Village Council Public Work Session Minutes 20140402
A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGEOF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, 2014 AT 7:30 P.M.
1. CALL TO ORDER – OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT – ROLL CALL – FLAG SALUTE – MOMENT OF SILENCE
Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 7:33 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Riche, and Walsh. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney. Councilman Pucciarelli was absent.
Mayor Aronsohn led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and asked for a moment of silence in honor of the American men and women serving in our Armed Forces, as well as those serving as first responders.
2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn welcomed the new Village Manager, Roberta Sonenfeld, and asked if anyone from the public wished to speak regarding any of the agenda items.
Anne Loving, 342 South Irving Street, also welcomed Ms. Sonenfeld as the new Village Manager. Ms. Loving stated that she was completely dismayed to learn that an anonymous person had sent an email to the employer of Village Council Candidate Michael Sedon, in what Ms. Loving characterized as a blatant attempt to derail his run for public office. She read about this in the newspaper last week. Ms. Loving commented that Mr. Sedon is an honest, dedicated Ridgewood citizen who has attended Village Council meetings, in the beginning as a reporter for the Ridgewood News, and more recently as an interested and concerned resident. His comments about topics confronting the Village have always been thoughtful, based on facts, and presented in a calm yet determined voice. Although reports were filed with the Ridgewood Police Department and the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission, it is Ms. Loving’s sincere hope that the Village Council would allocate any funds that might be required to investigate the incident to promptly uncover the identity of the email author. Ms. Loving pointed out that the Village needs to stand firm in its outrage over this attack on one of the candidates for public office in this community. She added that this has nothing to do with Mr. Sedon personally, but it has everything to do with the Village as a whole.
Mayor Aronsohn responded that Ms. Mailander, as the Acting Village Manager and Village Clerk, had looked into the matter. Ms. Mailander said she knew that Mr. Sedon had gone to officials at the County level, because that is where he was directed to go, as well as following up with the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission, as Ms. Loving indicated, which is the proper venue for that investigation.
Ms. Loving stated that she believes other things could be done to investigate and uncover the identity of the anonymous person who sent the email, and she hoped that the Councilmembers would discuss this matter and consider supplying funds, not in support of any particular candidate, but in support of honesty and transparency within the election system. Ms. Loving finds it outrageous and embarrassing that such a thing could happen in this community, although she pointed out that it may not have been sent by anyone within the community.
Jim Griffith, 159 South Irving Street, said he wanted to give the Councilmembers an update on his continuing efforts to improve the Community Center. He noted that the first question he raised was whether the first floor of Village Hall could be brought up to Code, for which he said many people chastised him. Mr. Griffith discovered that sometimes as many as 130 people use the Community Center, a lot of whom are elderly women, and they are forced to eat their lunches with their coats on because it is too chilly down there. He also learned that during the summer, the facility is used by the Department of Parks and Recreation when there is inclement weather or excessive heat, and sometimes as many as 250 children are in that area. Therefore, it would be better if the air conditioning worked more effectively. In addition, the emergency responders use that area during the Fourth of July as a triage center. Mr. Griffith asked if the Village does not have an acceptable facility, why should people be pushed to use the area. He stated that the reason for raising this issue at this time is due to the fact that it is budget time, and there will be line items included in the proposed budgets to bring the first floor of Village up to Code, including getting the heating and air conditioning fixed, and he wanted to make sure that the Councilmembers pay attention to the needs of the various people who use those rooms.
There were no other comments from the public at this time, and Mayor Aronsohn closed the time for public comment.
3. PROCLAMATION
Autism Awareness Month
Mayor Aronsohn read the following proclamation:
After the proclamation was read, Jamie England, 453 Van Buren Street, said her involvement with Autism Speaks is due to the fact that her three-year-old son, Mason, was diagnosed with autism just before he turned two. She noted that the diagnosis was devastating to her, but that Mason has made great strides since that time, and will continue to do so. However, she pointed out that one of the most important factors in his progress was that he was diagnosed early, so he could get the help he needed, including early intervention. That caused Ms. England to get involved with Autism Speaks, because she believes that raising awareness and acceptance of this disorder, as well as understanding it, is so important. In the State of New Jersey, one in 45 children is diagnosed with autism, and one in 21 boys is diagnosed with it. That is the highest rate in the United States. Therefore, Ms. England helps to raise awareness of autism, as well as helping to raise funds for essential research. The cause of autism is still unknown, although many theories exist. There is an event to be held on May 18th called “Walk Now for Autism Speaks” at MetLife Stadium. This year, $18,000 has already been raised for this cause. Ms. England invited anyone who wants to come out and walk to do so. She added that it means a lot to her and her family to live in a town that helps to raise awareness for all disabilities, and she praised the members of the Access Ridgewood Committee for their efforts, and the support shown from the Village to families of children with disabilities.
4. PRESENTATIONS
a. Conservancy for Ridgewood Public Lands – Daffodil Festival and Ribbon Cutting
Maribeth Lane, President of the Conservancy for Ridgewood Public Lands, said the group was formed approximately two years ago to enhance the parklands in the Village. She invited the Councilmembers and Village Manager, as well as the public, to the ribbon cutting on Sunday, April 27th, of the Broad Street parkland. Efforts have been underway for approximately one year, and are slated to be finished by April 26th. Ms. Lane acknowledged the many people and organizations that have helped in these efforts, including Gary’s Landscaping; Jacobson Landscaping; as well as members of the public who have donated to these endeavors. The area from the parking lot to the taxi stand looks very different from when the project began in April 2013. The ribbon cutting will be held at the train station, because it dovetails into the Daffodil Festival. Ms. Lane noted that last fall, 7,000 daffodil bulbs were planted all around the Village, but due to the severe winter weather, they have not grown as expected. It is hoped that blooms will be visible by April 27th. A family day is planned, with a plant sale of perennials and annuals; 27 artists coming to present their art; antique cars to be displayed; children’s crafts; and a “doggie daffodil parade” to wind things up. Mayor Aronsohn asked what time the events are scheduled, and Ms. Lane responded that the ribbon cutting will be held at 12:30 P.M., and the Daffodil Festival will continue until 3:00 P.M.
Councilwoman Hauck thanked Ms. Lane for all of the work undertaken by the Conservancy in planting the bulbs all around Ridgewood. She asked if everyone is supposed to wear yellow that day, and Ms. Lane responded that yellow would be fine. Councilwoman Hauck pointed out that Earth Day is the day before the festival, so the weekend will be filled with events.
5. DISCUSSION
a. Budget:
1.) Award of Contract – School Bus Transportation Services for the 2014 Summer Day Camp
Ms. Sonenfeld said three submissions were received, and the lowest bidder is recommended, which is Durham School Services. A resolution will be put on the agenda for the April 9, 2014 Public Meeting.
2.) Award of Contract – Graydon Pool Discharge Pipe to Sanitary Sewer
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this contract will authorize work to rectify the problem at Graydon Pool for which the Village was fined by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP). Twelve plan holders were eligible to bid, and 10 bids were received. The recommended bidder is John Garcia Construction Company. Councilwoman Hauck asked if these funds have been set aside in the 2013 capital budget, and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that she did not know. Councilwoman Hauck said she believes that to be true. Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, noted that the funds are budgeted in the 2014 capital budget, for which discussions have not yet begun. Mr. Rutishauser does not believe that funding will be a problem if the Councilmembers approve the expenditure, because the work will not be performed right away. The contract does have a tight time frame of 30 days so that the pipe can become operational in order to get the pool drained and rehabilitate the bottom of the pool, as is done every year. This will be put on the agenda for the April 9, 2014 Public Meeting.
3.) Authorize RFP – Structural Assessment for Horse Barn at Irene Habernickel Family Park
Ms. Sonenfeld said this proposal is for architectural and engineering services for a structural assessment for the Horse Barn at Habernickel Family Park. There were five proposals from seven plan holders. The preferred provider is Arcari and Iovino Architects, but Ms. Sonenfeld believes Mr. Rutishauser recommended that it might be helpful if representatives from Arcari and Iovino Architects, as well as representatives from T. M. Rybak and Associates, appear before the Councilmembers to present their visions for the Horse Barn. Mr. Rutishauser agreed with Ms. Sonenfeld’s statement. He pointed out that the five bids received ranged from $4,200-$34,500 in response to the RFP. The second-lowest bidder, Arcari and Iovino Architects, presented a quote of $9,750 in an attractive proposal. The third-lowest bidder, T. M. Rybak and Associates, also had a very nice proposal. The lowest bidder, Element Architectural Group, had an attractive price, but their proposal seemed very “canned,” and did not seem to be what is sought for the Horse Barn. The Village can make the award as it sees fit under several different methodologies. Mr. Rutishauser recommended that if the Councilmembers wish to move forward with this project, the firms whose proposals are of interest can be invited to a future Village Council meeting to explain their proposals in more depth. Mr. Rutishauser said he has copies of all of the proposals, if the Councilmembers wish to take a look at them.
Councilman Riche said he would like to see the proposals, and he assumed that each respondent referenced other projects that they have done. Councilman Riche wondered if any of the respondents had worked on any municipal projects in the past. Mr. Rutishauser said that all five of them had done municipal work, and some had done a lot more municipal work than others. The second-lowest and third-lowest bidders each had done quite a bit of municipal work, which is one reason why Mr. Rutishauser and Mr. Cronin preferred them over the lowest bidder. Mr. Rutishauser asked Councilman Riche if he wanted to see all five of the proposals, and Councilman Riche answered that he would like to see the proposals from T.M. Rybak and Associates; Arcari and Iovino Architects; and Element Construction Group. The Councilmembers agreed with Mr. Rutishauser’s suggestion to invite representatives from some of the firms to a future Village Council meeting. Mr. Rutishauser pointed out that although he and Mr. Cronin reviewed all of the bids, a final recommendation was not made, because they thought it would be better to have input from the Councilmembers on the bids received before a final recommendation is made.
Mayor Aronsohn noted that the possibility of doing something similar at the Schedler property has been discussed, so the current project would be a very important one in correlation to the possibility of a future project on the Schedler property. Mr. Rutishauser agreed, saying that if the Village is comfortable with the team of professionals who produce the vision sought by the Village, there would be no reason to discontinue using their services. Councilman Riche also requested a copy of the RFP to which the firms responded. In response to a question from Councilwoman Walsh, Mr. Rutishauser answered that the RFP was for rehabilitating the existing structure, as well as for the firm to assess the structure to see if it is viable for rehabilitation. There was no choice offered between rehabilitation or rebuilding. Mr. Rutishauser said it was his understanding that the Councilmembers wanted to find out whether the existing barn is viable, and if any work could move forward on the existing structure. Councilman Walsh said the reason she asked the question is due to the fact that most equestrian facilities now use a pole barn due to cost considerations, which can be installed in approximately one week. Mr. Rutishauser agreed that they are cost effective and provide open expanses from which recreational programs could benefit.
4.) Accept Bid on Lease for 1057 Hillcrest Road
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is for two resolutions to approve the lease on the property, which is a one-year lease with an option to renew for one year. The rent is approximately $48,000 annually. One bid was received, and it is from the current tenant, who has been there for many years. Councilman Riche asked how the bid compares to what is being paid at this time, and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that it is equal to the current payment. This resolution will be put on the April 9, 2014 Public Meeting agenda.
5.) Award Change Order – Graydon Pool Sloped Entry
Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that unfortunately, some vandalism had occurred on the sloped entry to the pool, and it is recommended that the same contractor who constructed the entry should be allowed to fix it. The cost is approximately $1,957 due to the expense involved with matching the color of the repair to the current sloped entry. The recommendation is to award the bid to C and C Masonry. This will be put on the agenda for the April 9, 2014 Public Meeting.
6.) Extraordinary Unspecifiable Services – Foley, Inc. – Water Pollution Control Facility
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that, as has been previously discussed, there was a power outage in December 2013. This resolution is to pay Foley, Inc. for the work performed on the repairs. Mr. Rutishauser pointed out that the current resolution has been revised from the one presented to the Councilmembers at the previous Village Council meeting, based on a request from Councilman Riche to delete the amount for the preventive maintenance service. Mr. Rutishauser also explained that the charge that was deleted was not for a preventive maintenance service contract, but for work that was performed. Quotes will be sought for the service contract, because as noted by Mr. Rutishauser, the amount is under the bid threshold. The amount remaining to be paid under this resolution is for work that was done to correct the problem that occurred. Councilman Riche asked if, when the quotes are requested for the service contract, hourly labor costs and travel costs could also be requested at that time. Mr. Rutishauser said the request could be amended to include those charges. Councilman Riche said he was concerned because the hourly rates charged on the invoice seemed excessive. Mr. Rutishauser said he would ask if those rates could be provided, or if the quote for the service contract includes such rates.
b. Policy:
1.) Draft Ordinance for Abandoned Structures
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that the purpose of this ordinance is to notify property owners, lienholders, and other interested parties of properties within the Village of the intent to adopt the Abandoned Property and Rehabilitation Act. She explained that use of the Act is meant to provide another tool for the Village to remedy very troubled properties by being able to apply more pressure on the owner of the property. The Act itself, which is a State Statute, covers criteria for declaring a property abandoned or as a nuisance property; listing the property; publication of the property; notifications to owner(s); and challenges by the owner(s). At its most severe, where remediation is not done, the Village can take over the property. Technically, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the Village could always implement the Act. The point of putting it into an ordinance is to communicate the Act to property owners and other interested parties in Ridgewood.
Mr. Rogers agreed with the comments made by Ms. Sonenfeld, and pointed out that the Act has been in place for a number of years in New Jersey. By adopting this Act, which several other municipalities are also doing, Mr. Rogers said it gives the Village another tool to deal with properties that fall into disrepair and are not kept up; that are abandoned or vacant; or for which taxes are not paid. The Act seeks a level of communication between the Village and property owner, lienholders, or other interested party to try to remediate or correct the problem. Over the past several years, Mr. Rogers noted that there have been several occasions in which the Village used the Property Maintenance Code to deal with some of these properties, and this Act provides another avenue to deal with properties of concern that meet certain criteria. The criteria is designed by the State and prescribed by the statute, and the method and process defined in the statute help to develop a level of communication that is meant to remediate the property. With this tool, and by putting Village property owners and lienholders on notice that this tool can be used, a line of communication can be opened with the property owner or lienholder so that remediation can begin. There are prescribed criteria that must be met, and it will be a work in progress due to the fact that there are several policy issues that must be discussed among the Councilmembers. It will help to ensure that properties are taken care of and taxes are paid. There are many steps in the process, giving many opportunities to have the property remediated along the way, and for that reason, Mr. Rogers believes it is something that the Village must consider, because it can be a useful tool.
Councilwoman Hauck noted that there are some situations in which egregious violators are not responding to the various finds that are levied, and those processes often go on for years with no resolution. Although this law has been in place at the State level for quite a few years, the Councilmembers were not aware of it until recently. Having it codified as a local ordinance will give local officials tools to deal with egregious situations, and enable the Village to push property owners and lienholders into doing what they should have done in the first place.
Mr. Rogers added that the law allows a municipality to investigate a particular site or property that might be of concern to determine whether it meets the criteria outlined in the ordinance. If it meets the criteria, the property owner or lienholder can be contacted and notified of the law, and given time to take appropriate action. If no action is taken within the prescribed time period, the law allows the Village to add the property to an abandoned property list. Once the property is added to that list, notice must be provided to the newspapers and the property owner or lienholder to notify them, as well as the public, that the property meets the criteria to be included on such a list. At that point, the property owner or lienholder can challenge that decision within 30 days. The challenge stays within the Village, instead of going to State court. After a hearing has been held and the determination has been made that the property should be on the list, if it does not meet the criteria, or facts are presented to warrant it, the property can be removed from the list. On the other hand, if it is determined that it should still be on the list, the property owner or lienholder could appeal that determination to the State Superior Court. The intent remains the same, which is to open a line of communication and get some remediation for the property. Mr. Rogers noted that there are very few properties in the Village that seem to meet the criteria, and only three or four have been identified so far.
Councilman Riche noted that it seems that the jurisdiction initially stays with the local officials. After a determination is made, unless extenuating circumstances are found, the property owner or lienholder is likely to lose any appeal at the local level. At that point, jurisdiction is lost to the Superior Court. Mr. Rogers confirmed this, adding that the law provides that the burden remains with the property owner or lienholder to prove that the property does not belong on the list; the Village does not have any burden to prove that it does. Councilman Riche pointed out that there must be some costs associated with those actions, such as who owns the property; if it is in foreclosure; and if the title has transferred to the bank or lender. All of that research will cost the Village money, and Councilman Riche wondered how those costs could be attached to the property owner or lienholder. Mr. Rogers responded that, as previously noted, there are only a few properties in the Village that meet the criteria, and investigations will be necessary in order to determine whether they meet the criteria. The law allows involvement of the property owner, as well as any lienholder and other financially interested parties, so if the property is in foreclosure, action can be taken. It has happened in the past that the Village has tried to get some property maintenance done to remediate a property that was in violation of the Village’s property maintenance ordinance and the properties in question were owned by the banks. In such cases, the banks are hoping to either sell the properties or let them go. It is hoped that if the taxes are not being paid on such properties, the banks will react to that situation. There is always a record of ownership that can be found. Some of the information on the properties will be readily available, although there will be expenses involved in such investigations. Mr. Rogers said that the expenses involved have to be weighed against the necessity of the process, and each property should be approached individually before those decisions are made. Councilman Riche asked if those resources are available internally, or if the Village must go to outside sources for that information. He noted that there were firms that would pay delinquent property taxes, becoming in effect the lienholder on the property, and he asked what kind of rights, if any, the lienholders would have in that situation. Mr. Rogers explained that the way the law works, those lienholders are subservient to the abandonment action, and it is hoped that the Village could take action before any tax sales take place. For example, the criteria in the current law is that the property must be at least six months in arrears on back taxes, which would not make the property eligible for a tax sale. Ms. Sonenfeld commented that none of the properties that have been seen so far have been owned by the banks, and in any case, Mike Barker, Tax Assessor, has that information readily available.
Councilwoman Walsh pointed out that there are properties in the Village that are up-to-date on their mortgage payments, but are not being maintained, and she wondered how such properties would be addressed. Mr. Rogers responded that if the taxes are being paid on the property, it would not fit the criteria for abandonment. Councilwoman Walsh noted that such a property does fit many of the definitions given in the law. Mr. Rogers answered that he was not suggesting that the law would have to be applied in that instance, but even if the property does fit the criteria, it would be a discretionary decision as to how the property owner would be contacted; who would be contacted; and what could be said in that initial contact. The law is designed to bring in the property owner or lienholder at several steps along the way to have those discussions, which is why Mr. Rogers believes it can be a very useful tool. However, he cautioned that there is no “fail-safe” remedy for some of the problems experienced in any municipality with regard to properties requiring remediation, or any other such action. This is simply another tool that can be used by the municipality to try to effect that remediation.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked Councilwoman Hauck and Mr. Rogers for bringing this issue to the forefront, and he pointed out that while only two or three houses may be affected by this law, it is an important issue for the people who live in those neighborhoods. Councilwoman Hauck noted that the few properties that are being discussed are in such bad condition that the neighbors have become very concerned. The houses have been in a dilapidated condition for more than 10 years.
Ms. Sonenfeld asked what step the Councilmembers would like to take next. Mayor Aronsohn suggested that the Councilmembers could spend some more time reading the ordinance, and it could be put on the agenda for the April 23, 2014, Work Session meeting to answer any questions they may have.
2.) Draft Ordinance for Sustainable Jersey – Green Team
Ms. Sonenfeld said the discussion seems to be whether the Village should pursue and adopt an ordinance to create a “Green Team” under the Sustainable New Jersey certification program. The “Green Team” can be a stand-alone committee, or it could work under the auspices of the Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee (REAC). In either case, it must be established by ordinance, and it must include resident volunteers, as well as appropriate Village staff. One of the additional benefits to the Village is that it will allow the Village to begin competing for a wide variety of project grants. There are now 406 towns in New Jersey that have registered, with 139 towns now certified. In order to be certified, the municipality must take a certain number of actions. In 2009, the Village submitted a resolution to Sustainable New Jersey, but no further action has been taken since that time, including establishing a “Green Team”.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked Janet Fricke, Assistant to the Village Manager, for bringing this to the attention of the Village Council. He asked Ms. Sonenfeld if she had any recommendation to make, and Ms. Sonenfeld responded that she and Ms. Fricke have discussed this, but have not yet come up with a recommendation.
Councilwoman Walsh said that a “Green Team” was established a few years ago, but it never went anywhere or took any action. Some of the grants for which REAC has applied require an active “Green Team,” so a separate team would be necessary for such grants. There can be members of the “Green Team” who are also members of REAC, but Councilman Walsh believes it would make sense to have the “Green Team” members involved specifically with those initiatives. Ms. Sonenfeld said that would make the “Green Team” a stand-alone committee, rather than a subcommittee of REAC, and Councilwoman Walsh agreed, although she said they could hold joint meetings with REAC, the Shade Tree Commission, as well as the Department of Parks and Recreation. Ms. Sonenfeld said the question for the Councilmembers is whether they want to pursue establishing a “Green Team”. Mayor Aronsohn responded that because grant money is attached to it, the answer must be “yes”. He also asked Ms. Sonenfeld if she and Ms. Fricke could discuss this further and make a recommendation to the Councilmembers so they can move forward.
3.) Draft Ordinance for Redevelopment Zone
Ms. Sonenfeld explained that the Village Council, by resolution, had directed the Planning Board to review and make recommendations concerning the existing North Walnut Street Redevelopment Plan. Blais Brancheau, Village Planner, said the Planning Board discussed the proposed plans at their February and March meetings, and Mr. Brancheau submitted a memorandum summarizing the Planning Board’s recommendations for the amendment of the Redevelopment Plan. A Redevelopment Plan was adopted in 2007 for the North Walnut Street Redevelopment Area. Although some proposals were submitted, none were accepted, and the plan has been in limbo ever since. The Planning Board has asked the Councilmembers on at least one occasion if any action had been taken with regard to the Redevelopment Plan, and the response was a resolution containing recommendations made by the Planning Board, which are outlined in Mr. Brancheau’s memorandum. If the Councilmembers agree with those recommendations, the next step is for Mr. Brancheau to prepare an amended Redevelopment Plan to incorporate the recommendations into an ordinance. The ordinance would be introduced, a Public Hearing must be held, and then it would be considered for adoption by the Village Council.
Mayor Aronsohn asked Mr. Brancheau to put the recommendations in ordinance form so it can be introduced at the April 9, 2014 Public Meeting. Mr. Brancheau said he believes he could have it ready by next week. He has already started working on it, but there is still some work to be done. Mayor Aronsohn said it is his understanding that the ordinance can be introduced next week, with the Public Hearing to be held in May, and in the meantime it will be reviewed again by the Planning Board for their comments, just as with any other zoning ordinance.
Councilman Riche said it would be helpful if he could see some bullet points showing the pros and cons of redevelopment zones in general, as well as pros and cons that are more specific to this particular redevelopment zone. Mr. Brancheau said he would get that information to the Councilmembers.
Councilwoman Walsh asked about item 10, which provides that the affordable housing requirements within the parking deck should be amended, and that the primary goal for the Redevelopment Plan is for construction of a parking deck and ground-floor commercial use. She wanted to know what would happen if the parking deck did not come to fruition, and how it would affect this zone. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that the plan was created specifically to create parking, and Councilwoman Walsh noted that the parking deck is part of additional development, and she is concerned that this particular element may end up being excluded from the final plan. Mayor Aronsohn responded that it would not be accepted, and that once the ordinance is adopted to amend the redevelopment zone, an RFP would be prepared, and Mr. Brancheau agreed. The primary purpose of the redevelopment zone is for parking. Mr. Brancheau added that the ordinance establishes what would be allowed, but since the Village controls the property where the deck would be built, the Village has the final say as to whether to accept the proposal. It becomes a kind of partnership with the selected developer whereby a contractual agreement establishes rights and responsibilities of both parties. However, as Mr. Brancheau noted, the current plan is vague as to any affordable housing to be included, and housing is not a required component of the Redevelopment Plan. It is possible that the final plan could contain only commercial properties with a parking garage, or something else entirely. This is why the recommendation is being made to make that change. Mr. Brancheau added that ultimately, unlike a regular zoning ordinance where the developer comes before the Councilmembers to notify them of his compliance and requesting approval of his plan, this situation is different because the Village has ultimate control. Therefore, even if the developer is in compliance, the plan does not have to be accepted because the Village is the owner of the property. The RFP should include information to the effect that there is a Redevelopment Plan, and setting forth the limits of that plan, as well as the fact that any proposal should provide a specified amount of public parking, as well as any other provisions that the Councilmembers wished to include. The current plan does not provide a specific number of public parking spaces, but that is something that the Councilmembers will have to negotiate depending upon the different proposals received, which will undoubtedly contain a variety of layouts, as well as providing different numbers of parking spaces. Mr. Brancheau pointed out that building a public parking garage is the primary goal of the plan, although the exact number of parking spaces to be included is not, and Mr. Brancheau does not think a specific number can be specified. The last time this was attempted, Mr. Brancheau said five proposals were submitted, and none of them were accepted.
Councilwoman Walsh asked how this amendment would apply to the other property included in the redevelopment zone, which is not owned by the Village. Mr. Brancheau answered that there are some properties for which property rights were proposed to be acquired for construction of a parking garage, as well as other properties for which property rights were not proposed to be acquired, but are within the redevelopment area, particularly on Oak Street. That acquisition would move forward once a developer is selected. Mr. Brancheau added that the properties would either have to be acquired outright through the market, or via eminent domain. It would also be possible to negotiate easements and other rights to those properties. There is some shared parking on those properties, as well as private parking rights and other rights that would have to be negotiated. This ordinance amendment will be put on the agenda for the April 9, 2014 Public Meeting.
4.) Resolution for Gift Contributions
Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the resolution for gift contributions is a work in progress. In 2010, the Village Council adopted an ordinance dealing with contributions, gifts, and other donations. That ordinance asked the Village Manager to establish rules and requirements to be adopted by resolution of the Village Council. Information was provided to the Councilmembers regarding rules and regulations affecting dollar amounts, and asking for the Councilmembers’ approval or advice. After reviewing the information contained in the packet, Ms. Sonenfeld suggested that the information in the packet be amended to include a requirement related to whether a donor has business with the Village. Therefore, in all cases in which a gift or contribution is received by Village personnel from someone having business with the Village, acceptance of that gift or contribution would come before the Councilmembers for prior approval, regardless of the size of the gift or contribution.
Mayor Aronsohn clarified that what is being discussed is combining two policies into one. The policy established in 2010 creates different categories of contributions, gifts, and other donations: those that are under $500 in value; and those ranging in value from $500-$5,000. At a certain threshold, acceptance of the contribution or gift would have to be approved by the Councilmembers. Ms. Sonenfeld is proposing to add to that with a provision that any party with business before the Village, or who will have business before the Village within 90 days, and who makes a contribution to the Village, must get that contribution approved by the Village Council, regardless of the value of the contribution. Ms. Sonenfeld agreed with that clarification. Mayor Aronsohn thought it was a great idea, and said it would enhance the transparency in government.
Councilwoman Hauck said she does not see the need for such a resolution. She did some research from the other, larger municipalities around Ridgewood, and found that donations are made to municipal entities without any restrictions like this. In fact, none of the municipalities have any such provisions in their Codes. Councilwoman Hauck said the only information she could find that came close to this was contribution disclosure laws, which have to do with political campaign contributions, and provided that if a candidate accepted a contribution from a developer or corporation, it had to be disclosed in the interest of transparency. However, it did not affect whether a contributor was allowed to give such a gift. Councilwoman Hauck is concerned that this type of resolution or ordinance would discourage philanthropic contributions. She believes that there is already a very high level of distrust in Ridgewood, and she does not want it to appear as though the Village Council is overly scrutinizing people and exposing them to public discussion unnecessarily. It is her understanding that if an entity has an application before the Planning or Zoning Board, any recent contributions must be disclosed. Mr. Rogers said there is no municipal land-use law requirement of that type. Councilwoman Hauck continued by saying that other towns have such contribution disclosure forms for entities that submit applications before their Planning or Zoning Boards. The municipality must acknowledge that contribution when any appearances are made before the Planning or Zoning Boards, to make it clear to everyone of the situation that exists. Councilwoman Hauck believes that if the Councilmembers must deliberate every time a $500 gift is made, it would reduce the flow of contributions.
Mayor Aronsohn responded that enhancing transparency is wonderful, and he is not sure if such transparency exists in the Planning Board, but he believes that more transparency is better. It serves the Village’s purposes, as well as serving the public’s purposes. He also corrected Councilwoman Hauck’s assertion that this would affect every $500 contribution, pointing out that it would only affect contributions made by persons or entities with applications currently before a Village Board, or within 90 days of the contribution. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that such situations do not occur very often. He noted that this does not preclude anyone from contributing, but the public has a right to know about such situations. In fact, Mayor Aronsohn feels that this proposal strikes a balance between the old ordinance and the current ordinance.
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that the 2008 ordinance precluded contributions by people or entities with applications before the Village, and the 2010 ordinance was silent on the issue. In the 2010 ordinance, the Village Manager was asked to suggest procedures to be followed in such situations. Ms. Sonenfeld said she would like to review and amend the proposed ordinance and present it to the Councilmembers for further discussion before it is adopted. This will be put on the agenda for further discussion at the April 23, 2014 Work Session Meeting.
6. REVIEW OF APRIL 9, 2014 AGENDA
Ms. Mailander announced that the Public Meeting would include the following Proclamations: Declare the month of April as “Tree Planting Month;” Declare April 25, 2014, as Arbor Day; and Declare April 26, 2014, LAX Day in Ridgewood.
One new Police Officer will be sworn in. There will also be a presentation by Cub Scout Pack 44 for an Oil Memorial Sculpture.
Ordinances to be introduced are the Shade Tree Ordinance, and an ordinance to amend the Redevelopment Zone.
The Public Hearings on ordinances include: Amend Chapter 145 – Fees – Establish Fees for Use of Mobile Concession Stand; Amend Chapter 145 – Fees – Graydon Pool – Establish Membership Fee for a Resident Patron with a Permanent Disability.
Resolutions include: Establish Ridgewood Arts Council; Approve Girl Scout Silver Award Project – Par Course Improvements; Award Contract – 2014 Graydon Pool Concession Services; Title 59 Approval – Coach Bus Transportation Services – HILT Trips; Award Contract – Coach Bus Transportation Services – HILT Trips; Title 59 Approval – School Bus Transportation – Summer Camp; Award Contract – School Bus Transportation – Summer Camp; Title 59 Approval – Graydon Pool Discharge Pipe into Sanitary Sewer; Award Contract – Graydon Pool Discharge Pipe into Sanitary Sewer; Award EUS Contract – Emergency Generator Repair – Water Pollution Control Facility; Authorize Change Order – Graydon Pool Sloped Entry; Accept Payment from Ridgewood Water – Operating Administrative Maintenance Fees; Authorize Tax Mailing Fees; Accept Bid on Lease of 1057 Hillcrest Road; Certify Submission of Recycling Tax Payment; Declare Property Surplus – 1997 Chevrolet Pickup Truck; Authorize Execution of NJPDES Permit for Water Pollution Control Facility; Approved Shared Services Agreement – Bergen County Police Chiefs Association Mutual Aid Plan and Rapid Deployment Force; Appoint Joint Insurance Fund Commissioner; Appoint Public Agency Compliance Officer (PACO).
7. MANAGER’S REPORT
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that she thought it was important to discuss the situation regarding the theft of the quarters. Thomas Rica was arrested in January 2013, after being caught leaving the premises with stolen quarters. The quarters had been housed in the parking meter collection room on the first floor of Village Hall, to which Mr. Rica had access. A staff member noticed that one of the coin containers seemed to be much lighter, and alerted his supervisor, as well as law enforcement. At that time, the size of the theft and the time period during which the thefts occurred was not yet known. The Bergen County Prosecutor in its subsequent investigation of the case determined that Mr. Rica had stolen approximately $460,000 in quarters, with most of the activity occurring during a 25-month time period from approximately 2011-2012. Ms. Sonenfeld said she learned about this situation the night she was appointed as Village Manager, or around that time. Her initial reaction, like that of so many others, was disbelief. It seemed inexplicable to her at that time, especially after figuring out that it equated to approximately 1.8 million quarters, weighing approximately 11 tons. Obviously, there were some issues in the Village with controls, as well as with financial reporting. However, Ms. Sonenfeld said her initial thought was that Mr. Rica did not act on his own. She did not think it was possible that one person could carry out so many quarters. After speaking with Mayor Aronsohn and Mr. Rogers, it was determined that it might be a good idea to have another conversation with the Bergen County Prosecutor. Mr. Rogers had met with the Prosecutor previously, and Ms. Sonenfeld called him again. The Prosecutor affirmed that the County felt strongly that Mr. Rica acted on his own, with the caveat that the Prosecutor could not say that more coins had not been stolen, due to the lack of controls in the coin room. At that time, the Prosecutor also voluntarily spoke to Ms. Sonenfeld about the reason for the plea deal, and emphasized that the County took the view that it was more important to get the money back to Ridgewood, which was the reason for the lack of jail time. Approximately 3 weeks ago, Ms. Sonenfeld again spoke with Mayor Aronsohn and Mr. Rogers, and suggested that an independent forensic review be conducted of the books and records, as well as the process of collecting the coins. There was then, and there is now, strong support for taking that action. Village management has already enhanced the controls in the process mainly by tightening physical access and surveillance.
Ms. Sonenfeld said she is aware that many people are concerned that the financial records apparently did not offer any clues earlier than January 2013. Mayor Aronsohn requested an analysis of revenues dating back to 1999, which has been completed. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out the parking revenues are not limited to quarters, but include other things, such as Air Brook and Short Line monthly rentals on Route 17; UP3 permits; bagged meter fees; and valet parking. Mr. Rica was hired in 2003. From 2003-2008, overall gross revenues, which cover everything, went up and down, but there was no trend that would indicate any significant issue. However, from 2009-2012, overall gross revenues decreased by $45,000. That does not equal $460,000, but Ms. Sonenfeld noted that when the source of the revenue was investigated, the coin revenue had decreased significantly. During that time period, the decrease totaled $188,000. Gross revenues in 2013 increased by $366,000 over 2012 and 2012 was apparently when Mr. Rica was at the height of his thievery. It creates a very strong question in Ms. Sonenfeld’s mind as to how this disparity in revenue could have been overlooked. She believes the main causes to be the bifurcation of responsibilities, leaving essentially no one in charge at the management level for oversight of the Parking Utility. Ms. Sonenfeld suggested that putting someone in charge of the Parking Utility going forward will address this lack of oversight.
Going forward, Ms. Sonenfeld said that four tasks will be undertaken: an independent forensic review of the financial records of the Village, leading to appropriate action being taken; an independent review of the process itself, which has already been improved from a physical security surveillance standpoint; establishing clear accountability over the Parking Utility, with one person being responsible for the Utility from end to end, and until someone else can be found to do that job, that person will be Ms. Sonenfeld; and a review of each area in the Village where cash and/or checks are collected.
Mayor Aronsohn thanked Ms. Sonenfeld for her research and for taking so much time to investigate the situation, as well as for the time that she will be taking in the future regarding the situation. He pointed out that parking rates have changed in the Village, which also affected revenue, and this will become apparent once a forensic review is performed.
Changing the subject, Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that the new Coffee Concession at the train station will open on Friday, April 4th.
On Sunday, May 6th, from 9:00 A.M.-3:00 P.M., the Bergen County Utilities Authority will be collecting hazardous waste at Bergen Community College on Paramus Road.
Finally, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that she had been officially “on the job” for three days, and she is very excited to work with the Village staff. She intends to meet with every staff member, which she has already started to do. In addition, she and Mayor Aronsohn had an opportunity to meet with Kathleen Donovan, Bergen County Executive, and Ed Trawinski, Bergen County Administrator, regarding the parking situation in Ridgewood, as well as the opportunity to start collaborating with the County and other municipalities. Mayor Aronsohn agreed that it was a very good meeting, at which they discussed the work that Ridgewood already does with the County, as well as an extensive discussion about parking. Ms. Donovan and Mr. Trawinski visited the Hudson Street lot to see where the proposed parking garage is to be built with the Bergen County Improvement Authority, and they were very enthusiastic.
8. COUNCIL REPORTS
Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee (REAC) – Councilwoman Walsh reminded everyone that Earth Day is April 26, 2014, to be followed on April 27, 2014, by the Daffodil Festival. One of the things that REAC likes to have at the Earth Day festivities is a display of different cars that are energy efficient. Last year, three cars were on display, and it is hoped that at least that many will be displayed this year. Councilwoman Walsh provided information to the other Councilmembers from an organization that installs charging stations for electric cars. She noted that statistics indicate that many more people are moving toward using energy efficient vehicles, and the possibility of having a charging station in Ridgewood would have some positive effects. One of them is that it would be listed on a network available to drivers of electric cars so they could use the charging station if necessary, which would necessitate parking their cars for four hours in Ridgewood while they shop in the CBD, or possibly have a meal at one of the local restaurants while the cars are charging. There is also a fee for using the charging station, which would go to Ridgewood. Councilwoman Walsh said she would find out if the representative from the company is available to come to a future Village Council meeting, perhaps on April 23rd, to make a presentation to the Councilmembers. She added that this is not the only company that does this, but it would be an introduction to the possibility of having such facilities in Ridgewood.
Bergen County League of Municipalities – Councilwoman Walsh said that the Bergen County League of Municipalities will be meeting next week, and she invited Ms. Sonenfeld to attend the meeting. The Bergen County Sheriff will be at the meeting, as well as representatives from the American Red Cross, to talk about emergency preparedness.
Planning Board – Mayor Aronsohn said the Planning Board met the past two nights. Monday night, the meeting was all about Valley Hospital. Last night, the Planning Board discussed the multi-unit family housing. The expectation is that the Planning Board will be finished with Valley Hospital by the summer.
Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that April 26th, in addition to being Earth Day, is also LAX Day, as well as the day of the parade for the Ridgewood Baseball/Softball Association. On April 27th, the Interfaith Holocaust Service will be held at Temple Israel.
9. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
Mayor Aronsohn stated they would again have comments from the public and asked anyone wishing to address the Village Council to come forward.
George Wardly, 229 West Glen Avenue, said he appeared before the Village Council approximately one year ago regarding the runoff and curb problem on West Glen Avenue, which has been needing remediation for approximately 6-8 years. Mr. Wardly believes that funds were approved for the project, along with those in some other areas of Ridgewood that needed similar treatment to their curbs. Mr. Wardly thought the work was supposed to have been done last year, and his street was scheduled to be done in November. However, due to inclement weather, the project was delayed, and Mr. Wardly was told that it would be done in the spring. Now Mr. Wardly said he has been told that it will not be done because the money was diverted to other more recent projects. Mr. Wardly feels that, due to the length of time during which these problems have existed, it would be fairer from his perspective if the work was done this year, according to the initial plan. Ms. Sonenfeld said she would investigate the situation with Mr. Rutishauser’s help and get back to Mr. Wardly, because she is not aware of it.
Anne Loving, 342 South Irving Street, agreed with Mayor Aronson regarding his comments about the gift ordinance. Over the last few years, there have been many discussions about the appearance of impropriety on various issues, and Ms. Loving agrees that, even if it seems to be micromanaging, the ordinance should be tightened as suggested by the Village Manager.
Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, said he has been a regular attendee at Village Council meetings for more than a decade. However, it was not until this evening that he heard such an open and honest comment about troubles with a particular issue. He thanked Ms. Sonenfeld for being so direct and open with the public in explaining what she has discovered with respect to the coin theft. Mr. Loving urged Ms. Sonenfeld to continue sharing that type of information with the public, because it is helpful to know the real truth behind what goes on, as opposed to hearing nothing or just a sentence or two.
Next, Mr. Loving asked for clarification regarding the issue of abandoned structures. He wondered if that applies to structures only, or if it would also apply to properties on which there are no structures. Mr. Rogers responded that such properties were discussed, but it only applies to properties with structures or other improvements, not vacant lots. Mr. Loving also said he heard the word “homes” mentioned, but nothing was said about commercial properties. Mr. Rogers answered that the law applies to both commercial properties and homes, and combinations of such properties.
Mr. Loving then asked a question about the change order for the sloped entry ramp at Graydon Pool, saying that he understood it was a small amount of money (less than $2,000), but the type of vandalism involved was not explained. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that a concrete backgammon table was tossed into the pool, which hit the entry and chipped the stairs. A police report was filed on the incident. Mr. Loving asked if the perpetrator was apprehended, and Ms. Sonenfeld said that s/he was not. Mr. Loving recalled that there are surveillance cameras at Graydon Pool, and asked if they were on at that time, and if they recorded anything. Ms. Sonenfeld indicated that she did not know, but she would find out. Mr. Loving stated that he has seen surveillance cameras near the main office and the lifeguard stand, and if there is no camera in the area where the vandalism occurred, he suggested that one might be installed there. He added that it would also be nice if the perpetrator could be forced to reimburse the Village for the cost of the repair.
Christina Krauss, 488 Overbrook Road, welcomed Ms. Sonenfeld as the Village Manager. She then asked about the potholes on Van Dien Avenue, because she was under the assumption that at one point in time several months ago, all of Van Dien Avenue was to be repaired. However, she has subsequently heard from other conversations that it would only pertain to South Van Dien Avenue, and Ms. Krauss wanted to know if that was true, and if there was any plan to remediate the other portion of Van Dien Avenue. Mayor Aronsohn said it is his understanding that the grant money received from the New Jersey Department of Transportation was to be used for South Van Dien Avenue, and no grant money was approved for North Van Dien Avenue. Ms. Krauss asked if applications were submitted for two separate grants, which Ms. Mailander confirmed. Ms. Krauss then asked if award of the grants was based on the state of disrepair, or some other criteria. Ms. Mailander responded that it was her understanding that it was simply a funding issue, and that the Village resubmitted an application for North Van Dien Avenue, but no response has been received yet. The Councilmembers could approve those funds in the capital budget and pay for it, or they could wait to see if the grant is approved, and the work would be done in a subsequent year. Ms. Krauss asked what the time frame for the South Van Dien Avenue repair is, but it is not known at this time. Ms. Mailander said she assumes it will be done sometime this spring because grant money has been received for it. Ms. Krauss asked if the road will be completely taken apart and resurfaced, or if the potholes will simply be filled, and if it includes curbing. The answer to that question is also unknown. Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that there is also a larger issue involving the paving list that is created every year. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the capital budget has not yet been discussed, which will be done next week, and all of the paving will be considered at that time.
Next, Ms. Krauss asked what the residents along North Van Dien Avenue can do to make repair of that section a priority. She added that the street is a terrible hazard, and the potholes are everywhere, so they are unavoidable unless one travels into the lanes of oncoming traffic. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the fact that Ms. Krauss has brought this to the attention of the Councilmembers means that they will take it into consideration and get back to her with a response.
Ms. Krauss pointed out that her driveway is on Van Dien Avenue, although her home fronts on Overbrook Road. She stated that there is a particularly large pothole at the end of her driveway, and the Streets Department dumps gravel and macadam in it regularly, but within a week, it is filled with water again. Another part of the problem is that the workers do not get rid of the old gravel and macadam that has been scattered when the potholes are created, but they simply put more gravel and macadam on top of it, and it is now all over Ms. Krauss’s driveway, and in her plants and grass. There are hundreds of pounds of it which she and her husband must remove, and it cannot be included with yard waste. Ms. Sonenfeld said they would also take a look at that problem at the same time.
Regarding the property abandonment issue, Ms. Krauss asked if it is something that can be applied retroactively to a property. She noted that her daughter, who is now in seventh grade, spent a lot of time speaking about and writing to Frank Moritz, Director of Operations at Ridgewood Water, as well as taking photographs of a particular property that is adjacent to one of the local elementary schools. Nothing has been done about this property, although summonses were issued to the homeowners, who do not seem to care. Garbage is left outside on the property, and Ms. Krauss said she has seen vermin on the property. It is located on the corner of Pleasant Avenue and East Ridgewood Avenue, adjacent to the Somerville Elementary School parking lot. The owners do not shovel their snow in the winter, and Ms. Krauss has spoken to two different principals over the years about the property. The homeowners have a residence in another state, and do not seem to care about this property, although they let other people stay in the house. The property is in a constant state of disrepair, and is an eyesore. Mr. Rogers said the law cannot be applied retroactively, because the property can only be judged on its present condition. However, some of the other issues raised by Ms. Krauss fall under the Village’s Property Maintenance Code, as well as the Health Department, and action could possibly be taken under those auspices.
There were no other comments from the public at this time, and Mayor Aronsohn closed the time for public comments.
10. RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION
The following resolution, numbered 14-82, to go into Closed Session, was read in full by the Village Clerk, as follows:
11. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilman Riche, seconded by Councilwoman Hauck, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the meeting was adjourned at 9:07 P.M.
_____________________________
Paul S. Aronsohn
Mayor
_________________________________
Heather A. Mailander
Village Clerk
- Hits: 2342