• Home
  • Clerk Minutes

Planning Board Minutes - December 1, 2015

The following minutes are a summary of the Planning Board meeting of December 1, 2015. Interested parties may request an audio recording of the meeting from the Board Secretary for a fee.

Call to Order & Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act: Ms. Bigos, Councilwoman Knudsen, Mr. Nalbantian, Mr. Reilly, Ms. Altano, Mr. Joel, Ms. Dockray, and Ms. Patire. Also present were: Gail Price, Esq., Board Attorney; Blais Brancheau, Village Planner; and Board Secretary Michael Cafarelli. Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, Mayor Aronsohn, Mr. Thurston, and Mr. Abdalla were not present.

               

Public Comments on Topics not Pending Before the Board – Lorraine Reynolds asked about public comment during the reexamination of the master plan. Mr. Brancheau said no public hearing is required and that the reexamination is not an amendment.

Administration of Oath to Debbie Patire and Isabella Altano – Debbie Patire was sworn in as a new alternate member of the Planning Board, filling the unexpired term of Isabella Altano, and Isabella Altano was sworn in as Class IV Board member for the unexpired term of Michelle Peters, from alternate member.

Committee Reports - Ms. Dockray said the Open Space Committee survey is ready but it needs $1,032 in funding.

Correspondence received by the Board – Michael Cafarelli reported there was none.

Continued discussion of the reexamination of the Master Plan and development regulations - Residential Land UseMr. Brancheau provided the Board an overview of his report and redefined split-zones. He said his goal was to obtain feedback on what the Board wants him to include in the draft report. He said the entire Master Plan needs to be updated and digitized. He discussed the documents he provided the Board and talked about split-zones, corner properties, FAR in undersized lots, front yard setbacks, teardowns, clusters, and churches in split zones. He said subdivisions or lot mergers result in some properties being split by zone boundaries. His recommendation is to move some of the properties identified in the documents as split-zones into one zone.

Mr. Brancheau described a 'teardown' when a property owner retains a nonconforming basement or wall in a building to be demolished, which enables the structure to be grandfathered. Board members asked if this reduced taxes. Mr. Brancheau said it did not.

There was a discussion about obtaining the Zoning Board's annual report and that it would be helpful for the Planning Board to see what properties came before them and what was approved. Mr. Nalbantian agreed to write a letter to ask for a copy of their annual reports.

Ms. Dockray motioned to authorize Mr. Brancheau to move forward with his recommendations. The motion was seconded by Mr. Joel and all approved.

Discussion of the Housing Element Mr. Brancheau reported he provided the Village Attorney a housing summary that was submitted to the court. He said the court gave the Village an extension until March 2016. He said he received a confidential draft report regarding the Village's housing obligation. However, he could not disclose the information as it is a confidential report. He anticipated receiving the final draft report in late December. Mr. Brancheau said the Planning Board should be considering an increased obligation.

Approval of Minutes – The minutes from November 9, 2015 were adopted with one revision to add 'plan summary' to the third from the bottom paragraph.

Other Business – Board members asked about the status of the Church of God and Tito's Burritos. Mr. Rutishauser said he would investigate the status of the Church if God and that Tito's Burritos were working with the Historic Preservation Commission to finalize a suitable rendering.

Executive Session – 9:30 p.m. The Board went into executive session to discuss pending and threatened litigation.

The meeting adjourned at 11:50 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

                                                                                                Michael Cafarelli

                                                                                                Board Secretary

Date approved:

 

  • Hits: 793

A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING 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, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY ON WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 12, 2015 at 9:55 P.M.

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

Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 9:55 P.M. and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Donna Jackson, Deputy Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.  

2.            DISCUSSION

a.            PARKING

                1. Award Contract – Financial Feasibility Study for Hudson Street

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is an award of contract for a Financial Feasibility Study for the Hudson Street Parking Lot. She recalled that the purpose of the study is to determine the levels of revenue and cost for the new parking garage and the utility. Proposed parking rate schedules for Hudson Street as well as other lots and on street parking; increased usage projections; daily and annual income projections; how residential and non-residential commuters are handled; CBD employee parking; cost projections; financing for the project; annual debt service; and operations costs, will also be part of the study.

Ms. Sonenfeld said that three proposals have been received and two proposals are being reviewed. There was a discussion with the Parking Steering Committee who recommended going forward with the Walker Study for Financial Feasibility.

Mayor Aronsohn said that they have been studying the possibility of building a parking garage at the Hudson Street lot. A survey of the land and an environmental analysis has been performed as well as a study comparing automated parking with conventional parking. An ordinance for a bond referendum was adopted in order to hire a firm that would design a parking garage. Information on the Request for Proposal (RFP) is currently on the Village website and the deadline for the RFP is August 27th. There will be a public referendum on the parking garage in November. Mayor Aronsohn explained that hiring a firm to design the garage is one piece of the puzzle and hiring a firm to study the funding of the garage is the other component. The study will give Councilmembers and the public information on fees that would have to be imposed in order to have the garage be self-sustaining.

Councilman Sedon asked for confirmation that this is the first expenditure that would be drawn from the $500,000 bond. Ms. Sonenfeld confirmed that this is the case. He asked if the Walker Study would provide a range of different options for pay schedules and cost projections. He also inquired whether the study would look into any potential impacts on taxpayers if the cost couldn’t be covered by the utility. Ms. Sonenfeld said that the study will look at the various parking options, the times, the hours, etc. along with the expense side associated with paying the debt service on the new garage. Maintenance of the garage will be considered and the study will encompass the entire system and not just Hudson Street.

Mayor Aronsohn expects the report to provide information on an estimated cost of the garage and explain various ways of financing the construction by using parking revenue from the garage and metered parking, etc. Ms. Sonenfeld said that recently the Village has been using offsets such as the private/public partnership of Ken Smith, to handle the CBD employee parking and valet options for off-site parking but some of those options are unavailable during certain time periods. Mayor Aronsohn suggested that they might want to add something about the possibility of grants at the County and State level.

b.            POLICY

1.            Acceptance of Open Space Committee Recommendations Concerning the Schedler Property

Mayor Aronsohn stated that this comprehensive resolution recommended by the Open Space Committee strikes a good balance and embraces those recommendations. The recommendation refers to a ninety foot baseball field, a multi-purpose overlay field for lacrosse and soccer and accessible trails while recognizing the Schedler House and allowing for a year to develop a plan that has a sustainable funding proposal which meets the needs of Ridgewood residents, particularly children. It states that the Village needs to look at alternatives similar to what is being done at Habernickel Park. The resolution is specific while providing a way forward for the grant. Mayor Aronsohn said that the resolution allows for the house to first be stabilized, and then to be restored. He explained that the second resolution is house specific and recommends that the Council support moving forward with the grant application.

Councilman Pucciarelli said that this is a difficult decision, but there is a history which adds an element of promise about why the property would be acquired. The choice isn’t between the house and a ninety foot field or between a park and a field. He noted that Central Park is comprised of many fields where people love to play and walk and is a wonderful example of the use of land in a developed environment. Councilman Pucciarelli stated that he supports the recommendation of the Open Space Committee for a ninety foot field, but he understands the concerns of the neighbors. He said that locating a ninety foot field here is not optimum. The Village Council must be concerned about the safety element and the increase in noise due to tree removal. The elements of passivity must be preserved as much as possible, and he referred to a plan noting tree removal on the south side of the field which wasn’t necessary. Councilman Pucciarelli would not support lights on the field or artificial turf. Strict time limits as to the use of the field should be imposed. The field has to be maintained and it has to look like well-kept grass. Councilman Pucciarelli stated that the plan needs work, and he hopes that people with good will and intelligence can come together and greatly improve the plans that have been submitted with the needs of the neighborhood in mind.  

Councilman Pucciarelli referred to the Schedler House and said that history is worth preserving; however, he disagreed with the comment that history should be preserved at all costs. He asked the area residents to consider alternative uses of the funds that would be required to preserve the house. He suggested a community center but not a sports house or a field house. He said he envisions a one floor, accessible building with new plumbing and bathrooms that are ADA compliant. Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that some structures are not worth preserving and he suggested looking a new construction as an alternative. For the same amount of money a building could be constructed that could contain a meeting room, an art room and a kitchenette similar to Lester Stable. It could look historic, but be something new which is ADA compliant and, this option might be more beneficial to the neighborhood.

In conclusion, Councilman Pucciarelli said that he is in favor of the report supporting the ninety foot field; however, the plan needs some revisions. He favors preserving the house, but doesn’t think that public money should be spent until they have a cost estimate for this house versus new construction.

Councilwoman Knudsen stated that everyone who spoke this evening has presented a compelling case as to why this Council should act one way as opposed to another. She has three sons who played every sport that was offered; however, she was struck by the words “play” and “life” and she noted that quality of life is important. She walked the property and noticed that from there was a significant change in the noise level from one side of the area to the other. She questioned whether or not anyone would want their son or daughter playing on a field with that kind of traffic. Councilwoman Knudsen said that when the property is leveled for the field all that anyone will see is traffic. She had to agree with Crystal Matsibekker’s concerns relative to the impact of noise and traffic on people’s health.

Councilwoman Knudsen suggested tabling this vote in order to review the CMX report which was mentioned by Isabelle Altano, and to conduct an impact study. The primary goal of the Council is to ensure the health and safety of the residents. She added that they should conduct a thorough analysis of whether the burden of this ninety foot field would outweigh any potential benefit and it is incumbent that the Mayor and Council conduct a cost benefit analysis before they go further with this resolution.

Councilwoman Knudson referred to the Scheduler house and said that although she understands what Councilman Pucciarelli is saying about new construction, there is a presence that you can feel when entering a historic house. This house is listed on the historic preservation element plan component of the Master Plan of the Village of Ridgewood which was recently reaffirmed by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Planning Board. Bergen County also recognizes the historical significance of the house which holds a certificate of eligibility from the State of New Jersey. Councilwoman Knudson has to agree with the various organizations that have indicated the importance of the preservation of his structure. The house should be looked at as a gift to the Village and they need to ensure the health, safety and quality of life for all of the residents which must trump any baseball field.

Councilwoman Hauck said she enjoyed listening to everyone’s opinions tonight and opinions seem to be split down almost evenly in both directions. She agreed that everyone had a compelling case to present, but ultimately compromise is needed. She will never become part of the west side of town versus the east side of town mentality. She respects everyone’s opinion and understands that the quality of life concerns are real, as is fear of the unknown. Councilwoman Hauck agreed with a speaker who mentioned that the same type of concerns that were expressed during the Habernickel Park hearings.  

Councilwoman Hauck stated that everything about the first resolution is comprehensive and allows for everyone’s wishes to be met. It has been vetted through four committees including the Open Space Committee, Parks and Recreation Committee, Historic Preservation Committee and Conservation for Public Lands Committee. The comprehensive resolution takes into consideration reasonable requests from all interested groups and allows for sound, long term financial sustainability and support without over burdening the general tax fund. Councilwoman Hauck pointed out that Resolution One allows for another year of consideration to be given to a use that would provide economic sustainability for the historic house. In conclusion, Councilwoman Hauck said she supports the comprehensive resolution number one.

Councilman Sedon questioned whether or not any approvals were needed from the County regarding this property. Mr. Rogers explained that when a development plan is agreed to, it would require County Planning Board approval. Christopher Rutishauser, Borough Engineer, came forward and stated that he disagrees with Mr. Rogers because West Saddle River Road is a Village road. He would recommend that the Department of Transportation (DOT) be contacted relative to anything that is done on the Schedler property because the property borders Route 17. A courtesy review could be required with Bergen County due to the proximity of Route 17. Mr. Rutishauser added that the site has no wetlands or other environmental constraints.

Councilman Sedon said that he is unaware of any traffic studies or environmental impact studies. Mr. Rogers referred to an environmental study that Mr. Rutishauser noted which concluded that there are no environmental issues. Mr. Rutishauser stated that traffic studies are currently underway by the Police Department which include speed and volume counts with readings being completed at one location on West Saddle River Road. The initial findings indicate that the road in its current condition has a very low volume of traffic. The peak of volume is around 2 P.M. and there will be more information to come when the speed study is complete. Ms. Sonenfeld reported that she and Mr. Rutishauser have been meeting with John Ward and his team to look at the plans for this conceptual design. She explained that there is a lot that will change, and she stated that Mr. Rutishauser has designed a large berm with trees. Mr. Rutishauser explained that the goal is to put various ideas on paper in response to comments that have been received. The Police raised concerns regarding an extension of the berm further south along the parking lot that is shown on the plan. The Police were also concerned about how people would park, and parallel parking was added along the edge of the park. Mr. Rutishauser stressed the fact that these are all options.

Councilman Sedon asked if there had been any studies of the health impact that clear cutting the property would have on residents given the particulate, fuel and general pollution coming from Route 17. Mr. Rutishauser said that definitive studies have not been done and they designed the concept drawing to include a lot of vegetation going back in on the six to seven foot high berm below Route 17 which will be topped with deciduous trees. The berm extends along the entire west boundary with Route 17 and will contain a guiderail. They are contemplating installing a guide rail on top underneath the trees to stop heavy vehicles from entering the part from Route 17.

Councilman Sedon said he reviewed the application to the County for the Schedler House and noticed two discrepancies. The first is that the house is listed as 21,200 square feet which should be corrected to indicate 2,100 square feet. There is a question referring to any potential historic structures on the site and this was answered as no. He asked if the application would have to be amended and if that would impact any discussions about the property going forward. Councilman Sedon confirmed that he was referring to the original application for the grant to purchase the property and Mr. Rutishauser said that the Village has already received the grant money from the County.

Mayor Aronsohn recalled that when the committee went before the Open Space Trust Fund in 2009, the house was recognized. Janet Fricke., Assistant to the Village Manager, said that the Planning Board Secretary who kept the ledgers on historic preservation said that the house was locally identified and this was noted on page 7 of the grant application. Ms. Fricke added that when the grants are considered, every member of the grant team must inspect every location and they couldn’t miss the house on the property.

Councilman Sedon said that it seems that although there is a conceptual plan, there is no driving force moving this forward and there is no money available. He questioned why the Village Council was considering this because it seems like there is a lot that is subject to change. The house has potential historic value and a larger buffer is needed between Route 17 and the neighborhood. It unfair to the neighborhood and the sports teams to go forward with a plan if there are no funds available. There was no discussion of the Schedler property during the budget presentation and Councilman Sedon doesn’t recall anyone saying that the Village Council was interested in funding to develop a plan. He agreed with Councilwoman Knudsen that this should be tabled because there are too many unanswered questions and the plan could change drastically between what is approved and the final product. He referred to Councilman Pucciarelli’s comment that the plan needs to be revised and this is one reason why he doesn’t feel the Village Council should endorse the plan.

Mayor Aronsohn recalled that when he became a member of the Village Council in 2008, one of the first issues they considered was the acquisition of the Schedler property. This was also the time of the recession when municipalities had to think hard about how and where to spend their money. He recalled a conversation with Phil Dolce who made a compelling argument that this is a matter of equity and that there was not enough open space in that section of Ridgewood. This discussion convinced Mayor Aronsohn that purchasing the Schedler property was the right thing to do and subsequently the Village Council did agree to the purchase of the property. There were concerns that if the Village didn’t purchase the property it would be developed commercially or used for multi-unit residential dwellings. Mayor Aronsohn noted that the use of the property was for both active and passive recreation, and at that time there was no talk of the house.

Mayor Aronsohn said that in 2012, the Open Space Committee held three public meetings on the property resulting in a report recommending a ninety foot baseball field, a multi-purpose overlay and park like amenities. The Committee recognized that there were those who wanted to preserve the house and provided for a six to twelve month period for a plan to be developed relative to the use of the house. There were numerous meetings with those who wanted to preserve the house along with himself, Tim Cronin, Director of Recreation and Parks, and Christopher Rutishauser, the Village Engineer. Councilmembers Knudsen and Hauck have been involved with the grant application process over the last two years.

Mayor Aronsohn stated that he continues to believe that the Village Council needs to take a holistic approach. They need to make a decision about what should be done with the property as a whole and the recommendations of the Open Space Committee provide this blueprint. The comprehensive resolution which incorporates the recommendations of the Open Space Committee strikes a balance between active and passive recreation. Mayor Aronsohn said that the resolution also recognizes that public safety is paramount. He pointed out that several speakers have stated that it is such a wonderful thing to have so many children interested in sports, and the Village should do everything they can to encourage it. He hopes that the Village Council can move forward in the spirit of community they bring to all issues, and make this work for those who live in the neighborhood. He stressed the fact that there are not making a decision on the house at this time.

Councilman Pucciarelli commented that this has been an amazing exercise in public discussion and a tribute to how democracy can work at a grass-roots level.

Councilwoman Knudsen made a motion to adjourn this Special Work Session and reconvene the Regular Public Meeting. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                     Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:                    None

ABSENT:               None

ABSTAIN:             None

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                _________________________________                                                                                                                                   Paul S. Aronsohn                                                                                                                                                                                 Mayor

_________________________________                                                                                                                        Donna M. Jackson                                                                                                                                

           Deputy Village Clerk

 

  • Hits: 1368

A REGULAR WORK SESSION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 2015 AT 7:30 P.M.

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

Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 7:34 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney.

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

2.         COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

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

Gary Cirillo, 260 South Pleasant Avenue, reminded everyone that the yearly Project Pride day is coming up on Saturday, May 16, 2015, and he invited Mayor Aronsohn and all of the Councilmembers to join the festivities. Participants will be meeting at the clock at 9:00 A.M., and they usually continue their activities for approximately 1-2 hours. It is hoped that there will be some type of assistance from the real estate companies in the CBD. This year, the new hanging baskets will be put up on the poles, and it is hoped that the results will be the same as last year. Mayor Aronsohn thanked Mr. Cirillo for his invitation, as well as his leadership in this initiative.

Janice Fuhrman, 49 Clinton Avenue, stated that her husband has been in regular attendance at Village Council meetings for the past eight months or so, although she tried to tell him that the ordinance regarding Clinton Avenue was passed in early February. Ms. Fuhrman said she was under the impression that when an ordinance has been passed, that decision stands. She believes it makes a mockery of the system when the policies and procedures in place are not adhered to and agreed upon.

Jane Remis, 118 Madison Place, stated that although she does not live near Clinton Avenue for the past five years she has been the Safety Chairperson at Ridge School, and she is there every day after school. When someone observes something dangerous, that person usually knows that Ms. Remis is there, and is the person that would be informed. Despite the fact that Ms. Remis likes the people on Clinton Avenue, she believes it is unsafe, and she wants the children to be safe, which is currently not true. Ms. Remis pointed out that the main concern of the Councilmembers should be the safety of the children, not the number of people who are for or against this issue. Likewise, the primary consideration should not be the wishes of the residents in that area, but should always be the safety of the children. In this situation, Ms. Remis thinks it might be better to ask the residents of that area if they would prefer having sidewalks on one or both sides of the street, rather than making the choice whether to have sidewalks or no sidewalks. Ms. Remis noted that Ridgewood is a Complete Streets community, and there seems to have been no implementation of the Complete Streets program anywhere around Ridge School. In fact, there are many streets without sidewalks in that area, and Ms. Remis mentioned that one of the streets connecting Godwin Avenue to West Ridgewood Avenue should have sidewalks to enable people to walk from Hillside Avenue to Highland Avenue safely.

In addition, Ms. Remis asked the Councilmembers to consider that children under 10 years old are not developmentally ready to walk on their own in traffic or to cross street by themselves. Motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of death among young children, 20% of whom are child pedestrians ages 5-9. Students attending Ridge School who live across Godwin Avenue must walk up Godwin Avenue, even with cars driving up and down that street every day while children are walking to school. Ms. Remis said she would have assumed that the Councilmembers would have discovered this when they were considering the issue. The children also follow the example set by the residents of Clinton Avenue, and they walk down the middle of the street, because residents of Clinton Avenue have stated openly that they believe it is safer to walk in the middle of the street, rather than on a sidewalk. There should be sidewalks to make it safer at all times, whether for children walking to school or adults walking through the neighborhood. If a pedestrian should be injured in a motor vehicle accident, Ms. Remis believes that the Village could have some liability in that case. A walkable community requires sidewalks.

Deborah Glazer, 61 Clinton Avenue, addressed the comments made by Ms. Remis. She pointed out that Ms. Remis is a volunteer with the Home and School Association, and does not actually represent Ridge School. Ms. Glazer has an email from Jean Schoenlank, Principal at Ridge Elementary School, stating that the school remains neutral on the issue.

Ms. Glazer pointed out that she lives on Clinton Avenue, and she has two children who attend Ridge School, and one who is currently in pre-K and will be attending Ridge School. They walk to school every day. Ms. Glazer believes that the only way to ensure that children are safe walking to and from school is to make sure there is no traffic while they are walking. Ms. Glazer commented that Ms. Remis has no idea what happens on Clinton Avenue during school hours, because she is stationed in the red zone at Ridge School to make sure children get in and out of cars safely. Ms. Glazer stated that her concern with the petition presented to the Councilmembers is that it is not about safety, but about parking, which is why there is a second part to the petition stating that the petitioners want to open Clinton Avenue immediately to traffic and parking. Every year, Ms. Remis speaks at the Back to School Night clearly and succinctly on the most dangerous thing she sees, which is cars parked in the red zone, while other cars double park next to them so that children can run between the parked cars to get to school faster. If Ms. Remis was not there to stop the children from doing that, there would definitely be accidents. However, Ms. Remis is suggesting that the Councilmembers open Clinton Avenue, which will create the same situation. Ms. Glazer assumes that cars will park on one side of the street, due to the width of the street, with more cars double parking for children to run across the sidewalk and cross between parked cars. This could lead to someone getting hit by a car, because there will not be a counterpart to Ms. Remis present to stop them from doing so. That is Ms. Glazer fear.

Greg McAllister, 75 Clinton Avenue, echoed the sentiments expressed by Ms. Glazer about the issue never being closed. He asked how many times a vote must be taken on this issue. In addition, Mr. McAllister said he wanted to understand what safety issues have occurred during the 60 years that the street has been closed. So far, everything he has learned has been hearsay. His two children walk to Ridge School every day, and he sees a daily parade of children walking up and down the street with their parents to get to and from school. Mr. McAllister does not believe that a sidewalk will do anything to make the children safer. With respect to the assertion that there is traffic going up and down the street every day, Mr. McAllister said that is not true.

Alicia Simone, 295 Bellair Road, commented that her children attend Ridge School, and they use Clinton Avenue for access to the school. Ms. Simone said she knows that there is traffic on the street, because when walking up and down the street on many different occasions, she has seen landscapers, delivery vehicles, and people who live on the street coming and going. In fact, Ms. Simone said she has been forced to quickly get out of the way of a vehicle that was traversing the street. Ms. Simone said she does not know what the solution is, but she believes that her children deserve a safe corridor to get to school, whether it is via Clinton Avenue, or one of the other streets that are used to access the school. Ms. Simone stated that she has witnessed more than one incident in which children dart out into the street, while vehicles are moving along the street, and it seems to be just a matter of time before an accident occurs.

Anastasia Bamberg, 142 Melrose Place, stated that she goes up and down Clinton Avenue every day, and while she has not gone as far as to take pictures, there is traffic going up and down the street. Ms. Bamberg believes that the street should be closed, and she also believes that more streets in Ridgewood should be closed to allow children safe access to and from school. While Ms. Bamberg understands the Clinton Avenue residents’ objections to sidewalks, she believes their concern is really that the street will be opened to traffic. Ms. Bamberg believes in the Complete Streets program, but she has seen many near-misses. She said if there is an opportunity to install sidewalks, it should be done to keep the children safe. Moreover, the issue of whether the street is open or closed should not be given consideration, because the streets that are used as access for children walking to school should be kept closed. Ms. Bamberg also believes that allowing any more parking on Clinton Avenue will only encourage more driving, which is not desired in Ridgewood.

Enid Joseph, 17 North Murray Avenue, noted that her street does not have sidewalks. Over the past six years, during which Clinton Avenue has been closed, there have been many changes. While Ms. Joseph does not object to closing Clinton Avenue, due to changes in parking on West Ridgewood Avenue, more people now park on North Murray Avenue, which is narrower than Clinton Avenue. Therefore, Ms. Joseph said she would be very happy to pay for sidewalks on North Murray Avenue, so that she could send her children out to walk the dog knowing that they will be safe. Ms. Joseph commented that she only uses Clinton Avenue to go to the A & P, and there are times when she misses South Murray Avenue and breaks the law by going down Clinton Avenue. She estimated that, on average, there are always at least two cars parked there during the day, and sometimes as many as five cars. There is a massive landscaping job that is on-going at one of the houses, with four or five trucks being used for the job, making it unsafe for children to be walking in that area without sidewalks. Ms. Joseph said that she supports installing sidewalks everywhere, including Clinton Avenue, North Murray Avenue, and South Murray Avenue. She urged the Councilmembers to consider putting sidewalks on those streets.

Elena Conn, 67 North Hillside Place, stated that she had not planned to speak this evening, but felt compelled to mention that many of these parking and safety issues are due to the fact that there is not enough parking at Ridge School. There is a lot of space around the school, but there are not many parking spaces. Ms. Conn noted the points made by Ms. Glazer about how unsafe it is to have cars parked in front of homes and people cutting through streets, because that situation exists on her street, which is nearly three blocks from the school. Parents from Ridge School and George Washington School park on North Hillside Place because of the parking issues at those two schools. It is a very unsafe situation, because parents and babysitters block driveways; they park too close to the stop sign; and children run between cars to get to their parents on the opposite side of the road. North Hillside Place becomes very narrow when cars are parked on both sides of the street, and although no left turn is allowed coming from Ridge School, people do not always obey that sign, creating traffic problems. Ms. Conn believes that many of the issues at Ridge School are related to parents who get in their cars and pick up their children for many different reasons, and they are unable to park at Ridge School. Ms. Conn believes that more students would be walking to school if there were safer routes to get there. Furthermore, when those safe routes are devised, they must match the routes that the children use to walk to school. For example, children need a safe way to cross Godwin Avenue to get to school.

Peter von Halle, 48 Clinton Avenue, said he has lived on that street for nearly 30 years. Three of his sons attended Ridge School, and he never witnessed or heard of any parking or safety issues during that time. However, Mr. von Halle he could envision that if the street were open, it would create more congestion for cars turning at the top of the street into what is already a congested traffic situation. Mr. von Halle said he does not know if putting sidewalks on the street is the real issue in terms of making it a safe environment.

Ann Agnello, 31 Clinton Avenue, said she has lived there for more than 30 years, and she also had three children walking to Ridge School and George Washington School. In all that time, Ms. Agnello stated that no one has ever been hit by a car. Her kitchen window faces Clinton Avenue, and Ms. Agnello can see the families, children, and pets walking to and from school. Ms. Agnello believes that Clinton Avenue is safe because there are no sidewalks. She asked everyone to imagine the congestion if Clinton Avenue is opened up because it would be the most dangerous road for children to traverse, with cars going up and down the street. The plan is to put the sidewalk on one side of the street, which would require children to cross over Clinton Avenue to get to the other crossing guard, which would be a disaster. Clinton Avenue will become another shortcut street for people to cut through to other streets. Ms. Agnello commented that Clinton Avenue is not set up to become a parking lot for another school.

Ms. Agnello said Ridgewood is a very congested suburb. She noted that her job takes her to schools in parts of different counties, and in towns like Ridgewood, one would expect to wait. Ms. Agnello believes that too many people are in a rush, but that is how life is in a populated area. She also mentioned how many times this has been discussed and acted upon by the Village Council, and she is very frustrated at the lack of respect for the legal process. Moreover, Ms. Agnello is angry that the burden of putting in sidewalks, which destroys the property by removing part of the front yard, as well as destroying thousands of dollars of landscaping efforts, is a very high burden to meet.

Elizabeth Nixon, 284 Cantrell Road, stated that she has four children who attend Ridge School, and they walk along Clinton Avenue every day to get to and from school. Ms. Nixon believes that Clinton Avenue should remain closed to traffic, but it would be nice to have a sidewalk on each side because she finds it hard to explain to her two sons that they are allowed to run in the street when they are on Clinton Avenue. When Ms. Nixon walks to pick up her children from school, cars turn from Godwin Avenue, go up Clinton Avenue, and turn on West Ridgewood Avenue to avoid the traffic on Godwin Avenue. Although Ms. Nixon understands the concerns expressed by the residents of Clinton Avenue, she believes that just because an accident has not yet occurred on Clinton Avenue does not mean one will not occur.

Michelle Katzman, 35 Clinton Avenue, has two grown children who attended Ridge School with no problem, even though they walked to school. Ms. Katzman believes that if there was a safety issue, all of the residents on Clinton Avenue would support the installation of sidewalks. However, she agreed with previous statements that it is very frustrating to keep discussing this same issue so many times. If the Councilmembers want to install a sidewalk, they should make the decision and do it, rather than continuing to discuss it ad nauseum. In addition, Ms. Katzman was discussing this issue with a new neighbor on her street, who asked why sidewalks are needed, because Clinton Avenue already is a sidewalk. Residents along Clinton Avenue are very careful to go slowly, especially when there are children on the street, as do the landscaping trucks and other commercial vehicles that sometimes enter the street.

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

3.         DISCUSSION

a.         Parking:

1.)        Update on Parkmobile

Ms. Sonenfeld updated the status of Parkmobile. During this week, the Village is doing a soft implementation of Parkmobile. The preparatory work is getting done, with stickers and signage expected on Friday morning. All of the Councilmembers have a package that includes directions on how to sign up with Parkmobile, including a card to be put in their wallets, giving instructions on three easy ways to sign up for Parkmobile. There is also a new parking guide for Ridgewood. Starting tomorrow morning, Ms. Sonenfeld and several other Village employees will be at the commuter parking lots, as well as on Friday morning, to hand out the informational materials on Parkmobile and answer any questions. Ms. Sonenfeld encouraged everyone to install the Parkmobile app on their smart phones, as she has done.

Mayor Aronsohn suggested that Ms. Sonenfeld give a quick primer on the program. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this was a decision made by the Village Council several months ago, to introduce a new way to pay for parking. Users can pay for parking with their smart phones, or they can pay by telephone, if they prefer.

Councilman Pucciarelli added that there is no hardware involved, and payment can be done remotely via cell phone. Parkmobile would work without parking meters, which is probably what will eventually happen. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that the reason this came about was because the Village Council was looking at different ways of parking, and making parking more user-friendly to residents, as well as to visitors and commuters. When looking at parking meters, the other possibility was to replace approximately 1,200 parking meters to allow access by credit card, or payment by credit card. From a taxpayer perspective, that would have meant approximately $500,000-$700,000 in capital budget investment to replace the meters, which was part of the reason it was decided to go with Parkmobile. It was believed that, as the years progress, people continue to feel more and more comfortable using their cell phones, so rather than make a huge capital investment into more parking meters, Parkmobile is being implemented, which requires zero investment from the residents.

Mayor Aronsohn commented that at this time, Parkmobile will be implemented at the parking lots, and by the end of the month, street meters will also have that option available. Users can also pay with quarters, if they choose. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that effective today, the Village website includes a “Click and Park” icon for Ridgewood residents in response to concerns that have been expressed about people who are intermittent or infrequent commuters who do not wish to buy an annual Ridgewood Parking Pass (RPP). Those people can go on-line to purchase a daily pass for $7. Ms. Sonenfeld tried it, and it worked. A parking pass can be printed out that must be put in the windshield of the car. She reiterated that this is only available to Ridgewood residents.

Mayor Aronsohn stated that all of the Councilmembers are excited about this, because they feel that this is a step forward with respect to the changes in parking, and trying to make it easier to park in the CBD. It should provide a lot of relief to a lot of people, including commuters and shoppers. Councilman Pucciarelli noted that it alleviates the need to feed the meter, because if one is shopping or eating in a restaurant or some other activity, it is only necessary to use a cell phone to extend the parking time. The service can also be accessed from train by using a cell phone. Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that e-notices will be sent out later this week about this implementation, and those that do not currently receive e-notices should sign up for them as soon as possible. The parking primer, giving facts about Parkmobile, will also be sent out by e-notice.

b.         Budget:

1.)        Award Contract – Road Resurfacing and Repairs – Various Village Streets

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is to award a contract for road resurfacing and repairs. The lowest bidder is being recommended, which is Rockborn Trucking and Excavation. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that this is exciting because the Village will be doing approximately $3 million worth of paving this year, as long as the weather cooperates.

Councilwoman Hauck mentioned that many people have told her that Ridgewood is far behind in paving, which is why she is very happy to see that this is happening, although it is costing a lot of money. She asked if this was money that was budgeted in the operating budget. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that part of the money for this year’s paving comes from the 2014 capital budget, and part of it is from cleaning up capital budget accounts with money that has not been spent. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

2.)        Award Contract Under State Contract – Purchase of Road Materials – Ridgewood Water

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is to purchase raw materials for asphalt pavement repairs (potholes) needed by the Village and Ridgewood Water. Because the statutory limit of $17,500 will be exceeded, it is necessary to adopt a resolution to allow the purchase. This is covered in the operating budget.

Councilwoman Hauck asked if there is any idea of how much this will cost. Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the exact cost is not known, but that it is within the budget.

The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

3.)        Award Contract Under State Contract – Purchase of Chlorine Analyzers – Ridgewood Water

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is a resolution to award a contract under State contract for the purchase of chlorine analyzers from The Hach Company. These analyzers are necessary to monitor and report the levels of chlorine being fed into the system. Funding for this is in the Ridgewood Water capital budget. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

4.)        Award Contract to Sole Provider – Lab Chemicals – Ridgewood Water

Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is a request to award a contract for a sole provider for chemicals that can only be provided by IDEXX Distribution, Inc., for the Village’s water testing laboratory. The testing will cost approximately $25,000, and is in the 2015 operating budget. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

5.)        Award Emergency Purchase – Sodium Hypochlorite Pumps – Ridgewood Water

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is for the purchase of sodium hypochlorite pumps, which are larger chemical pumps that are required to provide the system with chlorine. The current pumps being used are too small, and in order to avoid burning them out, these pumps are being purchased to replace them.

Councilwoman Hauck noted that the resolution states that it is pursuant to mandates and regulations of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), which led her to wonder if the mandates and regulations are becoming more burdensome, or is it simply a need for stronger pumps. Mr. Rogers answered that the regulations have not changed, but it could be a different approach by the EPA, or a perception by the Village that is changing, and this is the response to that.

The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

6.)        Award Contract and Authorize Execution of Contract – E-Ticketing

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is a recommendation to award a two-year contract to Mobizent, LLC, for the e-ticket system. The cost is $49.99 per month for 24 months, and implementation is approximately one month away. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

c.         Policy:

1.)        Update on Corella Court

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that there was a safety issue on Corella Court, near Hawes School, due to teachers parking their cars all the way around Corella Court. Emergency vehicles could not get through, nor could sanitation trucks and leaf vacuums, which caused problems with leaf pickup. Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that Corella Court is a cul-de-sac off Stevens Avenue, very close to Hawes School. Several residents came to Village Council meetings to speak about an ordinance that was introduced based on action taken by the Citizens Safety Advisory Committee (CSAC) several weeks ago. The ordinance allowed two-hour parking all the way around the cul-de-sac. It seems that the cause of the problem on Corella Court is directly attributed to the lack of parking at Hawes School. An addition was built onto Hawes School, causing the loss of parking spots and dumping those cars onto the streets for parking. After the ordinance was introduced, the situation was re-examined and Ms. Sonenfeld, Mr. Rutishauser, Village Engineer, and Councilman Sedon went to Hawes School and measured the available space. According to their calculations, there could be as many as 16 extra parking spots available. Ms. Sonenfeld presented their findings to Dr. Daniel Fishbein, Superintendent of Schools. Two weeks ago, Ms. Sonenfeld, Dr. Fishbein, Mr. Rutishauser, Councilman Sedon, and the school principal walked through the Hawes School parking lot, and they reached an agreement that they would work on adding parking spots to that area. There could be as few as six more spots made available, or as many as 16. The Village Engineering Department will come up with a design, as well as work on the cost. That will help to alleviate many of the problems on Corella Court. After listening to residents and the school principal, it was also decided to change the proposed ordinance from two-hour parking to only allowing parking on one side of Corella Court. This will allow emergency and other necessary public vehicles to enter and exit that area.

Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that this was a very good example of working with the Board of Education to come up with a solution that addresses the root cause of the problem. Ms. Sonenfeld said that her greatest concern was that if parking was simply prohibited on Corella Court, as many people had requested, all of that parking would have moved to Stevens Avenue, or other nearby streets, and would not address the real issue, which is the lack of parking available at Hawes School. Ms. Sonenfeld now welcomes the opportunity to try to address the root cause of many of the problems around Hawes School, and she thinks Councilman Sedon’s suggestion is a very good one.

Councilman Sedon recalled that meeting, and said it was a very good meeting for a few reasons. There were some thoughts expressed about having an extra parking space, or maybe two, in front of Hawes School, but the principal pointed out that the location is where the snow is plowed during snow removal. It is very important to have that kind of input from someone who is at the school, because someone from outside of the school might have a very good idea, but it simply might not be practical. Ms. Sonenfeld added that she is starting to decide how to fund this work, because the Village is currently working with the Board of Education on issues on Benjamin Franklin School. The quotes that are currently being received for the work at Benjamin Franklin School are a bit less than what was budgeted by the Board of Education for that particular area, so there may be some funds available for the new parking spaces at Hawes School.

Mayor Aronsohn commended Ms. Sonenfeld and Councilman Sedon for their efforts on this project, noting that it is a good example of the partnership between Village government and the Board of Education.

2.)        Ridge School Safety/Clinton Avenue Sidewalks

Mayor Aronsohn began by thanking everyone on behalf of the Village Council for coming to give their input on the issue of Ridge School safety/Clinton Avenue sidewalks. Regardless of the position taken, the Councilmembers appreciate hearing from residents on issues that affect them. They also appreciate all of the emails that were sent by those who could not attend the meeting.

Councilwoman Knudsen reiterated the appreciation expressed by Mayor Aronsohn, and the sentiments expressed by some of the Clinton Avenue residents about rehashing the issue over and over, and she is confident that everyone wants to ensure that any work to be done is accomplished in the right way. In addition, Councilwoman Knudsen pointed out that the Councilmembers often revisit issues, whether it affects ordinances or resolutions, to change, modify, or rethink their position on the issue.

Councilwoman Knudsen continued by saying that part of the reason for this being put back on the agenda is due to the fact that some residents came to an understanding about the Clinton Avenue paving and sidewalk issue after it was a fait accompli. They knew nothing about the Citizens Safety Advisory Committee (CSAC) meetings, nor did they know that it was on the agenda for a CSAC meeting when it first occurred, and apparently not when it occurred after that. Councilwoman Knudsen did some research to find out where the agenda for the CSAC meeting was posted, and when the issue was to be included on the agenda for those meetings, in an effort to discover why residents would have such a difficult time in getting that information. Councilwoman Knudsen discovered that there is nothing posted about CSAC meetings, so many of the residents who have asked to be heard on this issue were unaware of the discussions being held. It happens that one of the members of the CSAC lives on Clinton Avenue, who was able to facilitate and generate interest from residents of that street. Unfortunately, residents of that area who do not live on Clinton Avenue were unaware that all of this was occurring. Therefore, tonight has been an opportunity to give voice to other residents of the Clinton Avenue area, who are also taxpayers and are entitled to be heard. They do have some safety concerns. Councilwoman Knudsen, in her past comments, had mentioned similar concerns after visiting Clinton Avenue on several occasions, and made the same observations about the ample traffic during the time that the road was closed, and the fact that children were navigating the street with that traffic present. Furthermore, a bigger concern of Councilwoman Knudsen is that when the street is closed, although there is traffic, there is a certain comfort level derived from the fact that the street is closed. However, when the street is open, there is quite a bit more traffic, yet people are still forced to walk in the street. Councilwoman Knudsen finds something very dangerous about that and she observed that it seemed to be very uncomfortable for some people while cars were trying to navigate past them, because they were looking for a safe place to walk. That is why Councilwoman Knudsen thought it would be fair to give the residents who had no knowledge of the CSAC meetings the chance to give their input about Clinton Avenue. These residents became aware of the matter due to some email exchanges from other residents who knew about the CSAC meetings and facilitated the discussion.

Councilwoman Knudsen noted the comments made by Ms. Bamberg, who stated that she supported the installation of sidewalks, and also supports keeping the street closed, which is something that other Clinton Avenue residents have also supported. Many of the residents feel it is a good idea to keep the street closed because there is a lot of traffic potentially entering the street from Godwin Avenue and West Ridgewood Avenue. Councilwoman Knudsen hopes it will cause the other Councilmembers to rethink their position and realize that it might be prudent to install sidewalks on one side of Clinton Avenue, and keep the street closed. Councilwoman Knudsen believes that would be a win/win for everyone. It would create a safe corridor for people to walk at all times due to the safety net created by the installation of sidewalks, and the street would be kept closed, alleviating the concerns of Clinton Avenue residents that they would be overwhelmed with increased parking and traffic. This was also mentioned in an email from another resident, as well as by Ms. Bamberg.

Councilman Sedon agreed that everyone should have a voice in what happens with this issue. At the CSAC meetings, Clinton Avenue has been a specific agenda item 3-4 times. In addition to that, every agenda has included some type of safety issue with respect to Ridge School, going back to September 2014. Issues include people making left turns where they are prohibited, or issues with queuing to pick up their children. That indicates that there are many safety concerns with Ridge School, not limited to those on Clinton Avenue. Councilman Sedon stated that he would like everyone to be heard, and he would like to invite residents from surrounding streets, as well as school staff, administrators, and a Board of Education member to take a comprehensive look at the whole area to determine what needs to be done to address these safety issues. The school must be included in any discussion, because it is a big part of the equation. Councilman Sedon thinks that it would be a wonderful idea if everyone could meet and develop a plan that may involve engineering, sidewalks, painting, signage, education, or anything else that might be necessary. The meeting could be publicized so that anyone who is interested could come, and the issue could be discussed and worked on in the following weeks or months, so that by the time budget season comes around again, any capital investment that might need to be made could be determined and proposed to try to solve the whole situation, instead of looking at different parts of the situation. Councilman Sedon said he would be happy to facilitate and host such a meeting.

Councilwoman Knudsen commented that she would be happy to work with Councilman Sedon to facilitate such a meeting in the plan, because it would be a great opportunity for them to join together and try to figure this out.

Councilman Pucciarelli supported Councilman Sedon’s approach. He noted that some of the emails from Clinton Avenue residents who support the installation of sidewalks also had other suggestions, but they related more to parking issues and whether the street should be closed or open. Although Councilman Pucciarelli does not think that safety issues should never be revisited, after hearing many discussions about sidewalks, he does not believe that issue needs to be revisited at this time. In fact, Councilman Pucciarelli explained that he traverses Clinton Avenue nearly every day, and he believes that the bigger issue has to do with vehicles idling while students are moving along the street. He suggested that while children are walking to and from school on Clinton Avenue, perhaps vehicles should not be allowed to continue idling while children are on the street. However, Councilman Pucciarelli said he is not sure that the answer to the problem on Clinton Avenue is sidewalks. He agreed with Councilman Sedon that a comprehensive plan should be formulated with respect to traffic and the attendant safety issues at Ridge School, because what is occurring there every morning and afternoon certainly needs to be improved.

Councilwoman Hauck mentioned that the CSAC started looking at this issue approximately one year ago, in the spring of 2014. The Councilmembers started receiving emails about it on September 7, 2014. Regarding the re-visitation of this issue several times over the past year, Councilwoman Hauck stated that her primary concern is certainly the welfare of residents. She has driven through that street many times, as well as knocked on doors, and she knows what has been going on with additional parking on Maltbie Avenue, which is partially in Ridgewood and partially in Midland Park. Councilwoman Hauck is also aware that the Borough of Midland Park is angry about the situation at Ridge School, and how it infringes on their community. That is an indication that the issue is much larger than simply making a decision about sidewalks. Councilwoman Hauck pointed out that having no sidewalks was already voted on, and she can see the merits of the arguments for both sides. At least nine new emails have been received on the issue since it was decided, and Councilwoman Hauck noted that there is no such thing as too much input, because that is how the Councilmembers are informed. Although she is happy to hear the opinions of the residents, Councilwoman Hauck does not think it will change her mind, because as Councilman Pucciarelli noted, they have not heard any new arguments for either side.

Councilwoman Hauck pointed out that the Complete Streets protocol gives the municipality the latitude to decide whether a sidewalk is better for community. In fact, the policy guide mentions that there are streets that are designed with only cars in mind. Moreover, Councilwoman Hauck mentioned that in 2013, there was a meeting that included the Councilmembers; Dr. Fishbein, Superintendent of Schools; the members of the CSAC; Police Chief John Ward; and other persons concerned with safety in the Village, and there was a lot of paperwork concerning the bad behavior on the part of drivers in and around school zones.

Mayor Aronsohn reiterated that all of the Councilmembers are concerned about safety, as is everyone in the Village. Everyone is particularly concerned with the safety of children. When this issue came up in September 2014, Mayor Aronsohn discussed it with Councilman Sedon, and they decided to see how the discussion went and then move forward. Mayor Aronsohn noted that he has learned a couple of things during this latest discussion. One of them is that there seems to be a serious parking issue, and that seems to be the primary issue at Ridge School, which has only worsened over time. The second thing Mayor Aronsohn learned from driving around that area is that there are other streets without sidewalks, including the streets on both sides of Clinton Avenue. The argument could be made that at this time, Clinton Avenue is the safest street, because it is closed off. There are also streets near Ridgewood High School that do not have sidewalks. Mayor Aronsohn commented that is a larger issue, and he does not understand why the focus is on Clinton Avenue. That is why he suggested that, because it seems clear that the decision has been made to move forward with paving and curbs with no sidewalks, it should be done as soon as possible. He also agreed with Councilman Sedon’s idea about looking at the larger safety issues surrounding Ridge School. The comprehensive approach seems to be the best way to go at this time.

Councilman Sedon added that at the CSAC meeting, it was explained by Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, that if a decision was made later to install sidewalks, it could still be done. Mayor Aronsohn reiterated that there are many streets in Ridgewood that do not have sidewalks, which might or might not be a good thing, but that is something that the Councilmembers should consider more broadly.

Councilwoman Knudsen commented that this was an opportunity for everyone to be heard on this issue, due to the number of emails that were received over the past several weeks.

Mayor Aronsohn asked if there is a schedule for work to be done on Clinton Avenue. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that currently, it looks like the paving and curb work will be done in September 2015 (early fall).

3.)        Ordinance 3066

Councilwoman Knudsen reminded everyone that the Planning Board has been working on Ordinance 3066 for the past couple of months. Ordinance 3066 is an ordinance that gives access to the Village Master Plan to private parties who have an interest in making applications to amend the Master Plan. This particular ordinance was implemented in 2007. The ordinance needed to be reviewed, because it was realized that there were some concerns, and it was problematic in certain areas. A committee was set up in September 2014 to begin working on review of this ordinance. The committee members include Councilwoman Knudsen; Mayor Aronsohn; Charles Nalbantian, Chairman of the Planning Board; Richard Joel, Vice-Chairman of the Planning Board; Gail Price, Planning Board Attorney; and Blais Brancheau, Village Planner. Part of the basis for revisiting Ordinance 3066 was to first establish that the Village owns the Master Plan, and retains the exclusive right to amend it.

Mayor Aronsohn noted that there was a lot of concern expressed by many people about Ordinance 3066, because they felt it was undermining the entire planning process. They believed that this ordinance would allow a developer to petition to revise the Master Plan by paying for that process, which meant that the developer would thereby control that process. That would remove some of the control and authority out of the hands of the Planning Board members. That feeling drove the re-examination of Ordinance 3066, and these discussions are trying to find out if that is true, and if so, what can be done to fix it. There was a lot of discussion about whether this type of ordinance exists in other communities. The result of this discussion will be taken to the Planning Board for their consideration and recommendation, after which time it will come back to the Village Council.

Councilwoman Knudsen added that the premise behind the original ordinance is that it became a funding mechanism, actually placing the fees in escrow, which would permit an applicant to request a change in the Master Plan, so that the funding burden was not shouldered by the taxpayers. That was a major piece of the puzzle.

Mayor Aronsohn asked Mr. Brancheau to explain the original purpose of Ordinance 3066; how Mr. Brancheau has seen it in practice; and what the document actually is. Mr. Brancheau commented that when the ordinance was first written, the Planning Board was beginning the process of hearing the Valley Hospital request for a Master Plan amendment. It was foreseen that there would be an extensive review and the need for outside consultants, the cost of which would be significant. Ordinance 3066 was adopted not with the intent to give someone the right to request a change, but to give the Planning Board the right to require applicants to pay for the time and trouble of the Planning Board members in reviewing the requests. That was adopted in 2007, whereas Valley Hospital initially appeared before the Village Council in late 2006, and started appearing before the Planning Board in 2007. Mayor Aronsohn asked if the strategy worked. Mr. Brancheau believes one of the reasons for the change is that there is a perception that when a development application is made, it is similar to a site plan application, or a subdivision or variance application. When those applications are made, State law forces the Planning Board or Board of Adjustment to take action, and that action must occur within a certain time period. In addition, it must go immediately to a hearing process. However, in the case of a Master Plan amendment, as was stated earlier, the municipality has far more control, and the municipality is not mandated to take any action at all, nor is any timeframe specified. A Public Hearing is not required. The purpose behind Ordinance 3066 was to reinforce that idea, and eliminate the confusion between a typical development application and a request for an amendment. It strengthens the language so that the Planning Board, the Village Council, and applicants would be aware that the Village is not forced to take any action, nor is it required to go through the hearing process, unless the Village chooses to do so.

The process as described in the amendment that was discussed was a two-step process, with an initial quick review at minimal cost to the applicant (administrative fee only), and no hearings required. Basically, it only required review at a Planning Board Work Session Meeting to determine if the application had merit to proceed, or that it did not have merit and would not proceed. If the Planning Board or the Village Council (in the case of an ordinance request) should decide that the application has merit, the second step of the process would begin. In that process, the Planning Board or Village Council could continue to work on an informal basis, without hearings and a lot of expert testimony in a nearly-adversarial proceeding. The process described in the ordinance is more informal. At the same time, the proposed amended ordinance provides that if the Planning Board or Village Council deems it necessary, they can require that the applicant place money in an escrow account to reimburse the Village for its costs in hiring experts to review everything. Mr. Brancheau emphasized the fact that all of that would only occur after the initial review is made, it is determined that there is some merit to the application, and it is worth studying. The current amendment is broader, and basically stipulates that an applicant must pay a more substantial application fee, and the funds must immediately be deposited in escrow to reimburse the Village. The perception was that the existing ordinance, although it does not require a formal hearing process, implies that a process will begin. Mr. Brancheau stated that was never the intent of the ordinance.

Councilman Pucciarelli noted that his tenure on the Planning Board both pre-dated and post-dated this ordinance. Councilman Pucciarelli asked if, before this ordinance passed, a private applicant had the right to petition the Planning Board to change the Master Plan. Mr. Brancheau believes that was the case. Councilman Pucciarelli said he assumed that was so, because there were applicants who felt that their properties were not properly zoned, and they could not possibly get the number of variances required, so they chose to make an application to amend the Master Plan. When this ordinance passed, it did not create the right for a private applicant to petition to amend the Master Plan. Councilman Pucciarelli believes there is a popular misconception within the community that the applications from private applicants who came before the Planning Board to amend the Master Plan were not due to the fact that the Master Plan was out of date, but because the door was opened to them by passing Ordinance 3066. On the contrary, he believes that Ordinance 3066 states that anyone who wants to present an application to the Planning Board to amend the Master Plan must pay his/her share. Councilman Pucciarelli does not see any repeal of this ordinance, and no one is saying that. In fact, he cannot see any reason to repeal it, because it seems to serve the exact purpose for which it was intended, which is that if someone does come forward with an application to amend the Master Plan, the old language even states that the nature, timing, and extent of any application shall be at the discretion of the Village Council or the Planning Board. Although the actual wording could have been better, and Ordinance 3066 certainly helps to clarify that, the decision as to whether to hear the application is still left entirely to the Planning Board. Therefore, Councilman Pucciarelli said he wanted to make it clear if there is any talk about repealing Ordinance 3066, he does not want to be any part of that. He thinks that repealing the ordinance would revert to the situation in which the applicants have the same rights and fewer responsibilities, and the Planning Board’s discretion is not explicitly stated. Councilman Pucciarelli commended Mr. Brancheau for recognizing that this ordinance should not be repealed, but should be preserved. He believes that Ordinance 3066 enhances the current ordinance, as well as preserving it, and is a far cry from repealing it. It also regulates the process in favor of Village government, and that is why Councilman Pucciarelli supports preserving it.

Mr. Brancheau noted that the opportunity for the public to make comments is available at the beginning and end of all Village Council meetings, while at the Planning Board, public comments are available at the beginning of meetings. Whether it is a resident, a member of the business community, or someone else, that right is always available during open sessions of the Planning Board to request a review of any issue. Whether the Planning Board or Village Council believes it is a good idea or not, the public does have a right to request that the government change its policies. Neither the Planning Board nor the Village Council is obligated to act upon the request, nor is either entity obligated to do what was requested, but they are only obligated to hear the request presented. Ordinance 3066 reinforces that process, and strengthens the discretionary role of the reviewing body.

Mayor Aronsohn also came to realize that there was no need to repeal the ordinance after sitting through the meetings and going through this process. On the contrary, it gives the governing body an option that does not exist in other municipalities. One of the points discussed with respect to clarifying language was that, at some point after the preliminary review by the Planning Board, if the Planning Board should decide to move forward with a hearing, there is a choice to be made about how to proceed with that hearing. The choice is whether to have the applicant pay for the process, or let the Planning Board fund it themselves. The amended language provides that the Planning Board should take a step back to make a very conscious, deliberate, and public decision, and get input from the community. He agreed with Mr. Brancheau that the language has been clarified, while at the same time preserving what Mayor Aronsohn considers to be an important option for the Planning Board. Mr. Brancheau agreed, saying that it gives the Planning Board or Village Council the flexibility about whether to require a deposit from the applicant, or to do the work on its own; whether to open the hearing process; and whether to require notices. Mr. Brancheau pointed out that State law provides that amendments to ordinances and Master Plans require that, prior to adoption of any amendment, Public Hearings must be held, and the same applies to ordinances. State law cannot be changed, but Mr. Brancheau commented that, until any issue reaches the point of a Public Hearing, the Village has as much discretion as it requires with respect to how to handle the issue.

Councilman Sedon commented that, in fairness to everyone, it is important to notify any applicant from the beginning that the possibility exists that no action will be taken. He believes that the implication was that, since money was required to be placed in escrow in starting the process, it would be formal from the beginning. This ordinance gives the applicant, as well as the Planning Board and Village Council, the ability to decide from the start whether to move forward, and how to proceed, instead of immediately embarking upon the hearing process. Mr. Brancheau pointed out that it was the reason for reducing the application fee to a minimal amount, as well as removing the requirement of a deposit in escrow. He agreed with Councilman Sedon that the requirement of placing funds in escrow created the impression in the minds of some people that the issue would move immediately to a formalized process. Councilman Sedon added that he thinks it is important for the taxpayers to know that if an application has merit, and the Planning Board wants to explore it further, the financial burden could be placed on the applicant, not on the taxpayers.

Councilwoman Hauck stated that, based on Mr. Brancheau’s summation of the changes, it sounds perfect to her. She agreed that Ordinance 3066 was already very clear, but she is confused by something that was in the draft given to the Councilmembers. There is an explanation of how various parts of the ordinance will be changed, and they are underlined. However, a new section after that strikes a lot of the existing language. Councilwoman Hauck asked if the new ordinance would have fewer paragraphs and sections, and thereby be shorter than the existing ordinance. She noted that 190-143 is completely stricken, and 190-144 is also completely stricken. Mr. Brancheau explained that, instead of rewording complete paragraphs, it would be better to start fresh with the wording. He pointed out that Section 190-143 in the existing Code has six subsections. The proposed amendment only has four subsections. With respect to Section 190-144 in the existing Code, there were also six subsections, which have been increased to eight subsections. Councilwoman Hauck thinks this was a great idea to reassure people, because there were many who had the misconception that testimony provided by experts would be affected by a perceived bias, based on monies placed in escrow. Councilman Pucciarelli noted that it had been addressed in the proposed amendment, where it was spelled out very clearly that neither the Planning Board nor the Village Council is obligated to conduct any hearing or to take any formal action concerning the request, except to inform the requester that a determination has been made. Mr. Brancheau noted that the language is repeated throughout the amendments, especially at the end of the process once the review has been completed, the Planning Board is not obligated to take any action with respect to the application. Even when time frames are suggested, the Planning Board is not obligated to take action.

Councilman Pucciarelli also noted that the proposed amendment illustrates the need to review the Master Plan regularly, because situations constantly change in the Village. He asked if this ordinance would be presented to the Planning Board for review before adoption by the Village Council. Mr. Brancheau responded that the Councilmembers have a choice. They could choose to introduce the ordinance as written, and then refer it to the Planning Board, or it could be sent to the Planning Board for final recommendations before introduction. It has not yet been reviewed by the full Planning Board, but only by a subcommittee.

Councilwoman Knudsen noted that there are many examples throughout the Village that demonstrate the success of the ordinance. She also commended Mr. Brancheau for cleaning up the language, and she thanked him, as well as Mr. Nalbantian, Mr. Joel, Ms. Price, and Mayor Aronsohn for their efforts throughout this process.

4.)        Endorse Community Development Block Grant Application – Family Promise

Ms. Sonenfeld reminded everyone that the endorsement of a Community Development Block Grant for Family Promise was done last year. The requirement of the grant is that the applicant notifies the municipality of the grant, but no Village funds are obligated by this endorsement. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

d.         Operations:

1.)        Adoption of Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this is adoption of a resolution formalizing the Village’s participation in the County-wide natural hazard mitigation plan. This is required in order for Ridgewood to be eligible for FEMA grant funding. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

2.)        Authorize Mailing of 2015 Third-Quarter Estimated Tax Bills

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this will authorize the mailing of the third-quarter estimated tax bills. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

3.)        Declare Property Surplus – Fiber Optic Cable Reels

Ms. Sonenfeld noted that this is self-explanatory, and is a resolution to declare extra cable reels as surplus, and that they can be disposed of by the Village Manager. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

4.)        Pease Library Lease Assessment

Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that this will authorize Mayor Aronsohn and Ms. Mailander to execute the second renewal of the Pease Library lease with Ridgewood Medical Media. This was considered by the Ridgewood Public Library Board of Trustees, and was reviewed by them, as well as by Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Rogers. The Village Council agreed to put this resolution on the agenda for the May 13, 2015 Public Meeting.

5.)        Rental of 1057 Hillcrest Road

Ms. Sonenfeld explained that the rental of 1057 Hillcrest Road, which is located in Habernickel Family Park, is being put out to bid. The property has always been rented under a one-year lease with an option to renew, because the situation with house has been tentative while there is on-going construction at the park. The current tenant has not committed to renewing the lease at the current price, and Ms. Sonenfeld noted that she is awaiting a report from the real estate professional regarding the market rate. This is for informational purposes only.

6.)        Authorize Execution of Contract with Northwest Financial Services – Review of Financials from Kensington Senior Development

Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out this should probably have been included under the discussion about parking, because it has to do with the North Walnut Street Redevelopment Zone, and one of the prime reasons for undertaking this project was to provide more parking within the CBD. This will authorize Mayor Aronsohn and Ms. Mailander to execute the agreement with Northwest Financial Services, which has been discussed in previous Village Council meetings. This is the next step in reviewing the Kensington Senior Housing proposal for North Walnut Street. Kensington Senior Housing is paying for this financial review, so no Village funds are being expended. Kensington will transfer the funds to the Village for payment to Northwest Financial Services. Mayor Aronsohn asked what the timeframe is for this part of the project. Mr. Rogers explained that as soon as the agreement is approved by the Village Council, it goes into effect, and the work can begin, as well as the financial review. It has been left open through the end of 2015 because it will be a need for an exchange between Northwest Financial and Kensington with respect to documents and other essential materials, and Northwest Financial stated that they could have it completed within a month if they receive all of the necessary documents.

Councilwoman Hauck stated that she was on the Redevelopment Committee, and there is still another proposal under consideration. Anyone reading this contract might believe that the other company did not have the option to obtain the same financial review, but that is not the case. The other company chose not to pay for a financial review. There has not yet been any determination made with respect to choosing Kensington Senior Development for this project. Mr. Rogers noted that there are only references to a “proposed developer” or “potential developer,” without identifying who that developer might be.

7.         REVIEW OF MAY 13, 2015 AGENDA

Ms. Mailander announced that the Public Meeting would include the following Proclamations: Proclaim “National Cancer Survivors Day”; Proclaim “Emergency Medical Services Week”; Proclaim the month of May as “Mental Health Month”.

The Temporary Chief Financial Officer will be appointed and sworn in. Two Firefighters will also be sworn in.

There are no ordinances scheduled to be introduced.

The scheduled Public Hearings include: Amend Chapter 25 – Vehicles and Traffic – Definition of Loading Zones; Amend Chapter 265 – Vehicles and Traffic – Corella Court – Stop Sign and Two-Hour Parking Limit; Amend Chapter 265 – Vehicles and Traffic – Delineation and Clarification of Yellow Zones on Curbs in Central Business District and Establish Vehicle Height Restrictions; Establish a CAP Bank; General Capital Ordinance; Water Capital Ordinance; and the Parking Utility Capital Ordinance.

Resolutions include: Title 59 Approval – Road Resurfacing and Repair; Award Contract – Road Resurfacing and Repairs; Title 59 Approval – Horticultural Supplies; Award Contract – Horticultural Supplies; Award Contract and Authorize Execution of Contract – E-Ticketing; Award Contract under State Contract – Purchase of Chlorine Analyzers; Award Contract under State Contract – Purchase of Computer Equipment; Award Contract to Sole Provider – Lab Chemicals – Ridgewood Water; Award Extraordinary Unspecifiable Services Contract – Distribution Leak Survey – Ridgewood Water; Award Extraordinary Unspecifiable Services Contract – Emergency Chemical Purchase – Corrosion Inhibitor; Authorize Execution of Contract – Northwest Financial Services; Award Emergency Purchase – Sodium Hypochlorite Pumps – Ridgewood Water; Authorize Property Tax Payment Refund Due to Reduced Assessment – Block 4205, Lot 7.01; Authorize Mailing of 2015 Third-Quarter Estimated Tax Bills; Adopt Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan; Declare Property Surplus – Fiber Optic Cable Reels; Endorse Community Development Block Grant Application – Family Promise.

8.         MANAGER’S REPORT

Ms. Sonenfeld started her report by welcoming Robert G. Rooney as the Temporary Chief Financial Officer, who will be sworn in next week. He joined the Village staff as of Monday, May 4, 2015, as the temporary CFO and Director of the Parking Utility. Mr. Rooney brings 35 years of experience serving the public sector working for one of the Big Four accounting firms, so he understands the finances associated with counties, municipalities, school districts, and other civil authorities. In addition, he has significant experience in understanding operations of municipalities, as well as systems implementation experience.

Bob Gillow, Superintendent of the Ridgewood Wastewater Treatment Plant, is retiring. Mr. Gillow joined the Village in 1978, and worked his way up through the plant, becoming the Superintendent of the plant in 2005. His entire working life has been spent in Ridgewood, and working with Mr. Rutishauser, they led the Water Pollution Control Facility through the liquid waste acceptance program and the sustainable energy programs. Ms. Sonenfeld said that Mr. Gillow will be missed, and she is currently interviewing candidates for his position.

Regarding Graydon Pool, Ms. Sonenfeld wanted to provide some updates on what actions have occurred over the past couple of weeks, what has been learned, and what her recommendations are. She unequivocally stated that during the last week in August, there is no staffing available for the pool. Other pools that are similar to Graydon Pool have different situations, because their communities do not start school until September 8th, allowing the pools to stay open. Some municipalities have not yet reached a decision about what they will do at that time.

As far as the pre-season is concerned, and whether the hours should be extended during that time, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that at this point, it appears that funding is available to keep the pool open two extra hours in the mornings, although it will be restricted to the kiddie pool area. However there are some concerns with that. First, although some of the college students are home and said that they could work at those times, there is always a risk that the pool will not be properly staffed. Therefore, whether the pool is open or closed could be a decision that has to be made on a day-to-day basis, and it might be necessary to close the pool at times due to inadequate staffing. Second, there will be limited staffing, as opposed to staffing throughout the property, which also causes safety concerns, such as people going to the other side of the pool; medical emergencies that might occur; and the fact that lifeguards would be required to work longer shifts, which might lead to insufficient down time for them. Another issue is a historical one, which was in 2012, when the pool was open for extended hours, but there was a low turnout. Many people believe the low turnout was due to weather issues, but after checking weather records for that time, the majority of days were warm or warmer than the average for June. The majority of days also had no rain. The final issue is the business/financial one. It is known that it will cost approximately $3,000 to keep the pool open the additional hours, and Ms. Sonenfeld discovered in her research that during the pre-season, Graydon Pool does better on the pre-season weekdays than many other municipalities’ pools, and the Graydon Pool regular season starts earlier than those other municipalities’ pools.

Moving on to parking, Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that there is a “parking team” that meets regularly, and tries to examine all the different facets of parking. However, there is a desire to place an emphasis on breaking ground for a new parking garage as soon as possible, perhaps early in 2016. As a result, a Parking Steering Committee is being developed, including Mayor Aronsohn and Councilman Sedon; Mr. Rooney; Mr. Rutishauser; and Ms. Sonenfeld. Other people can be added if necessary. The goal of the committee is to stay on top of this issue to ensure that adequate resources are devoted to it, and it is prioritized as high as necessary with any potential roadblocks being removed as quickly as possible. Weekly meetings will begin soon.

A quote was received from a vendor regarding automated versus traditional parking garages. Ms. Sonenfeld thinks that will be the first topic of discussion for the new Parking Steering Committee, with a decision to be made about whether it should be put out for an RFP.

Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that she thinks there is a bottleneck in the Engineering Department. Projects are getting delayed, with Ms. Sonenfeld noting that the three employees are working on approximately 40 projects at the moment. Those projects include a paving project, and paving projects traditionally require a lot of resources; the Hawes School parking lot, which must be designed and implemented; the Benjamin Franklin School driveway drop off situation, which needs to be redesigned; an RFP must be put together to review or privatize the Lakeview Recycling Facility, which may or may not need some other kind of work; the Hudson Street parking structure; the additional parking for the park-and-ride on Route 17, which has engendered some additional political issues; reviewing the valet parking issue in the CBD, which needs to be studied to consider the possibility of regionalizing it; looking at ADA-compliant ramps on all Bergen County roads so that those roads can be paved; continuing the process regarding the North Walnut Street will Redevelopment Zone; Engine 31, which is now working in a subdivision; the diversion issue that was discussed months ago and still exists; the Lester Stable ADA ramps that need to be coordinated; the Graydon Pool ADA ramp from the parking lot; the Saddle River stream bank project closeout of FEMA funds; the grant stream cleaning project from the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP); work that needs to be done on the Graydon Pool pumping station; the bathrooms at Habernickel Family Park; wall repairs that are needed at the salt shed; snowplowing that must be sent out for bid again this year; drainage improvements to be done on Monte Vista Avenue; wayfinding signs in the CBD; flood map updates for Ridgewood residents; and the list goes on.

Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that Ms. Sonenfeld did not get into the jobs for Fleet Services. All of these jobs are in addition to the fact that anyone who passes the Engineering Department at any given time will usually find a resident there asking for assistance or advice. Mr. Rutishauser also attends some of the Planning Board meetings, which takes up a lot of his time, as well as many of the other Village committees. Ms. Sonenfeld emphasized that she is not requesting action being taken at this time, but she will send the list of jobs awaiting the Engineering Department to all of the Councilmembers for their input regarding where the priorities should be. They should also consider the possibility of adding resources to the Engineering Department, whether permanent, temporary, or contracted.

Ms. Sonenfeld moved on to discussing the user-friendly budget. It is now a State requirement that municipalities submit user-friendly budgets, and it has been in the news due to the fact that it is regarded as an unfunded mandate. There are some municipalities who have either elected or are trying not to provide such budgets. Ms. Mailander distributed a potential resolution for the Village Council to adopt expressing the concern of the Councilmembers about this issue. Ms. Sonenfeld reported that the new CFO has completed approximately 75% of the new, user-friendly budget. She explained that the reason for this being so “easy” in Ridgewood is because approximately a year ago, she and the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) started examining fully loaded costs, while at the same time examining how pensions and benefits fit in, and other issues that were discussed with the FAC. All of that has paid off, because it has made Mr. Rooney’s job that much easier. The Village does not need a resolution of opposition to the user-friendly budget, and when the budget is adopted, it will be put in a user-friendly format.

In her “Response to Residents” section, Ms. Sonenfeld added that yesterday, she received two emails telling her how wonderful Garber Square looks. Both of the senders also mentioned that the bike lane is terrific, and they love the green paint. Ms. Sonenfeld commended the Engineering Department for all of their efforts.

At the “Meet the Manager” session in April, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that many the people who came wanted to discuss Corella Court, which gave her the opportunity to receive more input and feedback on how this could possibly be done a bit differently.

Upcoming events include a plant sale on May 9, 2015, to benefit beautification projects for the Ridgewood Land Conservancy. May 10, 2015, is Mother’s Day, and the last day to register to vote for the primary is May 12, 2015. On May 14, 2015, there will be the annual “Touch-a-Truck,” when children are allowed to climb on and investigate Village vehicles. The second quarter property tax grace period ends on May 11, 2015. Finally, on May 20, 2015, there will be the Building Safety Conference hosted by Tom Yotka, Director of the Building Department, in honor of Building Safety Month. Everyone is welcome to speak to him, as well as other Building Department employees.

9.         COUNCIL REPORTS

Planning Board – Councilwoman Knudsen stated that the Planning Board continued its review of the land-use plan element of the Master Plan, including the AH2, B3R, CR, and C-zone districts. Mr. Brancheau came forward with a newly revised amendment, and gave testimony, as well as fielding questions from the public and Planning Board members. The newly-revised amendment reflects a reduction in allowable units per acre from approximately 45-52 to approximately 30-35. Some residents and Planning Board members continued to express concern that the numbers were still too high, and there should perhaps be a reduction in the floor area ratio, Mr. Brancheau quickly pointed out that it does not yet include the newly-defined social areas. Councilwoman Knudsen stated that it was a very long night, and everyone stayed until the end. The Public Hearing on the newly-revised amendment will continue on Tuesday, June 2, 2015, at Village Hall.

In addition, with approximately nine months left to complete the Master Plan re-examination, the Planning Board continues to work on that issue. Councilwoman Knudsen noted that the Planning Board has a full plate this year, and they are trying to get their agendas posted more promptly, and she asked everyone to have patience during this extremely busy time.

Federrici Sculpture Update – Councilwoman Knudsen said that for those following closely, the Federrici sculpture was moved from its longtime resting place in the woods behind the Traffic and Signal Division, to a secure location. It was moved by Village staff, and Councilwoman Knudsen praised them for being careful to ensure that it moved smoothly. It is now in the care of a fine art restorer, and the decision was made to bring it to a pristine condition, as that is most appropriate to proper restoration. Early discussions in the fall of 2014 included permanent installation in front of the flagpole at Village Hall. However, upon reflection, it was determined that it would not be the best place, because the sculpture is not very tall, and bringing it up to an appropriate level would be difficult. Since then, it was determined that the sculpture will be restored to its most proper and prominent location, which is above the main entrance to Village Hall. This will require more funding, and some private donors have already expressed their willingness to help with that.

Fourth of July Committee – Councilwoman Knudsen mentioned that the Fourth of July Committee will meet on Monday, May 11th, at 7:30 P.M., at the Ridgewood Firehouse. Everyone is welcome to come and help. The committee is still seeking volunteers to work along the parade route and elsewhere. Councilwoman Knudsen commented that they are great group of people, who are very enthusiastic and welcoming. She hopes that other people will come and join in the efforts to continue this Ridgewood tradition. For more information, visit www.ridgewoodjuly4.net.

Historic Preservation Commission– Councilwoman Knudsen noted that this committee will meet next Thursday, May 14th, at 8:00 P.M., in the Garden Room. They are planning to review the historic component for the Master Plan re-examination, as well as any other applications that are pending.

Ridgewood Arts Council – Councilman Pucciarelli again mentioned the Ridgewood Arts Council’s website at www.rac.ridgewoodnj.net. He noted that on the website, people can find, among other things, the master calendar for all of their scheduled artistic endeavors in Ridgewood. Last Friday night, Councilman Pucciarelli attended the Ridgewood Symphony Orchestra’s performance at West Side Presbyterian Church.

Central Business District Forum – Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that the sixth forum in the CBD series, which was to take place on May 20th, conflicts with the scheduled Building Safety Seminar, which Councilman Pucciarelli urges everyone to attend. The CBD forum has been rescheduled for Wednesday, June 17th, and more information will follow.

Ridgewood Public Library Board of Trustees– Councilwoman Hauck mentioned that the Friends of the Library gave the report stating that the reading marathon fundraiser from February-March grossed $20,400. The author’s luncheon netted $28,500. These are great initiatives for the Village, and represent great collaborations between the Friends of the Library and the Public Library. A Library Foundation fundraiser will be held on October 17th in the Public Library. It was noted that computer class enrollments have increased by 20%. There was also a discussion about the Village’s participation in the Public Library budget, and how the 2015 budget is $20,000 more than the 2014 budget. They also acknowledged that once the budget is adopted, the Village has agreed to increase their capital budget by approximately $50,000 in 2015. The total Village contribution to the Public Library budget was $2.35 million.

The Public Library has a new program called Hoopla, from the Bergen County Cooperative Library System (BCCLS), which is something that Councilwoman Hauck feels could be quite addictive. It is similar to Zinio, which offers magazine subscriptions using a library card, in that Hoopla offers free movies, music, audiobooks, and television shows streaming online to computers and tablets simply by using a library card.

Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) – Councilwoman Hauck stated that the Financial Advisory Committee met this past Monday, and the meeting was brief, but productive. The members have decided to reduce their meetings to quarterly meetings, and they are currently reviewing the bylaws to see how that can be implemented. They do not believe it is necessary to meet monthly, because they can schedule work sessions as they are needed. Councilwoman Hauck mentioned that the FAC was instrumental in putting together the budget newsletter which will be coming out shortly. They reviewed the text, changed the pie charts and graphs, and edited the layout, and without the assistance of the FAC, that would place a greater burden on Village staff. The FAC is also compiling their annual report, which they plan to present to the Village Council in approximately two weeks.

Fields Committee – Councilwoman Hauck mentioned that the Fields Committee met this morning, and they had a visit from some of the members of the Ridgewood Environmental Advisory Committee (REAC). The purpose of REAC’s visit was to ask for help from the members of the Fields Committee to encourage more people to use refillable water bottles, in the hope that through awareness, advocacy, action, and alignment, people will stop using plastic bottles and leaving them all over the fields. Everyone agreed that it was a wonderful idea because there are approximately 4,500 children participating in Ridgewood sports programs, and if only 10% of them used refillable bottles, it would be a huge step in the right direction. The fall field schedule was also completed and distributed.

Today, Councilwoman Hauck attended the Bergen County Board of Chosen Freeholders Public Hearing regarding the needs of senior citizens in Bergen County. James Tedesco, County Executive, gave everyone the opportunity to come to the hearing to see if any new ideas could be generated for assisting senior citizens. One of the ideas that was discussed was from a woman who took it upon herself to start distributing absorbent briefs to senior citizens through Meals On Wheels. This was subsidized through donations and contributions, and is changing the lives of many who cannot afford to pay for those things themselves. There are 952,000 residents and Bergen County, and approximately 120,000 of them are senior citizens. Approximately 100,000 more are caregivers. The most vulnerable senior citizens are those 60 years and older. Councilwoman Hauck pointed out that the 50th anniversary of the Older Americans Act was also discussed, which was passed in 1965 in response to concerns about senior citizens. There was a lack of community and social services for older persons. The most common requests at the hearing were for more transportation for seniors, and for more housing. Currently, there is a five-year waiting list for Federally subsidized housing, and people who qualify for that are the ones who fall below 50% of the median family income. Councilwoman Hauck welcomed anyone who has questions about services for senior citizens to call her or email her.

Ridgewood Green Team – Councilman Sedon mentioned that he met with the Green Team yesterday, and Mr. Rutishauser is helping everyone to get the information they need. The team must compile documentation and a narrative of the green initiatives and actions that are being planned and have been completed by the Village. He noted that Ridgewood has already accomplished many of these initiatives, all of which are known to Mr. Rutishauser, so he has been an invaluable help in that way. The Green Team has some longtime volunteers, as well as some new recruits from the community, who are getting acquainted with Village Hall employees. It seems very likely that Ridgewood will be certified through the Sustainable Jersey program by the June 7th deadline. That will open up many grant opportunities and further certification, because some of the documentation currently being assembled has been very easy to obtain, but Councilman Sedon said there are some other things that are only half-done, which might require a few more initiatives on the part of Ridgewood. He emphasized that the Village can easily meet the requirements for initial certification for the bronze level by June 7th, which will open up grant opportunities.

Mayor Aronsohn mentioned that on Saturday, April 25th, Ridgewood hosted the Bergen County Access for All Forum, the fourth such event held in Bergen County. The purpose is to promote disability awareness and try to get municipalities to work together on disability issues. It was the largest turnout ever, and Mayor Aronsohn said that it also represented a real cross-section of people working throughout the disability spectrum. Mr. Tedesco attended, as well as several Bergen County Freeholders, and other Bergen County officials.

Mayor Aronsohn mentioned the struggles of Ridgewood resident Anthony Daniels, who has endured a long battle with an aggressive form of Hodgkin’s lymphoma. A bone marrow drive was held for him in Village Hall more than a year ago, and the turnout was incredible. Now, North Jersey Masters, sponsors of the Memorial Day run, have agreed to set up a tent for Anthony this year.

The Ridgewood Art Institute hosts its annual sponsor show this Friday, May 8th. Each guest pays approximately $275, and all of the guests’ names go into a hat. When a particular name is called, that person can choose any painting hanging on the wall.

Finally, with respect to Graydon Pool, Mayor Aronsohn thanked Ms. Sonenfeld and Tim Cronin, Director of the Department of Parks and Recreation, for all of their efforts with respect to the on-going issues with the pool. Mayor Aronsohn believes that every effort should be made so that the pool can stay open for the extra two hours in the early part of the season.

Councilwoman Knudsen stated that she agrees with Ms. Sonenfeld’s comments about Graydon Pool, but she wanted to know if there was any cost savings in keeping the pool closed at the end of the season to offset the additional $3,000 it will cost to keep it open for the extra two hours in the early season. Ms. Sonenfeld said that is possible. Councilman Pucciarelli commented that he thought it was a good objective to keep Graydon Pool open early for two weeks, but he would leave it to Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Cronin to make decision.

Councilman Sedon also supports keeping the pool open the extra two hours, although he is rather disappointed that at the end of the season, at the hottest time of year, the pool cannot be opened. He also thanked Ms. Sonenfeld, Mr. Cronin, and everyone else who worked on this initiative.

Councilwoman Hauck stated that she had three concerns, and the primary one is safety. The one thing she learned from this research is that other pools have 15-minute shifts so that a lifeguard never sits in a chair for longer than 15 minutes. The pool has eight lifeguards, and one extra lifeguard is scheduled as a “floater” in case someone is absent. Extending the opening time by two hours over nine days means that the lifeguards will be sitting in the chairs for 10 hours with no relief, which is not safe. That is why Councilwoman Hauck is glad that it is being restricted to the kiddie pool area. She also pointed out that this only occurs every 5-6 years, due to school openings vis-à-vis Labor Day

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that this will be viewed as a pilot program; it will be monitored, so the Village is prepared for next year, when Labor Day will be late again.

10.       COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC

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

Jane Remis, 118 Madison Place, stated that she would be happy to work with the Councilmembers on the situation at Ridge School. She also pointed out that the Village Engineer recommended sidewalks on Clinton Avenue for safety, and the reason it was discussed tonight was because many people believe it would help to alleviate some of the traffic problems.

Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, thanked the Councilmembers for their decision with respect to the additional hours at Graydon Pool. It is especially welcoming to those who are grandparents or parents of toddlers, who need to take a nap after lunch.

With respect to Corella Court, Mr. Loving believes there is a lesson to be learned, especially by those who are currently on the Planning Board or are contemplating joining the Planning Board, and with no disrespect to any members of the Board of Education. Mr. Loving thinks that what happens with additions and changes to school buildings is that the Planning Board does a courtesy review of those plans, without taking everything into consideration. In this case, an addition was built onto Hawes School, and there was no consideration for the amount of parking that was being lost, or how many new staff members would be joining the school, as a result of the addition. Mr. Loving hopes that there is some kind of courtesy review of the plans at Benjamin Franklin School, and that any review will take into consideration the ramifications on parking at the school.

Mr. Loving said he is a bit concerned about the proposed start date mentioned by Ms. Sonenfeld for the paving on Clinton Avenue. The start date is in September, and school starts on September 1st. Mr. Loving said he is rather disappointed to find that the Village is willing to cause chaos on that street at the same time the school is starting. That will bring in construction workers, additional traffic, street closings, and situations that might make it unsafe for children to walk on the streets. Mr. Loving asked if it would be possible to have the work completed by the time school starts, instead of starting a project at that time.

Councilwoman Knudsen pointed out that most recently, the Planning Board did a courtesy review for the Board of Education for the solar panel project, and one of the first questions asked by Councilwoman Knudsen was whether the stanchions or uprights would interfere with any parking spaces, to ensure that there was no loss of parking there. The Board of Education assured the Planning Board that there was no issue with parking, and no parking would be lost.

Anne Loving, 342 South Irving Street, asked a question about the purchase of road materials for pavement repair and trench restoration, on the agenda this evening. Ms. Loving wanted to know if the funds for the purchase would be coming from the Ridgewood Water budget. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that the monies are coming from both budgets, and only monies that are budgeted will be spent in either of those budgets.

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

11.       RESOLUTION TO GO INTO CLOSED SESSION

The following resolution, numbered 15-128, to go into Closed Session, was read in full by the Village Clerk, as follows:


10.       ADJOURNMENT

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

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    _____________________________

                                                                                                  Paul S. Aronsohn

                                                                                                          Mayor

_________________________________

            Heather A. Mailander

                Village Clerk

 

  • Hits: 3468

A SPECIAL PUBLIC MEETING OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 28, 2014, AT 7:30 P.M.

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

Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 8:00 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney. Councilman Riche was absent.

2.                     2014 BUDGET HEARING

a.                     Presentation of 2014 Budget

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that this is the third time the budget is being presented. The in-depth presentations were presented twice before, so this evening the budget will be summarized.

The operating and capital budgets were done together. The operating budget is $46.2 million, and a $2.8 million requested capital budget. The budget reflects a 0% tax increase. It was submitted to the State of New Jersey, and it has been approved by the State for adoption. The overall approach was to maximize the anticipated revenue, and the 2013 actual expenditures were used as a guide for the 2014 expenses. There are also some modest investments in capital.

Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that, as with most municipalities, the budget for public safety comprises approximately 41% of the budget. Working with the members of the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC), a different approach was taken by including in the costs of the Departments the amounts paid for pensions, benefits, and FICA. This is an effort to show the real costs of running each Department. Key considerations were: employee health insurance, which rose 11.8%, or $624,000; debt service, which increased by $956,000; public safety salary increases, which represent more than half of the total salary increases of more than $900,000; substantially higher costs for snow removal in 2014 of $571,000; terminal leave payments for 11 known employees of approximately $420,000; purchasing and leasing of Police Department vehicles, which cost approximately $100,000; salaries for two new Police Officers of approximately $80,000 total; money put aside for the Building Department to address some of the issues there; increases in the cost of mulching; forensic review of Village processes and Six Sigma training to prepare for the future; a decrease in Fire Department salaries of approximately $161,000 due to retirements and new hires; and increased funding for the Community Center.

Regarding revenues, Ms. Sonenfeld commented that revenues have been maximized. Most of the revenue derived from fees and permits come from Municipal Court fees, which total approximately $379,000. Other fees and permit revenue include: Graydon Pool, which brings in approximately $362,000; sewer use for tax-exempt organizations is approximately $322,000; fees for ambulance services of approximately $366,000; and the cable television franchise, which brings in approximately $344,000.

Overall, Ms. Sonenfeld said everyone believes that the anticipated revenue can be realized. The risks are some potential Municipal Court fines, particularly parking tickets, because the Village had fewer Parking Enforcement Officers in the first part of the year. In addition, there is the usual Graydon Pool risk, which is the weather. There is also less revenue in the Recycling Department, because prices paid to the Village are down.

Looking at opportunities, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out the increase in fees for side jobs by Police Department personnel, which will have an impact on the entire year. There has also in quite a bit of new construction in Ridgewood, leading to an increase in building permit fees.

The Village faces some challenges, according to Ms. Sonenfeld. She noted three anticipated challenges. The first is that there are some unfunded liabilities in the amount of $7.1 million, covering accumulated sick time; accumulated vacation time; and compensatory time. There is a reserve of $479,000 against that $7.1 million. Another challenge to be dealt with is that the Village has used surplus fund balance, one-time revenues, and trust funds, for a total of $4.8 million, which will need to be replenished. The surplus fund balance, in particular, had a balance of $4.4 million, but $2.9 million is being used in the 2014 municipal budget. The remaining surplus is now $1.4 million. However, there will be money coming in from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in the amount of $300,000, as well as more funds coming into replenish the surplus balance. The Recycling Trust Fund has been virtually wiped out. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that $294,000 of that fund was allocated against expenses, and another $150,000 was used to offset the tax levy. In addition, due to the amount of snow removal that was needed this past year, the entire Snow Removal Trust Fund of $211,000 was depleted. There were some one-time revenues in the past year. Funds were received from FEMA; the Green Acres trust, which is being reserved for debt service; and there were some deferred charges from the Parking Utility which were used this year. Overall, Ms. Sonenfeld estimated that the Village used approximately $500,000 more of one-time revenues this year compared to the previous year. That is another challenge.

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that basing the budget on actual expenditures gives the Village more discipline but less flexibility. Therefore, when she referred earlier to surplus balances, in order to add to a surplus, it is necessary to either decrease expenses, or increase revenue. Because revenue was maximized, and expenses are very tight, it makes the ability to replenish surplus a bit riskier than it has been in the past.

Switching to the capital budget, Ms. Sonenfeld stated that the capital budget is $2.8 million. Some of the larger items included in the budget are: the purchase of a salt truck with a plow for $236,000 to aid in snow removal; the Police and Fire Departments are purchasing new vehicles and equipment; some planned improvements to the parks; and installing a new audio/visual media system in the Public Library, as well as investing in some technology for the Public Library. Perhaps the most important item in the capital budget is the inclusion of funds for paving various streets around the Village. The current budget proposal includes two scenarios for the Councilmembers to consider. One of those scenarios is the complete capital budget, which includes paving. Because Ms. Sonenfeld noticed that it did not seem that the total capital budget would pass when it was presented several weeks ago, she took the paving element out of the capital budget and made it a separate capital budget issue for the Councilmembers to decide. The intent is to facilitate getting all of the paving done in 2014. Currently, the paving that is being done is covered by the 2013 capital budget. Ms. Sonenfeld would like to get all of the paving covered by the 2014 capital budget done in 2014. She is concerned that the paving will not get done with so many delays on voting for the funds to do the paving.

Breaking it down into individual tax dollars, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that 25% of each tax dollar goes to the municipality, while 65% of each tax dollar goes to the Board of Education. Approximately 10% of each tax dollar goes to Bergen County, but that is still an estimate due to the fact that the tax information is still not available from the County. Therefore, and average homeowner will see a decrease of approximately $5 in taxes paid for the 2014 municipal budget. That gives the Village a 0% tax increase for the second consecutive year.

Ms. Sonenfeld and the rest of her team believe that there are opportunities to be explored, including different ways of delivering services, whether that means collaboration with others; collaboration with the County; in- sourcing or outsourcing; or shared services arrangements. All of those possibilities will be reviewed, but that will take time. There are some modest improvements, which include investments in capital; human resources developing operational reviews; and more emphasis on people and people development. In addition, there are some opportunities presented by the expiration of four collective bargaining agreements in 2014 and 2015.

b.                     Village Council’s Comments

Councilman Pucciarelli noted that in 2012, he distributed a pamphlet asking the people of Ridgewood to vote for him, because he said, among other things, that he wanted to see Ridgewood have a government that is fiscally responsible. Councilman Pucciarelli does not consider it fiscally responsible to assume, year after year, that the budget will increase. He does not believe an increase is bad, as long as it remains close to the increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). However, he believes that is a lazy approach to budgeting. This year and last year, with the help of Village employees, and the FAC, a long, hard look was taken at every budget line, and savings were found. While that is not quite zero-based budgeting, it is nearly that. Moreover, it has raised awareness that the level of salary and benefit increases year after year has one of two outcomes: the increases can be passed along to already overburdened taxpayers; or ways can be found to do things differently. Everyone now has a real sense that the structural changes in how things operate, plus opportunities presented by the expiration of four collective bargaining agreements for uniformed services, will make future tax increases no longer inevitable. Instead, they will be targeted to areas that have long been neglected, such as capital expenditures. That is why Councilman Pucciarelli is proud to vote for this budget. Just as importantly, he looks forward to addressing the 2015 budget very soon. Councilman Pucciarelli is mindful of the fact that it is now May 28th, and the discussion is now focused on the budget for a year that is nearly half over.

Councilwoman Hauck thanked Councilman Pucciarelli for the comment about the year being half over, because she believes the budget should be a guidepost and should be used to make decisions within the Departments. Councilwoman Hauck said she will also be voting for the 0% tax increase budget with a heavy heart, because she understands the burden it places on everyone to concentrate and focus on ways in which the Village could operate more efficiently. Ridgewood is extraordinary because it provides layers and layers of services and comforts for the residents. Councilwoman Hauck believes sometimes people forget that people move here for those services. Therefore, she does not want to take away any services, but she would rather take away the inefficiencies, while being cognizant of the fact that New Jersey and Bergen County are ranked the highest in the United States for property tax values. In Bergen County in 2013, the average resident was spending 8.3% of his/her yearly income on property taxes. That puts everyone in the position of having to squeeze things financially, which is painful, but Councilwoman Hauck said she is proud that no one is afraid to do it. That is the job of the Councilmembers as leaders of the community.

Ms. Mailander read a statement prepared by Councilman Riche, who was absent, due to previously scheduled obligations. However, Councilman Riche felt it was important to put his thoughts and statement on the record with regard to the operating and capital budgets. Regarding the capital budget for the Parking and Water Utilities, he urged the Councilmembers to pass those budgets. Both of those are self-funding authorities, and the capital requests are appropriate. The municipal operating budgets and capital budgets, in the opinion of Councilman Riche, do not meet the criteria for prudent long-term fiscal planning. The substantial increase in debt service payments of approximately $1 million, as well as drawing down most of the available reserve funds, is counterproductive to sound financial planning. A 0% municipal tax increase eliminates any safeguards for unanticipated unfunded events, such as storm recovery or catastrophic failure of any Village infrastructure. For these reasons, in absentia, Councilman Riche said he would not cast a vote for the proposed budgets. Ms. Mailander explained that she indicated to Councilman Riche that he could not vote against the budget in absentia, and his vote would be registered as “Absent”. However, he did want his statement to be read into the record.

Councilwoman Walsh commented that she and Mayor Aronsohn agreed on nearly everything that was said at the meeting last night, but that would not be the case tonight. Recently, Councilwoman Walsh said she met a lifelong Ridgewood resident in Allendale, whose children grew up in the Village and have moved out. Councilwoman Walsh noticed that the woman was reading the budget newsletter in an ice cream store, and the woman told her it was because she was very concerned about what is happening in Ridgewood. She is worried that the services are decreasing, and she was reading the newsletter to see if she could understand it. During the subsequent conversation between Councilwoman Walsh and the resident, the woman mentioned many things that Councilwoman Walsh had already been thinking. Councilwoman Walsh appreciated all the work Ms. Sonenfeld has done over the past several weeks for Ridgewood, and she believes that Ms. Sonenfeld is putting her heart and soul into the budget, as well as a lot of time. After the many conversations about different things that have happened in Ridgewood, and things that could happen, and listening to the budget summary tonight, a couple of things stick out in Councilwoman Walsh’s mind. She noted that Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that the Recycling Trust Fund is “wiped out”. The Snow Removal Trust Fund is “empty”. The remaining surplus is $1.4 million, with an unfunded liability of $7.1 million, against a reserve of $479,000. Those words resonate with Councilwoman Walsh, and they are things in the proposed budget that give Councilwoman Walsh pause. She has maintained all along that a balanced budget does not necessarily mean a 0% tax increase, but it means trying to balance obligations while ensuring that there is some kind of budget planning going on. Councilman Walsh believes that the current budget process is still somewhere in the middle, and there are still a lot of things that need to be implemented, as well as things that are planned that give absolutely no flexibility in the budget.

Councilwoman Walsh worked with the numbers provided, and after considering the individual Councilmembers against the current property assessments provided by Ms. Sonenfeld, and if the Councilmembers approve the 1% tax increase, as Ms. Sonenfeld initially suggested, the amount that the municipal taxes would increase for each Councilmember is: Mayor Aronsohn – a $30 tax increase; Councilwoman Hauck – a $77 tax increase; Councilman Pucciarelli – a $51 tax increase; Councilman Riche – a $26 tax increase; her taxes would increase by $42; and Ms. Sonenfeld’s taxes would increase by $58 in 2014. That is why Councilwoman Walsh supports the initial plan for a 1% tax increase, but she cannot support the 0% tax increase.

Mayor Aronsohn was thinking while Councilman Pucciarelli was talking that when the Village Council was reorganized two years ago, there was a lot of discussion about recognizing the new normal. What is meant by that is that within the context of the Village, the tax burden on Ridgewood residents was too great. There are many people living in Ridgewood who are making less money than they were five years ago, or they are underemployed, or have been impacted in some other way. The current Councilmembers recognized that there was a need for some tax relief. The budget newsletter notes that there were some years in which the budget increase was 7% or 8%. The Councilmembers recognized that there was not just a new normal, but also the need to express their commitment and determination to do something about it. That determination was first expressed in the formation of the financial “Tiger Team,” which was a new concept at that time. A committee of Village residents from different backgrounds came together to review the budget and give the Councilmembers some input to help them do government differently. They came up with a compelling report, which led to the formation of the FAC. The determination was also expressed that February or March is not the time to be engaged in the budget process, but the process should be started the day after the current budget is adopted. The hiring of a new Village Manager who came from the private sector was yet another way in which that determination was expressed. Mayor Aronsohn said he is excited that this is the second consecutive year in which a budget that does not increase the municipal tax burden on Ridgewood residents will be adopted. He believes that could be historic. Even more importantly, it not only helps the current government, but could set the path for the future. A 0% tax increase is not something that can be done every year, but when it can be done, it should be done. Moreover, the Councilmembers are thinking differently about government, and doing government differently. Mayor Aronsohn said he is proud of the work everyone has done on the budget, whether they agree or disagree. Everyone has been involved in the process, and everyone has made a difference.

c.                     Public Hearing on 2014 Budget

Ms. Mailander noted that this is now the Public Hearing on the 2014 Ridgewood Municipal Budget, and Mayor Aronsohn opened the time for public comments on the budget.

Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, noted that Councilwoman Hauck spoke about getting rid of inefficiencies, and Ms. Sonenfeld spoke about revenue opportunities, as well as revenue in general. Mr. Loving has some concerns about getting rid of the inefficiencies in light of the fact that it seems that the Village Council is about to approve a 0% municipal tax increase. He has some family members who live in Hoboken, and when he visits them, he notices that they are now using automated summonses for parking enforcement. Last year, Hoboken collected approximately $1 million more in parking fines than they did the previous year. Mr. Loving knows that the issue of using automated summonses in Ridgewood has been discussed for some years, although that service is still not being used in Ridgewood. Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the Village showed decreases in parking enforcement fines. Therefore, Mr. Loving wonders if it is possible to use an automated summons system, and if it will lead to more revenue being generated from summonses. He also wondered if there is enough money in the budget with a 0% municipal tax increase to implement such a system.

Ms. Sonenfeld noted that in the more detailed budget presentation she did several weeks ago, e-tickets were not specifically mentioned, but there is money set aside in the budget to implement the system. She asked Captain Luthcke to comment on the time frame. Mr. Loving asked if anyone could also comment on whether that will increase revenue when it is implemented. Captain Luthcke stated that it is hoped that such a system could be implemented within the next few months. The current delay is due to the fact that the Police Department is working with a new vendor, and there is a delay on the administrative side in the response from the State. Once the system is implemented, it should increase revenue because of how much easier it will be to generate a summons, as well as how much easier it will be for Court personnel to properly read the summons. Due to difficulty in reading handwriting, there have been many errors made in the processing of tickets, and going to an automated system will help to prevent those types of errors. Ms. Sonenfeld added that she believes it would be a good idea to put a cost-benefit analysis together for the automated summons system to give a better understanding of what will be gained from such a system. Mr. Loving reiterated his concern of whether there is enough money in the budget to implement the system.

In addition, Mr. Loving recalled Ms. Sonenfeld’s comments about single-stream recycling. He asked if Mr. Moritz, the Director of Operations, could answer some questions about that. Mr. Loving pointed out that many years ago, he noticed that when the sanitation trucks went down the streets to collect recycled material, the sanitation trucks were compartmentalized. High-quality paper went to one side of the truck, while other paper products went to the other side. Now, when materials are picked up at the curb, the process is single-stream as far as paper is concerned, and it is Mr. Loving’s understanding that the Village gets less money from that process. If the paper is taken to the Recycling Center, the segregated process is still used, which brings in more money. Mr. Loving wondered how much money is being lost due to the single-stream recycling process, and why the paper cannot be segregated, as it once was. He asked if using the compartmentalized trucks costs more.

Mr. Moritz responded that the Village does not lose money using the current process, because the Village is paid for high-quality fibers, which is why the paper is no longer separated at the truck.

Leonard Eisen, 762 Upper Boulevard, said he does not understand why comments were made that there is no increase in the budget. The municipal tax levy is only approximately 25% of the monies that are collected. The school budget must also be discussed, which will increase taxes by approximately 1.9%. Mayor Aronsohn responded that when Ms. Sonenfeld showed the slide about the tax dollars, it included the fact that 64% of each dollar goes toward the Board of Education budget. The 25% of each dollar that goes toward the municipal budget is not being increased.

There were no other comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

3.                     RESOLUTIONS

Ms. Mailander read Resolutions numbered 14-133 and 14-134 in full as follows:


3.         ORDINANCES

a.         Continued Public Hearing – #3413 – General Capital Bond Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the third reading of Ordinance 3413 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be continued. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3413 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $2,836,500 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,700,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF

Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Public Hearing on ordinance 3413 was continued from the May Public Meeting as the budget had to be adopted prior to the adoption of this ordinance in order to provide for the down payment. The Public Hearing was continued, and Mayor Aronsohn asked for comments on this ordinance at this time.

There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:               Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3413 be adopted on third reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.


Roll Call Vote

AYES:               Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            Councilwoman Walsh

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

b.         Continued Public Hearing – #3414 – Water Capital Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the third reading of Ordinance 3414 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be continued. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3414 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS WATER UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $2,126,500 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,000,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF

Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Public Hearing on ordinance 3414 was continued from the May Public Meeting as the budget had to be adopted prior to the adoption of this ordinance in order to provide for the down payment. The Public Hearing was continued, and Mayor Aronsohn asked for comments on this ordinance at this time.

There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3414 be adopted on third reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

c.         Continued Public Hearing – #3415 – Parking Utility Capital Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the third reading of Ordinance 3415 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be continued. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3415 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PARKING UTILITY IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $127,200 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $100,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF

Mayor Aronsohn explained that the Public Hearing on ordinance 3415 was continued from the May Public Meeting as the budget had to be adopted prior to the adoption of this ordinance in order to provide for the down payment. The Public Hearing was continued, and Mayor Aronsohn asked for comments on this ordinance at this time.

Boyd Loving, 342 South Irving Street, recalled that he had a question about this ordinance at the previous meeting, which the Village Manager answered by pointing out that the specifics were available in section 3(a). After reading the section in question, Mr. Loving still has some concerns. Section 3(a) indicates that a portion of the money will be used for multi-space parking meter units, and the Chestnut Street multi-space meter unit. Mr. Loving wanted to know what other units are being purchased besides the one at Chestnut Street. In addition, he had a concern about Chestnut Street, because several months ago, Mr. Rutishauser was involved in a discussion about the multi-space units that were to be installed at the Park-and-Ride location, and the question arose about the multi-space unit at Chestnut Street. At that time, Mr. Rutishauser indicated that it was “a lemon”. Mr. Loving is worried about the amount of money the taxpayers will be asked to spend on that unit, because it has never worked correctly. After making an OPRA request, Mr. Loving learned that there were multiple instances when the unit did not work properly, and summonses had to be voided because the Parking Enforcement Agents were not told that the unit was not operating properly and people were still issued tickets. Revenues have gone uncollected, and Mr. Loving asked why he, as a taxpayer, should be forced to pay to replace the unit. He suggested that the manufacturer be called and informed that the unit has never worked, and nothing will be paid until it is replaced; or Mr. Rogers could institute a lawsuit against the manufacturer for all the monies that have been lost due to the unit being inoperative, as well as the aggravation caused to the taxpayers. Mr. Loving is very angry that money will be spent to replace something that has never worked without seeking redress from the manufacturer of the unit.

Ms. Sonenfeld said she appreciates Mr. Loving’s concerns, and her thought on this particular capital request is that it is very broad. In fact, Section 3(a) is broader than any similar sections in any of the other capital requests, with a very good reason. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that all of the parking meters will be re-evaluated as the forensic accounting process continues, and no decisions have been made at this time about what action will be taken. A recommendation will be made, and ideas are already being discussed, but no decision has been reached. She asked Mr. Rutishauser to address the particular unit mentioned by Mr. Loving.

Mr. Loving stated that he appreciates Mr. Rutishauser’s expertise in this matter, but he still believes that the ultimate decision rests with Mr. Rogers as to whether any redress is sought with the manufacturer. Mr. Rogers pointed out that normally, potential litigation is discussed in Closed Session. He suggested that Mr. Rutishauser could give background regarding the item in question, without discussing any legal aspects or contractual obligations. Mr. Rutishauser noted that the unit at Chestnut Street is manufactured by a company called Matrix, and it was purchased approximately 6-7 years ago. He does not believe there is any existing warranty on the unit, and the Village currently pays for parts and service, which are requested from the manufacturer. As far as litigation is concerned, Mr. Rutishauser said that would be for Mr. Rogers to address.

Finally, Mr. Loving commented that he strongly opposes any situation similar to the one at Chestnut Street, where there is only one unit. When that unit breaks, no money can be collected, and patrons are frustrated. He suggested that what New Jersey Transit has done at the train station with respect to their automated ticket dispensing units should be considered, because more than one of those units has been installed at the train station. Mr. Rutishauser suggested that one multi-space unit be installed at the Park-and-Ride location, and Mr. Loving spoke out vehemently against that idea when it was suggested. He asked Ms. Sonenfeld to please keep that in mind when she makes a recommendation about how the money should be spent.

There were no other comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3415 be adopted on third reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

d.         Public Hearing – #3419 – Bond Ordinance – Paving

Mayor Aronsohn moved the second reading of Ordinance 3419 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3419 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $1,549,000 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $1,330,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF

Mayor Aronsohn explained that Ordinance 3419 was introduced at the May Public Meeting in order to provide funding for the paving budget. The Public Hearing was opened, and anyone wishing to speak on this ordinance could do so at this time.

There were no other comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

Councilwoman Walsh asked for clarification about the 2013 paving. She noted that there was a schedule for the 2013 paving, and she asked how much was paid according to that schedule. Ms. Sonenfeld responded that she understood that the 2013 capital budget, which was approved in October 2013, has been rolled over into the 2014 capital budget for paving. She asked Mr. Rutishauser if all of it had been rolled over, or if only a portion had been. Mr. Rutishauser explained that the paving work that is currently under way is part of the 2013 capital budget, from a 2013 NJDOT grant, as well as a 2012 NJDOT grant as components of the paving work. Councilwoman Walsh asked if Mr. Rutishauser anticipates receiving a grant from NJDOT in 2014, and Ms. Sonenfeld and Mr. Rutishauser answered that such a grant has already been received for the work to be done on North Van Dien Avenue, in the amount of $149,000, which was added to the capital fund, rather than using it outright. Councilwoman Walsh asked if this Ordinance is approved, how much paving remains to be done from the list that Mr. Rutishauser prepared. Mr. Rutishauser said he would have to look at the estimated costs for each street, because each street has different work that needs to be done. Councilwoman Walsh asked if he could estimate the total, and Mr. Rutishauser responded that he thinks adopting this Ordinance would allow a significant amount of paving work on the current list to get done. He added that streets are constantly being evaluated against the criteria set by the Village to determine if paving or other repairs need to be done. Mayor Aronsohn interjected that this is arguably one of the most important issues to be decided by the Councilmembers, because street paving has both public safety and quality of life implications. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that she believes this is one of the largest paving budgets ever in the Village. Mr. Rutishauser said it is certainly one of the largest paving budgets in the last 10 years. Councilwoman Walsh explained that she had stated in previous Village Council meetings that her concern is that there was a capital budget, and different things have been pulled from that budget, including paving, which is a big part of the capital budget. However, she pointed out that it is not the only public safety issue affecting Ridgewood, which is affected by leaf removal; snow removal; running out of salt; or accidents occurring when the streets are icy.

Mayor Aronsohn pointed out that voting against the paving budget does not help the issues mentioned by Councilwoman Walsh, and in fact, it could possibly exacerbate those problems. He also clarified that the only reason paving was pulled from the capital budget was due to the fact that Councilwoman Walsh voted against the capital budget, so it could not move forward. Ms. Sonenfeld pulled out paving from the capital budget and made it a separate capital budget item to address the public safety imperative. Mayor Aronsohn added that waiting until the new Councilmembers are sworn in to adopt this ordinance simply delays the necessary paving. It is hoped that even if Councilwoman Walsh cannot support the entire capital budget, she can support at least this part of it, and the paving can move forward. Councilwoman Walsh asked the other Councilmembers if they are all confident that if the capital budget for paving is passed, there will be no issues with leaves in the streets or snow removal needs that might cause problems with the capital budget.

Councilman Pucciarelli answered that he is interested in getting the streets paved, which is what the current vote is about. He does not understand why it is necessary to mention snow and leaves, unless one wants to revisit the entire capital budget. Councilman Pucciarelli suggested that the Councilmembers should at least get the streets paved, and if it is necessary to deal with each problem one at a time until the new Councilmembers are sworn in, things will simply have to be done that way. He does not see any advantage in postponing paving the streets to make the point that Councilwoman Walsh is doing this because she does not agree with the capital budget, or what is achieved by not moving forward with this.

Councilwoman Walsh responded that her concern with pulling out pieces of the capital budget is that one thing is removed from the capital budget, while there are still many other items that are unbalanced, in her opinion. That is why, when she talked about the operating budget, it is very easy to go for a 0% tax increase, but the budget is not balanced at all. Mayor Aronsohn said he understands Councilwoman Walsh’s concern about the operating budget, but his concern is that she is holding paving hostage to her preference for a tax increase. Councilwoman Walsh said that the term “hostage” indicates that she is being irrational, and she maintains that she is trying to make a rational decision about the entire budget. Part of the capital budget was pulled from the capital budget, and while all of the Councilmembers agree that this paving is necessary, she is trying to make the point that the overall budget is not correct, and this approach is not good practice. Mayor Aronsohn said he respects her right to make a point, and he feels she has made the point. However, it has now gone beyond simply making the point, and Councilwoman Walsh is now preventing the paving from happening.

Councilman Pucciarelli moved that Ordinance 3419 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilwoman Hauck seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

e.         Public Hearing – #3420 – General Capital Bond Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the second reading of Ordinance 3420 by title and that the Public Hearing thereon be opened. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:              Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3420 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $1,356,000 THEREFOR AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $1,290,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF

Mayor Aronsohn explained that Ordinance 3420 was introduced at the May Public Meeting in order to provide funding for the general capital budget, which does not include funding for paving. The Public Hearing is now opened, and anyone wishing to speak on this ordinance could do so at this time.

There were no comments from the public, and Mayor Aronsohn moved that the Public Hearing be closed. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, Walsh, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

Councilwoman Hauck moved that Ordinance 3420 be adopted on second reading and final publication as required by law. Councilman Pucciarelli seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:             Councilmembers Hauck, Pucciarelli, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            Councilwoman Walsh

ABSENT:       Councilman Riche

ABSTAIN:     None

4.         ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Mayor Aronsohn, seconded by Councilman Pucciarelli, and carried by voice vote, the Special Public Meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    _____________________________

                                                                                                    Paul S. Aronsohn

                                                                                                            Mayor

_________________________________

            Heather A. Mailander

                Village Clerk

 

  • Hits: 815

PUBLIC MEETING OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD HELD IN THE SYDNEY V. STOLDT, JR., COURTROOM OF THE RIDGEWOOD VILLAGE HALL, 131 NORTH MAPLE AVENUE, RIDGEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, ON WEDNESDAY, APRIL 22, 2015 AT 7:30 P.M.

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

Mayor Aronsohn called the meeting to order at 8:44 P.M., and read the Statement of Compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act. At roll call, the following were present: Councilmembers Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn. Also present were Roberta Sonenfeld, Village Manager; Heather Mailander, Village Clerk; and Matthew Rogers, Village Attorney. Councilwoman Hauck was absent.

2.         2015 BUDGET INTRODUCTION

            A.        Budget Message

Ms. Sonenfeld stated that she would be discussing the highlights and accomplishments of the year 2014; presenting a budget summary; talking about revenues and surplus; discussing operating expenses; discussing how this budget is investing in people and services; talking about unfunded liabilities; and talking about the capital budget.

Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that the Village Council is not new to this process. The 2015 budget has been the subject of many meetings attended by Village staff and others, and this is the end of the process, although it may be the beginning for some people. Councilman Pucciarelli did not want anyone to have the impression that the Councilmembers are taking a cavalier attitude toward the budget. Ms. Sonenfeld agreed, saying that she has a slide in the presentation that talks about the process.

Ms. Sonenfeld commented that it is important to examine what has been done by this Village Council, as well as Village staff, and the previous Village Council, in the past year. The budget process also represents resident participation and business participation. Some projects and activities were supported by the businesses in the CBD, or they were ideas presented by residents.

Starting with the parking situation, Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that there were many accomplishments in 2014 with respect to parking, including establishing oversight of the Parking Utility; implementing valet parking; establishing a public/private partnership to offer CBD employees parking; implementing new policies and procedures, including new time parameters, pricing, enforcement, and distinctions between residents and non-residents; implementing the first credit card purchase program in relation to parking in the CBD and resident parking; planning for a new parking garage on Hudson Street; instituting an organizational change to appoint a combined Chief Financial Officer/Parking Utility Director, because it was felt that the Parking Utility needed a lot of focus; redesigning the Route 17 Park-and-Ride to accommodate 43 additional parking spaces; and identifying 16 new parking spaces in the CBD that will be accessible in the near future.

In addition, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that another highlight is the successful early settlement of a four-year Fire Department contract. It was significant, and has already had an impact on the budget, with more of an impact anticipated in the coming years. The Building Department has been restructured, with great strides being made, and more expected. The Human Resources Department has been launched, with some advances being made, although there is a lot of work to be done in that area in 2015. Communications with residents and businesses are enhanced, as well as improvement in communications with Village staff. In addition to the “Meet the Mayor” and “Meet the Manager” events, e-notices are being used effectively. Another item to note was the successful completion of the Complete Streets renovation of Garber Square into a safer environment for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians, as well as a more aesthetically pleasing environment. In 2014, the “No Leaf Left Behind” program was executed Village-wide. The Village worked with FEMA and several other agencies to recoup significant funds to pay for damages caused by natural disasters, which will be discussed more extensively during the budget discussion. Installation and implementation of a fiber-optic communication system was begun in 2014, and continues in 2015. The Community Center has been transformed into a welcoming, vibrant place. The Water Pollution Control Facility continues to generate more electricity, surpassing its own needs, and leading to recognition of this in the Bergen Record. The Ridgewood Police Department’s community policing and outreach approach continues to be recognized both locally and nationally. The recycling process has been streamlined, with input and support from the business community. The abandoned property process was also implemented. There is also a new approach to fleet servicing, which will continue in the next couple of months. The “Come Alive Outside” initiative, which was the result of a public/private partnership, received an award of excellence from the New Jersey Parks and Recreation Association for its “Fire and Ice” event. There were Planning Board hearings on the Valley Hospital and multi-family housing. The Village continued its strong history of the effective volunteer emergency services organization that responded to over 1,700 calls in 2014, with volunteers donating more than 19,000 hours of work. The Village absorbed a significant increase in work due to OPRA requests, the majority of which is borne by the Village Clerk’s office. Public health inspections were outsourced; aquatic programs were added to Graydon Pool; snow removal and Christmas tree pickup procedures were modified; and the sidewalk replacement project was accelerated, with 204 properties being addressed. In conjunction with the Board of Education, installation of lightning detection systems were completed at all Village fields. The budgeting process itself was enhanced with the assistance of the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC). Finally, the Redevelopment Plan for North Walnut Street was amended, and an RFP was prepared, and the evaluation process of those proposals has now begun. All of that is in addition to what Village staff members accomplish on a day-to-day basis.

Next, Ms. Sonenfeld addressed the budget process. As Councilman Pucciarelli noted, the budget process for 2015 was different than that of 2014. There were several rounds of internal reviews with Department Directors, the objective of which was to produce and provide to the Village Council an honest budget that did not need a lot of repetitious activity. The goal was to come in with the best numbers, and keep the increases as close to zero as possible, while taking advice from the Village Council about what is important. The emphasis was on operating efficiencies, as well as emphasis on customer service improvements. There was a lot of discussion about investment in people, processes, and technology. The budget reviews with the Village Council were a bit different, and were designed to elevate the dialogue to include strategic, as well as daily operations. Some of the subjects discussed included the Village footprints; what it means to have an effective Human Resources presence; and technology and treating the year 2015 as the year of technological advancement in the Village. Operating expenses were reviewed, as well as capital expenses. When the Village was discussed, that included discussions about Ridgewood Water, the Parking Utility, and the Public Library. There were three budget sessions, two of which were all-day sessions on a Saturday and a Sunday. There was one session held on a Monday night. The sessions included all Village management staff and the Village Council, which was a first in the Village. At the end of all of the sessions, three alternatives were presented to the Councilmembers. The Village Council agreed on the recommended course of action, which was the middle proposal of the three presented. That is what is being voted on today.

Councilman Pucciarelli pointed out that, in particular, the budget for the Public Library included a request for an increase, and Ms. Sonenfeld and her staff recommended that the increase should be a bit less than what was requested. Before a decision was made, Nancy Greene, Director of the Ridgewood Public Library, presented her arguments in support of her budget requests, and the result was somewhere in between the two figures. That is indicative of how the budget process has become a deliberative process. In addition, there was enough time allotted to the budget process to be able to have such discussions, so that there was no need to rush to move on to the next departmental budget. Councilman Pucciarelli added that the FAC deserves a lot of the credit for their assistance in this process.

Mayor Aronsohn mentioned that this process has become a more holistic one, which is not done simply department by department, but from a whole government perspective. The budget is assessed more strategically, and with much consideration given to looking forward. Mayor Aronsohn said that helped him to put things in the proper context, and made it easier to understand discussions about such areas as investments, technology, and human resources.

Ms. Sonenfeld reiterated that the operating and capital budgets were put together simultaneously. The operating budget is $47.1 million, and the capital budget is a net $3.1 million, with slightly more than the 2014 capital budget. The budget represents a 1.2% tax increase, which means that on the average assessed home value of $690,662, the increase is $46.72 per year. As a result of the way principal payments on bond issues are being handled, the estimated amount of outstanding debt at the end of 2015 will be approximately $2 million less than the amount of outstanding debt at the end of 2014, or $38.8 million at the end of 2014 against $36.6 million at the end of 2015. Revenues and expenses have increased approximately 1.8% over the prior year.

Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that the Village is using slightly more than $3 million in surplus. In addition, miscellaneous revenues total approximately $9.9 million, which means that the Village must raise approximately $31.3 million through taxation. That led to the increase of $46.72 per year for the municipal budget, and based on the State formula for the Public Library, there will be an additional $9 increase in taxes for the Public Library.

Starting with revenues, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that they are approximately $47.1 million in 2015. As was done in 2014, the anticipated revenues were maxed out as much as possible. Ms. Sonenfeld tried to optimize the use of available funds, as well as surplus funds. As she stated, miscellaneous revenues, which are basically non-tax revenues and include such things as fees, licenses, State aid, and grants, constitute approximately $9.9 million in anticipated revenues for 2015, representing an increase of approximately $450,000 over 2014. That is also an increase of $170,000 over actual funds.

There are risks to the revenue side, as pointed out by Ms. Sonenfeld. One of those is the administrative fees that the Village is paid for the Police Department side jobs. The reason why this is a risk is due to the fact that the Village anticipates operating at a reduced police force in terms of head count, while the Police Department contract is negotiated. That also means that there will be more overtime, as was done with the Fire Department last year. As a result, there may not be the same opportunities for side jobs, and therefore it might lead to less income from these administrative fees. There is also the usual risk associated with Graydon Pool, because it is weather-dependent. Recycling continues to be a challenge, because prices for recyclables have been reduced. There are also risks associated with the one-time fees that are paid, such as from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which was responsible for approximately $800,000 in revenues for 2015. Ms. Sonenfeld commended Christopher Rutishauser, Village Engineer, and Jovan Mehandzic, of the Engineering Department, for their efforts. She also thanked Mayor Aronsohn for being able to bring people together to coordinate the disbursement of FEMA money.

Regarding opportunities, Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that the Village continues paying back some Parking Utility deficits, which will continue into 2016. She also mentioned the possibility of new tax ratables as another opportunity for revenue.

Moving on to the use of surplus/fund balance chart, Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that in 2015, $50,000 more will be taken out from the fund balance than what was taken out in 2014. The amount for 2015 is $3.032 million, compared with $2.983 million in 2014. However, the remaining surplus balance is higher than it was in 2014, and the percentage of the budget is lower, at 6.44%.

Operating expenses for 2015 are approximately $47.1 million. Working with the FAC, Ms. Sonenfeld reminded everyone that they were looking more at actual expenses and trends from previous years, rather than budgeted amounts from previous years. Areas of efficiency were identified, as well as where supplemental expenses might be required. The budget team was also able to identify areas of investment to improve resident services and to develop staff. The risks on the expense side include snow removal, because the Snow Removal Trust Fund was again depleted. There is approximately $100,000 remaining that needs to cover necessary overtime, as well as chemicals that must be used in snow removal. Another risk is building maintenance, because a lot of funds were expended last year due to damage in the various Village buildings. If that continues, it increases the risk. There is also risk of legal expenses associated with the Planning Board, depending on how the litigation involving Valley Hospital progresses, as well as any other issues that might arise.

Ms. Sonenfeld highlighted certain budget items. She recalled that when she first became Village Manager, she had many discussions with Mayor Aronsohn, Councilman Pucciarelli, and Councilwoman Hauck about the necessity of increasing the level of service quality to residents along with any tax increases that might be necessary, as well as investing in the residents of Ridgewood. In that vein, Ms. Sonenfeld discussed the investments to be made in the Parking Utility. There will be a new Director of the Parking Utility, and there is anticipated implementation of Parkmobile and other strategies to enhance parking options for residents and visitors, as well as to minimize the handling of coins. The counting of coins will be outsourced. Parking conditions will continually be evaluated to ensure optimum parking for residents, and everything necessary will be done in 2015 to begin construction of a parking garage by 2016.

Ms. Sonenfeld also mentioned the revitalization of the Building Department through technology, which includes a technology platform that will do a better job of tracking applications; scheduling; recording results; client interface; using iPads in the field; and upgrading processes. As residents have pointed out, there is a need for more emphasis on Code and zoning enforcement, which is planned for 2015.

Another area of investment is full implementation of the Human Resources function throughout all Village departments. This will help to develop and optimally leverage the staff, and includes such things as guidance; succession planning; leadership identification and development; getting the right person in the right job; handling employee performance concerns more effectively; handling disciplinary actions more effectively; working through policy issues; keeping abreast of legislative changes; implementing an optimal organizational structure; and performance evaluations of management staff. As mentioned earlier, Ms. Sonenfeld noted that 2015 is being regarded as a year of technology, which will first have an impact on the Building Department, but will eventually spread throughout all Village departments.

The “No Leaf Left Behind” program will continue. The Ridgewood Police Department is going through its re-accreditation process this year, and it is hoped that it will be regarded as a flagship organization as a result of that re-accreditation. The budget also includes enhanced support for a vibrant Community Center. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that a critical item is staff development, so staff members will be participating in programs like Bergen LEADS; CIO training for Dylan Hansen, Network Supervisor; and leadership development in the Fire Department. The budget also includes plans to develop a continuity of operations plan, as well as a disaster recovery plan. There are some aesthetic aspects to the budget, such as shade trees and tree wells. The budget also provides for the launching of the new Village website. Another budget item is to develop the strategic plan for the Village footprint; as well as for conversion of the incandescent streetlights to LED streetlights, enhancing public safety. Preparation for the 2016 implementation of a new sidewalk café ordinance and enforcement of that ordinance is also included.

Ms. Sonenfeld noted some of the increases in expenses, including the large increase in the figures for the Police Department, due to contracts and ammunition. These increases are $367,000 more than those in the 2014 budget, and $518,000 over the actual expenses.

Building maintenance expenses were $30,000 over what was budgeted, but $20,000 less than what was actually spent. Dumping fees have also increased by approximately $80,000, and $40,000 of that increase was due to grass clippings. Group health insurance increased by approximately $350,000. Polymer for the Water Pollution Control Facility nearly doubled in price, from $57,000-$100,000. The fund for Planning Board legal fees was increased by approximately $40,000. Sludge hauling has been outsourced, which is a $47,000 increase in expense, but will also save capital funds because it will not be necessary to buy a lot of expensive equipment out of the capital budget. Another highlight is an addition of $35,000 in legal expenses for the PBA negotiations. As Councilman Pucciarelli mentioned, the Public Library will receive a .86% increase in their budget over 2014. Finally, the Village had to absorb the Blue and White Collar contracts from 2014 at a 1.5% increase in 2015.

There were also some decreases in expenses. Salaries and wages for the Fire Department decreased by $350,000. Ms. Sonenfeld believes that the salaries and wages are now at the 2008 level. In addition, there was a decrease in gasoline use in the Village, totaling approximately $200,000. Another thing that helped keep the budget manageable was that significantly-sized departments were within 1% of the actual or budgeted amounts in 2014. The Department of Public Works (DPW), which comprises approximately $5.2 million of the budget, at 0% versus the 2014 actual budget, and 3% over the 2014 budgeted amounts. The Department of Recreation budget is 5% less in both the budget and actual amounts. The Parks Department is 1% lower, and the Fire Department budget is 9% less than the prior year’s budget and 7% less than the actual amounts. Graydon Pool is 4% less than the prior year’s budget and 5% less than the actual amounts.

Ms. Sonenfeld pointed out that this budget also maintains overall staffing levels across the board, except for a few investment spending opportunities. There was also a decrease in the Labor Attorney’s fees (approximately $46,000) due to the establishment of a Human Resources capability. Moreover, it was possible to formulate a realistic Parking Utility budget, in which the allocations from the Village to the utility increased based on a better estimate of what is needed for that utility.

The 2015 budget includes approximately $28.3 million in contractual obligations to the various uniform departments, representing approximately 60% of the total budget. In 2014, it was approximately 58.1% of the budget.

Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned other key areas of deficiencies that will be worked on for the future include the negotiation of the PBA contract, which has already begun; continuing to explore ways of creating energy efficiencies and furthering the private/public partnership for the Water Pollution Control Facility; determining staffing and operating models for the Fleet garage, including how and when new vehicles are purchased, as well as other considerations; adopting technology to decrease departmental workloads; migrating the phone vendor from Verizon to Lightpath; examining methods to decrease the cost of workers compensation; completing the fiber loop project to decrease communications and Internet service costs while increasing reliability; adopting technologies that decrease IT workloads; outsourcing health inspections; exploring the possibility of outsourcing operations at the Lakeview compost facility; exploring the possibility of producing brine, which could lead to a very large cost savings, as well as possibly becoming a revenue source; implementation of e-tickets; and streamlining emergency communications with the use of SwiftReach.

Moving on to unfunded liabilities, Ms. Sonenfeld commented that they total $7.14 million, which represents terminal leave and accumulated sick time payments. That figure is slightly lower than 2014. At this time, there are nine confirmed retirements in the Village, representing $715,000 in payouts for this year. The trust fund balance is currently $636,660. The operating budget includes approximately $420,000 to increase the trust fund balance. That can also be considered a risk.

Next, Ms. Sonenfeld discussed the capital budget. She emphasized that despite the fact that only $500,000 was put aside for the capital budget in 2015, the Village will actually be doing approximately $3 million in capital paving. This work has already started, and the paving list is currently on the Village website. Ms. Sonenfeld noted that some of the funds are from last year, as well as money from previous years. There will be the purchase of some vehicles this year, for a total of $1,235,500. There is also a budget for the purchase of IT equipment in the amount of $321,725. The public safety capital budget is $189,900, and $591,000 has been budgeted for engineering issues. There is also $262,500 budgeted for other infrastructure and equipment, and $50,000 for the Public Library.

The current outstanding debt is approximately $38.8 million. The Village will be paying down approximately $3.7 million in principal, while issuing approximately $1.5 million in debt. That will bring the total debt to $36.5 million, which is approximately $2 million less than the previous year’s budget. There is also a line item of capital bonds and notes authorized but not issued, which is commonly referred to as the “sinking fund”. There is approximately $12 million outstanding in that fund, and Ms. Sonenfeld stated that there is a real effort to decrease that number.

Ms. Sonenfeld mentioned that she will be meeting with the FAC to discuss the budget newsletter, which needs to be published just before the Public Hearing on the budget.

Councilman Pucciarelli noted that the budget process is complicated, and it is easy to see from this presentation that there are many aspects to the Village budget. Every Councilmember was present at the budget meetings, and delved deeply into the details of the budget. Councilman Pucciarelli commented that he tried to step back and ask himself what he would be voting in favor of it if he supported a recommended increase, and he explained how he perceived it. There are three elements of approximately $350,000 each that had to be considered, as far as Councilman Pucciarelli was concerned. One of those was the contractual increase in Police Department salaries, which is a Village obligation. At the same time, there is another $350,000 savings in the expenses of the Fire Department from the new collective bargaining agreement that was negotiated. Those two elements offset each other. That led Councilman Pucciarelli to hope that there could be a 0% increase again this year. However, after reviewing the proposed investments in services and people that Ms. Sonenfeld included, Councilman Pucciarelli realized that would mean a $350,000 increase in the tax levy. That means that Councilman Pucciarelli is demanding of himself as a citizen, as well as his fellow citizens, $350,000 more in taxes. He realized that to try to keep the 0% increase in place would put the costs squarely on the backs of the Village employees, who have done a wonderful job under austerity budgets. That is why he believes that the $2,000 overall increase in the tax levy is justified. The management team has amply demonstrated what they intend to do with a $350,000 increase, and their case was very persuasive.

Councilwoman Knudsen stated that she agreed with everything Councilman Pucciarelli said, and she pointed out that the budget process is fascinating. Ms. Sonenfeld also made it very user-friendly and informative. The option recommended by Ms. Sonenfeld was not the highest budget of the three presented, nor was it the lowest, but Councilwoman Knudsen believes it struck a balance, and although she does not necessarily agree with everything that is included in the budget, she believes it is one of the best budgets ever presented. Councilwoman Knudsen also mentioned that she did not fully agree with the 0% tax increase of 2014, because she felt that it was putting too many things at risk. She thinks the current budget strikes a balance and is a very positive budget that advances in the areas that need to be advanced, and will have a positive impact on the Village overall, without putting the burden on Village employees. She thanked Ms. Sonenfeld and all of the Village staff who came to all of the budget meetings and supported the budget.

Councilman Sedon also thanked the management team and Village staff, as well as Ms. Sonenfeld, for making the budget process so much easier than it has ever been. As a reporter, Councilman Sedon sat through many previous budget presentations, and found them very hard to follow. This presentation made it very easy to put it all together and see the highlights of the budget, as well as showing how much thought went into it. Although the budget meetings did run a little bit long, Councilman Sedon felt that they were helpful because they brought everyone together, and if anyone had questions, there was someone there to answer them immediately. He particularly likes what the budget does for the Building Department, which was hit with many decreases in staffing and funding in prior years. Councilman Sedon is also pleased to see that there is funding for aesthetics, because there were some complaints in the past about how things looked in the CBD and elsewhere around Ridgewood. And perhaps most importantly, Councilman Sedon is pleased that there are funds for investments in technology, which is sorely needed in the Village. He also noted that the budget process is a difficult one to go through every year, because needs change from year to year; processes and procedures that work one year may not work the next year; and new challenges pop up every year that must be faced.

Mayor Aronsohn commented that there is always pressure on governing bodies to raise taxes. However the Village Council held the budget to a 0% tax increase for several years to try to rein in spending and keep the Village on the right track as far as fiscal matters were concerned. The Councilmembers always believe that taxes cannot be raised for the sake of raising taxes, but there must be some kind of purpose to the investment. This budget clearly justifies the increase. It has become necessary to invest more in technology, but the most important investment is in people, which is the greatest resource this or any other government has. Mayor Aronsohn particularly pointed out paving, because perhaps more than any other issue, it strikes a balance between public safety and quality of life.

Councilman Pucciarelli mentioned another item that he felt was worth noting, which is a surplus. There was some concern expressed during past budget discussions that the surplus was getting too close to the bone, and it is reassuring to see that there has been a slight increase in the surplus amount. Councilman Pucciarelli also commented on the capital budget, noting that the actual bonded debt of the Village is approximately equal to the tax levy, and the gross authorized debt is approximately equal to the total budget, which he considers to be fiscally responsible.

Finally, Ms. Sonenfeld thanked the Councilmembers; the management team who attended and participated in every meeting; Stephen Sanzari, Village Treasurer; and the FAC for all of their efforts and assistance in putting the budget together and going through the budget process.

            B.        RESOLUTIONS

THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTIONS, NUMBERED 15-119 THROUGH 15-126, WERE ADOPTED BY A CONSENT AGENDA, WITH ONE VOTE BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL, AND WERE READ IN FULL BY THE VILLAGE CLERK:


After the votes on the resolutions, Councilman Pucciarelli left the Courtroom.

3.         INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES

a.         Ordinance #3474 – Establish a CAP Bank

Ms. Sonenfeld explained what a CAP bank is for the benefit of the two new Councilmembers. It is an annual appropriation for the CAP. At this time, Ridgewood is below the 1.5% CAP by approximately $57,000, and the Village can appropriate the difference between what is on hand and 3.5%, which equals approximately $795,000 this year. Ms. Sonenfeld explained that this is a way for the Village to reserve the right to budget higher than the CAP.

Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3474. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilmembers Hauck and Pucciarelli

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3474 by title:

CALENDAR YEAR 2015 ORDINANCE TO EXCEED THE MUNICIPAL BUDGET APPROPRIATION LIMITS AND TO ESTABLISH A CAP BANK

Councilwoman Knudsen moved that Ordinance 3474 be adopted on first reading and that May 13, 2015, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilmembers Hauck and Pucciarelli

ABSTAIN:     None

b.         Ordinance #3475 – General Capital Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3475. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilmembers Hauck and Pucciarelli

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3475 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $2,559,725 THEREFOR, AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,431,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE PART OF THE COST THEREOF

Councilman Sedon moved that Ordinance 3475 be adopted on first reading and that May 13, 2015, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilmembers Hauck and Pucciarelli

ABSTAIN:     None

Prior to the final vote on Ordinance #3476, Councilman Pucciarelli returned to the Courtroom.

c.         Ordinance #3476 – Water Capital Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3476. Councilwoman Knudsen seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilmembers Hauck and Pucciarelli

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3476 by title:

BOND ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR VARIOUS IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WATER UTILITY IN AND BY THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $2,625,000 THEREFOR, AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF $2,493,000 BONDS OR NOTES OF THE VILLAGE TO FINANCE THE COST THEREOF

Councilwoman Knudsen moved that Ordinance 3476 be adopted on first reading and that May 13, 2015, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilwoman Hauck

ABSTAIN:     Councilman Pucciarelli

d.         Ordinance #3477 – Parking Utility Capital Ordinance

Mayor Aronsohn moved the first reading of Ordinance 3477. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilwoman Hauck

ABSTAIN:     None

The Village Clerk read Ordinance 3477 by title:

AN ORDINANCE OF THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD, IN THE COUNTY OF BERGEN, NEW JERSEY, APPROPRIATING $60,000 FROM THE PARKING UTILITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF ONE PICKUP TRUCK AND PLATE READER SYSTEM FOR THE VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD PARKING UTILITY

Councilwoman Knudsen moved that Ordinance 3477 be adopted on first reading and that May 13, 2015, be fixed as the date for the hearing thereon. Councilman Sedon seconded the motion.

Roll Call Vote

AYES:                        Councilmembers Knudsen, Pucciarelli, Sedon, and Mayor Aronsohn

NAYS:            None

ABSENT:       Councilwoman Hauck

ABSTAIN:     None

4.         ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before the Village Council, on a motion by Councilman Pucciarelli, seconded by Councilman Sedon, and carried by unanimous voice vote, the Special Public Meeting was adjourned at 9:44 P.M.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    _____________________________

                                                                                                Paul S. Aronsohn

                                                                                                        Mayor

_________________________________

            Heather A. Mailander

               Village Clerk

  • Hits: 3051

COPYRIGHT © 2023 VILLAGE OF RIDGEWOOD

If you have any trouble with accessing information contained within this website, please contact the MIS Department - 201-670-5500 x2222 or by email mis@ridgewoodnj.net.

Feedback