Council Public Meeting - July 10, 2007

The Regular Public Meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council was called to Order at 7:30 pm by Council President Greenbaum with the Pledge of Allegiance.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE & MOMENT OF REFLECTION for all those who have and continue to protect our freedoms and our way of life.

OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT ANNOUNCEMENT
According to the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate notice of this meeting has been given to the Mount Olive Chronicle. Notice has been posted at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mount Olive Township, New Jersey and notices were sent to those requesting the same.

ROLL CALL Present: Mr. Buell, Mr. Rattner, Mrs. Labow, Mr. Tepper,
Mr. Perkins, Mr. Greenbaum

Absent: Mr. Tobey

Also Present: William Sohl, Business Administrator; John Dorsey, Township Attorney; Michelle Masser, Deputy Clerk; Sherry Jenkins, CFO

Questions on Bill List?

APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

May 8, 2007 PM

President Greenbaum: Mrs. Labow, do you want to move the Minutes of May 8, 2007?

Mrs. Labow: Yes Mr. President. I move the Minutes for approval of May 8, 2007.

Mr. Buell: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any questions, comments, deletions, or changes? Seeing none, Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed unanimously.

CORRESPONDENCE

LETTERS FROM RESIDENTS / ORGANIZATIONS

1. Letter received June 25, 2007, from Margaret Griscti regarding the health and safety and welfare of the disabled.

RESOLUTIONS / ORDINANCES / CORRESPONDENCE OTHER TOWNS

2. Resolution received June 27, 2007, from the Borough of Rockaway regarding the amendment of Abbot- Burke Funding.

3. Executive Order received July 2, 2007, from Governor Corzine regarding all Flags to be flown at half- staff in recognition and mourning of Sergeant Trista L. Moretti.

4. Resolution received July 6, 2007, from Atlantic City regarding the Cost for the State Wide Gypsy Moth Control Program.

MUA / MSA

5. Report received June 27, 2007, from the Hackettstown MUA regarding the 2006 Annual Water Quality Report.

DOT / DEP / LOI / HIGHLANDS

6. Letter received June 25, 2007, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding NJEMS Incident # 237277, Marveland Farms Block 6000, Lot 5 and 6 (70 and 90 Pleasant Hill Road).

7. Letter received June 28, 2007, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding the impact of construction at the Morris Chase Development.

8. Letter received June 29, 2007, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding Toys R Us – Site Improvements Block 6600, Lot 1 (Bartley Road).

9. Public Notice received July 2, 2007, from John Boyce regarding Request for Highlands Applicability Determination for Jersey Central Power and Light.

10. Application received July 2, 2007, from Malick & Scherer, P.C. regarding Highlands Applicability Determination for Jersey Central Power and Light.

11. Letter received July 3, 2007, from D.R. Johnson and Associates, LLC regarding Letter of Interpretation for Block 4600, Lot 29 (16 North Road).

12. Letter received July 6, 2007, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding No further Action Letter and Covenant not to sue for Block 3606, Lot 21 (14 Washington Avenue).

MISCELLANEOUS

13. Nomination Form received June 29, 2007, from the United States Department of Agriculture regarding County Farm Service Agency Committee Election.

14. Publication received June 27, 2007, from the St. Clare’s Foundation regarding Pediatrics.

15. E-mail received July 5, 2007, from Sherry Jenkins, Mount Olive Township CFO, regarding Legislation Notice, Chapter 103 (PERS) .

COAH

16. Memo received June 27, 2007, from Hardyston Township regarding Elimination of Affordable Housing Regional Contribution Agreements.

LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES

17. E-mail received June 22, 2007, from Congressman Frelinghuysen regarding Support for Highlands, Great Swamp, House passes State and Foreign Operations Funding, and Frelinghuysen to Host Town Meetings.

DCA

18. E-mail received June 28, 2007, from the Department of Community Affairs regarding Core Principles on Asset Monetization.

MORRIS COUNTY

19. Minutes received June 25, 2007, from the Morris County Planning Board regarding the May 17, 2007 meeting.

TORT

20. Notice of Tort Claim received July 3, 2007, from Brunnock & Fleming, P.C. regarding Jonathan Trotter v. Mount Olive Township and Mount Olive Board of Education.

President Greenbaum: There are twenty pieces of Correspondence on the amended Agenda this evening. Does anyone wish to discuss any particular piece of Correspondence? Seeing none, we’ll move on.

ORDINANCE FOR PUBLIC HEARING

President Greenbaum: We have one Ordinance for Public Hearing this evening, entitled:

Ord. #29-2007 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive to Repeal Section 196-73 Entitled “Charges” Subsection B and Correct a Typo in “Note” in Subsection A.

Mr. Dorsey: This is simply a correction of some typos that were made in Ord. #37-2003, that improperly
referenced EDU’s in the Flanders system that have never been used there, and the others to include a word that
was omitted and to make it fully confirmed with the Township’s longstanding policy.

President Greenbaum: Any Council Comment? Actually, do you want to move it Mr. Buell, for approval?

Mr. Buell: I move for final passage Ordinance #29-2007.

Mrs. Labow: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any Council discussion? Seeing none, Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

President Greenbaum: Ordinance #29-2007 has passed on second reading and I hereby direct the Clerk to forward a copy of same to the Mayor and publish the notice of adoption as required by law.

ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING – 2nd reading July 24, 2007

President Greenbaum: This evening we have several Ordinances on for First Reading with the second reading to be in two weeks, July 24th, 2007. The first Ordinance is entitled:

Ord. #30-2007 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Stop Sign at the Exit at Turkey Brook Park on to Flanders Road.

President Greenbaum: Mr. Tepper, do you want to move that please?

Mr. Tepper: Yes Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #30-2007 be introduced by title and
passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building,
204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second reading
and 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.

Mrs. Labow: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any council discussion? Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:

Ord. #31-2007 An Ordinance to Amend and Supplement Chapter 234-8 “Rates” of the Code of the Township of Mount Olive (Towing).

President Greenbaum: Mr. Perkins can you please move that?

Mr. Perkins: Yes Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #31-2007 be introduced by title and passed on first
reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-
Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second reading and 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.

Mrs. Labow: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any Council discussion? Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously, with the exception Mr. Rattner voted no.

President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:


Ord. #32-2007 Bond Ordinance Providing for the Construction of a Dog Park in and by the Township of Mount Olive, in the County of Morris, New Jersey, Appropriating $35,000 Therefore and Authorizing the Issuance of $17,500 Bonds or Notes of the Township to Finance Part of the Cost Thereof.

President Greenbaum: Mr. Rattner do you want to move that?

Mr. Rattner: Thank you Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #32-2007 be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-
Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second reading and 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.

Mr. Perkins: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any Council discussion? Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:

Ord. #33-2007 Bond Ordinance Providing for the Acquisition of Various Equipment of the Township of Mount Olive, in the County of Morris, New Jersey, Appropriating the Aggregate Amount of $822,000 Therefore and Authorizing the Issuance of $780,900 Bonds or Notes of the Township to Finance Part of the Cost Thereof.

President Greenbaum: Mr. Tepper?

Mr. Tepper: Yes Mr. President. I move that Ordinance #33-2007 be introduced by title and
passed on first reading and that a meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building,
204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second reading
and 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.

Mr. Buell: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll Call.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

President Greenbaum: The next Ordinance for First Reading is entitled:

Ord. #34-2007 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Amending Ordinance #10-2006 Which Established Fees or Rates for Off-Duty Police Officers.

President Greenbaum: Mr. Buell?

Mr. Buell: I move that Ordinance #34-2007 be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a
meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road,
Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second reading and 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.

Mrs. Labow: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

President Greenbaum: The last Ordinance this evening for First Reading is Ord. #35-2007, entitled:

Ord. #35-2007 Ordinance Appropriating $105,000 from the Open Space Trust Fund and a Donation from the Baseball Association for the Purchase of Lights at Russ Nagle Field in and by the Township of Mount Olive, In the County of Morris, New Jersey.

President Greenbaum: Ord. #35-2007 is amended language-wise in terms of just a description of the project, and where the monies are coming from. Sherry did you get that information? John did you get it in terms of amending the agenda, the title? So when it comes back to us and it’s advertised it’s appropriate. Also there were a number of blank spaces that needed to be filled in, is that correct?

Mr. Dorsey: I don’t know about filling in the blank spaces, but I thought the additions we made were quite good…

President Greenbaum: No, it’s all done?

Mrs. Jenkins: The Bond Ordinance itself is fine. I think the Clerk’s office also put in all the attachments which are different records that will be filled in later.

President Greenbaum: Okay, that will have to be done later on. So then all we’re talking about is a change in the title?

Mrs. Masser: Yes, you don’t have to worry about that.

President Greenbaum: So then Mr. Tepper do you want to move that please?

Mr. Tepper: I move that Ordinance #35-2007 be introduced by title and passed on first reading and that a
meeting be held on July 24th, 2007, at 7:30 p.m. at the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road,
Budd Lake, New Jersey, for public hearing, consideration of second reading and 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.

Ray Perkins: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll Call please.

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 the Renewal of Alcoholic Beverage License for the 2007-2008 Licensing Period.

2. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive to Foreclose In Rem a Certificate held by the Township of Mount Olive

3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Authorizing the Release of Performance Guarantees Posted by Toll Brothers in Connection with Wyndham Point, Section IV.

4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Directing the Administration to Correct EDU Undercounts and Collect Arrearages Within the B.L.S.S.S.

5. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Approving and Authorizing an Agreement with the Township of Washington for the Joint Purchase and Use of an Asphalt Zipper.

6. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Authorizing the Acceptance of the 2006 Audit.

7. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Requesting Approval from the Director of the Division of Local Government Services for Insertion of a Specific Item of Revenue into the 2007 Municipal Budget ($1,320.00 for Tobacco Age-of Sale Enforcement).

8. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Appointing a Liaison to the Warren-Morris Council of Governments.

9. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Supporting the “Over the Limit and Under Arrest 2007 Crackdown.”

10. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Authorizing Change Order No. 2 for the Route 46 Sidewalk Improvements Project.

11. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township Mount Olive Authorizing the Mayor to Execute Professional Services Contracts.

President Greenbaum: Okay, we’re up to the Consent Resolutions Agenda. Does anyone wish to remove any of the eleven on the Consent Resolutions Agenda? Seeing none, I would ask that Mrs. Labow please move the Consent Resolutions Agenda.

Mrs. Labow: Thank you Mr. President. I can move Consent Resolutions #1 through 11.

Mr. Perkins: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Anyone from the public who wishes to be heard on the Consent Resolutions Agenda? Seeing none, I close it to the public. Anyone on Council have a brief clarifying statement
related to the Consent Resolutions Agenda? Roll Call please.

PUBLIC PORTION ON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS - none

COUNCIL COMMENTS ON CONSENT RESOLUTIONS - none

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

RESOLUTIONS NON CONSENT

PUBLIC PORTION ON INDIVIDUAL RESOLUTIONS

COUNCIL COMMENTS ON INDIVIDUAL RESOLUTIONS

ROLL CALL

MOTIONS

1. Bill List

President Greenbaum: Mr. Perkins do you want to move the Bill List please?

Mr. Perkins: Yes, Mr. President, I move for adoption of the Bill List pages 1 through 22, I believe, 1 through 22.

President Greenbaum: Is there a second?

Mrs. Labow: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

President Greenbaum: Mr. Rattner, do you want to move the Raffle Applications?

Mr. Rattner: Thank you Mr. President. I move for:

2. Approval of Raffle Application #2198 & #2199 for the Order of Eastern Star #107 Starlight Chapter and Raffle Application #2200 for MOHS Band Booster Association.

Mr. Buell: Second.

President Greenbaum: Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS

President Greenbaum: Any administrative matters this evening Mr. Sohl?

Mr. Sohl: None, I’d just like to comment though. We kind of brushed over Resolution #6 where we accepted the audit. I’d like to point out that for those who took the time to look at it, there was in fact not one recommendation or need for change. I commend the Finance Department and all of their support.

President Greenbaum: We take it as given, based upon Sherry’s continued quality of work on behalf of the Township. Since I’ve been sitting up here, I don’t believe that there has ever been a recommendation and that every single professional that I speak to only speaks volumes in terms of Sherry’s abilities and the job she is doing on behalf of the Township. So kudos to the Finance Department and to Sherry in particular in terms of our continued bond rating improvement approval, and also on the audit.

Mrs. Jenkins: Thank you.

OLD BUSINESS

NEW BUSINESS

SWAC vacancies

President Greenbaum: We do have the one resume for Appointment to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. There are two open Council positions. I assume, Mrs. Labow, that you’re going to be making a motion to add Mr. Bowman?

Mrs. Labow: I don’t really know anything about it. I just received this so I haven’t talked to him or anything…

President Greenbaum: Well does anyone at this point wish to make a motion with respect to Mr. Bowman, or do you want to hold off until Mr. Tobey gets back?

Mr. Perkins: I’ll make a motion that we appoint Mr. Bowman. I think it’s important if he’s interested, he’s submitted his resume and we do need somebody on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee.

Mrs. Labow: Well, I would like to just interject. The Solid Waste Committee is adjourned for the summer. We’re not going to meet again until September due to vacation schedules.

President Greenbaum: Mr. Perkins, are you making your motion to appoint?

Mr. Perkins: Yes.

President Greenbaum: Okay, and is there a second?

Mr. Tepper: Second.

President Greenbaum: It’s been moved and seconded. Any discussion? Colleen, you certainly have placed on the record your notion that we should hold off on making the appointment at the present time, based upon your…

Mrs. Labow: I didn’t read his resume, and I didn’t speak to him so I don’t feel comfortable voting for somebody at this point.

President Greenbaum: Okay, Roll Call please.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously with the exception of Mrs. Labow who abstained.

President Greenbaum: Congratulation to Mr. Bowman on his appointment to the Solid Waste Advisory Committee.

Mrs. Labow: Also just on this part, we do have Mr. Mark Kana from the Board of Health is interested in being on the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. I will give his resume to everybody for the next meeting, or prior to. Yes, I know. Mark Kana, he’s on the Board of Health, and he wanted to be on the SWAC also.

President Greenbaum: Thank you.

LEGAL MATTERS

John Dorsey: Yes, I think there are a couple I should mention. On Monday as you know, Chairman, since you got off the plane from Las Vegas to attend, we did have a most interesting meeting with the representatives of Rock Gold and dealing with the purchase of the Combe Fill North. I’ve written you a memo on this which I assume that you all got because I faxed it to you yesterday, but I think I can say rather briefly that number one, they were particularly impressed and appreciative of Mr. Rattner’s efforts to move the MSA into motion and do what I couldn’t do and that was to get Lee T. Purcell to do the necessary mapping that needed to be submitted to NJDEP for the service area to be expanded to include Combe Fill North. They have come up with a clever way of describing this development. They refer to it in EPA and DEP circles as an employment center, which I guess speaks for itself in the modern world. They reported to us that the head of Smart Growth, and it now seems to me that Smart Growth controls what a lot of Departments down there do in terms of various policy issues, just thinks that this is the greatest thing in the world, i.e. that Mount Olive and Rock Gold is going to take a remediated site and turn it into a productive area. I think that’s terribly important because the lower echelons within the DEP must recommend the extension of the sewer area for the MSA, and must also recommend a change in the planning area under the state plan, and redevelopment plan. I can only say that they’ve also met with the EPA and once again Les seemed to be very confident that the EPA had bought into the whole concept of the wonders of taking a remediated site and turning it into a productive piece of property. There is the issue as to whether EPA will attempt a windfall lien. I must say that I was terribly pleased to hear that since I chastised them for not inviting us to go to the EPA, and told them that Mr. Rattner thought they only invited us when they needed our help, they did properly articulate the inappropriateness of a windfall lien by the EPA on that property because nothing EPA did makes the property valuable. As a matter of fact, everything that the EPA did will be taken out. The Resolution tonight authorizing the in rem tax foreclosure is the first step in our solidifying our ownership of that property. I had withheld that action until I was requested by Rock Gold to proceed. Everybody agreed that this is now the time to proceed, and the Council has now done that which I asked it to do. The Dattolo litigation goes on, Mr. Rattner is going to have to give up another day. Lisa spent a full day on Friday under rather close examination. I’ll just read to you a letter that Dick Cushing the attorney representing her, retained by the MEL to represent the civil rights part of the case wrote about the deposition:
“Notwithstanding a rather long and detailed effort to do so, in my opinion, the plaintiff did not prevail in this regard. Ms. Lashway is a smart, independent person who takes pride in her independence and the fact that she has tenure to protect her against the demands of political officials. Ms. Lashway listened carefully to the questions, thought about her answer, and then presented her answer in a forthright and honest way. Although the plaintiff, through skillful questioning, sought to establish that as part of the regular records destruction of the municipality certain records relevant to this case may have been destroyed, Ms. Lashway, without prompting and without questioning on our behalf, indicated that no such destruction had occurred because her staff, which had arranged for the destruction of documents, was well trained and knew to look for documents relevant to the litigation prior to the destruction of any documents.”

Mr. Dorsey: Michelle had prepared these forms that you have to prepare to submit to Community Affairs for the destruction of documents, and at one point in this ongoing dilemma it appeared that all documents relating to this matter had been destroyed, but that was not the case. Lisa did a good job, and Michelle did a good job. Today Councilman Perkins led us into a meeting with the BPU, specifically the head of the Water Division, a fellow by the name of Joe Quirolo who is an attorney that advises them. We had a long discussion advising them that our paradox was that while we were prepared to grant to Toll / American Water a franchise, at no point did we want to do anything that would upset or interfere with the Township’s right to “call in” this system when the Township thought to do so. We reversed our position two weeks ago, perhaps it was a month ago when Mr. Rattner pointed out some of the economics of taking on that system at a very early point in time. Mr. Perkins joined in that, and now we are in a process with the BPU of fulfilling our obligations without in any way giving up any of our rights under the Developer’s Agreement. As I spoke with Mr. Perkins tonight, I directed Walter Reinhard who is an attorney that practices on a regular basis with the BPU, before the BPU, to draw the franchise ordinance that protects our interest. We will then forward that on to the other parties and tell them we are now prepared to proceed once they indicate that they are prepared to live with that form of ordinance. So, it was a good two days in terms of meetings, and I appreciate everyone’s cooperation.

President Greenbaum: Thank you. Any questions or comments on the Legal Matters? Mr. Rattner?

Mr. Rattner: Something that Mr. Dorsey mentioned, that Smart Growth is running, seems to be the center of operations in the state. I think one of the things that we were fortunate, the Council President and I went down to Trenton to try to help with the presentations about what we want to do in front of Smart Growth about three months ago. That’s when we found out that Eileen Swann was moving over to the Highlands and that the Mayor of Chester who knows the area very, very well, he knows the issues, and I think that this is the first time that we have somebody in a department that we need down in Trenton that is from the area, that understands the problems, and is going to help us in any way that is reasonable. I think that’s one of the reasons that we’re very fortunate at this time.

Mr. Dorsey: I should perhaps add that Rock Gold, as they like to call themselves, advised us that they have now completed all of the non-invasive studies that they require. Now, on the basis apparently of doing that, the specs that I drew, and I think that you will appreciate that I was just flying in blind when I drew those specs and put in a minimum amount of development for our standpoint in terms of trying to redevelop our tax base, I put in number 400,000 square feet. They are now up to 539,000 square feet, so we are now talking about a ratable if you use the usual numbers of about $100 million, which we very desperately need as well as the sale of EDU’s. We also discussed the fact, I almost can’t believe this because you all know the difficulties I’ve gone through with the Rockefeller Group and various aspects there, is that one question about the correctness of the documents I drew. They reflected on the fact, and he noted the fact that they acknowledged their COAH obligation and they suspect that they may and even try and build COAH units, which I think would be good for the Township on that site but off the actual landfill itself. There is a certain area that is not over landfill. Of course the big test is the invasive test, which are the hydraulic tests, is that the correct word? Hydraulic tests that have to be made to see whether or not they can indeed put in the necessary…

Mr. Rattner: Pilings.

Mr. Dorsey: That, I think that they probably would do that in about three months.

Mr. Rattner: You think that’s how long it’s going to take?

Mr. Dorsey: The most amazing thing is, I’m sorry, am I going too long? The most amazing thing is that I set up this timeline and one never knew what one was doing and for months they told me they were going to want some kind of an addition and I told them well Vornado keeps on calling wanting to know whether you guys are in this deal or not in this deal. They suddenly have now told us that they are on our timeline, which isn’t terribly important for us, but the most important thing is that invasive testing they have to do because everything else can be great, but if the soil can’t hold the building, but that’s where we stand. I’m sorry.

President Greenbaum: That’s okay.

Mr. Perkins: One quick comment. When you guys met with the office of Smart Growth, the whatever area they’re going to designate this as now…

President Greenbaum: Planning area two.

Mr. Perkins: …will the proposed COAH, if they decide to build on that out parcel, will that be included in the Smart Growth also?

Mr. Dorsey: Oh yes, area two would permit that whole thing.

Mr. Tepper: We would be required actually to have COAH because of area two.

President Greenbaum: Do you have something else?

Mr. Dorsey: No, I’m fine thank you.

COUNCIL REPORTS

Recreation Liaison Report

President Greenbaum: I assume no one has a Recreation report this evening since Mr. Tobey is not here.

Board of Health Report

Mrs. Labow: We had our meeting a couple of weeks ago, standard… I can’t remember if I reported on that at our last meeting or not. We talked about phosphorous and the importance of it. Yes, I did report on it. Okay.

Planning Board Report

Mr. Tepper: Meets Thursday.

Board of Adjustment Liaison Report

Mr. Perkins: No report.

Open Space Committee Report

Mrs. Labow: Basically, we met last night, and as we discussed we’re moving forward with our applications for the County.

Legislative Committee Report

Mr. Buell: Nothing to report.

Pride Committee Liaison Report

Mr. Perkins: Nothing.

Board of Education Liaison Report

Mr. Buell: Meets next week.

Lake/Environment Issues Committee

Mr. Rattner: Last Tuesday the Lake Committee actually held a meeting to discuss the issues of the Lake regarding the weeds. It was a very productive meeting, over forty people attended. Four subcommittees were set up to discuss different issues from moving forward on how exactly we’re going to try to improve the Lake to a committee to look at funding and grants and that type of thing. The subcommittees first meetings have already been scheduled, and we’re moving ahead. Phil Tobey was given the responsibility for the Lake Committee on this specific project as a liaison to the Council and will be reporting every two weeks to make sure it stays on schedule.

Safety Committee Liaison

Mr. Perkins: No report.

Finance Committee Report

Mr. Rattner: No report.

President Greenbaum: Is there going to be a meeting to discuss the shared purchasing?

Mr. Rattner: Yes.

Economic Development Committee Report

Mr. Rattner: Nothing to report

Solid Waste Advisory Committee Report

Mrs. Labow: Like I said before we’re adjourned for the summer due to vacation schedules and apparently one position is filled tonight, and we have another Council position and a Mayoral appointment.

Library Board Liaison

Mr. Tepper: Meets tomorrow.

PUBLIC PORTION

President Greenbaum: Anyone from the public who wishes to be heard this evening? Seeing none…oh yes, again, please state your name and address.

Cheryl Goodwin, 368 Drakestown Road, Flanders: At risk of incurring Mr. Tepper’s wrath, I still have questions regarding this Shop Lane development. I really felt that the more questions I asked the less clear the whole situation becomes, and I’m not particularly happy about it. We’ve gone through a lot of documents, I was trying to get a report which I believe Rob Greenbaum alluded to, as the Engineer having submitted after our meeting in March, explaining to us how grading was going to take the water to Shop Lane and wasn’t going to be a problem to us. What I came up with instead was a memo from him dated June 4th, which was a response, it was to Mr. Sohl, and it was a response to our e-mail of May 29th. When I came to the Council Meeting on the 12th, and I came to the Workshop I was under the impression that there had been absolutely no response to the questions that I had posed in my e-mail. I now have at a cost of $0.75, a copy of this memo from Mr. Buczynski, and it as well as some other things raises some questions. He alludes to these 2005 drawings which we were definitely not shown in March, and we have seen by coming to Town Hall and finding them. What we were shown was definitely showing grading to the top of the foundations and being graded toward Shop Lane. What we were shown the following day, which did have a walkout basement, still showed the entire front of the foundation typically graded up to the beginning of the first floor, which I guess everyone now knows is illegal, but we certainly didn’t at the time. It was something to me pretty incomprehensible. He alluded to a proposed swale adjacent to the property and if you recall in that Workshop there was a lot of discussion about the swale. I don’t know why it’s alluded to as being proposed. Mr. Pfaffenroth’s, I believe it was his engineer I don’t know, someone from… his employee, as a requirement for his final approval had staked out a swale. It was dug, it rained, it came over the top, it was redone and then it has subsequently worked with the exception of at one point where it has failed. It was true the entire time that Mr. Pfaffenroth had it in there that it was maintained, it was mowed, it wasn’t golf club but it was maintained. I don’t know why now it appears to be considered proposed. I’d like to get some clarification on that. The only ditches, and I think Mr. Buczynski said several times, alluded to ditches on that property, the only ditches on that property were dug by my husband in pouring rain, trying to get those rivers of water coming from that property, to get some of it to go somewhere else. So I would like to get some clarification, and I don’t know why I had to pay $0.75 for that. I would have thought that I would be clued into the answers when answers were given. In the Developer’s Agreement which was approved in 2005, I was very surprised to read as one of the conditions, now this is something as I understand that the developer must abide by and they certainly were during all of the years of Mr. Pfaffenroth’s ownership of that property, but it says that the developer shall ensure that no stumps, dead trees, or debris are deposited on or permitted to remain upon any of the lots or portions of said development, nor shall they be deposited below the surface. Anyone who has driven on that road from, I would say pretty much the second it was owned by the current owner, those boulders are not indigenous to anything on Drakestown Road. They were trucked in from elsewhere, and you can bet if you look at those boulders that nobody in the neighborhood could miss it when those trucks were coming in and they were being dumped. We had years, they still remain there, they’ve been there for years, we had years of a mountain of stumps. Not one of those stumps was from any of those lots. Some of them were trucked in from properties from who knows where, but they came in off Drakestown Road. Some were trucked in from the back property. I would guess some of them were from that other person’s property that was mistakenly cleared. However, they were allowed to remain there all that time. The dirt which initially started our questions, mountains and mountains of dirt with the water problems, and we’re saying, “What are you doing?” “Oh, they’re just storing it there.” I’ve been asking and asking, “Who’s keeping track of which dirt is for backfilling here and who’s keeping track of which dirt?” The most I’ve gotten, the closest to an answer has been a shrug of the shoulders, and I do not understand it. I do not understand why this is not being maintained at all. That swale which was maintained is now completely overgrown, and that silt fence is placed on the edge of it where it can certainly compromise the bank of that swale. I don’t understand and I don’t think it should be that way. There’s also the fact and we sat through, from 1989 which was the first hearing for Mr. Pfaffenroth through 2001, which was the final approval, many hearings and many long nights. One of the things in the Planning Board final resolution memorializing this is where it states that the parcel was originally zoned Rural Residential with a two acre minimum lot size. Although the lot size is now four acres, the application continues to be reviewed under the terms and conditions of the RRA zone. Now everyone who sat though those hearings knows that those lots were completely gerrymandered. It was a compromise between Mr. Pfaffenroth’s right to develop his property, and the conditions, the extreme wetness of a good part of the back parts of the lot, etc. In the two acre zoning, there is a 200 foot frontage requirement, and Mr. Pfaffenroth’s last drawings show the first dwelling facing Drakestown Road because that’s the only way that it could be without a variance, which he did not go for. I would like to know how that first house is sitting facing Shop Lane with 171.7 feet of frontage. As far as anything that occurred or was discussed in those meetings that would have required a variance, and certainly if there were a variance we should have heard about it, and now suddenly we have this three storey monstrosity. I think if everyone recalls initially when I came here, and I alluded to a three storey monstrosity everyone was telling me, “No, well it may look that way from your side, but it’s really only two stories.” Now we know since basements have to be above ground that yes it is three stories. I don’t understand how this has gotten to where now we have this not only a three storey monstrosity on Drakestown Road, but it is 171.7 feet. That’s more than 14% below the 1988 requirement, and that was the requirement when Mr. Pfaffenroth filed his application, his first paperwork.

President Greenbaum: Mrs. Goodwin, a lot of these issues that you are raising are really administrative issues, and should have been dealt with by the Planning Department or the Building Department. They’re not Council issues. We don’t get involved in terms of the building which is done pursuant to Planning Board, or not done pursuant to Planning Board approval. It’s really something which the zoning office needs to make sure that the plans that have been filed are the way that the development is getting built. To the extent that 200 feet was required in terms of frontage, then the zoning office needs to stay on top of that particular issue. It’s an administrative issue, and while all of us up here feel the anguish that you’re going through, I’m not sure ultimately what the relief which Council can give you is. It really is a zoning issue to the extent that they haven’t followed the plans, then the house should not be allowed to be built, period. But that’s a decision that the zoning office and/or the applicant needs to go back to the Board of Adjustment, or the Planning Board and get the appropriate variance, if appropriate, from the Board of Adjustment if they built a structure which is not consistent with the approvals that they’ve gotten. But as you go through these points after points after points, I’m sitting here going, “Okay, how as a Councilperson, can I help Mrs. Goodwin?” It really is not a Council issue unless someone up here can think of something, and I understand that this is the avenue which you have to vent, to discuss, to educate…

Mrs. Goodwin: Yes, Planning Board meetings you know, and this is the frustration. I did purchase a CD from the Planning Board meeting, and on the whole definition of “basement,” I hear that well it’s just a definition. Well then “building height” is a definition too, and so “building height” is lowest point to highest. It just seems like everything is running around in circles, and I don’t know where the answer is. I’m seeing things here which, as you say the Planning Board, you go and it’s the issues that are there on the Agenda, and that’s what you’re allowed to address. We’re just getting the run around and stone walled, and there are things here that seem to be highly irregular, including the fact of character of the neighborhood because waivers were based on that.

President Greenbaum: My decision-making aspect which doesn’t have to do with a lot of the issues that you have, it’s based upon the reports that we get from our professionals. We have to, as we sit up here, we have to rely upon our professionals irrespective of what you bring forward. You bring something forward I have to go back to the professional and say what about this? What about that? We get a report back from the professional that says everything was done pursuant to code. We don’t have any opportunity as we sit here to say, “You know what Mrs. Goodwin? You’re right, our professional is wrong.” I don’t have a basis to be able to make that decision. Tonight you’ve raised an issue with respect to frontage, and that the house was not built according to the plans that were submitted in terms of the frontage. It’s not facing Drakestown Road which would have given it the appropriate footage, but instead it’s built facing Shop Lane which doesn’t give it the appropriate frontage. If that in fact is true, you need to bring that to the zoning officer and say this house is not built pursuant to either the ordinances of the Township of Mount Olive, and it’s not built pursuant to the plans which were filed, and approved by your office. In which case, she then needs to make a decision. She needs to say, “You’re right Mrs. Goodwin that this house is inappropriately built, and the applicant is going to be stopped from doing any further work until they get the appropriate relief from either the Board of Adjustment or the Planning Board.” I would assume that at that point it would probably be the Planning Board since they don’t have all of their approvals and that’s where they got their original approvals. The Council does not act in an administrative function. We don’t have zoning people, we don’t review plans, we don’t make decisions based on plans, we simply implement decisions which are made by the Planning Board in the developer’s agreement. The developer’s agreement simply says you shall comply with all of the ordinances of the Township and/or the plans which were approved and the conditions that were required at the Planning Board level. That’s what the Council does. We’re like the Senate and the Congress rolled into one. We’re not the President, we’re not the Police Department, and we don’t have employees. We can’t follow through on all of the things which you have brought to light. So those things really need to go through, unless of course there is some overwhelming scheme to just ignore the Township ordinances, in which case, and that’s why we sent it back to Mr. Buczynski at the time and said, what about all of these things that Mrs. Goodwin is bringing to light. Is the house still at the appropriate elevation, and the answer is yes it’s still at the same elevation. Although there may have been some fill that was brought in to bring the top of the house, but the house itself is still at the same elevation. Now, you bring to light again and I only use this because it’s a concrete example that I can grab on to the way that the house sits on the lot and the frontage. If in fact you’re right, that needs to be brought to the zoning officer’s perspective, and a decision needs to be made. I assume that the relief which the applicant is going to get is a variance ultimately with respect to the way that the house is built. I can’t imagine that the Planning Board or the Board of Adjustment is going to say, “You know what, you can’t build it that way, you’ve got to knock it down.”

Mrs. Goodwin: Well I can’t understand how it could have…

President Greenbaum: You know what, I don’t disagree with you, we have sat up here, not with respect to your issues but with other people’s issues in the past and said what do we do from a legislative perspective? What law do we pass? What ordinance do we pass that will ensure from our perspective that ultimately what is approved is what is built? We’ve struggled with that, because we meet Tuesday nights and pass these policies and laws and resolutions which are general in nature, generally, in terms of this is the problem and this is how we think we can fix the problem. Then someone like you comes to us and says you haven’t fixed the problem because here it is again. Someone is actually building something that’s not pursuant to the ordinances and is not pursuant to the plans that were approved. We say okay, let’s check with our administrative branch, and we say Mr. Sohl, Mayor, Mr. Buczynski, go out and check it out and let us know if in fact it’s been applied, everything’s been followed and they come back and they say yes, everything’s been followed. We sit up here and we say okay, what are we supposed to do? And then you come back with more things, and I’m telling Mr. Sohl I’d like you to speak to Catherine Natafalusy. Issues have been raised in fact that the ordinances of the Township and the plans that were submitted were not followed at least in terms of the first house which doesn’t have appropriate frontage, according to Mrs. Goodwin, and didn’t get the appropriate variance. I’d like to know whether or not that’s true. I’d also like to know how that happened. If in fact that was built in that fashion, then someone in the building department, because I assume that once it leaves zoning they don’t go out into the field and check to make sure, I assume that is the building official who is supposed to sit there with the plans and say okay, you poured the foundation in a fashion which is not consistent with the plans. Your house is facing the wrong direction according to what was approved. If that has happened, that’s a problem, because then the construction code official is not upholding what he is required to do on behalf of the Township. So that is what I need to know. Mr. Sohl?

Mr. Sohl: Yes Rob, to that point what I’d like to request from the Clerk’s office, since there’s a lot of information that Mrs. Goodwin has conveyed tonight, if we could get this section of the Minutes typed up or at least transcribed so that I can use that to send and share…

President Greenbaum: I think it goes beyond that. I think a meeting should be set up between Mrs. Goodwin and Catherine because I’ve cut Mrs. Goodwin off at this point, and she hasn’t gone through her whole litany of issues that she has. I think that a meeting has to be established between Catherine and Mrs. Goodwin…

Mrs. Goodwin: I have no problem with setting up a meeting.

Mr. Sohl: Consider it done.

President Greenbaum: …and have Mrs. Goodwin go through all of the different issues she has with the way that the development has been built.

Mr. Sohl: Consider it done.

Mrs. Goodwin: I have no problem, she has been very, very helpful with everything. It appeared to be something before that, the swale, as to whether or not it’s proposed in the developer’s agreement and maintenance. Who do I go to for that?

Mr. Dorsey: The Engineer.

Mr. Sohl: What Mr. Greenbaum is suggesting… I will have a meeting scheduled with Catherine who is zoning, a construction official, and Mr. Buczynski, so that whenever anything may defer to one or the other’s expertise they’re right there.

President Greenbaum: Have a meeting with, yes?

Mr. Tepper: I was going to recommend you do it with Catherine first, and then take the items to Gene to have them addressed all at once.

President Greenbaum: I think it’s better if everyone sits down in the room with Mrs. Goodwin, and let her put all of her questions on the table. Let her get an answer to every one of her questions at the same time so that there isn’t any question that she’s not getting the run around. Let her sit with Gene and with Catherine and with Gary, and list the item and get an answer right there as to the particular question. Then you can come back to Council and you can say these are the questions you didn’t get answers to.

Mrs. Goodwin: With respect to character of the neighborhood, which is mentioned extensively in the ordinances, it’s not specifically with respect to residential areas however. This particular approval also had numerous waivers, everything was based on the rural nature of the area, including the fact that it is not a standard width.

President Greenbaum: You know I’m not sure that that’s going anywhere Mrs. Goodwin. I’m not sure that you’re going to get anyone up here to say that because it’s got a basement, which is a raised basement, that it’s changing the character of the general neighborhood. I don’t think that’s an argument which is going to carry any weight, and it’s certainly not an issue that we’re going to deal with as a Council. I think that the issues you need to focus on are whether or not the ordinances and the approved building plans have been followed, and if they haven’t been followed, then not only do we need to know about it, but the administration needs to take action with respect to any major changes to the building plans which were approved, or any violations of any of the ordinances of the Township.

Mrs. Goodwin: I understand what you’re saying, Mr. Greenbaum, but my only point is that in this particular case as I said, if character of the neighborhood has no standing then there should have been a forty foot road, and there should have been curbing, there should have been sidewalks. None of those things should have been waived on the basis of the character of the neighborhood and the rural nature of the area as they were. So, in my opinion, and I don’t know whether or not this is Council in terms of ordinance or not, if in fact character of neighborhood or area has no standing at all then it should not be the basis for waivers as it was in this case.

President Greenbaum: I don’t agree with you in terms of it being an issue. Character of neighborhood takes on many different factors. It doesn’t necessarily mean that a house as built, whether a ranch or whether its three stories or two stories, if they tried to put a machine shop in there, I would say that that goes against the character of the neighborhood, but the fact that they’re building new construction in the neighborhood, and in terms of whether or not sidewalks were or were not part of the development, or whether or not curbing was required or the width of the roadway, those are all issues which the Planning Board deals with at the time that the plans are before them. They make the decision as to what character of the neighborhood means under a particular circumstance, it’s not Council. They made that decision that the houses which were going to be allowed, or the number of houses which were going to be allowed and the width of the roadway, and whether curbing was to be or not to be, those are decisions which the Planning Board makes on any particular given application.

Mrs. Goodwin: I understand that, and I understand that there was a process and I understand that all of the neighbors were there, and they all had their input and based on that input it was part of a process. None of this now is in the process, it’s not open at all for comment and to me there’s a disconnect that shouldn’t be. There should be, if there’s input with respect to whether or not the road has to be the requisite code width and whether or not there has to be curbing, if all of that can be waived based on… I think there should be input beyond that process, and all the neighbors had input on the width of the road.

President Greenbaum: Well, as we’ve been advised there is no requirement that there is actually buildings approved, specific types of buildings approved by the Planning Board at the time that the site plan approval is done. With respect to the site plan itself, the roadway, the curbing, all of that, the drainage, all of that is properly before the Planning Board. So what you’re saying is that an applicant should be required to establish exactly where on the lot and what type of house he’s going to put on it. I don’t think anyone here on Council is prepared to move forward with that type of ordinance.

Mrs. Goodwin: That may be. That’s fine, but I have to tell you that’s my opinion if there are certain things that are completely out of character. There should be a process, just as there is with most of them where they include the houses.

President Greenbaum: Please let us know. Report back to us after you’ve had a chance to meet with the professionals. Thank you. Anyone else from the public? Seeing none, we’ll close it to the public. Any further comment from Council?

COUNCIL COMMENTS

Mr. Rattner: I just have a question. I see a young gentleman in the back row sitting here all night, and I don’t think the Judge sent him…

President Greenbaum: That’s Mr. Tepper’s son.

Mr. Rattner: Oh. You made him sit in the back?

Mr. Tepper: I didn’t think you wanted him sitting up here.

Mr. Rattner: You’re punishing him so he had to come to a meeting. Well welcome. He grew.

Mrs. Labow: He did.

Mr. Tepper: Significantly.

ADJOURNMENT

Motion was made and seconded, all in favor and none opposed, the meeting was adjourned at 9:09 pm.


_________________________________
Robert J. Greenbaum, 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 August 7, 2007.

______________________________________
Lisa M. Lashway, Township Clerk

 

2012 Mount Olive Township. All rights reserved.