Belmar council debates shift of water-service ownership as residents warn of large emergency bills

Belmar’s council spent the bulk of its June 9 public meeting debating a proposed change to the borough’s water and sewer ordinance that would make homeowners, rather than the borough, the legal owners of service lines from the curb stop to the street main.

The council introduced Ordinance 202612 for first reading and long discussion after staff and council members explained that a 2020 revision to Chapter 29 had altered who holds ownership and responsibility for the service from the borough main to the curb. Opponents of the revision said the practical effect is to expose property owners to steep emergency-repair invoices and urged the council to retain borough ownership or produce a thorough financial analysis before adopting the change.

A resident and attorney said two local homeowners already have received repair bills topping $20,000 after emergency breaks and called the shift “unfair,” arguing that the borough previously bore those costs and that fee schedules in Chapter 29 (which list standard charges for service excavations) should govern rather than passing contractor invoices to homeowners. The resident said the borough historically paid for main-to-curb repairs and that restoring that practice would avoid creating sudden, unaffordable liabilities for individual households.

Council members who stressed caution asked the borough’s finance and utility staff for a written analysis of the water utility’s fiscal capacity, including an accounting of recent emergency-repair costs and a projection of what returning ownership to the borough would cost the utility. One council member noted the utility’s recent rate increases and said she was not prepared to change ownership rules without a report on solvency and long-term budget impacts.

During public comment, residents described out-of-pocket costs and urged practical remedies: promoting private water-service insurance, clarifying which charges fall under the ordinance’s fee schedule, and examining how the borough’s existing contracts for excavation and emergency work factor into ultimate customer bills. One resident, Suzanne Ann of Fifth Avenue, said she paid $5,000 to replace a line and recommended residents consider private utility insurance; she added that such policies can cost roughly $15 per month and have paid in her family’s case.

Mayor Becca Fesco and other members said they would seek better data on (1) how many meters or service connections are being misread or not read (staff discussed hundreds of problematic meters in prior remarks), (2) recent emergency-repair totals, and (3) how state-required lead-service-line projects and other capital work will change the borough’s obligations. Council members indicated the ordinance will return for additional consideration at a later meeting after staff provides the requested financial and operational reports.

The council recorded a procedural vote related to tabling the measure during the meeting’s discussion; multiple members asked for more time to review the ordinance language and to see the financial analysis before taking a final vote.

Next steps: the ordinance was introduced for first reading and will return to the council for further consideration once borough staff supply the requested financial and operational details.