The Long Branch City Council on Sept. 10 adopted Ordinance 0-10-25, a bond ordinance authorizing issuance of $1,095,500 in bonds and incorporating a $750,000 grant from the New Jersey Department of Transportation to pay for 2025 capital acquisitions and improvements.

The ordinance covers three categories of work: roadway reconstruction on various city streets (including Oakwood Avenue and portions of Seaview Avenue), purchase of IT server equipment and replacement of three intersection traffic signals, the ordinance summary says.

The ordinance matters because it commits city borrowing and a state grant to public works projects that will affect neighborhoods where repaving and signal replacement occur. The ordinance passed on second and final reading after the council opened a public hearing and heard questions from a resident about the scope and timing of the work.

Vincent Lepore of 33 Ocean Terrace asked when the DOT grant would be received, whether Oakwood Avenue and Seaview Avenue would be repaved in their entirety and whether West Long Branch would contribute to Oakwood’s repaving, among other details. Lepore also asked whether a five‑year moratorium on development along Oakwood Avenue would be enforced after repaving and how professional engineering fees tied to the projects related to an aggregate $205,000 figure listed elsewhere in the ordinance.

A city staff member responding at the podium told Lepore that the Oakwood Avenue work is a 50–50 split with West Long Branch and that the city has already received the DOT grant. The staff member said Seaview Avenue will not be entirely repaved but addressed where two projects had overlapped, creating localized repairs for affected residents. On traffic signals, the staff member said locations had not yet been selected and that the traffic department was coordinating replacements; the city has replaced about two signals per year in recent years and has "four left" that need replacement. The staff member said the start and finish dates for Oakwood Avenue had not been determined and that the city was waiting on engineering work.

Council members moved to adopt the ordinance, and a roll‑call vote recorded all members present voting yes. The council did not adopt a schedule for construction or identify exact intersections for signal replacement during the meeting.

The ordinance summary references professional costs and authorized expense items "permitted under section 20 of the local bond law," and Lepore asked whether those professional fees were separate from the line items in section 3; the staff member did not provide a separate, itemized accounting at the hearing.

Next steps: with the ordinance adopted, the city will proceed with engineering and design work before setting definitive construction start and end dates; the council did not set a moratorium on development along Oakwood Avenue during the meeting.