Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Contamination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press Lambertville council over delayed water-testing and redevelopment agreement
Summary
Residents pressed the Lambertville council to press state investigators for property access and to avoid finalizing a redevelopment agreement before contamination testing is complete; the council said state testing is ongoing and the town has limited visibility into enforcement steps.
The Lambertville City Council heard sustained public concern Wednesday night as residents urged the town to press state investigators for access to a private property tied to an ongoing contamination inquiry and to delay any redevelopment agreement until testing and remediation are resolved.
The concern centered on whether the state Department of Public Health (referred to in the meeting as DP) had compelled access to the property and whether the town could require developer access as part of any redevelopment contract. A resident identified in the record as Wilson said developers have a history elsewhere of moving forward without remediation and argued the town should not allow a development agreement to proceed amid an unresolved investigation. "They can easily go to a judge and compel the owner to go on property," Wilson said, adding his worry that some developers "skirt[] around toxic claims."
Why it matters: The dispute involves potential public-health risks from suspected contamination near homes and a proposed redevelopment. Residents said state testing has been slow to yield public results and asked the council to use its leverage in negotiations so that access for testing and remediation would be guaranteed before approvals advance.
Council members and staff said they met with DP in late November and were told DP continued perimeter testing and planned additional field work in December and the new year. The council reported the town compiled resident surveys on odors and point-of-entry systems and has provided those to DP; the town also received a $6,000 Department of Health grant to support local testing and to secure lab discounts for residents. "They are pursuing the property owner to gain access to it," the council chair said in response to questions about court action, but added DP would not share all enforcement steps with the town because of the private-property and investigative nature of the case.
Residents asked whether the council could refuse to sign a redevelopment agreement until the investigation is complete. One commenter, Sean Ellis (who identified himself with an address), asked directly whether the town could withhold signature. Council members said legal questions about contract conditions were "billable" and could require attorney input; they said the council would seek to include as many access protections as possible in any agreement but stopped short of promising to delay execution until DP concluded its investigation.
Other details from the meeting: the town maintains spreadsheets of who has been tested and which residents filed odor surveys; it lacks a public, detailed testing map from DP but continues to add private-well test data to its records. Town staff said vendors have been evaluating filtration and odor controls at individual homes and that at least one homeowner remains a test case after filters did not fully remove intermittent odors.
Next steps: Council members said they will continue monthly coordination calls with DP and will discuss including access or testing milestones in redevelopment negotiations; residents said they want clearer timelines and publicly available results. No formal motion to delay any redevelopment agreement was adopted during the meeting.
