Berkeley Heights officials are moving forward with a $3.565 million bond ordinance, citing urgent capital needs. But as the Township prepares for a public hearing scheduled for August 19, 2025, scrutiny has intensified — not only over the specifics of what the funds will cover, but also over how the process has been handled online.

In a Facebook comment posted to the “Berkeley Heights Community Forum,” the Township Administrator pushed back on criticism, writing:

“The bond is ONLY for storm-related damage and repairs, nothing else.”

However, a review of the ordinance and official meeting documents shows that the word “storm” or “flood” does not appear anywhere in the document.

The ordinance’s stated purposes remain broad:

• $3.29 million for “various road improvements, including all work and materials necessary therefor and incidental thereto”

• $235,000 for “various culvert/bridge improvements”

• $40,000 for “paving of driveway on public building and grounds”

The ordinance still includes $713,000 in “Section 20 Costs”, a legal term that refers to soft costs such as legal, engineering, or planning expenses that are not tied to physical construction.

While capital repairs to roads or culverts could relate to storm damage, the ordinance does not make that connection explicit nor does it limit the bond’s use to such expenses.

You know…like how the whole Turf Field agreement never mentioned the term “Turf Field?”

The Township Administrator also addressed concerns about the Township’s handling of Zoom disruptions during the original meeting. That meeting, where the ordinance was first introduced, was interrupted by a screen-sharing incident involving explicit content and ultimately shut down.

“For the record, I was running the Zoom,” the Administrator wrote. “Hosting a private meeting and keeping people ‘out’ is significantly easier than hosting a public meeting. You can not utilize the same techniques as you can a private meeting.”

They asked residents not to turn the incident into “blaming someone for stupidity” and invited “CONSTRUCTIVE suggestions.”

Many public bodies across New Jersey have continued to hold Zoom meetings successfully, using safeguards such as:

• Enabling the waiting room feature

• Restricting screen sharing to hosts

• Assigning a moderator to monitor participants

• Removing disruptive attendees rather than ending meetings entirely

The Township has not clarified which of these measures were in place or attempted.

Questions have also emerged about how this ordinance ties into the broader capital plan. As NJ21st previously reported, an earlier capital budget resolution — Resolution 2025-239 — amended several line items upward, including:

• Sewer plant improvements: from $75,700 to $1,438,235

• DPW equipment: from $19,400 to $367,600

• Public safety equipment: from $173,900 to $1,570,300

• Document scanners: from $1,500 to $28,500

Those amendments were made through the capital plan, not the ordinance itself — but the bond ordinance may still be used to finance those types of purchases if appropriated separately through the capital budget process.

To be fair, the only item this might apply to is DPW equipment as some of that could potentially fall under “road improvements,”.

But it begs yet another question- why were these capital increases thrown into an emergency meeting alongside the bond?

If this bond ordinance is truly about emergency storm repairs, why is the capital plan being quietly amended at the same meeting to authorize millions more in unrelated categories?

The Township has not publicly explained how the bond funds relate to the capital plan or confirmed whether these large increases are part of the same storm recovery effort referenced by the Administrator.

As repeatedly stated by the Township Administrator during Town Council Meeting – it’s better not to trust Facebook Comments.

If that’s the case, the public would be better served if key details and assurances were clearly included in the ordinances themselves — not buried in comment threads.

No need for Facebook comments, unattributed articles etc.- just make the ordinance crystal clear. 

Updated @ 620pm:

15 Questions Residents Can Ask During the 08/07/2025 Meeting:

• What specific roads and bridges are included in the $3.29 million and $235,000 budget lines?

• Is there a list showing which projects are being funded, where they are, and how much each one costs?

• Did the Township do an engineering assessment or damage report? If yes, can we see it? If not, how were these dollar amounts decided?

• Which public building is getting the $40,000 driveway paving?

• What makes this an “emergency” under state law? Is there paperwork or criteria the Township used to make that call?

• Since this bond is being described as storm-related, can the Township show us any photos, reports, or cost estimates from the July 14 storm?

• Why are soft costs — things like legal or engineering fees — making up $713,000 of the total? Who is being hired for those services?

• Has the Township applied for any FEMA, state, or county money to help cover these costs? If so, can the public see those applications or approvals?

• For road and culvert repairs, why isn’t there mention of cost-sharing from Union County or the NJ Department of Transportation?

• Will a full breakdown of projects and costs be shared with the public before the final vote on August 19?

• What steps did the Township take to prevent the Zoom disruption on August 4? Were features like screen-sharing limits or a waiting room enabled?

• If, as the Township Administrator said during a public meeting, residents shouldn’t rely on Facebook comments for official information — then why aren’t these details included clearly in the ordinance or on the Township website?

• Why was the capital plan — which includes unrelated items like scanners and sewer equipment — updated at the same meeting as this emergency bond?

• Is any of the $3.565 million from this bond going toward those other capital items? If yes, which ones? And are they actually storm-related?

• How can residents be expected to weigh in or offer feedback when so few details about the projects have been shared?

Editor’s note: The steep capital budget increases cited above (e.g. sewer plant, DPW, public safety) were introduced via Resolution 2025-239 and included in a prior agenda. However, they are not part of the August 7, 2025 meeting materials and it’s unclear whether they’ve been postponed or removed.  However, the questions remain relevant – why were they there in the first place?

Link to 08/07/2025 Agenda and Materials

As a non-commercial and ad-free, free platform, we rely on you to help us grow. If you value independent coverage of local government, please consider helping us out.

Read More About the Berkeley Heights Town Council

Subscribe to NJ21st For Free

Our Commitment to Ethical Journalism