The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About1997/09/04 A Regular Meeting of the Mayor and Council of the Borough of Carteret was called to order by Mayor Peter 1. Sica at 7:30 P.M., Municipal CourtlPolice Facility, 230 Roosevelt Avenue, Carteret, New Jersey on Thursday, September 4, 1997. Upon individual roll call, the following were noted present: Councilmember Deborah Bialowarczuk " John P. DuPont " James Failace " William Feingold " Stanley Gutowski Noted absent were Councilmember Jack Fazekas and Borough Attorney Craig 1. Coughlin. The meeting was opened with a minute of silent prayer and the pledge of allegiance led by Mayor Peter. J. Sica. The Clerk stated that on August 29, 1997, in full compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, a notice of tonight's meeting was sent to The Home News & Tribune, The Star Ledger and posted on the bulletin board. Mayor Sica presented a Certificate of Merit to Police Lieutenant Michael PusiHo for his time as a Unit Leader at Boy Scout Camp. He stated how proud he was to give this certificate to Lt. Pusillo. At approximately 7:35 P.M., Borough Attorney CougWin was noted present. At approximately 7:36 P.M., Councilmember Jack Fazekas was noted present. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 COUNCIL MEETING ROLL CALL PRAYER, PLE:D.3E OF ALLEGIANCE STATEMENT OF MEETING NOTICE CERTIFICATE OF MERIT Lt. Fusillo Borough Attorney Noted Present Councilmember Fazekas Noted Present SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 ORDINANCE #97-29 Creation K Establishment of Police Department First Reading Comments ORDINANCE #97-29 was introduced and adopted on First Reading and the Clerk authorized and directed to advertised same for Public Hearing to be held September 18, 1997, upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace, Fazekas and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Feingold voted no. "CREA nON AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET" Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she has been advised by Counsel not to vote on this ordinance. It might affect her or her family personally. This started two weeks ago when she sat up here and questioned the bills. She didn't think Mr. Stowell, who calls himself her special counsel, appreciated that. Rather than write to her personally he did it in the third person. He wrote a letter to the Mayor expressing that something should be written to the Department of Community Affairs and the New Jersey Attorney General to see if she was acting correctly or incorrectly. She has already taken care of this problem prior to Mr. CougWin calling her and speaking to her about it. She has sent a letter to the Department of Community Affairs and to the Ethics Committee. She has a real problem with this because it's like she has said to much, let's shut her mouth. She has said things they don't want to hear so they want to keep her quiet. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said at a meeting last week she was told her husband was giving her advice. It is not Mr. Stowell's business to get into an altercation with her. She is his client. It's just not done. She shouldn't be threatened in a Closed Session Meeting or intimidated by him because he is a past Police Officer and now an attorney. Mr. Stowell thought intimidation is going to work and it is not. She will not cower in a corner when people intimidate her and try to stop her from giving her opinion, which she feels is the truth. She has looked at this ordinance. Mr. Stowell has even tried to give her a history lesson. When she spoke about a Police Director coming in who was unqualified, Mr. Stowell wrote a letter discussing how the country works. The President of the United States may be the Commander in Chief of this country, but there is a Joint Chief of Staff He discusses things with these people. The President doesn't call up every branch ofthe service every morning and decide what the rules are going to be and how they are going to play the game that day. It works in reverse. It's the people with experience that discuss things with the non-experienced. They are talking about a Police Director in this ordinance. An $80,000 to $100,000 a year job. If there is no Police Director, the person who heads the committee becomes the Director. Mr. DuPont was in charge. She doesn't know what experience he had or the rules going to be made to give him an $80,000 to $100,000 job She wouldn't be surprised as to what will be done with all of this. She doesn't feel as a client of his (inaudible) that they just spent $25,000 on, that she should sit and be threatened to keep her mouth shut. This is a free country. This is a great town. They are making a move to make this their own communist country. She asked when will they start building a wall around this place. Who's next L after the Police Department? Why doesn't everybody sit down and be quiet and let them run the show? .." SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Councilmember Bialowarczuk said this is not how it works. She will not sit back and be quiet. She has to take this type of advice tonight and she will find out if it was good or bad advice in the future, but what's going on here is wrong. This ordinance is not good for the Borough of Carteret. She said her husband has 1 Y2 years left on the force and he doesn't benefit personally from this. That does not make up her mind for her. She has always been a team player and wants what's good for the "whole" It's what is good for the Borough ofCarteret, not for the select few who have decided they have a little power and want to run with it. She voted no. Comments Can't. Councilmember DuPont said he welcomes comments and he's sure the Council does also He voted yes. Councilmember Failace said he was also at that same meeting. He believes that Mr. Stowell said he would advise her as 'Special Counsel. There were no threats. He voted yes. Councilmember Feingold said he is adamantly opposed doing anything that the Police Chief and the members of the Carteret Police Department don't want. He doesn't think that when they applauded after Councilmember Bialowarczuk spoke that they want this ordinance. First and foremost they should consider their wishes and input before the Council does anything that affects them directly. There is no doubt that this does affect them directly. They are here in numbers. He thinks there are police officers rrom other towns here in support of their brother officers. For the record, it should be noted that there are 150 people here and probably one third of them are members of police departments. If we look at why we are elected and why we sit up here, we are here to represent the people who have elected us. These police officers are members of that class. Weare here to represent the taxpayers of this Borough, not to dictate policy and shove things down people's throats. That is what is attempting to be done. Councilmember Feingold said if this ordinance is adoptéd, it will have an injurious affect on the Police Department and therefore, on the Borough. Lt. Auker aptly articulated the position he held and the position of the Police Department in general when he said what effect this would have on the Police Department's morale. If the effect is negative on the Police Department, then it will have a negative effect on the borough. That has a direct correlation with the effect it will have on all of the residents who this Council represents. Councilmember Feingold said if they as a Council don't support the members oflaw enforcement, they shouldn't be up there. He voted no. Councilmember Gutowski said this ordinance speaks for itself. Mr. Stowell was hired to do a job. The first thing he was hired to do was to look at the ordinance and tell the Council if it was in compliance with state statutes. He's done that. He told the Council it wasn't in compliance and he has rewritten it to comply with state statutes. At this point that is all he has done. Many things will be discussed in the future, but at this point we are talking about an ordinance that complies with state statute. He voted yes. ' ·-~ .. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Comments Can't. ~ ~~'IH>:\<' Mayor Sica said he thinks this whole thing got off on the wrong foot from day one. He had no problem with Mr. Stowell being hired to look into the administrative end of the Police Department. He has no problem with anybody coming in here and giving suggestions. Unfortunately, he had never met with Mr. Stowell or spoke to him until such time he was handed the ordinance, which he thinks was totally wrong. Subsequent to that, he did have the privilege of meeting Mr. Stowell last Thursday. He thinks it was a fruitful meeting and they cleared the air. Mr. Stowell informed him that he attempted to get in touch with him, but he was out oftown or never got the message. He said he will take that on face value because he seems to be an honest man. Mayor Sica said he thought there should have been some kind of meeting with the whole Council to see what direction they wanted to go in, not just come up with an ordinance. There are probably some things in this ordinance he may readily agree with. One of the things he definitely does not agree with is even creating the position of a Police Director. It's a meaningless position as far as he is concerned. He doesn't think it has enough power to stand on it's own two feet. He knows it will not test. He read rrom "New Jersey Practice Local Government Law by Pane, Volume 35:431 to the end." First, can a municipality have a Police Department without a Police Chief? In reviewing the statutes indicated in this (inaudible) municipal ordinance's rules and regulations shall provide the Chief of Police, if such a position is established, shall be the head of the Police Force." The statute does not say what will happen if the position of Police Chief was not established. He said that doesn't hold any water in Carteret because we do have a Police Chief. Councilmember Fazekas Noted Absent At approximately 7:47 P.M. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. Mayor Sica continued reading "What happens if the position of Police Chief has been established, but after the retirement of one Police Chief, the new Police Chief was not appointed can a civilian Director of Public Safety be appointed to run the department? Can the ordinance creating the post of Director of Public Safety abolish the position of a Police Chief?" He said he wanted them to understand that if they create a Department of Public Safety, he thinks under existing law they are not only creating a Director of the Police Department, they are creating a Director of the Fire Department, Emergency Services, etc. "There are some authority for the position that a municipality may abolish the position of Chief if no incumbent and create the position of Director of Public Safety to run the Police Force." In other words if the . ' Police Chief retired, they don't have to put one back in and they can put a Police Director in. Cauncilmember Fazekas Noted Present At approximately 748 P.M., Councilmember Fazekas was noted present. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Mayor Sica continued "second, if a Police Chief exists and a Director of Public Safety is appointed, can the ordinance establishing the position of Director of Public Safety give executive authority over the Police Department to the Director?" In other words, does he have the final say. "It would appear rrom one case (inaudible) that the position is established and where there is an incumbent the powers cannot be withdrawn rrom that incumbent Chief and vested in the Director." What is says is as long as you have a Police Chief you can't take the powers away rrom him just by changing any ordinance and making a Police Directòr. Comments Can't. "Analysis indicates while the power originally came from the Governing Body, the Governing Body might have the authority to abolish (inaudible). The Governing Body cannot divest the Chief of those powers and transfer them to a Director when there was an existing incumbent in the office of the Chief." In other words, as long as you have a Chief you can't take it away from him. When you don't have a Chief you might have a shot. "Finally, the ordinance has provided both for Police Chief and a civilian Director, with the Director of Public Safety to supervise the Police Department which authority the civilian Director has. How much supervision over administration can the Director exercise? In one case dealing with the area of Director's exercise, the number of powers as a result of the Director and municipality was brought to court by the Chief of Police. The powers of the Director sought to exercise were related to the assignment of named police personnel and two specific tasks." That means he tried to tell the Chief of Police who was going to be a patrolman, a detective, etc. It was upheld by the law division. In an unpublished law division decision the Judge upheld the Director's exercise of power on the basis that supervision was out, the right to direct was meaningless. While (inaudible) opinion alone, none the less, was reversed by the Appellate Division, which held that the Director and the Governing Body only had the power to set broad policy and must leave the day to day operations of the department, including personnel assignments to the Chief. ) Mayor Sica said if that's going to be the case, he didn't think they had to hire a Police Director like they did in the 70's, to sit in the Holiday Inn and drink coffee all day. We had a Police Director, it was taken to court and the court said he had no power to say how that department is going to be operated. He is not a trained professional person. This book goes on to say you can't have a Director unless he has been here for three years and a member of the Police Department. He said he didn't think there was a need for a Police Director at this point in time. There may be a need for some changes. He thinks on the strength of the ordinance that specifically says that there will be established an office of Police Director. Something is radically wrong. Something is wrong to the effect that someone was promised a job. Otherwise there would be no need to put it in there and sit up there and say maybe they are not going to do it. If they are not going to do it, take it out. Maybe we do have some problems in the Police Department that should be addressed. Maybe we do have some things that could be meaningful and save the city of Carteret some money. He said he has offered to sit down with Mr. Stowell and give him whatever records he has compiled in the years he has been here and sit down and work at it and do it right. He thinks to establish an ordinance that is going to throw something in your face isn't right. Let's act as individuals and look at the problems and attack it on all rronts. SEPTll1I>lli 4, 1997 Corœ1ents Con't. ORDINANCE #97-30 Approving Lease Agreement "Iith Middlesex County Improvement Authority First Reading ORDINANCE #97-31 Purchase of Fire Equipment First Reading AGENDA AtIENDED ._CJ Mayor Sica said not throwing things out there and say this is what they are going to do and that's the end of it. That's contrary to good government. Contrary to having a good Police Department. He said he is not the nicest guy in the world and if they ( the Police) are wrong, he will be the first one to can them down on that. If they an, right, he will be the first one to defend them. To do things like this ordinance is not good for the morale of the department. It's not good for the morale of the people of Carteret. It's not good for anything. He thinks there should be a lot of research on this ordinance before it has a second reading. ORDINANCE #97-30 was introduced and adopted on First Reading and the Clerk authorized and directed to advertise same for Public Hearing to be held September 18, 1997, upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Feingold and Fazekas. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. "AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE ENTERING INTO EXEcunON AND DELIVERY OF A LEASE AND AGREEMENT WITH THE MIDDLESEX COUNTY IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF COUNTY-GUARANTEED CAPITAL EQUIPMENT LEASE REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 1997 OF THE MIDDLESEX COUNTY IMPROVEMENT AUTHORITY" ORDINANCE #97-31 was introduced and adopted on First Reading and the Clerk authorized and directed to advertise same for Public Hearing to be held September 18, 1997, upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. "AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE PURCHASE OF FIRE EQUIPMENT FOR THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET, COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, NEW JERSEY APPROPRIATING $15,000 FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND- FUND BALANCE FOR THE COST THEREFOR" Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Gutowski and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present, the agenda was amended to include Ordinance #97-32 - A Capital Improvement Ordinance for the Purchase of Police Radios. 6 · ',.,.. ORDINANCE #97-32 was introduced and adopted on First Reading and the Clerk authorized and directed to advertise same for Public Hearing to be held September 18, 1997, upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Gutowski. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. "AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE PURCHASE OF POLICE RADIOS FOR THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET, COUNTY OF MIDDLESEX, NEW JERSEY APPROPRIATING $25,000 FROM THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND- FUND BALANCE FOR THE COST THEREFOR" Councilmember Bialowarczuk asked the Borough Attorney if she could vote on this? Borough Attorney Coughlin said yes. The Clerk stated that Ordinance #97-23 was introduced and passed upon First Reading at a Regular Meeting of the Borough Council of the Borough of Carteret held on August 21, 1997. It was duly published in The Home News and Tribune on August 26, 1997 with notice that it will be considered for final passage after Public Hearing to be held on September 4, 1997 at approximately 7:30 P.M.. The Ordinance was posted on the bulletin board and copies were made available to the general public and according to law, she read the Ordinance by title. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be open: There being no further comments or objections to the Ordinance, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Fazekas and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Fazekas ORDINANCE #97-23 "ESTABLISHING THE POSITION OF SENIOR ASSESSING AIDE IN THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET" 7 was finally adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 ORDINANCE #97-32 Capital Improvement Purchase Police Radios First Reading Comments ORDINANCE #97-23 Establishing Position of Sr. Assessing Aide Public Hearing Hearing Closed Adopted .' SEPTlllliER I;, 1997 Adopted Approved and Adopted: September 4. 1997 Introduced: August 21. 1997 Advertised as adopted on First Reading with Notice of Public Hearing: August 26. 1997 Hearing Held: September 4. 1997 Approved by: Mayor Peter J. Sica Advertised as finally adopted: September 9. 1997 ORDINANCE #97-21; Salary Ordinance Vexious Employees The Clerk stated that Ordinance #97-24 was introduced and passed upon First Reading at a Regular Meeting of the Borough Council of the Borough of Carteret held on August 21, 1997. It was duly published in The Home News and Tribune on August 26, 1997 with notice that it will be considered for final passage after Public Hearing to be held on September 4, 1997 at approximately 7:30 PM.. The Ordinance was posted on the bulletin board and copies were made available to the general public and according to law, she read the Ordinance by title. Public t!earing Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present, the Mayor declared the Public hearing to be open: Hearing Closed There being no further comments or objections to the Ordinance, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present. Adopted Upon MMMS&C, by Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Feingold ORDINANCE #97-24 "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ORDINANCE #71-9 ESTABLISHING SALARY SCHEDULES AND FIXING THE MANNER OF PAYMENTS OF SALARIES FOR VARIOUS OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET" was finally adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Approved and Adopted: September 4. 1997 Introduced: August 21. 1997 Adveliised as adopted on First Reading with Notice of Public Hearing: . August 26. 1997 Hearing Held:__ September 4. 1997 Approved by: Mayor Peter J. Sica Advertised as finally adopted: September 9. 1997 o () SEPT~ffiER 4, 1997 The Clerk stated that Ordinance #97-25 was introduced and passed upon First Reading at a Regular Meeting of the Borough Council of the Borough ofCarteret held on August 21, 1997. It was duly published in The Home News & Tribune on August 26, 1997 with notice that it will be considered for final passage after Public Hearing to be held on September 4, 1997 at approximately 7:30 P.M.. The Ordinance was posted on the bulletin board and copies were made available to the general public and according to law, she read the Ordinance by title. ORDINANCE #97-25 Salary Ordinance Seasonal Employees Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Fazekas and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be open: Public Hearing Councilmember Failace asked the Mayor ifthere was a,ny change? Mayor Sica said no. There being no further comments or objections to the Ordinance, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Fazekas and DuPont and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present. Hearing Closed Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Feingold and Fazekas ORDINANCE #97-25 "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND ORDINANCE #71-9 ESTABLISHING SALARY SCHEDULES AND FIXING THE MANNER OF PAYMENTS OF SALARIES FOR VARIOUS OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET" Adopted was finally adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Approved and Adopted: September 4. 1997 Introduced: August 21. 1997 Advertised as adopted on First Reading with Notice of Public Hearing: August 26. 1997 Hearing Held: September 4. 1997 Approved by: Mayor Peter 1. Sica Advertised as finally adopted: September 9. 1997 OJ The Clerk stated that Ordinance #97-26 was introduced and passed upon First Reading at a Regular Meeting of the Borough Council of the Borough ofCarteret held on August 21,1997. It was duly published in The Home News & Tribune on August 26, 1997 with notice that it will be considered for final passage after Public Hearing to be held on September 4, 1997 at approximately 7:30 P.M. The Ordinance was posted on the bulletin board and made available to the general public and according to law, she read the Ordinance by title. ORDINANCE #97-26 Creation & Establishment of Police Department SEPIflillER 4, 1997 (Kdinance #97-26 Creation {).I. Establishment of Police Dept. Can't. Public Hearing .~ - .,.'t-""'¡' Municipal Clerk Barney said that was the original one. She asked if they should move to table it? Borough Attorney CougWin said this was the one that was subsequently modified. Councilmember Feingold asked how could they table this? Mayor Sica asked why would they have to table it if they would do it last week? Borough Attorney Coughlin said they have to take some official action. Mayor Sica said they tabled it last week on the First Reading pending subsitive changes. Robert A Hedesh, Esq. (from the audience) said they have to have a Public Hearing (inaudible) introduce a new ordinance on first reading, not amending it on a change. There are two ordinances here. The law provides that the public has a right to speak at a Public Hearing as advertised at which time the Council can take whatever measure it wishes. Table it, vote it down or vote for it. When the Public Hearing is advertised, this isn't an amendment, it is a brand new ordinance. Borough Attorney CougWin said this isn't a brand new ordinance. Mayor Sica asked the Municipal Clerk if it was published in the newspaper? Municipal Clerk Barney said yes. Mayor Sica said they have no choice. If this was published in the paper they have to open the meeting to the public and have a public hearing and let the public speak on this ordinance. At that time, if they wish to table it and continue with the new ordinance then they can do it. He said they have no choice. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Feingold and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the fun Council present, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be open: ROBERT A HEDESH, ESQ. , 152 Edgar Street (former Borough Attorney) asked Councilmember Failace about the conversation they had last year right before election, when he told Mr. Failace, realistically, he is the only guy that loses in the election because he loses his job. He said he didn't know Stan or John personally, but thought they were nice guys that wouldn't hurt people. He was a little suspicious when they brought Mr. Stowell in. He was a little suspicious because Mr. Stowen was Mr. McGreevey's hit man on the P.B.A President over in Woodbridge. They brought him in and he does have some experience and maybe (inaudible). He said we know that's not true. He was going 10 tell them why it wasn't true. The best way to evaluate the situation is to look at Mr. Stowell's bill. You bring a consultant in for two reasons. One, you really want to know what the problem is and you want an expert to tell you what the problem is. 10 ~;.,~------- SEPTillliER 4, 1997 Mr. Hedesh continued. Two, you bring a consultant in to do your dirty work because you can blame him. You can say you're only doing what the consultant told you. Companies do that all the time. Look at Mr. Stowell's bill. That is the best way to determine what he did. The first tlúng that made him suspicious was when he looked at the bill and it states that Mr. Stowell spoke to the Chief of Police for six minutes. He didn't come in to see the Chief, but spoke to him on the telephone for six minutes. The next time and the only administrative person he talks to, is the most vindictive, childish person that has the biggest ax to grind in the Police Department, the three time indicted Deputy Chief. Mr. Stowell spends two hours and forty minutes with Dennis Nagy. How does anybody who has an ax to grind with the P.B.A., anybody who has sworn he will get at individual policemen, it's Dennis Nagy....... He said he wished Mr. Nagy was here because he doesn't like to say things when the person isn't present. He said then the ordinance is produced and Mr. Stowell states to the newspaper that it will save money. Mr. Stowell wouldn't and couldn't know that because there was not one minute spent with the Tax Collector, the Treasurer or reviewing the budget. Public Hearing Con't. Ordinance #97-26 Mr. Hedesh said Mr. Stowell is taking the example if you go from one shift to another shift you are going to save money. He's using phrases like millions of dollars or millions of hours in dollars. He couldn't know that. He couldn't know what an hour was worth unless he got it rrom Dennis Nagy. We all know how reliable that information is. When he looks through this bill, he knows this is not a legitimate effort to do something. Again, what was he supposed to do? Mr. Stowell came in here to do something with the four and four hours. That is all this is about because the next thing he does is he researches this He rese'arched the entire matter. He starts work here around June 10th and meets with Dennis Nagy on July 7th and on July 9th he is already research schedule negotiability, scope of negotiations, determination procedure (inaudible). That's what he researched. That's what the bill said. He is very specific. We know what he is here for. He's here to (inaudible) on the four and four work schedule. As much as he disagrees with Councilmember DuPont on this one, it would be stupid if Dennis Nagy's name was in the same sentence as Police Director. Mr. Hedesh said his problem was how they wrote an ordinance. He asked how do they determine an ordinance that is illegal, improper and not good for the department when the only person Mr. Stowell spoke to was the three time indicted Deputy Chief. If they really wanted to save money they should fire Mr. Nagy. They wouldn't need Mr. Stowell. Everybody in the department would (inaudible). 11 Mr. Hedesh asked the Council to be legitimate with this If that's the Council's goal, stand up in rront of everybody and say that's what you did and that's what you are here for. He told them not to hide behind Stowell. Mr. Stowell will go somewhere else. He will be a hit man for some one else down the line He is a consultant. He has heard of him. He has seen what Mr. Stowell did in Woodbridge. He know he has been in Edison. If they really want to go with that issue, be up front and say it, but don't let Dennis Nagy be their source of information. Councilmember DuPont said he knew Mr. Hedesh was intelligent and an attorney, but he never asked who the Chief put in charge to be the contact for Mr. Stowell to gather information. >·ii':.<f;J\'/,ii(:t~: ',~; SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Public Hearing Can't. Ordinance #97-26 "~ Mr. Hedesh said he hopes the guy wasn't Dennis Nagy. If It was, then Mr. Stowell is not worth his salt as a consultant because at that point in time, Mr. Stowell should have said ifMr. Nagy was his only contact what can he learn or do. There's another Deputy Chief, there are captains, lieutenants, etc. If in fact that is true, that the Chief put the Deputy Chief as the contact, then Mr Stowell did not do his job. ' ALAN ENGEL, P.B.A. President, Edison Township. He read about the meting in the paper today and that is why he is here. The only officer he knows as an acquaintance is Mickey Materazzo. He has lived through the wrath of Mr. Stowell and he saw the money that was spent and what the results were at the end. He told the Council to call Edison and speak to the Deputy Chief. A lot of things Mr. Stowell implemented are no longer there. There was a ton of money spent and hundreds of thousands of dollars by the time it ended. The Public Safety Director dragged down a ton of money also. He said he didn't know any of the people here. Obviously there are two parties and he doesn't know who is with who, but to all the people who represent the people of this town they are in for a hard hit financially and a lot of legal fees after the fact Mr. Stowell comes in and says it's going to cost this much, put a cap on it, but what happens when the law suits start? When the Public Safety Director and the Chief start suing each other and everybody else is in the middle. He said to trust him when he tells them it has happened in all the towns Mr. Stowell has been in. He has a track history. He said now he will be on his hit list. Those are the facts, whether they like to hear it or not. He said to mark his words and if they go through with this and put all their faith in Mr Stowell they will find out two or three years from now. All the taxpayers of this borough will pay for it. GARY STOWELL, ESQ. said with the permission of Council, it seems to him a lot of this questions are a result of a misunderstanding and he may be able to answer a lot of them It's up to the Council. Councilmember Feingold said he didn't think it was appropriate for their attorney to comment at a public portion. The Council should be privy to what response he will give. It should be in writing. He had spoken to the Borough Attorney about this before. . J Borough Attorney CougWin said there are two options. He asked if he wanted advice with regard to some legal or privileged conversation or they could have an executive session. Mr. Stowell has been appointed as Special Counsel. There are questions with regard to the ordinance, he thinks Mr. Stowell is eminently qualified, most probably the most qualified person here to respond to those questions. Mayor Sica said it was up to Mr. Stowell if he wanted to answer questions. At this point in time, he will be considered part of the public because this is the public portion. Mr. Stowell said he would not go beyond the work session or any privileged conversation that they had There are a number of things that are being misunderstood here. First of all, so he is not misunderstood, he is a little bit like the Mayor in some respects, ifhe is in a room with a thousand people and 999 are yelling the wrong thing, (inaudible) he doesn't agree with. Mr. Engel can be rest assured he will not be on any hit list he would be a part of unless he was doing an intentional wrong for personal gain without reviewing what he represents each client for he makes no apologies 12 ,'M SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Mr. Stowell said in these other towns where he has gone after police officers (inaudible) on the midnight shift, insult superior <;>fficers, there are such things as bad cops out there. We as a society have to hold law enforcement accountable for their actions. We take a dangerous step rrom democracy towards fascism. He has said it in writing and he will say it again (inaudible) just like plungers used in N ew York, precincts in Philadelphia gone bad and there have been indications rrom additional.... Public Hearing Con' t. Ordinance #97-26 At this point, the audience was very boisterous. Mr. Stowell asked ifhe could be more specific and go to some questions. Mayor Sica said that is what he thinks he should do. .3 Mr. Stowell said this ordinance does not and was never intended to create the position of a full time Police Director of a Director of Public Safety. They are two separate different type of animals and functions This ordinance carried, and there are a number of problems in the current ordinance and rules and regulations that do not satisfY law, not the least of which is, to make references and duties for the Chief of Police and Police Lieutenant, as well a Police Director, which they will find in the old ordinance as subsection 42: 11 without ever creating the position. There are two considerations in creating a police ordinance. Various components of the ordinance are discretionary, in which case he is guided by his client's advice, what they want. There are those sections of the ordinance that are mandated by statute and or common law in the State of New Jersey. If the Council told him they wanted to change one of those sections, he would have to advise them that he can't be part of it. It is statutory. Required by law. He is guided by the discretion of his client in those areas that are discretionary. If they look at the police ordinance it does not, and he said it at the work session it is not privileged, that not only does it not create a police director. If they never mentioned the term Public Safety or Police Director, this Borough Council (inaudible) any time they wanted to. If they ever change their minds and decide they want a full time Police Director or a full time Director of Public Safety, they will have to create an ordinance establishing what his duties are and they will have to conform to the (inaudible) New Jersey Practice Session. The reason the term Police Director is here is because it was in the old ordinance. It does certain limited duties in the Chairman of the Police Committee. That's why it's there. It isn't his invention or his creation. There is nothing in this ordinance that addresses any of the other problems he has been assigned to look into. This is an organizational infrastructure document. It gives this Council the power it needs and it satisfies, since 1981 there is a statute passed that they have an affirmative duty to act and do precisely what they have assigned him to do. He said they could sit here and debate all day long, but the discretionary component is his debate and he will be glad to answer any questions about the ordinance itself, but this does not create the position of Director of Public Safety or does it address the other (inaudible) issues sitting on the table, but they will have to take a look at. There are many different ways of addressing them. SEPTÐIJ:\ER i., 1997 Public HeGring Con't. Ordinance #97-26 '·"'""··r. Mr. Stowell said as far as being characterized, this is his second night at a public meeting, third night with the Council, he has not interrupted anybody, but it becomes clear to him, while he has not taken offense, a lot of the shots taken at him and the Council because they don't have an understanding of what the law is and where's their part in this ordinance. Consequently, he will be glad to answer any questions with the Council's authority to do so on any specific section of this ordinance. They can look at it. They can take it apart. He thought that was what the session was for, although, he understood that was the problem to do when this had to be introduced. The Mayor quite candidly, as an example, pointed out at least one typographical error. There was another matter, after discussion (inaudible) subsequent change until the solicitor pointed it out to him (inaudible) reintroduce it. He has no problem discussing this ordinance from start to finish. It just doesn't do what every body here is fearful of it doing. All it does do is bring it into statutory and common law compliance. They had the duty to do this since 1981. That's the bottom line. '- GEORGE SIMMS, 128 Edgar Street. To everyone on the Council, he thinks the whole picture they are missing, and he knows everyone ofthem, whether they be a democrat or republican, what ticket did they run on? To serve the taxpayers of Carteret. They didn't say they were going to hire a consultant to see if the floor could be mopped better. They didn't say they were going to hire a consultant because basically, what they are telling him is they are not competent to run this town. Every time we turn around, they are hiring a consultant, so why don't we just eliminate the whole board and put one person in charge and everything that comes up we will hire a consultant for. (inaudible) save the town money when the democrats are arguing against the republicans. The liberals against the conservatives... Why don't they just have one person He asked what is going on here? He said nobody knows how to run Carteret better than Carteret people. He was raised in this town. He gave up a $30.00 an hour job to become a fireman in this town because he loves this town. He is tired of people from Woodbridge, that they have tried to run for Council. Are they telling him there are no democrats in this town that were born and raised that could run. Councilmember Failace asked what that had to do with it. Mr Simms said he is just (inaudible) the whole picture. He said they went to the Council to guide them, to be their support. He said he is tired of consultants. Councilmember Failace asked him to name another consultant besides this one? Mr Simms said what about the one for the library. Councilmember Failace said that one would save them about $3,000,000. The audience got rowdy and the Mayor called for order. 1 ' L4 SEPTENBER 4, 1997 JANET SANTORO said she hasn't been to a Council Meeting in a long time. The thing they are all losing sight of including the people in the audience is everybody has a criticism nobody has a solution. They can sit here and find democrats, republicans, etc. The problem is Carteret is far from perfect. Find a solution. Get together and move forward. Stop picking and pointing and pulling everything apart. That is no way for any of them to survive. She wants to live and she wants her children to be raised here. Put everything aside and start talking like respectable human beings. Stop yelling and picking at each other. Stop pointing fingers. These problems weren't created overnight and they are not going to go away overnight. Come to a reasonable solution. Public Hearing Can't. Ordinance #97-26 JOHN SUDIA, 40 Cypress St, said he was a fifty year resident of Carteret and a former public official, honorary member of the P.B.A. and President of the F.O.P. Speaking on the ordinance he feels in reviewing some of the municipal ordinances in the past, we have covered about every base. We have a Police Committee, the Mayor and Council are the deciding factor as to who gets appointed and who is not appointed. How many cops we have. How many officers and how many top brass. This is all done in the past. We had a Police Director in the past. One who spent a lot of time in the corner tavern, the other one spent a lot of time at the Holiday Inn and we paid them for it. He personally doesn't believe that they need any such thing as a Director of Public Safety or a Police Director. He had the opportunity today to call (inaudible) Township and asked if they had a Police Director. They said no, they had a Director of Public Safety. He asked who ran their police department. They said nobody else runs their police department but their Chief. These were comments made to him by people in (inaudible) Township. Try to say that nobody else can run our Police Department except our Chief, whoever he may be. Our past Chiefs have run our police department. We have a good police department. He doesn't know of any real bad apples in our police department. He sees some great police officers, they honored one tonight. He is sure if push came to shove every officer in the whole department could be honored. He said to his democratic colleagues and his republican rriends, if they have any thoughts of any sort of police ordinance, go over it again. Let the person they hired do the job he was hired to do. Let him do the job of looking at the problems in the department and making corrections. This ordinance is not the problem and it is certainly not the solution. The solution would be that Mr. Stowell with his knowledge or background speak to every individual officer. Find out where the problems might be. Who has a gripe against whoever may be in the department. Talk about it and see how it can be worked out. Then meet with the Mayor and Council and tell them what he has found out. Councilmember Failace said Mr. Stowell is here, if there are any questions about the part of the ordinance they do not like, and Mr. Stowell can address, that's the best bet. ,5 SEPTEtmER 14, 1997 P1!blic He8ring Can't. Ordiœnce #97-26 ~~J ------ JAMES HOJECKI, Police Lieutenant and with P.B.A. Local 47. He is here basically to reiterate what Dr. Bosco said last week. He found it very discouraging that the Council went into Closed Session, came back and didn't do much to change the wording of the hours that are already in effect as regarding to shifts. I-Ie is disappointed that they had the opportunity If they want to ask Mr. Stowell to explain it, that's fine, but he has found that in his 23 years of working here it was a lot of easier to address the problem to Council, point it out properly, not get in an uproar and Council would step back, take the Borough Attorney and amend the ordinance to reflect the contractual agreement that has been employed by the Police Department since July 1, 1983 The ordinance that is rewritten in here adds the Fair Standards Act, unfortunately, it gives somebody the opportunity to illegally implement a new shift at a later date, rather than just following what has been decided in PERC, what's been (inaudible) in Superior Court, what's been scoped on the UL T's and what has been addressed in District Court We would much rather avoid it by taking the opportunity to step back. As Mr. Stowell addressed one portion he referred to was the discretionary input into the ordinances, step back, revise the ordinance that was written in 1981 to reflect the conditions that are arbitrarily negotiated as set under the standards of the New Jersey Public Employment Employer Relations Panel. He urged them to do this. Prior to getting to any other reading, Council was sent letters from the PB.A attorney and Dr. Bosco. He assumed they all received their copies. Please take this time to step back and think about it. If they want to address that portion, that's fine. Mr. Stowell said there has been reference to the Fair Labor Standard Act and the work schedule. As this Mayor and Council knows, this is one of the areas that was carried over. The previous ordinance carried the requirement, and very much as the process has been suggested by the previous gentleman, his job is to collect.. The first thing he has to do is look at the organizational infrastructure before he can look at 'the other issues, whether it be the work schedule..Everything that has been raised here has little or nothing to do with this ordinance. The work schedule mayor may not be a problem. There may or may not be a way of addressing it. The particular reference to the ordinance for the eight hour day and the forty hour week is in their existing ordinance It is carried over rrom it. The only amendment, and this is one that (inaudible) felt was a substitute change is that since thar older one was passed there are new requirements to give management additional flexibility under the Fair Labor Standard Act. They still are going to (inaudible) the ordinance to an eight hour day, forty hour week, but it gives you certain (inaudible) that it gives you just a little bit of flexibility otherwise you may be locked into an eight hour day, forty hour week, effects shifting which means reductions in rank. It is so limiting it leaves you totally no room to move. They are either going to have a worse (inaudible) they can't live with. They will be locked into one that may not be fair to them. What they did, because he had the affirmative duty to carry the old work schedules rrom the old ordinance exisiting in the current ordinance. After speaking to Council, he created this flexibility in here so that whatever they ultimately decide, the bottom line is they are the (inaudible) authority and the boss is the Mayor and Council. That's the only change put In this ordinance. The seven (inaudible) section was put in to provide that flexibility otherwise you are in between a rock and a hard place. One that you can't live with and one they can't live with. That's why it's in there - 16 , SEPTÐ1BER 4, 1997 Mayor Sica said he was reading Chapter 42 and no where in Chapter 42 is there a proviso to put a Police Director in or is there a position established of Police Director. He asked Mr. Stowell about this. Public Hearing Ordinance #97-26 Can't. Mr. Stowell said that's part of the problem. He said they would find in their old ordinance that also applies to the Chief of Police. They never created that position by ordinance and Police Lieutenant So, when he went through here and he found positions where duties were assigned, but th~ position was never created, he has an affirmative dµty to create that position. Right now, their Police Director is the same individual that is referred to in 42-11, that is the only duties and powers that he has and it does not create a Director of Public Safety or a Police Director that can go beyond what Pane's books says. Even the Appropriate Authority in existence is the entire Police Committee and they are responsible for policy. The Chief of Police is, has been and will continue to be, according to his mandate, the man is responsible for the day to day operation. (inaudible) that NJ.S. 48: 14-118 has created since 1981 that the Chief of Police is responsible for day to day operations. This in no way takes that away from him. In fact, it helps him because he really wasn't in a viable position, it wasn't created before. The same thing he heard of the Police Director So those are the three positions named in their old ordinance given the duties, but not the positions haven't been created. Mayor Sica said this book was codified by a law firm and at one time there was an office of Police Director and that was abolished in the recodification or when they did away with the Police Director. That was abolished. He said all Mr. Stowell is picking up here on the Police Director is that we had a Police Director, but in absence of a Police Director, there is no Police Director. By putting a new ordinance in and saying we could have a Police Director, we are adding it to this ordinance. Mr. Stowell said that is not exactly true. There are other things that control law including ex-practice and precedence. According to that logic, you never create the position of Chief Police or Police Lieutenant and even though you are going to assign duties and earning their pay and paying their salary because the position was never created you should just abolish it. That isn't how it works. You have to validate what they have been doing. Mayor Sica said every year we create a salary ordinance when some one gets a raise. In it the Lieutenant will get so much money, that creates the position of a Lieutenant. And it says in here so many lieutenants, so many chiefs, so many deputy chiefs. No where does it say anything about a Police Director. He thinks Mr. Stowell picked up a statement by the codification company that was hired to recodify this book by not referring to the position of the Police Director and just leaving the word in there. There is nothing in here creating a position of Police Director. In Mr. Stowell's ordinance there is a creation of a Police Director. That we can make a Police Director and set his duties by ordinance. .7 ':'·~"'·'~·1"""""'\'''''''-...._._ SEPTE}ffiER 4,1998 PUBLIC HEARING Ordimmce #97-26 Con't. '");~"~¡~ Mr. Stowell said if they were going to hiring a full time professional Police Director to be in charge of the Police Department, number one, as long as you had a Chief of Police here, his duties are limited. He would be the policy maker on behalf of the Police Committee. The only thing that the Police Director position, that everybody seems to be concerned about, besides ( inaudible) rrom the old ordinance, he is the signator for the Appropriate Authority. The three man committee implements the policy and the Police Director is the signator for it and it carries over the duties that is assigned to him (inaudible) Mayor Sica asked what if he wanted some guy to do that for $80,000 a year? Mr. Stowell said there is no salary. He asked how come everybody doesn't understand? This does not create a full time Police Director. There is no salary. This is part of the function of the Police Committee and the Chairman of the Police Committee. By the old ordinance and the new ordinance (inaudible) his duties. If he is going to perform those duties, the position is already created and established. To some extent this goes into the discretionary area. The state statute does require, since 1981, that each position be especially created and established by ordinance. That's why we have to create the position of Chief of Police. It can't be done by the salary ordinance. You can't even pay him a salary. There's an argument that can be made that the Chiefs salary that has been paid to him during the time that that position's duties were assigned to him, but not created by the ordinance, is illegal. They can ratify that easily by passing this ordinance. The only thing they are doing is ratifying their past practice, what they have been doing. That's all that this does. It does not create a head of the police department. The Chief of Police is responsible for the day to day operations. He answers, according to his understanding of this Council, he answers now to the Police Committee and through them to the Mayor and Council. Mayor Sica said the existing Chief of Police that they have was appointed to the position by a previous Council. It was an appointment. Whether it says it in this book or not, it is a legitimate position. Whether it is reduced to writing is irrelevant. Just like the reference two or three times in 41, it says the Police Director can, at his discretion and with the advice of the Council hire patrolman and they can stay on for one year and after one year they can get out. We don't have a Police Director. That was just inadvertently left in there. It was just an error. He said he is sure if they look through the book they will find numerous things in every department where the codification lawyers didn't pick it up. Somewhat like the error he found in Mr. Stowell's, briefly reading it. That's always possible. When the Chief of Police was appointed, he was appointed by a Mayor and Council to that position by ordinance. Mr. Stowell said that is the problem. He was not appointed by ordinance. That is a practice the Mayor described prior to 1981. This is how it was done, but the problem with it is since 1981 when the state statute was invented there is an affirmative duty, our Appellate Division has spoken, and says that in the absence of this Council acting to bring this ordinance in compliance with the current state statute and the state law, in the absence of that, any attempt to manage the police department is annullable. Whether it be discipline What has been described would be the Police Chiefs defense if somebody (inaudible) abolished that position because it had been previously created. They are not going to win that battle. He is trying to avoid that battle by bringing the position into creation. ~ if -'_J----' "'-~--.._.. SEPTlJ'lliER 4, 1997 Mayor Sica said what we are doing here is creating a battle we don't' have. PUBLIC BEAnING Ordimmc.e #97-26 Can't. Mr. Stowell said there is nothing in this ordinance that draws any battle lines or creates any battles... .... Mayor Sica said there are a lot of things that create battle lines only because of the absence of Mr. Stowell getting the right information and sitting down as a group and working out whatever our·differences are. Mr. Stowell said that is going to be the next step. (inaudible) we talk about organizational inrrastructure which is the ordinance and rules and regulations and that gives you the power to do something if in fact there is a problem. As they have discussed. There are a variety of ways. He said that he has not seen anything that would lead him to believe, at this point in time, that there is any police officer in this police department that is anything other than professional. He hasn't had that problem. He was assigned the contact in the police department by the Chief of Police. The only assignment that individual has is to provide him with the statistical data and he is having a little bit of difficulty getting that. This is an individual that is only providing him with how many beings are counted, how many accident investigations, how many calls..... This is not an individual that he has either asked for or would expect to receive information. In fact, one individual stood up and said, and he agrees with him and it is in the proposal, is for him to sit down and meet with every officer and find out what is broken, if anything, if it is they will fix it. Find out what is right, we enforce it. That is part of the assessment process, but you can't even begin that process until you address the organizational infrastructure, the required ordinance and the required rules and regulations and that is what they attempting to do. One final point, he does apologize to the Mayor because he has tried on two separate occasions to make contact with him, he wouldn't have done it. The Mayor would have been the first person he spoke to and he attempted to do that. He also had a mandate to get this moving apçl get this done. He did not expect, with what he knew this ordinance to ~ontain, what it does and what it represents, he didn't expect the ordinance to be the (inaudible) point. Ifthey identify problems, they can agree or disagree, whether it be work schedule or standing levels or other ineftìciencies that he is looking at, then they have to sit down and talk about these problems. There are a variety of way of addressing them. He hasn't even got a handle on it yet, not alone to attempt to offer a solution or recommendation. He has an idea where these problems are and he has submitted a preliminary report on them. That is basically where they are coming rrom and he looks forward to continue to be a one ( inaudible) project. There is no doubt that this ordinance is only specifically limited to bring this borough into compliance with that is which is required by statute and common law of this state, with the possible exception of some discretionary areas which have been pointed out to him from day one. .9 Mayor Sica said in Mr. Stowell's defense he is a very busy person, a lot of people tIy and get a hold of him and granted it is hard, but he is the Mayor here and he will avail himself to Mr. Stowell at any time and will answer any question as fair and honest as he can whether it be pro or con he will tell it the way it is. That's the way he sat here for twenty years. SEPTlllBER 4, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Can't. ...,.-" Mr. Stowell said in addition to the two attempts of the Chief to set up a meeting between them, there have been at least one or two attempts where he has had to call the Mayor. He knows how to reach him now and is looking forward to working with him. He asked if there were any other questions? Councilmember Bialowarczuk asked Mr. Stowell when was she going to get a phone ca\1? She asked for a report and she still doesn't have that here. Mr. Stowell said he believed he just handed it ... Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she told him what she wanted and as a client she should have had it within a week and she doesn't have it. Mr. Stowell said there are other members of the Council who have called him and he has gotten back to them as quickly as he could. He told her if she looked at the resolution, he was appointed at a manager consultant to the appropriate authority and that is who he has been reporting to, other than the Mayor (inaudible) them before he met her. If there is anybody on this Council that he can answer any question for she will be given every courtesy and he will bend over backwards.... Councilmember Bialowarczuk said no courtesy. She asked him a week ago for a report on the entire bill. She doesn't have it. It's been a week. She is sure if anyone of the other gentlemen up here asked him for that they would have it. She is just that little woman who should shut up and sit in the corner. She told him she wanted that report and she is entitled to it. PATRICK CRILLEY Crilley asked the Borough Attorney if this ordinance gives the Council the right to unilaterally change the work schedule without going to another public ordinance or to appoint this Public Safety Director without going to another public ordinance. Borough Attorney CougWin said there are two questions. The question is can the Borough Council unilaterally change the contract. Of course it can't. Mr. Crilley said he wasn't talking about the contracts When they change job descriptions in the town, doesn't it have to go on a public ordinance? Mayor Sica said yes. Borough Attorney Coughlin said as he understood it, whether they could appoint someone to fill that position without taking subsequent action. He thinks they spoke oftwo options. One to appoint someone and one to set a salary if it didn't exist. His understanding is if it currently doesn't exist that is a salary ordinance. Mr. Crilley said that's what they were currently doing now. Borough Attorney Coughlin said yes. It has to go through the typical ordinance process. 2C Mayor Sica told Borough Attorney Coughlin he didn't answer the first question. -,-'-""~"~-,. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Borough Attorney Coughlin said he thought he did. PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Can't. Mayor Sica said that Borough Attorney Coughlin said that they can't unilaterally change a contract That's not what the gentleman asked him. He asked does this ordinance allow them to change the work schedule. Borough Attorney Coughlin asked Mr. Crilley if that was his question. Mr. Crilley said his question was are we putting the cart in rront of the horse by getting all upset about what's potentially damaging to the police officers about the problem (inaudible) he is sure is their main concern. Are we getting ahead of ourselves here or is this another future ordinance that they will have to address later on and go through this again or not. We can put this to rest as an ordinance if it creates the power to do that or not. Borough Attorney Coughlin said this ordinance, and his understanding Mr. Stowell drafted it at their request, but sends out the hours of work to the borough. His understanding that the(inaudible) recodification of the existing situation. However, on a practical matter, in terms of the contract being adhered to, which establishes a four anct four schedule... Mayor Sica said they are talking about two different animals here. He said he doesn't want to get into negotiations. Borough Attorney CougWin said he is not trying to get into negotiations. Mayor Sica said but he is talking about a negotiated contract and he is talking about a work schedule that we under law, have the right to implement, if we so wish. Borough Attorney Coughlin said he thinks that's the question Mr. Crilley is asking. Mayor Sica said the question he is asking is does the ordinance allow them to go to 5 and 2. Five 8 hour days. Borough Attorney Coughlin said no it doesn't. Mayor Sica asked Mr. Crilley if that was what he asked? Mr. Crilley said without going to another public ordinance. Mayor Sica said the ordinance is going to be established. Mr. Stowell said they couldn't pass another ordinance to do that without going to a different (inaudible). Whether it be PERC or the courts, this does not change the work schedule. That is the bottom line. 21 SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Can't. -.I' ,-:I.....,.... DAVID LaPOINT,Lieutenant, Carteret Police Department. It seems this whole ordinance, according to what Mr. Stowell says, is to create a position for lieutenants and the Chief and update it rrom 1981. In 1983 they went in there, and according to Mr. Stowell, the ordinance should have been changed in 1983 to make it 4 & 4. They never did. So he is going back to when that was done in 1981. Why don't they just pass a very simple ordinance just creating the position of Chief of Police and creating the position of Lieutenant and give them the 4 & 4 that they have had for 14 years. That fell in the crack along with all these other little things they want in there or there is another reason why they want to do this. An unidentified man shouted "and you can save another $25,000. JOE GADOMSKI, 25 Oak Street, said it's $25,000 now. How much is it going to cost to finish what's started? Why waste the money. JOHN SUDIA said he had a copy of Ordinance #75-22 An Ordinance to Supplement and Amend Chapter 4 and Revise General Ordinances of the Borough ofCarteret, Middlesex County adopted September 15, 1970 which pertains to the establishment and composition of the Police Department of the Borough ofCarteret. He read part of the Ordinance. "Be it and it is hereby ordained by the Mayor and Council of the Borough of Carteret, Middlesex County, that Section 1.1 Chapter 4 of the Revised General Ordinances be amended to read as follows: 4-1.1 Personnel - The Police Department of the Borough of Carteret is hereby established and shall consist of a Chief of Police, two(2) Captains, six(6) Lieutenants, ten(10) Sergeants and such other number of patrolmen and discretionary officers, police maintenance, traffic and school (inaudible) officers, and employees as the Mayor and Council may rrom time to time appoint and approve pursuant to law. This ordinance shall take effect immediately." It was signed on September 16, 1975 by the then Mayor John Fenick, attested by Anne Szelag, Borough Clerk. There have been some amendments since that time to increase the number of detectives and sergeants, etc. etc. He told them they have a Police Chief properly appointed. Mayor Sica said just a couple of weeks ago it was brought to their attention that when the company did the codification to codify this book, they inadvertently left out a point on the liquor authority that bars couldn't open until 12:00 P.M. on Sunday, so they were opening at 6:00 A.M. There was an ordinance, but it wasn't put in this book. That doesn't mean that they can open up at 6:00 A.M. just because it's not in this book. There are numerous ordinances that are not in this book, just like there are numerous things that should have been taken out, like the Police Director. There is no position for a Police Director any more. This is a (inaudible), it's not the hardened cast law. The one Mr Sudia has is the one that goes. The absence of it being in this book doesn't mean there are no lieutenants. The absence of a Chief of Police not being in this book means there wasn't an ordinance after that one. Mr. Sudia said whoever was reviewing these items (inaudible) ROBERT SPOLIZINO, PBA President asked the Council if it was their intention, with this new ordinance to put the police on a five&two schedule and take away the four & four? Is this what they are getting at? 2; SEPTillliER 4, 1997 Councilmember DuPont said no PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Con't. JEAN DATA, 6 Coolidge Avenue, she said she has been hearing things tor two weeks and she thinks this is what she is hearing, but if she is wrong, please tell her. She is hearing that the new ordinance is very simple. It has three main characters. 1. Mr. Stowell i~ going to give us an ordinance that will put Carteret up to par to state statute, that we are supposed to have and do not have at this moment. 2. Chief of Police is going to be helped greatly because evidently he is not up to snuff, not appointed the right way. 3. The Director that you might put in at some other time because it is not the time right now, we will probably have a volunteer director. Is that what's going to happen? Then when the time comes we will pay $80,000 to $100,000 for a director. She was wondering what is the benefit to the taxpayers of Carteret for a Director for $80,000 to $100,000? She asked wouldn't their administration be top heavy? All the big corporations are trying to eliminate being top heavy. We have a Chief of Police We have two Deputy Chiefs. With their benefits they are probably around $250,000 then we will have to come up with another $100,000 for a Director. What benefit would Carteret have? COLlncilmember Failace said he thinks Mr. Stowell will address that. Of the $80,00 to $100,000 is Ms. Dato's number or some one else It is not Mr. Stowell's. The audience yelled they read it in the newspaper. Councilmember Failace told them not to believe everything they read in the paper. r,..1r. Stowell said when you have two statutes, ordinances are local legislation, local statutes and they conflict with each other, the newest one is the one that controls. The gentleman is wrong with his assessment that the prior ordinance controls the position of Chief of Police. If they read 42-1 which preempts it, it says the Police Department of the Borough of Carteret is hereby established and shall consist of three (3) Captains, thereby increasing the Captains in the Borough of Carteret to three in numbers and shall consist of twelve (12) Sergeants. That's the positions created by their latest ordinances. It left out Lieutenants. It left out Chief This is the one that (inaudible) control. Mayor Sica asked Mr. Stowell to read on because at the bottom of the ordinance are notes. Mr. Stowell said he understood the notes and understood some one had written them. 3 Mayor Sica said that shouldn't discount the Police Department. There were two Captains and they established a third Captain. He felt that it was not economically feasible at that time to have a third Captain and he vetoed it. It had nothing to do with establishing a Police Department. Mr. Stowell told the Mayor he could talk all day long about the codification needs to be (inaudible). He said that this is the latest legislation they have and they are limited by state statute by that which is in this ordinance. SEPTElIBER 4, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Can't. ,.,." Mayor Sica said he doubted that. (inaudible) you go in rront of a Judge and you say "Judge, this ordinance in 1970 established the Chief of Police and prior to that the city had a Chief of Police since 1909 and there has always been a Chief of Police and some where, inadvertently, it didn't get put in here" He asked Mr. Stowell ifhe knew what the Judge would say? Mr. Stowell said "Carteret make your ordinance comply". That's exactly what he would say Mayor Sica said the Judge would uphold the position of Chief of Police, would he not? He would probably say correct the book, but he would uphold the position of Chief of Police, would he not? Mr. Stowell said in this instance, he probably would, but he would say to correct the book. Mayor Sica said that is just what he said. Mr. Stowell said one (inaudible) answer, this lady cares about why $80,000 or $90,000. Not only does he not know where that number comes from, but he will be very clear. This gentleman over here says this is all premature. At some point in time if this Borough Council decides to create a Public Safety Director or a full-time Police Director, they can do it whenever they want to. It would be appropriate because they let their positions be known. This ordinance does not do that. He is telling them that it cannot even change the work schedule without presenting the issue at a different forum. He doesn't know how much clearer he can be than that. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said they were setting the stage. AN UNIDENnFIED WOMAN asked what the average salary for a Police Director was? Mr. Stowell was inaudible. He then said he thinks it was about $35,000. DENNIS McFADDEN said he didn't believe the question had been answered He wanted to know if this ordinance gives the Mayor and Council the authority to change their shifts tomorrow? Mr Stowell said no. Mr. McFadden said if they decided to implement 5 & 2, would they go to a 5 & 2 without it going anywhere? Do they have the right to say they aren't going to work that? Mr. Stowell said the short answer to the question is no. There are two (inaudible) to understand. As the high elected authority they can make those decisions anytime. This doesn't set a stage for anything. The stage is already there because that's a function of their office. If they were going to change the work shift, just from his understanding of their contract, the first thing they would have to do in order to change it is to have some other forum, a court, PERC, somebody say that the 4 & 4 is a management prerogative (inaudible) for whatever reason, it would have to be reversed in a different forum. · .~Þ-'~;"'} SEPTÐ'IBER iI, 1997 Mr. Stowell said in his opinion, and he stated this at the work session, no lawyer in his right mind is going to tell you to unilaterally disregard a contract. It doesn't make sense. After they get a favorable ruling, and there is no guarantee that they will, then they have to decide what is the proper work schedule and then they have to implement a policy. There is no way, in his judgement, that this ordinance can change the work schedule. PUBLIC DISCUSSION Ordinance #97-26 Con't. Mr. McFadden was inaudible Mr. Stowell said no. The only thing it does do is if they get some independent order rrom PERC or somebody to revert the current work schedule, it gives them the authority to come up with an alternative. That's something that has to be discussed. ROBERT HEDESH, Esq. said that was not true. (inaudible) 4&4 is invalid. It does not say (inaudible) alternative. If you put it in the ordinance that the management can set the work schedule, then you litigate that to determine the 4 & 4, then the Council passes an ordinance that sets the work schedule. What Mr. Stowell is doing is putting a work schedule in that he has now admitted is not legal or nobody has determined legal, until which time either PERC determines it's not negotiable and or a court determines it is improper. He said Mr. Stowell is (inaudible) in counsel fees into an ordinance by putting a schedule that no one can tell you is legal. Mr. Stowell said that is exact opposite of what is done. That work schedule, the 5 & 2 was carried over from the old ordinance. Mr. Hedesh asked Mr. Stowell if he ever (inaudible) if the codification he was relying on was accepted by the Clerk? He asked if he ever saw an ordinance accepting the codification as opposed to the ordinances that are on file in Ms. Barney's office? Mr. Stowell said he did that before those ordinances he was working on. Mr. Hedesh asked him if he found a resolution that says the Borough accepts this codification? Mr. Stowell said only the codification he has worked with. Mr. Hedesh is talking about a (inaudible) no. Mr. Hedesh said the reason Mr. Stowell hadn't done it is because it is not there and the ordinance books in Ms. Barney's office are the only ones that are valid because Mr. Abazia never reviewed it. It was never done with the old book and this one was never done two years ago. Mr. Stowell was inaudible. 5 Mr. Hedesh stated that Mr. Stowell relied on the ordinances. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Can't. ..,' .. ''':~.:-:'f. ..~~., <...... RICHARD LONG (inaudible) relying on a piece ofinformatión when he sat on the Council along with Mr. Hedesh and what Mr. Hedesh says is so. What he doesn't understand is Mr. Stowell was brought in as an expert, but he is dealing with something relative to the job of the Borough Attorney. Isn't that so? Shouldn't the Borough Attorney being doing basically what Mr. Stowell has done and what he will subsequently charge the borough for? Mr. Stowell said the bottom line was there are areas of law that are more highly (inaudible). You don't go to a general practitioner for heart surgery. This is an area oflaw that he spent 30 years on. Mr. Long said he should have studied municipal court decisions. That job should have been given by this Council to the Borough Attorney. Mayor Sica said they would have to stop screaming across the room at one another. This was getting totally out of hand. If anybody wants to make a statement to the Chair, they should do so. DENNIS McFADDEN asked if the department ever worked a 5 & 2? Mayor Sica said before he was the Mayor, yes. Mr. McFadden asked about a 5 & 2. Mayor Sica said 7 & 1. Mr. McFadden said 7 & 3 . He asked why should they (inaudible) a schedule that has never been worked. Mayor Sica said he had specific reasoning to go on 10 hour shifts. He will try to explain to Mr. Stowell why he felt that shift benefited the city of Carteret. He agreed with Mr. Stowell that they would sit down and discuss it further. He has done some economics on it where it doesn't show the kind of numbers that were indicated by the news media. In his honest opinion the 4 & 4 shift did more work to rid this city of some very bad element than anything he could have done with his fists if necessary. It's cleaned up bad bars, brought crime way down. It's put police personnel on the streets when he felt it was important to have police personnel on the streets at those certain prime crime time hours. He said they have to look into it and Mr. Stowell can show him that his determination at that time was erroneous and we can save money and still have the same kind of coverage that there is today, he might look at a change. As long as the work product, that he instituted by going on four ten hour shifts was beneficial to the city of Carteret, over his dead body will it be changed. AN UNIDENnFIED MAN said Mr. Stowell earlier spoke about all the problems everywhere else. We don't have those problems in Carteret. We have our fights between the Chief and the P.B.A. and the Mayor, but there has never been any hitting, etc. He asked why (inaudible) around the police department. 26 SEPTillliER 4, 1997 Mayor Sica said like he stated earlier when he opened this hearing, it is good that they air these things out. There are certain philosophies he adopted when he became Mayor and that was to have what he considered the best police department they could possibly have at the best cost effective way. He thinks they have established that. There are problems in the police department. There's always going to be problems in the police department. If he had his way he would get rid of a couple of people real quick. Unfortunately, we can't do that. Again, it is good that they have discussion. He still feels strongly that at the time 4 & 4 was implemented was a necessary work product. It accomplished what he set out for it to accomplish. We've cleaned up all the go-go bars. We don't have any more. That's something no other town can say they did. Even Woodbridge still has them by the train station. We brought crime down. The morale in the department is at an all time high and he's sure by next week it may go off again on some other problem unrelated to this, but that's life. Basically, he thinks they have the best police department in the State of New Jersey. He said he always bet on the philosophy that people just naturally hate cops. He is not one of those people. He will stand up to be counted no matter who likes it or who doesn't. It really doesn't matter to him because this job doesn't mean that much to him. PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance #97-26 Con't. Mayor Sica said before any work schedule is changed or before any ordinance is put in and takes the authority away rrom rank and file in the police department, he will in no way entertain the possibility of a volunteer Police Director or a fake Police Director, whatever it is. Every single person, who has a uniform on and is a cop will always aspire to be a Sergeant, Lieutenant, Captain, Deputy Chief and hopefully some day a Police Chief. When you take one part of that out of there it can do nothing but decay the morale of the department. RUTH DONOVAN asked why are they paying all1his money? How much does Mr. Stowell make? MayCl Sica said Mr. Stowell was hired for a fee not to exceed $25,000. Mr. Stowell's fee at the present time iÐ some where up around $15,000. J'vls. Donovan said he didn't even find anything out yet. Mayor Sica said he didn't know where the end product was going to go and he didn't think Mr. Stowell could tell them where it would go, in cost. Ifin fact we get into some kind ofiegal complication with the P.B.A. or the Chief of Police it could get higher. It could get worse. He doesn't know At the present time he was hired for $25,000. Before he can expect one penny over that $25,000 he will have to com,e to this Council. The way he scrutinized Mr. Stowell's bill the last time and he gave the borough back $720.00. Ifhe comes back and needs additional money it has to be voted on by the Council at a public hearing on an amendment to the resolution. Council member DuPont said it would be done the same way it was the first time. 7 Ms. Donovan said but the public has nothing to say and it is their money. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 .-:-o¡;-t-'¡, PUBLIC DISCUSSION Ordinance #97-26 Can't. Mayor Sica said in all fairness, you elect the Mayor and Council to run the city of Carteret, they can not go to everybody in town and say they are going to spend this money. They have to have some leeway. If in fact Mr. Stowell comes back to this Council and says he needs additional money the public will have the right to speak and say yes or no. This Council will take that advice from the audience and decide whether they want to go any further with dollars. If they decide to go, they have every right to spend the money. If they decide not to go, Mr. Stowell won't have a job. Ms. Donovan asked if they would vote once a year on how they were going to spend that money? Mayor Sica said she can vote once a year and that's election day in November. AN UNIDENTIFIED MAN said he agreed with the Mayor and Council. He said they have had consultants come in over the years. They came in on the sewer. An architectural person came in. They weren't questioned. Consultants do their job. This gentleman was hired to do a job and he is trying to do his job. They don't even give him the courtesy to let him finish his statement. He said the Mayor has been quoted that no one will touch the police department. He has been quoted that he didn't care for policemen or law officers. He said he didn't know how many people they have as officers, patrolman, etc, but here is a guy trying to do his job, whatever it is, he has no idea because this is the first Council Meeting he has attended, and they are all against him. He said that young lady over there said "Well, what will we do, how will we know?" There are public portions at every meeting. Come here and express their opinions Mayor Sica said he will not have this going back and forth. The man said he wanted to say that his sewer bill went down by $50.00. He said between his sewer bill going down and his taxes going up he is ahead $8.00. Mayor Sica asked the man if he knew why his sewer bill went down? The man replied he didn't know why it went up. Mayor Sica told the man the sewer bill went down twice. Three years ago it went down and this year It was established in 1986 and never went up rrom 1986. The reason why the sewer bill was able to be cut is because they continue to improve the sewer system with the existing funds and they have attracted new industry that pay a portion of these sewer bills that we never had before. Ifwe continue to do that, maybe the sewer bill will continue to go down JESSIE BAGALA said if they have so much money to pay these consultants, why don't they hire people to work on the ambulances? There were two catastrophes and it took 40 minutes before an ambulance came. Instead of paying these consultants, hire three paramedics. She said people would be willing to pay more on their taxes for paramedics. We don't need a Police Director. We have a good police force. What did the police do wrong? Why 2: do they want another Police Director? Mayor Sica said he didn't want one. Ms. Bagala asked what did they do wrong? Mayor Sica said he couldn't tell her what they did wrong because he didn't want a Police Director. Ms. Bagala said then let the Council tell her. She said she's a taxpayer and she is entitled to know what they did wrong. She said they had to do something for the Council to want to get a director. Councilmember Failace said no one said they did anything wrong. Ms. Bagala asked then why do they want a Director and pay more money? Councilmember Failace said Mr. Stowell explained that it doesn't hire a director. They don't know the cost of a director. Ms. Bagala said even if it was $10.00 put it towards something that we need. We don't need a director. Councilmember Failace said this has gone way out of hand and actually what they are trying to do is help the police force. They have been told by patrolmen that there have been times when there were only two policemen on the street at night. That's scary for the town. It's twice as scary for the patrolmen. That scares him. He said they already said they were not laying people off They weren't getting rid of anybody. We would like to help them. They got the radios that Mr. Feingold said "Thank God", but he was the head for two years and did nothing for those two years. We got the radios. (inaudible) spend a little more money and make this a better police force and protect the people better and make the police protected themselves. Ms. Bagala said she is not arguing that, but what did they do wrong that they need a Police Director? Councilm~mber Failace said they didn't say they did anything wrong. Ms. Bagala said something had to happen. Councilmember Failace said no. He didn't believe they did anything \vrong. Ms. Bagala asked him what was more important, people in the ambulance or a Police Director? She asked what would he want? He said he would want an ambulance. Ms. Bagala said then get it. :9 SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 PUBLIC DISCUSSION Oròinance #97-26 Con't. SE¥IEMBER 4, 1997 HEARING CLOSED TABLED ORDINANCE #97-27 Amending Bingo & Raffle Section in Code PUBLIC HEARING Councilmember Fazekas Noted Absent HEARING CLOSED 'J.'it There being no further comments or objections to the Ordinance, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Feingold and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and DuPont ORDINANCE #97-26 "CREATION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF A POLICE DEPARTMENT WITHIN THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET" was tabled. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace, Fazekas, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Bialowarczuk abstained. The Clerk stated that Ordinance #97-27 was introduced and passed upon First Reading at a Regular Meeting of the Borough Council of the Borough of Carteret held on August 21, 1997. It was duly published in The Home News Tribune on August 26, 1997 with notice that it will be considered for final passage after Public Hearing to be held on September 4,1997 at approximately 7:30 P.M. The Ordinance was posted on the bulletin board and copies were made available to the general public and according to law, she read the Ordinance by title. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and DuPont and unanimous affirmative vote of the full Council present, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be open: At approximately 9: 15 P.M., Councilmember Jack Fazekas was noted absent. There being no further comments or objections to the Ordinance, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present. 30 Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowslci and Bialowarczuk ORDINANCE #97-27 "AN ORDINANCE TO SUPPLEMENT AND AMEND CHAPTER 85 "BINGO AND RAFFLES", SECTION 85-2 "REGULATIONS" OF THE CODE OF THE BOROUGH OF CARTERET BY ADDING A NEW SUBSECnON E TO BE ENTITLED "LICENSES TO CONDUCT INSTANT RAFFLES" was finally adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. Adopted and Approved: September 4, 1997 Introduced: August 2 L 1997 Advertised as adopted on First Reading with Notice of Public Hearing: August 26, 1997 Hearing Held: September 4, 1997 Approved by: Mayor Peter 1. Sica Advertised as finally adopted: September 9. 1997 The Clerk stated that Ordinance #97-28 was introduced and passed upon First Reading at a Regular Meeting of the Borough Council of the Borough of Carteret held on August 21, 1997. It was duly published in The Home News Tribune on August 26, 1997 with notice that it will be considered for final passage after Public Hearing to be held on September 4, 1997 at approximately 7:30 P.M.. The Ordinance was posted on the bulletin board and copies were made available to the general public and according to law, she read the Ordinance by title. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Feingold and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be open: There being no further comments or objections to the Ordinance, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present. Upon MMS&C, by Council members Gutowski and Bialowarczuk ORDINANCE #97-28 "A1>¡ ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE OPEN PUBLIC SALE AT AUCTION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WHICH IS NOT NEEDED FOR PUBLIC USE" was tÌnally adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Council members Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. SEPTEJ'IBER 4, 1997 OPJ)INANCE #97-27 Amending Bingo & Raffle in Code Book Adopted ORDINAt,CE #97-28 Authorizing Auction S£lle of Real Property PUBLIC HEARING HEARING CLOSED Adopted SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 ~..>ii:;' Meeting Recessed Upon MMS&C, by Council members Gutowski and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, , the meeting was recessed for five (5) minutes at approximately 9:16 P.M.. Heeting Reconvened At approximately 9:25 P.M., the meeting was reconvened Upon individual roll call, the following were noted present: Mayor Peter J. Sica Councilmember Deborah Bialowarczuk " John DuPont " James Failace " William Feingold " Stanley Gutowski Noted absent was Councilmember Jack Fazekas. Also noted present was Borough Attorney Craig 1. CougWin. t1EETING OPENED Public Input On Resolutions A copy of each Resolution was placed upon the table for review prior to the meeting in accordance with the Rules of Council and upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace and unanimous vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, the meeting was opened for public input on all resolutions. MIKE CARNEVALE asked about the money on Resolution #97-276. Is it the same money as they give to the homeowners. Mayor Sica said they will get over three million dollars. A percentage of that we lend to developers and they pay it back over the course of so many years and we then lend it out again. 60% of the money we are going to get is going to homeowners. Mr. Carnevale said a lot of these homeowners are on the list He asked if another builder comes in and wants money does he go to the end of the list? Mayor Sica said explained by example what they would do rrom here on in. They balance it out. Mr. Carnevale said but there are 100 people on the list. Mayor Sica said although they were promised the money, the town would give it to them in increments. It will be distributed on a pro rata basis until they have satisfied everybody. It's important to understand they have an 32 obligation, not only to the homeowner, but to fix blighted areas They are uying to use the money and balance it out for everyone. ""'c.! Councilmember Failace said this is the money, the Cranbury money, and we worked out the deal with the developer where we will get something back for it. Mayor Sica said it has nothing to do with the Readington money. MR. GADOMSKI asked about Resolution #97-280. He wanted to know if that was another $25,000? Mayor Sica said when the original resolution was drawn it was not specific where Mr. Stowell would be doing legal work. For instances on Ordinances. He disagrees with some of this, but it was not specific on what his actual job duties would entail. The Council elected to hold that at last meeting until the time when they had a resolution that was more specific to the job duties that he was doing. It's the same $25,000. JOHN SUDIA asked about Resolution #97-277. Mayor Sica said there's a national award out there. He said he is sure they have heard President Clinton, Governor Whitman and everyone talking about brownfields and what should be done with them. There are specific projects that attack that problem. Carteret, as far as he knows, had Amax, Specialty Copper and it had 165 acre contaminated site. Someone recommended it and we are up for an award. We put in to be recognized as one of the foremost communities to clean up a brownfield site. He thinks they will win it. If they take into consideration that it was a really polluted site that lost 3,000 jobs when it closed down and a considerable amount of rat abies. We successfully have brought in more than 3,000 jobs and the taxes we are getting rrom our brownfield sites now, far exceed what we were getting when U. S. Metals was there. With that criteria we can win award. It opens the door to other contaminated sites and by being a model, it will open the door for additional funding for other projects. We have filled out the data that was necessary and now we are just memorializing by resolution so they see it has been done by the Mayor and Council and perhaps we can get some more money. If we get the award we can go to any funding group and we will probably get it. Upon MMS&C by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the five Councilmembers present, the public portion on resolutions was closed at approximately 9:25 P.M. At approximately 9:25 P.M., Councilmember Bialowarczuk was noted absent. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Public Input on Resolutions Con't. Public Portion Closed Cauncilmember Bialowarczuk Noted Absent SEPTEtIDER 4, 1997 RESOLUTION #97-269 Uingo License Carteret Je,·¡ish Community Center Adopted RESOLUTION #97-270 Raffle Licenses C.B.S. üand Parents and St. Joseph's B.S.A. Adopted RESOLUTION i~97-271 Appointing L. Villalba - Sr. Assessing Aide Adopted Councilmer.lber ßialmJarczuk Noted Present RESOLunON #97-269 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and DuPont RESOLUTION #97-269 "DIRECTING THE ISSUANCE OF BINGO LICENSES TO CARTERET JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Fazekas were noted absent. RESOLunON #97-270 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont RESOLUnON #97-270 "DIRECTING THE ISSUANCE OF RAFFLE LICENSES TO CARTERET HIGH SCHOOL BAND PARENTS ASSOCIAnON AND ST. JOSEPH'S H.S.A." was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Fazekas were noted absent. RESOLunON #97-271 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont RESOLUnON #97-271 "APPOINTING LISANDRO VILLALBA- SENIOR ASSESSING AIDE" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Fazekas were noted absent. At approximately 9:35 P.M, Councilmember Bialowarczuk was noted present. 34 RESOLUTION #97-272 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace RESOLUTION #97-272 "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE WAIVER OF BOND FEES - STAFLEX, INC. " was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. RESOLUTION #97-273 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont RESOLUnON #97-273 "AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A GRANT APPLICATION MIDDLESEX COUNTY OFFICE ON AGING" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. RESOLUTION #97-274 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace RESOLUTION #97-274 "PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR FOR LEGAL SERVICES" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. RESOLUTION #97-275 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Bialowarczuk RESOLUTION #97-275 "RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NUMBERS 95-268 AND 96-281" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 RESOLUTION #97-272 Authorizing Waiver of Bond Fees Re: Staflex Adopted RESOLUTION #97-273 Authorizing Execution of Grant Re: Office on Aging Adopted RESOLUTION #97-274 Professional Services McGowan & Coughlin Legal Services Re: Pike's Peak Nursery Adopted RESOLUTION #97-275 Legal Services - Jacob v. Borough of Carteret Adopted SEPTÐIßER 4, 1997 RESOLUTION #97-276 Release of R.C.A. Funds - Cranbury Adopted P-ESOLUTION #97-277 Application for Bro\lnfield Ca¡;]{[]unity Shm-lcase Adopted RESOLUTION #97-278 Architectural Services -Potter Architects Re: Library Adopted ConInents RESOLunON #97-276 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace RESOLUnON #97-276 "RESOLUnON AUTHORIZING THE RELEASE OF REGIONAL CONTRIBUnON FUNDS" - was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. RESOLunON #97-277 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace RESOLUnON #97-277 "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICAnON TO BECOME BROWNFIELD SHOWCASE COMMUNITY" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. RESOLunON #97-278 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace RESOLUnON #97-278 "PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmernber Fazekas was noted absent. Mayor Sica asked why they would put a cap on that when we have given them a contract saying 10% of the construction fee. < Borough Attorney Coughlin said in prder for Patrick DeBlasio to certify the funds he had to have an amount. He said the resolution relates to the conversion of the supermarket to the library. Mayor Sica asked if it wasn't just an exercise in futility when all they had to do was a professional services resolution for 10% of the construction cost. Then they wouldn't have to do anymore. Borough Attorney Coughlin said Mr. Blasio would be left with the dilemma of not being able to certifY the funds or have to guess. Mayor Sica said he could certifY the funds up the what he has available. He is certifYing funds for what every it takes and we will make funds available to finish this project There are funds available at the present time If there is 2.7 million dollars left in the bond as long as he doesn't exceed that amount there isn't any problem. Borough Attorney Coughlin said that would necessitate typing up all the money. Mayor Sica said it wouldn't tie it up. He said they could change it any time it came up. RESOLUTION #97-279 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont 'RESOLUnON #97-184 "RESOLUTION RESCINDING PREVIOUS RESOLUTION FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Feingold voted no. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. Councilmember Bialowarczuk asked about the dates it started. Borough Attorney Coughlin said the revision rescinds the previous resolution so it doesn't have an effective date. 37 Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she didn't think they could do that. She said she had a concern that a lot of these legal services that were done prior to reports, they don't become public knowledge. That locks them in. Her feeling has been that the public should know what is going on and these things that are being done without being in that original resolution then become confidential when they weren't confidential to begin with. The Borough has paid for them within those bills. She said it was like pushing everything in a file drawer, cleaning it up, so know body knows what happened There was a report on those bills. There were certain things done there that now will be covered. Those reports will no longer become public knowledge. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Corrmen ts Con't. RESOLUTION #97-279 Professional Services Helmer, Kassel & StmJell Adopted Corrments SEPTlllBER 4, 1997 Comments Can't. Councilmember DuPont said it was his understanding that everything should be open. There should be nothing kept back Councilmember Bialowarczuk said that's not true. She said there were two reports, that she felt under threat, that she couldn't even discuss in her own house. Councilmember DuPont said the understanding of his hiring was that his proposals should go to the entire council. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said they are not. She said they sat in a closed agenda meeting last week and they were told in no uncertain terms that none of that summary could be released. Yet, she already knew a whole paragraph of that summary verbatim because Mr. Failace had told some one a week prior to that about the difference in cost. He had discussed it prior to the meeting. Mr. Stowell gave it to the newspaper. He was the one that said none of the information could be leaked. She had heard that Mr. Failace had repeated it prior to her ever having knowledge of it but that was okay because Mr. Stowell always said he didn't have to tell her anything. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said there is a conflict between Mr. Stowell and herself, but as his client she is entitled to ask for certain things and she is not getting them. If this resolution is going to hide anything further to do with what's gone on with this appointment, which is the truth in closed session because what she hears out in public' isn't the truth. She believes in the truth whether it is in open session or behind closed doors. What was in that agenda meeting in closed session should be made public. Before we decide to cover anything else up here getting back to the beginning like an investigation that was going on that wasn't supposed to be going on (inaudible) She can't possibly vote on any of this because she didn't get a report, as a client, that she asked for because being a woman she is being discriminated against. It's becoming more and more obvious. People can say what they want, but she hasn't gotten this report and she has asked for it. If anybody else here would have asked for it they would have gotten it. She has been humored, laughed at and blown off, but she was elected by the people and she still answers the people and she wants the same courtesy and expects everything the council gets from Mr Stowell to apply to her. She shouldn't hear about it on the street a week ahead of time. It wasn't even covered in here and to have Mr. Stowell stand over her shoulder and say "if any of you leak anything" she lost it after that because the intimidation was "gee, is he going to sue me now" because everybody assumes Debbie's the leak. She wants an answer to all this. Mr. Stowell is smirking at her again and she doesn't appreciate it. Borough Attorney Coughlin said the purpose of this resolution is merely to appoint Mr. Stowell and clarify what the Council believes to be the scope of Mr. Stowell's involvement. The original ordinance talks about his involvement reviewing the police department operations. He thinks that we could have with a broad interpretation of that not had the necessity to pass this resolution, but we did. We wanted to be specific because we wanted it to be clear and that there would be no questions as to the scope of Mr. Stowell's involvement. That was the intent of the Council and he thinks that was the purpose of this resolution. With regards to reports he submitted at the last agenda session, as many reports are made by Councilor advisors to the Council, they are done in closed session and at some point they become public record in a natural course. 3E ",j ,~:'1""'~'<~"":"" ..~: ".:-.':~"-::""",..,, Borough Attorney CougWin said he recollected that the report related to managerial aspects. He doesn't think that this resolution provides any more protection. They aren't going to seal these records. They are going to become public at some time. There were some personnel things in the report that Mr. Stowell discussed and they are not ready for publication, but the report, he will be better able to tell her when that is going to be made public, but presumably the intention is to make it public upon receipt about the personnel things that were covered. He states he tried to address all her concerns and comments that she presented on Mr. Stowell's behavior and he doesn't know if he could answer that. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said Mr. CougWin says it will probably become public knowledge, not that it will. Borough Attorney Coughlin said at some point In the process all documents become public. Councilmember Bialowarczuk asked at what point in the' process? A year from now? Borough Attorney CougWin said when they vote on it, take action with regard to it and determine it is concluded then the matters will become public. He assumes the report will be received and discussed in open session. The managerial aspects of that report. Councilmember Failace said he thinks the report was passed out to the Council this evening and he assumes it will be a report for the public with the information (inaudible) about personnel matters. We have gone into closed session for a million things, he thinks this one is more personal to Ms. Bialowarczuk, but it can go to the public at some point. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said it is not that it's personal. This issue is important to her. Being that it is important and there are some things being done here that will effect the public in a big way, she thinks they are entitled to know. . Councilmember Failace said Ms. Bialowarczuk has a copy if she wants to give it to the newspaper. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said that wasn't her point. She is discussing what went on las Thursday was brought up to the point that we are rescinding a resolution and we are opening another one. Councilmember Failace said to the Mayor he had told him many times in the past, you have the agenda meeting to question all these and they don't get questioned. He told Ms. Bialowarczuk she didn't question this. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she brought up the problem with the billing (inaudible) She asked if they are rescinding this today, why isn't the start of the new one today's date? Why isn't iL.. 39 Councilmember Failace asked how do they pay him for what he has done? Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she didn't know. SEPl'EMBER 4, 1997 Comr.len t.s Con' t. SEPT~lliER 4, 1997 Conments Con't. Councilmember Failace told Ms. Bialowarczuk she recéi~ed the same proposal that they all did. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said.they tabled the bills and she asked for a report. Now we are rescinding because of the problems she has found. Councilmember Failace said absolutely not because of the problems she found. He said whether she chooses to pay that bill or not is okay, but absolutely not, that's not why this was rescinded. As far as he is concerned is what happened was the resolution that went out was generic and didn't precisely say. We had exactly what the proposal was. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said somebody up here was real busy having Mr. Stowell do things he wasn't supposed to do. Council member Failace told her she had the proposals. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she didn't vote for it, did she? Councilmember Failace said that was her choice. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said when she asked, after she saw what Mr. Stowell was up to, she still didn't get an answer. Councilmember Failace said she can say that fifty times, it has nothing to do with (inaudible) Councilmember Bialowarczuk asked Mr. Failace ifhe paid bills he didn't know about? Councilmember Failace said no, he did not. Councilmember Bialowarczuk asked why are they are paying bills they don't know about? Councilmember Failace said he does, many times, rely on Patrick DeBlasio to take care of the bills for them. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said "do you?" And he doesn't (inaudible) a bill that is $12,000. She said she is opening a can of worms here. Councilmember Failace said absolutely no can of worms. Quite honestly, she has a vote, vote yes or no or whatever she is doing. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said she was a woman of her own mind and doesn't need a man to tell her whether she should vote or shouldn't vote. It doesn't work. She asked how long before those summaries become public knowledge? How long do we have to keep (inaudible) behind closed doors a secret? Borough Attorney Coughlin said he couldn't answer that question because it is not a time specific. There isn't a statute that says you have to release it in seven days. When the Council thinks the matter is complete and takes some action on those reports, at that point they become public. 4C Councilmember Bialowarczuk said so after everything is a done deal then the people will know exactly what was done today. Mayor Sica said he thought that was a little erroneous. If in fact there is a bill generated and it specifically says they did X Y and Z. He read "Temporary Restraining Order billed $350 to pursue temporary restraining order". He thinks the Councilwoman or any member of this Council has every right to know what that temporary restraining order was for. (inaudible) that she doesn't have that information. Borough Attorney Coughlin said that was not was she asked. She asked when the report was done. . Mayor Sica said she asked Mr. Stowell to give her a detailed breakdown on the bill. There was a bill there for a telephone conversation with J.D., that means John DuPont. The Councilwoman wants to know what was the context of that telephone conversation. As a member of this Council she has every right to know that. Borough Attorney Coughlin said that was not the report she was asking for. Mayor Sica said that was the report she was referring to. Councilmember Bialowarczuk said what she said was because of the bills, that's one more thing that she asked for. She's supposed to rescind this and vote on this and she asked for a report she didn't get. She got one report, a four page summary that she had to keep her mouth shut about because God forbid the public should know anything, they might smarten up as to what is going on around here, that had to be kept a secret. She can't even get an explanation on the bills and she has asked for it and asked for it. She has been pleasant and she is done being nice. She can't be expected to vote on something and she doesn't think the taxpayers want to give anybody $12,000 when there is no explanation. How can she make a judgement on any of this if she doesn't have the answers that she ha:; requested. Everybody else seems to get the answers they request. She asks and doesn't get an answer. 41 Mayor Sica said what happened here is they put the cart before the horse. The bill has been incurred and the Councilwoman wants a detailed explanation as to what the telephone conversations were, what the T.R.O's were, all this stuff, that he can understand. We stopped paying t hat bill at the last Council Meeting because he didn't feel it was proper because there were some problems with the incurring some of the monies prior to passing bills. We subsequently ironed that out. Now the Councihvoman is directly saying she is now being asked to rescind that resolution, but she still does not have knowledge of what those bills were. So why should she rescind that resolution or do anything until such time that she knows what she is paying for. Then the next resolution is going to come up appointing Mr. Stowell back with a better job description, then again be asked to pay a bill without the knowledge of what occurred on the various line items that Mr. Stowell billed us on. SEPTfl1BER 4, 1997 Comments Can't, SEPTEt1BER 4, 1997 Comments Con' t. r~· Borough Attorney Coughlin said he thought they were two separate issues. There is the issue of the explanation of the bill and there is the procedural functions that were undertaken (inaudible) the previous resolution and the adoption has been made and second. Mayor Sica said he agreed with Borough Attorney CougWin, but you can't ask for one without the other. You can't ask a person to do diligence and vote on one if they don't have the answer to the other. Borough Attorney CougWin said he was not sure he would agree. You could vote on the resoluton and then the Councilwoman has a right to a report, a right to have (inaudible) of the special counsel. He doesn't know if he has to provide that report prior to her voting on the resolution which was made and seconded. He said he didn't know if that was procedural or that's a basis for taking any other action as far as the resolution is concerned. In any event, you don't need to (inaudible) the obvious, the obvious is to do everything. You don't ever have to go, except when an employee requests a closed session. Other than that we can discuss litigation and strategy. We can discuss contracts and budgets, but there are different reasons not to, so where Mr. Stowell was talking about something in connection with a bill that's someway related to a negotiation, his position or a strategy with regard to litigation he thinks it's appropriately kept in closed session. Mayor Sica said he understands that and agrees with him 100%, but he doesn't think that negates any Councilwoman or Councilperson up here responsiblity to see the bill, to see an itemized reason for that bill prior to voting on that bill. Borough Attorney CougWin said he a,greed, but the vote was not in regard to the bill. The vote is with regard to the appointment of Mr. Stowell. Her question was, if he recalls, when in fact, the report, and since she referenced the closed session meeting, he assumes she was talking about those reports, not the report she had requested. None the less, he thinks the standard is (inaudible) the report would be made public from the beginning or when the matter is concluded or took some action. By mere virtue of appointing (inaudible) not taken any action that would prevent her from seeing them. Mayor Sica said the problem is voting for it or against it without getting any information. Borough Attorney Coughlin said obviously he can't resolve it. He can request it. 4 RESOLUTION #97-280 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers DuPont and Failace RESOLUTION #97-280 "PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers DuPont, Failace and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. 'Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Feingold voted no. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. Mayor Sica read the first paragraph of the resolution. "Whereas, there exists a need for professional services to perform certain services as outlined in the attached proposal dated May 30, 1997, along with such litigation as assigned by the Mayor and Council" . He asked the Borough Attorney what does that say? He asked for an interpretation of that. Borough Attorney Coughlin said it means Mr. Stowell is authorized to undertake (inaudible) that is outlined in his proposal which is attached and to undertake litigation if this Council so directs. Mayor Sica asked the Council? A Councilman? Or does it have to be the Council and the Mayor? Borough Attorney CougWin said the Council, plural. Mayor Sica said he has a problem. He said a lot of this litigation was not brought to the attention of the Council as a whole Borough Attorney CougWin said he didn't know that the Council directed it's undertaking. Mayor Sica asked then what did they pay according to the bill. What's a 1'. R. O. Is that what it means? Borough Attorney CougWin said he didn't consider that to be in the nature oflitigation. Mayor Sica said if they didn't bring it up or discuss that they were going for a 1.R.O. , which he doesn't know what 1.R.O.is for. If we didn't bring it up, why should we pay that bill. 1.R.O. as far as he is concerned is specific litigation. It's in fact drawing of an ordinance. Borough Attorney Coughlin said he didn't know if Mr. Stowell implemented or took any action to commence litigation. 43 Mayor Sica said you commence litigation when you investigate the possibility of a 1. R. 0 to stop dogs across the street. Borough Attorney Couhglin said it's not going to legalize things. You have to commence the action by filing. SEPTll1BER 4, 1997 RESOLl~ION #97-280 Professional Services Re: Helmer, Kassel and Stov,ell Adopted COfT.lents SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 Comments Can't. RESOLUTION #97-281 Purchase of Block 192 Lot 3 Toth's Photo Adopted ".-~- -, Mayor Sica said you commence the action when you or your client tells you they want you to look into getting a T.R.O. for X problem. That's litigation. You just don't get it when you go to court. All these other things that happen in before you get to court. The feasibility of aT .R. 0 will it defend a challenge in court or is there allowance for a T.R.O. That's all litigation. That has to be first (inaudible). He said he thinks the problem he is having is if in fact there were some legal discussions with a prosecutor on the criteria of a possible TKO. against someone doing something allegedly illegal. If that was not specifically brought up to the Council, plural, then he has a problem with paying that in conjunction with this. Mayor Sica said he would like an interpretation. Although we never signed any specific orders as a body, he is not talking about as an individual person (inaudible) he is talking about as a body, as a matter of public record, where there was such a discussion saying that Mr. Stowell should do this, this and this. Borough Attorney Coughlin said he thinks they should find out what Mr. Stowell did specifically. Find out what the shorthand means on his bill before he makes a determination. Mayor Sica asked the Borough Attorney to contact Mr. Stowell and go through his bill with him and assure the Mayor that none of it was binding litigation or falls into the realm of litigation that should have first been assigned by plural the Council and the Mayor. At that time, when he gets a legal interpretation from the Borough Attorney that the T .R. 0, doesn't constitute litigation and was not something that had to be assigned specifically by the Councilor the Mayor, then he will sign it. RESOLunON #97-281 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace RESOLUnON #97-281 "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE BOROUGH ATTORNEY TO CONCLUDE A CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF BLOCK 192, LOT 3 FROM THE OWNER, FOR A PURCHASE PRICE NOT TO EXCEED $219,000.00" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmativç. Council- member Fazekas was noted absent. ,.,.".. 4' RESOLUTION #97-282 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and DuPont RESOLUTION #97-282 "RESOLUnON AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF EMERGENCY POLICE GENERATOR" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Bialowarczuk and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, the agenda was amended to include Resolution #97-283 Appointing a School Crossing Guard RESOLUTION #97-283 was introduced by the Mayor and referred to the Council for action. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be open: There being no comments or objections to the resolution, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing to be closed upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the tive (5) Councilmembers present. Upon JlvIMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace RESOLUnON #97-283 APPOINnNG JUDY HAND TO THE POSITION OF SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD" was adopted. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembers Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Council member Fazekas was noted absent. 45 Upon MM'S&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Biaiowarczuk, all bills appealing on the prepareù list, properly audited and signed, were ordered to be paid. Upon individual roll call vote, Councilmembérs Bialowarczuk, DuPont, Failace, Feingold and Gutowski voted in the affirmative. Councilmember Fazekas was noted absent. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 RESOLUTION #97-282 Purchase of Police Generator Adopted Agenda Amended RESOLUTION #97-283 Appointing J. Hand School Crossing Guard tleeting Opened Neeting Closed Adopted PA1IT1ENT OF BILLS SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 APPLICATIONS St. Joseph Amendmen t to Bingo License Carteret Volunteer Fire Ca. # 1 Caoke Avenue Liquors, Inc. Renewal - 1996 to 1997 Caoke Avenue Liquors, Inc. Renewal - 1997 to 1998 COMl1UNICATIONS Twp. of South Brunswick Re: Mutual Police Aide wi lentz, Goldman K Spitzer - Lease Ordinance N.J. Dept. of Human Services Re: Work First DCA & League of ~1unicipalities Re: Public Hearings Rehabilitation Subcode The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of an application rrom St. Joseph Church concerning the amendment of Bingo License #BL-1421 adding dates. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Bialowarczuk and Feingold and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, it was ordered to be approved. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of an application from the Carteret Volunteer Fire Co. #1 concerning the approval of Carla Mascaro and Christopher Zetty. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Bialowarczuk and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, it was ordered to be approved. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of an application for the Renewal of of an A.B.C. License held by Cooke Avenue Liquors, Inc. for 1996-1997. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Bialowarczuk and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, it was ordered to be turned over to the Police Department for investigation. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of an application for the Renewal of an A.B. C. License held by Cooke Avenue Liquors, Inc. for 1997-1998. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Bialowarczuk and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, it was ordered to be turned over to the Police Department for investigation. The Clerk stated she was in receipt of a communication rrom the Township of South Brunswick concerning an ordinance authorizing reciprocal agreements for mutual police aid. It was ordered to be received and placed on file. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of a communication from Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer concerning a lease ordinance regarding 1997 Capital Equipment Lease Program with Middlesex County Improvement Authority. It was ordered to be received and placed on file. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of a communication from the New Jersey Department of Human Services concerning changes in Work First New Jersey/General Assistance Program. It was ordered to be received and placed on file. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of a communication rrom the Department of Community Affairs and the League of Municipalities concerning Rehabilitation Subcode, Public Hearings September 25, 1997 at Kean College and October 7, 1997 at Camden County College. It was ordered to be received and posted on the bulletin board. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of a communication rrom the Middlesex County Planning Board concerning a notice of a County Meeting on September 10, 1997 regarding State Plan Cross Acceptance Schedule. It was ordered to be received and posted on the bulletin board. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of a communication from the Middlesex County Improvement Authority concerning a Charity Golf Classic to be held September 18, 1997. It was ordered to be received and placed on file. The Clerk stated that she was in receipt of the following reports: Clerk's Office - August 1997 Fire - July 1997. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and Gutowski and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, all reports were ordered to be received and placed on file. BUILDINGS & GROUNDS: Committee Chairperson Bialowarczuk reported progress. FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION: Committee Chairperson Failace said they had a meeting this week to discuss the purchase of a new fire truck through the Middlesex County Improvement Authority , if they go through them they can save a lot of money in interest, etc. He said that wasn't the final decision. The Mayor asked Mr. DeBlasio to check with some of the banks the borough does business with to see if we can save some money. The budget is pretty much on the mark. There are a couple of spots that Mr. DeBlasio said are kind of close to the numbers. He reported progress. FIRE: In the absence of Committee Chairperson Fazekas, Committee Member Gutowski gave the report. He said he didn't know if anyone was aware, but there was a situation last week with a fire on a barge. It was a barge containing 90,000 gallons of gasoline. It was a pretty precarious situation. He spoke with a number of volunteer firemen at the scene and it got to a point where they felt their lives were being threatened and they were in danger. For the record, he would like to read who was on the ship at the time and commend them for their actions: 47 Fire Superintendent Greenbe~g Volunteer Firemen Pine, Shelton, Gordon, Holland, Goddess, Evon, Hedesh, App, Lombardi, Evon, Rokosz, Simpson, Welch, Rhodes, Perry, Reynolds and D'Onofrio. Career Firefighter Varga. SEPTEMBER 4, 1997 COMMUNICATIONS: Can't. Middlesex County Planning Board Middlesex Caunty Improvement Authority REPORTS Departments Corrmittees , ..~ ^ SEPTÐIDER 4, 1997 Corrmittees Can't. Committee Member Gutowski said the men put their lives on the line. All are volunteers except for one. It is certainly appreciated. He understands the condition was dangerous. On behalf of Councilmember Fazekas, he thanked them. PARKS & RECREATION: Committee Chairperson Gutowski said Ethnic Day is September 13th, which is a week rrom Saturday. It starts with a Pancake Breakfast at the park at 9:00 A.M. He hopes everyone will attend. At 11 :00 AM on that day will be the Little Miss Carteret Contest at the band shell. On the following day, September 14th will be the grand opening of the new Recreation Facility He invited everyone to come down and look at the building on Sunday. It's something to behold. He hopes all the organizations that will be participating in the building will be represented. He looks forward to the Mayor cutting the ribbon with everybody there. With that, the parks are open. POLICE: Committee Chairperson DuPont said aside rrom the obvious interest in the Police Department, we did have two major things happen tonight. We passed a resolution so that a generator that is desperately needed can be purchased. Also, we read the first ordinance to appropriate money for the radios. They have been trying to do it in pieces and this is the last piece. They have all been replaced. He reported progress. PUBLIC WORKS: Committee Chairperson Failace said with all the questions about what is going on with the hours down at the Public Works Garage, he wants them to know he does the best he can to call up and check up to see who is there at 7:30 A.M. and 3:30 P.M. and he thinks things are going well on that schedule and they will continue on that schedule. He said the roads are about to be paved. He reported progress. MUNICIPAL GARAGE SERVICES: Committee Chairperson Feingold said everything is great in the garage. He said he felt it was incumbent upon him to discuss a comment that was made that he didn't do anything in the two years he was Police Commissioner. He said it started in November of 1994 when he didn't lose the election. Mr. Failace ran than as an Independent and then switched to a Democrat. He didn't lose to Mr. Fazekas or Mr DuPont either. Obviously the citizens ofCarteret want him up here. They want him to do the nothing that he did for two years. He said he guessed he didn't do anything for eight months either because they didn't mention that. One thing he doesn't do and he has never done is make personal attacks. He is above that and he doesn't have to do that. When you are above and ahead, people are going to take shots at you. He is ahead and doesn't have to take shots at people beneath him Another thing he didn't do was hire Mr. StowelL He rode with every police officer and got to know them personally. Mr. Stowell has charged the borough $11,000 and he hasn't done that yet either. That's why he voted against this ordinance because he knows the police don't want it. He rode with them until two and three in the morning He was on traffic detaiL He rode all sections of town. He went on foot patrol in Chrome with Oflicer Connolly. Another thing he did was identify the problem that they needed those radios and set the wheels in motion. He said he let them take the credit for it now. 4 Committee Chairperson Feingold said he thinks they should reserve judgement on what he did or didn't do and let the people decide what he did for the past two years in November. Upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Failace and. Gutowski and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present, the meeting was declared open for public discussion. JAMES MANCUSO said he was not going to belittle anybody. He spoke to Councilmember Feingold and said he should let the public know that he missed 13 meetings and walked out early on 8 meetings. That's what he has done. Councilmember Feingold said the public should also know that he is an attorney and has some brains to represent them. Mr. Mancuso was inaudible. Mayor Sica asked if they wanted to talk about taking a job and not doing it? The Borough Prosecutor was appointed to a job in the city of Carteret two days a week. So far, she has missed almost 40% 'Of her trial dates. Every single Wednesday Ms. Quinones does not come to work. She sends a replacement. You take ajob in order to do ajob. He said he is seriously going to consider asking this Council to replace Ms. Quinones. As far as he is concerned, it puts an undue burden on the court system when the assigned prosecutor is not there every single Wednesday since February. Councilmember Gutowski told Mr. Feingold that this was nothing personal. He said Mr. Feingold is also a prosecutor and he covers prosecutors and he knows that is a common practice that prosecutors do not cover their jurisdictions all the time. Mr. Feingold cannot sit there and deny it because when he does leave the meetings he says he is going to cover a prosecutor. Mayor Sica said he would readily agree with Mr. Gutowski that when a prosecutor takes a job rrom time to time, there are things that happen and they cannot get here, but this is common knowledge that Ms. Quinones does not come to any Wednesday court sessions. When she took the job it was with filII knowledge that there would be a courrsession on every Wednesday and every Monday night. She has taken it upon herself not to attend one Wednesday court session. Councilmember Gutowski said the Mayor should also check the previous prosecutors and see if their records are the same. He will find it is true. SEPTfilliER 4, 1997 Committees Can't. Municipal Gar&ge PUBLIC DISCUSSION Missed tleetings SEPTE11BER 4, 1997 Public Discussion Can't. Mayor Sica said he doesn't think they will find one of them that took off every single Wednesday. He would readily agree with him that from time to time circumstances warrant and prosecutors can't be here because of vacation or conflict of scheduling, etc. He has no problem with that, but when you arbitrarily just don't come in on Wednesdays, something is wrong. Councilmember Failace said at least there is a replacement. When Mr. Feingold doesn't show up at 12 meetings there is no replacement. Also, Mr. Feingold had a problem with Mr. Stowell, but he left last week before Mr. Stowell got to speak to us. Mayor Sica said he is going to ask for a 1099 for the attorney that was filling in for Ms. Quinones and see who's paying the taxes on that money. Councilmember Feingold told Councilmember Failace that he left last week at 9:00 P.M. for a court session that started at 6:00 P.M. There being no further business or discussion, upon MMS&C, by Councilmembers Gutowski and Failace and unanimous affirmative vote of the five (5) Councilmembers present the meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:20 P.M. ~~bmiU"'" h1~~~ K THLEENM. BARNEY, ~V Municipal Clerk - KMB/sj 5C