Mount Olive Township Council Minutes
January 11, 2000

The Regular Meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council was called to Order at 7:45 p.m. by Council President Sohl with the Pledge of Allegiance. I would like to briefly apologize, we had an Executive Session that began at 7:00pm. It ran a little bit over, so I apologize for holding you folks up for 15 minutes.

According to the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice of this meeting has been given by written notice to the Mount Olive Chronicle and the Morristown Daily Record. Notice has been posted at the entrance of the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mt. Olive, New Jersey, and notices were sent to those requesting the same.

ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Heymann, Mr. Scapicchio, Mrs. Kelly, Mr. Spino, Mr. Rattner, President Sohl

President Sohl: I would also like to acknowledge the attendance of the Mayor, Paul Licitra; Acting Business Administrator, Bob Casey; Township Attorney, John Dorsey; Township Clerk, Lisa Lashway: CFO Randall Carter; and our representative from the Board of Education, Don Rutledge. Before we go into Administrative Reports I would like to do something that, as a result of the vacancy of the one council seat when Mayor Licitra stepped down on January 3. That vacancy started a process in motion which began with the Clerk sending formal notification to the County Committee Chairman Larry Brown, indicting that there was a vacancy republican slot on the Council. The result of that was the County Committee had 15 days to go through their process and then submit back to the Council three names as candidates for that Seat. The determination then would be made by the Council. That process was done, the meeting was held and I attended that with some of the Council people on Friday. The names were forwarded to the Clerk, yesterday and those names that were put forth are Jay Jimenez, Chuck Spangler, and Bernie Guenther. If it pleases the Council I would like to potentially act on that tonight because we have a 15-day window which would, theoretically if we don=t do that tonight, end exactly two weeks from tonight. Is there anybody who wants to put forth a Motion or discuss any of these candidates.

Mr. Rattner: I=ll make the motion to appoint Mr. Bernie Guenther the unexpired seat.

Mr. Spino: Second

Mr. Rattner: I just want to say something on a personal basis. You hear about people paying their dues and being involved. I probably got involved with Mr. Guenther a little more than ten years ago. Probably in the biggest fight Mt. Olive had, and one that we won it would have changed the face of Mt. Olive foreverBand that was the fight against the incinerator. That took a lot of time, a lot of effort, a lot of ingenuity, dedication and perseverance and in fact what I remember is that some of us were getting kind of burned out, I guess it was around 1987 and Mr. Guenther was just one of the people that would come teach at the meetings and do whatever he was asked upon to do. I believe it was me who pointed out that when we were looking for another chairman I said, AMr. Guenther why don=t you step up and do it?:@ He just didn=t step up and do it, he did it with both feet. In fact he was actually warned a couple of times that you have a real job and this could be overwhelming but his dedication, and he hasn=t really even let up since then. I could be said that Bernie and I probably disagree on a lot of different things, but I don=t think his dedication to Mt. Olive and the people of Mt. Olive has ever been in question. That=s why I nominated him and I think that he his a superb choice.

Mrs. Kelly: I also feel that it=s important that somebody who is interested in a position in any of our Township level should at least attend meetings and I haven=>t seen the other candidates attend any of the meetings, so I think Bernie is a wonderful candidate because he hasn=t missed a meeting I think for the last year.

President Sohl: I=ll just follow up on the last point Charlene made and that is that we=ve known the vacancy was going to occur since certainly no later than November 6, I believe it was since Paul was elected as Mayor. It was really a simple manner of a passage of time. Mr. Guenther has President Sohl (cont=d): been diligently attending those meetings and I would point out, having attended the meeting the County Committee held on Friday, the other names of the individualsBtheir names were really put forth to provide a three name list of candidates and they in essence agreed to have their names added to Bernie=s, knowing that they in fact did not make that effort. There are, apparently, several others interested, none of them did the activity and homework that Bernie has done. So with that are there any other comments?

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

President Sohl: Bernie congratulations and I think we will take a minute here to have Lisa swear you in and if you would like to have your wife hold the Bible.

Mrs. Lashway: Repeat after me: I, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the Governments established in the United States and in this State, under the authority of the people; and that I will faithfully, impartially and justly perform all the duties of the office of Councilman according to the best of my ability. So help me God.

Mr. Guenther: I, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the Governments established in the United States and in this State, under the authority of the people; and that I will faithfully, impartially and justly perform all the duties of the office of Councilman according to the best of my ability. So help me God.

Mrs. Lashway: Congratulations.

Mr. Guenther: Thank you.

President Sohl: Thank you, Lisa. Bernie, do you want to take your seat up here.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

Mayor Licitra: A couple of things I like to tell you before I get into the DPW. I did get a call, as did Mr. Heymann from the Business Administrator in Dover asking us if we would join the fight to save Dover General Hospital. As you know I kind of touched that in the last four or five months but we never made a commitment to any funds out of the Township. So what I would like to do is put it on for a workshop to discuss--I feel, not Awhen@ we=re going to devote funds to help keep Dover there, but how much we are going to give them and how much of a role we=re going to take in the fight, so if you would put that on for a workshop.

President Sohl: YesBin fact, based on the conversation that I had with Mr. Heymann this week we already set that for next Tuesday at the workshop.

Mayor Licitra: Okay. I have one switch in the Planning Board Appointment. I would like to bring Mary Darnesto up to a term being vacated by Jack McCabe. I got his resignation and I am sorry to hear it. Jack has four children and he has to dedicate a lot of time to his office and his children. I have always said that family comes first and Jack has resigned his position on the Planning Board, hopefully he will except another position that does not warrant as much of his time. So I like to put Hank Fastert into Mary Darnesto=s position as Alternate, and bring in Mary to fill the unexpired term of two years of Jack McCage. The Master Plan Committee I have already contacted a bunch of people who said they would gladly serve on it. We can get started some time in February. Some of the names are Frank Ruggiero, Chuck Spangler, George Patino, Carroll Grignon, Norma Licitra, Nick Geiger, Howie Weiss and Dave (Scapicchio) has cooperated and has become to Council Liaison to the Master Plan Committee. I also would like to put some recreational people on that Committee and work with the Recreation Department and Recreation Committee. Because I think we have to put a Recreation Master Plan together as we=re doing this because we have to decide what we will be doing with our fields and which ones are first and second and so forth. What I would like to do is Mayor Licitra (cont=d): ask Eric (Schulte) to go and sit on this Committee and get a couple of people who will sit with him. Last but not least Bob (Casey) and I had a meeting having to do with the Department of Public Works. What you will see in front of you is an Organizational chart of what is and what I propose will be. Now we already called the Department Heads in and Supervisors in to tell them that we are thinking of doing this but its only in the thinking stages right now. As you can see, we are looking at putting one Head in charge in all these germane-type of organizations, and germane-type of departments. Bob=s had experience, I=ve passed this through him a couple of times and, Bob, you have a couple of opinions on this.

Mr. Casey: I think one of the issues that you are looking at, if you look at your existing organizational chart you can see you pretty well dispersed it forward and you actually end up with having the requirement of two licensed engineers, one who is actually, technically, a Director of Public Works and Engineering. There is the Municipal Engineer and one who=s in Water & Sewer. What I=m Suggesting to you is that if you look at the normal grouping of a Public Works Department, you will find that you will normally have a Director who is management person that is appointed by the Mayor under this form of government, you then you have within that Department it is standard to have a Department of Engineering which would be a Municipal Consulting Engineer or your employee Municipal Engineer. Then you would normally have your standard Public Works activities which deals with infrastructure, which deals with equipment, which deals with Athings@ for lack of a better term--which would be your roads sanitation, water, sewer, and the subject of equipment maintenance. Those all basically go with the same standard package. What I am suggesting to you is that you should have a Division of Water and a Division of Sewer. You can have the same person have both Licenses, but, it is common when you start taking the advance licenses like you have your W-4, or C-4, or T-4, for water treatment, very seldom you will have someone with a water treatment license and a sewer collection license. So you should set the ordinance up so that you can have the capability of recruiting different people but you can also have a person that handles both of those and would have both titles, that way you maintain some flexibility on how it would be structured. I=m raising the issue that in the future--not at this point in time you may want to look at buildings and grounds particularly with building maintenanceBnot necessarily custodial services, but the HVAC, the normal building maintenance activities which are usually also craftsmen-type individuals who fit in very closely with a Public Works operation. It is not unusual where you have a Department which has an equipment maintenance operation that allows the skills mechanics that can also do certain other activities. So what I recommended to the Mayor is that you slightly revise your current Code of Ordinances to centralize your Department of Public Works, provide for a Director that is a management oriented person, who basically will do the direct supervision, direct management that I think the issue has been raised in your Department of Public Works and still will retain all the existing various functions but just regroup them within that one operation. I think you may find if you do that, you may end up with some symmetry and you=ll end up with a little dynamics. Even in the staff meeting that the Mayor and I had, you get the people around the table they are all talking the same way, we immediately have streets and roads, using some of the equipment from water and sewer and that is what you need in terms of sharing equipment, sharing man powerBwhere you have a situation where you have a shortage over in a water main break and you need man power and a manager will simply trade his man power back and forth in order to get the job done. That will be facilitated here within the one operation. I think it would work to your benefit.

President Sohl: Okay, thank you. Paul, do you want to schedule this for a workshop in the future?

Mayor Licitra: Yes, I would like to have a workshop.

Mr. Heymann: I would like to have it discussed at a workshop.

President Sohl: We can add this at the end of the next workshop meeting. Mayor, the Auditor is here tonightBdo you want to give a report?

Mr. Higgins: I believe everybody has a report in front of them, an agreed upon procedures report prepared by myself and my office personnel. I don=t know if everybody got an opportunity to read it. We only finished it late yesterday. I tried to get it out to some people in the Clerk=s Office. I don=t know, Council President, how in depth you want me to go through this or cut to the chase and go to what we forecast as the new proposed rates for 2000. It=s at your pleasure. I have all night.

President Sohl: Cut to the chase is probably the appropriateBand then we can have questions, etc.

Mr. Higgins: All right, without going through all the detail, we do lay out our assumptions here for all the revenues and all the appropriations for the Year, 2000Bwhere we got the information, how we developed it. And we go in to projecting out >99 Operations for both the Water & Sewer Utility, and then projecting out a 2000 Budget. What we basically come up with, with Exhibit A is that the Water Utility Operating Fund should be self-liquidating for the Year 1999. What I mean by self-liquidating is that rents or revenues exceed expenditures, and hence we=ve run a profit for the year. We did carry forward an almost an $80,000 fund balance from the >98 Audit. So, our conclusion with the water utility is very simple. You=re self liquidating, meaning you=re in the black for 1999, and Year 2000 does not warrant a rate increase for the Water Utility since there will be sufficient rents to cover the projected appropriations. So, that=s really the easy side of the coin here. If you go to Exhibit B, in this Exhibit, we project out the >99 operations of the sewer utility, and then we come up with the 2000 Budget for the Sewer Utility by sector. Budd Lake, Cloverhill, and Village Green. Why we have to do it by sector is because you have two different Ordinances in place driving the fees, and additionally certain costs that are incurred in the Utility relate to different sectors in different proportions. One correction that just happened this afternoon, though, if you look at >99, and you look at Page 2,we had originally projected a deficit of $14,344 for the sewer utility for 1999. We reviewed the outstanding encumbrances of the utility and, based upon the fact of an unknown DEP issue that=s being worked on, an amount was encumbered, we felt that this time, since the amount is not known positively, we could undo the encumbrance, and put it in a future Budget when it is known, hence, we would take ourselves out of a deficit for 1999. More specifically, there=s an encumbrance on the other expense line, in the $434,547, that we=ll cancel which will tie into the cancellation Resolution that was previously passed by the Council of $50,000 not $20,000, which will put the Utility in a self-liquidating position for 1999. Which is good. Trenton will like this, your Auditor will like this since there=s no audit recommendation that you didn=t have sufficient funds to cover expenditures. So, based upon the 4:00pm conversation with the Administrator, the CFO, that modification will be made. So, >99, for both utilities appear they=ll end in the black. This also impacts your debt borrowing capacity, since with the self-liquidating capacity of both utilities, all your debt will be deductible in both the Water and Sewer Utility and none of it will come into play with respect to the net debt percentage. So, you pick up a lot of pluses with this one encumbrance adjustment. Looking into the 2000 Budget, though, we get a little cagey. If you go on to Page 2, what we=ve basically done, on the Revenue side we=ve taken the current rate structure under both ordinances that dictate the fees for the three sectors, and we=ve plugged in the maximum revenues which we can anticipate in 2000 based upon the current rate structure. What we=re driven by here is the general concept that we cannot anticipate any more rents in 2000 then we actually received in 1999 unless there=s a Sewer Rate Ordinance Amendment. Taking that into account, you=ll see that the Budd Lake and Cloverhill sectors end up with a shortfall in Revenues of $683,000 for Budd Lake approximately, and $105,000 for Cloverhill. Village Green will run a profit, and we=ve basically taken that and reallocated that profit back across the two other sectors proportionately to come out with a net-deficit of $563,000 and $86,000. Now this is where we have to start figuring a little bit further. Cloverhill is on its own, and we take the number of users, which is 1,014 users as of today, and we basically have to divide in that proposed deficit to get the increase to a Cloverhill user, which approximates $86. When we get into the Budd Lake Sector, we have to take it a step further and then interpret the Ordinance which sets forth that occupied units bear a proportion of all the costs and vacant lots bear a proportioin of all the costs except for the O&M (Operation and Maintenance.). So, on Exhibit C, you will see that we=ve allocated the costs in that fashion as the present Ordinance states. Coming down after removing the revenues as a deduction from the appropriations that we anticipate receiving prior to rents, and dividing it by the number of EDUs, Mr. Higgins (cont=d): occupied and vacant as presently being billed, we come up with what we present as the annual EDU charge for 2000, for occupied and vacant separately. And, in this case, it=s $640 for occupied and $497 for vacant. If you go back to the report on Page 3, we present a comparison for Budd Lake occupied and vacant and Cloverhill between the 1999 Rate pursuant to the Ordinance and what=s necessary to maintain self-liquidating status for the Year 2000. And you see the increases. Occupied shows an increase of $207, vacant $148, and Cloverhill $86. Reviewing the calculations that were done when the EDU rates were figured for >97, >98, and >99, there=s a couple simple explanations. For >99 the O&M charges per the calculations were a little under $200,000 for O&M. If you look at the actual >99 Budget, it was in excess of $700,000. There=s about a $500,000 error in actuality for the >99 Budget verses what was anticipated when the calculations were done some time in >97. That $500,000 based upon 2,500 EDUs, which were forecast as being billed in 1999, that equates to roughly $216. So, just the down and dirty on why you would go up $207 per EDU is the fact of the original Ordinance appears to be significantly understated with respect to what should have been charged for an EDU in 1999. And that void in 1999 happened to be covered with someBbasically one-shot revenues that were available to the utility, thank God, to cover that shortfall. But, without those one-shot Revenues available any more, it has to be passed along through a sewer rent increase. And that is why we=re showing the proposed increase as it is. One thing to keep in mind, the present Ordinance billsBon the Ordinance it says an annual basis, but the bills do go out quarterly. A quarterly bill is anticipated to go out in the next week or two, which puts you kind of in a predicament as to either delay the bills, which could create a cash flow problem, or would create a cash flow problem, or secondly, pass the whole increase along in quarters two, three and four. So, these are the decisions that have to be made. Obviously passing along the increase in three pieces verses four drives up the number for two, three and four, but the outcome to the rate payer in dollars is the same. So, that=s the synopsized version of my seven page report.

Mr. Heymann: Didn=t we get an add-on Ordinance addressing this tonight?

Mr. Higgins: Well, there were questionsBif we were fast-tracking, trying to get the first quarter adjusted so all four quarters were even, to try to Introduce an Ordinance by Title tonight to try and get this rolling. But, then there were thoughts later on this afternoon speaking to your Interim-Administrator, and speaking to the Mayor, of possibly then, going along with, to pass along in quarters two, three and four. But, that=s a decision you have to make. I did prepare a summary after our 4:00pm meeting that basically sets forth the impact of going along with the first quarter on the old rate and then passing the whole increase alongB

Mr. Heymann: My druthers would be to pass it along to one, two, three, and four. I think if you=re going to have to handle a Budget at home it would be easier to do it less per quarter than more on a shorter period of time. It=s the same amount of money, but I=d rather not give the users the fact that they have to pay 25% more the last three quarters. It=s not as if it=s going away. So as far as I=m concerned, I would prefer to pass the Ordinance by Title tonight on First Reading and then move forward.

Mr. Rattner: I talked to Mr. Higgins this morning when he was sending this fax out. I really haven=t had time to go through it. However, we know, and we=ve been talking about it for the last month or so that there=s going to be a substantial increase. I don=t think there=s any harm in introducing the Ordinance. Basically what that gives us is two weeks to get everything in order. If we don=t like it, we can change it then.

Mr. Dorsey: We=ve drawn the Ordinance. The question that Mr. Higgins raised with meBhe advises me that the quarterly bills apparently have been made up and are about to be sent outBis that true, Randy? So, they=ve already been made up, and they=re going to be mailed by the end of this week. So, in which case, do you want him to throw away those bills, or shall we simply make this Ordinance effective as of, service rendered March 31?

Mr. Rattner: I think if that=s the case, if the bills are scheduled to go out this week, and we expect we=ll get the majority of payments within 30 days, I would then say we=re probably better off sending out the bills we have now because we have to look at the cash flow. If we don=t, and we put it off, it will be another month before we get the bills out, and we have to give ourselves a month to collect the money. I think the loss of that cash flow would be detrimental to the operation of the utility.

Mr. Casey: If I mightBone of the reasons why we got into this discussion today, was looking at the issue of, not a one-year budget, but a two-year budget. One of our concerns would be that if you basically did an increase this year, which matched with the Year 2000 cash requirements, then, if, in fact, you end up with requirements, any normal increase in your operating budget for 2001, you could be faced with going back to the same users with another rate increase. If you look at what we were saying and recommending to you, if you do an increase based upon the last three quarters of the year, what will in essence happen to you, is at the same rate structure, in the Year 2001, you will obviously generate additional revenue. That additional revenue in the Year 2001 will basically prevent from an increase in 2001 and 2002. So, what we are looking at is the possibility and the probability of establishing a cash flow within your Sewer Authority, which will basically run you two or three years. The reason for that is by going through the quarterly billing, remember, this year, you only have three quarters at the new rate, next year, you=d have four quarters. The rate remains the same, but that increment becomes very important to you to establish a cash balance. Right now, you have a zero cash balance in your Utility Fund, and I think it=s to your long-term best interest in order to establish a positive cash flow so that in essence you have surplus generated. You start rolling your surplus over like you do in your water fund, and put yourself on sound footing. The reality is, your customers are going to be paying the same over long term. The issue is whether, in fact, you have toBAyou@Bthe Governing Body has to go back for rate increases on an annual basis so that every year you=re going to ratch it up or down a little bit in order to match in, and I don=t know if that=s in anybody=s best interest from a planning standpoint.

Mr. Heymann: Well, I want to know thenBare we assuming, Gary, that we will have an increaseBif we follow Bob=s proposal, we will already have a built in increase for 2001. Do we know that there=s going to be an increaseB

Mr. Higgins: Just so you knowBthis sheet hereBthis basically explains, if you go under First Quarter old Ordinance, three quarters, you generate the $640 that I=m saying is necessary. What happens, then you run four quarters at $177.25.The following yearBand you see the 2001 generation. The way we were looking at thisBand the last time I was hereBin December, we talked about trying to do a modelBtwo, three years out to get a grip on this. One of the key factors here is the MSA charge. I believe debt service going forward is level. We can forecast some rational increase for salaries and wages, O/E outwards The other big number driving would be the MSA, and I wanted to speak to Mr. Rattner and their Auditor, possibly, about this, if we=re going to do this model, if that=s going to be fairly flat, or if there=s going to be a little bump if they know anything, we=d filter that in. One thing we can forecast is additional EDUs at this point because we just don=t know. But that would be bonus points on top of this if we get more users on board. What this additional amount will generate would go to surplus, like Bob said. We have no surplus. We=re running a zero balance right now. And, that=s really not that good. So, if anything, this would build you some foundation with the Utility. We have no basis to do an emergency other than to say we=re raising it next year. We=re not backed up with any surplus funds here.

Mr. Heymann: All right, I changed my mind. I=m going to go for the $177, for the three quarters for this year, and right into the next year.

Mr. Rattner: Because the Bills are already made up, and I already said I would go with it, but looking at going into 2001, what we=d be doing tonight is already telling people they=re going to have an 11.5% increase in 2001. I=m going to have an awful tough time explaining that, AThis year we=re having a 48% increase, next year we=re already projecting a 12% increase.@ And I don=t think I could explain that in any rationale point of view. I think what we have to doBand it=s something that=s proposed before by somebody out in the peanut gallery, what we need to do is Mr. Rattner (cont=d): review the operation in November, and have the rates for the next year at that time set. So, we know going forward, so we don=t charge the people more than we need, but we make sure that we cover all the expenses. We know what it=s going to be for this year, and whatever the numbers come out, but I don=t want to explain to somebody why we=re already telling them there=s going to be another double-digit increase next year.

Mr. Heymann: I just want to respond to that in two ways. Number One, I really wasn=t aware

until I brought up that there is no surplus. Number Two, if you go from one dollar to two dollars, you have a double-digit increase. Percentages mean nothing to me. That=s just a playing around ofB

Mr. Rattner: Well, $68 to me is considerable.

Mr. Heymann: But the money is what makes a difference. I agree with you. But that increase is not that significant in light of the fact that we don=t have a surplus. That=s why I changed my mind. Without a surplus, I think nobody should run without some type of a surplus in order to foresee maybe a problem.

Mr. Rattner: It=s no problem sketching it out, but I=m saying right now we don=t have to set the rates. If it=s going to be 11% we don=t have to tell the people now that it=s 11%. I think we should look and see. Maybe we=ll have more EDUs and really look at it. We need a certain surplus, we need the cash-flow to keep the operation. We need a rainy-day fund. There=s no doubt about it, but we won=t really know how much we really need. I mean, it=s very possible the $68 may not be enough come November. What are we going to tell the Public, AIn January of 2000 we told you we were going to have an 11% increase of $68 in 2001.@ Come November, AWell, maybe it=s really going to be 15% and we=re going to raise it $100.@

Mr. Higgins: Just so you know, that extra moneyBthe way I figure it, based upon an approximate 2800 EDUs, about $194,000. So, if you run flat expense-wise in 2001, no more EDUs, you=d generate a profit of a little under $200,000. But I assume there are going to be some incremental increases across the board contractually, or whatever. But that=s what that represents to you. And that=s not a lot of surplus, even if you do generate it, based upon a $3.6 million budget.

Mr. Scapicchio: And we can always go back and reduce the rates.

President Sohl: Right.

Mr. Rattner: Well, that=s why I=m saying at this point, we don=t have to set the rates. We can sketch it out. We know the people are going to be paying the second, third and fourth quarter $177. I don=t want to have to revise an Ordinance because we said we were going to keep that rate in the Year 2000. Especially if we=re going to have to increase it on top of it. I=d rather just go. If it=s $177, we=ll say, AOkay, this is what we=re paying now, and what we need for the Year 2001.@ We should be reviewing that in November so we=re not at the last minute. We can then pass the Ordinance in an orderly fashion before the end of the year and have the bills ready going into 2001.

Mr. Higgins: I guess the only thing we=ll know different in November, though, would be more EDUsBwe wouldn=t even know the MSA charge for 2001.

Mr. Rattner: We could probably get a pretty good estimate because the MSAB

Mr. Higgins: They introduce 60 days prior to Year-end.

Mr. Rattner: We do the preliminary Budget in October, and send to Trenton by the end of October. We have a pretty good idea when we get it back, and it=s distributed in December.

Mr. Heymann: Well, can we draw this to a vote?

President Sohl: Is there any other discussion?

Mr. Rattner: Well, right now, we=re not fast tracking anything tonight, so we don=t have to do anything.

Mr. Heymann: Well, I think it=s the idea on whether we want to do it on a three-payment schedule.

Mr. Rattner: I thought we decided that.

President Sohl: If we say we are going to do it on the second, third, and fourth quarter, we don=t have to fast track anything.

Mr. Casey: That=s correct. We=ll consider thatBat your next regular meeting, we=ll have an Ordinance up and moving that fashion, and we can get other data if you need it.

President Sohl: Okay. Fine. Any other Administrative Reports, Mayor?

Mayor Licitra: No.

LEGAL REPORTS: NONE

CORRESPONDENCE

Letters From Residents

1. Letter received December 20, 1999 from James and Susan Kyle regarding request of West King Estates for LOI (Letter of Interpretation) of property located on Route 46 and Smithtown Road, Budd Lake. (Block 8200 Lot 1)

2. Letter received December 20, 1999 from Raymond and Danielle Miller regarding request of West King Estates for LOI of property located on Route 46 and Smithtown Road, Budd Lake. (Block 8200 Lot 1)

3. Letter received December 20, 1999 from Diane Johnston regarding request of West King Estates for LOI of property located on Route 46 and Smithtown Road, Budd Lake. (Block 8200 Lot 1; Block 7702 Lot 1; Block 8100 Lot 1)

4. Letter received December 20, 1999 from Rosemary and John Hill regarding request of West King Estates for LOI of property located on Route 46 and Smithtown Road, Budd Lake, (Block 8200, Lot 1.)

5. Letter received December 21, 1999 from Jane Curtain in support of Dover General Hospital.

6. Letter received December 27, 1999 from Birgitta Bloom regarding request of West King Estates for LOI of property located on Route 46 and Smithtown Road, Budd Lake, (Block 8200, Lot 1.)

School Correspondence

Resolutions, Ordinances, Correspondence from other Towns

1. Resolution received December 23, 1999 from the Borough of Netcong in opposition of Senate Bill 1961 which would Permit Off Track Betting in New Jersey Municipalities

2. Resolution received December 27, 1999 from the Borough of Lincoln Park in Support of Assembly Bill A-2683.

League of Municipalities

3. Letter Received December 20, 1999 from New Jersey State League of Municipalities, League Seminar 2000 Fiscal Update.

4. Letter received December 22, 1999 from New Jersey State League of Municipalities RE: Municipal Solid Waste Collection, WHS Realty Co., Inc v. Town of Morristown Decision.

5. Letter received December 27, 1999 from New Jersey State Leage of Municipalities RE: Eighth Annual Mayor's Legislative Day - January 26, 2000.

DOT/DEP/Permits

6. Letter received December 22, 1999 from NJDEP RE: LOI/Line Verification, Dry Creek Design & Development, Block 6600, Lot 8 (between Rt. 206 & Pleasant Hill Rd. on Chester Township border)

7. Letter received December 22, 1999 from NJDEP RE: LOI/Line Verification, St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church, Block 5800 Lot 41.

8. Letter received December 30, 1999 from NJDEP RE: Individual Freshwater Wetlands Permit and Trasition Area Wavers, Applicant: New Jersey Foreign Trade Zone Venture/International Trade Zone.

9. Notification received January 4, 2000 from White Environmental Services, Rockefeller Group Development Corporation c/o Mt. Olive Industrial Realty Co, is applying to the New Jersey DEP Land Use Regulation program for two statewide general permits and a Trasition Area Waiver. Block 403 Lot 7.

10. Notification received January 4, 2000 from C&H Environmental Inc., Westminster Realty, is applying to the New Jersey DEP Land Use Regulation program for approval of a Stream Encroachment Application, statewide general permits #7 and #10 and a Transition Area Waiver equivalent to GP#11 and a TAW averaging plan.

11. Letter received January 5, 2000 from NJDEP RE: LOI Presence/Absence determination, Applicant Paragon Village, LLC B 8400 L 8 & 9.

12. Letter received January 5, 2000 from NJDEP RE: LOI /Line Verification, Flanders Valley Tennis & Swim Club. Block 4400 Lot 3.

13. Letter received January 6, 2000 from NJDEP RE: LOI Applicant Laureen Alcock Block 6600 Lot 13 (Bartley Road)

Correspondence from Organizations/Committees/Boards

14. Minutes received December 20, 1999, Morris County Planning Board Meeting of November 4, 1999.

15. Letter received January 5, 2000 from MSA regarding the allocation for participating municipalities.

Correspondence Regarding Tort Claims/Verified Notice of Lien Claim/Petitions

16. Letter received December 23, 1999 from Stroud-Hopler, Inc. RE: Proposed Improvements to Flanders-Drakestown Road (Section I & II)

17. Notice of Claim received January 7, 2000, from Herbert Korn, Esq. in the matter of Joseph Selitto.

Land Use/Development Matters

18. Letter received January 4, 2000 from Nicholas Tufaro, NJCLA & PP, Environmental Planning & Design regarding Reissuance of LOI, Mt. Olive Center Associates B 4100, Lots 80, 83 & 84.

Correspondence from Cable Networks/Utilities

19. Letter received December 22, 1999 from Stephen J. Nicholl, Area Vice President, GPU Energy responding to residents' concerns regarding outages and maintenance of electrical lines in Mt. Olive Township.

Correspondence from Legislative Representatives

20. Letter received December 23, 1999 from Assemblyman E. Scott Garrett regarding receipt of Township Resolution requesting relief and help, from State and Federal Government to maintain a Viable Agriculture in Northern New Jersey.

21. Letter received January 4, 2000 from Congressman Frelinghuysen District Representative, Kenneth J. Basset in response to resident Richard Kummer's request for the addition of a mail collection box in the Sutton Plaza Mall in Flanders.

HMUA/ MSA/MCMUA

22. Minutes of the December 1, 1999, Meeting of the Musconetcong Sewerage Authority received January 7, 2000.

Morris County Community Development

COAH

23. December COAH Newsletter, received December 20, 1999,

Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control

Election Memos

Newsletters / Notices

24. Order Form received December 22, 1999 from Rutgers, regarding "Occasional Paper #8" New Jersey's Statewide 9-1-1 System: A Case Study in Regionalization in New Jersey.

25. Newsletter received December 20, 1999 from US Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency Newsletter.

Budd Lake Sewer Project

26. Letter received January 4, 2000 from Metra Industries RE: BLSP Contracts SS-1E1-92 and SS-1A(M)-92.

President Sohl stated that we had received 32 items of Correspondence and asked Council if there were any comments on same.

Mr. Scapicchio: Just a comment on #25. GPU did send a letter back. There was a meeting that was Chaired by Senator Bucco. GPU was advised that we did not attendBwe weren=t NoticedBI don=t know what happened with the mail, but we weren=t Noticed. They did send back a detailed explanation of the problem the way they see it, and I thought they came forth with what seemed like some reasonable solutions. They also offered to still, come before this Body if that=s our choice.

President Sohl: And I think we corresponded that we would like that.

Mrs. Lashway: We=re going to schedule it for a workshop in February.

Mayor Licitra: Let the Record show that my lights were out last night, as was half the development in Cloverhill. Also, I take notice of their cop-out on Floyd (Hurricane Floyd). I know our lights were out for 36 hours after Floyd. It had nothing to do with Floyd, and they kind of lumped that into the Floyd thing. They took a week or two, and everybody that went out, they kind of lumped it into the Floyd-thing. But, we were out for 36 hours or something and it had nothing to do with Floyd. It was a transformer that blew, and it took them that long to get to it because of the fact that they were doing a lot of work with Hurricane Floyd. But, just let the Record show that it was out again. I don=t know how many more of these outages that we have in Mayor Licitra (cont=d): Mt. Olive, but I agree with everybody elseBI=ve never seen as many. This is the fourth time it=s happened to us this year.

ORDINANCES FOR PUBLIC HEARING: NONE

ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING

Ord. #1-2000 An Ordinance of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Establishing Salaries for the Department Heads and Employees of the Township Clerk=s Office for the Year 1999.

Mr. Heymann moved that Ord. #1-2000 be introduced by title and passed on First Reading and that it be scheduled for Adoption after a Public Hearing on January 25, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Scapicchio seconded the Motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

Ord. #2-2000 An Ordinance of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Sale of Block 5300, Lot 18 C8.2A to Richard W. Eastman for $155,000. (Old police substation)

Mr. Scapicchio moved that Ord. #2-2000 be introduced by title and passed on First Reading and that it be scheduled for Adoption after a Public Hearing on January 25, 2000 at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Heymann seconded the Motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AGENDA:

Resolutions on the Consent Agenda List are considered to be routine and non-controversial by the Township Council and will be approved by one motion (one vote). There will be no separate discussion or debate on each of these resolutions except for the possibility of brief clarifying statements which may be offered. If one or more Council member requests, any individual resolution on the Consent Agenda may be removed from the Consent Agenda List and acted on separately.

1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Reduction in Performance Guarantees Posted by Homesteads at JJF, Inc.

2. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Release of Performance Guarantees Posted by Weis Markets, Inc.

3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing that Lot 16, Block 5800 Located Within the Township of Mount Olive and Shown on the Mount Olive Tax Maps, be Taxed by the Township of Roxbury. (Saunders -Taxing Agreement)

Mr. Heymann moved for approval of Resolutions #1 - #3, and Mr. Rattner seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

President Sohl: We now come to the Non-consent Resolutions.

4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing Payment of Final Benefits to the Estate of Charles Brown.

Mr. Casey: Administration drafted this Resolution in order to give some guidance to the Finance Office as to what should happen in this instance given the absence of a Contract or a Personnel Policy Procedures Manual.

Mr. Rattner: What are the specific benefits?

Mr. Casey: Accumulated and unused annual leave, holiday pay, and there=s a provision in there for unused sick pay which is payable on retirement or death of an individual up to 120 days. That=s in the Superior Officer=s Contract, and it was suggested to me by several Superior Officers thatBit=s their understanding that that benefit would provided to the Chief as well.

Mr. Rattner: Would it be proper to attach the page from the Superior Officer=s Manual, just so we know exactly what the benefits are.

Mr. Casey: Sure. We have no problem making those pages available.

President Sohl: So should we Amend the Resolution?

Mr. Rattner: Yes. I would like to Amend the Resolution by attaching that page to the Resolution.

Mr. Dorsey: To incorporate by Reference, the Schedule from the Superior Officer=s Contract, which specify the benefits to be paid to the deceased Chief.

Mr. Heymann: Second.

President Sohl: Discussion on Amendment? All right, Roll Call on the Amendment.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

President Sohl: All right, anyone from the Public wish to address this Resolution? Any Council discussion? Roll call on the Resolution.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

MOTIONS

1. Bill List.







^VENDOR NAME


^PURPOSE

AMOUNT



CURRENT






Budd Lake Fire Dept.


January, 2000 Contribution

$8,500.00



Flanders Fire Dept.


January, 2000 Contribution

$6,500.00



Budd Lake Rescue Squad


January, 2000 Contribution

$4,500.00



Flanders Rescue Squad


January, 2000 Contribution

$3,100.00



Mount Olive Public Library


January, 2000 Contribution

$20,000.00



Bollinger, Inc.


Dental Claims for January, 2000

$11,307.20



Major Police Supply


Equipment for New Patrol Vehicles

$5,748.84



Major Police Supply


Install Radios, Lights & Related Equipment in New Patrol Vehicles

$3,166.02



Tri-Maintenance & Contractors


Cleaning Services for Municipal Building for December, 1999

$2,644.86



SPLITS






Managed Logistics Systems, Inc.


Contract Charges for October, 1999 - 1/12th as per Contract

$34,333.25



Managed Logistics Systems, Inc.


Contract Charges for November, 1999 - 1/12th as per Contract

$34,333.25



Edmunds & Associates, Inc.


System Support for Tax, Finance & Utility Systems for Year 2000

$5,332.00



Morris County Municipal Joint Insurance Funds


First Installment Due for Fund Year 2000

$223,515.39



Serv-Us


Land Industrial Power Washer

$3,636.50



RECREATION TRUST






Lord, Anderson, Worrell & Barnett Inc.


For Engineering Services Rendered During 10/25/99 through 11/28/99






Regarding Flanders Crossing Park

$4,337.05



WATER & SEWER






Lerch, Vinci & Higgins


Management Advisory Services Rendered for Period Ended 12/31/99

$5,086.25



CAPITAL






Lerch, Vinci & Higgins


Final Billing of Advisory Services Regarding Official Statement &






General Obligation Bonds

$5,710.00



McManimon & Scotland


Advisory Service, 1999 Serial Bond Sale

$10,914.27





Charged to Cost of Issuance - 1999 Serial Bonds



Mrs. Kelly moved for approval of the Bills and Mr. Scapicchio seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

1. Approval of Bingo Application #919 for St. Jude Church; Raffle Applications #920 and #921 for Chester PTA; Amendment to Bingo Application #917 for the Budd Lake Fire Co., #1; and Raffle Application #922 for the Mt. Olive High School Parents Club.

Mr. Spino moved for approval of the Motion and Mr. Heymann seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

COUNCIL REPORTS

Library Board Liaison Report

President Sohl: Their first meetingBtheir reorganization meeting is tomorrow night.

Recreation Report

Mr. Heymann: The Mayor has advised me that the Flanders Crossing Park Application is scheduled for the 20thBwhich is a week from this ThursdayBbefore the Planning Board.

Board of Health Report

Mr. Rattner: Our Reorganization meeting is this Thursday.

Planning Board

Mr. Spino: We will be meeting this Thursday.

Open Space Committee Report

Mrs. Kelly: We had our meeting last night. We had our reorganization and discovered we have two vacancies that need to be filled. We went over the 1999 accomplishments and the goals that we want to achieve for the year 2000. The Smithtown Park, we still need a Resolution for the appraisalBto get the Appraisal. Earl brought it up last week, and it=s still not on the Agenda, so I was asked to bring it up again.

President Sohl: We need a Resolution.

Mr. Dorsey: What=s the delay here, Mr. President?

President Sohl: I have no ideaBit sounds like a Legal Matter to me.

Mrs. Kelly: We have to get the appraisals doneB

Mr. Dorsey: Let me ask you a question. Is this for Green Acres?

Mr. Spino: Yes.

Mr. Dorsey: And is this the usual team of Feminella and Krauser?

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Dorsey: And you=re ready for a Resolution? And what do you call this property?

Mrs. Kelly: We call it Smith Farm Tract.

Mr. Dorsey:

RESOLUTION OF THE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MOUNT OLIVE RE: Smith Farm Park (Appraisals and environmental testing)

WHEREAS, the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive hereby acknowledges

the requirement of preliminary costs to determine the scope and cost of a proposed undertaking. The

purpose of these preliminary costs are for the potential acquisition of Block 800, Lots 15 and 16

(Smith Farm Park) and that the amount to be charged is for the purpose for which bonds may be

issued under Chapter 2 of Title 40A.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive, County of Morris, State of New Jersey, that the amount appropriated for preliminary

costs shall not exceed $15,000 and the Treasurer is authorized to set up a reserve for preliminary

expenses out of the Capital Improvement Fund of the General Capital Fund.

Mrs. Kelly: So moved

Mr. Spino: Second.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously

PUBLIC PORTION

President Sohl: I now open the meeting to the Public. Is there anyone who would like to address the Council on any matter? If not, I will close the meeting to the Public.

COUNCIL COMMENTS

Mr. Guenther: It=s an honor to be here. It feels like Aold-home-week.@ As Steve has said, I=ve worked with most of you over the years on certain things, either Concerned Citizens or MORATS. It almost feels like Homecoming. I=m looking forward to it, and I think we have a great team here and I look forward to doing positive things for Mt. Olive.

President Sohl: We had the walk-through on the Crown Towers on Sunday. It was a very nice day, actually, for that kind of thing. I=d like to thank the Mayor and Administration for having Mr. McGroarty there on his, obvious, day off. We were there for probably about two hours. I would hope that that would be conveyed to Mr. McGroarty by way of thanksBand Mr. Buczynski was there as well. It was a very fruitful and productive time. We have a good idea as to what=s involved, and what is going on.

Motion made for adjournment. All in favor, none opposed. The meeting was adjourned at 9:15pm

____________________________________

William H. Sohl

Mt. Olive Township Council President

I, LISA M. LASHWAY, Township Clerk of the Township of Mount Olive do hereby certify that the foregoing Minutes is a true and correct copy of the Minutes approved at a legally convened meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council duly held on July 25, 2000.

________________________

Lisa M. Lashway

Mt. Olive Township Clerk

mee

 

 
 

Mailing Address:
Mount Olive Township
Post Office Box 450
Budd Lake, NJ 07828

Physical Address:
Mount Olive Township
204 Flanders-Drakestown Road
Budd Lake, N.J. 07828

Telephone:
Main (973) 691-0900, Fax (973) 347-0860

Business Hours:
8:30 am - 4:30 pm (Monday thru Friday)


 

Mount Olive Township has joined Twitter in an effort to keep you updated with a constant stream of current information. Twitter allows us to break news faster than any other source, organize instant events and improve communication between Mount Olive and the public.

Follow us on Twitter by clicking here
Or view our tweets here

 

  The Mount Olive Comments Form is geared towards benefiting you, the public. If you would like us to contact you back, please enter your contact details in our comments form or simply email us.


 
 

2012 Mount Olive Township. All rights reserved.