Mt. Olive Township Council Minutes
April 08, 2003

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

MOMENT OF REFLECTION in recognition of the men and women fighting terrorism and those who have lost their lives defending the freedom we all enjoy

OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT ANNOUNCEMENT
According to the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate Notice of this Meeting has been given to the Morristown Daily Record. Notice has been posted at in the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mt. Olive, New Jersey, and notices were sent to those requesting the same.

ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Spino, Mrs. Miller, Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rattner, Mr. Greenbaum,
Mr. Scapicchio, President Guenther
Absent: None

ALSO PRESENT: Mayor Paul Licitra; Cynthia Spencer, Business Administrator; Sherry Jenkins, CFO; Lisa Lashway, Township Clerk; John Dorsey, Township Attorney.

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

Questions on Bill List?

OLD BUSINESS

Turkey Brook Park Project Status

President Guenther: We will start since we see our Township Engineer here this evening. This ties in with the Turkey Brook Status report. But the specific incident we had last Friday, I want him to give a report on what happened later Friday afternoon.

Gene Buczynski, Township Engineer: Good evening, I also have one other report to give you to about something else we discussed last week. I’ll tell you what I know of it, last Friday I received a call at 4:30 from Linda in the Public Works Department saying that there was a problem with water, with silt going into Budd Lake. Phone calls went back and forth between myself, Mark, and Jim that day. I also called the Soil Conservation District and made them aware of it, Joe Dunn was on his way home, he stopped by to look at it also. I know from the Town’s standpoint Mark followed up with the procedure of contacting people from the Budd Lake Committee and what have you. As far as what happened, unbeknownst to us, on Friday Kyle Conti opened up the outlet structure and basically took three of three orifices from the detention basin to slowly let water out. One of the things he has to do in the spring now is to empty the detention basin, clean out all the silt and then stabilize the bottom so that it is ready for the park opening and ready to put more water in. We’re not aware of him opening it up and taking the plugs out that morning. I had a man on the site about 9:00 myself who goes there everyday just to see how many people are on the site logging that in. There was just landscapers there that morning and nobody advised him that they are going to do anything at the base and Cindy had mentioned to me that all they knew is Monday he was going to start pumping out the basin. I spoke to Kyle afterwards, his thought was it settled all winter and he figured he was just going to open it over the weekend and just let it drain. Unfortunately he did not use any environmental bag, which he should have utilized which he did not. I think what happens is when you have three orifices even though it may have been quiet and settled when you have water coming in from three locations to really start everything, the soil and everything basically just causing silt and yellow water coming out. I have spoken to him since then and he is going to have an environmental bag in the site, when he pumps it out, he was going to start that today, but of course with the snow storm yesterday he is not going to start that until next Monday. That is kind of the quick summary, if there are any questions. It is something that could have been avoided if he were to use an environmental bag instead of just trying to open up. I think his thought was it was clear, it was quiet, that if he opened up the three plugs it would not have caused any problems and it did. I supposed he opened them about 10:00 am in the morning. We really didn’t know about it until about 4:30 in the afternoon. I think at that point on the right methods were taken care of. I wish he would work as fast as Jim Lynch would work when there is a problem because Conti never showed up to the site and Jim was able pretty much to get it under control by about 7:00 or 7:30 that night with some interventions because two of the plugs did not work properly. That’s the story.

Mr. Rattner: The first thing I do want to say and you mentioned Jim, I’ve heard in fact that Soil Conservation is extremely impressed I don’t know if he jumped into water or how he did it but he was able to stop it up because at least he took action. I heard Kyle Conti refused to come back and close it off, at least that is the way I…

Mr. Buczynski: I personally never got to talk to him about it.

Mr. Rattner: I did hear that Jim went and used traffic cones and other stuff and was able to block it up and stop the silt. I mean it was great that he was cleaning up the silt by putting it in the lake. I think what he should be required to do is go by what’s commonly referred to as cowboy’s beach, the one by Route 46 on the start of Sandshore Road because there has already been a lot even prior that has been dumped in here. It is very shallow because of all the dirt and he should be required to clean some of that up. Kyle Conti and his father’s firm are very well known and one of the most knowledgeable in this State. He has a reputation, they know what they are doing, and he knows what he should have had; the filtering of the environmental bag or anything else. He probably knows, he should have told somebody, but he didn’t because he thought he could do it real simple and quickly. We should have to hold their feet to the fire because we know that there was a certain amount of silt. Some of that mud you could see was all the way down to Lakeview Drive and down that way so a lot went into the lake and it just gets frustrating when somebody appears to be keep doing this to us. I don’t think it was an accident. He is a known contractor, they have what, forty or fifty years of experience in total working in the whole state. He knew exactly what he was doing. He was there at 9:00 in the morning. Your inspector was there at 9:00 and he says he opened it up at 10:00. That tells me it was planned that way. Because if they opened it up your guy would have said something, but I think he should be required, I don’t know what it would take, to clean out some of that silt that is coming out under the road there and filling in that beach. Our residents should not have to put up with that.

Mr. Scapicchio: I am not going to repeat everything Mr. Rattner said, but I am in total agreement with his opinion.

Mr. Greenbaum: If he is not going to be prepared to clean it up then we need to go against his insurance company because that seems to be negligence to me at a minimum. So we have a claim for whatever cleanup costs against his insurance company. Second, I am concerned as we move towards completion of the park with regard to any activities that will affect offsite activity, such as, when we start up the pumps, have the pumps been started?

Mr. Buczynski: Not yet.

Mr. Greenbaum: So the pumps, anything that is going to leave that particular tract I think requires special attention on Schoor DePalma’s part at this point. I don’t want to have to come back and deal with other issues off-site as a result of things that we are doing in the park.

Mrs. Miller: I am sure that if this was a developer we have some sort of enforcement or fines that would be issued. I would like to give fines to Conti for doing this without advising our inspectors and doing it over a weekend.

Mr. Buczynski: I don’t know what fines we could actually impose on him.

Mrs. Miller: Well there must be something.

Mr. Rattner: Mrs. Miller, the problem being and I got this secondhand about what Mr. Dunn said, he said that the owner is the one that gets the fine, he would like to issue a fine, but the only place he could issue a fine is to the owner. We are the owner.

Mrs. Miller: That’s the contractor that is responsible so we could go after him.

Mr. Rattner: That becomes a civil offense; you are talking about the fine for violating some work. It would be the developer, not the contractor who would get the summons; I think Mr. Dorsey probably would concur with that. I don’t think we are going to force the issue. The Township of Mount Olive is going to get a fine that we are going to have to pay.

Mr. Buczynski: I think probably the best thing at this point would be to follow what the Council has said. I could draft a letter to Conti telling him it was discussed at the Council meeting and I am very concerned regarding the silt into the lake and he has to proceed with some action at the park down by Sandshore Road.

Mr. Rattner: We are lucky it happened this time of year. The last time we had, because of another issue, it was because of whether beyond control when we had the last silt that went in, I think everybody remembers we had a major fish kill. We are lucky that at this time of year, the fish probably aren’t active so it probably did not cause a big problem.

Mr. Buczynski: You’re limited probably to what you do at Cowboy Park or whatever it is before you are going to say you need DEP permits and things of that nature.


Mr. Rattner: They put the dirt there. When you tell me that their program was to pump it out of the filter. They decided to take the easy way out and pull a plug and maybe no body will notice before a weekend and dump it into a lake, to me it is very very plain. I remember we had those issues on a smaller scale with the sewer project; some people with lower level lots. They dug a hole to put their pipe connection in, filled up with water so they just pulled the plug and they let it go in the sewer line which causes a lot of problems later on. We caught them where we could. This is just a bigger deal because it was going into the lake.

Mr. Greenbaum: I don’t believe it was accidental at all.

Mr. Rattner: I don’t either. That was my point. I just want to again acknowledge we have an employee, Jim Lynch, every week it just astounds me what he gets himself involved with. I just want to personally thank him for doing that because I am very concerned about the lake and that is going way beyond.

Mrs. Miller: Bernie, I do have one other point. I know our business administrator told me the Budd Lake Beautification Committee was also notified as was discussed at our emergency management meeting last week.

Mrs. Spencer: The process that we have developed was actually used and it was used effectively. Mark DiGennaro called the Lake Association as soon as he had full details about what was taking place and what actions we were going to take and then Jim followed up at the end of his stop gap measures and let the Lake Association what had been done.

Mrs. Miller: Are they going to provide input as to perhaps ways to prevent this?

Mr. Buczynski: As far as the way to prevent it, it is just to do it the right way the first time. When Linda called me I said hec, we’re not doing any work out there that would cause any erosion going into Budd Lake. My first thought was evidently they have an environmental bag and that’s where everything came up. It’s very fine material and even though it might look like it is clear, once you start causing a vortex situation with three pipes, you are going to start silting and mucking it all up. It can look worse than it is. I know it was pretty bad though. It could get yellow with just a bunch of fine particles. Who knows how much actually went in as solids but something definitely went into the lake.

Mrs. Miller: That goes down our storm drains to the lake, correct?

Mr. Buczynski: Yes. And there is a combination too with that.

Mrs. Miller: So all those storm drains need to be cleaned out?

Mr. Buczynski: Not really. You have to realize, probably some of the silt even added up on the way down because every winter you have say the first flush of the spring, those inlets get filled up with grits and stuff from wintertime so this water with constant flow for six or eight hours I am sure I took some of that with it. It is just normal if you have something like that. It is just like if you had a major rain, the first time it is going to carry some of that out with you. If we are done with the lake, the other issue I wanted to give you an update on, remember last week when I talked to you about the change order for Conti and we had one item that was outstanding still $6,375.00 relative to a disagreement he and I have pertaining to the wet tap and the size they used because in fact we have to get another one because we have the wrong size. He called up today and he said it is zero. We have the right size; his contract ordered the wrong size. For once the plans were correct and he is just zeroing that change order so that was another $6,000 that they see as a zero item right now.

Mr. Rattner: I don’t think he wanted to talk to you today.

Mr. Buczynski: He didn’t call me; he actually talked to my assistant.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie are we going to authorize Gene to send Kyle Conti a letter stating we want that section of the lake cleaned up.

Mr. Buczynski: I’ll just do it. That is part of the job.

Mr. Scapicchio: Thanks Gene.

President Guenther: Cindy, is there anything else regarding Turkey Brook we forgot?


Mrs. Spencer: In relationship to Consolidated Building Corporation, the footings and foundation are completed for the baseball tower building. The footings and foundation are 70% completed for the soccer restroom building, they have one additional day’s work to complete this. The next step is to backfill the foundation walls, but this cannot be done until the soil dries out. So, given the weather today and predictions for the remainder of this week, it looks like the earliest they can be back on site is Friday, but probably not until Monday. There are two weeks of plumbing work scheduled and that should start next Tuesday. The President, Tom Loredo believes he is in very good shape to move forward quickly, but is currently being hampered by the weather. To bring you up to date on what Kyle Conti did achieve last week before this mishap, they had worked from Flanders Road entrance way back through the loop road, they are hand raking and clearing debris, rock – seeding and placing hay on non-athletic areas. The conduit for both well pumps is in. They placed infield mix on the baseball fields. They are planning to hand grade the fields as soon as the snow melts. Then they will be ready to sod those fields. The football goal posts are being replaced. The manufacturer was on site, it was a defective part so they will be replacing those goal posts. They have been clearing drains of washout materials from areas where seed did not take over winter, so they have been shoveling that debris out of the piping. They met with the landscaper to discuss the tree replacements needed and completion of the landscape plan. They did additional grading work, over by the detention pond, the northwest corner of the property and finally they are working on removing the debris and spread top soil over the area on the right side of the Seward mansion .With respect to the barn, if we do the roof in-house, we can get materials for approximately $700.00 from a local vendor for the roofing materials, so we would literally be paying the vendor cost to put that new roof on. Window replacements are 50% completed, work is on-going and he is happy in that all the new equipment has arrived.

Mr. Rattner: I have one question regarding the roof, if we went outside and had it contracted, what is the savings by doing it ourselves. I am concerned about having people that are not used to it that high off the ground working on a roof. Do we have a rough estimate if we asked the contractor to do the whole thing? I like doing things in house, but I also want to be reasonable and make sure we are not exceeding the capabilities of some of the people. I don’t want them to risk their safety.

Mr. Lynch: I called today just to get a rough price for the materials. We could always purchase the materials and contract the work out after buying them. It would save us to buy them at cost instead of paying for a middleman to deal with the materials. We’ll look at it, I just haven’t gotten quotes back yet.

Mr. Rattner: You understand what my concern is. I like the idea of what you are doing, but that to me is a little bit more specialized than being that high off the ground. I don’t want to risk the safety of any of our employees, not to save a couple of pennies or dollars.

Mr. Lynch: Absolutely. I will have quotes and I will be back for that.

Mr. Scapicchio: Jim, what has to be done with the roof?

Mr. Lynch: The asphalt shingles on the barn have pretty much reached the end of their useful life span. It is a single roof. It would just have to be torn off. The sheeting is still good, it would just be a straight reroof.

Mr. Scapicchio: How many square feet is that roof? Do you know?

Mr. Lynch: The numbers are in my office. Off the top of my head I would not be comfortable.

Mr. Rattner: You are a contractor, Mr. Scapicchio; you have to have a certain amount of dexterity to stay on the roof without falling off. I wouldn’t do stuff like that anymore.

Mr. Scapicchio: Retail value of a rip off roof for that would probably be in the neighborhood of $300.00 for a rip off and a reroof. $300.00 for 100 square feet. But if Jim feels he has the capability in house, and that is their recommendation, I won’t have a problem with that.

President Guenther: I have a question since I see Gene in the audience. Some time ago I had a discussion with Chuck McGroarty about the highway access plan. Do you have any word on that at all, Gene?

Mr. Buczynski: I don’t. I haven’t talked to Chuck at all about it.

President Guenther: I think we are going to try to get that moving along with the State and see where that stood because that was instrumental. Now the highway access plan, I think it was just for Route 46, or maybe it was for both routes, but we were trying to get that going with State. For some reason maybe it has been put on the back burner, maybe with the change of administration last year.

Mr. Buczynski: There is a State Highway Access Plan which classifies Route 46 and what future improvements will be to Route 46, long range. As far as trying to implement it, that is really up to the State, I am not sure what we can really do. I could speak to Chuck and get a little more about what you might have talked to him about. I am not sure what we could really do at this point.

President Guenther: I had the impression and he said, that there is a program where we could go to the state and get this highway access plan approved. He claims that really only one other town in New Jersey has done it for whatever the reason is. This was an idea of his that he came up with two or three years ago. I picked up on it again, especially with Route 46 and not having any shoulders for whatever the reason is being very constricted on the properties and what you can do with them. He brought up as an idea of making a more recent development along Route 46 to provide proper access, ingress and egress for everything that has developed along the highway.

Mr. Buczynski: I know what you are talking about. As far as doing something separate for Mt. Olive which might be a little bit different from the approved plan. We met with the State a year and a half ago and they were supposed to get back to us and it kind of died there. There was a big gung ho, let’s do it right away attitude. We met with them and then it died on their part. It kind of went in the back room, I know what you are talking about.

Mr. Greenbaum: Are we still under old business, Bernie? I would like to have the Old Municipal Building Project listed as an old business item on a going forward basis so that it is on the agenda.

President Guenther: Yes, while he brings that up, the last time we did request Gene, if you could get something from the State in writing.

Mr. Buczynski: I wrote and faxed the letter to Lisa today confirming the discussions about the meeting held about two weeks ago.

Mrs. Miller: As long as he has brought that up, I noticed that in the letter, second page it says that in accordance that if the applicant proposes to change the use of the existing municipal building to a hospital, clinic, nursing home, school daycare facility or any other similar structure, the new building must also have at least one more driveway access route elevated to or above the regulatory flood elevations. I don’t remember discussing that.

Mr. Buczynski: I confirmed what was discussed. What they discussed, basically at that point he pulled out the regulations, the regulations talk about all those different types of businesses.

Mrs. Miller: Who is they?

Mr. Buczynski: The DEP, when we met with the DEP.

Mrs. Miller: But this is a letter to the DEP.

Mr. Buczynski: It’s the DEP confirming the meeting from two weeks ago and that was discussed at the meeting. Basically what they did was they pulled out the regulations.

Mrs. Miller: I was under the impression this was what the Council discussed.

Mr. Buczynski: No. We weren’t to discuss what we could do and couldn’t do.

Mrs. Miller: Because we never discussed this.

Mr. Rattner: No. We are not considering a hospital. Not even an animal one.

President Guenther: I noticed also your request to the State to do another traffic study on Connelly Ave.

Mr. Buczynski: It took several weeks to actually get them to call me back and then they called me back and talked about what needed to be done and I was able to get the updated traffic reports. There were quite a few accidents from 2001 until now, probably on the average, maybe once a month. A lot of them were left turns from what I looked at. Hopefully that will have some bearing on them. He gave me some preliminary information. They still are not going to warrant the light. I asked them to look at the information and we will be glad to meet you again.

President Guenther: Thanks, Gene.


Mr. Scapicchio: Gene I haven’t seen it for myself, but I have heard secondhand that the cul-de-sac at the north end of Flanders-Netcong Road and International Drive South has been opened, that gate.

President Guenther: I am not aware of that. Up by Goldmine Road?

Mr. Scapicchio: On the State Trooper side. I haven’t seen it myself, but neighbors have told me.

Mr. Buczynski: Okay.

President Guenther: By whom Dave?

Mr. Scapicchio: I don’t know.

Mr. Buczynski: That’s interesting because there is construction on these out parcels like Chili’s & Macaroni Grill, of course that is right near there and I am not sure somebody tried to get trucks in that way.

Mr. Scapicchio: Like I said, I have heard that secondhand.

Mr. Rattner: I believe the lock on Goldmine Road up on my end was actually cut at one time and had to be replaced.

Mr. Buczynski: Maybe that is what happened. Who knows?

President Guenther: Also, I just also heard that Chili’s opened without a CO?

Mrs. Spencer: They are doing hiring and things without a CO.

President Guenther: Any other old business. Anything for Gene specifically?

NEW BUSINESS

President Guenther: How about new business?

Mr. Greenbaum: I have asked Lisa to get in touch with Mr. Dorsey’s office concerning rescinding of the cluster ordinance which is included in our current Land Use and I have asked that be listed for the next workshop for discussion.

LEGAL MATTERS

Mr. Dorsey: Well I will tell you what all of you on the Council already know, last Monday the Mount Olive Complex case which is a career case of over an eight year period came to a final conclusion. The Supreme Court rejected the second petition for certification filed by Mount Olive Complex which in essence ended the litigation once and for all. It is kind of amazing in this litigation because this litigation started in 1995 and in 1998 through the insistence of Councilman Spino, the Township rather fearlessly and recklessly, increased the zoning on this property from two acres to five acres and that in the end became the central focus of the litigation, ultimately resulting in a 47 page opinion written by Judge Harvey in the Appellate Division which I dare say will become a landmark decision in terms of the use by the Township of the State Development and Redevelopment Plan as a justification for what it had done and of course we are deeply indebted to Jay Lynch who was the Planning Consultant I think in Mount Olive for 27 years and to Chuck McGroarty for his fine work, undoing the testimony by their expert. Lisa was a great help, Gene was a great help, coming to court whenever we needed him to testify on matters. I finally thought that the anecdote to this litigation was that the Reporter for the Daily Record after she learned about the decision called me and then she tried to contact somebody at Mount Olive Complex. First she called Sal Garafolo, who is the managing partner, he refused to respond, she then called the attorney from Mount Olive Complex, Bruce Snyder, he refused to respond, then she called an administrative assistant in their home office in Short Hills, he was not responding and they referred her to the sewer operator at their plant. So it is a significant decision in terms of Mount Olive because there were some downsides. There were some real issues in this case, they sued for several million dollars in damages on the basis that they had installed significant improvements beyond which they were permitted to develop. They had given 30 acres to the beautiful middle school that is across the street from us here. They sued for a builder’s remedy under a 1983 agreement and through the insistence of again, Earl and Barbara Swasey as a matter of fact, in 1987 we terminated their rights under a 1971 preliminary approval, in which whether it was thought or not I specifically advised them that time that the Council had taken that action, and they foolishly failed to appeal the action at that time and then it was the rezoning in the midst of the litigation which become the central point of the appeal in which we were finally successful. It does involve 1200 acres, right next store, down the street. Mr. Dorsey (cont’): The Mayor will be happy, the last time he asked how many times did he get to appeal, which to me was the same as asking how many more times did he get to bill me on this case. There is no more. There are no more avenues of appeal, and there are no more bills in connection with this litigation. Number two, the suit started by Caro in connection with the Wild Geese Mall in which we had a problem, because Parker Publications had not published the notice of final adoption when forwarded to it in a timely fashion by Lisa and they started the suit, they have now backed off, swamped with paper discovery. The interesting thing is today that Russ Brown called me and AIG/ Baker, with whom we seem to be in another funning battle over the last two months, and advised that AIG/ Baker had advised Chili’s without a CO, and most importantly they had occupied it without the inspection and final approval of the fire prevention sub-code official. A rather important inspection from the standpoint that this is a place of public accommodation and he has placed me on notice that they are in violation and we will proceed from there. So, that is all I have to report.

President Guenther: Thank you. I do have one question that I received in my in box, an attached State of New Jersey Senate Bill number 169, it says as per the Mayor’s request it was attached; Cindy do you know any particular reason the Mayor had for this? This is the legislation that suggests a fund, a levy of .10, I believe it is for 1,000 gallons of water usage, to create a fund for the New Jersey Clean Water Trust fund Act. Any particular reason for attaching this? Does he want to put this on the agenda for discussion?

Mrs. Spencer: To tell you the truth, I was out of town, and I am unfamiliar with it, I haven’t seen it.

President Guenther: I think we should look at it in detail, I think there are obvious pros and cons to this.

Mr. Spino: After I read it I would think that we would want to talk about it. It seems like something that Mount Olive might want to do. It really only has to do, from what I understand of it, is very large users.

President Guenther: Anyone that had gotten a DEP water allocation permit.

Mr. Spino: That means a large user.

President Guenther: Absolutely.

Mr. Spino: Since they are using and taking our water, I think that may be something we want to look at, because the money goes into a fund and that is the part that interests me, is it goes into a fund for low cost loans, I don’t remember it saying grants, but low cost loans to communities who want to use that money to protect their waterways, either lakes, inlets, there is whole list of things that you could do with the money if you want to.

President Guenther: Now what it says here, the proceeds of funds shall be used for State water resources and water quality projects and to provide grants and low interest loans to assist local governing units in funding water resources and water quality projects. What I have a problem with is that it is going to be administered by the DEP.

Mr. Spino: Well, I guess you have to take some bad with the good.

President Guenther: It sounds like we are going to have a full agenda on the 22nd, the workshop. We are going to discuss the sign ordinance; we are going to have a discussion that Rob has brought up. I suggest holding it off until the May meeting, because I think those subjects are going to take up a lot of time.

Mr. Spino: At the same time we should keep track of where it is in the Senate. If it goes to committee and gets revoked before we discuss it, we’ll lose whatever…

Mr. Dorsey: There is no rush because they are on adjournment now for the budget. Well I wrote you all a letter in connection with Interverse. Do we wish to proceed?

President Guenther: Yes.

Mr. Dorsey: I don’t think we’ll ever be in a better position, that’s not to say we are in a 100% position at any time.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS:

February 11, 2003 Present: Mr. Scapicchio, Mr. Greenbaum, Mr. Spino, Mr. Perkins,
Mr. Guenther (late).
Absent: Mrs. Miller, Mr. Rattner

March 18, 2003 Present: Mr. Rattner, Mrs. Miller, Mr. Spino, Mr. Greenbaum, Mr. Scapicchio,
President Guenther
Absent: Mr. Perkins

April 1, 2003 cs Present: President Guenther, Mr. Scapicchio, Mr. Rattner, Mr. Greenbaum, Mr. Spino, Mrs. Miller, Mr. Perkins
Absent: None

Mr. Scapicchio made a motion that we approve the Minutes and Mrs. Miller seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Council discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously with the exception of Mr. Ratter and Mrs. Miller, abstained on
February 11, 2003, & Mr. Perkins abstained on March 18, 2003.

CORRESPONDENCE

Letters from Residents

1. Letter received April 3, 2003, from Susan K. Sunny of 241 Flanders Netcong Road regarding Requested Parking Restrictions – Flanders Netcong Road.

Resolutions, Ordinances, Correspondence from Other Municipalities

2. Letter received March 10, 2003, from the County of Sussex regarding the Highlands Stewardship Act.

3. Ordinance received March 31, 2003, from Washington Township regarding Land Use.

4. Proclamation received April 1, 2003, from the Township of Hanover regarding honoring the members of the United States Armed Forces.

League of Municipalities

5. E-mail received March 21, 2003, from the New Jersey State league of Municipalities regarding CAP Relief, Non Conforming Uses Legislation and FEMA Reimbursement for Snow Removal.

6. Letter received April 3, 2003, from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding League Seminar.

7. Letter received April 4, 2003, from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding League Dinner.

MSA / MUA

8. Letter received April 1, 2003, from the Musconetcong Sewerage Authority regarding a list of allocations for the participating municipalities in the 3.803 MGD Water Pollution Control Plant.

DOT/DEP/Permit’s/LOI’s

9. Letter received March 24, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Transportation regarding US Route 46 Intersection of Drakestown Road.

10. Penalty Assessment received April 2, 2003, from the State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection regarding Notice to right of Hearing.

11. Letter received March 26, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding new Stormwater regulations.

12. Letter of Interpretation received March 31, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding Letter of Interpretation – Line Verification Applicant Joseph Balk Block 4501; Lot 2 (113 Route 206).

13. Letter received March 31, 2003, from McDonough & Rea Associates regarding street intersection and lot subdivision application for access of Lot 12 in Block 9001 Located in Roxbury Township.

Correspondence from Organizations / Committees / Boards

14. Letter received March 24, 2003, from the State of New Jersey, Victims of Crime Compensation Board regarding 3rd Annual Victims Rights Summit.

15. Letter received March 24, 2003, from the Mount Olive Township Historical Society regarding cleaning up of Baptist Cemetery.

16. Minutes received March 26, 2003, from the Morris County Planning Board regarding the February 20th meeting.

17. Letter received March 26, 2003, from the Morris County Mosquito Extermination Commission regarding Application for Freshwater Wetlands General Permit and Stream Encroachment Permit for Water Management Activities for the purpose of mosquito control in various waterways in Morris County.

18. Newsletter received April 1, 2003, from Council on Affordable Housing regarding Certification of two Municipalities, Trenton’s RCA Recipient Certification Status Extended, Salem City Amendment and Election of COAH Officers for 2003.

19. Letter received April 1, 2003, from Alliance for Action regarding the Morris County Alliance for Action Chapter Meeting.

Utilities / Cable

20. Letter received March 24, 2003, from R.S. Webb & Associates regarding FCC Telecommunications Tower Project.

21. Fax received April 3, 2003, from Comcast regarding Demonstrations and New Advanced Services.

Letters from Legislative Representatives

22. Letter received March 25, 2003, from Rodney Frelinghuysen regarding supporting our troops.

23. E-mail received April 4, 2003, from Congressman Frelinghuysen regarding Emergency War Time Supplemental Budget.

President Guenther: Does anybody have any questions on the Correspondence?

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, are you going to address letter number 1?

President Guenther: It’s up to you; if you want to address it, address it. Why don’t I let Lisa give an update regarding the discussion she had with Mrs. Sunny.

Mrs. Lashway: She had called me and told me what the problem was and I gave her a history on the whole issue. Bernie, I directed her to write that letter to the Council. She had called out Officer Scott Van Ness. She is very reasonable and she only wants to prohibit the parking in front of her driveway and her mailbox. But she does work out of the home and can’t get deliveries. Scott Van Ness told her to call the County, the County said that they would ask for a letter or a resolution/ordinance from the Township before they would consider it. Bernie, you and I discussed it today and you said to list it for the workshop on the 22nd ?

President Guenther: Based on the report, do you feel we need to discuss this at a workshop further? Or if everybody agrees, just to send the County a letter. I don’t think it needs any further discussion if we are all in agreement with that.

Mrs. Lashway: If a letter is not sufficient and they require an ordinance then we will bring an ordinance before you.

Mr. Greenbaum: I just wanted to comment on the first item of correspondence before we move from the subject. I had driven by and actually saw the cars parked. It is not the same type of situation as within an actual residential community on that particular stretch of road where the course of parking is actually a very wide shoulder that has Mr. Greenbaum (cont’d): delineated from the roadway surface. To me it appeared to be the most appropriate parking area of all the areas that we have dealt with. I thought it was a little bit different. Now we only have one person who is objecting to the parking in that particular area, one person that I know of.

President Guenther: Well no, she is not objecting to the parking in that area, but the post office won’t deliver the mail to cars that are blocking the way. I think she has a legitimate gripe.

Mr. Greenbaum: I don’t disagree with that. I think that it should be limited in scope if that is what is being proposed and rather than prohibiting parking in that entire area.

Mr. Spino: There is only one house involved on that side of the street. We could eliminate the parking in front of her house and on the other side of the street there are houses also. I don’t know if anybody from that side has complained yet. It started out with two cars, and now there are about 14 or 15.

President Guenther: I agree with Rob. The area does lend itself to that because the shoulder is wide enough and it does not create a road hazard. On the other hand there is the other issue which she brought up and has been brought up and has been brought up before in the hearings we had before, that it could be a safety issue on the students actually crossing both roads at certain times. I think we knew that when we let the thing go by.

Mr. Rattner: I agree with Mr. Greenbaum, that the road is wide and they delineate the shoulder, but I can understand, nobody should have their mailbox blocked. However the one issue I did notice, because I have noticed over the course of this winter, we have had quite a bit of snow, on our roads we have an ordinance against parking if the roads are snow covered. I guess it’s a County road, the County snow plows, have had a problem going around the cars sometimes putting up the snow. They can’t clear the snow all the way off the road because they have to go around the cars. Maybe we should ask whether they want the same thing. Only when it’s snow covered, cause that is a good reason to be able to widen the road.

President Guenther: Do we have a sign on that road, as we do on some other roads that say no parking at certain times in the winter months.

Mr. Rattner: We just have a couple signs around in the beginning of Town. We don’t allow any parking on any road. That was the compromise we had with the condos that we only limit winter parking. We had an ordinance that said no parking on any road from November 1st to April 1st or something like that. We then revised it to say when roads are snow covered. I just happen to notice that was an issue sometimes with the County snow plow, so I don’t know if that would cover ours, or maybe we should ask for something special on that so that they could widen the road when they have to. We had a lot of snow this year and it was a problem for those occurrences.

Mr. King: You have a ordinance that covers cars parked on the road when it snows so you could issue violations for that ordinance.

President Guenther: Even on the County Road?

Mr. King: Yes.

Mr. Rattner: Then we should probably look at that. Because what was an issue is just that. I know on our own roads, because I listened I heard sometimes that our Road Department did call and have the police track down the people. I don’t know if the county did that with our police department to make a move, so we should make them aware that we do have that and they could call and we could get it removed. I think usually what they did is they tried finding the people and told them to remove their cars.

President Guenther: Let’s see what comes as a result after the letter is sent. Any other comments on correspondence?

Mrs. Spencer: Item number 20, I think a letter needs to be sent responding to them that that property would need a use variance from the Board of Adjustment if they were to erect the tower.

President Guenther: I will be honest with you. I did not read that letter, so I don’t know what it says.

Mr. Rattner: I think the Federal Law which frumps a lot when it talks about communication towers, say that the town and the limit; they can’t ban them, but they can limit the areas they are put in and it has to serve the public good. I think we have done that and we have non-exclusive usage of some of the Township facilities, some of our water towers. If this company wants to put that in, I think we have some leverage if we have room to make them use one of our existing sites so we don’t have to build something else, and that is in the Federal Law and I think maybe Mr. Rattner (cont’d): we could look that way. It accomplished two things, we get the rental, and it’s not another piece of property that is going to be what most people consider to be an eyesore of a tower that goes up 120 feet.

Mrs. Spencer: They just were advising us that they are looking to put up a 125 ft. high mono pole for communications with equipment and cabinets on the bottom and when we did the research it is in an R-A zone which prohibits communication towns.

President Guenther: What was the location?

Mr. Spino: Oakwood Village.

Mr. Rattner: We have that water tower there, I think we rent space on.

President Guenther: Is it really necessary to send them a letter? They should know to get a permit they have to go through a certain process, do we really need to send them a letter?

Mrs. Spencer: They are kind of writing to the Township Clerk as is if this is starting to process, so obviously they are not fully aware of what the process is, obviously suggesting that we advise them as to what their options are.

Mr. Greenbaum: I agree, I think Mr. Dorsey’s office should write the letter and especially in light of Mr. Rattner’s comments, that we may be able to use this to the benefit of the Township.

Mr. King: You see, what will happen is their rngineer will say that this is what they want to do, and requires coverage in certain locations, as long as there is other alternative locations and the one as Mr. Rattner said can work, you can limit them to that location.

President Guenther: There is a letter, I am looking here, I don’t see it in the list. There is a letter from Attorney Larry Fox, this didn’t make the list about the acquiring of a certain piece of property. Do you want to put this on the agenda for the next workshop?

Mr. Spino: That might be in today’s mail.

President Guenther: Yes. Actually it was received yesterday and it wasn’t on the list. Okay, we can hold off on that.

ORDINANCES FOR PUBLIC HEARING

Ord.#14-2003 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing and Adopting a Stormwater Management Plan for the Township of Mount Olive (amended). – S. Rattner

President Guenther opened the public hearing on Ord. #14-2003.

Richard Bonte, Budd Lake : I guess I would like Mr. Buczynski to come up and explain to you what was discussed between himself and myself to see if this is agreeable to the Council.

Mr. Buczynski: We had several discussions over the last couple of weeks and Rich provided me with an insert to add to page four of the plan. I talked to Rich last week and again this morning, regarding this, with a couple of minor changes we can live with it, but it could be incorporated into page 54 of the plan because page 54 was appendix A which actually was a copy of the Morris County Stormwater Ordinance. We can’t really change Morris County Stormwater Ordinance. They said what we could do, I faxed it to Mr. King’s office this afternoon, but to take the same paragraph, I just changed a couple of words from shall to may. What we want to do is take this and prepare an ordinance amendment to I believe it is section 400-75E and to add this as number 11 in the town ordinance and that would at least make the developer aware of the concern relative to increased rainfall due to oragraphic lifting in this area of the State and basically just as an advisory to consider your designs.

Mr. Spino: Would that make it a possibility and it would be done at the Planning Board I assume, that the Planning Board could make them use that.

Mr. Buczynski: We would review the drainage calculations as far as detention basins go. Then we have to see what storm they use and where it came from but it would basically give the public a right to question the applicant and the applicant’s engineer that did you at least consider addressing that portion of the ordinance?

Mr. Spino: But if the decision from the Planning Board says whether you thought about it or not, you decided not to do it, we are saying that this is our preference. This is what we want you to do.
Mr. Buczynski: But really what we are telling them, Earl, is to look at it. We are not telling them what storm to use, but to look at it and address the situation.

Mr. Greenbaum: Earl, I guess the answer to that question is that if the Planning Board felt that the local storm data should be used and ultimately denies the application or forces the applicant to use that, it be would subject to the arbitrary and capricious standard and so it would be at the Planning Board’s discretion whether or not to require subject to judicial review as long as it is allowed in our ordinance.

Mr. Perkins: I was just wondering Gene, we are giving them the option, we are saying we would like for you to use this.

Mr. Buczynski: Basically, I will read the last sentence which Rich actually prepared. Designers of stormwater management systems and higher terrain areas of the township should address these increased requirements as part of the proposed stormwater management design and I encourage sizing stormwater management systems appropriately. Now one of the things I was telling to Rich today too is some detention basins will be designed for larger storms depending on certain state requirements. Some detention basins are considered damns and to consider damns then the design standard is a one and a half times the normal rainfall, which if you look at 7.5, one and a half times that you are looking at ten and a half or 11.25 inches of rain which is pretty much what he is talking about. Some of this will automatically cap it just because of the DEP regulations. So it is just basically looking to see what we have and to work with it.

Mr. Perkins: I was just wondering, can’t we just put more teeth into it, say that they must use this where it exists?

Mr. Buczynski: I wouldn’t recommend it.

Mr. Perkins: How is the word “should” defined?

Mr. Buczynski: I basically would make the applicants aware of the concern and we would discuss it. You are getting back into what data does he really use from the storm. Where is the published data and you get back into that discussion. This I thought was a good compromise which Rich brought up, it gives enough of teeth to make the engineer at least look at it and address it.

President Guenther: Why don’t you recommend it? What is your reasoning?

Mr. Buczynski: I don’t really have published data to utilize to say, and I don’t have a published career from any respective agency that will show you a 100 year storm curve. We talked about certain types of rainfall that were probably in excess of a 100 year storm. You have to have from a published agency a chart which you don’t really have other than we have records of certain rainfalls and certain areas that exceeded, but you don’t have it equated to us, a certain year storm. I thought this was a good compromise, I was not the one that actually put it together, Rich did.

Mr. Perkins: Should and shall, I just wanted to get your expert opinion on those two words. Thou shall not steal, but we still have people steal.

Mr. Buczynski: Same thing with should. I think should still gives you a little bit more of a revisory…

Mr. Bonte: I would certainly like to see it stronger also. But I recognize and I have been accused on occasions of not being willing to compromise and this is a case where I think the compromise on this gets our point forward to the developers, it allows it to become a discussion point. It is something we can ask the developers to do for us and we could look at it on a case by case basis. Possibly as time goes on, we may be able to make it stronger, five or ten years out in the future as we see how things progress. But at least now, it becomes something that we alert the developers that we are looking for. It could be a discussable item at the Planning Board which it previously has not been allowed because we don’t even ask them to look at it and it is a step in the right direction. I realize that sometimes things like this take a lot of time to get implemented with the kind of teeth that we like to put in it and it might take another 10 years to develop the kind of data that we need to make it our requirement a little more stringent. I would like to at least open a door where we say to developers look, the mountainous areas of the township, these things happen. They are recognized throughout the world. We want you to take a look at it and we are going to discuss it and we may require you to do something a little more than you are asking. At least you put them on warning, that we are going to look at that.

Mr. Buczynski: One of the things too in contrast to that, as we just finish, approve tonight hopefully first reading, the Stormwater Management Plan, and as we had talked about it with the Planning Board too, it covers the new regulations so we are kind of ahead of the game a little bit on that. The same thing with that, right now you still have the IRIS standards which govern, but talking to people at DEP; as these new rules and regulations are going to be quite more stringent once we adopt the DEP regulations of Phase II, they are going to supercede IRIS. IRIS is going to have to come up with some revisions and they are looking towards more local data. It is going to eventually Mr. Buczynski (cont’d): evolve where you are going to see some changes from a public standpoint.

Mr. Bonte: I would like to, if the Council feels that it’s inclined, amend our stormwater management ordinance within the next month let’s say, with wording similar to what I gave out to you all last week. Then I would concur in the passage of this plan this evening so that we don’t hold the plan up. I hope that we can move on the other thing within the next few weeks.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, that brings me to my question, is this substantial that we want to just continue this until the next public meeting or do we want to adopt this?

Mr. Buczynski: There is no changing the plan, that’s what we talked about. There is no changing the plan. You can adopt the plan with the ordinance we prepared for tonight.

Mr. Spino: I have no problem with doing this and amending the ordinance. I would make sure that we try to do that as soon as we can. We should have that on and have an ordinance with this amendment in it for approval and pass it.

Mr. Bonte: I want to thank you all for your time and consideration.

President Guenther: Any other comments from the pubic? Seeing none, I will close the public hearing on
Ord.#14-2003.

Mr. Rattner moved for adoption and final passage of Ord. #14-2003. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Council Discussion?

Mr. Rattner I think it’s great that Mr. Buczynski and Mr. Bonte were able to compromise and come up with something to present to us.

President Guenther: Notice they are not sitting together though.

Mr. Rattner Yes, but they are dressed the same.

Mr. Perkins: I would like to say that it is refreshing to see that we have had this discussion especially in light of how it was brought up. I know during parts of the Crown Towers hearing it was brought up and not necessarily pushed aside, but I think this would go along way in helping us down the road as we address some things at the Planning Board stage, so I want to thank our engineer as well as Mr. Bonte for taking the time and getting this brought to us.

President Guenther: Ditto.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously.

President Guenther declared that Ordinance No. 14-2003 passed on second reading and hereby directed the Clerk to forward a copy of the same to the Mayor and publish a notice of adoption as required by law.

Ord.#17-2003Ordinance of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Amending Chapter 176
Parks, Article I, General Regulations of the Code of the Township of Mount Olive – “Parks.”
(Guidelines for Use of Parks attached)
Mr. Greenbaum moved for adoption and final passage of Ord. #17-2003. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Council Discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

Ord. #19-2003An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Revision to the Code of the
Township of Mount olive, Part I Administrative Legislation Chapter 4, Administrative Code
Article XV, Budget, Purchasing and Expenditure Section 4-73B and 4-73C Entitled Procedures
for Payment.

President Guenther opened the public hearing on Ord. #19-2003.


Colleen Labow, Budd Lake: Is this the ordinance that you are talking about where there is a certain amount of money that can be sent out without further approval from the Council, was it $2,300 or…

Mr. Rattner: $2,500. This is not changing that, what it is doing is taking specific items that don’t have to wait for a public meeting.

Mrs. Labow: Okay, specific items. So if there is a bill that is more than that, they are not allowed to make two payments. Like say if it is a $5,000 one, they can’t make two $2,500 payments?

Mr. Rattner: This was specifically for intergovernmental payments, things like having to pay the County Taxes, or the Musconetcong Sewage Authority, property tax refunds, utility payments, because they give you 10 or 15 days and they are very large and we don’t want to run into that. Tax Lien redemptions, which are where somebody is paying somebody’s taxes. Recreation trips which are in a trust fund, where the people are paying so they can pay the bus driver. Postage, because we are paying it only to the post office and payroll. Payroll, I don’t believe we have to vote on now. It is only these, it is very limited and it just makes it so they can operate the office in efficient manner.
Mrs. Labow: Great thanks.

President Guenther: Any other Comments? Seeing none.

Mrs. Miller moved for adoption and final passage of Ord. 19-2003. Mr. Perkins, seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Council discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

President Guenther declared that Ord. #19-2003 is passed on second reading and hereby directed the Clerk to forward ac copy to the Mayor and publish a notice of adoption as required by law.

Ord. #20-2003 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive to Vacate a Portion of Chelsea Drive.

President Guenther opened the Public Hearing on Ord. #20-2003.

President Guenther closed the Public Hearing on Ord. #20-2003.

Mr. Spino moved for adoption and final passage of #20-2003. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Council discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously.

President Guenther declared Ord. #20-2003 as passed on second reading.

Ord.#21-2003 Bond Ordinance Providing a Supplemental Appropriation of $65,000 for Section 3(A) of Bond Ordinance #37-2002, Finally Adopted September 24, 2002, for the Purchase of a Truck for the Budd Lake Fire Department in and by the Township of Mount Olive, in the County of Morris, New Jersey and Authorizing the Issuance of $61,750 Bonds or Notes of the Township for Financing Part of the Appropriation.

President Guenther opened the Public Hearing on Ord. #21-2003.

President Guenther closed the Public Hearing on Ord. #21-2003.

Mr. Perkins moved for adoption and final passage of Ordinance 21-2003. Mrs. Miller seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Council discussion? Mr. Rattner, I will designate you just to give a quick, just for the sake of the public, review of why this is being passed.

Mr. Rattner: Last year, we put in last years budget, a new pumper truck for the Budd Lake Fire Department. I guess around October when they started putting their bid specs together, they said after 9/11, they said the amount of emergency equipment being ordered had greatly increased and there were a lot of price increases. Not just from NYC, which lost a lot of vehicles, but also other areas that were starting to build up and they let us know at that time that they thought that they were going to be short. They could make up the money by selling their existing truck which I think they could get around $50,000 - $65,000, but the extra amount would have to be put in the capital appropriation. We told them to go out to bid before we did anything and just find out exactly what it was going to cost and I guess they received the bids about a month ago. It did come up where they thought it was going to come Mr. Rattner (cont’d): up. We already told them that we would go ahead and appropriate the money if it was required which it is and that is what we are doing now. We will be getting most of that money back when they sell the existing truck, which I think is about 20 years old. They think they are actually going to get that much. When it comes to our public safety, we don’t want to take a chance. We need the equipment, we need the updated equipment, also the equipment is safer which protects our volunteer firemen.

President Scapicchio: Thank you, Mr. Rattner. Council discussion? Seeing none.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

President Guenther declared Ord. #21-2003 as passed on second reading.

ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING (2nd Reading April 29, 2003)
Ord.#22-2003 An Ordinance of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Establishing Salaries
of The Department Heads, Supervisory and Certain Non-Union Personnel and for the
Employees of the Township Clerk’s Office for the Year 2003.

Mr. Rattner moved that Ordinance #22-2003 be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on April 29, 2003 at 7:30 pm at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders- Drakestown Road, Mount Olive NJ, for a public Hearing and consideration of second reading and a passage of said Ordinance and that the Clerk be directed to publish, post and make available said ordinance in accordance with the requirements of the law.

President Guenther: Council discussion?

Mrs. Miller: I have a problem with Section III, where it says the Mayor reserves the right to issue a yearly merit award. There is no amount. I thought we all agreed that the merit awards were not going to be given this year and this kind of opens it up to almost any amount. It could be $10,000 or it could total $110,000.00. I would like to see Section III omitted. Otherwise I agree with the salaries that we have, but I don’t agree with that merit award.

President Guenther Any other comments?

Mr. Rattner: I did not get the memo to the Administration until this afternoon. Last week when we were discussing this in workshop, at the Mayor’s request, we said that we would discuss, at a later time, the position of the assistant Tax Collector and the salary range and he agreed to take that off. I noticed that is still in the listing showing that range. We said we would have it later. We have enough money in a salary adjustment account, so if later on we decided to take some sort of action that would not be an issue. I believe we took the extra stipend for passing tests, off the table at this point to discuss at a later time. That was actually at the Mayor’s request to move the rest of the salaries moving forward.

Mrs. Spencer: Actually, we had understood it and maybe this is incorrect, was that we were to move that $7,500.00 into a salary adjustment account which has been done in the Budget and the purpose here was just to set it up in the ordinance as a range, knowing full well that each time that we would have further discussions and then at each time that this individual completes the course work, we would be bringing that information back to Council for discussion and approval of those stipends which is the agreement that was made with the employee at the time of the class work.

Mr. Rattner: Well, that is where the discussion has come up. If we do anything at all we have to do is modify the salary ordinance at that time when we do a modification to the budget, so it is not a real big issue. I thought and the way I took it, is that the Mayor said well, take it off the table at this point because there are a lot of questions from the Council. I am not saying which way it is going to go, if you look at the memo, I also went the other way, there were a couple items that I thought that we agreed to change, that I did not see where the money was put in the budget. I kept track and I would go along with the ordinance, but without the second number, knowing that we may be discussing it. We are not saying that it is not going to happen, right now we don’t know if it is going to happen, I don’t want to put it and publish it in an ordinance because then it becomes almost also guaranteed, the Council has already voted on it so I know somebody could get it, I don’t want to give any false hopes in case there is a change.

President Guenther: There was also another correction we had to make, I don’t know if you saw the memo that we found on our desk tonight, making changes to the two line items the Deputy Township Clerk and the Construction Code Official we are voting on.

Mrs. Spencer: Let me just explain those amendments, again the changes are put in because there an agreement for the Deputy Township Clerk that at the time that she passes her certification, there is an agreement with her that she will get a $2,000 adjustment to her base. It’s anticipated that is going to take place in December at which time the annual salary would change by that amount of $2,000 but she would only actually receive one month of that stipend, so that is the reason for putting the range in whereas if you look in the budget, because that shows the true annual salary similar to the change that was done to the construction code official. That individual was paid at the sub-code official of $55,000 for the month of January and the annual salary would be changing effective February 1, 2003. It hasn’t changed any of the budgeted numbers or those approved figures.

President Guenther: I just wanted to make everybody aware of the changes.

Mr. Rattner: I understood what the changes are with the Deputy Clerk. Actually on that one again, I don’t see where there was a need to put in the range as long as we have money in the budget so we decide to take action. It is also nice if somebody gets a promotion that we also acknowledge it at that time. The Construction Code Official is something different, that is something that we all were party to, we told that position at the time because we had some retirements, this is what was going to happen, we made sure it was in the budget and that should be because that is the pay rate I think the person is being paid at now or very shortly. That is why I also said that I wanted to make sure that I had the money in the budget because when I went through the State format, I was not sure if it was in there because we have to be able to pay it too.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, I agree with Steve and just for consistency, I would agree that the top end of the salary range for the Deputy Clerk and the assistant Tax Collector be taken out of this ordinance, but the funds for that be put in what Steve calls a salary adjustment account so that when these individuals do meet certain criteria, we can then via ordinance adjust those salaries and we have the money in the budget to do that. That was the understanding that I had in that last budget meeting we had with the Mayor and the Administration.

President Guenther: Any other Council Commnets?

Mrs. Jenkins: There are kind of two separate issues. What is in the budget in terms of availability and then what is in the salary ordinance? We can’t just give somebody a raise at some point in time without it actually being in here. Even thought the money may be in the budget, if it is not or there is not a range or a specific amount.

Mr. Rattner: We could amend the ordinance at any time.

Mr. Scapicchio: I would also agree to Charlene’s recommendation Bernie that section three be removed in its entirety.

President Guenther: Okay. I just want further discussion, and then I will call for a motion. Okay no further discussion, do you want to make a motion to that effect Dave.

Mr. Scapicchio: Sure, Bernie, I’ll make a motion that we amend this ordinance for the Deputy Clerk that there not be a range, that the salary for 2003 be set at $31,441.80, that for the assistant tax collector there not be a range that the salary for 2003 be set at $52,125.00 and on the last page of this ordinance as recommended by Charlene, section three be removed in it’s entirety. Mrs. Miller seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Any further discussion?

Mr. Scapicchio: To clarify that those ranges are out of line, the Council’s intention is to just wait until those milestones are met for these employees before we include the additional salary in the ordinance.

President Guenther: To make it clear, the monies are here to do this. That is not the issue, it is just the issue that we want to make sure those are completed before we authorize it. Any further discussion from Council? Seeing none, I will call the roll.

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 that 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.

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS

1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Dedication by Rider for Contributions – Historic Trust Fund.


2. Resolution Authorizing the Sale of Certain Lands by the Township of Mount Olive, County of Morris Lot 5, Block 3914, Clinton Avenue.

3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Awarding Telephone Coverage Services for 1 Year to ACC Business.

4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Awarding Local Service Fillings Telephone Services for 1 Year to Bridgecom International. Inc.

5. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Use of a State Purchasing Contract.

6. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Cancellation of Sewer User Charges for Block 2200 Lot 26 Previously Acquired by the Township.

7. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Awarding a Contract to Earth-Tec Associates, Inc. for the Overlay and Drainage Improvements to Pleasant Hill Road.

8. Resolution Authorizing the Execution and Delivery by the Township of Mount Olive of Certain Agreements in Connection with the Refinancing of a Loan Previously Made by the New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust.

9. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Place-to-Place Transfer of Alcholic Beverage License No. 1427-33-002-005 from Inactive Status to Property Owned Within the International Trade Zone South for Brinker New Jersey, Inc. Trading as Chili’s Grill & Bar and Romano’s Macaroni Grill.

10. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Seeking Reimbursement from AIG Baker for Certain Electrical Costs.

11. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing Execution of Treatment Works Approval Permit Application for Woodfield Section IIIB.

12. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing Execution of Treatment Works Approval Permit Application for Woodfield Section IIIC.

President Guenther: Does anyone from the Council wish to comment on any Consent Resolutions?

Mrs. Spencer: I just wanted to respond to item Number two, at last week’s workshop I was asked to look into why the Board of Adjustment approved the granting of this variance to this individual and according to the Board of Adjustment Minutes, they approved it without waiting for the Council’s decision of the sale of the adjacent property because they determined that number one, this individual had written requesting the purchase and the individual was interested in making the purchase and that the addition that was proposed was just continuing a preexisting exception to the property line and the line of the addition, so they improved it based on that. The property is surrounded on two sides, by wooded lots and one of the neighbors had attended the meeting and said that this was only going to be an improvement to the lot and they were fine with it.

Mr. Rattner: I don’t have a problem with what is being done and I look at the lot and you’re right, where he is going to be extending house, it’s a nicely wooded corner lot, it is just the fact that if I understand and I guess it was just a question and that when you go for a variance, you have to show basically it is a hardship. The hardship is, I don’t have enough property to make an improvement to my existing house, it is going to improve the area and I have tried everything I can. That is why you have to notify the adjoining lot owners, ask for a sale and bring back showing that I made a good faith attempt to buy additional property. When you don’t, you meet the criteria of a hardship. The thing is we responded to this rather quickly and that was the whole question. If we did that and we said that we would sell it, the question just came up, well we noticed that we got the variance, but now we got the question and we agree to sell it. It just seemed to be out of order. It doesn’t affect the guy’s end result. One of the things that I have always been concerned about in Town is when we give out a variance, and they should just be for a hardship because too many times in the past, we have had a speculator buy a substandard lot for very little money, probably in some of the areas of Town that we have drainage problems, everybody knows what I am talking about. He spends very little money because the lot is worthless, gets an engineer and an attorney and gets a hardship case to say now I want to build. So I am very very conscious of the way we give out variances. The person who lives in a house and has been a long term resident, or short term resident and wants to make an improvement, I could feel for Mr. Rattner (cont’d): and I should. If the neighbors don’t mind it, it fits into the neighborhood, you let them do it, but they should file through the process. I want to make sure that we don’t give out variances too easy, not this one in particular but it was just the fact that I know other people have had a much more difficult time because they had to go after the adjoining lot owner to try to make a conforming lot.

Mr. Perkins: Cindy, correct me if I am wrong, is it my understanding that even by purchasing this lot, the applicant still necessitated variances.

Mrs. Spencer: Yes.

Mr. Perkins: So, even by the purchase of this lot, that would not have relieved him to be in compliance, he still would have required the same variances, correct?

Mrs. Spencer: Yes, he would have.

Mr. Perkins: I guess that formed the basis of the approval.

Mr. Rattner: It is not inappropriate in there, it is just if he was directed by the Board of Adjustment to try to buy the joining land we agreed and found out that we were doing it, and we were told one of the reasons was because this person had the application. Then when we made the final decision, we discussed it we were told he already got the variance. It just seemed to be out of order and I think it should have been followed properly. Remember the Board of Adjustment is a Council Board, so that is us.

President Guenther: I think your point is well taken and no matter what the individual situation is because there happens to be vacant land and the neighbors don’t object, the rule still should be followed.

Mr. Greenbaum: Could I ask a question on that?

President Guenther: Yes, Rob.

Mr. Greenbaum: Steve has stood up here and made an issue out of this, but it dies here because unless someone is prepared to discuss this matter with the Board of Adjustment or the Board of Adjustment Attorney, the fact the Steve has raised this issue is not going to get back to the Board of Adjustment so I don’t know that we are finished on this subject, if Steve really has a concern, what are we going to do about it?

President Guenther: Well, let’s write a letter. Steve, would you compose a letter and I will sign it and send it to the Board of Adjustment.

Mr. Rattner: Okay. We have to be very careful because they are anonymous boards and they make their own decisions, we can just say we had that concern on this. We could pass ordinances to change things I guess.

President Guenther: Since you brought it up, you’ll draft it.

Mr. Rattner: Yes.

President Guenther: Thanks. Okay, on resolution number seven, Lisa informs me that Gene had to leave, but there is just a slight addition to that one, it said basically that it would be subject to approval by NJDOT. So with that added in there, we can just go ahead and approve that I hope. Okay, that is on the last paragraph which is now therefore be it resolved, right at the end it says “utilized in connection with the bidding, subject to approval from NJDOT.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie I would like to remove number nine from the consent agenda.

President Guenther: Anybody else? Seeing none.

MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AGENDA

Mr. Scapicchio made a motion to approve the Consent Resolutions Agenda numbers 1-8, 10, 11 12, and 7 as amended. Mrs. Miller seconded the motion.

PUBLIC PORTION ON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS

Mr. Bonte: Questions on numbers three and four, what precipitated this particular action?

President Guenther: I believe we were approached by this company, as a way of saving money. Correct?

Mrs. Spencer: Yes. Since Jim and I have been looking at different ways to save money with the telephone system so we were open to listening to their approach because we had already done a line analysis and had reduced our monthly charges by about $700.00 a month by reducing the number of lines we were actually paying for. This was another offer to come in and do an analysis of the overall telephone bills and to shop around and see if we can get better rates.

Mr. Bonte: What is the total expenditure on an annual basis for each of these contracts?

Mrs. Spencer: $0. For these two contracts we are not going to pay any money at all.

Mr. Bonte: We are getting the phone service for free? What is the total amount of money we will be spending with these two vendors over the course of the year?

Mrs. Spencer: I am going to estimate between $60,000 and $70,000 a year is what we have been spending and they hope to save us $30,000.

Mr. Bonte: Did we go out for public bid for these services?

President Guenther: One thing we did do is that we did go back to Verizon.

Mr. Bonte: I understand that, I know and we all know what all of these companies claim and when the year is up, a lot of time we kick ourselves for changing service, so I don’t want to debate that issue. The issue I do want to debate is, it appears that we are procuring telephone service for the next whatever period of time and are going to be spending more money than we can without doing this on a public bid.

Mrs. Spencer: This is just a billing processing. We are not changing any part of our services. This contracts for the processing of the bills.

President Guenther: It is also my understanding that this can be canceled on a month to month basis, correct?
Mrs. Spencer: For the one with Bridgecom on the local level phones it is a month to month. The one with ACC Business Systems which is the subsidiary area of AT&T, that is for your long distance.

President Guenther: For how long?

President Guenther: One year. That one is for one year and the other one is month to month.

Mr. Bonte: Mr. King, could we procure these services without going for competitive bids?

Mr. King: I thought it was a billing contract.

Mrs. Spencer: It is a billing contract.

Mr. King: You are not changing the service provider?

Mrs. Spencer: We are not changing any part of our service provider.

President Guenther: I am confused.

Mrs. Spencer: Right now we get 19 different bills from the telephone providers. What they are going to do is they are going to bundle those bills, charge a reduced rate for the services.

President Guenther: What are those 19 different bills that we receive? From different companies or what?

Mrs. Spencer: Most of them are from AT&T and from Verizon.

President Guenther: Why are there 19 not two.

Mrs. Spencer: Because we get 19 and they are different bundles of lines and services and couplings.

Mr. Rattner: What happened is over the course of time we have gotten different telephone service usually by office or by location. Each one was set up as a separate billing entity, even though it was the Township of Mount Olive, but every sewer location, for recreation and that type of thing. We were under the regular tariff billing rate of AT&T, just like some 40% of the people of the public still goes to AT&T and spend $.25 a minute or whatever. They didn’t get on to a plan. AT&T for business accounts set up a subsidiary, ACC, and that is where they give their reduced rate. Our rates under ACC are based on the information we got from the administration are going to average $.6 to $.7 a minute, right now we are averaging about $.14 to $.15 a minute This is actually changing the telephone service to another company even though it is still owned by AT&T which consolidated is going to give us one bill at a lower rate because we get the volume discounts. When that came in, the unit costs were very impressive. If you look at any of our bills you see were are paying $.17 a minute for this, $.19 a minute for that. It is now going to be around $.7 or $.8. I was concerned, that sounds like great idea and I named big companies so you have the security. They were actually given the proposal we got and said what doyou have to compare with this? The administration gave us back the information that showed that nobody could match at least a proposal at this point. The next thing you just asked was about the public bidding laws. Does telephone service fit under the category of utilities? Because in the Public Bidding Law, there is an exception for utilities, a certain section. If you go out for electric, I don’t believe you don’t have to bid it. I think if you go out for natural gas, you don’t have to bid it. Especially for deregulation now. I would imagine telephone service is considered a utility and it would probably be the same, I don’t know.

Mr. King: It is, from what I understand, this company is within AT&T, so you are not changing the company itself, but regardless you don’t have to go out to bid. With that understanding we are not even going to a different company, that was my understanding.

Mr. Rattner: The services are still provided by AT&T and Verizon who are our local and long distance providers. It doesn’t change anything for us.

Mr. Rattner: We don’t pay AT&T anymore, we pay ACC which is a separate corporation owned by AT&T.

Mr. Bonte: Why are we not going out on a formal competitive bid for our telephone service? Whether that be separate companies for local and long distance or one company that can give us both. Why are we not doing that?
I realize what has been done in the past and maybe we are not changing companies, but this brings to light now, why are we not going out and buying that like we would buy other products competitively.

President Guenther: I think Steve explained it, that apparently there is an exception for utilities, right?

Mr. Bonte: But it doesn’t mean you can’t do that.

President Guenther: Well, I agree. The two largest service providers in this area are AT&T and Verizon as far as local service and long distance are concerned. We went to Verizon and said can you match this. They could not match it.

Mr. Bonte: When you go out with a competitive bid package, it is different than calling people on the phone or saying take a look at what we are doing, or take a look at what we are being offered.

President Guenther: No, it’s not. They presented it to them. Cindy, explain please.

Mr. Bonte: It is different when you do a formal process. It is taken more seriously I believe by the people that bid on it and I believe on something of this magnitude, is the proper way to procure goods and services. When we need work done in Turkey Brook Park, what did we do? We went out on a competitive bid. The point is we are certainly talking about the expenditure of funds on an annual basis that is much greater than the bid thresholds. This is not something where you are talking about the professional services of a lawyer or an engineer and there is more than just price that we are concerned about.

Mr. Rattner: I consider the need for reliability and know what you are getting rather than going out and getting any reseller or some other company like that, these start ups that come and go, that when you talk about communications I know that I would feel uncomfortable, I wouldn’t buy it on price at home because I want reliability, I think for the communications for the town, it is even more important that we have to deal with reliability. Our telephones go down for a half hour or something and when people can get there, there is a real issue. I think what the Administration did when they came to us with the first proposal, I requested that they go out to some of the other big names. Everybody knows I used to work for AT&T. I know that everyone is competitive, see what they have to
Mr. Rattner (cont’d): offer, make sure that they have the resources and they are going to be around tomorrow, or if you call up a half hour later they are here and they get you back up and running. I think that is very important. But these people don’t maintain our phone service; they don’t maintain any problems with the equipment I think is Ryer or something like that we just got that. This is telephone service, the network, if the line goes down, if our connections go down.

Mr. Bonte: Which connections? We are not talking about the wires out in the street.

Mr. Rattner: Sure we are.

Mr. Bonte: No you’re not. That is Verizon’s responsibility. No matter who the carrier is, Verizon has the
responsibility of the lines.

Mr. Rattner: It depends whose line you are using.

Mr. Bonte: If I have AT&T phone service at home for my long distance and the line goes down, AT&T does not come and fix the line. Verizon does. I have no choice in that, which is regulated by the State.

Mr. Rattner: Suppose you go to a third ABC company that has bought bulk wholesale, they don’t have it, they have 600 lines, 700 people are calling and you keep calling and you keep getting a busy signal because that reseller ran out of lines to be able to go through, that only 600 people in that area can use it, and 700 people, not to indifferent that would happen with a DSL or something like that, the more users the more problems you are going to have. A bigger company has the extra capacity, the little ones buy AT&T’s lines, they buy Verizon’s lines, or Sprint or MCI, whichever is in the area. They buy them at wholesale, a certain number of lines and resell them retail. If they run out or their capacity is exceeded from what they bought, you get busy signals like what happens in certain
areas with your cellular phone. I wouldn’t trust a local company.

Mr. Bonte: What is ACC’s relationship with AT&T then?

Mr. Rattner: They are AT&T.

Mr. Bonte: Are they a subsidiary or are they a sub company that they have set up that is buying excess service.

Mr. Rattner: They have it so that they can come up with new pricing, so that they don’t affect their whole price.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, I just would like to make the suggestion that Mr. Bonte raises a good point but I think on a move forward basis now, I think the administration did the responsible thing. We can realize an immediate savings and maybe to satisfy everybody next time around, we could go out with a formal proposal and then make a decision that is based on not only price, but credibility and what we perceive to be better more reliable service. But for tonight, I am in favor of moving forward. The one proposal is on a month to month. The other one is 12 months and the administration could prepare themselves to go out for a formal bidding process 12 months from now.

Mr. Rattner: I think six months from now we should get a report that we really obtained the savings. This way it gives us time, so we have, I know that is what Mr. Bonte was going to get to. That is the way he thinks, he gives us the same plan each time so that we have enough time to do a formal review if we decide we want to get one.

Mr. Scapicchio: I also think, you know we have never bid any of this, so for the administration to go out and even research this on a quote basis is admirable.

Mr. Bonte: I agree with you 100%. Cindy I want to express my thanks for what you did here, I think you did a good job on this. I am really questioning now in light of what you have done. By the end of this year, we should have a bid spec prepared that we could go on the street with at the beginning of next year and see if we can procure something even better.

Mrs. Spencer: I think by next year we will be in better shape to do that because one of the things we still need to do is take a look at everyone of the couplings or groupings that they have us billed on now and see if there are further savings and ways to change those so that it is the most effective and efficient way for us to be operating and then we would have a clear description of what our overall system is so that we could be in a position to go out to bid.

President Guenther: Thank you.

Mr. King: The one problem, when you do that on bid you’re bound by the acceptance or rejection of that. When you do it the way that the administration has done it and for the reasons that Councilman Rattner stated, you can pick people that you know that may be a little bit more expensive but will be there to give you the service. So that is what the Council has to wrestle with when you make that decision.

Mr. Greenbaum: I agree with what Mr. King just said, that’s exactly what I was going to raise before he said it. I would not be in favor of bidding this out. It’s not apples to apples, it’s not just a price, I agree with Steve whole heartedly, I have had different service with different companies that I have found to be unreliable. I am very concerned about having ABC company providing service which is unreliable to the Township. I was very concerned about going forward with this, with only one quote and the administration went out and did some additional research and satisfied my concerns that the numbers that we’re getting are good numbers with regard to the companies that I feel are reliable and I am prepared to move forward with this. I believe that we should have a review in six months to see if we are actually realizing the savings and I would not be in favor of bidding this out at any point in time for the reasons that Mr. King has raised.

President Guenther: My only question is this, I guess I was under the impression it was all just one company that was going to handle both the local and the long distance. This Bridgecom International, what are they? Are they also affiliated with AT&T in some way? How did they come into play here?

Mrs. Spencer: They will be handling the Verizon or the local portion of the billings.

President Guenther: What relationship do they have to either one of those two companies?

Mrs. Spencer: I believe that they process the bills and almost similar to the way you have secondary resellers who take brand new AT&T equipment that AT&T would offer to you for five dollars, they could have that same brand new equipment and sell it to you for $350,000.

President Guenther: But how did they come into play here. Were they brought into the process through ACC?

Mrs. Spencer: No. The company that came to us is called S.S. Technologies. They take a look at your entire system and all of your bills and they do an analysis and they shop around to the various bill processors and then they came back to us and they offered us three different options on the long distance which we chose ACC, so that we would not have any interruption or change in the providers of the service. They only recommended Bridgecom and they have had a number of years experience with them and they have been very successful and they can process the bills at a lower rate than Verzion, but Verizon would still be the provider.

President Guenther: What did we pay S.S to do this?

Mrs. Spencer: Nothing. They are actually paid by Bridgcom and ACC systems.

Jane Israel, Budd Lake: I am confused. I worked for Verizon for 30 years. What are local service fillings?

Mrs. Spencer: I don’t understand what you are asking me.

Mrs. Israel: On the resolution, it talks about filling, that is one of my questions, and the other question is will our phone numbers have to change?

Mrs. Spencer: Nothing about out service delivery changes at all.

Mrs. Israel: Okay, because my experience with the other companies, they have a certain block of numbers in the Verizon central office that they buy and usually there are certain numbers and maybe your calls are forwarded to those numbers but are you sure that there is no change like that.

Mrs. Spencer: I have been assured, and the contract says that we will have no change in the providers of our service. Our service will not change. Not the equipment, nothing.

Mrs. Israel: Okay, does anybody know what fillings are?

Mr. King: I took that language off a memo, so perhaps it was a typo.

Mrs. Spencer: It may be. It is probably filing.

President Guenther: It still does not make sense.

Mr. Rattner: I think it should be lines. It is the closest thing. You have the long distance lines; you have your local lines. With affordability, if anybody looks at the telephone bill, you’ll noticed you get charged anywhere from $.90 to $1.50 per line, per month. That is so you can take this telephone number with you no matter what telephone company you go to.

President Guenther: If nobody has any objections to make this sound more sensible, is to change the title of it to awarding local telephone services.

Mr. Spino: I’d rather we find out exactly what we are talking about.

Mrs. Spencer: I have the file in my office.

President Guenther: Why don’t we take this one out as well? So we are going to take number four out and we will come back to it.

Mr. Bonte: Can I comment on one more thing, Bernie?

Mr. Guenther: Sure.

Mr. Bonte: After Jane got up and thinking about it a little more, I am still confused about this. I don’t understand how Verizon is still going to continue to provide the service, how they get paid, how this company gets paid, how Bridgton gets paid, how ACC gets paid. We pay a bill that is “x” amount less than we are paying now. Where does the money come from? I am really confused about this. The only thing I can see is that somewhere down at the bottom our service is being switched.

Mr. Scapicchio: Rich, the way I understand this is that these are both purchasers of the services.

Mr. Bonte: So that means somebody other than Verizon is providing the service to us.

Mr. Scapicchio: That may be true on the Bridgecom, because I don’t know who Bridgecom is.

Mr. Bonte: I don’t understand. Why wouldn’t Verizon do this?

Mr. Scapicchio: Rich, we brought that up at the workshop and I was wondering the same thing myself, but they refused to.

Mr. Bonte: I don’t have a good feeling now that our service is actually going to be somebody other than Verizon.

Mr. Rattner: I think Mr. Spino said to take those two off in and continue until the next meeting. I think that makes the most sense. We are not going to resolve anything now.

President Guenther: On both of these I think I want in writing something to satisfy us, that the present service is first of all local with Verizon and second, number two, long distance with AT&T are being continued under this plan. It should be made part of the ordinances. Do we agree with that Council?

Mr. Scapicchio: That’s fine, Bernie.

President Guenther: Okay so we are taking both three and four off and that won’t even be considered tonight and that, they will be taken off for the next meeting. Any other Public Commnets? Seeing none, any further Council discussions?

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

Mrs. Miller: Doesn’t Dave have to amend his motion?

Mr. Scapicchio amended the motion, Resolution number 3 & 4 are off. Number 9 was previously removed. Mr. Greenbaum seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Any further Council discussion?

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

RESOLUTIONS NON CONSENT

President Guenther: Discussion from the Public on Resolution No. 9? Seeing none, Mr. Scapicchio, what was your concern about it?

Mr. Scapicchio: The thought that I had, Bernie, was based on the information that Mr. Dorsey provided us this evening that Chili’s Bar and Grill, and Macaroni Grill has opened without the appropriate inspections and C.O.’s. Would it be appropriate for us to hold off on approving this liquor license transfer until those inspections and C.O were issued? That is a question I have for the attorney. Do we have the authority to do that?

Mr. King: I wouldn’t.

Mr. Scapicchio: Okay. I accept that.

President Guenther: Now that this has brought on the table, the question I have to ask is how this happens.

Mrs. Lashway: They didn’t open for business. As Cindy said, they opened just to do hiring.

Mrs. Spencer: They were doing hiring and they were not supposed to have anyone on those premises.

Mr. Rattner: They were using the business for business purposes which is illegal.

Mrs. Lashway: But they weren’t cooking and selling to the public.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, you asked a question, how did it happen? They broke the law and did it, but our code enforcement department caught them.

Mr. King: And the code enforcement department is taking the appropriate steps.

Mr. Rattner: Commerce bank did the same thing when they opened. I go to cut a ribbon and find out it was illegal.

Mr. Scapicchio made a motion that we approve Resolution Number 9. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously with the exception of Mrs. Miller who voted No.

A Resolution to Introduce the 2003 Municipal Budget.

Mr. Rattner made a motion to introduce the 2003 Municipal Budget. Mr. Scapicchio seconded the motion.

Mrs. Lashway: The amendments that came in today from Gary Higgins go into your budget package. You need to read the resolution into the record setting the date for the public hearing.

Mrs. Jenkins: If I could just explain a couple changes that were made, if that is okay. I went through the Budget on Friday after Gary delivered it and I just noticed in the Police Department that they hadn’t broken out the acquisition to police vehicles, they just had the total under other expenses, the bottom of sheet 14. Basically the total didn’t change, we just needed to break out the portion that was applicable to the acquisition of the vehicles. So that is really that change. The last sheet which talks about Open Space, Kathy was out on Friday so we just got the total acreage that was preserved to date and that was the only change that we made on that sheet which is sheet number 43.

President Guenther: Thank you.

Mrs. Lashway: Mr. Rattner should read the resolution with the Public Hearing Date.

Mr. Rattner: Be it resolved that the following statement of revenues and appropriations attached here to constitute the local budget of the Township of Mount Olive, Morris County New Jersey for the year 2003. Be it further resolved that the set budget be published in the Daily Record in the issue of May 2, 2003 and that a Hearing on the Budget be held at the Municipal Building on May 13, 2003 at 7:30 pm or as soon thereafter as the matter may be reached. Mrs. Miller seconded the motion.

President Guenther: Any further discussion?

Mr. Rattner: I sent out a memo and it was just after lunch today after reviewing the Budget and I saw something. I don’t know if I was just reading it wrong or I didn’t find it. It may be minor and we may be able to change it later, did the Administration get a copy of that memo?

Mrs. Spencer: No, I have not seen it yet.

Mr. Rattner: I’ll just read it and say what the minor ones were. I couldn’t find the salary adjustments for the Building and Grounds and Recreation Supervisors, when I looked at the line items, I did not see it included in the State Format Budget. That would have to be done, right? In other words, the adjustments we were making to those two positions that we had discussed and agreed.

Mrs. Jenkins: They were included Steve, they are not in the salary adjustment account but they are in the individual lines.

Mr. Rattner: I went back to the original Budget that I got, the black binder where it didn’t have those numbers in there and the numbers are identical to what is in the budget. I remember the one percent rule, the five percent rule and 10 percent rule about changing items. Does that fall in there so that if we could do this, we could just make the change because they are relatively minor right, if it is in fact omitted?

Ms. Jenkins: We could change it, but I am sure what is in there is right. We will double check for you.

Mr. Rattner: But if it isn’t we could change it anyway?

Mrs. Jenkins: Yes.

Mr. Rattner: I also did not see the salary adjustment for the construction official or the sub code official, the original amount of money we were putting in.

Ms. Jenkins: That was in the original budget.

Mr. Rattner: I am just saying because it looks like it just said the 4.5%, I didn’t see anything else where you had inserted lines where there were additional items.

Ms. Jenkins: I can give you the detailed sheets and you will see.

Mr. Rattner: I also did not find the budget dollars for the additional police officer that we said we were going to hire this August. In the bottom of my memo, I put down that I do realize that they are relatively minor in the whole scheme and I do believe under the Budget Law we could make those amendments at the Public Hearing if they are needed. The other one which concerns me a little bit more because I am not sure what it does with the conditions of the budget is that I am aware that a tax appeal was filed by K-Land, Number 51, LLC which is commonly referred to as Woodfield on April 1, 2003. The appeal represents 181 lots with an assessed value exceeding $6 million. The complaint states, I don’t know the facts, this is just what the complaint states, that the sub-division map not filed, lot not in existence. The area of concern that I have is the budget. We have spent a lot of time, we looked at making sure the reasonableness of the surplus, how much we were using, how we were going to replenish it, also the reserve for uncollected taxes, those types of things. I think that I need to know that the numbers that we have as assessments were good. I don’t know what it means. It may mean that we are just too aggressive, I am not sure where that is going. I know that we just got the complaints, so we probably have not had much time, but I fiqure the exposure could effect our reserve collection and our replenishment of surplus for next year. And also, if this is the first one that came in, do we know of any other big ones out there, because that could affect tax appeals that we will have to pay in 2003. It is a question, I felt really uncomfortable when I saw that come in.

Ms. Jenkins: Jack did mention this to me on Monday. I did talk about what other appeals might be coming in. We did speak about this appeal specifically and I will have him put something in writing for you.

Mr. Rattner: Do I have anything to be concerned about? In other words, anybody can appeal anything, and I understand that, especially when it is a big developer, we kept a lot of things in, but on the pubic document, the complaint states it’s the whole reason for the appeal, I don’t know if Mr. King has seen it yet, it states “subdivision map not filed, lot not in existence”. We have 181 of those. I stopped adding it up when I hit $6 million. I am just concerned, did we miss a date or did we get something on before something was filed. I don’t know what that means. What does that mean?

Mr. King: I have not seen it.

Mr. Rattner: But that could affect the way that we feel about the Budget.

President Guenther: What does this mean, the subdivision map not filed. They are claiming we have a fictitious assessment here; we did not just grab this out of the thin air I hope. Earl?

Mr. Spino: Why are we talking about this and we don’t really know what the situation is. Steve, I am not saying you should not have brought it up. Let’s find out more about it. We don’t really know what we are talking about when we talk about it because we have not seen it. John has not had a chance to look at it. We are talking about something in the legal field, and we are talking about the budget.

Mr. Rattner: That why I thought the Administration would be able to explain whether we should go ahead with the Budget tonight or not. I don’t know if it is something that we should hold up. Obviously it is something that we could always modify it later, but if it is something big, maybe…

Ms. Jenkins: I spoke to Jack and I do have some information, but at this point it is pending and I really don’t want to get into it in this forum, I think it is more appropriate if I go back and follow up if that is okay.

Mr. Rattner: But should we move ahead with the budget? Do we have any risks in the Budget? That is all I am asking. Why introduce a budget if there could be some risks in the future? If the risks are relatively minor in the whole scheme of things, I don’t have a problem about moving ahead.

Ms. Jenkins: I know the conversation that I had with him on Monday, and I want to reconfirm that giving that there are a couple things in here that we did not speak about, so I need to double check that.

Mr. Rattner: Okay, well that was why I wrote the memo today.

President Guenther: It will be taken off the table to be considered at the next meeting.

Mr. Scapicchio made a motion to table the resolution to Introduce the 2003 Municipal Budget. Mr. Greenbaum seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

A Resolution to Introduce the 2003 Solid Waste Collection District Budget was also tabled.

MOTIONS

1. Bill List.

Mr. Greenbaum moved for approval of the Bill List, Mr. Rattner seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

2. Raffle Application #1069 for District No. 6 Vasa Order of America and Raffle Application #1070 & #1071 for the Morris County Foster Parents Association.

Mrs. Miller moved for approval of the listed Raffle Applications, Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

COUNCIL REPORTS

Library Board Liaison Report

Mr. Scapicchio: A couple of things, the meeting last night for the orientation with Netcong, has been rescheduled based on the weather for next Monday at 7:00 pm. The low bid for the new library building has been challenged by the next lowest bidder and I believe that there were six points that next lower bidder made the challenge on, four of which Mr. Dorsey did not agree with, two of which I believe he did which was the requirement that the sub-contractors be certified by the State. One of the subcontractor’s certification was not submitted with the bid. The other contractor’s certification was outdated. I believe Mr. Dorsey has sent instructions to Rita, the Director of the Mr. Scapicchio (cont’d): Library. The Library Board meets tomorrow night and based on Mr. Dorsey’s review and recommendation, they have several decisions to make tomorrow night and that is to put the low bidder on notice that it has been challenged and to see what they have to say about that, and based on Mr. Dorsey’s analysis, I believe the Library Board has the authorization to reject that low bid and make the award to the next lowest bidder as long as that next lowest bidder has met all of the requirements of the certifications.

Mr. Ratter: This is a question, I guess just for the Attorney. Those seem like minor things, a date is expired. You don’t get any chance to, in other words, the one contractor that you need a certification, I guess each year. It’s like having an insurance card in your car. It expires but if you have the certification.

Mr. Scapicchio: I could answer that question, because I did ask Mr. Dorsey that question when I had a conversation with him, he said he tried that in Hanover, I believe it was the municipal building project and he lost, and it was obviously awarded to the next low bidder. It’s a requirement that one cannot overcome.

Mr. Ratter: How much was the next bidder up from the low bidder?

Mr. Scapicchio: The low bidder was $3.8 million, and the next was $4.1 million. So about $300,000.00 more.

Mr. Rattner: But that is still well within our budget.

Mr. Scapicchio: It’s still well within our budget. We still need to see what the Library Board does tomorrow night.

Recreation Report

Mr. Guenther: I was unfortunately unable to attend the last meeting but Jill has given me a very detailed report. They made a progress report on Flanders Park; for example that the restrooms will reopen when the chance of freezing pipes is over. We are getting into the spring season and certain facilities will be open for use by the public. They have now started the process of updating the website daily by 3 pm regarding field use and status information. So anybody that needs to know about that or has a group involved with that should check the website. A suggestion was made by Jill, apparently some issues had come up regarding the youth sports organizations and she made a suggestion actually forming a separate committee to handle items that pertain directly to youth sports associations vs. general recreational activities, apparently of some disagreement on the advisory committee about that and they will be discussing that further. There was just a reminder that I wanted to throw out to the public, it’s sport’s associations will have to submit the documentation following procedures and financial policies and memos in order to receive budget allocations, so that time of year is coming near, and the sports associations have been informed so that they could get their allocation. Also, they are looking for suggestions for Community Service projects for the summer.

Board of Health Report

Mr. Perkins: At our meeting last week, there were a couple of interesting items that were brought up. We had the honor of having Council members present, Mr. Rattner, Mr. Scapicchio, Mr. Art Myers, we awarded him with a plaque for his service on the Board of Health. His position has been filled, it is working out nicely. We had a question by Dr. Abrams, the Dattalo Shopping Mall, and Councilman Rattner has sent a letter which I believe the Council is also privy to regarding the well that is over there, so there is an investigation being done on that. We had an update from Frank Wilpert, the Morris Cooperative seems to be kicking off very nicely. They are getting a lot of interest in that. Frank did a lot of work on it, so far it has not cost us any money, and with any luck it won’t cost us any money, it won’t set up that next level of bureaucracy that I know Dave was concerned about. Moving on from there, there was a couple of cases of people coming back from the orient, looking at SARS, my understanding was that there wasn’t any confirmed cases in the area. There were some high fevers but there was no concern based upon that and as far as any of the outbreaks where we may be looking at bioterrorism or what not, the task group has put together a still booking, BASF is the partner that will be working that through with Picatinny Arsenal. In the event that something should happen, Frank Wilpert and his staff are up on all of that.

President Guenther: Ray, just a question on Dattalo, I know this issue is with the well, were they given a certain increased number of edu’s to operate that laundromat that they wanted. How was that resolved?

Mr. Rattner: That’s the lawsuit we have going.

President Guenther: Okay, thanks.

Planning Board Report
Mr. Greenbaum: Thursday night, Panera Bread, ITC South and the Mall at 206 expansion which is additional retail space and a childcare facility. There is no meeting on the 24th of April, the next meeting after that will be May 8th and that should be in part Crown Tower, although I don’t believe that there is going to be any discussion on the merits of the application.

President Guenther: Where is that childcare center supposed to go?

Mr. Greenbaum: There is a proposed expansion at the Mall at 206 on the side of the existing Kiernan’s side of the building, there was a question with regard to the parking lot and the stabilization of the hill and the applicant who is actually going to be leasing space from the owner of the shopping center wasn’t in a position to agree to redo some of the problems with that entire site and the Planning Board basically sent them packing back and wanted resolution of the issues on that entire site and they are coming back and I believe that they are going to repave, restripe that parking lot which everyone knows is a disaster as well as coming in with a retaining wall behind the building to stabilize the slope throughout the length of the building so I think that should…

President Guenther: Aren’t those condominiums in there?

Mr. Spino: Condo’s.

Mr. Greenbaum: I guess the common ground is a condominium association.

President Guenther: So you are dealing with condominium associations.

Mr. Greenbaum: We’ll we are not, we are actually dealing with the applicant.

Mr. Scapicchio: The condominium association sold the development rights to the property that is adjoined to that property.

President Guenther: Oh so this is on the adjoining property?

Mr. Greenbaum: I think it is actually the same piece of property and that is how the Planning Board is able to exercise jurisdiction over the existing property.

Mr. Scapicchio: Rob, what is happening with AIG/Baker, another application?

Mr. Greenbaum: Panera Bread.

Open Space Committee Report

Mrs. Miller: We did have a tour, we took a little mini van out and toured the open space of Mount Olive and I think the tour was a success, which was Saturday Morning.

Mr. Greenbaum: The other thing I think we wanted to do in the future and this is kind of a preliminary; representatives of various organizations in towns were present. The Board of Adjustment President was there, members of the Planning Board, different organizations, so everybody is kind of tuned in to exactly what we are doing which is great because a lot of these grounds also involve probably continuous to school property. The other thing we want to do in the future that really since I see some members of the press here, maybe in the future we will have a press tour and also what we want to do is invite members of the Mount Olive Business Community so that they could see what we are doing and possibly sort of integrate them in the process and have them buy into what we are doing in town to preserve open space.

Legislative Committee Report

Mr. Spino: I have no report.

Pride Committee Report

Mr. Perkins: No report.

Status of Committee RE: Lake/Environment Issue

Mrs. Miller: The next meeting is not until September.
Board of Education Report

Mr. Scapicchio: None

Master Plan Committee Report

Mr. Scapicchio: No report.

PUBLIC PORTION

Ned McDonald, Budd Lake: Just one question on the Bill List, on page 12, way down at the bottom, the Star Ledger, ad for Turf Maintenance for $896.00. Could somebody please explain what that is?

Mrs. Spencer: That was actually an ad for the turf maintenance technician, or the senior level person that was being advertised for an employee.

Mr. McDonald: Is that customary; an $896.00 fee for an ad in the Star Ledger? It seems like an awful lot.

Mrs. Lashway: That’s probably run a week; it’s very expensive to run a classified for a week in the Record and the Star Ledger.

Mr. McDonald: Thank you.

Richard Bonte, Budd Lake: Earlier in the meeting we had some discussion by Mr. Lynch regarding using our Town employees to reroof the barn up at Turkey Brook. The concern I would have, I think it goes along with what Steve had, but he didn’t carry it further, and that is, will our employees be covered by workman’s compensation insurance if they are outside their class, and if they are, I know for a fact, Workman Compensation rules require that for the 12 months period that the policy is rated at, you get billed for the highest class that the worker worked in during that 12 months and I know that the roofing rate is one of the highest rates, we need to get the answers…

Mr. Scapicchio: Rich, I am not sure it is for the whole calendar year.

Mr. Bonte: I can show you the letter I just got from my insurance company yesterday.

Mr. Scapicchio: We have some employees that are split.

Mr. Bonte: You are not allowed to split them; I can show you the rule.

Mr. Scapicchio: We do it, it is on the policy.

Mr. Bonte: I have had time split for the last 11 years and they had disallowed it, and I went back on an appeal and I got the ruling from the insurance commissioner. It is in the manual.

Mr. Scapicchio: Our insurance carrier allows it.

Mr. Bonte: I know, they are doing it and they shouldn’t be. I got away with it for 11 years.

Mr. Scapicchio: You may be right.

Mr. Rattner: That’s why I brought up the issue. The one thing that Mr. Lynch has been doing is that when ever we ask him to look at something and say can you get this done, he is doing a tremendous job. We have to make sure we have other professionals that can look into things like insurance, but I don’t want him to stop thinking out of the box like he is doing.

Mr. Bonte: I agree with you. I am not picking on Jim. My other question was, and it has been in the newspapers a couple of times over the last few weeks and I see we have reached an agreement with Netcong on providing library services at $20.00 and I presume it’s per card holder?

President Guenther: Yes.

Mr. Bonte: I don’t understand how we can provide that service that cheaply. Doesn’t it cost us more than that per card holder for Mount Olive residents?
Mr. Scapicchio: It does.

Mr. Bonte: So how are we doing this and why are we giving another town a “reduced” rate.

Mr. Scapicchio: Rich, I’ll just tell you, I have raised that issue with Rita, I don’t have a vote on that Library Board, I am just a Council Liaison. When that issue came up I did question that and the general response that I got from Rita was that, and I think it is a one year contract, she wanted to be able to show Netcong the value of the service that we could provide, see how it worked out and that she would revisit it.

Mr. Bonte: I have a real problem with that and I will tell you why. My problem is, first of all, we obviously are providing a service of tremendous value to another community at the expense of our Township residents. The Mount Olive Public Library may be an autonomous body, but I believe they receive funding from the taxpayer and therefore this Council has an obligation to the taxpayers of this Town that we are not giving our money away to another Town. I just have a problem with this. I saw what Roxbury’s numbers were, and they were $40.00. When I did some numbers in my head real quick, I kind of came up in the upper $30’s.

Mr. Scapicchio: I think ours are $37.00 and $38.00.

Mr. Bonte: So I don’t understand why we are being so benevolent here at taxpayer expense.

Mr. Rattner: I don’t know how they came up with the costs, I looked at that too. In industry, there are two ways of costing something, one is what they call fully loaded, fully weighted costs, the actual costs to everything in there. The other is incremental costs. Every manufacturer in the country uses it. Whether it be GE, they have a toaster under their own name, they’ll manufacture for somebody else under another name, as long as they cover all the variable costs and they cover part of their fixed costs. There is a benefit. It ends up to be a profit on the bottom line, especially if we are doing something experimental. As long as you can cover your variable costs, which having them come in, I don’t know, the variable costs have to be very very little. That is something that I just know from industry. I have no idea how they came up with it, but the variable costs, if there are 100 people from Netcong, and this is the easy way to look at it. We don’t have to hire a single person. We are not going to buy an additional book. I would imagine we probably have enough library cards, so it is not going to have to do anything there, so if we look at it on an incremental basis, we couldn’t take the Town of Roxbury and do it, but somebody like Netcong, if they are paying us $10,000 and it costs us maybe $300.00 out of pocket extra to run the library, the tax payers of Mt. Olive benefit by $9,700. I think what they need to do is look how many people use it, what the real costs are and go forward. But incremental costing is something that keeps every major manufacturing giant in this country alive.

Mr. Bonte: I understand the concept completely Steve, but we are talking about the tax payers that are funding the library and offering a service to non-residents at a reduced rate. I do have a problem with that. I understand what you are saying. But I do have a problem with providing a governmental service to another entity at a reduced rate. I don’t see the inherent fairness of that.

President Guenther: Wasn’t also one of the considerations that they had a very limited amount of money that they had allocated for that use in the school or wherever they were running it. Wasn’t that one of the considerations?

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, I could tell you that I was not privy to the calculations or the method which Rita utilized to come up with that number. I will tell you that when it came up in a board meeting the questions that I asked were the same as Mr. Bonte is questioning us about. Rita proceeded to tell me that the general funding for the library is based on population and my suggestion at that time is maybe what we should do is take the population of Netcong, the population of Mount Olive, and then figure out what the per household, or per card use would be based on those total populations. Her explanation was it is a trial period, she wanted to show Netcong what we had to offer and that she and the Library Board would revisit that in twelve months. But I certainly did share with her of my opinion that I thought it was unfair to offer a service to another community at less of a cost than it costs our own tax payers, I told her as an elected official I have a problem with that. That is all I know.

Mr. Bonte: All I could say is I hope everybody on this Council thinks about that, and considers that when they consider the library’s budget and the kind of numbers they are going to give the library this year.

President Guenther: Since we have the president of the library association here, maybe she would want to address that.

Jane Israel, Library Board: Well we had the same questions on the board that you brought up, but one of the things that is different and I don’t know if Netcong has realized it yet, but our cost is $20.00 per person and Roxbury’s was $40.00 per household which means that we were really in the same kind of situation as Roxbury. Anyway, the thing is, Netcong doesn’t know how many people are going to come over here and use the library and Mrs. Israel (cont’d): we don’t either. I don’t think that we really want to put Netcong in a position that they have to pay for our building or electricity or other things that we have to pay for anyway. It is not going to cost us any more if a few more people come through the door just as Steve said, we are not going to run out and buy more books or anything like that. How we came up with $20.00, is because you know the support of the library is dictated by the state according to the evaluation a third of a million per $100.00 dollars of evaluation and that is what it would be for Netcong. That is what they should support their library at about $20.00 a person. That is for their whole population.

Mr. Rattner: But they have 3,000 people in town.

Mrs. Israel: Believe me, they are not going to come over here.

Mr. Rattner: I agree, I understand their concept for an experiment, but if you are going to use that rationale, if we are paying based on assessed value at $20.00 per person, it would be $20.00 for it to be $1,000, which would be $60,000.

Mrs. Israel: I’m sorry, for us it is about $35.00. Dave was right.

Mr. Rattner: For a cardholder, or per resident?

Mrs. Israel: Per person in Mount Olive.

Mr. Rattner: Per card holder or per person of our 24,000 people?

Mrs. Israel: Per person of the 24,000 people.

Mr. Rattner: So then the same thing, even if you are charged, then it would be the same thing charged for the 3,000 people that live.

Mrs. Israel: Well should it be, though, because they don’t have a building, they have to come over here.

Mr. Rattner: Mr. Bonte and Mr. Scapicchio, that is a concept which I may disagree on how we implement it. But if you are going to use that, then it would be based on the same basis, here is the population. It is an experiment, it does not cost us anything, I think the bottom line is that we get $10,000 extra in the library that we wouldn’t have to use for other things so we could do a couple of different things. Next year, when they see the value, suppose six people show up, they are not going to pay a lot of money. We don’t know if people are going to travel from Netcong, up here.

Mrs. Israel: Right. I would invite Mr. Bonte to come to our meeting tomorrow night if he would like to question the Board.

Mr. Bonte: I have now heard something different, which is a much wider disparity and in thinking a little further about excess capacity, at the same time what you are doing is you are affording the opportunity for another community to say, we won’t spend the money for a building, and we won’t have a staff. We will run on the coattails of another community and let that other community bare the cost of the electricity and the books and the building and the new library structure. That is patently unfair.

President Guenther: Rich, there is a movement statewide on shared services and that has been happening in the case of small communities like Netcong, it makes sense. For example we are already doing it with Netcong with the Health Department.

Mr. Bonte: It’s a wonderful concept, but the burden should be equal, and now what I am hearing is, the burden is even more distant than I thought it was. I thought it was $35.00 per card holder vs. $20.00 per card holder. Now I am hearing that it is $35.00 per person in the town. I don’t know how many cards we have issued in town but I am going to venture to say it is half the population.

Mrs. Israel: That is an understatement, I am sorry.

Mr. Bonte: We need to get those facts. If it is per person in the Town, then that means that we may be spending $60.00 per card holder versus offering the service to an outside person for only $20.00. I think we need to find out the answers to this. We need to correct this as soon as possible; I don’t think we should be offering our service to other communities at less than we charge our own citizens.
President Guenther: I agree with Rich, at least we should look at it, I agree with a trial period for a period of time, I am not sure that a year is really the appropriate time, but since that is what we have approved I guess.

Mr. Scapicchio: I am not sure what authority we have.

Mr. King: The only authority you have is budgeting in future years.

Mr. Scapicchio: So we are still locked in. All we have to do is voice our opinion, which is what I did.

President Guenther: Then I guess Rich, Jane Israel’s suggestion is the correct one, address your concerns to the library board. But your point is well taken, and I promise we will bring it up at the next budget hearing for next year. It will be interesting to see to what extent the Netcong Residents use it. If there is all of the sudden a flood of people coming in, well then certainly you have to re-evaluate it. But if it is a trickle of a couple of hundred people even finding $20.00 too expensive, well then you know, what does it matter. It is not significant income one way or the other.

Mr. Scapicchio: Bernie, the individuals from Netcong aren’t paying that fee. What Mount Olive is going to do is they are going to keep record of every resident that applies and receives a library card, they are going to bill Netcong on a monthly basis and Netcong is going to pay that. Not the individual users.

President Guenther: Any other comments from the Public? Seeing none, final council comments?

Mr. Rattner: Next Tuesday is the Board of Education Election. Lets at least get a good showing out, whether you like the candidates, whether you don’t, whether you like the budget or you don’t but the more people that go out, at least they know it is the feeling of the community. If the people don’t know, if the budget gets turned down it comes over here, then we are having problems with our own budget and we get that one too. We have done that, and I think we have done a good job in the last couple of years, but that is where it goes if you tell them no.

Mr. Greenbaum: With respect to the cluster ordinance I would request that the chair invite Mr. Buczynski, Mr. McGroarty and someone from the Environmental Commission to our meeting when we discuss the rescinding of the cluster ordinance.

President Guenther: Why the environmental commission?

Mr. Greenbaum: They may have some impact; or Open Space. One or the other, or both.

Mrs. Lashway: Rather than bringing them into a meeting, how about once I have the ordinance prepared I send it to those Boards and ask them for their comments?

President Guenther: Your point is well taken. I was planning to do that, invite Mr. Buczynski and Mr. McGroarty. Definitely they should be here. Anyone else? I have one final question, this thing I found in my mail, an Administrative Order on the penalty from the Department of Environmental Protection. What did we do wrong this time?

Mrs. Spencer: I don’t know.

Mr. Rattner: According to the complaint, it says that we put in a generator with out a permit.

President Guenther: A generator, but where? Is this at the Sewer Plant?

Mrs. Spencer: I don’t know I will have to research it.

President Guenther: Okay.

President Guenther made a motion to adjourn, all in favor, none opposed. The meeting adjourned at 10:12 pm.

______________________________
BERNHARD D. GUENTHER
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 September 16, 2003.

_____________________
LISA M. LASHWAY
Mount Olive Township Clerk

nw



 

 

2012 Mount Olive Township. All rights reserved.