SHARE:  

PLANNING BOARD VOTES NO ON OUTDOOR CAFES PLAN

PUBLISHED BY TEANECK VOICES

Contents View this issue in your browser

Planning Board Votes No on Outdoor Cafes Plan

New Code to Rank Use of Town Athletic Fields?

Update on Teaneck's 2022 Election Candidates

Town Expenses: Is Council Watching?

Ready, Set: BOE Preps for School Days Ahead

Voter Registration Information

Upcoming Municipal Meetings

Events at the Library

One Town One Vote Resident Survey


COVID Updates


  • Rapid Home COVID tests from the Post Office


Announcements


  • Meet Your Teaneck Democratic Committee Representatives
  • Back to School 2022 - 8/27 - First Baptist Church
  • Free Breakfast and Lunch for NJ Students
  • Rodda Center Hours - 8/21 to 9/2 
  • NJ Fire Fighter Jobs
  • New Jersey State Updates
  • Prayers and Support for Ukrainian People
  • Contacting Teaneck Voices

PLANNING BOARD VOTES NO ON OUTDOOR CAFES PLAN!

An ordinary hour-long August 25, 2022 meeting of the Township’s Planning Board became extraordinary when the 6 regular members of the Board in attendance voted 4-1, with 1 abstention, to inform Town Council that its Introduced Ordinance 20-2022 to define a certification process for Outdoor Cafes and Parklets outside of some Town eating establishments was, in fact, inconsistent with the Township’s Masterplan.


It was not the first time that the Planning Board had seen a draft ordinance on this topic. Council had introduced a prior version on May 31 (Ord 25-2022), but after concerns were raised about it by the Planning Board, Council had tabled the prior version. What was proposed for Introduction by Council on August 9 said that the revised version would receive a public hearing and vote on September 20. 


The idea of allowing municipalities to extend the outdoor dining that had helped the state’s restaurants survive the Covid 19 pandemic got a specific additional boost when in early August, NJ Governor Murphy signed S-2364, that, until 2024, allows businesses in towns that permit them to file an application with a municipality’s zoning officers to extend their dining and drinking areas outdoors onto patios, decks, yards, walkways, parking lots and public sidewalks. Click Here for the NJMG story on the new state legislation. A week later, Teaneck’s Council’s decided to try again at the August 9 meeting. Click Here  to see the newly-revised ordinance as Introduced.



But as the Planning Board gave the revised ordinance very careful scrutiny for a full hour on Thursday night 8/25, it became increasingly clear that the Board members in attendance overwhelmingly found serious fault with the new version’s provisions concerning pedestrian safety, provision for snow management and parking impact and particularly the fact that as the specifications were written, most Teaneck eating establishments would never be eligible for those outside café and parklets certificates. One Board member asked if any other area but the stretch on West Englewood from Queen Anne to Palisade would meet the requirements. No one in attendance could name another locale.



There were other anomalies that helped reinforce the Board’s initial skepticism about the revised ordinance. The explanation of the Ordinance was not, as is routine, provided by a Town planner. There was no planner’s report on the ordinance. And no planner was there at the PB meeting to field any questions. Board member Stern indicated that not having a planner to answer his many questions would cause him to abstain when the Board voted.  Deputy Mayor Schwartz was absent. In his stead, Councilman Kaplan provided a brief introduction to the ordinance but soon demonstrated his limited understanding of it when asked specific questions. Voices readers who have the time can Click Here to observe the Town’s video and see how a land use board which for several years has consistently supported literally everything the Council majority has asked it to approve suddenly embraced an unambiguous motion to find this Council-proposed ordinance inconsistent with the Master Plan.


The vote to find the ordinance inconsistent with the MP received support from Board members Bodner, Zomick, Thompson and Ramos Reiner. Board member Lowe was the single vote against the motion. Member Stern abstained. Absent were members Schwartz, Parker, Kohn and alternates Hashmi and Greene


So what happens now? Consistent with NJ Statute 40:55D-31, Council had referred the ordinance “to the planning board for review and recommendation in conjunction with [the} … master plan” The statute goes on to specify that the Council “shall not act thereon, without such [PB] recommendation or until 45 days have elapsed …without receiving such recommendation.” The Board briefly considered NOT making any recommendation, but then did so when Chair Bodner made the motion to say no.

 


Council is not bound by statute to accept the Board’s decision. The Council had specified in the Introduced ordinance itself that it would not hold a scheduled hearing or vote on this Cafes and Parklets plan until the September meeting.


Will Council move to quietly table the ordinance – at either the meeting on Tuesday 8/30 or at the 9/30 meeting? Or will it actually push ahead to create a process that apparently only one block of eating establishments can benefit from. Watch This Space

      NEW CODE TO RANK USE OF TOWN ATHLETIC FIELDS

Likely as a result of the public criticism leveled at the Township by senior officers of the Teaneck Junior Soccer League (TJSL) at the Teaneck Council's August 9, 2022 meeting, the agenda for the Tuesday August 30 Council meeting includes introduction of a new ordinance specifying how the Township will prioritize permits given to organizations seeking to use its athletic fields. TJSL leadership expressed their distress that the League had been told its permits for key soccer times in the Fall had again in 2022 been "taken away" from the League and given to an organization (Yeshiva University) which is not located in the Town, (See last week’s Teaneck Voices story on this controversy which appears Click Here on the Voices website.)


Clearly Teaneck’s Mayor and Council did as they said they would do - scramble to sort out how to prevent a reoccurrence of this issue by creating Town code to give actual permit and timeslots priority to Town organizations as had been done since 2004 but only guided by Council resolutions that expire after every Council election.. Teaneck Voices has submitted OPRA requests seeking to verify that what actually caused the TJSL glitch this year and last was NOT, as some Council had suggested, the Recreation Department’s scheduling system.


It does not appear that the proposed ordinance (scheduled to receive a hearing and final vote at the Council's September 20 meeting) will remedy the problem this Fall. (To see the proposed ordinance, Click Here). Voices readers will want to watch the next two Council meetings to see whether the TJSL leadership is persuaded that the ordinance will succeed in giving Town-based user organizations the priority everyone now appears to agree that they deserve.

UPDATE ON TEANECK'S 2022

ELECTION CANDIDATES

A review of both the County Clerk and Election Law Enforcement Commission(ELEC) websites on August 27 indicates no change from Voices last report as to who will be or are aspiring to be candidates in the 2022 Teaneck elections (Council and school board) on November 8.

 

There remain 14 candidates competing for 5 school board positions – Three positions are to be elected for 3-year terms and two positions are to be elected for the 1-year term left by the resignations of board members in 2022. The 5 newly-elected BOE members will join the 9-member Board. Ballot positions for these 14 BOE candidates have already been drawn and appear in the 8/22 issue of Teaneck Voices and on its website www.teaneckvoices.com

 

An unknowable number of residents are gathering petitions to qualify to be placed on the ballot for one of the 4 available four-year Council seats . For the first time, these positions are being elected in November instead of May. Aspiring candidates must make the required submissions to the Township Clerk by September 6.  Voices is aware that several aspiring Council candidates have now submitted signed petitions to the Township Clerk’s office where they will be reviewed to determine whether the potential candidate has submitted at least 308 valid Teaneck voter signatures.


Readers who want these election processes spelled out in greater detail can access prior Voices election stories that are being updated weekly and found on the Voices website. Click Here and click on the relevant stories when they appear in the slide show at the left hand side of the site’s main page. of Voice’s website.

  

TOWN EXPENSES: IS COUNCIL WATCHING?

When John Shahdanian became the Township attorney in July 2017, he was a member of the distinguished Secaucus firm, Chasan, Lamparello et. al. The contract he authored and Council approved that summer continued virtually every feature of the then recently-negotiated Township attorney contract (2015) which called for a large retainer (approximately $20K monthly) but significantly reduced the number of attorney activities which would be charged to the Town at an hourly rate. 


One of the most significant characteristics of Mr. Shahdanian’s original 2017 contract was its specification that the Town would NOT be charged hourly rates for attorney time spent with the various functions (including litigation) that involve adjudication of Open Public Records Act (OPRA) requests and related issues.

Five years, four different law firms and four attorney revised contracts later, the Town’s attorney fees landscape has shifted significantly. Various legal activities are now billed separately. The number of cases in litigation reported in the monthly bill lists continues to grow because, apparently, the new legal team specializes more in keeping cases going rather than finding settlements.


But there is one feature found in the Council agendas for the last several months of bill-lists billing that should be questioned by any vigilant Town Council. In addition to the $20K+ charged as the regular monthly charge for the attorney firm’s retainer, there is one charge each month – the OPRA hourly charge – that stand out.in these bill lists

·       May 2022: $19,313

·       June 2022: $19,872

·        July 2022: $17,083.

If those 3 months are averaged and multiplied by 12, the Town can apparently expect to be billed for OPRA a total of $225K+. And note, this again is for functions which, when Mr. Shahdanian became attorney, were INCLUDED in the retainer!  


So when our Township attorney was reauthoring the revisions to his contractual agreement with the Town – and including the new contracts among the resolutions in the Council’s consent agenda – at no time did a Council member ask that the resolution be separately examined! instead those resolutions passed as part of the “routine” resolutions that make up the consent agenda.

So far as Voices can determine, those resolutions were never mentioned let alone split out for examination.


How many times in the past year has a member of this Council questioned a single expenditure of any kind which appears at least monthly on the bill lists at Council meetings? Voices reporters’ research has found NONE.

How many of the seven members of Council even take the governing board’s financial oversight function seriously enough to examine and then vote to approve the bill lists of every Town expenditure? 


One who does not is Deputy Mayor Katz. Voices is currently examining old Council videos to determine when was the last time the Deputy Mayor actually voted on a bill list rather than abstain without explanation.   

READY, SET: BOE PREPS FOR SCHOOL DAYS AHEAD

At its Special Meeting on August 24, the Teaneck Board of Education addressed the full range of school opening issues with considerable confidence that its facilities and curriculum are ready for the first true post-pandemic school year. Interim Superintendent Pinsak was especially enthusiastic about how the new personnel training sessions had gone. In contrast to so many school districts across the county, the District has apparently nearly succeeded in filling its teacher posts. 


The one source of concern is the fact that the District had not in its initial annual school bus bidding received bids for 4 bus routes. Bids for these routes in a second-round competition, which Interim Business Manager Zeno told the Board had been aggressively advertised to all local bus companies, are to be opened on Monday August 29. Like the concerned parents who called into the meeting, all BOE and administrative personnel are anxiously awaiting the result.


Following the lead of many other local school boards, Teaneck BOE passed last Wednesday a resolution strenuously objecting to the huge proposed increase in the 2023 cost of health care for district employees under the School Employees Health Benefits Program. The resolution was addressed to the state’s School Employees Health Benefits Commission asking it to reconsider the rate increase and find rate increase that is appropriate in the current economic conditions The Board’s resolution notes not only how school district budgets will be negatively impacted, but that since employees participate in paying a portion of their health insurance premiums, school employees now facing the effects of high inflation will be hit with serious additional strains on their personal budgets. (Similar concerns are being raised by public employee units of all sorts throughout the state) 


The BOE has been meeting frequently to interview many of the 9 current candidates it has identified for the District Superintendent position. Four were interviewed last week and several more will be interviewed tonight (8/29). Chair Rodriguez expressed confidence that the Board would successfully complete its search in order to have the new Superintendent “on board” by the end of the calendar year. 


VOTER REGISTERATION INFORMATION

If you are not registered to vote, please make it a priority to do so. To complete a registration form or for more information regarding voting in Bergen County, please click onto the this link.


If you are not sure if you are registered to vote in Teaneck, you may search here.


To check the details of your voter record, you may sign up here.

UPCOMING MUNICIPAL EVENTS


Board of Education Special Public Meeting -Monday, August 29, 2022, 5:45 pm Please click the link below to join the webinar:

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88942226707


(Note: BOE will be meeting almost entirely in Executive Session on Monday (8/29 to conduct personnel interviews for the next District Superintendent) 


Teaneck Council - August 30, 2022 at 8:00 pm For zoom access Click Here and add passcode at 971743. Click Here for meeting agenda


  • The Council will hold a hearing simultaneously on 4 different ordinances-only two of which are likely to get much attention. 
  • Ord. 37-2022 would have Court Street passing in front of the Rodda Center become one-way going west. (For some reason, the Cafes and parklets" ordinance isn't being considered until 9/20_)
  • Ord 40-2022 looks innocuous - licenses and requirements for first aid and ambulance squads. It is, in fact, woven into a struggle as to who delivers EMS services.
  • Resolution 237-2022 will, if passed, define one more AINR (Area in Need of Redevelopment) in the Northeast - this time beginning at Teaneck Road & W. Englewood going south and west to include 18 lots in the 4905 Block). Voices extensively covered the Planning Board meeting where this AINR was first investigated and raised serious questions about whether this particular AINR continues an unneeded embrace of the concept that Teaneck is doing development by designating more and more areas of Town as blighted (Click Here to read that story on the Voices website.) 

 

Board of Adjustment (BofA)Thursday Sep. 1, 2022 – 7:00 pm For zoom access Click Here and use passcode 775265. For the agenda  Click Here


  • The interesting agendas items for this B of A meeting are the large number of resolution decisions on complicated applications which the Board will memorialize.(54 West Englewood's denial and Plaza Dentistry's approval). Even more significant is that the application to turn 205 Cedar Lane into a large multi-family facility was withdrawn - and thus dismissed w/o prejudice on 8/4. Proponents of permitting cannabis retailing on Cedar Lane had mentioned this address in a recent Council G&W.  
  • The "new business" applications are all addressing variances at single family residences. 


This Week's Events at the Library click here
ONE TOWN ONE VOTE RESIDENT SURVEY

One Town One Vote (OTOV) is a grassroots, nonpartisan volunteer organization that worked with other community groups to make it easier and more convenient for Teaneck residents to vote for their local leadership by unifying Teaneck’s stand-alone town council elections, previously held in May, to take place on the same day as the General Elections in November. Tuesday, November 8, 2022 will be the first time Teaneck residents will have the opportunity to vote for town council members at the same time as we vote for other local, state, and national officials.


In anticipation of this historic event, OTOV is conducting a town-wide survey on resident issues and concerns. We need your input! Your responses will help us achieve our ongoing goal of helping to listen, educate, organize, and empower residents on local issues so your voice matters and your vote counts in the November elections. Your information will not be shared with any other organization.


Please click here to take the One Town One Vote resident survey! Your voices will be heard, your voices will count!"

COVID UPDATES
Rapid COVID-19 Test Kits Available for Free from USPS

Free at-home COVID-19 tests ordered on www.covidtests.gov and delivered by USPS. Limit of 2 orders per household. Each order contains 4 individual tests
ANNOUNCEMENTS
NJ FIRE FIGHTERS
JOB OPPORTUNITY
Closing date: August 31, 2022
Fire Fighter test and information about the job of being a firefighter.
The projected starting salary next year is $55,687 and $55,781 if the candidate has an EMT (before or after hire) as well. Salary may differ with each jurisdiction.

https://info.csc.state.nj.us/Vats/WebAnno.aspx?FileNumber=30142 (click onto the link to read the "FireFighter Fact Sheet"

TEANECK VOICES CONTINUES TO OFFER ITS

PRAYERS AND SUPPORT

TO THE BRAVE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE FIGHTING FOR THEIR FREEDOM

Contacting Teaneck Voices


By Email: teaneckvoices@gmail.com

By Phone: 201-214-4937

By USPS Mail: Teaneck Voices, PO Box 873. at 1673 Palisade Ave., 07666

Sign Up Now
Send a Comment
Submit an Article
Editorial Policies
LinkedIn Share This Email