DEER HUNT, FIELD FEES, AND NOR'EASTER - OH MY!

At the October 24th conference meeting, one of the items on the slim agenda was a deer management update.  Activity has already begun to start reducing the number of deer infesting Livingston.  With herds roaming through my backyard, and the children of several friends infected with Lyme disease over the summer, I look forward to a successful deer management season!

More discussion was held on field management fees and we will be hosting the stakeholders at the 11/14 meeting and, I hope, finally putting this to bed.  The Town has invested monies in the past several years to bring the fields more up to snuff; the fees to be charged to the users are not unreasonable and will be earmarked toward field maintenance.

I find it interesting that the Councilmen don’t see the difference between charging fees for field usage and waiving fees for the use of community resources.  The question had come from Cycle for Survival regarding waiving the fees for their usage of the Community Center for a fund raising event.  I voted no as the Township is NOT a charitable organization; however, the other 4 councilmen arbitrarily (to my mind) decided to waive the fees.

But, the great news was that LTV will finally begin taping and broadcasting the Regular Town Council meetings.  They will be presented uncut and unexpurgated at least twice after each Council meeting.  As far as I am concerned, they can run continuously  - all Council all the time!  Still pending is information on garage sale ordinances from other townships.  Given that some homes are abusing the ability to hold garage sales by having multiple sales per month, we need to figure out a way to stop the abuse without generating onerous requirements for the occasional garage sale holder. 

I was sorry to have missed the volunteer appreciation night; I had to make a choice between seeing my mother in the hospital and going to the event.  I heard a great time was had by all.  I did, however, make the dedication of the Library Endowment Fund quilt on Wednesday, November 2^nd and the Livingston Environmental Commission meeting on Thursday, November 3^rd.  Finally, I was delighted by the invitation from the Livingston Symphony Orchestra to be present at the kickoff of the 54^th season on November 5th.  My husband, Oliver, and I, very much appreciated the program and the LSO performed extremely well.

The great pre-Halloween Nor’easter impacted every household in Livingston.  On a personal note, we were without cable, Internet, and phone from Saturday until Friday with our power going out at least 5 times during that period.  But, we were VERY lucky as there were quite a number of people still don’t have power even I as write this blog.  In speaking with one Town resident whose power was not restored until Thursday, hearing that 95% of the Town has power is no comfort when you, as an individual, are 100% without!  I thank the DPW for their unceasing efforts on our behalf in trying to clean up the streets and dealing with the power lines alongside PSE&G.  Unfortunately, I think it will be some time before we can drive down the streets without dodging all the branches.

Trees, Trees, and More Trees

The main part of the conference meeting on October 10^th was to finalize the Tree Ordinance – which the Council has been working on since the Spring and which the Livingston Environmental Committee and the Planning Board have been working on for years.  The primary goal of the ordinance was to keep people from clear-cutting their property – as had happened in recent history on two properties in the town.   The hardest thing to do in the ordinance was to walk the fine line between intruding on how citizens managed their own private property and the Town’s desire to maintain the trees.  I was particularly happy with not being mandated to report every tree cut down that did not require a permit; the LEC will be tracking those trees where people voluntarily report it.

In keeping with the ‘green’ theme of that meeting, the Planning Board proposed an ordinance for Alternative Small Energy Systems that was approved by the Council and introduced at the October 17^th meeting.  The ordinance defines what and how alternative energy systems (i.e., windmills, solar panels) can be implemented in the Town.  So, don’t look for wind farms anywhere in town; they are prohibited by the ordinance!  And, do start looking for utility mounted solar panels – PSE&G will begin to install them in Livingston shortly.  The units will be 3’ x 5’ and will be 15’ above the ground.

Parette Somjen was awarded the contract without competitive bid to provide Architectural & Engineering services for the Monmouth Court Elevator construction.  I was the only one who argued against proceeding with a non-competitive bid and I had major issues with the proposed contract that Parette had provided.  I was assured that substantial due diligence had been done on Parette for previous bids.  I then expressed my concerns regarding the contract language that had been provided by Parette and was assured that the Town Counsel would be addressing those and that we typically utilized the ‘Town’ contracts and not the vendor’s.

The final item of concern regarding the environment was the issue of contaminated groundwater at Okner Field.  While this does not impact our drinking water (due to scrubbers at the affected wells close by), it must still be remediated.  The first step dictated by the DEP was to have Livingston hire a Licensed Site Remediation Professional to begin site investigation.  I am praying that this won’t turn into a soil remediation nightmare as occurred at the Town Hall site.  Stay tuned…

At the October 17^th meeting, we continued a conversation regarding both signage and garage sales that I had raised on the 10^th, based on a complaint that I had received from a Livingston resident about the biweekly garage sales taking place on her block.  I requested two action items from the Town Council:  a) to put in a public service announcement into the West Essex Tribune reminding people of the signage ordinance and that ALL signs must be out of the public right of way (i.e., the first 10 feet off the street) and b) to look at what other towns have in the way of controlling garage sales and see whether we want to adopt an ordinance limiting the number of garage sales an individual can hold a year.  In addition to the increased traffic and noise a garage sale brings to a street, we also want to avoid the situation of people running these as businesses out of their homes.

Believe me – I am not in favor of another ordinance.  We have a great many ordinances on the books that are imperfectly enforced.  Many of the ordinances are enforced only when a complaint is registered.  So – in the interest of maintaining good neighbor relations and keeping governmental interference to a minimum, your comments and suggestions as to how this issue might be controlled would be very welcome.

There were a number of presentations at the 10/17 meeting – and it is always terrific to be part of a group saluting a team of children who, as their coach said, ‘lived up to their potential.’  Congratulations to the 11 Year Old America Little League Williamsport team!  The Livingston Municipal Alliance Committee Chair was on hand for the proclamation of Red Ribbon Week – which is celebrated nationally from 10/22-10/29 – to bring greater awareness and support of drug free lifestyles.  And, we had a presentation from Cycle for Survival that is having a Livingston based event.  I’m not sure if Steve Santola, who announced that he has reached out to others to form a team of former mayors, is aware that his team would exclude the two newest members of the current Town Council.  Maybe he thinks Republicans don’t cycle?

Last but not least, the Community Outreach Committee – which started its life as the Asian Outreach Committee – was finally approved by the Council and adopted on 10/17/2011.  The citizens who originally proposed the committee were extremely disappointed that it took the Council this long to move this along and enthusiasm is somewhat dampened.  The other Councilmen objected to the original mission statement as they found it ‘not inclusive.’  Much of the hold up was trying to get the rewrite of the mission statement done (volunteered by Gary Schneiderman) so it would be more encompassing and not just geared to the Asian community.  I am looking forward to getting this off the ground.  There was one addition to the committee listing that I found very puzzling as that person had no involvement at all with the creation of the concept, the drafting of the original mission statement, and/or the original group that presented it and there were other individuals that had expressed an interest in joining.  However, I look forward to everyones contribution.

PAY TO PLAY - AGAIN (with a nod to the Livingston Patch for the great title)

Field usage fees have once again reared its ugly head.  Although the various organizations which are the big users of these fields have been polled regarding usage fees, and have had numerous discussions regarding the potential for fees, and theoretically have bought into the need for these fees – now there is apparently ‘push back’ on the actual implementation of field usage fees.  Given the need to implement these fees to help defray the growing cost of field maintenance and the negative response being received from the organizations impacted, there will be a meeting called of the ‘stakeholders’ in the fields (e.g., Livingston baseball, softball, football leagues, Township groups – Cerbo, Temple softball, etc.) to further discuss this issue. 

Also up on the 9/26 agenda was the review of the Vision 20/20 survey to be disseminated to the town.  Vision 20/20 is a town-appointed committee whose purpose “is to create a vision for the Township of Livingston that will improve the quality of life for the community, its residents, and businesses.”  I’m all for quality of life; I am obviously a Livingston resident as well.  However, given costs are rising, and we are trying to hold taxes down, rather than asking what more we should be doing for the Township, why not see what services might be cut back or charged a fee to use?  This, in fact, was the very sentiment raised to me by a member of the Vision 20/20 committee.  As the most basic Township expenses are rising (e.g., wages, benefits), and given an incredibly robust service offering we currently have, we have to realize that, while it is good to plan for the future, we may not be able to accommodate new services (or even maintain old ones) in the short term.  I do applaud the work that the committee has done and look forward with interest to the results from the survey.

Finally, I read with great interest the Zoning Board of Adjustment Annual Report for 2010.  The report provided a summary of the variances for residential lots and use variances requested.  It also made a recommendation regarding reviewing the accessory structure (e.g., garages, pool houses) provision – which engendered some lively discussion about 4 car garages.

The regular meeting gave me a sense of real satisfaction – we were giving citations honoring the 6 Essex County Senior Citizens Juried Art Show winners who were Livingston residents (the most winners from one township at this show) as well as the 2011 10-year-old National Little League Williamsport Team.  The art show winners shared with us information about their winning pieces or their art in general and the kids were just great!  I don’t remember the last time I saw so many ‘paparazzi’ in the room.

The rest was primarily housekeeping – including two change orders for road reconstruction/ resurfacing that were due to the increase in the cost of asphalt and passing a legislative appropriation in order to get $450,000 in funding from a Green Acres matching grant.

BUSINESS AS USUAL, ONLY LESS OF IT

In keeping with the winding down of summer, we have been having a lessening of the load on the Town Council.  Our September 6^th Conference and Regular meetings did not really bring anything unusual or controversial to the fore.  Closure on one issue, the construction of the Municipal Complex, was done through a final change order.  I still consider the building too overblown with a huge carrying cost for maintenance, property management, and energy costs – but at least there will not be any more change orders or costs to be paid for the building of the Town Hall.  I think this is a white elephant and will cost the town significant amounts of money over the course of its life.

Another item almost put to rest was the final hearing on the amendment regarding the posting of notices.  Given there had been some issue regarding religious symbols being placed in the Town’s right of way in violation of the ordinance, we had wanted to make sure that this issue was clarified so that there would not be any misunderstandings nor any inconsistencies regarding its enforcement.

One very important thing did happen in our Regular meeting on 9/6 – a post-Hurricane Irene thanks to the men and women of the Department of Public Works, Fire Department, and Police, who went above and beyond assisting the citizens with issue and problems created by Hurricane Irene.  In addition, and rightly so, kudos were given to the Mayor, Town Manager, and Deputy Town Manager for the activities during the hurricane weekend in disseminating information and assisting the townspeople.  Good preparation, well executed – Well Done!

I had the opportunity to ‘see the gang’ again at the very moving and poignant September 11^th ceremony on the 10^th anniversary of 9/11.  Bunnie Ratner did a wonderful job coordinating the solemn event and every note – from the selections sung by the LHS choir, to the Girl Scouts laying roses on the memorial, to the memories shared by some affected by the events on 9/11, to the playing of taps – was very affecting and rang true.  The number of townspeople who attended the memorial seems to have grown and it is good that the town could come together to mourn those lost and celebrate America’s triumph over adversity.

The conference meeting of September 12^th had two items, in my opinion, of major note.  First was the ‘Best Practices Inventory’.  State aid payment is impacted to a township based on implementation of these 50 best practices and, as Livingston scored 46 out of 50, the township will receive 100% of our 2011 State aid allocation.  One question, that I have raised before and will continue to raise, has to do with municipal health benefits.  At this time, Livingston does NOT exclude part time employees (less than 35 hours per week), elected or appointed officials.  That means that the Town Council members (excluding Mike Rieber and myself) get the same ‘cadillac’ benefits that full time employees receive.  It also means that part time employees (e.g., 20 hours per week) are also getting these benefits.  [In the first wave of health benefits reform in NJ in 2010, health and pension benefits were disallowed for part time employees (i.e., less than 35 hours on the State level and 25 hours at the local level).  Per the memo I received shortly after I was elected, this was going to be enforced for anyone not already covered as of May, 2010.  However, if you were already a part time employee or elected official as of that time, you would be grandfathered in.]

 There are two issues at stake – one is that the benefits plan currently offered to our Township employees is incredibly rich – with $5 copays, no deductibles, and no coinsurances.  This is unheard of in industry.  The second issue is that part time employees are included in the benefits plan – again, something that is not typically done in industry.  Why?  Because the cost of benefits is too high.  And the ‘richer’ the plan, the higher the premium cost.  At last blush, premiums for family coverage for one of the options in the plan were over $2,000 per month per member.  And this is coming out of our taxes – to the tune of over $3,000,000.  I think that this is something that we have to seriously look at and figure out a way to provide livable benefits to our employees without breaking the taxpayers’ back.  When I asked the question regarding bidding out the benefits, I was told that the cost (for the current plan) was cheapest through the State Health Benefits Plan as, so I was told, utilization was over 100%.  Well, people will use/abuse their health benefits when it doesn’t cost them anything!  We need to figure out a way to also ensure township employee wellness to bring our utilization costs down.  But, as is the issue is in America as a whole, most people will not properly manage their own healthcare and healthcare costs unless they have some ‘skin in the game.’ 

The other item has already caused some concern and controversy.  That is the issue of field usage fees.  My understanding – as was discussed in the meeting – was that the Youth Sports Council was involved in this proposal from the start.  The Town Council in previous years had allocated funds to the improvement of the fields so that, when usage fees would ultimately be charged, the fields affected would be in good condition.  The fees to be charged in no way cover all costs associated with their maintenance but begin to have the people who most benefit from and use these fields start to contribute toward their maintenance.  This issue is very similar to the one created when sports clubs and teams began charging fees to their participants.  We all pay high taxes and believe that all town services should be included.  Unfortunately, that is no longer a realistic viewpoint.  The Town needs to provide basic services to the entire citizenry; but field usage fees are only charged to those limited people who actually use the fields for sports.

This is not an easy change to implement and will impact unequally on our townspeople.  I encourage everyone who is opposed to this issue to make his/her comments known prior to our next meeting on 9/26.  At that point, it may be too late to be effective in changing the course of action currently set on by the Council.

Finally, the Council discussed an Anti-Idling resolution.  Now, I’m all for education regarding idling and support anti-idling law.  But to enact a resolution?  In general, the powers of a municipality are effected through the enactment of ordinances and resolutions by the governing authority of the municipality. The permanent rules of conduct or government of a municipality are enacted by ordinances. Ordinances are considered to be local laws and have only local applicability, unlike state laws which have general applicability. A resolution is a less formal and more limited action, not considered to be a law, usually dealing with administrative functions.  [See uslegal.com definitions.]  The proposed resolution provides some education on anti-idling and culminates in resolving that we enforce the existing laws and encourage activities limiting exhaust emissions.  I agree with the thought but would prefer that education be done through other means (public relations campaigns, schools, newspaper ads) than by wasting time discussing and passing this resolution.

Earlier start, long agenda, long meeting

It’s nice to have the two-week break between the August 15^th meeting and the September 6^th meeting.  But, we make up for it by having had substantial agenda items to go through on the 15^th with anticipation of sessions – both conference and Regular – on the 6^th.

Much of the session was taken up with discussion of the new tree ordinance that the Livingston Environmental Commission has been working on in conjunction with the Planning Board.  The motivation for updating the existing ordinance was an incidence or two of clear-cutting properties that were less than the one-acre threshold covered by the current ordinance.  The new ordinance primarily takes away the distinction between properties based on size (i.e., less than one acre, greater than one acre) and establishes parameters for which trees may be cut down with or without permits.  I applaud all those involved – with special kudos to Peter Klein of the Planning Board and Gary Schwartz, the chair of the LEC, and the entire LEC committee – for navigating all of the issues, including managing the delicate balancing of Township and environmental interests with citizens’ right to privacy and control of their own property.  Once the ordinance is introduced, the LEC will be very involved in organizing education and increasing awareness of the new regulations, including creating a registration of landmark trees.

There rest of the meeting was taken up with mostly administrative items.  One item approved was having Livingston participate in a National Moment of Remembrance on the tenth anniversary of 9/11 by issuing a proclamation and committing to sounding sirens for 1 minute at 1 PM on 9/11.  This resolution will be voted on at the September 6^th meeting – along with resolutions for NJDOT grant submission, a change order for landscape design services for the Town Hall (final change order we are told!), and for Title 39 (parking and other motor vehicle violations) enforcement at the Regency Club [which they requested and which is done for other private developments in Livingston.]

During the Public Comment portion of the meeting, three Livingston residents had questions for me regarding the release of the Township Counsel’s conflict of interest opinion.  I provided all of them with my personal contact information for additional offline conversation and thanked them for their continued interest in the matter.

And, in our packets, as had already been mailed to us, was the invitation to the 9/11 Ceremony of Remembrance taking place at 7:00 P.M. on September 11^th at the Living Memorial Garden on the Oval.  Among the thousands murdered that day by terrorists, seven of the lives were those of Livingston residents.  As this is the 10^th anniversary of this tragic event, I would expect a significant turnout – rain or shine.

During the roundtable discussion, I did raise several items – a few which had been outstanding from previous meetings.  First, Gary Schneiderman promised to have his revisions to the mission statement for the Community Outreach Program that has been outstanding since May.  Second, I inquired as to the status of televising the conference and Regular meetings.  Rudy Fernandez was meeting with LTV the next evening and I hope that we will have an answer on this soon.  This has been an ongoing issue with no resolution to date.   Third, I inquired as to whether we might be able to start budget talks before year end (as most businesses budget for the following year in the current year) and which I would hope would obviate having to approve an interim budget.  However, due to governmental issues/requirements of which I had been unaware, it cannot be done.  Oh well!  Finally, I raised the issue of going out to bid for other insurance coverages given the changes in the contributions now allowed by the State.  Michele Meade indicated that we would have difficulty in doing that as there is over 100% utilization of the current benefits (and, why not, as they are so rich and so cheap!) as well as a penalty that would be assessed should Livingston leave the State Health Benefits Plan.  I have found some information on how Parsippany saved $1 million by doing just that – and that was without increased premium participation by the covered employees.  This will be an issue worth coming back to and discussing more.

On another note:  At the August 1 meeting, Rudy Fernandez spoke about Soles4Soles, which is an organization devoted to collecting new and used shoes for charitable purposes.  I was pleased to see a collection box at the New York Sports Club on Northfield Avenue – which I am hastening to fill!

Conflicting views...but not interests

Charter school have recently become a hotly debated topic in Livingston and, I am afraid, a source of division in our community, as well as a wellspring of misinformation.  I want to take this moment to set the record straight regarding my beliefs on charter schools and my involvement with the Asian community.

As a candidate for council last year, I pledged that one of my priorities – besides cutting municipal spending and taxes – would be to create an Asian outreach program for Livingston.

About 16 percent of the township is of Asian descent – a sizable minority.  Many Asian-Americans face barriers to full integration into the community and it was my hope that a town council-supported Asian outreach program would break down communication and cultural barriers between our Asian neighbors and the community at large.   

Shortly after my election last November – as I sat down with leaders of the Asian community, I learned of their desire for greater communication with municipal officials and of their interest in creating a Mandarin language charter school.

I embraced the desire of our Asian Americans neighbors to pursue the feasibility of a charter school because I believed it was one way – and just one way – of helping the Asian-American community as well as the community at large.

Many Asian Americans had expressed to me their desire to retain their cultural identity as a minority population in our community – a concept I fully respect as Jewish woman whose family remains committed to following Jewish traditions.

 My support for a charter school was in no way meant to be an attack on the excellent public education offered by the Livingston School system, which I fully support.  Nor was it intended to divide the community along ethnic or political lines. I understand how much Livingston parents love their school system and the last thing I want to do is diminish the quality of education in the township. At the same time, I do not want to ignore the desires of our Asian community. It is their legal right to pursue a charter school in New Jersey.

A recent New York Times article highlighted the emotions churned up over charter schools, going so far as noting that some supporters of charter schools have received threatening e-mails from those opposed to charter schools.  I find that unfortunate, especially in an area that prides itself on its progressive diversity. This kind of heated community division is exactly the OPPOSITE of what I had hoped for when I embraced the idea of an Asian outreach program.  I want the community to come together to embrace its diversity, not be driven apart by that diversity.

For the record, you should know that despite what you may have heard, I have not been asked to raise funds, make any donations, or sign any bank guarantees for a charter school.  I have not been asked to sit on the board for the proposed Mandarin-language immersion charter school,  nor serve as a trustee, nor will I have ANY affiliation with the school when and if it is created.   My involvement has been purely as an advocate of school choice with a firm belief that this would be beneficial to Livingston residents and ANY town progressive enough to participate in this educational opportunity.

And, let me add, that any assistance I offered the charter school advocates is within my role as a private citizen.  My position as a Founder of the Hanyu school poses no conflict of interest (as some have mistakenly asserted and has been confirmed by Township legal counsel) since there is no personal gain for me if a charter school is approved. The faulty logic some are seeking to apply to the "conflict" issue could just as easily be applied to the council members who have children in our public school and oppose the charter school. They are acting in what they believe are the best interest of their families, are they not?

Rather than belabor the point, let’s just say that passions are strong on both sides and that everyone comes to the issue with a personal interest. Public debate is a good thing – and we need more of it in Livingston. However let’s keep the debate civil and on point and not use public forums for political bashing and character assassination.

Perhaps I have been naive in thinking that broadening school choice would be good for the community as a whole. Perhaps I have misread the depth of misperception that many parents have about the negative budgetary impact charter schools might have on the general public schools. It was never my intention to create such concerns and I welcome the opportunity to help allay them.

My goal from inception was to create a bridge to our Asian American neighbors, not to erect barriers to community tolerance. I hope that the community can move forward with respect for differing opinions and mindful of the fact that Livingston is a community composed of many interests and points of view – and we should be tolerant of all of them.

It’s not what Lola wants, it should be what Lola needs…

At our last meeting on June 27^th, time was spent discussing additional changes to the Christmas Tree Ordinance and the Tree Ordinance.  The Christmas Tree Ordinance was originally being changed to reduce the permit fee from $1,500 to $500 as this was felt to be too onerous for the vendors to pay.  The additional change now being passed is to waive the permit fee altogether for service organizations (e.g., Boy and Girl Scouts) holding such a sale.  I personally do not agree with that stance.  When fundraising is held by an organization, there are costs that are involved in whatever form that fundraising takes.  I don’t believe that Livingston, as a Township, should be making a contribution to those service organizations by waiving the fee.  Permit fees are in place to defray Township costs.  Individuals can make their contributions however they want; it is not the Town’s place to make the contribution for them.

The Tree ordinance is still being tweaked.  There is a fine line that needs to be drawn between having an ordinance that keeps people from clear cutting their property indiscriminately – to the detriment of their neighbors and the environment – and impinging on personal freedoms.  There is also a fine line to draw as to how much the Town can charge someone for cutting down “their own” trees.   We seem to be almost there – but not quite.

Members of the Deer Committee came to make a presentation regarding expanding the deer hunt.  This apparently is causing some concern in the Town, as people are afraid of harm coming to their property and/or themselves from the hunters.  My husband, who sits on the Deer Committee, and I have discussed this at length.  The hunters are very concerned for safety and are willing to abide by more stringent rules than legally necessary or mandated by the State.  They also understand that keeping good public relations regarding the locations of the hunt and its operation is paramount.  Therefore, I think we can be confident that this hunt will proceed smoothly and discretely.  The hunters all understand that it is more important to keep the Township populace’s good will and to maintain public safety than to bag the deer.

Finally, there was a discussion of the contract for architectural services for building a new Department of Public Works (DPW) facility and for a move of the Health Department from the Hillside Community Center to the Town Hall.  For those musical theater aficionados out there, ‘Whatever Lola wants, Lola gets’ is sung by Lola, the Devil’s assistant, in “Damn Yankees”.  I think that the scheme to start looking a build a new DPW facility at this time may be coming from the same place as Lola.  First, I think that starting to look for sites for a new DPW facility is premature when it will be years before the Town can afford a new one – if we even need a new one.  Some on the Town Council say that we need to be proactive, not reactive, and that it can take years to get permits and plans together.  In this case I think that it is still premature to be proactive.  There is no burning need to have a new DPW – other than that is what Lola wants.  The rationale I have heard regarding having a new DPW facility is that we can’t garage all the trucks and cars (poor cars have to be parked outside) and that there is insufficient storage.  There is also the fact that a stream runs through the current DPW facility location  - thereby not allowing usage of the land across the stream.  At this time, and in the foreseeable future, a new DPW facility is a ‘nice to have’ not a ‘need to have’.  And, when ‘shared services’ are spouted, I concur with the sentiment of “Let someone else build it and we’ll share theirs!”

The second part of the proposed contract is to move part of the Health Department from the Community Center to the Town Hall.  As I have been told, the second floor of the Town Hall was built in the hopes that we could share the facility with the Board of Education.  That didn’t happen.  Now we want to move Vital Statistics from Hillside to the Town Hall.  Why?  Because there is no public transportation to Hillside and people need to get birth certificates.  We’ve managed so far – and I don’t think we need to spend the money for moving and additional overhead that would be required to manage a ‘split’ department!

Finally, the Town Manager has requested a courtesy counter to be put in her office as an ‘add on’ to the contract.  This was to avoid people just walking into the area when no one was at the ‘service’ desk.   I was told that she would not debate her request and that I was free to vote No.  I will – given that I can think of three ways off the top of my head to take care of the issue that would not cost anything – let alone $1,900 for the plan and who knows how much for the execution.

So there you have it.  We all want many things – but I refuse to reach into the citizens of Livingston’s pockets to pay for it.  I know the contract amount is minimal – with a minimum of $14,800 to be spent.  But it’s $14,000 here and $14,000 there and pretty soon it’s real money.  Let’s turn our back on Lola and spend it when we NEED it.