The Montclair Town Council held a special meeting today at 8 am, officially blessing a project to improve sewer lines for Montclair State. But the odd timing of the meeting and the lack of a public input had some residents concerned.
Resident and MSU neighbor Cyd Caillerac told Baristanet after the meeting, “I’m not comfortable with this. It’s too rushed, and I’m not sure the public has all the information on the benefits and risks. There’s been no public hearing.”
This morning’s special 8 am council meeting was called to discuss Montclair township’s budget, which apparently is getting leaner and leaner. Last Friday, a discussion of Montclair State University’s proposal to improve a section of the municipal sewer system in the first ward was added as the first agenda item. Last week, MSU formally reached out for a confirmation that the work would be done, Mayor Fried said.
The project, which will replace 100-year-old pipes, described by town utility engineer Gary Obszarny as “leaking, root and groundwater infiltrated” is prompted by the university’s construction of campus residences that will house 2,000 students. The expanded on-campus population is anticipated to produce an extra 211,000 gallons per day of sewage waste.
Mayor Jerry Fried began by stating that the project is not under council jurisdiction. “The work itself is the purview of the head of the Montclair Sewer Utility, which responds to all requests for sewer hookups. It is essentially the same as if a new business or single family residence were to need new service,” said Mayor Fried. “I feel it’s important for residents to understand the position of the council on this.”
Council members unanimously passed a non-binding resolution which basically is a polite endorsement of the project which will generate an estimated $2.6 millioni connection fee to be charged to MSU and an estimated additional $350k/year in usage fees, based on capacity, plus improve some of the town’s old sewer pipes on MSU’s dime. Obszarny enthusiastically backed the project saying the old pipes would need to be repaired in any case on a case by case basis. The MSU project will replace an entire section all at once with no service interruption to residents, and save thousands of gallons of sewage seepage resulting from leaks in the current system. “It’s a win-win for the town and the environment,” he said. Recent floods provided an opportunity for excellent flow tests, providing current flow data. “There’s no guesswork here,” he stated referring to the proposed larger capacity pipes.
MSU spokesperson Paula Maliandi says, best case scenario, this project could start by April 15. It is projected to take about six months to completion. The new sewer would start at Valley Road and Normal, to Alexander Avenue, to Yanticaw Brook. Obszarny stated the construction would progress 20 feet at a time, through the street and backyard easements. “Maybe work would take a couple of weeks in front of people’s houses.”
Only one resident spoke during public comment. Joan Checca expressed her concern that the proper due diligence would be done, and questioned MSU’s compliance record on restrictions specified by the permits. Fearing potential back-ups, Checca raised the issue of retro-fitting 100-year-old residential “laterals” (pipes connecting from homes) into a new trunk line.
The council then went behind closed doors to discuss the town’s budget.
Here is a draft of the resolution passed today:
TOWNSHIP OF MONTCLAIR
RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR MONTCLAIR STATE UNIVERSITY’S PLANS TO CONSTRUCT NEW ON-CAMPUS STUDENT HOUSING AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE TOWNSHIP’S SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM_________ __
March 31, 2010
WHEREAS, Montclair State University (“MSU”) has notified the Township of plans to construct new student housing on the University’s campus for approximately 2000 students; and
WHEREAS, MSU and the private developer that will contruct the new student housing have requested that the Township provide water and sewer service for this project and, in connection therewith, the developer has agreed to construct substantial improvements and upgrading to a portion of the Township’s sanitary sewer system at an estimated cost of approximately $4,000,000 to be paid by the developer; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the improvements to the Township sanitary sewer system, it is anticipated that the student housing project will generate substantial revenues for the Township in the form of sewer connection fees of approximately $2,600,000, annual sewer user fees, water connection fees and water user fees; and
WHEREAS, the Township and its residents will also receive additional benefits by virtue of the increased capacity and improvements to the sanitary sewer system; and
WHEREAS, the construction of on-campus student housing with additional parking facilities will have a positive impact on adjoining residential neighborhoods by reducing off-campus traffic and parking demands; now therefore
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the Township of Montclair, in the County of Essex, that the Township hereby expresses its support for MSU’s student housing project, including the proposed installation of improvements and upgrades to the Township sanitary sewer system, as depicted on the engineering plans prepared by Paulus, Sokolowski and Sartor Engineering, P.C., dated March 26, 2010, and any revised plans which shall be approved by the Township Manager and the Director of the Department of Utilities.
How is this connected (pun intended) to the story posted here recently about Clifton having issues with MSU because of the new dorms and the use of their town sewers? Are these related at all?
According to MSU spokesperson Paula Maliandi, Clifton tabled the proposal/request from MSU. MSU has not gotten a response from Clifton, so they have approached Montclair. They would only need to improve one town’s system, not both.
There are too many words in this item. Can we keep news items to 500 words or less?
55 minutes discussing sewers
25 minutes discussing the budget
I tried to limit the meeting to just budget discussions, but others felt it was important to “listen to the community” about sewers.
I’m totally frustrated!
Cary Africk
2nd Ward Counil
I say we hold out for more money.
“I tried to limit the meeting to just budget discussions, but others felt it was important to “listen to the community” about sewers.”
What gall, that “others” (meaning elected representatives) think the public should have their say….
I love how the resolution is written to make it sound like there will be 2.6 million in annual fees. Nicely done!
“WHEREAS, in addition to the improvements to the Township sanitary sewer system, it is anticipated that the student housing project will generate substantial revenues for the Township in the form of sewer connection fees of approximately $2,600,000, annual sewer user fees, water connection fees and water user fees; and”
Well, in fairness – it will generate $2.6M in annual fees*
*and at least $2.6M in annual costs
Dear ROC,
The point is we set up a meeting to discuss the BUDGET. Our deadline is THIS COMING TUESDAY. Today was our first discussion of said budget.
I’m all in favor of setting up meetings to discuss sewers or any subject people think important.
But in fairness, let’s set aside specific times so that all topics can be heard with sufficient time.
Given that we are discussing tax increases for all the residents, first things first.
The budget takes the spotlight, in my opinion, especially as we are talking elimination of people and programs.
I think that’s more important, right now, than sewers.
“MSU spokesperson Paula Maliandi says, best case scenario, this project could start by April 15. It is projected to take about six months to completion. The new sewer would start at Valley Road and Normal, to Alexander Avenue, to Yanticaw Brook. Obszarny stated the construction would progress 20 feet at a time, through the street and backyard easements. “Maybe work would take a couple of weeks in front of people’s houses.”
Huh? the BEST case scenario is six months work but only a “couple of weeks” in front of people’s houses? Where is the (best case scenairo) 5 months and 2weeks of other work going to take place? In the vast stretches of open land in the area?
Won’t it ALL be “:in front of people’s houses” or, alternatively in their yards?
Ahh then it sounds like you are not in favor of deciding the sewer issue now Cary. Fair enough. But if the issue is decided now, citizens should have their say.
The budget as well.
You need not spend any time on the budget Cary. Here is the formula Montclair has been using for as long as I can remember.
Current municipal budget + 5% (to cover raises and increased energy costs) – Montclair property tax revenues = Total tax increase.
Now back to those sewers…
“Current municipal budget + 5% (to cover raises and increased energy costs)”
And pedestrian malls….
2,000 students = an extra 211,000 gallons of sewage waste per day?!
MSU students are FULL of crap.
Dear ROC,
Residents can’t have their say re. the budget because we don’t have one, yet.
If you heard me today you would know that I made a big deal to the Manager to make public as much information as possible.
The budget should be ready for Tuesday night’s meeting, although that won’t be a “final” budget. But it will show programs being cut, personnel changes, etc.
It will be strange in that I don’t know if the public will even have our budget more than an hour or so before we vote on it!
I’m not sure if there are any options re. the sewer. Our Resolution is not necessary, according to the Mayor, for work to proceed.
Are people going to be “inconvenienced?” I would imagine so. But then again my neighbor’s aging sewer line broke two weeks ago and it cost him, so far, over $10,000 to repair, not to mention the two feet of sewage in his basement, and his not being able to live in the house for two weeks. I’ll bet he wouldn’t have minded the “inconvenience” of having a new sewer line put in.
And, let’s just say for a minute that the new sewer line affects 100 families. Do they all get a vote? Does it have to be unanimous? What if it impacts the costs to the town now and in ten years? Does that get considered too? How about if it affects 500 families? How does work get done in the town?
ROC,
You are mixing up capital with operating budgets. We all know that capital budgets do not involve costs. So why even bother discussing them? $12,000 per resident is small beans when you continue to make the monthly minimum payment. Heck, we won’t even notice the debt until it’s closer to $50,000 per resident. More bike racks, more police parking lots, more $25,000 fancy playground entrances and more pedestrian malls. There’s still plenty of room on the capital credit card.
I can’t tell what your point is Cary.
But here’s mine. Whether it’s “symbolic” or not, if the council is going to take up business, any business at all, I think the public should be able to register comments. I’m sorry if you are frustrated by that.
I share your concern that the budget is not the primary issue. I also think your are correct that it is a travesty that the public will have no time to review the budget prior to its ratification by the council.
May I propose a solution?
Why don’t you also put forth at the same meeting a resolution requiring a “public review period” for the budget which requires the council to post a budget, say a week, before any vote.
Excellent point, ROC.
My point was that it was our intention to ONLY discuss the budget, recognizing it for the important event it is.
I FULLY agree with you about public comment. If you’ve “followed” me over the last six years you’ll know it was my “big stink” that got the public comment period into the “upstairs” council meetings and I have been the one screaming about the necessity of all meetings strictly obeying OPMA regulations.
The resolution re. “a public review period” makes perfect sense. I’ve been trying to get this type of information up on the town web site for YEARS!
We NEED public input. Besides, it’s the law.
Cary
p.s.
The sewage deal sounds like a good one to me. (I’m not opposed).
After all, we’ve always been proud of how effluent our community is.
Great Cary.
Going to introduce such an ordinance? Think how great it would sound.
“seeing as we are giving the community ZERO time to review the budget before we vote on it. I think it’s high time we fix the process for the future, so today I’m introducing …”
How could they say no?
And if they do – you’ll be the next mayor with openness as an issue to run on.
Cary,
When is Montclair going to see cuts made? I see other towns now beginning to make the cuts, however, nothing from Montclair. I don’t see any council meetings about the topic just that two months ago letters were sent out. What is this new Town Manager doing?
Hopefully layoffs will be kept to a minimum, furlough the big dogs, cut programs and the like. Hopefully our police and fire wont be greatly affected by layoffs. I would like to still feel safe at night. Anyway, just curious when we’ll begin to see something?
That seems like a lot. Is it reasonable? The sewer repair seems like a win-win situation in theory, but why do they get a fixed rate with the Sewer Dept.? Don’t the rest of us have to pay per actual usage?
And this is linked to the budget. How much else do we subsidize for MSU? There are what–like 20,000 students there now? How much do the 100,000 people in Montclair subsidize those 20,000 people + faculty/staff and the water, sewerage, etc. they use? I always thought services went through Clifton and Little Falls. Does the University pay for any of this stuff? If it’s going through Montclair shouldn’t we be charging for it?
And who pays for overtime for cops, etc., when they shut down Valley Road for sewerage repair?
Seems like a done deal now, but awfully stinky that it didn’t go through regular channels.
a) Construction projects that utilize police are part of the bid, i.e. the contractor charges whoever is doing the building for payment for police.
b) MSU didn’t need Montclair’s “permission” to do any of this. It was a courtesy.
c) Montclair gets a good chunk of new sewer line, FREE. Good deal for Montclair.
d) Montclair State has ALWAYS paid Montclair for the water and sewer that they use, and they are by far our biggest “customer.”
e) As for other services, Montclair State has made more police assistant calls TO Montclair than from Montclair, i.e. THEY ought to be charging us.
There are some people who simply wish that Montclair State would just “go away.” There are 20,000 students and their parents who count their blessings each day that a school of this quality, at such an affordable price, is available to them.
My comment to Montclair State: THANK YOU!
Cary Africk
2nd Ward Councilor
Thank you, Councilor Africk. It’s good to know that MSU is our “biggest customer” and that they’re paying for water and sewerage (but are they paying the same rates as residents?).
I don’t think most people wish the University would “just go away,” but most, like me, would like to see more transparency in how township transactions with the University are conducted. You complained in this discussion thread about letting the public comment in the 8am weekday sewerage meeting, but it was a good idea–too often deals with MSU are struck behind closed doors which creates the impression of crony-ism even if there isn’t any.
MSU has a history of duplicity with regard to projects affecting neighbors (this is why Clifton was cautious about the effects of allowing MSU to pump sewerage through their town). It’s only normal that residents want to consider all options before moving ahead. Careful reflection is not a sign that people want MSU to “go away.” An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, as they say.