Page 10 THE VILLADOM TIMES I • May 9, 2012 Wyckoff Officials adopt salary ordinance, hear from residents by John Koster Last week, the Wyckoff Township Committee adopted the salary ordinance for town hall employees and heard from residents on a number of issues. The ordinance, which was adopted unanimously, provides salaries by ranges rather than by exact figures, and covers municipal employees who are not members of unions, but hold full-time or part-time jobs. The top salaries include up to $144,945 for the chief of police, up to $131,737 for the township administrator, up to $123,617 for the township engineer/building inspector, and up to $114,827 for the chief financial officer/assistant administrator/information technology officer. All three jobs are filled by one person. The recreation director receives up to $99,581. The construction code official/building code official receives up to $79,072. The tax collector receives up to $62,897, and the zoning enforcement officer/property maintenance officer and fire marshal receives up to $58,701 for all three jobs. The township clerk/administrative assistant receives $32,586 for the first job and $43,915 for the second. The senior civilian police dispatcher’s salary is up to $59,233, and the other dispatchers’ salaries are up to $41,507. The executive administrative assistant receives up to $47,107. Most of the other salaries covered were secretarial salaries in the mid-$40,000 range. The ordinance also covers part-time stipends and wage-hour salaries for part-time and summer help. Wyckoff reportedly has the lowest incident of employees to residents of any town in Bergen County, which is cited as a factor in keeping taxes comparatively reasonable. The concept of encourage senior employees to double up on job responsibilities reduces the number of pensions that must be covered and the number of salaries, even when an employee receives two or three increments for different responsibilities. There was no audience comment on the salary ordinance, which had been introduced with complete figures at a previous meeting. The public spoke once at the work session and again at the public meeting that immediately followed. George Pitts, a resident with a keen interest in nature and the environment, praised the township committee for the recent purchase of Russell Farms and volunteered to help plant flowers or sprinkle mulch on plantings. Members of the township committee said they received a grant of $28,581 from the Department of Environmental Protection for recycling bins that will help protect the environment and produce revenue through the sale of recyclable materials. Sue Winton, a long-time resident, told the township committee that all grants originate with money taken from the individual taxpayer. She added that the “green” initiative was part of a United Nations plan to stifle free enterprise and initiative in the United States and to reduce the standard of living in American closer to that of foreign countries, a process she called “un-democratic and un-American.” The governing body also prepared for the opening of the renovated Wyckoff Memorial Library, slated for May 19. Jerry Goetting, a resident who has been a critic of library spending, said that based on his calculations, the library board owed the township committee not $307,000 – the committee’s figure for surplus – but $369,385. He said that if Wyckoff had not received at least $307,000 by this week, the committee should consider court action. Goetting claimed the money had been “stolen” for the library fund. Board approves settlement (continued from page 4) added. Belsky also pointed out in his statement that Saxton sought approximately $150,000 from the district for a variety of items such as what Belsky characterized as compensatory time, which Belsky described as overtime pay, which Saxton felt entitled to because he worked long hours and weekends. Belsky claims he was not entitled to that extra compensation because it was not provided for in his contract. A review of the memorandums of understanding between the board and Saxton that were signed between 2001 and 2005 revealed, that he was entitled to 15 days vacation in addition to legal holidays and he was granted five additional vacation days for the school years of 200001 through 2005-06. He cashed in some of those unused vacation and sick days, but was entitled to receive compensation for the unused vacation days, not to exceed 15 days per school year, a flexible spending account for the years 2001 through 2006, and a tax sheltered annuity for the school years of 2005-06 through 2008-09. Belsky criticized past presidents of the board, whom he did not name, for agreeing that Saxton should be paid such additional amounts. He also criticized one of those past presidents for a previously published statement that claimed that anything done of a contractual nature with Saxton was done with the full knowledge and approval of the school board, saying, “Unfortunately, saying it does not make it so.” “During the litigation, neither Saxton nor any of the past presidents supporting him, presented a single piece of documentary evidence showing that the board had authorized any additional compensation,” Belsky stated. “As they all knew, absent a resolution adopted by the board, no changes to Saxton’s contract or additional compensation could occur.” Belsky further claimed that, had Saxton at any time during his tenure as superintendent, presented a resolution to the board authorizing such additional compensation, the board would never have refused Saxton’s demands for this extra pay and no defense of these claims would have been necessary. Rick Meier, who was on the board for six years and was president during the 1999-00 and 2000-01 school years, said everything that was done with regard to the two contracts he had helped craft was done with the advice of counsel and full approval of the board. “In the case of the disputed portion of Paul’s contract,” Meier stated, “our board counsel at the time actually suggested the form that it took and crafted the language and then the board reviewed and approved it. As it turned out, his advice was in error, but we had no way of knowing that and I would have expected that insurance coverage from the board’s law firm would have covered that mistake, but apparently not.” Belsky defended the board’s decision not to pay Saxton what he demanded and to defend the lawsuit, stating that the board is accountable to the taxpayers and he is “amazed that we’ve been criticized for spending so much to defend against Saxton’s claims by the same people who think we should have paid out so much more in taxpayer funds to Saxton to avoid the costs of the litigation. “While this might make sense to some, no math, certainly no math taught in our district would support such an argument. We’ve defended the interests of the taxpayers as we were elected to do. We did this based solely on the board’s judgment of the merits of the claims after a careful review by the district’s outside counsel.” Thomas Madigan, who served on the board for 12 years and as the board’s president from 2005 to 2007, said, “It’s ridiculous that Belsky would claim that five past presidents were wrong and only he is right. The board of education paid $5,000 for an auditor’s report before agreeing 8-1 to pay Saxton $129,000 for time worked and for accumulated sick days and only Ira Belsky was not in favor of it.” Madigan criticized Belsky for his “many outrageous comments” about Saxton and his determination to have Saxton’s name taken off the administration building. “It’s a shame that over $270,000 ended up being expended in this litigation and, why things were handled the way they were is still baffling,” Madigan stated. Meier also pointed out that during the time he worked with Saxton they achieved so much with the building referendum, the University Programs, the resolution of the Franklin Lakes split controversy, and the long-term facilities plan. “Paul brought a lot to the district in terms of leadership that was sorely needed,” Meier stated. “He brought the communities together in a way that I had not seen in the past. He brought over $20 million to the district. He was tireless and totally committed. It is unfortunate that all he achieved has been sullied in this controversy.” Roger Lane, who was on the board for six years and served as president during the 2004-05 school year, provided the following statement: “There would have been no lawsuit by Saxton had Mr. Belsky adhered to an ethical standard not to publicly discuss personnel matters. On more than one occasion he violated this code by ridiculing Saxton’s performance verbally and in writing. He left Saxton no alternative but to sue or lose his rights. “The pension matter would have been resolved at the state pension board level at no cost to the taxpayer, and the taxpayers have Belsky to thank for spending in excess of $200,000 or more to pay $85,000 to Saxton. It’s also amazing that no less than five very different past board presidents agree with Saxton’s position and respect what he and previous boards accomplished for the district .The citizens of Franklin Lakes deserve better and Saxton deserved respect for a job well done.” Saxton responded to Belsky’s statement, saying Belsky must believe if he keeps saying something long enough people will believe it is true. “I will let every board member I served under speak for me and the accomplishments of the district represented by 11 years of outstanding evaluations by those boards which absolutely confirm that,” Saxton concluded.