ready. >> We can start now. It's on. >> Okay. Good evening everyone. Happy new year and welcome to the January 6 Township Council regular meeting.
This is a regular meeting of the council of the township of Montlair. It's being broadcast live on channel 34 and is stream live streaming live on Montlair TV34 YouTube channel. It's available on
demand and can and will be rebroadcast. The meeting is called pursuant to the provisions of the open public meeting act. The meeting was included in the annual notice of the meeting schedule as set for forth in resolution R-25-352.
It was adopted by the township council at the regular meeting of November 25th, 2025. advertised to the official newspaper on December 25th, 25, January 1st, 26, and January 8th, 26. It was posted on the
bulletin boards outside of the municipal building, and it has remained continuously posted. In addition, a copy of the annual notice is and has been available to the public and is on file in the office of our township clerk.
Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> Madame clerk, welcome back. Would you be so kind as do the roll call, please? >> Yes, Mayor. Thank you. Deputy Mayor Anderson, >> here. Council Birmingham >> here. >> Councelor Damato >> here. >> Councelor Harrison >> here. >> Councelor Toller.
>> Good evening. Present. >> Good evening. Councelor Williams absent. Mayor Baskerville >> present. Um, okay. At this time, >> um, are there any members of the public
who are here who have signed up for public comment? There's none in the back there. >> I I don't know what's back there. >> Thank you so much. >> Huh? >> Um, good evening. I'm I'm going to call
again, please, if there are members of the public who would like to address us. >> Seeing none, we're going to move on to the consent agenda. >> Yes. Um, are there any members of the council
who would wish to remove anything from the consent agenda? If so, please let us know at this time, >> Madame Mayor. >> Yes, councelor Toller. >> Just want to table number six. I have some questions and I believe the manager may have an answer for me.
>> Okay. Anyone else? >> Mayor. >> Yes. Um, Deputy >> Yes. I do not want to speak for Councelor Williams, but I believe he did um express that he wanted to pull um number two. >> Okay.
>> From the consent agenda. >> Anyone else? >> Trying to check if there's stuff we just >> Oh, from the packet we just got. Okay. Let's take a moment and see if there was anything in there. I um just wanted to have um >> and number 14, please.
>> 14. I want number three. uh just discuss I believe um thank you to the the chair of our finance committee. I believe that I got the information that I need but I'd just like to uh make sure that I am understanding correctly how we ended up
um on number >> four. So that's two. No, I said three. I'm sorry. It's four. Two four six and what was the other one? >> Three. >> Three. >> 14 and 14. >> 14. And we're still looking.
>> H. >> Can we Yes. >> Pull eight. >> Eight. >> Mhm. Number eight. Should we like amended item 12? >> Amended 12. Did you want We wanted to
have discussion on amended 12. Okay. >> People were speaking referring to that >> resolution appointing a member to the housing commission. >> This is the one that we just got. Um Um and there are um other other spots
open so if other people have other names we would really like to have them so that we can get them on there. Yeah. At least five. >> Yeah. I would like to pull number seven for so I can discuss. I have a question. >> Number seven for discussion. That's 2 3
4 6 7 8 12 uh and 14. >> No. >> No. >> Oh, did you want it pulled? Oh, I'm so sorry. I didn't know that. 12. Okay.
Do we have 14 pulled or I'm not asked to pull it just for discussion. >> Anyone else? Council Damato, anything that you would like for us to pull at this time for further discussion? >> And did we pull one? I'm sorry. I just
let's be like >> one can we just pull that for >> Okay. We have two. Yeah. An eight. Two seven. Yeah, we have eight. The ones that we have so far are one 2 3
uh four 6 7 8 12 13 and 14. Yes. >> Okay. Um manager, please will you um lead us through the
consent agenda number five? >> Oh, you're taking number 10 out, too. Okay. So, we have number five, number nine, number 11. Uh >> eight. Okay. Number 11. And then what
about was 13 in or out? >> I have 13 in. >> 13. I have 13 in. And I have 15 in. >> Is that correct? >> Take 15 out. >> Take 15 out. Okay. So we have one, two, three,
four items for the consent agenda. Number five. Number nine, 11. And >> third 10 was out. >> Yes. And 13.
>> Is that what you have, madam clerk? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Do we have a movement? >> Hm. >> Do we have a movement for those four consent items? I didn't know if the manager wanted to >> read through them or anything so that
people will know what we're doing. >> Would you like me to read them by title? >> Yes, please. Thank you. >> So, item number five is a resolution authorizing renewal of contract to Edmonds Govve for support and maintenance of proprietary software for township financial um utility billing
tax collection and accounting services. >> Can can we ask questions now on this one? Yes. >> Can you just go into a little detail? Is this a renewal? Is this a Are these license fees or these just are these support services?
>> Um these are these it's um Edmonds is a proprietary software program that most municipal municipalities use in the state of New Jersey. So it's a software licensing fee. >> Licensing. >> Yes. >> Okay. Good. For >> for financial accounting purposes
>> for the tenor. For how long? >> It's a year. My understanding is it's a year-to-year contract. >> It's just a year to year. Okay, that's right. Okay. >> Number three is is in, right? Yes. Manager, can you do number three? >> Oh, oh, okay. I thought three was
pulled. Uh item number three is a resolution authorizing the township to pre-qualify and award fair and open contract for municipal financial advisor for uh calendar year 2026 uh which was RFP26-P02. >> Okay.
Next item is number nine, a resolution authorizing purchases from vendors pursuant to contracts with certain approved county and New Jersey state cooperative purchase. um cooperative contracts pursuant to NJSA4A11-10
uh for calendar year 2026. >> Item number 11 is a resolution awarding fair and open contract to Axon Enterprise Inc. for bodywn cameras, in-car video cameras, and cradle points for the police department with uh New
Jersey State Contract 17 uh fleet-0000738. And item number uh 13 is a resolution authorizing the award of a non-fair and open contract, I'm sorry, non-fair and open professional services contract to
Clary Jacobe, Alfieri and Jacobs LLC to provide services as interim township attorney for county year 2026. >> Thank you. Um number seven I I have that as um being on the consent agenda too.
Did we pull number seven? We pulled number seven. Okay. Thank you. All right. So, let's start at the top uh with number one. >> Who Who was it that asked? >> Oh, yes. Thank you. >> Yes. Um please, Madame Clerk. Um
>> may I have a movement, mayor, on the consent agenda? >> I so move. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson? >> Yes. >> Councelor Birmingham? >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato? >> Yes. >> Councelor Harrison? >> Yes. >> Councelor Toller? >> Yes. >> Councelor Williams? Yes, >> Mayor Baskerville.
>> Yes. Thank you. >> All right, let's start with number one, please. >> Who was the person that wanted to have further discussion on number one? >> I did. And really um hi. I just wanted to um
make clear to anyone watching what the purpose of this is. This is um because we are we don't we are in a calendar year budget, but we don't adopt our budget till later in the year. we're required to pass this temporary budget and um so I just if you don't mind just
explaining what this includes here. >> Good evening. So um because we don't have an adapted budget in order for the township to operate um and pay its bills, it has to approve a temporary budget. So by law we we can um adopt uh
1/4th of the 2025 budget. Um that's 26.25%. So that's what this is um um presenting to you guys. So you guys can >> Great. >> And then we make the full debt service payment.
>> We did. >> Okay. >> We already paid anything that was due on the first of the the year and then I did include what would be for the entire year um included in the temporary. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Please, while we're on um
this temporary budget, can you please tell me the rent control um salary and wages and um the other number? Um what what what is that for? >> The amount on which one?
>> The rent control salary and wages on page one. So that was just a percentage of what was already adopted on 2025. I was just going down the line when I had prepared. >> Mayor, that's for the administrator
position. >> It's for the rent control administrator's position. >> Okay. And this is a person that's in the board that we set up that's going to help administrate or >> administrate the rent control ordinance, >> right? >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> All right. And can you tell me a little bit about the position for $28,000? What What is this person doing? >> Well, she's in receipt of any complaints from the either a tenant subject to rent
control or the rent control uh landlord. Um she prepares the responses for my signature when needed, sets up the um the hearings and the uh and the meetings.
>> Is this is this full-time um person with pension and benefits, right? >> Yes. Right now we have the um the parallegal performing this function too. has kind of been flipped
>> but and so is that is that then was a parallegal getting a stipen and this is now not the parallegal or is this just addition money for the parallegal I'm just trying to figure this works yes sir um before we get too far into this if we're discussing the duties and
responsibilities of an individual employee I think we would have to rice notice them before we have this this discussion >> okay um and so then when we're voting on something and we're not really clear about it, then should we just pull this for another day? I'm just trying to find
out. I don't know when I'm seeing this what that job is. Mayor, this is just um authorization for the finance department to fund that position should there be a person. It I believe it's just been prepared based on
the previous year's budget. It's just a budget. It's not an expenditure or an authorization to expend per se. >> H >> how many years have we had that position? >> Since Since April 2022
>> when you guys were here the >> May I clarify this is a position that's required by Mayor. It's required by ordinance. >> Yes, that's >> the administrator and the officer position. >> Okay. Thank you. I was just trying to find out though if the if the position changed. Can they tell me if the
position has changed without telling me the the responsibilities and duties? Did it change from the previous year? I I really want to know anything that's on here that has changed from what it was before. There's been there's been no change in
that function. The change has been the responsibility of the person performing the function. Thank you. >> I have a question. >> Councelor Toller. >> Sure. The department of complete streets is kind of the same thing as a question about a person. So, do we pull that for
discussion? Same thing with the rent control position that you're referring to or I don't know. I'm asking the attorney. There's a complete complete >> I had a question on the complete street salary and wages
>> operating expenses as well. That's a person correct. >> That's a the CFO can answer that question in terms of what is required for a temporary budget >> requires 26.25.
These are new departments that were approved by ordinance on the last meeting I believe. So I thought that I should include them in the temporary budget. So if those departments do go into effect, uh they can function because there would be a budget amount
for them. >> But um yes, Deputy Deputy Mayor and and then um council Birmingham. >> Uh just yeah, with respect to I mean I this is just the temporary budget. I understand that. Just I wanted to be with regards to the complete streets
position that was also like the rent control position created by ordinance and we have been actively recruiting to replace that position the the the vacancy and yeah so I just wanted to point that out.
Yeah. And and so understanding that right and when you see this salary I'm trying to figure out is that the entirety of the complete street salary and wages. >> So if if I may the the >> it's 1/4 of the salary
>> of of the budget. >> Okay. That's 1/4 of the salary anticipated salary of that individual. >> No. >> Okay. So um the the temporary budget by statute is 26.25% of the
>> previous year's budget. So the numbers you're seeing is just a calculation based on what was budgeted last year. It's not based on >> just for the first two or three months of this year. It's not based on what's projected for the entire year. >> Great. Thank you. >> It's more prescriptive.
>> No, I appreciate that. Got that? Yes. Okay. Anybody else? >> I just have one more question. Yes, councelor Tola. >> There's a line on here on page two. It says prior year bills operating expenses for 253 and some change. Can you just tell me
what prior year bills those are for and why we're behind? >> Um they were numer there are few vendors that were not paid for a couple years. I don't know all the details but um there's Verizon that has all bills and
then there was other >> uh vendors that are behind so I try to come up with an amount based on what I saw that was outstanding so that we can make um payment as soon as possible and just clear those old accounts.
>> But this number could change if we do this again in the near future. Correct. >> It might go up if more things come up. >> And Mr. Marks, do you are you aware of why the bills weren't paid? Is there some lack of internal controls that need to be put in place? >> Well, the person who was administering
the bills is no longer here. So, that's that's part of the accountability. Um, there we came across about $250,000 worth of Verizon bills that should have been paid in previous years that weren't paid. And that was part of that was part of a performance evaluation involving that individual who's no longer here.
>> Thank you. Okay. Um I'd like to to to make a motion to um accept item number one. >> Second. >> Madame clerk. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes.
>> Council Birmingham. >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato. >> Yes. >> Councelor Harrison. >> Yes. >> Councelor Toller. >> Yes. >> Councelor Williams. >> Yes. >> Mayor Baskerville. >> Yes. >> Okay. Moving on to number two, please. Resolution establishing a cash
management plan and naming official depositories for the township of Monontlair for the calendar year 2026. Who had uh wanted further discussion? >> I I didn't want further discussion, but I wanted to pull this out of the consent agenda because I plan to abstain.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Did did you um have any thoughts that that you wanted to share with the rest of us that may help us now? Okay. >> Because I I don't this is something that's particular to me.
>> Okay. Okay. Anyone else on number two? I'll make a motion uh to move resolution establishing cash management plan. >> Second. >> Okay. Madame clerk, please. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes. Councelor Birmingham, >> yes. >> Councelor Damato, >> yes.
>> Councelor Harrison, >> yes. >> Councelor Toller, >> yes. >> Councelor Williams, >> abstain. >> Mayor Baskerville, >> yes. Okay. >> Uh, number three, we did number four. Did we do four? >> No. Someone had discussion or
conversation or wanted us to pull number four. Resolution authorizing the award for professional service contracts. PKF O' Conor Davis. That was Did you have a question? >> Not on that one. I had one on the other one. Oh, was this a part? No, number
four where it said the audit services. Yes. Okay. I just wanted and um I thank you um councelor Birmingham because I got um I read through what I think was very helpful and I just want to um have
explained to me if this is the same audit service and if it's not if it can just be explained and I do believe that you sent us something um and I think it was about this one but I'd just like please for um from the public about if
anything that that's on here that changed. So, the audit service we're we're changing. >> Yeah. So, um we are I'm making the recommendation to award the um order uh contract to PKF O' Conor. Um they were
one of the three that submitted an RFP. Um the prior auditor was with they were the auditors I believe for the prior nine years. The last two years was with Supi. Um and I was just making the recommendation to go with them because
unfortunately during my um employment here I had some professional questions and I did not receive feedback from them when I reached out. Did anyone here have any previous um relationships or working with this group
in the past? >> No. That's a no. Okay. Anyone else have any questions on that one? >> I have one question. >> Yes, sir. Just as a general principle now, uh how many years are we what would
be best practices in terms of cycling out our auditors? >> Uh GFOA usually recommends that you rotate auditors every five years. Five >> um and that is to try to keep the cost at a minimum. Um but this is not going to have a very significant change on the
cost. They all all three came around the same uh price. So it's not a increase per se. So if they do a good job, we would expect to keep them for another four years. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thanks. >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Madame Clerk. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes. >> Councelor Birmingham. >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato. >> Yes. >> Councelor Harrison. >> Yes. >> Councelor Toller. >> Yes. >> Councelor Williams. >> Yes. >> Mayor Baskerville. >> Yes. >> Uh are we at number seven now or am I
missing one? >> Six. >> Six. Okay. Number six, please. Resolution granting authority to the chief financial officer to prepay selective bills. Um, that was me.
>> Mhm. Do you have an update for me, Mr. Marks? >> So, sorry. Um uh we discuss I discussed your concerns uh with Miss Bartlett um and over there were two items in particular that were on here that the
counselor had uh just concerns over. One was interfund transfers and the other was payment of uh pre-authorized or or um previously authorized by resolution. Maybe if you could speak to that. >> Um I know this might be a new
resolution. These are practices that were already in place. I was just trying to make it formal and for transparency. So it's also um approved. I mean that's how it was done in previous uh places. So the release of money is approved by resolution will be um you would already
bid have like a resolution that could be tax refunds, escros or settlements. So basically that resolution would say that you guys are authorizing our office to make the payment. And what this is basically just saying that we are allowed to make payment on that before
the the bill is um and then um we I did make the change on based on the recommendation and now it would be on the next bill list. The ratification will be done on the next one. The reason I had given myself a little room it was because sometimes there could be questions on how to post something and
it might not make it really to the next one. But I did make the the change so it's on the next um the list. >> Okay. and the release of monies approved by resolution. You said those are for very specific resolutions. Do those need to be outlined in this document because
as it reads now it could be anything but >> so it would be anything presented to you uh to the governing body that would require you guys to approve it. So example examples of that would be the tax refunds, any escro refunds and things in that nature. I I understood
what you said, but my question was, should we add a bullet underneath to stay what those specific items are or is this sufficient? >> I I believe this is sufficient. It's generic enough that it would cover anything in case because if I
specifically said what those items are and then you guys approve something that might not be included on that then and if something that needs to be paid then I cannot make the payment. This was practicing to prevent a fiasco. You know what I mean? We have a lot going on in our town right now. The board of ed's
got issues. I'm just making sure that we don't need to be very specific about release of monies approved by a resolution. Should we identify what those exact resolutions cover? >> Um, excuse me, councelor Toller. Is this for the enter funds?
>> No. Release of monies approved by resolution. >> Oh, >> the next one >> on the other side. Yeah. Okay. >> I understand. >> I don't then I'll come back to that then while we're doing the release of money. I understand that part. I'm talking about the release of monies approved by >> I mean I can look through the last year
see what kind of resolutions if there was anything more than what I just mentioned and if you want I included >> I would appreciate it. It's just covering ourselves and at least we know >> there's some money that we will never know what's being paid. We don't have to see it because you have the
authorization if we grant this to send those checks off. Well, the my in my purpose with this is and I'm not sure if you guys get the memo. I want you guys to be aware of any payments that are made by my office. So, this is the in intent of this
resolution. I am letting you guys know because in the past, not everything was being brought or included in the bill. I want to include that. That's what I'm used to in other municipalities I work for. So I wanted to make sure for transparency and accountability that you guys are aware that what other payments
are being made that might not necessarily be part of the bill list that you guys have seen in the past. So um I can certainly try to go through prior um resolutions and see what exactly Montlair does approve by
resolution that might not be included in what I just mentioned. >> Thank you. Yes. Um >> just make sure I'm understanding this as well. >> Oh, just to be clear. So this with respect to this particular release of
money is approved by resolution. So does this mean so we would have already approved payment right via a resolution? >> Yes. >> So this is referring to things that we would already have taken action on as a
council. This is just talking about before it's presented on the bills list, the bill list. Okay. >> So, for example, if and I'm sorry, if there's a settlement that says we need to pay that person within 15 days, it will give me the authority to make that payment on that person and then include
that payment on the n later bill list. So, you guys are aware that that was taken care of. >> The next bill list. >> Yes. The next bill list. >> A check will have left the building and then we'll know about it at the next meeting. >> Yes. And I will change how that's being
tracked as well. So there is um it will be numerical so everybody can see like if the last one was five but the next one is six because right now we were using the date of the payment and you can have multiple payments on one day and it would be hard to track. Um so I
am changing that procedure internally in my office. >> Councelor Birmingham and then councelor Damato. >> Okay. Councelor Damato. >> All right. Just to piggyback off of councelor Toller's question, I mean all monies that are dispersed are
approved by the council in general. >> In the past, there were things that were not included. For example, payroll was not included on the bill list and that is something that happens. I see. So I guess a way way to look at this is the
question would be what is not included if you take all of these categories of things and we pass this. What what kinds of payments would you not be able to prepay? >> If you don't give me authorization to do
them, then I I won't do them. But >> no, no, no. I'm asking you >> everything everything that's on the bills list. Basically, >> this is everything that's on the bills list. This these would be items that um the chief financial officer could prepay before the bills list. Send send out a
check before the bills list is officially >> and it would show up on the bill's list as things that were prepaid that I understand. I'm just curious what kinds of payments do we make that are not encompassed by this list of things. >> That should be all. >> So it's everything.
>> Yes. So then I'm just wondering why we need to enumerate things >> because in the past we were making payments that were not being included on the billless as a as a payment. You guys were only sometimes voting on things that needed to be paid but not
everything that was being wired and paid by finance was included. So you guys were not aware of certain things. I'm trying to be transparent and make sure that everything >> it's uh presented to you guys. All right. I think I get that maybe, but
I maybe copy. >> Council Birmingham. >> Yeah. Just to be So, every year when we approve a budget and there's an operating expenses, let's just say that we we don't pre-approve,
let's just say, Verizon, you know, every Verizon expense. It comes in the um bill list because we've we've allocated for it in our budget. We understand we need to pay for Verizon. Um, and so we get it in our bill list and then you pay it. What you're talking about here, as I
understand it, is we do sometimes get resolutions that come through that are like escrow return to John Doe because, you know, because he had put money into escrow or like tax refund to Bill Smith.
>> That's what you're talking about here, right? in some of the instances but like other items are budgeted for. It's just that they were not always included like payroll it is budgeted that there's a budget you know the salary every employee gets paid those items were not
previously included as a for ratification in the bill list so if you look at the bill list on the back of it I think the last page it includes like checks disperse wires that will be the column that now you would see more activity in that column and it's just
for more transparency >> great >> but there's no way to rescend if we need to resend it. If there's ever instance where we need to resend a resolution or resend a bill, the check has already left the building, right? >> Well, most of these things are statutory
that we have to pay them. The ones by the resolution, you mean? >> Well, you wouldn't approve the resolution. But if it does get approved and we discover next day or next week that perhaps we want to resend that resolution and it has an amount on it, how does that prevent the check from
leaving the >> then communication would have to come up to us that you know do you guys want to resend? I don't know how the process for that would be but we would only take action if the resolution has been approved. >> Okay. >> On those items that are approved by
resolution. >> I I just have one more um question please. Can you give me an example of inter funds? >> So that is just when um we have various uh funds. We have current fund capital and from time to time inter funds are
created meaning one fund owes the other one money for if something was paid. Uh usually we have centralized services or bills that we paid out of current fund that can create an interfund where current fund made that payment but part
of that was supposed to be charged to sewer then an interfund is created and now sewer owes current. So this is just letting you guys know or giving me the authorization to clear those interfund. It's not it's not wires outside is within our own bank accounts that are moving uh money to clear uh the interf
funds. >> Got it. Thank you very much. Anyone else on on this one? Um deputy? No. Okay. >> Sorry, one last one. >> Council Damato, >> I would just ask this the manager. This is a common practice in other municipalities.
>> I'm sorry, Council Damato. I couldn't hear what you were saying. >> I said, "Is this a common practice?" >> Is this a common pra? Um I it happens. Um I don't recall have seeing a resolution where it's enumerated like
like you say, but like paying you know paying the board of education their you know allotment if it's not on the bills list. I mean that it's statutory as Miss Bartlett said. These are most of these items. There's I don't know 14 or 16
items. Most of the items are statutory and the other items that are not statutory are usually enumerated themselves in resolutions. It's resolution authorizing a a tax, you know, refund to John Smith and and so you're getting two bites at the apple. One is the first bite of the apple is
authorizing the resolution, you know, uh or approving the resolution authorizing a a reimbursement for an escrow or a tax refund. The second bite of the apple is the actual bills list. Sometimes there's a timeliness issue, a settlement. The settle we had a settlement agreement on
for we'll have it on for the next council meeting. Uh the settlements are often almost always uh approved by resolution. There's usually a time if if you're going through the courts, there's usually a timeliness issue that the settlement has to be paid within so many
days. Um so something like a settlement, you're already author authorizing it by resolution. Uh but the timeliness factor, you may have to actually cut the check before the next bills list. So that's that this resolution in terms of like uh Miss Bartlett's due diligence,
this resolution addresses those items. >> I understand that. I'm just asking like in your opinion, and I'm not going to hold you to it. Do you believe that it it is not uncommon that in other municipalities that are wellrun they would have a bills list that includes
>> I think it it's definitely belt and suspenders best practice you know I have I don't recall seeing it before but it's you know it's definitely best management practice >> okay good thank you that's all >> yes um so move
>> second >> madam clerk Please. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes. >> Councelor Birmingham. >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato. >> Yes. >> Councelor Harrison. >> Yes. >> Councelor Toller. >> No. >> Councelor Williams. >> Yes. >> Mayor Baskerville. >> Yes.
>> Uh, which one are we up to now? Number seven. >> I was the one with the >> Councelor Harrison. Number seven, please. >> All in favor of this, but I have a problem with the indemnification clause on the last page. It says that we
will hold the county indemnify and hold the county harmless with reference to any cause of action resulting from any act or conduct or omission by the county or its design. And normally things like this exclude gross negligence and intentional acts.
And I have a tremendous problem agreeing to something where we're responsible if the driver intentionally or grossly negligent runs someone over. I I think we we can remove the clause and go back to the county and
>> see if they >> I mean normally there for common negligence would normally be included in something like this. But doing anything they do wrong is much further than I would I have ever seen really.
It's definitely broad. Um, and my recommendation actually is even further that indemnification clause is generally void for public policy when it comes to public entities. So, I would just remove it.
>> Okay, sounds good to me. >> Any questions for me? I just would like to say that the um the county and this contract has been incredible for >> I'm sorry I'm not hearing you very well.
>> This contract we are very fortunate to have with the county. We have provided um just you know over 40,000 rides to seniors and people with develop to disabilities this past year.
and our portion of 175,000 uh in comparison to what the um county last year paid was oh almost 600,000. So we are definitely getting our a good
deal and the the majority of the rides that the seniors and people with disabilities take are for medical appointments. Uh that's number one. Second is shopping for food. And the third is socialization, going to
programs and seeing people. So, I will be happy to go back to the county and see if we can take that out and move it forward. >> Um, attorney, is there any way that we can um address uh Councelor Harrison's
concerns and not have it a substantial difference or we have to go back? >> No. No. No, you can uh move to um approve the resolution with that change. >> So what was the change? >> So I'll I'll move the resolution with
the delete >> deletion of the indemnification paragraph. >> Second. >> Second. Okay. >> Yes. Um deputy. >> So um so in the in the memo you you >> I can't really hear you.
>> Sorry. In the memo, um, you mentioned that Essex County is going to be reintroducing two senior buses, correct? For for shopping. >> We do have two senior buses already. We pick up um seniors in the senior housing
>> complexes. We are also looking at our our group in addition to um going we've done a survey with the uh town uh for grocery shopping for seniors and we are looking at going to throughout the the
whole town to pick up other seniors who are not living in just the senior buildings. So we have have that ability to do that. >> Councelor Tobler, >> I'm sorry. Did anybody else have a question for Judy? No council, >> thank you for doing the work that you do
with our seniors. Just appreciate it. >> Um I often stop and do drop in and they're just elated. So I just wanted to thank you for doing the work that you do and helping us. Thank >> you. >> And this is just to pick up Vermont clear residents. >> Excuse me. I'm sorry. >> This is just to pick up Vermont clear
residents. I'll give you an example. If say correct one of our near neighbors from East Orange is at the Wall-E Choice Community Center and they wish to go to Pathmark, can they get a ride or is it just for Montlair residents? >> Just for Montlair residents.
>> Thank you. That I mean that's what I I thought but I just wanted to make sure because it it's a wonderful program. It's working well. Um thank you. But we have to make sure that when we have these opportunities we put out as much information as we can so that there won't be misunderstandings.
>> Right. Good. Thank you. You're welcome. Anyone else? Councilor Damato. No, you moved it. There was a second. Madame Clerk. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes. >> Councelor Birmingham. >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato. >> Yes.
>> Councelor Harrison. >> Yes. >> Councelor Toller. >> Yes. >> Councelor Williams. >> Yes. >> Mayor Baskerville. >> Yes. >> Number eight. >> Yes. This is a resolution authorizing the award of a contract for the lease for the lease of fleet vehicles for the
police department under Sourcewell National Cooperative Purchasing Agreement contract number 030122-EFM to Enterprise Fleet Management, Inc. I just asked that this be pulled in. I'm in favor of the leasing arrangement, but
I just wanted to ensure that not the entire fleet, and I know that it's only certain vehicles right now. >> I think I saw the number in here. Yeah, >> there's certain vehicles in there right now. I just want to make sure that it's
not the entire fleet. We had we discussed something about pulling out certain vehicles that, you know, maybe are for side jobs or things of that nature. So, I don't know if this would allow us to,
you know, pull those things out or if we agree to going to this leasing contract, then it's kind of something that doesn't come back to us at any point. So, that that's all I wanted to clarification on. >> I'm not sure I understand the last part of the question. So, if we approve this
right here, I'm assuming that who's ever in charge of acquiring vehicles at the police department is going to go out to the lease to the leasing agent and just start, you know, leasing vehicles and it's not going to come back here the way
they come right now and say, "Hey, I need a Chevy Tahoe," you know, and stuff like that. It's just >> This is a So, it's a leasing program. There are 49 vehicles in the police department. This would turn over. I think this is a three-year contract, but under if it if it's renewed uh at the
end of this contract, basically the program uh turns over all the vehicles. So, you have you you don't have older uh vehicles u more than 5 years old because there's the warranty implications, too. It's a lot more expensive to maintain a vehicle that's no longer under warranty
than uh a newer vehicle. So the pro the way the program runs is that um it turns over b they basically uh purchase from the town older vehicles. They resale them resell them uh they give you the credit for those uh purchases and then
they give you new vehicles. So this would essentially turn over the the entire police department vehicle fleet within a five-year period. >> Now I all that I understand. So let's say for example there are side job
vehicles in in the fleet right which don't have as much usage and you know mileage and things of that nature. I think the the primary benefit to this leasing program, we're getting newer vehicles for kind of like the patrol vehicles that put a lot of have a lot of
heavy use on them and stuff like that and we don't have to have the maintenance on them whereas the side job vehicles relatively low mileage and things of that nature. So what I wanted to make sure here is that if we do this that we're doing this primarily for
vehicles that are high use vehicles and not necessarily like side job or you know other class of vehicles which I'm not going to uh anyway. So >> it's primarily for the patrol function. >> Okay. Yeah, that's that's what I wanted to drill down on. Thank you, >> Councelor Toller.
>> Right. I think the patrol vehicles, they use them whenever, wherever, and if officers are working aside jobs, if there's an emergency, they're leaving in the car that they're in to do the side jobs. So, >> I don't think that's the case with >> um I don't know. We could The police department's not here to answer those
questions, but um for me personally, if they need the vehicles, cuz whether they're working a side job or patrolling, they're protecting the residents and our community. So, I'm pretty sure when they're working a side job, Yeah. they're working a side job in a car, does it matter what car they're
in? >> I here's what I would say, >> Councelor Birmingham. So, um, we we are trying, you know, in all aspects here to to, um, you know, reduce cost where we can.
We we had a you know we have a system right now where we're spending as it said here $500,000 to buy cars and then we're on top of that paying maintenance for the existing cars. So, with this here of
$420,000 at year three for leasing 30 cars, I think, and this is where um councelor Williams I have a similar question in that the projection for a few more years out was like three4ers of
a million dollars, right? Mhm. I am just going to say for a town of 40,000 people with that has to pay for its school district, 3/4 of a million dollars per year for police vehicles seems high. So I I just want to be
careful like this three-year lease seems reasonable to me. >> Higher than that I have caution. And that's where I just want to know like as we turn over cars what that again the projection is out out of the
>> I think that it's was a three-year projection that's in the in the um the resolution the body of the resolution and the uh >> and the memo the corresponding memo. So, >> okay. So, >> that's not a one year that's not a one-year cost. And it's actually the way they there was a full um presentation uh
on this by uh the enterprise and by Lieutenant Bardi. Um I >> believe there's over 70 municipalities in New Jersey that participate in this program. It's very popular. I'm familiar with it. it there's actually a net cost savings to municipalities who do
participate in it because they maximize the the vehicle values um in the program. So it's a it's it's a coste effective uh solution for managing your vehicle fleets. >> Yeah. Like I because I'm not sure and I
I thought I saw Summit might have been going back to buying like might have going been going back to buying. So I'm all for this. I just want to make sure that in year four and five, you know, that we're not kind of creeping up cost.
>> Lieutenant, >> Lieutenant, are you available >> for a question? >> What number are we on? >> It's the uh Enterprise >> Enterprise uh program here. I'm sorry. >> Oh, great. Thank you for joining us. Happy New Year. >> Get the memo. Happy New Year, everyone.
>> Um what would you like to know? What was the question? I'm sorry. I was outside. I didn't hear it. >> Um ju basically we really we have a three-year contract here. >> Okay. >> And it's the not to exceed for the total
for three years is $834,000. Correct. Okay. >> The projections beyond that because we're talking about selling, you know, cars that we own currently own. >> Yeah. And that's how you sort of get to
lease cars at low lower cost, right? >> The equity that we had in the cars and and >> so my question is beyond this three-year period and we will have given up cars etc.
>> The my I'm just wondering do we have projection of costs beyond these three years? >> We do. We have a 10-year uh cost savings of a little over a million for the township. Um >> that's alto together based on
um you know spending what we spend now annually is about 450 to 500,000 on cars which we only get four to six of them. And uh in in the beginning most of the cost savings will be in the beginning but we're not locked in beyond the three
years. We don't have to do that. we can just start all over again if for some reason we don't like it going back to the way we do it now. Um but everything that all the research that we have done regarding this matter is that it's going to save a lot of money for the township
and it also will give us more cars. Right now we we're dealing with a lot of vehicle maintenance costs that are involved. Um the cars have to be in the fleet for us to be fully operational that have a lot of um you know it's probably gas guzzlers and and a lot of
damage. I mean I know we've done a few transmissions over the last few years which is expensive. All that will go out the window and they handle everything from top to bottom. I I council Harrison I got your email uh today. Sorry, I
didn't get it before today, but uh the they handle everything. So, even from like a manpower standpoint, we're saving money because right now we're getting the cars from the the dealership, driving them down to the the people who equip them. And that's happens to be in
Flemington. So, you're losing half a day just for man man-hour, people just driving it down there, and then we got to pick it up and do the same thing all over again when it's done. they handle everything from that aspect. Um it's really something that I mean we met the
um the financial uh group we met with uh the manager as well and the enterprise rep and uh we discussed it on in that virtual meeting a couple months ago. It seems like a win-win and the other townships around here that I have
mentioned in in the memo, they all seem to like it as well. I think it would be beneficial for the township and uh and we're not like I said we're not beyond beyond the first year um you know it's still we still have that stipulation of the budget
having to be approved for next year 27 28 and they're well aware of it >> uh if I may >> yes council Dato >> so to a couple of questions so first of all the the cars are outfitted completely >> yes so they basically work with our
outfitter They work already, but the company that we use, East Coast Lighting right now. >> Okay. >> So, the way it worked is is we got quotes from East Coast Lighting to for for the 11 cars that we would get this coming year or 12 cars, I forget what it was,
>> and they incorporated that into the lease price. So, the it's not going to be an additional cost to equip these cars. So the lease price that we had in the quotes and in this first year is all part of that cost.
>> There may be a few other things that we may have to add in there on our own. Um but it's very it's insignificant as far as money goes. So lease leasing arrangements for consumer vehicles um
obviously is a very popular um thing but there are ways in which people get >> are unhappy at the end of the lease usually with mileage and things like that >> right >> so >> there is no there there's
>> there's no downside >> there's no downside with regard to that because it's different it's not like the lease that me or you would get if we just went to a dealership Right. >> It's uh it's basically uh the way they said it was like a it's like a government uh leasing program
where you know like they said uh councelor Birmingham was saying they use the equity that we have in there and use that towards the next purchase and the next lease. >> So it keeps the leasing prices down. There isn't an issue as far as the mileage goes. They know what we're using
these cars for. It's patrol. They know that there's going to be a decent amount of miles on these cars. Um, I can have a rep come and talk to you guys if you really wanted to. That he he expressed that he would be willing to at our
meeting if you guys remember. >> Um, but we've been discussing this for a while now and all our research indicates that it is going to save money for the township. The memo has um >> apologize I didn't get to do that
deputy chief young >> DC. >> Yeah. So >> this this is a uh it's a relationship with uh with enterprise. It's not a transaction. So they want to keep a happy customer. It's not and the the more successful I I have had personal
experience with personal professional experience with this program in in a previous uh employment setting and and it was very popular. It's very successful and it was very cost effective. >> I like the I like the model. I just want to kick the tires. So one and two and
three oh year three. Okay. So what you're seeing is that the increase in prices because we're we're going from leasing 12 vehicles to I believe then 20 and then or up to 30 on the third >> and the vehicles are all new when they come into the fleet.
>> Correct. And when you get to the third year, we will now be leasing 30 vehicles, which if we just stayed at our current model, we would be getting, like I said, based on the type of car would be four to six vehicles based for that
price that we're paying in that third year. It it it seems like a real cost. So it's basically you can start by year two. You're rolling the the fleet is aging slightly as it goes on. But you can just
do a simple division of the fleet number divided by the cost and it's whatever 12 $13,000 >> and they keep it on a rotation so they don't age. So they don't we never have a car that's like we're we're having transmission issues, we're having
>> severe uh engine problems. It's they'll once we get to a certain year whether we we'll decide whether you know it's the fourth year whatever they'll they'll start recycling them again and then they'll use those new ones that we do in
year one sell those and use that equity while they're still valuable and they can get a decent amount of equity and use that towards leasing their new vehicle. Um, that's the way I understand it and I and like I said, he would be willing to come here and present to the council. No,
>> it's okay. Two more two more quick ones. One is then the issue of like the model types is that that is pre-agreed with them. >> We can they so they have a set amount of cars that are available, but we can pick and choose which ones we want based on
our needs. So, we're not locked into a certain model or type. >> And then where are the repairs done? So, they do work with our right now we have a contract with the local mechanic uh Montlair Motorworks at Clare Pine. Um I
don't know when that contract is coming up, but I do believe it's coming up at the end of this year. I think we renewed for one year. I'm not 100% sure. Don't quote me on that, but they do work with local uh mechanics and would be willing to have them do it, but they do want a
little bit of oversight with it. So, we'll just have to report to them. This is the issue. This is what we're doing and we're bringing it here for this repair. >> Okay. Thanks so much. You're very welcome. >> Any other questions? >> Yeah, just a couple >> council Harrison.
>> So, just so the answer to my question is this price includes the vehicles basically being fully outfitted. fully equ. >> Okay. Then the the price per year goes from a little less than >> let me do this $10,000 a vehicle and
then goes up to a little little over 14,000 then almost exactly 14,000. Why the difference? So that's that's so what if you look it's because we're leasing 12 in the beginning and then we'll have those 12 and then on year two we'll also
have an additional nine. >> So we'll be leasing a total of uh 21 at that point. So that's why the price >> that's the math I'm doing. It >> should be higher as you start but >> and and then then we'll be leasing a
total of 30. But I'm doing the price per vehicle at >> 12 >> because it's not per vehicle. So we we have to do >> we have to consider the fleet and what type of cars are involved in the fleet too. >> Okay. So that was my that was my next
question I guess I asked in the so >> this doesn't specify what vehicles but so for year one you're getting a different mix of vehicles from year two from year three based on what vehicles are >> it's just an best guesstimate and we're we're probably on the high side for
years two and three because they can't give us the pricing for vehicles >> um two years from now. They don't know what they're going to be those prices at this point. The dealerships don't know. They don't know. But we do know for a fact what the prices are this coming year in 2026. That's based on actual
quotes from actual dealership. >> You're doing it based on year one, you need these types of vehicles. Year two, you need these types vehicles, >> but most likely it's going to be less than the amount that we've asked for. We asked for the high amount to put in the resolution so we have that if if we need
it. But most likely even this coming year the price is going to be less. We don't have to spend the entire amount of the money. It's it's an up to >> right >> kind of situation. >> Anyone else? Welcome, Deputy Chief. Sorry. >> Happy New Year to you.
>> Anyone else from council? >> Was this moved? >> No. >> I so move. >> Second. >> Madame Clerk. Deputy Mayor Anderson, >> yes. >> Councelor Birmingham, yes. Councelor Damato, yes. Councelor Harrison, yes. Councelor Toller, yes. Councelor Williams, yes.
>> Mayor Baskerville, >> yes. >> Okay, where are we? Number 10. Thank you. >> Yes, that was me. I requested councelor Toller, please. Number 10. Um, maybe the attorney can help me with this one. My
question is um this is saying that the purchasing agent is authorizing a contract and I'm just trying to see how does that tie into the election um transparency act through a purchasing agent.
>> I'm sorry attorney. I can't hear you. Is your mic on? I I I I would need to look into this. I I'm This is not my resolution. >> No, I I know it's not the purchasing agent. Yeah. >> So, um yeah. Any questions? I'm happy to answer. Um
>> Mr. Marks, do you have an answer or do you know why he's authorizing what he's authorizing and how this ties into Election Transparency Act? The purchasing agent is a very specific role. I've just never seen this before. So, can you shed clarity?
>> I'm not sure. I I understand the exact question. >> Why is the amount increasing? >> No. >> How does this tie into the New Jersey Election Transparency Act? Is he authorizing this award of contract?
>> This this is more of a a policy. So, New Jersey state law allows uh municipalities and counties who have qualified purchasing agents to actually uh approve uh professional service contracts up to um the biddable amount
and the bill biddable amount had been 40 and went to 44 and I believe it's now at 53. So, um the going through of so I think the way that it's tied to the um uh the election >> Okay, I get it now. So, what he's asking
for, this is the purchasing agent asking us to adhere to the new state law where we won't see anything that's 53,000 and under. >> Correct. >> Right. >> And I think I believe that Montlair's
already had this uh policy in effect. >> Yes, we have. And the reason why it references the election law is because this has to do with paytoplay. >> Okay. Can you tell me please u madame clerk about that paytoplay part? I'm not that familiar with paytoplay
>> the paytoplay law. Uh paytoplay laws, excuse me. And of course, I'll invite the attorney to comment if I misspe cuz I'm going off the top of my head. Of course, when you issue contracts, if you go over $17,500,
the vendor or the provider needs to provide the governing body and also it is made public. uh a business entity disclosure form and a political contribution disclosure form. And those
two forms together are referenced as pay-to-play documents. So you do receive that anytime you go over the the 17,500. It'll be in your packet. And we also do make it public so that everyone knows, >> right? >> So no one's, you know, paying to play.
>> Yeah. Well, see that's what that's what's confusing for me because it sounds like you're paying to to play and I wouldn't normally think that that's a great thing, you know. >> Oh, the municipality has denied contracts when those paytoplay forms
have come in completed and people have seen that or noticed that the contracts have not been awarded. It has happened in this township because of that. >> Okay. I just question. Yes. Um, councelor Toller. >> Sure. Madam clerk, you said we've had this in place and we we do this every year because I thought this was just
introduced to us last year under the former manager. >> Yes. The reason >> in the past we didn't have to do >> No, ma'am. Not until that new law came into effect. >> Right. Is it something we have to do >> or is it something >> that I'm not going to tell you what you
have to do, but I'll tell you. >> You understand what I mean? Is this does the law say that we the town council have to >> Yes. That's why it's presented to you, counselor. Yes. So that the governing body, it's about transparency so that you're aware that these window contracts are going to be awarded by the QPA. You
still will see everything. Nothing's going to change over what has been going on over the past 12 months. It's just being made clear here by resolution. >> I don't understand. But okay. Um, I think we need to see any contract that
comes in front of us in a resolution. $53,000 is a lot of money. This is what happened with the last attorney we had. We didn't know about it because it was $10,000 paid and then it was brought to us at the last meeting because then it was going over the threshold for another
36,000. And I had questions because we were unaware we hired an attorney. So, this is allowing a purchasing agent to hire vendors, people under $53,000, and we won't know who it is, what it's for
until much later in life. Is that my understanding correctly? >> That question's for me or the clerk, I'm sorry. >> Got the answer. >> Or the attorney. I mean, you'll still if if there's uh any billing involved, you'll still see
the bills the the uh the firm the bills on the bills list. >> I understand. Council told there are various rules and regulations under pay-to-play laws uh for various contracts and not all
contracts and of course for the uh are are will be especially professional services contracts as you mentioned are necessarily um need to even meet the 53,000. >> I understand but I'm just saying this governing body will not see it will not
know about it. Is that is that is that that's a fact? Um, councelor Toller, I'm I'm trying to receive what you're saying and it doesn't sound like that's really good if we're not going to see something. So, is that >> Well, we didn't know we hired a firm back in October. I remember that
>> because it was a certain amount of money. We learned about the firm in December >> because at that point they had went over the threshold and they needed to come to us for approval because it passed the $44,000. But when we hire someone at 10,000, we won't know.
Or >> Council Williams, >> 2,000. >> Council Williams, >> I I I do remember this from last year, and I get I get everything that Councelor Toller is saying, but all all of the
bills have to come to us. Now, if you if you have concerns about services being rendered prior to us giving approval, then that seems to be what what the issue is here. >> Well, this is about taxpayer money, number one. And yes, we should want to
know what we're spending in advance and not learn about it after the fact. That's just makes good sense to me. But >> I but the other part of this is is that you know you have folks here that are doing this on a day-to-day basis and in
order to have municipal services operate in an efficient manner you have to have they have to have the ability to do things and not come back to us for a $10,000 item or stuff like that unless they go over a threshold. I understand that I get your point. >> Transparency. We need to know what we're
approving and paying for. It's just that simple. I can see a lot of hiccups coming if we don't know what's going on. But >> well, once again, it does come to us >> to to to pay it. So there there is transparency here. So I don't I don't
want anybody listening this to that. >> That's correct. But it's after, not before. We don't get to have a say. The residents don't get to have a say. It's already paid. >> Council Williams, though, can you help me? So if um we get something say for um
53,000 right and it comes to us after they paid it then what recourse do we have if we're not happy? >> No. >> Well I mean just in the normal normal course I mean I'll let uh councelor
Harrison do it because I I think he can more eloquently say it than I can say. >> Okay. >> Okay. So there there are a couple things at play here that one there's a pay-to- pay legislation that anything over
17,500 >> has to fill out the form saying who among local governments ent county legislative districts that they've given contributions to. That's one part of this. There's a second part
of this where under an executive order by the governor, it enables contracts up to now $53,000 for professional services to be approved
by by the qualified purchasing agent without approval by the council. Ultimately, we will have to approve the bills, but the professional firm, as happened with Parker McKay, will already be retained. And
if their services do not exceed the 53,000, you're paying them for their services up to that amount because they have been lawfully hired by the the qualified purchasing agent. So it it's a question
of the threshold. The council wants to allow correct the administration to do it that way to issue contracts >> without our approval in advance. >> Right. Because you said it allows it's not mandated that we have to agree to
this. We can set our own limits on what we would like the purchasing agent to adhere to. I know what the state law says but we could say anything under 30,000 you can do. 30,000 in a dollar, bring it to us. Is that correct, >> attorney? I see you shaking your head on
that end. >> That's correct. >> So again, uh I I'm not quite certain and I will I can come back to it, but I'm not quite certain that you um the council has the authority to reject the qualified purchasing agent.
>> No, no, I'm not saying reject it. You can't do third. Well, if if the statute allows up to or executive order allows up to 53,000 and gives that authority to the qualified purchasing agent, the council can't take away that authority. >> Is that for certain? >> I don't think so. Not for certain. Is that for certain? Anybody for certain on
that? >> Triple check. Prove this right now. >> Have to approve it. I can take a look at it. Please check. >> Thank you, Council Damato. >> Yeah. I mean, why I if we don't have the authority >> to say no to the QPA's authority, then why is there a resolution? >> Good point.
>> I this resolution wasn't um reviewed by myself. Was it submitted to me earlier? So, I'm not quite sure what why it reads the way it does. >> Yeah, this is like to take a look at it because I'm not >> This is deja vu for me. And I kind of am with councelor toler on this a lot. Like
it is not that we don't trust the QPA and that you know you want to be preapproving every $2 purchase of bottled water, but it's like that number 53 feels like a real number. >> Yeah, it is. Now, if I can also go off script and just say something that like
the actual transaction that happened that we're talking about involved a firm of the uh uh that I have no problem with the service that they're providing, but it it does involve a
related series of business entities, let's say, and political entities of the sort that I don't want to see that, you know, it was exactly the wrong check that was cut that in fact I was showing this around >> Yep.
>> obliquely turned into kind of weird political attack >> on an esteemed member of our community. And I'm not using this as a prop. It was just literally sitting there. >> So I would like to examine this and and just
>> look at where we're at. What happened? I would like to know what are the real world need. what's the real world need and do we you know and again do we even have the if we don't have the the power to say do it then obviously what's it even for like why do we have a
resolution so I I I I'm just going to say >> can we just table this I agree with you councelor Demato table it >> before we table it though I just want to ask councelor Harrison who seemed to have um a breath of knowledge here is it
your understanding that we don't have a choice here because I agree with what um council >> de I will await our attorney's research. >> Okay. So I'd like to make a motion that we table No. Yes. Um >> second. >> I'm sorry.
>> The change in law is increasing. >> Right. >> Um the threshold from 44,000 to 53,000. So that I'm assuming that we have been adhering to that threshold that threshold >> the 44. Yes. But it does it becomes more real. I think I heard council Damato say
that. Council Toller and myself becomes more real when you hear 53,000. That sounds like a pretty big number. So, I'd like to make a motion to table this until the 27th. >> Thank you. I'll second that. >> All in favor? >> I >> I. Any opposed?
>> No. Any abstensions? Okay. Where are we? We are at number um 13. Did I miss one? >> No. 12. Number 12, please. >> We already passed that one.
>> Um, number 12, please. >> Number 12. >> We're on number 12. >> We're on number 12. Yes. Mhm. >> Resolution. We just we we just got an amended one of your name. >> Yes. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Yeah. Um,
is this So, this individual, I believe, used to be on the um this housing commission. I'm just wondering why the last minute addition. >> Um the person reached out to me um and said that there were several seats available, some expirations, and she
wanted to do some good here in the township of Montlair like she's been doing. She used to serve on the housing commission. Um so I recommended her name. The mayor seconded. I I know her work. I know her worth. Um, we have some real housing and affordable and section
8 issues here in town and we could use someone with some knowledge such as hers at the table. Um, and I can't see why she wouldn't be appointed. She's a breath of fresh air and she knows her stuff. This is what we need. Someone on this commission that actually knows all
things housing. And how long did she serve before? Or you don't even know we're talking about Mr. Scott, do we? I'm sorry. Yeah, I um I agree with what councelor Toller is saying and I was on the housing commission um with this individual for a long time and she is um
just very very knowledgeable with with everything in our township from one end to the next and um she she was participating I think at one time she was a co-chair there was a change in circumstances in her life for temporary
time and now um that that no longer seems to be problem. We were all very very sad to see that um her life circumstances caused her to step down, but that's um now that that's resolved, she is stepping up again. And um I'm I
am very excited to see that we have other seats open. I know some people here said they had other names. We haven't gotten them. I think we have about another five seats open for our housing commission. So, if there are people uh within my voice who would like
to fill out a volunteer interest binder, we would love to um have you please fill them out so that we can review them. Uh also, >> can I just confirm that this individual submitted a BIF in the past two years?
I don't remember it. Okay. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Yes. Um Councelor Birmingham. Um I this is not at all a comment on this individual who I am going to vote for. It's not that
it's back to our word, the process word and just that the public doesn't even know who we're talking about probably. Um, and just to be clear, like there are other committees that need appointments and when people reached out to me to
say, um, can you put me on for early January and it was like, well, sorry because we've, you know, the deadline has already passed because it was the holiday and so other people for, you know, other committees didn't make it on
and like I wasn't going to come in today and say, you have to vote for this person. >> That's all I'm saying is all I'm saying. It's just it's again like back to like because again the public doesn't even know who we're talking about here and it's more just again make being
transparent. It's nothing at all about this person and >> we do have other >> but that that is important and just like when we did some things with planning and other committees and process and and it is very important and um the process
here um was followed and um >> so did you move that? >> Sorry, mayor. Can I can I just cuz because I just want to be clear here when you say the process was followed. What what do you mean? Because we got
our packet >> to your interest, >> right? But we got our packet on th last Thursday. Again, I I don't I'm going to come off as arguing against this. This is not what I'm doing. It is just because again I told other people, sorry, I can't put you on for this
Tuesday. I'm sure you did as well. And then here there's a person on that wasn't you know what I'm saying? So it just >> and I think and and I totally agree with you. So let's let's talk about the civil rights commission um because of the timing of these meetings that we're
having. You have a meeting, you have a special meeting, you have an emergency meeting, then sometimes you know we get behind and I was not able to get some appointments too. I know that disappointment um was viewed um as special circumstances because they need to have enough people to take care of
their business and that's how that was presented to me from from that committee and so I agreed to go along with it but I totally agree with you even we got something I guess from planner tally today or yesterday and so yeah um and
and as we move into 2026 I I think that that's something very big for all of us and um you We need to get everything written down and I know deputy mayor has been trying to do this for a while and we need to follow the process. I totally agree with you because it's not just the
civil rights commission, the housing um historic preservation and that um luckily the um madame clerk was kind enough to let me know that that is a mayor um appointment for all of those and so I don't need to go through here but I agree with you 100%.
>> Yes. >> Thank you, mayor. I appreciate you um saying all of that. Is there any issue then considering you know just we're trying to adhere to process and transparency to um um move to uh put
this on the the next meeting agenda if there's no urgency just because >> because they don't the seats are it's people have left. There's >> urgent. >> Well, there are five five other spots open. So what's the urgency? >> But the other Yeah. and the other ones are are not reappointed. There there is
a a sense of urgency that was presented to me. Um and I don't see that that this is going to harm anything. I mean it's not going to be the first time that we haven't followed process and I'm just wondering you know today you know if there if the housing commission is
saying there's a sense of urgency they need people in order to do their work. I don't know why we couldn't grant this like we've granted other appointments that we've made and some other things that have gotten on our agenda. I don't I don't see the harm and I guess I'm
trying to weigh is it going to be harmful to somebody if we do that today and I don't see that it's going to be any way harmful and I do feel that it's going to help the housing commission to move forward. They've got a very important meeting coming up on the 20th
of this month where they're having some outside people and I just think that it would be helpful. Mr. Marks, would you like to weigh in on this topic? >> In my perspective, this is a purely legislative policy oriented discussion.
So I >> Okay, >> I don't want to be over my uh skis on this. Councelor Toller. Um, are you having a dialogue here or you want to keep that there? Because I want >> I wanted to know if the manager had any inputs. No, he doesn't. >> No. And Council Williams thinks I'm
being he doesn't know what he's talking about cuz I had a conversation. >> All right. So then let's let's vote. You u moved it. Sure. I second it. >> Uh, roll call, please. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. I'm going to have to abstain. You know, not for the not because of the council
Birmingham. >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato, >> yes. >> Councelor Harrison, >> yes. >> Councelor Toller, >> yes. >> Councelor Williams, >> yes. >> Mayor Baskerville, >> yes. >> Thank you. Next, please. What number are
we on? Number 14. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Um, resolution number 14, please. or not resolution 14 but number 14 please that is about 14 Miller Street council to was that you
>> yes I was hoping councelor Harrison was going to >> councelor Harrison would you like to lead us off on we are now talking about a resolution authorizing a study to determine whether block what is this
3112 lot 4 located at 14 Miller Street is an area in need of rehabilitation. That's a discussion now. >> Councelor Harrison, >> not sure what role you want me to play cuz I I mean I think
>> whatever role you like I think we're >> you understood my concern. Yeah. So, I I I think the question here is what the township wants to do with the property. And just so the public knows,
this is property that was formerly owned and managed by Homecore. Has three affordable units on it. Um Homecore decided to sell the property.
the township purchased the property. Um so so there would continue to be three affordable units and the question at this point the is how best to maintain the three
affordable units on the property. And what is proposed to us is that the property be investigated as qualifying as an area need of rehabilitation. The criteria for that in the statute, there's no question the property will
qualify. Um, and the advantage of that is it gives the township the ability to directly sell the property to an entity of its choosing who will do what the township
wants with the property. But it is presupposing that's the route we're going as to selling the property to a third party. And >> I think that's what >> Yeah, >> councelor Toller's concern is. >> Right. Correct. And um I'm sorry. No,
councelor Toller. >> Sure. Thank you. I know that councelor um Anderson had a question. So with this, do we need to ensure or are we at the point where we put in these deed restriction controls? Is this the place to do it or do we wait until we've found
someone and make sure that they don't expire? Because I have some concerns. You know, we can't have military. It's a historic area. Um, >> I'm sorry. You said what about the historic area? >> Miller Street is a historic, >> you know, a naturally historic area. So, you know, my concerns is that we keep
the charm and the character of the neighborhood and this isn't going to hurt that down the road, say 5 to seven years from now. How do we make sure that these deed restrictions and affordability controls remain in place if we're giving up our own property to someone else? So, so it's to answer your
question. So, as part of the transfer of the property, we could impose conditions on, >> you know, I don't know the current status of the deed restriction, but we could increase the deed restriction if that needs to occur. We can put
requirements in terms of what is done to the existing units on the property in terms of you know is the existing structure maintained or you know you want to give some flexibility because circumstances will change but there you can impose and part of the
point of doing it through um the the area need of rehabilitation lead lets you directly negotiate and hence impose terms whereas has if it's not in an area need of rehabilitation, the township if it's selling the property would have to go through the
public bidding process and go to the highest qualified bidder for the property. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'm sorry, Deputy Mayor has been trying to get in here for a minute and then um Council Damada. >> Uh I'm just going to pretty much reiterate some of what councelor
Harrison said. So this was actually before it came here discussed within the economic development committee >> on the planning board. >> Correct. Yes. Um and as councelor Harrison said uh you know this was a property that had three um two-bedroom
dwelling units. There was some discussion about um within that committee about you know what what would be the best way to um handle this property. Um and the thought that is we would you know the the committee thought that it would be better to maintain this
property and try to have this maintained as affordable units. >> Um and how are we going to uh go about doing that? So, um the the uh RFP process um was determined to be the best
way um to uh you know for the for the township to be able to put in the RFP exactly what we would want whoever the the buyer um uh to do. And um but we were um advised by the planner that we
would not be able to go through the RFP process to sell the property um ideally to an organization uh um that would specialize in this type of housing um without a this a study um to determine that this area is in an area of need of
rehabilitation. So that's why um this is being presented. Mhm. Councelor Demato. >> But I mean getting a brass tax on like what's the difference that over the long haul
if you can deed restrict certain things quite broadly about like what it's going to be used for that it's going to be maintained. Obviously the affordability controls can be extended to 40 years now. I believe that would be you would do that as you were transferring it. So
why what are you missing out on if you just put what you want into the deed restrictions? What you're just is it that you want to be able to pick the entity that you are giving it off to and what would prevent us from doing that
anyway? In other words, like why can't we what prevents us now from get entering into an arrangement with a a third party without like why why do we need to do
this change in the status of the land? I don't get it. >> Council Harrison. >> Um okay. So, if the township is going to maintain ownership and lease it to, then you can do all of those things. But if you're going to sell it,
>> you can absolutely do the deed restriction before you sell it. But you you lose some control over who you're selling it to. because you ultimately are governed at that point by the bidding statutes and you can put a bunch of requirements you
know whether this has a practical difference or not um you know I've trying to think of any like circumstance um you know you're you're >> the most the bidder that qualifies as
being qualified in the lowest may not be an entity that the township wishes to sell it to even with whatever restrictions are imposed. >> But then wouldn't they wouldn't they be able to be disqualified as not being a qualified bidder? >> What what are the criteria?
>> It's actually as I as I understand it from Janice Thally's last presentation, if it is not subject to rehabilitation, then it has to go to public auction. >> Okay? >> And you can't control the bid. It's not a bid process. we would actually have to do an online auction. We can reject uh
reject those but it's a longer process and more convoluted than going just um in this route. So this is why she's proposed this alternative. >> What presentation is that >> the last time that this came up um I think it came up twice before. Mhm.
>> Sorry, M. It would be an auction process and you again, you can do the some restrictions, but you're not at liberty to say we're rejecting your bid unless you can really show, >> right? I'm just trying to think of the
like real world example in which you in which it's fair for the township to be picking winners and losers on on a piece of property that is deed restricted. So, like who is the person? Is it the planner who just gets to pick this is
the person who's going to get a piece of private property? Cuz that that that doesn't sound like fair ball to me. >> Oh, it would ultimately be the township decision. Coun council council decision. >> Yeah. >> I' I'd like to please give um manager um
Marks an opportunity. You've been sitting there like you have some information to share. Not. So, I don't know if I could um enlighten the the uh conversation, but I you you just the the mayor and council as the governing body is the redevelopment agency for the town
and just as we're going through a redevelopment agreement on another, you know, property in town, you are in the driver's seat. So, it's not it's not a way of avoiding, you know, laws or circumventing anything. If we go through the redevelopment rehabilitation process
as the redevelopment agency of the municipality, you are in control. you'll be voting on a redevelopment agreement or >> I like >> you know the the the controls that are a forementioned >> ma'am. >> Good. Yes, councelor Toller. >> Right. That's why I asked the question um because I think we sold property to
another agency before and then they lost it and we had to buy it back. So I'm just very concerned with this process and asked maybe this attorney and council Harrison probably doesn't want to answer it but when do we put our controls in place? Does it happen on this document or another document?
Because I know in EDC, which I sit on, there was full discussion and I really wasn't in favor of doing this. I felt like the township could be landlords and take over the property, but I was outvoted. Um, >> I was. So, I'm just saying I'm just trying to understand and make sure that
we're protected and preserve this particular street, that this isn't going to turn into some major project or problem later, 5 to seven years from now, for families. you know, when do we get to say that we want to put these certain restrictions and controls in place now before we get out to the
developer so that they understand coming in this is exactly what we want period. >> Do we get the purchase agent? Right. >> My understanding is that this is something that needs to be um enumerated in the RFP. I mean ultimately it's a policy decision that we have to make if we're going to um and that's why this is
in front of us today. So, and after you get the purchasing agent, >> I just don't I just explain it to me and the people at home like what are we exactly trying to prot you know to do? Would the restriction be like
>> you can't redevelop the site? Is it that you can't paint the house? Like what are we what are we trying to protect by >> we're trying to protect the historic area for what it is? They're cottages. You been down Miller Street. Have you taken a look at these properties?
you could see what we're trying to create and keep um deed constru, you know, deed restriction controls so they don't expire for 40 years. >> Um, >> but that's in the deed, the sale deed, >> right? But again, I'm still asking when do we, the council, governing body get to put those things in place now before
we go out for a developer. Instead of a developer coming in thinking he or she can do whatever, they need to know what box they can work in. >> Why doesn't it have to be declared an area need? We are not I mean I don't I to answer your question >> um councelor Birmingham.
>> No I my understanding is the reason that to to have this sort of control to say we want it kept this way or is we would have to start by having it declared an area of need and redevelopment which is what this is going to do. >> Yes. >> I'm sorry.
>> Um manager Marks. So um if a uh if a municipality declares an area in need of rehabilitation, there's still a redevelopment plan. Yes. That gets put in place and redeveloper agreement. So there's an additional, you know, at least two bites at the apple that the the mayor and council exercise control
over. >> Through this process, >> council Havson, >> and you can't do those absent the determination it qualifies as an area needed rehabilitation. And I absolutely agree long before we go
offering the property that >> one we develop a plan and in that plan it should specify very specifically what we want to have happen on the property and two before we go off we put the longest possible affordable housing deed
restriction on the property. >> Thank you councelor Williams. >> So just two questions. So, and I'm asking this because I I generally don't know, can we declare a specific piece of
property in an area in need of development instead of >> a broader area? So, you're shaking your head. Excuse me. Reil. You're shaking your head. Yes. >> Okay. The other thing here is I I went
to for uh to Miller Street and yes, it it looks like something that you could film movies on. It has that old school old uh feel. >> Is there this block isn't currently in I don't know uh designated as a historic
block >> currently? Is it? >> Yes, >> it is. All right. So, no, I was just saying because you said to uh maintain the historic nature, but if it's already designated as then you can't make any changes. >> But also, I don't understand all the
land use laws. I'm not a planner. I'm not a developer. I know there's some language out there where loopholes and slips can happen. So, I'm just trying to ensure and protect the neighborhood. It's that simple. >> Did um Councelor Harrison didn't explain that? Okay. Is there anyone else up
here? >> Um council members or or anyone else that wishes to say anything else? Was this moved? >> No. >> Okay. So, move. >> Second. >> Roll call, please. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes. >> Councelor Birmingham. >> Yes. Councelor Damato,
>> no. >> Councelor Harrison, >> yes. >> Councelor Toller, >> yes. >> Councelor Williams, >> yes. >> Mayor Baskerville, >> yes. And is that is that that that's it for us? >> Item 15.
>> 15. Item number 15, please. >> Okay. I I'm the one who had the question. >> Councelor Harrison. Uh the when this was on at the last meeting, I asked about the two planning forms that were out of state. Um manager Marks explained one of
them. The other one where one of the things the memo from Miss Thally um went through who the planner was and their New Jersey planning experience and one of them it says none. And I'm not
quite sure why, you know, particularly since the firms, New Jersey firms are all wellqualified, why we're authorizing a non- New Jersey firm with no New Jersey experience to do planning
work for the township or its boards. If I may, mayor, >> I'm sorry. >> So, um, by pre-qualifying a list of of professionals, it allows the administration to actually solicit proposals from pre-qualified firms for
as as work comes up. So, um I'm not familiar with one of the firms that's from New York City, but uh typically uh you would solicit um as projects come up, you would solicit uh proposals from more than one firm uh based on that
firm's strengths or qualifications or or um expertise and select the proposal. It's a truncated uh bidding or or RFP process and it just allows for by pre-qualing pre-qualifying firms um it
it um allows the administration to um uh expedite a a RFP process. So I I don't know if that properly I understand that and I have no problems I mean with the whole long list of pre-qualifying all of those. I just not sure why we're
prequalifying a firm that I have no knowledge of and no indication. The indication is they've never done New Jersey work >> and I I'm not familiar with that firm and I I can't speak to why would we be there
there's probably some expertise they may have that was attractive to the uh person who was reviewing these proposals. >> Question council to you said you're not familiar. We're not using them at all right now on any projects that you know of. Number six under professional planner. That's my first question. And
my second question is this list that's provided by Miss Tally. Um are we ensuring that we're giving each of these firms fair play regarding our affirmative action policies? Because I see one on here that could be a
professional planner, but they're listed as a number two. So she can use any of these or we can use any of these. I don't think these are in in any particular order. So, um when we solicit I I know from other
um RFPs that I've evaluated, there's a fivepoint um preference for minority and women uh business enterprises. So um I'm not sure how you know assuming we use the same metric there would be uh a preference
shown for for small minority and and small business minority and female or womenowned businesses. I don't know if that answers your question or not. >> That answers some of it. But again this list that she submitted can can we amend it to take off
excuse me number four and number six under item C? number four. Uh I'm not familiar with number four. I am familiar with number six. Um I had actually reached out the former I was having a meeting with manager Mono about the town the parking
utilities um curbside management policies and plans and just the operations of the the Montlair uh parking utility. Um the former director of the Hoboken parking
utility uh does work with Alta. I would consider him a highly qualified expert in uh parking policies. I did reach out to him uh to ask him to provide some um some guidance on our parking policies.
He does work for the firm Alta. Uh we have not awarded a contract, but I would I would recommend even though Alta is a uh Baltimore, Maryland based firm. Um Ryan Sharp does reside in I think it's South Orange. Um so he is local even
though his firm is out of state. Um so I would just uh recommend including Alta. I am not familiar. There could be a similar backstory to number four. I'm not familiar with uh um the Ferman number four. I wouldn't want to disqualify them just because I'm not personally familiar with them.
>> And we can use firms outside of New Jersey. I guess >> as long as they have a New Jersey business registration. >> Uh yes. >> Okay. Um well, we can't make any amendments tonight. Correct. >> Uh no, counselor. This is uh to
pre-qualify based on bids that were submitted in response to an RFP RFQ. The RFP RFQ that I reviewed did not have any criteria that the uh business be actually physically located in New Jersey. So there's no um sound legal
basis to not pre-qualify all of these persons. >> But we don't have to use them. >> We don't have to use them in the future. >> Yes. >> No. No. This is just to narrow the field of professionals should the need arise
for any of the specific specialties of that profession. >> Okay. So move >> second >> roll call please. Madam clerk. >> Deputy Mayor Anderson. >> Yes. >> Councelor Birmingham. >> Yes. >> Councelor Damato.
>> Yes. >> Councelor Harrison. >> No. >> Councelor Toller. >> No. >> Councelor Williams. >> Yes. Mayor Baskerville. >> Yes. >> The next time we do this, we should have a New Jersey specification
>> for the new city. >> Thanks very much. Agreed. >> I >> Okay. And so that brings us to the um end of the um consent agenda. I see that that we have um some people that are in
our um audience and I I want to find out please um if some of you that are here came specifically for public comment. Okay. If so, show me put your hands cuz I need to make a decision. Just so you
all know we we passed the public comment but because this is this is new today. Um, we started right and when you see our agenda and moving forward and people at home and it says 5:30, if we don't have an executive meeting or something
else there, we may change and have the public comment earlier than 7:00. Since you guys had no way of knowing that, this is the first day that we did that. I'd like to offer you um, show me how many people please would like to be heard. That's one, two,
just two people. three. Okay. Did you guys sign up here, please? That's one, two, and three. You guys, everyone over there? No. Well, thank you for coming anyway. I remember you all. Okay. So, we have three people that we're going to offer um three minutes of public
comment. Thank you. >> And then we're going to close close the public comment after these three people. If you guys change your mind, just throw a hand up and go. >> Yes. Good evening, uh, Mr. Scott. How
are you? >> Good evening, Mayor and Council members. Uh, I just want to say thank you for >> Excuse me. Um, thank you, Mr. Scott. >> Okay. Excuse me. William Scott, 23 Cedar Avenue. I'm also a member of the housing commission. >> Yes, sir. >> And I appreciate the appointment of the
new appointee. >> Uh at least we'll be able to approve our minutes at the next meeting. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Uh but there are a number of reappoints and obviously hopefully you'll have an opportunity to >> the 27th we're shooting for. I stand
with uh councelor Birmingham there and I just didn't I just because I missed the deadline. >> I understand that and and we do have a tremendous amount of work to do as it relates to affordable housing and we are really hoping that the housing commission has an opportunity to present
as much information as possible. uh the faith-based organization. There's some things that are definitely on the table that we need to take a very close look at, not only from a township standpoint, but also from a state standpoint. So, uh thank you for the appointment and we look forward to some more.
>> Thank you, Mr. Scott, and thank you for your service. >> Thank you. >> Guest number two, happy new year to you both. >> The dynamic duo. >> Happy New Year. Happy new year and thank you mayor and council for
>> and you guys are on our civil rights uh commission and also as with some of the others and with the situation that councelor Birmingham had I was unable to get those members who are waiting in a timely manner.
>> That's one of the things I came to talk about. >> I'm sure it is. That's why I'm telling you up front and I'm I'm very certain that I will be able to do that by the 27th. at least get them on for discussion with this council. >> Excellent. Thank you. So, we have to say who we are. >> Yes. And my name is Rebina Spence. I'm a
resident of Montlair and the president and a co-founder of Out Montlair >> and I'm Maline Gail and we're here as both out Montlair just as citizens and also as civil rights commissioners. >> Yes. As civil rights commissioners.
Okay. Um wanted to say number one we wanted to congratulate our township on the 100 plus um uh index. Um this is a milestone for us as we are celebrating five years also of outontlair and we
also are celebrating five years of it goes very quickly Montlair pride. So this all coincides together and we stand stand proudly and we are so part of very happy to be part of uh Montlair's um
community. Um so that 100 uh 100% of the human rights campaign to uh 2025 was met and we are again proud and I think that everybody who's here is part of that because the community cannot be one
person by themselves. So, and she's referring to the municipal equality index. >> Index. Yes. >> And so, um, so I'm going I prefer to read. Thank you. Um, so, uh, Montlair stands out nationally for its commitment to equality and inclusion through
inclusive policies, non-discrimination protections, all gender restrooms, and community engagement. And then we're proud to serve also as uh on the township of civil rights commission and we were appointed in 2020
by then council member and now mayor Dr. Renee Baskerville and town council. Thank you very much. >> Thank you guys. And as co-founders of Montlair, we are grateful to be able to help build on this progress and celebrate a community that truly leads with pride.
>> So then again, we we thank Dr. Renee Baskerville and the town council and town manager and our incredible Montlair community for their continued support for these equalities and the LGBTQ community that started 5 years ago. >> Yes. >> And now also as a civil rights
commissioner, you already said it, but just so I can go on record to say that we are requesting that you please review the applications for those who are interested in joining the civil rights commission. and then as soon as you're able, please appoint those folks to fill our vacancies. But you said you're
already doing that. So, we thank you. And again, we thank all of you for your commitment to civil rights of all kinds, especially the LGBTQ community. Every time we've communicated with all of you, you've answered immediately and we're really um proud of that. So, thank you for your support. And happy new year to
all of you. >> Looking forward forward to pride num number five. >> Thank you so much for your service. >> Thank you. and thank you for letting us speak after the real time. >> Oh, no problem. Thank you so much for your service. I'd like to make a motion to adjourn the meeting.
>> I just >> Oh, well, come on up. How are you? >> I'm happy new year. >> I'm good. Happy New Year. Um, I just had one quick thing to ask and this is good time. Um, I know we had spoken about applying to be the MHS non- voting designate on a couple of different commissions. That position is open. Uh,
parks and recreation, housing commission, and I don't know if it's open on civil rights. I think that's it's an issue. Um, however, every time I've tried to apply on the website, >> um, once I get through the first section of like name, basic information, and I press the button to continue, it says
sorry, like it couldn't work. Try again. I've tried on my home Wi-Fi. I've tried here refreshing and I can't get it to work. Um, and so I don't know where to go from there. >> Ma'am, Madame Clerk, is there anyone um in your office that may be able to help her? she's been trying for a while and
we would really love to to have you or or whoever's interested in. So, can you assist us with that please? Madam Clerk, >> also Madame Clerk, do you know off the top of your head which committees or commissions have need more high school students because I know some need college students.
>> She named the the group civil rights park and civil rights has what was the other one? Who is the one on civil rights? >> There's a student already. They need a college. We actually have both now then cuz I have the names of the >> So I just didn't want her to, you know,
I wanted to make sure there was one with a student. >> Yeah. >> Position college student. >> What which ones have the students civil rights housing and parks and um sole impact is for civil rights at the moment. Parks,
>> right? So civil rights is off the table for this young lady because she's a high school student. >> All right. Actually, we have not voted in the other um person yet. >> Saul Saul is a high school student. We need a college student for civil rights commission.
>> I know I was a person that put those positions out there. I'm so proud of me. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to adjourn the meeting. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? Welcome to 2026.
Look what time it is. All right. Now >> go home and enjoy. >> Thank you. Can we try to