Mount Olive Township Council Minutes
February 27, 2001

President Rattner: The February 27, 2001–I invite everybody to join us in the Pledge Allegiance to the Flag.

PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE

President Rattner: Open Public Meetings Announcement, please.

Mrs. Lashway, Township Clerk: According to the Open Public Meetings Act, adequate Notice of this meeting has been given to the Mount Olive Chronicle and the Morristown Daily Record. Notice has been posted at the entrance of the Municipal Building, 204 Flanders-Drakestown Road, Mt. Olive, New Jersey, and notices were sent to those requesting the same.

ROLL CALL by Township Clerk

Mr. Heymann: (Not in attendance)

Mr. Guenther: Here.

Mr. Sohl: Here.

Mrs. Kelly: Here.

Mr. Spino: Here.

Mr. Scapicchio: Here.

Mr. Rattner: Here. Also in attendance tonight, uh, the Mayor is here. He’ll be probably walking in any second. Uh, we have our Business Administrator, Mr. Kaplan, and Township Attorney, Mr. Dorsey. Uh, the Mayor had a Presentation. Since he’s not here at the moment, we’ll move on to the Civic Achievement Presentation. Mr. Sohl?

Mr. Sohl: Certainly.

CIVIC ACHIEVEMENT PRESENTATION - Sara Ottoson

Mr. Sohl: Is this working, Lisa?

Mrs. Lashway: Yes.

Mr. Sohl: Okay. It’s always a pleasure to honor people that are doin neat things, especially when they’re recognized and they extend beyond the boundaries of our Community. And, uh, as I mentioned to Sara just before, my wife scans the newspapers and is my best right-hand in terms of identifying things that I often in my busy world overlook. Uh, so it was back in December that the, uh, Daily Record–and I think it was also mentioned in the Chronicle, uh, had an article about, uh, Sara Ottoson as a Cheerleader from Mt. Olive being sent on a special Community, or Goodwill Trip, uh, to England. So, in recognition of all the things you’ve done in order to get to that point–because I’m sure they didn’t pick a name out of the hat, uh, we wanted to extend to you this, uh, Certificate of Achievement. So, Sara, if you want to come on up, and-- Sara this is presented to you, Sara Ottoson, Member of the Universal Cheerleaders Association All-Star Squad. And it’s presented on this Day, February 27, and on behalf of the Township.

Miss Ottoson: Thank you.

Mr. Sohl: Congratulations, and good luck.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS

President Rattner: Okay. Administrative Reports?

Mr. Kaplan: The only thing that I want to let the Council know is that, uh, on Friday, I received a phone call from Mr. Duke of Duke Realtors. The, uh, Company, or the, uh Realty Firm that we had hired to, uh, solicit the sale of the Route 206 Condo, and he supplied me late Friday with another contract signed--duly signed to purchase the Condo Unit for $150,000. So, I have, uh, advised the Clerk and the Town Attorney to Mr. Kaplan (cont’d): draw up the necessary Resolutions to proceed with this Sale and it will be on your next Agenda, for, uh, Adoption. Hopefully this one will go through. I think the usage that they’re proposing is–will be much more acceptable to the Condominium Association.

Mr. Sohl: Do we know what it is?

Mr. Kaplan: It’s going to be like a Medical, um, Supply and Equipment Showroom, which I think will fly. I don’t think there’s any problems–

Mr. Sohl: Essentially a sales–

Mr. Kaplan: Yes.

Mr. Sohl: Good.

President Rattner: Thank you.

Mr. Kaplan: That’s all I have.

LEGAL REPORTS

President Rattner: Mr. Dorsey, any Legal Reports?

Mr. Dorsey: Just two things. I think you all know that Grinnell Paving Stones, Inc. Commenced an action against the Township, and uh, Northeast Mesa, the, uh, Contractor to whom the Bid was awarded for the 17 Retaining Walls. He did that about ten days ago. There was a pre-trial conference, uh, last Thursday, the 22nd. And, this morning, the trial was to begin at ten o’clock and they withdrew it about 5:30 last night. So that is over and done with. The Contract has been signed by the Mayor and AIG Baker can move forward with its supplier. The other thing is, we have had open for almost, um–over two years now, the sale to the State of New Jersey of a Tract of Land that is referred as The Budd Lake Budd. Um. under that Contract, we’re to get $49,000. It involved 13 Lots, um, most of them very small Lots. I think all of INAUDIBLE and they determined that my predecessor in Foreclosing on an In-Rem Certificate made an error. We’ve now negotiated that they will give us, uh, I think $45,000 now, and then the balance as soon we complete that re-foreclosure. So, we’ll finally get that money. That’s it.

President Rattner: Thank you. Mayor, you have a Presentation/Proclamation you would like to make?

PRESENTATION: Employee of the Year - Robert Grignon - Mayor Licitra

Mayor Licitra: Yeah, I guess so. Radar, true form, doesn’t like the notoriety. We’ve asked him four times already–

Mr. Spino: Do you have a picture of him?

Mayor Licitra: Yeah, we do. The last thing I want to do is tell him that he had to be here, but, uh, as you know, we have our Employee of the Year Awards. And, um, uh, the first year we gave it to Rudy because, it was the first year we were on, and Rudy was here the longest. But, the second year, we decided from all the Department Heads and talked about it with the employees, and, you know, when I first got here, I thought the Township was Mt. Olive Township and Radar, because any time I needed–or somebody needed something around here, Radar did it. Radar is invaluable to us. In fact, we’re finding ways to utilize him and better it, uh, but he still just wants to do his regular job and just do his best job for Mt. Olive. So, I’ll tell you what. I’m gonna get–I’m gonna hunt him down tomorrow and issue him the plaque. Hopefully I can get a picture out of it, and hopefully we’ll get it into the papers. But, um, Radar is, believe it or not very shy, but he is one of the best employees we have in the Township. He never says, “No.” Always has time. Call him at home, he’s down fixing something or, uh, working on something, whatever it is. um, I just admire him. He–he’s here early in the morning, doesn’t punch a clock. Just an asset to Mt. Olive. So. Radar, here’s a plaque for you. It’s uh, it’s the Mt. Olive Employee of the Year Award, uh, for the Year 2001, Presented to Robert “Radar” Grignon in appreciation for many years of dedicated Service. I shall hunt him down tomorrow and present it to him. Take a picture, and hopefully we can get it n the papers, and at least hang it up, up on the–up on the wall or something. So, if you get to see Radar in the next week or two, congratulate him. Okay?

President Rattner: Mayor, why don’t you just have the Dispatcher, have him call him saying there’s a fire alarm in the building and he’ll be one of the first people here.

Mayor Licitra: That’s true. Good point. Tell him something is wrong in the Senior Center, we’ll all go over there and present it. It’s a good idea, maybe we’ll do that Friday night when the Seniors are there. That’s an okay idea. But, anyway, thank you very much. And thank you, Radar, where ever you are.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS:

President Rattner: Uh, now we have approval of--Minutes, uh, we have the Minutes from the Closed Session from February 20th. Can I get a motion to accept them?

February 20, 2001 CS Present: Mr. Heymann, Mr. Guenther, Mr. Sohl, Mrs. Kelly, Mr. Spino, Mr.Scapicchio, Mr. Rattner

Mr. Sohl: So moved.

Mrs. Kelly: I’ll second.

President Rattner: Any discussion? All in favor?

All in favor, none opposed.

CORRESPONDENCE

Letters From Residents

1. E-mail received February 14, 2001, from Al Weiner regarding Ethics.

2. Letter received February 22, 2001, from Caldwell Banker regarding their Auction Division.

3. Letter received February 23, 2001, from Michael G. Bannon regarding the Saint Patrick’s Day Parade of Morris County.

Resolutions, Ordinances, Correspondence from other Towns

4. Ordinance received February 14, 2001, from the Township of Chester regarding Land Use.

5. Resolution received February 15, 2001, from the Borough of Netcong regarding Surplus snow removal funds.

6. Resolution received February 16, 2001, from the Township of Parsippany regarding a Resolution urging State funding to Address revenue shortfall caused by State inaction on telecommunications business personal property tax reductions.

7. Resolution received February 16, 2001, from the Township of Parsippany regarding support of Assembly Bill A2272 Providing funds to acquire flood prone properties along the Passaic River and its Tributaries.

8. Resolution received February 16, 2001, from the Borough of Bloomingdale expressing stringent opposition to Cablevision of Oakland increasing its monthly cable service rate by 12.4 percent and requesting that the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities negate the increase.

9. Notice received February 20, 2001, from the Township of Roxbury regarding a Public Hearing on Land Development Ordinance for Master Plan.

10. Resolution received February 20, 2001, from the Township of Hanover regarding a Resolution restoring funds to municipalities - loss of telecommunications business personal property taxes.

11. Resolution received February 20, 2001, from the Township of Roxbury regarding a resolution reaffirming the opposition of the home-based business promotion act.

12. Resolution received February 20, 2001, from the Township of Hanover regarding the Home-based business Act.

13. Resolution received February 21, 2001, from the Township of Randolph regarding Council on Affordable Housing.

14. Three Ordinances received February 22, 2001, from Washington Township regarding Land Use.

League of Municipalities

15. Letter received February 14, 2001, from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding League Marketing Seminar.

16. Legislative Bulletin received February 22, 2001. from the New Jersey State League of Municipalities regarding 2000- 2001 Legislative Session.

DOT/DEP/Permits - LOI’s

17. Letter received February 16, 2001, from the State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection regarding Notice of Termination of Grant.

18. Letter received February 20, 2001, from the State of New Jersey, Department of Environmental Protection regarding a Letter of Interpretation for Block 2507, Lot 1 , Applicant: The Rose House(299 Sand Shore Road)

Correspondence from Organizations/Committees/Boards

19. Letter received February 14, 2001, from Alliance for Action regarding the Alliance for Action Chapter Meeting.

20. Letter received February 15, 2001, from the Association for Conservation Information, Inc. regarding the annual conference of the Association for Conservation Information.

21. Letter received February 20, 2001, from the State of New Jersey, Division of Water Quality regarding Salmonella sp. Bacteria Testing, MSA.

22. Letter received February 20, 2001, from Morris Land Conservancy regarding the 4th Annual Workshop Series.

23. Preliminary Equalization Table received February 20, 2001, from the Morris County Board of Taxation.

24. Tentative Agenda received February 22, 2001, from the Upper Delaware Watershed Management Project regarding Project Work Group Meeting.

Land Use/Development Matters

25. Public Notice received February 15, 2001, from Roxbury Township regarding application for Development (New Jersey Foreign Trade Zone)Block 38, Lot 2 - 99 Route 206.

26. Letter received February 20, 2001, from Courter, Kobert, Laufer & Cohen regarding application for Variance for Block 8400, Lot 11 (Woodfield Estates).

27. Public Notice received February 23, 2001, from Roxbury Township regarding application for Development for Block 38, Lot 1 - 99 Route 206.

Correspondence from Cable Networks/Utilities

28. Letter received February 14, 2001 from Comcast regarding Welcoming new officials, Comcast news makers, Customer service, Grants, Annual Franchise fees.

Correspondence from Legislative Representatives

29. Letter received February 16, 2001, from Senator Robert Torricelli regarding property tax relief.

President Rattner: We have 29 items of correspondence. Anybody like to comment? Uh, Mr. Spino?

Mr. Spino: No, never mind, I’m sorry–yes, on #11, it’s a letter in opposition to the Home Based Business Act that the State Senate is considering–or will be considering. I would like to ask that we send a Resolution for the same thing–to oppose the way that it’s written. I’m not opposed to people having businesses in their home, but I would prefer that the Township have some control over it, instead of uniform.

President Rattner: Okay, I think we did a Resolution on that–probably many years ago, but we have to look–

Mr. Sohl: Yeah, we did.

Mr. Spino: I know we did, but it’s already been passed, and it’s up again this session.

Mr. Sohl: Did we get the actual version of it?

Mr. Spino: I don’t–I think we did at that time. I don’t know–

Mr. Sohl: No, no–I mean whatever the new version–I’d like to see that before–

Mr. Guenther: Yeah, I’d like to see it too.

President Rattner: Okay, if there’s nothing else, we’ll move right along.

ORDINANCES FOR PUBLIC HEARING - None

ORDINANCES FOR FIRST READING

Ord. #6-2001 An Ordinance of the Township of Mount Olive Amending and Updating the Fee Schedule and Provisions of Chapter 126 Entitled “Fire Prevention” of the Mount Olive Code. (increase fire subcode fees)

Mr. Sohl moved that Ord. #6-2001 be introduced by title and passed on First Reading and that it be scheduled for Adoption after a Public Hearing on March 27, 2001 at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Guenther seconded the Motion. (Statement not Verbatim)

ROLL CALL by Township Clerk

Mr. Guenther: Yes.

Mr. Sohl: Yes.

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Spino: yes.

Mr. Scapicchio: Yes.

Mr. Rattner: Yes.

ROLL CALL: Passed Unanimously

CONSENT RESOLUTIONS AGENDA:

Resolutions on the Consent Agenda List are considered to be routine and non-controversial by the Township Council and will be approved by one motion (one vote). There will be no separate discussion or debate on each of these resolutions except for the possibility of brief clarifying statements which may be offered. If one or more Council member requests, any individual resolution on the Consent Agenda may be removed from the Consent Agenda List and acted on separately.

President Rattner: Does anybody have any comments, or would like any removed? Mr. Spino?

Mr. Spino: Not necessarily removed, but, I did have some questions about that Ordinance, and that’s #8. Uh, about the Towing Service to make sure that the Tower-person being on the list has met all the requirements that we have–including–you know–one of them that I remember is we went through machinations over this about a fenced in area to put the vehicles behind, things like that. So, if all of those have been met–whatever they are–I mean that’s only one that I remember, I don’t know how many others there were–

Mayor Licitra: Is that about umpteen-years ago?

Mr. Sohl: No, it’s not–it’s only about–

Mr. Spino: Maybe eight.

(INAUDIBLE)

Mr. Spino: Yeah, that was on 46 and the one on 206–they had to meet those requirements–put up fences because they didn’t have it. So, I would hate for us not to continue that.

President Rattner: I believe the Business Administrator last Tuesday told us that the Police Department went over and they met each one of the requirements.

Mr. Spino: Okay. I didn’t call the Chief. So, if it’s not, it’s my fault.

Mr. Kaplan: Well, I think at the last meeting I showed you a memo, um, inadvertently not attached to my memo–two memos, I think it was, that show the Sargent’s recommendation and the Chief then passed it on to me for Resolution and that it did meet all the requirements that the Township had established.

President Rattner: Okay. If there’s nothing else–if nobody else wants anything removed–I just want to make one comment–you did get a revision of the last Ordinance #12, we’re making sure that we check and double check each Lot and Block Number. We had a modification to make sure that everything matched and matched the maps. So, that’s the revised one that you have and it’s noted as such. Mr. Spino?

Mr. Spino: And it’s “Lakeview” not “Lakeland.”

Mrs. Kelly: This is Lakeview.

Mr. Spino: Mine doesn’t–

President Rattner: On the description–on the Agenda–

(INAUDIBLE)

President Rattner: Mr. Guenther, would you move the Consent Resolutions?

1. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Execution of a Developer’s Agreement Between the Township and CLC Builders. (2 lot subdivision Byron & Gold Streets)

2. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Accepting a Grant of $5,000 from Stop Violence Against Women Grant.

3. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Execution of a Developer’s Agreement Between the Township and Westminster Realty Corp. (Dara Estates)

4. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing the Execution of a Developer’s Agreement Between the Township and Stephens Mill Estates.

5. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive to Reforeclose an In Rem Certificate Held by the Township of Mount Olive. (Budd Lake Bog Property)

6. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing a Lease Agreement With the County of Morris. (Sr. Citizen Nutrition)

7. Resolution of Need - Paragon Village, LLC. (HMFA requirement)

8. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing Bill’s Service Center of Route 46, Hackettstown, New Jersey, as an Authorized Towing Service.

9. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Waiving Enforcement of the Township’s Noise Ordinance Relative to NJDOT Maintenance Roadway Repair Route 46, Milepost 24.70 to 27.00.

10. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Authorizing an Agreement Between the Township and NJDOT. (Jurisdictional Agreement Route 46 & International Drive)

11. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive, County of Morris, State of New Jersey, Creating and Continuing the Mount Olive Municipal Alliance Committee.(Annual MOMAC Resolution)

12. Resolution of the Township Council of the Township of Mount Olive Accepting Certain Lands from Lakeview Estates. (Lakeland Open Space Dedication)

Mr. Guenther moved for approval of the Consent Resolutions and Mr. Scapicchio seconded the motion.

(Statement not Verbatim)

President Rattner: Uh, is there anybody from the Public that would like to address anything on the Consent Agenda? Mr. Bonte?

Mr. Bonte: A question on #8. Excuse me, not #8–#12. It references, uh, a payment that has to be made for a contribution towards the future maintenance of a detention basin on Lot 42. What about the detention basin on Lot 43? That’s not referenced in this Resolution.

Mr. Spino: It should be. It should be for both of them

Mr. Dorsey: All right.

Mr. Bonte: And I just have a comment on #6. I certainly hope that after a year and a half, or two years of arguing about this–which, in my estimation is, uh, deplorable that this has happened–that once this activity commences that we monitor it carefully, and hopefully, in a very short order that program could be expanded to more days a week than just two. Every Senior in this Town, regardless of where they may live, or what their income, or whatever, should be afforded the use of this facility, and this facility should be used to benefit all Seniors in Town for a multitude of activities. Thank you.

President Rattner: Anybody else from the Public that would like to address the Consent Resolutions? I’ll close the Public Session. Is there any Council Comments? Roll Call.

ROLL CALL by Township Clerk

Mr. Guenther: Yes.

Mr. Sohl: Yes.

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Spino: Yes.

Mr. Scapicchio: Yes.

Mr. Rattner: Yes. Now we come to motions.

MOTIONS

1. Bill List.

Mr. Scapicchio moved to approve the Bill List as presented and Mr. Spino seconded the motion. (Statement not Verbatim.)

ROLL CALL by Township Clerk

Mr. Guenther: Yes.

Mr. Sohl: Yes.

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Spino: Yes.

Mr. Scapicchio: Yes.

Mr. Rattner: Yes. We have a Peddler’s Permit.

2. Approval of a Peddler’s Permit for Martin Osborne.

Mrs. Kelly moved for approval of the Motion and Mr. Sohl seconded the motion. (Statement not Verbatim.)

ROLL CALL by Township Clerk

Mr. Guenther: Yes.

Mr. Sohl: Yes.

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Spino: Yes.

Mr. Scapicchio: Yes.

Mr. Rattner: Yes. Okay, now we come to Council Reports. Moving right along.

COUNCIL REPORTS

Library Board Liaison Report

Mr. Sohl: Uh, thank you, uh, the, uh, Library Board and–and actually the Building Committee met with the architects so they’re continuing in that Planning Stage and I believe Council Pres–or, uh, Trustee President Jane Israel has been in contact with Mr. Scapicchio to sit down with a Sub-committee of the Council to discuss plans, and that’s moving forward.

President Rattner: Thank you, very much. Uh, Mr. Heymann is not here.

Board of Health Report

Mr. Scapicchio: There is no report. The next meeting of the Board of Health is March 8th.

President Rattner: Thank you, Planning Board Report, Mr. Spino?

Planning Board Report

Mr. Spino: Yes, I have a report on what happened at the last Planning Board Meeting where some small application approvals and the continuation of a larger application for the Morris Hunt–I believe it’s called–one of Toll Brothers developments. And, they are–the Planning Board is reviewing and the process through Chuck and the Board of some Ordinances. One, the–of course the Quarry, one is the payment for maintenance of Detention Basins, and the Tree Ordinance.

President Rattner: Thank you, Mr. Spino. Open Space Report, Mrs. Kelly?

Open Space Committee Report

Mrs. Kelly: Oh, really nothing.

President Rattner: Environmental Commission Report, Mrs. Kelly.

Environmental Commission Report

Mrs. Kelly: I’m no longer on the Environmental Commission.

President Rattner: Legislative Committee Report, Mr. Scapicchio? I mean, Mr. Guenther?

Legislative Committee Report

Mr. Guenther: Um, really, I think we reported on it the last time, but we did meet with the, um, State Representatives, um, and, laid out the, uh, our concerns on Route 206 and 46. Gotten a response from Dick Kamin who was the, uh, Department of Transportation, uh, representative there. Um, he warned us that some of these things, the, uh, the implementation--there are three steps. One kind of thing can be done fairly immediately, others take a little bit longer, and others are in sort of almost the “Never, Never Plan.” So, he um–he agreed to identify those and, um, we work on the immediate things that can be done. Uh, I think that, uh, I think I mentioned this at the last meeting that, uh, I just wanted to congratulate the, uh, the Police

Mr. Guenther (cont’d): Department, the great work that they did in preparing for that meeting. They put a very detailed list together of our concerns, of their concerns, uh, their experience over the years and it really helped us get through the Agenda with the State.

President Rattner: Mr. Guenther, I just want to add one thing–I saw Freeholder Schrier on Sunday and he saw what we were doing–I guess he read in the newspaper–and he wants to have the Freeholders also give support and be involved and see what they can do to help with the different roads, and I said we also have some County roads that could probably use some improvement at intersections within the Town. If we put everything together, so he said he’s going to be going on vacation in the next two weeks, but as soon as he gets back, he’ll be contacting the Clerk to see about setting up the meeting to see what the County can do to help–

Mr. Guenther: Yeah, because there’s also–I think Sgt. Gallop, uh, pointed out the fact there have been discussions–one of the intersections that a lot of people are concerned about is the intersection down at River Road and Bartley–what’s it Bartley-Chester–no–Bartley–

President Rattner: Bartley Road.

Mr. Guenther: Uh, nobody knows who has the right-of-way outside of the two Stop Signs. Uh, so there is a study going on. It’s gotten beyond that. The–the County is really involved, they’re really reconfiguring that intersection, and really making a lot of sense out of it. But it’s–it’s gonna take a couple of years to implement.

President Rattner: That’s on their priority list. The Engineering is going to be done this year. In fact they wanted the help–they contacted our Planning Department last Fall to see about if they need to acquire any land and we got very lucky and found out through some Developer’s Agreements we had, there’s enough property that was already dedicated, and they’re putting money in the Budget to start construction in Spring 2002. Uh, but, it’s good that the Freeholders were looking and they want to see what they can do for the area, knowing the problems we have.

(INAUDIBLE)

President Rattner: Thank you very much, Mr. Guenther. Master Plan Report, Mr. Scapicchio?

Master Plan Report

Mr. Scapicchio: Um, no report, although Earl wants to add something.

Mr. Spino: I have a suggestion for the Mayor, and the Master Plan Committee for David. You said that we were going to be working–continuing to look at areas on Route 46 to Rezone. I know there’s a lot being done now. We just came from a meeting, Chuck is very, very busy. But I’d like us to at least consider starting that next step and take another area or two areas on 46, and start that process.

President Rattner: Mayor?

Mayor Licitra: We’re already in the planning stage for that.

Mr. Spino: I know you are.

Mayor Licitra: Why did you know you were gonna get that answer? But anyway, Chuck is aware. We’re gonna have a meeting–we have a couple of new members–in fact, um, and I want to remember his last name–the traffic expert from Country Oaks–

Mr. Guenther: Bernie–

Mayor Licitra: Bernie something.

Mr. Guenther: I remember the first name, but I–

Mayor Licitra: Yeah–he’s being one, and, um, we have a couple new members to join us, but, Chuck is aware. It’s gonna be a planning session on which that–where we wanna go next as far as, um, do we want to continue on 46, or do we wanna, you know, start looking at other areas in Town. So, we’re gonna prioritize what we wanna do.

President Rattner: Thank you, Mayor. Mr. Scapicchio you wanted to make a comment?

Mr. Scapicchio: Yeah, Paul, when is the next meeting?

Mayor Licitra: Chuck hasn’t called it yet, Dave--

Mr. Scapicchio: Okay.

Mayor Licitra: But he will.

Mr. Scapicchio: Okay. I just wanted to make sure I didn’t miss something.

Mayor Licitra: And, I don’t know–it might be in September, after what we gave him tonight to do. All right? No.

President Rattner: Pride Committee Report?

Pride Committee Report

Mr. Guenther: Um, I really apologize for not having detailed report. I’ll have it the next time. There was a meeting. I unfortunately had to leave early because now those meetings are on Tuesday nights as well. But I know they’re planning for the Memorial Day Parade, and some other projects. I’ll get a more detailed report. But, I do want–in addition to that–it doesn’t really tie into these comments–I do want to um-I guess I can make it later, but I’ll do it now. I attended a, uh, Brownfields Seminar, uh, which the Township was kind enough to send me to, uh, last week, uh, down in, uh–I guess it was Bordentown or near there. There’s a new–it’s Envirocenter–it’s built right next to a landfill, and they’ll be using the methane from the landfill to heat the building. Very interesting. But, Don DiFrancesco was there, it was a very high level, uh, uh, thing–Officials, uh, DEP. They described essentially all the programs that the State has for helping finance Brownfields, or redevelopment. Uh, I asked a couple of people questions, you know, regarding our specific possible interest with the landfill, and I think there’s some–some things that can be done there. I think one of the messages I came away with is, there’s a lot of competition out there, uh, developers who specialize in this kind of thing, and I think–I believe we have to look at this very carefully, um, and I’d like to have–maybe have it put on the, uh, one workshop session where we can go into–maybe as we’re getting along in what we want to do with that property. Uh, but, the bottom line is, to avail ourselves of any State Financing, the Town has to take Title to the property. I’m sorry, take that back–you don’t really have to take title, but you have to have the–take over, I believe, the Tax Certificates. I don’t know the exact terminology, but, the point is, it’s got to be in control. The Town has to be in control. It can’t be in private developers control. And there is a lot of State funding available. It’s now not completely being used. There is a lot of State Funding that can be gotten. And, it’s–it was very interesting.

President Rattner: Thank you very much, Mr. Guenther. Okay, we’re finished with Council Reports. We come to the Public Session where the Public can address the Council on anything they would like.

PUBLIC PORTION

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Mr. Dorsey, members of the Council. My name is Lawrence Fox, I’m an Attorney. I’ve been asked to appear tonight on behalf of my client, Angela Presco with regard to a problem that she’s had, and efforts over the last two years to purchase an adjoining lot owned by the Township, next to a lot where–a lot she already owns. If I may have a few minutes by way of background, Mrs. Presco and here husband live on Outlook Avenue, Lot 4, Block 3504–which is a 100 x 100' lot. She’s resided there with her husband for 20+ years. Personally, Mrs. Presco has resided in Mt. Olive her entire life, since 1962. They also own–actually Mrs. Presco owns Lot 3, which is next to the house lot, where she and her husband and three children reside, and, for a number of years thought that the next Lot, which is also a 50 x 100' Lot, Lot 2, was owned by her neighbor. In early 1999, it came to her attention that in fact, Lot 2, Block 3504 is actually a Township Lot. So she began making an inquiry in March or April 1999 to see if she could buy this 50 x 100' Lot that the Township owns and merge it with her other 50' Lot. I would like to point out, the 50' Lot that she owns next to the house lot, she utilizes as part of her house–there’s a swimming pool on it, and so forth. And, there is Mr. Fox, Esq. (cont’d): no sewer connection to it, she did not intend to develop the property, but she owns an additional 50' next to her house Lot. She would like to buy the Township Lot, too, and add another 50' to her property. She has a growing family–she has a teenage daughter, and so she approached the Township in an effort to try and buy it. Basically, what’s happened in the last two years is, the Lot is Assessed at $6300, the Township first said, “If you want to pay the $6300, you can buy the Lot.” She said, “Fine, I’ll pay the $6300.” It then turned out–and I think properly so, that they had to approach the other neighbors, the Thompsons–let’s call them by their name because it’s just easier to understand, to see if they’d be interested in purchasing the 50' Lot to add to their house Lot, which is a 50 x 100' Lot. Apparently, the Thompsons are interested–or indicated some interest in buying the Township Lot. the problem is–that I stated before is, for years, Mrs. Presco thought that that Lot was owned by the Thompsons because they use it–as though it was their own. There are sheds–a picnic table, a wishing well, and their little driveway on the Township property. I circled–

Mr. Sohl: It’s a Township mini-park, unbeknownst to us.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: So obviously, they don’t have any real interest in paying for something that they’ve been using for at least 20 years for nothing. Unfortunately, it’s a $6300 Lot that the Township owns that they haven’t got the money for, and it’s a $6300 Lot that no one is paying taxes on. So, Mrs. Presco’s preference is that she buy the whole Lot, she’d like to just buy it and merge it with her other 50' Lot and utilize it in conjunction with her house. The problem is, apparently, that the Thompsons have indicated some concerns about buying the Lot. So Mrs. Presco was advised that perhaps the Lot should be split into two 25' Lots and separate. Well, that’s not her preference. She said if that’s the decision, she’ll go along with it and take the 25' strip, and the Thompsons can purchase the other 25' strip. Again, her preference would be to own it all. The last communication she got was, that someone would have to subdivide it. And she said, “Well, that doesn’t seem very fair, if I’m gonna split the Lot, why should I have to subdivide it?” And, obviously, the Township doesn’t have to subdivide it. They own it, they can just come up with a legal description through their Engineering Department and divvy the Lot up. So, she said that doesn’t seem very fair. Why should I bear the entire cost of the subdivision if the Thompsons are going to take 25' of it. And then finally she communicated that and the last letter she got was that the Township decided not to sell it at all. And that’s where it is. It’s off the Tax Rolls and it sits there, and the Thompsons get to use it for free. And we didn’t feel that that was an appropriate decision. It certainly doesn’t seem correct to me.

President Rattner: Mr. Sohl, you have a comment?

Mr. Sohl: Yeah–I may not have the right Lot, but if my recollection serves me right, I think there was some initial–the last concern the Council had when we kind of discussed this was that–we didn’t want to see the 50' merged with a 50' and now there’s a potential buildable Lot. I mean, if–if what I’m hearing tonight is that your Client would be perfectly content to basically get that whole thing merged into one big Lot with a Deeded restriction of some type that says it’s not gonna be subdivided again, I know, I wouldn’t have a problem with that. But my other concern is the issues–whether it gets subdivided or not–John–

Mr. Dorsey: Wait–wait a minute. Larry, you used the term “merged.” I take it, you use that term as we use it so this 50' Lot would simply expand you Client’s larger Lot and never be subdivided again. I mean, we have that understanding?

Mr. Fox, Esq.: My understanding is, that a 100 x 100' Lot is a conforming Lot in that Zone. So, I have a problem from a legal standpoint saying, well it that’s the way it’s zoned and it conforms, why couldn’t it be used. On the other hand, I also understand when you buy a Lot from somebody, they have a legal right to put any restriction on it they want. So, while I’m not happy, I don’t like to limit something forever because forever’s a long time. But the Zone in Mt. Olive is 100 x 100. But if the Township says, “We’re going to sell you the Lot, but we have a condition. It can never be used to build on it.” Then what choice do we have?

Mr. Sohl: I mean built on it in terms of a separate residential dwelling. That’s where I’m coming from.

Mr. Dorsey: Bill, he understands with some reservations. But he understands what we mean when we say, “merge.” And that’s the restriction that would be on it. Now, it’s a very peculiar situation here. I know that’s it’s gone back and forth. I don’t think I wrote the last letter, I think I’ve written some letter. The only way the Township can sell this, Larry, as you know, is to put it up for Public Auction. Both the adjoining property owners, under the Statute have preference. Now, if the Thompsons don’t come in and Mrs. Presco does, and is the only Bidder, than it’s hers and there will be restriction that it merges with her existing holding and can never be subdivided. Because the price of $6300 does not represent a buildable Lot. It represents some excess land out there. So there is that aspect to it. But, we cannot take away from the other adjoining property owner his statutory right to Bid. So, I mean, I would think it would be acceptable to the Township Mr. Dorsey (cont’d): with the understanding that if it is sold, it will merge into one Lot or the other, and not be subdivided out, to put the Lot up for sale. The only people who can bid–the people that are given preference–let’s say like a first option will be the two adjoining property owners.

Mr. Fox: What happens if they both have an interest in purchasing it, Mr. Dorsey?

Mr. Dorsey: Well, then it goes to the highest Bidder. They are the only two initially–they have first options. But that’s very specific under the statute. It gets to be a Bidding. If they don’t bid, then any outsider can Bid, but I assume one or the other can Bid. Now, we can’t force the Thompsons to buy half of the Lot. What you say is absolutely right, there should be no cost involved in splitting that Lot if both want to come in and buy. You are right, the Engineering Department or the Legal Department can draw that description very, very, very, simply. But if we want to sell, we have to–

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Well, she’s been trying for two years to get it. We’d like to get it up and buy it, so it can back on the Tax Rolls, and the Township can get $6300 for it–or more.

Mr. Spino: Yeah, I would like to see it. (INAUDIBLE) And if there is an agreement by both parties to buy the Lot, that we do allow them to separate it and each buy half, and each pay half the cost. It doesn’t make any sense for one person to pay the cost if they’re going to split it in two.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Yeah, it would be kind of silly for them to get in there and Bid against each other. So, it seemed to me–the upset price, typically, Mr. Dorsey, the Assessed Value is $6300.

Mr. Dorsey: That’s the way it’s typically done.

President Rattner: Mr. Dorsey, Mr. Fox mentioned something that they got a letter saying that we weren’t interested in selling it. Do we know where that came from?

Mr. Kaplan: I believe it came from my office.

President Rattner: Why are we not interested in selling it versus, just–you, know, what was the issue–

Mr. Dorsey: It got bogged down in going back and forth.

Mr. Kaplan: I think the problem came up regarding the restriction on not building on–but I–it’s been a long and ongoing and I think this–what I’ll do tomorrow, I’ll turn it over to the Assessor and let him proceed.

(INAUDIBLE)

President Rattner: If we’re gonna have a–if we’re gonna have to have an auction, we should look at other piece of property we have and try doing, you know, grouping together see if we can get other cash for Lots that are access.

(INAUDIBLE)

Mr. Spino: The only thing I would say to that–if we’re not ready to do that right away, I don’t want to prolong this–the agony that’s been going on there.

President Rattner: No–no–I know we’ve tried selling in the past, we can try putting some on the list again.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Mr. Spino, it did strike me as odd that the Township would suddenly say, Well, we’re not interested in the $6300 and we’re not interested in putting the house–getting it back on the tax rolls It seemed a little odd.

Mayor Licitra: There’s more to it. All right.

(INAUDIBLE - Auction)

Mr. Dorsey: It will be done in Public, in this room and you and the other adjoining property owner will be given Notice–specifically given Notice.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: That’s fine. Okay, thank you–just one last thing–I just want to make sure we understand–that the merger that we’re talking about does not include the Lot that has their house currently on it. That’s a separate, distinct Lot that’s 100 x 100. We’re talking about merging with Mrs. Presco’s other 50' Lot.

Mr. Sohl: But we don’t want a house–

Mr. Spino: But aren’t all three Lots together? Doesn’t the tax records merge all those Lots anyway?

Mr. Fox, Esq.: The conformance they would merge, unless they’re non-conforming. That’s my only concern. She owns a 50' Lot, this 50' Lot would merge with that 50' Lot. But–

Mr. Sohl: I wanna make my position very clear. I don’t want to create another building lot.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Understand.

Mr. Sohl: I mean, if–if–if–if–an owner wants to have a 200' Lot, to join it with the pool, and everything else, that’s fine.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: I understand that you want to do it–but, if–I don’t understand why you’d be so opposed to it–

Mr. Sohl: Because we have–

Mr. Fox, Esq.: But it conforms with your Zoning Ordinance.

Mayor Licitra: Does your Client–if I may–does your Client understand that. What you’re saying. Does she agree–does she agree with what you’re saying now?

Mr. Fox, Esq.: If that’s the restriction you guys put in the Deed, what choice do we have? That’s the way it is. We understand it.

Mr. Spino: Fair enough.

Mr. Dorsey: Now–Larry, wait–now we are getting to the confusion. What is the size of the Lot that your Client owns that immediately adjoins Lot 2?

Mr. Fox, Esq.: 50 x 100.

Mr. Dorsey: 50 x 100. So, what he is saying is, he has no objection, or he agree that we put a restriction we sell them Lot 2, let’s say the adjoining Lot is Lot 1, they would then combine, merge together–

Mr. Fox, Esq.: It’s Lot 3.

Mr. Dorsey: Lot 3, okay. And he would then have 100 x 100. He accepts that. What he doesn’t accept is, a restriction that merges Lot 2, Lot 3, and Lot 4. Because then you have 200' of frontage by 100' of depth.

Mr. Spino: My only thing–what’s the difference? If you can’t develop it–

Mr. Dorsey: No, no, no. You understand. If we sell him Lot 2, 50 x 100, he has no objection with that merging with the immediate–

Mr. Spino: I understand that, yes.

Mr. Dorsey: And that gives him one conforming Lot on which there is no structure at this time.

Mr. Sohl: There’s a pool.

Mr. Dorsey: Then, of course, he owns another adjoining Lot, separate Lot, which also conforms. So, theoretically, on this street, you could end up with one more house.

Mr. Sohl: That’s why we want a Deed restriction.

Mr. Dorsey: I understand that. But you’re–you see, you’re really going a step beyond what we have ever done before. We never–what we never had before was someone who owned a conforming Lot, plus an additional 50'.

Mr. Sohl: But that’s–we own the property–

Mr. Dorsey: That’s right–

Mr. Sohl: We can make the rules.

Mr. Dorsey: Well, you can make the rules–

Mr. Sohl: We did that with the A&P, right?

Mr. Dorsey: Well, that was a little bit different. That was a commercial transaction–

Mr. Sohl: I mean, we are pressured as elected officials to be concerned about the growth and the constant development. I mean, especially areas that are already densely populated. So, that’s–I mean, I’ll be very blunt about it. That is exactly where I’m coming from. Earl’s head is bobbing–

Mr. Spino: Yes, I agree. We’ve talked about this many times–

Mr. Fox, Esq.: It may be that the Presco’s would like to build a garage, and I don’t want them to be–

Mr. Sohl: No (INAUDIBLE)

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Nor should this be one single Lot. They’ll have a 100 x 100' Lot that they can’t build on–they can’t put a separate house on, excuse me. And, I understand again, there are so many 50 x 100' Lots in that neighborhood, as I’m sure you’re aware of, with houses on it–

Mr. Sohl: Yeah, one more won’t make any difference, I’ve heard that story.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: But this is not a 50 x 50'–this is would be 100 x 100, which you permit.

Mr. Sohl: But every house makes a difference.

President Rattner: But, in all seriousness, on the other side of Town, if you talk–go on to the back end of the Lake, there are hundreds of Lots that we’re considering buying just to stop one house here, one there, just because we figure it would help the drainage problem. Things like that, and we’re actually buying it up, and that’s one of the reasons we’ve held on to it.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: They understand that the 100 x 100' Lot cannot be used for another single family residence.

Mr. Dorsey: Larry, I understand what you’re saying, but do you understand what he’s saying?

(INAUDIBLE)

Mr. Dorsey: No, that’s not what he’s saying. You have to understand–we need McGroarty out here.

Mr. Spino: We need Chuck here.

(INAUDIBLE)

Mayor Licitra: John, use the board. Maybe at that point they’ll understand what Larry’s asking for.

(INAUDIBLE - Side Conversations)

Mr. Dorsey: Lot 4, 100 x 100–owned by Ms. Presco, which the house is located.

Mr. Sohl: Correct.

Mr. Spino: Right.

Mr. Dorsey: Adjoining that is Lot 3; 50 x 100, in which I guess the swimming pool may be located in part. The next Lot is Lot 2. (INAUDIBLE - Side Conversations) Okay. Now, Mr. Fox says he has no objections if you convey this lot and you convey it to the adjoining Lot, and I do assume that on the Tax Map, Lot 3 is shown as a separate Lot–

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Yes it is, and it’s owned differently than Lot 4, too. Lot 4 is owned by Mr. and Mrs. Presco, and Lot 3 is owned only by Mrs. Presco.

Mr. Dorsey: There is no objection if we merge these two, okay? He does object–and legally it may not be possible to say that you are going to merge Lot 2 with Lot 3, and Lot 3 with Lot 4. No objection, but this chunk of land becomes one Lot. If you do object, if you’re going to say they have the right to 2, 3, and 4–

Mr. Fox, Esq.: That’s where it’s at.

Mr. Sohl: But he does accept the building restriction.

Mr. Dorsey: But he does accept that this Lot–assuming we sell it to him–we would then have a Lot 100 x 100 that will stand as an individual Lot. And presumably, as long as the Zoning Ordinance Permits his Lot to have a dimension of 100 x 100, he could put a house on that.

Mr. Sohl: Unless we sell the 50 x 100 with a restriction. We own that property, John. I mean, this is a commercial transaction, it’s not a Zoning issue.

Mr. Dorsey: Bill, I am not arguing with you--

Mr. Sohl: Okay, thank you.

Mr. Dorsey: You can put any restriction on you want. What he’s talking about (INAUDIBLE) that they think are fair (INAUDIBLE.)

Mayor Licitra: John, let me ask you–if I may, Steve?

President Rattner: Go ahead, Mayor.

Mayor Licitra: Thank you. When does that become arbitrary and capricious?

Mr. Sohl: It never does.

(INAUDIBLE)

Mr. Fox, Esq.: The other point, as John pointed out, as I indicated, Lot 4 is owned by Mr. and Mrs. Presco, and Lot 3 is owned by only Mrs. Presco. Which would prohibit as a matter of law, the merger.

(INAUDIBLE - multiple conversations)

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Okay. I think everyone understands, then, so, it doesn’t change anything, I presume, about selling us the Lot–selling–putting the Lot for Public Auction.

President Rattner: I think what is going to have to happen, I think we’re going to discuss it at a work session so everybody can get their views. I mean, just, exactly what we want to do and how we want to proceed with it.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Yes. I understand that, if the Thompsons, for example, if the situation were reversed and the Thompsons purchased it, you’d have the same constraint, “No new single-family houses.” in that instance is, of course, because it’s undersized. This is a little bit different because, as John pointed out, is because we have a conforming Lot, which conforms–

Mr. Dorsey: That would be the best of all worlds from Mr. Sohl’s standpoint, because if Lot 3, or Lot 2 is divided into half, than nobody gets a buildable Lot. All right–

President Rattner: Mr. Scapicchio?

Mr. Scapicchio: Is it the intention of your Client to put together a–two parcels of property to create a building Lot?

Mr. Fox, Esq.: No–as I said before, there’s no sewer allocation for that. They have never done anything to indicate they were going to develop it. Their swimming pool is on Lot 3, and they use it as part of their home. But, they may want to add a garage, they may want to do something with it. They have no intention of building a house on it right now.

Mr. Dorsey: Well, okay, “Right Now.” In other words, in perpetuity, you’re not about to accept a restriction that you can never build a new residence on there.

Mr. Fox, Esq.: If you sell me–you sell my Clients Lot 2, as a seller, you can put any Deed restriction you want.

Mr. Dorsey: All right.

(INAUDIBLE)

Mr. Fox, Esq.: Legal–do I have a problem with saying, “Everybody in that Town, in that Zoning Ordinance, in that area where it’s zoned 100 x 100 can develop a Lot except you because you bought the Lot from us.” That’s really what you’re saying. If we were complete strangers, and you didn’t buy the Lot from Mt. Olive Township, you could develop it, but because you bought from Mt. Olive, you can’t develop it.

Mr. Dorsey: I mean, what they propose is certainly not unreasonable. All right, okay.

President Rattner: We could take to death, but we’re not going to solve anything tonight. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else from the Public that would like to address the Council? Mr. Bonte?

Mr. Bonte: Richard Bonte, Budd Lake. My question is to aaa--Mrs. Kelly. You’re no longer a member of the Environmental Commission?

Mrs. Kelly: It appears that way.

Mr. Bonte: Were you an appointed member to that commission prior to tonight?

Mrs. Kelly: Prior to the new Township Directory.

Mr. Bonte: Were you an appointed member to the commission?

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Bonte: And . . .

President Rattner: Mr. Bonte, I believe what happened is I believe your appointment, you’re your term, your appointment expired as of the end of the year.

Mrs. Kelly: That’s correct.

Mr. Bonte: Did you ask not to be reappointed?

Mrs. Kelly: aaa--no.

Mr. Bonte: Who appoints you?

Mrs. Kelly: Uhhhhm–

Mr. Bonte: Is this a Council appointment or--

Mrs. Kelly: no.

Mr. Bonte: A Mayoral Appointment?

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

Mr. Bonte: Were you replaced?

Mrs. Kelly: Not that I’m aware of.

Mr. Bonte: So there’s a vacancy on the committee?

Mrs. Kelly: It appears so in the Directory, yes.

Mr. Bonte: Is there a vacancy on the committee Mr. Mayor?

Mayor Licitra: Am I being grilled now? After you finish grilling her.

Mr. Bonte: I didn’t grill her. I asked some questions.

Mr. Dorsey: Make it a little softer.

Mr. Bonte: If you consider it a grilling, consider it a grilling. All I’m doing is asking some questions.

President Rattner: Mr. Bonte, the appointment expired, I don’t believe--I think there was--

Mr. Bonte: Excuse me Mr. Rattner.

President Rattner: I’m explaining what happened. The appointment expired at the end of the year. The Mayor was looking and had some, had candidates. We looked at it. There is still an open issue that’s been discussed here for the last couple years about who appoints. And the appointment process of this particular seat that we were looking at investigating. Uhhh, I haven’t followed up on it the way I should, but we didn’t fill it until we resolve the legal questions about who that appointment comes from and what the qualifications are of that appointment. That’s where it is. If anybody’s to blame on that part, it’s probably me because the, we haven’t resolved the legal question.

Mr. Bonte: Who appoints members to the Environmental Commission? The Mayor or the Council?

President Rattner: This appointment I believe was the Mayor’s appointment but then we still had the issue about, the thing with the Planning Board and something else on which direction it goes. I’m not really sure.

Mr. Bonte: Well, now that you’ve brought that up Mr. Rattner. As you know, a number of us have brought this to the attention of the Planning Board. And we have a situation that is not in compliance with State Law. State Law is very strait forward. And the intent of the law is very straight forward as to the fact that a member of the Environmental Commission, if there is an Environmental Commission, shall be appointed to the Planning Board. And we have been in violation of that Law for numerous years now. And I would like to know when this body will correct that.

President Rattner: That’s why the appointment has not been made. The Mayor agreed at the Council and my request to hold up on the appointment until that is getting resolved. And I’ll make sure that we get whatever we have to so we know what we’re doing within the next two weeks.

Mr. Bonte: And how does this, the fact that this condition has existed for a substantial period of time, and both this Council and the Planning Board have been aware of that, effect ongoing Planning Board hearings which have, I believe, been held illegally. The Board is not legally populated and not has been legally populated for a substantial period of time.

President Rattner: Mr. Bonte, I don’t know what to say at this point. But in the next two weeks, two weeks we’ll get it resolved. And have the proper person appointed. Proper, that appointed by the proper way that meets Statute. And we’ll get the ruling on that within the next two weeks.

Mr. Bonte: So basically you have agreed that what has occurred has been improper.

President Rattner: No. The question came up about exactly how were going to do the appointment. We weren’t sure. The Mayor agreed to hold off till we resolve it. He couldn’t do more than that. That’s all I could ask him to do. Because he had the right to make that appointment. He agreed not to. Just to make sure that we do it, and we do it right. And we said we were following up on it. And I know we were doing that in President Rattner (cont’d): January. And maybe with the Budget and a couple of other things it wasn’t at the top of the tickler list. It will be now so we can get it resolved in the next two weeks so we don’t have to keep addressing it. Cause I agree we have to get it resolved and have full contingent on board.

Mr. Bonte: Okay, Charlene did you volunteer not to be on the Board any more? I mean did you not want to be considered for the board?

President Rattner: Rich, you’re putting her on the spot and I think it’s unfair at this point.

Mr. Bonte: Well, I’m --Steve I’m asking a Council person a legitimate question. Did she ask to not be on this board any more or was . . .

Mrs. Kelly: I did not send in a resignation.

Mr. Bonte: You did not send in a resignation or desire not to be on the board any more.

Mrs. Kelly: I would like to be on the board.

Mr. Bonte: Thank you.

Mrs. Kelly: Besides, it’s not a board. It’s a commission.

President Rattner: It’s a commission. And it’s the Mayor’s appointment. The Mayor was gracious enough not to appoint somebody till we resolved it. And I can’t ask for more than that. He, did exactly the right thing in our eyes in, you know, agreeing with the Council to do that. Anybody else? Close the closed session. Oh, Public portion. And a go to Council comments. Mr. Guenther--.

Mr. Guenther: none at this time.

President Rattner: Mr. Sohl.

Mr. Sohl: I was just, in one of the pieces of correspondence, it’s not on the list. We must of just got it. It involves a potential donation of a piece of property from a, a Rose Mackinshock. I would like to make sure that, that starts the process of

Mr. Kaplan, Business Administrator: I started it–

Mr. Sohl: The Environmental Commission looks at it and all that.

Mr. Kaplan: There’s a memo already prepared.

Mr. Sohl: Good enough.

President Rattner: Mrs. Kelly.

Mrs. Kelly: Nothing. Thank you.

President Rattner: Mr. Spino.

Mr. Spino: I have none, thank you.

President Rattner: Mr. Scapicchio.

Mr. Scapicchio: None.

President Rattner: Okay, the thing I have, and this goes back to the budget. At the last meeting we asked if anybody from the Council, were there any departments that they would like to see come in. We asked to contact Bill or I because we want to give them enough time. Bill, nobody’s approached you on departments that Council members would like to speak to during our Budget hearings?

Mr. Sohl: No, they haven’t talked to me.

Mr. Spino: I mentioned one at the meeting.

President Rattner: I know.

Mr. Spino: I have to go personally to tell them?

President Rattner: No. No.

Mr. Sohl: No, other than the one Earl mentioned at the meeting.

President Rattner: I just wanted to make sure, Mr. Guenther, we’ll go this way. Is there any departments that you would like to speak to during the budget hearings or ask for an explanation?

Mr. Guenther: No.

President Rattner: Mr. Sohl?

Mr. Sohl: No.

President Rattner: Mrs. Kelly?

Mrs. Kelly: No, not at this time.

President Rattner: Mr. Spino, I know you wanted recreation–

Mr. Spino: Yes, all.

President Rattner: All?

Mr. Spino: All.

Mrs. Lashway, Township Clerk: All departments?

Mr. Spino: All departments.

President Rattner: I’ll take that under advisement. Mr. Scapicchio.

Mr. Spino: Do whatever you want with it. On all departments.

President Rattner: Mr. Scapicchio?

Mr. Scapicchio: The Police Department and the Building Department.

President Rattner: Okay, I would like, with that I would like to see, well just adding to what Mr. Scapicchio said. Planning which includes the Construction office, I would like to see the Police Department too. Recreation I also had. Public Works, specifically, I was looking at the Road Department.

Mr. Scapicchio: Steve, should I tell you what I’m looking for from Building–

President Rattner: No, we can do that–

Mr. Scapicchio: Give them a heads up?

President Rattner: We can have that within, were scheduling that, that’s next week?

Mrs. Lashway: It’s next week.

President Rattner: Next week, by anybody who has specific comments that would take some research. You can just scribble it on or just give Lisa a call. Let her know. Bill and I will then will review it and put together one list to make it work. We’ll make sure that if three people ask the same question we, we answer it once. If we don’t get an answer, you know we’ll ask for the information. But we’re trying to get as much information

President Rattner (cont’d): when they’re here as possible. So, Mr. Spino, besides the Police, Planning Roads, Rec--you know Public Works and Recreation. I guess Building Department because it’s really one. You want to see every individual department–

Mr. Spino: Yes.

Mrs. Kelly: You don’t like the explanation sheet?

President Rattner: Can I, Can I ask why?

Mr. Spino: I’d like to do it that way.

Mr. Sohl: Can I suggest we discuss it at a Workshop?

President Rattner: No, no it’s the next Workshop.

Mrs. Kelly: Is it going to be the whole workshop?

President Rattner: Yeah, It’s going to be the whole workshop except–

Mrs. Kelly: There’s nothing else on–

President Rattner: No, and we’re going to be starting at seven, right.

Mrs. Kelly: Yes.

President Rattner: We agreed were starting at seven. It’s just that unless a couple other things may crop up. But were not going to schedule anything else. It’s just the Budget. And we’ll see. If we don’t get to everything, or if there are other departments and other questions then we’ll have to have another meeting which will then probably have to be on a Saturday. But we’ll see how much we can get done.

Mr. Guenther: Did Earl say your including Planning as one of the Departments?

Mr. Spino: I said all.

Mr. Guenther: All. Oh, okay, I didn’t need to say anything.

President Rattner: What we have on our list is Police, Planning which includes the Construction Office, Public Works and Recreation, Buildings and Grounds. Okay, Mr. Kaplan, we’ll start with at least those four. And anything else that we have questions, doesn’t mean that we can’t ask the Administration for other questions. And if we find out there’s something that comes up and we wanna speak to the people, we’ll do that. If we have to we’ll do it even at a--you know at the next Public meeting we can just set aside you know a half hour or an hour. I’d just rather not set up a lot of extra meetings if we don’t have to.

Mr. Scapicchio: And just to make clear what I’m looking for is not necessarily to critique the budget that they submitted. Because I’m actually satisfied with the documents that I’ve received. Sandy, I said just to make myself clear, I’m not looking to critique the budget that they submitted. I’m satisfied with the documents that we’ve gotten and that I’ve reviewed. You know with the Building Department and the Police Department. I’m just sort of looking to get a better understanding on how they operate. And what they see coming down in the future. And with respect to the Building Department, I mean there’s a State requirement to be able to get permits issued in a number of days. I would like to see if we’re meeting that, if we’re not meeting that, are we understaffed? So that’s the sort of information that I’m going to be looking for.

Mr. Kaplan: When you say Building Department, you’re talking Construction?

Mr. Scapicchio: Construction.

Mr. Kaplan: I just want to understand this. Because I wrote down Building and Recreation–

Mr. Scapicchio: No, no. I’m talking about construction.

President Rattner: When we talked Planning, I mentioned that. I said that includes the Construction official.

Mr. Kaplan: I have that down. I have planning construction but then I heard him ask for building and I assumed he meant Eric’s–

President Rattner: No, I said recreation but I said Recreation, Buildings and Grounds because it’s under one person. Mr. Sohl.

Mr. Sohl: Yeah, one of the things I think I’m hearing is an undercurrent here, and I think we all, I would like to have the opportunity over a course of the next several months to talk to each department. Where they come in and focus an hour or an hour and a half. Not so much, again I’m, I’m satisfied with the budget detail we’ve gotten and the back up material which has been excellent. I mean we’ve never seen it to that level before and it does what any, what a corporation would do in making those judgements. But just like a corporation, you know you bring in a, a department head and one or two of their staff to talk to the corporate board about what’s going on in their department. I would like to see us do that. And maybe that’s a better way to consider-- I mean if we got clearly financial issues. Then they gotta be done right now. But if it goes beyond that, if it’s more generic. And what can we do to think about what you need next year, I think that need not hold up the budget process.

President Rattner: I remember ten years ago when I was Council President or nine whenever it was. My idea and I got through at least the first five, over months, we had a different department.

Mr. Sohl: Yeah, and that’s great.

President Rattner: And we’d just do it so we could listen, too, about their plans, what they need, what projects they’re working on, so we can understand what their priorities are.

Mr. Sohl: Right, and I think that’s a good one. Let me put that as a suggestion.

President Rattner: Yeah, and we’ll start that in April. Okay, that’s all the comments that I have. So with that I’ll move for adjournment.

Mr. Spino: Second.

President Rattner: All in favor?

Motion made for adjournment. All in Favor, None Opposed. The Meeting was adjourned.

______________________

Steven W. Rattner

Council President

I, LISA M. LASHWAY, Township Clerk of the Township of Mount Olive do hereby certify that the foregoing Minutes is a true and correct copy of the Minutes approved at a legally convened meeting of the Mount Olive Township Council duly held on March 27, 2001.

________________________

LISA M. LASHWAY

Mount Olive Township Clerk

mee