Mr. Rogers to explain the sentence handed down to Mr. Rica, because Mr. Kossoff was not sure that he had all of the facts correct. Mr. Rogers explained that Mr. Rica pled guilty to theft of $460,000 worth of quarters from the Parking Utility, and he was sentenced today. Judge Roma, the sentencing judge, accepted the plea agreement, and sentenced Mr. Rica in accordance with the plea agreement that had been entered into between the Prosecutor’s Office and the defense attorney. The Assistant Prosecutor took quite a bit of time to explain why the plea agreement was structured the way it was, and the considerations that were offered in coming to an agreement, in an effort to try to answer many of the questions regarding punishment and restitution raised by many people when the plea was first entered. Mr. Rica did admit to the theft of $460,000 worth of quarters taken from the Village, and confessed to and signed a judgment that was entered in the Court for that amount. That judgment is to be discussed tonight, and should be signed and sent back to Judge Roma for him to affix his signature, as the original plea agreement provides. In addition, as part of that plea agreement, Mr. Rica is prohibited from ever suggesting or arguing that he cannot pay back that money based upon an inability to pay, and that for the first five years, he will pay $2,000 per month. As part of the agreement, today, the Village received a check for $64,337.55, which is the first payment made by Mr. Rica. After 45 days, if Mr. Rica does not appeal his sentence, there is another $4,000+ payment to be made to the Village. Every amount paid is deducted from the $460,000, including the $120,000 that will be paid monthly over the next five years. At that time, the remainder of the judgment can be executed, and a plan can be worked out between Mr. Rica and the Village to schedule the remaining payments. The Village or the insurance carrier could also choose to liquidate whatever assets Mr. Rica has at that time to satisfy the judgment. Mr. Rogers commented that currently, he is in the process of negotiating with the insurance carrier about the remainder of the judgment.

Mr. Kossoff stated that the reports about the sentencing seemed to be accurate, but they did not discuss the next chapter, which is the period after the initial five years. Mr. Kossoff asked why a payment period of 10 years was not established for Mr. Rica to pay off his judgment. Mr. Rogers explained that Mr. Rica pled guilty to four counts of a third-degree crime, which carry penalties of up to a maximum of five years. That is why his probation was set for only five years, with each sentence running concurrently. During that five-year period, all of Mr. Rica’s payments will be made through probation, and will then be turned over to the Village, or to the insurance carrier. The payments are scheduled to begin on August 1st, as was stated in Court, and continue for five years thereafter. After that time, the Village is free to seek satisfaction of the judgment in whatever way it may deem to be appropriate at that time.

Mr. Kossoff noted that it is already being reported that the terms of Mr. Rica’s probation will satisfy less than half of the judgment, because nothing is being said about the Village’s option to take action after the five-year probationary period, which makes the Village look silly. Mr. Kossoff also asked about the situation with the insurance carrier, and what that is as far as the employee theft is concerned. Mayor Aronsohn asked if this discussion could wait until later in the agenda, because it is scheduled to be discussed more fully later on in this meeting.

Leonard Diamond, 131 Cottage Place, commented that he wanted to give the "monthly" bicycle and pedestrian update. First, Mr. Diamond thanked the Engineering Department for the new stencils in the bike lane on Grove Street, which clearly indicate that it is a bike lane, not a shoulder, so that people will not park there. Regarding the on-going construction of Garber Square and the general divisiveness mentioned earlier, Mr. Diamond noted that there had been times when people objected to various Village projects, and he believes that no matter what is undertaken, there will always be people who will object to that particular project. Usually, people are more vocal and tend to show up at such things as Village Council meetings when they have objections, as opposed to not feeling as strongly about something, or agreeing with whatever is occurring. Mr. Diamond pointed out that the construction project at Garber Square was designed in compliance with national guidelines by accepted engineering experts and organizations, and he complemented the Engineering Department for coming up with a design that follows those guidelines and is appropriate. He added that it is understandable that many people do not like change, as well as people who are worried about traffic, but he disagrees when people say that it is not safe for bicycles, because they are not engineers, and do not have the necessary expertise to make such determinations. The guidelines were written by experts, and were followed in this case. Mr. Diamond stated that based on his experience, it is a safe design. He commented that the next step would be to come up with a bicycle and pedestrian plan for the entire Village, which can be paid for with State grant money. That would give the Engineering Department a plan that they could follow, and as streets and sidewalks are paved and/or repaired, the plan can be expanded. The Village would never have the money to do all of the work at once, so it would have to be done piecemeal.

Regarding pedestrians, Mr. Diamond stated that he walked around the CBD and took pictures of the outdoor café seating. He noted that many of the businesses with such seating are not in compliance with their own rules and regulations, especially the seating areas along the curb line, which block pedestrians from getting to their parked cars. The rules state that such seats cannot be fastened to the ground, but Mr. Diamond said he has pictures showing that many of the seats are fastened with screws. In addition, there are many seats and tables that are covered in slate, brick, or other types of stone, and weigh hundreds of pounds. It would create quite a problem if they needed to be moved for any reason. Mr. Diamond suggested that the tables comprised of pipes with canvas, which are very simple, should be enough to satisfy seating needs, and they are movable. He suggested that such seating types be considered for use in the outdoor seating areas of the CBD. The rules also state that there must be 52 inches of space available for pedestrians to walk, and many of these seating areas do not leave that much room. It necessitates walking single file down the streets of Ridgewood, with people taking turns to walk through certain crowded areas. Mr. Diamond understands that sidewalk seating is profitable and is good for the Village merchants, but it must be balanced against the rights of pedestrians, and it should not create obstacles. Mayor Aronsohn thanked Mr. Diamond for his "report," and said that he had made some very good points. He added that such crowded seating areas also create problems for people in wheelchairs, as well as people pushing strollers.

Leonard Eisen, 762 Upper Boulevard, welcomed the new Councilmembers, and hoped they would be inspired by those who preceded them.

Hayley Punjabi, 269 Rock Road, said that she had a plan to propose. Ms. Punjabi is in the process of getting her Girl Scout Gold Award, and when she was trying to think of a project, she thought about the summer of 2013, when she volunteered at a camp in Passaic for low-income children, who paid a flat fee of $20 to participate in the camp for two months. That included breakfast, lunch, and a snack each day for each child. Ms. Punjabi discovered that breakfast consisted of an apple; lunch was a bag of potato chips; and there was nothing left over for snacks. As a result, Ms. Punjabi also noticed that people in shelters and nursing homes are often given mediocre food that is unhealthy to eat. Therefore, Ms. Punjabi decided that the issue she would like to address in her project is getting healthy food into food pantries. She noted that Ridgewood has an "Ample Harvest" pantry, which accepts healthy food, as well as fresh produce. Many people in Ridgewood do not know about this. Therefore, Ms. Punjabi proposed a plan called "Healthy Donation Month". For the month of September, once school has started and there is still a lot of fresh produce available, people could donate fresh produce to the food pantry. She also proposed that it be part of the Mayor’s Wellness Campaign. This would help those who are less fortunate and the elderly in nursing homes to eat healthy foods. Ms. Punjabi would like to solicit the citizens of Ridgewood to donate fresh produce to the Social Services Organization of Ridgewood, and she could obtain the produce through the community garden, as well as sending letters through the schools to homes with children and reaching out to local houses of worship. In addition, Ms. Punjabi stated that flyers could be displayed in key locations throughout the Village, such as at grocery stores and other high-visibility locations. Her goal by the end of September is to deliver the donated produce to shelters and nursing homes in the area. Ms. Punjabi also hopes that in the years to come, the month of September will be viewed as "Healthy Donation Month". She added that she has been a Girl Scout for 12 years, and she has not felt that she has been able to make an impact until this time, and believes that this is her last chance to do so. Ms. Punjabi asked the Councilmembers to proclaim the month of September "Healthy Donation Month" from now on. Mayor Aronsohn commented that this is a great project, and he believes that Ms. Punjabi will have an impact. He added that this will be memorialized in a resolution, and a Proclamation will be discussed.

Ms. Sonenfeld introduced Lilyanne Park, who has opened a business at 84 East Ridgewood Avenue called Farmers Insurance – The Lilyanne Park Agency. Ms. Sonenfeld wished Ms. Park the best of luck in her new business. Ms. Park stated that she moved to the area last year, and she had been looking for some time for a town in which to open her insurance agency before she found an opportunity in Ridgewood. She is also intrigued by the proposition outlined by Ms. Punjabi, because she was a clinical dietitian, and she was looking for a way to give back to the community.

There were no other comments from the public at this time, and Mayor Aronsohn closed the time for public comment.

3. PRESENTATION

a. Student Parking – Basil Pizzuto and Ridgewood High School Students

Mayor Aronsohn reminded everyone that there have been numerous discussions about the need for additional parking around Ridgewood High School. In particular, one of the areas that has been discussed by the Councilmembers is adjacent to Stevens Field, along the PSE&G right-of-way. A group of students have taken it upon themselves to try to help move that proposition forward.

Basil Pizzuto, Assistant Principal at Ridgewood High School, noted that one of the law classes was studying government, and in the spring, the students were assigned a project in which they had to come up with a problem that exists at the high school, and they were challenged to find solutions to the problem. One of the students in the class, Michael Ramsey, and his group presented this idea to Mr. Pizzuto, and then it was presented to Dr. Fishbein, Superintendent of Schools, who contacted Mayor Aronsohn. Mr. Pizzuto introduced the President of the Ridgewood Student Government, Gabe, and the Vice President of Ridgewood Student Government, Cameron.

Gabe commented that, as Mr. Pizzuto noted, the students came to this meeting to discuss the possibility of getting more parking spots made available for Ridgewood High School students. Some of the benefits to be reaped from having the additional parking spaces include: the convenience it will provide students by opening 75-100 additional spots under this plan, which could also be used for other types of parking in the future; allowing students to park closer to school than the spots at Veterans Field allow, which can be significant during periods of inclement weather, when the sidewalks and other walkways from Veterans Field get obstructed; alleviating parking issues for residents around the High School during sporting events; and alleviating parking issues at Village Hall and the Public Library, because students will no longer be parking in the Graydon South municipal parking lot.

Cameron discussed the issue of protection for the new parking spots, including protection for the utility poles that are in that location. He said the solution is fairly simple, and would only require the placement of barriers to protect the poles, or the installation of guardrails. To protect cars from going into the brook which runs alongside the area in question, trees could be taken down and laid horizontally to prevent such an occurrence, or guardrails could be installed.

In moving forward with preparations for this change, the students believe there are minimal changes that would need to take place. For example, only a small portion of the right-of-way would need to be cleared of bushes, weeds, and other such debris to allow more room for parking. In addition, it was suggested that perhaps some gravel could be laid to allow access to the road without damaging cars. The students have found a potential donor for the gravel.

When thinking about all of this, the students said they took some things into consideration, such as how the right-of-way has already been accessible through the years, including this past spring, when parking was allowed for events at Stevens Field. Another potential problem could be when it becomes necessary to plow snow during the winter. However, the biggest issue is getting permission from PSE&G to use that area, which is not being used at this time, although PSE&G does perform service on their utility lines. In order to comply with the right-of-way, the students would ask that PSE&G give 24 hours’ notice to the High School so that parking can be prohibited when access is needed, and the lot can be reopened after the work is performed.

In order to identify the spaces, the students proposed using concrete blocks to mark the spaces, as demonstrated in their PowerPoint presentation. They also proposed making the right-of-way a one-way street, allowing students to enter the lot from North Irving Street, and they would exit onto East Ridgewood Avenue. That would also help to alleviate any traffic concerns.

Mayor Aronsohn commended the students for tackling the problem, and the way in which they considered all of the possible issues involved. He noted that in previous discussions with PSE&G, they were not inclined to allow the right-of-way to be used. However, Mayor Aronsohn asked the students to send the presentation to him via email, and he would share it with representatives from PSE&G, and hopefully revisit the issue with them.

Councilman Sedon asked if the students were made aware of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) concerns, given the location’s proximity to the brook, and the fact that it might be used on a daily basis as a regular parking lot. Councilman Sedon is concerned that the NJDEP might place some restrictions on use of that area. The response was that the students had not looked into this, nor had any communications been received from the NJDEP, but they acknowledged that the NJDEP might have some concerns that will have to be addressed. The students feel that the first issue to be addressed must be with PSE&G in order to get their permission to use that location. Once that has been done, they plan to talk to any other organizations to find out if any other restrictions might be placed that will further limit any possibility of parking in that area. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that the NJDEP will definitely be concerned with the usage of gravel versus asphalt.

Councilman Pucciarelli commented that if the traffic flow could be implemented as suggested by the students, he believes it would be a wonderful idea. He suggested that the students work with Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, to see if a curb cut out to East Ridgewood Avenue could be created to accommodate exiting cars.

Councilwoman Knudsen commended the students on a comprehensive presentation, which was well-thought-out, to try to resolve such a huge issue. However, she thought it might be prudent for the students to make the same presentation to PSE&G, and perhaps Mayor Aronsohn could accompany them when they do so. The students would be the best ones to discuss the parking issues confronting them. Mayor Aronsohn thought that was a good suggestion. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that it could be coordinated through the Village.

One of the students asked if any specific concerns have been raised by PSE&G in previous discussions about this area. Mayor Aronsohn responded that they seemed to have concerns about the safety factor, and the general feeling that they did not like people parking on their right-of-way. However, PSE&G did acknowledge that they had allowed such parking to occur in other communities, but Mayor Aronsohn did not know if the situations were similar. A protocol would have to be worked out to address access when PSE&G needs to service their utility lines.

4. DISCUSSION

a. Budget:

1.) Street Opening Fees in Emergency Situations on Newly Paved Roads

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this deals with the Village moratorium on streets that have been resurfaced, which led to penalties of $1,000 being incurred since 2009 due to utilities that wanted to open up streets that were resurfaced within the past five years in order to work on their conduits. The amended ordinance recommends increasing the fee from $1,000 to $1,500, in the hope that utilities that want to open up streets would plan more effectively in anticipation of doing any proposed work on those streets.

Councilman Sedon asked how this ordinance has worked in the past to encourage utilities to coordinate with the Village, knowing that there are possible fines or fees incurred for opening up recently-paved streets. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that the ordinance is implemented 6-8 times per year. She believes it is hard to say whether the ordinance is preventing any utility companies from opening up recently-paved streets, but Mr. Rutishauser might be able to answer the question. Councilwoman Knudsen asked if there was any kind of insurance or bond supplied by the utility company to protect the Village if the costs of opening up the street, and the ensuing repair work, ended up costing more than the fine or fee. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that there is a separate bond to cover such costs.

Mr. Rutishauser explained that the fines are collected from companies that do not plan properly, and unfortunately, the biggest violator is usually PSE&G. The Village does try to coordinate with them regarding streets that have been resurfaced. PSE&G’s current "Energy Strong" program has allowed PSE&G to give the Village notice regarding which streets will be facing repair work, and Mr. Rutishauser said that his office has been able to plan accordingly by delaying paving on those streets. However, it sometimes becomes necessary for the utility companies to perform emergency work, or to correct an error made by a builder or developer. Fees collected from the moratorium go into the general fund, but the utility companies must also post a bond for any excess costs.

Councilman Pucciarelli asked if a resident needs a new line connected from the house to the main sewer line, and must excavate for that purpose, is that the resident’s responsibility, and would the resident, therefore, be subject to this fine for opening up their street for the work to be done. Mr. Rutishauser answered that the resident would be subject to the fine, and there have been cases in the past when developers or builders have requested permission to run sewer lines from new residences, and Mr. Rutishauser explained to them about the moratorium fine. Some of the builders have elected to wait until the moratorium lapses, while others have paid the fine and continued with their work. Councilman Pucciarelli said it seems excessively harsh for homeowners who are forced to pay for emergency repairs, and must pay the moratorium fine in addition to the repair costs, and he would like to see exceptions made for such cases. Mr. Rutishauser said that could be incorporated into the ordinance, and he would have to prepare a second ordinance including that language to amend Chapter 238. Mayor Aronsohn asked how many of the 6-8 incidents per year fall into that category, and Mr. Rutishauser responded that to the best of his knowledge, all of the incidents involve utility companies, not homeowners. Mayor Aronsohn also asked if any kind of notification is made to homeowners when street repaving is to take place. Mr. Rutishauser answered that letters are usually distributed by placing them in screen doors, or under doors. His staff members are not allowed to place the letters in mailboxes, because they do not have postage on them. Such letters usually give approximately 48 hours’ notice to the homeowners about the resurfacing. Many homeowners become aware of the resurfacing efforts when contractors start working on the curbs, ADA ramps, and milling, which usually starts several weeks before the actual resurfacing. Mayor Aronsohn agreed with Councilman Pucciarelli that perhaps some kind of relief should be provided to homeowners in emergency situations, and Ms. Sonenfeld suggested that perhaps the Village Manager could waive the fees at such times, rather than forcing Mr. Rutishauser to draft another ordinance. Mr. Rutishauser said such discretionary language could certainly be written into the ordinance.

Councilwoman Knudsen asked if the fees are waived in emergency situations, what assurances would the Village have that the work will not be inferior. Mr. Rutishauser explained that contractors are required to take out permits, and if homeowners request such permits, Mr. Rutishauser said they are advised that it is preferable that the contractors obtain the permits. That is because contractors will be doing the work, and they are more likely to have the necessary insurance coverage.

This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

2.) Award Contract – Snow Plowing Services

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is a recommendation to award snowplowing services to Conquest Industries, which is the optional second year of last year’s contract. The rates will remain the same as those of last winter. This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

3.) Award Contract – Removal and Recycling of Grass Clippings

Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is a recommendation to award the contract for the disposal of grass clippings at the Lakeview Compost Facility. Three quotes were obtained, and the total value of the contract is $65,000. The vendor is Environmental Renewal, who has been doing this service for the Village since 2007. This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

4.) Award Contract – Telephone System Maintenance and Emergency Troubleshooting Service

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is the award of a contract for telephone system maintenance and emergency troubleshooting services to Entel Systems, which is the optional second year of last year’s contract. This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

5.) Award Contract – Registered Environmental Health Inspection Services – Northwest Bergen Regional Health Commission

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is a resolution for a Shared Services Agreement for Registered Environmental Health Services with the Northwest Bergen Regional Health Commission. Some of the services provided include inspection of food establishments; public schools; public recreational bathing facilities; youth camps; and animal bite investigations. Councilman Pucciarelli asked who provides the services specified, and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that Northwest Bergen Regional Health Commission does. She added that the price of $14,500 for six months of 15 hours per week is very competitive, and was compared with the County rates. This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

6.) Award of Professional Services Contract – Hiring of Consultant for Ridgewood Water – System-Wide Corrosion Control Application and Response to NJDEP Administrative Order

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this is a two-part recommendation to award a contract to Agra Environmental and Laboratory Services. The first part of the award is to provide corrosion control to the Ridgewood Water system, and the second part of the award is to address an Administrative Order received by the Village from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during a sanitary survey, with detailed remedies to fix issues included in that Administrative Order. The total is approximately $25,000. Mayor Aronsohn asked if there is anything else the Councilmembers should know about this. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that she believes there are some questions as to whether or not any of these issues, particularly those contained in the Administrative Order, were related to water quality. It is her understanding, based on conversations with Frank Moritz, Director of Ridgewood Water; and Dave Scheibner, Business Manager of Ridgewood Water, that they are not. Councilman Pucciarelli asked if this is a capital budget item, or an operating budget item. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is from the operating budget, specifically the Water Utility. Councilman Pucciarelli asked if it is budgeted, and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that there is money in the budget to do this.

Mr. Moritz explained that when the EPA conducted its inspection, Ridgewood Water was the fifth utility to have such a survey performed. It is not simply a matter of monitoring the Village, but also monitoring the NJDEP to ensure that they are monitoring the Village. Therefore, there was no way of knowing what kind of costs would be involved in addressing these issues. There is enough money in the Ridgewood Water operating budget to cover this expense.

This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

7.) Award Contract – Purchase of Water Meters

8.) Award Contract – Installation of Water Meters

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that approximately 20,000 water meters required replacing. Efforts to replace those meters began in 2002, and began in earnest in 2011. Approximately 6,400 meters still need to be replaced. Approximately 180 per month have been replaced in 2014, but the average has been closer to 230 per month over the past three years. At that rate, it will take approximately 28 months to 3 years to finish replacing all of the meters. Therefore, Ms. Sonenfeld feels strongly that it would be wise to accelerate the replacement efforts, for several reasons. One is due to customer dissatisfaction. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that she, as well as many of the Councilmembers, have received phone calls and emails from Ridgewood Water customers expressing their dissatisfaction. Currently, estimated bills are being sent out, and at least half of those bills result in very large payments being required from the residents. As a result, revenue is not optimally collected, and systems maintenance of the infrastructure is compromised because some of this work is being done on a "fill-in" basis. This new proposal would come out of the capital budgets, which allows the Village to spread the cost over a period of time, thereby fairly treating all of the users going forward. The current financing environment is an excellent one, and the current price of the water meters could potentially rise if the Village chooses to wait another two or three years.

The proposal is to purchase 6,400 water meters from the existing supplier, and hire Lenegan Plumbing, who was the lowest bidder, to complete the installations within six months. The cost of the water meters is approximately $1.5 million, which could have been substantially higher if it had been spread out over the next three years. The installation will cost approximately $577,000, or approximately $90.24 per meter. The Village will also incur savings of approximately $1,500 per month from telephone reading of the water meters that will be installed, or a savings of approximately $36,000-$48,000 over the next three years. There will be an additional savings of approximately $30,000 per year, because the temporary employee who has been doing the work will no longer be required. There is currently approximately $2.097 million in the capital budget that has already been approved for water meters, and another $15,000 would be needed for this work, which could be covered out of the Ridgewood Water operating budget. The house would also be replaced in the process of these installations, which would require a cushion of approximately $90,000 in the budget. That would be under a separate ordinance.

Mayor Aronsohn asked what the estimated time frame is to have this work completed, and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that Lenagan Plumbing said they could have the work done within six months.

Councilman Pucciarelli said Ms. Sonenfeld made a very strong case for this work to be done, and he is aware of some of the horror stories regarding the large payments being required of residents.

Councilman Sedon asked if there is any way to ensure that the work is done within six months. He realizes that it is difficult for contractors to work with homeowners to set up appointments to get such work done, but he does not want the work to take another year. He asked if language could be included in the contract to ensure that the work is completed by a specified date. Ms. Sonenfeld said she has a letter from the contractor indicating that the work could be done within six months. Mr. Moritz added that it is to the contractor’s benefit to get the work done as quickly as possible, because then he is free to move on to the next job. He also pointed out that the Village asked for a letter confirming the fact that the contractor would approach the work with the intent of finishing it within six months.

Councilwoman Knudsen asked if the new meters to be installed would work with any new technology that is already being implemented in other communities, which Mr. Moritz assured her is the case.

This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

9.) Award Professional Services Contract – Licensed Water Superintendent

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that, as the Councilmembers are aware, there was recently a resignation of the W-4 licensed operator, Eric Fooder. This resolution would allow the hiring of a temporary consultant to fulfill the W-4 licensed operator requirement, as required by the NJDEP. In order to avoid any violation, it is suggested that a contractor be appointed on a consultant basis, at a cost of $10,900 per month. That is approximately the same as the salary and benefits that were being paid to Mr. Fooder. Mayor Aronsohn thought that this might be a way to fulfill the staffing needs for this position in the future.

This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

10.) Award Contract – Infrared Asphalt Surface Repair and Miscellaneous Curb and Sidewalk Repair

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this recommendation is to award a contract to do infrared asphalt surface repair and miscellaneous curb and sidewalk repairs. These are small repairs, which are done after street openings have occurred. There were 10 bidders who responded, and the lowest bidder was D and L Paving Contractors. This resolution will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

b. Policy:

1.) Valet Parking in Central Business District

2.) Amend Ordinance for Parking in C-Zone

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is an idea that was suggested by a new restaurant in the Village, and she believes it has a lot of potential. It would add valet parking operators in the CBD. The ordinance is now being drafted. The idea is that a restaurant would have valet services in which the restaurant owner would contract with an owner of a parking lot to provide valet parking spots located off-site, and valets would pick up the vehicles at the restaurant, take them to the off-site location, and return them when the customers leave the restaurant. A new restaurant, Roots, has already set up a valet parking system. In fact, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that several weeks ago on a Saturday night, approximately 80 cars were parked in that manner, and the restaurant has 100 spots located off-site for valet parking. Therefore, Ms. Sonenfeld believes this has potential as a short-term fix until the ultimate goal of having a parking garage in the Village is achieved. She suggested that valet parking operators could be regulated while utilizing the public streets and rights-of-way, and it would significantly increase available parking spots in the CBD. At some point, it would lead to the establishment of a Valet Parking Operator Permit program. Each valet parking operator must meet certain requirements, including significant insurance requirements. Applications would ask for such information as the seating capacity of the business; a map of the routes to the off-site parking lot; and a copy of the agreement between the business/restaurant and the owner of the off-site parking location. Operating requirements would extend to such things as signage, which would not be allowed to obstruct or otherwise interfere with pedestrian walkways; and a sufficient number of valet parking attendants must be employed so that traffic on the streets will not be impeded. After the application is made, Mr. Rutishauser, the Village Engineer, or his designee would review it to ensure that the method of dropping off and picking up cars is workable and safe, as was done with Roots. Mr. Rutishauser would also determine whether the Fire Department or Police Department must be brought into the situation. The initial application fee would be $250. Ms. Sonenfeld stressed the fact that this is all very preliminary, and it is only the beginning of the discussion.

Mayor Aronsohn commended Ms. Sonenfeld for taking this initiative. He added that Roots restaurant had approached the Village about valet parking, and instead of viewing it as a one-time situation, Ms. Sonenfeld thought it would be better to establish a policy in the Village. She examined policies in communities in other States in an effort to address a parking challenge that is shared by many businesses, in a way that can apply to all of the businesses. Mayor Aronsohn noted that even if parking garages are built in the Village, they could also be used for valet parking by some of the businesses.

Councilman Pucciarelli asked about the concept, because he wanted to understand the process. He pointed out that a restaurant owner would enter into an agreement with the owner of an off-site parking facility, and that agreement would be between the restaurant owner and the owner of the off-site parking facility. In addition, a valet parking operator, who could be independent of the restaurant owner and the property owner, would engage employees to park the cars for that restaurant; or the restaurant owners themselves could also be the valet parking operators for that restaurant. Ms. Sonenfeld confirmed all of that, and added that it is a potential business opportunity for entrepreneurs. The ordinance will be written with both scenarios taken into consideration.

Mayor Aronsohn clarified that it is possible that some of the metered spots in front of certain businesses would be designated as valet drop-off and pickup spaces from 6:00 P.M. Mr. Rogers interjected that those are some of the legal issues that must be addressed, and he is not sure if that would be permitted in the CBD. At this time, the focus is to designate the ability to allow for safe drop-off and pickup of cars, without impeding traffic. Mayor Aronsohn asked if this is only being considered for nighttime valet parking, or if daytime hours are also being considered. Ms. Sonenfeld answered that right now, only nighttime parking is under discussion. There does not seem to be such a demand for valet parking in the daytime, although that could change.

Councilman Sedon asked if there could be some way to ensure that the locations for valet parking spots are within a reasonable distance from the Village. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that that was the reason for having Mr. Rutishauser or his designee assess the location and route to the valet parking spots.

Councilwoman Knudsen asked if the current B1 and B2 zoning permits allow parking lots as a primary use, which Ms. Sonenfeld confirmed. Councilwoman Knudsen asked if Ms. Sonenfeld could explain the tie-in of this issue to the rezoning issue that is to be discussed next on the agenda. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that by allowing parking as a primary use in the C-zone, it would give the Village more parking spaces that could be used for valet parking.

Ms. Sonenfeld noted that the C-zone allows parking as an accessory use, while B1 and B2 zones allow parking as a primary use. She commented that it is hoped that more people can be part of this discussion, and Mayor Aronsohn asked if she had reached out to the Chamber of Commerce and Ridgewood Guild to get their opinions. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that she has mentioned it to members of the Chamber of Commerce, and she is meeting with one of their representatives tomorrow. The response has been very positive. Mayor Aronsohn suggested that she also contact members of the Ridgewood Guild, which Ms. Sonenfeld said she would do.

Ms. Mailander stated that next week, at the Public Meeting, a special Work Session will be held with this one item on the agenda. It is hoped that an ordinance can be prepared by that time that can be introduced at the Public Meeting, which will immediately follow the Work Session.

Councilwoman Knudsen asked if proximity to a particular restaurant would be defined, and what would the guidelines be. She stated that she would have some concerns if it would be necessary for cars to travel from one side of Ridgewood Avenue to the other side of Franklin Avenue, especially if it involved 80-100 cars. That would add traffic in an already-congested pedestrian area. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that examination of the routes would include such an analysis. She also noted that such a scenario would not make sense, because once the valet drives the car to the parking location, the valet must then return to the restaurant, which could cause a potential pedestrian issue. Mr. Rogers pointed out that the agreement that a parking lot owner would have with a restaurant owner regarding parking would have some control over the business. For example, if a patron had to wait 30 minutes to get his/her car back after eating at a particular restaurant, the patron might be less inclined to use that valet parking service again. Therefore, that would give the valet parking business owner an added impetus to run the parking business well, including finding parking spaces that are in reasonably close proximity to the restaurant.

Mayor Aronsohn asked Ms. Sonenfeld if she could provide any background from her investigation into valet parking practices in other communities. Ms. Sonenfeld asked if he wanted that information sent to him, which Mayor Aronsohn confirmed.

Grant Halliday, a representative from Harvest Restaurants which operates Roots Steakhouse, said that they are very happy to be in Ridgewood. He thanked Ms. Sonenfeld and Mayor Aronsohn for their support in helping to get the valet parking service implemented. Mr. Halliday noted that the 80 cars mentioned before were parked over a 5½ hour period of time. He estimated that there were probably no more than eight cars parked in a 20-25 minute span of time. The dining process at Roots Steakhouse is approximately 1.5-2 hours, and with a finite number of seats available in the restaurant, there are only a certain number of cars that could be accommodated. Regarding the issue of proximity, Mr. Halliday pointed out that as an operator, it would not be desirable for one of the restaurant’s patrons to be forced to spend the amount of money required to dine in one of the restaurants, only to be forced to wait an inordinate amount of time to get his/her car back. Roots Steakhouse operates 10 locations in New Jersey, and four of them offer valet parking. Their valet parking service is outsourced, and the same company services those four locations. Moreover, at some of those franchises, the valets are required to drive through city streets in order to get to the off-site parking location, which is negotiated with the community in advance. Mr. Halliday considers it a big advantage for the restaurant to be able to park 12-15 employee vehicles off the streets and parking lots of Ridgewood seven days a week, for 10-12 hours per day. It is another advantage for Roots’ patrons to be able to visit the Ridgewood location without having to worry about parking issues. According to surveys that were conducted prior to opening the location in Ridgewood, many of the restaurant’s potential patrons come from surrounding communities like Saddle River, and they seemed very excited to know that they could drive into Ridgewood and not have to negotiate through the CBD to find parking in order to patronize the restaurant.

3.) Honor Roger Wiegand

Mayor Aronsohn noted that the subject of honoring resident Roger Wiegand has been discussed on several occasions. Three different possibilities were mentioned. One was the placement of a plaque on the podium; another was a tree to be planted in his honor; and the third was to name his block of South Irving Street "Wiegand Way," or something to that effect. The general preference among the Councilmembers was the placement of a plaque on the podium. After meeting with Mr. Wiegand’s niece and nephew, Mayor Aronsohn asked if the Councilmembers would reconsider the possibility of also doing the other two items mentioned. Mayor Aronsohn believes that all three measures would be appropriate to honor Mr. Wiegand, and could be supported. With respect to the tree, Mayor Aronsohn suggested that, in conjunction with honoring Mr. Wiegand, the Shade Tree Commission might be able to come up with a policy going forward with respect to honoring residents with trees.

Councilman Sedon agreed that asking the Shade Tree Commission to develop a policy for honoring residents with the planting of a tree would be very appropriate, and he said he would be happy to discuss that possibility with them. He is also supportive of the plaque on the podium, as well as the renaming of that portion of South Irving Street. Mayor Aronsohn noted that, in his conversations with Mr. Wiegand’s niece and nephew, they are agreeable to covering any costs associated with the various honoraria.

Councilman Pucciarelli also likes the idea of doing all three things in Mr. Wiegand’s honor, and he is sure that there must be some video clips and/or photographs of Mr. Wiegand that could accompany the dedication ceremony. With regard to the tree planting, he thought it would be an excellent idea to have memorial trees planted in Ridgewood, especially in light of the fact that several people have asked if they could have trees planted in honor of their loved ones who have passed away. Councilman Pucciarelli suggested that perhaps a memorial garden could be created somewhere in Ridgewood for that purpose. Councilman Sedon also thought that was a wonderful idea. As far as renaming a portion of South Irving Street is concerned, Councilman Pucciarelli noted that when he visited Mr. Wiegand’s home after his passing, all of the residents in that area knew Mr. Wiegand, indicating how active he was in the community. It is for that reason that Councilman Pucciarelli thinks that renaming that part of the street would be appreciated by his neighbors.

Councilwoman Knudsen agreed that all three tributes would be fitting, and a wonderful way to honor Mr. Wiegand’s memory.

Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that suggestions are needed regarding what the plaque should say. He received his suggestion from Mr. Wiegand’s family regarding the text that they would like to have on the plaque, which are words to the effect that "the public has the last word," which had been Mr. Wiegand’s suggestion about public comments at Village Council meetings. The other Councilmembers supported that idea. Mayor Aronsohn also asked about suggestions for a date on which the ceremony could be held, because one of the family members lives out of state and would need prior notification in order to be able to attend.

4.) Locations for BYOB

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this item was suggested by Ms. Mailander, who thought it was important for the Councilmembers to recognize certain things that were happening among the business establishments, and she took it upon herself to provide information about one of those things. The issue is regarding BYOB establishments in Ridgewood, in conjunction with the opening of a new business called Pinot’s Palette, where patrons can participate in artistic activities, and can also bring their own bottles of wine to drink while they are participating. Ms. Sonenfeld reminded everyone that there is a long-standing tradition and practice of BYOB in Ridgewood restaurants, but this particular location is not a restaurant, which is one of the points that Ms. Mailander was hoping to bring to the Councilmembers’ attention. It does not violate any current ordinances are statutes. Ms. Sonenfeld wondered if there was any need for the Village Council to enact any regulations for this type of business.

Ms. Mailander confirmed that she intended this to be a discussion item only, and she wanted to make the Councilmembers aware of this. She pointed out that Councilwoman Knudsen was aware of this, because the application was made to the Zoning Board of Adjustment for an interpretation of the zoning law. Councilwoman Knudsen said she noted that the attorney representing the applicants at that time was at this meeting. She explained that the Zoning Board of Adjustment did a zoning interpretation of the particular ordinance, and found that it was consistent with other entities in the Village, which are essentially art studios that conduct private parties/events, at which snacks, wine, and champagne might be served. The parties also include the creation of some type of art by the attendees. At the time, Councilwoman Knudsen said the Zoning Board of Adjustment determined that Pinot’s Palette was consistent with other businesses in town that are doing the same thing. She still believes that it is consistent with those businesses.

Councilman Pucciarelli said the concept seems to be a very appealing one. He noted that in his practice, he sometimes deals with liquor licensing laws that are very arcane, but there is a lot of resistance encountered in trying to change such laws. He asked for clarification that only beer and wine is allowed at such activities, which Mr. Rogers confirmed.

5.) Amend Ordinance – Civil Service – Resident Preference

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is to amend an ordinance regarding a resident preference. The Village has an existing ordinance that seems to be very ambiguous. This has led to a procedure in which, under the classified criteria of Civil Service, competitive and non-competitive jobs were treated differently, and the Ridgewood resident requirement was being applied to competitive jobs, and non-resident requirements were being applied to non-competitive jobs. Ms. Sonenfeld said the ordinance needs to be made clearer, and that could be accomplished by stating that the Ridgewood preference would continue to be used in all public safety jobs, which are competitive jobs and which also involve testing. All other types of jobs (non-public safety) would have their preferences expanded to Bergen County. This has been established practice in the Village already. However, it was pointed out that there are instances in which Ridgewood residents have scored lower than applicants further down the list, which has sometimes forced the Village to employ a Ridgewood resident with a lower score. Therefore, from the perspective of getting the best people to fill the positions, only the policies affecting Police and Fire Department personnel would continue with the Ridgewood preference, and every other job would be treated with a Bergen County preference. In addition, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that there had been times when a State Civil Service requirement did not agree with the local Civil Service requirement, and amending this ordinance would correct that.

Councilwoman Knudsen noted that when she first read this proposal, it seemed a bit ambiguous to her. However, her position has always been that whenever a job is available, if there is a test required for the position, and the score differential is only half a point or a point, she believes there is a benefit in offering the position to a Ridgewood resident first. That person would know the Village and the particular neighborhood better than someone who is not a resident, and would be aware of the "spirit" of the Village. Therefore, Councilwoman Knudsen is a bit concerned about opening up so many positions to Bergen County residents, as opposed to giving preference to Ridgewood residents. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that this practice has been in place for over 25 years, which does not necessarily make it correct, but it simply memorializes it in a clear way.

Mayor Aronsohn noted that, as explained in the memo, the requirement is that the applicant must be a Ridgewood resident from the time of application to the time of hire, which Ms. Mailander confirmed. Mayor Aronsohn asked what would happen if the applicant moved out of Ridgewood after being hired, and Ms. Mailander and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that there is no restriction on that. Ms. Mailander also pointed out that the time period between the date of application and the date of hire can sometimes be as long as three years or more, depending upon how many candidates are hired off of a particular list. She also noted that there have been instances in which the score differential between Bergen County residents and Ridgewood residents were five or six points, or more. Councilwoman Knudsen stated that typically, when someone takes these types of employment tests there is still some type of training involved, so the test becomes a benchmark. The test by itself is not the only gauge of a person’s ability, and employing someone who lives in the Village affords the opportunity, in the event of an emergency or other such inevitable issues that arise, to have that person live nearby, as well as having a familiarity with the Village. From a managerial perspective, Ms. Sonenfeld believes it is important to be able to choose the best person for the job. Placing a residency requirement on hiring practices for all jobs, especially where there was no such limit before, limits the ability of supervisors to do that. Councilwoman Knudsen argued that the opposite might also be true, and Ms. Mailander pointed out that in public safety hiring, the ordinance requires the top three candidates to be given consideration.

Mayor Aronsohn asked what the practice is in other communities. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that there seems to be a split among other communities. Ms. Mailander added that many communities do not have any residency requirements, but of the ones that do, the general consensus is that they apply such requirements to public safety jobs. Some communities require residency for a specified period of time after being hired. The city of Trenton requires its employees to live in Trenton for the entire time in which they are employed by the city.

Councilman Pucciarelli stated that he knows many Village employees who do live in the Village, as well as many who do not, and he does not consider those who do not live in the Village to be any less capable than those who do. He believes in hiring the best person for the job.

Councilman Sedon pointed out that, because there is a choice available among the top three candidates, the Village would not be forced to choose a Ridgewood resident who scored far lower on the Civil Service test than candidates who scored much higher. It was pointed out that it depends on how many Ridgewood residents are on the list, because all of them may have scored lower than those in the next tier of the list (Bergen County residents), and are ranked higher only because they are Ridgewood residents.

Mayor Aronsohn said he likes the idea of an exception being made for public safety jobs, as well as the idea of giving discretion to the Village Manager. Furthermore, if this has been the practice for the past 25 years, it seems to make sense that it should be memorialized in an ordinance. This will be put on the agenda for the July 16, 2014 Public Meeting.

6.) Amend Ordinance – Site Plan Procedural Requirements

Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that this is another amendment to an existing ordinance regarding site plan approval. The Site Plan Exemption Committee (SPEC) was conceived to expedite site plans that are simple and straightforward. The Committee is comprised of the Village Planner; Village Engineer; a member of the Planning Board; and the Construction Code Official. The idea is to allow approval of such simple site plans by this Committee, rather than having to face the full Planning Board. After discussions with the business community and internal brainstorming, Blais Brancheau, Village Planner, has prepared an ordinance amendment to make applications eligible for either site plan exemption or for general exemption.

The proposed ordinance amendment differentiates between minor and major site plans; expands the development that is done within the definition of a minor site plan, and would therefore be subject to less procedural requirements than a major site plan; expands the list of developments which are exempt from site plan approval requirements, as long as the improvements comply with the ordinance; and provides new ways to comply with this ordinance. In addition, the SPEC can authorize one of its members to act on behalf of the entire Committee to expedite very simple applications in an effort to decrease the amount of time required to obtain site plan approval.

After reviewing the ordinance with Mr. Brancheau, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that there may be some changes made to the ordinance the next time it is brought to the Councilmembers. Mr. Brancheau’s intent was to try to list what would be allowed to be brought before SPEC, rather than what would not be allowed.

Mr. Brancheau agreed with Ms. Sonenfeld’s summarization of the amended ordinance, and mentioned in particular one part of the ordinance that might be changed. But the current ordinance and the proposed amended ordinance state that certain things are automatically exempt from site plan approval, while other specific things are automatically not exempt from site plan approval. There is another category of specific things that can be exempt from site plan approval, if SPEC allows that. However, the ordinance limits what SPEC can exempt from such approval. It also defines what items cannot be exempted by SPEC, for example, a new building, which is never exempt from site plan approval. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that there is a gap that leaves one to guess whether a specific item can be determined by SPEC to be exempt, and the idea behind the proposed amended ordinance was to provide a more positive list to indicate to applicants when they should make their application to SPEC.

Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that Michele Peters, a member of the Planning Board, was in attendance at this meeting. He mentioned that, as Ms. Peters could attest, many of the items listed do not require the approval of all nine members of the Planning Board, the Planning Board Attorney, and the Village Planner. Those are the kinds of things that are best left to technical experts, which would free the Planning Board to deal with matters that are not discretionary, and might require more professional judgment to be exercised.

Mr. Brancheau commented that simply because something is determined to be exempt, or is automatically exempt, does not mean it will not undergo any type of review. In many of these cases, he pointed out that it would be necessary to obtain a building permit or a grading permit, or some other type of permit. That means that a permit official will also be reviewing the plan. Councilman Pucciarelli agreed and stated that when a professional review and opinion have been completed, there is really nothing discretionary left for the Planning Board members to debate and decide. The Village’s experience with SPEC has been very positive so far, and Councilman Pucciarelli believes they can continue to deal with such approvals very effectively.

Councilman Sedon agreed that anything that can be done to speed up this process, especially for minor issues, should be done.

Councilwoman Knudsen said she wanted to take the time to review the proposed amended ordinance a little more before she comments on it.