The emergency meeting of the Berkeley Heights Town Council was set to be a quick adoption of a resolution for a bond to provide for street and culvert repairs after July 14th’s record rainfall. Instead, multiple residents showed up to voice their frustration and anger with the lack of action on the continued flooding of the Briarwood Drive area of town.

Before the citizen’s comment portion of the meeting,   Anthony Padovano from the Office of Emergency Management (OEM) gave an update and information on what has been taking place since the storm. OEM personnel was out during and after the storm, recording conditions, and has been working to detail damages in the time period following. The availability of emergency funds from the County, State and Federal governments are dependent upon varied dollar amounts. The extent of the damage in Berkeley Heights has qualified the town for potential help from the County and the State, while falling short of the level needed for FEMA assistance at this point, but it is not yet clear whether funding will be received. Phase one was the compilation of damages. During Phase two, representatives from the State will visit properties to assess damages.

After this presentation by OEM, residents spoke about their experiences with rising creek levels and flooding, not only during this most recent storm, but in 2021 and 2024 as well.  Concerns brought up were complex and varied.  Residents commented that they were uncertain about who owns portions of the creek in the neighborhood, and were frustrated by township regulations requiring residents to maintain sections of the creek that are on their property.  It seems that the creek is, at points, part of residential property, part of township property, and possibly county property.  Homeowners stated that even as they maintain their portion, other sections may not be maintained.  They questioned what their recourse is when the full waterway is not kept clear, and who is responsible for making sure everyone does their part.  

The town council, and the substitute for the town’s usual attorney, responded that residents can contact the zoning office if someone is not clearing and maintaining the creek.  It was suggested by one property owner that the township should have a yearly plan that includes inspection, as it is unreasonable to expect homeowners to go up and down the creek to examine the property of others. Several residents noted that the creek is steadily becoming more shallow as silt builds up, and that dredging is not something that can be done by a homeowner alone, but that would need to be done the entire length of the waterway.

The mayor expressed her own frustration with regulations that keep the township from making repairs on portions of the creek and various components of the drainage system that are owned by the county, and promised to follow up in attempts to get the county to take action.  An example was given of debris that is blocking a drainage pipe near Springfield avenue.  At one point, a section of fence was impeding flow, and given the force and level of water, heavy equipment was necessary for removal.

Interestingly, two long-time residents who have lived in the neighborhood since it was built noted that the creek was moved from its original location to make room for houses in the development.  Both said that flooding issues were not an issue in the past, but are becoming more common, with one mentioning that the new affordable housing and senior housing upstream has created more square footage of surfaces that are impermeable, which could be contributing to run-off in this neighborhood.

The resolution to place the bond on the agenda for the August 19th Town Council meeting was approved unanimously within a couple minutes of the completion of the citizen’s hearing.  A list of repairs has been published, and residents will have the opportunity to speak again prior to final approval of the bond.

Note on Zoom Participation Concerns:

The disruptions of the two prior zoom-only emergency council meetings raise questions about both the method and motive behind the interruptions. Whether driven by frustration over council practices or simply by the opportunity to disrupt, these incidents carry real consequences for public access. There is concern that officials could use them as justification to limit or eliminate remote participation instead of adding simple measures and procedures that could allow the practice to continue, This is an opportunity for the township and Board of Education to improve—not restrict—public access, ensuring the outcome is a gain for civic engagement rather than a loss.

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 All Articles Connected to the 07/14/2025 Flood “Emergency” Bond

Subscribe to NJ21st For Free

Our Commitment to Ethical Journalism