##VIDEO ID:Nokiwvu459k## [Music] okay on am you can hear me yeah okay good evening good evening this one is Direction yes okay we have board administrator yes yes something like that no unfortunately de's dog had to be has to be put down today so rainbow so she's uh very upset about that um okay I hereby call the Zoning Board of adjustment regular meeting uh to order for July 2nd 2024 at 7:32 p.m. call to order and statement of compliance adequate notice of this meeting SL hearing has been provided by posting a copy of the public meeting hearing dates on the municipal bulletin board and website by sending a copy to the acro Sentinel and courier newspapers and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk standard board procedures any hearing conducted by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times electronic devices all in attendance are asked to mute cell phones or any electronic devices as do not interrupt the proceed excuse me Pledge of Allegiance Tom would you lead us please be glad pledge Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation God indivisible liberty and justice for all thank you okay roll call okay uh chairman G here Vice chairman grov here uh Mr arono here miss Brennan here Mr Flatley is excused um Mr gianakis here uh Mr Rosenberg is excused um Mr Watts here and M Crawford Collins here all right and May the record show that uh uh Liz is filling in for Deb and we have our uh uh glor we have our um engineer here also uh so uh meeting minutes they're going to be the uh uh approval of those are going to be carried to 820 now we have some resolutions we have 1 2 3 four five resolutions some of all of which have different people that can vote on them um we have the first one which is SF Holdings LLC 837 miles a row Gillette New Jersey block 14001 l25 application number 242 Z has any everybody had a chance to uh review the resolution I know they were emailed out yes uh any corrections changes comments on the resolution for that applicant none that I noticed and for the record there is no no public so there's no comments coming from that area uh okay now for this one I'm eligible Vice chairman Goff is El eligible uh Mr Watson and Miss Crawford are eligible so um Mr J Mr and Mr ganakas I'm said Mr ganakas is also eligible um so do I hear a motion to approve the SF Holdings LLC resolution so moved second okay uh um vo call okay uh Mr Gan ois yes Mr Watts yes Miss Crawford Collins yes uh Vice chairman Groff yes and chairman GRE yes okay okay one down now we have the uh CPM Associates LLC AKA The Uncommon thread located at 331 LM Street Sterling New Jersey block 1 13006 Lots 14 and 14 Z 01 application number 24- 03z again no one in the audience to comment uh does everyone who uh is eligible to vote of which I am not she accidentally put that I was but I'm not because I had to recuse myself from that one um it says here that I that I was recused when it comes to the uh last page but unfortunately she uh put in here that I could vote on this this one but anyway um everyone had a chance to look at this one any comments Corrections hear none the the only changes would be Mr chairman just to reflect that I'm not there yeah I think it might have had the on the vote thing it did say that it said correct no none we chose none I guess that's the only way you could do that um so I am not eligible all right now we've got uh Vice chairman good Mr G Mr Watson Miss Crawford Collins somebody want to make a motion I make a motion to approve okay second do I hear a second second okay voll call okay Mr ganakas yes uh Mr Watts yes Miss Crawford Collins yes Vice chairman grov yes okay another one there all right the next one is drone Dron Ron llc at 1893 lill Road Millington New Jersey block 2302 lot 11 application number 24-6 Z and you're not eligible right I am not eligible again um no audience on this one either uh do I hear any comments uh Corrections or any other uh um input on this one okay hearing none do I hear a motion to approve so moved do I have a second second okay well call please uh Mr ronio yes Miss Brenan yes uh Mr Watts yes Miss Crawford Collins yes uh and vice chairman grov yes okay the next one is Stephen jenck and Kathleen Canon jenck 14 151 fars Drive Sterling New Jersey block 14206 lot one application number 24-7 Z and uh the eligible people on this is myself M Mr gof Mr gianakis Mr Watts and Miss Crawford Collins uh do I hear any um changes Corrections or comments on this one hearing none do I have motion to approve motion to approve okay a second second okay V call uh Mr ganakas yes uh Mr Watts yes Miss Crawford Collins yes Vice chairman Groff yes chairman GRE yes all right and the last one is the r doggies Inc 977 Valley roow Gillette New Jersey block 0601 Lot 8 application number 24- 08z again I see no public for this one uh the eligible people to vote on this is myself Mr grov Mr arono Mr ganakas Mr Mr Watson Miss Crawford Collins do I hear a mo do I hear any comments or changes on this one one uh yes typographical error Mr chairman uh first paragraph third line down uh 977 Valley Road oh the valley is got plug an in there I don't know how that happened but I think that's a minor correction exactly just one thing uh any other changes or comments Valley Road Sterling or Valley Road belette uh that's Gillette you tribute also Gillette there too so it's Valley road Gillette okay so that's that's thank you good catch oh that's why he's a real estate agent he knows where he is yeah most of the time um do I hear a motion to approve this one I'll move it as amended okay and do I hear a second I'll second okay uh will call please okay Mr ronio yes uh Mr gianakis yes Mr Watts yes Miss Crawford Collins yes Vice chairman Groff yes chairman GCT yes all right that takes care of the resolutions now I understand you have some new business or SL old business yes uh I guess you can consider a new and old business Mr chairman um so edification of our board professionals uh you guys w't at the plan the longor longor The Long Hill planning board meeting last week right well it turns out that the planning board apparently never adopted bylaws and uh the last time this board adopted bylaws this is to everybody was in 2015 right so I remember being that that's the case um the planning board um they're working on their own set of bylaws but noticing that the board this board hasn't adopted one in a very long time um Steve directed me to put a new uh set of bylaws together for you all um so what I sent you guys by email the other day and lien Joe I'm sorry for not sending this to you guys because I I didn't think you were going to be here because we didn't have much on the agenda um I put I kind of synthesized what was the 2015 bylaws with what my firm kind of uses as our temp set of bylaws that we basically provide to every board that we have so um document I'm referring to right now I don't if you guys brought copies of it but no okay okay would would have expected dead to print him out but she's not here she's dealing with some stuff so besides the point um well if nobody has it it's hard for me to really refer to anything here but what I had sent you guys was just that you know like I explained it you know kind of a synthesis of your bylaws your old bylaws plus our template um It's relatively lengthy you know once I get past the uh uh the table of contents page from it's like Pages four to 24 it's almost 20 Pages worth of of content in here so um even that nobody has it in front of them I guess we can't really discuss it tonight but if you guys want to take a look at it we can come back and yeah do you have a clean do you have an original version of a old one yeah the email I circulated to you guys the other day had it in there right I had the original your your 2015 set our regular template set and the combined the combined and then also a Redline version of the combined version so you can kind of see where things got plugged in and changed okay well what I would suggest is that everybody has a chance because it was a little bit of last minute thing it if everybody would please look at them for the next meeting that we can spend some time on them uh I'm sure there's going to be meeting coming up that we're not going to have so busy hopefully and if we could just um take the time to review them if you want to print them out fine if you don't look them out on a computer and uh be ready to to discuss them at the next time at the next available date that we can do it m and hopefully uh we can uh adopt a comprehensive set of bylaws that are useful to us that are actually uh offic that are legally useful basically exactly and Mr chairman I'll just throw in there I when I was looking at the 2015 bylaws I could there was a resolution page included with that and from what I could tell from this just this resolution page yourself and other members of the board at the time uh chairman beay right board member om Mullen who was apparently an attorney you guys put a lot of work into this so I Tred did my best to yeah there was there were probably some areas of it that could have been improved cuz uh Michael melan and myself sat down and tried to work these out but you know uh we would it's so far back I don't remember it was almost a decade ago yeah I know uh you know it's one of those things where you know you put the best effort into it but it's right you know sometime everything can be improved and things change Law changes to so well well there was actually a lot of stuff in that 2015 set that wasn't in our template so if anything it kind of helps us and roundabout good we won't charge you no I won't charge you yeah um so um how does everybody feel I know did anybody have actually a chance to look at them I I was away over the weekend I didn't okay see anything pertaining to that's what I figured 20 minutes ago right I did say it and I do recall 5 Ed you and I were both here yes I know and it was a little bit controversial at the time if you remember there was this was done because there was some I say dissension among the board yeah that's why we did it we never had bylaws and there was never any need for them but this was done there was you know there was different and there still are we're always going to have like differences of opinion but at the time it was more I could say divided and it was you know close so I was a little bit hyper paranoid about some of the Clauses in here in particular the one for disqualification of board members where another board member can disqualify a board member I did a little research on that talked to some some planning attorneys the one that taught the class you know our own and that's the only thing that I had an issue with at the time it went through anyway um our own our own board attorney thought that it wasn't necessary at the time and thought that it could be used for political reasons so in other words if it's a if it's a controversial application that's ongoing which we had at the time M and it's you know it's a close decision everybody kind of knows where other people stand on density development all kinds of stuff like that especially at the time and they were arguing over it um my problem with that was that you could single out an easy target and remove from the board and which is well just I just I know I know it's in deference to the board that was never done it was never done yeah no but that was my hyper little paranoia maybe I don't know but well let's look to see what say that's the only I I remember too from that remember that whatever was in that b so so I just wanted to have you think about that and let I want to know what your thoughts are because I think that the second you do that a board member that does that is now conflicted with either some of the board or at least another part of the board so you actually created a conflict there and now you're an interested party like you now became part of what is an interested party was a board member able to be removed by one other board no so the process is that the board will meet and and hear the and hear what's going on right um and and really hold a hold a case like have a hearing about that that issue now of course if the board's going One Direction you could say well that we're going to go that way anyway but you know I'm saying like there could be you know fishing Expeditions I don't like it I don't love it I don't know if I'm wrong I could be way out there on my own with this one but like I said I've talked to some land use attorneys and they're like we never heard of that you know if you if you are conflicted you step down right you know and that's it and we're all at large board members and we all are responsible for ourselves and you know I think the minute you have other board members telling other board members what to do there's an issue right what the interpretation of that own board member whether they're conflicted or not then the other people Well normally a board member if he thinks he has a conflict would discuss it with our attorney attorney and the attorney would would uh give their legal opinion as to whether it does uh look like a uh an appearance of impropriety and then you know an appearance but not even actual are on the side of caution you step down yeah so it's a legal matter and normally we defer to the attorney because that's their job that's what we paying the big bucks for I have uh for the edification of the board I have the that section of the our prior bylaws I call them prior because I'm assuming we're starting with page page five and this ification of board members and I'll read it briefly that there's three bullet points there where the board member owns a property within 200 ft of of sub where a board member or a member of his or her immediate family has direct or indirect Financial or personal involvement okay we've got that one and where the board member has any other personal or pecuniary involvement or interest that might reasonably be expected to impair the board memb objectivity yeah okay I right so maybe this is watered down from what you originally saw Jerry but these don't these don't seem these don't seem too bad seems like what we do that is not the issue that's normal that's standard that's in the land use manual right that's where we get that from it's the process of it's thank you it's the process of another board member challenging you and saying you know Tom I think you shouldn't be on this case you said well I'm not conflicted well you know what you're not going to decide that Tom we are right you know the Border attorney should decide that so correct that's what I believe if there's well that's that was paragraph C that's should a board member fail to disqualify himself or herself for a particular matter on the basis of potential conflict of interest as defined in one that whatever as any interested party or member of the board of adjustment May request that the board make deter board M qualific member of the board because the minute a board member steps up up and say have a problem with Mrs Jones they're conflicted they now too have to leave why because they just had a conflict with the with with the board like that's the board the board's a body right so if you go against that body now you have a conflict with them like you are on the other side issue doesn't make no this means if a if a party in the audience thinks you have a conflict understand that well one of the board members thinks that there may be well not a member of the audience because now that's just the general public I it's only interested party it says any interested party well usually is not an interested party well usually most people that show up are within the 200 fet it's different than member of the public well I all right that's true I meant the people that usually show up are interested I think what this does Mr ronio is it sets up a procedure let's say you have an applicant that comes in and they you know question whether one of the board members is going to be impartial right this gives them this proced I agree with you ESS that's the interested party it's the applicant right right that's the interested party the board members are not interested parties because if we were we would be interested parties we be conflicted so we should be disin but what if member a knows that member B lives across the street from let's say that's that's too simple let's say they know they have some financial interest that maybe is not as EV would know yeah that nobody else would know be right because living across the street everybody would see that but let's say that one member knows that another member has some financial interest in it that he might think it's a conflict but from what I read here is if that's brought up then you go into close section you get legal advice from the attorney so it's not that easy to just kick someone off the board I mean all that person is doing get it but whether it's an interested party or or a board member they're just bringing the issue up if it's facts based yes then process by with the attorney and if the attorney ultimately says no there's no conflict that's what stands you know so I don't think it's more and it's more so I say when the board is debating on something that has to do with density or a pilot program or something like that where there's differences on the board and it's close they say all we need is one more vote and we can get that guy off off right we can say you're conflicted and now you're gone and now the vote changes that's what I about you can't just say someone's conflicted because according to even the bylaws we had it has to go through a hearing the attorney has to uh be advis be consulted so it's not just say he has a you know she has a conflict I want her off that's not that simple so what you're saying is you're still calling out other board members that's what I understand that that's what I have the issue not we don't have we shouldn't be doing that to each other we shouldn't be telling each other when steep down and went not to right we should all handle our own seats okay what do you think Mr just to be fair like theoretically you could run into a situation I'm not taking as side I'm just trying to explain I want your opinion let's say you run into a situation where you know a board member does have a pretty obvious or at least to some people obvious conflict of interest but he or she refuses to step down from the days and says screw you I'm not going anywhere I'm just I'm here you know the idea is that there should be a process to have that person removed now what particulars that would be who's we got to come to a kind of you know something that everybody could agree upon that's that's legal but you know I'm just trying to give you the Devil's Advocate explanation as to why in that Cas process [Music] procedures if a board member participating if I could help there were no opinion is that in close session that there appears to be a conflict and would be the best interest in municipality to avoid the potential of down line right and without those violence top I'm sure you could kind like put something together so to speak at that that's we did no clear path so this clear path to make sure that in an abundance of caution everybody's in a disagreement it goes to its own CL it has a process right yeah there's I mean if you read this it's pretty extensive we don't one person cannot do it alone one person just brings up the issue without that you you'd have to create the framework there has to there no exactly you know they're still entitled as a board member you're entitled to do process see Jer I don't view it as one member calling out another I view it as one somebody saying I think there may be a conflict here not against any not being against a person just saying I think there's a conflict so that way you air on the side of of caution so that if the board if the applicant is approved or disapproved they don't have an appeal issue so then the board discusses it and if the if the person who who may may or may not have the conflict doesn't see it they have the right to be heard and and their opinion it matters and if the whole if the attorney feels no there isn't a conflict that stands and then we vote so I don't think I I don't think this can be used like you say it can be used can I make a suggestion because I don't think that we're going to come to a resolution on this today could we ask the board attorney to resarch it research it and come to us with a recommendation as to what other towns do and how that compares to what we currently have and to the extent that there is anything in the municipal land use law that would or case FL for that matter yeah that's great thank you yeah no no I I was going to have him do that anyway but I was I was just explaining it I don't think this is just for back I'm only bringing this up because at the time that was going on there was like I said the Border was arguing there was one person that wanted this yeah one person I don't remember I'm not going to say names I don't either push this through push this like really wanted this bad like it was rabit about it and I was thinking it's not it's not we don't need it like we don't have to have this and that was that was 90% of the reason that drove us to have bylaws okay we didn't have bylaws prior to that no I understand that they wanted the ability to remove someone if they had to well I understand what you're saying but I don't think that gives any one person the ability to do anything in fact it takes five it takes it takes five people I agree with that yeah so you to me it was a little dangerous that's all no yeah I don't think it's as dangerous as you think right um we'll find out it's not the Smoking Gun that right I'm not saying that it is I'm just saying that that's the of all that was done and you worked hard on that I know you did yeah and I know uh Tom did too and and and and Michael M Michel M right and Tom bear did a lot of work on that as well deciding some's refusal from application for dismissal from the no just the application yeah exactly it's just a if it's said of an interested party challenges that totally fine with that like if the applicant says you know this guy shouldn't be up there he's he's conflicted on this so they what you you're doing you're you're exception that it's a fellow board member you don't mind if the appli oh okay 100% I'm glad you explained that I wasn't quite sure what you I in my view I could be totally wrong with in my view the minute that the board member does that they have sided with something to do with the case I don't think they've sided with see that's why I don't see that I don't think they've sided with anybody I think they're just protecting the Integrity of the decision be thinking that if a decision is made with a potential conflict person sitting it could potentially jeopardize whatever the decision is and they would have to to convince four other sitting board members right right which is not easy to do if you're wrong so now this is this is the that's the um Redline version so that's why is this one so thin this is the original this is the one what I this one this no this is the 2015 okay this is the 2015 this is my firm's like template set oh this is your firm I use that as a springboard to put and this is the two combined correct well that's the the redline version of the two combined and then this is the two combined the two combined like the clean one has the let me see table of contents on all I see I still have to a page on yeah yeah you together okay and this was all emailed to us correct okay all right yeah okay I'm sorry for not getting it out to you guys sooner but I wanted to rush resol so we know the applicant there was there was no way that we could comprehend everything here and and talk about it I mean we've discussed some part of it and and and I appreciate thator no no I appreciate it uh that's what we want to do we want to discuss it because I think should come up I think that we're being proactive about this however the the final version comes out I think it's a it's a good thing to have because we then we have policies and procedures and everybody knows what they are and if there's a problem we refer to the bylaws and we follow them and I think that's a lot better than just about a city of pants if the problem comes up so exactly uh you know that's why we work so hard on them on 2015 and I appreciate you we looking at them because there could be something that's outdated there could be something that changed in the law so it's always good to revise them at least every n years most of our boards if not all of them they they do them every year so we were kind of I was like we a little bit over aiing Boards out there my well typically it's the same thing they just put a new date on it they just put a new date on it I mean if something if in the law changed that out that made your bylaws wrong then you'd fix it right exactly but um so like I said if everybody could U look at them on their computer print them out do whatever you want be familiar with them come up with some questions some concerns about them uh and then I'll check with Deb to see what our schedule is and the next light night when we maybe only have one applicant or no applicants for that matter you know that happens we'll take this up and we'll discuss it and and uh then we'll come to a hopefully a resolution as to which version or what we want to include in right uh so thank you thank you for bringing it to our attention because my job and and if we do have questions ve them for the next meeting yes yeah yeah write them down keep them and and when we come down and mark them up you can mark them up on your your paper and then when we discuss it you'll know exactly what you want to ask and what your concerns are and between all of us we'll put our heads together on our attorney we'll figure something out we'll come up with some good byw one suggestion I'm taking off on ry's point here if if we all come up with our questions yeah at the next meeting regardless if we're booked till midnight like last time or if it's an easy night perhaps we can just gather them together give them to the attorney give it to the attorney good ide come back yeah if if you have any questions or comments on it um write them down uh and we'll give them to the attorney the next time we meet if if everyone can do it that quickly if not I understand uh and then perhaps at that time he'll review our questions and comments and then maybe that'll promote some facilitate some changes in things or or not and then we'll have a chance to discuss it after that so I think that's a good idea thank you all right um Mr chairman I think our next meeting is August 20th it is August 20th so that's this is your homework assignment yeah so we have plenty of time we have plenty of time to to to to dissect every word plenty of time to procrastinate this and yes no no no we are not this by by October this is going to be passed um and I'm saying that only I don't say that in just because I don't know what our schedule is so we might not have that much time to discuss it uh but I think that given the hard work that went into this I think we can come up with something that is uh uh universally accepted uh anything else Mr chairman just real quick on one last thing on the bylaws yeah just got to refer this real quick um I don't know if you guys recall this in the early part of the year we had a informal educational session meeting and uh at the time you guys wanted us to make a few changes to what we thought were the bylaws the 2015 bylaws regarding uh I think it was the compens not the compensation but um the hiring decisions regarding the Planning and Zoning administrator and the secretary because the way the bylaws were drafted MH um it kind of implied that the board made those decisions when the governing body that changed right right well I I was going through my emails and I saw that I had sent Deb the proposed text change to circulate to you guys but I think we had a very busy docket at that point time and it just kind of fell to the Wayside but just so you guys know when you go review this this doesn't that additional that changed language good the new version okay great terrific so just wanted to point that out so that is a change that you already made correct okay to to ver to reflect what was done by the by the municipal body right right exactly um all right is there anything else that we have to talk about tonight I don't believe there is I think we're we're um do you don't know our schedule right I don't I I just know that the next meeting is August 20th so um assuming there's nothing that's I got to imagine it's pretty light considering we had nothing tonight so yeah yeah that's true but this good because it got a chance to clean up all these resolutions and get these people uh going on their projects right clean sleep when we come back yeah good except for the minutes we have these June 18th minutes always something yeah always something all on um all right hearing no other further business uh do I hear a motion to adjourn I'll move it second second second okay all in favor all right we're adjourned at 8 8:02