Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee

Posted on March 5, 2017 March 5, 2017

Still No Word on Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Meeting Generally Excepted Industry Standards

file photo by Boyd Loving

March 5,2017

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, readers are questioning why has the Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee still not met commonly accepted standards used throughout the world?

While the rumor and innuendo spending in an attempt to undermine the Mayor and the current council are being sprinkled around town, the fact is the Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee continues not to meet the most minimum commonly excepted practices in the Finance and accounting industries.

This taints any advice given by the committee and could open the Village to a whole host of law suits.

Once again in order for the Financial Advisory Committee to be an effective part of the Village governance the following criteria have to be met:

Publish clear and realistic by-laws
Post agenda’s of all meetings
Post minutes of all meetings promptly
All members must sign Financial disclosure forms
All members must sign NDA’s or non-disclosure forms

These are professional standards that are used and commonly accepted everywhere in the world.

Posted on February 2, 2017 February 1, 2017

Reader says The Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee is NOT a financial decision body and does not make binding decisions

Agreed on the criteria listed for governance of the FAC, but the post above seems to be a deliberate attempt to mislead people. The FAC is NOT a financial decision body and does not make binding decisions. Their sole purpose is to offer independent, expert advice to the Council members on financial matters including budgeting, municipal tax policy, contract negotiations, and long-term financial planning for capital improvements to the Village. Ridgewood has many talented residents with financial, tax, contract law and budgeting experience. These people are tax paying residents just like all of us and are willing to volunteer their time to give their advice on how the Council can make better financial decisions on behalf of all taxpayers. Why wouldn’t Council members want this?

Posted on January 12, 2017 January 20, 2019

Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Pushed Parking Plan and Fee Increase

January 12,2017

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, Jeff Voigt missing in action (most likely because he knew room would be filled with commuters who were pissed off at the price increase for commuter parking – a plan developed & supported by the FAC, of which Jeff is the Village Council liaison).

After listening to all the comments, we do believe a 1000 dollar premier parking permit is too much. In two years it has gone from 600 dollars to 750 to the current 1000. Glen Rock was said to be 150 dollars and HoHoKus was around 375. 1000 dollars seems pretty steep

Posted on January 8, 2017 January 8, 2017

RIDGEWOOD FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

January 8,2017

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ ,the clearly stated responsibilities of the Financial Advisory Committee (FAC) , yet are we the only ones who see no evidence that the FAC is meeting its responsibilities?

The Committee shall assist the Village Council by marshaling and channeling its expertise and insight to complement the judgment of the Village Council and Village management with respect to financial matters.

The Committee shall identify both short- and long-term financial challenges. As potential issues are raised, the Committee shall study selected issue(s) at its own initiative and at the request of the Village Council and recommend solutions/potential actions to the Village Council

FINANCIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Resolutions:
13-88
14-171

Members:

NAME TERM EXPIRES

Charles DiMarco 6/30/17

Alex Kisilevich 6/30/17

Brian Lahey 6/30/17

Evan Weitz – Chair 6/30/18

Rei Shinozuka 6/30/18

John Cavanaugh 6/30/19

David Hough 6/30/19

Robert Kotch 6/30/19

Councilman Jeff Voigt is the Council liaison

MISSION AND BY-LAWS

Establishment:

A new committee known as the “Financial Advisory Committee” was created by the Village Council of the Village of Ridgewood on April 24, 2013, by Resolution No. 13-88.

Duties and Responsibilities:

The Committee is hereby charged with the following duties and responsibilities:

The Committee shall assist the Village Council by marshaling and channeling its expertise and insight to complement the judgment of the Village Council and Village management with respect to financial matters.

The Committee shall identify both short- and long-term financial challenges. As potential issues are raised, the Committee shall study selected issue(s) at its own initiative and at the request of the Village Council and recommend solutions/potential actions to the Village Council.

The Committee shall have ongoing responsibility for the following:
1. Analyze and evaluate the annual Village budget process (expense and capital) and the resultant budget, to advise the Village Council in their decision-making process to ensure that necessary revenues are raised in an equitable manner and that taxes are spent effectively and efficiently.
2. Review the quarterly financial reports and the current year’s revenue and expenditure projections.
3. Advise on the development and implementation of effective financial reporting policies and procedures for the Village Council and Village management that build upon and retain the public’s faith and trust in the Village’s policies and procedures.
4. Assist in the review and improvement of organizational structures and recurring contracts arrangements, including collective bargaining agreements, with due regard for applicable legal requirements governing civil service, procurement and labor relations.
5. Provide an annual report to the Council.

The Committee may also perform the following:
1. Study critical issues and perform independent research to formulate and develop thoughtful and well-developed recommendations on strategies and opportunities.
2. Provide a forum for community education and discussion concerning the financial condition of the Village and various alternatives for improvement.

Meetings:

The Committee shall meet once per month and/or on an as-needed basis. Decisions shall be made by consensus and if necessary, by majority vote. The minutes for regular monthly meetings shall be kept, transcribed, and made available to the Village and Council and such other Village officials as the Village Manager shall direct. Public comment will be requested at the beginning of a meeting and will be capped at 3 minutes per person; public comment will not exceed 15 minutes. The Committee may also hold closed working sessions as needed.

Composition and Terms:

The Committee shall comprise up to nine (9) regular members of the public appointed by the Village Council, a liaison from the Village Council, and a liaison from the Department of Finance of the Village at the discretion of the Council and the Village Manager. The public members of the Committee shall be appointed on July 1 of each calendar year and serve for a term of three (3) years, with the exception of the initial Committee appointed as of July 1, 2013, with three members appointed for a term of three (3) years, two members appointed for a term of two (2) years, and two members appointed for a term of one (1) year.

If a public member resigns, the Village Council shall appoint a replacement as

soon as possible to serve out the remainder of his/her term. The Financial Advisory Committee, through the Village Council liaison, will provide input into this process.

Posted on May 14, 2016 May 13, 2016

Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Political Hacks or Valuable Input?

May 13,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, a reader said the ,Financial Advisory Committee was created by the mayor solely as a breeding ground for future council members willing to live in his shadow and image. It didn’t work. Disband it!

The leadership of Financial Advisory Committee is there just to stamp the Village Manager’s decisions. So she can say ‘an expert panel has looked at it and they agree with my approach”. She comes from the corporate word and knows how to put everything on outside ‘consultants’.

Its beyond funny that the Chairman of FAC, a candidate for the council election, Weitz is not even a finance guy. He is an attorney and we have seen how good attorneys are on the council (Albert). Try asking him some finance questions. May be he will do better than the CFO?

Inorder to save the committee the FAC needs to have bylaws and minutes and a clause that prohibits members from running for public office while serving. THe VM needs direction, goals and an evaluation after a specified time. She needs to be held accountable for the administration and operations of the Village. There can no longer be selective ordinance enforcement. The Village Attorney, PB attorney should be evaluated and if necessary replaced. The assistant VM should be evaluated and if needed replaced. The new Council needs to be prudent but decisive in their actions. Let’s not replicate the mistakes of the past.

The election is over. The new council needs to stabilize the governance of the municipality by vesting the village operational authority in the VM where it belongs by law and holding her accountable for the execution.

Posted on April 18, 2016 April 17, 2016

Whats the Role of the Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee in Raising Taxes

file photo by Boyd Loving

April 18,2016
the satff of the Rmidgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, from the “Take Back Ridgewood ” Facebook page,put forth a very taxing matter. According to “Take Back Ridgewood ” , “Our taxes are going UP this year. Public hearings on the new tax rates are not scheduled until May 11th (May 10th is the election date).

Since “two council candidates Evan Weitz and Janice Willett and ranking members of the Financial Advisory Committee;
when they knock at your door to ask for your vote, please remember to ask them about their role in Financial Advisory Committee and raising our taxes.

Also ask them why the news about tax increase is not being shared with the residents until May 11th. Please share and spread the word, so everyone can make an informed decision on May 10th.”

Posted on April 4, 2016 April 4, 2016

Reader asks is the Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee nothing more than a group to Promote the Mayors Agenda

Ridgewood_-Village_Hall_theridgewoodblog

Can we start a thread on the Financial Advisory Committee?

What is their mission? Are they supposed to be a nonpolitical group? Is it the bull pen for council positions?
How did the committee get so big? Who appointed them?
Will their job ever be complete or will they hang around forever?

We sincerely hope that the current Village Council will have the wisdom and
courage to act, thereby avoiding the urgency for another “independent” review of the Vil
lage budget and management process in the future.

Our committee focused only on the municipal budget and practices, not the Board of Education (BOE). Since
the BOE budget represents 64% of the property tax burden in Ridgewood, we hope that this report wi
ll also serve as a template for the BOE to establish a similar process for cost and efficiency improvements
.
Given the time and resource constraints mentioned earlier, the report is not an exhaustive study, but attempts to raise
issues and make actionable recommendations for the Village Council’s immediate attention and further
consideration. We held almost 50 hours of meetings, including with current and past Village representatives
and various Village constituents. We met with consultants in municipal government operational efficiency and
studied all of the Village’s collective bargaining agreements.

Finally, we carefully reviewed the Village’s budget trends over the past 10 years to understand key budget influences and, more importantly, what they tell us about Ridgewood’s future liabilities. Collectively, our Committee devoted hundreds of hours in an
effort to deliver recommendations that we hope will have great value for Ridgewood taxpayers.

While our committee has no authority to enact any of our recommendations, we appreciate and are honored
to have the opportunity to serve our community in this manner. We took the responsibility of Mayor
Aronsohn’s mandate seriously. We respectfully submit the following recommendations to the Village Council
with the hope that you will make every effort to act on them fully and expeditiously. We wish to be clear that
these recommendations do not, necessarily, represent the unanimous opinion of all members of our
committee. However, they do represent the consensus of the committee. It is the opinion of the committee that the consequences of failing to act on these recommendations have never been more momentous or urgent for the sustainability of our Village, as we know it, and for the rising fiscal burden on Village taxpayers.

The Members of the 2012 Financial Advisory Committee (alphabetically)
Rich Barclay
Bayard DeI\/Iallie
Ed Feldsott
Nancy Johansen *
Charlie Kime
John Maxwell
Jim McCarthy
David Sabath
Jim Schimmei
Fran Shovlìn
Roberta Sonenfeld *
Bob Zeller

Nothing above gives the FAC authority to submit letters to the editor and promote the agenda of the mayor.

That was the 2012 roster. Are they all still on? Some of them are just wanna-bees. No real financial expertise. A couple have oversized egos but can’t even manage their personal finances

Posted on March 27, 2016 March 27, 2016

Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee sends out Erroneous Email

photo by Saurabh Dani

March 26,2016

the staff of the Ridgewood blog

Ridgewood NJ, , a member of Financial Advisory Committee sent out a mass email. It says “Last Wednesday the Village Council unanimously approved funding a parking garage on Hudson Street. It will be funded by Ridgewood (not the county), and it reflects an updated design that seeks to address concerns of residents, including removing a level.”This is just not true. Plan D and Plan A have

SAME number of stories, same number of levels. Plan D is only couple of feet lower than plan A, because it removes the cantilever, so a supporting beam of somewhere between 2-3 feet was removed.

Huge lie in first paragraph! “including removing a level”

Another lie in 2nd paragraph. This petition will have binding referendum question on November ballot. That will cost ZERO. No special election with this petition.

If you received that email, please check the facts yourself before believing it.Unfortunately, there is too much misinformation being spread from some council members, village officials and members of FAC / HPC etc.

Lets ask them to provide Ridgewood residents correct facts on size and street encroachment, and if residents still want to proceed without changes, it’s fine, but please don’t provide incorrect information.

How does someone in a position of authority get away with sending this?

Friends —

Last Wednesday the Village Council unanimously approved funding a parking garage on Hudson Street. It will be funded by Ridgewood (not the county), and it reflects an updated design that seeks to address concerns of residents, including removing a level.

Now, the group that opposed funding the garage through Bergen County is seeking to oppose this vote, even though the issues that arose through county funding no longer apply. They want an even smaller garage. As opposed to standing behind a reasonable compromise, they want to stop progress at all costs. They are asking residents to sign a petition to put the issue to a special referendum, which will create further delays and cost the Village about $45,000 to implement through a special election. Of course, a significant majority of Village residents already voted to support a garage in a special referendum last year.

I am a member of the Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee, and we analyzed the funding model for the garage. We recognize that a taller garage has aesthetic implications. Financially, however, a larger garage is more fiscally sound — more spaces create more revenue, and the marginal cost of each level is much lower than building the base of the structure. That’s why compromise is necessary and appropriate. I believe the current compromise is the best path forward for the Village.

Please don’t sign the petition. Tell your friends not to sign the petition Forward them this email. The group supporting the petition will be in Van Neste Square today seeking signatures — show up and tell them you support progress for Ridgewood.

Thanks.

Rich Cundiff

Posted on October 26, 2015 October 26, 2015

Readers call Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Conclusion on Hudson Street Parking Garage Questionable at Best

Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Concludes Hudson Street Parking Garage can be funded entirely by parking revenues. Well maybe they would like to sign a contract that they will be financially responsible for any shot falls of the garage for the term of the bond. That board both past and presents members are all tied in to the 3 amigos.

Timing alone of this released opinion is more than questionable.let them release the Data or withdraw these Statements.NO ONE GETS CALLED OUT ON ANYTHING IN RIDGEWOOD.We are talking Millions in underfunded liabilities including New village Emoloyees and associated Liabilities also for their Employment and Benefits Costs.

The scary issue is what utilization the garage has to achieve to cover its fixed cost ( salaries, debt service, etc.). If it covers with 50 % of spaces occupied during the day that might be OK, but if it takes 90%+, then we’re probably looking at a money pit.I don’t see where this issue was addressed by the FAC. As others have said, “can” is not the same as “will” or even ” will probably”

Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Concludes Hudson Street Parking Garage can be funded entirely by parking revenues
This title is misleading. Maybe it “can” be funded by parking revenues, but maybe it cannot. Maybe it “can” be if the rates go up town-wide, if the hours of paid parking are extended, if the lot is occupied 24/7…….or maybe even then it cannot be.

“We recognize that while parking revenues should cover the cost of the garage, funding the garage still creates an additional financial obligation for the Village, which would need to be met by other sources in the unlikely event that parking revenues fell short. However, we think the substantial benefits offered by a garage support taking on that obligation. * * *”

SHOULD is not the same as WILL. “IN THE UNLIKELY EVENT THAT PARKING REVENUES FELL SHORT” – If the economy tanks as it did in 2008, parking revenues WILL FALL SHORT and taxpayers will be stuck paying for this money pit.

Why wouldn’t they recommend a public private partnership (PPP) between the Village and business owners in the CBD? If it’s so beneficial to the Village’s core, wouldn’t business owners want to contribute to the cost of the garage? Village taxpayers will get better cost oversight from private business people than if it’s just the Village engineer overseeing it… $500,000 golden toilets anyone?

Posted on October 25, 2015 October 25, 2015

Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Concludes Hudson Street Parking Garage can be funded entirely by parking revenues

Statement of the Ridgewood Financial Advisory Committee Hudson Street Parking Garage

The Financial Advisory Committee (the “FAC”) of the Village of Ridgewood strongly supports the proposal to construct a parking garage at the site of the existing Hudson Street parking lot.

Members of the FAC have carefully reviewed the proposal, including discussions with Village management and a thorough review of the financial analysis prepared by Walker Parking Consultants (the “Walker Study”). Based on that review, we believe it is in the best interests of the Village to move forward with the project.

We would like to highlight the following points: The Walker Study substantiates the long-held belief of many of our residents that there is insufficient parking to adequately serve the Village core.

While there is ample anecdotal evidence that parking is difficult in downtown Ridgewood, the Walker Study provides factual confirmation based on observations of parking usage at different times and days of the week. We believe the methodology used in the Walker Study is reasonable and its findings accurate.

While there is excess capacity in parts of the Village, parking demand in the central core exceeds practical supply at nearly every key time of the day. As set forth in the Walker Study, the costs of the parking garage can be supported entirely by Village parking revenues, assuming small increases in parking rates and the extension of metered hours to 9 p.m.

The FAC conducted its own independent analysis of the costs and revenues associated with the proposed parking garage. Using very conservative assumptions (no new revenues, construction costs as high as $14 million and interest rates as high as 4%) the garage can still be funded entirely by parking revenues.

A new parking garage will have a significant positive economic impact on the Village. The new parking garage will enhance the attractiveness of existing stores and restaurants, encourage new businesses owners to choose Ridgewood, and modernize our parking infrastructure.

We recognize that while parking revenues should cover the cost of the garage, funding the garage still creates an additional financial obligation for the Village, which would need to be met by other sources in the unlikely event that parking revenues fell short. However, we think the substantial benefits offered by a garage support taking on that obligation. * * *

In its last annual report to the Village Council, the FAC stated that “addressing the Village’s parking problem is probably the single best thing the Council could do for the central business district.”

Parking has been an issue in Ridgewood for decades. Finally, we have an opportunity to address the parking problem, and thereby safeguard Ridgewood’s appeal as a destination for dining and shopping, and preserve the vibrancy of our central business district.
The FAC encourages you to vote “YES” for parking on November 3.