July 30, 2025, Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM Page 109 to 112 of 130 28 of 33 sheets 109 one thing, degrading an existing full forest is quite1 another. To create a microforest because you don't have2 any, that's a different question from destroying one3 that exists.4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Actually it was using5 parts of the forest. Also there's information based on6 the National Forestry Service about this, how you can7 upgrade a forest with a microforest. There's many8 tentacles to this and we would like to find out more9 about it.10 MR. AFRAN: I have no objection to finding11 out through experts. Just suddenly publically just12 talking about it.13 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: It just came to light.14 MS. McGOVERN: It was just in The New York15 Times last week and it seemed applicable to a lot of16 different projects in town.17 MR. PLOCKER: So Chairman Bagoff, if we18 could review the article, I'll get in contact with Ms.19 McGovern.20 MR. AFRAN: Would you please send me the21 article. I didn't see it.22 MS. McGOVERN: Sure.23 MR. AFRAN: I think it's an open question to24 relevance but let's review it.25 110 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.1 You're on, sir.2 MR. AFRAN: Yes, okay. So I did not reach3 Mr. Goll, but I'll -- we'll talk about that at the end.4 So Mr. Pannullo wishes to speak to certain issues. My5 feeling is that I'm not in a position to say you can't.6 I don't I have that type of control over anybody. He7 will proffer certain documents, I don't think it matters8 who proffers them, if the board does not wish him to,9 Mr. Chairman you can say so, I can proffer them. And he10 has certain other matters he wishes to address. So I am11 not in a position of saying yes or no.12 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: If it comes as public13 comment we're going to stop it.14 MR. AFRAN: I think it relates more to the15 manner of going forward and procedure and he believes16 certain things need to be stated in addition to17 proffering certain documents.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: The procedure is the19 function of the board and attorney, so if there's issues20 of how things should go that's a question for the board21 attorney.22 MR. AFRAN: I can only say Mr. Pannullo,23 after speaking with me, wishes to go forward and I don't24 have any ability to say to anyone that they --25 111 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Let's go forward. We'll1 see what happens.2 MR. PLOCKER: Well, what documents are we3 talking about?4 MS. McGOVERN: I don't know.5 MR.

any ability to say to anyone that they --25 111 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Let's go forward. We'll1 see what happens.2 MR. PLOCKER: Well, what documents are we3 talking about?4 MS. McGOVERN: I don't know.5 MR. AFRAN: He will read them off.6 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We don't know.7 MR. AFRAN: They're in that e-mail actually.8 MR. PLOCKER: Which I don't have, for the9 record. Can I receive -- can I get the e-mail.10 MS. McGOVERN: The e-mail should have been11 sent to you.12 MR. FAGAN: I can put it up on the screen.13 MR. PLOCKER: Can I see it.14 MR. AFRAN: Not all of it's relevant to this15 particular portion.16 MS. McGOVERN: Let's send the e-mail to Mr.17 Plocker.18 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Send it to Mr. Plocker.19 We're not going put it up.20 Mr. Pannullo.21 MS. McGOVERN: Please raise your right-hand.22 Do swear to tell the truth the whole truth nothing but23 the truth.24 THE WITNESS: I do.25 112 MS. McGOVERN: Put your full name on the1 record, please.2 THE WITNESS: Joseph Pannullo.3 MS. McGOVERN: Your address.4 THE WITNESS: 200-foot notice area. Essex5 Fells.6 J O S E P H P A N N U L L O, having been7 duly sworn under oath testifies as follows:8 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Sir. I said go ahead.9 THE PUBLIC: Simply the first issue, the10 documents should already be in the hands of everyone11 here, because they are a series of e-mails that started12 prior to today which is the first anniversary of the13 first hearing, July 30. But we all know there were two14 hearing dates that were set prior, July 16 and 17th and15 those dates were cancelled and they were cancelled not16 on the record anywhere, that's why I'm asking that these17 be made part of the application. The application was18 approved June 25, these are just e-mails and19 correspondence. You already got them. I'm on the20 e-mails, Bill Potter's on the e-mails, Diana McGovern is21 on the e-mails, the Planning Boards on the e-mails, even22 counsels on the e-mail. You got them already. They're23 just not in evidence in the record in this application24 prior to the first hearing, but from the date it was25

29 of 33 sheets Page 113 to 116 of 130 09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM 113 filed. That's real simple. And I would just like them1 in the record. You already got them. They're not2 marked, they're not noticed, they're not even3 identified.4 MR. PLOCKER: Again, I'm going to object.5 If they want documents in the record the objector has6 counsel.7 THE PUBLIC: Well, I would like to hear from8 the Chair and the Planning Board attorney if necessary9 because they're already on record, they're just not in10 the record.11 MS. McGOVERN: So you're talking about the12 meetings that happened -- that never happened, because13 it was cancelled. You're talking about meetings that14 never happened because they were cancelled. So they're15 not part of the record.16 MR. AFRAN: We're arguing --17 MS. McGOVERN: A whole new notice went out18 and it was begun, I don't remember the exact date, I19 don't have my notes. But whatever took place before it20 never got started, so it's not part of the record.21 THE PUBLIC: But it should be part of the22 application filed June 25.23 MS. McGOVERN: No. No.24 THE PUBLIC: Why?25 114 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Because the application1 wasn't presented.2 MS. McGOVERN: At that point -- I know what3 you're talking about. You're talking about the4 ordinance that was drafted and approved by the council,5 they neglected to send it to the county planning board.6 THE PUBLIC: Right.7 MS. McGOVERN: And that was corrected and so8 then this started after that was corrected. So whatever9 took place before has no relevance to this.10 THE PUBLIC: Well, then why would it not be11 part of the application from the date it was filed?12 MS. McGOVERN: Because it's not relevant.13 It's got nothing to do with us going forward with this14 that started last July.15 THE PUBLIC: Okay. Well, so they won't be16 marked, they won't be part of the record of these17 hearings?18 MS. McGOVERN: Correct.19 THE PUBLIC: Okay.20 MR. AFRAN: Let me clarify one thing, if I21 may. I can profer them and have them marked for22 identification purposes, even if the board declines to23 admit them into evidence.24 MS. McGOVERN: You want to do that, yes.25 115 MR. AFRAN: And I can do that at a certain1 point.2 MS. McGOVERN: Absolutely.3 THE PUBLIC: Fine. Thank you.4 This is an ongoing discussion for some5 reason, and I'm not sure why. But the last minutes6 transcripts that were posted in this matter were

.2 MS. McGOVERN: Absolutely.3 THE PUBLIC: Fine. Thank you.4 This is an ongoing discussion for some5 reason, and I'm not sure why. But the last minutes6 transcripts that were posted in this matter were in7 January. Our experts didn't begin until February, there8 are no transcripts. I understand we're supposed to9 listen to audio, that's great. Some of us are impaired,10 that's okay. I'm one of them by the way. It's not of11 any use in this room, because I can't hear anyway. But12 there are no transcripts released since January. Our13 experts began testifying in February. Our experts at14 some point will rely on other experts, there's no15 minutes in the record, there's no transcripts.16 As far as minutes are concerned, the17 Planning Boards own rules and procedures and Municipal18 Land Use Law call for minutes. This is the only19 application in town that doesn't have minutes and I20 pointed out an e-mail which was sent out earlier this21 week, there's an application here that's got one single22 family, 75 pages worth of minutes taken at a couple of23 meetings for one lot. You all must be familiar with it.24 They're special meetings. We've been here for 1625 116 meetings, there's no minutes. How is that a proper1 record in conformance with this the Municipal Land Use2 Law. I cited it for you, the Planning Boards own rules3 and procedures. How is that okay, and if it's not okay4 and this night is going to be different than every other5 night, I'd like that on the record. That's all.6 MS. McGOVERN: Let me respond.7 THE PUBLIC: We would like minutes taken and8 certified and issued so we can see them. Transcripts9 are insufficient and they're not timely.10 MS. McGOVERN: The transcripts are11 sufficient.12 THE PUBLIC: Well, they're sufficient --13 MS. McGOVERN: Under the statute that14 requires minutes, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-9 Section C, "Minutes15 of every regular or special meeting shall be kept and16 shall include the names of persons appearing and17 addressing the municipal agency and of the persons18 appearing by attorney, the action taken by the municipal19 agency, the findings, if any, made by it and reasons20 therefor." What the transcript provides is all of that21 necessary information and then some. And what we have22 is case law that then goes into interpreting that and in23 a reported decision, Mahwa Reality Associates v.24 Township of Mahwa, decided on July

necessary information and then some. And what we have22 is case law that then goes into interpreting that and in23 a reported decision, Mahwa Reality Associates v.24 Township of Mahwa, decided on July 5, 2011 and cited in25

09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM Page 117 to 120 of 130 30 of 33 sheets 117 the Cox book which -- with approval, it's cited from the1 Cox book and it's 420 NY Super 341, which a2 certification was denied by the Supreme Court. So in3 other words, they were satisfied with what the Appellate4 Division ruled. The Cox book reaffirms that you don't5 have to describe every detail that happens but it6 specifically said, the fact that -- the fact that --7 recognizing that all though the practice of keeping a8 verbatim record of every everything is of value, it is9 not required. So we are going above and beyond what is10 required by the statute when we set forth these11 transcripts. So we have more than satisfied the12 requirements from the minutes. There might be a delay13 in getting them done, the transcripts I believe are --14 we have more minutes that are getting approved, I think15 that take us up to April. Is that right? That are16 going to get approved at our regular meeting. Our next17 regular meeting is next week. We are going above and18 beyond what the statute requires. So I take issue with19 your description that no minutes have ever been20 produced. Because they have been produced since last21 July 2024 through to currently January or February and22 then the balance of them through April or will be23 admitted next week.24 THE PUBLIC: Planning Boards own procedures,25 118 rules and procedures, was this Planning Board 3.021 special meetings, special hearing devoted to exclusively2 to the consideration of the specific application may be3 requested by an applicant, blah, blah, blah. Such4 hearing only scheduled at the discretion of the board.5 Hearing minutes three hours in duration. Special6 meetings -- I'm sorry. I'm reading from the wrong7 pages. Section 2.03, Secretary. "Secretary shall,8 under the direction of the Chair generally perform9 secretarial work for the board, including but not10 limited to among other things --" I'm sorry. 4,11 "Arrange to make a tape recording as a record of the12 proceedings of each hearing of the board in accordance13 with the rules and keep minutes of the proceedings of14 each meeting, including work meetings and hearing held15 by the board and to enter therein." These minutes are,16 shall, that's your own procedures.17 MS. McGOVERN: Yeah, we followed them.18 That's part of the statute.19 THE PUBLIC: No, transcripts are

ld15 by the board and to enter therein." These minutes are,16 shall, that's your own procedures.17 MS. McGOVERN: Yeah, we followed them.18 That's part of the statute.19 THE PUBLIC: No, transcripts are not20 minutes. I'm sorry. They may seem sufficient for21 appeal in a court, that's great, but they're written22 four to a page, they're five, six, seven months late, we23 don't see them. That's not sufficient for our experts24 to just listen to audio, thank you by the way to bill by25 119 the hour, these things are expensive, that's fine. But1 Municipal Land Use Law 4:55D-10.5, the regulations of2 certain governing review application not withstanding3 any provision law from the contrary. Those development4 regulations in effect of the date, I think it was 9C.5 40:55D-9C, I can pull it out for you here, but I sent it6 out to you the other day --7 MS. McGOVERN: And I just quoted it to you8 from 40:55-9C. That was what I just read.9 THE PUBLIC: -- the cases that applied.10 So I guess the discretion of the board to11 conform with any set of rules you would like. This is12 the largest application in town, it's maybe one of the13 longest opposed applications unfortunately and the14 ability for people to hear, to see, to come and be15 present, our experts, we've got more people to come but16 we're having a hell of a time trying to keep track17 what's in the record for our own experts. It's not18 there. Timely minutes, transcripts at the expense of19 the developer if you'd like, that's great. But that20 doesn't replace minutes and it doesn't give a record of21 the actions of the board.22 MS. McGOVERN: It does. It replaces minutes23 and it gives every single action of the board, every24 objection that was made, every objection that was25 120 sustained, every objection that was overruled. Every1 decision of the board, every person who's testified,2 who's providing information, that's contained in the3 transcript. It's better than minutes in a typical sense4 of the word.5 THE PUBLIC: So would it be fair to say6 before this board concludes these hearings and before7 this boards comes to it's own resolution and8 disposition, those -- all of those transcripts will have9 been approved and in the record before that happens?10 MS. McGOVERN: I am sure that we will have11 approved as many of the minutes as we can. If the12 transcript hasn't been provided to us yet, no, we

been approved and in the record before that happens?10 MS. McGOVERN: I am sure that we will have11 approved as many of the minutes as we can. If the12 transcript hasn't been provided to us yet, no, we can't13 approve it. Obviously.14 THE PUBLIC: So will there be a complete15 record of these hearings before you come to a decision.16 MS. McGOVERN: That's not the requirement.17 The requirement is that we get timely minutes and we are18 doing that.19 THE PUBLIC: Okay. So when the hearing is20 over, it is done, when will we know actually when we're21 getting a complete record?22 MS. McGOVERN: If you take an appeal you'll23 have a complete record. You can make a request for it24 and we would've already provided it to you.25

31 of 33 sheets Page 121 to 124 of 130 09/16/2025 06:29:53 AM 121 THE PUBLIC: Okay. So I appreciate the1 time. So I'm going to guess that these hearings will2 not go six or seven more months, I hope, but the3 transcripts that don't exist in the record from January4 until what's this week, August, we'll assign and maybe5 we'll see something. But then before it's all over they6 will get done. But it's notable the discretion or the7 difference, the inequity of what we have to deal with8 and I just want to make sure that's clear now because9 we're dealing with the complications of it. That's all.10 MS. McGOVERN: I understand that but, you11 know, one of the holdups have been we have been waiting12 for documents that were brought in at the last minute on13 your end of the case. Objectors side of the case. And14 they weren't supplied. And we can't post a complete15 record if we don't have the documents. And they're in16 your possession, that's why we've asked, yes, you're not17 subject to the ten-day rule like the applicant, but if18 you're going to start introducing stuff at the hearing19 and then we have to wait to have it sent a week, a month20 or so later, that causes a delay as well.21 THE PUBLIC: I appreciate that. I learned22 about that a few weeks ago. I have presented some to23 Jamilet and she's catching up with it. I didn't know24 about it. If there's anything missing, I don't see25 122 communications, but I'm here certainly enough and I did1 provide what I could and I do think there's one2 outstanding. Anyway, I appreciate your forbearance. I3 do thank you and public comment, I am a fact witness,4 I'm not an expert, there are things that came out5 tonight. We're good. I appreciate the good grace.6 Thank you.7 MR. PLOCKER: Mr. Chairman.8 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Mr. Plocker.9 MR. PLOCKER: Mr. Chairman, just for the10 record, to be clear that, this is our court reporter11 here and we've had a court reporter every meeting, those12 transcripts are eventually prepared and sent out to us,13 when we receive them we do send them into the board14 secretary.15 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you.16 Okay. Mr. Afran.17 MR. AFRAN: You know, I -- following along18 the lines of that, all though it wouldn't be official,19 if Mr. Plocker could copy me that would actually allow20 me to send them to my client quickly and possibly21 eliminate some of the issue.22 MR. PLOCKER: Should I send

though it wouldn't be official,19 if Mr. Plocker could copy me that would actually allow20 me to send them to my client quickly and possibly21 eliminate some of the issue.22 MR. PLOCKER: Should I send the invoice to23 you or should my client?24 MR. AFRAN: It's irrelevant, if the board is25 123 using these as minutes, I ain't paying for it.1 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you very much for2 the comment. Okay.3 MR. AFRAN: I have one quick question --4 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Yes, sir.5 MR. AFRAN: -- concerning what we were6 discussing earlier. If Mr. Plocker's client is going to7 commit to funding for any additional expertise8 concerning forestry, I'd appreciate being copied on any9 communications simultaneously so I know, you know, what10 is happening, when, and possibly the extent of the11 funding being proposed.12 I would also note I have a series of doubt13 about the relevance of this question of microforests. I14 know something about this subject, and they're generally15 scientific tools designed to study the stresses on --16 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Let's not testify.17 MR. AFRAN: No, no. I'm not testifying.18 MR. PLOCKER: Yes, you are.19 MR. AFRAN: I'm raising an issue of20 relevance. Well, then I won't speak of personal21 knowledge except the following --22 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Well, then what I'm going23 to say is, submit your request to the Planning Board,24 the Planning Board will decide if the information is25 124 relevant or not.1 MR. AFRAN: Well, you had a discussion2 discussing how it was relevant. I do want to point out3 why I think it's not and the scientific tools designed4 to study how to avoid stresses on forests. For example5 in the Amazon they're sometimes intentionally created to6 study that question. That is not relevant to the7 question of the environmental harm from destroying an8 existing forest and I'll raise a strong objection to9 offering testimony about studies from microforest10 experiments in order to evaluate whether we should be11 destroying --12 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: We're not there.13 MR. AFRAN: Okay. I'm just rising an issue14 of relevancy at the earliest opportunity.15 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: If it comes up then you16 can object, I understand that. But we're not there yet,17 so.18 MR. AFRAN: I want to make it clear what our19 position will be.20 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Okay.21 MR. AFRAN: Okay.22 CHAIRMAN BAGOFF: Thank you. Appreciate23 that.24 MR. AFRAN: We are done