20180228 Village Council Work Session

A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR. COURT ROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOD, NEW JERSEY ON FEBRUARY 28, 2018 AT 7:30 P.M.

 

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

Mayor Knudsen 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: Councilman Hache, Deputy Mayor Sedon, Councilman Voigt, Councilwoman Walsh, and Mayor Knudsen.  Also present were Heather Mailander, Village Manager/Village Clerk; Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney; and Donna M. Jackson, Deputy Village Clerk.

Mayor Knudsen led those in attendance in the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag as well as a Moment of Silence to honor the men and women serving our Nation, our first responders, and all those who suffer needlessly from violence.

2. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

Mayor Knudsen asked if there were any comments or questions from the public.

Gary Cirillo, 260 South Pleasant Avenue, stated that he is the President of Project Pride, which is a civic organization that does all of the plantings downtown, he added that he knows the Council is coming up on the Budget beginning this weekend, and asked that the Council understand that any picture that is taken of the downtown always includes an aspect of Project Pride whether it be the flowers, the kissing balls which have become the snowflakes, so on and so forth. He added that he thinks this year their duties will be increased, and they will be asked to water some trees so with all that said he asked that the Council take that into consideration.

Mr. Cirillo added that he wanted to appeal to the Council to consider some construction, with the new housing and things that are coming into the town he feels that the Village could greatly benefit from a better bicycle stand across from Bagelicious, perhaps something with a roof on it that would encourage more people to take bikes. This would allow them to be covered and the Village could encourage more people to use bicycles to get to work. Mr. Cirillo added that right now it is very haphazard as the grass isn’t cut around there and it looks terrible and is not inviting for someone to take a bike. He is hoping that the Village can lead the way in that regard and have one of the best bike facilities for all of the commuters.

Mr. Cirillo also added that he wanted to approach the Council about possibly building a pickleball court somewhere in the town, as the Council is aware this sport has taken off and the dimensions are much smaller than a tennis court and there is a great need for it. He added that the goal would be to have it somewhere at Vets Field. He’d like to make Vets more of a sports area where people could come and do a multitude of things. The only things that are missing right now are basketball and tennis (which is just too big to put in), but he has approached the Council before about basketball and perhaps pickleball. Mr. Cirillo also added that a final issue was along the path to perhaps having some exercise equipment at certain points, known as stations, where people can do chin-ups and other exercises so that anyone who visits, such as when the weather is warm and it is used all day, he would like to see Vets used to its greatest ability.

Mr. Cirillo stated that as the Village builds for the future and as there are more people coming to town and there will be a need for more things.

Denise Fabiano, 618 Spring Avenue, stated that she was there on behalf of JOLT to ask the Council to sign a resolution opposing a bill pending in the Senate called the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2017 or CCRA. She stated that first she wanted to say what this Resolution is not about. It is not about any changes to our Second Amendment Rights. It is about this State’s right and this community’s right to have its own laws apply to everyone who is physically in our State whether you live here or whether you are visiting from Louisiana or Pennsylvania or any other State.

Ms. Fabiano added that if the CCRA becomes law it would require each State to recognize the concealed carry standards of every other State. In other words, as long as a visitor to our State has a permit to carry in their home State, they can carry here too. So, what does that mean. New Jersey has among the toughest gun laws in the Country, not surprisingly we also have one of the lowest gun violence rates ranked number 45 out of 50 States. New Jersey requires that anyone who wants to carry a concealed weapon be 21 years of age, and go through a rigorous vetting process. It includes safety gun use training, a background and reference check, and to demonstrate what’s referred to as a justifiable need to carry. She added it was not easy, and in contrast there are 12 States that don’t require any permit at all including Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire. In Pennsylvania, a State that borders us, no safety training is required and people with violent, criminal, or domestic violence convictions, as well as teenagers are allowed to carry. Ms. Fabiano stated that if the CCRA becomes law they will be allowed to carry here too.

Ms. Fabiano stated that to get a concealed permit in New Jersey, right now an individual has to go to local law enforcement and then go before court. Perhaps that’s why law enforcement has overwhelmingly opposed this legislation. It’s been denounced by the Fraternal Order of Police, the International Association of Chiefs of Police, the Police Foundation, and the Major Cities Chiefs Association which includes the 66 largest law enforcement organizations in this Country. She added that people are allowed to carry their weapons through our State, that has always been the case under New Jersey law, they just have to carry it locked up in a manner that has been specified by Statute. They cannot keep them in their pocket as they walk around the street or drive down Route 17 and that is a decision that our State has made. She stated that New Jersey has a high-density population and she, for one, wants to know that when she is walking down the street or sending her child to a concert that someone from a neighboring State isn’t standing next to them with a gun in their pocket without having been put through the application process that is required here in New Jersey.

Ms. Fabiano stated that in closing, she just wanted to ask that the Council remember that under the CCRA a resident of our town would be denied a permit to carry in New Jersey if they had a criminal conviction. However, a resident from another Sate with that same conviction would be allowed to carry here with their out of State permit. That just can’t be, and that is what this resolution is about.

Ann Burton Walsh, 112 South Irving Street, stated that she serves as President of the League of Women Voters of Ridgewood. She was there tonight to respectfully request that the Village Council consider signing the Resolution that Denise from JOLT just presented that opposed Federal Concealed Carry. Since it’s National Convention in 1990 the League has supported gun safety. Last fall, their local board heard from the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence as well as MOMS Manned Action regarding this proposed legislation. Since their directors meeting the Bill has passed the House and their State League has decided to allow local Leagues to oppose it. Ms. Walsh added that when their League board heard of JOLT’s initiative this month they took the opportunity to sign on to continue the Leagues work on this issue.

Ms. Walsh stated that as a review to Ms. Fabiano’s point, in 2008 the Supreme Court stated that like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. Citizens’ rights under the Second Amendment may be restricted if such restrictions are substantially related to important Governmental objectives, such restrictions therefore do not constitute infringement of those rights. She added that New Jersey has restrictions in place, including standards for concealed carry that are tailored to the important objective of safeguarding the public of this State which is the most densely populated in the nation. Ms. Walsh stated that other States have lax permitting laws for concealed carry and some States don’t require permits at all. The question now is whether a gun owner from one of those States may, under Federal law, carry a gun into a more restricted State against that States wishes and concern for public safety.

Ms. Walsh stated that as the National Review stated in an article about the proposed law, it is the States rather than the Federal Government that should decide the question of reciprocity. State legislators know the reasons behind their own permitting regimes and are thus well equipped to decide whether other States policies are similar enough to justify recognizing their permits. A sovereign State that requires its own citizens to meet certain requirements before carrying a concealed weapon should be allowed to demand the same of non-residents. She added that the article continued this is a question not of what the policy should be, but of who gets to make the decision. Sometimes Congress must protect Constitutional Rights against infringement by State governments. Other times it is impractical or otherwise problematic for each State to chart its own path. Neither justification for Federal action holds here. Ms. Walsh urged the Village Council to take a stand against this unjustified Federal action and in support of New Jersey and New Jersey voters by signing the Resolution.

Bonnie Chalek, 110 Sheridan Terrace, stated that she is a resident and an active member of the Bergen County Brady Chapter which is part of the Brady Campaign. The Brady Campaign began after Jim Brady who was Assistant to the White House Press Secretary under Ronald Reagan was shot along with President Reagan. Ms. Chalek stated that Jim Brady was permanently disabled and devoted the rest of his life for getting universal background checks. Thirty years ago, working for common sense gun laws was a bipartisan issue which is should be today because its all about public safety. She stated that she has been following gun violence reports daily since Sandy Hook and although mass shootings capture the attention of the nation she has found that if you take out inner city gang violence, the homicides are mostly due to toxic male anger whether its domestic violence situations or someone who gets angry in a Louisiana movie theater or a Florida gas station and wants to settle the score with shooting a gun.

States that have recently passed lax concealed carry laws have also seen an uptick in road rage incidents where guns were used. Ms. Chalek stated to the Council, can you imagine this happening on Route 17 or in a New Jersey mall packed during the holidays. States with the most lax gun laws have the highest gun fatalities. In contrast, New Jersey has strong gun laws. We shouldn’t be forced to accept National Concealed Carry on the terms being accepting the weakest rules from the weakest States on gun safety. A Town Council does not have the authority to enact gun legislation, it can pass a resolution that provides a voice from its residents to our Federal and State officials that we feel more guns on our street is not the answer. This is a public safety issue and she hopes the Council passes the resolution.

Dr. Judy Lustwig, former Ridgewood resident living in Washington Township 451 Beech Street, stated she is a retired neurologist who worked at Valley Hospital for 16 years and she was asking Ridgewood if they would please sponsor a sister rally in solidarity for the Parkland students March 24^th at Vets Field at 10:00 A.M. She stated that we have all seen these students and have seen their amazing dedication, passion, intellect in the face of tremendous tragedy and grief. She thinks they need the adults to help them and she would like to do that. Dr. Lustwig added that this was not a referendum on the Second Amendment this is just to advocate for common sense gun laws. She added that people may ask why Ridgewood. Well, Ridgewood is in the center of Northern Bergen County, and as far as she knows there is a rally or a march in Newark, there is one in New City, one in New York. The internet says there may be one in Morristown the internet says there is but the students themselves don’t note it as another venue. So, Ridgewood needs one here. She has spoken to a lot of people that live in surrounding towns that would all love to come here. Also, besides this she wanted to get in a couple of points.

Dr. Lustwig added that remember she is a neurologist, and the frontal lobes are responsible for impulse control, rational thinking, critical thinking, executive planning, organization, etc. They are not fully developed until people are at least 25 years old, so it really makes no sense to allow 18 years olds to possess assault weapons which should be only used in times of war. She added that she heard the woman from the NRA say we let the 18 year olds who are in military action have the right to hold a gun so why shouldn’t all 18 year olds have the right? Well they are a special group of people who are very patriotic. They’ve undergone tremendous education to learn how to handle guns safely, how to use them properly, and they are under adult supervision. So, that really is not a good argument as far as she’s concerned. Dr. Lustwig stated that the second thing she wanted to say is that she read an article in The Atlantic written by the radiologist who saw the CAT scan of the injuries that the assault weapons generate in people’s bodies and its astounding. Mayor Knudsen stated that she had reached her time limit.

Karen Feder, 817 Morningside Road, and Maddie Leluc, 166 Foster Terrace, introduced themselves. Ms. Feder stated that she and Miss Leluc were from the Ridgewood Cambodia Project and their organization is celebrating its 10^th anniversary this year. While they have clubs in four schools in town they realized that folks who don’t have school-aged kids don’t really know about the work that they are doing. Ms. Feder stated that they work in Cambodia because the country is still struggling years after the genocide of the 1970s and the Civil War that followed. In 2009 the Ridgewood Village School in Cambodia was built and a group of Ridgewood folks, including Maddie and her family, have been going to visit and support their school ever since. They have accomplished a lot in the past 10 years. They provide an English computer teacher, internet service, computers, a printer, school supplies, books, water filtration systems, and their favorite is a teacher training program for both their middle school and the neighboring primary school.

Ms. Feder stated that one of their goals was to make the community of Ridgewood more aware of what they are doing and involved in their project. So, for their 10^th anniversary celebration they are bringing a little bit of Cambodia to Ridgewood. Miss Leluc stated that she was in the 4^th grade at Orchard Elementary School and last year in February she had the opportunity to go to Cambodia. She stated that as soon as she arrived she was mind-blown on how poor the Country has become and going to a sister school felt astonishing. To teach, play and communicate with kids halfway across the world felt awesome and she made so many friends that she still remembers and will remember her whole life. Miss Leluc stated that before she left, she had a fundraiser at her school where people donated colored pencils and crayons which she later gave to all grades at their partnering school.

Miss Leluc added that she got so inspired she decided to start a Cambodia Club at Orchard and teach her classmates about Cambodia and all they ways they can help just like her. That’s why on March 8^th, next Thursday night, all the kids from the club are having a celebration at the Ridgewood Public Library where kids from all the clubs who participate can talk about their experiences. They have two special guests, a traditional Cambodian dancer is coming up from Washington, D.C., Seradia Biv, and Film Producer LinDa Saphan an Associate Professor from Mount Saint Vincent’s College will talk about Cambodia today and the need of education. Miss Leluc stated that there will be food, drinks, and light refreshments served and special beautiful items from Cambodia will be sold, too. If anyone is interested in the club or would like to attend the event, she encouraged them to take one of the fliers and stated that she hopes they will join the club at the Ridgewood Public Library next Thursday from 6:30 P.M. to 8:30 P.M.

Mayor Knudsen questioned whether there was a website for the Cambodia Club. Ms. Feder stated that they are the RidgewoodCambodiaProject.org and they are also on Facebook as the Ridgewood Cambodia Connection, and if anyone would like to contact her it is RidgewoodCambodia@gmail.com.

Donald Leibreich, 219 Hope Street, stated that for five years he has been heading up the upgrading of the Village Community Center. At first they used the Community Center Advisory Board to begin with and later, a charitable corporation to raise money and pay for the improvements they have made. They thank the Council for resolution #18-17 accepting the improvements they have made. Mr. Leibreich stated that all of their work was done with the great coordination of Parks and Recreation, Nancy Bigos and Deanna Schablik. Also, a group of twelve diligent Ridgewood volunteers has been with him for these five years, headed up by Gwenn Hauck and Bill Carbone and Jen Griffith. He added that having established a charitable corporation, some of their members applied for a grant from the Taub Foundation and Beth Abbott and Sheila Brogan have been very successful in launching Age Friendly Ridgewood. They have been so supported in all of their efforts and given advice by Deputy Mayor Sedon and Janet Fricke, who have been great additions to their group. Mayor Knudsen thanked Mr. Leibreich for all of his work.

Jan Bottcher, 425 Fairfield Avenue, stated that she was here in support of the Concealed Carry Resolution. She added that others who have spoken before her have very articulately expressed the reasons that she supports this as well and she just wanted to add her voice to theirs and ask the Council to please pass the Resolution.

Saurabh Dani, 390 Bedford Road, stated that he was before the Council today to talk about the presentation on the agenda regarding WaterSmart, and asked if the Council could clarify a few points first. There was a mention of variable costs based on the number of reports generated. What is a report. If a customer or end user looks at their analytics will that be a report. Or, the Village Manager had mentioned it was the number of mailings that would go out to inform the users about the benefits adding that the Village has a lot of newsletters going out. He is wondering why a third-party vendor would have to be paid to send letters to residents. Mr. Dani stated that Ridgewood Water has newsletters and email addresses and can do promotions without paying a third-party vendor. He would like it to be clarified what that report is, what is that variable cost, and what is the upper limit of the variable cost, because a lot of times these variable costs can go completely out of scope.

Second, Mr. Dani would like the WaterSmart presenters to clarify what is the single sign-on because right now in the billing software when he creates an account he does not have to provide an address. Anybody in the world can create a sign-on. All they need is an email address and user name to create an account. Then using that account they could look at anybody’s water bill. If they were to have the IP address they could look at the water bill. He added that in single sign on for the app they would have to add the number of family members and the profile. Does that mean that anyone who logs on once can then go to the WaterSmart software and then look at anyone’s information.

Mr. Dani stated that third, he was wondering how these two systems would connect. What is the single sign-on capability and how are they limiting the access only to that family for their account. Now all he needs is an email address and can create five accounts using five email addresses. He stated that single sign-on, privacy, and variable pricing were his main concerns, adding that variable pricing is how software kills clients because they start small and the fee just keeps going up as more storage or reports are used. This is similar to what happened to the Village in the Parkmobile scenario.

Mr. Dani appreciated the presentation on the parking garage process, and the thanked the Council for making a lot of progress on that. He keeps asking and he needs some responses as to what is the official process. He doesn’t want to continue coming here, or commenting, or sending an email and hoping that the Mayor will respond to that email. The residents need an official process where they see an anticipated problem or have a question on a particular process and they can file a case, and maybe it is assigned a case number, and there is an official resolution, it can be closed. He added that if it is a closed session type thing the Council could say that they have completed their investigation, but residents need some official process.

Patricia Infantino, 6 Betty Court, stated that she was here for something regarding the Zabriskie-Schedler House. She also wanted to say to the Council, to please support the resolution for concealed carry weapons that all of the Mayors are doing. She thinks it is something that Ridgewood should do as well.

Regarding the Zabriskie-Schedler property and the house, Ms. Infantino added that she is delighted that tonight the Council is going to vote on the Schedler house and it will finally get the roof. She added that she was going to read from her husband’s notes about the approval of the Schedler ad-hoc committee’s recommendations. He could not be here tonight, and he has warned the Council about the health risks of children exercising in the proximity of a busy highway. He wonders if the Council has done due diligence and consulted Public Health officials in regard to the risk.

Rurik Halaby, 374 Evergreen Place, stated that he was in total support of what Ann Burton Walsh has said. In his own way, today he decided to support that Dick’s Sporting Goods Store, which banned the sale of these weapons, and he placed a small order as a token that people care. The madness has got to stop, and gun-toting people have to be kept under control.

Mr. Halaby stated that as far as Schedler was concerned, he would not spend a penny until the Village comes up with a study as to why the house is historic. We need to come up with a plan as to what the Village is restoring it too and also what it will cost. He added that last time when he raised this point he was disappointed that someone on the dais had no idea of the cost. He stated that he was pleased that the Village Manager did not throw the lifeline because nothing has been put together as to what things are going to cost. No one has said anything about what it will be used for or what the costs of maintenance and operation will be, as we are talking about millions of dollars in the long run.

Mr. Halaby stated that he remembers when the Council was talking about the garage one of the members of the Council to prove her/his bonafides as being a fiscal conservative basically said, “A garage is a garage” and let’s go for the cheapest looking thing. He added that $1 million dollars is what it will take to go from a cheap horrible looking garage to one that we and our grandchildren would be proud of. Mr. Halaby stated that the Village spends money like crazy, $23,000 on this ill-fated valet parking, and now spending $1.5 million on the Elks Lodge. The Village will be spending $1 million on what have you, so let’s bear in mind where our money is going, and the Council should be fiscally responsible.

Mr. Halaby added that he called the firm of Connolly and Hickey and he spoke to Mr. Connolly and he was amused because he caught him off guard. Mayor Knudsen signaled that his time was up.

Jeanne Harris, 625 Hillcrest Road, stated that she was here to voice her support for the Concealed Carry Resolution, she understands that is a resolution and the Village is not making Federal Law. She did do a little bit of research and when she was starting out she was thinking that not everybody does have stringent requirements like New Jersey does and she did have the benefit of living in the south for almost a decade and there are differences in the States.

Ms. Harris stated that when she started researching it disturbed her when she found a Boston University study that came out for 25 years there are 12 states that require no permit at all, nine states including Massachusetts give Police Chiefs wide discretion over whether or not to issue the permit, and 29 states require permits but give Police Chiefs little or no discretion. This concerns her very much as everyone knows this is a Village and it is populated here. She is not comfortable with people from other States who do not have our stringent laws and requirements coming here with a concealed gun. She does not want to be in the Stop and Shop next to somebody who could be from a State where there could be no requirement. Ms. Harris added that she does not want her children in Rite Aid, or at the Warner Theater, or sitting in Daily Treat with somebody with a firearm. This is something that really is very important to her as a parent and a resident of this Village and she urges the Council to consider this and hopefully approve the Resolution.

Catherine Brienza, 364 Graydon Terrace, stated that she wanted to acknowledge the hard work of the Council and that she supported the Concealed Carry Resolution which was so articulately presented. She also wanted to say that the students are working really hard, being really brave and being really public, and our town needs to work really hard, be really brave and be really public. This resolution may be more symbolic but it is a voice, and our voices have to be raised and our legislators on the national level have to listen. We can’t let them down so she is hoping that the Council can see its way to sign the resolution.

Alexandra Wagschal, 15 Circle Avenue, stated that as a parent, she wanted to state her support for the Concealed Carry Resolution and thank the people present who spoke so eloquently. She added that she is also the President of the Somerville Home School Association and she wanted to raise the question if it would be possible for the Village to consider placing a crossing guard at the intersection of Spring and Kenilworth. It has been brought to their attention that there was a crash there a few weeks ago and there were students on the way to school. Her own daughter had to make her way around the car while the Police were tending to it. Mr. Wagschal added that it rose her concern along with a woman who is a parent at the school and lives on the corner and as well as other parents have said that it is a very dangerous corner. She often sees people running the lights which makes it hard for the kids to cross. She understands there are limited resources but she does feel it is a dangerous situation that would benefit from a crossing guard.

Mayor Knudsen stated that public comment was now closed, and she was going to give some feedback. Regarding Mr. Cirillo with Project Pride, she stated great work, and the idea of a bike stand that is covered sounds really terrific. She added that to the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Resolution, she wanted to correct someone that it is not a ban on concealed carry, it is a concealed carry reciprocity resolution that is crossing State lines utilizing the concealed carry guidelines of your State crossing into New Jersey or to any other State. Mayor Knudsen added was not on tonight’s agenda but would be added to the Work Session agenda for March 7^th. She stated that regarding the Cambodia Project, the Council will give them a plug and make that announcement. Mayor Knudsen stated that Mr. Dani’s concerns would be responded to with the WaterSmart presentation. Finally, to the Kenilworth issue, the Council met last Friday in the rain. They are taking a couple of initiatives by implementing double-faced stop signs and looking at the intersection. When the Council was standing there, they realized that everyone was racing up the hill to get to the light. She added that it was her neighborhood, so she can go over there. She also knows a lot of people living at Spring and Van Dien. There are a lot of near T-bones. So, the Village will be doing the same there.

Mayor Knudsen stated that the Council would take a motion to suspend the Work Session and convene a Special Public Meeting. Deputy Mayor Sedon moved the motion, and Councilwoman Walsh seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:             Councilmembers Hache, Sedon, Voigt, Walsh, and Mayor Knudsen

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:        None

ABSTAIN:      None

 

3. SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING - SEE SEPARATE MINUTES

Mayor Knudsen called for a motion to adjourn, there was a motion by Councilman Sedon to adjourn the special public meeting and reconvene the Work Session. Councilwoman Walsh seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:             Councilmembers Hache, Sedon, Voigt, Walsh, and Mayor Knudsen

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:        None

ABSTAIN:      None

4. PRESENTATION

 

Mayor Knudsen thanked Ms. Hickey and Janet Fricke for their work on the Zabriskie-Schedler Property and stated that she appreciated their energy and effort, adding that this is a bittersweet project.

1. WaterSmart

Ms. Mailander stated that the Council had some concerns about metrics and various things with the WaterSmart Customer Portal. She stated that Mr. Dani was here this evening to express his concern, so there is a representative from WaterSmart here to give a brief presentation and answer questions directly. Ms. Mailander stated that they brought him back because it was something that some of the Council members expressed concerns about and felt that if they had additional information perhaps they could have voted a different way.

Mayor Knudsen questioned before the presentation began if the representative from WaterSmart had all of Mr. Dani’s questions, he replied that he did.

Erik Andersen, from WaterSmart, stated that he wanted to call attention to the presentation as he thanked Mayor Knudsen, Deputy Mayor Sedon, Councilmembers, staff and members of the community, adding that he was happy to be there tonight at the Council’s invitation to address their questions and those of the community. He stated that he was going to try to take about 15 minutes to run through some information about WaterSmart and what they do, as he wants it to be different from what was heard in the prior Work Session so that the Council is clear on some of the questions. Mr. Andersen added that he was pleased with the engagement and interest in the community. He was there because they are accountable for every customer that they serve, in every community that they serve, so he was going to go through a few things, and in particular he wanted to speak first about the context as he had a few handouts.

Mr. Andersen stated that he wanted to give a bit of context and then talk about their goals and specifically how they would like to propose measuring success because that’s really important and then share some examples from other communities that they have served. He stated that water is a very local issue as every community is unique, every community is different. In this community there are 52 wells providing ground water. There is also purchased water that supplements this community and the neighboring communities that Ridgewood Water serves and there is a very high seasonal demand due primarily to irrigation in the summer months. Another thing that is happening is that consumer preferences and expectations of people in and beyond this room is self-service. People expect instant information; people expect personalization; people expect things that are relevant, timely, and topical to them. He stated that it’s the text from Chase that your deposit hit; it’s the information that you get when your shipment is delivered; people want to know what’s going on.

Mr. Andersen stated that Water Utilities are moving in this direction as well, so this is the context that’s happening not just for consumer products and consumer technologies but also utility services. He stated that individuals may also enjoy these today from electric or gas companies here in Ridgewood and neighboring communities. He stated that what he wanted to do tonight was present some hard numbers because he thought Councilman Voigt expressed some interest in quantification. He respected that and thinks it’s fair to ask for goals and some expectations they can hold themselves accountable to, and to corroborate with the community and the water utility team here.

Mr. Andersen stated that included in the WaterSmart subscription is a customer satisfaction survey. A lot of communities send surveys out from time to time about various topics. They did this specifically around water and they measure pre-WaterSmart and then 12 months later, and they want to measure how many people in this community say the Water Utility is excellent and they want to grow that number by 25 percentage points. They have seen that, they’ve proven it and he thinks they can do it here. So, he wants to improve this water service in the eyes of all the 4 communities it serves by 25%.

Mr. Andersen added that they want to bring community engagement and quantify that and measure it. How do they know people will use the software; how will people interact with it; how will people respond; and they want to measure what engagement means. He added that they also want to manage demand as there is a very high peak demand here and they want to create a goal of saving 50 million gallons of potable water in the first year. That is a substantial number but he thinks it is achievable based on the evidence that they have developed in the randomized control trials that they perform. They are happy to conduct a randomized control trial here in this community as well in the design of their approach.

Mr. Andersen summarized what has been seen about what the customers see and what the utility will see. He stated that the customer information is different than what is on the internet today coming from Ridgewood Water. So, speaking to one of the earlier questions from public comment, the present-day information that the customer would see is going to be different as it looks on the screen. The upper left shows an illustration of the customer portal which he could take the Council into later if they would like to see it. Mr. Andersen stated that they also deliver alerts in the preference of the customer. So, if they would like they can receive a text when WaterSmart thinks there’s a leak. If they want they can get a call.

Mr. Andersen stated that there are also two kinds of reports that he has handed out. One is a welcome letter that invites people to participate and explains the process. It is done separate from the bill; in color; personalized; and relevant because they know that this is more effective than a bill insert. He added that the Village may also want to promote this through a variety of other channels that they have. WaterSmart provides a marketing kit for the community whether they want to put things on Facebook; or on NextDoor; or on a bill insert; or on a bus. That is fine and WaterSmart will provide assets to help promote WaterSmart. The reports that he speaks of are Water Reports, and they are proposing to do four reports per year and are delivered to the account holder. So, it is not a report that is extracting something from a database, but these are actually personalized home water reports that give a social comparison to the residential customer on their use relative to others. WaterSmart knows that social norming and behavior science works to get people to understand what they are using is normal or out of the ordinary and to give context. WaterSmart creates a lot of context and has done a lot of work on this.

Mr. Andersen stated that lastly, one of the great things about Ridgewood is that meters are read monthly yet billed quarterly, so they want to be able to provide leak alerts based on that monthly data. If WaterSmart sees things that are out of alignment based on the season they want to be able to let customers know in advance. If they have seen the hose has been left on; the water softener is running; the kids left the spigot open; maybe there was a toilet leak that has been running; they want people to be able to identify this because it will eventually turn into calls and painful and difficult conversations with the community. Mr. Andersen stated that leak alerting is one of the most powerful tools that they have seen as far as outcome. He added that for the Utility they are also providing a rich set of analytics and reports. There are over 50 reports so there is faster information and they wrote the reports because of people like the Council who want to know what is going on or want to provide information to the EPA or regulators and need this information quickly and accurately.

Mr. Andersen added that WaterSmart can visualize through mapping and then have metrics in the software so the Council knows and its transparent and clear what’s happening with WaterSmart and all of those metrics are provided in the software. The last thing in the lower right of the Water Report is Group Messenger which they can provide for the Village to use in emergency and non-emergency settings. It has been really amazing to see the uses the communities have for this, whether it is hydrant flushing; a main break; boil water notice; or a picnic. They have seen all types of uses for this Group Messenger.   He added that they do allow the water utility to draw shapes in the community and if they want to send a message to this neighborhood, or this street, or this metering district in the metering system and let them know about something that is important, or not so urgent but they want to let people know about it. Mr. Andersen stated that WaterSmart does not charge any variable costs for sending texts or emails or automated voice calls. So, Ridgewood Water can use this, however he added that they do not recommend it as emergency reverse 911 because that is something that Law Enforcement or those in charge of 911 services should control. However, this is very helpful for public health information related to water or public works information related to maintaining water service.

Mr. Andersen stated that he had some quick comparisons and contrasts; he has four scenarios. Improve customer service; the old way is to pay the bill every quarter; the new way is to present information 24/7 to customers that’s rich, relevant and in context; understand their bill and their consumption in context. In terms of funding, he wanted to speak to some of the other questions about how WaterSmart would measure success. They think about these calls or bill disputes or making it easier for folks to pay online, set up autopay, or take their bill by email. These are all ways that we are moving and more and more people are adopting these methods for getting information through their smart phone, through their tablet, through their desktop, through their laptop, or through text, and WaterSmart is making this available to Ridgewood and other communities that they serve. He added that there are real savings when some of this work can be done through customer self-service and transparency and providing this to customers. WaterSmart and Ridgewood are a team as they are both accountable and delivering together. There are also real costs because water has to be acquired, treated, pumped, and transferred within the community. If those real costs can be saved through demand management by bending the demand curve through this kind of information, the Village can see lower pumping costs, lower water treatment costs, and lower customer service costs and that is what they are trying to achieve.

Mr. Andersen stated that WaterSmart has examples from many utilities that they have worked with that have between 15,000 and 30,000 accounts, and Ridgewood Water has 21,000 accounts. They have seen measurable real increases in customer satisfaction from the community based on thousands of responses. They can also see enhanced program participation, explaining that every water district has programs whether it is “high efficiency toilet rebates,” “replace your grass with needed plants,” or “workshops on composting.” There is a wide range just based on the geography, the climate, and the water needs of the community. In particular, lead and copper testing is a requirement where water samples have to be taken from within someone’s home and you need their participation and consent. So, they will be able to use WaterSmart to say that they need more participants. The Village has based the data properties that are appropriate for this kind of testing because Ridgewood Water wants to ensure that the water supply is within the appropriate levels of lead and copper.

Mr. Andersen stated that next, they want to improve communication and transparency. The old school way is bill inserts and newspaper advertisements. What they see now, is the need for targeted, timely, and topical communication. For example, what is happening in the customers home, or if somebody in an apartment needs information versus someone who lives in big lot versus the hospital. So, WaterSmart needs to provide relevant information for all of those stakeholders and let them choose how they want it to be whether that is email, print, text, or voice. Mr. Andersen stated that they want to be able to reach customers in the way that they prefer. So, through this rich mix of print, alerts of different types, emails, and the portal for both phone and laptop, Ridgewood Water can reach customers and WaterSmart can measure whether they are engaging or not. It is their hope and expectation that they will reach 70% of the community within one year meaning they will respond, they will remember, they will value these services.

Mr. Andersen stated that he wanted to explain what WaterSmart does regarding payments and single sign-on. He stated that in the portal, there will be a way for customers to pay their bill, so one can see their water use historically based on a comparison on similar households with similar occupancy. They can see the rainfall, the temperature and the other information that helps them understand their water bill in context, and they can pay it. So, the customer can say it was really hot in July, or really dry, or they did this last July, or they are using less or more than their neighbors. So, they can pay it just as people can pay for their Uber in the app or when buying something through an online store.

Single sign-on in WaterSmart’s world is a secure payment processing service for credit cards and debit cards. They partner with those firms because it is a very specialized occupation to handle customer credit cards and banking information, and WaterSmart does not do that. So, the single sign-on they speak of, is a way to seamlessly present a payment interface in a secure manner without the credit cards every being available to anyone in this room or anyone at WaterSmart. Mr. Andersen stated that was what single sign-on was all about. So, it’s a unified platform for payments, consumption and communications.

Mr. Andersen added that within the portal on the phone or desktop, customers can go right in and see their usage, quick view bill, pay bill, and see some history and it is up to the Village what payment processor it would like. WaterSmart understands that the one that is in use or will be chosen is one that they are familiar with, have worked with, and are comfortable with. In terms of demand management, some may be familiar with the watering day restrictions that exist in the Village and then there are “sticks and carrots” that one can use to influence demand. He doesn’t know if enforcement is possible in neighboring communities because of the way the governments are structured. WaterSmart presents a way for people to understand how they compare, to see if they are more or less efficient than properties of similar size with similar occupancy, and then provide personal relevant ways in dollars and gallons. People understand those measurements. They understand what they can do if they want to save money and that matters for fixed income residents, low income residents, and those who have unexpectedly high bills or leaks in their side of the meter. Mr. Andersen stated that they wanted to deliver leak alerts as well because of Ridgewood Water’s monthly reads.

Mr. Andersen added that because evidence matters in terms of presenting outcomes, WaterSmart will work with Ridgewood Water and study with them the work they will do over the proposed term. There are three examples. First they did an extensive study with East Bay Municipal Utility District that serves the communities of Oakland and Berkeley, California which are very substantial suburban and urban settings. They had a third party compare the efficiency study where they saw 4.5-6.5% improved water savings from WaterSmart using a randomized control trial of residential customers. This past year, the University of California Davis did an energy water study which interestingly was looking both at the water savings which was consistent with their other findings. What they found was the stow over effect in electricity reduction that people once being exposed to WaterSmart were actually being more cautious of electricity consumption and used 2.3% fewer kilowatt hours during the summertime. That was unexpected and actually very interesting and exciting for WaterSmart and it was nice to have a peer reviewed study do that work and present those findings. Mr. Andersen added that as they work with other utilities similar to Ridgewood, he feels good about this goal and this expectation that WaterSmart will see 50 million gallons, 2.5% reduction in savings. In 12 months after four home Water Reports and the Welcome Letter, they would like to be able to come back to present the findings on customer satisfaction.

Mr. Andersen stated that he wanted to make sure that he addressed the questions from the community. He stated that he wanted to address privacy, saying that it is essential and is part of WaterSmart’s commitment to every community. As they serve over 4 million account holders, 10 million Americans, with WaterSmart today. So, they must create a private and secure environment for all of their customers, and they have to go through third party audits. That is one of the reasons also that they don’t handle the payment information because that is done by people who are really good at that.

Mr. Andersen stated that the privacy matters, and the current lookup is available on the Ridgewood Water website, and Ridgewood Water can decide to leave it up or take it down but is not related to WaterSmart. There are variable costs, for these home Water Reports because there are costs to print in color, personalize, tailor, target and create the content that makes it relevant to one household versus another and deliver it through the US mail and pay the stamp. He added that every community WaterSmart serves on contract can terminate in 30 days. So, if Ridgewood Water is not happy with them, there are 30-day termination rights in every contract that they have. Second, he is really happy to say that WaterSmart has flexibility in these conversations. If Ridgewood Water says they would like 4 Water Reports a year, but in 2019 they only want to do two or one then they call WaterSmart to work it out. That’s fine because every community is different and everyone has different needs and things change. The hot issue next year might be something different and so WaterSmart needs to be flexible because conditions change in each community. The needs change, the priorities change, and Ridgewood may have new water issues coming up a year or two from now that they will need to collaborate on.

Mr. Andersen added that everything WaterSmart does is very different between Texas, Massachusetts, and Hawaii. Water is very local and so they encourage the collaboration to make sure that it meets the needs of the community. He stated that he would stop there, and he was happy to show the software. Ms. Mailander asked if he would like to show a sign on before going to questions so that everyone could see what that looked like.

Mr. Andersen demonstrated the Utility View to look up an account holder’s information, what alerts they have subscribed to, their balance, and relevant consumption. A leak alert has been thrown in, and viewers can see the seasonal consumption for this account holder. WaterSmart intends to bring back data through January 2014 if the Village allows them to. So, from what he is displaying there is either a toilet running or water softener and so a leak alert would be thrown on that account. Then it is not only an alert to the customer but also it gives them the tools to diagnose the leak. Mr. Andersen added that WaterSmart actually has the only closed-loop self-service leak system that says how to check the toilet or appliances and so on.

Mr. Andersen wants the team here to see what the customer can see because it is very helpful when on the phone with someone to see what they can see and so he displayed the view of the Customer Portal on the desktop view. It shows a Home tab with key points for important notifications and alerts are on the right. He added that people have this notion of things that they want to do; they want to transfer service; they want to stop their service; they want to understand how to pay their bill. He added there were also tabs across the top with various things the customer can do. When he talks about viewing and paying bills, the customer can view past bills including the PDFs and the customer would have a Pay button. Clicking up to the track tab is where WaterSmart provides richer information that is available to the customer as well. This shows their historical consumption, and their consumption against temperature and precipitation. This is important for people understanding why things are happening, and then looking at historical consumption period over period; summer versus summer; quarter versus quarter. They can actually show people through their model where water is being used in their property, irrigation system, bathrooms, kitchens, so on. Lastly, there are a lot of priorities that the Village may have has a community under Recommended Actions.

Mr. Andersen stated that the things that matter, are often in the upper left and can be anything from a pharmaceutical announcement or a variety of priorities that Ridgewood Water may have, such as a water or wastewater perspective that they want to deliver to the communities, so the notifications are all prioritized based on the type of property, the season, and more.

Councilman Voigt stated that Mr. Andersen had mentioned that WaterSmart would perform research and he wanted to know if they do that on their own for Ridgewood and if that is part of the analysis. Mr. Andersen stated that they can if the Council would like. Councilman Voigt questioned if he could define what those outcomes are and a duration of the research. Mr. Andersen stated that they would recommend a randomized control panel. Councilman Voigt questioned what would happen if Ridgewood decided to put the research together and look at the outcomes and saw that the outcome wasn’t favorable. If it didn’t do what the Village thought it should and after a year, could the Village get their money back. Mr. Andersen stated that typically that is not how it is handled, but there may be other reasons that those outcomes would come to 2.4% or 2.7% or only 23% customer satisfaction he guesses they would have figured that out. Councilman Voigt stated that it was a good way for the Council to figure out if it was worthwhile, or not, but if they find out in the end its not worthwhile it would help the Village to say they didn’t want to use it anymore because it’s not helping us. Mr. Andersen agreed. Councilman Voigt asked if that would be a consideration. Mr. Andersen stated that they have not done that, but they could consider that, some sort of performance benchmark if that is important to the Council. Councilman Voigt stated that it was, and again if at the end it didn’t meet the benchmark the Village would make a decision as to whether to use it or not pay for it in full and he asked if that was reasonable. Mr. Andersen agreed stating that it was reasonable.

Councilman Voigt stated that the other issue that would help him is from a cost savings standpoint. There was one slide that said $89,000 a year in cost savings and he thinks that was from some of the printing and paper that goes out. Dan Timmeny, Business Manager, Ridgewood Water, stated that those costs are really broken out into three categories. Ridgewood Water looked at the projected budget that they are using for 2018. If they reduce their budget projection in each of those categories, and for example, they effect the demand curve and drive down demand by 2.5% which is the goal here for the program, they then multiply that 2.5% by the estimated budget figure in each of those categories and the associated costs that would accompany that reduction. He added that they are hard, actual, tangible costs that support the network that Ridgewood Water needs to push water into locations such as electrical power, maintenance of pumps and the electrical grid. Mr. Timmeny added that on the treatment side, that is a 2.5% reduction in things like chlorine and phosphate and hard, tangible chemicals. He stated that on the Customer Service side, it is something that Ridgewood Water is looking at now, and they think longer term, it would certainly be a reduction in staffing as they reconfigure their current and customer service staff to figure out how and what the ideal mix is, who is working on what projects, and they have projected $35,000.

Councilman Voigt stated that information was helpful, he added that the Village will be paying so much for this software in year one and it would be nice to see from a performance standpoint what the savings will be. He asked to look at the amount in total in terms of a conservative, optimistic range to help him understand that the Village will pay a certain amount in year one and what will they potentially save based on that expenditure. Mr. Timmeny added that there are two aspects of savings there, and that’s sort of what was indicated in the slide. One really deals with the types of call that come in to Customer Service, the reduction in costs associated with those types of calls, and the other is the hard costs associated with actually having the program and what that means for how much water is being pumped. He added that Ridgewood Water will identify that and certainly split it up for the Councilman. Councilman Voigt stated that he is assuming that if a study is done there are going to be appropriate statistics associated with it. So, the Village will be looking at statistically significant differences as opposed to just a slight difference. Mr. Andersen stated that WaterSmart has a data scientist on staff who they would bring in.

Deputy Mayor Sedon thanked Mr. Andersen and Mr. Timmeny for taking the time to come in and present this. He stated that this would basically bring Ridgewood Water into the 21^st century and offer the same kind of portal that other utilities such as banks, credit card companies, things like that possibly have. It could also help with conservation efforts for people that are so inclined can go into and look at the water use, and see if it’s out of line. What else could it do for conservation efforts he questioned. Mr. Andersen stated that the Village could dial up or dial down the conservation voice in the software. They have seen utilities use this for programs like rebates where they actually might incent weather-based irrigation controls or maybe the Village would like to consider it for its municipal ball field. You might be able to measure the savings associated with doing something like that. He added that WaterSmart has also seen rebates for high efficiency toilets, dishwashers, or washing machines which are often done in conjunction with the power company. They have a library of over 250 different tactics and strategies to be drawn from that are available to the Village including everything from gardening and composting to coupons being given for different incentives. Mr. Andersen stated that they want people to be able to click on any of these indoor or outdoor recommendations and have a wide range of choices that are relevant to their household.

Councilwoman Walsh thanked the presenters and stated that her question was regarding the initial billing system and whether it was going to go away. Mr. Timmeny stated that no, Ridgewood Water has a billing contract separate and aside from this. So, their billing contract is for the actual background work on all of the data and incorporates all of the actual meters. It is the system that allows them to have an employee go out and read the entire system on a monthly basis in all four towns, and input that data into a billing system. Then they populate the bill, which has some features on it although it clearly has nowhere near the amount of things offered by WaterSmart. Mr. Timmeny stated that if someone does not want to participate in claiming their account on WaterSmart, we will be keeping access to them paying their bill, but they wouldn’t have access to the plethora of information that is available on WaterSmart they that. He stated that the billing contract is really for billing and reporting features. They use that company not just for billing but for function such as Ridgewood Water audits, reporting, questions on bills, water use consumption, various purposes. They are completely separate and would be working with WaterSmart in that they are pushing the data up to WaterSmart for them to use, but the separate billing company will remain.

Councilwoman Walsh stated that she has lived in Ridgewood for 20 years, and her bill every quarter is paid, they conserve, have a rain sensor, and she makes sure her kids don’t shower too long. She feels that the existing system is sufficient and she does not know that she personally would use any more of the data. Knowing there are some that would, and if a large percentage of customers never claim their accounts, will Ridgewood still be charged the same amount. Mr. Andersen stated that they sell by the meter per year and WaterSmart helps the Village through these vehicles that he shared. Councilwoman Walsh may be amazing and then when she sees the social comparison she may realize that maybe she isn’t. You never know until the data is presented in a social context. He added it’s a fact that there are some who may never log in.

Councilman Hache stated that most of the focus has been on the user satisfaction and interface which he gets as it is a portal for that purpose, and he thinks that one of the biggest problems in New Jersey is leakage as he read somewhere that the leakage rate in New Jersey is about 30% compared to 15% in the rest of the country. He questioned if WaterSmart has measured what the aggregate benefit to the systems is that they service from having a system that can hopefully catch leaks at an early stage and what the benefit or improvement has been in the leakage rate in those areas. Mr. Andersen stated that there are two types of leaks, the ones that WaterSmart measures are on the customer side of the meter. They don’t measure leaks that go through the mains in the community. He stated that they do quantify and share all of the leak information both with the account holder and the utility. Leaks in the mains are much harder to quantify as they don’t sensor those. The Village would need to install acoustic sensors on the distribution system to identify leaks. Councilman Hache questioned if this was more to identify the smaller leaks. Mr. Andersen stated that was correct.

Mr. Timmeny stated that Ridgewood Water has an escaping system at the Wortendyke facility that does allow them to have electronic control of moving water around various areas. If something significant is happening, they would see that but that isn’t to say that everything is caught. Unaccounted water is absolutely an issue they are focusing on and trying to always be cognizant of and that is where Capital investment is heard. The Capital Plan does address the ongoing issue of the age of mains in the system that were neglected for a period of time. So, this next phase of the Capital Plan really aims at what Councilman Hache is talking about and remedying the in the ground side of the transmission making sure that the information can support this on an ongoing basis.

Councilman Hache questioned if users would be able to receive alerts on their phones if they want to know whether they surpassed a 100 gallon per day mark. Would there be a way for a customer to get that and can the usage be tracked that way. Mr. Andersen stated that yes, to the extent that Ridgewood and the community reads the meters monthly, WaterSmart could provide monthly threshold alerts to the resident. If the community chooses to go to the advanced metering that is now available they can get hourly data which Ridgewood may choose to do in the coming years. WaterSmart can do those types of things on a daily basis if there is unusual activity on a given day. Ridgewood is currently only reading monthly so they can only provide based on those readings. Mr. Timmeny stated that longer term, the fixed network would be a very tangible benefit, but right now it is very possible that someone could go 90 to 100 days without any idea that they have had a leak. So, they panic when they see their bill or if Ridgewood Water happens to contact them. Ridgewood Water is absolutely concerned about a massive amount of water getting pumped and the costs associated with that and the customer is paying for that as it passed through the meter.

Mayor Knudsen thanked them for the presentation and stated that her first question was just in the context and whether WaterSmart said that Ridgewood would theoretically save 50 million gallons over what period of time. Mr. Timmeny stated 12 months. Mayor Knudsen stated so everyone understands the value of 50 million gallons can Ridgewood Water quantify that, to which Mr. Timmeny responded absolutely. Mayor Knudsen stated that one of her very first Council meetings someone made a comment about lost water, and she kept asking where the water was, find it, how much is that worth, because it is a finite resource, but just for the record Ridgewood has one of the lowest amounts of lost water, so maybe that should be cleared up because the Village’s numbers are very negligible. Mr. Timmeny stated that they look at the very granular level and are really trying to drill down to incorporate every potential source of lost water so they can get as close to an absolute figure as they can. Then they have a baseline going forward as there is a capital outlay for investing in infrastructure and replacement of mains that have been in the ground forever. Ridgewood Water knows that really is the source as they have done everything they can on the other aspects that would play into the unaccounted water percentage. Now they must make sure the other side of that transmission main, those pipes are good and support the amount of water that is being pushed through the system on a daily basis and they continue monitoring.

Mayor Knudsen questioned the software. She sees it as a more streamlined customer portal that is not “klunky” as we are accustomed to. She also sees it as a very valuable conservation tool and she doesn’t know what value to put on the conservation of a finite resource. So, she is not certain how those two things connect and she thinks that it is more valuable to conserve. Even though the Village has to be cognizant of the cost, she thinks it is a small price to pay for that effort. Mayor Knudsen stated that one of the issues raised was being able to go online if you have an account, you can pull up Councilman Walsh’s water bill as it is public information. So, to that end, someone would have to go back into that “klunky” system to pull that information.

Mayor Knudsen stated that it is public information, she can see late payments and she thinks it is a great collection tool. She thinks people will pay their bills on time, they get a notification, go to it and it will save them money on late fees. For the Village, she thinks if it is streamlined, people will pay their bill in a more timely manner. She asked if Mr. Timmeny would speak to those questions about public information and how someone might still be able to access it. Mr. Timmeny stated the question was raised with the existing provider MCC as to what information was publicly available. Currently, as some people pointed out, in other towns and municipalities none of this information would be redacted or withheld from an OPRA request. It is all going to be readily available; however, Ridgewood Water is going to look into whether removing account numbers, or redacting account numbers, is even something they could pursue in the next iteration of the contract.

Mr. Timmeny stated to that end, in WaterSmart there is a lot more information. Customers building up their portal would be behind a completely different wall and reporting things such as how many people are in their household, or how much water they are using relative to their neighbor. Ridgewood Water is going to look at what can be done on the legacy system; but, here it would be a different sign-on category where that information wouldn’t be available in the same manner.

Mayor Knudsen questioned the greater than 70% engagement in the first year and if that was average. Mr. Andersen stated that was correct, and what was projected for the Village of Ridgewood based on WaterSmart’s experience is a mixture of all different types of engagement that are available through this platform. Mayor Knudsen stated that she thought that was important dealing with customer engagement. The experience the Village had when there was a little problem, Ridgewood wanted to get information pushed out to the public and there were some difficulties and they had to use the County.

Mayor Knudsen asked whether the reports could be made available by email. Would someone have an option to not have it mailed. They are speaking about conservation and generating more paper, so why aren’t they using the same electronic systems to generate those reports and push them out. So, would that change the cost involved if that is possible. Mr. Andersen stated that the customer can choose to receive by email if that is their preference and it can affect the cost based on the mix of print versus email. Mr. Timmeny stated that on the early side, the point of having Water Reports is that beyond all of the really valuable information that a customer would receive on the report, they are going to have the welcome letter which an early touch point where someone is getting engaged with the platform. Reports are on an ongoing basis, and they are not going to decide today to use the maximum number of reports each year. This is something they will assess from a cost perspective.

Mayor Knudsen stated that she understood the reports would actually generate that engagement. She added that she had one more question regarding the last time a resident may have asked why the Village had to go through Rio to access the WaterSmart software if they could go to WaterSmart directly. Mr. Andersen stated that was a great question, and the way they sell and market their software is through distribution. There are 50,000 water agencies in the United States and they are a relatively small software company. It is difficult to reach 50,000 water utility companies so there are a number of meter manufacturers and distributors that serve these utilities. So, they found that the best way to get a young software company’s product to market was to hire a channel and Rio Supply; among others around the country; sell and market the software on WaterSmart’s behalf. Also, they help them with the specific Ridgewood and State of New Jersey requirements to qualify as a responsible and authorized provider of services, which is important to have that local understanding.

Mayor Knudsen stated that the discussion would be opened to residents, by taking a couple of minutes to see if there are any residents that have a question on this system.

Jan Bottcher, 425 Fairfield Avenue, stated this was the first time that she has seen WaterSmart and had a few questions. Mayor Knudsen stated she was going to limit Ms. Bottcher to about two questions as the Council was on a tight agenda and this was very out of the ordinary to allow residents to come up and ask questions in this kind of a presentation. So, just limit it and any additional questions please email and the Council can get the answers to her. Ms. Bottcher questioned, as a marketer, as to why the Village thinks that consumers really want to be that engaged. She stated there was the chart that said there were three goals: 70% engagement, 2.5% water reduction, and she couldn’t remember the third, but who’s goals are they, were they the Councils goals or Ridgewood Water’s goals. She understands what’s in it for WaterSmart, but she doesn’t understand what’s in it for the consumer. Ms. Bottcher added that there were also cost estimates about saving $20 an account here and $5 an account there, but her question is what is the additional cost to her as a consumer for all of these bells and whistles that she personally does not have a burning need for. She stated that she has more questions, but she is not convinced.

Mayor Knudsen stated that the engagement piece of this was pretty straightforward and that the Village is looking to access those customers in the case of an emergency, if there is a water leak, or some greater conservation effort. Mr. Andersen stated it very well that it may also help with Ridgewood’s water restrictions during the summer months. Mr. Timmeny stated that to be clear, as the person who manages customer service here in the Village, lots of people ask for this information all the time and it is a huge percentage of the calls every day and people want self service tools that Ridgewood Water currently doesn’t offer. They want information that is often easily fed back to them over the phone or via email but they don’t have a simple mechanism for a self-serve tool. He added that people want a portal akin to the Verizon bill or the PSEG bill. They want to know a lot of those basic usage questions and Ridgewood Water is unique in that they read monthly but bill quarterly, and as a result there is a delta there between what information is available to them at any moment in time and what is available to the customer.

Mr. Timmeny added that one practical application, and there are many, is landlord/tenant issues. People never call exactly on a billing date, that never works. They want to know how much water the tenant used, or the tenant wants to know before they get out of the lease how much water they used. Ridgewood Water has that information but there is no mechanism for people to have access to that, so that is one basic example. Anywhere between 33-40% of their calls would be self-service calls if they would have those tools, but Ridgewood Water just doesn’t have those tools right now.

Mayor Knudsen stated that just to remind Ms. Bottcher that this is a water utility purchase and there are customers in four municipalities. So, the demand isn’t just from Ridgewood, it’s not a Ridgewood resident taxpayer issue but a water utility and a customer base of four municipalities.

Saurabh Dani, 390 Bedford Road, stated that he had two questions, one for Mr. Andersen and one for Mr. Timmeny. First, if the Council decides that the customers don’t need these paper reports, will the costs be just for the fixed costs in a year. If the Council says they don’t need any paper reports the only thing different from the bill that he receives now is the chart that shows how he compares to others. If he doesn’t care how he compares to other residents will the costs be $36,000 a year.

Mr. Dani stated that the Mayor mentioned that our current software is “klunky;” he felt that another software shouldn’t be bought because the current software is “klunky.” The current software would be replaced by buying another software to put on top of it. Cost saving would result in terms of human capital and customer service, as well as a reduction in water usage. He asked if 50 million gallons less water are used what is the impact on revenue, not just the cost and cost reduction. Mr. Dani asked if Ridgewood Water actually identified the discounts.

Mr. Andersen stated that he can confirm with clarity and certainty that the $37,840 annual subscription for the software is all it is. So, if the Council or staff chooses to discontinue the Water Reports, WaterSmart still provides the customer experience, the analytics for the team here, as well as the outbound messaging for emergency or not emergency or service related issues. Mayor Knudsen asked to confirm the costs, and there was discussion about this.

Mr. Timmeny stated that in response to Mr. Dani the current billing provider, there is a billing company and a payment provider, and that company is MCC. That company has been acquired by a company with a better product called InvoiceCloud who is partnered with WaterSmart. He stated that was not by design, but just happens for Ridgewood Water to be gratuitous that this is the case. He added that billing is a separate entity than analytics. They are not the same thing and if there was one company that did all of those things that would be something that Ridgewood would look at, but as there are very niche markets with very niche skillsets they are pursuing different tools for different reasons.

Mr. Timmeny stated that Ridgewood Water’s billing provider charges for the services of the utility capturing meter reads, inputting them into the system, and then all the other reporting audit associated requirements. WaterSmart offers Ridgewood Water and the customer a lot of different benefits, so for them it is not that they are spending money to replace “klunky” software, they really are two distinct programs, features, and sets that will allow Ridgewood Water to do their job better and have more information with which to do their jobs.

Jacqueline Hone, 30 Carriage Lane, stated that she has had extensive experience in communicating with the water department on several issues in the past and she thinks they are doing a really good job the way it is, including once when she called and said she needed to know exactly from 8:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. what her usage was and how many gallons were used. Within an hour, they were able to get back to her via email. So, it was effortless. Her question is how is this different. It looks fancier. It’s at her fingertips, but so was her phone and she got the information she needed. She doesn’t know if she is willing to pay upwards of $100,000 just to have it look prettier. Her other question was about being able to identify leaks and how exactly that would be identified versus the case if there was a period that she knew water was being utilized excessively for an out of town guest for an extended period of time. So, how exactly would they really know where in her house there is a leak other than more water is being used.

Mr. Timmeny stated that he was glad to hear she has had a great experience with the customer service staff, and that the information that she requested would have had to be acquired from a data logger which is a feature within the meter. Not every meter in the system currently has it. Depending on how new your meter is, Ridgewood Water would be able to access that information Ms. Hone had requested. To get to that degree in the entirety of the system is longer term involving a fixed network, which is where utilities are going over the long term. Having access to hourly or several hours’ worth of data and being able to identify those leaks in real time, isn’t the case for everybody, so it is something that they are having to be cognizant of terms of cost. Mr. Timmeny added that meters are expensive to replace, they are on schedule, involving number of years and gallons, and so as a result this is by far the more cost-efficient approach for Ridgewood Water to take at this point.

Mr. Andersen stated that from a leak perspective, one can only identify irregular use so it is impossible to say this is a leak. What they found was the three most common words they get back in WaterSmart are “fixed, leak, and thanks.” There are times when it wasn’t a leak but people are grateful to know that there was irregular use on their property and they see it time and again on the data they collect. He added that if this community chooses to go to hourly data to everyone then Water Smart can provide that information on a near real time basis to the community.

There were no additional questions. Mayor Knudsen thanked Mr. Andersen for his presentation and stated that the Council will have to make a decision as to whether they want to bring this back. She thanked Mr. Timmeny and stated that she appreciated his vast knowledge of the system as well. Mayor Knudsen stated that she happened to love it and thought it was a nice system.

Deputy Mayor Sedon asked whether the Sustainable Jersey presentation could be moved up.

 

 

1. Sustainable Jersey Award

 

Deputy Mayor Sedon began by introducing the members of the Ridgewood Green Team, chair, Jiffy Vermylen; George Wolfson; Bob Upton, also Chair of the Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee. Through their work and members who are not here, the Village of Ridgewood was certified this November through Sustainable Jersey at the Silver level. He added that there are only 49 towns in the State of New Jersey that are certified at that level, which opens up grant opportunities. They just got an email today that a $20,000 grant is in the works and so they will find out at the end of March if they do get that for a tree survey in the town, it is a matching grant, which will be discussed during the Budget presentation. Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that when they got involved the town was registered but it wasn’t anything else. So, Janet Fricke had some paperwork to start them out, and they had to go out into the Village and collect a lot of documentation. Their current application is 400 pages with all of the documents. It is a substantial amount of work, but it proves that the Village is focused on sustainability and conservation efforts. He would really like to applaud the membership for helping the Village to achieve this, and they are working on the Gold Standard now for waste and other things for Sustainable Jersey. So, it is a good thing for the community and Ridgewood should be proud that only 49 other towns have achieved this level of certification.

Jiffy Vermylen stated that she thinks it is very important to document the work that has been going on in the Village in order for the Green Team to really track and know what the opportunities are to keep pushing forward and if they don’t really keep track of what has been done it is hard to have a good and clear direction for moving forward. She thinks that the work of the Green Team and REAC to come together and really compile what others have done and Ms. Fricke had started was a meaningful step for the Village and she think it is really pointing the Village in the right direction. Hopefully they will get those grants, so they can keep marching ahead.

George Wolfson stated that it was also important to say that Sustainable Jersey provides a good road map for Councilmembers as it covers just about every single topic that could be thought of. Every commission or committee that they serve has a component or a chapter within Sustainable Jersey and these are programs that are pointing the way of the future for making things work in a municipality. He would urge the Council after the Budget meetings to take a look and see if there is something there that catches the Council’s eye.

Bob Upton stated that he had nothing more to add but urged everyone to put April 22^nd on their calendar for the Village’s annual Earth Day event.

Mayor Knudsen thanked everyone for all of their hard work and commitment to the Village, to Bob, George and Jiffy, but she also wanted to point out that back in 2014 when the Council was behind closed doors trying to divvy up who was going to be on which boards and which committee. The only things left on the table was The Green Team, REAC, and Shade Tree Commission and everyone was walking in the other direction and the Deputy Mayor had nothing so he chose those committees. She has to say that no one has worked harder to keep the Village green and work on the environment, Shade Tree and REAC and she thought a round of applause was owed not just to the Committee members but to the Deputy Mayor. Ms. Mailander stated that she wanted to ask Deputy Mayor Sedon if there were representatives from the Shade Tree Commission as well; or if he was going to do a report. Deputy Mayor Sedon replied that he would do a report when it comes time.

 

1. Walker Report on Hudson Street Parking Garage

 

Ms. Mailander stated that the Council had reviewed a preliminary report a couple of weeks ago, and the revised final report has been received so she was going to have Mr. Rooney our Parking Director come up and give a summary of those two reports. One was a financial analysis and the other is an allocation study as to how the parking garage should be allocated.

Mr. Rooney stated that there were two reports that Walker has completed for the Village. The first phase of this process started in 2015 when the Village was considering putting up a 412-car garage and experts came in to explain how to fund this garage and how to make it so that it is self-sustaining and wouldn’t impact taxpayers as all of the revenue from the parking utility would be sufficient enough to pay for that garage.

Mr. Rooney stated that Walker came in and did the study in three versions, 412, 350 and ended up at 325 spaces and each time they put together a spreadsheet as to what the impact was and when the rates would have to change. He stated that now the Village has a 240-car garage and needs to understand what financing it needs to make that happen and make that operable, the key obviously is to maintain debt service coverage, that is critical. Mr. Rooney stated that Walker came in and based upon the information that they had from their first report, duplicated, retested it and came up with the conclusion as far as capacity, supply and demand, that there was definitely a need for additional parking. They did counts, made observations at certain times in the Village during different hours, and there are a couple charts that identify the times that they came in and what their findings were, what the capacity was, and whether or not the core area that they define had need for additional parking spaces.

Mr. Rooney stated that Walker went back and looked at the revenue streams he had provided to them for the last three years and determined that the smaller the garage the less revenue the Village will generate so it will require rate increases either sooner or higher than they initially anticipated. So they came up with, looking at the revenue stream the Village had in 2017, projected out all the way through for about 10 years and determined that in July 2018 the meter rates would have to increase 25 cents to 75 cents and the meter hours would have to extend to 8:00 P.M. In January of 2020 another increase of 50 cents to $1.25 and in January of 2025 it would need to go up 25 cents to $1.50. Walker also projected the need for increase in parking permits by about $25 in years 2020, 2023, 2026 and 2029.

Their findings were consistent with what Walker had in the past. They determined that in order to maintain debt service coverage this was the type of increase that the Village would have to entertain. Basically, if the Village had this garage in the position now where it wanted to start construction a rate increase would be affected in July and that money would then be accumulated into surplus so that when it came time to start making payments there would be sufficient funds to start paying that down as long as the revenue stream stayed the same every year. Mr. Rooney stated that the capacity of the garage was at the levels that they thought it should be and everything would move forward with a self-sustaining parking utility.

Mr. Rooney stated that Walker provided in their executive summary, and later on in their report, the expenses estimating that there would be approximately a 3% increase in the cost to operate the garage. He added that hasn’t been compared to the information that was obtained from the contractors last week. So, there are still some disconnects and the only way to resolve that would be to have everyone in a room and just hash that through. They estimated costs for the garage at a $12 million construction cost, a 25 year pay back on debt service, and at a 3% interest rate which is similar to what they did back in 2015, but Mr. Rooney thinks it was at a 2.5% interest rate.

Mr. Rooney stated looking at page 11 of the report shows their revenue summary by meters and permits as to what they anticipate with 2017 being actual and 2018 on is estimated cost. On page 12 is their estimate for operation of the garage, with $75,000 in allocations that are currently used for law enforcement, time for management, and things of that nature, which are charged back to the parking utility. Also, the repair, maintenance, and different operational expenses that they see for the garage. Because they are experts in transportation and garages, Walker has a large database which they use to determine the location of the garage, and weather in terms of maintaining surfaces. So, that is a lot of what they bring into this project.

Mr. Rooney stated that on page 13 where he was talking about the cost of the garage, the period of payback and interest rate, Walker has also the projected net operating expense and net operating income. Along the bottom it has debt service coverage assuming that debt service first payment would be in 2020. So, from the time the rate increase took effect in 2018, 2018 and 2019 surplus funds would be accumulating and then coming to pay covered debt service in at least a one to one ratio. He stated that was the rationale behind the timing of the increasing in the rates.

Mr. Rooney stated that the second report that they did was the user group allocation report, and this was to determine how many people or what type of parker should be using the garage. So, on page 1 of the report they indicate that it is recommended that 40% hourly users and 60% monthly users be split during normal business hours and then they also go on through the report to describe who should park where. So, obviously the ones that are permits will probably be there early in the morning catching the train. Walker recommended that they go upstairs, and those that would be there during the day for shopping or visiting restaurants would go downstairs as they would be going in and out of the garage. That is described on page 2 in the second report.

Mr. Rooney stated that they also talk about the types of systems that the Village can have to monitor the parking, a gated or an ungated system. The Village has been leaning to an ungated system as it is less costly and fits in with the type of parking enforcement in place currently. If the Village had ungated it would need someone to maintain it, and on call in case it doesn’t function, and they have to repair it. Mr. Rooney stated that ungated would continue to use a mobile forum for the parking in addition to having a kiosk available on each floor. Someone could park by plate and then law enforcement would monitor parking times by plate reader to determine whether there are any violations as they go through. So, each parking enforcement officer would have a handheld device as they do now, and they would use that data that’s downloaded on the spot to monitor the enforcement of the parkers. Mr. Rooney stated that was a high-level summary of these reports and he would try his best to field any questions that the Council may have.

Councilman Voigt questioned how much the permit tags for the garage would be per year, are they the $1000 per year permit that the Village has now. Mr. Rooney responded yes. Councilman Voigt questioned how much the tags would increase, to which Mr. Rooney stated starting in 2020, 2023, 2026, 2029 there would be an increase of $25. Councilman Voigt questioned what Mr. Rooney considered to be an appropriate debt service as he knows the higher the ratio. Mr. Rooney stated that the higher ratio the better. Councilman Voigt questioned what Mr. Rooney would consider safe, to which Mr. Rooney responded at least 1.5 and when this was first done with the larger garage the revenue stream was sufficient to get to approximately 1.5. Councilman Voigt questioned whether Mr. Rooney was concerned at all about the debt coverage approaching 1 on some of the analyses. Mr. Rooney stated that he thinks that when it gets to 1.09 that’s sensitive, but in the same token in the earlier years if you can build up enough surplus you could put money aside in a reserve to pay that debt service just like there is now in other authorities. A debt service could be put aside just for that purpose.

Councilman Voigt questioned whether the 3% interest rate seemed pretty reasonable or did Mr. Rooney think the Village could get a better rate than that. Mr. Rooney stated that yes, Ridgewood could definitely get a better rate than that, but they took a conservative approach. Councilman Voigt stated that there were a bunch of little tweaks to the report that may make the result better or worse. If the Village can get a better interest rate than 3%, he’s wondering if Walker can look at that. If they can look at spaces above 240 as there were presentations that had 250/260 spaces, and if the Village added 10-15 spots, what would that do to the revenue streams. He added that the other question he had is regarding parking permits for the garage. Why couldn’t those people have access to all of the area close to the train station so they could park at the garage or wherever they want, which is what the Village does now. Would that make a difference. Mr. Rooney stated that he didn’t think it would, but he would see if Walker could make the change.

Councilman Voigt questioned the $12 million as there were several proposals that were much less than that and could that be tweaked to closer to $11million. Mr. Rooney stated that it is his suggestion as the Village gets closer to getting that number finalized, but $12 million was where they started. Councilman Voigt questioned if Walker would be willing to look into the tweaks he mentioned, to which Mr. Rooney responded absolutely.

Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that he had a few questions, but to continue along the same line that Councilman Voigt went down, there are other minor tweaks to make. He noticed they said the annual parking pass was $750 and some of them are, but others are $1000. He, didn’t think that would change things dramatically, but it would change things. He coupled that with Parkmobile where they went off the current contract and asked if they used a 35% usage for Parkmobile or did they stay with the current 15% as the cost to the Village in their projections. Mr. Rooney stated that he thinks they just looked at the net revenue number not the cost. Deputy Mayor Sedon said that in the report, Walker said that right now its around 15% of people use Parkmobile, but generally that’s 35% in other towns and they figured that it would eventually go to that. Under the current contract, if it was that much the Village would lose a lot more revenue, but if they enter into a contract with either Parkmobile or someone else and it’s no longer a cost to the Village, then that might change the numbers a little more substantially and is that something that Walker would be willing to look at. Mr. Rooney was in agreement.

Councilwoman Walsh stated that being a commuter reading the reports, she was thinking what are we looking at, what are we expecting, and what are the taxpayers expecting. She wished Mr. Halaby was still there so that she could comment to him because when the Council was looking at the designs, she was looking at more of a basic design. The Village would get the same amount of spots whether or not the fancy façade was chosen. They are looking to get a parking garage to fill the needs that it has now and will have in the future. Councilwoman Walsh stated that there will be developments built within several blocks of the garage and whether those cars are onsite or not, she believes that they will have lots of cars offsite as well. This means they are either going to be in the street or in the lots whether they go down to Cottage or another lot, there is going to be this influx. She stated when she has visitors who meet her in town, they have to park somewhere.

Councilwoman Walsh stated that what she was trying to work through what’s going to be the habit that’s going to keep that garage full because ideally the Village is building the garage to change the pattern throughout the parking of the Village. She was thinking if the habit that they are trying to form is to get people into the garage so there’s more revolving use on the street which will get people into the shops and businesses more successfully. She didn’t know if Walker touched on that in the report. Councilwoman Walsh stated that she was trying to figure out how the Council could supplement that to figure out some of the costs because the parking pass is a fixed cost. Will the Village want every commuter parking there, or to start a habit of people thinking there is always a spot in the garage so they’ll go straight there. That to her is what is going to help this whole process and it is not going to happen overnight.

Councilwoman Walsh stated that once commuters are moved into the garage there will be a new use for the train station parking lot as it’s not going to be all commuters. Train station parking lot people are creatures of habit and usually park in the same spot and that would be her hope for the garage. So, if there are people who are using the garage who were always in the Village from 9:00 A.M. to 12:00 P.M., wouldn’t you charge them a flat rate of $4.00 for that time frame as opposed to a per hour charge. The Walker report doesn’t touch on that at all. If she was going to park, she’s going to either swipe her card or do whatever to get in and then park, and then if she’s there for an hour she pays $3.00 or $4.00 the same as being there for three hours. So charging to park in different increments is what she was hoping to see in the report but she thinks the Council could supplement it with ideas for what they believe the habit or the use is going to be. She added that she liked a lot of the data in the Report but there is no crystal ball as to what the habit is going to be. Mr. Rooney stated that one of the things they point out on page 1 of the allocation report is the need to monitor the mix in the garage at one month, and three months. So, there is a large investment of time to make sure you get the right mix. To, Councilwoman Walsh’s point, he would think to explore who is parking in these other areas and where permit parkers are going is more than is in the report.

Councilwoman Walsh stated that her other concerns are in terms of enhancements of the revenue, because again the Village wants it to be a net zero. What is going to be the buy-in from the Chamber and the businesses as to what the Village is going to be doing with the garage.

Councilman Hache stated that he was looking at page 2 of the Executive Summary and under key assumptions, the new garage will attract roughly 50 commuters from outside of Ridgewood and that should be zero because the Village is not building the garage to bring commuters from out of town. So, he would like to see what happens to the assumptions when that is swapped out. He added that he didn’t see in the assumptions what they are assuming the Village will see in terms of premium parking passes versus regular. He knows that there was talk about trying to incorporate the current mix which is 210 premium versus 140 regular at some point in time and was that data in this redo of the report. Mr. Rooney stated that no it wasn’t.  

Councilman Hache stated that looking at the allocation of monthly versus hourly, he thinks one of the things the Village would want to do with this garage is to make sure that the Village knows with a great deal of certainty is how much of it will be paid for by January 1^st of every year. So, he would go 3 levels for monthly parking and then the bottom level, which is really more realistic for people who are going to come in and out to shop. He thinks the mix would be 75%/25% and the Village would know at the very worst by January 1^st of every year, 75% of the garage is paid for.

Councilman Hache added that another way to handle this is if the Village simply goes and sells more passes because it now has a garage that has done nothing to make a dent on the parking situation. So, he thinks keeping the commuter passes steady and pulling them from the other lots that are closer to the businesses, as a commuter, they would want to be closer to the train. He stated that he has another question, as Walker has a lot of experience dealing with different parking utilities throughout the United States and he trusts Mr. Rooney’s opinion as he has been running this utility for several years. Is Mr. Rooney comfortable with the assumptions made here in terms of the operating costs for the garage year to year. Also, does he think these are pretty accurate assumptions because Walker can tell what is a trend throughout the U.S., but Ridgewood might be even higher or lower.

Councilman Hache questioned whether Mr. Rooney was comfortable with the assumption that Walker was making. Mr. Rooney stated that he was comfortable, the only caveat being that in talking to the construction companies that presented the other night, they came up with some areas that he doesn’t think the Council thought about as far as costs. For example, having to wash the garage down several times a month during the winter season. He doesn’t know how that’s impacted here, so he hasn’t gotten into the nitty gritty of what these numbers are. So, from a high level he is comfortable, but he would have to push down further as to what some of the costs are to make sure.

Councilman Hache stated that the builders gave a safe assumption of the cost to maintain and range from $50 per space per year to $100 per space. He stated that perhaps, we might negotiate directly with them, and can be built into the construction things such as pitch or drainage, or perhaps a wheel wash that is weight sensitive. This would wash the tires as they came into the garage. He’s seen these systems that are not overly expensive and can protect the Village’s investment. Councilman Hache added that he knows the assumptions were made for a $12 million garage, and the 3% interest. Does it change much in terms of the assumption of the operating costs whether the garage is $12 million versus $11 million versus $10 million. Mr. Rooney stated only the utilities would change, and he didn’t think by much. Councilman Hache questioned whether it would change talking about a garage with 240 spaces with four levels, to which Mr. Rooney responded it should be close but there will still be electricity if there is one level less. Councilman Hache stated that assuming there are 4 levels, or 3 stories, the Village’s operating costs should not change whether it is $12 million versus $11 million versus $10 million. In theory, the Village will be paying for the aesthetics of a nicer looking structure. So, the Council could take the provided assumptions and calculate what the debt service would be at each of those constructions amounts and it looks like it would be a cost savings of $60,000 a year.

Councilman Hache stated that one of the things that he would like to look at a bit closer was one of the builders including some analysis in terms of short-term interest-only financing. If they can do interest-only for the first three years, for example in terms of debt service coverage ratio in 2020 at 1.38, that can go to almost 4 times, they go 3.96 and can bring that financing down assuming a conservative rate of around 2%. So, he thinks that’s something the Council should look at. It is not binding and they can go directly to the local banks, talk to them, and allow that to be the mechanism that the Village uses to build that early cushion. Maybe we don’t rely as much on the rate increases immediately, which he felt was something that was worthwhile to take a look.

Councilman Hache added that another thing he saw in the assumptions, the first line in the revenue is parking meter and RPP fees for 2019. Following what happens from 2017 to 2018 where the revenues go from $1,237,000 for $1,473,000 that’s consistent with increasing parking meter rates by 50% but only for 5 months out of the year. If it were 6 months, the Village would see a 25% increase in the revenue and here the Council is seeing about a 20% increase. Councilman Hache added that he didn’t follow what happens in 2019 that there is a drop off in the revenues from $1,473,000 to $1,399,000. Mayor Knudsen suggested it was because the Hudson Street lot would be closed and there would be no revenue stream. Mr. Rooney stated that he would check.

Councilman Hache stated that the Village was saying they would find a place for those commuters to park, so he didn’t think 15 spots reserved for shopping and dining would make that much of a dent. He added that another concern was when looking at the revenue assumption it assumes the Village meets terminal velocity after increasing to $1.50, but there is a constant increase of 3% every year of operating expenses. Would it be possible to assume that the Village try to build in a more gradual increase in the parking meter rate. It just doesn’t make any sense that the Village would have the revenue cap off but the expenses keep climbing so maybe that was something that Walker could look at in terms of the assumptions.

Councilman Hache stated that his other observation was that the supply and demand analysis on pages 4 and 5 tells a story of where the demand is when looking at both during the week and the weekends. There is a 94-95% occupancy in off street parking lots, 98% both during the week and Saturdays in the on street lots. Dayton Street is the exception, and he thought that was very telling. Just to clarify, it is better the sooner the Village can have this 3 year build up period before they bond and they start bonding not in 2020 but go to 2023 or late 2022. When were these assumptions assuming the garage would be built by, because when talking to the construction companies, the assumption is that the Village will not have anything before the second half of 2019. So, is it the assumption that the garage will be completed and bonded, adding that he sees that it starts accruing debt service in 2020, but how far into the year. Mr. Rooney stated that he thinks Walker was looking at the end of 2019 to have it constructed.

Councilman Hache stated that he had some concerns regarding safety with the garage particularly what happens after hours. Assuming 75% is allocated to commuters, there are some concerns as to what happens if people start parking there over night or mischievous people start pulling in there to party. Maybe, the Village can look into how feasible it would be to block off the garage to prohibit overnight activities or limit it to the first level where a quick visual read is possible, or close off the upper levels. He stated that maybe the contractors could give some suggestions as to how the Village could accomplish that.

Mayor Knudsen stated that she thought that the drop in 2019 appears to be a $75,000 +/- difference and she had to almost assume that was as a result of the parking lot actually being closed because that would be the 70 odd cars times the $1000 pass. She added that she had interest in knowing the value of a stall in the Hudson Street parking garage because when she looks at the numbers of increasing the meters she doesn’t know the break point. When do people just say they’re not paying because they could drive up the street and it would be free, or go to Westwood and pay zero. She was interested in understanding the value of a stall if somebody has access they buy a parking pass and they get 200 +/- square feet that they have access to every single day to commute. Is the value of that $750 or $1000 or $1500. To Councilman Voigt’s point, tweaking numbers means you find revenue streams elsewhere and not burdening the day to day visitors. Mayor Knudsen stated that she would be curious to know the value of one of those stalls.

Mayor Knudsen stated that going back to the 85% stress they are really talking about a small number of vehicles that gets to that stress factor. So, is that something that also just looking at other opportunities of on street parking, such as the boxes. There is opportunity there and would that release the stress factor as they are talking about a negligible number of vehicles. When thinking about it she would like to see if that’s resolved in another way. She added that in terms of going back to the out of town commuters, when she reads that line, the numbers have to be tweaked so that 50 out of town commuters reestablish themselves. She is interested in knowing what analysis was done to come to the conclusion that the system in the Village wouldn’t be able to fill the garage without having 50 out of town commuters come back in. So, where did that number come from, and is that absolutely necessary in order to do that. Mr. Rooney stated he believed that Walker used the 112 of nonresident parkers the Village had in the past saying that now there is going to be an interest for them to come back. It was an assumption they made, and surely the Village can make sure it’s not something that’s going to happen.

Mayor Knudsen stated she had an email today from someone who has a business downtown and received a ticket. They made a complaint that every time he turned around the people at a nearby store, run out when they know the PEO is in the vicinity and they drop the coins in the meter so they can essentially park for as long as they want and not pay anything. She stated that she sees it as theft of a service but nonetheless he pointed out that this happens every day and that the Village should do something to get the employees off the streets. She was shocked and wondered how that could be when there are all the employee parking spaces available. They have been availed of these opportunities at a discounted rate and nobody changed their behavior. So, when Councilwoman Walsh talks about behavior, Mayor Knudsen would like to understand better how this behavior changes. Reading the Walker Report and talking about people that are circling block after block after block even though there is parking 3 blocks away and what makes the Council think that behavior changes, and if that is the issue how then do you change that behavior. Mr. Rooney stated that possibly it is something Walker could deal with. Mayor Knudsen stated she would be interested in understanding how that behavior is changed. She does think if the Council is reviewing these documents and they keep seeing that the stress, that 85% factor is the tipping point, and that people still go around and around the block, what makes them decide to not go around the block again. Mr. Rooney stated that he would ask.

Councilman Hache stated that looking at increases from 50 cents an hour to 75 cents, $1.25, $1.50 where does that put the Village compared to places with comparable downtowns like Summit, Morristown, Montclair. Mr. Rooney stated that a lot of information can be pulled together, adding that back in 2015 Ridgewood was about the lowest of all municipalities that had train stations throughout the State. Now that Walker proposes a different rate, he would have to go back to look as he’s sure other rates have changed as well, but he can pull something together. Councilman Hache stated that Red Bank had similar downtown space, to which Mr. Rooney added Summit, Montclair, so a lot can be compared to and see where the Village is.

Mayor Knudsen stated going back to the terms of the value of that stall, whether or not there is a different approach to funding and whether or not there is a more hybrid approach to finding the money for this parking deck. Mr. Rooney stated ok. Mayor Knudsen thanked Mr. Rooney for his patience and waiting.

5. DISCUSSION

1. Ridgewood Water

 

1. Award Professional Services – Water Rate Study

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this resolution was for awarding a professional services contract for a water related study. A contract was awarded to Howard J. Woods, Jr. to perform a water rate study for the years 2010 to 2012, and then that was extended to include the years 2013 through 2017. It is anticipated that Mr. Woods’ services will need to be expanded to include expert testimony from a specialist in water rate case matters and further analysis of such rate case data. The Village is looking to increase to an additional $30,000 for Mr. Woods.

Councilman Voigt questioned if Mr. Woods had completed 2017 yet, as he was sent 2013 through 2016. Mr. Rooney stated that he didn’t think Mr. Woods had done 2017 yet, because the data isn’t available yet.

2. Award Professional Services – Design and Administration of Improvements at the Southside Reservoir

 

Ms. Mailander stated this resolution was regarding the award for the Southside Reservoir project which is located in Glen Rock. Proposals were received, and it is critical that these improvements be made by January 15, 2019 as per an Administrative Order of Consent by the USEPA. Non-compliance may subject the Village to penalties. There were three proposals received, and D.J. Egarian is the least expensive at $52,000, they are from Fairfield, New Jersey, and the funding is in the Ridgewood Water Capital Budget. Their proposal is half the price of the next highest bidder, and Ms. Mailander asked Mr. Calbi why that occurred, and he responded that they are a smaller firm and they know the Ridgewood Water system as they have done work for the Village successfully, so this is a good deal.

Mayor Knudsen stated that she had emailed this afternoon and gotten the same response, that they are a smaller firm with less overhead and they can provide this service for the Village.

3. Award Second Year Contract – Supply and Maintain Cold Water Meters

 

Ms. Mailander stated this resolution was a notice of bid award for year two for cold water meters. Last year it was awarded for a two-year contract to Rio Supply out of Sticklerville, New Jersey. Last year the cost was $165,115 and this is for the second year which is $169,255. They were the sole bidder last year, and funding is in the Water Utility Operating Budget.

 

1. Parking - None

1. Budget

 

1. Award Contract – Graydon Pool Concession – Refreshment Service

 

Ms. Mailander stated the next resolution was under budget for the Graydon Pool Concession Refreshment Service which is annually at the Graydon Pool Water’s Edge Café. The sole submission from Michael Sims of Mellsworth Foods in Ramsey, New Jersey, is the provider who has been there for several years. He has decided to exercise the previous year’s bid option for 2018 to offer it, as well. This gives the Village revenue of $9,300 for the season at Graydon and it is the same as 2017.

Councilman Hache questioned if he was the only bidder. Ms. Mailander responded that he was last year, they do a very good job, and Parks and Recreation is very happy with them. She added that there had been some concern trying to find healthier or cheaper priced options as individuals had asked the Village to provide. Mr. Sims seemed responsive to those requests.

 

2. Award Contract – Coach Bus Transportation Services

 

Ms. Mailander stated this resolution was for H.I.L.T. trips for senior citizens. In the past, the Village has awarded to Vanderhoof Transportation. Unfortunately, there are major factors of concern with this provider including lateness; unreliability; various mechanical issues with the buses; unprofessionalism; and inferior customer relations. Ms. Mailander stated that although the bid for Vanderhoof is actually $880 less than the next lowest bid, which is Panorama Tours. The Recreation Department is recommending Panorama Tours at $9,260 for the year of 2018.

Mayor Knudsen questioned whether those issues that are being raised were documented. Ms. Mailander stated that as far as she knows yes, they did, and it was discussed with the company. So, this turns out to then be the lowest responsible bid.

 

3. Schedler Property – Phase I and Phase II Archaeological Investigation RFP

 

Ms. Mailander stated that the next resolution was for the Phase I and Phase II Archaeological Investigation RFP for the Schedler property. Mayor Knudsen stated that all information that she provided was read, back when the ad-hoc committee was in the process of preparing or discussing plans for the property. A resident raised a question about the historic elements of the property and asked Mayor Knudsen to investigate. She did contact the State and had all the documents from Art Libel, who submitted all of the documentation for the Certificate of Eligibility. They went through every piece of the documents and in contacting the State; they clarified why the house met the criteria for an Historic Certificate of Eligibility and the property, in fact did not. What they are stating is that it would require an Archaeological Phase I investigation and then an Archaeological Phase II investigation. She added that it was also shared that even having any historic value wouldn’t mean that the property couldn’t have a sports field. What they like to do is simply document and that would allow the property to then become also eligible.

Mayor Knudsen added that reading the letter from the State says that there is a high probability that it will yield historic artifacts and meet the criteria. She stated she does not know the cost. She just put the information out there if the remainder of the Council had the opportunity to read the information, they could decide whether or not they want to pursue, or at least send out an RFP, and establish what the cost would be. Mayor Knudsen stated that when she spoke with the State the representative was heading from Trenton to Upstate New York and they stopped at the property and take a look at everything. She also was not concerned with the tree removal or any of the work that the Village was engaging in. She observed the trees that were marked and did not feel that would be a sufficient ground disturbance to compromise any historic value that might be there. So, this is something, if the Council is interested, it is not cost prohibitive, and answers some questions, they might want to send out an RFP and at least determine what the cost is.

Ms. Mailander added that she just found out today that this was done most recently in 2015. It wasn’t an actual RFP, but it was going out to ask how much this might cost, and the estimate was approximately $10,000. She added that the Village could certainly go out for the RFP and maybe it is the same, less, or more, but she wanted to mention it because this just came to light today as she had not known previously. Mayor Knudsen stated that she found that interesting and wondered whether it was for both Phase I and Phase II investigations. Ms. Mailander stated that Janet Fricke gave her that information. Ms. Fricke stated that it was for a Phase I investigation. Mayor Knudsen added that the letter states Phase I and Phase II would be required. Ms. Mailander stated that it was up to the Council if they would like to go out for an RFP to see what it would cost.

Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that when he read the report it said that after Phase I they could determine if you need to go on to Phase II or not because if they don’t find anything in Phase I then there is no reason to go an incur a greater cost by going into more detail with Phase II. He stated that he felt it was worth it to go out and see what the specific costs would be and then decide then if the Village wants to find out what’s in the ground.

Mayor Knudsen stated that it probably doesn’t hurt to at least establish an absolute price and send out for the RFP and then at least the Council will know what the cost is. She added that again it is the question as to whether or not both the house and the property meet the criteria for a Certificate of Eligibility. Just being mindful that on the Village’s Mater Plan Historic Element both the house and the property are listed. So, she doesn’t know what the cost is, but if everyone agrees they could go out for the RFP.

Councilman Hache stated that he was unable to read one of the pieces of paper, and Deputy Mayor Sedon agreed. Mayor Knudsen stated that she does have the original which is clear enough for her to read but maybe it was the way the file came in as a PDF, but what she will do is forward the originals from Joe Suplicki. HPC also felt this was the right direction to take with the property so it was endorsed by them. Ms. Mailander stated that she would move forward with having a RFP writer do that.

 

4. Deferred School Tax for 2018

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this Resolution was for deferred school tax for 2018 which is an annual Resolution. It has to be approved annually by the Council and will allow for the maximum deferral which is the most favorable position to take as it will increase the Village fund balance and will help offset any restrictions from reserve accounts which may arise in 2017 financial operations. Ms. Mailander stated that this can always be amended as the Budget goes along if the Council feels that they want to change that number.

 

5. Correction to Resolution #17-111 – Award Contract – Portable Fuel Cell Trailer

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this was for a correction to Resolution #17-111 which was adopted in April 2017 and was for a portable fuel cell trailer. This resolution contained an incorrect purchase quote. The amount not to exceed in the resolution was $5,478 and unfortunately it should have been $5,748. So, the Council has to redo the resolution to have it be accurate. It is really just correcting the original Resolution and it just came to light.

 

6. Award Contract – Tub Grinder

 

Ms. Mailander stated that the next resolution was for the tub grinder, the Village accepted proposals. Three bid specifications were picked up with two bids being received. The low bidder was W.E. Timmerman of White House, New Jersey. The recommendation is to award the contract for $365,580 which is below the estimated amount for this piece of equipment at $380,000.

Deputy Mayor Sedon questioned if this was to replace the tub grinder that the Village currently has which is old and broken down. Ms. Mailander stated that was correct. Deputy Mayor Sedon stated he believed the Village was partners with Glen Rock on that equipment, which Ms. Mailander stated was correct. Deputy Mayor Sedon questioned if the Village was going at it alone right now with the tub grinder. Ms. Mailander stated that she would have Mr. Calbi come up and discuss that.

Mr. Calbi stated that it was something that he had discussed as part of a contract that the Village has with Glen Rock, and he forwarded a copy of the contract to Ms. Mailander to share. He stated that there may be options with Glen Rock to take the current one or share the new one, but those discussions haven’t started yet for the Village.

Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that it was something like 1/3 and 2/3 on the last agreement between Ridgewood and Glen Rock, so he guessed on this if they were interested in continuing the shared service, then potentially the cost could go down by 1/3. Glen Rock also paid for parts and maintenance annually. Deputy Mayor Sedon questioned if Mr. Calbi had any idea when he would know if Glen Rock was interested in the shared service. Mr. Calbi deferred to Ms. Mailander, who stated that it should be shortly as the Council would need to know by next week and if not then definitely in time for the April Council meeting.

Mayor Knudsen questioned that if the Village was sharing the tub grinder, how much of the life span is reduced by that added use. Is there an understanding of spending “x” amount of dollars are we shortening the lifespan of something by having this shared service. She questioned when the first tub grinder was purchased, adding that she didn’t think it was that old. There was some indecipherable discussion. Mayor Knudsen questioned whether the useful time of that tub grinder, which was possibly from 2006 to 2018, because it has been down for quite some time, is actually shorter because of the shared services. Would it be better to just go it alone and this way the Village has longer use of it because this way Ridgewood might actually be paying more. She questioned whether there was any way to do any analysis on it. Mr. Calbi stated that was a good point. Ms. Mailander stated that hopefully there will be more information to bring back for next week’s meeting.

 

1. Policy

 

1. Approval of Schedler Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations

 

Ms. Mailander stated as the Council would remember there was a presentation back in December and it was about the recommendations from the Ad Hoc committee where they proposed two different scenarios for the field, a playground, a parking lot, and the way it was being laid out. She stated that the former Village Council put their intentions to paper in a resolution indicating they wanted a 90-foot field and she thought that before proceeding with any of these plans this Council should have a resolution indicating what it is that they’re agreeing to. So, the Village knows for funding and what is intended with that property.

Mayor Knudsen stated that in terms of the cost, a cost analysis could be done before anything else is done. Ms. Mailander stated that this would be discussed Friday with Parks and Recreation, as they do have a soft estimate based on what is proposed. She added that again, people at the time said thank you for preparing this and thanks to the Schedler Ad-Hoc Committee. She thinks the whole Council was in agreement, but she feels that she would be more comfortable moving forward once the Village has these costs and for the Council to say this is the direction it wants to go through in a resolution so it is on the record that they all agree and are moving forward in that direction. Ms. Mailander stated that this would be discussed further at the budget meeting this Friday and then possibly bring it back next week or approve a resolution in the budget meeting for March 14^th.

Mayor Knudsen questioned whether the Village ever established whether it needs DOT approval since that’s a steep hill. It needed a lot of fill to increase the elevation of the interior part of that property, which is currently a catch basin for water. Is that going to be a problem because of Route 17, and was there ever any analysis done as to what kind of flooding might take place. Ms. Mailander stated that she would check with Mr. Rutishauser.

 

1. Operations

 

1. Purchasing Process

 

Ms. Mailander stated that Deputy Mayor Sedon asked if this could be put on the agenda, and herself and Mr. Rooney met with some concerned residents and discussed the process with them and indicated that they were open to suggestions. Mr. Rooney, in fact, stated that if they had any concerns, they could reach out directly to him and he would address them in the future. Ms. Mailander stated that the Council had the purchasing presentation from Mr. Rooney, and she asked if there were additional questions or suggestions from the Council as to how they may want the Village’s purchasing process to be amended.

Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that he wanted to see if there was a willingness to look into the Village of Ridgewood purchasing policy, because obviously there is nothing the Council can do about the State regulation. He wondered if there were any suggestions from staff who deal with this on a daily basis. Could it be streamlined or become more transparent. Is there any room for adjustments or any type of changes that would make sense and help the process along.

Ms. Mailander stated that she would ask Mr. Rooney to come up and discuss it. She added that, as mentioned to the residents, the Village is controlled by the State of New Jersey and the Village has regulations it has to follow for purchasing. New Jersey has some of the tightest purchasing requirements in the Nation, so the Village is regulated, but there may be some suggestions just as the residents that she met with had a few. She said they could possibly be implemented but she wanted Council to give their input, as well.

Mr. Rooney stated that when he first came on board, there was a purchasing manual dating from 2006. So, he took that manual and massaged it and incorporated a lot of what other municipalities in the area do as a sort of best practices. So, that is how the Village got to where it is today. That does not mean that the manual is perfect and there are often times when he consults with the QPA, just to review processes to make sure that the Village is complying with the law and its own policies. Mr. Rooney stated he was open to suggestions and anyone that has recommendations, concerns, or questions obviously can come to him. What he tries to do every year when the Village has the audit done, he works with Nisivoccia to see if the auditors have any suggestions on things the Village may have done. So, they spend a lot of time going through the bidding process and how requisitions go through the system.

Mr. Rooney stated that the Village has been pretty good, as far as compliance and haven’t had any comments or recommendations but is it something that he tries to look at all the time. He does solicit feedback from the Department heads as to whether or not they have any suggestions. So, it is a moving target and they try to do what they can to make certain that they take care of the compliance with the law.

Ms. Mailander added one thing was recommended by the residents. When she and Mr. Rooney met with them, the Department Directors had already been informed that they would implement process to go out for written quotes. It will be done via email and sent to the people who they know. It’s usually vendors the Village knows that do this type of work, and do it all at the same time. Instead of calling someone today and then someone else a week from now, and another ten days from then, this way they all get the same information at the same time and return it by a certain date and time. That has already been implemented and the Department Directors have been advised that is how the Village wants to proceed. She wanted to thank Mr. Rooney and the residents that met with her because that was one of their suggestions. They are already in the process of implementing this procedure.

Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that was where he was going with at least one suggestion. He knows that sometimes things come in via text message or off a website, and it didn’t seem as good as sending out an email to everyone and then having it timestamped. It goes out the same time and then comes the same time. Ms. Mailander stated that was the other part of it. The Village will not accept a quote by text, it will have to be in an email. Mr. Rooney stated that if there is a non-response, the Village will make another call or inquiry to cover the three minimums the Village has.

Ms. Mailander stated that currently, if the Village goes out for three quotes and one comes back that they don’t want to quote on this, that is actually new in the State of New Jersey that this is allowed to be a quote. The Village instead will ask the Department Directors to go out for a fourth quote and hopefully get a third actual quote.

Mayor Knudsen asked if there was anything that limits the Village to three quotes or if there is an opportunity to expand the pool of possible vendors. She was thinking when someone says they are not going to bid, then that actually takes more time. What happens in that instance is one bidder said they were not interested and two bidders submitted their bid. Or maybe two submit and then maybe somebody calls and says they want to submit a bid but then two have already submitted their bid. The other scenario actually, by expanding the pool of possible vendors, makes it a little more even that everybody is submitting at the same date and same time.

Mayor Knudsen stated that another thing she thought was brilliant was when Mr. Calbi did the grid across the resolution. So, when the Council sees the grid they see that Companies X, Y, and Z. This is how much this person bid and she thinks its so helpful. Even today she emailed her questions comparing apples to apples, and then what the difference was. She stated that it was helpful for any Councilmember to see what those differentials are, too.

Mayor Knudsen thanked Mr. Rooney and the residents who were helpful in reviewing the purchasing process.

2. Major Soil Permits – The Enclave and Ken Smith II Projects

 

Ms. Mailander stated that the next resolution was regarding two major soil permits, one was for The Enclave which is the former Sealfons Building, and they have applied for a major soil moving permit. The project received Planning Board approval on February 6^th of this year and the Village needs a resolution to approve it. She added that obviously the route will be coordinated with the Village Police Department and the Village Engineer, and they intend to remove approximately 4,116 cubic yards of material from this site.

The second is KS Broad which is a Ken Smith Property. They also applied for a major soil permit and received Planning Board approval also on February 6^th. Again, the construction routes will be carefully coordinated with the Police Department and the Village Engineer, and they are looking to move approximately 4,342 cubic yards of material.

Ms. Mailander stated that both of them will require resolutions of approval, they need escrow, specific hours during which time they can do the work, not on East Ridgewood Avenue and certain other restrictions.

Mayor Knudsen stated that she had a couple of questions, but Mr. Rutishauser wasn’t present, so she would go on record with the questions. She wondered if the Holmstead School was not a designated school zone, as she thought it said school zone, at the corner of Hope and Ridgewood Avenue. Ms. Mailander stated that she would have to find out. Mayor Knudsen stated that it wasn’t noted on the paperwork, but she thought there were a couple of other schools that may have been designated school zones in that vicinity, but they are not necessarily Village public schools.

Mayor Knudsen stated that her other question was on how many trucks there would be. Ms. Mailander stated that she could find out. Mr. Rogers estimated that a truck could hold about 13 cubic yards, there was some discussion, and this was estimated at 660. Mayor Knudsen stated that her next question was that there is written on both of these permits that no trucking shall be permitted within the hours of 8:30 A.M. and 5:30 P.M. full or empty in any of the Village’s designated school zones. Then it indicated East Ridgewood Avenue by the high school. Presumably that is based on the likelihood that there are students and pedestrian activity. The high school is an open campus and she was concerned because she didn’t know how to address that when there are 600 some-odd trucks going back and forth.

Ms. Mailander stated that this would be over many days. Buses go up and down East Ridgewood Avenue everyday and there is an open campus. Trucks do as well. So, yes there will be additional trucks but it’s not as if there will be 600 trucks in a week, but rather over months.

Mr. Rogers stated that in the last discussion when the Council was talking about Dayton’s soil removal permit, they talked about the fact that depending upon how the system seemed to run with the restrictions and conditions of the soil removal permit, they can be changed so that it can be adjusted if it looks like problems are beginning.

 

3. Declare Property Surplus – John Deere 544 H Loader – Streets Department

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this resolution was for declaring surplus of a John Deere Loader from the Streets Department which has been out of service for two years and has been traded in for the purchase of another vehicle.

 

4. Declare Property Surplus – Ford F250 – Parks Department

 

Ms. Mailander stated that this resolution was for declaring surplus of a Ford F-250 from the Parks Department which doesn’t start or function and actually the repair estimate is far greater than the value of the vehicle. It is a 2004 with 124,433 miles on it.

 

5. Replacement of Tree at Graydon – Report by Shade Tree Commission

 

Ms. Mailander stated that Deputy Mayor Sedon would be presenting a report from the Shade Tree Commission on the replacement of the sycamore tree that has been removed at Graydon Pool.

Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that the Shade Tree Commission received a recommendation from Wayne Cahilly who performed the second study on the tree and sonared it with the tomograph. That suggestion was to plant a grove of 5 to 7 black tupelos. They heard from Jeanne Epiphan, who is an ecologist and a volunteer with Ridgewood Wildscape, suggested planting a sycamore that would live there for 100 or so years. Why not just plant another sycamore when it has been proven to handle the conditions. He added someone else says they wouldn’t recommend planting the same tree in the same spot because of bacteria and diseases from the previous tree might move into the new tree.

With all of these expert opinions, the Shade Tree Commission has decided to reach out through email and just run one opinion by another opinion and sort it all out. Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that the Shade Tree Commission would reach out to all of the experts who made different suggestions and try to pull them together and come back hopefully in the beginning of March with a presentation on what to replace the sycamore tree with and when.

Mayor Knudsen added that Ms. Epiphan stated that a grove of black tupelos was a concern for lifeguard visibility and that was the other point that she noted in her email. Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that it would be a line of sight issue, but anything that is planted there at some point is going to grow. So, at some point in a couple of years there is going to be a line of sight issue because the tree is going to be so tall and have a crown and when it is in full bloom a lifeguard from across the pool may not be able to see the corner. There is also a lifeguard chair that is right by that corner, so they would have to see how that would work with Parks and Recreation as well. He added that the Commission and members were pulling everything together and would probably have something for the beginning of March.

 

6. MANAGER’S REPORT

 

Budget Hearings - Ms. Mailander reported that the Budget Hearings would be held on March 2^nd, March 9^th, and March 16^th beginning at 5:30 P.M. and then the final one is on Wednesday, March 21^st. She added that the meetings would be televised and certainly the public is welcome to come and attend the meetings in person.

Hudson Street Parking Garage Update – Ms. Mailander stated that on February 21^st the Village Council will interview four companies who submitted their proposals. Each concept plan was reviewed for design and adherence to the requirements posted in the RFP.

Super Science Saturday – Ms. Mailander stated that Saturday, March 3^rd was the 30^th Super Science Saturday which is a free family event that will take place in the Ridgewood High School Campus Center from 9:00 A.M. to 1:30 P.M. adding that it was a wonderful day and she would encourage anyone who is interested in science to go. There will be interactive exhibits from Liberty Science Center, a Great Paper Airplane Contest, a 30-foot egg drop challenge, an indoor and outdoor drone racing and a live rocket launch.

 

7. COUNCIL REPORTS

 

Planning Board – Councilman Voigt stated that the Planning Board met on February 20^th and there was an informal review of a major subdivision which is across from The Stable at 232 and 250 North Maple which is approximately 3.5 acres of land. They were looking to develop a cul-de-sac and eight new homes on this lot, and they would demolish the two larger homes that are on the existing lots. There was a total of 14 variances that were included in this particular subdivision, and there may also be an issue with affordable housing. Mr. Rogers stated that if it remains at eight new homes it will generate an affordable housing need that they will have to deal with.

Councilman Voigt stated there were a number of concerns regarding the number of variances, as well as the number of homes. Suggestions from the Planning Board were to make this a six to seven home cul de sac, but again this is an informal review and feedback was given.

There was also a minor subdivision review at 174 Emsley Court, off of North Murray, and it is actually a subdivision that was previously subdivided then combined and re-subdividing it and that request was granted unanimously.

Mayor Knudsen added that one of the big issues with the major subdivision was the cul de sac that was presented was exceptionally narrow and they wanted the Village to approve their cul de sac with only one side of the street parking and would want it to be restricted on the other side. The Planning Board was very concerned because it is not necessarily a deep cul de sac and they could see the spillage for parking could potentially cause problems as the overflow went into other neighborhoods. That was a big stumbling block and it included a variance with it as well.

Library Board of Trustees – Councilman Voigt stated that the Library Board of Trustees met February 27^th and there were a few issues related to the Pease Library. There are two tenants in the library and it looks like the tenant in the upstairs portion will renew their lease for the next three or six years, that particular tenant is the Ridgewood Medical Media.

The upcoming event taking place on Wednesday, April 25^th is the Friends of the Library Annual Author Luncheon at Seasons in Washington Township. The author is Nicole Krause who wrote Dark Forest, and tickets go on sale on March 6^th. There is a book signing and a silent auction, as well and these events typically sell out fast.

 

Shade Tree Commission – Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that on April 10^th at 7:30 P.M. Wayne Cahilly will be appearing at the Library as a speaker for the Shade Tree Commission. He is the expert who came and diagnosed the sycamore tree at Graydon Pool. He is also an expert witness following an incident in Central Park where an elm tree fell and injured some people. He was pulled in to do the forensic study of the tree and the injuries. He is very accomplished and will be a great speaker for anyone interested in trees or tree related topics.

Ridgewood Environmental Action Committee – Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that REAC would be having a discussion and a video shown on April 19^th at the library at 7:00 P.M., the New Jersey Highlands video and a presentation to talk about the New Jersey Highlands.

Community Center Advisory Board – Deputy Mayor Sedon stated that Don Lieberman was here at the beginning of the Council meeting and spoke about the good work that the Community Center Advisory Board was doing and the Board is looking into buying some new tables for the Anne Zusy Youth Center and the Patrick Mancuso Senior Center downstairs of Village Hall and as it is probably going to turn into an annual event. There will be an end of the year resolution for gifts that the Foundation has raised funds for and purchased and given to the Village of Ridgewood. These will be officially donated every year as they are items purchased and added to the Community Center. So, he wanted to thank everyone for their good work on that committee.

 

Ridgewood Arts Council – Councilwoman Walsh stated that even though during March the Ridgewood Arts Council was not having an artist event they would like to remind everyone that at the Ed Center they are going to have all student artwork, which is done every year.

She added that the only other question she had was going back to the grant writing. They have not received anything from Millennium Strategies related to art grants that they are eligible for and so they were curious as to the frequency that they would hear. Ms. Mailander stated that any grants that come up she sends them to a Councilmember that would benefit relevant to a Board or Committee. She added that Millennium Strategies are aware that the Arts Council is looking for grants so anything that she receives will go to Councilwoman Walsh.

School Resource Officer – Councilman Hache stated that he met with the Board of Education last Friday, and ever since the unfortunate events that took place in Florida, a lot of parents have called and written expressing their concerns about the security in Ridgewood schools. Councilman Hache and Mayor Knudsen attend a meeting with the Board of Education on a monthly basis and this time around they asked that Chief Luthcke join in the discussion, as well. Usually the Village Manager participates, too. Councilman Hache stated that he spent a good part of the last year and a half trying to convince the Board of Education to help the Council bring the School Resource Officer (SRO) to the schools, but somehow it hasn’t gotten there yet. He added that unfortunately, they saw how vulnerable, particularly the high school is, yesterday when there were two people who did not attend the school, were on campus and were luckily unarmed.

Councilman Hache stated that it is important to get an SRO as soon as possible, and some of the estimates they have gotten so far are approximately January 2019 and he thinks that is about ten months too late. He added that everyone present should consider trying to work on how to get an SRO quicker than that.

Mayor Knudsen stated that the Village Manager and herself had a number of communications pertaining to the SRO and have discovered there is not actually required training, but there is a five day, 40 hour class training for an SRO which is sensitivity training. When going into a school environment there are confidentiality issues and special needs issues and they need to be sensitive to individuals with different needs. They are also looking at how quickly they can put a more seasoned Police Officer in as soon as possible, even on a temporary rotating basis, to have police presence. We believe whenever there is a community Police Officer or SRO present, it builds trust and confidence with the kids and they share more information as they become more familiar with the Police Officers and Police Department.

Mayor Knudsen added that they are aggressively working on that and hope to bring it to some conclusion by the end of the week, but she will be working with the Chief to get that taken care of. The Council shares the concerns of the parents, and are either parents or have been parents, so they share the concern of student safety and well-being and take it so seriously.

Super Science Saturday – Mayor Knudsen stated that the Ridgewood High School 30^th Super Science Saturday is on March 3^rd and she just wanted to thank the crew for inviting her to a pasta dinner. She did have the opportunity to present them with a resolution acknowledging their 30 years. Greg, Michael, Aaron and Mel did a terrific job and are so committed and started doing this when they were kids in high school because it was going to be discontinued. So, they took it upon themselves to make certain that every student in the Village had Super Science Saturday every year and that it was not forgotten. The Village owes them a debt of gratitude for continuing their work, and, also, Michael Aaron Flicker is going to be recognized as a Distinguished Ridgewood High School Alumni. She thanked all of those fine young people.

Sign Ordinances – Mayor Knudsen stated that she and Councilman Hache met with Village Planner, Bridget Bogart. They should have been joined by Bill Gilsenan, but he couldn’t make it. They started updating the Village CBD sign ordinances, and are excited about that and looking at how they can give businesses tools to be more successful and visible to pedestrians and vehicles. She stated that there will probably be some changes to the sign ordinances and she is hoping to have them on the next agenda. Mayor Knudsen added that Ms. Bogart is working on the Blade Ordinance piece of it and after it goes before the Council it would go to the Planning Board for comment, then Historic Preservation for comment and back to the Council, but they are working very aggressively to have it taken care of.

Planning Board Master Plan Subcommittee – Mayor Knudsen stated that the Planning Board Master Plan Subcommittee would be making recommendations to the Planning Board on the visioning process next week. Once again, that will come back to the Village Council to vote on because the Council is funding it. A letter will be sent making those recommendations back to the Council.

Ridgewood Cambodia Project – Mayor Knudsen stated that the Ridgewood Cambodia Project event is March 8^th from 6:30 P.M. to 8:30 P.M. at the Library and the flyer will be posted downstairs at Village Hall and online.

Socks for Soldiers – Mayor Knudsen stated that two of Ridgewood’s Senators, Senator Corrado and Senator Bateman have partnered to launch a new Socks for Soldiers Donative Drive. Donations of clean, unworn socks are among the most requested items by our troops all across the world and especially our veterans at home. Socks for Soldiers was first launched when Kristin Corrado was a County Clerk and they collected more than 6,000 pairs of socks and were distributed to many grateful soldiers, veterans and homeless veterans. She asked everyone to stop by the box in the entry way to the lobby at Village Hall with new, unworn socks to keep them warm and cozy. We owe a debt of gratitude to all of those serving our nation and residents can all provide some nice socks.

 

8. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

 

Mayor Knudsen opened the meeting for Public Comment and stated that it was not to exceed five minutes per person.

Michelle Italia, 3 Betty Court, stated that she was commenting on some things that came up in her mind this evening in reference to the Schedler property. She said that the plan of the Schedler property was mentioned in the Master Plan originally that this was a parcel of land which was deemed historic in nature and she is assuming that is correct. Mayor Knudsen stated that was identified in the Master Plan Historic Elements. Ms. Italia stated that her biggest problem turns out to be now that many people in that particular section of Ridgewood were not aware of the fact that it was. So, that leads to another issue which is whether or not the Village can proceed because they think that the land is historic. There have been Bergen Community College students who have researched the aspect of having some areas which could be deemed as being historical and there have been attempts to place something else on that property. Ms. Italia questioned why it was that many of the residents weren’t aware of that information, as she thinks the whole town might feel differently and wouldn’t have such a negative attitude towards preserving that area.

Ms. Italia also stated she went along with Phase I and cutting the trees and removing it to make the land supposedly better, but now she is a little upset. How can the Village proceed when they should have gone to that historical aspect of the land first before proceeding to do anything else. Now, this Committee that has been established which she participated in and a compromise was reached regarding a field in that area. She cannot believe that all of those members that attended that meeting were aware that the land was designated for that and that the Village did not follow through with it. She added she is not blaming the Council, but rather the events of this process that has taken too long which she believes has been very confusing and slow. Ms. Italia stated that this should have been done two years ago, adding that even now the roof on the house and these trucks have come and disturbed the land, and placed mulch all over it. She knows that the Council said that they could still identify it and it wouldn’t be for Phase I and Phase II, but still that she thinks the house has been impacted because they were huge trucks that were driving into the area near the house.

Ms. Italia stated that she doesn’t know if she was a member of the group now that asked for a 75-foot field, she was not for it and she will discuss that with her group.

Bill McCandless, 71 Ridge Road, thanked the Council for providing documents ahead of tonight’s meeting and added that he hopes it is a trend that can continue as transparency builds trust and he thinks it’s important to talk a lot about those aspects.

Mr. McCandless stated that the Walker analysis was deeply flawed from the 2015 count and analysis that was done originally and they cite that overall again and again. He stated that he trusts everyone on the Council has read the 2015 Walker Report, if not they need to go through it again. He stated it was available on the website and the main Hudson Street page and he would encourage the Council to take a good look at several of these pages. Mr. McCandless stated that the facts were very clear, and he felt very strongly about the facts that are presented and it is used as a touchstone now as a reference point, and residents are comfortable with parts and uncomfortable with others and are okay with it.

Mr. McCandless stated that page 15 of Walker is Daytime Weekday Parking Demand, there are monster openings throughout the Village and there are multiple lots marked well under 85% capacity. On page 16 Weekday Evening Parking Demand, shows open parking at Walkers count throughout the entire Village with no deficit and it is represented in color where there is parking Monday through Friday. He asked that the Council please take a look at both of those when they could and then encourage the Council to move to page 19. He stated this was where it gets very interesting, as you start to move from West to East beginning at the train lot. It is marked yellow as under capacity. Cottage Place is actually marked green, as empty. On weekend nights there is an empty parking lot. Walker on this page right at the bottom of the page stated large surpluses exist in the Village. This isn’t an interpretation but unbiased data that is quite clear and right there. The Village has paid for it twice and he is not sure what the Council is looking at when anyone can claim there is a deficit. Mr. McCandless stated there is none, and the Village has paid these people who have been deemed experts and they told the Village there are large surpluses.

He added that diving into the data and looking at the numbers is also quite evident and pointed the Council to the Appendix. Mr. McCandless stated that the Appendix charts are fascinating because the analysis does not use all of the data available to it. It looks only at a six-block area, with 800 feet on one end, 1500 feet on another to create a square. In Weekday Existing Conditions Public, 57% of the Village parking is occupied showing that the Village has adequacy that is well beyond industry and town standards. He added that on the weekends when there is allegedly no parking, there is more parking available when the Village was planning to build 194 spaces that were already paid for, versus 160. Its time to stop, the parking is there, he doesn’t know what the Council is doing or why they are doing it but this garage is unnecessary and unneeded and an expense that the Village cannot afford and do not need. Mr. McCandless stated that there are perverse parking incentives in the town around pricing, it needs to stop now.

Jaqueline Hone, 30 Carriage Lane, stated that she wanted to speak about the Schedler property to reiterate what Ms. Italia was trying to explain. The Master Plan did identify the Schedler House and parcel as historical but that was way back before the Village every purchased the parcel. In 2013, the HPC identified it as well, and proceeded with the eligibility of both the house and the parcel. In 2015, the Village Manager stated that quotes were obtained for an archaeological investigation, and in 2016 Bergen County puts the Village of Ridgewood on notice saying that there are historical elements and they believe that the Village will do their due diligence and fiduciary obligation to proceed with the historic preservation. Ms. Hone stated that in November of 2017, the State representative visited the site and also says to go ahead and proceed. So, why are we now almost at March 2018 and this is the first that the Village residents are hearing of the findings of a State representatives visit and the archaeological quotes that were received in 2015. More importantly, why are we in 2018 and absolutely nothing has been done in regard to the historic registration of both the land and the house.

Ms. Hone stated that she has repeatedly heard that the Village of Ridgewood has eligibility but eligibility is very different than actually moving forward with the registration. For the last five to six years residents have repeatedly attended Historic Preservation meetings and these Village Council meetings saying that they wanted to proceed with that and had a ton of questions regarding the historic preservation of both the house and the land and were told that the historic preservation would proceed. She stated that the now there is a Village Manager who is pressuring the Council to move ahead with the recommendation of the ad-hoc committee which includes a 75-foot field over an archaeological site that has already been deemed with historical elements.

Ms. Hone stated that her question is how many more times is the Council going to speak about the historical elements within the land and the house and the eligibility and nothing will be done as far as the registration. She would desperately ask that the Council to give the residents a timeline, a date when this would happen, before the actual moving forward with any plan. The ad-hoc committee recommendation is flawed, as Ms. Italia pointed out, the committee had no idea and never represented to its members that the land was also historical. It was a very small group that attended the meeting where the determination was made and how they came to the conclusion of their plan. She believes it was a group of about 20 people. It was not publicly informed to the members and the people that were invested in the development of Schedler. It was a notice that went out to a very small select group that attended the meeting at Menishe’s house to give input on what they wanted the ad-hoc committee to present to the Council. She thinks that is flawed and a mistake and there are enough errors to say that that recommendation has to be reviewed, especially since that recommendation was only for a field and we all know that there were people who have stood here hour after hour in many public meetings stating they wanted historical, passive and preservation.

Ms. Hone stated that she asked that the Council move forward and do the fiduciary obligation and not put the cart in front of the horse, find out the historical elements first, move forward with the registration as identified back in early 2000 and hold off on any more plans to put anything on top of that archaeological site.

Patricia Infantino, 6 Betty Court, stated that regarding Schedler she hoped that the house could be named after Isabella Altano when the Village has it preserved.

Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, stated that during the discussion of the Walker Study tonight there was some mention made of Walker’s recommendation to increase the parking rates. He stated that Councilman Hache asked Bob Rooney to take a look and see what other towns with train stations were doing in terms of how the new rate would compare to the other towns. He added that what was not discussed is also the Walker Report indicated a recommendation to increase the time from 6:00 P.M. until 8:00 P.M. That was also part of the recommendation so he would ask if Mr. Rooney is doing an analysis to show what some of the other municipalities with train stations are doing and how our new rate can compare to those rates. He should also check and see what times were in some of those other towns.

Mr. Loving stated that he took a quick look and there were some towns that went to 6:00 P.M., some that go to 8:00 P.M., some that go to 7:00 P.M. but it would be nice to have all of that on paper. The report could include the name of the municipality that is near the train station, what the hours of the meters in effect are, and what the current rates of the meters are, so that the Council can compare apples to apples. He stated that what upset him most when he read through both of the studies is that it talks about the parking system, not the parking utility, and it talks about the parking system being self-supporting. What the report fails to mention is that all of the utility money now is not spent on parking. A good portion of that money goes into the General Fund and is used for other purposes in Ridgewood. Nowhere in this study did he see how much of that revenue has to be used now to support the parking system. Is 100% of the revenue going forward going to be needed to support the parking system. If that’s the case, that means that there are some things that the parking utility money is funding now that need to be funded by another source. What concerns him, is the source going to be property tax revenue unless some services will be cut that money is currently funding.

Mr. Loving stated that another analysis that needs to be done is what percentage of the parking utility money is now going into the General Fund and what portion of that money is not going to be able to go into the fund in the future. What is the Village funding that it can no longer fund or that the Village is going to have to create some alternate source of revenue for. He stated that when the report is being tweaked, it would be nice to know that. His concern is the money that is now going to the General Fund will no longer go there and then that means it’s going to come out of property tax revenue. Property taxes are going to have to be increased, or the parking rates will have to be increased, and even more or services are going to have to be cut. He asked that the Council take a look at that along with the time that the parking has to be extended to and how it compares to some others.

Saurabh Dani, 390 Bedford Road, stated that he wanted to thank the Village Council, Ms. Mailander, Mr. Rooney for listening and acting on the purchasing process.

Mayor Knudsen stated that the Council would get the information for Mr. Loving and be precise about that. She also stated that the properties identified in the Master Plan Historic Element, when the application was submitted and she thinks that Ms. Hone would have these documents. If not, she would send them to her, but nothing can be registered on the State listing without a certificate of eligibility the only piece of that parcel that has a certificate of eligibility is the house. No the land did not qualify for the certificate of eligibility based on lacking information pertaining specifically to the Phase I and Phase II archaeological investigation so there is nothing that the Council can do to accelerate that because it simply does not have a certificate of eligibility. That’s not something she or anyone here decided. It is something that the State decided and she thought that was pretty clear in the documents. Mayor Knudsen stated that because of these inquires she did contact the State and asked them specifically what was required and necessary to advance that to get a certificate of eligibility and they told her what it was and the Council is here attempting to do it. She stated that she has to say that this five member Council has been actively engaged in historic preservation and they continue to make every effort to ensure that our history is there for future generations; they want to be not only in the crosshairs of people who oppose this and say don’t spend this money but then to be in the crosshairs of the people who support historic preservation and the Council thinks they are doing the right thing. The State indicated that the removal of the trees was not enough significant ground disturbance to compromise any historical artifact that might be present. They were comfortable with their finding and that was the reason that the State representative stopped there in November. She wanted everyone to know that the Council is actively engaged in historic preservation and there were reasons that the property cannot advance to the State list.

John Paquin, former Ridgewood Resident, 110 Ridgewood Road, Washington Township, stated that he was late to the Zabriskie-Schedler debate but he has seen an awful lot of effort by wonderful people over many years. He applauds all of that effort and he sees a lot of people really trying to preserve that slice of history. He stated that he was just reading one of the documents provided that said written descriptions of historic houses don’t serve the purpose for reminding us of our past, and they really don’t. If you stand at Zabriskie-Schedler and you look across to the church the wonderful thing is you can imagine the town that was there, the center that was there, and that was Ridgewood. People do not realize that the history of Paramus is the history of Ridgewood. What people called Paramus was actually the town of Ridgewood. He added that the Council has talked about the history and the battles and all that has gone on there. He also sees a house that’s really threatened and in real danger right now, and his concern is that there may be nothing to preserve. Mr. Paquin stated that he didn’t want to point fingers but it is a wonderful piece of history that has been there all our lives and witnessed so much history. It seems like it is really at risk and he would think it a shame if in a year’s time it’s said that the house was too far gone. That’s his fear.

Mayor Knudsen stated that again the historic architect is extremely confident that the house can and will be saved. Her plans are intact, her pricing is in place and she is ready to move forward. The Village is doing matching grants and are very confident that it will be able to save the house, and she just wanted to point out that Mr. Paquin has amazing renderings and they are fabulous, beautiful and it does appear that back in the day all roads led to the Church.

 

9. RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION

 

Deputy Village Clerk, Donna Jackson read Resolution #18-74 to go into Closed Session as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

10. ADJOURNMENT

 

There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilwoman Walsh, seconded by Deputy Mayor Sedon, and carried unanimously by voice vote, the Village Council’s Work Session was adjourned at 11:31 P.M.

______________________________

                                                                                                     Susan Knudsen                            

Mayor                        

______________________________

              Donna M. Jackson

           Deputy Village Clerk