Good morning everybody. Get good evening everybody. Let's stand for the flag salute please. 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. I know. Thank you. We I got before we go on. I got to talk about the top. You remember and you you remind me and I remind you to remind me. >> Okay. >> Young man, what what's the what's your name, sir? >> Paul. Paul.
>> Paul. Thank you. Paul. Paul. Please call the role. >> Mr. Maltano. >> Yes. Here. >> Mr. Deltu. >> Excuse. >> Mr. Smith. >> Mr. Tangor. Oh, Miss Tangor. Excuse
>> Dr. Marquesi. >> Mr. Corbanick >> here. >> Commissioner Scarpelli >> here. >> Mr. Guy and >> Mayor Kelly. >> Excuse >> Mr. Kazer
>> here. >> Mr. Contella >> here. >> Mr. Rancheski. >> Mr. Shooty >> here. >> Yeah, I read I read that list. She has
everything phonetically spelled. >> I'm telling you. Uh pursuant to the requirements of the open public meetings act, notice of this meeting was included in the annual notice of the uh regular meetings for the year 2026 as advertised in the Star Ledger, the Herald News, and
the Nutley Sun on November 20th, 2025 with copies posted on the Township of Nutley bulletin board first floor town hall. A copy is filed in the office of the township clerk and copies are available to all members of the general public.
Okay, we received some minutes for the January 7th. >> Assign your alternates first. >> Oh, I'm sorry. That's why we That's why we got you here, buddy. I tell you what. Uh, so let's see. Jerry's not here. So, Miss uh Robesky, please sit for Mr. Deltufo.
And that's it, right? Everybody else is Oh. Oh, no. Carol's not here. And Mr. Canella, please sit for Miss Tangor. Is that good? All right. Good. Okay. Again, we have minutes that were sent to us a day or so ago. Does anybody have any comments, questions, rude remarks?
No. >> Move it. >> Move it. Second. All in favor? >> I. >> I. Thank you, counselor. Yes. Communications and bills. I have one bill for approval. to the miss sense
the series attendance at preparation of the meeting minutes for January 7 2026 which were just approved it's the amount of $150 which I find to be fair and reasonable >> would be paid second all in favor >> I thank you
it >> that's it for bills >> okay no communications >> no other communications I do have a short attorney's report >> so why don't we do that now and then and why don't do that now and then we'll go go over the workshop stuff real quick. >> So, at the last meeting, uh, one of the
questions that arose was what's going to happen with notices once the newspapers start to shrink and disappear, etc. And I think, uh, Commissioner Scarpell raised that. I don't know if you're aware, but we did have a meeting today of the attorneys and various people from the township concerning that very
subject matter because there's been a lot that's been kicked around down in Trenton and uh we have to follow the Trenton rules, so to speak. So, there's two two aspects of this to to look at. One is the uh the announcement that uh
Mark reads at the beginning of the meeting uh that indicates where uh the township has published notices of these meetings under the uh under uh the sunshine law and historically we've always had several newspapers for for
that to be published in and in fact it's been done for this year already. Uh but the but the reality is that's going to stop happening at some point and I as as I understand it'll probably stop happening at least as uh as just paper
in March. In March uh we're going to go to an electronic posting of the notices for that you read for this meeting. You'll read it still here. That'll still be done. But the posting for that won't be in a newspaper anymore. It will be on
the township website. Uh this is all by the way I I'm doing it kind of generally because it's still fuzzy but this is mandated by the state. This is the way it has to be done. Okay. There's a little wrinkle to that we'll get to in a second. Okay. And the uh and and then
the second part of it which is which is we're still uh we raised today uh and it it was kind of interesting at the different perspectives we have. uh when an applicant comes in for one of our applications, they have to give notice to the homeowners within 200 ft, which
we all know about, but they also have to do a publication in a newspaper. So, if the newspapers are disappearing, what now what? Okay. And the now what is they're supposed to publish on websites
uh uh a website that has a number of criteria associated with it. It'll be posted on the township website, too, but that's not sufficient notice. They have to publish on a website, and it's it's it's got a lot of detail to it, which I
won't bore you with, but for example, they had the website has to have 4,000 hits per month uh in order to qualify. So, it sounds like a lot, okay? Especially if you think about, you know, the way things used to be, but it's not
really a lot anymore. uh because uh the hits can be, you know, if it's the Star Ledger and they're one of the ones who's still in the business of now having it on their electronic version, well, they have more than 4,000 a month for sure. Okay. Uh and there are other
publications similar. USA Today is another one. U and so on and so forth. In fact, we we were talking about it. What about Tap into? Does Tap into qualify? Uh because do they have 4,000 hits a month? I think if we have something going on, they have 4,000 hits in a week, you know, so it's it's
certainly possible uh that they could fit the definition. So, we're we're sorting through that. Um and and and here's here's kind of the the dilemma because of the way they wrote the law. Uh we were talking about, okay, so an applicant comes in, Dave gives them the paperwork, they fill out the paperwork, and they said, here's the here's the 200
ft neighbors uh and go and uh do your uh uh publication and consistent with the law. Well, they the people are are given no guidance as to what that means. So facitiously perhaps this attorney said today this
one me said well the people who come before my board with applications they have experienced counsel they should be able to figure out where to do the publication and uh I was uh uh quickly countermanded by Ms. McGovern who said, "Well, the people that she has before
her board are not likely to have the sophistication of those attorneys, so how are they going to pick?" And I said, "Well, that's a very good point." So, in order to kind of make this happen, I think we're going to come up with some websites that we know qualify, and we'll
they can pick and choose which one they use, and they'll no doubt pay a fee, I'm sure. Uh but those applicants will have a list that will and and they'll have to provide identification what the website was when they put it up there etc etc
just like they do for newspapers now except it'll be done electronically. Um we were all kind of cynical about this because you know whenever there's quote improvements and quote get made uh there's there's changes that get made and sometimes they're not so great in
terms of improvements at the end of the day. I uh uh quite I I said, "Well, who are these websites who are going to be getting the new business?" So, my true belief it's going to be the same companies that had it before and they're just not going to put it in papers.
They're going to put it on the website. So, if it's a Star Ledger, they're going to have just as much business as they had before. So, the the fear of them disappearing because of the absence of fees is probably not justified. Will the fees be cheaper? I don't know. Will they
be uh you know what will the requirements be? We really don't know any of that yet. But that's kind of an overview that of what's going to be happening. So you will be seeing in the next couple of months, three months or so, the notices that we're going to be
reading to the public are going to change somewhat to reflect these changes. And uh these changes will be happening, you know, uh gradually but kind of quickly. when you think about 60 days or so.
>> Well, the not if you're a neighboring town, you you'll get your notices just like you always got them. >> You get Yeah, they'll get the mailed notice. They'll have the mailed notice, but if they want to see the online notice, you'll look at the website.
Well, the electronic newspaper, no doubts, there'll be some place electronically where this is stuff is posted. And that's how that mechanics is going to work. We don't have those details yet, you know. >> Well, you maybe you can. I wouldn't
trust it, but u anyway that that's going to be happening in short order. Yes. Not to throw a wrinkle into that, but the chambers here is going to be under construction soon, which means our meetings will be moved. And I don't
think that's been determined where they're going to be moved yet. And so, will we have to renotice the meetings for the rest of the time that we're moved? >> How long? >> Uh, six to eight months.
>> Well, that's a fair question. So I I suspect even though it sound even though it's a great question, I think it's probably an easy answer because they're going to >> Yeah. No, they're going to have the electronic notices anyway. So look, first of all, the neighbors, if this is if this chamber is going to be moved,
one, they're going to get a notice of where they have to go. >> Okay. No, but but we do the yearly notice, right, for all our techniques. So, has to be redone. >> I think what's going to happen is there's going to be a republished new notice with the electronic information
as to where the township is also uh uh uh requiring that you you use. We're we're trying to work through that because the the the statute has some specifics and we we we're just kind of digging into it today. But I will say
this, I felt I was actually pretty impressed. I'm not usually too impressed, but I was pretty impressed because everybody sort of jumped into this. They uh Lenny was really all over it. she pretty much had a lot of I'd say we're she had us like 90% through it
with her uh her information gathering and uh you know of course we have to we have to see that's this actually works you know I don't know if it's going to work yet until we employ it but there's going to be some overlap period so I think that's going to be the testing and
I don't know if you can get away with extensions of time and things like that you know usually the state provides for all that uh but It it should be it should be interesting and hopefully it's more transparent. >> Our next meeting may be in a different
location. >> Maybe >> the next meeting >> the planning board >> the the franch. >> Yeah. >> Well, maybe it'll be >> okay. >> It'll be interesting. >> Long as I know where it is. >> Yeah,
it'll be all right. Is there is there a minimum of amount of publications that they have to use? >> Uh you mean currently? >> Yes. Because I I I recite three, but is it required to be >> I think I think they're required to have at least two
>> and I think the third one is, you know, added on. Uh >> okay. >> You know, the real problem, too, is let's face it, even with the the current notice, these folks have to be able to get a hold of those offices to put this stuff in and publish it. And it's not so easy anymore because the hours are
restricted. They're only there certain days of the week. You have to be in by certain deadlines, otherwise you don't make the publication date. So, you know, what was probably pretty pretty good and pretty easy way back when has gotten more difficult for applicants than
anybody using the newspapers for press. >> Be able to just go online and do it >> like on their website without even talking to a human being. Well, you might be able to try that and see if you know what's firm and what's >> and how do you know it worked? Look, we just had that issue recently with the
the publication >> was supposed to be in a in a nutly paper. It was a bell paper, right? And they confirmed it was in a nutly paper worse yet, which was like, how did they make that mistake? >> But it would have been a bad mistake for us and and not our fault, but we caught it and so we we corrected it. So the
problem is even with your suggestion, who knows if they get it right. You know, you still have human beings at the other end that could make mistakes >> and you have to be build. >> Have to what? >> You have to be build. >> Yes, that's true, too. >> Yeah. So, >> well, you'll keep us up.
>> I'll keep you posted on that. You'll you'll you'll probably know about it pretty fast. So, >> Okay. All right. Very good. Thank you. And we don't have any memorializations. No business. All business. We're confirming that. February 4th, 2026, we
are going to hear uh the 300 Kingsley Windsor Place Townhouse uh redevelopment plan presentation. >> We are we've we've confirmed it. We've been told yes, so we haven't heard a no. So that should happen. >> As of right now, it's going to be here, but we're not.
>> All right. So, we're going to do a little workshop work and I think we should just talk about two different things. Okay. Uh, and that's all we we need to really address because we've addressed a lot of these things. A lot of these a lot a lot of our prohibited uses have been uh already sent to the commissioners for the for their review.
Um, but there's two of them that are I think they're a little pressing. We might want to get on right away. One of them being accessory dwelling units because there is a uh bill in the state senate. It's uh Senate Bill 234706. Um, if you haven't read it, I highly
recommend you read it because it's always restrictive for the towns. Um, and the way it's written, anybody who's who has read it, it basically is saying that nothing nothing a town can do can stop that from going through anyway. But I don't believe that's true. I think if
we have a specific u uh definition and and the commissioner listed as a prohibited use, I think if they try to put it through, I think that we uh and other towns do it. I know I have an ordinance 3014-21,
which is Maplewood's prohibited use for uh accessory dwellings. So, I'm sure that they're not the only other town out there uh that are going to do that. So um >> let me just make one comment on it and and and in a past when we we've dealt with the state on this and many other
issues, the state does have the power legally to override local government. Okay. Uh and they can be pretty successful with that. So the so the real question aside from reading these carefully, which is a excellent idea, and looking at other townships to say
see how they've handled it because why why build the clock twice if you don't have to? Uh the focus it seems to me to to to kind of keep the state in control is health, safety, and welfare. You know, they if if if you if you as a township,
you know, look at the health, safety, and welfare of anything, you probably have greater expertise than the state does in knowing what's in the best interest of Nutle from a health, safety, and welfare point of view. So, I'm going to make something up that doesn't apply.
But suppose they have some kind of, you know, uh, water, you know, storm water off-site requirement that says blah blah blah, okay, and they say you have to do it this way. Well, I happen to think that if you go to Commissioner Scarpell's department and they look at
this and the staff that they have and the engineering people they have and they look at this, they say, "Hey, you do this, you'll have people drowning, getting sick, uh being flooded out, you know, we won't, if we do everything to
change what we presently have, it's going to create a problem or substantially exacerbate a problem. If you have something like that and you detail it in terms of why you're not doing whatever
it is that you're being asked to do, uh, and and you don't just make things up because I don't think anybody here would ever do that. But if you can detail that, I think that there's a good chance your position will be sustained over the state. And this this accessory uh you
know dwelling unit that's been bandied about for quite a few years now and it's still getting bandied about and it means different things in different locations and states and cities. There is no real definition of it. I mean, they're trying to create a definition of it down in Trenton and and
they're looking at it really from their parochial point of view because what would be a great accessory dwelling unit in a in a in a in New York City maybe? Probably none, but uh and what would be okay in say Buffalo might very well be
different because of the landscape literally and the property sizes etc. If you've got properties that are multi-acres, putting an accessory dwelling unit on it may may not even be observed. You might not even know it was done and that might be something that
you know you it fits and and it would be adopted. But if you have, you know, a property that you're going to create a problem with ingress and egress for automobiles, for example, uh you know, we look, we have not le, you know, a very developed town. We have some lots
that are pretty small. Okay. And they have single family homes on them. Sometimes they're multif family homes for that matter because they go back. That's to say, oh yeah, I want to put an accessory dwelling unit on this lot. It's say 40 by 100 or 40 by 80 or
something. Uh and stick that on there. And we already have two cars, you know, backed up to each other. Now we're going to have a third one. I I don't know if that's a great idea. This gentleman, this is this is Yeah, this is one we used when we we we had
discussed this about a year ago and that is a definition that we put together. >> And is it already in our >> No, no, no, no. It hasn't been there's nothing in the actual books. There's a red line version that Paul sent that I actually was handed out which we don't like. So,
>> it's been a while since that wall. Was it mainly because of trying to increase the >> basically? Oh, not not just my opinion is they're trying to increase the availability of homes because there's a shortage of homes in New Jersey. >> Affordable
>> affordable housing, >> right? >> It's under the guise of affordable housing. So, we have we don't have enough according to the state. Some people don't have enough affordable housing in order to create affordable
housing. this is the way to do it is to have an accessory unit on the property. >> So is it the township participate in that form of affordable housing? No, no. I think >> this this bill would be
>> I don't know what you would call it >> global. >> Global global >> well what they're going to do they're going to they're going to define it whether it's our this definition or something else they're going to define one and say this is got to be permitted period. Yeah.
>> Well, you'd still have to comp. >> You'd still have to comply. You'd still have to comply with the federal because the federal tends to over override the state. You know, by the way, there was a decision just came down yesterday involving affordable housing in the
federal courts where I think 27 towns uh challenged the state and they lost. >> They lost. They lost. I I I I read it and I said, "Man, this is a lawyer's dream." Uh, but it was never never going to happen. Uh, and even the reporting of it was pretty bad. But, uh, uh, yeah, I
I don't think you're going to come up with some striking principle to set it aside because this has been around since I got I was in law school and that was a few years ago. Okay. and and that's when it started with Mount Laurel one
>> and and it's just rolled forward >> when we first read that >> I honestly don't think >> here's here's a general >> I think it may >> well it can that's the danger the danger look the danger is maybe though there's
been a big turnover in the state legislature so maybe some of the proponents are not there or maybe there maybe there more of them >> there's more of them >> who knows But the problem I have with the state legislature is if you looked at the laws that got passed in the last two weeks before Governor Murphy left
office there a whole slew of things that was last minute you know put throughs and you know decisions of that governor uh whether you like them or you don't like them is not the issue but some of these things have been debated forever. Uh no phones in the classrooms you know we've been talking about this for years
and I got people tell me oh you can never do it'll never be able to do this etc. Look, they did it in New York City. They're going to do it in New Jersey and discussion's over. Discussion's over. It's >> figure it out. >> Yeah, that's right. It's the discussion's done. And and many other
things like that. If that happens, you know, you get >> the steam rolling behind something. >> You suggesting that start looking at at those areas present.
I I think I think you need to look at you know look at the town and say you know where would this be a terrible idea. Okay I think well it might be a terrible idea philosophically for some people everywhere. On the other hand
there's got to be a cut off where it just is a horrendous idea. I mean, uh, fire, you know, fire situations, uh, anything that's health, safety, and welfare. We should not be endangering the public that we presently have or the
future public. >> That's a nice policy. It's a It's a nice policy. >> So, to get back to real quick to what you were saying about it fits here and it fits there. New Jersey is a perfect example. You got Hoboka and and and Union City, the very dense areas. Then
you have suburban like nothing. And then you have Warren County where every house is on five acres. So I called up Britney Timberlake's office a year ago and I spoke to her assistant and I said, "Is there going to be any uh any kind of adjustments made or consideration for
the density of where?" And he said, "No." So, >> well, what they really want to do is have a one-sizefits-all. And and I think in land use, you can't you can't have one-sizefits-all. You have to look at the land. And we have all kinds of
reasons in the law for doing that for other reasons. Why is this any different? Is it a policymaking argument? We need more housing. We need more affordable housing. Therefore, throw caution to the wind. I don't think that's a great, you know, way of approaching. I think maybe if it's
needed and it and it fits. >> This bill also mentions towns like Nutley. We don't have any overnight parking. >> It would basically kill overnight overnight parking in Nutley. That is one of the greatest things we have we ever
seen this and we all know that. So, I mean, they're they're uh they're looking at all these different items that will drastically negatively. >> So, let's just talk about that for a second. Let's just talk about that for a second. Let's say that's our our our
Alamo. We're going to defend Overnight Park. Why? Okay. Why? And >> well, you're saying it and let's do this. Let's let's let's proof that that that's better. But
Well, no. No, but that's kind of very narrow. I think that's too narrow. You have to show I think this is what you would have to show. Nutley has it and our reason is public safety and we mean that when by not having those cars on the street, it makes it easier for
police to patrol and oh, and it's a that's a safety issue. I'll go with that. But just let's use the the broader, you know, it's safer because crime detection is easier. I got to believe there's the way of looking at a town that doesn't restrict overnight
parking and comparing us. Compare us to somebody else. Compare us to somebody else. Take a street that's like Chestnut Street and pick another Chestnut Street over in another town. You know, we have no overnight parking. What's the crime rate on that street where they have
overnight overnight parking? What's the crime rate on that street? Anything. But all of that, but I think you have to do a a comparison to defend and show, you know, we we we listen, I I I know everybody who's native nutly
person like Mrs. Kazeri, no overnight parking. That's it. You know, if I want to have a raw nerve, that's the nerve. And and and many other people, too. But the and and the and the justification is the very things you're saying. It's safer. But we're defining
safety now. better for crime, better for accident prevention. U you know, so I think what you need to do >> snow Yeah. I I that's a that's a that's for sure. But the point of the matter is I think you need to document it. I think
you need to document it and and and say, look, we've studied this and this is what we find. And then when somebody says, oh, you know, your overnight parking has to go, you say, no, we're not going to sacrifice safety for snow plowing. uh uh for accidents, uh crimes,
and we have a we have a a database for supporting your position, not just the feel-good kind of part of it, which is probably fine, too, but that's not going to win the war. So, I think you have to look at that for all of these issues. I know it's a lot of work, but if you want
to maintain >> Well, you know what? I I'll tell you, I I don't know why >> these are rapid, by the way. >> Well, I I don't know why. and and and probably never thought to ask for one thing. And maybe she doesn't view this part of her constituency as uh you know
having a significant uh uh issue and she may listen she may not know those three things that we just mentioned. So you know they're not going to know everything. They just don't. But I think if you're going to defend something you have to have a basis.
So, >> is it truly part of affordable housing? Because the way affordable housing works that I know of, if a builder's going to build an apartment building, they have to put a certain amount aside and and you have to apply anybody to this is different. This is
philosophical. >> Yes. Yes. Not not Mount Laurel, you know, the council on affordable housing. This is a philosophical argument that there is not enough affordable housing. How can we make more affordable housing in New Jersey? You
know how we can do it? By letting people take their garage and convert it into a dwelling unit. >> That's one one of the answers. >> And it doesn't matter like how does it fit in with our zoning? >> Does it? Well, it doesn't they over if you look at the bill, it says you can't
have you can't have you can't deny it due to setbacks. Can't deny it due to parking. Can't deny it due to >> due to anything. >> I'm I'm paraphrasing. >> When did they start this?
>> Oh, this has been going on for this over a year. >> This is a fair fairly recent version that Mark is talking. We're getting back to it now because all those big big applications are are pretty much done for now. We have a little time to go back to work workshops. Um I will I can
I can email this out to everybody so everybody has it. >> I think but I do think that the direction is going to pick up in this in this way. >> So >> especially with the new administration. Well, I I think listen, I I I I don't
want to prejudge the new administration, but you know, you you have to look at the legislature because that's where this stuff gets its steam. And they're the ones who pass the laws. Whether you, you know, like them or you don't like them, they come from your legislature. And if they if they get together and
they say, "Oh, we got this great instant idea," that's what you're going to get, the instant idea. You know when we have bad laws at any level it's a product of not fully looking at the problem adequately when you had it. You thought something needed to be done you did it
and it turned out to have consequences. So clarify something the scenarios that you're discussing that would be if we adopted this definition a prohibited use and now it's on the books and then they try to pass this >> y
>> we would need that information to fight at that point. We don't need that. We don't need the the the the detail of the safety and all of that stuff to actually get it on the books as a prohibited use. >> Well, I think >> but we need to be we need to be prepared in case we have to fight. >> I think what you you do, but I and look,
it's not going to be developed instantaneously. We know these things take time to put together, but I think if you were going to come up with your own definition of an accessory dwelling unit, if that's the concept that they're looking for, and you want to have it uh
not impact upon health, safety, and welfare, you ought to have something that's part of your definition uh that says, "Yeah, this is a great idea, but it can't impact the health, safety, and welfare." And be detailed about it. It can't impact overnight parking, for
example. Yeah. I I I I think you really, you know, I'm sure there's planning boards all over the state right now who are concerned about this. So, I wonder if if people could other municipalities could now institute no overnight parking
in advance. Well, I you know, they they got that Bel. >> Yeah, totally. >> Look, look, look, the towns can try >> the genie back into the bottle, >> right? I look, towns can try to do whatever they want to do, but if it looks like they're doing it to beat the bill, they're going to lose. That's why
I think we have a better shot at winning because we're not doing it to beat the bill. We already have it, and we're just explaining and why we've done it and why it should be maintained. And I'm just using that simple one as an example. There's probably other things you should
look at the same way in terms of uh you know land use and development. You know things think about think about you know taking this theoretical accessory dwelling unit and sticking it on different lots. What's the consequence? You know that like like the law is crazy
because to say setbacks don't matter is a terrible idea. Setbacks do matter. Setbacks are part of safety. Okay. That they're part of safety and to to not have setbacks. Oh, yeah. You know, you could say, yeah, well, it's a for a lot of reasons, it's
a it's a terrible idea. I mean, you know, when setbacks are too small, we have problems. I mean, there are complexes that have been built with troubles. Not to try to get into the head of the people who wrote this, but I think they
wrote it in a way that to prevent towns anything they could use. Anything that you could use as a as a a way of denying whether it be parking or setbacks or or >> You're right. >> You're right. They've tried to anticipate
>> lock coverage, what whatever. They put everything in there saying, "Yeah, >> you you can't deny it because of any of these things, >> any local >> any of your local zoning. >> This this supersedes." >> Yeah. Well, that's what they're trying to do. And and as I say, okay, grant
that you are trying to do that, but you can't override the health, safety, and welfare of the public. If you're going to do this and you're going to create a fire hazard that's inevitable, you can't create the fire hazard and say that's okay because we've said it's okay. >> Yeah. I think that's going to get set
aside by a judge uh and and it won't be enforced. >> Now, do am I right? We'll never know until we get there. But I think I think you have to think about it that way. You have to think about how do you protect the public. Um you know,
and and look, I'm not saying there's not a a a good intention behind some of these laws that there is, but I don't believe in one-sizefits-all. I think you have to look at things very carefully. Certainly that's something I've learned being here board attorney. You know, you
have to look at it. >> That would be a great way. I think you know you want to show a judge. Hey judge, look at this. >> You know what I think be a great idea what you're saying? A lot of the streets over by me, it's half Bloomfield, half
Nutley. They have they can park on the street. They they allow the when it's a snowstorm, they've got the signs up. They have to be on the street for that. But that's how you can compare our half to their half >> and that might get like the crime rate
up. What happens here? >> How do you where do you get that information? >> Well, you get it from Bloomfield and Nutley, I would think in that example. I mean, I don't know. >> I think that would be great because now you've got one streak that's half Nutley, half Bloomfield. Let's see what goes on here. Let's see what goes on there.
>> Look, there's no to find things that twin up identically won't be so easy. Okay? I I I I we can predict that ahead of time, but you have to have some, you know, reasonable comparisons. >> So now you could start having and now there's kids. What about the schools? I
mean, this could be, >> right? How about our infrastructure? Could our infrastructure handle it? Water and storage. If everybody puts one on the property, that's double the storage. Double the water, right? >> Yeah. Well, these are these are valid points. And the question
>> Yeah. >> probably never You know what? So much opposition. take whatever you have. >> I mean, a lot of legislation gets passed without really thinking through all the implications.
>> I would say that's very true. Yes, I would say that's definable to know who's >> So, so are you saying that we can't give this to the to the commissioners as a definition and a prohibited use and while that process is being done then we
could put together information how we how we would defend it because defending it as a public as public safety and and welfare and all of that does that is that actually verbiage in the ordinance. I think if you want to have a better chance of your ordinance and your
positions being sustained in the future, you have to have a knowledge base that goes with it and some evidence you know just your presentation have feel a white paper or something. Yeah.
And I like the listen I like the notion of having some research to support this. >> Is that something for it? Does it hurt? >> I listen I don't have an answer for that. I mean it could come from lots of different sources. I was trying to think ahead of
time ahead ahead because I knew this would come up at some point. How would you do this? You know, you you know, interns, college interns can put together a package or even high school interns could put together the package. If you tell them what you want them to look for, you know, you give
them the the the authority to go get the police reports or records for a street in Bloomfield or whatever it's going to be and then you get it. Somebody has to analyze it. Then that becomes a second step. But to get the thing rolling, you could there's a lot of different resources that you can have. >> I don't personally don't have any
interns. Yeah, I think I've only mentioned that because somebody just offered me the opportunity to have some free interns. Uh, but it's a narrow period of time between May and June. So, it's not like a lot of time uh that they'd be working for me. So, I'm looking at it.
>> You agree that we should have more information before we send it up to you guys or do you >> Well, I I I understand Mr. Cazer's point. I mean, it's coming to, >> you know, it's gonna, you know, it's certainly better to have empirical data
to base your decisions on. Um, I'm wondering if there's some language we could put in there or rely on Mr. Kazer's. >> No, no. I >> legal acumen.
>> Yes. on that you could put in there that would kind of be a catchall for a lack of a better word as we then try to get that empirical data. >> Um, I'll take a stab at it. I I I you know, I could put together some
language. I'm not so sure it's any more supportable than what you already have there because I don't have the database either. Uh, everything you're saying, by the way, I think is logical and makes sense. Look, it's is it easier to stole plow with the cars off the street? Yes.
>> Uh you know, uh again, >> well, just for instance, right, >> if we get the storm that everybody's talking about, right? >> And you have parking on the street. >> Yeah. and you try to put 18 inches of
snow or 12 inches of snow, >> you know, on a street that has parking on both sides of the street, >> it's pretty hard to do. And then if you can try to get a fire truck down
that street or or an ambulance, >> to your point, let's assume we get the snow. I think you ought to have the videos running >> from your guys and what they encounter and what the fire department may encounter. I think you're I think it's a totally valid point. Yeah. And the EMT
people too. I mean I remember a bunch of years ago I had a medical episode at home which was like overrated by my family. So they called for they called for you know EMT and like I was embarrassed. Okay. because they they they they
you know they sent these vehicles they took up and it had snowed. It had snowed and we had some neighbors who had par you know had had not cleared the street so they couldn't quite get to the curb for the vehicle for me. I could have probably been wiped out by being taken
into the vehicle rather than whatever was bothering me which was nothing by the way. Uh but it makes the very point that you're talking about. You know, look, there's a certain amount of that you can't avoid because there's just so much snow perhaps in this storm. But add
the car situation to it. It's, you know, it's terrible. And I'll share with you this anecdote, too. The I guess a a snowstorm ago, not not the latest one, but the one before that, somebody parked in front of our house. Okay. And you
know uh so the plowing didn't really happen and it was you know more than it was an inconvenience and a major annoyance for my spouse okay who who was very unhappy about the whole thing and then the and then we have another storm
that blows in and somebody parked there again. So here it was about to happen again. I said don't bother me telling me about this. you know, she said, "Well, Joe's people aren't going to be able to." I said, "Call the police department. I'm not law enforcement. Call the police department." And they responded and took care of the problem,
by the way. But the whole point is, and by the way, it's it was very easy to get to the curb tonight when I was dropping stuff off and coming in. It was still some snow and ice. But the but makes your your point. It's safer. It's much safer to have that done, right? And I I
think I think this might be a good time to take some pictures, you know, maybe put the videos on, save some, you know, take whatever it takes to get a couple of good shots. I think that could help bolster whatever it is uh that I would
say u and what you would do. So um >> you see all carefully laid out given the example of the fire truck down
the street. >> These are perfectly logical things there. Look, these are perfectly logical things. People aren't stretching to come up with these things because they're all natural and inevitable and and they may apply elsewhere too, but they can particularly apply to nutley. And if
they if it happens here and that's a reason for your taking the steps, document it. >> And just just >> think about the towns, >> not >> that have parking on the street. >> Yeah.
>> And now going to add more people and cars. where they gonna park that. >> Yeah, >> very point. Very point. I I I think they I think that's built into these definitions and allowances of these things are increased traffic safety
problems because of exactly what you're pointing to that there's going to be extra vehicles. Where you going to put them? I think they adopted all over that
all kinds of mult that's what happened that's what it looks like you can not pick up what streets are the same Okay.
I guess we could do a comparison as well. >> Well, lots of places really. >> Yeah. More more have talking then don't I'm sure. >> Yeah. >> Yes. I'm curious. >> It's not
It's >> There were many more than there are now. I mean I Glen Ridge doesn't have overnight parking. We don't have overnight parking. >> Um Montlair may not have overnight parking.
>> You know the the the the point of I think it's shortsighted the way they look at every town and say one sizefits all. You know we're talking about Lentley because it affects us and we're trying to figure that out. But if you look at some of these dense places like Bayon, New Jersey, now there is a dense
city friends. very dense issue. >> Sure. Sure. >> But she said it was a big deal. Real estate. >> Well, it is a big deal. I mean, look, some of these some of these areas were
designed with narrow streets. Okay. Not not necessarily here, but elsewhere. Narrow streets, very limited off- streetet parking, maybe one vehicle or maybe the garage in one vehicle. Not always both. And you know what do you do
when the third car shows up and there is no parking lot nearby? Okay, you try to find a neighbor who says you can use my driveway. I mean, that's what what you have to do in the old days and still may have to do in many places. But the the answer is it let's make the place more
dense by allowing more, you know, more of these accessory dwelling units because they don't have room to start with. >> Okay. >> We we've had, right, we've had discussions about subdividing big lots
>> into legal lots, right? And then trying to come up with ways of maybe preventing that in some areas. >> This you don't need to subdivide. No, put the No, just put it up. >> Yeah.
>> You don't even have to build it. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Could be inside the house. It could be outside the house. They were taking standards to families making for building people in the attic basement in a real
crisis. say to double and they go from a single family to a double family and he said you know what >> your mother-in-law needs a place to live and somebody starts >> and yeah it's always a family member >> but the thing is I'm just counselor
thinking down the road so but you know we're having this discussion and I'm sure there are other towns are having this discussion but then there's going to also be people that are going to try to fight it. So if the state I'm just wondering how that works if the state comes up this law let's say it's
>> and we put something in place to not allow try to put it ahead of time. They definitely got to be before. >> Now, would it be something that residents could fight us? Say, "Look, everybody else in the state has it." >> Why, you know, so >> residents can fight us and fight you on
anything. >> Yeah. You know, they definitely can >> set ourselves up legal. >> Well, it's it will be a legal battle if you want to if you want to maintain that or any other say that say it was upheld, right, Cap? Like the you're okay
that your prohibition is okay. Someone's going to go for a barance, right? So, you know, state law says I'm able to do it. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. You even though you're prohibiting it, I'm going to go for >> right. Is that language that we're
talking about? Is that a term that can grow on this definition by approval only? >> No, I think it has to be automatically approved. That's the way the state laws are being written. You can't, you know,
well, they would say their law overrides your law is what it comes down to. >> They need a building permit, but only for uh quality of the codes for electric and plumbing and framing and all that stuff that any other contractor or builder
would have to do. But it could be literally on your your rear set uh your rear property line right on. They're basically saying in the state law, and I can't wait to read it, but they're basically saying, "Go ahead. Do whatever you want. If you're going to create an extra space for somebody to live, do
it." >> When you read it, you trust that. >> Yeah. >> Yes. And so I'm going to send it to you and I apologize in advance. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> So, all right. So, >> is it a committee that you
committee for the uh review of presenting? >> You mean for us? Yeah. >> Well, the zoning committee is the ones that put this together. >> Exactly. >> Right. >> Um Well, probably a good idea. >> I think it's probably a good idea. We um
but speak about what we talked about tonight. >> Yeah. I mean, what I what >> and there might be other things to expand upon. I I mean, we're just kind of jumping on it. So, >> but what what I I won't say what I'm going to say what concerns me, but I'm not it doesn't really concern right now.
I don't know how to proceed. I don't know where would we go to get the information that that we need and I don't know I'm not really sure what is it that we need to get this a prohibited use of Nutley so when this does go through God forbid have
something on the books what what would be our next step as it I mean we could sit and come up with all these different things to park into this and that is that what we need to do I think gather information that makes it >> I think you come up with the bullet points of what you want would like to see and then somebody else has These are
some of the reasons. >> Yeah. And I think then you refer to the commissioners in order for them >> to identify experts that would be able to do some of this work or a technique or methodology for getting the answers. >> Okay. So we would we we have a definition, right? We'll we will come up
with bullet points why we think this is a negative impact on Nutley and that gets sent to the to the commission. >> How it affects the health >> health safety. >> Yeah. is now you're gonna present it through. >> No, no, you you you'll do it here. You
adopt it. We'll send >> I'm sure if I go through all my archives. I'm no Jerry doof all. But I'm sure if I go through I'll find all our stuff and I'll redistribute it and we might even have enough notes to really
focus in on a half a dozen different things to add to the shop. >> Yes. >> Really? >> Yeah. I spent a fortune on uh on cold cuts and the pasta was
magnificent, wasn't it? We were there all night. >> Wendy meeting. >> Yeah, we had a meeting in Jerry's backyard when >> it was me, Jerry, Anthony, and Lorraine and Dave. >> And I staggered off of that,
man. Oh, man. You got a lot done. >> Well, do it again. Do it again. >> So, let's let's deal with something easier. Noise. >> Yes, that's our next thing. The reason I wanted to address noise which zoning committees on this board has never
really addressed before directly is it's the opinion of my counselor and myself that our how we address noise ordinances in nutly is not is insufficient. So, I sent everybody what's called the model uh noise control ordinance and and I
think our expert whatever his name was that we had for the for one of our uh applications he did a great job and he be very knowledgeable on um >> with the database coming a noise is is is an issue for a database. So we need
to be have ourselves talking about database, >> right? We I mean that could be a year away. I don't know when it's going to be here, but we should have something >> data set. I say database. >> I did say database. >> I meant data center. >> So my database is a little offkilter right now.
>> Um yeah, the data center. I actually spoke to um I think it was a guy in Clifton about the one that used to be AB >> and uh he said they haven't really had too many issues. >> Um and actually I spoke to the code enforcement uh head of code enforcement
in Clifton. He can't he didn't say that they had too many issues. But there between the the mechanics of what a data uh center does and the uh with the cooling and all that stuff plus in this case I think we're going to be looking for a substation uh to to help offset
the the electricity the electric electricity draw on our grid. I think it might be and and the location of where it is where that there's residential uh houses fairly close proximity. I think we should have a a noise ordinance
adopted so we have a guideline for that application and future application. >> Let me just add to it. I I think that Mark is right in so far as what he's just said, but I think it's broader than that. We don't have any, you know, we don't have a constitutional noise
ordinance. We have a noise ordinance that's so subjective that if somebody challenges it, they'll win, you know, and so you effectively don't have a noise ordinance even though it's on the books. And I think our expert when he testified he testified about noise and
noise ordinances I think he was very kind to us because he he he didn't he didn't emphasize that but he did point out you know you don't have the the uh the the model noise control ordinance that the state put out quite a while ago by the way
>> and that's actually how I found >> Yeah. Right. But but the whole listen this is a very good noise ordinance and and you can modify this by the way. Okay. So what I think you need to do with this everybody needs to read it and understand it and then what you should
be doing is hey what don't what if they overlook or what should what else should be in here. Okay. Now the way that works is if you want to make changes to this the state allows you to make the changes but you can't adopt it until they look at it and approve it.
Yes, this this ordinance unless you're this is from Yeah, this is you can adopt this, right? >> The kind of patch you're going to want to do, right? You have to get their approval, >> right? So, you've got this model ordinance here. >> Yeah, we'll make noise. But the but the
fact is they they invite whatever changes you have be made. Submit it. A redline copy is probably sufficient uh uh once you study it. uh and you give it to them and they'll say yes or no to the changes. >> That's that's if we want them in changes,
>> right? You don't have to. But I say study it first and think about it. If there are changes, make them now. Get them approved. Uh but but if you're not going to if you're not if if you're not going to recommend changes, at least recommend that they adopt this because you need to do it. You need to do it.
>> Do we And I'm just asking a question, not not trying to push for this. Would it be helpful to have our expert come in and give us his opinion
of the of this model ordinance and any changes based on where he's testified it in the state where it may make it a little bit better? tattooing them and see >> I I I listen I think they were very professional in their two presentations we had them for and I wish I'd known
about them sooner because I think they do a great job and I think they could be not only helpful with the applications but once these places are built you're going to want to test them to make sure that they are complying and there's not a problem and they're they're there may not be a problem but I think they're
very you know on top of their game. So I I think if if you said to him, "Hey, we're Nutly. You know, take a look at the town. This is us. What would you recommend we add to this or change?" I think that's probably a worthwhile expenditure of money. Uh and I think you
could, you know, I don't know if you could just do it at a workshop session like this or you bring him in and ask him questions that way. It might be the best way because then everybody inputs into it, right? >> Uh and he could get back to you with with his recommendation. I just think that he was very knowledgeable and I
think if he's testifying throughout the state, I'm sure he's seen some of the pitfalls and or some things that may make it a little bit stronger. Um I think it's worth as Mr. Gazer said worth the expense. And I think he's the
kind of guy too if there's an environmental issue with say a neighboring property a butdding up against a development you know it might be a different impact or you know a bigger impact that requires something more specific. So I I think he's he that
would be certainly worthwhile maybe a workshop but in the meantime I think everybody ought to read read it and kind of exchange their ideas. Everybody has it, right? So, everybody has it. >> But give give everybody a time. >> Things I'd like to have this guy do. >> That's why I had Jessica send me the contact information, but unfortunately I
didn't reach out to him. What What does 65 dB sound? >> How many dec? >> It's about 200 in my ear just now. I wasn't ready for >> It's got to be It's got some >> a meter. Yeah, definitely meter. >> Yeah. I obviously
>> the Essex regional Essex regional health commission has an ordinance in place because they handle that. So if we have a noise problem like so say somebody has an air conditioner on a roof and it's too loud >> and they call us. >> We call regional they come out with their meters and they test it and if
it's high they tell them whatever. >> What do they measure it against? Do they measure >> I'm not I'm not sure about that. I know they do it for us. >> Yeah. No, but I'm saying when they come out >> read the decibb. >> Yeah. Yeah, they just they must >> No, I understand. But how do they look at a document and say, "Okay, you're
above the level." >> Yeah, they must have something. >> They have Yeah, they have the decibel meter. >> No, that's how they measure the sound. The question is, is there a vi is there a violation? >> Oh, they must have something on the books as far as what's too loud. >> You think you could ask somebody about it? Just ask them what they have. Maybe
it might be this they might follow these these charts. But that's what I would like to know. What does it sound? What does 55 sound like? >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, as Rich Fudge
works in Yeah. >> I really don't know. >> All right. >> Say that one more time. 65 dB is the loudest of a normal conversation. >> AI is a mess. >> So, you're telling me I should go home
and do the laundry? Is that >> your wife sent that request? >> That's a good idea, though. I'll reach out to him tomorrow. She sent me the name of the company, but I don't think the guy's name was attached to it, but I'll find her. It's in one of the reports. >> Yeah, sure. I'll fine.
>> All right. So, like the old days all over it. >> Yeah. >> Because because decibb to Anthony is different than decor complaining about the noise, things like that. So, subjective. Just like you said, there are county people that come
in building itself in the guidelines when they show you the guidelines. This is permissible for human compound. Did you get the answer you were looking for about?
No, actually this is being ass. All right. So, I'll reach out to the um most professional and we'll see if we can get him here at our next workshop meeting, which might be the second meeting in February, unless something else comes up. >> Okay.
>> Um and I'll call a meeting of the um uh zoning communities and uh we'll put our heads together and see what we can come up with. Uh hopefully for that same workshop we move to have a couple hundred. >> Yeah, there's other I think I think I've added you to the zoning committee to
take Lance Place. Thank >> Do you want Do you want the committee list sent to everybody? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Why don't I just do that? I could I'll do that. >> Oh, did you get it? >> Dr. before
>> uh zoning committee. No, Dr. Larry, you're on the zoning committee. >> Okay. >> But check your email if you didn't if you can't find it. >> Yeah, I didn't I I I gave all the information to Deborah and she uh sent it to me for for my approval.
>> Hey, that'll help you with Pokemon. >> They're out there now. 35 degrees. God bless them people. >> Yeah, but you know what? statew.org and just looking at their >> I see we have a member of the public. Do you have any comments?
>> I mean you you're uh you're welcome to speak if you like. >> What else? Good. >> I think that's it for now. That uh thank you for your input. I will take care of all those items. You have something there. >> No, we reaching down the agenda list.
Did we reach the bottom? >> Yeah, we we reached the bottom. Well, we're not we have not the very bottom yet. I'm looking for a motion. >> Motion. >> Motion. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> I I
>> Thank you. Hi >> the