Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Utilities topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents press Sayreville council to escalate repeated power outages; some councilors seek contract clarity

Sayreville Borough Council · February 10, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

During public comment, residents said recurring localized power outages—attributed to Jersey Central/First Energy—have imposed costs and risks; councilors asked staff to escalate to the Board of Public Utilities and sought more detail on several contracts in the consent agenda, including an animal control services contract.

Several Sayreville residents used the Feb. 9 public comment period to press the borough council to take stronger action after repeated, localized power outages that left parts of town without electricity for several hours.

One resident, identified in the record as Ken, characterized the outages as ‘‘negligence on the part of Jersey Central’’ and urged the council to escalate the issue to the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities and to state legislators. He recommended inviting district representatives and the BPU to a council meeting and suggested potential legal remedies if outages continue.

Council members and administrators said they have attempted to engage the utility and the BPU; Councilwoman Novak described sending letters and said she received little or no response. Council members agreed to pursue higher-level outreach to state officials and the utility as the record shows repeated failures to obtain satisfactory answers.

On the consent agenda, councilors discussed a two-year animal-control-services contract (resolution 2026-75). Staff said contractor proposals were revised during the RFP process and cited proposed annual contract amounts verbally in the meeting (‘‘150 for ’26 and 185 for ’27’’) but the written contract amount was not included in the meeting record; staff offered to provide exact figures to the council the next day. Some council members said they wanted those numbers in writing before casting votes on related contracts.

Councilmembers also questioned a PR/communications contract with Jaffy Communications and asked for clarity on tasks and value the vendor would provide to Sayreville compared with the firm’s other municipal clients. At least one councilor withheld a yes vote on that contract pending clearer documentation.

What’s next: council staff said they would supply contract figures and supporting documentation; council members asked the administration to pursue higher-level contact with the BPU and state representatives about recurring outages.