On the eve of elections, the town council went into extra-innings at the council meeting as they touched on an array of hot topics. COAH, the Highlands, tennis courts and the budget were all part of the discussion. The one subject capturing the public’s attention is the proposed budget for fixing the municipal tennis courts. The keenly debated topic is raising awareness about the town’s finances, and is encouraging residents to examine all elements of the budget as opponents and supporters seek to justify their stance. The following is a summary report.
The Vote
Headlines announcing the approval of $850,000 for the tennis court project were proven premature as Frank Di Pentima, facing re-election to council, refused to support the ordinance authorizing the borough to borrow the money at this time. Explaining previous reservations, he suggested that their was no impediment to moving forward with the project using the already approved $410,000, and that the council should wait until engineering work and tests are completed before approving an indiscriminate lump sum.
Council member Burns and Mayor Szabo saw no benefit in delaying the vote as the council would still be approving or denying the project based on bids received. Mr. Di Pentima countered that there was also no rush to approve the funds and that it would be wiser to have a safety mechanism to prevent any unintentional expenditures. He was supported in his proposal by Council member Pignatelli, and the tie vote was broken by Councilman Visconti who’s position on the finance committee would make him heir apparent should Di Pentima lose his bid for re-election. Explaining his vote, Mr. Visconti offered that it was better to side with caution and seek the funds after bids are received. Council members Marcalus and Burns voted in favor, and Betsy Stagg was unable to attend the meeting.
The Council moved forward with funding all additional capitol improvement projects, and scheduled November 12th as a meeting many residents may find interesting with regards to the budget.
Downtown Oakland
The Mayor dashed hopes for minimal improvements to the downtown area by discounting arguments made by candidates Pat Tirri and David Skoblar who’s campaign has included a beautification effort. The Mayor placed a greater emphasis on seeking developers who can offer more significant improvements with large scale projects. The question of outdoor tables raised during a debate between all the candidates appeared to be squashed as the lack of sewers makes it unfeasible. The lack of sewers will remain an obstacle to any major changes, and present economic conditions will force this project far into the future.
It was noted that a failure to keep ordinances up to date probably impacted the town’s ability to negotiate a more advantageous development plan for the Eden project; and this has led the council to pursue clarification on the code prohibiting drive-thrus. The goal is to restrict drive-thrus so as to allow for a more pedestrian friendly environment. This issue surfaced because of Starbucks plan to offer drive-thru service. The towns master plan for downtown is intended to promote more pedestrian cross-shopping, but Mayor Szabo’s description of the Eden project as not being part of downtown because it is on the other side of Route 202 seemed to raise questions as to where exactly is downtown Oakland.
COAH & Highlands
A representative from the consulting agency assisting the borough with planning and COAH compliance reported to the borough council. He indicated that a memorandum of understanding between the COAH Council and the Highlands Council is still in negotiations. The two councils have issued contradictory mandates, and towns impacted by both are seeking clarification as to how they can abide in preserving the environment and building affordable housing. As mentioned in previous council meetings, the new Highlands Act allows towns in “the planning area” to opt in for greater protection by agreeing to abide by stricter regulations like those in the “preservation area”.
Oakland is requesting a $15,000 grant, like those given to Mahwah, Ringwood, and West Milford, to study the feasibility of extending the restrictions, the benefits, and any potential pitfalls. Also, by filing a notice of intent to consider opting in, the borough can extend the filing deadline for a COAH plan by another year. There are many lawsuits in play challenging the fairness of the new COAH obligations, but there is little chance that the December 31st deadline will be extended. Oakland’s unique position allows it an opportunity many towns do not have, and the ability to extend this deadline will allow an opportunity for additional review.
While the majority of borough business is conducted behind closed doors, Council member Burns and Pignatelli made some effort to keep residents informed. During the course of the consultant’s presentation, it was requested by Council member Burns that lay terms be used in describing lots of land so that residents would have an understanding of the tracts under discussion. Specifically, there was reference to land between the Oakland Shopping mall and the railroad tracks. It was suggested that this area could provide both affordable housing and increase the mixed-use zone being favored as a means of re-vitalizing downtowns. Council member Pignatelli asked what the town’s COAH obligation is, and surprisingly there was no answer.
The third round COAH obligation has created an uproar through suburban towns in New Jersey, and most leaders involved with the issue have the number seared into their memory. It was surprising that neither the consultant nor the mayor was able to provide this information. The convoluted nature of COAH’s rules and regulations make traversing the subject difficult for the majority of citizens, so the final assessment of what COAH determines as the obligatory number of units is often the one statistic easily understood.
Open Session /Tennis
The debate of the tennis courts continued as both sides of the question were represented by residents who were unable to attend previous meetings. Most of the arguments were similar to those heard before, and all contained the same passionate plea. Mike Kozak and Jim McGuire argued that the immense savings provided by the all volunteer Recreation commission should allow for the availability of funds to fix the courts without resorting to a band-aid approach. They suggested that significant funding could be raised through naming-right, sponsorship, and other advertising avenues to help defray the cost to taxpayers. They pointed to monies already spent in the past with regards to a quick fix, and made the case that continuing in that direction was not fiscally responsible.
Frank Monaco’s voice for fiscal conservatism in a time of national economic crisis was joined by Bob Fabrizio who opposes attaching a high price tag to the project. Both men spoke of the need to refurbish the courts to make them usable, but expressed dismay that the council would consider such a large investment during a national economic crisis. The long time residents felt that this was not the time to be adding an additional tax burden to residents. Mr. Fabrizio cited the impending cuts in state aid, and the need for other improvements that will be needed in the future; specifically mentioning a leaking roof in the senior center. The Mayor responded with appreciation to Mr. Fabrizio’s comments, adding that the council has struggled with the topic for a year and, “We’re a very smart governing body.”
Open Space
Howard Wegman, as did the Mayor, spoke on behalf of the open space tax. This tax is up for renewal in the coming election and has proved vital in Oakland being able to purchase open space with matching grant money. There appears to be no opposition to continuing the tax, but it’s defeat would put the town at great disadvantage in pursuing any future projects. All council members, along with the residents in attendance, added their endorsement to a continuation of the tax.
Mayor’s Report
Apologizing for doing it again, the Mayor offered fresh evidence of Trenton’s intrusion into local administration by describing a proposed bill to require purchases by municipalities to be handled by certified purchasing agents. He described it as another example of State mandates usurping municipal authority with regards to the management of tax dollars. The Mayor promoted the town council’s ability to balance a budget, but did not reference the increased taxes necessary to accomplish that. The intention of Govenor Corizine to slash 500 million dollars from the state’s budget will provide a new challenge for Oakland’s 2009 budget.
The Mayor reported on the town’s intention to seek monies available in the form of a grant to study energy conservation. New Jersey’s BPU will provide 80% of the funds to conduct the study, and the town can recoup the remaining 20% should recommendations be put into place afterward.