##VIDEO ID:ce3t8HIiSPA## for e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e we're going to call this meeting to order please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stand one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all pursuant to the njsa 10 colon 4 the open public meetings act notice of the special reorganization meeting of the Jackson Township Zoning Board of adjustment has been published and posted in all appropriate locations roll call please Mr Hyman Dr hoffstein Mr Hudak Miss Parnes M Rosal here Mr Martins here Mr such here Mr Bessie here miss Bradley here uh next up our resolutions we do have three for this evening uh resolution 202- Z1 I'm sorry oh no I thought Dr said something I apologize resolution 2025-the by way of consent order and granting use variants for a change of use as to the detach garage and preliminary and final site plan approval for a 340t addition to the accessory structure on properly property excuse me located at 28 Ashford Road Block 6202 lot 15 eligible to vote are Mr Heyman Dr hofstein Mr Hudak Miss Rosal Mr Martins and Miss Bradley motion to approve roll call please Mr Hyman yes Dr hoffstein yes Mr Hudak yes Miss Rosal Mr marn yes Miss bradling yes resolution 2025-the resolution of the Zoning Board of the township of Jackson granting amended site plan approval with use variants relief to permit construction of an automobile paint booth on property located at 370 and 375 Faraday Avenue block 22010 lot 4.02 eligible to vote are Mr Heyman Dr hofstein Mr Hudak Miss Rosal miss parns and miss Bradley second roll call please M Mr Heyman yes Dr hoffstein yes Mr Hudak Miss Parnes Miss Rosal Miss Bradley yes and resolution 2025-the time extension for development related to preliminary and final site plan approval with minor subdivision as previously granted on property located at 12:35 East Veterans Highway block 13801 Lots 4.01 5 and 6.01 eligible to vote are Mr Heyman Dr hofstein Mr Hudak M Rosal Mr Martins and Mrs Bradley motion to approve second roll call please Mr Hyman yes Dr hoffstein yes Mr Hudak M Rosal Mr Martins yes Miss Bradley yes Elizabeth do we have any minutes this evening no Madam chair and do I have a voucher for you for this evening no Madam chair okay thank you all right no announcements but we are going to have executive session this evening as you're aware this is our reorganization meeting uh so as far as executive session I will now articulate a resolution to enter executive session I will need one member to move to approve and adopt the resolution a second and a roll call whereas the Zoning Board of the township of Jackson is subject to certain requirements of the open public meetings Act njsa 10 col 4 and whereas the open public meetings Act njsa 10 colon 4-12 provides that an executive session not open to the public may be held for certain specified purposes when authorized by resolution and whereas it is necessary for the Zoning Board of the township of Jackson to discussion a session not open to the public matters relating to the item or items authorized by njsa 10 4-12 B this evening those matters being Personnel specifically the reorganization and appointment of the board's professionals and now therefore be it resolved by the zoning Board of the township of Jackson to enter executive session for discussion of personnel and more specifically the board's professionals it is anticipated that the deliberations conducted in closed session may be disclosed to the public upon the determination that public interest will no longer be served by such confidentiality as requested may I have a motion to approve and adopt this resolution Madam chair I have a question yes um normally the these uh closed sessions of a Personnel Personnel being somebody here or professional you may have on contract that you want to address the issue um I've never really seen it done for when you're trying to hire or look at professionals that you want to put on the board normally has done out in public in public trust um I I don't really see that that's a stretch of the word of personnel and I don't see how that fits into that in that category I believe the professional appointment should be debated out here in public in Public's interest and do it that way over the years that's how I've always seen it so um I really you know I I think the word in that whole thing being Personnel is really being stretched I don't really see the need for a close session on appointing professionals that's my only opinion thank you okay thank you um since I've been on the board that's how it's been done um so this is what we nor nor this is why I shouldn't say normally this is what's been normal since I've been on the board anyone else have any input uh when when I first joined the board many years ago the first couple of years that's how it was done publicly and then after that it's the last 10 10 n to 10 years it's always been done executive session and then voted on in public when we come back that brings a question public vote in Clos session you're going to be discussing in in a that has a full board there of what you're doing outside that should be done outside in the public doesn't meet the criteria to be in a closed session I've been called other things I have no problem with that I've also been on some land use boards and been through the stuff and that's why I bring it up because it caught my attention that's all thank you uh chair yes I would comment that I would like to refrain from going into executive session I do have concern with going to the executive session without U professional guidance and advice exactly what may and may not be discussed um I don't think it's a good idea to enter executive session I would make a motion to deny Madam chair yes um I feel like this is a matter for uh an attorney to weigh in on and I know that that's part of what we have to address but I I guess I'm just thinking out loud like I mean none of us really we could weigh in and we could say what we've seen but um I'm just thinking out loud like you know what if there was uh I mean I know part of one of the professionals that we want to appoint is an attorney um but maybe having the discussion or deliberation around an executive session be done after we appoint an attorney so that at least we have the advice of an attorney um just an idea I mean I know there's still you know that discussion around that professional but uh you know maybe could at least help with the rest of the Personnel issues yeah Jeff sorad sorry I just went Chim in with my opinion I am surprised that this is all even coming up now so so we discussed about having this this special meeting to go to theor to go into exective session with an attorney there when we did that some time ago we all agreed that that was the right thing to do now I understand we have a new member and he has a different opinion that's okay but what what what's the I I don't understand I'm sorry why you bringing this up now when we agreed we were going to do this you know not nothing certain members of this board that are in on appointments to someone who this is our very first meeting having a vote I don't think that they should have a vote and they were appointed as a full-fledged member where we have alternates that should have been moved up inad of someone being I'm sorry I'm trust upon you D Dy chair if I may can I just ask a question sorry can I just ask you a question first Jeff I don't mean to put you on the spot you've been on the board again as Miss pars pointed out and as I'm kind of stuck up here and I I'm tempted to ask Bren from my so I was going to ask Jeff Andor Jeff and Brent Jeff you've been doing this way longer than me since I've been on the board this is the way it's been done um that's the guidance I've always had from the prior attorney and the attorney that was serving guidance here it's my understanding that whoever the attorne attorney was up until he's not is the attorney that would be representing the board I'll defer to Mr um hman on that um Mr ruro is correct that under um law of the state of New Jersey that a um attorney for a municipality or a board is is appointed for either a fixed period of time or until the The Bard obviously any public public entity has a right to terminate the relationship of their attorney at any time um and and there can never be a period of time where a public entity actually is without councel I'll tell you that myself I've sat as councel for public entities where I knew I would no longer be sitting as councel after that but um a public a board should always have counsel and you always do have counsel and if you have appointed Council they can answer your questions um as I have been appointed special counsel for the township and I can represent to you that I do have significant amount of experience in board governance if you have any specific questions for me I don't want this board to be without councel although you have prior appointed councel but if you do have questions for I be more than happy to answer them for you this evening Madam chair yes a motion on the Flor yep I'll second a motion to deny executive session you're saying yes if there's a motion on the floor to deny we can have a vote uh I'd like to give Mr Murphy his a I'm sorry oh right Mr M chairman then a yes vote means to deny the public and a no vote means to have to have a no vote is to have to not have a public yes is to deny Mr Murphy Madam chair I take no issue with the motion that's pring on the floor this can be done in executive session you may have discussions regarding personnel and executive session it is not a stretch that board professionals are Personnel of the board um notwithstanding it can also be done in public so um I have no issue with the pending motion and if that's the way that the board would prefer to do it this time around that would be perfectly acceptable sorry can I just ask an alternate will I be voting on well I'm just ready to ask that question of Mr Murphy so Mr Brey was appointed as a regular member not an alternate so he does have a vote based on his appointment however do alternates vote as well on the motion no Madam CH not on the motion okay not on professional appointments either no no not on the motion though either no not on the motion not on professional right professional okay thank so Mr such and Mr Martins will not be voting on the motion nor the professional appointments um so we do have a motion on the floor to deny executive session and there was a second by Mr Heyman Al so a yes vote means we want executive session we're going to deny the motion right did I say that wrong Jeff got so yes means we do not want executive session and no means no vote says we do want executive session roll call please Elizabeth Mr hman I just want to comment that I would like this to be done in public and yes Dr hofstein No Mr Hudak no Miss Parnes I don't Oh I thought Mr Murphy was well I I'm not opposed to that so that's safer option Miss Rosal Mr bressie yes m Bradley no and let me just add um I too am a little taken back um obviously we welcome all the new members forgive me for being rude Mr such and Mr bressy but I'm a little taken back that it was waited till now to have this discussion um something could have been brought up we have emails I was here nobody discussed anything so um I I do have a bit of a problem with how this was handled and I'd have to agree with Mr hudak's comments and I I think we need to take a step back remember we're all supposed to be working together and not a not against one another this is not a political situation let me be abundantly clear this is a quasi judicial board and we're supposed to be working better to do better and serve better the residents of Jackson so the motion to deny executive session four yeses three NOS was approved so the discussions will take place out here through the chair yes if I can just make a comment um I did bring up to Mr Murphy on a phone call recently about an issue that um about the guidance exactly what you may and may not discuss in executive session I do not have Clarity on the exact details what you may or may not discuss and we have not had in the past year that I'm on this board I have not been given any specific advice what we can and cannot discuss the majority of the time the attorney is in the room when it does come to appointing professionals the attorney is not in the room and I do not think it's a good idea that is why I believe it should be done in the public and until we have clear concise guidance on what may and may not be discussed in executive is not a good idea thank you so we'll move forward and look at uh our board professionals uh we can start off with our engineer uh the two in question are Morgan engineering and surveying and Remington inverting Engineers comments issues input chair yes um I've met with many of the uh rfps um I've interviewed them I had discussions with them with their experience um we actually have somebody representing from U Morgan engineering here I did meet with Mark um he is a lot of years of experience working through tnm for Morgan um and I think that he would be a suitable candidate for the job anyone else Madam chair I've met with somebody else from Morgan and Morgan also I'm very familiar with Remington and Vernick uh I GRE with them for a lot of years too as far as with the engineer I could support a motion to uh hire Morgan engineering surveying Mar well we haven't had a motion I would hope that you with withdraw the motion until everybody's had a chance to right well he said support a motion so we haven't had a motion yet so go ahead Dr initial question I have is these meetings that you had with the people from Morgan engineering with in what capacity was that I've met with I went to interview them on my own I'm allow to interview is that permissible on own absolutely to inter interview somebody I reached out I did my due diligence and I reached out to the rfps absolutely I've never heard of that before did you speak to sorry who did you speak to what do you mean who did I speak to who did you meet with you said you met with represent I said I met with Mark R that's what I said it doesn't make a difference who I met with I I I I don't need to answer your question I've I've met with I've met with professionals excuse me excuse me we're all adults here let's act like it okay um Mr Bry and Mr Heyman have express some support for Morgan engineering any other comments I'd like and then do we have a new member who came in who is influenced by others who is influencing board members here and and it stinks to high head it's so obvious what's here I I also have to add to this that you said that that you did your due diligence and you interviewed somebody from Morgan I mean that's not fair you should have interviewed everybody who who came in for you're interviewing one person be obligated to interview all the others okay if you want want you interview I spoke to RV I said I spoke with RV also and would you speak to there it doesn't make a difference it does make a difference but it excuse me excuse me ites does make a difference okay you put excuse me you put on the record Mr Murphy has taught us over the last number of years that I've been on this board when we talk about an application and we admit that we went to the property we need to put that on the record you Mr Heyman put on the record that you interviewed and did you due diligence you admitted you met with Mark who did you meet with at Remington and Vern i' I've had discussions with um Mr didn't offer I believe his name is so I just have a question for you you met with someone so Ernie has served this board for quite some time but you didn't feel the need to speak to him although he's been guiding us since you've been on this board prior to you being on this board to be to be factual that is correct he is he is currently our planner I mean he was our planner and possibly will be our planner based on this Sport's decision so I think if he's going to be the planner we should have another individual to be the engineer I could agre that but just a is CME still still an applicant in this and is Harbor consultant still well on the last so this was a conversation that I as well and it is my understanding that the two rfps that on the table for engineering at this time or Morgan and Remington there was apparently a rebid unbeknownst to the board but apparently there was a rebid for whatever reason I can't answer so please don't ask I don't know I'm just being honest um and so uh the only two on the board at this point are Morgan engineering and Remington and Vernard oh God I thought they were an additional and Mr Hill uh withdrew well he there was a a before Mr Hill withdrew there was a rebid like I said unfortunately Dr hopin I can't tell you why because I don't know okay um who would who would who would be representing uh the Morgan engineering firm is that a question I can ask well we know with with Remington that there's one person who represents them before this board except if you can't make it uh will will we have something similar for Morgan when they're represented or do we have a different engineer every meeting so I would comment that um they also have in the RFP that Matthew Wilder was also part of the uh proposal they had they had three people that there were three people people in that that that is correct and so we want like to know who will be the one who whom will seek the majority of the time right Mr Murphy Mr pulman I have a question for you Mr Hudak and Mr uh Dr hoffin excuse me uh did bring up a point and I didn't want them to think I ignored their comment I did hear it I just wanted to let them finish that discussion the doing his due diligence and interviewing the candidates is that allow my understanding is that so long as it was done on his own valtion uh by himself without others present uh then that would be permissible thank you I concur with Mr Murphy um so long as that it was it was not done in the context of a of a what would would constitute a formal board meeting or board action then it would be permissible thank you so we've had some support for Morgan engineering any other comments yes please no but you can still contribute to discussion absolutely and I don't knowbody thank you um well I've sat on this board and since I came on uh Remington and verdict was the township planner given that we no longer have EV we've lost a vast amount of knowledge um Evan we were I think I can speak for all of us we were very comfortable he was great with the applicants um very informative very helpful and he worked extremely well with Mr Peters from Remington and Vernick um given the the vast dynamics of Jackson and the changing town I um feel that it would be in our best interest to appoint Remington and Vernick and Mr Peters who would be representing them to represent us with all the changes we need somebody who is intimately knowledgeable about jaon he's worked in a variety of different capacities um I think given all the change we have to be very sensitive to that that we still need again the reason where're this board exists is to assist the residents of Jackson and help them and I think that Mr Peters has shown all along that um he's willing to do that he puts the time in and not only that we also have to think about what goes on behind the scenes at many meetings we've heard about the different uh meetings they've had with the applicants and and the time they put in outside of here and to have to have somebody completely new come in who's not familiar with how it all is done uh in that position when we've had somebody in that role and Evan in that role for so long I think it's a difficult transition having someone who's been here knows the process works well with Jeff worked very well with Evan I think we'd be better served to have him in the engineer capacity uh before the question comes up um it I do not recommend that we would have him in both roles just to be clear I'm recommending them for engineering I don't think we'd all be well served we don't want number one we don't want to stretch him too thin don't forget he is involved in other things as well so I am not I'm not suggesting that he be both I'm suggesting that he that Remington and Vernick be named the engineer Miss paress um so I don't I I agree that you know having experience with the town is a big benefit and losing Evan is um you know it's it's with all his experience and guidance that's you know that that those are big shoes to fill um my question about bringing Ernie or Remington you know and the and our professional from planner over to engineer is I mean ultimately then we're losing the continuity of you know who we had as planner and it's so like I mean I I've thought about this and I kind of I I think about it from two perspectives there's um I don't I don't know if Remington identified who their professional would be in their bid for engineer Ernie did they specify Ernie yes yes I I'm pretty sure they did let me pull it off here hold on I'm pretty sure it wasy it's in here somewhere yes it does it specifies Ernie yeah I mean I'm curious you know because I don't know if you made a motion or just suggested an idea I'm I'm guess I'm curious you know I always I think you have very grounded thoughts around things and I'm curious like uh you know how does that what's your what's your opinion on how like how that helps us we're we're shift like we're going to have to have someone new and so here was my thought behind it okay my thought behind moving uh asking not asking but having Remington and Vernick serve as engineer have Ernie move over to the engineer role he can then work with the planner to rooll he's done so I right so I thought it would be better to have him in the new role with his experience and then he can work with the new whatever whatever we haven't gotten there yet but whoever the new planner ends up being so my thought was it's better to have his experience in the engineer role and then he can work well and work alongside with the planner and bring them along and teach them all the different uh like I said they go we've heard how they have these pre- meetings and they talk to the county and they do this there's a lot more involved than just coming to a meeting so that was that's my thought so I guess my kind of other thought sort of thinking about it in the big picture is like then we're essentially well I agree with you that I don't think it's a good idea to have one One Professional fill two roles I think it if you know that this is your capacity you're sort of more focused on looking out for those things and I think that's a benefit for us if that professional has that focus and so I guess the question would be who would then right we're we're basically pulling uh TR you know a tried and true from one position um considering putting him in another position and then we also that like for me part of that decision would be thinking about who the other options are and sort of on balancing like you know Alternatives like we're well if I I we may we could choose to have Ernie in one of the positions and have the the continuity and the experience that he brings and and you know all all of that um to one of the two positions and then I guess the question would be what are the Alternatives if he's in position a you know who are other Alternatives then kind of try it on for size on the other side and then sort of to me it has to be part of the decision um chair if I can get a word in oh yes sure sorry um um look looking at the uh planning three application I I was not impressed with CME or Harbor so I would prefer to have Mr Peters as a planner uh also the the planner and and attorneys sometimes step on each other's toes and it's good to some have somebody who's familiar with the board and when to step back and when to pick up the ball so I I would prefer to have uh um Morgan engineering uh as the engineers and uh have Mr Peters as planner uh since it is it is more logical to have one person in each job at this point except maybe traffic engineer when we get to that but uh I I would be more inclined to support more Morgan engineering that's if I may yes are you done Dr hopstein okay um you know you sort of finished my thought in a s like uh I think for engineer right now our rfps are CME Harbor and Remington and for planner it's CME it's um Morgan Harbor and I'm sorry Morgan CME and Remington correct well engineer like I said engineer we have listed Morgan and reming I just I think I just flipped them I'm sorry engineer is Morgan Remington and Remington that's it right okay right I'm sorry and the U planner was Remington CME and harbor harbor right so yeah so thinking about you know if we say we don't want and I would say I would not want one professional to to fill two roles correct um so if we say for engineer we want we want um Remington we're essentially saying we we are not going to be choosing him for planner correct so then we have CME or Harbor as our options correct so I just don't know Harbor I try to look around I haven't seen them in our town not on any boards not in any developer like not on as the an applicant's professional I just don't have confidence that they are really involved in the town understand the lay of the land the ordinance the zoning the master plan I just I just haven't seen them around so I don't have a confidence that that would be a good fit for us in this position um and if and and and CME you know they they they are doing some work in the town and there actually were some one one of the things I tried to do as well um is watch some meetings of the different applicants or I don't know rfps um and I would feel like for planner I would choose Ernie over what I've seen um from CME for now for this and so that sort of for me like locks him into planner for me and therefore like you know when you suggested uh moving him over to me I I can't consider I I I appreciate the thought but I can't really consider it without also considering what that does to the other decision and so I just I I wouldn't support that because it it boxes me into a place that I'm not so happy about on Planner on the planning side um so that would be my concern with you know that with that with appointing um Remington for and Ernie for engineer Mr who back any comments shame we're supposed to be apolitical not involved people that are in power in that have influence and with board members to get I Mr puror I don't know if this is appropriate so Brent or Endor Mr Murphy please feel free to stop me if my question is not appropriate um Jeff you I'm I'm curious if I'm allowed to ask him his input as someone who has to work absolutely he's not he's not a professional he's a he's the zoning officer of the township representing an administrative officer and he provide he's he's a liaison to the zoning board you're you're permitted thank you Mr Papo well just the the one thought I had with the with the the um REM vernick's um RFP I I thought I saw that there was a choice so to speak between Ernie and Allan D Hopper is his name not on that RFP yes his name is is on it it it is it is on it both names listed so I just wanted to make sure I I I read it correctly so then what you're saying well let me not I'm not I don't want to assume let me ask you is what you're saying Brent don't laugh at me is he looked up and laughed I was like thanks is what you're saying so then conceptually we could appoint Remington and Vernick but two different people one as an engineer and one as a planner is that what you're saying I'm just saying that there's it appears as though they gave you options for the engineer okay okay is it sorry is it customary to have firm with two different professionals fill in the two different roles I'm just curious I feel like I've always seen not that I've seen that much but I've always seen two different there is no usual or customary um in in other municipalities you know they're depending on the scope of work and size of projects and you can certainly have multiple professionals from the same firm filling different roles that that is not uncommon okay I think if you were to look around the state or do a ser right um you would see that that that that occurs okay I guess I haven't seen just just to follow up for one example is actually Remington Vernick um they are both the planner and engineer in Berkeley Township for their own and I believe planning board as well thank you any other comments input can I ask what would be an advantage of having the same firm with the two um is is there an advantage or a disadvantage like I I'm just curious well from a so I'm going to put my squarely put my manager at work hat on right now the advantage to me would be you have two people who work together and know one another so here this goes back to my concern about the change with so much change with losing evid and all that experience having two people who work together like I said my thought for moving Ernie over was because we'd be losing that experience but if we were to a point the other engineer from Remington if we were to appoint the other gentleman excuse me from Remington and Vernon to engineer and leave Ernie a planner or vice versa you now have two people who work well together who have worked together who know one another and it won't be the same as heaven Evan obviously but there'll be some continuity there uh you know in thought and in Vision I would think and again um Ernie's worked in Jackson for many many years Remington and verdict has been in Jackson for many many years so I think that I don't want to lose that knowledge in any way and having two from the same firm um having two from the same firm may be an advantage that we hadn't thought about through yes to play Devil's Advocate um and I'm I'm really kind of you know trying your idea on for size and um you know on the flip side like Ernie's reports as planner have been thorough and sort of you know hit the nail on the head and um there's you know having him fill the role of planner um rather than like we're already getting a new engineer maybe let's not touch planning that's that's a professional that well they gave us they gave us another option as Mr perur pointed out there there's a way to have some continuity and have people who work together and someone who's would your would your um position now be okay so you would keep you would think to keep Ernie as the planner and bring Remington in as the engineer I'm just trying to understand you could in that way because you still have Ernie's Ernie's if Ernie if we appointed someone else as a new engineer Ernie is still going to have to train for lack of a better phrase this new person correct Ernie is still going to have to train this person teach them the teach them excuse me are we allowed to ask a question through Ernie himself Mr pulman Mr Murphy process it's being done in public um appropriately so um to the extent that members of the board have any questions for anybody who submitted their credentials um to them for consideration to appointment for a position it would be wholly appropriate um for for you know for you to raise a questions it would not be inappropriate in any way I do concur with Mr pulman thank you um so Mr Peters um my understanding from Allan D offer is that he is not a practicing um not looking to take on this role to be either engineer or planner in the town is that correct I believe so right so I think that this question that we're debating of whether or not um Allan is the second option on the RFP I don't really think that it was true um his name is is on there but from what I understood from him was that would be only for earning thank you just one more can I ask a question to Ernie as well oh go ahead I mean person we have we have have on board for engineer is it is more cut and dry there are certain rules in engineering that must be followed and uh uh certain laws that must be followed and uh it's more technical when it comes to to planner there's a lot of leeway there's some interpretation and uh I think Mr Peters does that fantastically and we saw somebody who can do the technical stuff and I think we should stick with a firm that can do the technical uh things that that the board requires uh on these applications and uh I I would go with a with a different firm than rington on on engineer well obviously it was in RFP so we would have had no way of knowing that Mr dher really wasn't going to serve in that capacity that sort of clim to it right so but I do want to just make one point as far as the technical stuff it's my understanding that Mr Peters serves as engineer in other places so he he is well familiar with that um but back to my I I would agree with you that obviously since Mr dher can't fill that role um and we don't want to lose obviously Ernie's expertise um I would have no problem then I don't I don't think we need to lose Ernie is what I'm trying to say we we've had enough change we need to have some continuity we don't want to lose his knowledge and his expertise I'm going to put you on the spot here though forgive me don't yell at me do you have a preference I want to do what works for best for the town I feel as though I've worked with just about everyone on the board in some capacity over the last 20 or 25 years whatever works best for the town I'm happy to be the backup for everything else um you know I I've had an opportunity to have any number of positions in the municipality I'm grateful for that whatever works best for you the zoning board and the town I'm happy to take on we're certainly qualified to do any of the task to the extent that I can be the backup for other folks I think that's part of the I don't want to sound overly confident but I think that's part of the confidence that our firm can give you regardless of the position that we have we have the experience of having been here as the town engineer as the town planner as the planning board's Consultants as well as the zoning board's consultants and the utility authorities Consultants so the knowledge that we have certainly can be shared with other Consultants people come in people come out just how life goes Consultants come in Consultants come out whatever works best for the board so that there's continuity we're happy to do thank you and I'm sorry I put you on the spot like that okay well that being said um I think we go back to our original discussion then um we don't want to lose obviously Mr Peters in that role so um I would be willing to support Morgan engineering as the engineer as well any additional comments are you asking for form motion or I was going to say if anybody would like to make a motion I just I would just make one more comment um from my speaking with Mark uh rire from Morgan engineering um I was impressed that he actually does have intimate knowledge with the town he did work for tmn tnm Associates um doing the engineering for this town so he has done that for many years um he is currently I believe representing uh another project in town here and I do think that he has specifically knowledge in the Jackson Township I like you make a motion to approve Morgan engineering as the town as the zoning board engineer and hopefully they can uh assign uh this person Mark uh if possible to represent them I would second I'll second that motion I um I would just like to make a comment you're mentioning Mark several times but the RFP mentions Matthew not the same person correct the RFP has Matthew and it has Mark and has Frank s has three names on there so I would say you know specifically that you know Mark has um you know done more work in the town for a longer period of time than uh Matthew has Matthew actually has come before this board numerous times and um I think that Mark would be a good representative for this board so Madame chair would would the bid be then or the I'm sorry the motion be for Morgan Engineering Services and Mark rmer being the main person naming the firm with them so they can alternate if they have to for the firm so we have a motion and a second to appoint Morgan engineering as the engineer for the town yes the chair just just to clarify I don't I don't Dr hon said he didn't hear he didn't hear Brent's response his explanation I believe is that let let Brent put that on the record please sorry Dr apologize usually speak loud enough I didn't know the microphone um what we gen what we would recommend I would recommend is that the board appoint the firm for a position and make a request if there is a specific engineer they wish to be their Consulting engineer but not take an actual resolution to appoint individual as it's the firm that has submitted the proposal okay I concur mad just just just use the firm name so we have any motion uh and a second on the floor to appoint Morgan engineering as the zoning board attorney engineer oh Jesus zoning board engineer engineer uh roll call please Mr hman yes Dr hofstein yes Mr Hudak Miss Parnes yes Miss Rosal Mr Bry yes Miss Bradley yes some work in engineering has been approved we also need a conflict engineer um you heard Mr Peters Remington was the other applicant anybody discussion as far as conflict engineer I think it's a good idea I mean there's only one other proposal would you like to make a motion I would make the motion yes for RV as a conflict engineer I second that motion okay we have a motion and a second on the floor to name uh Remington and Vernick as the conflict engineer roll call please Mr Hyman yes Dr hofstein yes Mr Hudak yes Miss Parnes yes Mr Rosal Mr Bry yes Miss Bradley yes well hopefully after that discussion this one should be an easy one uh the the planner uh the zoning board planner uh we have Remington and verick we have CME Associates and harbor Consultants comments questions should we make any comments or we heard them or well that's why I said this should be an easy discussion I I first you would like to make a motion I've worked with Ernie for so many years I worked with last year at the planning board and there's expertise in the whole area here Ocean County and Jackson especially I definitely make the recommendation I'll second and and I agree working with her and he has always been a pleasure and he's always had to answer any questions that we have at any time so I would second we have a motion on the floor in a second to name uh Remington and Vernick as the zoning board planner uh roll call please Mr Hyman yes Dr hofstein yes Mr Hudak yes Miss parnaz yes M rosol Mr Bry yes Miss Bradley yes uh we now have the traffic engineer and the two RPS are from Remington and Vernick and CME uh questions comments discussion I I would think we've been at a disadvantage by by not having a a traffic engineer we have sometimes uh Mr Peters pinch hits but we need somebody who can uh who is U an a graduate engineer and is a an expert in traffic engineering uh to to represent us every applicant comes in with their uh usually one firm that represents them and I find we're at at disadvantage uh when it comes to that and traffic is always a a major issue with the public though they may not they don't understand a lot of times that the it's the traffic at the site that is the issue traffic on the roads leading to it is not a board uh uh problem but uh it's good to have somebody who who is qualified to represent us I agree that I'm actually just if I may um many of our applications don't involve don't require traffic so I'm just thinking like practically how does that work because the way we've had it is sort of very convenient I could answer that for you previously when we had a traffic engineer he he was not asked to come down unless there was a a traffic issue and the applicant had their traffic engineer come down otherwise they they didn't come to every meeting okay and um question uh I just want to know like what the I didn't notice a specific application or RFP for a traffic engineer is that like supposed to be specifically different than the regular engineer um excuse my ignorance but I didn't notice that specifically thing different how is that meaning I I I know that you know Ernie I believe is supposed to be a traffic engineer he wasn't even our engineer he was our planner though he was he's been I'm sorry forgive me let me just answer let me just answer your first question I apologize um they do have a separate I can't tell you what page it was there was so many pages in our p but they did uh CME did uh submit a a specific one for Board of adjustment traffic engineer um Ernie kind of Pitch hit for us that's the phrase that Dr hofstein used um because he is a traffic engineer um he Pitch hit for us because like uh Miss bar par pointed out not every application requires a traffic engineer we have six foot fences we have things like that they don't require a traffic engineer so Ernie um you know Remington and Vernick kind of um pinch him once Mr M movich uh retired um but CME did submit a separate one and I'm pretty sure the other one mentioned both right it did yeah and I'm saying Remington's mentioned both thank you sorry go ahead sorry yeah I was I was just gonna ask who I don't remember seeing like options who are our options oh Remington and Remington CU I also didn't see it as sort of like a separate category like I don't even think on Dawn's summary yeah it was on there and it said okay my bad perhaps it might I'm sorry go ahead Mr M perhaps it might help to provide the board with some guidance on this particular issue um with regard to the traffic engineer we do have one uh it we did um it was Ernie Peters uh from running Remington and Vernick and and again I know Mr M misovich was the traffic engineer prior I did not have the pleasure of working with him um I do believe it's important to have a traffic engineer uh based upon certain case law there was a case out of East Brunswick where the board had made some determinations as to traffic um they did not have a traffic engineer uh the determinations made as to traffic were in direct contradiction of what the applicant had testified to or the applicant's engineer testified to uh the Appel division did not look kindly on that um so again I think it's important that the board appoint a traffic engineer I don't have any with the comments that were made with regard to having a separate traffic engineer although I also don't have an issue with um Mr Peters also acting in that capacity so hopefully that provide some guidance to the board but we absolutely need a traffic engineer whether we deal with uh applications that involve traffic or or not because we do have several that do mam I say something yes I think uh AG current climate School redistricting no one knows what's going on including the board of education so right now not only do I think having a specific engineer just to deal with traffic is crucial I think it's necessary and it's a responsibility that we owe the tal because right now coming from someone that I ran for Board of Education some of the issues that were addressed with me traffic is going to be it's literally one of the the top priority of a lot of these people wondering how long their kids are going to be sitting on buses how their high schoolers are getting to this side this that so I think the most responsible thing would be to have an engineer who's focused specifically on traffic instead of having to have an engineer spread thin dealing with like you said fences and this and that where if we had one engineer their main focus and then even if problems and issues came with traffic we have that one engineer that we can go to where we don't have to bur Ernie and his team trying to figure out who is pinch hitting for an issue which I think is significant right now in town so thank you any other questions comments I I do as well I do as well and you know we've had a lot of applications come before us as you all know and you know the other issue we have in Jackson as you're all well aware as we have a lot of County Roads Traffic we have no control of what the county does or doesn't do end timing of that so I do believe it's important that we have a traffic engineer as well I will actually say um I think CME is working on our master plan and so I kind of I think about the master plan as being basically the opposite of the zoning board um where we're kind of dealing with the Fallout of you know where big picture didn't really properly address this specific property um but you know having that familiarity with it as filling in as our traffic engineer I think could be a benefit um and having a dedicated engineer and I I was just thinking practically like I just felt like it would be very wasteful um to have a traffic engineer here at every meeting but if we could you know selectively choose which you know obviously we know the agenda we know which ones are you know have a traffic uh impact um which applications might require that um that I I I think I would appreciate as well having that like hyperfocus when I guess similarly to when I was saying you know having one person in planning versus engineer um similar thoughts about traffic where if that's all you're here for that's what you're going to zero in on you're going to rip the application you know apart with that Focus um and and really make sure that everything's addressed so I think it definitely sounds like a benefit to me Jeff I I know in my time here when Mr misovich was here he was here all the time is that not is my memory not right he seemed to have been here most every meeting and maybe those of the applic the nights where we needed him to give testimony will only send the applications to the traffic engineer when it's applicable okay um so I was remiss when we uh did our motion for the planner we didn't do a conflict planner so we'll do the traffic engineering then go back to that forgive me um so if someone would like to make a motion for a traffic engineer unless there's other questions or comments I'm like okay well is anybody here familiar with CME they all in the I don't know I I've never excuse me they're currently doing working on our master plan okay so m is currently retained by the township to serve as the consultant for their master plan okay I have a question pretty good job uh Mr Peters if reming verdick had the traffic engineer who would that be would that be a separate person other than yourself yes our firm has professional transportation operations Engineers um we simply didn't list them because they do the reviews I come to the meeting if you need someone to come to the meeting and be a professional transportation operation engineer it's a subset of professional engineering I'm a professional engineer I'm a professional planner I'm a c Municipal engineer so having a professional transportation operations engineer if you wanted to have us be the named traffic engineer I'll get you a list of the P folks in my office that have the ptoe specialization if you'd like to review them if not and you want to Simply have us as the conflict in case that's necessary we can do that as well but unfortunately in our proposal I don't believe I listed a professional transportation operation engineer that's on me um I'm familiar with the ptoe over at CME you're well served by that individual as well again whatever works best for the municipality I'd be remiss if I didn't remind you that my our firm is the Township's traffic analysis engineer oh thank you just one quick Ernie Mr Peters sir would would this person be considered an expert witness yes okay that's I'm sorry what did you say yes Mr Hudak also I'll I would second that motion too I think it's no then bring up a good point Bob that we can work close together he can dictate when we have to have here stuff it's just a perfect marriage I'd make the motion okay we have a motion in a second to name uh Remington and Vernick as our traffic engineer roll call please Mr Hyman yes Dr hoffstein yes Mr Hudak yes Miss Parnes yes M Rosal yes Mr Bry yes Miss Bradley yes so uh we also need a motion and a second for the uh conflict traffic engineer which obviously we're left with not left with Excuse me that's not the proper way to play to state that uh our option is CME make a motion second we have a motion in a second roll call please Mr Heyman yes Dr hofstein yes Mr Hudak Miss Parnes yes M Rosal yes Mr Bry yes Miss Bradley yes and as I said I was remissed we did not um select a uh conflict planner I'm sorry anytime Mr Peters has to come down somebody from his firm came down because don't forget we approved the firm correct so I said yes um so we did I was remissed in that we did not select a uh conflict planner so we uh selected Remington and Vernick as our planner and then our choices for conflict planner our CME Associates and harbor Consultants comments discussion excuse me if I may was there are whether RFP specifically for conflict planner I don't think so we I think we've only we've only gone with the conflict engineer we've never had a conflict traffic nor a conflict planner thank you Jeff okay so Jeff educate me forgive me why would we need a conflict engineer but not a conflict planner it just seems as though that's a way we've done it over the years I I that for some reason that seemed to be the the position where if there ever was a conflict the engineers seem to be the one we've never seem to have a conflict with a planner we can certainly put it out there but perhaps if there were no rfps I'm not sure what the process is if there weren't rfps for a conflict planner I'll defer Mr pman and Mr Murphy I'm sorry Mr pulman and Mr Murphy I'd like your I'm just curi now because pragmatic question um whether or not you actually need it um I I would say in in the last 10 years how many times has the board seen that conflict arise and that probably answers your question there you go okay all right and uh now the discussion turns to um re uh appointing an attorney we have rfps from gerner Murphy uh Dy and stagger rostin Mandel stro ham and ciani I hope I said all those names right if I didn't I apologize question uh not questions comments discussion um I have a comment before anybody I just like to get rid of the elephant in the room uh that that rumors have been going around and that that outside people are getting involved in thiso first of all the uh Power resides in the board to appoint its own attorney and uh according to the ethics rule given down by the state it is not ethical for a governing body to attempt to influence the zoning board on the hire of an attorney or any other professional so uh hopefully any decision made is on on this is is that that whole issue of ethics and and arm twisting and suggestions is eliminated uh uh fortunately we have three good firms uh uh applying for the job uh I have worked over the years with with a number of people from those firms and and there there will find people so uh let's just get get to the appointment part um I would just like i' like to comment on your comment um I we listen we'd all be plain gains here if we admitted that it obviously Mr Martins was abundantly correct there is obviously a very different Dynamic here um I'm not sure what has transpired who's talked to who but there's obviously something has gone on Mr Hudak I I have to agree with you completely I have no problem putting it on the record um I'm not quite sure why you brought it up now Dr hosting but um I I do feel that something has gone on what it is I can't tell you but obviously there's been something that's transpired and I think it's sad because as a board we've worked so hard to work together to serve Jackson and this a volunteer role let's not forget this is this is a volunteer role we're here giving up our time to help the people this should not become a a a struggle here on the board we're supposed to all be here serving our constituents our our neighbors our friends so um I am a little disheartened at some of the comments some of the discussion uh but that being said listen we're all adults here we have to work together so let's move forward to the discussion for attorney uh comments I'll probably be criticized again making a first comment but no problem I I have a strong feeling of rine Mandel stro home and cypriani I just don't say that because of rfps in front of me I say that over many years working with that firm in so many ways in L use COA alupa and the township I I think they're an excellent firm they got the years of experience they got enough depth in the firm and if I was to make a motion I'd make a motion for w mandal Strom home and Zen was the experience all right hold up we're having any motions we we we can't we we can't talk about as though it's a hypothetical uh if you were um as as a member of the board um you have to be very clear uh Mr bressie whether or not you are making a motion or not I I I would make a motion if they want so are you making a motion no I didn't make a motion okay I was very clear on that I I could support a motion make do it pending the board can can cons can continue discussion correct any other comments ordinances I comments I would just hold on Mr Martin just so we're clear although you said you're going Mr Murphy there you're not making a motion at this point the the matter is still open for discussion okay great um so I'll just second um everything you said and uh about Mr Murphy and I I think as you remember we didn't start off in good good feat so when I was on that side right um but that that's how that's how things are and um since then and and and working uh Mr Murphy's been um a great experience like like U like was said he's always available um at any time and we'll call us back and any questions that I have so um I see absolutely no isues I don't know the other ones but but I I do know I do know this one and um like I said we didn't even start off with it on a good but but uh but it's gone well so far so that's my opinion Dr Hy just I think we should go through each firm uh and and give everybody a hearing instead of just coming forward and saying how you're going to vote before it's discussed uh give everybody a what give everybody a turn all the firms make some comments on them I think uh The Firm of Dy ster I have uh I see the senior partner or whatever is is Chris Christopher dasty uh he has he has been a conflict engineer for Mr G over a couple attorney conflict attorney and uh thank you and uh we have worked with him and he has done a good job he even won a a court case uh for a board uh my my problem I have with with the firm is is that uh it's young it's big it's it's moving uh across Ocean County signing up town after town and uh uh hopefully they're not getting too big uh to to uh take into account what what our needs are and we do have special needs in in in this town when it comes to uh land use the um also U there's another dity firm his dad whose uh firm is uh as Mr McGuckin who's our Town attorney and uh any any application that is challenged in court the representation comes from the zoning board attorney and from the town attorney and there's some conflict in just between those two firms uh uh handling it and uh I don't know what the relationship is there with with the either to them um as to uh uh the uh firm of watstein Mandel St Helm ciani uh the mention was that Robin Leu was probably going to be the attorney that represents us before the board uh she has uh good credentials to start with from col to Rodas law uh most impressive is uh that she clerked for judge grao who uh was the appointment judge for the Superior Court in Ocean County and if there was ever a friend to Jackson that was Jud grao particularly uh after he followed Mr serpentelli who hated this town uh he he was always quick to to try to resolve it before the case went be went before him as a trial and many times he remanded it back back to the board and the board was a with the applicants attorney was able to work out some kind of compromise so if if that's a standard that she would have uh uh and and somebody she learned that that that is uh quite good uh when when it comes to Mr Murphy when when I first came on the board then in uh as an alternate for a few months um um the from March until the reorganization uh the board was dominated by one person a former judge and nobody was able to get a word in edgewise um Mr Murphy was at a disadvantage because he he he he was almost overruled every time he tried to say something after uh the retired judge left uh Mr Murphy did come into his own I was very happy to uh uh see how he handled himself and I think he's been uh growing over the months uh that he's he's been on been left to to use his own powers and uh he's let us uh conduct the hearings when we needed to he uh gives suggestions if if uh to the chair to ask questions if he feels that that they being missed uh uh particularly when we've had a lot of new members and inexperienced members uh that have been on the board and uh he does uh uh actively draw out the relevant information from the witnesses and make sure that that the record shows that and uh also what what he does not do is tell us how to vote which is very important I mean all the professionals give us advice we make the final decision so uh and what he does give is continuity that everybody's been looking for uh particularly when when we have some new people uh coming aboard so those are things to consider and I'll let other people make their their remarks anyone else I just like to add something to Mr Shelton's comments you mentioned Robin labu in L use there's other ends of L use that she's very a great expertise in and that's COA which really burdens all Landing all the time um she's very familiar with that and I've seen her in working when I was with the council as cor representative with cor and stuff and the knowledge was extreme that just add to the company that she was to be the one here as far as planning and Z she's well into that too any other comments um I came on the board as someone not knowing anything about Municipal land use law um Mr gerner was the attorney at the time I I learned a lot I worked with some people who'd been here for quite some time um our professionals were extremely help extremely helpful um when Mr Murphy was would substitute for Mr uh gerner he was extremely helpful he explained things in language that I could understand and not necessarily in legal ease um I found that extremely helpful because again I came on the board to help the people of Jackson and to help them understand becoming standing up at this Podium sometimes is very daunting to some because they don't understand they don't understand why they need a fence why they need a variance for a fence or why they can't put their shed where they want we it's our responsibility to help them understand and I think that Mr Murphy's done a great job at that I think that um I will piggy back on Dr hofstein comment and and applaud him for bringing it up I I you know I admired how that was a tough position to be in for anybody um and I admired how he handled that um when you have somebody with that wealth of knowledge right with that wealth of knowledge it can be difficult because you're the attorney for the zoning board he's a member at this point and you and Mr Murphy had to help him try to learn that he was not the judge in this capacity um and I admired the way he handled that um you know when concerns were raised to him for example I know that um concerns were raised to him about timing on uh resolutions and things like that um you know he made a a a definite effort to improve on that but again he inherited some things that he had to help get cleaned up and he also we also have to remember he had some very new members he was educating a lot of us as we were going along um as far as availability I I could never complain any question I have Mr Murphy this was just said like what does this mean for us as a zoning board I ask his opinion all the time I may have gotten him in trouble today asking a question about something um because he hadn't been reappointed yet so if I did I do apologize for putting you in that position um Mr pulman not to embarrass you at this moment but I I the relationship between the two of you um I admire that I see how you work together you don't always agree but that's okay but you work together and I see and I and I applaud the two of you for that because you don't always agree but you work together and do what's best for everybody um again I'm you heard my comments earlier when we talking about engineering planner I'm a I like the continuity I like the I think that Mr Murphy's experience here in Jackson speaks for itself I think um in a short time the board has transitioned to until the evening into a board that really worked well together um and you know I think a lot of that goes to Mr Murphy's um the way he handles things and the way he deals with all of us and Mr Martin you're right you didn't get off to a great start but you know what the one thing you both did was you treated each other with respect and when you came upon the board you work together that's a lot to be said we're all professionals here we all have other jobs and that's not always the easiest thing to do um so for me as the board chairwoman I have to tell you he's been a tremendous resource um and even though I listen no disrespect I found the rfps of the other two firms extremely uh extremely impressive um a lot of great experience but I don't think that any of them surpassed Mr Murphy's experience or knowledge on any of the different topics that have been brought up and because he's done such a good job in working with this zoning board I would uh like to see Mr Murphy continue looking for a motion I was just waiting to see if anybody else was going to speak up one thing I try to do all the time is try to give everybody a chance to well again you heard people talk we didn't always have that it was a little difficult at times so I try to make sure everybody has a chance to speak we have a motion second I will second that motion obviously we have a motion and a second to reappoint uh Mr Murphy as the board attorney any additional comments or questions before we vote um I if I may um I like Dr Hof's uh idea of kind of going through going through you know the firms and sort of weighing and evaluating each one um on their Merit and um I think that there's um there's there's a lot to be said for experience and you know I when I hear the word continuity um I don't know if I if I for me it's like experience in general with the township with understanding what's going on what has gone on the the ordinances the you know the different zones and the master plan and and land use law sort of all weigh in um so I don't look at it only as you know continuity but as like just experience as a whole in the specific knowledge that would help that professional kind of guide us um I I will say that Mr Murphy has you know just the kind of work through them has um definitely shown a lot of commitment to and and dedication to um you know to to to the board and to his role in the board um I as a new member like when I joined I really didn't know anything um and I I've learned a lot from all from all the Professionals in general um but you know he he's they they've all been available to me and uh offered you know offered offered their time and you know sometimes I would be like I'm not sure if this is really a question you know in in my capacity as a zoning Board member I don't know this is a question that came up you know help me and Jeff as well help me with you know is this you know is this a question that I should be contemplating so you know and just you know I I appreciate all of um all of everyone's time but you know we're talking about Mr Murphy um I definitely appreciate how uh committed he was to you know has always been to to to his role and to uh you know trying to do a good job and and and represent us um I don't know the firm dy I I guess you know you made a motion and I I kind of feel like I I only I I I did try to do some due diligence on the different firms um and I did actually like I said you know I I I tried to get a sense but um I don't feel like I got the best uh handle on that on that firm so I've heard Dr Hof's comments I didn't I you know I'm I'm I'd be curious um and and and the the final firm there's way too many names I can't I can't rattle them all off um but it does seem like they actually have very extensive knowledge in um and have been very involved in different aspects of the town and in different facets of land use law and um and uh and I think I think that there's um there's definitely a lot to be said for that as well um I'm I'm curious you know before I know a motion was made and I don't know if um it's appropriate to kind of continue deliberations I know you asked then I didn't speak up but I I would I would um be I would I would be inclined to hear a little like to have a little more discussion before a motion I don't know if that's Brent I saw you look my way there just so you know Madam chairwoman um when there's a motion pending there going be discussion on the pending motion so to the extent there's discussion on the pending motion that's permissible but it has to be limited to to to the item the action that's before the board at this point okay I'd like to respond to something she just said uh you brought up you went through it and you saw the extense of uh robenstein Mandel Strom homman aini okay a and uh you hit it on the head in Jackson they probably know more about Jackson Master plans over the last 15 years than any other attorney in this room they also put together plans for COA believe they started round I was around round one I think they started plan two three and four they're involved in doing Co at that time so you talk about being well-rounded in the town for so many years from the beginning of it the ordinances the zoning the master plans they were always part of it until a couple of years ago so you hit it right on the head what you were reading that's what's in here and that's factual if you if you're GNA go all the way back there to to co I'm sorry I can't hear you Dr to the call with the affordable housing affordable housing was SED by a judge and it had nothing to do with the town the town was forced into an agreement where either you uh Madam chairwoman I'm just gend there's a mo Mr mad chairwoman I just have to recommend to the board that the conversation be limited to the motion that is currently pending before the board and also I would like to remind the board that a public discussion on the merits of COA would not be appropriate before this board at this time this board is not involved in the determination of the Township's response to its co- obligation to its fair share obligation um and I would caution anybody on making any public comments about that right now there is a motion before the board for the reappointment of gerner Murphy discussion should be limited to that item and I say with all due respect and I also say for a caution of protecting the members of the board I would restrain from making any public comments about your positions on the Township's COA obligation thank you um Jeff I'm going to put you on the spot again I apologize ahead of time um you work I know you have to work closely with Mr Murphy as well um your thoughts do you have any thoughts well I I'm not sure it's appropriate to give you my thoughts I just know that since I've been you know zoning officer I've only dealt with gner Murphy's firm you know as it pertains to the board so um you know for me it just again I I'm not going to get in the way of the board's deliberation but continuity for sure so we have a motion in a second on the floor to reappoint Mr Murphy roll call please Mr Heyman no Dr hofstein I'll pass for a moment Mr HUD excuse me what is that uh you either abstain or you vote correct you H you have to either vote affirmatively vote negatively abstain um or I mean you can recuse if if there if there would be a basis for for any type of conflict which I don't believe has been articulated in this matter yes Mr Hudak yes Miss Parnes like like I said in my comment I I don't I didn't really feel ready to vote on this um because I didn't feel like there was enough discussion about the different options so I would abstain Miss Rosal um so I keep hearing the word continuity and I agree I I do think that is good to to do that but at the same time how you know the expertise of the other firm you know they have something that they can give especially for someone that's new like me that you know I I know you know very little on land use law for another firm to have that expertise and knowledge and um expertise or you know that experience I think would be beneficial for for us so um I would like to abstain for now well I don't think you can for now you either vote you're abstaining from the matter the question that's before the board at this time okay then yes I will abstain yes she abstained thank you Mr Bry Miss Bradley yes three yeses two two Nos and two up stains Brent three yeses two NOS two abstains could you please speak it to the microphone me thank you is it the three affirmative two negative and two abstentions yes yes can can I change my vote or it's too late no it's too late now so um it the it's a majority of voting members but I'm going to be honest with you guys I I I came here I did not come here tonight as as Council to to advise on this um I'm here as your alupa counsel um I would would have to go back and look at this this is not something that I candidly I have done in a number of years um and it is 32 and two um it's it's majority of of of eligible voting members um can you well hold on I don't I give me Madame chairwoman can um C can we take a can we take a 10-minute recess yes please thank you we're going to take a 10-minute recess e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e Mr pman um Madame chairwoman um again just I just need to be clear you know I'm I'm special counsel of the township I was here tonight to provide legal training to the board I have served as your attorney in other aspects um because the board has a legal question and I have a duty to the township to answer your questions I'm doing so pursuant to the open public meetings law um abstentions are not counted as no votes um and they're not treated as recusals it it satisfies the it satisfies the standard for a quarum and so it becomes a majority of votes eligible votes cast um given based on I'm sorry Jeff you said that the numbers were 32 yes can I just a question yes but which would mean that pursuant to New Jersey state law the motion would carry can I can I ask a question yes I did not understand when I said I abstain I was kind of as I said pretty clearly I just felt like not prepared like there was more discussion and like after the before the vot before the roll call was completed I um I requested to actually vote it wasn't like formalized um I don't I don't want to give my I don't want to give up my right to vote on this I understand I said something that I didn't realize I didn't understand the implications um and I really would like to vote um I have to say at this point one I believe this board always did have councel um but to ensure that there was appropriate communication I and and advice I feel like I did my duty both as an attorney as to this Township to provide information pursuant to state law a vote has been cast motion carried you have appointed councel he can advise you and he is an highly ethical individual who advise you on what steps you could take after this and um and explain to you the process but the motion did carry um okay so the move car Mr pulman I just need one more last piece of advice here so the motion carries so at this point the existing attorney stays in place yes the the the motion that was before the board was for the reappointment of the law firm of gerner Murphy that motion carried on a 32 active vote for two extensions um and based on New Jersey municipal law that carries so I will ref frin all comment on board governance to the firm that's been appointed Mr Murphy do we now have to swear in our professionals I can't hear you I'm sorry wait you get to your seat excuse me despite the fact that Roberts of order uh exists um as parliamentary procedure um admittedly attorneys aren't as familiar with it as maybe we should be and these are sort of unusual circumstances um with that being said I'm not quite comfortable with the fact that Miss Parnes wanted to change her vote um whether that negatively affects me or not um and i' I'd like and I apologize I'd like to take a moment to look into that particular issue as raised by Miss partner um so that this vote is representative of what the board would prefer that and no and I and no disrespect to anyone sitting up here um we got these rfps on November 11th if I'm not mistaken to say that you weren't prepared to me is an insult to the professionals who submitted the rfps and to not really to say you didn't understand understand what you were saying I I'm sorry I I completely disagree and I there there are no doovers and as Mr pman stated the it's carried and we'll have to move forward so I believe at this point we have to swear in our professionals if I could just make a comment on the record because we're discussing me um Madam chair that's yes um I I I did I did do uh a fair amount of d and um I guess I I what I I didn't understand was what abstention means and that I guess I I've never considered abstaining before and it sort of was cast by a couple of members and I was just like I I guess I I didn't feel like there was enough discussion um for me to formally make a vote and um so I kind of threw out I guess I abstain um but immediately after when I realized that like wait does that mean I'm I I I never I never considered the impact of what abstaining meant then basically I'm sort of recusing myself but without recusing myself and I I guess I was I that I I didn't understand exactly how that works or what that means um and so I realized I was basically giving up my right to vote and I and I before the vote was even completed the I realized I don't want to do that and so um I I just I guess I want to State on you know on the record that I did not mean to abstain from casting a vote and giving up my right to vote and um and you know I I didn't understand the impact of that and um and I guess that M Madam chair yes and I she referred to what happened Dr Sheldon Sheldon had first abstained and then he he changed his vote answer he mne told by the way he said he needed a minute that's corre different he did not abstain I guess I he said he needed a minute and that's when Mr pman stepped in he clarified it one way the other so and it says he heard abstain and then heard vote that's he needed a minute to breathe heavier or whatever that that's not abstaining right for so I'm just going to say you said there wasn't enough discussion I opened the floor I asked for comments questions I asked Jeff on his yes Mr Murphy let's keep this civil listen I I'm not entirely comfortable with the procedure if Miss Parnes want wanted to change her vote um my gut tells me that would be that might be permissible um but I'd like five minutes to look at that as I requested because I'm not 100% sure now again I I am well aware of which way that vote will go so you know this is to my own detriment and I understand that but this is also important um so I I I would like to take a moment to to look at that if if the board will permit do you want to swear in the professionals first and then take your five minutes or How would would you like to do yeah absolutely gentlemen if you would please raise your right hands do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony information questions or comments you're about to present before this board will represent the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth yes if you would each please State your names and your positions with the board Mark rer board engineer Ernie Peters board planner Jeffrey Pororo zoning officer thank you all right welcome aboard Mr I'll call it Mark because I I don't want to mess up your last name welcome aboard we look forward to working with you would it be okay I ask questions Mr M is that okay okay um so it sounded like what you felt abstaining me wasy I don't have enough information right now to make a v give me some time I want to make I want to vote later right that's sounded like to me the way you explained it is that correct I that's what you understood abstaining means when Dr hofstein said like I'll take a moment and then when um you said Mr hman said you have three options like I don't know why I kind of just said oh perfect I need you know I'm just I I need some time you need some time yeah I just felt like more time to sort of hash out my thoughts around around okay because my question was going to be what happened between the time you obained what did you learn between the time you abstained and now that you have a vote not I didn't Madam excuse me one second Mr Mr pman yeah um Mr Murphy sorry um um on the agenda this evening is to provide the board training which is which is the reason that I'm here Mr Murphy had had stated that he he was looking for an opportunity to review um the the legal standard requirements um would it be acceptable for me to provide the board training at this time while M Mr Murphy undertakes the the review and and the work that he wanted to do Mr pman wants to leave um you mean you don't want to get home at midnight um it's prob me your special counsel what do you think about this I respectfully defer to counil thank you Mr always helpful appreciate it yes that would have been conversation among to say that you didn't know what the word have at that I agree so I Mr P go I mean per personally I have I I don't see anything under Roberts's orders that would permit the the vote to be changed um but I'm I'm still searching um I don't know where Mr P went but the results weren't I it would be my legal opinion that the vote as cast would be final the votes weren't counted yet when I said I want change my not you said when I said I want to change my vote the votes were not counted you V I did vote I did not when I said I want to change my vote the votes were not yet counted that's Mr pman has said it's been carried Mr Murphy's going to review let's discuss whether or not we're going to go forward with the uh training with Brent pman this evening I don't know where he went but needed a break you it can't be more than half an hour but I'll tell him to hurry up I I can't I can't find anything on this she's was where e does anybody care what I have to say excuse me come on Corum please miss ciani and I uh who uh I have great respect for uh who is a colleague of mine who I've known for quite some time um Miss cion and I have uh put our heads together um and we do uh and I will I will um advise the board uh under Robert's rules um once the results are read which they were as 32 to2 once that was read um the vote could not be changed the record indicates if you were to go back and watch it or listen to it you would see that you asked to change the vote after the the results of the vote were read did I yes and because you asked to change your vote after the results were read you would require the consent of the entire board to change your vote which it does not appear that you will get but if you'd like to take a vote on that you you we can do that did I ask only after the votes were it was like memorialized or finalized respectfully yes and again I I wasn't trying to to take away your vote and quite frankly I did you know again I sani's here and um I think we're in agreement on on the the the effect uh of what occurred so I don't love it I'll be perfectly Frank with you um but that's what the the Parliamentary procedure is so again it's up to you if you'd like to take a vote um as to whether the board will permit you to have to be 100% consensus correct cion is that how you understood 100% consensus yeah correct the entire board so that would be the the procedure hear from Miss Parnes again I I I I don't I'm sure everyone in this room knows me well enough to know that my reputation as ethical is certainly something I pride myself on so um I don't love the idea that Miss Parnes feels that her vote was taken away um even though you know uh it may have ultimately benefited uh me um it still doesn't sit right so um but again some things just simply don't sit right and and Miss Sani agree that that that would be the procedure to change the vote so yes Mr s can I help you that moot that motion would fail correct correct are there any other questions for me at this time on this issue okay just paron as would you like to make a motion or are you satisfied I'm not satisfied but again I i' I've outlined the procedure as I understand it and if you'd like to make a motion and see if you draw a second and then we can take a roll call but um decision sort of needs to be made so we can get Mr Pullman I don't I don't think that um I guess I I don't I don't think that uh a vote is GNA dra uh draw a consensus but um I Heard sentiment from some of the members that you know they wouldn't they they wouldn't agree to allow me to actually um choose to vote in a way that feels like a vote to me um so I guess my only question is if if if we were to and I'm not questioning anyone but if we were to review the record and see that I asked the change before it was the vote was finalized um would that would that change anything it would I guess even subsequently I I'm you know it seems like you and some others are fairly certain that that's it it only it I I requested it too late I I don't I definitely thought about it like before it was finalized but I maybe I didn't say anything I was sort of like trying to figure out um but I'm curious if going back after the fact and see like if it were to be uh before the fact would it change anything um take ation no I'm I'm not I'm not talking about rev voting now I'm saying like if we were to go back and find out that I actually said that I want to change it before the vote was counted um I'm well I'm I'm asking I'm asking a different question I'm saying the understanding the assumption is the the understanding is that if I asked to change my vote before it was finalized then I would be allowed to and after then I'm not allowed to correct and it seems like some people here are convinced that it happened too late but I'm curious to go back to the record and see I could be I got it wrong well forgive me for taking your time I apologize here's what I could here's what I can here's what I can suggest what I can suggest is I can advise the board of the proper procedure to deal with this type of issue prior to the next meeting okay um we can all take a look at the I was going to try to pull it up now but we can all take a look at the um YouTube uh following the meeting and see when that when that occurred um and we can make a determination uh based upon the information that we have at the next meeting thank you that's what I was getting at I appreciate it is that acceptable yes thank you thank you Mr pulman I believe the floor is yours still wish Madam chairman you want me to continue do you want me to continue with your training tonight or how long it 30 minutes I defer I defer to the board I'm going to be perfectly honest with you after what's carried on this evening I I'm not going I'm just being honest I am not going to be able to pay attention the way you deser and I don't want to be disrespect and it's not about me it's about the process to ensure that we we comply with our requirements and and I understand that and that's why I asked that of the board um and I will at some point in January we have to do it um I will I will come back down at that point um and understanding why so that that I and I apologize but I we'll schedule a time in January Sor time thank you for your ADV this evening no it's always a pleasure to be before the board um and I will see you see you folks at some point Mr Mr pman thank you for providing the board with guidance in my absence uh or in the absence of other Council I appreciate that thank you Mr thank you I that is a decision the board can make it can be handled now or if you'd like to wait until the next meeting I don't know if anybody considered the appointment of the vice chair prior to this meeting because it wasn't part of the original reorganization plan so I would suggest that uh that we alert we advise the board um which I will do now that at the next meeting the board will be um tasked with with selecting a vice chair um I suggest that the board consider their options for vice chair um and again uh if the board it seems that the board as currently um constituted would PR pre prefer to um deliberate appointments um for both uh for professionals um and and the like in public um the same would be true for uh the vice chair position that could also be done uh in public um if there if if the board feels there's a need for um executive session um you know again I I'll leave it to the discussion of the board as to whether uh how you want to proceed with that um but again I would suggest that given the fact that some members may not have known that we needed a vice chair I would suggest to the board that we provide an opportunity for uh that consideration to be made uh at the next meeting on that note just to be clear and fair to our newest members obviously Mr Bry was appointed as a regular member so he would have a vote what about the two alternates uh no they would not have a vote as to the vice chair um just for the just for the purposes of clarifying the record uh when a vote calls for the entire Assembly online members would have a vote um that consists of all seven regular members and the two alternates um on the majority of things that we deal with um on a daily basis whether it be the appointment of professionals the appointment of um you know of uh uh of board officers uh the appointment of U newspapers and the like uh and the everyday applications that's going to be limited to the seven seven regular members unless uh one of those members is unavailable at which point the alternates would um vote alternate one followed by alternate two does that make sense yes thank you I just that just clarifies the that should clarify the procedure going forward if I may before we journ there's been an issue with uh which where the meetings and everything could be advertised the uh Township the legislature is in the middle of trying to change it because some of the newspapers print newspapers have gone out of business that's correct as of now everything is supposed to stay the same for the first three months of the year well they devise a bill that's correct so uh right now uh some of the newspapers that uh we did advertise in are are no longer going to be publishing in print so uh we have to wait to see how that works out so um oddly enough this board has two reorganization meetings um which is not typical um but we do and the January reorg is reserved for professionals uh while the July reorg is reserved for Board office officers unless we need one obviously um and uh meeting schedule newspaper and the like that's inj um that's correct so uh as of right now this board's two newspapers are the uh Asbury Park Press and the Star Ledger um both of those are currently still in print um for the opma purposes um so so I don't really have a concern at at the moment but if that were to change based upon what what the legislature comes down with um then we can address that at the time Madam chair you're the chair you can make a comment on anytime you'd like um before we close and I promise you I will keep this quick um again on the record I want to let everyone know I was completely appalled at how this went I'm disappointed um I think my challenge to each one of you sitting up here tonight is to go home and really ask yourself what are you doing here why if you're here for this town and the people of this town Bravo if you're not you need to re-evaluate yourself thank you than you um before we close I'd just like to say um welcome Mr bressie welcome Mr such um I look forward to getting to know you better Mr Bry I know we've met a couple times Mr such I have not yet had the pleasure until this evening um but I look forward to getting to know both of you and working with you um and again I I think you heard the comments from from some of the board members I do make myself available um I will give you myself if you'd like it um I'm available to the board members pretty much 247 uh unless I tell you otherwise um but but in all sincerity I I do T do have a great respect for this job in fact if you listen to me long enough you'll hear me say tell you I love it and that's the truth so um I'm here to assist you in any any manner that you might need so again anytime hi than