[0:05] Public meetings act 1975 chapter 231.

[0:09] The nose requirements have been

[0:10] satisfied. The meeting dates for the new

[0:12] year are confirmed at the annual meeting

[0:14] are posted on the both on the public

[0:16] voting board in the lobby of the

[0:18] municipal center and published in the

[0:19] record within the first 10 days of the

[0:21] new year. Salute to the flag.

[0:25] >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the

[0:27] United States of America to the stands.

[0:32] One nation under God, indivisible, with

[0:35] liberty and justice for all.

[0:40] We have a roll call, please.

[0:42] >> Yes, Mayor. Councilman Corsair

[0:44] >> here.

[0:45] >> Councilman Dayton,

[0:46] >> here.

[0:47] >> Councilman Jackson,

[0:48] >> here. Councilman President Michaels

[0:52] >> present.

[0:53] >> Councilman Dr. Okconor

[0:55] >> here.

[0:56] >> Councilman Rogillary

[0:57] >> here.

[0:59] >> Mayor Zinna

[1:00] >> here.

[1:02] >> Okay. First item on the agenda is the complete streets update.

[1:08] >> So yes, Mayor, we have um uh only uh

[1:11] agenda for introduction is the ordinance

[1:14] uh for the complete and contacts

[1:15] sensitive streets policy. Um I I as I

[1:19] explained at the last council meeting

[1:20] and it's in more detail under the

[1:21] authority and the several um uh on the

[1:25] ordinance. This basically sets the broad

[1:28] framework of the policy um to uh and by

[1:35] adopting this policy it will allow us to

[1:37] be better position for additional grant

[1:39] funding and other funding opportunities

[1:42] with both federal and state government.

[1:44] Um if this uh ordinance gets adopted in

[1:47] September, then you would have some

[1:49] implementing resolutions that would be

[1:51] uh adopted after this ordinance is

[1:55] adopted. And it's my understanding that

[1:57] you're considering a um a complete

[2:00] streets committee that would consist of

[2:04] major of most of your key department

[2:06] heads that have uh some responsibility

[2:09] regarding traffic and in streets and

[2:12] some public. Sure.

[2:15] >> And just questions just in in a sense

[2:18] for me is this is all about pedestrian

[2:21] safety, vehicular safety, everything.

[2:24] >> Yeah. It's going to encompass

[2:27] key, pedestrian safety, traffic lights,

[2:30] but improved vehicle and pedestrian

[2:35] >> integrate some of all those, right?

[2:40] » Lauren, oh, you have a question. Sure.

[2:42] Um, so I wanted to talk about the speed hump ordinance

[2:47] >> and we have two ordinances that we're

[2:49] looking for. One is an always stop

[2:50] guidance and the other is about speed

[2:52] humps and when they're appropriate. Um,

[2:55] and I know we have discussed and I have

[2:57] been adamantly uh against adding a

[3:01] significant number of speed humps, but

[3:02] with this ordinance, this is criteria

[3:05] that if they don't meet it, they don't

[3:07] get the speed up. I just want to let the

[3:09] public know very

[3:10] >> that's what that's what the goal is. Now

[3:12] in this complete streets ordinance it's there by reference to the

[3:16] memorandum if in fact the council wishes

[3:19] to

[3:21] codify the memorandum the

[3:24] recommendations

[3:26] for either student homes

[3:30] always.

[3:32] So my recommendation is that we notify

[3:34] both of them. And what that does is it

[3:36] gives notice to our residents like if

[3:38] they want to know, hey, am I pulling in

[3:40] about a speed like a stop sign? Let me

[3:42] see what the burrow says. Someone in a

[3:44] burrow is very quickly able to pull this

[3:46] up, reference it, have the rules right

[3:48] there. And I think that that is a great

[3:50] thing for our residents.

[3:53] >> Yeah. Just just to be clear though, I

[3:54] mean, I don't think it's something that

[3:56] someone's going to be able to answer.

[3:57] It's more of an investigation to see if

[3:59] the criteria is met. And then the

[4:01] recommendation would be either a yes or

[4:03] a no based on the criteria. But if not a

[4:05] check the box.

[4:06] >> No 100%. It's not like somebody you can

[4:08] fill out the DVDW.

[4:10] >> This would be something that would go,

[4:12] you know, but at least our residents can

[4:13] reference these regulations.

[4:15] >> And just because if you satisfy the

[4:17] criteria doesn't mean you are 100%

[4:22] clear.

[4:22] >> And the opposite is also true. If this

[4:25] the criteria is not satisfied, that

[4:27] doesn't mean you can't put one in.

[4:28] >> Correct. I thought that

[4:33] I mean the way I read it there's a lot

[4:35] of judgment statements in that too often

[4:37] asked and and we can

[4:39] >> so it's not

[4:41] >> well no it's not necessarily always

[4:43] black and white but it's it's a

[4:44] procedure and I think that um John could

[4:46] probably speak to it quite well what

[4:48] they just went to next to the Smith

[4:50] school with um painting the roads

[4:54] different measures to try to slow

[4:55] traffic if things don't work then you

[4:58] may try the next step. It's not always a

[5:00] yes or a no right away, but I'll defer

[5:02] to John. But

[5:04] >> John Jar, your least favorite traffic

[5:06] engineer for the moment. I think that

[5:08] the mayor's what the mayor's saying is

[5:10] actually correct is that it does go both

[5:11] ways. There is flexibility, but the most

[5:14] important thing is to follow the rules.

[5:16] Title 39, it's state of New Jersey and

[5:20] UTC and it have guidelines. That's what

[5:24] you're that's what you're saying. We're

[5:26] going to go by the rules. and here are

[5:28] the rules and if resident has hey I want

[5:30] to be on street they can read the rules

[5:32] and sometimes it might make make them

[5:34] think that okay I really need to call up

[5:35] and and get someone to do something or

[5:37] they might read it and say well I guess

[5:38] I don't fit into that category all right

[5:40] so it it it goes both ways some of the

[5:43] actually many of the towns that we've

[5:44] done this for they have actually posted

[5:46] the rules on their website so that when

[5:47] residents want you know ask for that

[5:49] they they're instructed please first

[5:51] read this on the website and if you

[5:53] still think that you know it's

[5:54] appropriate for your street because

[5:56] again most people really happy you'll

[5:58] have a speed bump until it's front of

[5:59] their house

[6:00] >> or they're listening to the numbers,

[6:01] >> right? You know, once it's in front of

[6:03] my house, well, I'm not feeling so good

[6:04] about it. But the mayor's also right and

[6:06] that is that, you know, there are

[6:08] mitigating services sometimes where you, know, for example, by a school is a

[6:12] place where you don't have to meet all

[6:14] the criteria. It's by a school. That's

[6:16] one of the criteria, right? But to the opposite of that, in front of the

[6:20] ambulance court is not a good place to

[6:22] put a speed bump.

[6:23] >> Sure.

[6:23] >> Okay. And even though it might meet the

[6:24] buying criteria or other speeding

[6:26] criterias, it's not a good place to put

[6:28] speed. You're not, you know, we're not

[6:30] going to recommend, you know, so there

[6:32] is, like the mayor said, go both ways.

[6:34] Is that helpful?

[6:36] >> It's helpful.

[6:37] >> We need a consensus to budget.

[6:41] >> I think it's a consensus as the

[6:44] administrator asked the director to move

[6:46] forward with drafting.

[6:48] >> We didn't have an ordinance. Those two

[6:53] It could also be by resolution. It would

[6:56] be discussed in the past as well unless

[6:58] they're on disagree who could do a

[6:59] resolution and it would be adopted and

[7:02] given many in place and another

[7:03] resolution that would amend right here.

[7:06] >> I prefer it to I would like to testify

[7:10] the ordinance.

[7:11] >> That's fine. How's everybody feel about

[7:12] that?

[7:14] >> The drafting process is no different for

[7:16] me. It's just whether you're going to

[7:17] have anyone meeting, right? It's not

[7:19] going to make a difference.

[7:24] Okay,

[7:24] >> one thing. Go ahead.

[7:26] >> Congratulations.

[7:28] This is a giant step forward in

[7:30] following the rules and doing what we're

[7:32] supposed to do and helping us to be less

[7:34] carentric as many other things are going

[7:36] to be discussed tonight.

[7:38] Congratulations, council. I think it's a

[7:39] great move.

[7:40] >> Thank you for all your help with making

[7:43] it happen. I'll leave it, please.

[7:46] >> Okay. Electronic sign protocol Route 9W

[7:49] and East Clinton Avenue. Before we start

[7:52] with the protocol, I would like to if I

[7:54] now I'm not sure if anyone else is

[7:56] getting this, but I'm getting some phone

[7:57] calls about complaints about our sign on

[8:00] NW

[8:02] >> electrical the electronic sign. I'm

[8:03] getting opposite. I'm getting crazy. I'm

[8:05] getting people saying you love the sign.

[8:08] >> Well, I'm getting that at night that it

[8:10] is um very blinding when you make the

[8:12] curve that the louvers are too hot. The

[8:14] lens are too high. It's too bright. It's

[8:16] blaring. Somebody actually named it. So,

[8:18] Las Vegas, Lost. I mean, that's, you

[8:21] know, we thought that was kind of funny.

[8:23] Um,

[8:25] you know, it's not this time, but maybe

[8:27] the brightness. So, I was wondering if

[8:28] maybe we can be toned down.

[8:33] >> I I've I've heard the same complaint.

[8:35] I've not only heard the same complaint.

[8:38] I've driven home at night. I've taken

[8:39] that left. We need to tone it down at

[8:42] night. There should be a warm switch to

[8:44] get the a warm light instead of the

[8:46] glaring light. It's a very fair comment

[8:48] >> and I've heard it from a bunch of people

[8:49] and lived it myself.

[8:51] >> All right, so we'll tone that down a

[8:52] little bit. All right, but let's get in

[8:54] touch. I'm sure John

[8:58] assume that there's some ordinance. How

[9:00] about we just change the brightness down

[9:02] a little bit?

[9:04] >> I think I actually think that's a fair

[9:06] thing. I think it's

[9:07] >> all right. So what the protocol now

[9:10] we're going to talk about.

[9:10] >> So yeah. So, one of the things that that we wanted to do is is still the

[9:15] last

[9:16] >> is clean up that intersection so it

[9:18] doesn't look like used car sales lot or

[9:21] food um with all the signs that so we

[9:25] our electronic sign is there. Um I asked

[9:28] Bob to hold off in issuing permits for

[9:31] that location. One of the agenda is to

[9:33] remove that location as a as one of the

[9:36] four areas for for building signs. And

[9:40] we have uh initiated a test in our pilot

[9:44] on putting what would have been one of

[9:46] those four board signs very much to um

[9:49] to very great um reception. So one also

[9:53] talk about the JCC event that's coming

[9:57] up and we put that up in their artwork

[10:01] colors and all that. They're really

[10:03] happy with it. I think they're going to

[10:05] fill a couple.

[10:07] I think I think all those billboard boys

[10:09] up there should go away. I think that

[10:10] this year was just and it's fair to

[10:13] everybody because everybody's in and you

[10:15] can put your whatever your marketing on.

[10:18] >> No. No.

[10:19] >> Why not?

[10:21] >> It's all bad. Can I have a conversation?

[10:23] >> Why you discuss the community events and

[10:28] nothing more? Because it's a Pandora's

[10:30] box.

[10:31] >> We already discussed.

[10:33] >> Yeah. My my point is if we're allowing

[10:35] billboards, why is that not already a

[10:37] panel response?

[10:39] >> It is. So you've regulated the time,

[10:42] place, manner, but not the context,

[10:44] right? So you set certain locations that

[10:47] are quote unquote open for that type of

[10:51] facility. They can only be for a certain

[10:52] amount of time. They're related to

[10:53] certain events. They're not offsite

[10:56] marketing. Um we don't allow off signs.

[11:00] That's the equivalent of billboards and

[11:02] advert. So, do we want to get rid of all

[11:03] those votes up there and just follow the

[11:05] day?

[11:05] >> I think I No, we agree on this, but we

[11:07] find this conversation.

[11:08] >> Yeah, we there's no need for more

[11:10] conversation on the same thing. disagree

[11:12] that we agreed because I'm adamantly

[11:14] against removing an open forum for

[11:17] public speech for political speech or I

[11:19] would like to keep saying as to whether

[11:21] or not you want to keep that as one of

[11:23] your locations that you know you have an

[11:25] ordinance that says you have certain

[11:26] location you will set by resolution

[11:28] every year locations where these

[11:31] temporary signs can go and we have a

[11:33] definition for temporary signs what I'm

[11:35] saying is content but do not move all

[11:39] content onto your digital

[11:41] We have a clear um you know

[11:44] >> community signage, community events,

[11:47] >> our churches, our JCC, that's our

[11:49] community and that and that's just to

[11:51] say

[11:51] >> that's okay.

[11:52] >> It's okay.

[11:53] >> We can be like

[11:55] so just so just so they say not the

[11:58] Pandora's box

[12:00] we are our community nonprofit community

[12:04] nonprofit.

[12:05] >> That's what that's

[12:09] on the song. electronic sign.

[12:10] >> Correct. So it will reduce some clutter

[12:13] because now like if the school's having

[12:15] a play, we can have it on our sign. We

[12:17] don't have to have a separate billboard.

[12:19] >> So really it's just any temporary

[12:22] signage which at this point I think only

[12:24] political signs are going to fall into.

[12:26] >> Y suggestion for that and may I hear you

[12:28] that it definitely looks

[12:30] >> looks terrible.

[12:31] >> What if we change the size requirements

[12:33] of a lab today are smaller?

[12:36] >> We have five other places. We're good.

[12:38] I'm just saying that but obviously trust

[12:40] the Ford in in downtown um you know when

[12:42] you have basketball courts and so

[12:44] instead of these huge six by you know

[12:46] eight billboards or whatever the size

[12:48] they are 4 by8 um we do smaller ones

[12:52] that that you can only go up to a

[12:54] certain size.

[12:55] >> So for the other for the other three

[12:57] locations I think that's definitely a

[12:59] worthwhile conversation to have. I would

[13:01] keep it at this so that it's

[13:04] >> it was a mess.

[13:05] >> Yeah.

[13:07] >> Even smaller. It's a mess. It's going to

[13:08] be a me. It was It was a disaster. But

[13:10] it's an open public. It's a way to

[13:12] communicate with people and

[13:16] for that

[13:18] >> I question

[13:21] >> and the last discussion I think you had

[13:24] the policy

[13:25] >> the technology of it was whatever was up

[13:28] at 9w would also be the same thing

[13:31] that's on the other two.

[13:33] >> Yes.

[13:33] >> Right. Is that still the case?

[13:36] >> Yes. So any anything we're putting in

[13:38] that's again the school community events

[13:41] obviously events is going to be on

[13:44] three.

[13:45] >> Okay.

[13:49] All right. Uh reform of tree

[13:52] planting ordinance and practices.

[13:55] >> I'm sorry.

[13:56] >> I think we decided smaller sizes. Yeah.

[13:59] No,

[14:00] >> you have to put that on the agenda for a

[14:01] whole another conversation which we will

[14:03] do. Let's put that for the other sites.

[14:05] That's fine.

[14:13] where the new bill was.

[14:15] >> I'm sorry.

[14:16] >> The one the

[14:19] one.

[14:19] >> Okay.

[14:21] >> They just want to pull it out. So, did I

[14:23] pull that resolution when the time

[14:24] comes?

[14:25] >> Thank you. It's 12. It never be.

[14:30] >> Go ahead. Go ahead. Tree management.

[14:32] >> Yeah. So on the tree management uh

[14:35] ordinance practices, I broke you a very

[14:37] lengthy item along with a draft

[14:41] ordinance and u and dedication by writer

[14:46] resolution for new committee and input

[14:49] and consideration that this is this item

[14:52] is on the agenda for to be considered.

[14:55] It's not one for introduction. Um, so

[14:59] you know, I'm going to ask we look at it

[15:02] and and give some additional feedback so

[15:04] that it can be moved forward the

[15:07] September 8th committee. Um, in the

[15:10] interim uh we draft um dedication by

[15:15] writer resolution. Uh they plan to sell

[15:18] that to the state just to ask um them to

[15:22] review it for compliance and if they

[15:24] have any comments or um recommendations

[15:28] that they want it changed so you know we then have resolution in form that

[15:34] would be approved by the state

[15:35] department to go back and visit that

[15:41] and that can be sent to this

[15:43] >> where disability they would not have

[15:45] gotten from another town or something.

[15:48] >> I do a lot of research. I I intend not

[15:51] to copy just other towns because there's

[15:53] no balancing of other.

[15:58] >> So yeah, I tend to to cross.

[16:02] Okay.

[16:03] >> You studied under Shakespeare.

[16:08] I I had um I I'll let Warren jump in,

[16:13] but I had given David some thoughts with

[16:16] like CC Wendy as well. There's some

[16:18] questions regarding some of the

[16:20] allowable expenditures.

[16:22] Um, you know, my concern is that since

[16:26] it's going to be using tree fund money,

[16:29] you know, uh, I just want to make sure

[16:31] that we don't open like to use a

[16:35] metaphor again that we have some more

[16:38] expenditures that are not tree funds

[16:42] expenditure. So I was a little concerned

[16:43] about there was something about doing

[16:46] the the man forestry management plan.

[16:50] You know as I was telling David those I

[16:54] know those are these costly things these

[16:57] forestry management plans and unless the

[17:00] town was compelled to do one for you

[17:02] know specific reasons like the state say

[17:04] you need to do a management plan. These

[17:08] are not usually things that we tend to

[17:10] like just do, right? Because um there's some downsides to doing them

[17:16] too, which I'm not going to get into.

[17:18] But uh the whole thing is and then some

[17:20] equipment stuff. I just wanted to make

[17:22] sure that the pools of money were the

[17:26] type of things that we don't open up the

[17:28] tree funds to doing some of the things

[17:30] that were covered or would be covered

[17:34] should they ever come up by other

[17:36] sources. And my other concern is again I

[17:39] said it the first time is that we still

[17:43] need to hold PSC and GSP to the fire in

[17:46] the sense that they're the ones who are

[17:48] supposed to uh maintain the trees around

[17:53] the power plant and I you know I know we

[17:56] talked about it reaching out I think it

[17:58] said six feet. So the PSG is not

[18:02] responsible to maintain, right? All they

[18:05] do is come in and cut branches. They'll

[18:07] trim branches that are within six feet

[18:10] of our lawn. So what this does is to say

[18:14] we're going to manage our our trees that

[18:16] if there's a hazardous tree or dead

[18:18] tree, rather than waiting for it to take

[18:21] that power, you know, we're gonna we're

[18:23] gonna responsibly maintain that.

[18:28] >> Yeah. Um again, uh you know, I I wrote

[18:31] the feedback basically, but um I had

[18:34] concerns about a couple of expenditures,

[18:36] but I didn't I'll let the attorney

[18:40] >> on that. And it's also important what

[18:42] the what they can't use for so

[18:46] resolution, it specifically talks about

[18:49] what it can be used for. So it can't be

[18:51] used for just to plum a hole in the DPW

[18:54] budget. it can't be used to really uh

[18:58] fund personnel in the budget. I assume I

[19:02] guess like anything we do no matter

[19:05] where it sits it has to come to the

[19:06] castle that's the other

[19:11] discretionary body

[19:12] >> right so even if you uh

[19:14] >> it'll be in your bill

[19:15] >> even if you did even if you do this stud

[19:18] equipment you know that has to initiate

[19:21] and be controlled here right so uh

[19:24] you're going to be awarding a contract

[19:27] or you're going to be authorizing a bid

[19:29] or you're going to be accepting

[19:30] rejecting bids. So at every step of that

[19:34] level, the council has control.

[19:37] >> Yes. I just again when we're opening up

[19:40] allowable expenses into something that

[19:43] we hadn't previously used the fund for,

[19:46] I have concerns.

[19:49] >> No, I understand. I think it's a larger

[19:50] public safety issue that was trying to

[19:53] >> So I actually agree with Julie that and

[19:56] this is a note I wrote that it should be

[19:58] a separate account that this should be

[20:00] you know the tree can management or the

[20:02] you know utility protection zone fund

[20:05] should be separate than our tree escrow

[20:07] which is used for our residents and I

[20:10] have to say the other thing I was very

[20:11] concerned about is that we are actually

[20:13] encouraging using the tree esil within

[20:16] the first 10 ft of into property with

[20:18] many power lines. So, if this is going

[20:21] to counteract that and we're going to,

[20:23] you know, plant a tree and then cut it

[20:24] back the next year, we should really

[20:26] think about uh figuring out how to

[20:28] coordinate over those weeks because

[20:30] right now we are

[20:30] >> I think I can tell you from personal um

[20:33] discussions as as a resident that that

[20:36] is something that your tree expert in

[20:38] town is looking at. um because I

[20:42] asked if I could get one and I have a

[20:44] pole right in front of my property

[20:47] >> potentially create a problem

[20:48] >> and so um circular indicated that

[20:51] there's only certain trees that we would

[20:53] recommend for planting and they're the

[20:54] ones that don't grow this pole so that

[20:56] it will impact the poll. So it is

[20:57] something that he's already looking at.

[20:59] >> I think Mr.

[21:01] Right now it's

[21:05] » $700,000.

[21:07] >> But that's that's that's a misnomer. A

[21:09] lot of money is going absolute back to

[21:11] the to the resident.

[21:18] So I would like to go ahead

[21:19] >> again. It is as Julie said, it's a

[21:21] revolving account where when mitigation

[21:23] happens, we return to large source of

[21:26] that account. And so really what's

[21:28] usable at all times is not 700k. It's less.

[21:32] >> Dave, what's the

[21:34] >> But

[21:36] before you ask a question in the middle

[21:37] of my question, can I just

[21:39] >> Oh, no. Please go on.

[21:40] >> I I was just going to say, but I also

[21:43] don't think that I want to hire outside

[21:45] companies and pay for them to cut back

[21:47] our dead branches. Like that is we have

[21:49] tree poor men. We hire our DPW guys. We

[21:52] hire our tree guys. We are spending the

[21:55] money currently and one of their tasks

[21:57] is to cut back dead or dead trees. We

[22:00] have a tree foreman that inspects. If

[22:02] there is a dead tree, he's allowed to

[22:03] remove them. If there's branches in the

[22:05] way, they're allowed to be, you know,

[22:07] noticed and RCW does it. So, we're

[22:09] actually creating an additional expense

[22:11] for us to do something. We're already

[22:13] paying a salaried employee to conduct.

[22:16] Well, that's an operational question of

[22:18] whether right how many how many hours,

[22:21] >> but I haven't seen

[22:22] >> available to actually do that.

[22:23] >> You didn't see the 300

[22:25] sc without power for

[22:27] >> and that was a healthy tree that's split

[22:29] in half at Dave Johnson. I saw the tree.

[22:31] I walked over to it. I touched it. He

[22:33] was still perfectly helping inside. He

[22:35] just got hit by lightning and took down

[22:37] the power and the stuff I can completely

[22:40] agree is very hard to anticipate and we

[22:43] need to react. But I'm saying I don't

[22:44] necessarily

[22:45] >> I don't think you should react. I think

[22:47] we should be proactive. We should

[22:49] protect our people. I don't want to

[22:51] double dip. I don't want to have two pe

[22:53] two different people in charge of

[22:55] cutting and tearing for our trees. We

[22:57] have people outside

[22:59] >> except we're not double dipping for our

[23:01] trees.

[23:01] >> It's like any any other thing we do. If

[23:04] we don't have enough resources or we

[23:06] have this much work and only this much

[23:08] resources in a period of time, we use

[23:10] outside.

[23:12] >> Yeah. I mean this is what we earn an

[23:14] assessment

[23:15] >> again we have someone who assesses we

[23:17] have tree born who are graduates of

[23:20] people with degrees the health of trees

[23:22] >> no one's arguing that

[23:23] >> so maybe we hire an additional tree

[23:25] person instead of hiring an entire bid

[23:28] to go put an outside company

[23:30] >> that's just a simple economic $1,000

[23:33] >> yeah I mean that's that's a economic

[23:35] question of which is

[23:37] >> I see 12 in here I see an open bid I see

[23:40] not two

[23:43] Okay. But again,

[23:44] >> so to to protect,

[23:45] >> how many times are we going to do this

[23:46] versus having someone on staff do the

[23:48] job that we hired them to do?

[23:51] >> They they are doing the job of hiring

[23:53] them to do it. But sometimes if we have

[23:54] more more things to address, then we

[23:57] need people and work hours. We need to

[23:59] get help from

[24:00] >> unfortunately these storms as we're

[24:02] seeing are happening more often. And

[24:05] again, if we could spend a little bit of

[24:07] money to protect our residents, the

[24:09] houses, I'm full protecting our

[24:11] residents.

[24:12] >> Not for cutting down our tree canopy so

[24:15] drastically when we are actually trying

[24:17] to replant most of our tree plant tree

[24:21] so drastically. I don't drastically

[24:25] it's misleading because we don't know

[24:28] how many trees. Someone's got to go

[24:29] around and see. I think we're talking we

[24:31] have to look at the one

[24:34] professional

[24:36] >> to tell us if we're safe

[24:38] >> or we're not.

[24:39] >> We have that person. It is our DW tree

[24:42] for copy someone with that exact job

[24:44] description. Make go see if there's

[24:46] health. Go see if there's

[24:49] >> He's not licensed.

[24:50] >> We don't have licensed street for right

[24:52] now.

[24:52] >> He's not lic. And as a matter of fact,

[24:56] um our former super our former director

[24:59] is president and he's to do the book.

[25:04] So, it's someone that we're familiar

[25:05] with.

[25:06] >> And again, I might not be interested in

[25:08] private,

[25:09] >> you know, to me like again, my my topic

[25:12] was it's it's definitely I support

[25:14] everything to protect the citizens. I

[25:18] I'm just also

[25:20] ensuring that the money is

[25:23] protected in the sense of I don't want

[25:26] people to think they're paying for one

[25:28] thing and then we find out it's not for

[25:31] the purpose as they thought that it was.

[25:33] So I have to say your your thing that

[25:36] you brought out about having two

[25:38] separate funds, those type of things are

[25:39] more interesting to me because I believe

[25:41] the transparency that I can tell you for

[25:45] the pure donation

[25:50] port is very limited. Most of this is

[25:52] that you're grabbing it from the lack of

[25:54] mitigation.

[25:55] >> Yeah.

[25:56] >> Right.

[25:57] as we talk.

[25:59] you try to you need to adjust that

[26:02] somewhat you ask to um so um you know

[26:06] this is something that uh arguably you

[26:09] control the money uh so it can't be you

[26:12] know it's not a slush volume that we can

[26:15] use and say go a lot and hire you want

[26:18] and do this stuff

[26:19] >> right

[26:19] >> the control is still here even when an

[26:21] outside treaty company comes in to

[26:23] assist

[26:24] >> so David when you say outside company I

[26:27] mean obviously we don't look at public

[26:28] business but for you to saying is that

[26:30] the person who was our tree foreman who

[26:32] left Tennifly to get a different job in

[26:35] the middle of a very important season um

[26:38] now wants us to pay him to come back to

[26:40] assess the trees and he took the job as

[26:43] the for that has nothing to do with

[26:45] anything he resigned to get it to get a

[26:47] different job.

[26:48] >> Okay,

[26:48] >> we have no there's nothing everyone at this table is at some point

[26:52] in life.

[26:52] >> He knew then he was walking with his

[26:54] licensed tree foreman and now he wants

[26:56] us to pay for that privately. or we

[26:59] could pay a different license. I don't

[27:00] think that's the issue with

[27:02] >> just a very

[27:05] like I I gave the feedback. I just want

[27:08] to make sure that the funds is, you

[27:10] know,

[27:12] clear and that those expenditure.

[27:16] So, you know, I know we're talk talking

[27:18] about these things for September 8th.

[27:20] What about uh Lauren's suggestion about

[27:24] different demonetation understanding? I

[27:26] understand what you're saying about most

[27:28] of the money is coming from un uh

[27:31] mitigated situations for trees.

[27:36] How we resolve that?

[27:38] >> Well, I mean

[27:39] >> I mean just just to actually discuss

[27:42] I think everyone is aware that we need

[27:44] to do a new resolution dedication by

[27:47] trust um a dedication

[27:51] by writing

[27:53] proper ways. I'm sorry my brain's not

[27:55] punching but so no matter what we used

[27:58] to have a reservation on to now reflect

[28:00] the new free ordinance which is required

[28:02] by state law right now it's under the

[28:05] administrative code. So just want to

[28:08] keep that clear. We can certainly kick

[28:10] off one way or the other but we do need

[28:12] to establish a new resolution

[28:16] to authorize our our tree fund based on

[28:18] how our ordinance is written which

[28:21] >> well we did we did that a couple months

[28:23] ago. We did the ordinance. We have not

[28:24] done the residency.

[28:26] >> Oh, okay. So, I I would like to request

[28:30] that the DPW I'd like to speak with our

[28:32] DPW and our food group and see if I'd

[28:36] like them to weigh in on this to see

[28:38] what kind of timing and commitment they

[28:40] have to do this kind of work versus what

[28:43] if they think they need outside.

[28:47] » Yeah, but I haven't on the DPW.

[28:50] >> You can have a DPW. Thank you. Me too.

[28:53] That's not what I should do all the four

[28:55] September.

[28:58] >> I'd like to talk about staffing and we

[29:01] need another license.

[29:03] >> I can tell you that you have one trooper

[29:06] and if law enforcement is on vacation

[29:08] sick they don't utilize

[29:13] three people right

[29:14] >> and to hire additional people just to do

[29:16] treats. You're talking

[29:20] forward talking about labor health

[29:21] benefits. You're talking a commitment of

[29:24] 150,000 hours where you can utilize a

[29:27] tree contract with the Riverside

[29:30] Cooperative for a rolloff

[29:35] » $10,000.

[29:38] Well, they are contract

[29:41] >> but a lot of times in the storms

[29:46] they fall.

[29:46] >> Well, this is so this isn't about doing

[29:49] it. We don't cut trees down during

[29:51] storms. Nature takes care of that and

[29:53] takes the trees down and destroys

[29:54] everything that's bad. But we this sort

[29:57] of pruning of trees and things like that

[29:59] would happen in an organized fashion

[30:01] before and after storms, not you know in

[30:03] anticipation of storms, not during the

[30:05] storm, right? Again, this is not to

[30:08] exceed 70,000

[30:10] under the sun.

[30:11] >> So So I'm good with any council people

[30:14] speaking to anybody. I just want to make

[30:16] sure this is on the agenda because I

[30:18] don't want to delay and protect.

[30:21] >> Yeah, it'll be on the agenda for the

[30:22] next meeting. We'll have a deep

[30:24] like in the hurricane.

[30:27] >> I think it's also important to note the

[30:29] DN

[30:31] setting out their MSP storm water

[30:33] furnacing in the model 3 or specifically

[30:36] that the fees that are set into the

[30:39] first one are for city planning and

[30:42] continued maintenance. All of this is

[30:44] falling between the regions. I was a

[30:47] little concerned about the cost of being

[30:50] of the most

[30:52] equipment. I don't think we ever bought

[30:54] equipment through preferences

[31:03] equipment right now. Especially

[31:07] this part of the satellite

[31:10] just like we do in the old space, right?

[31:12] You decide what you feel like you want

[31:14] to put through for a generalization

[31:16] model. What you put through wanting to

[31:18] trust or devot

[31:26] we've never like I know like my time on

[31:28] council like we we kill ourselves to try

[31:31] to spend a little bit of the money.

[31:33] We've never got anywhere near spending

[31:36] all the money and sit down. Right.

[31:38] >> True job.

[31:38] >> Yeah. The hundreds of thousands of

[31:40] dollars.

[31:42] Okay. I still think we should look to

[31:45] our offerings in house, but we have to

[31:47] bid this out every single year.

[31:49] >> If we had the time in house, then it

[31:51] would be done and it's not. Everyone's

[31:54] working super hard. The DW was amazing.

[31:57] So clearly additional help could be

[32:01] again

[32:03] >> $17,000 could protect our res. We ready

[32:06] to move on to the next topic?

[32:07] >> Yes. Good. Rank choice voting.

[32:09] Counciloman Dave put this on the agenda.

[32:12] >> I did. So, a member of the TDMC has

[32:15] actually asked that this be brought to

[32:16] council. So, I put this on the agenda

[32:20] and um this is to consider for our

[32:23] elections. Right now, it's a one vote

[32:26] option, but rank choice voting is you

[32:29] have your top choice and your secondary

[32:31] choice. So, you can rank your candidates

[32:33] in the order in which you'd want to

[32:34] succeed. It actually allows for you make

[32:37] your first choice, you get your second

[32:39] choice and maybe not support a different

[32:43] choice that you would want to see

[32:45] succeed. It actually allows for people

[32:47] to have more flexibility in voting. Um,

[32:49] it ensures that the winner has a

[32:51] majority of more residents than less.

[32:55] Maybe it's someone's second choice.

[32:56] >> So, does primary voting go away? And

[32:58] it's just a general election.

[33:00] >> And it would be the finals legislation

[33:03] does not apply to the governance.

[33:06] >> It doesn't apply to the finance.

[33:08] >> Not the legislation that he's referring

[33:10] to.

[33:12] >> It hasn't technically shelled yet. Um

[33:15] the general sent

[33:20] there is and I also note because I

[33:22] looked into it. Um there's proposed

[33:25] legislation coming out of the Senate

[33:26] which is different than coming from the

[33:28] Assembly.

[33:29] >> What's exciting?

[33:30] >> Um neither one has primaries in it which

[33:33] quite frankly for 10:00 is when you have

[33:35] the most opportunity for rank choice

[33:37] voting.

[33:38] >> But I would just caution that because

[33:40] there's conflicting bills proposals

[33:43] right now coming on two sides. I would

[33:45] suggest waiting because we're not sure

[33:48] what the process would be if and when it

[33:51] >> I can't do anything now. as response.

[33:53] Well, cool.

[33:54] >> It's a very very interesting concept,

[33:56] right? It's all in different places

[33:58] around the country.

[33:59] >> Can you get copies of the bills?

[34:02] >> I I did think other municipalities were

[34:04] putting in rank choice at the municipal

[34:06] level even before the state bills were

[34:09] passing.

[34:10] >> How could they do that deal with

[34:13] both?

[34:16] » Yeah. So, the municipalities don't set

[34:19] the ballots, right? It's not on the

[34:21] county.

[34:22] >> I think they put it in

[34:24] >> we want we want or we support franchise

[34:27] bill.

[34:27] >> Yes. There's resolutions that have been

[34:30] floating around looking with support

[34:32] board for it to send to the um

[34:34] legislature, but they're not actually

[34:36] able to implement anything until such

[34:38] time as we go out.

[34:39] >> So, I'm going to make a recommendation

[34:40] here that we can you distribute the bill

[34:46] to the council members and then maybe

[34:48] after we've had a chance to read it and

[34:50] think about it, we consider a uh a uh

[34:54] resolution to support it to the state

[34:55] legislature.

[34:57] Again, I'm happy to have put this before

[35:00] everybody.

[35:01] It's not necessarily mind. I think

[35:03] everyone should look into this and think

[35:05] about it. Um I'm glad it should be part

[35:07] of the discussion. I think elections it

[35:10] does make a lot more flexibility in

[35:11] elections.

[35:12] >> Okay. As I understand it, just think

[35:15] again. There's nothing else to implement

[35:18] till things get closer. But I would

[35:21] assume this is when there's lots of

[35:24] people running. You know, one 10 people

[35:26] run for mayor of New York.

[35:29] >> Well, if it's two, then there's no need

[35:30] the right choice. You need three. You

[35:32] need three. So, that's my whole point.

[35:34] We kill our So, having two creates no

[35:37] value.

[35:38] So, again, it's kind of

[35:42] >> look at it.

[35:43] >> It doesn't. No, I wish more people ran

[35:45] here.

[35:45] >> Mr. President, I think it is looking at

[35:48] places that have nonpartisan buildings.

[35:51] So it's open the school board and that

[35:54] are nonpartisan. They could potentially

[35:56] incentivize voting. But I think you're

[35:58] right. I think it's very limited

[36:01] opportunities

[36:02] different for that council

[36:11] » question because I have a lot of

[36:13] questions on um our safe streets and our

[36:16] complete streets. Would it be possible

[36:18] to ask you the presentation with

[36:21] breakthrough now before we get into the

[36:24] admin report and that way we can review

[36:29] ordinance or do you want to wait till

[36:30] later?

[36:31] >> Let's wait too long then. Let me get

[36:32] because so much of this stuff we'll be

[36:33] able to dispose

[36:35] >> trying to get John on earlier.

[36:36] >> Sean, you don't want to go home anyway.

[36:40] » Okay, we're going to move to public

[36:42] comment. Sorry. Oh, sorry. No jokes.

[36:48] So the third truck issue uh is has come

[36:52] across is that there's somewhat I I'll

[36:54] refer to it as a loophole um where uh

[36:58] there's an annual permit that the food

[37:01] truck can can apply for $100.

[37:05] And the way it's being uh looked at

[37:08] right now is that that food truck gets

[37:11] the permit for 100 hours and then can go

[37:13] and permanently park it uh for a number

[37:16] of consecutive days permanently parked

[37:19] at a location. Uh Bob Burns has uh I

[37:23] think rightfully uh determined that it's

[37:27] it would not

[37:29] come since not classify or qualified as

[37:32] a permitted excessive abuse. Um on the

[37:35] other hand you know from the revenue

[37:37] perspective I always this is that you

[37:40] know food truck is going to provide adal

[37:43] taxation opportunities for the

[37:44] municipality and uh quite frankly if uh

[37:49] they can

[37:51] um don't have to dial it in comparison

[37:54] to what they pay taxes. Um, that being

[37:59] said, it's my understanding, as goes to

[38:02] those of you that have been around,

[38:04] um, that the original legislative intent

[38:07] of food trucks was to allow for food

[38:10] trucks to be permitted at special events

[38:13] and, um,

[38:16] at a construction zone or an

[38:18] industrialized zone. um as opposed to

[38:22] just another business zone where we can

[38:25] fill in the burrow where you know

[38:27] restaurants are million half mile away

[38:31] what have you. Uh so Julie looking for

[38:33] feedback as to whether or not the

[38:36] burough attorney should be looking to um

[38:40] take a to to clarify the code intent or

[38:44] whether the the intent that I stimulated

[38:46] is actually what the intention was or

[38:49] what the current memory value feelings

[38:51] intention should be.

[38:53] >> So I say to ask the question what is the

[38:55] current what does the governing body

[38:56] want to do if anything about this? No.

[38:59] To to explain, we don't want we should

[39:03] be giving people $100 million worth of

[39:06] property for $100,

[39:07] >> right?

[39:09] >> When we initially passed the food truck

[39:12] ordinance, a big a big concern was of

[39:14] course supporting our existing

[39:16] businesses downtown and not giving them

[39:18] direct competition. You know, in a

[39:20] coffee truck for a while that was

[39:21] directly competing with the coffee

[39:23] shops. And as much as I like a coffee

[39:26] truck, I want my businesses to stay open

[39:28] more. And so I I do agree with David's

[39:31] point of view. I think that it should

[39:33] absolutely be limited to the special

[39:35] events and construction is over, which

[39:37] is a great time when we get to have

[39:39] them, but then I'd rather our residents

[39:41] support our downtown.

[39:48] » Oh gosh. Um, so first of all, that $100

[39:51] food trick truck permit that is paid for

[39:53] is there's only a couple of food trucks

[39:55] that actually see that opportunity. So

[39:59] that's just a couple of ice cream trucks

[40:01] that we have in town. That's it. our

[40:02] special events food truck is a different

[40:05] the the current applications that are

[40:07] before my office Jen or Councilwoman

[40:10] Jackson I'm sorry are um are uh food

[40:14] trucks actually food trucks that are

[40:16] looking to locate uh along here

[40:20] location so one I think is a is

[40:24] something and I don't know the other

[40:26] nots

[40:28] >> I'm sorry I just it's kind of hard to

[40:30] understand you from here I wish I was at

[40:32] the meeting it would be a lot easier.

[40:34] Um, you're saying that it's a Jamaican

[40:35] food truck for that specific location.

[40:38] >> Yeah, there there are two there are

[40:39] actually two food trucks that that have

[40:41] applications right now. They're not the

[40:43] ice cream trucks

[40:44] >> and that right. Okay. So, those people

[40:46] want to be more regular food trucks on a

[40:49] specific piece of property. Not anywhere

[40:51] around town, but they want to be on a

[40:52] specific piece of property. Is that

[40:54] correct?

[40:55] >> At this particular point, yes.

[40:58] >> Okay. So, um, which is interesting and I

[41:01] think that, like you said, it's a

[41:03] loophole and we should address that, but

[41:05] I think that the current, uh, food truck

[41:08] ordinance that we have, this $100

[41:09] doesn't also apply to the special event.

[41:13] So, just to like decipher that for all

[41:15] of us that like we have this ordinance

[41:18] that isn't quite the food truck

[41:20] ordinance isn't quite applicable to the

[41:24] regular use of um, of food trucks in our

[41:27] town. So, just to put that out there, I

[41:30] think that sure I I I would say that

[41:32] personally my opinion is that we could

[41:34] invite more restaurant opportunities in

[41:37] our town. I'm not against that. I think

[41:39] it's actually we actually need that. I

[41:41] wouldn't want to turn it away. I don't

[41:43] think that maybe $100 is not the right

[41:45] fee for that, but I don't think that

[41:48] turning away a potential business owner,

[41:50] small business owner who's certainly not

[41:54] um

[41:56] wellunded, not a corporate. Okay. So,

[41:59] anyway, that they shouldn't be spending

[42:01] $10,000

[42:03] to do business in our town. There should

[42:05] be something um in the in the

[42:07] intermediate.

[42:08] So that's my question.

[42:10] >> If you if we wanted to allow the idea of

[42:13] a food truck,

[42:15] >> if we want to allow an idea of a food

[42:17] truck, is there a number that's not $100

[42:20] and it more kind of

[42:22] >> again this is more of a permit. So like if we want, you know, a

[42:28] weekend or a food truck to come,

[42:30] >> this has nothing to do with what we're

[42:32] talking about. Right. But I'm also

[42:34] >> So, so the question is if there is a

[42:36] more permanent food truck,

[42:38] >> is there a number?

[42:39] >> Do we want more?

[42:40] per permanent food

[42:42] trucks? I think Jenny was saying

[42:44] possibly. Yeah,

[42:46] >> I'm seeing we have a lot of interest in

[42:48] food trucks. We have a lot of people

[42:50] coming repeatedly to town. And I know

[42:52] David didn't wasn't really intending to

[42:54] bring this up, but I've been trying to

[42:56] talk about this for a while. We have

[42:58] people coming on repeat, paying $54

[43:01] every time they come. Um, and it this

[43:03] $100 permit fee doesn't apply to them.

[43:07] Um, and it only is two ice cream trucks

[43:10] that are coming to town that are paying

[43:11] that. I see it's a loophole we need to

[43:13] close.

[43:14] >> And that's Jackson. Just to clarify, the ice cream trucks are not regulated

[43:20] under our food truck ordinance. They're

[43:21] underwater ordinance.

[43:23] >> Then who is?

[43:26] So presumably these food trucks, they

[43:29] have to get licensed before they can

[43:31] ever come to one of our special events.

[43:33] I'm not sure.

[43:35] >> Right. So the the $100 is covering the cost of the fire and health

[43:40] inspection and then you know it might be

[43:43] $54 for another event when they come

[43:45] back just because the the truck has

[43:47] moved. I'm not really sure where that is

[43:49] coming from, but this is part of being

[43:53] allowed to do business. Even at special

[43:55] events, you should have a license first.

[43:59] >> So, we don't have that's not how we've

[44:01] been doing business. I'm regularly

[44:03] interacting with these businesses. So,

[44:04] just to point that out that there's a

[44:07] lot of gray area here clearly now that

[44:10] all of this is coming to the table. So,

[44:13] >> and perhaps the answer is to look at our

[44:17] special events permits and only through

[44:19] that application.

[44:22] » I guess a problem.

[44:25] >> Yeah, sorry. Council,

[44:28] so are you interested then in having

[44:30] some trs sort of like stay for a couple

[44:33] weeks in a certain area here? I'm

[44:35] interested in

[44:38] what I'm interested in is not turning

[44:40] away a a business uh who wants to have a

[44:43] food truck on their property or turning

[44:46] away that food truck that wants to be on

[44:47] that business property. How do we allow

[44:49] it if we you all agree that that's okay

[44:52] to have a food truck there? How do we do

[44:54] that in a way that makes sense for the

[44:56] burrow? Okay, that's like in line with

[44:58] our with our vision for the town. Cuz

[45:02] that's what that's what David was

[45:03] bringing up was like, is this in line

[45:05] with our master plan? He was questioning

[45:08] that it's not and I think that is what

[45:10] is in line with our master plan if we

[45:12] have more restaurant opportunities in

[45:13] the town. That's what I'm saying.

[45:15] >> So, can I just ask a followup? I mean,

[45:18] would you

[45:20] >> like do you see a limit on how many

[45:21] trucks will allow or do we want a

[45:23] limited number? Because, you know, if we

[45:25] open this up hypothetically and we get,

[45:28] you know, 15 trucks parking and they're

[45:32] competing with our downtown businesses

[45:34] or blocking businesses or private, you

[45:36] know, sports sports areas. I mean, just

[45:39] I'm just trying to delve through this.

[45:41] So, I want to know what you what you

[45:44] >> I listen it just got

[45:47] >> I see what you're asking me. It's like

[45:48] it just got brought up like two hours

[45:50] ago. It just happens to be something

[45:52] I've been dealing with for uh years now.

[45:55] So, but I didn't have a big vision for

[45:57] it. I I I I wouldn't see a problem with

[46:01] one food truck being permanently at a a

[46:04] business in town because I think that we

[46:06] have a demand for more food

[46:07] opportunities in town. I don't think

[46:09] that it's going to take away from our

[46:11] downtown businesses. Lauren, that's what

[46:13] I'm saying. I don't know that there is a

[46:16] number necessarily. I don't think we've

[46:17] reached capacity.

[46:21] Okay. So, do you want to continue this

[46:23] conversation offline?

[46:25] >> I think this

[46:26] >> Yeah, I'm fine with that.

[46:32] » Yeah, that's okay with me. But David,

[46:34] you know, David, I think you you can

[46:36] explain a little bit further about why

[46:38] that this is a problem. Or maybe that's

[46:40] what I couldn't really hear you saying

[46:42] and I think that that's important that

[46:43] we close the loophole like you said.

[46:46] But uh other than that, I'm interested

[46:48] in in looking at food truck permits like

[46:51] as as a separate item because I think it

[46:54] brings the up the the problem that we

[46:56] already have right now.

[46:59] >> Yeah.

[47:00] >> I'd like to hear from the chamber

[47:02] contest.

[47:02] >> Yeah. Yeah. So, we want to hear from the

[47:04] chamber as well. But the the immediate

[47:06] thing is is that um I I support Bob

[47:09] Burn's uh uh position as a officer on

[47:13] this call that um that uh he would he

[47:17] would deny an application because it uh

[47:20] it would not be admissible accessible

[47:22] use uh and that the zoning code does not

[47:24] allow for it.

[47:26] If we want to uh entertain some kind of

[47:30] parameters or bars that would allow for

[47:34] selling limited locations or number of

[47:37] days, hours, what have you, then I think

[47:40] we come back with some of the listening

[47:41] team discussion.

[47:43] >> Okay. So then essentially maybe we can

[47:46] come back to that business. We can say

[47:47] that you know we have to we have to

[47:50] readress it. we deny this permit but we if they still are interested in the

[47:55] opportunity

[47:56] you know can we provide that opportunity

[47:59] that's my

[48:00] >> David's going to come David's going to

[48:01] come back with some suggestions and talk

[48:03] with the chamber um for the next meeting

[48:06] >> okay thank you

[48:07] >> from there okay um public comment time

[48:13] audience member audience members wishing

[48:15] to speak will have a threem minute time

[48:17] limit to address the governing body on

[48:19] items on the agenda Large groups are

[48:22] asked to have a spokesperson

[48:23] represented. Uh, anyone here in the

[48:26] chambers like to speak? Yes, please come

[48:27] to the microphone.

[48:30] >> My balance isn't so great.

[48:31] >> We have to bring the microphone over

[48:35] here.

[48:36] Hold on one second.

[48:38] >> My name is Marie.

[48:41] >> Okay, hold on one second.

[48:43] >> Let me see how we can get the microphone

[48:45] to you. Otherwise,

[48:45] >> you might have to come through. Andrew,

[48:47] could you slide in so young to that

[48:49] area?

[48:51] Does it

[48:58] » come to the front row sit down?

[49:09] » Yes.

[49:13] » I'd like to address the issue of

[49:14] handicapped parking. I've been emailing

[49:17] the mayor about this. uh we left

[49:20] Oakwood. We're going to speak to some

[49:22] department head about it, but uh

[49:24] Washington Avenue has no handicap

[49:26] parking at all. And I think that that

[49:28] would be very advantageous for old

[49:30] ladies like me and other handicapped

[49:33] people because we shop too.

[49:36] >> And I said the only ones are like in the

[49:38] post office and at CVS or in by the uh

[49:42] in the old high school. That's far from

[49:44] someone.

[49:44] >> So I did speak to the chief chief about

[49:46] the old chief about this. Um, and there

[49:50] was something he said that he had no

[49:51] problem making north handicap in the

[49:54] middle, but there has to be a ramp

[49:56] leading

[49:58] on the sidewalk.

[49:59] >> So, right.

[50:01] >> Yeah, you have to cut the Yeah. So, that

[50:03] was kind of where we

[50:04] >> Okay. Was that going to be something

[50:06] coming up soon?

[50:07] >> So, now we'll we'll continue the

[50:09] conversation.

[50:10] >> We have we have the chief of police here

[50:11] with us today. Chief, we're gonna put

[50:13] you right on the spot. Come on, Mike.

[50:14] >> Yeah. Yeah,

[50:17] >> this is sharp.

[50:20] Don't take like three minutes

[50:23] next to each other.

[50:25] >> All right, let's do this. So, um, first,

[50:28] uh, thank you for coming out and

[50:29] speaking to to the council on behalf of

[50:32] all handicap folks in town. Um, it is

[50:35] absolutely important to us that you guys

[50:36] have your space to be able to access

[50:38] everything in town. Um, I'm going to

[50:40] work with uh Don Nard here to see if

[50:43] there's any provisions that we need to

[50:44] make sure are appropriate and in line to

[50:47] make sure we're able to do this. I don't

[50:48] see why we can't uh any space downtown

[50:51] or adequate number of spaces so that

[50:55] we're able to provide that access to our

[50:57] residents 100%.

[50:59] >> Thank you very much. Yes. I also have a

[51:01] problem with the enforcement of certain

[51:03] rules and regulations in the town. When

[51:05] a tree took down our garage, we didn't

[51:07] get a a variance for inches to put back

[51:10] our garage. Now I see little houses

[51:13] going down and the mansions going up in

[51:15] their spaces with no backyards and no

[51:18] sideyards. It's very uh ugly looking and

[51:22] I'm just very surprised that Temply

[51:24] would allow something like that. It

[51:25] seems we had a variance for inches in

[51:28] our yard.

[51:28] >> You on you said

[51:30] >> yes. I also have a question in regards

[51:33] to uh enforcement of trees being cut

[51:36] down. We pull out on I told the police

[51:38] also on JW Avenue on the corner of

[51:41] Clinton. There's some very big

[51:42] evergreens and it's very hard to make a

[51:45] left-hand turn out there. There's a

[51:47] slight incline and the cars are upon you

[51:49] fast. And I said when I spoke to the

[51:52] department uh relaying department, he

[51:54] said to me they've already received a

[51:56] notification to cut back their trees. I

[51:58] understand there's a lot of would be

[52:00] very very expensive but it is a

[52:03] dangerous situation.

[52:05] >> So when you when you're driving on Jew

[52:09] left there's a little rise there and

[52:10] it's just enough a man was killed

[52:13] years years ago. So also I I wanted to

[52:16] ask about um lawns and I said we got

[52:20] years ago and noticed that our lawn

[52:21] needed to be cut. you get a fine, but

[52:24] there are laws all over town that are up

[52:26] to your knees and they're not enforced.

[52:28] And there's one place particularly

[52:30] that's got hoarding issues. Now, it's

[52:32] concerning to think about people like

[52:34] that because they really need to be

[52:37] addressed by the board of health because

[52:40] people need help and they may need some

[52:42] social services and it's not fair to

[52:44] their neighbors because they pay high

[52:46] taxes to have to live like that. So,

[52:48] that was another issue. Then uh we had

[52:51] tree limbs that went down in the storm.

[52:53] We put ours out. He got another notice

[52:55] saying that they were more than three

[52:57] feet and that was our responsibility. I

[53:00] called the department uh building

[53:01] department. He said, "Oh, I told the DPW

[53:04] about your situation." When I called

[53:06] them, the girl said to me, "One, it

[53:08] wasn't their job. Two, they did it as a

[53:11] favor to the town. And three, they only

[53:13] did it for a week." And I said to her,

[53:15] "How would I know any of these things?

[53:17] What if you're poor? What if you're old?

[53:19] She will come out and get it, but our

[53:21] landscaper had to come back and get

[53:23] them. I also um am missing the um corner

[53:27] house by us. Uh I think is a Airbnb and

[53:32] I spoke to you told me that on June 4th

[53:35] >> because we changed the rules on that.

[53:37] >> I know you said in 90 days it's not

[53:39] happening.

[53:40] >> 30 days. 30 days.

[53:41] >> 30. It's not happening. I don't think 30

[53:43] days. I'm really surprised at that

[53:46] because someone I know in real estate

[53:47] said you'd be very surprised that TFly

[53:50] would allow that. Don't

[53:54] >> go 90 days.

[53:55] >> No, 30 days is allowed.

[53:57] >> 30 days minimum.

[53:58] >> Yeah, I'm surprised. She said she'd be

[54:01] surprised that it shouldn't been 90

[54:03] days. They they're doing it by weeks.

[54:05] >> Yeah.

[54:07] >> I have personally checked that one. It's

[54:10] really um you know oversees it.

[54:12] >> So both David the administrator and I go

[54:15] on periodically check Airbnb and the RBO

[54:18] to see what's listed and they don't like

[54:21] it.

[54:21] >> They're not they're not posted for less

[54:24] than 30 days. Okay.

[54:25] >> If they're making side deals, we're not

[54:27] over

[54:28] 90 days and that is much more annual to

[54:32] other.

[54:36] So, the state board doesn't allow us to

[54:37] be with it till more than 30 days.

[54:40] >> Okay. We're no longer getting the Friday

[54:42] halls from the mayor.

[54:43] >> We are. You must not be signed up for

[54:45] it, but they're going out.

[54:46] >> Oh, we

[54:47] >> they are.

[54:48] >> We always got them and then all of a

[54:49] sudden they just stopped.

[54:50] >> Yeah. I don't know why that's going on,

[54:52] but it's been going on every Friday at

[54:53] 4:00.

[54:54] >> I said, "No, I can just speak to that."

[54:56] So, we're right now still investigating

[55:00] when we transferred over from our old

[55:02] system. We have a pocket of individuals

[55:04] that have signed up that are not getting

[55:06] those notifications where we've made the

[55:09] company aware of it. We're trying to

[55:10] solve that.

[55:11] >> Thanks. Because then we would have had

[55:12] some of those things about the trees at

[55:14] the street and the limited time to know

[55:16] all that. Also, I wanted to know about

[55:19] the police department sitting here. Um

[55:22] my assistant woman is scattery. They

[55:24] have a thing for uh either handicapped

[55:27] or people that live alone. It's like the

[55:28] help I'm fallen thing forms that you

[55:31] fill out. People know where your keys

[55:33] are so that in time of emergency police

[55:36] can get in and there is some kind of I

[55:38] guess notation that they can to carry on

[55:41] them.

[55:42] >> So So I'm not made aware of systems that

[55:45] are currently to allow

[55:48] police. However, in an e situation like

[55:50] that, short of calling by by way of

[55:52] home, but we do house fees for a great

[55:55] many. And beyond that, we have um we

[55:59] have provisions in our system to be able

[56:01] to take down information and keep that

[56:03] just

[56:05] because she's

[56:08] still like two of us, but there's some

[56:10] people that don't just like who knows

[56:13] how long it's going to be.

[56:16] Also, I've heard

[56:17] >> Wait, before you There is something you

[56:19] put on your refrigerator. It's a sheet.

[56:21] The senior services committee does this.

[56:23] >> It's a sheet you put on your

[56:24] refrigerator. It is usually bright

[56:26] yellow. Yeah.

[56:27] >> Um, you keep it on your fridge, on your

[56:29] kitchen cabinet or somewhere in your

[56:30] kitchen. Police and emergency responders

[56:32] know to look for this. It's emergency

[56:34] contacts and medical information.

[56:36] Anyway, it does exist and I'm sure the

[56:40] >> My last my last question to you is I've

[56:43] heard from several people that don't

[56:45] live in town that the Clinton M is

[56:47] planning to build a multi-story hotel

[56:50] with some kind of a nightclub or

[56:52] something on top of it. Now, I heard

[56:54] this from two other people and I would

[56:56] be very distressed to hear that that

[56:59] actually happened.

[57:00] >> So, if the multi-story part is true, the

[57:02] nightclub part is not. There's no

[57:05] nightclub.

[57:06] They're planning to put a pool wall in

[57:07] the roof.

[57:08] >> Oh, that's what I heard.

[57:09] >> But not a nightclub.

[57:10] >> Okay. And we're requiring the pool to be

[57:14] screened and um

[57:16] >> sound for well, not sound approved, but

[57:19] for sound modifications. There'll be

[57:21] hours of operation and so it won't be

[57:24] something.

[57:25] Was there any possible way that the town

[57:28] of Tennifly could maintain some of its

[57:31] beauty with some of the boxes with

[57:34] windows that are going up in this town?

[57:36] I said, we're losing the little capes,

[57:38] the beautiful Victorians. I said, uh

[57:41] they're all going by the wayside and now

[57:43] we have cement blocks. I said, they're

[57:46] really quite ugly. And I said, this town

[57:48] was always so beautiful. In November, I

[57:50] would have lived here 60 years. So, I've

[57:52] seen a lot of changes in the town and

[57:55] it's not pretty. And I said, I hope the

[57:58] Clinton would put something that would

[58:00] kind of resemble the bucolic kind of

[58:02] look that it had years ago. Maybe I'm

[58:05] living in the past, but that's kind of

[58:06] the way I feel about 10 fry. I said I

[58:09] really don't like to see some of the

[58:11] things that are are being built and

[58:14] going up with a nice little houses.

[58:16] That's all. Thank you for your comments.

[58:20] Thank you.

[58:21] >> Thank you, Gish. Okay. Is there anyone

[58:22] else here in the chambers that would

[58:24] like to speak? And McKel

[58:33] according to you Andrew McK

[58:36] um couple two two things. So first of

[58:39] all the uh complete streets policy

[58:43] uh wanted to say and fortunately traffic

[58:47] engineer took away the upon but

[58:49] congratulations.

[58:51] We're very proud of you. Uh, it's

[58:53] something that the Northern Valley

[58:55] Greenway Committee has been talking.

[58:58] We've been talking to a group called

[59:00] Bergen County Concrete Streets. That's a

[59:03] group that goes around and tries to get

[59:04] each other of the towns to pass here a

[59:07] ordinance on concrete streets. So, you

[59:10] guys saved us from having to bring all

[59:12] of them in to talk to you. Um, because

[59:16] you took the initiative. David, thank

[59:18] you very much for going to a session

[59:20] actually following up on it. Um, my

[59:24] understanding and again between David

[59:26] and John, it's the experts.

[59:29] It's not the any exact specific word

[59:31] that's in the ordinance that counts, but

[59:33] the fact that you have because it opens

[59:36] up doors for funding, for policy, for

[59:39] being included in county plans, and all

[59:41] types of things. I'm way above even me.

[59:44] Um, congratulations. I think it's also

[59:48] great because it will give you the

[59:50] framework to start preparing the town

[59:53] for the northern grid uh connectors,

[59:56] traffic arrangements, whatever. And if

[1:00:00] you're you're ahead of the other five,

[1:00:02] so we'll take credit and we'll take some

[1:00:05] uh pride in that one. And the other

[1:00:07] thing I wanted to talk about is I don't

[1:00:10] want to talk about that, but the sign on

[1:00:12] 9W by Clinton and beautiful sign. Um, I

[1:00:16] also drove by it at night time and maybe

[1:00:20] I'm getting old, but uh, it was just

[1:00:23] blinding,

[1:00:25] incredibly bright. So, I know on my

[1:00:28] apples there is something called the

[1:00:30] night mode where you can reverse the

[1:00:34] colors, the black and white at night.

[1:00:36] There's all types of things that you

[1:00:38] guys can figure out what works.

[1:00:40] >> We're going to look into it.

[1:00:41] >> But definitely look into it. And then as

[1:00:43] far as the messaging,

[1:00:46] and I hate to bring it up because none

[1:00:49] of you seem to like the ability to have

[1:00:52] six messages up on that corner or 20 at

[1:00:55] any one time, but the reality is again,

[1:00:59] there are public communication experts

[1:01:01] here in this room who know more about

[1:01:03] it. But a sign like that rotates through

[1:01:07] a set of messages.

[1:01:10] If you're driving by it, the chances of

[1:01:13] having enough time to even read one of

[1:01:15] those messages is pretty small because

[1:01:19] it goes through one after the other. So

[1:01:23] you may catch one of the 20 messages or

[1:01:26] six or five, whatever that it goes

[1:01:29] through over its cycle, but no. But

[1:01:32] that's it. You know, it's an interesting

[1:01:34] I'm going to just throw it out there,

[1:01:36] but it's like one of the mantras in

[1:01:39] terms of billboards

[1:01:41] is seven words or less. Other words, the

[1:01:44] human ability as you're driving by is

[1:01:46] for seven words or less to understand

[1:01:48] it. So, when you have 10 billboards up

[1:01:50] there and you're driving by, the average

[1:01:53] person is only, which is all of us, is

[1:01:55] only grabbing seven words out of the

[1:01:57] whole thing.

[1:01:58] >> I picked the one I want to look at and

[1:02:00] that's what I

[1:02:01] >> absolutely correct. But on this one,

[1:02:03] what I'm concerned is

[1:02:06] that you may catch one of the messages

[1:02:11] as you drive by me,

[1:02:14] >> which is what you do in the billboard.

[1:02:15] Besides, if you're typically driving by

[1:02:17] there like myself, like many people

[1:02:19] every day, drive by 501, 502, 449. So on

[1:02:24] different days, you see different

[1:02:25] flashing signs. That's all.

[1:02:26] >> It's right,

[1:02:28] >> whatever. But the brightness at night

[1:02:30] time is something I highly recommend.

[1:02:32] You guys look good. Thank you.

[1:02:34] >> Thank you. Anyone else here in the

[1:02:36] chamber want to speak? Um, is there

[1:02:39] anyone online who would like to uh be

[1:02:41] heard? Public comment. Anyone raising

[1:02:44] their hand?

[1:02:45] >> I see no hands. Mayor,

[1:02:46] >> no hands. Okay, we're going to uh close

[1:02:49] public comment time then and move on to

[1:02:52] the administrative report. Council

[1:02:54] members or questions for the

[1:02:55] administrator?

[1:02:59] really

[1:03:00] obviously committee for complete

[1:03:02] streets. I would like to get out of it.

[1:03:04] >> Yeah, Dave and I both did that in the

[1:03:07] lead and I did follow up a little bit of

[1:03:09] our budget mall and I am definitely

[1:03:12] working

[1:03:14] on that. I have a question about

[1:03:18] May

[1:03:21] in the report. I know this might be a

[1:03:24] question that comes up because you know

[1:03:26] it's in the resolution

[1:03:29] to just tell me if when you want me to

[1:03:31] ask it but um I know now we've uh we're

[1:03:35] going to be awarding tonight a

[1:03:39] we're going to be awarding like

[1:03:41] engineering services tonight.

[1:03:44] >> So two different one is we already

[1:03:46] authorized the student to like special

[1:03:49] meetings. This is just um codifying the

[1:03:53] actual number. Okay. Um uh so that's not

[1:03:57] part of the bank scenario like the new

[1:03:59] person rate engineering services and

[1:04:02] specifically uh time towards the bank

[1:04:06] application and John can talk about that

[1:04:09] you know when you know it's ready for

[1:04:11] the process take place but it's a um you

[1:04:15] know it's a very involved study

[1:04:18] basically

[1:04:20] filling um

[1:04:23] the intersections that live traffic

[1:04:26] lights and design so

[1:04:29] we

[1:04:31] can conver

[1:04:34] one

[1:04:36] that was we we didn't get the bids uh

[1:04:40] was that a one we didn't get bids for

[1:04:41] the the amount

[1:04:45] rejected on technicality and the rest of

[1:04:47] the bids the second time were too high

[1:04:49] >> too high was authorized to negotiate a

[1:04:52] contract so we negotiated get them over

[1:04:54] there. Um, right. And you reduce the

[1:04:58] amount by 74,000.

[1:05:01] >> Oh, okay. So, that that's on the

[1:05:04] resolution.

[1:05:05] >> That's correct.

[1:05:05] >> So, my question is about that. is

[1:05:08] explained going to be that that it

[1:05:12] becomes a four-way stop sign in that

[1:05:15] area or it will be just two stop signs

[1:05:20] where when a person is coming out of

[1:05:22] what that entrance will be crossont

[1:05:25] I just I just want to know

[1:05:28] >> in fact

[1:05:31] that we chief put in

[1:05:36] >> currently the The plan is that behind is

[1:05:40] where the stop signs be in the street

[1:05:42] farming. Uh the chief raised some

[1:05:44] concerns about you know people trying to

[1:05:46] get out of of

[1:05:51] the study of you start to see whether or

[1:05:53] not

[1:05:54] it's not what the impact that would lead

[1:05:56] to the disruption of the other.

[1:06:00] >> All right. I mean personally I think

[1:06:01] it's probably going to end up needing a

[1:06:02] light you know that you know because it

[1:06:05] is a high school crazy area

[1:06:08] >> but uh okay so so that's going to be

[1:06:10] looked at. That's what I wanted, you

[1:06:12] know. And I I just want to uh one other

[1:06:15] thing on your end is your administrative

[1:06:17] report was you mentioned about the table

[1:06:20] is now going to Grove Street. So we'll

[1:06:22] be able to have security cameras. I

[1:06:26] wanted to say that Omar uh ordered the

[1:06:29] signs for the little stream flots. So

[1:06:32] the desk or anybody who's interested in

[1:06:34] also um gardening there that we'd have

[1:06:38] the security in case anyone wanted was

[1:06:40] >> actually council lady.

[1:06:46] So, I just was I asked how many were

[1:06:48] being taken because if they're not being

[1:06:50] used, I thought maybe it'd be a good

[1:06:52] idea to offer them up to our restaurants

[1:06:54] so that they might want to grow some of

[1:06:57] their own herbs and vegetables there. We

[1:07:00] could really be a farm-to-table

[1:07:02] community. Um,

[1:07:03] >> that's that sounds really compelling.

[1:07:06] Uh, I think just we were going to do a

[1:07:08] little bit of like a promotion of it

[1:07:11] because it the it roll out is a little

[1:07:12] funky. But but I think that's that's

[1:07:15] >> I mean I just want them to be to be used

[1:07:18] to me that space is great. So I want to

[1:07:20] have to be used and if it's first to the

[1:07:23] residents if not let's businesses.

[1:07:26] >> Absolutely.

[1:07:26] >> There's people grow their own basil and

[1:07:28] herbs and rosemary and garlic and

[1:07:31] tomatoes and I think it'd be amazing

[1:07:34] market kind of thing here. And now we'll

[1:07:36] have security.

[1:07:38] All right. Thank you. That's a good

[1:07:39] point.

[1:07:40] >> Another question on street. So, you

[1:07:43] know, and this is old. Um, but we had

[1:07:46] initially when we were talking about

[1:07:48] girls street years ago and passed it,

[1:07:50] we're talking about naming the dog park

[1:07:52] after our former mayor. um never

[1:07:56] happened, but uh I believe that our

[1:07:59] former mayor actually was hoping that it

[1:08:01] would supposed to be after Mayor Rosen.

[1:08:05] Um and so I just want to follow up on

[1:08:07] that request

[1:08:09] >> and I know that he's called me. I know

[1:08:11] he wanted to speak with her mayor about

[1:08:13] this. Um

[1:08:14] >> I wish we could talk about that all.

[1:08:17] >> So I just wanted to know if it ever went

[1:08:19] to our naming committee, if it's ever

[1:08:21] reviewed. So because our council back

[1:08:24] then had discussed it, it had let the

[1:08:26] mayor outgo mayor at that time know it

[1:08:29] was going to be named after him. It was

[1:08:31] told to him. So again, I just don't want

[1:08:33] to leave that game. I believe that prior

[1:08:36] to the renovation, the park had been

[1:08:38] named previously. Yeah.

[1:08:41] >> So it was the original dog park. It all

[1:08:44] has obviously changed with the

[1:08:47] >> and then we just named it the Gro Street

[1:08:49] Park,

[1:08:49] >> right? I think this the area he would

[1:08:51] like is the dog park. You know, he was

[1:08:53] always seen walking his dogs. It was not

[1:08:55] horrific giving to an outgoing mayor. I

[1:08:57] would like to just follow up and see

[1:08:59] maybe if we can put that honorific back,

[1:09:02] you know. I think

[1:09:04] years it was done in his name.

[1:09:10] » I think

[1:09:12] it was

[1:09:14] okay.

[1:09:14] >> So I don't remember discussion about

[1:09:17] removing it. So that's why I think it's

[1:09:19] not going to um I did have another

[1:09:21] question just I wanted to tell the

[1:09:23] public status of the little leaf fields.

[1:09:25] I know construction begins and they're

[1:09:28] waiting on them every day but

[1:09:30] >> Yeah. Yeah. So um the the be offsite by

[1:09:35] September the 1st.

[1:09:36] >> Okay.

[1:09:36] >> Uh borrowing torrential raintorms. Um so

[1:09:41] the the contract was is you know under

[1:09:44] contract. So they're taking a little bit

[1:09:45] on the chin. Um they've had to uh

[1:09:48] dewater and remove silks. Um I got a

[1:09:52] hill talks now. Uh so you know they have

[1:09:55] that expense and they're working

[1:09:57] diligently. I

[1:09:59] was not pleased with some of the

[1:10:01] communication from my OG uh frankly on

[1:10:04] the status of of the project and I spoke

[1:10:07] with the contractor directly uh this

[1:10:09] morning and we were advised that that

[1:10:11] parking lot is needed for school faculty

[1:10:14] for August 24th and that the school

[1:10:17] opens on August 31st. area they wanted

[1:10:20] to uh certainly be off of that parking

[1:10:23] lot

[1:10:25] if they could be out of the area

[1:10:29] 347.

[1:10:30] So that's what we're hoping to see. And

[1:10:32] as you know from the joint committee, we

[1:10:34] obviously

[1:10:38] as you know from the joint committee,

[1:10:40] you know, schools absolutely want their

[1:10:41] parking lot done.

[1:10:42] >> Yeah.

[1:10:46] » So I I feel like, you know, we really do

[1:10:48] need to abide by that.

[1:10:50] >> But collective care is underway.

[1:10:54] and um and I've communicated the the

[1:10:56] status to general cleaning and

[1:11:00] they they have to take a seat there

[1:11:01] which may be done by all

[1:11:05] one more question. Um it's on the

[1:11:08] amphitheater. Um, so I will say, and

[1:11:12] maybe I just don't have it, but I did

[1:11:14] think it was going to be wider and

[1:11:15] lower. And again, I I know I asked this

[1:11:18] to you last time, but it does seem to be

[1:11:20] higher than the what the spec showed. It

[1:11:23] did show like a wider, lower indicator,

[1:11:26] and I asked last time, is it being built

[1:11:28] to spec?

[1:11:29] >> So it's it's being built to the spec

[1:11:32] that the actual contracting photograph

[1:11:35] that's in it's temporary sign. So we

[1:11:38] stop the

[1:11:40] >> Yes. That's not that's not the design we

[1:11:42] ordered.

[1:11:43] >> Yeah. So

[1:11:44] >> a lot of residents ask me about that.

[1:11:46] They see that picture and then they see

[1:11:47] the epid

[1:11:49] is that you can see all our downtown

[1:11:51] business. It doesn't block the running

[1:11:53] of any of our downtown businesses. So we

[1:11:55] have brought down still

[1:11:58] everything on railroad which I think is

[1:12:00] so important and they were really upset

[1:12:02] when like things do block.

[1:12:04] >> Um so I know that is off the top of my

[1:12:06] head. It's 50 ft wide at the widest peak

[1:12:09] and then it was 36 ft.

[1:12:15] » Yeah. 506 opening day.

[1:12:18] >> So

[1:12:22] from US Open finals weekend definitely

[1:12:26] which is

[1:12:28] 12 and 13

[1:12:29] >> subject to the weather.

[1:12:31] >> It keeps raining like it's raining. Um

[1:12:34] uh we're hoping that it will be ready

[1:12:36] for the previous weekend for the

[1:12:37] semifinals uh which is the fifth and

[1:12:41] 6th. Um but you know we we are

[1:12:44] definitely planning to have a grand

[1:12:46] opening card so and so forth will be US

[1:12:50] Sunday the 13.

[1:12:54] So we anticipate we hope that uh that

[1:12:59] the contractor will have progressed far

[1:13:01] enough that the community

[1:13:08] that they don't punch this scenario by

[1:13:11] meeting.

[1:13:15] » All right. Uh next item on the agenda is

[1:13:18] correspondence regarding the block party

[1:13:21] on Richard Street. Everybody good with

[1:13:23] that? Yes.

[1:13:24] >> Okay.

[1:13:29] Next is

[1:13:37] » Okay. Introduction of ordinance 26-22

[1:13:41] complete streets. Councilwoman Dayton,

[1:13:43] would you like to make a motion, please?

[1:13:46] >> Discuss this. So I I am, you know,

[1:13:50] looking at the $1 million for surveying

[1:13:54] and and possible I'd like to bring out

[1:13:57] discussion.

[1:13:57] >> That would probably be

[1:13:59] >> Isn't it as part of it?

[1:14:02] >> This is just the

[1:14:06] streets policy

[1:14:08] >> and it says I'm passing the right.

[1:14:11] >> Yeah. Okay. That's resolution.

[1:14:13] >> And yes, I absolutely want to run. Um,

[1:14:16] so a movement introduced on first

[1:14:18] reading ordinance 26-22

[1:14:21] and set the hearing for September 8th,

[1:14:23] 2026 at 7:33 a.m.

[1:14:27] >> Have a second, please.

[1:14:28] >> Second.

[1:14:29] >> Okay. Kira, can you please read title of

[1:14:31] the ordinance and conduct those votes?

[1:14:34] >> Introduction of ordinance. Ordinance

[1:14:35] number 26-22,

[1:14:38] an ordinance establishing a complete and

[1:14:40] contextsensitive street policy and

[1:14:43] supplementing the revised general

[1:14:44] ordinance of the Burrow of Tennifly.

[1:14:47] Councilman Corsair,

[1:14:48] >> yes.

[1:14:49] >> Councilman Dayton, Councilman Jackson,

[1:14:52] >> yes.

[1:14:54] >> Councilman President Michaels,

[1:14:56] >> yes.

[1:14:57] >> Councilman Dr. Okconor,

[1:14:58] >> yes.

[1:14:59] >> Councilman Robi,

[1:15:01] >> yes.

[1:15:07] In terms of the consent agenda, there's

[1:15:10] two resolutions. 26293, which is the

[1:15:13] traffic engineering study, which we just

[1:15:16] talked about. I did a vote on that

[1:15:17] separately. So, we discussed and then uh

[1:15:20] resolution 26 296 the temporary science

[1:15:23] display

[1:15:26] on that side. I just one question

[1:15:30] was that 294

[1:15:33] street

[1:15:37] just super quick. Um with the awarding

[1:15:40] of that is that also you had said that

[1:15:43] the chief was bringing up possible

[1:15:46] concerns about making it like a four-way

[1:15:48] stop sign. Is that like a conclusive

[1:15:50] event or is this like a conversation

[1:15:53] after the

[1:15:56] >> as

[1:15:58] you got the traffic engineer?

[1:16:02] It's my understanding that there is put

[1:16:04] it in place with the two stop signs and

[1:16:07] then do a study to then see if the

[1:16:09] conditions warrant in the stop.

[1:16:12] >> And would that cost me one?

[1:16:14] >> No.

[1:16:17] Either way, you're going to do the

[1:16:18] study. So,

[1:16:21] >> well, you know, as long as it's not, you

[1:16:24] know, more money because I do think

[1:16:26] you're probably going to need four.

[1:16:27] >> I mean, and the chief wasn't in here

[1:16:29] when I made that comment, I believe. But

[1:16:31] what the chief had expressed in our

[1:16:33] earlier meeting was that uh he made he

[1:16:37] had concerns of Peter left him in terms

[1:16:39] of

[1:16:42] >> Yeah. to kill and if you will always

[1:16:45] stop and wait.

[1:16:46] >> Okay. You can try.

[1:16:48] >> All right. As long as it's you inclusive

[1:16:50] of this cost. Okay. Thank you.

[1:16:53] >> Okay.

[1:16:55] I get a motion to approve resolution

[1:16:57] R26-284

[1:17:00] through R26 292 and R26 294 and R2695.

[1:17:08] >> Do I have a second?

[1:17:09] >> Second here. Please call the roll.

[1:17:11] Councilman Corsair,

[1:17:12] >> yes.

[1:17:13] >> Councilman Dayton,

[1:17:14] >> yes.

[1:17:14] >> Councilman Jackson,

[1:17:16] >> yes.

[1:17:18] >> Councilman President Michaels,

[1:17:19] >> yes.

[1:17:20] >> Councilman Dr. Okconor,

[1:17:21] >> yes.

[1:17:22] >> Councilman Robi,

[1:17:24] >> yes.

[1:17:25] >> Okay. Resolution Rule 6293. Who has

[1:17:29] questions? Lauren, you have a question?

[1:17:30] >> Do.

[1:17:32] >> Yeah. John, come to the microphone,

[1:17:34] please.

[1:17:36] So, just so the public understands, this

[1:17:38] is a proposal for a million dollars for

[1:17:42] the review and survey of 14 different

[1:17:45] intersections

[1:17:46] throughout Temply. Um, thank you. First

[1:17:50] of all, thank you for the proposal and

[1:17:51] work to create it. I'm so excited about

[1:17:54] these rates. I mean, I feel like we

[1:17:56] looked at that like a year ago already.

[1:17:57] I'm so excited to get them. Um, but so I

[1:18:01] wanted to talk about some of the

[1:18:03] limitations here that things that are

[1:18:05] not included in a million-doll proposal

[1:18:07] and I'm hoping maybe we can include a

[1:18:10] little bit more survey work. One of them

[1:18:12] is um an intersection on the on the

[1:18:15] water flow. Is there any way as we look

[1:18:18] at this intersection to see if that

[1:18:20] intersection has flooding issues

[1:18:24] >> on all of them? I'm sorry. All 14

[1:18:26] intersections.

[1:18:28] At all 14 signalized intersections, we

[1:18:31] are going to upgrade them all to be both

[1:18:33] pedestrian and vehicular appropriate.

[1:18:36] That will include reviewing the drainage

[1:18:38] at every intersection. Now, remember,

[1:18:40] we're doing we're doing the most

[1:18:41] critical places, right? We're doing 14

[1:18:43] critical locations in town, right? We

[1:18:46] will be looking at everything. The

[1:18:47] sidewalk, the curbs, the gutters, the

[1:18:50] grass, you name it, it's all getting

[1:18:52] done. Right.

[1:18:53] >> I just didn't see that kind of wording.

[1:18:55] So

[1:18:56] that that was done.

[1:18:57] >> Good question. No, it doesn't say that

[1:19:00] specific in there. You're spot on.

[1:19:02] >> Um I actually want to talk about um

[1:19:06] excuse me, I know we're not doing, you

[1:19:08] know, traffic counts and that's our

[1:19:10] traffic division with our police and um

[1:19:13] I wanted to ask about how much

[1:19:14] coordination you're going to have about,

[1:19:16] you know, prior accidents. Um,

[1:19:20] are you getting the information from our

[1:19:22] traffic division on count and

[1:19:24] intersection?

[1:19:25] >> Your police department is fantastic.

[1:19:27] >> Yeah, they followed it.

[1:19:28] >> Okay. We have we have never been

[1:19:30] disappointed by them and we work very

[1:19:32] closely. We work closely with Chief

[1:19:34] Chamberlain. I'm looking very I've

[1:19:36] already met with the new chief and we're

[1:19:38] looking very forward at the chief's

[1:19:40] office.

[1:19:42] >> How long you send that up? just want to

[1:19:44] be sure, you know, obviously we have

[1:19:46] more intersections where we've had a lot

[1:19:48] of fender benders. You know, I'm

[1:19:49] thinking Angle Flinton, that's a huge

[1:19:51] one. Um where, you know, we have a lot

[1:19:53] of traffic. I just want to make sure

[1:19:55] that as we're looking at that, we're

[1:19:57] considering all of those. Um the other

[1:20:00] things I want to talk about is um

[1:20:04] I know this is algebra but as we talk

[1:20:06] about you know free cutting the

[1:20:07] landscaping and the sight lines

[1:20:09] >> uh is that something we're going to be

[1:20:10] looking at about things that would

[1:20:12] improve site

[1:20:13] >> at every one of these 14 intersections

[1:20:15] that will also be reviewed. Trees will

[1:20:17] be trimmed or removed and we're going to

[1:20:19] bring them all up to current standards

[1:20:21] that big leap forward.

[1:20:23] >> I mean I know you guys are doing that. I

[1:20:25] just want to make sure my understanding

[1:20:27] of of what's about to occur is is

[1:20:31] >> No, these are good questions and the

[1:20:32] public should be aware of all the

[1:20:34] detail.

[1:20:36] >> Um, and just so the public understands,

[1:20:39] this is an incredible proposal because

[1:20:41] it's a million dollars from the

[1:20:43] intersections. So, it really is $70,000

[1:20:46] approximately per intersection. And

[1:20:48] that's to survey and do all this work is

[1:20:50] an incredible proposal. So, thank you.

[1:20:53] Um, I'm I'm a quick question following

[1:20:56] up with Councilwoman and Dave. Just

[1:20:58] remind me of something. Do you study

[1:21:01] when um when you're doing these

[1:21:03] intersections that this results in cars

[1:21:07] then avoiding intersections and then

[1:21:10] going up different roads and how that

[1:21:13] might

[1:21:14] >> that's not that's not part of this this

[1:21:16] project.

[1:21:17] >> Okay. This is

[1:21:19] >> what this is going to do is we're going

[1:21:21] to fix so people will be okay to go to

[1:21:24] the intersection right now. You know,

[1:21:25] we've made some improvements already

[1:21:27] downtown, right? We had some nice

[1:21:28] success last year. Everybody forgot

[1:21:29] about that by now. Okay. And you know,

[1:21:32] we did do Easton and Dean and we kind of

[1:21:34] forgot about that now. All right. Now,

[1:21:35] we're going to put the next big bite of

[1:21:36] the apple when we make the intersections

[1:21:38] where people will pretend less not to

[1:21:40] avoid them. All right. Um Okay. The

[1:21:43] we're going to have a fully coordinated

[1:21:44] intersection program where they're all

[1:21:46] going to talk to each other. All right,

[1:21:47] we're going to have them all on call GPS

[1:21:49] timer. So, I'm be able to organize these

[1:21:51] lights so they can work. And the chief

[1:21:53] and I were actually getting into the

[1:21:54] detail of that today. We have decided

[1:21:55] how we want the green band to work. We

[1:21:57] want it to be where cars drive along,

[1:21:59] get a green light as they go. We want

[1:22:00] them all to turn red at the same time.

[1:22:02] All right. He and I need to figure that

[1:22:03] out and figure out what works best for

[1:22:04] time to fly. So, the first time we do

[1:22:06] turn everything on, it might not be the

[1:22:08] way it stays because we may find that a

[1:22:10] better solution might be in place. Okay.

[1:22:12] But the idea here is we're taking on the

[1:22:14] biggest challenge, the intersections,

[1:22:17] right? The parts in between we can take

[1:22:18] care of later. This is the challenge,

[1:22:20] guys. You guys have taken this on and

[1:22:22] we're going to not just improve it for

[1:22:23] the cars, okay? The cars are very

[1:22:25] important, but we focus too much on the

[1:22:27] cars over our entire lifetimes. It is

[1:22:29] time to get less carcentric. Let's look

[1:22:31] at the pedestrians. Let's look at the

[1:22:33] other users of the intersection and

[1:22:35] let's make it unifiedly safe and usable

[1:22:37] for everybody. And that's what the focus

[1:22:40] of this job is to make it good for us

[1:22:41] all and improve everything for everyone.

[1:22:44] So we won't be looking at other you know

[1:22:48] right now it's just this this part. All

[1:22:50] right. And I think in the future there

[1:22:52] you know there may be you may find when

[1:22:53] we get done with this that we're good

[1:22:55] for a while that your lights are 80

[1:22:57] years old in many cases. They're so old

[1:23:00] that that it's it's amazing.

[1:23:02] >> They're experienced.

[1:23:03] >> They're very experienced. They're some

[1:23:04] of the most experienced I've seen in my

[1:23:06] whole career.

[1:23:08] and a chief that your past chief and his team including the new chief were

[1:23:13] miracle workers keeping these things

[1:23:15] going. So they all deserve they deserve

[1:23:17] the credit here, not me or or anybody

[1:23:19] else. My goodness, they've done a great

[1:23:21] job.

[1:23:22] >> All right, question.

[1:23:24] >> You have another question?

[1:23:25] >> Just in terms of the um public

[1:23:26] transportation, the buses and the

[1:23:28] coordination of the bus lines,

[1:23:30] >> I assume all of that is going to work as

[1:23:32] well on these intersections. We're

[1:23:33] looking at it. We're going to look at

[1:23:35] commuter traffic, public transportation.

[1:23:39] >> I'm not really sure what the question

[1:23:41] you're asking. I'm sorry.

[1:23:42] >> So, we're adding a lot more public

[1:23:44] transportation. Let's say on County

[1:23:45] Road, right? We're trying to take it off

[1:23:47] of some of the side streets. We've

[1:23:48] closed Higher Center down. So, the buses

[1:23:51] are now um county and you know, they're

[1:23:54] turning down to Dean. So I I just want

[1:23:57] to make sure that as we look at these

[1:23:58] intersections, we're incorporating

[1:24:01] a look for public transportation for the

[1:24:03] commuters, for the timing. You know, if

[1:24:05] the bus turns, it takes a whole light,

[1:24:07] for example.

[1:24:08] >> The mere nature of these improvements

[1:24:10] are going to improve the experience for not just um our our our automobile

[1:24:15] drivers and and pedestrians, but also

[1:24:16] the bus drivers as well. I mean, the bus

[1:24:18] drivers certainly can anticipate they'll

[1:24:20] be able to get through town a little bit

[1:24:21] more efficiently.

[1:24:26] Okay, any more questions in this

[1:24:28] resolution?

[1:24:30] All right. Can I get a motion to approve

[1:24:31] resolution R26-293,

[1:24:34] please?

[1:24:34] >> So move.

[1:24:35] >> Can I get a second?

[1:24:36] >> Second.

[1:24:37] >> Uh, please call.

[1:24:39] >> Councilman Corsair.

[1:24:41] >> Yes.

[1:24:41] >> Councilman Dayton. Councilman Jackson.

[1:24:45] >> Yes.

[1:24:47] >> Councilman President Michaels.

[1:24:48] >> Yes.

[1:24:49] >> Councilman Dr. Okconor.

[1:24:50] >> Yes.

[1:24:51] >> Councilman Rogilleri.

[1:24:53] Yes.

[1:24:56] >> I get a motion to approve resolution

[1:24:58] R26-296.

[1:25:03] » I get a second.

[1:25:04] >> Second.

[1:25:05] >> Call the roll, please.

[1:25:06] >> Councilman Corsair,

[1:25:07] >> yes.

[1:25:08] >> Councilman Dayton,

[1:25:11] >> Councilman Jackson,

[1:25:12] >> yes.

[1:25:14] >> Councilman President Michaels,

[1:25:15] >> yes.

[1:25:16] >> Councilman Dr. Okconor, no.

[1:25:19] >> Councilman Rogaryi,

[1:25:21] >> yes.

[1:25:24] Okay. Minutes to be approved. Can I get

[1:25:27] a motion to approve the minutes of May

[1:25:29] 19th, 2026, June 30th, 2026, and July

[1:25:34] 13, 2026?

[1:25:36] >> Ma'am, we do July 13th separate. We f

[1:25:43] July 13 separately doesn't have a

[1:25:44] meeting.

[1:25:45] >> Sure. We get a motion to approve May 19,

[1:25:47] 2026 and June 30th, 2026. So have a

[1:25:52] second. All in favor?

[1:25:54] >> Any opposed?

[1:25:56] Okay. A motion to approve July 13, 2026

[1:25:59] minutes.

[1:26:02] >> Second.

[1:26:03] >> All in favor?

[1:26:05] >> Any opposed?

[1:26:07] Okay. Committee reports. Counciloman Dr.

[1:26:09] Okconor.

[1:26:10] >> Yes. Just last one, the new resident

[1:26:13] event is going to be on September 9th.

[1:26:17] Uh there will be new resident event. Uh

[1:26:20] that's that's my report for the new

[1:26:22] regular committee and just to let the

[1:26:25] police commission chief know um you're

[1:26:27] going to be receiving invite me email

[1:26:30] and of course fire to support.

[1:26:36] » Okay. Thank you.

[1:26:38] >> Just want to um announce that we have

[1:26:41] community night coming up September

[1:26:43] 15th. one of our best events organized

[1:26:48] by the town and radical police. It's

[1:26:51] really an amazing community event and I

[1:26:53] encourage everyone to come.

[1:26:57] >> Okay. Thank you, Council President

[1:26:59] Michael. Any comments tonight?

[1:27:01] >> Yes, sir.

[1:27:02] >> Council Dave,

[1:27:04] >> I just wanted to discuss an issue I

[1:27:07] feel. It's not an issue. Excuse me. But

[1:27:10] just Yeah, I know I I brought this up.

[1:27:12] We've had in in the past couple months a

[1:27:15] lot of subdivisions come before us and

[1:27:18] so I mean David spoke very briefly on

[1:27:20] this is sort of chicken and egg. I would

[1:27:22] like to actually review the ordinances

[1:27:24] on subdivisions uh with the planning

[1:27:27] board and with the council. Um it's up

[1:27:29] to the council which place you'd like me

[1:27:30] to start. So, I can go to the planning

[1:27:33] board and see if there's any interest in

[1:27:35] amending those rules or working with our

[1:27:37] city planner, uh, David Novak, to see if

[1:27:40] there's an interest. Um, or we can

[1:27:43] discuss it as a policy initiative here

[1:27:45] and see if you'd want to discuss the

[1:27:48] subdivisions. And what's happening is

[1:27:50] that many applicants are coming before

[1:27:52] the planning board that don't meet the

[1:27:54] parameters of our ordinances, but we are

[1:27:57] allowing them to subdivide given uh you

[1:28:00] know the applicants and

[1:28:03] the size of the lot. A lot of times it's

[1:28:04] like an R two R10s but just short of the

[1:28:07] second R10. So a lot of the planning

[1:28:10] board is saying well it's okay but what

[1:28:12] happens

[1:28:12] >> that is the purpose of the planning

[1:28:14] board

[1:28:14] >> of course but as as the neighbors are

[1:28:17] watching these houses go up and per

[1:28:19] resident you know we are expanding our

[1:28:21] borders and shortening our sideyards and

[1:28:24] front yards and backyards to accommodate

[1:28:26] these uh subdivisions that may not meet

[1:28:29] the code. So the question is are you

[1:28:31] interested in reviewing this as a

[1:28:33] policy? Do we want to make it easier

[1:28:36] harder? We want to see what's happening

[1:28:38] in a pattern of practice here. Um

[1:28:40] because what's happening again like I

[1:28:41] said is planning boards approving things

[1:28:43] that are

[1:28:46] not meeting code. There's not enough

[1:28:48] land. And so the surrounding neighbors

[1:28:50] that we're hearing from surrounding

[1:28:52] neighbors, you know, this house is

[1:28:54] encroaching my like mayor was not

[1:28:57] >> but you understand that the entire

[1:28:59] purpose of the planning goal is to

[1:29:01] empowering it.

[1:29:02] I I understand that to

[1:29:04] >> I guess your question is what's the goal

[1:29:06] of what we're trying to accomplish. Um,

[1:29:08] I think that I think that I'd like to

[1:29:11] review why we constantly need to have a

[1:29:14] variance of subdivision and should we be

[1:29:17] changing our our size of lot or

[1:29:19] subdivision? Should it say you must meet

[1:29:21] a minimum of a certain size to R10s for

[1:29:25] example before you know it has to be an

[1:29:27] R20 size before we can divide to two

[1:29:29] R10s instead of like a R15.

[1:29:33] >> So just a little bit of um ballistics.

[1:29:37] So generally it it is a true like a

[1:29:41] large deviation it goes to the zoning

[1:29:43] board um not to the planning board. It's

[1:29:45] at the planning board is because it's

[1:29:47] very minor deviations. The zoning board

[1:29:51] um

[1:29:52] should be providing an annual report to

[1:29:56] the council of the matters that it

[1:29:58] looked at in years prior to see whether

[1:30:00] these kind of um situations keep

[1:30:04] occurring so that you can reconsider

[1:30:06] what your zoning would be. Um, what I

[1:30:08] would suggest is perhaps to since we're

[1:30:10] already not obvious, if you want to wait

[1:30:13] till November, December for that report

[1:30:15] and see what's happening at the zoning

[1:30:16] board level, that might be a great place

[1:30:18] to start. I'd actually like to see what

[1:30:21] they are seeing now because what I'm

[1:30:23] seeing sitting on the planning board is

[1:30:26] not minor variances, but actually larger

[1:30:29] asks for variance that really do deviate

[1:30:31] from our code. Um, and they're not I

[1:30:34] don't see them going to zoning. I see

[1:30:35] them coming before us. So, Not the oil

[1:30:38] like the highest oil would been 10%.

[1:30:41] That's a major

[1:30:42] >> over 20% variances.

[1:30:43] >> It wouldn't be would be at the board of

[1:30:45] adjustability.

[1:30:49] » You had 20%

[1:30:53] variances

[1:30:55] possible

[1:30:56] >> in the setbacks.

[1:30:58] >> Oh, in terms of the feet maybe perhaps.

[1:31:00] Yes.

[1:31:00] >> Yes.

[1:31:01] >> And so again the question is it could

[1:31:04] start on either any of the three boards

[1:31:06] actually is what you said. I could start

[1:31:07] with a discussion of the zoning board

[1:31:10] planning board for this house wouldn't

[1:31:11] be a discussion with the zoning board.

[1:31:13] Um the zoning board is you know

[1:31:16] autonomous priority they always the

[1:31:19] planning board purpose is to take the

[1:31:21] policies that are enacted by the

[1:31:23] governing body and they're almost like

[1:31:24] it's board you know they it's only here

[1:31:27] based on what the ordinances say. the

[1:31:29] zoning board has the ability to grant

[1:31:31] deviations which is why we're saying

[1:31:34] that to get to the planning board level

[1:31:36] they're have to be within a certain

[1:31:38] percentage anything that exceeds that

[1:31:40] would be the zoning board um but we're

[1:31:43] seeing there like I said all the all the

[1:31:46] yards all

[1:31:47] >> the res the residents that are

[1:31:51] residential peers that have been

[1:31:52] appointed to that that's their job they

[1:31:56] oversee

[1:31:57] >> my question is I could actually start

[1:31:58] that conversation with plenty board or I

[1:32:00] can start that one here. What I wanted

[1:32:02] to understand is what is the council's

[1:32:04] take on this and see do you want to even

[1:32:08] discuss this as a policy you know do we

[1:32:10] want to continue to allow subdivisions

[1:32:13] all over even though they don't meet our

[1:32:15] so

[1:32:19] » no this council says we the council

[1:32:22] based on the ordinances and the res that

[1:32:24] we put together that is our view it then

[1:32:27] goes to committees of residents that sit on these committees that may

[1:32:33] might make a recommendation to create a

[1:32:36] barrier which again

[1:32:38] >> well they would be approving by resol

[1:32:40] resolutions or any developments but I

[1:32:43] guess what I'm not sure similar to city

[1:32:46] council what the goal would be because

[1:32:48] the only thing we could do at this point

[1:32:50] is potentially to reduce the size of

[1:32:53] what is required for minimum lot area in

[1:32:56] a different zone because if you now make

[1:32:58] it bigger you're going to create a lot

[1:32:59] of pre-existing nonform Those

[1:33:03] are grandfathered.

[1:33:05] >> Correct. But that's still going to put

[1:33:07] So that's more hardship on the residents

[1:33:09] who want to do anything that they

[1:33:10] otherwise could have done in the

[1:33:12] property that they're in now that they

[1:33:14] won't be able to do later if the lot

[1:33:17] sizes are changed. But again, maybe

[1:33:18] their next door neighbor didn't have the

[1:33:20] right property and still was allowed a

[1:33:22] variance to subdivide and now is

[1:33:23] encroaching. So they're not because no

[1:33:27] on somebody else's property.

[1:33:29] >> I'm just saying light, air, shadow,

[1:33:30] sunlight, you know, tree lot, etc.

[1:33:33] generator.

[1:33:34] >> We're saying we don't want we don't want

[1:33:36] that. So now I think you have to you

[1:33:38] have to have on the planning board.

[1:33:43] >> I don't see it happen like it's not like

[1:33:45] an epidemic that's happening all over

[1:33:47] town once or twice when they come. You

[1:33:49] have to just I think the planning board

[1:33:51] has to have a strong you know

[1:33:54] so you know we've had very few

[1:33:56] subdivisions.

[1:33:58] >> Yeah. But a bunch is like there's one on

[1:34:00] angle that was one up on the west side

[1:34:03] of town near uh near near river and chew

[1:34:08] lots.

[1:34:10] I mean what's that sweet

[1:34:14] island? That's a two family zone.

[1:34:16] >> That's a two family zone. That's all

[1:34:18] love.

[1:34:19] So I don't know what any of us would

[1:34:22] want to be different.

[1:34:23] >> When I when I sit at the planning board

[1:34:25] and I hear discussions, there is a lot

[1:34:26] of um middle and close. People are not

[1:34:29] really sure if it's really a very gray

[1:34:32] area where we're deciding some of these

[1:34:34] substitutes,

[1:34:36] >> right? But I feel like we need to be

[1:34:38] clear and we're saying we don't want to

[1:34:40] go against our code and this is our code

[1:34:42] for a reason. But when you have a

[1:34:43] planning board, wait, I'm speaking like

[1:34:45] it's not a legal thing. When you have a

[1:34:48] planning board deciding against your

[1:34:50] code each time, then it's a policy.

[1:34:54] >> Not deciding against the code. Their

[1:34:56] existence is to grant variances. They

[1:34:59] have no other purpose is to grant

[1:35:01] variances.

[1:35:05] I have some subdivisions you don't need

[1:35:07] a variance, right? It's right.

[1:35:10] >> It's as of right. So I'm thinking that

[1:35:14] how many TB have you granted? How many

[1:35:16] variances did you grant subdivision?

[1:35:18] >> I think you did three at the most.

[1:35:21] >> I sure subdivisions. No.

[1:35:24] >> So I'd be provocative to see if I could

[1:35:27] speak on behalf of my fellow council

[1:35:29] would say we would love you as our

[1:35:30] representative to speak up and speak

[1:35:33] more influentially to stop it. I think

[1:35:36] the council we don't want these

[1:35:37] variances. you're our representative on

[1:35:40] account on the planning board. We'd like

[1:35:42] you to be more influential.

[1:35:44] >> So the mayor and I actually both voted

[1:35:46] no to one of them and the rest of vote

[1:35:48] yes. So you know we we are

[1:35:51] >> well independent. They were going to

[1:35:54] they have they

[1:35:56] >> they go to their thought process.

[1:35:58] Well, I I have you know just the one

[1:36:01] thing I would just say to your query

[1:36:05] about this as I do think it's important

[1:36:08] for us as a governing body to have

[1:36:11] information and to know what's going on

[1:36:13] in these committees any committees. So

[1:36:16] like I know that we have a separate

[1:36:18] project in environmental commission

[1:36:20] where we've had the DPW report on tree

[1:36:25] mitigations like how many trees you know

[1:36:28] year upon year that are you know more

[1:36:31] coming down and more going up and I've

[1:36:34] always you know at different times in

[1:36:36] our discussions with my colleagues here

[1:36:38] I' I like to share that and I kind of

[1:36:41] want to share that. So I I do think it's

[1:36:44] important that all of us kind of know

[1:36:46] what's happening on these committees. So

[1:36:49] to to that point, if there is some data

[1:36:52] that we can share or if it's not new,

[1:36:55] maybe it makes more sense to have the

[1:36:58] attorney who's the attorney for the

[1:37:00] zoning for the board of adjustments or

[1:37:02] something just to give us all

[1:37:04] information because I I think that's

[1:37:06] important.

[1:37:07] >> I do try to support each one.

[1:37:10] >> Yeah, absolutely. Thanks.

[1:37:12] from a from a like a like a dad like

[1:37:15] what's happening

[1:37:17] >> trend that's the word because I know I

[1:37:20] can tell you that friends with the trees

[1:37:21] are not right

[1:37:22] >> in this town so that you know I would be

[1:37:25] curious are are we subdividing our towns

[1:37:28] more than I'm aware of and I so I don't

[1:37:31] know what's the best way for you to um

[1:37:34] present that to us or or have that data

[1:37:38] made maybe by one of our uh

[1:37:40] professionals know, write a book, but reports don't necessarily mean much.

[1:37:44] Like I'm more interested in the in the

[1:37:47] attorney or someone to like explain what

[1:37:49] we want

[1:37:50] >> and also which trend do we want to go

[1:37:52] forward, right? What's our future look

[1:37:54] like? And

[1:37:54] >> that's our

[1:37:57] experience.

[1:37:59] >> Anything else to report on so we could

[1:38:00] keep moving?

[1:38:02] >> Okay. Councilwoman Jackson, do you have

[1:38:04] anything to add?

[1:38:06] >> Yes. Yes.

[1:38:08] >> Hold on. Hold on a second.

[1:38:11] I did. I wanted to actually um I spoke

[1:38:14] with fire department and I spoke with

[1:38:15] David. I wanted everyone to know that we

[1:38:17] are applying for a grant for our

[1:38:20] firefighter equipment. Um I also spoke

[1:38:22] with Congressman Dohammer's office who

[1:38:25] is going to write a letter in support of

[1:38:27] our grant application and we've applied

[1:38:29] for grants for firefighter equipment and

[1:38:31] we've lost on them in the past. um we're

[1:38:34] losing to all our stress downs and so I

[1:38:36] really hope this year it's us and we can get this included in our budget.

[1:38:41] I just want to let everyone be aware.

[1:38:43] >> Thank you.

[1:38:44] >> Councilwoman Jackson.

[1:38:46] >> Yes. Couple of quick updates. Tomorrow

[1:38:48] night um in Higher Park, we have Soul

[1:38:50] Farm coming to play their amazing um

[1:38:54] Israeli bluegrass band. It brings a big

[1:38:56] audience. So because it's so awesome. Uh

[1:38:59] next week, August 20th, on Thursday

[1:39:02] night, we're having the Grateful Dead

[1:39:04] cover band and uh food and art festival

[1:39:07] to accompany accompany. So would love to

[1:39:10] see you guys out there for that if

[1:39:11] you're in town. And then October 4th,

[1:39:14] the fall festival, the applications for

[1:39:16] participation are open. So if you can go

[1:39:18] to the Tennifly Chamber of Commerce

[1:39:20] website, tenniflychamber.org,

[1:39:22] um you can share that with anyone who's

[1:39:25] interested to apply to participate.

[1:39:27] Thanks.

[1:39:29] Thank you. Council Councilman Rolieri

[1:39:32] have anything?

[1:39:34] >> No, sir. No report for you this evening.

[1:39:37] >> Okay. Thank you. Uh council, can you

[1:39:40] read the close session line please?

[1:39:43] >> Resolution R26-1097

[1:39:45] at a meeting of the mayor and council of

[1:39:47] the Bifite County Burton State of New

[1:39:49] Jersey held on August 2026.

[1:39:52] We resolved in the announcement of JSA

[1:39:55] 4-2 the mayor and council testify go to

[1:39:58] post executive session to discuss the

[1:39:59] following matters attorney privilege of

[1:40:02] litigation update and potential

[1:40:04] litigation real property property

[1:40:06] acquisition will be taken in the meeting

[1:40:09] to the public and items I need a motion

[1:40:11] to

Tenafly Council Meeting 8/10/2026

Transcript