Mt. Olive Township Council Minutes
October 22, 2002

The regular meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council was called to order at 7:30 pm by Council President Scapicchio with the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

MOMENT OF REFLECTION

President Scapicchio: If everyone would just join us. At these Public Meetings, we now do a moment of reflection of the men and women fighting terrorism and defending the freedom that 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 Mt. Olive Chronicle and 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. Guenther, Mr. Greenbaum, Mrs. Miller,
Mr. Perkins, Mr. Rattner, Mr. Scapicchio, Mr. Spino

Absent: None

Also in attendance: Cynthia Spencer, Business Administrator, Peter King; Township Attorney, Sherry Jenkins, CFO, Nicole Whittle, Deputy Township Clerk.

RETIREMENT RESOLUTION & PLAQUE PRESENTATIONS

President Scapicchio: We have five Resolutions on the Agenda tonight and we will start off with some resolutions and plaques of presentations to certain employees that are going to retire. The first one on the agenda is Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon. Unfortunately she is not present and we will have to do it another time. Rudy is not coming so do we want to introduce and move that resolution and will present him with the plaque.

1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Commending Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon on Twenty-One Years of Outstanding Service to the Township.

2. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Commending Raynour "Rudy" Rudolph on Thirty-Two Years of Outstanding Service to the Township.

Mr. Greenbaum moved resolution No. 2. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

President Scapicchio: Comment on this resolution? Council?

Mrs. Miller: I think we should read the whole thing into the record.

President Scapicchio: Charlene would you like to do that?

Mrs. Miller: Sure.

WHEREAS, Raynour "Rudy" Rudolph was hired by the Township of Mount Olive as a Plumbing Inspector in 1970 and has with great dedication served the Township until now, as he has given notice of his retirement; and

WHEREAS, "Rudy" Rudolph has served the Township of Mount Olive during what is obviously the greatest growth period in its history. He has also served as Plumbing Inspector for Hackettstown and Allamuchy; and

WHEREAS, Raynour "Rudy" Rudolph while serving the Township has also shared his experience and expertise with students at Morris County Community College and Essex County Community College and he has served on the State Arbitration Committee for numerous years; and

WHEREAS, the Township by virtue of this Resolution expresses its gratitude for Rudy*s many years of fine service.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive that it does hereby wish to thank Raynour "Rudy" Rudolph on behalf of all the citizens of the Township for his years of outstanding dedication and service to the Township and to wish him the very best, happiness and good health in his retirement.

3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Commending Raymond "Ray" Kemmerer for Thirty-Four Years of Dedicated Service to the Township.

Mayor Licitra: I think what we have to remember when we go as far back in Mt. Olive in the last thirty five years, we have to always remember where we have been and who brought us here. I can't tell you how we're going to do it in our Road Department, Ray was just fantastic. He had public relations throughout the Town. Whenever someone called he got back to them, he responded, he was up all hours of the night. The reasons why a lot of the times we don't get complaints about snow removal is because of the job that Ray and his department has done and will continue to do because he set the standard. You don't replace someone like Ray, you could hope that somebody does the job as good as he did and as dedicated as he was. His personality was such that it made my job that much easier because of the way he responded to people and because of the way he fixed things when they were broken. Even if he didn't fix it, he made people feel comfortable by telling them why it wasn't fixed. So Ray this is a very small plaque to go along with your big heart and your dedication to Mt. Olive. I have had the pleasure of working with you as Mayor for the past three years. I want to present this plaque to you on behalf of the Council and the Mayor. Congratulations on your retirement after 34 years of devoting your service to the Township of Mt. Olive presented the 22nd day of October 2002 by the Mayor and Township Council. Ray I don't know what I am going to do without you. I am still going to call you on snow nights.

WHEREAS, Raymond "Ray" Kemmerer was hired by the Township of Mount Olive as a laborer in July 1968; was promoted to heavy equipment operator in July 1975; was again promoted to Road Department Foreman in August 1979 and finally received a promotion to Road Department Supervisor in January 1996; and with great dedication serviced the Township, without interruption, until he gave notice of his retirement; and

WHEREAS, Raymond "Ray" Kemmerer has served the Township of Mount Olive during a tremendous growth period with more road construction and new Township roads to maintain than any municipality has ever experienced in Morris County, and has managed his staff efficiently and effectively; and

WHEREAS, "Ray" Kemmerer is a reliable and dependable figure within the Township Department of Public Works and will be missed by the department as well as the citizens it serves.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive that it does hereby wish to thank "Ray" Kemmerer on behalf of all the citizens of the Township for his dedication and years of service to the Township and to wish him the very best, happiness and good health in his retirement.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously.

4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Commending Frank Kennedy on Twenty-Six Years of Outstanding Service to the Township.

Mrs. Miller moved for approval of this resolution. Mr. Rattner seconded the motion.

Mayor Licitra: You know when I took over three years ago, I think I said three words to him in the first three months I was in. I know that this Sanitation Department worked as well as the Road Department with both the Public and the Township. I'll put our Sanitation Department up against anybody, there are things that Frank has brought to that department, you wouldn't believe half the things that I get, letters and calls about our Sanitation Department and that is a reflection upon the leadership of the Sanitation Department. I knew when I first took over and I said to my Business Administrator, I think I said it to Cindy also when she took over. I said don't know what he does in there but leave him alone, he makes us proud. Then again he wouldn't take any advice anyway, he would do it his own way. So it doesn't make any difference what I say but again so many years of experience that we are going to be losing and you don't replace it but like Ray and like Frank they have told me that they will be around. They are citizens of Mount Olive and anytime I need them just give them a call and they will be there. To tell you the truth I know that. I know I can call them at any time and they will be there to help us as they were in the past. So Frank, tonight I would like to present to you Frank Kennedy, congratulations on your retirement. 26 years of devoted service to the Township of Mt. Olive and this is presented this 22nd day of October 2002 by the Mayor and Council. Thank you.

Mr. Rattner: Frank has really had an interesting career in Mt. Olive Township. People don't realize he started out in the Police Department as a patrolman for almost six years. I heard a lot of stories but that was before my time so I cannot attest and I won't repeat. When I got on the Council in the late 1980's, all the employees wanted to be transferred into Sanitation. They said the good jobs were in Sanitation. How many towns could say that? Also for years, when we were talking about services in Town, the one that I kept getting compliments on was in Sanitation. It was the way that Frank was able to run a department, come up with new ideas and have his men follow his orders. Also, when we had different needs; when we had a problem with maintaining the vehicles. Frank said well, with my current job, I will look at that too and I can manage that. He just stepped into that. He volunteered for that. He didn't ask for anything, just stepped into it and worked that way. He has also been very involved in almost every community activity. He was the one who sponsored the "Welcome the Boys Home From Desert Storm." He had been also involved with the Mount Olive Days; he and his business has made sure to participate because the loves the Town, not just being an employee but he is a resident and he is a man of Mount Olive. So with that we have a resolution from the Town Council.

WHEREAS, Frank Kennedy has been employed by the Township of Mount Olive for over twenty-six years, first as a Police Officer from 1970 through 1979 and after six years in the private sector, Frank returned to Mount Olive in his present and essential capacity as Sanitation Supervisor; and
WHEREAS, Frank Kennedy has served the Township of Mount Olive conscientiously and diligently and has taken proper care of what the citizens of Mount Olive are exceptionally concerned about, namely their garbage; and

WHEREAS, Frank has served the citizens of the Township who are indeed dependent upon his services; and

WHEREAS, Frank has served the Township well and is deserving of the recognition and gratitude of the Mayor and Council and the citizens of Mount Olive; and

WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council are hopeful that the high level of service that Frank has rendered will continue beyond Frank*s retirement.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive that it does hereby wish to thank Frank Kennedy for his years of outstanding dedication and service to the Township and to wish him the very best, happiness and good health in his retirement.

Frank Kennedy: I would like to thank you first of all. Number two I would like to thank Mr. Scapicchio and number one I would like to thank you Mr. Spino from way back in our day and Mr. Rattner. We have had our day together on the dais right here on Council, when we did Budgets. I always remember the days that we go way back. Thank you again.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

PUBLIC PORTION

ORDINANCES FOR PUBLIC HEARING

Ord. #40-2002 Bond Ordinance Amending Bond Ordinance Numbered 26-2002 of the Township of Mount Olive, In the County of Morris, New Jersey Finally Adopted June 18, 2002 Providing for Various Improvements to, and Acquisition of Equipment and Vehicles for Turkey Brook Park and in Order to Amend Such Bond Ordinance in its Entirety.

Laura Szwak, 7 Theresa Drive, Flanders NJ: About this Ordinance; I see that there is some use of some Open Space Trust funds being considered in this Ordinance and I was disappointed that the Council didn't ask your advisory body of the Open Space Committee about this. My opinion today is expressed as just Laura Szwak and not exactly the Chair of the Open Space Committee because the committee as a whole has not discussed it. In my professional capacity as assistant of the Morris Land Conservatory I work with 19 different Towns in five Counties using their Open Space Trust and from what I could tell from this Ordinance, the use of $1.00 for this ordinance is an illegal use of the fund. The referendum that was passed that supported the Open Space Trust; I'll mention two purposes, recreation facility development and land acquisition. There was no mention of maintenance or purchase of maintenance type equipment in there. As I understand from the attorney's that I deal with in other Towns as well, that unless that purpose is specifically stated in the local referendum that established a trust that the funds cannot be used for that purpose. The State has enabling legislation that allows the use of maintenance, but a local ordinance that establishes the Open Space Trust has to have that on a referendum. Right now we have not asked the Mount Olive voters if that is a purpose for the referendum. Harding Township has got a referendum on the ballot this November to add the maintenance as a purpose. But I will give you an example, Morris County has a referendum on the ballot to add historic preservation to the use of their Open Space and Farmland Preservation Trust and they don't really have to do it on the County level as we understand because the State enabling legislation supersedes what is on there, but the Freeholders have decided it was a prudent thing to do to go back and ask the voters if historic preservation could be added as a good purpose. I am sorry you did not ask the Open Space Committee. We could have helped you. We always want to try to be positive. So we strongly recommend that you not use open space trust funds for this purpose. We have been able to leverage those dollars for Mount Olive and a number to add thousands of dollars to the Town. We suggest perhaps you set up a trust for the stewardship of Turkey Brook Park which is going to be very important funded by user fees, as I hear from the Mount Olive Soccer Club, this is going to be a premiere facility so it should be able to be a facility that should generate some income for the Town. There is also a brand new Morris County improvement fund where you can borrow at a very low rate and not have to pay the five percent down for bond anticipation notes. If you do decide to hold the referendum to ask Mt. Olive voters if they would approve of the maintenance as a purpose for Open Space Trust but at the same time you ask them to increasing the trust with the same referendum. I know I would recommend having a separate trust for the Stewardship of Turkey Brook Park or any Mount Olive Park. I think you are mixing apples and oranges. We don't want to mortgage our future, we may have been able to leverage dollars quite successfully using the money that is in the Open Space Trust and I know you are not asking for much out of the Trust but I fear it is not a legal use.

President Scapicchio: Thank you. Mayor you and I have had several discussions, any comments?

Mrs. Jenkins: If I could just speak first about exactly what this Ordinance has done just to clarify because I think there is some confusion. When we set up this ordinance we took the down payment of $75,000 from the Open Space Trust Fund. The debt that we authorize is general obligation debt, debt that would be paid for through taxation the way that out other debt is paid for. I understand that the time that we set up the Ordinance there was some discussion about taking the annual debt service from the Open Space Trust Fund. But this Ordinance does not do that, I just want to make that clear.

President Scapicchio: Thank you.

Mr. Greenbaum: I have a question for Sherry. If I understand correctly the $75,000 is the down payment to finance the entire amount of the bonding, correct?

Mrs. Jenkins: Yes.

Mr. Greenbaum: Most of the money which is being used for the bonding is for the actual improvement and it does not relate to the purchase of the equipment particularly. One could argue that the $75,000 which is taken from the Open Space Trust Fund is being used specifically towards the improvement of the park which is a permitted use under our enabling statues; could one make such an argument?
Mrs. Jenkins: You can say that and you can also extend that even further because we are also as part of out down payment, we applied $133,333 for money that we got from AIG baker is also applied here, so it wasn't only $75,000 that we used as a funding source for this ordinance. In fact there was $133,000 that has since come in from AIG Baker.

President Scapicchio: Steve, this was actually your recommendation, do you have any thoughts?

Mr. Rattner: It was my recommendation in the technical parts of the different Ordinances and all of the funding that we have done with Turkey Brook, obviously at that time I didn't think of. Lets put this in the proper perspective. We bought Turkey Brook, it cost us about $2.8 million that was for the land acquisition. We did not use any of the Open Space money for that general obligation. We then bonded another $5.9 million, nothing out of Open Space, general obligation. We also got probably somewhere in the vicinity of $800, 000 that we got in contribution. Some left over from Country Oaks, the Soccer Club; $800,000. The last $1.5 million that we had to find the funding source for was for the purpose of additional costs to complete Turkey Brook which was the $1.5 million. Why I bring that up is because we bonded for $7.4 million just recently between those two ordinances, $5.9 strictly out of general obligations; down payments and future payments. The $2.8 million before that general obligation. If we really look a this, we have a project that is now up to around $10 or $11 million and we are saying $75,000 is coming out of Open Space. Now I say that there is a way of straightening out the book, this is bookkeeping, it's nothing more. If we are talking about $75,000 out of an $11 million dollar project, what are we spending all this time on? I have to agree, you have to be very careful with what we are doing with our Open Space Funds, because we told the people what it's used for. Open Space funds was for acquisition and development So at this point, $11 million dollars and we are talking about allocating $75,000 of that. I have had this discussion when Sherry called me when she said there may be an issue that is coming up. I said well we still had money left in the $5.9, lets make sure that we take the equipment out of that bond and the $1.5 would be used for some other amounts. It's the bookkeeping that we will have to straighten out the Ordinances but it is not something that I think we violating the law in any which way and as I told her, I am not going to do anything because her suggestion was to take $200,000, take it out of general obligation, you know my position was that I am not going to vote for anymore money in Turkey Brook. The bottom line is, $75,000 out of $11 million for acquisition and in development of a park, I think if you are talking about leveraging Open Space Money, no town has ever done something bigger than that.

President Scapicchio: Thanks, Steve. Charlene.

Mrs. Miller: I am embarrassed that this Council did not ask the Open Space Committee for their opinion therefore I think we should send them this because that is what the Open Space Committee was appointed for. Earl, and myself and Kathy were all on that first Open Space meeting to review how that committee was to be set up and the way it was set up is so that it would not become a political machine but it would become a citizens advisory committee on how that trust fund was to be spent. By not including The Open Space committee prior to approving this I think that we have committed a wrong. I voted no on this to introduce it and that was the reason, but there was another reason and now I am going to make it public because now it is official that we have fired several of our Mt. Olive employees, several of them have been with us for numerous years. One was 16 years and one was 18 years and these were all positions that were women in order to hire maintenance people for Turkey Brook and I have a real problem with that because I feel that is very bias because the maintenance people that are going to work at Turkey Brook are most likely going to be male and we have…How many people's position have been terminated that are going to end this December?

Mrs. Spencer: It will be two full time and one part time.

Mrs. Miller: So three people will lose their positions and they were all women. Is that correct?

President Scapicchio: A point of order here Charlene, we are talking about Ordinance 40-2002 which is a Bond Ordinance we are not talking about employees. I think if you want to address that, we could certainly entertain that…

Mrs. Miller: I am explaining why I am going to vote no on this issue.

President Scapicchio: Charlene, you were at the Workshop Meeting where this was discussed when Mr. Rattner first brought that to the Councils attention as a viable suggestion.

Mrs. Miller: And I did take it to the Open Space Committee and they were never asked.
President Scapicchio: You are the liaison to the Open Space Committee?

Mrs. Miller: Yes.

President Scapicchio: You were at that meeting?

Mrs. Miller: Yes.

President Scapicchio: And you did take it back to them?

Mrs. Miller: They did not have the Ordinance.

President Scapicchio: But you are the liaison; the point I am trying to make Charlene is that you are the liaison between the Council and that Committee. This Council in no way tried to keep that committee out of the loop. You are part of that committee and it is your responsibility as the liaison to bring that back to the respective committee.

Mrs. Miller: I brought it up to them, they did not have the Ordinance I told them to please see if they could get a copy of it, we did not have time to act on it. It was not given to them in the same manner.

President Scapicchio: The point I am trying to make Charlene is that you are the liaison.

Mrs. Miller: You are trying to make it sound like I am not doing my job.

President Scapicchio: You were aware of the recommendation that Mr. Rattner made. That is the point. Any other Public discussion on this ordinance?

Rich Bonte, Budd Lake: My first question is; who used to maintain the fields across the street here? Who did that? Did the Township maintain those fields?

President Scapicchio: I am not sure. Mayor, do you know?

Mayor Licitra: If I had to take a guess, I would say yes we did. I don't think Jim would know that.

Mr. Spino: In reality it was a combination of the School Board and us but mostly us.

Mr. Bonte: How did we do that?

Mr. Spino: What we did there first of all was mow the fields. Mow the grass and the Soccer Club did the majority of the work. Lining the fields, keeping track of the goals and all that. You have to remember now, all they did was mow the fields, that was a cow pasture.

Mr. Bonte: I understand that. My first thing I want to state here because I find it incredulous that we need to be spending this kind of money maintaining these fields and I believe I have heard that we are going to be talking about them getting mowed two to three times a week; which I find even more incredulous. I really don't understand what it is that we are trying to establish up here. I have heard terms used in the past, "World class soccer facility" It is going to be the "Jewel of Mt. Olive." We'll attract all these people here to this and that and everything else. My first question to this Council, is this necessary? Is it necessary to spend this kind of money to put this kind of effort into manicuring lawns for the youth of the Township? I don't believe that what we are planning here is necessary. It may be nice to have, but we are talking about a lot of money in terms of equipment in terms of man power, in terms of operating expenses. Secondly I have a copy of Mt. Olive's legislation here, I don't know if any of you others have it. It does appear from reading this legislation that you can't use any money for anything other than acquisition of Open Space. Mr. Greenbaum is shaking his head,

Mr. Greenbaum: I think you must be looking at the older piece of legislation.

Mr. Bonte: I am looking at what is on our current web-site.

Mr. Greenbaum: My understanding was and correct me if I am wrong were two actually enabling legislation. The first dealt with and this was before I was on Council, dealt only with the acquisition of the Open Space. The later referendum dealt with the acquisition and improvement for recreational facilities.

Mr. Bonte: Are you telling me that our website does not have the current legislation on it.

Mr. Greenbaum: I don't know what our current web-site has Rich.

Mr. Bonte: Well let me tell you what our web-site has and you tell me if this is current or not. Because if it is not current, then I don't think you should act on this. The Public does not have the information to make a decision. This states that the funds accumulated within the trust fund may be utilized for the acquisition of land by out right purchase, long term lease donation, development rights conservation easements, scenic easements or as a down payment for the issuance of bonds for the same purposes as the discretion of the Township Council. Monies from the Trust Fund shall only be appropriated as for an authorized purpose by the Township Council. Is that the current Legislation?

Mr. Greenbaum: I don't believe so.

President Scapicchio: I don't believe so either Rich. What is the Ordinance number?

Mr. Bonte: Adopted September 10, 1996 Ordinance #27-96. This is what is on our website available for the public I have printed it out this evening.

President Scapicchio: We will check but I believe that there was an ordinance that has been amended that also allows for the development of Open Space.

Mr. Bonte: But it does not allow for the expenditure of funds for equipment?

President Scapicchio: That language is not in that Ordinance, you are correct.

Mr. Bonte: If that language is not in that ordinance, I understand what Mr. Rattner is saying. It doesn't mean because I went down a road eleven times at 15 mph when the speed limit is 25, I am now entitled to go down at one to fifty to make it up, because the average is 25mph. You know that would never hold up in court, this would never hold up in court.

Mr. Rattner: That wasn't my point Mr. Bonte.

Mr. Bonte: Your point was that we spend a lot of money out of taxpayer funds and never went to the Open Space.

Mr. Rattner: I am saying that we still have money in some of those other funds, in the donated funds and it is basically getting it in the right funds. The $1.5 million ordinance that we passed just a couple months ago does not have to be used for this. We have total of somewhere in the vicinity right now $7.3, $7.4 million dollars. Not all of that is expended. We have to get it to the right ordinance, I agree with you there. We could use that full $1.5 for improvements which is what it is being used for. What's left, we could probably find some money in the $5.9 or in the $800,000 worth of contributions. We only got $50,000 last week, so we did not spend it yet. I agree with you. The $1.5 is basically on our legislation, we cannot take it out of that ordinance. I happen to agree with you on that. What I am saying is that in the total project, we have the money in there, it's more bookkeeping to make sure it is taken out of the proper funds.

Mr. Bonte: Whether it is more bookkeeping or not, I would certainly hope that even though it is more bookkeeping, we are charging properly to the water and sewer account and not the general taxation. I don't believe that either this legislation or what you say may be the current legislation if you have any legal authority of spending $1.00 of Open Space dollars towards this equipment.

Mr. Spino: I would like to say that if we separated the ordinance into two purposes, by far the largest purpose is $1.3 million provided for improvements into Turkey Brook Park including all working materials necessary therefore. It would seem to me that the $75,000 is well within what I believe the Ordinance allows us to do since I was involved in getting first and second referendum that allowed us to increase it to use it for farmland preservation including maintenance. In fact I was the one that argued that it shouldn't be a percentage. Somebody wanted to have a percentage of so much for maintenance and so much for the purchase of the property. I was the one that said there shouldn't be a percentage difference; the amount to be left up to the Council. I would think if we separated the ordinance into two parts and had two separate ordinances we would not have this problem at all.

Mr. Bonte: Well that may be so Earl; that's what needs to be done.

Mr. Spino: If you are saying yes to that then you have to say yes to the fact that we are allowed to do it the way we are doing it.

Mr. Spino: It does not particularly say that it is purchasing equipment. What it says is that there is a $1.3 million for work and there is $200,000 for equipment as I read it.

Mr. Bonte: Does it specially prohibit the use of those funds for that purpose?

Mr. Spino: You have to understand that's what we are doing. If you are saying that we are deliberately saying well we are going to do it but we are only going to buy equipment with it, then you are wrong. As I said before, we will never convince you, I won't argue the point anymore. If my colleagues feel they should separate it into two ordinances or whatever, fine. This is the third time I am saying it, we will never convince you.

Mr. Bonte: I presume that you are all convinced that we need to spend this type of money and to put this type of work effort into manicuring the fields. Is that correct?

President Scapicchio: That is not correct Mr. Bonte, I think you missed the workshop where the topic was discussed.

Mr. Bonte: I was at the workshop.

President Scapicchio: I was the one individual that was not in favor of purchasing equipment or doing it in house. Mayor, you and I have had several discussions since I knew that this subject was going to come up. Are you and your Administration comfortable that you are following the letter of the law and that the language within this ordinance is appropriate and the use of the funds is appropriate as presented to us tonight?

Mr. Bonte: Does anybody here this evening have a copy of that law?

President Scapicchio: The second Ordinance Rich?

Mr. Bonte: The law that allows you to spend money on equipment.

Mr. Spino: The second referendum including purchase of property and development of property.

Mr. Bonte: But that does not say equipment.

Mr. Spino: We are not buying equipment.

President Scapicchio: Earl I have a suggestion. I am going to purpose that we continue this until October 29, 2002 which we will establish as a Public Meeting tonight.

Mr. Spino: On that, I was going to ask that we not have a public meeting on the 29th. Mrs. Murphy is presenting our Open Space proposal to the County. I would suggest that at least two Council People be present at that because it looks good and it puts your position in a favorable light when you have Council people there to represent that position. Since we are going to be begging for money, someone should be there to represent the Township besides Mrs. Murphy and the Open Space Committee. For that instance, I know am not going to be here.

Mrs. Jenkins: If I could make a suggestion so we could maybe move forward with this and not prolong it, I am proposing that we take this ordinance off the table and that we go back and amend ordinance 36-2000. That was the $5.9 million funding that we had set up in 2000 for this project. We have $200,000 available in that ordinance that we could reapply towards this particular purchase of equipment.

President Scapicchio: Sherry, is your proposal to amend the ordinance that is in front of us?

Mrs. Jenkins: I am saying to decline the ordinance that is in front of you and in fact we go back and amend…

President Scapicchio: So we are going to introduce a new ordinance?

Mrs. Jenkins: Yes. We will introduce a new ordinance that is in no way related to Open Space.

Mr. Rattner: That is what I mentioned before when I said it's just really getting it in the right account. We have $5.9 when we first went out for Turkey Brook. That is not including the gifts, the grants and the sales that we have accumulated another $500,00 - $700,000. Since the other account, the $5.9 had nothing to do with Open Space, it was strictly out of the general taxation, we take it out of there. My concern was that which ever way we did it we didn't take new money that we had to live within the budget and then I said I would release both to buy equipment to maintain it. That is what Mrs. Jenkins is suggesting.

Mrs. Jenkins: We are going to reallocate money that we have already appropriated and apply it towards the purchase of the equipment; which is what we were attempting to do here.

Mr. Greenbaum: The bottom line is you are still going to be utilizing the $75,000 of Open Space money with regard to the development of the park itself. It's really a matter of semantics in terms of making sure that we are complying with the law as Mr. Bonte sees it.

Mrs. Jenkins: Well if there is an uncomfortableness with the amendment of this ordinance; either the original understanding was that we were going to take the debt service from this ordinance through Open Space Trust Fund, so if we just decline this and go the route that I am suggesting; yes.

Mr. Bonte: Can I also just suggest that if you are going to spend the money and I don't know what it is costing to have the Township web site, that we make sure that the information on that website is accurate?

President Scapicchio: Thank you Rich. Anyone else from the Public? Seeing none. We will close the public hearing on this ordinance.

Mr. Guenther moved for the adoption and final passage of Ordinance #40-2002; Mr. Ratter seconded the motion.

Mayor Licitra: Jim advises me that we have favorable rates on the equipment and the Administration would like this dealt with next week. If we could put the other portion of the amendment on for next week so that we could get it started; we don't loose that favorable status.

President Scapicchio: Mayor I am not sure we are going to have a quorum to be able to do that, are we? We need four to introduce it. We could put it on if we have the appropriate number of members, we could move it Mayor.

Mayor Licitra: Could you please ask the Council if anybody is going to be absent next week unbeknownced the sicknesses and whatever?

President Scapicchio: Anyone on the Council have any intentions of not being here next week? That is four people that are not going to be here Mayor.

Mr. Guenther: Mr. President, may I make a suggestion?

President Scapicchio: Sure.

Mr. Guenther: Kathy, what time were you planning to be there?

Mrs. Murphy: We start at 8:35.

Mr. Guenther: Is there any way that we can start our Township Council meeting earlier and vote on this particular ordinance? So to start the Council Meeting at 7:00 and put the vote on this Ordinance at the beginning of the meeting so we who are planning to attend the Freeholder Open Space Meeting can have enough time to go to Morristown.

President Scapicchio: I will talk to Lisa and we will try to arrange that Bernie. I will try to arrange something to accommodate everybody.

Mrs. Miller: Could I have a clarification of what the motion is?

President Scapicchio: We have got this ordinance on the table; the consensus is that it is going to be defeated. The Administration is going to draft a new ordinance.

Mrs. Miller: Please just answer my question. Is the motion to vote to defeat it or is the motion to vote to approve it.

President Scapicchio: There is a motion to get this on the table but we are going to vote against it. That is what we are going to do.

Mrs. Miller: I just wanted to know because sometimes we motion to table.

ROLL CALL: Defeated

Ord. #41-2002 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Establishing Linwood Road as One Way during Certain Designated Times.

President Scapicchio: Would anyone from the Public like to comment on this Ordinance?

Jim Buell, 7 Linwood Rd. Budd Lake: I submitted to the Council a letter asking questions related to this particular ordinance. Last year I opposed a similar Ordinance, I oppose this ordinance. I oppose this ordinance because I don't think there is anything that has improved the safety related to the pedestrians and the people arriving at that school by making Linwood Avenue a one way street. For instance, this particular ordinance does nothing to address the major problem. If anybody was there to for the back to school night last Thursday night, the street was parked on both sides of the street. Jameson was parked both sides of the street, Knollwood was parked both sides of the street at 8:00 at night and there was still three or four cars driving around looking for a parking place, that's the problem. That is one of the major safety areas where this ordinance doesn't even talk about. Secondly, the problem during the daytime exists for about 20 minutes a day; 3:10 until about 3:45 in the afternoon. Beyond that, there is no safety problem related to Linwood Ave. To expect the people who live on Linwood Ave and we are the only 10, or 12 houses of people who are involved in this other than the people who arrive to pick up and drop off their kids to go one way sometimes and not one way at other times for instance; one of the questions that I asked last year the summer school; last year they had summer school at Mountain View school which lasted through, I think mid July. So, now we are talking about a one way street, 10.5 months of the year from 8:00 - 4:00 pm Monday through Friday, not extending through the evening hours. What's the use? If we are going to have an ordinance, lets make it one way and make it permanently one way all the time. Then there is no confusion, for instance, one of the questions I asked is what did we do on Columbus Day. Children were present, there was no school in session, however the teachers were there. Is it a one way or not? What do we do on a day when we have a cancellation of school, for instance on an inclement whether day, is it one way or is it not one way? What about days when school is only scheduled for half a day? Again there is no answer at least in terms of this particular in terms of what we are supposed to do in those particular cases.
Last year I strongly argued that if you are going to make Linwood Ave. a one way you, should make Linwood Ave one way westbound. The opposite of what is proposed here and was proposed last year. Why is that? Well, if you look at the school and you make this one way westbound, the 125 cars arriving in the morning, people could come into the school driveway, go through the school driveway and exit out on to Clover Hill Drive, the distance of about 250 feet. Instead when we go eastbound with this, all of the cars are going to have to go through this driveway and exit down Linwood Ave. through Knollwood and up Jameson. That means everyday in the morning and in the afternoon between 3:00 and 3:15 and about 3:45 we will have 150 cars going up Jameson Ave. So what we have done is transferred the problem from Linwood Ave. to some extent and put it on to the people at Jameson. One of the questions I would like to ask the Council, when you notify people, spending $50.00 to notify us about this meeting in order to get this Ordinance passed, did anybody notify the people on Jameson, Edgewood, Allison and Collingswood; that this was going to affect them, because that is where the real problem is going to be. You are now going to force all of these people coming into this complex back through those back streets. Now the other concern I have is, has anybody been up there and looked at this at 3:50 in the afternoon? Is the Police Department going to enforce the new parking up here in the circle? Where the real safety problem is this; you have the top of the parking lot up here 27 feet wide. There are no parking signs. Every single day cars are parked bumper to bumper in both of those zones. There is a no parking zone here and a no parking zone here. Cars are parked bumper to bumper in there. That is where the safety problem exists. Now the other problem that exists is here. There are five parking places around this circle, the macadam is only 20 feet from the end of these front end parking spaces on this side, that's completely parked and again what you have is a real major problem right there at that driveway. If you are talking about a safety problem, that is where it exists. The way to correct that is to make these three spaces up here which are now parked all day long, which are all these parking spaces, part of the solution is to make these three spaces no parking. Allow people to pick up and drop off their kids up here right in front of the school. My other concern with the Ordinance is I have lived in this house for almost 30 years. There is a major problem at the bottom portion of Linwood Ave. and at the bottom portion of Jamison Ave. when we have inclement weather during the winter. The first problem that exists is there is a walkway here which is the only safe way for pedestrians and I am talking about 30 pedestrians in the morning and about 30 in the afternoon, which have to walk; the only safe way for them to exist the school to walk back into the sub-division. If you go down this walk way right here on this eastern portion of this sidewalk down here. The problem with it is there's the sewer drainage down here. There's been a 10 or 15 foot easement for sewer and the water drainage. That's never plowed. So we plow it on the first morning. The school pushes all the snow down and dumps it in that drainage easement. The person who lives here who is a widow, she shovels her sidewalks. Then for the next 6 months in one case, this pile of snow sat there and no- body could exit there. So basically what you have to do is you have all these 30 residents or pedestrians walking out into this icy slippery street while all of these cars are going down. The second problem is the school does plow that sidewalk the first morning, but then after the first morning they don't do anything. Why? Because nobody could walk on it. That sidewalk is icy. The second problem is that both the intersection of Jameson and Knollwood and Linwood and Knollwood, the other two major drainage problems. Those two intersections are almost and completely iced over when ever it's cold and there is wet on the ground. Yet we are going to run many more cars through this sub division as a result. Obviously I am against this Ordinance. I think there is a more effective way of doing this if possibly eliminate all of the cars, or eliminate the evening problem, it doesn't involve this ordinance in which you could run the cars east or westbound, but it's a much simpler solution that exists. That is very simple, all that has to be done is at the corner of Jameson and Knollwood, you place a do not enter sign right here at Knollwood and Jameson. That effectively stops all of the cars from going this way. Then if you put a no right hand turn at each of these driveways to the school permanently full time forever, you have effectively made Linwood Ave. a one way street with out making it a one way street. That also allows the residents of Linwood Ave. to park in their driveways and once they get into their driveways to go which ever way they would. There is a very simple solution that solves the night time problem, I think there is a better flow of traffic in terms of making a west bound road east bound. I think it was not considered, unfortunately. I asked the police at the conclusion at the last Council Meeting the last time this ordinance was presented, the police contacted me, I made the suggestion, I made two follow up calls to the Police Department, never received a call back. I heard by mistake that this ordinance was back on the agenda. Thank you very much.

President Scapicchio: You did not hear that by mistake, we purposely noticed the Linwood residents.

Mr. Buell: You gave me one week and I tried to come up to the meeting last Tuesday night and it was cancelled.
President Scapicchio: We took extra steps above and beyond what's required to make sure the residents knew this was one the table.

Mr. Buell: Did you tell the people on Jameson?

President Scapicchio: I don't know what the mailing list was. I know the Clerk was instructed to notice by letter the affected individuals and I believe that they were only the residents on Linwood.

Mr. Buell: Thank you.

President Scapicchio: Thank you. Anyone else from the public?

Richard Bonte, Budd Lake: I spoke out regarding this ordinance when it was back here a year ago and I really don't see much difference in what is being proposed here. It still has the vague wording and it's just going to become confusing to people and be the source of people receiving summonses for not knowing what is going on. It's as vague as the sign we have in front of every school now, speed limit 25 mph when children are present. You wouldn't be able to find any two people that agree on what present means. But to have us think that during those periods of time which Mountain View School is open and specifically 8:00 am through 4:00 pm together with certain notice/specific recommendations that appropriate signage. Is the appropriate signage going to list every specific holiday and day that the school is not and is open and what days you can and can't. I think this gentleman had some good ideas regarding the do not enter signs, and no right turn signs. Another alternative would be at the intersection of Jameson Place and Knollwood, to have a sign with flashing lights and the control of that sign be from school and that the appropriate times of day the lights will go on and the sign can say do not enter when lights are flashing. Just like many school zones have signs that say speed limit 25 mph when lights are flashing. It makes a lot more sense than the vague signage that say when children are present. The last thing we want to do is be vague. We don't want people in there when they shouldn't be in there when there could be a safety hazard and we don't want to restrict traffic when it is not necessary to restrict it. If there is a period of time in the morning and a period of time in the afternoon when the lights need to be on, the school officials can turn the switch on and that switch can be designed in a fashion so that it will only be on for a period of time so we don't have to remind somebody to shut them off. But I think you need to come up with a much more specific way of making a street one way. Otherwise just make it one way all the time. But to have it be one way at certain times of the day and then we all have to know the school calendar, is beyond me. Not opposed to the concept of what you are trying to do. We really need to make sure that it is done properly so that everybody has a full understanding of when they can't go two ways on that street.

President Scapicchio: Anyone else from the public?

Jim Sprague 5 Linwood Ave: My wife and I are probably the prime instigators in trying to get this before the Council and get it passed so I figured I should at least come up here and let everybody see what I look like. I also came up here this evening to support this ordinance as it was written. Mr. Buell makes very very good points. I agree that Linwood Road should be one way all the time; it avoids the ambiguity. My preference would be eastbound. I have no problem with westbound. Listening to what he said with a circle there at the school, westbound probably makes as much sense if not more. The part about the Ordinance that bothers me is "and certain other designated signage and times" I agree that it should be 24 hours a day, 7 days a week so that there is no ambiguity, signs could be posted to say one thing. It may take us a couple of weeks to slowly get used to it but we will get used to it and I think it is a lot better. Thank you. We would like to continue to have that no parking in that area right in front of my house.

President Scapicchio: Thank you. Anyone else?

Colleen Labow, Third St. Budd Lake: I am to agree with everything that's been said tonight. The time difference, sometimes it's one way sometimes it's not really bothers me. Just before they took away the HOV lane on Route 80 my son was driving down Route 80 and somebody was going slow in the middle lane and he went into the left lane to pass, got back in the middle and he got pulled over, he got a ticket and it was 10 minutes after 3:00. He did not have a clock in his car, he did not have a watch on and he got a ticket because he went in the HOV lane at 3:10, so that brings me a lot of concern as to who is really going to be watching your clock.
The other problem that I really have with this having it one way bringing all the cars in to the development is the fact that there is a lot of children in that development. Lots and lots of children and who's to say these people are going to go down Linwood, make a left onto Knollwood and then where are they going to go? They're going to race down Knollwood, and then they are going to turn down another street. They are going to be gabbing with their kids, the kids will be fighting, they are not going to be paying attention and little children are going to be playing in the street while these people are not going to be paying attention to where they are driving are going to be pushed into this neighborhood and that really concerns me because I think that creates more of a safety issue for the development in that area.

President Scapicchio: Thank you, Colleen. Would anyone else from the Public like to address this Ordinance?

Mr. Buell: Thank you. I would just like to add to my remarks to the no parking as listed here, across the street, 5 Linwood Ave. If this ordinance is amended in any way, I would really like to see that stay completely a no parking area.

Mr. Guenther: Excuse me. Which area are you talking about?

Mr. Buell: Where it is angle parking now.

President Scapicchio: Thank you. Anyone else from the public? Seeing none, we will close the Public Hearing.

Mr. Ratter moved for adoption and Final Passage of Ord. #41-2002. Mr. Spino seconded the motion.

Lieutenant Beecher: First off, I appreciate the effort on part of Mr. Buell and Mr. and Mrs. Sprague, we appreciate your input. In regards to westerly traffic, we did look into that but one of the reasons we wanted it to go east was to pull traffic away from that intersection. I was down there this morning and I think you would agree with me that during the times that were in your letter, it becomes a bit of a log jam on Linwood when you have parking on both sides of the road, and you have cars making a left or right on Clover Hill, and then cars going west, some cars have to stop to allow others to pass, it gets backed. Additionally when the crossing guard stops traffic on Clover Hill, it blocks that intersection. When we have people that want to leave Linwood, they have to stop and when the crossing guard moves, traffic wants to turn left right onto Linwood, once again we have a log jam there. We wanted to pull traffic away from that intersection towards Jameson. It is our experience with accidents that the cause of most accidents is driver inattention. So we wanted to increase the flow there where it seems to be pretty natural right now where people are making left or right turns and going east. As far as the confusion, there is room for confusion in this Statute for sure but I think the intent was to minimize any inconvenience to the people on Linwood. We would certainly support a year round, or September through June 8:00 to 4:00 24 hours a day east.

President Scapicchio: I think it also needs to be noticed that this is a recommendation that the Police Department has made after a thorough review twice over. If once adopted, we see that it needs to be modified or they sort of need to tweek the program a bit we could certainly do that. We are not closing the door forever.

Mr. Spino: I was just going to say very simply that if people in the area are not upset with the fact that it would be a one way all the time then maybe that is what we should do. It makes it so much simpler to do that. I think if that was the case and that's what we decide to do that we make sure that we notify everybody in the area, not just the Linwood residents but the other residents on Knollwood and Jameson. That might be the better way to go, eliminate it all.

Mr. Rattner: We have been discussing this now I guess over the course of probably two months over the course of the last year. The first time it got defeated because I did not like the idea of an hour or so in the morning, an hour in the afternoon and I did not like the signage. I figured that was really too much confusion. I did support having it 7 by 24 just to eliminate it once people get used to the traffic flow they will go that way. I know from the first time we discussed this, the police actually talked to about different residences, so it was more than just Linwood. They gave it and they had a breakdown where a lot of people did not like the idea of having it 24 hours a day. I think what the Police tried doing was trying to solve an immediate problem and satisfy or disrupt the lives as few people as possible. The couple hours a day because I could not get my moveable signs or something to block the traffic. I think it would cause even a bigger problem, and I think we compromised because we were discussing with justification and did not want to go against a recommendation of the Police. They are the trained people, they have taken the classes, they know exactly what to look for and we came up with this one that is from 8:00 - 4:00 pm just at least so we have a set time because that was before school opens, because after it leaves. Now I wouldn't have a problem going to 24/7 but I think everybody in that area has acknowledged there is a problem and I would at least like to get something up. If it looks like the 8:00 to 4:00 is not working that we modify it making it 7 by 24. My first preference, I think we came to an agreement that this was something that we could agree on and move forward on and I think at this point lets move forward with it, at least see if the people start learning what problems it causes. If we find out that Jameson becomes a mess, maybe we will realize that we have to do something else other than just change the hours.

Mr. Greenbaum: I disagree with Steve, I agree with Mr. Buell that it should be full time, one way. I believe with the Police Department that it should be full time one way easterly even though it forces whatever cars will go through the neighborhood. I believe if you went westerly you would cause horrific traffic problems on Clover Hill Drive and Linwood Drive and in that traffic circle because you would not have any access at all once you have reached the school. Linwood would allow you to at least move down the line and allow cars to move down the line. If we are trying to eliminate ambiguity, Mr. Buell's other idea of putting the do not enter signs where he had suggested, I do not believe that creates additional ambiguity. If you have Linwood Ave. residents going both ways on the street, you would be having people doing k-turns on Linwood Ave. possibly because it would be a two way street so I don't think that really eliminates the problem, I think that the best solution is to just have it one way, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, and make it easterly.

Mr. Perkins: I would entertain asking the Police Department to go back and look at the other schools in the Township, this will now be the second time Mr. President that we have been addressing one ways, no parking, moving people from parking on one street or another whether it be at the high school and now we are over here it's Mountain View. If we take a look at all the schools, kind of see what type of pattern we have down there. I would sure like to know what else is happening. I don't want to keep addressing this every few months, we are going to find out now there is a problem at Sandshore School, and then we are going to find out there is a problem at Tinc School and were going to keep finding out that there's problems, I mean where you drop off children there are problems…That is the nature of the beast. It's what happens. I agree it should be one way seven days a week, lets not confuse the people any more than absolutely necessary. If we are going to put up no parking signs, it's no parking all the time or do we make it Monday through Friday like we did up at the high school? If you get somebody at a party on a Saturday you want to make sure they are in a legal parking spot, if they decide to park in that abandoned area directly across from your house. There are areas Dave, that we need to think about when we look at these schools. I just don't want to keep readdressing the same animal every single time. Officer, you have no issues at Tinc, Sandshore, everybody is fine, it works better.

Lieutenant Beecher: You are always going to have problems on back to school night. Areas are not meant to accommodate a vast number of people, so those are rare circumstances that we have to deal with . The situation at Mountain View is unique, it concerns our schools in Town.

Mr. Perkins: Your department then would be in agreement then that 24 hours a day 7 days a week would be the best.

Lieutenant Beecher: We want it to be as clear as possible, we don't want there to be confusion on the part of people; I believe it was an attempt on all our parts to try to minimize the inconvenience to the people on Linwood. Certainly if you are only 100ft. on Clover Hill and you have always been able to make the right to go out to the street you are not going to be happy when the Police Department says we want you to go left and up Jameson. We could absolutely understand that. The situation there is such that it needs to be addressed. We believe that this is the safest way to do that.

Mr. Perkins: So being creatures of habit, 21 days will be in the new habit and we will all make the right turns.

Lieutenant Beecher: Like I said we can certainly understand wanting to make that right around Clover Hill, but the way the traffic flows right now, most people are coming down Linwood swinging into the parking lot and coming back out, when they could just make that right and go down 200 feet and make the left onto Jameson.

Mr. Perkins: Thank you.
Mrs. Miller: I have been a school bus driver for 23 years and I have driven to all of our schools and we have a great deal of problems at each and every one of the schools and I have seen parents do some really crazy things. I guess the mentality of the parent is oh my god, my kid missed the school bus, I got to get him to school as fast as I can. They see that front door and they are going to get their kid as close to that front door no matter what obstacles are in front of them I have seen parents drive over grass. I have seem them go around the school buses while we have had our stop signs out while we were unloading. I have seen parents drive over sidewalks. I have seen them back up. I have seen them back into buses, scrape along the sides of buses. You name it, I have seen it and no matter what we do it is going to be confusion in the beginning. I know this has been discussed several times. I think Mr. Buell's ideas are excellent, but I think I would like to go with the recommendation of our Police Department because they have studied this now for several months and this is the second proposal. I would like to get something on the record to help the school bus drivers in that area and like Dave said we can always re-evaluate again and make revisions, but I like the idea of starting out with a time frame and if it doesn't work out going to a one way. I think the recommendation from the Police Department to keep it in an easterly is just going with the mentality of the drivers because if they get to that spot and find out that they can only come out of that street and not into it, it is only going to cause more confusion. Right now they are going down that street and back up that street and that's the problem is going back up and down the street. I am in favor of the proposal as it is but I think we have gotten some excellent input.

Mr. Spino: First of all I would ask Mr. Perkins to reconsider. I agree every school is unique in itself and I would agree with Mrs. Kelly that all our problems would be if the one at Linwood is unique to that situation. Secondly, the police had said that they are not opposed to having it one way 24 hours a day, seven days a week. What they are doing is trying to make it as easy as possible on the people in the area and the people that are going back and forth to the school. So if we made it 24 hours a day, seven days a week, it is not going against the recommendation, I would call it a secondary recommendation to make it 24 hours a day, seven days a week. I don't think we would be going against the Police recommendation which is what I thought the last time, but I would support it 24/7.

Mr. Guenther: 24/7 I am in agreement with that, I just want to make a comment about the East vs. West. I think that it doesn't really resolve the issue of traffic through the development. Whether coming out or coming in, they are going to come in on Jameson and Collingswood and so forth and come up on Knollwood, so I don't think that is a very good argument. So I would agree with the east going out and notifying and I think we should notify all the residents. The only concern I have is Mr. Buell's comment about the snow removal at the corner of Linwood and Knollwood. If that is a major issue that snow accumulates, especially that one winter where we had a tough winter where it all froze and it didn't disappear for several months I believe.

Mr. Buell: That snow at the bottom of Jameson and Linwood is a Major problem, right in the middle of the street.

Mr. Guenther: Is there anything we would do about that? Is that the schools jurisdiction? Do they plow that street to keep it clear?

Mr. Spino: No, we plow it.

Mr. Buell: It is not a question of plowing, if you plow it, it's clear. Then you get ice melt, and the unfortunate problem is that you've got two drains at the bottom of Linwood Ave. that actually are the drains for most of Jameson and most of Knollwood and that comes right down and lays across Jameson, they plow and the next day you have sheer ice across the intersection of Linwood and Knollwood. That is a major problem.

Mr. Guenther: We have ourPublic Works Director here, I would like to address that question to him. If there is some way we could find to resolve that, I don't know if you have to come in with a backhoe and haul it away, dump it in the woods or something like that to get it off the road so that you don't have that kind of melting and icing over.

Mark DiGennaro, Director of Public Works: We're going to get together on this.

Mr. Guenther: Okay great. Thanks, Mark.

Mr. Rattner: I guess we keep losing time. I don't know what happened from our workshop when we had the discussion about the 24/7. It sounds like now there is an agreement on 24/7. I am now going to vote against this ordinance so we can reintroduce it and get it right. It is the simplest in signage; unless we get an uprising from other residents that really have a major problem, I think simple makes sense and I think it would be best for everybody involved after the first couple weeks and everybody gets used to it. I got used to the extra 10 minutes it takes me to get to 206 when Goldmine was made a dead end.

Mr. Buell: Two other minor problems we have if you make it one way 24/7. First of all is the mail person. If you make it eastbound I think the mail person is going to have a very hard time delivering mail down Linwood Road.

President Scapicchio: They'll work that out.

Mr. Buell: The other problem we have is about 5 five times a week you have 12 and 16 wheel tractor trailers coming in there to that school. If you make this thing one way 24/7 you are going to have problems with tractor trailers that size coming down any of those other streets particularly in the snow and ice and making that turn.

Mr. Rattner: What time do the trucks usually get there?

Mr. Buell: Anywhere from 3:00am to 6:00am. The milk delivery, the food delivery comes in I think three or four times a week.

Mr. Spino: They deliver with tractor-trailers?

Mr. Buell: Yes. There is one 16 wheeler and one 12 wheeler. That's going to be a problem coming through there.

Mr. Guenther: Where do they deliver, through that through that parking area?

Mr. Buell: Yes. It gets delivered to the loading dock at the back of the school in that parking area.

Mr. Guenther: Could they make another access for the school from the other side?

Mr. Buell: Not really. That's the problem.

President Scapicchio: Thank you. I would like to make the recommendation that we vote in favor of this Ordinance, the Police Department has done a review, the purpose is to create a safer position over there for the parents and the students. If it needs to be modified after this is implemented they could certainly come back and make a recommendation and we could look at it that time. But I think we need to get something in the works sooner rather than later.

ROLL CALL: Defeated Mr. Rattner - No
Mr. Greenbaum - No
Mr. Perkins - Yes
Mrs. Miller - Yes
Mr. Spino - No
Mr. Guenther - No
Mr. Scapicchio - Yes

President Scapicchio: The Ordinance is defeated.

Mr. Greenbaum: I would like Mr. King to bring that back with the wording to read…

Mr. King: That the street will be a one way, seven days, 24 hours.

RESOLUTION

5. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Establishing October 29, 2002, as a Special Public Meeting.

Mr. Greenbaum moved Resolution No. 5; Mr. Rattner seconded that motion.

COUNCIL COMMENTS

Mr. Spino: I would suggest that we do not schedule this meeting, if you start it earlier that might work out.

President Scapicchio: Earl would it be your preference that we don't so that you could be here.

Mr. Spino: I am only one; I am suggesting that there are other people that might not be here that night unless you change the time.

President Scapicchio: Mayor, is time of the essence with regard to this. Is it your position that I need to try and make sure that we have a quorum on October 29, 2002 to move this. Is that your position?

Mayor Licitra: I would suggest that.

President Scapicchio: I will try to work out scheduling this an hour earlier with Lisa so that we can make sure that we have four members here. Over the next day or two, I will get back to you.

ROLL CALL: Pass Unanimously

President Scapicchio: Council Comments anyone? Seeing none.

MOTION

1. Approval of Raffle Application #1048 for the Lions Club of Mt. Olive.

Mr. Perkins moved for the approval of Raffle Application #1048; Mr. Guenther seconded the motion.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously
President Scapicchio: Okay going back to resolution No. 1, Charlene would you like to move that for us please?

1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Commending Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon on Twenty-One Years of Outstanding Service to the Township.

Mrs. Miller moved of Resolution No. 1; Mr. Perkins seconded the motion.

WHEREAS, Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon was hired by the Township of Mt. Olive as a police dispatcher in Janurary of 1992 and has with great commitment served the Township diligently and passionately since that point in time and

WHEREAS Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon has served as an emergency medical dispatcher, fire service dispatcher, handled every imaginable emergency and call and every imaginable emergency situation and done so with dedication and precise efficiency and

WHEREAS, Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon has served the Township with considerable expertise and concern in every conceivable situation for which the Mayor and Council, the Police Department and the citizens of Mt. Olive wish to express their gratitude and

WHEREAS, the citizens of Mt. Olive and the Police Department are dependent upon a high standard of serviced as could be expected from Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon and;

WHEREAS, Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon has served the Township for 21 years demonstrating her obvious expertise in emergency service and;

NOW, THERFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Township Council of the Township of Mt. Olive that it does herby wish to thank Kathryn "Sweets" Hannon on behalf of all the citizens of the Township for the Years of outstanding dedication and service to the Township for 21 years and to wish her the very best, and happiness and good health for retirement.

President Scapicchio: Thank you Charlene. Anyone from the Public?

Richard Bonte, Budd Lake: Regarding the Special Public Meeting next week, is that specifically for one issue or will it be a "Public Meeting".

President Scapicchio: It will be a Public Meeting, Rich. The meeting last week was canceled and I believe Lisa had some other agenda items that need to be addressed.

Mr. Bonte: Is that meeting going to start at 6:30?

President Scapicchio: I don't know yet Rich, I need to try to work out the details with Lisa.

Mr. Bonte: What are the notification requirements?

President Scapicchio: I am not exactly sure what they are but I need to go over that with Lisa.

Mr. King: You have to notify the paper three days before which can be done. She would have to specify that our discussion of the ordinance is going to be on for that meeting as well.

President Scapicchio: Rich, it is my goal to try to make sure that we could get four members here at 6:30 on the 29th.

Mr. Bonte: Will that be for the just for the introduction of that Ordinance and then the regular meeting starts at 7:30 or are you going to actually start the whole meeting at 6:30? I am just trying to find out when members of the Public who are here now…

President Scapicchio: Rich, I would say that if we get here at 6:30, we will start the meeting at 6:30 and the first item on that agenda would be the introduction of this amended/new ordinance and we would continue whatever other business is on the agenda right through.

Mr. Bonte: Will this be posted on the website?

Mr. King: The Meeting will be noticed in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act.

Motion made for adjournment. All in Favor, none opposed. The Meeting was Adjourned at 10:05 pm.

_______________________
BERNHARD 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 January 14, 2003.

________________________
LISA M. LASHWAY
Mount Olive Township Clerk


nw


 

 

2012 Mount Olive Township. All rights reserved.