EAST AMWELL PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
March 14, 2007 at 7:30 PM East Amwell Municipal
Building
CALL TO ORDER, ATTENDANCE
AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
This meeting of the East
Amwell Planning Board was opened on March 14, 2007 at 7:30 PM. The following
notice was read: “In compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, this is a
regularly scheduled meeting pursuant to the annual meeting notice as published
in the January 25, 2007 issue of the Hunterdon County Democrat, a copy of the
agenda for this meeting was forwarded to the Hunterdon County Democrat, filed
in the Township Clerk’s Office and posted on the bulletin board on March 8,
2007.”
Present: Emmerson
Bowes
Gail
Glashoff
Fred
Gardner
Bela
Kamensky
Linda
Lenox
Don
Reilly - Chairman
Dart
Sageser
Larry
Tatsch
Joe
Wolfgang
Excused: Philip
Ward
Michael
Weis
Regarding the agenda review,
Ms. Andrews noted that Fred Gardner will be briefly discussing run-in sheds
after Linda Lenox presents her Agricultural Advisory Committee report and the
public hearing scheduled for Pete Crisafulli will not be heard this evening due
to noticing deficiencies.
CITIZENS PRIVILEGE TO
SPEAK ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
A motion was made by Don
Reilly to open to the public. Dick Ginman, a Mountain Road resident and member
of the Farmland and Open Space Preservation Committee (FOSPC) came forward and
informed the Board that the committee was working on an update of the tax map
which will depict all of the preserved and publically held lands that are
currently not recognized accordingly. Mr. Ginman asked about the Gorduek
subdivision which allowed for a portion of preserved land. Engineer O’Neal
responded, “The application was approved with conditions and the conditions
have not been met yet. First the conditions must be met, then the plans are
signed off on and then the map is filed to ‘create’ the lots–at that time the
lots would exist, until then they don’t exist.”
Andrea Bonette of 17 Ridge
Road came forward and noted that she had her Stormwater Committee meeting in
the Road Crew Office last Monday evening. She stated that among the Township
Committee minutes and flyers that she had to clear off of the table, she
noticed an email correspondence between Joan McGee and Barbara Wolfe dated
October 2006. Ms. Bonette said, “I’m just very puzzled about how an
email...from Joan McGee to Barbara Wolfe from last October would be sitting in
the Road Crew Office.” Mr. Reilly indicated the Board had no knowledge of the
matter and suggested she speak to the Township Administrator if she had
concerns.
Mike Grzankowski of Route 31
came forward and commented that he has a house on his property that may be
suitable for a COAH unit. The Board asked him to provide his information to Ms.
Andrews who will have Jim Robbins the Township COAH Administrator contact him.
A motion by Fred Gardner,
seconded by Gail Glashoff to close the floor to the public was unanimously
approved.
REVIEW OF MINUTES
A motion by Fred Gardner,
seconded by Larry Tatsch to approved the minutes from 1/17/07 was approved with
Bela Kamensky abstaining.
NEW BUSINESS - OTHER
Public Hearing - Pete
Crisafulli - Block 21 Lot(s) 2 and 2.03 minor subdivision - lot line
adjustment: The Board suggested a
special meeting be scheduled for this applicant due to the desperate need for
the barn which is currently straddling the property line, to be rebuilt. Ms.
Andrews will coordinate scheduling a special meeting.
Informal Presentation -
Helen Rynearson - Block 3 Lot 3 -
Proposed Subdivision: Present for
this presentation was property owner Helen Rynearson, her son John Rynearson,
Jr., her daughter Terri Mitchell and her son-in-law Jim Mitchell. Also present
was Judy Conard, the Township’s FOSPC Administrator to help clarify the issues
associated with the proposed subdivision. Mr. Reilly explained to the Board
that Ms. Rynearson wanted to get a sense from the Planning Board what the
details and cost of the project would be. Ms. Conard summarized that the
proposal is to subdivide the property, creating a north lot with a
non-severable exception. Ms. Conard believed there are two potential problems:
One, the placement of the driveway for the new lot. Two, there is a ditch that
may need to be crossed to access the new lot and this may be a DEP issue.
Planner Banisch suggested that there may be a way to create a driveway to
access the property from the other side of the lot.
Engineer O’Neal summarized
the issues that need to be addressed by Ms. Rynearson: An Engineer should be
hired to determine if a viable driveway with the proper site distance can be
established. Second, a determination must be made as to whether or not the
ditch is a DEP issue. Next, the Planning Board checklist should then be
thoroughly reviewed to determine any other areas of concern relevant to the
proposed subdivision.
Approval of Resolution
PB#2007-06 - Extension of Time to File Deeds: Wielenta Minor Subdivision -
Block 32 Lot(s) 5, 5.02 & 5.03:
It was noted that Ms. Wielenta was requesting an extension because she was
awaiting reports from the State on one of the lots. A motion by Larry Tatsch,
seconded by Linda Lenox to approve the Resolution granting the extension of
time to file the deeds was unanimously approved.
Approval of 2007
Professional Contract: Joe Skupien/ Stormwater Management Consulting, LLC: A motion by Fred Gardner, seonded by Linda Lenox to
approve the contract with the condition that the Resolution be revised to
include the company name was unanimously approved.
Discussion of Planning
Board Priorities for 2007: Mr. Reilly
commented that he wants to review land use along the Route 31 corridor. He
explained there are a number of critical issues such as habitats, steep slopes,
septic suitability etc. and Planner Banisch will be providing a series of maps
for the Board to review which will depict these areas. The Board will then need
to address the current uses of the land along Route 31 and what the vision for
the future should be. Mr. Reilly noted there are a number of commercial
operations and residential dwellings all along the corridor. Planner Banisch
stated, “We don’t want an evolving character along the highway that is
determined by variance...we want to have a proactive vision for how the
corridor is supposed to turn out.”
Discussion of Tree
Harvesting Ordinance: Mr. Reilly
explained that the Planning Board passed a Tree Harvesting Ordinance last year
and it was sent on to the Township Committee and at that public hearing there
were a number of people who raised a number of legitimate concerns that needed
to be addressed and so the Ordinance has been sent back to the Planning Board.
Mr. Gardner was in agreement that the Planning Board needs to re-assess the
Ordinance. Mr. Gardner noted that there is a Tree Harvesting Ordinance on the
books that was passed back in 2000. Therefore, the plan is to scrap the current
Tree Harvesting Ordinance as it was presented and try to incorporate language
into the existing ordinance to address the issue of “clear cutting.”
Mr. Bowes commented that
residents with state approved plans by foresters should not need permits from
the Township. Ms. Glashoff commented that there should be fines and penalties
for people who abuse the clear cutting.
A motion was made by Don
Reilly to open to the public.
Mike Strizki, a Snydertown
Road resident came forward and stated he did not understand what spurred the
new ordinance. Mr. Reilly responded that it was the issue of clear cutting.
Joe Kleber, a Stony Brook
Road resident came forward and stated the ordinance is redundant because anyone
with a forester is state regulated.
Thomas Sweeney, a Lindbergh
Road resident came forward and noted that he believed the issue of clear
cutting could easily be resolved.
Joe Sowsian, an Orchard Road
resident came forward and noted a Stormwater Management problem. He explained
that the 25 acres, neighboring his property along Orchard Road and Linvale
Road, and owned by DEP has a stream that runs through it. Mr. Sowsian said the
stream is not controlled and when it floods, it creates “the Grand Canyon” on
his property. The Board noted that Engineer O’Neal will look into this matter.
Dick Thayer, a Mountain Road
resident came forward and thanked the Board for coming to their senses.
Donna McTeigue, a Wagner Road
resident came forward and said she did not want to see anything override the
woodland management plan.
Mr. Reilly noted that the
subcommittee consisting of Fred Gardner, Gail Glashoff, Michael Weis and
Emmerson Bowes will continue to review this ordinance and reach out to the
residents for input.
Review Working List of
Outstanding Issues: Mr. Reilly noted
that the issue of “outside boilers” will be added to the Planning Boards list.
Mr. Reilly continued to explain that he wanted to share the Board’s outstanding
issues list with the Zoning Officer to get his input on what he views to be a
priority. The list will then be sent to Planner Banisch and Engineer O’Neal for
their comments and then brought back to the Planning Board.
Discussion: Planning Board
Administrative Secretary position/appointment: Township Attorney Dick Cushing joined the meeting at
this time. Don Reilly recused himself and stepped down from the dais. Vice
Chair Fred Gardner took over the meeting at this time and read the following
statement: “As Don has said, he cannot participate in discussion of the next
agenda item: Planning Board Administrative Secretary position/appointment. This
is because he has been sued along with others by the current holder of that
position. All of us who were serving as volunteer members of the Planning Board
at the end of 2006, some of us specifically named, but all included under the
umbrella of ‘The East Amwell Planning Board’ along with several Township
employees including the secretary for this evenings meeting have been included
in a Notice of Claim signed by Joan McGee, but have not been served as yet with
papers suing us for an extensive variety of accusations spelled out in that
document. We, therefore, do not need to recuse ourselves since we have not yet
been sued as Don has needed to. As Vice Chair I will chair this part of the
meeting. First I would like to review with the Board certain facts regarding
Ms. McGee’s current status, and various communications which have been sent and
received by the Township Office, Dick Cushing, and those of us listed in the
Notice of Claim. Ms. McGee has been absent from work since November 29, on
which date she attended a Planning Board meeting at which she has claimed she
received a work related injury. The precise nature of this injury has never
been documented in accordance with Township policy, despite repeated requests.
Details regarding this request are included in a draft letter which Mr. Cushing
prepared after the most recent Township Committee meeting. Larry Tatsch has
copies of this draft if you should wish to examine it. In her Notice of Claim
dated December 28, 2006–but delivered sometime after that, Ms. McGee states
that at the meeting on November 29, 2006 she was–and I quote–‘harassed,
screamed at, humiliated, subject to severe emotional distress causing
continuing psychiatric and severe emotional problems which prevent claimant
from working with all of the above mentioned employees and Planning Board
members’ and in a subsequent paragraph that–and I quote again–‘she can no
longer work in the East Amwell Township Offices.’ These statements are at the
bottom of page two of the Notice of Claim...I have no wish to assess the
grounds which Ms. McGee asserts in support of her claims, but it seems to me
that we have a strong statement from her indicating that there would be
significant problems if she were in fact, to return to work. At its January 17
reorganization meeting, this Board reappointed Ms. McGee as its Administrator
for 60 days–a period which expires on Sunday March 18. When we did so, it was
with the expressed thought that Ms. McGee might return to work and conform to
behavior standards which might help bring about better relations with the
office staff. It was also with the understanding that the 60 day appointment
might be extended. To date, the Township has received no indication when, or
if, or under what conditions Ms. McGee might be able to return to work. This
evening we need to make decisions when we have completed discussions on this
matter whether to extend further Ms. McGee’s temporary appointment, or whether
to move on with our business and advertise the position.”
This matter was then opened
to the Board for discussion.
Mr. Bowes asked if anyone had
heard from Ms. McGee’s Doctor or Attorney. Mr. Tatsch responded, “After two
requests we did receive a letter from Dr. Hill.” The letter was dated 2/26/07.
Township Attorney Cushing commented that normally medical issues or reasons why
an employee is on a leave of absence are discussed in an Executive Session.
Attorney Cushing explained the Board is bound by the Open Public Meetings Act
which gives the employee, to be discussed, the ability to control whether or
not the discussion takes place in an Open Public Session or an Executive
Session. In this case, Ms. McGee indicated, through a RICE Notice, she wanted
the matter discussed in an Open Public Session. With regard to the question
raised by Mr. Bowes, Attorney Cushing stated, “I think it is a relevant
inquiry...which was the question of ‘has there been medical information to
verify the fact that Joan has been out for a three month period’ and with that
context in mind...I think it is not inappropriate to discuss the specific and
very narrowly tailored information that we received from the doctor.”
Mr. Tatsch read the letter
dated 2/26/07 from Dr. Hill stating, “Ms. McGee continues in active treatment
at Hunterdon Medical Center. She has not recovered to returning to work at this
time. She will be re-evaluated for this in another two to three weeks. She will
need to continue with a Wednesday evening program for at least eight weeks.”
Ms. Glashoff asked if anyone
had seen Ms. McGee. Ms. Andrews indicated she had seen her last Monday evening.
Ms. Glashoff asked where and Ms. Andrews replied, “At West Amwell Township
coming out of an interview.” Ms. Lenox expressed confusion with Ms. McGee being
able to work elsewhere, but not being able to return to her job with East
Amwell. Mr. Wolfgang asked, “Does the doctor’s note indicate that she’s not
able to work?” Mr. Tatsch stated, “All we know is what was provided to us...our
Township Administrator requested a detailed response from the physician as to
what the physician thought might be a return to work date and any other details
that could be provided and that was all we received back.” Mr. Gardner pointed
out that the letter does state Ms. McGee has not recovered to the point of
returning to work at this time. Ms. Glashoff asked the legality of not being able to return to work, but being able
to go out on an interview. Attorney Cushing responded, “I’m not sure if that is
a legal question, but it is certainly a question.”
Attorney Cushing advised the
Board that they should determine whether or not they have been provided
adequate information to keep the job open for a period of time, taking into
consideration all of the administrative needs of the Planning Board as well as
the community.
Mr. Gardner clarified that
the Board had two choices: To reappoint Ms. McGee for some period of time or to
advertise for the Board Administrator position. Ms. Glashoff asked what dates
the letters were received by the Township regarding Ms. McGee’s leave of
absence. Mr. Tatsch responded, “On November 29th Joan McGee attended
a public meeting. The following day it was reported that she was not capable of
returning to work due to a work related personal injury. I believe that was a
direct communication from Ms. McGee or her lawyer. Then there was a note dated
December 5th.” Mr. Gardner suggested that Mr. Tatsch read the factual
information contained in the draft letter the Township Committee requested
Attorney Cushing write. Mr. Tatsch said, “There are 10 items here...this will
give you a time line of only one aspect of our deliberations tonight, and that
is the aspect of Ms. McGee’s condition and how the Township Administrator has
been working with the Township to determine what that condition is and where we
stand on it...Item one: On November 29, 2007 Joan McGee attended a public
meeting of the Planning Board to discuss concerns about her employment. Certain
actions were decided upon at that meeting regarding her future employment with
the Township. Item two: The following day it was reported that she was not
capable of returning to work due to a work related personal injury. The
Township was also advised that none of its employees were permitted to contact
Ms. McGee on any work related issue and all contact had to be through your
office–and that’s referring to Ms. McGee’s Lawyer, Jeffrey Mahoney. Item three:
The East Amwell Township sick leave policy states, ‘a certificate from the
employee’s physician may be required as sufficient proof of the need for sick
time. The certificate shall also provide an expected return to work date and if
warranted, a statement t
hat the employee is able to
return to regular duties without limitation.’ Item four: Ms. McGee provided a
medical explanation only after Township Administrator Matheny specifically
requested one. That note, dated December 5, 2006 was extremely vague and did
not provide any return to work date per the policy. It stated, ‘Joan McGee is
currently receiving treatment at Hunterdon Health Care System and will be
re-evaluated weekly to determine if further treatment is necessary.’ No further
updates were received from this Doctor. Item five: Thereafter, Ms. McGee
provided to Mr. Matheny, a handwritten note, on a small page of spiral bound
paper that stated she had suffered an injury at the Planning Board Meeting and
that she would seek compensation for same. Item six: Because of lack of clarity
as to her intentions and her medical condition, I (Township Attorney Cushing)
wrote to Bill Courtney (Ms. McGee’s Attorney) on January 9, 2007 seeking
clarification as to whether Ms. McGee wished to be reappointed and requesting
that she provide detailed medical documentation of her medical condition if she
wished to continue her employment with the Township...Item seven: Even though
your client did not comply with township policies after being requested to do
so, the Planning Board, at it’s reorganization meeting, reappointed her to her
position on a temporary basis for 60 days. Item eight: I wrote to you again on
February 13, 2007 to request medical information documenting Ms. McGee’s
medical condition...Item nine: On February 14, 2007 Mr. Matheny also sent a
rather detailed letter again explaining the Township’s policy and requesting
medical information. This apparently prompted a letter from a Doctor Hill dated
February 21, 2007. This letter still had limited information–‘Ms. McGee
continues in active treatment at Hunterdon Medical Center. She has not
recovered to returning to work at this time. She will be re-evaluated for this
in another two to three weeks. She will need to continue with a Wednesday
evening program for at least eight weeks.’ Again this note does note state when
the employee is expected to be able to return to work. The letter also does not
explain your client’s medical condition and whether it prevents her from
returning to work. Item ten: At one point you demanded the Township provide an
accommodation to Ms. McGee apparently asserting she was handicapped, but you
provided no details of her handicap or what the accommodation sought was.”
Township Attorney Cushing
commented on the two areas of concern for the Board. One is whether or not Ms.
McGee has fulfilled her responsibilities under the Township’s policies and
supplied adequate information. Second is the need for the Board to evaluate the
situation as to whether or not the absence of having a permanent administrator
presents difficulties for the Board.
Board Attorney Norman
addressed the legal and practical standpoint of having an Interim Board
Secretary. Attorney Norman stated, “Section 24 of the Land Use Law specifically
requires that Planning Board’s have a secretary.” He also commented on some of
the duties and responsibilities of the secretary.
A motion by Emmerson Bowes,
seconded by Bela Kamensky to temporarily reappoint Ms. McGee with the condition
that regular medical updates be provided including a statement as to when she
may be able to return to work was made. Ms. Glashoff asked what date the
reappointment would be extended to. Ms. Lenox noted Ms. McGee’s treatment
nights were Wednesday evenings which conflicted with the Board’s meeting night.
Mr. Tatsch commented that Ms. McGee’s Notice of Claim was a legal document that
has been presented and clearly states Ms. McGee cannot work with the Planning
Board. Mr. Bowes clarified his motion to be a 30 day reappointment. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Kamensky.
Roll Call Vote: Emmerson Bowes: Yes, Fred Gardner: No, Gail Glashoff:
No, Bela Kamesky: Yes, Linda Lenox: No, Dart Sageser: No, Larry Tatsch: No, Joe
Wolfgang: No.
Mr. Gardner noted that the
motion did not carry and he stated, “The consequence of this is that Joan’s
period of temporary reappointment will expire on Sunday March 18, 2007. As of
Monday March 19, 2007 as I understand it, she will no longer be an employee of
East Amwell Township.
A motion by Gail Glashoff,
seconded by Larry Tatsch to advertise for the position (of Planning Board
Administrator) was made.
Roll Call Vote: Emmerson Bowes: No, Fred Gardner: Yes, Gail Glashoff:
Yes, Bela Kamensky: No, Linda Lenox: Yes, Dart Sageser: Yes, Larry Tatsch: Yes,
Joe Wolfgang: Yes.
Don Reilly returned to the
dais at this time.
ORAL REPORTS
FOSPC: Linda Lenox reported that the Omick property closed.
Ms. Lenox also reported that the state is changing their rules and criteria for
farmland preservation, making each municipality set its own criteria. Ms. Lenox
said this Saturday she will be meeting with a little sub committee to establish
some criteria. She noted she had reached out to some Agricultural Advisory
people with preserved farms. Ms. Lenox commented she attended a preservation
summit at Rutgers University and it was informative.
Mr. Gardner discussed the
issue of run-in sheds. He stated there have been a number of instances in the
Township where because of the topography of a piece of property, a person who
already has a barn or stable or sheep shed with adequate land for pastures has
had to come to the Board of Adjustment for a variance because a run-in shed is
incorporated under the same definition as buildings with foundations and
therefore needs 100' setback from the property boundary lines. Mr. Gardner
stated his position is that a run-in shed is something quite different. He
noted it is required by the ASPCA for the protection of animals, it does not
have a foundation, it is an open-ended three sided structure and it needs to be
situated in a particular manner for the protection of livestock. Mr. Reilly
noted that this issue should be put on the Planning Board agenda for
discussion.
Environmental Commission: Dart Sageser said the Committee met and had an
interesting presentation from Americore regarding stream conditions in the
Sourland Mountain concerning the South Branch water shed. Additionally, the
Commission will be updating their goals for 2007 to include discussion on
environmental uses at Clawson Park.
Smart Growth: Planner Banisch noted the 2nd phase of the
Sourland Mountain includes a detailed open space and conservation plan with a
cataloging of the natural resources with a series of recommendation on how to
better manage the mountain. The next phase is a comprehensive management plan
that will look less at the zoning and more at the resource values on the
mountain.
Stormwater Committee: Emmerson Bowes reported that the committee met Monday
evening and sent their suggested Ordinance changes over to Engineer O’Neal for
review.
COAH: Dart Sageser stated there was nothing new to report.
Planning Board Interim
Secretary: Ms. Andrews reported that
the transcripts from the Planning Board’s November 6, 2006 and November 29,
2006 meetings were back from the transcriber. An additional reminder was made
for all Board members to mark their calendars regarding the required
Planning/Zoning Training classes.
Chairman Report: Don Reilly commented the subdivision application
process document is still an evolving document. There was a discussion on the
Application Review Committee (ARC) being able to deem applications incomplete
in the interest of re-setting the MLUL “clock” for the applicants.
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC
A motion was made by Don
Reilly to open to the public. Mike Grzankowski of Route 31 came forward and
provided his contact information to Ms. Andrews so the COAH Administrator could
contact him. A motion was made by Don Reilly to close to the public.
PRESENTATION OF VOUCHERS
A motion by Fred Gardner,
seconded by Gail Glashoff to pay the vouchers was unanimously approved.
A motion by Bela Kamensky,
seconded by Fred Gardner to adjourn was unanimously approved.
The meeting adjourned at
10:07 PM.
____________________________
Maria Andrews, Interim
Secretary