Council debates Trenton Water Works, agrees to seek assessment; three water-related resolutions tabled

Public comment and several council exchanges at Tuesday’s Trenton City Council meeting focused on Trenton Water Works, with residents and advocates urging fuller representation for outside service-area customers and council members pressing for a comprehensive financial assessment and clarification of options for addressing the utility’s multi-million-dollar capital needs.

Frank Cusack, who identified himself as a founder of the Coalition for Healthy Water, urged council to give service-area customers a seat at the table and questioned whether an ad hoc committee composed of three council members would be enough oversight for a regional utility issue. “This honestly feels to the people of the service area as the blind leading the blind,” Cusack said during public comment.

Other public speakers — including Becky Taylor and Mark Lexington — warned of disproportionate rate impacts on lower-income Trenton residents, urged clarity about repair cost estimates cited in consultant reports, and highlighted staff shortages and retention problems at the utility. Lexington asked council to examine overtime and pay in the water department, noting what he described as “pathetic” salaries for some technical staff and urging the ad hoc committee to request personnel and overtime data.

Council members spent more than an hour debating the structure and purpose of an ad hoc committee Vice President Edwards proposed to accelerate work on the utility. Edwards said the ad hoc committee was intended to work within sunshine-law limits — smaller groups can meet without triggering a full public-meeting notice requirement — and to speed up outreach and technical conversations. “It kind of slows down the process when we have a lot of council members in the meeting because of that,” she said.

Several members expressed concern that smaller meetings could appear secretive or enable “divide and conquer” tactics; Councilwoman Frisbie said she was uneasy about moving quickly and emphasized that Trenton Water Works is “Trenton’s” and should remain under the city’s control. Councilman Harrison, who said he was not told about a meeting some council members held with the Department of Environmental Protection commissioner, pressed for transparency and asked who attended.

Council members confirmed a meeting had taken place the previous day that included the DEP commissioner, the mayor, Council Vice President Edwards and Councilwoman Feliciano; several council members who were not at that meeting said they had not been notified in advance. Council staff and members said the meeting produced information about assessment options and possible DEP support for a financial study to evaluate capital needs, asset valuations, and bonding capacity.

Following the public discussion, Council President Gonzalez moved — with a second from Councilwoman Williams — to table three resolutions listed on the docket dealing with Trenton Water Works (identified in the meeting as resolutions 25-3-84, 25-3-78 and 25-3-61). The motion to table passed on roll call.

In related business, the council approved, by unanimous roll call, a bond ordinance to fund Phase 6 of the lead service line replacement program in the Trenton Water Works service area, appropriating $20 million and authorizing $20 million in bonds or notes to finance the work (ordinance 25-130). The council also adopted a large consent agenda that included multiple ordinances authorizing sale of city-owned properties; those sales were approved by roll call as a package with the amended items noted during the meeting.

Council members and public speakers repeatedly stressed that any outside assessment must not be a pretext for regionalization or privatization. Council Vice President Edwards and others said DEP officials had indicated the department could fund a comprehensive financial assessment — distinct from prior compliance and managerial reports — but council members said they must see the scope and terms before deciding next steps. “No one in this ad hoc committee is going to make any decisions on behalf of council without the entire council,” Edwards said.

Several council members asked that any ad hoc committee be transparent: that findings be reported to the full council, that notes and invitations be public, and that council members not on the ad hoc committee be kept informed. Council members also pressed the administration to provide clearer data from the utility on staffing, overtime, debt and asset valuation to inform whatever assessment or next step the council chooses.

The meeting record shows a divided but deliberative council reaching a temporary pause on multiple water-related actions while directing staff and members to gather further information and to report back at a future meeting.