Good evening everyone. Welcome to the regularly the regular public meeting of September 22nd, 2025 of the township council of the township of Washington. Adequate notice of the meeting was given in accordance with the open public meeting act by the township clerk on May 20th, 2025 to at least two newspapers and this meeting has been posted on the
township bulletin board electronic message board, WCTV and on the township website. Please notify the municipal clerk for any disability requirements necessary for attendance at township council meetings. The fire exits are located through the double doors to your right and through the door on your left. Please silence all cell phones. If you
are unable to attend the council meeting in person and would like a topic to be addressed at a council meeting, please visit www.twp of washington. us contact us tab, click on mayor and council, send email to contact all council members at once. Can
everyone please stand for a salute to the flag? 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. >> Roll call. >> Council Casio >> here. >> Councilman Sears >> here. >> Councilman Omen >> here. >> Councilwoman Vez >> here. >> Council President >> here. Let the record reflect. Also in attendance, Mayor Peter Calamari,
township admin administrator Mark D Carlo, Township Attorney Siobhan Bailey, and Township Clerk Susan Wakowski. Payment of bills. Resolution number 25-310. Authorized payment of bills September 4th through September 18th, 2025. Do I have a motion? >> So move.
>> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Omen. >> Yes. Councilwoman BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President Done. >> Yes. >> Public service announcement for
September 22nd, 2025. The township annual fall festival will be held on Saturday, October 4th at Memorial Field from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Please visit our website for further information. Around the county, satellite office and passport outreach services will be at the township on
Wednesday, September 24th, 2025 from 10:00 a.m. to 2 pm. Services include passport applications, photos on site, swearing in of notary oaths, free discount cards for seniors, veteranexempt firefighters. No appointment is necessary. On Wednesday,
September 24th, the county board of elections will be at the senior center at 1:30 p.m. to demonstrate the voting machines and answer any questions. All are welcome. The Township of Washington Board of Health and Northwest Bergen Regional Health Commission will be sponsoring our 2025 flu clinic on Wednesday, October 8th at the Township
Senior Center. Registration is required. Please visit our website for further details. The township's wicked 5K and fun run will be held on Sunday, October 26th. Please visit our website for registration information. A dedicated e-recycling container is now available
year round at town hall through a partnership with E-Revival LLC, a certified electronics company. Drop off is available Tuesday from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. and Saturdays 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. by ecology permit only. Please note the yard is closed on Tuesdays
during bulk and leaf collection weeks. Please visit our websites for a full listing of acceptable items. Friendly reminder, please curb your dogs and pick up their waste when necessary. And please don't dump it in other people's garbage cans. We are getting lots of complaints about all three of these subjects.
The Kuanas Club of Pascak Valley meet on the second Wednesday of each month at 6:30 p.m. at the Westwood Community Center. If anyone would like more information, please contact Paul Ralph Cardulli at 516-5818319 or Pasak Valley Kuanasgmail.com. Our next council meeting will be held on
Monday, October 6, 2025, 7 p.m. Thank you everyone. Approval of minutes, none. Report of the administrator, Mr. Daro. >> Yes. Thank you, sir. Good evening uh to everyone. This is my council followup and response from our meeting September 8th, 2025.
Uh there was no resident concerns or questions to follow up on. However, there were two from the council. Council conveyed concerns regarding ebikes, school bus violations, and school zone safety. The concerns were brought to the attention of Chief Calamary and his
command staff. Chaff the traffic unit was already aware of the ebike concerns and they are going to approach all the concerns with education and enforcement. Uh the police department and the township administrative side have since disseminated ebike information on our
social media. Second was I was confirm I confirmed >> Carla really quick. Is there is there a way we can send it to the schools the the uh elementary schools in township and to Westwood Regional School so they could disseminate it through all the
parents through >> I can I can speak with the business administrator >> if you don't mind. Yeah. cuz I think that's I I I appreciate what you guys have what's on the our what's on the township website's great but I don't know if you know everybody's looking at that but I think if they got it home from the from the school district if we
could just maybe partner with them and get this information to them I think it would be a great idea. >> Okay, we'll do that. >> Uh second thing I confirm that DBW does have and still utilizes the yellow sticker notices that are placed on the items when an item is placed at the curb inappropriately. The notice indicates
what the problem is, such as an example, white good placed at the curb during debris week or an overweight container. And it does have the contact information uh which comes right into our administrative um desk or DPW. Just a few updates. The police
department has received their 2025 police vehicle. It will be sent to the next vendor for upfitting. The DPW has received their 2025 F350. It will also be sent to the next vendor for upfitting. And the fire department has received their new fire department
vehicle as well. And the finance department has met with John Swisser, our new auditor, and he has begun working on the 2024 audit. And thank you, sir. That concludes my report for this. >> Thank you, Mr. Klo. Any questions for Mr. Gallo? >> Yeah. Uh Mark, how long is it going to
take them to upfit the uh new police vehicle? Any idea? >> They think about a month. >> A month. Okay. >> Thank you. Any other questions? Does that close out all of our open vehicles? >> Yes.
>> Yeah. Or not. >> Thank you. General public comment limit to 5 minutes. Motion to open public comment period of the meeting. >> So move. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Would anyone like to come up and address the council at this time? Seeing no one,
motion to close the public comment period. >> So move. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. Public hearing. Removal of Jeffrey Roberto, member of the zoning board of adjustment. Resolution number 25-311 authorized the removal of Jeffrey Roberto as member of the zoning board of
adjustment of the township of Washington. Do I have a motion? So, >> hold on one second. >> Since there's a public hearing presumed to the >> Well, I got let's just do the motion. So, we have a motion from Mr. Cassie and seconded by Mr. Sears. Now, we can discuss. >> Thank you.
>> Since this is a public hearing um and It appears that Mr. River did not appear even though he was served by certified mail uh return receipt. Um I think if I may uh if I may suggest um that we
simply mark the documents in evidence and Okay. Um >> so you want to do that? >> Yes, please. Um so just by way of background the council will recall that um the uh it came to the attention by
letter dated July 16th 2025 from uh ZBA chairman gets that there was an attendance issue um with uh zoning board member Jeffrey Robero. Um within that letter he attached an attendance record
um that the council will recall. I believe he he has been to six um of the last 33 meetings. Um uh you know and other attendance information the council directed that was at the conference
agenda which is required by ordinance to consider. Um the council directed that I prepare a motion for removal and to start the proceedings. Um that included a certified letter to Mr. Roberto giving him notice that of the public hearing
tonight um that he was uh uh permitted to appear by council uh to question ask whatever questions make whatever argument related uh to the motion that he wanted to. Um seeing it is now 10 after 7 and there's been no
communication to the clerk to myself or to the council um about whether he's appearing or not >> or the zoning board >> or the zoning board >> or the zoning board. >> Correct. Um so at this time I would uh suggest that we mark the following documents in evidence in support of the
motion to remove Jeffrey Roberto as member of the zoning board um as C1 and C stands for council's exhibit one. Uh C1 would be the July 16, 2025 correspondence of zoning board chair Fred Gats. Okay.
>> Mark C2, resolution 25301 authorizing the initiation of removal proceedings pursuant to ordinance 7- something. Excuse me one sec. 7-23. C3 is the September 10th, 2025 certified
letter return receipt requested to Jeffrey Roberto. And C4 is the green card receipt confirming receipt by Mr. Roberto on September 12th, I believe. Um the clerk will confirm. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um and that is all that is all the
um the evidence for the hearing and council can proceed. Any discussion from the council or we proceed with a vote? >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio, >> yes. >> Councilman Sears, >> yes. >> Councilman Omen,
>> yes. >> Councilwoman BZ, >> yes. >> Council President Denna, >> yes. Thank you everyone. Ordinances, adoption, second reading. Ordinance number 25-18, an ordinance amending chapter 223, article 8, entitled schedules of the ordinances of the
township of Washington and Pasc Road. Resolution number 25-312 authorizing second reading and opening of public hearing for ordinance 25-18. Do I have a motion? >> So move. >> Would any discussion? Would anybody in the audience like to
come up and discuss resolution number 25-312? Seeing no one, motion to close the public hearing for ordinance 25-18. >> So move. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio? >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears?
>> Yes. >> Councilman Omen? >> Yes. >> Counciloman BZ? >> Yes. >> Council President December? >> Yes. Motion to adopt ordinance 25-18 at second reading by title. Do I have a motion? >> So move. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio? >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears?
>> Yes. >> Councilman Omen? Yes. >> Councilwoman Bles. >> Yes. >> Council President the Senate. >> Yes. Ordinance number 25-9, an ordinance amending chapter 465 entitled Trees of the Ordinances of the Township of Washington. Resolution number 25-313
authorizing second hearing and opening of a public hearing for ordinance 25-9. Do I have a motion? >> So move. >> Second. >> Would anybody like to discuss this ordinance or would anybody in the public like to discuss this ordinance? Seeing no one, motion to close the
public hearing for ordinance 25-9. >> Wait a minute. >> I gota vote. You went too fast. >> Yeah, I got a vote. >> Let's vote uh >> to open >> to open. Motion and seconded. Let's vote to open. So, roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Alman. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman Vez.
>> Yes. >> Council President. >> Yes. Would anybody like to come up or discuss uh resolution number 25-313? >> No one in the audience. How about it on the desk? No one. Motion to close public hearing for ordinance 25-19. >> So move. >> Second.
>> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Olman. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President. >> Yes. >> Motion to adopt ordinance number 25-9 at second reading by title. Do I have a motion to move? >> Second. >> Roll call.
>> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. >> Councilman Omen. >> Yes. >> Counciloman BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President. >> Yes. Introduction. First reading. None. Resolutions. Resolution number 25-314. Authorize cancellation of any current tax liability and all future property
tax bills due to US veterans permanent disability block 4309 lot one and authorize refund of overpayment to property taxes in the amount not to exceed $917.81. I'll make the motion. Anybody? >> Roll call.
>> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. >> Councilman Sears. >> Yes. Councilman Omen. >> Yes. >> Councilwoman BZ. >> Yes. >> Council President. >> Yes. >> Motion to adjourn to conference agenda. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Next meeting of the township council
will be on October 6, 2025 beginning at 7 p.m. Sign up for NIXL. Text 07676 at 288777. Key code TWWP of Bergen. Thank you. Conference agenda administration uh memorial field
electrical upgrades update. >> Uh thank you council president. If uh if I can direct council's attention to the first set of paperwork right after the conference agenda. It should start it'll stay for Green View Technologies.
All the supporting documents for the conversation kind of go in chronological order as to how I'm going to explain it. Ultimately, we have identified a safety hazard over at Memorial Field and on bringing the uh council up to date on
it. Ultimately looking for funding to resolve the problem. And then when we get to our next topic under capital ordinances, I believe I have uh it would just um involve uh a reappropriation capital ordinance. So essentially, we
have the money on hand. So, very quickly, it's it's just under $12,000 to fix the lights. >> No, no, that's that's something else you're looking at, and I'll take you through that. >> Okay. rapidly, you know, not not too slow, but just so you chronologically know, if you remember when we were doing
the recfield uh rehabilitation project, like the end of 24, beginning of 25, um I let council know that the contractor from Green View Technologies that was doing the underground sprinkler system stuff hit a conduit and broke the
electrical wires. We made an insurance claim and the insurance paid um for the electrical repairs, Mr. Descent, is what you're looking at. So, if you go after this gentleman's report, that's where you'll see the uh the advanced
electrical contracting bill for 11,849. >> So, that was the original hit in late last year when we were doing this. So, I had told council that I believe the contractor Green View should be
responsible for paying the deductible which was $2,500. He wrote this report which was quite compelling and after reviewing it with our insurance company and Miss Bailey, uh we did not feel that he was responsible and we were not going
to pursue um anymore. So, he was paid for his service. he hit the line. Insurance paid for 75 or I should say more than that. We were just responsible for $2,500 deductible
minus the from the 11,84976 insurance paid for that. The problem is he identified, you know, in writing rightfully so, that we had a potential liability on our hands because he believed that the electrical lines and
conduit were not buried by whoever did the work. you know, who knows how many years ago um to an appropriate depth. Therefore, uh could leading to a potential hazard if a line became exposed with all the children and adults
that that utilize that field. So, if you go past the invoice for advanced electrical contracting, we get to SM electrical group. So what we did is uh through the help of uh Beckmeer engineering they uh received
several proposals in order to basically trace the conduits throughout the field. We tried looking through old records to see if we had anything that identified it and uh we tried for actually a couple months through all the records that we keep and we could not find anything. So
we ultimately um contracted with SM Electric Group. That cost uh was estimated at like 11,100. It ended up costing, you know, somewhere in the eights. That's already been on a recent bill list. But this is the report
generated from SM Electrical Group. Essentially, the problem we were going to identify if it was really a problem with the depth of the conduits, that was all fine. as part of their investigation, they checked the wiring to all nine poles that are located at
Memorial Field. And I believe there's um kind of a map drawing um with with the problem, you know, just actually it's a it's a identifying where all the poles are >> and then in the report it states that
you know there's some so at the base of each light pole there's an access panel. most of them were not secured appropriately and when they had to access them they were no longer uh ability to put them back appropriately.
So, several of them have duct tape wound around them to keep the the uh plate cover on there, you know, good six, seven times around. One of the poles, which would be like the third baseline to the men's softball field straight out
towards the woods, is up in the embankment a little bit. And excuse me, the runoff over years and years has rushed dirt and water down and covered the access panel of that um hole.
>> Would that dug out by our BBW or somebody dug it out? >> Yes, it dug it out. Yeah. So, um they they had identified that as well as old wiring. They showed, you know, you guys got the photos, ladies and gentlemen got the photos, but we didn't photocopy them
obviously on your packet. But if you go through the photos, they show pictures of all the problems. So, of course, all those problems um you know, what was identified as an immediate issue that needs to be repaired and what's the proposal to um the cost to fix that? So,
DPW's already satisfied digging out around that area. So the water will no longer enter into the the panel that doesn't have a cover on it. And we put a temporary cover on it and I believe put more duct tape. So when I identified it and you go
through the emails, you'll see my emails uh with the representative, you know, explaining that we don't necessarily have the funding. Can he identify for me what is a safety hazard and what needs to be done? And if we did that, we and
we eventually um did the wiring, the rewiring in 2026, I don't want to do something and then waste money. So me and Glenn uh Beckmeer Jr. went over there. We had a conversation with uh I think his name is
Cliff Brener and he explained that the rewiring if we did the rewiring it would satisfy us not having to do the grounding investigation and then possibly grounding each. So right now
there is no belief um that there's a grounding system for each pole which means if someone's touching the pole and lightning hits the pole the person will become um the ground. So this but it's not you know it's not 100%
definitive that there is no grounding. So they want to charge us you know potentially $2,900 to see if there's grounding and then almost 2,900 each pole to ground it. Why don't we just ground it and be done with it? And why I I I don't mean to cut you off, Mr. D.
Carlo, but four years ago when this miraculous lighting project happened, um, you know, and it was questioned, you know, why wasn't all this discovered then. I know it's beyond your time, but can we discuss what our
avenue is to go after that electrical contractor that installed those lights four years ago and missed all this and he just went out there and put lights up without addressing all these safety concerns. But it's a little bit disheartening that we spent all that money to put new lights out there and when he did that, you know, very quickly
didn't identify all these safety hazards. >> Like you said, I was not here, sir, so I couldn't speak to that. I assume you're speaking about the LED replacements. >> Yes. >> Yeah. I'm not sure if that that sounds like a project that was just at the top of the poll.
>> Definitely not a project to identify the conduits in the field and or >> um >> but if we put you know we put $250,000 worth of how much was it? I forget how much. It was a lot of money. >> Yeah. I think it was about 160 or >> 160, you know, how do we you know, how do how did that electrical contractor
proceed without gra, you know, like something's something doesn't smell right here. So, I just I wanted to maybe we should submit a claim to that gentle that that electrical contractor's insurance company and see if we could recoup some of our costs because maybe
you shouldn't have done that job without all this stuff being identified. Again, I'm not I'm not prepared to comment on that. I I can certainly see the scope of the project, but again, my understanding it was the replacement of LEDs at the top of the lights. Um
nothing to do with the wiring going from pole to pole. Um but I don't know that for >> Yeah, but you should have checked for common ground like the like these gentlemen are like, you know, to make sure we had ground continuity and you know, >> can we can we investigate what their project entailed?
We certainly can, but again to to refocus back on what the problem is tonight, we have a potential exposure to to safety concerns for people on that bill and a liability. >> So, if we just proceed with the 2,900 bucks and have them ground all the poles,
>> but that but that's not it. It's $2,900 to um determine if the poles are grounded. If they're not grounded, it's another $2,900. >> I'm saying don't even determine if they're grounded. Just put new grounds in and be done with it. We could, but it's $2,900 per pole. Or if we do the
rewind >> per pole. >> Per pole. I mean, we're talking a ground rod that goes into the ground, right? >> Yeah. But then he's got to wire it in. So, it is more than >> Yeah. But 2900 to >> How many poles? >> Three foot ground rod. >> Kind of a lot of money. >> It's more than three foot,
five, whatever. >> It might be mult It might be multiple ground rods. It's It's a lot of work. So, I'm not disagreeing with the cost, but I I the way it was written, I didn't think it was $2,900 each. I thought it was $2,900 total. I I just may have missed that. >> Well, there if we go through the
proposal that's here, they want $11,000 to uh replace this the covers at the bottom. When I asked, you know, that seems like an excessive amount. They don't have anything that's exactly fits that. So, they'd have to have the steel
um created. The part the other part of $11,000 is to um to fix all the the uh broken wire nuts that are in the pictures and stuff like that. And we we have not um pursued any other quotes at
this time. I'm just utilizing this as the conversation. No, based on the pictures you sent, all the work they're they're identifying as a hazard is definitely a hazard. >> So then if you look at at number two, ground testing the polls, we pleased to submit a proposal for electrical scope
of work for the above reference project for the budgeted time and material price of $2,950. That's just to determine. All right. And then it says, "We are pleased to submit a proposal for the electrical scope of work for the above reference project for the budgeted time
material price of $2,800." That's per pole and it does not cover a does not cover the um let me see what it was. Some ground penetrating radar.
They couldn't even give me an estimate on that. So the budget includes install one 3x4 10inch ground rod ground rod mechanical >> 10 foot 3/4 in by 10 foot. >> Okay. Uh cost unit just go down.
>> Okay. Then if you look at clarification if we have to drive ground rods we need to have the area ground penetration radar before we can start work. This cost is not included in each one. So I then asked him what what would be a waste of money if we were just going to come and do the rewiring. and he
suggested to do do it all at once. So he has not provided me how much that would be. I said, "Can you give me a roundabout estimate?" I said, "Are we talking more than 50,000?" He said, "No." He said, "You know, not to hold him to it, but the rewiring would be somewhere around the $20,000 mark."
>> Are we are we doing it aerally, not through conduit any longer? >> Aerial? No, I I don't know. I don't know that. I believe it I believe it would be through the conduits. He did. If you notice, there is two poles that are linked. >> Yeah, because there was a failure
between the poles and they went aerally. That's why I'm saying if he was to go aerial cable, would that save us a lot of money? That's why they did that because when I remember way back when the cost to put new conduit in and go underground was very excessive. So, if he can connect those poles with an
aerial cable just like those, you know, those those repairs are and we can save even more money. Maybe that's something to look at. Maybe we get two numbers, Mark. one for conduit and one for aerial if you don't mind. >> Yeah. Yeah. Um you know, of course, the biggest thing is letting letting you guys and girls know about the problem
and then recommending um a funding source. Um which is really our next topic. If you don't mind if I go into it. >> Yep. Go right ahead. >> Mark, that's not live now, right? That's all >> that's all dead. >> No, the lights could go on, right? >> No, the lights the lights do work and
they they are on. There's no exposed wires right now. >> So, nobody can dig? >> No, no, no. The original investigation we were doing, we have proven that is not a problem. >> So, there it originated because the the contractor hit the wires and goes,
"Whoa, these are way too >> they're not shallow, right?" >> So, we traced them all and everything was fine. I don't know what happened in that area, but everything is fine. >> But, as part of that investigation, they checked other things and then that's when they said, "Hey, A is fine. B, C,
and D is a problem. >> Which is good, but you know, they're it's shallow. So, >> yeah, it's good. It's stink. >> Hopefully, we at least have do not dig uh flags there because >> Well, nobody should be digging there other than no one should be there doing a lot of things, but if we have, you
know, a potential hazard. >> Yeah, >> the underground conduits are not not a problem at this point. It's just >> So, the use of the field is still >> Yeah, it's fine. You know, again, we have an You know, >> I didn't get zapped the other night when I turned the lights on. So, as long as it's safe, I'm still here. I'm still here. That's the major concern.
>> As long as you clear the field and the lightning detectors go off and >> yes, we >> aren't holding on to the polls with the lightning strike. I mean, again, it's probably better chance of winning the lottery, but god forbid. >> No, we'll we'll make sure. >> Right. So, I'm sorry, Mr. Nicole.
>> So, funding. Uh well, thank you for the uh information and the details that you reviewed. Can we just go back to the first the opening that there was a a claim made we received
uh I guess monies from GIF and we attempted to go after the uh vendor for the deductible. what what's I guess uh contributed to them
not being liable for that? >> If um you know I'm not telling you your my answer is for you to read this but if if and when you do get a chance or you elect to he makes a pretty compelling argument that you know he did everything
he was supposed to do. He did the call before you dig. you know, he puts in here that these lines are supposed to be a certain depth and then I think there's supposed to be some type of like caution tape. >> Yes. >> You know, over them. >> So, based on that and then reviewing it with Miss Bailey and um Miss Mulligan
from the insurance company, we felt that, you know, he presented a good case as to why he's not liable and the insurance company was not interested in going after any further. The insurance company also said that our insurance is
only covering the repair, not the initial cost. Right? So, it wasn't going to cost I'm sorry. The insurance wasn't going to cover paying him for the work he did. It was only going to cover the repair from
>> Understood. Understood. Okay. >> And then so the depth is not an issue. It is simply the wiring within each pole that there's a potential that they're ungrounded. >> They're ungrounded. And again, if and
when um and or if you already have in those pictures, you know, you see just like wires coming out and that's because they took them out to inspect them. >> Sure. >> And you'll see cracked wire nuts and you'll see old wires. So he said, "Hey," and this is in the reports, too. There's a lot of paperwork I do. He'll say, you
know, we recommend this is done. We recommend this is done. And by the way, these wires are so old looking, you may want to consider just replacing the wires alto together. So the wires go underground through a conduit except back by where the the children's
baseball field is. Mr. Desenn has said the two poles are linked from an aerial uh electrical wire. So, um, so the correction that we're potentially proposing to
address the grounding, is that going to resolve any of the lighting issues that are reported as of 811 in your documentation? >> No, that's like more like a bulb is out kind of thing. To to oversimplify it,
let me just get to that. >> This is not a wiring issue or we don't believe it is. >> I I don't believe it is. No. >> Okay. >> And if you go to like the first page of the SME electric report dated August 18th, you know, he'll start going going down the list of what was the good news
and then based on their findings, they recommend the following. So, of course, not having a dedicated funding source, my next question is what do we have to do so we don't have a hazard to anybody? And that's what kept the that's what I
gave you all the emails. Um so you could see the the chain of of discussion. The one you're talking about with the first sentence that says lighting is found at Memorial Park for 811. Um that is a that I'm taking as like a bulb. And again it's probably an
oversimplified word I'm using. I have not yet um done anything to address that yet. I was working more on the you know on like the hazard stuff. But yes, to answer your question, I imagine um that will have to be looked into too. And that that might be something that
certainly resorts back to what Mr. Stenna asked. You know, should the life expectancy of these LED heads be more than four years? >> Again, I'm just saying four years because that's what Mr. Denna said. I I don't know when that project was done. >> It was done the last uh last mayoral
campaign. And then the the last question I have is um why and it maybe goes to Mike more than you. to if it if we can get them tested
for 2950 based on what is there and what we can see. Is there a basis to say that we don't think any of them are grounded? Cuz to me, if we can test 11 of them for
$3,000 and only six of them need to be remediated, then we're saving ourselves. You know, >> I think we need to find out. Mr. Mr. D, the question is if we we don't do all 11 of them, will the UL listing be uh
granted to us for the polls for grounding? What will the what >> the UL listing for grounding and lightning and lightning detection be given to us if we don't do all 11 as new? Can we can we like what Mike is asking, can we use old and new if we need to and still get a UL listing for
grounding and >> you got >> lightning detection means >> UL listing? >> Well, somebody's going to give us a certificate. Somebody's going to give us a UL certification saying that the poles are now grounded properly and have a lightning detection that meets the criteria of the, you know, the code.
>> So, if if that's pos if if he's willing to do that with a like Mr. all been saying the ones that do pass and the ones that don't pass get fixed. >> Mhm. >> Then that's fine. But he may say, "Well, if you want that, then I need to do all 11." >> Yeah. So, so I kind of want to answer it
like this. When we had our last conversation with uh the engineer and him, it he was over the phone. Me and Glenn were together at the field. My priorities were one, what's a danger to somebody, and two, not wasting money.
So I asked him and he the best they can tell professionally is that they don't think they're grounded. So So like you said, why would we spend 3,000 if we don't think they're grounded? But there's a possibility that they all may be grounded. It's probably highly unlikely. So I
said, well, if I can get the council to go for the rewiring now, is it essentially a waste to do the grounding and then the wiring or can we all do it at once? and that sounded like it was more his. So then I had a followup with four four questions to him
that I haven't received the response to yet. >> So are we going to re are you proposing or maybe I missed it so my apologies sort of two sub projects. One is grounding. So potentially grounding all
11 poles. And when you say rewiring, are you referring to that's over and above the grounding? That's actually would it be from the head down and everything is updated?
>> Yes. So, one of the questions I asked when I is, you know, when these poles came, did it include the wiring that was in it? You know, like almost like a lamp, you know, and then we just do the wiring. And then what constitutes the wiring project
from pole to pole? And it's, you know, I I I don't remember, but it was one of the follow-up questions that I asked him. So, I'm waiting on whether that would be the rewiring from top to bottom, soup to nuts, or if it's just pole to pull because he told me the poles as as they are structurally are
fine. They might look like, you know, not the prettiest anymore, but the poles themselves are fine. It's more just the wiring. So, um I'm waiting for that proposal, but my recommendation is obviously to get more quotes and I'd ask them like,
"Hey, we have a bid threshold. Are you state co-op or state contract or co-op? You're supposed to answer me on that. Give me a roundabout, you know, is this going to be something that totally isn't going to be over the $53,000?" Um, and that's when he said no. which I was surprised cuz I'm like to rewire
some nuts and give me some uh face covers was 11,000 but the potential rewiring he said a lot less wires are utilized from when they did it before I'm trying to convey a conversation between an engineer and an
electrician. So um you know my my recommendation is let me let me get more answers to those questions. I'll look into that other project from the four years. Um, I do want to go over the the capitals. Basically, I'm going to ask you to, you know, close out some old
capitals and reappropriate it towards this project and then let me get started with that. That'll, you know, that's going to at least take us a month and in the meantime find out the total cost and of course bring that to the council. But, you know, based on my conversation,
it's certainly not something any of us want to overlook or try told I'm not suggesting that's what you're trying to do. I just conveying the information I did understand. Um we, you know, we definitely don't want to now that we know about it, you know, let it go.
>> And the last question I have is has Mr. Fedini been consulted because I know uh when there was a concern about the field surface, he actually came in and they
closed the fields at times when they were deemed to be unsafe. Uh you know, >> no, I did not think of that. I didn't think of talking to him. So, you know, the fact that, you know, someone has to be hugging the thing and, you know,
licking the pole and a lightning strike that, you know, that's I view that's his job to tell us what the risk is there. So, I would just I would like to understand or if Mr. Fedini can be consulted on
>> maintaining the field and keeping it open. Yeah. Yes. >> And I mean I imagine there's the expectation to want to use these all fall. Correct. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. >> We But we we did confirm with the electricians right now that it is safe
the way it is right now to use them. >> Yes. Right now. But yeah, the >> Okay. >> I just want to make put that out there. >> The potential is if it's not grounded and you know someone is in contact with >> we we clear the fields when the lighting detector is going on. So it's it's fine. Okay.
>> Okay. Um, >> anything else on the capital ordinance? I guess you went over. >> Oh, yeah. Let me just jump into that because it's also the DPW that I talked to you ladies and gentlemen about. So, if you have the first one, it should say Memorial Field. >> It's It's right after all that
paperwork. So, Memorial Field. So, this is >> this is >> 43,60138. >> Yeah. So, I'm proposing that we you know, all these jobs are done. All these capital projects are done. Um, they're all fully funded. So, this is money we
have in the bank. So, as you can see, some of them have, you know, good amount of money to them. And I would like to we'd have to write a capital ordinance and to reappropriate this funds towards the memorial field project. So, if
acceptable to the council, I would try to have that first um you know, get it to the council for uh October 6 and then it would need the two readings just like just like normal. The second one we talked about when we awarded the bid for
the DPW building, I wanted to uh you know formally reappropriate that as well. And that would be um the firehouse balance that's left over the 5367944. I had told council about the section 20
um that's associated with that ordinance 17-04. A reminder ordinance 17-04 does have money allocated or appropriated for the D I think they call it DMF back in 2017. And then the 20,720
is left over from this year's recreck field fencing. It was estimated at like 85 when you guys and girls approved it um for capital, but the project ended up only costing 65 and that'll you know, as you know, you know, there's always going
to be something. So that'll give me another 112,000 if needed towards um towards the DPW building and all its associated you know u anticipated costs. >> So you want to add this to as as more
contingency than what's already in there Mark? >> Not not well I guess contingency for us not contingency for premier construction. So this would this would dedicate this but if you remember you know we are going to need you know eventually either next year we'll have to fund you know wherever we're going to
lease um either through the current budget or through capital you know we're going to have to do the work of the fencing we're going to have to do the work of that you know of the of the you know again I don't want to say too much because it's a closed session topic but I think that's fine you know to to make
the the site we're going to lease appropriate for usage. So again, it's not car blanched for me to, you know, go out as a, you know, spending stuff, but, you know, we're also going to need money for the wiring and any cameras or key fobs that we do in the building that
that was not um included in the bid. So, you know, there's other things or any anything else we're going to have to for furnishing it or, you know, I'm just throwing stuff out there that may cost in addition to what uh was not in the bid. So if acceptable council I'd like
to present two capital reappropriation ordinances to you guys and girls 10 106 um you know I would work with uh LS Vincy but mostly Bob Binfeld in the in the writing of the ordinances. So how much is that? So, we at the last meeting
approved I want to say $40,000 in professional service fees for Binefield and for Lurch Vincy. I think that was for the borrowing of the money.
>> So, the rewriting of these ordinances and the rededication doesn't involve additional fees. >> It will, you know, Mr. Finel is going to want money, but they're usually >> much less >> much less. May, you know, again, I I hate throwing numbers out that I don't, but you know, I don't think it's more
than than like $1,000 in ordinance, but um to rewrite it, but plus it's a reappropriation. It's not a bond ordinance, so there's less work involved. There's no supplemental debt statement or anything like that. It's already money we have. >> And are these ordinances now exhausted?
>> What is it? Meaning, is there if we rededicate 53K for the firehouse, is there anything left over in that capital ordinance? >> No, this pretty much sums up, you know, how we've been chipping away a little at
a time with like the old ordinances and closing them and reappropriating them. This is pretty much everything I got other than this is pretty much everything I got other than you know the current ones that haven't been done yet like the musquaps and crook or um you know everything associated with the DPW
or DMF capital lines like you know this is it or any of the you know the current road projects that we have going on. >> Understood. How about if we does this deplete all of the historical if we if I put it that way?
>> Yes. Yes, except for the ones I need for that that project itself. >> Yes. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Any other discussion, ladies and gentlemen? >> Yes, Mr. Sears. >> Well, we're throwing things out over this thing. >> Whether you got people aware enough, the
traffic in front of the firehouse is getting out of hand. I know originally we wanted blinking lights. >> Mhm. >> To control the traffic. We have an increase in the ambulance core. The traffic will not they they pull up
right next to the fire trucks. They try and beat around us. I don't know. I know the original plans call for traffic lights on either side of the emergency servicing building >> to stop the traffic so we could at least get out. >> Yep.
>> Now the problem is you have multiple ambulance calls going on right now with the calls of increase. It takes us forever to get the traffic stopped so we can back up into the firehouse. We have to have guys jump out of the truck
>> to stop traffic >> to try and stop traffic. It's very dangerous at night and with the increase of traffic that's going on. The level of somebody getting hit is off the wall. Now, I I appreciate everything that the
administrator has done. There's 53,000 for the firehouse. What is the cost to get traffic lights up there? >> So, so >> it is it is it's becoming a critical critical issue. >> I had asked I had asked and it was originally in the scope was to have two
solar powered uh emergency vehicle stop here when flashing emergency vehicles exiting or entering >> and they would be remote controlled by the the drivers in each one of the cabs. >> Right. And I know I'm dating myself, but like 15 20 years ago when I did it in
Waldwick, it was about $10,000 a pole. >> I'm sure with inflation it's more than that, but there are avenues we could ask, you know, to look at for the solar powered um >> there's 53,000 for firehouse. Why don't
we use it to protect the firemen and the amore people? My my recollection, Tom, and council members, is um the county initially thought that would work and then as the intersection was under construction, um they decided that the facility was too far away from the
intersection to try and tie it into the intersection. And I don't remember the reason off hand. We did ask that question about putting the lights on either side. >> Well, my concern is not the intersection is is where the fire emergency service, >> but they also had a reason for that. Uh,
but we can go back to them, say, "Hey, it's a problem. Will you readress it?" >> This is becoming a major problem. I'm telling you right now, it's getting scary to try and pull out when they're not stopping. They're trying to beat you literally. >> I've seen I've seen You're right. You're right. All right. We can reach out to
the county with that concern. See, because it's a county road as we know. >> Reserve the 53 or anything for for that. I would pull it out >> for the we have that. Well, can we get an estimate of what's >> Well, we got to talk to the county first to see if they'll allow us to do what I
just said. >> But this is now a critical issue. By then, you know, we haven't the intersection. >> They were supposed to be stand alone. Originally, they wanted to do the intersection. Then I you're absolutely right, Peter. They said >> what's happening is when you got two lines racing ahead
>> and then all of a sudden the trucks pulling out, you got >> three lines trying to consolidate to one line. Uh, no. Tom, I'll talk to the uh director, make sure he concurs with what you're saying, and I'll talk to ambulance also, just to make sure I have enough to go to the county and say,
>> "Well, talk to some of the drivers of the trucks and they're ain't going to tell you the same story." >> It's dangerous. >> Can Can I just recommend that since we have 53,000 that is designated for the firehouse, that would be a firehouse expense, I would just pull it out of that and leave the 57
58 left and just leave that. And if you know something comes good, we'll take it. We could put something up and use that money. If anything's left over, it'll go back into uh capital. But let's take that out because I I've noticed this when they
made uh Washington going eastbound, consolidating those two lanes. People are racing. Who's going to be first to get in the in the single lane? So >> Tom, I can understand. No one's going to if someone's pulling out, those people are racing. No one's going to stop for >> and and the problem is when you're
trying to make a right a right-hand turn to get out, >> you have that traffic is already where you have to stop >> and they back and they're backing up. You bring the truck out. >> I had um I had recommended we put the same thing up that Hillsdale has across
the street from 7-Eleven, which is right next to both county roads. >> Um and they have it. So, >> what do they have? >> They have a full stop bar. You know, it says stop here for exiting emergency vehicles or entering emergency vehicles. And I know there was I know there was some budgetary things, but maybe we
could look at that again, Peter. >> Yeah. Right. My selection. I understand. >> Yeah. No, no, but I I instead do the same thing. >> The traffic is increasing increasing to a point where >> I couldn't get out on beat Street to get to the firehouse because the traffic was
all the way down to the BP station and it was a solid line. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, Mark, can we pull if we're going to re re um >> reappropriate? >> Let's take Can we take the 53 out? Will that >> leave it on the firehouse? So, we got an answer. >> We We certainly can. I was going to ask
would would the council be receptive to say taking 30 out to dedicate to that project and then >> I think we I think we should leave it all until we get the actual numbers because Okay. Because >> because it's part of that building's it's part of that building project. So until we get if we do get the numbers in there, let's mark whatever's left then
we get >> I just think the it's now critical that we get >> then it's appropriate for that. >> So moving on under uh the following ordinances and legislations amendment chapter 580 zoning storage of boats boats and trailers the zoning excuse me the planning board has requested that um
they're going to send revisions and present back to us for our 106 meeting. So we'll table this if everybody's okay. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Um, >> again, I would just request that that um if they're going to go with the 18 ft length, >> it says 20 now. >> Well, that was the the comments we made,
but they say you have more comments. So, >> you know, again, you have quite a few um vessels that are that exceed that already. I just want to know if that goes into effect with the 18 ft, what do those people do? >> Either either sell their boat or we'll
all put it in Schlake Lake in a moringa. You know, >> Steve, did you make the recommendation of 20 or 24? >> Hold on. Hold on. Hold on. Time out. Time out. >> It's the ordinance for demolition. I >> Yeah, I was just going to say. >> Yeah, we jumped ahead a little bit. All right, that's what I thought.
>> Under under ordinance and legislations amendment chapter 580, zoning storage of boats, boats, trailers, commercial vehicles, and recreational vehicles. Has everybody had a chance to review that ordinance with the revisions? Is everybody okay with those revisions? >> That was my question. Did Steve, did you
make a recommendation for 20 or 24 ft? I can't recall. >> I think I think I put 24. >> I I don't I don't remember right now. And it says 20. That's why I'm asking. >> Well, mine still says 18 on my 18. >> Mine still says 18. So, I don't know where you're >> 20. >> No, right here. I'm looking at the
ordinance. The ordinance is probably wrong. And in the ordinance itself, it still says >> page 2 B and C. >> Yeah, 2 B and C still says 18. So, that's a >> So, I would I would like to increase it. My my recommendation I believe was 28. >> Well, in in the paperwork it says 24, but in the ordinance it's it's
mislabeled. >> So, okay, that's what I that's what I would like to see again. And if they go with 18 or something less, that the question is, and I'll ask the attorney, what would those um residents that have a vehicle larger
than 18 ft, what do they do >> right now? >> No. If this if it goes through the way it's the way it's written, >> right? >> Well, what would you what what how would we accommodate them without them selling their vessel? >> Yeah, but >> basically, >> but up here it says 18.
>> So, just just to um clarify, so it says 18 ft, but then at the bottom we're talking about in section 3E 20 ft in overall length, but this is for commercial vehicles. >> Yeah, extra vehicles, not boats. The boats are all labeled as
Yeah. All right. So, that's the confusing thing. >> That's what's confusing me. So, maybe we could look through this and bring it up with the demolition ordinance at our next meeting. I know we've been putting this off. >> Yeah. >> All right. >> So, what do you want it to be though? You want it to be 24? >> Whatever is in Well, one says 24, one
says 18, which I know Mr. Casio had asked for 24 and we all agreed that it should be 24, but the ordinance is still, you know, holding 18. >> All right. >> Everybody okay with that? And then and then the question was if it stays at 18, what do what do we how do we satisfy
those residents that already have? >> Why does it have to stay at 18? Can't >> No, if it does. I'm just saying if it does. >> No, but we all made a decision up here to make it 24. That's what we This This ordinance just has a typo in it. >> Yes. So, this should change to 24. >> Yes. >> Okay. Yes.
>> To match the the code. >> All right. Uh last thing on our uh current business is 450 Pasc Road update. I had asked Mr. I'd asked Sue to put this on our agenda. I know we've been um working on 450 for a long time.
We do own 450 now and I thank the council for putting the escrow for the money for any environmental concerns we may have there. Thank you, Miss Bailey, for getting that done. Um we do have a, you know, an escrow account for any environmental issues that may come up at 450. So, Mr. D. Carlo, where do we stand
with the demolition of the, you know, the the rundown house and the environmental concerns at 450? >> Okay, I'll start financially. Financially, I sound I signed the voucher for the reimbursement today for the $472,500. So, that that was good. We got that in.
We sent it back. Hopefully, uh we should get that um that reimbursement in soon. Environmentally, there's a small area contaminated with lead presumed to have come from the paint on the outside. >> Yep. >> You know, there's no way to definitively
tell, but it's only around the area of the home on the back side of the home. That contamination exceeds the soil remediation standard. Liscoco's currently conducting their last two rounds of soil testing to determine an
exact delineation of where the area is that the soil has to be excavated. They're obtaining three quotes um for that excavation and they assured me today that they believe that all that excavation work will be done in October.
From that point, I'm simultaneously working with uh Beckmire Engineering on a demolition plan for the home and the um whatever we want to call that accessory building. >> Yeah, the accessory building on the outside. >> Um so once the propertyy's turned over
to us from Lisco, we'll be able to take that building down and again we'll, you know, most likely, you know, obtain several quotes. But the good news is is that the remediation is coming from the escrow and we have $66,000 in grant
money that will assist us in the demolition and removal of the structures. >> Thank you. >> And then it'll be turned over for mayor and counsel to determine, you know, what happens next. >> So the the historical
what did they refer to them as? Historical fill >> the uh >> historical filth contamination. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> That is not an issue any further >> based on their further testing.
>> Well, it's an issue only because there's lead. So, we'll have to escape the lead, but there's nothing else down there. No PCBs, no, >> you know, no nothing else. It was just lead. And then the lead is presumed to have come from the exterior paint >> and it's limited to that area around
just around the house. >> So Mark, could we talk to Lisco? Would we have to remedy that lead before we demolish the building on the buildings themselves? >> They preferred that that we did it in that order of things that we allow them to come in, excavate the soil, >> and then they'll abate the lead on the
buildings before we can tear them down. >> Um >> cuz that still has to come out of escrow. >> That will probably come from the demolition plan. They're just dealing with the environmentals in the ground. But, you know, I will follow up with Mr. Beckmire on that because we've talked about asbestous,
but we didn't talk about, you know, what would be involved with the lead for de demolition of the building. >> Just want to make sure we get the bang out of our espro. >> Oh, yes. Understood. Thank you, everyone. Motion to enter into close session. >> So move.
>> Resolution number 25-315. Motion to enter into close session for Bethany Community Center negotiations personnel matters with the police department. Township council anticipates that it will not come out of close session. >> Motion to enter into close session.
>> Second. >> All in favor? We'll >> do Bethany first. [Applause] >> Everybody ready? >> Yes. >> Yep. [Applause] >> Okay, we're back.
>> Good evening everyone. Welcome back. Uh we will be um motion to enter into close session resolution number 25-315 Bethany Community Center negotiations personnel matters police department. Previously we I had indicated that council would not be coming out of close
session. However, we will be coming out of close session. So motion to enter into close session for resolution number 25-315. >> So move second. >> All in favor? I. >> No. Nay. >> Okay.
So, we will come out and vote once the close session discussion is over. >> Welcome back everyone. Uh, resolution number 25-317 authorizing the mayor to execute the agreement and general release between the township of Washington and Chief
John Calamari. Do I have a motion? >> So, move. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Uh, yes. Councilman Sears, >> yes. >> Councilman Alman, >> yes.
>> Councilwoman Veles, >> yes. >> And Council President, the Senna, >> yes. Resolution number 25-318, authorized the mayor to execute the agreement and general release between the township of Washington and Sergeant Seario Fasciano. Do I have a motion? >> So move.
>> Second. >> Roll call. >> Councilman Casio. >> Yes. Councilman Sears, >> yes. >> Councilman Omen, >> yes. >> Councilwoman Vez, >> yes. >> Council President,
>> yes. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Second. >> All in favor? I. Thank you everyone. >> Thank you very much.