OLD BRIDGE TOWNSHIP COUNCIL
AGENDA MEETING
April 4, 2005
An Agenda Meeting of the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge was held in the Municipal Complex on Monday, April 4, 2005. The meeting was called to order by President Baker who asked all present to participate in a salute to the flag followed by a short prayer. President Baker also asked for a moment of silence for our troops in harms way.
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.
Roll call by Deputy Clerk Stella Ward showed the following answering present: Councilmen Butler, Calogera, Gillespie, Greene, Maher, Testino, Volkert, Councilwoman Panos, President Baker.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 7, 2005 – Agenda Meeting
CERTIFICATES – (4/11/05)
Old Bridge Varsity High School Cheerleaders
Old Bridge Rams Junior Pee Wee Cheerleaders
PROCLAMATION – (4/11/05)
Diana Nelson – USA Field Hockey Team
Councilman Calogera: I had requested that a Certificate of Recognition to the Housing Authority be placed on the Agenda for next meeting. I know there was some confusion as to whether it be a resolution, a proclamation or a certificate. I would like that to be on the Agenda for next week so we can do a presentation from Council. I would invite myself and a member from each side of the aisle to join in on behalf of Council to give our Housing Authority the due recognition that they are entitled to. They were recognized by the State for their works with regard to both Maher Manor and for assistance to persons with disabilities.
Mayor Phillips: Kindly refer to item C-4 on the Consent Agenda.
Councilman Calogera: That is a resolution. What I would like is to do it in the form of a certificate so that they can hang it.
Councilwoman Panos: Are you going to present the resolution?
Councilman Calogera: I have never seen us present a resolution to groups or persons, we have always done it in the way of a certificate or proclamation.
President Baker: In the past, proclamations have come from Administration and resolutions come from the Council and we would rather keep it that way.
Attorney Convery: It is pretty clear under the law that a proclamation is usually given by the executive branch, whereas a resolution is given by the municipal body. As far as the document is concerned, I would think that if you pass a resolution recognizing an individual or an organization, then a copy of the resolution could be prepared and presented to the individuals.
Councilman Calogera: What is the difference between a resolution and what is on this agenda for presentation of certificates?
Attorney Convery: The answer is that the executive branch, which is the Mayor, requested these certificates be presented. As a result of us researching this, if the Council wishes to recognize some individual or some organization, it should be done by resolution.
Councilman Calogera: Is that going to be our policy from now on?
Attorney Convery: I think that is the law and I would recommend that. If a particular councilman feels strongly about any topic, they could discuss it at Council Comments or our ordinance provides for a council person to prepare a statement and have it read into the minutes.
Councilman Calogera: I will have the wording sent to the Clerk's office for the preparation of the resolution.
Mayor Phillips: I don't have a problem doing it either way. The certificates are good for sports teams because they acknowledge what they did as a team, very seldom is there an individual. The resolution was your request and I think it should have multi facets to support them. So, if it is your position that you would like the Council to give a resolution, I am in favor of it. If you want a proclamation, that would come from my office fine, but, in this case since it is your request, between now and Monday, if you want it put on a board, my office can do that for you.
Councilwoman Panos: Why can't it be a proclamation from the Mayor and then have the Councilman and the Mayor present it together?
Mayor Phillips: The request for the proclamation did not come from my office, it came through the Clerk's office from Councilman Calogera, that is why it is in the form of a resolution.
Councilman Testino: Why don't we do a joint action with both Mayor and Council?
Councilwoman Panos: That is the same suggestion that I just made.
Mayor Phillips: I would be happy to do it as a proclamation and present it with members of the Council.
ORDINANANCES FOR SECOND READING
ORD. #06-2005 To Amend the Land Development Ordinance (Personal Signs)
ORD. #08-2005 To Amend the Land Development Ordinance Article VII – Zoning Of the Old Bridge LDO – Application of Yard Requirements
ORD. #09-2005 Authorizing various capital improvements projects within the Township of Old Bridge appropriating the sum of $3,741,000.00 and Authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds or bond Anticipation notes in the aggregate principal amount of up to $3,335,000.00.
ORD. #10-2005 Authorizing the replacement of the roof of the Ice Arena in the Township appropriating the sum of $262,500.00 and authorizing The issuance of general obligation bonds or bond anticipation notes In the aggregate principal amount of up to $250,000.00.
ORD. #11-2005 Amending Section 10-8.9 Parking Permit Only in designated Residential areas to add the following streets: Southwood Drive from Ridge Road to Route 516, all of Ridge Road; all of Robin Lane from 9 p.m. on Friday to 5 a.m. Saturday, from 9 p.m. on Saturday to 5 a.m. Sunday.
ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING
FR-11 Ordinance governing preservation, protection, maintenance and removal of trees and shrubs within the Township of Old Bridge
Councilman Maher: I need some clarification with respect to this. I know what we are trying to accomplish here and I have read this ordinance and I have heard the Mayor say we are trying to prevent developers coming in here and just “clear cut” the land. The majority of our residents live in sub divisions and I think this ordinance is too onerous on them. If they need to cut down a tree on their property, they have to apply for a permit and that permit has to be approved by the conservation officer, I just need this clarified for me.
Attorney Convery: What we are trying to do is preserve trees throughout the town and one of the main goals is to prevent clear cutting, which is where someone gets approval and goes in and just clears every tree off the property to make it simpler to put up a building. Under this program we are trying to preserve as many trees as possible without stopping development. As far as the permits are concerned, there are certain exceptions and the main one you are concerned about is under subsection D and it refers to nursery, garden center, or an orchard where trees are being grown, this does not apply to these facilities. If you are managed by the State DEP, under their management plan, that is also exempt. If you have a working farm, you are also exempt. If you are located on a property that is less than one acre, there cannot be more than five trees per year removed and a permit would not be required. I can tell you from litigation in other towns, that we cannot except single family property owners because that would be considered discrimination. Whatever program you set up had to be universal across the township.
Councilman Maher: Are we defining the size of the five trees?
Attorney Convery: There are some definition on this, but our main concern is something called a “specimen” tree. If someone wants to take a down a tree that is 36 inches or greater in diameter, they are definitely going to have to get permission. This is outlined in the ordinance. If a developer takes down a number of trees, and they have a diameter of 4 inches or greater, they have to be replaced.
Councilman Maher: I am not talking about a developer, I am referring to a single homeowner.
Attorney Convery: The same definition applies. If the tree is one inch or considered a garbage tree that does not count towards the five trees or the permit situation. Also, the conservation officer will be the person who goes out to check to see if a replacement tree needs to be planted.
Councilman Maher: Jerry has answered my questions, but I still have some concerns.
Councilwoman Panos: If the resident hires a tree service, does that mean the tree company has to obtain the permit?
Attorney Convery: It is the same situation as to whether or not the homeowner applies for the permit or the company they hire applies for the permit, be it plumbing, electrical, it is the decision of the individuals involved in the transaction who decide who is applying for the permit.
Councilwoman Panos: With regard to the conservation officer, is that a full time or part time position?
Attorney Convery: It is by contract. It will be someone who specializes in this field and has the proper credentials as specified in the ordinance. This person will be paid out of the tree fund and would not come from taxpayer's money.
Councilman Testino: I support the anti clear cutting part of the ordinance, but I have some reservations regarding the bureaucracy of the situation. Some older homes may have landscaping trees that have now grown and now if they want to re-landscape it will require them to get a permit.
I do not want to see the residents burdened unnecessarily.
Attorney Convery: Five is not a magic number. If this Council thinks that the number should be higher, we can change the ordinance before we publish it.
Councilman Testino: I guess this would be very factual sensitive to the particular land that we may be applying the ordinance to. My question is how do I balance my concern and still meet the goal of protecting the clear-cutting?
Attorney Convery: The simple answer would be to allow up to ten trees per year to be removed without replacing trees.
Councilman Testino: Some of these ordinances, you never know how it is going to work. You can legislate one thing and someone finds a way around it. I am not looking to give the developer any latitude, I am just looking to make sure we do not over regulate our homeowners.
Attorney Convery: We can always change the ordinance at a later time if we find the number is not working.
Councilman Testino: Could we get an annual report from the conservation officer as to whether or not the number is working?
Attorney Convery: There is no reason why you could not ask for such a report. We are moving this up for first reading and it would be a good time to make any changes prior to advertising the ordinance.
Councilman Testino: Can we get the suggestion of the conservation officer as to the number of trees that can be removed on a yearly basis?
Attorney Convery: We are basing our information on surrounding towns and what number they use within a given year without having to replace the trees.
Councilman Gillespie: Has it been your experience with Monroe Township that a lot of homeowners come in for permits and complain about same?
Attorney Convery: I am the Planning Board attorney there, so I am not in the building part, but I can ask the conservation officer there this question and get an answer before next meeting.
Councilman Calogera: I agree with what is being said and in addition my concern is this going to be within a calendar year or any twelve month period? Also, trees provide a valuable and essential barrier for drainage and this might create a problem if too many trees were removed especially within a short period of time and therefore I would like to see us stay on the lower side with the number of trees that can be removed.
Attorney Convery: I think that we will be looking at within any one year period. You can cut down five within a 12 month period and once you go one day over into the next 12 month period you can cut down five more, but then you are precluded from cutting trees for the next 11 months. I will change the wording to read five trees within a 12 month period, so it is all consistent. Whether it is a developer or a homeowner if a tree is in an area that is dedicated as a public improvement, be it part of a roadway, parking area, those trees can be removed and there is no replacement required in a public area. That is not to say that the township through its tree escrow fund cannot put trees elsewhere in the township or in that particular area.
Councilwoman Panos: If it is for a parking area for the YMCA or the golf course, projects that are down the road, do the trees have to be replaced?
Attorney Convery: If it is a public area for parking, the answer is no.
President Baker: I would like to thank the Council for making some changes that I think were necessary.
Attorney Convery: I will do some research and prepare an addendum to the tree ordinance for review before the next meeting.
Councilman Greene: I just have a suggestion about the one year period, that perhaps you should start the clock when the first tree is cut so that you cannot go back. I want to say that I appreciate the discussion on this first reading ordinance and that is a positive step. DISCUSSION ORDINANCE
DO-1 To Amend ordinance providing for the defense of actions and the indemnification of public employees and officials.
Attorney Convery: This discussion came up previously because there was a law suit filed against some former township officials as well as current employees. We discovered that there is an ordinance in place providing for defensive actions. I looked at that ordinance and discussed it with the business administrator and we realize that there might be some improvements that need to be made. One improvement would be rather than just leaving it up to an administrator or a council to determine whether or not someone is entitled to defense and indemnification we changed it to leave it up to a court of confident jurisdiction. That takes any mistake out it because if someone goes to court and it is determined that they acted with malice or acted upon fraud or committed a criminal offense, certainly they should not get a defense or indemnification. So if the court determines that then the town is not going to pay any award or counsel fees. That is one change that I made. I am not asking you to move this up, I think that it deserves a review by each of you. I am meeting with the attorney for the JIF this week regarding the lawsuit and I am going to solicit comments from the attorney and I am also meeting with some of the employees that are subject to the law suit to get their concerns and I would like to tell you ultimately that whether you are an employee or an official of the town, this ordinance would affect you.
Mayor Phillips: Would you explain this because I think it is important for people to know that if someone is found to have acted with malice or fraud, this ordinance would not apply to them. This only applies to people who in a normal course of doing their job are subject to litigation and they are entitled to a proper defense by the township.
Attorney Convery: That is correct, but if someone sues an employee or an official of the town, you cannot make a decision unless you know some of the facts. If it turns out that there was malice or fraud on the part of the employee or official or you commit a crime, we are not going to pay to defend you.
Councilman Calogera: Is there any clause in there that precludes people who are indicted for criminal acts not be represented by us? You are telling us that until we get the actual outcome to decide whether or not someone acted with malice or criminal intent. In the case of an actual indictment are we going to be responsible for having legal fees up to that point that a guilty or innocent verdict is applied.
Attorney Convery: That is a different situation, but there is a precedent in regard to defense of police officers because if an officer is accused of a crime such as aggravated assault, even in the course of duty, and he gets indicted, he will have to get his own attorney. The JIF is obviously for civil claims. The law does make it clear that if he is acquitted, he could make a claim against the town for reimbursement of his counsel fees. That is the type of standard that we are looking for, we would not provide an attorney up front. However, if the person is totally cleared, we would have to look at whether or not he/she has a valid claim against the town for legal fees.
Councilwoman Panos: If there are criminal charges against a township employee and in the end they are found not guilty, then they can come to us for reimbursement, correct?
Attorney Convery: Generally speaking, if an employee is accused of a crime while acting in the performance of his duty, and he is acquitted, I would say without exception they would make a claim to the town that they should be compensated for their own attorney fees.
Councilman Gillespie: Could we have a copy of the old ordinance to compare with the new one?
Attorney Convery: We will reproduce it and underline what are the changes so that you can see both.
CONSENT AGENDA
C-1 Bingo/Raffle
RA 51-05 Old Bridge Soccer League
RA 52-05 Salk School PTA
RA 53-05 Miller School PTA
RA 54-05 Miller School PTA
RA 55-05 Cooper School PTA
C-2 Chapter 159 – Law Enforcement Officers Training and Equipment Fund (LEOTEF) in the amount of $8,150.00 (HS)
C-3 Memorialize Reduction of Performance Guarantee Bayshore Fitness Center.
C-4 Resolution acknowledging the award given to the Commissioners of the Housing Authority for their strides in addressing seniors and persons with disabilities housing problems. (KC)
C-5 Resolution authorizing preparation of specifications for Cell Tower at Pension Road Property. (MJ & JC)
C-6 Interlocal Service Agreement between Old Bridge Township and Middlesex County Improvement Authority for the Provision of Recycling Collection and Marketing Services of Designated Recyclables. (HS)
C-7 Resolution authorizing the grant application for NJDOT Safe Streets to Schools Grant. (JC)
C-8 Resolution authorizing the Business Administrator and the Township Attorney to negotiate a lease agreement for farming of the Lambertson/Rose Farm for the 2005 calendar year. (JC)
C-9 To cancel taxes for a 100% Disabled Veteran and refund taxes paid in the amount of $1,144.83. (KS)
C-10 Resolution authorizing the Purchase of three (3) 2005 Dodge Durango's for Code Enforcement Department under State Contract No. A53130 in the amount of $19,940.00 each for a total of $59,940.00. (CERT. #1320) (AFFIRM. ACT.) (HS) (This resolution rescinds and supersedes Resolution #141-05 voted on 3/28/05 for three (3) 2005 Chevrolet Blazers – they are not available.)
C-11 Award of Contract #2005-02 Curb Replacement – (Bids to be opened on 3/31/05) (PS)
President Baker: Asked for any comments on the Consent Agenda.
Councilman Maher: With regard to C-5, Cell Tower at Pension Road, I would like to see one of the specifications to include a “green tower”, which is a term used in the industry and not just a normal cell tower.
Administrator Jacobs: I have requested this information from people in the industry and I know it is possible to do this. I have heard arguments recently that the gray cell towers are sometimes less noticeable that the one that is made to look like a tree, it is a matter of aesthetics, but I will try to get information from the representatives of the industry and get it to you within the next several days.
Councilman Maher: I can tell you that the representatives are not in favor of the green towers because they are more costly.
MOTION
Motion to request that the specifications for the cell tower include “green tower” specs made by Councilman Maher, seconded by Councilman Calogera and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Calogera, Gillespie, Maher, Testino, Volkert, Councilwoman Panos.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Councilman Greene, President Baker
Councilman Testino: For anyone who has not seen this type of tower, if you drive on Rt. 18 North, near the Pelican Ski Shop, right in that development there is a green tower and a gray tower right next to each other and most people cannot see the green tower, so take a look and you will see what Dennis is talking about.
Councilman Calogera: There has been a lot of creative stuff done to these towers over the years. I would not be adverse to having some ideas submitted by the company.
Attorney Convery: It is up to you to specify what you want and we will incorporate it into the specs and send it out. It is up to the industry to respond to the specs, so I don't have any problem to incorporate the green tower into the resolution. If they don't want to do it, they won't bid on the project.
Councilman Gillespie: You can have more than one company on the same tower and that will potentially reduce the need for other towers as well as increase the revenue to the township for the multi-company lessees, have you contemplated this multiple use?
Attorney Convery: We can also incorporate that into our ordinance. I think that the industry is aware of the fact that Old Bridge is going to require that. We will try to get the maximum amount of funds from each company wishing to use the cell tower.
Administrator Jacobs: The tower outside our building has several companies using it with separate lease agreements
Councilwoman Panos: With regard to C-10 authorizing the Purchase of (3) Dodge Durango's for the Code Enforcement Department, I have some questions.
Administrator Jacobs: Last week you did approve the acquisition of (3) vehicles. We need to rescind that because the Chevy Blazers are no longer being made so we are switching to the Durango's.
Councilwoman Panos: Why Durango's? How many miles to the gallon do they get?
Administrator Jacobs: That is the next cheapest SUV that was available.
Councilwoman Panos: These vehicles are expensive to run. Is there not another vehicle that is more cost efficient than the Durango that we could purchase?
Administrator Jacobs: We have four SUV's now and three are out of service and not worth repairing, so we are not increasing the fleet. We have added inspectors to the department and they have to go out in order to do their inspections and therefore, they need the transportation. I don't know the dates that the old vehicles were taken out of service, but I am recommending that we buy this number of vehicles for the department.
Councilwoman Panos: Can't we buy a more cost efficient vehicle?
Administrator Jacobs: I am sure there are a lot of vehicles that are more cost efficient, but I am not sure they are appropriate for our department.
Councilwoman Panos: I would like administration to look into some other type of vehicle because these Durango's are very expensive to run. Are these vehicles taken home by the people who are using them?
Administrator Jacobs: No, they do not take them home and we have looked into other vehicles and it is my recommendation to purchase these cars.
Councilman Calogera: I know gas is over $2.00 per gallon and the Durango is an extremely large SUV, I don't know what our needs are, but I think we could possibly look into something more cost efficient.
Administrator Jacobs: I never thought that in the town gas mileage was a factor. We do not put on a lot of miles, I did not think it would be an issue.
Councilman Greene: I would like to speak to the purchase of the vehicles and not what we are buying. I would like to speak up for Mike, I know from first hand experience that Code Enforcement employees need cars and cannot get out because they do not have a car. Some of them literally borrowed their boss's car to do inspections, so as far as the purchase of these vehicles, I certainly support it.
Councilman Butler: I know that these gentlemen need vehicles to get out to their inspections and I know that you need durable vehicles. You have to get something of quality that will last and do the job.
President Baker: From what I am hearing, the Council, in the future would like you to make sure that we get the best buy for the town.
Councilman Testino: I am accepting the recommendation of the business administrator. I am sure that he has looked into all the options and come up with the best solution.
Attorney Convery: With regard to C-11 the Award of Contract #2005-02, curb replacement, there is some question about the bids and we need to remove this so that administration can review it.
APPOINTMENT
A-1 Ethics Board Reappointment – Andre Strus (New term expires 12/31/09)
RESOLUTION No. 153
BE IT RESOLVED, by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that:
WHEREAS, Andrew Strus be appointed to the Ethics Board for a term expiring December 31, 2009.
Moved by Councilman Butler, seconded by Councilman Calogera and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Calogera, Gillespie, Greene, Maher, Testino, Volkert, Councilwoman Panos, President Baker.
NAYS: None.
Prior to the roll call vote the following discussion took place:
President Baker: I want to thank Councilmen Calogera and Greene for all their help in putting this matter behind us.
Councilman Calogera: I had requested that a discussion item be placed on the Agenda regarding televising additional meeting such as Planning and Zoning Boards. Many people cannot make it to meetings and it is a good idea that people can tune in to their TV and see what is going on. I think it should be a leadership issue from this Council rather than going to the committees and asking what they want to do.
President Baker: Leadership is a large word and I am told leaders must solicit information from all parties involved before they make decisions. It was my decision not to put this on as a discussion item and I ask for your tolerance until we can get all the information from the chairmen of the committees as well as the financial impact on the town and the TV station. I will certainly support your effort to put it on for discussion once we acquire the information.
Councilman Calogera: Do we have a timeline?
President Baker: If I don't get it back within 30 days, then I will send another memo out. I support your efforts to televise each and every single thing that happens in Old Bridge. We just have to look to see if it is feasible.
Councilman Calogera: I will wait the 30 days and at that time I will put it up for an agenda item once again.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Paulette Mayers: I live on Boulevard West in Cliffwood Beach. A week ago we received certified letters regarding a GP6 Permit for surrounding properties. It is a request to place bird houses to get regulatory approval for NJDEP Notice of Violation. This project has been going on since September of 2003. There was illegal filling going on in wetlands behind our houses. We tried to take the steps and be in compliance with the township. We were told that dirt was being stored there for future use on Old Bridge ball fields. We took photos and brought them to the town. We met with Mr. Phillips and took Mr. Volkert there to see the site and it still did not stop. We contacted the DEP, the N.Y. and N.J. Baykeeper and the Old Bridge Environmental Commission. Everyone agreed with us and I have letters of response from each of them. Finally the DEP issued a notice of violation against the township. From that point on we have constantly received the response that the township and DEP were working on remediation program and kept asking for extensions.
The next thing we received was that the town was looking for a post permit to allow what was illegally dumped to stay there and that they want to construct two bird houses.
I met with Mr. Jacobs last week and told him that I had met with all of the neighbors and explained to them that placement of bird houses was a cover-up for what was done to the wetlands. We are asking for several things:
1. All illegal fill be removed which is 200'x 200'x 15”
2. The material removed be tested to determine its toxicity
3. The area to be restored to its original status
4. Cost will not be put upon the residents of this township
President Baker: We will give these questions over to administration and they will contact you with answers and information per your request within seven days and if we need to we will put it on the agenda for follow-up.
Linda Seiler: Discussion on the cell tower was very informative. I had asked questions in the code enforcement department regarding the vehicles and the cost of operating those vehicles. I would like to know how many vehicles are pooled throughout the administration and I want to know if any vehicles go home?
President Baker: We will capture your questions and I am not prepared to answer them this evening, but if you give your questions to administration, we will get back to you in writing.
Linda Seiler: I would like to know who is commissioning this tower.
President Baker: I am not prepared to answer every single question. What I am prepared to do is treat you with the same courtesy that you treat me with and document your questions and get back to you within five days.
Linda Seiler: Who will be preparing the specs for the cell tower? I would like to request that discussion ordinances be posted on the bulletin board and also on the web, so that people who want to come and talk about them, can discuss them intelligently. I would like to know the total amount bonded for in 2004 and 2005 because just this evening we have almost $4 million dollars in bonding. I would also like some additional information on the indemnification of employees who go out and select their own attorneys.
Ms. Richcek: I have a question about the clear cutting of trees and their replacement. Will this ordinance protect the property that we are planning to develop in the future? Also, who will be responsible for replacing the trees?
President Baker: If you will submit your questions, we will get back to you.
COUNCIL COMMENTS:
Councilwoman Panos: Will we get copies of the questions asked by the speakers this evening along with the responses?
President Baker: Yes to the Councilwoman's question. I have been asked by the residents of Ward 2, if we could look into a shuttle service extension to 516 East and either down Ticetown Road to the Rt. 9 corridor. The second comment I have is a question regarding the Old Bridge High School students parking near the library. I know it will end soon with graduation, but I would ask you to request the police department if they could put a special on Rt. 516 to protect the children when they are crossing and prevent an accident. Please update me.
MOTION TO ADJOURN
Motion to adjourn made by Councilman Maher, seconded by Councilman Calogera and so ordered on the following roll call vote:
AYES: Councilmen Butler, Calogera, Gillespie, Greene, Maher, Testino, Volkert, Councilwoman Panos, President Baker.
NAYS: None.
______________________________________
President William Baker
_____________________________________
Rose-Marie Saracino, Township Clerk
vo
Dist: |