Village Council Public Work Session Meeting Minutes 20140129

A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 29, 2014, AT 7:30 P.M.

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

Councilman Pucciarelli 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, Pucciarelli, Riche, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Heather Mailander, Acting Village Manager/Village Clerk; Donna Jackson, Deputy Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.

Councilman Pucciarelli 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 who serve as first responders in Ridgewood and throughout the United States.

2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

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

Jane Shinozuka, 825 Norgate Drive, said she wanted to keep the Schedler property in the public consciousness. It has been a hotly-debated subject, but Ms. Shinozuka pointed out that there are people throughout Ridgewood who believe that whatever happens, the Councilmembers will bear in mind that any plan that calls for a parking lot to be put on the property poses a serious crime risk due to its proximity to the highway. Ms. Shinozuka commented that she could see a lot of drug activity going on at that location, if a parking lot were there. She believes that should be the most important question to be considered in any development plans for that property, and Ms. Shinozuka wondered if the Councilmembers had already given any thought to that idea. It poses a very serious threat to the entire east side of Ridgewood.

Frank Delvecchio, 65 Walthery Avenue, commented about the amendment to section 343 of the Ridgewood Code regarding the Police Department, which adds two additional spots for patrol officers. Mr. Delvecchio understands that two officers are supposed to enter the Police Academy tomorrow at 7:00 A.M., and as a Police Chief, he wanted to commend the Councilmembers for taking a proactive approach with respect to the Police Department and public safety. Mr. Delvecchio pointed out that many police departments throughout Bergen County are losing many officers, and his own department is facing the retirement of five people, with four officer candidates starting at the Police Academy as part of an inter-governmental transfer. Mr. Delvecchio also noted that police department budgets are rapidly increasing, with the costs of overtime spiraling, and being proactive and forward-thinking means that the Councilmembers are doing the community a great service.

William Corcoran, 371 William Street, is a former Chief of Police of the Ridgewood Police Department. He commended the Ridgewood Police Department, saying that as a veteran of 33 years of Police Department experience, he believes the Ridgewood Police Department is one of the finest in the state of New Jersey, if not in the United States. Mr. Corcoran noted that when he was the Police Chief in Ridgewood, a study was done to evaluate the response time to emergency calls and how many officers are needed to respond to an emergency call, as well as other issues. A recommendation was made regarding the minimum number of officers who should serve in the Police Department, based on the results of the study. Mr. Corcoran is concerned that when the current contract expires, the Village will lose up to five police officers, and he does not believe that the Village can continue to be safe if that many officers are lost. He mentioned the recent spate of school shootings that have occurred throughout the United States, and he implored the Councilmembers to keep the number of police officers high enough to ensure the safety of all Ridgewood residents.

Tom Landers, 413 Meadowbrook Avenue, said he agrees that having more police officers can make the Police Department more proactive, and he understood that Police Chief John Ward made offers of employment to two candidates for police officer. Ms. Mailander interjected that if Mr. Landers wished to discuss personnel matters, they cannot be discussed during public Work Session meetings. Mr. Rogers added that he, Ms. Mailander, and the Councilmembers would not be able to respond to any comments made regarding personnel matters. Mr. Landers stated that he was not asking for any response to his comments. He continued by saying that the offers were made in violation of Village Ordinance 3142 and its amendments, which stipulate staffing levels for the Ridgewood Police Department. Mr. Landers said to the best of his knowledge, the Chief of the Ridgewood Police Department has never hired an officer unless the position to be filled was vacant, and never in violation of Village Code, because to do so would not pass judicial review, and would open the Village to potential litigation. He pointed out that there are no confirmed pending retirements from the Police Department for 2014, and only rumored retirements for the end of 2015. At any given time in the Police Department, there are always a handful of officers who are eligible to retire. Chief Ward and Ms. Mailander enjoy long-standing professional relationships with the fathers of both of the candidates. Mr. Landers pointed out that somehow, the candidate who was number six on the certified list of candidates rose to the position of number three, enabling him to be considered for hiring under the Civil Service provision known as the “Rule of Three”. Three other viable candidates were eliminated from consideration, and Mr. Landers does not believe that the Village Council has been adequately informed about the reason for each candidate’s elimination. Recently, the Village has been a party to two Civil Service appeals and one lawsuit regarding the Village’s hiring, promotion, and personnel practices. The Village lost two of these lawsuits, and prevailed in the third. These matters were litigated at taxpayers’ expense, and one loss resulted in a multi-million-dollar judgment against the Village. The opportunity to hire these candidates is closing quickly; because the eligibility lists are due to expire in a number of weeks. Amending ordinance 3142 and hiring two additional police officers in their early to mid-20s will cost the taxpayers of Ridgewood in excess of $10 million for their salaries, pensions, and benefits over their combined lifetimes, according to Mr. Landers’s estimates. For these reasons, Mr. Landers asked the Councilmembers not to amend ordinance 3142 at this time. The offers of employment have the appearance of favoritism and nepotism, and in fact, may be a lot worse. The Chief of Police and the Village Manager are charged with enforcing and upholding the ordinances of the Village, and in this instance, they acted outside the scope of their authority. Mr. Landers believes that by amending the ordinance tonight, it only condones such actions, and he asked the Councilmembers to take a thoughtful, measured approach going forward.

Reverend Jan Phillips, 234 Union Street, thanked the Councilmembers for being proactive in moving forward with the amendment to Ordinance 3142. Reverend Phillips said she comes from a long line of community activists, and she serves on two senior citizens’ boards in the Village, which have received tremendous support from the Village Council and the Police Department. She has told many stories about the people who volunteer to help with the various senior citizens’ activities, and the police officers who are first responders as well as visitors for the senior citizens. Reverend Phillips recalled a particular incident, in which some young children had been removed from their homes for protective reasons, and Captain Luthcke, who was Lieutenant Luthcke at that time, came to the dinner served to the children at SHARE, and a five-year-old girl unhesitatingly ran to embrace Lieutenant Luthcke. It was very heartwarming, and something that Reverend Phillips said she has come to expect in Ridgewood. Reverend Phillips noted that she appreciates the level of safety that accompanies having police officers on the streets.

Reverend Johnson of the Mount Bethel Baptist Church at 399 South Broad Street said he supports the Ridgewood Police Department. He pointed out that he does not know all the details associated with not replacing the officers who are due to retire this year, or what the schedule is for replacing those officers, but Reverend Johnson believes it is vital for the community that he serves to know that the Police Department does a fabulous job responding to the needs of the community. Reverend Johnson stated that he would be very nervous if there was not adequate police coverage to protect the citizens of Ridgewood. However, he understands that there are problems in this area, and if a certain element were to find out that there would be less police scrutiny, Reverend Johnson believes that element would take advantage of the situation. He asked that the Councilmembers do not consider cutting back the number of police officers. Reverend Johnson believes it is important to the community to have first responders available, because it makes the community feel safer to know that the residents can count on the Police Department to be wherever they are needed. He believes it is essential to give the Police Chief and his staff adequate personnel to feel comfortable about keeping everyone protected.

Nancy Johansen, 115 Lincoln Avenue, is the Chairperson of the Financial Advisory Committee, who noted that the previous comments included questions about procedure in the Police Department. Ms. Johansen believes everyone in the community supports the Police Department, but it is necessary to focus in a thoughtful way on the procedure and the long-term financial impact of the decisions to be made.

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

3. DISCUSSION

 a. Policy:

1.)        Amend Section 3-43(D) of the Ridgewood Village Code – Administration of Government – Police Department

 Mayor Aronsohn explained that this section is basically the organizational makeup of the Police Department. He believes it was last amended in 2011 by the previous Village Council, which included three current Councilmembers. The issue today is that a current Village ordinance sets a maximum on the number and types of police officers that can serve on the police force. After many conversations between Mayor Aronsohn and the Police Chief, as well as the former Village Manager, Mayor Aronsohn questions whether that makes sense, and whether it would not be better to hire additional police officers. It would give the Village additional police officers on the ground, and could also help to reduce overtime costs.

The issue tonight is that two conditional offers of employment were made to officer candidates, which might be in excess of the numbers permitted by Village ordinance. If that is true, and the Village were to be in excess, Mayor Aronsohn said the discussion would center around what steps must be taken. One possible solution is to amend the law retroactively to allow the officers to be hired. The situation arose on Friday, January 17^th, when Police Chief John Ward made these conditional offers of employment. After some conversations with Ms. Mailander, it was brought to the Councilmembers’ attention almost immediately after the offers were made that hiring the additional officers might violate the Ridgewood Code. After two Closed Session meetings, during which this issue was discussed among the Councilmembers, Ms. Mailander, Mr. Rogers, and the Village’s labor attorney, the Councilmembers have been trying to determine how to proceed. Chief Ward was invited to attend the second Closed Session meeting, but he was unable to at that time.

Mayor Aronsohn said the Councilmembers now find themselves in a very difficult situation, which should not have arisen in the first place. There is also a sensitive personnel element to this situation, which involves the Village’s nepotism policy. A second question has arisen regarding whether the process was handled in consistency with the nepotism policy. The Councilmembers would like to figure out how to proceed and to move forward with this situation. Depending on the outcome of this discussion, the Village Council might convene a Special Public Meeting to introduce the ordinance which would amend the law to allow these hires.

Ms. Mailander added that the discussion is about amending the ordinance which establishes the makeup of the Police Department, delineating specific numbers for each rank of the Department. The amendment to be considered would allow for two additional officers to be hired at this time proactively, in anticipation of seven potential retirements between May and December 2015. The reasons for hiring the two new police officers at this time are as follows: seven anticipated retirements are anticipated, as mentioned before; it takes approximately 9 months before a police officer is allowed to go on patrol by him/herself, which includes six months at the Police Academy and three months of field training; there is a potential for a reduction in overtime in 2014, and going into 2015, due to extra personnel; it will allow for internal training of junior officers to take the place of the senior officers in the Detective Bureau and Traffic Bureau; and the Police Department cannot do field training for more than two or three new recruits coming out of the Police Academy at any one time, leading to the request of Chief Ward to phase in the hiring of new officers in 2014 and 2015. In addition, best practices calls for succession planning, and hiring officers in 2014 alliance with best practices. Funding was previously approved by the Village Council. Ms. Mailander said it should also be noted that in the past, before this ordinance detailed specific numbers within the ranks, hiring was done proactively. Police officers were hired in anticipation of having retirements in the future, so those candidates could complete their course work in the Police Academy and field training, while the potential retiree was still serving in the Police Department, and when the senior officer retired some months later, a fully-trained officer was ready to step in.

Ms. Mailander said the results of hiring new police officers in 2014 would include a reduction of overtime in the latter part of 2014 and going into 2015 due to the availability of two new, fully-trained police officers; elimination of a tremendous amount of overtime costs, which may average approximately $1,200 per 12-hour shift, according to Steven Sanzari, Chief Financial Officer; the ability to maintain police services while there are many retirements occurring, due to succession planning and proactive hiring. The Village does not want to be in a position in which the new hires have just completed field training, but it is preferred that the new police officers have been on patrol for a period of time before the first retirements occur in 2015. This will give the new officers at least six months serving as police officers on their own, which will give them additional experience prior to the senior officers leaving.

The overall goal is to maintain public safety at the same level or better than it is now as these large numbers of retirements occur, in the most cost-effective manner possible. In other words, while reducing overtime costs. By phasing in the hiring of these new police officers in anticipation of the retirements, this goal can be achieved. Ms. Mailander said this is a win-win for the public and the Village: the public will have police services maintained during the transition period, and overtime costs are reduced. It also allows the Police Department to train junior officers to take the place of senior key officers in the Detective Bureau and Traffic Bureau, due to increased personnel.

Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that the most important question to be answered is whether the Village is now in violation of what is permitted by the ordinance as far as police hires are concerned. Police Chief Ward responded that at this point in time, if the two candidates being discussed are hired, it would put the Village in excess of the numbers allowed in the amended policy for patrol officers. There are some positions in the command staff ranking that are still vacant, but the wording in the ordinance was changed to limit the number of patrol officers to 30, and if the fifth Sergeant’s position is not filled, the number of patrol officers will be 31. Mayor Aronsohn asked how many patrol officers are currently in the Police Department, and Chief Ward answered that right now, with the officer recruit currently in the Academy, the number of patrol officers will be 31. If the two additional hires are approved, the number of patrol officers will increase to 33.

Mayor Aronsohn said the next question is why Chief Ward and the Village Manager extended conditional offers of employment in excess of what is permitted by ordinance. Chief Ward responded that going back to early 2013, the Police Department was already receiving information from Police Department personnel that they would be retiring in 2015, due to the fact that a number of the senior officers had contracts due to expire in 2015. Chief Ward approached the former Village Manager and explained that if the Police Department were to lose seven officers without replacing them in advance of their retirements, the Department would be crippled as far as its ability to respond to non-emergency calls, and overtime costs would increase dramatically. Chief Ward thought it would be better to try to be proactive and present an alternative, and the former Village Manager asked for a plan. Chief Ward developed a plan as requested, and he asked the officers to let him know to the best of their ability the tentative dates of their retirements. After exchanging emails and direct conversations, it was determined that three officers would be retiring sometime between the late spring and summer of 2015, and other officers said they would definitely be retiring between October and December 2015. Chief Ward prepared a plan, which he presented to the former Village Manager. In addition, Chief Ward mentioned in his July 2013 report, he outlined his plan and the potential problems that he anticipated. When Ms. Mailander took over as the Acting Village Manager, she was briefed on the situation, and Chief Ward confirmed with her what his plan was. Although he was not a part of the discussion in October regarding funding, Chief Ward said he was informed that the funding had been approved for his plan, and that certification of the civil service list could move forward. Mayor Aronsohn asked if Chief Ward was aware of the limits that were established regarding Police Department personnel. Chief Ward said there had been some confusion regarding the limits, and that he never received a copy of the amended ordinance. In fact, he stated that the entire Police Department was under the impression that the number of officers could be as high as 43, based on the matrix study performed. This was also based on negotiations between the former Village Manager and the police unions regarding replacing the four officers lost in 2010, as well as some supervisory staff, which did not occur. Chief Ward mentioned that the only other time he heard about any additional changes was sometime in early 2011, when the former Village Manager was discussing one of Chief Ward’s monthly reports, and told Chief Ward that the Detective Captain could no longer be listed as an open position due to the fact that the position have been removed because the wording was changed regarding Captains and Sergeants. Mayor Aronsohn asked if Chief Ward was now aware of the change, and Chief Ward confirmed this.

Mayor Aronsohn agreed that being proactive is a very good idea, and he acknowledged receiving a copy of the proposed plan from Ms. Mailander. He noted that one of the first proposals made by Chief Ward in the plan was to hire 3-4 officers in July 2014, not in January. Chief Ward said he included options in his proposal, and January was one of the options given. He noted that hiring officers in January is a good idea because it allows the officers to be out on patrol by September, which would help to reduce some of the increased overtime that has been occurring. In addition, Chief Ward said he had factored into his proposal the costs of hiring two officers in January and two in July at approximately $107,000 in salaries over the course of 2014. He noted that in an effort to keep overtime costs down, he had been moving officers from the Detective Bureau and Traffic Bureau to cover vacant patrol shifts to save $200,000+ every year. Hiring the new police officers would eliminate the necessity of moving other officers around, as well as reducing overtime. For 2015, Chief Ward recommended either hiring three officers in January, or two in January and one in July, which allows for some flexibility in the plan. However, Chief Ward stated that his main concern has always been that something should be done before 2015, because waiting until 2014 or 2015 to take action would leave the Police Department without seven officers for more than nine months. That would make it necessary to strip the Detective Bureau of its officers to cover patrol, as well as making it necessary to have at least one overtime shift every day.

Mayor Aronsohn commented that the concerns are twofold: one is that the Village would not be in compliance with its own law, leading to the question of how to remedy that situation; and the other concern is that if the ordinance is amended right now to accommodate these two hires, does it expose the Village to people who might have wanted to be police officers over the past couple of years but were told that there is a limit to the number of officers in the Police Department, so they could not be hired. Chief Ward responded that he is not a labor counsel, but forward movement is based upon civil service needs, so as soon as Ms. Mailander informed Chief Ward that she was requesting a certification of the civil service list, action was taken. Mayor Aronsohn responded that he understood all of that, but the fact remains that the law does specify limits. He asked Ms. Mailander if she was aware of the limits set by the ordinance, and she answered that she was not familiar with the ordinance. At the time it was adopted, she was not the Village Manager; she did not have hiring authority; and it did not pertain to her.

Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that the other area to be considered is the financial impact of these hires. While he does support being proactive, Mayor Aronsohn said one of the concerns is the specter of multiple potential retirements in 2015, but they may not happen next year, which would lead to having additional people in the Police Department, with all of the attendant salaries and benefits, for an indefinite period of time. Chief Ward responded that he understands that concern, and he pointed out that there is a timeframe for Police Officers to submit their retirement papers. At this time, it is far too early for anyone who is planning to retire in 2015 to submit the necessary paperwork. Chief Ward believes commitments from these potential retirees is not set in stone, based on the emails and other written communications he has received from them. Mayor Aronsohn said he appreciates all of that, but the fact remains that these hires are taking place so far in advance without any assurance that the positions will need to be filled. In addition, he noted that the proposed ordinance specifies raising the number of police officers to 32 from 30 in the current ordinance. If Chief Ward is considering hiring two more officers in July, that would require increasing the number of officers again. Chief Ward said that if he had been consulted when the ordinance was first proposed, he would have recommended that there be no specified limit on the number of police officers, because he does not believe there should be a limit on the number of officers in the Department. Limiting the number of Chiefs and other command staff is fine, but Chief Ward pointed out that the needs of the community change, which is why he does not recommend limiting the number of police officers that can be hired. To answer the question, Chief Ward said that hiring two more officers in July would require another increase, which would also require that Chief Ward appear before the Village Council to ask for that increase. Mayor Aronsohn answered that he appreciated Chief Ward’s comments, and he agrees that there should not be a specified limit to the number of police officers, because such limits seem very arbitrary.

Mayor Aronsohn noted for the benefit of Ms. Mailander and Mr. Rogers that, as noted by Chief Ward, the number of officer should be increased by four instead of by two. Ms. Mailander responded that the change could be made, and that the ordinance was only set to be introduced tonight.

The last point Mayor Aronsohn wanted to make was regarding the nepotism policy, because it is a relevant issue. Chief Ward responded that the Police Department follows all Civil Service rules. The top three candidates were offered positions, and the nepotism rule applies to all of those candidates. The list of potential candidates has been around for several years, and the candidates in the top three positions were not always in those positions. Chief Ward noted that the Police Department follows the letter of the law, and he reminded the Councilmembers that when his own sons were involved in this process, Chief Ward recused himself from the process. He reiterated that no one was chosen based on anything other than his/her standing in the list of candidates. Moreover, Chief Ward said he re-instituted the panel method of doing interviews. The top candidates were brought in based on their Civil Service scores, and they appeared before a panel of officers from the supervisory staff in the Police Department. After that, the Village Manager conducts her interviews to make the ultimate decision on those candidates. Chief Ward commented that it is been mentioned by many people that he has personal relationships with some of the candidates, and he pointed out that he has personal relationships with everyone in the community, because he regards the community as his family. He said that he would never jeopardize the Ridgewood Police Department just to hire someone for his own personal reasons.

Mayor Aronsohn stated for the benefit of the public that the discussion about the nepotism policy is due to the fact that many of the top candidates are “legacy” candidates who are related to people already serving in Village government. He added that many people appreciate the fact that there are families who have such a commitment to public service, but the Village does have a nepotism policy, which puts additional constraints on the authority of the Village Manager to hire and fire employees, and requires additional approval of the Village Council when hiring anyone who is related to someone already working in Village government.

Chief Ward added that he must call for a certified list of candidates, which changes each time the request is made. There was a delay of 1½ months the last time the request was made. The previous list was received on November 25, 2013, and the individual notices were sent on December 3, 2013. Candidates are given five business days to respond, which means that their letters of intent had to be received by the Village Manager’s office within that time, and those respondents are put on a final list so that the Police Department can begin its background investigations on each candidate.

Councilman Riche said he wanted to put things in perspective. He noted that there is one officer currently in the Police Academy who will soon graduate. Chief Ward confirmed this, adding that the officer is a replacement hire. Councilman Riche recalled that there were two officers at the Police Academy, but one of them was injured and was forced to withdraw. He commented that if both of those officers had finished their training, Chief Ward would have two police officers completing their training at this time. Chief Ward said that, in fact, he would have two officers ready for patrol, including completion of their field training, but that is not the case. He pointed out that the Police Department had to go through another round of candidates, because the officer was injured after the Police Academy training had begun, so the list had to be re-certified, and the whole process had to be restarted. Councilman Riche also recalled that Chief Ward has always lobbied for more police officers in his Department, and that years ago, the Police Department had many more officers than the number currently serving. Chief Ward corrected Councilman Riche’s statement, saying that currently, the Police Department is much larger than it has been in the past. In the mid-1990s, there were approximately 52 officers. However, by 2000, the number had decreased to 48, and it has dropped continuously since that time. Moreover, former Chief Corcoran had said that he believed the minimum number of officer should be 48, in order to keep control over overtime and provide adequate public safety. Chief Ward agrees with that assessment, although he pointed out that the professional matrix study that was done said the minimum effective number was 43 or 44 officers, based on the current Police Department structure. Councilman Riche said he appreciates that, and pointed out that everyone is doing more with less.

Councilman Riche said he does not remember the particular ordinance that was passed limiting the number of police officers, due to the fact that the Councilmembers deal with so many ordinances. He recalled that the former Village Manager used the number of police personnel as a negotiating tool, and now the Councilmembers are being asked to make these changes because of that. Chief Ward responded that there are several different reasons for increasing the number of police officers, and they are not limited to controlling overtime pay and ensuring public safety, but he believes that if the Village does not act proactively, it will be faced with the elimination of Chief Ward’s ability to reduce the amount of overtime pay that has been expended in the past due to the fact that he will have to deplete the Detective Bureau and Traffic Bureau to cover patrol on overtime, as well as affecting how coverage can be provided for special events. Moreover, it will reverse the progress made by the Police Department in getting back into the schools; enhancing initiatives; and it will have an impact on traffic enforcement and other services. Chief Ward said he modeled his recommendation on what other departments are facing or have faced, which is approximately a 40% decrease over a span of years.

Councilman Riche asked Chief Ward to go through the process of hiring and firing again. Councilman Riche pointed out that the Councilmembers really have no say regarding the hiring and firing of individuals in the Village, but that is taken care of by the Village Manager. The Civil Service list is published according to test scores and place of residence, with candidates being ranked on the list. The candidates remain on the list until a municipality is ready to hire them. The municipality, through its Village Clerk, calls for the list to be certified. At that point, it is possible that the list is several years old, and candidates may have moved on by that time. The Village operates on the “rule of three,” which means that one or two of the top three candidates can be chosen by the Village for consideration for employment. As Chief Ward has pointed out, that process is done by a review board consisting of senior officers in the Police Department, after which time a recommendation is made to the Village Manager, who conducts interviews and makes a recommendation based upon those interviews. The Councilmembers have no say in who is hired, but they do vote on the funding for those hires. Chief Ward agreed with Councilman Riche’s explanation of the hiring process, and pointed out that as far as the particular list in question is concerned, several of the candidates were hired by the Fire Department. The list includes candidates for both the Police and Fire Departments. Chief Ward commented that many times, candidates will take jobs in other locations.

Councilman Riche said he thinks it is a tremendous benefit to the community when members of a family go into public service, such as being police officers, like Chief Ward’s sons have done. Chief Ward said his belief is that it should be based solely on the test scores and qualifications. If the candidate happens to be related to someone already in Civil Service, the Village has established a process to avoid any appearance of impropriety. The Civil Service test was created with the intent to take local politics and nepotism out of the mix by having a State-run examination, and having the “rule of three” allows for some leeway in considering candidates.

Councilwoman Hauck said she does not dispute the importance of public safety and the Police Department, and how much they are valued and needed. She is also not disputing the nepotism policy. However, Councilwoman Hauck sees the current problem as an administrative problem and how it would appear if the ordinance were changed to facilitate an administrative error. She suggested that it might be better to wait until the next round of Police Academy candidates graduate, and hire new police officers in July. That would avoid being in violation of Village Code. Councilwoman Hauck said she feels uneasy about amending the current ordinance in order to bring people in prematurely. She pointed out that no one knows for sure when the next batch of police officers will retire. Therefore, if each candidate has nine months to go through the Police Academy and field training, Councilwoman Hauck believes that gives the Village time to wait for the next group of candidates. She understands that the Village has now been put in an awkward position in which offers of employment have to be rescinded, but that was an administrative mistake, and the Village must suffer those consequences. Chief Ward said he appreciates her point of view, and all he can do is to make recommendations based on the needs of his Department. He added that no action was taken until he was told to move forward. Furthermore, Chief Ward said it is not known when the next Civil Service list will be published, although it has been said that it could possibly be in March or June. He noted that if hiring is postponed until the next list comes out, there is no guarantee that the list will be published on time, and the delays in getting lists certified or re-certified can be considerable. In addition, Chief Ward said he would have to find out from labor counsel if the offers of employment could be delayed until March, but he noted that money has already been spent on uniforms for these candidates. Chief Ward stated that this is how the Police Department was told to proceed, and added that he could not say with absolute certainty that the current officers will retire when they said they would, but he is concerned about what will happen to the Police Department, especially since the current contract is expiring. The potential retirees are worried about what may happen regarding legislation affecting their retirement benefits, and what they might have to pay for those benefits, as well as their medical benefits. That is why they have indicated their intent to retire. Chief Ward asked them to put their intentions in writing so that he could take action proactively and avoid jeopardizing public safety while also avoiding exorbitant overtime payments. He appreciates the difficult position in which the Councilmembers find themselves, and he thought it would have been better if he had been included in the discussions about the ordinance from the beginning.

Councilman Riche pointed out that the Village has a process by which ordinances can be changed. The Councilmembers have been advised by labor counsel that once a conditional offer of employment is made, if the candidates are not allowed to enter the Police Academy tomorrow, the Village would be in violation of Federal employment law. Councilman Riche said the Village Council will not violate such laws. Therefore, in order to remedy the situation and give the residents of Ridgewood the assurance of protection to which they are entitled, Councilman Riche supports moving forward with amending the ordinance.

Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that labor counsel said that the Village could be in violation of Federal employment law, but he did not recall that it was established definitely that any violation would exist. The only established fact is that the Village is currently in violation of its own ordinance.

Councilman Pucciarelli stated that, as an attorney, he is surprised to hear another Councilmember declare that if the offers are not rescinded, the Village would be violating Federal law.

Councilwoman Walsh thanked everyone for coming to this meeting, and added that when issues of this magnitude come before the Village Council, it is important for the Councilmembers to act as a cohesive group. Although there have been moments in the past months when these Councilmembers have not acted cohesively, Councilwoman Walsh said when this topic first arose, all five of them acted as one body. They met no less than four times on this matter, and they unanimously agreed on the action that was taken. Councilwoman Walsh believes the action taken was a very wise decision.

Councilwoman Walsh reminded everyone that she has been the chairperson of the Citizens Safety Advisory Committee (CSAC) since 2012. The meetings are often heated because the citizens of Ridgewood believe there are not enough police officers on the streets. Every month, Councilwoman Walsh says citizens come to the CSAC meetings with complaints about traffic in Ridgewood; crosswalks; and individuals getting hit and killed by vehicles. In addition, there are always at least two police officers at the meetings, sometimes including the Captain, while other times including other police officers. The police officers are very gracious under fire, although the meetings are not pleasant. A Girl Scout who was working on her Gold Award project was surprised at the vehemence shown at one meeting. Her project involves working on one of the most dangerous intersections in the Village, because she feels very strongly that more police officers are needed on the streets.

Councilwoman Walsh said she has always asked Chief Ward about a “floater,” which is her terminology, not a word used by the Police Department. She has consistently pointed out that if $200,000 per year is spent on overtime, and the estimated salary of a starting police officer is approximately $45,000, it would be better to hire four additional police officers, rather than continually paying overtime that just seems to increase every year. This would also appease those residents who continually ask for more police officers on the streets. Moreover, Councilwoman Walsh noted that over time is just that, and is not intended to be factored into the salary of a police officer. That is something that has also been pointed out by the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC). Chief Ward pointed out that for 2013, the overtime expenditure was $266,000, which he noted is a fraction of what is spent in many other towns. He added that Ridgewood has been very successful in managing overtime. Chief Ward also stated that the cost of adding four officers has been estimated at $107,000, and phasing in three more officers in 2015, after factoring in the savings realized from the retirements, would lead to a cost savings of approximately $106,000, based only on salaries. For 2016, the cost savings is estimated at $748,000. In 2017, the savings is estimated to be $666,000; and in 2018, the estimate is $319,000. Those figures only reflect the costs associated with the seven anticipated retirements, and the hiring of officers to replace those who retire. Chief Ward pointed out that the savings are also due to the contract negotiations between the Village and the police officers’ union.

In response to the comments made by Councilwoman Hauck, Councilwoman Walsh stated that she does not believe it is unreasonable for the Councilmembers to examine the ordinance and move forward with the necessary changes to enable progress on the plan as agreed upon in the last several months by the Councilmembers. The fact that there is discussion about it is a positive thing, because it demonstrates better communication. Councilwoman Walsh does not think it is unreasonable for the Councilmembers to continue along the path which the Councilmembers started as a unanimous group. Whether new definitions are given for overtime, or any other new definitions are added to the Village Code, Councilwoman Walsh believes it is the most reasonable thing for the Councilmembers to do.

Councilman Pucciarelli said he is also grateful for all of the police protection and security that has been provided to him and his family, and the Police Department does a wonderful job, but that is not the issue being discussed by the Councilmembers. For him, the issue is law enforcement, and the Village must obey its own laws. Councilman Pucciarelli received a telephone call on Friday, January 17, 2014, from the Acting Village Manager, to tell him that the Village was hiring two of the three candidates, all three of whom are relatives of current Village employees. Councilman Pucciarelli previously expressed his aversion to nepotism, because he believes that objective criteria should be the criteria applied to everyone. He told Ms. Mailander very plainly that he wanted to make sure that the nepotism policy was not being violated, and Ms. Mailander assured him that it was not. Councilman Pucciarelli subsequently found out that the nepotism policy can only be considered by the Village Council in a meeting.

Councilman Pucciarelli also stated in that telephone conversation that he supports hiring the new candidates, provided it would not be creating new positions, expanding the organizational chart, or in any way exceeding the authorized number of police personnel. He was told that none of those conditions applied. On that basis, he told Ms. Mailander that it would be her decision whether to hire the new candidates. Emails were sent among the Councilmembers and the Acting Village Manager that included copies of the ordinance. On Wednesday, January 22, 2014, the Councilmembers had a special meeting with the Acting Village Manager, Mr. Rogers, and labor counsel, at which time it became obvious that everyone needed to hear the opinions of the Chief of Police. Councilman Pucciarelli suggested inviting Chief Ward another meeting to discuss the nepotism issue and resolve it, as well as all the other issues encompassing overtime and hiring, and particularly the issue of timing. The next day, Councilman Pucciarelli received an email informing him that Chief Ward could not attend the meeting because he was teaching a class at Fairleigh Dickinson University, yet the Councilmembers did meet that night with Mr. Rogers and labor counsel, as well as Ms. Mailander. Councilman Pucciarelli absented himself from the meeting, because he felt strongly that input was needed from Chief Ward. The nepotism issue cannot be discussed at this meeting, because it is a personnel matter. Therefore, it seems to Councilman Pucciarelli that tonight is not the time to make a decision.

Typically, the new list of candidates comes out in March. It may or may not be delayed. Councilman Pucciarelli reminded everyone that they were just told that the first retirements are expected in June 2015. If nine months is required in order to get a police officer completely trained and ready for patrol, then no hiring is required before October 2014. For those officers leaving in December 2015, no hiring is required before March 2015. Councilman Pucciarelli asked why is it necessary to hire two new police officers in January 2014, in violation of Village ordinance, and while requesting that the Village Council correct the mistake. Nothing that was discussed this evening has given Councilman Pucciarelli any greater understanding of the situation than he had before. He believes this is premature, anticipatory hiring of speculative retirements, and Councilman Pucciarelli does not want to violate the law. Councilman Riche pointed out that rescinding the offers would violate Federal law, and Councilman Pucciarelli believes that keeping them active violates State law. Councilman Pucciarelli said he would vote against hiring two new police officers, for the following reasons: the Village Council has not had an opportunity to discuss the matter with Chief Ward before this evening; the requirements of the anti-nepotism policy were not satisfied before the offers were made, because there was no Village Council meeting, nor was any approval given by the Councilmembers; the Village Code section in question was not taken into consideration before the offers were made; anticipatory hiring so far in advance of possible retirements is unprecedented; the retirement expectation is based upon the assumption of retirements that may never happen; hiring additional personnel prior to the time that they become absolutely necessary, when other Departments are operating below staff levels, is unfair; Chief Ward indicated in his own memo that hiring new officers could wait until July 2014; a new Village Manager will be hired in Ridgewood within the next 4-6 weeks, and the expectation is that the new Village Manager will take a long, hard look at staffing levels; hiring two new police officers at this time would be pre-empting the process involved in hiring a new Village Manager; a preliminary look at the required salary increases in the 2014 budget indicates substantial increases in the Police Department alone, without these hires, which will have to be offset by cutting elsewhere, due to the fact that they are mandated contractual increases; and making new law because a mistake was made is not how law should be made, and Councilman Pucciarelli does not believe it will solve the problem by making a new law because of the possibility of a lawsuit, because he believes there is an equal chance of a lawsuit if the Village were to move forward. Councilman Pucciarelli would like to revisit this issue in the fullness of time, when there has been an opportunity to speak privately to Chief Ward, which Councilman Pucciarelli thought would have happened last week.

Mayor Aronsohn asked Ms. Mailander and Mr. Rogers if the two candidates who were given conditional offers of employment had been sworn in, and Ms. Mailander confirmed that they had not. Mayor Aronsohn asked what the plan is at this time. Ms. Mailander responded that it was planned that the ordinance would be introduced this evening, and the Councilmembers would have to tell her what to do about the pending appointments. Mayor Aronsohn asked when the Police Academy course starts and Ms. Mailander responded that it begins tomorrow. Mayor Aronsohn then asked if the Councilmembers order to move forward with the introduction of the amendment, it is Ms. Mailander’s plan that the candidates would be sworn in, after which time they would attend the Police Academy, and the Village would still be in violation of its own ordinance, because the amendment would not take effect until it is adopted. Ms. Mailander confirmed all of that. Chief Ward interjected that the Essex County Police Academy course starts in March, and there is another Police Academy in July. He added that he does not know what the status would be if the conditional offers of employment held open while the situation is resolved to the satisfaction of the Councilmembers. Ms. Mailander answered that the ordinance could be amended by February, in time for the March session of the Police Academy.

Mayor Aronsohn stated that he does believe the number of police officer stated in the ordinance seems arbitrary, and there must be a number that would ensure the safety of the community, as well as saving money for the Village. However, he does not believe this is the correct way to make law, and there is no good solution to the problem. Mayor Aronsohn also noted that Chief Ward had provided information to the Councilmembers regarding overtime costs and savings, and Mr. Sanzari was also asked to provide figures relating to Police Department salaries and benefits. Ms. Mailander said she received that information just prior to this meeting. Mayor Aronsohn said the numbers should include any cost savings, if any, in terms of overtime if two or four additional police officers were hired in 2014, as well as the overall cost of hiring additional police personnel. Ms. Mailander said the cost, including salaries and benefits, is $96,590 to hire the two candidates under it for 11 months. Adding two more would not necessarily double that number, because they would not be hired until July, so their salaries and benefits would be estimated for approximately 5 months. Therefore, Mayor Aronsohn said a rough estimate of the cost for salaries and benefits for all four hires would be approximately $150,000. Chief Ward said it would be possible to reduce those numbers by having the next two officers to be hired attend the Essex County Police Academy, which will have a session starting in September 2014. Mayor Aronsohn answered that the possibility of waiting until July might have to be considered, in order to analyze what makes sense in terms of the Police Department, its structure, and positions. After that, the issue could be revisited in July, as was mentioned in one of Chief Ward’s emails.

Councilman Pucciarelli interjected that, as he mentioned before, there will be a new Village Manager in place by that time, and these are the types of decisions that Chief Ward and the Village Manager, in close consultation, should make together. He also reiterated that if the retirements are not to occur until June 2015, it would not be necessary to have new police officers in place before October 2014. For the remaining retirees who are not scheduled to retire until December 2015, new police officers must be in place by March 2015. Ms. Mailander pointed out that the hiring of new personnel must also synchronize with the courses at the Police Academy, while Chief Ward noted that time must also be included to allow for the selection process and background checks. Councilman Pucciarelli said he finds it ironic that, as the current collective bargaining agreement is nearing its expiration, there are so many potential retirees who want to take advantage of the healthcare payments, and he considers that the agreement is evidence of bad planning. Chief Ward agreed with Councilman Pucciarelli, and also pointed out that another reason for so many retirements is due to the fact that no one knows what action the State might take regarding benefits for public employees.

Councilwoman Walsh had questions about the candidates. She asked if there was another test given since the time that these particular candidates took the test. Chief Ward answered that there was another examination since that time, but he does not know if they took that test, also. Councilwoman Walsh said that means that they will not appear on the next list of candidates if they did not take the test.

Councilman Riche asked Mr. Rogers to explain the Village’s legal position in this situation, without revealing more than was necessary. Mr. Rogers said he could only convey information that was given to him by the Village’s labor counsel. There are issues that are presented by the conditional offers of employment, and that once those offers of employment have been given, the municipality is bound to a certain extent to a particular action that must be taken, the first of which is the scheduling and attendance of the candidate at a psychological and physical evaluation. Those are two of the three conditions of employment, and the last one is attendance at the Police Academy, including the ability to pass the courses there in a satisfactory manner. According to the labor counsel, the Village has certain legal obligations after making those conditional offers of employment, so that if the offers are withdrawn, there are ramifications for the Village to consider. Those ramifications were spelled out to the Councilmembers by the labor counsel at the Closed Session meetings. The Councilmembers were urged to take those issues into consideration before making those offers.

Mayor Aronsohn stated that because this law has been in place, which sets a ceiling to the number of police officers who can serve in the Police Department, he assumes there were other candidates over the past several years who might have wanted to join the Ridgewood Police Department but were unable to be considered due to the limits set. Now that the Councilmembers are contemplating amending the ordinance retroactively to allow for these two hires, Mayor Aronsohn wonders if the Village will be exposed to a requirement to consider any of those previous candidates. Mr. Rogers responded that because that particular issue was not discussed with labor counsel in his presence, he could only give his understanding of the laws pertaining to that issue. He stated that a municipality or government entity cannot be bound to a future act. With any type of contractor agreement, there must be an offer, acceptance, and consideration. If there were no offers made at that time, Mr. Rogers explained that as he understands the law, he does not believe someone could say that s/he would have been hired by the Village had an offer been tendered.

Councilman Pucciarelli interjected to say that he is very uncomfortable discussing in a public forum and on the record the legal exposure of the Village if the Councilmembers do not do what is being requested tonight. It is not a good idea to be discussing legal exposure in front of potential plaintiffs. Mr. Rogers said he would normally agree with Councilman Pucciarelli, but unfortunately, sometimes it must be considered when a decision must be made. Councilman Pucciarelli believes that this entire issue should have been dealt with in Closed Session, particularly as it relates to the legal exposure of the Village, as well as the nepotism question.

Councilwoman Hauck recalled that there was some mention of extending the offers of employment to March 2014, so that this issue could be discussed further, and she wondered if that would be possible. Ms. Mailander responded that she would have to ask labor counsel if the offers could be extended, but since there is a Police Academy course beginning in March, if the amended ordinance is adopted, the offers could be made at that time. Councilwoman Hauck said she asked the question because she believes that the discussion should be very thorough and deliberate, and a decision should not be made quickly. Chief Ward noted that if the applicants enter the Police Academy in March, they would graduate in September, and the additional three months of field training that is required would make them full-fledged officers by December 2014 or January 2015. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that the needs of the Police Department could still be met by proceeding in that manner, and Chief Ward agreed.

Mayor Aronsohn suggested that the Councilmembers need time to review the ordinance in order to have a fully-informed discussion about this matter, and that it should be done before any vote is taken to amend the ordinance, rather than amending the ordinance retroactively. Councilman Pucciarelli said he learned a lot from listening to the comments made by Chief Ward, and he believes the Councilmembers could make a more reasoned decision with more discussion, because the nepotism issue will also have to be decided as a separate issue. Chief Ward said his question would then become what is he to tell the two candidates in question who are awaiting action by the Village Council. Ms. Mailander pointed out that if the Councilmembers want to have the ordinance in place by March, it must be introduced in February. It could be discussed again next week, whether publicly or in Closed Session, after which time it could be introduced, with adoption in March. Mayor Aronsohn responded that Ms. Mailander’s explanation of the scenario is a good one, and would allow for both public discussion of the Police Department personnel needs, as well as allowing the Councilmembers to discuss the nepotism and other personnel issues in Closed Session. Ms. Mailander also pointed out that she informed all of the Councilmembers in Closed Session who the three candidates are, and what their relationships are to current Village personnel.

Regarding the nepotism policy, Mayor Aronsohn acknowledged that Ms. Mailander had spoken to the Councilmembers in a general way about the policy. However, there was a caveat to the Councilmembers’ agreement, which was that if any candidate was to be passed over, Ms. Mailander would go back to the Councilmembers with that information, due to the fact that the former Village Manager was believed to have passed over some candidates inappropriately. Ms. Mailander stated that she had a discussion with the Councilmembers in an advisory capacity, and because she and Councilman Pucciarelli had a long conversation about legacies and nepotism. Ms. Mailander said her belief, which is apparently incorrect, is that if she were to pass over someone who has no connection to anyone in Ridgewood, she would explain to the Councilmembers why she was passing over that person. However, because all three of the current candidates have legacies, and the Councilmembers knew who the candidates were and their familial relationships, she did not feel it necessary to go back to the Councilmembers again for more discussion. Mayor Aronsohn noted that the different interpretations of those discussions are illustrative of all the “gray areas” in the current nepotism policy.

Councilman Riche said he is very disturbed by this current situation. It is clear to him that an offer of employment was made, which was discussed by the Councilmembers in Closed Session. None of the Councilmembers ever indicated that the medical or psychological examinations, or any of the other necessary steps in the process, should not be taken. However, now the discussion is that the candidates should be asked to wait to enter the Police Academy. Councilman Riche said he is disgusted by the situation, as are many members of the community.

Councilwoman Walsh stated that she believes it would be wise to put this on the agenda for a future Work Session. Ms. Mailander said the next Work Session meeting will be on Wednesday, February 5^th. Councilwoman Walsh also noted that the Councilmembers have already been informed about the scheduling of budget meetings. In the meantime, the Councilmembers could gather whatever data is available on the subject. Councilman Walsh is concerned that putting this off any longer will bring the discussion into March, and decisions must be made by then so the Essex County Police Academy deadline is not missed. Therefore, Councilwoman Walsh proposes giving Ms. Mailander the direction to put this matter on the agenda for the next Work Session meeting.

Councilman Pucciarelli said he wanted to go on record as saying that this is not a game for him, and he finds this very serious. He feels very sorry that the two young men got caught up in this process. Furthermore, Councilman Pucciarelli noted that the Village’s own ordinance was violated, and there is some question about the nepotism policy. He wondered if that is the type of governance the people of Ridgewood want.

Mayor Aronsohn stated that this item would be put on the agenda for the Work Session meeting on Wednesday, February 5, 2014. He said any additional discussion on personnel issues could be done in a Closed Session meeting. More information is needed from Mr. Sanzari, particularly regarding overtime costs. Ms. Mailander pointed out that Mr. Sanzari had provided that information already in his report. Mayor Aronsohn responded that some clarification is needed. Chief Ward asked for guidance regarding what he should tell the two candidates. Ms. Mailander answered that he should tell them that the situation is currently on hold, and she will be contacting them. Chief Ward added that there might be a problem with the gear that has been issued to the candidates, because it is labeled for Bergen County, and might require some changes to conform to the requirements in Essex County. He also asked that the Councilmembers move forward as quickly as possible, so he can make arrangements with the Essex County Police Academy for the two officers. There is a possibility that Ridgewood might be billed by the Bergen County Police Academy, because spaces were held for the two candidates. Mayor Aronsohn suggested that any outstanding questions the Councilmembers may have should be addressed to Ms. Mailander before the Village Council meeting next week.

4. MOTION TO SUSPEND WORK SESSION AND CONVENE SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING

At 9:05 P.M., upon a motion by Councilman Pucciarelli, seconded by Councilwoman Walsh, and carried by unanimous voice vote, the Village Council suspended the Work Session.

5. MOTION TO RECONVENE WORK SESSION

At 9:10 P.M., upon a motion by Councilman Pucciarelli, seconded by Councilwoman Walsh, and carried by unanimous voice vote, the Village Council reconvened its Work Session. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Riche, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Heather Mailander, Acting Village Manager/Village Clerk; Donna Jackson, Deputy Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.

6. PRESENTATIONS

a.)        Annual Report from Financial Advisory Committee

Councilman Pucciarelli commented that the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC), which was established last year, has undertaken a lot of work in that time. Councilman Pucciarelli has attended their meetings as the liaison between the FAC and the Village Council. The FAC is obligated by the resolution that formed the Committee to make an annual report in January of each year to the Village Council, and they presented their report at this meeting. Nancy Johansen, Chairperson of the FAC, and Roberta Sonenfeld, Vice-Chairperson of the FAC made the presentation.

Ms. Johansen commented that all of the Councilmembers received a copy of the annual report in their reading packets for this meeting, so the intention of this discussion would be to highlight some of the points made in that report, and then take any questions the Councilmembers might have. She reminded everyone that the creation of the FAC was the main recommendation of the report prepared by the “Tiger Team,” so the logical beginning for the FAC was to start by reviewing the recommendations made by the Tiger Team. As a newly-formed Committee, Ms. Johansen said that all of the members of the FAC agreed with the conclusions in the Tiger Team’s report that the status quo in Ridgewood is unsustainable from a financial perspective, and it is extremely important that the Village takes a look at the long-term financial situation. In prioritizing their efforts, the first area of focus was budget on financial reporting. The reason for that is because the members of the FAC believe it is the foundation to help provide better information for decision-making.

The next major effort under way is a review of the collective bargaining agreements (CBAs), in order to assist the Councilmembers and Village Manager to be better prepared for the upcoming negotiations. Mr. Hansen said the FAC also worked on the Village Garage. Those have been the main issues upon which the FAC has concentrated. Over the next six months, Ms. Johansen said they plan to continue in those efforts, as well as other priorities that come up and are considered to be important for the FAC to evaluate. One of the upcoming issues that Ms. Johansen believes might be very important will be starting to work with the newly-hired Village Manager and the Councilmembers to help put together the strategic plan, which does not yet exist.

Ms. Sonenfeld said a meeting was held this afternoon regarding the Village Garage, which the members of the FAC call the “repair facility”. She explained some of the history behind the current efforts regarding the repair facility, which started last year when Councilman Pucciarelli asked the FAC to review the efforts that have been undertaken regarding the potential joint venture with Glen Rock to build a new repair facility on Village-owned land. The members of the FAC toured the current Village Garage site, as well as taking a look at the proposed new site. Ms. Sonenfeld said the members of the FAC concur that the current facility is in decrepit condition, and that something must be done. However, they also recommended that additional monies should not be spent, other than the monies spent on the feasibility study, to determine whether or not the proposal with Glen Rock could work. The members of the FAC felt it would be more important to have a broader analysis or study that would look at a full range of options, covering a continuum ranging from performing everything in-house to completely outsourcing all repair work. Today, the members of the FAC discussed the situation, including how they would like to move forward with this issue. Ms. Sonenfeld said they all concluded that it would be good to go with the recommendations discussed earlier, including the broader analysis, which would include external benchmarking of other municipalities to flush out any prospective partners now that Glen Rock is no longer in partnership with Ridgewood; as well as alternative servicing ideas, such as trying to get best practices. In addition, the members of the FAC want to evaluate County and State resources to get their perspective and capabilities, because there has been a big push at the County level on regionalization and sharing of services, with some money available for that purpose. It is not known what the County is doing with its own fleet, nor the State. It was also agreed that the FAC would reach out to see what large companies like FedEx, UPS, and the United States Postal Service do about their fleets, with the purpose of identifying potential new servicing alternatives, as well as gaining knowledge. However, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that before any decision can be made, there must be a detailed understanding of the costs involved, as well as a detailed understanding of the Village’s operational and productivity metrics. That information is not yet available. There should also be a detailed understanding of the current needs and future needs, because some of that information is still undecided. In approximately 2009, a study was done by the commercial vehicle consultants, who noted that the current facility is operational and could be repaired. This study is referenced because Ms. Sonenfeld believes there are other possible alternatives.

In conclusion, Ms. Sonenfeld said that a person within Village Hall was identified who could start working on gathering some of the data, while Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Highet would work with that person to put this project together. A recommendation would be made to the Councilmembers that it might be necessary to hire a consultant to help with this issue, and hopefully it would be someone with a good understanding of this type of service facility. An RFP will be drafted, and Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, has agreed to give some assistance. Ms. Sonenfeld believes that a project of this type could be accomplished in a relatively short period of time, depending upon the resources available. Councilman Pucciarelli thanked Ms. Sonenfeld for her report, and said it was illustrative of what the FAC can do, although they can only do what they do with the cooperation of staff.

Councilman Pucciarelli mentioned the other members of the Financial Advisory Committee: in addition to Ms. Johansen and Ms. Sonenfeld, the FAC is comprised of Janice Willet; Rich Cundiff; Mac Highet; and Kevin Shea. There is still one vacancy that is expected to be filled within the next couple of weeks.

Mayor Aronsohn thanked Ms. Johansen and Ms. Sonenfeld for their reports, and he thanked the FAC for their efforts. He noted that although the FAC is the newest Village committee, it is playing an increasingly important and valuable role in the Village. Mayor Aronsohn added that he has not yet had a chance to read the entire report, and he invited Ms. Johansen and Ms. Sonenfeld to come back to another meeting, after he and the other Councilmembers have had a chance to read and digest the report. Ms. Johansen thanked Mr. Sanzari for all of his help and participation as an active member of the FAC. Ms. Sonenfeld added that the members of the FAC work well together and it has been a very good experience. Ms. Mailander agreed with their assessments, and said that the meetings she has had with the members of the FAC have been very beneficial. Discussions have been very open and frank.

Councilwoman Walsh thanked Ms. Johansen, Ms. Sonenfeld, and the FAC for their efforts. She thought that the Councilmembers might want to discuss the report in a Closed Session meeting prior to any public discussion of the report. Ms. Johansen commented that the committee has only been in existence for approximately six months, and that while the report is due to the Councilmembers in January, it should include a re-evaluation of their priorities, which would have to be a joint discussion between the FAC and the Councilmembers.

7. DISCUSSION

a. Budget:

1.)        Award Contract under State Contract – Cameras for Police Cars

2.)        Award Contract under State Contract – Operating System for Cameras for Police Cars

 

Ms. Mailander explained that the cameras are newer cameras, which will record in high definition (HD). The current cameras are outdated, and difficult to repair.

Sergeant Brian Pullman of the Ridgewood Police Department confirmed Ms. Mailander’s statements about the old camera system. The current system was originally purchased in 2005-2006, and is no longer supported by Panasonic. The infrastructure of the system and the components in the vehicles need to be updated. What is proposed is to purchase a new system that is available under State contract. The proposed new system is much better than the old one, with many enhancements, and when compared to the current Panasonic system, is a much better value. There are two resolutions for the two separate elements that comprise the camera recording system: one is for the actual cameras, and the other is for the operating system, which is installed at Police Headquarters. Once the operating system is installed, there is no limit to the number of cameras that can be added to it, and vehicles purchased in the future can also be equipped with cameras that are compatible with the system. As the current equipment breaks down, they must be sent to third-party vendors for repair. Many of them cannot be repaired, and they have not been replaced. That means that there are some patrol cars with cameras that do not work.

Councilman Pucciarelli asked if the cameras and operating system are being purchased through the capital budget, or are they considered operating expenses. Sergeant Pullman responded that there are two different capital accounts from which the funding was approved. This will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

3.)        Award Contract under State Contract – Purchase of Ammunition

Ms. Mailander commented that this ammunition is obviously what is necessary for Police Department weapons, and is also used for semi-annual qualifications of police officers. This will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

4.)        Cancel Taxes – Block 4704, Lot 12 – General Energy Property

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this resolution is for the General Energy property that was purchased by the Village this past summer, and it allows the taxes for the second half of the year to be waived, in the amount of $590.24. Going forward, this property would not be taxable, because it is now owned by the Village. This will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

5.)        Mobile Concession – User Fees, Application Requirements

 

Ms. Mailander stated that currently there is no charge for the mobile concession unit, which was donated by the John Vandevander Foundation. However, there are expenses associated with the mobile concession unit, which includes cleaning the four filters, at a cost of approximately $30; refilling the two propane tanks at a cost of $85 per tank; and some professional cleaning that might be needed, which costs about $100 each time go to page 24. To date, the users include Ridgewood Junior Football; Ridgewood Soccer; Maroon Soccer; and the Ridgewood Baseball/Softball Association. A usage fee has been proposed in the amount of $250 per event, or $500 per season. The additional fees mentioned will be included in the event charge, and this proposal has been approved by the Fields Committee. So far, the charges associated with the unit have come out of the operating budget of the Department of Parks and Recreation. The unit is used several times during the various sports seasons. Councilman Pucciarelli asked who staffs the mobile concession stand when it is used by a sports group. Ms. Mailander responded that the group using the stand is responsible for providing staff. Councilman Pucciarelli asked if the Board of Education also uses the unit, and Ms. Mailander answered that she does not believe they do.

Timothy Cronin, Director of the Parks and Recreation Department, said that he wants to have some way to formalize any user fees for the unit, and to be able to pass along expenses that are incurred with its usage. Currently, Ridgewood Junior Football uses the unit for the entire season, but the other groups only use it when they hold events. At first, only Ridgewood Junior Football was using the unit, but other groups have started using it, as well. It was a minor expense before, but now that budgets are much tighter, Mr. Cronin said they approached the Fields Committee with this proposal, which they supported. In addition, the Fields Committee helped to draft the agreement formalizing the proposal. This will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

6.)        Award Contract – Physician for Child Health Conference

 

Ms. Mailander said this is an annual resolution. Seven quotes were solicited, and Doctors Kim and Narucki, who have done this in the past, would like to do it again. The fee they are requesting is $140 per hour, which is five dollars more per hour than the fee from last year. The cost is shared with the Borough of Glen Rock, because there is a Shared Services Agreement with them. The maximum amount for each municipality will be $1,750. The services are provided for less than two hours per month, and the conferences are held 11 times a year. Dr. Kim and Dr. Narucki have been performing this service for the Village for the past five years. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

7.)        Award Professional Services Contract – Retainer for Preparation of 2014 Tax Assessment Map

 

Ms. Mailander said this is another annual resolution, as well as an annual retainer, which is $1,700. The retainer amount has been the same since 2007, and it provides the Village with a New Jersey Professional Land Surveyor, who endorses all of the tax maps and provides the license coverage for the survey work prepared by the staff of the Engineering Department for various construction projects. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

8.)        Award Contract – Extraordinary Unspecifiable Services – The Stable and Graydon Pool – Repair/Replace Alarm Systems

 

Ms. Mailander explained that when the Village suffered a major power outage on December 31, 2013, the alarm systems at The Stable and Graydon Pool were damaged. This resolution is to award a contract for replacement and/or repair of those systems. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

9.)        Award of Bid – Two 25-Cubic Yard Sanitation Trucks

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this resolution is to award of bid for two new sanitation trucks, which will replace two trucks from the year 2000. The trucks to be replaced are both in need of having their engines rebuilt, at a cost of $20,000 just for the engines. Moreover, the cabs, particularly underneath where the drivers sit, are completely rotted, and there are no replacement parts available. Parts for these trucks have been discontinued, and the staff of Fleet Services has been making replacement parts up to this point. If the trucks are ordered now, they can be on the road in six months. The current trucks will not pass State diesel emission tests, so they would have to be retrofitted with after-treatment devices, putting additional pressure on the engines, which could cause them to fail. In addition, the transmission on one of the trucks has been replaced within the last seven years, and the other one has not been replaced at all. However, the concern is that if the transmissions go, it would cost $10,000-$14,000 to repair. That would mean that the Village is putting more money into the two trucks than they are worth. The recommendation is to award the bid for two of the trucks. Earlier this year, RFPs had been issued for the purchase of Sanitation vehicles, and the funds have already been approved from the capital budget. Mayor Aronsohn noted that the supporting documents indicate that the existing trucks will be classified as surplus and sold, and he wondered how much revenue the Village could expect to get from the sale of the trucks. Ms. Mailander said she would find out that information. Councilman Pucciarelli commented that the vehicles cost approximately $250,000 each, and one of the discussions pertaining to the new repair facility pointed out that these vehicles should be stored, if possible, which would save a lot of the wear and tear. Second, there is no truck wash, so it is not possible to effectively wash the salt off the vehicles. Ms. Mailander said that the trucks are sent to a truck wash, but it is in Lodi, but the staff at Fleet Services also use hoses on the trucks.

Councilwoman Hauck asked when these trucks were projected in the capital budget. Ms. Mailander answered that if the resolution is approved, that would occur on February 19, 2014, and the process takes six months from that point. Councilwoman Hauck noted that many of the big trucks are purchased out of the sinking fund, monies set aside for this particular purpose, but Ms. Mailander said this purchase was actually already in the 2012 capital budget.

Councilwoman Walsh pointed out that the members of the FAC had just made a presentation, and one of the items under discussion was the possibility of outsourcing Sanitation services, so Councilwoman Walsh wondered why the Councilmembers should approve the combined amount of approximately $500,000 to purchase two new trucks. Ms. Mailander explained that the reason is because of all of the issues that have arisen with the current trucks, such as rotting; the inability to obtain parts; putting more money into the trucks than they are worth; and the fact that even if outsourcing were to be done immediately, there is still the question of lag time. Outsourcing would require putting together proposals and in evaluating the best way to proceed, which means studies would have to be done. Purchasing two new trucks would serve the Village until that point is reached, and if outsourcing does become a reality, the vehicles could be sold at that time. Councilwoman Walsh then asked why there is only one sheet of information pertaining to $500,000 worth of vehicles, with no other backup information. Ms. Mailander explained that this bid went out in 2013, and Foley Inc., agreed to honor the bid. Councilman Walsh asked if the supporting information from that time was still available, including the specs on the trucks. Ms. Mailander said she would get that information.

This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

1. b. Operations:

1.)        Sale of 1991 Pierce Aerial Ladder Truck

 

Ms. Mailander said the Fire Department no longer needs the 1991 Pierce aerial ladder fire truck, and Bergen County is interested in purchasing it for use at the Academy for training purposes, in the amount of $35,000. The Board of Freeholders is expected to adopt the resolution authorizing the payment of $35,000 to the Village. Another good point to this transaction is that the Village can still borrow the truck, if need be. Fire Chief James Van Goor told Ms. Mailander that he had investigated how much other fire trucks of this age were selling for, and this is a very good deal. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

2.)        Shared Services – Agreement with Ho-Ho-Kus – Adult Health Clinic

 

Ms. Mailander explained that this is another annual resolution in which Ho-Ho-Kus joins the Village for the adult health clinic. Blood pressure screenings; doctor referrals; and information on diabetes, as well as flu shots are available through the clinic. This resolution allows the Village to join Ho-Ho-Kus in that process. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

3.)        Shared Services – Agreement with the Borough of Paramus – Wastewater Collection System Operator

 

Ms. Mailander said this is a renewal of a Shared Services Agreement with the Borough of Paramus. Robert Gillow, Superintendent of the Water Pollution Control Facility, is a licensed wastewater collection system operator. Paramus pays the Village $500 per month, which allows them to have a licensed operator available for their Borough. This agreement has been in effect over the past two years, and the new agreement would be for another two years, 2014-2015. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

4.)        Cellular Communications Tower Service Upgrade – Water Pollution Control Facility

 

Ms. Mailander reminded the Councilmembers that there is a cell tower at the Water Pollution Control Facility, which is owned with the Borough of Glen Rock. Periodically, a carrier needs to service or upgrade the equipment, and require approval from the Village to enter the property to gain access to the tower. This item will be put on a resolution for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

c. Policy:

1.)  Proposed Encroachment Agreement – 470 Fairway Road

Ms. Mailander explained that currently there is a basketball hoop in the Village’s right-of-way at 470 Fairway Road, which has been there for approximately 10 years. There has been no accident or incident in that area. Letters of support have been received from people who live in that neighborhood stating that a generation of children has enjoyed gathering there and playing, and another generation is coming up. Mr. Rutishauser has indicated that if the Village Council grants the encroachment agreement, he would request that the property owners submit a certificate of insurance to meet Village requirements. Ms. Mailander asked Chief Ward to give his comments on the safety issues involved.

Chief Ward said that from the perspective of law enforcement and safety, any time people are in the roadway, it presents a danger to those people and motorists. For that reason alone, Chief Ward said he could not recommend allowing the encroachment. While he understands the sentiment behind it, and agrees that there have been no incidents reported in the area, he has not actually seen any children playing basketball in the street. However, he noticed that someone installed a temporary basket across the street, which means that full-court games are purportedly occurring there. The street is neither a dead-end street, nor is it a highly traveled one. Nevertheless, it is a through street between Overbrook Place and Linwood Avenue, so there is a potential for traffic to go through there. The basketball hoop that is under discussion sits in the grassy area adjacent to the curb. Chief Ward said his primary concern is for safety. As a public safety professional, he cannot endorse this encroachment agreement.

Mr. Rogers commented that he understands safety is the primary concern, but from the standpoint of the law, liability is another concern. Once it is legally recognized that there is an encroachment agreement, the next step is to publish notice of the encroachment agreement, and if it is deemed to be an unsafe condition, it would present liability issues. In addition to an encroachment agreement, Mr. Rogers said there should be a deed restriction with regard to the property owners of the properties adjacent to the area in question, so there is an understanding by everybody, whether a particular house is sold within the next few years or after a number of years have passed, that they will hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the Village against any claim that might arise as a result of someone getting hit or hurt by whatever means. Therefore, Mr. Rogers cautioned the Councilmembers that if they are interested in taking this step, other steps are also necessary to ensure that the Village is covered from a liability standpoint.

Ms. Mailander said it has to be the decision of the Councilmembers whether to proceed with this matter, or they could choose to reconsider it and discuss it again at a future meeting. Mayor Aronsohn asked if Ms. Mailander has any recommendation. She responded that, based on the safety and liability issues presented, she is not sure that the Village should condone this. Mr. Rogers added that he could explore the liability issues with the people involved in that area to see if they might be willing to agree to the terms he stated to protect the Village. Ms. Mailander pointed out that there are other basketball hoops throughout the Village like the one in question, and if this encroachment agreement is allowed to proceed, it could set a precedent for others that might follow. On the other hand, if it is decided not to pursue the encroachment agreement, Ms. Mailander believes that more vigilance will be exercised to try to ensure that the other hoops are not in Village rights-of-way. Councilwoman Hauck noted that the situation was precipitated by a summons that was written about the hoop on Fairway Road, which Ms. Mailander confirmed.

Councilwoman Walsh said she would abide by the recommendations made by Ms. Mailander and Mr. Rogers. Councilman Pucciarelli agreed, although he feels that the applicants have made a very compelling case for allowing the hoop to remain. Councilwoman Hauck also agreed. Ms. Mailander said that the homeowners would be notified.

2.) Sewer Fees for Significant Dischargers – Wastewater Collection System

Ms. Mailander noted that several meetings have been held with Central Business District owners, as well as the Chamber of Commerce, about the significant sewer discharge fees. She reminded everyone that anything in excess of 109,500 gallons discharged for commercial purposes is billed at $4.03 per 1,000 gallons over that amount. That rate has been in effect since 2010, and after reviewing it, the Village decided to leave the rate as is for 2014. This ordinance would allow it to remain the same. There will be further discussions between the Village, owners in the CBD, and the Chamber of Commerce about this matter. Mayor Aronsohn added that one of the issues discussed in the meetings was the idea of billing the businesses earlier. Ms. Mailander responded that if the ordinance is adopted, the billing could be accomplished by June or July, and the businesses would be allowed to spread their payments out over a period of months from that time through December, when the bills are due. Councilman Pucciarelli clarified that there is no charge to the businesses for the first 109,500 gallons of water, which Ms. Mailander confirmed. She noted that the reason for the excess billing is due to the wear and tear on the Water Pollution Control Facility, and because in the CBD, extra degreasers are introduced into the system because of all the food products that go into the system. This item will be put on the agenda for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

3.) Lease for 1057 Hillcrest Road Property

Ms. Mailander reminded the Councilmembers that there is still a house at 1057 Hillcrest Road, which is in the Habernickel Family Park. The house is rented, and the lease will expire on June 14, 2014. Rental of the property does bring revenue to the Village, and provides a caretaker-type presence on the property. It is allowable at this time under the Green Acres purchase, as has been discussed previously. The lease is a one-year lease, with the possibility of renewal for a second year. The short-term lease keeps the Village’s options open if it should ever be determined that something else could be done with the property, other than renting it to tenants. This lead time is necessary so that the lease can be put out for bid. It is recommended that the rent stay at the current rate of $3,969 per month at a minimum. This item will be put on the agenda for the February 19, 2014, Public Meeting.

4.) Parking Charges for Special Events in the Central Business District

Ms. Mailander stated that Janet Fricke, Assistant to the Village Manager, and Captain Luthcke of the Police Department have worked on this together. This issue arose because there were some special events in the CBD where free parking was given on Sundays, along with the general idea of bagging the meters. Meters are bagged for different reasons, and sometimes the bagged meters are next to a store because of a special event, or parking is being reserved for certain people during a special event. The charge is $10 per day for each bagged meter Monday through Saturday, 10:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M. at street meters, and from 6:00 A.M.-6:00 P.M. in the metered parking lots. Ms. Fricke and Captain Luthcke have recommended that the Village continue to charge for bagging meters, with the Village Manager given authority to waive the fees for up to 15 parking spaces for events sponsored by non-profit groups that benefit the Village, such as the Ridgewood Chamber of Commerce and the Ridgewood Guild. On Sundays, bagging meters would still be required, as well as charging for bagging the meters. However, Ms. Fricke and Captain Luthcke believe that the fee could be waived because there is no charge for parking meters on Sundays, particularly at those meters adjacent to parks or the train station. Ms. Mailander mentioned such events as Jazz Feast; Sale Stock; and the upcoming Daffodil Festival near the train station as instances in which there would be no charges for bagging the meters. Although there might be a small loss of revenue on Sundays from the bagging fees (because there would be no revenue from the meters on Sundays), the longer-term benefit is the attraction of public activities in the CBD. Ms. Mailander said she agrees with the recommendations made by Ms. Fricke and Captain Luthcke that bagging of meters should continue during the week, but when the meters are adjacent to a park or the train station, or on Sundays, the fees could be waived. In addition, Ms. Mailander believes the Village Manager should be given the authority to waive the fees for non-profit groups, for up to 10-15 parking spaces, even on weekdays.

Councilwoman Hauck asked why there are charges for bagging meters on Sundays if parking is free on Sundays. Ms. Mailander responded that it is for reserving the particular spaces, because many times, event sponsors request specific spaces be reserved for patrons of the particular event. Mayor Aronsohn agreed that waving the fees could encourage community events in the CBD, and he supported the suggestions made by Ms. Fricke and Captain Luthcke. Ms. Mailander suggested that Mr. Rogers could draft an ordinance for the Councilmembers to consider at the next Work Session meeting.

8. MANAGER’S REPORT

Ms. Mailander said sanitation continues to be a challenge with the ice and snow conditions. She reminded all residents to make sure to provide a safe, clear, and direct path to their garbage cans. If there is a need to collect garbage cans at the end of the driveways, an e-notice will be sent to those who have registered. Ms. Mailander urged everyone to sign up for e-notices, which can be done through the Village website at www.ridgewoodnj.net.

The Streets Department continues to fill potholes caused by recent extreme weather. Christmas trees will continue to be picked up at the curb. Anyone who has questions should call the Parks Department at 201-670-5565.

Ms. Mailander distributed information to the Councilmembers about the third-quarter median home sales. The market is starting to pick up.

There are many activities scheduled in connection with the Super Bowl. On Friday, January 31^st, there will be family sport arcade games; a kids’ corner with arts and crafts; and a big vault treasure hunt, in which the old safety deposit boxes will be filled with fun prizes at 54 East Ridgewood Avenue from 4:00 P.M.-10:00 P.M. there will also be a band from 8:00 P.M.-10:00 P.M. On Saturday, February 1^st, at 54 East Ridgewood Avenue, from 11:00 A.M.-4:00 P.M., there will be a chili cook-off with Carlos Bakery; sports arcade games; and kids’ corner arts and crafts. At around 12:00 noon, there will be a halftime show, with the Ridgewood High School women’s and men’s chorus, marching band, and cheerleaders. On Saturday, February 1^st, at Graydon Park, there will be a “Fire and Ice” festival, with winter sports, snowshoeing, ice skating, hiking, ice sculptures, and great food. Admission is $5 per person, including donuts and hot chocolate. Pre-registration is necessary, and can be done through The Stable. For more information, call 201-670-5560. Ms. Mailander reminded everyone to dress for the weather, although it is supposed to be a bit warmer on Saturday. In addition, many of the Chamber of Commerce members are having special sales related to the Super Bowl. All of this information is also available on the Village website.

9. COUNCIL REPORTS

Parks, Recreation, and Conservation (PRC) Board – Councilwoman Hauck said that the “Fire and Ice” festival is combined with all of the other activities associated with the Super Bowl. This is all part of the pre-game events, which has brought about a feeling of community in Ridgewood, and that is the most important thing as far as Councilwoman Hauck is concerned. She believes that Ridgewood has now achieved status as a “complete” community that is connected and engaged. It is infectious, and it starts when enthusiastic people work together. Councilwoman Hauck believes Ridgewood is an example to many other towns, and she is very proud of the way the community has come together.

So far, 400 people have registered for the festival at Graydon Park, and Councilwoman Hauck estimates that means there will be at least 500-600 people there.

At the PRC Board meeting, Councilwoman Hauck said The Stable renovation project was discussed. It looks like work will begin sometime in 2014. In addition, they discussed the Shade Tree Policy development, and how the Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee (REAC) is finalizing the policy itself. They also discussed departmental visibility, as well as the Community Center development.

Community Center Advisory Board – Councilwoman Hauck commented that the Community Center Advisory Board is working hard to re-establish and revitalize the Community Center facility uses. A new desk has been purchased, and they are trying to partner with groups to utilize the space in Village Hall.

Village Garage/Repair Facility – Councilman Pucciarelli stated that, as the FAC noted earlier, they are now considering alternatives, particularly outsourcing some of the functions, and Councilman Pucciarelli asked them to move quickly so this project can keep moving forward and will not get put on the back burner. In addition, the existing facility must be evaluated to see what the alternatives are for that location, such as selling it; demolishing it and then selling it; cleaning it up and then selling it; or any other alternatives. The FAC has agreed to help with that endeavor.

Ridgewood Arts Council – Councilman Pucciarelli said the Ridgewood Arts Council has completed its first year of activities. Dotti Fucito, President of the Ridgewood Arts Council, has some interesting plans for the coming year. She would like to change the format of the Arts Council, and she will be appearing at a Village Council meeting to discuss some of her ideas.

Super Bowl – Mayor Aronsohn stated that the first activity in connection with the Super Bowl has already been held. It was at the YMCA this past Sunday, and it was hoped that 100-200 people would attend, but the actual attendance was estimated to be well over 500. There are events scheduled at the Public Library tonight, tomorrow, and Friday; and, as Ms. Mailander noted, there are events scheduled at the former Bank of America building. The proceeds from those events will be going to Family Promise of Bergen County, as well as the Social Services Association in Ridgewood. Mayor Aronsohn thanked everyone who has been involved in the planning of these events, as well as in all of the Super Bowl activities in Ridgewood. He acknowledged the Chamber of Commerce for really driving this process, and its Executive Director, Joan Groom, and President, Tom Hillmann, who have been instrumental in moving things forward.

10. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Mayor Aronsohn stated that they would again have comments from the public and asked anyone wishing to address the Village Council to come forward.

Frank Delvecchio, 65 Walthery Avenue, said he came into the meeting commending the Village Council, but now he is absolutely disgusted with the actions of the Councilmembers. He believes there are several things that were not taken into consideration when the decisions were made tonight. He accused Councilman Pucciarelli of being condescending to the speakers this evening, and of questioning their integrity. Moreover, Mr. Delvecchio commented that the costs associated with the actions taken this evening were not considered. When a new police officer is hired, s/he must undergo an employment protocol at Hackensack University Medical Center, which costs $1,200; a psychological examination, which costs $700; as well as other examinations and fees that are charged whenever a new police officer is added to the roster. After that, uniforms must be ordered and paid for, and different Police Academies have different uniform standards. Uniforms for the Bergen County Police Academy are free, while the ones for the Essex County Police Academy will incur a cost. Mr. Delvecchio considers that the Councilmembers, after professing their concern for the taxpayers of Ridgewood, threw the taxpayers under the bus. It is obvious that mistakes were made, but Mr. Delvecchio asked how the Councilmembers could act as if they knew nothing about them. The Councilmembers approved the budget, as well as the hiring of the two officers, yet the very last minute, it seemed as if the Councilmembers were blaming the Chief of Police and the Village Manager, without taking responsibility for their own actions.

In addition, Mr. Delvecchio believes there will be legal ramifications to the actions taken by the Councilmembers tonight. For example, he wondered if the two candidates quit their former jobs in order to take the jobs offer to them what the Ridgewood Police Department. In addition, it could be construed that the Village made promises of employment to the two candidates, which will also have legal ramifications. Mr. Delvecchio stated that the ordinance should be open-ended when it comes to patrol officers, with words to the effect that the number of officer should meet the needs and demands of the Department. It is not possible to set a finite number of officers who can serve, because an allowance must be made in order to plan for retirements and the replacement of those officers before their retirement.

Mr. Delvecchio asked Ms. Mailander when the certified list was called for with these candidates’ names on it. Ms. Mailander responded that it was requested in October 2013, after the funding was approved, and the Village received it November 25, 2013. Mr. Delvecchio explained that the certification is valid for six months. The Village Council can choose to take no action and allow the list to expire, if they wish.

Regarding nepotism, Mr. Delvecchio finds the issue preposterous. The two young men in question took Civil Service examinations, which they passed, and which most likely cost them money to do. They have also undergone background checks and psychological and physical examinations, which they have also passed. However, based on what the Councilmembers have been saying, it seems that they still cannot have the jobs, although they have done everything necessary to get the jobs. Mr. Delvecchio also noted that the Academy dates will dictate when the officers can be hired.

Finally, Mr. Delvecchio reiterated that he was discussed, and he believes that what the Councilmembers did to the two candidates is deplorable. He agrees that the rule of law must be followed, and mistakes were made, and the Councilmembers need to accept responsibility for their own actions.

Mayor Aronsohn noted as a point of clarification that it was his understanding that it is one of the candidates gave notice at his former job before he was actually offered the job in Ridgewood. Ms. Mailander said that the candidate did not give notice, but had informed his previous employer that he was going through the process of becoming a police officer.

William Corcoran, 371 William Street, pointed out that the Village of Ridgewood, in the past, has sent its police officers to the New Jersey State Police Academy. However, the State Police stopped allowing municipal officers to attend its Academy. The Bergen County Police Academy is second only to the State Police Academy, and far ahead of all of the other Police Academies. The Village started sending its police officers to the Bergen County Police Academy, and the Bergen County Academy has, since that time, far surpassed all other Police Academies. Former Chief Corcoran believes that the Essex County Police Academy is far below the Bergen County Police Academy as far as standards are concerned. Moreover, he noted that if the classes not filled at the Essex County Academy, there is no course for that term.

Former Chief Corcoran noted that Councilman Pucciarelli had mentioned legal ramifications, and he suggested that Chief Ward should contact a lawyer as soon as possible, because too much of the process has been completed to be able to turn back now.

The question of whether the officers who are due to retire will actually retire also arose. Former Chief Corcoran pointed out that he retired due to the Governor’s attack on public pensions, and many other former members of the Police Department did so for the same reason. He also mentioned the issue of nepotism, noting that one of the candidates in question scored a 98.3 on the Civil Service test.

Finally, Former Chief Corcoran said he believed the ordinance was ridiculous from the beginning. People’s lives are put at risk by setting such limits on public safety personnel.

Mayor Aronsohn asked Ms. Mailander when the next Bergen County Police Academy course begins. She responded that it begins in July. Mayor Aronsohn said that if cost is a concern, it might be possible to wait until that time. Ms. Mailander pointed out that there could be a new Civil Service list published by then, and it is not known where the two candidates would place on the new list.

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

11. RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION

The following resolution, numbered 14-29, to go into Closed Session, was read in full by the Deputy Village Clerk, as follows:

 12. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come to before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilwoman Hauck, seconded by Councilman Pucciarelli, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 10:11 P.M.

                                                                                                                                                                                   

                                                                                                PAUL S. ARONSOHN, Mayor

                                                                                   

DONNA M. JACKSON, Deputy Village Clerk