The Trenton City Council voted to create an ad hoc oversight body and to endorse a comprehensive independent assessment of Trenton Water Works (TWW) — while a related measure supporting creation of a Trenton Water Utility Authority failed in a recorded vote after amendments.

Council members debated three related resolutions. Resolution 25‑3‑84 (to create an ad hoc body to address TWW governance and oversight) passed on a roll call. Resolution 25‑3‑78, an endorsement for a comprehensive independent assessment covering asset values, bonding and debt capacity, financial and capital planning, operational capacity and legal impacts, also passed. Several council members and staff emphasized that the assessment would be used to evaluate all options — including maintaining the current structure, improving oversight, or other governance options — but that no structural change would be automatic.

Councilwoman Williams proposed a separate resolution (25‑3‑61) endorsing the creation of a Trenton Water Utility Authority; she later amended the language to state that council would "explore" the creation of such an authority and that the administration should engage experts to study the idea. After a motion to amend and subsequent roll calls, the final motion to approve the authority‑exploration language failed on the floor.

Council debate focused on three points: (1) the need for an independent fiscal assessment before making governance changes; (2) concerns about state influence, noting that the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) had previously indicated support for regionalization and had offered funding to pay for an assessment; and (3) the value of regular council oversight. Supporters of the ad hoc approach said frequent, public meetings with TWW leadership would provide direct oversight and speed up the assessment and remediation work; skeptics warned against predetermining outcomes and urged careful wording so the assessment would be truly independent.

Public commenters and council members emphasized urgency. Caroline Clark, a resident who had addressed council earlier, urged the council not to place the utility under an "unelected group" and worried that an authority could lead to loss of local control. Administration staff and council members responded that the assessment would evaluate all options and that the council — not state actors — would make any final decisions.

The council instructed the administration to proceed with the procurement process for the assessment and to schedule recurring oversight sessions to monitor progress. Council members said they expect an 18‑ to 24‑month assessment timeline and asked the administration to share RFP language, selection criteria and the assessment scope with council.