Village Council Special Public Meeting Minutes 2010528
A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2014, AT 7:30 P.M
1. CALL TO ORDER – OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT – ROLL CALL
Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Riche, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.
2. 2014 BUDGET HEARING
a. Presentation of 2014 Budget
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this is the third time the budget is being presented. The in-depth presentations were presented twice before, so this evening the budget will be summarized.
The operating and capital budgets were done together. The operating budget is $46.2 million, and a $2.8 million requested capital budget. The budget reflects a 0% tax increase. It was submitted to the State of New Jersey, and it has been approved by the State for adoption. The overall approach was to maximize the anticipated revenue, and the 2013 actual expenditures were used as a guide for the 2014 expenses. There are also some modest investments in capital.
Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that, as with most municipalities, the budget for public safety comprises approximately 41% of the budget. Working with the members of the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC), a different approach was taken by including in the costs of the Departments the amounts paid for pensions, benefits, and FICA. This is an effort to show the real costs of running each Department. Key considerations were: employee health insurance, which rose 11.8%, or $624,000; debt service, which increased by $956,000; public safety salary increases, which represent more than half of the total salary increases of more than $900,000; substantially higher costs for snow removal in 2014 of $571,000; terminal leave payments for 11 known employees of approximately $420,000; purchasing and leasing of Police Department vehicles, which cost approximately $100,000; salaries for two new Police Officers of approximately $80,000 total; money put aside for the Building Department to address some of the issues there; increases in the cost of mulching; forensic review of Village processes and Six Sigma training to prepare for the future; a decrease in Fire Department salaries of approximately $161,000 due to retirements and new hires; and increased funding for the Community Center.
Regarding revenues, Ms. Sonenfeld commented that revenues have been maximized. Most of the revenue derived from fees and permits come from Municipal Court fees, which total approximately $379,000. Other fees and permit revenue include: Graydon Pool, which brings in approximately $362,000; sewer use for tax-exempt organizations is approximately $322,000; fees for ambulance services of approximately $366,000; and the cable television franchise, which brings in approximately $344,000.
Overall, Ms. Sonenfeld said everyone believes that the anticipated revenue can be realized. The risks are some potential Municipal Court fines, particularly parking tickets, because the Village had fewer Parking Enforcement Officers in the first part of the year. In addition, there is the usual Graydon Pool risk, which is the weather. There is also less revenue in the Recycling Department, because prices paid to the Village are down.
Looking at opportunities, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out the increase in fees for side jobs by Police Department personnel, which will have an impact on the entire year. There has also in quite a bit of new construction in Ridgewood, leading to an increase in building permit fees.
The Village faces some challenges, according to Ms. Sonenfeld. She noted three anticipated challenges. The first is that there are some unfunded liabilities in the amount of $7.1 million, covering accumulated sick time; accumulated vacation time; and compensatory time. There is a reserve of $479,000 against that $7.1 million. Another challenge to be dealt with is that the Village has used surplus fund balance, one-time revenues, and trust funds, for a total of $4.8 million, which will need to be replenished. The surplus fund balance, in particular, had a balance of $4.4 million, but $2.9 million is being used in the 2014 municipal budget. The remaining surplus is now $1.4 million. However, there will be money coming in from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the amount of $300,000, as well as more funds coming into replenish the surplus balance. The Recycling Trust Fund has been virtually wiped out. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that $294,000 of that fund was allocated against expenses, and another $150,000 was used to offset the tax levy. In addition, due to the amount of snow removal that was needed this past year, the entire Snow Removal Trust Fund of $211,000 was depleted. There were some one-time revenues in the past year. Funds were received from FEMA; the Green Acres trust, which is being reserved for debt service; and there were some deferred charges from the Parking Utility which were used this year. Overall, Ms. Sonenfeld estimated that the Village used approximately $500,000 more of one-time revenues this year compared to the previous year. That is another challenge.
Ms. Sonenfeld commented that basing the budget on actual expenditures gives the Village more discipline but less flexibility. Therefore, when she referred earlier to surplus balances, in order to add to a surplus, it is necessary to either decrease expenses, or increase revenue. Because revenue was maximized, and expenses are very tight, it makes the ability to replenish surplus a bit riskier than it has been in the past.
Switching to the capital budget, Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the capital budget is $2.8 million. Some of the larger items included in the budget are: the purchase of a salt truck with a plow for $236,000 to aid in snow removal; the Police and Fire Departments are purchasing new vehicles and equipment; some planned improvements to the parks; and installing a new audio/visual media system in the Public Library, as well as investing in some technology for the Public Library. Perhaps the most important item in the capital budget is the inclusion of funds for paving various streets around the Village. The current budget proposal includes two scenarios for the Councilmembers to consider. One of those scenarios is the complete capital budget, which includes paving. Because Ms. Sonenfeld noticed that it did not seem that the total capital budget would pass when it was presented several weeks ago, she took the paving element out of the capital budget and made it a separate capital budget issue for the Councilmembers to decide. The intent is to facilitate getting all of the paving done in 2014. Currently, the paving that is being done is covered by the 2013 capital budget. Ms. Sonenfeld would like to get all of the paving covered by the 2014 capital budget done in 2014. She is concerned that the paving will not get done with so many delays on voting for the funds to do the paving.
Breaking it down into individual tax dollars, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that 25% of each tax dollar goes to the municipality, while 65% of each tax dollar goes to the Board of Education. Approximately 10% of each tax dollar goes to Bergen County, but that is still an estimate due to the fact that the tax information is still not available from the County. Therefore, and average homeowner will see a decrease of approximately $5 in taxes paid for the 2014 municipal budget. That gives the Village a 0% tax increase for the second consecutive year.
Ms. Sonenfeld and the rest of her team believe that there are opportunities to be explored, including different ways of delivering services, whether that means collaboration with others; collaboration with the County; in- sourcing or outsourcing; or shared services arrangements. All of those possibilities will be reviewed, but that will take time. There are some modest improvements, which include investments in capital; human resources developing operational reviews; and more emphasis on people and people development. In addition, there are some opportunities presented by the expiration of four collective bargaining agreements in 2014 and 2015.
b. Village Council’s Comments
Councilman Pucciarelli noted that in 2012, he distributed a pamphlet asking the people of Ridgewood to vote for him, because he said, among other things, that he wanted to see Ridgewood have a government that is fiscally responsible. Councilman Pucciarelli does not consider it fiscally responsible to assume, year after year, that the budget will increase. He does not believe an increase is bad, as long as it remains close to the increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). However, he believes that is a lazy approach to budgeting. This year and last year, with the help of Village employees, and the FAC, a long, hard look was taken at every budget line, and savings were found. While that is not quite zero-based budgeting, it is nearly that. Moreover, it has raised awareness that the level of salary and benefit increases year after year has one of two outcomes: the increases can be passed along to already overburdened taxpayers; or ways can be found to do things differently. Everyone now has a real sense that the structural changes in how things operate, plus opportunities presented by the expiration of four collective bargaining agreements for uniformed services, will make future tax increases no longer inevitable. Instead, they will be targeted to areas that have long been neglected, such as capital expenditures. That is why Councilman Pucciarelli is proud to vote for this budget. Just as importantly, he looks forward to addressing the 2015 budget very soon. Councilman Pucciarelli is mindful of the fact that it is now May 28th, and the discussion is now focused on the budget for a year that is nearly half over.
Councilwoman Hauck thanked Councilman Pucciarelli for the comment about the year being half over, because she believes the budget should be a guidepost and should be used to make decisions within the Departments. Councilwoman Hauck said she will also be voting for the 0% tax increase budget with a heavy heart, because she understands the burden it places on everyone to concentrate and focus on ways in which the Village could operate more efficiently. Ridgewood is extraordinary because it provides layers and layers of services and comforts for the residents. Councilwoman Hauck believes sometimes people forget that people move here for those services. Therefore, she does not want to take away any services, but she would rather take away the inefficiencies, while being cognizant of the fact that New Jersey and Bergen County are ranked the highest in the United States for property tax values. In Bergen County in 2013, the average resident was spending 8.3% of his/her yearly income on property taxes. That puts everyone in the position of having to squeeze things financially, which is painful, but Councilwoman Hauck said she is proud that no one is afraid to do it. That is the job of the Councilmembers as leaders of the community.
Ms. Mailander read a statement prepared by Councilman Riche, who was absent, due to previously scheduled obligations. However, Councilman Riche felt it was important to put his thoughts and statement on the record with regard to the operating and capital budgets. Regarding the capital budget for the Parking and Water Utilities, he urged the Councilmembers to pass those budgets. Both of those are self-funding authorities, and the capital requests are appropriate. The municipal operating budgets and capital budgets, in the opinion of Councilman Riche, do not meet the criteria for prudent long-term fiscal planning. The substantial increase in debt service payments of approximately $1 million, as well as drawing down most of the available reserve funds, is counterproductive to sound financial planning. A 0% municipal tax increase eliminates any safeguards for unanticipated unfunded events, such as storm recovery or catastrophic failure of any Village infrastructure. For these reasons, in absentia, Councilman Riche said he would not cast a vote for the proposed budgets. Ms. Mailander explained that she indicated to Councilman Riche that he could not vote against the budget in absentia, and his vote would be registered as “Absent”. However, he did want his statement to be read into the record.
Councilwoman Walsh commented that she and Mayor Aronsohn agreed on nearly everything that was said at the meeting last night, but that would not be the case tonight. Recently, Councilwoman Walsh said she met a lifelong Ridgewood resident in Allendale, whose children grew up in the Village and have moved out. Councilwoman Walsh noticed that the woman was reading the budget newsletter in an ice cream store, and the woman told her it was because she was very concerned about what is happening in Ridgewood. She is worried that the services are decreasing, and she was reading the newsletter to see if she could understand it. During the subsequent conversation between Councilwoman Walsh and the resident, the woman mentioned many things that Councilwoman Walsh had already been thinking. Councilwoman Walsh appreciated all the work Ms. Sonenfeld has done over the past several weeks for Ridgewood, and she believes that Ms. Sonenfeld is putting her heart and soul into the budget, as well as a lot of time. After the many conversations about different things that have happened in Ridgewood, and things that could happen, and listening to the budget summary tonight, a couple of things stick out in Councilwoman Walsh’s mind. She noted that Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that the Recycling Trust Fund is “wiped out”. The Snow Removal Trust Fund is “empty”. The remaining surplus is $1.4 million, with an unfunded liability of $7.1 million, against a reserve of $479,000. Those words resonate with Councilwoman Walsh, and they are things in the proposed budget that give Councilwoman Walsh pause. She has maintained all along that a balanced budget does not necessarily mean a 0% tax increase, but it means trying to balance obligations while ensuring that there is some kind of budget planning going on. Councilman Walsh believes that the current budget process is still somewhere in the middle, and there are still a lot of things that need to be implemented, as well as things that are planned that give absolutely no flexibility in the budget.
Councilwoman Walsh worked with the numbers provided, and after considering the individual Councilmembers against the current property assessments provided by Ms. Sonenfeld, and if the Councilmembers approve the 1% tax increase, as Ms. Sonenfeld initially suggested, the amount that the municipal taxes would increase for each Councilmember is: Mayor Aronsohn – a $30 tax increase; Councilwoman Hauck – a $77 tax increase; Councilman Pucciarelli – a $51 tax increase; Councilman Riche – a $26 tax increase; her taxes would increase by $42; and Ms. Sonenfeld’s taxes would increase by $58 in 2014. That is why Councilwoman Walsh supports the initial plan for a 1% tax increase, but she cannot support the 0% tax increase.
Mayor Aronsohn was thinking while Councilman Pucciarelli was talking that when the Village Council was reorganized two years ago, there was a lot of discussion about recognizing the new normal. What is meant by that is that within the context of the Village, the tax burden on Ridgewood residents was too great. There are many people living in Ridgewood who are making less money than they were five years ago, or they are underemployed, or have been impacted in some other way. The current Councilmembers recognized that there was a need for some tax relief. The budget newsletter notes that there were some years in which the budget increase was 7% or 8%. The Councilmembers recognized that there was not just a new normal, but also the need to express their commitment and determination to do something about it. That determination was first expressed in the formation of the financial “Tiger Team,” which was a new concept at that time. A committee of Village residents from different backgrounds came together to review the budget and give the Councilmembers some input to help them do government differently. They came up with a compelling report, which led to the formation of the FAC. The determination was also expressed that February or March is not the time to be engaged in the budget process, but the process should be started the day after the current budget is adopted. The hiring of a new Village Manager who came from the private sector was yet another way in which that determination was expressed. Mayor Aronsohn said he is excited that this is the second consecutive year in which a budget that does not increase the municipal tax burden on Ridgewood residents will be adopted. He believes that could be historic. Even more importantly, it not only helps the current government, but could set the path for the future. A 0% tax increase is not something that can be done every year, but when it can be done, it should be done. Moreover, the Councilmembers are thinking differently about government, and doing government differently. Mayor Aronsohn said he is proud of the work everyone has done on the budget, whether they agree or disagree. Everyone has been involved in the process, and everyone has made a difference.
c. Public Hearing on 2014 Budget
Ms. Mailander noted that this is now the Public Hearing on the 2014 Ridgewood Municipal Budget, and Mayor Aronsohn opened the time for public comments on the budget.
Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, noted that Councilwoman Hauck spoke about getting rid of inefficiencies, and Ms. Sonenfeld spoke about revenue opportunities, as well as revenue in general. Mr. Loving has some concerns about getting rid of the inefficiencies in light of the fact that it seems that the Village Council is about to approve a 0% municipal tax increase. He has some family members who live in Hoboken, and when he visits them, he notices that they are now using automated summonses for parking enforcement. Last year, Hoboken collected approximately $1 million more in parking fines than they did the previous year. Mr. Loving knows that the issue of using automated summonses in Ridgewood has been discussed for some years, although that service is still not being used in Ridgewood. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the Village showed decreases in parking enforcement fines. Therefore, Mr. Loving wonders if it is possible to use an automated summons system, and if it will lead to more revenue being generated from summonses. He also wondered if there is enough money in the budget with a 0% municipal tax increase to implement such a system.
Ms. Sonenfeld noted that in the more detailed budget presentation she did several weeks ago, e-tickets were not specifically mentioned, but there is money set aside in the budget to implement the system. She asked Captain Luthcke to comment on the time frame. Mr. Loving asked if anyone could also comment on whether that will increase revenue when it is implemented. Captain Luthcke stated that it is hoped that such a system could be implemented within the next few months. The current delay is due to the fact that the Police Department is working with a new vendor, and there is a delay on the administrative side in the response from the State. Once the system is implemented, it should increase revenue because of how much easier it will be to generate a summons, as well as how much easier it will be for Court personnel to properly read the summons. Due to difficulty in reading handwriting, there have been many errors made in the processing of tickets, and going to an automated system will help to prevent those types of errors. Ms. Sonenfeld added that she believes it would be a good idea to put a cost-benefit analysis together for the automated summons system to give a better understanding of what will be gained from such a system. Mr. Loving reiterated his concern of whether there is enough money in the budget to implement the system.
In addition, Mr. Loving recalled Ms. Sonenfeld’s comments about single-stream recycling. He asked if Mr. Moritz, the Director of Operations, could answer some questions about that. Mr. Loving pointed out that many years ago, he noticed that when the sanitation trucks went down the streets to collect recycled material, the sanitation trucks were compartmentalized. High-quality paper went to one side of the truck, while other paper products went to the other side. Now, when materials are picked up at the curb, the process is single-stream as far as paper is concerned, and it is Mr. Loving’s understanding that the Village gets less money from that process. If the paper is taken to the Recycling Center, the segregated process is still used, which brings in more money. Mr. Loving wondered how much money is being lost due to the single-stream recycling process, and why the paper cannot be segregated, as it once was. He asked if using the compartmentalized trucks costs more.
Mr. Moritz responded that the Village does not lose money using the current process, because the Village is paid for high-quality fibers, which is why the paper is no longer separated at the truck.
Leonard Eisen, 762 Upper Boulevard, said he does not understand why comments were made that there is no increase in the budget. The municipal tax levy is only approximately 25% of the monies that are collected. The school budget must also be discussed, which will increase taxes by approximately 1.9%. Mayor Aronsohn responded that when Ms. Sonenfeld showed the slide about the tax dollars, it included the fact that 64% of each dollar goes toward the Board of Education budget. The 25% of each dollar that goes toward the municipal budget is not being increased.
There were no other comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
3. RESOLUTIONS
Ms. Mailander read Resolutions numbered 14-133 and 14-134 in full as follows:
3. ORDINANCES
a. Continued Public Hearing – #3413 – General Capital Bond Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the third reading of Ordinance 3413 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be continued. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3413 by title:
BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $2,836,500 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,700,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF
Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Public Hearing on ordinance 3413 was continued from the May Public Meeting as the budget had to be adopted prior to the adoption of this ordinance in order to provide for the down payment. The Public Hearing was continued, and Mayor Aronsohn asked for comments on this ordinance at this time.
There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3413 be adopted on third reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: Councilwoman Walsh
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
b. Continued Public Hearing – #3414 – Water Capital Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the third reading of Ordinance 3414 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be continued. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3414 by title:
BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS WATER UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $2,126,500 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF
Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Public Hearing on ordinance 3414 was continued from the May Public Meeting as the budget had to be adopted prior to the adoption of this ordinance in order to provide for the down payment. The Public Hearing was continued, and Mayor Aronsohn asked for comments on this ordinance at this time.
There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3414 be adopted on third reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
c. Continued Public Hearing – #3415 – Parking Utility Capital Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the third reading of Ordinance 3415 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be continued. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3415 by title:
BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARKING UTILITY IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $127,200 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $100,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF
Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Public Hearing on ordinance 3415 was continued from the May Public Meeting as the budget had to be adopted prior to the adoption of this ordinance in order to provide for the down payment. The Public Hearing was continued, and Mayor Aronsohn asked for comments on this ordinance at this time.
Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, recalled that he had a question about this ordinance at the previous meeting, which the Village Manager answered by pointing out that the specifics were available in section 3(a). After reading the section in question, Mr. Loving still has some concerns. Section 3(a) indicates that a portion of the money will be used for multi-space parking meter units, and the Chestnut Street multi-space meter unit. Mr. Loving wanted to know what other units are being purchased besides the one at Chestnut Street. In addition, he had a concern about Chestnut Street, because several months ago, Mr. Rutishauser was involved in a discussion about the multi-space units that were to be installed at the Park-and-Ride location, and the question arose about the multi-space unit at Chestnut Street. At that time, Mr. Rutishauser indicated that it was “a lemon”. Mr. Loving is worried about the amount of money the taxpayers will be asked to spend on that unit, because it has never worked correctly. After making an OPRA request, Mr. Loving learned that there were multiple instances when the unit did not work properly, and summonses had to be voided because the Parking Enforcement Agents were not told that the unit was not operating properly and people were still issued tickets. Revenues have gone uncollected, and Mr. Loving asked why he, as a taxpayer, should be forced to pay to replace the unit. He suggested that the manufacturer be called and informed that the unit has never worked, and nothing will be paid until it is replaced; or Mr. Rogers could institute a lawsuit against the manufacturer for all the monies that have been lost due to the unit being inoperative, as well as the aggravation caused to the taxpayers. Mr. Loving is very angry that money will be spent to replace something that has never worked without seeking redress from the manufacturer of the unit.
Ms. Sonenfeld said she appreciates Mr. Loving’s concerns, and her thought on this particular capital request is that it is very broad. In fact, Section 3(a) is broader than any similar sections in any of the other capital requests, with a very good reason. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that all of the parking meters will be re-evaluated as the forensic accounting process continues, and no decisions have been made at this time about what action will be taken. A recommendation will be made, and ideas are already being discussed, but no decision has been reached. She asked Mr. Rutishauser to address the particular unit mentioned by Mr. Loving.
Mr. Loving stated that he appreciates Mr. Rutishauser’s expertise in this matter, but he still believes that the ultimate decision rests with Mr. Rogers as to whether any redress is sought with the manufacturer. Mr. Rogers pointed out that normally, potential litigation is discussed in Closed Session. He suggested that Mr. Rutishauser could give background regarding the item in question, without discussing any legal aspects or contractual obligations. Mr. Rutishauser noted that the unit at Chestnut Street is manufactured by a company called Matrix, and it was purchased approximately 6-7 years ago. He does not believe there is any existing warranty on the unit, and the Village currently pays for parts and service, which are requested from the manufacturer. As far as litigation is concerned, Mr. Rutishauser said that would be for Mr. Rogers to address.
Finally, Mr. Loving commented that he strongly opposes any situation similar to the one at Chestnut Street, where there is only one unit. When that unit breaks, no money can be collected, and patrons are frustrated. He suggested that what New Jersey Transit has done at the train station with respect to their automated ticket dispensing units should be considered, because more than one of those units has been installed at the train station. Mr. Rutishauser suggested that one multi-space unit be installed at the Park-and-Ride location, and Mr. Loving spoke out vehemently against that idea when it was suggested. He asked Ms. Sonenfeld to please keep that in mind when she makes a recommendation about how the money should be spent.
There were no other comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3415 be adopted on third reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
d. Public Hearing – #3419 – Bond Ordinance – Paving
Mayor Aronsohn moved the second reading of Ordinance 3419 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3419 by title:
BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $1,549,000 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $1,330,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF
Mayor Aronsohn explained that Ordinance 3419 was introduced at the May Public Meeting in order to provide funding for the paving budget. The Public Hearing was opened, and anyone wishing to speak on this ordinance could do so at this time.
There were no other comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Walsh asked for clarification about the 2013 paving. She noted that there was a schedule for the 2013 paving, and she asked how much was paid according to that schedule. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that she understood that the 2013 capital budget, which was approved in October 2013, has been rolled over into the 2014 capital budget for paving. She asked Mr. Rutishauser if all of it had been rolled over, or if only a portion had been. Mr. Rutishauser explained that the paving work that is currently under way is part of the 2013 capital budget, from a 2013 NJDOT grant, as well as a 2012 NJDOT grant as components of the paving work. Councilwoman Walsh asked if Mr. Rutishauser anticipates receiving a grant from NJDOT in 2014, and Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Rutishauser answered that such a grant has already been received for the work to be done on North Van Dien Avenue, in the amount of $149,000, which was added to the capital fund, rather than using it outright. Councilwoman Walsh asked if this Ordinance is approved, how much paving remains to be done from the list that Mr. Rutishauser prepared. Mr. Rutishauser said he would have to look at the estimated costs for each street, because each street has different work that needs to be done. Councilwoman Walsh asked if he could estimate the total, and Mr. Rutishauser responded that he thinks adopting this Ordinance would allow a significant amount of paving work on the current list to get done. He added that streets are constantly being evaluated against the criteria set by the Village to determine if paving or other repairs need to be done. Mayor Aronsohn interjected that this is arguably one of the most important issues to be decided by the Councilmembers, because street paving has both public safety and quality of life implications. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that she believes this is one of the largest paving budgets ever in the Village. Mr. Rutishauser said it is certainly one of the largest paving budgets in the last 10 years. Councilwoman Walsh explained that she had stated in previous Village Council meetings that her concern is that there was a capital budget, and different things have been pulled from that budget, including paving, which is a big part of the capital budget. However, she pointed out that it is not the only public safety issue affecting Ridgewood, which is affected by leaf removal; snow removal; running out of salt; or accidents occurring when the streets are icy.
Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that voting against the paving budget does not help the issues mentioned by Councilwoman Walsh, and in fact, it could possibly exacerbate those problems. He also clarified that the only reason paving was pulled from the capital budget was due to the fact that Councilwoman Walsh voted against the capital budget, so it could not move forward. Ms. Sonenfeld pulled out paving from the capital budget and made it a separate capital budget item to address the public safety imperative. Mayor Aronsohn added that waiting until the new Councilmembers are sworn in to adopt this ordinance simply delays the necessary paving. It is hoped that even if Councilwoman Walsh cannot support the entire capital budget, she can support at least this part of it, and the paving can move forward. Councilwoman Walsh asked the other Councilmembers if they are all confident that if the capital budget for paving is passed, there will be no issues with leaves in the streets or snow removal needs that might cause problems with the capital budget.
Councilman Pucciarelli answered that he is interested in getting the streets paved, which is what the current vote is about. He does not understand why it is necessary to mention snow and leaves, unless one wants to revisit the entire capital budget. Councilman Pucciarelli suggested that the Councilmembers should at least get the streets paved, and if it is necessary to deal with each problem one at a time until the new Councilmembers are sworn in, things will simply have to be done that way. He does not see any advantage in postponing paving the streets to make the point that Councilwoman Walsh is doing this because she does not agree with the capital budget, or what is achieved by not moving forward with this.
Councilwoman Walsh responded that her concern with pulling out pieces of the capital budget is that one thing is removed from the capital budget, while there are still many other items that are unbalanced, in her opinion. That is why, when she talked about the operating budget, it is very easy to go for a 0% tax increase, but the budget is not balanced at all. Mayor Aronsohn said he understands Councilwoman Walsh’s concern about the operating budget, but his concern is that she is holding paving hostage to her preference for a tax increase. Councilwoman Walsh said that the term “hostage” indicates that she is being irrational, and she maintains that she is trying to make a rational decision about the entire budget. Part of the capital budget was pulled from the capital budget, and while all of the Councilmembers agree that this paving is necessary, she is trying to make the point that the overall budget is not correct, and this approach is not good practice. Mayor Aronsohn said he respects her right to make a point, and he feels she has made the point. However, it has now gone beyond simply making the point, and Councilwoman Walsh is now preventing the paving from happening.
Councilman Pucciarelli moved that Ordinance 3419 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Hauck seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
e. Public Hearing – #3420 – General Capital Bond Ordinance
Mayor Aronsohn moved the second reading of Ordinance 3420 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3420 by title:
BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $1,356,000 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $1,290,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF
Mayor Aronsohn explained that Ordinance 3420 was introduced at the May Public Meeting in order to provide funding for the general capital budget, which does not include funding for paving. The Public Hearing is now opened, and anyone wishing to speak on this ordinance could do so at this time.
There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: None
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3420 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.
Roll Call Vote
AYES: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, and Mayor Aronsohn
NAYS: Councilwoman Walsh
ABSENT: Councilman Riche
ABSTAIN: None
4. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Mayor Aronsohn, seconded by Councilman Pucciarelli, and carried by voice vote, the Special Public Meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M.
_____________________________
Paul S. Aronsohn
Mayor
_________________________________
Heather A. Mailander
Village Clerk
- Hits: 2454