Environmental Commission

Madison  Environmental  Commission   Meeting  Minutes—May  31,  2012     Call  to  order  and  Open  Public  Meetings  Statement  at  7:30pm.   PRESENT:  Missy  Durham,  Jim  Greene,  Donald  Links,  Susan  Niculescu,  Roy  Redmond,  Jeff  Sarrett,  Stephan   Stocker,  Betsy  Uhlman.   ABSENT:  Jeff  Gertler,  Claire  Whitcomb.     Minutes:  The  minutes  of  the  meeting  of  April  24,  2012  were  approved  with  changes.   Guests:    Bob  Vogel,  Madison  Borough  Engineer.   Mail  received:    Library  Newsletter;  announcement  of  appointment  of  new  Borough  Attorney.   Discussion:   1. Executive  Sessions:    R.  Redmond  expressed  concern  about  the  recent  increase  in  the  use  of   “Executive  Sessions”.  He  stated  that  in  his  experience  such  closed  sessions  should  be  extremely   limited  in  order  to  preserve  the  open  aspect  of  public  meetings.  He  felt  that  two  executive   sessions  already  in  this  year  were  excessive.  D.  Links  responded  that  they  are  necessary  in  order   to  discuss  issues  related  to  personnel  and  to  contracts.  B.  Uhlman  discussed  executive  sessions   with  R.  Codey  who  concurred  that  they  should  be  used  for  personnel  and  contract  issues  at  the   chair’s  discretion,  but  the  law  has  a  preference  for  open  public  meetings.  J.  Greene  stated  that   in  retrospect  he  felt  that  the  initial  executive  session  called  for  the  discussion  regarding  the   formation  of  “Sustainable  Madison”  was  perhaps  not  really  needed  (the  minutes  are  included  in   this  document).    B.  Uhlman  noted  that  now  it  is  time  to  make  public  the  issues  of  that  particular   executive  session.  General  discussion  ensued  regarding  the  appropriate  reason  for  executive   sessions  to  be  called.  It  was  noted  that  some  information  is  sensitive  and  that  it  might  not  be   released  in  an  open  public  meeting,  thus  denying  the  members  of  the  Environmental   Commission  access  to  such  information.  S.  Stocker  asked  if  there  was  any  resolution  to  the   issues  discussed  at  the  last  executive  session.  D.  Links  noted  that  PK  Environmental  did  not   attend  the  scheduled  executive  session  with  Council  in  May.  They  will  attend  June  11th  and   report  on  their  findings  and  recommendations.  B.  Vogel  noted  that  there  is  considerable   pressure  on  PK  to  resolve  the  situation  at  the  MRC.   2. Green  Fair:  S.  Niculescu  reported  that  it  went  well  and  was  very  well-­‐attended.  There  were  59   vendors/organizations  represented,  with  as  many  or  more  attendees  than  other  years  and  the   speakers  and  musical  performers  were  well-­‐received.  However  it  was  very  labor-­‐intensive  and   not  effective  if  viewed  solely  as  a  mechanism  for  raising  funds.  She  felt  that  the  Scouts  might   wish  to  run  the  Fair  themselves,  without  much  participation  from  the  Environmental   1      Commission,  and  keep  the  funds  for  their  own  use.  In  addition,  to  avoid  the  last-­‐minute  rush,   the  Green  Fair  committee  (Scouts  and  MEC)  has  decided  to  start  working  on  the  Green  Fair  a  lot   earlier.  This  means  that  work  will  start  on  the  next  Green  Fair  in  October  of  this  year.  Plus  there   is  some  on-­‐going  work  at  this  time  on  a  feedback  questionnaire  to  the  exhibitors  to  ask  about   possible  improvements.  S.  Niculescu  requested  that  serious  consideration  be  given  as  to  the  role   that  MEC  would  like  to  play  in  future  Green  Fairs.  It  was  considered  important  that  the   Environmental  Commission  have  some  role,  even  if  smaller,  because  of  the  outreach  it   represents.  J.  Greene  suggested  that  in  the  next  few  months  we  should  go  to  the  Scouts  with  a   plan.  S.  Stocker  suggested  that  we  ask  the  Scouts  what  they  would  like  to  see  happen.  J.  Sarrett   asked  if  the  time  and  money  involved  could  be  brought  to  and  presented  at  the  next  meeting.  S.   Niculescu  agreed  to  do  that.   3. Storm  Water  Management  at  the  MRC:    B.  Vogel  reported  that  he,  Steve  Stocker,  Sandy   Kolakowski,  Betsy  Uhlman  and  Jerome  Bergstrom,  a  Rutgers  Storm  Water  Management  Expert,   visited  the  site  after  a  rainfall  and  observed  evidence  of  storm  water  flowing  out  of  the  fields   and  the  parking  lot.  Their  conclusion  was  that  there  was  too  much  water  to  be  handled  by  the   two  rain  gardens,  which  are,  they  concluded,  undersized  for  their  function.  However,  there  is   not  space  to  increase  their  size,  due  to  the  adjacent  pin  oaks.  J.  Bergstrom  suggested  some   berms  and  some  rocks  to  slow  down  the  flow  of  rainwater,  also  some  gravel  filled  drywells  to   hold  rainwater.  B.  Vogel  noted  that  the  standard  DEP  details  which  were  used  in  the   construction  documents  show  sand,  organic  material,  and  topsoil  for  the  rain  gardens.  During   construction  this  was  changed  due  to  an  elevation  problem.  Sand,  organic  material  and  topsoil   were  not  installed.  There  is  no  evidence  of  the  required  sand  base.  Some  amendment  to  the  rain   gardens  is  necessary,  probably  augured  holes  filled  with  gravel.  Soil  erosion  from  the   construction  site  of  the  facilities  being  constructed  at  this  time  is  also  unacceptable  and  soil   erosion  control  mechanisms  are  necessary  and  should  be  put  in  place.  B.  Uhlman  recommended   hay  bales  to  contain  the  flow  of  muddy  water  and  asked  if  we  could  obtain  some  assistance   from  the  contractor  to  rectify  the  rain  garden  problems.  B.  Vogel  responded  that  the  contractor   will  not  be  asked  to  do  that.  When  the  settlement  with  the  contractor  is  finalized  it  may  be   possible  to  accomplish  some  more  of  the  items  that  are  incomplete  or  inadequate.  B.  Vogel   summarized  the  situation:   a. Stabilize  uphill  slopes   b. Soil  amendment  at  rain  gardens   c. Vegetative  amendment  (some  plants  installed  are  invasive  and  were  not  specified)   D.  Links  noted  that  when  the  slopes  are  stabilized  the  other  items  will  be  easier  to  resolve.  B.   Uhlman  noted  the  urgency  of  testing  the  run-­‐off  from  the  fields  and  that  it  is  also  running  off   into  the  wetlands,  along  with  silt.  If  a  test  was  done  and  any  filtering  for  remediation  was   necessary  then  it  could  be  included  in  the  contractor’s  scope  of  work.  S.  Stocker  noted  that   2      mosquitoes  are  breeding  in  the  standing  water.  D.  Links  responded  that  as  soon  as  the  PK  report   is  submitted  then  the  testing  can  take  place.   4. Solar  Power  and  the  Municipal  Electric  Utility:  B.  Uhlman  reported  on  a  public  meeting  regarding   solar  power.  The  Electric  Utility  Study  Group  was  not  supportive  of  changing  the  way  solar   power  is  metered—that  is,  going  to  net  metering—since  it  would,  in  effect,  be  subsidizing  those   with  solar  power.  There  are  eight  solar  residential  customers  at  this  time.  Each  is  saving  about   $90/month  compared  to  their  previous  costs  for  electricity.  Most  homeowners  use  4-­‐8  KW   systems.  If  the  metering  were  more  favorable  a  larger  number  of  homeowners  might  install   solar  panels—up  to  3  %  of  homeowners  have  installed  panels  in  some  municipalities.  The  spread   between  what  customers  pay  and  what  they  are  reimbursed  for  electricity  is  currently  19  cents   to  9  cents.  S.  Stocker  noted  that  we  could  install  up  to  500  KW  of  solar  in  this  municipality.  B.   Uhlman  noted  that  Morris  County  Improvement  Authority  has  an  opening  and  will  visit  the   proposed  municipal  sites  to  see  if  any  are  appropriate.   5. Anti-­‐idling  measures:  B.  Uhlman  reported  that  anti-­‐idling  measures  are  a  State  law  but  that   Madison  police  are  reluctant  to  enforce  it.  She  thought  that  perhaps  the  Sustainable  Madison   group  could  help.  One  member  is  very  knowledgeable  about  vehicular  traffic  issues.  J.  Greene   asked  if  it  might  be  possible  to  obtain  support  from  the  Council  regarding  signs  at  the  schools   and  regarding  instructing  the  police  to  ask  people  to  stop  idling  in  the  pickup  areas  of  the   schools.  B.  Vogel  noted  that  it  was  largely  a  matter  of  public  education.  B.  Uhlman  noted  that  it   was  a  matter  of  education  of  residents  and  also  education  of  police  in  Chatham  where  anti-­‐ idling  is  now  being  enforced.  She  noted  that  the  Chatham  police  learned  from  the  Summit  police   and  asked  if  perhaps  Madison  police  could  learn  from  Chatham  police.  A  motion  was  made  that   the  MEC  will  draft  a  resolution  to  go  to  Council  to  cover  this  issue.  J.  Greene  volunteered  to   draft  the  resolution.   6. Sustainable  Madison  Developments:    B.  Uhlman  reported  that  Sustainable  Madison  was   established  and  that  the  members  are:   D.  Links,  Council  member  and  coordinator  to  Council   B.  Uhlman,  member  of  MEC  and  coordinator  to  MEC   J.  Burnet,  Assistant  Borough  Administrator   B.  Vogel,  Borough  Engineer   D.  Maines,  DPW   J.  Trause,  Madison  School  representative   Sandra  Gaurin,  (has  experience  supporting  Sustainable  Jersey  in  other  communities)   Kathleen  Caccavale,  grant  writer  and  author   3      Heather  Shepard,  originally  from  San  Diego,  worked  on  clean  energy  and  clean  cars   Harriet  Honigfield,  runs  the  farm  trust  in  Monmouth  County  and  well  versed  in  land  use  issues   Steve  Eget,  from  Madison’s  solar  power  subcommittee   Ben  Wolkowitz,  also  from  Madison’s  solar  power  subcommittee.   B.  Vogel  noted  that  he  had  a  collection  of  sustainable  infrastructure  articles  that  he  would   circulate  to  the  group.   7. Fund  raising:  B.  Uhlman  noted  that,  with  the  assistance  of  Project  Porchlight  $400  has  been   raised.  And  that  the  funds  raised  from  the  Green  Fair  are  available,  when  needed.     8. Rosenet  addresses  and  MEC  page  on  rosenet:  B.  Uhlman  noted  that  everyone  should  now  have   a  rosenet  address  and  should  start  using  it.  Also  that  accessing  and  updating  the  MEC  page  on   rosenet  is  not  difficult  and  she  encouraged  people  to  learn.   9. Storm  water  issues:  S.  Niculescu  asked  about  the  issues  of  the  infiltration  and  inflow  of  storm   water  into  the  sewer  system.  What  is  the  plan  to  control/reduce  this  problem?  B.  Vogel   responded  that  some  communities  do  a  C  of  O  inspection  when  a  property  changes  hands.   Madison  does  not  do  this.  But  if  we  did  it  might  be  an  opportunity  to  check  the  outflow  of  sump   pumps  and  rain  leaders.  He  further  reported  that  written  material  explaining  the  issue  was  sent   to  the  residences  served  by  the  North  Street  pumping  station  (the  one  with  the  most  critical   issues  right  now)  and  those  inspections  are  starting  with  a  view  to  determining  which  residences   might  have  a  problem  and  getting  that  problem  rectified.   10. Executive  Session  in  March:  D.  Links  called  an  executive  session  in  order  to  discuss  the   membership  of  the  Sustainable  Madison  group.  The  concerns,  as  discussed  by  the  group  as  a   whole,  were  on  several  levels:   a. To  maintain  a  close  link  to  the  Madison  Environmental  Commission   b. To  obtain  involvement  of  the  appropriate  Borough  Departments,  at  the  appropriate  level   (sufficiently  high  up  to  have  impact  on  the  running  of  the  Department)   c. To  limit  the  involvement  of  the  various  Borough  Departments  so  that  it  does  not  become  an   additional  burden  to  Borough  employees  who  are  already  overworked  and,  at  times,   stretched  thin.    To  this  end  it  was  decided  that  many  Borough  Department  heads  could  be   invited  to  attend  a  specific  meeting  to  discuss  a  specific  issue  on  an  as  needed  basis  and  that   most  do  not  need  to  be  standing  members  of  the  committee.     11. Meeting  adjourned:    The  meeting  was  adjourned  at  9:10  pm.       4