April 5, 2017

Motion: Chairman Bagoff Second: Vice Chairman Klein Cardoza: Yes Eben: Yes Ghebremicael: - Klein: Yes Keigher: Yes McCartney: Yes Trenk: - Wegner: Yes Weston: Yes Wilkes: Yes Bagoff: Yes Chairman Bagoff stated the last time the Board undertook the Reexamination of the Master Plan the Board sent out a Request for Proposal (RFP) advertisement; several firms submitted proposals, the Board chose Phillips Preiss Grygiel. Eventually Mr. Grygiel became the lead Planner on that 2010 Reexamination; and subsequently he became out Township Planner. Chairman Bagoff advised the Board he had sought the opinion of Township Attorney, if it would be within the within the law and reasonable, to entertain the thought of re-hiring Mr. Grygiel’s firm. He stated his reasoning was that Mr. Grygiel also sat on the (Township) Zoning Board; Mr. Grygiel knew what had transpired between 2010 and present day. Chairman Bagoff stated he was very satisfied with Mr. Grygiel’s work; personally, the Board in general, the Zoning Board and the Township. Chairman Bagoff stated if an outside firm were hired, it would be starting from zero. Mr. Grygiel had an understanding of the nuances of the Township over the past ten years that would be advantageous and economically feasible to maximize a budget, and the use of his time. Chairman Bagoff stated he would entertain any discussion from the Board on the matter. Mr. Weston asked for clarification regarding the response from the Township Attorney. Chairman Bagoff stated the response from the Township Attorney was there was no conflict of interest or no reason under the law that the Board could not hire (Phillips Preiss Grygiel). Chairman Bagoff stated he also sought advice from Mr. Dwyer, who said it would be reasonable to get an opinion from the Township Attorney. The Board discussed the issue and agreed it was a good idea to re-hire (Phillips Preiss Grygiel). The Public Advocate had no objection to re-hiring (Phillips Preiss Grygiel). (Council President) Joe Krakoviak, 20 Grandview Avenue was sworn in. He asked if there was an actual (monetary) number associated with the Resolution. He stated it would help the Council in determining the budget allocation; the statutory budget hearing was this coming Saturday. Additionally, he understood the value of considering a single proposal, and then deciding on whether to consider other competing

dget allocation; the statutory budget hearing was this coming Saturday. Additionally, he understood the value of considering a single proposal, and then deciding on whether to consider other competing proposals, but that process would always leave an unknown. It was his opinion to solicit all proposals at the same time, and then compare what the world offered as compared to just one firm. Chairman Bagoff stated the Board was now under a time crunch. He recommended the Board take Council President Krakoviak’s suggestion under advisement, and still ask for the Resolution to be adopted. He asked Mr. Grygiel to supply the Board with a rough (monetary) number to work backwards with before the next Council meeting. Councilwoman McCartney stated that Mr. Grygiel could submit to Council a proposal stating an “amount not to exceed”. Chairman Bagoff requested Mr. Grygiel provide Mr. Dwyer with the proposal amount by the next day. Mr. Weston stated the Board had not yet hired Mr. Grygiel’s firm; the Board was looking for a budget number, not an “amount not to exceed”; the Board needed to present a budget number to Council. Chairman Bagoff asked if in the last three years, Mr. Grygiel’s firm had performed a reexamination for a municipality that was similar in size to West Orange. Mr. Grygiel stated that in the last five years he had prepared reports as varied as a basic document costing $7,500, to full a reexamination costing $25,000-$30,000. His records indicated the 2010 proposal for the Township was $40,000, plus additional fees for new maps drawn from scratch as well as sustainability elements. He stated that many elements would not have to be re-done. He estimated the cost of a thorough reexamination would be approximately $30,000. Mr. Weston suggested the Board make a motion to request a $30,000 budget. Councilwoman McCartney stated she 7