Village Council Special Public Budget Hearing Minutes 20140327

A SPECIAL PUBLIC BUDGET MEETING OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE PATRICK A. MANCUSO SENIOR CENTER OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2014, AT 5:00 PM.

1. CALL TO ORDER – OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS LAW – ROLL CALL

Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 5:05 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Riche, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Heather Mailander, Acting Village Manager/Village Clerk; and Stephen Sanzari, Chief Financial Officer (CFO). Councilmembers Hauck and Pucciarelli were absent.

Mayor Aronsohn led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and asked for a moment of silence in honor of the American men and women serving in our Armed Forces, as well as those serving as first responders.

2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Mayor Aronsohn stated that they would now have comments from the public and advised anyone wishing to address the Village Council to come forward. There were no comments from the public at this time.

3. DISCUSSION ITEMS

    A. REVIEW OF DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS

        1. Village Council

 Mr. Sanzari presented the 2014 budget for the Village Council, saying that the budget was essentially the same as the 2013 budget. That includes funds for television technicians, who record the Village Council meetings. In addition, $12,000 is usually budgeted for printing, to cover the cost of printing and binding the annual Ridgewood calendar, but that is not always the amount that is spent. The cost is dependent upon how many sponsors can be found for the calendar, which helps to reduce the cost.

Councilman Riche said he is not sure if matching FICA taxes should be classified as a fringe benefit. He believes it is a mandatory tax, and it could be misconstrued. Roberta Sonenfeld of the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) commented that that the actual budget shows an increase of 13% over that of 2013. Most of the savings were found in the printing costs.

The first item Mr. Sanzari discussed was the group health insurance. The Village is enrolled in the New Jersey State Health Benefits Plan, and the premiums, on average, increased approximately 8% across-the-board. Employee contributions to the plan increased by 5%. There was also a new coverage option for individuals who waive their insurance; they are entitled to a payment in lieu of health insurance. Retiree premiums also increased by 8%, based on the bills currently received by Mr. Sanzari. Dental insurance costs remained flat, because according to the current contracts, the Village is only responsible for $20 of each premium per employee, so no matter how much the premium may increase, the portion for which the Village is responsible is still $20 per employee. All increases are passed on to the employees. The vision care plan is a self-insured plan maintained by the Village for employees, who receive up to $100 reimbursement toward eye examinations every year. In the future, any time a change of plan is desired, the appropriate time to do so would be during contract negotiations. Any change in the health care plan must, by contract, provide the same benefits that the employees currently receive.

Councilman Riche noted that the retiree premiums paid total far more than the salaries of people who are still working. Mr. Sanzari responded that the figure varies, because it is difficult to budget for retirements that occur during the year, and the other issue is that there are retirees who reach the age at which they become eligible for Medicare during the year, which decreases the premium. Councilman Riche also pointed out that where it says “Workmen’s Compensation,” it should read “Worker’s Compensation”. In addition, he asked why Mr. Sanzari is anticipating such a huge jump in the allocated budget versus the actual budget from 2013. The actual amount paid in 2013 was $195,000, yet Mr. Sanzari has budgeted $400,000 for 2014. Mr. Sanzari explained that the claims that are budgeted every year are not actually paid until the following year, and he budgets a specific amount to cover claims that are to be paid during the current year. For 2012, approximately $230,000 was paid in Worker’s Compensation claims, and in 2013, approximately $310,000 was paid. Councilman Riche asked if there any large claims yet to be paid, and Mr. Sanzari said that there are. He added that claims are usually paid out of the insurance trust fund, and that nearly $66,000 in claims was paid out of the general liability fund. There was almost $347,000 in Worker’s Compensation claims; almost $43,000 in employment practices claims; and environmental claims totaled approximately $1,200 for a total of approximately $457,000 that was paid. Mr. Sanzari asked the insurance company what other claims might be outstanding, and they told him that there are some general liability claims of approximately $232,000, and Worker’s Compensation claims of $583,000, for a combined total of approximately $815,000 in potential payments. However, Mr. Sanzari pointed out that none of those payments will occur in 2014. Amounts budgeted for 2014 will cover anything from this point forward. At the end of the year, the insurance reserve was $249,000, with more than $100,000 in other funds to pay off other claims. Councilman Riche stated that, as he has mentioned before, on an employee ratio basis, the Worker’s Compensation claims are huge. As an example, he suggested that if there are 300 employees, and approximately 100 of those employees are labor employees, who would make most of the Worker’s Compensation claims, the amount of claims points to a lack of a continual safety program to help prevent injuries and other accidents on the job. Mr. Sanzari said the actual number of employees with claims is 22, and those claims totaled $583,000. Mr. Sanzari also pointed out that in 2013, claims were processed through the Joint Insurance Fund (JIF).

Councilwoman Walsh asked a question about the flood insurance premiums paid by the Village, and how much was paid back to the Village by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after the most recent flooding event. Mayor Aronsohn asked if Mr. Sanzari could give an overall picture of FEMA reimbursements received to date. Councilwoman Walsh said the reasons for her question are to find out if it is mandatory to pay for FEMA insurance, and if the Village should consider self-insuring for such insurance. Mr. Sanzari responded that the Village is required by the JIF to have flood insurance in the flood zone. Councilwoman Walsh asked what percentage of the actual damages incurred is received by the Village in flood insurance claims. Mr. Sanzari answered that the Village pays approximately $50,000 per year for flood insurance, and so far the amounts received by the Village have totaled approximately $26,000. Next, Councilwoman Walsh asked how much the insurance premiums are for the renovations currently underway at The Stable. Mr. Sanzari believes that amount will be determined once the improvements are completed. Finally, Councilwoman Walsh asked how many employees have taken the no-coverage option regarding insurance, and why the amount budgeted increased by $8,000. Mr. Sanzari explained that the number of employees using that option varies from year to year, and the amount to be paid varies from year to year. Councilwoman Walsh asked how those employees might be covered by the Affordable Healthcare plan, and whether that has any impact on the payments made to those employees. Mr. Sanzari said does not have that information readily available, but he said he would get it.

Councilman Riche had another question regarding unemployment insurance, noting that there was a significant increase in contributions after 2009, and he wondered if it was due to all of the layoffs in 2010. Mr. Sanzari confirmed this, and it was partly due to the Federal government extending unemployment benefits to employees for two years. In 2013, $110,000 was spent on unemployment insurance claims. Councilman Riche asked if Mr. Sanzari had included the increase in unemployment insurance as an offset to the potential savings when he developed the matrix in 2009 for all of the anticipated layoffs. Mr. Sanzari responded that he did not, because it was impossible to calculate those amounts accurately, partially due to the fact that many employees retired instead of being laid off. Councilman Riche pointed out that the amounts decrease as claimants become ineligible to receive those benefits.

        2. Insurance and Debt Service

Mr. Sanzari pointed out that the summaries show an increase in the long-term debt of the Village, which is a direct result of the 2013 sale of the bond anticipation notes. Going forward, the Village will save $42,000 in bond payments. Most of the debt related to open space will be paid off in 2014. The current budget contains approximately $174,000 in Green Acres grant money that will be used to reduce the outstanding debt for open space purchases. In addition, the open space levy is $284,000, which will be used to offset the total debt service for open space projects that are currently underway. There are various debts and bonds outstanding on open space projects, some of which will be paid off in 2014, and others that will not be paid off for several years yet. Councilman Riche asked what the open space levy is versus the current debt service, and if it is still showing a deficit. Mr. Sanzari responded that it still shows a deficit of $284,000. For 2014, the debt service for open space is nearly $598,000. Mr. Sanzari added that he tries to keep the open space debt service at a 10% pay down schedule. Councilman Riche noted that the current tax levy for open space is .5%, so that doubling that tax levy to 1% would double the $284,000, and just about cover the debt service. Mr. Sanzari pointed out that there is also the possibility of another Green Acres grant being received, but that is not definite. Councilman Riche asked what .5% levy means to the average homeowner, and Mr. Sanzari answered that it is a very small amount. Councilman Riche suggested that perhaps increasing that levy to 1% could be considered in the future, if necessary.

Councilwoman Walsh asked what the current Green Acres grant application is for, and Mr. Sanzari explained that the Green Acres grant previously obtained by the Village was for several hundred thousand dollars, in the form of bonds issued on the Habernickel property. The current application would pay down the remainder of the original bond. Janet Fricke, Assistant to the Village Manager, noted that some more funding may be available for the Schedler property in the future, when Green Acres grants become available, in approximately two years. The Village has done everything required for these grants, so there is no question about qualification. Councilman Riche asked if all of the bonds have the same terms, such as whether they are all 30-year bonds, or 10-year bonds. Mr. Sanzari said he would get that information. Councilman Riche said it would be helpful to have the maturity date of the bonds included in the budget reports.

Ms. Sonenfeld asked a question about the $4.567 million principal and interest payment figure, and how that compared to the actual amount from 2013, and if it includes the Parking Utility. Mr. Sanzari responded that the figure does not include amounts for the Parking Utility and Ridgewood Water, which will be explained later during this meeting. He added that the principal and interest figure represents a 13% increase over that of 2013, when bond anticipation notes were reduced.

          3. Engineering 

Mayor Aronsohn asked Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, to highlight any significant increases or decreases in the Engineering Department budget. Mr. Rutishauser answered that the only increase in staffing being requested is a promotion of one staff member from Senior Engineering Aide to a Principal Engineering Aide, which has been vacant since the previous person retired in 2010. Mayor Aronsohn asked if that promotion was reflected in the budget, and Ms. Mailander responded that it is not. Next, Mayor Aronsohn asked about Tom Rica, the former Public Works Inspector. Mr. Rutishauser explained that Mr. Rica’s position was included in the 2012 budget, but not in the 2013 budget, because he was suspended in early January 2013. Councilman Riche pointed out that the position is not included in the 2014 spreadsheet provided to the Councilmembers. The position of Public Works Inspector was eliminated, although it was still reflected as a part-time position in 2013. It should be reflected as a part-time position at $50,000, not $10,000.

Other than that, Mr. Rutishauser pointed out that there was a reduction in the consideration for paying for the education of one of the members for Certified Public Works Manager School. Councilman Riche noted that those costs are reflected in the “Conferences & Meetings” line item in the budget, in the amount of $4,700. Mayor Aronsohn asked about the printing and binding fees, and Mr. Rutishauser explained that those costs are usually for plans that are prepared and put out for public bid, which are offered for a price, and that money goes into the general fund.

Councilman Riche said he does not understand why the requested budget for Stormwater Management software has more than doubled, rather than requesting the actual amount. He wondered if there is some big increase that is anticipated. Mr. Sanzari explained that the $12,000 is an estimate, and Councilman Riche noted that it was trending at $5,000-$6,000 in the past several years. Mr. Rutishauser answered that the Village has been fortunate because it has remained fairly constant, but that he has been advised to revise the stormwater permit, and Mr. Rutishauser is not sure whether that will mean an increase in those fees or not. The fee is for the Village-wide stormwater permit, which must be renewed every year.

Ms. Sonenfeld asked if Mr. Rutishauser could review some of the other operating expenses, because there seem to be some drastic increases in many of the expenses. She wanted to see if there is any room within the operating expenses for cuts in order to bring the budget down. Mr. Rutishauser explained that the Engineering Department has software licenses that must be renewed, and there are also upgrades to equipment that must be performed, including survey equipment. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the operating expenses have increased by more than 30%, and some have increased by approximately 60%. Councilwoman Walsh noted that the revenue generated from printing goes into the general fund, not back to the Engineering Department. Mayor Aronsohn said he does not understand how the budget for printing and binding could go from $140 in 2013, which was the actual figure, to $2,800 requested for 2014. Mr. Rutishauser explained that the figures are affected by what is printed by the department, and jobs that are put out for bid, which often require large sets of plans to be printed. Councilman Riche asked if there is a specific anticipated event that is driving that increase. Mr. Sanzari explained that this is the most recent update, reflecting all bills and expenses that have been paid. Mr. Rutishauser stated that some of the projects on the horizon include some paving projects, and remedial work to be done on the North Walnut Street parking lot.

Mayor Aronsohn reiterated Ms. Sonenfeld’s point that everyone is looking for ways to cut expenses in order to find potential savings in the budget.

         4. Traffic & Signal 

Mr. Rutishauser presented the budget for the Traffic & Signal Division. There is one staffing change requested, to replace an individual who retired at the end of 2013. The individual to be hired will be hired at the Laborer level, which is considerably less than the individual, who retired, was earning. In addition, materials costs for signs have increased. Mr. Rutishauser reminded the Councilmembers that in August 2013, he mentioned that sign thefts had increased. It was theorized that the signs were being taken as “hometown souvenirs” for students to take back to college. Moreover, certain street names are more desirable than others to hang in dormitory rooms, such as High Street and Corona Place. Councilwoman Walsh noted that when she was recently at a meeting of the Bergen League of Municipalities, it was mentioned that the signs might possibly be stolen for scrap metal, and she asked Mr. Rutishauser his opinion on that speculation. Mr. Rutishauser responded that he does not believe that is the theft issue in Ridgewood, due to its proximity to Paterson and Clifton. However, that would be up to the Police Department to track. There is not much value in the signs, and there would be little compensation to be gained in their scrap value.

Mayor Aronsohn asked the reason for the increases in temporary and seasonal salaries and wages, as well is in overtime. Mr. Rutishauser answered that staffing is down in the Signal Department, yet the demands on the department are still the same. The Signal Department staff also does Building Maintenance, as well as the Parking Utility jobs, such as collection from the parking meters.

Councilman Riche asked if the On Call dollars are written into the union contract. Mr. Rutishauser stated that they are, to a certain extent. That money enables the Village to call on Traffic& Signal employees to come out immediately to fix a broken traffic signal, or replace a stolen sign at a critical intersection, so that the Village is covered as far as liability issues are concerned. In the past year, there have been many accidents involving utility poles at intersections. Insurance claims are made to the responsible parties, but insurance companies are not always cooperative, which takes a lot of time. Councilman Riche asked if the fee for the On Call service would be lower if the minimum response time was increased from two hours to four hours. Mr. Rutishauser answered that one of the reasons he supports having the service is because On Call will send a competent individual in response to a request. He said that particularly in cases involving drivers with CDL licenses, the alcohol threshold is much lower for such drivers. If an On Call driver with a CDL license knows that he is on call and must drive, he is less likely to drink alcohol during his personal time.

In addition, Mr. Rutishauser noted that there is a part-time employee in the Signal Department, Victor Amoruso, who Mr. Rutishauser would like to make full-time and share among the various Village departments. Mr. Amoruso currently works part-time in the Signal Division and Recreation Department. However, Mr. Amoruso is also trained as a traffic control person for school zones (crossing guard), and he has been helping the Police Department whenever crossing guards take sick days. Therefore, Mr. Amoruso could fill such a post without requiring the Police Department to put a uniformed officer in that position. Mayor Aronsohn asked if the savings to the Police Department was reflected in that budget. Mr. Sanzari said it was not, and Ms. Mailander added that it reflects a change in personnel that has not yet been approved. Councilman Riche noted that it is a salary for a part-time employee, yet that salary is not reflected in the existing budget, and he wondered why. Mr. Sanzari said it has not yet been approved. Mr. Rutishauser responded that the salary is reflected in the Property Maintenance budget. Mayor Aronsohn stated that it would be helpful to know how much the additional costs would be to make Mr. Amoruso a full-time employee, as well as how much the potential savings would be in the Police Department. Mr. Rutishauser responded that the current position is limited to 29 hours per week, and he is under strict instructions from all departments that utilize his services that the total number of hours cannot exceed 29 per week. While it has been difficult, everyone has managed to adhere to this. Ms. Mailander pointed out that Mr. Amoruso can always be found working at evening events in the Community Center, and is doing custodial work after those events. Those hours must also be included in the 29 hours per week that he is allowed to work.

Councilman Riche pointed out that there is no part-time employee salary listed in the Building Maintenance budget. Mr. Rutishauser noted that Mr. Amoruso’s services would be used by the Department of Parks and Recreation for various events; janitorial services at The Stable and Veterans Field; and as a fill-in crossing guard for the Police Department during the school year. Mr. Sanzari commented that Mr. Amoruso was formally a full-time employee, and his salary is included under full-time employees in the Building Maintenance Department budget. Ms. Mailander added that in 2010, his working hours were reduced to 29 hours per week. According to Mr. Sanzari, Mr. Amoruso’s salary would increase by $24,000, and another $10,000 (approximately) would be paid for benefits if he were hired full-time. Councilman Riche asked if Mr. Amoruso is collecting any partial unemployment benefits in addition to his salary, because he may be entitled to do so as a result of the reduction in his working hours. Mr. Rutishauser believes he is not, because too much time has passed since the hours were reduced.

            5. Water Pollution Control Facility

Councilman Riche had a question about the outside fees for sewer use, which is showing the same budget amount for 2013 and 2014. Mr. Rutishauser explained that it is due to the fact that the sustainable energy project is now active, and part of the contract is that the vendor gets the first $100,000 for the liquid waste, because the Village can now accept fats, oils, and grease (FOG). Before the sustainable energy project was completed, that was not possible to do at the Water Pollution Control Facility. Once it is fully operational, it should bring in additional revenue. However, as Mayor Aronsohn pointed out, that additional revenue it cannot be anticipated. Mr. Sanzari can only project the revenue based on what has been realized in the past. In 2013, there was a slight decrease in revenue because of the revenue sharing provision in the contract with the vendor. Mayor Aronsohn noted that while the Village cannot budget anticipated revenue, he wondered if Mr. Rutishauser does anticipate higher revenue in the coming year. Mr. Rutishauser said he believes there will be higher revenue next year, and one of the principal reasons is that Two Bridges Sewage Authority (TBSA) has been shut down as far as the use of their incinerators is concerned, so a number of entities that had formerly used their facilities are now asking to come to the Village for incineration. It has also affected the Village, because now all of the Village’s sludge must go somewhere else, which may also cause a change in the cost to the Village. Mr. Rutishauser has obtained prices from the Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission (PVSC), as well as consulting Mr. Rogers, Village Attorney, about the Village doing an interlocal agreement with PVSC for sludge disposal.

Councilman Riche noted that the budget is pretty flat, and Mr. Rutishauser agreed, pointing out that there has been no personnel increase. However, he suggested that the Village should consider reviewing the ages of some of the staff members in this department, because the Plant Superintendent is very close to retirement age, as well as the Laboratory Manager. They are the two principal license holders at the Water Pollution Control Facility.

            6. Building Maintenance

Mr. Rutishauser presented the 2014 budget for the Building Maintenance Department. Ms. Mailander pointed out that the work of the Building Maintenance Department is performed by staff from the Traffic & Signal Department, under the supervision of Jim O’Connell. Councilman Riche commented that no budget credits were included in the spreadsheet for the Building Maintenance Department, and he asked if there was any particular reason for that. Mr. Sanzari responded that he tried to keep everything at the same level, and the current fund budget must be done first. Councilman Riche pointed out that because of that, there should not be a 14% increase in this budget, as indicated on the spreadsheet, but that the budget would remain flat, which Mr. Sanzari confirmed. Councilwoman Walsh and Councilman Riche noticed that the amount budgeted for overtime in 2013 was approximately $2,000, but the actual amount spent was $5,500. Mr. Sanzari explained that it was due to the fact that people were used to fill in for custodians who were out sick, and one particular custodian had an extended sick leave last year.

        7. Planning Board

 Mr. Rutishauser explained that the Planning Board budget is difficult to formulate, because there are usually costs for outside counsel, as well as the Planning Board Attorney. The biggest unknown factor is what type of litigation will be involved. As the Councilmembers are aware, there are two major issues before the Planning Board at this time with the potential for litigation. They are the projects associated with Valley Hospital and multi-unit family housing. It is hoped that those two projects will be finalized by the Planning Board at some point in 2014, and presented to the Councilmembers. Mr. Sanzari noted that the amount budgeted for attorneys’ fees in 2014 is approximately $86,000, and the amount budgeted in 2013 was $45,000, but the actual amount spent was approximately $24,000. Mr. Rutishauser pointed out that a couple of cases did not end up going to court, and one of them was a subdivision case, which Mr. Rutishauser believes will be back before the Planning Board in the future. It is difficult to predict when applicants will want to pursue litigation to wrap up that project. Currently, a lot of the attorneys’ fees are taken from escrow funds, for the Valley Hospital project, as well as the multi-unit family housing project. The cost for the attorney will be borne by the Village if the Village is sued by anyone involved with either one of those issues. Mr. Rutishauser believes the amount budgeted for the attorneys could be decreased, because many things at the Planning Board level have been protracted, even those issues that involve litigation.

The only other increase in the Planning Board budget is for continuing education for the Village Planner, Blais Brancheau. He would like to increase the budget by several hundred dollars so that he can maintain his professional standing.

      8. Historic Preservation Commission

 Ms. Mailander said the budget for the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is not available, but it is not a very large amount of money. Mr. Rutishauser explained that Jane Wondergem, Secretary to the HPC, receives a stipend to attend its meetings. There are also some expenses for printing and supplies for the Commission. Mr. Sanzari and Ms. Mailander noted that the budget for 2014 is flat, with no substantial increases over 2013.

     9. Parking Utility 

Mr. Rutishauser noted that he and Ms. Mailander had received some complaints about the bus shelter on northbound Route 17, near the pedestrian bridge to the Park-and-Ride. After consulting with the Customer Care Representative from New Jersey Transit (NJT), Mr. Rutishauser tried to convince him that the bus shelters belong to New Jersey Transit, and should be replaced by them. However, after some research, the Customer Care Representative said that the shelters were installed at the behest of Short Line Bus Company, and there was never an agreement executed between Short Line Bus Company and NJT to maintain the shelters after they were installed. Mr. Rutishauser stated that if NJT installs a new bus shelter, perhaps the Village would execute an agreement with NJT to maintain the shelter going forward. That means that the Village would get a new bus shelter, and perhaps the maintenance costs would increase slightly at some point in the future. Mayor Aronsohn said that seems like a reasonable approach. Mr. Rutishauser said another option for the Councilmembers to consider is to replace the bus shelters with units that have advertising on them, as has been done in Paramus. They do not offer as much shelter to riders as the current ones do, but NJT does pay to install them, and they maintain them.

Mayor Aronsohn asked how the Parking Utility is doing as far as revenues are concerned, and Mr. Rutishauser answered that revenues have increased. Councilman Riche asked if the Parking Enforcement Officers’ salaries are reflected in this budget, and Mr. Sanzari said that their salaries are in the Police Department budget. Councilman Riche asked how many full-time employees are in the Parking Utility, because he noted the figure of $359,000 for salaries and wages, and wondered how many employees are covered by that figure. Ms. Mailander pointed out that the amount is an allocation, and Mr. Rutishauser added that the time is split among several other departments. Councilman Riche asked if the coin collector’s salary is included in that budget, and Ms. Mailander said that it is included in the Traffic & Signal Department budget. Mr. Sanzari explained that the budget also includes the 10% pay down of the bond anticipation note that is outstanding, an amount that will change as more information becomes available. Mayor Aronsohn said the bottom line is that the Parking Utility is making money, not losing it, which Mr. Sanzari confirmed. The actual revenue was approximately $400,000, which is sufficient to pay down the operating deficit from the prior year, as well as leaving funds to pay for the consultant for the parking garage project. Capital funds may not be used for those fees. Councilman Riche asked why the funds could not be used to reduce the bond issue to a greater extent, and Mr. Sanzari said that could be done, but he usually follows a guideline of 10% toward paying down debt. Mayor Aronsohn asked about the references to the North Walnut Street parking lot. Mr. Rutishauser explained that there are nine underground storage tanks under the North Walnut Street lot, and the removal of those tanks had been postponed for some time. However, the site remediation professional is recommending that the tanks be removed as soon as possible, before the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) levies fines against the Village. Mayor Aronsohn said he asked the question because the project will be coming back before the Village Council for an RFP to be issued to find a developer who would be willing to commit and build a parking garage and take care of the remediation. Mr. Rutishauser said if the Councilmembers want to go in that direction, he will delay issuing an RFP for the removal of those tanks. The tanks have not been seen since the 1960s, and Mr. Rutishauser noted that there are two or three plumes of contaminants coming into the North Walnut Street parking lot. One is coming from Chestnut Street; one from the former Town Garage; and he believes there is one other source. Mayor Aronsohn asked if they are causing any environmental concerns at this point. Mr. Rutishauser answered that he is concerned because it will get very confusing to determine who the responsible party is. That will be important when determining who will be responsible for remediation costs. Mayor Aronsohn asked for clarification that there is no environmental concern in terms of the health and welfare of Village residents, which Mr. Rutishauser confirmed. He added that exposure of the residents to contaminants is minimal, if at all, because the parking lots are paved, and there is an institutional barrier cap that exists in the asphalt that is on top of the lots. The groundwater may be affected by it, but there are no potable wells in the vicinity of the parking lot. If the NJDEP thought there was any effect on the health of the population, they would be pushing much harder for the Village to address the issue. Mayor Aronsohn said it would be a good idea not to spend the money at this time, but to wait and see if there is any interest in taking on the parking garage/retail space project, especially given the fact that interest has already been expressed by one party. Mr. Rutishauser said all that was true, and he would wait for direction from the Councilmembers.

Councilwoman Walsh pointed out that representatives from the Town Garage met with the Councilmembers several years ago, and they furnished information regarding what their remediation would cost. Councilwoman Walsh was under the impression that there were only two tanks at their facility, and she wondered what kind of costs would be incurred if there are nine tanks at the North Walnut Street lot. Mr. Rutishauser responded that the current estimate is approximately $900,000. Councilwoman Walsh asked where the tanks in question are located. Mr. Rutishauser answered that they are in the corner parcel where the Texaco station used to be, and they are all related to the former Texaco station. He also pointed out that the Town Garage has a plume of contaminants that have leaked into the Village-owned site, and it is possible that there are plumes of contaminants going out from the Village-owned site to other tanks that are off-site. That is creating a lot of the confusion associated with who is responsible for the remediation of all of these locations. There is already a plume coming from Chestnut Street.

Councilman Riche thought that if the Village were to do the remediation at the Walnut Street parking lot, it would make sense to mandate that the Town Garage do a remediation at the same time. Mr. Rutishauser does not believe the Village has the authority to mandate such cleanup efforts, but the State does. Representatives from the Kensington Group told Mr. Rutishauser that they have an agreement to purchase that lot, if they have not already done so. They realized that by buying the Town Garage property in the North Walnut Street lot, it allows a greater area for their proposed project. This extra property might also be a way to alleviate some concerns about how high the structure involved in the Kensington Group’s project would be. Mr. Rutishauser added that if the Village cleans up the property owned by the Village, and could demonstrate to the State that it is satisfactorily cleaned up, the State would find that no further action is necessary. The off-site plumes would have to be addressed separately by the parties responsible for those sites. Councilwoman Walsh noted that when these discussions were held several years ago, the estimated cost to clean up the other sites was approximately $1 million.

          10. Other Utilities

 Councilman Riche asked why the electricity costs keep increasing in light of the fact that there are solar panels on the roof of Village Hall. Mr. Rutishauser answered that a lot of electricity has been used. He added that the principal use of electricity in the five Village-owned buildings has been for HVAC, due to the cold winter (electricity for heat), and the hot summer (air-conditioning). Any reduction in the use of the utility would be tied to the comfort level of staff and visitors. Councilman Riche noted that the same argument could be made for the Fire Department Headquarters, but their electricity use has decreased. Mr. Rutishauser pointed out that their facility has more of a fixed payment, because they do not have as many changes in population as does Village Hall. For example, when Municipal Court is in session on a hot summer night, the air-conditioning must be turned up higher for the comfort of the Judge and all of the other people in the courtroom. Councilman Riche asked the location of the main building for the Parks Department, and Mr. Rutishauser replied is located at 201 East Glen Avenue. Mr. Rutishauser also noted that the Traffic & Signal Division building is inefficiently designed. Although a new roof was put on the building last year, it continues to waste a lot of heat. Councilman Riche asked Mr. Sanzari why there is a large increase in the anticipated electric usage at Graydon Pool. Mr. Rutishauser said that is due to the fact that the discharge from Graydon Pool must now be pumped to the sanitary sewer in order to comply with the Administrative Consent Order. Councilman Riche asked if that would lead to those costs more than doubling, and Mr. Rutishauser said it is possible, because the pumps will have to run continuously since they are no longer allowed to have anything flow by gravity over the weirs. Everything that comes out of Graydon Pool must be pumped into the sanitary sewer system.

        11. Village Clerk

Mayor Aronsohn noted that the budget for the Village Clerk’s office shows no significant increase. Ms. Mailander explained that it is partly due to the fact that when her full-time clerk/typist went to work in the Village Manager’s office, she was replaced by two part-time clerk/typists, who do not receive benefits. Mr. Sanzari commented that the percentage increase or decrease is based on the appropriated amount, not the actual amount. Mayor Aronsohn asked why the focus is not on the actual budget figure, instead of the requested amount, as shown. Councilman Riche pointed out that there is a decrease showing, because the actual amount spent in 2013 was $191,000, and the amount requested in 2014 is $173,000. Mayor Aronsohn asked if the percentage could reflect the actual budget amount from 2013 versus the requested amount for 2014, because he thinks that would be helpful information. Councilman Riche asked if any of the election-related expenses are in the Village Clerk budget, and Ms. Mailander responded that Elections is a separate budget.

Councilman Pucciarelli arrived at the meeting at 6:45 P.M.

      12. Elections

 Ms. Mailander pointed out that the Elections budget will increase dramatically in 2014, due to the fact that there is a Municipal Election to be held this year. In Municipal Election years, the Village is responsible for all of the expenses associated with the election, including such items as printing; mailing ballots; machine strips; and translation services, as well as other goods and services associated with the election. In addition, the Village pays for the voting machines and their delivery, as well as the overtime incurred by County offices for the Municipal Election, which is pro-rated based on the number of municipalities that hold Municipal Elections in a particular year. Ms. Mailander noted that the Village is charged for Primary Elections, as well, and they normally average $22,000-$26,000, depending on such things as the number of registered voters and the number of mail-in ballots, among other things. Councilman Riche commented that the proposed budget is a significant increase over the amount from 2010. Ms. Mailander agreed, and pointed out that it is a significant increase over the 2012 budget, as well. Part of that is due to the fact that there is an outstanding bill remaining with a vendor, because the vendor never billed for the services or goods. However, Ms. Mailander is sure that the Village will be billed this year.

Councilman Pucciarelli asked if it would make sense from a budgeting perspective to even the costs out, because it is known that there will be an election every two years. Mr. Sanzari pointed out that the amount can only be carried over for one year, because the monies are not paid from the trust fund, nor is there any trust fund set up for this. Councilman Pucciarelli said as a matter of planning, it is known that Municipal Elections are held every two years, and they will cost a certain amount of money, which could perhaps be budgeted every year. Mr. Sanzari commented that by law, he is only allowed to hold one year in reserve, which would help in 2015. A purchase order can be prepared in 2014, and paid in 2015, but after 2015, the funds would no longer be available.

Changing the subject, Mr. Sanzari noted that FEMA provides a project worksheet for each individual incident requested for reimbursement. The worksheet shows how much was claimed for each incident. The first one is debris removal, in the amount of $1.1 million; emergency protective measures, in the amount of $243,000; and so on. The next column reflects the anticipated insurance proceeds that the Village will receive from the insurance company. The claims indicated on the worksheet are 90% of the expenses, which is what FEMA should pay. Under each category, those funds are out of the current fund operating budget, because in the last two budgets, charges had to be deferred as future taxations, meaning that the expenses incurred as a result of the storm had to be paid and raised in future budgets. Storms that occurred in 2011 and 2012 resulted in deferred charges of $1.168 million, which must be paid in 2013 and 2014. Anything related to debris removal, emergency protective measures, and cleanup will be reimbursed by FEMA, and will help offset their claims for facility repairs. For example, the Traffic & Signal building sustained roof damage, as well as several other Village-owned buildings. A capital ordinance was adopted two years ago for $563,000, which took care of all of the major buildings that were destroyed. Any FEMA reimbursements for repairs received will go into the capital fund. Mr. Sanzari set up a reserve fund to pay off the debt on that bond ordinance. Mayor Aronsohn asked Mr. Sanzari how much was owed; how much was paid back; how much came from the operating budget; and how much came from the capital budget. Mr. Sanzari responded that FEMA is basically responsible for $1,327,693, and the State is responsible for 10% of the damage, or approximately $147,000. So far, the Village has received $690,000 from FEMA. The balance due is approximately $637,000. Mayor Aronsohn asked Mr. Sanzari to break down the portions allocated to the capital and operating budgets from that $690,000. Mr. Sanzari answered that approximately $400,000 of that money would be available in the 2014 operating budget. Mayor Aronsohn said it was his understanding that more money would be forthcoming, and asked what the status of that is. Mr. Sanzari said he received a small check for $8,000, and an overpayment of $77,000, which was related to the damage to the first floor of Village Hall. At this time, Mr. Sanzari said he is awaiting confirmation of what the $77,000 is a payment for before it can be added to the budget. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that there is no way of knowing when the balance owed to the Village will be received from FEMA.

Councilman Riche asked why FEMA only paid 50% of the major claim. Mr. Sanzari answered that it is simply the way FEMA operates. Councilman Riche asked if FEMA considers that $1.1 million claim paid in full, and Mr. Sanzari said they do not. Councilman Riche asked why they only paid half, and Mr. Sanzari responded that he did not know. Councilman Riche said the reason he asked the questions was because FEMA had paid the other, smaller claims at the 90% rate, while they have paid the two most expensive claims at a rate of approximately 50%, leading him to believe that FEMA may consider those claims paid in full. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that, according to the information he received, that is perhaps not the case, because more money is expected to be forthcoming from FEMA.

      13. Northwest Bergen Central Dispatch

 Jack Tancos, Director of the Northwest Bergen Central Dispatch (NWBCD), presented the budget for this entity. Mayor Aronsohn said there did not seem to be anything unusual or striking about the budget, but he asked Mr. Tancos if there was anything in particular he wished to discuss. Mayor Aronsohn then asked Mr. Tancos about the percentages shown for the host communities, and what the rationale is behind those percentages. Mr. Tancos responded that Ridgewood and Glen Rock received full dispatch coverage, while the other towns that are not host communities only get partial dispatch services, or a fraction of what Ridgewood, Glen Rock, and the Tri-Boro Communities receive. The rationale behind it is that this was established when the NWBCD was first created, and the two-thirds/one-third breakdown was based on the concept of call volume; population; and anticipated demand on the NWBCD. Therefore, at that time, it was believed that Glen Rock represented approximately one-third of the volume, and Ridgewood represented approximately two-thirds of the total volume. That is borne out by the numbers, and Mr. Tancos explained that it is impossible to take one particular area and associate demand exclusively with that area. For example, looking strictly at dispatch volume, there are things that are not accounted for or reflected in the dispatch volume. The Ridgewood Police, Fire, and Emergency Services Departments logged more than 32,000 calls in 2013. However, that number is not reflective of all calls received from residents. The other questions include what time the Recycling Center opens and closes; whether the parking meters are in effect on a particular day; or reporting broken parking meters, just to name a few. Mayor Aronsohn asked if that two-thirds percentage represents two-thirds of the total budget. Tancos said it does not, but that it does represent two-thirds of what remains after revenue has been received for the services contracted by the communities. Mayor Aronsohn said it seems like the Village is paying a lot for this service, and it would be helpful to know what the services are. He asked how this would be explained to an average citizen. Mr. Tancos answered that it is because Ridgewood is proportionately so much bigger than the other communities, in terms of population; telephone call volume; and dispatch traffic. The usage of the NWBCD by the Village is proportionately larger than any of the other communities. Mayor Aronsohn asked if Mr. Tancos feels the amount is justified, and Mr. Tancos said it is justified.

Mr. Tancos pointed out that the rent paid for use of the Pease Library facilities also comes back to the Village by way of the Public Library. In that way, the Village’s burden for the Public Library expenses is reduced to a certain extent by that amount of the rent paid. Ms. Sonenfeld asked if Glen Rock also pays for use of the Pease Library facilities, which Mr. Tancos confirmed. He added that every community involved with the NWBCD is paying a portion of that cost. Mr. Tancos noted that Ridgewood’s net contribution for 2013 was a little over $540,000, which represents 35.7% of the entire NWBCD budget. Ridgewood’s dispatch volume is 39% of the overall activity of the NWBCD. On the other hand, the number of 911 calls from Ridgewood is a bit higher, but when everything is averaged together, it still accounts for 35.3% of the overall budget. Another point Mr. Tancos wanted to make is that when looking at Ridgewood’s contributions, in 2002, they were $620,000; they rose to $654,000 in 2007; they dropped to $550,000 in 2009; and they have dropped further in 2014 to $539,000. Therefore, the net costs to Ridgewood have been decreasing over the years.

Councilman Pucciarelli commented that the contributions from the other communities appear to be fixed numbers. Mr. Tancos pointed out again that the classification of those communities differs from that of Ridgewood and Glen Rock. The amounts for the full dispatch communities are not fixed, but are set at 3%-5%. As far as the partial dispatch communities are concerned, the fees have been stable. Councilman Pucciarelli asked which communities are partial dispatch communities, and Mr. Tancos responded that they include River Edge, New Milford, and Oradell. Mr. Tancos added that a conscious decision was made to keep those fees stable, based on the fact that they would not be getting any substantial gains if the costs were increased. Councilman Pucciarelli noted that Oradell appears twice in the list, under dispatch services, as well as in the 911 handoff section. Mr. Tancos pointed out that the 911 handoff fees are also fixed by population. Councilman Pucciarelli asked if salary increases are thus absorbed by Ridgewood and Glen Rock. Mr. Tancos responded that salary increases are absorbed by the Tri-Boro Communities. Councilman Pucciarelli asked if Mr. Tancos was saying that Ridgewood’s contribution is also fixed, and Mr. Tancos responded that Ridgewood’s contribution has been flat, not fixed. In fact, Glen Rock’s contribution has remained flat, while Ridgewood’s has decreased by 17.7% over the past seven years. Mr. Tancos also pointed out that the total call volume for the Tri-Boro Communities was approximately 26,000 calls, compared with the more than 32,000 calls from Ridgewood residents. Councilman Pucciarelli also noted that the out-of-pocket share paid by each Ridgewood taxpayer for this service is approximately $540 in 2014.

Councilman Riche offered some history behind the NWBCD. He reminded everyone that when the State of New Jersey mandated 911 services throughout the State, it was thought that there would be 70 dispatch centers throughout Bergen County, or one for each municipality in the County. At the time, the County offered grant money to form consolidated dispatch services. Ridgewood, Glen Rock, and Midland Park were the only communities who took advantage of that offer. They became the original members of the NWBCD. Eventually, Midland Park went their own way, which left only Ridgewood and Glen Rock, with no services to any other communities. Over time, other municipalities decided that, instead of constantly upgrading their own equipment for 911 dispatch, they would have the calls answered in Ridgewood at the NWBCD. They are now the 911 Handoff Communities, and those rates are fixed based upon what the market allows. The Tri-Boro Communities of Park Ridge, Montvale, and Woodcliff Lake had their own dispatch center for many years, and adding them as members has further reduced costs. This has occurred over the past 20 years, and the NWBCD has evolved from a standalone entity which had to absorb all of its own costs to a profit-making venture, in which costs are kept to a minimum.

Ms. Sonenfeld asked if the cost savings to the Tri-Boro Communities are known, but no one seemed to have that information. She speculated that it must be a savings for them, or they would not have joined. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that there might also be a time savings consideration, as well. Mr. Tancos pointed out that when they originally joined in 2008, the initial pricing was very low. Their call volume was reviewed, and a price was developed based on that call volume. However, it was realized during the first year that the need for staff was greater than anticipated, based on the added call volume. Therefore, Mr. Tancos has been a bit more aggressive in their fee increases in order to bring those fees in line with the call volume generated by those communities.

Councilman Pucciarelli asked what happened to Midland Park, and Councilman Riche responded that they joined with Wyckoff for dispatch services.

Ms. Sonenfeld asked if the Bergen County Dispatch facility in Mahwah is viewed as competition for the NWBCD, and Mr. Tancos responded that it must always be looked at as a possibility, although he does not think it likely that the NWBCD would lose significant business as a result of the County facility. He also noted that the Mahwah facility was built based on a presumption of demand that has never materialized.

Regarding the prospect of free 911 services, Mr. Tancos offered his opinion. He pointed out that when a 911 call is made, that call is only a fraction of the entire process. Mr. Tancos has a four-page list of what has to be done as part of the dispatch duties. While the County has been touting the idea of free 911 calls, which does not include the other 98% of the workload that is associated with providing emergency dispatch services. Therefore, if the Village were to take up the offer of free 911 services from the County, it would not reduce staffing at the NWBCD. This is due to the large number of calls that would still come in from Ridgewood, as well as the calls that would be coming back to Ridgewood from the County dispatch center so they can be dispatched from Ridgewood. That only creates a delay in response time. Therefore, the “free” dispatch service is not really “free” at all.

Councilman Pucciarelli said he received an email from a citizen asking how a decision is made regarding whether to send out a Ridgewood EMS ambulance, or an ambulance from Valley Hospital. Mr. Tancos explained that the first call would go out to the Ridgewood Office of Emergency Services for one of its ambulances. If second ambulances are needed, Ridgewood has those resources as well. If three ambulances are required, or if the second ambulance is unavailable from Ridgewood, assistance is requested through the Mutual Aid service. The first call goes to Glen Rock, and if they are not available, the next call goes to Valley Hospital.

In closing, Mr. Tancos pointed out that another advantage of being part of a facility like the NWBCD is that they have been able to accomplish approximately $950,000 worth of upgrades using State grant funding. A grant was received from the very beginning to establish the NWBCD, and over the course of time, upgrades have been done which have been funded in large part by State grants.

4. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilman Riche, seconded by Councilman Pucciarelli, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 7:47 P.M.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    _____________________________

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              Paul S. Aronsohn

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      Mayor

_________________________________

            Heather A. Mailander

                Village Clerk