OLD BRIDGE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL
COMBINED MEETING
December 18, 2000
A Combined meeting of the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge was held on December 18, 2000 in the Municipal Complex. The meeting was called to order by President Maher who asked all present to participate in a salute to the flag which was followed by a short prayer.
Deputy Clerk Stella Ward announced that this meeting is being held in conformance with the open public meetings act, notice has been given to the newspaper and notice of the meeting has been posted in public places. The next open public meeting of the council will be held on Monday January 2, 2001 at 8:00 p.m.
Roll call at 7:40 p.m. by Deputy Clerk Stella Ward, showed the following members present: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio and President Maher. Councilmen Hoff and Redmond arrived late.
Bill List
RESOLUTION #625
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, the Business Administrator has the responsibility of approving all bills and vouchers subject to preaudit and control; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Finance is responsible for the preaudit, the disbursement of all monies and the control over all expenditures to ensure that the budget appropriations are not exceeded; and
WHEREAS, the Finance Committee of the Township Council has satisfied themselves in
respect to the bill listing of December 18, 2000 that there exists a detailed bill or voucher supporting each payment and there is indication that goods or services have been received or rendered.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge that the bill listing of December 18, 2000 as approved by the Business Administrator after preaudit and control by the Director of Finance and after review by the Finance Committee be spread on the minutes in the amount of $787,396.50(General Fund)
Moved by Councilman Butler, seconded by Councilwoman Marinaccio and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Councilmen Hoff, Redmond.
Report of the Attorney
Attorney Ruggierio: I met with Judge Wolfson on Friday in connection with the Sommers
case and there is some attempt to revive the settlement proposal that was before us a long time ago. I would like to schedule an executive session for discussion on this when I have more information.
Councilman Redmond: Can we get a report on the Spring Knolls performance bond?
Attorney Ruggierio: There is litigation that has been pending before four judges in Middlesex County and as you know there is an application before the Planning Board to have Hovnanian pick up the approvals and he would undertake completing some of the things that were left undone by Kaplan. The attorneys for Hovnanian and Lenar (the person who owns the site now) and Kaplan will advocate to any judge that we go before, that Hovnanian is a white knight and if you attend the planning board meetings, you are hearing this. My position is that you really can't wait to see what happens at the planning board level, we need to move forward with these defaults. If a judge can find a way to postpone having to deal with difficult issues and opening up discovery and litigation, in preference to some resolution, for example Hovnanian coming in and fixing things up, that judge will go for that resolution. We have been successful in getting temporary remedial measures put out at the Oakwood site, enforced by the soil conservation district and our engineering department. I think that we have stopped the soil erosion from getting worse. Most recently, the judge has agreed to look at our list of higher priority items on the punch list, we are having a meeting with Judge McCormack in January. She will tell us whether or not she will initiate proceedings to compel some of these more important punch list items to be done, notwithstanding that, you have this application before the planning board for Oakwood. This is really at a stand still because of this application.
Councilman Redmond: The issues at the planning board are considerably difficult. I thought that was why we had performance bonds.
Attorney Ruggierio: As far as I am concern, the applications that are bonded by Kaplan's bonding company are obligations that are independent from whatever you do at the planning board level. I don't think that there should be any compromise of what you would otherwise do with developer. I think in a litigated forum we can compel the responsible parties to do what they are obligated to do.
Councilman Redmond: Have you done any discovery yet?
Attorney Ruggierio: The judge has stayed discovery and it is all premised on this representation that there is a white knight out there. I think that Hovnanian has also promised some of the residents recreation amenities that make them more in favor of the application.
Councilman Redmond: Keep us posted on this.
Councilman Cucchiara: I would like the administration to forward a letter to Fire District 3 on the meeting on Routes 516 & 18 scheduled for January 11, 2001.
Ms. Shepler: I have been assured by DOT that they were notified. Mr. Benke cannot attend but is sending a representative.
Councilman Cucchiara: That is the fire department, the fire district is something different. I want to make sure that the Fire Marshall gets a letter.
MOTION
to accept the report of the attorney by Councilman Hoff, seconded by Councilman Butler and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
DR-5/C-6 Resolution formally adopting the Agreement of Sale with the Housing Authority-Re: Barsel Property
RESOLUTION #626
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that the attached Agreement for the Sale of Real Estate (Block 17000, Lot 27.12) is hereby adopted by the Township Council; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Township Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the documents necessary to implement this agreement. The Township Attorney shall review any and all documents prepared in furtherance of this agreement.
Moved by President Maher, seconded by Councilman Testino and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Hoff, Redmond, Testino, President Maher.
NAYS: Councilmen Greene, Sohor, Councilwoman Marinaccio.
Prior to the vote the following discussion took place
Mr. Shah: You need to approve this contract resolution before you adopt the budget.
President Maher: We have gotten approval from the Department of Community Affairs that we can use this $600,000.00 in the budget. It is my understanding that all the issues are resolved.
Attorney Ruggierio: I believe that you can consider that the contractual disagreements are close enough that it's resolved. The last draft that we gave Mr. Miller incorporated some of his
suggestions and we instated some of the things that we thought were important and he wasn't very adverse to. I think that if you do adopt this resolution, it would be an adoption of the contract in the manner that we've drawn it. I think that we have a meeting of the minds.
President Maher: Have you gotten concurrence from Mr. Miller that the modifications and deviation of our December 14, 2000 memo are acceptable?
Attorney Ruggierio: We forwarded an agreement to Mr. Miller under some time pressure because of his meeting with the Housing Authority. The Housing Authority passed a resolution that basically gave him the authority to endorse a contract that was substantially in accord with the one that we had forwarded to him. He wrote to us with some comments and I know I forwarded those comments to council, he wanted some things changed in the contract and we responded to them. The final draft is the December 14, 2000 letter. It is my belief that this would be satisfactory to Mr. Miller. He wanted some things modified and we felt that it wasn't in the Township's best interest to do it.
Councilman Testino: You had proposed an ordinance as opposed to a resolution as a way to change things. I am not sure that I want that in there. Is that in the form that you are proposing tonight?
Attorney Ruggierio: That was one of the issues that was in the letter from Mr. Miller. The ordinance language that you are referring to is this: The only way that you can change the provisions of the contract that deal with the types of uses or the rights to assign and so forth would be by ordinance as opposed to resolution.
Councilman Testino: Why should the council change the current structure of powers between the council and mayor? We already know what powers the council has as a legislative body. Why should we make it tougher for the council and contract our rights away to do things?
Attorney Ruggierio: I think that I explained that to you the first time...
Councilman Testino: I understand your rationale. You want to make it longer, and more involved and difficult for the council to do anything subsequent to this vote.
Attorney Ruggierio: I would not say that.
Councilman Testino: Why do we have to agree to make these contractual obligations more difficult? As I understand it, you raised the issue, not the Housing Authority. I do not see any reason to give the mayor more authority on this line item.
Mayor Cannon: It is so that the public would have input.
Councilman Testino: The public has input every meeting.
President Maher: What is your rationale for this Bill?
Councilman Testino: I know what the answer is. You want an ordinance that takes longer, thirty days worth of input, gives the mayor the right to veto as opposed to a simple resolution.
Attorney Ruggierio: That is not true. You are free to characterize what you think is in my mind as much as you want, Mr. Testino, but I will be happy to tell you what is in my mind if you want you hear it.
Councilman Testino: I am looking for a reason that you can make to the rest of the council as to why I should give that authority and change the powers between the governing bodies.
Attorney Ruggierio: I will be happy to answer your question.
Councilman Testino: I know that the Housing Authority didn't ask for this. You asked for it.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: Can we please allow the attorney to answer?
Attorney Ruggierio: I put this provision in the very first draft of the contract and I explained that to the council then and it is still my explanation, that the council can say
"Ruggierio we do not agree with you and we want to endorse the Housing Authority's point of view." I think that you probably consider it important that the language of the agreement that says "the Housing Authority may only use this for affordable housing and housing authority offices." If you think those provisions are important, what you are doing without the provision that I have put in the contract, is leaving it open to any council in the future, to pass a resolution and modify that. You are right, Mr. Testino, it is easier to do it that way but I think that you should consider taking my recommendation to make more difficult for any successor body to modify those provisions. The first that will occur is that the public will have a chance to be heard. An ordinance requires a public hearing, a resolution does not. A resolution can be passed at an agenda meeting that is not even on television. It can be done in a very cavalier way, and you might not be able to take all the public's point of view. This contract requires that the conveyance of title occur before June 30 of next year and that the $600,000.00 will be given to the township in this year's budget. The Housing Authority has no obligation whatsoever to design this site or get approvals until after they take title to the property. I think that it is good policy for the council to think about making sure that if there is going to be a change in the use of the property, this be done with a public hearing. We sat in the initial meeting with the Housing Authority and there were statements being made by members of the Housing Authority that either indicated that they didn't have a clear idea of what could be done on this site or in some cases people were advocating things to be done on this site that had nothing to do with affordable housing, it was about swimming pools, etc. I don't think that you should be afraid of hearing the public.
Councilman Testino: What I am afraid of is your making policy decisions.
Attorney Ruggierio: I told you this from the beginning and you could have said then that you were not in favor of it.
Councilman Testino: I did say at that point that I wasn't in favor of you making policy decisions.
Attorney Ruggierio: I don't recall that.
Councilman Testino: I am not in favor of delegating my authority away.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: If there is no other reason that the Housing Authority is going to use that land for other than for affordable senior housing then there shouldn't be any questions about passing an ordinance. Why are we afraid to pass an ordinance stating selling the land for what this council agreed to sell it for? We can't leave the door open for a future council.
President Maher: Are you in favor of an ordinance?
Councilwoman Marinaccio: Yes, if this is what we agreed to then let's make it law. Why leave it to a new council to change this?
President Maher: I am in favor of a resolution. It gives us more flexibility, we can make changes more timely.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: It also gives a brand new council a chance to flip-flop our plans.
President Maher: This contract reads that they will close on this property by June 30, 2001.
Councilman Testino: I had asked that it be May 1, 2001.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: Why did we go into the contract?
President Maher: To get an additional $600,000.00 of revenue.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: That was our only reason? It wasn't for affordable housing? We could have gotten an additional $400,000.00 if that was all we wanted because we turned down more than a million dollars for affordable senior housing, I think an ordinance is how it has to be stated so that in the future no other council can change that plan.
President Maher: I have had discussions with the Housing Authority about a May 1, 2001 closing.
Councilman Testino: I would like that change made.
Councilman Butler: Has the attorney gotten a response back from the Housing Authority on your final proposal?
Attorney Ruggierio: No. I have no idea if Mr. Miller has had a chance to make comments on that. We are working very quickly on this because I know that council is very anxious to have this in this year's budget.
Councilman Greene: I have said before that this was a difficult decision and have come to the point of where I support this because I support the concept of affordable senior housing. I am not crazy about the location nor the availability to the seniors of facilities. Since this is in ward five I want to guarantee the residents of my ward as well as the other residents that if there are changes to be made, they will have the ability to speak. I support what the attorney had proposed in that any amendments to this contract be done through an ordinance.
Councilman Testino: This is a resolution.
Councilman Greene: I want an ordinance.
President Maher: The sale is being adopted by resolution.
Councilman Greene: I know. I want any changes made to be by ordinance.
President Maher: That really doesn't make sense.
Mayor Cannon: Why is it such a problem to use an ordinance to change deed restrictions? When I was in one of the meetings and I raised a number of concerns, I was told to put them in as deed restrictions. We are down to two deed restrictions. One is that there be affordable senior housing and the other is that the land cannot be transferred to another entity, although I think that has been modified. I don't understand why the council is so resistant to having any change done to this deed restriction by ordinance. We are selling public lands at below market value as evidenced by two bidders of over a million dollars. We would all like to see affordable senior housing become a reality but if there are any changes to those deed restrictions or modification I think it must be done by ordinance which allows publication and a full public hearing and public notice This is their property and they should have the opportunity to comment on this. I do not understand what the problem is. I am a little bit concerned that there is so much opposition to having it as an ordinance. Whether it happens next year or five years from now, I think that the public has the right to know what is going to happen there.
Councilman Sohor: In the past when we sold land, we always sold it by ordinance, why aren't we doing that now?
Attorney Ruggierio: I don't believe that we always have. We are permitted under the local land and buildings law to sell real estate by resolution or by ordinance. It only allows us to buy property by ordinance. The reason is that they don't want to put on the public the obligation to maintain real estate without there being a full public hearing.
Councilman Testino: I remember removing deed restrictions without public hearings and ordinances.
Attorney Ruggierio: With all due respect the Housing Authority has a very general concept of what they want to there. They haven't done any engineering, they don't have any idea of how many units, no layout. All these things are going to occur during the due diligence and after they take title. I think that there was some ambiguity during our meetings as to what could and will be placed there. I think that you as a council are getting representations to you about what is going to go there. I think that the idea of an ordinance is that you will have some further level of formality of doing away with the deed restrictions. They couldn't be done away with in a willy nilly fashion.
Councilman Testino: Are you saying that when the council acts on resolutions, it is in a willy nilly fashion? I take offense to that.
Councilman Hoff: I can remember many times that this council has sold land by resolution. The mayor is constantly bringing up these "million dollar bidders" but the conditions that they imposed on us were mass, mass development on little ground, it would of been a nightmare.
Councilman Sohor: That is not true.
Councilman Hoff: What we are trying to do is give affordable housing to people who need it. I can't see the moral sense in your arguing this.
Mayor Cannon: Why are so eager to have this so easy to remove the restriction?
Councilman Testino: It's an argument over your jurisdiction versus ours.
Mayor Cannon: I may not even be here, why do have you make such a personal agenda? Why don't you think of it as a public trust.
Councilman Testino: I think that it is a mistrust of the council that is going on. That is my offense. You sneak something into the contract so that the council can't exercise its authority later. It's the council authority. Leave it with the council.
President Maher: I am in favor of streamlining this whole process. We are set to accept this contract by resolution, it is more timely and effective and it gives the council greater flexibility. We award contracts by resolution on a bi-monthly basis. It gives us greater flexibility with the changes. An ordinance ties our hands, you have first reading, second reading that whole process can take 30 or 45 days. I would like move this forward with the two changes - changes to this contract are by resolution and also that the Housing Authority closes by May 1, 2001.
Councilman Testino: Seconds the motion.
Mayor Cannon: If we are talking about powers I would like to ask a legal question of Mr. Ruggierio. Isn't it the mayor's responsibility to negotiate contracts?
Attorney Ruggierio: Yes.
Mayor Cannon: The major issue as I understand it is that Mr. Testino wants to make sure that the $600,000.00 is available to use in this year's budget. I was under the impression that the rest of the items in the contract were doable as long as the dollars were put up front in the budget. That's the contract that we were recommending. Now if the contract is being changed, what is my responsibility?
Attorney Ruggierio: I think that you are asking a complex question because although the Faulkner Act contemplates that the mayor negotiates contracts and the council endorses the contract, it is not ever perceived to be a perfect system. I don't know if it has ever been litigated and I haven't researched it. Certainly if the mayor was so left out of the process that he or she felt that their powers had been circumvented then I suppose the mayor could be in the position not to sign the contract and there could potentially be litigation and of course, that is not a favorable outcome. The statute contemplates that the mayor will substantially be involved in the negotiation of the contract. I don't think that the Faulkner Act precludes the council from making changes at the time of adoption.
Councilman Sohor: Are you amending the contract or taking two separate votes?
Attorney Ruggierio: Either way is appropriate.
President Maher: My motion was to accept the contract with these two changes.
Councilman Testino: I seconded it.
Councilman Sohor: From the beginning I have had a lot of questions about this proposal. At our November 13th meeting we requested that the Clerk's office send a letter to the Housing Authority requesting that representatives from the authority return to the council the following Monday 11/20 a meeting we were going to televise, so that they could answer questions. I have not heard from the housing authority and they did not appear to answer questions. On December 12th I sent a letter to Mr. O'Leary; the executive director of the South Amboy authority, who is running Old Bridge now, requesting a series of public documents that relate to questions around this project. I still have not gotten any of this information. I am told that maybe I will get them tomorrow. We have a proposal and we don't know what it entails, a lot of things have been left out and since the housing authority has seen fit to not give me details that I have been looking for, I am going to make some statements that I believe are all true and correct, I haven't had any cooperation from the authority to help me verify them. In the preamble of the ordinance that created the housing authority in 1985 was a declaration that construction activities of the housing authority would not compete with private enterprise. At this time the housing authority wants to take this property from private enterprise so it would seem that we are not following the ordinance, so the point about doing things in the future by ordinance or resolution doesn't make a difference because we will ignore an ordinance just as well. Regarding COAH, we are under a spending plan, substantive approval, certification. We are also governed by litigation that we were a party to, we were sued by a Civic League of New Brunswick in the mid and late 1980's. Our current situation in terms of plans for affordable housing in Old Bridge is largely the result of that litigation. At one point we had a surplus of affordable units as a result of Mt. Laurel decisions. Every developing municipality is required to provide a fair share of affordable housing for low and moderate income families. Back in the 1990's a number was generated as to what our fair share was and we had to put forth a plan. Part of meeting that obligation were homes that were going to be built by developers in town. We have had little affordable housing development in the last four years. We had 20 units of senior and non-senior housing that were built at Highpointe, and 6 units at Yardley Manor. Other developments that will be providing affordable housing include Woodhaven - 75 homes, Brunetti who is moving forward with the Oaks will providing 175 units. There may also be units in Spring Knolls. One of the interesting things with Spring Knolls is that they are supposed to provide 226 affordable units at least for seniors.
Councilman Hoff: Is this all documented fact?
Councilman Sohor: Yes.
Councilman Hoff: Has it been approved and accepted?
Councilman Sohor: Yes. One of things that I found out at meeting this week is that with response to the 60 units at Spring Knolls, at this point one of the plans is to accept cash from that developer and get involved in a regional contribution agreement, which would take that money from Old Bridge and send it to another town and not build that senior housing in Old Bridge. In the Woodhaven development there is three and half million dollars coming from them. $1750.00 a unit will start coming into our CDBG office which has a very specific plan laid out in the court settlement of rehabilitating senior housing and selling it to seniors at reduced costs. We also have some other stuff that is starting to happen and has not been discussed here. Curtis Johnson was working on a complete update and revision of our fair share plan and spending plan. I don't know if that has been totally abandoned or if it is in limbo. The spending plan is a document that was generated by Mr. Johnson, approved by township council and the council on affordable housing. One of the very clear statements of that plan was and I quote from a letter November 1, 1996 written to the council on affordable housing by Mr. Johnson "Old Bridge Township does not envision being responsible for public or non-profit sector construction of housing" That statement is picked up by COAH in their analysis of our spending plan and the documents that support of our plan. Old Bridge made clear to the residents of this town that we were not going to be building housing. Our intent was to subsidize other peoples construction with gap loans, rehabilitate, homeless prevention assistance, mortgage and down payment assistance. Rather clearly, through all the documentation was the intent of Old Bridge was not to build any housing of its own. The fees that we collected in the developer fee under COAH, were going to be a revolving fund that we could spend from and have the money come back as these loans were being repaid so that we would have long into the future funding available to maintain affordable housing for our residents. Mr. Condon - our attorney, Mr. Miller - the authority's attorney, Mr. Norman - our planning board attorney were at a meeting... and it is all written here in multiple places, it goes back to the court settlement how the funds were to be divided up, basically it doesn't matter. Through the years the township council and the housing authority have made promises to the public as to how we were going to address public housing; and it is in writing clear and explicit, but it doesn't matter, I find that really disturbing and add that to the attitude of the housing authority who is stonewalling questions. I take umbrage at what is going on here and not having my questions answered when we had earlier discussion on why this property? The mayor offered two other properties in the township, those properties were originally selected by the mayor's senior housing committee; which this council praised. We heard statements that these properties don't meet any standards, that there is not sewer or water, I've done some research and there is plenty of water and sewer, one of those properties is almost directly across from existing senior housing, the other is close to a location that Marlboro Township is discussing putting in senior and affordable housing. We have had absolutely no open discussion on what is a very important long term decision, there is a need for senior housing. How much? We don't know because the demographic studies have never been done. If we go forward with this project we are going to have three affordable senior projects right next to each other. There are some potential problems with that, we were sued and made concessions because we were going to put 200 senior affordable housing units in one location, because that does not meet the standards of the fair housing act of 1985 or follow the inclusionary rules. We are going to take this one time revenue and if we really wanted to lower taxes we could get more for this property, as we all know. One of the things that we hear all the time that makes Old Bridge unaffordable is the property taxes and what are we doing? We are taking a piece of property that would generate on going tax revenues for us and taking it off the tax rolls. We haven't even had a discussion of making this a for sale project for seniors that would generate just as much taxes. I have spent a lot of time of this project and I think that we are going forward with a situation where we are trying to make the ends justify the means and we are doing it at a cost to the taxpayers of Old Bridge. I am not opposed to affordable or senior housing, I think that it is too important an issue to take lightly, we are going to take the $600,000.00 and run.
Councilman Redmond: The Brunetti and the Spring Knolls things that he was talking about are written in stone. Brunetti has already been back looking for amendments. We are not sure if Spring Knolls will come to fruition, both of these properties are riddled with wetlands. We don't know how many units we will get out of them. We are talking about a project that will get us affordable housing soon. I live less than a mile from this location and I think that it is a very nice location and I don't know what you mean by massive senior development in the area.
Councilman Sohor: They are putting an 88+ unit on the hospital property, that is directly adjacent to Barsel, on the other side you have the Reformed Church.
Councilman Redmond: The Reformed Church is an assisted living facility.
Councilman Sohor: That is for affordable...
Councilman Redmond: That is about $3,500.00 a month. I think that this is a good plan I think the Housing Authority has worked hard...
Councilman Sohor: Why don't you want to discuss it?
Councilman Redmond: I am giving my opinion, I've discussed and attended meetings with the housing authority about the contract, I have looked over the plan...
Councilman Sohor: What plan?
Councilman Redmond: The plan that they have talked about. I think that it is a good idea to have these affordable units.
Councilman Sohor: I still don't know what plan you are talking about.
Councilman Greene: I did come around and support this project in the budget. However, I take very seriously what the attorney says and I agree with him 100%. If you have a deed restriction, it should only be changed by ordinance. I think that a resolution limits the public participation and as council member I really don't think that would be right. We do have the ability to pass a resolution at an agenda meeting. I take this project seriously and I want affordable senior housing but I do not want the council to have the ability to change the nature of the project without proper public notification and participation.
Councilman Testino: There has been a county task force on senior housing which has reported that if we added 500 new units, we still would not have enough senior housing. I don't see where this is over densely populated senior housing in Old Bridge. What better entity could you have to take the public trust and try to develop it than an entity, which is the Housing Authority - a public body, quasi political, appointed by this council, the Mayor and the Governor, to handle a project like this. I think there is a distinct mistrust in the Housing Authority by those who oppose this thing going forward with the Housing Authority will never be satisfied. This is senior affordable housing, and I support it.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: Everyone is aware that the council supports senior affordable housing. Why are we not doing this by ordinance thereby guaranteeing senior affordable housing giving no opening that this will never be anything else but senior affordable housing? Why pass a resolution which could open a door to a change? I want this bound by ordinance, by law. Why doesn't Mr. Testino feel the same?
President Maher opened a public portion.
Capt. Cerra: I am getting the impression that the public does not have the opportunity to speak when you vote on a resolution. During the second reading of an ordinance, the public has the opportunity to speak on the issue. A resolution is placed on the consent agenda. Every meeting you open to the public any issue on the consent agenda. Whether you vote on something by resolution or by ordinance, the public still has the opportunity to speak.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: A resolution is not advertised, and can be passed at an agenda meeting.
Capt. Cerra: You are giving the impression that the public cannot speak on a resolution. That is inaccurate.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: Can an ordinance be passed an at agenda session? This should be an ordinance so that the public is aware of it.
Capt. Cerra: My point is that the public gets to speak.
Ms. Gurliaccio: You can have a resolution, but why don't you amend it for public hearing by advertising? The problem with an ordinance is that it can tie up a tremendous amount of time for any project. Do we need to go to an ordinance every time we want to have office space? Mr. Sohor, the commission has set policy, and I cannot answer your legal questions. We were supposed to appear on the twentieth. I instructed my executive director to send you a letter stating that if you had any questions, to please place them in writing. Our professionals would answer those questions. We have never once denied you access to questions that needed to be answered.
Councilman Sohor: I have received no letter from you. The Housing Authority was created by the governing body of this township, and as such you report to this governing body, and a request by this governing body to appear is not something to be ignored.
Ms. Guarliaccio: We had the right to ask you to put your questions in writing so our professionals could answer them. You did not. I know that this went through the Clerk's office. I received a copy from the Clerk's office. The council should have received that copy also. Much of the business that we do through the Housing Authority is confidential. You asked for records by 4:30 in the afternoon. No authority could get anything together that quickly. You also sent a fax at 2:00 Thursday afternoon asking our staff, who has just opened up the waiting list and is busy with clientele who we must house, and asked these people for these documents within two hours. That is true because I trust my staff and operating director completely. I am sure the Clerk's office can answer this question if someone comes to the office and asks you for documents, there is a period of time until you turn over those documents. You cannot do that in four or five hours. Never once would I deny this council any information concerning the Housing Authority. It is my understanding that you did go to COAH with some of my professionals. You questioned Ms. Bishop extensively on the COAH funds and our spending plan. She assured you that we are in our jurisdiction and properly involved in the project with no problems. I will have a letter sent from Ms. Bishop's office for the council to have at the next meeting.
Councilman Sohor: The misstatements are continuing. I sent a written request on December 12. In the morning of December 13, speaking with one of the members of the Housing Authority, my request was in process. On the evening of December 14 my wife, one of the commissioners, was told by the same employee that "all the material was ready, and whenever Roman wants it, he can come and get it". I arrived this morning and was told that "nothing was ready; perhaps tomorrow".
Ms. Gurliaccio: If that is the case, that will be rectified immediately. I ask the council that if you have any requests of the Housing Authority, please put it in writing and give us a substantial amount of time to collect the necessary documents. There is nothing we would do to keep those documents from you.
Mr. Rao: Who will save money from senior housing?
Mayor Cannon: What I proposed and what the council endorsed was to sell the Barsel property at a public auction. We did that, and there were two bids of over one million dollars which means that we would have collected one million plus dollars. We would have collected with the proposed project a little over a half million dollars per year every year thereafter. This would have brought in tax dollars and not off the tax rolls. That would have brought more dollars into the community to reduce the tax rate.
President Maher: As we vote on the resolution, I repeat Himanshu's comments that the Department of Community Affairs has received the Housing Authority's contract, the agreement of sale and word back from the Department of Community Affairs in a memo dated December 14 and as communicated to Himanshu that as long as we adopt the resolution tonight, the sale of the Barsel property, we can use the $600,000 in this year's budget.
Municipal Budget SFY 2000-2001
President Maher: I asked Himanshu to find the $50,000 for the library. Himanshu has informed me that we will have the $50,000 in the normal May transfer period.
Mr. Shah: One of the avenues in which you can appropriate additional money for the library is to transfer in May. I made it clear that there is no guarantee, but we have always done a transfer and picked up the items that we may have added through the years and certain items such as the library issue that may have come up after the actual adoption of the budget. One of the issues that concerned me was the police department overtime where we put an additional $400,000. I don't have to worry about covering that funding. That gives me a higher comfort level because we should be able to address the $50,000 to transfer.
President Maher: I suggest that the council make that decision rather than an amendment tonight that in the normal transfer period in the May-June time frame, the money can be properly presented to the library.
Mr. Shah: We did that last year - $35,000 to do the survey. We have a package of information on the table for the public to review. The letter from the Mayor and my message is what was covered in the budget in July. The question and answer part of the package is updated to reflect the changes that were made during the introduction. The budget as introduced by the council brings the tax rate to .60 per $100, and the amount to be raised by taxation would be certified at $17,770,633.00. There are major items added in the revenue section of the budget during the introduction - $600,000 which we just discussed from the sale of the Barsel property to the Housing Authority. $1 million is included from the reserve to pay bonds (originally, $500,000). The surplus anticipated in the budget is $6,825,000 leaving a surplus balance of about $1,000,058 with the treasury. The is detailed information on the budget as laid out in the package. Mr. Farrell will make his presentations to the budget.
Mr. Farrell, Auditor: I was involved in the expenditure side. When I reviewed the budget, all relates back to last year when you had significant dollars. You had $3.2 million of nonrecurring which equals to a 10 cent tax decrease. We want to minimize a tax increase or spikes in the tax rate. We had a 10 cent decrease. Are there any avenues available to the township minimizing that 10 cent tax increase? You have utilized $1.7 million which is non-recurring. Instead of having 10 cents this year, you only had a 5 cent tax increase; in all probability, you will have at least a five cent increase next year unless there will be substantial revenue coming. You are trying to level the spikes in the rate. I recommend doing a projection of what your revenues are and operating costs are. This is critical. Himanshu projects that you are losing $600,000 out of revenue. Out of a $40 million, $600,000 is not a lot of money. You must look at the costs associated with the budget. In my discussions with Himanshu and members of the governing body, this process that you are undergoing (the budget) is not reckless abandon on the spending portion of the budget. I asked what the expenses were going forward. It appears that your strategy is to minimize the operating increases in the other expenses. Salary and wages are the only two expenses that impact the budget. The salary and wages are going to be controlled on whatever your contractual agreements are. If you are successful in those agreements, you are staying on top of the operating expenses. You are trying to level out that spike in the tax rate with whatever revenue source that is available.
Mr. Goldman (Treasurer Library Board): We are replacing a retired person with a part-time employee finding another $5,000. We have been audited three times with no recommendations - it was perfect. I don't spend what we don't have. There is no guarantee of a transfer of $50,000 in May. As treasurer I cannot tell the director and his assistant to spend money I don't know if I will have. If for some reason, I don't receive the money, I have to shut the library.
Mr. Shah: There is no way that I can make a guarantee. The comfort level is there.
Mr. Farrell: You (the library) have monies that are allocated for utilities, and you are not going to expend that tomorrow. If you have sufficient money to operate until May, there are options available to the council - by transfer resolution or they can declare an emergency and increase your appropriation and transfer the money.
Mr. Goldman: We have never asked for an emergency appropriation. I know what the auditor has told us. I want to act responsibly.
President Maher: We are six months into the budget. We will adopt tonight and have been doing temporary emergency appropriations.
Mr. Goldman: We have not done some of the things we want to do.
President Maher: We have been spending money that has not been approved. When we do normal transfers of money, we will transfer additional money into the library's budget. Historically and traditionally the money is there. We do that at the end of the year. We make these normal transfers at the end of the year.
Mr. Shah: Gene (Farrell) has indicated that if there is no money to transfer, which none of us can guarantee, we will adopt an emergency appropriation and allocate the needed money. We can make that commitment now.
Councilman Testino: There is no place you can find the money tonight?
Mr. Shah: We would have to amend the budget.
Councilman Testino: That would mean that we would not be able to adopt; therefore, we could not get the tax bills out on time.
Mr. Armenio: Mr. Maher and I spent eighteen months looking at the ten years of budget history of Old Bridge and presenting a number of recommendations on process improvements. No one on the council liked the final report we submitted because the first ten pages were critical of the council and administration. In 1994 and 1995 the finance administration was in shambles prior to Mr. Shah's coming. During one council meeting one point raised concerned department heads' salaries. That was shot down because the budget had not been approved. I uncovered my old report that recommended that there be personnel policies in place re: dealing with professionals. We made a recommendation in the area of technology productivity and what gains have we gotten which would reduce staff (with the exclusion of the police department)? I hope that we don't have file cabinets and that the information is on hard drive. That is productivity. Do we ask our department heads for productivity gains? Has a study been done on benefits and benefits administration for employees? Is there a budget process in place? The government has to take collective blame because it is Christmas, and we still do not have a budget. I don't see accountability.
Capt. Cerra: The police department would like a clarification of the additions to its budget. There were two additions written down by the Director of Finance. One was $200,000 for overtime, and another was $146,000 for the hiring of four new officers for the entire year. The council added two more - $150,000 for cars and $200,000 for salaries of the requested officers by the police for one-half the year (an additional eight). Is that correct? The Finance Director said that was not correct. He said the $200,000 was put in for overtime. Mr. Maher said that this "would cover the salaries the police department needs for one-half the year". I want this straight for the record so we are not going around over this issue. Did you or did you not put in $346,000 in Salary and Wage to hire four police officers for the entire year, and eight for half the year?
Councilman Cucchiara: Along with me were Mr. Greene, Mr. Shah, Ms. Shepler . . . .
President Maher: The changes we made at that meeting were that there was no money in the budget as presented by the Mayor in July for additional officers. We were facing a potential deficit in end of year overtime. The changes recommended by Himanshu were that we needed to put the $146,000 in Salary and Wages for officers. Himanshu put $200,000 in there for the overtime deficit. We put an additional $200,000 for officers to attack the budget overtime for the remainder of the year, and $150,000 for the cars. That was the intent of the council.
Mayor Cannon: The $140,000 plus was put in to allow us to continue to keep the force at what I was told was 100 including the four cops in the school for which we received a grant. The additional money was being put in because Capt. Cerra indicated that the overtime was going to rise to $800,000. That was stated at a public meeting. He (Capt. Cerra) said that by the end of June, we would be at $800,000 for overtime expenses. My understanding is that Himanshu had recommended the $200,000 to bring it up to $600,000 because we had only budgeted $400,000, and then the council put in the additional $200,000 to cover the $800,000 in overtime. I don't know where these eight officers came from. We were trying to deal with an extraordinary amount of overtime. I was at that meeting, and I did not hear of the additional eight officers.
Capt. Cerra: The number that was originally asked for by the police was twelve. We had 96 police officers going into last year. Out of our twelve, the Mayor agreed to four which Himanshu forgot to put the "146" in for the four. We asked for twelve; she (the Mayor) approved four. That night and at the meeting that we held, we said we needed all twelve, not just four. I told you that going on this path and if nothing changes, we will spend $800,000 in overtime. I did not say that we were going to spend $800,000 in June.
Mayor Cannon: What has changed? You knew that night you were getting the seven guys.
Capt. Cerra: We just got the seven guys. I said to you that if nothing changes, we were running a $800,000 overtime course.
President Maher: I don't think we are talking seven guys; we are talking about individuals - men or women.
Capt. Cerra: I am referring to the seven guys that just got out last week. What is the intent; I don't want to have this argument for a month. Did you intend to raise the number to 108, or did you intend to raise the number to 100? That is what we need to know.
President Maher: Mayor, what are your intentions in terms of hiring this year?
Mayor Cannon: My intention is to replace those who have left which means three hires. We have three vacancies now, leaving us with ninety-seven. I committed to bringing the number to one hundred.
President Maher: You recommended an additional four in your budget.
Mayor Cannon: That includes the four. We have had three that have left since.
President Maher: The total you want to hire is seven?
Mayor Cannon: Three.
President Maher: Why did you ask the council for four?
Mayor Cannon: Those were the four that had already been hired and have been aboard since July.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: As a council person, a resident and as a parent, we have a growing population and an increasing beach front and expanding work programs with the kids, we need the additional police. We are not having a meeting of the minds with administration; council makes the decision. The police either get the additional police, or they don't. We are not going to agree. Don't waste time.
Councilman Hoff: The county expects the waterfront park to be completed by May 1.
Councilman Testino: The council makes the decision as to how much money to put in the budget. We are putting this money in for the Mayor to make hiring decisions. She exercises that flexibility each year. I would hate to see her go to June and find out that we need more officers, and we cannot train them in time. The money will be there because the council is saying that we have things coming along and you need to reconsider and see where you are at in order to appropriately patrol and meet the agreements that this town has entered into, i.e., the beachfront and the cops in the school and policing for a growing population. These are some flexibilities the Mayor has in her budget once we hand it to her. Place the additional money there. If the Mayor does not hire, and this drops to surplus, that is her decision. If we are without the police protection, it will not be on the councils' shoulders.
President Maher: The council has put a total of $546,000 additional money in the Salary and Wage line when we introduced this budget a month ago. We put an additional $150,000 in the budget line for additional cars. We put additional money in the budget for the maintenance contract with Motorola for the radio system. It is up to the Mayor to do with that money what she intends.
Mayor Cannon: If Capt. Cerra is wrong in his projection about not reaching the $800,000, how do you intend to fund that?
Capt. Cerra: I have seven guys out on their own for three months. If we get the money back from the insurance company that we spent at 100 Ticetown, I don't think we will hit $800,000, but perhaps $600,000 plus. I said that if we stayed the course, we would be spending $800,000. We spent $398,000 on twelve pays. I did not say that we were going to spend $800,000 by the end of June.
Mayor Cannon: When the Captain made his projection, he knew that the seven officers were going to be out of the academy in December. None of those facts have changed. Even if we were to hire tomorrow, none of those people would be aboard until June. $200,000 is a big difference. That number came from him (Capt. Cerra), not from me. The police administration had the power to control overtime. I am glad to see they are choosing to do that. As far as hiring eight additional police, the council has to understand that in next year's budget, you would have to double those salaries at the higher salary once they get out of the academy. Since we had a tough time with this budget, I want to know how you intend to fund those positions next year.
Capt. Cerra: We do not control overtime. Overtime is controlled contractually. The Mayor is responsible to negotiate contracts. If there are overtime problems, she does not know how to negotiate a contract.
Councilman Greene: There are two different ways to look at the numbers. How many police officers are budgeted for? How many can you have paid on board? We have budgeted four officers more than last year. A decision was made to go from 96 police officers to 100 budgeted this year. I accepted that increase. How many are currently on board? You could be down ten. That is an administrative issue. I have discussed this proposal with Chief Palumbo and Capt. Cerra, and they have given me many valid reasons why we should hire more police officers. I cannot see it. I have many questions. I brought up the overtime problem due to sick time. When I mentioned this, it was decided that the problem should be addressed, but it must be addressed in collective bargaining. I want it laid out. For me to say that you have eight more police officers than the four that we are giving you, is difficult for me. I need a plan. You will need $200,000 now; $500,000 three years from now. That is tax money. I need you to tell me where these police officers are going and the amount of overtime you feel we can reduce.
Capt. Cerra: Sick time is negotiable. Our hands are tied by a contract which is negotiated by the Mayor. We can only do what the contract says. The issue was addressed many, many times; we had to change the contract. When they took the sick days on accruement, that means that every man gets sixteen days a year and has to save four. In twenty-five years, the four adds to 100. Four minus sixteen is twelve. Those days are burned. They are not going to lose them. I have to deal with what we get stuck with. We have been working short; you are spending much money in overtime because they are not doing forty hours a week - they are doing sixty. You are paying them for seventy because twenty hours are overtime.
Councilman Greene: I understand, but have a problem, when at the last minute when we are ready to adopt the budget, a piece of paper appears stating the need for an additional $200,000 for more police officers. We had a budget meeting months ago, this was raised and nothing was done in between.
Capt. Cerra: We raised the issue and said we wanted twelve. Is that correct?
Councilman Greene: Yes.
Capt. Cerra: Was there anything for us to do from there on our end?
Councilman Greene: I wanted it in black and white telling me what you needed the eight police officers for and how much in overtime the township would be saving.
Chief Palumbo: You cannot lay out in black and white what police officers are going to do. They are going to patrol this town and answer calls. If we don't get the police officers, I will have to cut back on the non-emergency calls. I may have to pull them out of the schools. Do what you want to do. I am on record as telling you that we cannot keep up with the police calls we receive daily. Police officers do police work; they answer calls.
Councilman Greene: If we authorize the $200,000, we give the Mayor the ability to look at this picture and make the decision to hire four or eight. The problem in committing to eight is that we are going to have to live with that for this, next and the year thereafter. Under these circumstances, if we approve the $200,000, this represents a commitment that we now have . .
Capt. Cerra: Houses are not being torn down in Old Bridge.
Councilman Greene: I have the utmost respect for the police officers in town. Unfortunately, I want this done in a manner where the administration has a flexibility.
Capt. Cerra: You could give them $1 million dollars, and they could say no. If the Mayor does not want to hire, she has to answer to the public why calls are not being answered. The Mayor makes the rules that we have to follow by negotiating the contract.
President Maher: We are giving the administration the tools to hire additional police officers or to tackle the overtime budget. The Mayor hires and fires. We need additional police officers. We are faced with the opening of the new county park. We heard from the police administration in terms of the deficit and how the manpower is down. We are giving administration the tools to increase the resources.
Councilman Cucchiara: If someone is speeding on a street, and they call you on the phone, what do you do? Do you take a cop out of patrol and make him to sit in a particular location for hours? How many people in traffic and safety?
Chief Palumbo: Three.
Councilman Cucchiara: What does the traffic and safety division do?
Chief Palumbo: Accidents.
Councilman Cucchiara: They take care of the accidents; the patrol officers leaves and goes back on patrol. We don't do that here because we don't have enough officers in patrol. How many officers do we have in narcotics?
Chief Palumbo: Two.
Councilman Cucchiara: We have 65,000 residents and if anyone in this room doesn't think that there is a narcotics problem in this town, they had better wake up. The problem is huge.
Mayor Cannon: This discussion has been going on for over nine years. What is the magic number that will enable the police department to carry out its responsibilities? The captain indicated that 120 would make the 4/4 work. I always thought you staffed the police department based on the level of service and how you can best serve the public, not how to best make a schedule work. Even with that the captain admitted that there was no way that you can add 10,12 or 15 officers in one fell swoop. You have to phase them in, so that is what we are doing, we have hired four new officers this year and we are going to make sure that we maintain the level that we have by filling all vacancies or retirements. I will take another look at this in the spring and see where we are.
Councilwoman Marinaccio: We have a lot of growth in this township, we just opened a skate park and there are a lot of additional children coming into this town. We have drug problems in the schools that we can't ignore. There is much more traffic, I am asking the state to put a sign at Cindy St and Route 9 alerting the people that they have now entered the death trap. There is an accident there at least once a week and with fatalities. Yes, mayor you are going to hire and fire but I want to make sure that the money is there for whatever comes down the pike. We are talking about lives and safety of children and I will not err on that side. We have no problem with giving extra dollars to the recreation or legal departments. This is the one department that the health, safety and well being of everyone in this township depends on. I want to supply you with the money and what you do with it is your call, I want to make sure that the money is there for you to staff the police department.
Captain Cerra: The mayor is right I did say that you can't mass hire but the difference between this year is that the beach is opening up and you contracted to cover that beach 24 hours a day. We also have the guys in the school so we got overwhelmed. These are commitments that this township made so give us the people to do the jobs. You have three or four guys out IOD, three were working overtime when it happened, it's not healthy. If you want to address the schedule I told you at the meeting I will be more than happy to sit down with you but you are going to pay for it. We have to deal with what we have, they don't open up contracts for another two years. We have commitments that you made that we would do and we are going to do it but if you don't have the right amount of cops you are going to pay more.
Rita Peterson; (Library Board): I want to voice my level of discomfort of the solution that you brought forth to us to solve the budget gap. We start the process in March and we are now six months into our year and we are finding out that we are going to get a $58,000.00 cut. We have an independent auditor - are we spending money that we don't have? I am really uncomfortable spending money that is not there. I would like it to go on record that we are not coming to you in May with an emergency request for funds. We just want the money that we thought we had budgeted for.
President Maher: This council has not cut your budget.
Mayor Cannon: The mayor did not cut your budget either We cut the amount that you asked for, which was above and beyond what you got last year. Instead of giving you the $91,000.00 increase that you asked for, we gave you $36,000.00. This was made available to you as of July, when I submitted my budget.
President Maher: The library should have been aware of the budget as it was presented to council in the July time frame. The council was only aware that you needed an additional $50,000.00 a month ago when we introduced the budget.
Ms. Peterson: We only found out the Wednesday before Thanksgiving.
Mr. Shah: The mayor's budget was given to the council on July 15th. The library director was given a copy, the cuts were discussed with the director at the meeting. It is amazing that we get blamed for increasing expenses and blamed for decreasing expenses. We look at every department's budget and we cut almost all of them. The library's budget wasn't cut from last year's amount. There are many department budget's that were reduced. Maybe we should just submit to you the department requests as the budget.
President Maher: You should have been notified of the mayor's recommendation in July.
Ms. Peterson: We received something prior to the budget meeting with the council. We were under the impression that we weren't going to have any cuts. If we have to take some action because you are not going to be able to meet your commitment of $50,000.00 it is because our hands are tied.
President Maher: I don't want to paint the picture that the library is going to close.
Mr. Farrell: You have to wait until the council is able to make a transfer.
Ms. Peterson: We never had to do that before.
Mr. Farrell: It is not you; it is the council.
Seeing no hands President Maher closed the public portion.
MOTION
To close the public portion by Councilman Testino, seconded by Councilwoman Marinaccio and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
Adoption of the 2000/2001 Municipal Budget
RESOLUTION #627
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex that the budget herein before set forth is hereby adopted and shall constitute an appropriation for the purposes stated in the sums therein set forth as appropriations, and authorization of the amount of:
(A) $17,770,663 (Item 2 below) for municipal purposes
(B) $0 (Item 3 below) got school purposes in Type I school districts only (NJSA 18A:9-2) to be raised by taxation and
(C) $0 (Item 4 below) to be added to the certificate of amount to be raised by taxation for local school purposed in Type II school districts only (NJSA 18A:9-3) and certification to the County Board of Taxation of the following summary of general revenues and appropriations.
Surplus Anticipated $6,825,000.00
Miscellaneous Revenues Anticipated $14,727,225.00
Receipts from Delinquent Taxes $1,600,000.00
-
Amount to be raised by Taxation for Municipal Purposes (item 6(a) sheet 11) $17,770,633.00
-
Amount to be Raised by Taxation for Schools in Type I school districts only (item 6 sheet 42), item 6(b), sheet 13 (NJSA 40A:4-14)
Total Amount to be Raised by Taxation for Schools in Type I School
Districts Only
Total Revenues $40,922,858.00
Within CAPS
(a&b) Operations Including Contingent $26,557,751.00
(e) Deferred Charges and Statutory Expenditures - Municipal $1,675,920.00
(f) Judgments $100.00
Excluded from CAPS
(a) Operations-Total operations excluded from CAPS $3,020,089.00
(c) Capital Improvements $211,975.00
(d) Municipal Debt Service $6,039,665.00
(e) Deferred Charges - Municipal $77,500.00
(m) Reserve for Uncollected Taxes (Include Other Reserves if any) $3,339,858.00
Total Appropriations $40,922,858.00
It is hereby certified that the within budget is a true copy of the budget finally adopted by resolution of the Governing Body on the 18th day of December, 2000. It is further certified that each item of revenue and appropriation is set forth in the same amount and by the same title as appeared in the 2001 approved budget and all amendments thereto, if any have been previously approved by the Director of Local Government Services.
Moved by Councilman Hoff, seconded by Councilman Butler and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher
NAYS: Councilman Sohor.
Consent Agenda
Bingo/Raffle
RESOLUTION # 628
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, the following organizations have made applications to hold, operate and conduct a Bingo/Raffle; said applications being in accordance with the statutes relating thereto:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that the clerk is hereby authorized and directed to issue to the following applicants, the following licenses:
RA29-01 Colts Neck PTO
RA30-01 Colts Neck PTO
RA31-01 Colts Neck PTO
RA32-01 Colts Neck PTO
RA33-01 Sayreville Assoc. for Brain Injured Children
BA34-01 Temple Ohav Shalom
Moved by Councilwoman Marinaccio, seconded by Councilman Hoff and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
Renewal of License for Legends of Golf
RESOLUTION #629
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
the amusement games license for Legends of Golf, located as Block 21000, Lot 3, in Old Bridge Township is hereby renewed for 2001, pursuant to the original resolution dated December 27, 1997 and subject to the following:
1. In granting these approvals, pursuant to the Zoning Board of Adjustment, the tract will be a commercially operated permanent business opened to the public more than thirty (30) consecutive days annually whose acreage is designed and themed for the primary purpose of providing participatory amusements and incorporates food, merchandise and amusement rides (of the type required to be licensed under N.J.S.A.5:3-31 et seq.) In permanent structures; and
2. By Ordinance No. 9-97, the Township Council, by adding new Sections 5-4.10 through 5-4.10 through 5-4.17 inclusive of Chapter V of the Code of the Township of Old Bridge, to be entitled Redemption Amusement Games, made certain findings, including but not limited to the finding that the tract, when developed in accordance with approvals previously granted, will be recognized as an amusement park as that term is used in the Amusement Gaming
Licensing Law (N.J.S.A. 5:8-100 et seq.); and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Township Council finds that the Applicant is duly qualified to hold, operate and conduct Redemption Amusement Games that the Principals of the Applicants are persons of good moral character and have never been convicted of a crime; that the Applicants Redemption Amusement Games are to be held, operated and conducted in accordance with the ordinance, the Amusement Games Licensing Law and the rules and regulations governing the holding, operation and conduct thereof; and the Township Council is satisfied that the prizes to be offered and given in any single game shall be of merchandise only of a retail value not in excess of $15.00 and that no such prizes will be redeemed or redeemable directly or indirectly for money.
Moved by Councilwoman Marinaccio, seconded by Councilman Hoff and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
Change to the 2001 Council Schedule of Meetings
RESOLUTION #630
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
The following changes be made to the Council Schedule of Meetings for the Year 2001:
Remove Monday September 17, 2001 Night Before Rosh Hashanah
Change Monday September 24, 2001 To Combined Meeting - 7:30 p.m.
Remove Monday October 1,2001 Eve of Sukkot
Change Monday October 8, 2001 To Combined Meeting - 7:30 p.m.
Moved by Councilwoman Marinaccio, seconded by Councilman Hoff and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
Authorization of Handicapped Recreation Grant Annual Contract with NJ DCA for Grant ($6,500.00 for Robin Recreational Programs)
RESOLUTION #631
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge desires to enter into an Agreement with the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs during Fiscal Year 2001 for approximately $6,500.00 to carry out a program to provide recreation programs to the children and adults who participate in the Robin Therapeutic Recreation Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Township of Old Bridge does hereby authorize the execution of such a contract for the receipt of such a grant and upon receipt of the fully executed contract from the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs will expend these funds pursuant to the terms of said contract between the Township of Old Bridge and the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the persons whose names, titles and signature appear below are authorized to sign such a contract and any other documents necessary in connection therewith:
Moved by Councilwoman Marinaccio, seconded by Councilman Hoff and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
Authorizing Cancellation of Mortgage for CDBG Mortgage for Carol Serfass
RESOLUTION #632
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, a Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Mortgage was entered into by Carol Serfass with the Township of Old Bridge for premises knows as 782 Greenwood Avenue, Laurence Harbor, New Jersey; and
WHEREAS, the amount of the CDBG Mortgage is $5,591.62; and
WHEREAS, the above-named individual has paid the outstanding amount of the mortgage and is requesting cancellation of said mortgage.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that the CDBG Mortgage in the amount of $5,591.62 is hereby canceled. The Township Council authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to execute the discharge documents.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a true copy of this Resolution shall be deposited with the following Township offices: Community Development Block Grant.
Moved by Councilwoman Marinaccio, seconded by Councilman Hoff and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio, President Maher.
NAYS: None.
Dedication by Rider - County Municipal Open Space, Recreation, Farmland and Preservation Trust Fund
RESOLUTION #633
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge successfully established an open space funding program by referendum in November 2000.
WHEREAS, the law specifically requires funds raised through the dedicated tax to be deposited into a dedicated trust fund called "Township of Old Bridge Municipal Open Space, Recreation, Farmland and Historic Preservation Trust Fund."
WHEREAS, interest earned on investment of the funds is to be credited to the fund.
WHEREAS, that planned capital spending of trust funds must be included as part of the local unit's capital budget.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that such receipt for Open Space Tax and Interest earned to be place in a specific trust fund called "Township of Old Bridge Municipal Open Space, Recreation, Farmland and Historic Preservation Trust Fund" shall be considered a "Dedication by Rider" to the budget of the local unit per N.J.S.A. 40A:4-39 for the sole purpose state above.
Moved by Councilman Testino, seconded by Councilman Butler and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Sohor, Testino, Councilwoman Marinaccio.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT PODIUM: President Maher.
Prior to the vote the following discussion took place
Councilman Testino: I would like the resolution to read " Old Bridge Township Municipal Open Space. I don't want it to say county.
Mr. Shah: That is not a problem.
Councilman Testino: It says "adjustments can be made from previously budgeted current fund appropriation shifted to the trust fund". Do we have other money and should they be shifted and what happened to the money we did have?
Mr. Shah: There is $346,000.00 that was left over from the non-binding referendum. I believe that money is there. I have checked the money that you appropriated last year and that lapsed into the reserve. I am not sure if you can transfer that but I will check.
Councilman Testino: How much was in last years?
Mr. Shah: I think it was $200,000.00 and we used some for different acquisition purposes.
Councilman Testino: So you are going to move the $346,000.00 even though we haven't gotten any tax revenue on it yet?
Mr. Shah: No, we are going to bill in January.
Councilman Testino: Can you find out by next meeting about the $200,000.00 in reserve and also let the Open Space Committee know.
Mr. Shah: We will set up a procedure where they get a monthly report.
J.I.F. Contract
RESOLUTION #634
BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge has considered various proposals for insurance coverages; and
WHEREAS, the Township Council wishes to purchase insurance coverage through Government Risk Management Associates:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that the purchase of insurance services through Government Risk Management Associates is hereby authorized;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Township Attorney shall meet with representatives of Government Risk Management Associates to obtain insurance coverage for the Township of Old Bridge for a term of one year beginning January 1, 2001
Moved by Councilman Butler, seconded by Councilman Hoff and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Cucchiara, Hoff, Redmond, President Maher.
NAYS: Councilmen Greene, Sohor, Councilwoman Marinaccio.
ABSTAIN: Councilman Testino.
Prior to the vote the following discussion took place
Councilman Greene: At the last meeting we had a spreadsheet that didn't make it easy for us to decide, If you wanted to compare the different provisions, it was unclear. One of the key factors that came out of the last meeting was that with the Mercer JIF which we are currently in and have been for three years, we are eligible for a rebate. I think that it is significant to take into consideration. I spoke to Mr. Shah and he indicated that the Mercer JIF has been in existence for 15 years and has a track record. I would go Mercer JIF.
Councilman Sohor: If that was a motion, I would second it.
Councilman Butler: No, we are just taking comments at this time. We are taking about three JIF's Mercer JIF, Central Jersey JIF and Government Risk Management. Mr. Shah gave us tonight an analysis on Mercer and Central Jersey. In reference to the meeting that we had two weeks ago, it seemed like there was collusion between the consultant and the two other JIFs. That's the impression that I got. I feel that the proposal submitted by Government Risk Management - and he had been with us for quite some time before we switched. State law says that we have to go out and do three bids. State law also says that we have to accept the lowest bid. I remember when we did not accept the lowest bid and were sued by the lowest bidder. I think that money that you are talking about getting back from Mercer, I think the litigation would be more than that. My contention is to go with Government Risk Management.
Ms. Shepler: We are not looking at three JIF's. There are two joint insurance funds which this township has been in for the last fourteen years and one private carrier proposed by one individual broker on private insurance. The plan that Government Risk Management is proposing is to go to the private insurance market which is extremely volatile and takes us out of the security of a JIF and place us in a position where we have no control of the increases. The second portion of the proposal is to self insure workers compensation which is more than risky. It was a hodge-podge of taking the private insurance company, self insuring our worker compensation with a number that came out of the air which even the gentleman admitted was the exact same number submitted by Middlesex JIF, who then withdrew their quotation. The $401,000.00 is not based on actual. It has no basis, no function in actuarial history, it is a number pulled from the air. Why would we want to reverse fourteen years of good coverages and the security of a joint insurance fund, to go into the private market? I know that the same carrier is an insurer for a major north Jersey university that suffered tremendous losses in a fire a year ago. I have serious concerns for the fiscal stability of the particular insurance company. I cannot |