School Board on Partnership With Village: Flooding is Bigger Than Council, BOE

Despite differences of opinion on a variety of community issues, village officials extended an olive branch to school board counterparts to jointly analyze the state of flooding in Ridgewood. Though top district officials will be meeting with the mayor and Village Manager to get the ball rolling, the school board cautioned the problem is bigger than both municipal bodies.

At the most recent village council meeting, Mayor Keith Killion told those in attendance that he believed it would be in Ridgewood's best interest to partner with the board of education to assess flood conditions and, moreover, to see if a plan could be ironed out that would be beneficial to both governing boards and village residents.

Village facilities in low-lying areas, as well as board properties like the footbridge and both football fields, have been cited as potentially exacerbating flooding, according to residents.

"I guess I feel like at this point in time no one factor can be evaluated independently on the characteristics of the flood plain that impacts our neighborhoods throughout the watershed," said Board President Michele Lenhard. "The footbridge, the Ho-Ho-Kus brook structure and the turf fields are part of the larger watershed."

Killion, Village Manager Ken Gabbert, Lenhard and Superintendent Daniel Fishbein will be meeting to outline how to best move forward and the next steps for a cooperative effort. Lenhard reminded fellow board members that there is expertise within the village, something that could be put to good use.

While board members said they were willing to open up discussions, Ridgewood is just a small part of the bigger picture.

"I agree conversation is good but the next step is just the four of you meet?" asked member Sheila Brogan. "I think the four of you meeting is a start but this is a huge question and it's not just Ridgewood. So I don't have any objection to you meeting but where are you going to go with it?"

"The real solution is a major construction project," remarked Charlie Reilly, who . "These are things that would require, dare I say, federal involvement, maybe?" he pondered.

"It's something much bigger than the village council or the board of education," Fishbein added, "whether it's remedy or expertise."

Board members variously remarked that larger government entities –from the DEP to Army Corps of Engineers to neighboring municipalities, possibly even those in New York (which some suspect to be the point or origin for some flooding) – might have to be part of the equation. Logistically, that's no small feat.

Board vice president Bob Hutton pointed to data that he said might show the recent flooding to be an anomaly. Citing a recent study, Hutton said New Jersey has received 16.4 inches of water in August, four times the usual amount.

"When you have that much volume of water, that bridge would need to be 25 feet high to prevent [flooding]," Hutton said.

Lenhard said the conversations she'll be having along with Fishbein and officials are "baby steps."

Neighbors again loud in criticism

Major sticking points remain, the ones most aggrieved by neighbors.

Tom Kossoff, a neighbor and vocal critic of the turf fields project, said the discussion "was great" but should have been had years ago, before the turf was installed.

The neighbor, who coined Monday "Reality Night," said the critics of the flood-plain-located turf fields have been unfairly labeled as "NIMBYs". Lenhard denied they've characterized neighbors as such and remarked that the district has never denied the fields were in a flood plain and there could be flood damage.

Kossoff further stated that he believes the continual maintenance of the turf will cost a teacher's job (something school officials denied, with Fishbein remarking that maintenance is already budgeted for) and presented the board with archived coverage of the damage in the wake of Floyd in 1999. Kossoff said the projected costs of cleaning the then-grass fields in 1999 was $30,000 and they were open within weeks for play. , was "apples to grapefruits." The most recent flooding will cost just north of $115,000 and Stadium and Stevens are still closed.

The district has not responded to multiple requests by Patch to disclose line items from the 1999 storm cleanup.

The school board did not respond to the litany of neighbor concerns Monday night, including whether a permeability test should be done to examine how well the fields are absorbing water.

However, board member Christina Krauss said Kossoff might be right on some aspects of the turf.

"I think the larger problem there also is not just the flooding per se . . . We have this multi-million dollar investment there. How do we protect our investment? We're not going to be moving [the turf fields] anytime soon," Krauss said. She suggested involving LandTek, the fields contractor, to help come up with a solution.

"We're in a flood plain and that goes without saying. I think that speaks toward what Tom [Kossoff] is trying to say – we're not trying to stop flooding, we're just trying to protect the investment."

Brogan said she didn't believe it would be appropriate to bring the council aboard on HS field-related flooding, as it's not within its purview. 

There's no defined timeline for officials on both sides to meet and brainstorm.