Residents praise Middletown resolution opposing Transco/Williams 'Nessie' pipeline, cite water‑quality concerns

Residents and environmental advocates used the public‑comment period at the Aug. 11 Middletown Township Committee meeting to praise the committee for approving a resolution opposing the Transco/Williams pipeline project, often called "Nessie," and to press local leaders to stand with neighboring towns.

"I am so happy to see that a resolution in opposition to Nessie the Transco Williams pipeline was approved tonight," said Susan Mckinus, speaking for Food and Water Watch and as a Middletown resident. Multiple speakers thanked the committee for adding Middletown to a growing list of municipalities that have passed similar resolutions.

Pat Miller, co‑chair of the township building‑electrification committee and a member of the Jersey Shore Group of the New Jersey Sierra Club, described the project as including a new compressor station and a pipeline route that would cross major roads, railways and ultimately pass under Raritan Bay. Miller warned that construction could harm coastal wetlands and resuspend historic contamination from the bay bed.

Don Adler and Madison Worst of Clean Ocean Action echoed those concerns. Adler said the construction phase would bring up material buried for centuries in the Raritan Bay that could have toxic implications for shorelines and marine life. Worst said the pipeline is "arguably completely unnecessary" for New Jersey and emphasized water‑quality risks tied to dredging and trenching work.

Committee members did not debate the technical merits of the engineering claims during public comment; speakers thanked the committee for the resolution and urged continued coordination with neighboring towns that have passed opposition measures.

The meeting record shows a number of nearby municipalities have recently passed similar resolutions, including Keyport, Hazlet, Aberdeen, Middletown's neighbors and others, according to comments offered by residents during the meeting.

The committee received the comments and the public‑record opposition will be part of ongoing municipal outreach and intermunicipal discussions about the project.