Old Bridge Township, New Jersey - Sept 23, 2002 Minutes

A meeting of the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge was held in the Municipal Complex on Monday, September 23, 2002. The meeting was called to order at 8:03 p.m. by President Butler 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 was 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 Ward showed the following members answering present:

Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler.

Councilman Maher arrived at 8:30 p.m.. Councilman Testino was absent.

RESOLUTION #479-02

BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of 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 September 23, 2002 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 September 24, 2002 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 $2,145,924.43(General Fund)

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Calogera and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler.

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION #480-02

BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of 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

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge that the bill listing of September 23, 2002 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 $683,450.58 (Payroll).

Moved by Councilman Calogera, seconded by Councilman Green and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION #481-02

BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of 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

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by President Butler and so DENIED on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Redmond, President Butler

NAYS: Councilmen Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Councilwoman Panos

ABSENT FROM PODIUM: Councilman Maher

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

CLERK'S REPORT

Deputy Clerk Ward: There is no report at this time.

ATTORNEY'S REPORT

Attorney Ruggierio: No formal report.

Councilman Redmond: Bill copied most of us on the piece of land from Perth Amboy.

Their Council passed a unanimous ordinance conveying the property to Old Bridge for $16,500.00. I would like Bill to prepare a matching resolution.

Attorney Ruggierio: I will fax a copy of the article to Perth Amboy and they will be able to follow-up.

PROCLAMATION

Rupali Kulkarni

PROCLAMATION

WHEREAS, Rupali Kulkarni was a resident of Old Bridge who tragically passed away on August 29, 2002 as a result of complications of leukemia; and

WHEREAS, Rupali was only seventeen years old; and

WHEREAS, Rupali was an intelligent and highly motivated young woman who was graduated from Old Bridge High School in 2001 as an honor student and accomplished tennis player; and

WHEREAS, Rupali spent the last two years of her life serving her community as a volunteer with the Cheesequake Volunteer First Aid Squad; and

WHEREAS, Rupali was a role model for her peers excelling in all she attempted.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT KNOWN that the Mayor, the Township Council and the residents of the Township of Old Bridge wish to honor the life of Rupali Kulkarni. Her legacy will continue in the hearts and minds of the many lives she touched during her short life, and her smile, warmth, kind spirit and generosity will never be forgotten.

___________________ ____________________________

Barbara Cannon, Mayor Reginald Butler, Council President

PRESENTATION

President Butler: We have with us this evening The New York Police Department Retired Officer's Local 1013 represented by National President Anthony Perrone and Harry Moss, President of the New York Chapter to honor the Old Bridge Police Officers who went to New York on 9-11 and offered their assistance.

Mr. Tony Perrone: I am the National President of the New York 1013. 1013 is the signal for New York City Police Officers when an officer is in trouble. We have chapters all over the United States. Also, here this evening is Patsy Noto, Vice-president of the New York City Chapter, John Zinetti and Charles Lacata from the Jersey Shore 1013, Edward Birmingham who is an active police officer and on the Board as a trustee to the Verrazano. It was brought to our attention by one of our members that Old Bridge was active and volunteered to go to Ground Zero and we are very proud and honored to acknowledge these officers for their fine work. In recognition of that I would like to say that police officers always have been the first line of defense for every community. They wear a hundred hats, not just the one they wear today; they act as medical, firemen, clergy, lawyers and judges every day of their lives and they contribute much more to their communities and we are very proud of them. 9-11 was not a tragedy, but rather an attack on this country and that is what we should remember. We are very proud that recognition has been given to the heroes and the true heroes are police officers, every single day they are heroes as they are our first line of defense. I wanted to come here tonight to say "thank you" to these fine gentlemen.

Captain Dennis Croni,n Det. Steve Daroci, Ptl. Keith Calvosa, Sgt. David Lynch, Det. Robert Mazlewski, Ptl. Michael Cronin, Sgt. Robert Weiss, Det. Glen Cavasin, Ptl. Ronald Atlak, Sgt. Charles Spinola, Ptl. Steven Sherry, Ptl. Michael Blahota, Det. Peter Lopresti, Ptl. Thomas Montagna, Ptl. Michael Laforte, Det. John Reinhardt ,Ptl. Walter Decker, Ptl. Edward Jarusiewicz

Edward Birmingham: I am an active member of NYPD. 9-11 changed a lot of things. There has always been professional courtesy between police agencies all across the world. Not only has 9-11 brought us a lot closer than we were before, but now when I retire, I will have a lot of war stories to tell my children and grandchildren. Some of those stories will be about the camaraderie and teamwork that brought this instance to a close. I would like to thank all of the ladies and gentlemen of all the departments that helped us out.

Capt. Cronin: On behalf of my unit and the Township of Old Bridge, the Mayor, the Police Department and our Council, I would like to thank all of you from the bottom of my heart. We have been bound together by this terrible disaster and we will never forget the brotherhood between the departments.

PRELIMINARY PUBLIC COMMENTS

Rudy Patel: I have lived in Old Bridge for the past five years and I also own a business in Old Bridge and I am concerned about the new cigarette issue and the new ordinance that was passed. I know anything that involves children is a sensitive issue and the new ordinance is a step in the right direction, but the approach is not appropriate. Putting a sign in the window just creates a negative stereotype against Indian-American store owners. As you know 75%-80% of these store owners are Indian/American. The right approach would be the education of these store owners to establish an educational forum and are instructed in the financial and moral consequences of selling cigarettes to minors.

Charles Donnelly: I am a member of the Friendly Sons. We are a fraternal organization and have been active here for about 38 years. We are here to respond to accusations that were brought forward without substantial proof that our membership was responsible for any damage to neighboring properties. Our purpose is to assure you that whenever we organize any fund raiser, social events, personal parties, we will surely abide by the rules and obtain the needed permits. It is unfortunate that our neighbors experienced some damage, but from time to time we also have experienced damage to our property as well. Our membership is over 500 and we constantly remind them of our obligations to our neighbors.

Our monthly newsletter does dictate the rules and regulations of our organization and makes clear what we have to do. We have been a charitable organization and offer help to our neighbors. I point this out to rebut the ethnic slur that was made before this body and come before you and set the record straight, but most importantly we will take our neighbors best interest in hand and abide by the rules and regulation of this township.

Kiran Desai: This Council has passed an ordinance to publish the offender who is selling tobacco to the minors. In my belief this ordinance is unfair and unjust. Let me state for the record that the New Jersey State statute for selling tobacco to minors is considered a petty disorderly person offense and is punishable with a fixed fine. If the same establishment violates the law a second time, the fine is still only double of the first time and there is nothing in the statue that says the license will be suspended. I am not promoting that businesses should sell tobacco to minors again and again, but what I am asking is for one bad apple why should all the businesses be punished. What I am suggesting to Council is that this ordinance be rescinded and revisit this issue and my suggestion to amend is that if a person sells tobacco to a minor, more than two times, or like New York State, three times within 24 consecutive months, their license can be suspended. I think that is the best route because we would not punish the good business men in the community. Let's amend this ordinance.

Blythe Dim: I am here on behalf of 7-11. As you know we have several stores in the neighborhood which have independent store operators. It is our position that the ordinance although something has to be done, this ordinance is unfair. These operators are acting in good faith and are actively engaged in the "we card program" teaching their employees to card anyone who appears to be under the age of 27 in conjunction with the cigarette companies who are also actively working to decrease the underage population of minors who are smoking. We are asking that you reconsider this ordinance as it is unfair to the good citizens of the community. A good faith is made on our part to do everything we can to stop underage smoking and I hope that you take this into consideration.

Raj Patel: I am here as the president of a non-profit association and I am getting many calls from my fellow association members about this ordinance. They are concerned, we are a hardworking community and we believe this is a very unfair ordinance upon us. We do everything in our power to do the right thing and we have no intention to sell to minors. Mistakes do happen, but this labels us as big criminal and we are not. I strongly urge that this ordinance be revoked.

Anish Patel: I have a business in Old Bridge. A few weeks ago you passed this ordinance to advertise the businesses that violate the sale of tobacco to minors. The way you are punishing them by labeling is not fair to the businesses and I request you to take Mr. Desai suggestion and rescind this ordinance and make amendments.

Shailesh Patel: I have lived in Old Bridge for ten years and have a business here for five years. I would like to reiterate what my business colleagues have said. I know it is a sensitive issue and we always stress to our employees and try to educate them about this law. Sometimes mistakes happen and by having the sign on the door it creates negative impression for the business, so we ask that you reconsider this ordinance.

Reginald Springer: I am here about the $25.00 fee for the parking sticker. Why the fee?

President Butler: It helps the township to recoup some of the expense for its administrative costs. We did not do this lightly, we made calls to other townships and they charge a much higher fee that we have implemented. It is called a user fee, for those residents to make use of the facilities.

Reginald Springer: I understand a user fee, but my other question is why from zero to $25.00?

Deputy Clerk Ward: A survey was taken by the Clerk's office and most of the neighboring towns charge between $100.00 and $125.00 for the sticker and it too does not guarantee a parking space.

President Butler: What I have said before, is that we are just trying to recoup some of our costs.

Reginald Springer: I was told that last year 3000 stickers were issued, times $25.00, that is a lot of money.

Deputy Clerk Ward: Since the $25.00 fee has been implemented, we have issued a lot less stickers, approximately 400 have been given out and the stickers expire the end of this month, so you can see we are getting a lot less volume.

President Butler: I would like to make an announcement and you have probably seen it on TV, the Walk for Chris. This young man lives in Old Bridge and he has leukemia. He and his family need our support and all proceeds will go to help defray medical costs. They are having a walk on Saturday, October 12^th, 10 am, rain or shine at the Old Bridge West High School campus. We hope you all get on board and help Chris.

Lucille Panos: I will be there for Chris. I had the occasion to work with the Township With a Heart group recently and I was asked to remind people that the annual dinner dance is being held on Friday, October 25^th . So please plan on helping.

HEARING

Release/Reduction Performance Guarantee - Park's Edge (Application #62-98Z, Block #3230, Lot 15) REMOVED - No documents submitted for proper noticing & publishing of hearing.

ORDINANCE FOR SECOND READING

Ordinance #44-02

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER X, TRAFFIC SCHEDULE XII
PERMIT PARKING IN DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL AREAS (ROCK HILL ROAD)

BE IT ORDAINED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey, that

Section 1. Purpose

The purpose of this ordinance is to designate the named streets as residential permit parking areas to alleviate resident parking problems and promote safety.

Section 2. Amendment

Chapter X, Traffic, Schedule XIII of the Code of the Township of Old Bridge is hereby amended to add the following:

Name of Street Side Location

Rockhill Road Both Entire Street

Section 3. Inconsistent Ordinances.

All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency.

Section 4. Partial Invalidity.

If any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this ordinance shall be adjudged invalid, such adjudication shall apply only to the section, paragraph, clause or provision so adjudged and the remainder shall be deemed valid and effective.

Section 5. Effective Date.

A. Except as set forth at subparagraphs B and C hereof, this Ordinance shall take effect on the earlier of the following dates: (1) on the date the Mayor affixes his/her signature thereto and returns same to the Municipal Council by delivering it to the Municipal Clerk pursuant to NJSA 40A:69A-41 or (2) on the tenth day following presentment to the Mayor of the Ordinance pursuant to NJSA 40A:69A-41 applicable when the Mayor has failed to return the Ordinance; whichever occurs first.

B. If the Mayor vetoes the Ordinance (in the manner set forth at NJSA 40A:69A-41), this Ordinance shall become effective upon the Township Council's vote to override the Mayor's veto.

C. Notwithstanding any other provision hereof, this Ordinance shall not take effect less than twenty (20) days after its final passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor, where such approval is required, unless the Council shall have also adopted a resolution declaring an emergency and at least two-thirds (2/3) of all the members of the Council vote in favor of such resolution.

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Greene and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote, President Butler opened the meeting to the public. Seeing no hands, President Butler closed the public portion.

ORD. #45-02

TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE
ORDINANCE NO. 45-02

AN ORDINANCE AMENDING FEE AMOUNTS FOR COPIES OF POLICE DOCUMENTS

BE IT ORDAINED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey, as follows:

Section 1. Purpose

This ordinance amends Township Ordinance No. 32-96 to change the fees charged by the Township of Old Bridge for copies of police department records to amounts consistent with New Jersey Open Public Records Act, NJSA 47:1A-1, et. seq.

Section 2. Ordinance

The following fees shall be charged by the Township of Old Bridge for police reports, including, but not limited to, accident reports, criminal case reports, and DWI case reports:

1. Pages 1 through 10 .75 cents per page
2. Pages 11 through 20 .50 cents per page
3. All pages over 20 .25 cents per page

For all police reports which are requested other than in person, an additional fees of five ($5.00) dollars for the first three pages and one ($1.00) dollar for each page thereafter shall be charged.

Section 3. Inconsistent Ordinances.

All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency.

Section 4. Partial Invalidity.

Section 5. Effective Date.

B. If the Mayor vetoes the Ordinance (in the manner set forth at NJSA 40A:69A-41), this Ordinance shall become effective upon the Township Council's vote to override the Mayor's veto.

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Calogera and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote, President Butler opened the meeting to the public. Seeing no hands, President Butler closed the public portion.

ORD. #46-02

TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE
ORDINANCE NO. 46-02

AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE EXEMPTING CERTAIN BUSINESSES FROM PAYMENT OF RETAIL
FOOD ESTABLISHMENT LICENSING FEE

BE IT ORDAINED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey, as follows:

Section 1. Purpose

This ordinance amends Section 19-10.5 of the Code of the Township of Old Bridge to exempt certain businesses from the payment of retail food establishment license fees.

Section 2. Retail Food Establishment Fees

Section 19-10.5 of the Code of the Township of Old Bridge is hereby amended as follows:

19-10.5 Fees. The following shall be the schedule of fees for each retail food establishment.

a. No change

b. No change

c. Incidental Sales. Businesses whose sales of food items are limited solely to the sale of pre- packaged food, such as dry goods and other non-perishable items, which is displayed in an area not exceeding twenty (20) square feet and five percent (5%) of the total square footage in the business location shall be exempt from the payment of licensing fees in this subchapter.

Section Inconsistent Ordinances.

All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency.

Section Partial Invalidity.

Section Effective Date.

B. If the Mayor vetoes the Ordinance (in the manner set forth at NJSA 40A:69A-41), this Ordinance shall become effective upon the Township Council's vote to override the Mayor's veto.

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, President Butler.

NAYS: Councilwoman Panos

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote, the following discussion took place.

Councilwoman Panos: Does this exempt them from the fee or the license?

Attorney Condon: From the fee?

Councilwoman Panos: So they still have to get inspected? I would like my fellow council members to consider some things. If they are just being exempt from the fee, but they still have to get the license, and they still have to be inspected am I correct?

Attorney Condon: Correct.

Councilwoman Panos: Shouldn't we get reimbursed for some sort of and we have to send our inspectors out there, I am thinking maybe there should be a minimum thing.

Attorney Condon: The inspectors going out there are the Middlesex County health inspectors and they offered no resistance to this idea, simply because the inspection of the area for the exempted businesses is so small, it is basically a countertop, and the agreed that the fee is not warranted for that sort of inspection.

Councilwoman Panos: I have some other issues with this. I could see some exemption, maybe during the holidays? Mr. Azzarello can you address this?

Russ Azzarello: I don't think that any of those establishments that were referred to us are relative to this matter, like a local drug store, necessarily has aisles of this type of stuff. They might have something incidental to their business.

Councilwoman Panos: How many stores does this cover?

Russ Azzarello: I think as I stated in the memo to the Council, we did not take a survey of any particular number of stores, we were given a complaint based on the fee schedule sent to a small business owner and when we discussed it with the Health Department and the Legal Department who then decided that there was merit to the complaint, because they were being charged by the square footage of their store and a 7000 sq. ft. drug store that had a counter top of convenient items was being charged $300.00, when their only sale of prepackaged products amounted to an area of 2x4 sq. feet and they felt that they would never sell $300.00 worth of a product like gum or candy. This scenario was presented to both the Health and Legal Departments who felt the complaint had merit and so the ordinance was written as you see it.

Councilwoman Panos: I thought you were going to come back with more information. How many stores are going to get relief?

Russ Azzarello: That will be determined when the stores are looked at for their normal annual fees. If the inspectors do not agree, then they will have to pay the additional fee in accordance with the ordinance schedule.

Prior to the roll call vote President Butler opened the public portion.

Reginald Springer: I would like to know if the store owner is going to be given a break on the fees, what about the customer who still has to pay the tax on the meal? I go to certain places and I see that the floors and counters are dirty. If the customer doesn't receive some kind of inspection, then owner will be inclined to be even more careless with the health of his customers and I would suffer as a consumer.

President Butler: What this refers to is a pharmacy who for the convenience of their customers has a small candy counter, this is what this is about, it is not about the food stores.

Seeing no further hands, President Butler closed the public portion.

ORDINANCE FOR FIRST READING

FR - 1 Ordinance to amend Land Development Ordinance - Section 4-3 (Sign Posting)

Township of Old Bridge
Ordinance No. 47-02

ORDINANCE AMENDING OLD BRIDGE LAND DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE SECTION 4-3(M) REGARDING NOTICE OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

BE IT ORDAINED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey as follows:

SECTION 1: PURPOSE

The purpose of this ordinance is to amend the Section 4-3(M) of the Old Bridge Land Development Ordinance to clarify which applications are subject to the requirements of Section 4-3(M).

SECTION 2: ORDINANCE

Section 4-3(M) of the Old Bridge Land Development Ordinance is amended by substitution as follow:

M. Posting of Notice of Development Application

Upon the filing of an application for development applicant shall post a sign upon the property which is the subject of the application. Such signs shall provide notice to the public that the property is the subject of a proposed subdivision, site plan and/or variance application. The signs shall be obtained by the applicant from the Township of Old Bridge at the expense of the applicant. The fee for such signs shall be $250.00 per sign. Signs shall be posted in such a manner so that one sign is clearly visible from all roadways which abut the subject property.

Signs shall be posted within seven days of the filing of the application and shall not be removed until the application is approved, rejected or withdrawn.

This Ordinance shall be limited in scope and shall only apply to applications for development which are for General Development Plans, major or minor subdivisions, new commercial site plans on vacant land or lands being converted from a non-commercial use or use variances under 40:55D-70(d) applications. Any land development application involving the construction or alteration of a one single family dwelling unit on one lot is exempt from this sign posting ordinance.

SECTION 3: INCONSISTENT ORDINANCES

All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with or in conflict with this ordinance are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency.

SECTION 4: PARTIAL INVALIDITY

SECTION 5: EFFECTIVE DATE

Except as set forth at subparagraphs B and C hereof, this Ordinance shall take effect on the earlier of the following dates: (1) the date the Mayor affixes his/her signature thereto and returns same to the Municipal Council by delivering it to the Municipal Clerk pursuant to NJSA40A:69A-41 or (2) on the tenth day following presentment to the Mayor of the Ordinance pursuant to NJSA40:69A-41 applicable when the Mayor has failed to return the Ordinance; whichever occurs first.
If the Mayor vetoes the Ordinance (in the manner set forth at NJSA40:69A-41), this Ordinance shall become effective upon the Township Council's vote to override the Mayor's veto.
Notwithstanding any other provision hereof, this Ordinance shall not take effect less than twenty (20) days after its final passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor, where such approval is required, unless the Council shall have also adopted a resolution declaring an emergency and at least two thirds (2/3) of all the members of the Council vote in favor of such resolution.

Moved by Councilman Calogera, seconded by Councilman Greene and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler.

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote, President Butler opened the discussion to the public. Seeing no hands, President Butler closed the public portion.

CONSENT AGENDA

RESOLUTION NO. 482-02

GRANTING PERMISSION FOR OLD BRIDGE DAY PARADE

BE IT RESOLVED, by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that:

WHEREAS, the Township Council of Old Bridge has proposed an Annual Old Bridge Day Parade on Saturday, October 5, 2002 (no rain date); and

WHEREAS, a resolution is required for that purpose;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex , State of New Jersey that it hereby grants permission for an Old Bridge Day Parade to be conducted by the Township of Old Bridge Committee:

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler.

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 483-02

MEMORIALIZING RELEASE OF PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR COURTCO LUBE FACILITY

BE IT RESOLVED the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that:

WHEREAS, Courtco, LLC (Oil Well Lube Facility), located on Route 516 is now seeking a release of the performance guarantee; and

WHEREAS, a bond hearing was held on September 9, 2002 at which time the Township Engineering Department and the Township Council were heard; and

WHEREAS, the Township engineer has performed an inspection of the work done and fine that the bonded items have been completed satisfactorily; and

WHEREAS, the Township Engineer recommends release of the performance guarantee as follows:

Performance Bond $153,660.78 (UBO247182)

10% Cash Deposit $17,073.42

Total $170,734.20

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that the performance guarantee be released subject to the following:

The developer posting a Maintenance Bond for a (2) two year period in the amount of $25,610.28 (15% if the Total Performance Bond.)

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 484-02

AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY FOR AN ADDITIONAL GRANT FOR THE MUNICIPAL ALLIANCE BABES PROGRAM

WHEREAS, on May 2, 2002 the County agreed to provide the sum of $54,133.00 to the Township of old Bridge for the purpose of providing Municipal Alliance related activities; and

WHEREAS, the County wishes to provide the Township with an additional sum of $9,900.00 for the provision of additional Municipal Alliance Activities; and

WHEREAS, the additional sum of $9,900.00 provided by the County will be used as follows: $5,400.00 for the B.A.B.E.S. Program and $4,500.00 for the Caution Without Fear Campfire Girls Program.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that the execution of the agreement with the County to provide the additional $9,900.00 is hereby authorized; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and Township Clerk are hereby authorized to sign any and all documents necessary to effectuate the terms of this agreement as may be approved in form by the Township Attorney.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 485-02

RESOLUTION ADOPTING CHANGES REQUIRED BY THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TAX RELIEF RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2001 TO AN EXISTING DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN. (Benefitscorp, Inc. former NPC)

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge by resolution adopted a Deferred Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2002 for the purpose of making available to eligible employees the accrual of tax benefits under a Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 amended Section 457 of the Internal Revenue code; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge desires it Plan to conform with the changes in the Code brought about by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge desires to adopt a restated Plan that conforms with the changes in the Code resulting from the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001; and

WHEREAS, such revised Plan shall supersede the previously adopted Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Township of Old Bridge hereby adopts the attached revised Plan (Plan Identifier 09-GWL-PD-E041502).

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to the Director of the Division of Local Government Services.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 486-02

AWARDING CONTRACT #02-22 FOR WINDOW REHABILITATION CHEESEQUAKE VILLAGE TO TRI-STATE BUILDING MATERIALS, INC. FOR $38,600.00.

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge advertised and received bids for Contract #02-22 for window rehabilitation for Cheesequake Village; and

WHEREAS, bids were received and opened on August 28, 2002; and

WHEREAS, the Township Council wishes to award the contract for window rehabilitation to the lowest responsible bidder; and

WHEREAS, the Township Engineer has recommended that a contract be awarded to Tri-State Building Materials, Inc., 65-89 Lodi Street, Passaic, New Jersey 07055, as they submitted the lowest responsible bid.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey, as follows:

Tri-State Building Materials, inc., is hereby awarded a contract in the amount of $38,600.00 for window rehabilitation.

The award of the contract is contingent upon the issuance of a Certification of Availability of Funds #1082 Certifying the existence of a sufficient appropriation to fund the said contract.

The Mayor and Township Clerk are hereby authorized to sign the contract documents necessary to effectuate the award of this contract .

The Township Attorney shall review any and all contractual documents prepared in furtherance of this award.

This Resolution is conditioned upon the following:

Formal execution of a contract approved by the Director of Law which is signed by the Mayor and Township Clerk.

Issuance of a Certificate of Availability of Funds as aforesaid.
Compliance by the vendor with signing the mandatory affirmative action language required by law.

D. Compliance by the Vendor with filing of Affirmative Action Form AA302 or AA201, or otherwise complying with affirmative action employees information reporting.

No contract shall be considered awarded unless, and until, the above requirements are executed.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 487-02

ADOPTING CHANGES REQUIRED BY THE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TAX RELIEF RECONCILIATION ACT OF 2001 TO AN EXISTING DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN (VALIC)

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge by resolution adopted a Deferred Compensation Plan effective January 1, 2002, for the purpose of making available to eligible employees the accrual of tax benefits under a Section 457 Deferred Compensation Plan; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge by resolution retained (The Variable Annuity Life Insurance Company ("VALIC") as the contractor under the Deferred Compensation Plan and executed a Service Agreement with said contractor; and

WHEREAS, the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 amended Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge desires its Plan and Service Agreement that conform with the changes in the Code brought about by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge desires to adopt a restated Plan and Service Agreement that conforms with the changes in the Code resulting from the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001; and

WHEREAS, such revised Plan and Service Agreement shall supersede the previously adopted Plan and Service Agreement;

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Township of Old Bridge hereby adopts the attached revised Plan (22-PD-VALIC0E121201) and Service Agreement (03-SA-VALIC-E1212010)

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to the Director of the Local Government Services.

Moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler.

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 488-02

AUTHORIZING EXTENSION OF DEADLINE FOR HABITAT FOR HUMANITY (22 NAPLES AVE.)

WHEREAS, in a prior Resolution, the Township sold property known as 22 Naples Avenue and 17 Biondi Street, to Habitat for Humanity; and

WHEREAS, Habitat for Humanity was given two (2) years from the date of the deed restriction, October of 2000, to renovate and restore the properties; and

WHEREAS, investigation and inspection of the properties by Habitat for Humanity have revealed certain problems; and

WHEREAS, Habitat for Humanity has requested an extension of the deadline to renovate and/or restore the properties.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey as follows:

The current obligation of Habitat for Humanity to build on the property by October 2002 be extended.

Habitat for Humanity shall secure a building permit permitting it to construct a single family dwelling upon the land conveyed on or before December 31, 2004.

Habitat for Humanity shall demolish the existing residence within twenty-four (24) months of the adoption of this Resolution

4. Habitat for Humanity shall diligently pursue OBMUA approval for connection of an existing sewer line and shall render reports every six (6) months on its activities in this connection. Habitat shall have no such obligation of diligence until the Genoa sewer extension is run by the OBMUA.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 489-02

MEMORIALIZING RELEASE OF PERFORMANCE GUARANTEE FOR CEDAR VIEW ESTATES - SECTIONS 1, 2, AND 3

WHEREAS, the developer of Cedar View Estates, Section 1, 2 and 3 has requested a release of the following performance guarantees:

Section 1 (original Bond of $641,358.86, reduced January 9, 1995)

Performance Bond $140,513.56

10% Cash Deposit $32,653.26

Total $173,166.82

Section 2 (original Bond of $294,854.40, reduced January 9, 1995)

Performance Bond $60,209.56

10% Cash Deposit 19,401.13

Total $79,610.69

Section 3 (original Bond of $218,157.70, reduced January 9, 1995)

Performance Bond $49,490.18

10% Cash Deposit $9,412.21

Total $58,902.39

WHEREAS, a bond hearing was held on March 18, 2002 at which time the township Engineering Department and the Township Council were heard; and

WHEREAS, the Township Engineer recommends release of the performance guarantee based on the following conditions:

The developer posting a Maintenance Bond for a two year period in the amount of $173,155.64 (15% of the Performance Guarantee)

The developer agreeing to forward the amount of $26,835.50 to the Township of Old Bridge for deficient pavement section (see attached report).

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex State of New Jersey that the performance guarantee be released subject to the developer posting a Maintenance Bond for a two year period in the amount of $173,155.64 (15% of the performance guarantee) and the developer agreeing to forward the amount of $26,835.50 to the Township for deficient pavement section listed in the attached report.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 490-02

SUPPORT OF TOWNSHIP'S LIVABLE COMMUNITIES PILOT PROGRAM GRANT APPLICATION FOR THE MASTER PLAN STREETSCAPE ALONG COTTRELL ROAD

WHEREAS, the Department of Transportation has funds earmarked for the funding of Statewide Livable Communities; and

WHEREAS, New Jersey municipalities are eligible to submit a Livable Communities Pilot Program application; and

WHEREAS, the project must have a direct relationship to a specific component or mode of the transportation system; and

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge wishes to submit an application for the Master Plan streetscape along Cottrell Road in the amount of $250,000.00.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey as follows:

The application for the Livable Communities Pilot Program is hereby authorized in the amount of $250,000.00.

The Mayor and the Township Clerk are hereby authorized to execute the documents necessary to effectuate the award of this grant. The Township Attorney shall review any and all contractual documents prepared in furtherance of this grant.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

RESOLUTION NO. 491-02

AUTHORIZING THE STATEWIDE LIVABLE COMMUNITIES FUNDING FOR PARK/OPEN SPACE IMPROVEMENTS - PENSION ROAD

WHEREAS, the Township of Old Bridge is aware of funding for municipalities to maintain and upgrade open space, parks and playgrounds offered by the State; and

WHEREAS, the Statewide Livable Communities fund will help communities address these needs for improvements to their parks and open space; and

WHEREAS, the Township Parks & Recreation Director wishes to apply for said funding the Pension Road Park improvements; and

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, county of Middlesex, State of New Jersey as follows:

The Township of old Bridge shall and is hereby authorized To apply for the Statewide Livable Communities grant.

The Mayor and Township Clerk are hereby authorized to sign the documents necessary to effectuate the award of this grant. The Township Attorney shall review any and all Contractual documents prepared in furtherance of this grant.

Moved by Councilman Baker seconded by Councilman Redmond and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote, President Butler opened the Consent Agenda items to the public. Seeing no hands, President Butler closed the Consent Agenda portion.

LIQUOR LICENSE

LL-1 RENEWAL OF 2002-2003 PLENARY RETAIL CONSUMPTION LICENSE #1209-33-007-003 JANELA, INC. (Inactive) Special Ruling

RESOLUTION NO. 492-02

RENEWAL OF 2002-2003 PLENARY RETAIL CONSUMPTION LICENSE #1209-033-007-003, JANELA, INC. (INACTIVE) SPECIAL RULING

WHEREAS, JANELA, Inc. has applied to the Township of Old Bridge in the County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey for a renewal of their inactive Plenary Retail Consumption License No. 1209-33-007-003 for the period of July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2003; and

WHEREAS, they have complied with the rules governing the renewal of said license and having paid the fee of One Thousand Five Hundred Seventy-six dollars and Sixty Cents ($1576.60) and as no objections have been received to the renewal of said license; and

WHEREAS, a licensee has received a Special Ruling from the Director of the Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control to permit the filing of a renewal application of an Inactive License for the 2002-2003 licensing term, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 33:1-12.39;

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Clerk of the Township of Old Bridge is hereby authorized to issue the applicant a renewal of their Plenary Retail Consumption License for the period of July 1, 2002 - June 30, 2003, effective September 23, 2002.

Moved by Councilman Calogera, seconded by President Butler and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Hoff, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

NAYS: None.

ABSENT FROM PODIUM: Councilman Maher

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote the following discussion took place:

Councilman Redmond: Which license is this? Where is it located?

Clerk Saracino: It is inactive and does not have a location.

Councilman Redmond: When we do these licenses are there restrictions on what you can do with a liquor license as far as what type of establishment it can go with?

Attorney Ruggierio: The answer is yes, but a multi-faceted yes. There is a limit in terms of the type of license. For example a retail consumption license only allows you to serve drinks over a bar; a retail consumption license with a broad "C" component to it, these are old liquor licenses, allows the sale of liquor over a bar, but you can also sell liquor out of a refrigerator case close to the bar. We have ourselves imposed certain limits on new licenses or transfers licenses, such as no Go-Go bars, would be applicable.

Councilman Redmond: This one says they intend to open a restaurant, but I don't know. The name is Rare Hospitality International. However, my question is I hear they are opening a dance club on Rt. 516, with a liquor license that we just renewed down there, I don't know anything about that and I want answers.

Clerk Saracino: You are referring to Saljoper's license, which we just renewed. I just received the transfer information to The Breakfast Club.

Councilman Redmond: I saw them taking out all the kitchen stuff, this place does not appear to be a restaurant. Have we gone over traffic concerns and everything else down there.

Clerk Saracino: I am just going through all the information in the application and waiting to hear from all the departments including the police as to their recommendations on this application. At this point Breakfast Club should not be in the building because they do not have the ownership to it.

Attorney Ruggierio: If you should see that they are heading towards some use that might not be approved, you can advise us.

Councilman Greene: We started talking about something other than this license. The license we are renewing and discussing here tonight has been inactive for some time. I think that some type of regulation that states you can only renew an inactive license a couple of times. I just want to get a clarification because I think this is just more than a renewal of inactive licenses, because they have been inactive for too long a period of time, and I want to know before I vote what the status of the license is.

Attorney Ruggierio: ABC regulations allow a liquor license to be held for two years in the pocket before some special application to the ABC such as this special ruling to get the license extended. The only other thing I will tell you is that the only time it does not work for us and we have been monitoring them, so that if they go beyond two years we have been aggressive in trying to eliminate pocket licenses in the town. There are times when corporation such as this file for bankruptcy, in which case we do not have very much to control over the extension of the license because it is pretty much mandated by the bankruptcy law. I don't know the details of this license because I have not looked at it. I will tell you that your philosophy is correct and pocket licenses are not good and that if they exist for over two years we should not rubber stamp them and say that you approve them. The ABC may give a special ruling, allowing for an inactive license to be extended for longer than two years, but you as the municipal issuing authority should say you don't agree with that and in which case, we would push these licenses to be put into active use or being retired. As most people know, Old Bridge has more consumption licenses than its population.

Councilman Greene: I would like to ask the Clerk for her comments in regard to this license because she is the one who oversees this.

Councilman Baker: This does not seem to be new ground to me, is there some documentation or some information that you could give us to educate the Council?

Clerk Saracino: They file a petition with the State in order to get a renewal of their license. This particular license has had potential buyers over the years and for one reason or another the deals have fallen through. Now, they have a contract for sale, which is Rare Hospitality, which is Lone Star Steak House and they have given them permission for renewal for this year and I believe for next year.

Councilman Greene: Where is Lone Star locating?

Clerk Saracino: I believe that it will be where Laura's Pancake House is located.

Councilman Greene: Well now I have more information I know where the license will be located and the fact that they did go to the State for the proper paper work.

Councilman Hoff: Inaudible...

President Butler opened this renewal to the public, seeing no hands, President Butler closed the public portion.

REPORTS

R-1 Termination of Manzo lease with leagues - (Update) Re port by Legal - Bill Ruggierio.

Attorney Ruggierio: I am taking the credit here for a lot of work that was done by your administrator. As of today, what we have learned is that I must write to the attorney that is representing the trustee of the estate and what will happen as a result of that the leases that we talked about at the Agenda meeting will be turned over to us along with whatever notice went to the leagues. Beyond that it is my understanding that the trustee and the fiduciary will probably be amenable to a meeting with our legal staff and the mayor and perhaps others from the Council to see if this matter can be worked out. That is where we are and I know that Brian Enright still has his task to do in terms of giving us what might be a reasonable value of these properties. The engineering department is also looking at some representations that were made in connection with the subdivision application which may obviate all of this.

Councilman Hoff: If you set up a meeting on this matter, please include myself, Dennis and Edward.

President Butler: I would like to be included in that meeting also.

PRESENTATION

Presentation by professionals representing Dennis Pinkiewicz in connection with the subdivision application.

Thomas Phiffer: I am here on behalf of Dennis Pinkiewicz. We have been before the Council a few months ago in regard to this application, which has been approved as a sub-division by your Zoning Board. This application has a lengthy history, by virtue of a condition of approval that was put into the resolution regarding access to the property that it required either an easement acceptable to the township attorney or in the alternative in the opinion of the township attorney that an easement was not necessary. This specifically refers to access to the subdivision premises which as approved is for four lots for the construction of single family homes. While this was pending before the Zoning Board for final approval, I corresponded with Mr. Ruggierio attempting to address this issue. What we are requesting tonight is that this condition be addressed in one way or another.

There was a presentation made by your professionals at that meeting at what they termed would be a reasonable solution. It was not met with great support from Council. We had a subsequent meeting with your professionals to try and work this out. We have proposed a possible resolution to this matter which we thought would be beneficial to both the applicant and to the township, looking at some possible land trades or land swaps. It is my understanding that the Council met in some type of caucus, but I am not sure what their feeling was on that so we are here this evening to try and resolve this matter and receive some type of answer so that my client may proceed in whatever way is necessary.

Attorney Ruggierio: We need to have a decision from the Council one way or another. Many months ago we brought this matter to you and once it was clear that there was no consensus on the Council's part, we ask that you make a decision. The Council has heard about this matter a number of times. You know the details of why it might be beneficial to have this subdivision, which was approved by the Zoning Board conditionally. The options are to either approve the petition or to buy the property from the Pinkiewicz interests or to have a land swap that might move this subdivision away from the park and that position was generally endorsed by the engineering department and certainly endorsed by us after we received all the facts, which certainly were complicated. In any case if you decide tonight that you want us to pursue this land swap idea which I think has merit, we will certainly will proceed. If you don't want to allow this access into the road at Veteran's Park and you don't want to pursue any of the alternate ways then you should make a motion tonight to have me inform the Zoning Board of that fact and it would be my view at that point that he would have to return to the Zoning Board to tell them that the condition of the approval was not met.

Councilman Greene: I am surprised by the condition aspect of the approval. I don't know why the Zoning Board would make it subject to a condition. When it was present here before, the alternatives presented to us really were not acceptable and I just want to hear from somebody why they would give those condition, why approve a subdivision and then turn around and say in order for it to work, the township has to accommodate the developer.

Councilman Baker: Can't we wait to hear from the Zoning Board, because the applicants attorney certainly cannot speak for them?

Councilman Greene: The only reason I am interested in this is because we are spending millions of dollars in certain areas of the township to preserve property as open space. Maybe it is worth exploring purchasing that property as open space so we don't risk a situation where you reaffirm the approval. I am open to a swap and I personally think that the property is important to the township and it would be very unfortunate if down the road it was built on. If it does not involve a great deal of money for the township to purchase or have a land swap for another piece of property, I am just trying to be open and reasonable with this. I just don't understand why the Zoning Board granted it knowing that there would be problems. I am willing to spend some time on this and I am not going to rush this matter.

Mr. Phiffer: As you aware conditions of approval are normal in any kind of resolution that passes your boards. As this property is adjacent to Clinton Street which also contains the entrance to the park, I believe the board did not know whether or not anything further was needed and that is why it was put in there phrased as it was.

Attorney Ruggierio: I just want to tell the Council how I have analyzed this from the Council's prospective. It seemed to me that the Zoning Board that it would be reasonable to let this applicant tie into what is an access road to the park. That access road and I don't remember whether it is a right-of-way in existence or one that used to be in existence, but certainly some portion of that road would be known as an access road to Veteran's Park is outside any right-of-way that this applicant might be able to otherwise use. So I guess the Zoning Board thought why not have them tie into this access road and make sure they can do it by asking the township attorney. I have determined that without access by this Council you cannot do it. But as we pointed out to you when we made the presentation, Clinton Road could be developed by the applicant, but in order to do that they have to go back and amend the application to show that they are going to build a road along that right of way, and I am not sure how the economics of that play out for the applicant.

Councilman Greene: I wanted to speak out because I felt that down the road we may be in a position where we are told that we have to accept this. I know Bill has worked hard and is trying to come up with an alternative which may be suitable.

Mr. Phiffer: The applicant has a substantial investment in this.

Councilman Calogera: For whatever reason the Zoning Board put that stipulation in there the fact remains that one exists, and is not common to have a stipulation that is subject to approval by Council. What it tells me is that they must have had some concerns as to this projects concerns on the adjacent park and that is why they put it in. The fact that it is at this Council gives us the end jurisdiction on disposition of this matter. I think that we need to keep this in mind because we have the final say.

Councilwoman Panos: I have the resolution from the Zoning Board this was ER property, environmental recreation, and there might be a chance that the Zoning Board will say because it is ER and it is staying ER.

Vice-president Redmond: Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the deed variance go with land even if you sold the land tomorrow and it would transfer to the new owner. Do you have the resolution for the "D"there?

Councilwoman Panos: No for the "C".

Vice-president Redmond: The resolution that changed it from ER was the "D", "C" is the bulk variance.

Councilwoman Panos: It states that the property is located in the ER zone, if this goes back to the Zoning Board does that leave the possibility that this could remain ER?

Vice-president Redmond: In order for them to build on it, a variance would have had to have a "D" variance changing it because you cannot build on an ER Zone.

Attorney Ruggierio: Well I cannot say without reviewing the record, but my advice to you is that the applicant put on a case which the Zoning Board found sufficient to change the zone from ER to this proposed use and it would unlikely that those conditions would cease to exist. The problem that may occur is that the Zoning Board may have to adjust their approval to make provision for this proper access along the paper street that is there.

Councilman Calogera: With a stipulation that cannot be met as declined by this Council, would that negate the approval that was given?

Attorney Ruggierio: They do not have a perfected approval at this point but be aware that the condition was not that you deal with the matter, but that the matter be presented to the township attorney to determine if any type of easements were required to get into the access road to the park. I have determined that those easements are required and so the applicant is now required to get this approval from you, which you are not willing to grant. If we are all right about that then the applicant has to go back to the Zoning Board and say I cannot get access on this park road so here is my alternate suggestion and I don't know what that will be. If it turns out that what is suggested is so bad in an environmental sense then the board has jurisdiction to deny the "D" variance. However, without the record I would just be guessing.

Councilman Calogera: Do we need a motion to deny this access to the applicant?

MOTION

Motion to return this matter to the Zoning Board as outlined by Attorney Ruggierio, moved by Councilman Baker, seconded by Councilwoman Panos and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos.

NAYS: None.

ABSENT: Councilmen Hoff, President Butler

ABSTAIN: Councilman Greene

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Attorney Ruggierio: I will memorialize your action that you are not going to grant access to the park road and that they applicant is instructed to go back to the Zoning Board to propose and alternate development.

Councilman Greene: I disagree with that because you are expanding on the resolution.

Attorney Ruggierio: I will render an opinion to the Zoning Board that an easement for access is required and that it is my understanding that the Council will not act to grant that. If you want a formal motion then I think that might be helpful and I agree with Mr. Calogera.

MOTION

Motion to deny granting the easement for this subdivision made by Councilman Calogera, seconded by Councilwoman Panos and so moved on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Greene, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos.

NAYS: None.

ABSENT PODIUM: Councilman Hoff, President Butler

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

PUBLIC PORTION

Louis Valentino: I live at 26 Fordham Road, Parlin. I want to thank everyone for pushing through the ordinance regarding the posting of the sign for those criminals who sell cigarettes to minors. I know there is an opposing view. The first thing I want to say is that the wakeup call went out, we mean business. It has nothing to do with any ethnic personality that happens to be a business owner. This is for criminals. There was a good suggestion as to getting the store owners together and educating them. Part of my future plans include this. I have set up Old Bridge Watch at AOL.Com. That e-mail site is available for people who want further information or clarification on this ordinance and also to report any establishment who is in violation. I personally will go out and visit that establishment and go over the ordinance so that we will not have to convict anyone for selling cigarettes to minors. Some other things that I have in my head is to establish a nonprofit organization that would allow store owners to participate in making a statement that they would not sell cigarettes to minors and they will be a member of Old Bridge Watch and that will be posted in their stores to show that they are against selling cigarettes to minors. Any contributions that are given to join, after expenses are met the balance would go to the DARE Program.

Councilman Hoff: I spoke against this last week. I am a smoker, the point I am trying to make is that I have seven children and I felt it was my obligation to teach my children to do what they should do morally and I taught them about drugs and cigarettes and alcohol. Out of the seven, three have never smoked, that is my job as a parent not you to tell me that you want to play "big brother" and tell me how to raise my kids, that is my job and not yours. You take care of your kids and I'll take care of mine, I don't want "Old Bridge Watch" to be looking over my shoulder, a one man patrol.

Inell Springer: I live at 60 Glen Oaks Court. I would just like to address the bus shelters in Old Bridge. I work in New York, the ones on the southbound side of Rt. 9 are very filthy. I would like you to find out who is responsible for the maintenance and take care of it.

Joe Pagnotta: They should not sell cigarettes to minors, but grown-ups if you want to smoke you can. What is going on in the streets, my wife broke her arm last week, and she slipped again and broke her shoulder. What is going on, look into it and take care of them and get the curbs done quicker.

Seeing no more hands Vice-president Redmond closed the public portion.

EXECUTIVE SESSION:

ES-1 Nelson Iglesias

RESOLUTION NO. 493-02

BE IT RESOLVED, by the Township Council of the Township of Old Bridge, County of Middlesex, State of New Jersey that:

the public shall be excluded from this meeting pursuant to N.J.S.A. 10:4-13 for discussion of the following matter or matters.

Discussion of Personnel Matter Matter of Potential Litigation

We will reconvene in public session in fifteen minutes. Minutes and other records of these discussions shall be available to be disclosed to the public in sixty months unless a sooner date is determined by vote of the governing body at public session.

Moved by Councilman Calogera, seconded by Councilman Maher and so ordered on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilmen Baker, Calogera, Hoff, Maher, Redmond.

NAYS: None

ABSENT PODIUM Councilmen Greene, Councilwoman Panos, President Butler

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Council reconvened in public as per request of Mr. Iglesias' attorney.

MOTION

Motion to grant retroactive raise monies to Mr. Iglesias made by Councilman Hoff, seconded by President Butler and so denied on the following roll call vote:

AYES: Councilman Hoff, President Butler

NAYS: Councilmen Calogera, Greene, Maher, Redmond, Councilwoman Panos

ABSENT PODIUM: Councilman Baker

ABSENT: Councilman Testino

Prior to the roll call vote the following discussion took place.

Attorney Ruggierio: The Council knows the background to this issue. Some years ago, there was a presentation made to the Council about two employees who were leaving the employment of Old Bridge and it was said at that time, although we have left, you have given non-union employees a 3 ½ % raise and we were there 20%, 40%, 60% of that time period and we should get for a least the time we were there we should get those raises or that amount of money given to us because if we were still there we would get that raise. At the time, what we told the Council is that we do not have a policy on this and your policy should be expressed in an ordinance and without an ordinance there is no legal requirement to pay these sums. Moreover, we were engaged recently, in litigation in the Goldie case where we succeeded in court in knocking out probably $2-3 million dollars in claims for comp time based on raises that would have been given over time. Thereafter, the resolution also said, that all employees were put on notice that they are not entitled to get this raise if they leave employment and it has not yet been voted on by the Council. I can tell you so that you have the picture, there is at least one employee, Mr. George Coyle from our Court who is quite upset by this because he did not get the benefit of a raise that was passed after he left employment. The long and short of this is that Council has never addressed it in terms of policy. Mr. Heilbrunn is going to speak on behalf of Mr. Iglesias and you can make a determination. You are also free to hear from your administrator and your Mayor on their point of view on this matter. You either have to authorize this or not authorize it. It would be my recommendation, although it is not a legal requirement, that you make a judgment as to policy as opposed to individual by individual basis.

Alayne Shepler: When Mr. Iglesias was leaving he did address the issue and I informed him at that time of the Council's policy with regard to the two previous employees. The resolution was actually passed in February 1998 and the language was very, very specific to what the policy was at that time and if I may.....Whereas the Township Council does hereby specifically declare that these payments shall not be considered as the establishment of a policy by the municipality. Further, any present or future nonunion employee should consider themselves on notice that they have no legal right to compel payment from the Township of Old Bridge for retroactive pay increases if they leave employment prior to the effective date of same... and that is what I informed Mr. Iglesias at the time of his departure. He subsequently wrote me a letter in June and I replied to him after speaking to the attorney, in writing and I did provide a copy to the Council, and I have provided you with a copy of the resolution. I have not changed my position since. It is now obviously in Council's hands. Mr. Iglesias has hired Mr. Heilbrunn to lobby for a retroactive increase for the period of time that he was here. However, he did leave prior to the Council giving us by ordinance the salary increases. Mr. Ruggierio did point out that Mr. Coyle was actually impacted by the same policy and there may be others but I did not research that today and it is entirely possible that there would be other liabilities in this issue should you do what Mr. Iglesias is asking.

President Butler: When specifically did Mr. Iglesias leave?

Alayne Shepler: January 1, 2002.

President Butler: When was the increase passed for the other employees?

Alayne Shepler: I do not know but quite awhile after, when Council passed the ordinance, but he had left the prior January. He was gone approximately six months.

Councilman Hoff: So if he was still here in July, he would have gotten that raise, am I correct?

Alayne Shepler: If he were still here he would have been entitled to the raise. However, I just want to point out one thing and it is probably a legal issue, but Mayor Cannon did not appoint Mr. Iglesias as the head of the Department of Community Development. He was reappointed as the Township Engineer, so the ordinance that was passed when the other department heads received their retroactive increase, did not include the title of Director of Department of Community Development.

Councilman Hoff: You stated that Mr. Iglesias as not the Director of the Department of Community Development, who was the acting director?

Alayne Shepler: Nelson was the acting director. I merely pointed out that title was not included in the ordinance when you in fact granted those retroactive increases. The reason I said it was very specific, was because the decision as to whether or not a department head gets an increase obviously the Mayor proposes, the Council disposes. In the case of a non-department head, the Mayor grants those increase without the approval of the Council. Prime example of that right now is Mr. Vincenti has been serving as the Township Engineer, he was appointed by the Mayor with a salary for which Council has no say as long as we have the budgeted dollars.

Mr. Vincenti has not as you know been granted the title of Director of Community Development by this Council because for whatever reason has not seen fit to do so. There is a distinction between the two titles. In this case Mr. Iglesias may have been working as the acting director, however, he was the Township Engineer and not a department head.

Councilman Hoff: When did the non department heads get their raise?

Mayor Cannon: It is usually after the majority of the unions have settled. I have never given non union, prior to union settlement, so there is a pattern of settlement. Mr. Iglesias left before we granted the raises.

Jonathan Heilbrunn: I am appearing on behalf of Nelson Iglesias. I am aware of the resolution to which Mr. Ruggierio and Ms. Shepler refer. The quote that Ms. Shepler gave you is in fact accurate. The resolution was never codified as part of an ordinance, it is not the law of the Township of Old Bridge because this Council has never seen fit to adopt the policy that it discussed on the night it approved the resolution. From a purely technical point of view, I think that assuming the Township was authorized to pass an ordinance of the type that would be referred to in the resolution, then I think a much more cogent argument could be made that Mr. Iglesias would be bound by it because it was an ordinance of the Township and would have to be guided by it. No such ordinance exists so therefore it was not part of his employment contract with the Township. This request is simply to be paid for work that was in fact performed. Mr. Iglesias was the Township Engineer and whether appointed or simply acting as same was the director of the department. He served in that capacity along with the eight years of service that he gave the Township from July 2001 thru December 31, 2001 when he retired. He had a contract with the Township that would have permitted him to continue to remain here in that capacity until November 2002, but he opted to take advantage of ability to retire and did so effective January 1, 2002. He has never been paid the same amount that other department heads were paid from the period of time from July 2001 thru December 2001, simply because he saw fit to exercise his right to take his retirement. You paid graciously your other employees for the work they performed from July 2001 thru December 2001, but chose to eliminate Mr. Iglesias from that category because he exercised his right to retire. This constitutes, I think, unequal treatment and a depravation of due process of law. I think he is entitled to be paid for the time that he was here and the work that he did for the time that he was here in the same fashion that you have treated all your other employees.

Councilman Baker: How much money are we talking about?

Jonathan Heilbrunn: In actual dollars approximately $1622.00.

Alayne Shepler: I don't want Council to get the misunderstanding we are talking about. There is an entire issue here and Mr. Ruggierio alluded to it when talked about some of the entitlements that have put us into litigation over a number of years. Old Bridge has had an unfortunate practice, special compensation, payment of comp time to employees who were not entitled to it, so this issue goes far beyond $1622.00 and may in fact affect other employees, specifically and absolutely Mr. George Coyle and there may be others.

Jonathan Heilbrunn: In answer to Mr. Baker's question it is just about money. The amount of money between July 2001 and December 2001, is $1622.00, it has an effect on the pension that Mr. Iglesias will receive for the rest of his life, and based upon his life expectancy tables, he has about another 22-23 years.

Councilman Greene: Typically collective bargaining negotiations can go very easily past the date of the current contract. Employees have gone a couple of years before actually finalizing a contract. If somebody leaves during that time that the contract is being negotiated, when it is finally negotiated is it policy to go back and pay all those employees who may have left prior to that time?

Alayne Shepler: There is a distinction between union and nonunion employees here and collective bargaining agreement and agreements that may be in place. Some of the agreements in Old Bridge, I believe for union employees may contain a provision that would entitle them to retroactive pay. However, Mr. Iglesias and others are nonunion employees and are not covered by any of the terms of the collective bargaining agreement.

Councilman Greene: Because of the delay in the Council's action in voting for the department head increases, the Council had discussed giving Mr. Iglesias an increase because we knew he was retiring and we were told by administration that it would not be proper.

Alayne Shepler: Yes, I believe that is correct that it would not be proper to single out Mr. Iglesias. However, there is a fine distinction about what the Mayor's actions were and I think that you may be missing that point. The Mayor made a very conscious decision not to reappoint and not to put forward Mr. Iglesias' name as the Director of Department of Community Development. S